Ads interim sub.

Studio AIRGrady Peterson

SM2_2013_391033

ARC

HIT

ECTU

RE:

A D

ISC

OU

RSE Architecture and the design processes

involved have long been set in their ways. This document will demonstrate how Architecture Design Studio AIR challenges this. Its a journey, a personal experiment on a new way of architectural thinking, a new way of creating and developing design ideas. Architecture as a discourse. It will challenge the possibilities of architecture as we move away from tradition and embrace a new age of technology. The case developed in this studio will help me to form an opinion on computer generated design and may even foster a new way of thinking. Until then though i must remain sceptical. Myself like many others struggle to adopt to this new discourse of architecture.

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO:

AIR SEMESTER TWO 3013

GR

AD

Y PE

TER

SON

391

033

GRADY PETERSON

Hi I’m Grady a 22 Year old, Third Year Architecture Student. My interests outside of the course include heading to the beach, designing and building furniture and working on my car, a 1974 Volkswagen Kombi. I have always been interested in architecture, as a child I was constantly drawing houses, mainly in plan and elevation, however I did get to dabble in the world of digital modelling using the Sims build tools. My architectural Interests tend to lie with Earthy materials and a simple, clean almost industrial aesthetic, My favorite building materials are earth, timber, glass and concrete. Some of my favorite architects include Sean Godsel and Jackson Clements Burrows. In the future I’d like to see myself working in the residential sector working with both new builds and the retrofitting and renovating of old Terrace and Industrial buildings. My dream homes are a breezy beach-side escape and a Lofty Urban warehouse conversion. My experience and interest in Digital and Parametric design is limited so I feel this course will be a great, albeit challenging learning curve.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION 6

A CASE FOR INNOVATION

A DISCOURSE IN ARCHITECTURE 10

COMPUTATION 18

PARAMETRICS 24

CONCLUSIONS 30

REFERENCES [A] 32

PART B

PART C

APPENDICES

A.0.1

Digital Architecture: An Experience

I have a very limited knowledge of digital architecture and the processes involved in designing and experimenting digitally. The last few years studying a Bachelor of environments has generally seen me using computers merely as a tool of representation. Programs such as AutoCad, Photoshop and InDesign have been priceless assets when it comes to presentations, the manipulation of photographs of models and the creation of plans, elevations, sections and Presentation layouts.

One First Year subject required a notably different approach. Virtual Environments was as close as I have gotten to digitally derived design. The project required us to develop an abstract Architectural, or Sculptural headpiece through a process of physical and digital modeling not unlike that of Frank Ghery. My headpiece (Right) was inspired by the split second a water bomb explodes. The Digitised models, once fully developed were able to be panelised, unfolded and printed. This process enabled us to easily create Physical models

A.0.1

Digital Architecture: An Experience

from card, that had a very complex, and non uniform appearance. Virtual environments was a basic introduction to digitalisation in design and Architecture. It used a program called Sketchup which has many limitations when it comes to digital modeling and I find it quite surprising that some architectural practices use it as a professional tool.

The second year studio Unearthing project demonstrates a more conventional and much more familiar approach to design and representation within architecture. The project was to design an interactive learning and gallery space for Herring Island. Approach and the journey through different layers of the space were a main focus, with an emphasis placed on the outlook of windows and the manipulation of light to convey the focus of each space. Initially a series of sketches, in plan and elevation as well as massing models were used to discover the form of the building. Digitisation using programs such as Sketchup were only involved later on in collaboration with Photoshop to create renders and photomontages.

Clockwise from top left:A Graphical Representation; Unearthing: A Discovery Centre; Headspace Project

A Case For Innovation

A

A.1.0 LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

A DISCOURSE IN ARCHITECTURE

Architecture has to be described as a superbly complex Discipline. It Gains both its strength and its weaknesses from the fact it deals not only with objects, but the relationship between the subjects and the object as well as everything around it [1]. Architecture is a Discourse between form and function, It is more an Idea or set of ideologies than a physical outcome. One can even argue that some of the most influential architectural ideas have never been realised in built form. Archigram stated that:“A new generation of architecture must arise - with forms and spaces that seem to reject the precepts of “Modern”; REJECT - curtains - design - history - graphpaper” [2].This statement, Radical in the 60‘s is still relevant to todays Architectural context. While design, mainly in terms of the physical outcomes of Architecture has evolved along with the introduction of new materials and technologies the process of achieving this hasn’t fully rejected the graph paper of the past so to speak. Throughout history Architects have developed a way

Image [1]


A DISCOURSE IN ARCHITECTURE

to design and represent their work prior to construction. This hasn’t changed greatly with the increase in digital technology. Architects, after all, can design with pencils anyway which is why research money has gone into technical applications and productivity aids such as drafting software rather than digital design tools. The paradox is that for decades architectural software has striven to emulate the analogue working practice that architects have developed over the past two centuries and, as a group, architects have not been especially motivated to assist lifting themselves out of the analogue design methods rut [3]. This However is changing. We are on the cusp of a new Architectural discourse. The Rise of Parametric modeling software and the vast number of open source programs available mean anyone can design architecture with this new technology. It is us, the next generation of architects whom will truly adopt and develop this new Discourse. We will look beyond the Blob and random combinations of geometry, we will unlock

the key to a successful and more engaging discourse of computational design. We are at the forefront, the great change between computerisation and computation.

Through this Document I will endeavor to provide a case for innovation, on why this new digitally based method of architecture and design is the right tool to showcase to the world a progressive and modern Wyndham, able to embrace new technologies and be there at the forefront of what one day could be the successor of the Modern Movement. The Discourse I envisage will not be one of the Blob. Much like Herzog & de Meuron I am uninterested in arbitrary geometric possibilities[4]. I Envisage a Discourse where design, engineering and the construction process are closely linked. It will be a discourse of simplicity, structural and material minimalism, it will push the boundaries, and be thought evoking. An architecture that is truly adaptable to the local vernacular. It Is the future.

A.1.1 PRECEDENT PROJECTS

TECHNORAMA FACADE

The Technorama Facade, is the facade of a major science center in Switzerland. Designed by Ned Kahn in collaboration with the staff of the Technorama and the Architects Durig and Rami. It is composed of thousands of aluminium panels that move in the air currents and reveal the complex patterns of turbulence in the wind. This effect earths the building and gives it a constant and ever changing connection to the site, and to the function of the building. It’s part of this new Discourse in architecture where it is unnecessary and even counter intuitive for a building of a specific type to follow a set style dictated by its historical precursors. It gains recognition as a public institutional building by its sheer size and the overall composition as well as its placement in the expansive public fore court. Rather than be a familiar experience it is one of intrigue, evoking a sense of curiosity, perfect considering it is a science learning and research centre. The Facade is a part of a new interactive and user experience based approach to art, public space, education and architecture. Kahn sees

much of his work “as scientific instruments that reveal what nature is doing” [6] making it the ideal facade for a science centre, with each visitor experiencing a different effect of the vast facade which is constantly evolving as a direct response to the weather conditions. A Building or any structure with a facade system like this is a forever new experience for repeat visitors as the overall effect constantly sways between what see, and what you don’t see, between what catches your eye and what is hidden. It is this idea that would be ideal to emulate in the Wyndham City Gateway.

This Facade typology is one that embraces new design and fabrication technologies as well as the natural elements. It interacts with the user from a distance and evokes a sense of curiosity. It is this that we want the audience of the Wyndham Gateway to experience, a dynamic and ever changing monument rather than an obscurely placed static object reminiscent of both freeway art and city gateways of a time gone past.

The Swiss Centre, Winterthur, Switzerland. 2002Architects: Ned Khan in Collaboration with Durig and Rami

Image [2]


MESSE BASEL NEW HALL

Herzog & de Meuron’s Messe Basel New Hall is an addition to an existing Exhibition and Convention Centre. As the Function of the building calls for vast and open exhibition spaces, the form invariably follows, with large rectangular forms and little much else. Hence the idea of Facade was quite important to this project, as was the skewed orientation of the different Exhibition Halls to break up these vast walls. This successful use of a computer generated and refined facade system envelopes the whole building, a great contrast to other similar buildings such as the Exhibition centre here in Melbourne, which from the wrong angle is undisputably just a huge shed.

The facade is made up of 2D CNC-Milled components that are assembled into this complex three dimensional structure. The Facade strategy has both double curvature and variably sized openings which open up to allow for what little glazing there is to

be revealed. The Success in this system is the simplicity of the structure yet the overall complexity of the texture and patterning produced. The use of computational design allowed Herzog & de Meuron to experiment with this system and easily create models both digitally and physically at various scales to compliment the design process[7]

This building is an example of how the new architectural discourse will progress into the future, they haven’t exploited the geometric possibilities of all this new software and as a result have come up with an extremely refined facade system that perfectly compliments the vast size and lack of openings or any other details this building typology requires. Although looking at parametric software as a way of creating intricate and variable facade systems is extremely superficial, these practices translate nicely into the idea of the gateway project, which is purely an Aesthetic element with no internal program.

Herzog & de Meuron.


MESSE BASEL NEW HALLHerzog & de Meuron.

Image [3]

Image [4] Fabrication Drawings for CNC Milling

Image [5] 1:1 Scale Fabrication Prototype

Image [6] Facade detail at window openings


COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

We are on the cusp of a new Architectural Discourse. Computational Architecture is right at the centre, and already Architects and Firms who design using methods of computation are at the forefront of the industry. For the last two decades the economic returns of using computers have been increasingly undeniable and computers are here to stay. There is still tension between the computer as a practical aid, and the computer as a digital design agent [8]. This argument between computerisation and computation is the main thing holding the industry back. There is often a certain amount of fear associated with using a

Image [7]


COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

computer to generate the design of a building however I’m willing to argue that there is no reason to be fearful, after all it is still the designer driving the computer, writing the scripts and essentially dictating what the outcome is. Using computational design techniques, Architects and designers are finally able to push the limits of design and representation without pushing the bounds of what can actually be realised in built form [9]. Geometries are able to be pushed, designs are able to be fully rationalised and many of the problems that usually arise during the construction process can be nutted out prior

to the design being approved as the way forward. If Archigram had these tools at their disposal who knows, perhaps architecture as we know it today would be vastly different under their influence. Computational Architecture almost steps us back to the times of Architects as master builders, every little decision, every joint and every bolt can be decided on and specified prior to construction, ultimately giving much more design control to the architect, resulting in successful and much more refined buildings [10].

the way it behaves structurally, with the entire lattice able to be erected and fully stabilised without the need for any initial braces or scaffolds. A stressed wooden skin was developed, which gradually forces the lattice into its structurally stable, double curved state by the local actuation of each skin element. This actuation was calculated on an individual skin cell basis, and entirely informed by the detailed computational studies.[11]By Integrating material properties and working on very specific and individual elements this beautiful and non uniform structure was possible. Designs like this are extremely resolved and simple, and are only possible with extensive use of computational techniques. Its an example of where Architecture and design is headed and sits nicely at the forefront of this new Discourse.

A.2.2 PRECEDENT PROJECTS: COMPUTATION

DIFFERENTIATED WOOD LATTICE SHELL

The Differentiated Wood Lattice Shell Project is a prime example of how computation, and computerised production techniques work hand in had as a tool for creating simple, yet beautiful designs where the structure and the Aesthetics are intrinsically linked.

By experimenting with the properties of wooden elements the project architects were able to extend the range of lattice geometries based on the bending behavior of wooden elements with varying cross sectional dimensions along its length. This research data was able to be translated into a computer design tool for the form finding of the lattice shape in relation to the properties of its members, which in turn provided fabrication data to construct the initially planar grid of the lattice. The really innovative aspect of the project is

Jian Huang and Minhwan Park,Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2009

Image [8]

A.2.2 PRECEDENT PROJECTS: COMPUTATION

DIFFERENTIATED WOOD LATTICE SHELLJian Huang and Minhwan Park,Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2009

Image [8]

Image [9] An example of how Computational inputs can inform the shape of the structure.

Image [10] Interior Quality of the space. Showing the double nature of the skin.


PARAMETRIC ARCHITECTURE

Parametric Architecture fits perfectly into the world of computation. The idea of Parametrics however, is one of much debate. Is Parametric a style? Is it even a new way of coming up with Architecture? I’m tempted to say it isn’t. Parameters as set by the client for the brief or parameters set by the spanning abilities of a piece of wood for instance are something an Architect has always had to deal with. Parametric Architecture by itself isn’t that innovative. This new discourse of Computation goes hand in hand with Parametric Architecture and enables limitless possibilities. Parametric modeling enables different inputs to be specified, enabling things to be changed, with those changes been transferred throughout the model. This

Image [11] Zaha Hadid, Flinders Street Station Proposal, Melourne. 2013


PARAMETRIC ARCHITECTURE

has great advantages when compared to standard CAD drawings, where changing one thing will result in everything else needing to be changed manually. With Parametric Architecture the lines between structure and design can be blurred simultaneously, with a specific view towards fabrication.

For the Wyndham Gateway Project Parametric Design tools will enable us to create an up to date and well informed design idea that is able to be adapted and adjusted right up until the time of construction. Computer software such as Grasshopper easily lets input relevant data, and using plug in software such as Firefly and Kangaroo and electronic hardware

such as the Arduino board we will be able to make our structure responsive, interactive and undisputedly cool. This is just one of the many features of parametric architecture. This is an area of Architecture that is yet to be fully adopted. That’s what makes it so fascinating. There is no parametric, or computational style, there is not an expansive list of precedents. [12] This lack of rules and guidelines, teamed up with the infinite possibilities of the computer and scripting tools is what makes the world of Parametric Architecture one of free and unrestrained creativity.

Image [11] Zaha Hadid, Flinders Street Station Proposal, Melourne. 2013

A.3.1 DESIGNING PARAMETRICALLY

PARAMETRIC SPACE ZAHA HADID

Image [12]


PARAMETRIC SPACE

Zaha Hadid’s Parametric space is a fascinating example of the powers of parametricism. While it isn’t Architecture so to speak it is a pure example of design that is able to find its form in relation to the viewers proximity. As its function is purely artistic it has allowed Zaha Hadid to think outside the rules and responsibilities required when designing real architecture. At first glance, Parametric Space is a dark rectangular volume – four walls, floor and ceiling. However, in the presence of a visitor, what appears to be a normal flat ceiling reveals itself as a glowing and flexible membrane that physically moves down into a funnel that protrudes out towards the floor. The closer a visitor gets to the funnel, the further it moves down; by stepping back the membrane will retract back into the ceiling. In addition to changing its shape, the membrane is also brought to life by thousands of dynamic light

particles that inhabit the surface and react to the membrane’s movements[13]. This type of experiential space is an abstract example of Parametrics in architecture and is relevant to the Wyndham Gateway project as it interacts with its audience. It is an experiential installation with a unique meaning for each visitor creating a sense of intrigue and memorability. The ability of parametric architecture driven my motion and proximity sensors to interact with its inhabitants and its environment is limitless. This area of the Architectural discourse is only starting to find a practical use, especially with environmental applications such as adjusting eaves and louvres according to light conditions, or tracking the sun in solar panels. Hadid is one of the Lead architects of the parametric movement, already one of the greats such as LeCorbusier was to the Modernist Movement.

ZAHA HADID

Image [13]


FLINDERS STREET COMPETITION ENTRYZAHA HADID ARCHITECTURE AND BVN ARCHITECTURE

Image [14]


FLINDERS STREET COMPETITION ENTRY

Zaha Hadid is at the forefront of Parametrically Designed Architecture. In terms of this competition proposal Zaha Hadid Architecture and BVN Architecture pulled out all stops and pushed the boundaries of design within a fairly historical setting. Their vision for the Flinders Street Station is to create a new civic and commercial centre that is fully integrated with the mixed mode transport hub. The idea endeavors to knit the site into the city grid and creates a strong interface with the river. While the concept didn’t win the competition, it is an example of how Parametricism can be applied to current developments within a local context.

Data inputs that helped to develop this project were informed by the need for a quick construction turnaround as to not

interrupt the flow of this major transport hub for any long amount of time. Other inputs such as the curve of the Yarra and the rigidity oh the Hoddle grid also helped to influence the form, and essentially establish how the building interacts with its surroundings. In the image on the left you can see that the size of the void is calculated on the requirements for ramps and adequate ceiling heights and all would have been adjusted parametrically. [14] The lack of rules and guidelines and the temptation to take parametric design too far were perhaps the reason Zaha and BVN were unsuccessful with the competition. It’s an example of parametric architecture allowing free and unrestrained creativity that perhaps has pushed the boundaries of context too far. This isn’t an issue for the Wyndham Gateway site as it sits freely with no existing constraints on style and design.

ZAHA HADID ARCHITECTURE AND BVN ARCHITECTURE

Image [15]

A.3.3 CONCLUSIONS

OUTCOMES

Throughout Part A: A Case For Innovation I have developed a new understanding of Computerisation and Computation and the relevance of both to the current architectural discourse. My opinions on computer generated design have changed greatly and I believe I am able to embrace it more freely now. I have experienced arguments both for and against computation and Parametric design and see that it is the way forward. I feel perhaps it wont be my generation of Architects who will fully embrace this design methodology but I do realise we are on the cusp of what could be the next big movement in architecture. I feel the lack of a distinct style or a set of design rules is both allowing this new way of thinking to grow and develop, yet holding it back at the same time as people are often uneasy with the outcomes of computer generated designs.

Towards the rest of this semester and for the remainder of the project I am extremely excited at the concept of developing my Parametric Design Toolkit. I feel that even in the last three weeks experimenting with Rhino and Grasshopper I have learnt so much and am beginning to gain and understanding of how this software is able to be applied to building real life and full scale designs. Our Group has been given the task of developing a Responsive outcome for the Wyndham Gateway which scares me a lot. I’m keen to get Experimenting with Firefly and the Arduino software and feel that this extra complexity will only help me more with understanding the vast possibilities of designing with this software. Its still a bit odd designing minus the pencil but I feel it does have benefits when looking to the future. Model Making and Construction are real passions of mine so that portion of the semesters tasks cant come sooner. I’m super excited to see the design outcome my group and I will be able to come up with and at this early stages I can only imagine what it could be like, but that is the nature of this fast paced studio. We are doing something totally foreign to us. The language of Computational Architecture.

A.3.3 CONCLUSIONS

TOWARDS THE WYNDHAM GATEWAY

A_a case for innovation

REFERENCES

[1] Mark Cousins, ‘Building an Architect’, in Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User, ed.Jonathan Hill (London: Routledge, 1998), pp. 13–22.

[2] Sadler, Simon. (2005) Archigram: architecture without architecture, MIT Press, Accessed 06-08-13 <http://issuu.com/filipesilva/docs/0262693224>

[3] Burry, Mark (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 8 - 71.

[4] Peters, B. (2013), Realising the Architectural Idea: Computational Design at Herzog & De Meuron. Archit Design, 83: 56–61. doi: 10.1002/ad.1554

[5] http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/the-critics/patrik-schumacher-on-parametricism-let-the-style-wars-begin/5217211.article# Accessed 15 Aug 2013

[6] FORM Magazine, “The Art of Observance, Ned Kahn”, June 2007. Accessed 15 Aug 2013 <www.narrativela.com/files/formkahn07.pdf>


[8] Burry, Mark (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 8 - 71.


[10] Mark Cousins, ‘Building an Architect’, in Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User, ed.Jonathan Hill (London: Routledge, 1998), pp. 13–22.

[11]Performative Wood Studio (Visiting Prof. A. Menges)Jian Huang and Minhwan Park, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2009Accessed 18 Aug 2013 http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4339

[12] Schumacher, P. 2010 Patrik Schumacher on parametricism - ‘Let the style wars begin’6 May, 2010. Accessed 15 August 2013 <http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/patrik-schumacher-on-parametricism-let-the-style-wars-begin/5217211.article>

[13]Rosenfield, Karissa “Parametric Space/Zaha Hadid Architects, Kollision, CAVI, Wahlberg” 02 July 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 18 Aug 2013. <http://www.archdaily.com/396923>

[14] Zaha Hadid Architects. Flunders Street Station proposal. Accessed 16 Aug 2013 <http://vote.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/entrant/zaha-hadid-architecture-bvn-architecture>

Text

A_a case for innovation

REFERENCES

Images

[1]Archigram, Walking city Accessed 12 Aug 2013 <http://www.archigram.net/projects_pages/walking_city_5.html>

[2]Kahn, Ned. Technorama Facade 2002Accessed 17 August 2013 <http://nedkahn.com/portfolio/technorama-facade/>

[3]Furuto, Alison. “Messe Basel New Hall / Herzog & de Meuron, by Hufton + Crow” 27 May 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 18 Aug 2013. <http://www.archdaily.com/377609>

[4]+[5]+[6]Peters, B. (2013), Realising the Architectural Idea: Computational Design at Herzog & De Meuron. Archit Design, 83: 56–61. doi: 10.1002/ad.1554

[7]Burry, Mark (2011). Scripting Cultures: Architectural Design and Programming (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 8 - 71.

[8]+[9]+[10]Performative Wood Studio (Visiting Prof. A. Menges)Jian Huang and Minhwan Park, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, 2009Accessed 18 Aug 2013 http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4339

[11]Zaha Hadid Architects. Flunders Street Station proposal.Image from supporting files. Accessed 16 Aug 2013 <http://vote.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/entrant/zaha-hadid-architecture-bvn-architecture>

[12]+[13]Rosenfield, Karissa. “Parametric Space/Zaha Hadid Architects, Kollision, CAVI, Wahlberg” 02 July 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 18 Aug 2013. <http://www.archdaily.com/396923>

[14]+[15]Zaha Hadid Architects. Flunders Street Station proposal.Image from supporting files. Accessed 16 Aug 2013 <http://vote.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/entrant/zaha-hadid-architecture-bvn-architecture>

EXPRESSION OF INTEREST

B

Date post:	24-Mar-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	grady-peterson
View:	218 times
Download:	1 times

Ads interim sub.

Documents