DD, M1

Digital Design - Module 01 Semester 1, 2019 Zachari Adam Orelowitz 910231 Dan Parker + Studio 10

Week One

Reading: Zeara Polo, A. 2010. Between Ideas and Matters.

According to Zeara-Polo, the diagram does not play a representational role in the design process but provides an organisational and can have a performative quality depending on how it is deployed. Explain how Diagram is different from Signs and Symbols? (100 words Maximum)

Symbols and signs visually manifest and represent dynamic objects. Moreover, they do not provide a descriptor to mediate an object’s form and contents, rather operating to display subjective depictions. However, it is according to Zeara-Polo that diagrams refer more broadly to the spatial-performance relationship which governs a locality. He contends that in contrast to symbols and signs, diagrams generate novel sensations and organisation patterns which enable humans to conceptualise beyond our basis of reality – ultimately acting as tool to aid in the manifestation of concept.

2

Week One

Precedent Analysis

Rotating clockwise: Drainage perspective, illustrating roof to ground delineation.

Close up shot of interal roof mechanism and tiering.

Perspective demonstrating relationship between mound, internal cavity, seating and railing systems.

Gollings, John. MPavilion 2018, 2018, photograph. ArchitectureAU. Accessed November 17, 2019. https://architectureau.com/articles/carme-pinoss-mpavilion-opens/.

3

Week Two

Reading: Hertzberger H. 2005. The in-between and The Habitable Space Between Things, from Lessons for Students in Architecture.

Herzberger discusses how design should not be extreme in its functionality. Use your precedent study to explain how the pavilion allows for an appropriation of use. (100 words Maximum)

Hertzberger contends that in the pursuit of functionality – when taken to the extreme – designs are often self-limited to one particular use and certain persons rather than offering the freedom of affordance to users. Carme Pinos’ 2018 MPavilion ingeniously offers users the freedom to interpret spatial function whilst simultaneously developing an overarching and unifying structural presence. This is done in large part through her development of semi-permeable walls and roofing structure, providing both internal space whilst also broadening the pavilion outwards – emphasising a dynamic sense of space. Moreover, the roofing structure itself appears to hover over a central void, draining into terraformed mounds (which are wrapped with seating) delineating the notion of roof, wall and floor. Through the development of such connection she implicitly infers the pavilion as a space of gather, yet in what manner is left undefined.

4

Week Two

Isometric

Carme Pinos’ MPavilion 2018 The modelling process in the construction of this model was particualrly challenging in the sense that the majority of the structure is rotated in all axial degrees meaning that for an accurate modelling process, one could not simply model in plan/elevation and rotate to suit. Additionally, the elevations provided did not match one another and were not an accurate depiction of the final construction of the 2018 MPavlion.

However, whilst I found the model challenging to construct, forming a base system to model accurate dimensions, this process forced me to deeply meditate on the circulation and threshold spaces embedded within the structure and surrounding landscape.

This was most notable through the layered modeling within the roof, here Carme has taken control of light and depth in order to develop an ambient threshold, evolving the Pavilion into a sort of intemediary space which delineates the indoor-outdoor spatial connection. The key concept alluded to in this precedent study is arguably the notion of interplay and connectedness; with Carme ingeniously intertwining the seperate roof panels with one another and further, the respected landscape through the elelavtion of of terraformed mounds. Further, Carme has emphasised this connectedness through a semi-permeable structure allowing for the space to leak out leading to a diffused threshold progression and ergo, diffused user interaction.

Moreover, Carme prescribes no objective point of entry allowing for a cross pollination system whereby users interact at key spatial points and collectively create subconsious spatial openings allowing for affordances in occupation and presentation.

5

Week Two Diagrams

Circulation Diagram

Threshold Diagram

With no objective entry points users collectively develop a circulation pattern which stabalises with a

Carme employs an array of threshold techniques through her pavilion, all of which emphasis the

central and a three exterior cross pollination points, as well as cresent shaped affordance zones which

distribution of public and private realm and divide such private realm into a collective public-private

can be utilised for presentation or entertainment spaces (these inherent forms arise due the calculated

and interpersonal-private space. In terms of public-private space, the roof layering and shadow de-

mound orientation). Moreover, thicker circulation lines around the seating array demonstrate seating

velopment leads to a diffused but defined concept of space, gently transitioning the progression from

ambulation and length of stay relative to more dynamic ambulatory curves which illustrate shortest

outside in - emphasised through strong enclosure withing the mounds. Additionally, the raised seating

travel paths.

and angled roofing creates a sense of intamacy with each incremental increase in height. Ultimately, these two techniques largely define the user behaviour whose connection the the space diffuses with

6

the shadow and roof inclines.

Appendix

Process

Initial modelling attempt at roof.

Modeled in plan and rotated, leading to incorrect dimensions.

Second attempt at roof using a base structure in 6 degrees of rotation.

Purlin cross section aligned on roof base tangent; then utilised Sweep1 and trim to extrude dimensions.

Blue Orb Polycarbonate roofing extruded across base points.

Secondary base adjusested to suit lower U-beam dimensions which taper and are not parellel with the top flange.

Layers of U-Beam construction highlighted. Each flange section constructed individually to give accurate tapering and angle

Internal roof layers demonstrated in accurate rotation and dimension, without exterior beams.

Gutter model contructed through lofting two cross sectional curves estimated from instagram images and scaled accoring to elevation.

7

Appendix Process

Wall portion base modeled in order to build accurate exterior beams and timber slats (rather than constructing in elevation and rotating)

Progress image of exterior beam construction using cross section, sweep2 (for angled tapering) and trim technique.

Final exterior beam construction for wall panels.

Mound, internal cavity, railing and railing support curve, view captured on mac leading to different render.

Demonstration of rhino file set up with elevation, plan and model organisation.

Final production model of Carme’s MPavilion.

Development of seating and railing system before the inclusion of mounds.

Boolean difference was then used to cut back mound overhangs

8

Discarded potential threshold angle showing exploded roofing system and wall framing.