karim wadid omar anas marwan omar
y r ju
e c a p s
timeline date 9/6 11/6 13/6 16/6 18/6 20/6 23/6 25/6 27/6 30/6 14/7 15/7 16/7 18/7 21/7 25/7 28/7
tasks
deliverables
introduction + research
introduction + research
understanding
present an understanding
tell your story +start exp
presetn a story + doc
build your story
experiential model
2nd model + structural research
2nd model
structural story
structural model
str model 2 + design concept
2nd model
concept development
design concept sketches
protests review concept development
drawing + model
ďŹ nger off event
stitches
func., light, ventilation studies
1:20 model
concept development
design concept sketches
development
development
development
development
ďŹ nal presentation
3
june
initiation: problem identification
tuesday
11
the researchers initiated the classification of the jury process through identifing the lead roles and elements that make up the actual process. There was the players (jurors and students and the design pool affiliates) that are key element to the process. Moreover, there is the space that brings the players together to allow them to exchange their thoughts through dialouge and visual connectivity. The final element identified was the actual game ( the jury) and how this game affects the overall process. Are the rules of this game known? are these rules known and settled for by all affiliates of the jury process? how do all the elements come together ? The chart bellow denotes the identified elements which lead to the research that the students conducted.
JURY PROCESS
STAFF
STUDENTS
LOCAL
AUDIENCE
GLOBAL
auc
egypt * pattern identification: literature
student (to jury)
experience staff (to project)
external faculty
internal faculty
design professor
* pattern identification: literature
GROUP
PLAYERS
GAME: JURY
PLAYERS
INDIVIDUAL
models
posters
DISPLAY
SPACE
periods of year * shading, light, ventilation analysis
4
initiation: the starting point Secondary Questions
what are the available jury locations? what are the characteristics of a jury space?
Student Survay
the space identity curve according to required display sheet? Cognition Sketches What was the student experience to the jury process?
Interviews Mapping
What are the dimention & qualities needed for display space? What are the a jury’s architectural requirments?
litreture Documentation & Photograghy
The researchers matched the questions that were identified to the apporpriate research methodologies; these included student interviews, staff interviews, surveys, cognition sketches, mapping, photography and literature. However the students attempted to gather as much information as possible in a two-day time-frame that a second round of research data gathering was required to refine the questions asked and lead the architects into more insight about the matter. The pool of information was diversified, though focused more on the AUC pool due to it’s relavance and proximity and ease of gathering.
5
june
methodology
sunday
16
6
the stand
th
eu un nla de be fin le ed d/
Due to the openness of many elements in the jury process the knowledge at hand lacks a creative and sufďŹ cient exchange which has led to the existence of different languages of understandings that meet in the jury and affect the outcome learning process as a whole.
ou com tp m ut un (b al ou in nd pu ar t/ ies )
problem recognition OF S NG GE DI UA AN NG ST LA DER UN
the unlabeled/ undefined
the rules of the jury?
lack of communication
rite of passage
OF N O TI ERS C Y RA LA E P T IN THE
communal input/ output (boundaries)
architectural trends of thought? engaggement liMited to own work? development of the educational program ?
the unlabeled/ undefined
communal input/ output (boundaries)
the rules of the jury? lack of communication rite of passage
architectural trends of thought? engaggement liMited to own work? development of the educational program ?
is it Deficient?
INTERACTION OF THE PLAYERS
is it Deficient?
lack of communication?
absence/existance of a creative exchange?
outcome further implmented?
imprint in a long or durable way?
INTERACTION OF THE PLAYERS
LANGUAGES OF UNDERSTANDING
lack of communication? absence/existance of a creative exchange? imprint in a long or durable way? outcome further implmented?
peer-to-peer understanding ground? staff-to-staff understanding ground? grand perception of a jury?
LANGUAGES OF UNDERSTANDING
peer-to-peer understanding ground? staff-to-staff understanding ground? grand perception of a jury?
the problems identiďŹ ed were investigated each and links between the problems were documented and presented in a series of booklets that have led to the formulation of the stand.
7
green booklet
the unlabelled &undefined
The questions mentioned in this book aided, in a direct or indirect manner, to come out with one of the main themes discussed in this research, which is the interaction between the different participants of a jury process. The questions were broken down into smaller questions answered using different research methods, and the answers collected, analyzed, and revisited to see if they really relate to the topic discussed. In the end, the researchers took a step back and re-analyzed the whole outcome of answers/questions to make sure that their ďŹ ndings were relevant, and to investigate how would their ďŹ ndings help form a stand that easily and clearly present the problem.
8
blue booklet
the unlabelled &undefined
This booklet was done to collect and investigate the questions that aided the process of coming out with one of the four main themes of this research, which we called “The undefined/unlabeled”. It is mainly tackling the questions that either have no answers, or their answers fall into the category of the unlabeled, which could be due to a variety of reasons, the most repeated being the answers having many different sides and cannot be fixed or standardized. Some of the topics discussed in this book have a dual nature, which allowed them to be also discussed in other books.
questions tackled
1
How do students and instructors prefer their connection with the displayed material? (Faculty Survey)
2
how did the jury players affect or impact the design course and it's outcome?
players
3
what do you expect to be the outcome of a jury to a student/professor?
players
4
What jury identity would you hope to be perceived as to the surrounding educational institutions? (Faculty Survey)
players
5
what is the criteria for the order of player participation in a jury?
6
In your opinion, what is the ideal number of jurors in a jury?
7
what is the function and purpose of a jury?
space
players players game
9
red booklet
the unlabelled &undefined
As the researchers attempted to answer the Train of thought questions presented the answers of a selection of these questions has led to the formaulation of the idea of the communal input to the jury process and how it’s output affects the overall scope of the process. These questions are presented here and how they were approached in the research tools invested in the time-frame of the data-gathering. Moreover, the data is analyized to show the links of thoughts that lead to the recognition of the communal input to the jury process. The questions asked are classiďŹ ed bellow accordingly to their association with the space, players and/or game. Not all questions were tackled through the same approach, and some questions had to be disected to an array of questions that would lead to a better understanding of the topic. I
questions tackled
1
What are the space requirements for students and jury members?
space
2
Are there other types of display that students can showcase during a jury? (Faculty Survey, literature)
space
3
How does the jury players impact the psychological comfort of the jury? (Student Survey)
4
how did the jury players affect or impact the design course and it's outcome?
players
5
Why would you choose to bring professors from outside AUC as jury members? How does this add to the learning process and the identity of architecture department at AUC?
players
6
what distinguishes the architecture jury at AUC from other academic institutions?
players
players
10
yellow booklet
the unlabelled &undefined
As the researchers attempted to answer the Train of thought questions presented the answers of a selection of these questions has led to the formaulation of the idea of languade of understanding. through out the research, we have asked similar questions for students and staff and the ďŹ ndings were surprizing for the same questions we got extremely different answers and a whole differnet language. And below, there is a list of the questions that helped in formulating this idea of different languages
questions tackled
1
What are the common model sizes used during a jury (preferred by students, instructors, UIA Accreditation )?
Space
2
Why would you choose to bring professors from outside AUC as jury members? How does this add to the learning process and the identity of architecture department at AUC?
players
3
What jury identity would you hope to be perceived as to the surrounding educational institutions?
4
experience of the students & Staff to the jury process?
players Game
11
final research presentation
the presented documents were modeled in steps showing the progress of thought that led to our stand. The train of thought initiated with the data gathering that led the researchers to realize the unlabeled / undefined nature of the jury process this was further denoted to how the players interact together; leading to the second booklet “interaction of players.” Once this was researchered the architects realized the communal input and output directly molding the jury process and how this led to languages of understanding between players that seemed to an obstcale to the overall outcome of the process.
12
experiential models first trial
june
tuesday
18
the experintial model above was intented to show the problemization of the lack of denfition of the roots ( multiple perspectives that are not directional) and the fruits that lack a purpose. in the model the roots were mades of tape ribbons that lacked a defintion and were layered in a method to actually become destructive to one another and rationally affecting the outcome of their fruits. the fruits had painted fingerprints that had irregular sizes and colors and no specific purpose that matches those intended. the stem of the tree of education was made from a metal mesh to showcase the roughness of the process but yet indicate how mouldable it could be. The model contains all the resources needed for a fuirtful jury process.
13
ﺩﻩ ﺶ ﺸﻤ ﺵ ﺍﳌ ﻮﻭﻭ ﺣﺒ ﺍ
experiential models first trial
the proposed model aimed to highlight the potential of the roots affecting the jury process in an intertwined mesh the reached all the way to the fruits and let to them emerging. The fruits had a unifrom shape though still had different footprints on them accordingly to how they wanted to be molded. Another proposed exerpiential model was made from real fruits, one stack of fruits was a combination of different unmatched fruits that were unwashed; i.e. lack a purpose. The other stack was washed berries that were ready to eat and were consumed fast by the pool of design affiliates. Both exerpeintial models were complementary but as noted by the TA’s lacked a three-dimentional aspect as much explaintion was needed to clarify the idea rather than being able to experience it automatically.
14
experiential models first trial
The experintial model above was made to show more than the other two model; that is motion. The model invested in the mobility of marbles and showcased the idea of motion within that implies how diversified the impacts of the jury process are. A marble was put in and as it follows the tilt of the model it is led by gravity to the exit. However, the journey is undefined due to the obstacles the marble faces at a more or less random apporach of an exist. There is no guidance or leading tracks that the marble has to follow to be able to reach the exit. The feekback from the TA’s pinpointed that the entrance and the exit are still defined and there is a route that can be tracked. The point of a three-dimensional model was once again brought up and the need to combine all the three experientail models presented (and neglecting the fresh fruits.)
15
experiential models ďŹ nal submission
june
thursday
20
the ďŹ nal experiential model invested in the motion of the previous models as well as the lack of deďŹ ntion and seedless fruits of the previous models. The model had pipes that were sprayed with an array of colors and the process of their spraying was metaphoric to the impact of their journies. Moreover, the pipes were suspended in mid-air through support from the ceiling and walls to showcase a three-dimensional jjourney. The pipes led to a water plate that had clean water in it, once a marble was placed in one of these pipes it gained momentum and color (put inside the pipes) and fell in the water and gave iit color, as many marbles was put, many colors were mixed in the water leading to grey water that seemed to be polluted more than coherent; i.e. the fruits of the jury process lacked a purposel
16
experiential models ďŹ nal submission
the model was divided into two sections one of the denoted the current situation of the jury process at AUC and the other showed the future or proposal. A marble was placed in one of the pipes of the current that led to hitting another marble that ignited the proposed model (it was explained that the wooden table was the groundline with the earth above the table.)The marble moved by gravity along a route of intertwined marbles and regardless of the route it took the color gained was gold leading to a pool of golden water that seemed coherent and useful in many ways( colud actually be used as a coloring water as well as being metaphoric to something with value.) The feedback from Dr. Amr indicated that the current jury process is indicated well and one can understand the logic behind it. However for the proposed jury process the intertwined pipes more or less provide a similar journey for all users and the difference of their journies are thus not indicated well. The architects proposed that if they had this feedback previously they would of made the pipes seperated each leading to a different water plate allowing each color to show it’s diversity and clarity.
17
structural research folded, tent & cables ﻘﺎﻭ ﺒ ﲔ ﺑﺘ ﺎﻣﺎ ﻄﺒﻘ ﻧﺎ ﻳ ﻣ ﳊﻼﺯﻭ ﻭﻧﺎ ﺍ ﳊﻼﺯ ﺍ
as shown by the presented poster the selected structure was the folded structure. The poster contained the three researched structures and then folded and presented with the strcutural experiential model as means of yet another model surface.
18
structure story
june
sunday
23
the researchers were asked to select three strctural systems and compare them. however the selection criteria had to be justiďŹ ed and well thought off; for that nine strcutural systems have been analyized as shown above in a table and through a system of comparitive analysis the three strctures highlighted (cables, tents and folds) have been selected for further analysis. The table listed all keywords that the reseachers could think of regarding structural characteristics and were matched to the nine structures selected. Some characteristics were unique to certain structures which gave it an advantage over the other structures only if the intented characteristic was matching to the evolutionary jury process the architects are proposing. Variety of angles and perspectives pinpointed how the folded structure is essential, whilst the exiblity and temporary nature of the tents was aswell noted worth value to the experience intended.
19
Variety of viewpoints/perspectives
folded structure
Light
Flexible
Pointy/Edgy
Complexity What is the act of folding?
ﻳﻌﻨﻲ ﺘﻨﻴﺔ ﺎﺭ ﻣ ﺘﺸ ﺘﺮﻛ ﺳ
•“The fold is power…. force itself is an act” Deleuze. •The fold allows for a variety of perspectives and portrays an impact (force) or molding act. •Imagine folding an item, you put in force however which closet/drawer/shelve it will be placed in depends on how it wants to be molded. E.g. folding a wedding dress is different from folding a formal pant, each will lead you to fold it in a certain way, although the same force might be applied to both. •The sharpness of the system denotes the educational function of the place; i.e. it is both flexible and rigid. •There is a complexity factor embedded in the structure that pinpoints the process of the jury. •“Thus a continuous labyrinth is not a line dissolving into independent points, as flowing sand might dissolve into grains, but resembles a sheet of paper divided into infinite folds or separated into bending movements, each one determined by the consistent or conspiring surroundings” Deleuze.
“The fold is power…. force itself is an act” Deleuze
20
tent structures What’s the story of the tent?
po r
lig
ary
ht
ne
ss
fle
xi b
le
t em
-Tents Defy Gravity as if the tent is “free from constraints” and has the power to fly freely. -Flexibility within unity: the merge of perspectives to one plane; a common language of understanding. -Rite of passage: the tent is commonly associated with a ritual (e.g. Ramadan tents locally) that transits you from one state (or location) to another (e.g. from Ramadan to Eid.) -Tents are the byproducts of a wandering tribal existence that has largely disappeared. As such, they are closer to life than architecture, and are as beautiful and saturated with symbols as much as any building can be.” – New Tent Architecture - Tents become a separator rather than an isolator. Although it creates a space where you can get your privacy and personal space, it still doesn’t isolate you from the surrounding environment. Its permeable nature of the tent fabric allows for controlled amount of natural light to enter. More importantly, its visual and environmental impact on the surrounding is much less severe than other structural systems in terms of construction process (fabrication and installation) and overall aesthetics
o m s
h t o
“ closer to life than architecture” New Tent Architecture 21
suspended structures keywords -Individuality -Complementary -Suspension -Dependency
What do cable structures present? -The concept of suspension: “earliest method of crossing large gaps” Aural Stratan. - The dependency of the cable structure on elements to foster their tension; could be seen as the dependency on one another to reach a fruitful outcome. - Cable structures are usually complementary; as they are commonly used for cable-stayed roofs, bicycle-wheel roofs and suspension bridges. -As part of the tensile membrane structures they are usually used as roofs, thus their connection with their ground flexible. -Steelcable-stayedbridgesareregardedasthemost economical bridge design for spans ranging between 200 and 400 m -Shorterspans:trussorboxgirderbridges -Largerspans:suspensionbridges Lacks: -Lacks Tensegrity: thus lacks discussion. Only tension forces present. -Ideal for long spans; using it for short spans could be controversial to its function. -Lack of stability in high winds; could be interrupted as a deficiency to accept external viewpoints.
“ earliest method of crosing large gaps” aural stratan 22
structural experiental model
the structural experiental model was placed between two table as shown by the diagram bellow. The folds used were made from one sheet of paper showing the integrity of the folds. Moreover, the model was initially placed as shown in the picture (folds creating a pit) using both table supports and placed on a transparent board. The pit indicated the current jury process and how the different perspectives were obstructive. The architects then iped the model where the pit became a rise/rooďŹ ng structure; this was indicative to the proposed jury process where the same elements are used to a constructive process.
obstructive constructive
23
june
concept development
tuesday
25
Hierarchy of Pedagogic Aims -Real-life simulation -Educational vision:
-Merging the life-cycles of design courses. -Guidence/ qualitative assessment
responsive, inclusive and encourging of attainment by all.
-An enhancing deconstruction
-Supportive: to develop the potential of all learners. -Collaborative/ creative exchange -Triggering the diversity of enabling-impacts.
-Future-proofed to enable space to be re-allocated and reconďŹ gured. -Flexibility in accommodating current and evolving pedagogies. -Involvement: of users in aspects of the design
-Erasing the habit of closure. -Quantitative assessment :grade, rank, winner / loser
identify
analyize
respond
repeat
in atempting to formualte the concept the architects decided to initially identify the pedagogic aims of a jury process and further more catagorize them in a hierarchy to make clear the goals of the designed space. The highest on the hierarchy included things like real-life simulation and the braod educational vision of AUC as a foundation. As you go down the hierarchy the aims become more focused and include pinpointed speciďŹ c points by the architects that include erasing the habit of closure and a design that is future-proofed.
24
25
Transforming the soon revolutionary jury to a value-architectural-engineering process.
concept
ﺳﺘﻨ
ﻲ ﻳﺎ
ﺍ
ﺠﻨ ﻣ
ﻮﻧﺔ
bubble diagram ﻨﺒﻲ ﻭﺍﻟ ﻌﻬﺎ ﻔﺮﻗ ﻻﻣ
26
second structural experiental model
the second structural experiental model invested in the arangement of three elements; the audience space, the creative exchange (display space and interaction of players) and the value architectural engineering space (the agreement space.) The VAE space is given the most importance as it tackles the alignment of thought and potential for the users of the space. The creative exchange is placed around the VAE and is shown in a golden color that denotes it’s future-proofed nature and enabling exiblity. The audience space is used in this model to support the creative exchange and the VAE showing how the learning process can be extended to the input and output of the audience.
27
june
sunday
30 BBC: “The number of Egyptians protesting today is the largest number of protestors in a political event in the history of mankind"
28
ﺍ ﻣ ﻧﺰﻟ ﺼﺮ ﻲ ﻳﺎ ﻣ ﺑﻮ ﺤ ﺘﺎ ﻣ ﺔ
ﺟﺎ
ﻛﻲ ﺎﻧﺰﻝ ﺶﻫ ﻮﺭ ،ﻣ ﻓﻴﻒ ﻓ ﻨﻮﻧﺔ ﻃﺐ ﻭﺍﻟﻔﻮﺭ ﺶ ﻣﺠ ﺰﻝ ﺃﻧﺎ ﻣ ﻣﺶ ﻫﺎﻧ
29
july
digital submission: space formation function
experience
•Entry: first contact point •Accessible information about the space and what can be achieved here.
•Orienting users to the experiences inside. •sense of belonging
•Students and jurors get to decide on game scenario. •Audience gets to see the jury process. •waiting space reinterpreted.
•importance; core •Coming to an agreement (could be broken plates meeting in the middle) •Feeling of unity
•Students present their work to jurors, audience can see. •creative exchange: discussion.
•focal to display •closer to life than architecture •no distractions
•Toilets •Kitchenette; cattering •creating the basic comfort for users
•Students present their work to jurors, audience can see. •creative exchange: discussion.
•functional •comfort provider •insignificant
•functional •insignificant
space Entry & Lobby space
value-architectural-engineering space
creative exchange & display space
wet zone
storage
tuesday
02 compartments none
none
relationships 3 main spaces: 1-V.A.E 2-Creative exchange 3-entry & lobby Main Relationships: 1- V.A.E & ENTRY 2-V.A.E & Creative exchange 3-ENTRY & creative exchange ENTRY with VAE space: Direct: Emerging from Supported By: entry is result of V.A.E (Sudden).
possibly; to foster a dual jury event
required; male and female restrooms and kitchenette
ENTRY with Creative exchange space(s): Direct Transitional V.A.E with creative exchange: leading/ transitional hierarchy to V.A.E ENTRY with Wet space: No importance. Unnoticeable Indirect, separating Storage (if present): Indirect separating
required; for tables, interactive items,could be integral with wet zone or part of each space
30
space program
space Entry & Lobby space
value-architectural-engineering space
space requirements Allows for efficient circulation and gathering of small groups on the sides, maybe display of work samples.
Allows for flexible patterns of seating (auditorium, meeting hall, round tables) and hosts up to 60 people
Display of students work (posters, models, touch screens, projectors, other tools), enough space for presenter and jurors to sit and move around.
creative exchange & display space
area 10 people entering = 10x0.75 sq. m. = 7.5 sq. m. 10 people standing = 10 x 1 sq. m. = 10 sq. m. Display space (possible) = 9 x 1 = 9 sq. m. Assumed Area = 30 sq. m.
Auditorium space is 0.5 meters squared per sitting spectator. We assumed in our space 1.5 square meters per spectator/user to allow for more flexibility and more comfortability than auditoriums. 1.5 x 60 = 90 sq. m. Art galleries: 3-5 sq. m. hanging area (wall) for pictures, 6-10 sq. m. ground surface for sculptures. Architectural Display: 1.2m height of posters (assuming 2 A1’s above each other), and 3 meters long (assuming 3 A1’s in a row). Given student motion, 6 sq.m average ground area for posters. Allow for jurors space, 8 jurors x 1sq.m. = 8 sq. m. Total area needed = 2 x (6+8) = 28 sq. m.
-two individual restrooms: male and female -one kitchenette
assumptions: 2 m squared per cabinet in restroom. 2 cabinets (one disabled) in restroom + sinks = 14 sq. m. 4 m squared for kitchenette. calculations: (2x14) + 4 = 32 sq. m.
integrated with spaces, could be part of the creative exchange space, or the entry lobby or the value-architectural-engineering space.
asssumptions: storage space could be increased/decreased accordingly to flexiblity of display mechanism.
wet zone
storage
3 m squared (half of a wedding hall storage)
value-architectural-engineering space 7x7 = 49 m2 creative exchange & display space + storage
247 m2
concept An evolutionary process rather than a revolutionary one.
31
site selection criteria for site selection
.proximity to department -visual connectivity from department -Availability of nearby wet zone -proximity from entrance (gate) -provides an experience to reach space (this site allows for a possible route across the architectural departPRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUC ment.)
from department
2.9179
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
1.7729
22.8126
30.2291
restrooms entrance from bus-gate 46.3118
6.8694
32
design
agreement room/ V.A.E
from architectural corridor
creative exchange(jury/event space)
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
three main spaces were to be designed into the selected site; the Agreement room; the creative exchange; and the entry
Entry: By placing the agreement room (V.A.E) at the first floor (at staircase landing of the architectural department) the entrance to the first contact point for the jury space is an experience which either has to go through the architectural department corridor (see the source) or from the busgate and up the stairs and visually be familiar with the jury space and it’s design.
The agreement room: the V.A.E becomes visually and physically, easily
accessable by architectural engineering affiliates and the act of agreement and collaborative participation is elevated due to it’s importance. Moreover, structurally it is solid, heavy and permenant; it is also becomes the source of the creative exchange.
Creative exchange: in this space the actual jury event takes place and
thus the space needs to have an enabling flexible design that allows for students and audience to participate in the jury. This space has a strong connection with the V.A.E and needs to be clearly indicated.
33
conceptual digital model
34
sketches
35
digital model
36
physical model: in progress
37
agreement room concept initial digital modeling of room
later physical modeling of room
why contained within a cube? night
morning
The room is a showcase of the act of agreement and need to framed to transit the rectalinear building to the folded structure of the jury space. Moreover the glass cube allows for this effect shown to the left, that when the room is in use the interior is what’s focal and thus the act is shown through the folds now visable (previosuly not visable due to reflective glass). Also the cubr provides a double skin that will allow for heat reduction through radiation and air insulation. Why is it on the first floor? Direct connectivity with the department and transalting the entrance to a physical experience. Why use isosceles triangles in all the folded surface of the room?
inspirational photo for showcasing the act within a cube
Isosceles trangles show the idea of duailty within unity at a spectrum of possiblities which is what the room is attempting to create. Two angles come in (both of which have equal size in the room; no superior/ inferior) and come to an agreement that regardless of it’s value will only be a result of the summation of the other two angles. !"#$%&'$()*(+,(+%-#$'./('$%&+-0#,+1(!"#$%&-
38
physical model: Agreement room/ V.A.E As shown by the diagram above the agreement room/ V.A.E is made out of isosceles trangles that fold within the inert cube. The triangles moreover poor out from the elevated room to the creative exchange at the ground oor. Their connection is still under consideration; two possibilites have been suggested by the group. One is as shown in the digital model; folds pour out with and are structually supported on the ground as well as from the V.A.E. The other suggestion which is under experimentation is to connect folds emerging from the V.A.E and grounded folds with tents; that show the cerimonial and temporary nature of the event in relation to the stable and permenant agreement room.
39
agreement room concept V.A.E Stairs Creative Exchange
Supporting Columns
V.A.E
Stairs Creative Exchange
Entrance
40
seating arrangment in the proposed plan (later altered) we decided to keep the creative exchange space as two spaces to provide enabling exibilty, however a privacy issue appeared. To tackle this problem the students were inspired from this project of a folded wall that is movable and is used to allow multiple juries to take place at the same time.
41
customed designed ďŹ xtures
V.A.E chair sketch (folded) V.A.E chair digital model
42
interactive table sketch interactive display table digital model
43
agreement room table sketch agreement room table digital model
44
Reasoning behind zoning Stairs calculations: 6000mm / 34 steps = 176 mm riser The staircase: The staircase is used as a connector between the creative exchange space and the Value Architecture Room, and as a separator between the two creative exchange spaces where different courses can have their juries at the same time. Creative Exchange space: Individual Jury Space (Left): This space is designed for juries where each student presents as an individual. Three clusters are formed, allowing for privacy and minimization of distraction from other juries or from circulating audience. Group Jury Space (right): This is one huge space that allows for a group presentation where more space is needed for group members to present, and also more space needed for audience or jurors to attend. Fixtures: • A smart touch table-screen is used by the presenter to display to nearby jurors, while a wall-mounted screen shows to the audience the same content presented on the tablescreen. • Folded paneled furniture are used to create the jury clusters and used as a seating area and acoustic insulators.
please view plans 45
ground oor plan
46
ďŹ rst oor plan
Initially, there was the VAE (cube-like space) that is connecting between the architectural vocabulary of the SSE and the jury space. A staircase connects between the VAE and the jury space, creating a group jury space on the right, and an individual jury space on the left. The individual jury space on the left is furthermore divided into 3 clusters or zones in order to host multiple juries at the same instant. The group jury space has one big smart table in order to accommodate for the group members and the jurors while the individual jury zone has a smaller table.
47
section A-A’
48
!"#$%&'$()*(+,(+%-#$'./('$%&+-0#,+1(!"#$%&-
Feedback and method of approach
july
wednesday
10
“My quick comments on the submission are as follows: - the breakdown of spaces and experiences is good, it would be even better to try to sketch these relationships through conceptual diagrams that capture your intentions visually Approach: More sketches have been done to allow for a clear transcirption of the designed relationships. - when you draw the ground floor always contextualize it and draw the surrounding elements, buildings, circulation routes. the entrance to your building starts with the path take to reach it, you need to study that, you also need to see in section the relationship of your proposed structure to the surrounding structures
!"#$%&'$()*(+,(+%-#$'./('$%&+-0#,+1(!"#$%&-
[Approach: As noted in the previous submission the entrance routes have been studied (as part of the entrance experience is the route taken to reach the structure) and for that the proposed courtyard has been selected, possibly it was only put down in sketches and wording for that sectional studies have been conducted.] - you did not include studies on how the local jury space would be delineated within this folded form: how are we going to sit, hang posters, have good visual connectivity and engagement for all participants - I am not sure I understand the significance of the various platforms and how they contribute to a better usage of space for the various functions - I assume the strange rectilinear elements in the plan have to do with poster hanging or such ... it is not clear [Approach: In the last submission custom furniture have been sketched and digitaly modeled to showcase seating arrangements and the digital interactive display table that we suggest for the jury space. However, this was later developed and is shown clearer here with illustration and captions. ] - no indication of what structural system and materials will be used to realize this folded form (assuming concrete is not an option) [Approach: There is a study included for the systems (and yes concrete is not an option) and the materials we propose for realizing the form.] - no indication how natural light is utilized [Approach: Light analysis has been conducted on Ecotect for the site, the model, as well as the interior (with physical model.)] AAK”
49
the story clarity sketch of design proposal
The structure’s first floor is the agreement room (V.A.E), emerging from it is the creative exchange (event space) that is on the ground floor courtyard. The creative space is divided by a showcase staircase that fosters space for audience to stand an have an overview of the juries and visually connect to the space as a whole. The juries are proposed to take place in a transparent cube, with interactive display table that can shift between digital submissions and a place for models inside. The trasparent nature of the cube (possibly glass) will allow for audience to view the jury with audio-aid (very similar to tourism head set in sight-seeing) and provide acoustic privacy for the jurors and students. Moreover, the glass can allow for single sided vision to avoid distractions. Outside there are spaces across the staircase and the folded structure that can foster poster-hung juries that would not utilize the glass cubes for their function, but can utilize their surface for showcase by hanging posters. The visual privacy of the cube could also be achieved by hanged posters inside, if the jury was agreed upon to not involved audience.
50