Paul Thorpe
Year Portfolio
University of Westminster Student No: 145064371
DS
10
Contents Brief 1a - Burning Man Proposal Site Location Proposed Development Environmental Conditions
Section 2 - Component Development Tennis Court & Bowl Dimensions Model Photos Glulam Transportation & Material Sourcing
Section 3 - Roof Development General Solar Analysis Solar Rays in Summer Months Roof Form & Result
Section 4 - Component Testing Tensile Testing Machine - One & Two Components Tensile Testing Machine - Grouped Component Connection Joints Detailed Connections
Brief System
01
y
250mm
75mm
75mm
x
0,0,0
A1
Location on grid
y250 x75 x-75 z0 t12
A1 - Elevation 1
bottom (2,3,0) top (3,3,14cm)
y
250mm 150mm
150mm
0,0,0 ne
or li
mirr
x
2A1
(y250 x75 x-75 z0 t12) x2
Location on grid
bottom (1,3,0) top (3,3,14cm)
2A1 - Elevation 1
Grid image
Tapeworm model
Cluster A1 + A2
Grid image
Tapeworm model
Cluster 2A1 + A1 + A2
curvature analysis DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Monocoque structure This page sees the development of my ideas for generating a single structure formed from sheet material. The laser cut sheet opposite identifies the range of calculated curves which were then used to generate the forthcoming forms. In order to develop a rigid structure, it was important to connect each end point of a curve to another so that once they are all connected the entire structure could form a continuous loop with no end point. This idea could then be translated to Grasshopper where the 3 fixed node points and connections remain the same, however the curves could be altered to create a new form.
monocoque DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
The Component This page sees the rationalisation of my previous monocoque designs to form a single ‘part’ or ‘component’ from one cut curve. This component could then be tessellated with others to form a complete structure. The parameters for the curve input can also be manipulated to generate a number of different parts that could interact together.
singular ‘pod’ DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
design variations DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
‘Crash Landing’ Narrative: A site engulfed in intrigue and mystery where extra terrestrial life is not only a thought, but possibly an experience. Intertwined within a maze of vertical ‘pods’, the user is free to explore and navigate for themselves, leaving it up to individual interpretation and understanding of the space. Physical Description: Formulated using a single ‘pod ‘ component, the plywood is treated in a manner of ways to provide a number of intimate/communal spaces. The monocoque structure of the pods provides strength in itself, with the stress skins and clustering of the pods forming rigidity within its environment.
Concealed circle hub ‘The Arc’ Extent of ‘vertical pod farm’
‘Crash Landing’ DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Brief
Festival Abstract
The Petal Hypothesis Narrative The petal has long been a surround for the reproductive parts of the flower, its varied forms and designs attract numerous species of animals and insects, enabling its existence to grow and spread. As a result, the petal will not only encounter pollen of its own species, but also that of many differing plants. Taking people as the pollen. This caravanserai will attract people both day and night, providing a space for play and discussion. Encouraging communication, observation and interaction.
Physical Description The Petal Hypothesis sits expressively within its setting. Exposing the raw structure of the plywood ‘petals by day and revealing the elaborate display of the EL wires by night. Configured in a circular array, each ‘petal’ is construct from just two ‘pods’ which in themself only take 1 sheet of plywood to construct. Connected together to generate one ‘2d’ curve, the end points then bend around to complete the monocoque structure. These pods are then mirrored to generate the ‘petal’ form and anchored to the ground. The act of fixing the extreme widths and mirroring the pods minimises the natural flex within the ‘pod’ and enables it to be a strong physical structure. In place of the EL wires, a cloth stress skin has been incorporated to the top tier of petals. This not only provides shading during the day but also absorbs the light from the EL wires and distributes it across the whole surface.
Interactivity Inhabit - Climb the structure and occupy one of the many vantage points within the ‘petals’ Observe - Sit around and within the ‘petals’ to observe the activities at its centre. Connect - Share memories and congregate with either on mass at its centre or privately within the petals.
Dimensions: Modulated mirrored pods (approx) - 3800mm (l) x 1400mm (w) x 1400mm (h) Overall Footprint - 10800mm (diameter) Height - 4000mm
2A
1:1 Model Construction The next pages document the process undertaken to cut and assemble the 1:1 components . Two thicknesses of wood were tested - 3mm and 9mm with the 9mm having to be placed in a water bath prior to bending.
1:1 model PROPOSAL
sequential diagrams PROPOSAL
Cloth stress skin roof
Top Tier
EL wire mesh
Middle Tier showing EL wire platform
exploded diagram PROPOSAL
EL wire mesh
Bottom Tier
4000mm 10800mm 3800mm
Section
1:20 Model of final proposal PROPOSAL
Brief Realise
2B
WORLD TOUR FINAL LOCATIONS Men's professional tennis has featured a year-end showpiece event since 1970, where the Masters Grand Prix and World Championship Tennis Tour brought together the best players in word tennis from that year. The ATP (Association of Tennis Professionals) and the ITF (International Tennis Federation) competed for a number of years to be the defining tournament for the year, however in 1999 they jointly agreed to amalgamate the two tournaments and create a jointly owned Tennis Masters Cup. This was then renamed the ATP World Tour Finals in 2009. Traditionally, the finals have been played on either hard court or carpet surfaces, however it has become increasingly apparent that this surface choice benefits some players more than others with Rafa Nadal stating that he feels it would be fairer to host the tournament on a multitude of different surfaces to even the playing field: “The Tour Finals have been indoors from 2005 until now, so I am a bit unlucky with this. For me it is more fair to have it outdoors on different surfaces,” “I know it won’t happen in my generation. It’s not for me. I say it for the next generation and because it would be interesting for the fans.”
1970
1974
Kooyong Stadium
Melbourne, Australia -1974 Capacity 8,500 / Court Type: Grass
1977
1989 1990
Madison Square Gardens New York City, United States -1977-1989 Capacity 18,000 / Court Type: Carpet
Frankfur
Frankfurt, Ge Capacity 12,000
Hannover, Germany - 1996 - 1999 Capacity 15,000 / Court Type: Indoor Hard
1995 1996
Festhalle
ermany -1990-1995 / Court Type: Carpet
Gallery Furniture Stadium
O2 Arena
Houston, United States - 2003-2004 Capacity 5,240 / Court Type: Outdoor Hard
1999 2000
Pavilh찾o Atl창ntico
Lisbon, Portugal - 2000 Capacity 12,000 / Court Type: Indoor Hard
London, United Kingdom - 2009-2015 Capacity 17,500 / Court Type: Indoor Hard
2003 2004 2005
2008 2009
Qizhong City Arena
Shanghai, China - 2005 - 2008 Capacity 15,000 / Court Type: Indoor Hard
Number of years held: Number of years held: 13 13
0 0
20000 20000
Round-Robin Match Win 200 points Match Win Round-Robin 200 points Semi-Final Win 400 points Win Semi-Final 400 points
15000 15000
Undefeated Champion 1500 points Champion Undefeated 1500 points
Final Win 500 Finalpoints Win 500 points Emirates ATP Rankings Points (Singles Doubles) Emirates ATPand Rankings Points (Singles and Doubles)
Stadium Capacity Stadium Capacity
10000 10000
5000 5000
0 0
Tokyo Tokyo Paris Paris Barcelona Barcelona Boston Boston Melbourne Melbourne Stockholm Stockholm Houston Houston New York CityCity New York Frankfurt Frankfurt Hannover Hannover Lisbon Lisbon Sydney Sydney Houston Houston Shanghai Shanghai London London
rt
Hannover Fairground
Key Key
Alternate Alternate Participation Fee
Singles Doubles Singles Doubles
Participation Fee Round-Robin Match Win Round-Robin Match Win Semi-Final Match Win Semi-Final Final Win Match Win Final Win Champion Undefeated Undefeated Champion
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
M25
M25
24
23 1
19
A411
A5183
5
25
117
26
London Map
27 6
Hill Hall
17
M11
London Gateway Services
A404
Court Locations
17
A1112
4
A1000
Fryent
1
Marina
A41
A406
4
T3
T5
Olympic Park
A5
2
A307
A3
A3
1
A308
Manor House
A1081
11
London Gateway A3 Services
A318
78 © Crown copyright/database right 2014. Ordnance Survey/EDINA supplied service. FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY.
A4180 A245
A412 A245
M25
Bayhurst Wood
Coln Valley Visitor Centre
A307
A245
M25
A3
A1000 A2022
A24
9 9
Fryent
Epsom Downs Sta 1
A406
0.5
1
1.5
A22
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
A107
Kenwood
16 1a
M40
4
15 4b
2
3
5
M4
T3
A307
T4
M25 A316
13
A307
A24
A308
11
A317
A320
78 © Crown copyright/database right 2014. Ordnance Survey/EDINA supplied service. FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY.
A243
A2022
A244 10
A3
M25
A21
A245
A24
9 9
0.5
1
1.5
2
A22 2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
Down House
5 km
ROMAN VILLA
A233
4
4.5
A107
2
A3
A233
M25
Paul Thorpe Westminster
M26
A125
17
A13
Way
A245
30
Visitor Centre
31
Observatory
A20 Dulwich Picture Gallery
A126 Power Sta Tolls
A220
A207 Danson House
Well Hall
A2 Eltham Palace
A3
Red House
A226
Hall Place
Bluewater Retail Centre
A20 A24
A223
90
Palace
City Farm
A212
M25
A225
3
A217
A232
120
Castle ROMAN VILLA
A2022
A21
A2022
Scale 1:50000 0
0.5
1
1.5
2
A22 2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
A20
M20
Lullingstone Castle
A224
A23
A237
A243
A2
2
A21
Crystal
A23
Lakeside
A206
4
Brands Hatch
Visitor Centre Shoreham Cross
A225 Feb 27, 2014 16:57
Down House
5 km
Paul Thorpe Westminster
2
A244
M26
Belhus Woods
Rainham Hall
Lesnes Abbey
A3
Paul Thorpe Westminster
Ingrebourne Valley
A1306 Power Sta
2 2
A24
9 9
A127
Visitor Centre 41
A118
A2
A24
Feb 27, 2014 16:57
2
Way
Pilgrims'
A124
A1083
LONDINIVM
Horton Park Farm
Pilgrims'
Feb 27, 2014 16:57
29
A240
A307
Th
M25
A118
A3
Brands Hatch
Brands Hatch
Tower
A205
A225
A245
A245
A225
A12
Brooks Farm
A3
A309 M20
Visitor Centre Shoreham Cross 78
Shoreham Cross
A12
A202
Location Zones
Lullingstone Castle 4
Havering 4
M20
Lullingstone 11 28 Castle D OA Visitor Centre N R MA RO
A104
1
Hampton Court Palace
A20
A20
Castle
Fairlop Waters
Thames Barrier
A2
Wi
A225
ROMAN VILLA 105
Down House
A406
5 km
A308
A244
10
A23
3.5
Olympic Park
Bluewater Retail Centre
A225 A3050
Castle
A317
Epsom Downs Sta
A240
3
Kenwood
A307
2
3
A320
Scale 1:50000 0
A126
A316
A318 A224 A319
2.5
A402
90 A307
120
A2022
A22
Marina
A226
© Crown copyright/database right 2014. Ordnance Survey/EDINA supplied service. FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY.
A307
A245
A245
T4
M25
A23
A237
Horton Park Farm
2
A4
Hall Place
12 2
A3
1.5
120
Community Farm
A13
1
11
1
A30
A212
A240
A318
Lakeside
M4
T1 T2
A232
0.5
A23
A308
A24
A319
A240 A41
4 Scale 1:50000 0
A5
A4020
A223
A3
A21
A2022
A40
Services Power Sta Tolls
A320
A217
A309 A244
3
A244
Palace
City Farm
Free
Hampton Court Palace
A3050
4
T3
Red House
A21
Crystal
A23
T5
A406
M25
85
31
13
A308 A20
A308
1
12 2
A2 M25
Eltham Palace
A3
A244
A320
A20 Dulwich Picture Gallery
A205
Danson House 14
Epsom Downs Sta 1 Fryent
30
A220
A207 Well Hall
A1000 A2022
A1
Temple
Visitor Centre
A206
Hainault Forest
2
Stadium
Belhus Woods
Rainham Hall
4a
Observatory
A3
Visitor Centre 9 41
M11
A224 A1112
A23
90
102
5
A232
Stockley
Lesnes Abbey
5
A24
9
M26
Ingrebourne Valley
A4020
15 4b
A2
17
A1306
A408
1
A30
A245
A113
A104
A237
A4006 2
The Secret Bunker 104
A11
Power Sta
Thames Barrier
A202
T1 T2
A124
LONDINIVM
A4
Services
4a
T5
A4007 Langley Park
A412
Tower
A402
2A127
Hill Hall A223
Conservation Centre
3
A243
A244
Way
A125
A40 A13
A13
A4020
Feb 27, 2014 16:57
26
A2
2A128
27 6
A10
Horton Park Farm Paul Thorpe Westminster
Pilgrims'
A128
117
A1010
A217
A1 A240 M1
Bluewater Retail Centre
A113
A21 A112
A212
Trent
A111
Thorndon
A118
A40
A4020
A3
Brands Hatch
A410
A307
M25
A3
Coln Valley Visitor Centre
1
LondonA3 Gateway Services
M25
A404
10
City Farm
A226
Hall Place
A20
Crystal Forty Hall Palace
A23
A24
4
29
85
Stockley
A408
A308
A1083
A12
A4007
A225
A4180 A245 A118
Bayhurst Wood
A11
Langley Park
Shoreham Cross 78
© Crown copyright/database right 2014. Ordnance Survey/EDINA supplied service. FOR EDUCATIONAL USE ONLY.
A233
A309
Lullingstone 11 28 Castle AD O Visitor CentreN R MA RO
A12
M25
Olympic Park
4
A1081 12
A411
M20
A244
109
Community Farm
Brooks Farm
A5
Windmill
Hampton Court Palace
A20
Castle ROMAN VILLA 105
A317 A404
A412 A245
A413
A104
A23
120
Fairlop Waters
Down House
A406
5 km
4.5
Marina
Stadium Temple
A40
A240 A41
A21
A320
Scale 1:50000 0
Hainault Forest
A224 A1112 A318 Havering
A319
A2022 4
A1
A4006
A244
17
2
A243
10
M11
Red House
Eltham Palace
London Map
A24
A126
Danson House
A2
Dulwich Picture Gallery
25
A1005 1471
Pay & Play
A225 A3050
3
A207 Well Hall
A20
M25
24
23 1
90A307
A5183
104
5
A308 M25
18
11
A23
The Secret Bunker
A411 1
A3 A308
Lakeside
Power Sta Tolls
A220
Canoeing
A2
19
Observatory
A205
31
A206
A3
A226
30
Visitor Centre
Lesnes Abbey
A2
A202
102
5
A232
A237
Hill Hall A223
A113
12 2
2 A128
A244
A320
A10
Horton Park Farm
A404
Conservation Centre
A104
A410
A320
26
1
Bluewater Retail Centre
A316
A113
20 27 6
Manor House
A217
A1 A240 M1
A3
A319
A21
6
Belhus Woods
Rainham Hall
LONDINIVM
A307
M25
Hall Place
Ingrebourne Valley
A1306 Power Sta
Thames Barrier
A30
T4
13
117
A1010
A24
4
109
A112
A212
Trent
A111
A411
A244
A317 A404
Crystal Forty Hall Palace
A23
City Farm
Membership
A309
17
London Map
A24
Hampton Court Palace
A3050
18
1471
A308A20
25
A1005
A5183
5
M25
24
23 1
A308
17
A13
Tower
A402
A4
G TLIN WA T EE STR
Canoeing
2
A126
M4
T1
Red House
M25
Eltham Palace
Lakeside
Services Power Sta Tolls
T2
Visitor Centre 41
A118
A13
A4020
31
3
T3
T5
Danson 14 House
A125
Olympic Park
A40
30
A220
A2
Dulwich Picture Gallery
A205
4
A206
A1083
A12 A5
A127
29
A124
85
Visitor Centre
Lesnes Abbey
Th
M25
A118
Brooks Farm
A107
Kenwood
Stockley
A207 Well Hall
A20
A41
A406
11 28
A104
Stadium
Belhus Woods
Rainham Hall
4a
Observatory
Marina
AD
RO
A12
A406
A11
A4020
15 4b
1
Temple
Ingrebourne Valley
AN
M RO
Fairlop Waters
4
A1
A4006 Fryent
A1306
5
A2
A202
A127
105
Havering
Community Farm
A1000
Visitor Centre 41 17
Power Sta
Langley Park
A412
A408
1
A307 A411
A13
A1112 2
A125
LONDINIVM
A4
19
A320
A4007
M1
A124
A40
Thames Barrier
G TLIN WA T EE STR
A244
1
Tower
A402
A4020
T1
20
M40
Hainault Forest
A10
A1
M25
29
Coln Valley Visitor Centre
102
5
Thorndon
A118
A13
T2
13
16 1a
A40
Services
6
14
Wi
M11
A128 A410
A404
A1083
T4
A412
104
A104
A118
Bayhurst Wood
A11
The resulting zonal areas (hatched) A30 provide idealised locations for the M25 M25 venue. A316 14
M25
A12
Temple
A12
85
3
4a
AN
A4180
Brooks Farm
A107
Kenwood
A RO
M RO
A413
A104
Stadium
Stockley
15 4b
A406
11 28
D
Havering
A412
A1
A4006
Langley Park
5
109
Fairlop Waters
2
Coln Valley Visitor Centre
1
1
The Secret Bunker
A113
Trent
A111
London Gateway Services
105
A404
Community Farm
Bayhurst Wood
M40
A1081
4
Hainault Forest
M1
A404 In order toA412identify aA4180viable location A413 in which to propose my Stadium, M25 I first looked at the locations of existing tennis courts in London, in M40 particular those which have indoor A40 courts enabling year-round tennis A4007 to be played. The maps on this page A412 identify the locations of A4020 these courts A408 and breaks them down into three categories, membership, pay & play, and free. M4
16 1a
Hill Hall
A1010
A411
A10
A1
109
A410
A413
A128
27 6
Conservation Centre
A112
Forty Hall
12
102
5
4
12 2
26
London Map
1471
Windmill
117
18
A104
A411
A308
A5183
104
5
A113
25
A1005
A113
18
16 1a
24
23 1
The Secret Bunker
A411 Manor House
Trent
A111
M25
19
A1010
A1081
A128
Conservation Centre
A112
Forty Hall
1471
A113
20
Canoeing
G TLIN WA T EE S TR
M25 A1005
Manor House
6
Canoeing
G TLIN WA T EE S TR
6 20
Pilgrims'
Epsom Downs Sta
A240
A233
A23
Way
M26
Site Location
Landscaping
Water
Built Development
Roads
site location SITE ANALYSIS
Abstract
ATP World Arena Over the past few years, there has been a significant reduction in the number of people participating in tennis, whether this be socially or as a member of a club. On the contrary, the yearly ATP World Tour Final that has been staged in London’s o2 Arena has seen record spectator attendances, filling the capacity of the arena. This proves, that whilst there is clearly an underlying interest in tennis, few people are taking that passion to the playing fields. This project aims to amalgamate the factors above and create a universal, year-round tennis facility and stadium. Catering for a variety of ages and standards and allowing people to participate in a venue they will have seen some of the most famous stars in tennis feature in. It is anticipated that this development would for part of an overriding plan to increase public participation in the sport and thus, reinstating the sport’s funding. The form of the stadium is largely dictated by the efforts to open the views over to canary Wharf and protect the court from direct sunlight. It is constructed using a combination of ‘egg’ shaped components which have the opportunity to be occupied and inhabited by shops/bars etc. On the back of the o2 bid to secure the ATP World Tour Final until 2015, it is hoped that this facility would no longer make the tournament a travelling final but one that is secured in its new location, that of London.
The Bowl
Stadium Design
01
COURT DIMENSIONS The first parameter of bowl design is the size of the playing surface. From here you are able to determine the distance from that surface to the first row of fans. The bowl section can then be calculated from there. In order to maximise the usable playing space and make the stadium accessible to the public as a tennis centre and not just for its tournament use. I have devised a stadium floor plan which, through the use of retractable seating, can be used in a number of ways for all ages and standards of tennis. The IFT (International Tennis Foundation) and the LTA (Lawn Tennis Association) provide guidelines for court sizes and orientation, both suggest a North-South orientation and the diagrams opposite (left) identify the various court sizes and positioning.
Red Mini-Tennis Court 11m x 5.5m
Green/Adult Practice Court 23.77m x 10.97m
Orange Mini-Tennis Court 18m x 6.5m
Competition Court 23.77m x 12.80m
C VALUES
Distance from ‘point of focus’ to first row of seats.
First step
The c-value is but one of the factors to consider when designing the bowl for the stadium, relating to the sight lines of spectators on concurrent rows. Its value is measured by calculating the vertical distance from a spectators eye level to its intersection with the ‘line to point of focus’ from the spectator behind. Sight lines range from 60mm (bare minimum) to 150mm (suitable for people to wear hats), however, a typical value of 90mm is traditionally achieved. Below is the formula used to establish the main parameters for the bowl design,. The grasshopper script I have devised enables me to associate values to each of these, providing me with a corresponding range of c-values. The forthcoming diagrams will highlight where and how these values have been achieved and how the script works. N=( ((R+C) x (D+T)) / D ) - R t
N = riser height; R = height between eye on ‘point of focus’ on the playing field; D = distance from eye to ‘point of focus’ on the playing field; C = c-value; T = depth of seating row.
Lower tier retractable seating steps. (Total: 18 steps)
Sight lines from eye to ‘point of focus’
n
Having checked the c-values for the spectators, I could then generate the solid form for the seats.
C-value averages
Lower Tier: 152mm Upper Tier: 120mm
c
CAPACITY By extracting the main lines from the bowl and dividing each line by 450mm (seat size). I have been able to determine a maximum capacity for the stadium. The introduction of gangways to the seats and the design of the upper tier seating pods will inevitably lower this capacity down. Maximum capacity derived from set of curves: 33070 Anticipated capacity once circulation and pods are added: 25000
The Facade Stadium Design
02
Facade Design This page shows how the grasshopper script I wrote has helped to inform my design and be adaptable and manipulated through a number of different parameters. Starting from a single curve, the single interpolative curves are constructed at exact points along the curve. From here my component can be made into a pod and form the solid forms you see opposite. These screenshots show areas of control within script and how I can change and manipulate it.
This small sequence shows how the components are formulated along the curve: 1 - Interpolate curve formed as a result of the grids opposite 2 - Curve then rotated 180 degrees about its centre point 3 - Curve then mirrored and moved about the x direction so as to create a separation and ‘thickness’ between the curves. 4 - Lofted curves are then mirrored to create a ‘half component’ 5 - Finally they are mirrored again to create the full component 6 - Components are ‘culled’ to remove the inner pods and create the tier for the stadium seating. 7 - This process was repeated for the intermediate level in which each pod is mirrored to the one below it so as to line up the curvature
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
The script does not just allow me to form a single size curve, it also allows me to alter various parameters to create the curvature, thickness, length angle and distance from each other. This allowed me to generate the optimum pod for the stadium in terms of capacity, sight lines and aesthetics.
This detail shows how each glulam beam would be connected to each other. A 1:20 model is contained amongst my models.
V-shaped, extruded sheet steel connector Steel supporting frame Weld joining sheet steel to fin Through-bolts attaching glulam to sheet steel Throug-bolt Large steel plate fin Fin bolted to Glulam Steel plate fin Glulam beam
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT
Below are a series of views showing how the script can be manipulated to form differing curves.
Variations in form based on simply drawing a different curve and connecting it to the script
The Roof
Stadium Design
03
Roof These diagrams show how the form of the roof was calculated and design using the existing plan of the stadium and the form of the pods. 1 - Plan view of the stadium without a roof 2 - Main axes derived and curves drawn through the centre of the pods 3 - The curves have been rationalised to fit a coherent pattern 4 - Shape of the roof to cover has been drawn from a detailed solar analysis in Ecotect. 5 - The distance between the curves is lofted and kept within the confines of the shaddow pattern
6 - Curves are drawn around the extremes of the stadium so that the roof fits to the external pods and forms a clean curve
7 - Roof curves are lofted to the projected ‘green’ form above
8 - The resulting roof form is complete
Landscaping Stadium Design
04
Curves have been offset from the outermost point of the pods.
Additional curves have been drawn and mirrored from the centre point of the pods through the offset curves.
Using the interlocking pattern as a base, new curves were drawn and then thickened to resemble a quarter component of a pod
Separating the ‘seats’ before mirroring them opens up numerous vantage points overlooking the Thames, Canary wharf and the practice courts.
External covered areas for hog dog stalls etc
Practice courts and seating
Masterplan Forming part of the overall masterplan and redevelopment of the Peninsula, my masterplan uses the existing drawings from Liftschultz Davidson Sandisland’s SPD document for the proposal may me for this area. The diagrams opposite show how the form of the landscaping feature have been derived and how they impact the surrounding environment and circulation around the stadium. To the right is a masterplan view of the site identifying the wider context of the stadium and its surrounds.
Proposal
Stadium Design
PAUL THORPE - DS10 Exploded Axonometric ATP World Tour
05
External landscaping and practice courts
Aerial view
Internal walkways
Let the games begin....