Studio AIR 2017S1 Final Journal - Cassandra Lee 761006

STUDIO AIR

2017 Semester 1

Cassandra Lee 761006 Studio #8 - Finnian Warnock

Table of Contents 5 0.0 - Introduction 7 Part A 9 A.1 - Design Futuring 11 A.2 - Design Computation 13 A.3 Composition/Generation 14 A.4 - Conclusion 15 A.5 - Learning Outcomes 17 A.6 - Algorithmic Sketches 19 Part B 21 B.1 - Research Field 23 B.2 - Case Study 1.0 27 B.3 - Case Study 2.0 29 B.4 - Technique Development 33 B.5 - Technique: Prototypes 34 B.6 - Technique: Proposal 35 B.7 - Learning Objectives and Outcomes 37 B.8 - Algorithmic Sketches 39 Part C 41 C.1 - Design Proposal 43 C.2 - Tectonic Elements and Prototypes 49 C.3 - Final Detail Model 55 C.4 - Learning Objectives and Outcomes 57 References 59 Image List

4

CONCEPTUALISATION

• 0.0 - Introduction • I was born and raised in Melbourne, and am currently undertaking my third year of a Bachelor of Environments with a major in architecture.

Throughout the first two years of this degree, I have had limited exposure to digital methods of design. I have had experiences with softwares such as AutoCAD and Rhino, but not to the extent that this studio interacts with them. I am keen to learn about Grasshopper and methods of parametric design, and gain experience in using the program. I am also looking forward to extend my skills in terms of fabrication, as I have limited to no experience in this area as well.

Similarly with the software, I am not very knowledgeable in terms of digital and parametric design and its advantages and direction. Especially with this method being or becoming very prominent, this will be key to my development in architectural studies.

This studio will be a huge learning curve for me, but I am looking forward to expanding my skills and learning about parametric design.

CONCEPTUALISATION 5

6

CONCEPTUALISATION

Part A

CONCEPTUALISATION 7

Bloom - dO|Su Studio Architecture

Defuturing Humankind has reached a critical point in time, where it is not certain that we have a future. This could be attributed towards our unsustainable lifestyles, one of excess and anthropocentricity 2. Fry suggests that though the definition of design has shifted towards aesthetic and style due to the availability of design software, it can be brought back to a point where designers are aware of and responsible for the impact that their designs will have2.

FIG. 1

FIG. 2

8

CONCEPTUALISATION

• A.1 - Design Futuring • Skyfarm - Roger Stirk Harbour

Bloom is a project that looks at responding to the environment 3 . The project uses thermo reactive plates combined with computational pattern making to create a structure that alters its shape depending on the amount of heat or sun that it is exposed to.

This project was originally intended as a sun tracking device 4, however it does have potential towards being a helpful device in terms of passive energy shading. This contributes towards design futuring in terms of looking for low- to no energy consumption, counteracting “our unsustainable lifestyles”.

Similarly, the Skyfarm looks to counter current methods, but in this case, tackles farming’s high land usage by proposing a vertical, bamboo framed farm 5. This could have impacts, not only on land usage, but on transport, non renewable fuel usage, and greenhouse gas emissions. Furthermore, it is designed to be a re-circulating system 5, minimising wastage in the tower. It also incorporates education, furthering the impact on the future.

FIG. 3

FIG. 4

CONCEPTUALISATION 9

ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

The Development of Computers in Design The design process has undergone a major shift with the introduction of computation. The process that was once completely analogue slowly began to include new technologies. This began with the emergence of parametric design, enabled designers to research through design and design with material systems as tectonic systems, and even allows completely automated fabrication 6.

However, while the ability of computers is amazing analytically, Kalay (2004) emphasises that they are unable to create nor think independently. This then brings the question: how do computers fit into the design process? Kalay suggests that designers must work in tandem with computers, to make use of computers abilities where theirs fall short, and to use theirs where computers fall short7.

FIG. 5

FIG. 6

10

CONCEPTUALISATION

• A.2 - Design Computation • Al Bahar Tower - Aedas Architects

The ICD/ITKE’s research pavilion of 2011 is a prime example of design computation. It was a predetermined requirement at the beginning of the project that the pavilion would be developed in a closed information loop. This resulted in the form being closely interlinked with the structural aspect of the pavilion. The research pavilion also made use of digital fabrication through the information loop, enabling machine involvement 8 .

However, the pavilion did rely on outside factors, reflecting Kay’s argument that current computation cannot be entirely independent.

Experiments were conducted in regards to the joints, and factored into calculations 8 .

The Al Bahar Tower also makes use of computation in creating its responsive facade. It operates off of a parametric base to define the facade’s geometry 9, as well as calculations in the sun’s movement10. This capitalises off design software capabilities, taking data and combining it with the parametric definition, enabling a concept that would not be possible without it.

FIG. 7

FIG. 8

CONCEPTUALISATION 11

Serpentine Gallery Pavilion (2002) - Toyo Ito, Cecil Balmond, Arup

Computation Computation can serve a range of purposes within the design process and to designers themselves. Computers have come to perform numerous different tasks to assist designers, from being a drawing tool or a digital way of carrying out existing procedures, to using computers as tools to further their skills and abilities11.

Generation Generation is creation based on parametric rules in computation. Many generated designs have originated from an understanding of the rules behind natural phenomena, such as the branching of trees and the flocking of birds, rather than studying them from a visual standpoint.

FIG. 9

FIG. 10

12

CONCEPTUALISATION

• A.3 Composition/Generation • Voussoir Cloud - IwamotoScott

The Serpentine Gallery Pavilion of 2002 demonstrates the use of an algorithm to determine the design and structure of its facade. The facade seems complex, or random, however it was calculated, derived from an algorithm12. Rotating around a central axis, a series of squares are decreasingly scaled, overlapping to give the triangles and trapezoids, and are then bent over the cuboid form of the pavilion. Additionally, the edges of the series of squares form the structure of the pavilion13.

The Pavilion utilised generation in its development, building the design from an algorithm, without aiming for a certain form from the outset.

Similarly, the Voussoir Cloud by IwamotoScott is based in the generation of a design from an algorithm, rather than aiming to create a certain form. The generation of the form is a result of structure, material, and the connection method14 .

FIG. 11

FIG. 12

CONCEPTUALISATION 13

• A.4 - Conclusion •

14

CONCEPTUALISATION

• A.5 - Learning Outcomes • Learning about the theory in this part of the course has been extremely helpful in understanding the basis of this studio. In comparison to the beginning of the semester, my knowledge regarding the use of architectural computing has grown, extending to include the current uses of parametric design, where it might take architectural design in the future, and how new froms can be generated rather than created.

With this, it is possible to improve on past designs and build from precedent projects, whether by working from them and altering them to include other aspects, or learning from them and incoporating parts of their ideas into other ideas.

CONCEPTUALISATION 15

16

FIG. 13

FIG. 15

FIG. 14

FIG. 16

CONCEPTUALISATION

• A.6 - Algorithmic Sketches •

FIG. 17

Week 1 Attractor points Fig 13 + 14 Week 2 Recreating Heatherwick Cathedral Fig 15 + 16 Week 3 Image Sampling Fig 17 + 18 FIG. 18

CONCEPTUALISATION 17

18

CRITERIA DESIGN

Part B

CRITERIA DESIGN

19

20

FIG. 19

FIG. 20

FIG. 21

FIG. 22

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.1 - Research Field • Patterning

The field of patterning in parametric design involves change in a predictable and repeated manner. The Oxford dictionary defines “pattern” in this context as “a regular and intelligible form or sequence discernible in the way in which something happens or is done” [CITE]. As such, patterning in parametric design is no different, it is only applied in a different context.

Potential issues in fabrication Fabricating a project of this nature can have many issues in the fabrication process. Units require precise labelling as well as ensuring that they are able to be unrolled properly. If this is not the case, the entire design can fail.

Other issues could largely revolve around the support of the design and its connections. If connections are not meticolously planned, then again, this will impact the model in fabrication and construction. Additionally, many patterning projects have a supporting system, which also requires precise planning.

CRITERIA DESIGN

21

22

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.2 - Case Study 1.0 • Spanish Pavilion - FOA

FIG. 23

CRITERIA DESIGN

23

24

CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN

25

One Kearny Lobby - IwamotoScott

FIG. 24

FIG. 25

26

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.3 - Case Study 2.0 •

CRITERIA DESIGN

27

28

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.4 - Technique Development •

CRITERIA DESIGN

29

30

CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN

31

32

FIG. 26

FIG. 27

FIG. 28

FIG. 29

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.5 - Technique: Prototypes •

Prototypes at this stage were largely about the material properties and connection types.

As can be seen in fig. 26, the material is quite stiff when bent, and does not bend or warp to an extreme extent. Taking advantage of this, a first unit prototype was made, resulting in a form that was able to hold its own curve. This also resulted in interesting views, presenting a circular shape when viewed from the side, and a diamond or triangle when viewed from the top or front respectively.

In terms of connections, there were limited options available in terms of simplicity and accessability.

In wanting to keep the units largely self supporting without the aid of other connections, the Dragon Skin Pavilion was referenced. The Dragon Skin Pavilion consists of multiple timber panels that slot together at predetermined angles, and is able to hold its form with its method. A similar technique was tested in fig. 28, and was successful to an extent. The connection held under slight force, but was prone to shifting and twisting.

Other cut angles were tested, but resulted in the material breaking or folding, and being weaker than the prototype shown in fig. 28.

Moving on to look at other methods of connection, options were limited by accessibility, and as such custom 3D printed joints were not viable. Instead, simple connections like eyelets were explored. The results were promising, providing a strong hold under pressure, with no twisting of the connection point.

CRITERIA DESIGN

33

• B.6 - Technique: Proposal • The design proposal for this project centres around parametric patterning and material properties.

Utilising patterning can result in simple but effective aesthetics, and are able to take on a variety of affects depending on what is best suited to the context.

The form and affects also depend on the material and its capabilites. As such, this plays a large part in the design proposal.

Drawbacks exist within the current proposal, largely surround the material type, rather than its properties. This can easily be remedied by selecting a new material more suited to a ballroom, however the challenges and unique look in the orthogonal paper weave would be interesting going forward.

Rather than pursuing a new material altogether, a similar but perhaps less rustic could be used.

34

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.7 - Learning Objectives and Outcomes • Throughout Part B, there were many experiences to learn from and objectives to complete, largely focused around expanding my abilities in terms of parametric design and the use and construction of algorithms.

This was achieved through the observation and manipulation of existing algorithms, as well as the recreation of a project from scratch. These methods were highly effective in building my skills in this area, and understanding data and how it is used in Grasshopper. This enabled me to develop a variety of possibilities, models and prototypes.

CRITERIA DESIGN

35

36

FIG. 30

FIG. 32

FIG. 31

FIG. 33

CRITERIA DESIGN

• B.8 - Algorithmic Sketches •

FIG. 34

Week 4 Lunchbox Diamond Panels Fig 30 + 31 Week 5 Surface Frames Fig 32 + 33 Week 6 Recreating SAHMRI Fig 34 + 35 FIG. 35

CRITERIA DESIGN

37

38

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Part C

PROJECT PROPOSAL

39

40

PROJECT PROPOSAL

• C.1 - Design Proposal •

The Part B interim presentation provided many points to work forward from. A large amount of work from this point will focus on addressing the material properties, and perhaps altering the material in use.

The material properties were not properly addressed in Part B, and as such, more effort will be put into looking specifically at this aspect. In particular, the orthogonality of the material must be addressed.

The concept behind this proposal must move forward from Part B, moving further than simplicity.

It will incorporate the basis of patterning parametric design, and combining it with material properties to a greater extent. This means that the materiality will play a bigger part than merely providing basic constraints. The current issues will be addressed, and work towards the challenges in the material properties being turned to strengths or advantages.

Another point to focus on would be capitalising on the found form with the opening and the material holding the curve on its own.

This could prove to be a highly interesting perspective. As advised in the Interim Presentation, this will be pushed much further.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

41

FIG. 36

42

PROJECT PROPOSAL

• C.2 - Tectonic Elements and Prototypes • Unit Prototype #1

The primary focus in the prototyping stage was on the individual units, and solving the issues there before moving on to connecting multiple units together.

This first attempt looked at the units performance with minimal changes to the original algorithm.

The results were as expected, the unit would not hold the curved opening on its own, and so this became the main issue to be resolved.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

43

FIG. 37

44

FIG. 38

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Unit Prototype #2

Attempting to force the material to hold a curve led to the need to determine ways to connect to sides of a central cut.

The centre cut and join method worked well, resulting in a strong, wide opening in the unit. However, problems arose when unrolls of units with larger arcs warped away from a 90 degree angle, as can be seen in fig # and #.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

45

FIG. 39

FIG. 40

46

FIG. 41

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Unit Prototype #3

This prototype was aimed at resolving the issue of certain units unrolling with edges that curve away from 90 degrees. Fig. # demonstrates the method that was implemented.

In order to make this viable, another solution was needed in order to create the proper curve in the unit. It was found that the longer the central cut, the lower the arc.

The results were much more promising, implementing a relationship between the angle of the unit, the height of the arc and the length of the central cut in the unit.

Further improvements from here would be in increasing the accuracy of the relationship.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

47

FIG. 42

48

PROJECT PROPOSAL

• C.3 - Final Detail Model • Layout Prototype #1

The process of producing the final model began with orienting the material, as well as finalising the connections and their order.

Initially planning to nest the unrolled geometry efficiently without any particular orientation, this resulted in some material weakness on the majority of the unit edges. This could be detremental in terms of longevity.

As for the connection order, fig. # demonstrates the alternating pattern for the two major connection point types.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

49

FIG. 43

50

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Layout Prototype #2

This prototype aimed to address the material properties. The previous prototype revealed the issue of laser cutting across the grain of the material. In order to remedy this, this prototype purposefully rotated each unit half to align the majority of the edge along the grain.

The results were promising in terms of strength. The only exception came at the connection points, where occassionally the material would break apart. Unsure of whether this would change when introducing the forced curve, options such as moving the connection points or making the connections smaller were kept in mind.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

51

FIG. 44

52

FIG. 45

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Layout Prototype #3

The final prototype was the first attempt to combine the third element prototype with the second layout prototype.

Following the complication with the connection point weaknesses in the material, a smaller connection was attempted and was successful. The size difference can be seen in fig # and #. The material does not break at any point, and the change does not compromise the connection’s strength.

However, simply combining the two prototypes resulted in the loss of the curvature, which could be corrected by altering the angle to centre cut ratio to achieve the most accurate recreation.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

53

54

PROJECT PROPOSAL

• C.4 - Learning Objectives and Outcomes • Following the final presentations, there could be further development in this project. Currently, this focuses on pushing the individual units even further, emphasising the found form and the openings. Additionally, the material choice still poses issues, as it is not suitable for a ballroom. In this situation, an entirely new material could be used in conjunction with the current method. Since the current explorations have centred around the existing orthogonal pattern in the material, this would be brought over to the new material, perhaps experimenting with introducing new material patterns and experimenting with its effects on the material.

This studio and design project has had a large impact on my knowledge of architecture and design computation, from learning about the theory to putting it into practice. I am now able to create and manipulate parametric design algorithms, and use this to design and fabricate.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

55

56

PROJECT PROPOSAL

• References • 1. Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013) Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press) pp. 1-9, 33-45

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

2. Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16

12. “Serpentine Gallery Pavilion 2002 / Toyo Ito + Cecil Balmond + Arup”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily.com/344319/ serpentine-gallery-pavilion-2002-toyo-ito-cecilbalmond-arup> [accessed 6 June 2017]

3. “Do|Su STUDIO ARCHITECTURE”, DosuArch.Com, 2017 <http://dosu-arch.com/ bloom.html#> [accessed 6 June 2017] 4. “Bloom / DO|SU Studio Architecture”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily.com/215280/bloomdosu-studio-architecture> [accessed 6 June 2017] 5. Frearson, Amy, “Rogers Stirk Harbour Tackles Food Crisis With Vertical Farm”, Dezeen, 2017 <https:// www.dezeen.com/2016/03/17/skyfarm-rogers-stirkharbour-partners-global-food-crisis-vertical-farmconcept-bamboo/> [accessed 6 June 2017] 6. Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25

13. Rita Margarida Serra Fernandes (2013).

“Generative Design: a new stage in the design process”, < https://fenix.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/ downloadFile/395145541718/Generative%20 Design%20a%20new%20stage%20in%20the%20 design%20process%20-%20Rita%20Fernandes-%20 n%C2%BA%2058759.pdf> [accessed 6 June 2017] 14. “VOUSSOIR CLOUD - Iwamotoscott”, Iwamotoscott.Com, 2017 <http://www.iwamotoscott. com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 6 June 2017]

7. Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 8. “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd. Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2017 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=6553> [accessed 6 June 2017] 9. “Al Bahar Towers Responsive Facade / Aedas”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily. com/270592/al-bahar-towers-responsivefacade-aedas> [accessed 6 June 2017] 10. “Al Bahr Towers | Office & Workplace | AHR | Architects And Building Consultants”, Ahr-Global.Com, 2017 <http://www.ahr-global. com/Al-Bahr-Towers> [accessed 6 June 2017]

PROJECT PROPOSAL

57

Fig. 1 “Do|Su STUDIO ARCHITECTURE”, DosuArch.Com, 2017 <http://dosu-arch.com/ bloom.html#> [accessed 6 June 2017]

2017 <http://www.archdaily.com/344319/ serpentine-gallery-pavilion-2002-toyo-ito-cecilbalmond-arup> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 2 “Do|Su STUDIO ARCHITECTURE”, DosuArch.Com, 2017 <http://dosu-arch.com/ bloom.html#> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 10 “Serpentine Gallery Pavilion 2002 / Toyo Ito + Cecil Balmond + Arup”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily.com/344319/ serpentine-gallery-pavilion-2002-toyo-ito-cecilbalmond-arup> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 3 Frearson, Amy, “Rogers Stirk Harbour Tackles Food Crisis With Vertical Farm”, Dezeen, 2017 <https://www.dezeen.com/2016/03/17/ skyfarm-rogers-stirk-harbour-partnersglobal-food-crisis-vertical-farm-conceptbamboo/> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 4 Frearson, Amy, “Rogers Stirk Harbour Tackles Food Crisis With Vertical Farm”, Dezeen, 2017 <https://www.dezeen.com/2016/03/17/ skyfarm-rogers-stirk-harbour-partnersglobal-food-crisis-vertical-farm-conceptbamboo/> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 5 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2017 <http://icd.unistuttgart.de/?p=6553> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 6 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2017 <http://icd.unistuttgart.de/?p=6553> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 7 “Al Bahar Towers Responsive Facade / Aedas”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily. com/270592/al-bahar-towers-responsivefacade-aedas> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 8 “Al Bahr Towers | Office & Workplace | AHR | Architects And Building Consultants”, Ahr-Global.Com, 2017 <http://www.ahr-global. com/Al-Bahr-Towers> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 9 “Serpentine Gallery Pavilion 2002 / Toyo Ito + Cecil Balmond + Arup”, Archdaily,

58

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Fig. 11 Ong, Rob, “Voussoir Cloud By Iwamotoscott | Dezeen”, Dezeen, 2017 <https://www. dezeen.com/2008/08/08/voussoir-cloud-byiwamotoscott/> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 12 “VOUSSOIR CLOUD - Iwamotoscott”, Iwamotoscott.Com, 2017 <http://www.iwamotoscott. com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 13 Algorithmic Sketch Week 1 Fig. 14 Algorithmic Sketch Week 1 Fig. 15 Algorithmic Sketch Week 2 Fig. 16 Algorithmic Sketch Week 2 Fig. 17 Algorithmic Sketch Week 3 Fig. 18 Algorithmic Sketch Week 3 Fig. 19 “Winery Gantenbein / Gramazio & Kohler + Bearth & Deplazes Architekten”, Archdaily, 2017 <http://www.archdaily.com/260612/ winery-gantenbein-gramazio-kohler-bearthdeplazes-architekten> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 20 “Aqua Tower”, Studiogang.Com, 2017 <http://studiogang.com/project/ aqua-tower> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 21 “New Book From ARM Architecture Uncovers The Mysteries Of Their Projects | Architecture And Design”, Architecture And

• Image List • Design, 2017 <http://www.architectureanddesign. com.au/news/new-book-from-arm-architectureuncovers-the-myster> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 38 Unit Prototype #2 high arc unit unroll

Fig. 22 “De Young Museum - Data, Photos & Plans - Wikiarquitectura”, Wikiarquitectura, 2017 <https://en.wikiarquitectura.com/building/deyoung-museum/> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 40 Unit Prototype #3 pseudo algorithm

Fig. 23 Ceramicarchitectures.Com, 2017 <http:// www.ceramicarchitectures.com/obras/spanishpavilion-expo-2005/> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 24 “ONE KEARNY LOBBY - Iwamotoscott”, Iwamotoscott.Com, 2017 <http://www.iwamotoscott. com/ONE-KEARNY-LOBBY> [accessed 6 June 2017] Fig. 25 “ONE KEARNY LOBBY - Iwamotoscott”, Iwamotoscott.Com, 2017 <http://www.iwamotoscott. com/ONE-KEARNY-LOBBY> [accessed 6 June 2017]

Fig. 39 Unit Prototype #3 material bending diagram

Fig. 41 Unit Prototype #3 pseudo algorithm Fig. 42 Layout Prototype #1 connection order diagram Fig. 43 Layout Prototype #2 material orientation diagram Fig. 44 Layout Prototype #1 large connections Fig. 45 Layout Prototype #3 small connections

Fig. 26 Material bending demonstration Fig. 27 First unit prototype Fig. 28 Connection test 1 - slot Fig. 29 Connection test 2 - eyelet Fig. 30 Algorithmic Sketch Week 4 Fig. 31 Algorithmic Sketch Week 4 Fig. 32 Algorithmic Sketch Week 5 Fig. 33 Algorithmic Sketch Week 5 Fig. 34 Algorithmic Sketch Week 6 Fig. 35 Algorithmic Sketch Week 6 Fig. 36 Unit Prototype #1 idea clarification Fig. 37 Unit Prototype #2 low arc unit unroll

PROJECT PROPOSAL

59