Page 1








-Introductory Paragraph -Brick Country Villa (Mies Van Deh Rohe)


-Jewish Museum Berlin (Daniel Libeskind)

B1. EXPRESSION OF -Reverse Engineeri



-Development Proc





EXPRESSION OF -Matrices Devel


EXPRESSION OF -Proof of Conce


EXPESSION OF -Fabrication Pro






EXPRESSION OF -Model Photog -EOI Review

-Uknown Project (Daniel Libeskind) -Villa Libeskind (Daniel Libeskind)


-Futuropolis Installation (Daniel Libeskind)


-Progress Reflection

A7. PANELISATION -Aggregated Porosity (Biao Hu & Yu Du)


-Sheer Wall (Jesse Pietila)


-McCormack Tribune (Rem Koolhaus) -Redevelopment Matrix


-Voussoir Cloud



-Reverse Engineering -Failures





ing cess

F INTEREST lopment







‘Computers are enabling architects to do things that used to be virtually impossible, or possible for only the most original and creative architects.’

Karrie Jacobs (2009)

It’s only a matter of time until the limitations are alleviated and the knot is undone. So I suppose we better all get on board then....

A1- Me. I’m Matt Ambler, I’m 20 years old and completing my third year of this Environments Degree, with a major in Architecture. I work as a Cocktail Bartender, I live out in the ‘burbs and moved to Melbourne 3 years ago from country Victoria. I’ve always had a certain passion for Architecture, and knew it what was what I wanted to do from an early age. My experience with Digital Architecture is very limited, it isn’t a major interest of mine and at this stage I suppose I don’t really appreciate the whole Parametric Design thing, but it’s growing on me. I have particular interest in sharp geometric forms, modernism and minimalism. I’m hands on, and design with a clear direction and insight into my final product. I like to control the processes and solutions in design, rather than an unknown program doing it for me. The content of this course will be a challenge, as well as the overall processes and outcomes of parametric design. But nethertheless, bring it on. I understand that Digital Architecture will become more and more dominant in the design world, as I am aware of the greater pool of possibilities associated with digital architecture combined with parametric design. Greater levels of complexity can be achieved, and those achievements can become fabricated accurately, creating new forms and aesthetics that were simply unattainable before. My appreciation for Architecture lies elsewhere. Modernism and the modern movement is my favourite style, with use of sharp geometries, minimal ornamentation, where the form of the design alone is ornate. Architecture for me is something drawn and designed from start to finish, where the design and the construction of that design is derived from a collection of different professionals. Architecture for me is functional, effectively creating an aesthetic shell in order to support a specific function.

Brick Country House (Unbuilt) -Mies van der Rohe (1923) The Brick Country House is my favourite modern design. It makes use of simplified shapes and surfaces, clustering towards the centre and across mutliple vertical levels. The emphasis on horizontality and it’s extension into space blurs the line between design and surroundings, built spaces and natural spaces. Walls thrust out into the surroundings, emphasising a natural relationship and connection to the site. Something I potentially intend to incorporate into my Wyndham City Gateway Project. This design was radical and was drawn up in 1923 in the height of the modern movement, it is a standout representation of the modern movement representating a shift in ideals.




Terzidis, Kostas (2009) Algorithms for visual design using the processing language

Jewish Museum Berlin (1999) -Daniel Libeskind The Jewish Museum is an extraordinary design. Its overall form and layout is extremely unique, featuring sharp geometric angles kind of like how lightning is depicted. It is an aggressive design capable of evoking strong emotion, with its tall, dark and raw faรงade, completed with its unique diagonal slit windows. The inside is just as evoking, with strangely off-center spaces, dull skylights and large dark spaces. The building alone has the ability to spook you, representing a series of catastrophic events in Jewish History around Berlin. I love the consistency of form throughout the design, with sharp, diagonals created through relatively simple geometries. The building alone has an ability to evoke emotion suiting superbly within its role.

A2- Discourse: Non Euclidean Forms.

My chosen discourse is Non-Euclidean forms, but more specifically, those with a deconstructivist and rectilinear influence. Non-Euclidean is a comtemporary architectural form specifically referring to a unique set of geometries, unlike original Euclidean forms, used in classical architectures in the past. Non Euclidean form is unnatural, following a unique law of geometry. It is unsettling, abrupt, and unique and it doesn’t conform to standard straight-lined Euclidean rule. Deconstructivism is a late 20th century movement following post modernism, therefore is highly influenced by modernism and post modernism, but with a bit of an unpredictable and contemporary competitive edge. The movement entailed deformation of architectural element, into a manipulated structural form and surface. Decontructivism and Non Euclidean architectures work hand in hand together. My original interest in architecture lay strictly with straight, sharp and rectilinear forms (such as the Brick Country Villa on previous page), but more specifically, those forms combined with a Non-Euclidean twist. Furthermore, with the influence of the architectural movement deconstructivism, I found that it was the tying of these basic forms and geometries with a more complex, twisted and visually aggressive touch to be my main interest, and something I wish to influence my design concept for the Wydnham City Design Project.

A3- Computational Architecture and Design. Computers are the supreme tools to assist in the architectural design process. They have the ability to quickly and relentlessly draw from endless stored collections of information, they never tire, and they present information in forms ideal for human comprehension. Stored information is accessed and used as we request and instructions set will be followed flawlessly and precisely- Computers are capable of many things humans simply are not. 1 Nevertheless, individual designers are still in control of the design process, as it is our creative design process that transforms the product- not the computers. Computers are entirely incapable of making up new instructions, totally incompetent of actual design. 2 Computational design operates through a circle of communication between designer and computer, constantly drawing from the shared knowledge of both, sharing the task of design between them, endlessly improving the product.

1.Kalay, ‘Architectures New Media,’ 2. 2 Kalay, ‘Architectures New Media’, 4.

I have a particular interest in modernism the modernism movement, partly because of it’s aesthetic, but also because it was simply unprecedented and radical, modernism was making use of the recent tools, technologies, styles and materials. Computational design is just that, encapsulating the innovations of present day science and technology. Parametric design is the up-to-date modernism. The innovations of modernism that I took particular interest in were the development of the façade, the push from ornate embellishments to plain surface geometries. Now, parametric design has the potential to push that even further, and that is what fascinates me. Digital Architectures open up a whole new conceptual world of opportunity, which through fabrication can become tangible. Parametric design partnered with technological developments in fabrication and computer aided manufacture allows for new designs to be created, produced and constructed. Digital Architectures allow for computerized dynamic and kinetic systems and facades, it makes the creation of much more complex geometries such as topological geometries (solid yet continuously deformed and stretched forms) an attainable reality.

Daniel Lineskind’s Pavilion (2001) -Daniel Libeskind

Villa Libeskind (2003) -WDaniel Libeskind Daniel Libeskind’s work is phenomenal, where sculptural living space meets the highest standard in design, craftsmanship and sustainability. Clean, crisp and elegant lines create neat and sharp rectilinear forms, bending and folding around spaces. His work has strong emphasis on the diagonal, slanting, sloping and the oblique; nothing is simply straight forward vertical or horizontal. The product is a sophisticated balance of simplicity and complexity, with overly simple forms and shapes combined to create abstract and seemingly complex forms. I see Libeskind as one of the masters of modern architecture; it is this signature form of his designs which I particularly adore. Through Computational design structures and architectural forms such as Libeskind’s can be more easily achieved.


Futuropolis Installation (2005)- Daniel Libeskind Imagine trying to construct a sculpture that weighs seven tons, has 98 towers and consists of 2,164 different birch plates. Realizing this design within a two week timeframe and limited budget would be impossible by traditional craftsmanship professionals, but through parametricism this design became a reality. The exact geometry of all 2,164 parts was recorded and was 3 dimensionally modeled parametrically. From here the individual pieces were expanded, separated and labeled, milled and assembled. here, a previously unattainable fabrication was made possible through parametric design. I find this exhibit particularly interesting because of its complex rectilinear form. Once again simple geometries combined through repetition create a highly aesthetic faรงade. The design is unified throughout the use of this form, with the separate towers aligned in arrangement. The emphasis on straight, sharp and diagonal line is also present through the sections lines trimming the design to shape.

FLUX Installation (2009) -CCA Architecture/MEDIAlab

A4- PARAMETRICISM - The FLUX Installation designed and constructed by CCA (California College of the Arts) students. It is a 100ft long skeletal structure, undulating in plan and section producing a sense of dynamism through expansion and contraction. The structural form is a series of repetitive geometries with minor differences in shape, built using grasshopper through parametric modeling. The skin is perforated, but not randomly; this was also done using matrices in grasshopper. This parametric design interests me in two ways; the overall rolling geometries completed using sharp and straight geometries, combined with the patterned perforations spanning the entire faรงade. Through parametrecism this design was also made possible. This overall geometrical form is something I wish to incorporate into my design and discourse.

A5- PANALIZATION I chose to explore Panelisation as our secondary discourse. Panelisation is an excellent concept and parametric design style to investigate. Panelisation when used in architecture and design can assist to create a highly repetitive collection of relatively simplistic components, in order to create a unique overall form which I particularly admire, made possible by the large number of smaller components and connections. Panelisation also allows the potential to create a certain dynamic aesthetic, with a variation in scale and shape of individual components, consistent throughout a surface creating a wave like appeal. This concept also allows the opportunity for perforations throughout individual components allowing for vision through the design and the potential for shadows. Perception points can also be created through the use of Panelisation, which could be a very effective feature of a roadside installation, where all of sudden, for one moment in time at one particular viewpoint, a design can be fully seen, appreciated and understood. What I’m getting at is, I admire Panelisation physically, but also because it’s so tightly interconnected with multiple design principles and elements. Panelisation boasts repetition and pattern, as well as potentially creating senses of dynamism and fluidity with in entire forms. Panelisation is an excellent starting point to focus on as a discourse whilst developing a roadside design for Wyndham.

Reflection so far... My experience with parametric/ digital theory thus far has been extremely positive, I feel a lot more confident and comfortable using the programs and attempting to achieve what I’m setting out to achieve parametrically. My knowledge of tools, methods and the programs is still very little, but It’s a big step for me. There still is a big knowledge gap between what I know and what I want to know so my design goals are more attainable. My perceptions of parametricism have also changed since the beginning of semester; I want to understand it all better. But I just haven’t quite got there yet.


Aggregated Porosity is an installation designed by the Digital Architecture Library. This style of parametric design features a strong influence of Panelisation, with multiple individual panels joined together to create the composition. The overall curved form creates an empowering sense of fluidity, with the different sizes and angles of the individual panels creating a rippling sense of motion and dynamism. Some panels have voids within them, adding another feature to the design and creating the potential for an interesting incorporation and light and shade within the design. This theme of dynamism and fluidity would be well suited to a road side installation, such as the Wyndham City Design Project. Aggregated Porosity -Biao Hu & Yu Du

Sheer Wall by Jesse Pietila is an installation representing a twist on the division of space. Curved rows and columns create different sized small void spaces, revealing what’s behind the wall. The columns and beams curve toward multiple focal points, where the void spaces and smaller. The overall effect is the creation of a dynamic rippling facade distorting vision yet providing a sense of division within a space. This could be an interesting concept and work well as a roadside installation in Wydnham. Sheer Wall (2008) -Jesse Pietila


McCormick Tribune Campus, IIT -Rem Koolhaus (Window Design) This given case study features some very innovative design aspects such as the creation of a perception points, as well as light and shade completed through perforations set out by graphics created using multiple symbols. The supplied grasshopper definition provided a patterned surface consistent with these small symbol like icons of Rem Koolhaus. Using grasshopper, these icons were parametrically created and arranged to create an overall image

using the image sampler tool. Different numbers of rows and columns of these symbols can also be altered parametrically. For my alterations, I kept things simple, editing the existing definition rather than creating new componants. I changed the image in which the design is based, maintaining simple, geometric forms. Another major alteration was the subject of the smaller compnants. Originally, like Koolhaus’

Tribune Campus, the componants gave the impression of small people-like lines, these proved to be a little too complex and drew away from the overall form in which they were assisting in creating. Replacing these, I used simpler geometric forms and lines to develop similar designs. Through only altering very few componants, with relatively simplistic twists, I managed to create a wide range of interesting products.


A8- CASE STUDY 2.0 Voussoir Cloud Redevelopment

Our chosen major case study in ‘Voussoir Cloud’ designed by Iwanmoto Scott. This design drew our attention through its unique overall form combined with the surface texture and pattern. The overall form stands from 5 different legs, spreading to each other and the boundaries of the design through the use of catinary curves. Multiple double surfaces connect these curves together creating a solid and connected overall geometry. The design is boxed within a tight walled area, assisting with supporting the structure. Delauney Triangulation is implemented onto the curved surfaces creating multiple organic individual forms (which look exactly like garlic gloves) connected parametrically which is consistent with our Panelisation discourse. The result is a relatively complex pattern taking a seemingly natural undulating curvilinear rolling form providing shelter below.


A9- CASE STUDY 2.0 Reverse Engineering- Failed Attempts

Interestingly enough, it was the initial process of setting out the basic form of the design in which we struggled the must with recreating. We knew what we wanted to do, and broke down the design into a process of stages. We really struggled with matching the steps we planned to take with a grasshopper component. We started off with 5 basic circle forms in which we planned to connect with multiple centenary curves. The circle bases were divided and the curves were produced, yet the product was a series of inconsistent and seemingly uncontrollable curves branching was from circle to circle. After this we attempted to create a raised rectangle in which we would connect to the base circles, this also had a similar result. We then focused on one single base circle, creating a relatively positive result, yet once lofted the design method proved to be problematic. Even with simpler forms and fewer centenary curves, we still encountered issues when lofting the surface, where the loft would fold back on itself and not work as planned.

A10- CASE STUDY 2.0 Reverse Engineering- Development Process

This time round we created 5 hexagon shapes as the base of our design. These shapes were then divided, and catenary curves were produced spanning across individual hexagons. The curves were grouped and divided on the y axis, creating a solid surface in which we could produce textures and patterns on. This was done by creating a separate geometric surface in which we could draw a pattern or series of shapes on, and then apply that to the main surface. The final design is a representation of the original case study, only limited by our grasshopper capabilities. From here, the opportunities for exploration are ideal, basic changes can be made to the overall form in terms of scale and arrangement, but more importantly we can add develop a series of shapes and patterns in which we will apply to the main surface.

B1- EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Matrices Development- The search for a design

B2- EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Proof of Concept- Final

This is our final EOI design concept- our proof of concept. This parametric model is one of the five forms generated throughout case study 2.0. This design features hexagonal individual forms at a relatively large scale. This design was chosen because it was attainable, after a lot of issue with grasshopper, particularly with the fabrication, we ended up deciding to take a few steps back and model something relatively simple, something that we knew we could fabricate. I personally wasn’t for using this design, instead I wanted to push the more rectiliear ‘sail boat’ forms, but a group decision was made to stick with this, as it still has some representation of the Voussoir Cloud and was an attainable creation. As a concept model, we saw this as an ideal option, it expresses the concepts we wanted to achieve throughout the design of Wyndham City Gateway Project, and more importantly, reflects where we are at as a group. Although not a finalized solution, this model represents multiple oppertunities to work on and create an ideal final design.

B3- EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Proof of Concept- Fabrication Process

For fabrication, we only focused on one of the 5 individual forms from our proof of concept, as only one was required to present our design proposal. The parametric model was flattened using exlab’s cluster definitions, and baked into rhino. Here we attempted to number the surfaces but did not manage to do so. The design was then colour coded to designated what was cut and what was only etched when sent through the laser cutter. Once cut, we set out to sort all the individual pieces of the design into groups, grouping the same pieces together and ordering them in scale. The largest pieces were the base of the design, which were stuck together and dried, where we began to build up. Each individual piece had 4 etches along its surface, marking where 4 folds took place, each piece was bended to create a closed loop stuck together using a tab. Because we were unable to label the design’s pieces, the fabrication process was relatively inaccurate, as we were simply grouping the pieces by eye. The model was starting to take shape until we started reaching higher levels. It was very challenging working with the smaller, higher up pieces on such a small scale, the intricate connections were extremely hard to accurately connect. The combination of a series of connection errors, some pieces in the wrong places as well as poor material choice is what made our model misrepresent our design as intended. We also found that our material choice of card was not the ideal choice for the model, as it tore, warped and became misshapen quite easily. This series of design errors and modeling errors had a detrimental effect on our model, particularly with the higher up, smaller pieces. Let’s put it this way, we’ve got plenty of room for improvement, and learnt a whole bunch of lessons as to ‘what not to do.’

B6- EXPRESSION OF INTEREST Review We evaluated our design on three key aspects: aesthetic integration with structure, viewer based experiential qualities and overall design appeal. These key aspects we chosen because they integrated all three of our group member’s original design discourse ideas, fulfilling all our collective ideas. Through critically evaluating selected design precedents, the brief, the concept of Panelisation and the collective ideas of the group, we decided our final design must possess those three key design aspects for it to be successful. We were particularly interested in how some Panelisation based designs possess structural integration with the design, whereby, the structural elements and the aesthetic elements are not completely separate beings, rather share a combined and interconnected relationship. The structure will be part of the design. We were also interested in self supporting and self standing designs, ideally suited for the particular roadside installation project. We also chose to place emphasis on the experiential, as it is suited to the viewers and users of this design (who are driving at around 100kmph.) We placed importance on the experience shared with driver over the few seconds that they will be viewing this design. This can be achieved through the use of perception points, whereby all of a sudden the design simple makes sense and communicates with the viewer. Experiential qualities are also achieved through the use of the entire form of the design, with individual components linking together to create a more sophisticated overall form. The design must also be appealing, particularly to the specific clientele of Wydham, with some direct associations and relationships between Wydnham and the installation. Our Concept model in our Expression of Interest features signs of just that. The structure is the design, creating a hybrid structural and aesthetic façade, which is self standing and self supporting. The use of voids throughout the panels of the design suggests the use of perception and attraction, adding to the experience of the design. The designs skeletal like structure also allows for vision into the rich surrounding natural environment, another key aspect in which we wish to incorporate into our design. And for the personal appeal, we’re still working on our designs connection with Wyndham. Our design is a structural, skeletal system, drawn from Panelisation and with reference to the Voussoir Cloud. But where to from here?

Referencing Torabi, A 2010, Parametric Array, Torabi Architects, accessed 12 July 2012, <> ArchiDE 2008, Jewish Museum, Daniel Libeskind, accessed 08 July 2012, <> PC.Blogspot 2010, Brick Country House, Mies Van Der Rohe, accessed 29 July 2012, <> Impact Photos 2008, Krakow Balcony, Laurence, accessed 22 August 2012, < e=RM> ARCH470 2009, Lostritto, Sandra Schwarz, accessed 9 August 2012, <> Gaurdian 2001, Daniel Libeskind’s Pavilion, Daniel Libeskind, accessed 22 August 2012, <> ConcreteAspirations 2011, Libeskind Pavilion, Daniel Libeskind, accessed 12 July 2012, <> Iaacblog 2010, Futuropolis, Daniel Libeskind, accessed 18 August 2012, <> Vectorworks 2005, Futuropolis, Daniel Libeskind, accessed 18 August 2012, <> Otaplus 2009, FLUX Installation, California College of the Arts, accessed 19 August 2012, <> Design Playgrounds 2011, Aggregated Porosity, Biao Hu & Yu Du, accessed 29 August 2012, <> A Design Ideas 2009, Sheer Wall, Jesse Pietila, accessed 2 September 2012, <> Pleatfarm 2009, Voussoir Cloud, Iwanmoto, accessed 7 September 2012, <> Jacobs, Karrie 2009, Quote of the Day: Karrie Jacobs on Parametric Design, ‘Regator,’ <>, accessed 20 September 2012. Terzidis, Costas, 2009, Algorithms for visual design using the processing language, Wiley Publishing; Indianapolis.)

Air Mid Sem  

Journal, ads3, panelisation