Folded Paper Pavilion

Folded Paper Pavilion

For Moscow Farmer’s Market

Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

General Requirements of Given Site................................................................................1 Explorations of Previous Studies and Materials..............................................................4 Realization of Successful Component and Materiality......................................................8 Evolutions of Assembly Aggregations...............................................................................9 Examination of Assembly on Site...................................................................................17 1:1 Fabrication Process..................................................................................................22 Future Considerations.....................................................................................................26

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

Project Site

E 3rd St Parking Parking

The market is located in Mosow, Idaho on Main Steet, with offshoots into 4th Street and 5th Street. There is a large parking lot a block away off of Jackson and some street parking along 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th.

Proposed Site Proposed Site

W 4th St

E 5th St

S Washington St

S Main St

S Jackson St

Moscow, ID

Farmers Market Area Farmers Market Area

N Main Street in Moscow, ID

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

E 6th St

1

Site Analysis The market stalls are firstcome-first-serve, but we have chosen a specific stall spot that would be ideal for our pavillion.

It is in direct or indirect sunlight most of the day with the exception of shade from nearby trees.

This combination of sunlight conditions offers the option of shade as well as the opportunity to cast interesting shadows.

Solar Radiation of Farmers Market

Shadow Study: 8am-1pm May 3rd 2014

Shadow study: 8am-1pm May 3rd 2014

Solar Radiation of Site

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

2

Programmatic Plan Our proposed site was chosen because of the sun and foot traffic.

721’-1 3/4” 118’-8 11/16”

It is located near parking and Friendship Square, where there will be a lot of people entering the market.

Proposed Site

15’-0”

B

C

F

Shadow Analysis

F F

F

Market Area

22’-0”

F

B

C

The pavilion is placed in such a way that it has a medium amount of solar radiation, so it will not be too sunny nor too shaded.

F

Access Points

Parking Lot 957’-11 1/16” Market Tents

B

F

B

F

F N

C Solar Radiation

86’-9”

F

F

C

F

Primary Movement Secondary Movement

Foot Traffic

730’-1 13/16”

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

3

Field Testing Our first components lacked a lot of structural dignity, so we moved on to a folded paper design that would curve inward when a force was applied and hold itself together.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Downward Force on Unfolded Paper

Reaction on Unfolded Paper is Collapse

Downward Force on Folded Paper

Reaction on Folded Paper Distributed Load

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

First Component Design No Rigidity

Second Component Design Folded Flat

Third Component Design A lot of Wasted Material

Fourth Component Design A lot of Wasted Material

4

Component Design 1”

1/2”

3/4”

Final Componet Design

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

We have two different types of our single component: One with a tip, and one with two bases. This allows them to aggregate infinitely.

3/4”

3/4”

Downward Force Reaction On Point to Base Component

1”

1”

7/8”

Downward Force Reaction On Base to Base Component

The final component was a bow-tie shape with a triangular base and top that was cut out of a single sheet and folded up into its form.

2”

1/2”

2”

3/4”

Cut Fold

5

Component Testing Various structural testing techniques were employed to aid us in understanding the component’s strengths and weaknesses.

It was found that any horizontal scoring damaged the structural integrity of the component, but vertical scores did not.

Cutting any amount of material out of the sides of the components damaged its ability to hold weight because it took area away from the interior tabs that give it its strength.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

Interior Horizontal

Interior Vertical

Interior Cross

Interior Diagonal

External Horizontal

External Vertical

External Cross

External Diagonal

Partial Truss Bracing

Diagonal Bracing

Edge Bracing

Full Truss Bracing

6

Component Testing Waffling and stacking methods were also explored fabrication methods.

Waffling was very strong, but also time consuming and very wasteful.

Parallel Waffling

Perpendicular Waffling

Diagonal Waffling

Parallel Contouring

Perpendicular Contouring

Diagonal Contouring

Stacking lacked strength. The number of pieces involved caused it to lose its structural dignity when force was applied.

Cut Fold WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

7

Material Testing We quickly attempted to move forward from paper.

Wood was obviously a poor choice due to its inability to fold. Metal could not be bent effectively to achieve our sharp angles, casting failed do to such a small mold, and bristol paper caused gapping in the full assembly because of a lack of flexibility.

We settled on milk carton paper from the Lewiston paper mill. This material is very cheap if not free, local, reclaimed, strong, flexible, and waterproof.

34-Mile Route B

Inability to bend metal effectively

Moscow, ID

Casting Failure

A

Lewiston, ID

Gapping

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

8

Case Study We used the Shellstar Pavilion as an influence in much of our design. It posses arches with leg and celing conditions that create a structure that can hold itself up. We also drew upon the use of tabs and zip ties to connect our components.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Shellstar Pavilion Arching Design

Pavillion Design with Arching Design

Shellstar Pavilion Connection Design

Pavilion Connection Design

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

9

Tab Connection We introduced tab connections to increase the flexibilty of our assembly. Rather than having a face-to-face connection, our components could now be spaced away from eachother more, which solved our gapping problem.

The tabs were included into our template, and folding out using a ruler and creasing technique so we didn’t break the waterproof seal on the paper. They were then hole punched and eyeletted, and then could be connect to one other using zip ties.

Glue connection

Tab and String Connection

Zip Tie Connection

Tab

1/8”

Eyelet

1/2”

Fully Assembled Component at Full Scale

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

10

Plan

East Elevation

Attributes -Small entrance for patrons

1st Gen

-Difficult for mutiple people to inhabit at one given time

-Large entrance for patrons

2nd Gen

-Easily habitable for multiple people at one given time -Extremely Symmetrical (Not designed site-specific)

Assembly Logics Our assembly started out with two legs and a small canopy.

This design left little space of inhabitants and didn’t stand or hold weight well.

The next evolution of our pavilion had four legs and a larger, highly symmetrical ceiling condition. This was great for holding more people but the amount of spanning needed and the large whole in the ceiling would have caused it to collapse.

The final generation of our pavilion is in the form of a tripod shape with three lightweight ceiling panels. This allows people to flow in and out of the pavilion and holds itself up well.

-Ceiling is very massive

-Large entrance for patrons

3rd Gen

-Easily habitable for multiple people at one given time -Asymmetrical to accomodate for the flow of patrons with Downward Force Applied onPavilllion site -Ceiling is ‘lightened’ and become more massive at the landscape

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

11

Assembly Programs Our assembly consists of three different types of aggregations: landscape, wall, and ceiling.

Ceilin

g

Each aggregation is made of pentagon-units that consist of five components.

Wall

Landscape

Ceiling

6’

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

4’

6’

8’

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Landscape

Wall

4’

4’

Horizontal Panel

Vertical Panel

Dodecahedron

Light-weight panels

Provides support for

Support at legs, options

12

Canvasing and Ceiling

Ceilin

g

There are three ceiling pieces in the assembly. They are articulated by horizontal panels that are light-weight and can span large distances.

Because the farmer’s market is in the summer and most of the market is in direct sunlight, provisions needed to be made for shade.

Wall

Landscape

After several different experimentations, we devloped a system whereby a piece of spandex could be stretched across a pentagon-unit on the ceiling panel and zip-tied closed to create shade.

These canvases can be unhooked and moved around throughout the day to improve their effectiveness as the sun moves.

With gaps

Full coverage

Partial coverage

Final canvasing

Zip Tie Connection

Shading Ability

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

13

Footing and Wall

Ceilin

g

Landscape pieces are made from a full dodecahedion and have sand in the base that acts as a footing for the pavilion. It is strctural enough to support the legs and ceiling pieces.

Wall

The canvases can also be left loose and attached to a landscape element to create a basket for food or goods.

Wall pieces are a partial dodecahedron that allow for arching. They have enough dimension to span between the landscape and ceiling pieces.

Landscape

Sand-filled Components

Sand sealed in a bag, then inserted into component

Ceilin

g

Wall

Multidimensional Wall Assembly Landscape

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

14

Forming Assembly The assembly can be built from the ground up, with some temporary supports needed until the structure is complete.

1st Step

2nd Step

3rd Step

4th Step

5th Step

6th Step

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

The pavilion starts out with landscape pieces as footings, then moves up into wall aggregations as it begins to arch. Finally, there are three large ceiling sections at the top.

15

Assembly Cuts Section cuts showing how the pavilion changes as the viewr moves through it.

H

H

G

G

F

F

E

E

D

D

C

C

B

B

A

A

Section Lines WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

16

On the Site The pavilion is located on a corner near other market stalls and coffee shops. There are no trees impairing a viewer’s ability to see it from a distance.

West of Paris Restaurant

Market Stalls

Bloom Coee

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

17

On the Site The pavilion is easily viewd from across the street and is large enough for several people to inhabit.

42’-3 1/8”

12’-0”

Bloom Coffee

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

Market Stalls

West of Paris Restaurant Main Street

18

On the Site The pavilion lines up with te other stall along the street.

Market Tents

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

West of Paris Restaurant Friendship Square Park

19

On the Site The pavilion is tall enough to comfortably inhabit, and it mostly open on the interior to allow for the flow of people.

Market Stalls

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

West of Paris Restaurant Main Street

20

On The Site The pavilion is located in an area that is not distrupted by too many buildings, bollards, or trees.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

21

3’-0”

1:1 Assembly The fabrication started by copying our template on to a piece of MDF board, then sandwiching paper between two of those boards. It was then bolted together, cut out, and assembled.

1’-1”

6”

Carton Paper

CREASE CUT

MDF Board

3’-

0” WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

22

1:1 Assembly Within a weekend we mass produced about 70 components.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Paper is stacked between boards

Layers are bolted together

Template is cut out

Holes drilled for eyelets

End Result

Tabs folded with a ruler

End flaps folded with a ruler

Eyelets inserted

Zip-tie connections between components

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

23

1:1 Assembly The components are connected using zip ties in the eyelet holes located on the tabs.

When actually assembled on site, each program assembly is connected using white zip ties, and then those panels are connected with black.

When being disassembled, the black zip-ties can be cut while leaving the white ones.

Then when it comes time to reassembly the pavilion, only a few large sections need to be connected.

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

24

2.5 Hrs

Template Tracing

1 Hr

Production The first phase of our fabrication was done with a 2-man crew, because we only have one saw and too many people complicated the process. We moved up to a 3-man crew for folding and assembly, because we had more steps that needed to be completed. All of the fabrication can be done in a weekend, but the actual assembly can be finished in a matter of minutes.

MDF/Paper Stacking

1.5 Hrs

Template Cutting

1 Hr

Drill Guidelines

3 Hrs

Component Folding

5.5 Hrs

Eyelet Clamping

0.5 Hrs

Sand Insertion

1.5 Hrs

2-Man Crew

Assembly

3-Man Crew

The costs of our production were very low due to the use of reclaimed materials. After the up-front costs associated with our pavilion, the percomponent cost is under two dollars. If a component in the assembly fails, it can be replaced cheaply and easily.

Cost of Production Up-Front Costs

Per-Component Costs

MDF

50

Milk Carton Paper

0.71

Document Fastener

42

1/8� Brass Eyelets

0.62

7

Zip Ties (18)

0.36

Spandex Fabric (per yd.)

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

25

Critique’s Notes

Future Plans and Explorations

Rob’s Notes:

Reactions for Rob:

-How much tension can this module take?

-Why did you go towards asymmetrical arrangement?

-Need to keep it in compression and vault it more -Consider as a space frame- have a space frame as the ceiling and

develop full 3D pieces

-Solve for the max tension that can be applied to the full assembly -Explore more iterations of the final assembly -Apply a more domed shaped structure to the assembly to apply more

compression to the structure -Explore the full dodecahedron as the blocks of the assembly rather than

The pentagon formation

David’s Notes:

Reactions for David:

Darrin’s Notes:

Reactions for Darrin:

-Bilateral symmetry about the radius, can complete 4 + 3 off the center

-The corners are the weak areas of the component; the joint at the

corner is weak -Develop how you can modify the component and the gaps through a

single edge, with new proximity to the edge for the connection -How does the eyelet and the tab become structure and integral to the

expression of the structure -Thinking of curved bending with a stronger strength -Gaps are opportunity; potentially corkscrew the tabs at the corners -Ask yourself if the shape makes sense with the overall ball

WSU_SDC_Arch_301

Group 3 Jay Henson, Emily Moneymaker, Stephanie Chimonas, Berta Zubiate

-Develope the assembly with a symmetric axis

-Add tabs along the entire side of the component to supply support in

the connections along sides.

-Explore new ways of folding and allowing for less gapping and a

Smoother assembled component -Figure out how to use eyelet as a clearer connection tool with the tabs

and to other components in the assembly -Rather than folding from the bottom up fold at the sides to allow for a

seamless edge rather than a cut edge -Rather that leaving gaps open experiment with closing them with an

interesting connection different then the tab -If the dodecahedron is where the design moves to edit the component

to adapt to the dodecahedron’s shape.

26