DESIGN STUDIO AIR
TIMOTHY ALLAMBY STUDENT JOURNAL
STUDENT JOURNAL
TIM ALLAMBY (587964) ABPL30048: STUDIO AIR SEMESTER 1, 2015 THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE STUDIO 7, CHEN
CONTENTS
PART A
CONCEPTUALISATION
a.0 design futuring 6 a.1 design computation 8 a.2 composition/generative 12 a.3 conclusion 14 a.4 learning outcomes 14 a.5 appendix 15
PART B
CRITERIA DESIGN
b.1 research field b.2 case study 1.0 b.3 case study 2.0 b.4 technique development b.5 technique: prototypes b.6 technique: proposal b.7 learning objectives/outcomes b.8 appendix
PART C
DETAILED DESIGN
c.1 design concept c.2 c.3
FRONT COVER: 11 FRAC CENTRE, MARC FORNES, THEVERYMANY (02) NEXT PAGE - LAGA EXHIBITION HALL
02
A
part.
conceptualisation
CONCEPTUALISATION 5
A.0 Design Futuring SPACE KITCHEN - OSTANG PROJECT [2014]
FIG.3 MODULAR KITCHEN W/ GARDEN, COLLECTIF ETC.
FIG.4 DINING & COLABORATING, COLLECTIF ETC.
Created during an exhibition in Mathildenhohe gardens in Summer of 2014. Germany. This project was a students realisation of the issue of future community spaces, and a questionable future of the abandoned space. This project was more of a design and construction experience with each new day a new space, use or furniture created to compensate the kitchen space that was constantly growing over the 3 week period the festival was held. The theme behind the festival and inherently the kitchen structure was of “living together”. It looked at ideas of communial living, if it could work in todays society and what spaces were “needed” in a community. The Kitchen was one set of structures design and built by a team of students, and it would
work in conjunction with other spaces such as: a Main Hall, a Central Square, Information Tower, Workshop House & 3 cabins for dwelling. Where the kitchen and dining spaces were also connected to a vegetable garden. This project took ideas of addressing issues with future proofing and sustainability in an interesting and engaging way. By implementing and needing the community to build it/for it to work. It was just a temporary structure, made up of simple modules of 2.5 x 2.5 metres, to then be pulled down and used for other things (precycling). Though the aspect of creating a system that works together as a “living” environment with the communities input I find very interesting.
Osthang Project: Space Kitchen Architect: Collectif Etc. Location: Darmstadt, Germany (Mathildenhohe Gardens) Year: 2014
6
CONCEPTUALISATION
PRECEDENTS ARROW
FIG.5 ‘ARROW’ IN LANDSCAPE, PHTR
FIG.6 LATTICE WINDOW COVERING, PHTR
This project “ARROW” brings aware the idea of design and spatial thinking into small everday architecture. Designed as a gallery for a family in Victoria’s central suburbs this project rethinks what is possible for the backyard shed. PHTR Architects designed this alien looking structure in a wooded landscape when a Melbourne family needed a gallery space that was secure and affordable. Above all though it told a story and created a design that leads you to think differently. A large arrow is not the typical garden shed structure, but it suited the family’s needs meeting some extremely simple ideas. I see this project as an innovative way of thinking about a commonly generic object. It has shown that it is possible, and even simple to be foward thinking with a structure as simple and barrenly practical as a garden shed.
By pre-selecting the builder, Carbonlite design & Build. the 32 square meter space could adhere to a budget similar to an off-the-shelf garden shed. This straight foward piece of architecture adds to a residential home, where it is now not only used as a gallery space but a ‘lattern’. It lights up the backyard of where it resides as well as the wooded reserve in the distance. Tony Reed and the other architects involved have taken a step to change a building culture, that in Australia is settled in it’s times. Something as elementary as a garden shed in rural Victoria can be progressive in how it’s using building technologies that are common, yet in a site specfic and interesting way.
Project: Arrow Architect: PHTR Architects (Tony Reed) Location: Macedon Ranges, Victoria Year: 2014
CONCEPTUALISATION 7
A.1 Design Computation BRICKTOPIA [2013]
FIG.7 BRICKTOPIA INTERIOR, EME3 FESTIVAL
This project ‘Bricktopia’ uses an innovative way of thinking about designing by quite clearly and purposefully combining traditional and contemporary construction techniques1. A vaulted brick pavilion, which is not a new form of construction, is created by utilizing the compressional material properties of the bricks. This fluid shaped pavilion was achieved by designers Map 13, using digital tools to optimise the structure through it’s geometry.2 This design illustrates some of the ideas and benefits behind using computation tools. A traditional technique that has been used for thousands of years in the same way has now been given a whole new
context due to computational tools. It has allowed an organic and interesting form and essentially design come from a static technique. It breaks this idea of conventional applicatoin of a spanish style of construction using software in Rhinoceros, additional the plugin Rhinovault. This use of computational techniques is important to highlight as it not only shows possibilities but can inspire completely new techniques to be formed in the future.
1 Dezeen, Brick Pavilion 2 Dezeen
Project: Bricktopia Architect: Map 13 Location: Barcelona Year: 2013
8
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG.8 BRICKTOPIA CONSTRUCTION
PRECEDENTS EXHIBITION HALL
FIG.9
FIG.10
(LaGa Exhibition Hall) Meaning: Horticulture Show Designers: ICD, Institute for Computational Design, Prof A. Menges. ITKE, Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design, Prof J. Knippers. IIGS, Institute of Engineering Geodesy, Prof Volker Schweiger.
This Exhibition Hall used at a horticulture show in Germany is the first of it’s kind. The hall was created by a team of designers, engineers and structural specialists and has been optimised with digital tools through it’s geometty, similarily to ‘Bricktopia’ .
Project: Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall Architect/Desginers: ICD, Institute for Computational Design, Prof A. Menges. Location: Germany Year:
FIG.11
CONCEPTUALISATION 9
A.1 Design Computation REST HOLE [2012]
A simple rest area that was designed and built on the first floor of a university building. It was created as a place for relaxation and though it looks simple it is impressive in the features and technologies adapted to the space, that was once just a dark, ineffiecient space. The interior covers up the dark, “heavy” columns, and the timber panels create a more fluid feeling space that allows air and light to pass through it. The curved panels create a cave like space that isn’t imposing due to the materiality. Digital tools used for this project allowed for fast simple construction of panels and the fabrication. Architecture students were able to work with designing and building this space. As Fig.12 shows, with use of computational tools all the individual panels were able to flattened to a construction plan, once the design was made. This makes for efficient construction, due to the exactness of the plans and fabrication being completed directly from them. All the panels would be labelled and sent in the most efficient way to save time and money.
Curves are usually difficult to fabricate, but in this project as they were created using flat surfaces it quite easily becomes a possible design.
Project: Rest Hole Architect: UTAA & Architecture students Location: University of Seoul Year: 2012
FIG.12 PANELS LAID OUT IN PROGRAM
10
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG.13 SPACIOUS, FREE FLOWING REST HOLE
CONCEPTUALISATION 11
A.2 Composition/Generative HYGROSKIN - METEOROSENSITIVE PAVILION The Hygroskin - Meteorosensitive Pavilion by Achim Menges is climate responsive architecture. The pavilion uses biomorphic systems to try mimic the simplicity of such a system found in nature. As climate responsive architecture is normally laden with countless technical systems and many mechanical devices this response is a fresh perspective. In the evolving technologies of computation design, there is a distinction between compositional and generative techniques. And a compositional tool will help designers solve complex problems that they are looking for solutions for, such as materiality that opens or closes depending on the humidity of the environment it is in. Generational tools help with creating forms or designs that directly respond to issues and inputs to what is trying to be solved, like possibly the geometry of structures that respond to biomorphic systems. The openings of this pavilion open or close when the humidity changes within a range of 30% 90%, which can practically respond to outdoor climates. It is an experimental project that shows the possibilities of designing in response to an problem where the form follows that result. Project: Hygroskin - Meteorosensitive Pavilion Architect: Achim Menges Location: Year:
FIG.14 HYGROSKIN, ACHIM MENGES
12
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG.15 HYGROSKIN, ACHIM MENGES
PRECEDENTS NONLIN/LIN PAVILION - FRAC CENTRE “nonlin/lin pavilion� at the Frac Cenre in Orleans, France is a spacial experiement held by Marc Fornes and Design team Theverymany. This project was designed and created using the same computational tools as we will use in this studio. It used the 3D modelling software Rhinoceros, and plugins RhinoPython & Rhinocommon, to develop more complex scripting problems in the software. The designers created their own code for the design, and analysed the data with different components for form finding, form description and structural analysis. The idea of this project was to experiment with text based morphologies to then create linear composition from non linear data, an extremely complex issue that becomes an instant reality with generational techniques in the computational world. As already stated digital tools aid in fabrication and this project was fabricated with CNC machines that could drill, engrave and cut to exact specifications created by the computer. When constructed the experimental space becomes an impressive feat of design and construction that ignores humans in a strange way. It is neither a building nor an art installation yet it is structurally sound enough to hold its own weight with out assistance and hold people, being a scalable project. Project: nonlin/lin pavilion Architect: Marc Fornes Location: Orleans, France Year:
FIG.16 FRAC 11, MARC FORNES
CONCEPTUALISATION 13
A.3 Conclusion A.4 Learning Outcomes
A.3 CONCLUSION
A.4 LEARNING OUTCOMES
Most of the projects looked at in this journal so far are pavilions or installments that use the computational tools discussed have been experimental or developing ideas of using computational or generational tools. But by examining built projects as well and how they use digital tools it will create a more solid understanding in how designing can use both the functions at hand along with the knowledge about sustainable design and socially sustainable projects to create a space which has the theory of thinking about future designs in place behind it.
In this semester I have changed the way in which design can be thought about, and how these computational tools examined can play an important role in solving complex issues that have seemed impossible in the past. I hope to continue to explore innovative ways in designing with a more generative approach to design that responds to issues of a subject and working back to form from there. As well as improving algorithmic skills from where they already are to be competent in creating a project that can both be physically fabricated from the computer but also respond to some outside issues.
14
CONCEPTUALISATION
A.5 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketchbook
Some images taken from my algorithmic sketchbook, I created these forms when experimenting with different components of the grasshopper plugin for Rhinoceros.
CONCEPTUALISATION 15
PART A - References
References Collectif etc. http://raumlabor.net/osthang-project/ Arrow: http://www.phtr.com.au/projects/arrow/index.html http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/story/2325168/ arrow-design-at-the-pointy-end-of-architecture/ A.1 Computation BricktopiaDezeen, http://www.dezeen.com/2013/11/26/ bricktopia-vaulted-brick-pavilion-barcelona-map13/ “Rest Hole in the University of Seoul / UTAA” 24 Oct 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 20 Mar 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=440719> 11 Frac Centre, nonlin/lin pavilion, <http:// theverymany.com/constructs/10-frac-centre/>
16
CONCEPTUALISATION
Images 1. Frac Centre, Marc Forbes 2. The Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall, ICD/ITKE/ IIGS, University of Stuttgart, March 2015 3. Osthang Project-Space Kitchen, Collectif Etc., http:// www.collectifetc.com/realisation/osthang-project/ 4. ilbid. 5. PHTR Architects, Arrow - http://www.phtr.com.au/ projects/arrow/index.html 6. Houzz, PHTR Architects, -http://www.houzz.com/au/ photos/15442855/arrow-studio-modern-melbourne 7. Bricktopia, Map 13, Eme3 Festival, -http://www. uncubemagazine.com/blog/10098883 8.Ilbid 9. LaGa Exhibition Hall 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. http://openbuildings.com/buildings/hygroskinmeteorosensitive-pavilion-profile-45827/media 15.ilbid. 16. Frac Centre
CONCEPTUALISATION 17
18
CRITERIA DESIGN
FIG.1 AWHC / MINIFIE NIXON
B
part.
criteria design
CRITERIA DESIGN
19
B.1 Research Field Material System: Geometry
FIG.2 NORTH GATE / SOFTLAB
Geometry will be the research field explored in part B of the project. This will involve focusing on a technique that can be explored in grasshopper. Geometry covers techniques that include ruled surfaces, parabaloids, minimal surfaces, geodesics, relaxation & general form finding and booleans. By studying precendents such as these 2 examples; North Gate and Canton tower, I will examine how the techniques can be used and what possibilities and constraints they hold. With the many different techniques geometry covers there are different ways to realise designs, to fabricate them and ways they can be used, examining these precedents will help understanding this.
Project: North Gate Architect: SOFTlab. Location: NYC. San Gennaro Festival Year: 2011
20
CRITERIA DESIGN
SOFTlab created an interesting outdoor space, North Gate in San Gennaro, using algorithms. The geometry is made up of 2 opposing torusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; that intersect, the entire surface is also perforated with the pattern changing depending of the extremeity of the curve [1]. The form created with a minimal surface, which is something that uses mathematics to achieve the smallest surface area possible. It has then been fabricated with thousands of Mylar plastic panels that can be fabricated quite simply. This type of fabrication I find interesting as it works simply and can be erected relatively simply to create a prominent, impressive design feature. On our site in the Merri creek this technique could be adapted and suspended between trees or structures.
FIG.3 CANTON TOWER/IBA ARCHITECTS
Canton Tower, a complex, curvy skyscraper has been achieved by use of computational analysis of materials and geometry to make this â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;puzzleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of a struture possible and fabricatable. This 600 metre tall building in Guangahou, China was the result of striving to create a skyscraper that was different to the usual, straight, rectangular and repetitive buildings. The building was designed with 2 ellipses, 1 at the bottom and 1 at the top, that by rotating them gives a tightening effect that becomes denser in the middle [2]. This lattice like structure was put under many tests of algorithms and computational analysis to evaluate the integrtiy of the design. Being a unique structure, these tests were even
more crucial in the construction of the project. The software and techniques used in this sort of analysis are constantly improving, and with more complex designs that break away from set procedures the more it will be needed. This use of physical testing as a technique could become useful in our project, helping to make it more realised. Throughout Part B I will continue to study precedents that use geometry and in particular techniques of minimal surfaces and geodesics. By creating iterations of the designs with the techniques that are used you are then able to find how far they can be pushed from that original form, using those similar techniques.
Project: Canton Tower Architect: IBA Architects Location: China Year: 2010
CRITERIA DESIGN
21
B.2 Case Study 1.0
The precedent to be used for case study 1.0 is Matsys Design’s “SG2012 Gridshell”, a timber frame structure created from geodesic curves and parabolic functions. The project is overall a simple one that was a 4 day workshop designed and built by the same team in New York [3]. This project uses simple techniques to create a dramatic effect, and the result of sticking to these simple techniques is something that can be fabricated (fig.6). Another aspect of this installation I found interesting was the low cost of build and minimal waste of materials. This aspect could be vital for later on in my project, as phyiscally representing an idea created in virtual space is essential in strengthening that concept. As Peter Brady’s arcticle about computational design at Herzog de Meuron describes, a physical model is vital in how architecture or a component of architecture can be constructed [4]. It is easy with the availability of computational tools to develop arbitrary geometries that have fabrication in mind, this can be extremely inefficient. By designing in conjunction with a digital workshop, the design will not only be buildable, but meaningfully buildable, buildable in a way that does not explode costs [5]. The final product will also be more integrated to the architectural idea.
This way of designing is similar to what the team at Matsys Design used. The techniques used meant the components could be easily laid out and fabricated (fig.4), and even precise allocation of connection points manufactured all through effective use of digital tools (fig.5). The project uses similar techniques that can be found in the grasshopper plugin, and so can be easily recreated. The use of point allocation functions to manifest geodesic curves around a geometry is the main idea behind it. The grasshopper definition I have studied uses rail curves to define the space and size with grasshopper to create the pattern using curves and points. The purpose of the matrix on the following page is to explore how far this definition can be pushed, and what possibilites this project can produce. An endless number of outcomes can be produced by changing the base geometry of the project, each time possibly giving a whole new concept to the result. By altering the algorithm exciting results have also been achieved, that completely move away from a simple demonstration of the technique being used.
Project: SG2012 Gridshell Architect: Matsys Design Location: New York Year: 2012
FIG.4 2D LATH LAYOUT
22
CRITERIA DESIGN
FIG.5 LATH DETAIL
SG2012 GRIDSHELL
FIG.6 SG2012 GRIDHELL /MATSYS DESIGN
‘the design is not only buildable, but meaningfully buildable, buildable in a way that does not explode costs’
CRITERIA DESIGN
23
B.2 Case Study 1.0 1
2
3
4
NO. OF CURVES
REDUCE CURVES
INCREASE CURVES
REDUCE ‘SHIFT’ OF CURVES
A
BASE GEOMETRY [35]
[15]
[100]
[-1/1]
[100]
[-1/1]
B
CIRCLE [35]
[15]
C
SQUARE
[35]
[15]
[100]
D
TOWER
[35]
24
CRITERIA DESIGN
[15]
[100]
[-1/1]
MATRIX: SPECIES // ITERATIONS 5 INCREASE ‘SHIFT’ OF CURVES
6
ONE SET OF CURVES SHIFT: [8] POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.2-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.1-1.0
7
SHIFT: [2/11] 2 SETS OF CURVES POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.08-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.1-1.0
SHIFT: [2/16]
8
POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.0-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.15-0.85 INVERSE
[-3/15]
[-5/18]
CRITERIA DESIGN
25
B.2 Case Study 1.0
B.5 - A highly repetitive form that uses a mathematical geometry of a circle would normally be a boring idea. Though this iteration uses the dynamic nature of the algorithm to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;shiftâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the points in the model to make a form that seems progressive and changing. The use of repeating the same geodesic curves would also mean easy construction, and possible with flat pieces. This model could be used at a smaller scale for a seat or bench, with the density of curves changing of the structure.
26
CRITERIA DESIGN
A.3 - This iteration has been created with a simple addition of the number of curves used. The form has remained the same to the original design yet by changing the number of members used the structure becomes more refined and appears more like a surface. Though it is still made up of singular lines.
SELECTION CRITERIA: 4 ITERATIONS
C.8 -
D.6 -
CRITERIA DESIGN
27
B.3 Case Study 2.0
The Australian Wildlife Health Centre (AWHC) will be looked at in Case Study 2.0. The centre was designed by Minifie Nixon in 2006, located in Healesville Victoria[6]. The form and function of this building is extremely unique and the main geometric space in the central room is a magical space, known as a costa surface. This sophisticated tensile surface is what I will be examining in case study 2.0. The surface that is the roof, ceiling and interior of the space all in one works with the entire concept of the building. It creates an organic and scientfic wonder that makes people feel like they are simulatenously outside as they do inside[7]. The design by Minifie Nixon Architects has been succesful I believe in creating a space for visitors and veterinarians to feel comfortable to converse and
28
CRITERIA DESIGN
exchange knowledge about the patients at this animal hospital[8]. The organically shaped roof structure, known in mathematics as a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;costa surfaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; uses interesting parametric techniques to create a double curving surface[9]. The feeling inside this geometry would feel very interactive and would make people question what the form is doing. The visitors would also be wondering whether they are inside or outside, an interesting element of the design that intrigues me. And with smart use of geometry could be replicated using the grasshopper plugin. At the time this building was designed and constructed the design techniques used by Minifie Nixon were not new ideas but the computational tools were simple and something being developed [10].
Australian Wildlife Health Centre (AWHC)
FIG.7: AWHC, GEOMETRY OF CENTRAL SPACE FROM THE OUTSIDE
Though now with computational tools constantly expanding the techniques used to design this are more available. This central geometry could’ve been produced in a software similar to grasshopper using components such as ‘kangaroo physics’ that puts physical forces on elements of a design, which can optimize a surface or structure such as a ‘costa surface’.
The main gallery has been created from minimal surfaces technique, which can be replicated with ‘kangaroo’. To reverse engineer this project I will examine the overall form from plans to generate a mesh that mimic the basic shape. A relaxation of that surface mesh will result in a geometry that gives the same effect. The technique will then be explored further and developed.
“the surface is the roof, ceiling and interior of the space all in one. It creates a scientifc yet organic wonder.” Project: Australian Wildlife Health Centre Architect: Minifie Nixon Location: Healesville, Victoria Year: 2006 CRITERIA DESIGN
29
B.3 Case Study 2.0
FIG.8: AWHC SECTION
Reverse Engineering this project was achieved by examining the schematic and architectural drawings from the building and realising that geometry in a basic shape. This shape was then created in Rhinoceros & Grasshopper using polysurfaces.
FIG.9: AWHC PLAN
Creating a cylinder by lofting a circle that can be adjusted with height and radius parameters, this will make definition flexible.
1>
Move next set of curves and loft to create the top â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;funnelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Surface split 1st surface with cylinders.
3>
2>
4>
Circular surface intersected with curves will create the first ceiling in the geometry. 3 circles placed evenly around central funnel.
30
FIG.10: SKETCH OF FORM
CRITERIA DESIGN
Move 1st surface to height of cylinders to create top of the geometry. Surface split function to be used again.
A.W.H.C / REVERSE ENGINEER
FIG.5 CRITERIA DESIGN
31
Diagram & Final Result POINT
SCALE - SURFACE
SURFACE SPLIT
CIRCLE MOVE LOFT
6 POLYSURFACES > BREP MESH TRIANGULATE > WELD
32
CRITERIA DESIGN
KANGAROO RELAX MESH
REVERSE ENGINEER
CRITERIA DESIGN
33
B.4 Technique Development 1
2
3
4
5
A Mesh in Rhino Relaxed Weaverbird triangulation
B Mesh in Rhino Surface Relaxed/ Exoskeleton
Using Quadme matching up th UV surfaces of different geom another way of the mesh 1-2 moving the curves
C Quad mesh made from UV surfaces
D Mesh Relaxed - adjusting uniary force
E Adjusting Force Objects &Anchor Points
A:E/SPECIES 1:10/ITERATIONS 34
CRITERIA DESIGN
MATRIX: SPECIES//ITERATIONS 6
7
8
9
10
esh file he f the metries is f creating
e input
CRITERIA DESIGN
35
Selection Criteria - Successful Iterations
Mesh Subdivision - Weaverbird, creating quad surfaces. The mesh in this iteration has been evaluated to create quad surfaces. To construct a mesh structure such as this would most likely be inefficient though the pattern created is interesting and dynamic even though all division have the same number of edges.
In and out qualities of the form
36
CRITERIA DESIGN
Polysurfaces remade - with UV meshes that are joined together. This simplifies the complex geometry to mesh it relatively smoothly. This iteration was developed by originally adjusting the input curves of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Species Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.
Interactive and at a scale that makes people wonder.
CRITERIA DESIGN
37
B.6 Proposal Interactive Lookout Multiple schools in the area , high activity in the area USERS: walkers, school children, families Interactive space Lookout to aspects of site
38
CRITERIA DESIGN
pre-school
high school
primary school
CRITERIA DESIGN
39
B.6 Proposal
40
CRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
41
B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes
Merri Creek - WHere to now Overview 70 km long in Melbourne’s Northern suburbs Runs from Wallan to Yarra River (Dights falls) Was the site of heavy industrial use - ecosystem is highly damaged from waste and rubbish in area. Hosts some of the most threatened ecosystems in Australia. Storm water runoff is an understated problem for the ecosystem of the area and particularily Merri Creek area.
Critique of first proposal, where I could go from here: Re-think the site, somewhere that works better with the design agenda It’s not in place to maximise the potential Work on the idea of the in and out geometry that causes the people to ‘wonder’ What happens when it rains? will they get wet? or will the form make it sheltered even though they can look out?
Reasons for looking at site in first proposal: Users - the users of this first site could’ve been children from the local area/ the nearby schools, though the ‘lookout’ aspect was not optimised as theres not much to lookout to.
Interactive for children of the site (near the schools), in how they might want to touch and run around it.
FIG.5
42
CRITERIA DESIGN
FIG.5
Learning objectives Learning Objectives of the subject -
CRITERIA DESIGN
43
B.8 Appendix: Algorithmic Sketchbook Images of : Gridshell Experimentation - tower looking Kangaroo (AWHC & Exoskeleton style) Greenvoid - SOftlab grasshopper experimentation
44
CRITERIA DESIGN
CRITERIA DESIGN
45
Part B - References North Gate[1] Design Playgrounds. “San Gennaro North Gate by SOFTlab”, 2015. http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/sangennaro-north-gate-by-softlab/ Canton Tower [2] Archdaily. “Canton Tower / IBA Architects”. http://www.archdaily.com/89849/canton-tower-information-basedarchitecture/ SG2012[3] MATSYS Design. “SG2012 Gridshell”, 2012. http://matsysdesign.com/2012/04/13/sg2012-gridshell/ Smart Geometry. “sg2012 material intensities”, 2013. http://smartgeometry.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=a rticle&id=134:gridshell-digital-tectonics&catid=44 [4,5] Peters, Brady. “Realising the Architectural Idea” AD, (2013), pg 56-61 AWHC Minifie Nixon Pty Ltd. 2013. “Australian Institute of Architects / http://dynamic. architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20063001 Jackson, Davina. Next Wave/New Australian Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007. Print. [10] Monash University Museum of Art, “Pavilions for New Architecture”. MUMA:2005. Print. [pg 32] Proposal-
46
CRITERIA DESIGN
Images Fig 1. - AWHC - http://www.archello.com/en/project/australian-wildlife-health-centre/image-3 Fig.2 - North Gate - Archinect. “Softlab”. 2015. http://archinect.com/softlab/project/san-gennaro-north-gate Fig.3 - Canton Tower, IBA Architects, www.iba-bv.com Fig.4 - 2D Lath Layout, SG2012Gridshell, Fig.5Fig.6Fig.7- AWHC - HTTP://ARCHITECTUREAU.COM/ARTICLES/AUSTRALIAN-WILDLIFE-HEALTH-CENTRE Fig. 8- AWHC Section Fig.9- AWHC Plan Fig.10- AWHC Sketch of form ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES -
CRITERIA DESIGN
47
48
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C
part.
detailed design
“architecture can be structure and ornament at the same time.” PROJECT PROPOSAL
49
50
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.1 Design Concept C.1.1 - Form Finding / Spacial Qualities of Form C.1.2 - Form Finding Precedents C.1.3 - Natural Ideas - Gaudi / Otto C.1.4 - CERES Site of Interest C.1.5 - Water Management System
PROJECT PROPOSAL
51
Form Finding Precedents Looking at precedents that use computational tools to and physics tools in particular (kangaroo) showed me the types of forms that can be created, and the range of qualities and experiences they can create due to differences in, scale, material, application of software & design. Here are some of the major ones I looked at:
MATSYS - Shellstar Pavilion This pavilion by MATSYS design team uses a basic mesh that has been formed into an interesting/compelling geometry through the use of kangaroo physics, in the grasshopper plugin. The geometry is self-organised into the catenerary like structures, similarily developed by Antonio Gaudi and Frei Otto.
Marc Fornes - Chrysalis
This is another outdoor pavilion that uses structural form finding techniques to establish the geometry. This is an even more complex geomety at a glance, though from the use of and development of computational tools the possiblilties of fabrication are evident.
52
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Ernesto Neto - Installation experiences scale/proportion senses sinuous forms doesnt use computation, rather an art project, these are the qualities that would be good to try and achieve.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
53
Reminder of Precedents that influnce form
Northgate - SoftLAB
Greenvoid LAVA
Tape Numen
54
PROJECT PROPOSAL
AWHC
Frei Otto / Gaudi - Influences on Form and Techniques Frei Otto, Bodo Rasch: Finding Form Minimal surfaces that are developed with todays computational tools are essential the same architecture as discusses before these ease of computational tools came about, by architects such as; Frei Otto. Frei Otto then even used ideas developed by Gaudi. It is going back to a primitive idea of architecture, where nothing is used to excess, and combining it with new tools that mean architecture can be structure and ornament combined. Self Forming Processes that are used in architecture, are using natural processes. So these artifical objects even as seen with precedents such as green-void, have natural components.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
55
Merri Creek
CERES Environmental Park Area of Interest
56
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
57
CERES
COMMUNAL GARDENS
LEARNING CENTRE
CERES SITE MAP
58
PROJECT PROPOSAL
A
B
C
C
Dam
Communial Gardens
A B AREA OF INTEREST
PROPOSED SITE MAP
Learning Centre PROJECT PROPOSAL
59
Siting the Project The site of CERES, the community environmental park was chosen as the new location for the project. This site has more clear objectives that are trying to be achieved, and the use of such a site is under-used
CERES Agenda - Set of Objectives
Design Agenda
CERES Mission Address the causes of climate change, Promote social wellbeing and connectedness, Build local and global equity, and Embrace and facilitate rapid change
Community Based Water Interactive - touch, sound, smell, Wonder of water, spaces Flowing of in and out spaces Education - learning
Water Management
Flow of Spaces
Proposed Site
60
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Community Based
Water Management System
PROJECT PROPOSAL
61
62
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
63
64
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.2 Tectonic Elements & Prototypes C.2.1 - Material System Precedents C.2.2 - Prototype 1 Realising Technique C.2.3 - Prototype 2 Developing Technique C.2.4 - Prototype 3 Pushing Technique
PROJECT PROPOSAL
65
Technique: Cable Ties / ZIP studio 400 A project by a group of architecture students in School: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Course: Studio 400 Year: 2013 Futures Plus. “Zip - Studio400”, 2013, http:// futuresplus.net/2013/02/14/zip-tie-studio400/
FIG.X:
66
PROJECT PROPOSAL
FIG.X:
ZIP
ZIP
PROJECT PROPOSAL
67
Technique: Cable Ties / Massimal D.O.T.S. Design Office Takebayashi Scroggin Zip Tie Massimal - 2011 Using a template to tie the zip ties. Behind the fabrication process: How will it be suspended? Use a support diagram The mesh elevations Unroll the templates in different sections Diagram of how those different sections (components) are arranged in physical space.
68
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
69
70
PROJECT PROPOSAL
This was the first prototype created in using the technique of cable ties fabricated into a surface
prototype1_realising the technique PROJECT PROPOSAL
71
Prototype 2 _Developing the Technique
72
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Prototype 2 looked out testing whether what was found in prototype 1 could be applied to a complex geometry such is this. This would inficate whether the in and out qualities could be achieved with the technique of cable ties.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
73
14.0
10
.0
11.0
3.0
9.0
2.0
30.0 13.0
7.0
22.0 12.0
8.0
1.0
21.0
20.0
0.0 17 23
6.0
.0 .0
16.0
19.0
37.0 18.0
25
.0
41.0
32.0
39.0
.0 42
40.0
36.0
27
.0
2 4.
33.0
0
43
26
.0
.0 29.0
38
5.0
74
28.0
31 .0
35.0
PROJECT PROPOSAL
.0 15.0
.0 34
4.0
PROJECT PROPOSAL
75
76
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
77
prototype3_testing materiality Prototype 3 was testing a way to make the cable tie surface functional in relation to the design concept. From the design concept: The structure can be used as a shelter for users on site, and a practical water diversion/management system. The aim was to find a waterproof membrane that would cover the areas of the surface used for water collection/diversion. And do this in a nonobtrusive way.
78
PROJECT PROPOSAL
We took multiple plastic based materials under consideration for this element. Settling on the idea to prototype transparent tabletone / vinyl, which would be cut based on the strip templates that made the overal geometry. By soldering these strips together a layer of plastic that represented the form was created. Downfalls to address: Attachment of plastic membrane to the cable tie structure. Too seperate from the geometry - taking away sinous qualities. A slow process to solder the individual strips
PROJECT PROPOSAL
79
80
PROJECT PROPOSAL
C.3 Final Model
C.3.1 Matrix of form development C.3.2 Storyboard of form development C.3.3 Image of Final Rhino Model C.3.4 Cable Tie Refinement C.3.5 Construction - Digital to Physical Final model for presentation User friendly construction instruction/pamplet
PROJECT PROPOSAL
81
Form Development Matrix
A
B
C
D
A - Experimenting with geometry of plane B - Fiinding qualities that enclose the space for users C - Adjusting Plane & Up/Down spouts D - Finding a form that is site specific
82
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
83
Story Board of Form Development
Qualities that enclose the space for scale and making the object one pe 2 funnels up for views out, the rest
Creating a plane that attached to multiple points and spreads over site - more horizontailty and surface area for water collection
Adjusting the plane so itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s more dynamic and connected with the site Only one plane can take away from complex form
84
PROJECT PROPOSAL
r users - playing with a sense of eople will want to interact with down for water drippingg
Adjusting of spouts position and direction makes it more site specfic Addresses the idea of directing storm water on the site.
A Balanced geometry that is large enough for a shelter, is site specific, funnels come down engaging users, and has a complex intersection of form/funnles in the centre. PROJECT PROPOSAL
85
Rain Water
Illustration of Design in context of site
Naturally filtered runoff
86
PROJECT PROPOSAL
The site is currently used mainly by school groups, the design would also act as a pavilion where teachers incorporate water management strategies into the space the are present.
The shelter would direct rain to the areas directly below the funnels. With an improvement of planting at these locations the water can be naturally filtered into the dam, thus improving the mud and quality of site for users.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
87
_Cable Ties _large cable ties make surface of mesh _small cable ties for connections cable ties are a easily avalaible material and will always be manufactured - meaning our design doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need any fabrication of material to achieve the form The amount of cable ties can be calculated accurately from the use of grasshopper _1430 large cables _1680 connection cable ties the only other thing needed is a printer, scissors + tape _the fabrication can still be optimised further and made more user friendly
88
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Iterations of Model based on the Cable Ties needed (Data obtained from grasshopper)
Iteration 1 - Maximum Complexity Size - 13.2m x 10.3m Mesh type - Quads subdivided into triangles
Cable ties (cells) - 4840 Cable ties (connectors) - 14,520 Min. Cable tie length - 312.5 mm Max. Cable tie length - 609.8 mm
Iteration 1 - Balanced Complexity Size - 3.9m x 3.0m Mesh type - Largest quads subdivided into triangles
Cable ties (cells) - 2746 Cable ties (connectors) - 4948 Min. Cable tie length - 87.0 mm Max. Cable tie length - 279.9 mm
Iteration 1 - Minimal Complexity Size - 3.9m x 3.0 m Mesh type - Quads
Cable ties (cells) - 1210 Cable ties (connectors) - 2748 Min. Cable tie length - 280.0 mm Max. Cable tie length - 1132.4 mm PROJECT PROPOSAL
89
90
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Images of Final Physical Model PROJECT PROPOSAL
91
0 3.
1. 0
3.0 1.0
0 8.
0.0
0.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
7.0 2. 0
7.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
9.0
Rhino Model - Exploded to Components (A-K) for clear construction
5.0
13.0
11
10.0
.0
8.0
9.0
7.0
11
5.0
6.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
0 4.
7.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
2.0
.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
8 4.0
6.0
7.0
4.0
8.0
4.0
5.0
3.0
2.0
.0
1.0
7.0
5.0
4.0
0.0
9.0
8.0
4
2
5
7
6
0.0
3.0 1.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
0.0
11.0
7.0
6.0
1.0
3
1
3.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
2.0 0.0
11
5.0
7.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
6.0 8
0.0
5.0
5.0
6
2.0
2.0
3.0
1.0
6.0 0.0
3
4
12.0
9.0
6
5
10.0
14.0
13.0
1.0
15.0
12.0
11
.0
10.0
8.0
9.0 9.
2
8.0
7.0
11
5.0
6.0
.0
7.0
1.0 3.0
4.0
2.0
5.0
3.0
0 4.
5.0
1.0
0.0
2.0 0.0
1.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
2
4
8
6.0
4.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
3.0
3.
2.00
2.0
1. 0
9.0
8.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
9.0
0
9.0
0.0
6.0
9.0
4.0
5.0
5.0
0
3.
7.0 9.0
9.
0
0
6.0 7.07.0 8.0
8.0
3.
8
4.0
6.0
0 5.
4.0
6.0
1. 0
1.0
1.0
2.0
0.0
1. 0
7.0
1.0
6.0
5.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
0 4.
4.0
.0
4
9.0
7.0 2. 0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2
0
7.0
8.0
4.0
6.
6.0
5.0
2.0
7.0
5.0
6.0 7.0
9.0
8.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
9 .0
8.0
9.0
9.0
0 8.
84 DETAILED DESIGN 0.0 2.0
5.0
4.0
0
PROJECT PROPOSAL .0 5 .0
6.0
0 8.
2.0
3.
5.0
3.0
3.0
9.0
8.0 7.0
7.0
9.0
4.0
3.0 1.0
0.0 4.0
3.0
1.0
0.0
10.0
6.0
6.0
2.0
2.0
8.0 7.0
11.0
.0
5.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
5.0
15.0
4.0
8.0 9.0
8.0
0.0
11
7.0
I
4.0
2.0
9.0
7.0 6.0
5.0
9.0
12.0
4.0
3.0
3.0
1.0
3.0
6.0
13.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
4.0
5.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
9.0
5.0
10.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
9.0
8.0 7.0
6.0
0.0
11..00
8.0
7.0 6.0
14.0
3.
12.0
5.0
1.0
1.0
5.0
.0 10
6.0
5.0 9.0
3.0
8.0
47.0 6
5 2.0
1.0
8.0
8.0
9 .0
1. 0
6.0
.0 10
2
H
0.0
3.0
2.0
7.0
4
1.0
77.0.0
5.0
0 8.
2. 0
3
1.0 0.0
0.0
1.0
4.0
6
0 5.
5
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
9.0
6.0
1.0
0.0
0
4
7
2
0.0
0.0
6.
8.0
1
0.0
5.0
7.0
2.0 3
0.0
0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0 12.0
4.0
9.0
10.0
3.
2.0
1.0
0.0 3.0
1.0
6
5
4.0
7.0
5.0
4.0
3
7.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
5
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
7
0.0
4
8
0 3.
4.0
5.0
0.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
7.0 6.0
8.0
9 .0
7.0
4.0
.0
4.0
3
1
7
10 .0
0.0
.0 10
1. 0
6.0
11
11.0
9.0
7.0
9.0
7
6
3.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
2.0
8.0
8.0
2
5
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
1.0
0.0
92
3.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
5.0
4
4.0
2.0
4.0
3
7.0
9.0
6.0
1
4.0
7
3.0
5.0
7.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
2
2.0
1.0
7.0
4.0
0.0
.0
3.0
2.0
9.0
6.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
0.0
0.0
0 8.
5.0
10 .0
2.0
9.0
3.0
6.0
1.0
0.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
8.0
1.0
11
10.0
0.0
A
0.0
2. 0
10 .0
12.0
9.0
6
5
9.0
2
4
8.0
7
3
1.0
11.0
2.0
3.0
5.0
0 3.
4.0 0
4.0
6.
7.0
0
7.0
0.0
0.0
0 5.
1. 0
9.0
3.
0 5.
6.0
3.0
10 .0
2.0
9.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
1.0
8.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
6.0
0.0
B
9.0
8.0
8.0
7.0 6.0
1.0
5.0
7.0
2.0
3.0
2.0
4.0
0
3.0
1.0
3.0
0
0 4.
10.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
6.
5.0
1. 0
12.0
9.0
6
5
5.0
4.0 0
2.0
2
4
3.
6.0
7
3
1.0
1.0
0.0
7
6
2.0
2
5
7.0
4
8.0
3
1
7.0
6.0
12.0
6.0
6.0
1. 0
14.0
1.0
1.0
5.0
2.0
3.0
9.
4.0
2.0
3.0
6.0
8.0
0.0
7.0
4.0
7.0
L
8.0
8.0
8.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
9 .0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
K 15.0
4.0
.0 10
10 .0
9.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
8.0
C
11.0
2. 0
0 8.
0.0
5.0
7.0
0.0
8.0
9.0
.0
1.0
14.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
6
9.0
7.0
5.0
12.0
3.0
2.0
2.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
6.0
1.0
1.0
5.0
4.0
8.0
4.0
7.0
.0
10.0
8.0
9.0
7.0
0.0
8
11
12.0
6.0
7
7.0
13.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
1.0
5.0
6.0
6.0
0.0
0 5.
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
0 4.
14.0
0.0
5
10 .0
4
.0
9 .0
0.0 0.0
5.0
6
11
.0 10
2.0
7.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
6.0 10 .0
5
3
3.0
2.0
1.0
D
4
10.0
1.0
8.0
7.0
9.0
6.0
4
2
5
6
7
0.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
0.0
3
1
8.0
2
0.0
4
4.0
E
10.0 5.0
0.0
9.0
6
5
2.0
12.0
8
7
3
1.0
3.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
1.0
6.0 10 .0
9.0
7.0
8.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
2.0
.0
1.0 1.0
3.0
2.0
5.0
4.0
0.0
0.0
11
8.0
7.0
9.0
6.0
0.0
6.0
4.0
5.0
7.0
7.0
5.0
4.0
6.0
11 2.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
1.0
8.0
0.0
0 3.
3.0
1.0
8 4.0
3.
0
5.0
6.0
8 4.0
4.0
7.0
7.0
8.0
8.0
9.0
4.0
5.0
8.0
5.0
4.0
2.0
3.0
1.0
6.0
7.0
3.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
6.0 7.0
9.0
8.0
5.0 0 DETAILED DESIGN 0 85 6. 8.0 9.
7.0
2.0
3.0
0 4. 4.0
7.0
6.0
8.0
5.0
4.0 0
9.0
2.0
0.0
1.0
1.0
3.
10.0
15.0
2.0
.0
3.0 1.0
11
.0 10
9 .0
8.0
4.0
7.0
2.0
3.0
1.0
6.0
11.0
PROJECT PROPOSAL 0
93
12.0
5.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
0
9.0
5.0
0.0
9.
9.0
8.0
3.0
7.0
4.0
2.0
11.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
G
4.0 2.0
1.0
0 65.0.
6.0
5.0
9 .0
4.0
9.0 12.0 8.0
.0 10
1. 0
3.0
0 5.
0.0
3.0
5.0
4.0 0
2.0
6.0
0.0
0
7.0
4.0 5.0
4.0
1.0
2.0
0.0
3.0
3.
0 4.
0.0
0.0
3.
2. 0
2.0
1. 0
9.0
7.0
9.0
0 8.
J
0 8.
4.0
6.0
5.0
1.0 1.0
2.0
7.0 5.0
6.0
9.0
0.0
6.0
7.0
7.0
5.0 7
6
5
8.0
4
9.0
3
10.0
3.0
.0
2.0
11
1.0
8.0
1. 0
11.0
12.0
0.0
0.0
14.0
13.0
12.0
11
.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
0.0
0
9.0
8.0
0.0
0.0
9.
10.0
6.0
5.0
2.0
2. 0
9.0
8.0
6.0
0 3.
4.0
1. 0
2.0
0.0
3.0
7.0
2
3.0
11.0
8.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
6.0
4.0
6.0
1.0
1.0
0 5.
6
7.0
6.0
4.0
7.0
0.0 3.0
1.0
0.0
9.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
8
4.0
1.0 2
5
9.0
80 6..0
9 .0
0.0
2.0
3.0
4
7
2.0
6.0
.0 10
3.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
4.0
0 4.
3.0 3
1. 0
8.0
7.0
5.0
7.0
5.0
2.0 0.0
6.0
2.0
1
0.0 4.0
7.0
1.0
5.0
4.0
0
5.0
4.0
9.0
0.0 0.0
5.0
8.0 7.0
6.0
6.0
5.0
7.0
1.0
3.
6.0
3.0
4.0
2.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
3.0
0.0
0.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
2.0
1.0 2.0
1.0
0.0
9.0
0 8.
0.0 0.0
9.0
6.0
2. 0
8.0
7.0 6.0
.0
8.0
7.0
F
10 .0
5.0
5.0
11
3.0
2.0
8.0
2.0
1.0
9.0
3.0
2.0
11.0
9.0
8.0
1.0
7.0
9.0
10.0
0.0
6.0
5.0
8.0
1.0
0.0
12.0
9.0
6
5
1.0
2
4
2.0
7
3
3.0
12.0
10.0
0.0
9.0
6
5
5.0
0.0
4
3.0
2
3
0.0
4.0
5.0
7
1.0
1.0
7.0
6.0
1.0
7
6
7.0
2
5
10.0
0.0 0.0
0.0
4
9.0
8.0
.0
1.0 3
9.0
5.0
2.0
7
6
4.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
0 8.
2.05
1. 0
2
1
4
11
2.0
6.0
3
0.0
1
7.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
8.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
7.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
4.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
9 .0
7.0
.0
0.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
6.0
10 .0
9.0
8.0
1.0 3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
3.0
.0 10
13.0
12.0
11
.0
.0 10
9 .0 9.0
10.0
0
9.0
3
1
9.0
0.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
0 4.
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
9.
8.0
0
9.0
8.0
9.
8.0
15.0
7.0
8.0
11.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
0.0
0 M 6.
7.0
7
3.0
5.0
4.0 0
2
2.0
1. 0
3.
4.0
2
1.0
0.0
2.0
11.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
15.0
9.0
7.0
5.0
11.0
11
0.0
Step 01 - Cut out paper template, which is used to create one strip of a component
Step 04 - Use short cable ties for connections between the already made cable ties 94
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Step 02 - Use large cable ties to fit the template cells
Step 05 - A connection cable ties will be placed at every circle that indicates it on the template
Step 03 - Cut off excess tie, and tape cable tie to template until all cells have a matched cable tie.
Step 06 - With multiple completed strips they can be matched up and connected together to the desired form. PROJECT PROPOSAL
95
96
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Once establishing the desired form and qualities of the design it was time to take what has been learnt from the development of the technique from experimenting in grasshopper and especially prototype #2. The complex geometry as shown was split into individual components to then be reconnected at a later stage. These components were selected to ease in the construction process and eliminate confusion of strips locations experienced in prototype #2. Each component could be logical connected with a numerical order (eg. 0 11) of 12 strips for component A and so on. These individual strips oculd be completely seperated from the model and fabricated as an indivudual object, though to ensure all the strips would connect accurately and the cable ties would match up they were completed in the vicinicty of the other strips.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
97
COMMUNITY BASED DESIGN From the Design Agenda of CERES For this design to be a community based project, and one that interacts with the users and community as a whole, this simple construction process can be made clearer and more user friendly so that it follows a simple set of instructions and anyone can construct a highly complex form. Where someone with no compuational knowledge or experience with Rhino could make it. This page shows an example of possible user friendly instructions - made easy to follow
4
1
2 5
3 98
PROJECT PROPOSAL
6
8
7
PROJECT PROPOSAL
99
100
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Progression of Final Model to Presentation
PROJECT PROPOSAL
101
Final model Image - learning outcome Every stage of this design project was a big learning curve and lead to outcomes I could never have imagined. I see the major development in the project through the protoypes created to the final model. From intially gaining the idea of gaining cable ties to attempt to achieve a minimal surface structure to the process of finding a way that it can actually be done was extremely fulfilling and took the grasshopper skills I development in Phase B of the project to a whole new level. Rather than coming up with interesting and complex form with no context for them, Phase C took me through specific problems of creating a form that could be fabricated and with each step in the process, things were learnt and adding to this form development process to make it possible. Not to mention then tieing in the qualities of the form to be achieved based on the design concept.
102
PROJECT PROPOSAL
I believe up to the stage this project is currently at all the steps in development have been taken in an effective way, From addressing the site, and determining a agenda to be fulfilled based on what is currently needed / under utilised. Then trying the technique of connecting cable ties to create a form that would respond to the site and the design ideas addressed. Then by working on grasshopper scripts and prototyping them to develop and progress to a technique that with even more tweaking could be used as a construction technique the average person with no compuational experience could build - simplifying the idea right back to tieing a single cable tie and fitting it to a template.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
103
104
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
105
Special thanks to my group members: Cara Brongo, Derek Huynh & Daniel Kellet And to my Studio Tutor, Chen Cahui, who I learnt a tremendous amount from
108
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
109
110
PROJECT PROPOSAL
PROJECT PROPOSAL
111