JunyiBai|Bartlett|RC17 BLOCKETIES FInal Portfolio by Junyi Bai

Blockerties Research on spatial transactions and architectural forms Part 1

Junyi Bai Anna Galika Qiuru Pu

Blockerties Research on spatial transactions and architectural forms

Design Portfolio Part 1 Junyi Bai ucqbjb5@ucl.ac.uk 17099583 Anna Galika ucbqaga@ucl.ac.uk 17082151 Qiuru Pu ucqbqpu@ucl.ac.uk 16115225 Tutors: Daniel Koehler, Rasa Navasaityte Research Cluster 17 B-Pro MArch Urban Design The Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL London Submitted 3 September 2018

Acknowledgments We would like to thank the Bartlett Prospective Urban Design program that gave us the chance to explore and research architecture in a new way. We also want to thank our tutors Daniel and Rasa who gave us inspiration and constant feedback with comments and guidance. Also all the guest crits that helped us evolve our project. Finally, we would like to thank those who were by our side and supported us this year.

CONTENTS Theoretical Background

The Blockchain Technology

The Mereology of a Blockchain From Whole to Blocks

ReAssembling The Blocks

Aggregations in Large Scale Formations

Chaining the Blocks

Aggregations Based on the Notion of Shareability

Chain of Chains

Towards Distributed Models

Structural Chain

Shareability of Structural Elements

Navigational Chain

Shared Data Distribution

Programmatic Chain

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks

Chain Optimization

The Cost of the Chain

Facade Chain Envelope

Chain of Chains

Application

Interchain

Building Proposals

Blockerties Proposal

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

Theoretical Background

The Blockchain Technology

The Blockerties links the blockchain technology with ownership issues and in extend architectural design decisions. Currently, blockchain is drawing increasing attention from all over the world. Even though the theory behind the blockchain is not widely known, the possibilities that this system introduces should be here explored. In an urban design context, this paper investigates the new potentials of urban form connected to the application of the logic of the blockchain to urban design.

BLOCKERTIES

Wall | Structure

Block

Private| Programme

Wall | Structure

Private | Programme Cost

Shared | Navigation

Blockchain Technology

Narkomfin Building

Villa La Roche

Saltzman House

Interlace

Rental Space Tower

House II

House Na

Vertical Village

Villa Safadasht

The Block

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The blockchain, is a new foundational technology, meaning it has the potential to alter and “establish new foundations for our economic and social systems” (Iansiti,2017). The blockchain technology allows building decentralized databases storing a registry of assets and transactions across a peer-to-peer network without the necessity of a third party (www.ibm.com). A blockchain is a distributed electronic ledger -a set of records available to all parties on the ledger which is immutable, i.e. cannot be changed, only added to. Any additions to the ledger have to be agreed by all parties using a mathematical proof and everyone can inspect the ledger. While the block remains unpenetrable –private to only its creator, on the same time it can be inspected by the whole ledger. There is no assumed trust or faith that the records are correct; they are proven to be accurate by computation by multiple independent parties. Secured through cryptography that transaction history gets locked in the blocks of data that are then cryptographically linked together and secured. As a result, an immutable and unforgeable record is created. And then this record is replicated on every computer that uses the network. That means, we can create a shared reality across non-trusting entities, and users can monitor and validate the chain for themselves. The blockchain concept prospects that the proprietary and centrally controlled platforms today can be replaced with distributed, open ones; trusted parties replaced with verifiable computation; and inefficient monolithic services replaced with peer-topeer algorithmic markets. The blockchain relies in the object oriented programming, where data and execution code is stored in the same place, called object. When this information is stored and secured, the object acts like a black box that nothing can alter it but on the same time updates and informs the copies of itself inside the blockchain. So when an object is defined, it is allowed to perform only the way that it is designed, keeping it safe and ensuring the trust between

the transactions. The state of the whole blockchain system is only modified when the block is ‘sealed’ and attached to the chain. Furthermore, the blockchain is based on an ontological design –blockchain is a distributed consensus system for parties, that by nature do not trust each other to exchange information. This is what differentiates the blockchain from any other economic system and traditional transactions, storing the data inside the distributed ledger. Thus, there is no way that data inside a block can be anyhow manipulated, while the changes affect all the active copies of the ledger across the network. Blockchain can be detected in tree forms: public, private or hybrid. The blockchain can be seen as a progression of peer to peer network protocols, like the TCP/IP facilitating the internet (Britto, 2013). Characteristics of blockchain such as the distributed ledger network, anonymous trust system and information untamperability enable the transfer from network economies from the digital to the physical, from online to offline leading to the internet of things. This opens the opportunity to imagine architecture in an unprecedented manner. Seeing the city in the light of the blockchain technology understandings of what privacy, ownership, and share-ability is, are entirely altered. What the blockchain proposes is that each block consists of a private data structure and a shareable entity, that go hand by hand as one entity. In the architectural discourse this means that each block to exist should have a shared space alongside the private one, which is also the means of its connectivity. This kind of thinking explores new opportunities of reading and designing a new form of urban realm, that can be comparable to what it is already described as a block, a slab or a high-rise, that this time does not prioritize shared or private spaces but takes both at the same time under consideration.

8 9

BLOCKERTIES

Blockchain Technology Rem Koolhaas Diagram

Rem Koolhaas, Madelon Vriesendorp The City of the Captive Globe Project, New York, New York, Axonometric 1972

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Today, cities are presently based on a discrete central authority system, accompanied with a similar property ownership logic. Taking as an example the planning authorities and the way they work with plans and plots, we see how each plot, each piece of ground traces back with a unique number (street address and number) to a central authority, where the value is also derived from. Exactly this third party involvement is what the blockchain combats, giving value to the block distributed around the system giving value to the whole chain. Today, in the realm of big data, the planning of a city follows logistic principles, and their abstract logic of arrangement, and organization. At the current stage, “logistics simplifies architecture to a stack of entities” (Marullo, 2015) and every unit is considered as an independent block, parallels with considerations of the basic units in a blockchain-concept. Taking this vertical multiplication of the ground as the centralized notion of value addition, we witness the possibility of the blockchain theory to rearrange and reshape the city’s fabric. Due to the application of cryptography in the blockchain, we can use blockchain to create a new relation to the contemporary property rights, in which high share-ability and communicable property rights can be achieved. Based on the “partial property rights” concept, real estate sharing, and exchange of property rights can be guaranteed. As a result, real estate ownership is no longer immutable, and it becomes user-friendly and can be changed through negotiation, and such changes will be recorded in the distributed ledger by blockchain technology as well as updated throughout the whole database. The property right is a theoretical socially-enforced power to assign the resource in economics (Alchian, 2008). The processes of operating property rights include making decisions and allocating benefits (Field and Ostrom, 1992). Property rights emphasis on the collective can support the claims that people possess resources (SauriPujol and Bromley, 1992). Actually, property rights record

the relationships between the participants involving and the shared resource (Demsetz, 2002). Besides, establishing and applying the property rights can impact the effectiveness of benefit allocation and sharing. From the traditional perspective, the long-term and well-defined property rights drive a sustainable and equitable benefit stream managed by participants, while the indistinct property rights generate evasive benefit distribution (Ostrom, 1992). With the emergence of the sharing economy and rental platforms like Airbnb and Uber, constant peer-to-peer transactions and shifts of ownership have become common phenomena. The traditional, centralised transaction network has difficulty handling these massive changes of ownership. Unlike the platform economy, a blockchain is neither a third party nor a database. It is a service that provides the infrastructure, the simulated network and the acknowledgements for anonymous and trustless transactions. It opens up the possibility for people to perform peer-to-peer validations and transactions, which enhances the efficiency of the sharing economy. When people pay to use tools or spaces, a blockchain can recognise the transaction and, via a smart contract, the ownership of the tool or space will automatically update in the system, which can be seen by everyone. The use of cryptography techniques in the blockchain ensures the non-trust and the anonymity of the transaction. The information of the transaction is immutable and can be traced. Therefore, all of the transaction history is open and transparent, and users can monitor and validate the data by themselves and decide whether to make a transaction or which space to make a transaction with. This helps to retain the autonomy of the sharing economy and the changes of ownership. Property rights are no longer fixed; instead, the system is user-friendly and can be updated through negotiation.

10 11

BLOCKERTIES

Blockchain Technology

High-Rise

Shared | Navigation

Private | Programme

Wall | Structure

Envelope

High-Rise vs. Blockerties

Blockerties

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Shared | Navigation

Private | Programme

Wall | Structure

Envelope

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Examining architecture under the blockchain scope, it can be seen how architectural parts can be independent of their whole –the building, and can be self-existent and selfexplicable. The parts become the whole again and their qualities can be compared with the ones of a whole. That means that parts can have the same gravity of importance as the whole, making them equal to them. While the inner characteristics, or the way that they connect or act maybe not be completely understandable, we are aware of the impact they have on their environment. It can be seen, in other words, how parts –now blocks- can be described as hyperobjects and treated as such. The first step, thus, is to recognise conditions and qualities existing in buildings that can be subtracted from them, yet retaining their connections to the whole but on the same time be independent. Seeing the building as a blockchain, the mereological extraction process differs a lot than seeing it as a plain architectural composition. What the reality now is, is that buildings in a city are consisted of layers of information, stacked on a plot, defined by a city grid. That phenomenon was a result from economic models of the 20th century. A central authority, as described previously, implied that there was a need for a certain building typology. This stacking is wrapped in the high-rise, where all the collective parts of the building as the navigation, the core, the façade are what enable the layering. The data consisted in one-layer floor was repeated until it reached certain economic limitations. The problem with this method of design was that it resulted in buildings that compromised important aspects of them in the sake of economic profit. By saying that it can be seen how in this building typology, private spaces consume the most space of the building and communal spaces are shrunk to their minimum requirements, as they lead to no economic profit. The importance of a building is shifted on its private parts, as this is where the value is seen. However, on the same time, private spaces are so optimized that they are again minimized in order to host multiple buyers. The paradox of this situation is that while on buying for example an apartment in a building, what is also included in its value is the communal spaces surrounding it. Modern high-rises may minimize the living spaces but as compensation they offer communal areas such

as receptions, gyms, cinemas, pools etc. These spaces and their qualities are what increase the value of the apartments. Moreover, taking a step further, communal spaces that surround the buildings are also raising the value of its private spaces. For example, if the roads are wide or narrow, if there are plazas around or if public buildings are close to it. In the same time, in a discussion opened by the question of ‘Who belongs the columns of a building?’, it can be understood that elements like that –or the corridors, façade etc. are shared elements in a building that are also included in the value but do not belong to the apartment. So, while value is thought to be derived from private spaces, it can be concluded that shared spaces are the ones that finally define it.

12 13

BLOCKERTIES

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

The Mereology of a Blockchain From Whole to Blocks

With the aim of applying distributed ledger logic to the design of architecture and the urban fabric, the building elements under blockchain thinking can be recognised and described. In a blockchain, a new block is added to an old one in a certain way. The whole digital network is aggregated by a great number of small parts with a limited number of connection possibilities. When applying this process to architecture, the building elements are the small parts and can be seen as private spaces, shared spaces and navigation elements that provide linkages like stairs and corridors. They combine under a certain number of connection possibilities and together form a distributed urban network. The spaces under the scope of blockchain description are comparable to what it is now described as building elements, such as walls, slabs, columns and staircases, but with an added layer of function and time. Blockchain elements can be either private or shared and, over time, this can be changed via spatial transactions.

BLOCKERTIES

Narkomfin Building Moisei Ginzburg, Ignaty Milinis Moscow, 1928

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

Social Housing that incorporates the concept of the social condenser bridging private apartments with collective space. The element describes the connection of one private unit with the space dedicated for shared use with the use of a bridge.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Villa La Roche Le Corbusier Paris, 1923

Art collectors house with gallery. An encapsulated bridge connects the private parts of the apartments with the gallery and the shared spaces. The element describes the connection between the public gallery of the building with the private rooms.

16 17

BLOCKERTIES

Villa Safadasht Kamran Heirati Architects Iran, 2016

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

Residency divided in two parts connected by a walkway above the pool. This project also intends to be both a passage and a frame, to emphasize the presence of the site not only as the exterior but also a stream which flows around and inside the building.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Saltzman House

Richard Meier Architects East Hampton, 1969

Vacation house where a passage is en-framed by an elevated platform which connects the two bedrooms of the house. The element is the guest room unit with the connection to the main house.

18 19

BLOCKERTIES

The Interlace

OMA and Ole Scheeren Singapore, 2013

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

This 1000-unit apartment building creates uplifted bridges of the same block-unit leaving free space on the ground. The element is the interlocking core of the settlements. It is the handle that lets the buildings rotate by its center.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Parc de la Villette Bernard Tschumi Paris, 1982

Eisenman has a series a house design studying the configuration arrangement of the walls, columns and slabs. We extract the different levels of slab and columns attached.

20 21

BLOCKERTIES

House II

Peter Eisenman Vermont, USA 1969

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

Eisenman has a series a house design studying the configuration arrangement of the walls, columns and slabs. I extract the different levels of slab and columns attached.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Farnsworth House

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe Chicago, 1951

Vacation house where a passage is en-framed by an elevated platform which connects the two bedrooms of the house.

22 23

BLOCKERTIES

House Na

Fujimoto Tokyo, Japan 2011

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

This project can be considered as a study of raumplan, slabs at different levels according to human dimension. Slab and column is a way to create and separate space.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Kait Kanagawa Institute of Technology Junya Ishigami Kanagawa, Japan 2010

The arrangement of the columns is the only means to separate and define space in the project. Density is an important factor to consider.

24 25

BLOCKERTIES

Gap House

Archihood WXY Karea, 2015

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

The concept of the Gap house is to support new life style of the young, single demographic household by sharing common spaces such as the living room, kitchen, and dining area. The balance is coordinated by the outdoor space which is defined to ’The Gap’ – a design which helps bring in nature to the residents and encourage interaction and mingling amongst housemates. There is a small gap which arises between the house and the village. It fills ‘the gap’in between its people. BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

Rental Space Tower Fujiomto, Japan, 2016

Comprising twelve projects and some other few small interventions, the second edition of â&#x20AC;&#x153;House Visionâ&#x20AC;? offered a domestic exploration for a near-future scenario. Creating a model that visualizes as a interconnected system of pathways, common areas and plant-filled terraces.

26 27

BLOCKERTIES

Vertical Village

Franรงois Chantier, Maria Fernandez Hongkong, 2016

From Whole to Blocks Parts Extraction

Using the vernacular gable, the scheme offers a varied sectional treatment to each module, providing a dynamic, rich spatial variety whilst helping to form an interconnected vertical village. A robust morphology, along with simplified post-and-beam construction results in a scheme which is both adaptable, economical, and flexible. The vertical navigation is one of the most important part.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE MEREOLOGY OF A BLOCKCHAIN

We examined architectural examples that in a small scale come close to the projectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s approach of space, challenging the relations with the ground and the property that it creates. The first examples contributed to the research about connectivity of private and shared spaces through bridges, the second examples research the vertical relation of the slabs and the ground and the last ones articulate accessibility and possibilities between properties and in-between spaces.

28 29

ReAssembling the Blocks

Aggregations in Large Scale Formations Objects are not just aggregations of other objects but have an irreducible internal structure of their own. There can be detected two types of relationships of an object –the internal and the external or as Graham Harman (2010) refers to them as “domestic and foreign” relations. Domestic relations are the one that describe the internal structure of an object and contradictory, foreign are the ones occurring when an object nests in another. The stronger bond out of them are the domestic because they describe the nature of the objects, while foreign are more fragile as objects can be easily detached from these relations. This refers to nested systems, where objects exist inside other objects with respect to the relationship to each other, but yet independent or autonomous of their nested objects. In these kind of systems, the wholeness is not only described only by its objects, but also by the relationships they establish. These relations according to Badiou (2005) are “always and everywhere necessarily contingent and capable to of being otherwise”, which means that have the ability to change at any given point and thus cannot solely define the system. What is important to be retained is not only the parts but their relations too.

BLOCKERTIES

Configurational Flexibility Slabs and columns

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

REASSEMBLING THE BLOCKS

Concourse Building Singapore, 1981 Paul Rudolph

With arranging the spaces we can create some free spaces in the middle. The roof can be used for the upper floors.

32 33

BLOCKERTIES

Configurational Flexibility Slabs and columns

Ten Bungalows Hong Kong, 1981 Paul Rudolph

These are the small multiples arranged according to needs. The roofs can be used by the upper levels and some units can have larger thresholds.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

REASSEMBLING THE BLOCKS

Concourse Building Singapore, 1981 Paul Rudolph

According to the Raum Plan theory, different heights of the space depends on the requirement of different function.

34 35

BLOCKERTIES

Configurational Flexibility Slabs and columns

Concourse Building Singapore, 1981 Paul Rudolph

Some enframing space can be found in the section, they can be vertical courtyard providing opportunity to grow green facade.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

REASSEMBLING THE BLOCKS

Ten Bungalows Hong Kong, 1980 Paul Rudolph

In the urban planning scale the arrangement of clusters can based on the negotiation of residents. The urban pattern is designed in the process of negotiation.

36 37

BLOCKERTIES

Configurational Flexibility Slabs and columns

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

REASSEMBLING THE BLOCKS

Density will change the spatial relations.

38 39

BLOCKERTIES

Configurational Flexibility Slabs and columns

Atrium space will be created by the vertical arrangement.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

REASSEMBLING THE BLOCKS

High density slabs potentially make private space shareable.

40 41

Chaining the Blocks

Aggregations Based on the Notion of Shareability Examining architectural examples under the blockchain scope, it can be seen how architectural parts can be independent of their whole â&#x20AC;&#x201C;the building, and can be self-existent and self-explicable. The parts become the whole again and their qualities can be compared with the ones of a whole. That means that parts can have the same gravity of importance as the whole, making them equal to them. While the inner characteristics, or the way that they connect or act maybe not be completely understandable, we are aware of the impact they have on their environment. This mereological description focuses on the closed, as private, and the open, as shared entities as well as their connecting elements. This means that the same way a blockchain builds up on distributive ledgers having the block as its core, the new mereological defnitions are based on blocks as parts. Translating this basic ingredient into a physical form, a block that already embeds the collective data in it is proposed. The block is later on added in a distributive way to the system only if it can contribute to it and be beneficial, otherwise it gets rejected.

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 1 Bridge - Private - Shared Ring with Courtyards

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 2 Shared - Private - Bridge Linear with Overlap

44 45

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 3 Private - Bridge - Shared Ring with Overlap and Courtyard

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 4 Shared - Private - Bridge Ball with Overlap

46 47

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 13 Private - Shared - Private - Bridge Ring with Courtyard

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 6 Private - Private - Shared (Bridge) Ring

48 49

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 7 Private - Shared - Bridge Linear with Courtyards

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 8 Private - Shared - Bridge Ball with Overlap

50 51

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 9 Private - Shared - Bridge Linear with Overlap

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 14 Private - Shared (Bridge) - Private Cluster

52 53

BLOCKERTIES

Assemblies Private Shared Bridge

Assembly 11 Private - Shared (Bridge) - Private Ring with Courtyards

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAINING THE BLOCKS

Assembly 12 Private - Shared (Bridge) -Private Curved Linear with Courtyard

54 55

Chain of Chains

Towards Distributed Models It can be seen how most of the urban patterns are consisted of block arrays, which means the city is arranged into some sequence or order. This is just like a traditional data collection, that all the information is on the list one by one. Thus, we can consider the city as a series of data, while the arrangement process of urban formation can be regarded as the process of compiling the program of data. For the innovation of data compilation, when information is no longer hierarchical, information capture becomes easier and faster. The same is true for city compilation. When cities can be reproduced from bottom to top, adding and subtracting urban elements become free, urban planning becomes more flexible and accessible.

BLOCKERTIES

Towards Distributed Models New Urban Fabric

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OF CHAINS

Regarding the blockchain, the decentralised system means there is no single central storage. Some servers provide data to the clients, the clients are disconnected while the servers are connected. Correspondingly, the decentralised city means there is no single centre, but there are multiple equal clusters, each of the clusters has their own centres, as the servers. While the distributed system means there are no data storages. All of the single nodes contain the data, the clients are equal and have equal rights. In term of the city, the distributed city means all the parts of the city is equally connected to each other. This means, there is no centre or cluster. And the pattern of a city would follow local demands which are defined by the spatial hierarchy, instead of following the bottom-up masterplanning (the third party), thereby forming a highly mixed and shareable city. So, what will happen to them then? In terms of share-ability, when the share-ability of one node changes, it not only impacts another one but also the whole system because of the high connection of the entire system. Meanwhile, the share-ability of the whole city will continuously increase with the parts of the city changed or added. This means, the blocks in the city are no longer isolated or single connected, but all connected together. From block A can directly arrive block B, C, D, E, there is no need to cross a specific node to arrive. The relationship of the blocks in the city become peer-topeer, and the city will be no longer planned by the urban designer according to the different functions but can be created bottom-up. This means, the change of the city is according to the demands of the people, but not the ideal planning, the city will become highly mixed and sharable. Thus, people’s need for daily activity can all be met by direct commute, there is no central node in the city, and no marge either. The blocks in the city become the dispersible node. As we know, every “block” added in the chain can impact and increase the whole in a distributed system. This is just like in blockchain, the consensus and immutability will be influenced by the rapid growth of each chain. Because each chain should take responsibility for running the whole, the computing demand will substantially augment. Consequently, the large public operation of blockchain will be affected. This situation can directly lead to the tendency

of centralised transition, which is the total antithesis of the initial intention of blockchain – establish a distributed ledger (Swanson, 2015). The transition can start at decompound the distributed system. For clear the disassembly, the margin area should be defined. The farther from the node the area is, the more marginalised it is. So, we can divide the distributed system as a large number of blocks, which is formed by connecting nodes around margin areas. After separating the distributed network, is creating more interaction. Because the high interaction can give a rise to a high connectivity, which leads to a low cost of the system. Here, the interaction is regarded as the way to produce a high efficiency of the edge area. While this interaction increasing is not only making a superposition of the edge and centre in 2-dimensional representation, but also can be in 3-dimensional structure. In this situation, the overlap of two surface becomes a surface touches a point. Thus, the new chain presents and creates the equilibrium of the whole, I define it as equalised chain. Going back to the chain connection, when we connect nodes with nodes in distributed logic, generally, we connect the edges of parts. This is also why the marginalisation forms. However, the connection of the new chain, equalised chain, is not only the edge to the edge but the edge to the centre, the centre to the centre and so on. Thus, the overlap, created by the new connection, eliminates the marginalisation. On top of that, the special sequence gets diversity with the new connection.

58 59

Structural Chain

Shareabilty of Structural Elements The structure here is no longer handled as distributions of loads but used as in an urban sense, of how structural elements can be shared between different blocks or units. This means that the structure is established by collectively exchanging. As mentioned above, all the elements derive from the breaking of the whole, which means each of them contains a program (the private and shared space) and structure (the vertical system). Thus, the investigation of structure can be linked with the collective exchange in a vertical direction. This can be achieved by four developments: (i) supporting and stability of the structure; (ii) evaluating the structure in different distributions; (iii) understanding the structure with the program; (iv) utilising the structure to lead the spatial volume. The following part will discuss these four steps.

BLOCKERTIES

Connecting link1+link3

Shareability of Structural Elements

Connecting link1+link2

Connectivity Change

3 4 1 2

The triple wall structure

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Walls are the means of support, which are distributed in the buildings to provide support in vertical aggregations. Thus, the preliminary research is about how the wall can support the chain. The thickness of the wall also changes according to how shareable the wall is. According to the privacy and share-ability, we can get the wall form one layer to three layers. When it is one layer, the wall is only used by one space; when it is two layers, the wall can be shared by two spaces; and when it is three layers, the wall connects three different spaces. This means, the more shared the wall is, the thicker it is.

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

Connecting link1+link2+link3+link4

Connecting link1+link2+link3

Consequently, the different connection results can be generated in various walls. When more single walls are connected, the more private spaces are connected, single walls become double walls. Meanwhile, in the vertical direction, the wall connection makes the system expand vertically. In this situation, the centralised private space and distributed shared space can be seen. While when it comes to the triple wall, the wall should be extended to an extreme hight, because the shared space requires more free space. Thus, the faster vertical space generation can be achieved. In this situation, a more distributed space arrangement can be elicited.

62 63

BLOCKERTIES

Connecting 1+2+4

Connecting 1+2+5

Shareability of Structural Elements Connectivity Change

1 2 4 3 5

The double wall structure

Compare the private parts distributed in linear system and centralised in the core.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

Connecting 1+2+3+4

Connecting 1+3

Compare the compressing vertical system and enclosing void system.

64 65

BLOCKERTIES

Connecting 2+3+4

Shareability of Structural Elements

Connecting 1+2+3+4

Connectivity Change

3 5

1 2

The single wall structure

Compare multiple centres and single centre in the core system.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

Connecting 1+2+5

Connecting 3+4+7

Compare multiple centres and single centre in the grid system.

66 67

BLOCKERTIES

4 5 6 1 2 3 7

Shareability of Structural Elements

3D Structure

The less connected

The most connected

Tree Formations

2D Connection Connecting 1-6

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

At the same time, evaluating the structure can depend on counting the connection. The more connected the wall is, the brighter it is. The most connected means the strongest wall, which is also the brightest parts. Thus, when the brightest parts are distributed in the whole system, the structure can be regarded as the most stable and effective one. Based on the different connecting strategies, the structure library can be made. We can see the most vertical and horizontal structure, also the most centralized and distributed structure. On top of that how the arrangement of the strongest wall is formed from the distributed to the centralized. The more distributed means the more stable of the whole system and more movable and exchangeable for each of them.

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

Connecting 1+2+3

Connecting 1+4

Connecting 1+6

Elevation

Perspective

Top

However, the structure exists not only alone, but also generates with the program. Because the program is braided with the structure. Thus, the cost, described above, should also be taken into consideration. When the pattern of structures change, the cost can also be calculated. As a result, we can get the library of the structure evaluation with the cost. While what need to be selected by computer is the equal arrangement of structure and the lowest cost it can be. Which means, a stable as well as effective arrangement. Finally, we come to the conclusion, due to the evaluation that a tree-shaped structure can provide the stability as well as be able to be shared with the rest of the building.

68 69

BLOCKERTIES

Connecting 2+3+4+6

Connecting 1++2+6

Elevation

Shareability of Structural Elements Tree Formations

Perspective

Top

The evaluation of structures in different shape. The strip, the triangle, and the rectangle.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Connecting 1+2+3+4+5+6

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

Connecting 2+3+4+6

Perspective

Top

The less connected

The most connected

70 71

BLOCKERTIES

Centralised Structure

Extension

High Value Cost

Linear Patterning

Shareability of Structural Elements

Cost 184

Evaluation of Tree Formations

Distributed Structure

Density

Low Value Cost

Tree Arrangements

Cost 120

The evaluation structure and program. The compassion can be seen in linear and tree structure. The linear structure can achieve more vertical extension, while the tree structure can achieve a more equal arrangement. Thus, in this compassion, the tree structure, the more effective and stable structure, should be selected out. | Image source: by the offer.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

136

140

142

145

126

130

135

138

143

160

122

128

120

127

143

172

132

136

185

172

165

160

165

145

175

172

178

179

188

185

182

180

181

189

72 73

BLOCKERTIES

Shareability of Structural Elements Large Scale Verticallities

Connecting 5+2+3+4

The centres distributed in a apreadable system.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

STRUCTURAL CHAIN

74 75

Connecting 5+1+2+3+4

The centres distributed in a ball system.

Navigational Chain

Shared Data Distribution Regarding the blockchain, the decentralised system means there is no single central storage. Some servers provide data to the clients, the clients are disconnected while the servers are connected. Correspondingly, the decentralised city means there is no single centre, but there are multiple equal clusters, each of the clusters has their own centres, as the servers. While the distributed system means there are no data storages. All of the single nodes contain the data, the clients are equal and have equal rights. In term of the city, the distributed city means all the parts of the city is equally connected to each other. This means, there is no centre or cluster. And the pattern of a city would follow local demands which are defined by the spatial hierarchy, instead of following the bottomup masterplanning (the third party), thereby forming a highly mixed and shareable city. So, what will happen to them then?

BLOCKERTIES

A1+A2+B1+B2

A2+A3+B2+B3

A1+A3+B1+B3

C1+C2+B1+B2

C2+C3+B2+B3

C1+C3+B1+B3

A1+A2+C1+C2

A2+A3+C2+C3

A1+A3+C1+C3

Shared Data Distribution Proportion Position Connection

A Corridor cost: 8

B Bridge cost: 8

C Platform cost: 7

Starting from the very basic element with a private space and a share navigation space such as corridor and bridge, we see how the connections can result in corridors, roads or even squares.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

Connect private

Connect middle

Connect shared

Connect edge

78 79

BLOCKERTIES

cost: 2+2+1+1+6+6+1+1+2+2=24

cost: 2+1+6+1+2+1+2+6+1+2=22

Shared Data Distribution Cost and Data Models

cost: 24*2+6=54

cost: 22*2=44

A cost to connect system is again applied to give us the least expensive pattern. Evaluating them with the methods described before, it can be seen how centralized systems are the most expensive. Decentralized systems though are less expensive for example network with street is more expensive than one with square.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

cost: 6+1+2+2+2+2+1+6=22

cost: 22*2=44

cost: 2+2+1+1+2+2=10

cost: 10*2=20

80 81

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Cost in Patterns

Centralized 20 pieces chain Cost: 600

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

Decentralized 20 pieces chain Cost: 504

82 83

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Cost in Patterns

Grid with Road 20 pieces chain Cost: 440

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

Grid with Square 20 pieces chain Cost: 200

84 85

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Patterns of Shareable Data

Larger arrangements can show how different navigational patterns can result in different distributions of private spaces and sometimes merge with them. The cost also shows how a centralised pattern is more expensive than a decentralized one.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

With diferent arrangements, even same element can result in diverse urban patterns. Left one shows a more condense living space often occur in the city center, whereas the right one shows a regular housing community in the countryside.

86 87

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Patterns of Shareable Data

The distributed examples open more possibilities. They can range through different forms of courtyards, road networks and plazas that can also be provide meeting and working spaces. We can in addition control the densities and increase the value of the chains.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

This one generate an obvious strip over the clutter ones, can be seen as a shopping street in a commercial area.

88 89

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Patterns of Shareable Data

The edge of the cluster defines how connect the spaces are.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

Some pattern shows an obvious center over the loose space.

90 91

BLOCKERTIES

Shared Data Distribution Patterns of Shareable Data

From axonometric view it is more obvious to see how the levels change in the space and how private each area is.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

NAVIGATIONAL CHAIN

With the regulrity, the structure of the space can be seen clearly. The repetition of the walls and private space provide possibilities to accommodate certain programmes.

92 93

Programmatic Chain

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks When we now more precisely design in a smaller scale this relations, even over simple sequences, we can establish unprecedented spatial formations that offer new kinds of collective spaces. The chains can form landscapes, courtyards or overlaps. Seeing the following as examples, we can see how the shared space forms a horizontal landscape that connects the private spaces. Blockchainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s economic transactions are stored in data structures. This is why we used a graph representation to analyze the spatial elements and trigger changes. This deeper investigation enables us to understand better the constitution of the block. A cost to connect system is applied with the more private elements having the higher cost and the shared the least expensive. Our aim is to research which is the cheapest chain as well as what is the relevant element that plays the key role in the creation of the chain.

BLOCKERTIES

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block A 1Shared 3Private

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

CENTRAL CONNECTIVITY

Center to Center=courtyard+stair+corridor+stair+courtyard Cost= 1 + 1 + 2 + 1 + 1=6

ENDINGS CONNECTIVITY

Edge to Edge = wall+corridor+stair+courtyard+stair+corridor+wall Cost= 6 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 6=19

PRIVATE CONNECTIVITY

Private to Private = wall+corridor+wall+wall+corridor+stair+courtyard Cost = 6 + 2 + 6 + 6 + 2 + 1 +1=24

SHARED CONNECTIVITY

Shared to Shared = wall + corridor + stair + courtyard + wall Cost= 6 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 6 =17

96 97

BLOCKERTIES

A1 20pieces chain cost: 60

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block A 1Shared 3Private

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

A2 20pieces chain cost: 190

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

A3 20pieces chain cost: 240

A4 20pieces chain cost: 170

98 99

BLOCKERTIES

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block b 1Shared 4Private

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

100 101

CENTRAL CONNECTIVITY

Center to Center = platform+stairs+platform+corridor+corridor+ platform+platform+corridor+corridor+platform+stairs+platform Cost = 1+1+1+2+2+1+1+2+2+1+1+1=16

ENDINGS CONNECTIVITY

Edge to Edge = wall+corridor+platform+stairs+platform+wall+ corridor+platform+stairs+platform Cost = 6+2+1+1+1+6+2+1+1+1=22

PRIVATE CONNECTIVITY Private to Private = platform+stairs+platform+corridor+corridor +corridor+platform+stairs+platform Cost = 1+1+1+2+2+2+1+1+1=12

SHARED CONNECTIVITY

Shared to Shared = wall+corridor+platform+stairs+platform+platform +stairs+platform+platform+corridor+wall Cost= 6+2+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+2+6=23

BLOCKERTIES

B1 20pieces chain cost: 160

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block B 1Shared 4Private

B2 20pieces chain cost: 220

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

B3 20pieces chain cost: 120

B4 20pieces chain cost: 230

102 103

BLOCKERTIES

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block C 1Shared 1Private

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

CENTRAL CONNECTIVITY

Center to Center=Wall+Bridge+Bridge+Corridor+Corridor+Stai rs+Stairs+Bridge+Wall Cost=6 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1+ 1+ 6=21

ENDINGS CONNECTIVITY

Edge to Edge =Wall+bridge+coridor+Corridor+Stairs+Stairs+B ridge+Wall Cost= 6 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 6=20

PRIVATE CONNECTIVITY

Private to Private =Corridor+Stairs+Stairs+Bridge+Wall+Wall+ Wall+Bridge+Stairs+Stairs+Corridor Cost= 2 +1 +1 +1 + 6 + 6 + 6 + 1 + 1 +1 + 2 =28

SHARED CONNECTIVITY

Shared to Shared = Wall+Bridge+Stairs+Stairs+Corridor+Corridor+Corridor +Bridge+Bridge+Wall Cost = 6 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 2 + 2 + 1 + 1 +6=23

104 105

BLOCKERTIES

C1 20pieces chain cost: 210

Distribution of Private and Shared Blocks Block C 1Shared 1Private

C2 20pieces chain cost: 200

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

PROGRAMMATIC CHAIN

C3 20pieces chain cost: 280

C4 20pieces chain cost: 230

106 107

<?xml version=”1.0”?>

-<Vertices>

-<Graph>

Chain Optimization

The Cost of a Chain

Running speculations similar to economic narratives, we create chains that can increase private or shared spaces or create voids or dense chains. The graph structure can design in an economical way the physical space. We use this range in order to design with an economic narrative, with the same sharing principle but in connection with the form, inverting the collective to private ratio. Going through alterations and evaluations of these, we trigger different value distribution in the buildings. From higher value to lower value, we simulate building arrangements and use a learning algorithm to optimise them. We look for decreasing the cost and at the same time reverting the ration of private to shared. We search for open free spaces, high connectivity and distribution of value that give us the cheapest form.

BLOCKERTIES

Thε mereological description focuses on the closed, as private, and the open, as shared entities as well as their connecting elements. So, what matters in the extraction is the block from which we can represent the building as a data structure, allowing us to capture all the relevant information that can be then used in an algorithmic way. The extraction follows a blockchain logic. This means that the same way a blockchain builds up on distributive ledgers having the block as its core, the new mereological defnitions are based on blocks as parts. Translating this basic ingredient into a physical form, a block that already embeds the collective data in it is proposed. The block is later on added in a distributive way to the system only if it can contribute to it and be beneficial, otherwise it gets rejected. From the whole, extracting the relevant part and then translating it into a data scheme we can represent the requirements of a building, but this time with the connections that compile with the blockchain thought.

The Cost of a Chain Data Graph Structure

Aiming to comprehend better these relations, a graph analysis is used. To be able to reduce a part and describe it as vertexes and edges, a deep understanding of the composition elements and their connections is mandatory. The same way blockchain’s transactions are translated in data schemes, in this case a building block is described in a graph format. The graph is useful cause it allows us to capture all relevant information in one data structure that can be operated in an algorithmic way. The graph is multi scaler revealing more and more different information as you zoom in. What is also allowed with a graph is the immediate upscaling of the chain. Without emphasizing on the inner data structure, a graph needs only the outer connection of the nod –as block. From the computational side all is needed is a data matrix that records the connections and type of each node. That way a block can be easily triggered in order to produce different results. Depending on the desired results, what is the next step is for the chains –seen now as building fragments- to be trained accordingly. A path finding logic is the used to generate schemes. As it was previously described, as ‘path’ is only used in terms of consistency on graph representations. It does not by any means imply a navigational scheme, but it depends on accessibility, as authorship inside the blocks. Basically, there is a starting point where path finding agent is sited,

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

following ruleset places units into specified intercom. These rules give us distinct tree like structure, which describe the interconnectivity of the whole aggregation. The ‘movement’ is further controlled through the ‘cost to move’ system. A block can consist of walls, corridors, stairs, roofs etc. For the sake of defining private and shared space, the standard of private and shared is defined and distinguished by the walls. In a block there are multiple ways of connection or else access inside it. The way to describe the part as data follows a cost to connect or elsewise cost to move system (‘transaction’). A sequence of space then could be to connect corridor – stair - corridor - stair – stair – roof and that would give the cheapest cost of 6. It can be seen that the more private elements require a higher transaction cost, thus making the system more expensive. As private and public data go hand by hand in the block model, what is considered the most valuable impact of a block is the ability to host and create more shared spaces. A multi-objective programming is then used, at first to measure the connectivity and in a next level to aid decision making through machine learning techniques. There are two cost structures, the first one deals with distance to ‘move’ from one space to another and the second one gauges the privacy of the elements inside the part. Both systems, as described above, set a starting point and a target to evaluate the efficiency of the part. The cost system is calculated by the cost from one point to another target in a certain space. The cost defines the crossing ability of a certain area, that is how much you should ‘pay’ for it. Six parts you can cross-corridor, stairs, bridge, roof, door, wall. Then, according to the different degree of the privacy a different cost is given. The more private the part is, the higher cost. Afterwards, the block definition is sealed and it only keeps open its connection points. This allows us to examine at the same time a graph definition of big aggregations according to the outer connectivity of the element. Each record includes a ‘transaction’ timestamp, and a block of detailed information is considered a block. The information is all connected and encrypted. Therefore, it is credible and immutable. Every part is so designed that, there are two paths from one point to another –one is the shortest path, which cross more the private parts and use the least steps from one

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

point to another and another is the cheapest path, which cross the more the shared parts and use more steps than the shortest path. According that, the next step is to assemble these elements firstly in a small scale. The start point and the target point of each element are connected. The ratio of private space to shared space will be changed after connecting the points. And the path cost of the new element will be changed as well. The aim is to research the cheapest chain as well as what is the relevant element that plays the key role in the creation of the chain. Running speculations similar to economic narratives, we create chains that can increase private or shared spaces or create voids or dense chains. When the goal is programmatic (private-shared) and is, for example, to increase the private spaces then the private connectivity is chosen, which merges the private spaces together. We see that a chain increasing the private spaces, meaning that leaves the shared spaces segmented, is more expensive than the one that creates unified shared spaces. On the other hand, examining the geometrical conditions, chains with more or none free space can be created. In each case, the margins or the core of the elements will be connected, accordingly. What can be seen in the cost explanations is that the creation of more void spaces increases the cost of the chain. The graph structure can design in an economical way the physical space. This range is used in order to design with an economic narrative, with the same sharing principle but in connection with the form, inverting the collective to private ratio. Going through alterations and evaluations of these, different value distribution in the buildings are triggered. From higher value to lower value, we simulate building arrangements and use a learning algorithm to optimize them. When blocks are connected in a randomized way, they are evaluated the way it was previously described. From yellow to red, it is indicated how well connected a block is inside the chain, which also means that is more valuable for the chain. At the same time, in the blockchain discussion, the higher the value of a block is, the more credible it is and thus it can increase the trustworthiness of the whole chain. The aim is to decrease the cost and at the same time reverting the ration of private to shared. We search for open free spaces, high connectivity and

distribution of value that give us the cheapest form. In that way, the training process optimizes the building simulations giving always a cost for them, which always tries to decrease, while in the same time keeping the value of the system high. Finally, the centrality measure is introduced. “Centrality indices are answers to the question ‘What characterizes an important -space-?’. The word ‘importance’ has a wide number of meanings, leading to many different definitions of centrality.” (Wiki). Through the large scale aggregations and with the graph analysis described above systems with new connectivity qualities are designed. When coming back to the blockchain discussion, these aggregations can be seen as the chain ledger with different accessibility measurements. Spatial sequences are what define space and the importance of each part is defined by how well is connected with its surrounding parts as well as its centrality.

110 111

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Data Graph Structure

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

112 113

Distribution of Value

Free Spaces

High Value Elements

Discrete Patterning

Cost 130

Low High Value Pieces

Density

Free Space Creation

Distribution Cost 185

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Branch Assemblies Low to High

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

114 115

BLOCKERTIES

Many Higher Value Blocks

High Cost-to-Connect

The Cost of a Chain Branch Assemblies

Limited Branches

No Distribution

Cost 16318

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

116 117

Low High Value Pieces

Density

Free Space Creation

Distribution

Cost 25182

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Linear Assemblies Low to High

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

118 119

BLOCKERTIES

Many High Value Blocks

High Dependency

The Cost of a Chain Linear Assemblies Comparison

High Value Elements

Centralities

Cost 18238

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

120 121

Less High Value Blocks

Fade of Value

Easy to Connect

Distribution

Cost 24654

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Spread Assemblies Low to High

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

122 123

BLOCKERTIES

Central Value

Density

The Cost of a Chain Spread Assemblies Comparison

More Vertical

No Pattern

Cost 16938

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

124 125

Distribution of Value

Free Space

Same High Value Elements

Patterns

Cost 21862

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Large Assemblies

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

126 127

BLOCKERTIES

The Cost of a Chain Large Assemblies

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OPTIMISATION

128 129

Facade Chain Envelope

Facade is the exterior side of a building. In architecture, the facade of a building is often the most important aspect from a design standpoint, as it sets the tone for the rest of the building. Here, the facade is focused on how to enclose a building and create the interior space.

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Enclosure of the Building

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

Here, the facade chain is added at the exterior parts of the building, so that it can eventually enclose the whole building.

132 133

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Enclosure of the Building

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

Here, the facade chain in this assembly creates balconies and terraces.

134 135

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Clustering the Building

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

The cluster sizes can differ according to how many blocks it can combine.

136 137

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Glassing Along the Tree Structure

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

In these cases there is a classification on the private and shared parts, where a big glassing is used on the shared part and a smaller glass covers the whole private part. This way both qualities are intensified, private becomes more private and shared opens up to connect with more shared elements and create big facade.

138 139

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Glassing Along the Tree Structure

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

Another way of sheltering the indoor space is to add facade on the structure. The public spaces sheltered within the facade become indoor spaces and the ones outside become outoor public spaces.

140 141

BLOCKERTIES

Envelope Glassing Along the Tree Structure

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FACADE CHAIN

142 143

Chain of Chains

Application

The relationship of the blocks in the city become peer-to-peer, and the city will be no longer planned by the urban designer according to the different functions but can be created bottom-up. This means, the change of the city is according to the demands of the people, but not the ideal planning, the city will become highly mixed and sharable. Thus, peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s need for daily activity can all be met by direct commute, there is no central node in the city, and no marge either. The blocks in the city become the dispersible node.

BLOCKERTIES

Application What is the Interchain?

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OF CHAINS

The new urban form the project proposed is composed by all the above-mentioned qualities. These are now wrapped in the Intechain â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a chain of chains that is capable of creating its own environment. As a chain of chains, it should be first examined in terms of compatibility and in a later step is terms of completeness. Since building forms are already described through the chains, programmatic, structural and navigational patterns are combined in order to finally give the form of the Interchain. Each chain has its own characteristics and produces its own value. However, while two or more chains are merged and each one contributing with their own qualities to the intechain, a blurring of the patterns is seen. Each chain has its own rhythm, but when merged with other chains, the final intechain has a new, different rhythm that may or may not converge with the rhythm of the compositional chains. The same way a Hyperumwelt is described, an Intrechain produces new qualities that are on the one hand dependent on the sub-chains, but on the other hand is able to create a new definition of the whole. When the aggregations are seen as city parts, it can be seen how the patterning of private and shared spaces are now not solely defined by their binary definition. Here, shared spaces can take the place of road network infrastructure, or pathways, while on the same time they can be spaces of gathering and form plazas. On the other hand, private entities can have a range of shareability according to the connectivity of the element. What is here proposed is an InterChain, as described before that can define a city structure compiled by different degrees of shared spaces. This aggregatory method is capable of creating polyphonic spaces with inherent features, as navigation, and structural definitions that can on the same time be eligible to diverse readings. This is because of the large scale effect, that leads to ambiguity but with specific variable design characters. While forming InterChains, what is important is the large scale effect that fades the inteconnectivity but focuses on the distributed patterns. In this arrangement there is witnessed two types of patterning and this stems from the outer connectivity of the block. While the two forms merge with each other, it can be clearly seen how on the one hand private spaces (blue) are able to cluster together, while the yellow, navigational space is always connected.

On the other hand, the connectivity of the block suggests a more dispersed private space while the prevailing space of the chain is the navigation. Moreover, the share-ability is according to the efficiency and the accessibility of the shared space, which is defined by how many private parts can connect to the shared part. When the shared part connects to the shared part, there is a hierarchical structure created. The share-ability can have a different degree from the highest to the lowest.

146 147

BLOCKERTIES

Application Structure and Programme

Two spots connected

Based on the structure connections we get above, I connect the same two different elements in different ways. When two different elements are acting at the same time, the two programs function together. We can get the two merged chains connected but treeshaped structures inside. When the structures are closer to each other, the denser space can be generated, and vice versa.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OF CHAINS

The support can be merged in the building, which creates different possibilities that we can see through the sections. From different angled Vs dispersed and arranged in the aggregations to completely dissolve in the building. When it is V-shaped structure, there is always a horizontal space inside, which is formed by the structure. There is, however, no completely merged programs generated. While when it is dissolved in the whole, the different elements utterly merged, more programs elicited. However, there is no stable structure support. As a result, what we search should be the in-between situation.

148 149

BLOCKERTIES

Application Structure and Programme

Four spots connected

The structures lead continuous shared spaces as the landscape, which is marged with independent private spaces as the aparements.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

CHAIN OF CHAINS

150 151

BLOCKERTIES

Element A

Element C

Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

Application Structure and Programme

The structures formed the continuous landscape. The structures is dissolved in the whole respectively.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Structure Extration

CHAIN OF CHAINS

152 153

BLOCKERTIES

Element A

Element C

Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

Application Structure and Programme

The structures formed the continuous landscape. The structures is in small angle V-shape.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Structure Extration

CHAIN OF CHAINS

154 155

BLOCKERTIES

Element A

Element C

Element B

Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

Application Structure and Programme

The structures formed the continuous landscape. The structures is in big angle V-shape.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Structure Extration

CHAIN OF CHAINS

156 157

BLOCKERTIES

Element A

Element C

Element D

Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

Application Structure and Programme

The structures formed the continuous landscape. The structures is in small angle V-shape.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

Structure Extration

CHAIN OF CHAINS

158 159

The Interchain

Building Proposals The new urban form is composed by all the above mentioned qualities. We design the interchain, a chain of chains that can create its own environment. The stability of the tree structure gets intensified into a 3D geometry. Speculating in the programmatic distribution and navigational patterns, we design building forms of two or more chains that can be seen as concept building proposals. In a larger and more distributed structure as this one we can design different program. Or going on higher level, with this kind of 3D structure, we can see how we achieve bigger open spaces. The programme again becomes different resulting in another form of a building.

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain A Conical Stricture Dense Programme

Element A

Element C Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

The interchain of building proposal.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

Structure Extration

The single corn-shaped structure leads the whole building and creates the void space.

162 163

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain A Conical Stricture Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

164 165

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain A Conical Stricture Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

166 167

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain B Tree in Clusters Loose Programme

Element A

Element C Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

The interchain of building proposal.

THE INTERCHAIN

Structure Extration

The multiple corn-shaped structures lead the whole building and creates the void spaces in horizontal direction.

168 169

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain A Tree in Clusters Loose Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

170 171

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain B Tree in Clusters Loose Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

172 173

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain C Vertical Clusters Loose Programme

Element A

Element C Supporting structure connection Vertical structure connection

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

The interchain of building proposal.

THE INTERCHAIN

Structure Extration

The multiple corn-shaped structures lead the whole building and creates the void spaces in vertical direction.

174 175

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain C Vertical Clusters Loose Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

176 177

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain C Vertical Clusters Loose Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

THE INTERCHAIN

178 179

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain D Tree Structure Loose Programme

Nequatet volupti isimpero ea cus explaborem qui consequi quam eos cum faccabo. Xim re parum que ne consero doluptiatem. Ut volorit aut eosam, consed qui oditasim quat autem nimoluptatur rem dis vellab iliquo di voluptat es simpor acest aut quiae. Endam assunt por ratiuntur ressi blaut quiduntius ad ut la voluptatiur, quis et, quiatem volectur sunt faceped que nullit eum rempori bernaturibus magniae qui dolorep udaerum res modia cus everis BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

Structure Extration

180 181

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain D Tree Structure Loose Programme

FROM WHOLE TO PART

182 183

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain D Tree Structure Loose Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

184 185

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain E Tree Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

Structure Extration

186 187

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain E Tree Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

188 189

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain E Tree Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

190 191

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain F Atrium Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

Structure Extration

192 193

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain F Atrium Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

194 195

BLOCKERTIES

Building Proposals Interchain F Atrium Structure Dense Programme

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

FROM WHOLE TO PART

196 197

Blockerties Proposal

What we propose as a building goes beyond the definition of a distributed model. We create the interchain, which is the merging of two or more chains that is able to create a new environment and thus is not defined by the inherent definition of the information of the block, but is capable of introducing the fourth part â&#x20AC;&#x201C;the unprogrammatic and the unexpected. What it cannot be clearly defined. The fourth part can be detected in the patterns of space and the new form that it proposes. As we can see the interchain can take a lot of different forms, merging and supporting each other. The forms can be seen as buildings or even city patterns with different ratio of shared and private space. Furthermore, if we see these arrangements under the programme they can foster, we can see how polyphonic a space can be.

BLOCKERTIES

The tendency that urban design which is mixed with cutting-edge technologies is inevitable, as the presentation of the new city sequence. It affects the interaction amongst spaces that exist in the whole. As such, the spatial sequence, with high potential to impact the relationship of parts of the whole, should be considered uniquely important to generate based on the blockchain technology. What the blockchain technology contributes in the planning of a city is the missing element of overlapping. A city, seen as a collage of different layers of programmatic uses and navigation routes can only lead to monotonic repeating compilations. The blockchain allows us to design the city in a multi-scaler way revealing more and more information as we zoom in, without centralized monolithic spaces, but with distributed patterns and sequences of space.

Proposal

Plans, due to their share-ability of elements create communal spaces that can be seen as paths, roads or big plazas. Different chains can have a wide range of activities they can foster. All of them though can blur together or create unexpected spaces. Spaces like these could not be designed in a different way and this is what the blockchain way of thinking is allowing. What the project proposes is a system dependent on the binary connections of shared-private, that however creates more versatile space. This is derived from the relations between the linked elements. Translated with the above terminology it means that the aim is to create a Hyperumwelt, with parts of different importance. In this shared economy system, the architectural parts are independent, but they share features that makes us see them as a complete whole. The chain logic creates polyphonic spaces with decentralized value. Centers are distributed as to connect and affect not only their surrounding elements but every element connected to the chain. In this part to whole relationship, value is generated by interconnectivity. Thus, through change of independent entities, we create space accessed and evaluated constantly as new things link to each other.

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

BLOCKERTIES

200 201

BLOCKERTIES

Proposal Johannesburg as a Case Study

BPRO URBAN DESIGN RC17

BLOCKERTIES

Johannesburg is the largest city in South Africa and is one of the 50 largest urban areas in the world. The metropolis is an alpha global city as listed by the Globalization and World Cities Research Network. In 2011, the population of the city of Johannesburg was 4,434,827, making it the most populous city in South Africa. The land area of the municipal city is large in comparison with those of other major cities, resulting in a moderate population density of 2,364/km2.

202 203

BLOCKERTIES