Creagh leila 584605 journal partc

Part C Detailed Design C1 Design Concept C2 Tectonic Elements C3 Final Model C4 Additional LAGI Brief Requirements C5 Learning Objectives

C 3 4 7 8 10 12

C1 Precedence C1 Panopitcon Ringing Tree C1 Aeolus C1 Design Criteria; Wind Pattern Communication C1 Design Criteria; Lighting Matrices C1 Performance Criteria; Energy Generation

14 15 16 20 21

C2 Structural Design C2 Materiality C2 Construction Details; Pipe Support System C2 Construction Details; Wire Arrangement Logic C2 Construction Details; Wire and Pipe Connection

24 28 30

C3 Physical Model Images C3 Fabrication Technology C3 Experiential Renders

35

C4 LAGI Brief Requirements

37

C5 Learning Outcomes

38 References

C1 Design Concept Precedence The Aeolian Harp and Piezoelectricity The Aeolian Harp is a musical instrument comprised of a number of strings stretched typically between two bridges. Sound is generated by the Von Karman vortex street. Wind motion causes vibration on the string by creating alternating or periodic vortices. [1] Conceptually, the Aeolian Harp is interesting for it’s generation of sound using wind. There is opportunity to integrate energy generating materials into the principle structure of the instrument.

One energy generating technology that may be integrated into this vibrating wire system is piezoelectricity. Piezoelectricity operates on the basis that a material under mechanical pressure will generate energy. [2]

Some basic materials posses piezoelectric properties. These include bones, protein, crystals and ceramics. [2] However, the technology has been integrated into constructed systems such as the 2012 LAGI proposal WindStalker.

Essentially, a 55m carbon fiber reinforced stalk is clad entirely with small ceramic disks. Between the disks are electrodes which accept the energy generated by the ceramic tiles when they undergo the applied mechanical stress, as caused by the wind. [3] Beyond this point, the wind generated energy is transported through the electrodes to a torque generator, located at the 10x20m concrete base.

Here, the piezoelectricity is transformed into consumable electricity. [3] Left, Figure 1, Aeolian Harp.

Page 3

C1 Design Concept Precedence Panopitcon Ringing Tree

2 The panopitcon ringing tree is an artistic installation in a four part series of sculptures. The design aim is to ‘Provide a comprehensive view’ [4] of the renaissance of the East Lancashire area of England.

The sculpture is comprised of aesthetic and structural galvanized steel members. The aesthetic members engage wind energy, using it to generate ‘discordant and penetrating choral sounds[s]’ [4] The Tree was investigated as a potential form to apply INVELOX technology because it integrated vault like structures, could be positioned to harvest maximum wind and also for its aesthetic and sonorous qualities.

3

4

5 Page 5

Prototyping 1

6

7

Design and Performative Criteria The strengths of this design is its aesthetic qualities. The idea of wind is effectively captured in the gradually rotating layers of metal piping.

However, to capture this aesthetic quality, the structural integrity of the model was compromised.

Foreseeable issues arose in regards to integrating a center solid load bearing element as a compromise of the seamless aesthetic quality.

Furthermore, there is little opportunity to experience the design from within. The form is highly sculptural and thus disengages visi-

tors from a range of perspectives.

There is opportunity to implement, at a small scale, the SheerWind INVELOX principle within each tube. The reduced scale would cause low levels of energy to be produced however and thus the technology becomes demonstrative rather than effectively applied for energy generation.

Further research was conducted to resolve a form that: 1. Was more energy efficient and 2. Offered dynamic experiential qualities

8

C1 Design Concept Precedence Aeolus

9 The Aeolus pavilion is designed to ‘make audible the silent shifting patterns of wind and to visually amplify the ever changing sky’. [5] The pipes harvest wind using wire connections between each pipe and to the surrounding environment. The strings generate sound according to the principle of Von Karman vortex sheet, the same as the Aeolian Harp.

The pipes have dual purpose by capturing select sky views. The long, reflective and refractive surfaces communicate an abstraction of the sky and create a somewhat dynamic and original experience for visitors.

Piezoelectric wires are proposed as the renewable energy for this precedent. Scale and quantity of pipes will be increased to generate proportionally more energy. The experiential factors of this precedent are also favoured.

Page 7

Prototyping 2 Iterations

Iteration 1

Design Criteria The quality of form was judged according to its aesthetic qualities. Primarily, the opportunity to visually integrate wind pattern data into the form was favoured. Secondly, the responsiveness to natural lighting and shadows cast was applied as criteria.

Iteration 3 has been chosen as the form to address the design criteria most effectively. The reason are outlined in the following analysis of application of wind data and light responsiveness qualities.

Iteration 2

Iteration 3

Left, Figures 10-13 Iteration 4

Iteration 1 This 3D Metaball configuration is approximately 200m long by 100 wide, entirely covering the LAGI site. It’s scale is massive and impersonal and so would generate fairly alienating experiential qualities. Furthermore, the domed structure will magnify the sound generated by the pipes and strings. This may cause user discomfort.

Iteration 2 This 3D Metaball configuration is a development of Iteration 1. It addresses the issues of scale previously encountered. It is still the dominant form on site though given its functional role as an energy generating structure, this is acceptable. Importantly, this iteration reflects the wind movement through the site to a greater extent. The distances between each module are dictated in some way by the force and direction of wind. The determining factors here are arbitrary however.

Iteration 3 The third iteration is developed using a grid method to translate wind movement. The grid lines represent the negative space on site and as such are the pathways of wind throughout the form. The form grows where intersections are of high density to highlight the buffering acceleration and deceleration of wind movement.

Iteration 4 The final iteration is a basic grid arrangement. It is a devolution of it’s previous exploration of form yet is useful in understanding division of space and visitor movement manipulation. It’s simplicity is not productive in terms of representing wind movement however.

Right, Figures 14-17

Page 9

Design Criteria Lighting Matrices

Model

Iteration 1

9am

12pm

5pm

12pm

5pm

Entrance view Winter Summer

Mermaid View Winter Summer

Spatial Model

Iteration 2

Entrance view Winter Summer

Mermaid View Winter Summer

9am

‘The Little Mermaid’ Spatial Iteration

Iteration 3

9am

12pm

5pm

9am

12pm

5pm

Entrance view Winter Summer

Mermaid View Winter Summer

Iteration 4

Entrance view Winter Summer

Mermaid View Winter Summer

Performance Criteria Performance criteria was dictated by the opportunity of form to generate energy. Higher levels of energy generation were favoured.

According to Yang et al.

(2009), ‘...repeatedly stretching and releasing a wire [over a minute]...creates an oscillating output voltage of up to approximately 50mV...’ [6].

Assumptions đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ = đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„ đ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œ đ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒđ?‘ƒ

đ?‘„đ?‘„ = đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„đ?‘„ đ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œ đ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Šđ?‘Š =

đ?‘†đ?‘† = đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘†đ?‘† đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“đ?‘“ đ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œ đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤ = 1000

đ?‘–đ?‘–đ?‘–đ?‘–; đ?‘‡đ?‘‡ = đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡ đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸ đ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??ş đ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œđ?‘œ đ??šđ??šđ??šđ??šđ??šđ??šđ??šđ??š

đ?‘Žđ?‘Žđ?‘Žđ?‘Žđ?‘Žđ?‘Ž; đ?‘Œđ?‘Œ = đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ?‘‡ đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸đ??¸ đ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??şđ??ş đ?‘?đ?‘?đ?‘?đ?‘?đ?‘?đ?‘? đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤đ?‘¤ đ?‘‡đ?‘‡â„Žđ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’; đ?‘‡đ?‘‡ = đ?‘„đ?‘„ Ă— đ?‘Œđ?‘Œ Ă— đ?‘†đ?‘†

This claim is dependent on: 1. A nanowire 2. A strain of 0.05-0.1% 3. The rate of pull Thus, the claim is somewhat arbitrary in relation to our specific model. We intend to use wires that more closely resemble guitar strings. Also, we do not expect to have the resources to control and regulate wire strain.

Regardless, this paper is currently the most effective way to gather performative criteria for each iteration with which we can deduce optimization. Each figure produced is an estimate and is unlikely to have bearing on the reality of the project.

Previous spread, Figures 18-21 (matrices)

đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ Ă— 0.8 100

đ?‘¤đ?‘¤â„Žđ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’đ?‘’; đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź1 = 320 ; đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź2 = 625

; đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź3 = 1400 ; đ?‘Ľđ?‘Ľ đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź4 = 350

Example Calculation đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź1 =

320 Ă— 0.8 Ă— 525600 Ă— 1000 100

∴ đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź1 = 1,345,536,000

Conclusions đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź2 = 2,628,000,000 đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź3 = 5,886,720,000 đ?‘‡đ?‘‡đ??źđ??źđ??źđ??ź4 = 1,471,680,000

All answers in mV

C2 Tectonic Elements Structural Design

The primary load bearing structure for Iteration 3 is a basic waffle grid, shown above in Figure 22. The method has been applied in realised projects including the Metropol Parasol

by Mayer H. Architects and the Chick ‘n’ Egg Chair by Kretzer.

The grids are parametrically formed using the following work flow.

SDivide Trim

IntCrv/Flip

Extr to SrfNormal

Rect 2Pt / R, Material Thkns.

Above, Figure 22

BBX Eval, 0.5

23

24

25

Materiality Aeolus demonstrates steel materiality, highlighting its reflective and warping visual representations. The illustrations support the design criteria for their aesthetic qualities. Essentially what the steel achieves is an original experience to be had through visitors engaging with the design. The steel pipes in Figure 23 and 24 capture the natural environment in an new way and perhaps causing reflection regarding the way the world around us may be perceived.

Figure 25 shows a less specific view looking up from underneath the proposed structure.

The reflective piping interior is captured.

This original view fits in nicely with the Renewable Energy drive.

It’s success lies heavily on the changing views and perceptions towards energy production and consumption today.

Page 15

C2 Tectonic Elements Construction Detail of Pipe Support The base surface is irregular which generated issues when developing a support system for the pipes (Figure 26). My group member, Sophie, resolved this by engineering a standardised part (Figure 27).

Non - Planar Angle

Planar Angle

Initial issues with modeling arose due to the irregular surface of the structure. The irregular surface caused each pipe support plate to be a customised dimension. The repercussions of this relayed to either highly labor intensive modeling with efficient location communication of parts OR an attempt to 3D print a construction detail, a costly endeavour.

In order to resolve the need for customised parts, Sophie developed a system where by each pipe was supported by a standard plate. The depth of the plate was reduced so that it covered the necessary area of the pipe though did not reach the perimeter edge of the waffle grid. This allowed cost and time efficient modeling.

Left, Figures 26-27 Above, Figure 28: Construction Detail showing pipe supports

29

30

31 This solution works effectively for a small scale representation of our model. In the case of physical construction, the plates may not support the massive steel pipes.

Additional reinforcement and such as cast concrete within the waffle grid may be implemented to reduce pipe movement. The mass of concrete will cause strain on the dome structure which may demand internal column supports.

32 Figures 29 and 30 show modeling pieces laid for fabrication.

Figure 32 shows the constructed waffle grid.

Figure 33 shows the clad waffle grid with string attached.

33

34

35

Construction Detail of Wire Connection

To resolve the arrangement of wires, performative criteria was developed with regards to site safety and pathway obstruction and

Pipe to Ground Arrangement

The advantages of arranging the wires from the pipe to the ground (and simultaneously, pipe to pipe) (Figure 35) include the engagement of visitors with piezo technology. The purpose of the installation is to generate energy and so this seems a viable opportunity to communicate the models action. Furthermore, the integration of the wires with the walkways heightens experience on site with opportunity for tactile engagement.

Pipe to Pipe Arrangement However, connecting wires between pipes only reduces risk of tripping and injury. The wires have low visibility with their steel casing and minute 2cm diameter. Furthermore, removing the wires from a tactile environment will reduce the need for maintenance and repair. The wires will be under enough strain from the wind let alone further tension from visitor engagement. Finally, the wires will gain greater exposure to wind the higher up they are.

The conclusion is to connect wires only between pipes, as shown in Figures 34 and 36.

36

Proposal of Wire Connection - 1 One method of holding the piezo wires in tension is by scaling the same method used in an aeolian harp - the tuning peg. Essentially the wires are curled around a steel peg and clipped in the waffle structure. The tuning movement means that the tension can be monitored as required for efficient maintenance and consistent pull.

This proposal is engineered by Sophie, who has accompanied the connection with a physical detail model (Figures 37 and 38).

37

38 Page 21

Figure 39: Guy-wire for tension support [7] UL Shackle

Guy Clip

Shackle

Stainless Steel cable

Figure 40: Diagram of Wire Connection to Pipes and energy direction to Grid

Anchor Guy Wire Waffle Grid Member

Pipe

Top Pipe Support

Base Pipe Support

Anchor Exterior Metal Clad

Interior Metal Clad

Invertor Ground Line

Energy Grid

Proposal of Wire Connection - 2 An alternative method for connecting the piezo wires to the pipes is to use a guy-wire. A guy-wire is commonly used in high tension structures such as in support of wind turbines, ship masts and utility poles.

The basic principle is a steel rod anchored to the ground using further steel reinforcements. [8] One advantage of using a guy wire is that it offers an opportunity to connect the harvest energy to the grid of Copenhagen. As in Figure 40, the piezo wire passes from it’s steel coating to join a wire circuit.

The circuit is connected to an inverter which converts the piezo energy into transferable energy to the grid. From here, the circuit links to the city’s main electricity supply.

A second advantage of using the guy wire is that it allows for movement in the pipe and wire alike. The main steel chord is connected to a hinge joint which allows axial movement in response to wind and thermal responsiveness. In the long term, this will reduce strain on the structure and wires and therefore prolong the life span of the system.

On major disadvantage of the guy-wire is that there is no method for tightening the strap. The wires will inevitably stretch under constant tension and as such, will suffer performative set backs.

Another disadvantage of this particular proposal is that the tension is supported purely by the structural waffle grid. It is unlikely that the grid will be able to simultaneously support the mass and movement of the pipes and the strain of the wires. As such, the recommendation to attach the wires to the structural grid is largely unrealistic.

However, both proposal 1 and 2 ensure that the wires are connected and in tension. They ensure the quality of interior space is maintained as an open plan and space for free movement of visitors.

Page 23

C3 Final Model Scale: 1:1500 Media: Plasticine imprint from 3D printed mould

41

42

44

43

45

C3 Final Model

Design Technology

46

To model the final design 3D printing was decided as the most effective method. This is because the geometry of the pavilion contained dissimilar curved surfaces. The fabrication method allowed an exact physical model of the surfaces to be replicated. This was important in communicating the exact wind movement representation throughout the site, as modelled on the surfaces.

The moulds were prepared with a thin coating of oil and the clay then applied. The moulds were pressed firmly to ensure no air bubbles or inconsistencies on the surface. The moulds were pulled away, the edges cleaned up. The clay was baked and then coated with a metallic paint to demonstrate materiality.

C4 LAGI Brief NjÜrðr’s Harp is a sonorous and visual installation that engages wind velocity to generate energy for Copenhagen. The design, pipes branching from core structural dome-like elements, is proposed as a morose instrument that represents the invisible pattern of wind using sound. The series of forms are created by mapping the wind movement throughout the site and the pipes placed to optimise wind exposure.

Piezo-wires are strapped to the piping array in a dense formation. Each wire generates energy when exposed to a varying wind conditions.

The estimated energy generation by the piezo-wires is 5886 kWh per annum, as based on the experiments of Yang et al (2009).

The acting structure is fashioned from steel. Steel has the necessary compressive and tensile properties to maintain structural integrity in latent and gusty conditions. The embodied energy of steel poses an issue for the environmentally friendly intent of the design. More than 120GJ of energy is poured into its production, with a mere 25GJ of energy necessary for materials such as stainless steel and stone. [9] Furthermore, the significant body of steel generates a massive load. Sourcing and transport will be laborious and costly.

Finally, installation will be highly laborious. Each pipe weights more than 500kg and so will require individual crane lifting. Considering the scale, it may be poignant to question whether the Page 35

piece of land on which the form is settled with be able to maintain float under its mass.

At this point, it is important to note that the design is proposed as a concept for renewable energy generation rather than a foreseeable structurally sound space.

Structurally speaking, the load bearing structure is a waffle grid system. Each grid references one pipe member. The maximum dimensions are listed here; width (W), 30m, length (L), 202m and depth (D), 18m. The minimum dimensions, to illustrate the irregular surfaces are listed too; W, 6m, L, 95m and D, 1m.

The large range of dimensions is a result of the influence of wind patterns in form finding.

The materiality of steel, though harboring significant sustainability set-backs, was chosen for it’s unique reflective and simultaneously structural properties. The surfaces capture, reflect and refract light in an original way and, in tandem with the hollow cylindrical piping, frame the natural environment, particularly the sky, with a degree of alienation. This quality is topical given the intent of the design to encourage an awareness of the presence and application of renewable energy technology in a cityscape.

Furthermore, the acoustic properties of steel were considered favourable for this design because it amplifies noise. The provisions for sound generation attempt to make the invisible patterns of wind visible, so to speak, and as such, exag-

gerating the effect will contribute to the awareness of visitors of the role wind plays in the design. The intent is to create a somewhat uncomfortable environment, to reflect an element of dissonance and destruction, as has been the variably careless actions of people regarding their immediate environment.

Steel forms a moisture barrier around the piezo-wires. It is tensile and thus can respond to the movement in the structure inevitably resulting from Copenhagen’s gusty winds. Arguably, the steel structure will not with stand the strongest winds.

With proper and maintained protective coatings, such as galvanization, most corrosion and rust can be avoided.

Holistically, Njörðr’s Harp is designed as a sonorously and tactilely engaging form that aims to inform visitors of the potential for sustainable technologies in cities. In the long term, it is intended to generate surplus energy as opposed to consumption of energy, as most conventional structures tend towards.

It manipulates and frames views in a playful way so as to suggest a dynamic portrayal of immediate and distant environments.

C5 Learning Outcomes Objective 1

The brief was analysed according to spatial and environmental considerations. Parametric modelling enabled iterative explorations which allowed incremental improvements and optimisation for final resolution. The integration of wind patterns and material data to a small extent related process of algorithmic representation of the real world within our conceptual proposal.

Objective 2

At the final leg, iterative designs were proposed as a sounding board for improvement and adaptation of design. These iterations highlighted the growing relevance of the form to wind patterns and energy harvesting and so defined a design process of incremental improvements. However, I feel that the ‘intrinsic capacities for extensive... extrapolation’ were not engaged for optimum results. I was limited by (or limited myself with) time and by theoretical understanding of parametricism and its potential. I wish to continue further, reducing complex systems to algorithmic representations and in doing so use design technology as an enabling space rather than a disabling one.

Objective 3

One guest lecturer said that the most important lesson in the new digital age is to learn how to learn. What has been most interesting is that the skills I learned in grasshopper were easily applied to all the new, scary and complicated plug-ins that accompanied it. The skills I have learned in Grasshopper and Rhino involve a rudimentary understanding of data structures, patterns and organisation as well as some ability to manipulate it consciously. The effect being that given a simple set of rules, I am able to generate some forms which respond to the parameters I chose to represent it.

Objective 4

Coupling architecture with wind presented the challenge of engaging the physical, seeable world in the invisible one. Njörðr’s Harp approached this challenge using sound - droning and eerie, as a tool to emphasize the omniscient power of nature.

Objective 5

In some ways, I feel like my groups final design was plagiarised from the creator of the aeolian harp and Mayer Architects, as though there is nothing original in our design. To me, architecture and design must come from the imagination and from the individual rather than defined external sources. This part of the course I have found limiting and as such feel I have performed poorly in.

Objective 6

This is apparent in my attempts to re-engineer the Digital Origami Pavilion. My initial process was to generate the geometry exactly. I realised quickly that my knowledge was too limited to replicate it in this fashion and thus began to explore the conceptual elements of the design - the soft interior, the buildable surfaces, the ability to create a neighbourhood from the final forms.

Objective 7

My understanding of GH Data Structuring: a simple branching system whereby each datum is organised according to the item from which it was generated. As such, the ‘levels’ of data generate give the opportunity to generate complex interactions between simple sets of computerised information. The result of mastering this organisational structure is to generate unimagined forms using simple, repeated

Objective 7

Personally, I’m most interested in integrating live data with form generation. I want to use Firefly and Elk to record movement and sound patterns of a localised city space and to then translate this data into a responsive surface. In doing so, I imagine the surface will further add to the complexity of a highly complicated space by reflecting noise and redirecting movement. Though, I think the beauty of this idea is that I can’t predict exactly what will eventuate because I take the role of the definer of the issues rather than the resolver.

Page 37

Part c Reference List 1 GES DISC, 2012, NASA Earth Data, viewed 8/6/2014, < http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa. gov/education-and-outreach/additional/science-focus/ocean-color/

science_focus.shtml/vonKarman_vortices.shtml > 2

The Green Age, viewed 8/6/2014, < http://www.thegreenage.co.uk/tech/ piezoelectric-materials/ >

3 ‘Windstalker’, LAGI, Last modified 2010, < http://landartgenerator.org/blagi/

wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Windstalk.pdf > 4 ‘Wind Sculptures’, Symphony Capital, Last modified 2007, < http://www.sym

phonycapital.co.za/?page_id=11 > 5

Aeolus - Acoustic Wind Pavilion, 2011, Luke Jerram, last modified 2011, viewed 8/6/2014, < http://www.lukejerram.com/aeolus >

6 Yang, Qin, Dai, Lin Wang, 2009, Power generation with laterally packaged

piezoelectric fine wires, Nature Nanotechnology Letters, Vol 4, pp 34-39.

7 Solacity, 2006, Grounding, < http://www.solacity.com/grounding.htm > 8

American Society of Civil Engineers, 1997, ‘Design of Guyed Electrical Transmis sion Structures’, ASCE, USA.

9

Australian GreenHouse Calculator, 2010, < http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/agc/r_ emissions.html#/! >

Part c Figure List 1

Creagh-Molino, Illustrator Line Drawing, Melbourne, 2014.

2 Lienbenberg, Mark, 2006, visited 8/6/2014 < http://www.symphonycapital. co.za/?page_id=11> 3-4

Creagh-Molino, Image Site Map and Render, Melbourne, 2014.

5-8

9

Atlihan, Samil (model), Creagh-Molino, Leila (Photography), Melbourne, 2014.

Aeolus, 2012, < http://www.lukejerram.com/aeolus >

10-13 McAllister (model), Creagh-Molino (image capture), Melbourne 2014.

14-17 McAllister, Melbourne, 2014.

18-21 McAllister (model), Creagh-Molino (image capture), Melbourne, 2014.

22

McAllister, Waffle Grid Structure, 2014

23-25 Aeolus - Acoustic Wind Pavilion, 2011, Luke Jerram, last modified 2011, viewed

8/6/2014, < http://www.lukejerram.com/aeolus > 26-28 McAllister, Construction Detail, Melbourne, 2014.

29-33 McAllister, Creagh-Molino, Construction Detail, Melbourne, 2014.

34-36 Atlihan, Wire Arrangement, Melbourne, 2014.

37-38 McAllister, Wire to Pipe Detail, Melbourne, 2014.

39-40 Creagh-Molino, Construction Detail Sketches, Melbourne 2014.

41-45 Creagh-Molino, Final Model, Melbourne 2014 46

Creagh-Molino, Molds, Melbourne, 2014.

Page 39