Student Lodge 1&2

Page 1

AA Design & Make Project Portfolio

Student Lodge 1 & 2 Thiago JosĂŠ Barros 2011 | 2012

1


2


Student Lodge 1 & 2 Thiago JosĂŠ Barros

AA Architectural Association School of Architecture March Design & Make Director Martin Self Hooke Park - Dorset, UK 2011 | 2012

3


CONTENts 1- ‘Student Lodge 1&2’ - 5 2- Site Selection - 7 3- Starting Concept - 11 4- Material Source - 23 5- Material Production - 29 6- Longitudinal Frames - 33 7-Secondary Members - 51 8-Ability to Change - 59 9- Moving Foward - 93

4


5


6


Student Lodge 1 & 2 The project documentation seeks to expose the individual involvement developing the ‘Student Lodge 1 & 2’. The document has it main focus on the material approach and the thesis research topic. The timber procurement was part of the individual task, which was different for each student. From the species selection to stock control, the task was helpful to develop a conscious approach to materiality. Furthermore relating material to place and a more ecological agenda. Relating to the thesis, the research is around the idea of how a building can be designed to better cope with time. By that means, how can accommodate

its actual function but still leave scope for change. Understanding the building as something in a constant state of flux, the analyses tries to define a rational understand of permanence and change in the built environment. Seeking to define a background not only able to change, but also friendly to a ‘making’ agenda. Weaving all that is the physical engagement during the test of ideas. Being part of the making process was crucial to relate those arguments with scale and physical limitations. Developing a argument grounded in the particularities of the physical realm, overlooked by many architectural theories.

7


The ‘tree’ used as a key element in the design concept. A hinge point for the building articulation.

8


site selection 9


D&M students trying to emulate the possible view from the Student Lodge

Site and Footings The site selection came by the cross of the master plan with the living experience at Hooke Park. Seeking for integration with the landscape, the building emerges from the middle of the trees. The location places the building on the bottom of the slope, just in the boundary defined by the masterplan. That is a strategic position, first in terms of view and privacy and second in logistics aspect. The building has the highest possible point, providing a complete view of the park. Also, further away from the workshop and the main road, it delivers more privacy to the inhabitants. In terms of logistic, by using the further extreme, the future buildings can grow towards the road without disturbing the Lodge. Adding to that, the direct route to the Big Shed allowed elements to be prefab and easily delivered to site. Using this concept of embracing the trees and fusing with the landscape, the footings were defined responding to that. Even without a clear design definition, the footings were casted according to the site access possibilities. With a set of defined footings, the project had to be reassessed and from that became much more responsive to the realities of the place. 10


Footings embracing the main tree localtion.

11


12


starting concept 13


Initial sketchs studing the Student Lodge geometry and its’s relation to the surrounding trees

14


15


D&M students and tutors studing the rooms arrangement inside a big scale model

16


The concept Using the footings as an initial reference, the first scheme departs from a basic geometry morphing towards the woods. A simple shelter was the starting figure on the west side, evolving in complexity as heading east, responding to the site obstacles and qualities.

First model

Second model

Looking for structural stability and buildability, the scheme was simplified being divided in three parts, West, Centre and East. The Centre bit presents a more complex geometry, fragmented to respond to light exposure and a big tree, representing the project node that shelters the living space. Both West and East parts have a similar geometry, with it’s up corner slightly raised to accommodate mezzanine areas and more light incidence, giving room for the more private spaces. With both ends raised the geometry shrinks towards the node, or centre, acknowledging the existence of a big tree and making a more cosy space on the living area. 17


Interlocking ROOMS Proposing the central node as a living area the rooms should take full advantage of the high celling spaces. Volumetrically appropriating the space, the 4 rooms are divided in mezzanine and ground area, interlocking each other to provide access, light and stimulating spaces for the dwellers.

/room4

/room3

18

/room2

/room1


/room4

/room2

/room1

/room3 19


Ground floor plan

20


Mezzanine floor plan

21


22


23


24


Material Source Hooke Park Forest

25


Hooke Park

Spruce Trees location

Student Lodge 1&2 demand - 40 m3

2012 felling plan - 600 m3

Annual possible production - 1200 m3

26


TImber species / Spruce

The material strategy for the Student Lodge project was clear since the beginning, use locally sourced material, as much as possible from Hooke Park. For that was necessary to comprehend two important factors, first the material heritage used in the other projects and the forest production chain, crossing both information to deliver the right material alternative. In terms of building history, Hooke Park is a site composed by projects that relates to the forest in it’s actual state. Recently, the Big Shed gives continuity to this research in the use of round timber, developing a methodology that combines different round sections to minimize the waste. Starting the analyses from this point, the material choice for the student lodge follows the same principle. Analysing the forest chain, in contact with Chris Sadd the forestry in charge, it came to topic that some species are getting closer to its decay point. Usually, means they are getting older and close to decay, with radius not commercially valuable (too large) and not allowing younger trees to get light and nutrients from the ground, preventing the natural resources to develop. With that in mind the natural option was to use large radius trees and from that extract squared sections, from where the building components could be taken. In terms of species, the one available in these terms was Spruce, a soft wood with low tolerance to water. The material choice is a direct response to site conditions and the building details are designed to better cooperate with the material properties.

27


squared sections

28

steel f


footings

responsive design Following the forest cycle, the material choice was Spruce, a non-durable soft timber. To better use the material, the building needed to be responsive to its properties. To deal with the large radius, all the components are squared and with different profiles. This allows less waste during the cutting, so there are more options to fill the timber cutting plan. Also, as non-durable specie, Spruce shouldn’t get in direct contact with water. For that, the columns have steel footings, to protect the timber from the dump ground. Also, all the components are behind a waterproof layer. There are no exposed timber parts, just in the building interior. Those decisions ultimately try to increase the material lifespan and keep its aesthetical properties. waterproof membrene

29


30


material production 31


Technical aspects After the material choice, cutting lists were produced following the technical limitations of the woodmizer. With the maximum length of 5,10 meters, the cutting lists had to be produced to match that length, any member longer than that would have to be specially produced. From 5,10 to 6,20 meters lengths, the members could be done in the woodmizer in a slower and accurate process with trees specially procured to match that dimension. After that critical measurement, the pieces would have to be manually spliced using components inside the 5,10 meters, for example the column measuring 7,50 meters. The first cutting list was produced according the 3D model of the building, providing the elements to make the longitudinal main frames. The following cutting lists were made according to site measurements and inside the 5,10m length, taking always in consideration an extra margin for mistakes.

32


Material check with the forestry in charge, Chris Sadd

33


34


Longitudinal Frames 35


A5A6

B5B6 A2A3

B2B3

36


200 x 200 Column

(10x)

3d model and material The Longitudinal Frames were the first step in the project ‘making’ process. During the design definition, a 3D model was generated containing all the initial measurements. From that model, technical drawings were produced indicating the material measurements and the connection point between elements. Even trying to stick with the proposed limit of 5,10 m length, a few elements were longer than that. In that case making the procurement process slower. Another issue that comes to topic is, longer the elements heavier they are. This fact was a problem when dealing with longer lengths, demanding more people and concentration to move any member. More people to develop one task ultimately lead to more time consuming in the overall process. Despite their beauty, the longer elements are a challenge in a process of self-fabrication.

300 x 150 Roof Beam

(5x)

350 x 175 Floor Beam

(9x)

37


Students making the longitudinal frames in the ‘Big Shed’

38


Pre fab elements The four longitudinal frames had to be individually pre-fabricated in the shed to be craned in position afterwards. Particular in that phase, precision was a crucial point. Starting from representation, there is no reference in the material world. Each frame had to be precisely made to allow precise fit during the meticulous lifting process. Furthermore, the components of those frames were the longest timber pieces, which were procured specially for that purpose. Any mistake in that phase would mean more time consumed to find and fell new material in those long lengths.

Frames ready to be transported to site and reassembled 39


a5a6

40


/frame raising sequence

/longitudinal frame

4,70m

4,80m

5,40m

1,60m 1,60m 4,80m

4,70m 41


b5b6

42


/frame raising sequence

/longitudinal frame

4,40m

4,20m

4,40m

5,20m

43


A2A3

44


/frame raising sequence

/longitudinal frame

4,70

4,40m

3,60m

4,20m

45


b2b3

46


/frame raising sequence

/longitudinal frame 4,70m

5,10m

4,70m

5,10m

7,20m

47


A4

48


/asssembling work

/central frame

4,80m

2,20m

3,20m

49


50


51


52


Secondary members 53


220 x 150 Roof Rafters

(38x)

Rafters

Floor Joists

Wall studs

Plates

Columns

54


220 x 75 Floor Joists

(38x)

150 x 50 Wall Studs

(36x)

220 x 50 Plates

(8x) 55


Floor joists arriving on site

INFORmal process After the Longitudinal Frames, the timber procurement followed in a more informal way, better responding to the site activities. With an initial list made according to drawings, the process followed with sequential requests. Dealing with demand and project changes, those requests were a direct response to site activities. This approach was only possible with the constant feedback between site and timber stock. Dealing with a self-build operation, with non-skilled labour, the material waste increases a lot, mostly regarding cutting mistakes. To manage that, an intensive control of supply and the anticipation of necessities was key to make the material constantly available for use. Plus the projects changes that demanded new material profiles and quatities. 56


longitudinal frames|

Initial timber cut list made acording to drawings

floor beam roof beam 300 mezanine beam 300 terrace beam 300 x roof beam 200 350 x 175 x 150 x 150 150 x 100 4.500

A1 | A2

columns 200 x 200 0,500/A1

B1 | B2

1,062/B1

4.775

A2 | A3

4,200/A2 3,681/A3

4.500

4.570

B2 | B3

7,272/B2 5,648/B3

4.644

5.174

A3 | A5

3.247 2.700

B3 | B5

5.100

A5 | A6

5,409/A5 4,739/A6

4.703

B5 | B6

5,295/B5 4,503/B6

4.301

main rafters B2 -­‐WMR 153 x 75 x 2354 A2 -­‐ WMR 211 x 75 x 6150

main rafters 200 x 75

2.735 4.241

4.644

4.703

4.703

4.335

cross frames|

West B2/A2

meters

meters

beam lateral support mezanine 220x100 300 x 150 5546 6233

main wall studs floor joists 150x75 220x75 3.749 4923 2.168

East B2/A2

2.184 6.050

4.049 2.484

4898

West B3/A3

4.990 3.183

1.822 2.211

5.481

East B3/A3

B3 -­‐EMR 205 x 75 x 3256 A3 -­‐EMR 276 x 75 x 4898

2437 2188

5.481

West B5/A5

B5 -­‐WMR 315 x 75 x 4816 A5 -­‐WMR 276 x 75 x 2416

2875 2982

4.561

East B5/A5

4.904 2.198

2.598 2.794

4.561

West B6/A6

5.142 1.552

2.375 2.794

4.564

East B6/A6

B6 -­‐EMR 231 x 75 x 5206 A6 -­‐EMR 168 x 75 x 1721

1792 2474

4.564

AB4

4706

4280

secondary members|

linear meters

AB12

Meetings and stock counting as a way of keep track ot the supply

rafters 220x50

wall studs floor joists 150x50 220x75 top plate 175x50 37

AB23

33 16,8

21 12

55,2

AB34

20

7,5 12,5

32

AB45

15,2 7,2

10,8 9,6

18

AB56

34,3

21 12

35,2

bottom plate 175x50

complete frame missing lenght critical lenght

57


58


59


60


Ability to change 61


62


framework and levels The Building is designed to better suit the initial briefing, a Student Lodge. On top of that specific program, design decisions were taken to make the building cope with time and acknowledge the presence of a possible ‘creative user’. The approach doesn’t propose ‘flexibility’ as an excuse to provide a non-optimized solution, presuming that a state of flux should be a generic state. In opposition, the proposal suggests the most suitable solution for the requested program, but in a way that the system is not static, or locked. For that, the design is conceived on levels of permanence and change, which are independent of each other and visually compre-

hendible. To acomodate that the Framework gives the suport as the most fixed element. In that fashion, the building doesn’t need a forensic investigation to be deployed. The intention is to facilitate the accommodation of different uses or even a radically new interpretation of the space, providing the building a longer lifespan and a more user related environment. In that approach, the building elements can be easily replaced and customized according to technical needs or user’s aesthetical aspirations. Allied to that, the possibility of a different use makes the building more relevant in a dynamic environment of change and new demands, like nowadays society. 63


High level

64

FRAMEWORK

SHell

cover

_main structure

_secondary members; rafters, wall studs, floor joists, plates. _insulation _water proof membrane

_cladding _insulation


low level Permanent interior

semi-Permanent interior

suggestive frames

_toilet _shower _heating stove

_mezannines _kitchen

_partitions frames

supply sistemns _electric line _heating 65


66


FRAMEWORK It’s the building most solid estate, what confronts the gravity forces. Can be considered the minimal unit where the space starts to take shape. In a ‘design and make’ agenda, where modifications are welcome during the process, the user could physically inhabit this space. That would lead to a spatial perception that allows the user to challenge architectural ideas made in an immaterial domain. Furthermore leading to a rethink of the following project’s steps accepting the user’s participation. Being the most fixed part of the building, its design should be over dimensioned, to allow a certain degree of future additions on top of that. As a matter of scale and preciseness, its fabrication doesn’t take much advantage from the user or architect involvement. As the experience in the Student Lodge demonstrated, it’s a labour intense work, where time is more relevant than the individual’s input. As the most stable and unchangeable state, the Framework would be considered the highest level. To sun up, a level of stability that demands higher technical skills to be developed and changed.

67


68


69


70


SHELL The second level would give a more defined shape to the building, kind of a shell. This layer would house the secondary building elements, like wall studs, floor joists and rafters. Closed on exterior and interior faces, this could also receive the insulation material and the external waterproof membrane. Another function is to house the openings. Treating that level with independency of the interior walls and supply systems leaves more chance for interior changes. This level is more easily manageable during the building process, but after enclosure of its faces demands more work to be accessed. This means that after the completion it’s modification or replacement needs to be handled by technical labour, being not so accessible to the user. Even being a more fixed level The Shell has an important role. That’s because will be the support for more changeable levels. 71


72


73


74


Cover With the Level above holding the insulation and the waterproof membrane, the cladding and facades can be more users friendly. Generally with a smaller lifespan, those elements can be easily replaced and attend to the user’s aesthetical ambitions over time. In the particular case of the ‘Student Lodge’, the Polycarbonate façade can be replaced or punctured to receive new openings. Also the cladding could have part of it prefab in a more controlled environment, as the building is waterproofed and the cladding will perform aesthetically only. Even with the making process happening, the facades and cladding could be changed, having their design reviewed during the process. This allowed the building to be more responsive to the site and its making process, and ultimately will allow another changes during its life development. 75


meetings happening on site to define the facade layout and material

76

46


77


78


permanent interior Even with an independent interior, covered and waterproofed, there are still bits that need to be defined as permanent. This particular level relates to the elements that due to its technical nature have to be fixed. The bathroom and the fireplace need to be defined because their support had to reach outside the Shell level. In the Student Lodge, was used a strategy to give more options to the users. Being permanent elements, their walls were used as loadbearing partitions, giving the opportunity to be support for a mezzanine. This would allow more occupation options without adding other fixed elements. With its independence from the Shell layer, the partition’s positions could be tested on site before assembled. This allowed confronting the drawing information with the sensation of physically inhabiting the space before taking a final position.

79


Ground floor plan

80


fixed elements being tested anddefined on site

81


82


Semi-permanent interior This level is considered semi permanent, as it has their places defined but it’s optional to happen. This occurs to the technical support demanded for its deployment. The mezzanines have their support points and can be used or not. For example in the ‘Student Lodge’ where the combinatorial analyses of 3 possible mezzanine spaces results in 8 different space configurations. Other option is regarding the kitchen position. Providing two different points for location, it gives more freedom to the user. Its difficult to predict if future user’s will demand a larger or a small kitchen, or even no kitchen at all for example. 83


expandable light room 3 (R3

expandable light mezzanine 3 (M3)

expandable light mezzanine 4 (M4)

expandable light room 2 (R2) expandable light mezzanine 2 (M2) expandable light mezzanine 1 (M1)

expandable light living room 2 (LR2)

expandable light room4 (R4)

expandable light living room 1 (LR1)

expandable light small living (SL)

M1

expandable light room 1 (R1)

expandable light room4 (R4) M4

M2

M3

R2

R1

R4

SL

R3 LR1 LR2

K1 K2 K3

spot light pendant light switch socket power suply for external light

power suply for external light

power socket heights and position (see floor plan)

small power suply exposed galvanized pipe

/ diagram used in the building process to better explain the unconventional electrical suply to the contractor. 84


Supply systemns

R1 / room 1 M1 /mezzaznine room 1 R2 / room 2 M2 / mezzanine room 2 R3 / room 3 M3 / mezzanine room 3 R4 / room 4 M4 / mezzanine room 4 SL / small living room LR / living room K / kitchen

M1 M2

M4

M3

/ mezzanine floor plan extendable rubber wire to allow the lamp position to be defined by the user

R2 R1

SL R4

LR

R3 K

/ pendant light detail

/ ground floor plan

This level is crucial to allow change, being one of the most difficult levels to be handled by the user. Most of the times those systems are mixed and hide inside walls, making their change part of an investigation work. In the proposal this level uses the shell as support, being mounted on top of it. Being exposed and happening on the building perimeter allows more independency of the interior partitions. The design of the supply line is made to better attend the initial design. But as a visible element running on the fringes, it allows scope for additions and direct changes. For example in the electrical line, that can easily receive extra sockets and light fixtures. 85


166

165.

165

5

165 BEDROOM 3 BEDROOM 4 MEZZANINE BEDROOM 3 RIDGE LINE

SHOWER DINING

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 4

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 2

BEDROOM 2

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 1

RIDGE LINE

KITCHEN LIVING

BEDROOM 1

SMALL LIVING wood burning stove 9.5 kw

TOILET

163 Electrical Ground floor plan

3

16

86


166

165.

165

5

165 BEDROOM 3

164

BEDROOM 4

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 3 RIDGE LINE

BEDROOM 2 MEZZANINE BEDROOM 4

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 1

MEZZANINE BEDROOM 2 RIDGE LINE

BEDROOM 1

TOILET

163 Electrical Mezzanine floor plan

3

16

87


88


Suggestive frames The suggestive frame was a way to deliver hints of a possible layout without being dictatorial. The idea gives a support to receive partitions that will need modest DIY skills to be completed. These hints of occupation still leave the space free of fixed elements. Still those frames can be completely ignored and the space reinvented in the future according to users terms. The ambition is to challenge flexibility ideas that propose free spaces, but also empty of any specific configuration. They were placed following the overlay with different configurations, placing the elements that are shared by them. This would be a lower stance in the levels hierarchy, as it demands less technical skills to be modified. This would be the last state of change before entering in the aspect of modifications with aesthetical purpose only, like painting walls and changing furniture for example.

89


90


Marks pointing the position to receive the frames that defines partitions positions

91


92


93


photo by Valerie Bennett 94


moving foward 95


96


working space Following the ‘suggestive frames’, which is made by an overlay of different uses, the building can be reconfigured. In this case, during the building process the school direction suggested to have an intermediate use for the space. Before the other group of accommodations are complete and more students can live in Hooke Park, the ‘Student Lodge’ will face a different program. With more students coming, Hooke has more employees and a demand for new office spaces. This proposal transforms the West wing in a shared working space, with its larger mezzanine being used as a more private office. The East end works as a meeting room, with its smaller mezzanines housing places for storage. In the centre, a small reception uses the step as a siting area for waiting. To achieve that, minor modifications have to be done. Just one of the frames has to be filled and the kitchen is not used. As the other buildings emerge and the office is relocated, the building can easily go back to its initial proposal, a ‘Student Lodge’.

Ground floor plan

Mezzanine floor plan 97


98


collective space The initial proposal for the ‘Student Lodge’ is more focused on the individual space aspect. With larger rooms with ground and mezzanine areas, the configuration doesn’t leave much scope for shared spaces. In other hand, the ‘collective’ proposal tends to make smaller individual spaces to provide more options of social engagement. The Mezzanine in the West wing, gives space for a large living room, taking advantage of the open façade to create a more lightly ambient. The ground floor is divided into two rooms, with enough space for bed, wardrobe and studying desk, a smaller private space in comparison to the initial proposal. In the East side the configuration gives space for two independent mezzanines and the option of a shared ground floor. This tries to achieve degrees of sociability, with the mezzanine being the most private. Followed by the shared ground, a semi private space for a more intimate engagement, with two or three people. And the living room, the social space where all the students can gather and bring people from outside to their coexistence. The kitchen is located in the central area, with enough space to house a table and take advantage of the steps as more casual siting place. Like the ‘office’ proposal, this configuration can be achieved using the frames to define the partitions.

Ground floor plan

Mezzanine floor plan 99


100


The end as a begining With the end of the architect’s work the life of a building starts, and just in time the success or not can be evaluated. Part of the ‘Student Lodge’ proposal, is to have a building that is able to deal with time, incorporating the user’s as a participative agent. Proposing a way to conceive architecture detached from the notion of final estate, the building is something that evolves beyond an established idea of completion. In that fashion architecture is an instance of its living state, something that surpasses the initial architectural predictions. 101


102


103


Architectural Association School of Architecture MArch Design & Make

2011 | 2012

104


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.