Masters (Ongoing) Thesis: Responsive Choreography

Responsive Choreography Master of Science in Architecture Thesis Gautam Pradeep Advisor Shelby Doyle, Assistant Professor of Architecture Iowa State University

“Architecture appears for the first time when the sunlight hits a wall.

The sunlight did not know what it was before it hit a wall.” ― Louis Kahn

| p.2 | Gautam Pradeep

Table of Contents

Phase 0

4-9

Phase 1

10-21

Phase 2

20-33

Overview Objective Methodology History

Classification

Case Studies

5 7 9

11 12 14

Local Climate Analysis 21 Responsive Facade Breakdown 26 Prototype 1 28

| p.3 |

Phase 0 | p.4 | Gautam Pradeep

Outline

This project investigates responsive architecture while primarily limiting the focus to responsive facades and their interaction with the world and the user.

Through a review of the existing projects and theoretical efforts on the topic, a responsive facade system is designed and fabricated to operate within the climatic environment of Ames, Iowa. In the design phase, these shading systems are tested and optimized using environmental simulation software and building energy modeling (BEM) software. The designs’ performance will further be tested quantitatively with the Mobile Diagnostic Lab’s equipment which include multiple microclimate data logging sensors to understand the responsive shading systems physical performance metrics as compared to traditional shading systems. The qualitative aspect will be tested by installing the modules in a test classroom and see how well users respond to this more adaptive system.

| p.5 |

| p.6 | Gautam Pradeep

Overview

Exterior shading in building design can be broadly defined in two categories: passive and active. Passive shading strategies employ non-mechanical means to maximize a building’s performance on a site. Active shading systems, on the other hand, use mechanical means to respond to environmental stimuli and offer varying degrees of control to occupants to control. Active materials like bimetals do exist between these two paradigms and may cross over into either, depending on its application. This general division can be further expanded into multiple classifications based on actuator types, control types, or response types.

The introduction of air-conditions interiors in the twentieth century had profound implications on building design and environmental impact through increases in electricity use. During this same time, user comfort has benefited from the Internet of Things (IoT: a collection of sensors and intelligent systems that respond to different user needs and environmental conditions. Humidity control systems, temperature controls, motion-sensing lighting are all examples of intelligent systems that operate within contemporary buildings. However, the building facade (or skin) have yet to see the same proliferation of intelligent systems due to challenges such as maintaining electronics and operable parts in exterior conditions. Responsive systems can respond to different conditions to enhance occupant comfort as well as reduce environmental load. While active shading systems are not always meant to replace passive strategies, these can complement the effort to create better-performing architecture which requires lower cooling loads and reduce electricity use. Active systems are also inherently better at managing daylighting as they can respond to changing daylighting conditions.

Specialized projects that utilize active systems that respond to lighting and glare conditions in real-time have started to emerge in current years. This interest is in part due to advances in sensor and actuator technology and increased awareness of the environmental impact of heating and cooling buildings. Especially in hot climates like UAE, projects like the Al Bahr towers

by AEDAS introduce the viability of controlling issues like heating and glare through active shading systems. The field of dynamic shading is in its infancy and faces problems such as the need to be continuously serviced, the need for specialized professionals to service components, and the lack of user control in large-scale implementation. There is also a lack of research on the performance of active façade systems in different environmental settings.

This potential for further inquiry leads to my interest in active façade systems. I aim to fabricate and then, through testing the system’s response to real climate conditions, understand the performance of a responsive façade systems. I aim to study the performance of active façade systems in the Ames environment and understand how the goals for active façade systems would change due to the environmental conditions in Iowa. By designing and fabricating prototypes, I aim to further this field of limited examples and understand its impacts on building comfort through simulation, data collection, and analysis.

| p.7 |

| p.8 | Gautam Pradeep

Methodology

Resources: To better inform my research, I consulted different seminal literature in the field like Cristoph Reinhart’s Daylighting Handbooks and Russell Fortmeyer & Charles Linn’s Kinetic Architecture. I complement the theoretical context of the research with a collection of case studies. The case studies will look at built projects that have implemented different types of responsive facades. I use these case studies to identify and understand the criticisms of existing case studies and use them to guide the module prototypes’ development.

Design: The facade modules are designed using the 3D modeling software Rhinocerous 7 (Rhino) and tested using Building Energy Modeling (BEM) software Climate studio, Diva, and Ladybug. These programs come as plug-ins that are compatible with Rhino and hence allow for testing of design proposals early in the process.

The designs are influenced by climate data obtained for the site (Ames, Iowa, USA) and respond to the unique environmental situation present here. This also helps corroborate physical testing on-site as this research is conducted in Iowa.

Physical Prototype: To prototype working models, I use Arduino microcontrollers that respond to different qualitative and quantitative input. I will use the input to vary the façade cover of a test glazing using stepper or servo motors. These motors will help change façade coverage either through rotation or folding mechanisms. I will check the performance of the final module using the Mobile Diagnostic Lab (MDL) managed by the Center for Building Energy Research (CBER) with permission from Professor Ulrike Passe.

Testing Criterion: The facade modules will be tested on how well they can respond to the multiple goals they need to address. By creating a responsive panel that attempts to address multiple qualitative and quantitative concerns, we can see better how dynamic facades offer much more than just automated shading systems. The quantitative inputs include physical measurements like temperature, illumination, humidity, etc. Qualitative inputs will attempt to respond to user requests or feedback.

The problem of shading a facade is a complex one. This is because there are always multiple concerns that very often require conflicting responses. Issues like thermal gains, daylight autonomy, and glare prevention impose different and sometimes opposing requirements. The benefits of creating dynamic facades are the ability to try and address these complex problems with intelligent system solutions that dynamically respond to different needs.

| p.9 |

Phase 1 | p.10 | Gautam Pradeep

History

Nicholas Negroponte first coined the term ‘Responsive Architecture’ (Negroponte, Nicholas, Soft architecture machines, 1975). Negroponte utilizes the term responsive to mean “the environment is taking an active role, initiating to a greater or lesser degree changes as a result and function of complex or simple computations.” The language requires a contextual reading of his work that looked at the emergence of cybernetics and its architectural applications. While this project uses the term responsive architecture in a similar spirit of allowing the environment to take a more active role, significant changes have occurred since Negroponte’s writings. What constitutes a computation or what/who performs the computation is vastly different because of the emergence of smart materials and the advance and proliferation of technology. The text, however, remains relevant due to many ideas surrounding the field that have been distilled within. The scope of this project works within this term but focuses on the architectural skin or facade.

The first physical manifestation of a responsive facade significantly predates its theoretical beginnings in the discourse. A conversation with any landscape architect will remind one of the vegetation’s responsive nature and as an example of one such responsive feature: their ability to provide variable shading for different seasons. This use of vegetation as a variable shading layer is also extensively documented in different papers like J. Alan Wagar’s paper Using Vegetation to Control Sunlight and Shade on Windows on this specific case in 1984. This reading of vegetation as a responsive element allows us to understand that the idea of a responsive environment is not new nor born of the industrial age. What did, however, change over time is our ability to design and control the responses of elements ourselves personally. The context of today’s advances allows us to push this ability even further and make systems that not only respond to the environment but can instead choose what to respond to in a dynamic scenario with multiple variables and, as a result, make more intelligent choices.

The development of built responsive facades happens irregularly across the globe, as explained by Charles D. Linn states in Kinetic Architecture: Designs for Active Envelopes. Various facades have created different degrees of responsive facades. While we may argue that response to human action (like a person opening a window to cool a building) may constitute a responsive facade that responds to human intention, this project focuses on Negroponte’s earlier stated definition of responsive architecture. This inquiry focuses mainly on scenarios where the environment itself has agency to affect the facade (while allowing users’ option to intervene). Thus, the first example of a facade that starts to function as a responsive system is the Occidental Chemical building. The case studies shown later will start from this building and then move towards more recent examples of responsive facades.

| p.11 |

1

2

3

Existing classifications based on adaptation, control system and technology

| p.12 | Gautam Pradeep

Classifications

Responsive systems are an amalgamation of interdisciplinary endeavor that involves various fields. To explain the functionality of responsive systems, I take a moment to look at how we can break this complex system into parts. Various classifications and taxonomies attempt to distill these into branches depending on properties like actuators, energy, technology, etc. Some of the earliest efforts at classification were conducted in the 1970s by William Zuk and Roger H. Clarke’s seminal work on this subject in Kinetic Architecture. They classified the systems of the time based on degrees of adaptation (1). Michael A. Fox and Bryant P. Yeh furthered this taxonomy into one based on control systems in their text Intelligent Kinetic Systems in Architecture (2). Recent advances in actuation technology have led to classifications based on the technology relating to the different parts (Ms. Negar Heidari Matin, Dr. Ali Eydgahi, and Dr. Shinming Shyu, Comparative Analysis of Technologies Used in Responsive Building Facades, 2017)(3).

This project looks at facades as a system that can also be part of more extensive systems. William Zuk’s Degree of Adaptation (Fig 1.)is an impotant taxonomy that will be used to describe many of the projects as we move forward.

To understand the facade as a responsive system, I break down the system into four parts: Input, Processor, Output, and Energy.

1. Input here refers to all the ways the responsive facade takes in data. Input includes quantitative data like temperature, illuminance, etc., to qualitative data like user comfort.

2. Processor looks at how the system processes information obtained from the input. This can refer to microcontrollers or computers attached to the system, to material/biological characteristics that understand inputs in very distinctive ways. The Processor also deals with issues of memory and evolution in instances of heuristic systems.

3. Output looks at how information is acted upon. The information can be acted upon mechanically or through material/biological properties.

4. Energy looks at how the system is powered. Energy becomes especially important in today’s discourse as it directly deals with how sustainable systems are. Latest innovations have seen various sources of power being used to create changes in the system like solar energy (for bi-metal or biological facades) or electrical for mechanical systems.

Responsive System Input

Energy

Processor

Output

| p.13 |

Case Study 1: Occidental Chemical Building

Architects: Cannon Design Inc., Principal, Mark R. Mendell Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum Client: Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corporation Year: 1980 Site: Niagara Falls, New York

The Occidental Chemical building is a notable precedent and earliest in the System Breakdown history of responsive facades. The Occidental Chemical building was a corporate building whose inception owed thanks to a unique set of circumstances the client faced. Occidental came under immense public scrutiny due to its association with Love Canal, a chemical dumpsite over which the city of Niagara Falls built schools and houses. This meant that the company needed good public relations and was convinced by the project principal Mark Mendell from Cannon Design to build the “most energy-efficient Class A office building”(Charles D. Linn, Kinetic Architecture, 22) on this very prolific site. This led to the company investing significantly in this pursuit for good PR.

Ventilation mode Time

Daylight Sensor

Manual Override

Electrical Energy

Processor

Rotation of Louvers

As a responsive facade, this building has distinct characteristics that characterize it. The first is that it is surrounded by curtain panels on all sides while being situated in a climate that experiences significant cold spells. It also has an inner ring of curtain panels housing the shading devices in between. This created a thermal barrier and allowed the motorized panels to be separated from the elements. This design was unique (to say the least) and was tested using physical mockups and manual/ mainframe computer calculations. John Yellot and Richard Levine also contributed heavily to the performance of the building. Once built, the building effectively stabilized internal temperatures and dealt with glare using the automated shading panels. The rotation of each shade was controlled using the four light sensors (one on each side of the building) to respond to the sun. The air space between the facade had motorized dampers and controlled ventilation and air movement within the void. The air space allowed the building to uniquely respond to the summer vs. winter months and maintained its thermal performance by changing ventilation strategies. Independent energy analysis showed the building functioning 98% better than conventional buildings for heating and 81% better for cooling.

Although this led to the building being received well on its opening and was the recipient of different awards at the time, the building fell into disrepair once its original tenants moved out. Due to the maintenance required for these complex systems, failure to do so by later tenants who did not have the means to put in the effort led to the building performing worse than regular buildings. All the efficiencies put into place due to its responsive system led to very poor performing building without them. Its program and site also led to its eventual abandonment and now is a shell of its previous life.

| p.14 | Gautam Pradeep

Rotation of Wind Dampers

Input: Photocell sensor data from sensor in facade, time data, user override Processor: Centralized automated mainframe computer Output: Motorized Louvers Energy: Electricity

Degree of Adaptation: Level 3 Energy Savings: 2% conventional heating load, 19 % conventional cooling load (when operational as analysed independently by Progressive Architecture Status: Non-operational

Sources: left: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Occidental-Chemical-building-utilising-adouble-envelope-and-convective-loop-photo-M_fig4_277790385 right: https://www.tboake.com/ds/hooker.pdf

| p.15 |

Case Study 2: Institut du Monde Arabe

Architects: Architecture-Studio, Ateliers Jean Nouvel Client: Arab League + French government Year: 1987 Site: Paris, France

While the Occidental Chemical building was no less a spectacle, the Institut du System Breakdown Monde Arab by Jean Nouvel takes the cake for drama as aesthetics of kinetics start to get ingrained in the facade as a function. The Institute was built in Paris as a link between France and other Arab countries in the region. The building’s facade comprises “240 photo-sensitive metal apertures” (Charles D. Linn, Kinetic Architecture, 29) designed to evoke traditional Arab mashrabiyas and arranged to pay homage to Islamic geometry.

Photosensor data Thermal Gains

Manual Override

Electrical Energy

They open and close using a mechanism similar to a camera shutter and respond to daylight and thermal gains. Its multiple parts (30,000 light-sensitive mechanical control diaphragms) and complex makeup have reportedly resulted in constant maintenance and serious mechanical problems (J. HRASKA, Adaptive Solar Shading of Buildings). The facade lost its ability to respond locally within three years and ceased to function in six years (Meagher. Mark, Designing for change: The poetic potential of responsive architecture). The cause of failure is generally attributed to lack of maintenance and the overt complexity of the system. However, no concrete reason has been found yet.

Processor

Rotation of Louvers

Input: Photocell sensor data from sensor in roof, thermal gains data Processor: Centralized computer Output: Motorized Iris Shutter Energy: Electricity

The Institute did not have a primary directive from its context to use a responsive Degree of Adaptation: Level 3 facade. While it did use it, what sets it apart is its use. It adds another layer Current Status: Non-operational of complexity to the adoption of responsive facades and promotes its capacity Energy Savings: Not available to address the aesthetics and quality of space. Where the Occidental building had responsive louvers that attempted to provide functional lighting levels, the Institute instead had highly designed elements that played with light. Here, we see architecture contesting between responsive facades’ functional benefits and their ability to evoke an emotional response from users. However, similar to the Occidental Chemicals building, we see the relatively short lifespans of responsive systems in practical scenarios. The lack of maintenance props up in both scenarios. This issue requires a push to better inform clients of maintenance requirements and requires from designers’ designs with longer lifespans in mind to be resolved.

| p.16 | Gautam Pradeep

Sources: top-left: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Occidental-Chemical-building-utilising-adouble-envelope-and-convective-loop-photo-M_fig4_277790385 top-right: https://www.imarabe.org/fr/missions-fonctionnement/historique bottom: https://www.akdn.org/architecture/project/institut-du-monde-arabe

| p.17 |

Case Study 3: Manitoba Hydro Place

Architects: Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg (KPMB) Architects Client: Manitoba Hydro Year: 2009 Site: Winnipeg, Canada

Moving from Jean Nouvel’s prolific design, we move onto the more inconspicuous responsive facade system of the Manitoba Hydro Place designed by KPMB architects. Built in Winnipeg for Manitoba Hydro, the Manitoba Hydro is a LEED platinum-certified building that is one of the most energy-efficient buildings in North America. This building is an exercise in restraint and a precedent for the integration of multiple building systems. Through extensive climate analysis of Winnipeg, a region experiencing frigid winters and warm summer, they came to similar conclusions like the Occidental chemical building designers 30 years later.

Glass-covered buildings can perform better if there is enough solar radiation in winter compared to super-insulated materials with well-designed buffer spaces.

The facade reaps the benefits of having a solar-heated air space in the west and east northeast orientations by automating shading. The shades are also tweaked in a small but impactful way by using differentiated perforations that allow light to penetrate deeper into the rooms by having larger openings in the top compared to the bottom. The building also integrates other passive strategies like geothermal heating that the facility uses to even out swings using radiant concrete floors.

The responsive facade also controls exterior window vents that allow for fresh air ventilation at appropriate temperatures.

System Breakdown Humidity Wind Speed

Light levels

Ventilation Manual Override Electrical Energy

Rotation of Louvre blinds

Processor

Rotation of Vents

Integrated dimmable electrical lights

Note: Manitoba Hydro Place uses in total upto 25,000 sensors from various places and hence has a very complex building management system. The following diagram shows major systems that are part of the responsive facade system.

Input: Photocells, Temperature Processor: Centralized computer Output: Motorized blinds and vents Energy: Electricity Degree of Adaptation: Level 3 Energy Savings: 70% energy savings compared to typical building (overall building savings are the only figure available, so exact facade contribution requires further research) Status: Operational

| p.18 | Gautam Pradeep

Sources: top: https://www.archdaily.com/44596/manitoba-hydro-kpmb-architects?ad_ medium=gallery bottom: https://www.akdn.org/architecture/project/institut-du-monde-arabe

| p.19 |

Phase 2 | p.20 | Gautam Pradeep

Local Climate Analysis Iowa

The climate of Ames is made up of frigid winters and warm summers. This presents a very unique and challenging climate to design for. Heating is the primary concern in this region. We can reduce heating requirements with the help of solar heat gain. However, solar heat gain needs to be balanced with possible glare through the glazing to create better functioning shading systems. Different passive strategies are generally applied to combat this climate. However, thermal gain requirements often conflict with glare prevention in this climate. Typical passive strategies involve the use of superinsulated materials and reduced glazing cover.

However, from the case studies presented in the previous section, there are opportunities for double skin facades with responsive shading systems to provide a better response. One big difference between direct implementation is the difference in sunny days Ames experiences compared to Winnipeg. While Winnipeg has 316 annual sunny days, Ames experiences only 202 days (lower than the US average of 205). This necessitates research into whether similar systems would be applicable here and how we can leverage opportunities in this climate to create unique responsive systems. The Occidental Chemical precedent, which also employed double facades in the climatic context of Niagara Falls, offers hope.

They enjoy an even lower amount of sunny days - 158 sunny days. Due to its strong performance (as analyzed by Progressive Architecture) before the systems failed, we can see how responsive systems still offer advantages to projects willing to consider them. The biggest of them being able to approach sites and the building’s orientation in completely different ways (as shown in Manitoba). Views can now be opened up to other orientations without large energy or visual comfort tradeoffs.

Dynamic shading opens up the possibility for facades to open up in the east and west orientations which are traditionally warned as the worst places for glazing.

By leveraging their solar heat gain potential and using responsive shading elements, we can mitigate issues like glare while allowing for passive solar to provide natural heating in those areas. By integrating a double skin facade, we also allow for ventilation and allow for stack effect to manage heat within the building. The provision of a double glazed facade also allows for better functioning of the responsive systems. This is because it allows for them to function without being exposed to the harsh exterior conditions that could affect electronics.

It also allows for easier maintenance of these systems (especially since Iowa has extreme climates that make exterior maintenance hard). This issue is often mitigated when using smart materials that don’t have the same sensitivity to create facades, but this comes at the cost of being able to influence them as a user. Current responsive shading systems like the Manitoba Hydro Place are very interesting examples that already have begun this move towards active facades as a way to harness passive heating. However, as there are a limited number of cases, the field is still in its infancy when understanding implementation in the field.

| p.21 |

Local Climate Analysis

Local Temperature Range Chart

The Temperature range chart shows the vast amount of heating required in the climate context of Ames. As shown, we have a large number of heating days that could benefit from solar heat gain. This, along with daylighting levels, could be optimized by implementing these systems. Quotidian daylighting changes, as well as seasonal requirement changes (as seen in the sun shading charts on the right), can benefit from a responsive system rather than a passive shading device.

What dynamic shading can achieve well is daylighting the eastern and western oriented spaces in a building. The daylighting potential of the west facade during the morning and the east facade during the evening is taken advantage of by simple solar tracking programmed into the facade. Compared to standard Venetian louvers used traditionally in facades facing these orientations, we can expect a better performance from active systems in general. The user does not have to adjust the blind through the day, freeing them up to either only interacts with the shading to enjoy views or, in cases of intelligent systems, create more meaningful lighting levels than the prescribed levels by the building manager.

| p.22 | Gautam Pradeep

Sun Shading Chart (June 21- December 21)

Sun Shading Chart (December 21-June 21)

Psychrometric Chart (Dry-Bulb Temperature)

| p.23 |

Annual Solar Radiation Map

Cylindrical Shoebox test

Standard rectilinear shoeboxes are typically used to simplify understanding each glazing’s individual contribution. However, to understand daylighting across a building, a cylindrical form is used for these tests to better understand solar radiation not as four kinds of loads across the surface but as a dispersed and differentiated load across the volume.

| p.24 | Gautam Pradeep

Roof

Southern Facade

Northern Facade

Eastern Facade

Western Facade

| p.25 |

1

A level 4 responsive facade system expressed as a Complex Adaptive System

| p.26 | Gautam Pradeep

Responsive Facade Breakdown

As seen in the classification, to simplify the project, we look at the system as Input, Processor, Output, and Energy. Now that we move into the fabrication of prototypes, we have to understand this system in a bit more detail. What are the inputs that can be generated, what kind of outputs can we generate, how do we power the system, all become relevant questions at this stage. The chart on the left of the page attempts to map out possibilities offered within the system.

Quantitative Data Collection

Quantitative Feedback Positive Phase

Facade Neutral State

Signal Input

Change

Increase Permeation

Qualitative Feedback

New Facade State

Facade Change

Change priorities based on feedback

Yes

Qualitative Data Collection

Is system in balance?

No

Negative Phase

Change

Decrease Permeation

Process loop of a level 4 facade system

| p.27 |

Responsive System Study A

The first prototype creates a basic grid and divides each module into four parts. The top louver is used for overhead lighting conditions while the sides are designed to be used for glare that sneaks in during sunrise or sunset. The bottom panel was designed to bounce more light into the space.

| p.28 | Gautam Pradeep

Orthographic Views

N

| p.29 |

Annual Glare Map

The initial tests in climate studio of this shading system was successful because it helped considerably reduce Daylight Glare probability (DGP) in its closed position over the course of a day. However, better lighting conditions could be created on closing and that is an area to take forward in the next iteration.

| p.30 | Gautam Pradeep

Annual Glare Map

Glare without Shading: daylight glare probability (DGP)= 0.45

Glare with Active Shading: daylight glare probability (DGP)= 0.28

| p.31 |

Fabricated Test Module A

Testing Setup

System Breakdown

Solar Tracking

Illumination

Temperature

Electrical Energy

Processor

Rotation of Louver

Input: 1. Temperature: TMP36 Sensor 2. Illumination: Phototransistor 3. Solar Tracking: DIVA weather data Processor: 1. Computer (Using Firefly) 2. Arduino (Microcontroller) Output: 1. Microservo Rotation Energy: 1. Electricity

Degree of Adaptation: Level 3

The module used to house the facade panel was 12” x 12” x 12” cube. This was created as a primary grid for the facade to attach to. The servo clipped onto the sides of the wooden cube and controlled the panel using two gears that transfer movement from the servo to the panel.

The first iteration looked at whether the current state of the script and the mechanics of the actuator could cause required changes within the panel. This was successful in that regard. The biggest area to take forward is the housing of each mechanism. From the sensor to the servo, the elements need to be better integrated into the facade assembly.

| p.32 | Gautam Pradeep

Kinetics Test

The daylighting qualities of the setup may benefit from more study. This requires an enclosed space and will be studied in the next phase.

| p.33 |