ArchitecturalDesignStudioAir

374511 Nara Park

Contents

1.0 Case for Innovation 01-12 1.1.1. Introduction 01 1.1.2. Previous Studio Works 02 1.1.3. Favourite Architectrual Projects 03-06 1.2.1. Computer in Architecture 07-08 1.3.1. Parametric Modelling 09-122.0 Expression of Interest 13-40 2.1.1. Parametric Design Journey So Far.. 16 2.1.2. Group Project 17-18 2.1.3. Case Study 1.0 19-20 2.2.1. Case Study 2.0 21 2.2.2. Case Study 2.0 Grasshopper Model 22 2.2.3. Recreating Case Study 2.0. Project 23-24 2.3.1. Matrix 25-28 2.4. Expression of Interest Presentation 2.4.1. Inspirations 31-32 2.4.2. Presentation Model 33-36 2.4.3. Development of Grasshopper Technique 37 2.4.4. Process of Model Making 38 2.4.5. Further Development 39

1.0Case

of Innovation

I’m Nara Park. I’m from South Korea. I’m doing Bachelor of Environment. Although I have expe-rienced using sketchup for ADS Water and Rhino for Visual Communication, I’m not very good at them.

1.1.1. Introdution

01

1.1.2. Previous Studio W

ork

02

Architectural Design Studio: Water - Boathouse The design was produced for Architectural Design Studio: Water. The project was intended to create a boathouse according to a method of a selected architect, Le Corbusier. I thought that the most interesting feature of the site is the surrounding natural environment, river in front and rock hill behind.

The design mainly focus on visual experience in the site. The long corridor in the ground floor allows to see the scenery of river and an oppsite bank. The rhythmical pattern of a large window in the west facade allows visitors to enjoy seeing rock hill in the west. The ribbon window in the first floor provides panoramic view of scenery.

According to ‘Architecture and Visual Culture’, I mainly regarded architecture as experience, which allows to enjoy local features

03

1.1.3. Favourite Architectural P

rojects

TJIBAOU CULTURAL CENTRE | New Caledonia |RENZO PIANO

I like this building because I’m recently interested in an architectural approach, which presents vernacular architecture with advanced technology. Renzo Piano was clearly inspired by local tribe, Kanak’s Great House. Simple timber-straw structure of Kanak has transformed by Piano to timber-steel structure which can be seen weav-ing patterns of Kanak house. The architect’s imitation of local architecture did not stay at simple employment of patterns of its structrue. He solved structural problem in windy area like the site with local architecture (Irwin, 2011). The concave shape of the building which was inspired by Kanak House helps the structure to stand up against strong sea wind. This shows that studying vernacular architecture not only teaches us asthetics of local art but it also gives us solutions to endure local envi-ronment. In addition, this building is a good example of architectural discourse ‘architec-ture as symbol’. This building was commissioned by French government which tries to concilate its oversea terriotory. The name Tjibauo comes from a name of leader the independence movement so the centre represents culture and independency of Noumea. To sum up, the building shows benefits of studying vernacular architecture and an

interior of Kanak Great House Structural solution of curved facade

Interior of Kanak Great House: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Kanak_house_hearth.jpgStructural solution of curved facade: http://www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty_projects/terri/366essaysW03/corciega_tjibaou.pdf

04

1.1.3. Favourite Architectural P

rojects

Tjibaou Cultural Centre: http://www.fondazionerenzopiano.org/project/85/jean-marie-tjibaou-cultural-center/images/enlarged/1997/

05

1.1.3. Favourite Architectural P

rojects

Lotte Buyeo Resort | Buyeo | Seunghoi Kim and Wonphil Kang

Lotte Buyeo Resort: http://www.designersparty.com/entry/Lotte-Resort-Buyoe-Seunghoy-Kim-Wonphil-Kang

Louvres: http://www.tripadvisor.in/LocationPhotos-g946498-d2010166-w2-Lotte_Buyeo_Resort-Buyeo_gun_Chungcheongnam_do.html#39084191Stone and brick wall of the palace: http://www.masterfile.com/stock-photography/image/821-05789442/stone-wall-of-Gyeongbok-palace-Seoul-South-KoreaTile pattern of Baekje: http://new1.culturecontent.com/10_search/search_content.asp?SearchType0=0&query=%EB%B4%89%ED%99%A9%EB%AC%B8%EC%96%91%20%EC%9D%BC%EB%9F%AC%EC%8A%A4%ED%8A%B8Perspective drawing: http://www.designersparty.com/entry/Lotte-Resort-Buyoe-Seunghoy-Kim-Wonphil-Kang

06

1.1.3. Favourite Architectural P

rojects

I like this building because it gives us a new idea of manipulating traditional architecture. The resort is located in Buyeo, which was a capital city of Korean ancient country, Baekje. Its architecture has not been discovered much. Since the site is in front of Baekje’s palace, the architects tried to represent the country’s culture and architecture with the resort. However, lack of information on its architecture, they couldn’t help but create a new type of architecture. Unlike other Korean traditional buildings, it has round plan, which, i think, was inspired by Baekje’s drawings. Moreover, the polychrome louvres in the facade of modern building were inspired the brick wall patterns in the palace. This building shows that using local architecture is not simply copying them but regenerating new image of its culture.In spite of its creativity, the building has some unseen problems. First of all, since the building is in front of Baekje’s palace and it has in a traditional form of architecture, it may mislead people to its architecture. As mensioned, round plan buildings have not been discovered in Korea but the building’s clear relation to the palace, people may believe that round plan building was common type of Baekje’s architecture. Moreover, while polychrome louveres create interesting patterns, they are not functionally useful. personally I don’t like architectural elements which are not functional although they are aesthetic. Nevertheless of its shortages, the building shows a good example of architecture which have people experience its culture and art.

Tile pattern of Baekje Perspective drawing

Louvres in the facade Stone and brick wall of the palace

1.2. Com

puting In Architecture

07

Flight Assembled Architecture

http://inhabitat.com/the-worlds-first-tower-built-by-flying-robots-rises-in-france/http://www.dhub.org/flight-assembled-architecture/

1.2. Com

puting In Architecture

08

Benefits of Computational Design

Development in computer has influenced improvement of architectural design process. After all, architectural computing programs allow reducing time and budget to create and modifying design. Unlike a physical model, which is spent a lot of time to remake or modify, 3D parametric software allows architects to more easily modify models because all elements of a model are linked with mathematical equation. In addition, communication between participants has become easier and faster with development of computer programs. Building Information Modelling (BIM) allows participants to share their knowledge, consequently it leads the project to a better result. (Autodesk, 2011) Moreover, 3D modelling programs such as Rhino, 3D Max and Sketchup allow Architects to provide virtual image of their building so customers more easily understand how their builings will look like. At last, computer programs provide creativity with ability to draw most of curves. Limitation on drawing curve was restricted by construction difficulty, however, digital software, such as CAD, helps architects and practitionst to create formly unavailable mathematical geometry. (Glen, 2004)

The role of computation in architecture has expanded to a variety of fields such as manufacturing and construction. Although constructional technology is in progress, it still shows possibilities that machine will replace human in a dangerous construction site such as building skyscapers. One of cutting edge computing construction method is flight assembled architecture. The technology was designed by Swiss architects Gramazio & Kohler with an engineering help of ETH Zurich. They created a group of levitating robots which carry bricks and place them in programed locations. Although the new techonology has a lot of limitations such as weight of materials, budget and time and difficulty in programing construction process, accurancy of construction will significantly increase.

1.3 Param

etric Modelling

09http://archrecord.construction.com/projects/Building_types_study/adaptive_reuse/2012/Museum-of-Cultures-slideshow.asp?slide=14

1.3 Param

etric Modelling

10

CNC mill and mold machineDetail of roof tiles

Museum of Cultures | Basel | Herzog & de Meuron

Ceramic tiles in Museum of Cultures: http://archrecord.construction.com/projects/Building_types_study/adaptive_reuse/2012/Museum-of-Cultures-slideshow.asp?slide=3CNC Mill and Mold Machine: http://kcaiceramics.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/3-d-modeling-and-ceramic-media/

The buildng is surrounded by brick roof tile houses, which architects regarded as main character of the site. To distinguish the museum from the surrounding buildings with preserving the local character, Herzog & de Meuron chose to use iridescent ceramic roof tiles. To maximise the iridescent effect of the ceramic tiles, the architects intended to irregularly fold tiles. They use CNC mill and mold machine to achieve those folded tiles. The machine re-duces time and space to produce repeatable work process. Unlike 2D laser cutting machine, CNC mill and mold allows producing volumic models with 3D modelling pro-grams. In addition, the machine produce more accurate and less error products with computer programs. In spite of its advantages there are some drawbacks which lead to restriction to use the machine. First of all, limitation of materials is a huge problem with the machine. More-over, the machine is costly and its maintenance is difficult and expensive. Furthermore, ventilation system is compulsory because it may produe toxic gases during the produc-tion. For the iridescent tiles, CNC mill and mold machine is the best choice to maximise the effect but there are some restrictions to use it so materials and forms should be care-fully chosen to present the problems.

1.3. Param

etric Modelling

11 Source: http://theverymany.com/public-art/11-st-louis/

1.3. Param

etric Modelling

12

Plasti(k) Pavilion | St Louis | TheVeryMany

CNC laser cutting machine Thermoforming machine Forming prototype

Although panels should be combined by human hands, I like this parametric structure due to the technique, which deals with materials and patterns. The pavilion is entirely constructed in thermoplastic, which can be easily bent by heat. The plastic panels are cut by CNC laser cutting machine according to computer drawing program. This process is much faster than manual labour. In spite of reduction of time and space for production, this process has several problems. First of all, there is limitation of materials. The machine cannot cut too thick or reflective materials such as copper and aluminium. In addition, toxic gasese may be produced during production. At last, this is not environmental-friendly due to huge energy consumption.

After creating a pieces of panels, these planer panels are transformed into bent ones by thermoforming machine. This machine can only bend plastic therefore there is also limitation of materials. While it can generate accurate shapes designers want, it often spends more time than other method such as injection molding. Furthemore, it is not efficient to reduce energy consumption and material. The machine consumes up to 50% more energy and 10 t0 20% more plastic.

Nevertheless there are shortcomings in the process, the machines give us more possibliities to produce interesting shapes and forms. Moreover, it can reduce possible errors, generated by human forces. Although limitation in materials is a huge problem, the pavilion sucessfully solves its limitation by using best material which enhances the process.

CNC laser cutting machine: http://metalworkingmachine.net/2011/02/25/cnc-laser-cutting-machine/Thermoforming machine, Forming prototype, : http://theverymany.com/public-art/11-st-louis/

2.0 Expression

of Interest

15

Parametric Journey So Far...

My understanding of parametric design has widened, comparing to the beginning of this semester. Although I do not like computer generating design, parametric design through Grasshopper has attracted me a lot. I stilll do not like some of Grasshopper components such as ‘Voronoi’ because there are not much things to do for me to create patterns although the patterns are interesting and attractive. Except for some components, I think Grasshopper gives us more and better opportunities to create interesting forms and shapes. Controlling every elements by changing values of number slider allows us to create accidental design.

Although now I like the concept of parametric design, there are some reasons which make me unwilllingly use the parametric design process. The main reason is that parametric design seems to too much focus on createing interesting patterns and shape rather thinking of comfortable and functional space. Personally I hope to learn the relationship between space and parametric patterns throught the rest of semeter.

2.1. Param

etric Design Journey

so far...

16

2.1.2 Group P

roject

17

Case Study: Structure

Our group, Nara, Karl and Elliot, has decided to choose structural approach for Wyndham city gateway project. There are a number of reasons why structural approach is the most suitable for the site and the project. Firstly, structure helps to support Wyndham city’s development principle, ecologically sus-tainable development. Structure itself forms patterns therefore extra façade and patterns are not necessary to produce. It consequently reduces in waste of materials. Moreover structure is relatively easy for maintenance. Secondly, due to the character of the site, the project has to mainly focus on visual ef-fects. Structural sculpture can easily create shade effect, which can generate different atmosphere in open space like the site. These visual experiences with structural sculpture can help to create iconic image of the project. Lastly, our group has intended to use aboriginal drawings and tools to generate structur-al sculpture. There are a number of structural examples, which are inspired by aboriginal art and tools. The most familiar building in Melbourne is Webb Bridge in Dockland. The structrual bridge is clearly inspired by aboriginal fish trap. The bridge shows that simple patterns of aboriginal tools and art can generate attractive architecture by manipulating their design elements. In conclusion, structural sculpture is the best choice for the Gateway project for financial, ecological and empirical reasons.

Aboriginal fish traps: http://nga.gov.au/Exhibition/Tactility/Detail.cfm?IRN=121378Webb Bridge at Dockland: http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Oceania/Australia/East/Victoria/Melbourne/photo1261170.htm

2.1.2. Group P

roject

18

Webb Bridge at Dockland

Aboriginal Fish Trap

2.1.3. Case Study

1.0.

19

Case Study 1.0 : Webb Bridge

Webb Bridge is a perfect example for our group, who is trying to create structural sculp-ture using aborigina art and tools. The bridge was clearly inspired by aboriginal fish trap. With the location of the bridge, it works pretty well as symbol of aboriginal culture in the Yarra River. The most difficult process of making Grasshopper model is create a random pattern of joints between structures. The joints were created by joining two points in dif-ferent arches. If the points were simply produced by using ‘Divide Curve’ components, the joints look regular patterns so it does not look like the original building. To accomplish the irregular patterns of joints, we used ‘evaluate curve’ and ‘random’ components. Although the overall shape of bridge was generated with Graph Mapper component, the component is qutie difficult to produe accurate and control the shape. Therefore, we need to look up a better way to control shape of the bridge.

2.1.3. Case Study

1.0

20

1. Drawing a curve

2. Dividing the curve

3. Drawing arcs

4. Creating points on the arcs

5. Connecting points

Drawing a curve and reference it to Grasshopper. This curve will decide an overall plan shape of the model as a path of the bridge.

Dividing the curve with ‘perp frames’. It creates a number of planes which are perpendacular to the curve and will become base planes for ribs of the bridges. Plane numbers indicates rib number of the briges.

With the plane, drawing a number of arcs, having different radius. The radius is controlled by Graphic mapper.

Creating a number of points on arcs with ‘evaluate curve’. ‘Random’ applies to create points irregularly.

Connecting points using ‘Line’ components. Points were produced by random so the points are not in a row therefore it creates diagonal lines.

2.2.̀1. Case Study

2.0.

21

Case Study 2.0 : South Pond by Studio Gang Our group’s case study building is South Pond pavilion by Studio Gang. We chose this building because this pavilion shows how simple structure creates an interesting patterns and space. The building can be simply divided into two parts: timber structure and opaque surface. The structural part creates eye-catching patterns and the opaque surface part blocks sunlight so the building produces shade for users. The surface does not cover en-tire pavilion. Eye level of the structure is open to see through so it acts as frames to see through. The pavilion can be produced with Grasshopper by producing a row of structure and copy-ing and pasting it in rows. The surface part can be made by rotating half of structural lines.

Move and Series Rotate arches

South Pond Pavilion: http://www.dezeen.com/2010/08/22/movie-by-spirit-of-space-south-pond-by-studio-gang/

Front Elevation Side Elevation

Perspective 1 Perspective 2

Grasshopper Model2.2.2. C

ase Study 2.0

Grasshopper M

odel

22

Above images are what our group has produced for case study 2.0. The shape of structure is almost same as the case study pavilion although opaque surfaces on the structure are slightly different from the orig-inal building. Although the case study pavilion has fixed form of structure, our group has made the model can change the shape of structure and consequently the surface shape as well. The reason why the sur-face has slightly different shape form the original is we simply rotated structural lines rather than created a number of line and loft them. One of the main shortages of our model was that it takes too much time to produce. After the Week6 Tu-torial, we found easier method to create the model using ‘Map to Surface’ component. Nevertheless, this case study helps us to better understand grasshopper components and to find new useful components and difficulty in some components such as ‘Offset curves’. Unlike our simple thoughts on these components, they have some limitation and conditions to use them. Understanding these shortages of the components has helped us to understand and use vector components. However, for the next stage we are gonna ignore these new knowledge of vector. Rather, we will focus on using ‘Map to Surface’ component to reduce time.

2.2.̀3. Recreating C

ase Study P

roject

23

1. Draw an arch

2. Draw two more arches

3. Extend a centre arch

4. Create points on the arches

Draw an arch on XZ plane. This arch de-cides the size of structure.

Draw two more arches which have the same size with the former arch.

Extend the middle arch. The middle arch must be extended to draw basic shape of structure.

After creating points, using ‘Divide Curve’, join points using ‘arc’ component. These strucrual arches are half of structure.

5. Mirror the curves

6. Increase Radius of base curves

Mirror the structural arches to complete shape of structure

Create a bigger structure arches by increasing size of basic arches. (This process can be easier if you understand ‘Offset’ component. Our group guessed the component did not work properly due to our lack of understand-ing of vector.)

Process of Recreating Case Study 2.0

2.2.̀3. Recreating C

ase Study P

roject

24

7. Create series of structure

8. Select arches to create surfaces

11. Add them to structure

Loft two group of curves. The distance of two groups of arches relates to the thickness of materials.

This group of arches are shorter than struc-utral arches due to the surfaces do not cov-er all over the structure. To select specific arches from structural arches, we have used ‘Cull’ component.

Create surfaces by revolutioning above arches. Domain of revolution is 180.

Using ‘Move’ and ‘Series’ components, create a series of surfaces.

Combine structures and surfaces.

9. Create surfaces with Revolution

10. Create a series of surfaces

25

2.3. Matrix

26

2.3. Matrix

MatrixWith this exercise, our group wanted to know how pattrens look like in different sur-face. Unlike case study 2.0, we used ‘Map to surface’ component so we could reduce time to produce patterns and to apply them into surface. First pattern was simply em-ployed from the case study building. The follows two patterns are simple modification of case study but in relation to density of patterns, these patterns look total different from the case study pattern. Next five patterns are simple copies of aboriginal Possum skin patterns. Our group project goal is to enhance and re-generate aboriginal culture in the site due to historical background therefore we imitated a number of aboriginal patterns and applied them into some surfaces. All the aboriginal patterns we select-ed are interesting and eye-catching but some of patterns have structural problem. For instance, aboriginal pattern 5 in the Matrix is structurally impossible to construct. The last pattern was created by image simpler. Although unlike other patterns which we could control all the element, we cannot control the last pattern but we wanted to ex-amine a different way to produce patterns. Our group did not choose best pattern be-cause we have tried to make a number of small sculptures. Therefore we have priorly focused on the density change in different surface rather than choice of best pattern. We also wanted to examine shade effect of the patterns in difference surfaces but no one knows how to use rendering programs so we could not examine it.

27

2.3. Matrix

Patterns

Surfaces

Case Study Pattern

Case Study modification 1

Case Study modification 2

Aboriginal pattern 1

Flat

Case study

surface

Screen

Box

Distort

28

2.3. Matrix

Aboriginal pattern 2

Aboriginal pattern 3

Aboriginal pattern 4

Aboriginal pattern 5

Leopard pattern with image sampler

Expression

of

Interest

Presentation

31

2.4.1. Inspirations

Italian Futurism & Gateway Project

Dynamism of A Car 1910, Marinetti

Italian futurist painters tried to visualise speed and movement. The concept of visu-alisation of speed and movement fits to character of Gateway Project site. The main users of the site are automobile drivers who experince the speed of 100km/h. Our group tries to visually enhance their speed experience with a number of sculptures. At this stage we have simply imitated the concept of above painting by Marinetti. We create a number of panels which at the beginning folded panels are eventually straight up. In addition, patterns of the structure eventually become less dense. This alteration shows drivers images of speed-up. The visual effect of sculpture will be different according to the speed of audiences.

(Source :http://pavlopoulos.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/luigi-russolo-dynamism-of-a-car.jpg)

32

2.4.1. Inspirations

Aboriginal Art & Gateway Project

Possum Skin Cloak

Historically the Werribee River was used as a boundary of two different aboriginal tribes, Wuiwurong and Wothowurong. According to the guildline of the project, the council has wanted to construct sculptures which can represent municipal characters. Therefore our group has decided to employ patterns of possum skin paintings. These paintings show aboriginal understanding of geographical characteristics of their ter-ritory. Although we simply employed the patterns of the paintings for presentation model, we will do more research about meanings of patterns and will re-create pat-terns suitable for the current site situation.

(Source:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Cloak_of_sewn_possum_skins_(Australian).gif)

33

2.4.2. P

resentation Model

01. Create a number of different heights of panels.

02. Mirror the panels, using top lines as axises.

03. Fold the panels by moving middle lines.

04. Rotate the panels

Process of Making the Presentation Model

Create a number of rectangles in XY Plane, using ‘Point XYZ’ and ‘Series’ components. This method allows con-trolling size of rectangles and distance between rectangles by changing value of number sliders.

Mirror the rectangles, using top lines of them as axises. Althogh all the ele-ments can be changeable, top rectangles are mirror images of bottom rectangles therefore creating different shapes is not available.

Fold panels by moving location of middle lines (formerly top lines). ‘Move’ com-ponent is connected to ‘Series’ compo-nent, therefore we can generate different value of folding throughout panels.

Rotate panels individually. Different val-ue of rotation also can be achieved by using ‘Series’ component.

34

2.4.2. P

resentation Model

05. Apply patterns into the panels.

06. Extrude surface.

07. Mirror the structures.

Apply patterns, we made for the matrix, to panels.

Extrude lines in panels to show the thickness of materials. The panels have been rotated so we need to know vector value of each panels. Using ‘Vector Unit’ component to generate same thickness of materials.

MIrror the structure using YZ plane as axis plane.

35

2.4.2. P

roposal TOP VIEW OF THE SCULPTURES

PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF THE SCULPTURES

ProposalOur proposal for the Gateway project is to create image of speed, using indigenous patterns. To visualise speed and movement, we employed the concept of Marinetti’s Dynanism of A Car. A series of images which start from folded forms to unfolded form visualise change of speed. With the speed of users in their cars, the visual effect of speed will be enhanced. Structure of the sculpture imitated patterns of possum skin cloak of aboriginal tribe Wathawurong who used to live in Werribee region. We tried to express the history of the site with the aboriginal patterns and to regenerate destroyed culture since European arrival. Ab-origin’s simple drawing patterns help us to produce structural system of the sculpture.

36

2.4.2. P

roposalt

Development of Grasshopper Technique

Case Strudy 2.0 Matrix and Presentation model

37

2.4.3. D

evelopment of G

rasshopper Technique

Throughout the first half of the semester, our group has been struggling to choose between time reduction and accuracy of model. When we made the South Pond Pa-vilion, we produced the model by createing individual structures. This process bene-fits to create accurate model and to control all the elements of the model while it took a lot of time to produce the model. After week5, we found easier way to produce the model by using ‘Map to Surface’ component. This component reduced enormous time for making the model. However, the component is not perfect. Sometimes the com-ponent does not work with certain surfacs which we have not figured out why it does not work with. Moreover, it is difficult to produce a precise model. We were oftern unavialable to presume what shape will be produced with the component. In spite of some disadvantages of the component we have generated our model with the compo-nent because it is convenient and gives us more alternative forms of structure. Nevertheless ‘Map to Surface’ component is convenient and reduces time to produce digital model, we still need to study the component to produce accurate model.

Process of Model Making

38

2.4.4

. Process of M

odel Making

Unfornately, our group did not record our process of model making. We divided our model into two parts; structrues(patterns) and spines(supporting the struc-tures) At the start of the design process, we intended to produce self-supporting sculp-tures, however, our model was too week to support themselves so we added spines to stablise the structures. After making digital model using Grasshopper, we simply projected patterns of struc-tures into XY plane while spines were placed on the the plane through rotation. These two different process made a problem when we assembled structrues and spines. Since the structures are tilted if we projects the structures onto XY plane the size of structures be-comes shortened. We solved the length difference problem by cutting out part of spines. We used box board for our model. The material is relatively cheap and strong enough to support themselves but during laser cut the material was burnt and produced soots on the surfaces. Moreover it was difficult dissemble our patterns from the board. We learned im-portance of materials through the experience.

39

2.4.5. Further D

evelopment

Reflection Further Development

After EOI presentation, our group have found a number of shortages of our interim design.

First of all, understanding advantages and disadvantages of 2D laser cut machine is es-sential for the final model. We were pointed out several shortages of our interim design during the presentation such as structrual simplity of our design. Some of shortages were due to our misunderstanding of laser cut machine capability. We could not find solutions to create more complex structure with the machine. For the final model we need to know whether the machine can produce our design or not. In addition, we need to find other ways to enhance our physical model. During early stage of journal I studied theromoforming ma-chine. The machine can help us to extend our idea and to produce more advanced structur-al sculpture.

Secondly, we need to derive from simple imitation of our inspiration. Our interim model too resembles the concept of the Italian futurist painting. To improve our design and to produce idea which can be approved by the customers, we have to generate our own idea of visual-ising speed and movement. On 18th of September, our group visited the project site and we found topographical character of the site. The site is not simple flat land but it has a small hill which block to see other side of the freeway. Our corrent idea does not fit into the site because we thought the site is flat so all the cars which head for both direction can see the sculptures. We should, therefore, think of design which can generate image of speed and suit the site.

Lastly, we may need to simplify our idea. Main users, drivers, can pass the site within 30 seconds. They do not have much time to think of the meaning of the sculptures. Rather, they will only react to visual impact of the sculpture. Therefore our group needs to think of how to visually attract the drivers. The visual effect needs to corresponse to the develop-ment of advanced structure of the sculptures. Simple structure may be easy to produce and maintain but it has more possibilities become boring for users. More complex structure can attract audiences as well as express advanced technology as a symbom of Werribee.

To sum up, our group design still needs more improvements and modifications for better design. Extra researches and more creative thoughts are necessary to complete our final model.

40

ReferencesReferences

Irwin, S, 2011, Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Centre Noumea, New Caledonia, viewed 15 August 2012,< www.architecture.uwaterloo.ca/faculty.../irwin_Tjibaou.pdf>

Autodesk, 2011, Realizing the Benefits of BIM, viewed 21 August 2012, <images.autodesk.com/adsk/files/2011_realizing_bim_final.pdf>

Glen, L, 2004, ‘Introduction’ in Folding in Architecture, viewed 21 August 2012, <http://arch629eldridge.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/read-to-p23wk14-lynn-et-al-folding-in-architecture.pdf>