Week 3 logbook

W03 - STUDIO REPORT CAMPUS LAB This week we went through and analysed a variety of buildings across campus. The aim was to consider what kind of structural system was used, the structural elements involved, the materials which were used and any further importance of structural joints etc.

The first site that we looked at was ‘Lot 6’ a cafe behind 757 Swanston St. One of the most striking features concerning Lot 6 is its obvious contrast of the materiality and design of its surrounding buildings. These buildings seem to consist of a classic ‘mass construction’ style architecture and are elaborately adorned with various decorative features such as arches and

stylised columns yet the style of Lot 6 is far more modern being quite geometric and cube-like in design. Another way in which this building varies from its surroundings is that it seems to be built on a skeletal or frame based structural system. Whilst the building does use concrete, a feature common in mass production, this is mainly as slabs or beams and on the outer facade. The buildings structural system was reasonably easy to figure out as the building has quite an expressive structure. Indeed various portions of the building’s framework are used for visual and aesthetic effect as well as function.

The building consists of 3 levels; one basement and two storeys above ground level. Dividing the upper two levels is a ring beam running around the building, there is also a large steel beam that helps support the floor of the top level and runs through the building and then protrudes from the facade having distributed its load where is acts only as a visual feature. Outside the steel beam is supported by a brick wall, this has been

constructed using a stack bond. The stack bond is considered one of the weakest forms of brick laying and so is a testament to how little load must be carried through to the extruding section of the beam. Inside the building the beam supports a large concrete slab which supports the floor of the upper storey; this is supported by the beam and an interior brick column.

Another material used commonly across the building is glass, these panes of glass are another indicator of the framework used as they are unable to bear any significant load, thus they are divided and supported by various beams which also prevent and load being placed on the windows.

STUDIO REPORT

The second structure examined was the South lawn car park, something I never realised the extent of. The car park is enormous covering practically the whole of the South Lawn open area. What is even more important to consider is the massive load it has to bear.

When we first arrived we looked at the layout of South Lawn itself, in particular the layout of the trees. These were ordered into rows which we discovered almost mirrored the layout of the large concrete columns underneath. The car park has been constructed out of rows and rows of identical columns These heavy ‘funnel’ shaped columns were too large to be installed and thus were

recognised to be cast in situ, there were various other signs of this such as their rough surfaces and lines, possible from the moulds, left along their faces. The concrete for these columns would have been poured in three stages for each column, as they were divided quite clearly into three sections. A fourth section was also present and this was their pad footing, designed to disperse the load down into the foundation.

These columns rose up to the roof to become a large grid connected by articulation joints.

The services were exposed and ran along these joints.

One point that was particularly interesting was the mild discolouring and weathering of the concrete on some of these columns. This is due to efflorescence, concrete cancer, which is the process by which water is filtered down through the porous concrete from the plants and soil above, the salt left behind solidifies on the surface and begins to oxidise some of the components of the concrete.

Discolouration of concrete from efflorescence

STUDIO REPORT

Site number 3 was the stairs located at the rear of the union house. These stairs were supported through a (multiple) structural system with both skeletal and tensile components. The main elements consisted of a large steel platform supported by steel I beams which were in turn suspended by cables at the end of large steel beams. These beams then disappeared into the ground, we were unable to see the extent to which these beams were supported or cantilevered but I would imagine it was quite extensive. There were several articulation joints running through the brickwork of the building.

The structure was made out of three different types of steel, the main structural elements such as the beams were made from galvanised steel, the cables were made from a different type of steel whilst the balustrade was made from polished stainless steel posts welded to a handrail. Once again this structure was quite expressive in terms of its elements and system, with only the bases of the steel beams hidden from view.

One interesting point noted was that whilst the stairs created tension and were supported by cables from above there also seemed to be ground supports at the base of the stairs, upon further inspection it was found that these posts acted not as supports but rather anchors to stop the suspended staircase from swaying.

STUDIO REPORT

The pavilion was the next site that was visited, already knowing a little about its construction from the theatre sessions and plans this was probably the structure that most interested me. After a section of the old building burnt down a new shelter and facade made of timber, steel and glass has been added to the remaining structure. What was most immediately obvious was the large timber clad shelter at the front; this structure is both cantilevered and uses columns to support the large combines elements of support such as columns and a cantilever. What was interesting about the columns was that when they were tapped upon they sounded hollow.

This most likely indicates a column with a more simple shape in the inside supporting

the load of the roof whilst the more aesthetically pleasing design of the visible column is just lightweight plywood panels supported by a series of battens for visual appeal. The timbre planks used to clad the ceiling of the shelter had various points where they would turn a corner and change direction; it was quite impressive that all of the planks lined up together as this join would apparently be quite difficult to do well.

sections of the wall meaning the load was not transferred directly down through the bricks but more through the framework of the building. In this sense the bricks do not play the same roll they would in mass construction but rather are only there as a visual element known as brick veneer.

Within the building the roof was supported by a portal frame; a number of timber columns with interlocking steel beams.

The exterior around the back was mostly done in brick with various articulation points. The brickwork here had a number of elements that we hadn’t seen before, such as vertically placed bricks at the base called ‘soldiers’ and weep-holes, the weep holes are designed to allow and condensation from the interior of the building to run outside. Once again the windows to the rear of the building were protected from carrying load by a series of beams, these beams actually spanned large

A number of the platforms at the front of the site were thick concrete slabs. These slabs actually resembled wooden planks. These would have been set to moulds and cast in situ as could once again be seen from their rough finish.

STUDIO REPORT

The final site that was visited was the outdoor study area just behind the Sydney Myer Asia Centre. This had quite a modern design, much like the pavilion and used concrete, timber and steel.

There were a variety of elements in this structure which had been made to fill both visual and structural roles, and as a result their shapes had been modified to be what may not be the most efficient form. One example of this was a large diagonal column, which had clearly been made of sight due to its smooth joints. Due to the slant of this column its centre of gravity would be different to that of a simple straight column, and as such it would have a tendency to overturn. This was

prevented by pinning it to a large concrete block meant to both support its load and weight down one corner to stop it tipping.

Many features were connected to concrete, especially the cantilevered elements which were connected to several tonnes of poured concrete. In many instances these large concrete blocks also doubled as seats giving them and additional practical and visual appeal.