MATERIAL - CONSTRUCTION architectural projects by
Rasmus R. B. Maabjerg Aarhus School of Architecture Unit 2/3 F 2016
Aarhus School of Architecture
TA BLE OF
CO N T E N TS 002
2016
Step 4 & 5 material - construction
005
Step 4 & 5 material - investigations
006
Excursion - Saint-Gobain Weber A/S
010
Excursion - Krabbesholm Højskole
012
Material investigations - hands on
014
Fabrication - cnc milling
016
Robotic fabrication - Hotwire cutting
020
Samples and component design
026
Samples - Compression test
028
Samples - Heat transmission properties
030
Results
031
Samples - aesthetic potentials
032
Aesthetic potentials - color
034
Aesthetic potentials - additions
035
Component design - surface treatment
036
Surface treatment - post processing index
038
GodsbanegĂĽrden - historical view
050
Green wedge
058
Building typology - material alphabet
060
Comment / user mapping - specifying a location
062
Place for reflection - choosing building site
068
Place for reflection - design phase
070
Visualization - concepts
076
Place for reflection - preparing the site
080
Place for reflection - principles of construction
084
Place for reflection - casting process
088
Place for reflection - final result
090
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
ARCHITECTURAL STUDIES BY
Rasmus Romme Brick Maabjerg
STEP 4 -GROUP WORK IN COLLABORATION
Dan Ravneberg Nielsen Rasmus Gaare Marte Sofie RubĂŚk Slotsgaard
STEP 5 -GROUP WORK IN COLLABORATION
Dan Ravneberg Nielsen Rikke Helbo Julie Tholens
UNIT
TUTORS
Unit 2/3f
Niels Martin Larsen Fabio Gigone Kasper Riis Jensen Tommy Bruun
004
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Step 4 & 5 material - construction
This year’s studies are focused on developing an architectural thinking through physical production. A few deviations from the study plan occur in the actual assignment, while maintaining the focus areas and learning goals in the original plan. The main themes will continue to be openings, light, material and technology. These topics were investigated in smallscale studies in the autumn, and are brought into an architectural scale in the spring. As in the autumn semester, we are maintaining a strong emphasis on digital design methods and digital fabrication technologies. Particularly robotic hotwire cutting and CNC- milling will be introduced as methods for processing EPS foam for making of casting moulds. All projects will be developed in Rhino 3D (or equivalent software) and we will discuss parametric strategies, mainly available through use of Grasshopper. During the semester we will discuss the relation between to be and to build i.e. construction and the creation of space as a link to the fundamental matter of being. We are now going to work in 1:1 scale, focusing on a single material type, namely lightweight expanded clay aggregate (LECA). Saint-Gobain/Weber will provide us with the LECA material needed for investigation and casting of the elements. During the semester we will explore and investigate the inherent qualities of this material. How does the material work in terms of structural strength? What aWre the architectural qualities within the material and how does it work environmentally? To obtain as much knowledge of the material as possible, we will take a trip to the manufacturing plot and learn form the process of producing LECA. The project period will be split in two sections. The first section of one month will include all students divided into groups. During this period you are going to explore and investigate deeply into the LECA material regarding the overall themes of the semester. The knowledge you have received from your prior semester in the workshops will form the basis for these studies. You are going to investigate material properties, fabrication method, construction method, surface texture and geometry. After the common workshop month, the assignment will split for second and third year students. Second year students will continue developing the project, which is going to be realised in 1:1 scale. Third year students will develop an architectural design for a building in a specific context. 005
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Step 4 material investigations The studies in February are organised as a series of investigations of different aspects of the material and the realisation process. First, we will produce a number of casts with different mixtures of clay, lime, cement and aggregates. We will carry out analysis of aesthetic qualities, strength, u-value and life cycles. Some of these analyses will stretch into the following period to allow the samples to cure and dry. We will develop production methods for casting through use of digital fabrication, such as robotic hot-wire cutting and CNC-milling of EPS foam. For the investigation of the inherent qualities in the material each group will produce a number of LECA blocks of specific dimensions. Some castings are contributions to the unit’s collective set of samples, and will be used for testing strength and thermal properties. Other samples will be directed towards investigating the aesthetic properties of the material; such as how light is reflected, how the material relates to curved and rigid geometries and various surface treatments of mould and casting. This second type of samples is freely developed; depending on which potentials the group decides to investigate. The studies will be supplemented by lectures and courses. Building a circular future STEP 4 will be supplemented with theoretical input through lectures and courses with Heidi Merrild, the school’s consultant on materials. Theory will be combined with practical exercises and test that will give knowledge and skills to chose material on behalf of the context as climate, strength, insulation value, environmental impact etc. We will in order to understand the origin of materials, use value stream mapping as a method to overview input as well as process to get the final product. The energy can be supplied endlessly from the sun but resources as raw material is limited and some a scarcity. As the population grows we have an increasing use of resources, this we have to approach by new way of designing where we define the end use of the materials from the beginning. We will therefore address design for disassembly as a design tool both in term of materials and building component with a goal of building a circular future.
We will work with some aspects of a material passport, which is a way to ensure the ability to gain access to all relevant information describing the characteristics and quality of a component or material in a product. With the relevant data available, the quality and reliability for re-use is documented and hereby the highest possible exposure to the market and the highest market value is ensured. The passport is the documentation of the component’s history, and contains: • Chemical and technical specifications • Environmental impact during production and lifetime • Instructions for assembly, disassembly, maintenance, reconstruction and re-use • Description of quality assurance and relevant certificates • Unique code to identify exact location in the construction
Step 5 construction
You will develop a project for “space for reflection”, located in the area west of Godsbanen in Aarhus. You will write your own program for a basic building, constructed, mainly of materials investigated through the preliminary studies in February. You will use digital design tools and digital fabrication technologies to develop your project. As part of the project development you will produce samples and test castings in 1:1 scale to demonstrate and investigate the tectonic qualities and principles as part of the design for the building. The project material will consist of these samples, models and architectural drawings, communicating the final design and the development process. The specific constraints for this phase will be presented in the end of February. You will realize a design proposal for at specific site. The project will be initiated with site analysis and development of a basic program, based on contextual analysis and understanding of potential users. You will use digital design tools, linked with digital fabrication facilities, to make a series of 1:1 scale test components, in order to develop a realization strategy and to communicate and specify the project. The solution should be developed directly in continuation of February’s investigations of casting methods and material properties. You will then produce and build the actual construction on the site, and finally document how it was realized and experienced. The specific constraints for this phase will be presented end of February.
006
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
lecastone from saint-gobain weber a/s use over time in casting area.
007
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
STEP
4
MATERIAL INVESTIGATIONS 01.02.2016 - 29.02.2016
008
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
009
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Excursion - Saint-Gobain Weber A/S Leca has been used for its isolating abilities for at long period of time. It is made from clay, and is a ceramic product. The clay is transported from the clay pit and is mixed at the factory to make it all similar quality. After the transport the clay is burned in large round ovens. As the oven rotates the leca is spherically formed. Thereafter the leca is ready to isolate with, because every stone consist of small air-holes. The product is a loose material and it is used in this condition in comparison with other materials. Leca is normally used as slabs and it can be used for casting. By using leca you get a moldable material which will adapt to what it is cast in. In addition to other materials used for isolating, leca is one of the few that can be load bearing1. The photos show the process of creating lecastones. The clay is transported to the factory where it is burned and afterwards stored in large piles, until it is packed and brought the stores.
Saint - Gobain Weber A/s
Aarhus
1
http://www.energihjem.dk/leca-isolering/
010
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
saint-gobain weber a/s 01.02.2016
011
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Excursion - Krabbesholm højskole 04.02.2016 Visiting Krabbesholm Højskole in Skive to see and investigate “Pardo House” by Jorge Pardo. The building is built with lecablocks from the local shop and cut afterwards to fit the proportions and change the look og the surface. The Pardo house shows how leca can be incorporated in a building together with other building materials such as wood and glass. It gave us an example of what leca really can do.
Krabbesholm
Aarhus
012
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Pardo House - Details 04.02.2016
Pardo House - Contrast 04.02.2016
013
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Material investigations - hands on
1
2
2 - 4 mm 4 -10 mm 10 - 20 mm
First step for preparing our mixture, was to gather all the materials we needed. We tried finding different types of leca and then we found both a grey and a white cement. Water is the element that binds it all together.
Second step was to find a bucket that could contain the desired amount of cement, water and leca. Everything could be easily mixed by using a large mixer.
3
4
Then everything is carefully measured, until the desired mixture was achieved. The first few times it is good just to test out the different proportions, but in the beginning we went with 1:7 (Cement : Leca). When the mixture seems thick enough it is ready to be poured into the moulds.
At last we need to find a mould, which can be anything. The mould can be made out of both cardboard, wood etc. and have any design you want. The leca will adapt to whatever mould it is poured into. The smaller the leca, the more precise cast you get. The test we carried out were made in all leca sizes.
014
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Leca tests - form and strength
015
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Fabrication - cnc milling As part of the experimentation, each group should produce at least one mould with robotic hot-wire cutting, and one mould with CNC-milling, and produce samples with these moulds. Through the alphacam software, we managed to mill an double-curved surface in foam, which will be the base of the casting mould. The surface became more rough than expected. The last diagram (nr 4) is added, because it shows the negative form of what is being milled. This is how the leca casting are supposed to look like.
CNC Milling - Polystyrene
016
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
4
3
CNC-milled surface outcome
Negative form which is removed
2
Lofted surface between two curves
1
30
300mm
Polystyrene box
0m
m
m
0m
30
017
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Leca castings which were made on top of the cnc milled polystyrene forms. The curved forms show lecas’ ability to adapt to the surface, and how it nicely keep the intended geometry. We found that the leca between 2-4mm and 4-10 mm worked best for creating a clean looking and smooth felling surface. The mixture in these casting are 1:7 (cement, leca), which work fine for investigating form.
Diagram showing cnc and casting process
018
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
1
2
Castings on top of polysterene
019
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Robotic fabrication - Hotwire cutting Following diagrams show the process of creating one of our desired polystyrene moulds. The boxes are drawn in Rhino 3d and afterwards developed in Grasshopper. The HAL plugin for grasshopper created the framework for directing the robot.
1
4 Curves are drawn from which the surface is created
220 mm
Polystyrene box
2
5 30
0
mm
30
0
mm
Given measurements for production
3
Lofted surface that will be cut be the robot
6
Two sides controlling the paths for the wire to pass through
After the cutting the two pieces can be seperated
020
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
ABB IRB 120 robot
021
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
BOX 1
1
2
BOX 2
3
4 Polystyrene cut with a hotwire. The surface is created from two lofted curves
022
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
1
2
Leca castings on basis of the forms which have been cut with hot-wire in the robot lab. The examples on the top (nr 1) are cast directly on the polystyrene, while the one on the bottom (nr 2) is casted between two opposite standing moulds. The last one therefore shows the gap og the interaction between both the negative and the positive side og the mould. Casting nr 1 is done in 4-10mm leca while the casting nr 2 is done in 2-4mm leca
023
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
024
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
CONCLUSION 1.01 On basis on all the different test we went through, we found out that the smallest leca (2-4mm) is the best for making sharp and precise casts on top on moulds. The downside of using the small leca is that it need a bigger amount of cement, which mean the castings become much more heavy than the intention is. The large leca (10-20mm) is much more light , but in our small mould it cant make a precise cast. The scale must be even bigger. This type of leca will therefore work better in 1:1 full-scale castings, which we are supposed to do later on. We used both cnc and robots for fabricating our polystyrene moulds. The robot and the hotwire cutting created a cleaner surface, but the creativity was a bit bound by the two beginning curves. We thought that this first chapter was too loose, because no one had a clue what casting was what and which mixture were used. There we wanted to make something that becomes more systematic and precise.
025
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Samples and component design Samples
First of all, the groups will produce a large number of samples, which together will form a shared collection. Some samples will be used for compression strength tests, carried out in March and April at Navitas under guidance of civil engineer Jacob Fisker. Others will be tested for heat transmission properties at AAA with the school’s thermal camera. These tests will be carried out in March, when the samples are dry. Furthermore, each group will carry out a series of samples, investigation more aesthetic potentials, and the mixtures, geometries and processing of these are decided by the groups, except that the group must deliver a set of samples for the collection with the dimensions described below. The diagrams below indicate which groups produce the different samples. Component design Besides the set of samples, the task for each group is to develop a design for, at least, one type of building component that can serve as a starting point for developing a project in March. The scale can vary from brick size to the size of a wall panel or take the form of a construction principle for in situ casting. The design should include mixture specifications as well as fabrication and construction process. At least one sample (or part of it, if it is large) should be produced. It should be illustrated, for instance with isometric drawings and/or models, how the component can function as part of a larger architectural system.
026
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Casting area, test samples
027
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Samples - compression Compression test sample diagram The group produces 8 samples with the same mixture (according to the diagram below), approximately on February 10. 4 samples will be tested end of March, and 4 samples are to be tested mid April. - Samples with binder and LECA mixture: 1 : 7 (binder : LECA) - Samples with sand mixture: 1 : 3 : 7 (binder : sand : LECA)
Raw clay
2-4mm Leca
028
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
320mm
Unit F
160mm
Results After letting our clay mixture dry for several days, it turned out that it wouldn’t get dry. Our first thought was that it was because of the small amount of clay in the mixture, compared to the amount of leca, but it turned out that clay isn’t good for using as binder in a construction. The tubes filled with the clay mixture are therefore not ready for testing yet, because they fall apart if you move them around.
Groups have leaved their tests for drying until March.
029
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Samples - heat transmission properties U-value test sample diagram The group produces the samples as described in the diagram Samples with binder and LECA 1:7 (binder : LECA) Samples with sand mixture proportions: 1:3:7 (Binder : sand : LECA)
0m
60mm
30
Cement / 2-4 mm
m
300mm
Cement / 4-10 mm, sand mixture
030
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Samples - results The samples were situated in the same spot for 5 hours before their temperature were measured. Results showing how the mixture is able to absorb and release warmth. The photographies were taken with a thermal camera. All the data was therefore given to us. The data was put into a common Excel document, which can be used later on for getting knowledge about material and mixture properties.
031
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Samples - aesthetic potentials
3 : 3 : 25 Rough sand, cement, leca 10-20mm
3 : 3 : 25 Light sand, cement, leca 10-20mm
6 : 3 : 25 Rough sand, cement, leca 4-10 mm
6 : 3 : 12 : 13 Rough sand, cement, 2-4mm leca, 10-20mm leca
032
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
100mm
30
0m
m
300mm
Samples of mixture, texture, shape and pattern Each group produces at least 4 samples of different mixtures (free combination) in a mould with a flat surface. With a specific mixture, 4 flat surfaces with different textures are produced, either by using mould with different textures or by post- processing the surface. By the use of different types of sand, we created both an strong, but also plain surface. The surfaces of one specific mixture were treated differently according to investigate types of treatments and looks. Two photos showing an example of sanding the surface. 033
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Aesthetic potentials - colour We tried out different castings, where we added “pastry color” bought in the local supermarket. We tried adding it but directly in the cement, but also after the leca was added into the mould. The results can be seen here.
We tried adding blue and green colour as well, but it did not have any effect on the casting. After the drying period it turned into normal colour of the cement again. This was because the cement dissolves the colour.
By adding yellow “pastry colour” bought in the local supermarket, it was possible to create a random pattern through the leca casting. In the long run it will not be possible to use, because it will be washed out by water.
034
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Aesthetic potentials - additions Different starting points, in terms of creating and adding aesthetic solutions to our casting.
Wooden component added to investigate how it affects the drying, and whether it is possible to separate afterwards. The separation succeeded, and created a clean imprint.
Furthermore we tried adding sawdust to our mixture of leca. The dust sucked a lot a the moister in the mixture, but it turned out pretty strong in the end. The photo shows how the texture of the final result after cutting it into two pieces.
035
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Component design - Surface treatments The focus of this task was the finishing of the surfaces after the casting. We tried to carry out a systematized principle by leaving a surface untreated, one surface that was sanded and at last one that was cut with a grinder. The reason for that was to able to collect information and categorize principles of how to post proces leca.
2
1
3 Moulds get filled with desired mixture of leca and cement casting moulds cut out from cylinders.
Mould and castings get separated.
At last they are post processed with the desired medium
Casting are drying The casting are treated with both a sander and a grinder
6
4
5
036
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
037
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Surface treatments - post processing index 10 different surface treatments with same casting ratio: All treatments were carried out the same day.
CUT
1 : 1,25 : 10 (water, cement, leca 10-20mm)
SANDED
^
UNTREATED
^
1
3
2
Untreated
Soured milk
5
4
Linseed oil
038
Liquid glass
Liquid glass + linseed oil
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
6
7
Molten wax
8
Linseed oil + black pigment
9
Lime water (1 : 5 )
039
10
Clay
Hydrochloric acid
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Same surface treatments : This shows the result after drying four days inside.
CUT
1 : 1,25 : 10 (water, cement, leca 10-20mm)
SANDED
^
UNTREATED
^
1
3
2
Untreated
Soured milk
5
4
Linseed oil
040
Liquid glass
Liquid glass + linseed oil
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
6
7
Molten wax
8
Linseed oil + black pigment
9
Lime water (1 : 5 )
041
10
Clay
Hydrochloric acid
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
042
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
CONCLUSION 1.02 In terms of using clay for binder, we found out that it wasn’t possible. It would not dry before it was able to be tested. Furthermore we succeeded in making the two test-samples or heat transmission. In other investigations we tried adding colour to the mixture, but it soon became clear to us that cement removes the type of colour we used. In addition we tried adding sawdust to the mixture, and by that we created a strong and consistent mixture. Furthermore the sawdust created a great looking surface texture. At last we created the catalogue of post processed surfaces. We went to the local supermarket and bought different things for treating the surface. It became clear that clay, lime and linseed oil were best for treating the surface. By adding colour to the oil, we could give the surface a distinct black colour. The overall idea was to create a catalogue to go back to, when we need it later on in he project.
043
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Value stream mapping Production of cement and leca, until it is made into a lecablock. This block will be incorporated into a house and later reused. The proces is described in danish.
044
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
045
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
STEP
5
CONSTRUCTION 01.03.2016 - 29.04.2016
046
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
047
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - Godsbanegården
The site we are dealing with is located in middle of Aarhus. It is also referred to as “the green wedge” because it on of the lowest lying areas in Aarhus, and it fits in the between the surrounding landscape like a wedge formed by nature, connecting Brabrand with the train rails into the centre of Aarhus.
048
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
049
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Godsbaneg책rden - Historical view
18 42
18 19 99 01
050
19 54
19 19 71 76
19 80
9 0
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
20 01
20 16
051
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
052
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg Unit F
03.03.2016 Godsbanen, Institute for X and the green wedge
053
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Green wedge - Site approach / analysis The overall site is here emphasized to show how large is actually is. It goes from the old train-central down to the large bridge. The overall area is called “the green wedge”. It is characterised by being situated in the part of the city closest the water-level, which means that the wind is blowing more often in the part of Aarhus (p. 48-49)
After looking at the area from an overall perspective we investigated how the area can be approached in terms of entrances. We found out that the “Godsbane” area is having larger entrances with more people coming through than the lower more open area has. The area closest to the bridge has more smaller roads and they are only used by the one who knows their existence. This depends on the ones using it though. Based on the knowledge about the entrances to the area, we analysed the way people moved around the area. The patterns are mainly linear because of the way the buildings are arranged. They go parallel to the main buildings and ends up where the open space is. The only place where you loose a sense of direction, is when moving around between the containers. The overall movements is based on the location of the institutions. (X,Reuse, Godsbanen etc).
054
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
PRIVATE PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC
PRIVATE
PUBLIC
The green wedge is divided into both public and private owned institutions and areas. We therefore investigated the area and found both knowledge about the private and public institutions but also the how the areas distinguish themselves in terms of how the user feels when entering both a private and a public area. The private areas are here refereed to as X and Håbets Allé.
Based on a walk around the whole area we divided it into parts that are experienced as open and parts that are closed. This was basicly determined by the experience of the changing of scale, but also whether we felt like entering a private or public area as well.
Open Closed
Furthermore the area is strongly influenced by central lines and axes running through the northern part to the southern end by the “ringgadebro”. This creates a basis for the overall flow of the area, because of the long directional views.
Start/end of axis
055
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
The choice of site is also based on an analysis of the openings in the adjacent buildings. The space by the hill is already there, but by shielding of the space from the line of sights, a more private area turns up.
DENSITY WINDOWS
DENSITY DOORS
DENSITY BUILDINGS
056
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Man made terrain is created at institute for X, because the wanted a diverse area with plants and possibilities to stay in more or less private areas without being disturbed all the time. The plan drawing shows where the small hills are located and how they are placed in connection with other buildings.
After analysing the overall area we wanted to place us in the most dense area of Godsbanen. The area has a better flow of people and there is a greater activity. By placing us here we make sure that our space and design will be seen and used.
057
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Green wedge - Diversity of organization Investigations done based on the overall organization of the site. The investigation shows the building and mass typologies, an different types of volumes and how they interact together. The area ranges from the main-building at Godsbanen all the way to “Ringgadebroen�.
Free organization decided by the need of a specific function. The organization creates a more privat space, but also a flow with more undefined movement.
Free organization decided by the need of a specific function. The organization creates a more privat space, but also a flow with more undefined movement.
Linear organization based on a growing and moving development. Temporary plan views that changes both quick but also over time.
058
Large buildings that contributes the axis present on the site. This organisation frames the overall plan view and should be seen and main buildings.
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
059
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Building typology - Material alphabet
1
2
6
11
15
7
8
12
13
16
18
3
4
9
17
19
20 060
5
10
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
All the different buildings were also photographed too create a catalogue defining the way of building, designing and arranging materials together to create spaces and structures. The overall site is affected by both old and new buildings ranging from the old train-halls to temporary tent structures. The overall design of the buildings are left to the user, but the tendency is to follow the idea a growing and self-emergent architecture. All the different structures have a function whether it is for living, being creative or working in. This reflects in the use of different types of materials such as bricks, wood, glass and iron. Everything can be changed until it has the desired function or look. We as group therefore decided to implement this idea to our own project. “Adding to something, already existing�. This thinking is used to create a space close to way is would be done by the local users. 061
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Comment & user mapping - Specifying a location Different users of the green wedge are asked about their opinion about the area. Their responses are mapped on top of the site-plan based on their location when asking the question and whether their comments were positive og negatively charged. After the interview the person is asked if i could take their photo or not. The result is shown beneath. Based on their comments we decided to place our buildings site inside institute for X. The reason for that was the fact that people were more open-minded and could relate the project.
1
4
7
2
5
8
10
1. The copenhagener 2. The painter 3. The workshop user 4. Born and raised in Aarhus 5. The workshop responsible person 6. The grafitty painter 1/2 7. The grafitty painter 2/2 8. The trainee 9. The enthusiast 10. The photographer 3
6
9
062
Not allowed to photograph
COMMENT & USER MAPPING Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
1 + Creativity + Brings in the area around + - Community /Closed door + Community + The city gathers here for exchange of creativity - Free area
+ +
5
- In need of privat spaces - Goes home for thinking + - Flow- many people + + + - + 2
3
- + If no one take action - nothing happens + Commitment + Community
2
1
Nest box Startup - move on idea Coincidences under restrictions Temporary
6
+ Exciting area + Takes photos + Likes the buildings
9
+ Social design space + Open attitude + Knowledge about eachother
7
8
Owned by the Municipality Organized Alternative Playground for adults Temporary Open environment
- + + + + +
10
Open/closed attitude Things to reflect upon Gathering area inside the city Starting point Area with contrasts - People + Buildings
+ + + + + ++ + -
+ + + + + +
Freedom to what you wanne do + �Just stick within the rules of the area�
Closed school which wants to be integrated Creativity + Closed municipallity -
Never alone Community Cooperation Everybody know eachother Collective freedom
++ + ++
Only walks through Everything should be preserved +
3
-
+ Need gathering Connection to scandinavian center + Borring surroundings Only for young people -
4
1. The copenhagener 2. The painter 3. The workshop user 4. Born and raised in Aarhus 5. The workshop responsible person 6. The grafitty painter 1/2 7. The grafitty painter 2/2 8. The trainee 9. 10. The photographer Not allowed to photograph
063
1 Small conversations
and hard to get in contact to. People
are more reserved and private.
2
Longer conversations and more people to talk to. People
talked more privately and openly about the area.
3
Fever but different people. They were willing to talk about the area eventhough they used it rarer.
+ -
POSITIVILY CHARGED ATTITUDES NEGATIVELY CHARGED ATTITUDES
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
“If i was to built a space for reflection, i would propose a space for gathering artwork produced by the users of the site” - Retired photographer at Godsbanen 11.03.2016
“(...)most def would love to make this exchange and collab work .. I love the idea of micro galleries. Anyway , really love your idea . i am very interested in talking more and see who this can be beneficial to the both of us and more so to the city and the region” - Creative artist Abdul dube 14..03.2016
064
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
“Mødestedet” by Abdul Dube. Presenting photos and films from his travels. An small exhibition space for people to come by and look at. Similar thinking to our proposal for a space for reflection.
065
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
066
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
CONCLUSION 1.03 After the investigation of Godsbanen we found that the site has changed massively since its beginning. The site is characterized by a continuous flow of people. It has a lot of axes going through the area and is also containing several private and public areas. The private areas are more freely organized while the public areas are more strictly planned. The buildings analysis showed that is based on a “add’on” architecture that is based on adding something to something that is already existing. By using walking as a mean for investigating the site, we talked with different user of the area. By doing that we found out what was good and bad about the area and actually also what was missing. We got inspiration from a photographer that wanted a place for him to hang up his photographies. “Mødestedet” or the meeting place is already existing at Godsbanen and we wanted to create a space similar to that. A space where it is possible to use for exhibiting everything freely. 067
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - Choosing building site The site is characterized by the two piles of sand and the stairs that are separating them. Underneath the piles, there are tiles put there to create a platform. The pile to the left is primarily used as waste-deposit area, which now has to be moved somewhere else. This site was chosen because of investigation showing how many people who actually passed through this area. In terms of us wanting to create an open gallery, it seemed obvious. This site can already be seen as a space for itself shielding of the trains behind and opening up towards the whole institute. The area seems already private, but by opening a gallery will perhaps create a feeling of something that can be shared together. By pacing our project there, we could corporate with the many users of this area and help bringing the closed public area from Godsbanen into Institute for X.
It is located in the middle of the green wedge and in the area of institute for X. This is determined on basis of the users and its ability to give a certain amount of privacy.
LOCATION
068
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Grass
Wood
Sand
Stone
Soil
Furthermore the chosen site is based on different types of underlays, textures and materials. Ranging from sand to stone. These types of characteristics gives the site a feeling of temporality. Something that is existing but is able to be rearranged in different ways. 069
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - design-phase We took a starting point in investigating how it was possible to approach the terrain architecturally. How massive should our design be and how should it shield the surroundings of? We did that by investigating the plan view of the site and ended up with several design variations. How should the user enter and should the walls eventually follow the slnated terrain. In the end we chose the one which could contain all of our parameters . The design proposals are listed on next page, and explained.
Simple design investigation on forming a space inside the hill. How walls are arranged in order to form our gallery space.
Meeting with the site. How should the terrain be approached, when entering the space’?
070
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Modelling a conceptual idea. Investigating forms and how they interact with an existing surface and terrain.
DESIGNPROPOSALS BASED ON TERRAIN DIAGRAMMES
SECTIONS
PERSPECTIVE
071
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
#1 This approach was way to complicated in order the cast in leca. The design took approach in a flow inside the hill and a focus on a single exhibited image in the middle. This design used more leca than we were able to use. The linear idea was i principe that we took with us.
072
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
#2 An even more closed box, which minimized the flow, but was more able to work as a micro gallery. This design did as well use way too much material for us to built it in time. The idea of a focus on the gallery was a principle that we took in consideration.
073
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
#3 The desired design ended up being a simple rectangular room that figuratively cut it self into the hill. In the beginning we wanted to make the wall follow the terrain, but we found out that the underlying ground was concrete we could not dig down under it and make a ramp going down into the ground. Instead we compromised with the site end drew a simple form that contained our principles of design.
074
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
#4 Renderings showing how we translated the design from a slanted form into a straight form. Everything became more linear because of how we was forced to compromised with the site. An experience that turned out to strengthen the project, and make it more simple.
075
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Visualization - Concepts
Storage
Rendering/collages showing the idea behind our gallery. A space for people to come and hang up their photographies. It points away from the massive trains and railways, and turns towards the open area around institute for X. When the times come and we are done with the project, it is supposed to be taken over by the users of the site. We have created for frame/space for for-example a gallery, but the intention is that it can be used for nearly everything. People can sit on the site of it, our it can be used for storage of bikes.
Relaxing
Plan
076
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
SECTION
077
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Wind diagrams showing how much the wind is present on our site. The closed space that we have created reflects the wind, which gives a quiet feeling for the user of our gallery. Be making the wall 2, 5 meters high the room becomes anechoic and lovely the experience at stay.
078
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Sun diagram which shows how the sun affects our gallery. Because of us making larger walls, the inside of the gallery wont be affected as much as we wanted. The renderings gives an idea of how it actually will look at the site.
Sunset
Sunrise Sunset Sunrise
B
079
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - Preparing the site The site was characterized by a large compost area, where nature had taken over. Because of the fact that we wanted to dig into the pile, we had to remove the dirt and the bricks. A physical job that was necessary. Luckily we got help from the a larger digging machine which could do the job more precisely. Underneath the layer of bricks we discovered that there was a large
Lockstone “J� - survivals from freight transport
080
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg Unit F
Straight cut
Naturally grown plants from compost heap
081
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Building site - Removing the stones
082
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg Unit F
Building site - removing the dirt
083
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - principles of construction
Polysterene cut with robotic hotwire. Used for the space for the windows and for the notch inside
Welded wire reinforcement 150 x 6 mm 215 x 250 cm connected with the steelbars in the concrete slab.
Outer formwork consisting of 12mm mendozapine 250 x 125 cm casting plywood.
Inner formwork - connected with battens 47 x 125 x 3000mm
Reinformercing steel bars - 12mm
Concrete slab below the layer of tiles
084
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
12mm steelbars are forced down into the concrete slab for fastening the 6mm reinforced iron net.
Outer formwork consisting of 12 mm mendoza pine is created and secured, so that it will not fall apart while constructing the rest.
Outer formwork done and connected.
Inner and outer formwork are done and ready for casting.
085
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
#1 Casting principle Reinforced iron net placed 30 mm from inner edge. Model 1:20
#2 Casting principle Removable foam for placing of the window tiles. Model 1:20
#3 Casting principle Form-work which is developed gradually, based on the level of the material in the form. Model 1:20
086
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
190 mm
Glass tile Glass tile Lightweight concrete
650 mm
50 mm
550 mm
150 mm
Unit F
2500 mm
34 mm
notch for pinup
1300 mm
Reinforcement net 6 mm
Reinforcement tube 12 mm
Rammed Stone dust and sand
70 mm 70 mm
140 mm
Woodpiece for distance
Lock stones Sand
220 mm
9mm
Section through wall and ground
1:10 Section Foundation, notch & windows
087
aa
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - Casting process Our casting process began by finding and collecting materials from both the Ceres area and around Godsbanen. Our wood and steel reinforcement were kindly sponsored by Mthøjgaard, which gave is instructions on how to cast concrete like this. We sat the formwork up and made the wall separately, so that it was possible to disassemble later on. Polystyrene was cut in order to create rooms for the glass tiles and the notch. The mixture was made out of 3 types of leca. 0-2 mm, 4-10 mm and 10- 20 mm. Everything is then mixed with white cement from Aalborg portland and water.
088
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Inside the formwork
PRESSURE
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
089
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Place for reflection - Final result
090
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
091
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Notch for exhibition
092
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
Glass tiles
093
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
Relation between the hill and the gallery
094
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
hvid cement
Aa. cement
weber
leca
ceres
værktøj
mads p
X
Diagram showing where we got our materials from and how many people whom we got involved in the project.
armering
X
vinduer fliser
lægter
Karl
paller
M.T.H
forskalling armering reglar
modtaget
x
lægter
x
DR
armering
forskalling
CONCLUSION 1.04 After we finished the casting we found out how much time it would have taken if we wanted to build the first deign proposals we had. After the drying time of three days, our micro gallery stood ready for the finishing of the window tiles and the notch. It was the time anyone of us had created a complete form work for a casting before and the overall concept was successfully done. Concerning the casting principles, it were not all of them that we carried out. The guidance from the engineers help us with finding out how we should cast the foundation and how to use the reinforcement correctly. After the project was ended we gathered all the leftover materials and distributed it all around Godsbanen to both Institute for X, the smith and a local club. That meant that none of the materials were thrown out directly after we finish our casting. The overall project was there ended successfully. 095
GIVET videre
Aarhus School of Architecture
2016
096
Unit F
Rasmus R.B. Maabjerg
097
04.05.2016