Architecture Design Studio: Air Georgia Honan 2018 Tutor: Alessandro Liuti
Table of Contents 4 Introduction 6
Part A. Conceptualisation
A.1: Design Futuring
10 Precedent 1: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 12 Precedent 2: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014 14 A.2: Design Computation 16 Precedent 3: Grandstand Roof, designed by Eduardo Torroja 18 Precedent 4: ICD/ITKE - Research Pavilion 2016-2017 (2017) 20 A.3: Composition to Generation 22 Precedent 5: Ney + Partners - Dutch Maritime Museum (2011) 2
24 Precedent 6: L’OceanográfiWc, Felix Candela, 2003 26 Conclusion 28 Learning Outcomes 30 Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches 32 Bibliography
Hi there! My name is Georgia Honan and I am commencing my third year of majoring in Architecture under the Bachelor of Environments at the University of Melbourne. Both of my parents have careers in either the Fine Arts or Actuarial studies which provoked from early on, an interest in design coupled with reasoning and physics from me. As we are living in the digital age, I have grown more of an appreciation for digital design and fabrication. Where in the past I have recognised the importance of handmade craftship in Architecture, my past design studio: Water opened me up to the concept of using Rhino to clearly depict structures and designs. This is a skill that I aim to develop throughout Studio: Air as it will take my designs to a whole new level of sophistication and complexity. With numerous architects emerging, I believe that Studio Air will equip me with digital skills that will give me a competitive edge in the industry. Working alongside some of my favourite Architectual firms such as Stephen Akehurst & Associates and MGS Architects has affirmed the importance of digital design in the industry and I am keen to explore the new digital realm. My main strengths are model making and sketching, although I would also love to explore the paths of digital fabrication and explore the opportunities for presenting my designs that this skill can offer.
Bring on Studio Air!
Part A. Conceptualisation 7
A.1 Design Futuring In the past, design was about the form and function of things. These features, which were limited in space and time, could be delivered in a fixed form, such as a blueprint. In today’s ultra-networked world, it makes more sense to think of design as a process that continuously defines a system’s rules rather than its outcomes and designers should become facilitators of flow2. ‘Design Futuring’ requires identifying what changes need to be made to ensure a design caters for the changing environment. The best way to achieve this is by ‘changing our thinking’1 and gaining a better understanding for sustainability. One method of doing so is adopting a meterial efficiency approach to design which can be demonstrated through lightweight structure, where designer’s make the most of limited material. Design Futuring explores creation and destruction, how to avoid destruction in the future and how a building can be renewed after chaos. Fry’s article states that the use of the planet’s renewable energy is ever increasing, and we as designers must gain perspective into how to best combat Greenhouse emissions and global warming1. Design Futuring bridges the current state of the design world with more sustainable approaches to contemporary architecture. Lightweight structures illustrate not only environmental sustainability through limited use of material, but also prove that simplified designs articulate beauty and in a technologically advancing world, we must embrace new ideologies which will help sustain the environment.
Tony Fry, Design Futuring (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014). John Thackara, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224.
It is not possible to go forward while looking back. - Mies Van Der Rohe
Precedent 1: ICD/ITKE Research Pavillion 2011 The ICD/ ITKE Research Pavillion 2011 was created by the ITKE in collaboration with students at the University of Stuttgart. Their approach involved a temporary structure that is a bionic research pavilion, with the main material being wood. The pavilion is an exploration into biological principles of the sea urchins skeleton morphology through computer-based design and simulation methods, along with computer-controlled digital fabrication methods3. The pavilions high load baring capacities is achieved by the student’s geometric arrangement of the plates and their joining system, proving the possibility for strength in a lightweight strcuture at an even larger-scale. What was extremely exclusive about this building is that it demonstrated the complex ability to be solely built from thin sheets of plywood. The lighterweight design demonstrated material efficiency in that only plywood was used. The plywood plates along with their detailed joints were placed with an industrial robot arm which would ensure accurate placement of each sheet3. If we have learnt anything it is that over time, architectural design is shifting away from an individual worker approach where there was one master behind all design projects (as found evident in Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies Van Der Rohe and Le Corbusier) and is shifting to a more collaborative effort where we are able to combine minds to create the best structure possible. The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion of 2011 is a testamony to this in that it involves the skill set of students and professional architects. It in turn, inspired the creation of future research pavilions such as the one in 2013. The structures threedimensional and geometric shape doesn’t seem to conform to traditional architecture, of thicker and more sturdy forms however proves itself to be able to withstand even the toughest of climates. The design demonstrates the positives in lightweight structures in that they are material efficient and innovative. The openings to the pavilion invite people in whilst cocooning them from the outside world which evokes a sense of security from the person, once again proving lightweight structures to be strong5.
Jan Knippers and Thomas Speck, “Design And Construction Principles In Nature And Architecture”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 7.1 (2012), 015002 <https://doi.org/10.1088/17483182/7/1/015002>. 5
“ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> [Accessed 14 March 2018].
Christoph Gengnagel and others, Computational Design Modelling (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011), pp. 239-248.
Figure 1 Image sourced: https://literatureandpopupology.weebly.com/temporary-wooden-pavilions.html
‘The water spider spends most of its life under water, for which it constructs a reinforced air bubble to survive. First, the spider builds a horizontal sheet web, under which the air bubble is placed. In a further step the air bubble is sequentially reinforced by laying a hierarchical arrangement of fibers from within.’ (Halbe 2015)8
Precedent 2: ICD/ITKE Research Pavillion 2014 Image sourced: ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018].
Figure 2 I chose to study this research pavilion as it demonstrates the ‘architectural potential of a novel building method inspired by the underwater nest construction of the water spider’ (Halbe 2015). Students studied the water spider’s survival method of constructing a reinforced air bubble and aimed to recreate this in their 2014 research pavilion. The lightweight fibre shell creates this efficient and stable structure and was manufactured with the use of robotic fibre placement6. This pavilion has subsequently influenced further design and digital fabrication techniques in that it proves that structures do not require complicated systems and formwork to be able to effectively adapt to environmental stresses, just as the water spider’s air bubble. The pavilion sparked interest in me as I thought about this structure in terms of the viewer (who we can assume as no prior knowledge of the architecture behind it). They might think ‘What is its purpose? It doesn’t look very durable. Why implement this structure here? However I believe that the communiy behind the structure proved the strength behind lightweight structures and can ultimately encourage other designers to adopt a similar approach in architecture, leading to more environmentally sustainable design thinking. I thought that it also demonstrates history intesecting with modern design in that there are classical elements in it such as inspiration from nature, however with a digital twist. This demonstrates that natural world has been accepting and implementing lightweight structures in the past and therefore proves it to be durable and sustainable7. The 2014 pavilion is a testamony to the fact that design is becoming more than just a product these days, but also a service. More specifically, the machinery behind creating this pavilion opens up new opportunities for design infrastructure in that it proves how lightweight structures can be efficient and effective. This is Highlighted in Thackara’s book where he states that ‘In the past, design was about the form and function of things. These features, which were limited in space and time, could be delivered in a fixed form, such as a blueprint. In today’s ultra-networked world, it makes more sense to think of design as a process that continuously defines a system’s rules rather than its outcomes’. 2 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. Moritz Doerstelmann and others, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15: Fibre Placement On A Pneumatic Body Based On A Water Spider Web”, Architectural Design, 85.5 (2015), 60-65 <https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1955>. 2 John Thackara, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224. 8 Valentin Koslowski Seiichi Suzuki Erazo, “ITKE - Development”, Itke.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://www.itke.uni-stuttgart.de/entwicklung.php?lang=en&id=69> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 6 7
Figure 3 Image source: http://www.ehu.eus/ehusfera/industrialized-architecture/2015/09/01/ icditke-research-pavillon-2014-15-stuttgart-germany/
A.2 Design Computation
Within the last few years building design and construction practices have started to be impacted by the advances in computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacturing (CAM) technologies in that design firms are being forced to accept and incorporate this in design in order to stay competitive and create accurate, strong design. In turn, CAD has opened up new opportunities by allowing production and construction to be undertaken of complex forms that were, historically near-impossible and expensive to create using traditional methods of design9. The main way to use computers in architecture today is that of computerisation, where algorithms or processes that are already conceptualised in the designerâ€™s mind are entered, and then created using technology.11 Architectural design is an activity that deals with numerous external forces which pose as constraints (such as site conditions, climate, cost, functionality, and building codes) and can therefore be made easier with computers.10 Computers are analytical engines that can follow a line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, unlike human intelligence. They never tire or make silly mistakes and will perform the tedious tasks that are often subject to human error. They will do this quickly and present solutions to the designer in a sense that is logical and suitable for human comprehension (such as in the form of tables, reports, charts, images and sounds).
‘Digital technologies are changing architectural practices in ways that few were able to anticipate just a decade ago.’
More specifically, parametric design has emerged in the past few years as a form of digital design. ‘Beyond being merely a design technology, parametric design is a new form of the logic of digital design thinking.’10 Parametric design computer programs allow the writing of algorithms for the creation of variations of the same design, this consequently benefits the designer as in the past where an unnecessary amount of time would go into reproducing the same design to demonstrate slight variations within each, can now be formulated quickly and effectively with programs such as Rhino and plug-ins such as Grasshopper, which allows the designer to spend less time focusing on tedious work and more time on design thinking, which computer based software’s are yet to conquer. On the whole, parametric design in architecture develops as a new form of design logic which is efficient and effective. In other words, history proves that the majority of CAD research has been directed towards developing software’s that provide assistance to human designers by achieving the smaller or larger parts (time consuming factors) of the design process. This all seems final and perfect in the architectural world in that more accurate designs can be constructed in order to ensure safer and better built structures; however there is still a place for the designer. More specifically, computers are incapable of making up new instructions: they lack any creative abilities or intuition. Although CAD can aide in efficiency and accuracy, there initially needs to be the original design concept to work with as programs can’t just think them up themselves. This is where the designer comes in. In many ways, it can be argues that CAD interrupts the design craft and this idea was explored in lecture two where the prevailing thought that CAD might conspire against creative thought by encouraging ‘fake’ creativity’ was recognised. Robert M. Oxman and Rivka E. Oxman, “Formal Knowledge In Knowledge-Based CAD”, Building And Environment, 26.1 (1991), 35-40 <https://doi.org/10.1016/03601323(91)90037-c>. 10 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 11 Issa, Rajaa ‘Essential Mathematics for Computational Design’, Second Edition, Robert McNeel and associates, pp 1 - 42 9
Precedent 3: Grandstand roof designed by Eduardo Torroja When exploring a range of historical precedents that lead to the creation of CAD and CAM, I couldn’t look past Eduardo Torroja’s Zarzuela grandstand. Not only would have the designing and fabrication stage have been made easier with the use of such programs, but perhaps it would still exist today had have digital repairs been implemented after it suffered from several hits throughout the Civil War. The stress that this caused the structure resulted in its collapse.12 The structure’s large size, absence of beam at the connection between the two cylindrical sections, asymmetry and skylights defied what was historically possible to achieve before the 1930s and this was one of the first examples of a ‘shell’ roof. In order to make this idea feasible, Torroja had to not only understand the behaviours of thin concrete shells, but consider the variables such as material thickness, impact of weather conditions, the support frame, skylights and the new concept of reinforced concrete13. All of these problems had to be solved by hand which took extensive time to research and test. He would then create models to test these theoretical calculations, incorporating his assumptions in hope that the structure would be strong and supported. Not only could have all of this been more accurately and efficiently determined through the use of computeraided design, but even demonstration models could have been mass produced and personalised in order to speed up this phase of the design process and lead it promptly into construction14. Perhaps the end result could have even anticipated trauma such as the hits it took throughout the Civil War and been able to accommodate this as it would have been faster for CAD to test even more variables. Subsequently, computer-aided-manufacturing could have more easily poured the concrete for the ribs and superior beams as the concept of using concrete to create a lightweight structure was new to begin with, and this could have made it easier for successive phases. Juan J. Moragues and others, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008>. 13 Eduardo Torroja, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14.137 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930>. 12 Juan J. Moragues and others, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008>. 13 Eduardo Torroja, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14.137 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930>. 14 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 12
Image sourced: https://divisare.com/projects/275790-eduardo-torroja-carlos-arniches-moltomartin-dominguez-esteban-ximo-michavila-hipodromo-de-la-zarzuela
Figure 6 17
Precedent 4: ICD/ITKE - Research Pavilion 2016-2017 (2017)
The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion of 2017 is an exploration into the fabrication of glass and carbon-fibre using Computer-AidedManufacturing15. Although the design was definitely also designed through Computer-Aided-Design techniques, what I find most interesting is it’s manufacturing process. To the everyday person who may pass the structure without appreciating the technology behind its development, they may feel confused with its purpose and function, however it is a marvellous demonstration of digital design and fabrication which will continue to be celebrated in future pavilion design. As this is a lightweight structure, robots and drones are able to produce it as it’s at a small enough scale for robotic production to be possible whilst still testing the boundaries of CAM to this day. Students from the University of Stuttgart investigated into materials and structures found in the natural world and aimed to reflect and mimick this in their pavilion design (which also links the 2017 design to the 2014 Reseach Pavilion which was inspired by the water spider’s natural habitat). This therefore proves the use of stretching out the one material for efficiency10. Students once again looked to the past to learn about what had historically been fabricated using digital methods and built on from this aiming to produce similar concepts but at a much larger-scale and in a larger context. Along with this, the student’s also had to create a completely new method of production to be able to achieve this, especially where stability and durability of lightweight structure had previously been a concern in the design world15. The structure is a true testamony to the recent development in Computer Aided Design and Manufacturing in that it incorporates the use of drones and robots throughout its construction process. Both the robots and drones have sensors to detect where to land and fly without the need for human pilots. As depicted in figure 7, the tension and direction (flow) of the fibre was controlled by the robots and which would react to the structure throughout the building process accordingly15. This prevents the structure from being subject to human error as computer’s aren’t wrong. In addition, it proves to be a more efficient use of time for the designer as they don’t need to perform tedious tasks and can instead, focus on optimising the design outcomes. This computer-aided manufacturing inspires future lightweight structures to be made at a larger-scale in that it is proven possible here. Where there were previous concerns regarding lightweight durability, they have been explored and addressed in this structure and demonstrates how far technology has come today16. “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 16 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 15 10 15
Image sourced: https://www.designboom.com/architecture/icd-itke-researchpavilion-university-of-stuttgart-germany-robot-drone-fabrication-04-14-2017/
Figure 8 Images sourced: https://www.dezeen.com/2017/04/12/icd-itke-research-pavilion-university-stuttgart-germanycarbon-fibre-robots-drones/
A.3 Composition to Generation
A.3 Composition to Generation
‘When architects have sufficient understanding of algorithmic concepts, when we no longer need to discuss the digital as something different, then computation can become a true method of design for architecture’ Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15
In recent years, the shift from composition to generation has influenced the creation of numerous large-scale design projects in that it allows for designers to effectively analyse and implement endless design variations.17 The ability to mass produce multiple design iterations at a fast pace has allowed for architects to be absolutely certain that their chosen design is perfect for any situation. Where in the past designs such as the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilions could have taken up to months just analysing potential variations of a single design, algorithmic software’s such as grasshopper can just bake the formula and create multiple iterations in just seconds. Subsequently, programs such as Kangaroo can test for material performance to ensure that the manufacturing of the structure runs smoothly and that it will be sustainable. As we move into a digital world, many firms are accepting generative design as natural.16 The only drawback to these programs is that it requires a whole new skillset of mathematical algorithms and confidence in using the programming software’s. However, the above quote rings true in that computers do allow for accurate and safe design outcomes, generative design should not be perceived as ‘different’ and ‘unique’, but should set the standard for what is expected in the future of architecture.
Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge)
Precedent 5: Ney + Partners Dutch Maritime Museum (2011)
Figure 9 Image sourced: http://www.wbarchitectures.be/en/ architects/Ney___Partners/Netherlands_Maritime_ Museum/555/
The designer, Laurent Ney, argued that ‘the freedom in generating efficient forms lies in the right selection of the material and boundary conditions’
The numerical, form-finding shell depicts a reciprocal structure where if one steel beam was remover, the rest of the structure would topple. The reciprocal structure was initially inputed into ComputerAided-Design (grasshopper) which enabled for accurate measurements and security in knowing the structure will be feasible and strong. Being a reciprocal structre, computers constructed the best possible way to position each steel beam, so that it relies on one another yet will still demonstrate strength18. Had have they not verified this through digital modelling softwares, it would have been extremely difficult to construct such a complicated structure18, as historically evident where geometric design was invisioned, however rarely executed. The inputed algorithms also ensured that the final outcome was not subject to human error and the engineers were guaranteed a well-built structure14. The Museum roof is construction of a glazed roof which was achieved in an international architectural competition. The structure is a true testamony to Mies Van Der Rohe’s idea that ‘it is not possible to go forward while looking back’ in that the museum’s glass roof pays tribute to the historically preserved building. This is achieved by basing the design off wind hoses of ancient marine maps of the museum collection, so in this way the design is relevant to the building’s purpose but commissions the new through computer generative design. The complexity of the shell is resolved through oragami of reciprocal structures, which is then later computer generated. Algorithms harness the creation of reciprocal structures on Computer-Aided Design softwares. allowing for efficient design and the ability to mass produce concepts with slight deviations and this ultimately leads to its manufacturing. In addition, grasshopper allowed for the structure to be flattened which demonstrated the effects of the sun casting shadows through the roof (figure 10), and we have also studied this technique in-class. A selection of materials were tested in Kangaroo to ensure the most durable outcome. In addition grasshopper and kangaroo ensured that there was no wastage of materials in that they were efficiently used and that just the right amount of mterial was purchased and used in order to create the structure. Sigrid Adriaenssens and others, “Finding The Form Of An Irregular Meshed Steel And Glass Shell Based On Construction Constraints”, Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 18.3 (2012), 206-213 <https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000074>. 14 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 19 “NEY & Partners | News | Dutch Maritime Museum Nominated Prize Best Reuse And Transformation 2012 (NL)”, NEY & Partners, 2018 <http://www.ney.be/dutchmaritime-museum-nominated-prize-best-reuse-and-transformation-2012-nl.html> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 18
Figure 10 Images sourced: http://www.ney.be/project/glass-roof-dutch-maritime-museum.html
Precedent 6: L’Oceanográfic, Felix Candela, 2003 The Felix Candela demonstrates the same type of generative design that we have been focusing on in class to the nth degree. It proves that generative design really does ensure a well-designed outcome as it has the ability to cycle through thousands of iterations to be left with the best possible structure and know what works and what doesn’t. CAD and CAM tested and analysed each possibility past the point of what man can do which in the past has been almost impossible to achieve in complex lightweight structures20. In a sense, Brady’s article on computation is reflected in this design in that it’s interesting how man helps make the machine and the machine in turn, helps man17.
Figure 11 Image source: <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_ posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/Optimality-of-Candelasconcrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf>
Previously, composition in architecture involved much trial and error which was evidently very time consuming, historically resulting in the lack of very complex structures at it was simply too difficult to conceptualise. When computational methods revolutionised design, it paved the path for the concrete in this design to be analysed and be composed in the more effective and efficient geometrical form while still conforming to laws of physics. Kangaroo discovered that the best use of material was concrete reinforced with netting, it also determined the overall thickness of the shell to best be durable without impacting on the overall aesthetic which Candela had initially sought out to achieve20. It also analysed its appropriate load bearing weight. The result: an improvement in the structural behaviour where slight geometric changes were made through using grasshopper. ANTONIO TOMÁS AND PASCUAL MARTÍ, “OPTIMALITY OF CANDELA’S CONCRETE SHELLS: A STUDY OF HIS POSTHUMOUS DESIGN”, JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS, 2018 <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/Optimality-ofCandelas-concrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf> [Accessed 14 March 2018]. 17 Brady Peters, “Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought”, Architectural Design, 83.2 (2013), 8-15 20
Figure 12 Image sourced: Algorithmic Journal, Kangaroo demonstration
Figure 13 Image source: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Oceanogr%C3%A0fic
A.4 Conclusion In summary, Part A has proved to me the importance of digital design in the architectural world in that it paves the path for more efficient and sustainable design. In the past, the traditional approach to design through composition proved to be extremely time consuming, and even then the designs would be subject to human error as evident in my precedent 3. Through computation, architecture can now be perceived in a completely different sense in that it incorporates the use of algorithms (grasshopper) and a new way of design thinking which can both scare and intrigue people. CAD and CAM should not and do not provide complications or new creative ideas to designers, they merely assist in the creation process so that the designer can best gauge an understanding of what outcome works best for their ideology. It is only a matter of time before computer-aided-design and computer-aided-manufacturing is no longer known to be ‘cool and innovative’ but rather ‘the expected norm’ to ensure a safe, sustainable and aesthetically beautiful outcome.
What interested me most in my research was the approach that the students from the University of Stuttgart took by basing their structures off precedents found in the natural world. More specifically, taking inspiration from the bubbles generated from the water spider, spider webs and cocoons to create a lightweight structure. I have decided to incorporate biomimicry in my design with the idea that it will encourage people to interact with the innovative form-found structure and accept the concept of efficiency through new lightweight structures.
A.5 Learning Outcomes At the beginning of the Semester, my understanding of architectural computing was that it overcomplicated traditional design methods and it honestly intimidated me. Whilst I still have a long way to go until I master the new concept, I can now understand the opportunities it opens up to designers. CAD and CAM can mass produce concepts quickly and in turn efficiently which ultimately benefits the environment and innovative design, itself. This concept is demonstrated in my algorithmic journal where I have demonstrated the technique of baking curves and surfaces in order to easily and quickly create multiple iterations of it. Iâ€™ve learnt that I shouldnâ€™t be so scared of change, because technology can more often than not alleviate unnecessary stress from designers concerning the accuracy of their design and that they are producing the best possible outcome.
Had have I been able to understand these concepts in my previous design studio: Water, I would have been able to produce more of a structurally accurate design. Although I loved the overall look of my final boathouse (as shown on page 4), I didnâ€™t have the confidence in knowing that it would work from an engineering standpoint, and programs such as grasshopper and kangaroo would have tested the more efficient and best possible outcomes for me so that I would have the reassurance in knowing my design is perfect. However, mistakes are my best source of learning so Iâ€™m eager to embrace this new approach to design thinking.
A.6 Appendix: Algorithmic Sketches
Bibliography Fry, Tony, Design Futuring (London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014) Thackara, John, In The Bubble (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2006), p. 224 “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=6553> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Gengnagel, Christoph, Axel Kilian, Norbert Palz, and Fabian Scheurer, Computational Design Modelling (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011), pp. 239-248 Knippers, Jan, and Thomas Speck, “Design And Construction Principles In Nature And Architecture”, Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 7 (2012), 015002 <https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-3182/7/1/015002> “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=12965> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Doerstelmann, Moritz, Jan Knippers, Valentin Koslowski, Achim Menges, Marshall Prado, and Gundula Schieber and others, “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2014-15: Fibre Placement On A Pneumatic Body Based On A Water Spider Web”, Architectural Design, 85 (2015), 60-65 <https://doi. org/10.1002/ad.1955> Seiichi Suzuki Erazo, Valentin Koslowski, “ITKE - Development”, Itke.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://www.itke.uni-stuttgart.de/entwicklung. php?lang=en&id=69> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Oxman, Robert M., and Rivka E. Oxman, “Formal Knowledge In Knowledge-Based CAD”, Building And Environment, 26 (1991), 35-40 <https://doi. org/10.1016/0360-1323(91)90037-c>
Adriaenssens, Sigrid, Laurent Ney, Eric Bodarwe, and Chris Williams, “Finding The Form Of An Irregular Meshed Steel And Glass Shell Based On Construction Constraints”, Journal Of Architectural Engineering, 18 (2012), 206-213 <https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)ae.1943-5568.0000074> “NEY & Partners | News | Dutch Maritime Museum Nominated Prize Best Reuse And Transformation 2012 (NL)”, NEY & Partners, 2018 <http://www. ney.be/dutch-maritime-museum-nominated-prize-best-reuse-and-transformation-2012-nl.html> [Accessed 14 March 2018] TOMÁS, ANTONIO, and PASCUAL MARTÍ, “OPTIMALITY OF CANDELA’S CONCRETE SHELLS: A STUDY OF HIS POSTHUMOUS DESIGN”, JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR SHELL AND SPATIAL STRUCTURES: J. IASS, 2018 <https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Antonio_Tomas3/ publication/279761881_Optimality_of_Candela’s_concrete_shells_A_study_of_his_posthumous_design/links/55a7d16d08ae1dca686fcdd1/ Optimality-of-Candelas-concrete-shells-A-study-of-his-posthumous-design.pdf> [Accessed 14 March 2018] Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16 Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013) Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press) pp. 1-9, 33-45 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25 Issa, Rajaa ‘Essential Mathematics for Computational Design’, Second Edition, Robert McNeel and associates, pp 1 - 42 Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 08-15 Definition of ‘Algorithm’ in Wilson, Robert A. and Frank C. Keil, eds (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press), pp. 11, 12 Moragues, Juan J., Ignacio Paya-Zaforteza, Oswaldo Medina, and Jose M. Adam, “Eduardo Torroja’S Zarzuela Racecourse Grandstand: Design, Construction, Evolution And Critical Assessment From The Structural Art Perspective”, Engineering Structures, 105 (2015), 186-196 <https://doi. org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.10.008> Torroja, Eduardo, “Hipódromo De La Zarzuela”, Informes De La Construcción, 14 (1962), 19-38 <https://doi.org/10.3989/ic.1962.v14.i137.4930> “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2017 | Institute For Computational Design And Construction”, Icd.Uni-Stuttgart.De, 2018 <http://icd.uni-stuttgart. de/?p=19195> [Accessed 14 March 2018]
Published on Mar 16, 2018