VCorallo Studio Air Expression of Interest

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO

AIR

JOURNAL VALERIA CORALLO 540721

CONTENTS PART 1 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST I 11

1.1 Architecture as a Discourse

22

1.2 Computational Architecture

30

1.3 Parametric Modelling

32

1.4 Algorithmic Explorations

33

1.5 Conclusion

34

1.6 Learning Outcomes

35

1.7 Notes

PART 2 EXPRESSION OF INTEREST II

2

40

2.1 Design Approach

46

2.1.1 Argument

47

2.2 Case Study 1.0

49

2.2.1 Design Focus - Revisited

50

2.3 Case Study 2.0

53

2.3.1 Case Study 2.0 Revisited

55

2.5 Technique Development

60

2.4.1 Biomimicry Revisited

63

2.4.2 The Argument - Revisited

65

2.4.3 Design Focus (Again?!)

67

2.4.4 Precedents

69

2.4.5 Technique Development

71

2.5 Technique Prototyping

72

2.5.1 Fabrication Techniques

73

2.6 Technique Proposal

78

2.6.1 Technique Prototyping

80

2.6.2 Technique Proposal

81

2.7 The Inspiration and Focus

82

2.8 Learning Objectives

83

2.9 Notes

Welcome to my journal.

Corallo, valeria, 2013

3

PART 1

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST I 4

1.0

CASE FOR INNOVATION 5

"Architecture is like a language. It talks to me. Architecture is an insight

"

into the mind of an architect..

CORALLO, VALERIA (2013). THIRD-YEAR aRCHITECTURE STUDENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE

6

ABOUT ME

"A is for architecture” Hello there! My name is Valeria and I am 20 years old, styding third year of Bachelor of Environments, and majoring in Architecture. I was born in Melbourne and have grown up in the city my whole life. My love for travelling started every since I was very young, but it probably kicked off the first time I travelled overseas to China, Hong Kong and Italy. Travelling around Europe, including Spain and France, and other parts of the world has inspired my interests in Architecture. I don’t really know what it is about Architecture and design, but when I see it, automatically it talks to me. Architecture surrounds me wherever I go.

Over the past couple of years, I have been able to use a range of Architectural tools. Hand-sketching and computer modelling programs have been used as valuable materials as a part of my designs. “Rhino” (in particular the “Panelling Tools” plug-in), was used extensively as a design tool for Virtual Environments in year one. Moreso, “Autocad”, with the help of “Rhino” modelling, were used for second year’s Design Studio: Water. My knowledge of computer modelling is very limited, however now that digital architecture is taking over hand-sketching in the design industry, it would be an essential tool for me to learn throughout my University studies. Therefore, I look forward to, and hope, to master the skills of digital design so that I am able to broaden my knowledge of digital architecture and create structures which would otherwise be impossible to create using solely hand-drawing.

7

PREVIOUS PROJECT

THE LANTERN PROJECT 2011

“worm-like” patter to represent sound’s inreasing wavelength. Moreso, I explored the “distortion” of sound by looking at old sound speakers. This gave me the inspiration to further elaborate my lantern and create interesting forms. Hence, it represents the evolution of sound from the surrounding environment (ie. the input), to a chaotic level of intensity or distrotion (ie. the output).

The study of prototypes broadened my creativity in design. In particular, the “Metropol Parasol” in Seville, Spain by Jurgen Mayer H. Architects. The interlocking geometry of the “honey-comb” or “waffle-like” wooden structure pushed me to use panelling tools and create interesting patterns for my lantern design. I wanted to generate a new prespective on design using complex geometries.

This is where my experience to computer modelling and digitial architecture initiated.

The brief for this Vitual Environents subject in-

volved the design and fabrication of a lantern based on a natural process.

My design concept explores the process of sound; in particular how it travels, how it can be represented, how it travels, how it can be represented, and most of all how it takes on different forms and intensities.

The curved surface and “worm-like” form portrays the varying levels of sound using geometrical shapes. I interpreted the ascending form of the 8

PREVIOUS PROJECT THE BOATHOUSE 2012

This Studio: Water project in-

volved designing a new boathouse in Studley Park, Kew. It had to follow the “formal rules” of famous Architect, Mies Van Der Rohe. The design of the boathouse uses some of the most significant “Miesian rules.”

My boathouse encourages all people to experience the architecture which is surrounded by the abundant landscape.

Inspiration came from my favourites of Mies’ workssuch as Farnsworth House and Barclona Pavilion.

With these precedents, I was able to produce a flexible piece of architecture that took advantage of the natural surrounding

landscape and its vistas.

The “High Line” Project in New York (2009) by Diller Scofidio + Renfro was an outside-of-Miesprecendent, as it inspired me to create the Roof Garden.

Therefore, with the use of Digital Modelling, I was able to develop from a “beginner” designer to an “amateur” with the capability of generating simple

notions into complex structures.

With the tools learned, I was able to experience the challenges involved, and so learn about the digital architecture theory. Studying the works of famous architects- such as M. Van Der Rohe, A. Gaudi, J. Mayer H. Architects and F. Gehry, it makes sense now as to why digital computer modelling has become so important to digital Architecture. It has encouraged me that studying precedents can be a useful tool in starting the Gateway Design Project, ie. an “exciting, eye-catching installation that inspires and enriches the municipality”. It will be useful to use the success of “Seeds of Change” and “House in the Sky” to set the benchmark for this assignment.

9

"Parametric modelling represents change...they are the first truly active medium...computers can present

"

almost limitless kinds of tools.

Woodbury, Robert (2010). “Elements of Parametric Design�. (London: Routledge), pg. 1.

10

1.1

ARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE

"D is for discourse” “Discourse” comes from the

Italian word, “discorso”, meaning “speech” or “conversation”.

But why do we need to relate “discourse” to Architecture?

Architecture is not just art and design, but also a discourse of issues related to society and how we live in it.

As Williams states, “We expect [architecture] to be legible as images...as a single sign...to be revolutionary in some way...a kind of greatness...aesthetic brilliance” and yet “we are disappointed when buildings do not achieve it.”1 Therefore, Williams suggests that architecture must be thought of less as a set objects or materials, but rather as a “range of social and professional practises that something, but by no means always, lead to buildings.”2 We must always question Architecture to know about its existence. ......

If we turn to Greg Lynn’s article, “Blob Tectonics, or why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy”, we see another kind of article. Instead of talking about Architecture as a discourse, he discusses the development of

architecture using the “blob” metaphor, which is like a mechanism to free up and develop the design process.

Lynn states, “Blobs suggest alternative strategies of structural organisation and construction that provide intricate and complex new ways of relating the homogenous or general to the heterogenous or particular”.3 Their spatial organisation interests Lynn, how they “slither” or “creep” and move through space as though “aqueous”.4 Lynn focuses on Blob Construction, and in particular discusses the overrated notion between humans and Architecture.

However, as Lynn tries to explain, many architects are now starting to “think outside the square” and explore alternative ways of designing using the “blob” modelling. Just now the “blob” has been introduced into Architectural language, and the concept seems to be used most often in roof constructions.5

(2006) by Grimshaw Architects (and others).

The design focus of the station is the “wave-like” roof that blankets over an “entire city block”.6 With the assistance of computer modelling, the design of the roof symbolises the movement towards sustainable architecture to endure the hot external Melbourne climate and the need for internal cooling via natural ventilation. Therefore, the roof geometry is made in such a way to allow for the architecture to ventilate itself.7 These two discussions relate to the Gateway Design Project as we need to use these ideas to create a new, eye-catching installation that will illustrate architecture as a discourse and the movement of architecture towards more complex, innovative forms relating to the topology of the surrounding landscapes.

An example that immediately comes to mind is the roof design of “Southern Cross Station”: corner of Spencer and Collins Street, Melbourne, Australia 11

PERSONAL FAVOURITES

LA SAGRADA FAMILIA- ANTONIO GAUDI

“ an unfinished masterpiece”

Antoni Gaudi’s “La Sagrada

Familia” in Barcelona, Spain (1882-present) was always, and will always be my favourite piece of Architecture. The architecture is too overwhelming to describe, that one must experience “La Sagrada Familia” to understand the emotions it engenders. Why else do I like it?

Well, it just represents the genius of Gaudi and his skill for innovation using both nature and complex geometry.

perboloid vault in the nave of the Church; and the innovative “leaning columns” that Gaudi uses to form the structure of La

Sagrada Familia’s Temple are previously seen in Parque Güell (1900-1914: Gaudi’s park for Barcelona aristocracy).10

The style represents a “warped Gothic style” which is obvious when observing the site. The “rippling contours of the stone facade” give the impression that the church is “melting in the sun”; and the towers are “topped with brightly-coloured mosaics” that portray “bowls of fruit”.8 Gaudi’s influence is emphasised in the architectural landscape of Barcelona. We see “Gaudi” when we think of Barcelona. We see the use of strong colours and imagination and very detailed features. Gaudi established a new architectural language, which is evident throughout Barcelona.9 Gaudi’s way of thinking by using organic architecture and natural shapes as his basis for design, is clearly seen in his masterpiece and other works. For example, using the “tree” to form a hy12

La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, Barcelona, Spain 1882-present

La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, Barcelona, Spain 1882-present

The structure has become such an iconic building in Barcelona. It is a landmark for the Spanish city and sets a high benchmark for the complexity of Architecture around the world. Everyonefrom locals to tourists around the globe- want to experience this architectural space. Not only the space, but the words that are illustrated outside La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, the structure Barcelona, Spain 1882-present itself, “The Truth is Inside”. His study of nature and his greatest inspirations from past experiences visiting mountains and caves translated into a complex use of ruled geometrical forms. This is seen in the exterior and interior; for example the hyperbolic paraboloid, the hyperboloid, helicoids, cones, catenary curves, and other very complex shapes.11 Gaudi states in relation to ruled surfaces “Paraboloids,

hyperboloids and helicoids, constantly varying the incidence of the light, are rich in matrices themselves, which make ornamentation and even modelling unnecessary”.12 His scale model for the Church was used to calculate structures. For example, he used strings with small filled bags, hung the strings, recorded the geometric curves produced and recorded them to define the outline of the church.13 This is what makes this structure so sig- La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, nificant: the everBarcelona, Spain 1882-present so-detailed mosaics to the detail of the ceiling and every pillar, Gaudi recorded every single detail of the building: architectural, stylistic and decorative.

La Sagrada Familia resolves and revists all of the structural difficulties Gaudi faced and the errors he committed in previous projects.14 Was it Gaudi’s destiny that it was to be his greatest work, and yet he was not even able to see it finish?

13

PERSONAL FAVOURITES

METROPOL PARASOL- JURGEN MAYER H. ARCHITECTS

Metrpol Parasol, Jurgen Mayer H. Architects, Seville, Spain, 2005-2011

My love for Spain and its

diverse Architecture continues in Seville. The Metropol Parasol (2005-2011) by Jurgen Mayer H. Architects is extraordinary.

Their waffle-like crown structures incorporating a sequence of undulating parasols make up the world’s largest wooden structure. This project relates to the Gateway Project in the way that this structure sets a new, innovative icon, and a “place of identification” for Seville.15 Nonetheless, it has played a role in driving Seville to become one of the world’s “most fascinating cultural destinations”.16 This influence of organic architecture, as seen “to death” by Antoni Gaudi, has been used to establish a new, fashionable, modern-day urban centre that the Plaza de la Encarnacion 14

has become. Why do I like it? It achieves what the brief outlines; that is, a unique, organic urban space within the dense fabric of the medieval city centre of Seville to allow for a variety of public activities to be performed. It has become a social and cultural “hub” where residents, visitors and tourists are able to collaborate and “gather” under the architectural “crown-like waffle.”

As Jurgen Mayer H. Architects states, the contemporary landmark defines “a unique relationship between the historical and the contemporary city”.17 What I most like about it is that it is not just an architectural feature to the city, but it has so many functions. For example, it includes an archaeologi-

cal museum, a farmers market, an elevated plaza, multiple bars, restaurants and a panorama terrace.18 Its flexibility in its use and its imposing timber “waffle-like” timber structure landmarks a dymanic development for culture and commerce in the heart of Seville.19

Metrpol Parasol, Jurgen Mayer H. Architects, Seville, Spain, 2005-2011

Jurgen Mayer H exhibits his inspiration that derives from “Seville’s expansive cathedral...without walls...that ...is democratic...and by the...trees already in the square.”20 It is so significant to the design scheme of the city as it offers shade, which is considered a valuable “service” in Seville during the hot summer days.

The high-performance polyurethane resin, which is used to construct the architecture, is tested to ensure even the highest of temperatures could be endured.21

cityscape and provides a fluid movement of space.23 Not only is it fluid in its undulating movement, but its neutral tone harmonises the stark contrast of the “ultra-modern structure with the medieval surrounds of Seville”.24 The Metropol Parasol has introduced a sleek contemporary landmark, into a city with such rich history and unique medieval architecture, and has defined its iconic cultural role.25 Why can’t we have more of this “sculptural landscape” in the heart of our cities?

In a way, Jurgen Mayer H has represented a piece of art. His former studies in art reflect his elements of art and sculpture in his architecture. He is stating something about architecture: ie. That architecture and art are similar, and that both represent the interrelationship of “human and space”.22 Complex geometric and sculptural-like shapes of inconsistent elements create a space and a landmark; and it is computerized design and construction that make it possible.

What makes it so appealing to me is that timber polyurethanecoated interlocking parasols can create such a monumental piece of art or architecture, which also provides for shade and the game of light and shadows. Different sensations are experienced at all angles of the structure as it undulates within the landscape of the

Metrpol Parasol, Jurgen Mayer H. Architects, Seville, Spain, 2005-2011

Metrpol Parasol, Jurgen Mayer H. Architects, Seville, Spain, 2005-2011

15

1.2 COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE "C is for computation ” We ride along the line of continuum of Architecture by talking about Computation in Architecture.

What does it mean to use computation? The previous examples in fact fall under this category. They both adopt computational techniques in order to achieve such outstanding outcomes. Without the use of such technology, we would simply not have the ability to produce these structures.

The evolution of CAD and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) have opened up many new opportunities in architecture by allowing the production and construction of very complex forms. It is only recently that this advance has played a role in building design and construction, but as a result, a new digital continuum has formed. As Kolarevic states, “A new digital continuum, a direct link from design through to construction, is established through digital technologies.”26 Therefore, digital technology is not just a tool we use later in the design process to “finalise” our designs ready for manufacturing, but it is used from start to end - from the generations of ideas right through to the final stage.

Why is CAD used so extensively? Have architects just become lazy now that they don’t have to think for ideas independently? Through using CAD, designers or architects are missing an important piece in the design puzzle. Digital technology is not creative like the human brain. As Lawson states, “CAD might conspire against creative thought...by encouraging “fake” creativity.”27 Is this true? Is computation just a “tool” for creative design? John H. Frazer seems to think so as he states, “design computation is still only seen by many as “just a tool” and remote from the real business of creative design”.28

Left: Guggenheim Museim, Frank Gehry, Bilbao, Spain,1997 16

Computers are analytical machines.29 They follow a line of reasoning to its logical conclusion.30 They represent reports, tables, charts, anything can be produced fautlessly, yet, they are unable of making up new instructions and “lack any creative abilities or intuition”.31 Considering this, why then are we still using computers for design? 1) Computers excel at recalling past history; they have supurb rational and search abilities.32 2) Humans have creativity and intuition.33 What is 1) + 2)? A “symbiotic” design system.34 Computer-aided design over the years has ranged from: 1) Drafting and modelling systems, such as drawing lines and such; 2) Analytical systems which provide rational appraisal of designers’ solutions, for instance, cost, acoustics, fire egress, and so forth; 3) “Intelligent” design systems that can propose design solutions for further development.35 Therefore, systems have been developed as to help human designers communiate with each other.

The Torus

Design to me is a significant and purposeful activity aimed to achieve a well-defined goal. The search for effective general methods of design began with the Ancient Greeks, but now, computers help us.36 We see a change in architectural design, ever since the concept of professional practice commenced in the 1450s in Italy.37 It was the architects who invented the design methods, for example, scale drawings. It was the Masons and Carpenters that were the two major crafts needed to construct a building. During this time, architects moved from being technicians to being designers, for example, Leon Battista Alberti.

Through him, there was made the separation between the conception of a new building and its construction.38 A new drawing language was developed as architects used plans, sections and elevations as design representations. But in order for architects to experiment with alternative design solutions, they had to test alternatives on paper before they were committed to construction.39 These drawings marked the importance for scale models, 3D volumetric manners of showing a building.40 Thus, scale drawings became a significant tool for planning and design of structures.

Torus House, Preston Scott Cohen, Old Chatham, New York, 2001

17

Conceptual digram of the Mobius House, UN Studio / Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos, Het Gooi, the Netherlands 1995

Mobius House, UN Studio / Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos, Het Gooi, the Netherlands 1995

Mobius House, UN Studio / Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos, Het Gooi, the Netherlands 1995

It is amazing to imagine this development through a timeline. It was not too long ago that this original method of design was followed. The design information became part of a long process of four phases: ie. an anlalytical process, the creative phase, evaluation phase, and finally communication.41 Nowadays, “the design information is the construction information”, whereby more complex and direct designs through digital architecture is possible, and information can be recalled, tranformed, and used with greater facility and speed.42 Nonetheless, computeraided design has moved to this sudden interest in “blobby” forms. Why is this the case? Well, it has to do with the 3-dimensional digital modelling based on NURBS and the offers it brings. According to Kolarevic, this form has opened a new world of complex forms, that until CAD and CAM, 18

we would find very hard to achieve, manufacture and represent.43 It is a new phenomenon that can create new, undulating sinous “skins” feasible to architecture and construction.44 This geometry of continutity of curves and surfaces is now featured prominently in contemporary architecture.

We see, for example, the “Mobius House” (1995),

by UN Studio/Ben Van Berkel and Caroline Bos, and “Torus House” (2001) by Preston Scott Cohenexamples of projects that have been named after their topological origins (ie. the Mobius Strip and the Torus).45 This use of topological forms, as new shapes and forms, is been made possible with the use of digital modelling software. It is through this technology (CAD, CAM and CATIA), that designers are able to bring these complex forms into architecture and give them more control of the building process.46

The shipbuilding industry has been considered pioneering in using digital technology from the design to the construction stage. As Kolarevic states, ships are just like buildings in many ways: “Ships, just like buildings, are objects of considerable techincal complexity...[they] are large objects, with similarly complex service systes and interconnected spaces inhabited by people... and serving specific functions...both rely on similar principles, methods and processes of design, analysis and production.”47 Shipbuilding has elimiated the drawings from design and the contruction of the ships, and are instead using 3-dimensional modelling right through from design (start) to production (end).48 This is where the term “computation” comes into practice. Computation is redefining the practice of architecture. It is now just easy to say that most architects, now, apparently use computers. Computation means the process of using a computer to process information through an understood model expressed as an “algorithm”.49 This contrasts with the term “computerization”, ie. where processes already in the designer’s mind are placed into a computer, are manipulated and

then stored in the system.”50 Further, architects are using the computer as the virtual drafting board as it is more convenient to manipulate and edit any possible changes to sketches, whilst maintaining and enhancing their precision.51 However, computation in some cases are considered “generally limited”.52 How is it limiting though? Are we just limited by our own knowledge of the software? According to Terzidis, our creativity is being limited by these very softwares that are supposedly supposed to “free” our minds.53 We see many examples however, of designs that are generated using the computation process, ie. using an “algorithm” to create form and generate design options. The Khan Shatyr Entertainment Centre, Astana, Kazakhstan (2010), is a recent project by Foster + Partners. It comprises of a cable-net structure that was generated using an algorithm. This algorithm formed part of the parametric model which was then used to further develop, manipulate and define the building form.54

NatWest Media Center. Future System / Amanda Levette Architecture, London, UK, 1999

19

Consequently, architects are able to design beyond the limits of 2-dimensional drawings or scale models, and are able to adopt a new language of architecture of much more complex, continuous curved geometries and forms. Computation allows the exploration of new ideas and increases the capability of solving more complex issues.55 Take a look at Frank Gehry’s work. Let’s talk about the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.

This building celebrates digital technology in creating complex geometric forms, which are not only captivating to the human eye, but are fully functioning pieces of architecture that work in a cohesive manner.

The production would not have been possible to contruct without the evolution of local steel 20

and the shipbuilding industry.56 The impact of innovative technologies in such industries was phenomenal. This movement developed into a reinvention of how products were designed and made.57 What about Gehry’s Fish Sculpture (1992), Barcelona, Spain. It clearly illustrates the use of computation as a means to ensure high-degree precision in fabrication. Digital design makes the complex geometries that make up its form describable and producible.58 Nonetheless it is the 3-dimensional digital models that were used not only in the design development, but also for structural analysis, and a source of construction information.59 The structural solution to this architecture was Computer- Aided 3-Dimensional

Guggenheim Museim, Frank Gehry, Bilbao, Spain, 1997

Interactive Application: CATIA. A 3-dimensional modelling and manufacturing software developed for the French aerospace industry.60 Why is this fish-shaped pavilion so significant to the computation in architecture?

Well it seems to be that it was one of the first projects to be experimented using a “paperless” process of digital production.

Not only this idea of the “paperless” process was significant, but it was also the notion of the structural skin. Gehry adopts this new method in his subsequent projects that are seen around the world. For example, Experience Music Project or Walt Disney Concert Hall. New ideas, new materials and new geometries of curves and folds formulate into a form that enable a line of continous skin.61

We also see this motion from digital computer design to digital physical modelling. For example, Frank Gehry’s Nationale-Nederlanden Building (1996). This was possible with the introduction of digitally-driven machines that digitally cut the irreguar glass panels covering the frame of the structure behind it.62 Therefore, it is obvious to see how far the design process has actually come. We have come from a world of drawing ideas on paper to virtually drawing ideas on computers. Digital technology has definitely allowed for complex forms that would be very difficult, even impossible to construct using the manual human hand and paper, and it has made our progress to design production much faster.

Despite its advantages, digital architecture does not have the freedom and mind of a human

brain. Computation is limiting our freedom as designers and architects, to create structures that we would like to eventually be able to produce in the external world. However, digital technology allows for this creation to be accurately formulated into a cohesive, constructable whole.

What will the future of Architecture be? Will be in favour of computation? Will we get a choice?

Will all architects just have to accept a system?

We now see that the visual programming language has increased and is still increasing in the designer professional practice. We are in an era moving from “architects using software” to “architects creating software”.63 This Gateway Project is using one of these languages, ie. Robert McNeel * Associates’ Grasshopper. We are learning new pathways to architectural design where new possibilities-more complex possibilities- are available for us to discover and explore.

Fish Sculpture, Frank Gehry, Vila Olimpica, Barcelona, Spain, 1992

Computer-modelling: Fish Sculpture, Frank Gehry, Vila Olimpica, Barcelona, Spain, 1992

Nationale-Nederlanden Building, Frank Gehry, Prague, Czech Republic, 1996

21

1.3 PARAMETRIC MODELLING "P is for parametric ” We hear the word “parametrics” now emerging in our language, but I have never really understood what it meant. So what is “parametric”.

Parametric can be defined as “a set of equations that express a set of quantities as explicit functions of a number of independent variables known as ‘parameters’”.64 Some say that parametric is change, like design changes. Woodbury mentions that “parametric modelling represents change” and that parametric modelling has introduced this fundamental change.65 Designers are now able to “add, erase, relate and repair” with the use of paramentric modelling, rather than being constrained to only “adding and erasing”.66 There are so many different terms for parametric - is it “change” as Woodbury defines? Is it “design”? Or is it “scripting”? Or “parametricism”? It is probably all of them!

Burry uses the term “scripting” to refer to how computer programming is becoming part of the design process. Its langage is synonumous with the programming language as it is the means which the user gives highly specific instructions to the computer.67 This, in turn, makes the tool designer (designer) the new toolmaker (software engineer).68 It is also a form of design. But what is design? Design is the exploration of an idea through to an intended outcome. It seems like Burry agrees to this too. It seems though, that we need to be “part designer part computer scientist, and part mathematician” in order to help us as designers relaise the potential for the ‘“parameter” in their work using the ideas of geometry and computer programming.69 Therefore, it is definitely safe to say that the parametric medium is highly complex.

It combines so many elements including thinking mathematically and algorithmically.70 22

A digram of parametric modelling as a graph. A collection of nodes (ideas) are joined by links (arrows) to form a relationship.

The Parametric Design software “Grasshopper”. Parametric modelling using this software is used to construct such complex forms as shown.

But does parametric modelling have any advantages to assist in design? We see parametric through design when referring to Gaudi’s scale model for La Sagrada Familia as I previously discussed. His concept originated from physics and was able to create a form using the scale model of hanging chains inverted that created curves.

This has to do with parametric design because parametric modelling allows designers to think mathematically and algorithmically. As Woodbury states, mathematics becomes an “active” part of parametric systems and a means and strategy to the ends of design.71 It involves graphdependent “nodes” and expressions, which is able to be changed by the user.72 This falls under one of the advantages: that parametric modelling is used because it is in the control of the user. Using La Sagrada Familia again, designers used CARTIA as a spreadsheet model software.

From this, they were able to make changes to the design when desired without the need for constant re-starting.73 Even the most tiny changes

- like moving the positioning of the window just 5mm - could be so difficult and time-consuming in a conventional process, however it is easy with parametric modelling tools. The effect of learning the software can change one’s relationship with the computer. This is the case with Burry as he was working out solutions to turn 2D hyperbola curves into 3D hyperboloids. He states, “The effect of learning to script [for 3D hyperboloids] changed my relationship with the computer”, the problems that had encouraged to “step outside the box” stimulated his need to rid himself of repetitive work that was boring and inclined to human error.74 Which brings me to my next point: that parametric modelling generates shapes that are possible to achieve when constructing them.

Hence, it is involves precision using parameters or algorithms. For example, the joining of hyperbolas for fabrication may be just too difficult or even impossible by hand. However, are designers becoming too reliant on computers? Can we trust that a computer never faults?

Left: “Dermoid” - the large-scale architectural installation produced in collaboration with SIAL, RMIT, CITA, Royal Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture, Copenhagen and RMIT Fashion and Textiles.

23

Scale Model for Guell Chapel, La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, Barcelona, Spain, 1882-present

Further, parametric modelling involves efficiency.

Making changes can always be a problem in the later stages of the design process if done in the “traditional” sketching and drafting process. It can be difficult and also time-consuming. However, parametric modelling aims to address these limitations of the 1980s conventional tool concept so called as the “copy, cut and paste”.75 Nonetheless, the designer is thus able to explore for more ideas because of the reduction of “tedium” rework.76 Referring to the “Dermoid” as an example, designers did not know where this structure was intended to sit in context or what it was going to look like. They spent so much time focussing on the detailing of the structure and eventually came to a favourite result using parametric modelling. If parametric modelling can be used to change form whenever desired, why should designers have to know what it is they are designing is going to look like? It seems like parametric modelling is like a “scribbling board”. Instead of using paper to “doodle” ideas, they just use parametric modelling! Also, parametric modelling allows tasks to be divided, or as Woodbury calls it “divide-and-conquer” strategy.77 We are able to organise parametric designs into cohesive parts; parametric modelling is clear and explainable as we are able to even name the “nodes: that define our algorithm providing our parametric design.

Despite some of the advantages, there are also issues related to parametric modelling. Firstly, 24

Parabolic curves from the scale model, Guell Chapel, La Sagrada Familia, Antonio Gaudi, Barcelona, Spain, 1882present

parametric modelling involves notions (nodes) and links: it is a relationship. Whatever you do to one variable will affect the other. Therefore, it requires the need for careful planning of the independent and dependent variables before starting to model.78 Secondly, making changes to parametric modelling, for example in Grasshopper say, may not be as easy as it may seem.

Backtracking to find which node linked to which relationship to that intended change can be time-staking and confusing. Especially with all of the wiring of the “links”. Thirdly, sharing parametric modelling can be very difficult with other users as it is only the control of one person who creates the relationship. Unlike conventional architecture, where concepts derive from the designer’s ideas onto bits of paper (like Frank Gehry), parametric modelling is not able to see the relationship from the first inital idea of the designer. But sharing ideas is important to design because it allows us to learn from the existing, and create new things from our experiences.

I always question parametric modelling and what it will bring to architectural society in the future.

Schumacher’s notion that “parametricism will be the unified style of architecture of the 21st century” is far beyond my view. That is going way too far.

I will be discussing a couple of key examples adopting parametric modelling such as the Museo Soumaya and National Bank of Kuwait Headquarters.

National Bank of Kuwait Headquarters. Foster + Partners, Kuwait City, Kuwait, 2007-present The parametric model enabled the design team to quickly produce various options and multiple prototypes.

INTEGRATED PARAMETRIC MODELLING NATIONAL BANK OF KUWAIT HEADQUARTERS FOSTER + PARTNERS

The National Bank of Kuwait Headquaters offers a perfect example of Foster + Partners’ design of

complex geometry. Not only is in complex in form, but it is also complex in the way it is also designed to be environmentally responsive.

The design concept of the new skyline was influenced by the local climate. For example, the vertical structural fins protect the eastern and western facades of the tower; the fins open to the north to introduce natural light and vistas.79 It is amazing to see how not only is design becoming important in architecture, but nature is also a significant aspect of design, in making the architecture fully functional and responsive to the world.

So why does this structure fall under the parametric modelling topic? Well, Foster + Partners adopted a design system analyst in the Specialist Modelling Group (SMG) in the early stages of the design proces in order to develop a parametric model that was capable of “integrating various performance parameters while continuing to investigate geometrical solutions”.80 Various “scripted tools” including Bentley Systems’ GenerativeComponentsTM (GC) was used to quickly produce various options that were then further explored by the design team.81 The major elements to achieve the intended environmental response was produced using parametric models. For example, the orientation of the fins, profile of the fins, saw-tooth cladding between the fins, and the arc forming the north facade.82 The parametric model was useful in producing specific geometrical descriptions of the construction of the fins and involves engineering input through linking 25

Left: National Bank of Kuwait Headquarters. Foster + Partners, Kuwait City, Kuwait, 2007-present The bold skyline and its complex geometry are driven by the local climate.

Right: National Bank of Kuwait Headquarters. Foster + Partners, Kuwait City, Kuwait, 2007-present The various levels of development - from wire-frame to strctural elements, cladding and glass; and solar, wind and planarity analysis.

to a data spreadsheet.83 But this is not all. The fins were examined for buildability through experimentation of the level of curvature of the elements; “and through derivation of elements with possible repetition, [while] maintaining its shape”.84 Precision was a key principal in this design. The fins of each side of the building had to become joined and form continuous arches at the peak, while simultaneously framing the view to the sky. Moreso, the glazing between the fins had to be carefully positioned independently according to its “special rule” that allows it to change position whilst remaining planar.85 The northern facade comprises of an undulating shape and is scaled according to a specified ratio.86 Therefore, it is obvious to see the relationship between design and parametric modelling.

Parametric modelling was used 26

to link the complex geometric relationships between its elements. It invoved complex geometries, mathematical techniques and other means to assist in the process to result in a successful outcome. It is particularly useful in this project as “trial-and-error” accellerated the design outcome. The paramatric model was used in order to generate multiple variaions of the building shape; from these, the designers could develop these for rendering and prepare prototype models and for calculating solar, wind and acoustic analysis.87 So what if these designers did not have parametric modelling? Would they have been able to still produce this design? This form? A structure that stands whilst also being aesthetically pleasing, fully functionional and environmentally responsive?

No I don’t think so. The relationships created in parametric modelling achieved exactly what the designers had intended. They achieved the beautiful structure as well as all of the elements mentioned. If parametric modelling wasn’t the case, I do not believe such bold, complex geometries would be able to be contructed so rapidly, smoothly, so precisely; and work in a way that is very functional. However will all designs now be trying to copy this intent? It seems like many designs (especially commercial high-rise buildings), are adopting this technique in achieving “environmentallydriven designs”. I agree that new architecture should take this into account because it is bringing sustainablility into society, but I feel as though it is driving our architects into designing forms that are too complex.

Why not be simple? I like complex, but I also like simple!

INTEGRATED PARAMETRIC MODELLING

MUSEO SOUMAYA - FERNANDO ROMERO + ARMANDO RAMOS (FERNANDO ROMERO ENTERPRISE “FREE”) “A structure of this complexity had never been attempted in Mexico”

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, Computation Works: the building of algorithmic thought AD, in Architectural design reader (John Wiley & Sons LTD, 2013), p. 67

How can design allow for new possibilities of building form?

The Museo Soumaya was given two tasks: to host one of the largest private art collections in the world, and to reshape an old industrial area of Mexico City.88 It was a big challenge as Mexico did not have any designs as complex as this.

Various teams collaborated; and laser scanning, parametric modelling and other algorithmic techniques were tools that helped design and model the structure into three dimensions.

The aim of the project’s facade was to be composed of hexogonal aluminium panels.89 Digital models were used to ensure the curving columns making the form of the structure and the horizontal sttel rings lay on the design surface, The complex 3-dmensional structure comprises struts that are independently adaped to the local surface conditions - hence, there is no repetition. So how did the designers achieve this?

A design team was able to select free-form space-frame solutions for the facade structure in order to support the facade panels. But there

Left: Museo Soumaya, FREE, Mexico City, Mexico, 2011 Structural diagram illustrating the inner columns of the parking grid; steel columns; concrete belt; steel bracings (lateral forces); concrete core (gravity forces).

was an issue. The facade structure was alredy decided upon and being assembled, so there was limited room for manipulations.90 “Each node in the facade structure held the centre of gravity of a single hexagonal panel and three incoming struts”.91 Therefore, there comes the issue raised before, that whatever happens with one node affects the relationship with the other nodes.

The designers wanted to have a consistent gap between each of the surface panels, and this geometrical solution involved complex analysis.

Hence, Gehry Technologies was used to create “families” whereby the surface could be divided into two zones to carry out the desired outcome.92 Further, Gehry Technologies created shop drawings for the hexagonal panels using their Digital ProjectTM 3D Modelling tool.93 Other custom computer programs were simaltaneously used to extract each panel from the 3-dimensional model and create many 2-dimensional shop drawings. The mechanical elements were able to thus be aligned, detailed and coordinated using a central 3-dmensional model.94 Therefore, there is the advantage of “rapid production”; quick decisions were able to be made at crucial stages of 27

Museo Soumaya, FREE, Mexico City, Mexico, 2011 28

the design process.

The important thing is that the whole team was able to continue their work throughout the construction phase based on this digital 3-dimensional model. What was the use of this? Well, each team member was able to access and communicate accurate information about the structure at any time; and it was organised in such a way that was easily understood by each team member.79 Nonetheless, different elements of the design could be designed simaltaneously, many iterations of the design were able to be quickly studied, and the graphic definitition of the variables provided a very clear, visual picture of the design intent.95 Would this structure have been possible without the use of parametric and 3-dimensional digital modelling devices? Surely not!

Traditional 2-dimensional drawing and design process would not have allowed for the project to be designed in such an interated, holistic way where all of the complex relationships between each element is visibly clear.

Would the traditional design “mode� have allowed designers to produce every aluminium hexagonal cladding panel which is consistently spaced by a particular degree?

No! And surely not would designers have been able to create a curved form from these individual aluminium panels. Surely not would have this extraordinary piece of iconic architecture have been possible without the use of such techniques, especially parametric modelling.

Architecture is now becoming so much more complex so a simple, integrated process to communicate this complexity is essential. Communication is definitely important for the design team, but communication between the design team and the parametric model is just as important. Every single variable in the design affects the other variables. This is like parametric modelling - it is like a human relationship. So complex, so intricate and so flexible.

Museo Soumaya, FREE, Mexico City, Mexico, 2011 Aluminium hexagonal cladding panels Left: Museo Soumaya, FREE, Mexico City, Mexico, 2011 Exploded axonometric detail of fcade with tridesic structure as support structure for hexogonal panels.

Below: Museo Soumaya, FREE, Mexico City, Mexico, 2011 The complex detailing of various layers making the facade.

Where would architecture be without this tool?

29

1.4

ALGORITHMIC EXPLORATIONS

Using the software Rhinoceros and Grass-

hopper Plug-in, I was able to explore the world of computation and parametric design.

Undertaking research related to these topics confirmed that a lot of architecture, is now adopting this form of process. Participating in the tutorials and researching other material allowed me to self-teach the complexities of design that are possible using this software.

It is very difficult to adapt to, and there are many elements that need to be revised. A slow step-by-step process will hopefully result in more expertise into the programs so that I, as a designer, will be able to take that step further into design.

I included these explorations because they illustrate my out-of-class self-learning using the tutorials to learn Grasshopper software.

I was amazed by all of the forms that could be created using this plug-in; how a relationship between nodes and links can result in a range of different outcomes. These illustrations demonstrate the various tools I have learned in the early-learning stage of the assignment.

They represent all of the new ideas that can be explored, and the interesting thing is, I - the user - am in full control. I tell the computer what I want, and it provides it to me. Say, I want to loft a series of circles together; I simply load the “loft� command and connect it to my geometry.

These algorithmic sketches confirm that computation and parametric modelling is a new and inventive way of design. It allows for not just one idea, but a series of ideas that can be repeated with further developments and adjustments, until the desired outcome appears.

30

31

32

1.5

CONCLUSION Do I agree that the 21st century sees architec-

ture as the era of parametricism? No. Do I see a fast moving advancement in technology with architecture as a reflection of this notion? Yes. Schumacher’s view that “parametricism” is a style of the 21st century is plain silly. Do people even know what style is? He says that we have been waiting and searching for a new concept of design and finally this new “style” so-called “parametricism” offers it. He says that it is a great new style for post-modernism. But was post-modernism even a style?

I think parametricism is definitely not a style, but it is a geometrical model type that employs functions of parameters to create a relationship, thus a geometry. I believe that some architects are starting to believe that parametricism is the new way of architecture, but I do not believe all architecture has to now be parametric. I believe that it should be used as a tool if desired to create complex forms that would otherwise be too difficult to crete using conventional methods.

But this gateway project is related to the architecture discouse of parametric design. I believe that this is the right track to take to ensure that the brief and expectations of the competition can be achieved. Researching on many successful projects confirms that architecture has the capability to ecourage discourse. I believe that architecture has many purposes, but I feel as though its main purpose is for the public to experience and see the architect’s mind, and see their design intent.

Aqua Tower, Studio Gang Architects, Chicago, USA, 2009

I believe that in undertaking the project via this track, Wyndham will be seen as the “beginning” of a development in architecture, ie. an architecture that portrays the transition to new digital technology. Also, it is a project in which one visualises and experiences the purpose of being there; and this purpose is established by the architect.

33

1.6

LEARNING OUTCOMES

My understanding of architectural computing

has definitely expanded. My attitude was disinterest in digital architecture, but most of this was purely to do with my lack of understanding of the field. I came into the subject saying “why do we have to learn this? Why do people always try and make things harder? What is the point of all of this? And no one actually uses these programs in the real world!”

Well, I guess most of these questions have been answered, and although some of my views have not changed, I think it is important to know that research in the theories and practice of architectural computing have actually changed some of my understanding. It turns out that in fact, many successful firms utilise the process of computational architecture and digital architecture to produce the architecture that is in our world.

Now I know the information occurring behind the scenes in architecture. Computation has become so wide-spread in our world due to the rapid development of technology, and architecture is definitely representing that movement.

Curvy shapes, complex geometries, environmentally-responsive buildings are now more common in architecture and it has to do with this advancement. I have realised that computer-aided technology is a great tool for reducing the time of the design process.

34

Researching into these theories however makes me somehow concerned that the architecture will all reflect similar design intent. I am afraid that the computer is taking away the creative nature of the human mind. And I am afraid that architects will now be forced into adopting a new technique which they do not necessarily want to use. That is why I still am in favour of sketching on paper with pencil in the inital stages because I feel as though a designer has more freedom when sharing their mind to other people. The thing I do like about computation and computer technology is that it allows the capability for more organic architecture, which I personally love, because I feel as though the architecture speaks the mind of the architect’s intention.

However, computer-aided technology is a great tool for developing these ideas. The useful thing is that we are able to make changes late in the design process without the need for “re-sketching” or “restarting”. The computer is smart; it has a big brain and definitely a big memory span. Looking back at past projects, I realise just how simple the tools I used then were compared to what I am learning now. How did I ever think that what I was doing was so hard?!

I guess it has to do with the learning process. You will never find anything easy when you are learning something completely new.

1.7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

29 30 31 32 33

NOTES Richard Williams, “Architecture and Visual Culture”, in Exploring Visual Culture : Definitions, Concepts, Contexts, ed. by Matthew Rampley (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), pp. 102-116 (p.105).

Ibid, (p. 108).

Greg Lynn,“Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy”, in Fold, Bodies and Blobs: Collected Essays ed. by Greg Lynn (Bruxelles: La Lettre volée, 1998), pp. 169-182. (p.169).

Ibid, (p.171).

Ibid, (p.178).

Grimshaw, “Southern Cross Station”, (Grimshaw, 2011), <http://grimshaw-architects.com/project/ southern-cross-station/>.

Hamish Lyon, “Australian Design Review: From the archives: Southern Cross Station”, (Niche Media 2013), < http://www.australiandesignreview.com/architecture/833-from-the-archives-southern-crossstation>.

“Basilica de La Sagrada Familia”, < http://www.sagradafamilia.cat/sf-eng/index.php?lang=0>.

Wikipedia, “Sagrada Familia”, (Wikipedia, 2013), < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_ Fam%C3%ADlia>.

“Basilica de La Sagrada Familia” Ibid Ibid Wikipedia, “Sagrada Familia” “Basilica de La Sagrada Familia” Marcia Argyriades, “Metropol Parasol, The World’s Largest Wooden Structure”, Architecture: Yarzer, (2011), < http://www.yatzer.com/Metropol-Parasol-The-World-s-Largest-Wooden-Structure-J-MAYER-HArchitects>.

Ibid Ibid J. Mayer H., “Metropol Parasol”, < http://www.jmayerh.de/86-0-Info.html>.

Ibid Marcia Argyriades, “Metropol Parasol” Ibid J. Mayer H., “Metropol Parasol” Marcia Argyriades, “Metropol Parasol” J. Mayer H., “Metropol Parasol” Ibid Branko Kolarevic, “Introduction”, in Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 3 - 28 (pp. 3-4).

Bryan Lawson, “Fake’ and ‘Real’ Creativity using Computer Aided Sesign: Some Lessons from Herman Hertzberger”, in Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Creativity & Cognition, ed. by Ernest Edmonds and Linda Candy (New York: Acm press, 1999), pp. 174-179.

John H Frazer, “The Generation of Virtual Prototypes for Performance Optimization”, in GameSetAndMatch II: The Architecture Co-Laboratory on Computer Games, Advanced Geometries and Digital Technologies, ed. by Kas Oosterhuis and Lukas Feireiss (Rotterdam: Episode Publishers, 2006), pp. 208212.

Yehuda E. Kalay, “Introduction” in Architecture’s New Media : Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design, (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5 - 25, (p.2).

Ibid, (p.2).

Ibid, (p.2).

Ibid, (p.2).

Ibid, (p.2).

35

34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 36

Ibid, (p.3).

Ibid, (p.4).

Ibid, (p.6).

Ibid, (p.6).

Ibid, (p.8).

Ibid, (p.9).

Ibid, (p.9).

Ibid, (pp.9-13).

Branko Kolarevic, “Introduction”, (p.7) Ibid, (p.6).

Ibid, (p.6).

Ibid, (p.7).

Ibid, (p.3).

Ibid, (p.8).

Ibid, (p.8).

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, “Computation Works: the Building of algorithmic thought AD”, in Architecture Design Reader, (John Wiley & Sons LTD, 2013), pp. 1-142, (p.5).

Kostas Terzidis, “Algorithmic Architecture,” (Boston, MA: Elsevier, 2006), (p. 11).

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, “Computation Works: the Building of algorithmic thought AD”, (p.5).

Kostas Terzidis, “Algorithmic Architecture,” (p.11).

Kostas Terzidis, “Algorithms for Visual design using the processing Language” (Indianapolis, In: Wiley, 2009), (p. 20).

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, “Computation Works: the Building of algorithmic thought AD”, (p.5).

Ibid Branko Kolarevic, “Introduction”, (p.9).

Ibid, (p.9).

Branko Kolarevic, “Digital Production”, in Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing, (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 28 - 62, (p.31).

Ibid, (p.31).

Ibid, (p.31).

Ibid, (p.39-40).

Ibid, (p.33).

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, “Computation Works: the Building of algorithmic thought AD”, (p.5).

Eric Weisstein, “CRC Concise Encyclopedia of Mathetmatics”, Second ed., (Florida: Chapman & Hall/ CRC, 2003), (p.2150).

Robert Woodbury, ”Elements of Parametric Design” (London: Routledge, 2010) pp. 7-48, (pp.1-5).

Ibid, (p.5).

Mark Burry, “Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming”, (Chichester: Wiley, 2011), pp.

8 - 71, (p.9).

Ibid, (p.9).

Robert Woodbury, ”Elements of Parametric Design”, (pp.1-2).

Ibid, (p.47).

Ibid, (pp.33-34).

Ibid, (p.34).

Daniel Davis, “Introduction to Parametric Modelling”, (Faculty of Architecture: University of Melbourne, 2013), Lecture.

Mark Burry, “Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming”, (p.30).

Robert Woodbury, ”Elements of Parametric Design”, (p.24).

Ibid, (p.24).

Ibid, (pp.28-29).

David E. Weisberg, “The Engineering Design Revolution: The People, Companies and Computer Syste that Changed Froever the Practice of Engineering” (2008), <http://www.cadhistory.net/>.

Xavier De Kestelier and Brady Peters, “Computation Works: the Building of algorithmic thought AD”, (p.34).

Ibid., (p.34).

Ibid., (p.34).

Ibid., (p.35).

Ibid., (p.35).

Ibid., (p.35).

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95

Ibid., (p.35).

Ibid., (p.35).

Ibid., (p.35).

Ibid., (p.67).

Ibid., (p.68).

Ibid., (p.68).

Ibid., (p.68).

Ibid., (p.68).

Ibid., (p.68).

Ibid., (p.69).

Ibid., (p.69).

37

PART 2

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST II 38

2.0

design approach 39

2.1

DESIGN FOCUS

"B is for biomimicry” “ innovation inspired by nature”

Biomimicry happened to be

the favoured research stream as a basis for design development. We only had a very small hint of what biomimicry meant, and before choosing the stream, we did a ittle bit of research. It immediately captivated our attention.

So what is biomimicry and where did it come from? Biomimicry comes from “bios” meaning life, amd “mimesis” meaning to imitate.1 The science established in 1997, with the book “Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by design” by Janine Benyus explains its definition.2 Biomimetics is the examination of nature; in particular its modules, systems, processes and elements to emulate or take inspiration from, in order to solve human problems.3 But why has it become such an important part of design? The notion of Biomimicry is that nature has solved many problems in life itself; for example, it has provided energy through food production, climate control, 40

non-toxic chemistry, transportation and packaging.4 Hence, biomimicry is adopted into the design field because it operates on the principle that in the 3.8 billion year history of nature, it has itself, already found solutions to many of the problems we are still trying to solve. So why not use nature as an inspiration? We, as designers, are always trying to solve design and structural solutions in making things work smoothly.

Janine Benyus set up the project “AskNature”, which explores how nature’s organisms can inspire designers and teach them the principles of design.5 In other words, it is the “digital library of nature’s solutions”. Animals, plants and microbes act as the “engineers” as they explore what works, what is appropriate and what lasts on Earth.6 Nature is obviously doing something right to have survived for so many years and brought so many resources to the world.

Nature has been regarded as a model, measure and a mentor in design. For example, it acts as

a model as we are emulating nature’s forms, processes and its systems to solve our own problems; it acts as a measure as we are evaluating our designs and solutions against those of nature; and finally it is a mentor because it is creating a relationship between designers and nature.7 Instead of humans being a separate part of nature, we are included in it and behave accordingly.

Studying biomimicry questions our current method of design.

Can design be as efficient, simple and sustainable as found in nature?

In 2008, the Biomimicry Guild (1998), formed a permanent connection with the global architecture firm HDK.8 This expanded the mainstream application of biological-inspired design in the firm’s projects.

But why is it being used in the design field?

The integration of biomimicry is a beneficial “tool” in the design process for architects and de-

signers. The so-called “design spiral” acts as a guide which assists in biologizing “a challenge, query the natural world for inspiration, then evaluate to ensure that the final design mimics nature at all levels” - ie. form, process and ecosystem.9 This “spiral form” or “design spiral” helps to emhasise the reiterative nature of the design process.

This field provides two different design approach paths: 1. Design to nature; and 2. Nature to design.

The first approach illustrates how designers identify a design problem, and turn to nature to find a solution; the second approach looks at studying nture and imagining human applications for nature’s designs.10

Left: “Biomimetic Heels”, Dutch designer Marieka Ratsma and Architect Kostika Spatro,2012.

Below: “Building Cars like Bones” Opel GM and Mercede’s Experimentation, 2009.

Bottom: “HygroScope: Meteorosensitive Morphology”, Achim Menges with Steffen Reichert, Centre Pompidou, Paris, 2012.

Now, biommetics seems to appear in architecture and product design as in fashion, car-designing and buildings.

For example, “Biomimetic Heels” by Ratsma and Spatro experiments with biomimicry in fashion to make the heels look like “bones.”11 We also see this though the design of the Opel GM and Mercedes Benz, where an organic structural solution using the inspiration of nature’s trees and bones has resulted.12 What about “HygroScope” at the Centre Pompidou in Paris? Reichart and Menges create an installation which is climate-responsive to architectural morphology.13 Architecture has evolved to the stage where the structure is able to respond to climatic conditions. In this installation, the structure opens and closes in response to the fluctuations in relative humidity.14 But what is making these designs buildable?

Thanks to computation, designers are able to produce virtually any form they like. I will be discussing this further on.

Why do I like biomimetics? I find that nature has much potential in the inspiration of a designer’s design space. Not only is biomimetics aesthetically pleasing when combined with design, but it is also functional. It establishes a framework for design. As I questioned previously, why not use nature as an inspiration to answer the problems we as designers are stil trying to solve?

Why not use materials that make up structures as machines in order to adapt to the environment?

41

INTEGRATED BIOMIMICRY

RESEARCH PAVILION AT THE UNIVERSITY OF STUTTGART- ICD / ITKE

This architecture aims to integrate performative capacity of biological structures into architectural design by testing spatial and structural material-systems at a full scale. It was established with biological research collaboration beween the Institure for Computational Design (ICD) and the Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design (ITKE), as well as student input.15 But what does this structure show in terms of biomimicry? It demonstrates just how far design has come in creating a marriage of computation and biomimicry. The idea originated from analysis of different biological structures. This analysis lead to a particular interest to the plate skeleton morphology of the sand dollar - a sub-series of the sea urchin.16

Above: The Sea Urchinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s skeleton

The skeleton that makes up the shell structure is a modular system of polygonal plates, joined together by finger-like calcite protrusions.17 This structure achieves something extraordinary.

How is it possible that such a light-weight material would be able to make up this form, with so many undulating joints and edges that are so accurately combined?

Nature has inspired not only the design, but also the structural solution. Very thin (6.5mm) plywood sheets create this domed structure; and the structure use the same principles a sea urchinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s shell plates notch into one another in order to find a structural solution.18 The geometrical arrangement of the plates allow for high bearing capacity, and the transfer of normal and shear forces is feasible due to the three plate edge meeting at one point.19 This design principle is therefore able to be applied to many types of geometry, allowing for the construction of such light-weight structures.

Research Pavilion, ICD / ITKE, University of Stuttgart, 2011.

42

However, other properties of the biological structures wereapplied hroughout the compua-

tional design process. For example, heterogeneity: the cells are not constant, but they adapt to the local curvature and discontinuities; anistropy: the structure is directional, so the cells stretch and orient themselves according to mechanical stresses; and hierarchy: the pavilion is organised as a trio-level hierarchical structure to ensure flexible edges are all levels.20 What help was there to construct this project? You guessed it. Computer-based design and simulation methods, as well as computer-controlled manufacturing methods for its building implementation were tools to make this design possible.21 What was achieved by this pavilion? It offerred designers opportunities to investigate methods of modular bionic construction by using free form surfaces to represent different geometric characteristics.

This project is successful with integrating biomimicry in creating an innovative structure. It demonstrates how nature and design create innovation and so many possibilities.Complex morphology can be built exclusively with the use of extremely light-weight materials and yet still function effectively.

Research Pavilion, ICD / ITKE, University of Stuttgart, 2011.

43

INTEGRATED BIOMIMICRY

MANGAL CITY - CHIMERA DESIGN TEAM “DESIGN + NATURE = SUSTAINABILITY + INNOVATION?”

This project also falls under biomimicry as the design approach. It was designed by the team as a thesis proposal for Master of Architecture in Parametric Urbanism Program at the AA School of Architecture in London.

The designers became inspired by the “complex ecosystems created by the mangrove trees”.22 But what was the purpose of the project? Its aim was to create a series of futuristic spiraling skyscrapers for London, which defined an urban ecosystem whilst also supporting housing and cultural programs.

It promotes flexibility, in particular flexible building systems in the way the structure works. For example, the building comprises of modular pod capsules that continue shifting to adapt to the surrounding environment and its contextual conditions.23

“Mangal City Skyscraper”, Chimera Design Team, London, 2011.

What makes up this structure? A twisted latice frame forms the biomimetic characteristics, with the structure modelled after a mangrove tree, spiraling plant growth patterns and the interaction of natural ecosystems.24 Hence, the relationship between design and nature are revisited with the leaf-like residential pods that rest on “branches”. These branches twist towards the sun to maximuse warmth and sunlight.25 So how far more can design reach? We have seen design through biomimicry, but what is next? Will architecture become more “alive” just as nature is alive? Will buildings now all start to move according to our desire?

Well it seems as though this statement is confirmed by these past projects, and amongst others, whereby biomimicry is being used as a design approach.

Using nature as an inspiration has provided many avenues for architects to explore the design space and search for design solutions that nature can provide.

Is this the next step towards sustainability?

44

2.1.1

THE ARGUMENT

WHY BIOMIMICRY? WHY THIS APPROACH FOR THE GATEWAY PROPOSAL?

After carefully analysing biomimicry and its development in the design field, it is confirmed to be a suitable and very flexible design approach for the Western Gateway Installation.

Firstly, biomimicry provides innovation in architectural practice.

We have seen through looking at past projects, that nature can be combined into design. This outcome allows the structure of the design to become the design itself. In other words, using nature’s modulars, systems, processes and elements, we are able to create a structure. This structure makes up the design solution, hence becomes a cohesive whole. We can therefore say, that the notion of using a biological structure as a design solution provides the architecture itself. Design and structure is therefore no longer separate, but it is morphed together.

This relationship correlates to the new architectural discourse focusing on computational design. Design information is becoming construction information, and this is achieved through the use of computer technology - in particular computation and parametric modelling. With the help of these “tools”, we are able to create many interesting, complex geometries - not just basic geometries, but geometries based on the idea of biomimetics. It is said that biomimicry is a great source of innovation. “Biomimicry is just one of the best sources of innovation to get to a world of zero waste because those are the rules under which biological life has had to exist”.We are able to demonstrate the underlying structures that make up nature in our structure. What is it that makes up nature?

Is it cells? What happens to these cells?

Secondly, biomimetics is a stream that can be directly incorpoated as part of the design brief for Wydnham. As well as providing a new discourse with the study of the “recent” idea of biomimetics in design, we are able to further expand this discourse in the growing municipality of Wyndham. Can we promote this new discourse through a new Gateway Proposal? Sure we can. But how? Cells that make up a structure could potentially act as a metaphor for the growth of the suburb. Wyndham City has been growing at a rapid rate - from 8,000 to 10,000 residents every year; and it is expected to become a city of more than 430,000 in the future.

Similarly, nature has been alive and evolving for so many years.

“Seeds of Change”, Thompson Berrill Landscape Design, Victoria, Australia, 2004

45

Hence, cells that make up the growth of nature can be integrated into design to reflect the “growing municipality” of Wyndham in Victoria. If nature has been alive and evolving for so long, it is obviously doing something right. So why not use it as a design basis and inspiration to solve our own structural and design solutions?

Finally, nature that exists today have faced the natural selection process which involves finding the “survival of the fittest”. In other words, what we see surrounding us is the secret to survival, but fossils are inticators of failure. Therefore, by reflecting optimaal solutions as found in nature, we as designers are able to also create something so-called “optimal”. But what is optimal?

Using biomimicry as a design stream allows us to imitate an optimal behaviour has demonstrated by nature. This is also significant in performative design; for example, we may want to create something that produces energy in the most “optimal” way, and perhaps by analysing the process of photosynthesis in leaves, would we be able to achieve this intent.

Therefore, we are able to refer to nature as not only an initial design inspiration, but we are able to link it to the structure as well. It is demonstrated that nature plus design can create so many possibilities, in partuclar innovative possibilities. This is what we are trying to achieve, a proposal whereby we are able to create a discourse, using computation and parametric modelling as our “push”in order to create something “innovative” and functional. Something that will define Wyndham as a growing municipality, and promote its existance through an interesting an “innovative” design.

If we are able to achieve a biomimetic design through computation and parametric modelling, why not use it for Wydham? So what’s next with this approach? Let’s explore our possibilites and open our “design space.”

“Melbourne Gateway”, Denton Corker Marshall, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 2000 46

2.2

CASE STUDY 1.0

VOLTADOM - SKYLAR TIBBITS & SJET

We used the defitnition provided by the VoltaDom by Skylar Tibbits and SJET (2007) in order to explore the possibilities in Grasshopper.

We initally thought we had a large design space to work with, however it seemed as though we were restricted in moving forward once we hit only a couple of steps. Yes, we played aound with the sliders and enabled/disabled the inputs to investigate their function, but we felt as though we were constrained into someone elsee’s definition, rather than our own. It felt as though the cones restricted our possibilities.

Therefore, we came up with our own idea to use some of our own inputs but still use some of the ones providided - like the cones for example.

We wanted to extend our design space by creating voronois, an input directly reminds us of biomimicry, perhaps because of its “cellular” form.

Therefore, we explored this more, seeing what possibilites there were.

But then we came to a dead end.

Our selection critera involved cones, grids, voronois, metaballs, meshes etc. becaused we wanted to explore the interesting forms that grasshopper allows us. By “playing around” with this case study, we considered an idea of trying to achieve “growth” and “movement” in its form as this is part of our main argument on choosing Biomimicry for the Wydnham freeway installation: moving towards growth in a natural environment.

“VoltaDom” Installation, Skylar Tibbits and SJET, MIT Campus, 2007 2011.

47

We did not settle on a final version as we

took this opportunity purely and simply as a learning tool. It was an opportunity to explore the possibilities in Grasshopper and try and create as many 2-dimensional iterations as we could from the inputs available. Perhaps our outcomes, or one can be applied as part of our new Gateway Design Project to find an approtiate form? A design that looks at growth of particles in a small community. However, it tends to only really focus on one thing the more I look at it - ie. aesthetics. The form may “mimic” nature’s nature, but we need to look deeper into the theory. Further research on biomimicry and why it is “optimal” i our next step. We need to focus on a few ideas in order to make this “exploration” actually purposeful and useful for our future design.

48

2.2.1

DESIGN FOCUS- REVISITED After the tutorial, we were pleased to have received

feedback that our “argument” was reasonable and had full potential to develop. What they did want to know was, however...

WHY IS BIOMIMICRY OPTIMAL?

Our argument seemed to be so focused on the notion of biomimicry being “optimal”, but why? We realised that this was an opportunity to do more research. Explore the possibilities with biomimicry, since it is such a complex design approach. We had our three main arguments, but how can we expand them and think deeper into the idea?

49

2.3

CASE STUDY 2.0

SPANISH PAVILION - FOREIGN OFFICE ARCHITECTS

“Spanish Pavilion”, Foreign Office Architects,Nagoya, Japan, 2005 Expo

At the same time we were exploring various

outcomes and doing futher research, we also attempted to re-engineer an existing project the Spanish Pavilion at the 2005 World Exposition

by Foregin Office Architectts. It is considered the most captivating out of all of the 65 pavilions build to exhibit themselves.26 It consists of walls of irregular hexagons of mixed colours - the colours that match are of the same hexgonal composition. Hence, it is colour-coded which also adds a striking expression to the architecture. These “outer skin” walls are separated to the inner pavilion to portray a “half-in-half-out” space.27 The hexagonal grid enables each edge to precisely 50

fit to the according hexagonal edges.

It is interesting to note how some of the hexagonalfaces are closed, and some are open - what was the reason behind this? It is important that we break down the steps of the facade design to attempt to re-engineer in Grasshopper.

I feel as though it was a successful design in that it not only creates a functional space, but it is simple, yet complex in its inner structure, and creates a gesture with its use of colour, irregularity, openness and closure, and geometry. It reflects the colourful, creative aesthetics of the Spanish culture, in particular Gaudi’s input to the Spanish culture.

51

We worked out that the wall panels consisted

of a hexagonal grid, therefore we created the hexonagl grid, with its size according to the numbers set on the nuber sliders.Setting them into a panel frame and extruding the frame and panel allowed me to create a 3-dimensional form. However I wanted to take a step further and explore how I can create varying offset heights. Connecting the parameter to random enabled me to set a domain of the heights. Therefore, I was in control of the height levels of the hexagons.

However we reached a dead end. Our limita52

tions of grasshopper constrained us in achieving the desired effect. We were unable to create the â&#x20AC;&#x153;opening and closingâ&#x20AC;? pattern that the actual project creates. We expect it to do with the boolean parameter, however we were unsuccessful.

This held us back in our re-engineering experiment.

We went back to the provided definition to see how they attempted to produce the product.

It did not make sense to us and we found that it took too many steps to produce this piece of geometry. Was there an easier way to reverse engineer this project?

2.3.1

CASE STUDY 2.0 REVISITED

We revisited the Case Study and attempted

again. What can we do differently to produce such an effect like the Spanish Pavilion? It seemed as though we got stuck again after we figured out how to “cap” the holes. But we decided to leave the project and stop wasting time on something we did not need for the Wydnham installation.

cells making up the structure’s facade. Nonetheless it gave us a starting point for further Grasshopper development in our own exploration.

I felt we were limited in the design space because we felt as though it was going to be an easy task to achieve, but in the end it was not.

Irregularity of the hexagons and capping of only some faces was not able to be achieved and we could not find a solution. We tried our best.

I guess the benefit of the exercise was that we were pleased to see that we could produce interesting geometries; for example, the hexagonal

We did, however, want to take a step further and produce some more iterations with the skills learned.

53

54

2.4.

TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT

With the further steps, we explored the vari-

ous grids we could create and from these produced prototypes. First, we used the hexagonal face grids and then we explored the traingular grids to create 3-dimensional models. The main reason for this step was not purely as a design intent but more a structural and “exploration” intent - investigating how some shapes and elements may fit together and if they are successful or unsuccessful. This was a useful time to use the Fablab. It had been a while since we had used that tool, so it was interesting to revisit the experience. We developed the “unrolling” method using only Rhino because at that stage, we did not know any grasshopper definitions for unrolling existed! It was such a time-consuming process to unroll and delete some of the unnecessary curves that rhino was producing. Using ivory card enabled a light-weight, flexible and quite structural material to produce the puzzle pieces for construction. Using the FablLab at an earlier stage of the design process we thought would be beneficial for us to become familiar with the process again and explore what materials they have available for us. In the end, it made us realise that unrolling in Rhino is very tedious, and we look foward to comparing it to Grasshopper - will it be easier?

55

In the meantime, more explora-

tions were produced using the similarities I saw when comparing the past “biomimic” projects.

Hence, I focused my explorations around: 56

• Repitition • Form • Opening and closing Geometries made in Rhino were able to be linked into Grasshopper, and after many attempts, we worked out how to create a more random list by using the “dispatch” parameter and setting a boolean.

Morphing different geometries applied the pattern to the lofted surface.

I hence used other parameters such as polygons set to a surface, voronois, dividing the surface into polylines, and using hexagonal grids to enhance my explorations.

1.

2.

57

3.

58

After exploring some of the inputs inspired by

the terms explained, we came to question ourselves....

Was this actually useful for what we want to achieve for our project? It was useful playing around with grasshopper, but we wanted to get straight into our design, on something we wanted to achieve for Wyndham.

I guess each iteration were simply unexpected results, as we were simply exploring. So it is never really a waste when you explore. We did find however, that we should really knuckle down into our own gateway proposal design and begin thinking about how we might want that to eventually look like.Because frankly, these iterations seemed â&#x20AC;&#x153;unsuccessfulâ&#x20AC;? in terms of the Wydham design intent and our argument.

4.

1.

2.

3.

4.

59

2.4.1 BIOMIMICRY REVISITED biomimic? really?

After undertaking these couple of re-engi-

neered projects and researching more into the meaning of Biomimicry, I thought to myself, is this actually biomimic what these projects have demonstrated?

I honestly do not think they do. Yes, perhaps the designers took their design inspiration and form inspiration from nature, but it has been used purely as an aesthetic. There is no point using Biomimicry as a design apporach if the design is purely mimicing nature’s form to make it a designer’s own form. Biomimicry is so much more than that, and this is what we wanted to achieve in our Gateway proposal.

“VoltaDom” Installation, Skylar Tibbits and SJET, MIT Campus, 2007 2011.

“Spanish Pavilion”, Foreign Office Architects,Nagoya, Japan, 2005 Expo 60

“Biomimicry 3.8”, (Biomimicry Group Inc., 2012)), <http://biomimicry.net/>

So I interviewed a Biomimic Specialist at an Architectural firm. In essence, after a long discourse, I

can say that Biomimicry is used as a life principle where “life creates conditions condusive to life”. But why is it optimal?

This diagram above answers my question. Biomimicry: • Evolves to survive • is resourceful (material and energy efficient) • Adapts to changing conditions • Integrates development with growth • is locally attuned and responsive • uses life-friendly chemistry supporting life’s processes.

So many things can be explored by using this diagram as a basis. The challenge however for designers is:

how does nature do that?

61

"P is for performance” This took me back to the lecture relating to

“Performance Driven Design” where I was able to revisit what design was.

Is it: • Performance-oriented?

• Performance driven?

• Performative?

• Optimally directed?

Michael Hensel believes that “performance as a paradigm enables the study of nature and the built environment as active agents, rather than as passive context”28 Therefore, we reiterated our point that nature and its processes can be used as a mentor, measure and a model to performative design.

We can look at performative design in terms of many things, in particular structural optimization, embedded material propertes, fabrication and optimisation of passive performance via accurate use of climatic data.29 We can experiment these using interdisciplinary outcomes and constrain the developing outcomes to meet an eventual criteria. For example, look at Frei Otto’s “Form Finding” projects that uses computation to produce a structure that follows a load path whereby the material informs the form. This produces a design outcome which the designers were satisfied with.

“Train Station” Project, Frei Otto, Stuttgart, Germany, 2000

“Munich Olympics Grounds”, Frei Otto, Munich, Germany, 1972

We can use computation to allow for experimentation and produce something efficient; perhaps something made of cheap, readily-available materials which are also structurally stable, functional and perhaps aesthetic; for example, the “Voussoir Cloud.”

It made me think, biomimicry favours all of the criteria explained, so what performative criteria will we be able to set our project for Wyndham?

Can we set a good example to the city?

62

“Voussoir Cloud”, IwamotoScott Architects, L.A, USA, 2008

2.4.2

THE ARGUMENT- REVISITED WHY BIOMIMICRY?

Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s revist the reason behind our argument as to why we chose biomimicry as a design approach.

Thorough research and a lot of thought sumarise our conclusion. A few simple diagrams will illustrate our thoughts from start to finish...

63

2.4.2 THE ARGUMENT- REVISITED "O is for optimal” WHAT IS IT THAT MAKES THESE ORGANISMS OPTIMAL?

Our design focused on the idea of nature being “optimal”, hence biomimicry being an “optimal” design approach. A quote by Leon Megginson inspired us:

"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one

"

that is most adaptable to change..

Ginatta, Carlos (2010). “Architecture without architecture- biomimicry design”. (Germany: VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & co. KG).

64

2.4.3 DESIGN FOCUS - (AGAIN?!)

"A is for adaptable” We decided to study the tree - in particular itsrings

and how they are pure evidence of how a tree grows and adapts to surviving in its environment. So, our research focused on various things that make a tree adaptable.

This is a structural adaptation in trees

that ensures the attachment of branches to their trunks. The formation of the layering and interlocking of tissue is what provides the branch and tree connections structural integrity.30 This may be applicable to our design as the interlocking of various component can assist in creating a rigid structural system.

“Heliotropism” refers to a leaves “strategy” to maxmise their amount of solar radiation by tracking the sun.31 They lay horizontally to increase their solar intake, and vertical to reduce their solar absorption.32 Hence, leaves respond to the sun preventing their leaves from burning.

We can apply this to design as the sun impacts on the degradation of materials through direct exposure. This can be avoided by orienting to retain the aethetics of the material and ensure an “eye catching” nature of design.

Cross-section of a tree:“The evidence

of growth” and markers of life, Each year, a tree grows a “new coat of wood” over the older wood, and hence changes in diameter.33 The outer layer is dead and provides the tree with protection against the environment. Drier environmental conditions lead to smaller ring production; larger rings represent good growing conditions.34 Hence, layering and growth can be seen as an analogy to the growing population in Wydnham.

65

ORIENTING

LAYERING AND GROWTH

INTERLOCKING

66

2.4.4

PRECEDENTS

RMIT DESIGN HUB- SEAN GODSELL & PTA

“ SMART SKIN DESIGNED AS A CLIMATE-RESPONSIVE ORGANISM”

“RMIT Design Hub”, Sean Godsell and PTA, Melbourne, Australia, 2012

This Hub by Sean Godsell and Peddle Thorp Architects (2012) includes an outer skin of automated sun shading devices (16,000 sand-blasted glass cells - photovoltaic cells) that become transparent in the rain and automatically track the sun to help provide shade.35 Hence, low evaporative cooling, optimal fresh air intake and improved internal air quality and building running costs are achieved.36 It demonstrates that improved design and multidisciplinary design can lead to innovation; that is, sustainability for the environment and its occupants It is not only sustainable, but it is aesthetically pleasing and demonstrates performative design where adaptability occurs through change.

67

2.4.4

PRECEDENTS

THE MORNING LINE- ARANDA/LASCH “ A MUTABLE STRUCTURE”

attach back upon itself.38 This defines the structure into 3-dimensional fractals. Computation allowed this project to be achieved, especially through studying the language of cells and lattices found in crystallopgraphic construction forming the idea of “growth.”39 Inspiration came from the “organising” of crystal structures which allowed the, architecture to perform as a moduated structure through its simple principles and unfolding symmetries. This project tells us, however that biomimicry in architecture responds to the environment to provide unique, innovatie solutions to design. It allows a multi-functional structure, not just a static structure.

How do these projects relate to our project? Well, they demonsrate how multi-disciplinary design can use strategies to “optimize” their buildings or he concept was to construct a ruin and monustructures. It demonstrates how architecture can ment through an exploration of open cellular change to enhance its function; and hence result structures.37 Its geometry forming a “universal bit” is formed by a truncated tetrahedron, intended to in both an optimal design and an “engaging” piece of architecture. reproduce its ability to shrink and grow as well as

T

“The Morning Line”, Aranda/Lasch, Schwarzenbergplatz, Vienna, 2012 68

2.4.5

TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT THE PURSUIT OF A RELEVANT TECHNIQUE...

We took our design focus

back into Grasshopper and explored ways in which we could represent “interlocking”, “layering” and “orienting”. Continuing dividing curves into segments and eventually merging the lofted forms established this intent. We were very happy with this outcome, as we knew we were on the right path to what we wanted to achieve. This form also somehow demonstrated a “wooled” surface.

69

2.4.5

TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT

1.

2.

We then took our design

even further, exploring different attractor point techniques to create something that creates its form by attracting to a certain point. This is what we want to achieve when we refer to “orienting”, like the leafs orient themselves according to the sun’s rays. Hence, the sun is the attractor point. Here, we used the parameter “vector 2 point” and found it very useful in creating this effect.

70

1.

2.

2.5

TECHNIQUE PROTOTYPING

With these ideas, we thought about

producing them into 3-dimensional sketch models. In a way it was useful because what you may think works on Grasshopper may not neccessarily be constructable in real-life! It was useful to also experiment ways in which the elements could fit together. For example, prototype 1 uses a “backing strip” that ties the orienting planes into a growth movement - where one

1.

point is attacting the plane’s orientation. A structural element to hold this was built using a thin wooden material (a skewer). It also happened to fit into the design of the model quite well, considering it was made of a contrasting material! The structure would not have been able to stand up without this “tensile-like” element. Similarly with prototype 2, the orienting planes were connected through a thin, malleable wire which allowed flexibility to form a particular shape. The wire acted as a structural support but could even be considered as part of the architecture. I liked how two constrasting materials were used for fabrication because I thought it prevented a monotonous outcome and instead represented a more “engaging” structure with a play of materials. I do not however think that we will be ending up using plain card as a material - very plain and simply used more for sketch models to experiment how connections can be made, and if any additional elements need to be assembled to ensure structural integrity. It is also interesting to see how the structure conveys different lighting effects due to its form.

2.

71

2.5.1

FABRICATION TECHNIQUES

It is interesting to find examples of past projects

employing fabrication to produce 3-dimensional models. Moreso, it is interesting to see how these examples above relate to our “terms” that we want to focus on - ie. layering, interlocking and orienting. They achieve this by different connection methods and materials. We noted how some examples use screw-ins to enable a flexible or a rigid joint. Will we maybe be able to employ these kinds of methods for our final design? Perhaps!

72

These examples we favoured not only because they reflect our three criterias, but they also “engage” with viewers in their form. They encapsulate a kind-of movement and frame that creates a dynamic, eye-catching installation.

2.6

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL

so...what’s the deal? what does wyndham city want? how do we place this on site?

Revisiting the exact requirements made by the Wydham City Council, this is what we extracted:

"an exciting, eye catching installation at Wydham’s Western Gateway [that] inspires and enriches the municipality...[that considers] the high speed movement of traffic..."

Through the experience of driving past “Seeds of Change” by Thompson Berrill and “Melbourne Gateway” by Denton Corker Marshall, what is compelling is how they are not literal in their intent - they are abstract - but they somehow engage with the drivers. This is what we are in-

tending to do, and through more development and refinement of ideas, we will eventually reach this point. Hence, this diagram summarises our techniques that we wish to apply to the Gateway Proposal to fulfil the criteria made by the Wydham City Council.

73

2.6

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL FINALLY A RELEVANT / WORKABLE TECHNIQUE...

Using our thorough research under Biomimicry as a design

approach and applying the considerations made my the Wydham City Council lead to a pathway of approach. How will we integrate Biomimicry ideas and the freeway context to produce an “optimal” design? What parameter do we focus on in order to achieve our intentions?

INTERLOCKING

LAYERING

ORIENTING

74

2.6

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL

"A is for attractor point” Using the attractor point as a main parameter

enabled this functionality. This will be applied to create these effects to create an eye catching and engaging gateway entry of Wydham city. Its innovation derives from the complex ideologies based on biomimicry, in particular the growth and adaptation of the tree through three main processes to produce an “optimal” organism adaptable to survive.

Wydham is a rapidly growing population and encompasses a wide urban landscape ideal to designers to enhance. We feel as though our project proposal is a smart, complex idea yet put in simple form, notion that has full potential as a not only a gateway proposal, but an installation that looks deep into nature and its functions to make it optimal. Nonetheless, the installation will fit well into the growing municipality and create a new discourse that looks at biomimicry as an

innovative design. How? The evolution of biomimicry and its structure can be used as a model, mentor and measure to establish a design solution that makes a cohesive whole. This discourse is enhanced with the evolution of new technologysuch as Grasshopper and Rhino, and fabrication techniques.

Nature has worked itself out for so many years in order to survive, but the main challenge for designers is establishing the idea. How do we emulate nature? How does nature do something we cannot do as humans to survive?

These drawbacks are part of the design process, and we must draw on all of what nature has come up with in order to “think biomimically” and produce a design strategy.

We humans are also a part of nature, we are not separate entities; and we must respect that.

75

2.6

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL how do we do it?

Using a mapped and divided

curve and connecting it to a point attractor allowed us to create three-dimensional planar panels that aligned in a certain orientation occording to where we wanted them to be aligning.

We felt in control at this stage as this was our own definition and we could control the number of panels we wanted, the distance between these panels, the thickness and its size. Nonetheless, we are able to control the location of the attractor point, ie. the sun, in the coordinate space. Wherever the location of the sun will affect the orientation of the panels. A bottom-up approach illustrates how one element affects other parameters in the coordinate space.

76

77

2.6.1

TECHNIQUE PROTOTYPING

We decided to produce another prototype

that imitates the final outcome at this stage.

We had actually sent three different types of materials to the FabLab for laser cutting (one of which being plywood), but unfortunately it was not cut properly, so we used what we had. This was polypropylene - a lightweight, translucent plastic material. Polypropylene was used for the panels which was fixed onto thicker wire. Holes were produced for the FabLab to perforate, which made the building process much faster as all was required was piercing the wire through the holes. This enabled a flexible joint whereby we could orient the panels in a certain orientation. We did not, however, consider how the panels might orientate themselves to form a “twisted” shape as produced by the grasshopper file. Perhaps we will need to find another solution whereby the joints are completely non-rigid thus allowing the panels to orient more flexibly, like the leaves of a tree orient themselves according to the sun’s rays.

We were happy with the polypropylene as a light-weight, yet structural material that also conveyed a sort-of ornamental effect. It was translucent, so allowed the light to penetrate through the material and create interesting lighting effects.

A problem we faced however was the wire.

Clearly it is not a very appropriate material because it becomes too distorted and created “kinks” which makes it hard for the panels to be

78

2.6.1

TECHNIQUE PROTOTYPING

inserted in a regular, smooth curved shape.

Overall, we were excited to see our exploration become built in front of our eyes. Nonetheless, it conveyed the elements we wanted it to convey.

However we were not pleased with the optical illusion it created as the material was perhaps too rigid to work with, and perhaps it did not collaborate well to create a structural form.

This is all a part of the design process and learning process. When we enter our next stage, we will be developing our ideas and becoming familiar with more materials and techniques to produce a more appealing piece of art that we, our tutors, and the whole community want to see alongside the freeway in Wyndham City.

79

2.6.2

TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL THE OUTCOME

80

THE INSPIRATION AND FOCUS THE BACKGROUND NATURE

ch a

ng

in

on di

me nt

h

ns

Dev

tio

elo p

t row

rv iv e

gc

w

g ith

to apt Ad

Evolve to su

sso

n’

r

e

Le

BOTTOM-UP

2.7

s

tu from N a

Operating Conditions 81

2.8

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Our mid-semester presentation went better than expected. Thank

you to our strong argyment, we were able to succesfully engage the viewers into why our approach is successful in terms of designing a new gateway proposal for Wyndham City. They seemed to be so hapy with the argument, but a bit surprised with the final outcome. They were expecting to see that strength in the design, but to them it was not shown.

I feel as though they took the outcome as an actual â&#x20AC;&#x153;final designâ&#x20AC;? and did not consider the next stage of development. However we will take their feedback into consideration and develop it futher to produce better work. We know now the technique and process that we want to apply, but it is now a matter of further skill enhancing in grasshopper to produce a more engaging, eye-catching installation for our final design.

The studio classes enabled us as a group to get together and discuss our objectives. We were then able to deliver these objectives to other studio members as well as our tutors to receieve useful feedback. Class groups are very useful as one cannot simply learn independently; one learns from others. It is especially useful in this subject as we are introduced into a new computation spectrum and a new program, with absolutely no experience of how it works!

In regards to parametric modelling, it was definitely a huge struggle trying to learn the program, better still apply our imagination into the program and try to reproduce it. However in the end, we were happy to where we got to because we achieved something we intended to, and now we have a clear path of direction. We are now in control of our inputs and our design, so we are able to create, manipulate and design using parametric design. We have demonstrated our successful and sometimes unsuccessful outcomes, however most of all we have demonstrated our skills in parametric modelling.

I am very happy with our argument, as it demonstrates that hard work through deliberation and research can pay off! Nonetheless, continuous amounts of explorations in grasshopper can lead to unexpected outcomes, and some of these outcomes can lead to a design intent.

Resarch into biomimicry and researching some past projects accellerated our design approach. Prototyping different outcomes also put the project into realistic perspective and gave us the opportunity to problem solve any structural assemblies as well as explore different materials.

The next part will look at how we consider our design on the actual site.

Using the tutorial feedback and our own opinions, we will try our very best to improve our Grasshopper skills and beome more developed designers so that we can eventually conceive an optimal, engaging and eye-catching freeway installation for Wyndham.

82

2.9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

NOTES The Biomimicry 3.8 Institute, “AskNature”, (The Biomimicry 3.8 Institute, 2013), < http://www.asknature. org/ >.

“Biomimicry, ” (designboom, 2010), < http://www.designboom.com/contemporary/biomimicry.html>.

The Biomimicry 3.8 Institute, “Biomimicry 3.8,” (Biomimicry 3.8, 2012), < http://biomimicry.net/>.

The Biomimicry 3.8 Institute, “AskNature” “Biomimetic Architecture”, (Biomimetic Architecture, 2013), < http://www.biomimetic-architecture. com/what-is-biomimicry/>.

The Biomimicry 3.8 Institute, “AskNature” designboom, “Biomimicry”.

Ibid Ibid Ibid Ehsaan, “Biomimicry Shoe by Marieka Ratsma Kostika Spaho”, Biomimetic Architecture, (2012), < http://www.biomimetic-architecture.com/2012/biomimicry-shoe-by-marieka-ratsma-kostika-spaho/>.

Ehsaan, “Buidling Cars like Bone”, Biomimetic Architecture, (2009), < http://www.biomimetic-architecture.com/2009/build-like-a-bone/ Ehsaan, “Biomimicry Shoe by Marieka Ratsma Kostika Spaho”.

Ibid.

“Dezeen Magazine: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart”, (Dezeen Limited 2010), <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/>.

Bridgette Meinhold, “Amazing Bionic Resarch Pavilion Explores the Sand Dollar’s Skeleton Morphology”, (Inhabitat, 2013), <http://inhabitat.com/amazing-bionic-research-pavilion-explores-the-sanddollars-skeleton-morphology/>.

Ibid.

“Dezeen Magazine: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart”.

Ibid.

Ibid.

Bridgette Meinhold, “Amazing Bionic Resarch Pavilion Explores the Sand Dollar’s Skeleton Morphology”.

“Mangal City spiraling skyscraper to define urban ecosystem for London”, (ESHI Internatioan PTE LTD, 2010), < http://www.designbuzz.com/mangal-city-spiraling-skyscraper-to-define-urban-ecosystem-forlondon/>.

Ibid.

“Mangal City Skyscrapers by Chimera”, (Archivenue, 2013), < http://www.archivenue.com/mangalcity-skyscrapers-by-chimera/>.

Green Futures, “Mangal City: A Mangrove Inspired Skyscraper Design by Team Chimera”, (Architecture for Humanity, 2012), < http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/011319.html>.

Simon Glynn, “Spanish Pavilion 2005 World Exposition Aichi Japan,” (Galinsky, 2005), < http://www. galinsky.com/buildings/spainaichi/>.

Ibid.

Hensel, Michael (2011). ‘’Performance-oriented architecture and the Spatial Material Organisation Complex.” FoRmakademisk, vol. 4 issue 1, pp3-23.

David Lister, “Introduction to the Design Project: Public Art and Motorways”, (Faculty of Architecture: University of Melbourne, 2013), Lecture.

Erv Evans, “Tree Anatomy”, (NC State University, 2000), < http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/depts/hort/consumer/factsheets/trees-new/text/tree_anatomy.html>.

Wikipedia, “Leaf Angle Distribution”, (Wikipedia, 2013), <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leaf_angle_distribution>.

“Heliotropic Leaf Movements in Plants”, (University of Maryland, 2013), < http://www.biol.umd.edu/ Forsethlab/leafmovements.htm>.

83

33 34 35 36 37 38 39

84

Erv Evans, “Tree Anatomy”.

Museum State Illinois, “How Do We Know? Tree Rings.”, (Illinois State Museum, 2000), < http://www. museum.state.il.us/muslink/forest/htmls/how_tr.html>.

Sean Godsell Architects, “RMIT Design Hub”, < http://www.seangodsell.com/rmit-design-hub>.

Ibid.

Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary, “Matthew Ritchie with Aranda/Lasch and Arup AGU - The Morning Line”, < http://www.tba21.org/pavilions/49/page_2?category=pavilions>.

Ibid.

Ibid.