ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO AIR
2013 NICHOLAS COOPER
Contents
Part A: CASE FOR INNOVATION A.1. Architecture as a Discourse A.1.1. Case Study 1 A.1.2. Case Study 2 A.1.3. Case Study 3 A.2. Computational Architecture A.3. Parametric Architecture A.4. Conclusion A.5. Learning Outcomes A.6. Appendix – Algorithmic Explorations
Personal Statement Initial skill set: Rhino:
1/5
Photoshop:
2/5
Illustrator
1/5
Indesign
1/5
Grasshopper
1/5
My name is Nicholas Cooper, I am 39 years young. I am a third year Environments student majoring in architecture. I have completed a Bachelor of Arts in Interior Design in which I gained experience with digital design programs such as AutoCAD, 3D Studio MAX, Page Maker and Photoshop. I have had limited experience with Illustrator and Indesign. I have a keen interest in architectural design, interior design and industrial design, as well as sculpture and fine art. It has been a long time wish of mine to study Architecture with the aid of digital design tools as I am passionate about a career in which I can be involved in an imaginative blend of Art and Science in the design of environments for people. Naturally I am a decision maker and I revel in team leadership and creativity. In choosing Architecture with the use of digital design tools as I am interested in the fact that people need places in which to live, work, play, learn, meet and shop all of these enabled by the evaluative nature of these tools. At a young age I was a Designer using CAD, I am trained in the art and science of building design and I long for the privilege to be licensed to protect public health, safety and welfare. In the future I hope to transform these needs into concepts and then develop these into building images that can be constructed by others through the use of a virtual environment. In doing so, I will satisfy my personal need to communicate between and assist those who have needs. I believe my talent lies within a role that will involve computer generation of architecture as well as interaction with clients, users, the public as a whole and those who will make the spaces that satisfy those needs. Whether the projects I tackle are single rooms or a new building or the renovation of an old one, as an Architect I am interested in providing professional services, ideas, insight, technical knowledge, drawings, models both physical and computer generated within the virtual world. I am confident in my ability to deliver a balance of an extraordinary range of functional, aesthetic, technological economic, human, environmental, and safety factors. As an Architect I will be in a position in which I have the opportunity of finding a coherent and appropriate solution for the needs at hand. Interest in a career as an Architect comes easily, and it began early. By learning to see buildings, spaces, and their relationships, I am sensitive to things that concern Architects. I notice the effects of colour, texture, light, and shape. I consider how spaces feel when we are in them. I look for rhythm and pattern, simplicity and ornament, old and new in our environment. As an Interior Design Student I visited the design studios of schools of architecture, toured the offices of a local firms and read books and magazines on architecture to gain a broad understanding of the nature of an Architects work and the values of the profession. An Architecture curriculum is intensive and demanding, however I know that I am capable of putting in the required hours of late-night effort. The most exciting thing for me about the prospect of Architecture study is the opportunity to participate in a digital Design studio.
Introduction
a. Architectural technology has developed significantly over the last 2 decades which have allowed a multitude of options for generating designs. Computerised design has enabled students to manipulate the design process from its infancies to be most high-tech levels of analysis. At university computer modeling has become the most integrated design solution to the varying problems that arise in designing the high-tech buildings of today. In fact it has become the universal discourse of the design and building industries. It presents an interface in which sculpting architectural space has allowed various and wide architectural forms to become possible. Digital media becomes malleable in a physical sense as the type of architecture we are talking about allows a complex set of architectural prototypes which are precisely aimed at generating a discourse about the design of interactive space. Entry into such a highly diverse range of possibilities is allowed as the built or physical is transformed into the digital environment and parameters are tested to the ‘limit’ of unlimited possibilities. Structures within computer environments allow geometry to be unfolded into translucent and divided layers creating a virtual space which is hypothetically perceived in four dimensions. In this journal which has been created through extensive research through architectural magazines I have encountered and included different contributions from leading architectural projects most commonly concentrating on the use of parametric modelling to create these buildings of interest. I have also included one building in which I believe the design to be boring, in fact ugly. At this point the question arises - which of these buildings uses parametric modelling? Can parametric modelling techniques replicate nature? - and if so, how? Does it do it through the replication of form, structure or ornamentation? The use of space by interaction between physical and ethereal elements enabling people using the space to have their senses provoked and to see the unseen. An interesting question is how parametric modelling enables the use of a designed space in regard to how it was foreseen and ultimately constructed. In regard to the buildings in question their atmospheric quality, acoustics and light all play a part relevant to how they were perceived from the architect’s vision of the space and then realised through parametric design.
“applying the principles of science to solving the problems of humanity.� B u c k m i n s t e r
F u l l e r
A.1. Achitecture as a Discourse
b.
b.
‘Over the last 20 years technological advances have presented a range of new possibilities for architects. All students now learn some form of Computer Aided Design (CAD) skills at schools of architecture and it is now an accepted language in the discourse of the discipline.’12 Now that we are taught how to use scripting or computer based methods of architectural design the ultimate “solution space” can be susceptible to designer abuse with the creation of unbuildable architectures. If addressing the problem and continually referring to it, we can avoid such side tracks of abuse and we can orient design and in some cases produce amazing, previously unattainable, architecture. An advantage with parametric design is that as in virtual reality environmental conditions can be tested as with car and boat design where things like aerodynamics are important. ‘The starting point for many design methods has been the notion that design is a process of searching for a solution that satisfies a given set of goals and constraints. The sought-after solution, according to this notion, “exists” within a universe of potential, or candidate, solutions— a so-called solution space.’16
The use of parametric tools enables contemporary examples of architecture that could only be apparent after computational architectural modeling has taken place on a given design idea. It is interesting to note in my three examples of computer generated architecture that the forms are interesting designs – the Tod’s building for its angular construction elements, the Gherkin for its overall symmetry but underlying constructional complexity and the Bird’s Nest for its abstract structural forms. These three buildings are an interesting take on the use of computational architecture to generate their forms and it is apparent that these three design would not have been able to be constructed without it.
A.1.1. Case Study 1 Tod’s Omotesando Building
c.
d.
Toyo Ito’s Tod’s Omotesando building is situated in Tokyo, Japan squeezed amongst some unusually bland residential architectural situations which is reflected in the Tod’s L-shaped wrap-around plan. The Tod’s building is of particular interest as it is derived from something found in nature - this being a tree. It is presumed that the facade was generated from the analysis of the naturally occurring tree branch structure. However irregular this may seem it is noted that the building contains both upright and oblique elements which act as a very efficient structural system for the building. The Tod’s building is constructed with composite materials, these being reinforced concrete - the beauty of which allows for angular elements to be a part of its structure. The materials in discussion allow for compression where the concrete would crack on a minute level allowing for the steel reinforcement to become the banding tensile structure. It is important to note that the characteristics of concrete used in this manner provide the opportunity for further abstraction of form to be achieved enabling a built outcome. It is particularly apparent at night when artificial lighting enables viewing of the interior, as light filled cavities; create voids as irregular as branches create within a tree. Though, irregular they may seem, there is an underlying pattern which is obvious when observing the branches of the tree. In comparison to this building’s natural inspiration it can be said that the tree optimises its growth in relation to the mass of the branching members holding up the canopy. This means reducing the member size as the tree grows to expand and optimise its ability to capture the sun’s rays. The Tod’s building has underlying patterns of structure that allow for loads to be distributed towards the foundation in similarly optimized fashion. They are positioned throughout the building’s skin which allows openings in the façade. This tree-like structure brings the external in and projects the internal out.
e.
f.
A.1.2. Case Study 2 Foster’s Gherkin
g.
h.
The Gherkin Tower situated in London is a recognisable piece of architecture which fits on the global scale as a master piece. It has many interesting features, the most obvious is its skin which is hexagonal and is derived from the Venus Flower Basket Sponge. This sponge, a beautiful part of nature has a lattice exoskeleton that appears visually translucent in its underwater home. Stresses upon the organism in many directions become the driver for the evolution of its geometry. The pressure distribution on its exoskeletal structure is reduced by its rounded shape. The reduction of forces due to underwater currents was applied to Foster’s design of the tower. When studying these two buildings there is a similar design process in that the vertical structure are accompanied by angular elements portraying natural phenomena as indicated by the Gherkin Tower as a sponge and the Tod’s building in the image of a tree. This far-reaching design was possible due to parametric modeling in several programs. “The models allow you to play around with certain features of a building without having to re-calculate all the other features that are affected by the changes you make. This makes them extremely powerful design tools.”6 So, the design becomes a host to the parameters that the designer has set whilst allowing other features that you do not want to change creating a strong basis for abstract angles and curves.
i.
j.
A.1.3. Case Study 3 Herzog and de Meuron’s Bird’s Nest
k. Herzog and de Meuron’s Bird’s Nest structure for the Beijing Olympics is truly a sophisticated system that borrows from formal qualities of a bird’s nest. However, functionally, the design allows the natural crisscross elements of such a structure as found in nature - on the building they act as angular bracing between the vertical hybrid space-truss elements. These being overlapped in several angles across the building: giving cross bracing structure to the building. Whereas, the space-truss elements act as columns and cantilevers tied in with the external structure of the facade. The building can be perceived as a bird’s nest upside-down where the nest-like façade encompasses and nurtures the seating bowl. The covered spectator area is independent from the façade’s structural method where a standard mode of structural support is used, namely, reinforced column and beam. The reinforced concrete is used here as it provides rigidity – a quality which is needed in such a high traffic purpose where it must withstand the stresses and strains put upon the building. The massive qualities of the construction of the seating bowl reduce the possibility of movement – the resonant reverberations. The use of steel in construction allows for long spanning members that can be wrapped around the freely expressed form as the exoskeleton which ties together the structure and entwined ornamental façade. “The design resembling a bird’s nest was inspired from the art of Chinese ceramics and its purpose is to leave the spectators wondering which aspects of the structure are functional and which are only included for design purposes. In order to achieve the design of a stadium that was “porous” while also being “a collective building, a public vessel”, the team studied Chinese ceramics. These two main conceptual ideas gave birth to the “nest scheme.””10
k.
l.
The curved rim of the top sides is an extension of the overall curved nature of the building; which portrays a softer take on nature’s bird’s nest. In a building of this blob nature it can be subjected to more complex structural loads than a rectilinear building. The nature of the blob building has evolved in an environment where parametric architectural software is being used causing a further push of the visual scope and freedom in ‘parametric’ form. This being included in the design process for aesthetics - not necessarily structure. However, in a structural sense, it is plain to see that there is some regularity within diagonal elements which repeat in parallel.
m.
A.2. Computational Architecture
n.
This technological advance has presented a whole new interface to describe architectural spaces and has allowed new sorts of architectural forms to evolve. ‘A set of installations and architectural prototypes, it is aimed at developing a discourse about the design of interactive space and, more precisely, investigating ways of treating digital media as physical matter. The surface of a computer projection is unfolded onto a translucent structure, with the result that ‘layers of digital information, behaviour and ambience share projection territories’ and create the prospect of a ‘nonscreen-based computer environment’.’1 As history tells us the process of architectural design is now a lot further down the technological track than previous methods using plans, sections and elevations all done by hand. In the birth stage, design appears in one’s head then on paper and for highly sophisticated generation – the computer. It is in-fact, the computer that allows us more technically advanced design through which we can create a level of abstraction not formally attainable with previous methods. ‘As an idea, a formless phenomenon, a technological development towards lightness, a tabula rasa of a capitalist economy, a gradual loss of architecture’s moral weight and certitude’7 Despite the current situation - where the computer has its downfalls because of a lack of control in some situations where the computer becomes the designer – not the facilitator as designer. However, the computer has an innate ability to provide the platform within which we are provided with the opportunity to conceive, write, draw and model to a further and far more sophisticated form of architecture. It is important to note that the quality of the design idea, its purpose or “moral weight” is dependent on the ability of the designer – not necessarily the technology. ‘For a long time architecture was thought of as a solid reality and entity: buildings, objects, matter, place, and a set of geometric relationships. But recently, architects have begun to understand their products as liquid, animating their bodies, hypersurfacing their walls, crossbreeding different locations, experimenting with new geometries.’6 With the attraction of blob architecture, in this case where ‘the term blob connotes a thing which is neither singular nor multiple but an intelligence that behaves as if it were singular and networked, but in its form can become virtually infinitely multiplied and distributed.’8
o.
Currently there are many theories surrounding blob architecture and its ability to impress visually and the possibilities of fabrication at high speed with a previously unachievable precision. The only downfall of this type of architecture is that the more sophisticated the design is, the harder it is to build. Though the architect is allowed to visualise his or her dream design and critique it, in some cases it may not be built and they just remain as theorised entities. ‘architecture is as much a philosophical, social or profes¬sional 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.’14 As Patrick Schumacher states, ‘[architecture] encompasses all three categories: artefacts, knowledge and practices all understood as communications that connect to each other in an ongoing recursive network.’11 Hence, the built and un-built architectures both have just as much authority in the context of architectural discourse and how we communicate them. ‘The autopoiesis of architecture is the ongoing communication process that takes place in myriad architectural practices, schools of architecture, magazines, books and web-sites: a gigantic parallel process producing a swarm-formation of cross-referencing elements. The total mass of communications that constitutes this autopoiesis comprises diverse items such as sketches, drawings, CAD files, renderings, buildings and photographs of buildings that all circulate as communications.’11 At this point of scripting for architectural purposes we can say that the environment has come to a point where the majority of architects are using Computer Aided Design methods. Historically CAD has used primitives where scripting software creates volumes via points, curves and surfaces – in contemporary practice it is becoming more prevalent that through object oriented scripting within a CAD tool has imbedded itself within the designer’s process of creating and procuring the architectural result - of which the software is either too advanced to pick-up. The environment of cyberspace allows for sharing of scripting data which in some ways compromises the control or authorship of parametric design processes. The concept of design sharing is still in the stages of debate and it is a fact that learning scripting is enabled by the use of co-authorship. This type of learning enables a further depth in architectural concepts, both philosophical and material which an individual can presuppose.
A.3. Parametric Architecture
p.
q.
Parametric: a “set of equations that express a set of quantities as explicit functions of a number of independant variables, known as ‘parameters’”13 It is born from the depths of mathematical equations that parametric models arise. These may be simple equations found in reference books or direct mathematical correlations with natural phenomena in which I began looking at a commonly found natural object this being the sea shell. It is noted that such a structure can be deciphered by looking at the fibonacci sequence. These equations may be found through the development of computer modeling of which can be done within an architectural firm or contracted out to specialists in analysing structural systems. Project data derived from the design gives parametric modeling the validity it needs to have a profound effect of the overall design. The accuracy of the data analysis methods determines the varied sophistication of the design outcome. Uncertainty of outcome is common as well as desired to break free from the norm. Modeling produces a less bias towards rigidity of design generated within an older school environment in fact it produces a further advanced process. This enables an extensive feedback graphically which includes support for traditionally risky areas such as input sizing and wizards. ‘usually algorithms are thought of as recipes, methods, or techniques for getting computers to do something, and when restricted to computers, the term “algorithm” becomes more precise, because then “unambiguous and simple to follow” means “a computer can do it.”’15 Within an architectural discourse there is always a purpose. In this sense we can call it a problem. The reasoning is generated in the mind then it is transferred via sketches and furthermore to the ultimate outcome of which is to put these ideas into parametric software. In the end finding a solution in which ‘an algorithm is a particular set of instructions, and for these instructions to be understood by the computer they must be written in a language the computer can understand, a code.’2 The danger of computation is to over work a scenario or situation to the point where the purpose is lost or becomes unclear. Therefore it is integral to relay between analog and digital mediums. The positive thing about parametric design is the option to repeat, reassess and reconfigure. ‘These performance tools, though they can be very helpful for certain designs, can also distract.’3 In some people’s view ‘it can be argued that computational design tools need to be more closely connected with the building process.’ 3 As is the condition at the moment where builders work from drawings and lack the availability of the software programs puts them in the situation where they can’t decipher or even view computer models. ‘We have a hunger for far greater computer power to allow the multi-parameter decision-making to take place in realtime, and many of today’s scripters need to take off their gloves, define their goals more precisely, and think about coding from first principles as excitedly as adopting an algorithm designed for another context, before discovering any limitations’4
A.4. Conclusion
Architecture as a profession has been using computers to generate forms and analyse structures for 50 years. The second example, the Gherkin Tower shown above, is an example of the power of this type of programing. Parametric modeling allows changes at all stages of the design process each of these having an effect on the other elements of the project. Geometrical parameters can be altered whilst retaining the overall integrity of the project. Parametric modeling allows an otherwise unavailable interaction with nature letting the form of the Venus Flower Basket Sponge to guide designers in producing the Gherkin Tower. Malleable design process that is tolerable of changing variables enables a landmark curved building as a result of experimentation with generative form creation.
Tree-like algorithms allow the generation of building features similar to the oblique tree branch inspired structural skin within the Tod’s building. These computer generated branches optimised for structural and architectural merits. Unfounded opportunity lies within parametric design tools, especially when used in designing such buildings as we are mirroring nature. The Bird’s Nest is widely received iconic building generated out of the need for a landmark building for the Beijing Olympics. Not only do we recognize that the Bird’s Nest is in part a Chinese delicacy we can find similarities in the parametric methods applied to the Tod’s building – specifically using these methods to enhance its structural integrity – in contrast to the Bird’s nest entwined structural and biased to the ornamental purpose. Where only physical models previously allowed the form to be generated - computation has generated a building of unique quality with enterprising angular qualities. A bright innovative scheme conceived on all levels.
A.5. Learning Outcomes
It has become apparent through these exercises that parametric design methods have a major place within the discourse of architecture. Computation of space in a virtual world is playing currently a large role in the design of buildings. As well as in other associated industries where its testing methods enable superior results as can be clarified in the virtual world. Upon generating a digital model form and function can be manipulated with elements of structure and materiality. Design is tested throughout modeling software that optimises all elements of a varied design process within the algorithmic rules set by the designer - producing a parametrically produced design. Materiality and structure intertwine to produce an innovative outcome. In this sense the complexity of buildable dreamt architectural form becomes seemingly limitless. From the world of virtual reality, ‘a solution space’ becomes available in which design problems are solved and ultimately enable the data to be turned into a building physically. Outcomes of a higher nature put forward a platform to advance architectural design discourse.
r.
A.6. Appendix - Algorithmic Explorations Preliminary Exercise 1. Circle 2. Copy x2 3. AreaCentroid
top
4. Scale 5. Loft Left
Front
1. Rotate3d 2. Cap
top
3. BooleanDifference 4. Extractsrf Left
Front
1. Rotate3d 2. Rectangle
top
3. Split 4. Scale1d Left
Front
1. Mirror 2. Dupborder top
3. Planarsrf 4. Split 5. Extractsrf
Left
Front
1. Extractsrf 2. Rectangle 3. Curve 4. Rotate 5. Arraycrv 6. Sweep1 7. Split
top
Left
Front
Grasshopper Challenge 1.0 Volume/Room
Meshing Exercise
s.
Grasshopper Challenge 2.0 Meshing Exercise
Grasshopper Challenge 3.0 Array Along a Curve
References
1.
Bouman, Ole, 2005, ‘Architecture, Liquid, Gas,’ Architectural Design, vol 75, no. 1.
2.
Brady, Peter (2013) Computation Works: The building of algorithmic thought. Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 8 – 15
3.
Brady, Peter (2013) Realising the Architectural Intent: Computation at Herzog & De Meuron. Architec tural Design, 83, 2, pp. 56 – 61
4.
Burry, Mark (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 8 - 71.
5.
Farrelly, Lorraine, 2007, ‘The Fundementals of Architecture,’ AVA publishing SA, Switzerland.
6.
Freiberger, Marianne, 2007, Plus Magazine, viewed 10 April 2013, <http://plus.maths.org/content/per fect-buildings-maths-modern-architecture>
7.
Hill, Jonathan (2006). ‘Drawing Forth Immaterial Architecture’, Architectural Research Quarterly, 10, 1, pp. 51-55
8.
Lynn, Greg (1998) “Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy”, in Fold, Bodies and Blobs: Collected Essays ed. by Greg Lynn (Bruxelles: La Lettre volée), pp. 169-182.
9.
Morten Wilhelm Scholz, 2001, Open Buildings, viewed 21 May 2013, http://openbuildings.com/build ings/milwaukee-art-museum-profile-2502
10.
Pilloton, Emily,2007, Inhabitat, viewed 21 May 2013, <http://inhabitat.com/beijings-olympic-stadi um-by-herzog-and-demeuron/>
11.
Schumacher, Patrik, ‘Introduction : Architecture as Autopoietic System’, in The Autopoiesis of Archi tecture (Chichester: J. Wiley, 2011), pp. 1 - 28.
12.
Somlai-Fischer, Adam, 2005, Aether Architecture, ‘Induction House,’ Architectural Design, vol 75, no. 1.
13.
Weisstein, Eric, 2003. CRC Concise Encyclopedia of mathematics. Second. Florida: Chapman & Hall/ CRC.
14.
Williams, Richard, ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Con cepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), pp. 102 116.
15.
Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil , 1999, Definition of “algorithm” in The Mit Encyclopedia of Cogni tive Science (London: The MIT Press) pp.11-12
16.
Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5 - 25;
Images
a. http://vi.sualize.us/cross_scalar_variation_studies_parametric_rocker_architects_christian_j_lange_new_comtional_paradigms_in_digital_architecture_algorithmic_picture_iziK.html b.
http://www.evolo.us/architecture/parametric-housing/
c.
http://www.arcspace.com/features/toyo-ito--associates/tods-omotesando/
d.
http://architecturalmoleskine.blogspot.com.au/2011/11/toyo-ito-tods-omotesando.htmL
e.
http://www.arcspace.com/features/toyo-ito--associates/tods-omotesando/
f.
http://www.arcspace.com/features/toyo-ito--associates/tods-omotesando/
g.
http://news.beloblog.com/ProJo_Blogs/architecturehereandthere/2011/06/column-oops-exc.html
h.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gherkin_stitch.jpg
i.
http://www.lifeofguangzhou.com/node_10/node_35/node_109/node_266/2008/05/15/121082487938577.shtml
j.
http://duniaandromedaku.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/keajaiban-sangkar-cahaya.html
k.
http://www.homesthetics.net/the-chinese-national-stadium-in-beijing-the-birds-nest-stadium/
l.
http://inhabitat.com/beijings-olympic-stadium-by-herzog-and-demeuron/
m.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bird%27s_Nest_stadium,_May_2008.jpg
n.
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/voronoi?before=37
o.
http://blog.rhino3d.com/2013/04/rhino-grasshopper-and-kangaroo-for.html
p.
http://www.manandmollusc.net/advanced_introduction/nautilus_cx.html
q.
http://brahmastrapower.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/our-dna-secret-hidden-under-fi bonacci.html
r.
http://jamesnorbury.tumblr.com/
s.
http://punkzoology.blogspot.com.au/2011_09_01_archive.html