Arch7140spring14 greenberger by Northeastern School of Architecture

THESIS:

M. ARCH 2014 COLLABORATOR:

SKIDMORE OWNINGS & MERRILL

DAYLIGHT NAME:

STEVEN GREENBERGER

EFFICIENCY VOLUME II GENERATIVE ARCHITECTURE

THROUGH GENE OPTIMIZATION Northeastern University School of Architecture

SU PEF

012

015

014

021

SAR

018

019

The initial research endeavor began with the proposition that Efficiency is an essential quality of Tall Office Towers. However, more interesting questions embedded in the subject emerged as the investigation unfolded.

SAV 017

"Why efficiency?" was answered with relative ease. Minute factors can have significant impacts on Spatial, Environmental, and Structural aspects of the design because the Repetitive, large Scale, and Extreme nature, true of all Tall Office Towers, magnifies [in]efficiencies.

016 PASA

022 023

020

025

While the importance of Efficiency in virtually any complex system is undisputed, there is no precise definition, and only primitive measuring tools, in the arena of Tall Office Towers. The real question is "What is efficiency?" and "How can greater efficiency be achieved?".

PA FAR

010

PAR

008

TP 001

OPTIMIZATION

CLS

011

CAR

007 UA

024 003

004

005 002

006 D

The previous volume of this research began to describe what efficiency is by developing the language of Genes. This is a departure from contemporary practice because it renders quantitative analysis and objective comparison of architecture possible, in a much more meaningful way than the simplistic terms which currently exist. This volume is aimed at continuing to define Efficiency and, more importantly, leveraging the research to achieve designs which are measurably more efficient. The ultimate aspiration for the research is greater than creating a benchmarking system; it is the groundwork for a new design methodology.

SECTION:

OPTIMIZATION TOPIC:

CONCEPT INTRODUCTION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

TAPERING FACTOR

0.55

1.29

pg 089

017 +50 %

+50 % 0.97

2.19

pg 057

AVG.

0.75

PA2S 1.69

PA2S

AVG.

011

REPETITION 0.72

0.75

0.56

1.04

PA2S

pg 065

REPETITION 0.99

0.75

REPETITION 0.39

SU pg 053

REPETITION 0.71

pg 045

pg 037

REPETITION 13.5

CPF

SCALE

009

.004

SECTIONAL USABILITY

008

FAR

REPETITION 0.86 COLUMNLESS PLANNABLE FACTOR

006

PLANNABLE AREA

004

FLOOR AREA RATIO

PO pg 049

pg 025

pg 069

REPETITION 0.95

PERIMETER OFFICE

007

REPETITION 0.99

UA pg 029

REPETITION 0.75

CLS

002

USABLE AREA

pg 081

CONSISTENCY OF LEASE SPAN

001

CWU The Aggregation of genes begins to describe the complexity of Tall Office Towers. Each gene is a metric which defines a particular characteristic, and is a measurement of efficiency in itself. However, when considering multiple genes simultaneously, the concept of efficiency becomes convoluted.

015

SCALE

SAMENESS FACTOR

012

REPETITION

0.04

Both genes have an inflated importance because of vast implications on the resulting architecture. For instance, 017 Useful Illuminance measures the amount of daylight a space receives, the significance of which can not be overstated when designing a healthy, productive, and environmentally sustainable workplace.

USEFUL ILLUMINANCE

pg 041

CURTAIN WALL UNIT

EXTREME

005

SCALE

D pg 033

0.49

PEF

5.15

DENSITY

003

SCALE

VC pg 085

1.69

VERTICAL COMMUTE

016

PV pg 101

SCALE

020

SCALE

EXTREME

PERCEPTIBLE VOLUME

PLANNABLE AREA TO EXT. SURFACE

PA S

PAR

0.29

The experiment of efficiency begins by studying the relationship between two carefully selected genes.

PERIMETER ENCLOSURE FACTOR

pg 061

SCALE

pg 073

.034

GENE EXPLORATION

PROTOTYPICAL FLOOR 2 C 30,000 GSF 10’ FLOOR TO CEILING

GENETIC SUBJECT MEASURED RATIO PAGE NUMBER

010

PROTOTYPICAL FLOOR 10C 30,000 GSF 10’ FLOOR TO CEILING

GENETIC NUMBER

PLANNABLE ASPECT RATIO

013

SCALE

REPETITION 0.99

SHADOW AREA

pg 097

SA V

10.6

pg 105

SCALE

SURFACE AREA TO VOLUME

021

0.87

pg 109

022

VO SCALE

CARBON FOOTPRINT

019

VOLUME OPTIMIZATION

AGGREGATE TY T PICAL

GENETIC SYMBOL

pg 001

EXTREME

GENETIC NAME

001

10.5

pg 093

018

EXTREME

pg 077

1.39

SAMENESS FACTOR

ENCLOSURE TRANSPARENCY

pg 117

CAR

1.97

pg 125

EXTREME

024

4.14

CORE ASPECT RATIO

026

SA P EXTREME

014

EXTREME

SAR pg 113

0.91

SAIL AREA TO THE PERPENDICULAR

023

AR pg 121

EXTREME

025

SURFACE AREA RATIO

ASPECT RATIO

-50 %

1.69

PA2S

020 Plannable Area to Ext. Surface Area measures the amount plannable space against the amount space enclosing it. For a developer, a lower gene 020 ratio implies less profit because more money is going into materials relative to the space they sell; for a building manager, a lower gene 020 ratio implies higher operation costs because more volume must be conditioned relative to the amount of space being rented. Lastly, the genes were selected because they are counterpoints. Generally, as one increased the other decreases. Maximizing one gene with complete disregard for the other would be a shallow demonstration of efficiency.

SECTION:

OPTIMIZATION TOPIC:

CONTROL

VARIATION 01

VARIATION 02

VARIATION 03

VARIATION 04

VARIATION 05

VARIATION 06

VARIATION 07

ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

CASE STUDY The concept of balancing two genes is tested initially through the manipulation of this case study. One World Trade Center is 1 of the 9 case studies used in the previous volume. It is reintroduced as a starting point for this process because it can be helpful to test ideas in an environment with preexisting conditions.

A series of manipulations are applied to better understand how different configurations affect the two genes and explore how the genes relate to each other. While none of the iterations shown are remarkably successful, the exercise is invaluable. Working with a case study allowed theories to be tested in a controlled way, and the feedback proves to be crucial throughout the duration of the project.

+50 % 1.00 2.17

PA2S AVG.

0.75

0.60

1.69

PA2S

1.00

0.75

1.69

PA2S

0.75

1.69 1.62 2 2

PA S PA S

0.75

0.68

1.08

PA2S

1.69

PA2S

2.17

1.69

0.75

PA2S

-50 %

2.03

0.88

1.78

0.75

0.62

PA S 1.69 2 PA2S

0.75

0.60

PA2S

1.69

PA2S 1.47

PA2S

0.75

0.52

1.69 1.66

PA PA22SS

Rectangle

Rotated Sq

Rotated Tri

Spoke

Square

Triangle

GROSS SF

30,112

30,172

29,914

29,584

30,107

30,110

30,000

29,929

29,951

29,811

29,929

29,951

PLANNA N BLE AREA E

22,584

22,629

22,436

22,188

22,580

22,583

22,500

22,447

22,463

22,358

22,447

22,463

10E 06B 04C 09B 12B 05A 11A 08A 07B 06C 01A 09C 05B 12C 08B 11B 04D

Spoke Jagged Sq Intersecting Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Square Rotated Sq Rectangle Jagged Sq Amorphous Rotated Tri Intersecting Triangle Rotated Sq Square Intersecting

07C 02A 01B 03A 05C 09D 12D 08C 11C 04E 01C 02B 03B 07D 05D 09E 11D 08D 12E 01D 02C

Rectangle Circle Amorphous Ellipse Intersecting Sq Rotated Tri Triangle Rotated Sq Square Intersecting Rec Amorphous Circle Ellipse Rectangle Intersecting Sq Rotated Tri Square Rotated Sq Triangle Amorphous Circle

10' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 12' - 00" 10' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 10' - 00" 10' - 00" 08' - 00" 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 10' - 00"

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.68 0.68 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.61 0.61 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.56

03C 07E 08E 11E 02D 01E 03D 05E 06D 06E 02E 03E

Ellipse Rectangle Rotated Sq Square Circle Amorphous Ellipse Intersecting Sq Jagged Sq Jagged Sq Circle Ellipse

10' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00"

0.54 0.52 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.41

FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT

12’ - 0”

TEST NUM TE U BER E

01A

02A

03A

04A

05A

06A

07A

08A

09A

10A

11A

12A

017 - USEFUL ILLUMINA N NCE

0.77

0.69

0.68

1.00

0.82

0.90

0.87

0.81

0.90

1.00

0.81

0.90

020 - PLANNA N BLE AREA E TO T EX E T SURFA F CE AREA E

1.58

1.94

1.78

1.39

1.61

1.27

1.65

1.73

1.53

0.91

1.73

1.53

FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT

11’ - 0”

TEST NUM TE U BER E

01B

02B

03B

04B

05B

06B

07B

08B

09B

10B

11B

12B

017 - USEFUL ILLUMINA N NCE

0.69

0.62

0.61

0.93

0.75

0.84

0.78

0.73

0.83

1.00

0.73

0.82

020 - PLANNA N BLE AREA E TO T EX E T SURFA F CE AREA E

1.68

2.06

1.89

1.48

1.71

1.36

1.75

1.84

1.63

0.97

1.84

1.63

FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT

10’ - 0”

01C

02C

03C

04C

05C

06C

07C

08C

09A

10C

11C

12C

017 - USEFUL ILLUMINA N NCE 020 - PLANNA N BLE AREA E TO T EX E T SURFA F CE AREA E

0.63

0.56

0.54

0.83

0.68

0.78

0.69

0.66

0.75

0.97

0.65

0.74

1.79

2.19

2.02

1.58

1.82

1.45

1.87

1.96

1.73

1.04

1.96

1.73

0.56 - 0.70

TEST NUM TE U BER E

FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT

9” - 0”

TEST NUM TE U BER E

01D

02D

03D

04D

05D

06D

07D

08D

09D

10D

11D

12D

017 - USEFUL ILLUMINA N NCE 020 - PLANNA N BLE AREA E TO T EX E T SURFA F CE AREA E

0.56

0.49

0.48

0.73

0.60

0.43

0.61

0.57

0.66

0.92

0.57

0.66

1.92

2.35

2.16

1.69

1.95

1.55

2.00

2.09

1.86

1.12

2.09

1.86

TEST NUM TE U BER E

01E

02E

03E

04E

05E

06E

07E

08E

09E

10E

11E

12E

017 - USEFUL ILLUMINA N NCE

0.49

0.42

0.41

0.63

0.45

0.42

0.52

0.49

0.58

0.85

0.49

0.57

020 - PLANNA N BLE AREA E TO T EX E T SURFA F CE AREA E

2.06

2.52

2.32

1.83

2.10

1.67

2.15

2.25

2.00

1.20

2.25

2.00

FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT

017 USEFUL ILLUMINANCE 0.00

0.50

1.00

0.41 - 0.55

8’ - 0”

08' - 00" 11' - 00" Rec 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Sq 12' - 00" 12' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 10' - 00" Sq 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Rec 09" - 00"

0.85 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.73 0.73 0.73

Rotated Tri Triangle Rectangle Rotated Sq Square Intersecting Circle Amorphous Ellipse Rectangle Rotated Tri Triangle Rotated Sq Square Intersecting Intersecting Amorphous Ellipse Rectangle Rotated Tri Triangle Square Rotated Sq Intersecting

08' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 10' - 00" 10' - 00" Sq 09" - 00" 12' - 00" 09" - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Rec 08' - 00" Sq 10' - 00" 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 12' - 00" Sq 11' - 00"

2.00 2.00 2.00 1.96 1.96 1.95 1.94 1.92 1.89 1.87 1.86 1.86 1.84 1.84 1.83 1.82 1.79 1.78 1.75 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.71

04D 01B 06E 07A 09B 12B 05A 04C 01A 06D 09A 12A 04B 06C 04A 06B

Intersecting Amorphous Jagged Sq Rectangle Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Intersecting Amorphous Jagged Sq Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Jagged Sq Intersecting Jagged Sq

Rec 09" - 00" 11' - 00" 08' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Sq 12' - 00" Rec 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 09" - 00" 12' - 00" 12' - 00" Rec 11' - 00" 10' - 00" Rec 12' - 00" 11' - 00"

1.69 1.68 1.67 1.65 1.63 1.63 1.61 1.58 1.58 1.55 1.53 1.53 1.48 1.45 1.39 1.36

06A 10E 10D 10C 10B 10A

Jagged Sq Spoke Spoke Spoke Spoke Spoke

12' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 12' - 00"

1.27 1.20 1.12 1.04 0.97 0.91

Circle Circle Ellipse Rotated Sq Square Circle Ellipse Rectangle Intersecting Sq Square Rotated Sq Amorphous Circle Ellipse

09E 12E 07D 08C 11C 05D 02A 01D 03B 07C 09D 12D 08B 11B 04E 05C 01C 03A 07B 09C 12C 11A 08A 05B

SECTION:

2.11 - 2.50

Jagged Sq

02E 02D 03E 08E 11E 02C 03D 07E 05E 11D 08D 01E 02B 03C

OPTIMIZATION TOPIC:

DATA VISUALIZATION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

FLOOR PLAN STUDY The array on the left had page is a catalogue of different building geometry with varying floor to ceiling height. Each floor plan measures the two genes of significance, and showcases a wide range of results.

1.71 - 2.10

Intersecting Sq

2.52 2.35 2.32 2.25 2.25 2.19 2.16 2.15 2.10 2.09 2.09 2.06 2.06 2.02

1.36 - 1.70

Intersecting Rec

08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 10' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00"

0.85 - 1.35

Ellipse

0.86 - 1.00

Circle

Intersecting Rec 12' - 00" 1.00 Spoke 11' - 00" 1.00 Spoke 12' - 00" 1.00 Spoke 10' - 00" 0.97 Intersecting Rec 11' - 00" 0.93 Spoke 09" - 00" 0.92 Jagged Sq 12' - 00" 0.90 Rotated Tri 12' - 00" 0.90 Triangle 12' - 00" 0.90 Rectangle 12' - 00" 0.87

0.71 - 0.85

Amorphous

GEO E METR T ICA C L DES E CRIP I TI T ON

04A 10B 10A 10C 04B 10D 06A 09A 12A 07A

The diagram on the right hand page is a useful tool in visualizing those results and reaffirms the inverse relationship of the two genes. It is obvious from this data-set that some geometries lend themselves to daylight maximization, while other geometries are better suited for surface area minimization. A truly efficient building, through the established framework, must factor in both metrics. At this stage, it is unclear how this can be reconciled.

0.90 0.85 0.80

0.69 0.69 0.69 0.68 0.68 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.63 0.63 0.62 0.61 0.61 0.60 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.56

03C 07E 08E 11E 02D 01E 03D 05E 06D 06E 02E 03E

Ellipse Rectangle Rotated Sq Square Circle Amorphous Ellipse Intersecting Sq Jagged Sq Jagged Sq Circle Ellipse

10' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00"

0.54 0.52 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.49 0.48 0.45 0.43 0.42 0.42 0.41

0.75

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

5% +2 0% +1 5% +1 0% +5 % AVG (0)

0.56 - 0.70

020 PLANNABLE AREA TO EXT. SURFACE AREA

The Comfort Zone Diagram (above) is an alternative visualization of the Floor Plan Study. By plotting Ext. Surface Area on the x-axis and the Useful Illuminance on the y-axis, a new understanding of the genes' relationship emerges. The "comfort zone" is the green area of the graph which is defined through identifying the area with a positive deviation.

0.85 0.84 0.83 0.83 0.82 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.78 0.78 0.77 0.75 0.75 0.74 0.73 0.73 0.73

2.00 2.00 2.00 1.96 1.96 1.95 1.94 1.92 1.89 1.87 1.86 1.86 1.84 1.84 1.83 1.82 1.79 1.78 1.75 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.73 1.71

04D 01B 06E 07A 09B 12B 05A 04C 01A 06D 09A 12A 04B 06C 04A 06B

Intersecting Amorphous Jagged Sq Rectangle Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Intersecting Amorphous Jagged Sq Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Jagged Sq Intersecting Jagged Sq

Rec 09" - 00" 11' - 00" 08' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Sq 12' - 00" Rec 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 09" - 00" 12' - 00" 12' - 00" Rec 11' - 00" 10' - 00" Rec 12' - 00" 11' - 00"

1.69 1.68 1.67 1.65 1.63 1.63 1.61 1.58 1.58 1.55 1.53 1.53 1.48 1.45 1.39 1.36

06A 10E 10D 10C 10B 10A

Jagged Sq Spoke Spoke Spoke Spoke Spoke

12' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 12' - 00"

1.27 1.20 1.12 1.04 0.97 0.91

Circle Circle Ellipse Rotated Sq Square Circle Ellipse Rectangle Intersecting Sq Square Rotated Sq Amorphous Circle Ellipse

09E 12E 07D 08C 11C 05D 02A 01D 03B 07C 09D 12D 08B 11B 04E 05C 01C 03A 07B 09C 12C 11A 08A 05B

SECTION:

2.11 - 2.50

07C 02A 01B 03A 05C 09D 12D 08C 11C 04E 01C 02B 03B 07D 05D 09E 11D 08D 12E 01D 02C

0.95

08' - 00" 11' - 00" Rec 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Sq 12' - 00" 12' - 00" 12' - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 12' - 00" 10' - 00" Sq 11' - 00" 10' - 00" 11' - 00" 11' - 00" Rec 09" - 00"

02E 02D 03E 08E 11E 02C 03D 07E 05E 11D 08D 01E 02B 03C

1.71 - 2.10

Spoke Jagged Sq Intersecting Rotated Tri Triangle Intersecting Square Rotated Sq Rectangle Jagged Sq Amorphous Rotated Tri Intersecting Triangle Rotated Sq Square Intersecting

2.52 2.35 2.32 2.25 2.25 2.19 2.16 2.15 2.10 2.09 2.09 2.06 2.06 2.02

1.36 - 1.70

0.71 - 0.85

10E 06B 04C 09B 12B 05A 11A 08A 07B 06C 01A 09C 05B 12C 08B 11B 04D

1.00

08' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 10' - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 08' - 00" 09" - 00" 09" - 00" 08' - 00" 11' - 00" 10' - 00"

0.85 - 1.35

0.86 - 1.00

0.41 - 0.55

017 USEFUL ILLUMINANCE

04A 10B 10A 10C 04B 10D 06A 09A 12A 07A

OPTIMIZATION TOPIC:

DATA VISUALIZATION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

COMFORT ZONE The Comfort Zone Diagram (left) provides further insight into the behavior of the two genes in relation to each other. The data farthest right is the best in terms of Gene 020, and the closest to the top is the best in terms of Gene 017. Plotting the genes against each other and calculating the average line creates a benchmark for performance. Therefore, a zone can be established which highlights the better performing data. This methodology is a tool from which a precise definition of efficiency emerges. While it may not be possible to achieve perfect results for both genes simultaneously, an optimal balance between the two can be pinpointed. From the diagram on the right, it becomes more evident that certain configurations perform better than others, while both genes are being assessed. Therefore, the floor plans within the comfort zone can be considered more efficient because they employ an optimization of both genes.

The image to left is appropriated from The Metropolis of Tomorrow (1929), an illustrated novel by Hugh Ferris. Ferris, an early 20th century architect best known for his architectural renderings, emphasized light and shadow in his graphite illustrations. The defining characteristic of his work is the dark quality, which became so influential that the first zoning ordinance in New York City requiring setbacks is credited, in part, to Ferris. This speaks to the long standing importance of daylight as a consideration in architectural design. While this idea is not ground-breaking, the approach of coupling daylight with additional factors to develop a more holistic design deserves further exploration. The term "generation" is used to acknowledge the importance the genes play in the conception of the tower. It is not "designed" in the traditional sense, the form is generated through the continual development of gene optimization. Much greater emphasis was placed on achieving higher efficiencies than appealing to any preconceived formal or stylistic agenda.

TOWER GENERATION Image Credit: Graphicine.com Original Artwork by Hugh Ferriss

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

SITE IMPLEMENTATION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

CONTEXT MET LIFE BUILDING

THESIS PROJECT

GRAND CENTRAL STATION

The project site is located in the dense metropolitan area of Midtown Manhattan. This provided a great challenge in the implementation of the concept because daylight availability is constricted, especially in the lower region of the tower. CHRYSLER BUILDING

There are many attributes of this particular site which directly influence daylighting. The density of the area alone provides limitations. The availability of light is greatly affected by the surroundings, requiring an innovative design response. However, the presence of Grand Central Station to the east and slightly south provides a great opportunity to recapture daylight. The formal response which arises is a direct result of the gene optimization with the constraints of the context factored into the equation.

PROTOTYPICAL FLOOR 4 B 30,000 GS F 11â&#x20AC;&#x2122; FLOOR TO CEILING

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

OPTIMIZATION, REVISITED

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

THE PROTOTYPE 1.00 0.95 0.90

What the entire optimization study revealed, beyond the development of the Comfort Zone Diagram, is an ideal geometry for a floor plate. However, this can only be considered a prototypical solution, at best. The "T" shaped floor plan, pictured left, is the highest deviation above the average for both genes, but with no external obstructions affecting the results.

0.85 0.80 0.75 +2

1.00

1.25

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25

5% +2 0% +1 5% +1 0% +5 % AVG (0)

Therefore, this is only the starting point for the development of the office tower. Applying the internal program of an office tower along with the external factors of the site requires another creative leap which will generate the form of the tower.

+50 % 0.93

Revisiting the Comfort Zone Diagram, it is important to note that the study involved generic floor plans, with no surrounding context. The exercise revealed the genes' behavior and helped formulate a model of efficiency, but further study is necessary to adapt the methodology to the site.

AVG.

0.75

1.69

PA2S 1.48

PA2S

-50 %

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

FORM ITERATIONS

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

ADAPTATION

M ASSING 01

MASSIN G 02

M ASSING 03

M ASSING 04

1,233,609 0.53 644,329 1.91

1,174,441 0.66 606,471 1.94

1,006,398 0.74 694,991 1.45

1,245,465 0.74 646,272 1.93

Plannable Area 017 U I Ext. Surface Area 020 P A 2 E

The adaptation to the site involved specifying the program requirements in more detail. The target GSF assigned is 1,000,000 sf, with a minimum requirement of 70% Plannable. A simple core design allows morphs the simplified "T" shape to allocate enough plannable area, and maintain a high Consistency of Lease Span.

Plannable Area 017 U I Ext. Surface Area 020 P A 2 E

The process involves measuring floor plate samples at multiple elevations, because core drop-off's and site conditions create drastically different circumstances throughout the tower. The results are interpreted after each iteration, providing a feedback loop and drives the progression of the design. This continual process of form generation and refinement could go on endlessly, but time constraints inevitably set the limitation of this experiment. Nevertheless, the final product of the form generation process proves very successful in it's results.

MASSING M ASSING 05

MASSIN G 06

M ASSING 07

M ASSING 08

1,128,209 0.68 644,329 1.86

1,146,824 0.72 640,733 1.79

792,963 0.81 555,553 1.43

1,086,555 0.74 624,794 1.74

Plannable Area 017 U I Ext. Surface Area 020 P A 2 E

855,329 0.81 574,968 1.49

09 Plannable Area 017 U I Ext. Surface Area 020 P A 2 E

HIGH RISE 15,509 0.84 15,509 0.82

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

Plannable Area 017 U I Gross Area 002 P A

TOPIC:

TYPICAL CONDITIONS

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

FLOOR PLANS

114'

164'

MID RISE 15,429 0.82 19,919 0.77

Plannable Area 017 U I Gross Area 002 P A

The typical floor plans (left) demonstrate the full range of spaces which were derived from the form generation process. The resulting layouts vary significantly, but the most noteworthy attribute is that the floor plan opens up dramatically as the tower increases in height. This space offsets the smaller lease spans to ensure the overall plannable area requirements are still met. Though daylight and surface area drive the project, at no point are the basic elements required of any office building ignored. Additionally, the orientation of the tower to due south, 30 degrees off the Manhattan Grid, benefits the daylight optimization.

50'

30'

74'

30' 102'

134' 154' W

W 20'

15' M

32' 99' 40'

50'

37' 156'

20'

20' 126'

LOW RISE 6,970 0.70 12,474 0.56

Plannable Area 017 U I Gross Area 002 P A

29'

A typical furniture layout (right) is included as well, demonstrating the flexibility and openness that the floor plan provides. It becomes apparent that the traditional exterior office layout is not viable for this project. Instead, an open office layout lends itself to this project becase the lack of obstructions enables daylight to penetrate deeper.

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

RENDERING

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

OFFICE SECTION PERSPECTIVE

SOLAR GAIN ANALYSIS

RESULTING FRIT PATTERN

UNFOLDED FRIT PATTERN

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

SOLAR HEAT GAIN MITIGATION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

HIGH EXPOSURE = DENSE FRIT AGGREGATION

FACADE STUDY A separate design consideration emerged as the form generation was concluded. Because the scheme is largely dependant on unobstructed glass spans, the tower invites solar heat gains and glare. The precise energy load striking the building throughout the year is exhibited in the The Solar Heat Gain Analysis (Left). This pinpointed the exact location of undesirable surfaces and is used as a source code for creating the solution.

MODERATE EXPOSURE = NORMAL FRIT AGGREGATION

LOW EXPOSURE = THIN FRIT AGGREGATION

The Solar Heat Gain Analysis was translated directly into a Frit Pattern, which is modulated according to the amount of radiation it receives. The Frit is meant to counter the unwanted heat gains and glare while still allowing light to penetrate through. It is an equalizer because it has a specific response to a specific amount of radiation, which helps to regulate the overall building.

SECTION:

TOWER GENERATION

TOPIC:

SUMMARY

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

FULL SECTION The tower design is successful in that the experiment achieves what it set out to do; it utilizes the gene research as design tool. And, it achieves a high level of efficiency; an efficiency that was only able to be envisioned through the framework of the gene research. The optimization strategy and the tower generation show one way path in which the research facilitates the creation of a design. It was not only a methodology for defining this thesis project, but proof of concept for the greater body of research.

This famous photograph of Grand Central Station was taken at a time when rail travel was in it's heyday. The historic space is depicted in the likeness of a cathedral. The landmark structure is adjacent to the site, and influences the this project's ground floors a major way. Most importantly, it provides a precedent for a magnificent civic space. It is necessary to point out that the qualities of the space could hardly be more different from that of an office tower. Daylight, the primary subject of this thesis, will not be disregarded on the lobby floors, but it will adhere to a new set of rules entirely. While an office space might benefit from constant and even light, a public space is invigorated by dynamic and dramatic light. The purpose of the ground floor design of this project is to draw inspiration for Grand Central Station and contextualize some of it's attributes.

CONTEXTUALIZATION Image Credit: shrineodreams.wordpress.com Unknown Artist

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

SITE EXPLORATION

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

CONTEXT Every building meets the ground in one way or another. Most often, ground floor logic differs from the rest of the building. And, whether it is continuing a rhythm, or breaking up a rhythm, most buildings are formally conscious of their surroundings. This project is no exception. However, in this case the qualities that are being "drawn over" are not window sill heights or column repetitions. Alternatively, construction lines are gathered through the study of the sun and its interaction with the surrounding buildings. The grand gesture of the lobby is defined by large punctures through a monolithic form. These punctures allow light to penetrate in dramatic fashion at particular times of the day, not unlike the concourse of Grand Central Station.

The simple fact that Grand Central Station is adjacent to the site make the South-East corner incredibly significant. Furthermore, the significance is twofold; it carries cultural significance, and practical significance in terms of daylight access.

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

RENDERING

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

LOBBY SECTION PERSPECTIVE

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

RETAIL LEVEL

Park Ave Viaduct

RETAI RETAI DOWN TO STREET LEVEL SERVICE ENTRANCE

LIGHT SCOOPS ABOVE

OPEN TO BELOW

A floor devoted to retail exists one level above grade. This space is confined to much smaller than the footprint of the site to allow for high ceilings at a scale that isn't dwarfed by Grand Central. This space also resides towards the north end of the site where it receives adequate light, but forfeits the more intense light to the main lobby space. The orientation of the tower is not aligned with the manhattan grid, because the daylight optimization benefited from rotating the tower due south. However, it makes sense to regularize the ground floor within the grid, for practical and aesthetic purposes. The retail floor not only fulfilled a requirement of the project, it served to bridge the gap between the ground conditions and the tower conditions.

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

STREET LEVEL FIRE STAIR

Ave ve

UP TO RETAIL LEVEL SERVICE ENTRANCE

OFFICE TOWER SECURITY

DOWN TO MAIN CONCOURSE LEVEL

MAIN LOBBY ENTRANCE

E 42 nd St

The main lobby was conceived of as a monolithic form, with punctures allowing light to pour into the space. A large interior puncture allows light to reach the main concourse level, and it doubles as the route for people to get below grade, as well. This is most easily accessed through the south-west entrances on Madison Ave and E 42 St. The south-east entrances on Vanderbilt and E 42 St look directly at the office tower elevators, however, all entrances can be used to get to any location. Retail space exists in towards the north end of the site, and the loading docks have direct access to E 43 St.

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

CONCOURSE LEVEL RETAI RETAI

SERVICE ENTRANCE

LIGHT WELLS ABOVE

UP TO STREET LEVEL

RETAII LIGHT WELLS ABOVE DN

The remainder of the retail space resides below grade, though it is not completely cutoff from daylight. Punctures on the street level allow light to trickle into the space below. Major connections lead to the main concourse of Grand Central Station, as well as access to trains on lower levels. Having a strong connection to the main concourse level places a greater importance on the lobby of this thesis project. There is a great opportunity to integrate the spaces and allow this site take part in the energy of Grand Central Station.

SECTION:

CONTEXTUALIZATION

TOPIC:

LARGE LIGHT SCOOP

RENDERING

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

LOBBY INTERIOR Dramatic Lighting of the space is paramount. Several strategies are employed to disperse light (and facilitate circulation) in dynamic and diverse ways. The public space is not intended to mimic Gand Central in any way. Instead, some of the qualities are reinterpreted in a more modern way, embodying the idea, but not necessarily appropriating the form.

LIGHT WELL

INTER FLOOR CONNECTION

SECTION:

+150 %

ASSESSMENT TOPIC:

RELATIVE GENE PERFORMANCE

DAYLIGHT DESCRIPTION:

DEVIATION GRAPH 28.7

FAR

+100 %

The goal of optimizing two genes to create an innovative definition of efficiency did have some unpredictable results on the peripheral genes. Most of the genes fell well within the extremes of the case study metrics, however, are boardering on the edge of the common limitations.

6.74

AR +50 %

CAR

0.063

0.48

PO AVG.

0.99 0.98

0.95

CLS 0.86 CLS

0.042

13.49

FAR

0.0043

0.75 0.71

PA PA

0.86 0.83

UA UA

0.99 0.97

CPF CPF

0.39

0.81

CWU

5.67

PAR 5.15 PAR

1.56

0.72 0.70

SU SU

0.75

CWU

SAR 0.29

SA SA

0.0026

-100 %

1.39

SAR

0.80

1.41

PEF 1.29

PEF

0.49

PV 0.42

0.22

-50 %

The sucesses of this project is that it proved that the research is a useful tool for designers. There is no question that the genes hold the potential to positively impact the field of architecture in a very meaningful way.

13.98

0.75

0.70

1.24

0.55

0.034

1.69

0.027

PA2S

SA2V PA2S

10.58

0.87

1.49

SA2V

0.56

4.14

10.73

CAR

0.91

2.19

P SA 1.97 2 SA2P

THESIS:

M. ARCH 2014 COLLABORATOR:

SKIDMORE OWNINGS & MERRILL

DAYLIGHT NAME:

STEVEN GREENBERGER

EFFICIENCY VOLUME II GENERATIVE ARCHITECTURE

THROUGH GENE OPTIMIZATION Northeastern University School of Architecture