MSD Studio 20_The Shape of Wine

M.Arch Studio 20:

The Shape of Wine Semester 1 - 2020

Final Portfolio Thai Bui - 842574

Studio Leaders: Alberto Pugnale & Alessandro Liuti

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

INTRODUCTION

ABSTRACT In the same manner that the Industrial Age was revolutionised, the architecture industry in the Information Age of the 21st century is being challenged on not only the way buildings are designed but also how they become interoperable with manufacturing and fabrication. As stated by Kolarevic, digitally-driven design processes are characterised by the dynamic, unpredictable and consistent transformation of three-dimensional structures.1 Computational, topographical, dynamic systems and algorithms are opening up new dimensions in architectural design and architectonic possibilities.

Studio 20, with the topic of form-resistant structures, explores the principles, case studies, form-finding processes and construction of shells and gridshells. Hence, students are given the opportunity to develop an effective level of understanding and application of parametric computational tools to serve their design outcomes, practicing in both the virtual world and reality.

1. Branko Kolarevic, Architecture in The Digital Age (New York: Taylor & Francis, 2003), p62.

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

TABLE OF CONTENT 1.

TIMBER GRIDSHELLS Precedents, concepts & strategies

4

7. DEBRIEF Debrief: Moving Forward

Design exploration & reflection 2.

RC & MASONRY SHELLS

New Site 7

8.

Concepts, precedents & strategies Design exploration & reflection 3.

CASE STUDY - HEINZ ISLER

TSOW - BRIEF & SITE

16

9. TECTONICS

INITIAL CONCEPT & CASE STUDY

22

10.

CONCEPT FINALISATION & MIDSEM REVIEW Presentation Reflection

38

COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW

40

Version 1 - 2 Reflection 24

11. REFINEMENT

Design brief analysis Site analysis & proposal 6.

32

Precedents Implementation

Design brief analysis Site analysis & proposal 5.

PLANS & SECTIONS Version 1 - 2 Version 3 - 4

Structure, materials & construction techniques Interpretation & exploration 4.

30

46

Design elements relationship Discussion: Perspectives 28

12.

FINAL WORK Final Drawings Reflection

48

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 1 - TIMBER GRIDSHELLS PRECEDENTS, BASIC CONCEPTS & STRATEGIES SHELL STRUCTURE

PRECEDENTS

“Shell structures are constructed systems described by three-dimensional curved surfaces, in which one dimension is significantly smaller compared to other two. They resist external loads predominantly through membrane stresses.� 1

The TRIO Gridshell or The Masseria Ospitale structure began with a grid of squares that were forced into deformation through variable heights and torsions that flex the rods of the grid into a mesh of diamonds.

This new structure creates a very intricate, but effective shade structure that breathes life into the restaurant patio. This amazing shade structure is spans the depth of the outdoor patio behind Masseria Ospitale and is semi-covered through an integrated wood skin system. It is a typical example of a lightweight form resistant structure, featured across multiple architectural blogs and magazines throughout the world.

GRIDSHELL Gridshell is a shell that is constructed of a grid/ lattice framework of rods and rigid joints. The rods elements form a planar grid with rectangular meshes and constant spacing between the knots/ nodes.2 They are also quite often seen in materials such as timber or bamboo.

The Toledo Gridshell is a timber gridshell that is proposed and applied to the construction of a full scale prototype, built by the University of Naples Federico II in 2014. It was designed and built by the research group gridshell.it.

From the construction photos, it is a typical example of how active bending timber gridshell is created. From assembling the timber grid that is placed and joined on site, deforming the grid by bending/rotating to restraining the boundary and placing bracing/tightening the connection for the final rigidity.

Fig 1: TRIO Gridshell in Lecce, Italy.

1. Adriaenssens et al., Shell Structures For Architecture.

2. Chilton and Tang, Timber Gridshells.

4

Fig 2: Making of the Toledo Gridshell in Naples, Italy.

STRATEGY: FORM-FINDING EXERCISE In the very first exercise of form-finding, we will be exploring the gridshell forms using the method of pushing edge or anchor points (if they are not on the edges). The aim is to develop a sense of understanding of the relationship between these anchor points and the overall form/structure of the gridshells that is demonstrated in its construction process.

Group Work

Thai | George | Gloria | Mukum EXPLORATION: PHYSICAL Due to the tight local lockdown restriction of COVID-19, physical model material options have become significantly limited. Hence, not many of the team members could perform the exercise effectively.

Even though the exploration using grid paper was the most common among all groups, the physical model using steel mesh (by Gloria) striked me the most as it represent quite truthfully how active bending is simulated in timber gridshell. It is a very smart choice of material as there is very little resistant when the mesh is bent so the structure can be formed quite easily without needing and restraining elements such as pins in paper models. The mesh model also revealed quite clearly how a gridshell look like without the edge beam element.

Fig 3: Gloria’s exploration with physical models..

Fig 4: George’s exploration with physical models..

5

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 1 - TIMBER GRIDSHELLS EXPLORATION: DIGITAL Serie 1:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Serie 2:

Serie 1 (George) aimed to explore the idea of creating one opening at the back of the stage to be combined with the idea of a backdrop. This serie also successfully incorporate the diagonal bracing into the structure.

Serie 2 (Thai & Gloria) aimed to create one main big arch from the stage looking to the audience area while also trying to form opening where needed.

Iteration 8.1 was a combination of serie 1 and 2.

6

8.1

Group Work

Thai | George | Gloria | Mukum FINAL OUTCOME

2a

1

3a

3b 2b

3c 2c

5

1

Referencing the initial surface of the gridshell.

2

Generating the grid consists of 2 main directions (a & b) and diagonal bracing (c).

3

Creating the bending conditions when the grid is pushed at anchor points.

4

Referencing the initial anchor points and the location of new anchor points.

5

Creating physical conditions for the mesh length and applied load.

The team divided the tasks into grasshopper findings (Thai & George) and producing draiwings (Gloria & Mukum). The goal was to combined Gloria’s idea of the powerful arch in her physical exploration with symmetry and elegancy. There would be one big arch for the stages and a few smaller arches/ openings for circulation. This brief led us to choosing the Red Stair Amphitheater besides the Yarra river as our site.

4

As we tried to combine our explorations for the final outcome, the diagonal bracing element was left out. The reason was because of how part (c) was forming the bracing on only on direction, dragging the geometry to be asymmetrical.

The better option would be to have symmetrical bracing throughout the whole structure, which could be further investigated.

7

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 2 - RC & MASONRY SHELLS PRECEDENTS Mapungubwe Interpretation Centre, South Africa Peter Rich Architects The Mapungubwe Interpretation Centre could be seen an interesting example of this week’s shell topic.

“Peter Rich has designed a 1,500 sqm visitor’s center which includes spaces to tell the stories of the place and house artifacts, along with tourist facilities and SANParks offices.

The complex is a collection of stone cladded vaults balancing on the sloped site, against the backdrop of Sandstone formations and mopane woodlands. The traditional timbrel vaulting, using locally made pressed soil cement tiles, allows the design to be materialized with minimal formwork and no steel reinforcement. In addition, the ambition was to also integrate local unskilled labor into a poverty relief program by training them to produce the over 200,000 tiles necessary in the construction of the domes.”

Fig 5: Photos and drawings of the Mapungubwe Interpretation Centre (Authod’s combination).

8

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

2.1 - CONCEPT PRECEDENTS The Confluence Park in Texas, 2018 Matsys, Lake | Flato Architects, Rialto Studio The confluence park in San Antonio, Texas was formed by the shapes of pavilion “petals” imitating the form of plants. These petals were the result of an exploration in a modified tilt-up concrete system that allows the modularity that the client needed for both speed and cost-efficiency while also simplifying the visual aesthetics and maintenance of the materials and increasing the durability.

Because of this idea of modularity and prefabrication, it re-defined my initial idea of what a concrete shell structure can be. This idea of rotating and arraying one modular unit while allowing irregularity to the whole geometry is definitely worth looking further into.

Fig 6: Photos and drawings of The confluence park (Authod’s combination).

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 2 - RC & MASONRY SHELLS (Catenaries and funicular forms)

EXPLORATION: 2D CATENARIES 1

Length: 0.2, Stretch: 2.57%, Strength: 1827

2

Length: 0.2, Stretch: 1.64%, Strength: 1827

Length: 0.5, Stretch: 6.14%, Strength: 300

5

Length: 0.5, Stretch: 8.3%, Strength: 200

Length: 0.1, Stretch: 4.74%, Strength: 700

10

6

Length: 0.5, Stretch: 8.3%, 8.31%, Strength: 200

9

3

10

4

Length: 0.5, Stretch: 6.97%, Strength: 150

7

8

Length: 0.5, Stretch: 8.24%, 13.6%, Strength: 100 Length: 0.5m, Stretch: 8.2%, 8.3%, 13.6%, Strength: 150

11

12

Length: 0.1, Stretch: 4.74, % 6.84%, 6.9%, Strength: 700 Length: 0.1, Stretch: 4.74, % 6.85%, 6.9%, Strength: 700 Length: 0.1m, Stretch:4.14%, 4.19% Strength: 700

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

GH SCRIP: 2D CATENARIES_W2

1

4 3

2

The 2D Catenaries script was a script that was provided to us by the studio leaders. The purpose was to allow student to do a lot of tests/experiments and getting use to the interface of Grasshopper. Hence, the only job for the week was to test out the function of the script by changing the initial geometries. I started with simple triangles and increasing/decreasing the number of support points and moving their locations.

Afterwards, I started to combine triangles with squares

1

Referencing all initial geometries (combination of geometric curves).

2

Locating the support point positions and defining the length of each broken-down edge.

3

Perform the simulations of reverse hanging form-finding methods with Kangaroo.

4

Result visualisation.

and other geometries. The goal is to slowly increase the level of complexity and the level of visual impact. As I moved forward, I started to add the curves that run accross/diagonally (e.g the curves that form the ribs of a vault that initially is from a square). As geometries change, I apply the same method of relocating support positions and number of support points that I did in the first 4 iterations. Finally, in the final 4 iterations, my goal was to test out the script for many repetitive and

complex geometries to see whether or not the script still work. Because it was the same method, only slight changes needed to be made in order to generate those iterations. Overall, it was quite a successful exercise and the most important lesson that I learned was that it is extremely important to correctly define the Start and the End points for such script as they can change a lot of the result if done incorrectly/unsystematically.

11

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 2 - RC & MASONRY SHELLS (Catenaries and funicular forms)

EXPLORATION: 3D CATENARIES

12

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

GH SCRIPT: 3D CATENARIES_W2

1 4

3 5 2

1

Referencing all initial geometries (combination of surfaces).

3

Locating support points, applying load and adjust the length of broken-down edges.

2

Generating meshes from surfaces and applying random mesh-discretisation.

4

Perform the simulations of reverse hanging form-finding methods with Kangaroo.

5

Result visualisation.

The 3D Catenaries Script was also provided to student by the tutors with the same intention as the 2D script.

However, as I wanted to test out my understanding of the function of the script (to see whether or not my understading of the script was correct or not), I had to make my personal adjustments to the provided script.

Comparing to the provided script, which contains a single surface, which is then turned into a very nicely done mesh using Meshplane component, I wanted to test on more complex and random geometries. Hence, I started to create random curves to create multiple surfaces instead of one. Then I turned them into meshes

using Meshbrep component and play with the mesh setting. The result came out quite nicely in terms of visualisation. However, I learned that with multiple surfaces, they needed to be discretise in the same way or in ways that allow the mesh to be properly connected/ compartible with each other at the meeting edges.

13

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 2 - RC & MASONRY SHELLS

TEAM PROPOSAL: WEDDING GAZEBO The chosen site for the wedding gazebo was the Riverstone Estate, which is a winery in the Yarra Valley, Victoria. It is situated on a subtle hilll that is open to a panoramic view to a mountain view. It is also very famous among the locations for wedding ceremony in the local area.

After a lot of exploration, the group decided to go with a design of two gazebo on two opposite wings of a ceremonial center. The reason for this choice was mainly because of the existing content and the direction the site was looking into. One of the reason that make the site famous was that when the wedding ceremonies start, people can look into the background of the scenery which is the famous hills and mountains of the Yarra Valley. Hence, we did not proceed with options/iterations of a gazebo that covers the main area. It conflicts with the purpose of having an outdoor wedding ceremony. Instead, we decided to have the gazebo to be used for sheltering the secondary program, which is the wedding party.

When the ceremony is finished, the party can be organised and the two mirroring gazebo will frame great views towards the scenery. The internal columns where multiple meshes meet each other emphasise the architecture quality of the space.

Fig 7: Riverstone Estate.

14

Group Work

Thai | Dan | Joshua | Harry

3

2

4

1 1

Referencing all different surfaces that form the shell structure.

2

Generating the meshes and applying suitable mesh-discretisation.

3

Locating support points, applying load and adjust the length of broken-down edges.

4

Perform the simulations of reverse hanging form-finding methods with Kangaroo and adding thickness.

5

Analyse the structure with FEM using Karamba.

For the Gazebo script, it is an upgrade version of the 3D Catenaries script that I made in the previous class.

Basically, the two script share the same method/ process, which starts from base surfaces, turning into meshes that correctly/compartibly discretise with each other, Kangaroo reverse-hanging form finding and then structural analysis using Karamba 3D. The

difference lies in the second step (discretisation). This time I added the Stellate component from Weaverbird to have a better result of mesh discretisation. It also created pointy edges and make the overall surface of the structure became uneven, which is a side effect of the component. It has proven to be useful in iterations where there are very little or no internal columns, as the

5

extruded pointy edge of the component cannot crush each other, and hence confusing the structural analysis process. However, to match our intention of using masonry, we decided to not use the component for the chosen iteration for a smooth surface that is applicable for masonry vault.

15

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 3 - HEINZ ISLER RC SHELLS

CASE STUDY: SICLI SA FACTORY SHELL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHELLS “Reinforced concrete shells frequently constitute the most visible element of a building envelope. They dominate the architectural expression, yet the threedimensional form is generally determined by the engineer according to its structural efficiency, rather than by the architect according to aesthetical considerations.

The design philosophy of recognised shell designers is introduced, specifically that of Swiss shell designer and structural artist Heinz Isler, who is considered to have had particular sensitivity to the aesthetics of his shells, rooted in his admiration of the natural world and derived by natural laws.”

SICLI FACTORY SHELL The Sicli Factory shell, 1968, is taken as a case study and is used to compare Isler’s design method with contemporary digital form-finding using Kangaroo physics in Grasshopper. The shell can be perceived as two free-form shells that share one mutual support point. The bigger portion covers the main hall while the other one covers a two-storey administrator building.

ISLER’S ORIGINAL STRATEGIES Two years before the project construction, Isler developed five solutions of form-finding one after another. Solution A,B & C were trying to use two shells to complete the construction of two spaces; while solution D & E were merging two spaces with one shell, and include a clerestory windows to introduce light into the interior.

Fig 8: Isler’s solution D.

16

Fig 9: Isler’s solution E.

Fig 10: Isler’s solution A, B & C.

Fig 11: An overall look of the Sicli Factory Shell.

Group Work

Thai | Lingke Isler’s last solution (E) was the one the determined the final design outcome for the Sicli Factory Shell. It was form found by his famous reversed hanging model technique. The design naturally splits the mass into two separate functional spaces whilst unified by one single surface and allows light penetrate into the interior.

CHUANG’S DIGITAL REPLICATION In a research paper by John Chilton and Chu-Chun Chuang, this shell

by Isler was examined and reproduced digitally. From this research, we manage to find out the exact building footprint and how the initial mesh of the building might look like when we perform our reverse engineering process.

CONSTRUCTION Even though it was almost impossible to find out how the shell was originally constructed as there was very limited resources, it was noted that Isler had similar method for all of his RC shells. Hence’s we had a guess from the available general description of the way Isler handled the construction:

Fig 12: Chuang’s digital replication of the Sicli Factory Shell.

“Isler’s construction process begins by erecting metal scaffold to support the curved laminated wooden arches (that will be reused a number of times), on top of which are placed wooden slats. Since Isler needed expensive curved wooden girders to create his forms, he gained economy by constant reuse of those forming members.

On these wooden slats, builders place flat fibreboards, on which they place the reinforcing steel bars. The concrete goes over the steel but with no further cover. When concrete hardens, the formwork, arches and wooden slats are removed leaving the fibreboards to act as insulation which serves to prevent the concrete structure from having cracks due to differential strains from the cold exposed surface above and the warm internal spaces below. This construction plan also does away with the need for the waterproof covering normally required for concrete surfaces, keeping them crack-free.”

Fig 13: Isler working on one of his RC shell project (Giulia Boller).

Fig 14: Author’s interpretation sketch of how the Sicli shell was constructed.

17

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 3 - HEINZ ISLER RC SHELLS

REVERSE ENGINEERING EXPLORATION

3

2

4

1

1

Referencing the three initial surfaces that form the shell structure.

2

Generating the grid of the 3 meshes and ensuring the connections of the points at the edges.

3

Referencing the initial anchor points and the location of new anchor points.

4

Perform the simulations of pneumatic form-finding & reverse hanging form-finding methods with Kangaroo.

5

Analyse structure with FEM using Karamba.

Despite the fact that Isler’s shells were famous because of his form-finding method of reverse-hanging, there were documents that mentioned pneumatic formfinding strategy specifically for the Sicli SA Factory Shell that Lingke and I looked into this week. Because of our uncertainty in the original way of Isler form-finding method, Lingke and I decided to create two versions of the reverse engineering model. Therefore, after correctly discretised the three meshes to be compartible, we did physics simulation and structural analysis steps twice. In the first experiment,

18

5

we followed the pneumatic form-finding strategy. The FEA analysis resulted in quite a nice result with only 1.31cm of displacement. Afterwards, we changed into reversed hanging method which led to a worse result in terms of structural performances.

However, looking back at this exercise, I realised I could have improved the result of the second experiment a lot simply by adjusting the length of the broken-down edges, making the structure become much more like its precedent.

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

1

2

3

Shell Thickness: 15cm Material: Concrete C30/37 Load: Gravity, Mesh Load = 1.5kN/m2 Support: Fixed Max Displacement: 1.31cm

4

5

19

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 3 - HEINZ ISLER RC SHELLS

SITE SWAPPING ITERATIONS

For the site swapping exercise, it is my opportunities to further look into the other group (Glocia and Cecile) who is doing the reverse engineering of the Grotzinger Shell. Their script was constructed differently comparing to our script in the first two steps of setting the initial geometry and mesh discretisation. Because their script resulted in a much more convincing structure, I decided to test out their way of doing the first two steps but applied them into our case study. In this exercise, we 20

are contructing a shell for the same outdoor theater with the method of combining multiple meshes like Isler did with the Sicli SA Factory shell. The results become much better comparing to what we did in the previous class mainly due to a better definition of the meshes. However, because it was fairly simple to do the iterations, I decided to test out structural analysis but with variable thicknesses, which was not successful as I could not generate the needed FEA result.

Individual

Thai Bui - 842574

3

4

1

2 3

1

Referencing the three initial surfaces that form the shell structure.

2

Generating the grid of the 3 meshes.

3

Referencing the initial anchor points and the location of new anchor points on the inclined plane.

4

Perform the simulations of pneumatic form-finding & reverse hanging form-finding methods with Kangaroo.

5

Analyse the variable thickness structure with FEM using Karamba.

1

2

3

4

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 4 - SITE ANALYSIS

DENTON VINEYARD The site for the winery is Denton Vineyard in Yarra Glen (VIC 3775, going North East from Melbourne CBD) where there many other wineries in the Yarra Valley is located. It is on Old Healesvilles Road, which is a turn around the intersection of the Melba Hwy and the Yarra Glen Bypass. in order to reach it by car, you will have to pass Denton View Hill Vineyard on Old Healesvilles Rd before reaching the main entraince on the right which lead straight to John Denton’s House. Topography wise, the site is a slightly downwards slope with the highest point being John ’s house. There are two artificially made lakes on the East & West sides. From what was shown on Denton Winery’s official website, there is an emphasis on the West lake, where the pattern of the vineyard is naturally suggesting a visual connection to John’s house. It is also closer to the main access road, which will tie more towards building the identity of the winery, which is important for a new winery and has not yet been considered.

Fig 16: Initial concept site location.

22

N

ville

eales

Old H

Rd

Fig 15: Overall Site Plans.

Fig 17: Views from main entrance & main acess road.

Fig 18: Views towards John Denton’s House from concept location.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

Fig 21: Shigeru Ban’s Centre Pompidou Metz.

Fig 20: Initial Concept Sketches.

Fig 22: Toyo Ito’s Meiso No Mori.

IDEA 1

Fig 19: Sections throughout Denton Vineyard.

Assessing the topography of the site in a slightly more detailed manner, it is noticable that the steepness of the slope from is quite minimal. Hence, I personally thought that there would not be many opportunities to play/experiment with the type of structure that is embedded into the topography. I imagined the structure would be standing on a fairly even surface with an emphasis on the roof structure

as I limitedly perceived it would be the only suitable part for the requirement of a shell structure. The intention of forming visual connection to John’s house reminded me of the Centre Pompidou Metz with the clever integration of a gridshell and “box” shapes, while the connection to the West lake is making references to Toyo Ito’s Meiso No Mori.

23

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 5 - INITIAL CONCEPT & CASE STUDY

IDEA 2 On the other hand, while Harry also thought of compiling all the programs of the winery into one main building/structure, he had a different approach on visualising how the winery might be conceived.

Fig 24: Vina Vik Winery by Loreto Lyon & Smiljan Radic in Chile.

Despite not having been able to settle on a location for his proposal, Harry was still inspired by the Vina Vik Winery in San Vicente, Chile. The winery’s design features a uniquely transparent, stretched fabric roof that allows for natural sunlight to permeate the winery and thereby to operate without artificial lighting. More importantly, the topography of the site is similarly flatten to our site, and the majority of the building is located underground to naturally cool the wine during the wine making process. Hence, Harry’s idea was to also have a shell structure as the roof for the main building but the whole structure would be sunk slightly into the ground so that there would be Fig 23: Harry’s concept sketches.

24

an opportunity to create artificial landscape work on the roof. He would also love to experiment with finding ways to have natural lighting into such structure.

Perhaps this was a braver and more unique idea comparing to mine. He did not let the nature of the topography affect on his way of thinking, while I was unnecessarily limiting myself into less options.

Therefore, we agreed on developing his idea further to see how the winery might look like, while having my location on the winery as the location.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

PRELIMINARY CONCEPT WORKING WITH SECTION / ELEVATION While Harry’s sketches were mostly drawn not to scale and distorted, they are quite effective in terms of communicating specific ideas. Therefore, I decided to try to reimagine his descriptive words and sketches to make drawings (a section and an elevation at 1:200 scale in particular) to have a better sense of scale and atmosphere. In the section, I was trying to think how people would interact with the space from the left side (North East entrance) to the right side (the West lake) of the building. I found the excercise quite helpful not only in developing a clearer mindset of working with the slope of the site properly to scale, but also in recognising the need to research on the proposing programs for the winery (in plans) before drawing more sections.

CASE STUDIES Therefore, Harry and I decided to look into more case studies that either have similar physical appearance to our preliminary concepts, or wineries that were worth examining. A few typical examples could be listed are the Antinori Winery in Italy or a few Yarra Valley wineries such as TarraWarra Estate, Balgownie Estate or Fergusson Winery & Restaurant (competitors).

Fig 25: Preliminary sketches on concept.

Fig 26: Antinori winery plan & section.

Fig 27: Tarra Warra Estate plan & sections.

25

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 5 - INITIAL CONCEPT & CASE STUDY LEGEND

OUTDOOR

CIRCULATION VISUAL CONNECTION

VINEYARD (TOUR)

PARKING

COMMUNAL AREA

WEDDING VENUE SUITES RESTAURANT

RECEPTION

CELLAR DOOR TASTING (PRODUCTION 3)

PRODUCTION 2

PRODUCTION 1

INDOOR

Fig 28: Bubble Diagrams of Programs.

PROGRAMS Initially, we decided to include all the requested programs within the brief for Denton Winery which are: parking, outdoor communal, wedding, suites, restaurant, wine tasting and production. However, as we looked more into the rivals in the Yarra Valley, we noticed that the majority of the served programs were always restaurant, cellar door tasting, wedding venues and suites. Furthermore, it was suggested by Folk Architects in their presentation that there is a demand for wineries with certain facility that allow visitors to be educated on the wine making process (harvesting, crushing, fermenting, pressing & aging). Therefore, we decided to emphasise on providing opportunities for witnessing an underground wine production chain, which will be the main program while other functions will be arranged based on.

Fig 29 to 31 : Top to bottom: Frankfurt Museum Lawn, Musmeci Bridge & Stuttgart 21 Station.

Source: Marc Jacquemin, Ana Mombiedro, Ingenhoven Architects

Fig: Concept development sketches.

26

Group Work

Thai | Harry

FINALISING CONCEPT THE DIFFERENT USER EXPERIENCE Therefore, finalising the overall concept, the proposal will be determined heavily on the difference between the winery experience of visitors comparing to workers. The whole structure will be a double-story underground building, with the ground (or lower ground) level predominantly designed for the workers of the winery, while the intermediate level surrounding the production area will mainly serve the visitors, who will walk on a minimal surface

structure and be able to look into the whole wine making process. The roof structure will be blended into the existing landscape. Visitors will also be able to look down into all floors underneath through skylights. It was inspired by a compilation of precedents such as: the Musmeci Bridge, Stuttgart Station, Rolex Learning Centre, Frankfurt Museum Lawn and the formation of minimal surfaces.

Fig 32 to 34 : Top to bottom: Frankfurt Museum section, Rolex Learning Centre & Schoen’S Gyroid surface section.

Source: Schneider & Schumacher Arch2o Catherine Zhang

Fig 35: Program placement

Fig 36: Intermediate Level sketches by Harry & annotated by Alberto.

27

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 6 - CONCEPT FINALISATION & MIDSEM REVIEWS

MIDSEM PRESENTATION

COMMUNAL

OFFICE

For the mid-semester presentation, a set of plans, a section and a few perspective renders were made. As previously adviced, the majority of the effort was put into the section as it was the drawing that communicate the most of the proposal. The finalised proposal consisted of three layers of shells: the top shell is in a shape similar to Heinz Isler’s Grotzinger Theater shell, underneath is a layer of soil so grass can grow in order to make the whole winery blend in with the landscape (visitors will be able to walk on when the project is pushed further), and then bottom shell is almost mirroring the intermediate level. The intermediate level can be seen as the most unique part to the winery experience. It was heavily inspired by the geometry of the Musmeci Bridge. As a result of the up and down protruding supporting edges of the minimal surface floor design, this floor will contain uneven walking surfaces. The wavy walking surface is purposely left in as it sets a reminder to the hills in the Yarra valley. The wine production remains as the star of the winery as people will be educated on the making process as they circulate around the building.

CELLAR DOOR TASTING

CELLAR DOOR TASTING

BOTTLE SHOP

RESTAURANT ACCESS

RESTAURANT

LOBBY / RECEPTION WINE CELLAR

PRODUCTION

VINEYARD TOUR LOBBY

BOTTEM LEVEL FLOOR SCALE: 1:500 @A2 1 2

5

INTIMIDATE LEVEL FLOOR SCALE: 1:500 @A2 10

40

Fig 37: Pre-Midsem Ground Floor Plan.

1 2

5

10

40

Fig 38: Pre-Midsem Intermediate Floor Plan.

Fig 39: Midsem Section.

28

Fig 40: Midsem Renders.

Fig 41: Post-Midsem Renders.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

MIDSEM REVIEWS - REFLECTION The mid-semester presentation left a disappointing feeling to me personally. Despite a few positive feedback on the excitement that the proposal brings, the majority of the criticism was on the under-developed functional program of the building as well as the lack of efficient graphic contents to communicate the idea.

The mistake lies in the decision to re-do the digital model: changing the middle level and adding two more layers of shells for the landscape roof. It was heavy work in Grasshopper and costed approximately 70-80% of our 72 hours of preparation time (from the lastest class).

Despite the fact that we were given feedback to further develop our roof structure and change the “shoebox” outline of the plan to work in combination with the middle level, the decision to make further major gestures was poor as the presentation was only 3 days away at that time. It was proven that it was impossible for us to be able to properly change and at the same time still manage to provide drawings that adapts to those modifications. Therefore, the proposal was merely assessed on the geometric potential of all aspects.

The previously discussed work on the programs of the building and explanation on how the building works was left out because there was no graphic content to communicate our ideas.

Fig 42: Post-Midsem Ground Floor Plan.

Furthermore, it was unwise of myself to leave my partner to be responsible for doing plans and explaining what we discussed on programs despite the proposal’s starting point was more of his idea. I should have anticipated more carefully since Harry’s background is not Architecture but Interior Design. I assumed that my partner would have not many troubles explaining our ideas through his drawings without realising he has not worked on such large scale projects before. The expectation levels graphically were different between us. Therefore, I did not have enough time to further work on his drawings before preparing for presentation.

Fig 43: Post-Midsem Intermediate Floor Plan.

Fig 44: Post-Midsem Exploded Isometric.

29

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 7 - DEBRIEF

MOVING FORWARD Moving forward, I think it is crucial to firstly recognise the strongest points of the proposal, which was the variety of user experience at different levels created by the excitement of geometry. These are the defining features of our winery and they should remain to be the drivers to any decision that are made from this point. Secondly, there needs to be simplification and extra clarity in the proposing structure.

The feedback was suggesting to emphasise the geometry only to the middle level while simplify the roof to possibly a flatter surface (for the experience above only). The under layer of the roof should work (almost) in mirror with the intermediate level and interact with the ground level as larger columns. The two geometries could even be merged into one rather than working separatedly. Openings for skylights should start to be taken into consideration regardless of difficulties in the digital domain of Grasshopper. Last and most importantly, we need to balance between digital design (of geometry) and practical design (of the winery itself) to avoid the project being a “geometry exercise”. It should be reminded that in architecture, form and functions must interact with each other in certain manners.

Without a more careful consideration towards the functional aspects, the winery will simply not perform as a winery. I personally think that if correctly tackled, the surrounding programs should or will heavily influence on how the intermediate level is generated, hence, possibly giving more parameters for a more specific design.

Fig 45: Original Concept Sketch.

30

Fig 46: Sections of midsem proposal and pre-midsem proposal.

Fig 47: Harry’s sketch on combination of two proposals before presentation.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

POTENTIAL NEW SITE

Fig 48: New site accessibility map.

From the feedback, we realised that in mid-semester, a lot of decisions were made without careful consideration of all elements. One of the important element was site analysis. Hence, Harry and I decided to redo site analysis (inspired by other groups’ methods of analysing the site). We found out that on the Eastern side of the vineyard, there is a large empty green space right next to another lake that is almost identical in size comparing to our previously proposed lake. If we propose our winery in this location, the building footprint will not damage the existing vineyard in any form.

Fig 49: New site vineyard direction.

Fig 50: Vineyard topography map.

Fig 51: New site distance map.

Fig 52: Old and new site locations.

The pattern/row of the trees are heading upwards towards Denton’s House and it is at the same distance (roughly 750m) comparing to the old site. Lastly, it is much more accessible with two main roads on the North and South sides that run along the shape of the lake. Therefore, we sees a much better location that is much more suitable to our proposal than the previous site.

31

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 8 - PLANS & SECTIONS

CONCEPT 1 Moving from week 7 - debriefing and reflecting on the feedback, our analysis tells us that the new site next to the alternative lake on the Eastern side is more suitable and worth looking into. Proposing a potential building footprint in this area will not destroy/disrupt any of the vineyard.

B Fig 55: Concept 1 Section AA.

A

A

B

Fig 56: Concept 1 Section BB.

Fig 53: Concept Plan - Ground Floor.

Me and Harry once again decided to split our initial jobs to be done separately so we could have more ideas to discover. Concept 1 (by Thai) witnesses the overal shape of the building is influenced by three major elements: the Northern Road, the Southern road and the curvature of the lake. These three curves together determines how the building should look in general. The proposal would retain its three levels vision interaction as can be seen in both section AA and BB. The main features of the winery would be the curved columns continuing from the roof slab to meet the ground level (following the Stuttgart 21 precedent). They would be located in the Eastern side of the winery where there are wine tasting and cellar door. Visitors would be able to look into the double-storey production area through the featured columns. The production is located adjacent to the lake

Fig 54: Concept Plan - Basement.

32

Group Work

Thai | Harry

CONCEPT 2 Concept 2 (by Harry) follows concept 1 in terms of how the overal building is shaped and the allocation of the programs. However, in concept 2 Harry followed the Musmeci Bridge precedent to make the minimal surface connecting the basement and ground level the feature of the building. He would also carry on to combine the two working direction (Stuttgart and Musmeci Bridge) together and explore the possible solutions in elevation and perspective sketches.

Both concepts were said to be fresh and worth exploring. However, we needed to work together to form one unified concept moving forward for the next week, where plans and sections at a more appropriate scale need to be produced. We were also said to explore the concept of a Ruled Surface to be possibly used as our columns or exposed facade strategy.

Fig 57: Concept Plan - Ground Floor.

Fig 58: Concept Plan - Ground Floor.

Fig 59: Concept Section 1.

Fig 60: Concept Section 1.

Fig 61: Column strategies sketches

33

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 8 - PLANS & SECTIONS

PLAN V1 PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PARK ING

In the first version of the plan, we explored the set of plans together with the ruled surface idea applied to the North and Southwest facades of the winery. When dealing with slightly more complex geometries, it gets a little bit more tricky to produce the correct section. Hence, we decided to test out digital modeling to help us understand better the geometries in order to create the right drawings.

WINE TASTING

TOILE

T

CO

MM

RECE PTION

ON

AREA

SUITES

KITCHEN

N CH AIN

ON

PROD UCTIO

SHOP BOTT

LE

CO

MM

OUTDOOR

AREA

RESTAURANT

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

At this point, we were introduced to the main precedent, Talponia residential units in Ivrea, Italy as it has much in common with our proposal.

LOADING AREA

N

0

2

5

10

20

50

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Fig 62: Plan v1 - Ground Floor.

PROD

UCTIO

N CH

WINE

AIN

CELLA

R

TOILE

T

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Fig 64: Talponia concept precedent - Section.

N

0

2

5

10

20

50

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

Fig 63: Plan v1 - Basement.

34

Fig 65: Digital model - Section.

Fig 66: Test iterations of ruled surface facades.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

PLANS & SECTIONS V2

Fig 69: Rolled Eastern Elevation.

Fig 70: Section AA.

Fig 71: Section BB.

Fig 67: Set of plans v2.

Fig 68: Simplified Diagram - Circulation..

After testing out a few iterations on the ruled surface, we decided to have the ruled surface to be applied on the most important part of our building, which is the Eastern facade where the major program of the winery (production area) is located instead of spreading out to less important North and South facades. The concept becomes slightly refined and simplified. We

would then try to explore possible functions of the ruled surface, in this case, acting both as a slab to walk on (connecting the main building to the decking area) as well as the roof of the production area. The sections also portraying how visitors could possible “climb� the shell to reach the roof.

35

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 8 - PLANS & SECTIONS

PLANS & SECTIONS V3

Fig 72: Set of plans v3.

36

0

2

5

10

20

0

2

5

10

20

0

2

5

10

20

0

2

5

10

20

Fig 73: Set of sections v3.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

PLANS & SECTIONS V4 Despite having explored many possible solutions to have the stairs connecting to the roof on top of the shell, we were advised not to follow this direction as the connection seems unnecesarily complicated (as shown on section v3). Instead of trying to merge the overall building together with the shells, the alternative solution would be to have the eastern external wall end at where the shell begins. This allowed a clearer connection between the building and simplified the function of the shells: to act as the roof of the production area and at the same time allow movement from the main building to the decking area as previously discussed.

The main programs of the winery is moved to the eastern side adjacent to the eastern wall (which will be primarily made in glass to allow maximum natural light). This change would make the overall proposal more in sync with the initial concept drawn from the rolled elevation in the previously, where the main programs can be seen from the lake side. As a result, all unwanted minor space such as toilets, services and also the stairs will be moved adjacent to the Western external wall. The carpark would also be replaced to external parking, allowing the expansion of the basement cellar wine to follow the shape of the building. Most of the changes can be seen when comparing the sets of plans and sections between V3 and V4.

Fig 74: Set of sections v4.

Fig 75: Talponia Plan.

Fig 76: Set of plans v4.

37

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 9 - TECTONICS

TECTONICS PRECEDENT The Bosjes Chapel by Steyn Studio is our main precendent when looking into tectonis. Constructed from a slim concrete cast shell, the roof supports itself as each undulation falls to meet the ground where it is connectedto a few reinforced concrete columns. This strategy is very much similar to the strategy that me and Harry had discussed together about our type of materiality (treated concrete) before starting to look at details. The construction photos and illustrated 3D model reflect quite clearly how the shell was made. Hence, we based the majority of our detail drawings and diagram on the project’s resources. The work is still in-progress and will need to be further resolved, especially in the area where we have a decking area which make the structure exposed to water that is quite different from the precedent.

Fig 76: Bosjes Chapel by Steyn Studio.

Fig 77: Bosjes Chapel - Construction Illustration.

Fig 78: Bosjes Chapel - Construction Photos.

38

Fig 79: Ruled Surface, Column & Decking Connection (3D model) - In Progress.

Fig 80: Bosjes Chapel Shell & Column Connection (Exploded).

Fig 81: Ruled Surface & Wall/Column Connection (3D Model).

Group Work

Thai | Harry 10CM THICK CONCRETE WATER PROOFING MEMBRANE

PLYWOOD PANNELS WITH PLASTIC BAR CHAIRS TIMBER SCAFFOLDING

5MM THICK CONCRETE

Fig 82: Ruled Surface & Wall/Column Connection (3D Model).

CONCRETE REINFORCEMENT LAYER SINGLE STEEL REINFORCEMENT LAYER

WATER PROOFING MEMBRANE

5MM CONCRETE FOR CONCEALMENT

Fig 84: Ruled Surface Cut-out Layer Diagram.

10 CM OF CONCRETE

PLASTIC BAR CHAIR

DETAIL OF RULED SURFACE

Fig 83: Ruled Surface & Wall/Column Connection (2D Drawing) - In Progress.

Fig 85: Ruled Surface Section.

39

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 10 - COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW

COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW V1_W10

The first version of the computation workflow received positive feedback. Since our workflow is categorised as the “Geometry + Structural Analysis� type, it is essential that the Geometry part reflect clearly the methodology of creating the form. Our shell / ruled surface is heavily influenced by the program, the form and orientation of the winery. Hence, we decided to merge our Geometry diagram with together 40

with the building development to demonstrate the process. Overall, the diagram is quite clear, clean and effective from step 1 to 5. The image represents step 6 - creating parametric model and step 7 - optimisation should be merged into 1 clearer image at a different angle. The building/context should be shown in a more diagramatic way rather than focusing on the building mass (step 8).

Group Work

Thai | Harry

CONSTRUCTION

The construction / tectonics diagrams also reflect quite effective the technicality and materiality of reinforced concrete in the construction phase. The space for improvement would be to re-position the angle of the diagram to be at the same angle as the Geometry and Structural Analysis phase to create a better sense of consistency and connection between the phases of the workflow in general.

Secondly, the lineweights in some of the images were too thick to be placed on the board (typically at step 5 where the shape of the steel reinforcement bars could not be recognised because of the line density). Lastly, the displacements of FEA were at a good range. However, it should be done at lower thicknesses for the shell, and the load applied should remains 1.5kN/m2 for all iterations.

41

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 10 - COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW

COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW V2_W10

42

Group Work

Thai | Harry

REFLECTION We were able to catch up with the class’s progress after falling behind in week 7 and 8 because of ineffective time management between subjects. However, since ideas and discussion were rushed, a lot of the time we encountered the situation where we need to continuously revise what we were doing.

In terms of computational workflow, we ended up not using the solution provided by our technical tutor. Also, looking back at our parametric aims in week 9, a lot of goals have been simplified as we further refine our proposal. However, I personally think it is still worth spending some extra time looking at the alternative script as it seems to allow much more freedom in exploration that could become useful for our iterations/optimisation process of the ruled surface in the last two weeks.

Fig 86: Computaltional Workflow - Aims (Week 9).

Fig 87: Alternative GH Script by Grabrielle.

43

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 10 - COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW

GH SCRIPT W10.3

Offseting the radial lines to locate the initial position of the Mid points.

Creating the initial curve and locate local points in the building

Contro movem Mid Po Creating radial lines and move vectors by connecting local points to circle cente.

44

Controling movement of Low Points.

oling ment of oints.

Group Work

Thai | Harry Visualising how the surface is supported Locating support positions of the ruled surface.

Structural Analysis (FEM) with Karamba 3D.

Surface/Mesh Visualisation.

Controling movement of High Points.

Allowing variable thickness for the ruled surface and testing thickness optimisation with Galapagos.

45

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 11 - REFINEMENT

RELATIONSHIPS: BETWEEN DESIGN ELEMENTS

Fig 88: Snapshots of in-progress modeling and design suggestions.

Overall, the Span and Space interim review received more positive feedback than negative. The workflow diagram has proven to be quite effective in terms of communicating our strategy in a clear and concise manner. The scheme is heading toward the right direction and the only that matter at this stage was to keep refining what we are proposing through our drawings and diagrams. One of the suggestion was try to communicate what we did in the workflow diagram in terms of geometry but in a 3D view such as Axonometric or Isometric drawing.

46

Therefore, Harry and I agreed to mainly work on 3D modeling at this stage as not only it will serve us well in communication but completing it would also make us refine a lot of our design decision. The three main design decisions and refinement themes that we worked on while completing our 3D model were: the skylights and there relationships to the shells, the design and materiality of the handrail at the edge of landscape roof and its relation to the overall idea of concealment, and lastly, the main and side entries and their transitional relationship with the surrounding landscape.

Group Work

Thai | Harry

DISCUSSION: PERSPECTIVES

Fig 89: Snapshots of possible render angles.

Besides discussion on the main design decisions on the model, Harry and I also find this is a good stage to start thinking about placing the camera positions to do the best renders that communicate our idea in the most effective manner. Since photorealistic renders have a direct connection to the model, we immediately chose the method as the way to communicate our different perspective. While some of the angles were definitely effective in terms of delivering the overall architectural quality,

the combination between them was said to be misleading. The reason for that was because the inconsistency in the quality and the chosen angles of different images, especially in the area that communicate where the building is located in the overall context. Therefore, we decided to move into a more conceptual/abstract way of delivering these perspectives in the upcoming week. The graphic level of the other drawings will therefore be matched.

47

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 12 - FINAL WORK

SUNLIGHT HOUR ANALYSIS 1

H: 2 - C: 0 9

H: 2 - C: 5 17

H: 2 8 8 2 - C: 0 5 5 0 25

H: 6 4 6 4 - C: 5 0 5 0 33

H: 8 6 4 2- C: 5 2.8 1.7 0

2

H: 4 - C: 0 10

H: 4 - C: 5 18

H: 4 6 6 4 - C: 5 0 0 5 26

H: 8 4 8 4 - C: 0 5 0 5 34

H: 2 4 6 8 - C: 5

3

H: 6 - C: 0 11

H: 6 - C: 5 19

H: 4 8 8 4 - C: 5 0 0 5 27

H: 6 4 6 4 - C: 0 5 0 5 35

H: 8 6 4 2 - C: 5

4

H: 8 - C: 0 12

H: 8 - C: 5 20

H: 6 4 4 6 - C: 0 5 5 0 28

H: 4 8 4 8 - C: 5 0 5 0 36

H: 2 8 4 6 - C: 1.7 2.8 0 5

5

H: 2 - C: 2.5 13

H: 2 4 4 2 - C: 0 5 5 0 21

H: 8 4 4 8 - C: 0 5 5 0 29

H: 6 4 6 4 - C: 5 0 5 0 37

H: 8 2 6 4 - C: 2.8 0 5 1.7

To further justify our design proposal for the ruled surface, I decided to run Sunlight Hour Analysis on a mass model of the winery with different iterations of the shell. (H for Heights, C for Cantilever distance). From iteration 1 to 12, the purpose is to test out the shell with the same heights and same cantilever distance. Iterations 13 to 19 aimed to achieve the visual quality of Low-High-High-Low. Iterations 20 to 23 aimed for High-Low-Low-High. Iterations 24 to 27: High-Low-High-Low and 28 to 31: Low-High-Low-High. Iterations 32 to 35 aimed for an equal increase from Low to High and reverse with either the cantilever distance followed the height or staying the same. Lastly, iterations 26 to 40 aim to create irregularity.

The result showed the flaws of the script in terms of how much can be changed which is quite limited. However, it also pointed out that for such symmetrical proposal, it does make sense to propose something like iteration 1 to 12 or 13 to 22 as they commended the geometric arrangement and symmetry.

Analysis Period: 1/11 - 28/02 (8AM to 5PM every day) 48

6

H: 4 - C: 2.5 14

H: 4 6 6 4 - C: 22

H: 6 4 4 6 - C: 5 0 0 5 30

H: 4 8 4 8 - C: 0 5 0 5 38

H: 8 4 6 4 - C: 0 1.7 2.8 5

7

H: 6 - C: 2.5 15

H: 6 8 8 6 - C: 0 5 5 0 23

H: 8 4 4 8 - C: 5 0 0 5 31

H: 6 4 6 4 - C: 0 5 0 5 39

H: 4 6 8 4 - C: 5 0 0 1.7

8

H: 8 - C: 2.5 16

H: 2 6 6 2 - C: 0 5 5 0 24

H: 8 4 8 4 - C: 5 0 5 0 32

H: 2 4 6 8 - C: 0 1.7 2.8 5 40

H: 6 8 4 6 - C: 1.7 2.8 5 2.8

Group Work

Thai | Harry

FINAL DRAWINGS

C

B DN

CARPARK ENTRY

A

B

ENTRY

A DN

C

ROOF PLAN

49

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 12 - FINAL WORK

FINAL DRAWINGS

C

LOBBY

DINING

UP

B GALLERY RAMP DN

DINING BOTTLE SHOP

A

DINING

UP

LOBBY

TERRACE

BOTTLE SHOP

A

DN

UP

OFFICE

TERRACE

DINING

RAMP KITCHEN

C K

UC

50

G

IN

TR

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

B

DINING

L

D OA

Y

BA

Group Work

Thai | Harry

FINAL DRAWINGS

C

WINE TASTING

LAB DN

B

RAMP UP

A

DN

B WINE TASTING

A

UP

WINE CELLAR

DN

KITCHEN WINE PRODUCTION

RAMP

C

BASEMENT PLAN

51

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 12 - FINAL WORK

FINAL DRAWINGS

EXPLODED ISOMETRIC

MASSING DIAGRAMS PROGRAMS

52

VISUAL ACCESS DIAGRAM

Group Work

Thai | Harry

FINAL DRAWINGS

SECTIONS

UNROLLED ELEVATION

53

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 12 - FINAL WORK

FINAL DRAWINGS

COMPUTATIONAL WORKFLOW

54

RENDERS

Group Work

Thai | Harry

FINAL DRAWINGS

REFLECTION

Overall, the final design achieved its potential. The level of details in all graphic documentation was satisfactory. Therefore, they successfully deliver the final design proposal.

Throughout the whole semester, despite the difficulties of the lockdown situation, I personally felt that I’ve worked really hard especially in the digital domain to make up for the physical aspect that is traditional to this studio. As a level D student, I also think that I’ve done a fairly good job collaborating with Harry, who is a level C student with less experience and different background than me in order to push our proposal to the present level. I’ve definitely improved my skillset not only in visual scripting but also in other fundamental aspects of architecture such as design thinking, decision making and graphic communication/ visualisation. This is an important preparation before going into studio level E and Thesis of the Master of Architecture coursework.

RENDER - HERO SHOT

55

M.Arch Studio 20: The Shape of Wine

WEEK 12 - FINAL WORK

SUNLIGHT HOUR ANALYSIS SCRIPT Starting Ladybug in GH

Generating Sunpaths in analysis period Referencing Analysed Geometry

Loading Weather file Defining Analysis Period

56

Generate Sunlight Hour Visualisation

Group Work

IMAGE REFERENCES Fig 1: https://inhabitat.com/gridshell-creates-a-parametrically-designed-shade-structure-for-masseria-ospitale-restaurant-in-lecce-italy/gridshell-italy-3/ Fig 2: https://www.archilovers.com/projects/87775/toledo-gridshell.html Fig 5: https://www.archdaily.com/57106/mapungubwe-interpretation-centre-peter-rich-architects Fig 6: https://tilt-up.org/tilt-uptoday/2018/11/02/design-and-construction-of-confluence-park/ https://www.archdaily.com/896460/confluence-park-lake-flato-architects Fig 7: https://www.riverstonewine.com.au/ Fig 8-10: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00004-017-0357-5 Fig 11: https://structurae.net/en/structures/sicli-company-building Fig 12 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00004-017-0357-5 Fig 13: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TlEzvcchMI&t=594s&ab_channel=IWSS2020

Fig 29: https://miesarch.com/work/506 Fig 30: https://twitter.com/anukinuk/status/829651314997092352 Fig 31: https://rok-office.com/projects/1007-stuttgart-21-automated-reinforcement/ Fig 32: https://miesarch.com/work/506 Fig 33: https://www.arch2o.com/rolex-learning-center-sanaa/ Fig 34: http://catherinezhang.squarespace.com/minimal-surface Fig 75: https://www.pinterest.com.au/pin/478859372858413606/?nic_v2=1a3KZ6iaX Fig 76: https://architizer.com/blog/inspiration/stories/2019-aawards-project-of-the-year-bosjeschapel-by-steyn-studio/ Fig 77, 78 & 80: https://archello.com/project/bosjes-chapel

Fig 18: https://www.dentonwine.com/ Fig 21: https://performativearc.wordpress.com/pompidou-metz/ Fig 22: https://blog.sevenponds.com/soulful-expressions/toyo-itos-meiso-no-mori-funeral-hall Fig 24: https://www.archdaily.com/529903/the-winery-at-vik-smiljan-radic?ad_medium=gallery Fig 26: https://www.dezeen.com/2013/05/04/antinori-winery-by-archea-associati/ Fig 27: http://kerstinthompson.com/index.php?id=315 57