“i don’t know why
People hire
A r ch i t e c t s and then tell them what to do” -Frank Gehry
The university of Melbourne ¦ Bachelor of Environments ¦ Surath Thenabadu (637944) ¦ Design Studio Air, S2 2015
3....................................Introduction 6..........................A.1. Design Futuring 11.......................A.2 Design Computation 17.................................A.3. Generation 23....................................A.4 Summary 25......................A.5. Learning Outcomes 28......................................b.1 research 34.................................b.2 Case study 1 43.................................b.3 case study 2 50...................b.4 Technique development 62....................................b.5 prototypes 66......................................b.6. proposal 70........................b.7. Learning Outcomes 72..............................c.1 detailed design 82..................................c.2a refinement 90....................................c.2b tectonics 102..............................c.3 pysical render 123.........................................c.4 review 131............................................endnotes 133.......................................refereneces 138.......................................Algorithmic sketchbook
Contents
introduction S
urath, theirs a name you don’t hear every day let alone stare at this page and twist your tongue to try and get the exact syllables out to make something that sounds somewhat like the actual pronunciation, then sit back with great gratification knowing that you have achieved a miracle feat. I like to think, that in my name, somewhat so, reflects my personality, mind-set and focus on creativity. It’s unusual, up front and has you staring mind boggled as to “where do I start”, but leaves you with a great satisfaction in its entirety. Ever since I could walk on two feet, design, and construction and in particular architecture has been the fuel that has fed the fire. From a young age I was continuously designing and building objects ranging from simple Lego buildings to glass coffee tables, and eventuating at one of my greatest achievements of a user mimicking robotic hand.
However the thirst for more is ever looming. The aspects of parametric modelling and design futuring only leaves intrigue and I hope to absorb all that is thrown my way during this course. Although I have previous knowledge of design base software mainly, AutoCAD and Adobe suite, the aspects of Rhino3D ™ pose a new frontier, with no previous experience, I am excited to see what this holds in terms computational design. My other interests don’t stray very far, but I love working on automobiles, a good Beer and the company of friends. I define myself as unusual, unique and continually improving work in progress. Surath.
My ventures in the design field have led to many accolades including placement in the 2011, Victorian Top designs, and being recognized as the highest achieving design student of VCE.
Introduction ¦ 3 ¦ Studio Air
Introduction ¦ 4 ¦ Studio Air
the university of melbourne ¦ Bacherlor of Environmetns ¦ Surath Thenabadu (637944) ¦ Design Studio Air, S2 2015
A.1 Design Futuring
The future of ananchient proffesion [1]
Tomorrow’s today The future of an ancient profession
T
he discourse of architecture has seen much debate over its meaning as a profession. The accompaniment of the term designer within this decline, with the 21st century, now carries with it aspects that make the architect as much artist, fabricator and builder as it did in a by-gone era where the title, master builder, was deemed appropriate. The information age brings with it a new frontier of challenges and as equally interesting a varied solutions and can be the front-line of transformative actions1 in society and culture, where the role of the digital realm, mustered with the creativity of
the mind can result in solutions that perplex and bewilder the senses and introduce new ideas of materiality, sustainability and interactive environments to the table. As adequately put,“We need to dream new dreams for the twenty-first century as those of the twentieth century rapidly fade”2 As such through the course of this project, the eventuating solution will aim to address, experiment and create new aspects that for-go the notions of the past and seek to add the discourse of contemporary architecture.
A.1. ¦ 6 ¦ Studio Air
Biomimetics Steffen Reichert: Responsive Surface one,2007 T
he discipline of architecture brings about it a reflection of a standardized object –the building- to many when the word is uttered. However the discipline as developed around the culmination of various aspects of science, art and technology to name a few and as such the futuring of this profession, should encapsulate the advances that a contemporary world pose and change this objectified view. In its varying disciplinary aspects, materiality in architecture is by far the most profound feature. It is physical, tactile and brings with it emotive response, simply materiality is understood to facilitate rather than generate3 and merely support what we perceive. The Responsive Surface Structure 1, by Steffen Reichert exemplifies how the use of materiality and its compositional elements can lead to design through computation that can produce models be programmed to achieve desired goals and forms. Rather than just be for aesthetic purposes, the design takes into account one of the oldest construction materials of wood and utilizes its biotic response to water and heat to program levels of openness and movement in panels which are clad in a composite veneer over a parametric substructure4,in essence producing a behavioral trait, that is stimulated by humidity.
The use of ordinary materials, can be transformed into exuberant models using such a technique with relevant understanding of physical properties. Exploiting new means of fabrication and computation to constitute the very physicality of design5 and can also aid in altering relevant performance aspects such as ventilation and light. This project poses a view of the multi-faceted aspects that a design can embody and challenges conventional practice.
[2]. Computer generated parametric model.
Reicherts work, signifies how materiality can be utilized to not only form the physicality of what is viewed but constitute programmable behaviors which can be in constant adaptation and interaction with its relative environment.
A.1. ÂŚ 7 ÂŚ Studio Air
[3]. Responive surface physical model
A.1. ¦ 8 ¦ Studio Air
Biological design icd/itke Research Pavilion 2010
I
n age of machine and computer, it is the simplicity found in nature and all its diversity that can have the most profound and innovative designs. The ICD/ITKE research pavilion 2011, demonstrates how the amalgamation of natural design in the form of the plate skeleton shell of the sand dollar (sea Urchin) and the adaptation of geometric components in combination with parametric computation and simple means of fabrication can from functional and structural viable models for architectural utilization, in simple the transfer off biological principles to the architectural discipline6.
In this design the plate structure of the Sand dollar poses to yield an extremely performative structural system7, and a modular gird shelled structure was formed. The joints between the grid shells employs the use of finger joints constructed from 6.5mm cross laminated plywood, milled using CNC, mimicking that off the interlocking skeletal plates of the sand dollar, this results in minimal fastenings and reduces structural distortion due to expansion and contraction of the plywood. This perceived idea of biological precedent provokes the boundaries of traditional form and becomes simple to fabricate and construct and able to be integrated to an environment posed.
complex geometrizes and intricate design, but can be structurally viable and perform adequately using less material and simpler construction techniques to produce. ICD/ ITKE can be read as a look outside the methodological playgrounds of design8 and merger of two words to form a new discourse based on parametric design.
[4]. Sea dollar skeletal plate structure
[5]. Panel map
Ecological embedding, utilizing what some might say as the opposing worlds of nature and machine in the process of design can produce models that form
A.1. ÂŚ 9 ÂŚ Studio Air
[6]
A.1. ¦ 8 ¦ Studio Air A.1. ¦ 10 ¦ Studio Air
A.2 Design Computation
[7]
Vitruvius Digitalis T
he synthesis of computation poses a new frontier in the design profession. Where some might see this aspect as detached, as slimily another means of rendering physicality to conception, this modern stranger to an age-old profession can pose somewhat as an intrusion to our own intellect, as stated by science philosopher Jacob Bronowski, design is the epitome of intelligent behaviour9 and adding something as confined and calculating as a computer to the creativity and intelligence we solely inhibit in this field mat seem absurd. However, it is through computation the discourse of architecture and design is futured. It only takes glimpse into the past at aspects such as the Vitruvius’ treatises and the Modernist movement amongst others to witness how they challenged the contemporary ideals and concepts of architecture to its betterment. As such in the age of parametric and lofted curves, computation should be viewed as an integral part of the design process, a symbiotic design system10, a relationship that reinvigorates the traditional notions of the discipline. Computation in architecture can and should be embraced as holistic approach to returning to the roots of the profession. Where in the past the discipline may pose as just “designing a building”, computation allows the architect to be an integral part of the communication between research, material design, fabrication and physical production, in essence computation has renewed the traditional notions of the architect as the master builder11 , now empowered with the digital realm and all its means at his disposal. A.2. ¦ 12 ¦ Studio Air
Spanish PAvilion EMBT architects & Mc² structural Engineers, Shanhai, 2010
I
t only takes one look at the Spanish Pavilion, 2010 by EMBT architects and MC squared structural engineers to witness the marvels and design possibilities that the integration of computation into the design process holds.
[8]. Interior construction
The structures curvilinear from further marvelled by its eloquently weaved panelling serves as a performance minded and systematic design only possible through digital assets, in this case Rhino™. The structure comprises of a double layered, orthogonal grid of tubular steel members, with a woven panelised façade. The role of computation was essential, with the irregular form devised as a geometric NURBS surface in Rhino™12,in addition the buildings structural efficiency and viability was analysed namely fluid dynamic analysis, responsive spectrum analysis and time history analysis13 all based from the rhino Model. In addition the geometric model posed was later used in fabrication and construction of the tubular members which required precise geometric definition14, further reiterating how the amalgamation of computation in the design process poses an architect’s intervention from conception, fabrication and final form.
[9]. Exterior panels
EMBT and MC2 structure has proceeded the formalities of the complete integration of computation, with the architectural generation through the logic of algorithm15 going past just designing rather producing a piece of work with clear communication and a generated solution adapting the creativity of the mind and analytical accuracy of a computer defined by performance, sculpture and visual complexity. A.2. ¦ 13 ¦ Studio Air
14¦
[10]. Spansih Pavilion, 2010
A.2. ¦ 14 ¦ Studio Air
Endesa Pavillion Institue for advanced Archietcure of caralonia, Barcelona,2012
T
he power and effectiveness of the algorithm and the computer can produce models that consequently adhere to and adapt to individual environments and produce functionality (in this case electricity generation). As seen in the Endesa Pavilion of 2012, it forms the idea that architecture doesn’t necessarily have to be fixed but rather interactive to go beyond simple inhabitation advocating the notion, “the house is a machine for living in”16 . IAAC’s, design incorporates the locality and environment to algorithmically map the position of the suns path to each seasonal change17, with each modular facade relative to each position. The use of parametric allows each module of the facade to be coded to optimise the modular geometry18 and be exposed to the maximum solar radiation in turn producing a totally self-sufficient building. The Endesa pavilion advocates how the use and manipulation of data and parametrics can render a structure that integrates into its locality seamlessly, is sustainable yet yields a resource and doesn’t compromise aesthetics as a side effect. As such IAAC’s design challenges the idea of what architecture should produce in its entirety, where the digital language can produce physicality’s that respond intelligently and sustainably to its environment. [11]. Solar responisve modules.
A.2. ¦ 15 ¦ Studio Air
[12]. Endesa Pavilion, Barcelona.
A.2. ¦ 16 ¦ Studio Air
A.3 Generation
Binary Architecture T
he incorporation of computation into the generation of solution is seen somewhat as outlandish, if not distinguished as a “separate” field to that of architecture. However in the information era the computer simply enhances the intellect and creative possibilities of the designer. The use of parametrics and algorithms opens new possibilities on integral solutions that encapsulate their environments and interact with users, and experiments with form and space, entailing with it a perception as new medium to produce work redefining the profession. Just as paint and brush facilitate the artist, Algorithm and parametrics now define the architect.
A.3. ¦ 18 ¦ Studio Air
[13]
Swarm Morphology Evan Emery, Southern California Institute of Architecture
I
ntegrating the use of computation in the form of algorithms, scripting and parametrics in the process of design produces, in such away a level of consciousness within the digital world that can render forms, abstractions and solutions through the manipulation of data. Such generation of concepts are constantly adaptable to the changing notions of the architectural discipline (through a few lines of code) and form the basis of another medium of design. Such integration and relation to computation can be seen in the Swarm [al] Morphology project by Evan Emery. The conceptualized forms of Emery’s work derives as a form of Biomimicry, using the precedents of a swarm of birds chasing prey and an accompanying analytical code to represent their behaviour. The code with its animation ultimately renders the”archeturalization”19 of the data into a generated form.
In contrast such form generation and designs may be seen as “short-cut” to design, where the generation and chosen solution may be left solely to a computers analytical processor and not the intuition and judgment of a human intellect. In that case the purpose of a designer is somewhat rendered redundant. In addition such algorithms and scripts lead to the “copypaste” phenomenon, where individual work may be capitalized on unknowingly without the proper acknowledgment. The use of such algorithms ultimately form another means of medium to the discipline which can facilitate integrative and enriched concepts in future designs. [14]. Algorithmic Process, following Natural precedent
This digital manipulation of natural behaviour and simplicity in its aspects, pushes the boundaries of architectural design and explore spaces and concepts that are not possible without the use of computation20, in essence opening a new dimension to the possibilities that architecture can take. Emery’s project further shows how these random meshes and multiple forms through the movement of the birds can eventuate in a design that is void of singular view and can be perceived differently through each individual, a rising multi-planed high-rise or a sculptural entity in a public square, and in all accordance objectifies the notion that all design is a mental process and bound by it21 .
A.3. ¦ 19 ¦ Studio Air
[15]
A.3. ¦ 20 ¦ Studio Air
CirriFrom Surface Cirriform Responsive surface, Jason Kelly Johnson/Future Cities Lab,2012
W
hen the digital is not discussed as something different or alien to design, the underlying logic of architecture is redefined22 , it is this taboo notion to stray from the field that lead to experimental designs that encapsulate the bets of the physical, experimental and digital worlds.
None the less, the Cirriform Responsive surface poses as sharp contrast to standard static design incorporating the best of both worlds.
As such the Crirriform Responsive surface, by Jason Kelly Johnson/Future Cities Lab of 2012, explores the idea of how parametric design can lead to new aspects on user integrated and somewhat evolving architecture (facade) that responds is environmental contexts. The facade structures motorized (programmed) panels integrated with illuminated crystalline components integrate and react to form an engaging experience with the user, utilizing Firefly ™ to program the system to react to users as attractors , changing the panels as the user approaches.
[16]. Cirriform surface.
Where computation is relatively viewed as the methods of getting a computer to do something23, Johnson’s facade system ultimately poses something more, an integrative approach to bridge the barriers between the digital and physical realms24 . However in contrary the complexity of the design poses issues such as maintenance and repair as well as concerns over possible photosensitive epilepsy in the vibrant illumination as well the viability to produce such a design on a large scale.
[17]. Panel system.
A.3. ¦ 21 ¦ Studio Air
[18]. System functionality.
[19]. User response diagram.
A.3. ÂŚ 22 ÂŚ Studio Air
A.3 Summary
sUMMARY T
he ideas and contexts posed in the previous chapters, form intriguing look at the future of the Architecture discipline. The notions of computation in a field long held to the accreditation of human intellect and creativity challenges the very notions of the discourse but open new frontiers in all aspects of design. As such the intended design solution will form that of a Green house, to facilitate the growth of organic produce for the fresh food Market at CERES Environmental Park as well as encourage learning of such practices by school groups present there. The design will aim to utilize precedence such found on site in relation to the ones discussed i.e. Endesa Pavilionsolar radiation capture, to form a solution that will integrate with the site and users present.
A.3. ÂŚ 24 ÂŚ Studio Air
[20].
A.4 Learning outcomes
Outcomes T
he theoretical knowledge posed through the past few weeks pose an intriguing take on what architecture has become and is going to be. It’s hard not be bewildered by what technology and its relative use in architecture can produce. From the beginning of this course, the knowledge I possessed in relation to computation, algorithms and the like and architecture was very limed, however I come out of this phase enlightened, and now understand that there is much more to this profession than pen on paper and the power of the computer to augment the creativity of the mind can be very powerful. Looking back to my past, the possibilities posed by computation, in particular Rhino3D™, could have immensely helped in the design of my robotic hand (see introduction). Being able to adequately model this unit and fabricate the aluminum components through such processes as laser cutting would have yielded a more refined product, saving time, money and countless Band-Aids. Theoretically, the very notions of architecture are challenged, but it is this approach that will drive a revolution in design.
A.4. ¦ 26 ¦ Studio Air
[21]
B.1 Research
T
o further the research for the proposal at hand, a design field will be investigated, this in turn will aid in transferring ideas, concepts and principles that can utilize computational design to maximise the solutions desired effect.
b.1. ÂŚ 28 ÂŚ Studio Air
[22]
T
he form finding aspects of tessellation can have interrelated attributes with parametric design. Defining a whole form (Homogenous) with repetitive elements (heterogeneous) can entail with it methods to create responsive and integrated solutions to the problem at hand. This field offers a way in which algorithms designed to incorporate relevant data can directly alter functions and offer a heightened visual legibility to a structure. In addition the ability to tessellate a form produces individuality in each heterogeneous component and allows for modification and specification of elements to meet certain needs and work systematically as a whole.
Tesselation b.1 ÂŚ 29 ÂŚ Studio Air
Voussoir Cloud iwamotoscott architecture, los angeles, 2008
V
oussoir Cloud by IwamatoScott Architecture poses the implications and concepts of tessellation and vaulted surfaces along with the natural capability of materiality (plywood) to form a structure comprised of individual cells relying on compressive strength. The concepts of such a project pose and interesting innovator for the design solution poised for CERES environmental park. Voussoirs- the wedge shaped elements on a building vault or arch, in this case are extruded in the form of cellular panels each optimized using material properties-surface tension and structural logic-greater cell density of smaller connective modules at key structural zones1 to form the selfstanding vaulted system. [23]. Voussoir Cloud interior
The tessellation and the formation of cells, using digital modelling can also allow for geometry optimized for certain functions implied by the structure. In this case it deceives the perception of weight but also uses light to shift between translucent and opaque. Similarity, cells could be optimized for other purposes such as solar gains, collection of water and stand as a way to interact and engage with the context of the site and users. In addition structural logic could be implemented on a design Solution for CERES, with a tessellated structure being able to be erected on site with minimal skilled labour as the park runs on volunteers and still pose as structurally viable system with ample interior space for any work to be undertaken. This also poses an opportunity to produce a solution which is visually abstract from the norm present at the site and possibly fabricated using materials which are recycled or sustainable. This not only benefits the volunteers on site but engages with secondary users of the park, primarily in school children, as a point of education in the sustainable aspects of what CERES is built around.
[24]. Panel System
[25]. Panel fabrication and connection
b.1 ¦ 31 ¦ Studio Air
Art615 Pavilion Aalborg University,Denmark, 20010
A
rt615, explores the relation between digitized geometrizes, spatial systems and tessellation. The structure incorporates advanced fabrication techniques in CNC milling complimented by digital software of Grasshopper and Rhino™ to explore the correlation between space, form generation and social complexities in its environment2. The tessellated panels adapt to the conforming shape of the structures “skeleton” to form a system of dynamic light control, with each individual panel attributing not only to form generation but in context a responsive aspect.
This synthesis of form and function offers interesting aspects to be taken aboard. The most evident being the tessellation, the individual panels could be programmed to take different angles to optimize traits, in this case solar gain (for a greenhouse) according to the movement of the sun, increasing its performance. In addition secondary functions could be incorporated, with the position of the panels serving seasonal variation, optimizing solar gain in colder months, and maximizing ventilation in the warmer ones. [26]. Art615 pavilion
b.1 ¦ 32 ¦ Studio Air
[27]. Art615 pavilion form.
T
he use of tessellation poses opportunities to make simple forms, more extravagant aesthetically but also produce viable functionality. Coupled with the traits of the Voussoir cloud in its materiality, structural effectiveness and ease of construction, a design solution incorporating these aspects would ultimately pose as an engaging and functional structure to CERES. b.1 ÂŚ 33 ÂŚ Studio Air
B.2 Case Study 1
Selection Criteria
T
he permutations selected to be analyzed here after in section B.1 and B.2 inclusive will follow a selection criteria as defined bellow, in a bid to identify the most successful iterations for potential development and use. C1. Constructability Defined as the ability for the structure to be erected on site with minimal skilled labour, and simplistic joints as the site in question is run by volunteers. This Criteria also reflects the use of materials to be as cost efficient as possible and the possibility of using recycled and sustainable materials in the construction of the structure without voiding performance and structural viability. C2. Performance Defined as the structures passive ability to successfully absorb ample solar radiation to increase internal temperature, but also aid in ventilation to regulate temperature. C3. Aesthetics Defined as the physicality of the structure and its appearance to the user. Subsequently the form needs to utilise digital form finding to maximise appeal and stand as a point of singular interest in the park. In addition this is to aid in the parks education role to minor as a form of education on suitability and as such a structure both appealing visually and functional will form a strong basis for educational purposes. C4. Form characteristics The use of digital form finding and its attributes to integrate specific properties into the form of that may be unique to that individual form, but will aid in any of the above criteria in any way.
b.2 ÂŚ 35 ÂŚ Studio Air
T
he Voussoir cloud, by Iwamotoscott Architecture, presents how tesselation can be utilized to form models that conform to varying geometries, structural logic and ease of construction. The installations key attributes simple connections and self supporting form may constitute the basis of which would aid in the presented project at CERES environmental park.
[28]. Voussoir cloud inerior.
Case Study 1/ Voussoir
Cloud
b.2 ÂŚ 36 ÂŚ Studio Air
Permutation Catalogue Species 1
SP 1.0 Additional vaults and changing depth.
SP 1.2 Increasing load ( depth of vault), reduction of radius.
SP 1.3 Changing bounding
SP 2.2 Radius alteration and multiplication.
SP 2.3 Weaver Bird stellat altering bounding g
Species 2
SP 2.1 Spring alteration.
b.2 ÂŚ 37 ÂŚ Studio Air
g box geometry.
SP 1.4 Change of anchor point.
te function and geometry.
SP 2.4 Reverse of vault and offset of mesh
SP 1.5 Altering U,V sliders for height and anchor point.
SP 2.5 Not sure..
b.2 ¦ 38 ¦ Studio Air
Permutation Catalogue Species 1
SP 3.1 Reduced mesh.
SP 3.2 3D Veroni experimentation.
SP 3.3 Lunch box mesh.
Species 2
SP 4.1 Not sure..
SP 4.2 Radius alteration.
SP 4.3 Radius alteration tion.
b.2 ÂŚ 39 ÂŚ Studio Air
and multiplica-
SP 3.4 Additional anchor points.
SP 3.5 Reverse vault and additional anchor points
SP 4.4 Double mesh.
SP 4.5 Additional anchor points, varying spring lengths.
b.2 ÂŚ 40 ÂŚ Studio Air
Result Speculation T
he below permutation will be analyzed for future potential. The given definition utilized Kangaroo to generate form, however use of kangaroo in the CERES project I believe would be ineffective in relation to the chosen research field of tesselation but in any case the result chosen did show some future prospects.
Species 1 - Result
c1
0.20
c2
0.50
c3
0.55
c4
0.30
Total
1.55
The presented iteration showed interesting future prospects. The algorithm used kangaroo to change the load applied to an anchor points to produce what is shown. This could be used in conjunction with something like a sun path map to define a form which is “dimpled” with larger radiuses in areas of high solar exposure and smaller radiuses in areas of less exposure.
Species 2 - Result This iteration was created mistakenly by changing UV sliders and anchor points. Speculating the design further, a secondary function could be incorporated into the geometry of the design, for example with a drainage system at the centre point of the vault to collect water for the greenhouse. A secondary system could benefit the users and increase performance but also entails with it issues of contractibility.
c1
0.25
c2
0.45
c3
0.55
c4
0.60
Total
1.85
b.2 ¦ 41 ¦ Studio Air
Species 3 - Result
This model was quite unique from the rest both in form and algorithm. It utilized weaverbird mesh function as well as the original kangaroo algorithm. The iteration conforms with the notion of tesselation with its hexagonal panels which would be altered for radiation exposure, however the spiraling form of the structure could produce significant construction barriers.
c1
0.15
c2
0.35
c3
0.55
c4
0.35
Total
1.37
Species 4 - Result The presented model was created by reducing the bounding shape to a hexagonal geometry and altering height values. This could be utilized to form light tunnels in the CERES project at varying angles to compensate for the path of the sun. However this could create issue with aesthetics producing a very bulky structure as well as having a complicated joining system to Create the right angles needed.
c1
0.15
c2
0.40
c3
0.35
c4
0.35
Total
1.11
b.2 ÂŚ 42 ÂŚ Studio Air
B.3 Case Study 2
[29]
T
he Art 615 Pavilion, is a tessellated pavilion structure intended as a crime deterrent in a park environment. Its focus is to draw the negative connotations associated with the park it is situated in and provide the feeling of a safer environment for its users. The design conducted by the University of Aalborg’s, Faculty of architecture and design explores the dynamic concepts through computer generate geometry in relation to developing new spatial systems. The design aims to articulate new social complexities and utilize digital media in form generation, performative functions (light) and production. Given the circumstances, the use of tessellation and intuitive form generation complies well with the solutions context. It stands as a singular abstract beacon to a user as a safe haven, connecting users and deterring crime. Although the form was proposed as a social solution, it signifies the variation and flexibility that tessellation offers, both sculptural yet performative and dynamic.
Case Study 2/ Art 615 Pavilion
Re-Engineering/ Art 615 Pavilion
B
eginning the Re-engineering, first I sought to drawing a rough sketch (on paper) of the structure and listing the possibilities, components, commands that could have been taken to creating it in Grasshopper and Rhino. In doing so I came up with 5 definitions to model the structure all with their pros and cons, with the one presented modelling the structure the most accurately.
Shift 1
Curves drawn in Rhino, replicating the supporting structure, referenced into grasshopper.
Shift 2
Curves lofted together to form an approximate surface structure.
b.3 ÂŚ 45 ÂŚ Studio Air
Selection of the nodes contained in the grid-shell and using them as a origin point to create plane surfaces with length and width controlled by number. The accompanying polyline following the curve now forms the ribs of the structure.
Shift 4
Shift 3
Creating of a grid structure on the surface of the loft controlled by number sliders to from the basis from where to tessellate the structure (using panels).
b.3 ÂŚ 46 ÂŚ Studio Air
Shift 5 Extrusion of lanes along the z-axis. Gives dimension to all panels and adjusting the panel size via the number sliders allows for the panels to overlap slightly like in the original pavilion.
Failed attempts
Not so much a fail however,Use of the HFrames function along with the surface divide and orient function to tessellate the structure, longer script than the one used, was trying to achieve a script what could have individual components that could be easily manipulated to achieve individual characteristics at each panel.
In this definition was trying to map curves onto the loft using the Map-to-surface command, couldn’t orient the curves to the shape of the loft and also found that for some reason they didn’t extend the length of the loft even though they were controlled by number sliders.
This definition tried using the surface frames command, to try and create panels on each frame, nut couldn’t select each frame individually tried using a list item command but to no avail as this command selected each row of frames rather than a single one. b.3 ¦ 47 ¦ Studio Air
Final Result b.3 ¦ 48 ¦ Studio Air
Grasshopper
Users + Site Design Problem, Situated around digital form finding, space manipulation an advanced production techniques initiate a new social context on site.
Digital Form finding in context with social aspects of the project Social Context
Rhino 3D
Parametric Process b.3 ÂŚ 49 ÂŚ Studio Air
CNC milling
iteration
Production and Construction
Structural Analysis and connections , assess viability
Variation and development
Grasshopper
Site construction
b.3 ÂŚ 50 ÂŚ Studio Air
B.4 Technique Development
T
he following presented will be permutations of the definition presented in B.3. (Art615 pavilion) to produce species with incremental variation. This exploration will aim to utilise the functions of the script in form finding and generation, with the aim producing variations with incorporate the research field of tessellation. Each variation will also present the factor which was added and/or altered
b.4 ÂŚ 51 ÂŚ Studio Air
Permutation Catalogue Species 1
Original.
SP 1.2 Increase of surface panels.
SP 1.3 Extrusion of panels at varying height.
SP 1.4 Cull pattern/Positive negative extrusion.
SP 1.5 Random pat and Cull.
SP 2.7 Diamond grid morph and Facet edges.
SP 2.5 Octagonal ex geometry an morph.
Species 2
Original.
SP 2.6 Circular tubes and attractor point.
SP 2.3 Diamond grid morph and panel loft.
SP 3.2 Triangulation mesh and pipe function with extended bounds.
SP 3.3 Mesh map and Weaverbird midedge and stelate.
Species 3
Original.
SP 3.4 Ran dome geo-population, splitquads and Midedges .
SP 3.5 Alterartion of eters.
b.4 ÂŚ 52 ÂŚ Studio Air
ttern(list)
xtrusion nd surface
f param-
SP 1.6 Random pattern(list) and extrusion.
SP 1.7 Odd number sequence cull.
SP 1.8 Surface panels-verticies and pipe function.
SP 1.9 Panel vertices and rectangular array.
SP 2.4 Double skin extrusion with surface morph.
SP 2.2 Diagrid structure with increased nodes and tube function.
SP 2.8 Diagrid structure, increased nodes, surface panels and extrusion.
SP 2.9 Not sure..
SP 3.6 Alteration of parameters and Carpet function.
SP 3.7 Random geo-populaiton Weaverbird Loop and Carpet function.
SP 3.8 Atering Parameters.
SP 3.9 Not sure.. but result was very satisfying...
b.4 ÂŚ 53 ÂŚ Studio Air
Permutation Catalogue Species 4
Original
SP 1.2 Surface box and extened height inputs
SP 1.3 Surface box extrusion and manipulation of input angles
SP 1.4 Surface Morph of geometry
SP 1.5 Secondary g morph with and random
SP 2.7 Cull extrusion and mesh.
SP 2.5 Panaelising create pane ing to a del
Species 5
Original.
SP 2.6 Random point mesh.
SP 2.3 Tubular mesh.
SP 6.3 Mesh with extruded notes.
SP 6.3 Surface mesh, with faces extruded and mesh subtraction.
Species 6
Original.
SP 6.4 Mesh vertices thicken.
SP 3.5 Triangulatio extrusion.
b.4 ÂŚ 54 ÂŚ Studio Air
geometry h extrusion m cull.
g - trying to els accordlauny mesh.
on Mesh
SP 1.6 Cull pattern/Positive negative extrusion.
SP 1.7 Random pattern(list) and Cull.
SP 1.8 Double skin.
SP 2.4 Responsive triangular panels using multiple attractors and graph mapper - Closed.
SP 2.2 Open.
SP 2.8 Increase of geometry amplitude.
SP 3.6 Surface random domain mapping and Surface frames.
SP 3.7 Random cull and delauny mesh.
SP 3.8 Delany mesh, random list and Weaverbird Catmullclark function.
SP 1.9 Secondary extruded geometry with varied openings.
SP 2.9 Quite interesting..3D veroni extrusoin forming a “web”, mapped onto a square grid referenced onto surface.
SP 3.9 Catmullclark and Frames function.
b.4 ¦ 55 ¦ Studio Air
Result analysis T
he following section will aim to review the highlighted permutations and discuss successes, failures (according to review criteria) as well as possibilities and implications such a design will have on real life applications.
Species 1 - Result
T
his iteration utilized a simple cull pattern along surface normal extrusion to created a lofted, tesselated surface. This was simple experimentation with simple script , basically probing the field of what could be achieved however could lead to a more refined model. In terms of potential the individual panels could be altered in height to maximize solar gain or work as light tunnels to interior space, however the contractibility of the structure poses its main issue, with a subsequent substructure would have to be utilized.
Species 2 - Result
c1
0.35
c2
0.45
c3
0.55
c4
0.40
Total
1.75
T
his result utilized attractors and a packing algorithm to map the surface of the structure. The aim was to increase packing in areas of the surface that had poor solar gain to try and improve performance, while reducing them in areas that had abundant solar exposure. This concept proved quite viable, with a proper mapping of solar paths and heat gain could yield successful results. In addition the diameter of the curricular tubes could be altered to increase/decrease light entering the structure. c1
0.45
c2
0.65
c3
0.50
c4
0.35
Total
1.95
b.4 ÂŚ 57 ÂŚ Studio Air
Species 3 - Result
T
his permutation proved my favorite, not only for its aesthetic appeal but the functionality that can be incorporated into it. The form was derived from dividing the surface and using two mesh function is unison with a random cull to produce the resultant form. The script allows for the size of the opening to be varied at will as ell as the number present (in this case 400 openings). This poses significant opportunities, a sun path analysis could render which openings to enlarge and reduce in order to gain the most solar radiation. The structure could be modularized into cells that could be joined together easily on site for ease of construction. Furthermore aspects like ventilation could be utilized with a digitized system opening and closing window panels to regulate temperature. With further work, especially in environmental analysis this model could prove very successful.
b.4 ÂŚ 58 ÂŚ Studio Air
c1
0.65
c2
0.75
c3
0.60
c4
0.75
Total
2.75
Species 4 - Result
T
his model was achieved by mapping extruded geometry onto the surface and increasing density. In its entirety it has potential, with geometry optimized for performance could be similarly adopted onto the surface, but induces issue of customizing and fabrication. In this the model is still visually perplexing and could perform well .
c1
0.50
c2
0.55
c3
0.55
c4
0.50
Total
2.10
Species 5 - Result
T
his iteration tried to utilize something similar to sun path diagram, using a graph paper attached to the accompanying script of triangular panels, the openings could be altered to varying angles. This is basically a simple running script of solar mapping, in addition the construction of such a structure could be simple due to its modualized triangular nature. Improvement could be mead however on the aesthetics as it comes through a being too simple, especially for the possibilities presented through digital form finding
c1
0.60
c2
0.50
c3
0.50
c4
0.60
Total
1.75
Species 6 - Result
T
his form proved quite successful , the clearly defined panels reiterate the notion of tesselation but also provide an opportunity for experimentation, for example the panels could be glazed to be light sensitive (tint) to regulate interior temperature. It also provides quite a visually pleasing aesthetic. In terms of constructability a secondary substructure to mount the panels would be required, which may increase costs. c1
0.50
c2
0.60
c3
0.75
c4
0.50
Total
2.35
b.4 ÂŚ 59 ÂŚ Studio Air
Successful iteration
Front
I
n development, two definition were made. The first was a general from as presented below, the second was modularized into panels as seen on the right, in order to aid construction/prototyping. The definition also allows the thickness, the number of openings, height regulation and splay of the structure.
Perspective b.4 ÂŚ 60 ÂŚ Studio Air
T
he presented iteration, is what I believe was the most successful and the most promising of the multiple permutation created. The design presents a multitude of areas that could be altered to benefit the criteria it was chosen out of. In terms of constructability the modularized system of hexagonal panels could be utilized with a simple connection system (dove tail) for ease of construction on site. The from offers a stinkingly aesthetic comparison to the present buildings on site and there for aid in the creation of new social context within the site as well as an educational tool. Performance wise the entire form could be altered in accordance to environmental analysis (ladybug) in order to increase performance and possibly aesthetic as well. In addition further form characteristics and aspects could be investigated , for example sensory systems to aid in ventilation to control interior temperature (open and close panels as required). In saying this I still believe further development is required to fine tune issues, for example some panels have sharp angles that could pose a problem in construction.
b.4 ÂŚ 61 ÂŚ Studio Air
b.5 Prototypes
O
f the iterations in B.4, the selected model was chosen not only on the criteria for section, but also by investigating prospect of construction/prototying, hence why two definitions were made. The definition allowed for manipulation of opening sizes and mesh thickness which tied in well, when it came time to send appropriate files for fabrication. In prototyping this model, three options were considered. 1. 3D print Fabrication - For a complete model to view form and structural logic 2. Laser Cutting - For larger scale tectonic models 3. Card Cutting - For medium scale tectonic models The aim of the tectonic models was to test connections and the structural viability of the form selected.
Tectonic Prototype The first tectonic model created was created using a card cutter. The aim was to test connections and the ability of the form to stand on its own weight. The selected model was too large for a complete model (400 openings , 1000+ connections), instead a smaller section was cropped for use (20 openings, 268 connections). The mesh form from grasshopper had to be edited in Rhino to created surfaces on each panel (which for some reason didn’t workout in grasshopper) in order for the entire connected surface to be unrolled as a flat surface for card cutting . The connection type employed was folding tabs of 2.5mm offset from each vertice.
b.5 ¦ 64 ¦ Studio Air
The second model employed was a 3D printed model of the general form and structure. This proved a challenge as the definition needed was one continuous mesh, whereas I had several exploded meshes together (simply as big mess). This proved a major problem and after much deliberation I hit a dead end. At this point I Subjected my problem to the Grasshopper online forum to which I received help. Adding and subtracting a few components the preexisting definition fixed and one single mesh was created , and was able to be sent for fabrication.
In its entirety, the prototyping stage was of a general success. The 3D printed model was of particular satisfaction. However the tectonic model could be improved vastly. I believe it was partly a bad choice in material and laser cutting with thin Plywood or MDF would be more effective. The form failed to hold up as more connections were added and bucked under even the slightest added pressure, in addition the tab connections failed to account for the angles each panels were at which resulted in small gaps at some points. However it did produce quite an astatically pleasing form, with the individual components twisting and conforming at different angles to the form of the structure. In addition the effect of light through the openings was quite pleasing with different levels of penetrations according to opening sizes. In future models a more stable material will be used to produce both a more stable structure but also a “cleaner” model, as folding tabs and glue was quite the struggle. b.5 ¦ 65 ¦ Studio Air
b.6 Proposal
Site: CERES environmental park
[30]. CERES Enviromental Park 1:500
In implementing, the proposal will focus on CERES environmental park. The outcomes and development of the technique will shift towards the brief, site and it accompanying attributes The technique proposed will aim to address and aid in the betterment of the values the park is based around - Dressing climate change - Addressing stainability - Incorporating community - Education b.6 ÂŚ 67 ÂŚ Studio Air
[31]. CERES demographic and educational information
CERES strong community approach yields a key factor to attribute any design implemented. Upon analysis of the site it was evident to see a continually upgrading park in terms of building from and technology in a bid to keep revitalized with modern context but still also focus on key environmental goals. It was evident to see the keen interest on performative implications on site. With the site harbouring a solar station, complete rain water system (for nursery and Greenhouse) and an electric car recharge station. The most prominent aspect was the large volume of users on site. Ranging form local community member, school groups and tourists from abroad. The parks focus on education and awareness through practical use and hands on experience is a key aspect. Key Points of Interest 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
1
2 3
4
5
6
Organic market Entrance/Gathering zone Nursery School Education zone Chicken Farm Secondary Learning zone
These points represent the key areas at which any group of users, use the site.
b.6 ÂŚ 68 ÂŚ Studio Air
Implementation on site will need to account for several characteristics. Performance in the structures ability to produce more adequately than any that was there previously and increase its viability. Construction of the structure needs to be relatively simple (a modularized system) due to the volunteers that work there, and the need for minimal skilled labour for construction. The Aesthetics of the structure need too be something of contrast to the preexisting buildings in order to bring intrigue and interest amongst the sites users. This is in a bit to form new social context around this area of the site and become a tool for education and learning. The positioning of the structure is to maximise user flow towards the currently limitedly used end of the park but also to aid in the practical learning and usage on site. The structure itself is aimed to be used entirely, for example, the splayed outer boundary towards the north is to used as a “hardening zone” to grow out seedlings, with this area also benefiting from maximum light exposure. The building form towards the Southwest would be used as learning zone, with subsequent seating and he structure as aback drop for seminars to school groups of visitors.
User flow and Destiny
The above represents the possibilities of a new intervention may have on CERES. However the design proposed has further improvement to be made and refinement to its aspects to render it a more unique and singularly innovative design option. b.6 ¦ 69 ¦ Studio Air
b.7 Learning Outcomes
T
he learning process of Part B are far fetching. The evident aspect presented to me is the fact that architecture has to adhere to not just the form of a building but its innovative qualities that render its Physicality. I found it somewhat hard to grasp a particular original innovative quality within this section as my understanding was a somewhat obscured by my original notions of architecture. However this notion is changing with more research into the field. I delved into additional aspects of computational design, using environmental analysis software on a basic level to try and render innovative qualities in my design, as well as manipulating Grasshopper to new extents. In the coming stages I aim to further use the power of digital design to further improve and refine my proposal to produce something original and unique.
b.7 ÂŚ 71 ÂŚ Studio Air
c.1 Detailed Design
D
iscussion with a Crit panel and Assessors gave valuable insight, and a second view to aspects of the project that I would have either looked past or been bias to.
In any case it was evident that the project was far from complete, but well on they way there. The review outlined the lack of site integration within the context of CERES as well as the need to objectify the design to both the specific needs of the users but also fuctionality of the project, in addition the actual construction of the project was bought into question with advise to look into size, connection systems that were feasible and stable. In moving forward with the design, refinement will be made to integrate the project more aptly within the site to work in accordance with the users and values set by CERES, the structures panelised system will be fine tuned to respond to the environmental factors governing its function through its Grasshopper definition. In addition more research will be conducted on materiality, an aspect which was long alluded to, as well as connections of each panel. Moving forward the refinements conducted will be physically prototyped on a trial and error basis utilizing digital fabrication until a finalized form with relevant characteristics and functionality is achieved.
c.1 ÂŚ 73 ÂŚ Studio Air
c.1 Site Review
I
nitially the concept of placement was to utilized a relatively flat open space towards the north east of the site and condense existing greenhouses into one, and in addition try to create user flow towards the relatively unused end of the park. However with review its evident the proposal doesn’t interact with the site, especially in the fact that digital tools can be utilized to make a more interesting interaction on site, as well as utilize pre-existing user flow to accommodate attention and usage. In addition the scale of the project was slightly ambitious, at most especially to keep in context with CERES volunteer based service. c.1 Œ 75 Œ Studio Air
c.1 ¦ 76 ¦ Studio Air
F • • • •
urther analysis of the site and its topography revealed a more suitable location that provided several opportunities. Integration around site topology and existing infrastructure Access to the main user flow on site Access to main gathering region Sprawl access of greenhouse onto hardening zone
The placement of the project at the chose site goes hand in hand with user interaction as much as it dose with the sites infrastructure and topology. The Greenhouse will lye as the backdrop to the organic farmers market, cafe and nursery giving the analogy of “Farm to Pate” allowing users to directly see how produce and products are grown. It also allows the hardening zone to sprawl out into the existing hardening zone making one big field (as though the structure seamlessly blends with the environment) and finally keeps all existing buildings and utilizes the unused space and digital tools to construct a form that will blend with the sites slight incline and existing buildings.
New site
Supply Access
Ar
ea
entre Resource c
of
in
te
re
st
Planned Learning zone Central gathering point
Fa rm
er
s
M
ar
ke
t
cafe
Hardening zone
User Flow
Nursery
Optimized environmental fascade
Hardening zone
t
Ceres Environmental Park Education Providing short course and educational training, working with school groups and the broader community in promoting sustainable living and living practices. Community Hub Gathering place for community members, school groups and tourists.
Volunteer Operated Completely Volunteer operated and managed, with goods produced benefiting the park. Park Funded Funded on its own accord through sales in its nursery, farmers market and cafe.
c.1 ÂŚ 80 ÂŚ Studio Air
Design proposal Education Providing a contemporary and aesthetically motivating platform to provide education on the aspects of sustainable organic farming. Community Hub Create new social complexities on site and spark interest and intrigue.
Volunteer operated Construction costs to a minium, with no skilled labour for construction and simple modularized system with simple connections that can be achieved with everyday tools. Park Funded Provide a performative structure that utilizes year round environmental analysis to increase productivity output .
c.1 ÂŚ 81 ÂŚ Studio Air
c.2a Refinement
I
n refining the design, I decided to go back and analyze precedents to try to understand more so how these projects utilized computation to drive very specific characteristics that were both site specific and functional. The project that stood out was the Endesa Pavilion, the use of solar analysis to govern both the aesthetic of the building but also provide a highly performative solution with the use of PV panels. Taking this concept I proceeded to alter the current design definition by firstly breaking down the current definition to make it more workable, but also adding environmental analysis plug in into the definition in the form of LadyBird.
Environmental Analysis
Site specific Response
Deign Definition
Tesselate/modularize
T
he concept behind the new definition was to integrate the environmental analysis on site to form a modularized system that would react to radiation levels by mapping levels and determining the opening sizes on the structure. The north facade of the structure would be the most translucent moving over to a more opaque southern side with opening sizes in between determined by radiation levels.
North side of the building sprawls out onto the existing hardening zone, providing the openings as planter boxes for developing plants but also a relatively easy transition to the existing field.
Exit/Larger opening for supplies
c.2a ÂŚ 84 ÂŚ Studio Air
Facade openings gradually fade to an almost opaque south side, openings determined by the amount of radiation received through the year.
Entry
Learning zone for educational purpose located on south side as back drop of educational programs. South side is not completely opaque so that some light filters through for both aesthetic purposes but also to provide an interesting light scheme for activities taking place at the learning zone.
c.2a ÂŚ 85 ÂŚ Studio Air
Sky Matrix
Melbourne metro Environment data
Ladybird environment engine
Radiation Mesh
Disco Close
Radiation result Analysis Period: jan 01 - December 31 from 0:00 - 24:00 Input Geo (loft)
Loft
Geo Population (Openings)
Veroni + Bbox
Create pol
Move
Reference as curve Amplitude + Multiply End point
Discontinuity
Vector 2pt
Pseudo code
Vector and Length
ontinue face + est point
lyline
Divide and Addition Controlled by sliders
List item
Remap Numbers with alternating domain
Explode
Preview
End point Wb Catmullclark
Merge + quad Mesh
Number slider
WB mesh thicken
Mesh join
unify Normals
Kangaroo Clean funcyion
c.2a ÂŚ 87 ÂŚ Studio Air
New definition
Radiation mesh and mapped values.
Opening sizes ca altered to suite li needs .
Result
an be ighting
c.2a ¦ 89 ¦ Studio Air
c.2b Tectonics
T
he second phase of refining the proposal was to investigate tectonic systems, connections and construction procedures . The system had to be simple enough for the everyday person to understand and use and construct with minimal hassle with general tools. In addition factors that had been alluded to had to be addressed such as the materiality of the structure as well as system for implemented transparent insulation in the structures openings, the challenge lied in finding aspects that could be incorporated to the project that would still be consistent with the brief and the constraints employed by it.
c.2b ÂŚ 91 ÂŚ Studio Air
T
he connection system employed needs to be simple in implementation in order to be successfully integrated with its users and in specific the volunteers who manage the park. As such simple tectonic models were made using 300gsm Card and folding tabs to first gain a grasp on the from, its weigh composition, possible development of connections and its stability. These were probing tests to develop later models and proved useful(and expensive), with several iterations showing flaws in the design and possible areas of improvement.
Inadequate tolerances
Connection System
Structural stability problems
P
roblems faced by these initial tectonic models were inadequate tolerances on connection tabs resulting in gaps between members. Construction by hand also encounter problems in getting the angles of the form right. But what was more concerning was the structural stability, with the form slumping to either side without support. This was possibly due to using the older definition with uniform sized panels and no support system. Additional models will use the new definition and ground support to stop slumping.
c.2b ÂŚ 93 ÂŚ Studio Air
U
tilizing the refined definition, more models were constructed on a trial and error basis and adjusted for tolerances, angles and loads enforced by the structures weight. A successful model was constructed after adjusting parameters which provided stability and proper form.
Small tolerance problems
Connection System
t
Self supporting with anchor point
T
he model used 300gsm card as per the previous, but increased tolerances, tab length and by using the definitions transparent to opaque system, the member thickness went from thick to thin allowing the weight to be distributed in such as way that the form was able to stand on its own accord.
c.2b ÂŚ 95 ÂŚ Studio Air
Connection System
I
n anyalysing the models, it occured there was a simple system that could be implimented on the memebers that would suit the breif and construction quite well. The tabs could be utilized as flanges (to a material chosen) and bolts used to secure memebers together to form moduels and communal bolts between moduels ro construct the entireform. The reason for this selection was its simplicity in design and constrcution, requires very limited skilled labour and uses both mateirlas (Nuts and bolts) and tools that are readily available. The next aspect of this system is matreriality, and finding a suitable material to go hand innhand with this system.
Account for torrences a bolt lengths
Individual panels with pre drilled holes.
t
and
Module Conenction point
Memeber connection points c.2b ÂŚ 96 ÂŚ Studio Air
Connection System
t
c.2b ¦ 97 ¦ Studio Air
membrane System
I
nitially, insulation of the openings were to use Perspex cut at the required angles and sealed together. However this entailed with it mass customizing to every opening, and the scheme was dropped as it did suit the requirements of the proposal. The next concept behind the membrane system was to be malleable in order to conform to the non-planar openings . Utilizing a sandwich panel along the perimeter of the opening, a double layer of ETFE film would be used, with the later inflation of the air cavity between causing a airtight seal.
Analyzing this idea, it was evidently flawed in several ways. The expense of the ETFE was far from what was required of the proposal, the sandwich plate along the edge of the openings may prove inadequate for a air tight seal and more so the idea that in inflation of the membrane it would form a tight seal ended up being s little ambitious. In the end the membrane system was an element that was not completely resolve to the best possible way.
Sandwich plate
Air Cavity Membrane
Sandwich Plate ETFE Film
t
Confrom to membrane
Later inflation of air cavity c.2b ¦ 99 ¦ Studio Air
Material and Construction
T
he material selection for the different components of the proposal was somewhat something that seemed to change with critical reflection at each stage
The initial material for the form of the proposal was timber. Reflecting of the ICD research pavilion, it suited well with the suitability aspect of the brief, was a readily available material and could be customized with relative ease. However it posed problems of maintenance with long-term implementation, and as such was viewed as going against the ease of use for the volunteers that run the sit. The next concept was to use aluminium, as it suited a recycling theme and could be prefabricated off site but again raised questions of contractibility and the need of additional labour on site for construction. In addition it also posed the fact of thermal conductance, making the proposal more a sauna than a greenhouse on hot days.
Off site manufacture
Material manufacture
Design concept
Transport
membr
construction components Connection components
c.2b ÂŚ 100 ÂŚ Studio Air
t
Even though Aluminium was the choice for interim discussion, later investigation of polycarbonate materials proved more viable in both construction and use. In proposing a material for the membrane, ETFE proved promising but was later abandoned for its expense. Investigation into other materials especially polymer based existing greenhouse membranes that could be used to form a double layered membrane proved promising, however this aspect was not completely resolved.
Member to module
rane Labeling
module construction
form construction
Ground anchors
c.2b ÂŚ 101 ÂŚ Studio Air
c.3 Physical render
t
I
n creating models to convey the aspects of the design a number of digital fabrication tolls were utilized, with the models aiming to show three primary implications.
• Connections • Site implementation of form • General holistic render The concept behind this selection was to achieve a well rounded understanding of the fundamentals behind the project.
c.3 ¦ 103 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 Holistic model
t
c.3 ¦ 105 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 Holistic model
t
c.3 ¦ 107 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 Connection model
t
c.3 ¦ 109 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 Connection model
t
c.3 ¦ 111 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 form model
t
c.3 ¦ 113 ¦ Studio Air
c.3 form model
t
c.3 ¦ 115 ¦ Studio Air
CERES Greenhouse
t
c.3 ¦ 117 ¦ Studio Air
CERES Greenhouse
t
c.3 ¦ 119 ¦ Studio Air
CERES Greenhouse
t
c.3 ¦ 121 ¦ Studio Air
c.4 Review
t
U
pon review of the final proposal, overall I’m quite satisfied with the outcome. The use of digital tools to progress the design solution proved an interesting and unique way to address the different issues presented and provided an extraordinarily dense field of options to achieve a variety of characteristics.
However in saying this, their are aspects to the project I believe that could be improved significantly, its just more so a matter of developing skill and familiarity with the new tools preesnted in this course and utilizing them to their full potentiation. Discussion with the assessors after final presentations left quite positive remarks, with the site integration being resolved and the building being adapted to performing in its environment. The connection system was said to be relevant and of smart use in relation to the user context (even though I assumed it was too simple) and the tesselation and use of environmental analysis in relation to the structure creating and interesting aesthetic. Feedback also noted areas that could be improved and functions that would need critical analysis to even be feasible.
c.4 ÂŚ 124 ÂŚ Studio Air
F
eedback outlined problems and improvements to the design that could be implemented to make it both more feasible in practical application as well as aspects that may not even function as envisioned. Firstly, the materiality of the structure came into question, the use of aluminium was likely not the best choice, due to its conductance would have lead to excessive heat gain in warmer months, rendering it unusable. In addition the fabrication and the possibility of the need of on site labour for construction would not sit well with the brief. The membrane system, was inevitably flawed. It was the one aspect that was over looked during the design process, where I was transfixed on using grasshopper and digital tools to generate form, function and contractibility, I dismissed smaller aspects such as the membrane which would inevitably play a crucial part to the entirety of the project. It was pointed out that even though the inflatable idea was practical,the use of the sandwich plate system would not work especially trying to run something like this around the perimeter of the openings which would require additional custom fabrication as well as using ETFE (which at the time I thought was cheap) would be an expensive option. The environmental analysis for the structures form and construction also needed review. Initially I wanted to add another aspect of ventilation to the script to regulate optimum temperature all year round and generate function and from through this means, however I found it difficult to manage one script to regulate radiation alone and left ventilation/shading out. It was pointed out that this would have been a secondary factor which would have been of equal importance to radiation as it would allow produce to be gown all year round at an optimum level.
improvement
t
Futuring I
n futuring the project , these aspects that were continued would be adequately addressed in the best possible way with some concepts as outlined below.
Review of current aspects
Futuring
The use of a material such as Polycarbonate both for performance and durability
Materiality
c.4 ÂŚ 126 ÂŚ Studio Air
Use of existing greenhouse membrane material to create an inflatable insulation solution.
Membrane
Th an a op by re
Connections
A new connection system to accompany a polycarbonate material, in addition to simplifying construction, possible a deviation of a clip and lock system.
he use of environmental nalysis to possibly provide shading element to each pening, with size determined y how much radiation is equired at each point.
Temp regulation
Shade
Ventilation
In implementation of a self regulation ventilation system through materiality or automation.
c.4 ÂŚ 128 ÂŚ Studio Air
Objective 1. The process of brief formation I believe was fundamentally a critical stage as it allowed one consider and formulate aspects that were relevant to each conceptualized project, and with successive l site visits formulate a brief that targeted key characteristics that both used computational design and benefited the client in context. In creating the brief I aimed to find the underlying factors that drove the need for the project I was proposing, this helped by talking to volunteers on site and consecutive site visits which allowed me to create an accurate brief but also pinpoint specific digital tools for use. Objective 2. Utilizing parametritis, algorithms and other forms of digital design proved both insight full and interesting. It allowed me to experiment vastly though iterations , changing parameters, adding and changing definitions, allowing the mind to run free in this new medium with endless possibilities. The exploration of design-space using computation allowed me to generate possibilities that were consistent with the brief and use a variety of tools to inform and simultaneously generate concepts such as kangaroo and ladybird. Objective 3. The skills learnt in parametric modeling I believe are constantly evolving, with each sit down I was able to create or understand something new and different. What I learnt the most was the bridge between the computer and a physical model, its a very fine one at that. It took me many iterations,definitions and countless fabrications to produce models that were relevant,functional and even so some of which were not completely resolved. Objective 4. The constant fabrication of models to grasp the understanding of atmosphere and physical presence at time led to disappointment, with models on digital media not as savvy in the physical realm, however for myself it only added the need to go back and keep refining till a solution was complete. This allowed me to physically manipulate in a way, my digital thoughts and actions.
Summary
Objective 5. Arguing for a proposal I found hard at the start, but with consecutive site visits and understanding better the characteristics behind my proposal I developed a means to justify and argue the relevancy of such a project. It helped through the readings to provide a insight and basis for argument, further back proposals by new ideas and concepts that could be applied to my project. Objective 6. The use of precedent projects, along with research was one I thoroughly enjoyed. It allowed me to delve into the world of existing designs governed my digital media and allowed me to focus key aspects of existing project such as the Endesa Pavilion to the betterment of my own. Objective 7. In this objective, the foundational understandings I grasped well, however it is a big field to comprehend. When shown how data structure and programming working in actual projects it made more sense. In a way towards the end of the course I was able to decipher and almost talk to my self in code while working on definitions rather than picking and choosing components and hoping they would work. Objective 8. In the course, I was able to by myself and with help compile an array of definitions, techniques and computational means and understand their advantages and disadvantages. At times these techniques were confusing at most but by understanding the underlying structures behind them I was able to over the course compile a collection of varying different techniques such as environmental analysis algorithms, mapping algorithms and tesselation algorithms in my iterations to name a few. This course was my first introduction into digital design, using parametrics and algorithms. Never before had I used such programs such as Grasshopper or Rhino but it has since dawned on me that this medium is powerful tool for creation, manipulation and fabrication of architectural concepts. For me , digital design provided a challenging and insightful way to express myself, I started with little to no understanding and now finish the course with comprehensive start to new repertoire of design. - Surath
c.4 ÂŚ 130 ÂŚ Studio Air
Endnotes 1. Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona. Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press), 2013. Print.pp.2 2. Fry, Tony. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg)., 2008. Print. pp.6 3. Menges, Achime “Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2 ,2012, Print. Pp.17 4. Steffen Reichert, 2013, “Responsive Surface Structure”. 1 August 2015. http://steffenreichert.com/04_surface.html 5. Schropfer, Thomas, Ecological Urban Architecture: Qualitative Approaches to Sustainability, Germany: Birkhauser Verlag GmbH, 2012.Print. pp.63 6. The University of Stuttgart: Institute of Computational Design, 2015, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion2011”. 2 August 2015. http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553. 7. Menges, A. and Schwinn, T. “Manufacturing Reciprocities”, Architectural Design: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design, 82.2, 2012, print. Pp.122 8. Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona. Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming. (MIT Press). , 2013. Print.pp.3 9. Kalay, Yehuda E. Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004. Print.pp.1 10. Kalay, Yehuda E. Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design. Pp.3 11. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the Digital in Architecture: London: Routledge. 2014.Print.pp.5 12. Calzon. J and Jimenez. C. “Weaving Architecture structuring The Spanish Pavilion, Expo 2010, Shaghai” Architectural Design, The New Structuralism: Design, Engineering and Architectural Technologies. 80.4, 2010. Print. Pp.59 13. Young, B. Tubular Structures 8. Florida: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, 2010. Print.pp.366 14. Cruz, P. Structures and Architecture. London: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, 2010. Print. pp.192 15. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the Digital in Architecture.pp.3 16. Corbusier Le. Towards a new Architecture, Butterworth Architecture., 1989, London. Print, pp.4 17. Markopoulou, A & Rubio. R. “Smart living architecture: Solar Prototypes”, Architectural Design: an Experimental Approach to Intensely Local Architectures. 85.2 ,2015.print.pg 131 Endnotes ¦ 131 ¦ Studio Air
Endnotes 18. Markopoulou, A & Rubio. R. “Smart living architecture: Solar Prototypes”, Architectural Design: an Experimental Approach to Intensely Local Architectures. 85.2 ,2015.print.pg130 19. Evan Emery,2013, “Swarm[al] Morphology 04 [Swarm Variation]”. 12 August 2015. http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/swarm-almorphology-04-swarm-variation?commentId=2985220%3AComment %3A994284&xg_source=activity 20. Peters, Brady. ‘‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’’, Architectural Design,83.2, 2012.pp.11 21. Terzidis, K. Algorithmic Architecture, Architectural press,2006. Print.pp.5 22. Peters, Brady. ‘‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’’,pp.1 23. Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11 24. Payne.A & Johnson.J. “Firefly Interactive prototypes for architectural design”, Architectural design: The Building of Algorithmic thought.83.2.pp.146
Endnotes ¦ 132 ¦ Studio Air
References 1. Calzon. J and Jimenez. C. “Weaving Architecture structuring The Spanish Pavilion, Expo 2010, Shaghai” Architectural Design, The New Structuralism: Design, Engineering and Architectural 2. Corbusier Le. Towards a new Architecture, Butterworth Architecture., 1989, London. Print 3. Cruz, P. Structures and Architecture. London: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, 2010. Print. 4. Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press) 5. Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona. Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press), 2013. Print 6. Evan Emery,2013, “Swarm[al] Morphology 04 [Swarm Variation]”. 12 August 2015. http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/swarm-al-morphology-04-swarm-vari ation?commentId=2985220%3AComment%3A994284&xg_source=activity 7. Fry, Tony. Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg)., 2008. Print. 8. Kalay, Yehuda E. Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design: Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004. Print. 9. Markopoulou, A & Rubio. R. “Smart living architecture: Solar Prototypes”, Architectural Design: an Experimental Approach to Intensely Local Architectures. 85.2, 2015.print. 10. Menges, Adam, “Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2 ,2012, Print. 11. Menges, A. and Schwinn, T. “Manufacturing Reciprocities”, Architectural Design: Higher Integration in Morphogenetic Design, 82.2, 2012, print. 12. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman. Theories of the Digital in Architecture: London: Routledge. 2014.Print.
References ¦ 133 ¦ Studio Air
References 13. Payne.A & Johnson.J. “Firefly Interactive prototypes for architectural design”, Architectural design: The Building of Algorithmic thought.83.2. Peters, Brady. ‘‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’’, Architectural Design,83.2, 2012.Print. 14. Schropfer, Thomas, Ecological Urban Architecture: Qualitative Approaches to Sustainability, Germany: Birkhauser Verlag GmbH, 2012. Print. 15. Steffen Reichert, 2013, “Responsive Surface Structure”. 1 August 2015. http://steffenreichert.com/04_surface.html 16. Terzidis, K. Algorithmic Architecture, Architectural press, 2006.Print. 17. The University of Stuttgart: Institute of Computational Design, 2015, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion2011”. 2 August 2015. http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553. 18. Young, B. Tubular Structures 8. Florida: Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, 2010. Print.
References ¦ 134 ¦ Studio Air
iMAGE References 1. Huffton and Crow, Vanke Pavilion, 2015, Photography, 1200 x 631 pixels, <http://us.archello.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/header_detail_large/Studio_LibeskindVanke_PavilionExpo_2015cHuftonC_19.jpg> [Accessed July 2015]. 2. Steffen Reichert, Computer generated form, Photograph, 600 x 600 pixels, <http://steffenreichert.com/images/surface/07.png> [Accessed July 2015]. 3. Steffen Reichert, Responsive Surface Model, Photograph, 900 x 60 pixels, <http://steffenreichert.com/images/surface/14.png> [Accessed July 2015]. 4. Achim Menges and Tobias Schwinn, Calcite plates in sand dollar, Photograph, “Manufacturing Reciprocities”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2, 2012, Print. Pp.122 5. Achim Menges and Tobias Schwinn, Encoding of Parametrics, Photograph, “Manufacturing Reciprocities”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2, 2012, Print. Pp.118 6. The University of Stuttgart, Research Pavilion, Photography, 700 x 1300 pixels, <https://www.competitionline.com/en/projects/46654/from/post/56119> 7. Esteban Ochogavia, Faisal Al Barazi, Rasheed Shallah, Non-linear Computational design, Digital Image, <http://www.algorithmicdesign.net/apomechanes/ moldy/moldy1.jpg> [July 2015]. 8. Pedro Pegenaute, Construction, Photograph, 1440x1440 pixels, <http:// res.cloudinary.com/divisare/image/upload/c_fit,w_1440/f_auto,q_80/v1/project_ images/1967717/2-28-014.jpg> [Accessed July 2015]. 9. Iñigo Bujedo, Zhen Zhonghai, Spanish Pavilion, Photograph, 1440 x 2100 pixels, <http://architizer.com/projects/spanish-pavilion-for-expo-shanghai-2010/ media/765617/> [July 2015]. 10. Iñigo Bujedo, Zhen Zhonghai, Spanish Pavilion opening evening, Photograph, 1700 x 900 pixels, <http://architizer.com/projects/spanish-pavilion-forexpo-shanghai-2010/media/765617/> [Accessed July 2015]. 11. IAAC Catalonia, Endesa Pavilion, Photograph, 823 x 1200 pixels, <http:// www.archilovers.com/projects/64999/gallery?467170 > [Accessed July 2015].
Image References ¦ 135 ¦ Studio Air
iMAGE References 12. IAAC Catalonia, Endesa Pavilion, Photograph, 1200 x 900 pixels, < http:// www.archilovers.com/projects/64999/gallery?1110892 > [Accessed July 2015]. 13. Evan Emery, Swarm[al] Morphology, Digital Image, <http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/swarm-al-morphology-04-swarm-variation/next?context=user> [Accessed July 2015]. 14. Evan Emery, Swarm[al] Morphology, Digital Image, < http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/swarm-al-morphology-04-swarm-logic> [Accessed July 2015]. 15. Evan Emery, Swarm[al] Morphology, Digital Image, < http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/swarm-al-morphology-04-swarm-variation?commentId=298 5220%3AComment%3A954390&xg_source=activity> [Accessed July 2015]. 16. Hao Wu, Cirriform Interactive Facade Proposal, 2011 Henry Art Gallery, Seattle, WS, Photograph, < https://www.pinterest.com/pin/157133474469033297/ > [Accessed July 2015] . 17. Andrew O Payne and Jason Kelly Johnson, Final full scale prototype, Photograph, “Firefly: Interactive prototypes for Architectural design”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2, 2012, Print. Pp.146 18. Radha L, Cirriform Interactive Façade, Photograph, < https://www.pinterest.com/pin/277393658268499369 > [Accessed July 2015] 19. Andrew O Payne and Jason Kelly Johnson, Final full scale prototype, Diagram, “Firefly: Interactive prototypes for Architectural design”, Architectural Design: Material Computation, 82.2, 2012, Print. Pp.146 20. Frederico Borrelo, Hyper Connected Network / Swarming Particles, Digital Image, 6600 x 5000 pixels, < https://federicoborello.files.wordpress. com/2013/02/swarming-single-system-white-22.png > [Accessed July 2015]. 21. Roland Snooks, Swarm Matter, Digital Image, 750 x600 pixels, < http:// payload2.cargocollective.com/1/2/68467/2359845/01.jpg > [Accessed July 2015]. 22. Peter Lee, It’s a dome after all, Photograph, 900 x 1200 pixels, < https:// www.flickr.com/photos/oldpatterns/5817264314 > [Accessed July 2015]. 23. Judson Terry, Voussoir cloud, Image, 1280 x 850 pixels , < http://www. archdaily.com.br/br/01-54024/voussoir-cloud-iwamotoscott-architecture-maisburo-happold >, [Accessed July 2015]. Image References ¦ 136 ¦ Studio Air
iMAGE References 24. Lisa Iwamoto, Voussoir Cloud, Photograph, 1200 x 1200 pixels, < http:// alvaraaltosymposium.fi/project/lisa-iwamoto/ > [Accessed July 2015]. 25. Iwamoto Scott, Diagram, 1280 x 500 pixels, < http://www.archdaily.com. br/br/01-54024/voussoir-cloud-iwamotoscott-architecture-buro-happold/voussoircloud_1307120366-isar-vc-install01 > [Accessed July 2015]. 26. Esben Skouboe Poulsen, Pictures from the Social Technology exhibition at Platform 4, Photograph, 3000 x 2000 pixels, < https://socialtechnologies2010. files.wordpress.com/2010/04/img_1108.jpg >, [Accessed July 2015]. 27. Unknown Author, Art615 Pavilion, Photograph, < http://40.media.tumblr. com/tumblr_m1ycxbFwlc1r6cinno7_r1_1280.jpg > [Accessed July 2015]. 28. Craig Scott, Voussoir Cloud, SCIArc Gallery, Photograph, 900 x 500 pixels, < http://www.iwamotoscott.com/following/iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD > [Accessed July 2015]. 29. Unknown Author, Art615, a pavilion by Aalborg University students, Photograph , < http://images.adsttc.com/media/images/55e6/b2c0/8450/ b545/5500/0ebc/medium_jpg/dsc_1496.jpg?1441182394 > [Accessed July 2015]. 30. Google Maps, CERES Environmental Park , Satellite image, < https:// www.google.com.au/maps/place/CERES+Community+Environment+Park/@37.765689,144.9806613,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x6ad6435e295bb43f:0 x41761fff9e6748c2 > [Accessed July 2015]. 31. CERES Environmental Park, Annual report, Image, < http://ceres.org.au/ > [Accessed July 2015].
Image References ¦ 137 ¦ Studio Air
aLGORITHMIC sKETCHBOOK
T
he following are algorithmic sketches conducted through the course as well as several sketches done outside of the class utilizing existing new definitions.
E
xperimentation with general grasshopper functions.
Algorithmic sketchbook ÂŚ 140 ÂŚ Studio Air
E
xperimentation with Kangaroo physics , manipulating mesh surfaces, anchor points and loads on springs. Various mesh surface (mesh sphere) were also experimented on
E
xperimentation with data tress and tree manipulation, some of the iterations were quite stunning an visually intricate.
Algorithmic sketchbook ÂŚ 141 ÂŚ Studio Air
E
xperimentation with image mapping using circle and mapping images onto curves.
Algorithmic sketchbook ¦ 143 ¦ Studio Air
E
xperimentation with Geo populations and Veroni meshes creating a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Veroni Ballâ&#x20AC;?
Algorithmic sketchbook ¦ 145 ¦ Studio Air
E
xperimentation with kangaroo and a pipe mesh.
Algorithmic sketchbook ¦ 147 ¦ Studio Air
E
xperimentation with force vectors. (Curtsey of DesignPlayground)
Algorithmic sketchbook ¦ 148 ¦ Studio Air
Surath Thenabadu The University of Melbourne Bachelor of Environments Studio Air S2, 2015 Tutor: Finnian warnock