TEHCNE: ARCHITECTURE By Julia Mavros
v.01 Journal , May 2012
STRUCTURE
1
1. Architecture as a Discourse Computing in Architecture Parametric Modelling Case for Innovation: Conclusion
1
Case for Innovation
1.2.1. 1.2.1.1 1.2.1.2 1.2.1.3 1.2.1.4 1.2.2
Research Project
1.3
Evaluation
1.2 Scope of possibilities Input/Association/Output Matrix Reverse-Engineered Case-Study Material Effects Assembly Methods Research Project Conclusion
1
1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 1.1.4
1.3 EOI Conclusion: Competitive Adv Learning Objectives + Outcomes: Interim
1.4
1 march 2012
case for innovation part one
1.1
part 1.1.1 week one case for innovation: architecture as a discourse
Understanding the Course: Architecture as Discourse Understanding the Course: On the lecture: Introduction to the course learning objectives, framing of the project and scratching at the surface of what architectural discourse means. Looked at architecture as a holistic, cultural practice: apart from the building’s physical presence, architecture contributes to the culture of a society. What are the primary functions? How does discourse engage within contemporary society? It is the discourse of architecture that contributes to its function and success, not construction of the building itself. Ideas ARCHITECTURE
(b) Why is it significant/ appropriate?
(a) What are the implications? Author starts with the description of the traditional way which approaches architecture as a form of art. Mainly, when he talks about the discourse of architecture, he refers to the traditional way of looking at architecture as art, value and critique; examined and assessed from its aesthetic aspect, prominently emphasizing the facade. Aesthetics, appearance, appeal- in the way a visual work of art impacts upon people.
Architecture is not, and should not, just be considered as art only: it is also science, symbolism, as well as urban and social experience. Williams argues that it should not only be the realm of the specialists, nor the academics: ANYONE, rather, should be able to say ‘ okay, I have my own explanation, my own understanding and interpretation of that type of thing’ 1. Altogether the architecture discourse is changing and changing for the better- why? Because it’s a more honest, holistic approach to design in contrast to architecture as art, the two not being mutually exclusive, and looking to new technologies for new potentialities and opportunities for architecture- as a service toward humanity.
and AS
DISCOURSE FROM
On the reading: Richard Williams
innovations: A
SOCIAL AS
INSULAR
CONDENSER POWER
TO
INVITATION
1Williams, “Architecture and Visual Culture”, 107-108
*AUTHOR CONTENDS TO LOOK AT ARCHITECTURE FROM 2 FURTHER PERSPECTIVES:
ARCHITECTURE AS A SIGN OR SYMBOL
LOOKING AT BUILDING OVERALL MOTIVE + INTELLECTUAL CONCEPTION OF PRODUCT ENTIRELYOWNED BY ARTIST/ CREATOR
LOOKS BEYOND FACADE
POWER OF SIGN: MEANING TRANSCENDS ALL BOUNDARIES E.G. LANGUAGE + EDUCATION BREAKING BOUNDARIES
EIFFEL TOWER ANAOLOGY
ARCHITECTURE AS PRODUCTION
ARCHITECT/ COLLECTION OF INDIVIDUALS + ARCHITECTS = PRODUCT THE USE MADE OF THE PRODUCT, BY THE PEOPLE SPACE:
SOCIAL + POLITICAL FUNCTION DISCOURSE ELEVATED
HUMAN EXPERIENCE TOTAL EXPERIENCE POST MODERNIST CRITIQUE: IT IS A MATTER OF HOW EACH + EVERYONE OF US SEES + PERCEIVES ARCHITECTURE
*Williams, Richard (2005). ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture: Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press), pp. 102-116
START NOT JUST ART ARCHITECTURE AS A SPATIAL EXPERIENCE
SIMPLE/ INCOMPLETE ARCHITECTURE AS ART= NOT CREATION/WORK OF ‘SINGLE’ INDIVIDUAL
SPECIFIC/ REQUIREMENTS/ CONDITIONS REQUESTED BY PATRON/ CLIENT /GOVERNMENT
FINAL PRODUCT MULTITUDE INDIVIDUALS
SPECIALISTS
REGULATORS MORE THAN JUST SYMBOLIC, OR ‘ART’ FOR AESTHETIC VALUE
PRODUCT OF ARCHITECTURE EXCEEDS BEYOND ARCHITECTURE HAS UTILITY
FUNCTIONAL ROLE
ADMIRED
ASSESSED
VALUED
ARCHITECTURE AS CONSUMPTION
IN ENGAGING WITH DISCOURSE HAVING A RELATIONSHIP TO SOMETHINGTHAT EXISTS + RELATES TO IT = ARCHITECTURE ELEVATED, DIFFERENT IMPORTANCE
IN PUBLIC DOMAIN: EVERY MAN HAS/ IS ENTITLED TO OWN EXPERIENCE OF ARCHITECTURE- IMPACT
INVIVIDUAL/ PERSONAL NOT SPECIALIST SPECIFIC. NO MORE RIGHTS THAN AVERAGE PERSON
END
(c) How does it relate to the project? Please refer to diagram
“This broadening of architecture allows for different kinds of interpretation…in the view of critic Charles Jencks (Horn 1939), it allowed ‘double coding’ in other words, a dual set of symbolic references, one for interpretation by ‘high’ architects, the other by the general public.”1 Resonates with Brief: let us reach out to the wider community, to the general public and increase its awareness of the municipality of Wyndham- through the interaction of a sculpture. Uses the benefits of a technological advanced system- in our case, scripting through grasshopper. Parametric in the sense of aiding in technical skill, not creative restriction or dictatorship. Must learn to use Grasshopper with discretion, where it is efficient, not for the sake of creating elaborate definitions. 1
Williams, “Exploring Visual Culture”, 112.
On Rhino Tutorials: Not as yet delved into GH, experimented with modeling in Rhino. Aimed at familiarizing myself with x and y planes, ability to optimize view ports and building simple shapes/ performing basic commands such as mirror, rotate etc. I found it took me much longer to complete the webinar exercises than expected; this sent warning bellsneed to develop these technical skills sooner than later.
Precedent 1 Architect: Project: Date: Location:
Peter Zumthor Therme Vals 1993-1996 Vals, Switzerland
Connection to approach/ advancing discourse: Symbiotic relationship to its natural surroundings and materials Absence of unnecessary, architectural flourishes. In undertaking research into Zumthor’s work, I began to explore the possibilities and constraints of design that are based around the things that are only essential. He says “perception of the whole not be-
ing distracted by inessential detail”.1 Takes his design and adapts it cohesively with the physical environment. Forming a complementarity of the construction, with the physical environment and nature of design. Link to Williams’ reference to architecture as production and consumption: in this case, the architecture having a spatial relationship to things that exist around and relate to it. Although the context of Zumthor’s project is completely different with the Gateway, Williams point delivers- through the spatial parameter - its use and consumption by people - architecture takes a different importance, and the discourse is elevated to the social and political function of architecture, on every level enabled through growth both physically and intellectually/ cognitively. This is the very essence of growth. There is a conceptual reference to Le Corbusier’s architecture, to his concept of a space which is both functional and aesthetic, along the lines of an architecture 1
wZumthor 2002
“of silence, which speaks without shouting, without big gestures... because the things that last are the things which best fulfil their mission. This is the root of the need not to disturb, of the pleasure of silent forms, of their simple existence, until they become, I hope, an integral part of the essence of a place.” PETER ZUMTHOR, 2000 *Image: Karaiskakis ‘Therme Vals and the Concealment of Complexity’, 2007.
Precedent 2 Architect: Project: Date: Location:
Peter Zumthor Swiss Pavilion 2000 Hanover, Germany
Connection to approach: -Growth + Materiality -Elegant minimal design, “following” the nature of wood as a changing, living material -Expressive potential of the material “I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT HOW MY BUILDINGS AGE, THAT THEY SHOULD BE ECONOMICAL TO MAINTAIN. I WANT TO ACHIEVE SOMETHING LASTING, DURABLE WITH MY ARCHITECTURE. BUT I LIKE TO INTRODUCE NATURAL ELEMENTS AND PHENOMENA INTO MY ARCHITECTURE WHICH REFLECT THE PASSAGE OF TIME.”
Advancing discourse: Culture’s obsession with high technology- looking to low tech materials for inspiration. And natural systems: how they succeed and fail. Taking power away from the designer, from the ability to ‘control’ a design. Letting nature run its course. Durability of constructed materials VS natural materials.
Advancing Discourse: Lebbus Woods: “to what extent is destruction necessary for creation,” when looking at Matta-Clarks ‘Building Cuts’, we recognize a similar question, a need to demonstrate an alternative attitude to buildingssubtracting, altering, removing exposing. This ‘removal’ process can be approached as letting the public in- removing boundaries and barriers. This is what we can offer Wyndham: a greater connection to the greater city. Let us not be afraid in breaking things down, in destruction, as opposed to building up, and boxing in.
Link to Williams’ diagram: Art historians, or specialists/ "authorities" who in the past engaged in the discourse of architecture, looked at it from a very narrow perspective- as specialists trying to interpret the intention of the artist, the architect. The post-modernist critique now queries, questions that and goes beyond it. It is not enough or about what the "authority" says about an architect, his intentions and his product. It is a matter of how each and everyone of us sees and perceives architecture: it's in the public domain and everyone has their own experience of architecture and they feel its impact individually and personally. The specialists have no more rights than the average person in the street engaging in the discourse of architecture.
Precedent 3 Architect: Project: Date: Location:
Gordon Matta-Clark Building cuts, ‘Conical Intersect’ 1975 Paris Biennale
Image: Structural investigation model, by Garret Knoll and Adrianne Ngam, Green Bay, USA, 2012.
part 1.1.2 week 2 case for innovation: computation in architecture
Introduction to Computing in Architecture “Because design is a way of thinking intrinsically weaved with the most existential human characteristics, that of logic, artificiality, creativity, and identity, algorithms serve as the means to explore beyond, in parallel, or in lieu of traditional established ways of thinking...In such a synergetic relationship the unpredictable, impossible, or unknown are not factors of fear but rather invitations for exploration.” - Kostas Terzidis ‘Algorithmic Architecture’
On the lecture: Introduced to the modes and roles of contemporary computing in architecture. All connotations of the word ‘space’ do not need building to have a social activity: computational design= hybrid spaces= a new engagement. Formalism VS rationalism, but with intelligent form and creativity (trackable). Ideas of how to allow architectural design to shape and grow: introduce a ‘new order’ construction: create urban spaces: occupation. Connection of lecture and my ideas: biological and natural environments e.g. the formation of ant hills simulated and adapted via parametric approach/design. A graceful reaction, reconstructed (computer) without destroying, responsible, efficient, flexible way of production.
What I took from the lecture/ week: Spatial control extends beyond - POSSIBILITY stay experimental. Constantly changing. Be bold. Explore restraint. Computation: exchange of information on a global scaleuse this to your advantage, but beware of ownership. And originality. The loaded and changing meaning of ‘creation’ and original. Submission- distributioninnovation- initiative.
Grasshopper Tutorial Summary: Very explorative and equally confusing at times. Focused on familiarizing myself with toolbars, context menus and icons. Beginning to understand that grasshopper definitions are not always the most appropriate ways to approach a design, should use Rhino where time can be saved (e.g. curves). But that generating a parametric loft from referenced geometry in Rhino can be used in conjunction with Grasshopper to form points and perform cool, intricate functions. Panel component helped remind me of steps taken, really helpful at this stage of early learning. Need to try to stay consistent with this process.
Precedent 1 Architect: Casey Reas Project: Tissue Place: Los Angeles Date: 2002
Unique Innovation: Software exposes the movement of thousands of synthetic neural systems- each line in the image reveals the history of one system’s movement. People interact with the software by positioning a group of points on the screen, where by moving the points, they acquire an understanding of the system as a whole- the relations between the positional input and rich visual output. * Technical information & images provided by Group c & REAS website
This precedent was fundamental in my learning, understanding and appreciation of the role of computation in architecture. Immediately upon first glance, it has these soft, delicate characteristics. Things I would never have associated with parametric design in the past. It has an inherent humanistic quality to it which appeals to me, and the link of the software with neural systems further dignifies the opportunity and potential of designing with computers. It is the success of the symbiosis between technology and the human being.
The interface of this system is something I wish to explore in approaching the brief. There are limitations with interacting with software, considering the project is on a highway. However, I shall employ investigation in the potential of generating data from the road, vehicle or perhaps fixed cameras as interacting with a software system.
“Architects are ultimately choreographers of systems, and the benefits of teaching programming in an architectural context are manifold. If architecture wants to survive as a discipline, it needs to engage the culture of innovation and computing.� (Mark Collins & Toru Hasegawa, Proxy)
Unique innovation: Alternate Architecture Alternate architecture: life, technology, and existence As much as technology is profoundly inter-facing with and extending human life and existence, there is no transmutation or trans-substantiation between animate and non-animate matter. Nor is there human existence, and certainly consciousnessand thus meaningfulness- in living, if all human organs/ parts are not fully and cohesively functioning. Antithesis argument: The gateway project uses the design project (technological interfacing) and the natural environment to provide a symbiotic outcome of functionality, appeal and organic encapsulation of growth and its temporality. In comparison, the approach of alternate architecture, exemplified by the ‘Third Arm’ project, is contrary to the naturalness of growth and cohesive integration.
Material- Stelarc’s is no symbiosis. One is living matter the other is not. There is no naturalness. Naturaleness and complimentarity. You cannot turn one into the other. You cannot change something from one state to another. Non-animate matter (steel, wood, etc.) cannot be turned into animate matter.
As much as technology is profoundly inter-facing with and extending human life and existence, there is no transmutation or trans-substantiation between animate and non-animate matter. Nor is there human existence, and certainly consciousnessand thus meaningfulness- in living, if all human organs/parts are not fully and cohesively functioning. A limb can be kept alive/ grafted onto another body, artificial organs can be introduced to the human body, but limbs or organs functioning on their own only or separately, do not sustain and cannot constitute life and human consciousness. Eventually, there has to be an overall inter-connected, integrated functionality of all parts/organs/limbs of an entity- human or mechanical/ artificial.
Yet, technological advance and human ingenuity provide limitless combinations and possibilities for forms of existence, quality of life/living, and at least potentialities of chimeric nature, overall increasing the tapestry of human imagination, creativity and boundlessness. In this light and paradigm, alternate architecture cannot but add to the reservoir of all human activity, thinking and meaning, let alone to the styles, modes and rhythms of architecture to date.
Precedent 2
“I SIMPLY HAD A DISTASTE FOR ANYTHING THAT SOUGHT TO DAMPEN THE INFLUENCE OF WHAT I REGARDED AS THE MOST PRECIOUS DESIGN INPUT AFFORDED TO US AS HUMANS: OUR INTUITION .” -MARK BURY
Artist: Project: Date:
Stelarc Third Hand 1976- 1981
*images: stelarc.org
Summary of the reading: Symbiosis 1: computer mind + human mind = optimal design opportunity This has been the most fundamental point in my learning thus far: understanding the role/strengths/weaknesses of design of the computer and the human mind, and realizing the potential and benefit of the two combined- however, only when necessary. Grasshopper tutorials have brought this to light, sometimes Rhino commands can be a more efficient approach to the design. Lesson: use software that will optimize efficiency of design process. Do not choose the most complicated process to achieve a simple task, for the sake of proving technical skill. Something to be mindful of for the Gateway project design, worth experimenting with in matrix task 1 Kalay, “Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design”, 3.
Personal criteria-
as suggested by Kalay reading
1.
Dissect it:
2.
Plan it: time management, set achievable goals, but be most creative and adventurous at this stage of design, not necessarily rational
3. 4. 5.
identify all the elements of the problem- goals, constraints, side effects potential designs can create
Break it: Judge it: Share it:
divide work in group, playing on strengths and weaknesses constructive criticism will make a design better, evaluation is essential
listen to others, share with others. Aesthetics, experience and ‘feel’ need more than one opinion to become informed. Sharing also by process of models, photographs, information derived from digital models and tex tual arguments
Mastering those methods which are most efficient (through trial and error) to optimize design.
part 1.1.3 week three case for innovation: parametric design
Introduction to Parametric Modeling On the lecture:
Grasshopper Tutorial Summary:
Introduced to the concept of parametric design. Many case study examples exemplifying this helped re-affirm what it looks like, what it enables and what to strive for. Placed us in a position to think about parametric design potentialities, as well as constraints for the Expression of Interest document. A lot of information covered, required re-listen online. Difficult in these early stages of the course to get a clear grasp of these concepts- discourse, computational + parametric design.
Big step up from last week’s material: into vector and NURBS geometry and simple transforms. Exercise 7 ‘orient an object around a circle’ was particularly interesting. I enjoyed experimenting with different cone profiles as they produced some different forms. And really complete, well executed, better and quicker than drawn-by-hand. I never though I’d be able to achieve these results (complex geometries for me) prior to this tute, and without the aid of the mathematical definitions.
THE PRECEDENT CONNECTION- A PRO FOR SCRIPTING At the core of Andrasek’s A/MAZE is an accumulative library of scripts, applicable to the constraints of materials, structure, fabrication and assembly. “Evolving algorithmic infrastructure allows a designer to work at the scale of information linked to various forms of materialisation” Alisa Andrasek Computational design enhances the potential for precise expressions, at various scales to be experimented with, and produced. In our case, the programming is visual- Grasshopper rather than textual. One advantage: page8 “a significantly deeper engagement between the computer and user by automating routine aspects and repetitive activities, thus facilitating a far greater range of potential outcomes for the same investment in time”. 2 IMAGES: www. biothing.org
THE ‘P’ WORD ANTICIPATING CRITICISM: The main concern hovering over and around the ‘p’ word (parametric design) seems to be around inventiveness. Are we as student designers inventing new strategies and approaches? How can we sell our idea to Wyndham City, if our ideas are not our own? “Still very few are truly inventive. We are at the very beginning of this process and very few designers are already virtuosic [sic] and highly creative. Many are still vertiginously propagating other people’s inventions. This condition is changing with maturing of scripting cultures.” (Alisa Andrasek) We are limited with the scope of what we can learn in such a small amount of time, however, and therefore not directly a target of this criticism. But for future endeavors of using grasshopper or other programs, they are constructive things to work toward.
Reflection: We need to consider scripting as a design process, however tough it may be to make a distinction between what is a tool and what is your design. Herein lies the challenge: duplicity. Has to be about your design and what drives your design- about using particular tools to make the process efficient, and overall, appropriate.
NOT JUST A WAY OF DESIGN, A WAY OF THINKING A difficult moment in architecture: evaluate what we think of as being a ‘designer’ Digital architecture is a paradigm shift: it makes use of, and is enabled through “machine”- technology, and it is process driven. Yet, it is inherently man directed, explored and controlled. As a final product, it is conceptually the creation of the human mind- it cannot exist without it. ‘P’ design makes time consuming, technical and menial tasks immeasurably easier and quicker to accomplish. Also, it provides maximum number of specifically and technically precise options/potentialities that the human mind can be challenged to produce.
Idea of specialization More depth to this approach of designing, than just typing Process driven architecture? Process is important, but there still needs to be an outcome. Why we want to use scripting? Not designing a building, more about exploring forms- not prescriptive. This relates directly with the methodology driving design: Way material interacts with patterning Documenting patterns Making the invisible, visible
Reference list so far: Burry, Mark. “Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming”. (2011): pp 8-71.
Chichester: Wiley
Kalay, Yehuda E. “Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design”, Cambridge. Mass: MIT Press (2004): pp 5 -25. Williams, Richard. “Architecture and Visual Culture”, Exploring Visual Culture: Definitions, Concepts, Contexts ed. Matthew Rampley, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press (2005): pp 102116. Terzidis, Kostas. ----www.biothing.org reas.com stelarc.org
Algorithmic Architecture.
Oxford: Elsevier, 2006. Selected Pages
Introduction to the Design Project: Public Art and Motorways On the lecture:
What I took from the lecture/ week:
Introduction of the design project, drawing on urban intervention precedents and discussion of criteria and context of the competition. The emphasis of the lecture given by representatives: municipality and a connection to the metropolis via the gateway. Project objective for a better connection and outlook of the Wyndham community- more attractive, recognizable, aesthetic. Sitespecific information also delivered. Marcus White discussed how a project could be ‘experienced’, the value of an EOI, and potential for formal complexity through simple mathematical processes.
Understanding your client, understanding your community is imperative to the design process. This gives you scope and constraints to design within. However, understanding your position within the site is equally as important- and in our case, the experience. A sculpture in this position is to be a transitory experience. Re-adjust perception of sculptural design. Re-asses priorities: function or aesthetics? Push for dynamic not static.
Ideas and innovations:
Another valuable lesson I learnt this week was the importance of backing up work. This has been the most mentally difficult task to overcome thus far. Computers will remain unreliable, but it is our role as human beings to have to plan ahead for these situations. Although only 10 per cent of work was recoverred, and I was left computer-less for over a week, by re-doing the matrix exercise 3 or so times over, I began to look at my work critically in relation to the broader scope.
On the Exlab Grasshopper tutorials Prior to completing the matrix task, I tackled these exercises and came out with two important concepts: 1- Circle component: is running an algorithm that takes two parameters and outputs of the circle. If GH receives a different amount of information for the 2 parameters, then it maps the algorithm to produce as many circles as it can. So, if it only received 1 input for the location of the circle, and 11 for the radius, then it uses this same location for all 11 radii. Why is this a useful tool in GH? It means if we can define 1 algorithm to produce 1 circle, then it’s no different to produce 500,000+ circles. 2- Inputting several points for a circle: If the distance to an attractor point controls the size of a circle, how can we do this? Using a math equation. The further the circle from the attractor point, the smaller its radius should be. So if something’s closer to the attractor, it’s more heavily influenced. Skills: Found a way of creating input geometry in the form of a hexagonal grid. Using an associative technique: finding the distance between the location of circles and an attractor, and multiplying the length using maths function (invert 1/x). The output: circle. But we can substitute any of these elements (input output associative techniques) with a different algorithm. Substituting input instead of the hexagonal grid creates paths on a surface - replace point attractor with an image and look at different output geometry. Surfaces don’t have any volume.
Variation: Move a grid of points using a random function. By additionally connecting a number slider to the integer input of the random component, I was able to control the points, so that they aren’t so sporadic. This might be defeating the purpose of the exercise. Yet, it leads to my future scope/ possibilites to plot information of the site. For example, creating controlled points of growth rates, such as speed limit of the highway, compared with random points such as accidents on the highway. These points can be data derived from the Wyndham City Council, or Vic Roads. Again, playing with this notion of control.
Link to symbiotic studies: computer + human = MATRIX POSSIBILITIES = optimal design opportunities
HUMAN MIND
COMPUTER MIND
LECTURES, TUTORIALS, INDEPENDENT RESEARCH
SYMBIOSIS
GRASSHOPPER, RHINO
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY ATMOSPHERE, WEATHER
MATERIALS, PRODUCTION
CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
WHEN THE COMPUTER AND HUMAN CLASH
Challenge 1: Baking GH/ exporting Rhino to Illustrator
Challenge 2: The computer crash
T HE POT E NT I A L SUSTAINABILITY current strategies in place: litter reduction & prevention site: l o c a t i o n water action plan car c a p s u l a r waterways strategy plan pros + cons BUT NOTHING grow for greenwaste ing mor populat e fam ion = gre envi ater sen ilies = ronm s enta itivity to l con ditio ns The estimated population as at June 2012 is 184,191 people representing a 7.1 per cent annual growth rate. (source forecast.id, 2010)
Wyndham has experienced the largest and fastest growth in all Victorian local government areas and is the third fastest growing in Australia.
CONTROL
BREAKING THE MOULD
encourages ong o i n g interest by generating care for further r e f l e c t i o n beyong f i r s t g l a n c e
abstract aspirational
THE EXISTING WHAT? western gateway design project
WHO $$ funding project wyndham city council
OBJECTIVE? inspires & enriches the municipality altering perception and c o n v e n t i on s sculpture as ‘pleasant’ to view
accessible to a wide public
explore placemaking
compelling
longevity in its appeal
+ Spanning 542 square kilometres + On a coastal plain on the western fringe of Melbourne + Diversity of sectors: strong industrial and technology districts, two major retail precincts. Intensive vegetable growing areas and grazing lands. + The principal areas of population are Werribee and Hoppers Crossing, with substantial growth occurring in Tarneit, Point Cook, Truganina and Wyndham Vale.
EXISTING CATEGORIES
+ Major industrial area at Laverton North.
+ Werribee Park Mansion
ART TOURISM COMMUNITY
+ Shadowfax Winery + Point Cook Coastal Park + RAAF Museum & Interactive Flying Display
INTERPRETING THE BRIEF
+ Werribee Open Range Zoo + Wyndham Art Gallery
impact c o n f r o n t i n g?
upgrade conditions of street s c a p e s o p e n spaces and p a r k s
provide a statement
THE DESIRES
With reference to Kalay Kalay’s 1 diagram on the right indicates a logical approach to dealing with goals and solutions when designing. Before even attempting the matrix combinations, I devised a plan of how I would approach the task. I did this simply by filling out the blanks in Kalays already developed plan. In doing this exercise, I formulated a structure which would assist me in the design process. In assisting, I refer to attacking the design process with more cohesion, direction and focus. It was also benefitial in assessing what the priorities were for the task at hand, as well as future speculations.
matrix reflective of concept and criteria
creative/logical matrix heirachy labelled
generate 90 combinations be critical during design process
allocate number/ techniques/ skills amongst team members
combinations variation? development? explorative?
THE MATRIX TASK
generate a matrix using input, output and associative techniques
understand + develop function + components for future modelling generate a matrix using provided inputs and associative techniques
expressive in design intent
PERSONAL CRITERIA Dissect it: Identify all the goals and constraints at beggining. Plan it: Set 4 days to be creative with design process, 2 days to evaluate work and construct matrix layout, and 1 day to receive feedback/make adjustments. This was a nice plan, but in reality, 4 weeks worth of work closer to the reality. Break it: Divide work in group, complete a minimum of 30 combinations Judge it: Constructive criticism and evaluation is an essential process. Share it: Listen to others, share with others - with tutors, with peers. Ask others what immediately comes to mind when viewing matrix - is the direction and concept clear? Use the internet to share a wider audience, and faster. information with
1 Kalay, “Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design�, 16. 2 Kalay, “Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design�, 20. 3 Kalay, “Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design�, 20.
“Designers, therefore, must impose upon them additional constraints to make the selection process more tractable” 2
For MATRIX 1
(following page)
Constraint 1: abstract aspirations To create combinations that can portray philosophical underpinnings. How to approach this? Be conscious of using/ forming chains and link type formations when designing. Constraint 2: aesthetics To create combinations that portray levels of growth and deterioration. How to approach this? Focus on contrasting elements such as linear pathways and size of circle radii. Constraint 3: political or social messages To create combinations that can speak to a wide, moving audience i.e. children in vehicles. How to approach this? Design patterns with sophistication - this does not mean complext and chaotic patterns. Aim for simple, clean and relatable designs.
THE RESULT “...gradually reduces the size of solution space and guides the process toward a particular solution” 3
+ SURFACE GRIDS + ATTRACTOR POINT
+ SURFACE GRIDS + CURVE ATTRACTOR
+ SURFACE GRIDS + IMAGE SAMPLER
+ BOOLEAN PATTERNING + ATTRACTOR POINT
+ BOOLEAN PATTERNING + CURVE ATTRACTOR
+ BOOLEAN PATTERNING + IMAGE SAMPLER
+ CURVE INTERSECTION + ATTRACTOR POINT
+ CURVE INTERSECTION + CURVE ATTRACTOR
+ CURVE INTERSECTION + IMAGE SAMPLER
+ ARBITRARY POINTS + ATTRACTOR POINT
+ ARBITRARY POINTS + CURVE ATTRACTOR
+ ARBITRARY POINTS + IMAGE SAMPLER
SPECULATIONS: Patterns appear cohesive - more ‘finished’ compared with other combinations. This has a more fluid effect/ value in how to use this beyond surface application, beyond resolved or digital.
+ SURFACE GRIDS + MATHS FUNCTION
+ SURFACE GRIDS + MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION
IN RELATION TO NARRATIVE: To show depth - micro life forces xray vision daytime/nightime application using images as propaganda/ iconography.
SPECULATIONS: A lot of variation from strong to weak line weight. Could be used to show variations of groups in Wyndham, e.g. age groups, males/ females. IN RELATION TO NARRATIVE: To show variation of people living in the community; difference in age group=different approach to sustainable living.
+ BOOLEAN PATTERNING + MATHS FUNCTION
+ BOOLEAN PATTERNING + MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION SPECULATIONS: Mapping - Wyndham in relation to Melbourne and Geelong. Proximity to green facilities, e.g. parks, recycling outputs, water plants. Proximity to attractions, e.g. wWrribee Zoo.
+ CURVE INTERSECTION + MATHS FUNCTION
+ CURVE INTERSECTION + MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION
IN RELATION TO NARRATIVE: Apply sharp intersecting patterns to emphasize the rate of growth and decay/ contrast how the process is occuring simultaneously and at different rates.
SPECULATIONS: Clear, simple, easy to read. Could be used to articulate data, such as tectonic points on site, growing morphologies or ‘cluster’ areas of high density, e.g. traffic patterns at peak hours.
+ ARBITRARY POINTS + MATHS FUNCTION
+ ARBITRARY POINTS + MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION
IN RELATION TO NARRATIVE: Growth ‘spurts’. Expression of decay such as fungus spores, termite mound placement, populations and areas of migration.
USING SURFACE NORMALS + ATTRACTOR POINTS
+ EXTRUDE
+ CURVE ATTRACTOR
+ EXTRUDE
+ IMAGE SAMPLER
In completing this matrix combination, the focus was on considering the behavior in terms of materiality. In approaching this task, I employed Kalay’s Breadth first process: I looked at several ways to develop a canditate solution and explore this iteration, before any one was to be chosen as the finite combination. One way of doing this was to look at each definition critically, and from different view ports, in order to understand the way it could potentially be viewed/ experienced at different levels.
+ ROTATE
+ ROTATE
I tried to capture the interdeterminate atmospheric qualities that people experience when being ‘out in the open’/ when in contact with the air. Experimenting with the radii of the circles was one way of doing this, as well as with start and end points, and attnetion to textural qualities. This combination reflects the intimacy and personality of individual experience. No two people experience the same thing idendically - variations will always exist. This is something driving my design direction.
+ MATHS FUNCTION
+ MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION
+ MULTIPLE MATHS FUNCTION
OVERLAPPING PATTERNS
Attractor Point + Extrude + Rotation
Image Sampler + Extrude
Image Sampler + Rotation + Extrude
Image Sampler + Rotation
Maths Function + Rotation
Multiple Maths Function + Extrude
Multiple Maths Function + Rotation + Rotation
In this matrix, we have a convergence of the elements: air, space, location and matter, the outcome of which is growth and evolution. We can see this articulated in the above example, where the extrusions symbolise clusters of growth and deterioration.
BOOLEAN PATTERNING
Figure 1
+ Maths Function + Rotation This matrix is merely a detail of my preferred Boolean Patterning combinations, exemplifying the limitless potentialities that parametric design has to offer. Figure 1 articulates the control element in the sense that all the circles are interlaced and bound by one another. One break in the chain, or in our case, the grasshopper definition, would cause disruption to the overarching pattern. Conceptually, this is metaphoric for the current trend in architecture/design fields: designer/artist losing control once the final product is out in the public domain.
Figure 2
SURFACE GRIDS + Maths Function This combination explores fluctuations. The method could potentially be employed later in the design process, in relation to the exsiting topography and contours/ undulations of the landscape.
Still unknown waters No specific terms or conditions
Performative Architecture
Open to questions, to interogation
Parametric Modelling inhibitions Associate a particular geometry - to another particular geometry
Optimise how we think about materials Do Mapping the way people move through space Greg Lynn Forefounder Embriological House Project 2000 How aeronorctic and shipping industries for inspiration Each component could have embedded within it, fabrication information
SSStimulation
Intelligence - heirachical situation Efficiency - make updates to small components, without having to make many changes within ‘whole’ Ability to TEST - faster, better, volumes
Physical space Digital space
Why Computing?
Performance-Driven Design On the lecture:
This diagram is a summation.
Optimising architecture through performance/ in conjunction with: Space usage
Fabrication
Lighting
Thermal usage Negotiation between the two: suboptimal
Procedual
Fully optimised buildings are a misnoma
Feedback throughout design process makes you and your design more informed Enabled through parametric modelling
Design industry competing with optimisation
Thus far, projects are arbitrary - more or less an aesthetic exercise in expression
From arbitrary to feedback > quantifiable
Design tools Generative tools: collapse design and evaluation in sequence with each other Evaluative tools:
FORM FINDING : explorative process, ideas which you work with, understanding of materiality > embedded within design process. Simulate the physical.
Predominantly used by engineers
IMAGE
PROJECT
De Young Musuem [ Herzog & de Meuron ]
Restaurant Aoba-Tei [ Hitoshi Abe ]
Airspace Tokyo [ Faulders Studio ]
Dior Ginza [ Office of Kumiko Inui ]
BANQ Restaurant [ Office DA ]
Carabanchel Social Housing [ Foreign Office Architects ]
John Lewis Department Store [ Foreign Office Architects ]
Spanish Pavilion, Expo 2005 [ Foreign Office Architects ] Gantenbein Vineyard Facade [ Gramazio & Kohler ]
PARAMETRIC
perforation; layering; weathering
ANALYSIS conscious choice of material: copper properties ‘deterioration’ + ‘changeability’ = decoration air as design protagonist symbiotic: using ‘p’ techniques to simulate a natural process/effect
perforation; abstraction from nature
from natural landscape > urban form exploration of the old + new : old environment + new technologies (critique of society?)
layering; voronoi patterning
digital technology replicating a natural system – vegetation
perforation; image mapping; layering
contouring
cutting; folding
layering
icon: signature motif – association – glorifying a label scale + branding high end, stunning, simple: poised, classic power, control – beautifully restrained topological ,tectonic variation amalgamation seamlessness filtered emerging dictates logic in
light – forest mimicry technologies VS nature. Which of the two our design process/inspires us more? natural evolving design process. systematic?
a heavy/ highly utilized space of everyday use, with no demand for aesthetic appeal, which is constantly seen, visited and frequented by people; appearance and functionality complimenting one another: function + aesthetic beauty for the sake of beauty
image mapping; selective perforation
cultural heritage: islamic geometric patterns + foliage based arabesques pattern metaphoric of decorative Islamic calligraphy, instead of pictures which were forbidden in mosque architecture use of bright colour
stacking; rotation; image mapping
insulator treatment of sunlight + temperature pattern: pre-specified, organizational and orienteda ‘moving’ perspective what is pure? what is perspective?
Why we chose the Dior to reverse-engineer: After evaluating the matrix task, it was the combination of Image Sampler Associative Technique and Overlapping Patterns Input that stood out to our group. This combination could be applied to the case-study, where the overlapping pattern simulates a skin like, shifting effect, between two surfaces. The shifting pattern interplays with the filtration of light, which sharpens the overall image.
Model 1: Fabrication In achieving the desired effect of a ‘skin’ in the effect of layering, two overlapping screens were created. Our prototype comprised of 6 panels at 300mm x 3. We quickly realised in this phase of preparation for fabrication, that intricate details (such as using images in image sampler) may not always be achievable. In this design process we began to evaluate our priorities: achievable/unachievable amount of detail to be fabricated. One way of dealing with this problem, was to create new grid dimensions. This dispersed the pattern more rationally on the geometry.
Model 1: Constraints One of the constraints, as outlined by Kalay, was cost. I had no qualms with cost or budget for this model, however, other member in the group could not justify spending money on experiments at this stage of the design process. This was frustrating and disheartening. And the first encounter with group dynamic problems. I feel as though digital modelling, fascilitated by digital fabrication, would have given greater scope in design potentialities and discoveries. Had we produced more models, more outcomes would have been realised. This would have enabled a clearer direction for future designing as physical testing delivers clear ad/disadvantages. The laser cutter was the chosen mode for fabrication of this model, as the perforations of the pattern performed by human hand, could not match that of a machine. Additionally, there was huge appeal in using the laser cutter, as our group had no experience using this tool, previous to this subject.
Explorative Criteria: Layering Effect – The ‘Skin’ Linearity - Using intersections to represent growth and rising populations Shadowing visual effects – A looming presence, a growing population Materiality – A natural resource, sustainable aims
Materiality selection for fabrication The plywood was a conscious contrast from the alluminium in the Dior case study. We aspired for a material which met expressive needs, over aesthetic quality. This is something we hope to experiment with further testing - a subtractive method using low technologies.
Shadowing effect:
An airspace seperates the two layers of the facade of the Dior building: 1 perforated, 1 printed
The moire effect produced by the scalar dissonance between the 2 layers of the facade of the Dior builiding
The micro image enhances the textual qualities of the material. Not only does this bring to the foreground the benefits of laser cutting - an emerging digital technology, but it creates an opportunity to experience the model at a more realistic scale. This is important for future designing outcomes > placing views at an appropriate context.
These images explore the model skin, as an internal and external layer. The lighting conditions enable the perforations of the plywood to stand out in contrast to the existing linear pattern. This enables the transparency.
Architecture as a science: As taught. As a construct by master builders, artisans; practical experience. Separating architecture from art to science- conceive and construct; also, the utilization of computers. The article* advancing architectural discourse via the medium of computational design.
Article very definitive, very prescriptive, with a very detailed technical analysis. Starts with an initial historical overview of architecture and how it evolved, beginning with the ancient Greeks, where it developed as a science; that is, it was written down, documented, and it could be taught, copied and used as a tool. Then, it goes on to the middle ages(14th/15th century). Alberti first defined the ‘rules’ of architecture- separating architects as artists/ designers from the actual people who were constructing the building. So you had the architects that were the designers, the ones that conceived of the building and then you had the builders, the artisans, the other masters who were constructing it. Here now the ‘conception and the construction’ distinction is developed.
During the medieval times (historical evolution), the master builders were both the designers and the builders- they did everything by apprenticeship and serving their masters. By the 15th century, Alberti said no- the designers/ the architects are a separate science: they planned things, gave dimensions, and then the builders constructed. WE CONCEIVE IT- YOU CONSTRUCT IT. Here came the distinction and the development of architecture as a science. Alberti then talks about what the purpose of architecture/ design is- it is the means to addressing a problem. You are given certain requirements e.g. wishes/ request of client, within certain constraints (space, materials etc.) and then you, as an architect, have to design something that gives the solution to the problem (within those constraints), and it relates to a number of methods in the reading. You can either start from nothing/ scratch, usually you look at a precedent but do not replicate something entirely due to the different social and cultural demands. You get key examples/ elements from the past and adapt them.
Key conceptsThe difference between the original master builders (artisans) where they built by experience, without having any pre-conceived ideas of designs. Here the master builder was everything- he was the labourer, the technician, the controller of everything. Then during the renaissance, Alberti said ‘its got to be more than that. We are scientists’. 1. Architecture as a science: all about buildings and constructs of any shape and functionality, based on a professional basis and presented as a science. Started originally and was documented and able to be taught and passed on to others from the ancient Greeks. That’s when it was taught as a science. 2. Architecture as being documented and taught. 3. During medieval times, buildings were constructed by master builders, artisans who did their apprenticeship and did everything by experience, not by referring to designs, sketches, plans. It was all a matter of practical experience where the master builder was the architect, the designer, the civil engineer, the graphic designer, the construction manager- everything. During the renaissance, Alberti set about changing this position- architecture is not just an art, but it is a science. Architects design, plan and develop rules and builders construct. In that way, we have those that conceive the plans, and those that construct them. Architects now develop the conceptual designs and devise the plans only; they do not ‘dirty their hands’. 4. Use, utilization, aid of programming computers- where you can program a computer and say: these are the parameters, these are the constraints, these are the givens…what solutions can you come up with? Alberti’s position here is the architect is an artist/ scientist. There is the ability to be able to adapt, adjust and modify. Creativity is an intrinsic part of the architect, a human quality unable to be replicated by a machine. With computers, you give them a certain task- they don’t have the creativity, the imagination to generate ideas. What the computers have is that ability to recall information. Computers in that sense are perfect. They lack creativity which can be input by the human factor, but then instead of having to remember every single thing, and work out the complications- well, then the computer does that. 5. Contemporary, present day situation: architecture as science. 6. Methods of how you design (article)- by method, by rule, by case, by base- by precedent. No matter what, there will always be differences there because any given situation cannot be fully and identically replicated/ adapted to something that happened in the past (out of time, place and socio-cultural conditions), so you have to modify. To look at a problem, to analyze the given as a problem (a requirement of a client, the constraints) and try to find a solution that meets these constraints. If there are no constraints, then the solutions can be LIMITLESS (interesting idea).
Contrast between the humans and computers: humans have imagination, creativity but they cannot be exact, cannot remember or recall everything by perfect accuracy and precision. Computers are fixed, non imaginative. Computers are the way of the future in terms of their technical ability and capability- total recall and precision which a human cannot match. Computers cannot make mistakes, within the given constraints; whatever things you give them, or program them to do- they will respond, exactly. The two can HELP each other (computer and human), the final product being a complemented, enhanced outcome.
A computer cannot imagine, cannot create. Within the given program and direction, it WILL come up with all the options, whereas the human, not that it cannot do this, but rather, it would take time, a lot of time and repetition, where it could go wrong. The computer will give all possibilities within program commands. With maximum functional efficiency and easy to use, what the computer’s limitations are is that it cannot think, imagine and create beyond the programmed commands and directions. Cognitive thinking, imagination and creativity cannot be made into a computational formula. To the extent that you can develop technical computational formulae, these then constitute a prototype, a precedent, then yes. But the human mind can invent, can re-invent, re-imagine things slightly differently. All the nitty gritty, the technical stuff- the computer can do quickly and easily. It is a means to attaining your goals, and in those requirements, you get precise responses and answers. So, it is a great aiding tool, but it is NOT THE ANSWER TO EVERYTHING. The computer, within its own ‘thing’, cannot imagine. It can only think and imagine within the ‘givens’; it cannot go beyond and above what you command and direct it to do. Well, not at this stage, anyway. Though, the legitimate question that must be asked is ‘Why so’? Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that the intent, the will and desire, and the direction, are only human qualities. Non-animate beings/ objects do not possess them. So, we need to have the human element; cannot do away with that. ANALOGY It is like cultivating a piece of land200 years ago, it would yield a bag of wheat per 1 square km. Now you fertilize it and you get 100 bags of wheat. Of course you are going to do this (with concerns/ impact on health issues). Along the same logic, within an hour, with the help of computers, you can produce certain types of things that will give you all the possibilities and options. But computers cannot, do not have the creativity, imagination element that we do- only within the givens that are being commanded (i.e. cad command line, or rhino command line- prominence of ‘command’ line, utilitarian, constant). And paralleling ‘the health issues concerns/ impact’ of the example above, over-reliance on the “machine” diminishes man’s capacity and reduces his ability to acquire knowledge, blunting- or even negating- the poten-
tial for refining his skills, expertise, imagination and creativity.
Critical thinking… Importance of the notion of master builder, of artisan; how he encompassed all traits. He was the artist, the designer, the civil engineer and the labourer. He was everything. Now you have a multitude of professionals- the artist, the architect/ scientist, civil and structural engineers, draftsmen and a range of craftsmen, all with their own specialty. Is this the right way to go about things? As a point of juxtaposition, who says this situation/ practice now is better than that of the prerenaissance times? With architecture becoming a science of its own, the question to be posed at this juncture is as to how functionality, production expediency and the “profitability” factor of today can weigh up against the all-encompassing holistic approach of the past. This line of questioning is a method of discourse. It is taking the discipline (architecture) apart, de-synthesizing it and saying: what happened, who did what, why and how it came about. It breaks down, decomposes the final product through time and looks at its separate parts. That is, then, the nature of discourse. Then you have each part in that final project, that building, becoming an art in itself, and a science within itself- architecture of the designer, the engineer etc etc., each one becoming their own speciality, their own speciality becoming a science. Look at a builder even: the materials, everything is computed. You just don’t take risks anymore, like in the past, don’t have the ‘eye’- ‘you need more cement, you need more concrete, you need more gravel’- that sense of judgment and practice has gone. You have to have the calculated ratios (1 part sand, 2 parts blah blah) sort of thing- everything is an art/ science, and nothing peculiar, nothing special about it- that is the case with ALL sciences, finding something special, unique and exact.
Again, looking at architecture as a matter of discourse, every element of this science can be looked at similarly, where everyone can legitimately be considered as a ‘scientist’. Or, can they? There are all the elements, compilations, analogies- everything is precise, and in the literal sense- scientific. It is not haphazard or accidental, nothing literally is. As university students studying architecture, we need to take advantage of being creative and imaginative, demanding of ourselves to push the boundaries of critical discourse beyond the conventional, the comfortable, the ‘safe’. We have to get out of any shackles; of our own, of the “experts”, of the discipline of architecture itself. With architecture, everything is now designed, calculated, computed- precisely, even plumbing. NOTHING IS LEFT TO ACCIDENT. In this multitude of involved professionals and technological/ computational aids for the final, complete product, one thing that architects have is the concept; where their creation, their contribution is the original/ initial conception, the IDEA. The others (non-architects) are involved in the implementation/ actualization of the idea, not its conception: final product/ outcome, not the concept.
Role, use and functionality of computers/ technology in the realm of architecture; can make things easier for us in terms of precision and calculations, but one thing computers lack is imagination and creativity, which us humans possess. ARE COMPUTERS TAKING OVER? NO. They can only do things that WE command them to do, no matter what. Technology/ computer/ computational design- does it add to/ enhance, or lessen/ detract from the importance of the architects, or the human element when we are looking at creativity and imagination? How can we tell? Well, the discourse, with its associated enquiry and questions, leads to the correct path. Additionally, the discourse on its own is of immense value and with its own intrinsic importance!!!