Waring_Sarah_582815_FinalJournal

STUDIO AIR JOURNAL2014, SEMESTER 2, PHILSARAH WARING

COVER IMAGE:PAUL MCCOLLAM, ‘HILLY’, IMAGE, STRUCTURAL SURFACE, <HTTP://PAULMCCOLLAM.COM/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/

HILLY.JPG> [ACCESSED 4 AUGUST 2014].

Table of Contents

4 Introduction

7 PART A: CONCEPTUALISATION

8 A.1. Design Futuring

12 A.2. Design Computation

19 A.3. Compositional and Generative Strategies

33 A.4. Conclusion

34 A.5. Learning Outcomes

35 A.6. Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

36 Part A Reference List

37 Part A Image Reference List

41 PART B: CRITERIA DESIGN

42 B.1. Research Field: Geometry

48 B.2. Case Study 1.0: BanQ

60 B.3. Case Study 2.0: Swiss Re HQ

68 B.4. Technique Development with Case Study 2.0

72 B.5. Technique: Prototype

78 B.6. Technique: Proposal

90 B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes

91 Part B Reference List

92 Part B Image List

94 B.8. Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

96 PART C: DETAILED DESIGN

98 C.1. Design Concept

125 C.2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes

142 C.3. Final Detail Model

150 C.4. Learning Objectives & Outcomes

156 Part C Bibliography

156 Part C Image List

4 CONCEPTUALISATION

My name is Sarah Waring. I am currently an

undergraduate student in my last year of the Bachelor

of Environments at The University of Melbourne,

majoring in Architecture, though this was not always

the case. I had commenced my tertiary education with

the Bachelor of Science at The University of Melbourne

and transferred to Environments at the end of my first

year after taking Designing Environments. I had been,

and still am, relatively unsure of what I want career I

wanted to pursue, conflicted by an admiration for the

methodical, technical and defined realm of science as

well as the ephemeral and transcendental world of art.

It was at the crossroads of these fields that I found

architecture, or rather it found me, with its embrace of

the artistic as well as the methodological and technical.

I was always drawn to design and have had a love and

propensity for it since my childhood. I spent alot of my

time playing with Lego, constructing cities in Sims, and

making robots, houses and contraptions out of cardboard,

masking tape and anything else at my disposal.

Having moved between Australia and California a few

times I have had the opportunity to travel to many places

ranging from New York to Tanzania, Rome, and Hong

Kong, which allowed me to experience first hand various

international approaches to architecture and design.

As I have only recently ventured into the world of

architecture, I have had just a little bit of experience

with technical drawing and computer rendering

technologies. I was briefly introduced to Rhino during

a workshop for my Visual Communications class,

and supplemented this with additional self-teaching

to produce my final project for Architectural Design

Studio Earth (Fig. 1). Even with my preliminary technical

skills I was proud to be able to visually represent my

ideas and design in a clear and interesting manner.

Introduction

CONCEPTUALISATION 5

FIG.1: RHINO MODEL OF DESIGN OF FINAL PROJECT FOR DESIGN STUDIO EARTH

6 CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 7

PART A: CONCEPTUALISATION

8 CONCEPTUALISATION

Design is the ‘front-line of transformative action” [1]

in the battle for possible futures. Design Futuring is

about changing the way that we design and think about

design, so that we can move from our current path of

unsustainability, in which we are sacrificing ‘the future

to sustain the excess of the present’[2], to follow the

Sustainment movement. This entails individuals thinking

about how their lives influence the world we live in and

the cost and impact of their actions. It requires not

only a reshaping of design to be more sustainable, but

the redirection of peoples lives to a more sustainable,

environmentally conscientious and enlightened path.

Through design individuals are both encouraged and

enabled to live more sustainable lives. The utlimate

goal being to design the possibility of futures not

destroyed by our current consumption and devastation.

After all, ‘we only have a future by design’ [3].

This movement of design futuring entails designing

not only to have a minimal impact on the environment

in terms of ecological footprint and embodied energy

of a design, but also to invigorate a consciousness

in the individual for a more sustainable mindset

and lifestyle. Design Futuring has two tasks. Firstly

to reduce the rate with which we are ‘defuturing’

with our unsustainable designs and lifestyles, and

secondly, to redirect our ideas of habitation to

embrace design[4] ‘as a world-shaping force’ [5].

The Land Art Generator Initiative (LAGI) aims to

encourage design futuring through its competitions

for designs of land art installations that are a

combination of aesthetics and practical concepts

which include the generation of clean green

energy to be contributed to a city’s grid [6].

A.1. Design Futuring

Photoreactor Farm Tower

2010 LAGI SUBMISSIONTEAM: GREGOIRE DIEHL, XUHUI LIU, ALEXANDRE

BRALERET, LEA SANTAMARIAThis team of French designers attempted design

futuring with their photoreactor farm tower which

harnesses the potential of algal greenhouses to produce

clean, renewable energy that could be collected and

transported to the grid. This was incorporated into

their design in the form of their artistic installation of

vertical green algal glass tubes, which creates an algal

greenhouse that produces energy. Though this alternative

energy source is not a radical new idea, it is unusually

incorporated as part of an artistic instalment that

minimizes the amount of land cover with its verticality.

The use of this renewable energy source as part of a

piece of land art encourages users to interact with it

and consequently encourages positive perceptions

of design futuring and of alternate energy sources. It

posits the real possibility of living a more sustainable

lifestyle without sacrificing aesthetics and arts.

This entry has a number of faults though. The objective

put forth by LAGI was to put the aim of creating a

land art installation first and foremost, rather than

developing an institution to research energy sources.

The tower, a vertical stack of environmentally focused

functions, dominates the design and overpowers the

impact of the surrounding glass tube installation.

Additionally, the embodied energy required to construct

such a tower would not only likely negate the energy

produced by the algal tubes, but the land area saved by

extending the building vertically rather than spreading

it horizontally is used by the green algal tubes.

1. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2009), pp. 6.

2. Tony, Design Futuring, pp.2.

3. Tony, Design Futuring, pp.3



6. Robert Ferry and Elizabeth Monoian ‘Design Guidelines: Land Art Generator Initiative’, Land Art Generator Initiative, Copenhagen <http://landartgenerator.org/images/LAGI2010DESIGNGUIDELINES.pdf> [accessed 1 August 2014].

The progressive aspect of design futuring is

addressed in their aim to enhance educational,

scientific and technological advancement

towards more sustainable energies and

lifestyles through the functions held within

the tower. These include vertical farming,

education, research and recycling, aimed at

producing and encouraging a more sustainable

lifestyle. However, the aim of advancing

sustainability is undertaken literally in the

functions rather than trying to redirect

peoples thinking and attitudes towards

sustainability through design. Furthermore,

some of the functions it tries to encompass

with in this tower, such as farming, don’t seem

logical or logistically achievable in a vertical

environment and have no clear advantage

from their proximity to each other. [7].

FIG.4: PHOTOREACTOR FARM TOWER 2010 LAGI SUBMISSION

7. Gregoire Diehl, Xuhui Liu, Alexandre Braleret and Lea Santamaria, ‘Photoreactor Farm Tower’, Land Art Generator Initiative 2010 Competition, <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/co2po4/> [accessed 1 August 2014].

FIG.2: (LEFT) SECTION OF PHOTOREACTOR FARM TOWER SHOWING FUNCTIONSFIG 3: (RIGHT) DIGITAL PERSPECTIVE OF PHOTOREACTOR FARM

TOWER WITH ALGAL TOWERS IN FOREGROUND

10 CONCEPTUALISATION

the user to find a connection between this man-

made design and the environment thus encouraging

them to consider the impact of their actions.

By elevating the ribbons off the ground, minimizing the

contact with the terrain, this sculptural, artistic design

that generates energy, encourages ideas of minimizing

ones impact upon the planet. It promotes the idea to

not only literally reduce one’s carbon footprint and the

amount of natural landscape destroyed to make way for

modern life, but to mitigate this effect by positing that

one doesn’t need to give up modern aspirations and

lifestyle in order to preserve and mend the environment.

The design of the Light Sanctuary is not only stronger

and more realistically possible to construct, but it also

effectively addresses the competitions guidelines. First

and foremost, it is a landscape artwork and secondly

it practically functions as a means of generating and

collecting energy that can be transferred to the grid [8].

Like the algal tower, this submission focused on

minimizing the degree to which the design interacts

with the ground, taking advantage of the vertical

dimension, and used an unusual energy sources. The

Light Sanctuary land-art is composed of a network of

ribbons made of thin solar membranes that generate

and capture solar energy and transfer it to the grid

(Fig. 5).The amount of energy captured by the design is

optimized not only by the large surface area of the solar

membranes that make up the ribbons, but also by the

revolutionary technology that allows for the absorption of

light even when vertical, thus maximizing the amount of

penetration while minimizing the amount of land covered.

The maze-like pattern of the design through which

the user transverses, echoes the characteristics

of the site in its colouring and the contours of the

topography. The interaction with the structure prompts

FIG.5 LIGHT SANCTUARY 2010 LAGI SUBMISSIONLight Sanctuary: An empowered landscape for the UAE

2010 LAGI SUBMISSIONTEAM: MARTINA DECKER AND PETER YEADON

8. Martina Decker and Peter Yeadon, ‘Light Sanctuary: An empowered landscape for the UAE’, Land Art Generator Initiative 2010 Competition <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/8s3b9u/> [accessed 2 August 2014].

CONCEPTUALISATION 11

FIG.6 LIGHT SANCTUARY 2010 LAGI SUBMISSION

FIG.7 GROUND LEVEL VIEW OF ELEVATED SOLAR RIBBONS OF LIGHT SANCTUARY 2010 LAGI SUBMISSION


A.2. Design ComputationAs design, ‘the epitome of intelligent behaviour’ [9],

has shifted from drawing to algorithmic thinking,

some worry it has been compromised and limited by

the overly enthusiastic embrace of computers in the

design process. While their concern that the reliance

of computer technologies in producing architecture

constrains this intelligence and limits the forms and

geometries produced to those achievable with the

software, is somewhat true for novice designs using

readily available popular software, it isn’t necessarily

the case for designs produced by Computerization

and Computation in architectural practice.

Computerization v. Computation

Computerization, the dominant form of contemporary

computer utilized architecture, is when an architects

pre-conceptualised designs are manipulated, stored

or input into a computer system. In other words,

the computer is used to recreate something that

was previously made without a computer by using

Computer-Aided Design (CAD) or Computer-Aided

Manufacturing (CAM ). [10] For example, software like

AutoCAD is a computerization of line-based drawings.

On the other hand, Computation, otherwise known

as computing, is the use of a computer based

design tool in which the computer figures out things

for you using algorithms in parametric modelling

software like Grasshopper. Computational design,

or ‘computing’ is an extension of computerization,

where the computer goes beyond being used

as a tool, to become a platform for design.

Computation is often utilized as a means of more

efficiently performing time consuming and repetitive

tasks by following a set of given instructions. While

the computer will faultlessly follow these instructions,

they are unable to create their own instructions. These

algorithmic instructions are the product of the creative

human mind that produced the design. Computation is

predicated on communication of shared knowledge in

the form of a set of instructions, between the computer

and the designer. This is achieved by the designer

thinking algorithmically, in other words, understanding,

executing, creating and evaluating the algorithms to be

read by the computer. It is computation, that despite

its ability to free and embrace a designers imagination,

that is accused of limiting their creativity [11] . This

is not the case however, as computation entails the

computer following a designers predetermined set of

instructions or algorithms and according to an already

conceptualized design. “Computational thinking

is the thought processes involved in formulating

problems and their solutions so that the solutions are

represented in a form that can be effectively carried

out by an information-processing agent.” [12]

Evolution of Digital Design

This realm of digital architecture that has erupted over

the last decade formed a continuum of architectural

theories that integrated architecture with science

and technology. Digital architecture was a revision

of the representational mode of form generation, and

gave rise to a period of experimental architecture that

explored otherwise impossible geometries of free-form

and the complex geometries of folds and curves[14].

Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim was one of the earliest

buildings to embrace digital architecture, and capture

its ‘fluid logic of connectivity’ [15]. Their curvilinear

surfaces and volumes were achieved by Gehry’s use

FIG.8: FRANK GEHRY’S SKETCH FOR GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM (ABOVE)FIG.9 CLOSE UP OF CURVILINEAR SURFACE OF GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM (RIGHT)

9. Yehuda E. Kalay,, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 1.

10. Branko Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 31.

11. Kostas Terzidis, Algorithms for Visual Design Using the Processing Language (Indianapolis, IN: Wiley, 2009), p. xx

12. Jan Cuny, Larry Snyder, and Jeannette M. Wing, “Demystifying Computational Thinking for Non-Computer Scientists,” work in progress, 2010.

13. John Hamilton Frazer, “The Generation of Virtual Prototypes for Perforamnce Optimization”, in Oosterhuis, K., and L. Feiress (eds.), GameSetAndMatchII: The Architecture Co-Laboratory on computer Games, Advanced Geometries and Digital Technoologies, (Rotterdam: Episode publisher, 2006), pp. 208-212.

14. Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, eds. Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 1.

15. Greg Lynn, eds., ‘Folding in Architecture, Architectural Design’ (Wiley-Academy: West Sussex, UK, 1993), in Oxman Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 2.

of computation to translate his physical model and design into a mathematically and physically achievable form. In

doing so, Gehry was able to embrace biomorphic forms that were previously essentially lost geometries due to the

difficulties in representing them architecturally, with his form reminiscent of the Expressionist artists of the 1920. [16]

Gehry’s designs were conceived prior to being transferred to a computer, which was then used as a tool

to materialize his work for construction, not for the development of the architectural design and concept.

Computation freed Gehry from traditional design constraints to achieve the artistic expression of his design

by breaking it down into mathematical realities. Digital technologies weren’t used as a medium for developing

the architectural design and concept, but were rather used as a way of translating the geometry of the design

of his physical model to produce a digital representation of its geometry by generating NURBS curves, that

could be constructed. It would be near impossible to effectively communicate and structurally conceive of this

design of curvilinear surfaces using traditional drawing techniques. Gehry’s process of reverse engineering

is the inverse of computer-aided manufacturing as it translates a physical model into a digital form. [17]


FIG.10: THE GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM BY FRANK GEHRY

16. Branko Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 31.

17. Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age, pp. 31.

FIG.11: THE PRODUCTION OF THE GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM FROM DIGITAL POINTS TO A DIGITAL SURFACE

Parametric design thinking follows a logic of ‘associative

and dependency relationships between objects and

their parts-and-whole relationships’ in which altering

the values of the parameters within such a geometric

relationships creates a multitude of variable results

[18]. The popularity of parametric design rose from

its ability to control the relationships that enable

the ‘creation and modulation of the differentiation of

the elements of a design” [19]. This allowed for the

emerging younger generation who were moving away

from compositional and representational theories

and embracing algorithmic scripting, to undertake

research by experimental design. [20] This experimental

design used form generating modellers, to produce

a topological geometry of curvilinear surfaces which

is prevalent in contemporary architectural design. The

appeal of these NURBS curves and surfaces is due

to the ease in which one can control their form by the

manipulation of their control points, knots and weights.

NURBS not only allows the “heterogeneous, yet coherent,

forms of the digital architectures to be computationally

possible”, that would otherwise not be conceivable

or at least extremely tedious done by hand, but their

construction is also made attainable through the use of

computer numerically controlled (CNC) machines.[21]

Benefits of Computation and computational thinking in practice

Through algorithms, computer aided design systems

assist the designer by undertaking small to large jobs

in the design process. The role that computation takes

ranges from a limited assistance drawing lines and

geometries for drafting and modelling systems, to the

evaluation of a designers solutions regarding energy,

acoustics, cost etc.., in analytical systems, to even

proposing such solutions in intelligent design systems.

EFFICIENCY

In short, computational thinking enables the

bending of computation to facilitate the designer’s

needs by being able to perform repetitive and

menial task instructed through an algorithm,

understanding and working according to a materials

constraints and can develop variations in the

design according to a set of defined parameter

PERFORMANCE ORIENTED DESIGN

In conjunction with the emergence of a new generation

of digital architecture, came the embrace of integrated

simulation software that enabled the calculation

of the performance of a building in terms of its

energy, structure, cost, water usage, etc.. both before

and after the buildings construction. Rather than

focusing on form making, the building’s performance

is the guiding force in the design principle.

COLLABORATION IN DESIGN

The computation tool of 3D Building Integrated

Models (BIM) facilitates collaborative work between

disciplines due to their multi-layered nature. [22]


18. Oxman, ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’, pp. 3.

19. Oxman, ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’, pp. 3.

20. Oxman, ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’, pp. 4

21. Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age’, pp. 15

22. Kalay ‘Architecture’s New Media: Principles’, pp.4.


Computation enables the establishment of an

interactive and collaborative environment for design and

performance evaluation through simulation. [23]Foster

Associates Swiss RE and London City Hall completed

in 2003 are examples of such an integrated approach in

which the architect and engineers worked collaboratively.

[24] This technological shift to computation made

collaborative design between architects and engineers

possible and opened the architectural discourse to a

multitude of disciplines. Modelling software enabled

research into the design of material systems and

technologies by modelling their economic potential,

producing smart and hybrid materials. [25]

The Swiss Re Head Quarters by Norman Foster, otherwise

known as ‘the Gherkin’, was designed using a parametric

approach and scripting to generate complex geometric

models to establish a consistent unifying system that

had a variable vertical geometry. [26]Parametric design

was also used to study the buildings performance for

optimization, to gather databases of design conditions

to enable a rationalization of the buildings details and

structure as well as to produce a three dimensional

model to examine and coordinate the structural design.

Different forms were able to be tested by varying

the key parameters of the digital model (Fig. 12).

The use of a parametric mode, responsive to change and

offering flexibility in design, was used to achieve the

variable diagrid geometry, and enabled the examination

of details by establishing mathematical relationships

between the geometric parameters that define the

buildings form [27]This is evident in the curvilinear shape

of the Swiss Re which was achieved by the breaking

down of its structural surfaces using a nodal approach

to develop the external diagrid geometry of interlocking

FIG.12: DIGITAL MODELS OF POSSIBLE FORMS FOR THE SWISS RE

FIG.13: PARAMETRIC NODES OF THE DIGITAL MODEL OF THE SWISS RE TOWERFIG.14 (RIGHT) PHOTO OF SWISS RE BUILDING HQ BY NORMAN FOSTER

23. Oxman, ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’ pp. 4,5.

24. Witold Rybczynsky, ‘ Parametric Design: Whats Gotten Lost Amid the Algorithms’, Architectmagazine.com (July 11 2013) < http://www.architectmagazine.com/design/parametric-design-lost-amid-the-algorithms.aspx> [accessed 16 August 2014]; Dominic Munro,’ Swiss Re’s Building, London’, NR 3, NYHETER OM STÅLBYGGNAD, (2004), pp.42.< http://www.epab.bme.hu/oktatas/2009-2010-2/v-CA-B-Ms/FreeForm/Examples/SwissRe.pdf> [accessed 11 August 2014]; Architecture Week, ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’, (Published 04 May 2005) <http://www.architectureweek.com/2005/0504/tools_1-2.html> [accessed 11 August 2014].

25. Oxman, ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’ pp. 4,5.

26. Munro,’ Swiss Re’s Building, London’, pp.42; Architecture Week ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’.

27. Munro,’ Swiss Re’s Building, London’, pp.42; Architecture Week ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’.


diagonal steel components (Fig.15 and 17). The circular

plan and tapering cucumber-like form, less bulky than

conventional block buildings, responds to the site specific

demands as the buildings slimmer profile increases

the degree of daylight penetration on lower levels while

maximizing the usable office space. It’s parametric form

encourages wind to flow around the building, making

the structure more efficient as the wind loads applied

to the cladding and structure are minimized.[28]

The ability to analyse the building in 3D provoked

collaboration between the team, ensuring a strong

logistic plan and accurate pricing for material, and

was used to develop the information required for

fabrication. “The continuity of model information

from analysis through to fabrication greatly reduced

the scope for errors in interpreting the design

requirements”[29]. The use of the 3D model enabled

detailed coordination of the trade interfaces from

cladding to services, from design to construction.[30]

FIG.17: THE NODAL CONNECTION USED FOR THE SWISS RE’S FACADE

FIG.16 EFFICIENCY OF FORM OF SWISS RE VERSUS A CONVENTIONAL BUILDING IN MINIMIZING WIND LOADS

FIG.15: THE GEODESIC FACADE OF THE SWISS RE

28. Architecture Week, ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’.

29. Munro,’ Swiss Re’s Building, London’, pp. 42.

30. Architecture Week, ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’.


A.3. Compositional and Generative Strategies

Architectural practice is being redefined by computation,

allowing architects to develop digital tools to expand the

possibilities in construction, fabrication and the design

process. Computation, the digital processing of information

and interactions of a specific environment of interrelated

elements, capable of complex forms, is essentially the

algorithmic expression of digitally processed information.

Just as architects moved from using computers as

computerization, simply digitizing existing procedures

as a ‘virtual drafting board’ to develop the designers

preconceived design, to the more complex realm of

computation that enables designers to augments their

ability to address complex problems, so too did the design

approach shift from compositional to generative. [31]

Shifting from Composition to Generation

With the embrace of computation, design strategies

shifted from an initial concern with achieving a desired

form, to producing a multitude of variations of a form

created to address set constraints on the design.

In traditional compositional strategies, the relationship

between the designer and the design is direct and the

architect retains control over how the overall form of

function of a design is produced. Computation is

used after the conception of the designs form, to

amend its basic shape for ease of construction or

for the optimization of its performance. [32] Gehry’s

iconic Guggenheim Museum built in 1997 in Bilbao,

Spain and the Fish Sculpture at Vila Olimpica built

in 1992 Barcelona (Fig. 18), both followed a top

down compositional approach to computation.[33]

The fish sculpture was the first time that Frank O.

Gehry & Associates used computer-aided design and

manufacturing . Prompted by financial and temporal

constraints, they utilized the computer program

CATIA (Computer Aided Three-dimensional Interactive

Application) to facilitate their design and construction

process. CATIA models complex surface geometries by

analyzing data produced by digitized physical models and

using the results to engineer the building systems.[34]

Conversely, in generative strategies, instead of directly

manipulating the design produced, the designer creates

and modifies the rules and systems that interact to

generate the designs. The form of the design is created

autonomously by the computer, according to the

constraints and algorithms defined by the architect. [35]

31. Brady Peters, ‘Computational Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83,2, pp. 10

32. Branko Kolarevic, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 3–62.

33. ‘Guggenheim Museum Bilbao’, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation , <http://pastexhibitions.guggenheim.org/gehry/bilbao_15.html> [accessed 16 August 2014]; . ‘Fish Sculpture at Vila Olimpca’, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, < http://pastexhibitions.guggenheim.org/gehry/fish_sculpt_11.html>, [accessed 16 August 2014].

34. . ‘Fish Sculpture at Vila Olimpca’.

35. Jon McCormack, Alan Dorin and Troy Innocent, ‘Generative Design: a paradigm for design ressearch’, in Redmond, J. et al. (eds) Proceeding of Futureground, (Melbourne: Design Research Society, 2004), pp. 1-8. <http://www.csse.monash.edu/~jonmc/research/Papers/genDesignFG04.pdf> [accessed 17 August 2014].

FIG.18: FRANK GEHRY’S FISH SCULPTURE AT VILA OLIMPICA AS EXAMPLE OF COMPOSITIONAL APPROACH TO COMPUTATION.


Algorithmic thinking

Computation is essentially the algorithmic expression

of the digital processing of information and the

interactions of a specific environment of interrelated

elements, capable of complex forms. Unexpected

solutions that exceed the designers capabilities can

be generated by utilizing computer programs to solve

design problems, as the ability to modify the program,

or ‘sketch algorithmically’, makes a vast amount of

options available. [36] Algorithms are sets of precise

instructions of a specified procedure that are written in

code. [37] Most computer –aided design programs have

use programming or ‘scripting’ languages to implement

algorithms, tmaking designs by implementing the ability

to add, modify or erase elements of a model. However,

designers must understand algorithmic thinking to

fully benefit from these functions though. [38]

Computation in Practice

The increase in architecture practices use of computation

was driven by the availability and possibilities offered

by scripting languages such as Rhino Script, and

Grasshopper, a visual programming language, which are

used to tailor the design environments within existing

software. [39] Using these languages, computational

designers are able to make customized tools for designs

by writing and modifying algorithms that relate to

the configuration, placement and interrelationship

of its elements. [40] Such computational tools which

can simulate and analyze the performance of the

overall building as well as its structural, environment

and material performance, are able to be use these

constraints as parameters for generating architectural

forms. [41] But for computational techniques to be

effective, “the design environment, of which the

architect is now part author, must be flexible and

have the ability to accommodate change “. [42] As

design is shifting, design practices have become

inadequate, insufficient and as such, the organization

of architectural firms are changing to integrate

computational design expertise. [43] Typically, they do

so by fully integrating computation into their practice

and design process or with the employment of either

a long software designer, an internal specialist or an

external specialist consultant or hybrid designers

who are literate in computer programming and

scripting and develop their own design software.

However, having an internal specialist group is

not always necessary to develop computational

strategies, as networks of communal knowledge

are becoming readily available. Through online

forums like the Grasshopper community, designers

have access to a repository of digital tools, codes,

workflows and algorithms capable of being adapted

to their designs. Facilitated by computation, this

sharing and communal accumulation of codes, ideas

and tools is building algorithmic thought. [44]

Generation

Generative methodology incorporates dynamic processes

and outcomes and sees a shift from the conception of

an object, to envisaging the interaction between the

components, processes, and systems that generate

new products. The integration of generative systems

into the design process enables the production of

genuinely novel properties, that do not come from the

designers design concepts or expectations , and results

in unexpected forms thus enabling new design solutions

that were previously impossible to be achievable. [45]

The generative design process consists of four elements:

firstly the input of the parameters and conditions,

then the use of generative technique such as rules

and algorithms, followed by output, the generation

of design alternatives, and finally the evaluation and

selecting of the most efficient design alternative. [46]

36. Peters, ‘Computational Works’, pp. 10.

37. Peters, ‘Computational Works’, pp. 10; Robert Woodbury, ‘How Designers use Parameters’, in Theories of The Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 163.

38. Robert Woodbury, ‘How Designers use Parameters’, in Theories of The Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 163.





43. McCormack, Dorin and Innocent, ‘Generative Design’, pp. 1; Peters, ‘Computational Works’, pp. 11.


45. McCormack, Dorin and Innocent, ‘Generative Design’ ,pp. 1-8.


FIG.19 THE STEPS OF A GENERATIVE DESIGN PROCESS

The four main properties of generative design systems

are: the ability to generate complexity, often in a dynamic

hierarchy; a relationship between the environment

and design that is complex and interconnected; the

capability for self maintenance and repair; and the

ability to give rise to new and original structures,

outcomes, behaviours or relationships. [47]

There are three broad categories of generative systems:

linguistic, biological and parametric. In linguistic

generative design strategies, design is governed

and shaped by a set of compositional rules that are

digitally manifested in shape grammars. This is where

a new, complex design is generated by an initial

object getting replaced by a new string of characters

according to defined modification rules. [48]

Biological generative design approaches use natural

emergence, the way complex natural systems grow,

evolve and self-organize to derive and transform the

forms of complex architectural and performative designs.

[49]. These evolutionary systems that digitally simulate

FIG.20 THE INTERACTIVATOR’S NETWORKED EVOLUTIONARY DESIGN FORMS


48. McCormack, Dorin and Innocent, ‘Generative Design’ ,pp. 6; Dino, ‘Creative Design Exploration’ pp. 209.

49. Dino, ‘Creative Design Exploration’ pp. 209.


the process of reproduction and natural selection,

breed the ‘fittest’ designs and are used to produce a

new generation of designs that inherit the successful

traits of their parents. [50] This architectural approach

is based on the concept of the genetic algorithm

that John Frazer defines as “a class of highly parallel

evolutionary, adaptive search procedures”. This genetic

algorithm, expressed as a set of generative rules,

allows the development and evolution of architectural

concepts to be digitally encoded.[51] Numerous

prototypical forms are produced by following these

generative script of instructions. These unexpected

emergent forms are then evaluated according to how

they perform in a simulated environment. [52]

The 1995 Interactivator by John and Julia Frazer

generated architectural form by following an evolutionary

approach . It experimented with evolution of the

forms produced by the interaction with environmental

sensors and visitors. Genetic algorithms were used

to pass knowledge and traits from the successful

generation to the future generation. [53]

Parametrics

In parametric design, it is the parameters or constraints

for a specific design, not the shape, that are defined.

The assignment of different values to these parameters

allows for the creation of different shapes, objects or

configurations, with the associate geometries defined

by the relationships between these objects. [54] The

effect of modifying the structures parameters on

the form is automatically determined by parametric

design software. [55] A computational method based

on algorithms, parametric tools enable greater

computational control over the designs geometric

form during the design process . As it acts in both

generative and analytical capacities, parametric design

can enable the performance analysis to be integrated

into the design [56] Parametric modelling provides new

design possibilities to play with and “creates endless

opportunities to explore for forms that are not practically

reachable otherwise” [57]. Design is evolving through the

constant exploration for new form-making possibilities.

Taking a parametric approach to design and construction

not only allows for high quality results to be delivered

on time and within budgets, but it also facilitates design

teams to work iteratively by providing a centralized

means to coordinate communication. The Aviva

Stadium in Dublin Ireland by Populus, was the first

building designed from conception to completion using


51. Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age’ :pp. 24-25

52. Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age’ :pp. 23-24.

53. . John Hamilton Frazer and Patrick Janssen, ‘Digital code scripts for gerneative and evolutionary design: De identitate’, < http://www.generativedesign.com/asialink/de6.htm> [accessed 17 August 2014].

54. Kolarevic, ‘Architecture in the Digital Age’ :pp. 17.

55. Allison Arief, ‘New Forms that Function Better’, MIT Technologyreview.com (July 31, 2013), < http://www.technologyreview.com/review/517596/new-forms-that-function-better/> [accessed 16 August 2014].

56. Dino, ‘Creative Design Exploration’ pp. 207.

57. Robert Woodbury, ‘How Designers use Parameters’, in Theories of The Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 165-166.


a parametric modelling software. A single model in

Bentley’s GenerativeComponents (GC) was used by both

architects and engineers to optimize the design of the

façade, structure and form. This parametric software

integrated structural analysis and automated the designs

fabrication. Working on a shared model facilitated

design conversations between disciplines and design

teams, acting as a conduit for information. At the core

of the workflow was a parametric geometry definition

shared by the architects and engineers. This defined

the control systems hierarchy that enabled the addition

of more control during the designs progression, and

separated the definition and control of the envelope

from that of the cladding and structural geometry. [58]

Using generative parametric design tools enabled

Populus to make modifications to the design, and based

on initial arbitrary “place-holder” parameter values in

the parametric model, the affected areas of the design

would respond accordingly. Not only did this allow

for more control over the geometry, but it also had

a knock-on effect when changes to the design were

made. This proved beneficial when they later needed

to amend the stadium’s radius, as the establishment

FIG. 21 INTERIOR OF AVIVA STADIUM

58. Roly Hudson, Paul Shepherd and David Hines, ‘Aviva Stadium: A case study in integrated parametric design’, International Journal of Architectural Computing, Vol. 9, Issue, 2 (June 2011), 188 191, < http://people.bath.ac.uk/ps281/research/publications/ijac_preprint2.pdf>, [accessed 17 August 2013].


FIG.22 THE AVIVA STADIUM, DUBLIN, IRELAND


of this control curve enabled them to locally control

the radius on the grid-lines around the stadium.

The constraints that the panels were to be four sided

planar polygons and that the designs underlying

geometry must be followed were imposed on

the cladding. These constraints, paired with the

control mechanism, enabled the investigation of

several design variations through rapidly produced

parametric models. As the overhead associated

with producing design iterations was reduced by

the use of this software, variations to the design

could be readily made and potential problems

FIG. 23 THE INTEGRATED WORKFLOW TO THE PARAMETRICAVIVA STADIUM

could be identified and resolved quickly. [59]

Throughout the design process, the architects and

engineers had their own focuses. As the architects

developed the buildings overall form and cladding, and

explored the form in response to criteria such as floor

area ratios and the shapes aesthetics, the engineers

addressed the sizing and positioning of the structural

members, as well as the structure of the cladding system

that operated as a rainscreen of interlocking louvres,

and the roof trusses. Through the simultaneous use

of a single parametric model that functioned as both a

design tool and a platform for coordination, it enabled

59. Hudson, Shepherd and Hines, ‘Aviva Stadium’, pp. 192-193.

60. Dino, ‘Creative Design Exploration’ pp. 213-214.

61. Hudson, Shepherd and Hines, ‘Aviva Stadium’, pp. 190.


the design process of the form, structure and façade to

be integrated, consequently allowing design changes to

be quickly responded to. [60] This ability for specialists

to work on different levels of the design in varying

detail, simultaneously, proved beneficial when there

was a downstream requirement to significantly alter the

design that otherwise would have been disastrous. [61]

Parametricism

Some designers, like Patrik Schumacher, use generative

strategies for the sole purpose of generating unusual

forms, rather than to solve problems. He goes beyond

using parametrics as a tool and embrace it as an enabler

of a new architectural aesthetic, which he coined

‘parametricisim’. A response to the heterogeneous nature

of society, this aesthetic promotes avoidance of axes,

symmetry, regularity, repetition, right angles, straight

lines and resemblance to anything from the past. [62]

Optimizing performance

Performative design arose with the emergence

of computation tools that can model a buildings

performance in terms of its structure, energy, lighting

and acoustics. Through parametric modelling,

energy-efficient solutions such as façade design

and optimizing window size, are able to be explored.

Although this sounds promising, this technology is

‘very elementary’, according to the director of the T.C.

Chan Centre for building Simulation and Energy Studies

at the University of Pennsylvania, Ali Malkawi. [63]

Even though Ali theorized that genetic algorithms

that mimic natural evolutionary processes, combined

with computational dynamics, could evaluate and

optimize design alternatives in terms of ventilation

and thermal performance, he stressed that achieving

this is still some distance in the future. Instead of

treating environmental conditioners of heating, air and

daylighting as integrated, current building simulation

models treat them separately. Furthermore they are

subject to unpredictable and external variables and

are dependent on the behaviour of its occupants,

the modelling of which is still rudimentary. [63]

The Shanghai Tower designed by Gensler, demonstrates

the benefits of parametric technology in optimizing

performance. Although its twisting form was an aesthetic

choice, the wind loads on the facade were minimized

by plugging the form into the parametric modelling tool

62. Rybczynsky, ‘ Parametric Design’ .

63. Rybczynsky, ‘ Parametric Design’ .

FIG. 24 OPTIMAL DEGREE OF ROTATION FOR SHANGHAI TOWER FOR REDUCING WIND LOADS


Site

Location: Lujiazui Finance and Trade Zone, Pudong district, Shanghai, China

Area: 30,370 square meters

Tower

Height: 632 metersStories: 121 occupied floors Area: 380,000 square meters above grade

141,000 square meters below gradeProgram: Office, luxury hotel, entertainment, retail,

and cultural venues

Podium

Height: 36.9 metersStories: 5 stories above gradeArea: 46,000 square metersProgram: Luxury retail, bank, restaurant, conference,

meeting, and banquet functions. Below-grade levels will house retail, 1,800 parking spaces, service, and MEP functions.

Owner, Developer, Contractor Shanghai Tower Construction & Development Co., Ltd.

Design Architect Gensler

Local Design Institute Architectural Design & Research Institute of Tongji University

Structural Engineer Thornton Tomasetti

MEP Engineer Cosentini Associates

Landscape Architect SWA

Project facts Team information

24 25

Gensler is a leading architecture, design, planning, and consulting firm with offices in the Americas, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Gensler Design Update is a publication announcing new projects of interest.

Gensler Design Update is produced by Gensler Publications. ©2010 Gensler.

www.gensler.com

Gensler Design Update is printed on FSC-certified, 10 percent postconsumer-waste paper with ultralow-VOC (–3 percent) vegetable oil–based ink. Savings to our natural resources include:

trees million BTUs of net energy gallons of wastewater pounds of solid waste

41

1,760107

FIG. 25 THE TWISTING FORM OF THE SHANGHAI TOWER


FIG. 26 COMPLEX GEOMETRY OF THE ROOF OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION WITH LOCALLY ADAPTED COMPONENTS’

Site

Location: Lujiazui Finance and Trade Zone, Pudong district, Shanghai, China

Area: 30,370 square meters

Tower

Height: 632 metersStories: 121 occupied floors Area: 380,000 square meters above grade

141,000 square meters below gradeProgram: Office, luxury hotel, entertainment, retail,

and cultural venues

Podium

Height: 36.9 metersStories: 5 stories above gradeArea: 46,000 square metersProgram: Luxury retail, bank, restaurant, conference,

meeting, and banquet functions. Below-grade levels will house retail, 1,800 parking spaces, service, and MEP functions.

Owner, Developer, Contractor Shanghai Tower Construction & Development Co., Ltd.

Design Architect Gensler

Local Design Institute Architectural Design & Research Institute of Tongji University

Structural Engineer Thornton Tomasetti

MEP Engineer Cosentini Associates

Landscape Architect SWA

Project facts Team information

24 25

Gensler is a leading architecture, design, planning, and consulting firm with offices in the Americas, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Gensler Design Update is a publication announcing new projects of interest.

Gensler Design Update is produced by Gensler Publications. ©2010 Gensler.

www.gensler.com

Gensler Design Update is printed on FSC-certified, 10 percent postconsumer-waste paper with ultralow-VOC (–3 percent) vegetable oil–based ink. Savings to our natural resources include:

trees million BTUs of net energy gallons of wastewater pounds of solid waste

41

1,760107

Grasshopper to generate multiple design variations to

determine the optimal degree of rotation of the form. [64]

One of the many advantages of generative design is the

ability to relatively easily create and modify complex

geometries like that seen in the Courtyard Enclosure roof

of the of the Smithsonian Institution built in Washington

DC in 2007. [65] The geometry of this undulating roof

was generated with a single computer program created

by Brady Peters, a member of the Foster + Partners

design team and Specialist Modelling Group (SMG).

This computer code was modified constantly throughout

the design process and used in generating the final

geometry. It also generated additional information

required to visualize the space, analyze the designs

acoustic and structural performance and to fabricate

data to produce the physical model. [66] The entire roof

geometry was controlled by three surfaces, column

markers and this computer script that allowed for

the easy control and manipulation of the geometry.

Controlled by the parameters of the generative script

of a set-out geometry of a surface of simple control

lines, this code generated various roof components

64. Arief, ‘New Forms that Function Better’.

65. Brady Peters, ‘Smithsonian Institution’, <http://www.bradypeters.com/smithsonian.html> [accessed 17 August 2014].

66. Peters, ‘Computational Works’, pp. 13

67. Brady Peters, ‘Smithsonian Institution’.


FIG. 27 THE UNDULATING PARAMETRIC ROOF OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION , WASHINGTON D.C. BY BRADY PETERS


that responded to their environment through a

performance evaluation. Peters used scripting “as a

sketching tool to test new ideas”. [67] Although this

explorative approach required a combined knowledge of

architectural design and programming, it proved to be

fast and flexible, capable of generating 415 models in

six months. Using scripting as a design approach was

beneficial as it permitted the generation of numerous

representations simultaneously within a single model,

68. Brady Peters, ‘Smithsonian Institution’,.

FIG. 28 ROOF OF SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION

and for the independent development of strategies for

the individual components and the roof configuration.

Their use of a computer-generated model proved to be

advantageous as it allowed them to have precise control

over the roof systems, relationships, and values, which

allowed for the generation of numerous variations. [67]


A.4. Conclusion

The emergence of computerization marked an epoch in

architectural design. From it evolved computation with

algorithmically based parametric tools like Rhino and

Revit, which offere greater complexity and flexibility,

producing more unique designs. Abstract, curvilinear and

gravity defying complex geometries that were previously

unimaginable became conceivable and achievable. Early

computationally achieved designs like Frank Gehry’s

Guggenheim Museum, focused on embraced these newly

achievable forms, implemented computational tools to

make their designs a reality. Furthermore, supplemented

by Building Information Modelling, computation has

also opened up a realm of collaborative and multi-

disciplined design, which was seen in use of a single

digital model in the development of the Aviva Stadium.

Although architects are still designing, we are

moving into such a digitized age that they are now

also programming. The hybrid software developer/

architect who can develop algorithmic software

specific to a design that becomes integrated into

the design process, is becoming more prevalent.

Through the integration of such software architects

ventured into an exploration of form-finding through

designs generated by algorithms. Architects have begun

optimizing building structure, material use, energy

efficiency and cost by utilizing software that analyses

and simulates the building based on performance

and evidence. We are seeing a move towards more

sustainable, efficient and user-friendly buildings.

Through the scripting of design specific programs,

complex geometries can be created and manipulated,

that following defined constraints, generate a vast

array of design options. A vast array of novel and

unexpected designs can be quickly generated and their

performance evaluated. Repetitive processes have

been relegated to the computer to produce variations

or randomly generate patterns based on parametric,

linguistic or biological processes. Despite this, generative

design approaches haven’t been widely adopted as

it is relatively new and its performative possibilities

are still in their early stages of development.

Throughout this project, I intend to undertake a

generative design approach to form-finding, embracing

computation to explore the possibilities of parametric

design. Using Grasshopper to experiment with varying

the inputs, parameters, and components to generate

a variety of forms and test the designs capabilities, I

aspire to develop designs that are not only successful

in their functionality and aesthetics, but are inherently

novel, unique, and perhaps most importantly, something

I wouldn’t have dreamed of developing solely by hand.

My hope is that this design approach will extend

my capabilities through computation, and will also

widen my imagination and open up a world of new

forms that offer a multitude of design possibilities.


A.5. Learning Outcomes

Entering this subject four weeks ago, I had very little

experience with Rhino, none with Grasshopper and rather

embarrassingly, barely any with computerization let

alone computation. I hadn’t even heard of those terms

prior to this subject. Basically I’m a novice. While I’m not

at all saying that this is no longer the case, I now have

some experience with Grasshopper and have started to

delve into the realm of parametrics. If I had been able

to use even the little bit of the knowledge I have been

able to gain thus far, I may have been able to further

explore the design possibilities of my project for Design

Studio Earth. By changing the parameters applied to the

angled wall, I could have explored a variety of forms and

patterns and generated a more complex geometry, to

either complement or contrast with the designs situation

within the surrounding landscape. I possibly would have

even been able to integrate the pattern of the rock statue

into a geometric pattern along the long, bending wall.

FIG. 29 RHINO MODEL FOR DESIGN STUDIO EARTH FINAL PROJECT WHICH WAS MY FIRST TIME USING RHINO

FIG. 30 MONTAGE OF SITE PHOTO AND RHINO MODEL FOR DESIGN STUDIO EARTH FINAL PROJECT


These spheres (Fig. 32) are some of the variations

I produced for the algorithmic sketch task we were

assigned to do in week 3 in which we recreated the

façade of RMIT Building 80 and altered the colour and

size of the triangles by manipulating the algorithm

in Grasshopper. Cull index and list item were used to

generate different lists of triangles that can have varying

colours applied to them. By splitting cull indexes in two,

using cull patterns, culling every Nth item, or setting

a domain, I was able to produce different patterns.

I then decided to explore the geometries I could apply

this to beyond varying surfaces I could produce by

manipulating the control points of the original curve, and

plugging this algorithm into a sphere that I generated in

Rhino by substituting it for the curve input component.

I chose to include this example from my Algorithmic

sketchbook, as it is the most complex form and the

most complex algorithm I have worked with to date.

Its quite a leap forward from my first attempt at

creating and generating an algorithm which I did in

the week 1 task (Fig. 31). Even though this example

I produced is not remarkably different from what we

did in the tutorial, it is the furthest I have been able

to explore beyond the tutorial and video materials.

This algorithmic sketch task, like the others I have done,

has supplemented the theory on generative design

that was covered in the lectures and reading material.

The hands on experience of actually being able to get

involved in the form-finding generative design strategy,

manipulating the parameters and components of the

algorithm to produce variations in the design, has helped

me better understand the possibilities it holds in both

being able to generate such complex patterns, and also

the speed and ease with which variations can be made.

Furthermore, the complexity of even the relatively

simple the algorithms for some of these tasks has

helped me gain an appreciation for not only why good

code is so valuable, and why architects favour the copy

and paste approach when dealing with algorithmic

code, but also how difficult it is to generate code.

FIG. 31 WEEK 1 ALGORITHMIC SKETCH OF GENERAL TOWER VOLUME

FIG 32. WEEK 3 ALGORITHMIC SKETCH TO GENERATE VARIATIONS OF THE RMIT BUILDING 80 FACADE PATTERN

A.6. Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches


Architecture Week, ‘Modelling the Swiss Re Tower’, (Published 04 May 2005) < http://www.

architectureweek.com/2005/0504/tools_1-2.html> [accessed 11 August 2014].

Arief, A., ‘New Forms that Function Better’, MIT Technologyreview.com (July 31, 2013), < http://www.

technologyreview.com/review/517596/new-forms-that-function-better/> [accessed 16 August 2014].

Cuny, J., L. Snyder, and J. M. Wing, “Demystifying Computational Thinking for Non-Computer Scientists,” work in progress, 2010.

Decker, M. and P.Yeadon, ‘Light Sanctuary: An empowered landscape for the UAE’, Land Art Generator Initiative

2010 Competition <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/8s3b9u/> [accessed 2 August 2014].

Diehl, G. X. Liu, A. Braleret and L. Santamaria, ‘Photoreactor Farm Tower’, Land Art Generator Initiative 2010

Competition, <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/co2po4/> [accessed 1 August 2014].

Dino, I. G., ‘Creative Design Exploration by Parametric Generative systems in Architecture’, METU Journal of Faculty of Architecture 29, 1,

(2012), pp. 207-224, < http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2012/cilt29/sayi_1/207-224.pdf> [ accessed 17 August 2014].

Ferry, R., and E. Monoian ‘Design Guidelines: Land Art Generator Initiative’, Land Art Generator Initiative, Copenhagen

<http://landartgenerator.org/images/LAGI2010DESIGNGUIDELINES.pdf> [accessed 1 August 2014].

‘Fish Sculpture at Vila Olimpca’, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, < http://pastexhibitions.

guggenheim.org/gehry/fish_sculpt_11.html>, [accessed 16 August 2014].

Frazer, J.H., and P. Janssen, ‘Digital code scripts for generative and evolutionary design: De identitate’,

< http://www.generativedesign.com/asialink/de6.htm> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fry, T., Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg, 2009), pp. 1-16.

‘Guggenheim Museum Bilbao’, The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation , <http://pastexhibitions.

guggenheim.org/gehry/bilbao_15.html> [accessed 16 August 2014].

Hudson, R., P. Shepherd and D. Hines, ‘Aviva Stadium: A case study in integrated parametric design’, International Journal of Architectural

Computing, Vol. 9, Issue, 2 (June 2011), 188 – 203, < http://people.bath.ac.uk/ps281/research/publications/ijac_preprint2.pdf

12>, [accessed 17 August 2013].

Kalay, Y.E., Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5–25.

Kolarevic, B., Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 3–62.

Lynn, G. eds., ‘Folding in Architecture, Architectural Design’ (Wiley-Academy: West Sussex, UK, 1993), in Oxman Rivka

and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 2.

McCormack, J., A. Dorin and T. Innocent, ‘Generative Design: a paradigm for design research’, in Redmond, J.

et al. (eds) Proceeding of Futureground, (Melbourne: Design Research Society, 2004), pp. 1-8. <http://www.

csse.monash.edu/~jonmc/research/Papers/genDesignFG04.pdf> [accessed 17 August 2014].

McManus, D.,‘Aviva Stadium Dublin, Aireland: Architecture Information + Images, e-architect, March 6,

2014, <http://www.e-architect.co.uk/dublin/aviva-stadium> [accessed 17 August 2014]

Munro, D., ‘Swiss Re’s Building, London’, NR 3, NYHETER OM STÅLBYGGNAD, (2004), pp.36-43.< http://www.epab.bme.

hu/oktatas/2009-2010-2/v-CA-B-Ms/FreeForm/Examples/SwissRe.pdf> [accessed 11 August 2014].

Oxman, R. and R. Oxman, eds. Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 1–10

Peters, B. ‘Computational Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83,2, pp. 08-15.

Peters, B., ‘Smithsonian Institution’, <http://www.bradypeters.com/smithsonian.html

> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Rybczynsky, W., ‘Parametric Design: Whats Gotten Lost Amid the Algorithms’, Architectmagazine.com (July 11 2013) <http://

www.architectmagazine.com/design/parametric-design-lost-amid-the-algorithms.aspx> [accessed 12 August 2014].

Terzidis,K., Algorithms for Visual Design Using the Processing Language (Indianapolis, IN: Wiley, 2009).

Woodbury, R., ‘How Designers use Parameters’, in Theories of The Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 153-170.

Part A Reference List


Cover: McCollam, P ‘Hilly’, image, Structural Surface, <http://paulmccollam.com/wp-content/uploads/hilly.jpg> [accessed 4 August 2014].

Fig. 1 Waring, S., ‘Rhino Model of Deign of Final Project for Design Studio Earth’, Rhino Model screen captures, 2014.

Fig. 2 - 4 Diehl, G., X. Liu, A. Braleret and L. Santamaria, ‘Photoreactor Farm Tower’, Land Art Generator Initiative

2010 Competition, <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/co2po4/> [accessed 1 August 2014].

Fig. 5 - 7 Decker, M. and P. Yeadon, ‘Light Sanctuary: An empowered landscape for the UAE’, Land Art Generator

Initiative 2010 Competition <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/8s3b9u/> [accessed 2 August 2014].

Fig. 8 Gomez, F. ‘Sketches of Frank Gehry: Gehry’s Sketch of The Guggenheim Bilbai, Spain’, courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics, < http://

www.2flashgames.com/mp/2006_Sketches_of_Frank_Gehry/2006_sketches_of_frank_gehry_014.jpg> [accessed 11 August 2014].

Fig. 9 Flickr User Cincinnato: EEPaul, ‘Architecture Photography: AD Classics: the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao/Frank Gehry(422475)”,

Archdaily < http://www.archdaily.com/422470/ad-classics-the-guggenheim-museum-bilbao-frank-gehry/521fa08fe8e44eb94a000037_

ad-classics-the-guggenheim-museum-bilbao-frank-gehry_flickr_user_cincinnato-jpg/ > [accessed 11 august 2014]

Fig. 10 Katy and Scott, ‘The Guggenheim Museum designed by Frank Gehry’, uploaded July 10th 2008 < http://

www.karieandscott.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/img_0489.jpg> [accessed 11 August 2014]

Fig. 11 ‘The translation process in Gehry’s office: [a] digitized points; (b) digital surface reconstruction; and (c) digitally fabricated

model’, in Kolarevic, B., Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (New York; London: Spon Press, 2003), pp. 31.

Fig. 12 Foster and Partners, ‘By varying key parameters, the design team was able to quickly test numerousforms’,Architectureweek,

www.architectureweek.com/cgi-bin/awimage?dir=2005/0504&article=tools_1-2.html&image=12686_image_4.jpg >, [accessed 11 August 2014].

Fig. 13: Foster and Partners, ‘ Parametric nodes of the tower’s computer model’ http://www.architectureweek.com/cgi-

bin/awimage?dir=2005/0504&article=tools_1-1.html&image=12686_image_2.jpg> [accessed 11 August 2014].

Fig. 14 Young, N., ‘Architecture Photography: The Gherkin Receives CTBUH’s Inaugural 10 year Award (406795)”, Archdaily, < http://www.

architectureweek.com/cgi-bin/awimage?dir=2005/0504&article=tools_1-2.html&image=12686_image_7.jpg> [accessed 11 August 2014].

Fig. 15 ‘The geodesic façade of the Swiss Re’ in Munro, D. (2004) Swiss Re’s Building, London, NR 3, NYHETER OM STÅLBYGGNAD, pp.36-

43.< http://www.epab.bme.hu/oktatas/2009-2010-2/v-CA-B-Ms/FreeForm/Examples/SwissRe.pdf>, p. 40 [accessed 11 August 2014].

FIG. 16 Foster and Partners, ‘The Swiss Re tower compared to a conventional rectilinear building in reducing wind loads and turblence’ < http://

www.architectureweek.com/cgi-bin/awimage?dir=2005/0504&article=tools_1-2.html&image=12686_image_7.jpg> [accessed 11 August 2014]

Fig. 17. ‘The produced node is prefabricated in the factory’, in Munro, D. (2004) Swiss Re’s Building, London, NR 3, NYHETER OM STÅLBYGGNAD,

pp.36-43.< http://www.epab.bme.hu/oktatas/2009-2010-2/v-CA-B-Ms/FreeForm/Examples/SwissRe.pdf>, p. 40 [accessed 11 August 2014].

Fig. 18 Shayan, ‘The Frank Gehry Fish and the Barcelona Grand Casino’, photograph, retrieved

from http://www.everystockphoto.com/photo.php?imageId=2768227.

Fig. 19 Adapted from: McCormack, J., A. Dorin and T. Innocent, ‘Generative Design: a paradigm for design research’,

in Redmond, J. et al. (eds) Proceeding of Futureground, (Melbourne: Design Research Society, 2004), pp. 1-8. <http://

www.csse.monash.edu/~jonmc/research/Papers/genDesignFG04.pdf> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 20 Frazer, J., J. Frazer, M. Rastogi, P. Graham, P. Janssen, ‘Interactivator: Networked Evolutionary Design System’, Computational

model, (London: Architectural Association, 1995), retrieved from John Hamilton Frazer and Patrick Janssen, ‘Digital code scripts

for generative and evolutionary design: De identitate’, < http://www.generativedesign.com/asialink/de6.htm> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 21 Hines, D. ‘Aviva Stadium interior’, photograph, Grasshopper, posted 3 September 2013, < http://

www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/aviva-stadium-5?context=user>, [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 22 Hines, D‘Aviva Stadium’, photograph, Grasshopper, posted 3 September 2013, <http://www.

grasshopper3d.com/photo/aviva-stadium-8/next?context=user>, [accessed 17 August 2014].

Part A Image Reference List


Fig. 23 Hines, D. ‘Aviva Stadium workflow’, diagram of workflow, Grasshopper, posted 3 September 2013, <

www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/aviva-stadium-8/next?context=user>, [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 24 Gensler, ‘optimal rotation of tower to reduce wind loads’, model, retrieved from ‘Gensler Design Update: Shanghai Tower’,

pp. 6, <http://www.gensler.com/uploads/documents/Shanghai_Tower_12_22_2010.pdf> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 25 Gensler, ‘The Shanghai Tower’, model, retrieved from ‘Gensler Design Update: Shanghai Tower’, pp.

24, <http://www.gensler.com/uploads/documents/Shanghai_Tower_12_22_2010.pdf> [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 26 Peters, B., ‘Complex geometry of roof with locally adapted components’ , photograph and model,

retrieved from http://www.bradypeters.com/smithsonian.html, [accessed 17 August 2014]

Fig. 27 Foster and Partners, ‘Smithsonian Institution Roof and interior’, photograph, retrieved from <http://

www.fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1276/img0.jpg >[accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 28 Foster and Partners, ‘Smithsonian Institution Roof’, photograph, retrieved from http://www.

fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1276/img1.jpg, [accessed 17 August 2014].

Fig. 29 Waring, S., ‘Rhino Model of Deign of Final Project for Design Studio Earth’, Rhino Model screen captures, 2014.

Fig. 30 Waring, S., ‘Photomontage of Design of Final Project for Design Studio Earth’, Rhino Model montaged with photo, 2014.

Fig. 31 Waring, S., ‘Week 1 Algorithmic Sketch Task’, Design Studio Air Sketchbook, 2014, pp. 5.

Fig. 32 Waring, S., ‘Week 3 Algorithmic Sketch Task’, Design Studio Air Sketchbook, 2014, pp. 16.

CRITERIA DESIGN 39

40 CRITERIA DESIGN

PART B: CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 41

42 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.1. Research Field: Geometry

For my research field I chose the rather broad system

of ‘Sectioning’, that involves sysems of contours,

slices and grids. I was drawn by the systematic,

logical and creative manner in which variations

in the sectional planes can not only generate a

coherent surface but also define a space.

Computer modeling has expanded orthographic

representational tools of plans and sections beyond

two dimensional drawings and projections to a

method of cutting cross-sections through established

three dimensional forms, known as sectioning. The

technique of sectioning has proven to be effective

construction process as designs increasingly incorporate

complex geometries, being commonly used to make

the curving surfaces of airplanes and ships.1

Often occurring on a one-to-one scale and liaising

between digital production and manufacturing,

sectioning fabrication techniques . are often used as

a production strategy for 2D fabrication of models and

later of actual buildings. Instead of constructing the

forms surface, the digitally driven sectional methodology

involves using sectioning or contouring commands

of modeling software on the digital model to extract

a series of 2D planar components from the buildings

geometrically complex form. The sequence of edge

profiles produced that follow the surface geometry

are used as a set of parallel planes that cut a whole

surface into pieces or ‘ribs’ at set intervals established

by the thickness of the given material . Plotted at full

scale, these sections are used as templates from which

to cut the material, streamlining the construction

and assemblage process, with the ‘ribs’ capable of

generating both the surface and structure of a design.2

These sections which can generate both the surface

and structure of a design, are fabricated using

computerized cutting tools such as laser cutters and

1 Lisa Iwamoto, Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, N.D., p. 4-17 <http://atc.berkeley.edu/201/readings/Iwamoto_Digital_Fabrications.pdf>

2 Iwamoto, Digital Fabrications,p. 10-17.

FIG 33. GRID OF WEBB BRIDGE

numerically controlled computers, a cutting technology

called CNC routers, which work off digital files of the

profiles.3 The introduction of these tools meant that

manual labour was no longer required to construct

the pieces, and enabled the production of precision

models. Furthermore, the coupling of these tools with

digital design software generated a shift from their

use to make models, to non-standard form making and

the realization of the potential for the representational

method of sectioning to be used as a building technique.4

Sectioning construction techniques are diverse

3 Carlos L. Marcos, ‘New Materiality: Digital Fabrication’ in: IMproVe 2011 – International Conference on Innovative Methods in Product. P. 1044.


CRITERIA DESIGN 43

with varying interpretations of its eloquently simple

tectonic of grids, stacks and layers. Almost limitless

design possibilities are ensured by the intermediary

calibration between the digital and physical sectioning.

Sectioning allows architects to describe a surface

through the implied visual continuity of edge profiles

that merges and advances the relationship between

material tectonic and form. This is evident with

stacking, as the frequency of the sections proportionally

increases with the surface geometry, consequently

increasing the materials visual intensity.5


FIG 34. SECTIONAL GRID OF WEBB BRIDGE

The Webb Bridge by Denton Corker Marshall and

Robert Owen employed sectioning to create a grid

of curved ribs that encircle the deck of the bridge,

forming a volume from their sectional sinous

form. These ribs that vary in size are constructed

from prefabricated steel sections and connected

by steel straps.The bridge is not only a light,

volominous object with dilineated structure, its

dynamic and transitional space created by its

sectional approach makes it a place of action.6

6 Denton Corker Marshall, ‘Webb Bridge’, in The Australian Insitutte of Architectus (2013)< http://dynamic.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20053006> [accessed 27 August 2014]..

44 CRITERIA DESIGN

The advantages of sectional techniques are evident

in hollow construction , in which a form is divided into

sections of structural ‘ribs’ that are then clad with a

surface material, as it produces a lightweight structure

with accurate profiles onto which a surface material

can be applied. The implementation of sectioning for

the geometry and construction in making curved forms

are apparent in Le Corbusier’s chapel at Ronchamp.

Its roof used the hollow construction technique, with a

series of structural concrete ribs laterally connected by

crossbeams and clad in thin shells of concrete.7 When

in adequate proximity, a collection of ribs can even

form the complex surface as well as the structure.8

Greg Lynn experimented with the aesthetics possible


8 Carlos L. Marcos, ‘New Materiality’. P. 1044..

when using digitally generated sectional construction

as a design methodology, and observed a change

in the aesthetics when moving from Cartesian

defined volumes to surfaces defined by vector

coordinates that had an organized fluidity to them.9

The curvilinear and parametrically nuanced design

of One Main Street by dECOI Architects employs a

sectional approach combining ready made components

with customized fabrication by using Computer-Aided-

Design (CAD) and Computer-Aided Manufacturing

(CAM) processes, building the project entirely from 3D

instructional files instead of plans and sections.10

9 Iwamoto, Digital Fabrications, p. 10-16.

10 dECOi architects, ‘OneMain Street;, (2011), <http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain/> [accessed 28 August 2014].

FIG 35. INTERIOR SPACE OF ROOF OF CORBUSIERS RONCHAMP SHWOING CONCRETE RIBS

FIG 36. EXTERIOR OF THE ROOF OF CORSBUIERS RONCHAMP

CRITERIA DESIGN 45

The overall form of the design, which reads as a

coherent unbroken whole, composed of plywood strip

sections was fabricated as a collection of sectional

elements cut from plywood sheets milled using a

CNC router, according to digital path instructions.

The ability to maintain a continuity of the surface the

design was able to maximize temporal, material and

economic efficiency in its assemblage. The customized

prefabricated parts created an apparent unity in form

and surface and allowed for quickly on-site installation.

Furthermore, the dECOI Architects were able to employ an

FIG 38. PLYWOOD PLANES THAT FORM THE CURVING ROOF SURFACE

FIG 39. INSTALLATION OF PLYWOOD SECTIONS TO FORM SURFACES FIG 37. INSTALLATION OF PLYWOOD SECTIONS THAT FORM ROOF SURFACE

FIG 40. DIGITAL MODEL OF DESIGN FROM WHICH THE PLYWOOD SECTIONS WERE CUT FROM ACCORDINGLY

46 CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 47

environmental objective in their sectioning methodology

with the efficient translation of the sustainable, carbon

absorbing raw plywood into its functional elements

using low energy digital cutting technology.

To maximize efficiency, dECOI scripted algorithms

for generating the milling protocols that create

the complex, curved edges of the plywood sheets.

These protocols analyzed the surface geometry and

automatically divided it sections that were then cut using

a millwork fabricator with a CNC router accordingly.

In other words, the designs of the plywood sections

were digitally issued as cutting instructions for the

CNC router. Using these algorithms allowed for a

seamless transfer from design to fabrication as well

as a high accuracy and minimal error and wastage.

dECOI’s design demonstrates the seamless

fabrication process and consideration of economic,

environmental, and material opportunities

possible when utilizing a sectioning system.11

11 dECOi architects, ‘OneMain Street’.

FIG 41. ONE MAIN STREET INTERIOR WITH SECTIONS CREATING A COHERENT SURFACE

48 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.2. Case Study 1.0: BanQ

BanQ by architects Office dA, is a restaurant at the

base of the old Penny Savings Bank in Boston. While

its function is divided into two segments, a bar and a

dining area, the space is designed around a division

on the z-axis between the floor and the ceiling.

The architect’s design responded to the requirement

of the ground to remain flexible to accommodate the

changing restaurant activities by containing the fixed

infrastructural elements of the building such as the

structure, drainage, mechanical equipment and lighting

within the ceiling. To conceal the infrastructure, the

architects developed a canopied ceiling out of striated

wood-slated system using a sectioning construction

strategy. The geometry and radius of the wooden slat

was generated to correspond to the infrastructure

above, concealing it with a seamless surface of

panels. From the longitudinal axis, the illusion of a

seamless surface is emphasized and the services

are concealed, while the infrastructure above is seen

in glimpses between the slats from lateral views.1

The sectional wooden slats of the undulating ceiling

create an overall striping affect that plays throughout

the restaurant space with the ribs appearing to sway

1 “BanQ / Office dA” 03 Dec 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 06 Sep 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581>

Introducing BanQ by Office dA

FIG 42. PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BANQ BY OFFICE DA

FIG 43. PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BANQ BY OFFICE DA (TOP)FIG 44. COLUMN OF BANQ(RIGHT)

CRITERIA DESIGN 49

FIG 42. PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BANQ BY OFFICE DA

FIG 43. PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BANQ BY OFFICE DA (TOP)FIG 44. COLUMN OF BANQ(RIGHT)

50 CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG 45. EXPLODED PERSPECTIVE OF BANQ BY OFFICE DA

as a single unit.2 The ceiling is suspended from

above, with each rib running the width of the

space. The ribs are single, customized continual

pieces of plywood that fit together like a puzzle,

with each piece having a specific location, creating

a coherent and apparently continuous surface. The

spacing between the ribs varies to maintain the

overall surfaces visual density, while the variation

in the shape of the ribs are for aesthetics and to

define space. The changes are minute along the

ceiling to create a gentle flowing aesthetic, while

drastic changes in shape occur where the ribs

curve down and touch the ground to form the wall

columns.3 The ceiling essentially acts as the stage

from which the design occurs with the ‘intersection

of the extraordinary with the totally conventional’. 4

I used this design as my case study from

which to explore the reach of its algorithmic

definition as I thought it provided the opportunity

to generate vastly different outcomes by

manipulating its parameters and the definition

itself, testing its limits. Furthermore, I was

drawn to its strategy of the overall form

following function, but not being confined by

it, as while the form hides the infrastructure

2 David Sokol, ‘Banq’, Australian Design Review’, (2009), <http://www.australiandesignreview.com/interiors/661-banq> [accessed 29 August 2014].

3 BanQ / Office dA” . ArchDaily.

4 David Sokol, ‘Banq’.

CRITERIA DESIGN 51

FIG. 46 PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BAN! BY OFFICE DA1 1 photographed by John Horner, “BanQ / Office dA” 03 Dec 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 06 Sep 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581>

FIG 47. PHOTOS OF SECTIONAL APPROACH TO BAN! BY OFFICE DA1 1 photographed by John Horner, “BanQ / Office dA” 03 Dec 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed 06 Sep 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581>

52 CRITERIA DESIGN

NUMBER OF SEGMENTS VECTOR

5

10

15

20

30

45

60

0 0 3

0 2 3

2 0 3

2 2 3

4 2 3

2 4 3

4 4 4

X Y Z

Matrix of Definition 1

FIG 48. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 1 FOR CASE STUDY 1 SHOWING ALTERATIONS TO THE NUMBER OF SEGMENTS AND VECTORS

CRITERIA DESIGN 53

MODIFYING SHAPE OF INPUT SURFACE MODIFYING INPUT SURFACE SHAPE BY MANIPULATING CONTROL POINTS

FIG 49. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 1 FOR CASE STUDY 1, ALTERATIONS TO THE INPUT SURFACE

54 CRITERIA DESIGN

MODIFYING INPUT SURFACE AND CURVE

FIG 50. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 1 FOR CASE STUDY 1 ALTERING INPUT SURFACE AND CURVE TO PRODUCE INTERWEAVING AND INTERLOCKING RESULTS

CRITERIA DESIGN 55

Matrix of definition 2

(2,3)

(2,4)

(2.5)

(2,6)

(2,7)

(2,8)

(2,9)

CHANGING VECTORS THAT DIVIDE THE SURFACE (U, V)

(6,2)

(8,2)

(5,6)

(10,6)

(5,8)

(10,8)

(5,10)

ALTERING THE INPUT IMAGE FROM WHICH THE PATTERN

Increasing V Changing U & V

FIG 51. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 2 FOR CASE STUDY 1 ALTERING THE INPUT VECTORS AND IMAGE

56 CRITERIA DESIGN

CHANGING INPUT IMAGE

FIG 42. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 2 FOR CASE STUDY 1 ALTERING INPUT IMAGE AND THE COLOURS IT PICKS UP

CRITERIA DESIGN 57

CHANGING INPUT SURFACE

FIG 53. MATRIX OF DEFINITION 2 FOR CASE STUDY 1 ALTERING THE INPUT SURFACE WHICH

58 CRITERIA DESIGN

I explored components that make up the two

grasshopper definitions provided for the case study,

testing the extent of their reach of the basic parameters

that define the number of segments and vector

coordinates that define the size and orientation of the

segments. I was then able to generate a more diverse

variety of outcomes when I manipulated the geometry of

the input surface and the image that defined the pattern

of undulation. Not having any particular goal in mind at

the time I pushed the definitions capabilities as far as I

could, generating some rather complex outcomes some

of which were successful and others which weren’t.

DESIGN CRITERIA

Out of the iterations I generated, I selected these

4 outcomes as the most successful. This is based

on a three-point design criteria I produced:

The Most Successful Iterations

1

3

The ability of the design to define a

usable space that permits (and possibly

also encourages) movement.

Maximal surface area exposed to sun so as to

enable maximal penetration of solar radiation if the

surface was made of or covered in solar panels.

It must be aesthetically pleasing, not

too busy and not too plain. It must

celebrate the curves of parametrics.

2

FIG 56. DESIGN GENERATED FROM DEFINITION 1

FIG 54. DESIGN GENERATED FROM DEFINITION 1

FIG 55. DESIGN GENERATED FROM ALTERING INPUT IMAGE IN DEFINITION 2

FIG 57. DESIGN GENERATED FROM ALTERING NPUT IMAGE IN DEFINITION 2

CRITERIA DESIGN 59

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

Outcomes that were particularly unsuccessful

were those that produced overly complex and often

intersecting and overlapping sections. These designs

actively restricted movement through the space. Some

of the patterns of undulations produced were too

intense, with the variations changing too drastically

making them appear too busy and overpowering.

While others were too ordinary and uninspiring.

The two definitions produced different outcomes. The

first definition generated strips with a consistent defined

width, with their shape following that of the input

surface. The second definition produced sections that

extended from a flat plane, changing its width to produce

undulations according to the input pattern. The strips of

the first definition also moved horizontally according to

the relative location and shape of a reference line, while

the strips generated from the second definition occur at

regular set intervals regardless of the input geometry.

The 4 iterations I selected as the most successful are

those that not only have maximal surface area, thus

allowing them to generate the most solar energy if

composed of or covered with a solar energy generating

material, given the correct orientation, but also

produce an aesthetically pleasing way of defining

usable spaces through which people can move.

SPECULATIVE DESIGN POTENTIAL

Variations in the shape of the sections collectively

create the flowing and dynamic form of the undulating

surface. The outcomes produced from the first definition

could be applied in numerous ways. They could be

applied to flow along the ground plane, creating a sort

of maze of paths for people to walk through, or they

could create a ‘floating’ floor or ceiling plane, elevated

by the dips in the curvature of the sectional strips.

The products of the second definition though appear to

find the most logical application hanging upside down

as a ceiling with the sections running along the ceiling

to define the space below. The space would be confined

where the curves increase in size and opened where the

curves transition from thick to thin. Their application

as wall planes, running along the ground is much

more limited than the first definition, likely only being

used as ornament, partitions between lines, to divide

a space into uniform aisles, or as seats or tables. The

range of ways the geometry from the second definition

can be applied along the ground is extended by the

application of another material such as glass between

the sections to make the curving surface traversable.

60 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.3. Case Study 2.0: Swiss Re HQ

Introducing the Swiss Re Head Quarters

The Swiss Re HQ on 30 St Mary Axe by architect Ken Shuttleworth was architecturally, socially,

technically and spatially radical. Nicknamed ‘The Gherkin’, its 41 story’s are mixed use including

accommodation, offices and retail. The distinctive gherkin form responds to the site constraints

and is generated by the radial plan of the ground floor with a circular perimeter, which incrementally

increases, widening the building, and then start to decrease in size again towards the apex.

The first tall ecological building in London, it featured an energy efficient enclosure with a

continuous triangulated skin that permits light, views and a column-free floor plan. The buildings

profile not only maximized the public area on the ground level, but it also deflected less wind to

the ground than traditional rectilinear towers of similar sizes would. This created external pressure

differentials in the open ground floor spaces that in conjunction with opening panels, drives the

buildings natural ventilation system. This system was intended to enable the building to be more

sustainable, predicted to consume only half the energy that an air-conditioned tower would use.1

Although it does not fit within the traditional category of land art, I chose to use the Swiss Re as

my second case study as its unique form stands out against the typically rectilinear cityscape,

transcending its role from a mere building, to a large scaled piece of art. It diverts from the traditional

building geometries, favoring more unusual forms, with its curved form and a façade and skeleton

integrating a diagrid tessellation pattern composed of triangular and diamond shaped segments.2

I think that the Swiss Re has succeeded at its design intent of creating an iconic

building with a skeleton-like diagonally braced internal structure incorporated

within the light, continuous, triangulated glass skin with an energy conscious

agenda, and with the illusion of being unstable and gravity defying.

1 Isabelle Lomholt, ‘Swiss Re Building’, in e-architect, (July 30 2014) <http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/swiss-re-building> [accessed 27 August 2014].

2 Ben Pell, ‘Stacked/Tiled’ in The Articulate Surface: Ornament and Technology in Contemporary Architecture (2010), accessed < http://books.google.com.au/books?id=4nfkr_0_xIsC&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=Swiss+re+tessellation&source=bl&ots=nINYNPrEXG&sig=4jE2HG3QVfguZZoxyJGOFYfTPAI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VC4kVMiHCJegoQThyoGICw&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Swiss%20re%20tessellation&f=false>, p. 159.

FIG 58. SWISS RE DIAGRID GLASS SKIN AND STRUCTURE

FIG 59. GROUND LEVEL OF SWISS RE WITH OPENINGS IN THE DIAGRID GLASS SKIN, EXPOSING THE STRUCTURAL SKELETON TO ALLOW LIGHT AND AIR INTO THE BUILDING

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1004/img1.jpg

CRITERIA DESIGN 61

FIG 58. SWISS RE DIAGRID GLASS SKIN AND STRUCTURE

FIG 59. GROUND LEVEL OF SWISS RE WITH OPENINGS IN THE DIAGRID GLASS SKIN, EXPOSING THE STRUCTURAL SKELETON TO ALLOW LIGHT AND AIR INTO THE BUILDING

FIG. 60 THE SWISS RE, WIDENING AT THE MIDDLE THEN TAPERING TOWARDS THE TOP

FIG 62. STARTING FROM SCRATCH AND CREATING CONE SHAPE AND CORRESPONDING FLOOR PLATES

62 CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG 61. ATTEMPT AT REVERSE ENGINEERING FLOOR PLATE OUTLINE THAT RESULTED IN A DEAD END

Reverse Engineering the Swiss Re Design

FIG 63. APPLYING A DIAGRID STRUCTURE COMPONENT TO THE CONE SHAPE

Baked 10 (U=20, V=10)Pipespipes with floorsPipes with surfaceBaked 10 (U=20, V=10)Pipespipes with floorsPipes with surface

FIG 64. ALTERING THE PARAMETERS OF THE DIAGRID STRUCTURE COMPONENT

CRITERIA DESIGN 63

64 CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG 65. RE-STARTING, AND ATTEMPTING TO CREATE A DIAGRID FROM SCRATCH,. SUBDIVIDED THE CONE SURFACE, SORTED IT AND CREATED A SPIRAL PATTERN. HIT A ROAD BLOCK WHEN TRYING TO CREATE A SPIRAL GOING IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION TO CREATE THE DIAGRID.

CRITERIA DESIGN 65

First final outcome

The pipes were divided up into small segments rather than as

smooth continual pipes that travelled up the structure.

I resolved this issue by removing the offset componment I

had used inbetween the pipe component and that used to

create the diagrid pattern across the structure as. I then

merged the resulting small pipe structures where they connect,

resulting in a smooth, continuous piped structure.

The Skeletal structure of the Swiss Re is not the external layer, but

is surrounded by a glass panel ‘skin’, with strips that vary in colour.

Offset the skin so that it was external to the frame.

Culled every second panel to create stripes.

Problem 1:

Problem 2:

Solution:

Solution:

Although relatively

rudimentary, this definition I

created is somewhat able to

emulate the diagrid pattern,

the iconic feature of the

Swiss Re. I came back to

this definition in week 8 and

revised it with a bit more

experience with grasshopper

under my belt, addressing

the problems and major

elements that were lacking

from this final product.

FIG 66. RENDERS OF MY FIRST FINAL OUTCOME, WITH THE SEGMENTED PIPED SKELETON ON THE EXTERIOR

66 CRITERIA DESIGN

Later Alterations to Final Outcome

FIG. 67 PROCESS OF FURTHER DEVELOPING THE DEFINITION USED FOR MY FIRST FINAL OUTCOME. APPLIED MATERIALITY. CREATED ALTERNATING STRIPS OF COLOURED PANELS WITH CULL

COMPONENT. APPLIED A SKIN WITH DIAGRID TESSELATION OVER THE DIAGONAL STRUCTURE

FIG. 68. PERSPECTIVES OF ALTERATIONS TO MY FINAL REENGINEERED DESIGN OF THE SWISS RE

CRITERIA DESIGN 67

Diagram illustrating how to

produce project using parametric

tools

Floor Plan Established general

shape of Structure by

creating parabolic arc

extending from opposite

edges of the circular

floor plan, with a turning

point at the highest

point of the building

Generated floor plates,

the same shape as

the ground floor

plane, spaced at set

intervals according

to the structures

established countour.

Twisted star-shape floor plates.

Generated multiple iterations

to establish optimum angle of

rotation for wind resistance.

Offset the surface and

created a diagrid pattern

on exteiror surface

corresponding to the

edges of the floor plates

Piped the digarid

pattern to establish

the structure. Created

construction joints

to connect the glass

panels to each other

and to the skeleton-

like surface.

Created lists of the glass

panels and coloured

them according to

a list pattern

FIG 69. DIAGRAM ILLUSTRATING THE POTENTIAL

68 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.4. Technique Development with Case Study 2.0

SHAPE

DIAGRID

SPIRAL VECTORS

DIAMOND PANELS

DIAMOND FRAMES

SELECTIVE DIAMOND

FRAMES

CRITERIA DESIGN 69

FIG. 70 MATRIX OF ITERATIONS FURTHER EXPLORING AND TESTING THE LIMITS OF THE DEFINITION I PRODUCED WHEN REVERSE ENGINEERING THE SWISS RE

70 CRITERIA DESIGN

Evaluating iterations according to selection criteria

Creating matrices of the evolution of an algorithmic

definitions as alterations and amendments are made to

test its boundaries lends itself to the ‘search’ techniques

described by Yehuda E. Kalay. ‘Searching’ involves a

process of developing solutons to consider and then

evaluating them against the constraints and goals for

further development, to be repeated until a satisfactory

solution is achieved. Kalay describes three common

search methods that explore depth, breadth or the best

design solutions first. The flexible nature of these search

metholdogies allows them to be used in combination,

and for designs that were put aside to explore further

possibilities to be returned to. While ‘searching’ is

meant to direct the design process, the back and forth

between designs it allows opens up a wide array of design

possibilities as doors aren’t permanently closed on any

design options. Dead ends like that I encountered when

attempting to recreate the diagrid structure of the Swiss

Re, are back tracked and other design solutions and goals

are pursued until more satisfactory solution is acheived.1

1 Yehuda E. Kaylay, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and MEthods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT PRess, 2004), pp. 18,19.

The process of evaluting the most successful

iterations is a breadth first approach, in which

several designs are developed to address the

solution, with a few potentially promising solutions

selected and possibly developed further.

These four designs above address my selection

criteria, offering the potential for creating a large

inhabitable spaces that are also geometrically

interesting unlike the relatively simple early sphere,

and oblong dome products. and inhabitable space.

Furthermore, they are capable of defining a usable

space, featuring either a structure to support a

relatively large surface or the surface itself, for

collecting solar radiation, generating solar power .

Their unusual geometries create varied spaces that

cater for different uses and encourage different

interactions with the structure. The splayed cone for

example emphasises activitiy towards the elevated

FIG 71 SUCCESSFUL SKELETON 1

FIG. 72 SUCCESSFUL SKELETON 2

FIG 73. SUCCESSFUL SKIN 1

FIG. 74. SUCCESSFUL SKIN 2

CRITERIA DESIGN 71

centre of the structure while the looped geometries

encourage circumabulation around a central point.

RECONSIDERING SELECTION CRITERIA

Reverse engineering the Swiss Re and its structural

skeleton and glass skin form have inspired me to

look for a design that is light and almost floating

and that has the potential to either allow or withold

light to create an atmosphere approriate for its

prescribed use. Two of the selected successes have

the potential to be ‘structural skeletons’, while the

other two could be an external ‘skin’ cladding.

FURTHER EXPLORATION

With these selected successes, I further explored

the tesselation approach employed with the Swiss

Re, and subdivided the surface with more patterns

and further explored the possible structural

geometries possible with these input shapes.

FIG 75. FURTHER EXPLORATION OF THE SELECTED SUCCESSFUL OUTCOMES

SUBDIVIDING THE TRIANGULAR PANELS

INTO SMALLER TRIANGLES

72 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.5. Technique: Prototype

FIG. 76 DEVELOPING THE SKIN WITH TRIANGULAR FRAMES:

FIG. 77 ATTEMPTS AT OFFSETTING THE REFERENCE SURFACE SO THAT THE PANELLED SKIN RESTS ONTOP OF THE STRUCTURAL SKELETON BELOW

Following on from the successful designs I isolated, I decided to further investigate the potential of the design

in figure 73, particularly its materialisation. I chose this particular geometry as its not only does large span

allows it to create a large enclosed and habitable space. Furthermore, its subtle gradation in height creates

a more intimate relationship between the structure and the ground it rests upon while barely touching,

almost as if its floating. For ease of construction and to increase the sturctural stability of the design, I

changed the tesselation pattern applied to the structure and the skin from diamonds to triangles.

Process of developing the materialisation of my design

Potential problems lie with constructing the tightly angled triangualr paneLs around the opening in the

middle of the design and the short but elongated panels. fabricating the design at 1:250 scale could

offer insight into whether this design can physically be achieved and how this might be done.

CRITERIA DESIGN 73

The skin and skeleton style of my design requires

consideraiton of how these two ‘layers’ interact with each

other as the structural skeleton holds up the large span

of the triangulated skin. Furthermore, the structure that

supports the skin needs to be able to withstand a large

load from the dead weight of the sturcture, and resist the

strong wind loads that the building will likely be subject

to due to its shape and location along the water front.

Constructing the skeletal structure

Therefore, at the nodes of the piped skeletal structure

which correspond to the corners of the frames on the

skin , I put a sphere and boolean split the pipes and

spheres, leaving holes in the spheres the location

and angle of which uniquely correspond to their

respective pipes. The sphere acts as a rigid joint,

providing structural stability to the skeleton, and also

provides the an extension of the structural surface

where the corners of the skin’s frames can connect to

it while still being offset from the skeletal structure.

FIG 78. SKELETAL STRUCTURE WITH RIGID SPHERE JOINTS AT NODES OF TRIANGLES FIG. 79. EXPLODED SECTION OF SKELETAL STRUCTURE,

DEMONSTRATING ITS POSSIBLE CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE

FIG. 80. SIDE AND FRONT PERSPECTIVES OF DESIGN SHOWING PANELLED SKIN RESTING ONTOP OF THESPHERES OF THE SKELETAL STRUCTURE

74 CRITERIA DESIGN

I construced my model by dividing the overall structure

into strips cut out on 200gsm white card, which join

together by laying over protruding tabs of the adjacent

strips. The structure is further subdivided into triangular

shaped frames formed by three connecting trapezoids,

which act as the structural component of the skin and

hold the triangular panels. This construction technique of

layering on the structure in sections could be translated

to the real life construction of the design. Dividing

up the structure into smaller parts could facilitate

a faster more efficient construction process as the

parts could be fabricated and constructed off-site.

This process of dividing up the structure reminds me of

the sectional material system methodology I explored

in Case Study 1, in which an overall form is establsihed

Constructing the skin

These connections would require further development

as they are currently only representational. I

attempted to generate a rudimentary joint that could

connect the pipes together, or to another surface

like the sphere, or possibly even connect the two

FIG. 81. ATTEMPT AT CREATING POSSIBLE JOINT BETWEEN PIPES OR SKELETON AND SKIN

FIG. 82. SKELETAL STRUCTURE (TOPI), TRIANGULAR PANEL SKIN (MIDDLE), HOW THEY FIT TOGETHER (BOTTOM)

FIG. 83. PHOTO OF WHITE PAPER CARD MODEL FROM TOP

CRITERIA DESIGN 75

by the culmulative effect of the relationship between

its consistuent parts. This methodology allows for a

faster, safer and more efficient construction as the parts

can be formed off-site, to be arranged on-site later. For

my design, the triangular frames, and possibly even the

strips could be assembled offiste, and then connected

to each other on-site to form the overall structure.

The detail model I fabricated of the triangular frame

of trapezoids tested how these trapezoids would

connect to each other to form the triangular frames.

I carefully arrayed tabs along select edges of the

trapezoids that the adjacent trapezoids would rest

ontop, allowing them to appear to almost join together

seamlessly once the tabs were glued down.

However, as the tabs I created were just rectangular

protrusions and not carefully shaped to correspond

to the shape of the adjacent trapezoids, I had to

manually adjust a few of the tabs so that they did

not stick out. Therefore, in the real life construction

of this design, the protrusions upon which each

adjacent strip would rest would be much more carefully

determined, and tailored to the receiving shape.

FIG. 84. THE ‘STRIPS’ THAT THE DESIGN WAS BROKEN DOWN INTO TO BE CUT FROM THE CARD CUTTER AND ASSEMBLED. COLOURED TO SHOW HOW THEY CULMULATIVELY FORM THE DESIGN FORM

FIG. 85. PHOTO OF DETAIL MODEL MADE OUT OF DIGITALLY CUT PIECES OF WHITE CARD FIG. 86. THE LOCATION OF THE DETAIL I WAS MODELLING

76 CRITERIA DESIGN

Testing the atmospheric lighting

28

26

25

31

3230

27

29

14

15

12

15

10

24

23

19

21

18

17

22

20

02

8

5

16

3 6

1

4

7

9 11

Constructing the model enabled me to see how light is able to penetrate

through the empty panels on the skin, and the manner in which it illuminates

the ground below. By making a physical model and photographed it,

it allowed me to see how light that the relatively arbritaray placement

of the culled panels didn’t provide a particualrly interesting aesthetic

quality. Furthermore, it allowed me to realize that the light cast on

the ground provided sharply defined areas of bright light, would not

be as effective at full scale. This lead me to decide to pursue an airy

atmosphere of filtered light that would cascade over the users.

FIG. 87 DIGITAL MODEL OF DETAIL AND ITS CONSTITUENT PARTS ANNOTATED WITH NUMBERS TO SHOW HOW THEY FIT TOGETHER

FIG. 88. CLOSE UP PHOTO OF MODEL SHOWING SHADOWS CASE ON GROUND BELOW (BOTTOM)FIG. 89. PERSPECTIVE PHOTO OF CARD MODEL (TOP)

CRITERIA DESIGN 77

FIG. 90 PHOTO OF CARD MODEL

78 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.6. Technique: Proposal

The large span of the design that I began to

develop in B.4 and modelled in B.5 lent itself

to a number of uses such as an ice skating

rink, a market place, a covered pool.

However, these didn’t respond to the nature of the

site and the context of its surroundings, located on

a patch of land that extends onto the waterfront.

Instead, I thought that a concert hall could take

advantage of the open, somewhat isolated land

where volume wouldn’t need to be compromised,

and where the view over the water would aid in

establishing a powerful, ephemeral atmosphere.

FIG 91. PAVILION AND WORKSHOP FOR NATURE BY DJA

FIG. 92 THE LEVITT PAVILION BY WALLACE ROBERTS & TODD FIG 93. THE LEVITT PAVILION BY WALLACE ROBERTS & TODD

The Programme

CRITERIA DESIGN 79

FIG 94. PIER SIX PAVILION

Altering the overall shape

Altered the shape of the structure slightly to better

suit the intended programme of a pavilion for concerts,

manipulating the opening so that it drew focus towards

the elevated performance area situated underneath

the the hole in the middle of the structure.

Instead of having relatively arbitrarily culled panels on

the surface left open to permit light, I decided to further

direct attention to the stage by filling in the panels

behind it with a solid surface. The filled in panels act

as dark backdrop behind the stage while the angled

opening in the structures ceiling above the stage further

directs light onto the stage. The highlighted stage

contrasts with the filtered light over the audience.

Looking at case studies, most outdoor concert halls feature a covered, elevated stage and are surrounded

by large empty areas around them for people to casually gather in varied sizes, but that would be largely

unoccupied and empty for the majority of the time. The stage is arranged as the centre of attention,

with either a physical backdrop or a stark contrast to the surrounding environment, to enhance the

emphais of the lit stage during performance. While outdoor concert halls are often lit with artifical

lighting, the natural light permitted into the audience space, in concjunction with the connection with the

surrounding natural environment can evoke a powerful atmosphere, aiding the auditory experience.

FIG. 95. AERIAL RENDER OF NEW STRUCTURE FORM

80 CRITERIA DESIGN

Stairs and Seating

FIG. 96 DEVELOPING THE ARRANGEMENT, SPACING AND SCALE OF THE SEATS

CRITERIA DESIGN 81

Although my design is intended to be a pavilion in which

people can go and watch a concert, play or performance,

the seating is more specifically arranged for concerts.

There is a gradation of formality in the seating, from rigidly defined

seats around the stage to an open under covered area, and finally

to a maze of elevated platforms arrayed across the landscape,

increasing in size and height close towards the concert pavilion.

As the shape of the pavilion is relatively low to blend into the

landscape so as to not be obtrusive, the stage is set five meters

below ground level, with seats arrayed along large steps that lead

down to the stage positioned underneath

the halls skylit opening. The shape of

the seating and stage area initially

copied the input curve for the pavilions

boundary, after placing the triangulated

pavilion ontop of the digital models of

the below ground structure I found that

they did not align, with large gaping holes

left around the apex behind the stage. I

responded to this by altering the shape of

the interior wall behind the stage so that

it corresponded with where the pavilions

structure would meet the ground.

FIG 97,98,99 (LEFT TO RIGHT): INITIAL BELOW GROUND WALL SHAPE

FIG. 100: NEW SHAPE OF BELOW GROUND WALL THAT CORRESPONDS WITH STRUCTURE ABOVE

82 CRITERIA DESIGN

Landscaping Platforms

FIG. 101: : DEVELOPMENT OF LANDSCAPE OF PLATFORMS USING ATTRACTOR POINTS AND CURVES

CRITERIA DESIGN 83

In addition to the formal seating and the informal

covered area, I decided to array triangular platforms

across the land. The pattern that I decided on was

developed by using attractor points and curves

along the surface to increase the size and height

of the platforms towards the structure and create

a path that weaves through to the pavilion.

although the maze of platforms varies gradually

in height across the site, some of them rise

above eye level, and create areas somewhat

removed from the concentrated effect of the

concert experienced underneath the pavilion.

The platforms have an offset stone boundary, are

covered in either grass or wood, and serve as areas in

which people can sit and listen to the concert while not

necessarily facing the stage, and instead experiencing

it with the surrounding water front landscape. These

platforms also provide the space with another function

when there aren’t performances as they provide a sort

of man made park with areas for people to congregate,

have lunch, or just relax by the waterfront.

FIG. 102: INITIAL ATTEMPT AT DIFFERENTIATING THE USE OF THE TRIANGULAR PLATFORMS

FIG. 103: RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF FINAL DESIGN FOR INTERIM PRESENTATION

84 CRITERIA DESIGN

The panels

Taking what I had learnt from the randomly culled panels of my physical model which produced large, harsh

areas of dramatic light, I decided to go back to a definition I had started to explore in my iterations, and

subdivide the trinagular panels into more triangles. I then used culling to select a number of the subdivided

glass panels and assign them different colours, which would filter light through to the audience, creating

an almost mystical, other worldly atmosphere enhancing the stereophonic experience within the pavilion.

This dramatic lighitng over the audience and the atmosphere it creates in ocnjunction with the concert

experience, is further emphasized by the panels behind the stage being filled in so as to exaggerate the

effect of the lighting on the stagefrom above and from lighting suspended from the steel skeleton.

All the glass panels arebuilding integrated photovoltaic solar panels that come in a variety of

colours, patterns, opacity and sizes. There is a space located beneath the seats where the

equipment for solar power generation, inaccessable by the public and out of site.

FIG. 104: VIEW OF THE PAVILIONS OPENING INTO THE BELOW GROUND SEATING AND STAGE AREA

CRITERIA DESIGN 85

FIG 105: CLOSE UP OF PAVILION OPENING

FIG. 106: PERSPECTIVE SHOWING TRIANGUALR LIGHTS

86 CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG. 107: ELEVATION FROM LEFT

CRITERIA DESIGN 87

FIG. 108: ELEVATION FROM RIGHT SHOWING GRADUAL INCREASE IN HEIGHT OF PLATFORMS

88 CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 89

FIG. 109: FLOOR PLAN

90 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.7. Learning Objectives and Outcomes

The opportunity to provide an interim presentation,

although stressful, proved to be reassuring and much

more helpful than I had expected. Connections that I

hadn’t quite fully formed yet were brought to fruition

when the reviewers pointed them out, as another set

of more experienced eyes were capable of catching

things I hadn’t. This is particularly the case with the

feedback I got about the wide path leading towards the

pavilion being unneccessary as the spaces between the

elevated platforms not only are sufficient, but created

an added element of further interacting with the site

and the idea that one would have to weave through

them, lead by the sound and light eminating from the

stage. The suggesting to individualize the platforms

was another one that I had begun to think about, as I

had started to differentiate some of the platforms by

lining them with a grassed area instead of wood.

One piece of feedback that hadn’t even occured

to me before was making the skin an even lighter

structure. Before this was suggested I hadn’t realised

that the structure was actually relatively heavy,

unlike the airy, light, but gravity defying Swiss

Re which I had initally been emulating. I intend

to further explore how I could make the structure

lighter, possibly increasing the amount of glass, or

decreasing the amount of material all together.

Although tediuous, the process of creating dozens

of iterations, pushing the definition to its limits and

exploring its possibilities, helped me understand the

design advantages and opportunities made possible

by such generative design technologies which I

hadn’t fully appreciated when doing theoretical

reasearch in part A. Furthermore, it proved to be

much more helpful in developing my design proposal

than I had thought it would be, and I ended up going

using a triangular subdivision component that I had

briefly explored in a number of my iterations.

Although I was able to find some success in manipulating

the definition for case study 1, I really struggling coming

up with a definition from scratch for case study 2. This

is evident in my rather rudimentary initial final product

for reverse engineering the Swiss Re. However, after

struggling through with grasshopper, and following the

online videos, I was able to gain some more confidence

in my ability to model parametrically and went back

and attempted a secondary final reverse engineered

Swiss Re, utilizing the knowledge I had gained in

just a few short weeks to develop the design much

further than I had initially. This is not to say that I

have not struggled with establishing definitions since

then, but I have become more resourceful, looking up

online tutorials, rummaging through the grasshopper

files and experimenting with what I can produce.

I had been intending on carrying the solar power

generating feature through my entire design, and

had begun to think about incorporating it into the

platforms, but it seems to be proving to be a secondary

consideration and isn’t really driving the form of

my design at the moment. I’m not likely to try and

integrate it that much more into my design from

now on. However, if I do happen upon a particuarlly

interesting design solution I may re-integrate it

back as a more primary element of my design.

CRITERIA DESIGN 91

Part B Reference List

“BanQ / Office dA”. 03 Dec 2009. ArchDaily. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581 >[accessed 06 September 2014]

Pell, Ben. ‘Stacked/Tiled’ in The Articulate Surface: Ornament and Technology in Contemporary Architecture (2010), accessed < http://books.google.com.au/books?id=4nfkr_0_xIsC&pg=PA159&lpg=PA159&dq=Swiss+re+tessellation&source=bl&ots=nINYNPrEXG&sig=4jE2HG3QVfguZZoxyJGOFYfTPAI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VC4kVMiHCJegoQThyoGICw&ved=0CEEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Swiss%20re%20tessellation&f=false>.

dECOi architects. ‘OneMain Street’. (2011), <http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain/> [accessed 28 August 2014].

Denton Corker Marshall, ‘Webb Bridge’, in The Australian Insitutte of Architects (2013) < http://dynamic.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20053006> [accessed 27 August 2014].

Iwamoto, Lisa, Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques (New York, Princeton Architectural Press, N.D.) http://atc.berkeley.edu/201/readings/Iwamoto_Digital_Fabrications.pdf.

Kaylay, E. Yehuda. (2004) Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories and MEthods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT PRess).

Lomholt, Isabelle ‘Swiss Re Building’, in e-architect, (July 30 2014) <http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/swiss-re-building> [accessed 27 August 2014].

Marcos, Carlos L., ‘New Materiality: Digital Fabrication’ in: IMproVe 2011 – International Conference on Innovative Methods in Product, (2011).

Sokol, David ‘Banq’, Australian Design Review, (2009), <http://www.australiandesignreview.com/interiors/661-banq> [accessed 29 August 2014].

92 CRITERIA DESIGN

Part B Image ListFig. 33 Denton Corker Marshall, ‘ Webb Bridge’, photography, retrieved from http://www.

dentoncorkermarshall.com/projects/webb-bridge/ [accessed 27 August 2014]

Fig. 34 Instinia,’Web Bridge’, photograph, May 2013<,http://instinia.com/photography/architecture/webb-bridge/ >[accessed 31 august 2014].

Fig 35 ‘Inside Ronchamp Roof’, photograph, supplied by Carlos Zeballos, MY Modelskin Architecture, 2012,< http://

architecturalmoleskine.blogspot.com.au/2012_06_01_archive.html >[accessed 31 august 2014]

Fig 36 ‘Exterior of roof of Corbusier’s Ronchamp’, photograph supplied by Carlos Z eballos, MY Modelskin Architecture,

2012, <http://architecturalmoleskine.blogspot.com.au/2012_06_01_archive.html >[accessed 31 august 2014]

Fig 37 dECOi architects, ‘OneMain Street’, photograph, (2011), <http://www.decoi-

architects.org/2011/10/onemain/> [Accesseed 06 September 2014].

Fig 38 dECOi Architects, ‘One Main Street curved sections’, photograph, (2011), <https://acdn.architizer.com/

thumbnails-PRODUCTION/ba/da/badaeb2e33a4a86dad048d1192831ab2.jpg> [Accessed 06 September 2014]

Fig 39 dECOi architects, ‘OneMain Street’ photograph, (2011), <http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain/> [06 September 2014].

Fig 40 dECOi architects, ‘OneMain Street’ , photograph, (2011), <http://www.decoi-

architects.org/2011/10/onemain/> [accessed 06 September 2014].

Fig 41 dECOi Architects, ‘One Main Street interior roof and column’ photo by Anton Grassi/Esto

< http://www.cwkeller.com/proj_cat/commercial/> [Accessed 06 September 2014]

Fig 42 Horner, John. “BanQ / Office dA”, photograph, (2009). ArchDaily. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581> [accessed 06 September 2014]

Fig 43 Horner, John. “BanQ / Office dA”, photograph, (2009). ArchDaily. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=42581 >[accessed 06 September 2014]

Fig 44 Horner, John. “BanQ columns’, yatzer, (17 February 2009) photograph, http://www.

yatzer.com/BANQ-restaurant-by-Office-dA> [accessed 06 September 2014]




Fig 48-57 Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

Fig 58 Foster + Partners, ‘Diagrid glass skin’, Dimscale Blog, (8 February 2013), photograph, < http://dimscale.

blogspot.com.au/2013/02/architecture-references-foster-partners.html> [accessed 10 September 2014]

Fig. 59 Foster + Partners, ‘Swiss Re entrance, Dimscale Blog, (8 February 2013), photograph, < http://dimscale.

blogspot.com.au/2013/02/architecture-references-foster-partners.html> [accessed 10 September 2014]

Fig 60 Foster + Partners, ‘Swiss Re exteriror’, Foster and Partners website, photograph, http://www.

fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1004/img1.jpg [accessed 10 September 2014].

Fig. 61-90. Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

Fig 91 Sveisbergs, Ernests. ‘Pavilion and workshop for Nature concert Hall by DJA’, Archdaily (17 August 2014), photograph,

http://www.archdaily.com/537479/pavilion-and-workshops-for-nature-concert-hall-dja/53ebfeb9c07a80388e0002a4_pavilion-

and-workshops-for-nature-concert-hall-dja_02_nature_concert_hall-jpg/> [accessed 15 September 2014]

Fig. 92. Totaro, Jeffrey, ‘Levitt Pavilion’, Archdaily (16 June 2014), photograph, <http://www.archdaily.com/515902/

the-levitt-pavilion-wrt-wallace-roberts-and-todd/Fig94 > [accessed 15 September 2014]

Fig 93. Totaro, Jeffrey, ‘Levitt Pavilion at night’, Archdaily (16 June 2014), photograph, <http://www.archdaily.com/515902/

the-levitt-pavilion-wrt-wallace-roberts-and-todd/Fig94 > [accessed 15 September 2014]

Fig. 94‘ Pier Six Pavilion’,< http://ramsheadgroup.ticketfly.com/files/2013/09/PierSix_web.jpg> [accessed 15 September 2014].

Fig. 95-109 Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

CRITERIA DESIGN 93

94 CRITERIA DESIGN

B.8. Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches

CRITERIA DESIGN 95

FIG. 110: GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION FOR ‘SKIN’ OF DESIGN AND ARRANGEMENT OF TRIANGULAR PLATFORMS

96 PROJECT PROPOSAL

PART C: DETAILED DESIGN

PROJECT PROPOSAL 97

FIG 110. (LEFT) RENDERED TECTONIC UNIT DEVELOPED IN C.2.FIG 111. (RIGHT) RENDERED DETAIL OF GLASS

FRAMING UNIT DEVELOPED IN C.2

FIG 112. EXPLORATION OF SIZE OF PANELS AND SPAN OF MEMBERS TO MAKE DESIGN MORE STRUCTURALLY FEASABLE BY REDUCING LOAD CARRIED BY EACH MEMBER

98 PROJECT PROPOSAL

C.1. Design Concept

To be more adventurous in the algorithmic techniques I employed, particularly regarding the

patterning and panelling.

Reduce the proportion of steel forming the frame for the glass on the skin layer to make the

design appear delicate, lighter and less imposing as I had intend.

Consider the span of the structural elements and their relative size, to make them more

realistically be capable of accommodating the large load from the cantilevered opening.

Further develop the sphere based joint system to utilize the parametric capabilities of

grasshopper.

The feedback I

received from

my interim

presentation

was as follows:

I addressed these suggestions in three main stages of exploration and development, as detailed in the following pages.

Addressing feedback & amending the design

1) PANEL SIZE AND SKELETON SPAN

I reduced the span of the skeletal support

members and the size of the panels by altering

the number of divisions in the U and V directions,

exploring the different aesthetic and geometric

outcomes. In some variations, increasing the

divisions too much produced panels of sizes

and angles too small to be developable and

which created a very jagged appearance.

I redrew the structure

input curves to reorient the

‘seam’ where the triangular

panels meet from the centre

of the overhang, to the

area behind the stage.

PROJECT PROPOSAL 99

2) MORE DEVELOPED/SOPHISTICATED JOINERY SYSTEM

Following on from my rudimentary design

of a spherical joint system, I used the piping

command to join the end segments of

skeletal beam members that shared a node,

to form a tectonic system of intersecting

steel pipe joint units custom moulded to

accommodate the unique angle of the

respective skeletal pipes and skin beams. FIG. 113. RENDER OF PIPE JOINERY SYSTEM IMPLEMENTED THROUGHT

WHOLE STRUCTURE OF DESIGN BY UTILIZING ALGORITHM

FIG. 114. (ABOVE) CLOSE UP OF PORTION OF STRUCTUREFIG 115. (RIGHT) DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES OF JOINT OF PIPES CORRESPONDING

TO MEMBERS THAT SHARE A POINT OF CONNECTION WITH THE VERTICAL PIPE ELEMENT WHICH JOINS THE SKELETAL SUPPORT LAYER TO THE SKIN LAYER

100 PROJECT PROPOSAL

PATTERNING TRIANGULATED GLASS PANELS

Smaller than 32m

Culled panels according to the relative distance

from their centers to reference

points on side. Larger than 32m

Selected items 3 & 4 from list

Culled sub -triangles 3 & 4

Light side panels

Dark middle panels

3) MORE SOPHISTICATED AND INTERESTING PATTERNING SYSTEM THAT INTEGRATES COLOUR

I developed my patterning algorithm further, exploring the various patterns generated by selecting items from the

list of panels, culling them and forming subset lists, and culling panels according to the distance from their centre

to points around the amphitheatre structure.

1 2 3

4 5 6

FIG 117. CULL PATTERNING ALGORITHM USED TO GENERATE COLOURED PATTERN IN FINAL DESIGN

PROJECT PROPOSAL 101

After this exploration, I developed the final pattern from a combination of variations that I concluded were

the most successful:

FIG 116. FINAL COLOURED GLASS PANEL PATTERN

7

8

1: Culled panels at a distance smaller than 31m from the back of the stage. Assigned a dark blue-

black colour and minimal transparency to create a dark backdrop behind the stage.

6: Retrieved panel items 3 & 4 from each subdivided triangular unit. Assigned dark blue colour and

high transparency. Culled items the same 3&4 items and assigned light blue and high transparency.

8: Culled panels according to the distance from their centres to points located on either side of

amphitheatre. Coloured light blue and highly transparent so users in surrounding area can see the

concert area within through the side glass panels.

The different hues of the panels will cast a soft blue light on the stage and seats below that varies in

intensity and hue in accordance with the transparency and hue of the panels above.

FIG. 115. FURTHER EXPLORATION OF CULL PATTERNING ALGORITHMS THAT LEAD TO FINAL DESIGN


FIG 118. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF PATTERNING OF THE GLASS PANELS WITH DIFFERENT HUES OF

BLUE FROM THE BACK OF THE AMPHITHEATRE


The site at Refshaleoeon in Cophenhagen is

surrounded by industrial buildings and piers. Its

relative isolation from residential and commercial

buildings makes it a prime location for housing a large

amphitheatre that will likely generate a lot of sound.

The low and gradual but powerful shell-like shape

of the amphitheatre structure is reminiscent of

a wave rolling off the water and crashing onto

the land. The structures orientation so that it

opens up onto the site and the blue colouring

of the glazing adds to the symbolic imagery

The amphitheatre is oriented so that it faces the

main access points to the site: the water taxi

and the footpaths along the Sonder Hoved pier.1

This enables users to weave their way through

the maze of triangular platforms of varying

heights straight towards the concert hall.

1 Robert Ferry and Elizabeth Monoian, ‘LAGI 2014 Design Guidelines’, pp. 5 <http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/>

CONSIDERING THE CONTEXT:

Revisiting the Brief & Finalizing the design concept

FIG 119.AERIAL VIEW OF AMPHITHEATRE AND LANDSCAPING DESIGN INSTALLED ON

REFSHALEOEON SITE IN COPENHAGEN


The reasons for the amphitheatre structure’s location in the upper western corner of the site is four-fold:

1) To maximise the ability of users lounging on the triangular platforms to view the concert

2) To provide the users on the triangular platforms with a view of the surrounding waterfront environment so that it may

enhance their experience of the concert, or provide places to view the waterfront landscape of the old shipyard when there is

no concert on.

3)To maximise the number of audience members.

4) To provide some areas that don’t face the amphitheatre opening from which one would embrace the auditory experience

in the emotive atmosphere created by the light effects coming through the panelled glass working in conjunction with the

surrounding water-front environment.

FIG 120. PANORAMIC VIEW FROM SITE LOOKING AT SITE, SURROUNDING PIER, AND WATERFRONT

FIG 121. PANORAMIC VIEW FROM SITE OF WATERFRONT

66m

80m


2) To provide the users on the triangular platforms with a view of the surrounding waterfront environment so that it may

enhance their experience of the concert, or provide places to view the waterfront landscape of the old shipyard when there is

4) To provide some areas that don’t face the amphitheatre opening from which one would embrace the auditory experience

in the emotive atmosphere created by the light effects coming through the panelled glass working in conjunction with the

FIG 120. PANORAMIC VIEW FROM SITE LOOKING AT SITE, SURROUNDING PIER, AND WATERFRONT

FIG 121. PANORAMIC VIEW FROM SITE OF WATERFRONT

6.3m

154.63m

236.87

3.5m

FIG 122. (ABOVE) CLOSE UP AERIAL VIEW OF AMPHITHEATRE AND LANDSCAPING PLATFORMS ON SITE SHOWING ACCESS PATHS AND KEY DIMENSIONS OF SITE AND DESIGNFIG 123. (BELOW) VECTOR-LINE SECTION THROUGH DESIGN WITH HEIGHT DIMENSIONS


FIG. 124 AERIAL PERSPECTIVE OF DESIGN INTEGRATED INTO SITE SHOWING ITS INTERACTION WITH THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONMENT


The triangular platforms are arrayed across the site, gaining in size as they near the wave-like amphitheatre structure. Their function is four fold:

-3.5m

0m0.5m1.0m

1.5m

0m0.5m

1.0m1.5m

1.7m

1) The platforms serve as seats from which people can watch the concert. For this purpose, their height increases proportionally as their distance from the amphitheatre increases to provide individuals further back from the structure with a higher vantage point so that they may see the concert. With the tallest platform reaching 1700mm, their height however is not so great that the cantilevered opening obstructs their view.

2) Platforms provide a different setting from which people can experience and appreciate the concert, immersed in the calm environment of the waterfront surrounding. For this purpose the array of platforms extends to the edge of the site to provide the concert with

3) They provide the site with a secondary function when there is no performance or concert on as people can gather there to hang out, have lunch or read on the grass or the timber topped platforms with a view of the waterfront.

4) They lead the users through the site along the maze-like paths between platforms (Fig. 130). This maze-like quality is especially aimed for children whose views of the amphitheatre from the ground would be obstructed by the taller platforms due to their shorter height. The users would weave through the platforms on a path of discovery following the sound and light from the amphitheatre.

TRIANGULAR PLATFORM

LANDSCAPING

FIG 125. AERIAL PLAN OF DESIGN WITH CONTOURS SHOWING THE ‘LANDSCAPE’ ELEVATION AS THE HEIGHT OF THE PLATFORMS CHANGES

FIG 126. (RIGHT) RENDER OF DESIGN DEPICTING LIGHT SHINING FROM WITHIN THE AMPHITHEATRE OUT TO THE SURROUNDING

LANDSCAPE CREATING A MYSTICAL ATMOSPHERE AT NIGHTFIG 127. (PAGE 110-111) RENDERED INTERIOR VIEW OF AMPHITHEATRE DEPICTING THE MYSTICAL ENVIRONMENT CREATED WHEN THE LIGHT SHINES THROUGH THE

PANELS OF DIFFERENT HUES OF BLUE AND THE ATMOSPHERE THIS CREATES WHEN IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EMOTIVE EFFECT OF THE MUSIC FROM A CONCERT

FIG. 128. (PAGE 112-113) RENDERED LOW-ANGLE PERSPECTIVE OF AMPHITHEATRE AGAINST WATERFRONT BACKDROP


THE ATMOSPHERE CREATED BY GLASS PATTERNED WITH HUES OF BLUE

While the competition calls for the design to focus

on sustainability and the production and storage

of energy, through my design process I decided to

focus my design criteria on creating a habitable

space for holding concerts and performances in an

environment that evokes an emotive atmosphere

that will enhance the users experience of the concert

in its auditory and visual effects. The translucent

nature of the amphitheatre concert hall, not only

influences the area underneath the structure as

light shines down through the multicoloured glass

panels, but also the surrounding area where

the triangular platforms are scattered. During a

concert, the lights from the performance will shine

through the glass and the music will spread across

the landscape. The combination of the music and

light passing through the glass panels with these

different settings form very different environments.

Users listening to the concert from the triangular

platforms are set within the calming interface

of the water-front landscape, looking outwards,

instead of the intense environment at the heart

of the concert, looking in towards the stage.


FIG 129. PERSPECTIVE OF THE BACK OF THE AMPHITHEATRE FROM A VANTAGE POINT ELEVATED ABOVE THE WATER. DEPICTS THE PATTERNING OF DIFFERENT HUES OF BLUE IN THE TRIANGULATED GLASS PANEL SYSTEM

FIG 130. (PAGE 116-117) RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF MAZE-LIKE EFFECT OF THE ELEVATED TRIANGULAR PLATFORMS

FIG 131. DIAGRAM OF ALGORITHMIC TECHNIQUE I DEVELOPED USING GRASSHOPPER THAT

PRODUCE THE MAIN BEAM AND PIPE COMPONENTS THAT FORM THE STRUCTURES

SKIN FRAME AND SKELETON STRUCTURE

Referenced curves

Loft

Triangular pattern on

surfaceU = 12V = 30

TRIANGULAR GLASS

PANELS

Divided into trapezoidal

frame around a triangular panel

surface

TRAPEZOID GLASS FRAME

PANEL

SKIN

SKELETONMoved

triangular paneled

surface down 800mm in z

axis

Extracted panel wire

curves

Extended -590mm on

both ends of C8 curves

Extracted node points that various curves share

Exploded panels into

separate curve segments.

C8


Algorithmic technique for skin and skeleton system

Culled panels according to

distance from their centers to a relative point at the center of the

structure

Subdivided culled panels into smaller

‘sub’ triangles

Smaller than 31m

Extruded & moved

90mm in Z axis

Retrieved brep wire

outline

Retrieved frames interior triangular shaped brep wire

outlines

Retrieved interior edge curves of

frames that divides them into trapezoids

Shortened curves by extending

ends by -5mm and -126mm Extruded

curves 90mm in z

axis

Retrieved frames exterior triangular shaped brep wire

outlines

C2

C1

C4

C3

Skin frame

Frame for subdivided

triangles

Dark panels around stage

Larger than 31

Skeletal Beams

Created line segment starting at

node points extending 800mm vertically . Length= distance between

the paneled surfaces

Divided curves into

points 590mm

apart

Retrieved & created line

between end and first points

Piped with 120mm radius and flat capped ends

Extended line by 100mm at

top and by 150 at bottom

Piped with 120mm radius

and flat capped ends

Shortened curves by 120mm from

node point

Extruded 1/2 x pipe radius in positive

and negative z direction

Vertical Pipe

‘Bones’

C9


FIG 132. (ABOVE) DIAGRAM OF ALGORITHMIC TECHNIQUE I

DEVELOPED USING GRASSHOPPER THAT PRODUCES THE

TRIANGULAR LANDSCAPING PLATFORMS, THE STAGE AND THE SEATS ARRAYED ALONG

CORRESPONDING STAIRS

FIG 133. (BELOW) SECTION ALONG SHORT LENGTH OF SITE

THROUGH THE TRIANGULAR PLATFORMS SHOWING THEIR

SUBTLE CHANGE IN ELEVATION


Algorithmic technique for triangular platform

landscaping, stage and stairs

TRIANGULAR LANDSCAPING

PLATFORMS

Referenced site

boundary curve

Divided surface into triangular

panels. U=12V=18

Retrieved nodes shared by adjacent

panels

Offset curve by distance

from referenced point /60

Created planar surface

from curve boundary


from curve boundary

Solved for center point

Distance to closest point on curves to referenced

curveExtruded triangles in

z direction according to their relative distance

from reference curve

EXTRUDING THE PLATFORMS TO

VARIED HEIGHTS RELATIVE TO THEIR

DISTANCE FROM CURVE

STAIRS

STAGE Referenced smaller closed

curve of opening

Projected curve in Z

direction onto XY plane

Move down 2000mm in z

direction


from curve boundary

Referenced curve

Created linear array curve, with 10 elements, at

1000mm intervals in Y

direction

Used array list length to determine

number of values/count fors series of numbers with 250mm step

Simplified and

grafted series of numbers

Grafted & simplified list

tree

Moved curves

according to series


Grouped node

curves

Node point

Culled curves further than

53m

Distance between node point and

point in middle of pavilion structure

Culled triangles with distance

smaller than164m

Extruded triangles in

according to their

from reference curve

Scaled geometry

by 0.75

Move to XY Plane

Solved for center point

Moved 350mm in z

direction

Culled list according to

true/false pattern

Culled list according to

reversed true/false

patternExtrude brep

1000mm up and 1500mm down in Z

direction

Extend curves by

1000mm on both ends

Extruded 1000mm in Y direction and down 250mm in Z direction

to form stairs

Moved curves down 500mm in Z

direction

Generated 55 equally spaced,

and aligned plane frames along

curves

Created box on curve frames, 500mm in X,Y

and Z direction Culled every 14th

Culled item 0, the first box on the

curve

Moved curves down 500mm in Z

direction

Generated 55 equally spaced,

and aligned plane frames along curves

Created box on curve frames, 500mm in X,Y

and Z direction

Culled every 14th

Culled item 0, the first box on the

curve

Flat seats

Stairs

Stage centered below & following outline of

opening

Seats on

stairs

Timber platforms

Grass platforms

1000

250

Extruded platforms


Preliminary construction process

FABRICATION

Cut triangular and trapezoid glass panels according to digital model specifications

192 x dark trianglular panels964 x dark blue middle triangular panels 718 x lighter blue middle triangular panels360 x random green triangular panels838 x light blue side panels474 x clear trapezoidal glass ‘frame’ panel

Steel vertical pipe columns. Standard size throughout design.

Custom steel pipe joints. Protruding pipes at specific, unique angles and a radius

greater than that of skeletal beams.

Custom length poles and skin frame beams. Can be modified onsite if required.

Produce: TRANSPORTED to site by trucks

Ground excavated & concrete poured.

Skeletal system erected: horizontal skeletal steel pipes inserted into corresponding

larger pipe protrusions of custom joints. Fastened with

bolts.

Steel beams of ‘skin’ frame slotted into sides of the vertical

extension of the piped joints.

Glazing panels connected to steel beam frame with sealant.

Stones laid for triangular platforms. Center filled with soil and covered in grass or timber

planks.

ASSEMBLY

FIG 135. (LEFT AND MIDDLE) DIAGRAMS OF EXPLODED PIPE JOINT CONNECTION TO DEMONSTRATE HOW THE SKELETAL PIPES WOULD SLOT INTO THEIR RESPECTIVE PLACE IN THE JOINT TO FORM TRIANGLES WITH UNIQUE, PREDETERMINED ANGLES

FIG 136. (RIGHT) ENVISAGED SLOTTED CONNECTION OF SKIN FRAME TO VERTIAL PIPE WITH EXTENSIONS FROM THE BEAMS SLOTTING THROUGH CAREFULLY PLACED HOLES IN THE VERTICAL PIPE THAT CORRESPOND TO THE ANGLE OF THE BEAM.

FIG 134. ENVISAGED CONSTRUCTION PROCESS OF PIPE JOINERY SYSTEM DEVELOPED FOLLOWING FEEDBACK FROM INTERIM PRESENTATION. NOTE: FURTHER DEVELOPED FOLLOWING MORE SOPHISTIATED AND FULLY RESOLVED TECTONIC SYSTEM DEVELOPED IN C.2


C.2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes

FIG. 137 PERSPECTIVE DIAGRAM OF RENDERED CORE TRIANGULAR CONSTRUCTION UNIT FROM ABOVE

In C.1 I had been exploring a tectonic system of

intersecting custom moulded steel pipes joints units.

After further consideration however, I came to realize

that the design of this tectonic system was likely to

be inefficient, costly due to their custom nature, and

incapable of providing any flexibility in the construction

process if necessary. Furthermore, the connection

of the vertical pipe element to the skin beams had

yet to be fully resolved as I had been envisaging.

To improve the flexibility and efficiency I employed

the use of fin plates, a form of simple pin connection

panels used to connect steel beams and columns. 1

1 ‘Simple connections’, SteelConstruction.info, http://www.steelconstruction.info/Simple_connections#Beam-to-beam_and_beam-to-column_connections [accessed 10 October 2014].

The structural skeletal system of horizontal steel pipes

or ‘bones’ supports the thin and minimal ‘skin’ layer of

beams above which house the glazing system. These

two layers are connected by the vertical steel pipe,

standard in size across the design. Unique angles of

the beams and pipes are achieved more efficiently by

using the standardized vertical pipe in conjunction with

fin plates. The edges of these fin plates correspond

to the angle of their connecting components and can

be easily modified during construction if necessary,

prior to being welded to the vertical pipe.


FIG 138. EXPLODED PERSPECTIVE DIAGRAM OF RENDERED CORE TRIANGULAR CONSTRUCTION UNIT THAT REPEATS THROUGHT AMPHITHEATRE

Although this new joinery system is still customized to the angle of the adjoining pipes and beams, it is much easier to manufacture these smaller individual fins and elements with minute variations that are much more flexible to apply due to the ease in which they can be modified on-site if required.

While reducing the tectonic system down to a greater number of components translates to a somewhat

fiddly construction process, this can be mitigated by following the designations provided according to the digital model. Furthermore, slightly increasing the number of elements also enables the design to be more maintenance friendly, as damaged components like the fins, glass panels, and top plate of glazing frame unit can be removed and replaced without having to manufacture the whole joinery unit again.

TRAPEZOIDAL CLEAR GLASS

FRAME PANELS

SKIN FRAME BEAMS AND

GLAZING FRAME UNIT

VERTICAL PIPE JOINT

SKELETON PIPES AND BEAMS

INDIVIDUAL COLOURED

GLASS PANELS


FIN PLATES

SKELETON BEAMS

SKELETON PIPES

FRAME PLUG

GLAZING FRAMING UNITSKIN FRAME BEAMS

SCREW/ BOLT HOLES

VERTICAL STEEL COLUMN PIPE

FIG 139. JOINT COMPONENT WITH MEMBERS LABELLED

FIN PLATES

FIG 140. JOINT COMPONENT WITH PLUG AND PLATES LABELLED


I decided to implement a simple pin

connection system that utilizes fin plates or

‘fins’ to connect the skin and skeleton beam

members to adjacent members, the joinery

unit and the skeletal beam to their respective

pipes, due to the following reasons:

The fin plates are welded to the pipe members

off-site, and then bolted to the members

on-site at angles corresponding to the

specifications in the digital model.

These fin plate element can be replicated across the

design, set at angles specific to the angle of their

connecting members, relatively easily by utilizing

algorithmic techniques. Modelling and calculating

the angles of such a tectonic system using a non

algorithmic method such drawing or solely using

CAD would by very difficult and laborious.

FIG 141. DIAGRAM OF FIN PLATE CONNECTIONS TO BEAMS

FINS

A) They are capable of accepting loads

and rotation, resisting possible uplift

and additional load from the cantilevered

opening, without adversely affecting

the members structural integrity.

B) They are simple and quick to erect

and are economical to fabricate.

C) Their application on only one side of the

adjoining member reduces the occurrence

of intersecting bolts where the angle

between fins is small, which is much

higher with two-sided connections.1 1 ‘Simple connections’, SteelConstruction.info, http://www.steelconstruction.info/Simple_connections#Beam-to-beam_and_beam-to-column_connections [accessed 10 October 2014].

The vertical pipes along the edges of the

structure just offset from the below-ground

wall, that intersect the ground plane are

connected to a the ground as steel posts.

The end of the pipe is welded to a 35mm

thick square steel base plate 150mm x

150mm which is bolted to a 70mm thick

225mm x 225mm concrete base which

connects to the reinforced counterweights

installed in the concrete ground below.

CONNECTION TO GROUND

FIG 142. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF CONNECTION TO VERTICAL PIPE TO GROUND BY BEING WELDED TO

STEEL BASE PLATE BOLTED TO CONCRETE BASE


FIG 143. EXPLODED RENDER DIAGRAM OF MAIN CONSTRUCTION JOINT

TOP PLATE

PLUG AND

T-SHAPED

BOTTOM PLATE

GLAZING

FRAME

UNIT

FINS


GLAZING FRAME UNIT

In refining my tectonic design I explored the manner

in which the glass panel facade could be secured and

affixed to the rest of the structural system while retaining

the strong skeleton and skin design I began exploring with

my reverse engineering of the Swiss Re. Initially I was

considering implementing a point-clamp ‘spider glass’

system typically used for curtain walls that elevated the

glazing system with small protruding clamp elements with

circular components at the tips that connect to the glass

panel. However, I decided not to pursue this system as

one would logically remove the skin framing layer when

implementing such a design, as the small protruding

elements could directly join to the skeletal support.

FIG 144. POINT CLAMP ‘SPIDERGLASS’ GLAZING SYSTEM

However I decided against this system as the reduced

space between the skeleton and the glazing would

make the skeleton pipes, which are relatively thick

to support their large span, more visible from the

structures exterior. To support the loads and span of the

structure, the skeletal pipes are thicker than the skin

frame that supports the glazing. Setting the skeleton

further back from the glazing, enables the structure to

appear ‘lighter’ due to the reduced visible weight. This

is evident in the comparison between my design for

B.6 (fig.103-109 ) and my current design (fig.124 & 129)

which appears notably lighter as the amount of steel that

constitutes the skin frame and the amount of visible

steel material overall has been largely reduced.

Furthermore, such a system would face the same

problem as my previous preliminary tectonic

system, in that each unit would need to be custom

moulded and fabricated in its entirety to account

for the angles, size and spacing of the panels

of this type of system would also prove not

only highly laborious as each component would

need to be custom fabricated to suit the angle

at which adjoining glass panels connected, but

also problematic as the panels vary in size and

shape. The small corners of the smaller panels

would make it difficult to place the end cups

without resorting to adhering them in the centre

of the panel which would disrupt the aesthetics.

FIG 145. GLAZING FRAME UNIT INSPIRATION: CURTAIN WALL GLAZING SYSTEM


Although the skeletal pipes are still visible in

the new tectonic system, they offset from the

skin layer by over 800mm, and are partially

hidden by the thin plates of the glazing frame

unit that connect to the T-shaped bottom

plate on-top of the skin frame beams.

Instead, I drew inspiration from adapting the

standard non-load bearing glazing frame

unit for curtain walls wherein the glass

panel is enclosed between an inner and

outer frame plates or ‘mullions’ separated

by a smaller element set back to create

a slot for the glazing. The design would

be installed using a combination of stick

and unitized systems, with the smaller

triangular units composed off-site, and the

larger units connected piece by piece. 1

The glazing unit connects to the top end

of the vertical pipe joint via a cylindrical

‘plug’ that protrudes down from the glazing

frame bottom plate and has a diameter

smaller than that of the vertical pipe. The

glazing system would be waterproofed by

the implementation of sealant where the

glass panels connect to the glazing frame

and along the sides of the plug to stop

water dripping onto the audience below.1 Nik Vigener, PE and Mark A. Brown, ‘Building Envelope Design Guide – Curtain Walls’, Whole Building Design Guide, (2012), <http://www.wbdg.org/design/env_fenestration_cw.php> [accessed 13 October 2014]

TOP PLATE

BOTTOM PLATE

SLOT FOR

GLASS PANEL

SKIN FRAME BEAM

FIG 146. (TOP) ELEVATION OF TOP OF JOINT SYSTEM FOCUSING ON THE GLAZING FRAME UNIT

FIG 147. (BOTTOM) PERSPECTIVE OF GLASS PANELS SLOTEDINTO THE GLAZING FRAME UNIT


FIG 146. EXPLODED ISOMETRIC PLAN OF RENDERED FINAL DESIGN INCORPORATING NEW TECTONIC SYSTEM WITH CLOSE UPS OF LAYERS


‘SKELETON’ ‘BONE’ SUPPORT STRUCTURE

‘SKIN’ FRAME

TRIANGULATED SKIN FRAME

TRIANGULATED GLASS PANELS

GLASS FRAME PANELS

JOINT


Prototype of single triangular core construction unit

I constructed a holistic prototype of the bottom triangular core construction unit which is repeated throughout the design, varying only in the angle and length of the components. I simplified the glazing framing unit, glass panels and skeletal beams in the model as I intended to focus on the structural rigidity of the triangulated frame beams. Another objective of this prototype is to test whether this smaller triangulated unit would be sufficiently suspended by the steel I-beam and cleat plates that connect it the larger triangular frame formed by the skin beams that run between the vertical pipe columns. FIG 147. RENDERED AERIAL PERSPECTIVE OF 2 TRIANGULAR UNITS WITH THE SAME PROPERTIES

REPEATED IN ALL UNITS. PROTOTYPE MODEL IS DEVELOPED FROM BOTTOM RIGHT TRIANGULAR UNIT.

FIG 148. PHOTO OF PROTOTYPE SHOWING SUPPORT OF SKIN FRAME LAYER AND ITS ELEVATION ABOVE THE SKELETAL PIPE LAYER BY VERTICAL COLUMN


FIG 149. PERSPECTIVE PHOTO OF PROTOTYPE MODEL

FIG 150. PERSPECTIVE PHOTO OF PROTOTYPE MODEL SHOWING THE PATTERN CREATED BY THE SHADOW CAST FROM THE TRIANGULATED FRAME BEAMS.


FIG 152. ‘SKIN’ FRAME BEAMS. LASER CUT FROM

1.5MM PLYWOOD.

FIG 153. VECTOR LINES OF ‘FINS’ THAT ADJACENT

BEAMS ARE BOLTED ONTO TO JOIN THEM

TOGETHER. CUT FROM 290 GSM IVORY CARD.

Sent vector lines of beams, fins, and

glazing retrieved from scaled down

digital model to FabLab to be laser cut

FIG 155. VECTOR LINES OF INDIVIDUAL GLAZING PANELS COMBINED INTO

SINGLE COMPONENT & INDICATED WITH ETCHED

LINES FOR REPRESENTATION. LASER CUT FROM 2.0MM

TRANSPARENT PERSPEX.

Removed laser cut components

from material sheet

1 2

PROTOTYPE MODEL FABRICATION PROCESS

FIG 151. ‘SKIN FRAME BEAM VECTOR LINES SENT TO FAB

LAB TO BE CUT FROM PLYWOOD OF SPECIFIED THICKNESS

FIG 154. CUT OUT PLYWOOD FRAME COMPONENTS


FIG 156. (TOP LEFT) FRAME COMPONENTS LAID OUT PRIOR TO ASSEMBLY.FIG 157 (TOP RIGHT) AERIAL PERSPECTIVE OF FINS JOINING PLYWOOD FRAME COMPONENTS TOGETHER

FIG 158. (BOTTOM RIGHT) PERSPECTIVE OF CARD FINS AND I BEAM HOLDING TOGETHER AND SUSPENDING THE SMALLER TRIANGULATED UNIT UNDER THE WEIGHT OF THE PERSPEX

Laid out plywood components

in respective locations.

Adjacent plywood beams

joined together by

adhesion to shared fins

1mm diameter balsa wood

cylinder cut to respective

lengths according to digital

model specifications and

joined to frame by shared fins.

Representative of steel pipes.

Glazing representation

placed ontop of frame

3 4

5

6


TECTONIC TECHNIQUE ALGORITHMIC DEFINITION

EVALUATION OF THE

PROTOTYPE MODEL

Overall the prototype was successful in its

objectives of testing the rigidity of the skin

frame components joined by the adhesion

of shared fin plates adjacent beams. I

encountered an unexpected result as the

laser cut card beams between the pipes

proved to be inefficient at providing sufficient

rigidity to the skeletal structure. However, I

was not concerned that this would require

altering my design as the card beams do

not adequately represent the material

properties of the steel beam members they

are portraying which are strong and rigid.

FIG 159. DIAGRAM OF ALGORITHM FOR TECTONIC DESIGN DEVELOPED USING GRASSHOPPER WHICH

APPLIED THE COMPONENTS THROUGHT THE DESIGN ACCORDING TO THE ANGLE OF THE MAIN BEAM AND PIPE

COMPONENTS OF THE SKIN AND SKELETON LAYERS

Exploded & divided wire

curves into 16 segments

SKIN FINS

Moved 40mm in

z axis

Divided into 2 segments

with 3 points

Moved 40mm in

z axis

Extended

Divided into 2 parts with 3

points

Extended Divide into 10 segments

Created line between

item 0 and 1 from list

Used list item to retrieve

item 0 and 1, the first and

second points on the curve

Divided into 70

segments

C2

C1

C1

C3

C2

C4


Reversed list

SKELETON FINS C9

BEAMS

SCREW HOLES ON FINS AND CLEAT

Extruded curve

Face normal

Center point of

area


Fin 2: Protruding plates that correspond to unique angles of

frame

Made line between

these points

Extruded 35mm in

z axis

Moved 10mm in z

axis

Divided points in half to find mid point. Retrieved points on either

side

Drew horizontal line between

points

Extruded C7 line along vertical C5

curve


Retrieved and drew line between the midpoints

( item 1 from list) of each frames relative interior and exterior

curves

Extruded 40mm in negative z axis

Vertical line 40mm long in z axis starting

from middle point

Beams between frame beams

I-beam cleat plate

Fin 1: between horizontal and vertical pipes

Divided into 2

Created line between

item 0 and 1

Extruded 60mm in z

axisMoved

10mm in z axis

C7

C5

Used list item to retrieve item 0 and

1, the first and second points on

the curve

Extruded 30mm in positive and negative z

direction

Used list item to retrieve item 0 and 1, the first

and second points on the

curve

Extruded 30mm in positive and negative z

direction

Skeletal fins near vertical pipe

Skeletal fins near horizontal pipe ends

Moved up by same distance C8 curve

ends extended by at each end

Moved up 1/2 x depth of skin

frame

Skin Fins near vertical pipe

Type 1: Single circle of 10mm diameter aligned to surface. Connects sub triangle frame

components

Shortened by extending in

z direction until just

shorter than fin height

Divided curve into 2

segments with 3 points

Type 2: 3 circles with 10mm diameter aligned to surface.

On C9 and skin fins Line segment from point.

Length <1/2 x height of fins

Circle from normal,

center and radius

Circle from normal,

center and radius


FABRICATION

Cut triangular and trapezoid glazing panels according to digital model

specifications

1) Steel vertical pipe columns. Standard size throughout

design.

2) Custom fins and skeletal beams between poles with

specific angles.

3) Custom length poles and skin frame beams, I-beams and components. Can be modified

onsite if necessary.

TRIANGULAR FRAMING SYSTEM:

Bottom t-shaped plate of frame components screwed to main

frame beam.

Smaller triangulated units entirely assembled, with

subdivided framing components and beams joined

to main skin beams that run parallel to skeletal pipes

OFFSITE ASSEMBLY

JOINERY SYSTEM: fins welded to pipes.

Produce:

1

2Refined

Construction Process

TRANSPORT

Large preassembled

components

Smaller components: smaller triangular glazing units, joint

unit, individual panels, stones for triangular

platforms

Boat or large flat-bed truck

Smaller trucks or vans

Larger unassembled components: larger pipe & frame beams, glass panels

3

FIG 160. REFINED CONSTRUCTION PROCESS THAT INTEGRATES THE

NEW FULLY DEVELOPED TECTONIC SYSTEM WITH THE VERTICAL PIPE,

BEAM AND FIN CONNECTIONS.


Ground bulk excavated & stage and seating area dug out

Extensive reinforced support system located under where amphitheatre structure will connect to the

ground to counterbalance the overhanging opening

Concrete ground laid

ONSITE4

AMPHITHEATRE

Skeleton beams bolted to horizontal skeletal pipe fins

Concrete -to-steel pipe components that connect skeletal support system to ground

and reinforcement installed

Bolted to fins of custom vertical joint pipe

Skeletal system erected

Larger framing units assembled onsite, directly to vertical pipe joints connected to

skeletal system

Preassembled smaller framing units lifted into position by cranes and fastened to main

skin beams via I-beams

Glazing installed in framing unit

Top plate of framing unit screwed down to secure glazing panel

LANDSCAPING:

Support for timber topped platforms

placed before timber planks laid

Grass filled platforms filled with dirt. Grass plantings installed

Triangular platform stone base laid

MAINTENANCE

Glazing system can be partially disassembled by removing the top layer of the frame. Allows for removal and replacement of damaged glazing units and

cleaning.


C.3. Final Detail Model

After producing my prototype model which focused on the rigidity of the skin frame beam members, I decided to produce a detail model of the fully resolved vertical pipe joint component which is the main and most complex element in my tectonic system. I also printed a number of the adjoining components to demonstrate how this unit connects them together. To demonstrate the unique angles of the fins I have ommitted a few of the repeitive beam membersbut ensuring that a variation of this member is represented in the final detail model.

To fabricate my detail model of the core construction joinery unit I decided to use 3D printing due to the curved nature of the cylindrical pipe and the geometry of the ‘plug’ components that would be challenging to construct sufficiently well using laser cut methods.

3D printing is an additive process that translates and fabricates three dimensional digital models as physical structures, by adding and

binding ABS, resin or powder materials in successive layers according to the digital model geometry. 1

1 ‘Fab Lab 3D printer Guidelines’, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Design, Melbourne School of Design, The University of Melbourne, p. 3.

The Powder Printer doesn’t require or print supports. Suitable maximum print area of 170 mm l x w x h.

The ABS-Based Makerbot Replicator or UP 3D Printer which cannot do thin structures like the glazing unit plates, which span more than four times its thickness and prints non-removable supports.

The Photopolymer resin Form 1 3D Printer has a maximum print area smaller than the largest dimension of my model, 170mm. 2 2 ‘Fab Lab 3D printer Guidelines’, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Design, Melbourne School of Design, The University of Melbourne, p. 4.

Reasons for printing model using the powder-based Z Corp 3D Printer:

FIG 161. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF DIGITAL JOINT UNIT FROM

WHICH MY FINAL DETAIL MODEL IS DEVELOPED FROM


ABS, resin or powder materials in successive layers according to the digital model geometry. 1

1 ‘Fab Lab 3D printer Guidelines’, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Design, Melbourne School of Design, The University of Melbourne, p. 3.

FIG 162. PHOTOGRAPH OF COMPLETE FINAL DETAIL MODEL WITH PROTRUDING BEAM ELEMENTS ATTACHED WITH ‘BOLTS’ AND GLAZING FRAME UNIT IN PLACE

FABRICATION PROCESS OF FINAL DETAIL MODEL


A) Checked for Naked Edges to be joined.

Didn’t find any.

B) Converted solid polysurface geometry

into mesh, changing curved surfaces into

developable flat and triangulated surfaces.

C) Export mesh geometry as STL file to be

sent to FabLab for digital printing using the

3D Powder printer.

Adapted design for

fabrication purposes:

Protruding fins broke off during printing due to

thickness of fin and distance from screw holes to

edge of fin being less than recommended 2mm.

Although the actual fin elements used in construction

would be made of steel which is much stronger, this

complication has revealed possible points of structural

failure due to fragility which could prove to effect their

structural integrity and efficiency when constructed

Adjusted thickness of digital model, increasing fins

to 3mm thick and reducing the thickness of the pipe

for material efficiency. Maintained interior diameter

to ensure that glazing system plug would still fit.

Reprinted component 1:

FIG 164. COMPONENT 1B: REPRINTED VERTICAL PIPE WITH LARGER FINSFIG 163. COMPONENT 1A: VERTICAL PIPE WITH BROKEN FINS

1

2

FIG 162. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE OF DIGITAL

MESH GEOMETRY OF JOINT UNIT WHICH IS CONVERTED TO STL AND THEN SENT TO

FABLAB FOR PRINTING

FIG 165. COMPONENT 1A: SILVER COATED BEADS ACTING AS BOLT NUT

FIG 166. COMPONENT 1B ROUND TOPPED SILVER PINS CUT DOWN TO

REPRESENT BOLT HEAD AND SHAFT

FIG 167. COMPONENT 1: COMPONENTS 1A AND 1B JOIN TO FORM THE BOLT UNIT.

FIG 168. COMPONENT 2: BEAMS WITH CUSTOMIZED BOLT-END EDGES CORRESPONDING TO ANGLE OF CONNECTING STRUCTURAL MEMBERS


Assembled component 1 and used it to fasten component 2 beams to corresponding protruding

fins on component 1A through aligned holes in fins and beams.

FIG 169-171. COMPONENT 4: GLAZING FRAME UNIT WITH PLUG:

A) T-SHAPED BOTTOM PLATE WITH ATTACHED ‘PLUG’; WITH

CORRESPONDINGB) TOP PLATE

3

FIG 174 -175. STEP 3 OF FINAL DETAIL MODEL FABRICATION PROCESS WITH COMPONENT 1B


FIG 172. (LEFT) CLOSE OF UP BEAM BOLTED TO PARTIALLY ASSEMBLED COMPONENT 1AFIG 173. (RIGHT) COMPONENT 1A PARTIALLY ASSEMBLED

Repeated steps 3 and 4 with component 1B5

Attached components 4A and 4B together and placed on

component 1

4


FIG 176. (TOP LEFT) COMPONENT 1B WITHOUT BEAMS ATTACHED WITH GLAZING FRAME UNIT ONTOP

FIG 177. (MIDDLE LEFT) CLOSE UP OF GLAZING FRAME UNIT END RESTING ON SKIN FRAME BEAM

FIG 178. (RIGHT) CLOSE UP OF GAP BETWEEN TOP AND BOTTOM COMPONENTS OF GLAZING FRAME UNIT WHERE GLASS PANEL WOULD FIT

FIG 179. CLOSE UP OF SKIN SECTION OF FINAL DETAIL MODEL COMPLETELY ASSEMBLED


FIG 180. CLOSE UP OF SKELETON PORTION OF JOINT UNIT COMPLETELY ASSEMBLED.

FIG 181. SYSTEM OF BOLTING BEAMS TO CORRESPONDING SKELETAL BEAMS


FIG 182. PERSPECTIVE OF COMPLETED FINAL DETAIL MODEL OF JOINT UNIT


C.4. Learning Objectives & Outcomes

OBJECTIVE 1: “INTERROGAT[ING] A BRIEF” BY CONSIDERING THE PROCESS OF BRIEF FORMATION IN THE AGE OF OPTIONEERING ENABLED BY DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES;

optioneering offers the rapid and systematic exploration of numerous design options by utilizing parametric design tools. These outcomes, coupled with simulation analysis, are ‘sifted through’ by using Computational optimization to find the design that best fits the objectives of the brief. 1

Although I did not know it at the time, in part B I had begun exploring the rapid design methodology of optioneering in my production of over 80 design options in the generation of matrices intended to push the algorithms for BanQ and my own reverse engineered algorithm for the Swiss Re to their limits (Fig. 48-53, 70). Although I was mildly aware 1 David Gerber and Forest Flager, ‘Teaching Design Optioneering: A Method for Multidisciplinary Design Optimization’, Standford University Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, (2011), abstract, <http://cife.stanford.edu/node/713> [accessed 31 October 2014].

Objectives

Feedback from final presentation crit

Following my presentation, I received four main points of feedback during my crit, predominantly about improvements I could make in my graphic representation.

The first was that my tectonic system was well developed and utilized parametric modelling, a marked an improvement from the rudimentary spherical system I had developed in Part B.

Secondly, the exploded axonometric of the layers of the amphitheatre structure (Fig. 183) was unclear and could be improved. Following this advice, I did another exploded isometric plan that portrayed the designs layers more clearly (Fig. 146) by separating them further and ensuring that they didn’t overlap. Furthermore, as my design is relatively large and some of the elements in the layers quite small, I added close up views of the layers to provide greater clarity.

The third piece of feedback I received was that I needed to produce a rendering showing the experience from inside the structure. For the presentation I had used figure 185 to portray the atmosphere in the amphitheatre formed by the light shining through the patterned glass panels in their respective colours. As this render was not very good at achieving this objective I spent numerous hours producing more renders, exploring the materials and lighting settings. However, I was unable to render the underside of the glass panels which always came out grey or black, despite following instructions and tutorials online on rendering materiality with V-ray. Instead, I took to Photoshop to create this atmosphere, selecting and colouring the panels ‘manually’ with their respective hues and levels of transparency,

which created the glowing blue effect I had envisaged.

Lastly, the renders I had included in the presentation didn’t sufficiently demonstrate the use of colour in the panels, and consequently didn’t do the design justice. To remedy this I reviewed the renders, and found that in some of them the representation of the colouring greatly improved just by lightening the weight of the vector line-work which had drowned out and overpowered the rendered image. I also produced a number of other perspective renders like figure 129 in which the colouring ‘pops’.


Objectives

that these iterations formed part of the explorative process leading up to the final design for the LAGI brief, the objectives of the brief had not largely influenced the manner in which I produced them. I moved away from the energy objective of the LAGI brief and instead developed my own selection criteria to select the most successful design outcome through my own logic and reasoning rather than through simulation analysis or computational optimization. In this regard I had not utilized the second component of optioneering in the development of my final design. However, I had begun exploring the use of such analysis in my week 7 sketch (fig. 49-52 of sketchbook). Provided with more time I would have liked to utilize this analytical algorithm to explore my design further by tilting the glass panels with the objective of receiving solar radiation and utilizing this analystical algorithm to determine their angle according to which angle would allow for maximum solar penetration.

OBJECTIVE 2: DEVELOPING “AN ABILITY TO GENERATE A VARIETY OF DESIGN POSSIBILITIES FOR A GIVEN SITUATION” BY INTRODUCING VISUAL PROGRAMMING, ALGORITHMIC DESIGN AND PARAMETRIC MODELLING WITH THEIR INTRINSIC CAPACITIES FOR EXTENSIVE DESIGN-SPACE EXPLORATIONJust as I had done with my exploration of the reverse engineered algorithm for the Swiss Re (Fig. 70), My final design was achieved through the development of various algorithms and exploration of iterations generated from them until I reached a design option that I deemed to be the most successful. This was especially the case for determining the most successful patterning and landscaping arrangements.

OBJECTIVE 3: DEVELOPING “SKILLS IN VARIOUS THREE- DIMENSIONAL MEDIA” AND SPECIFICALLY IN COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY, PARAMETRIC MODELLING, ANALYTIC DIAGRAMMING AND DIGITAL FABRICATION;

Quite frankly I’m surprised at how much my parametric modelling techniques have improved since the start of the semester when I had no previous experience or even knowledge of computation, parametrics or programming and only minimal experience. From my initial difficulty and hesitation to generate a volume algorithmically in the week 1 sketch task (Fig. 2 sketchbook), I have since formed the monster of a definition that encompasses numerous smaller algorithms to produce my whole design (Fig. 81 sketchbook). Although my skills could still improve, they have excelled what I expected to be able to achieve in this short time. While I saw some appreciation for the efficiency for using algorithms to design repetitive elements, I had not fully understood the advantages of using this capability until I developed the joinery unit of my tectonic system in C.2. The idea of manually producing each fin plate at specific angles that correspond to the angle that their adjoining beam or pipe members need to be orientated in order to form the shape of the amphitheatre, is quite frankly terrifying!

OBJECTIVE 4: DEVELOPING “AN UNDERSTANDING OF RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARCHITECTURE AND AIR” THROUGH INTERROGATION OF DESIGN PROPOSAL AS PHYSICAL MODELS IN ATMOSPHERE;

Considering the design within the context of the surroundings is an important element in design development as the scale, orientation and aesthetic relationship with surrounding buildings cannot be fully understood until they are considered in tandem


design, and utilizing Photoshop to portray the emotive atmosphere experienced within the amphitheatre due to the patterning of the glass in different hues of blue.

OBJECTIVE 6: DEVELOP CAPABILITIES FOR CONCEPTUAL, TECHNICAL AND DESIGN ANALYSES OF CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS;

Although the majority of My exploration of contemporary architectural projects was mainly done in parts A and B, the knowledge I gained from their analysis carried through to part C, especially the skeleton and skin system employed in the design of the Swiss Re which remained a prominent aspect of my final design and drove its development. While I did not use specific precedents in developing my tectonic system, I took inspiration from traditional construction methodologies and the standard tectonic system associated with curtain wall systems.

OBJECTIVE 7: DEVELOP FOUNDATIONAL UNDERSTANDINGS OF COMPUTATIONAL GEOMETRY, DATA STRUCTURES AND TYPES OF PROGRAMMING;

Getting a handle on programming logic or ‘algorithmic thinking’ was probably the hardest part of the design process for me. While I could follow video tutorials and instructions relatively easily, I struggled to apply them to other scenarios. Although I felt I had understood the theory in the particular instance used in the tutorial, ran into road-blocks. As I waged through this difficult learning process, I began to become more confident in adapting algorithms and began programming my own algorithms from scratch. This shift is evident in my second attempt at the array of seats along a set of stairs. The initial attempt, employed and developed in part B, drew inspiration from an amalgamation of tutorials and instructions and resulted in fiddly

with the site. I was very aware of the large scale of the design site from the onset. This awareness largely drove the development of my design, influencing my decision to propose designing according to the programme of a concert hall/amphitheatre that takes advantage not only of the large site but also of its relative isolation from areas that would be bothered by loud sounds. I also began exploring how the rest of the site would be used in relation to the main amphitheatre feature. Transforming the digital design of my tectonic system into two physical models, a prototype to test the overall system and a final detail of the main element of this system, the vertical pipe joint, allowed me test whether they would be structurally feasible.

OBJECTIVE 5: DEVELOPING “THE ABILITY TO MAKE A CASE FOR PROPOSALS” BY DEVELOPING CRITICAL THINKING AND ENCOURAGING CONSTRUCTION OF RIGOROUS AND PERSUASIVE ARGUMENTS INFORMED BY THE CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE.

Case proposals can be a bit of a mixed experience for me. Although I may not have graphically represented my presentations as well as some other individuals did, I happily took the criticism and attempted to address the suggestions made to improve the conveyance of my ideas graphically. This transformation in my graphic representation is evident in the evolution of my renders. My interim presentation and part B renders were very rudimentary renders using rhino, while I started to explore the capabilities of V-ray for my final presentation and part C. Utilizing V-ray allowed me to show the materiality of my design more effectively, with the transparency of the glass and shine of the steel members portraying the lightness of the structure I had envisaged. Following my final presentation I improved my representation further, adjusting the thicknesses of the vector lines, re-doing my exploded axonometric to more clearly portray my


outcome that didn’t line up and a set number of stairs that I struggled to adjust. The second attempt I developed using the general knowledge I had gained of programming logic, manipulating the lists and trees with cull lists and putting them into series for further manipulation, worked a charm. The arrangement of the seats matched the curvature of the steps and I could easily change the tread and riser of the stairs and the steps would follow!

OBJECTIVE 8: BEGIN DEVELOPING A PERSONALISED REPERTOIRE OF COMPUTATIONAL TECHNIQUES SUBSTANTIATED BY THE UNDERSTANDING OF THEIR ADVANTAGES, DISADVANTAGES AND AREAS OF APPLICATION.

I never thought it would be possible but I have come to feel as though I have developed (somewhat) of a Handle of culling lists, at least relative to my initial battle against them in the week 3 sketch. In generating my final design I employed culling in almost every algorithm I developed. One technique that I became particularly versed in is using cull lists to selected items based on their distance from a set point and manipulating them according to this distance. I used this technique in the triangular platform landscaping, to exclude the triangles immediately surrounding and underneath the amphitheatre, to increase their size as they near the amphitheatre and to increase in elevation according to their distance to referenced curve.

In developing my tectonic system I came to appreciate the advantages and also encountered the disadvantages of algorithmic modelling. While it allowed me to repeat my joinery system throughout the design, some of the elements that formed the smaller triangular units were too close and overlapped. The complex geometry I was able

to achieve by utilizing grasshopper hindered my ability to apply my tectonic system throughout its entirety without encountering some hiccups. To develop these few overlaps I would need to address them individually.

Though this has been a hard uphill battle to get a handle on algorithmic and parametric modelling and programming, riddled with bouts of frustrated road blocks, I have come out of it happy with the progress I have made. Never had I thought I would be able to design such a geometrically complex and intricate design through a method in which I didn’t have a designed structure already in mind. Although I was hesitant to embrace them, and am still relatively new to it, I can see the benefits of computational and generative techniques and plan to utilize them, where suitable, in my future designs.


Appendix of renders produced for final presentation that I have since improved

FIG 183. EXPLODED ISOMETRIC PLAN PRODUCED FOR FINAL PRESENTATION WHICH HAS

SINCE BEEN REVISED AS FIGURE 146 WHICH MORE CLEARLY

PORTRAYS THE DESIGN


FIG 184. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE USED IN FINAL PRESENTATION. I DID FURTHER RENDERS (FIG. 127-130) WITH IMPROVED MATERIALITY, LIGHTING AND LINE WEIGHTS THAT MORE EFFECTIVELY CONVEY MY DESIGN.

FIG 185. RENDERED PERSPECTIVE USED IN FINAL PRESENTATION TO PORTRAY THE ATMOSPHERE IN THE AMPHITHEATRE FORMED BY THE LIGHT SHINING THROUGH THE PATTERNED GLASS.


Part C Image List

Part C Bibliography

Fig 110-118. Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

Fig 119. ‘Aerial photo of site’, LAGI 2014 Annex Documents, LAGI, <http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/> [accessed 1 October 2014].

Fig 120. ‘Panoramic view from site, LAGI 2014 Annex Documents, LAGI, <http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/>[accessed 1 October 2014].

Fig 121. ‘ Panoramic view of waterfront from site’,LAGI 2014 Annex Documents, LAGI, http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/.

Fig 122. ‘Aerial photo of site’, LAGI 2014 Annex Documents, LAGI, <http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/> [accessed 1 October 2014].

Fig 123. Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

Fig 124. ‘Aerial perspective photo of site’, LAGI 2014 Annex Documents, LAGI, < http://

landartgenerator.org/designcomp/> [accessed 1 October 2014].

Fig 125-140. Waring, Sarah, Rhino renders using Grasshopper, Studio Air, (2014).

Fig 141. ‘Simple connections’, SteelConstruction.info, <http://www.steelconstruction.info/Simple_

connections#Beam-to-beam_and_beam-to-column_connections >[accessed 10 October 2014].

Fig 143. Leia Mais, ‘Spider Glass’, Alumigraph, <http://www.alumigraph.com.br/galeria.html> [accessed 11 October 2014].

Fig 144. PittCo ‘Aluminum and glass curtain wall’, ArchiExpo, <http://www.archiexpo.com/

prod/pittco-architectural-metals-inc/aluminum-glass-curtain-walls-58265-493490.html

> [accessed 12 October 2014].

‘Fab Lab 3D printer Guidelines’, Faculty of Architecture, Building and Design, Melbourne School of Design, The University of Melbourne.

Ferry, Robert and Elizabeth Monoian, ‘LAGI 2014 Design Guidelines’, http://landartgenerator.org/designcomp/ [accessed 10 October 2014].

Gerber, D. and Forest Flager, ‘Teaching Design Optioneering: A Method for Multidisciplinary Design Optimization’, Standford University

Center for Integrated Facility Engineering, (2011), abstract, <http://cife.stanford.edu/node/713> [accessed 31 October 2014].

‘Simple connections’, SteelConstruction.info, http://www.steelconstruction.info/Simple_connections#Beam-

to-beam_and_beam-to-column_connections [accessed 10 October 2014].

Vigener, Nik, PE. and Mark A. Brown, ‘Building Envelope Design Guide – Curtain Walls’, Whole Building Design Guide,

(2012), <http://www.wbdg.org/design/env_fenestration_cw.php> [accessed 13 October 2014] .


FIG 186: THE END PRODUCT OF A SEMETERS WORHT OF EXPLORATION OF ALGORITHMIC MODELLING AND PARAMETRIC DESIGN

Waring_Sarah_582815_FinalJournal

Documents

Transcript of Waring_Sarah_582815_FinalJournal