Guggenheim print

Guggenheim helsinki OSKAR NORDSTRÖM DEGREE PROJECT IN ARCHITECTURE 2014

1

2

THANK YOU! John Ross, for superb tutoring.

Tomas T채gil, for great advice and comments.

3

GUGGENHEIM HELSINKI Degree project in architecture

By Oskar Nordström Lund School of Architecture, LTH Spring 2014 Examiner: Tomas Tägil Tutor: John Ross

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract 6 Introduction 8 1. Background 1.1 Guggenheim Foundation 10 1.2 Competition Site 12 1.3 Site climate data 20 2. Work process

2.1 General Principles of Airflow 23 2.2 Museum typologies 26 2.3 Building program 32 2.4 Atrium shape studies 36 3. Final project 3.1 Project description 42 3.2 Site concept 44 3.3 Drawings 58 Conclusion 75 References 76

5

ABSTRACT

This project is a proposal for a new Guggenheim Museum in the South Harbour of Helsinki. The site and general brief is based on the upcoming open competition of a Guggenheim Helsinki museum organised by the Guggenheim Foundation together with the city of Helsinki during the spring of 2014.

The thesis project was generated on two main topics.

- The idea of entering a large scale competition for a public building.

- Investigating how analytical software tools may influence the choices made in the early sketch process. Involving building site strategy aswell as interior space geometries.

The main conclusion of the project was, that involving a mainly analytical sketch method, the sketching easily becomes a bit unwieldy and cumbersome. But at the same time the input from the analytical side can help make valuable design decisions early in the sketch process.

6

7

INTRODUCTION

This thesis project began with the idea of entering an open competition. Before starting my thesis some months were spent browsing different media for a suitable competition with an interesting program and a feasible entry-fee. I was looking for a rather large program for a public building.

THESIS TOPIC

During the spring of 2014 a competition for a new Guggenheim museum in Helsinki was supposed to be launched, something that would would suit my time frame perfectly. However the competition launch was delayed so this thesis project builds on the preliminary competition program made public at the start of 2014.

THESIS PERSONAL GOAL

• Investigate in what ways analytical software tools may influence the sketching in the early project process

• Enter a large scale public architecture competition • Designing a complete project from urban scale down to the character of interior spaces at the level of a concept design suitable for a competition entry • Expand my “toolbox“ by getting familiar with interdisciplinary software tools concerning light and microclimate.

8

9

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 GUGGENHEIM FOUNDATION The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation is a nonprofit organization founded in 1937 by philanthropist Solomon R. Guggenheim and his long-time art advisor, artist Hilla von Rebay. The foundation is a leading institution for the collection, preservation, and research of modern and contemporary art and operates several museums around the world. The first museum established by the foundation was The Museum of Non-Objective Painting, in New York City. This became The Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in 1952, and the foundation moved the collection into its first permanent museum building, in New York City, in 1959. The foundation next opened the Peggy Guggenheim Collection in Venice, Italy, in 1980. Its international network of museums expanded in 1997 to include the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao in Bilbao, Spain, and it expects to open a new museum, Guggenheim Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates in 2017.

NEW YORK, US

VENICE, ITALY

BILBAO, SPAIN

ABU DHABI, UAE

10

1.1

GUGGENHEIM HELSINKI SOLOMON R. GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM - NEW YORK

GUGGENHEIM BILBAO PEGGY GUGGENHEIM COLLECTION VENICE

GUGGENHEIM ABU DHABI

11

1.2 HELSINKI SOUTH HARBOR / COMPETITION SITE

HELSINKI

HELSINKI, FINLAND

HELSINKI SOUTH HARBOUR

GUGGENHEIM PLOT

12

1.2 HELSINKI SOUTH HARBOUR

Helsinki South Harbour includes a history of several hundred years. Many of the cities urban core locations is situated in the area. Valuable and well-functioning urban elements Combining the new solutions is a key goal South Harbour development.

The South Harbour has functioned since the end of the 17th century as a port and quay area neighbouring the city centre. The city growth and the development of the city centre structure as well as market functions and boat traffic have moulded the formation of the port, the surrounding blocks as well as the shoreline and public space. The determined construction work of the South Harbour to an urban port and trade place started, when the period of Swedish rule that had started in the 13th century ended in Finland in 1809 and Finland was joined to Russia. The Emperor declared Helsinki as the capital of the Grand Principality of Finland in 1812. The town plan (1812-17), based on classicistic composition principles, was prepared by Johan Albrecht EhrenstrĂśm for Helsinki.

Slowly, in the 19th century, the modest village-like city that was destroyed by the war and the 1808 fire turned into an architecturally representative and busily functioning city.

The shed and storage buildings occupying the shore areas as well as the fishers’ wooden piers reaching to the sea were demolished. The naturally winding shoreline was filled up and straightened into representative promenades, where ships were able to berth. The promenades widened at the bottom of the South Harbour Bay into public markets and squares opening to the sea that had space for unloading and loading ships, storing goods as well as for trading. This is how the western shore market, Market Square and at its east end the Imperial Palace Square and their port basins were created. The wealthy bourgeoisie of the city constructed their classicistic houses on the northern edge of the market.

It was also the location of the Imperial Palace, the current Presidential Palace, and garrison as well as Seurahuone, the current City Hall. In 1889, the Market Hall was opened on the western shore.5

5 - Constructed Cultural Environment - City planning Department Helsinki - 2012

13

1.2 HELSINKI SOUTH HARBOUR

South Harbor Marketplace around 19006

East pier - 1900

6 - Helsinki 200 책r som huvudstad - http://www.helsinki200.fi/sv - (2014-05-12)

14

1.2 HELSINKI SOUTH HARBOUR

Ferry ‘Arcturus’ at the west pier - 1900

View of the islands from observatory hill - 1900

6 - Helsinki 200 år som huvudstad - http://www.helsinki200.fi/sv - (2014-05-12)

15

1.2 WESTERN SHORE

WESTERN SHORE

2. MARKET HALL

5. OLYMPIA TERMINAL BUILDING

The western shore area gained its current form gradually in the 1890s. The area was developed to ensure the future of trade, industry and traffic as well as that of the Port of Helsinki and hence the future of the entire business life of the city. Therefore, more berth space suited for deep draught ships was built and the South Harbour was united to the railway network of Finland. The western shore buildings on Eteläranta Street are residential buildings that were mainly constructed at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries.

The basilica-like Market Hall is the oldest in Finland. As a building type, it follows the model of market and passenger halls, exhibition buildings and glasshouses that were also built elsewhere in Europe in the late 19th century. Its façades follow the Dutch Brick Renaissance style.

The Olympic terminal was built for the Helsinki Olympic Games in 1952. Today there is a regular connection to Stockholm and Tallinn, and it works Silja Line ‘s terminal for Finland. Over 1.5 million passengers travel through the Olympia Terminal annually.

Here huge passenger ships bring their own level of landscape structure, taking place at six in the evening and leaving it again in the morning. 1

1. MARKET SQUARE The Market Square is one of the important squares that were formed after the Emperor had declared Helsinki as the capital in 1812. It is part of Helsinki’s marine façade and one of the city’s most famous sights.

3. TÄHTITORNIN VUORI HILL The Tähtitornin vuori Hill with its observatory and park is an important part of the marine Helsinki. The dominating position of this highest point in the Helsinki City Cape (32 m above sea level) has always dictated its significance as part of the surroundings. Beside the purpose in the landscape structure as a viewpoint of the sea and surroundings, it serves as a important area of recreation.

The Market Square with its port basins and piers were formed in the 1810s. Market trading started in the Market Square in 1818.

1 - South Harbor Waterfront Areas - City of Helsinki - 2008

16

1.2

1

2

#1 MARKET SQUARE

#2 OLD MARKET HALL

4

#MAKASIINI TERMINALI

3 4 TÄHTITORNIN VUORI HILL

1 - South Harbor Waterfront Areas - City of Helsinki - 2008

5

OLYMPIA TERMINAL

17

1.2 COMPETITION SITE

COMPETITION SITE

1 - South Harbor Waterfront Areas - City of Helsinki - 2008

18

1.2 COMPETITION SITE

1 - South Harbor Waterfront Areas - City of Helsinki - 2008

19

1.3 SOUTH HARBOR WIND CONDITIONS WIND DATA // JANUARY - JUNE JANUARY

WIND ROSE PLOT:

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

FEBRUARY

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

January - Kaisaniemi

DISPLAY:



COMMENTS:





DATA PERIOD:

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 1/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 1/31/2005 - 23:00

 

TOTAL COUNT:

CALM WINDS:

744 hrs.

1,08%

 

3,62 m/s



2/14/2014

>= 11,1



COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATE:

2/15/2014

>= 11,1 8,8 - 11,1

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

3,6 - 5,7

3,6 - 5,7

3,6 - 5,7

WIND ROSE PLOT:

DISPLAY:

2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1

Resultant Vector 212 deg - 25%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

January - Kaisaniemi Calms: 1,04%



Resultant Vector

PROJECT NO.:

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

January - Kaisaniemi





MAY

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

June



CALM WINDS:

720 hrs.

0,28%



DATA PERIOD: DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 5/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 5/31/2005 - 23:00

 

4,61 m/s

TOTAL COUNT:

CALM WINDS:

744 hrs.

0,54%



Start Date: 6/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 6/30/2005 - 23:00







AVG. WIND SPEED:

4,62 m/s



COMPANY NAME:



COMMENTS:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

DATA PERIOD:



AVG. WIND SPEED:



DISPLAY:



 Start Date: 4/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 4/30/2005 - 23:00 TOTAL COUNT:

COMMENTS:

PROJECT NO.:



DATA PERIOD:



JUNE

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)





2/15/2014

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software





DATE:

2,1 - 3,6

0,5 - 2,1 Wind Speed Calms: 0,13% Direction (blowing from)



197 deg - 25%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

APRIL

0,13%



8,8 - 11,1

PROJECT NO.:

CALM WINDS:

744 hrs.

5,69 m/s

MODELER:

WIND SPEED (m/s)

TOTAL COUNT:

AVG. WIND SPEED:



DATE:

0,5 - 2,1

WIND ROSE PLOT:



COMPANY NAME:

2,1 - 3,6

January - Kaisaniemi

1,04%

8,8 - 11,1

Calms: 1,08%



672 hrs.

Start Date: 3/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 3/31/2005 - 23:00





MODELER:

222 deg - 32%

CALM WINDS:

3,64 m/s



>= 11,1

TOTAL COUNT:



AVG. WIND SPEED:

COMPANY NAME:



WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 2/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 2/28/2005 - 23:00



AVG. WIND SPEED:



COMMENTS:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)







DISPLAY:

January - Kaisaniemi





Resultant Vector

MARCH

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

January - Kaisaniemi





0,56%

>= 11,1

Resultant Vector 205 deg - 22%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software



WIND SPEED (m/s)



2/15/2014

>= 11,1

WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATE:



2/15/2014

>= 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

3,6 - 5,7

3,6 - 5,7

2,1 - 3,6

2,1 - 3,6

0,5 - 2,1

0,5 - 2,1

Calms: 0,28%

PROJECT NO.:

Resultant Vector 208 deg - 21%

Calms: 0,54%



MODELER:

3,62 m/s

DATE:

COMPANY NAME:

2/15/2014

3,6 - 5,7 2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1 PROJECT NO.:

Resultant Vector 227 deg - 17%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

744 hrs.

AVG. WIND SPEED:

MODELER:

DATE:

TOTAL COUNT:



 

WIND SPEED (m/s)

Start Date: 1/1/2 End Date: 1/31/2

4,62 m/s COMPANY NAME:



MODELER:

CALM WINDS:

720 hrs.

AVG. WIND SPEED:



COMPANY NAME:



TOTAL COUNT:



Calms: 0,56%

PROJECT NO.:

MODELER:

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

WIND SPEED (m/s) >= 11,1

DATE:

2/14/2014

8,8 - 11,1

// Wind data: Kaisaniemi weather station - 1km north-west of Guggenheim Site

5,7 - 8,8 3,6 - 5,7 2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1

Resultant Vector 222 deg - 32%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software



Calms: 1,08%

PROJECT NO.:

20

1.3 SOUTH HARBOR WIND CONDITIONS WIND DATA // JULY - DECEMBER JULY

WIND ROSE PLOT:

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

AUGUST

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

June

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:







DATA PERIOD:

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 7/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 7/31/2005 - 23:00



TOTAL COUNT:

CALM WINDS:

744 hrs.

0,54%

 

4,14 m/s





2/15/2014

>= 11,1



COMPANY NAME:

MODELER:

WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATE:

2/15/2014

>= 11,1 8,8 - 11,1

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

3,6 - 5,7

WIND ROSE PLOT:

270 deg - 5%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

January - Kaisaniemi Calms: 0,40%



Resultant Vector

PROJECT NO.:

DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

June



 DISPLAY:

COMMENTS:

June





 

DATA PERIOD:

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 10/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 10/31/2005 - 23:00

Start Date: 11/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 11/30/2005 - 23:00

TOTAL COUNT:

CALM WINDS:

744 hrs.

2,02%

  

AVG. WIND SPEED:

3,13 m/s



COMMENTS:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)



DATA PERIOD: DATA PERIOD:

TOTAL COUNT:

CALM WINDS:

720 hrs.

0,14%



Start Date: 12/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 12/31/2005 - 23:00







AVG. WIND SPEED:

5,70 m/s



COMPANY NAME:



DISPLAY:







DECEMBER

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)





COMMENTS:

PROJECT NO.:

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

NOVEMBER

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

2/15/2014

2,1 - 3,6

0,5 - 2,1 Wind Speed Calms: 2,08% Direction (blowing from)



188 deg - 21%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

OCTOBER

DATE:

3,6 - 5,7

DISPLAY:

2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1

Resultant Vector

PROJECT NO.:

2,08%



8,8 - 11,1

0,5 - 2,1

CALM WINDS:

720 hrs.

3,13 m/s

MODELER:

WIND SPEED (m/s)

TOTAL COUNT:

AVG. WIND SPEED:



DATE:

2,1 - 3,6

June



COMPANY NAME:

3,6 - 5,7

WIND ROSE PLOT:

0,40%

8,8 - 11,1

Calms: 0,54%



744 hrs.

Start Date: 9/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 9/30/2005 - 23:00





MODELER:

109 deg - 19%

CALM WINDS:

4,67 m/s



>= 11,1

TOTAL COUNT:



AVG. WIND SPEED:

COMPANY NAME:



WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATA PERIOD:

Start Date: 8/1/2005 - 00:00 End Date: 8/31/2005 - 23:00



AVG. WIND SPEED:



COMMENTS:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)







DISPLAY:

June





Resultant Vector

SEPTEMBER

WIND ROSE PLOT:

Wind Speed Direction (blowing from)

June





744 hrs.

0,00%

>= 11,1

Resultant Vector 220 deg - 25%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software



WIND SPEED (m/s)



2/15/2014

>= 11,1

WIND SPEED (m/s)

DATE:



2/15/2014

>= 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

8,8 - 11,1

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

5,7 - 8,8

3,6 - 5,7

3,6 - 5,7

2,1 - 3,6

2,1 - 3,6

0,5 - 2,1

0,5 - 2,1

Calms: 2,02%

PROJECT NO.:

Resultant Vector 252 deg - 22%

Calms: 0,14%



MODELER:

3,62 m/s

DATE:

COMPANY NAME:

2/15/2014

3,6 - 5,7 2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1 PROJECT NO.:

Resultant Vector 219 deg - 26%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

744 hrs.

AVG. WIND SPEED:

MODELER:

DATE:

TOTAL COUNT:



 

WIND SPEED (m/s)

Start Date: 1/1/2 End Date: 1/31/2

6,24 m/s COMPANY NAME:



MODELER:

CALM WINDS:

AVG. WIND SPEED:



COMPANY NAME:



TOTAL COUNT:



Calms: 0,00%

PROJECT NO.:

MODELER:

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software

WIND SPEED (m/s) >= 11,1

DATE:

2/14/2014

8,8 - 11,1

// Wind data: Kaisaniemi weather station - 1km north-west of Guggenheim Site

5,7 - 8,8 3,6 - 5,7 2,1 - 3,6 0,5 - 2,1

Resultant Vector 222 deg - 32%

WRPLOT View - Lakes Environmental Software



Calms: 1,08%

PROJECT NO.:

21

2. WORK PROCESS

Realising that the vast open site of the of the museum could in fact be rather windy an investigation of design guidelines related to wind and microclimate aswell as possible wind analysis software were studied.

The intention was initially to have a workflow through out the thesis project of sketching and in parallel study its implication on windflow on the site.

Using Ecotect Analysis 2011 a few conceptual wind studies were made in order to test how building geometry could affect wind phenomena such as turbulence and speed.

However, the studies were not able to give a result detailed enough in order to compare slight variations between sketches, but gave a basic understanding of windflow. A series of rough studies in Ecotect informed the choice of direction when it came to building geometry.

22

2.1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF WINDFLOW

Wind is normally described by its speed, as a mean value or gust speed. However you can easily sense the effect of the wind force, which is what you can feel, see and hear during windy conditions.

The wind force is proportional to the wind speed squared, which means a relatively small increase in wind speed can have a significant effect on pedestrian comfort.

All buildings obstruct the free flow of wind, causing it to be deflected and accelerated, which results in various rather complex flow patterns.

When wind hits the face of a building it produces positive pressures that reach a maximum value at a point around 2/3 of the building height. Below this height the wind will tend to deflect downward to the ground, and accelerated around the corners at ground level creating turbulence. Above this height the wind will deflect upward and accelerate over the roof, again causing increased windspeed and turbulence.2

TERRAIN The type of terrain influences the local wind speed greatly. Wind blowing over smooth terrain, open plains or water, will get an evenbut high mean speed at pedestrian level with little turbulence.

2 - Blackmore, Paul - Digest DG 520 - Wind microclimate around buildings - May 2011, 3 - Digest 350 - Climate and site development - Part 2: Influence of microclimate - March 1990

Wind blowing over rougher terrain, such as towns and cities the mean wind speed will be reduced due to frictional drag at the surface.3

FUNNELLING Wind funnelling and acceleration of windflow can occur where there are gaps between buildings. The effect is stronger where the axes of the buildings make an angle of 90 degrees or less.

BUILDING HEIGHT Wind speed increases with height above the ground, which means the taller the building the higher the windspeeds acting on it.

This does not mean however that all tall buildings cause wind problems. What is important is the relative height of the building compared to the neighbouring context. A tall building in a group of buildings might not cause problems wheras a lower one may cause unacceptable conditions if it is situatued in an open area.

PASSAGEWAYS When wind strikes a building it generates positive pressures on the windward face and suctions on the side roof and leeward faces. The wind will flow in the direction of decreasing pressure gradient, which means from areas of high pressure to areas of lower pressure. Where passageways or tunnels pass beneath a building at ground level, or whete the building is raised on columns this will frequently be a source of wind problems due to the direct path from possitive pressure on the windward side, to the low-pressure area on the leeward side.2

ENTRANCES The entrances of buildings can be particularly wind-sensitive areas. Even a light breeze far exceed the air speed within the building, so when people move from warm conditioned internal environments the external environment, the wind conditions can be perceived to be much worse than they actually are. If windy conditions at the site are anticipated at the design stage, then the entrances should ideally be positioned at less windy locations around the building, and preferrably away from corners.

BUILDING SHAPE Whether a building is isolated or in a group, it should present the least resistance to tha passage of the wind over and around it.

For normal buildings, this implies a shape as near as possible to a pyramid. Cubical and slab shapes will be the least satisfactory, since these are more likely to generate undesirable wind effects such as turbulence and high wind speeds at the corners of the building at or near ground level.

23

2.1 NOTE Conceptual shape study by simulation of a windtunnel measuring wind speeds with Ecotect and WinAir4. Wind hitting building onto the corner.

OBSERVATION The more resistance the building creates, the more turbulance will occur. Building corners seem to create more turbulence in the wake compared to a smoother shape that provides less resistance to the wind.

[wind speed] LOW

HIGH

24

2.1 NOTE Conceptual shape study by simulation of a windtunnel measuring wind speeds with Ecotect and WinAir4. Wind hitting building on flat side.

OBSERVATION Building corners seem to result in higher wind speeds while a smoother shape provide less resistance to the wind and calmer wind speeds.

[wind speed] LOW

HIGH

25

2.2 MUSEUM TYPOLOGIES

In order to understand how a museum could be organised a study was made to categorize different museum typolgies in regard to circulation. A variation of museums were compared, some visited in the past, some visited during the thesis and some from litterature.

One of the comparisons were made by listing the major pros and cons of the different museums in order to find a possible hybrid organisation for Guggenheim Helsinki by combining some of the known examples.

26

2.2 MUSEUM TYPOLOGIES

OPEN PLAN

MATRIX

SINGLE SEQUENCE

# Minimizes the control the layout places # Maximum amount of flexibility on the visitor # One space, no surprise, see all at once # Impossible to visit in an orderly sequence # All artwork compete for visitor attention # Lack of visual references may result in a a maze-like experience.

CORE SPACE

# Comes from the character of palace architecture. Connected rooms on axis.

# Typically surrounded around a central atrium.

# Imposes strong rules in the pattern of movement, no option of changing the course.

# The visiting circulation of each exhibition hall starts from atrium

CONTINOUS CIRCULATION

# Single sequence in several levels. # Blends horisontal and vertical movement

!

# Certain directivity for visitors. # Visitor will have to move back through the same spaces, intersecting the path.

!

# Works best to combine with exhibition theme and a chronological

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

National Gallery, Sainsbury Wind, London

New National Gallery, Berlin

Mercedes Benz Museum Neue Staatsgallerie Stuttgart Le Louvre Guggenheim New York “Museum of unlimited growth�

Museum of Modern Art, San Fransisco Guggenheim Bilbao

Mercedes Benz Museum Guggenheim New York Leeum - Samsung Museum of Art, Seoul.

!

? ?

? ?

?

27

2.2 MUSEUM TYPOLOGY STUDY

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New york

Unorganized circulation can make the visit feel chaotic and exhausting for visitors

Le Louvre, Paris

Dead end exhibition spaces creates a bad visitor experience.

Neue Staatsgaleri, Stuttgart

Sainsbury Wing, National Gallery, London

New National Gallery, Berlin

Dead end exhibition spaces creates a bad visitor experience.

Matrix organisation. Lack of visual references creates a maze-like experience. Visitor will have to move back through the same spaces, intersecting the path.

Open plan, gives complete freedom of movement and flexibility to the exhibition.

Similar sized rooms on axis results in a monotone spacial experience, with no surprises.

Gives the visitor the freedom to choose which path to take and which gallery to enter.

One space, no surprise, see all at once. All artwork compete for visitor attention.

?

?

Great variaty of gallery dimensions contribute to a greater exhibition experience.

Linear exhibition circulation guarantees the visitor a glimpse of every room

!

? ?

? ?

?

28

2.2 MUSEUM TYPOLOGY STUDY

Jewish Museum, Berlin

Guggenheim Bilbao

Guggenheim New York

Louisiana, Humlebeck

Linear exhibition guarantees the visitor a glimpse of every room.

The central space scheme requires the visitor to always take the same path back to the starting point.

Spatially the paths have dead ends.

The Guggenheim New York ramp handles the issue of vertical circulation effectively, creating a one-story museum. Horisontal and vertical movement blends together.

Possible loop circulation takes the visitor back to the starting point without having to retrace the steps and go through the same spaces once again.

Closed ramp and change of exhibition limits the circulation and overall impression of the building greatly

Transitional spaces divide the galleries. This also help to control the length of a visit, which can ease tiredness.

?

? ?

?

! ?

Visitors have no option of changing course. Long paths without any breaks may result in tiredness.

Separate and individual gallery spaces. Galleries can be closed without a great impact on the overall visitor experience.

29

? ?

2.2 ?

CONCLUSIONS ?

!

?

?

?

?

?

! ?

INDIVIDUAL GALLERIES

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT Complete freedom of movement and flexibility to the exhibition. Visitors does not have to walk through the whole museum to get the exhibition of interest.

Separate and individual gallery spaces. Galleries can be closed without a great impact on the overall visitor experience.

!

? ?

?

FREE MOVEMENT WITH SEPARATE GALLERIES A combination system of individual galleries and freedom of movement guarantees the visitor to not miss out on the full experience when one part is closed. At the same time each gallery can be a fully controlled and versatile space, each with separate entrances.

?

?

30

2.2 CONCLUSIONS

?

? ?

?

!

!

?

LOOP Possible loop circulation takes the visitor back to the starting point without having to retrace the steps and go through the same spaces once again.

CORE SPACE The central space is however a great point of reference in the museum where local and global movements meet. However the central space scheme usually requires the visitor retrace their steps back to the starting point. Spatially the paths have dead ends.

CENTRAL LOOP CIRCULATION A combination of sequence and the core space system creates a loop system which guarantees the visitor a full museum experience through all the exhibition spaces but still with freedom in which path to take. The central space will act as a point of reference for the visitor.

31

2.3 BUILDING PROGRAM

Since the competition launch was delayed I based the building program on the preliminary program released early 2014. The preliminary program gave the site area aswell as a rough building size of 12.000 m2 where a minimum of 4000 m2 should be dedicated to galleries.

The Guggenheim Foundation together with the City of Helsinki also requested the building to be a public institution and meeting place with a big focus on learning and creative areas.

The site was requested to become better connected to the city preferrably with space for exhibiting outdoor art and recreation areas.

With regard to the previous museum typolgy study the initial idea was one of a a core space, some sort of admission free zone that would act as a public forum for the citizens of Helsinki.

This resulted in a couple of diagramatic sketches.

32

2.3

PRELIMINARY GUGGENHEIM HELSINKI PROGRAM

OTHER - 8000 M2

GALLERIES 4000 M2

EXTENDED PROGRAM

GALLERIES 4000 M2

COMPLEMENTARY FUNCTIONS

RESEARCH/ ADMIN

EDUCATION & CREATIVE

STORAGE /MEP

PUBLIC SPACE

SCULPTURE PARK

RETAIL 100 M2

OFFICE 800 M2

LEARNING 1000 M2

DELIVERY 800 M2

PUBLIC AREA 2000 M2

PUBLIC AREA 3000 M2

LIBRARY 1000 M2

MECHANICAL 1000 M2

CAFÉ 200 M2 RESTAURANT 200 M2

STORAGE 800 M2

33

2.3 EARLY PROGRAMATIC SKETCHES

PUBLIC FORUM

CENTRAL PUBLIC FORUM Program defines central public forum

PUBLIC FORUM

ADMISSION FREE - PUBLIC GROUND FLOOR 1. Building remains open to the city 2. Extension of the surrounding sculpture park 3. Possible “event space”

34

2.3 EARLY PROGRAMATIC SKETCHES

GALLERIES GALLERIES

GALLERIES

GALLERIES

GALLERIES FORUM

GALLERIES AROUND ATRIUM 1. Galleries steps up in a spiral motion 2. Around the central atrium above the forum

FORUM

GALLERIES AROUND ATRIUM 1. Glimpses into other galleries 2. Different perspectives of the art

FORUM

LIGHT FROM ABOVE 1. Diffuse natural light reflected into galleries

35

2.4 ATRIUM SHAPE STUDIES

Having the idea of a core space around which galleries and circulation would be arranged a few studies related to light conditions and geometry were studied.

Using a parametric approach with the use of Rhinoceros, Grasshopper, DIVA and Galapagos a few parametric atrium sketch models were created in Grasshopper. The atrium models were given different degrees of freedom, such as tilt, rotation, and scale, allowing the atrium to take a number of different forms.

Using the plug-in called Galapagos a huge number of iterations can be produced, all with a different rotation or scale. These iterations were analysed through DIVA for light levels, in order to find a well performing geometry in regard to light.

36

2.4 study I - GENERAL ATRIUM SHAPE STUDY NOTE

Preliminary study with Grasshopper, Galapagos, and DIVA. Atrium consists of section curves which is allowed to be scaled in X/Y direction, aswell as rotated.

With these parameters Galapagos is set to find the highest total light level of the surfaces.

[KWH]

Square - shear

Square - rotation

TRIANGLE - SHEAR

TRIANGLE -ROTATION

LOW

HIGH

37

2.4 GROUND FLOOR LIGHTING CONDITIONS

NOTE Preliminary study with Grasshopper, Galapagos, and DIVA. Atrium consists of section curves which is allowed to be moved in X/Y direction. With these parameters Galapagos is set to find the highest total light level of the surfaces.

FLOOR TOTAL: 7824 kwh

FLOOR TOTAL: 7691 kwh

FLOOR TOTAL: 7628 kwh

FLOOR TOTAL: 14023 kwh

FLOOR TOTAL: 13523 kwh

FLOOR TOTAL: 14570 kwh

CONCLUSION An atrium that shears towards the south increases the solar irradiation levels at the ground floor by a factor of 2.

[KWH] LOW

HIGH

38

2.4 ATRIUM SURFACE LIGHT LEVELS

TOTAL: 38550 kwh

NOTE Preliminary study with Grasshopper, Galapagos, and DIVA. Atrium consists of section curves which is allowed to be scaled in X/Y direction, aswell as rotated. With these parameters Galapagos is set to find the highest total light level of the surfaces.

TOTAL: 38593 kwh

TOTAL: 34194 kwh

CONCLUSION An atrium torsion generally decreased the combined maximum light amount hitting the walls.

However, a torsion creates a much more even distribution of light hitting the different surfaces. With the block-shape, one surface in particular gets all the light, resulting in a less dynamic and interesting space.

The atrium torsion could also enhance the spiral sequence of ramps and galleries around the building center.

TOTAL: 29250 kwh

TOTAL: 31529 kwh

TOTAL: 27645 kwh [KWH] LOW

HIGH

39

2.4 ATRIUM TORSION SKETCH VISUAL

40

2.4 ATRIUM TORSION SKETCH VISUAL

41

3. FINAL PROJECT 3.1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This concept proposal for a new Guggenheim Helsinki aims to create not just a museum but a public area for all of Helsinki.

Introducing a new topography the museum park bridges the observatory hill and waterfront area, making the pier accessible to the public. Below the landscape the museum service functions are placed, enabling the above museum to be open in all directions.

The museum itself is lifted above the new topography. In between the two, an admission free public forum is created, housing waterfront cafĂŠ, bookshop and open exhibits for the City of Helsinki.

42

43

01 EXISTING CONDITION 3.2 SITE CONCEPT

01 EXISTING CONDITION The site is currently a restricted terminal area and not accessible due to the difference in height between the pier and the adjacent road Skeppsbrogatan. The terminal is moved to another location in order to fully connect the site with the city.

44

02 MUSEUM MASS ON SITE 3.2

02 MUSEUM ON SITE Massing of the Guggenheim Helsinki Museum at 12.000 m2 on the site.

45

03 NEW TOPOGRAPHY 3.2

03 NEW TOPOGRAPHY A new topography bridges the old terminal area connecting the park and waterfront.

The site becomes fully accessible and connected to the city.

46

04 LIFT 3.2

04 LIFTED MASSING The museum is lifted above the landscape enabling freedom of movement in order to not risk becoming a new barrier by the waterfront. The ground floor becomes an admission free public zone for the city.

47

04 PROGRAM 3.2

05 PROGRAM Service and loading goes below the landscape in order to make the building accessible from all directions.

The museum exhibition zone rests on a new structural table top in form of the learning and administration floor.

48

05 EXTEND THE PARK 3.2

06 EXTEND THE PARK The park is extended towards the waterfront. Green areas together with art plazas activates the site.

Trees and foliage increases the surface texture and reduces wind speeds.

49

07 RESPECTING VIEWS 3.2

07 RESPECTING VIEWS Respecting views from the adjacent park and streets. The volume is cut and aligned with the shortest side towards the park and road to minimize its impact on views and possible pedestrian movement.

50

08 INVITING 3.2

08 INVITING ENTRY PLAZAS A twist of the three short sides creates dynamic and inviting entrances with sheltered outdoor plazas.

The resulting shape improves wind conditions by avoiding a flat slab facade which could increase windspeeds and wind downwash.

51

09 CITY DIALOGUE 3.2

09 CITY DIALOGUE Large city windows creates a dialogue with the city, exhibiting monumental art and gives passers by a sneak-peak into the museum interior. In the same time these windows acts from the inside as a dramatic city backdrop for the art to be displayed against aswell as an interesting view for the auditorium.

52

10 ATRIUM 3.2

10 CENTRAL ATRIUM A central atrium acts as the heart of the building. This is where the museum main circulation is located. Where global movements meet the local ones. This atrium also gives a great freedom of displaying monumental work hung from above.

53

11 BLANK CANVAS 3.2

11 FACADE AS A BLANK CANVAS The white facade acts as a blank canvas, where different art projections and installations could be showcased for the city.

54

12 NIGHT 3.2

12 BY NIGHT A GLOWING LANTERN By night the semi-transparent facade lights up like a big lantern in the harbour exposing some of the art inside. A glowing light-house in the Harbour of Helsinki, welcoming tourists and ferry trafffic.

55

56

57

3.3 DRAWINGS SITE PLAN 1:1000

GREEN

PAVILLION GREEN

GREEN

RETAIL

ART PLAZA

INFO/ TICKET

+3.5 ENTRY ENTRY

+6

PUBLIC FORUM INFO

WATERFRONT CAFÉ

RESTAURANT LIFT

ART LIFT

EVENT SPACE CITY EXHIBIT

GREEN

ENTRY

+6

PLAZA FOUNTAIN

GREEN

PARKING

LOADING ENTRY

+6

+1.0

LOADING ENTRY PARKING

TERMINAL AREA

58

3.3 BASEMENT PLAN 1:1000

Loading goes below the landscape from the terminal area and does therefore not interfere with the pedestrian zone, leaving the building above completely accessible from all directions. Cloakroom and toilets are accessible from the lower lobby located at the center of the level. From this space visitors may have a look behind the scenes of the museum into the art preparation zone.

ART PREPARATION

MEP

LOWER LOBBY

CLOAKROOM

RESTAURANT LIFT

ART LIFT

RESTAURANT STORAGE

RESTAURANT DELIVERY

ART STORAGE

ART DELIVERY

LOADING -1.0

-1.0

PARKING GARAGE

LOADING EXIT

LOADING ENTRY

+1.0

59

3.3 SITE STRATEGIES

RESPECTING SIGHT CORRIDORS

EXTENDED PARK

Views from the park and adjacent The park landscape provides Bernhardhinkato road is respected by recreation areas by the waterfront the shape of the building. Placed with while mitigating wind conditions. the short side towards the park and the broader side facing the waterfront the building .

PUBLIC PLAZAS

PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION

At each of the buildings three broader The site is accessible for pedestrians entry sides public plazas of different from all directions. To the south the characters are located. boardwalk connects with the ferry terminal creating a possible path to Towards the city an art plaza for enter the city for tourists. sculptures which creates an informal meeting between the city and the museum. While at the waterfront the plaza have the character of a staircase leading down to the water with direct contact with the interior museum cafĂŠ. Facing south is a more green and lush area protected from

LOADING/ DROP OFF Loading goes below the landscape from the terminal area and does therefore not interfere with the pedestrian zone, leaving the building completely accessible from all directions. Tourist buses and short term parking is located just north of the site.

60

61

3.3 BUILDING ORGANISATION

VOID

CENTRAL VOID The central atrium is the heart and core space of the buiรถding. The atrium void enables museum goers to get an overview and a point of reference while making it possible to showcase art in reference to other art pieces across the void.

CENTRAL LAYER

CENTRAL circulation - inner layer A central vertical circulation around the atrium. This is where global and local circulation meet. Where the visitor get the choice of which route to take.

SERVICE

GALLERY LAYER

service The cores housing elevators, art lift and storage feed the central area aswell as the galleries. Just as a thick service wall the cores blends into the museum area.

GALLERIES - middle layer Versatile and controlled galleries, all with a separate entrance enables complete curator freedom. Up to 5 different shows can go on at once or they can be joined into one large exhibit.

OUTER LAYER

OPEN EXHIBIT - outer layer The outer layer is a more relaxed zone fed with rich daylight from the exterior. This zone houses smaller scale temporary exhibitions and less sensitive art. Public program such as restaurant and auditorium are located here.

62

3.3 EXPLODED VIEW

SKY LIGHTS All the galleries on the top floor is provided with diffuse natural light from above.

ATRIUM

LEVEL 03 • EXHIBITION • AUDITORIUM • RESTAURANT

LEVEL 02 • EXHIBITION • AUDITORIUM

The twisting atrium is buildings core space. It links all the floors together visually and act as a point of reference for the visitors.

3 CORES Three cores lifts the building above the site. They house the vertical circulation and provide storage while feeding the controlled galleries.

MEGA STRUCTURE

LEVEL 01 • EDUCATION • ADMINISTRATION • OFFICE

Level 01 forms a space frame creating a new table top for the museum to rest upon.

THIN TRESHOLD The column free public ground floor is separated from the exterior by a thin band of of glass strething around the buiilding.

LEVEL 00 • PUBLIC FORUM • WATERFRONT CAFÉ • EXHIBITION SPACE

ART PLAZA The outdoor art plaza creates an informal meeting with the city. A gradient of art which in a seamless manor enters the building.

RECREATION GREEN Public space for recreation and art by the waterfront.

63

GREEN

3.3 PLAN 00 - GROUND FLOOR PUBLIC FORUM 1:500

RETAIL

ART PLAZA

INFO/ TICKET

+3.5 ENTRY ENTRY

+6

PUBLIC FORUM INFO

WATERFRONT CAFÉ

RESTAURANT LIFT

ART LIFT

EVENT SPACE CITY EXHIBIT

GREEN

ENTRY

+6

PLAZA FOUNTAIN

64

GROUND FLOOR - PUBLIC FORUM View over the open admission free public zone. The wide spanning structure enable a huge column free zone which make it possible to house all sorts of different events or exhibitions.

65

3.3 PLAN 01 CREATIVE LEVEL - LIBRARY, EDUCATION AND OFFICE 1:500

The first floor is the creative level and also what supports the whole building. The new tabletop spanning the ground floor and on which the two upper exhibition levels rest upon.

ADMIN KITCHEN STORAGE

LIBRARY

The level houses an education zone, a library and the administrative functions.

OFFICE

VOID

OPEN WORKSHOP

OPEN WORKSHOP

EDUCATION ZONE

OPEN AUDITORIUM

66

EDUCATION ZONE The exterior form take an expression in the interior of the building. The sweeping facade on the exterior create small amphitheaters on the inside, perfect for learning areas.

67

3.3 PLAN 02 GALLERIES, AUDITORIUM 1:500 CITY AUDITORIUM

The second floor houses the exhibition galleries gathered around the central atrium.

Each gallery is independent from the other and can be reaarranged according to the curators wishes.

GALLERY

GALLERY

GALLERY

DOUBLE HEIGHT GALLERY

GALLERY GALLERY

68

PLAN 03 GALLERIES, AUDITORIUM, RESTAURANT 1:400

CORE SPACE The buildings center acts as the intermediate space between the controlled galleries.

Here the local and global circulation meet and visitors can make the choice of which route to take.

69

3.3 PLAN 03 GALLERIES, AUDITORIUM 1:500

CITY AUDITORIUM

The third floor houses the exhibition galleries gathered around the central atrium.

Each gallery is independent from the other and can be reaarranged according to the curators wishes. This floor also house a waterfront restaurant with views over the harbour and islands.

GALLERY

WALL STORAGE

GALLERY

VOID

GALLERY

PARK VOID

WATERFRONT RESTAURANT GALLERY

GALLERY

KITCHEN

70

CROSS SECTION - NORTH SOUTH 1:400

GALLERIES Top floor galleries area flooded with natural light from above. Through the atrium, the visitor may look at art not just as a separate and isolated experience but in reference to other art, from different vantage points.

71

3.3 SECTION EAST / WEST 1:500

+28.3

GALLERY

03 EXHIBITION

+22.7

02 EXHIBITION

+17.0

01 EDUCATION

+11.5

00 PUBLIC FORUM

+5.0

-01 SERVICE

-1.0

PARK GALLERY GALLERY

EDUCATION ZONE

OBSERVATORY HILL

VOID

OFFICE

SKEPPSBROGATAN

PUBLIC FORUM

WATERFRONT CAFÉ WATERFRONT PROMENADE

LOWER LOBBY STORAGE

72

OPEN AUDITORIUM The auditorium could be incorporated in the exhibition, showcasing large scale exhibits with the South Harbour of Helsinki as a backdrop.

The large window also showcase art for the whole harbour which creates a dialogue between the city and the art.

73

3.3 SECTION NORTH / SOUTH 1:500

+28.3

GALLERY

03 EXHIBITION

+22.7

02 EXHIBITION

+17.0

01 EDUCATION

+11.5

00 PUBLIC FORUM

+5.0

-01 SERVICE

-1.0

CITY AUDITORIUM GALLERY

VOID EDUCATION ZONE

SCULPTURE PARK

PUBLIC FORUM

LOADING

WATERFRONT CAFÉ

ART PLAZA

LOWER LOBBY

74

CONCLUSION

I started this project with the intention of learning about and involving an analytical method in the sketch process. Using quantative means to evaluate sketches. But even though setting out to learn more about a quantative approach I ended up learning more about the qualitative aspects of the project while realising some of the limitations to the quantative method.

Another conclusion is that involving a mainly analytical sketch method, the sketching easily becomes a bit unwieldy and cumbersome. But at the same time the input from the analytical side can help make valuable design decisions early in the sketch process.

The open Guggenheim competition was finally launched by the time the project was finished. I believe the lack of a program and full information about the needs of this certain museum had several positive impacts on the thesis project.

All in all the thesis project acts as an extensive concept study before entering the next phase of the competition.

75

REFERENCES

BOOKS & ARTICLES 1 2 3 4 5

-

South Harbor Waterfront Areas - City of Helsinki - 2008 Blackmore, Paul - Digest DG 520 - Wind microclimate around buildings - May 2011 Digest 350 - Climate and site development - Part 2: Influence of microclimate - March 1990 Glaumann, Westerberg - Klimatplanering Vind, Statens Institut fรถr byggnadsforskning - 1988 Constructed Cultural Environment - City planning Department Helsinki - 2012

INTERNET 6 7 8 9

-

Helsinki 200 years as capital - http://www.helsinki200.fi/sv - (2014-05-12) Museum typologies - http://www.architectural-review.com/essays/typology-quarterly-museums/8640202.article (2014-03-17) Space Syntax - http://kaynar-rohloff.com/papers/kaynar_SpaceSyntax05.pdf (2014-03-19) Movement Patterns and the General Value Principle - http://www.jsu.edu/psychology/docs/49.4.Bitgood.pdf (2014-03-25)

PRELIMINARY COMPETITION PROGRAM http://www.guggenheimhki.fi/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/gHelsinki_web_ENG1.pdf

76

77