Design Studio Air - Journal C

STUDIO AIR JOURNAL

SEMESTER 2, 2018 PATRICK DENNIS 699033 ALLAN BURROWS, T10

The Spanish Pavilion, by Foreign Office Architects, 2005.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.

C1. Design concept

5.

C1.1. Interim feedback

8.

C1.2. Addressing Merri Creek

11.

C1.3. Systems approach

14.

C1.4. Form-finding and generation

38.

C2. Tectonic elements & prototypes

38.

C2.1. Envisaged construction sequence

40.

C2.2. Prototype 1 and assessment

48.

C2.3. Prototype 2 and assessment

52.

C3. Final detail model

54.

C4. Learning Objectives and Outcomes

FIG.2: Part B proposal prior to interim feedback.

2

Guidance

Artistic

C.1. DESIGN CONCEPT REVIEWING FENCES

There is such significant variety in fencing especially in the Merri Creek and its surrounding region.

Realistically, there is no singular precedent by which we can inform our insert, but rather we can pull lessons from each to design something exciting, innovative and experimental.

We tend to prioritise the functionality of fences in the form of barriers that demarcate space.

However, my interest lies in challenging this notion.

What follows in this section is an exploration in how parametric form can encourage interaction with space in unexpected ways - enabling a boundary insert to gain an extra dimension. The impact of this would be an increased interface with Merri Creek itself, as well as developing a new fluid circulation pattern and opportunities for engagement with the levels of the fence.

Natural

Human

Temporal

3

Transparent

C.1. DESIGN CONCEPT REVIEWING FENCES

Demarcate

There is a tendency for fences to play with privacy, especially in the natural setting where nature is framed and encouraged to be visible. My proposition frames views and creates pockets of space at the same time, challenging the preconception that fences need to align with one or the other. Private moments are facilitated, while social and natural interactions are encouraged in other moments.

Opaque

Fences tend to prevent the flow of data (movement, visibility, encroachment, continuity). Given the large, monolithic nature of my Part B proposal, it would appear that this prevents flow on a real, physical level. However, given the nature of my parametric computational design, the nodes get smaller and finer the closer they are to the water. These act to facilitate the flow of water through the river, while preventing the flow of rubbish downstream.

Direction

The combination of these principles serve to challenge preconceptions of fencing and allow for an intriguing insert.

Transluscent

4

C.1.1. INTERIM FEEDBACK 1.

Re-engineer filtration.

As the Grasshopper definition evolved and my attention begun to shift toward the finding of form, the resolving of natural and human systems fell by the wayside. In particular, the filtration of Merri Creek held promise.

Further exploration into how my hexagonal extrusions might divert from their rigid geometry is one path with intriguing potential. Submerged extrusions could function as follows:

Some concerns remain on constructibility - this really ought to be simplified using the same flow ideas.

FLOW

5

C.1.1. INTERIM FEEDBACK 2.

Distribution of grid and encouraging engagement with the river bank.

A clearer underlying logic for the grid’s layout may be required. This could be justified through reviewing of the site information. At present, this is formally non-specific in relation to Merri Creek - this could be an insert deployed anywhere. What would make this specific to Merri Creek? Allow for fragmentation from the grid and encourage play within the form.

Interlocking basalt hexagonal extrusions of Giant’s Causeway, Northern Ireland.

3.

Develop aesthetic and joint complexity.

Pixelation or minor distortion of the form could provide the complexity required to divert from the regularity that is evident at present. I think this has some potential, but the feasibility of this idea from a fabrication point-of-view remains to be seen.

6

C.1.1. INTERIM FEEDBACK 4.

Negotiate river crossing.

Balancing of the filtration system and a genuine river crossing appears conflicted and confused. Is there necessity for a river crossing with a bridge so close by? I believe stepping stones of various heights could be intriguing for those brave enough to attempt.

The bridge serves as access for differently-abled individuals.

7

C.1.2. ADDRESSING MERRI CREEK

8

ACCESSIBILITY

CIRCULATION

NATURAL CONTEXT

URBAN CONTEXT

Undertaking a desktop exploration and site analysis of Merri Creek provided useful data in choosing the site for my ‘BOUNDARIES’ insert. However, it would be the on-site obsarvences that would ultimately determine the functionality of my insert.

The location I arrived upon was on the river front, given my human and natural systems research (this is to come). The boundary crosses the river as a mechanism for physical engagement with the river, while also acting as filtration for the courseway. This creates an opportunity for Merri Creek patrons that was otherwise not there.

9

C.1.2. ADDRESSING MERRI CREEK

The contours and gentle sloping of the site itself proved to be a major contributor to the overall form. As such, generating a 3D topographic representation of the sloping riverbank was imperative to get right.

10

C.1.3. SYSTEMS APPROACH

ADDRESSING LITTER

RIPARIAN POLLUTION

COSTS:

ECONOMIC - $3.3 million/year on litter removal.

- Monthly debris removal.

- Stormwater systems effectiveness decreases.

- Flooding due to major blockages in waterways.

- Conservation efforts are costly.

AESTHETICS - Merri Creek provides a rare corridor of greenery in a largely urban context.

- The surrounding area is frequented by a wide variety of patrons - cyclists, joggers, commuters, CERES patrons, etc.

- A less pretty natural setting will result in a drop-off in park users.

BIODIVERSITY - Habitat of marine and land animals destroyed over time.

- Aquatic life mistake for food.

- Chemicals can stifle plants, trap animals, decrease water quality and reduce oxygen levels in water.

SOLUTION:

FILTER - Litter traps and boom systems are an effective mechanism to catch surface pollutants, but a submerged filtration device could help to remove chemical pollutants.

- A meandering system could also prove beneficial.

CHALLENGES: - Need to be small yet robust enough for variety in pollutants.

- Need to facilitate habitation and movement of local wildlife in and around the water.

11

C.1.3. SYSTEMS APPROACH

GROWLING GRASS FROG

HABITAT

APPEARANCE - Large, bright green frog. White belly; groin and armpits tinged blue.

- Noted for its unique call that sounds like a ‘goose being strangled’.

- Tadpoles are translucent yellow with emerald green pigments found along the spine and over the brain.

- Blends in with habitat.

THREATS

- Requires dams and pools that retain water and stagnate in early summer for breeding.

- Aquatic vegetation for basking is ideal, but tall, dense reeds may limit sun penetration too much (water ribbons are ideal).

- Frogs use drystone walls and logs to shelter under in cool/dry weather.

OPPORTUNITIES - Trapping water in small alcoves/artificial rock pools for breeding purposes in Summer.

- Water ribbons are are sparse enough to allow for sun to penetrate, while also providing protection from predators. Use a GH algorithm to provide space for water ribbons to grow.

This will also enable prey to breed.

- Filter the course of the river through boundary insert - this will reduce the likelihood of threat to frog population. Meander the river.

- Habitat degradation. Silt and pollutants are a major contributor.

- Human intervention into their habitat.

Chemical pollutants including herbicide and pesticides are particularly harmful.

Physical pollutants very impactful.

- Filtering the water upstream would go a long way toward ensuring that population increases.

CHALLENGES

- My site has a drystone narrowing of the river.

Provides access and facilitates flow during times of low rainfall, but could prove tricky to insert a boundary with this in mind.

- Retaining separation between the filtration method and breeding ground for frogs.

- How can I ensure that these frogs can continue to bask in the sun while also ensuring they stay safe?

12

Triglochin procerum (water ribbons)

Litoria raniformis

CONCEPT DIAGRAMS

WINTER CREEK LEVEL

SUMMER CREEK LEVEL

FLOW

13

C.1.4. FORM-FINDING AND GENERATION

A

A

The inputed geometry for this insert at Merri Creek utilises the same logic as the Spanish Pavilion by Foreign Office Architects. It takes a honeycomb-like set of bricks that vary based on inputs of the site condition. As seen below, they echo the slope of the ravine through which Merri Creek runs. The height and thicknesses of these hexagonal extrusions directly correlates with their proximity to the centre-line of the creek (enabled by graph mapping and curve attractors). This pattern has also been culled in order to make some of these submerged extrusions functional as stepping stones - allowing for the ‘boundary’ to become fluid and usable at a number of different scales and functions.

A 14

A

1. ENTRY/ EGRESS

2. FILTRATION DISTRIBUTION

3. OCCUPATION AREAS

4. WATER RIBBON PLANTERS

15

A significant amount of this design is underpinned by the idea of adjusting behaviours and the interface between patron and the natural setting of the creek. There was no opportunity to experience the soothing sounds of the babbling creek, while now there is a physical engagement over the creek and patrons are visually drawn into the volumous spaces between the taller extrusions. Their changes in 16 circulation are represented in this diagram.

17

Another key element of my design is its ability to filtrate the water that runs through it as part of the Merri Creek.

Without intervention, there is a significant degree of litter that accumulates in this particular area (see Human Systems research).

In addition to the individual filtration components, my insert adjusts the flow of the river and forces a micro-meandering pattern.

The hexagonal shapes create little pockets wherein litter is trapped and can be removed safely.

Meandering in nature improves the speed of the flow, which filtrates through the water ribbons found around the edges of Merri Creek.

18

19

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Mutate a fence.

Develop the fence.

Aggregate bricks.

Contouring.

Photo-montage and visualizing the site.

Form-finding: tessellation (Spanish Pavilion & VoltaDom).

Technique refinement.

Rebuilding.

Identify site location for ‘boundaries’ insert.

Conceptualize fence.

Human system research: litter.

Site investigation.

Form-finding: fractal tetrahedron (Morning Line).

Natural system research: Growling Grass Frog.

Conceptualize the site.

Contextualizing the fence.

Lofting.

20

Sectioning.

Understanding curves.

Conceptual development: human/natural integration.

Detailing of fence; mutate it.

Resolve the site.

E t a

T

3

Week 7

NTP

Week 9

Week 10

Week 11

Week 12

Explore fabrication and materiality potential.

Diagram design process thus far.

Review and amend Grasshopper algorithm.

Analyse form generation against criteria; incorporate input geometry (Spanish Pavilion); renew understanding of transform controls and assess feasibility.

Greater exploration into fabrication and prototype development.

Final detail model making.

Testing of prototypes.

Finalisation of concept based on interim feedback.

3D printed mold.

- Concrete.

- Pinkysil.

Laser cutting: - MDF. - Aluminum.

Re-address site condition.

Re-engineer filtration system and address human systems research.

Pinkysil and concrete; readdress moulds and feasibility of filtration.

Clean up journal and document design process to date.

Develop detail.

WORK FLOW

21

Step 1

Create hexagonal grid using number sliders to manipulate array and cell size.

Step 2

22

Step 4

Analyse for proximity to attractor points using ‘Closest Point’.

Scale hexagon inwards based on proximity to attractor points within domain of 0.2 to 0.95.

Step 5

Step 6

Find centroid of cells.

Extract points for analysis.

Point attractor(s).

Attractor curve.

Step 3

Divide curve into points.

Scale internal and external hexagon extrusion heights based on proximity to attractor points within domain of 0.01 to 0.7.

Unit Z vector.

Step 7

Extrude internal and external hexagons based on remapped numbers from scaling.

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Step 11

Solid difference between Brep A and Brep B.

Cap extrusions with domain of 1.1 from attractor points.

These will form the filtration modules.

Cull pattern to allow for water flow between modules.

Cap holes in external hexagon extrusions.

Cap holes in internal hexagon extrusions.

Step 12

Manipulate and cull in Rhino to suit site conditions and promote circulation through the form as desired.

GRASSHOPPER PSEUDO-ALGORITHM

23

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Poor reinforced footings to ground level.

Some starter bars may be required.

Implement the six variants of thicknesses for the hexagonal extrusions.

Apply Rugasol and pour concrete in. Ensure smooth surfaces to prevents scrapes or injuries to patrons.

Class 1 concrete finish.

Site preparation

Manufacture of moulds for concrete pillars out of urethane or polyurethane.

24

- Temporary diversion of creek courseway (divert half momentarily).

- Strip away topsoil and retain as many trees as possible.

- Excavation of location for pillars to 1 of 6 different depths, as stipulated by data pulled from GH algorithm.

Given the aesthetic aim for these pillars to wear down over time, no reinforcement is required (except for filtration elements). Place these accordingly.

Step 6

Different treatment is required for filtration components. Refer to following sections.

Step 7

Allow to set and cure before removing mould.

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Sand surfaces and inspect for imperfections.

Fill top of planter hexagons with soil.

Potentially may require a hydroponic watering system, given their proclivity for water heavy environments.

Divert pathways either side of the river into the three entry/ exit points of the form.

CONSTRUCTION PSEUDO-ALGORITHM

25

N

PLAN 26

27

AXONOMETRIC (NORTH) 28

29

AXONOMETRIC (SOUTH) 30

31

PERSPECTIVE 32

33

PERSPECTIVE 34

35

WINTER CREEK LEVEL

SUMMER CREEK LEVEL

DETAIL: FOSTERING GROWTH 36

While this is aesthetically very encouraging, I believe it would provide most difficulty in terms of fabrication moving forward. I have greatly simplified this below, as I believe this is most achievable with my mould fabrication technique. This should still give the mechanism of filtering out very fine debris and some chemicals. A grate may be implemented to aid this process.

DETAIL: FEASIBLE FILTRATION

37

C.2 TECTONIC ELEMENTS AND PROTOTYPES

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Poor reinforced footings to ground level.

Some starter bars may be required.

Implement the six variants of thicknesses for the hexagonal extrusions.

Apply Rugasol and pour concrete in. Ensure smooth surfaces to prevents scrapes or injuries to patrons.

Class 1 concrete finish.

Site preparation

Manufacture of moulds for concrete pillars out of urethane or polyurethane.

38

- Temporary diversion of creek courseway (divert half momentarily).

- Strip away topsoil and retain as many trees as possible.

- Excavation of location for pillars to 1 of 6 different depths, as stipulated by data pulled from GH algorithm.

Given the aesthetic aim for these pillars to wear down over time, no reinforcement is required (except for filtration elements). Place these accordingly.

Step 6

Different treatment is required for filtration components. Refer to following sections.

Step 7

Allow to set and cure before removing mould.

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Sand surfaces and inspect for imperfections.

Fill top of planter hexagons with soil.

Potentially may require a hydroponic watering system, given their proclivity for water heavy environments.

Divert pathways either side of the river into the three entry/ exit points of the form.

ENVISAGED CONSTRUCTION PROCESS

39

C.2.2 PROTOTYPE 1 AND ASSESSMENT 3D PRINTING - INITIAL TESTS

Upon initial exploration into the realisation of desired forms, I arrived on a modular system of interlocking hexagonal moulds. Given the repeating nature of these extrusions, I arrived at the idea of a finite number of moulds which can be used to replicate one of six variations of these pillar-like forms.

This core construction element is a detail which is repeated across my design with dimensional variation. This reflects the value of the Grasshopper plug-in in the design process because the individual design of these repeating modules would be incredibly time-consuming if completed manually.

One way that this could be achieved is through utilising the 3D-printing capabilities of the FabLab. These will differ in terms of their hexagonal height and thickness to echo the contours of the banks of Merri Creek.

This mould can be utilised with a number of different materials and set-retarding surface treatments, but I believe concrete will be the most effective material to use on-site. This will allow for the thickness to be varied while ensuring that the form is retained to a highly accurate degree.

A variety of oils are available as set-retarders which will prevent the formwork from sticking to the plastic concrete. I shall deploy Rugasol as a releasing agent, as it is an easily accessible substance that is used at a commercial scale for achieving concrete finishes in large-scale applications.

40

41

C.2.2 PROTOTYPE 1 AND ASSESSMENT 3D PRINTING - INITIAL TESTS

I learnt very quickly that this 3D print below would be unsuitable to act as a mould for the hexagonal extrusions. This is largely due to the inability for the poured contents to be removed without causing damage to the mould itself. This has a direct impact on the lifespan of my mould it means that deformation is likely to be produced with a damaged mould.

were

42

Attempts to discouraging

separate and

the mould, ruined the

as

shown mould’s

below, finish.

It would appear that my thinking in this regard was rather short-sighted and re-addressing my initial research would be required. The image below shows how a mould should be able to be opened and removed from the object safely. I go on to implement these lessons going forward. The product is shown at left.

43

C.2.2 PROTOTYPE 1 AND ASSESSMENT SILICON MOULD MAKING

Transil is a useful product when making moulds for modular elements. It is poured as a liquid around an object to give a relatively accurate negative depiction of said object. It then sets as a gelataneous kind of rigidity. The peeled away product is one that can be poured into again to replicate the inital object. The benefit of this is that modular elements like my hexagonal extrusion do not need to be individually 3D printed. The impact is enormous: costs are slashed; time taken for construction is also significantly reduced.

However, the While transil is its usefulness on

pitfall of a valuable the scale

this is mechanism of Merri

its scale of application. for small-scale applications, Creek remains to be seen.

I believe that the most useful and efficient use of resources for of insert would be to employ a third-party prefabricator of concrete to these off-site in controlled conditions. This is a very similar approach would be doing, except they are better equipped to deal with the scale

this type construct to what I required.

Concrete prefabricators utilise expensive surface moulds and casting beds to create this forms, which is effectively the same theoretical approach that I have taken to deploy these prototypical models.

44

01

02

03

04

05

06

45

C.2.2 PROTOTYPE 1 AND ASSESSMENT USING SILICON AS A CONTROL

46

I have chosen to create a control material for further testing down the line. While I am skeptical of pinkysil’s ability to resist compressive strength and weathering over time at Merri Creek, I do believe it is valuable in expressing the inherent characteristics of concrete in this application.

It is also worth pointing out the clear faults in the surface finish of this approach. The 3D print spool layers are evident in the finish, as are the elements that were required to try to remove the silicon from the mould.

Ultimately, I am relatively satisfied with the finished product, but it is simply a mechanism to explore the potential of concrete for these extrusions. I feel as though, with a more rigid material like concrete, the surface imperfections might be avoided entirely. This was a useful exploration in prototyping.

47

C.2.3 PROTOTYPE 2 AND ASSESSMENT CONCRETE

I have chosen a very low-aggregate, highly workable cement in the form of grout in order to allow myself to be working with the most malleable material with similar comrpessive strength to concrete.

On Merri Creek itself, I shall be exploring concrete with higher degree of aggregates and admixtures (like water-resistant surface treatments) to combat the natural conditions present. It remains to be seen if steel reinforcement will be required in this case. I believe that the biggest challenge going forward will be how my piece can best allow for the submerged filtration components to resist the flow of the Creek and further resist fluvial erosion of the concrete.

Due to an improper mix of the concrete, some of my tests failed in the mould process.

Another failure occurred in the way the design of the mould prevented removal of the concrete pour without destroying the mould itself. In fact, a table saw (see bottom right) was deployed to remove the concrete in as usable form as possible!

48

SUCCESSES

(Vibration)

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

(Sanding)

09

FAILURES

01

02

core Off-centre

Mould failure and concrete fragmentation

49

C.2.3 PROTOTYPE 2 AND ASSESSMENT COMPRESSIVE TESTS

I believe that the most significant controlling factor for material and geometric suitability revolves around the natural forces present at the Creek. However, my first priority is the safety of the patrons that decide to traverse and move within the boundary insert.

This means the hexagonal extrusions need strong in compression to the point that structural the question, even if a family were to jump up and

to be sufficiently failure is out of down on one pillar.

Given my inability to perform an actual cylinder compression test (as is the tendency for concrete mixes), I have employed a simple ‘maximum weight before failure’ test.

As predicted, the silicon has much less compressive capability than the concrete equivalent. However, this was more of a test of the fabrication technique, rather than its structural potential. One can glean that, while silicon performs well under tension (owing to its gelatinous state), it is not a material suited for these types of applications.

The 3D printed plastic extrusion performed better than expected, almost rivaling the concrete versions. I attribute this to a better, more comprehensive support structure. My inexperience with concrete led to cracks, bubbles and overall non-uniform finish. The significant cracks in the larger pour (3) failed sooner than expected, but still proved the structural benefit of employing a larger section of concrete.

01 50

02

03

04

A chopping board was used as the inital surface to be exposed to each extrusion. This was to ensure a safe and evenly distributed load directed into the sample being tested. These were then exposed to a variety of weights until failure occurred. A simple floor scale recorded these results.

It became increasingly difficult to evenly distribute physical weights onto the extrusion itself. My solution was to fill a bucket with water gradually. This would ensure that the load would be distributed (as liquid spreads and fills a volume). Then, I could approximate the weight when failure occurred, knowing 1 millilitre = 1 gram.

51

C.3 FINAL DETAIL MODEL

In order to reflect the parametric variation and modular nature of my design, the chosen detail models are genuine formalistic explorations of the hexagonal extrusions.

Additionally, exploring concrete itself has allowed me to understand the serious impact of water on the concrete mix, as well as its tendency to flake and fail under certain conditions.

This has been a very valuable tectonic exploration.

52

These modular elements can be manipulated simply by controlling the degree of concrete that is poured within its respective mould. Consequently, the height of the extrusion can be directly manipulated to a height of up to two metres. The effect of this is that the user within the 303-pillar space feels engulfed and in a private space -- further breaking down what is considered to be private and public demarcation of boundaries.

Each dot represents a single occurence of the hexagonal extrusions.

53

C.4 LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES Objective 1: Interrogating the brief by considering the process of brief foundation in the age of optioneering enabled by digital technologies.

Objective 3: Developing skills in various three-dimensional media and specifically in computational geometry, parametric modelling, analytic diagramming and digital fabrication.

I was very hopeful moving forward from Part B to address the brief with a newfound appreciation for the diversity in creative potential that I had gained over the semester. However, I believe a large part of being able to develop a design into a fully realised brief was limited for me due to inability to get specific and regular feedback. To some extent, my own personal critique had to be the driver and I was not able to get the external feedback that would have helped greatly in achieving a more specific response to the brief. In some respects, this was a valuable experience and helped me develop my own critical thinking skills, and I can only grow from it.

Like in Part B, I think this particular category could do with some development. My Grasshopper skills are largely proficient, but my thorough understanding of the potential of digital fabrication may lag behind this. I still managed to achieve some prototyping potential and exploration of different methods of fabrication, but I expect this is a field that will require some attention going forward. Historically, my brain operates better in the physical space and tactile play, rather than experimentation in the digital realm.

Objective 2: Developing an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation by introducing visual programming, algorithmic design and parametric modelling with their intrinsic capacities for extensive design-space exploration.

Over the course of the semester, I believe I have done a good job of pushing the potential of Grasshopper and Rhino to produce interesting and thought provoking forms. This inspired me to attempt various algorithms (as I pushed an extra definition in B.4.2). My visual communication skills - I believe - require some development, including a better understanding of rendering than just touching up designs through Photoshop.

54

Objective 4: Developing an understanding of relationships between architecture and air through interrogation of design proposal as physical models in atmosphere.

Considering the development of my piece as of the standard at Part B, I am quite satisfied with my ability to turn a basic, theoretical idea for an algorithm into something with aesthetic and functional complexity. I believe the architectural insert in the physical realm has significant potential and is usable at a very real scale.

I believe this is one of the biggest learnings from ADS: Air. This is a field that I have struggled with historically.

Objective 5: Developing the ability to make a case for proposals by developing critical thinking and encouraging construction of rigorous and persuasive arguments informed by the contemporary architectural discourse.

Critical analysis of my own work has been essential to the direction of my design production. As addressed in Objective 1 of this discussion, this has been largely responsible for my design development. I was able to redirect and refine some preliminary ideas as per the interim feedback, however. I believe this is where my design process lacks; a missed opportunity to ascertain regular feedback that the other students benefitted from.

I am confident, however, that my rigorous critique of my own work, in addition with an inability to share the load with another student, will hold me in good stead.

Objective 6: Develop capabilities for conceptual, technical and design analyses of contemporary architectural projects.

I think the work done to analyse and break down the Spanish Pavilion and the Morning Line has been thorough and rewarding. I even went further than this to analyse VoltaDom for more design complexity. Understanding the logic behind each of these went a long way toward understanding Grasshopper but also digital design on the whole. The combined thinking of attractors, modularity and variety was achieved through analysing these various projects. I believe there is a direct correlation in aesthetics and technical understanding between these precedents and my final project.

Objective 7: Develop foundational understandings of computational geometry, data structures and types of programming.

As touched upon in Part B, this criteria does not arrive naturally for my own brand of design thinking. Data structures in particular have evaded my understanding. Yet I believe that my understanding was benefitted greatly by being put into practice. This began with the various replication attempts and was followed up with my own design. Such was the development of my understanding that I only dropped a small number of marks in the quiz testing.

Objective 8: Begin developing a personalised repertoire of computational techniques substantiated by the understanding of their advantages, disadvantages and areas of application.

I believe this objective wasn’t achieved as well as it could have been.

I feel as though as soon as I found a technique which was suitable for my needs to the ends of this subject, I stagnated with my experimenting. While I am encouraged by my clarity of thought and forethought, I do believe it left me disadvantaged for grasping various algorithmic techniques. This is not to say I didn’t gain any understanding - in fact the work of my Algorithmic Sketchbook suggests otherwise.

55

Week 1

Week 2

Week 3

Week 4

Week 5

Week 6

Mutate a fence.

Develop the fence.

Aggregate bricks.

Contouring.

Photo-montage and visualizing the site.

Form-finding: tessellation (Spanish Pavilion & VoltaDom).

Technique refinement.

Rebuilding.

Identify site location for ‘boundaries’ insert.

Conceptualize fence.

Human system research: litter.

Site investigation.

Form-finding: fractal tetrahedron (Morning Line).

Natural system research: Growling Grass Frog.

Conceptualize the site.

Contextualizing the fence.

Lofting.

56

Sectioning.

Understanding curves.

Conceptual development: human/natural integration.

Detailing of fence; mutate it.

Resolve the site.

E t a

T

3

Week 7

NTP

Week 9

Week 10

Week 11

Week 12

Explore fabrication and materiality potential.

Diagram design process thus far.

Review and amend Grasshopper algorithm.

Analyse form generation against criteria; incorporate input geometry (Spanish Pavilion); renew understanding of transform controls and assess feasibility.

Greater exploration into fabrication and prototype development.

Final detail model making.

Testing of prototypes.

Finalisation of concept based on interim feedback.

3D printed mold.

- Concrete.

- Pinkysil.

Laser cutting: - MDF. - Aluminum.

Re-address site condition.

Re-engineer filtration system and address human systems research.

Pinkysil and concrete; readdress moulds and feasibility of filtration.

Clean up journal and document design process to date.

Develop detail.

WORK FLOW

57

Step 1

Create hexagonal grid using number sliders to manipulate array and cell size.

Step 2

58

Step 4

Analyse for proximity to attractor points using ‘Closest Point’.

Scale hexagon inwards based on proximity to attractor points within domain of 0.2 to 0.95.

Step 5

Step 6

Find centroid of cells.

Extract points for analysis.

Point attractor(s).

Attractor curve.

Step 3

Divide curve into points.

Scale internal and external hexagon extrusion heights based on proximity to attractor points within domain of 0.01 to 0.7.

Unit Z vector.

Step 7

Extrude internal and external hexagons based on remapped numbers from scaling.

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Step 11

Solid difference between Brep A and Brep B.

Cap extrusions with domain of 1.1 from attractor points.

These will form the filtration modules.

Cull pattern to allow for water flow between modules.

Cap holes in external hexagon extrusions.

Cap holes in internal hexagon extrusions.

Step 12

Manipulate and cull in Rhino to suit site conditions and promote circulation through the form as desired.

GRASSHOPPER PSEUDO-ALGORITHM

59

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Poor reinforced footings to ground level.

Some starter bars may be required.

Implement the six variants of thicknesses for the hexagonal extrusions.

Apply Rugasol and pour concrete in. Ensure smooth surfaces to prevents scrapes or injuries to patrons.

Class 1 concrete finish.

Site preparation

Manufacture of moulds for concrete pillars out of urethane or polyurethane.

60

- Temporary diversion of creek courseway (divert half momentarily).

- Strip away topsoil and retain as many trees as possible.

- Excavation of location for pillars to 1 of 6 different depths, as stipulated by data pulled from GH algorithm.

Given the aesthetic aim for these pillars to wear down over time, no reinforcement is required (except for filtration elements). Place these accordingly.

Step 6

Different treatment is required for filtration components. Refer to following sections.

Step 7

Allow to set and cure before removing mould.

Step 8

Step 9

Step 10

Sand surfaces and inspect for imperfections.

Fill top of planter hexagons with soil.

Potentially may require a hydroponic watering system, given their proclivity for water heavy environments.

Divert pathways either side of the river into the three entry/ exit points of the form.

CONSTRUCTION PSEUDO-ALGORITHM

61

B.8. APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK

62

01

02

A very simple rectangular prism was adapted into the fence as the chosen aggregated brick to be replicated (as a control). A single attractor point generated some volumes and the scaling affect lead to a semi-permeable aesthetic.

A ‘pot plant’ type of geometry was used as the brick input to the Grasshopper definition. The product was interesting in the orientation was flipped in particular parts. This is perhaps the most successful iteration, given it seems as though it would be easy to fabricate and the volume created.

Two attractor points added complexity.

03

04

Orienting the attractor point far to the left of the fence had a significant influence on the fence’s consistency. Could this be a way to incorporate a gradually-unveiled aperture in the boundary at Merri Creek?

I tried for significant intrigue using a bizarre pipe polysurface as a brick to be aggregated onto the lofted surface. This reflected the potential impact that scaling the brick input might have on the final geometric output. I struggle to picture this inserted at Merri Creek, however.

05

06

An ellipsoid geometry was the input here, and lead to predictable results. There is not much fabrication potential here, although effect of the attractor point is apparent.

Using cylinders with a different orient component lead to interesting results.

Playing with the attractor point affected density of the bricks in a profound way.

07

08

A truncated pentagonal pyramid inspires imagery of stalactites in caves and could be a natural brick shape to use going forward.

The overall form seems as though it could be entered and interior spaces seem to unfold.

This fence is composed of similar bricks as 01, yet reflects the influence of scale in the final form of the boundary. Here, the attractor point has minimal influence on the scaling of each brick. Yet the result is feasible and could be interesting with a Cull Pattern.

63

64

65

B.8. APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK 01

02

03

04

05 While B.2. proved to be a useful form-finding exercise, I felt as though it led to a dead-end for application at Merri Creek. The elements are interesting, but have limited potential as a realisable form.

Instead, I back-tracked and reviewed the value of being able to tessellate a tetrahedra to bridge the river, while also covering the required 50m.

The two selected have merit going forward into the following section.

66

It becomes apparent very quickly as soon as the form is viewed as a plan that the tesselation of the tetrahedron follows a limit set of geometric principles. I do think that the form could be deployed at Merri Creek, given its snaking form and potential to create little pockets of space.

PLAN

Analysing the elevation of the aggregated tetrahedron illuminates the capacity for the form to create variety in the permeable nature of the boundary. There are several openings which could allow for different uses as applied to different types of users. Children may climb over parts, adults may rest or sit on the lower tetrahedra.

ELEVATION

Overall, the form is encouraging and I can genuinely envisage the form at Merri Creek.

However, significant complexity is required to make this a suitable response to the site conditions. At the moment, this could be replicated anywhere. There is geometric promise, however.

PERSPECTIVE VIEW

67