2015 S1 Jennifer Payette

ARCHITECTURE

Design Studio JENNIFER

PAYETTE

AIR

.

2015

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO: AIR JENNIFER PAYETTE 635850 SEMESTER 1, 2015 TUTOR: BRADLEY ELIAS

CONTENTS Introduction 5

PART A // Conceptualisation

A.1.

Design Futuring 8 A.2.

Design Computation 12 A.3.

Composition/Generation 16 A.4.

Conclusion 20 A.5.

Learning Outcomes 20 A.6. Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches 21

PART B // Criteria Design

B.1.

Research Field 26 B.2.

Case Study 1.0 28 B.3.

Case Study 2.0 38 B.4.

Technique: Development 44 B.5.

Technique: Prototypes 58 B.6.

Technique: Proposal 60 B.7. Leaning Objectives and Outcomes 62 B.8. Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches 63

PART C // Detailed Design

C.1.

Design Concept 68 C.2. Tectonic Elements & prototypes 78 C.3.

Final Detail Model 88 C.4. Learning Objectives and outcomes 98

INTRODUCTION

My name is Jennifer Payette. I am a FrenchCanadian/Indian born in Montreal, Canada and raised in country Victoria, Australia. I am currently in my third year, completing a bachelor of Environments (Architecture) at the University of Melbourne.

My two greatest passions are design and children.

My earliest memory of wanting to be an architect is from the time I was around 12 years old, where I would spent countless hours drawing out floorplans for make-believe clients. From then until the time I finished high school, I battled between the decision of becoming a teacher or an architect. I decided to choose architecture for the challenge; the road less travelled. So far it has definitely been a challenge, but an enjoyable and rewarding one.

As I chose not to do Virtual Environments as a subject in my bachelor, I feel that my knowledge in Rhinoceros is most likely much more basic than those of my classmates. However, I have no intention of letting this affect the development and final result of my project in studio Air.

Digital architecture is an area that is very unfamiliar to me and in some ways also daunting. When given the oppurtunity to design, I have always preferred using my craft skills which developped from my interests in sewing, dress-making, knitting and scrapbooking. Model making is something I have the patience for and find is the best way to illustrate my ideas. However, I have learnt some basics in computer modelling over the course of my degree and can see the usefulness of it. Now that I am doing studio Air, I can no longer avoid digital architecture and must be open to the posiibilities and opportunities it can bring.

[1]

1. Laurence Amy Payette. “New York.� 2015. JPEG file.

5

A

A

CONCEPTUALISATION

A.1. DESIGN FUTURING Design futuring is concerned with redirection towards sustainable modes of planetary habitation. [2] “Sustain-ability” is an acceptance of anthropocentric desire – it is about “saving humanity” by saving what we collectively depend upon (thus it refuses the deception of “saving the planet”) and it implies changing the process by which our lives are sustained.’ [2]

Precedent One: The Helix Bridge Location: Singapore Architect: Cox Architecture + Architects 61

[3]

8

2. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practise, (Oxford: Berg, 2008), p44 3. Christopher Frederik Jones ‘Helix Bridge’ 2012, JPEG, < http://www.archdaily.com/185400/helix-bridge-cox-architecture-with-architects-61/2010199650_01_%EF%BF%BDcfj_helix_bridge_300dpi/>

Winner of the 36-entry international design competition, this 280m-long pedestrian bridge is the first of it’s kind.

Rather than creating a bridge with a usual truss system, the architects and engineers worked together to produce the first ever bridge that uses a double-helix structure, which acts as a tubular truss system [4]. The structural consultant company, Arup, used its own 3D software to explore possible solutions of linking helices together.

“The Helix is truly an engineering marvel. While the structure is incredibly delicate and intricate, it’s been engineered to support more than 10,000 people at a time. The Helix is the first example of this structural solution applied to a bridge – there is nothing else like it.”

– Dr See Lin Ming, Arup project leader [4] The revolutionary structure allows for 5 times less steel to be used, compared to a conventional box girder bridge [5]. This has a positive sustainability outcome in terms of reduced materials, and also due to the reason that the structure was almost entirely constructed of stainless steel; a durable, low maintenance material [5].

[6]

Not only does the bridge provide a smooth crossway across the river, it shows spectacular views of the city, and is used a social hub to display artwork and competitions for the Singaporean youth. The locals believe this bridge bring prosperity and peace to the area.

Therefore, this project has not only used software to optimise design and fabrication, but also had a positive impact on the culture and site.

[7]

[8]

4. “The Helix”, Arup, last modified 2013, http://www.arup.com/Projects/Helix_bridge.aspx.

5. SCI Steel Knowledge, “Helix Pedestrian Bridge”, Structural Stainless Steel Case Study 11, 2011, http://www.worldstainless.org/Files/issf/non-image-files/PDF/Helix_Pedestrian_Bridge.pdf.

6. Christopher Frederik Jones ‘Helix Bridge’ 2012, JPEG, http://www.archdaily.com/185400/helix-bridge-cox-architecture-with-architects-61/2010199650_07_%EF%BF%BDcfj_helix_bridge_300dpi/ 7. Arup, “3D model to analyses forces”, 2011, JPEG, http://www.worldstainless.org/Files/issf/non-image-files/PDF/Helix_Pedestrian_Bridge.pdf.

8. Angelo Pereira, ‘Helix Bridge’ 2013, JPEG, http://www.flickr.com/photos/angelopereira/9504055863/.

9

Precedent Two: Hy-Fi Location: New York City, USA Architect: The Living

[9]

10

9. The Living, “Hy-Fi”, 2014, JPEG, http://thelivingnewyork.com/hy-fi.htm

The Hy-fi, a biodegradable pavilion, was the 2014 winning design of the MoMA PS1 Young Architect’s Program.

“If the twentieth century was the century for physics, then the twenty-first century is the century of biology.

Biological technologies are advancing rapidly. Our structure uses biological technologies and cutting-edge computing and engineering to create a new paradigm for design: self-assembling, industrial, compostable. And it all happens with no energy and no waste.” – The Living [10] The process of creating the bricks involves using corn stalk waste from local farmers and mycelium (mushroom roots) that will hold the corn stalk together and form a solid shape in the period of approximately five days [11].

This process means that there is no waste, no input of energy, and no carbon emissions.

[12]

A large amount of testing needed to be done before constructing the tower due to the complex shape, new material and inability to cut the brick on site. The design team used generative modelling, structural simulations and intensive physical testing to realise this project [11].

The great thing about this project is that it has an end-oflife plan. Due to the type of material used, the bricks can decompose and be used as fertilizer. The design team thought about the whole life cycle of the design, and utilised computer software to create the optimal shape in terms of structural stability and aesthetics.

[13]

[14]

10. “Hy-Fi”, Vimeo Video, 2:43, Posted by David Benjamin, 2014, http://thelivingnewyork.com/hy-fi.htm 11. Matt Clark & Shaina Saporta “Engineering a Mushroom Tower”, The online magazine of Arup in the Americas (June 2014), http://www.arupconnect.com/2014/06/24/engineering-a-mushroom-tower/ 12. The Living, “Hy-Fi”, 2014, JPEG, http://www.archdaily.com/477912/behind-hy-fi-the-entirely-organic-compostable-tower-that-won-moma-ps1-young-architect-s-program-2014/ 13. Arup, “Finite element analysis of fungus wall”, 2014, JPEG, http://www.arupconnect.com/2014/06/24/engineering-a-mushroom-tower/ 14. Arup, “Engineering a Mushroom Tower”, 2014, JPEG, http://www.arupconnect.com/2014/06/24/engineering-a-mushroom-tower/

11

A . 2 . D E S I G N C O M P U TAT I O N Computerization refers to the process where an architect visualizes and develops an idea in a traditional form and then finds the means to reproduce this idea through the use of computer softwares.

Computational design is a collaboration between what the architect wants and what can be achieved through digital computation. In this process, the architect has less of an idea about what the final design outcome will be and relies more on the computer software to create something from the information and direction given by the architect, such as materials, location and size.

Precedent One: Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall Location: Stuttgart, Germany Architect: ICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart

[15]

12

15. University of Stuttgart, â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Landesgartenschauâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;, 2015, JPEG, http://www.archdaily.com/520897/landesgartenschau-exhibition-hall-icd-itke-iigs-university-of-stuttgart/53ab66bdc07a8033bd000134_ landesgartenschau-exhibition-hall-icd-itke-iigs-university-of-stuttgart_laga_300_interior-north-jpg/

According to team member, Oliver David Krieg, this project is the first of its kind to have a fully integrated computational design and fabrication process [16]. Inspiration for the structure comes from the skeleton of a sea urchin – one of the most efficient modular systems in nature. Each panel uses joints, which resemble the sea urchin’s microscopic connections. Once all the panels are put together, the result is a shell that requires no additional support.

“Rather than drawing each plate manually, the plate’s design space is incorporated into a simulation and optimisation process for automated form-finding, which includes parameters and constraints of robotic fabrication.”

[16] The use of computational design in this project has allowed for resource efficiency, significantly reduced the amount of time for design realization and assembly, and the use of robotic fabrication immensely reduced the possibility of errors. Additionally, the fact that each plate is unique poses no additional difficulties, due to the flexbility of the robotic fabrication tool.

[17]

“The development, fabrication and construction of the Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall demonstrates that robotic fabrication in conjunction with computational design, simulation and surveying methods enable architects, structural engineers and timber manufacturers to work interdisciplinary as well as material and fabricationoriented” said the team. [16] [18]

[19]

16. ‘Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall’, Anna Winston, DeZeen Magazine, June 2014, http://www.dezeen.com/2014/06/24/landesgartenschau-exhibition-hall-at-university-of-stuttgart-robot-prefabricated-plywood/.

17, 18, 19. University of Stuttgart, ‘Landesgartenschau’, 2015, JPEG, http://www.archdaily.com/520897/landesgartenschau-exhibition-hall-icd-itke-iigs-university-of-stuttgart/

13

Precedent Two: 3GATTI Location: Chongqing, China Architect: Francesco Gatti

[20]

14

20. Shen Qiang, “SND Fashion Store”, 2014, JPEG, http://3gatti.com/#1866

This retail project located in Chongqing World Financial Center has become a sculptural attraction for all visitors. The architect began with the simple idea of hanging everything from the ceiling in order to create more space for customers to move around the store [21].

Software was used, such as the Kangaroo plug-in for Grasshopper, for physics simulations that allowed the architect to produce a range of design outcomes, where the objects would pull the ceiling down due to their weight [21]. By entering material parameters, the outcomes generated could be realistic.

Once the final form was selected, a range of over 10,000 geometries needed to be fabricated. Rather than hand crafting each individual piece, machines were used to cut the strips [21]. This process is much preferred as it not only saves time, but also money and, as mentioned in the previous precedent, greatly reduces the chance of errors.

[22]

Computational use is demonstrated in this project where the architect had a basic idea of what he wanted to produce but relied on the computer software to create real design outcomes from the given parameters. One of the main benefits of this process is that an unlimited range of outcomes can be produced and then quickly eliminated or selected based on aesthetic appeal or other requirements by the client.

[23]

[24]

21. “3GATTI - SND Concept store”, 3GATTI, 2014, http://3gatti.com/#1866 22, 23, 24. Shen Qiang, “SND Fashion Store”, 2014, JPEG, http://3gatti.com/#1866

15

A . 3 C O M P O S I T I O N / G E N E R AT I O N Composition of design refers to the organisation of a form and the interrelation between its elements, intentionally designed by the architect. ‘Generative design is not about designing the building – it’s about designing the system that builds the building’ [25]. With computation, design has the potential to go beyond the capabilities and ideas of the designer by generating unexpected results [26].

The process of generation allows the architect to explore new possibilities, to analyse decisions during the design process and to solve more complex problems [26]. Architects are now able to create softwares, generate codes and modify them to explore design potential; this is known as algorithmic thinking.

Precedent One: Hangzhou Tennis Center Location: Hangzhou, China Architect: NBBJ

[27]

16

25. “Changing the face of Architecture”, Technology Focus, September/October 2009, http://ftp2.bentley.com/dist/collateral/docs/press/changing-the-face-of-architecture_caduser.pdf 26. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 27. Nathan Miller, “Hangzhou Tennis Centre”, 2011, JPEG, http://www.theprovingground.org/2011/01/acadia-regional-2011-hangzhou-tennis.html

The design of the 10,000-seat stadium is a modular system of repetitive sculptural steel truss geometries, which provide shade and protection of technical equipment [28]. Rhinoceros 3D and Grasshopper were both used extensively for this project, as part of the design and documentation.

For conceptualization, a parametric system was used to define and control surface geometry and study formal variations, where the ‘petals’ could be manipulated as well as increased or decreased in number [28]. The main driver for the decision on the final form was the aesthetic appeal, however, computation allowed the team to also consider the parameters of shade, drainage, structural performance and technical systems [28].

The team generated a wireframe structure through the Grasshopper algorithm, which was compatible with the engineer’s analysis software and therefore eliminated the need to create a whole new engineering-specific model [28]. This facilitated the process of easily adjusting errors and saved an immense amount of time.

Kangaroo Physics simulations were used to test how the forces moved through the structure. This developed a greater understanding about the structure for the architects and allowed them to better communicate with the structural engineers [28].

The Hangzhou Sports Center is an example of a process where new design tools were invented, developed, integrated, coordinated, modified and shared for the purposes of delivering a project of special civic value in China’ – Nathan Miller, NBBJ [28]

28. Nathan Miller, ‘The Hangzhou Tennis Center”, 2012, http://issuu.com/pabloherrera/docs/28122011_hz_tennis_issuu_original_2011?e=1550707/2627663 29, 30. Nathan Miller, “Hangzhou Tennis Center”, 2011, JPEG, http://www.theprovingground.org/2011/01/acadia-regional-2011-hangzhou-tennis.html 31. NBBJ, “Hangzhou Olympic Sports Center”, 2011, JPEG, http://www.nbbj.com/work/hangzhou-stadium/

[29]

[30]

17

Precedent Two: Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre Location: Astana, Kazakhstan Architect: Foster + Partners

[32]

18

32. Foster + Partners, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centreâ&#x20AC;?, 2010, JPEG, http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/khan-shatyr-entertainment-centre/

The Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre consists of a cable net structure, which encloses a three storey base building with entertainment, retail, leisure facilities.

Parametric design tools were used to generate a range of enclosure forms. A form-finding algorithm was written to simulate the structural forces of the cable net structure and this then developed and defined the final form of the building [33].

One of the difficulties with computational design and generation is that the outcomes and forms are often very complex and difficult to represent in 2D documentation as well as physical modelling. Therefore 3D printing must be used, as in this project where this was the first time Foster + Partners extensively used 3D printing. This facilitated rapid prototyping, meaning that several design options could be produced each day, printed over night and brought to meeting the next day [34].

[35]

[36]

[37]

33. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 34. ‘Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre’, Brady Peters, 2008, http://www.bradypeters.com/khan-shatyr-centre.html 35. Foster + Partners, ‘Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre’, 2008, JPEG, http://www.bradypeters.com/khan-shatyr-centre.html 36, 37. Foster + Partners, “Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre”, 2010, JPEG, http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/khan-shatyr-entertainment-centre/

19

A.4. CONCLUSION At first I found the brief for this semesterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Studio Air very vague and believed that it did not give enough direction. However, I have come to understand that by unrestricting the project, it allows each individual to explore their own area of preference. I believe the most important part of the given brief is that my project must be a new possibility that contributes and adapts to the environment and site.

Through Part A, I have learnt about performative architecture and the ways that architecture can contribute positively to the planet. Although I do

not yet have a clear design intent, I hope to create a project which contributes to the site in an environmental and cultural way. Most importantly, I aim not only use computation for the aesthetic but also for optimisation of the project in terms of materials and structure. I look forward to exploring the possibilties in the next part of this subject.

A.5. LEARNING OUTCOMES Through the completion of Part A, I learned that digital architecture is not simply about the aesthetics and creating new forms, but that computation is in fact a very powerful tool. It creates ideas and possibilities that are beyong the thoughts and capability of the architect. It is able to help solve complex problems. It provides information that would be otherwise unobtainable. It optimises projects and can results in sustainable design ideas.

Importantly, it also has the potential to save large amounts of time and money.

20

Having no previous experience or knowledge with digital architecture, I was quite surprised by the useful of these design tools. I hope to be able to develop my skills much more in the future, as my appreciation for digital architecture grows further. If I had known more about computational design while producing previous work, I would have been more open to using these digital tools and possiblity could have produced more complex work in the same amount of time.

APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

One of the interesting Plug-ins I learned in Grasshopper was the Kangaroo physics simulation.

I found that this was also used in several of the

precedent project I chose. This is a very useful tool as it allows to create realistic simulations of forces

in many ways and directions. It allows architects to predict the shape and movement of form with applied force, without having to physically model it.

21

References Arup, “The Helix”, Arup, 2013, http://www.arup.com/Projects/Helix_bridge.aspx.

Bentley. “Changing the face of Architecture”, Technology Focus, September/October 2009, http://ftp2. bentley.com/dist/collateral/docs/press/changing-the-face-of-architecture_caduser.pdf Clark, Matt & Saportam, Shaina “Engineering a Mushroom Tower”, The online magazine of Arup in the Americas (June 2014), http://www.arupconnect.com/2014/06/24/engineering-a-mushroom-tower/ Fry, Tony. ‘Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practise’, Oxford: Berg, 2008, p44 Gatti, Francesco. “3GATTI - SND Concept store”, 3GATTI, 2014, http://3gatti.com/#1866 Miller, Nathan. ‘The Hangzhou Tennis Center”, 2012, http://issuu.com/pabloherrera/docs/28122011_hz_ tennis_issuu_original_2011?e=1550707/2627663 Peters, Brady. ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 Peters, Brady. ‘Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre’, Brady Peters, 2008, http://www.bradypeters.com/khanshatyr-centre.html SCI Steel Knowledge, “Helix Pedestrian Bridge”, Structural Stainless Steel Case Study 11, 2011, http://www. worldstainless.org/Files/issf/non-image-files/PDF/Helix_Pedestrian_Bridge.pdf.

Winston, Anna. ‘Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall’, DeZeen Magazine, June 2014, http://www.dezeen. com/2014/06/24/landesgartenschau-exhibition-hall-at-university-of-stuttgart-robot-prefabricated-plywood/.

22

B

B

CRITERIA DESIGN

[A] B.1. RESEARCH FIELD

[ B I O M I M I C R Y ] bi·o·mim·ic·ry : the design and production of materials, structures, and systems that are modeled on biological entities and processes. The word biomimicry is composed of two words; bios, which means life and mimesis which means to imitate [1].

There are two approaches to biomimetic design: the first is defining a human need or problem and looking to the ways of nature to solve this. The second is to identify a particular characteristic, behaviour or function of an organism or ecosystem and translate it into human design [2].

Within these two approaches, there are three levels of biomimicry: organism level, behaviour level and ecosystem level.

Biomimicry on an organism level would include mimicking the organism’s form, material, inner processes and function.

26

On a behaviour level, examples of biomimicry would include creating something thar appears to have been created by the organism, using materials and construction processes used by the organism, and replicating the function of things created by the organism. Ecosystem level refers to mimicking the ecosystem of the organism in terms of materials, form, function, process and construction.

‘Mimicking life, including the complex interactions between living organisms that make up ecosystems is both a readily available example for humans to learn from and an exciting prospect for future human habitats that may be able to be entwined with the habitats of other species in a mutually beneficial way.’ [2]

1. The Biomimicry Institute. What Is Biomimicry? Ask Nature. (2008-2011) http://www.asknature.org/article/view/what_is_biomimicry.

2. Maibritt Pedersen Zari, “Biomimetic Approaches To Architectural Design For Increased Sustainability”, School of Architecture, Victoria University, http://www.branz.co.nz/cms_show_download.php?id=5dbe91 c43fc173275e1bf6bdd988b587bc5cd4b5 3. [Image - right] http://www.integritusprime.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/nature-spiral-bokeh-micro1.jpg

[A] B.2. CASE STUDY 1.0

THE MORNING LINE // ARANDA LASCH The Morning Line is an experimental project collaboration with Matthew Richie, architects Aranda/Lasch and structural designers from Arup. The structure is dedicated to the convergence of art, music, architecture, engineering, mathematics, physics, cosmology and technology. [4] The Morning Line is far from a traditional pavilion, it is rather an ‘anti-pavillion’ that takes form of an open cellular structure.

The structure can be reconfigured into multiple forms – there is not single way in or out and there is no final form [4]. The Morning Line reflects the represents the use of biomimicry in its ability to change, its adaptiveness and self-inventing nature.

28

4. “Matthew Ritchie with Aranda\Lasch and Arup AGU – The Morning Line”, TBA21, http://www.tba21.org/augarten_activities/49/page_2 5. [IMAGE] http://ecosistemaurbano.org/english/the-morning-line-anti-pavilion-launched-at-3rd-international-biennale-of-seville/

Figure 1 - Case Study 1.0 (A) Matrix

As I began to experiment with the definition provided for the Morning Line, I realised that I was able to easily create fractals and alter the parameters which resulted in interesting shapes and patterns, as shown in figure 1. However, although the individual outcomes were successful, I found that the results would hinder my possibilities to answer the brief. The patterns and shapes created were much too geometric, symmetrical and repetitive.

Our brief suggests that we create something that does not touch the ground, and is suspended from trees. This means that the final outcome should be

organic, and move around trees or other elements on site, as well as maximise on the capabilities of grasshopper to create unusal forms. Using geometric patterns restrics the development of the project. As I did further research I found that this topic would not be relevant for our specific brief and, therefore, chose to abandon this research field and move on to one which would allow for more fluidity in its outcome. As the alternative I chose sectioning, which will allow for fluidity and organic forms for the project.

29

[B] B.1. RESEARCH FIELD

[ S E C T I O N I N G ] In architecture, traditionally a section would have referred to a twodimensional orthographic projection.

However, sectioning has evolved past this two dimensional projection idea.

Sectioning is now also defined as the process of taking cuts through a formed three-dimensional object [6]. It allows a whole surface to be separated into comportarments, resulting with an aesthetically pleasing repetitive or rippled effect, where the profile curves follow the surface of the orignal geometry [6]. Sectioning has the ability to create a beautiful sense of fluidity, by staying true to its orignial surface form and without exposing its constructional system [6].

Different constructional techniques that have emerged include sectional ribbing,

30

lamination or parallel stacking and waffle-grid construction.

Today’s software now allows this sectioning technique to be instantly applied to any geometry. It is fast and easily applicable.

Once applied, the next phases must be considered, which includes material selection, fabrication, assembly and finally, structural stability.

These phases will all be further explored and experimented through the process of this project.

“By using edge profiles to describe surface through implied visual continuities, architects have taken advantage of sectioning— both to merge and to perceptually elevate the relationship of form with material tectonic”. - Lisa Iwamoto [6]

6. Lisa Iwamoto, Digital Fabrication: Architectural and Material Techniques. (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2009) 7. [IMAGE- right] http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain/

[A] B.2. CASE STUDY 1.0

DRIFTWOOD PAVILION // AA

“[The Driftwood Pavilion] provides a thoughtful, provoking reminder of the UK’s inextricable link to the sea its undulating form created by the motion of the water, carried by waves and coming to rest in busy central London”. - Danecia Sibingo [8] The Driftwood Pavilion is a carefully curved and carved three-dimensional form, which has been sectioning in a curved vertical manner. The form consists of twentyeight layers of plywood which conceal an overall internal structural system.

[9] Sibingo, along with her teammates, created a script which manipulated the movement of lines, which resulted in line drawings for the basis of the plan. The design was then pushed further

32

through carving,

her eroding

interests in and layering.

The grasshopper definition provided for this project is a simple sectioning algorithm, which intersects a number of planes with a three-dimensional form, resulting in a sectioned surfaces. The intersecting planes can be modified in the sense of direction, spacing and number of planes, to create some diversity in the outcome. As this technique is generally quite simple and easily applicable, it was in my best interest for this project to further explore the process of creating interesting three-dimensional shapes using Grasshopper and then applying the sectioning algorithm to these forms.

8. “Architectural Association Summer Pavilion 2009 : Driftwood”, Freshome, http://freshome.com/2009/07/09/architectural-association-summer-pavilion-2009-driftwood/ 9. “Driftwood AA Summer Pavilion, London”, e-architect, (2012) http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/driftwood-pavilion-design 10. [IMAGE - right] http://www.dezeen.com/2009/07/03/driftwood-pavilion-by-aa-unit-2-opens/

SIMPLE GEOMETRY

HORIZONTAL SECTIONING

VERTICAL SECTIONING

CROSS SECTIONING

EXTRUDED SECTION CURVES

HYBRID

LOFTED CURVES

METABALLS

MESH RELAXATION

SELECTION CRITERIA Our specific tutorial brief suggests that we create a

type of hammock, net, cocoon, web or canopy. The only

restrictions are that it must be not touch the ground and can onlt have a maximum of 10 users. these

requirements

my

personal

criteria

From

includes:

1. A form that could be stood or sat , in or on 2. A lightweight form that could easily be suspended 3.

Fluid

easily 4.

36

and

altered

A

form

organic

to

that

fit

shape

onto

is

the

that

could

speficied

structurally

be

site.

stable

O1. For this iteration, I applied the sectioning algorithm to the the lofted form in both the vertical and horizontal direcitons,

and then sllightly extruded the curves. The outcome is a fluid gridshell-like pattern that still stays true to its original form.

This shape coudl be easily altered to fit the specific site and

possibly suspended sideways. Using a stretchy fabric material could allow this to resemble a hammock form. However, that

idea moves away from the orginial research field of sectioning.

O2.

This form was created using a metaballs algorithm

found on the internet. After creating the form I applied the same sectioning definiton in the horizontal direction, and slighty extruded the curves.

This form reminded me

of the cocoon idea and I imagen that the hollow centers could be fitted around tree trunks.

However,

this form

lacks structural stability as it has no vertical components.

3. I used the Kangaroo plug-in for this next form to create mesh relaxation. After producting the mesh, I again applied

the sectioning algorithm. The way in which the form bends

to reveal the sections reminds me of steps. This form could easily be attached to surrounding trees and altered to fit well into the space. The organic shape itself has similarities to a

tree trunk and would fit well into the natural landscape. This shape is however also lacking vertical structural components.

4. As with the form above, I again used mesh relaxation and

the sectioning algorithm. This form is slighty more rigid and less fluid than the ones above, but would be able to span a greater distance.

It also has a larger surface area which

could accomodate space for a greateer amount of people.

B.3. CASE STUDY 2.0

Lignum Pavilion // Frei + Saarinen Architekten

The Lignum pavilion was designed to inform on the topic of wood application and possibilities within the construction field [11].

The production process was fully digitalized and allowed for maximum optimisation in terms of material quantity and assembly. This resulted in a great reduction of costs and time. The pavilion consists of 50mm thick horizontal panels assembled and braced with 130mm high uprights [11].

The architects described the project as follows. “The resulting space goes beyond the dichotomy between the

38

interior and exterior, instead acting on their reciprocal and benevolent relationship. In geometric terms, it is the result of the subtraction of a “figure-8 knot” from the original nucleus, which is then sectioned in horizontal layers.” [11] The thing which interested me most about this project is the way in which the internal space transforms into the external space through the use of geometry. The other interesting part that I hope to carry into my own project is the use of the horizontal sections as steps, which carry the users from the internal to the external.

11. “Lignum Pavilion / Frei + Saarinen Architekten”, Archdaily, (2012) http://www.archdaily.com/274331/lignum-pavilion-frei-saarinen-architekten/ 12. [IMAGE - right] http://www.contemporist.com/2013/03/06/lignum-pavilion-by-frei-saarinen-architects/

REVERSE - ENGINEERING

Curve Rhino

of and

the geometry created in referenced into Grasshopper

Grasshopper sweep used to inflate curve into three-dimensional form for sectioning

New sectioning definition used. Horizontal planes planes intersecting geometry

Vertical planes to create ribs

intersecting geometry as structural support

The resulting curves were then offset and extruded t o produce sectioned form resembling the lignum Pavilion

42

I reverse-engineerined the Lignum Pavilion with very simple tools, due to the simple nature of the project itself. I created a new sectioning algorithm that arrayed planes in a linear fashion, rather than around a circle - as with the definition for the Driftwood Pavilion. The new secitoning algorithm resulted in less errors and was more easily applicable to a range of geometries - rather than only circular ones. As I proceed into

my project I will continue using the new secitoning algorithm, but will look for a more a complex way to use grasshopper in defining a starting geometry.

Although using a curve and sweep worked relatively well for this reverse-engineering project, I believe there are much better ways to create geometries.

This will also add further complexity to my project, as the sectioning algorthim I produce is very basic.

B.4. TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

In order to add complexity to my project

the position of the access point, and can

grasshopper that I could then apply my

The end points and center of the moved

I found a way to create forms using

sectioning algorithm to. This method is able to use references from the site to

generate itself, making it ideal for this project, as

site

adaptability is one of

my criteria. The definition works by first refencing points as trees, a curve as

the creek and an additional point as the

access point. A line is then created from each tree ot the closest point on the river.

These lines are moved up in relation to

44

also be modified by changing the domain.

lines are grafted and NURBS curves are

created at each line. The curves are then

lofted to create one fluid shape. Once the loft shape is obtained I was able to add the previous sectioning algorithm

and experiement with the possibilities, generating many successful outcomes - shown in the following iterations.

The diagram on the next page gives a

clear visual explanation of the outcome.

S H A P E VA R I AT I O N & H O R I Z O N TA L S E C T I O N I N G For the first 10 iterations, I chose to move around the points of referenced trees, the path of the river and the reference

access point. This created a huge range of possibilities and

variety and responds well to one of my selection criteria which was adapability to any site. After adjusting the form I applied the sectioning algorithm created in Case study 2.0.

I also alltered the number of planes interesting and

expiremented with the outcome of more or less sections.

V E RT I C A L & H O R I Z O N TA L CURVE EXTRUSION The next 10 iterations used the outcomes of the first

10 iterations. Rather than creating planar surfaces from the curves, I added vertical sectioning curves and extruded

slightly extruded all curves. This technique is similar to

what was produced in Case Study 1.0 . These outcomes resemble more of a gridshell-like result and through material use could work well as hamock style structures.

However, this is not particular the direction I am looking towards and I do not find these iterations useful

in

furthering my project in the direction I am working towards.

VERTICAL CURVE EXTRUSION & H O R I Z O N TA L P L A N E S These iterations were the most succesfull and promising.

Creating planar surfaces only on the bottom horizontal curves created a bridge or tunnel effect. These iterations

began to look like they have some realistic pontential.

The

vertical

extrusions

provide

structural

for the seemingly floating planar surfaces.

support Adding

several planar surfaces also gives the idea of steps,

which relates back to the idea I suggested in Case Study 2. These iterations follow well with the direction of my project and I plan to

pursue this idea further.

V E R TRI C EA D LU CC EUDR VVEE RE TXITCRAUL S I O N & &H H OO RR I ZI Z OO NN TA TA L LS P E LCAT NI OE N SS I chose to continue with the previous idea of using vertical

extrusions and horizontal surfaces, but chose to reduce the

amount of sections. I did this to try to reduce the scale of the

outcomes and make them suitable for a fewer

number of people. However, I found that these did not look

as realistic as the previous iterations and would seem to lack much more structural stability than the previous. The smaller scale does, however, help to start thinking about the

connections between the vertical and horizontal sections.

HYBRID

For the last iterations I chose to expirement with random

techniques.

I

created

changed the direction of intersecting

planar

surfaces,

section planes,

extruded curves and

surfaces. Some of the resulting

further, and others

should not be pursued further.

outcomes are interesting and could potentially be used

SELECTION CRITERIA I have chosen to keep the same selection criteria as with Case Study 1. I have found these relevant and important

throughout the whole process so far. I hava added to

new criteria which were developed from Case Study 2 1. A form that could be stood or sat , in or on 2. A lightweight form that could easily be suspended 3. Fluid and organic shape that could be easily altered to fit onto the speficied site.

4. A form that is structurally stable 5. A form that can be stepped up to reach higher level 6. A form that uses sections to create internal and external spaces

56

O1. This iteration demonstrates extremely well how I would

like to use horizontal sections as steps. The vertical ribs act as a bracing system, however, they would need to be somewhat

modifited so that people can walk under them or cut off so that they are unseen, at the sections where they are too low to

walk under. The second method would work well in creating the illusion of external and internal spaces in the structure.

O2. This iteration demonstrates a different way of creating steps. It also provides a system of how I could allow people to walk up, and

suspend the structure without anything

touching the ground. This iteration does not show internal and external spaces. This could be easily added onto this

design by removing vertical sections towards the back.

33.

Similar to the iteration above,

this

demonstrate a

way to use sections as steps. However, there would need

to be additional vertical support. The interesting part of

this iteration is th way the ths curved vertical sections create

small

spaces

with ones above,

of

shelter.

This

structure,

along

would be easily adaptable to any site.

B.5. TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES

58

The main ideas that I chose to take from the iterations are the use of horizontal sections as steps and vertical extrusions as ribs to support the bridge-like structure.

The vertical sections are necessary members to support the structure - especially as it is going to be hanging. The prototype shows a small section of how the structure could be fabricated and assembled.

Notches in the ribs allow the horizontal sections to be held into place at the correct height. Areas in

the model where the are the most notches (most intersecting sections) are the most solid. Therefore, it would be beneficial to have more elements. The material used for this project would need to be solid and planar - such as timber. Further investigation into materials and joining will take place in Part C, as well as exploring how the structure will be suspended. The scale of the project will also need to be determined and will result in more accurate prototypes.

59

B.6. TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

The iterations exercise provided a variety of outcomes and possibilities for the project. No definite form has been selected for the project yet. The site I have chosen along Merri Creek is slightly North of St George’s Road Bridge. The image to the right shows some area of the selected site. The main reason for selecting this site is for the close proximity to the local primary school. The project is intended for the primary school children, parents and teachers - connecting the cultural system of school back to the nearby natural system.

The design intent is to create an area that would be used as a playground or ‘outdoor classroom’ area. The sectioning technique

60

13. [IMAGE - right] Merri Creek Site - Jennifer Payette

will be used for the design , by creating bridges and tunnels that may lead to an elevated platform, or cocoon-like shape.

The structure will be supported by the nearby trees, as it is not allowed to touch the ground. As per my selection criteria, the design will be able to support the weight of several people, to be stood or sat on. It will also need to be lightweight enought to be able to be suspended. The shape will be fluid and organic, moving around the trees on the site. The horizontal sections will provide steps to move upward and the vertical sections will act as structural ribs. Lastly, the intersection of sections will combine to create internal and external spaces.

B.7. LEARNING OBJECTIVES & O U T C O M E S

Part B definitely pushed me to develop my understanding and capabilities of computational design.

Familirasing myself with basic parametric tools has aided me in designing in a way that would not be possible, or very time consuming, in an analogue way. The most useful part has been the ability to generate a huge range of design possibilities in a very time efficient manner. However, I do feel that my lack of knowledge in parametric tools has limited my creative abilities.

As I continue to learn new skills I will be

62

able to produce much more complex and interesting work. Even though my current project started relatively simple, I now have the possibility to add complexity to it. As was mentioned by the guest critic during the interim presentation, it is better to start with a simple idea and add complexity to it rather than try to create something very complex from the beginning, especially when my knowledge in this area is very basic.

Therefore, I believe I still have a lot fo potential to finish with an excellent project.

APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

Part B forced me to experiment and push the possibilities of grasshopper much more than I

have ever done, and has been a great learning experience.

Creating

various

geometries

in

grasshopper, applying sectioning algorithms and extruding them in different manners resulted in very

interesting outcomes that have inspired my ideas for the development of this project.

References Furuto, Allison. ‘Lignum Pavilion/Frei + Saarinen Architekten’, Archdaily, 2012, http://www. archdaily.com/274331/lignum-pavilion-frei-saarinen-architekten/ Iwamoto, Lisa. ‘Digital Fabrication: Architectural and Material Techniques’. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2009.

Maibritt Pedersen Zari, “Biomimetic Approaches To Architectural Design For Increased Sustainability”, School of Architecture, Victoria University, http://www.branz.co.nz/cms_show_ download.php?id=5dbe91c43fc173275e1bf6bdd988b587bc5cd4b5 The Biommicry institute. ‘What is biomimicry?’ Ask Nature, 2008, http://www.asknature.org/ article/view/what_is_biomimicry TPA21. “Matthew Ritchie with Aranda\Lasch and Arup AGU – The Morning Line”, TBA21, http:// www.tba21.org/augarten_activities/49/page_2 Welch, AJ. “Driftwood AA Summer Pavilion, London”, e-architect, (2012) http://www.e-architect. co.uk/london/driftwood-pavilion-design Willock, Nathan “Architectural Association Summer Pavilion 2009 : Driftwood”, Freshome, http:// freshome.com/2009/07/09/architectural-association-summer-pavilion-2009-driftwood/

C

C

DETAIL DESIGN

C.1. DESIGN CONCEPT

[ I N T E R I M P R E S E N TAT I O N F E E D B A C K ] The feedback from my interim presentation was overall quite positive, with some suggestions of how to move forward with my project.

The panel identified that my computation technique is quite simple, however, they mentioned that is it better to start with a simple idea and add complexity to it as you go. Therefore, by having a a simple and solid idea I could then build upon it, and add complexity in terms of details and make it a very successful project. Some suggestions included changing the directions of

the vertical sections and making them open up in certain directions towards a specific view, using horizontal sections as steps to climb up and get on to the structure and to start thinking about how to suspend the structure. I took all the ideas on board when working towards the final form. Another change I made was join with a member of my tutorial. We both were utilising the similar sectioning techniques and the same site. Therefore, we thought we could create something better by having the two of us working on one project.

[ JOINING PROJECT IDEAS ] Due to the similarity of our projects, Jenna and I thought it would be benefical for the both of us to work on the same project, allowing us to produce a greater amount of work.

My ideas for part B involved using a lofted shape and creating horizontal sections as steps and vertical sections

68

to encapsulate the structure. Jenna had explored non-linear sectioning that followed the curve of the lofted shape. By combining both of our sectioning techniques, we were able to introduce further complexity to our designs, as had been suggested in the interim presentation.

Jennifer’s Part B IIteration

Jenna’s Part B IIteration

69

DESIGN PROPOSAL

70

The proposal for our site is to create a suspended playground for the children of Merri Creek Primary school.

The design agenda for this project was to provide a space that will [1] allow children to freely explore the surrounding natural environment; [2] encourage experiential learning and [3] is in harmony with the natural landscape. The following explains how the design proposal responds to this agenda.

[2] We wanted our design to inform a learning process through exploration, where the completion of the course would encourage them to: Develop relationships by learning to help one another, be exposed to a small degree of danger in order to promote decision making and problem solving through the exploration of the “real world” and develop a sense of accomplishment and triumph.

[1] We wanted our design to completely emerge children into nature through play, where they are able to experience nature through: Climate – where a non enclosed form achieved by spaced vertical sections allow for exposure to climate conditions such as breezes, sunlight, rain etc.; Natural Setting – where the slope of the design brings awareness to the varying heights in ground level by following the topography of the site; Trees – where the net and varying levels of each of the parts of the design forces children to climb the trees; Water – where the viewing deck suspended over the embankment exposes the children to the views of the water as well as the continuation of the creek showing them the flow of the river and the ecosystem within it.

[3] Lastly, the design needed to be harmonious with the landscape of the site where the form was design based on the positioning of certain elements on the site: The overall form was achieved by approximating the distance of a desired pathway between trees and giving the pathway an access point The pathway of the design wraps around/weaves in and out of the trees following the topography; mirroring the major features of the site The suspension cables of the design intertwines with the trees and almost reaches out towards them, creating a connection that is composite to the form of the design, rather than being completely separate.

71

A viewing platform was added to allow the children to observe the area and orientate themselves.

Entrance to playground. The children must climb up a hill to get on to the bridge. The bridge entry was not placed on the level of the footpath in order to not disrupt bike riders.

Horizontal sections act as steps on the bridge. Bridge extends over the river.

72

The three sections on this side of the river are all connected via a net. The children must jump into and climb up to get around the rest of the playground.

The end of the bridge wraps around the tree. The next section of the playground is on a higher level, therefore, the children must climb the tree in order to reach the next part.

73

points - tree locations

TECHNIQUE

curve - desired pathway

point - a

lofted b-rep

The technique developed in Part B - that referenced the position of trees and creek - was used to generate 4 different lofted shapes. Once the form of the lofted shapes was decided on, we applied the sectioning algorithms. Sectioning in vertical and horizontal directions and adjusting levels and heights to suit the progamme of the project. After adjusting these we extruded based on different material thickness and experimented with adding/ subtracting sections as well as the spacing between them.

These were constantly edited until the final prototype.

The last step was to interopolate the curves which would

number

divide

act as our rope/cables. Although this did not exactly represent the way that the rope would behave, it gave a close representation and allowed us to create the holes to fabricate the project.

74

interpola

number

number

access point XY

or

XZ

or

YZ

distance

series

factor

X or Y

input curve

plane

distance

number

linear array

Z

distance

extrude

distance

series

input curve

reference curve

distance

factor

Z

distance

curve array

extrude

sectioning surfaces

intersection intersection curves

+ and - direction distance

graft

ate set vector

loft

extrude

75

Vertical Members

CONSTRUCTION

Timbe All horizontal and vertical members need to be properly labelled and kept in correct order, as each individual member is different and can only be placed in one position.

Once members are cut (laser cut or hand cut) they will need to be slid into each other. Additionally, timber beams will need to be placed below each horizontal section, where there is an intersecting vertical section. These

Angle

will be attached with cleats, bolted on the vertical and screwed to the horizontal. Once the structure is secure, the wire rope can be strung through. All the wire ropes will be cut after being attached by the U bolt, except for one on each side. The one that is left will wrap around the tree, leaning against timber battens, and be secured by another U bolt as it comes around.

76

Screws

Horizontal Members

er beams Wire Rope

e Cleat

Bolts & Nuts

U bolt (1)

U bolt (2)

Timber Batten

77

C . 2 . T E C T O N I C E L E M E N T S & P R O T O T Y P E S

[ PROTOTYPE 2 ]

78

The second prototype, which used the

have worked, there was too much rope

same sections cut for my first prototype

involved in this structure and we didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t

in part B, was produced to focus on the

like the aesthetic of having excessive

ideas of how to suspend the structure.

amounts of rope showcased in this

One of the questions we were asked

way, above the structure. It also ruined

during class feedback was whether the

the notion of

structure would be suspended or self

also needed to start thinking further

supporting. In this prototype we chose

about materiality. The cardboard used

to explore the idea of suspension.

for this prototype was much too flimsy

One

piece of rope would be tied to

and would break and bend far too

two trees high above the structure and

easily. Using rectangular sections to

each individual vertical section would be

separate and support the individual

suspended off this rope. The horizontal

horizontal sections was a good way

sections would be supported by the

to replace the cuts in the vertical

vertical sections. Although this may

sections, which weakened the members.

a floating structure. We

79

[ PROTOTYPE 3 ]

For the third prototype we continued to think of a different way to suspend the structure, and this is where we had the idea to run ropes through the structure rather than above it. This prototype was also about exploring materiality of the structure and supporting elements. This was our first try at laser cutting the pieces.

We chose plywood as it is quite sturdy, also more lightweight than using steel and gave an aesthetic look that we liked and that blended well with the natural surrounding. We liked the overall look, but thought it might be better to place the vertical sections closer together and add more ropes through the structure so that it still resembles the lofted shape.

80

We had two problems with this prototype.

This first is the notches in the horizontal sections. We chose to do the notches on the horizontal planes in order to not weaken the vertical members by making cuts through them. However, due to the shape of the vertical sections it was quite difficult to assemble and they did not slot in properly. The second problem was the rope. Because the rope we used was very stretchy, the whole structure was quite unstable and any kind of wind or movement would make it sway. This was not ideal for our project, which would be supporting the weight of children and need to be much more stable. We addressed these two problems in then next prototype.

81

[ PROTOTYPE 4 ]

The fourth prototype was focused on resolving issues from previous prototypes and finalising our construction and assembly method. Because the notches we had done in previous prototypes, on vertical and horizontal sections, caused problems and did not function well, we chose to eliminate this idea. Instead we put horizontal timber members between each vertical member and bolted them together. This not only supported the the horizontal members but also kept the vertical members in the right position, restricting any movement. The second issue we had previously had was the materiality of supporting rope. For this prototype we chose to use galvanised

82

steel wire rope. We found this to be much more sucessful as it stretched a lot less than normal rope and was much more rigid and less likely to move unless physically pushed. The rigidity of the wire rope also held the structure in place quite securely. In order to not damage the trees with the wire cable we researched ways to attach the cable without bolting to the tree. The best method we could find was to wrap the rope around timber members with notches in them that would lean up agaisnt the tree and not cut the trunk as the cables would over time. We were quite content with the sucess of this prototype and felt that is resolved most of the issues we had previously had.

83

Bolt & Nut

Angle Cleat 84

U Bolt

Wire Rope

85

C . 3 . F I N A L D E TA I L M O D E L

88

89

C.4. LEARNING OBJECTIVES & O U T C O M E S

The final presentation gave us some valuable feedback. The panel liked that we had a strong design concept and programme, and they believed that it would work. However, they had a problem with the thickness of the material. Due to the limited range of plywood sizes available, it was not possible for us to get a thinner layer of plywood, and hence our vertical sections looked too thick and heavy in the model. This is something we would have changed, given more time, however, we did manage to show the proper thickness in the 4th prototype and in renders. The structural stability was also questioned, but 1:50 scale was not a large enough scale to be able to test the stability. Therfore, we again showed this in the last protoype, which demonstrates that the system is actually very solid.

The design processs of this subject was different to the way I had been used to in previous studios. The most important thing I learned was that computation, or Grasshopper is a powerful tool that is supposed to be a tool to enhance your design and rather than creating the whole thing on its own. In terms of studio objectives, [1] I believe I was able to interrogate the brief by connecting the

natural elements of the site with the my Grasshopper definiton, [2] I produced a large range of design possibilities from my algorithm which led to a great amount of design ideas that had potential to be refined into great projects, [3] having no previous experience in Grasshopper and limited amount of knowledge in Rhino, I believe that my digital skills have developed greatly, including rendering and other 3D modelling techniques, [4] my project specifically explored how to suspend a structure in the air and this helped me build an understanding of the relationship between air and architecture, and the opportunities and problems that come with it, [5] I developed a great proposal for the site, along with my partner, that had strong arguments and responded to its context, [6] Part A allowed me to investigate and analyse different contemporary architecture projects and use this new information to further my design thinking, [7] the online tutorials provided a foundational basis for the computation tools and this evolved further through part B and C, [8] where I was able to refine these techniques and create a functional and aesthetically pleasing piece of architecture.

83