2016 S1 Haotian Wu by Studio Air

STUDIO AIR 2016, SEMESTER 1 TUTOR: FINNIA WARNOCK STUDENT NAME: HAOTIAN WU 668986

Table of Contents 4

PART A CONCEPTUALIZATION 6 0.0 BIOGRAPHY 8 1.0 DESIGN FUTURING

12 1.1 CASE STUDY 01 14 1.2 CASE STUDY 02 16 2.0 DESIGN COMPUTATION 20 2.1 CASE STUDY 03 22 2.2 CASE STUDY 04 24 3.0 COMPOSTION & GENERATION 26 3.1 CASE STUDY 05 28 3.2 CASE STUDY 06 30 4.0 CONCLUSION 32 5.0 LEARNING OUTCOME 34 6.0 ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES 36 REFERENCE 38

PARTB CRITERIA DESIGN

42 1.0 RESEARCH FIELDS 44 2.0 CASE STUDY 01 46 2.1 ITERATION MATRIX 52 3.0 CASE STUDY 02 54 3.1 REVERSE ENGINEERING 58 3.2 PARAMETRIC MATRIX 60 4.0 TECHENIQUE DEVELOPMENT 62 4.1 ITERATION MATRIX 02 64 5.0 GROUP COMBINING 66 5.1 FROM FORM: ‘TOP-DOWN‘

68 5.2 FROM MODULE: ‘BOTTOM-UP‘ 70 5.3 MATERIAL TEST 72 5.4 IDEA SYNTHESIS 74 6.0 PROTOTYPE 78 6.1 LESSONS FROM PROTOTYPE 80 7.0 PROPOSAL: WO-CLOUD 82 8.0 LEARNING CONCLUSION 84 9.0 ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES 86 REFERENCE 88 PARTC DETAILED DESIGN 90 1.0 TECTONIC RESTART 92 1.1 DESIGN CONCEPT 94 1.2 MORPHING FORM 98 1.3 LIGHTING DESIGN 100 2.0 VITRUVIAN WORKFLOW 102 2.1 PROTOTYPE 1 104 2.2 PROTOTYPE 2 106 3.0 FINAL PROTOTYPE 110 3.1 FABRICATION SEQUENCE 112 4.O FINAL RENDERING 116 5.0 BUDGET CONSIDERATION 118 6.0 DESIGN REALIZATION 120 6.1 MASS LASERCUTTING 122 6.2 MASS 3D-PRINT 124 7.0 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

PartA Conceptualization 4

CONCEPTUALIZATION

0.0 BIOGRAPHY Now I am doing the last year of architecture and from the past studios and theoretical courses I have done, I found my interest in architecture is still quite broad. I am fond of playing with tectonics in Studio Earth, as well as learning theories and styles from masters in Studio Water. And I am particularly enthusiastic about model making and fabrication.

y name is Haotian Wu and my friends usually call M me Stewart. I originally come from Suzhou, China and had one year of foundation school in Auckland, New Zealand, before coming to the University of Melbourne. My interest in architecture has been fostered since childhood by my architect uncle. I liked reading plans from his working materials and tried to draw my own version. Yet in the following years in China, my enthusiasm in architecture was not encouraged either by my parents or the school education, until I went to Taylors College in Auckland where I spent a really fun year in Art course. And interestingly, I did help my uncle who had been living in Auckland by then do some construction work, which made me more familiar with this field.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

In the first year, I took computing and database courses as my breath subjects, which unintentionally opened the door of parametric design for me. I self-learned a bit Grasshopper during the summer holiday and just found it would be a trend in future architecture industry. Just like people inventing pencil to replace charcoal, CAD to replace draft paper, I feel there will be a significant place for computing soon. It is not just about coding to generate fancy patterns or structures but push architecture towards a broader world, influencing much more than buildings. For me contemporary architecture means in this age the task of architects is becoming ever challenging. We need to apply interdisciplinary knowledge to explore the possibility of architecture. I think Studio Air will be a great experience to synthesize contemporary design theory and skills so I am very looking forward to the project.

Second Skin - Keep Personal Space. Project from Digital Desgin and Fabrication 2015

Adapative Shelter - Urban Envelope. Project from AA Visisting School Melbourne 2016

Studley Park Boat House. Project from Design Studio Water 2015

Herring Island Pavilion. Project from Design Studio Earth 2015

CONCEPTUALIZATION

1.0 DESIGN FUTURING Background

Inspiring Studio Air

and design because of its innate ability of prefiguration, should be human’s method of futuring. However, not all designs can play this significant role. Fry suggests three main problems in the situation of current design which certainly includes architecture [1]. Firstly, the deregulated pluralization renders a large amount of design activities trivialized and stylized. Secondly, the limitation of social form causes most designs in the current world is either economy-oriented or culture-oriented but not sustainment-oriented. Thirdly, even those so-called sustainable design are just slowing the defuturing rather than essentially changing the condition. So before starting the Studio Air, we need to radically redefine the frame of design.

and reflected from the reading materials, there are a few inspiring points:

ow human are facing a critical moment as the future ontemporary design theories and digital techniques N which is supposed set in the front, is no more secured. C will be introduced and applied in Studio Air, so we can The defuturing condition of unsustainability is accelerating consider ‘futuring’ as a signpost of the project. Concluded

What is Future

ry’s book describes human society as a train running F towards a cliff and most design works with the ‘sustainable’ intention are just slowing down the train but the

defuturing is still inevitable [2]. Therefore the task of design should instead redirect the train to an alternative future, which requires designers as the first brave passengers to jump off the train and look for other directions firstly. In this way the future is defined with a dual meaning. Firstly there will be a single future we are eventually going to and secondly there are also plural possible futures which can aid us to speculate designs. So future is something we design for as well as something we design upon.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

The project does not have to stick with solving practical problems as we are still thinking within the a conventional frame. Instead the design should be able to speculate sustainable possible futures and illuminate transformative actions [3].

The design should engage users in depth and inspire users to think the status quo critically [4]. It should be a compass to indicate how to think sustainably rather than as a map directly showing where or what is sustainability [5].

The design should be innovative even revolutionary, encouraging fundamental transform from the underpinning concepts in order to break the existing thinking frame. But at the same time inflated faith and idealist reform should be avoided [6].

Speculating Future

Defuturing

Humanity

Speculating Future

Design

Speculating Future

Designer How design redirect humanity from defuturing to sustainable future

CONCEPTUALIZATION

1.0 DESIGN FUTURING

Design as a Discourse

Sustainability in the Project

chumacher suggests that architecture is a system of s Fry suggests, a futuring design should speculate S communication and the total mass of works and process A sustainable futures as a design tool, should redirect should work as a discourse to communicate the idea . So humanity towards sustainability and should inspire people [7]

during the studio not only the outcome but also our design process and all items involved in should in Fry’s word, mobilize ‘design intelligence’[8]. There are two requirements our design discourse need to meet:

The discourse should be participatory rather than consensual, which asks for the capability to be communicated among not only design community but the large group of people. It can act as an educational agency to promote design as a ‘common literacy’[9].

The discourse should explore the evolution from ‘things’ to a ‘design’ and how things act beyond their mere function as material or immaterial object. Trivalized pattern, function, structure and style must be avoided [10].

CONCEPTUALIZATION

to think sustainably. However he does not give an explicit definition of sustainability. If ‘design futuring’ is the signpost of our studio, what a sustainability are we going to pursue? There is one definition from my Reshaping Environments essay which I think will still work in this case: “Sustainability is the quality of a system regardless of its scale, if the relationships between and within its all subsystems are able to persist and nourish each other. There is no fixed focus of sustainability as it attempts to balance all stakeholders. “ So we need to realize that sustainability is neither anthropocentric nor nature-centred and can never be prescribed. The focus of the project will not be the answer of sustainability, but the process to explore sustainable futures, and the method of mobilizing people to think about sustainability.

WRITING

MODELING

SKETCH

PRESENTATION

......

trivialized styles / patterns / structures / functions

DISCOURSE

DRAWING

DESIGN OUTCOME

sustainable future??? The whole mass of design as discourse to mobilize peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sustainable thinking

CONCEPTUALIZATION

1.1 CASE STUDY 01 Project: Eden Project Architect: Nicholas Grimshaw Date: 2003 Location: Cornwall, England

Figure1. Eden Project consisting of two ‘Biomes‘

efore 1995 when the project started, the site was a B working china clay pit, nearing the end of its economic life. The barren valley exhausted by human beings was waiting

for the day of being ignored just like many other locations on the earth which used to be pit, factory, dump...... However, Eden Project changes its destiny. As an architectural work itself, the hexagonal structure of bubbles can set on any harsh terrains(pic 01), and the strong sense of biomimicry forms a nearly fictional contrast between the project and the surroundings, between human-created nature and humanabandoned nature.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Despite its wonderful architectural design, Eden Project should be regarded as a discourse rather than a mere structure - a complex of steel domes. The whole project, including the function, the lasting educational program and even the building progress are contributing collectively as a discourse to speculate future and inspire people to think about sustainability. The main function of Eden Project is to reserve and exhibit plants from diverse environments and climates which are artificially created by the two large ‘Biomes’(pic 02, 03). Before the ‘Biomes‘ were set down, the soil was made from local mine waste and the organic matter was from composted bark. That indicates a new possibility

for human to reapproach and regenerate the nature after the highly industrialized society isolated it. Besides, Eden Project also functions as an educational agency. It helds types of plant visit, apprenticeship, school of gardening and even green cooking course. The program aims to influence every aspect of human life and the focus is usually on children, to inspire the next generation. It is also a project involving users in depth. During the construction, the public was invited to see the progress of creating the paradise.

‘The moment we saw it we loved it, because it felt natural – a biological response to our needs, but forged in materials that would allow us to explore the cultivation of plants in a way never before attempted’ -Tim Smit, Eden co-founder Therefore we can see that the project has never been launched to solve any urgent problems. The emerging of Eden Project creates a paralled world beside our current life where human is so closed to nature and so cares about nature. The design is speculating a future which is still far away but we are yearning for. Most importantly, it is a built work, being a forerunner of speculative architecture. This encourgaes us to experiment bravely in our own project and make the idea real to challenge the conventional world.

Figure2. The site lays on a former china clay pit

Figure3. The Mediterranean Biome

03 Figure4. The Rainforest Biome

CONCEPTUALIZATION

1.2 CASE STUDY 02 Project: Continuous Monument Architect: Super Studio Date: 1969 Location: Unbuilt

Figure5. The most influential collage of Continuous Monument - the total urbanization in Manhattan

nlike the Edent Project that has been built and serving U the society, the Continuous Monument is just a series of photo-collages, not even a complete architectural

proposal. However, it is also a discourse to express the idea of architecture. This discourse was proposed by Super Studio in 1969, known for their conceptual architecture work. Though none of their ideas have been really brought to the real world, they influence and inspire many following contemporary architects such as Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid and Bernard Tschumi. Many of their projects were originally published in magazine and ranged from fiction to storyboard illustration and photomontage, which reflects Schumacher’s opinion: architecture does not only concern buildings.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

The simple collage with abrupt blocks easily makes people think of the relationship between architecture and natural or urban environments. From the collages on the right page we can see that the structured and hierarchic system of blocks supersedes the natural landscape that lies beneath it. The uniform blocks show a strong sense of indifference to the topography, to what exists naturally. It represents both architecture’s unpredicatable power of reshaping natural environments as well as human’s offensiveness to nature. These structures are nearly surreal but can inspire people of environmental thinking.

Another interpretation of the Continuous Monument is a form of architecture all equally emerging from a single continuous environment; the world rendered uniform by technology, culture and all the other inevitable forms of imperialism. The large collage on the left page seems predicting the way globalisation and urbanization are swamping the world in the 21st century. Given the way the world was developing, we shall realize that we might as well all live in one anonymous megastructure, with local cultures stripped away.

With the fictionally tremendous structures, Continuous Monument is an early version of speculative architecture. It was not proposed to solve a design problem but as an aid to understand the order of earth and as a critique on human society. Although none of these block structures have been really built, the drawings have been showing the possibility of the future world. The depicted scenario might be undesirable for the inharmony and uniformity, or in another way desirable for humanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s system governing the nature. But in either way it opens viewerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mind of thinking future and the relationship between human and nature. I think that is what we should purse in our project - an inspiring and critical design discourse. 03

Figure6. The structure spanning over the natural environment

Figure7. The structure cutting in the landscape

03 Figure8. The structure embracing the huge waterfall

CONCEPTUALIZATION

2.0 DESIGN COMPUTATION xman suggests that digital theories in fact brings O Vitruvian Effect back to architecture - a continuous logic of design thinking and making . Before Renaissance,

[11]

buildings were constructed not planned so design was not separated from construction. Architects at that time took charge of the whole project so the process is continuous. Then the knowledge of building has been becoming increasingly complex, forcing the division of specialization. This yet has brought an incontinuity to architecture. As the initial designers architects cannot control the whole workflow and can hardly realize the problems in the following process, which often causes undesirable designs. However now digital technology is able to provide architects the continuum again from form-finding, performance evaluation to materialization and fabrication. Form-finding

n the early years digital technology was just used as IGehryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s an assitance to actualize design proposals. Frank Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao is an example of compterization rather than computation in design process. Then the rise of morphogenetic conception reveals the value of algorithm in pursuing non-stardard and organic forms [12]. Computation is regarded as a new method of form-finding. One of the advantages of scipting form-finding is the possibility to incorporate multidisciplinary research such as computational geometry and biomimetic patterns. The Serpentine Pavilion 2002 by Toyo Ito is an example fusing mathmatical algorithm in(pic 01,02). Although by digital tools it is becoming much easier to generate complex forms, we need to realize that the formation always precede the form. Algorithmic form-finding in essence is a design logic which

Figure9. The mathematical algorithm behind Serpertine Pavilion

Figure10. The Serpentine Pavlion 2002, by Toyo Ito

CONCEPTUALIZATION

utilizes the associative relationships and depenency between objects and their parts-and-whole structure [13].

Performace Evaluation

he advance of digital tools also raises the performative T thinking in architecture. As architecture has been separated from construction for ages, many errors in design

proposal cannot be noticed until the construction started or even completed. Now with digital model and simulation tools such as BIM and CFD Analysis, not only the apperance but also the structural and functional performance of a building can be previewed. The image left is the simulation of temperature curves and airflow patterns of Sprawling Design Center, Linz(1993) before construction. With the feedback designers are able to change the proposal or on a higher level the form can be even driven by performance, which will be discussed more in case studies. 04

Digital Materialization and Fabrication

he emerging of CNC fabrication makes customized T materialization possible. Architects can better deliver the idea from the design proposal to the acuctual work. The development of 3D printing and laser-cutting encourages more creative designs. Also the digital techniques make a material-driven form-finding possible, which will be discussed in case study 04.

Figure11. The simulation of temperature curves and airflow patterns of Sprawling Design Center

Figure12. The laser-cut timber material in Performative Wood Studio, GSD

CONCEPTUALIZATION

2.0 DESIGN COMPUTATION

Design Algorithm

he use of algoritmic tools in architectural design is discussed on the last two pages. However we need to understand that algorithmic thinking is a different concept from algorithmic tool, with the former emerging much earlier than the later. In Kalay’s article, algorithmic thinking is an iterative design method which does not rely on computers [14]. Designing is not a linear problem-solving process but always concerns uncertainity, conflction, tradeoff and side effects. In order to make sure those ‘wick problems’ can be solved, a recipe is invented consisting of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and communication(pic 01). In Kalay’s opinion, within this frame designers act like search engines(pic 02). They define a domain of goals based on problem analysis first and then produce a range of candidates. Via numerous tests against constraints, the scope of candidates will be reduced and finally a satisfying outcome will appear [15]. This design method is highly organized and rational. It requires intuitional force to lead and rational force to iterate. Therefore Kalay suggests that we need a symbiotic desgin system in which human contributes the intuitional ability such as decisionmaking and principle-setting while computer contributes the rational ability such as iterative computation [16]. Though I think this method is too rigid, the loop is actually often used in our design process. For example we produce generations of prototypes as well as iterations of Grasshopper geometries to test effect. And truely the integration of human creativity with computer rationality will be a focus of this studio.

Figure13. The design process described in Kalay’s article

Figure14. The search scheme described in Kalay’s article

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Puzzle-Making Process

ltough the design algorithm is rational it is not linear. A When we are undertaking the iterations, our perception of the final outcome also shifts. Therefore the design process

will not be like playing with the Cube Puzzle that designers can foresee the result. Instead it is similar to playing with Tangram Puzzle [17]. During the design process, the designer keeps evaluating the outcome and keeps redirecting the design track. This reminds us that in the project we need to keep reflecting and adjusting the expectation of outcome. And accordingly we need to change our research and design methodology.

The diagram on the right bottom displays two modes of algorithmic design process - breath first or depth first. Considering the collaborative work in the studio I think we will start from the breath-first mode to produce diverse prototypes and then in the next phase we will focus on few most potential proposals to develop. The analogy to puzzle-making also inspires me of generative form-finding script. So far my Grasshopper skill can only command computer to form a geometry which can be prescribed in my mind. I think the next step is to to develop a script which can self-evaluate and self-redirect so that the outcome can be beyond expectation. This concept of generation will be explored further in the next topic.

Figure15. The Rubic Cube, an example of problem-solving behaviour

Figure16. The venerable Tangram puzzle - making new shapes from the seven basic pieces

05 Figure17. Two modes of design process - breath first or depth first

CONCEPTUALIZATION

2.1 CASE STUDY 03 Project: SoftOffice Architect: NOX Studio Date: 2002 Location: England, Unbuilt

Figure18. The bird view and interior design of SoftOffice

he project is proposed by NOX as a interwoven space T for both office and children’s relax space. This is a great example showing how computational thinking works

in architecture without nowadays advance of computational tools. Nox’s initial idea is to create a flexible space reacting to users’ movement and behaviours. They think the conventional architectural grid is too rigid and inefficient to plan space, frozening the real intention of users. Neither can they agree with the space neutrality of some modernism architectures. The form-finding process in their opinion should be actively driven by information of performance rather than as Mies Van Der Rohe suggests, leaving empty openness to passively suit all different events. Therefore a

CONCEPTUALIZATION

new method of form-finding is required to input circulation, behaviour and connection between different spaces as parameters and based on some principles, the method can generate a responsive geometry. From the images above of the design’s interior we can see, the ideology is about creating tense connectivity between individual spaces and openness should form on the concentration spot. This formation principle is algorithmic while at that time they did not have so advanced simulation algorithm as today. So what they did to achieve this algorithmic ideology was, inspired by Frei Otto’s wool thread technique, making an analog computing machine as

shown on the right page. They set a tank with liquid lacquer and two rings on which connected multiple sets of rubber tubes. The lines of rubber tubes represent the tense space, following the circulation pattern(input); and the two rings each represents floor and ceiling with the height between them able to be adjusted(input). So the formation process is that the tubes are dipped in the liquid and subsequently taken out and streched from both side(input). And after drying for a certain period of time(input), because of the viscousity of lacquer, the lines start to merge into surfaces and holes naturally form next to crossing lines. We can see this process is quite like todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s generative algotitmic design but NOX used a method without computer, which suggests that computation is more a thought than tool in design and the formation principle is the essence no matter it is completed by human or computer. Now with digital computation we can make the workflow of information more accurate but the idea is the same.

Another interesting point is that although the method is used to form a performative geometry, it is actually also a process to test materiality, which can be inspiring for our ceiling project. Mere complex geometry is now easy to form in Grasshopper but the performance of material is very hard to simulate so physical test is still indispensable. The advantage of physical test is the ability to input materiality as a parameter, which will be discussed more in the next case study.

Figure19. The analog computing machine with lacquer and rubber tube for form-finding

Figure20. The analog computing machine with lacquer and rubber tube for form-finding

03 Figure21. The analog computing machine with lacquer and rubber tube for form-finding

CONCEPTUALIZATION

2.2 CASE STUDY 04 Project: ICE/ITKE Research Pavilion Architect: ICD/ITKE Studio(Achim Menges) ,the University of Stuttggart Date: 2012 Location: Stuttggart, Germany

Figure22. The close view of ICD/ITKE Research Pavlion, 2010

he ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2012 is a great T example of information workflow between material properties, system behaviour, generative computational

process and robotic manufacturing. With the development of computational design in the recent decades, the topdown hierachial design process always prioritizes geometry formation and isolates material performance. Material in parametric design has become constraint rather than opportunity. This project however shows the possibility of inputing material performance as a parameter to generate form. So this case study is especially meaningful for our studio because timber veneer product is going to be the main material. Regarding materialization as a generative driver of

CONCEPTUALIZATION

design instead of facilitative afterthought is significant in our project. The first step is to test material in a microscopic scale. The deflection of elastically bent plywood strips in relation to various specification parameter is digitally mapped and delivered to computer(pic 02). Based on these data, the computer algorithm simulate the physical effect and form the geometry(pic 01). This simulation also tests the structural possibility and according to the feedback designers can adjust the position of clinks. Next the design can be transfered from digital model to the physical actuality(pic03). Robotic cutting(pic 04) enables the accurate information

delivery from computer to material and the final assembly is quite simple. When pieces of plywood are assembled to the correct position and interact on each other, the geometry is naturally formed by the elastic bending force - the materialization is the computing machine itself. Just like the first case study, this project also focuses on performative structure and essentially utilizes materialization as the driven force behind design. In this case study, digital technique plays a significant role in the entire information processing and simulation. But the algorithm after all is a script of principle and a recipe of design thinking which is initiated by human. So we should remember formation always precedes form and thinking always precede computation.

Also this project displays that wood itself is a sophisticated material worth exploring. Different from steel or glass, wood is a more sustainable material and has much lower embodied energy. It is also a natural fiber with heterogeneous and anisotropic structure which needs to be analyzed before designing. So the following research direction will be inclined to timber-based works. 04

Figure23. The physical simulation of timber strips and automatic allocation of clinks

Figure24. The test of material and digital mapping of data

Figure25. The transfer from digital design to fabrication details

Figure26. The robotic cutting of timber strips

CONCEPTUALIZATION

3.0 COMPOSTION & GENERATION eneration has become a new form of composing G architecture. We would like to embrace such a new thinking trend as well as design tool but also hold a critical atitude on that.

Using Tool or Creating Cool

he philosophy behind computational generation is the T processing of information and interactions between elements. Although now Grasshopper provides us with a frame

to do so, it is still a specific and limited software and many generation cannot be realized easily with that. Peters suggests that we are moving from an era where architects use software to one where they create software [18]. He lists four approaches of intergrating architectural design with computational tool and the one with the most depth is hybrid software engineers / architects, which means for a certain design purpose, they develop their own tool to customize the computation. The examples are Daniel Piker with Kangaroo(pic 01) and Giulio Piacentino with Weavebird (pic 02) which are both plug-ins for Grasshopper with a certain emphasis. Customizing tools can be thought as a future possibility but for our current stage the more practical goal will be getting familiar with different Grasshopper plug-ins so that we can realize more diverse generations. From Conceptual to Computational

egarding to design, the essence of algorithm is a thinking R mode which determines it is naturally ambiguous and imprecise. Taking the case study of SoftOffice as an example, the idea of forming holes on surface junctions is still an abstract concept. With the aid of materiality, NOX transfer the imprecise idea to a precise physical outcome. But in the case of computer-based algorithm, designers have to translate the abstraction to a solid language that computer can understand and execute. So appropriate coding skill is required in order 01

Figure27. The form generation based on physical principles such as gravity and tense, realized by Kangaroo Physics

Figure28. The diverse built-in surface generations in Weavebird

CONCEPTUALIZATION

to frame the design idea within a ‘finite’ and ‘effective’ structure [19]. The finity of algorithm asks for the consideration of threshold. When we design a script to generate a form we have to define clearly when the process starts, transform and ends. For example if we hope a generation stops when two expanding spheres touch with each other, we can never discribe the process in such an abstract langurage. Rather in computational logic, the threshold shoule depends on a ‘boolean’ value. The effectivity of algorithm asks for the consideration of principle. We should give the computer a rule to generate form relying on the design ideology, which can be mathematical, biomimic or performative. An unintentional, random generation is pointless. The images left show a project with a logical algoritm to generate ‘skeletons’(pic03,04).

Critique

‘At present scripts tend to be of the ‘lon gun’ mentality and are justifiably proud of their firepower, usually developed through many late nights of obsessive concentration. There is the danger that if the celebration of skills is allowed to obscure and divert from the real design objectives, then scripting degenerates to become an isolated craft rather than developing into an integrated art form.’[20] - Hugh Whitehead, the former head of the Foster + Partneers SMG

ith the spread of algorithm-based desgin softwares in W architectural field, there are a increasing number of generative designs. At the first glace people’s comment would

be cool but not all of them possess an intensional compostion. The compostion good-looking though has lost the sensibility of architecture. So Peters claims that computation should be integrated as a intuitive and natural way to design, not a mere tool to generate unusual forms [21]. The evaluation of a generative design should go back to the essential idea behind the form - how individual components are interacted in the whole entity and how a basic principle is intellecturally incorporated in the process, rather than the outcome of appearance. 03

Figure29. The tree matrix of L-system Project, a chart of iterations

Figure30. The generation outcome of L-system Project - artificial skeleton

3.1 CASE STUDY 05 Project: Qatar Convention Center Architect: Arata Isozaki Date: 2011 Location: Doha, Qatar

Figure31. The massive tree-like structure in Qatar Convention Center

he Qatar National Convention Center is located in T the Educational City, a new 2500-acre campus on the outskirt of Doha. The center aims to provide state-to-

art education to students of the Middle East and will be promoted as an international leader of education in the region. So the client asked for a massive sculptural Sitra Tree on the exterior facade, functioning as an architectural signature as well as structural support. The Sitra Tree is the an ancient Arabian icon of learning, growth and stability. In a traditional method of designing an analogical architecture designers tend to prefigure the target object first and evolve the design from the prefiguration. However

CONCEPTUALIZATION

in this project they wanted the Sitra Tree literally sprouts from the ground and generatively grow up to the height of roof. As the growth of tree is influenced by climates the generation of the tree form is accordingly decided by a set of parameters So they first analyze the biological features of a Sitra tree and its principle of growth. Because the natural growth rule of a certain specie is complex and not fully predicatable, the translation from biological language to a computational code requires an optimization. The script needs to ensure the generation is simplified enough for architectural aesthetics and construction possibility while at the same time the form

must be highly representative and can be recognized as the symbol. The image above is the geometry outcome by the generative algorithm(pic 01).

Although the form generation was well-conducted, I will criticize that their design method has an apparent shortage. The geometry of the Sitra tree is only for the skin which means the structural performance was not considered during the generation. That leads the engineering team - Buro Happold spent a second period of optimization to make the ‘tree’ structurally sound. Considering the massiveness of the project this incontiunuity is understandable. But for our project which is in a much small scale, we should pursue a generation which is not only unpredefined but also performance-engaged. Considering materiality and performance ahead will be explored more in the next case study.

Figure32. The result geometry of generating a Sitra tree

Figure33. The detail of the ‘Sitra tree’

01 Figure34. The detail of the ‘Sitra tree‘

CONCEPTUALIZATION

3.2 CASE STUDY 06 Project: Pleated Inflation Architect: Mar Fornes & THEVERYMANY Date: 2013 Location: Argeles-Sur-Mer, France

Figure35. The overview and pattern details of Pleated Inflation

his pavilion project is designed by Mar Fornes & T THEVERYMANY whose interest is in integrating generative forms with self-supported structures. The

innovation in this project is creating a synthesis between two material system behaviours. The form generation(pic 01) follows a inflation pysical simulation, taking the whole structure as inflatable. While the real material system is folded panels which needs to deal with compression and tension to be self-support. So it is a thorough and brave attempt of material-based design, referencing one kind of material characteristic as generation principle and another kind as constraints. The diagram of colour mapping on the opposite page(pic 02)

CONCEPTUALIZATION

displays the physical feedback of stretching pressure of the panel system. The more red the area shows, the higher stress it is acted on. So before the generation they record data of material limitation for both systems. And the generation process starts from â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;inflatingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the structure but ends with the bearing threshold of the folded panels. So the design outcome has a particularly aesthetic sense of materiality, showing both the vivid tensile curvature from the inflatable system and the ordered tessellated pattern of panelling system. Also, the design process itself would be an interesting analysis of the different and common points between two materials systems. Because I think our ceiling project will be material-based, this idea of synthesizing two

material systems may be able to push the project to a higher level. The detail handling is another thing we can learn from this project. For example the decotative hollow cutting on each individual panel may influence the physical performance of the material. If we hollow out the timber veneer, the panel might be easier to bend in a certain direction but the endurance might be reduced, which we need to consider even from the stage of testing material. The colour distribution of this project is also inspiring. As we have timber veneers with a range of colours, from light to dark, I think it is possible to apply different colour in different area to indicate the physical feedback. As a material-based project, that will be powerful to expose the genuine performance of the material to users.

Figure36. The generation based on physical inflation performance

Figure37. The colour mapping indicating the stretching pressure

CONCEPTUALIZATION

4.0 CONCLUSION Design Direction

Design Method

rom the lectures, weekly readings and case studies a s the project aims to produce a full-scale outcome, F general direction of this project has been developed. In A the design method must be practical and focuses the following parts, we should attempt to make the design: on fabrication. We should start from material analysis, Innovative

The topic of Design Futuring discusses architects’ great task of speculating future and redirecting humanity. In our small-scale project we cannot be so ambitious but being innovative is necessary - even a radical innovation should also be encouraged. Ceiling is a common component in interior design however we cannot be trapped in the cliche thinking frame.

Inspirational

Despite innovation, the design must be understandable and participatory. It does not have to be function-oriented. Rather it should suggest an ideology as a discourse and inspire users to expand their thinking further.

Performative

It has a dual meaning. Firstly the form generation will be parametric, reponding to users’ behaviour and other environmental factors. Secondly the generation will take materiality feedback into account. Performance will be the driver behind our ideology rather than any gaudy or empty fancy.

Generative

The form-finding will be generative rather than prescribed. This requires firstly finding an intellectual principle which responds to the design brief and materiality and secondly translating the principle to an optimized coding version. Good Grasshopper skill is expected.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

experimenting different types of material deformation and recording data. In this process of exploring material potential, we need to be innovative but also learn from relevant precedents such as ICD/ITKE Pavlions and Performative Wood Studio of Harvard GSD. On another track we need to analyze users’ behaviour and make response to clients’ demand, which will be key parameters to the generative computation. The form requires a synthesis of opportunities from both users and materiality. So generally we need a Grasshopper script to generate a form responding to the design brief but also inputs material constraints as the threshold. The script should be generative based on some simple principles but the final outcome should be beyond imagination. Considering the people number in the studio, we can take a breath-first method to encourage diverse ideas of generation and then focus on some most potential ones to develop. After we produce a rough form, making physical prototypes will be required to test the practicality. Altough ideally a physical simulation can be conducted in Grasshopper, prototype is a better way to incorporate material into design and it will be a rehersal for the final fabrication. The fabrication can be conducted with computational aid such as laster-cutting, ensuring the information transfered accurately from digital to physical. Several generations of prototyping and digital optimization will be ideal if time is allowed and the final fabrication, because of the size, will need a highly organized workflow.

Prepare the next stage - starting from material: timber veneer

CONCEPTUALIZATION

5.0 LEARNING OUTCOME

Architecture is a discourse to suggest an idea. It does not have to solve a practical problem. Rather it can be speculative and inspiring.

The emerging of digital tools creates lots of benefits for architectural design. We need to pay particular attention to their collective effect, the continuous logic from idea to fabrication brought by digital techniques.

Make use of the advantage of computational formfinding to acquire inspiration from transdisciplinary knowledge. Take my past work in Studio Water as example(right page top), I wanted to draw the curved plan based on tangent arcs but hand-drawing cannot achieve an acurate effect and was difficult to have iterations. If I could programe a script with relevant mathematical principles the design would be more solid.

Consider material performance and make use of physical simulation tools before fabrication. In the Digital Design and Fabrication Studio I made an expandable structure(right page middle) but at that time I did not test the digital model in a mechanical simulation so the prototype was highly bent. Using tools such as Kangaroo might be able to solve this problem.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Algorithm in architecture is more a thinking than a tool and the algorithmic thinking decides whether we can use algorithmic tools well. In a macroscale algorithmic thinking asks us to transfer an intuitional design process to a rational loop and apply computational aid to undertake the process effeciently; in a microscope algorithmic thinking asks us to communicate idea with computer in algorithm so it can complete a task such as form-finding or performance simulation.

Generative design is preferable. We need to tell a computer how to generate rather than what to generate.

Materiality can be a great driver of design rather than constraints. In AA Visiting School we followed a similar design track to analyze material first(right page bottom). However my design outcome just simply use the flexibility of the tensegrity structure but did not take material data as a parameter or threshold. Digitalizing material will be the first task of this project.

Although computational tool is powerful, we should always go back to the essence of design. Never allow the obsession with digital tool precede design itself.

Improving Studo Water: Computational Form-finding

Improving Digital Design and Fabrication: Performance Feedback

Improving AA Visiting School: Material-based Design Method

CONCEPTUALIZATION

6.0 ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES ‘Urban Sprawl’

his set of sketches use the distance away from the T center point of square as the parameter to generate random points with gradually changed density and based on

these points Veronoi patterns are formed and extruded. The height of extrusion is also linear to the distance

‘Atomic Collision‘

his set of sketches use the distance between the center T point and a group of random points within a globe as the parameter. The futher ‘atom‘ will be larger and exploded greater.

‘Net’

his set of sketches use multiple point charges to create T an undulating surface and the thinckness of pipes varies according to the height of the certain point

CONCEPTUALIZATION

‘Parametric Hypostyle‘

his set of sketches use multiple attractor and cosine T curve to create loft surfaces and use morph to allocate different types of columns.

‘Sleeve’

his set of sketches use loft of curves which are T incrementally arranged along a curved surface. The number of panels and the size can be adjusted. This kind of form is very relevant to our project.

‘Scales‘

set of sketches use series of numbers of create T hisgradual change of height and size of each ‘scales‘

CONCEPTUALIZATION

REFERENCE Reading [1] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 12.

[2] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 5.

[3] Anthony Dunne& Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (USA: MIT Press, 2013), p.33.

[4] Anthony Dunne& Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (USA: MIT Press, 2013), p.35.

[5] Anthony Dunne& Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (USA: MIT Press, 2013), p.44.

[6] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 11.

[7] Patrik Schumacher, The Autopoiesis of Architecture: A New Framework for Architecture (Chichester: Wiley, 2001), p. 3.

[8] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 12.

[9] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 6.

[10] Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2006), p. 13.

[11] Rivka Oxman and Oxman Robert, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2015), p. 2.

[12] Rivka Oxman and Oxman Robert, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2015), p. 6.

[13] Rivka Oxman and Oxman Robert, Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2015), pp. 7-8.

[14] Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 7.

[15] Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 12.

[16] Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 15.

[17] Yehuda E. Kalay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 21.

[18] Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2(2013), p.10.

[19] A. Robert and C. Keil Frank, ‘Definition of “Algorithm”’, The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press, 1999), p.11.

[20] Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2(2013), p.12.

[21] Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2(2013), p.13.

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Case Study Achim Menges, ‘Material Computation: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design‘, Architectural Design, 2(2012), 14-21.

Achim Menges, ‘Material Resourcefulness: Activating Material Information in Computational Design‘, Architectural Design, 2(2012), 34-43.

Brett Duesing, ‘A SMART approach to integrated 3D analysis at Buro Happold’, Obleo Design Media <http://obleo-pr.com/2009/05/topologica/> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Eden Project, ‘From Pit to Paradise‘, Eden Project <https://www.edenproject.com/eden-story/eden-timeline> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Eden Project, ‘What’s here‘, Eden Project <https://www.edenproject.com/visit> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Jo Elworthy, Eden project : the guide (London: Transworld, 2012), pp. 5-13.

Jonathan Glancey, Superstudio: Life Without Objects is at Design Museum <http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2003/mar/31/architecture.artsfeatures> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Lars Spuybroek, ‘The Structure of Vagueness‘, in Performative Architecture, Beyond Instrumentality, ed. by Branko Kolarevic and Ali M. Malkawi (Newyork, London: Spon Press, 2005), pp. 163-175.

Martin van Schaik and Otaker Máčel, Exit Utopia : Architectural Provocations, 1956-76, (New York: Prestel, 2005), pp, 105-126.

Marc Fornes & THEVERYMANY, ‘13 Argeles-Sur-Mer’, THEVERYMANY <http://theverymany.com/public-art/argeles-sur-mer/> [accessed 18 March 2016].

CONCEPTUALIZATION

REFERENCE Images Figure1. ‘Eden Project’ <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eden_> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure2. Eden Project, ‘Earlydays‘ <https://www.edenproject.com/eden-story/eden-timeline_> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure3. Eden Project, ‘Mediterranean Biome‘ <https://www.edenproject.com/visit/whats-here/mediterranean-biome> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure4. Eden Project, ‘Rainforest Biome‘ <https://www.edenproject.com/visit/whats-here/rainforest-biome> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure5.

Harizan

Cuma,

‘Continuous

Monument

1‘

<http://arch122superstudio.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/continuous-monument-architectural-model_15.html>

Monument

2‘

<http://arch122superstudio.blogspot.com.au/2012/06/continuous-monument-architectural-model_15.html>

[accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure6.

Harizan

Cuma,

‘Continuous

[accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure7. Super Studio, ‘Continuous Monument: On the River‘ <http://www.moma.org/collection/works/934> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure8. Super Studio, ‘Continuous Monument: On the Waterfall‘ <http://www.moma.org/collection/works/936> [accessed 7 March 2016].

Figure9. Serpentine Gallery, ‘Mathematics behind Serpentine Pavilion‘ <http://www.serpentinegalleries.org/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure10. Serpentine Gallery, ‘Serpentine Pavilion 2002‘ <http://www.serpentinegalleries.org/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure11. Branko Kolarevic and Ali M. Malkawi, ‘The simulation of temperature curves and airflow patterns of Sprawling Design Center‘, in Performative Architecture, Beyond Instrumentality (Newyork, London: Spon Press, 2005), p. 119.

Figure12. Jian Huang and Minhwan Park,’Differentiated Wood Lattice Shell’, in Architectural Design, 2(2012), p. 36.

Figure13. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘The major components of the architectural design process‘ in Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of ComputerAided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 10.

Figure14. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘Design as a process of searche‘ in Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 17.

Figure15. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘The Rubik Cube‘ in Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 14.

Figure16. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘The Tangram puzzle‘ in Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 15.

Figure17. Yehuda E. Kalay, ‘Breath or depth‘ in Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), p. 19.

Figure18. NOX Art & Architecture, ‘SoftOffice‘ <http://www.nox-art-architecture.com/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

CONCEPTUALIZATION

Figure19. NOX Art & Architecture, ‘Analog Computer_a‘ <http://www.nox-art-architecture.com/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure20. NOX Art & Architecture, ‘Analog Computer_b‘ <http://www.nox-art-architecture.com/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure21. NOX Art & Architecture, ‘Analog Computer_c‘ <http://www.nox-art-architecture.com/> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure22. ICE/ITKE, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2012‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure23. ICE/ITKE, ‘Physical Simulation‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure24. ICE/ITKE, ‘Material Test‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure25. ICE/ITKE, ‘Digital Model‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure26. ICE/ITKE, ‘Robotic Cutting‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 13 March 2016].

Figure27. Riyad Joucka, ‘From Digital FormFinding to Analogue Methods‘ <http://hybios.blogspot.com.au/2011_06_26_archive.html> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure28. Archieboy, ‘Shelling Grasshopper and Weavebird’ <http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/line2solid-1> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure29. Bradley Elias, ‘L-system Tree Matrix‘ <http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/lsystems/> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure30. Bradley Elias, ‘Generative Skeletons‘ <http://www1.rmit.edu.au/browse/About%20RMIT> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure31. Open Buildings, ‘Qatar National Convention Centre‘ <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/qatar-national-convention-centre-profile-41712> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure32. Brett Duesing, ‘Building a Tree‘ <http://obleo-pr.com/2009/05/topologica/> [accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure33. Open Buildings, ‘Interior detail‘ <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/qatar-national-convention-centre-profile-41712> accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure34. Open Buildings, ‘Interior detail‘ <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/qatar-national-convention-centre-profile-41712> accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure35. Marc Fornes & THEVERYMANY, ‘13 Argeles-Sur-Mer’ <http://theverymany.com/public-art/argeles-sur-mer/> accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure36. Marc Fornes & THEVERYMANY, ‘13 Argeles-Sur-Mer’ <http://theverymany.com/public-art/argeles-sur-mer/> accessed 18 March 2016].

Figure37. Marc Fornes & THEVERYMANY, ‘13 Argeles-Sur-Mer’ <http://theverymany.com/public-art/argeles-sur-mer/> accessed 18 March 2016].

CONCEPTUALIZATION

PartB Criteria Design 40

CRITERIA DESIGN

1.0 RESEARCH FIELDS lthough precedents can be classified in different A research fields, the thinking behind them is the same: parametric design. So we should learn from

different works and try to synthesize techniques across fields to create our own work. For the practical purpose of our project, I select four useful research fields and regroup them into two categories with different focus. Macroscope Formfinding - ‘Top-down’

hese works use parametric design to define the T general form first and then break the whole thing down to components. So the process is top-down. Geometr y

Material

The approach is to use mathematical principles to generate 2D or 3D geometries, such as different types of function curves, polygons, minimal calculation and boolean. They are the representational form of parametric control, conducting a very straightforward beauty.

The approach is to simulate the performance of a material system such as spring, membrane or pneumatic systems, to generate the design form. These works can produce natural and analogical effect. And on the deeper level, the form-finding can be directly linked to the component material, becoming the real ‘material-base‘ design.

Figure1. LAVA - Green Void, Sydney, 2008

Figure2. Voussair Cloud, Los Angeles, 2008

CRITERIA DESIGN

Microscope Implementation - â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Bottom-upâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;

ompared with the last category, this categoty of C works start from the components and focus on details. They rely on individual members to compose the whole thing so I call the design process bottom-up. Patterning

Normally the design has gradually -changed patterns on individual members and create an integral effect when the members compose the whole design. So these works also focus on the connection beteween members and the array sequence, very relevant to the timber ceiling.

Tessalation

Similar to patterning but this field focus more on 3D works, making the design more dynamic and interesting. This field will be analyzed further because it is very practical on fabrication, which is significant in our project.

hortly, the four fields introduced above will be S particularly paid attention, in an integral way rather than in individual fields. A good method to synthesize these ideas might be using the first category to generate a general form and using the second category to produce individual components. A match and negotiation between the whole and individuals will be a challenge as well as opportunity in our project.

Figure3. POLYP.lux, New York, 2011

Figure4. Dragon Skin Pavillion, Tampere, 2011

CRITERIA DESIGN

2.0 CASE STUDY 01 Project: VoltaDom Designer: Skylar Tibbits Date: 2011 Location: MIT, United States

Figure5. VoltaDom, MIT, 2011

oltaDom is designed by Skylar Tibbits for MIT’s 150th Anniversary Celebration & FAST Arts Festival. It is an installation in a corridor spanning building, lining the concrete and glass hallway with hundreds of vaults, reminiscent of the great vaulted ceilings of historic cathedrals. The vaults provide a thickened surface articulation and a spectrum of oculi that penetrate the hallway and surrounding area with views and light. VoltaDom attempts to expand the notion of the architectural “surface panel,” by intensifying the depth of a doubly-curved vaulted surface, while maintaining relative ease in assembly and fabrication. This is made possible by transforming complex curved vaults to developable strips, one that likens the assembly to that of simply rolling a strip of material.

CRITERIA DESIGN

Reason to pick this case study

bviously this work is a great example of parametric O design but the reason is not only that. In our studio the design task is clear and as I concluded in Part A the

design direction has also been pointed out. So we need such a suitable precedent as: 1. It is typologically relevant to ceiling, a parametric interpretation of conventional vault form. The design attempts to use digital tool to understand and then reproduce a traditional architecture language, in totally different material and new typology. This meets our requirement of being innovative and inspirational of the design.

2. The form coincidently creates an acoustic effect, which is mentioned as a good opportunity by our tutor who is also one of the clients of the project. The simulation above produced by Grasshopper generally shows the acoustic difference between using a flat ceiling and the vault-ceiling. This brings this form practical meaning rather than just aesthetics. 3. The most attraction from this precedent is that all modules are developable surface which means we can roll timber veneer into a 3D form. I believe this is a process sublimating planar material to solid form as well as challenging the material limitation. This point meets our requirement of being performative of the design

CRITERIA DESIGN

2.1 ITERATION MATRIX Matrix Organization

Evolution Criteria

he original intention of this step is based on Kalay’s article s discussed in the left paragraph, the approach in T which is discussed in ‘Design Computation‘ in Part A, A my matrix is actively creating possibility rather than to produce a pool of candidates by changing parameters of passively searching candidates. This process also requires an algorithm. Then following a criteria designers can select few satisfying outcomes from the candidates and improve the algorithm based on the features from those ‘successful‘ seeds. So the approach is iterative, similar to a search engine as well as species evolution. During this process, rethinking on the criteria is also important as this approach is more like playing with Tangram Puzzle rather than Rubik Cube. Generally I agree with this approach because the advantage of parametric design is easily producing iterations to compare to get the most desirable result. However, considering the given algorithm is very undeveloped and our design task is very clear, I have some critical opinions on the approach of matrix.

criteria, leading me to evolve the algorithm. Considering the practical design task, the client’s interest and the research background completed in the last chapter, I list the below criteria: Aesthetics

It is the most straightforward requirement from the client. The form of the design should be dynamic but at the same time follow some geometrical logic. It should create an effect of vividness for the office but also avoid chaos caused by a messy pattern.

Firstly, even the outcome of an algorithmic design can be predictable in most cases, which suggests that if one iteration can be conjectured based on the previous one, this iteration is pointless and should not be presented. So I cannot agree with a matrix with little changing parameters producing iterations which are in essence the same thing. I think each iteration should has its own identification and suggestion. Secondly, in the position of this studio, we are both designer and programmer so we need to control the algorithm. I cannot agree with the approach to ‘search ‘ the iteration pool, which conducts a passive attitude, like awaiting the unexpected effect to emerge. I think we need to lead the algorithm, keep adding new possibilities to it rather than exhausting its possibility.

Constructability

Parametric design often leads to paper works because of the gap between virtual and physical world. In this project we have to consider the constructability in advance. Any tectonics not suitable to be fabricated in this case, no matter how ‘good-looking‘, should be culled. The construction method should also be considered embedded in the species evolution.

Materiality

Similar to the principle above, I will pick the iterations with the most tectonic potential to integrate material performance. Also material limitation such as splitting will be considered.

Innovation

The form as well as the material behaviour should be both expressed in an innovative way, which means I will push the basic logic to more and more complex situations to test the possibility of synthesis.

Therefore the follow matrix will function as an experiment record sheet. It does not have many iterations but every iteration, more like a species, test one possibility of the algorithm. And during the process I keep refining the code to explore more possibilities. Beside each iteration, notes are listed to describe its feature.

CRITERIA DESIGN

Basic Parameter Test Test Goal: the basic elements on a planar surface. Key Parameters: the tessellation of basic points, the size of cut holes. Deliverables: should develop patterning algorithm to make design more dynamic

Diamond tessellation; Stable hole size; Has regular beauty but lack dynamic sense

Random tessellation; Stable large hole; More dynamic, can be developed

Random tessellation; Stable small hole; More deliberate, varying hole size should be considered

Convex

Concave

CRITERIA DESIGN

Planar Patterning Test Test Goal: the possibility of incorporating patterning and the method of controlling hole size Key Parameters: the density of basic points, the range of hole size Deliverable: should develop controllable tessellation pattern,, controllable hole size

Random tessellation, naturally forming Voronoi pattern Hole size linked to Voronoi size, but uncontrollable;

Controlled density tessellation; Hole size linked to Voronoi size, but uncontrollable; Better aesthetic effect, more dynamic power

Controllable density tessellation; Hole size linked to Voronoi size, controllable by mapper; Best aesthetic effect in the series, can be developed

Convex

CRITERIA DESIGN

Concave

Curved Surface Test Test Goal: the possibility of applying the boolean algorithm on different types of curved surfaces Key Parameters: the base surface, the pattern of basic points, the size of holes Deliverable: After improvement the algorithm can be applied on curved surface but may cause boolean problem if the curvature is complex

Convex semi-globe, boolean perfectly executed; Small concave on large convex(right) creates contrast, better aesthetic effect

Concave semi-globe, boolean perfectly excuted; Small convex on large concave(right) creates contrast, better aesthetic effect

Simple Loft Surface, boolean successfully executed but need extra algorithm to clean fragments

Convex

Concave CRITERIA DESIGN

Complex Formfinding Test Test Goal: the possibility of apply the algorithm on forms created by Kangaroo Key Parameters: the form from Kangaroo, Deliverable: application on complex surface is problematic; even achieved digitally, fabrication will be considerably difficult

Tree-like form, boolean unsuccessful unless manual adjustment; Random pop basic points on each mesh surface, uncontrollable; Hole size linked to Voronoi size, not fitting on small cones

Tree-like form, boolean unsuccessful unless manual adjustment; Random pop basic points on each mesh surface, uncontrollable; Hole size linked to mesh surface area, fitting on all cones

Dropping membrane form, boolean almost fails Random pop basic points on each mesh surface, uncontrollable; Hole size linked to mesh surface area, fitting on all cones

Convex

CRITERIA DESIGN

Concave

Samples with Most Potential to Develop

Global Surface: Successful Boolean, High Constructability, Harmonious Beauty

Tree Form: Dynamic Aesthetic Effectt

Conclusion

fter a series of testing, I found this algorithmic logic has the potential to be A developed further and can be applied to the next step for the project. It can integrate materiality with the overall form, and functionally it has an acoustic effect.

But the limitation is that the algorithm can only be applied on a simply-curved surface such as semi-globe otherwise the boolean can fail, leading to fabrication problems.

CRITERIA DESIGN

3.0 CASE STUDY 02 Project: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion Architect: ICD/ITKE Studio(Achim Menges) ,the University of Stuttggart Date: 2012 Location: Stuttggart, Germany

Figure6. ICD/ITKE Pavilion, Stuttggart, 2010

Pavilion has already been analysed as a case he reverse engineering is not meant to merely replicate Ias CD/ITKE study in Part A. It is a great example of using materiality T the form because the circular geometry is quite simple. the root of design and the design process of ICD/ITKE Instead, I attempt to analyse how materiality is simulated team reflects a lot of advantages of parametric design such as physical contact simulation and performance feedback. For a better understanding of this project, I decide to reverse engineer it in this topic.

CRITERIA DESIGN

and transfered to design, how components are digitally fabricated and how the performance feedback is acquired. Therefore the reverse engineering will include not only the final outcome but also the diagrams produced by the design team(pic 02,03)

Figure7 The interior of the pavilion

Figure8. Diagram of digital fabrication

Figure9. Diagram of performance feedback

CRITERIA DESIGN

3.1 REVERSE ENGINEERING

STEP1. Hand-draw Principle Analysis

STEP2. Bending Force Form-finding

me to understand the mathematical relationship and physical contact between components.

strips, in the form of lines. The form can be controlled by the original curve and the bending simulation can â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;releaseâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; the curves to create the real bending effect.

he outcome conduct a complex and repeating geometry n order to truly reverse engineer the work, physical T but it is composed of simple individual members, which I simulation is necessary. With Kangaroo, it is possible to act on each other to form the whole entity. The sketch helps create the physical relationship between one basic set of

Grasshopper definition of STEP2

CRITERIA DESIGN

STEP3. Material Digitalization

STEP4. Creating Individual Stripe

but when the physical contact is complex, the tolerance of collapsing does not allow me to simulate the whole work. So this step is just a trial, not really applied in the following process. But this still indicates the possibility of digitalizing material if my skill of software is better.

than truly ‘bending material’(last step, fails) so the curvature is sometimes problematic, causing uneven changing strip size. The general effect is acceptable.

he last step, although creating the form in a ‘physical‘ hen the form is created, the size of strips can be T way, is not a real contact simulation. So I also tried W decided based its bending extent(curvature). But to digitalize bending materials. It works well in single strip because the method I use is to extent ‘bend curve‘ rather

Grasshopper definition of STEP4,5

CRITERIA DESIGN

STEP5. Adjusting Spacing and Polar Array

STEP6. Simulating Physical Performance

nce the basic set of strips is worked out, the whole ust learning from the original version, I also try to display O design can be created by polar array and the spacing J performance feedback. The colour range, generate and angle can be controlled. But one deficit of this step, based on curvature indicates the bending force acted on the also one of the biggest difference from the original work, is that my version can be only an even ring, not able to form the undulation.

Grasshopper definition of STEP6

CRITERIA DESIGN

area.

Similarity & Difference

he core idea applied in this pavilion is material T performance which decides the design form. The formfinding in my version also comes from physical simulation,

presenting the similar visial effect but the approach is not based on material itself. The original pavilion displays a curved ring where individual module interlocking with each other but my version, due to the pseudo approach, can only form a regular ring. From the reverse-engineer process, I realize that digital tools although powerful, also have limitation and one can hardly grasp all required digital skills during design. So rather than relying too much on digital skills, we need to balance time investment on other aspets such as material test and prototype making which may produce more desirable outcome. We need to control digital tool instead of being controlled.

CRITERIA DESIGN

3.2 PARAMETRIC MATRIX

Physical Contact Simulation

Physical simulators enable designers to transfer material data to digital model and generate form-finding based on material performance. Simulation can produce a range of iteration for designers to select which is difficult to achieve in the real world for the size of a pavilion Material Actualization

Via robotic cutting the design can be transfered back to the real world accurately. Once done with the material fabrication, designers can just assemble the pavilion according to positions from the digital reference

Parametric Array

Parametric tool is particularly advantageous in generating iterations of form, which provides designers with more virtual options before decision-making. Also iterations create opportunities to evolve the design form.

Performance Feedback

As the design is material-based feedback of physical reaction such as bending stress is vital. Digital calculation can provide this function and avoid design beyond the material limitation

CRITERIA DESIGN

UNROLL ERROR

CRITERIA DESIGN

4.0 TECHENIQUE DEVELOPMENT

Reason for Development

Evolution Criteria

on the matrix before, I select the global variety because the boolean can be executed with no fail. In the following matrix, I will test this varietyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tessellation pattern and element dimension. And two more parameters are added: the cutting pattern and the internal cone. The tectonic analysis on the right page explains the functional reason to incorporate these two elements. So the development is still based on practicality, attempting to improve the material tectonic to be more constructable.

Aesthetics

Because of the addition of new elements, too complex pattern should be avoided in case causing a aesthetic boredom.

Constructability

Should consider whether the tectonic logic behind each tessellation is practical.

Materiality

This should be particularly noticed in the cutting pattern and the internal cone which affect the material behaviours.

Innovation

The design is developed gradually from a geometrical sense to a biomimic form. So I will pick the iterations with innovative appearance to contrast audienceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s expectation.

ompared with case study 2, the work developed from ased on the criteria of the previous matrix, I add on C Voltadom more attracts my interest because of its B some new considerations: potential to express materiality in a dynamic form. Based

CRITERIA DESIGN

Tectonic Element Analysis Adding the internal cone is meant to counteract the deformation of external large cone by the stiffness of grains in two directions

Cutting out strip patterns is meant to reduce the stiffness of bent area which is along the grain

The physical performance of timber veneer is determined by the grain direction and deformation happens when the material is rolled into cones

Potential Varieties from Development

CRITERIA DESIGN

4.1 ITERATION MATRIX 02

Tessellation Variation

Grid Point Number Base Diameter

square 60 2

hexogon 80 2

Diamond 40 2

Random 40 2

Rand 2 2

2 0.1 100%

2 0.6 100%

1.8 1 100%

1.5 1.2 100%

1. 1. 100

0.02-0.05 linear -

0.1-0.2 linear -

0.03-0.4 Bezier -

0.01-0.6 linear -

1/1 40 0.8

1/3 10 0.8

1/12 6 0.8

1/3 2 0.8

Dimension Variation Base Diameter Cone Height Globe Area

Core Variation Hole Size Mapper Curve Extruding Core

0.01 Bez -

Pattern Variation

Pattern Area Strip Number Pattern Size

Parameter Mixture

CRITERIA DESIGN

1/ 8 0.

dom 0 2

Random 100 2

Random 20 1.5

Random 60 1.5

Random 100 1.5

.5 .5 0%

1.8 0.8 80%

1.8 0.3 60%

1.8 0.6 40%

1.5 1 20%

1.5 1.5 5%

1-0.6 zier -

0.03-0.4 Bezier -0.5

0.03-0.4 Bezier 0.3

0.03-0.4 Bezier -0.3

0.03-0.4 Bezier 0.1

0.03-0.4 Bezier 0.2

1/4 20 0.8

1/4 8 0.3-0.9-0.3

1/4 8 0.8-0.3-0.8

1/2 20 0.2-0.9

1/3 20 0.1-0.9

/4 8 .8

Manual 40 1.5

CRITERIA DESIGN

5.0 GROUP COMBINING

‘Three Tracks’

o complete the final project of a real-office scale, T grouping is inevitable. Teamwork provides the whole group with more potential ideas and technical support while

Macro - Overall Form

Meso - Connection

Micro - Single Member

CRITERIA DESIGN

in one week combing three different tracks into one proposal is challenging. As mentioned in the starting topic of Part B, the styles of algorithmic design can vary greatly but the essence is the idea behind forms, which can be classfied and then synthesized. So based on this thinking we found that in fact we were just looking at three different aspects of one design, which can represent three design approaches: macro, meso and micro(diagram left). In our group, Chao’s focus is on the generation of an overall form, which brings a top-down design approach. His opinion is to produce a desirable form as the starting point and then break the form down into sublayers(pic 01). Guanjin’s focus is on the connection between small members as her case study is about iterative generation(pic 02). So the design in her approach should be determined by the logic of interrelationship. And my approach as suggested before is bottom-up because I am pursuing a material-based design in this project. So my focus is on micro-scale, starting from a single member and then using tessellation to aggregate the general form(pic 03). The three tracks do not conflict with each other so we were attempting to achieve an equilibrium to meet the logic from all the three aspects. However we still need a direction as the starting point to initiate the synthesis. So in the following week, we were discussing and exploring which approach should lead the group.

01 Chao’s reverse engineering work from ‘Aggregated Porosity‘ , focusing on the overall form

02 Guanjin’s reverse engineering work from ‘Morning Line’, focusing the internal logic between individual members

03 Developed work from my case study 1 ‘Voltadom’, focusing on the micro module and material performance

CRITERIA DESIGN

5.1 FROM FORM: ‘TOP-DOWN‘ 01 Seperated Ceiling Modules

D=10

Contrasting Panels

Interlocking Panels

L= F+D

X=1.065 Y=1.065 Z=1.065

Split Scaling Red Grey Split Scaling R: A>5000,S=500 G: A>5056,S=373

Opening For Shadow Effects

Contrasting Panels

Dynamical From

L= F+D

D=10

Interlocking Panels X=1.065 Y=1.065 Z=1.065

Opportunity

Issue

the design idea. And the ceiling as it is embedded in the office, can be considered as a form generation based on parameters from the surroundings and users(diagrams on left page). So a performative overall form is required.

digitally desirable but hard to be tectonically transfered to a real product. Normally the direct method to fabricate a form is to use mesh panelling or 3-D print which however does not make sense when a project needs to express the material’s internal feature. Therefore, the pursuit to a form is still required but we must prioritize the individual member, in other words, using a bottom-up approach

onventionally, form should be considered as the owever, in a material-based project it is vague to C starting point of design because it can at the first H regard the overall form as the determinant. The image place communicate with the audience, directly conducting above shows Chao’s outcome of form generation which is

01 The successful outcome from Chao’s matrix, generating a form for the ceiling based on parameters from the site and clients

CRITERIA DESIGN

3000mm

1000mm

1650mm

1400mm

Potential Ceiling Region

Axometric site analysis by Chao, indicating the sense of scale of the project

Section site analysis by Chao, indicating the userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience and expectation

CRITERIA DESIGN

5.2 FROM MODULE: ‘BOTTOM-UP‘ 01

Opportunity

Issue

s discussed in the last topic, the design should ut after a simple prototype test(images on right page), A undertake a bottom-up approach, which I had been B I found my understanding of ‘bottom-up’ is still a bit focusing on. My opinion is to celebrate the characteristic superficial. Although the individual members conform to the of timber veneer in the design, bending or twisting the material(pic 01,02). Materiality is the engine to initiate our consideration on joints, relationship between single members and finally the logic of the overall form. I used Voltadom as the form because the cone is a developable surface, able to make use of materiality. So in this approach, the use of material is considered in advance of form.

Module test: using pins and clips to test materiality, released

Module test: using pins and clips to test materiality, rolled

CRITERIA DESIGN

requirement of material performance, the joints between them were not involved. The consistency of logic from unities to the whole is broken again just like the issue we faced in the ‘top-down‘ approach.

Reflection

earning from Chao’s and my experience, we L realized that we need a thorough understanding on the material and the ‘bottom-up‘ approach. We

should incorporate the meso-scale idea as Guanjin suggests: considering how single unities of material react with each other, briding the overall form and the individual performance. This discussion brought us back to ICD/ITKE Pavilion 2010 individual strips interact to generate a form, We hoped to use this meso-scale logic to synthesize material and form. The first thing is to systematically acquire material data.

Prototype assembling: planar pieces

Prototype assembling: rolled individual modules

05 Prototype assembling: the outcome with poor joint design

CRITERIA DESIGN

5.3 MATERIAL TEST he previous experience on reverse-engineering suggests using Kangaroo to simulate T material performance is hard to control and not precise. So we attempt to simply use curves to simulate the bending effect, which though requires a precise data matching. So we

conducted the three sets of bending tests. We found that the single curved bending(1 & 3) are more precise to digitally simulate but there is a threshold, suggested in data diagrams, beyond which the curve does not perform linearly. So we acquired the limitation of the ratio of compression length to height.

1. Against Grain / Single Curve

2. Against Grain / Double Curve

3. Along Grain / Single Curve

CRITERIA DESIGN

Upward Push (mm)

Timber bend reaches normal

12.3 12.0 12 11.8 11.1

10.7 10.5 10.1 9.9

10.1

8.7

9.0

7.5

7.6

5.5

Upward Push (mm)

Timber bend reaches normal

12.7 12.5 12.3 11.5 10.5 9.5 7.5 6

5.8 2 0

Compession Length (mm)

This bending effect is flexible and provides more manural control, can be simulated by interpolate curve.

This bending effect is also flexible and has a sense to softness and fluidity. But the curve simulation is not precise.

This bending effect is stiff but has a sense of tension and strong expression of grain, can be simulated by blend curve.

CRITERIA DESIGN

5.4 IDEA SYNTHESIS

Unit1: Overlapped Hexagon

nspired by the notching IPavilion method of ICD/ITKE and the Dragonskin

Project, we generate hexagon tessellation on a curved surface and use bending and notching to create the geometrical overlapping effect. Due to the consideration on the precision of bending simulation, the base surface for prototype is singly curved and the tessellation pattern is regular. This aspect should be improved later because we should go back to achieve a dynamic and contrasting form.

CRITERIA DESIGN

Unit2: Iterative Hexagon

n Chaoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s vision the overall Idifferent form should contrast two topologies and

extend near to the ground so users can truly touch the material. We found Guanjinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s idea of iterative pattern is a good opportunity to fill this gap so we design the new algorithm left to contrast the ceiling as well as transit the bent hexagon panels to the planar wall. But this combination may cause a boredom in geometrical pattern so this part should be improved further in the next session.

CRITERIA DESIGN

6.0 PROTOTYPE

The section view of the prototype

ecause each of us had made some prototypes and he large scale of the prototype requires us to follow a B already familiar with the material, we decided to make T precise reference from the digital model to the physical a complete prototype which not only tests the physical product. Because we did not label the single panels when practicality but also functions as a conceptual model. Considering the office is wrapped with glass walls we use perspex to make a transparent box to frame the prototype. And all the installation details and tectonics are considered as a real scale product. So we use a hanging cable system to install the Unit1 and use waffle frame for the Unit2, as illustrated on the right page.

CRITERIA DESIGN

laser-cutting, it became quite difficult to install them and often caused mistakes. The process should be more organized for the next time. And due to the time limitation we tried to use simple joints such as staples for Unit1 and glue for Unit2, which should be improved to be more elaborate for the final product.

Unit1 Installation

he single panels in an array are T simply connected by staples and through the pre-punched hole the

panels are hanging by wires which connects to the screw eyes on the top board. Panels on neighbouring arrays notch interlacedly to make the whole ceiling stable.

Unit2 Installation

e apply Guanjin’s method W of using waffle as a backing frame and attach hexagon panels on

that. Because the office is a ‘glass box’ all structures are actually exposed to viewers outside so the design for a frame is also important and should be considered aesthetically as a part of the project.

CRITERIA DESIGN

Prototype photo: bent panel notching 1

Prototype photo: iterative pattern

Prototype photo: panel notching 2

CRITERIA DESIGN

Prototype photo: hanging wire and screw eye connection

Prototype photo: intersecting curve effect from side view

Prototype photo: details from the back

CRITERIA DESIGN

6.1 LESSONS FROM PROTOTYPE

Material Selection

Bending Direction

flexibility and colour contrast. But we found Rye, despite its desirable colour and hue, is quite fragile without paperback. The panel will split especially near the notch slot and joints. So for further fabrication we will directly use timber veneers with paperback which is much more durable.

but it also causes uneven distribution of force so deformation happens near the notching slots. For a precise transfer from digital to physical, we use the panels against the grain which are flexible and controllable.

the prototype we use two different timber veneers: e fabricate two sets of panels: along and against the IarenSpotted Gum with paperback and normal Rye. These two W grain. As suggested in the Material Test, bending selected from the catalogue samples because of their along the grain can express the beauty of material tension

CRITERIA DESIGN

Patterning Potential

Doubly-Curved Bending

potential to create the relief effect. And after cutting the stiffness of the material can be reduced. So this opportunity will be considered in our following design

the characteristic of material can be expressed on a higher level. Now we are trying to incorporate pattern cutting and complex bending into the design, to create a new dynamic tectonic logic.

he deformation by bending along the grain however o far for a precise simulation we apply a simply-curved T is another opportunity to express the material feature. S bending in our design but if the material can be bent in We hand cut some â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Vâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; shapes on the panel and found its a more uncommon way the design will be more dynamic and

CRITERIA DESIGN

7.0 PROPOSAL: WO-CLOUD

Wo-Cloud

The Next Step

is transparent, the hanging system makes the whole design floating in the air. While the ‘cloud‘ has a strong sense of materiality, expressing the beauty of timber grain and bending force. And via the extending Unit 2 we allow users to truly touch the material, experiencing the texture of the ‘cloud‘.

the existing tectonic on a more dynamic form, and ideally we will create a new tectonic to contrast this one. For the mesoscale, we will optimize the connections between single members and improve the quality of the final product. For the microscale, we will develop the individual panels by more complex bending or cutting patterns, for a better material presentation.

he proposal is named ‘Wo-Cloud‘ because of its two s discussed in the Group Combing topic, we need to T main features. The dynamic curve and overlapping A develop our design further to meet the requirements pattern remind people of cloud above head. As the office from the three scales. For the macroscale, we will apply

CRITERIA DESIGN

The view from below in the office

The view from outside the ‘glass box’

CRITERIA DESIGN

8.0 LEARNING CONCLUSION

Objective 1. ‘Interrogating a Brief’

Objective 3. ‘Three-dimensional Skills’

use materiality in the design. But now my teammates remind me to concern more on the form and the users’ experience. So brief is also an equilibrium between stakeholders in the project. I should keep balancing and adjusting the brief in Part C.

model fail. I think one thing should be improved is the breath of case studies I learnt from. In future I should keep looking more types of digital precedents and try to reverse- engineer them, which will be a good way to understand the design logic.

Objective 2. ‘Generating a Variety’

Objective 4. ‘Architecture and Atmosphere‘

in technique development I added on new elements to make it my own generation. But in the proposal after group combining I think our variety is too safe and the idea from precedents are obvious

form as feedback to the users. This objective should be kept noticed because a desirable design in this project should be performative

rief is concluded from both designer’s ambition and hrough parametric modelling I became familiar with the B client’s requirement. Before grouping I focus too much T workflow from algorithm to a digital model. In the matrix on my own understanding of the studio and merely wanted to I attempted to debug the Grasshopper definition to avoid

think i achieved this objective pretty well in the case believe our group has a quite good understanding on this Ialgorithm study 1 because I kept challenging the limitation of the I objective. Especially Chao’s opinion on the macro-scale and developing it to be more versatile. And then overall form imports parameters from the site and return the

CRITERIA DESIGN

Objective 5. ‘Making a Proposal’

Objective 7. ‘Understangding Computation‘

which means we need the capability to transfer a macroscale language to micro-scale utility so that we can truly make use of the design. Now we are on the correct track after discussing the design approach.

algorithmic design. In this project we should firstly not stuck too much in Grasshopper and secondly think more about the data structure behind each algorithm. If so, in future career we may go further in this field, to create a Grasshopper rather than being tricked by Grasshopper.

Objective 6. ‘Analysing Projects‘

Objective 8. ‘Personalized Repertoire‘

also studied the logic behind the algorithm, which is the essence of digital design. In Part C we should continue this learning method and analyse more relevant case studies.

develop our own interest in parametric design and always try to visualize the idea in Grasshopper. If we keep accumulating those sketches and skills one day they might be applied on some suitable designs.

his objective is particularly important for our project his objective is very challenging as it is not easy to T because most case studies given to us are a general T grasp Grasshopper skills. We need to realize that form while our proposal should concern the detail tectonic, Grasshopper is only a tool and only a starting point for

ll the three people in our group did good analysis on e have somewhat realized this objective during A precedents can successfully reverse engineered the W the Grasshopper exercises. The sketchbook is works. Moreover, we not only produced the outcome, but a collection of demo for our future design and we should

CRITERIA DESIGN

9.0 ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

‘Portrait’

This set of sketches use image sampler and data weaving to depict a photo with symbols

‘Dunes’

This set of sketches use Fields to create vectors interacting with each other, simulating the formation of natural dunes by wind force.

CRITERIA DESIGN

‘Terrain’

This set of sketches use image sampler to remap tessellation cells and project controllable patterns to the loft surface which is also based on image sampler data

‘Life Tree’

This set of sketches Lunch Box for hexagon paneling and Python Script to randomly twist the geometries, creating a geometrical but dynamic structure.

CRITERIA DESIGN

REFERENCE Images Figure1. ‘Green Void’ <http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/> [accessed 30 March 2016].

Figure2. Iwamoto Scott Architecture, ‘Voussoir Cloud‘ <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 30 March 2016].

Figure3. Softlab, ‘POLYP.lux‘ <http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/polyp-lux-by-softlab/> [accessed 30 March 2016].

Figure4. ‘Dragon Skin Pavillion‘ <http://designplaygrounds.com/blog/dragon-skin-pavillion/> [accessed 30 March 2016].

Figure5. Skylar Tibbits, ‘VoltaDom‘ <http://sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html> [accessed 30 March 2016].

Figure6. ICD/ITKE, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2010‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 25 April 2016].

Figure7. ICD/ITKE, ‘Physical Simulation‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 25 April 2016].

Figure8. ICD/ITKE, ‘Material Test‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 25 April 2016].

Figure9. ICD/ITKE, ‘Digital Model‘ <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458> [accessed 25 April 2016].

CRITERIA DESIGN

PartC Detailed Design 88

DETAILED DESIGN

1.0 TECTONIC RESTART

DETAILED DESIGN

Previous lesson

Timber Diamond

successful technique but only allow a regular surface which means low potential on developing idea. With the insistence on material-based design, we went back to playing with the material as the initial point and attempted to find a new tectonic logic to balance the considerations on material and form.

was naturally formed. The advantage of diamond shape is that it can be tessellated on complex surfaces, helping our proposal to be more expressive and elaborate. And the grain along the bending direction creates the integrated pattern with a strong sense of timber feature.

n the mid-term proposal we applied the logic of ith bending the timber veneer panel in a threeIincorporate overlapping and notching on the form , trying to W dimensional way, we found that the material the material internal feature. This was a potential was pushed further and the diamond shape

DETAILED DESIGN

1.1 DESIGN CONCEPT 1. Streamline

2. Collision 3. Fusion

Key Concept

ith the new tectonic of high flexibility, we went back W to form generation. Based on Chaoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s form analysis in Part B, we concluded three key points as the conceptual criteria for the new form generation. The first concept is streamline. We suppose the form should compose the timber veneer single members to present a smooth but nuance geometry in the office space. So the design can be viewed as an elaborate jewellery either from inside or outside. The

DETAILED DESIGN

second concept is collision. While the overall feel of the ceiling should be smooth, it should also contrast two parts or two different tectonics to vibrate the atmosphere of the office, and increase the complexity of the design. The third concept is fusion. As we did in the mid-term proposal, the design will extend section to the wall area so the users can truly touch the material and have a better understanding and experience.

1. Transparency 2. Solidity

3. Openness

Site Consideration

he office is a glass box sitting in the central area of the T floor, having a strong sense of transparency, openness and communication. Because the ground floor is also wrapped with glass walls, visually the ceiling design in the office is shared not only with users in the firm but also with

the passers-by from the outside. However, the solidity of the side columns and the back wall breaks the spatial harmony. So we think it would be a good opportunity to initiate our design from the three elements.

DETAILED DESIGN

1.2 MORPHING FORM

Three-dimensional Morphing

s there are many limitations in the office, we chose A a conservative method to generate the form - graph mapping. This technique allow us to carefully control every leading curves of the form while at the same time incorporate general ideas on the curve layout and curvature trend. We

DETAILED DESIGN

use this method from three views - top, side and front to make sure spatially the design outcome is desirable. We started from the plan view because the initial points were set from the two columns

Plan Morphing

Collision

Overlapping

Swirl

One of the initial key concepts;

Interaction of two wings;

Intensify the interaction;

Form covering the columns.

More spatially complex than only a surface.

Rotationally dynamic, swirl instead of collsion.

DETAILED DESIGN

Side View Morphing

Tapering

Leave more free space for users; Visually lighter from side view

Lifting

Prevent blocking circulation; Intensify the unbalance.

DETAILED DESIGN

Front View Morphing

Trimming

Follow the height limitation; Leave space for the table

Nuance

Angular nuance on smooth surface; Elaborate jewellery

Fusion

Open view when coming into the office; Two wings weave together at the end of view point.

DETAILED DESIGN

1.3 LIGHTING DESIGN

Consistent Lighting Concept

unctionally the lighting is indispensable for the central F office. For an aesthetic consideration, the lighting should also follow a consistent concept to match the ceiling design. Our proposal is to use neon lighting tubes to freely shape the light design, which will be generated from the

DETAILED DESIGN

edges of the ceiling. We provide three versions of proposal and all of them are based on developing the ceiling edge to actual lighting tubes.

Repeating Edge

Fragmenting Edge

Releasing Edge

DETAILED DESIGN

2.0 VITRUVIAN WORKFLOW

Tectonics

Form SITE ANALYSIS Side view morph

UV control

STRUCTURE

Front view morph

Lunch box diamond strcutrue

Piping the diameter

Plan view morph

JOINTS Structrual Joints Boolean into joints accounting for depth

Tapering pipes

Generating site model Panel connectors

Micro adjust left ceiling via graph mapper

Use base of column as origin point

Digitalising paper designed panel clips

Loft surfaces Interploate curves

Micro adjust right ceiling via graph mapper

PANELS

Move curves to site height

Extracting alternate lines

Physical-Design Feed Back Sequence Cost control measures

Update on site constrcution parameters

MATERIAL TESTING Data of material's twisting behavior

100

DETAILED DESIGN

BizerSpan lines

Fabrication

Indexing items

Offset for length

Installation

Cutting and labeling structural segments

Attaching ceiling hook to 'X' joints

Module assemblage offsite

Create central hole for hooking

Assembly of componets

3D print with indexing

Laser cut brass sheet

Adjust extend of bend

Loft bends

Unroll surfaces

Indexing items

Laser cut timber veneer sheets

Cost Calculation

DETAILED DESIGN

101

2.1 PROTOTYPE 1

The overall view of prototype 1

The tectonic detail of prototype 1

The joint detail of prototype 1

102

DETAILED DESIGN

Prototype Features

Prototype Issues

n the first generation we used rectangular strips as the owever the strip-clamp system leads to the offset of Ipanels(pic structure so they can function as clamps to fix the timber H timber panels so the joints and structure are overly ). The advantage is that the length of timber exposed, as the photos above show. Moreover, the structure 02

panels can be adjusted and trimmed after installation which means a good tolerance. The rectangular strips and the 3d-print joints present a angular beauty to contrast with the smooth surface(pic 03).

is criticized as too stiff and too thick, not consistent with the overall design concept.

DETAILED DESIGN

103

2.2 PROTOTYPE 2 02

The overall view of prototype 2

The tectonic detail of prototype 2

The joint detail of prototype 2

104

DETAILED DESIGN

Prototype Features

Prototype Issues

the new generation we customized 3d-print holders for he first issue is this system has no more tolerance Ithenthestructure connection system so the panels can perfectly cover T for installation so it requires a better accuracy in and joint(pic ). The joints are also redesigned prefabrication. As the photo above shows, due to the unroll 02

with a round finish to respond to the overall form(pic03).

error the prefabricated holes cannot match with each other so the joints are exposed again. The second issue is that the holder is an extra cost for the 3d-print. So we replaced them with standard metal components in the final prototype.

DETAILED DESIGN

105

3.0 FINAL PROTOTYPE e picked two sections from the ceiling design for the final prototype W fabrication, because we need to test the feasibility of different situations. One section is from the top area where the density is lower with lower bending

force. One section is from the bottom area where the density is much higher. Both the structure and panels suffer high force.

106

DETAILED DESIGN

e also test two different colours on the two sections. There is a broad W variety of timber veneer for choice but we found only reconstitute veneers can provide the flexibility we need. In the final prototypes we used Rye(light colour) and Coppertone(dark colour) to test which one is better for the office atmosphere and the possibility of combining them into one design.

DETAILED DESIGN

107

Prototype Features

he final prototype solved most issues from T the previous two generations. Firstly the panels this time can cover the structure with

clean finishes. And because we punched the holes on site the accuracy was not a problem. Both the bending and grain direction work well as we planned, conducting the desirable aesthetic effect. For the structure and joints, they are consistent with the overall design concept and will not dominate the design for the careful selection of materials. The timber veneer also works well as it did not break under bending and both the colours are attractive.

108

DETAILED DESIGN

Prototype Issues

here are still some details to improve T in the final prototype. Firstly the craft trace of metal holders is too obvious so a

more elegant design is required. Secondly the structure is better to be paint all black to fit the background of the office. Thirdly the 3d-print joints are better to be tapered from the rod end so the structure can look more fluid. And lastly we need a reliable hanging system to install the design to the office. These points are all solved in 6.0 Design Resolution.

DETAILED DESIGN

109

3.1 FABRICATION SEQUENCE

STEP1. Transfer Digital Files

Layout 3d-print joints and panels for prefabrication; Label all components for fast assembly; Measure rod length for cutting.

STEP5. Assemble Structure

Assemble the 3d-print joinst and rod together, referencing the label system.

110

DETAILED DESIGN

STEP2. 3D-print Joints

3d-print the joints and label them according to the digital reference.

STEP6. Laser-cut Panels

Laser-cut the timber panels and label; Holes are punched during assembly for accuracy.

STEP3. Hand-make Holders

Cut aluminium sheet, fold and punch holes.

STEP7. Attach Panels

Adjust postions for timber panels and punch holes; Fix panels to the structure with screws so they are convenient for replacing.

STEP4. Cut Rods and Attach Holders

Cut piano wires for rods and label; Attach two hangers on rach rod.

STEP8. Final Clean

Clean all the label tags

DETAILED DESIGN

111

4.O FINAL RENDERING

The front view of the powder-print model

112

DETAILED DESIGN

The detail of the powder-print model

DETAILED DESIGN

113

The front view of the office and the ceiling design

114

DETAILED DESIGN

The view from the outside

DETAILED DESIGN

115

5.0 BUDGET CONSIDERATION

s the project is designed for A realistic fabrication, the budget is an important consideration for us.

The main cost involved in the project includes timber veneer, 3d-print joints, structure rods, metal holders and fabrication fees such as lasercutting. The cost ranges according to UV resolution and by Grasshopper we calculate three versions of budget estimation. For the final production, the client chose the right one with the highest resolution which was also the prototype we made. After optimization of material choice and fabrication layout, the real estimation of cost is around 7000 AUD now.

U25, V6 Timber Veneer Area: 37m2 Cost: $1,961 Joints No.: 178 Pcs Cost: $1,424 (black plastic) / $1,780 (metallic plastic) Rod Length: 182m Rod Cost: $646

Total Cost: $4,031

116

DETAILED DESIGN

U35, V8

U60, V12

Timber Veneer Area: 49m2 Cost: $2,614 Joints No.: 320 Pcs Cost: $ 2,560 (black plastic) / $ 3,200 (metallic plastic) Rod Length: 253m Rod Cost: $896

Timber Veneer Area: 83m2 Cost: $4,366 Joints No.: 792 Pcs Cost: $6,336 (black plastic) / $7,920 (metallic plastic) Rod Length: 419m Rod Cost: $1,486

Total Cost: $6,071

Total Cost: $12,189

DETAILED DESIGN

117

6.0 DESIGN REALIZATION s pointed out before, we solved the problems from the final prototype and A did some adjustment according to clientsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; requirement. The diagram below illustrates the detail features of the updated ceiling design.

Panel Clipping System

Polypropylene Washer

Brass Clips

Chicago Screw Carbon Fiber Rods 3mm

Veneer Panels Organization a1

Indexing Panels Pre-cut Holes

Grain Direction

118

DETAILED DESIGN

‘Gripple’ Bondeck Anchor System

Suspension System ‘Gripple’ Loop End

Space Frame

Indexing System For Complex Assembly

Holes For Flexible Hooking Mechanism

Carbon Fiber Rods 3mm

DETAILED DESIGN

119

6.1 MASS LASERCUTTING hen facing real production some problems emerge. The amount of laserW cutting is huge, about 37 sheets of 2450x1250mm timber veneer. Although Grasshopper is used for assistance, the manual layout job can be

hardly replaced by computation because we need to concern material saving and boundary limitation. Also there is facility restriction: the size of some panels is too large for normal cutting bed so we have to look for industrial metal laser-cutters while most of them reject such as thin material.

The 37 cutting layout of timber veneer panels

The large panel with dimension

120

DETAILED DESIGN

8 6.4 597

9654.05

DETAILED DESIGN

121

6.2 MASS 3D-PRINT he 3d-print joints have the similar problem. There are 502 joints to be print T which means manual fixing is a huge task if boolean error happens. Also for saving materials we need to manually layout all the joints. Grasshopper is used for some help but manual check and adjustment is always required for careful fabrication. The outcome is irreversible.

The 502 joints to be 3d-print

The layout of all the joints

122

DETAILED DESIGN

123

7.0 LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Objective 1. ‘Interrogating a Brief’

Objective 3. ‘Three-dimensional Skills’

compromise with restrictions. The process is like zigzag but if we keep making effort to get closed to the initial brief, it can be gradually realized. For example after all our proposal integrate the material and form together which could not be realized in Part B.

prototypes we need to consider carefully the relationship between each components and transfer the sequence to the reality for assembly.

Objective 2. ‘Generating a Variety’

Objective 4. ‘Architecture and Atmosphere‘

to generate a variety of outcomes so we can discuss together which one is more desirable and make adjustment accordingly.

is relatively conservative and we keep pushing it to the limitation. The initial surface has been developed to a more spatial object to create a more desirable atmosphere for the office. So I think digital designers should be braver to push the design limitation rather than choosing safe options.

rom Part C I learned that brief keeps being changed, hree-dimensional skills are significant in our project F sometimes more ambitious when new opportunities T because every step in our digital model should be able are found and sometimes more realistic when we have to to transfer to a physical product. During the fabrication of

ne of the advantages of computational design is to his is the most improved aspect in Part C because our O generate iterations for designers to choose from. In T focus is on generating the aesthetic form to respond our design process we use the basic Grasshopper definition to clients’ requirement and the site. At first our design

124

DETAILED DESIGN

Objective 5. ‘Making a Proposal’

Objective 7. ‘Understanding Computation‘

the audience to better engage in our proposal. Apart from prototypes we make a powder-print overall model to display the final appearance. I think these are all good method to introduce the proposal to others.

computational errors sometimes will happen and are always uncontrollable. I think we need to regard computation as a tool and understand when to use it and when to avoid it. So that a better efficiency can be achieved.

Objective 6. ‘Analysing Projects‘

Objective 8. ‘Personalized Repertoire‘

concerns the site situation and clients’ liking but we have not done any in-depth research on the projects. I think this is what we should improve now - when really building the ceiling.

experiments, even not used in the project, will be stored as my repertoire and maybe oneday I can apply them on other projects.

mid-term presentation our narrative on proposal n Part C we not only see the advantages of computation Itimenwasthewetoomake straightforward and not very attractive. This I but also experience its drawbacks. For example in the real diagrams to illustrate the key concepts for fabrication we have to manually adjust many things because

onestly we lack the understanding of the site in depth uring the whole semester I learned a lot knowledge H until we go to the office after the semester. So some D not only about Grasshopper but also about material problems not shown on drawings emerge. Our design does characteristics and fabrication components. All of these

DETAILED DESIGN

125

126

DETAILED DESIGN