Alexander Maré (Undergraduate Student

The Need for Transformable Geometries and Responsive Disaster Architecture

A mathematical design response to COVID-19 and related crises

ALEXANDER MARÉ Undergraduate Student

Transformable and mobile structures are well-suited to responding to sudden crises such as pandemics – often in remote or adverse conditions – where simple, temporary, and adaptable infrastructure is sorely needed. The transformation of purely flat two-dimensional planes into complex three-dimensional structures using constraints (such as using only folds or a limited number of cuts) is a mathematical problem that has only recently received proper attention in formal topology, geometry, and practical engineering, but already has a long and productive artistic history in Japanese origami. Yet despite its obvious value for emergency infrastructure, not much mainstream attention has been paid in the field of design to using such transformable geometries to create new and comprehensive forms of what may be called disaster architecture. However, the recent COVID-19 pandemic provides both an academic opportunity and a moral imperative for architecture to engage with transformable typologies and so respond to the crisis at hand. Such crises always thrust the role of architecture into the spotlight. The built environment is not only responsible for the pathways of social interaction,

Figure 12: Conceptual Sketch

but also by the same token for the pathways of disease, and therefore it has a duty to respond. Architecture after all is about problem solving – not merely structurally or spatially, but also socially. In light of the above, this paper will explore some very basic transformable designs for further development and possible practical application in the field as a means of pandemic intervention, in the form of mobile testing sites, pavilions, and field clinics.

Transformable geometries, folds, and architecture for disasters

Transformable geometries refer to structures that are responsive to changes in force or energy (for instance pressure or heat) and adapt their shape accordingly in a controlled manner, shifting from one form to another both in terms of surface area and volume, without the addition or removal of material. Simple examples would include concertinas, pleated skirts, and tents, and more complicated examples would include the expandable sails and panels under consideration for future spacecraft. The advantage of such geometries is that they allow for controlled adaptability with comparatively little effort or change in material, because the material of transformable structures can be mechanically programmed to respond in certain ways, for instance along fold- or cut-lines Indeed, even rigid materials such as wood can be rendered bendable with patterns of surrogate folds in the form of cuts or filigree patterns, although for the purposes of this paper materials traditionally associated with folding shapes, such as tent canvas, will be used. In short then, the potential advantages of transformable geometry for the architectural typologies required in disaster, postdisaster, and relief scenarios can be summarised as follows: little assembly required; fewer parts required; increased speed of assembly; adaptability; ease of transport owing to foldable nature; lower cost due to ease of transport and assembly.

It will be noted that these properties are ideal for an architecture needed to respond quickly and variably to a sudden crisis. An adaptable architecture of this kind is especially necessary for the South African context, where the majority of citizens do not have easy access, either in terms of finance or proximity, to the more permanent medical facilities represented by building typologies such as large hospitals and clinics in urban centres. Instead testing facilities and fieldwork need to be mobilised and brought into rural areas.

Figure 13: Paper Model Explorations

In light of this, a very general idea emerges: using tent-like structures made largely from a single material with pre-set folds. Such structures would differ from most current tents and temporary architecture by being assembled almost entirely from a single piece using folds, and differ further in the potential for adaptability and variability if those folds could accommodate more than one final configuration. In other words, differentiable and non-self-identical structures. If made from tent canvas, these structures would need lightweight support in the form of both internal poles and external guy ropes. The manufacturing advantage is that such tents could each be fabricated almost entirely from a large single sheet of material and folded into shape on site. The presence of marked fold- and cut-lines would facilitate assembly by reducing the number of loose parts that have to be combined.

While we are still considering general solutions there are of course more complex possibilities within the domain of expandable geometries and tents, such as the geodesics of Buckminster Fuller or the tensile structures of Frei Otto. These, however, require either complex mathematics (to calculate the forces on curved surfaces) or complicated assembly (triangulated geodesic structures), neither

of which are desirable for responsive architecture during emergencies. Curves are also resistant to simple methods of folding since by definition they curve their folds along more than one axis at once, increasing the possibility of confusion as far as both packaging and assembly are concerned.

The solution then is a series of largely rectilinear foldable geometries in the form of adaptable and collapsible tents. Four simple designs for such modules will be discussed in this paper. The first is a miscellaneous adaptable module based on a simple square template that can differentiate by folding into several small configurations. It can be used for a number of purposes. The second is a small field hospital based on a radial design with triangular rooms, requiring the assembly of separate folding parts. The third is an extendable tunnel utilising pleats and an X-like fold. The fourth and last is a larger rectangular structure with an articulated front to break up the distance between individuals, and it can serve as a testing station, warehouse, or administrative point. These three-dimensional structures can easily be derived by observation from two-dimensional geometric nets, articulated with intuitively accessible folds. As is to be expected of disaster architecture, the main focus of these structures is not spatiality, aesthetics, or phenomenology, but instead functionality and ergonomics. These are structures that must be adaptable enough to respond to as many site contexts as possible (ruling out site-based aesthetics) and serve first and foremost medical and practical needs (ruling out long-term occupancy or time for an appreciable phenomenological experience). Basic elements such as lighting, sufficient space, and stability therefore come to the fore, and others such as texture and materiality necessarily recede. In Vitruvius’s terms, firmitas and utilitas predominate over venustas here. Below is a brief discussion of each module. A rough non-scalable sketch of each template is given with approximate dimensions and folding lines indicated with red dashes. All dimensions are given in millimetres.

Suggested transformable typologies

The H-Module

The H-Module, named after the plan profile of its most useful configuration, is the most adaptable of the designs presented here, able to transform into at least seven or eight different configurations by folding the same square template. The module can be used as a general purpose two-room tent with a flap between the rooms, or it can be fattened and folded to provide screens and partitions with a height lower than 2500mm. In its tent form it could be used as a small testing and treatment unit, or it could contain a desk and supplies as a first-contact reception area.

Figure 14: The H-Module Configurations

The V-Module

The peaked and pointed form of the V-Module serves several purposes. The first – slanting both the roof ridge and the vertical front wall away from the sun – serves to potentially reduce the amount of direct perpendicular sunlight falling upon the surface area of the structure, if it is correctly positioned. The second – tapering the volume of the interior towards an upwards peak with a ventilation panel – serves to encourage the upward and outward flow of warm air from within the structure. Lastly, if for no other reason, the unusual peaked appearance of the structure adds some visual and experiential interest for its users, which remains a phenomenologically valuable aspect in the context of a disaster.

The V-Module forms an array of four linked rooms in a roughly semi-circular plan. Each is isolated from the other and can accommodate at least one bed comfortably, or potentially two if positioned correctly. The module is open at both ends. The larger triangular opening, shown in the sketch, is sunfacing and should ideally be closed with a ventilation panel at the peak. Physical access can be gained through the smaller triangular opening at the opposite end of each room.

Figure 15: The V-Module

The X-Module

The X-Module combines the folds of both the concertina and the scissor-lift in order to create a horizontal collapsible cuboid or tunnel that can be made arbitrarily long.

This module could be used either as a connecting passage between other buildings, or as a unit on its own. As with the H-Module, the X-Module can be utilised for a variety of different purposes and was not designed with a single function in mind. It could be partitioned and contain beds, or it could be used as an expandable cover for supplies

Figure 16: The X-Module

The E-Module

The E-Module possesses an articulated or stepped front to break up the distance between individuals, giving it its name. Each of these faces can be provisioned with a window or opening, and the interior could serve as a storage facility, pharmaceutical dispensary, or administrative hub with access points through the openings on the stepped front. When in its compressed usable state, the collapsed extra material forms partial triangular barriers or walls inside the structure, providing vertical surface area for temporary shelves made of fabric. This collapsed vertical material can also be unfolded and stretched horizontally to expand the floor area of the E-Module. In such a case, additional roof and external wall material will have to be provided to fill the gaps.

Figure 17: The E-Module

Further considerations and applications Further design iterations and developments could of course be applied to each of the above modules. Several V-Modules, for instance, could be joined together in an array to form a circular structure with a central courtyard (resemblance to the notorious Panopticon notwithstanding). Each module side. could also be further developed with careful placement of window openings, ventilation panels, and a combination of translucent and opaque material to allow natural lighting; and each must also be provisioned with temporary flooring suitable to the context.

Other applications outside pandemic intervention can be imagined as well, for instance at smaller or even nano scales. If the patterns of transformable geometry were applied to stress-sensitive materials, then the resulting structures could potentially

A virus, like a hurricane, tsunami, or earthquake, recognises no borders, political differences, ” economies, classes, or races; and suddenly the justification behind trade and border disputes seems lacking as we all find ourselves on the same

self-assemble, an idea that has recently started to receive attention in engineering and medicine. At a macro scale one could imagine such structures being transported somewhere in one configuration, before transforming into useful new

configurations upon arrival at their destination in response to the different conditions there (such as wind, heat, or pressure). Thus at larger scales a nomadic, adaptable architecture could emerge, allowing for a literal reshaping of society.

A more philosophical note: the future of society and architecture

To return to the pandemic on a more broadly philosophical note before concluding: the reduction in pollution, return of wildlife to the streets, and shrinking global economies have all reminded us, not for the first time though perhaps most strongly, of the essential arbitrariness of human political and economic systems. A virus, like a hurricane, tsunami, or earthquake, recognises no borders, political differences, economies, classes, or races; and suddenly the justification behind trade and border disputes seems lacking as we all find ourselves on the same side. The current pandemic, like all crises past and future, serves to redirect our attention and values, call into question our basic assumptions, remind us what we take for granted, and return us to a more fundamental set of questions: what should we value, and how should we live? It has been said that the pandemic and subsequent lockdown are not ‘business as usual’. But that is a form of denialism spoken from within the old blindspot of anthropocentrism. That fantasy has been swept away by the most usual form of business imaginable, a force of nature. The harsh truth is that life as we knew it before the pandemic was never really ‘business as usual’, and that a radically new reimagining of society is needed instead.

What would the role of architecture be in reimagining such a society? This is of course difficult to answer, and any attempts must remain speculative. Most likely no answers will be viable until the full effects of COVID-19 on the global population and economy become clear in the years to come. One thing is however obvious: the fact that the pandemic required worldwide self-isolation and physical distancing shows that most of our current architecture – and more importantly the daily activities, ideologies, and economic requirements that utilise and underlie that architecture – is somewhat unsuited to promoting distance or space. Cities everywhere would not have stalled to the extent they have if our various forms of public architecture and spaces were not, by design, mainly extroverted and crowded, and if they could instead already have accommodated a greater form of space. We have seen

now that urbanism relies on an architecture of concentration rather than diffusion.

Of course such concentration is not necessarily always a bad thing, and using COVID-19 as an argument against everything from economic systems to workplace layouts might appear too radical for some. But the fact remains that most of the world’s architecture and infrastructure is currently standing empty, as it was designed for daily patterns and rhythms that cannot currently be sustained. COVID-19 has acted like a much-needed dye, seeping into the various cracks within society and revealing its fault-lines: whether the shortcomings of architecture or the class divides that still deprive some areas of medical facilities. An architecture of the future would have to take all of this into consideration. For example, it might be a more ‘dispersed’ architecture and urbanism, friendlier to a slower pace, with adaptable buildings that can radically alter their internal layouts as needed, perhaps in some cases akin to the ‘nomadic architecture’ mentioned earlier. It would raise important questions about work and access to spaces we have hitherto taken for granted – the pandemic has recontextualised our relationship with both the built environment and natural environment, since many of us have now spent months confined within the same space (often our homes) without the opportunity for a literal and metaphorical change of scenery.

How then do we incorporate nature, often sought as an escape outside the normal built environment, into everyday life and into ordinary homes? How do we allow homes to diversify their functions so that one can work without leaving? Or does working from home really constitute a covert invasion of the private sphere by the public and corporate? These are architectural problems with broader ideological underpinnings, and architecture in turn is well positioned to provide solutions that reimagine those ideologies. Whatever the answers it is likely that architecture, and the society it shapes, will not be able to remain exactly the same as it was before. In this sense, architecture has an emancipatory role to play in shaping future possibilities.

As far as responsive disaster architecture goes, the designs put forward in this paper are simply suggestions and starting points for the present crisis, and more input from the perspectives of epidemiology, ergonomics, movement circulation, and social behaviour is required. Nonetheless, the designs represent a platform from which to potentially explore further typologies of adaptable

disaster architecture, and hopefully they demonstrate the usefulness of transformable geometries within crisis scenarios in the form of practical easily-deployable solutions. After all, during an emergency our responsibility must always go beyond simply recording our experiences for posterity; we must also respond for the sake of the present.