Studio Air | Lussiospazio - Break Architecture | S2, 2017

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO

AIR

JIA SHUN XU 762122 2017, SEMESTER 2 JACK MANSFIELD-HUNG JOURNAL

CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PART A. CONCEPTUALISATION

A1 DESIGN FUTURING

A2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

A3 COMPOSITION TO GENERATION

A4 CONCLUSION

A5 LEARNING OUTCOMES

A6 APPENDIX

BIBLIOGRAPHY

STUDIO EARTH AXONOMETRIC MATERIALITY

STUDIO WATER FINAL PROJECT: REM KOOLHAAS

STUDIO EARTH DAY AND NIGHT CONTRAST

8

CONCEPTUALISATION

INTRODUCTION

My name is Jia Shun Xu, my preferred name is Johnny. This is my third year of studying a Bachelor of Environments, majoring in Architecture at the University of Melbourne.

I am interested in disruptive ideas, that aren’t just defined by the limits of architecture. I am currently a co-founder in two start-ups working on my third. The design thinking process taught in architecture has been the driving force to my work ethic.

It’s not merely designing ideas that work, but equally how we sell the idea and represent it. I’ve begun to appreciate more the processes behind architecture instead of the final designed product. The story, the experience and the narrative experiencing and appreciating the design process behind another people’s work. Hence, why I am more excited to learn and understand digital design

I’ve always understood architecture as the way we use and experience space, and ultimately that’s why architects exist to design solutions to how we can better use space or experience it. However, over the past two years I’ve learnt that the definition of architecture is subjective and depends on context.

CONCEPTUALISATION 9

“

We pref igure making a world with the idea of the world we are going to make. At the same time, having done tha t, tha t world makes us … We are both made by the world of design and we design the world tha t we make ”

Tony Fry Ted Talk 2014 On Futuring, the City & Sustainment - the Remaking of Design

10

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.1 DESIGN FUTURING

The development of modern t e c h n o l o g y, computer sof t ware has allowed the design f ield to achieve new understandings that couldn’t have been predic ted in the past. Just like how we today cannot possibly predict the future. But instead , we can speculate the optimistic future w e w i s h t o b e a p a r t o f a n d v i c e v e r s a1.

I n “ S p e c u l a t i v e E v e r y t h i n g ”, D u n n e a n d R a b y ’s , they explore the idea of speculative design through opening the imagination, new attitudes and ways of think ing and ultimately achieving s o l u t i o n s to o u r d e f u t u r i n g p r o b l e m s 2. T h r o u g h t h i s n e w p e r s p e c t i v e o f c r i t i c a l t h i n k i n g , i t ’s possible to bet ter obser ve and understand the future people want and ultimately avoiding the o n e s t h a t p e o p l e d o n o t w a n t 3.

This opens the possibility of informed decisions within the design process. As aspiring A rchitec ts , we should be critically informed in the decision making process, understanding the processes to an outcome. How that outcome and approach in design, can impact and shape our future. As Fr y states , ‘design de moc racy ’ ope ns new doors of oppor tunit y towards speculative complex solutions.4

1 Anthony Dunne & Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press, 2013) pp. 1-9. p2 2 Dunne and Raby. Speculative Everything. p2 3 Tony, Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008), pp1-16 4 Fry. Design Futuring. p1-10 CONCEPTUALISATION 11

CASE STUDY 1

HABITAT 67, MONTREAL MOSHE SAFDIE 1967

FIG 01 HABITAT

Habitat 67 designed by Moshe Safdie in 1967, for the World Exposition in Montreal. The thesis design is a prototype of mass produced housing aimed to challenge the concept of urban housing development in the 1960s1. It explores how people live and use space and how the urban environment influences the quality of life.

In the broadest sense, Habitat 67 draws very similar comparisons to the style of the Japanese “Metabolist” movement of the same decade 2. The Metabolists believed that buildings should be a system of living, interconnected prefabricated cells, as represented in the plan view of figure 3. In contrast, Habitat 67 aimed to provide a design solution to overpopulation and high-density living. Through critical design research and methodology proposed a threedimensional urban structure that fully utilised prefabrication techniques and mass-produced modules stacked upon each other shown in Figure 1 and 2, to form a complex highrise apartment system, aimed to bring life, sun, nature and openness to all its 158 residences 3, shown in Figure 4.

1

Mark, Byrnes. Revisting ‘Habitat’ 50 Years Later. Citylab ( revised June 2017). https://www.

citylab.com/equity/2017/06/revisiting-habitat-50-years-later/529164/ (31st July 2017) 2

McGill University. Habitat 67 Archive. Canadian Architecture Collection. McGill University (2001).

http://cac.mcgill.ca/moshesafdie/habitat/concept.htm 3

Safdie, Moshe. Habitat ‘67 - Towards the Development of a Building System. (February, 1967). pp

60.-61.

Along with its Metabolistic idea of impermanence and interchangeability of modules introduced where design can adapt and prefabricated to suit various site conditions depending on location1. It transformed how designers viewed housing. Habitat 67 can be considered the pioneer of a multifunctional residential complex 2. It attempted through its design to outline the current issues of construction and design of the 1960s and suggested the speculative direction of prefabrication half a century ago.

“

The concept is bold - but not for boldness’ sake. ” Moshe Safdie on the concept Habitat 67

Safdie’s Habitat 67, whether the masses consider it a successful design or not, it shifted and influenced the way we approach design 3. As this design piece was originally a thesis project, it meant Safdie through critical design achieved a system of building design that presents a potential solution to a complex issue of its time. In the works of Bjarke Ingels Group Architects and Herzog and de Meuron Architects, we can observe similar traits influenced by the Habitat 67. It was a technical feat of its time, that promoted innovation, political will, design for the community all in a built form.

4 Moshe, Habitat ‘67. pp 60 5 Moshe, Habitat ‘67. pp 62 6

McGill University. The Future of Habitat. Habitat 67 Archive. Canadian Architecture Collection.

McGill University (2001). http://cac.mcgill.ca/moshesafdie/habitat/future.htm

12

CONCEPTUALISATION

AT 67 DURING CONSTRUCTION

FIG 02 SECTION CUT OF THE HABITAT 67 FIG 03 DETAILED PLAN DRAWINGS

FIG 04

https://dncache-mauganscorp.netdna-ssl.com/wallpapers/1586/1586645-1920x1200-architecture-habitat-1080x1920.jpg?st=CfqDMBErD8A8mnJGJ7gw3g&e=1502354468

CONCEPTUALISATION 13

FIG 04 AXONOMETRIC VIEW OF PLUG-IN CITY, PETER COOK

14

CONCEPTUALISATION

CASE STUDY 2

THE PLUG-IN CITY

PETER COOK / ARCHIGRAM 1964 The vision of Archigram was like that of Safdie, where they saw the serious issue of outdated construction techniques and methods of design. Archigram’s “Plug-In City” sought to challenge the rational modern movement and instead engage their projects on a more conceptual level of paper architecture – a movement born amidst the fear of doomsday, space exploration and the post-war triumph1. The unbuilt paper architecture of the project

by Peter Cook serves to depict an ultra-futuristic vision of building typologies that blur the boundary between architecture and machine2 – one that is similar in nature to the works of the ‘Metabolists’ and in the broadest sense the Italian Futurists in utopic vision.

Archigrams opinion on consumerist culture was explicit in the proposal and they themselves considered it progress by making architecture consumable, they could bring freedom to people’s lives 3. Similar traits represented in Plug-In City and Habitat 67, a system of constant changing structure which is consistently renewing and consuming, rendering the proposal only to exist on paper.

The utopian novelistic vision of the “Plug-In” city aimed to be provocative in nature, much like the Futurists, where they’ve tried to instil the “could be” through representation.

Generating a response from the public, whether positive or negative, aimed to make people aware of its underlying messages and connotations rather than speculate and predict the future, targeting at the consumerist behaviour of the ‘now’, rather than the ‘what-if’4.

FIG 05 SECTION ELEVATION OF PLUG-IN CITY BY PETER COOK

1 Peter, Cook, Archigram (New York: Princeton Architectural press, 1999), 1961-74 2 Peter, Cook, “Plug-In City, 1964” Exit Utopia Provocations 1956-76 ed.

Martinn van Schaik and Otakar Macek ( Munich: Prestel Verlag, 2005), pp68 3 Jennifer Shields College and Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2014), 100 4 Anthony Dunne & Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press, 2013) pp. 1-9. p5 CONCEPTUALISATION 15

FIG 06 ICD MATERIAL COMPUTATION PAVILION

16

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.2 Design Computation T h e s y m b i o s i s o f h u m a n a n d c o m p u t e r. I t h a s become a tool for logical design thinking , generation , development and production.

Design computation moves away from the mere representational and looks at the logical processes and methods behind the practice. It ultimately introduces a novel way of approaching methodology and the design process.

It challenges the traditional intuitive pen to paper approach to a more logical methodical way of g e n e r a t i o n 1. A s t h e p r o c e s s s h i f t s t o b e c o m e m o r e research - based and experimental, as designers we are able to make more critically informed decisions about design outcomes.

The designer is the pilot who drives the design process through creativity and intuition. Parametric modelling, a te r m c o i n e d by S c h u ma c h e r, is w h e re th e c o m p u te r is optimised to generate limitless possibilities through the one design , the forms generated by algorithms redefines the possibilities, where the human mind c a n n o t d r e a m t o c o n c e p t u a l i s e d t h r o u g h d r a w i n g 2.

C o m p u te r - a i d e d d e s i g n (C A D) s of t wa re h as a ls o provided a platform for collaboration between disciplines which has bought on the new wave o f p e r f o r m a t i v e a n d m a t e r i a l i t y b a s e d d e s i g n s 3.

Introducing another level of new possibilities and avenues yet to be explored. Therefore, Human will unlikely be replaced by the computer in the design process, just yet.

1 Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2014) p5.

2 Oxman & Oxman, Theories of Digital. p10 3 Terzidis, Kostas (2006). Algorithmic Architecture (Boston, MA: Elsevier). pp1-5 CONCEPTUALISATION 17

CASE STUDY 1

ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION ACHIM MENGES 2016 -17

FIG 07 DRONE WITH ROBOTIC ARMS DIAGRAM

FIG 08 REPRESENTATION OF STRUCTURAL FORMATION OF FIBRE

The interdisciplinary approach to design through computation has opened new horizons. Achim Menges’ ICD/ ITKE Research Pavilion explores the fabrication of carbon fibre reinforced composite1. The novel process is achieved through the inspiration of biomimetrics and the unique characteristics of material choice, carbon fibre - which is known for its lightweight, high tensile qualities, allowing the pavilion to essentially cantilever out of the ground. Such feats is only possible with digital computation techniques to aid optimisation of material and performance. The research team then codes a drone flight path to span the long distance and automate the construction process. Oxman suggusts that human and computer symbiosis, working hand in hand can redefine how we view design, the possibilities through algorithms and the forms generated are ones where the human mind cannot dream to conceptulise on paper 2.

Achim processes seem to be refined versions of those used by works of Frei Otto shown Figure X next page. Through digital computation, multiple iterations are feasible reducing time and increasing experimentation efficiency. This is not to say Ottos process was inefficient. It served as a basis for the development of current design practice aided by digital tools.

1 Achim, Menges. ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2016-17. ICD University of Stuttgart. (2016). http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=19995 2 Ivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2014) p5.

FIG 09 REPRESENTATION OF STRESS TENSION LEVEL

18

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG 10 ICD/ ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION 2016 ACHIM MENGES CONCEPTUALISATION 19

FIG 11 PERSPECTIVE VIEW FROM GROUND UP OF MUNICH OLYMPIC STADIUM 20

CONCEPTUALISATION

CASE STUDY 2

MUNICH OLYMPIC STADIUM FREI OTTO & GUNTHER BEHNISCH MUNICH, GERMANY 2016 -17

From studying the structures developed by Frei Otto, it can be seen through their form that they all share a close visual character. This is not derived merely by materiality or even form, there is a bigger component shared through his projects that make such designs relatable. This ‘form-finding’ method leads to the development of his unique form. His procedure is comparable to design computation. Kalay in Architecture’s New Media, explores how computation aids the logical design process will rational slliders which now plays a crucial role in achieving these high tensile structural feats1. Allowing architects think interdisciplinary, think broader and shift towards strucutral engineering, materiality and performative optimisation.

Otto design thinking process success comes from various methods of modelling and experimentation. Through physical modelling, hanging experiments and sand pouring experiments. In a sense, the approach of design attitude and style draws similar comparisons to Achim Menges. It is this computational methodology and research experimentation that leads to the comple-tion of one of his most prominent projects the Olympic Stadium in Munich.

1 Yehuda E. Kalay. Architectures New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer Aided Design.(MIT PRESS. 2004). pp5, 11

FIG 13 ARIEL PHOTO OF STRUCTURE ABOVE MUNICH OLYMPIC STADIUM

FIG 12 DIAGRAMMATIC ELEVATION OF OLYMPIC STADIUM CONCEPTUALISATION 21

FIG 14 COMPLEX PHENOMENA RENDER UPEN 2010 ROLAND SNOOKS

FIG 15 DIAGRAMMATIC ELEVATION OF OLYMPIC STADIUM

22

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.3 Composition/ generation Computational design in the ever changing society has begun to push design into new avenues. As shown in the case studies of A 2 Design Computation, the for ward thining nature of computation allows the potential to g o b eyo n d th e pa ra m e te r s of th e d es i g n e r, th ro u g h research generation and unexpected outcomes. This contrast is shown in the works of Menges and O t to.

Using computation as a means of research it allows deeper understanding to generate intricate and organic forms from complex set of rules, algorithms d e f i n e by th e use r, as s h ow n i n th e wo r ks of Ro la n d S n o o k s , C o m p l e x P h e n o m e n a 1 i n F i g u r e 14 ,15 . B y understanding the logic behind the system , we are able to tap into a new computational design platform of genuine generative forms that may assist us in s o l u t i o n s y n t h e s i s o f c o m p l e x ‘ u n s u s t a i n - a b l e ’ i s s u e s 2.

This process or methodology is possible through algorithmic thinking, a framework that requires a logical input of rules, constraints and instructions t o c o n s t r a i n t h e b o u n d a r i e s o f t h e s o l u t i o n s p a c e 3.

This idea of designing from a top - down approach to a bot tom - up with no preconcieved ideals. Computer generative architecture can not only be an ex tension of the designers own creativity and novel intuition, but also a unison of both logical critical computation to a i d t h e f o r m - f i n d i n g p r o c e s s 4.

1 Roland Snooks, Complex Phenomena. Kokkugia 2010 . http://www.kokkugia.com/PENN-COMPLEX-PHENOMENA

2 Tony, Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2008), pp1-16

3 Peters, Brady. Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design (2013). 83. 2. pp9-10

CONCEPTUALISATION 23

FIG.16 CEILING OF THE AUDITORIUM ELBPHILHARMONIE

CASE STUDY 1 ELBPHILHARMONIE HAMBURG

HERZOG & DE MEURON 2016

The Elbphilharmonie in Hamburg is constructed with 10000 unique robot cut acoustic panels, designed through algorithmic input to optimise acoustics1.

Utilising algorithmic thinking to not only design the parameters of the building design, but also the digital methods of fabrication. The auditorium is described as an organic, only achievable through the efforts of parametric design, based on generative algorithmic input. Brady in “Computation Works” quotes Menges, highlighting that algorithmic processes should bring out the best in both human and computers2. The organic form of Herzog and de Meuron’s Elbphilharmonie is the result of computational design to find the most optimistic shape for acoustic reverberation, which is a curved seashell like form. It is mentioned that this technique has been around for centuries used in neoclassical building ornamentation3.

1 Elbphilharmonie Hamburg. Herzog de Meuron. Archdaily (Dec 2016). (Aug 2017) http://www.archdaily.com/802093/ elbphilharmonie-hamburg-herzog-and-de-meuron 2 Peters, Brady. Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design (2013). 83. 2. pp9-10 3 Elbphilharmonie, Archdaily

24

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.17 THE AUDITORIUM

Oxman would suggest that ‘formation precedes form’1.

Yet the produced outcome of the individual panels are simple yet intricate and special when constructed. This design further highlights the benefits and opportunities opened by computational generative design. That is the power of parametric design, it forms intricate, functional and aesthetically pleasing outcomes.

4 Ivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2014) p7

FIG.18 EXTERIOR FACADE VIEW OF THE ELBPHILHARMONIE HAMBURG CONCEPTUALISATION 25

FIG.19 BELOW THE ICD/ ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION 2015 26

CONCEPTUALISATION

CASE STUDY 2 ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION ACHIM MENGES 2015-16

FIG.20 DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATION OF STRUCTURE MATERIALITY

The ICD/ ITKE Research Pavilion of 2015, using computation to generate the form, space and order of the pavilion, through “processing information and interactions which define a specific site, providing a system for negotiating and influencing the interrelation of datasets of information”1. The pavilion introduces the construction technique of a timber elements together to create a structure. With computation design influencing in both the process of design and the overall fabrication of the elements to construction on site. Through parametric modelling it generates a form of unique outcome, focused on the qualities of the material and utilising it too its full potential in a logical and scientifically informed way - away from the orthodox traditional box pavilion.

1 Peters, Brady. Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design (2013). 83. 2. pp10

FIG.21 DIAGRAM OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Oxman always refers to the potential of materials and performance. Through algorithmic design, the material qualities acts as rules and constraints to the design outcome1. As Kalay discusses the method of “constraint design”, the material as a data set allows interesting unorthodox results which end up driving the design process2. Like the Elbphiharmonie, the resulted outcome, to fabrication process and construction would be impossible for the designer to intuitively construct and create without the aid of computer software. That’s not to say without the designers defining parameters and setting rules constraints to the algorithmic thinking process, it is unlikely such feats of parametric design can be achieved.

1 Ivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (New York: Routledge, 2014) p 9

2 Yehuda E. Kalay. Architectures New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer Aided Design.(MIT PRESS. 2004). pp5, 11 CONCEPTUALISATION 27

A4. CONCLUSION We must design for the future, towards a sustain-ble future. We shouldn’t assume our future or predict, but speculate. Speculation allows us to shift and change depending on what we wish oaur future looks like. With computational design tools as a tool to aid our journey to achieve the desireable future, it opens up the limitless possibilities through exploring ideas like biomimetics to achieve solutions within the design space. The answer may lie in the symbiosis of computer and human for us to dream in the future - or not?

We have seen the impact of the computer technology on design method, techniques to fabrication and construction in a mere decade. Looking at case study precedents half a century ago, compared to those of today, we can see previously unimaginable achievements. Who is to say we can’t speculate that in the near future, we can use design thinking and computation as a catalyst for ‘sustain - able’ future?

28

CONCEPTUALISATION

A5. LEARNING OUTCOMES I’ve always been interested in design computation, more specifically biomimicry, the study of nature and using it as the catalyst for innovative design solutions. However, with limited knowledge on the potential of computation on architectural design.

The approach to my design thinking before this studio and now, I believe I have developed an understanding that the opportunities are limitless,and preconcieved design solutions might seem like they’re the answer, but they’re just one slider, one iteration in a whole algorithmic equation.

I hope for the rest of the semester I critically approach the design tasks at hand, without relying on preconcieved precendents or ideas. But utilising computation as a tool to do the further critical explorations to my potential deisgn outcome.

CONCEPTUALISATION 29

CONTENTS [...]

PART B. CRITERIA DESIGN

B1 RESEARCH FIELD

TESSELATION

B2 CASE STUDY 1.0

ITERATIONS MATRIX BEST ITERATIONS

B3 CASE STUDY 2.0

REVERSE ENGINEERING PROCESS/ LOGIC

B4 TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

B5 TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES

B6 TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

B7 LEARNING OUTCOMES

A6 APPENDIX

BIBLIOGRAPHY

B

CRITERIA DESIGN

Fig 1 Unwrapped elevations of Technicolor Bloom by Brennan Buck

[ B.1 ] RESEARCH FIELD “Don’t fight forces, use them” - R. Buckminster Fuller.

B.1 RESEARCH FIELD

TESSELATION “We live in a beautiful and orderly world, not in a chaos without norms, even though that is how it sometimes appears”

- M. C. Escher

Tesselation is a collection of pieces that fit together without gaps to form a plane or surface. They can be of any shape or form, if they generate a tight geometric puzzle1. M.C. Escher graphic drawings are often referred to as “tesselations”.

Tesselation – in architecture is defined as tiled patterns and digitally defined mesh patterns that form a surface.

With the arrival and evolution of digital technologies and computer aided design, tesselation patterns are more varied through economical means of form finding generation in the architectural discourse2.

Fabrication process is more fluid, with the process of form finding is significantly simplified using digital models, allowing one to significantly reduce labour and time. This is achieved by the process of digital model to vector-line file to fabrication.

There are design implications that are influenced by smooth, precise or faceted and crude tesselation surfaces. Desires are often being highly accurate, but not always the case. There is no need to construct the full system, as the form itself is repeated.

Opportunities that rise from Tessellated patterns are its logical ways to describe and build nonorthogonal forms, it’s a method and tool that allows architects to modulate and gradate the surface and skin of form3.

This is the result of rapid acceleration of discretisation – the digital definition of a surface as a coordinated set of discrete parts, as a digital and material practice.

Tesselations greatest advantage and opportunity in design process is its ability to array unique panels across large surfaces to address multiple scales and curvatures.

1 Lisa Iwamoto, Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques (Princeton Architectural Press, Jul 2013). pp 36-37 2 Iwamoto, Digital Fabrication, pp36 3 Iwamoto, Digital Fabrication, pp38

Fig 2 Experiential perspective in Technicolor Bloom

An example of this is shown in Coop Himmelblau’s BMW Welt, the capability where the basic mesh size of the cones relates fractally to the structural roof grid. A project that describes the design potentials of tesselation, as well as the multiple ways in which digital fabrication is integral in the design process. Pattern, visual, structural and dynamism are all qualities of tesselation forms when judging success1. Le Corbusier’s Puppet Theatre at Harvard’s Carpenter Centre for Visual Arts designed by MOS, breaks surface into smaller pieces for easy and economical forms of fabrication. The dynamic qualities presented in tessellated surfaces are opportunities which can be further explored. Exploded tiles can be combined through unique joint logic that when bolted or joined together spans long surface areas with a strong stiffness and depth to its combined forms. The panels, strung or joined like jewelry combined with material performance defines a new level of intricacy for architectural discourse.

1

Iwamoto, Digital Fabrication, pp 37

m by Brennan Buck

Fig 3 Technicolor Bloom installation by Brennan Buck

Selection Criteria - KPI KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS The key performance indicators assess and analyses the design iterations of the various algorithmic species against its feasibility and success with achieving the design brief requirements and objectives.

2. Structural Structural Integrity, feasibility of structure, is the design economical and sustainable in the larger context of achieving the design brief requirements.

4. Spatial/ Flexibility Architectural and spatial qualities of form, the potential for the design to connect and adapt to its environment and users.

Functional and design intention, the potential further development and experimentation of form and materiality, deviating from original design intent without losing its original design qualities.

1. Aesthetic • Design intricacy and the quality of visual, use of patterning and tessellating techniques. Whether the design is desirable and/ or visually engaging.

3. Fabricatability • The ease of fabrication with current knowledge and understanding of technology and materials available for use.

Function Its function is to restrain potential solutions to plausible concepts within the research field of Tesselation. A selection criterion KPI is employed to critically extrapolate the most successful species for further development.

The KPI according to Kalay Yehuda in Architecture’s New Media states that “design as a process of search” for a solution/s that satisfies the given set of goals and constraints that is defined by the boundary set by the selection criterion.

Fig 4

[ B.2 ] CASE STUDY 01

VOUSSOIR C L O U D IWAMOTOSCOTT ARCHITECTURE SC-Arc Gallery Installation, Southern California Institute of Architecture, LA, CA 2008

The Voussoir Cloud by IwamotoScott utilises digital computation tools through an iterative process of experimentation and critical design analysis. A structural paradigm of vaulted arch form and the modules that compose its form achieves a level of complexity and intricacy. This provokes a new architectural discourse that redefines the historical construction technique and is reinterpreted through digital computational tools and material composition exploration.

[B.2] CASE STUDY 01

VOUSSOIR CLOUD IWAMOTOSCOTT ARCHITECTURE

SC-Arc Gallery Installation, Southern California Institute of Architecture, LA, CA

Fig 5

Fig 6 Voussoir Cloud aerial view

In collaboration with Buro Happoid, computational hanging chain models in the form-finding process to create a structurally efficient surface were previously experimented in an analogous way of the works of Frei Otto and Antoni Gaudi1. The Voussoir Cloud explores a process of surface tesselation based on Delaunay triangulation of gradated sizes under pure compression. In addition, this is combined with the use of an ultra-thin lightweight wood laminate material.

Fig 7 Voussoir Cloud finished installation piece

In terms of fabrication, the structural joint logic of the surface is described by the three-dimensional modules “voussoirs”. Voussoirs are formed by the folding of the thin wood laminate along curved seams defined by the algorithm. It produces a curvature form that relies on the overall surface tension and folded joint logic of the whole module to hold its “cloud-like” form.

The Voussoir Cloud was chosen as a case study project because it addresses technique development, digital design process, and combines critical thinking to construct new forms and explore new ideas. A process of idea generation to iterative development to fabrication - where material and form experimentation defines this process. A method of approach that should be followed when tackling our design brief to address the requirements of our brief with our research field.

Fig 8 Voussoir Cloud below the installation shot

1 Pete Winslow, Computation and geometry in structural design and analysis. (University of Cambridge, 2011). pp 2. https://core. ac.uk/download/pdf/2811472.pdf Fig 9 Voussoir Cloud Voussoir details and joints

[B.2] CASE STUDY 01

ITERATION MATRIX 1.0

SPECIE 1.0 Radius of openings (R)

R = 2 UF = 10

R = 2 UF = 25

R = 2 L = - 10 UF = 25

R = 2 L = - 8 UF = 25

SPECIE 1.1 Unary Force (UF) Rest Length (L)

SPECIE 1.2 Unary Force (UF) Rest Length (L) Stiffness (St) UF = -2 St = 100 L = 5

UF = -4 St = 100 L = 25

SPECIE 1.3 Rest Length (L) Stiffness (St) Number of anchor points (N) UF = - 10 St = 250 L = 0

UF = - 10 St = 250 L = -5

R = 4 UF = 25

R = 6 UF = 25

R = 8 UF = 25

R = 4 UF = 3

R = 6 UF = 3

R = 2 UF = 4 St = 10

R=2 L=-4

R = 2 UF = 2

UF = -10 St = 100 L = -10

UF = -50 St = 250 L = -5

R = 2 UF = 4 St = 10

UF = - 50 St = 250 L = - 15 N = 6

[B.2] CASE STUDY 01

ITERATION MATRIX 2.0

SPECIE 2.0 Radius of openings (R)

R = 3 UF = 25 L = 2 St = 250

R=4

SPECIE 2.1 Unary Force (UF) Rest Length (L) L = - 2.5

L = 1 UF = 0.5

SPECIE 2.2 Unary Force (UF) Rest Length (L) Stiffness (St) UF = 0.8 St = 10 R = 0.05

UF = 1.0 St = 250 R = 0.15

SPECIE 2.3 Rest Length (L) Stiffness (St) Number of anchor points (N) UF = 1 St = 250 R = 0.75

R = 0.10

UF = 25 L = - 10 St = 50

R=8

L = - 10

L = 10 UF = 1

UF = - 5 R = 0.5

UF = - 50 R = 0.5

UF = 10 St = 250 R = 0.15

R = 0.5

N = 7 UF = 1 L = 1 St = 50

R = 3 UF = 25 L = 2

UF = - 150

UF = 25 St = 100 R = 0.75

[B.2] CASE STUDY 01

ITERATION MATRIX 3.0

SPECIE 3.0 Stellate (D)

Inner Polygon Subdivision Level 1

Midedge Subdivision Level 1

D=1

SPECIE 3.1 Weaverbird Picture Frame (PF) Bevel edges (R)

Midedge Subdivison Level 1

Weaverbird Picture PF = 0.5

Radius = 0.5 St = 150 Sierpinkski Carpet D = 0.5

R = 0.8 St = 150 Sierpinkski Carpet D = 0.5

Radius = 0.15 Sierpinkski Carpet D

Midedge Subdivision Level 1 WbFrame PF = 0.2

Wbframe PF = 0.2 Mesh ThickenWb = 5

Inner Polygon Subdivision Level 1

SPECIE 3.2 Weaverbird Sierpinski Carpet (D) Bevel edges (R)

SPECIE 3.3 Wbframe (PF) Bevel edges (R) Stellate (d) Sierpinski Carpet (D)

Split Polygons Subdivis Sierpinkski Carpet D

WEAVERBIRD PLUG-IN

D=4

D = 5 UF = 10 St = 200

D = 10

e Frame

Weaverbird Picture Frame/ Bevel Edges R = 0.5

Weaverbird Picture Frame/ Midedge Subdivision Level 1

Weaverbird Mesh Thicken D= 0.5

5 D = 0.5

Weaverbird Mesh Window D = 0.5 Bevel Edges R = 0.5

L = 10 UF = 25 Sierpinski Carpet D = 0.5

L = 10 UF = 25 Sierpinski Carpet D = 0.5 WBFrame D = 0.2 Inner Polygon Level 3

Sierpinkski Carpet D = 0.5 Bevel Edges R = 0.5

Sierpinkski Carpet D = 0.5 Bevel Edges R = 0.5 Stellate D = 1

Sierpinkski Carpet D = 0.5 Bevel Edges R = 0.5 Stellate D = - 1

sion Level1 D = 0.5

[ B.2 ]

Successful Species 01

Potential Structural Aesthetic

S1 is an amalgamation of Kangaroo generated blob mesh, which is like minimal surfaces geometry, where the edges of the original curve become vacuum prestressed in the physics plugin. It is produced by the varying rest length and spring parameters of the algorithm, it allows one to manipulate form through simulated physics. The panels that form the mesh are of a panel logic, that allows simple fabrication logic to be applied, whether it be kangaroo or weaverbird plugins.

An opportunity of the plug-in that will be further experimentation and developed for producing the final product.

Spatial Fabricatability

Successful Species 02 Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S2 explores the physics of the Kangaroo plug-in pushing it to its limits, stopping where it still has an interesting, logical surface form. The method shown in this specie is like the works of Antonio Gaudi’s hanging model, but experiential with the original Voussoir Cloud algorithm. It generates an enclosure space where reversed allows the mesh to be in tension. Whilst S2 itself is not of a fabricable logic, it shows the potential of development in proposal and prototyping with the tools of Kangaroo down the track.

Successful Species 03

S3 the outcome is successful in its divergence away from the original product. The use of the plugin Weaverbird, has allowed the exploration and in turn success of this iteration specie. The grid shell like catenary structure forms a hanging diagrid intersected at every perpendicular point, generating an aesthetically pleasing outcome that presents an extremely viable fabrication logic. S3’s surface mesh generated replicates the works similar of Frei Otto, the opportunity lies in the economy and viability of construction and fabrication. It allows logical ways to describe and build the nonorthogonal mesh creating a surface skin that floats in tension.

Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

Potential

Successful Species 04

Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S4 The tessellated pattern mesh resembles existing algorithm but inverted. The use of the Weaverbird plug-in has allowed the surface to take on interesting diamond panels, combined with the picture frame tool, the surface mesh reflects a surface mesh offset with a diagrid frame to encapsulate each individual panel. It is successful in the sense of the interesting pattern formed by the exterior created by Kangaroo physics. The fabrication logic is somewhat complex due to the overall form, but using weaverbird, it allows for easy tessellated patterns with a fabrication logic to its mesh.

[ B.3 ] CASE STUDY 02

A E G I S H Y P O SURFACE dECOI Architecture & Mark Goulthorpe Birmingham Hippodrome Theatre Birmingham , United Kingdom 2001

The Aegis Hyposurface is an art installation piece for the Hippodrome Theatre in Birmingham.

Designers at dECOI explore the concept of computational generative forms, a form that could generate itself. The surface is interactive due to the integration of pneumatic pistons that drive the individual segmented triangular panels, in response to movement, sounds, temperature and light captured by a series of sensors.

Fig 10

“It is...a harbinger of nanotechnology-the intersection of information and matter itself�

-Mark Goulthorpe of dECOi

The Hyposurface is successful as the produced outcome is a real-time interactive, responsive skin facade that reciprocates and responds constantly to its ever-changing surroundings.

Designers at dECOI have redefined how responsive technological systems can be integrated into contextual design1. As it explores a new language of computational techniques that allow real-time adaptability of the user and the built environment. Opening up new opportunities to design futuring through responsive design.

The project while it celebrates success, it has many limitations. One critical limitation of the project through observation is scalability, where the feasibility of the responsive pneumatic piston driven panels in a large scale production and installation context is limited. As to simply put it, processing power required for each individual triangular panel to respond to its built environment through sensors increases exponentially, as the project scales in size. Therefore, while the breakthrough is revolutionary in the field of computational techniques of kinetic responsive facades, the Hyposurface project exists only as an art installation piece thus far.

1 Derek Chunha, Progene Lab: Aegis Hyposurfacce. (CalPolyPomona University. 2007). http://arc-hitecture.blogspot.com. au/2007/10/ex03-case-study.html

Fig 11

[ B.3 ] Reverse Engineer AEGIS HYPOSURFACE

Reverse Engineer Exploration 1.0

1. For a curved surface, create two curves to define boundary

4. PictureFrame tool from Weaverbird plugin.

Reconstructs original and offsets panels

2. Loft the two curves for a curved surface

5. For interactive surface, WbStellate to Firefly, extrude each panel with real time data flow

3. Triangulate panel C tool from Lunchbox plugin.

Generates surface divisions with diagrid

5.1. WbStellate from Firefly, real time data flow extrusions

Approach to Exploration 1.0 The tesselation generated on the surface outcome does not replicate and represent the original product. As the large driving factor behind the Hyposurface project’s success, is the individual responsive façade panels. The simple square is culled into eight segments allowing flexibility of form generated in the responsive system.

Our designed approach whilst the algorithm is simple with plugins such as Lunchbox and Weaverbird. The core flexibility and form of the skin is yet to be achieved. As it doesn’t reflect the design intention of the original project just yet.

Further exploration is required.

Approach and speculation of 2.0 The approach of second reversed engineered algorithm outcome is more successful, whilst it is more complex in algorithm. The logic behind the process is quite simple, essentially sorting the data list out to define where lines need to intersect and cut the surface mesh and then offset it with Weaverbird. The produced outcome is successful in its recreation of the surface skin facade.

Next logical step, is through Firefly and further experimentation of computational techniques to create the kinetic response from sensors. These tools are all accessible to generate a real time live feed and powering pistons. Our reverse engineered product stellates where pistons may have been utilised for the facade.

Reverse Engineer Exploration 2.0

1.Create 2D grid with square cells from original point, define extent of surface grid

2. Data tree cull points retrieve mid points of each square in grid

4. Sort data list for points to be joined and cull, to create a diagrid surface.

5. Flatten all surfaces created and surface split to create individual cuts into the network surface.

3. Create line between points of relative data tree points and connect two points with a line

6. PictureFrame paneling tool to offset each element of the cut network surface and reconstructis original by specificed distance

[ B.3 ] Reverse Engineer AEGIS HYPOSURFACE

t=0 ( Static )

t=1

t= 5

t = 10

t = 15

t = 20

Captured outcomes of reverse engineered Hyposurface skin through sound capture at different time intervals

Engineering responsive kinetic facade Firefly sound capture tool to weaverbird stellating the facade in response to sounds captured real time. This is to emulate the sensory real time skin facade. Whilst it differs to the original design, where pistons are used to provide a responsive effect. The stellate component from soundwaves design provides a gestural response to the design concept of the Aegis Hyposurface by dECOI. The design potential are limitless as we begin to explore the forms generated by real-time surroundings, as the world itself is everychanging. Concepts of adaptability through time, challenging the rational static design outcomes are all opportunities presented by these computational processes.

[B.4] TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

ITERATION MATRIX 1.0

ITERATION 1.0 First Generation: Basic Curves

SPECIE 1.0 SQUARE GRID

SPECIE 1.1 RANDOM POINTS GENERATION

SPECIE 1.2 HEX GRID

SPECIE 1.3 TRIANGLE GRID

ITERATION 2.0 Tesselated Mesh

ITERATION 3.0 Pattern Culled

ITERATION 4.0 Extrusion according to area

[B.2] CASE STUDY 01

ITERATION MATRIX 2.0

SPECIE 3.0 Firefly SoundCapture (t) t=0

t =1

MeshThicken Level 1

MeshThicken Level 1 Stellate

t=5

SPECIE 3.1 Stellate (d) MeshThicken (Mt) Stellate d=3

SPECIE 3.2 Weaverbird Sierpinski Carpet (D) Stellate (d) Wbframe (PF)

Stellate d = 5 Sierpinski D = 0.2

WbThicken 1 MeshWindow 10

Stellate d =2 Sierpinski D = 0.2

Stellate d = 1 Sierpinski D = 5 MeshWindow d = 5

WbThicken 1 MeshWindow 1

SPECIE 3.3 Wbframe (PF) Bevel edges (R) Stellate (d) Sierpinski Carpet (D)

Stellate d = 4 Sierpinski D = MeshWindow d

1 10

4 8 =5

FIREFLY & WEAVERBIRD PLUG-IN

t = 10

t = 15

t = 20

Stellate d=5

Stellate d=2 MeshOffset

Stellate d=5 MeshOffset

Mesh Window D = 0.5 Stellate d = 1

WbThicken 10 MeshWindow 1

WbThicken 10 MeshWindow 5

Stellate d = 5 Sierpinski D = 5 MeshThicken d = 5

Stellate d = 10 Sierpinski D = 5 MeshThicken d = 5

Stellate d = 1 Sierpinski D = 5 MeshThicken d = 5

[ B.4 ] Successful Species 01

Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S1 is successful in its deviation away from the original reversed engineered model. Exploring into three dimensional tesselated form. That could be further developed during the prototyping process.

Potential in its combination with kangaroo physics plugin to create structures that are constructed of planar elements.

The undulating surface suggests similar qualities to that of the hyposurface.

Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S2 explores the patternation of individual elements stand along.

Individual amalgamation of surfaces intersecting eachother and represented along a plane.

Through further exploration the transparency quality of the outcome is interesting in that one could represent ideas or meanings and through image sampling construct a new language to the form generated.

Successful Species 02

Successful Species 03 Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S3 success derives from its intersecting weaving patternation. A form of tesselation that explores how single elements in the three dimensional can collide without and generate new forms. The joint logic is selected as a focus of this piece as it forms a structure that essentially stands alone with no additional support or elements to connect and hold. It intersects itself at three different orientations allowing a weaved pattern.

Successful Species 04

Potential Structural Aesthetic Spatial Fabricatability

S4 generates an aesthetically pleasing outcome. The patternaion and repeated elements combines a three dimensional pyramid frame that sits an offset triangle at its center. This form explores patterning through repetition and intricacy of lifted surfaces in space. As the concept of the Hyposurface explores kinetic and responsive ideas.

[ B.5 ]

T E C H NIQUE: PROTOT Y P E S

[ B.5 ] PROTOTYPE 1.0

T E S SELATION

Prototype 1 explores the potential of tesselation as a research field. Through the aid of the Kangaroo Grasshopper plugin for the form-finding process, our group could successfully fabricate a tessellated panel box with tied joint logic to represent the stitching quality of the Haas Brothers x Versace throne.

The exploration of ties and weaves as joint logic were explored.

Considerations and complications in the prototyping process of Prototype 1, we found that our original fabrication outcome produced in the kangaroo’s plugin was too complicated.

While it represented the exploration of tesselation and our studio’s product agenda; the form was too complex and the 800 individual panels, meant our weave joint logic would require 400 individual connections.

Thus, for our prototype exploration, we simplified our box design.

Testing Early examples of stitching through weaving of different materials were considered. Early examples we wished to express steel sheets , a solid material with high strucutral qualities and manipulate it through tesselation exploration and redefine how materials are percieved through computational tools. However, constraints of fablab cutting and material limitations led us to test with mountboard instead.

We ran into many issues during the fabrication process, caused mainly due to not leaving enough offset at the laser cut panels edge on smaller segments of the laser cut template.

Fabricatability - was an issue during this process as it was still too complex for manual building, material choice of 3mm black mount board, gave our prototype a matte black finish paying homage to our “Donatella Throne� product choice. However, it proved many complications in the overall structural integrity of the outcome. As mount board is prone to bending, as it is a cardboard. The overall outcome was flexible, yet rigid, the purpose in our concept of combining function in design intention of a box, through joint logic and materiality allowed for new aesthetically qualities to be introduced.

Assembly process This prototype is modelled as tesselation, where its comprised of individual planar segments that are equal and repetitive and as a whole forms a dynamic structural enclosure. This model explores elements as single polygons to form enclosure. Each panel is laser cut to fit othrogonally and through planar elements create curved grid shell structure. Two prototypes were tested here, the use of string and steel wires to test joint logic.

Prototype was finished with gold patterning ornamentation through designed laser cut holes, to appeal to superficial level of luxury consumer desire

Render and diagrams of produced digital design model - prototype 1 tesselation

[ B.5 ] PROTOTYPE 2.0

S T R I P A N D FOLDING Prototype 2 explores form, how we could simplify joint logic to jigsaw, without a secondary joint/ tie, one that relies on the components that compose the structure, and provides a dual function of joining under tension and compression forces. Strip and folding as the driver of the original form and draws similarities to our original proposal concept. We took structural rigidity and ease of fabrication with available resources into account. The approach was the opposite of prototype 1. We found through a more structural rigid form, a tessellating pattern can be applied as a form of ornamentation, adding subtle elements of aesthetic qualities with the goal of tapping into superficial consumer desire.

Fabricatability of prototype 2 was simplified and structurally feasible with the 6mm MDF material.

Aesthetic elements of Versace patterning etched into the individual elements produced successful results. The overall prototype was less dynamic in function and design. It proved whilst Strip and Folding logic was applied, the simplification of our proposal concept meant the potential of further development and exploration is diminished. Whilst, visually appealing and successful in its representation of our proposal concept and product analysis.

Assembly process This prototype is modelled as strips rather than tesselation, where its comprised of individual planar surfaces that are equal and repetitive. This model explores elements as single strips to form its jig-saw connections. Each strip plane has customized teeth openings that allow each other to join without any external joints, such as bolts, screws or glue. It allows for a structurally rigid form that provides a contrast with its transparent cage like form that it encases.

[ B.6 ]

TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL “An accessory to the Cabanon”

B 6.1 THE BRIEF #BREAKARCHITECTURE We are designing in an imaginary world where consumer desire and trends are dictated by celebrity style. Designers have no control over style, where ideas are disseminated by the celebrity.

Our proposal speculates in this fantastical world of popular culture and how it can be represented through architectural qualities. A call to evoke a sense of irony and self- realisation in our current defuturing conditions - the dark side.

Our studio brief requires us to represent “Le Courvoisier�, to design an accessory which can be sold to accompany the signature Le Corbusier Cabanon. This is achieved through taking qualities from current pop-culture products and trends, as a form of inspiration and aid to represent it architecturally.

Our proposal is exclusively tailored for those young affluent professionals who love to indulge in art. Self- proclaimed art connoisseurs who enjoy boasting about their knowledge and passion on artistic endeavors.

B 6.2 PROPOSAL PRODUCT ANALYSIS Design proposal to address the brief is a space of security and exhibitionism, where one can exhibit anything as an art piece - even yourself. The product chosen is the Haas Brothers x Versace furniture line collection, specifically the Donatella Throne – a futuristic throne for the queen of fashion royalty ‘Donatella Versace’ shown in fig X. The Haas Brothers duo are well-known for their provocative, biomorphic, colourful and yet insanely imaginative furniture, ornaments and art. The collaboration with Versace Home for the Salone Milan 2013 exhibition.

The “Donatella Throne” was chosen as a product for analysis due to its innate qualities of ‘luxury’ – that appeals to consumer desire.

An example of this behaviour is shown in “Century of the self – Happiness Machines”, where Edward Bernays explores the psychology behind linking products to emotional desire and feelings. This idea of reinventing consumption and marketing a product not as a need, but as a want; something one would feel emotionally uplifted and better with.

The Haas Brothers x Versace, “Donatella Throne” is about style, about luxurious living. The throne explores the “all-consuming self” and accentuates “comfort” through “luxury”. Visually represented through the material quality: jet black leather and a heavy gold steel base. The product is celebrated not for its functional use of a chair, but as an art piece collection.

“It represents a vision of future luxury”

- Haas Brothers x Versace, Salone Milan 2013

Haas Brothers x Versace Home Furniture Collection, 2013

“Donatella Throne� of the Haas Brothers x Versace Collection, 2013

Artpiecify [Ahrt-peec-uh-fahy]

verb (used with Lussospazio) 1.

To exhibit an art-piece

2.

A space where anything inside becomes an artpiece

B 6.2 PROPOSAL

L U S S O S P A Z I O We aimed to reflect the qualities of the chair into architectural qualities and represent them through our accessory. The throne is made of lavish and expensive materials that evoke a sense of exclusivity and luxurious comfort. Our interest lies on this dualfunctional quality of product function and artwork.

We wish to challenge hedonism; tap into desire of the superficial, and satisfy peoples inner selfish desires.

We propose the Lussospazio, a complimentary architectural accessory that enhances the artistic value of the signature Cabanon. A space of security and exhibitionism, where one can exhibit anything as an art piece - even yourself. To “artpiecify� our clients Cabanon, possessions and life. It is a space, not only, for the preservation of luxurious goods. But also showcases a lifestyle an elite.

MOMENTS

B 6.2 PROPOSAL

[...]

This space will elevate these special items from exclusive everyday goods to exquisite art-pieces.

The design spaces feature a secure environment for the enjoyment of high life. Steering away from the simple, mainstream city life and redefines the rustic Cabanon. To an escape of self-indulgence through physical experiential touch and the visual eye candy of the architectural accessory the Lussospazio.

When possessions become artworks, the value grows and generates a moment of emotional attachment between the product and its owner. We focus on this desire of ownership and attachment. Further exemplified through exploration of ownership, of not just being one’s own possessions but to exhibit one’s own life.

Scenic moment of Lussospazio: Albero model. Start owning your surroundings, begin with nature?

Gestural experiential moment of Lussospazio: Veicolo model. Exhibit your possessions beginning with vehicles.

Experiential moment of the Lussospazio Persona model. A barrier against the outside world, artpiecify the human

LE COURVOISIE

L U S S P A

A space to ar Enjoy the first new look at the Le Cou line- with it’s new dual-function of se environment, nature and life - st

VEICOLO

ALBERO

ER X VERSACE

S

S

O Z I O

rtpiecify your life urvoisier x Versace Lussospazio accessory ecuring and exhibiting your possessions, tart owning your luxurious life today.

UCCELLO

PERSONA

B 6.3 THE SITE PROPOSED SITE CONTEXT AND SURROUNDINGS

SELECTED SITE LOCATION: MERRI CREEK JUNCTION

N AT DIGHT FALLS

SURROUNDING SITE PATHS AND ACCESS

Access of the surrounding area at Dight Falls of Merri Creek Junction is observed to be a densely populated zone with high traction of foot traffic and potential for interaction. The chosen site shown in the plan on the left, is an area that is tucked away on the tipedge of the Yarra River tucked away behind vegetation, a tussle between secrecy and public openness. A site that allows our clients to exhibit their art pieces, yet secure and inaccessible to the public.

SURROUNDING SITE NATURAL VEGETATION

The dense lush greenery of flora and fauna vegetation populates the surrounding area of Dight Falls. The nature and surrounding typography is taken into consideration and is selected as a potential focus. To connect ones surrounding nature and exhibiting it as an art piece, is an interesting concept and challenges how one should perceive ownership. Can we own nature? Can we exhibit nature for our personal endeavours?

SURROUNDING SITE YARRA RIVER WATER FLOW

catalogue

veicolo

albero

uccello

persona

Le Courvoisier presents its newest hit accessory for our signature Cabanon model. We present its newest hit accessory for first our signature Cabanon the Lussiospazio Le- aCourvoisier space to presents artpiecify your life.

Enjoy the new look at the Le Courvoisiers model. We present the Lussiospazio - a and spaceexhibitie to artpiecifydual yourfunction life. Enjoystorage the x Versace’s Lussiospazio line - with its security purpose, first new look at the Le Courvoisiers x Versace’s Lussiospazio line - with its sestart owning it today! curity and exhibitive dual function storage purpose, start owning it today!

[ B.7 ] LEARNING OUTCOMES

Learning Objectives Part B: Criteria Design, has allowed me to more indepth explore and experiment with both technical skills of the Grasshopper program, along with its plugins: Kangaroo and Weaverbird. Along with the digital design process, from research to idea, to generation and development, to fabrication prototyping and finally a proposal. The computational design program, Grasshopper has equipped us with the tools required to generate and explore design possibilities in a more time efficient and iterative way.

Through the engagement of B2 & B3, it required us to take an existing algorithm or “outcome” and fully explore its possibilities, or vice-versa, whether it be to reverse engineer an existing outcome.

What to note is even if you take a successful design outcome algorithm, by adding, subtracting and introducing new parameters into the algorithm, endless iterations are possible and a completely new outcome is generated. B3 allows us to then further develop our understanding of Grasshopper through reverse engineering a successful product, the purpose is to allow us to understand there is no one way of producing any existing outcome today.

Different approaches, with different algorithms can produce the exact same result, in fact it allows the algorithm itself gain new parameters and possibilities for further exploration into the form.

Through this iterative approach of baking and exporting, it enables digital design to emulate the generative process in design of idea generation.

We then are asked through B5, to take ideas and skills learnt through this generative process of other algorithms to start experimenting with prototyping and developing a physical product. A critical step in idea development, using a variety of different fabrication medias, laser cutting, CNC or whether it be Vacuum forming. We can further investigate and experiment on the deliverables the computer cannot: Scale, Materiality and Assembly (joint logic and form).

It is a steep learning curve, challenging yet enjoyable and rewarding. It has allowed me to see the possibilities of computational techniques, its tools that enable us to produce works not just in the field of architectural design but every day.

Our proposal case for B6, allowed us to interrogate the brief and critically examine the studio requirements. The process of analysing a successful pop culture product and representing it architecturally was somewhat challenging. As architecture school till now has been about critically examine the reasons behind design decisions, yet the reason of success in a lot of popular products is simply, appealing to consumer desire; by marketing products to emotional desires. Thus, for our proposal in B6, a lot of over analysing and thinking lead us away from the most successful outcomes.

Our feedback during our mid semester interim gave us food for thought, we limited ourselves in our final product design by relying on our idea being translated through the one algorithm – magnetic field. The feedback proved the delivery of our concept proposal was successful, in that the guest crits understood the portraying of a dark reality our superficial self-centered world heads towards.

However, whilst we are tapping into an interesting concept, the most critical take home message was we didn’t push ourselves hard enough in the generation of our algorithm and final product. Also, our analysis of qualities from the Haas Brothers x Versace, “Donatella Throne” could be further analysed, as our qualities we extracted were too simplistic and didn’t really represent the product.

Moving forward our team understands we shouldn’t limit the potential of a concept just because we have found a form and algorithm that represents our concept. We need to stop and ask ourselves to have we pushed it far enough, can we do more?

Overall, Part B Criteria Design has introduced us to the digital design process and how to successfully propose an idea using the computational tools in this new era. How we can learn from other successful designs and develop skills and techniques for pushing our own agendas.

CONTENTS [...]

PART C. DETAILED DESIGN

C1. DESIGN CONCEPT

INTERIM FEEDBACK

DESIGN PROPOSAL

TECHNIQUE REFINEMENT

CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

C2 TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES

PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT FABRICATION REFINEMENT

C3 FINAL DETAILED MODEL

FABRICATION PROCESS CONNECTION DETAILS EXPERIENCE DIGITAL MODEL

C4 LEARNING OUTCOMES

C4 CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

C

detailed DESIGN

[ C.1 ] DESIGN CONCEPT

“Our lives are complex; our emotions are complex; our desires are complex... Architecture needs to mirror that complexity in every single space that we have, in every intimacy we possess.�

- Daniel Libeskind

C1.1 DESIGN CONCEPT

CONCEPT PILOT CONCEPT To address feedback from interim presentation, our approach to part C was combining the group’s tectonics and took a stance on our detailed design direction to further develop and refine through prototyping.

PROTOTYPES AND TECTONICS

Private – Public We found the combination of two tectonics, exploration of how one field influences the other was intriguing. Moving towards a final design, we decided to refine further the relationship of combining two research fields through From Part B interim, our concept was a barrier fabrication techniques. to block out the world, in cage yourself, as our client owns the world. The irony of barricading, PRODUCT enclosing yourself from the world. With ideas of ownership of luxurious products (nature, animals, Being true to the product, in this concept of life) and exhibiting these items. an exhibition of lifestyle. We further explored For approach in Part C, a focus on the narrative the original Versace x Haas Brothers chair and the ownership of persona cage, a barrier of the broke it down into two main elements, the world for yourself. How can we challenge the black leather surface material of the chair that cage? Push this design idea of the bird cage? forms the seat supported by a gold honeycomb solid base of the chair. To test the relationship The final concept was refined with a focus on between the host and site, we decided to define the exhibition of humans and the lifestyle that a set programme space similar to our product encapsulates consumer desire. We broadened instead. design discourse with the combination of Where focus was all about the visual journey and tectonics; research field techniques of tessellation spatial experience for the client in the accessory and strip-folding. Emphasis was placed on space. the exploration of fabrication technique, constructability, and joint logics. _ Reflective questions post interim were:.

We originally intended to explore the multiple _ What are the qualities of the space? concepts of possession and ownership - nature, _ How do individual elements join together? animals, and life. However, as highlighted in _ How does it join with the Cabanon? feedback, given our time frame, it would be too _ How does joint logic work between two ambitious. Therefore, with the conception of different tectonics? exploring these avenues, we specialised in the _ Can ornamentation and decorative elements human approach of exhibition and voyeurism be functional? where lifestyle, the experience of space was the _ How does it respond to the site? vital focus.

OVERVIEW OF INTERIM FEEDBACK

Key feedback from interim presentation: - Further refine concept, more in-depth exploration of one species of our product line, rather than surface level exploration on multiple concepts on ownership and exhibition.

- More experimentation with prototypes, learn constraints and potential considerations through experimentation and testing with prototyping joint logic, fabrication techniques and materiality.

- In terms of Grasshopper, improve the script; the concept idea generation should be further explored and not just settle with ‘magnetic field’ definition on Grasshopper.

Explore plug-ins such as “Kangaroo” in moving towards a final design concept.

- Further refine the product KPI, extract more details off the original chair design. Be true to the product. Interim canopy design and other specific elements were not specific enough, further exploration is required.

- Relationship between the Cabanon and the accessory design, how do you define and test this relationship? How does it respond to the site? How can exhibition be relevant to the chosen site?

C1.1 REFINEMENT TO PRODUCT ANALYSIS

MATERIALITY OF VERSACE X HAAS BROTHERS THRONE

Being true to the product, in this concept of voyeuristic exhibition of lifestyle. We further explored the original Versace x Haas Brothers chair and decided to break it down into two main elements: 1. Black material leather on the surface of the throne that forms the seat 2. Supported by a gold honeycomb solid base of the chair.

To test the relationship between the host and site, we decided to define a set programme space similar to our product instead. Along with Versace style gold beads as functional ornamentation to act as joint logic for the accessory. In an attempt to appeal to a superficial level of consumer desire.

By combining techniques used in Part B, we focused on the details. A more specified approach compared to our interim product component details.

EASTERN FREEWAY MERRI CREEK JUNCTION

YARRA RIVER

DIGHT FALLS

LANDMARKS

WATER FLOW

CIRCULATION

SURROUNDING VEGETATION

SURROUNDING VIEW

C1.2 SITE ANALYSIS

 



The accessory design addresses and explores the following site and host requirements: 1. An accessory that’ll form and become part of the existing Cabanon building 2. Reflect and blur the lines between the interior and exterior; private and public 3. Creates moments of visual interaction between the client and the pedestrians visiting the Dight Falls site.

4. Contrast the existing materiality of the Cabanon with material techniques explored in interim.

fig Site plan of final concept

C1.2 SITE

The site is situated at Merri Creek Junction, the tip-edge island extrusion into the conjunction between Dight Falls and Yarra River. The same site has been used as identified in feedback, we have acknowledged the selected site has various walk ways and high-density flow of foot traffic surrounding it. Along with sited location is in the middle of various vista point locations looking down at Dight Falls and our site is situated parallel to Dight Falls.

An opportunity arises at the central focal point of viewpoints, to generate these crucial moments of exhibitionism when visitors visit Dight Falls or use the Merri Creek park. Also tucked away behind dense vegetation, creating a tussle between secrecy and openness. A site that allows the public access, yet blurred with site context and allows the public to peep if they dare.

C1.3 CONCEPT Creating moments of exhibitionism and voyeur for the client in the space Is it an unwritten rule or taboo to peak into someone else’s life?

What if in this world dictated by celebrity style, it’s the norm? – showcasing your lifestyle to those who visit the location, is the new insta filter? It is designed to be revealing at specific moments but private when required.

Only journeying around the Lussospazio accessory can you peak inside; would you dare to get close with others watching? Is it wrong?

Are you mainstream sheep; would you comply if everyone approaches?

Lussospazio aims to unveil this destructive defuturing condition of human society.

fig Lussospazio on site showcasing the experiential moments

fig Perspective render of final design on site from vista point

fig Perspective render of final design on site from Dight Falls lookout

fig Perspective render of final design upclose details and experience

fig Perspective experiential render of interior space looking out

[ C.2 ] TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES

By finalising design concept and sketch digital model, we further refined the idea through prototype testing various elements to generate and refine our form. Our final concept changed with the constraints found in fabrication and prototypes of the two tectonics – Tesselation and Strip & Folding.

C2.1 REFINEMENT TO FORM-FINDING PROCESS

The final form for the tessellation honeycomb base was informed through site. By taking the original site form offsetting it and using a “Superformula” in Grasshopper to quickly generate iterations of the base curve.



 

TESSELATION HEXAGON GRID SURFACE

 



 

 

 











Introduction of attractor points attracting, and repelling forces of the hexagon surface allowed us to control the designed function and programme of the base, the script allows us to control where we wish to extrude our leather openings, which will then in-turn informs design decisions for strips.

Honeycomb pattern is created through projecting polylines of our surface onto the curve. Issues arose with creating a solid base under the hexagon surface typology. We solved this through patch and boolean difference for required thickness.

C2.2 FORM-FINDING TO PROTOTYPING

Experimentation of attractor points in the digital grasshopper script. We found that attractor points were interesting, where repeated tessellated elements form can be shifted to suit the attracting, and repelling forces. Thus, by mirroring a similar approach of the throne product with the honeycomb texture of the base, we use the hexagon surface to control the designed function and programme of the base, the script allows us to control where we wish to extrude our leather openings.

Early digital sketch-ups in Grasshopper using attractor points allowed insight into potential opportunities, which informed the projection of polyline onto superformula.

Main issue that arose from this technique was the resulted surface typology was not planar, therefore, when trying to set the script up for fabrication issues of orienting each individual panel occurs. To solve this, panels were divided into half polygons which worked but meant we lost the effect of the honeycomb texture.

The algorithm was then used to convert, mesh and patch the polyline and orient each patch through Grasshopper and laid out ready for fabrication.

G TECTONIC ELEMENTS

C2.2.1

REFINEMENT TO FABRICATION PROCESS

Further exploration of the tesselated honeycomb surface, two MDF prototypes were sent and made at varying thicknesses. 3mm and 6mm respectively. To test joint logic of each individual panel by making connectors between each panel to form the base.

Success: 1.

Sharp finish with the algorithm designing each connector angle required to join the next panel. Strong and steady due to the material of MDF. 2.

Spray paint gold gives a perfect finish on MDF and brings a nice rustic shine.

3.

Tested the idea of creating an open panel for programme and leather to extrude out of the perforated openings.

Problems: 1.

Many problems arose with this form of fabrication, the process itself even with tags on the panels requires time to assemble.

2.

The connectors due to the size and scale, due to thickness of material and size of incision the laser cutting machine cuts either too much, or not enough.

Thus, causing issues with assembling. As glue had to be applied in the process.

Future: 1.

Test new joint logic for hexagon base surface, more efficient and easy assemblage is focus.

2.

Test new material, MDF is rigid with no room for movement in the surface, as there is material thickness needs to be taken into consideration and accounted for.

C2.2.2 REFINEMENT TO FABRICATION PROCESS

Tesselated honeycomb surface prototype 2.0 used 2mm boxboard, for a bendable, pliable material. We decided to test rivet joints which can be used as ornamentation like the beads of the throne. Tabs and 3.2mm diameter holes were created around each panel, etched with tags for efficient and easy assembling, the original panel sizes were also bought done by half.

Success: 1. Honeycomb base was joined with rivets with holes designed without worrying about offsets in size. Two prototypes of the boxboard were printed, one at 1:10 scale and the final at 1:20, to test material bending on the tabs.

2. 1:20 scale tabs with 2mm thickness allowed easy bending of the etched tabs and assemblage.

Problems: 2. We found the completed surface is extremely fragile once rivets have join them panels together due to the design and angles created by the script. Thus, during assemblage and handling, the boxboard would rip or break causing unwanted broken tabs in the design.

To comprimise our 1:20 scaled model completes one half of the full scale model.

Future: 1. Test new joint logic for hexagon base surface, more efficient and easy assemblage is focus.

2. Test new material, MDF is rigid with no room for movement in the surface, as there is material thickness needs to be taken into consideration and accounted.

C2.2.3

REFINEMENT TO FABRICATION PROCESS

MDF stencil was lasercut following iterations tested in Kangaroo from B2. A sheet of 1.5 mm thick plastic is heated at preset settings until sag and glossy plastic texture

Pre-Stress method Applying air against the heated plastic and then rapid cooling to retain form, instead of compressing.

Remove clipped fr plastic formed w

rame and MDF stencil, with a gridshell form

Vacuum Forming Following a similar approach to the Kangaroo physics grasshopper plug-in. Vacuum forming machine was used to test air pre-stressing, a method to test and experiment how the leather extrusions form the allocated areas of programme on the accessory. Vacuum forming a mold didn’t seem viable and pre- stressing is the opposite effect of compressing, its a method of applying air when plastic is semi-

Results are successful, key-takeaways are use a smaller stencil for future tests as a lot of plastic material wastage occurs with full size

A method tested is seen in the works of Frei Otto from Part A. The Munich Olympic Stadium utilises a similar approach for form-finding

Pre- Stress Vacuum Forming 2.0 Tested four different stencils of various sizes, material colour of the plastic and the former settings. With the initial preliminary experiments, shown on the left resulted in a more informed choice of control in the vacuum forming procedure.

They were not used as by staying true to the product, we should take the stiched diamond like cushions from the throne and represent them through this method.

We could take the 1:20 scale panels and test the extrusions, through pre-stressing.

The diamond and literally taking the panel openings and testing it. The most successful stencil was the diamond shaped form, as it mimics the openings of the panels.

However, due to its geometry it allowed the best extrusion of leather material out of the tessellation base, as shown in the final model photos on the right.

C2.3 FORM-FINDING TO PROTOTYPING TECTONIC ELEMENTS

STRIPS & FOLDING PROTOTYPE FORM-FINDING PROCESS

1. Form-finding Finger joint

2. Fabrication prototype Testing strip openings and material quality

3. Overlapping pin joint Material etching pattern

During the form-finding process we encountered a lot of problems, especially with testing materiality, joint logic and giving tolerance for potential defects was hard, but rewarding when you solve the issues one-by-one.

This process is the most direct approach to simplify our approach. However, many prototypes tested were for idea generation and will be shown next.

4. Overlapping rivet joint Material pattern testing

5. Final design with material, pattern and rivet joints

C2.3.1 REFINEMENT TO FABRICATION PROCESS - STRIPS

INITIAL PROTOTYPE TESSELATION PATTERNS REPEATED , BOX BOARD 2MM

INITIAL PROTOTYPE TESSELATION PATTERNS REPEATED , PERSPEX 2MM

Early stages of preliminary testing, as per feedback from interim submission.

Start with testing different techniques and how things join, before finalising idea first. We found this approach very informative and successful.

We started with simple repeated elements to create patterns that form voids of hexagon openings. We found the logic behind moments and openings through repeated elements is extremely interesting.

However, we didn’t succeed in carrying through this idea, but helped generate the honeycomb base. As we found to create a grid shell with this single element was structurally impossible.

We tested various materials from Perspex, PPE and Box Board. But we found every time the material was either too rigid and failed, or two soft to hold any sort of form.

As key take-aways from these intial testings is better informed approach to rivet joint holes, when fabricating depending on the material, it may require tolerance. Nuts and Bolts were not successful, as shown in images on the right, as they carry too much weight and are bulky to assemble.

INITIAL PROTOTYPE STRIPS, POLYPROPYLENE 2MM

C2.3.2 REFINEMENT TO FA

Experimentation Early stages of preliminary testing, as per feedback from interim submission. Start with testing different techniques and how things join, before finalising idea first. We found this approach very informative and successful. We started with simple repeated elements to create patterns that form voids of hexagon openings. We found the logic behind moments and openings through repeated elements is extremely interesting.

However, we didn’t succeed in carrying through this idea, but helped generate the honeycomb base. As we found to create a grid shell with this single element was structurally impossible. We tested various materials from Perspex, PPE and Box Board. But we found every time the material was either too rigid and failed, or two soft to hold any sort of form.

ABRICATION PROCESS - STRIPS

Future To further pursue the concept of hexagon void openings from the individual element, we then tested and combined strips with these openings.

Critical feedback was the technique fits our concept. However, during the digital design process we found sketching and fabricating the tectonic element was an issue. The design would comprise and lose the original concept. As we wish to fabricate and design a space that unites two tectonics that are interrelated. Where the base form drives strip technique and openings.

However, to push this design in the future, I wish to see this combined technique creating openings that celebrates the journey the visitor has with the client. To further accentuate the concept of exhibitionism.

C2.3.3 REFINEMENT TO FABRICATION PROCESS

JOINT LOGIC FABRICATION TECHNIQUE OF STRIPS



 

 





The process of fabricating strips for final design explores the rivet joint that pins two overlapping strips. The strips are then pinned to the hexagon base to form the completed accessory. Problems that arose during this process was the strip openings, whilst we planned to have smaller, more intricate openings to further accentuate the experience of voyeurism and exhibitionism.

Inside view of the strips assembled with rivet joints

Outside view of the strips assembled with rivet joints

[ C.3 ] FINAL DETAILED MODEL

 







   

 

 

 

HOW TO ASSEMBLE LUSSOSPAZIO DETAILED GUIDE

ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF ARTPIECIFY YOURSELF

ARTPIECIFY

LUSSOSPAZIO VERSACE BY HASS BROTHERS x LE CORVOUSIERS

ORNAMENTATION Strips joined through overlapping, with bead pin joint Function and aesthetic appeal

Polypropylene strip

COURTYARD SKYLIGHT Interior space of original host, becomes a courtyard, vestibule for transitioning from outside space into the new exhibition space

PROGRAMME

Function of space is defined by openings in the honeycomb base, where the original Cabanon’s programme is defined by the leather extrusions out of the base.

Allocated moments are interconnected with the strip perforations.

Black leather

EXPLODED AXONOMETRIC - MATERIALITY & COMPONENT DETAILS

Gold bead pin joints

STRIP PERFORATIONS Exhibitionism and Voyeurism Creates openings to generate moments where client sees outside and outside peeks inside on the life of the client- voyeurism.

Rustic wood panels of Cabanon

TESSELATION Golden hexagon panels

Honeycomb base Hexagon grid surface that forms the solid foundation base of the accessory space.

C3.2 PROGRAMME PLANS & ELEVATIONS

LOUNGE BATHROOM STUDY

ENTRY EAST SIDE

COURTYARD VESTIBULE CIRCULATION OPEN SPACE KITCHEN SKYLIGHT STORAGE

MINOR ADJACENCY MAJOR ADJACENCY

fig Diagram depicting west elevation

fig Diagram depicting east elevation

PROCESS OF PROGRAMME DEPICTING DESIGN OUTCOME FLOORPLANS

We defined the programme, whereby incorporate the programmatic function of relaxation and comfort. Outdoor space inverts the internal space of the existing Cabanon.

Therefore, what once was private space is now pseudopublic. The space is designed with spatial experience and functions. Diagrams above are abstracted floorplans showing the process of change. The Cabanon serves as a vestibule, a transition of space. Paying homage to the existing Cabanon the new space, the superformula base and layout of programme looks at the modular man.

C3.3 PHYSICAL MODEL

Detail of strips and golden rivet joints

Detail of interior honeycomb base

Detail of interior entrance experience

Detail of looking from outside to inside

Detail of moments looking through openings

Voyeuristic detail peeking through opening

Interior space close-up

Base to strips connection looking out

Moments of peeking inside activity

[ C.4 ] INTO THE FUTURE

TAKING THE DES

While the “Lussos and refined with to continue deve available. Regard further the design the guest panel. K finished concept d House�, but on a

As addressed in openings would component to fu moments of exhib system paying h function.

Although the fin informed based o limited by site. therefore, it could creek. Any contex will allow Lussosp The algorithm of th of programme. W can be tailored to then informs base site. Grasshopper the optimal base essentially design possibilities with l fig Phillip Johnson - Glass House, New Canaan Connecticut- Interior space https://www.inexhibit.com/mymuseum/the-glass-house-philip-johnson-new-

Parametric tools h which I did not c and elements can our defuturing con contradict each ot in the real world t

SIGN INTO THE FUTURE

spazio” has been, for the most part, completed the aid of parametric design. The potential eloping are limitless with the parametric tools ding final presentation feedback, looking to n, we need to address certain issues noted by Key issue was the openings of the strips, as the design is apparent, like Phillip Johnson’s, “Glass more specified approach and not as extreme.

Part C.2, to further this design the current further explore and integrate tesselated urther refine the openings. To create intricate bitionism and voyeurism, based off the modular homage to Le Corbusier’s original Cabanon

nal concept of our design is predominantly off the local site context, the final form is not It ties with the existing Cabanon structure, d be implemented and changed outside of Merri xt with people and foot traffic, not hidden away, pazio to influence the masses. he design is flexible and allows for customization Where the programme and function of the space o our client’s needs, wants and desires. Which e form, to strip openings and how it sites on r script such as “superformula” can generate e geometry based on site context. We have n a system, program that generates limitless little effort for any context.

have bought high flexibility to my design process conceive or fathom before. How simple scripts n combine to generate customizable scripts for ndition. While fabrication and digital design still ther at times. It allows for countless applications to solve our defuturing future.

fig Phillip Johnson - Glass House, New Canaan Connecticut - Exterior https://homeadore.com/2016/03/03/glass-house-philip-johnson/canaan-con-

[ C.4 ] LEARNING OUTCOMES

LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES

Studio Air has allowed me to approach new ways of design thinking and the process. More in-depth explorations and experimentation in both technical skills of the Grasshopper programs. Along with the digital design process, from research to idea, to generation and development, to fabrication prototyping and finally a proposal. The parametric design program, Grasshopper has equipped us with the tools required to generate and explore limitless possibilities in a more time efficient and iterative way. Through the engagement of Part A, research on case studies and understanding what it means to use computational tools for design.

To Part B, starting to study the design outcomes of exisiting designs and realising the limitless applications and possibilities at play. Along with Part C, mass customization, the realisation that we aren’t designing a product or a final piece, we are essentially writing a program that allows us to design for customization for the future. We aren’t limited to the site, the location or the client. Through using computational tools, we create a script that design, generates and creates iterations and new proposals simply through sliders.

Our design is largely shaped by the existing site, with the consideration of existing context, waterflow and typography, it responds to the various attributes of the site and the script allows us to alter and improve where we need. With guidance after interim, our group combined tectonics and underwent mass prototyping of different forms, experimented with materials.

A critical step in idea development, using a variety of different fabrication medias, laser cutting, CNC or whether it be Vacuum forming. We can further investigate and experiment on the deliverables the computer cannot: Scale, Materiality and Assembly (joint logic and form).

[ C.4 ] CONCLUSION

Architecture is represented through how information is shared, whether that be online or semantics. The internet is a tool for boosting exposure and ideas of virality are at play. How one uses the internet, literally controls the world. In this studio, #BreakArchitecture, this semester we have explored consumer desire and celebrity style, what people desire and how we can use tools such as the internet to influence the masses, be viral, just like celebrities in popular culture today.

The ideas of the role of the architect diminishes, as only architects understand architects. However, what if the role of the architect can be shifted and reinvented, then people’s perception of architect’s change with it. If we use architecture as a tool to explore and delve deeper into understanding what consumerist behaviour exist and how we can tap into this consumerist desire.

Architects would be like our final studio brief, designing in a world controlled by celebrity style. Therefore, one can through using computational tools, parametric design to mass customize consumer desire and control culture and behaviour. Architect’s would be the all-powerful, and thus the role does not diminish but redefined. As instead of understanding meaning behind designs, and sharing with people. Ideas can be used to control, hide our own agenda and

purpose. As Lussospazio, our final design concept, looks at identity and one’s reality. Is it the fake filters on Instagram, ego-boosting your self-conscious image and perceiving the internet as your reality. Or would you own that lifestyle and leave it all behind. The client inside the space does not understand the dark reality of the space. Only those outside.

The narcissism and irony in blocking of the world outside and immersing yourself into a space confined by strips. With Lussospazio, the architecture creates a space, a buffer, that forms lifestyle. It can elevate one’s ego through hedonism and constructing your new identity and ego within the space.

The space also explores ideas of voyeurism, the taboo nature of peeking on someone unaware. But what happens when the client is exhibiting, and the viewers are peeking from afar, afraid to be watched watching others in public.

The architecture of Lussospazio is not superficial, even when trying to construct a superficial accessory for young affluent professionals, we hid our own agendas within the design to explore society issues. Does the space break down the walls and create interaction between the two parties?