657609 part a b

STUDIOAIRSemester 2 2015Tutorial 5 [Bradley]Venansia Frisca657609

CONTENTS

Introduction

Part A | Conceptualisation A1 Design Futuring

A2 Design Computation

A3 Composition/Generation

A4 Conclusion

A5 Learning Outcomes

A6 Algorithmic Sketches

Bibliography

Image References

Part B | Criteria Design B1 Research Field

B2 Case Study 1.0

B3 Case Study 2.0

B4 Technique: Development

B5 Technique: Prototypes

B6 Technique: Proposal

B7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

B8 Algorithmic Sketches

Bibliography

Image References

Part C | Detailed Design A1 Design Concept

A2 Tectonic Elements and Prototypes

A3 Final Detail Model

A4 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Bibliography

Image References

4

PART A | CONCEPTUALISATION

03

INTRODUCTION

My name is Frisca. I am a third year architecture student. I am passionate in architecture and design in general. I believe architecture is not a solitary field of study because of its dependency on practically every other fields of study imaginable where human beings are involved. My current interest within architecture is phenomenology and behaviourology. I have never been fond of the organic forms and complex geometries that parametric design is strongly associated with. However, I believe there is more to parametricism than the looks of it and I am excited to explore those possibilities within this subject.

My first-hand experience with digital design so far is only at surface level. Although I have used Rhinoceros and other 3D modelling tools, namely SketchUp and Autodesk Revit, for my previous design studios and personal projects, my proficiency is restricted to basic geometries and operations that are based on manual calculations. It was only during the subject Digital Design and Fabrication, however, that I first gained in-depth knowledge regarding how to use these tools to their full potential.

Through the subject I learnt how digital tools and techniques have revolutionised the design industry at large. Digital modelling softwares such as Rhinoceros enables generative form-finding from a set of rules or algorithms. With ease of fabrication (aided by fabrication techniques such as laser cutting, 3D printing and CNC milling) and with most of the design process occurring in the digital realm, rapid prototyping becomes integral to the design process, which makes possible highly refined designs with higher value for time and resources. All these point towards a new future in architecture where its mode of production becomes pluralised and decentralised, what Rifkin called the “Third Industrial Revolution.”

I am curious to see how digital design and fabrication can be put into practice in a large-scale, real-world situation through

this studio.

04

PART ACONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION


07

A1 DESIGNFUTURING

The Complex and Uncertain

According to Fry, design futuring is the use of design to slow down the rate of “defuturing” in order to secure the future of humankind, by redirecting human beings towards sustainable methods of occupying the planet, which he termed sustain-ability” [4]. Because the environment where we build is made up of complex interdependencies between numerous systems, the state of the world is ongoingly complex and unpredictable, which gives rise to “wicked problems” [12]. The present state of design is increasingly unable to cope with this “wickedness” as it becomes increasingly plural yet deregulised [4]. The top-down nature of architectural practice by far, where architects are “master builders” who dictates sustainable ways of living, is therefore contributing to defuturing, as more designed artefacts are produced that are not necessarily effectively solving the problems they are meant to solve. Thus, architects should instead assume the role of facilitators, where they can promote new ways of thinking of how to live rather than merely providing new ways to live.

A Speculative Approach

Because we are dealing with the complex and uncertain, the use of some degree of speculation is inevitable. This is why speculative design is necessary for design futuring. Dunne and Raby defines speculative design as one that uses speculation in order to determine a “preferable future” [2]. Speculative design thus avoids unwanted future scenarios by being critical of present normalities and encouraging people to fantasize beyond such present normalities. It aligns with what Fry termed design intelligence, as it helps people “make crucial judgements about actions that could increase or decrease futuring potential,” which in turn

“able to deal with human beings making ever greater demands” [2] on the present state of the world. Speculative design is therefore complementary to futuring, as it helps sustaining the architecture discipline as a system by constantly providing materials for discourse.

Parametricism: the Answer?

Fry emphasised the power of design in making or breaking our future when he stated “whenever we bring something into being, we also destroy something”[4]. Architecture is especially powerful because it is responsible for the creation of our built environments, which in turn serves as a spatial setting for a majority of the systems human beings are dependent on, in particular social systems. Architecture being an autopoietic system of communications - a closed system capable of the self-production and regeneration of its elements [13], means that it is capable of self-sustainment as long as there is constant feedback from within itself that initiates the self-correction of its constituents. Given the power of architecture in creation, if the system can be sustained by constantly providing critical feedback to its present constituents, i.e. discourse and practice, then there is a greater possibility for securing our future through architecture. Schumacher’s “parametricism” [14] brings this closed-loop feedback mechanism into the scale of singular designed artefacts/architectural projects, wherein the artefacts themselves consist of smaller scale fragments capable of self-recorrection to adapt to the complex, unpredictable and equally fragmented model of modern society. This will be further discussed in Sections A2 and A3.

The precedents, Nakagin Capsule Tower and Chip City, compare the result of a past design futuring attempt that was built, and a present attempt that is purely speculative.

08


09

A1Nakagin Capsule Tower

Kisho Kurokawa, Tokyo, 1960 [built]

Kurokawa’s Nakagin Capsule Tower is one of the few built outcomes of the Japanese Metabolist movement of the 1960s. The building and its corresponding architectural movement was deemed radical at the time due to its promises of sustainability. The building proposed a new way of urban resource management through the use of cellular living units that can be attached and detached to their supporting cores or “megastructure,” therefore proposing a regenerative model to the society’s fear that Tokyo’s available land and resources would not be able to accommodate the growing urban population.

Despite its promises, the building ended up not performing how it was meant to perform. This is largely attributed to the lack of participation from its inhabitants and the discrepancy between its built and planned state. Though planned to be a self-regenerating structure, with recyclable steel-truss capsules that were meant to be replaced every 25 years, the main structural cores are massive concrete - it is practically meant to last, thus becoming a permanent contributor to the city’s carbon footprint The building is on the brink of demolition over the past ten years, with polarised

views on whether it should be retained for its innovative value within architectural discourse, or eliminated for pure economic practicality - the building has been in dilapidated state for decades, and it would have been more economical to demolish it to make way for better developments.

Although the building proved an unsuccessful prototype in fulfilling its own intentions, it taught the architectural profession a lesson in the importance of being critical of present states. It emphasises the flaw in the top-down nature of the notion of architects as “master builders” due to its failure to engage the users in responding accordingly to the building’s program. The plug-in, plug-out modular mechanism and the idea of a building that grows and changes itself to adapt to its inhabitants serves as a model for present-day design methodologies like generative design, particularly biomimetics and morphogenetic design - instead of requiring inhabitants to actively respond to the building in order to make its program work, generatively designed buildings has the capacity to actively respond to the inhabitants.

Figure 1.1Re-briefed conceptual diagramsof capsule mechanism

10“ But equally redirection is a process of establishing new signposting systems that first indicate the error of following those existing pathways of thought and action as they serve to defuture all that is vital for viable futures (at both the level of mind or matter). ”

- Tony Fry

Top to bottom

Figure A1.2Interior view of Nakagin CapsuleTower in its present state

Figure A1.3Close-up view of capsules


11

A1Chip City

Shinobu Hashimoto and Rients Dijkstra, 2000 [unbuilt]

This page

Figure A1.4Present-day Tokyo versusTokyo after PosTec [Chip City]

Top to bottom [next page]

Figure A1.5Examples of PosTecimplemented into everyday objects

Figure A1.6Scale model of a Chip City

Shinobu and Dijkstra’s Chip City project is an imagined future where directed traffic in urban nodes is eliminated by erasing fixed signage as means of wayfinding. In place of signage, the use of GPS is amplified to the extremes, using PosTec or Positioning Technology implanted in our everyday gadgets. Unlike the Nakagin Capsule Tower, the Chip City project is purely speculative and only exists in the imagined realm.

Thus, its significance within the architectural discourse is its own shock value - it presents an alternate version of reality as an extension to the present state, that is designed as a respond to what the architects think made the present state an unsustainable way of occupying the planet. The project is meant to provoke the society’s thoughts by designing something to provide what the architects speculate as a “preferable future,” in this case a future where built infrastructure is reduced to a minimum, if not eliminated, by

eliminating the need for an organised flow as a result of physical signage. Once traffic becomes deconstructed, people’s motion becomes more efficient and inherently the urban carbon footprint is reduced.

The project is entirely abstract and conceptual in its own right, but it has the power to redirect people’s way of thinking just as much as Nakagin Capsule Tower back in its day, given the variable of time. The nature of the intervention is as much technological as it is architectural, such that the role of the architect is questionable in projects of this kind. Nevertheless, with advancements in computational design, it is possible to materialise this project into an architectural outcome, without trivialising the role of the architects - they will be designing the algorithms that enable them to achieve the preferrable outcomes rather than formulating a pre-conceived architectonic form that risks obsolescence.

12“More motion but less collission. More information but less signage - fixed signage, that is. The promise of the GPS is that the sign will be miniaturised, internalised, personalised.”

- Shinobu Hashimoto & Rients Dijkstra [5]


13

A2 DESIGNCOMPUTATION

Computers + Design

Claude Shannon, inventor of the first magnetic mouse, proposed that computers as “complex systems of electrical signals” can be “built to replicate the logical operations of human thought” [5]. This implies that computerisation is merely a digital emulation of analogous thought processing, with augmented capacity to deal with complexity. In architecture, computerisation has been widely used in the form of CAD (Computer-Aided Design) as well as digital modelling and visualisation tools. It has increased efficiency, but retains the segmented nature of the design process . It keeps the conception stage separate from construction [6], if not severing the tie even more so, as the means of communication (i.e. drawings and models) become more abstracted. The mental processes that occur when architects draw or construct physical models at least still connects them to the tectonic reality through making, but once the computer takes over these mental processes, the connection is lost.

Design + Computation

Computation, unlike computerisation, is an action that can be performed either in the digital realm or in the analogue. By its simplest definition, computation is the calculation of a function with a given input parameters based on a set of rules or algorithms that determine specific outputs [11]. Therefore, computation, just like design, is one of the distinguishing characteristics of humankind. Designing, according to Kalay, displays human beings’ capacity for rational behaviour through problem analysis [6]. Likewise, computation involves the use of logical reasoning. The distinction between the two activities is in that designing involves some degree of human sensibility, whereas computation is largely an objective activity based on unambiguous data. Design

computation, therefore, is an ideal situation when the two activities merge, wherein human beings devise an algorithmic process to generate desired outcomes.

Computers + Design + Computation

As discussed in Section A.1, the difficulty of design futuring lies in the “wickedness” of problems as a result of the complexity and interdependency of the systems that sustain our existence, as well as the uncertainties involved in dealing with the future. Therefore, the state of design must adapt to this complexity, while accommodating the uncertain. This calls for the need for human-computer symbiosis, where design computation is performed using computers, such as to retain the human sensibilities needed for speculative imagination, while allowing the computer to perform complex analyses that are beyond human capacity.

Digital Craftsmanship

Computerisation has changed the extent at which computation can influence the nature of the design process, giving rise to an integrated one where between conception and construction exists a closed-loop feedback system ever-present in the era of craftsmanship. Oxman and Oxman termed this a “digital continuum” [10]. In other words, design computation signals a return to craftsmanship, except this time it is a digital craftsmanship. This closed-loop feedback between conception and construction results in a dynamic and variable design process, where designers can alter the input parameters of their design based on feedbacks on the output, with the bulk of the process occurring within the digital realm. Here, the human-computer symbiosis ideal becomes inherent, as discussed in the following precedents, Japan Pavilion and Gwangju RestBox.

14


Japan Pavilion

Shigeru Ban and Frei Otto, Hannover, 2000 [built]

Shigeru Ban’s Japan Pavilion, designed in collaboration with Frei Otto, is a temporary structure built for EXPO 2000 in Hanover, Germany. The goal behind the pavilion’s design is to produce as little industrial waste as possible while being as low-tech as possible in construction. In order to achieve that, the tunnel-like form made of undulating series of gridshells is constructed out of long paper tubes connected with simple metal angles and braced with diagonal tension cables. A layer of waterproof membrane is then draped over the primary structure.

Material computation is crucial in achieving this goal by enabling the use of an unconventional building material such as paper tubes for the gridshell structure. Unlike the reverse engineering process adopted in Frank Gehry’s works, where the forms are conceptualised using analogous methods before the

actual construction is made possible by reverse engineering through computerised digital modelling tools [8], Ban’s Japan Pavilion form is generated as a result of material research to determine the structural and energy performance of paper as a building material.

Computation for the structural performance of paper tubes determines the material’s capacity for handling stress and deformation. It further informs the fabrication process in that it enables the detailing of joints such that they allow for easy assemblage and dis-assemblage while retaining structural integrity, thereby increasing its potential for reuse. Energy performance analysis is then done to determine the most efficient form achievable with the least amount of paper tubes and other materials in order for it to generate as little waste as possible.

In such computation-based design process as the design of Ban’s Japan Pavilion, rapid prototyping becomes integral as a part of the performance analysis. Human-computer symbiosis then becomes necessary with the need of human intellect to evaluate the qualities of each fabricated prototype before re-designing based on that evaluation and arriving at a final solution. There is no clear boundary between when pure speculation and exact calculation comes in play, as everything happens simultaneously through the process of digital “making.” The project therefore becomes an embodiment of what computation can contribute to design futuring - speculations of the “preferrable” can be materialised with minimum risk.

15

A2

16

Clockwisetop to bottom

Figure A2.1Japn Pavillion interior renderof gridshell structure

Figure A2.2Reverse engineering of Japan Pavilion

17

Gwangju RestBox

IwamotoScott, Gwangju, 2009 [built]


A2

Top to bottom [this page]

Figure A2.3Human relaxation position shift analysis

Figure A2.4Tesselation and subtraction of panels for lighting

Figure A2.5Finished 1/20 scale prototypes

Next page

Figure A2.6Detail of the fabricated prototype’s resting void

18

Gwangju RestBox by IwamotoScott is a 2m x 2m x 2m cubic pavilion intended as a place for general resting area able to accommodate all possible human positions during the act of relaxation, from sitting to reclning. The design of the pavilion incorporates computational strategies such as dynamic simulation and inverse kinematics.

The form subtracted from the predetermined volumetric boundary of the 2m x 2m x 2m cube is defined as a result of the dynamic simulation of human movement during relaxation, as shown in Figure 2.5. Input parameters from the simulation, such as the angles made during shifts from one position to the next, are then used as a basis for controlling the topological transformation of the cube, resulting in an irregular void within the Platonic solid. The internal surface of the box can then be triangulated to accommodate the irregularity. These triangulations are projected to the outer surfaces of the cube, thereby creating triangulated blocks. In order to create a dappled lighting effect for the void within, a number of these blocks are subtracted from the main volume.

The RestBox is a small-scale “topological structure”, which means the “skin” material should also be capable of self-support [8]. Therefore, there must be a mutual dialogue between the form and the material choice, wherein one must inform the other. In addition, it must also take into account fabrication techniques appropriate for the chosen material, in this case laminated wood veneer, considering the limitations of each available technique. Given the closed-loop nature between conception and construction in Oxman’s “digital continuum”, and the constant dialoguing between goals and solutions suggested by Kalay [6], there is no clear order of which decision should be made first within the process, making it more spontaneous and dynamic.

Although given a formal constraint of a monolithic box, IwamotoScott arrived at a solution of much higher complexity and specificity by fragmentalising the given geometry into individual units and designing the algorithms to alter the behaviour of these units into one that fits the input parameters, thereby producing an inherently specialised architectonic form. This proves how algorithmic thinking in design enables more responsive solutions with minimum effort.


19

A3 COMPOSITIONAND GENERATION

On Complexity

In compositional design, there is a tendency to oversimplify forms, reflective of the architect’s intention of simplifying the complex problems. The problem with this is that often times, architects are subjectively selective of which problem they want to tackle for the sake of simplifying the form. Thus, in Greg Lynn’s “compositional complexity” [9], complexity is meant to be an intentional complexity, or complexity for the sake of complexity, which is still as much a product of the architect’s ego as compositional simplicity. Composition governed the formation of architectural “styles,” namely Modernism, Post-Modernism, and everything in between. This is due to the fact that composition is largely based on the creation of a single form that is meant to represent an absolute solution. Because the way architects think at a particular era is generally largrely governed by the era’s epoch, this approach leads to a homogeneity of architectonic forms that can be grouped and classified.

In generative design, on the other hand, complexity in form is inherent as a result of addressing the complex problems rather than simplifying/selectively tackling them. It more closely fits what Lynn termed “intricacy” [9], a more fragmented, part-to-whole model of complexity, with room to treat each part individually, where changing the behaviour of one part ultimately changes the behaviour of the whole.Hence, generative design, because of its capacity to conceive highly specific outcomes, goes beyond traditional classifications and ‘styles’ based on reductivist approaches in strategic form-finding. Schumacher’s “parametricism”, wherein generative design is perceived as a “style” in its own right, albeit one based on “adaptive variation” and “continuous differentiation” [14], is therefore also reductivist and undermines the potential for generative design beyond complex aesthetics.

Processuality/Designing Process

Generative design process is one that is based on algorithmic thinking. Wilson and Frank defined an “algorithm” as, fundamentally, “a recipe, method, or technique for doing something,” and specifically “an intensional definition of a computable function,” thereby specifying how a function is computed rather than just what it is [1]. In generative design, architects are meant to devise this algorithm, thereby letting architecture generate itself within the pretext of data and instructions. Hence, generative design is an ideal approach to design futuring because it strips architects of the top-down nature of their practice. According to Knippers, this computational approach in designing the process is a break from “model thinking” or “thinking in discrete typologies” [7]. This shift from model thinking to process thinking based on computational logic is what futurologist Bruce Sterling defined as “processuality”. Once the act of designing becomes entirely process-centric, the nature of the process becomes bottom-up - decision-making takes place from the smallest possible indiviual units of the whole. Architects merely provide the framework. Rather than programming the architecture to a particular set of functions that people must follow in order to not be obsolete, architects working with generative methods essentially lets architecture program itself to adapt to the environments and people. Frazer’s generative-evolutionary model explains this as when “generative system generates alternative designs in response to environment, and the evolutionary system manipulates and evolves the generative modifications” [3]. Within this model, generative design carries a bigger potential in futuring, as it excels where composition fails - giving users flexibility of program, without putting performative qualities aside.

20

Interactivator | Networked Evolutionary Design System John Frazer, Julia Frazer, Manit Rastogi, Peter Graham, Patrick Janssen

Architectural Association, London (1995)


Subdivided Pavilions

Michael Hansmeyer, 2006 [unbuilt]

21Michael Hansmeyer uses a computational approach for applying generative processes found in nature, such as L-systems, cellular automation, fractals and subdivision, to generate highly intricate architectonic forms. Subdivided Pavilions is a precursor to his famous Subdivided Columns, which uses the same principles of subdivision as the basic algorithm to generate autonomous self-composing structures.

The generative process started with a base geometry of two interlocking cubes. The cubes are then subject to a three-dimensional subdivision model called Catmull-Clark subdivision. With this simple algorithm, complex detailings within the cubic volumes are generated by altering the parameters, in this case the subdivision weights. Once the cubic bounding volume is removed, the resulting form will be entirely organic such that its Platonic origins would not be recognisable.

A3

22

Hansmeyer’s digital morphogenetic approach is innovative in that it lead the architectural discourse to reconsider its general stance against ornamentation ever since early Modernism. This is attributed to the change that computational thinking brought about regarding material tectonics. Projects like Hansmeyer’s Subdivided Pavilions can be easily materialised nowadays through digital fabrication, using additive techniques like 3D printing. In this case, a single material performs as the structure, the skin, and the ornament. Therefore, ornamentation = stucture and skin, which means it becomes inherent to the existence of the architectural artefact. In addition, the project defies the Modernist’s objection towards complexity simply by proving that it is now easily achieveable. The question of whether or not such projects can be brought to the everyday realm is only a matter of time.

Grotto

Aranda\Lasch, 2005 [built]

23

A3


Grotto is a prototypical project that explores the behaviour of fractal tetrahedras in natural rock/crystal formations. The design intent is to create a “man-made” grotto as a space for intimacy, that borrows the recipe of formation from naturally occuring ones. The grotto prototype is made of self-supporting “modular boulders” fabricated in polystyrene. The boulders are assembled in a manner of aggregration, resulting in an organic structure.

Aranda\Lasch began the generation of the boulder modules by investigating voronoi geometries. By defining the basic recipe of two-dimensional voronoi, based on the relationships between points, bisecting lines, and boundary lines intersecting each bisector, the architects were able to project that recipe onto a three-dimensional situation for the basis of their Grotto structure. Three-dimensional voronoi has the capacity for organic growth through tiling, based on repetition,

24

modularity and adjacency. This opens up limitless possibilities of tectonic outcomes. Human intellect then must come into play to narrow down the module types to fit project constraints, allow easy fabrication logic yet still retain the organic character of the natural grotto. Computation is then used again to determine the least amount of modules that can achieve this. Through digital experimentations with solid tiling and packing principles, the result is 4 modules with distinct behaviours, that although uniform within its own class, can assemble themselves to form a non-uniform whole.

The Grotto conveys how generative design has the potential for creating spaces with more freedom using principles of modular organic growth based on natural occurences. This opens up future possibilities where “modular architecture” is entirely bottom-up and user participatory, where architects generate modules that users can easily assemble on their own to build their own preferrable environments.


25

The first three weeks of this subject opened my mind to the truths of life: the universe is data, everything is coded, and mathematics explains it all. Learning Grasshopper made me realise that even aesthetics can arise out of pure logic. The computer is becoming increasingly omnipotent in this age of information. Architects need to be educated in computing as it is increasingly changing the way people live. Architecture as a profession is greatly dependent on the way people live. Therefore, architecture’s dependency on computational thinking is inevitable.

I also learnt that the role of design must not be underestimated, but the role of designers is overrated. There is a huge responsibility in the act of creation, but designers must not credit themselves too much for that. If anything, all we could do is guess work, and the rest of the “creation” happens beyond our control. In relation

to all that is the philosophical basis of algorithmic design. Prefiguration is an evidence of human instinct. Therefore it is human’s built-in instinct to exert control over things, which is why architects existed in the first place. Ironically, human existence itself is a product of pure chance devoid of control. Architectural computing therefore serves as a breakthrough for the architecture industry to question its own existence.

Generative design involves working from simple logic to generate an expansive solution space that range all the way to extreme complexity yet still very specific, rather than attempting to condense the already complex into something abstracted and simplified but not necessarily on-point. This matches the values of design futuring - bottom-up rather than top-down, thus making the act of creation itself sustain-able.

What needs to be outlined here regarding generative design is its capability to create possibilities and promote freedom outside present restrictions and compartmentalisations within architecture. For decades architects have attempted to do this and failed as they are always trapped within the ego-fueled act of composition. With computation, there is a chance to finally realise this, be it in the near or distant future.

Merri Creek can be described as a scaled-down version of the universe, as it is made up of complex, interdependent systems with various stakeholders. Because so many systems are dependent on it, it has a great risk of defuturing and even greater impact upon defuturing on all the systems dependent on it. Therefore, it is an ideal testing ground for computation-based speculative design.

A majority of the precedents I have chosen for discussion deals with modularity, or projects that start from the constraint of a basic “box” that is tweaked to complexity with simple algorithms. I would like my design intervention to be a little bit of both. I want to design something that cherish the uncontrollable that arises from the controlled, something that does not just allow one way of interaction, but multiple.

A4 | Conclusion

A5 | Learning Outcomes

This is my attempt at recreating Aranda\Lasch’s Grotto using fractals and aggregation to produce an organic structure based on simple modules.

The way each tetrahedral module is stacked up can be completely random or can be based on another set of rules to create a specific arrangement.

In my first experiment, I mirrored each module by taking two segments of one octagonal face, repeating the process several times using the same segments of the same faces. I noticed that doing this recursively can generate a ring formation much like that in Aranda\Lasch’s Grotto.

26

A6 ALGORITHMICSKETCH


[1] Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press)

[2] Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013). Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press)

[3] Frazer, John & Janssen, Patrick ‘Digital code scripts for generative and evolu-tionary design: De Identitate’ (2003)

[4] Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Ox-ford: Berg), pp. 1–16

[5] Gausa, M., Prat, R. and Tetas, A., eds. (2004). Verb Matters: Architecture Boogazine (Barcelona: ACTAR)

[6] Kalay, Yehuda E (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)

[7] Knippers, Jan (2013). From Model Thinking to Process Design, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 74-81

[8] Kolarevic, Branko (2003). Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manu-facturing (New York; London: Spon Press)

[9] Lynn, Greg (2004). Folding in Architecture (Chichester: Wiley)

[10] Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Archi-tecture (London; New York: Routledge)

[11] Peters, Brady (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 08-15

[12] Ritter, H. W. J & Webber, Melvin M. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, Policy Sciences 4 (1973), 155-169

[13] Schumacher, Patrik (2011). The Autopoiesis of Architecture: A New Frame-work for Architecture (Chichester: Wiley)

[14] Schumacher, Patrik (2008). Parametricism as Style: Parametricist Manifesto.

Bibliography

A1 Design Futuring

Figure A1.1 Figure A1.2 Figure A1.3


A2 Design Computation

Figure A2.1 Figure A2.2 Figure A2.3 Figure A2.4 Figure A2.5 Figure A2.6

A3 Composition/Generation

Figure A3.1

Figure A3.2 Figure A3.3 Figure A3.4 Figure A3.5 Figure A3.6

Image References

PART BCRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN

31

B1 RESEARCHFIELD

PART B | CRITERIA DESIGN

Patterning

Patterning in architecture can take place across varying scales,from surface, screen to structure. Farshid Moussavi [1] argued that this variation of scale can be classified into three categories; depth, material, and affects.

Over the past years, the use of patterns in architecture have developed beyond just surface application as the most common category.

Recipe for Packing1. Create a shape of a random size.2. Pick a random point.3. a) If the shape is inside another shape. or overlaps another shape, throw it away and go back to step 1. b) If not, place it. Go to step 1.

- Aranda\Lasch [2]

32

33

B1


CASE STUDY1.0

Spanish PavilionForeign Office Architects

The pavilion facade is composed of irregular hexagon tiles made of pigmented ceramic.

The base unit is a 3x2 grid of irregular hexagons with different hues assigned to each. This grid is arrayed across the facade.

This allows for flexibility in arrangement. For instance, In places where lighting effects are

desired the hexagons are offset to create a perforation. The rest can be left solid.

By starting with a basic unit that consists of irregular geometry, an overall irregular pattern can be achieved simply by repetition.

This project can be taken further by adding the variable of extrusion depth.

While having uniform depth constraints the project to only surface application, varying it opens up new range and scale of uses such as for storage, seating, and steps.

34

Cell Geometry GraphMapping

Scaling withAttractors

Extrusion withAttractors

35


Criteria 1 Criteria 2

Succ

essf

ul S

pec

ies

Module Groupings Selective Perforation

This species has the potential for organic self-organisation as the shape of the base module

Each module group can be assigned distinct functions, such as structural units, cladding and glazing.

Because of the shape the pattern does not have to cover the entirety of a surface while still bearing recognisable repetitiveness.

This species was created by image sampling a photograph one of a section of tree canopies along Merri Creek. The areas where the offset distance are smallest correspond to the areas shaded by the canopies.

This species can therefore be applied as an extended shading device for when trees shed their leaves in dry months.

36

Criteria 3

Gradient Extrusion

These two species were created by extracting points from the Merri Creek site topography and interpolating a curve through them to use as a curve attractor for the Z-vector extrusion direction.

These species have the potential to be used as water flow control device, pathway leveling strategies or erosion control measures for Merri Creek.

B3 CASE STUDY2.0

37


Packed PavilionETH Zurich

While FOA’s Spanish Pavilion deals with patterning on surface application, Packed Pavilion is a project that uses circle packing principles where patterning is applied as surface, screen as well as structure.

Circles are stable by nature. Due to this, circle packing

was chosen as a technique in conjunction with cardboard, a relatively structurally weak material.

The circle aperture sizes are adjusted to carry load and daylight into the pavilion to produce shading/lighting effects. In this, the project shows

the potential of packing in

38Reverse Engineering

Create base surface - hemisphere1 Populate with points2 Create mesh cross-referenced lines as guidelines for spring force

3

Pack circles onto points generated by spring forces

4 Use attractors to create varied openings and thicknesses

6


39

B4 TECHNIQUEDEVELOPMENT

40

II Radial Packing

Minimum DomainA

Maximum DomainB

Branch #C

A

B

C

A

B

C

5.00

10.00

7.00

0.00

10.00

7.00

A

B

C

10.00

10.00

7.00

A

B

C

A

B

C

5.00

10.00

8.00

2.00

10.00

8.00

A

B

C

10.00

10.00

8.00

A

B

C

A

B

C

2.00

10.00

18.00

0.00

10.00

5.00

A

B

C

8.00

10.00

19.00

10.00

10.00

19.00

39

I Fixed Radii Packing

Radius #A

RadiusB

Point countC

A

B

C

A

B

C

2

35, 90

6

4

35, 65, 75, 90

6

A

B

C

1

35

30

A

B

C

A

B

C

1

75

30

1

65

30

A

B

C

2

35, 90

30

A

B

C

A

B

C

4

35, 65, 75

30

2

35, 90

30

A

B

C

2

35, 90

50

4040

I Offset with Attractors

Offset behaviourA

VariableB

Percentage scaling [offset distance]C

A

B

C

A

B

C

5.00

10.00

7.00

0.00

10.00

7.00

A

B

C

10.00

10.00

7.00

A

B

C

A

B

C

5.00

10.00

8.00

2.00

10.00

8.00

A

B

C

10.00

10.00

8.00

IV Solid Packing

39

4040

V Packing on Mesh

39

B5 PROTOTYPING

D

D1

D2

D1

D3

D1

D4

D1

D5

D1

D6

D2

D3

D4

D5

D6

DD1D2D3D4

30mm25mm60mm65mm70mm

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

Testing Effects

CATCHMENTARRANGEMENT

SHADING

CONNECTION

CATCHMENTARRANGEMENT

SHADING

RESIDENTIAL AREA

PLAYGROUND

IMPLEMENTATION SITE

1

ORGANIC LITTER

MAN-MADE LITTER

2

PEDESTRIANSCYCLISTS

INTERVENTIONCLIENTSACCESS

RECREATION

A

B

TECHNIQUEPROPOSAL

B6

RESIDENTIAL AREA

INTERVENTION

COULSO

N RESERVE SHARED PATHWAYA

B

SHARED PATHWAY

MERRI CREEK MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

STAKEHOLDERMAINTENANCE

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

[1] Moussavi, Farshid and Michael Kubo, eds (2006). The Function ofOrnament (Barcelona: Actar), pp. 5-14

[2] Aranda\Lasch (2006). Tooling (Canda: Princeton Architectural Press)

Bibliography

B1 Research Field



B2 Case Study 1.0

Figure A2.1 Figure A2.2 Figure A2.3 Figure A2.4 Figure A2.5 Figure A2.6

B3 Case Study 2.0

Figure A3.1

Figure A3.2 Figure A3.3 Figure A3.4 Figure A3.5 Figure A3.6

Image References

Date post:	23-Jul-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	venansia-f-natasya
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

657609 part a b

Documents