Madeleine ingham 382423 partc journal by Madeleine Ingham

Architecture Design Studio: AIR ABPL30048_2013_SM1 Madeleine Ingham 382523

Contents Part A: A Case for Innovation Introduction Architecture as Discourse

Contemporary Computational Design

Parametric Modelling

Algorithmic Exploration

Conclusion

Part B: EOI III: Design Approach Design Focus: Tessellation

Precedent: Tessellation

Case Study 1.0

Case Study 2.0

Technique Development

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Technique Proposal

Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Part C: Design Proposal Design Concept Tectonic Elements

Final Model

Learning Outcomes and Objectives

102

PART A: A Case for Innovation

Introduction

My name is Madeleine Ingham. I am originally from Hepburn Springs in country Victoria but have since moved to Melbourne to pursue territory study. I am currently a third year Bachelor of Environments student with a major in Architecture. I hope to continue into a Master of Architecture in the upcoming years with a focus in sustainable and functional design. Over the years I have gained some experience in digital software in Photoshop and InDesign and have basic skills in Rhino from Virtual Environments in my first year. Below is my body lantern which was completed through using Rhino software. Other than this I have very little in the level of skills and understanding of digital architecture. I believe that digital technologies are an important part of any industry in this day and age, especially for presentation. This is one of the areas where I think digital design is very beneficial to the architecture industry. Presentation is how architects work to sell projects. If a designer has a great idea but cannot present the idea coherently to the client it is a loss at both ends. Computers can assist in merging the understanding of the project between architect and client which I believe is very beneficial. This is the same between clients as it is between industry professionals. Clear concise designs and blueprints are important communication tools between the architect and the building industry. Computer programs largely assist in providing neat, clear and concise information between industry professionals. Computer aided design is also important for architects to use in association with the building industry. In terms of digital design for architecture I only have the knowledge from which I have reviewed myself. I have mixed feelings about the use of digital design in architecture, mainly due to what I have seen in the industry rather than through academic learning. I think using the computer to aid in design generation is a dangerous concept as it can create a piece of art rather than a functional design. As a student who aims to focus in sustainable design I find this a flaw in computer aided design systems. However, imputing a design into a system to test the quality of the project I believe is a very beneficial analysis tool for architects. I think computer aided designs should be just that, aids. I think that the design process should still be addressed at a paper based level or at least diagrammatically represented before computers become involved. This may be purely because of the way I wish to practice but I also think the act of the architect drawing the design by hand gives creates a greater connection between the architect and the design.. I think that digital design is a tool for refining a design, but that it should not be the only media with which architects should interact with. I hope that this subjects gives me a better understanding of how computer aided design and digital architecture simulation can benefit my future as an architect.

Discourse In Architecture

http://artblart.files.wordpress.com/2010/07/fuller_domeovermanhattan.jpg

In the lecture we discussed the concept of discourse in architecture. Stanislav started the lecture by showing radical design ideas by Buckminster Fuller and discussed some of the debates and opinions which have been made about his designs. This led to a further discussion about conflict in architecture and how this has shaped the way in which architects have designed and practiced. Discourse in architecture, as I understand it from the lecture, is when cultural, social and political agendas create a differing opinions which ultimately can lead to a re-evaluation of a design. Discourse is an important component in architecture as without discussion about the design there would be no movement forward into other styles and ideas. ‘Any serious “rethinking” of architecture at the start of this century cannot be undertaken without upsetting the structure and emphases of the traditional profession, of traditional typologies, and of traditional modes of envisaging the architectural subject.’1 I found this quote from the lecture very useful in displaying how discourse has affected architecture throughout history. Without reevaluating the effectivity of the design there would be no move forward or leading development in design. Understanding the discourse around the design can lead to positive outcomes in the building industry as changes can be made for the better. Who knows how architecture would have progressed if it was not for the development of literary articles which discuss the issues surrounding the built form. The Richard Williams reading provides similar insight into the way in which discourse has shaped architecture design. In the Williams reading he discusses the difficulties in defining what architecture is as it is an ever changing profession. Williams address how as society changes, architecture in turn has changed with it. Throughout the article Williams discusses the progression of architecture from an art from and into a social and cultural expression. “As it will become clear, architecture is as much a philosophical, social or professional realm as it is a material one, and it is through the consideration of architecture as discourse that one can engage with it as visual culture.”2 Over the years discourse in the architecture industry has encouraged and discouraged certain aspects of design. This has lead to a developed culture surrounding architectural design and progress. Currently this culture is looking for new radical design ideas which have never been seen before however, as always, there is constant discourse over which designs achieve this. In the two precedents that I have chosen there are different levels of discourse with past and new architectural ideas. I feel that being open to discourse is a positive part of architecture design. Discourse provides the greatest analysis tool a designer can get. Discourse, despite its negativity, can be seen in a way as a form of constructive criticism.

1 Anthony Vidler, ‘‘Review of Rethinking Architecture and the Anaesthetics of Architecture by Neal Leach’’, Harvard Design Magazine (2000), 3. 2 Richard Williams, ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), pp. 102 - 116.

Discourse In Architecture

Source: http://aldorf.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/amazing-paperhouse-by-shigeru-ban/

Source: http://aldorf.wordpress.com/2010/08/29/amazing-paperhouse-byshigeru-ban/

Shigeru Ban PAPER HOUSE Lake Yamanaka, Yamanashi, Japan, 1995 Shigeru Ban has created much discourse in the architectural industry after creating a new building material and by being a leading architect in sustainable design solutions. Ban’s use of paper to create load bearing building elements was revolutionary to the building industry. Ban used strengthened paper as a design solution for providing temporary shelters to residents affected by the Kobe Earthquake in Japan 1994.1 Ban used paper as it was a material readily accessible, made sturdy enough to support a structure and could be broken down and recycled after use.2 Using paper as the main material and the quick construction time made this project inexpensive and available to a variety of people of varying socio economic status.3 This meant that anyone after catastrophic events had the accessibility to one of his designs. Ban’s humanitarianism work is seen throughout his career and he continually works throughout the world assisting in temporary building structures for the homeless. However, he has transformed his make shift shelter solution from paper tubes into more permanent structures such as Paper House (Lake Yamanaka, Yamanashi, Japan, 1995). Ban uses his paper tubes in a curving dynamic ‘S’ shaped manner to create the walls in between the static floor and roof elements.4 The floor and roof looks to reference back to Le Corbusier’s simple design principle of a flat floor and ceiling separated by columns, however Ban has made it strictly his own style through the use of the paper tubes. This could display a discourse influence in architecture as Ban has taken a well liked style posed by Le Corbusier and incorporated it into his own design. The use of paper has become a defining element in Ban’s work and he continually experiments to push the boundaries with the material. Already Ban has dynamically changed the way in which paper is used in building in his two different projects. The original use of paper as a cheap and efficient material for the less fortunate is transformed into a design feature in a grand house. The occupants of Paper House do not have the same social economic concerns or distress as the previous users of the temporary shelter which fundamentally changes the original purpose of the material. Although the material is no longer about helping people in need it still reflects Ban’s want to insure that people are comfortable and that they enjoy the privacy of the space.5 Ban is well known for his innovative ideas with recyclable materials, paper being the major material. Ban was working on sustainable solutions in architecture back in 1980’s years before environmental solutions and recycled materials were even apart of the architectural community.6 This makes him one of the leading architects in the sustainable design industry. Ban can be described as a modernist, experimentalist as well as a rationalist.7 Ban has created a new form of architecture in sustainable design with recyclable materials in which other architects will be measured against. His work in the architecture industry is significant to the movement of sustainable design by sustainable architecture not only functional and environmentally friendly but also beautiful. 1 Designboom, ‘Shigeru Ban: Paper Loghouse’2010) <http://www.designboom.com/history/ban_paper.html> [Accessed 21/3/2013]. 2 Designboom, ‘Shigeru Ban: Paper Loghouse’2010) <http://www.designboom.com/history/ban_paper.html> [Accessed 21/3/2013]. 3 Shigeru Ban Architects America, ‘Paper Log House’ <http://www.dma-ny.com/site_sba/?page_id=331> [Accessed 23/3/2013]. 4 Elizabeth Nielsen, ‘Shigeru Ban Builds with Paper ‘, ARCPROSPECT International Foundation, (2012) <http://arcprospect.org/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2370&Itemid=2&lang=en> [Accessed 21/2/2013]. 5 Elizabeth Nielsen, ‘Shigeru Ban Builds with Paper ‘, ARCPROSPECT International Foundation, (2012) <http://arcprospect.org/index. php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2370&Itemid=2&lang=en> [Accessed 21/2/2013]. 6 Barbara Porada, ‘Shigeru Ban’s Cardboard Cathedral Underway in New Zealand’, ArchDaily, (<http://www.archdaily.com/tag/shigeru-ban-architects/> [Accessed 22/3/2013]. 7 Artek, ‘Shigeru Ban’ <http://www.artek.fi/company/designers/13> [Accessed 24/3/2013].

Discourse In Architecture

Source: http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Temppeliaukio_Church_1.jpg

Timo and Tuomo Suomalainen TEMPPELIAUKIO CHURCH (Church of Rock) Helsinki, Finland, 1969 The Church of Rock has a large construction history associated with a large amount of discourse. After many years of the parish trying to find a design for the church, in 1936 the parish accepted Timo and Tuomo Suomalainen’s design of a church built into the bedrock.1There was a large amount of controversy at this time in the 1960’s regarding the role of religion in society and thus the scale, cost and necessity of the church was questioned.2 The churches original proposed size became smaller and ideas were squashed by the controversy of the Helsinki public. In fact, the original design did not include the walls to be left rough and virtually unworked as the architects thought it would be too controversial at the time to be accepted by the Parish.3 However, once the excavations were done, the combination of discourse amongst the public regarding the cost of the temple and the success of the excavations meant that the rocks were left rough and unworked.4 The rough rocks have now become a major feature of the church as well as enhancing the acoustics, making it a great concert venue as well.5 This movement away from being a traditional form of church can be said to be influenced slightly by the surrounding opinions at the time of the build. There are also many influences which can be seen in the original design from the modernist movement. The idea of using the natural topography to form a feature in the landscape can be seen in earlier inspirational buildings such as Frank Lloyd Wright’s Falling Water. Like Wright, brothers Timo and Tuomo Suomalainen have used the landscape around the site to create features in the building. Wright used natural stone surfaces in the interior of the building and contrasts it against smooth concrete and stone elements. This idea of contrast between artificial and natural has been incorporated into the Church of Rock. Most of the rock surfaces have been left rough, but there is the contrast of smooth stone and of course the very smooth and perfectly rounded dome. The dome references back to the original idea of a dome within a church but the use of glass and copper has fundamentally changed the antiquity representation of the church and dome. The copper dome sits above 180 glass windows which give the dome the appearance that it’s floating.6 When approaching the temple from the south all that can be seen is a layer of rocks and the copper dome peaking up from the surface. It is well hidden considering its large expansive space. The building entrance is off a main street and a sense of euphoria is felt when entering the surprisingly large space.7 Although the church still follows the style of many traditional churches though its oval space, alter and large dome, the design is very unique in it’s style from a traditional church. Unlike many traditional churches in which the large expansive space is normally dark with diffused lights from stain glass windows, the Church of Rock is underground but brightly lit by the glass which sits below the dome. Today the Church of Rock is regarded as an amazing piece of architecture which combines the natural elements of its surroundings while providing a separate well lit sanctuary used as a church, concert space and an architectural masterpiece. 1 Kirkko Helsingissa, ‘Temppeliaukio Church History’ <http://www.helsinginseurakunnat.fi/seurakunnat/toolo/touristinformation/temppeliaukiochurchhistory.html> [Accessed 22/3/2013]. 2 Maila Mehtälä, ‘Rectification to the Design History of the Temppeliaukio Church’2007) <http://www.temppeliaukio.fi/english/artikkeli1.htm> [Accessed 23/3/2013. 3 Maila Mehtälä, ‘Rectification to the Design History of the Temppeliaukio Church’2007) <http://www.temppeliaukio.fi/english/artikkeli1.htm> [Accessed 23/3/2013. 4 Galinsky, ‘Temppeliaukio Church’ <http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/temppeliaukio/> [Accessed 20/3/2013. 5 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013]. 6 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013]. 7 JollyRogArrh, ‘Helsinki Rock Church’2012) <http://upall.co/helsinki-rock-church-1556.php>25/3/2013].

Contemporary Computation Design The role of computers in contemporary design can be likened to the revolution of the industrial age on architecture. Beginning with Frank Gehry’s Guggeheim Museum, digital technologies have created a new realm to work in and are changing the way which we practice architecture.1 Computers are a great tool for architects, as unlike humans they will never tire and make arithmetical mistakes, providing architects with a logical analytical tool that can process tasks quickly and repetitively.2 Computers are largely beneficial to architects as they prevent errors in design, provide a way to see the design three dimensionally and can assist in the fabrication and construction of the design. Computer programing has allowed for the design, development and manufacturing of more experimental designs. In particular curved structures which were once limited by paper design are being revolutionized through computer aided design into organic forms which challenge the traditional development of buildings (solid, rigid structures which uniformly dissipate loads).3 Architecture largely ignored the use of curves throughout the last century despite how developed the use of curves were in other built industries. Computers are allowing architects to create geometries which were never before thought conceivable to build. Computers have become a tool which largely assist easing the design process for an architect however, there are some negative outcomes from computer aided design. Digital technologies have created discourse amongst the architectural community as these technologies, although pushing limits in designs, can also limit creativity. As with any media, the design in some ways is limited by parameters. The use of computers adds a new dimension to designing and can affect the design process. It is of concern to the architecture community that in generating design through the use of computer programming that the set parameters of a program will not be broken down and therefore designs will become the outcome of computer programs rather than the architects design capabilities. It is therefore encouraged in many academic journals that the design process should use multiple medias or follow the traditional explorative design process. 1 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 3. 2 Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design ‘, (2004), 2. 3 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 3.

The Guggenheim Museum Bilbao

Source: http://www.guggenheim-bilbao.es/en/the-building/outside-the-museum/

Computerization is primarily seen as a tool in architectural design. This is where the initial design is created by the architect but computerization is used to present the final design which the architect has envisioned, such as Frank Gehryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guggenhium Museum in Bilbao. This is a fantastic way in which computers have contributed positively to the architectural industry. The Guggenheim museum would have been a nightmare to communicate design information to clients, builders and other external contractors without the use of computer programs to break down the design into a way which could be communicated clearly to all external parties. Computers also assisted in construction of the Guggenheim by providing correct mathematical calculations allowing for the construction of the intersecting planes in the buildings. In contrast to computerization, computation is where the computer aided design is used initially in the design process and continued to the end of the design. This sometimes begins by the exploration of patterns in computer programs where a set architectural form has not already been made. Computation is surrounded by a large amount of discourse in the architectural community as this process solely relies on the parameters of a set program and redefines the role of an architect in the design process, which some architects believe is limiting. For the Gateway Project we are required to use Rhino and the grasshopper plug in to generate designs. Grasshopper is great for generating very innovative designs and I believe there is a great potential to design something very eye catching for the project. I think it is also important that we acknowledge that although there are benefits in using this technology that caution should be taken when using this program to generate design. It is important to keep assessing the design related to how it will work as a built form. As this will largely be a computation design the computer programming will be used to generate ideas to fabrication of the design. It is important that while undergoing the Gateway Project that we do not get too lost in the potentials for design in the program and that we keep referring back to how the design will work within the context of the site.

Contemporary Computation Design

Source: http://www.pscohen.com/torus_house.html

Source: http://www.tasmeemme.com/project/view/1002

Preston Scott Cohen INC TORUS HOUSE Old Chatham, NY 1998-1999. The Torus House by Preston Scott Cohen is an example of computer aided architecture. The curves are based on the mathematical concept of a torus.1 Preston Scott Cohen liked the torus for its symbolism and blended this shape into the formal home styled living spaces creating a struggle between curves and flat surfaces.2 Computer aided design heavily assisted in the evolution of this project as the unconventional curves between the straight flat surfaces required careful mapping and calculations for manufacturing. This project is referred to as smooth architecture belonging to an avant-garde style which explores curvilinear design.3 Computer technologies and CAD programs revolutionized the possibilities of curvilinear design through the understanding of NURB systems.4 This design can be described as a computerization design as the architect has used the computer to assist in representing the design after the initial idea was already created prior to computing commencement. In my opinion this is an example of where digital technologies have been positively utilized as a tool in the architectural process. Computers have allowed for precise measurement of curves and provides an insight into how these forms can be built, especially important when choosing materials. Without computers this would have been a very complicated design to produce and manufacture. 1 Derek Magee, ‘Preston Scott Cohen’2009) <http://dmageeish.blogspot.com.au/2009/01/preston-scott-cohen.html> [Accessed 3/4/2013. 2 Derek Magee, ‘Preston Scott Cohen’2009) <http://dmageeish.blogspot.com.au/2009/01/preston-scott-cohen.html> [Accessed 3/4/2013. 3 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 6. 4 Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 6.

Contemporary Computation Design

Source: http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=0&param=overview&param2=21&param3=0&

Franken Architekten GmbH BMW Bubble Frankfurt, Germany, 1999 The BMW Bubble is one of the first structures in the world that was created from start to finish by computers.1 This can be described as computation as the whole design process has been developed using digital technologies. The design is based on the interaction between two water droplets and like Torus House, the design is curvilinear and has used computer aided technologies greatly assists in producing this structure.2 The movement and tension of the water droplets was explored through computers, specifically using a drop simulation, making this design a project of movement or kinetics.3 The mapping of movement is a new design technology produced through computers and gives us a greater understanding of how the building will work, as well as making more specific bio-inspirational analysis. The curves in the BMW Bubble reference the study of water droplets very correctly as they do not follow one radius and display the shape of water surface tension. This design, in my opinion, is successful in communicating the idea of two water droplets. The design does not appear restricted by computer aided technologies, instead enhanced. It can be assumed that computer technologies assisted in manufacturing and producing the design as the produced form follows the lines of the digital design very closely. The BMW Bubble is an example of a computation design success where the design is creative and the materials elaborate the form of the design. 1 2 3

Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 21. Franken Architekten, ‘Bubble’ <http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang =en&cat=0&param=overview&param2=21&param3=0&>3/4/2013]. Branko Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing’, (2003), 21.

Parametric Modelling Daniel Davis’ lecture on parametric modelling provided a good summary on what parametrics is, how it has been incorporated into the architecture industry and the positives and negatives associated with it. Davis describes how parametrics is a term borrowed from mathematics which we now use in the architecture industry. The definition which Davis uses to define parametrics is taken from a mathematical encyclopedia where parametrics is described as a ‘set of equations that express a set of quantities as explicit functions of a number of independent variables known as parameters’.1 Davis describes how this expression has been adopted into architecture where ‘the idea of the explicit connection between the parameter and the geometry at the end’ is explored as design.2 Davis makes it clear in his lecture that parametric modelling does not require scripting and computation. Parametrics can operate in a realm outside of computers and has been used for many years prior to computation. A perfect example of this is Gaudi using a parametric model consisting of weights forcing point sources into certain shapes based on the force of gravity to create his design. This can be defined as parametric because there are set parameters (location of the weight points), equations (laws of gravity) and quantities (the model itself). As with many new technologies there is a large amount of discourse in the architecture industry which surrounds it. Woodbury has his own opinions on parametric modelling and how it should be implemented into the design process. Woodbury states that “Design is change. Parametric modelling represents change” and that architects should embrace parametrics.3 Woodbury discusses the many positives in using parametrics as it moves the designer forward from add and erase to add, erase, relate and repair.4 This is a major breakthrough in design as it means that a change in algorithms and numbers can lead to a change in the design and vise versa so bringing change to the design is very easy. “Initially, a parametric definition was simply a mathematical formula that required values to be substituted for a few parameters in order to generate variations from within a family of entities. Today it is used to imply that the entity once generated can easily be changed.”5 Being able to manipulate changes quickly and efficiently in a design while still being able to control the parameters of the design is a very beneficial aspect of parametric design. However, not all changes are fluent and easily adapted in parametric modelling. For instance, finding the point in the algorithm or in the program nodes which represents a certain aspect of the design to be changed can be difficult without a very deep understanding of the design and program. This makes it very difficult for external onlookers who have not participated in the digital parametrics to alter the design. In general it can even become hard for the original user of the parametric model to create major changes to the design as changing the parameters can create larger scaled negative effects. Creating changes to parametric designs later in the design process can lead to disfunction in the construction process as the initial parameters have been disrupted and altered. 1 2 3 4 5

Eric Weisstein, in CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics Chapman and Hall/CRC. doi: 10.1201/9781420035223-18., 2003). Daniel Davis, Parametric Modelling Lecture, 2013 Robert Woodbury, ‘Elements of Parametric Design’, (2010), 1. Robert Woodbury, ‘Elements of Parametric Design’, (2010), 5. Chris Yessios, ‘Is There More to Come?’, Architecture in the Digital Age. Design and Manufacturing (2003), 68.

14 14

Working with parametric modelling does create a large amount of control and efficiency in a design but there are many underlying issues which are becoming more prominent in the design industry. The more that parametric modeling software is being used the more similar we are seeing the end product becoming. This has created discourse amongst the architecture community as to what level should be parametric modelling be used in the design process. Scripting is an emerging solution which designers are using to break through the set parameters of parametric programs and make their designs more original and different to other parametric designs. Scripting is beneficial to parametric modelling as it provides a deeper engagement between computer and user which is not always present in using the set parameters of a program.1 Scripting is also a way in which designers reduce their time by automating routine tasks. Scripting cultures are emerging where designers create more imaginative, innovative solutions without being restricted by a programs parameters.2 Despite scripting’s position not yet being defined in the industry, scripting appears to be a positive solution to the issues regarding parametric modelling creating derogative design. However, like most computer technologies, there are issues with integrating them into the design industry. Scripting is largely an amateur based skill and it is a time consuming process, even for those who are considered experts at scripting.3 Scripting is limited by the skills and knowledge and “even after a model is created, other designers can’t easily modify the design because they don’t possess the knowledge about how it was created and the original design intent.”4 This is an issue when working in large groups in design which is becoming a more common way to practice when addressing large scale projects. Parametric modelling is very advantageous to the design community in providing great designs quickly and easily which are functional. Parametric modelling provides control and efficiency to a design which is not seen in many other design processes which eases the process of design. However, on a larger scale there are negatives to parametric modelling as the more it is used the more frequently we see the similar styles and patterns in built form around the world. Scripting provides a solution to these problems as it is usually the software’s parameters which continually create these similar designs. However, scripting in itself creates more issues in communications of designs despite the new and imaginative designs which are being created through this design process. I think that all design projects are different and parametric modelling can sometimes be very beneficial to a design. However, parametrics is not a necessity of the 21st century and it should not be used for the sake of using it. Parametric modelling, for me, is a great design generator which like all mediums has its limitations. It can be used more effectively in some designs more than others and I believe that there should be more observational analysis of the effectiveness of parametric modelling to find where exactly it is most beneficially used. 1 2 3 4

Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 8. Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 62. Mark Bury, Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley, 2011) 11. Parametric Technology Corporation, 2008. “Explicit Modeling: what To Do When Your 3D CAD Productivity Isn’t What You Expected.”

Source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interior-installation-architectu design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

Parametric Modelling

Source: http://architecturerevived.blogspot.com.au/2008/08/mercedes-benz-museum-in-stuttgart.html

UN Studio Mercedes Benz Museum Stuttgart, Germany, 2001–2006 The Mercedes Benz Museum was a very large project comprising of over two hundred and forty six companies and engineering firms.1 The museum is a complex double helix form based on the shape of the Mercedes Benz logo.2 Parametric design was used throughout the design, more specifically in reducing the labyrinth to a single diagram and controlling the overall geometry.3 According to Ben van Berkel, UN Studio’s cofounder and director, parametric modelling and digitally controlling the design made it possible for changes to be made quickly and efficiently and display the change on all other aspects of the building.4 This was interesting to read as the effect of small changes in parametric modelling can sometimes have negative impacts. It is interesting that parametric modelling was used to map and experiment changes in the design as working with such a large variety of companies requires many people to be able to use and adjust the design. This is difficult as it requires many people to know the exact parameters of the design and continually follow the changes which are made. As far as we know parametric modelling was successfully used throughout this design as the complex form has been compiled together effectively. Computer aided design separate to parametric modelling was also very important to this designs structure due to the combination of many materials and the curved surfaces in the design.5 1 Robbie Moore, ‘The Benz’, Specifier, (2013) <http://www.specifier.com.au/pastissues/9592/The-Benz.html> [Accessed 3/4/2012]. 2 Ibid. 3 Ibid. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid.

Parametric Modelling

All images from source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interior-installationarchitecture-design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

PROJECTiONE EXOtique Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA The EXOtique project was produced by PROJECTiONE and students from the Institute for Digital Fabrication.1 There were specific constraints such as time, budget and the site (the ceiling at the school architecture building).2 The intention of the designers was to ‘create a simple, hexagonally based, component system that would act as a lit “drop ceiling” for the space, as the ceiling height would allow for quite a bit of variation in the surface.3 To create this design PROJECTiONE used the parametric modelling program Rhino and primarily used its plug in Grasshopper. These computer tools were also used for preparing the fabricated surface, printing and connections.4 The design created is light bulb lit, loose hanging structure which is curved throughout the structure rather than just at its edges. The connections of this project were therefore critical to the design as it is the connections which are also responsible for the way in which the fits together and reacts with each hexagonal member. This process was an exploration of digital modelling for fabrication where the design was already in their minds. In Rhino they created a surface and divided the space into hexagonal forms with the aim of creating a non planar folding and bending surface. This is an example of a beautiful design using parametric modelling. As the design and build was based primarily on repetitive patterns and had a set size, parametric modelling was ideally suited to this project. This is a design where parametrics have not limited the design but rather the design is an exploration of what parametrics can achieve. Parametrics largely benefitted fabrication of this project by calculating the edges for the hexagonal components which were a critical part of the design as without these elements coming together the fluid motion would not have been achieved. 1 2 3 4

PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>. PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>. Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>. Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>.

Algorithmic Exploration Understanding Algorithms

Algorithmic Challenge Week One

For the first week readings we were assigned to read a definition of an “algorithm.” The reading describes the different ways in which an algorithm can be defined. Although it did provide a sentence long definition of an algorithm being a ‘recipe, method, or technique for doing something’,1 the reading also explains how the term algorithm can be used quite loosely and how this has made the definition of algorithm become a derogative term for something which requires a computer to generate it. Although computers can perform algorithms they are not the only way which algorithms can be solved or produced. Algorithms can be mathematical equations but more importantly can be anything which can be expressed finitely. The author then re-evaluates the previous definition to include that ‘an algorithm is an unambiguous, precise, list of simple operations applied mechanically and systematically to a set of tokens or objects.’2 The author deems this a more appropriate definition as an algorithm can be anything from a mathematical equation or tax bill to a cake recipe as long as the list of ingredients are finite.

This week we were asked to reproduce an algorithmic challenge demonstrated to us in a tutorial video. This tutorial explored how we could loft curves together and integrate this with Rhino to morph the loft into different forms. For this experiment shown along the bottom of the page I used a pentagon a circle a square and a circle. I then made set these curves into Grasshopper and joined them together with the loft tool. I then turned the points on and adjusted the curves which adjusted the lofts and kept baking my products to get the forms below.

I think that understanding the definition of an algorithm is important to this course work as Rhino is an algorithmic program. However, just because Rhino uses algorithmic expressions it does not mean that these functions are incapable to complete by hand. This begins to create the idea that Rhino is merely a tool used to express these equations which can be completed outside of a computer and that it is not creating something which cannot be Replicated elsewhere. 1 Robert Wilson and Frank Wilson, ‘Algorithm’, in The Mit Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science ed. by The MIT Press (London, 1999), 11. 2 Robert Wilson and Frank Wilson, ‘Algorithm’, in The Mit Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science ed. by The MIT Press (London, 1999), 11.

Algorithmic Challenge Week Two “AA Driftwood” This weeks “Algorithmic Challenge” required for us to try and replicate a sculpture through following a grasshopper tutorial video. Mine did not come out as I hoped it would (model opposite). I experimented with sliders to try and adjust the depth of which the extrusions cut into the BREP but could not find the right number set for this to work. I experimented with different BREP’s and curves and got some very cool results. Although not outcome I was required to make I did understand the concept of cutting away sections to create “AA Driftwood” project.

Algorithmic Exploration Algorithmic Challenge Week 3 For Week 3 we were asked to find a Grasshopper tool or definition and implement it into a design. I tried to find a pipe shape which I had seen already completed on a previous tutorial video. I found on the Grasshopper web site that what I was trying to achieve is done through using a pipe tool and that it is usually projected between two curves. I experimented and found that I could select curves, divide them (evenly so that the pipes can be projected evenly between the two curves) and then a line created between the divided curves. I then use the pipe tool to project pipes along the dividing lines of the curves and this gets me my achieved result. However, I wanted to take this further. So I created a spiral around a straight line and repeated the steps. The result was this amazing design of tubes twisting around a central axis. I tried to find a way to replace the pipe tool with something else which was a matter of examining node inputs and outputs and I found that the cone surface could be used as a substitute. Using sliders I can alter the radius and length of the cones to create these beautiful swirling designs.

Conclusion To conclude my Case for Innovation I wish to summarize the knowledge which I have gained from this section into how I will address my own design approach for the Gateway Project. Using computer aided technologies is an intrinsic aspect of this course and knowing how to properly use them in the design process is crucial to the effective outcome of the design. I have analysed the discourse around computational design and found that the main concern within the design community is that due to the limitations of software there is an evolving ‘digital style’ which is very repetitive in its style. This is a concern, however avoided if computer aided design is included in the right part of the design process. Obviously within the Gateway Project we are to use Rhino and Grasshopper to generate the design however, this does not necessarily mean that research and innovative design ideas will not be generated prior to computation. I personally find the computation approach a better design approach when addressing functional built models. However, using the parametric modeling design approach appears very beneficial to this project. Looking at precedents using parametric modelling such as EXOtique by PROJECTiONE which has a more similar brief with the Gateway Project compared to the larger built forms I have studies gives me much hope for a very innovative design to be created using Grasshopper. The gateway Project needs to be exciting and eye catching. Patterns is a very eye catching design feature and disruption within patterning immediately avert the eyes to get our attention. This is what EXOtique has done through its use of curves and patterns. However, what I found most appealing about this project is the tesselation of the surfaces. This design is striking and I think that the use of tesselation and lights is a very dynamic statement within the context of the Gateway Project. In tackling the design process for the Gateway Project I hope to use parametric modelling as a generative design tool based on innovative ideas which fit with the brief. I hope to generate these ideas using Grasshopper and continue to alter and develop the design until refinement. Using the tesselation technique will require many experimental models using light and colour prior to fabrication to assure that what is processed in the computer is communicated into the real form. The form of the model is crucial for this design to be effective. What makes using the tesselation process so innovative is how the design looks when you move around it. How the tessellated patterning appears to change as you move around the object is what I believe to be one of the most beneficial aspects of using it in the Gateway Project because as traffic moves around it, all sides can be beautifully eye catching and spectacular.

Learning Outcomes Through learning about the theory and practice of architectural computing I have developed a greater understanding of how digital software can interact within the design process. Prior to studying architectural computing I was very negative about how software’s can restrict design and take the creativity out of design. Learning about scripting and the cultures which surround algorithmic and parametric modelling I have much hope that architects are not planning on letting software’s limit their designs. This was a main concern for me coming into this course and I am glad to see that discourse in the architectural community is leading to people doing something about it. I have found beauty in the designs of Torus House and EXOtique through understanding how revolutionary they are to the built world. The use of curves in architecture is something which I myself have struggled with while working on paper which in some ways has limited my designs. Through understanding computer technologies I actually have more hope at being able to effectively use curves within the architectural field and manufacture them in a way I felt restricted through paper design. This is what made my last Algorithmic Challenge for week 3 so special to me. I was able to express curves effectively and beautifully in a way I couldn’t on paper.

PART B: EOI III: Design Approach

Design Focus: Tesselation

Dissecting the Brief Wyndham City is pleased to invite submissions for the Western Gateway Design project to create a Gateway into Wyndham for city bound traffic on the Princes Freeway. This project is an opportunity to capitalise on the success of “Seeds of Change” Gateway, located at the eastern interchange, and create an equally compelling installation. The proposed site for the Western Gateway offers a high exposure location to those entering the urban precinct of the municipality, as well as to those travelling along the freeway. Wyndham City is seeking responses from design professionals for the design and documentation of an exciting, eye catching installation at Wyndham’s Western Gateway. We would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in this initiative organized by Wyndham City, and encourage and challenge you to develop a proposal that inspires and enriches the municipality. Key words in the brief: gateway, Wyndham City, compelling, high exposure, exciting, eye catching, inspires, enriching, municipality

Tesselation My understanding of the definition is that tesselation is to cover a planar surface by the repeated use of a single shape, without gaps or overlapping. It is my belief that tesselation will reflect the requirements of the brief as despite the simplicity of its definition, its application provides strong compelling, exciting and eye catching designs which can become an iconic gateway for Wyndham City. Through studying it’s application I believe that this design focus can be reinvented into a gateway design which can achieve the desired effect which “seeds of change” be an iconic symbol for the city of Wyndham.

Source: http://www.archivenue.com/voussoir-cloud-byiwamotoscott-with-buro-happold/ Source: http://www.mediaruimte.be/digital_territories/ projects/cybernetic/Aegis-Hyposurface_deCOi.html Source: http://cubeme.com/blog/2009/07/07/puppettheater-at-harvards-carpender-center/ source: http://archinect.com/softlab/project/polyp-lux Source: http://www.triangulationblog.com/2011/05/ fermid-by-behnaz-babazadeh.html Source: http://www.arch2o.com/articulated-cloud-nedkahn/

Precedents: Tesselation

Source: http://zeospot.com/exotique-by-projectione-an-amazing-interiorinstallation-architecture-design/exotique-lighting-installation-design/

PROJECTiONE EXOtique Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA, 2011. As mentioned previously in Part A: A Case Study for Innovation, EXOtique by PROJECTiONE is a perfect example of a dynamic tessellated surface. Produced to be an eye catching ceiling feature at the Ball State University Architecture Building this project relates to many of the aspects of the Gateway Project brief.1 The intention of the designers was to ‘create a simple, hexagonally based, component system that would act as a lit “drop ceiling” for the space, as the ceiling height would allow for quite a bit of variation in the surface.2 Using the hexagon has been tessellated across a very largely curved dynamic surface which in my opinion has enhanced the tessellated design feature. Although tesselation is in itself repetitive, this design has used tesselation on a curving surface to create a large amount of variety within the design. The tessellated design is then further enhanced through the use of artificial lighting which has been distributed evenly throughout the grid. However, due to the curved structure of the surface, the design projects lights from many areas of the design further enhancing the variety in the form. This precedent perfectly demonstrates the versatility of tesselation. EXOtique’s Achievements in Tessellated Design There are many aspects in this design which can be used as inspiration for the gateway project. The use of the curving planar surface creating variety in viewing points can be incorporated into the gateway design to create variation in the design as the car drives past. Lighting can also be used to further enhance this variation as well as the tessellated pattern through puncturing of holes in the surface. An exploration of light distribution across the surface of the gateway design is important as in different lights the project can look dramatically different. There might need to be different lighting consideration from day to night. 1 PROJECTiONE.com, ‘Exotique’2009) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/>. 2 Arch Daily, ‘Exotique/Projectione’2011) <http://www.archdaily.com/125764/exotique-projectione/>.

Precedents: Tesselation

Source: http://matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/

MATSYS Shellstar Pavilion Wan Chai, Hong Kong, 2012. The Shellstar Pavilion was designed to be an iconic gathering place for festival attendees.1 This design therefore had to be eye catching and compelling to captivate the audience. MATSYS worked within a parametric modelling environment (grasshopper and kangaroo) and was quickly developed and iterated taking just 6 weeks to design, fabricate and assemble. The design process can be broken down into 3 processes that were enabled by advanced digital modelling techniques; Form-Finding, Surface Optimization, Fabrication Planning.2 The structure is composed of nearly 1500 individual cells that are all slightly non-planar.3 The curvature of the form meant that some of the cells overlapped which was minimized using a custom python script.4 Although there were some difficulties in fabrication, the solution in the end design is very effective. The structure appears light in a different way to EXOtique due to the larger holes within the structure. This is partly to do with the lighting which enhances the variety of both sides by projecting light along the surface rather than through the surface like EXOtique. Shellstar Pavilionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Achievements in Tessellated Design Shellstar Pavilion displays that there can be some difficulties in creating tessellated designs through parametric modelling due to overlapping of components. This will have to be something which is examined in the gateway project to ensure that the design can be built effectively. For Shellstar Pavilion a fluid surface was very important and there could be no kinks through overlapping. In the end they have used beautiful joinery so that the underside of the design has a different design effect than at the top. Utilizing joinery in the design may be important due to the many angles of which the gateway project may be viewed. 1 2 3 4

Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/ Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/ Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/ Http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/04/shellstar-pavilion-by-matsys/

Precedents: Tesselation

Source: http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html

Skylar Tibbits VoltaDom MIT, Department of Architecture, Massachusetts, USA, 2011. The VoltaDom is a double vaulted passageway based on the structural design of the inside of a cathedral.1 The design varies hugely along the surface through changes in both the tesselations shape and size and the distribution of joinery across the surface. The joinery is very dynamic where the corner of the panels create a new sharp feature making the joinery as much a feature as the projected tessellated panels. The variety in this design is very dynamic and eye catching. It is not necessarily beautiful in the same way as the smoothness of the Shellstar Pavilion but it is eye catching in a way which can be very beneficial to the gateway project in attracting attention and focus of the viewers. This aspect of the design would be beneficial to incorporate into the stylings of EXOtique and Shellstar Pavilion in creating a more monumental recognizable feature to the Gateway Project. VoltaDomâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Achievements in Tessellated Design This design represents a different aspect of tesselation through its rough and sharp features. This is eye catching from a distance and becomes more intriguing the closer you approach the design. This aspect of interest in design and the approach should be considered in the gateway project. From a great distance the VoltaDom can be seen and still be very eyes catching whereas the smooth surfaces of EXOtique and Shellstar Pavilion where not as dynamic from a distance. The bold edges and joinery are an integral part of the design and emphasise the overall structure of the tessellated surface which make the design so sharp and eye catching. If the gateway project was to be projected over the highway this change from exterior to interior might be something to consider. 1

Http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html

Case Study 1.0

Source: http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html

Case Study 1.0 VoltaDom We were given the task to explore a provided VoltaDom definition on Rhino and Grasshopper and explore its limitations and provide new potentials. As a group we found many limitations to the design through our own lack of understanding of the components which make up the definition. It took a lot of exploration to find what each component did and how this effected the design outcome. We found through adjusting the sliders in the definition that many aspects could be changed in terms of variations in the surfaces, heights and radices of the components. It was possible to change the cone shapes by replacing the cone surface with a sphere however, to change the surface which the cone shapes originally lay on did require more adjustments. We were able to extend the already existing surface quite easily but creating curves for the definition to be projected onto required a new component to be added to the definition as displayed below.

To make the definition be projected onto a different surface structure we needed to populate points onto the chosen surface and evaluate the surface before connecting it into the definition. This gave the definition a new potential and allowed for the development of many new designs from the original definition provided.

Matrix: Case Study 1.0

VoltaDom Definition Exploration The matrix outlines the many different outcomes which we were able to generate using the original definition and using the adjusted component to the definition to change the surface.

In this sequence we first explored adjusting the sliders in the original definition to change the radices and heights of the cones. We then changed the surface to be slightly curved and experimented with the extremes of the original definition.

In this sequence we projected the definition onto a torus surface and then turned points on to extend the surface into more organic shapes.

In this sequence we explored the sphere and how it can be adjusted to make teardrop shapes. We also explored adjusting the cones to very high long skinny projections which we thought could be further enhanced by putting a light inside the sphere.

In this sequence we returned to the torus surface and explored using spheres instead of cones in the definition and the effect of removing the trimmed hole at the top. In this sequence we continued to explore the definition on a torus with extreme variations in radius adjustments. We made a long curving surface to project the definition onto which we found very successful. In this sequence we continued to explore the curved surface which we liked experimenting with the different shapes, heights and radices of the definition.

Case Study 1.0

Case Study 1.0 VoltaDom Favourite Results As a group we found that we really liked how dynamic we managed to make the definition through changing the surface input and changing the components of the original definition. We particularly liked the idea of using the cut outs as a way to experiment with lights coming through the surface which this definition allowed for. We also really liked using the curved fluid surface which we find to be a more favourable characteristic of tesselation for the Gateway Project as we believe a softened form with subtle variety will be more attractive as a roadside feature. I think that the potential for the definition can be greater than just a smaller scale hallway. It has the potential to be used for very dramatic art forms. An idea we discussed was using these curved shapes and holes as a kind of water feature. As a public walkway like with VoltaDom it could still be used but even at a larger scale like as a skin for a building or a train or car tunnel exterior or interior.

Case Study 2.0

Source: http://matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/

Case Study 2.0 Shellstar Pavilion For Case Study 2.0 we were asked to reverse engineer an already existing project using our own knowledge of Rhino and Grasshopper. We chose the Shellstar Pavilion as we already had an understanding of it through studying it as a precedent. We also thought that its purpose related in some ways to our own brief through trying to create an eye catching design which was recognisable to people at a festival but for our purposes it would be an iconic a gateway to Wyndham. On MATSYS website we found the image below which outlines the development of the Shellstar Pavilion. It starts with the basic geometry of a five pointed flower shape composed of small triangles trying. This pattern provides a natural attraction or spiral around the central point. This flat surface then uses some kind of attractor or gravity points to make the curved surface. Then the tessellated pattern work has been later applied through the use of repetitive hexagons with an opening on each of the hexagonal panel shapes. We then attempted to replicate the surface and the tessellated design of the Shellstar Pavilion using Rhino and Grasshopper. To distribute the work evenly we had one person working on the surface exploration and another on the tesselation effect.

Matrix: Case Study 2.0

Shellstar Pavilion Explorations The matrix outlines the many different outcomes which we created in attempting to reverse engineer the Shellstar Pavilion.

In this sequence we started by lofting a surface in Grasshopper and using the panelling tools to create a panelled surface. We began by starting with three dimensional panelling which required projecting a second set of grid points from the lofted surface to create the panelling. We then explored the same shaped in two dimensional paneling which created less depth and interest but matched the design of the Shellstar Pavilion more clearly.

In this sequence we explored changing the density of the panelling grids.

In this sequence we explored the use of attractor points which was not successful for this surface but in creating the Shellstar Pavilion surface we could examine the use of attractor points as it would have been used for this project.

In this sequence we explored a little bit further away from the Shellstar Pavilion in examining our own interest with the hexagonal shaped three dimensional panelling which we liked. We then took an earlier experimentation to bake for fabrication.

We began to explore how by creating grid points on a larger curved surface and using the domain surface grid tools we could adjust the panelling based on how the surface naturally flows which would work with the Shellstar Pavilion Surface.

In this definition we examined the honeycomb three dimensional panelling tools as we thought that this could be a really dynamic effect for the Gateway Project.

Case Study 2.0

Case Study 2.0 Shellstar Pavilion We were unable to reverse engineer the Shellstar Pavilion into an exact form but we did learn a lot about tessellated design in attempting to re-create its design features. We had great success in using paneling tools and found that if we could have made the surface that we would possibly have had great success in closely replicating the design. To create the paneling we used the paneling tools associated with Grasshopper and projected it onto a surface. An issue we had with creating the Shellstar Pavilion surface was that there were a lot of inputs which were not provided through Rhino and Grasshopper which we needed to create the differing gravitational effect of the Shellstar Pavilion surface. We then had to use other plug-ins we had less of an understanding of such as Lunch-box, Weaver bird and Kangaroo which took a long time to learn. We managed with great difficulty to lift some of the surface up but it wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t very successful in making it fluid like the surface of the Shellstar Pavilion. Another negative outcome of the surface was that to use Weaverbird we had to work with meshes which means the end output was not a surface but a mesh which didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t correspond to our knowledge with the tessellated pattern design. To conclude in our reverse engineering it can be said that we managed to re-create aspects of the Shellstar Pavilion or at least understood how it could be achieved. We managed to create smooth tessellated surfaces like the Shellstar Pavilion but we did not manage to communicate this fluidity through the surface. This does not mean that the surface is not appropriate for a design, just that it does not reflect the fluidity which is such an appealing aspect of the Shellstar Pavilion. To reflect on this it can be said that the issue we had was combining our results together rather than a lack of trials or understanding of how this was to be created. However, despite the lack of a completely successful outcome this case study has provided us with many exciting ideas for our own Gateway Project.

Case Study 2.0

Case Study 2.0 Positive Outcomes In the many attempts that we made to try and replicate the Shellstar Pavilion we found a real interest in the use of three dimensional panelling tools. We particularly like the use of the elongated honeycomb effects which we believe can be really effectively incorporated into our own project. They provide an interest to us as we have a fascination with elongated tesselation, holes across the surface, the use of projecting light to emphasise surface and fluidity of the overall design. In many of the outcomes we found that although the hexagon is quite a sharp shape it became very soft and fluid when used with the right surfacing. Using the original rounded mountain shape which was explored in trying to replicate how the tesselation might coordinate with the surface we found through extracting parts of the pattern that both sides of the design was very dynamic and interesting. We continued to explore this idea in part F of the matrix study in creating more elongated hexagonal tessellated shapes which overlapped creating many different directions for the openings of the hexagonal pattern. This was a really interesting outcome to potentially implement in the Gateway Project as it creates a dynamic feature which would be fantastic to observe while moving past it in a car.

Technique: Development A

Technique: Development The matrix outlines the development in technique from the outcomes of the previous matrices and new developments.

In this sequence the use of three dimensional panelling was continued through explorations of different shapes and grid distributions. An issue occurred with more complex lofted surfaces and the panels overlapped one another. Lofting continuous curves allowed even distribution of panels but made the outcome very heavy in appearance loosing fluid appearance which we enjoyed.

In this sequence the honeycomb definition was explored as a surface rather than as a built up form. It created a very subtle tessellated effect.

In this sequence the honeycomb definition was explored on curved surfaces and used attraction techniques to create very dynamic outcomes.

In this sequence the honeycomb definition was explored creating varying effects based on changing the complexity of surface projections and density of the honeycomb tesselation.

In this sequence the previous tessellated definition was explored and we found this definition worked better with dynamically curved surfaces making it much easier to control within the program so adjustments were more straightforward.

In this sequence the cut out panel effect was explored using attractor points and the definition was then trimmed onto a surface. This surface was then manipulated to create varying perception of the patterning across the surface.

Technique: Development

Technique: Development Positive Outcomes In Kalay’s reading, Architectures New Media, the search technique is described as a development and analysis tool for designers to use to progress their design.1 I cannot say that as a group we followed Kalay’s exact outlined approach to developing our design but as designers we naturally blended many of the described techniques. The selection of which techniques we wanted to further develop were selected though unknowingly using the three search methods of depth first, breadth first and best fit. I can say that our selection of which process to explore further development were chosen using the best first search technique. We also used the Breadth search method to generate several alternative ways to develop a candidate solution which we have then used in this final development to bring to it’s logical solution. I feel that the depth first solution has been continually explored in all aspect of Par B of this assignment as it is a process of elimination which is commonly used by designers to address which designs are successful and should be further developed. The following three sequences display the development of techniques in which aspects of these search techniques are used.

This sequence for development follows the cut out surface technique as explored in Case Study 2.0 using panelling tools. The experimentation began with the development of a two dimensional paneling grid which was then projected onto a lofted surface where the panels were then trimmed out of the surface to create tesselation through subtraction. This technique was developed through the use of attractor points to create a more varying surface. The variety in density of the panels gave the surface a natural fluid and directional movement appearance across its surface. The experimentation with attractor points was successful in this scenario where it had previously failed in panelling tools in Grasshopper. It created the desired effect of variation across the surface which we thought would be very interesting as a feature in the Gateway Project as vehicular traffic moved past the structure. Then began the exploration of curving the surface to further enhance the effect of movement across the surface and created restricted and changing views of the structure as the vehicle moves past it.

In Case Study 2.0 we explored a hexagonal projection definition where two surfaces could be drawn and the long hexagonal honeycomb pattern would be projected between these two surfaces. The development of this technique was created though surface manipulation and creating sweeping surfaces that created a fluid movement for the projection of the three dimensional shapes. The desired effect would be for the hexagonal tubes holes to be projected away from approaching vehicle traffic and that it is not until you come nearer or begin to pass the structure that you notice its composition of long hexagonal tubes. At night time the cars on the opposite side of the freeway will alter the way in which the structure is viewed through headlights possibly moving through the structure.

This technique development uses the same honeycomb projection definition as seen in B’s development. What was thoroughly explored in this development was the grid density and attraction to certain points. We were able to create separate elements from reducing the grid in the U coordinates which we thought would be great to link to the Gateway Project through creating a set of progressive elements along the freeway. 1 Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2004), p 18.

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Source: http://www.monkeypuzzleblog.com/2011_10_01_archive.html

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly Richard Serra’s “Wake” Exploring built projects with a similar idealistic scale and materialistic ideas helps provide an insight into the fabrication and assembly of our developed techniques into a built form. Richard Serra’s sculpture “Wake” for Seattle’s Olympic Sculpture Park is composed of large metal panels which appear to be projected out of the ground. This design reflects similar ideas of fabrication and assembly as the cut out technique explored in technique development.1 Serra’s design uses heavy metal sheets laid on steel platforms which have been further secured with a concrete slab poured over the top. The metal has been left to rust and for our own design this idea might be explored but there is the potential to use other coatings or cladding systems for the metal sheeting in the proposed Gateway Project design. Metal is a good material to use to create smooth curves and be durable enough to maintain form on the highly exposed Wyndham site. 1 Http://www.waymarking.com/waymarks/WM151K_Wake_by_Richard_Serra_Seattle_Washington

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Source: http://www.suckerpunchdaily.com/tag/cloud/

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly Helbery Suarez & Remi Melander “Cell Cloud” The “Cell Cloud” installation was created by Helbert Suarez and Remi Melander in and exhibited in the Tent London, 2012.1 This installation provides a perfect example of a fabricated and assembled design which contains a structure very similar to that of our own explorations. This precedent provides insight into the way in which light, colour and materials can create a dynamic piece of art. This installation uses both white and blue polypylene, a transparent material, which allows light to pass through it and be reflected in coloured shadows.2 The polypylene’s transparency also allows to see through the three dimensional object create depth in the design. The material polypylene acts as a feature in the design as much as providing structural rigidity. Polypylene is a good material to use for this type of project but might not be durable enough for the gateway project. The idea of the use of transparent materials can be further explored using more durable materials like fibre glass and even coloured glass to reflect similar properties of polypyrene. 1 Http://www.evolo.us/architecture/cell-cloud-installation-helbert-suarez-remi-melander/ 2 Http://www.evolo.us/architecture/cell-cloud-installation-helbert-suarez-remi-melander/

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Source: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/13/ next?context=user

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly Brosalin K. Sokolov D. Beliy A. Hexagonal structure â&#x20AC;&#x153;Kartonskâ&#x20AC;? 2011, Ulianovsk, Russia. The Kartonsk project is more related to what we are going to be replicating at a prototype model scale to demonstrate our design three dimensionally as we cannot for obvious reasons have it physically fabricated in its true materialistic form. Kartonsk is a Grasshopper produced design using a similar hexagonal idea to our design developments. This precedent uses a heavy cardboard, punctures holes and threads the structure together with string. This is a clear example where joinery has more than one structural purpose. The string is used to tie the elements of the design together but also used to connect the design to the ceiling to hang it as a curved ceiling structure. This could work for numerous of our developed models, especially if we are to suspend them between wires like the Kartonsk model represents. The below model will need to use different techniques for fabrication as it is in many ways opposite to this precedent as a structure is largely in compression rather than in tension in the way which we want to represent this structure at the site. However, we found that if we were to suspend this developed model in our design that this is a good example of how choice in material and joinery can contribute to the structure of the design. For the model below we started discussing the possibility of the hexagonal structure being raised by columns rather than sitting on the ground and due to the smaller sized connections in would need to be made of a sturdy material such as fibre glass, steel or even wood.

Prototypes: Fabrication and Assembly

Prototype: Fabrication and Assembly Physical Models

When it came to fabricating our own models we had to consider replicating similar materialistic ideas which we had seen in our precedents exploration with a limited amount of materials. We began by creating a prototype of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;cut outâ&#x20AC;? development exploration using card. This was a fairly simple technique to fabricate but it did not necessarily maintain the exact surface form which was made using Grasshopper. The surface is much more straight and has lost itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s curve. Further exploration using thicker card or a more plastic material might be needed to be used to maintain the curved form. The subtractive technique is really interesting and from a distance it might just look like a solid form from a vehicle and as the vehicle moves closer the solid object might begin to become lighter and lighter as the tessellation becomes clearer. We used the prototype to experiments with different light sources to create very dynamic shadowing effects on the ground and to really enhance the form of the prototype. In the second prototype we had less success. This was largely due to difficulties in unrolling the surface in Grasshopper as the file was so large the computer kept crashing. We therefore made a smaller prototype model from the design. We were unsure how was the best way to fabricate the design and with many issues with getting the prototype cut at the fablab we tried our best to fabricate the design as economically as possible. We started with one long flat surface which we scored and then bent to make the hexagon patterns attaching them together with internal tabs in the form of internal walls. An issue with this technique was that the shape continually deformed and as shown in the bottom image the faces to be attached to the structure did not fit. For this process tabbing at each edge might be needed to make the structure rigid. The type of tabbing we will use depends on what type of materials we plan on using. From the information provided on the LMS we could do two different tab types. Fabrication Tool Three: Type one - Simple, would be more beneficial if we were to use less rigid materials like card at a small scale and polyphere at a larger scale. Fabrication Tool Four: Type two - Zip teeth,would be more effective for rigid materials like wood. From our own explorations we now have a greater understanding that the density and composition of the materials has a great effect on what type of joining techniques should be used.

Technique Proposal

Why Tessellation? Our exploration and development of the design focus tessellation gives me the greatest confidence that its application is highly appropriate for the Gateway Project. Tessellation is no longer defined simply as a repetitive shape or pattern across a surface. Tesselation is dynamic, eye catching, exciting, intriguing, imaginative and iconic. We have explored tesselation at both small and large scales and have discovered that there are many ways to represent this design focus. Through solid forms, patterning, form and light tesselation can be applied in a design and this is what gives us the greatest confidence in the potential for its application in the Gateway Project. In particular we believe that we can design a tessellated design which is appropriate for the design audience or drivers and passengers in vehicles which can put Wyndham City on the map. What we found so exciting about tessellation is its perception of movement and how viewing approached and angles largely effects how it is viewed as either a solid or light object. We believe that we can use tesselation to create a monumental approach to Wyndham City. Our hope is that from a distance the structure appears to be solid from a distance and the closer the vehicle becomes the more visible the tessellated application can become. This created a threshold and an interest in the structure. As vehicles approach there is the interest to discover what the structure is and once they become closer they will be excited by the design and thus be excited to approach Wyndham again and again. We believe that through using tesselation we can create a threshold in the approach to the design and make the design iconic in its shape and structure to reflect the City of Wyndham.

Technique Proposal

Wyndham City Site Mock Proposals We chose from a very early stage in development to have our design located at Site B of the freeway as it allows for dual viewings from both flows of traffic. These two images of mock proposals display the diversity which tessellation can provide. Locating the tesselation patterning to face parallel to the roadside rather than perpendicularly to the road is a critical part of our design and why tessellation can be more effective that other explorations such as geometry. The effect of the tesselation can be concentrated in such a way that it can captivate the viewer to see the whole design rather than just the one easy viewing point. Tessellated design can be head turning if achieved correctly. Not achieved correctly it can be perceived as messy but we believe that we now have the understanding to prevent this from happening through our exploration of varying surfaces and attracting techniques. The mock technique developments placed on the site give an indication of the kind of scale we would like the design to be on the site. This is largely to do with our idea of creating a threshold through the movement of vehicles towards a surface and changing the viewers perception of the design. We propose that tesselation is an innovative design technique for the Gateway Project as through our technique development we can create an iconic structure to act as a threshold for the Gateway to Wyndham City.

m lop

e lac

e e B ev Sit ed D s po o r P

Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Learning Objectives and Outcomes After the mid semester presentation we were given a variety of feedback, particularly in accordance with how we could implement our experiments into the Gateway Project and onto the given site. We addressed this through exploring fabrication and assembly at both a small model scale and its possible implementation at a larger scale on the site. We still need to experiment further with prototype models but we encountered many difficulties in unrolling on Rhino and Grasshopper due to overlapping elements and complex shapes. This link between computation and fabrication is something we will really need to consider moving into the next stage. That is not to say that we should limit our design potentials but merely examine more closely how some of the designs can be implemented in the real world. With this feedback in mind we attempted to make sure that our development reflected the learning objectives and outcomes outlined in the assignment requirements.

Learning Objectives and Outcomes Objective 1 Developing “the ability to make a case for proposals.” This objective we have explored extensively through part B of the assignment. We have continually discussed the shortcomings and limitations to our designs. Many limitations we encountered when communicating our digital designs into real life scenarios became the foundation for how we developed our techniques. There were some designs which we created using definitions which were more effective on one surface than another and therefore different definitions needed to be created to make it effective in a real life situation if that surface was to be used. For example, in the images below we used the same definition on both these surfaces. However, the paneling tool definition was not effectively executed on more complex lofted curves. The definition was however successful in a more simplistic lofted surface. Even though this worked effectively we found that the design was not appropriate for our intentions in designing for the Gateway Project. This analysis of technique development and effective design outcomes has made us able to make a case for proposals as we know how to examine our own work to make sure the design fits with the chosen proposal.

Objective 8 Begin developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques. Through Case Study 1.0, Case Study 2.0 and technique development we have definitely developed a personalised repertoire of computational techniques. Despite our group not being able to successful replicate the Shellstar Pavilion in Case Study 2.0 we definitely found our own understanding of how it could be used and found learning aspects such panelling tools which were used quite simply in the design to incorporate them into much more experimental and challenging designs. In Case Study 1.0 we show display how extensive our understanding of the definition is. We were able to explore the limitations of the definition, attach our own elements to the definition and create a large variety of very diverse outcomes. Our matrix developments display how diverse we have been in our exploration of computational techniques and that we have a large repertoire of computational techniques.

Objective 2 Developing “an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation.” In developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques we have proved that we can generate a large variety of designs for a given situation. While being given to task to explore the VoltaDom definition (the given situation) we were able to generate a great diversity of designs despite the limitation of using a single definition as the basis for our design. Even when we tried to recreate the Shellstar Pavilion we came up with many different designs and techniques to try and create the desired effect. Technique development led to further explorations, especially of the techniques used in Case Study 2.0, to create a large variety of designs from a linear idea development. This objective has been extensively explored throughout our journal. The one limitation in our variety is that we have looked extensively at hexagons rather than exploring any different shapes. This is largely to do with our given precedents as we particularly loved this pattern in our precedent examples.

Objective 7 Develop foundational understandings of computational geometry, data structures and types of programming. We have developed a very broad foundational understanding or computational geometry, data structures and types of programming. Even in our failure to successfully replicate an exact digital model of the Shellstar Pavilion we understood why we were encountering difficulties, merely did not have the extensive knowledge of the program to know where to locate the correct nodes to correct the problem. In reverse engineering the Shellstar Pavilion we started to understand how different programs and Rhino plug-ins could achieve different results. Although we were unsuccessful in implementing the spring tool in Kangaroo to pull the Shellstar surface into position we came very close and understood the various methods in how we could achieve this. In using the VoltaDom definition we developed an understanding of the various inputs and that some inputs require a specific component (for example a curve is not a surface, brep or geometry). However, we managed to provide a solution to many of these issues through adding other parts to the definition so that we could use a variety of different components for our definition.

Objective 3 Developing “skills in various three dimensional media” We have extensively explored three dimensional media through using Rhino and its various digital media plug ins such as Grasshopper, Weaverbird, lunch-box, Panelling tools, Kangaroo and Python. We have not explored extensively enough in my own personal opinion into physical models to investigate scale. We have explored fabrication and found the various difficulties we would have in fabrication. We have looked at what kind of scale we want the designs to be used at through our Photoshop explorations of designs at the proposed site and using examples such as Richard Serra’s Wake sculpture to demonstrate what kind of scale we our designs to be.

Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Final Remarks The set theoretical research tasks have further developed my understanding of how computation can play a role in the design process. Physically using computation as a design tool is very different to studying how it can be implemented in the design process and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s role in architecture. It feels like working you are working with a design tool and it provides different exploration and understanding of an idea. Computation, like painting and modelling is another media for experimentation of design. I feel that the program has restrictions like any other media and therefore it is neither limiting or enhancing my design any more than any other media would. Like any other media it requires a development in skill and as my skills have developed the more confident I become in my design capabilities. I am now able to create, manipulate and design using parametric modelling.

PART C: Project Proposal

Design Concept

Design Concept Explanation and Communication Wyndham is an ever growing city which prides itself on its rural and coastal beauty so close to the city. In addressing the Gateway Project as a group we wanted to display the pride of Wyndham as a sparse diverse landscape which is a change or escape from the densely populated city. This concept is fitting to the proposed site as the freeway facilitates the movement of individuals into Wyndham from Geelong and Melbourne. The proposed site is the platform for the design and the selection of which area of the site should hold the design is a critical aspect of communicating the design concept of density change. As outlined in the below diagrams the population density occurs in both directions towards Geelong and Melbourne. The Melbourne direction is the most important of the density change as it is closer to Wyndham and has a greater disparity in density from more than 50 persons per hectare in Melbourne to on average 20-25 persons per hectare in Wyndham. This means that the location of the design should be closely associated with the Melbourne traffic directions making Site A a perfect selection out of the three sites.

Design Location Site A has three points of visual intersection potentials for the design. Two of the proposed site design locations are at the closest point of intersection between the two traffic directions. However, despite the significance of the divergence of traffic at these two points, looking at the contours of the site reveals that there is a four metre high mound at the centre of the site which obstructs the viewers visual approach to the design. This mound is an interesting feature of the site and its uplift as the highest point from the road creates a raised platform for the design. This raised land from the road will make the designs concept easier to communicate to the passing traffic as it will be visible at all points of approach and departure.

S PO

SIT

S PO

SIT

Density Direction

Traffic Movement

ITE

E OS

Points of Intersection

Part C 78

Design Concept

Incorporating the Design Concept with Tessellation Using tessellation as our design approach perfectly fits in with our design concept as change in density can be communicated across a surface using differently scaled tessellated shapes. Communicating density has already been explored to an extent in Part B of the assignment through the use of attractor points to change the scale of the tessellated pattern across a surface. Projecting a tessellated pattern across a surface rather than using tessellation to create form appealed to our group as form is an important part of visual communication to the viewer. This decision was made as in previous explorations of tessellation form has been compromised when trying to associate it with the design approach. When creating our own definition for tessellation on Grasshopper we took many nodes, sequences and ideas from previous design explorations. We wanted to create a definition which projects a set tessellated pattern onto a built surface in Rhino. To do this we needed to make sure that we had a surface input which can be set into the definition. We initially created a hexagonal grid using a LunchBox node to bring the underlying pattern to the design. We then wanted to create central varying in scale hexagonal cut outs from the grid as a design communication of the density change idea. To do this we used Grasshopper nodes to find the centre of the hexagon grid, created a list and ranged this list so that each cut out would be progressively larger than the previous. We then partitioned the hexagonal grid using a combination of Grasshopper and Weaverbird nodes so that hexagonal centres could be cut out from the lofted surface. The combined effect of creating a hexagonal grid, creating hexagonal cut outs and create a range in the scale of the hexagonal cut outs creates the desired effect to the left. This definition achieves our want to project a ranging pattern of cut out tessellated shapes across a surface. The conceptual idea of density change is communicated through the varying hexagonal cut out sizes. This definition allows us to select any form which we create in Rhino and project the patterning across its surface. The patterning effects such as the range in cut out sizes and scale of the grid can be altered using number sliders making the definition very flexible to work with.

Part C 80

Design Concept

Design development The contours of the site really interested our group because the sloping mound created a great visual surface to communicate our design concept on. Since we had already created our definition for the tessellation pattern all that remained was to select a surface. We created a surface out of the contours of the site with the idea of having the tessellated patterning draped across the surface mound creating a subtle design with a strong communication of change. The result was a beautiful varied surface similar to design precedents such as PROJECTiONEâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s EXOtique which uses a curved surface to create a dynamic changes through the differential bending of panelling joins. After building a physical model of the design and creating mock digital representation onto the site, it became apparent that the initial benefit of the mound as a raised communication platform was lost as the side viewing of the design with its highly varied surface diminished the effect of the ranging cut outs. In plan view the design is very beautiful as the whole surface and its cut out variation is seen. In the side view the dramatic change from small to large cut outs is lost and when placed over the surface the beautiful shadowing effects seen in the models is lost. Despite the success of the definition and design, when placing it within its context the beauty of the simplistic communication of change is lost. We wanted to continue to use this definition but to create a surface which best communicates the idea of change to the passing viewers. We wanted to explore different forms which were more visually appealing, eye-catching and iconic which meant moving back to the original idea of using the mound as a physical platform which displays the design.

Part C 80

Design Concept

Design development As a development from previous explorations we decided to explore a more vertical form which makes viewing the tessellation clearer. In a previous development we used a similar two dimensional paneling on a flat surface. The design was clearly displayed on a vertical flat surface but lacked the depth as seen in more varied and curved surfaces. We experimented with solid forms and had great success with incorporating the definition with a sphere. We loved how the closed curve of a sphere created a natural movement and flow of tessellation change across the surface making the design very dynamic. In particular we loved how at the connector point of the curve there is a design juxtaposition created from the large and small cut outs. This connector point clearly displays the low density to high density change and is a beautiful design feature which dramatically displays the idea of change through contrast. The visibility of the other side of the sphere through the cut out brings depth do the design and allows viewers to glimpse at the change in form on the other side. This exploration was highly successful but we still believed that some improvements can be made to the form of the design. Due to the symmetricallity of the sphere the change is uniform and not as varied as we would like across the subject. We also wanted to create a form which is more memorable and iconic as a sphere is a very common form. We wanted to continue the idea of the closed curve but create a more extended form which makes the eye move around and up and down the structure.

Part C 82

Design Concept

Proposed Design As a group we explored many complex forms but found that many of them lost the clear visual communication which the sphere had. We tried to make the design as simple and as clear as possible and thus used the sphere as the design basis and extended the top to a point to create a teardrop shape. This teardrop shape achieved exactly what we had set out to do. It creates an iconic shape which is distinguishably different to many other road side structures. It is a sculptural form rather than a cover or shield which is often seen on freeways. The sculptural quality of the design fits in with the clients want to create something similar to ‘Seeds of Change’ and the “House in the Sky’ projects and reflect Wyndham’s strong support of art installations Similar to the sphere design, the teardrop form is still very dynamic in regards to the clear movement of tessellation, the strong connecting join and the depth created through the visible cut outs to the other side of the structure. In addition the teardrop form achieves further movement across the structure as its pointed end makes the eye moves up and down the object and provides changes in tessellation not just around the structure but also up and down the structure creating more interest in the design. This design fulfills the briefs requirements by creating an eye-catching, iconic, memorable structure which places the entrance to Wyndham on the map.

Part C 84

Design Concept Conceptual Analysis The concept of density change is subtly implied across the teardrops surface. The closer an individual is and the longer that they look at the design as they pass it, the higher their exposure is to the changing panels. Examining the design displays that from different angles the panels vary and thus movement around this object and the approach is important. That is why we believe that the location on the higher mound enhances the communication of the design. From computer studies the approach was mapped out and the mound definitely benefits the viewing. Locating it at the highest point means that it is visible for both traffic directions and that the eye follows it as they get closer, facilitating in the communication of the whole design. The design is eye catching atop of the raised mound and people can explore it extensively as it appears different each time they drive past it. Sun studies were not conducted in this analysis but changing light directions did change the viewing perception of the design. If this design was to be built I think that sun and light studies are very important aspect which should be considered in the final design.

Part C 86

Wooden panelling

Perplex panelling

Card panelling

Contrasting Card and Perplex panelling

Tectonic Elements

Material Exploration Before commencing our model making we needed to make prototypes which experimented with different materials. We want to find a material which creates clear cut edges, clearly displays the cut out hexagons and has some gloss to give the design a reflective glow. These material explorations will also give us some indications of what type of material we would construct the design with in real life. Wooden Panelling: Using wood as the material for the panels was not successful. Scoring the material was difficult and created messy edges due to the splitting of the wood grain. The wood has a matt quality which would require a glossy varnish to emphasize the edges of the hexagons like we want to which complicates the model making process. Perplex Panelling: Perplex explorations were successful in displaying what we wanted in terms of a gloss finish which created clear defining edges between panels. However, transparency is an issue with this material in displaying the design. At the scale which it would be implemented and the little interaction time the viewers from vehicles have with the design means that there is not enough time to fully examine the surface. For this type of installation an opaque material will be needed to communicate the design clearly. Card Panelling: The card explorations were very successful. The card creates nice clear crisp edges and makes the hexagonal cut outs very clear. Ideally we would like the card to be more reflective and glossy which is not possible at this scale but should be considered in real life construction. Contrasting Card and Perplex Panelling: A comparison of the card and perplex panels displays how the card more clearly displays the design to the viewer. For real life construction many of the qualities at the model scale will be carried through. We would ideally like to use a metal material due to its structural rigidity and its opaque but reflective qualities. We did not include any metal in our material explorations due to financial difficulties but have theoretically explored how a steel structure with a metallic cladding such as aluminum and titanium could be implemented at a larger built scale.

Part C 88

PANEL JOINING SYSTEM

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

GALVANIZED STEEL FIXING PLATE STEEL BOLTS STEEL CONNECTORS

INTERNAL CLASSING SYSTEM ELEVATION CLADDING SYSTEM INTERIOR ELEVATION

INTE

ODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

CONSTRUCTION AND JOINING ELEMENTS

Tectonic Elements

Construction For the real life construction of the design we would like to use steel for structure and a metallic cladding system. As displayed in the diagrams the panels will be manufactured off site, ideally with cladding already placed on the structure, and then it will be joint together with a steel bolts and steel fixing plates. We have suggested in these diagrams that there be a cladding system internally to the design. This is largely to do with covering the structure and creating a reflective quality which can be seen through the cut outs. The steel structure should hold all of the plates together without the need of a bracing system. If a bracing system is required we would prefer to use guide ropes due to their size and properties as will not compromise the physical attributes of the design. We think that using a circular steel base plate to bolt down the structure to a concrete base will be enough and ideally this is how we would like the built form to be.

Aerial View of the Design on the Site

Part C 90

Zip Join

Tab to Tab Join

Joinery Explorations Model

Tie Join

Tab to Surface Join

Tectonic Elements

Tectonic Exploration We selected to use card as our modelling material to best reflect a metal material as at this scale metal is too malleable and expensive for us to work with. Joinery is an important aspect of this design as the internal joinery is visible through the hexagonal cut outs of the surface. We explored different joinery methods prior to commencing our model making as many of these joints require tabs which need to be added in Rhino before printing. We chose a section of four panels from our design and explored different joining techniques for each edge. Zip Join: The first join we explored was the zip join. This method was effective in making the design flexible enough to curve the surface and maintain rigidty with the aid of glue. However, the zip join is exposed on the exterior of the design compromising the clear cut edges of the hexagon which gives a messy appearance. Tie Join: We then looked to the tie join but found the use of string too visible and the holes compromised the appearance of the cut out centres, thus not a suitable joining method. Tab to Tab Join: This method was very effective in bringing rigidity to the design without compromising the external appearance of the design. The overall effect is neat, clear and appealing on both sides which benefits the design. Tab to Surface Join: This method was also effective but was not as neat as the tab to tab join. Other issues such as the changing surface area due to the hexagonal cut outs means that this techniques implementation is not suitable. From our explorations we decided that the tab to tab join is best suited to the design. This requires us to create tabs on both sides of the panels in Rhino so that the structure can be joined together.

Part C 92

1 1

7 6

16 16

Tectonic Elements

Unrolling in Rhino To fabricate our design we had to unroll our designs surface into sections to be printed and cut from card. To do this we scaled the model to the desired size (1:50) and unrolled horizontal sections of the panelled surface from the top to the bottom of the structure labelling each section as we went. This made constructing the design simple and linear as it is put together theoretically in the same way as building blocks. After we unrolled the sections we needed to create the tabs for fabrication. We did this by offsetting the curves of the outer panels and manually trimming the tabs away from the design. To complete the unrolling process for fabrication we lastly had to separate the lines into lines to be cut or scored. We chose to get out our design cut at Make305 which uses laser cutting for card. It registers the colours black as a line to be cut, red as a line to be scored and blue as a line to be penned in. To make sure that the sections did not fall away from the card we had to score some of the cut lines. We then sent off this unrolled surface (to the left) to Make305 to be cut out of 1mm boxboard and .6mm Ivory card as we were not sure which size was best suited to the design at this scale.

Part C 94

Final Model

Fabrication After the card had been cut we took out the sections for fabrication and sorted them into groups to be fabricated. We began by experimenting with the thicker box board card but from an early stage found is was to thick for the teardrop surface. The tabs did not fold back clearly and joining them together in a tab to tab method created thick gaps in between the panels which changed the desired form of the design. The box board card was also unsuccessful for the sphere model but was more successful using the tab to surface method. We did not want to use this method for our final model because it is visually unappealing to the interior of the design. We had great success using the 1mm boxboard in our contoured surface model which needed the thick card to maintain rigidity. We often found ourselves cutting off both tabs when it got to sections with large hexagonal cut outs as the surface was not strong enough to support the join. The thinner .6mm ivory card was much more successful in prototypes of sections of the teardrop so we decided to progress with this construction material. Due to the small size of the model (a 9 metre high structure at 1:50 scale) the tabs were very small but needed to be so as to not compromise the rest of the design. We found a solution to this by using tweezers to fold down the tabs and glue them together. As it was small work we divided the model into three sections to work on to fasten the construction process. It was difficult to join these sections together but was overall faster than building it from the bottom up. We connected the horizontal panels first and then joined the overall structure at a central vertical join which required one person to hold the card in place, another to glue and another to tweezer the join together. Although this was tedious work we believe it was the best approach to building the final model.

Part C 96

Final Model

Final Model We fabricated our final model at a 1:50 scale and placed it on a base system similar to how it would sit in on the site. We are very pleased with the end result of our model. It is unfortunate that the glue is visible but it was unavoidable at such a small scale. Despite the small size of our model it still communicates in great detail the design intent and how the structural system would work. The model displays the fluidity of the design and the softness of the curves better than the digital model. This could be to do with our rendering technique at the digital scale but there is something beautiful about being able to move the model around and hold it in you hand which communicates the design intent more clearly to the client. Overall we are very happy with our design. It fulfills all the aspects which we wanted to achieve in the design by acting as an iconic, eye-catching structural feature for the entrance to Wyndham city. It not only makes the entrance to Wyndham memorable but it also subtly reflects the concept idea of density change which is happening at the site through the movement of vehicular traffic. By placing the design at the peak of the site the design is highly visible to all users. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s location on site A means that viewers which pass the structure will communicate with it differently as the changes in the panelling are clearly displayed. We believe that our design places Wyndham on the map due to itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique qualities not normally seen on a freeway.

Future Ambitions If we had the time to continue development of our design proposal there might be other things which we would consider addressing or changing prior to competition. For example in our final critique it was suggested that we make the design a rotating structure, which I thought would be a fantastic addition to the design. The rotation would further assist the communication of change across the object and make the structure more intriguing to the viewer. Another idea which we would have loved to experiment with would have been to use many different teardrop structures across the site at different scales and panelling densities. However, due to time constraints we made an executive decision that we would use one iconic mega structure rather than explore the possibilities of multiple structures.

Part C 100

Learning Objectives and Outcomes Objective One: Interrogating a Brief Rivka Oxman outlines how to interrogate a brief in her paper “Digital Architecture As a Challenge for Pedagogy: Theory, Knowledge, Models and Medium.” The way which I have approached interrogating the brief and developing an appropriate response has been achieved in a similar way to how Oxman has outlined. This is largely to do with the structure of the course which asks us to examine precedents and different design mediums. In Part A of the assignment this was largely covered through the examination of precedents and readings related to digital architecture and the discourse which surrounds it. In Part B of the assignment we assessed the flexibility of digital design through in case studies 1 and 2. Studying the VoltaDom definition on pages 40-44 physically displayed the limitations of using one medium in design but trying to reverse engineer the Shellstar Pavilion on pages 46-50 displayed to us how ideas can be taken and developed using digital architecture which largely benefitted the design. When it came to interrogating the brief in the last part of Part B of the assignments and to a larger extent in Part C of the assignment our studies of how different theories, levels of knowledge and mediums made us reconsider how to interrogate the brief and generate an appropriate response. We needed to outline key points and address what aspects of the design brief needed to be addressed when developing the design. As outlined in Oxman’s paper it is important to approach digital design development in a similar manner to any other medium through generation, performance simulation and evaluation of the design. This process was continued throughout the design with the evaluation leading to refinement and further development of ideas. When a concept that needed to formulate our design was introduced in Part C of the assignment this lead to reconsidering many designs and adding an evaluation of communication of concept to the evaluation process of the design. This lead to the brief being constantly looked back to as a base point in addressing the progress of the design to make sure the design was appropriate for its cliental.

Objective Two: Developing a Variety of Design Possibilities. In Part B of the assignment we were asked to examine and try to re-create tessellated designs using Rhino, Grasshopper and other components of these programs. This, along with tutorial videos, extended our algorithmic learning of these digital softwares and enhanced what we could create using this design medium. Reverse engineering the Shellstar Pavilion in particular enhanced our understanding of digital design using the set digital software. This is because in trying to re-create the design many of the nodes of the programs were explored and even other peoples definitions which they had uploaded online. This developed understanding of the digital software allowed us to explore a variety of design possibilities as we were not as restricted by our lack of knowledge. As shown in the developmental matrices in Part B of the assignment we were able to generate many different design outcomes using tessellation as our set design approach. We created designs which used tessellation as the surface and the form of the design with many other varying qualities. This process prior to conceptual thinking about how we were going to interrogate the brief meant that we were able to use the our varying knowledge’s of how to create designs using tessellation to create many design pathways. This has, in my own opinion, allowed us to create a design that was created using our knowledge of the program rather than by elimination of what we could not do. We often found ourselves wanting to understand the program because we wanted a particular outcome in the design and we did not let our lack of understanding dictate this.

Objective Three: Developing Skills in Various Three-dimensional Media. As outlined in Objective Two we developed an extensive understanding of the three-dimensional media through tasks set out in Part B of the assignment. In many cases we had to add other components of other digital media to generate our desired design such as LunchBox, Weaverbird, Panelling Tools and Kangaroo into Grasshopper. This further enhanced out understanding of what different tools can bring to three dimensional design. For example Kangaroo was particularly good to use when we were exploring anchor points on three dimensional objects whereas Weaverbird was very good to use when we wanted to edit meshes. This development of skill meant that we were able to incorporate many different tools together to create very dynamic designs.

Objective Four: Developing an Understanding Between Architecture and Air. In Part C of the assignment our understanding of the relationship between architecture and air (where air is the atmosphere) was physically explored in our own design development. The atmosphere in which the design sits on the site was explored extensively through digital modelling and Photoshop methods. At a physical scale our model was not presented on the site as it was at a large scale and even if the portion which the structure was to sit on was constructed there would be little variation across the surface at this scale. However, we still believed that our designs location on the site was communicated very clearly through our own digital explorations on the site in Rhino. We considered how the design would interact with the atmosphere through locating it in an appropriate place so that it could be clearly seen in the landscape. What we thought could further enhance the interaction between the designs relationship with the atmosphere would be to have the model somehow pivot or rotate in the wind. This idea was presented to us in our final critique and as a future exploration we thought would really benefit our design on the site as it facilitates the communication of the density change clearer to the viewer.

Objective Five: Making a Case for Proposals. My groups understanding of how to present a proposal developed greatly between the interim and final presentations. We learnt about how to address the main points that we were excited about and to only include information which was relevant for the client to see. This largely became a process of selection from our own design studies and journal. An argument is better presented if you have a strong understanding of the what the client is asking for and you use these main points as reasons why your design should be chosen. For example we stated in our presentation that our design was very eye-catching due to its shape, size and pattern but also as it is to be placed on a four metre high mound making it very visible to the viewers. These aspects addressed exactly what the client was asking for in the design and it is about selling to the client that your idea addresses this. The feedback we got from our presentation in the interim was largely negative based on the fact that we had not developed a strong enough idea for the design and that we had not considered the context of the site. In the final presentation we addressed this and our comments were largely positive or suggestive of what could be further added to our design. This reflects that we developed our case for proposal in a way which communicated our design intent clearly to the audience.

Part C 102

Learning Objectives and Outcomes Objective Six: Conceptual, Technical and Design Analysis of Projects. In Part A of the assignment we were told to pick certain projects to study. We studied how they created or were apart of discourse in the architectural community and/or how they used digital architecture and parametric modelling to be created. Being able to analyze the conceptual, technical and design aspects of a project was important to this assignment as it allows us to take what parts we thought were successfully achieved in these projects and incorporate it into our own design development. In many cases it was precedents from Part B of the assignment which used tessellation in their design which largely assisted in our design development. We took parts that we liked from these precedents (such as the smooth fluidity of EXOtiqueâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s surface and the atheistic joinery from VoltaDom) and found ways to use the same ideas in our own initial design developments. Precedents are an important part of dictating what we do and without analyzing how these designs achieved these desired effects it is difficult to successfully include these elements in your own design. I feel that I have reflected an understanding of conceptual, technical and design analysis of projects throughout my journal based on my initial studies of precedents in Part A of the assignment. I initially analyzed these designs in detail and continually looked back to them to try and enhance my own design potential.

Objective Seven: Develop Foundational Understanding of Computation. Throughout Studio Air our foundational understanding of computational geometry, data structures and types of programming has been developed. The readings in the first 6 weeks provided an understanding of the different types of digital software which can be used by designers and the discourse surrounding their use. The algorithmic tasks and challenge helped introduce us to the basic functions of Rhino and Grasshopper software providing us with a foundational understanding of the software. However, I believe that our own explorations in the tasks set out in Part B and Part C of the assignment really helped develop our understanding to sometimes beyond a foundation level. We were able to incorporate other programs such as Weaverbird, LunchBox, Panelling tools and Kangaroo into Grasshopper which were outside of the course guidelines to generate desired designs. Our own research and development of the programs through trying to create our own installation meant that we had to use our foundational understanding but incorporate other elements to move beyond the basic outcomes of digital design which is so heavily criticized.

Objective Eight: A Personalized Repertoire of Computational Techniques. Part B of the assignment allowed us to study how different computational techniques had been used in projects to generate particular outcomes. It was at the end of Part B and Part C that our own personalized repertoire of computational techniques is developed. After exploring the different nodes and inputs of Grasshopper definitions we could see how design tools can be put together to create what we wanted to do. In Part C of the assignment I found I was able to generate designs based on what I wanted rather than experimenting and getting unpredictable outcomes which was achieved in Part B of the assignments. Although my focus in the design was orientated around the tools to create tessellated design I found that I could get the same results through many different pathways of design, demonstrating that I have an understanding of the program and that I now have an extensive repertoire of skills to generate desired outcomes.

Final Remarks Studio Air has greatly enhanced my understanding and opinion of digital architecture. Prior to commencing this subject I felt that digital software should only be used for presentation and clarity of designs and not be used as a generative tool. Now, I feel very differently about digital architecture. I believe that there are some great designs already being created using digital technologies and that there is a great potential to create very innovative designs. There are still some issues with the use of digital technologies such as the limitations of technology, but this is the same when using any sort of media and therefore should not be considered a downfall of digital design. If I had the chance to continue to explore my design I would love to use other digital technologies to explore the effectiveness of the design using sun and shade explorations, material explorations and even incorporating kinetics into my design. As mentioned previously I would love for my proposed design to be centred on a rotating platform which I think could be explored more extensively through other digital technology techniques. Overall I feel that this subject has been hugely beneficial to my studies and I believe this knowledge will be used in my own profession as an architect in the upcoming years. I thank all of people responsible for writing and coordinating the course and my two wonderful tutors, Daniel and Kirrily, who have helped me along the way.

Part C 104