Exploring Automated Spaces by Ugur Imamoglu

EXPLORING AUTOMATED SPACES by Ugur Imamoglu

Â© May 2016 Ugur Imamoglu

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, Architecture School of Architecture Pratt Institute

May 2016

EXPLORING AUTOMATED SPACES by Ugur Imamoglu

Received and Approved:

Jason Vigneri Beane

Thomas Leeser

Date:

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I would like to thank to my parents and my grandmothers. They always supported me to become an architect. They sacrificed a lot, just to make my dreams come true. I would like to thank to my mentors Inanc Eray and Gonzalo Carbajo. They enhanced my vision and helped me to become a better architect. They encouraged me to start my masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s here in New York and I am grateful for that. I cannot thank enough to my undergrad third year studio professor Zeki Serifoglu. I learned all the fundamentals of architecture from him and I feel lucky to be a part of his studio. I would like to thank to my digital fabrication instructor Brian Ringley. His passion about digital fabrication inspired me to write this thesis about robotics technology and architecture relationship. I want to thank my thesis instructor Jason Vigneri-Beane for being supportive all the time. It was also great to meet with Thomas Leeser and his dark humor. Lastly, I want to thank to all of my friends. There is no word that can describe their importance for me.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract

Introduction

0100 // The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

0110 // Flexibility

0120 // Flexible Space

0130 // Responsive Architecture

0200 // Automation & Architecture

0210 // Robot

0211 // Industrial Robots

0212 // Home Made Robots

0212 // Nanotech Robots

0220 // Robotic Structure

0221 // Move

0222 // Transform

0223 // Self-Assemble

0230 // Robotic City

0300 // Home as a Laboratory

0310 // Dynamic Housing

0400 // Robotic Micro-Housing

Conclusion

List of Illustrations

Bibliography

Online Sources

ABSTRACT This paper is a discourse on the concept of designing flexible and responsive spaces with automated structures and materials for the constantly changing needs of 21st Century users. It analyzes current conditions of flexibility and responsiveness in terms of architecture while questioning adequateness of static structures for absolute flexibility and responsiveness of an architectural design. Research focuses on “the most flexible space is the most generic space an architect ever imagine” statement; it questions the “Generic Architecture” problem and the role of modernist movement within the context of flexibility. It argues the over simplified building components and proposes to increase “resolution” of the design. The research discusses the idea of automated structures and nanorobotic materials as a possible solution for “Generic Architecture” problem, over simplified building components and absolute flexibility and responsiveness. Finally, research introduces “house” as a laboratory for architects and proposes to experiment nanorobotic dynamic surfaces with housing projects.

INTRODUCTION

the 60’s like Cedric Price’s “Fun Palace”

Flexible and responsive spaces are the

or Archigram’s “Walking City.” However,

most common subjects of architectural

applications in the architecture

discussions lately due to constant

field are relatively new. Especially,

changes of the urban context and user

Fabio Gramazio and Matthias Kohler

demands. As a result of conventional

researches about robotic fabrication

architectural solutions to this problem,

inspires numerous architects in the

spaces have lost the sense of function,

world. Mass customization, automated

building components have been over

structures and materials constitute a

simplified and responsiveness of

whole new era of architecture. Robotic

the design limited with engineering

technology offers a huge potential

solutions. It is almost impossible to

for architects with its dynamism,

identify a building’s location, era or

precision, and intelligence. This

designer anymore. “Smart” buildings

research aims to discover these

still cannot go beyond the automated

potentials on various scales with

curtains or window cleaners while

various behaviors. Moreover, take the

“smart” cars can drive all around the

common terms such as flexible space

world without a driver. No doubt that

and responsiveness in architecture to

designing a flexible and responsive

the next level.

space with the rigid plan system is a huge challenge for architects. This

I argue that one can create highly

research argues that robotic fabrication

efficient (floor area, energy

methods and nanorobotic technologies

consumption, etc.) and customized

could help architects to create absolute

spaces for different users and

flexible and responsive spaces.

demands with the help of emerging robotic technology. I suggest to use

Robots are labelled as “The Technology

“house” as a laboratory in order to setup

of the Future,” but the truth is we are

an experiment for the argument, like

using robots to build cars and washing

great architects Frank Lloyd Wright,

machines or pack cereals for quite

Le Corbusier or Mies Van Der Rohe did

some time. Robotic technology has

before. Due to the complex user needs

been in our lives since the 70’s and

of housing and undeniable importance

some dreamy architects foresee a

in each person’s life, the house could

future with robotic structures during

be a great fit for this experiment.

THE IDEA OF FLEXIBLE AND RESPONSIVE ARCHITECTURE “Nothing is softer and more flexible than water yet nothing can resist it.” Lao Tzu

0110 // FLEXIBILITY

Mental flexibility is another aspect.

In dictionaries flexibility is defined as

It is as important for people as the

“The quality of being able to change

physical effects. It is an essential skill

or be changed easily according to

for 21st Century people because in

the situation.” It is one of the most

“The Age of Information,” dynamism

essential qualities for a human being

can be exhausting for close-minded

both mentally and physically, because

people. However, mental flexibility

we are living in a fast-paced world.

is not a new necessity, it has been

Ideas, nature and cities are changing

a virtue since the early ages. For

faster than ever. We have to be flexible

instance, the Chinese philosophy and

enough to live in this world. The term

belief “Taoism”, encourages people to

flexibility can be analyzed from two

think flexibly. According to the belief,

different aspects, physically and

a wise man will go with the flow; he

mentally.

will not limit his options. This belief still makes sense in the 21st Century,

At first sight, “Flexibility” is a subject

maybe more than before. Dogmatic,

of human kinetics. It is an important

prejudiced, and xenophobic minds

quality of human body and one of the

cannot survive in this century. The

indicators for one’s health condition.

power of flexible and open minds is

For instance, “Tai Chi” is a Chinese

undeniable.

martial art and it is a great way to improve the balance and flexibility of

On the other hand, flexibility is not

a person. A research in New England

just a concern of the human body

Medical Center demonstrated that

or mind. It is also an important

Tai Chi improved both the physical

quality of objects. We can think and

and psycological conditions of

move flexibly but we are as strong

patients. Especially, elder subjects

as our tools. Our tools should be

of the research, improved their

multifunctional and cover our needs.

musculoskeletal contiditions radically

We demand smart phones, watches

in six months and this triggered a

or pads to improve our flexibility. We

huge improvement of independence

are not obligated to work in an office

and life quality (Wang 496).

thanks to these sophisticated tools.

We can control different operations

Houses during the 17th Century had

in different geographies. Our tools,

only one or two multi-purpose rooms.

improve the efficiency, precision and

After industrialization of US houses

quality of our work. They contribute

become bigger and more specialized.

undeniably to our flexible lifestyle.

Partitions and functions were crystal clear. However, Frank Lloyd Wright

The pursuit of flexibility is not a

was experimenting a whole different

temporary trend. It was essential in

scheme, “open-plan” (Elliot, 52). During

order to progress back in the old ages

early 20th Century economical and

and it is still an important skill to

urbanism problems directed architects

survive and improve in the modern

towards more flexible organizations.

world. It is an essential quality of

Building lots were getting smaller and

one’s mental and physical health.

developers expecting more profit and

However, the idea of flexible life

the open plan solution became the

developed into a whole different level

best recipe to tackle this problem.

with sophisticated, multifunctional, advanced tools such as 3d printers,

Frank Lloyd Wright was interested in

nanorobots or smart devices.

social interactions within the house at that time. Because, “Victorian” lifestyle

0120 // FLEXIBLE SPACE

was evolving into a more relaxed

One of the most important political

lifestyle and current housing schemes

figures of the world, Winston Churchill

were limiting the communication

said “We shape our buildings;

among family members, Frank

thereafter they shape us.” which was

Lloyd Wright was aiming to meld

a great statement. We demanded the

spaces together and allow for greater

concept of flexible life in order to

functionality (Wildman 4) (Fig. 1).

progress, efficiency and high quality.

Later, he took the concept to the next

As its expected, architecture followed

level with integrating landscape into

this movement and started shape us

it. He minimized partitions in the

like we shaped them.

house and unified the outdoor and indoors. His uninterrupted space

The pioneer of the flexible space and

flow experiment evolved into a real

open plan idea was the American

architectural style.

architect Frank Lloyd Wright.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Open plan scheme then used in

On the other hand materials like

office buildings, especially in towers

concrete and steel started to be

for a “better” working experience.

used in housing projects (Elliot 52).

However, Frank Lloyd Wright’s ideas

New structural possibilities allowed

directed into another way. It was a

architects to decrease partitions

great opportunity for developers and

within the house. Improvements in

corporations to put more people into

technology extended the potentials of

one floor. Later open plan scheme

the flexible space idea.

became the only system used in high rise projects.

The idea of continuous flow between spaces and using each space for

One of the earliest open plan projects

multiple functions are standards for

of Frank Lloyd Wright’s is “Jacobs

architecture today. However, in the

House.” It is an open plan L-shaped low

course of the time spaces lost their

income housing project which was

spatial features, origins and became

built in Wisconsin. The house reflects

generic spaces. Today, the most

the fundamentals of Frank Lloyd

flexible space is the most generic

Wright’s philosophy successfully.

space that an architect could ever

Living room, kitchen and dining room

imagine. Spaces lost connection with

all work together as a one space. Also,

tradition, function and user demand.

thin borders of the house, allows the nature to flow inside the house and

Demonstration of the generic

integrate indoor life with outdoor.

architecture problem, could be done by

On the other hand, sustainable

comparing two different projects from

technologies such as solar power,

two different countries which designed

water boilers and passive cooling

by different architects. The first project

supports the philosophy of nature

is a housing project in Cadiz which

integrated house lifestyle.

was designed by Cano Lasso (Fig. 2). The other project is an office complex

Improvements in construction

in Istanbul, which was designed by

techniques also allowed the open-plan

Emre Arolat (Fig. 3). Someone who has

scheme to improve. Central heating

no information about these projects

systems changed the whole fireplace

cannot understand the function, place

focused house planning system.

or era of the buildings.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

We are in the age of over-simplified

Urbanization in China is one of the

design and the sense of space does not

most important examples of the

exist anymore. Pureness of projects

standardized urban fabric problem.

started to become a problem for users.

China adds housing for 10 million

When the sense of a space started to

citizens every year and it is not going

dissappear, the user experience of the

to slow down in a foreseeable future.

space gets worse too. The question

However, robotic fabrication can

is, “Why?” There are multiple reasons,

help to solve the problem of generic

but one of the most important factors

and homogeneous cities (Gramazio

is the “one size fits all” ideology. Due

and Kohler, 126). The idea of mass-

to mass production techniques of

customization can break the generic

building elements, customization is

image of a grey and monotonous

increasing the expenses for developers,

metropolis and start a whole new era

especially in large scale projects. Thus,

for cities.

engineers and architects focus on decreasing the variation for the sake

To tackle the generic architecture

of cost and time efficiency. However,

problem, as architects we should look

it makes structures unsustainable and

for new and flexible construction

inefficient. For instance, loads of the

methods to create flexible spaces

structure calculated for the worst case

without losing details and resolution

instead of calculated, designed and

of the design. Researchers working

manufactured individually for each

with industrial robots to improve

structural element (Gramazio and

construction techniques and shift

Kohler 46).

the “one size fits all” ideology. On the other hand, architects should design

In the bigger picture generic

more flexible spaces for our dynamic

architecture problem and design

lifestyle. It is a hard task to create

limitations effect the urban context.

more flexible and dynamic spaces

Current design of flexible and feasible

with conventional rigid structures.

projects does not allow spatial or

Maybe it is the time to consider

programmatic variations in the city. As

designing actual dynamic structures

a result, cities become unsustainable,

and re-invent the idea of flexible

over-simplified, mono-functional and

space with the help of tecnological

monotonous (Gramazio and Kohler 47).

advancements.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

0130 // RESPONSIVE ARCHITECTURE Discussion about new methods of flexible spaces brings another subject to discuss, responsive architecture. Buildings labelled as static structures where users adapt to its pre-defined features. We argued the flexibility in rigid structures limit the creativity and spatial features of the architecture. Structures and materials are evolving into more dynamic building components, it is not a science fiction idea anymore. As a matter of fact, the number of dynamic and responsive components of buildings such as airports, shopping malls and towers

in different ways and a gangway system for people to circulate between them. The building’s visual incompleteness was a provocation to its inhabitants to change and adapt it. It was also a representation of an architecture that could never be finished.” Omar Khan Responsive and dynamic spaces are an important research case for more than forty years and in the last decade we encounter many successful projects. Responsive design was a subject of artists and computer engineers in the late 60’s. One of these early artworks is “Glowflow” which is made by Dan Sandin, Jerry

increased radically (Eng, 1).

Erdman, Richard Benezsky and

One of the very first experiments on

glowing tubes on the walls were

the responsive architecture was made by architect Cedric Price and director Joan Littlewood in 1964 called “Fun Palace”. It was not an automated or futuristic design, nevertheless it was a dynamic architecture attempt with available tools. This attempt inspired most of the further experiments about responsive architecture later. Omar Khan describes the “Fun Palace”

Myron Krueger. Basically, there were defining an illusory space according to the steps of visitors. Space was also responding to the sounds to the walking visitors. However, it was not a perfect design, because the audience was not aware of the responsiveness. Later, Myron Krueger thought that interaction quality should be the only aesthetic concern instead of visuals or acoustics. Then, he developed his own

project briefly:

work which is called “Metaplay”. It was

“Price provided a crane that allowed parts

in the Memorial Union Gallery of the

of the building to be moved and stacked

an interactive drawing installation University of Winsconsin.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Basically, there were an artist in the

Especially in the last decade

computer lab and he was drawing on

prototypes of responsive spaces and

a data table. His drawings shown in

interactive installations evolved into

the gallery and visitors were sending

a whole other level. One of the most

drawings to the artist with the same

significant examples of responsive

way. It turned into a nice attraction

architecture in the 21st Century was

in the gallery during that time. It

the project “Ada: Intelligent Room”. An

may sound like very simple and

interdisciplinary group worked on this

easy, but this was an extraordinary

“playful” responsive space and built

work for that time and it was the

in 2002 for Swiss Expo (Fig. 4). It was

very beginning of interactive and

named after Lady Ada Lovelace, who

responsive space design.

was a pioneer of computer science. Ada was an artificial organism which

In 1969, John Frazer was a last year

was based on neuroinformatics. Ada

architecture student in Architecture

was able to identify and locate visitors,

Association, London. James Gowan

moreover, she could balance visitor

introduced him to very first thinkers of

flow and density and play games with

computational design such as Cedric

them. Ada played with her visitors

Price, Gordon Pask and Nicholas

more than five months and twelve

Negroponte. Later these thinkers

hours each day. During this period,

became his main inspiration to

approximately 550,000 visitors visited

experiment with computational design

Ada (Eng, 1).

and interactive architecture. His final year thesis was “Autotectonics” which

Responsiveness is not just a feature

argues using technology to change

for the human scale. It is also a subject

the choices available to the users of

of building scale too. Especially

architecture (Frazer 138). It took almost

building skins which response against

twenty years to reach his goal; in 1990,

natural changes such as temperature,

AA Diploma Unit 11 built a working

wind or the position of the sun is an

model of a self-organizing interactive

important starting point to design

environment successfully (Frazer

actual sustainable architecture. One of

136). These experimental works still

the earliest buildings with responsive

continue and develop parallel to

skin is “Zeilgalerie” in Frankfurt.

the improvements of technology.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

The skin is a Christian Moeller

Responsiveness and dynamism of

project, which is called “Kinetic

architecture is not just a fantasy, but it

Light Sculpture” built in 1992 (Fig. 5).

is an actual need of 21st Century people.

Basically, the skin colours change

Because, one can say that the current

with the help of 120 halogen spots

lifestyle of human being is closer to a

which were mounted over catwalks

nomadic condition. Constant changes

according to weather conditions

in life force people to move from one

during the night. If it was below 0 C

place to another one on the globe.

building colour becomes blue as the

While these changes are happening

temperature rises colours become

people start to become alienated

yellow, orange then red. It was

from their own life due to space and

arguably the first interactive facade

place changes around them. However,

installation in this scale (Bullivant 21).

an actual responsive environment

can help with all these changes and Responsiveness is not a new concept

smoothening up transitions in life.

for architecture. It was a dream of architects for a long time and we are

We are on the verge of creating

really close with the help of advanced

not only responsive spaces or

devices and sensor technology to

components. Advanced technology

reach the point that Marcos Novak’s

could also produce nanorobotic

“Liquid Architecture” in real life.

materials which could respond to

Description of “Liquid Architecture” is:

any kind of environmental chage. The founder of “Kinetic Design Group”

“Liquid architecture is an architecture

at MIT, Michael A. Fox mentions re-

that breathes, pulses, leaps as one

thinking the scale in his “Catching Up

form and lands as another. Liquid

with the Past” essay. He thinks large

Architecture is an architecture whose

“devices” which are made of small

form is contingent on the interests of the

scaled intelligent modules could

beholder; it is an architecture that opens

enhace the capabilities of the large

to welcome and closes to defend me;

“devices” in terms of flexibility, sensing

it is an architecture without doors and

capabilities and robustness (Fox 10).

hallways, where the next room is always

The next level of responsiveness could

where I need it to be and what I need it to

be hidden in small scaled components

be.” Marcos Novak (Gibson 272).

or smart materials.

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Figure 1: The George Berdan House, Image Courtesy of BDR Custom Homes

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Figure 2: Exterior of Housing in the Historic District Cadiz, Image Courtesy of Pablo Diaz-Fierros Figure 3: Interior of Housing in the Historic District Cadiz, Image Courtesy of Pablo Diaz-Fierros

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Figure 4: Exterior of Tekfen Kagithane Ofispark, Image Courtesy of Emre Arolat Architects Figure 5: Interior of Tekfen Kagithane Ofispark, Image Courtesy of Emre Arolat Architects

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Figure 6: Ada: Intelligent Room, Swiss Expo 2002, Photo Courtesy of Paul Veschure

The Idea of Flexible and Responsive Architecture

Figure 7: Kinetic Light Sculpture, Photo Courtesy of Moeller, Kramm and Strigl

AUTOMATION & ARCHITECTURE

“There are an endless number of things to discover about robotics. A lot of it is just too fantastic for people to believe” Daniel H. Wilson

0310 // ROBOT The word “Robot” first mentioned in

Later, The Unimate’s abilities

a Czech play writer Karel Capek’s

expanded to welding, painting and

“Rossum’s Universal Robots” play.

applying adhesives. It was one of

It is derived from the Czech word

the most important inventions in

“robota” which means slave labor

human history, because it was just

(Wilson 6). Nevertheless, robots are

the beginning of a whole new era for

actually mechanical or virtual artificial

humanity.

agents which are guided by codes or electronic circuitry. They can be

Villem Flusser, the philosopher,

autonomous or semi-autonomous

believes that factories are reflecting

with different scales from industrial

the history of humankind. He divided

enormous robots to microscopic

the history of humankind into four

nanorobots. People label robots as

sections which were hands, tools,

future caretakers of humankind;

machines and robots. People first used

however, it is a more complicated

their bare hands to manufacture, then

relationship and not that far away

they built tools and learned how to

from today.

use them. It was the first revolution because the human was not a part

The robot-human relationship started

of primitive life and its environment

long ago, in 1954, when William

anymore, he was different. Tool era

Grey Walter built first electronically

longed for ages and machine era

autonomous robot. Seven years later,

started approximately two hundred

George Devol invented, “The Unimate”,

years ago. Machine changed the

which was the first digital and

meaning of human existence. Thus,

programmable industrial robot (Fig. 6).

during the tool era, the abilities

Robots are first used in large scaled car

of a person were important in a

factories like General Motors, Ford and

manufacturing process. If a tailor

Chrysler. The Unimate was used to lift

broke his needle, he could get a

and stack die-cast metal parts taken

new one, it would not bother the

hot from their molds.

manufacturing process.

After the invention of machines,

change the concept of factories or

human existence lost its importance.

workshops because the process of

If a worker who controls a machine

manufacturing does not have to be a

die, another worker could have done

massive event anymore, like during

his job exactly the same way with

the tool or machine era (Flusser 48).

the same precision and quality.

Moreover, it is not a distant future

On the other hand, if a machine

prediction. For instance, desktop

broke, then the production will

3d printers becoming more popular

be stopped. This shift reflected

everyday and they are an essential

even in factory architecture. After

proof of the individual manufacturing

machines introduced to the process

era. If someone broke a plate, instead

of manufacturing workers pushed to

of buying a new plate, he can print a

the periphery of factories right after

new one. In the long term, it is more

machines placed in the middle of the

economical and practical for the user.

buildings (Flusser 47).

Moreover, customized fabrication according to user needs adds more

However, the third revolution,

value to manufacturing with 3d

introduction of the robots started a

printing technology.

whole new hybridic era for factories. Manufacturing is not a human or

“Arduino” is another milestone during

machine centralized process anymore,

the evolution of manufacturing. It is

contrarily it is a mutual relationship.

an open-source prototyping platform

A robot would not operate without

based on easy-to-use hardware and

a human being, it has to be taught

software. Basically, it is another step to

by a person. On the other hand, a

integrate robots into our daily life. It is

person cannot expect, anything robot

simple and user friendly, even a child

cannot do. If we consider the variety

can build a robot with this platform. It

of current robot types and usages,

is simple and practical. It is exactly like

this era is similar to the primitive

the inventor of robots Mr. Devol said:

man (hand) era. A person can take his robot and start a manufacturing

“We should take refuge in the fact that

process anywhere he wants. Each era

very crude systems can accomplish an

has made huge changes in human

awful lot. Elegant capabilities are nice, but

life, no doubt that robot era will

often unnecessary.” George Devol

Automation & Architecture

Simplicity of the Arduino platform

It will relax the constraints of design

enhances the ability of creative minds.

and allow more sophisticated forms

It is easy to find creative solutions

to be created and materials to be used.

for everyday problems online. For

Robots and parametric design tools

instance, “Lawnbot400” is a great

have started to be oriented. In the

solution for mowing a lawn with only

short term, robotics in architecture

an R/C controller (Fig. 7). Moreover, it

will improve the context of terms

is an open source project which means

like flexible space and responsive

anyone can make the same robot for

architecture. In the distant future,

themselves. “Open source” is really

they may create entirely new

important because it allows to improve

methodologies.

the technology and encourages people to “make” robots.

0311 // INDUSTRIAL ROBOTS ISO 8373 defines industrial robots

Advancements in robotics technology

as automatically controlled,

during the last decade are fascinating.

reprogrammable, multipurpose

However, it is just the tip of the

manipulator, programmable in three

iceberg. The next phase in the robot

or more axes, which can be either

era will begin with nanorobotics.

fixed in place or mobile for use in

Nanotechnology has a long theoritical

industrial automation applications.

history, which began in 1960’s. Great

Typical applications of robots include

vision of scientist Richard Feynman

welding, painting, assembly, pick

finally becomes real in this century.

and place, product inspection, and

It took a long time to develop

testing. Regardless of complexity of

technologies to a certain level for

assignment, industrial robots are fast,

nanorobotics, but it was definitely

precise and durable.

worth to wait. The earliest known industrial “robot” The era of the robots began almost

was built by Griffith P. Taylor in 1937

fifty years ago and technological

and published in Meccano Magazine. It

advancements made them affordable,

was called “The Gargantua” and crane-

smaller and smarter. No doubt that,

like device was built almost entirely

changes in fabrication techniques will

using Meccano parts, and powered by

effect the architecture too.

a single electric motor.

Automation & Architecture

Five axes of movement were possible,

It was an all electric, six axis

including grab and grab rotation.

articulated robot which is basically

Automation was achieved using

an imitation of an arm. Scheinman

punched paper tape to energize

designed another arm for MIT later,

solenoids, which would facilitate

which is called “MIT Arm”. On the

the movement of the crane’s control

other side of the ocean European

levers. The robot could stack wooden

companies also started to invest

blocks in programmed patterns.

in industrial robots. ABB Robotics

The number of motor revolutions

and KUKA Robotics were the first

required for each desired movement

industrial robot manufacturers in

was first plotted on graph paper. This

Europe. They introduced industrial

information was then transferred to

robots to the market in 1973. ABB’s

the paper tape, which was also driven

IRB6 is the first commercially available

by the robot’s single motor.

all electric micro-processor controlled robot in the world. First two IRB6

However, The Gargantua was not

sold to the Swedish firm Magnusson

fitting in the definition of industrial

to grind and polish pipe bends. Late

robots. The first industrial robot

1980’s are the boom years for robots.

patented in 1961 by George Devol.

Many US firms get into the business

His first robot is called Unimation.

of industrial robots, but not many of

Unimation robots were also called

them survived. Currently, most of the

programmable transfer machines

major robot manufacturers are based

since their main use at first was to

in Japan and Europe.

transfer objects from one point to another, less than a dozen feet or so

Usage of industrial robots also

apart. They used hydraulic actuators

extended out of the factories. It was

and were programmed in joint

a huge research field for engineers

coordinates. Monopoly of Unimation

from different backgrounds. Abilities

continued until the 70’s.

of large scaled robots can be used in space or on a construction site.

Early 1970’s are the rising years for

Industrial robots became a subject

industrial robots. First “Stanford

of architecture when they became

Arm” created by Victor Scheinman in

affordable in the last decade.

Stanford University.

Automation & Architecture

Fabio Gramazio and Matthias Kohler

mixed-use high rises with using

are the leading architects of robotic

industrial robots (Fig. 9). Robots cut the

fabrication researches in the field of

pieces precisely, glue them, than put

architecture. They founded the first

the piece into desired position. The

multipurpose fabrication lab in ETH

task is simple at first glance, however,

Zurich, 2005. Since that day Gramazio

it is not a simple task when there

and Kohler leaded numerous robotic

are hundreds of different positioned

projects and lectures. Their first

pieces for a human being. Robots

large scaled project with robots was

accelerate the process remarkably.

“Gantenbein Vineyard” facade in

However, it is just a beginning of

Switzerland, 2006 (Fig. 8). They were

building actual buildings with robots.

commissioned to design and built a

No doubt that in the near future these

facade for a concrete structure. At first

construction experiments will be done

sight, due to low payload of industrial

with one to one scaled prefabricated

robots was a problem for large scale

modules. When industrial robots

construction. However, with the “brick

become more feasible for construction

by “brick” approach payload problem

sites whole process of construction

solved. It was a breakthrough project

will change forever.

for digital fabrication because it was a non-standardized assembly of the

Another important robotic fabrication

20,000 individually positioned bricks

researcher in the architecture field,

with high precision.

Achim Menges, who is a professor in the University of Stuttgart. He is a

Gramazio and Kohler’s graduate

founding member of the Institute for

studios also work on plenty of

Computational Design. As a research

remarkable robotic fabrication

group they built an exhibition hall with

research projects. One of their

using only industrial robots in 2004

research project about high rise

which is called Landesgartenschau

buildings is just the beginning

Exhibition Hall (Fig. 10). It is one of the

of a whole new era in high rise

first attempt to use robots for building

construction. Graduate students in

structures.

Singapore-ETH Centre for Global Enviromental Sustainability built 1/50 scaled physical models of their

Automation & Architecture

Precision, speed, multi-tasking and

the interactive, responsive designs.

code orientation with parametric

However, artists and designers do

design softwares are the main

not have enough knowledge about

advantages of industrial robot usage

coding or the relationship between

for architectural fabrication. For this

software and hardware. Arduino is

project, 243 different wooden plates

the solution for them. No surprise that

manufactured with approximately

Arduino effected architectural designs

7600 individual finger joints with

too. There are thousands of projects

high material and energy efficiency.

in different scales. Also, parametric

Tasks like welding, drilling or

design softwares are now adapted

moving materials are usual duties

to Arduino. It became a really easy

for robots, but architects re-define

process for architects to code Arduino

these standard tasks with parametric

boards. Spanish firm Cloud 9 design,

design softwares to create unique

Media-TIC building in Barcelona (Fig.

results. It would not be a surprise to

11) is one of the most outstanding

see industrial robots on construction

examples of Arduino capabilities in

sites in the short term. However, it is

big scale. It is an office building and

also fair to say that usage of industrial

an important example of responsive

robots for fabrication is feasible when

architecture. ETFE facade cushions

it adds value to the process. Using

are placed on south to work as

the features of industrial robots and

sunscreen in summer, during winter

pushing the limits is a must for the

ETFE cushions open to gain solar

robotic fabrication.

energy. Arduino based facade sensing the environmental changes and adjust

0312 // HOME MADE ROBOTS

the interior climate. This feature

Robots are complex devices which

reduces the CO2 emission %10.

guided by codes or electronic circuitry. However, Massimo Banzi, Dave Mellis

Arduino could be also used as a

and David Cuartielles decided to

fabrication tool. CandyProject is a

simplify the process. They created

research project of Jin Shihui in

the prototyping platform Arduino

Barcelona (Fig. 12). The robot separates

in 2005. Their initial user group is

and spray the natural fiber to the metal

art and design students, because

structure with pre-adjusted material

contemporary art directed towards

density settings.

Automation & Architecture

Arduino is just one of the platform

the Bottom” audience thought it was

for robot prototyping. A number of

an entertaining science fiction story.

simple and user friendly platforms

However, it was just the beginning of

for prototyping growing and effecting

nanotechnology. Feynman repeated

various fields. Also being an open

his speech with elaborated ideas later

source platform accelerates the

in 1983 and 1984. In these speeches

development of simple but effective

he mentioned about nano-scaled

robotic platforms. Architecture student

computers, but this time audience

projects and hackhatons are just the

was impressed more than they

first step of more dynamic, responsive,

entertained. In fact, he is one of the

sustainable and flexible robotic

worlds most important scientist of

structures or advanced and mobile

humankind, but he did not invent

fabrication tools for architecture.

any kind of nanotechnology product or tool; however, his vision inspired

0313 // NANOTECH ROBOTS

future generations to re-think the

Nanotechnologic products started

scale conception.

to integrate into our lives in the last decade. There is a wide range of

In 21st Century nano-scaled computer

products from self cleaning glass to

or robots are not science fiction stories

bullet-proof vest. Nanorobots are the

anymore. In 2007, researchers Adriano

emerging field of nanotechnology.

Cavalcanti, Bijan Shirinzadeh, Robert

These devices ranging in size from

Freitas, Jr., and Tad Hogg built the

0.1–10 micrometers and constructed of

“Nanorobot Control Design” software

nanoscale or molecular components.

to simulate virtual nanorobots and

It is still in the phase of research and

accelerate the process of prototyping.

testing. However, it is a fascinating

Research group leader Cavalvanti said:

technology, which offers numerous opportunities for a range from health

“Some existing components, like sensors,

to the construction industry.

motors, actuators and antennas, are already available as nanodevices. Then

Richard Feynman is one of the

you have to take the next step: those

most influential scientists in

components should be integrated as

nanotechnology field. After his talk

embedded parts assembled into a

in 1959, “There’s Plenty of Room at

nanorobot.” Adriano Cavalcanti

Automation & Architecture

For instance, a sensor having a switch

“Mechanical counter top which can raise

approximately 1.5 nanometers across,

and lower itself when needed and a smart

capable of counting specific molecules

cabinet above which can assist you in

in a chemical sample. However, no

retrieving food items as desired. Both the

doubt that there is still a long way

countertop and the cabinet understand

ahead of nanorobotics.

the actions of each other and while only one may deduce a response based on

Potentials of nanorobots are not

environmental sensing, the other may

just limited by fighting with cancer.

operate accordingly based on the actions

Scientists are improving the current

of the other device. Countertop senses

technology and their work getting

the height of an individual it may lower

finer and finer. Researchers believe

itself to accommodate a specific food

that with this pace of refinement

preparation need, and the cabinet will use

nanorobotic DNA production could

the information of the countertops’ action

happen in a foreseeable time. These

and lower itself and organize the food

DNA parts can compute and link up on

items accordingly to a learned pattern of

specific combinations under specific

behavior what the person typically eats at

circumstances and some day we will

a specific time of day.” Michael A. Fox

have the ability to build “living” robots (Steffen, Gore, and Inc 106).

This is an achievable task by today’s technology. However, he wants to

Other than health industry,

expand this responsive device. He

architecture will also benefit from

suggests to think about a countertop

nanorobots. Michael A. Fox brings

and a cabinet which made by

up the idea of re-thinking scale

thousands of smaller mechanical

factor robotic field of architecture.

devices. Potential of geometric

Technological limitations directed

flexibility and variety, sensing

researchers to dynamic large scaled

capabilities would be enhanced

structures or objects. He explains

undeniably. Nanorobots could broaden

his idea with an intelligent kitchen

the technical limits and give more

counter. In his “Catching up with the

freedom to the designer during the

Past” essay, he says:

design process.

Automation & Architecture

Voxels are basically 3d pixels, which

more than a green rooftop or imitation

have been used in digital modelling

of a natural form. I argue that the

for quite some time (Fig. 13). With the

problem is the misjudgment of the

help of nanorobots, a similar approach

world. Stability does not exist in

could re-define intelligence, flexibility

nature and rigid structures cannot

and responsiveness of a space.

perform as an artificial nature

Architectural design methodologies

component. However, dynamic

will most probably extend beyond our

structures could really perform as

minds in the distant future.

a part of nature. On the other hand, pre-programmed behaviors are the

0320 // ROBOTIC STRUCTURES

other part of dynamism in nature.

Introduction of the book “The

An apple on a tree knows when to

Nature and Art of Motion” by Gyorgy

drop or a sunflower knows to follow

Kepes questions an important

the light source. Response against

common belief, in other words a

environmental changes is one of the

misjudgment. Why we define the

most important ability of nature. Roy

essential characteristic of the world

Ascott, leading artist of the telematic

as constancy and stability? In fact,

art movement once said:

nothing in or on the world is stable. As a matter of fact, the whole universe

“Behaviour relates to ideas... An organism

is in motion, stabilization is just a

is more efficient when it knows its own

misjudgment or a scale problem of

internal order.” Roy Ascott

humanity. Stars, ocean or atoms, they are all moving, transforming and

Since the smart device age started,

evolving. Nothing is “literally” stable or

people started to seek intelligence

durable in the nature.

in every object. As a result, architects started to design systems.

Designing with the nature is a

Theodore Spyropoulos describes

common conceptual approach in

these systems as pursuing higher

architecture; however, it is a still

ordered goals emerging trough an

shallow discussion in most of the

intimate correlation of material and

cases. Unfortunately, designed

computational interaction. This

most of the “sustainable” or “nature

synthesis creates a generitive time

focused” projects cannot develop

based behavioral model of living.

Automation & Architecture

Examination of these intimate

Some moves fast and changes fast,

orders built through the interplay of

some do not. Bruce Sterling explains

environmental catalysts.

and puts these differences into a system with “Pace Layers.” It is not

Discussing the robotic structure

a scientific argument, however, it

and architectural system behaviors

is useful to understand the order

will be more accurate to analyze the

of changes and speed in the world.

systems intelligence. Since moving,

This system is like an onion, which

transforming and self-assembling are

is layered. In outer layer everything

the basic behaviors of current robotic

works in fast pace. It is airy and light.

structures, analysis will focus on these

On the other hand, inner layer beneath

three behaviors.

outer is relatively slower and denser. Bruce Sterling enhances “Pace Layers”

0321 // MOVE

idea with fashion and commerce

The idea of moving structures can

relationship. He states that these are

be horrifying for most of the people

three different layers which exist

because of reminding earthquakes

since the ancient times, however, they

or natural disasters. However, the

changed in different paces. Fashion

benefits of moving structures can go

can change from season to season.

beyond our imagination. For instance,

Chanel can change jacket styles every

a tower, which moves according to

fall and spring. However, as next layer,

wind can reduce the load of the wind

commerce will not change as fast as

on the structure or moving according

fashion does. Chanel firm will exist

to the sun can produce more solar

as long as the business successfully

energy and reduce automatic climate

managed. It will change in time, but

control usage. Moreover, with the help

the pace of the change would not be as

of moving structures, actual flexible

fast as a jacket.(Yelavich and Adams

and responsive spaces can be created.

216)

Movement is constant for everything

“Pace Layers” also a great way to

and everywhere. Each existing atom

discuss moving structures. Because,

moves in universe. However, it is not

architecture is also a multi-layered

a steady pace for everything. Every

system which consists multiple scaled

object has its own behavior and pace.

elements.

Automation & Architecture

A city (inner layer) and a house (outer

movement to adjust itself to the

layer) can be compared in a same way

environmental changes. Especially

of Chanel example. This order of layers

Philip Beesley’s experiments on

should be considered and designed

interactive space points out another

carefully because if every layer of the

direction for moving structures. In his

system works in same speed, as Bruce

lecture with Dr. Rachel Armstrong,

Sterling stated “A fire on the ground

he defines current buildings as

floor leaps to ignite the roof.” (Yelavich

interaction resistant. The main goal

and Adams 218)

of their project, so called “Hylozoic Ground”, is to break this resistance

As an example for rapid movement,

against interaction with people (Fig.

“Dynamic Tower” project of Israelian

14). He thinks holding on to things

architect, David Fisher is an important

and making them pure and durable

design. Rotating floor plate idea

is not natural. He defines their work

is not a new one. There are plenty

as resilient public architecture which

of restaurants which can turn 360

breathes gently. His project in Venice

degrees around the center to benefit

Bienalle 2010 was a quite successful

every customer from the view of the

attempt to create the resillient

restaurant. However, “Dynamic Tower”

public space. Their main influence

in Dubai takes this idea to the next

was layers in environment which

level. Each floor of the skyscraper

works with chemistry around. They

can turn around the center and each

used chemicals to create interaction

second form of the building changes.

between space and visitors. It was a

David Fisher states that this feature

mutual but complex relationship. The

adds a fourth dimension to design

mechanism was working really gently,

philosophy, which is time. In terms

in Philip Beesley’s words “deliciously.”

of cost-efficiency, flexibility and responsiveness of this project still

When Greg Lynn first comes up with

questionable and no doubt that this

the idea of designing with motion, his

is just the primitive version of robotic

influence was boats. He questioned at

towers.; however, it is an important

that time, why architecture does not

moving structural design in large

use motion in the environment while

scale. On the other hand, there are

multiple forces shaping boats for a

projects which consider more subtle

long time.

Automation & Architecture

He thought motion should be a part

Greg Lynn’s “Room Vehicle House”

of architectural design. However, he

projects is an interesting approach

was not talking about literally moving

to transform the space (Fig. 15). It

structures. During his lecture in

is a mobile and ra otating house

University of Michigan, he made an

project, which originally designed

important statement:

for the “Bienalle Interieur 2012.” Main challenge of this project was

“It is time to start thinking about literally

building a 150m2 house on a 60m2

moving buildings.” Greg Lynn

lot. To tackle this problem design group thought about using interior

As mentioned before, moving the

surfaces intensively (Fig. 16 and 17).

structure is not a new idea. However,

It was again Greg Lynn’s argument

creating a behavior for a building is

long before, using walls, floors or

a whole new era for architecture. It

ceiling to create furnitures or spaces.

could be a gentle movement, constant

However, this time they used three

rotation or quick reaction. As long as

surfaces of the building to create

it moves with environmental changes,

space. User controlled mechanism

it is one step closer to actual flexibility

will rotate according to space needs.

and sustainability.

For instance, if someone wants to go kitchen instead of moving towards

0322 // TRANSFORM

there, building rotates and orients

Buildings such as conference halls,

the kitchen to the user’s position. For

sports centers could be named as

mobility, they used foam cored fiber

analogue transforming spaces.

epoxy laminate, just like an F1 car. The

Especially in US most of the sports

1/5th scale prototype which weights

arenas can be used for multiple sports.

less than 150lbs, can be easily moved

For instance, Madison Square Garden

by a regular person.

in New York is the home of basketball, hockey, boxing and concerts. It can be

RV House is a moving space rather

transformed from one to another in

than a transforming space. It is a

a very short time. However, there are

hybrid of moving and transforming

researchs to automate this process

space which makes it a special

with different methods for the sake of

approach to dynamic structure design

ultimate flexibility and efficiency.

with current technology.

Automation & Architecture

Especially, putting the user into

Studio of Theodore Spyropoulos in

god-like position is critical. The

Architectural Association, London

human factor is always crucial for

is leading research about robotic

architecture, but this approach is a

structures. Graduate students

whole new era for human centered

experimenting on modules which

design mentality. Human factor

can combine and create large scale

literally in the middle of the design

structures. For instance, project called

and spaces propelling around the

NoMad is a successful research project

human according to his needs.

by Dmytro Aranchii, Yuqiu Jiang, Paul

Moreover, mobility of the structure

Clemens Bart and Flavia Ghirotto

provides a high level of flexibility.

Santos (Fig. 18). The project proposes a behavioral assembly system. It

0323 // SELF-ASSEMBLE

marks a shift in our understanding

IKEA introduced a new concept of

of the built environment from

furniture design with a successful

one which is finite to one which

marketing strategy. Instead of

is autonomous, infinite and can

designing and manufacturing a

provide real-time solutions that can

traditional couch or bed frame, they

adapt dynamically to the demands

designed and manufactured easy

of its environment. Sensor system

to assemble pieces for lower price

allows the units to localize itself and

and high degree of flexibility. In fact,

communicate with other units instead

their approach has been used in the

of an imposed building form. Units

construction business over hundred

can form and synchronize in various

years. Especially, steel and wooden

orders and scales. It harvests real-

structures follows the same method.

time data of the environment and

However, the next step of the on-site

adapt to its surroundings. It is not

assembly will be robotic assembling.

a pre-determined design proposal,

Programmed robotic materials will

it is a system which regulates itself

assemble themselves to create

interactively.

buildings. Moreover, they may change form or orders in time according to

Self-assembling structures are

user needs. However, self-assembling

promising a great potential for

robotic structures are still in research

architecture in distant future.

and prototyping phase.

Automation & Architecture

Theodore Spyropoulos points out

Later, Mike Webb, Ron Herron, Dennis

the urban problems his essay

Crompton and Warren Chalk joined

“Constructing Adaptive Ecologies:

the group. Their work mostly focused

Notes on Computational Urbanism.”

on fast paced urban lifestyle and

He states that outdated practices

technological advancements. They

dictates developments in the world

discussed the necessity of “tied down”

and these buildings create generic

societies to a permanent location. They

cities which cannot adapt to the

published these works on Archigram

constantly changing needs of the built

Magazine. Later they started an office

environment. Self-assembling robotic

called Archigram Architects.

structures could turn around the whole story for the cities.

“Walking City” project was one of the most important ones among their

0330 // ROBOTIC CITY

works. The main inspiration for this

Final part of the discussion about

project was NASA’s towering, mobile

automation and architecture is in the

launch pads, hovercraft, and science

urban scale. Because, one can say

fiction comics. They envisioned parts

that a structure cannot exist by itself.

of itinerant buildings that travel on

Interaction is not limited to the user, it

land and sea for a nomadic society

interacts with the city and citizens. It

which lives in a future world without

is fair to say that if 21st Century human

boundaries and borders. The design

being expects more interactive and

of structures are plugged into utilities

flexible spaces with infinite potentials,

and information networks in different

they also expect the same from the

locations in response to the needs and

city as a whole.

desires of people, simultaneously. In “Walking City” different cultures and

“Walking City” is the very first example

information is shared and creating a

of a robotic city which designed by Ron

global information market is anticipated

Herron in 1964 (Fig. 19). Ron Herron’s

by Archigram group which can be seen

design published in Archigram.

also in “Instant City” or “Ideas Circus.”

Archigram was an important

A City is an organism which formed

architectural magazine during the 60’s

by buildings and citizens. Since

and 70’s which founded by Peter Cook

automated structures got into

and David Greene.

discussion,

Automation & Architecture

it is almost inevitable to discuss also dynamic cities. The great potentials of automated buildings are also starting exciting discussions about new building codes, functional organizations or transportation systems within the city. The emergent nanorobot technology could transform cities into actual organisms. Tiny robots could produce their copies and grow new structures temporarily or permanently in vacant areas. Moreover, they can “heal” infrastructure problems or “learn” from day to day activities of people and improve their life quality. Apparently, organism like cities could be the solution for todays common city problems. However, applications of nanorobots and cities would be realized in a distant future.

Automation & Architecture

Figure 8: First Unimate, Photo Courtesy of Bob Malone Figure 9: Lawnbot 400, Photo Courtesy of John David

Automation & Architecture

Figure 10: Gantenbein Vineyard, Photo Courtesy of Gramazio & Kohler Architects Figure 11: Mixed Use High Rise Group 1 Project, Photo Courtesy of Gramazio & Kohler

Automation & Architecture

Figure 12: Fabrication of Lansesgartenschau Exhibition Center Panels, Photo Courtesy ofICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart Figure 13: Exterior of Lansesgartenschau Exhibition Center, Photo Courtesy ofICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart

Automation & Architecture

Figure 14: Media-TIC, Photo Courtesy of Iwan Haan Figure 15: CandyProject by Jin Shihui, Photo Courtesy of Zoe Romano

Automation & Architecture

Figure 16: Voxel Explosion, Image Courtesy of Daniel Cristev

Automation & Architecture

Figure 17: Hylozoic Ground, Canadian Pavillion, Venice Biennale 2010, Photo Courtesy of Philip Beesley

Automation & Architecture

Figure 18: RV House Prototype, Photo Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form

Automation & Architecture

Figure 19: RV House Plan, Image Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form Figure 20: RV House Section A, Image Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form

Automation & Architecture

Figure 21: NoMad Self-Assemble Structure, Photo Courtesy of Architectural Association Design Research Lab

Automation & Architecture

Figure 22: Walking City, Image Courtesy of Archigram Archives

HOME AS A LABORATORY

“The home should be the treasure chest of living” Le Corbusier

In the past century, housing

Lastly, due to its varied user profile

projects, defined the key moments

such as mother, kids and father, it

in architecture and shaped our

becomes a great challenge for the

perception of modern life. Because,

architect. The complexity of life

architects used the home as a

brings problems and it push architects

laboratory. They experimented ideas

towards looking for new solutions and

and made their statements with

experimentations. However, in the

housing projects like Frank Lloyd’s

last decade, 20th Century experiments

“Usonian Houses”, Le Corbusier’s

and results cannot meet with 21st

“Villa Savoye” or Mies Van Der Rohe’s

Century user needs. With the rise of

“Farnsworth House.” There were

modernist architecture, industrial

multiple reasons to experiment with

production of building components led

housing projects.

to oversimplification. Today’s transient and changeable lifestyle requires

Firstly, It is an everyday function and

more sophisticated and complex

domestic living is affecting everyone.

components. While home interiors are

It is a fundamental function of life. The

in a constant state of change, users

philosopher Villem Flusser described

keep replacing or adding individual

the house as the most primary need

components. Instead of architectural

of a human being. In his opinion, it is

and custom solutions, users,

even more important than homeland.

transforming spaces with unreliable mass production home improvement

Secondly, client-architect relationship

components.

was more simple than any other function and it allows more

Role of the housing function evolved

experimentation. Laws and codes

into a blurry position. With the

require complicated procedures for

help of advanced communication

publicly used buildings. Developers,

technologies most of the public zone

politicians, city councils and

activities can be conducted

more actors involve into project

in private spaces. A house could

procedures. Number of actors limits

become a space that, one can shop,

the experimentation with projects.

work or study.

On the other hand, private space

In most of the â&#x20AC;&#x153;smartâ&#x20AC;? housing

activities such as watching TV,

projects, involvement of architecture

listening to music or private phone

way more less than engineering and

calls can be conduct in a public sphere.

technology. Architecture should step

The blurred line between private and

up and develop a strategy to create a

public spaces is also forcing architects

real 21st Century housing.

to re-think housing design. No doubt that architects always Another important change in the

looking for new ways to improve and

21 Century is the number average

adapt design methodologies to the

household. Every year, more and

requirements of the time. Housing

more people start to live alone or keep

projects could be the best place to test

changing their household setups. As a

their new methodologies and ideas.

result, static floor plans are becoming

Creating a flexible, dynamic and

outdated. On the other hand, spatial

adaptive housing could be the starting

requirements per household increases

point of actually living and working

Currently, almost half of the world,

organism like cities. Dynamism is the

stuck in their tiny urban structures.

most critical issues for future cities.

While our lifestyle pacing up, our cities Forward looking designers and

cannot leave behind. Transformability,

architects realized the new coming

adaptiveness and flexibility are the

challenges and possibilities of

most important topics of architecture

changing lifestyle around 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. They

in this century.

started to use advanced technologies and materials to enhance abilities

0310 // DYNAMIC HOUSING

of domestic settings. However, the

Transforming and adaptable

method of embedding technologies

housing is one of the most

in architecture to create flexible,

important concern of 21st Century

responsive, adaptive and intelligent

architecture. Modernist movements

environments is a questionable way

of architecture fundamentally aims

of enhancing domestic setting. The

for the transformable space for users.

current solution is an engineering

However, it is contradicting with its

solution rather than an architectural

own idea.

solution.

Home as a Laboratory

Modernism is against “the king”

Later in 1928, Richard Buckminster

role of the architect, but open plan

Fuller and his Dymaxion House was a

also dictates a specific environment

great statement of the transformable,

for users. Because, this time users

efficient and portable architecture

become dependent on hardware stores

more than a solution (Fig. 21).

or retailers of home development

However, his approach was innovative

for the sake of transforming their

and it used as a prototype of low-cost

lives. Especially, raising request of

mass production for housing (Bell and

customization of 21st Century users

Godwin 17).

makes transformable housing more important than ever. However, the

In 1993, Hans Peter Worndl’s approach

real dynamism of an architectural

to transformable architecture was

design could help to overcome this

different. In his The GucklHupf

problem and give users ultimate level

pavillion, he designed an animating

of transformability and customization

house (Fig. 22). It was built to “live.” The

opportunity.

name of the pavillion comes from the two verbs “gucken” and “hupfen” - to

In 1924, Gerrit Rietveld designed

watch and to hop. It is passive and

the Schroder House in Utrecht, The

active at the same time. On one level

Netherlands (Fig. 20). Gerrit Rietveld

the pavillion stands as metaphor for

designed pioneering sliding screens

the house with rooms and furniture.

and partitions to transform upper floor

On the other hand, the pavillion

of the house. The reason behind the

designed to response against weather

transformable spaces was dynamic

conditions by sliding, tilting and

and constantly changing lifestyle of

turning plywood panels on the facade.

the users. Owner of the house Ms.

Automation of the panels could not

Schroder had three kids, one girl and

be realized, but infinite variations of

two boys. She was expecting a design

openings activated manually. It was

which can be completely reconfigured

an impressive attempt to show the

each day, according to the family

potential of a “living” house (Bell and

needs. It was one of the earliest steps

Godwin 87).

towards transforming house idea (Bell and Godwin 10).

Home as a Laboratory

In the early days of science fiction

In the next phase, miniaturization

futurologists forsee the house of the

of hardware components will allow

future shaped like mushrooms made

technology to penetrate architecture

by bizarre materials like plastic.

more deeply. In the future, with

However, During the late 20TH Century,

the help of emerging nanorobotic

housing design was not changed

technology people will live in

much. There were experimental

dynamic houses which grow or shrink

works, but most of the practice

like actual organisms. Level of

stayed away from adventure. MIT’s

responsivity and flexibility will reach

“House_n” project was one of the

beyond our dreams.

few attempt to develop a responsive and transformable housing. It was investigating the integration of the technology to a housing unit (Bell and Godwin 49). Because, the technology embedded into the residential architecture was at least 20 years behind other industries. House_n aims to provide an “intelligent” house for the users moods and demands through integrated sensors and advanced materials. It is creating strategies to allow users to develop architectural spaces around them. Infinite customization of the house gives the user flexibility to adjust the house according to their lifestyle or budgets (Bell and Godwin 7). Long journey of the automated house dream getting closer to being realized step by step. From sliding panels to sophisticated sensor systems, it is all part of this dream.

Home as a Laboratory

Figure 23: Rietveld Schroder House, Image Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons Figure 24: The Dymaxion House, Image Courtesy of The Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller

Home as a Laboratory

Figure 25: GucklHupf, Image Courtesy of Paul Ott

ROBOTIC MICRO-HOUSING

“Great things are done by a series of small things brought together.” Vincent Van Gogh

One of the major concerns in the

For example, the author of this book,

metropolises such as New York,

himself lived in 3 different cities and

London or Istanbul is the rise of

6 different apartments in the last 6

rents due to lack of housing stock.

years. He will be moving to his 7th

Especially in Manhattan, average

apartment within July 2016. There are

housing prices hit all time high $2

lots of reasons behind this situation,

Million in the first quarter of 2016

but the result is the same. Lots

according to renowned real estate

money spent on broker fees, deposits

web site Curbed New York’s article.

and utility fees. When payed rent

Shaun Osher, chief executive of well

amount added to these fees, the total

renowned real estate company, CORE

cost of living in a decade would be

explains the main reason behind this

roughly the same cost of a small unit

problem:

construction.

“No one builds anything, and if they

At this point, people in the business

are building they are going to build

such as brokers and developers are

expensive,” Shaun Osher

also unhappy about the extremely high prices because in the current

On the other hand, our lifestyle is

conditions of the market even

not helping with this problem. Every

millionaires can hardly afford an

year, more people move into cities

apartment in Manhattan and the list of

and prefer to live single. According

potential clients shrinks every day.

to National Public Radio’s news NYC estimates by the end of 2030, there will

Lately, developers trying new ways

be one million more people start to live

to reach a wider range of people with

in the city and many of them will be

more affordable housing projects to

single.

earn more money in a shorter time. However, it is not an easy task to

Another critical point of changing

accomplish. Due to the incredible

lifestyle is the nomadic condition of

values of land in Manhattan, developers

21 Century people as its mentioned

looking for new ways to profit while

before in this book.

building affordable apartments.

Micro housing is one of their latest

The first challenge was creating a

strategies of the business. The initial

compact but spacious apartment unit

idea is based on fitting all needs of

which can transform. As a solution,

a person into a single space and

the designer came up with the idea

actually it is a great fit for the 21st

of using walls like Greg Lynn did with

Century individuals. Most of the

his RV house project. Vertical surfaces

single people in the cities using their

added to floor area by rotating the

apartments for a really short time in

whole unit. Thus, floor area multiplied

a day. The usage of the apartment

within the same volume. However, it

limited with a very basic activities.

brings some infrastructure problems.

However, micro housing design still

Since wetspaces need an undistrupted

very limited with furniture design

connection with the clean, grey and

strategies. Architects more focused

dirty water pipes for a better life

on designing transforming furnitures

quality design of the unit splitted into

rather than designing transformable

two parts. One part designed fixed

spaces. It is a questionable approach,

while the other part rotatable.

because throughout the history when architects faced with problems they

The needs of the unit effected the form

tried to find permanent solutions

development. For this project three

rather than quick fixes. Also,

main geometric shapes selected as

technological advancements always

starting points. Triangle used for the

led architects to more sophisticated

rotational part design because there

solutions. When you consider current

were three basic space needs for an

technology, architects should step up

individual. Living room, bedroom and

and find a real solution instead of a

study. For the purpose of mobility,

convertible couch.

a circular core designed. This core contains engines for wheels and

The idea of the Robotic Micro Housing

infrastructure such as water storage,

project developed with the passion of

battery, ventilation and electromagnets

creating the most efficient, mobile and

for unit to unit integration.

spacious apartment unit. There were plenty of challenges.

Singular unit gives the user freedom within a compact space. However, singular units are not the solution

Robotic Micro-Housing

for the problems of metropolises.

This unit design and formed tower is

Integration of multiple units and

just a step towards an architectural

aggregation strategies were relatively

solution for 21st city problems and it is

more important than singular unit for

not the final result, but a beggining of

the problem of over-priced properties

a more responsive, flexible, efficient

in cities. The initial idea for the

and livable apartments. It is a system

integration of the units was building

proposal rather than a design proposal.

a conventional core with an electro-

Visuals of the tower is illustrating

magnetic shell. Then, singular units

the snapshot of a potential daily form

will populate around this shell.

rather than a design proposal. When this kind of an adaptive system builds,

One of the important challenges of

variations of this unit design could be

this strategy was creating a circulation

designed according to user needs . The

between units. To tackle this, rear

variety of the unit design will enrich

part of the unit designed as a female-

the form of the tower.

male joint. This joint design creates a hallway when the two units integrates

Integration of robots to the

rear parts. When a residential tower

architecture, extending the potentials

formed by units, the building would

of the architectural design as it proved

form itself during the day according to

many times in this book. This project

environmental conditions. Especially,

is just another proof of the potential

wind direction and movement of the

of robotics technology and hopefully

sun will effect the buildings form. For

many more projects like this will help

instance, decreasing the surface area

to enhance the vision of architects and

in front of the wind flow would help to

effect their design ideas.

decrease wind load over the structure or rotating units towards the sun could decrease energy consumption of units. On the other hand, constant change of the form would be an interesting addition to the city skyline. It could be the landmark of never ending design strategy.

Figure 26: Nomadic Condition of Robotic Micro Housing Unit, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 27: Robotic Micro Housing Tower, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

TRANSFORMIBILITY

MOBILITY

ROTATING SPACES

STABILITY

CORE

WET SPACES

KITCHEN B AT H R O O M

ENGINES MAIN GEAR FOR FRONT W H E E L R O TAT I O N MAIN GEAR FOR U N I T R O TAT I O N

R O TAT I N G S PA C E S

Figure 28: Initial Form Development Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 29: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Exploded Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

QR CODED ADDRESS

KITCHEN

U N I T- U N I T JOINT

ELECTROMAGNET

CHARGING SPOT

WHEEL

Figure 30: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rear Part Design, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 31: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Core Part Design, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 32: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Front View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 33: Robotic Micro Housing Unit On The Beach, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 34: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rotation Exterior View, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 35: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rotation Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 36: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 37: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

UNITS WILL FORM T H E H A L LW AY S UNIT I N T E G R AT I O N AXIS

MAGNETIC WALLS OF CORE WILL BE USED FOR I N T E G R AT I O N A N D R O TAT I O N O F U N I T S

UNIT I N T E G R AT I O N AXIS UNITS WILL FORM T H E H A L LW AY S

Figure 38: Generic Tower Core Design For Robotic Housing Units, Drawing Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

+ + +

+ +

Figure 39: Robotic Micro Housing Units Magnetic Pattern Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 40: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Unit Movement, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 41: Robotic Micro Housing Tower, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 42: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Population, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 43: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Form Variations, Image Courtesy of the Author

Robotic Micro-Housing

Figure 44: Robotic Micro Housing Tower In Manhattan Skyline, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 45: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Top View, Image Courtesy of the Author

CONCLUSION

ignored by architects. Usage of robotic

The research examined flexibility

materials is would be inevitable in

subject in different cases. It described

the future’s construction business.

the importance for human life,

Discussion about nanorobotics

especially in the 21st Century. Later,

analyze the great theoretical physicist

examination focused on the current

Richard Feynman’s ideas and enrich

state of flexible and responsive

the discussion with the latest

space understanding in architecture.

developments in the industry.

Problems like “Generic Architecture” and the acquired degree of

Buildings are part of a larger

responsiveness questioned. Research

organization such as cities, towns or

argued that robotic fabrication, robotic

villages. Robotic structures, dynamic

structures and materials could help to

surfaces and animated buildings lead

solve these analyzed problems.

the discussion to the city aspect. No doubt that smart environments would

To illustrate potentials of robotics,

be the solution for our most of daily

research focused on background of

basis problems. Self adjusting roads,

automated systems and relationship

according to traffic conditions or

with architecture. Analysis of both

reproducing or diminishing housing

conceptual and applied projects

units, according to population flows

showed us that robotic fabrication

are just few insights about the future to

and automated structures enhance

illustrate the potential of robotic cities.

abilities of architecture and users. Additionally, research goes deeper

In the final of the discourse, “house”

into the robotic structure behaviors

proposed to use as a laboratory to

and looked for potentials of different

experiment the relationship robotics

behaviors. The insights of the robotic

with architecture. Experimenting with

structures lead to distant future ideas

housing function could help to explore

to enhance robotic structures abilities.

robotic structures in many ways.

Michael Fox’s inspirational essay

Especially, complex and constantly

“Catching Up with the Past” lead the

changing behaviors and habits of

conversation to re-thinking scale of

users would help to discover multiple

the robotic structures. The incredible

features and advantages of robotic

growth of nanotechnology cannot be

structures and materials.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: The George Berdan House, Image Courtesy of BDR Custom Homes Figure 2: Exterior of Housing in the Historic District Cadiz, Image Courtesy of Pablo Diaz-Fierros Figure 3: Interior of Housing in the Historic District Cadiz, Image Courtesy of Pablo Diaz-Fierros Figure 4: Exterior of Tekfen Kagithane Ofispark, Image Courtesy of Emre Arolat Architects Figure 5: Interior of Tekfen Kagithane Ofispark, Image Courtesy of Emre Arolat Architects Figure 6: Ada: Intelligent Room, Swiss Expo 2002, Photo Courtesy of Paul Veschure Figure 7: Kinetic Light Sculpture, Photo Courtesy of Moeller, Kramm and Strigl Figure 8: First Unimate, Photo Courtesy of Bob Malone Figure 9: Lawnbot 400, Photo Courtesy of John David Figure 10: Gantenbein Vineyard, Photo Courtesy of Gramazio & Kohler Figure 11: Mixed Use High Rise Group 1 Project, Photo Courtesy of Gramazio & Kohler Figure 12: Fabrication of Lansesgartenschau Exhibition Center Panels, Photo Courtesy of ICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart Figure 13: Exterior of Lansesgartenschau Exhibition Center Panels, Photo Courtesy of ICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart Figure 14: Media-TIC, Photo Courtesy of Iwan Haan Figure 15: CandyProject by Jin Shihui, Photo Courtesy of Zoe Romano Figure 16: Voxel Explosion, Image Courtesy of Daniel Cristev Figure 17: Hylozoic Ground, Canadian Pavilion, Venice Biennale 2010, Photo Courtesy of Philip Beesley Figure 18: RV House Prototype, Photo Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form Figure 19: RV House Plan, Image Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form Figure 20: RV House Section A, Image Courtesy of Greg Lynn Form Figure 21: NoMad Self-Assemble Structure, Photo Courtesy of Architectural Association Design Research Lab Figure 22: Walking City, Image Courtesy of Archigram Archives Figure 23: Rietveld Schroder House, Image Courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Figure 24: The Dymaxion House, Image Courtesy of The Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller Figure 25: GucklHupf, Image Courtesy of Paul Ott Figure 26: Robotic Micro Housing Unit, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 27: Robotic Micro Housing Tower, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 28: Initial Form Development Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 29: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Exploded Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 30: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rear Part Design, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 31: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Core Part Design, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 32: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Front View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 33: Robotic Micro Housing Unit On The Beach, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 34: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rotation Exterior View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 35: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Rotation Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 36: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 37: Robotic Micro Housing Unit Interior View, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 38: Generic Tower Core Design For Robotic Housing Units, Drawing Courtesy of the Author Figure 39: Robotic Micro Housing Units Magnetic Pattern Diagram, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 40: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Unit Movement, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 41: Robotic Micro Housing Tower, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 42: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Population, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 43: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Form Variations, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 44: Robotic Micro Housing Tower In Manhattan Skyline, Image Courtesy of the Author Figure 45: Robotic Micro Housing Tower Top View, Image Courtesy of the Author

BIBLIOGRAPHY 1 // Acharya, Larissa. Flexible Architecture for the Dynamic Societies. University of Tromso, 2013. Print. 2 // Bell, Jonathan, and Sally Godwin. The Transformable House (Architectural Design). Bognor Regis: Wiley-Academy, 27 Oct. 2000. Print. 3 // Bullivant, Lucy. Responsive Environments Architecture, Art and Design. New York: Distributed in United States by Harry N. Abrams, 2006. Print. 4 // Flusser, Vilem. “Digital Apparition.” Electronic Culture: Technology and Visual Representation. Ed. Timothy Druckery. New York: Aperture Foundation, 1997. 244245. Print. 5 // Flusser, Vilem. The Shape of Things: A Philosophy of Design. London: Reaktion Books, 15 Sept. 1999. Print. 6 // Fox, Michael, Bryant P. Yeh. “Intelligent Kinetic Systems in Architecture.” Managing Interactions in Smart Environments. United Kingdom: Springer London, 1 Dec. 1999. 91-103. Print. 7 // Fox, Michael A. “Catching Up with the Past.” Footprint Spring 2010: 5-18. Print. 8 // Fox, Michael A. Novel Affordances of Computation to the Design Processes of Kinetic Structures. Diss. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, June 1996. Print. 9 // Gramazio, Fabio, and Matthias Kohler. Digital Materiality in Architecture: Gramazio&Kohler. Switzerland: Lars Muller Publishers, 1 Sept. 2008. Print. 10 // Gramazio, Fabio, and Matthias Kohler. Made by Robots: Challenging Architecture at the Large Scale. United States: John Wiley & Sons, 25 April 2014. Print. 11 // Gibson, William. Multimedia Expanded Edition: From Wagner to Virtual Reality. Ed. Ken Jordan, all Packer, and all Randall Packer. New York: Norton, W. W. & Company, 2002. Print. 12 // Hutt, Dana. Open House Architecture and Technology for Intelligent Living. Ed. Susanne Jaschko. Germany: Vitra Design Museum / Art Center College of Design, 1 Sept. 2006. Print. 13 // Kepes, Gyorgy. The Nature and Art of Motion. New York: George Braziller, December 1993. Print. 14 // Lynn Elliott. “Breaking Down Walls.” Old House Journal June 2002: 50-54. Print.

15 // Negroponte, Nicholas. The Architecture Machine. N.p.: The MIT Press, 15 Jan. 1973. Print. 16 // Spyropoulos, Theodore, John Frazer, and Patrik Schumacher. Adaptive Ecologies: Correlated Systems of Living. United Kingdom: Architectural Association Publications, 1 June 2013. Print. 17 // Steffen, Alex, Albert Gore, and Sagmeister Inc. Worldchanging: A Userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide for the 21st Century. New York: Abrams, Harry N., 2006. Print. 18 // Wang, Chenchen, MD, MSc; Jean Paul Collet, MD, PhD; Joseph Lau, MD. The Effect of Tai Chi on Health Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review. American Medical Association, 2004. Print. 19 // Weston, Richard. 100 Ideas That Changed Architecture. London: Laurence King Publishing, 5 Sept. 2011. Print. 20 // Wilson, Mike. Implementation of Robot Systems: An Introduction to Robotics, Automation and Successful Systems Integration in Manufacturing. United Kingdom: Butterworth-Heinemann, 18 Nov. 2014. Print. 21 // Yelavich, Susan, and Barbara Adams, eds. Design as Future-Making. United Kingdom: Berg Publishers, 25 Sept. 2014. Print. 22 // ISO/IEC 8373:2012: Robots and Robotic Devices, Geneva: International Organization for Standardization. 1 Mar. 2012. Print.

ONLINE SOURCES 1 // Archigram Archives. “Walking City,” The Archigram Archival Project, nd. Web. < http://archigram.westminster.ac.uk/ > 2 // Architectural Association Design Research Lab. “NoMad Self Assemble Structure,” AADRL, nd. Web. < http://drl.aaschool.ac.uk/portfolio/nomad/ > 3 // Barrionuevo, Alexei. “Will Non-Billionaires Ever Be Able to Afford NYC Housing,“ Curbed NY, 14 Apr. 2016. Web. < http://ny.curbed.com/ > 4 // Beesley, Philip. “Hylozoic Ground, Canadian Pavilion, Venice Biennale 2010,” Hylozoic Ground, nd. Web. < http://www.hylozoicground.com/ > 5 // Cristev, Daniel, “Voxel Explosion,” Christevcreative Blog, 24 Apr. 2015. Web. < https://christevcreative.com > 6 // David, John. “Lawnbot 400,” Makezine, nd. Web. < http://www.makezine.com/ > 7 // Diaz-Fierros, Pablo. “Housing in the Historic District Cadiz,” Archdaily, 2 May 2013. Web. < http://www.archdaily.com/ > 8 // Emre Arolat Architects. “Tekfen Kagithane Ofispark,” Archdaily, 14 Jun. 2012. Web. < http://www.archdaily.com/ > 9 // Gramazio & Kohler Architects. “Gantenbein Vineyard,” Gramazio & Kohler Architects, nd. Web. < http://www.gramaziokohler.com/ > 10 // Gramazio & Kohler Architects. “Mixed-Use High Rise Group 1 Project,” Gramazio & Kohler Architects, nd. Web. < http://www.gramaziokohler.com/ > 11 // Greg Lynn Form. “RV House Prototype,” Greg Lynn Form, nd. Web. < http:// glform.com/ > 12 // Haan, Iwan. “Media-TIC,” World-Architects, nd. Web. < http://www.worldarchitects.com > 13 // ICD/ITKE/IIGS University of Stuttgart, “Lansesgartenschau Exhibition Center,” Archdaily, 9 Jul. 2014. Web. < http://www.archdaily.com/ > 14 // Malone, Bob. “First Unimate,” IEEE Spectrum, 26 Sept. 2011. Web. < http:// spectrum.ieee.org/ > 15 // Moeller, Kramm, and Strigl. “Kinetic Light Sculpture,” Media Kunst Netz, np. Web. < http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/ > 16 // Ott, Paul. “GucklHupf,” Busyboo, 2 Oct. 2014. Web. < http://www.busyboo.com/ > 17 // Romano, Zoe. “CandyProject,” Arduiino Blog, 14 Jul. 2014. Web. < https://blog. arduino.cc >

18 // The Estate of R. Buckminster Fuller. “The Dymaxion House,” Archdaily, 12 Jul. 2013. Web. < http://www.archdaily.com/ > 19 // Wikimedia Commons. “Rietveld Schroder House,” Archdaily, 29 Dec. 2010. Web. < http://www.archdaily.com/ > 20 // Wright, Frank Lloyd. “The George Berdan House Blueprint,” BDR Custom Homes, nd. Web. < http://www.wrightonlakemichigan.com/ > 21 // Veschure, Paul. “Ada: Intelligent Room, Swiss Expo 2002,” Ada Interactive Space, nd. Web. < http://ada.ini.uzh.ch/ > 22 // Zarroli, Jim. “As More People Move In, New York City Suffers Affordable Housing Crisis,” National Public Radio, 8 Mar. 2016. Web. < http://www.npr.org/ >