architecture deign studio: AIR
sophiebardoel bachelor of environments student the university of melbourne
CONTENTS 1.0
The Case for Innovation
1.1
Architecture as Discourse
1.2
Computing in Architecture
1.3
Parametric Modelling
2.0
Case Studies
2.1.1 Group Research & Arguement 2.1.2 Case Study 1.0 2.2.1 Case Study 2.1 2.2.2 Case Study 2.2 2.2.3 The Matrix 2.2.4 Digitial & Physical Models 2.2.5 EOI Feedback
3.0
EOI Feedback
3.1.1 Week 9 Progress 3.1.2 Week 10 Progress 3.1.3 Week 11 Progress 3.1.4 Feedback
studioAIR
studioAIR
1.0 The Case for Innovation
1.1 Architecture as Discourse
sophiebardoel bachelor of environments student the university of melbourne
studioAIR
I previously transferred from Monash University at the start of 2012, where I was studying Bachelor of Interior Architecture. I moved to Bachelor of Enviroments majoring in Architecture, to pursue my ambition to become an architect. I enjoy travelling, and have been lucky enough to have been overseas a fair few times. This might sound cliché but I have an internet shopping addiction, which in no effort do I try to suppress. From my previous study at Monash I was introduced to AutoCAD and 3ds Max. I can model and render in 3ds Max at a sufficient level. After completely Construction Design last semester I can quite happily say I could use AutoCAD blindfolded, after spending hours upon hours on it. I also did a 3 day Rhino course up at UTS which introduced me to the basics, which I picked up quickly as it fairly similar to AutoCAD and 3ds Max. I can also use SketchUp to a high level, and Vray. I’m very interested in digital architecture. While I was doing my Rhino short course up at UTS I was very quickly shown what grasshopper can do, and have been eager to try it. This semester seems like a big challenge, I’m scared but also really excited at the same time. I do not know any theory behind digital architecture, so I will have a lot of research to do this semester concerning it. I know parametric architecture has been used a lot to design buildings in the last decade, however I don’t know any inparticular- but I’ll take a stab at it a say the Nest in Beijing. I love architecture because it is my two favourite things merged together- art and design. On one level you are creating a beautiful sculpture and on the other you are making a functional space and environment for people to use. From as early as I can remember I’ve always been fascinated by architecture. From make-shift cubby houses to lego manisons and dioramas and my numerious visits to glorious cathedrals and monuments in Europe and the United States.
aboutME
1.1 Architecture as Discourse
the GETTYCENTER richard mier
studioAIR
After doing the architectural tour of the Getty Center, I fell in love with Richard Mier’s precious methodical execution of the building. Mier spent 12 years sitting on the top of the hill in Los Angeles designing it, with a brief that stated he could not take any land away. I liked this constraint he had. I love how Mier designed everything to a grid. The primary grid structure is a 30-inch (760 mm) square; most wall and floor elements are 30-inch (760 mm) squares or some derivative thereof. Meier has exploited the two naturally-occurring ridges (which diverge at a 22.5 degree angle) by overlaying two grids along these axes- making for a rich architectural experience. When at the Getty Center these architectural design techniques of the grid and axis made the interior and exterior morph into one. It was hard to decipher the transition between inside and outside, it was truly a magical experience- and that’s why it is one of my favourite buildings.
1.1 Architecture as Discourse
“Within it, two helical ramps take members of the public to a viewing platform high above the plenary chamber, raising them symbolically above the heads of their political representatives. � -Sir Norman Foster
the REICHSTAGDOME
sir norman forster
studioAIR
Reichstag building in Berlin is one of my favourite pieces of architecture. I like this design not only for its aesthetic appearance but the theory of why it was designed how it was. As it became the new home of a unified German Parliament after the fall of East Germany, it needed to address the issues of the past while giving Germany a bright new future. I like how the design focused on making the processes of government more transparent for the German people with an innovative architectural design that can be described as a sculpture of light. I think the design of the high-tech glass dome is conceptually quite simple, yet impressive. I like how Forster translated this theory into the architecture by designing the cupola to contain skylights with a significant inverted cone of mirrors in the middle of the opening with reflected light that illuminates the chamber below. This element of the structure creates a symbiotic relationship with the democratic ideal of, people above government. I like how the architecture is poetic of the past, present and future of Germany. After recently visiting the dome I became in awe of it, I like how the dome overlooks the debating chamber for the Bundestag, allowing you to look down upon their Government’s Parliamentary proceedings below. After Germany’s history I like this idea of keeping watch of parliament, adding a ‘big brother’ element to the design.
1.1 Architecture as Discourse
This model was a part of a project I did in my first year of Interior Architecture. It was a design for a Reading Room at
Monash University for the Art & Design students. We had a partially difficult site which was situated between two buildings at Monash’s Caulfield Campus that was only 4200mm wide. The design was influenced by the semantic network (the
connections made in the brain when thinking). One of the reasons I liked this project the most was because we were allow to design the whole thing- the exterior!
This model was a second year project for Furniture. I decided a
focus on lighting, and was very interested in exploring geodesic
pastwork
design was inspired by geodesic domes and pattern. It is design lamp piece, measuring 600x600mm.
s
wed
studioAIR
This model was another one of my first year projects called ‘Cut & Fill’. The brief allowed for only one cut to be made in the box and to explore the outcomes of this. I decided to make my project the entrance to Hamer Hall in Southbank. The design could morph into several different variations, adapting to the need of the venue. When the Hall was closed
at the start of semester to
the structure would morph back into a box
c domes. The final lamp
shape, making it an ambiguous structure
n to be a sculptural floor
till it was occupied.
1.1 Architecture as Discourse This was a design
The existing design
at the campus. The
decided to open up space.
pastwork
studioAIR
for Monash Universities Student Service Centre at Berwick Campus.
n was closed off and hard to notice, especially if it was your fisrt time
e brief was to redesign the existing space and combat these issues. I
p the space and use curvature in the joinery to give a sense of flow to the
This design proposal is for the Norman Robinson Stand (Promenade level) at the Caulfield Racecourse Melbourne. This space encapsulates the elements of movement through the arrangement of timber studs that transcend from the ground to the ceiling. The space depicts a movement captured in time. Just like the photo finish of a race, this space captures the essence of frozen movement.
1.2 Computing in Architecture
OLMPICFISH frank gehry As CAD softwares entered into mainstream practice over the span of the 1990s their nature rapidly changed, and they became increasingly used for computerisation, rather than computation. This was because they embraced the use of graphical user interfaces in order to make the programs accessible to a wider audience. Although this made the software accessible to those without a knowledge of programming languages, it did so by reducing common programmatic procedures into predefined ‘tools’. Moreover, these tools themselves could now be used to directly manipulate visualisations of geometric data, thus producing an interactive feedback loop between these tools and architectural form. This ability to directly manipulate a graphic model through a graphic interface made CAD accessible to designers, and thus this mode rapidly eclipsed the previous code-driven approach, and became the dominant mode of utilising CAD software.
studioAIR
This reliance upon standardised tools was evidenced in the emerging presence of complex curvatures within the architecture of the 1990s. The popularity of such forms can be directly traced back to CAD tools that allowed for the manipulation of spline curves and surfaces . However, even though these tools could produce highly complex results, they were still predominantly used as methods of computerisation in that they were a means to represent or optimise a pre-imagined design. This was prominently demonstrated in the design process of Frank Gehry, where his buildings were conceived through the use of traditional modes — such as sketches and mock-ups — and the computer was used only to test structural viability and produce technical documentation. Another common use of CAD was to employ the software as a kind of improvised sculpting environment to manipulate form according to the successive musings of the designer. This remains, however, as a primarily computerised mode of operation because it mandates tweaking a depiction, and is thus only a digitisation of a traditional modelmaking The accessibility provided by these graphical interface tools came at a cost. Previously, a set of programming routines would be written especially for the forms that each specific building required — however, the use of standardised tools severely limited the range of operations available within CAD programs, and thus the possibilities of form-making. Furthermore, because these tools were designed to mimic conventional pen and paper draughting concepts, as well as the traditional elements of architectural geometry, they embodied highly entrenched architectural forms and methods. As a result of this, the computer lost its ability to generate specialised forms on a project-by-project basis, and thus became predominantly used as tool to represent preconceived forms, rather than a means in which to design highly specialised forms.
1.3 Parametric Modelling
Following Patrick Schumacher
debated about ‘parametricism’
into architectural discourse ov
and leading contemporary writ modernism’.
This movement has been mad
existed in other industries for s
such as Grasshopper for Rhin and urban design, and, whilst
other advancements in scriptin
development of the movement
This discussion is important a
heading. It has been argued th
since the decline in modernism
modernism’ and argues that si
deconstructivism and minimali to modernism.
studioAIR
r’s manifesto unveiling at the Venice Biennale in 2008 much has been written and
m’, ‘parametric design’. This advent-garde agenda has quietly begun to make its way
ver the past 15 years. At the biennale Schumacher, director at Zaha Hadid Architects
ter, architect and theorist, enunciated Parametricism as the ‘next great style after
de possible by the development and advancements in digital design tools which have
some time but have found their way into offices of architecture only recently. Software
no have brought associative and generative modelling tools to the realm of architecture associative modelling is often considered as the main tool in a parametric tool set,
ng, simulation and agent based modelling have also contributed to the research and
t
as there is current debate within the profession about in which direction it should be
hat as a society we haven’t had an overarching design movement to guide progress
m during the 1970s and 1980s. Patrick Schumacher describes this as ‘the crisis of
ince then we have only had a series of transitional styles such as postmodernism,
ism. Schumacher looks to utilize this ‘crisis’ by pushing parametricism as the successor
studioAIR
2.0 Case Studies
2.1.1 Group Research & Arguement
So far I initially found grasshopper quite challenging however I am
not just following the instructions. I’ve found the software fascinatin
I’ve teamed up with Nick Bergin and Michael McLoughlin to form a
Our groups interest lies in bridging the gap between engineering an
unify structure and ornament, both must be considered in equal me both, holistically, throughout the design process.”
We gravitated towards structure because we felt that the current tre functional and performative considerations. Structurally performative digital architectures allow the designer to
be modified and reshaped without laborious recalculations. Beyond
in construction while maximising the presence and scale of the buil
engineering and art, and construction and sculpture, and return a s
Our group is focusing on parametric structural architecture, explorin
the location of Wyndham between the industrial and urban centres
the (false) dichotomy of purely rational engineering structures and p
performative architecture arrived at through a digital parametric me
THEGROUP
getting more of a grip to it now, and actually understanding the tutorials I’m dong-
ng, enjoying learning how to use it.
group.
nd art through the marriage of structure and ornament in digital architecture. To
easure at the beginnings of a design. Digital architectures allow us to work with
end in digital architectures focused too much on form-making neglecting structural,
create interventions that reveal and celebrate structure in architecture that can
d this, structural optimisation allows the architect to reduce the materials involved
lt form. Structurally perfomative digital architectures bridge the gap between
structurally functionalist aesthetic to architecture.
ng the tension between industry, urbanism and the non-human environment that
s of Geelong and Melbourne exemplifies. The aim of our intervention is to cross
purely artistic sculpture. By doing this, we hope to show the beauty of structurally
edium. The potential of our method is exciting due to it’s ability to offer.
studioAIR
2.1.2 Case Study 1.0
the WATERCUBE arup
First my first case study I decided
The analysed model
to research the Beijing National
was output to a text file containing
Swimming Centre more commonly
geometric and structural member
known as ‘The Water Cube’.
design data.
The building structure is a 3D
Next, Arup wrote a MicroStation
Vierendeel space frame 175 meters
VBA routine that used the text file
on each side and 35 meters high,
to create a complete 3D model of
based on a geometric cell made up
the steel structure. By enabling
of 12 pentagons and two hexagons,
MicroStation Development Language
which is repeatable in 3D without
(MDL) functions, the model could be
leaving any empty spaces. Covering
created as surfaces, solids, or structural
this frame are the translucent bubbles,
elements as appropriate.
studioAIR
or ETFE pillows. Using Bentley Structural and MicroStation TriForma,Arup generated a 3D array of the cell, rotated it about two axes, and then sculpted the building. The cut surface planes of the remaining elements form the flanges of the composite structure, while the internal elements form the webs. Stuart Bull,Arup senior 3D technician, described the modeling and documentation process as a “daunting proposal.” Arup created a 3D centerline wire-frame and exported it to a structural analysis program for engineering.
“The ability to use the VBA scripts to create our geometry, which gave us the link from the engineering and analysis model to our working 3D CAD model, was very important.” - Arup
2.1.2 Case Study 1.0
1- In the first step, I parametrically defined different dimensions of the building. I have used two “Box 2Pt� nodes and 3 sliders to create the general shape of the building parametrically. Image-1 shows the nodes.
the WATERCUBE grasshopper steps
studioAIR
2- In order to generate the bubble shapes I have used “3D Voronoi”. To use the Voronoi battery, I need to generate some random points. In a building as big as Watercube, to get the bubble size small enough I need a huge number of points. But as the number of points increases the simulation process gets slower and slower. Therefore, I had to find a way to limit the number of the random points. I decreased the number of points by putting some constrains to limit the points to be generated only in the parts that I need them (Walls and Roof of the building and not inside it).
3- In this step I have used the generated points and boxes in the previous steps. As you can see in image-3, I have used “Solid Difference” node to find the difference of the big box and small box to get closer to the building deign.
2.2.1 Case Study 2.1
CITYHALL forster & partners
The surface area exposed to
The main concept was to design a
direct sunlight was minimized, and
building that expresses the transparency
consequently, there was a reduction in
and accessibility of democratic process
solar heat gain and heat loss though the
and demonstrates the potential for a
skin of the building (Kolarevic 2005).
sustainable, virtually non polluting public building.
In the design of the interior space, the main criterion was the transparency. In
The main design approach was to
order to provide visual connections, a
generate the architectural form by
huge spiral was located in the building. Its
environmental performances with respect
function is to connect all ten floors of
to light, heat, energy, movement and
the building. Consequently, the building
sound; so both the design and design
provides the feeling of light and open
development are integrated in this project.
space. This openness is only obvious to pedestrians after dusk, when its lighting
The shape of the building, is derived from
transforms the building into a transparent
a geometrically modified sphere, which
form.
has a surface area 25 % smaller than that of a cube of identical volume. This
Acoustics also played a role in the final
was the result of a process of energy
form of the structure. While designing
performance optimization.
the outer form, architects noticed that its shape resulted in some acoustic
The form of this building is not only
problems. The initial scheme for the
designed according to the thermal and
assembly hall, which had a very smooth
acousticsimulations of the inside space
profile, was excessively reverberant.
of the building but also the wind. The
Arup developed a process for visualizing
wind directions formed in its surroundings
the reflection and absorption of sound
are also taken into consideration. The
by surfaces. After several iterations, a
building is designed so that its mechanical
solution emerged which was considered
systems consume fifty percent less
both architecturally and acoustically
energy
studioAIR
2.2.1 Case Study 2.2
studioAIR
I like the new extension to Kings Cross Station as it reminds me of 1852 train sheds. Like the 1852 train sheds, this is a structure that is at the limit of what’s possible, and the components are celebrated. The steel castings at the top of the perimeter columns weigh 1.5 tonnes each: they’re like overgrown Meccano. The engineer Arup came up with the detailed design of the roof, and the constantly varying sizes of the panels needed to make the double curve would only be possible to calculate on this scale using parametric computer-aided design.
KINGSCROSS
john mcaslan + partners
2.2.1 Case Study 2.2
KINGSCROSS
john mcaslan + partners
Creating Kings Cross Station on Grasshopper
studioAIR
2.3
The Matrix 1.
As we decided to use the diagrid as our technique as it has the capability to form patterns, we began to test with these capabilities to see how far we could push the patterns boundaries. In the first column we varied the amount of divisions in the grid, as well as the patterns of the grid by using a Dispatch component. In the second column, we have changed the base geometry that the grid is stretched across. Thoughout this process we have defined geometries in Grasshopper opposed to Rhino. We found it very easy to visualize functions, with Michael having a solid maths background. It also allows us to change the base geometries dynamically in grasshopper with ease. Having decided that some form of barrel vault for highway users to drive through would be apt for Wyndham gateway project, column 3 experiments with changed patterns and base geometries along the barrel vault’s arches along its short axis, allowing for a structure that curves along its long axis. At the bottom we have experimented with splitting the grid into multiple sections, or placing two grids on top of each other. Having decided that a long snake-like structure would allow for longer and more profound experience while traveling along the highway, we moved the start and finish points further along the long axis,
2.
3.
4.
studioAIR 5.
2.4
Digitial & Physical Models
studioAIR
2.4
Digitial & Physical Models
We decided that we want to focus on making a joint that we can use to join the structural members on our design. We want to explore the tectonic relationships between the members. We also wanted to experiment with making a material that could bend in both directions- as we needed this as the curves in our diagrid bend in opposite directions. This was best investigated through our silicon model which was reinforced with wire. The idea was inspired by reinforced concrete. The wire give the form the ability to bend in both directions and the silicon withstood the flexibility of these bends. This model was the most successful outcome of all our models, as it experimented the best with what we needed to achieve- a member that could bend in opposite directions. The other two models explored the form of the structure more, yet their drawbacks were that they were merely representational of the form and didn’t achieve a construction technique that could be used in reality.
FINALMODEL
studioAIR
EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST: GATWAY michaelMcLOUGLIN/nickBERGIN/sophieBARDOEL
Y TO WYDNHAM
studioAIR
01 | AAMI PARK COX ARCHITECTS
02 | KING’S CROSS JOHN McASLAN + PARTNERS
03 | BRITISH MUSEUM FOSTER + PARTNERS
04 | SOUTH POND STUDIO GANG
05 | CARDBOARD PAVILLION SHIGERU BAN
06 | ‘THE GHERKIN’ FOSTER + PARTNERS
07 | CHIDDINGSTONE ORANGERY PETER HULBERT ARCHITECTS
OPTIMIZATION OF STRUCTURE
FLEXIBILITY OF STRUCTURE
FLEXIBILITY OF STRUCTURE
STRUCTURE AS ORNAMENT
OPTIMIZATION OF MATERIALS
STRUCTURE AS ORNAMENT
STRUCTURE AS ORNAMENT
STRUCTURE
OPTIMIZATION
DIAGRID
FLEXIBILITY
PRECEDENTSRESEARCH
grasshopperDEFINITION
2.5
EOI Feedback
EOI/
FEEDBACK
studioAIR
Our group received relatively positive feedback. We received some good constructive criticism such as; we were too focused on looking at the joint and how to construct the structure rather than the actual form of it. Another criticism was that we were far too involved in exploring structural optimization than the more important factor of monumentalizing movement- which the panel said was our strongest point. What we have taken from this is that we need to be more critical of ourselves and focus on taking this design to the next level. We have taken the criticism on board which has helped us greatly in the areas we need to work on. From here we are now making a site model so that we can explore the urban-geographic relationships of Werribee and its surroundings. We are now working on a whole new grasshopper definition so that we can have more control over the overall form, which will allow us more flexibility to fine tune the design.
MIDSEMESTER
3.1
Week 9 Progress
Our group decided that we wanted to explore collision in our final design. This “collision” would be between the ‘movement’ of the human geographic forces of Geelong, Melbourne and, Werribee; centered on Werribee. Similarly, this would be like the collision that would happen between plates in a physical geography context. We investigated this through our parametric models, but found that our original parametric models developed for the EOI were too ‘rigid’ to highlight a collision of forces in their form, so we set about finding a toolset that would allow us greater flexibility and less rigidity. Once trialing with point attractors on a grid in 3D space, we was trying to work with points manipulating nearby points by an inverse square law, like gravity, once again exploring the idea of the inter-relationship between physical natural forces and human forces. We began to find that the mathematics behind the model were becoming increasingly complex- beyond our ability. After doing some research we came across a package of components called JellyFish, which is described by its creator as a magnetic displacement definition in 3-dimensions. The real power that lies in the component was that it tended not to force points to cross over each other, which was an issue we were having with original definition. By inverting the magnetic attractor, we were able to create a magnetic repulsor, which allowed us the ability to experiment with peaks and troughs. This influenced our idea of collision into the idea of waves of the coming urbanism (peaks) crashing along the geographical constant of the highway (the trough). This new definition gave us a great deal of flexibility as a form finding exercise and we were able to create forms that were very organic and really emphasised the idea of a collision. A problem we ran into was when we tried to transpose our designs onto the site. While JellyFish’s flexibility was what attracted me to it, when it came to actually placing the form onto the site, its randomness became its downfall. In attempting to create connections between the design and the landscape, one slight movement of a variable would push the design into the middle of the road, or out of the boundaries of the site.
studioAIR
We want to push the boundary of what a diagrid pattern could be used for. We were inspired by MyZeil in Frankfurt, by Massimiliano Fuksas, with its vortex in the facade that descends into the internal space of the building. This building shows a diagrid pattern used as more than a structure to span an internal space, rather it can be an ornamental, gestural piece of architecture. We believe this is relevant to a freeway art project because it creates a monumental form that emphasises movement and embodies the colliding forces of the local human geography. This type of structure is often used to monumentalise other places of movement, like Southern Cross Station; so lets apply this to the highway!
3.1
Week 9 Progress
CURRENT CONTEXT
URBAN CONTEXT
U MOV
URBAN CONNECTIONS
Current human geography of
urbanCOLLISION
URBAN OVEMENT
studioAIR
URBAN COLLISION
URBAN MOVEMENT
URBAN COLLISION
Greater Melbourne; growth of urbanism; collision of urban forces in at the site of Werribee.
3.2
Week 10 Progress We were able to overcome the problems we were run into with the JellyFish component. We started restructuring the definition into one that permitted us to modify one shape into another along a rail curve. This would allow us the rigidity of a pre-defined starting point, but with the flexibility and randomness of interpolating between varied shapes. While the definition did not have the flexibility of JellyFish, and is entailing interesting forms, it did allow us to create a form that we could actually situate on the site. For a while we got too stuck on the ideal of designing a ‘universal’ joint that could be applied throughout the whole structure. After a great deal of research on what this universal joint could be, we came across the ArcelorMittal Orbit in London by Anish Mapoor and Cecil Balmond. In this structural sculpture, the bolted joint was not at the node where individual members, but rather half-way between the members. This allowed all the nodes to be prefabricated and then simply delivered to site, craned into position and bolted together. We were very excited by the efficiencies created by this joint, while allowing us the flexibility of not having a joint that restricted how our nodes could fit together.
studioAIR
We had a few conversations with Paul about tectonics and materiality. This helped us decide against using steel for the structure- due to the sheer tonnage of steel necessary and the environmental impacts of using the material. After eliminating steel as our material we decided to use timber, this is because we came to the conclusion that we had slightly ignored the non-human environment in our proposal, and that timber and a native planting scheme would do more to celebrate Werribee’s unique position in its environmental context than tubular steel. We started designing and making various joints for our design that utilised timber. Originally, we intended to secure our members in a method similar to that of Chiddingstone Castle Orangery. This would allow us to have two sets of members, which ran in different directions, held in place by a vice-like joint. We also considered simply bolting the members together where they overlapped. Another idea we explored was simply rebating a groove into timber member at its end and placing a prefabricated welded steel joint within the members. This would allow us to somewhat deny the joint visually, creating a more continuous structure, without a bulky joint at every node. We also created a simple steel pin joint for the footing connection of our structure. This would allow one mass-produced joint to be used
3.2
Week 10 Progress
grasshopperprogress
studioAIR
3.3
Week 11 Progress
It turned out that interconnecting and placing a series of curves along a rail curve was a lot more difficult than we thought it would be. The curves would randomly rotate and create spasmodic lofted surfaces that had massive kinks in them. We needed to fix this problem fast- as we were desperately running out of time, with semester review impending. So we had to opt for an alternative solution to fix this problem and decided to draw 8 curves in space along the highway where chosen, and interpolated and lofted curves between them. After we had our chosen form nailed down we had to tackle the fabrication of the structure- and this was tricky! We were originally going to detail the structure the same way as the Chiddingstone Orangery, with two sets of members running in different directions placed on top of each other, however, we were unable to figure out how to construct this into its final form and opted for a cast steel node joint (which I actually preferred). I personally thought that this joint would deliver more freedom and flexibility in the structure as it didn’t have overlapping like our previous idea. We had made a 1:100 template of the Chiddingstone Orangery style joint construction to get lasercut, however, we had to abandon this when we decided to change joint design. It also took us a large amount of time to get the file for the 3D printer ready- around a whole day, and another whole day in communication with 3D systems. If we had more time we would of wanted to make a 1:100 section of our design, but I still think our presentation communicated our intend to a good standard without. I think the renders turned out well, it was about 30% Vray, 70% Photoshop- it took some time to gather a nice palette in Photoshop to paint with. Our group worked really well together, we separated the tasks to make it more efficient and a speeder process. I think we might of moved away a bit from our concept of monumentalizing movement through collision, however, I think with the time we had we did the best we possibly could.
modelphotos
studioAIR
modelphotos
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
BRIEF | The Western Gateway should propose new, inspiring and brave ideas, to generate a new discourse. • • • • •
Entry statement Arrival experience New identifier Focal point Iconic scale
01. | PROJECT BRIEF | GATEWAY TO WYNDHAM CONSIDERATIONS & ISSUES | • • • • • • •
Prominent location Service station/centre Integration of landscape. Scale Sculpture and landscape. Form Experiential
• • • •
Literal or abstract; Regulations Day vs. night Maintenance
| INTEREST | • Bridge the gap between engineering and art. • Marriage of structure and ornament.
| INT
• Explore the unique po broader industrial, urba ment
• Monumentalize movem
• Highlight the relationsh way share with urbanism
TENT |
osition Wyndham has in the an and non-human environ-
ment
hip Wyndham and the highm, industry and nature.”
0.2. | DESIGN INTENT | RESOLUTION | Expressed through the monumentalization of movement, the design translates Wyndham’s role as the epicentre of new urban expansion. In a Western regional context, its urban boundaries ‘creep’ towards a collision with surrounding cities in the future. This future collision phenomenon will be visible as one oscillates through the continuum of Geelong road. The structure reflects a commentary on the urban expansion of the Wyndham region as it expands outwards to carve its own identity in Melbourne’s Western Metropolitan region.
0.3 | PRECEDENTS | KEY LES | 01 | MONUMENTALIZING MOVEMENT | 02 |
SSONS & DESIGN DRIVERS STRUCTURE & ORNAMENT | 03 | COLLISION
| 01 | MONUMENTALIZING MOVEMENT | 02 |
STRUCTURE & ORNAMENT | 03 | COLLISION
| 01 | MONUMENTALIZING MOVEMENT | 02 |
STRUCTURE & ORNAMENT | 03 | COLLISION
| 01 | MONUMENTALIZING MOVEMENT | 02 |
STRUCTURE & ORNAMENT | 03 | COLLISION
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
TO GEELONG
COLLISION
TO MELBOURNE
04. | SITE CONTEXT MICRO SCALE | HIGHWAY SITE
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
WERRIBEE
GATEWAY SITE
COLLISION
05. | SITE CONTEXT | LOCAL SCALE | WYNDHAM CITY
06. | SITE CONTEXT | MACRO SCALE | WYNDHAM CITY
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
| 01 | Collision UPWARDS 02 | Collision OUTWARDS
COLLISION
URBAN MOVEMENT
URBAN CENTRES
URBAN CONVERGENCE
UPWARD COLLISION
09. | CONCEPT TO FORM
| 01 | Collision UPWARDS
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
| 02 | Collision OUTWARDS
URBAN MOVEMENT
URBAN CONVERGENCE
OUTWARD COLLISION
COLLISION
09. | CONCEPT TO FORM
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
SITE A
E
PR
PR IN
CE
SS
HI
G
HW AY
TO
M
EL
BO
UR N
SITE C
CALTEX SERVICE STATION
COLLISION
SITE B
RIN
C
S ES
Y WA H IG
E
G TO
NG
ELO
H
0
200
10. | SITE PLAN
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
COLLISION
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
COLLISION
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
COLLISION
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
COLLISION
11. | STRUCTURAL PRECEDENT | HERBERT MUSEUM & ART GALLERY
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
TOP VIEW
SIDE VIEW
CAST STEEL NODE | • Fabricated off-site • Reduces construction time • Flexible with angles • Transportable GLULAM TIMBER | • Strong in compression and tension • Large spans • Proven results in large span structures. • Laminated for waterproofing
12. | DETAIL | JOINT + MEMBERS
FOOTING DETAIL
COLLISION
FRONT VIEW
PERSPECTIVE
AIR | FINAL PRESENTATION | Gateway to Wyndham
CANOPY
River Red Gum
UNDERSTOREY
Round Leafbox
Australian Blackwood
Black
k Wattle
COLLISION
SHRUB LAYER
River Bottlebrush
Tree Violet
Wooly Tea-Tree
13. | LOCAL SCALE CONTEXT | PLANTING
3.1.4 Feedback
studioAIR
I personally excepted the feedback our group was given. We were aware of the flaws in our project, so it didn’t come as a surprise to me when they were pointed out, such as, if the structure could stand, the difficulty of our grasshopper definition and plants. Studio Air was all about extending past the horizon in design, and I felt the board thought we didn’t achieve this. We were heavily criticized on the structural integrity of the design, and I thought we did a pretty good job as 3rd year architecture students as to giving a design for it. However we feel that the level of structural knowledge needed would require considerable consultation with a structural engineer. We were also questioned about the sizing of the structural members from our renders, this is something if we would need to work out further if our design went into development. We were criticized from a technical side of our grasshopper definition that it was fairly simplistic. This might be the case, however, during the semester we fought hard to try and not take the easy way out by having everything parametric. We unfortunately ran out of time and had to reference in curves to be able to complete our design into for the presentation. That’s the thing about architecture, there is a time limit and you need to meet your brief with the best possible outcome you can. Sometimes you need to sacrifice elements to meet these requirements- nothing can ever be complete, you could always keep designing and developing your ideas. You just have to learn to know when push comes to shove, to get the project complete on time. We also got criticized that our planting idea was ‘half baked’. We realized quite late in the piece that we hadn’t really engaged in the environmental elements of the site. Paul felt as did we, a week before the project was due that we need another purpose for our design. This might of come off in our final design as rushed and not thought through properly, however, I think the problem was that we actually just needed to explain ourselves better- perhaps nerves and lack of sleep got the better of us! What we need to say was that we wanted the structure to appear as though it had evolved out of the natural landscape, as Wyndham had. Hopefully this was realized by the paneled upon closer inspection of our proposal.
presentationfeedback
4.0. Parametric Experience
I found the parametric experience to be a roller coaster of learning new programs and tools. I feel very lucky to have done such a unique studio where I was able to gain computer skills and techniques. I am still not sold on the parametric is the way, and not too sure if I’ll be using these grasshopper skills in the near future. I’m actually a bit relieved to be going back to an ordinary studio where the system doesn’t dictate the design. This is what I thought was the parametric approaches major flaw, that it does not think about the users experience of the space- that it’s too detached from the designers intent of spatial experience of the occupants of the space. However, after saying all this I think using grasshopper for doing simple tasks like paneling is very efficient and convenient. This is something I would consider using grasshopper again for. All in all it’s been a positive semester where I have been able to gain practical and technical skills that I’ll hopefully be able to use further down the track. Over and out.
studioAIR
ADS3 | COLLISION GATEWAY TO WYNDHAM | | COLLISION | “Expressed through the monumentalization of movement, the design translates Wyndham’s role as the epicentre of new urban expansion. In a Western regional context, its urban boundaries ‘creep’ towards a collision with surrounding cities in the future. This future collision phenomenon will be visible as one oscillates through the continuum of Geelong road. The structure reflects a commentary on the urban expansion of the Wyndham region as it expands outwards to carve its own identity in Melbourne’s Western Metropolitan
NICK BERGIN SOPHIE BARDOEL MICHAEL MCLOUGHLIN
CALTEX SERVICE STATION
SITE B
SITE A
NG
ELO
GE
IG
SH
ES
INC
NE
PR
TO AY HW
PR
IN
CE
SS
HI
G
HW AY
TO
M
EL
BO
UR
SITE C
0
200