STUDIO AIR: JOURNAL PART A NICOLAOS NICOLAOU 582946
SEMESTER ONE,2014
CONTENTS: Contents CONTENTS 2 INDRODUCTION: 4 PREVIOUS WORK: 5 A1: DESIGN FUTURING PRECEDENTS: Past Competition Entries 8-9 ENERGY GENERATING TECHNOLOGY: Piezoelectric 10-11 A2: DESIGN COMPUTATION PRECEDENTS: Brandscape BMW Pavilion and The Smithsonian Institution 14-17 A3: COMPOSITION AND GENERATION PRECEDENTS: Londan Aquatics Centre and Fondation Luis Vuitton 20-23 A4: CONCLUSION 24 A5: LEARNING OUTCOMES 25 A6: APPENDIX ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES 26-27 NOTES 28-29 REFERENCES- IMAGES 30
2
P A R T A C O N C E P T U L I S A T I O N
3
INTRODUCTION Additionally my high school years steered my interest to technical drawing and began to become familiar with terms and types of technical drawing. From this I explored design using CAD programs to design, houses, cars and furniture. Undertaking design subjects in high school allowed me to grasp a taste of the world of design. My time at university has been rewarding.
H
i I’m Nicolaos and I am third year Architecture student studying at the University of Melbourne. I have been passionate about architecture from a very young age and particularly have an interest for residential design. My appreciation for design was influenced by the environment I grew up in, as I have been exposed to various trades and hands on projects, particularly going to work with my father and see first-hand houses being constructed. Due to this I also value construction and am interested in how things work in terms of building. 4
To be honest I have found that the course has a different focus from what I pictured but none the less I have learnt some many valuable skills. My particularly favorite subjects are the technical and construction base subjects but do enjoy the design studios. Previously I have completed Studio earth, designing environments and virtual environments. I look forward to taking studio air and hope to explore the world of programs by learning Rhino and Grasshopper. Outside of my university life I hold interests in fitness, sport and anything to do with cars and motorbikes. In my spare time you will find me at the gym or outside photographing my car. And that is a little insight into my life.
PREVIOUS WORK
5
WWW
A.1. DESIGN
6
FUTURING
7
LAGI PRECEDENT EXAMPLE_ PIVOT T
he 2012 third place ‘PIVOT’ competition entry by Ben Smith and Vee Hu in my opinion responds the best to the site of the intended outcome and is the most visual and contextually suited proposal. The design is a canopy that is made up of a series of concatenated docks. The idea behind ‘pivot’ is to inhabit these docks in order to create a flow of human interaction on to the site and make a connection between the land and water1.
The material selection is well chosen so it has the least amount of environmental impact on the site. For example, translucent fabric and metal mesh has been utilized to maximize sunlight penetration to the water under the system in order that the sea grasses and other species that occupy the area can survive3. Such thought process should be considered for future designs as they incorporate beneficial factors to a site rather than impact on their quality.
What really appeals to me about ‘pivot’ is that the design has been constructed in a way that it can adapt to changing environmental conditions and still perform as is intended. As the canopy is made up of the floating docks, it is able to withstand changes in sea levels and easily adapt2. This also means that the installation of this design interacts with animal and plant species on the edge of the water and land, rather damage their habitat.
The way energy is generated by ‘pivot’ is by piezoelectric ceramic discs which are able to produce electricity by the force of rain and wind. The piezoelectric discs are made up of two types of fibers. This selection is lightweight, flexible making easy to integrate into the design; non-toxic, heat resistant and can reflex more than 95% of radiant heat that hits its surface. The energy generation system of this design generates 2,578MWh of electricity annually and is supplied to surrounding homes4.
What was also interesting about this notion of ‘pivot’ is that the designer have focused on the idea of movement and have been able to create a design that feels like it’s part of the landscape rather than being an object that has been fixed to the site separating its natural qualities such as land from water.
The important idea to note here is that this proposal considers future conditions and environmental changes and has been designed in a way that it is able to adapt for future circumstances so that it can be sustained for future use and is not reliant on resources to function.
The design of ‘pivot’ is very well planned as it is have a minimal mark on the site while still providing maximum output in terms of energy and a beneficial impact on the site.
8
Figure 1
Figure 2
9
ENERGY GENERATING TECHNOLOGY- P Piezoelectricity is generated by crystals that when pressure is applied to them a charge is conducted and therefore electricity is produced. The word Piezoelectric is derived from the Greek word piezo which means to press or apply pressure5. Piezoelectric crystals function by pressure, thus when they are compressed they create a generator charge which is the usual charge you find in batteries. Generally minerals such as quartz are common properties displayed in materials used to manufacture the crystals used to make piezoelectricity. Often the material is quite strong, has low cost and us chemically inactive making a beneficial material to use6. As this technology works by pressure I found it was interesting to see that forces such as wind and rain can be drivers to producing electricity by the means of piezoelectricity. As Figure 3
10
it is a new technology, it is still in it experimental stages and has mainly been seen to be utilized in design by having people interact with the piezoelectric crystals in a form of pressure applied through the action of walking or dancing. This is a great way to generate electricity that is not limited by one means of generation such as solar which can only generate electric through sun radiation. The advantageous aspect of pressure is that it can be achieved through many forms such as the force of wind, rain, sound and movement. Thus this form of energy generation can be incorporated in design, by making the most of space and materials that seem useless or wasted in terms of energy generation.
Figure 4
PIEZOELECTRICITY
Figure 5
11
A2: DESIGN C
12
COMPUTATION
13
PRECEDENTS: BRANDSCAPE BMW PAVILION Brandscape BMW Pavilion Designed in conjunction by Bernhard Franken and ABB Architekten, the BMW pavilion is a presentation of the BMW group return to Formula ONE which was designed for the 2000 Autoshow in Genva 7 . The design of this pavilion is a derivative of motion base design, which has to do with digital morphogenesis. The way the
The Pavilion is interesting in the sense that it is a complex design that is only made pos sible through the use of parametric modeling to create a process of which the fabrication can be made possible 9. The way this is made possible is by the extraction of isoparametric curves which help visualise the NURBS surfaces into two-dimensional members that form
Figure 6 and 7 form is generated is by motion dynamics. Motion dynamics are dynamic forces fields which are used to create changes in a form and their translation is a product of the actions between these forces 8.
14
the overall three-dimensional form of the pavilion. This process then allows for the model to be assemble out of smaller curved members that can be connected together to complete the whole structure.
Figure 8 These processes I will be utilising in my process of designing a form that can be fabricated without altering or impacting the integrity of it. The BMW Pavilion is a good example of how computational processes can be used to generate a form that is a derivative of form that has been transformed as a option of an original form. The impact this leaves on architecture is that geometrics and innovations that once were not possible are now viable and through computation, designs are able to be tested for performance in terms
of what will be the best methods of fabrication and selection of materials in order to ensure the best outcome of cost, time and structural reliability.
15
PRECEDENTS: THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION The Smithsonian Institution is a good example of computational design where the courtyard was redesigned by Foster and Partners. As the courtyard is the largest event space in Washington the courtyard needed an innovative renovation. The architects chose to pursue computational methods to generate a lattice-like structure that would form the new roof for the courtyard10. Computer generated design was the driving tool to creating the roof and making sure it is viable. The structure is comprised of three interconnected vaults that lead into one another through curved valleys made up of fins that house the glass cover. The program used to make the roof structure possible was written by Brady Peters. This software is an algorithmic basis was the driver for exploration of geometries11.
ideas which otherwise would be not be explored. Computational processes were also used to explore options of structural, acoustic and overall performance. The information collected by these explorations allowed for decisions to be made on processes that would be most effective in fabricating the structure and selecting the most efficient materials to do so12. The reliance on computational methodology to design and construct this structure I find to shows the benefits of using software to generate and make possible design outcomes that can be difficult to articulate. I will be focusing on using algorithmic processes to generate geometry and make sure that it can be fabricated using digitals means to ensure that the outcome can be achieved.
This process is an interesting method in which using parametric modeling to produce something that cannot fully be visualised or even documented by hand. This design is a great example of computational design and how it generates possibilities and allows the testing of those
Figure 9
16
Figure 10
17
A.3Design Computation
C O M P O S I T I O N / G E N E R A T I O N
18
Composition is the formation of elements which work together to create a whole. In architectural terms, this is the properties that define the overall purpose of the design. Conventionally composition was used as a design tool by which intentions could be expressed. Although it was not a rule or guide on how to design it acted in this manner. It was a way to organise design elements to achieve an intended theme by applying compositional conventions to a design, hence overall composition13. As architectural practice progress many expressive styles were followed and composition became a flexible means of following some sort of rules to follow a style and shift towards a unique design outcome. This began to show links to focus on the overall form as a whole, rather than a style of architecture and from this form and function became more important aspects of design.
a base for a range of possibilities for which the designer can choose from, whereas composition creates one possibility that defines the form. This means that compositional approaches allow a certain level of prediction and is less complex. But generation explores many options to find the most appropriate outcome to develop further. The benefits to digital generation is that it allows for extensive exploration of ideas and forms, which in turn means that since it is all done on computer, the designer is free to alter the design as many times as needed to produce the intended solution. Thus, generational approaches to design allowed for a more accurate testing of the design before it is construction which minimizes error and the potential for poor outcomes.
As architectural practice has progressed, design strategies have shifted towards generative design approaches rather than compositional. Generation has had a positive reaction in architectural practice and is becoming more and more profound. It has particularly caused the shift to digital- computation which has come about from past traditions and norms. The main reason it has become so favored amongst the architectural world is because it enables designers to generative forms that are difficult to conceptualise and document in innovative ways and minimize budget costs 14. Digitally-generated forms are not designed or drawn as the conventional understanding; they are premeditated by the selected generative computational method15. Generative processes can be founded on conceptions such as dynamic, parametric design and genetic algorithms. Thus, generation is the shift from the creation of form to the discovery of form. In comparison to composition, generation creates
19
PRECEDENTS: LONDON AQUATICS CENTRE BY ZHA A good example of generative design and parametric modeling is The London Aquatics Centre done by Zaha Hadid Architects. The concept of the building is inspired by the “fluid geometry of water in motion�16. The most complex element of the design is the constant surging roof. This without the aid of computational design would not be possible due to its complexity and surface topology. The reason computation has made this structure possible is it designs the elements needed to fabricate the roof to precise requirements and also allows the components to be organised in a manner that they can be assembled logically. This is one of the many benefits parametric design tools contribute to the design process 17. As complex and iconic as this building is, parametric design could be part to blame for the building failing to respond to the context of the site. Sure the design has satisfied structural reliability and performance based a criterion that
Figure 11
20
has been parametrically defined. However, the design has been heavily reliant and focused on parametric generation that the designers have forgotten to focus on site specifics and the consideration of discourse. Although computation and parametric softwares’ are very beneficial to the design process it is important to practice traditional methods in order to address aspects of the design that a computer cannot. Another issue that has been raised by this building is the obstruction of views from certain seating areas18. It is important to remember, although parametric generation has allowed the complex design to be structurally viable, there are always some issues that a piece of software cannot determine on its own unless it is programed in by a designer to do so.
Figure 12
A
Figure 13
21
PRECEDENTS: ‘FONDATION LOUIS VUITTON POUR Gehry Partners’design for the ‘Fondation Louis Vuitton pour la création’, which is an art museum located in Paris is by far an implanted aptitude to an innovative level. The project was generated and made possible through the creation of a design scripting tool. The tool was built by Gehry Technologies and was initially built on Subversion (SVN) which is an open source code program used for large software projects19. For this project parametric modelling was key in generating the design. The use of parametric tools from the start of the design process endorsed the exploration of geometry and performance of solutions. This would not have been possible if done using traditional methods, as traditional methods would not have the power to simulate the design. The use of the Gehry Technologies parametric tool was initially used to develop a best-fit panelled façade system made up of glass and concrete panels. The outcome was achieved using this tool to generate the correct fit to the complex form. Engineers and the GT team worked meticulously to create reusable models that could be stored in a serve to be able to explore and test the complex geometric issues
22
of the project and make any required alternations to the design20. From this fabrication and assembly are also tested. What was also an issue for this project was organisational complexity. Gehry Technologies also developed a tool that could manage all the information needed to construct the project without error. This was done using the SVN program which combined multilingual model based programs all into one common resource by which everyone working on the project could have access to. To extend from this Gehry Technologies created GTeam. This is the best cutting-edge multi-platform building information model (BIM) autopilot. The way it works is it combines data from a range of programs into a single tool that all can be accessed from. This includes information on accountability, social computing and workflow approval. From this navigation system the project was able to be virtually constructed and tested for structural, cost and feasibility performance before it was actually constructed21. Without the vast use of computation, projects like this example would simply be too difficult to develop and this would leave more room for potential error. Thus, generative design and parametric modelling will allow for prospective, complex buildings to be optimised.
LA CRÉATION’
Figure 14
Figure 15
23
C O NComputation C L U S I O Design A.4 Presently manifested to me is the innovation that parametric design brings to the design process. It allows designers to generate opportunities that would otherwise seem impossible to explore and develop. This is an approach to design that I hope to demonstrate during the design process and be able to explore new ways of generating form and ideas. I intend to utilise parametric modelling to generate a design that represents the benefits of sustainable design and show people how not doing so is degrading the potential of design. This will be done through a thorough analysis of the Refshaleøen, Copenhagen site. This will be the starting point into generating an appropriate form and also will help explore the prospective of energy generation sources. This design approach will be innovative as it will allow the exploration and analysis of the many various energy sources, from collecting data and manipulating the best possible source of energy generation. This will be a foundation into generating a form that integrates the importance of energy generation. The use of parametric design will allow the best possible outcome to be opted based on performance in terms of site response, cost, and energy
24
generating potential and how reliant it is on using resources to be maintained. The benefits this of this design approach are clear, in the sense that exploration and analysis will be easier to assess. The design process will run more efficiently and will have a higher production rate and will also minimise the potential for error. This means that costs will be minimised and construction and selection of materials will be appropriate to have least impact on the environment and be the best suited for the design to perform structurally and cost efficiently. This is a significant way to design as the architecture we create now needs to have the least possible impact on future generations and the environment. I hope to create a design that not only is friendly to the environment but also gives back to it, by producing energy and being able to use that for another purpose. Thus, it will allow us to move in the right direction for design in the future. In addition, these reasons for parametric design modelling is evident in the precedents I have studied and how parametric design has benefited the outcome of their design and how it has made the design process more productive and efficient to still produce the best possible solution to a design problem.
N
L E Computation A R N I N Design A.5 O U T C O M E Prior to Studio Air my understanding of the theory of architectural computing was slim. I viewed architectural computation as a way to design efficiently and model a design proposal. I was aware that it did allow to some extent exploration and analysis to be conducted. The terms generative design and parametric design were also poorly understood. These past few weeks have been essential in developing my understanding of computation. My knowledge of generative and parametric design was broadened and I have come to understand the significant benefits they contribute to the design process. I have come to see that a shift in architectural discourse is innovative and beneficial to producing the best solutions for design and making the design process easier to organise and progressed through. I am now mindful of the possibilities that computation permits and how without it, some structures that we see today would not be possible. From the precedents studied it is clear to me how algorithmic thinking and parametric design are profitable to developing complex designs. The technical component of this course has also developed my understanding of parametric and algorithmic design. The weekly video tutorial tasks have been a good example to how programmatic design can develop different outcomes
G S
quickly and how each can be tested and altered to achieve your intended outcome. Although I am still new to Grasshopper I am starting to get a feel for how certain components are used and how they can be used in conjunction with other components to alter an outcome or make the process more concise and understandable. This in turn, has sparked curiosity to explore the program and learn more about when and how to use components and what their effect is on an outcome. If I had the knowledge I have now about computation, in past studio subjects I would be able to explore and actually generate my ideas rather than be thinking of ways of how to document them. This would have been very beneficial as I would have more time to focus on other aspects of the design process and be able to refine the design outcome further within the time constraints. Also, this would benefit prototyping, particularly in the Virtual environments and be able to test fabrication techniques much earlier in the design process. Overall, I have learnt that computational design is highly beneficial. My learning has shifted my perspective of the architectural design process and I now draw focus on to the performance of a design not just its aesthetic and functional value.
25
A.6Design Computa
A P P E A L G O R I T H M
Figure A1
Figure A2
26
E N D I X M I C S K E T C H E S
ation
The weekly algorithmic tasks set by our tutors extend on the teachings of the video tutorials and are a good practical element to understanding how components and so forth work in grasshopper. By doing the algorithmic tasks I was able to familiarise myself with components and anything I did not fully understand in the video tutorials. This was done through a trial and error process. From this, I was able to explore the possibilities of parametric modelling and from this chose to explore additional videos to extend my knowledge of the program. The more I practiced using algorithms to design I began to appreciate just how complex some of the precedent buildings I have explored really are, and now understand that they are only possible using this method to design. The week three algorithmic task (figure A1 and A2) is an experiment using
the geodesic component to create a gridshell pattern through a selection of curves. This task was notable to my understanding of grasshopper and just how powerful algorithmic scripting can be in producing design. The algorithmic tasks have shown to be quite productive in terms of learning as with practice, grasshopper can be understood better. At times it is difficult to grasp the idea of how to connect various components but with more practice this should become easier. This being said the tasks have prompted me to hopefully be able to program a design outcome that is receptive of environmental conditions and to the site.
27
N 1 “2012 Third Place Mention Pivot,” Ben Smith, Vee Hu, Land Art Generator Initiative, last modified 2012, http:// landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/BV333332-3/ 2“2012 Third Place Mention Pivot,” Ben Smith, Vee Hu, Land Art Generator Initiative, last modified 2012, http:// landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/BV333332-3/ 3“2012 Third Place Mention Pivot,” Ben Smith, Vee Hu, Land Art Generator Initiative, last modified 2012, http:// landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/BV333332-3/ 4“2012 Third Place Mention Pivot,” Ben Smith, Vee Hu, Land Art Generator Initiative, last modified 2012, http:// landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/BV333332-3/ 5“Can house music solve the energy crisis?,” Maria Trimarchi, Discovery Communications, last modified 28 July 2011, http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/house-music-energy-crisis1.htm 6 Christopher Scholer et al., “A sustainable approach to clean energy generation in airport terminals,” Piezoelectric Harvesting, (2009): 4-8, http://emerald.ts.odu.edu/Apps/FAAUDCA.nsf/Second%20Place%20Environmental. pdf?OpenFileResource 7 “Accelerator,”franken-architekten, last modified 20 March 2014, http://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php? pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=6&param=cat&param2=123&param3=0& 8 Branko, Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), 19. 9 Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital, 43 10 “Smithsonian Institution Washington DC, USA, 2004-2007,” Fosters and Partners, last modified March 20 2014, http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/smithsonian-institution/ 11 “Brady Peters. Smithsonian Institution Washington DC, USA, 2004-2007 Foster + Partners,” Brady Peters, last modified 20 March 2014, http://www.bradypeters.com/smithsonian.html 12 Peters, Brady. “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought.” Architectural Design 83, no. 2 (2013): 13, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/doi/10.1002/ad.1545/pdf 13 Andrew Hutson, “The discipline of architectural composition: the elephant in the room,” CONNECTED 2010 (2010): 1-2, http://connected2010.eproceedings.com.au/papers/p319.pdf 14 Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital, 13. 15 Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital, 13. 16 “London Aquatics Centre,”Zaha Hadid Architects, viewed on 26 March 2014, http://www.zaha-hadid.com/ architecture/london-aquatics-centre/?doing_wp_cron 17 Designito, “Architectural Discourse, Digital Computation And Parametricism,” Designito The search continues, April 4, 2013, http://designito.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/architectural-discourse-digital-computation-andparametricism/ 18 Designito, “Architectural Discourse, Digital Computation And Parametricism,” Designito The search continues, April 4, 2013, http://designito.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/architectural-discourse-digital-computation-andparametricism/ 19 “Fondation Louis Vuitton,” Gehry Technologies, viewed on 26 March 2014, http://www.gehrytechnologies. com/services/projects/fondation-louis-vuitton 20 Nolte, Tobias, and Andrew Witt. “Gehry Partners’ Fondation Louis Vuitton: Crowdsourcing Embedded
28
O
T
E
S
:
Intelligence.” Architectural Design 84, no. 1 (2014): 86, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/ doi/10.1002/ad.1705/pdf 21 Nolte, Witt, “ Gehry,” :88
29
R E F E R E N C E S : Images: Figure 1-2,5 Pivot, 2012, computer generated, http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/BV333332-3/ (accessed on the 10th March, 2014) Figure 3 Kaist, Nanocomposite generator produces electricity, 2012, http://phys.org/news/201205-power-technology-based-piezoelectric-nanocomposite.html ( accessed on the 10th March, 2014) Figure 4 Scene-Sensor // Crossing Social and Ecological Flows, 2012, computer generated, http:// landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/AP347043/ (accessed on the 10th March, 2014) Figure 6,7,8 artist n/a, Bubbles, 1999, photograph/computer generated, http://www.frankenarchitekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=6&param=cat&pa ram2=21&param3=0& (accessed on the 17th March, 2014) Figure 9,10 Foster+Partners, Smithsonian Institution, 2004-2007, http://www.fosterandpartners. com/projects/smithsonian-institution/ (accessed on the 17th March, 2014) Figure 11,12,13 Zaha Hadid Architects, Architecture London Aquatics Centre, 2005-2011 http://www. zaha-hadid.com/architecture/london-aquatics-centre/?doing_wp_cron (accessed on the 24th March, 2014) Figure 14,15 Frank Gehry, Fondation Louis Vuitton, http://www.fondationlouisvuitton.fr/ledifice. html#.UzQwCfmSxv0 (accessed on the 24th March, 2014)
30