2
Contributions Tim Offer
ad:HOC and
Andy Humphreys
Peter Currie Architects and Plymouth University
Hugo Keene
Mole Architects
Sam Clark
Welsh School of Architecture
Sergio Pineda
Welsh School of Architecture
Sophia Ahmad Zaharudin Tzoulia Baltsaya Joanna Hart Kenji Ikegaya Elliot Jefferies Carys Jones John Kirk William Meakin Jai Patel Tom Wakeman
With special thanks to: Norman Evans and the Western Timber Association The Welsh Temple of Peace and Health
Mole Architects
4
Contents Introduction
6-7
[Developments] Initial Response: Truss Developments
8-11
[Contributions] Site Analysis
18-27
Logistics
28-29
Health and Safety Considerations Construction
30-31
Procurement and Ancillary Logistics
34-35
Final Design
42-43
Lessons Learned and Modifications
44-45
32-33
6
Introduction Big
span
refers
to
a
We
possibility
set out to build something
for form and also to the realm that
that would explore ideas of movement
encompass.
and rest, rhythm and pause, threshold
the
project
hopes
to
Our
investigations are based on the
and dwelling, responding to a set of
premise that rather than technology
conditions in a given site.
being imposed upon an architectural
these
proposition, in a poetic work detailed
topography included real world issues
strategies
should
the process.
We
reside
throughout
wish to observe and
understand the link between the general and the specific, from analysis to detail.
David Leatherbarrow
refers to a
milieu in which the life of a building unfolds, which he calls the building’s
‘topography’.
This
topography
can
be observed as a knot of influences,
To
well as
intentions
our
of budget, site, time, timber size and quantity, construction techniques and teamwork.
Each of these influenced the
final product, which encompasses and responds to these identified parameters.
By
using only a single small section
timber for the construct, we pushed an analysis of material possibilities and constraints, both in a technical and poetic sense.
complimentary and conflicting, out of which a project can emerge.
programmatic
As
The
engage
aims of the project were to
with this messy process requires that we
understand a site and propose a suitable
return to architecture, to the ordinary
intervention based on its constraints
fabric of buildings and the way that they
and opportunities
are put together, to reveal an underlying
understand the nature of the selected
language
communicate
material and the opportunities that these
something of the situation in which they
suggest – both practically and poetically
that
[TOOLS]; and to learn through making – to use our understanding of the site
convert architecture into some other
and of the materials to develop an
medium
–
Meaning
and culturally).
This
to
is to move away from the tendency to
exist
(spatially
can
[INTENTIONS];
art, language, or philosophy. is
conveyed
and
is
only
possible in the built artefact, embodied through the negotiation of real world phenomena.
This
is about more than a
intervention at
It
has
also
1:1 [REALISATION]. been
an
exercise
in
collective learning and collaboration
–
a laboratory of the wider world of
architectural
realisation
–
where
a
visual understanding and goes beyond
number of different personalities and
the building as an artefact.
roles are required to achieve our goals.
This
was an exercise in discussion and
negotiation, and in knowing when to step forward and when to step back.
Tim Offer
8
The process started with an investigation into how we could make a structure that uses materials in a clever way to do a lot with little. It is too simple to keep adding timber to a pavilion until it stands up. We wanted to develop a strategy that was efficient and flexible, allowing a number of spatial and programmatic possibilities.
We initially looked at truss forms in isolation, investigating the tectonic possibilities of the chosen material. This was coupled with careful interrogation of connections and fastenings. As well as a practical investigation this was also concerned with the tectonic expression of the end result. How could the detail of the structure start to communicate its intentions.
At the meeting, we experimented with coffee stirrer sticks on making different truss options.
This led to the creation of a truss that could extend itself with bracing in between. This ended up looking like two 'A-frames' combined.
'A-Framed' Truss
By expanding the truss shape and adjusting particular elements in increments this idea was to create a spanning structure in the form of a skeleton or "wing". The downside to this idea is that they have limited connections and bracing to the ground which would make them unstable.
Using 'A-Framed' trusses to construct structures that support themselves and help transfer loads to the ground. The downside of these models are that they are too simple in design.
Following from the truss Sophia did, Andy commented that it would rest on three points on almost every turn. He also commented that the structure we would be making would be using standardised timber pieces and in turn, to cut down different sized cuts.
10
Truss Developments Before our initial meeting, we were asked to experiment with small and scaled reciprocal structures. We were asked to look at matchstick structures as an initial reference point. Several of us came to the meeting with a few small maquettes.
Creating a reciprocal structure where the other members help to support the other.
Experimenting with reciprocal structure where the load is distributed evenly and create stability in the frame.
Making trusses with sewing pins as nails.
12
Truss combinations take three different forms. Firstly, the bench truss combination, secondly, the “sweep” connecting the double truss to the bench and thirdly the “sweep” from the double truss addressing the arch, which we term the “threshold” The bench truss combination works due to a C frame truss interlocking with a D frame truss, both slightly leaning towards each other and forming a self supporting structure. A A/C frame locks onto the left side and a E frame locks onto the right side, exaggerating this leaning effect. These structures all interlock, creating a self-sufficient structure. The main effect we attempted to achieve was a “swoop” in the top beams of the A/C, C, D and E trusses. Thus this is why the trusses “reduce” in height, from the tall A/C frame to the lower E frame. This concept is carried throughout the structure. The A/C frame and the C frame are braced with cut timber, creating a low bench, while the D and E frame are braced creating a high bench with back support. The entire bench structure then supports an A frame that threads through, which in turn supports a D frame truss.
The red dots indicate where the connection is located along the axis. The yellow dots represent where the other holes are drilled. Each piece of timber is drilled in the same location, making it an easier process.
14
Construction Sequence Using the model truss design, and reconfiguring the truss type according to the truss developments stage, we developed a step by step sequence for the construction process, which was used in an onsite format for reference when constructing the full size structure.
1/2. C-frame to the left, interlocked with D-frame on right
3. A/C-frame locks into left side
4. E-frame locks into right side
5. A-frame on its side threads through back of bench
6. E-frame locks onto end of thread 5
7. Double truss goes together - A/H-Frame sharing the top member
8. A-frame threads onto A-end of double truss
9/10. D-frame and C-frame interlock at bottom-front
11. A-frame threads through to stabilise 9/10
12/13. D & E-frames slot into thread 11
14. C-frame leans on double truss and truss 7 15/16. A & A/C-frames thread together and lean on 14
16
The physical site for our investigations was the garden of the Welsh Temple of Peace and Health. This was explored in relation to situation and the conditions it provided. This site investigation was twofold. Firstly, the pragmatic, objective task of measuring and understanding its physical characteristics.
Secondly, we asked ourselves questions of place and a response was offered that placed a structure on the site in relation to certain conditions that were identified. – Threshold, Enclosure, and Connection – that responded not only to the setting but also to the wider topography that the structure was to engage with.
18
Site Analysis Founded in 1988, the garden was created
situated the pavilion in a garden aimed to
in order to celebrate and support the
create peace we went forwards to create
Temple’s values. It is intended to offer a
a guideline of
place of tranquility and peace in the city centre. The garden contains a number of
3
stages in the design-
threshold, enclosure and view point. This idea allows people to be drawn inside the
commemorative plaques as well as trees
space and to experience the main purpose
planted in memory of contributors and
of the space, to experience and celebrate
significant people and events.
peace.
The
analysis we made informed
what kind of feel the structure should
The Temple of peace itself was opened in 1938 and is a non-religious civic building in the city centre given to the
Welsh
people by
Lord Davies. It
WW1. Today, the Temple is used by the Welsh Centre for International Affairs for conferences, seminars, wedding parties and social events and is also occupied by the Public Health Wales NHS Trust. lives as a result of
To decide the location of the pavilion we each stood in the area where we thought the main force should be corresponding
This
brought
forwards our individual thoughts on the site and how we would like the structure to enhance our experience of the place.
Having evaluated the site, it was possible to create different scenarios of how a person would like to experience the space and how our structure could enhance the use of the garden.
we decided to create a sweeping effect through the weave of wood, which draws the eye to a certain point.
was
dedicated to the men who lost their
to the main archway.
hold in the garden, and through this
Having
Carys Jones and Joanna Hart
20
To read the site in a more manageable scale we created a 1:10 site plan, to help locate the focal point of the structure and how the structure will engage with the site.
Having decided that the main part of the structure should face the commemorative plaque we mapped out the outline of the decided structure arranging it around the parameters.
Our main idea towards the structure was to split it into 3 categories - threshold, enclosure, and view point or place. We tried to represent this in a Photoshop montage showing how the visitor could be drawn into the site and experience enclosure and how through the creation of this pavilion they could get in touch with the main purpose of the garden as a peaceful place.
The context of this piece would be created in the enclosure of the space and how it allows only a few points of the garden to be experienced through portals. The pavilion creates its own topography in the way it sweeps from the ground and creates a unique language through the weaving of the trusses.
To believe that everything is established and finalised before getting on site, in any construction process, is to invite problems. Setting out altered quickly in response to the site, the order of fixing altered to aid strength, the exact position and interweaving of trusses adapted to aid stability and form. All of this occurred within the framework established in the studio. In one day an aspiration became a reality.
28
Logistics Having decided upon a design concept, this role was to organise the quantities, material lengths, fitting design and overseeing the effective construction and assembly process. When we knew the dimensions and quantity of the materials being delivered, it was necessary to establish final design based on prototypes quickly. The initial thoughts were to use smaller elements in the full scale design, e.g. 2.5m timbers and 1.5m timbers for the structure, but it was decided that the offcuts from the 4m lengths would be useless, and when testing out a larger dimension by cutting the timbers into 2.4 metre lengths and taking to site, the scale seemed more appropriate. The decision was made to use 2.4m timbers and create a larger scale version of the prototype
model, which would leave a large quantity of spare timber for later bench constructions, bracing etc. Sophia A. Zaharudin oversaw the sequential documentation for the construction sequence to provide a simple page of truss types, hole locations etc. Thomas Wakeman subsequently oversaw the sourcing of power tools and setting up a workshop close to site, cutting and drilling of the timbers prior to assembly.
Thomas Wakeman and Sophia A. Zaharudin
30
Health and Safety Considerations Our roles as health and safety coordinators required us to not only acquire safety equipment such as hard hats and gloves, but to also oversee safety considerations during construction. This included ensuring everyone was wearing a hardhat, wasn’t carrying too much and was behaving in a safe, appropriate manner. Climbing was limited to structures that were stable, and I am glad to say that no accidents occurred. Most of our teammates cooperated with our insistence of hard hats on the construction site, and those who did not cooperate were not allowed to be near the trusses. For the most part, people wore hard hats, and if they did not we would intervene and either give them a hard hat, or, if they did not want one, ask them to help from afar. I am glad to say that almost all of our team cooperated with our safety considerations, used hard hats, and acted in a safe, mature manner. The gloves also proved unnecessary, as the timber finish was smoother than expected. As we
the project progressed, saw ourselves obtain
responsibilities we did not expect, however we believe that we adapted aptly. Our job took on an extra role as construction continued as we found ourselves in charge of ensuring not only our team members safety, but the safety of any potential overnight visitors. We cordoned off the site with the use of blue nylon and danger signs, however during the night our structure collapsed. Most of our teammates blamed vandals, and thus we set out to create a greater threshold and barrier between public park space and the structure itself. We used actual safety tape (black on yellow) and not only cordoned off the structure, but also taped off the archway entrance. Rope was used as a boundary and further threshold. Additional signs stressing the fragility of the structure as well as signs stating that CCTV was in operation helped ensure the safety of the structure overnight, and to our relief, the structure survived the night. It helped influence the design as safety considerations meant that the structure was designed to be structurally sound at all times. The collapse of the structure
showed us that the use of hardhats was very legitimate, and that safety considerations are very important. We found out that we were adaptable and that health and safety is not only limited to the safety of our team mates, but also the safety of the structure overnight, and any visitors that pass by. Whilst we had roles as health and safety coordinators, we helped just as much as others on the construction side of things. We helped create trusses, and significantly in both the initial design (model making), design changes, and final construction. Thus health and safety was only part of our exclusive input during the project. Through the whole project, we coordinated well with the other teams aiming to achieve a successful group result. So even though our responsibility towards health and safety issues was significant, out general experience in terms of group work and harmonic coordination was also significant.
Kenji Ikageya and Julia Baltsavia
32
Construction Under the role of supervising construction, it was our responsibility to investigate the order in which the structure should go up so that as many pieces were self-supported at a time as possible. We did this by modelling the entire enclosure at 1:10 and deconstructing the model to determine a sequence in which the trusses might be erected. From this, we worked with the logistics team to develop a matrix of instructions that could be used on site to determine where each truss must go and when. Once on site, we also had the responsibility of making sure that the structure would be correctly positioned and spaced. We achieved this by identifying some key points in our design and triangulating them on site. Elliot Jeffries and Jai Patel
34
Procurement and Ancillary Logistics Construction of the pavilion followed a set of self-imposed constraints. Along with the familiar architectural design parameters which we had already encountered during our regular prescription of studio projects (considerations such as materials, site/context/ topography, desires of client etc.), working at this new 1:1 scale required that we also consider the real-world logistical implications of building. One of these was to keep to a budget, with a concern that the design need be assembled at minimal cost. We were generously donated 300 metres of timber to build with; however, further materials such as fixings and constructional aids were required. After liaison with the individuals coordinating the erection of the pavilion we were asked to procure bolts, washers and nuts to hold the beams of the trusses together, rope for guy-lines to temporarily secure these elements, and finally nails, to reinforce the connections between the individual trusses. For all of these, a fiscal cap of roughly £100 to £150 was set. This cap inevitably necessitated
that certain decisions be made regarding the expression of connections and the articulations between trusses – the details which ensured that the structure would form a coherent whole – which we were unaccustomed to thinking about. It was not, for example, possible to follow through with our initial idea of fixing the pivotal beams within trusses with rope, since this would have taken us over our financial limit. Instead, we opted for the less expensive route of using long threaded rods with wingnut fixings to fasten together the intra-truss beams, and annular shank nails to firm up links between each truss. This still gave us the expressed joints we were striving for, but at a considerable saving. The variable truss concept behind the project was designed to keep construction time and feasibility at manageable levels. However, the project did still require a consideration of these aspects. It was vital that equipment and services were in place before construction could begin and given the limited timeframe we had to work with, any delay or error in such arrangements
would have resulted in the lack of a finished product. The best possible methods of fabrication and construction were discussed as a group, from which we coordinated arrangements to allow these intentions to be realised. This involved procuring a suitable range of tools and the associated services these required. Secure storage also had to be organised to ensure the safekeeping of valuable materials and equipment. These considerations meant liaison with members of staff at the school, seeking specialist advice on suitable equipment, as well as organising the practical logistics of deliveries and storage. Carrying out the task of procurement and the associated logistics has been an enlightening experience. Working within a given budget, whilst maintaining a high level of design integrity, proved challenging. However, we can now value the complexity of the construction process and the numerous yet vital negotiations which have to be made in order to bring a design to fruition. William Meakin and John Kirk
The final design responds to the conditions identified in the site investigations. A loose threshold draws you from the entrance of the garden along the axis to the temple of peace. After passing through the tallest point of the structure a knot of timber forms an enclosure that reorients the observer. Here a bench refocuses the attention back out to the garden and the inscriptions at its entrance.
42
Final Design We wanted to create an enclosure that related to our site in a meaningful way, a place where one may experience the site and reflect on their surroundings. Two stones on the south edge of the site are engraved with the history of the Temple of Peace and its gardens. We thought this was an appropriate visual landmark for our structure. In the Western corner of the garden we built a bench that faces the stones. The bench was framed by the double truss sitting in front of it , also defining the entrance to our enclosure. Connecting the bench to the double truss is a sweep of trusses that form a density to separate the enclosure from the road more so than the bushes that border the garden already do. Gesturing out from the double truss are trusses that form a threshold condition, gesturing towards the arched main entrance to garden and gradually going to ground to integrate the structure with the site's landscape.
44
Lessons Learned and Modification Architecture school generally asserts that the architect is the source of all ideas and has the solutions and control over all problems and considerations. This exercise intended to reveal that building anything is a very complex process with many varied and often conflicting requirements. In any team or group there is the need for a number of different personalities, taking a number of different roles. Sometimes you need to step forward and lead, and sometimes step back and get stuff done. Both of these roles are important in realising a successful end result. As architects one of our key roles is that of negotiator and chairperson, managing the needs and expectations of a vast number of people, planning and coordinating vast quantities of information, whilst also steering an idea through a maze of hoops and hurdles. It is a complex and exhilarating negotiation to get anything done, and quite a miracle that anything ever gets finished! Responsibilities were shared among the group for deeper analysis. It was quickly learned that any decision made by one group had implications and ramifications on all of the others. Communication and teamwork became our most important tools.
BIG SPAN