Journal Air Final Submission

AIR JOURNAL STEFANIE JUDD 638809

2

CONCEPTUALISATION

STEFANIE JUDD 638809

CONCEPTUALISATION 3

CONTENTS: 1 Introduction

Part A: Conceptualisation

5 A.0 Design Futuring 8 A.1 Design Computation 12 A.2 Composition/Generation 14 A.3 Conclusion 14 A.4 Learning Outcomes 15 A.5 Appendix/Algorithmic Sketches

Part B: Criteria Design

20 21 27 33 39 43 48 49

B.1 B.2 B.3 B.4 B.5 B.6 B.7 B.8

Part C: Detailed Design

53 60 65 111

C.1 C.2 C.3 C.4

Research Field

Case Study 1.0

Case Study 2.0

Technique: Development Technique: Prototypes Technique: Proposal Learning Outcomes Algorithmic Sketches

Design Concept Tectonic Elements & Prototype Final Model Learning Objectives and Outcomes

INTRODUCTION ABOUT ME:

Many young people, by the time of high school, have absolutely no idea what they want to do with their lives. I was not one of these people. Since I was quite young I always dreamed of being a doctor, or a dentist, or a scientist, I loved maths and science, I still do. During my years of VCE I started spending my spare time designing models and building them, making cards, creating things, I used these things as a way of taking a break from my work. I think this is where my love for designing came from. Prior to this point I had not considered the idea of architecture, one thing lead to another, and well, here I am today. in my third and final year of the Bachelor of Environments, majoring in Architecture.

Since my first year of University I have managed to retain my love of modelling, and still do it for fun when I am not doing university work.

I have learnt that my design style initially starts out very much in a geometric form, however when I refine my ideas, they generally turn into a more organic design, very much the opposite to what I started with. Playing around with different renderings of hand made models in my spare time has taught me how to communicate my ideas of materials in a way that is clear and precise, something that I am only beginning to understand in the world of computer modelling.

Previously I have played around with digital design when I did Virtual Environments, however I only scraped the top of what I could even begin to fathom being able to do in terms of digital design. I am now starting, in this subject, to uncover a new world of extraordinary possibilities.

I have always been a fan of making things physically, with my hands, as I feel I can trust myself more than a computer. It is only now that I am beginning to delve into the world of digital design, that I realise that this fear was only there because I did not understand what I was trying to do and I felt safer sticking to what I know. This design studio will be very useful to me and a great opportunity to learn more about digital design.

1

CONCEPTUALISATION

PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE

My final lantern with the lights on inside it

I did the subject Virtual Environments in first semester first year university. This was my first ever designing subject and my very initial introduction to the world of digital modelling.

The brief was to create a lantern such that it interacts with your body somehow. We started with an image, in my case, a flower, and this became the basis of my design.

Using Rhinoceros we created our basic shape for our lanterns. Unlike second semester students, we were given the task of designing our lanterns on our own, so we all got a

first hand experience on how to use the program. I then proceeded to experiment with panelling tools to create the final design that can be seen here.

This subject was also my introduction to grasshopper, which we used to create tabs and prepare our designs for the card cutter.

I definitely found grasshopper overwhelming back then as we had little to no explanation on how to use it. After figuring out the basics of the program I found it was extremely useful and more efficient than trying to do the same things without the program.

Since Virtual Environments I have only used Rhinoceros a couple times. Hopefully this semester I will once again begin to learn and build up my skills such that the world of the digital becomes much more familiar.

My lantern design was picked from the tutorial to be on the podium (with me, since it was made to be held) at the lantern parade. This was a great experience and I had a great deal of fun, both making the lantern and presenting it.

CONCEPTUALISATION 2

3

CONCEPTUALISATION

PART A:

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 9

DESIGN FUTURING The Helix Bridge, Singapore

Fig. 1 Helix Bridge, Singapore

The Helix Bridge in Singapore, is a footbridge, finishing construction in 2010 after three years of construction.

As it was constructed relatively recently, I would not classify the design of the bridge radical, or never before seen. The bridge takes on the form and structure to that of a double helix, which is taken from DNA. This was interesting especially coming from a more scientific background.

In architecture and design of the past and present, we constantly see designers referencing nature, big structures extracting the shapes of wings from birds, or leaf patterns. The next step on from referencing nature is to delve deeper, change the scale. This reminds me of something Frank Lloyd Wright once wrote ‘we should look beneath her [nature’s] most obvious forms,’1 we should look deeper, and this is what the Helix Bridge has

done, it has looked ‘beneath’ into the cellular makeup of biology.

It is hard to predict the future, many have tried, some with success, and others with less. Futurologist Stuart Candy talks about how he illustrates potential futures by overlapping two-dimensional cones labeled, ‘plausible,’ ‘preferable,’ and ‘probable’.1 I found this an interesting way to vaguely interpret the trends of the imminent future. I feel the helix bridge fits into the new way of the future, it is plausible, preferable, and probable, this was reflected when the bridge won a prize for worlds best transport building.

It was important that this bridge was built as it provides a link across a river such that the pedestrians can walk across it.

The bridge, when viewed in plan forms an arc connecting the foreshore of the promenades such that the transition is somewhat continuous. Functionality is always important when designing.

Will it be more hassle than its worth?

Is it there purely on an aesthetic basis?

The Helix Bridge is very functional, it allows people to pass over the water as opposed to driving over the pre existing six lane bridge parallel to it, and it allows for people to enjoy the view and take in their surroundings.

Construction of the pedestrian bridge balances out the city as it contrasts the heavy and very much large overwhelming structure of the existing bridge by creating a light, free flowing, almost monumental, modern design. Being a recent addition to Singapore, the bridge complements the pre-existing design of the city which is also quite free flowing in terms of building design. I am not sure what designs are inspired by this bridge, but I am sure many will take away from this idea of looking further into the chemical make-up of the world.

McCarter, Robert. (2005). ‘On and By Frank Lloyd Wright: A Primer of Architectural Principles’, First

1

5

CONCEPTUALISATION

Published in ‘The Architectural Record’, 1908. (London: Phaidon), pp. 11-17 2

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

Parametric Bench, Oleg Soroko

Fig.2 Parametric Bench, Oleg Soroko

Oleg Soroko’s seating is very interesting in terms of modern design.

His design although a seat, can be used in so many different ways than that of a normal bench or chair. The shapes he creates intrigues people and encourages them to interact with the form and discover new ways to use, or situate themselves on it. This new sort of design for seating does not necessarily change the function of the object, but rather sheds some light on the simple pre existing chair, such that we see more interesting and different ways to interact with it.

This project was a built project, it was not just a paper project. I think it is important that designs like this are physically built because it is hard to grasp these new ideas involving parametric modeling as we are not used to them, therefore, we must physically create these ideas to understand them more. This issue is become less and less as parametric design becomes more available to us, leading to us being more understanding and comfortable with the forms. This chair seems very light, organic, and smooth in contrast to a typical sofa or bench.

It draws attention to itself without taking away from things around it.

It is interesting, but simple enough so that it does not get distracting. I think this mode of design will always be appreciated because there are so many possibilities of what can be done, nothing ever has to look the same. This style means we can take something old and renew it with added vigor and sense of freedom.

CONCEPTUALISATION 6

DESIGN COMPUTATION Synthetic Nature Fashion Shoot, Vlad Tenu Vlad Tenu’s Synthetic Nature fashion shoot was very interesting to me.

Conducted in 2014 it is quite a recent work of his, and after taking a look at his other designs, very much his ‘style’. To create something like this by hand would be amazing, very hard, and near impossible. Computational design is so helpful to us in that it opens up so many new opportunities and allows us to explore an entirely new world. Pen and paper can only take us so far, while it is true that many beautiful designs can come out of hand drawing, the emerging styles of design make it very hard for us to translate our ideas in our mind, onto the paper in front of us. Using computers definitely helps designers, it can inspire new ideas never before thought of,

it is faster than hand drawing (provided we can use the programs well), and it is much more accurate and easier to present to another person. If you look back through history a clear change in design style can be seen, take for example, architecture. As soon as modern architecture came through, it was very much either geometric shapes, or simple curved shapes.

Without too much ornamentation, and extremely different to the previous styles. With the help of computer generated design, we have been able to elaborate on our initial ideas, people may have had these almost parametric ideas in the past, but it was just impossible to fabricate, we did not have the resources. Now, we have everything we need, a mode of design,and the resources to physically build,

the impact computation has had on modern architecture is immense.

All this can be seen in the image to the left, the shear number of holes and detailed patterning would have been impossible to achieve to that standard, and now, it is all with the click of a button. Having the updated technology today provides us with so many more opportunities for the future, the ideas are endless.

CONCEPTUALISATION 8

Fig 3. Synthetic Nature, Vlad Tenu

Fig. 4 ContemPLAY Pavilion, Students at McGill University

9

CONCEPTUALISATION

ContemPLAY Pavilion, Students of McGill University

The ContemPLAY Pavilion was created for a competition by students of McGill University. It uses timber combined with an underlying steel structure to create the overall facade. I really like this design because of the way the wood is contorted to create quite organic shapes. I am not sure how something like this pavilion would be designed let alone constructed without the use of a computer. The things we are able to do are so diverse because of our new found computing skills.

In the past, timber has been used structurally, unseen in the finished product. Relatively recently there has been a flux in the use of timber, however it is often on the facade of a building in straight panels.

Computation provides us with opportinities to create shapes such as this seemingly infinite curved pavilion. It allows us to use materials in ways we never attempted before, to test theories on the computer instead of by hand, to ensure a design will work.

I don’t think that the geometry of the pavilion would have been seen as achievable in the past, it is only now that we are aided with parametric design that we can begin to explore further. Computers are analytical, they can create any shape or form, they never make a mistake.

Everything the computer does is precise, it does exactly what it is told.

There is no creativity on the side of the computer2, we are designing, the machine is simply following and doing exactly what we want. This is why we are able to achieve such beautiful forms such as this pavilion.

Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 3

CONCEPTUALISATION 10

Fig. 5,6. ICD-ITKE Research Pavilion

16

CONCEPTUALISATION

COMPOSITION/GENERATION ICD-ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14 / ICD-ITKE University of Stuttgart

This pavilion was designed by a group of people at the University of Stuttgart in Germany. The pavilion is a bionic research pavilion so the fact that people such as biologists and palaeontologists (as well as students) worked on the design was not surprising. This project focuses on biomimetic investigation and this is reflected in the final outcome.

‘Computation is redefining the practice of architecture’.3 This was stated by Brady Peters, an architect and computational designer. Taking one look at this pavilion it is impossible to not agree with his statement, the level of detail and accuracy required is above and beyond the abilities that we posses as humans.

Computational design provides us with the abilities to push past the previous boundaries and delve into a whole new world of design.

The design of the pavilion reminds me of string art, something I used to have fun playing around with as a child. This would always take me hours to complete, taking one look at this design there is no way that I would assume it was done by hand.

It would be impractical considering all the technology we have.

now able to make changes to designs that were a good idea to change but never were because it was far too difficult without the right equipment.3 The pavilion was created in separate segments in a way that it allowed it to be manually installed and easily fixed together.

Generation has been made much easier with the added use of technology, to adapt something in such a small way is much simpler than if designing by hand. It is not just the small aspects that are simple to change around now that we have computer aided design, we can also create many iterations of basic forms which aid in the design process. It can be used as a means for inspiration, and of communicating your ideas. Robert Woodbury talks about how parametric modelling addresses the limitations we have had in the past, and how we are

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

4

Woodbury, Robert F. (2014). ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 153–170 5

CONCEPTUALISATION 12

National Library of Kazakhstan, Astana This design for the National Library of Kazakhstan was one of many entries into an open international design competition. The design

by BIG architects took first prize in the competition and was said to be both ‘modern and rational and anchored in a classical vocabulary of traditional libraries.’5 I am interested by this design, it has a quite peaceful and light feel to it especially considering the large amount of space it occupies. This is most likely due to the light shining

through the holes in the facade creating the illusion. The ability to generate an image such as the one above is astounding, it looks as if it was actually built rather than simply an idea. This is where computers are making a huge difference in the lives of architects, they are now able to present their designs in a way that demonstrates their ideas completely and without any ambiguity.

This building is a parametric design, if

Fig. 7 National Library of Kazakhstan Competition Winner

we did not have access to the technology we have today, I can only imagine what a similar design would be like. For instance, the shape of the building, computer software is almost required to achieve the infinity circle shape. Even the facade of the building, all the little cut outs would have taken a very long time without parametric design. We are better off because of it, it allows us to express our ideas in more sophisticated ways, and it frees us from the limitations we had in the past.

http://www.worldarchitecturenews. com/wanmobile/mobile/article/12208 6

13

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCLUSION &LEARNING OUTCOMES In this design studio, I will learn so much more than I could ever imagine about parametric modelling and design, and I look forward to that.

The precedents I chose reflected the design styles that interest me the most, and I would like to explore these further. Prior to this subject the subject of parametric design never really entered my mind. Being exposed to all these new wonderful designs has been eye opening (and its only week 3). Often I have struggled in the past to create designs because I am not very good at representing my ideas by hand, however, I feel that this subject will give me the opportunity to design in a style that I enjoy more.

Learning about parametric modelling has really challenged me to think about the designs I see when out and about. Before, I never even had an inkling about how these designs were created.

Now I find myself wondering what tools they used to achieve those results, and consequently attempting (and somewhat failing at times) to try and figure out how to make the geometries I see myself.

This semester has opened up my eyes. If someone were to ask me what parametric design was at the beginning of the semester, I honestly can say I wouldn’t have much of a clue. When I think back to my past work where I didn’t use a modelling program, I can’t help but feel that if I were to go back now I could greatly improve my designs. Refine them if you will.

CONCEPTUALISATION 14

ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

Researching parametric design inspired me to try different shapes when using grasshopper.

I enjoyed researching parametric structures to see which shapes worked well and which ones did not. I chose these three sketches because they are the sketches which I experimented on to create something original, rather than following a specific set of instructions. Due to my new set of skills, I have so many ideas running through my head of what I want to model next.

15

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION

16

PART B:

CRITERIA DESIGN

Fig. 7 Skylar Tibbits VoltaDom

WHERE MAJOR OPTIONS ARE EVALUATED, TESTED AND SELECTED. 24

CONCEPTUALISATION

RESEARCH FIELD Biomimicry Biomimicry is when the design and production of materials and structures are modelled on or take the ideas of biological processes and entities.

The idea of biomimicry is interesting to me because I enjoy understanding how things work, delving past the initial skin of something. Many times instead of accepting things I learn, I feel the need to ask ‘but how?,’ almost to the level of an incessant five year old. Many designs use this idea of biomimicry today, not just architecturally but clothing wise, machines, and even everyday objects. People see that a certain creature has highly resistant skin, and they try to mimic the properties of that skin, manipulating them to create the same or similar effect.

With the idea of biomimicry it means we have a countless amount of new design opportunities, there are so many different living organisms in the world to research and understand, so many that we will never be out of ideas.

The issue is often taking the

initiative to look further, people often find it easier to stick with what they know, what others already know, it takes determined and resourceful designers to bother to look into these new ideas, and this lack of initiative can be an issue at times.

Aranda Lasch’s ‘The Morning Line’ and Skylar Tibbits ‘VoltaDom’ are two examples of biomimetic structures. They are complicated and use parametric design to create them, without this I doubt it would be possible to create designs such as these, they are far too complicated, precise, and detailed. It is interesting when Often biomimetic designs can researching biomimicry, just how be complicated and they can be many everyday objects, or well difficult to fabricate due to their known architectural designs, are different composition, and even actually biomimetic. Things such sometimes because of the lack of as some exercise clothes, fashion, technology, although this is less and buildings I know, all use various of an issue in todays day and age. ideas from biology, it opened my While most of the time it is possible eyes to all the possibilities. In the to fabricate these biomimetic past I had thought that biomimicry structures it takes much more was obvious, the composition of a planning and time than designs birds wing has been used to aid in of the past, this is because it is a the design of that of an airplane. new idea, we are not fluent in our Now I see that it doesn’t have to understanding of these concepts, be obvious, people today look not like how we understand the past the basic structure into what now ‘simple’ designs of present. lies underneath, and the future In time we will able to fabricate of design is better off for it. designs such as these with no issues and have adapted our fabrication methods and understanding to suit the design style.

CRITERIA DESIGN

20

CASE STUDY 1.0 Aranda Lasch - The Morning Line

Fig. 8 The Morning Line - Aranda Lasch

I chose Aranda Lasch’s ‘The Morning Line’ as my first biomimicry case study. I chose it because it is interesting and I found there were so many opportunities for adaptation.

There are so many geometries at different scales, it creates an interesting composition, I would like to perhaps use these ideas in my future designs.

21

CRITERIA DESIGN

Matrix Exploration

CRITERIA DESIGN

22

23

CRITERIA DESIGN

MATRIX EXPLORATION I found it interesting to explore the parameters of the algorithm. Initially I started by changing simple things like number sliders which changed sizes of certain aspects. After testing all the parameters given to me in the algorithm I begun to adapt them. Substituting in my own parameters and exploring what I could do. I found that this made some interesting forms, but could also get quite complicated and it made it difficult for the computer to handle. This made me have to wait for long periods of time, waiting for the change to be made as the computer was processing the information.

I really like the last iteration in the series, it looks like something I would enjoy exploring further.

The issue for me now, is perhaps simplifying it such that it can be edited without a massive lag time.

This exploration of the Morning Line algorithm has been very interesting and useful to me, it has provided me with the tools to understand the parameters used in grasshopper so much more.

CRITERIA DESIGN

24

SELECTION CRITERIA

My selection criteria was based on: 1. Whether the outcome was

interesting, is it plain and simple?

Or is it detailed and different?

2. Individuality. How different is it to the original design?

3. Sculptural effect. Does it

have the potential to become

something more? Can it be used for a range of applications?

4. Potential. Can I further this design, or is it at its peak? I want to be able to continue exploring an idea, not have the limits reached early on.

25

CRITERIA DESIGN

OUTCOMES

1

2

3

4

CRITERIA DESIGN

26

Based on my selection criteria, the four outcomes highlighted on the previous page were chosen. These outcomes were more successful than other attempts for a number of reasons. I have noticed that there has been a distinct correlation between success, and actually adding to the algorithm myself. Often it is not enough just to adjust the parameters, we need to actually add and subtract from the original algorithm to create an interesting outcome.

Often I would find that changing the existing parameters would only make small changes to the design. However when I explored the addition of varying geometries I found that the result was much more interesting and sophisticated.

If we test the boundaries of an algorithm and push them to the limits, we can create an outcome, a design, that we never imagined was possible.

27

CRITERIA DESIGN

When creating sequences of geometric variations, I was attempting to create shapes that resembled fractals, and geometries that were configured in such a way that they allowed light to shine through.

Since starting design subjects I have entertained the idea of patterning of light. Creating layers of material such that light can shine through and project onto other objects in interesting patterns. This was my objective when creating my geometric variations. I decided on the four outcomes because I could imagine light shining through them, creating various patterns of overlapping light. These outcomes reflect the ‘light patterning’ ideas that I would like to explore further.

DESIGN POTENTIAL

The new definition creates a different type of geometry to that of Aranda Lasch’s ‘Morning Line.’ It incorporates geometric openings which could be used to allow light to flow through, or as a viewing portal. This geometry has the potential to be applied architecturally in a number of ways, the main applications being; a facade to a structure, or used as the basis for a more sculptural design.

The fractal-like geometry creates the feeling of openness without actually being open as it can be seen through in certain places. This means it could be used as the outer shell of a building, reinforced structurally. The interesting thing about the base geometry is that

the materials used to create this sort of pattern could vary. It could be stretched and warped across a surface as a soft material, or created with a strong metal which does not allow for deformation of the original geometry.

Overlaying the geometry a couple of times could lead to an interesting dispersion of light where the light overlaps itself and creates a more complex pattern than with only one layer. This geometry could create a space that would be interesting to touch due to all the uneven surfaces, perhaps it could be used on the inside of a pavilion or a building inviting passers by to engage with the surface.

CRITERIA DESIGN

28

CASE STUDY 2.0 ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

Fig. 9 CD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

27

CRITERIA DESIGN

This pavilion was designed by the Institute for Computational Design (ICD), and the Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design (ITKE) together with students from the University of Stuttgart. It was designed and created in 2011 and has a temporary structure. It uses timber and attempts to emulate biological forms such as the sea urchin’s plate skeleton morphology.

I chose this design as my case study to reverse engineer because it reflects ideas and design principles that I would like to explore in my design process.

The way the pavilion uses double layering of materials to create an effect is interesting, especially if it is related to light and the patterns created when light bounces off the multiple layers.

CRITERIA DESIGN

28

REVERSE ENGINEERING THE PROJECT Attempts:

1

2 3

29

CRITERIA DESIGN

4

I found the proccess of reverse engineering this pavilion quite difficult, but with each attempt I got closer to the intended outcome.

Attempt number four was my best outcome as it looked relatively similar to the ICD/ ITKE Research pavilion.

I used grasshopper to cull points in a circle to create the basic 2D geometry (1) and then continued on and wrapped the geometry around the defined surface of the pavilion (2) creating a three dimensional structure. After finding the mid-points of all the polygons I offset that point in the z-direction in order to create the

pyramid shape (3). I then created planes which were offset from the base geometry which were used to cap the tops of the geometry (4) to produce the final product (5).

This was a good exercise, it taught me so many things about grasshopper through lots of trial and error.

CRITERIA DESIGN

30

Wrap Cull points to make 2D voronoi curves

PROCESS DIAGRAM

the 2D curves around 3D curves defining the boundary of the pavilion

Mid Points of curves, the point then offset peperpendicular in the positive direction

31

Surface Split

Cutting Plane

Split the part of the

Offset curves

geometry above

perpendicular from

and below the

the base polygon

cutting plane for

to create a capped

the final priduct

surface

CRITERIA DESIGN

REVERSE ENGINEERED PROJECT

Fig. 9 CD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

CRITERIA DESIGN

32

MATRIX EXPLORATION

33

CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN

34

35

CRITERIA DESIGN

Completing the iterations were a good way of expanding my understanding of the various components in my algorithm and testing them in a way that created completely different forms.

I initially started by altering the components that were there; dragging number sliders to change sizes and so on. This didnt alter the overall shape of the grasshopper design very much and I felt limited in what I could do.

Connecting various components to other pre-existing ones in the algorithm was the next way that I explored the algorithm.

I found that I could create interesting geometries this way.

Changing the base curves in which the algorithm responded to altered the geometries in a way which warped it from its original form. Combining this new (but still similar) algorithm with additional components lead me to the last few iterations.

I enjoyed exploring the ways which I could divide a curve or a surface, connect those points together with lines, and then pipe them. This created a much more complex overall geometry which can be observed in the final iterations of the matrix.

CRITERIA DESIGN

36

SELECTION CRITERIA REVISITED OLD

NEW

My selection criteria was based on:

My selection criteria is based on:

1. Whether the outcome was

1. Is there potential for this

interesting, is it plain and simple?

Or is it detailed and different?

2. Individuality. How different is it to the original design?

3. Sculptural effect. Does it

have the potential to become

something more? Can it be used for a range of applications?

4. Potential. Can I further this design, or is it at its peak? I want to be able to continue exploring an idea, not have the limits reached early on.

37

CRITERIA DESIGN

design to respond to the site 2. Individuality. How different is it to the original design?

3. Is it dynamic?

4. Potential. Can I further this design, or is it at its peak? I want to be able to continue exploring an idea, not have the limits reached early on.

DESIGN POTENTIAL

I chose the two iterations and blended them into one idea to produce the model shown above.

This design is much more complex than both of the original ideas, and incorporates ideas that I have been exploring in the past such as layering.

At the start of the journal I commented that my designs always morphed into an organic shape even though I would like to try design something geometric. As can be seen above, this is the case,

at least it is from a distance. When you look closely it is evident that the organic and curved structure is actually made up of many geometric shapes, straight lines and panels, which when put together create a dynamic structure.

the site (in Ceres). For example; timber and steel would work well because they are materials used frequently at the park, however, bright white plastic or something equally in your face, would not blend in with its surroundings, which is something I would like to achieve.

A blend between organic and geometric is a concept I would like to explore further as I feel it is a much better way to design rather than sticking to one or the other.

Depending on the materiality of this design (if it were to be built) I think that it would respond well to CRITERIA DESIGN

38

PROTOTYPES 1

2

39

CRITERIA DESIGN

EXPLORATION OF LIGHT

I made this initial prototype

using paper and tape so that I could understand how to put it together. I tested the model to see what pattern it created and I was happy with the outcome.

When light is shone through the model, an image is projected out which looks like stars

I did not like the outcome of this prototype as much as I did the first one, as it looked quite plain and simple. In terms of overall form I found it interesting; creating a curved shape with flat panels.

CRITERIA DESIGN

40

JOINTS/FIXINGS

Metal Clamp This joint type was not so successful as it was very fiddly to attach and not so strong. It would be good for a temporary fixing but otherwise I would not use this for my model building

41

Metal Rings - Loose This was quite a good way of fixing two pieces of paper together.

The fact that the rings were quite large and loosely attached allowed for movement in the joint.

Angled Fixing

Metal Rings - Tight

This was a very sturdy fixing. It allowed for little movement so would be good for creating something that needed to be stable.

These rings were much tighter around the paper so the connection joint was much less flimsy. This would be good to use if a small amount of movement in the joints was required.

CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA/BRIEF

My objective is to design a Walkway connecting two parts of CERES Community Environment Park. I want to create a seamless transition, a design which will reflect the atmosphere and environment surrounding it.

I want to design using materials such as timber rather than plastics and other materials which can be bad for the environment, in doing so, the design should fit in with the overall nature of the Park.

Ultimately I would like my design to be immersed in nature. For example; an idea would to be having plants growing over the walkway such that it is hidden and one with the landscape.

The people who will most likely be at the site are families with children. I plan to create a design which is very tactile as children enjoy being able to touch and engage with their surroundings.

As I plan to design a walkway I want it to be way to direct people through an area in an exciting and different way.

CONCEPTUALISATION 49

PROPOSAL Site Analysis

43

CRITERIA DESIGN

I chose the path between the chicken area and the gardens. This path links the main entrance with the rest of the park, although it looks no different to the rest of the paths. I want to design a walkway through this path so that direction can be given to people to indicate a clear route into the park.

RELATION TO THE SITE Materials

Timber Timber is a material that is used quite frequently throughout CERES. Because my brief states that my design should reflect the pre-existing style of the park this would be a good material to use.

Wire The idea of using metal wiring in my design comes from the surrounding vegetable garden and chicken area. There is a large amount of wire surrounding the path. I plan to take the opportunity and create a structural steel shell around my design which reflects the idea of the surrounding fencing. Perhaps it will be encouraged for vine plants to grow along the shell, eventually encasing the outside of the walkway.

CRITERIA DESIGN

44

French Pavilion, World Expo 2015 in Milan, XTU Architects

Fig. 10 French Pavilion, World Expo 2015

Nature and Man Made Combined

I wish to integrate the man-made and the natural environment in a seamless way. Looking at the pavilion design for the World Expo in Milan opened up my eyes to new possibilities. In my design I would like to explore this juxtaposition with the use of the steel shell acting as a guide for vine plants to grow across. CERES is about the environment, and all the designs of the buildings and pavilions have a very low impact

45

CRITERIA DESIGN

Harmonious Integration

on their surrounding environments. This is what I am attempting to achieve, having plants/vegetables/ flowers growing over the shell of the walkway until it is engulfed in a mass of tamed greenery. From the outside it will appear seemingly natural, whereas the inside evokes curiosity and tactility.

The steel on the outside of the design will be the structural element, it is what is holding the pavilion upright. The inside timber details are a secondary structure, providing much less support.

CRITERIA DESIGN

46

47

CRITERIA DESIGN

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES Discuss the learning objectives of the studio (introduced at the start of this document) and your performance in relationship to them. Explain how your research has affected your knowledge of architecture and the roles of computation in the design process.

Are you able to create, manipulate and design using parametric modelling? You can refer to each Learning Objective individually within this section and cross-reference from here to the other sections that provide specific examples of your learning.

CRITERIA DESIGN

48

ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

1

2

3

4

I chose these algorithmic sketches because I found them interesting concepts and thigns I would enjoy developing further.

The first sketch I created by using field and then offsetting the curves created and lofting them. I found that this made a very different dynamic form which almost looked like it would be able to move.

The second sketch is about image sampling. I chose a childs face to

49

CRITERIA DESIGN

test whether or not the features would be recognised, which they are.

The last two sketches are my own exploration of grasshopper, using panels to create a surface with gaps in it, and creating interesting organic forms.

CONCEPTUALISATION 57

58

CONCEPTUALISATION

PART C:

DETAILED DESIGN

CONCEPTUALISATION 59

53

DETAILED DESIGN

FEEDBACK AND REFLECTION`

Feedback given to me for my interim presentation was that my design was far too similar to the ICD pavilion I started my design with, and that I should relate my design to the site further. It was also mentioned that I could perhaps open up the sides of the walkway so that users could see out both sides and interact with the surroundings more.

I would also like to look further into what types of materials I would like to use. It is not enough to just say timber and steel, I feel as though I need to look deeper and be more specific as to my reasonings.

Recycled timber is something I would like to look into as CERES is an environmental park and I feel as though recycled timber would reflect ideas projected by the park itself.

I am going to try take into accound all suggestions made for my final design. I am interested in exploring ways I could connect the grasshopper design to the site, perhaps by using a point attractor.

CONCEPTUALISATION 61

DEVELOPMENT OF TECHNIQUE IN RELATION TO THE SITE As can be seen in the diagrams on the next page, I compared the movements of adults and children throughout the park. Whilst I understand that adults are usually accompanied by kids, I mapped the places adults would enjoy the most, versus the places that children would enjoy.

The results demonstrated to be that both users prefered different areas of the park, and that some of the places that they enjoyed going were only accesable by a single path, the path I chose to place my walkway.

It is at that access point that people funnel down through to the rest of the park. As the pathway is exactly the same as the rest of the paths it can be difficult to figure out what way will lead you through. By creating a walkway structure, it becomes clear that tehre is something in that direction, and people walk towards it to investigate.

55

DETAILED DESIGN

I also looked at the ways in which different parts of the park connected in the form of a flow diagram. From this diagram I could conclude that there are a large number of ways to get from various places, from small little paths to wide open ones.

It is very easy to miss a section of the park because there is no clear route through, this I learn through my own visit to the CERES.

Adults

Playspace

Kids

Chicken Coop

Market

Dam

Park

Diagrams for users

Garden

Entry

Playspace

Chicken Coop

Dam Market

Office

Park

Entry DETAILED DESIGN

56

Average Curve Showing Overall Layout of CERES

Site Data

The red circles are my interpretation of where the users of the park go the most. The larger the diameter of the circle, the more people go towards those points on the map. I drew a line through the map to give an idea of the average line between the popular places. The curved line to the right is the shape that formed when I did this.

57

DETAILED DESIGN

I would like to use this data I have collected from the site in my design.

Perhaps in the overall shape of my design will some how correlate to the curve. I am also interested in using attractor points so that another aspect of my design relates back to the site.

Wrap the 2D curves Cull points

around 3D curves

to make 2D

defining the

voronoi

boundary of the

curves

pavilion

PROCESS DIAGRAM

Mid Points of curves, the point then offset peperpendicular in the negative direction

Pipe Pipe the curves that were offset and connected

Connect Lines Create Lines connecting the various endpoints to create a more

Offset Offset curves of the base geometry, perpendicular.

complex shell structure

DETAILED DESIGN

58

Number each piece Unroll Surfaces of design

so you know where each piece goes

(very important for a complex design)

CONSTRUCTION PROCESS DIAGRAM

Stick the vines onto the steel frame section

DETAILED DESIGN

the fab-lab printing document.

Stick the wire shell

Stick together the

and spray paint white

walkway (the timber

to the timber layer

to achieve a uniform colour

59

Using appropriate

nesting tools, create

bottom layer of the sections)

THINKING ABOUT JOINTS I am not entirely sure how I would like to connect all the surfaces on my model. There are many different joint types, and I acknowledge that the joints I choose in real life, may not be the same as the ones I use on the model. This is due to the scale of the model, to do some of the ideas I have in such a small scale would be impossible. There are Five types of joints I want to explore using, these are; the keyed joint, the puzzle joint, the notch joint, tabs, and a joint that I created.

Keyed

Puzzle

Notch

Created Joint

Tab DETAILED DESIGN

60

Shell and joints variations

1

2

3

4

I created the joints in grasshopper I talked about on the last page, finding that some worked really well, and others not so much. The joints that worked the best was joint 3.

61

DETAILED DESIGN

This was because it not only fixed the strips (the steel shell) together, but also held the strips at the correct angle, so that there was little margin for error.

I found that the puzzle joint (4) was too complicated in terms of small scale, and even large scale fabrication. Joints 1 and 2 were also to flexible in their lateral movement, they needed to be more rigid.

CONCEPTUALISATION 69

70

CONCEPTUALISATION

This is the prototype for my initial design, I have included it in this section so that it can I found that the be puzzle joint (4)to my new, more resolved design. I changed this design because I found compared was too complicated terms of it wasinfar too similar to the design of the ICD building, from which this design started. small scale, and even large scale fabrication. Joints 1 and 2 were also to flexible in their lateral movement, they needed to be more rigid.

CONCEPTUALISATION 71

Unroll diagrams

Colour co-ordinated sections for ease of construction

65

DETAILED DESIGN

Numbers and colours from the above image correspond to the unrolled surfaces

Colour co-ordinated strips (steel framing)

This was my document which I sent to the fab lab to be cut with the card cutter, it is nested well to optimise the space DETAILED DESIGN

66

MATERIALITY Due to the nature of my design and its complexity, it would be wise for me to use a material that is easy to bend when scored.

This means that a very thin material like card or a plastic would be optimal.

I investigated the use of a thin ply for the timber sections of my design, however, using this material would mean I would have to connect each triangle individually, this would be far too confusing and innacurate.

The reason I am choosing card as the basis for my model is that it is less expensive than plastic. The difference in aesthetic qualities (especially after spray paint) is so minimal, the extra cost is not worth it.

The card cutter seems like the better option above laser cutting, as card burns slightly from the laser and would look less clean cut, which is something I am aiming to achieve with this model

67

DETAILED DESIGN

In terms of the materiality of the actual walkway, I initially stated that I would like to use timber and steel.

Whilst that idea has not changed, I would like to specify what type of timber. Due to the location of the design at CERES, I feel it would be appropriate to use recycled timber as the material for the panels. This is because using recycled materials would reflect the parks outlook and position on the environment. I don’t want the walkway to be grand, new and flashy in its material choices. The aim is to blend, blend with the park, blend in with nature. The belifes of CERES is that we should be making sure we make as little negative impact as we can on the environment. This is also why I chose to encourage vines to grow over the design, in an attempt to demonstrate that it is not stand alone, it is representing the bond between the natural and un-natural.

Fabrication Process for Final Presentation

1Card Cutter has cut out the pieces

each individual 2 Connecting cell together

3 Cutting out balsa strips for shell

vertical sections 4 Sticking to hold up the shell

the shell, and 5 Completing applying white spray paint

6

Sticking on representational vines

DETAILED DESIGN

68

FINAL MODEL PHOTOS

FINAL MODEL 1

76

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 77

ENTRANCE

78

CONCEPTUALISATION

EXIT

CONCEPTUALISATION 79

RENDERINGS

80

CONCEPTUALISATION

EXIT VIEW

DETAILED DESIGN

74

SIDE VIEW

75

DETAILED DESIGN

ENTRANCE VIEW

CONCEPTUALISATION 83

Render in Situ

Playspace

Chicken Coop

Market

Dam Plan of design on site

SECTIONS THROUGH WALKWAY

CONCEPTUALISATION 85

REFLECTION After the Final Presentation The final presentation went well and I received valuable feedback from the panel. One of the suggestions was to further connect nature to the design by cutting holes out of the inverted pyramids and allowing plants to grow through, much like my precedent, the French Pavilion.

This was interesting to me and I will try use the idea of allowing vines to grow through the design to further connect with the landscape.

A suggestion was also made that I open up some of the roof so that users could look up to the sky as they walk through. I think that this idea can be achieved in many ways, the main two being using glass panels in various places instead of timber, and also cutting out holes in the panels by offsetting borders.

The idea of using light has interested me right from the start of the subject. I have explored it a little bit in earilier iterations of my design, however, I have found, and it was pointed out to me, that I have strayed and not incorporated it what so ever. In this next stage I wish to improve my design and consider what lighting effects I can achieve.

79

DETAILED DESIGN

Fig. 10 French Pavilion, World Expo 2015

I feel as though it would be a good opportunity for me if I somehow used the fact that my design has two layers to create different patterns of light on the ground when the sun shines through. I am particularly interested in the overlapping of light, such that different shades of light emerge.

Hopefully I will be able to create a much more resolved design, incorporating the feedback I have been given, and new ideas that are emerging.

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT I decided to develop my design further after the presentation. What I wanted to do was include light into my design some way. The way I thought was best was to cut holes in the surfaces, and change the materiality of others, e.g. glass. Here are the changes I went through.

These are the three main developments in my design. The second image in the chain has used holes to allow light through, and these holes are in no particular size order.

They lack a relation to the site. This is why I moved on to my final design.

As can be seen in the final image, the holes get bigger towards the entrance, and close up at the exit. I chose to do this because the entrance is facing the entrance to the park. I felt that by opening up the front it would be more inviting and much lighter. This I hope would encourage the public to enter and experience the light change as they walk through.

DETAILED DESIGN

80

GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION

CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

83

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

DETAILED DESIGN

1

I got my unrolled model cut at the fab-lab, unfortunately due to unforseen circumstances I had to get it cut by the laser cutter rather than the card cutter and this left light brown burn marks on the card. I was careful to score the numbers next to the piece so that I could reference the chart I made on my computer.

2

I found that the best way of sticking my model together was with the hot glue gun. It was easy to get rid of excess glue, and I am used to using it for variousl other things. I did attempt to use pva and uhu gummy glue, but I found them to be much messier and time consuming.

3

I began cutting out the scored lines of each piece. I scored one line on every piece that was cut so that nothing fell out when laser cut. I soon realised that a number of the pieces had been accidentally unrolled backwards, so I had to manually score the opposite side if it was the wrong way around. This made the construction process take much longer.

4

I began sticking the individual cells together by the tabs. I found that they were much harder to stick together than the last model I made, due to the number of holes cut out of the faces making it fmore flimsy. If I did not have the colour co-ordinated reference image, I would not have been able to construct this model as it was far too complicated.

5

Using thin strips of balsa wood, I created the vertical elements of the external shell.

6

I then completed the shell with the balsa wood. This was very time consuming as I had to be precise.

7

I found that the areas where multiple strips of balsa would meet got quite messy and ugly as the model scale is too small to show accurate jointing systems.

8 9

In order to represent the joint system I demonstrated earlier, I used circular pieces of card, which both covers the mess underneath and indicates a rough idea as to the joints.

I then added small vines to the model to represent vegetation growing over the outer shell of the form. I also made sure that vines were hanging through the holes in the panels, becoming one with the form.

DETAILED DESIGN

84

INCORPORATING NATURE

This model I decided to use actual vine leaves instead of fake wire ones as a felt it looked much better and emphasised the connection between natural and man made better.

The reason why I had the vine plants over the shell was so that I could connect the two sides of the path.

The two sides were the chicken area and the garden, both which had vine plants growing on a wire fence.

I am not intending for only vines to grow over the shell. In reality it would be interesting to have flowering plants and vine produce growing over it to give some more colour to the form.

FINAL MODEL PHOTOS

94

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 95

96

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 97

98

CONCEPTUALISATION

CONCEPTUALISATION 99

93

DETAILED DESIGN

LIGHTING EFFECTS

Lighting has become an important factor for my in terms of the design.

I experimented with different angles of light to see what shadows and patterns it could create. The result was quite beautiful.

I have been thinking that in real life this design may have lights in the floor so that at night time it is lit up leading the way through, lighting up like a beacon.

It is also important how foliage responds to light. As can be seen in the image, you can still see light through the leaves, you can almost see the insides of the leaves. This is very interesting and could provide an added layer of lighting effects to this design.

DETAILED DESIGN

94

LIGHTING EFFECTS

The image below is of the patterns created by the walkway with no vines at all. The only difference is that no leaf patterns can be seen.

The overlapping of light creates an interesting effect on the ground, producing many shades of grey.

I also experimented with projection of the silhouette onto a surface.

This has quite a different affect to the last image which was very soft and inviting. The images to the right look as though a great big monster is looming. It looks very spindly and sharp, like a creepy forest at night.

95

DETAILED DESIGN

In Rhino I experimented using a spot light inside the model to project patterns onto the inside of a box. The results were amazing and unexpected. Of course in reality these patterns would not be created as it is out in the open.

These shadows are very much like the ones I achived with my model.

CONCEPTUALISATION 105

This was my attempt at rendering with shadows.

Needless to say it didn’t go very well. I was unable to get the exposure of the sun correct and found I lost detail because it was too bright. What I did find interesting about this image was the detail of the shadow on the ground. I like the idea that users can enjoy all views through the walkway, even the ground with its interesting patterns.

106

CONCEPTUALISATION

RENDERINGS

DETAILED DESIGN

100

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES This subject has taught me so much about grasshopper, Rhino, and even presentations. Looking back to how I was at the begining of the semester, there is a huge difference. I am much more confident in computer aided design, and feel much more comfortable using grasshopper. The algorithmic sketch tasks helped me understand how to design the things I wanted, and how to understand the program.

Objective 2 talks about how we should be developing an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation. When I first read this I was worried because I couldn’t see myself being able to do this at all.

Now that the semester is ending I feel that I am able to check this objective off the list. The whole semester was about generating a variety of design possibilities, there were so many different iterations before my final design, and I found all of them interesting in their own way. The reason I didn’t choose them as my final and continued to work, was that they didn’t suit what I wanted to do 100%.

Objective 3 talks about digital fabrication, and how we have developed this ability. Before this studio I had done a little digital fabrication, so I feel I haven’t learnt as much as I have with objective 2 (which I knew absolutely nothing about). I do however, understand limitations 111

DETAILED DESIGN

of fabrication, especially small scale.

I learnt that just because something works or stands in the digital program, it doesn’t mean it will work when actually constructed in real life.

Objective 5 mentions being able to

make a case for proposals. While I admit I have done this before for other studios, I found that studio air pushed me to think more critically about the site, and my designs relation to it. I have never been made to think about how I could incorporate site data into the design before, and I think it was a useful task to undertake.

In the past I’ve thought to myself, ‘oh thats a nice design,’ and that was it. There was no thought of, ‘I wonder how that was done.’ Now, more frequently than not, I find myself analysing designs in both architecture and other things, asking myself what tools they used to create the design.

Understanding digital design has shed light on the world of architecture, and encouraged me to pay more attention to the buildings around me.

REFERENCES Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013) Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press) pp. 1-9, 33-45 Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press) Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 Woodbury, Robert F. (2014). ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 153–170 http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/wanmobile/mobile/article/12208

Image Reference List Fig. 1 https://aviratgroup.wordpress.com/2013/02/22/the-helix-bridge-singapore/ Fig. 2 http://www.archello.com/en/product/parametric-bench Fig. 3 http://www.surface-gallery.com/?p=1087 Fig. 4 http://www.treehugger.com/green-architecture/mcgill-university-contemplay-pavilion.html Fig. 5,6 http://www.archdaily.com/522408/icd-itke-researchpavilion-2015-icd-itke-university-of-stuttgart/ Fig. 7 https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3671/10859395255_bfa5de298b_b.jpg Fig. 8 http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/wanmobile/mobile/article/12208 Fig. 9 http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/ Fig. 10 http://www.dezeen.com/2014/04/29/milan-expo-2015-xtu-architects-france-pavilion/

DETAILED DESIGN

112