BIM - Noise Nest

Architecture Journal 2023 Building Information Management

ARC3004 BIM

Contents

Semester 2 2023 Swinburne University Joshua Muldear y Studio Leader : A l i Te h a m i

Unit Convenor:

Dr Mehrnoush Latifi

02

Contents

PROJECT 3 Background | Workflow Site anaylsis | Design Drivers Program | Proposal Levels | Proposal Analysis | Impact Facade | Options Figures | Bibliography

Contents

03

04

About Me

ABOUT ME

I’m Joshua Muldeary, Born in 2001, Melbourne, Australia. I’m an Architectural design student, at Swinburne University of Technology, since 2020.

I am studying to become a creative and innovative designer who is adept at bringing ideas and dreams to life in the disciplines of architectural design, graphic design, illustration, and photography.

My main objective for my professional career is to be able to make a lasting impact on the wider population through my work, whether it be creating homes, workplaces, landmarks, or monuments.

I aim to contribute and design spaces that can enrich and improve the lives of others.

My passion for detail, minimalism and simplistic elegance forms the foundation for my future work and shaping the ways in which I approach functional and aesthetic qualities. I enjoy and appreciate peaceful moments where I can escape into a novel or one of my very eclectic playlists. I have a quiet appreciation for the world around me and view it with a sense of wonder; as well as an admiration for the quiet spaces one can find in chaos.

About Me

05

BIM + KNOWLEDGE BIM for Design and Feedback Loop | Project 3

ARC3004 Building Information Management Ali Tehami [Wednesday] 2:20-5:30

Joshua Muldeary - 103062074 Lachlan Retallack - 103066270 William Slane - 103617681 Alex Burrows - 103074529

06

BIM + KNOWLEDGE | Project 3

Figure 44.

BIM + KNOWLEDGE | Project 3

07

AMDC RENOVATION Project 3 | Overview

THE PROJECT

DESIGN VISION

The Swinburne Advanced manufacturing and Design Centre was selected for project 3. We were required to design two facade options, and redesign one floor from 5-8, per group member. Our group redesigned floors five to eight.

Our design vision for the internal spaces was to completely restructure the program of the floors make them more student focused, with more study spaces than classrooms.

Internally; we were to aim to accommodate comprehensive teaching and learning spaces dedicated to design and architecture.

Externally; we were to enhance the energy efficiency of the buildings envelope by implementing innovative and responsive facade strategies, that adapt to environmental conditions.

BIM

Additionally making the spaces more comfortable than they currently are.

Externally we wanted to address the lacking view angles and implement a way of controlling internal thermal exposure via the facade.

The implementation of BIM workflows allowed our group of four to efficiently and effectively delegate tasks, while teams was used as our chosen communication tool. Additionally, a gantt chart helped us stay to our self set deadlines for task. These tools and workflows allowed us to complete the assigned task on time and to a satisfactory qualitative level.

Figure 45.

08

Project Overview

PROJECT BIM Workflow | Process

The way we approached our groups workflow was two fold: Firstly, we would as a group break down the assignment briefs into a timeline of tasks that would then be used in a shared gantt chart to keep track of when each general task (Eg. Facade options) should be completed by.

Secondly, we took each of those tasks and then broke them down further into individual tasks that was then assigned and delegated to individual group members | Additionally we used a variety of tools to complete these assigned tasks. Listed below.

BIM Workflow | Will Slane & Josh Muldeary

Figure 46. workflow diagram, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3

09

DESIGN DRIVERS

47. Site analysis collage, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3

Site Visit | Problems

Natural lack could be taken further advantage of due to the void and abundance light exposure from windows

Pedastrian circulation optimised for classroom layout, not proposed changes to program Needs to be analysed and optimised

Existing facade significantly disrupts view angles from interior spaces

Central void provides light and ventilation, however neglects noise pollution and proofing Central void provides light and ventilation, however neglects noise pollution and proofing 010

Design Drivers | Will Slane & Josh Muldeary

DESIGN DRIVERS Interior | Exterior

Optimise

Introduce

Pedastrian

Collaborative

Traffic

Better

Spaces

Noise Management

Maximise Views

Provide occupants with effective and responsive lighting

Figure 48. Design drivers, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3

Design Drivers | Will Slane & Josh Muldeary 011

011

EXISTING CONDITION ANALYSIS Acoustics | Pedsim

In order to address the identified problems, a pedastrian simulation was done.

That data was then used as areas of activity for the acoustic analysis to generate the acoustics of the spaces We did this analysis mainly to understand the effects the existing conditions has on the space acoustically and for pathways. we would then be able to directly compare the results of the same analysis after our internal changes are complete

Figure 49. Acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack and Joshua Muldeary for Project 3 012

Analysis | Lachlan Retellack & Josh Muldeary

achieve desired changes the program was split into two sections: PROGRAM REDESIGN To • Floors five and six which would be focused as student spaces being; Existing Classrooms of various sizes, large communal and Existing | Proposed

private study spaces, smallscale workshop and protolab.

• Floors seven and eight would be focused on staff and student spaces being; presentation and showcase spaces, with student and staff storage and staff offices, computer labs with more staff offices.

EXISTING

PROPOSED

LEVEL 8

LEVEL 8

LEVEL 7

LEVEL 7

LEVEL 6

LEVEL 6

Offices

Offices

Computer Labs Offices

Computer Labs Offices

Presentation Gallery Storage Offices

Study Space Small Scale Workshop

Offices LEVEL 5

Classrooms

LEVEL 5

Classrooms Reduced Room size +One Larger Room

Figure 50. proposed program, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 Program 013| Lachlan Retellack & Josh Muldeary

013

fifth floor went through a number of changes: PROGRAM REDESIGN The • sound proof study pods were introduced in new rooms that made use of previously wasted space.

Proposed Changes | comparison

• added acoustic technology including vegetation to improve noise insulation • removed the collapsible walls between classrooms to make them two seperate rooms with extra storage capability • the larger classrooms had the collapsible walls entirely removed to become one large class room

Figure 51. Level 5 program proposal, created by Joshua Muldeary and Will Slane for Project 3 014

Proposal | Will Slane & Josh Muldeary

sixth floor went through a number of changes: PROGRAM REDESIGN The • All classrooms were removed to accommodate large communal and private study spaces Proposed Changes | comparison

• A small workshop and protolab were added as they are needed by design students regularly • Staff lounge was added for staff with a large sliding door for student access, this was done as protolabs need staff supervision to be operated in

Figure 52.

Proposal | Josh Muldeary

015

seventh floor went through a number of changes: PROGRAM REDESIGN The • The existing offices were mostly removed to open up the space and encourage optimal pedastrian flow Proposed Changes | comparison

• the old offices were converted into student show case and presentation spaces as AMDC severely lacks those types of professional spaces that are required by architecture and design students very regularly and for almost every assessment

Figure 53. Level 7 program proposal, created by Joshua Muldeary and Alex Burrows for Project 3 016

Proposal | Alex Burrows & Josh Muldeary

eighth floor went through a number of changes: PROGRAM REDESIGN The • the other floors computer labs and offices were moved to floor eight to accommodate classroom needs that the program Proposed Changes | comparison

would require to function as a design school and space. all the rooms have new acoustic technology to deflect and diffuse the sound waves and reduce overall noise levels

Figure 54. Level 8 program proposal, created by Joshua Muldeary and Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 Proposal | Lachlan Retallack & Josh Muldeary

017

PROPOSED CONDITION ANALYSIS Acoustics | Pedsim

After the internal changes were made, we conducted the same analysis simulations as previously to understand the effects ours changes caused The pedastrian pathing was again used as a reference for our areas of sound activity After the internal structural changes and the newly added acoustic technologies are the taken into account the results of the analysis are that the acoustics of all four floors have been improved quite drastically.

Figure 55. Acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack and Joshua Muldeary for Project 3 018

Analysis | Lachlan Retallack & Josh Muldeary

PROPOSED CONDITION ANALYSIS Acoustics | Pedsim

Figure 56. Acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack and Joshua muldeary for Project 3 Analysis | Lachlan Retallack

019

EXISITING FACADE ANALYSIS Viewing visibility | Thermals

The existing condition of the external facade is made up of vertical concrete fin like structures these structures have several drawback in that they: • Provide minimal protection from sun exposure and thus the internal rooms are quite warm • The fins block visibility angles and thus viewing from the internal spaces is very limited

Figures 57-59. Facade analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 020

Facades | Lachlan Retallack & Josh Muldeary

HYPERBOLIC FACADE Acoustics | Pedsim

Our first concept is a series of packed rounded windows that references the neighbouring buildings circular cutout design • These windows would open and close depending on internal acoustic activity, which would in turn protect the internal spaces from thermal exposure when not in use • They would operate via a spinning element that opens and closes a flexible membrane material

Figures 60-62. Facade analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 Facades | Lachlan Retallack

021

HYPERBOLIC FACADE Viewing visibility | Thermals

Figure 63. External Render, created by primarily Will Slane for Project 3 022

Figures 64-65. Gifs, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 Facades | Lachlan Retallack & Josh Muldeary

TENSILE FACADE Acoustics | Pedsim

Our second concept is a series of flexible membranes that cover the window panels.

• These windows would open and close depending on internal acoustic activity, which would in turn protect the internal spaces from thermal exposure when not in use • The shorter panels would provide greater visibility than existing when open, additionally the panels are matched to each window size which provides the best possible sun protection and the most comprehensive reaction due to activity in the interior spaces • They would operate via a rotating the bottom part of the panel along the central axis 90 degrees to open the façade panels.

Figures 66-68. Facade analysis, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack for Project 3 Facades | Lachlan Retallack

023

TENSILE FACADE Viewing visibility | Thermals

Figure 69. External Render, created by primarily Will Slane for Project 3 024

Figures 70-71. Gifs, created by primarily Lachlan Retallack and Joshua Muldeary for Project 3 Facades | Lachlan Retallack & Josh Muldeary

Reflection

Coming off the back of project 2, my group and I were well prepared in terms of workflow management as the system we had developed previously worked very well and efficiently. My own person workflow has somewhat evolved since project 2, as this subject has allowed me to learn how to better balance subjects workloads and assignments. I’ve since been able to work more efficiently on multiple things at once instead of just one task at a time.

The use of a gantt chart in particular is still the best time management took that I use and one I shared with my entire group for project 2 and 3 as it allowed us to better stick to a set timetable of deadlines and tasks that would allow us to comfortably finish them before the due date.

The use of collaborative cloud share in revit allowed worksharing and tasks to be a mainly pain free endeavour, as we could all work on our assigned and delegated tasks seperately with everyone still having access to another persons work. Once again this management tool allowed an incredible efficency when working that I had never experienced before and wish more softwares used.

The entire workflow process was mostly streamlined, the problems that arose did not come from any of our management skills, they instead came from the supplied revit file. The file was very intricate and detailed which took quite heavy toll on our computers, particularly regarding rendering. The file was often slow and seemed poorly optimised, it made what should have been a timely process quite long. The size of the file and complexity also made exporting any sheets to cause the software to crash or freeze, as a result making our drawing package was quite stressful. Overall the project was an incredible learning experience that was incredibly valuable both academically and professionally.

025Reflection | Project 3

Figure 72.

025

FIGURE LIST

Images | Explanations •

figure 1. AEC & BIM Knowledgebase,’What is Building Information Modeling (BIM)?’ ideCAD 07/09/23.

•

figure 2-26 Presentation slides, created by Josh Muldeary, Alex Burrows, Lachlan Retallack, Will Slane for project 1, Powerpoint, 11/08/2023.

•

figure 27-31. Presentation Slides, Powerpoint. 11/08/23.

•

figure 32. Austin Maynard Architects,’St Andrews Beach House’, Maynardarchitects.com.

•

figure 33. Austin Maynard Architects,’St Andrews Beach House’, Maynardarchitects.com.

•

figure 34. workflow diagram, created by primarily William Slane for Project 2, 05/09/23.

•

figure 35. Task delegation diagram, Rhino 7, 05/09/23.

•

figure 36-40. Structural system, Revit 2024, 14/08/23.

•

figure 41. External Render, TwinMotion, 03/09/23.

•

figure 42. Internal Render, TwinMotion, 03/09/23.

•

figure 43. Gantt chart, Excel, 02/08/23.

•

figure 44. cover page, revit, 29/10/23.

•

figure 45. floor levels, revit, 29/10/23.

•

figure 46 workflow diagram, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3. illustrator, 23/10/23.

•

figure 47. Site visit photo collage, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3. photos, illustrator, 23/10/23.

•

figure 48. Design Drivers, created by primarily William Slane for Project 3. illustrator, 23/10/23.

•

figure 49. Existing condition acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, revit, rhino 7, grasshopper, photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 50. Existing and proposed program diagram, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, rhino 7, photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 51. Level 5 proposal diagram, created by Josh Muldeary and Will Slane for project 3, revit, illustrator. 25/10/23.

•

figure 52. Level 6 proposal diagram, revit, illustrator. 25/10/23.

•

figure 53. Level 7 proposal diagram, created by Josh Muldeary and Alex Burrows for project 3, revit, illustrator. 25/10/23.

•

figure 54. Level 8 proposal diagram, created by Josh Muldeary and Lachlan Retallack for project 3, revit, illustrator. 25/10/23.

•

figure 55. Axo Proposed acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, revit, rhino 7, grasshopper, photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 56. Proposed acoustic and pedastrian analysis, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, revit, rhino 7, grasshopper, photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 57-59. Facade analysis, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, revit, rhino 7, grasshopper. 13/10/23.

•

figure 60-62. Facade analysis, created by lachlan retallack for project 3, revit, rhino 7, grasshopper. 13/10/23 026

Journal | Figure list

FIGURE LIST

Images | Explanations •

figure 63. Hyperbolic facade render, created by Will Slane for project 3. Twinmotion. 25/10/23.

•

figure 64-65. Hyperbolic function animation, created by Lachlan Retallack for project 3, Rhino, Photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 66-68. Tensile facade analysis, created by Lachlan Retallack for project 3, rhino, ladybug. 14/10/23.

•

figure 69. Tensile Facade render, created by Will Slane for project 3, Twinmotion. 25/10/23.

•

figure 70-71. Tensile function animation. Rhino, Photoshop. 24/10/23.

•

figure 71. Gantt chart, excell, 20/09/23.

027 Journal | Figure list

027

Bibliography Resource List •

AEC & BIM Knowledge base,’What is Building Information Modeling (BIM)?’ ideCAD. Accessed 07/09/23. https://help.idecad.com/ideCAD/what-is-building-information-modeling-bim

•

Daria Kuprienko,’ Five NZ budget baches on sale for under $500k’, OneRoof. Accessed 07/09/23. https://www.oneroof.co.nz/news/nz-baches-for-under-half-a-million-37367

•

Austin Maynard Architects,’St Andrews Beach House’, Maynardarchitects.com. Acessed 07/09/23. https://maynardarchitects.com/standrews

028

Journal | Bibliography

+65 487 436 605

103062074@student.swin.edu.au Swinburne University of Technology

040

Architecture design Studio