Architecture Design Studio: 101 Spring 2013 Devin Krizwold
One Driven Individual
Week One-Icebreaker! Organically grown
Quickly adap2ve
• From words to form as an abstract personifica3on of you • Construc3on may not have a base • Hand held size • Clear understanding through experimenta3on with rules and scales
Intrinsically Driven
Icebreaker-‐ 1st Itera3on Space & Form •
•
In using found wood I discovered that my costs were almost 0$ except for glue and clamps. I was able to make a statement about with my work as it was all compostable, and no new material was created so that my model could be built. I also began to learn more about natural curves and paFerns found in nature, which at first was a problem, but as I learned how the wood behaved I was able to turn it to my advantage. Later aHer I had completed my model I saw that the bark con3nued to express itself aHer I had set its shape. As it dried it began to curl and distort from my original idea, at first this annoyed me un3l I realized that this could be used to my benefit in future itera3ons. In the end my project was a joint crea3on between my personality and the personality of the bark, which I think is a great metaphor for how building with organic materials should be approached.
Icebreaker-‐2nd Itera3on Immigra3on of experience and space quality
With the two itera3ons I did following the original concep3on of my design sequence, I found that although they followed my design in material and displayed the general principal of my design metaphor ( A tree growing from a seed) they did not fit as a natural progression from the first piece. In limi3ng my project to only found material and making use of what was at hand was both a guiding element with interes3ng developments and a hindrance as my vision was transposed through fractured my idea through the materials available. I think that doing two itera3ons was a telling experience, which gave me insight into the phrase “quan3ty breeds quality”, and clearly defined to me that quan3ty is not quality. However from these itera3ons I saw the beginnings of what materials went well with the natural form of bark. In future itera3on I want to include materials that portray cement as well as frame the roughness of the bark, although I will need cleaner material than kabob s3cks, which just looked like kabob s3cks stuck to the side. I think that this may also be an unintended consequence of the bark, which may be remedied through using other barks that are more visually adap3ve as well as using refined wood. In the abstract portrayal of nature and specifically the growth of a tree, I will need to develop methods of expressing this other than just a column poin3ng up. From study of tree forma3on under various environmental condi3ons I believe that I can develop a more detailed expression of life’s intricate rela3onship with the forces of nature.
Week Two! Icebreaker to Kit of Parts Â
Icebreaker-‐ 3rd Itera3on In the third itera3on of my design I made a much more connected piece that included some new materials (wire and plaster) which I think are able to mimic the curves and edges of bark fairly well. In designing my 3rd itera3on I began with thinking of ignoring the two 2nd itera3ons, which in my opinion don’t follow well with the first. However evolu3on is never a smooth process and in using the essen3al form I believe I was able to create a more unified piece. The goal was to combine the fluid nature of the first one with the shape and form of the 2nd and 3rd, in that aim I believe I succeeded.
As I worked with bark I took mental note on the ways in which it behaved when I bent and broke it. As I began to incorporate the plaster I first worked with the metal to map out the basic shape which would compliment the wooden piece I had already completed. As the form took shape I remembered the requirement of the piece not having a base to which I responded by balancing the piece on three points across its lenth. I thought that adding refined wood would compromise the design aesthe3c I was going for so instead I stained a piece of the bark for a two-‐ toned look.
Thoughts and notes Mastery
Purpose
Autonomy
What is design? Why do you do it? Shaboi-‐ wabi sabi Light Less is more Use light to evoke curiosity and desire of explora3on Architecture frames a moment along the journey of life Think of limits as opportuni3es Deconstruc3on and displacement Lively, peaceful graceful The literal transla3on gives less offering of wonder and curiosity than the abstract The whole is greater than the sum of the parts
Kit of Parts The Project: Deconstruct icebreaker into elements of design: point, line, shape, texture, space, size, value, and color. Redesign and built as a hierarchical paFerns and expressive inten3ons. Generate new solu3ons that consider the design principles of balance, rhythm, emphasis, and unity. Work towards the crea3on of work that inspires first yourself and then others. Inten3ons: • To break down my wooden model into two simple components which would accurately mimic the elements of my earlier models. • To construct a new structure which evolved from my previous itera3ons What worked in this itera3on: I found that using sketch up to design my project made the trial and redesign process easy and effec3ve as I was able to undo moves and had an unlimited supply of object. The ability to assign color made the constraint of only two elements easier to work with. The constraint of a two element limit also proved useful as my usually over ac3ve imagina3on was forced to seFle on two shapes which would be able to accurately express my intent. The shadows produced by this model brought the factor of leFer form, a facet of my original interest in architecture to the picture, I was able to make a D in the first and an S ($) in my second itera3on. What didn’t work in this itera3on: I found that in my effort to depict a natural form with a digital lens made this project exceedingly frustra3ng. I found it difficult to translate the shapes I had made in my first physical models to a digital program as a linear interpreta3on of an organic, naturally derived form. Instead of interpre3ng the basic form of my design as line and basic shape I worked to build an accurate recrea3on of my icebreaker. By the 3me I had finally reduced my design to a basic form of two shapes I had spent too much 3me and didn’t make a physical itera3on. The structure I made lacked movement and texture, as well as value and a dynamic rela3onship with the space. What I learned: • The more forethought I put into an itera3on the beFer my vision of graphic ar3cula3on within the given perimeters will be. • Having and understanding clear steps and guidelines helps keep an idea on track as the mind inherently gives op3ons for a “beFer” idea which ul3mately ends up an incomplete design. • Shadows are a great element as they are both an ac3ve reac3on of the physical piece itself and a separate piece in themselves. • Less is more, simple can be complex
Week 3:! NARRATIVE!
What are the most significant aspects and quali3es of your constructed abstract design? Within my visual language lies the root idea of something grown, an organic crea3on pushing out of the earth. The materials, either by contrast or complementa3on expresses dis3nc3vely natural elements and textures. The quality of expanding complexity as well as more dis3nct components and integrated junc3ons plays a large part in the dis3nc3on of the piece as a whole and as each part individually. What will a first 3me viewer of your work see and experience? In viewing my work one would be instantly familiar with the natural form while being drawn to the organic components through the contrast with the inorganic ones, an outstanding aspect of the surrounding landscape that also integrates well into the locale. They would connect easily as a result of the textures and forms which people see every day. What does your design primarily represent? My language is primarily a representa3on of the tree as an icon of growth and life in the abstract. Organically inspired designs derived of organic materials integrated in harmony paired with a concept of structures/components, which in their unar3culated complexity would provide services beyond shelter and visual appeal. What are the details of what your audience will see and experience as they engage your work and how these details relate to your metaphors? My designs quickly adapts to the requirements of the project while maintaining a con3nuity that is evident in the evolu3on of the pieces. The materials chosen invite the viewer to explore the spectrum of detail and variety found in each view. The way in which my materials would add their own inten3ons to my design, specifically the manner of drying and twis3ng bark was another form of dialog between me, my work and the viewer. The flow of the piece as well as the direc3on responds to the metaphor of organic life and specifically a tree.
Week 4:! Form, Scale, Proportions, Beauty Â
Base Plane Ver3cal Linear Single Linear Plane L-‐Shaped Linear Plane Mirror Parallel Plane U-‐shaped Plane Full Closure Open at corners Open at Midwall Scaled object Intersec3ng Planes
Overhead Plane
Depressed Plane
Matrix Reflec3on In crea3ng a matrix I found it difficult to keep a single element defined in each piece. I ended up Making a matrix which had several elements present in each op3on. I found later in going over it That a good stratagy for keeping the ideas simple and then transposing them into a 3d space was Drawing a couple dozen boxes and breakeing them down: the first row had only one line to divide space, the 2nd row had 2 lines, and so on leading up to 4 lines. This exercise allowed me to develop Simple shapes and dis3nc3ve paFerns quickly and efficiently. However I did not make use of this in my Matrix design and worked with the idea of components rather than generic rendering in variety. I have had trouble sepera3ng my own inclina3ons and bias from the requirements or words used as a framework. I believe that clear understanding of the defini3on of each word as well as sketching design Before working with sketch up or modeling materials would give my designs a much more clear cut Ar3cula3on of my ideas.
Week 5 & 6! Space!
From the Matrix I designed a space which through divisions and extrusions I was able to capture the concepts of a space which was welcoming and comfortable, awesome and monumental, and finally in3mate and tranquil. From simple repe33on and curvilinear form I was able to derive a series of spaces which would connect smoothly to each other. I designed each piece separately and then joined them. As singular elements they made a greater impression upon their defini3ons. As I connected them around a central point I found that each sec3on radiated into the others, lessiong the percep3on of the monumentality and the tranquility, I think the welcoming aspect remains well. I had derived my inspira3on from the following images. The mountain dwelling took the origial icon of awesome and monumental space, the mountain and used it to represent their dwelling. I had hoped to do the same. The wave provided movement where the mountain was sta3c. In its simple yet ornate form it extended a welcoming hand towards the ocean. Finally the Samuel Becket Bridge, though industrial and lively in its use was tranquil, elegent and calm in its design.
The Mountain Dwelling, BIG Architecture-‐ Copenhagen, Denmark
The Wave, Big Architects-‐ St. Petersburg Florida
Samuel Becket Bridge, San3ago Calatrava-‐ RoFerdam, Netherlands
Week 7:!
" " " from scale and beauty! " " " " " to nature and frames Â
• • Is the Bauhaus manifesto, “Form follows func2on” truth? yes, as the design will be based upon the desired func3on of the structure i.e. a chair of the Bauhaus era will be simple and direct to its form as a func3on of this aesthe3c. By the same reasoning however a Victorian era chair will have a highly decorated form as a func3on of a decora3ve classical aesthe3c. Func3on is subject to the ideals of the designer/client if a visually intricate product is the func3on of the design the aesthe3c will differ greatly from the ideals which this manifesto sprang from. Though in modern design the minimal aesthe3c is becoming more complex as factors of design increase. i.e. green engineering and aesthe3cs, use of space, loca3on, choice of materials, and mul3ple func3ons of a single component. If I were to design the structure first then determine the func3on it would be used for I would either have an irrelevant product or the form would be constantly altered to make use of the func3ons decided upon
• • How do you dis2nguish between design by nature and design by humans? Design by humans will always be an imita3on of previous and current itera3ons done by nature. The form, while clearly of an organic nature will always resemble singular elements of nature portrayed upon a manmade frame. Design by nature will be seamless though flawed in an order that does not precisely repeat itself. The manner in which nature adapts itself to the environment in real 3me creates a design which when unaltered by human design will fit perfectly into its habitat, in addi3on the levels of interwoven design with other organisms (integrated systems) create a system which wastes nothing and produces more with the excess it has. Human design will always strive to achieve perfec3on in both form and func3on while nature excels and is inherently more beau3ful as a result of its flaws and real 3me recrea3on of itself.
Site Design: engineering the project requirements
In week 7 I found my favorite project, I was allowed to create larger scale structures which were in response to an organic form of my crea3on. I had basic ideas about what I wanted to build but nothing solid. I used paper balls and plaster to create a unique form derived of an Oceanside cliff (Lands End). From there I began to create responsive solu3ons to the evolved site. Since I was working alone I worked with a couple ideas from which I seFled on circles as a simple form with which I could construct my basic idea *note during produc3on: put more forethought into material use* I made a design which fit the criteria although it was surfaces instead of frame. using symmetry and repe33on I created a responsive structure which fit into the site in a manner which complimented the form of the site. Using curvilinear form in a ver3cally linear progression I created a overlapping structure which defined the heirarchy of the building as it reacted to the site. By using projected planes and scaled materials in a repe33ve form I evolved my tectonic language with the use of simple shapes and adap3ve movements.
In crea3ng the site of my first responsive design I found that the use of newspaper as the site base kept the base from drying and restricted the level of interac3on I had with implemen3ng my designs into the site. My second itera3on went much beFer as I had a much more clearly and structurally defined form. Using wire and pins allowed for manipula3on of the en3re site as I was forming it. The addi3on of plaster allowed me to take advantage of the rougher stone-‐like appearance while also making use of the curves and coves of the wire mesh. The structure itself was well thought out but poorly executed. The shapes I had derived were dependent upon each other and not structurally sound. They did not interact as full intersec3ng planes, rather as a complex line drawing which as I see in the pictures looses the form among the lines. All said I think that it was a good development from my first itera3on and answered some ques3ons about frame construc3on while opening others such as the interdependence of forms and line-‐weights. I had taken pictures of my site before I had added the plaster and thought that it looked interes3ng. In my next itera3on I decided to leave the site bare, unknowingly introducing structural support issues as the wire mesh was bouncy and didn’t hold the wood as well as the plaster had. I succeeded in my basic idea although the true poten3al of my form was lost as a result of structural integrity, material supplies, and composi3on of form.
Working with this ini3al sketch I derived a design Which would incorporate more aspects of the design Language. This picture to the right I found to be a great idea for BeFer ar3cula3ng the environment with simple materials
IN THE END!
Through all of these exercise and projects I have found that the predominant theme is a rushed project with a disappointed reflec3on. I have great ideas but do not engage enough to bring them to complete frui3on. I need to be clear with myself and write my objec3ves, materials, and sketches concisely and work from a preconceived thought without lelng my cri3cal and imagina3ve mind get into the construc3on phase. This is for the concep3on phase. My original objec3ves and thoughts were lost as I was not reviewing and reinven3ng the ways in which I would portray the ini3al design program. I have started to return to that but as with the bark in the second site itera3on it is superficial and does not hold the en3re design in its frame. having gained a beFer understanding for what is needed to accomplish a clear and concise model I am glad that I will be working with others who can cri3que my work as it is being developed. Being accountable to oneself and others is an indispensible quality which I need to develop further. Time management being the Siamese twin. To understand the objec3ves and ideas is not enough, to be able to build and ar3culate my designs is not enough, to truly understand my educa3on while being present in the design process, ar3cula3ng and incorpora3ng past successes and discoveries is the new baseline. Freedom without discipline breeds nothing.