What is: Integrated Project Design Studio

“INTEGRATED PROJECT DESIGN STUDIO”

“The design process is based on a constant interplay of feeling and reason. The feelings, preferences, longings, and desires that emerge and demand to be given a form must be controlled by critical powers of reasoning, but it is our feelings that tell us whether abstract considerations really ring true. To a large degree, designing is based on understanding and establishing systems of order. Yet I believe the essential substance of the architecture we seek proceeds from feeling and insight Precious moments of intuition result from patient work. With sudden emergence of an inner image, a new line in the drawing, the whole design changes and is newly formulated within a fraction of a second. It is as if a powerful drug were suddenly taking effect. Everything I knew before about the thing I am creating is flooded by a bright new light. I experience joy and passion, and something deep inside me seems to affirm: “I want to build this house!””

Peter Zumthor “Thinking Architecture”

INTRODUCTION Integrated Project Design is a mandatory course for those students pursuing a Masters in Architecture.

It is the only studio that is designed to make the students aware of the interactions between all the layers of a project, from the more conceptual to the technical.

From its conception, the studio was set up with the understanding that it is part of the graduate program. As such, it must challenge the students to work rigorously and with a higher level of expectation.

Part of this strategy resulted in project briefs that have degrees of complexity at numerous levels. In a very deliberate way, we have avoided simplifying the design questions so that the students can complete the technical requirements determined

by NAAB. The course inculcates in the students the importance of rigor and commitment in the design process, understanding that no good project is the result of immaculate conception but rather an almost obsessive search by those involved.

The studio challenges all preconceptions that the students may have and opens their horizon to ideas and ways of operating in which nothing is done just because.

As an instructor, one cannot demand without providing the appropriate level of support. For this reason, the collaboration with the student is direct, open and constant, at times expanding beyond the class hours.

In addition, support from professionals of different fields, in particular regarding technical layers, is provided throughout the semester.

GENERAL OBJECTIVES: a-Design as Primary Objective: Architecture with capital A embodies a richness far from the mere programmatic organization or technological gadgets. The responsible architect follows an exhaustive search to find a path to something meaningful, something that binds the architecture to a place and circumstance. The students need to develop the ability to stop, observe and learn the questions the studio is asking rather than immediately get to cookie-cutter formal or program solutions, particularly at a time when technology allows the ‘cut and paste’ approach without any sense of discipline.

The design process follows a series of steps that help outline the specific questions at hand, asking the right questions rather than the immediate solution is the hardest and most fundamental part of the design process.

Every project, no matter how small or irrelevant it may seem, has to be guided by a conceptual framework that provides it with logic and long-lasting meaning.

Spanish author, Antón Capitel argues that architecture is an impure art because it has to respond to a wide array of elements: construction, site, beauty, function and so forth, which at times contradict each other. It is the labor of the architect to mediate

K. Ford study model

between all of those elements and reach a solution that by nature will be to some extent, compromised.

In this course we guide the students to learn about everything that could offer a path, from history to programmatic requirements.

Through a rigorous process of research and evaluation they slowly prioritize the questions and develop a conceptual framework that informs all their decisions.

The breadth of layers to cover is wide, however it is not used as an excuse for a simpler, more manageable exercise. As stated earlier, oversimplifying the exercise would only go in detriment of the education that the students receive.

In this course, students are responsible for developing strategies for all the layers of the project, from the less tangible to the more concrete. These include matters of site and space as well as all technical aspects such as passive, active, structural, envelope and mechanical systems.

Throughout the course, the students are exposed to different concepts, a series of universal principles of sort, and how those have been reinterpreted throughout history and geographic regions. This widens their horizon and their understanding of the value of meaningful interventions on a site.

63

A. Daza finished model

b-Current condition: Global and local The direct connection of Integrated Project Design with matters related to practice has led to larger questions being part of how the course is conceptualized.

The world is changing at a rapid pace. The economic cycles seem to be more abrupt and stability is not guaranteed in any way. In this environment, those offices or universities who are able to adapt, those who are more diversified in terms of geography and type of work, are the ones who have managed to survive the downturns in the economy.

The students need to develop skills that would allow them to work in any setting, regardless of whether they are familiar with it or not.

Two fundamental aspects are worth considering: Mobility: Nowadays the majority of architects are working in contexts in which they do not live. Project opportunities and economic pressures have led many to have to diversify and find opportunities in unfamiliar environments. This has been facilitated by a communications network that has made working from a distance and transportation to the site more feasible.

It would be helpful to read through the mission statements by Virgin Galactic and a statement made by his CEO, one of the leading firms in space exploration and transport: “We are at the vanguard of a new industry, pioneering the next generation of reusable space vehicles. We aim to transform the current cost, safety and environmental impact of space-launch.

In doing so we are helping to create, for the first time, a basic space access infrastructure that will act as an enabler for scientists and entrepreneurs. It will also provide the catalyst for a new age of space exploration which promises enormous positive potential for life on Earth.

A typical moment in a day air space

Virgin Galactica prototype

Technology access

“New space technologies developed by private companies will bring about fundamental change that will influence business and our personal lives… In time, we expect to be operating a variety of vehicles from multiple locations to cater for the demands of the growing space-user community. Whether that be transporting passengers to Earth orbiting hotels and Technology access

science laboratories, or providing a world-shrinking, transcontinental service – at Virgin Galactic we will always be striving to open space to change the world for good.”

information, they do not feel the need to retain any of it, given that google can provide necessary information instantly.

How to teach the students to be selective and focus on information worth focusing on is at the heart of our work as educators.

George Whitesides CEO Virgin Galactic and The Spaceship Company

Embedded in this statement is the intention of facilitating movement without the downside of long travel times. A world in which two cities like New York and Tokyo, could be connected by a 90min flight, is a substantially different world than the one in which we live today. All of a sudden movement is democratized all over the world and new opportunities would emerge.

This reality is around the corner and there is a high probability that it will happen in our lifetime.

This level of mobility carries a great deal of responsibility for architects and designers. On the one hand, new markets and opportunities will emerge, on the other, there is a more evident danger of a daunting homogenizing effect of the work produced with the consequent loss of identity and diversity.

As Rafael Moneo states “the shadow of anywhere is haunting us” and we must, as an educational institution, teach the students how to protect and foment diversity. We must shape the professionals who are going to resist unscrupulous, superficial work of architects whose only concern is to financially profit at any cost.

Technology-Access to Information: Nowadays, a smartphone gives us access to information and connections as never before. While this, in essence, is a positive thing, the amount of information and the ease of access to it has led to a generalized inability to concentrate and focus.

Our students are not immune to this. Often bombarded with

Integrated Project Design studio addresses these two questions through the methodology. The studio follows a process of research, observation and evaluation that informs every step of the process, from the conceptual to the technical. The slow and focused process guides the student to a paused, in-depth study of a specific matter.

This approach to design takes a critical position against the sad trend in which design and strategies are exported/imported without any sense of meaning or respect for the existing logic which has been incredibly damaging to cities worldwide, many of which are becoming monuments to the generic.

The students are given the choice of two sections, one local/ national, one international, dealing with a variety of philosophical questions.

They also have the opportunity to travel to the locations of their projects and spend time experiencing, developing an understanding of and documenting its context.

In addition, relevant visits to buildings in the area are organized.

These building visits are carefully planned so that the students have full access to all the spaces, including mechanical rooms and envelope when possible, and are usually guided by the architect or people knowledgeable of the ideas behind it. This allows students to understand ways of building in the area and exposes them to great architecture.

Berlin, Germany

La Geria in Lanzarote, Spain

Ball Island in New Haven, CT

Natour in Enfeh, Lebanon

La Antigua, Guatemala

Marsa Wazer, Egypt

Santiago de Chile, Chile

Downtown Philadelphia, Pa

Banganga Tank in Mumbai, India

Lavapies, Madrid, Spain

Surveying the site in La Antigua, Guatemala

Visiing a building in Chur, Switzerland with Daniel Latner

Group of students in Basel, Switzerland

Surveying Library in Leuven, Belgium

Visting food production in Philadelphia

Visting Leuven

Exploring the site, Parque de los Volcanes in Lanzarote

At the Atrio of La Alhambra with Juan Domingo Santos

Visting building under construction at Columbia University

Visiting building in Chur, Switzerland with Daniel Ladner

Visting construction site in Madrid, Spain

Meeting with Piet Eckert in Zurich, Switzerland

Augusta Raurica, Switzerland

c-Collaborative process: Individual work is paramount to ensure that every student is absorbing the information and is developing a minimum level of competence, however, learning to collaborate with others is also an important part of the education of an architect. Integrated Project Design requires the students to do both throughout the semester.

The majority of assignments have components that are developed in small groups of 2 to 4 students. The tasks focus primarily on different categories of research, from the more conceptual to the more technical.

Building site model of sites in La Antigua

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Building site model Leuven

Building site model for studio in Merida, Spain

Collaborating in constructing site research document

Building model for studio in Leuven

COURSE FRAMEWORK: Integrated Project Design Studio follows a process of Research, Evaluation, Selection and Implementation. This updated structure allows the student to reflect, question, discover connections and make informed decisions at every step.

The general structure covers the following areas: 1. Research (site and its context, assembly) 2. Preliminary site and building strategies 3. Final building strategy 4. Structure 5. Building Envelope 6. Passive and active strategies 7. Consolidation It is important to understand that a true integrative process cannot be linear, therefore the structure listed above represents a series of steps that initiate the investigation in a particular subject. As the students advance through the process, they begin discovering relationships and conceptualizing how the different elements work together. The models and material they develop are always subject to alterations.

Eventually, the consolidation results in an implementation strategy in the final version of the project.

NAAB team room

1-Research: The class is divided into groups of 4, and each group is assigned the following areas of research: • Geography and history of the city • Climate analysis • Vegetation and green systems • Site-s o Understand their history o Analysis All the information is consolidated in a cohesive self-explanatory monograph that explains the connections between the different layers of research.

In addition, each group of four is subdivided into groups of 2 and each group is assigned a building envelope to study. The idea is that each group would find all the information pertaining to the specific envelope and produce the following documentation: • Booklet explaining the main ideas of the building and its envelope • Construct a composite drawing: Wall section, detailed plan and detailed elevation • Assembly axonometric explaining all the layers of construction The selected envelopes are representative of ideal construction strategies from the region where the students are intervening and they are meant to be used as a reference for the envelope strategies the students develop in future assignments.

They represent a variety of strategies, from lighter systems to massive ones and they are meant to provide a wide enough range of examples that the students can use.

In the final submission of this assignment, a roundrobin amongst students from both sections of Integrated Project Design is organized. Each student, individually, presents the monograph of research and both assemblies done by his/her group to another student.

At the heart of this assignment is a collaborative process for processing, documenting and organizing information.

Working in smaller team assignments

Presenting the work to each other in round robin

Discussing research on sample assembly (spring 2020)

Example of consolidation of information

Example of consolidation of information

Example of consolidation of information

Example of consolidation of information

Example of consolidation of information

Example of consolidation of information

TEACHER TRAINING COLLEGE

ARCH 513.01 COMPREHENSIVE Berenith Ortiz & Emily Luna

Chur, Switzerland

T.O. ROOF 11.4 m

Teacher Training College is a science learning building with classrooms and laboratories in Chur, Switzerland. Specifically looking at the science wing of the building, the need for total transparency comes from the idea of science being clear and open for all. In sticking with a monotone building, Deplazes wanted to increase our perception of the artificially of science in contrast to the lush greenery reflected by the glass facade.

Structurally, the building consists of four platforms stacked on top of each other, each row of columns is accompanied by a concrete beam, and the building is then braced with a concrete core tower off to one side. This building has a unique ventilation system where the sides of the windows include grilled openings that can be adjusted to circulate the air. This building is also equipped with external shading awnings for each window which is also adjustable. Lastly a screen that further blocked the sun from the interior.

In order to maximize the glass face facade, the decision was made to keep the structure towards the center on both long sides (north east wall and south west wall). However, having a completely glass facade will heat up any building tremendously, this is where the cooling and ventilation system comes in.

The system of the building is kept pretty basic to give the attention to the facade and it's cooling/ventilation system.

TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY - PARAPET W. FLASHING - GRAVEL - FILTER FLEECE - GV3 WATERPROOFING & EP4 ROOT RESISTANT - T4 INSULATION CELLULAR GLASS - GV3 VAPOR BARRIER - 28 cm CONCRETE SLAB

TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY

FIN. THIRD FLOOR 7.4 m

TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY

TYPICAL FLOOR ASSEMBLY - LINOLEUM - 80 mm CEMENT SCREED - POLYETHYLENE SHEET - 20 mm IMPACT SOUND INSULATION - 280 mm CONCRETE SLAB

FIN. SECOND FLOOR 3.7 m

TYPICAL FLOOR ASSEMBLY

TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY - 60 x 180 mm ALUMINUM FACADE SECTIONS - BRACKETS AND CAST-IN RAIL - DOUBLE GLAZING, 8 mm INNER PANE, 8 mm OUTER PANE - 60 mm EXTERNAL PATENT GLAZING - 120 mm EXTRA WIDE COVER STRIP - 60 mm ROCKWOOL PLUS SHEET ALUMINUM LINING - ACRYLIC FABRIC AWNING - STRAIGHT AWNING ARM - INTERNAL BLACKOUT BLIND FITTED IN RECESS IN SOFFIT

FIN. GROUND FLOOR 0.0 m

- 600 x 600 mm CONCRETE COLUMN

3-D ASSEMBLY

ELEVATION

TYP. VENTILATION FRAME ASSEMBLY - 60 x 180 mm ALUMINUM FACADE SECTION - 60 mm ROCKWOOL - ALUMINUM LINING - EXTERNAL PATENT GLAZING - 600 x 600 mm CONCRETE COLUMN - "PSYCHOLOGICAL" OPENING FLAP

TYP. VENTILATION FRAME ASSEMBLY - 60 x 180 mm ALUMINUM FACADE SECTION - 60 mm ROCKWOOL - ALUMINUM LINING - EXTERNAL PATENT GLAZING - "PSYCHOLOGICAL" OPENING FLAP

170.0000

TYP. GLASS FACADE - 8 mm OUTER GLASS PANE FLOAT - 8 mm INNER GLASS PANE LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS - GLAZING - MULLION

B.O. FOOTING -3.7 m

SECTION CUT

Research on wall assembly E. Durning and R. Derocco

Research on wall assembly by E. Durning and R. Derocco

PLAN

TYP. GLASS FACADE - 8 mm OUTER GLASS PANE FLOAT - 8 mm INNER GLASS PANE LAMINATED SAFETY GLASS - GLAZING - MULLION

Research on wall assembly by E. Luna and B. Ortiz

351.9999

797.9419

1 2

4

5

9

7

6

8

3

14 12

13 15

BASTIAN GALLERY | ASSEMBLIES 1 85 mm concrete slab at edge of roof 50 mm bed of gravel; filter mat 160 mm compression-resistant thermal insulation; sealing layer 340 mm reinforced concrete roof slab 15 mm plaster 2 235/200 mm precast concrete element, with high white-cement content and stone aggregate, sandblasted 3 100 mm precast concrete lintel bearing on facing brickwork, with high white-cement content and stone aggregate, sandblasted and fixed with pins to upper precast element 4 60 mm sandwich panel with 2 mm sheet-steel lining internally, painted grey 5 double glazing: 8 mm toughened glass + 16 mm cavity+ 2 x 5 mm laminated safety gl.

6 30 mm stone slabs, 10 mm thin bed of mortar; 60 mm anhydrite screed with underfloor heating; separating layer 30 mm impact-sound insulation 50 mm thermal insulation 320 mm reinforced concrete floor; 15 mm plaster 7 40 mm stone slabs in bed of sand protective mat; filter mat 120 mm compression-resistant thermal insulation sealing layer; 320 mm reinforced concrete slab to falls; 15 mm plaster

8 250 mm facing brickwork with recycled bricks (250/120/65 mm) in English bond, pointed and slurried with lime mortar; with 10 mm horizontal and vertical joints, raked out 3-5 mm, low-alkali mortar with added colour, ties through 130 mm thermal insulation 300 mm reinforced concrete wall 9 8 mm sheet steel bent up at edges, glued 10 mm steel grating; stainless-steel gutter 10 25 mm wrought ipe (tropical wood), untreated; door leaf: 68 mm sandwich element with insulation 11 190/50 mm laminated timber, painted grey 12 2 x 49/235 mm laminated timber rail, with 155/12 mm steel plate between

Exterior Shading Condition, Mechanical Strategy

Filtration / Drainage Mats, Recycled Water System

Mechanical Shading, Passive Shading via Orientation

3-5 mm Lime Mortar Pointed and Slurried, 250 mm Masonry Wall, Continuous Rigid Insulation, Concrete Wall

13 80/80 mm ipe cover strip clipped on 70/5 mm mullion cap 14 30 mm laminated construction board folding shutter 15 20 mm ipe opening element 80 mm sandwich slab with insulation

Construction information courtesy of Hoffmann / Schittich Construction and Design Manual, Detail Edition.

Filtered Water Collection, Radiant Slabs

Split Structural Loading at Foundation

Research on wall assembly S. Moncada and R. Kelly

2-Preliminary site and building strategies: This assignment is structured in a series of steps meant to help the student to outline a series of priorities, both at the level of the site and at the level of the architecture. The steps are as follows: • Site strategy • Program technical requirements • Program occupancy loads • Composition analysis • Preliminary building ideas The first step is to conceptualize an intervention of a specific size building on the site through a series of collages, site plans, writings and observations.

The specifics of the program are not known at this point with the idea that the students focus on site intentions only. The essay ‘The Murmur of the Site’

by Rafael Moneo is given as a point of reference in order to learn how to read a site and its potential.

The second step is to understand the actual technical needs of the program. As groups, they are asked to develop very precise research on functional and technical matters on the program.

All this information is formatted following the monograph guidelines.

Collage by A. Pizzanelli

The third step is looking at the program numbers to understand space types and occupancy loads. In subgroups of 3 students, they are asked to develop a chart identifying each space type, the occupant load coefficient, the total number of occupants and the fixture count. Further code issues such as egress, traveling distances, and so forth, are dealt with later in the process, once the designs are partially set up.

The fourth step is a re-introduction to ideas of composition and spatial definition through analytical research of a singular house holding universal principles of design. The design process is similar to that followed in the summer of 2019. In this step, groups of students are asked to analyze different aspects of the building which include: • Spatial Definition • Composition • Geometry • Program organization • Movement The research is done through a series of clear drawings and all the information is formatted following the parameters of the booklet.

Once the research on all the houses is completed, the students will pick one to use as a guide Collage by D. Sadowniczyk

to establish the design principles of their own projects.

Examples of houses selected are: • Solo House by OFFICE • AA House by Carlos Ferrater • Sert House by Josep LLuis Sert • House without qualities by O.M. Ungers • Raumplan house by Alberto Campo Baeza • Stone House by Emilio Tuñón From a pedagogical standpoint, this helps the students conceptualize their projects from a clearer standpoint, they learn to interpret abstract concepts of architecture and most of all, learn to leave their formal prejudices behind.

Colalge by D.Sadowniczyk

Once the analysis of the house is completed, the students are asked to conceptualize two potential preliminary schemes that respond to a single site idea. Each of the two preliminary schemes has to reinterpret the compositional strategy of one of the houses analyzed by the class.

The process involves generating single line plans and sections that include all program components (net) and associated services (gross). Along with planimetric studies, massing models are developed to begin understanding volumetric strategies and site responses.

The information is consolidated in the booklet format and all the concepts are explained graphically and in written form.

Collage by K.Mendez

Collage by M. Holmes

House analysis by S. Moncada and R. Kelly

Preliminary site model by K. Thieret

Preliminary model and diagrams by L. Irons

Preliminary studies by M. Holmes

Preliminary studies by M. Holmes

Preliminary building diagrams by M. Holmes

Preliminary model and diagrams by L.Irons

Preliminary building model and diagrams by L.Irons

Preliminary massign study by D. Sadowniczyk

Preliminary massign study by D. Sadowniczyk

Canal Offices

Castle

Monastery

Preliminary diagram by N. Valenti

Preliminary study by C. Norcross

3-Building strategies: Once the previous assignment is completed, the students begin to formalize the final version of the scheme. This is typically the result of different ideas they have learned from the preliminary two schemes.

In this step, each student composes a complete project which includes: • Site plan • Plans of all levels • All elevations • Relevant sections • Renderings • Definition of passive strategies • Large scale model of all levels with partitions and exterior wall The introduction of the large-scale models, built by hand, without intermediaries such as 3d printers or laser cutters, is meant to bring back the emotional connection of the students to their work. The tools that we currently use, have created a chasm between the project and its author, leading to a situation in which the students don’t identify with the work.

In addition, the exploration in model form leads to a more direct way of modifying the work and trying new things without reservations.

The material produced is consolidated into two types of documents: • Formatted black and white set of dwgs (technical documentation) • Monograph of the project (conceptual framework)

Preliminary massing study by T. Slota

Preliminary massing study by T. Slota

Preliminary massing study by N. Valenti

Massing model by L. Penaloza

Massing model by J. Arndt

Rendering by L. Penaloza

Rendering by L. Penaloza

Preliminary plan by D. Cirillo

Preliminary elevations by D. Cirillo

Diagram by D. Cirillo

A

B

Mass model by M. Holmes

C

D

E

F

G

H

1 A2-03

12'-0"

12'-0"

12'-0"

12'-0"

24'-0"

12'-0"

1

12'-0"

GRILLS FOR OIL TANK

I

J

2

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

A2-03

52'-81 2"

48'-0"

12'-4"

12'-0"

12'-0"

12'-0"

13'-0"

38'-4"

5'-4"

GRILLS FOR MECHANICAL ROOM DIRECTOR'S OFFICE

301

300

12'-0"

CONTRACT ROOM

CONFERENCE ROOM 312

2 ACCOUNTANTS 303 CONTRACT ROOM

12'-0"

SUPPLY DUCT

305 SUPPLY RETURN ROOM DUCT

3

323

12'-0"

ACCOUNTANTS

BATHROOM

306

INSURANCE ADM.

307

4

308

BATHROOM 7'-0"

309

5

PSYCHOLOGIST

CONTRACT ROOM

6'-0"

310

304

LOBBY 311

6'-0"

6

BATHROOM

7

200 6'-0"

8

WAITING ROOM COAT ROOM

203

204 1 A2-04

1'-31 2"

LOBBY RECEPTION

6'-0"

314

LOBBY 205 6'-0"

2 SHOWROOM MANAGER

6'-0"

13

313

LIFT FOR COFFIN

11 12

302

VIEWING ROOM

201 4'-81 2"

9 10

CONTRACT ROOM

206 6'-0"

15

210 WAITING ROOM 208

BATHROOM

BATHROOM

BATHROOM

317

318

209

SUPPLY DUCT

SHOWROOM PHYSICIAN

320

319 6'-0"

LOUNGE 5'-4"

18

321

2'-0"

19

4'-0"

20

316

RETURN DUCT

6'-0"

17

FILE ROOM

VIEWING ROOM

207

16

A2-04

315

CHAPEL

COAT ROOM

14

PHYSICIAN 322

21 7'-8"

22 12'-4"

24 12'-8"

25

Preliminary plan by M. Vang

10'-6"

10'-2"

11'-0"

8'-4"

8'-2"

11'-2"

10'-2"

11'-0"

13'-8"

1" 19'-42

1" 19'-42

10'-0"

9'-10"

1" 12'-52

8'-23 4"

1" 18'-94

14'-2"

Plan and sections by J. Arndt

FACADE CONDITION

PRIVATE CIRCULATION

PUBLIC CIRCULATION

MASSING

Diagram by N. King

Rendering by D. Sadowniczyk

4-Structure: In this assignment, the students focus on the role of the structure in their project, its technical resolution and its implementation.

Decisions about space and materiality go hand in hand with that of structure. The students are confronted with having to make clear decisions within the design conceptual framework they have set up.

The assignment has two steps, one to evaluate, and a final one to implement. In the first step, they have to conceptualize two possible approaches for dealing with the structure. In this phase, they produce the basic design framework and modulation.

Once the student has decided on a path, a final version of the structure is conceptualized. For this each student produces the following: • Conceptual narrative o Spatial logic o Relationship with the program o Materiality • Detailed modulation • Foundation selection (based on soil type) • Sizing of elements (using studio companion) • Structural plan • Structural sections (add structure to all building sections) • Structural axon • Physical model of the structure

Evaluating envelop during final review

The physical model is the first step in constructing a full model which will include all technical layers of the project.

5-Building envelope: With the structure completed, the students begin studying the envelope. The assembly systems studied during the first assignment serve as a starting point to outline a series of principles that the students must follow. Since there are two class sections, the students have a wide range of options from which to start.

They are asked to study two different ways of conceptualizing the building envelope through the production of a series of drawings in both 2d and 3d, and basic physical models in foam and paper.

Once the preliminary studies are completed, conversations with the consultants are organized to clarify relevant elements.

Once all the different layers are understood, the students proceed to develop the final version of the envelope and a final bay model.

Meeting with structural engineer at ARUP

Structural study by B. Capicotto

TRACES : LA ANTIGUA GUATEMALA

SANTA TERESA

DAN SADOWNICZYK

COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO ARCH 513

SCALE :

DATE :

NTS

STRUCTURE AXON

S1-06

Structural axonometric by D. Sadoniczyck

Structural diagram by D. Cirillo

Structural initial concept by D. Cirillo

O

W18

W18

W24

W12

W24

Sveavägen 73 113 50 Stockholm, Sweden

W12

W12

W12

W18 W12

W12

W12

W18

W12 W18

W12

W12

W12

W18

20' - 0"

W24

W24

10'-0" X 9'-0" OPENING IN SLAB

W12

W18

STOCKHOLM PUBLIC LIBRARY ADDITION

20'-0" X 56'-7" OPENING IN SLAB

10'-0" X 17'-6" OPENING IN SLAB

W12

W12

W24

W24

W24

W12

W12

W12

W18

W12

19' - 8"

W12

2

Q

W24

W12

W24

W24

1

W18

W18

W24

W24

W12

3

W24

W 24

W12

W12

W18

20' - 0"

W12

W18

W 24

W12

W18

GENERAL NOTES

W24

W12

4 W18

R 44'

W24

W12

W12

W18

20' - 0"

W12

- 11"

W18

W24

W12

5 W18

W12

W12

W18

20' - 0"

W12

W24

W12

W18

W24

W12

6

W12

W12 W12

W12 W12

W12

W12

20' - 0"

W12

W18

24 W

W18

W18

W12

W12

7

W24

W18

W24

W12 W12

W12

W18

20' - 0"

20'-0" X 9'-5" OPENING IN SLAB

W18

W24

W12

8 W18

W12 W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

R 36'

W24

20' - 0"

W18

KEY PLAN

W12

- 5"

W24

W24 W24

W12

W12

W12

W12

W24 W12

DECEMBER 20, 2013

DATE

W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

W12

W18

W12

1/8" = 1'-0"

SCALE

REVISIONS No.

Da t e

Description

W12

W12

W12

W12

W24

20' - 0"

W12 W12

W24

W12

W24

W12

W12

W12 W24

W24

W24

W12

24 W

W24

W24

W24

W12

W18

W12

W12

W24

W24

W12

W12

W12

W24

W12

W24

W24

W24

W12

W12

W12

W18

W12

W12

W12

W24

20' - 0"

W 24

10

W12

D A T A

ARCH 513.01 COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO ROGER WILLIAMS UNIVERSITY ROBERTO VIOLA OCHOA - INSTRUCTOR SAAHP FALL 2013 PAWEL HONC ARCH 513_01_13FA

W24 W24

11

P R O J E C T

W 24

W12

W12

W12

W12

W 24

W12

- 8"

W12

24 W

20' - 0"

W12

R 44'

W24

W24

9

W12

W12

24 W

W12 5'-0" X 36'-0" OPENING IN SLAB

W 24

4 W2

W18

12

W18 24 W

W 24

14'-6" X6'-8" OPENING IN SLAB

35' - 6"

SCHEMATIC DESIGN SET T I T L E

W2 4

S H E E T

13

19' - 3"

?

A

1 STRUCTURAL - FIRST FLOOR PLAN S C A L E : 1/8" = 1'-0"

18' - 11"

B

19' - 1"

C

28' - 8"

D

19' - 1"

E

19' - 1"

F

19' - 1"

G

19' - 1"

H

19' - 1"

I

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

19' - 1"

J

K

S1.03 Final structural plan by P. honc

Final structural plan by C. Winkler

Structural analysis by C. Winkler

Foam model study of envelope by M. Pegolo

Study models showing structure heating, ventilation, and insulation

Museo Escuela de la Tauromaquia - Merida, Badajoz, Spain

BUILDING ENVELOPE TECHNICAL

108 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK | a quiet backdrop

Assembly study by P. Honc

1 - The Bauakademie Berlin will take on the footprint of the site's proposed housing complex. This footprint opens up the site entirely, hiding the service street in the back.

2 - The Bauakademie Berlin becomes the third layer of the site, representing the new element.

This layering concept reveals footprints of the Bauakademie and GDR Foreign Ministry Office, showcasing them in seperate paving materials. The Bauakademie Berlin rejects any relationship with historic footprints of the site, as it does not mimic or allign with any. It is a new element.

3 - The mock-up corner of the Bauakademie and various statues of Schinkelplatz become ruins in the landscape for the public to discover. The Bauakademie Berlin is veiled with a screen, as it is a secondary component to the landscape. It is a quiet building with no intentions to impede on the public's discovery process on the site.

4 - The site becomes a park, branching off of Berlin's green systems - inviting many tall Linden trees for the public to travel under. This nature is invited through the screen at times, into various courtyards of the building where the public can visit. Ultimately, this park connects 2 major roads in Berlin, allowing the public to freely circulate to each end of the site.

5

Preliminary bay model study by S. Schwartz

Bay model by D. Contelmo

Bay model by N. King

Bay model by N. Valenti

Students working in studio

ROGER W UNIVER

ARCH 513: G

INTEGRATIVE

STUD

SPRING

ROBERTO VIO

MATTHEW

LEUVEN, B

KU LEUVEN,

LIBRARY A

AXONOMETRIC W

SPEC C

APRIL 19, 2

SCALE: 1

3d Assembly by M. Holmes

A3-0

ROOF ASSEMBLY LiveRoof GREEN ROOF SYSTEM LiveRoof GREEN ROOF PLANTS (MIN 95% SOIL COVERAGE @ INSTALLATION LiveRoof ENGINEERED SOIL LiveRoof MOISTURE PORTALS LiveRoof LITE MODULE ROOF MEMBRANE 3 4" ROOF BOARD MULTIPLY LAYERS RIGID INSULATION SLOPED AT 41"-1'

UPPER WALL ASSEMBLY

3 4" ROOF BOARD

INTERIOR WALL FINISH GYPSUM BOARD

WATER VAPOR MOISTURE BARRIER

LIGHT GUAGE STUD WALL

CONCRETE ON METAL DECK WITH POUR STOP AT EDGE

CONCRETE STRUCUTRAL WALL

W16x89 GIRDERS OR W12x50 BEAMS

WATER VAPOR MOISTURE BARRIER

SPACE FOR MECHANICAL

WOOL INSULATION EXTERIOR STUCCO LAYER

HUNG CEILING

6" VERTICAL FRAMING HORIZONTAL FRAMING VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN, ANGLED AT 45°

SECOND FLOOR ASSEMBLY FINISHED FLOOR SUB FLOOR CONCRETE TOPPING SLAB RIGID INSULATION CONCRETE ON METAL DECK WITH POUR STOP AT EDGE W16x89 GIRDERS OR W12x50 BEAMS SPACE FOR MECHANICAL HUNG CEILING WITH RIGID INSULATION

WALL ASSEMBLY CONCRETE STRUCUTRAL WALL WATER VAPOR MOISTURE BARRIER WOOL INSULATION EXTERIOR STUCCO LAYER 6" VERTICAL FRAMING HORIZONTAL FRAMING VERTICAL WOOD SCREEN, ANGLED AT 45°

FIRST FLOOR ASSEMBLY POLISHED CONCRETE TOPPING SLAB RIGID INSULATION CONCRETE ON METAL DECK WITH POUR STOP AT EDGE W16x89 GIRDERS OR W12x50 BEAMS SPACE FOR MECHANICAL

1" '-4 2 19

HUNG CEILING WITH RIGID INSULATION

UNDERGROUND WALL ASSEMBLY CONCRETE STRUCUTRAL WALL PAINTED ON WATER & VAPOR BARRIER RIGID INSULATION GRAVEL STABLE UNIFORMLY DENSE SOIL

SUB FLOOR ASSEMBLY POLISHED CONCRETE FINISH CONCRETE SLAB W/ WELDED WIRE MESH RIGID INSULATION 2" SAND PLACED OVER MOISTURE BARRIER MOISTURE BARRIER COARSE GRAVEL STABLE UNIFORMLY DENSE SOIL

Final assembly drawing by J. Arndt ROGER WILLIAMS UNIVERSITY

T.O. PARAPET 131' 6" CLEAT SEALANT UNDER CONT CLEAT

TYPICAL ROOF ASSEMBLY METAL FASCIA GALVANIZED METAL DAM 1/4" AIR WATER BARRIER 1/2" COVER BOARD 7" RIGID INSULATION 1/2" ROOF BOARD 3 14" CONCRETE W REBAR & RADIANT HEATING 2" STEEL DECKING STRUCTURAL FRAMING 3/4" STEEL DROP CEILING W/ RADIANT COOLING

TYPICAL PARAPET ASSEMBLY FORMED METAL COPING ROOF MEMBRANE UNDER COPING CONT. WOOD BLOCKING SLOPED 1" PER FOOT MIN. WOOD NAILER W ANCHOR BOLT TO METAL STUD

T.O. ROOF 128'6"

ARCH 513: GRADUATE INTEGRATIVE DESIGN STUDIO

WIDE FLANGE STRUCTURAL FRAMING

STAINLESS STEEL FLASHING FOR DRAINAGE OF 2" AIRSPACE

DOUBLE PANED OPERABLE WINDOW WITH STAINLESS STEEL FRAMING

SPRING 2019 ROBERTO VIOLA OCHOA

STAINLESS STEEL FLASHING UNDER MASONRY FINISH

T.O. FLOOR +2 115' 6"

STEEL ANGLE CAST INTO FLOOR SLAB TO SUPPORT BRICK VENEER W THERMAL PROTECTION

MATTHEW D. HOLMES

T.O. FLOOR +1 103' 6"

PRE-CAST CONCRETE TRIM PIECE (POLISHED)

ALL STEEL BEAMS FIREPROOFED WITH INTUMESCENT PAINT -

32" CONCRETE RAILING W REBAR

-

1'6" SLAB ON GRADE

TYPICAL FLOOR ASSEMBLY FINISH FLOOR 3/4" SUB FLOOR 2" SLEEPER SYSTEM W ACOUSITC INSULATION 314" CONCRETE W REBAR & RADIANT HEATING 2" STEEL DECKING STRUCTURAL FRAMING 3/4" STEEL DROP CEILING W/ RADIANT COOLING

HSS GIRDER

FOUNTAIN SUPPLY MODULE

-

1'X3' STEEL COLUMN

T.O. FLOOR 0 91'6"

STEEL CABLES FOR HANGING PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL

-

PRECAST CONCRETE PANELING 3" RIGID INSULATION CONTINUOUS BITUMINOUS MEMBRANE 3/4" EXTERIOR GWB

FOUNTAIN SUPPLY MODULE C.I.P CONCRETE DRAIN W CONTINUOUS WATER PROOFING

DRAINAGE TO GRAY WATER RECLAIMER IN FLOOR -2

-

STONE FINISH ON FOUNTAIN CONTINUOUS WATERPROOF MEMBRANE HIGH DENSITY CONCRETE FOR WATER PROOFING

T.O. FLOOR -1 79' 6"

ARENBERG II LIBRARY

TYPICAL WALL ASSEMBLY 4" X 16" VERTICAL BRICK MASONRY BRICK-TIES 2" AIR SPACE 4" RIGID INSULATION BOARD CONTINUOUS BITUMINOUS MEMBRANE 3/4" EXTERIOR GWB 2"X6" STEEL WALL STUD 3/4" GWB WALL FINISH

1'6" SLAB ON GRADE

TYPICAL BELOW GRADE WALL ASSEMBLY -FILTER FABRIC -2" RIGID INSULATION -3/4" DRAINAGE MAT - 2" PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL - 3" RIGID INSULATION - LIQUID MEMBRANE - CIP FOUNDATION WALL

T.O. SLAB FLOOR -2 67' 6"

TYPICAL BASEMENT & SLAB ASSEMBLY FINISH FLOOR 3/4 SUB FLOOR 2" SLEEPER SYSTEM & ACOUSTIC INSULATION 2' CONCRETE MAT SLAB W REINFORCEMENT & RADIANT HEATING VAPOR BARRIER 2" POLYSTYRENE RIGID INSULATION 4" CLEAN CRUSHED STONE

LEUVEN, BELGIUM KU LEUVEN, ARENBERG

T.O. SLAB FLOOR -2 87' 6"

LIBRARY ADDITION TYP. WALL ASSEMBLY

APRIL 19, 2019

SCALE: 1/2" = 1' 0"

A3-01 Final assembly drawing M. Holmes

PARAPET ROOF ASSEMBLY: METAL COPING ASSEMBLY PARADIENE 40 FR TG PARADEINE 30 FR FULLY ADHERED TO UNDERLYING PARADEINE 20 SURFACES PARADEINE 20 FULLY ADHERED TO ROOF SURFACE NON-COMBUSTABLE CANT ROOF MEMBRANE 1 2" PROTECTION BOARD WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE

TASTE ROOM 206

TYP. FLOOR ASSEMBLY: 3 4" T&G HARDWOOD FLOOR 3 4" FLOOR SHEATHING 3" METAL FLOOR DECKING W8 STEEL JOIST W12 STEEL GIRDER

T.O. PARAPET ROOF 32'-4" T.O. GREEN ROOF 31'-4"

1" 16'-22

1" 16'-22

T.O. GREEN ROOF 31'-4"

GREEN ROOF ASSEMBLY: 10" GROWING MEDIA 6" DRAINAGE LAYER 3" RIGID INSULATION 6" RIGID INSULATION VAPOR BARRIER 4" CONCRETE SLAB 3" ROOF DECKING W10 STEEL JOIST W12 STEEL GIRDER 1'-0"

T.O. PARAPET ROOF 32'-4"

Composite drawing by D. Sadowniczyk

1'-0"

Bay model by J. Karpeichik

TYP. WALL ASSEMBLY: TERRACOTTA SCREEN REBAR FRAME 2" RIGID INSULATION WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE 4X8 WINDOW 4" METAL STUDS 3 4" SHEATHING 6" HSS COULMN

14'-33 8"

T.O. SECOND FLOOR 15'-1 1/2"

14'-33 8"

T.O. SECOND FLOOR 15'-1 1/2"

ENTRANCE II 105

1" 108

GRADE 000'-0"

1" 108

T.O. FOUNDATION WALL 000'-10"

FOUNDATION TOP ASSEMBLY: METAL FLASHING WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE 2" RIGID INSULATION WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE 6" HSS STEEL COLUMN 5 8" STEEL BASE PLATE #4 ANCHOR BOLTS SPACED @ 24" O.C. 16" FOUNDATION WALL

T.O. FOUNDATION WALL 000'-10 1/8" GRADE 000'-0"

5" 13'-18

5" 13'-18

BELOW GRADE ASSEMBLY: 40X16 CONCRETE FOOTING #8 STEEL REINFORCING 4" DRAINAGE PIPE AT PERIMETER CRUSHED GRAVEL 16" FOUNDATION WALL WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE 2" RIGID INSULATION

TANK ROOM 001

BELOW GRADE FLOOR ASSEMBLY: COMPACT, CRUSHED GRAVEL 2" RIGID INSULATION 4" CONCRETE SLAB SLOPED 41/12

1" 1'-84

T.O. BASEMENT FLOOR - 13'-1 5/8" 1" 1'-84

T.O. BASEMENT FLOOR - 13'-1 5/8"

B.O. FOUNDATION - 14'-9 7/8"

B.O. FOUNDATION - 14'-9 7/8"

ROGER WILLIAMS UNIVERSITY

FALL 2019 ROBERTO VIOLA OCHOA

ARCH 513: GRADUATE INTEGRATIVE DESIGN STUDIO

JESSICA KARPEICHIK

LA ANTIGUA, GUATEMALA SANTA TERESA NEW WINERY ADDITION

SANTA TERESA WINERY

Final assembly drawing by J. Karpeichik

WALL ASSEMBLIES DECEMBER 10, 2019 SCALE: 1/2" = 1'

A3-02

Bay model by D. Sadoniczyck

6-Passive and active strategies: The last step before consolidation is establishing the strategies for environmental control within the building.

In this assignment, the students re-evaluate the climate data and further define the passive strategies that were outlined in assignment #3.

In addition, design framework ideas and program requirements are clearly outlined and possible active systems are evaluated.

Once the evaluation is complete, the final selection and implementation is undertaken and a workshop with ARUP is organized to finetune the concepts and clarify questions.

7-Consolidation This phase constitutes the final submission of the student. In consists of two components: • Monograph • Black and White formatted set The monograph is a detailed explanation of all the decisions made along the process. It is a complete, self-explanatory monograph of the project in which the student composes text and graphics in a cohesive booklet. For all practical purposes, this is a completed booklet which begun in assignment #3.

The black and white set is a precise technical documentation of the project. It encompasses all the layers of the project as follows: • General reference • Site plan • Relevant renderings • Code evaluation • Building plans • Building elevations and sections • Structural • Narrative • Structural plans • Structural axon • Mechanical • Narrative • Mechanical Plans • Mechanical Axon • Integrated axon (mechanical + structure) • Building envelope • Composite assembly • Typical Wall section • Detailed plan (at wall section) • Detailed Elevation (at wall section) • 3d Axonometric assembly (partial).

General diagram of strategies by M. Holmes

Diagram of concept by M. Vang

Diagram of strategies by D. Cirillo

Performance evaluation of preliminary scheme by M. Holmes

Performance evaluation of preliminary scheme by M. Holmes

Performance evaluation of preliminary scheme by B. Capicotto

Performance evaluation of preliminary scheme by B. Capicotto

Description of passive ventilation strategy by C. Winkler

Mechanical and strudtural axonometric by C. Winkler

Structural and mechanical axonometric by D. Sadowniczyk

Evaluation of active system needs accordance to program by J. Karpeichik

Evaluation of active system needs according to program by E. Liu

Evaluation of systems by J. Karpeichik

Distribution diagram of mechanical systems by C. Winkler

S104 REVISION -

STRUCTURE + MECHANICAL AXONOMETRIC DATE

ADDITION AND ALTERATION TO THE LIBRARY ON CAMPUS ARENBERG

-

KATHOLIEKE UNIVERSITY OUDE MARKT 13, 3000 LEUVEN, BELGIUM

THOMAS C. SLOTA

ASPIRING ARCHITECT

ARCH. 513.01 INTEGRATED DESIGN STUDIO

Structure and mechanical axonometric by T. Slota

SPRING 2019

DRAWN BY

SCALE

DATE

T.C.S

NOT TO SCALE

3-29-19

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

2

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Roger Williams University

Q

A2-03 232' - 5" 11' - 3"

4' - 11"

7' - 10"

16' - 2"

10' - 10"

21' - 0"

24' - 0"

24' - 0"

24' - 0"

15' - 10"

8' - 2"

6' - 9"

17' - 3"

9' - 6"

16' - 5"

14' - 6"

1

SAAHP ARCH 513.01 COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO FALL 2013

17' - 8"

General Notes

16' - 0"

2

3 7' - 1"

FW-9 Crown Boilers Sized @ 60% eff.

2' x 2' Chimney

8' - 11"

4

5 20" x 88" Exhaust 20' - 0"

Cooling Tower Sup. / Ret.

20" x 68" Main Supply Vision 040 Modular Air Handler

Stepping Foundation Wall

20" x 68" Main Return

6 1

-13' - 0"

A2-03 20" x 54" Main Return

Cooling Tower Sup. / Ret.

20" x 54" Main Supply

28' - 8" 198' - 0"

UP

7' - 4"

24" x 70" F.A. Intake

Projected Foundation Above

8

7' - 1"

9 UP

No.

Description

Date

10 10' - 11"

70" x 20" Main Return

Key Plan

8' - 7"

11

12 30" x 35" MainSupply 1

25" x 45" Main Return

15' - 2"

26" x 48" Main Supply

A2-04 200 Ton ea.

Screw Chillers

14' - 1"

13

15

Skogskyrkogården Funerary Chapel 36' - 5"

The Woodland Cemetary Sockenvägen 492 122 33 Stockholm Sweden

Z Designed By

Y 16

T

U

Alex Schweitzer

Sheet Name

Basement

X

2 A2-05

Project Number

V

Date Drawn By Checked By

1

Mechanical Basement Plan 1/8" = 1'-0"

0'

4'

8'

16'

0701457 9/15/2013 Alex Schweitzer Roberto Viola Ochoa

M1-01 Scale

11/20/2014 6:43:38 AM

2 A2-04

1/8" = 1'-0"

Mechanical plan by A. Schweitzer 43'-0"

43'-0"

1

2

3

4

BATHROOM EXHAUST

A 11'-6"

VERTICAL RETURN DUCT 5'-0"x4'-0" VERTICAL SUPPLY DUCTS 5'-0"x4'-0"

RETURN DUCT 2'-3"x10"

31'-6"

B

47'-0"

C

BRANCH SUPPLY DUCT 2'-0"x9"

BRANCH SUPPLY DUCT 2'-0"x9"

FLOOR SUPPLY GRILL

FLOOR SUPPLY GRILL

31'-6"

D

E 11'-6"

VERTICAL SUPPLY DUCT 5'-0"x4'-0"

F

RETURN DUCT 2'-3"x10"

VERTICAL RETURN DUCT 5'-0"x4'-0"

BATHROOM EXHAUST

RIVER OF TIME

CHRIS NORCROSS

COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO ARCH 513

SCALE : 3/16" = 1'-0" DATE :

12/19/2019

MECHANICAL SEVENTH FLOOR PLAN

M1.08

Mechanical plan by C. Norcross

Diagram of mechanical system by D. Sadowniczyk

Diagram of mechanical system by D. Sadowniczyk

Delivery axonometric by C. Norcross

b-Workshops with consultants: In Integrated Project Design, the students are required to research, evaluate and develop implementation strategies of the fundamental technical layers of the building which include environmental (passive), mechanical (active), structure and building envelope.

Since the complexity is high, it requires a more advanced level of expertise.

As part of the support, workshops are organized with consultants in which the students have one on one meetings and get feedback on their strategies.

The workshops are: • ARUP-Boston: ARUP is one of the leading engineering firms in the world and responsible for many of the relevant buildings since the 1930s. The students meet with environmental/mechanical and structural engineers, at their office in Boston.

• SGH (Simpson, Gumpertz & Heger Engineering): One of the leading building envelope consultants in the US, specialized in building performance, enclosure and building forensics. A number of their engineers meet with our students individually to evaluate and address any issues with each of their project’s envelope.

In order to meet with the consultants, the students have been required to be more rigorous in the process of documentation to facilitate the discussion.

The introduction of these workshops has improved the integration between and documentation of the technical layers: structure, passive and active environmental systems and building envelope.

Meeting at ARUP’s office La Antigua studio

Meeting with SGH (envelope), La Antigua studio

c-Supporting lectures: The lectures are generally given as an introduction to each particular assignment. The objective is two-fold; on the one hand, it helps frame the many ways in which the subject can be interpreted, on the other, it is a way to refresh some of the general concepts learned by the student in the years prior.

They cover a range of subjects from a historical perspective, linking projects built in different periods and conveying how the dialog with history has always been and will always be present in architecture.

The lectures cover a wide geographic area as well, for the students to be aware of how universal concepts are re-interpreted depending on the cultural idiosyncrasies.

Meeting with SGH (Envelope), Fall River studio

Meeting at ARUP’s office, The Hague studio

Meeting at ARUP’s office, Fall River studio

Workshop with SGH, Leuven studio

85

88

COMFORT: INTERACTION BETWEEN TEMPERATURE, RELATIVE HUMIDITY, RADIATION AND WIND SPEED REGARDING HUMAN COMFORT BIOCLIMATIC CHART

86

89

87

90

15 Lecture on sustainability sample

The lectures are on the following subjects: • Introduction to Integration • Perception of Space • Idea of Place (Sustainability Lecture) • Structure • Building Envelope • Active Systems In the Spring of 2020, the lectures were moved to Saturday mornings as an additional class period.

The idea behind the move was to preserve the studio time for desk crits and interaction with the instructors and have more time to cover the information on the lectures. While the presentations are on Saturday, they are still mandatory for all the students and attendance is taken. d-Folder and File management practices: Given the amount of information the course covers, it is imperative for the students to develop good habits in file management, naming conventions, etc… This is paramount when being in a professional setting, where more than likely there will be several people working on one project, and clarity in the set-up is mandatory to avoid confusion and unnecessary problems.

Each student receives a digital folder with a series of subfolders in which all the files are organized and turned in at the end of the semester.

In addition, supporting mini-lectures on CAD and other software are organized depending on the needs of the students.

The course places a stronger emphasis on constructed 2d drawings and constructed 3d assemblies using Rhino or Sketchup. For this reason, the use of BIM software such as Revit is limited for rendering purposes only.

The pedagogical intention is to make the students aware of every single element in the drawing.

Unfortunately, programs like Revit, follow a data management approach rather than a ‘construction’ approach and the students do not develop an understanding of how assemblies are put together that I feel is necessary at the university level.

All drawings produced follow a strict set up that matches the organization and conventions of files used in practice. This is done fundamentally to help the students develop better habits and reduce the waste of time that results from poor file management.

The structure relies on x-referencing files so that the full set can be constructed easily. The students work on a single set of drawings and save versions

on the archive folder periodically.

This set up is not what the students are generally used to, so at times it takes a bit of adjusting. In general, emphasis on digital drawing organization is not enforced and the students develop bad habits that at times are hard to break.

The instructors of Integrated Project Design consistently monitor the files to ensure the students are following through. Any effort to shortchange the process is immediately stopped.

For the folder structure, the convention used is as follows: • Arch513_01_19fa_lastnameinitial o Graphics  Jpg  Pdf  Psd  Ai o Cad  Working files  Base reference files (by the instructor)  Archive • MM-DD-YEAR o 3d  Skp  Rhino o Indesign  Links o Submissions (pdf) o Video presentations o Information provided by the instructor  Docs  Ppt  articles For CAD files: • Site plan-roof.dwg • Site plan-FL1.dwg • Code-analysis.dwg • FL-1.dwg (number follows floor) • Elevation-Section.dwg • S1.dwg (structure framing FL-1) • M1.dwg (mechanical FL-1) • Assembly.dwg

EVALUATION PROCESSES: Integrated Project Design studio has to respond to NAAB criteria that focus not only on technical matters but also on verbal, graphic and written communication skills. These are of paramount importance for those students seeking successful professional practices.

For this reason, the course sets up numerous types of formats and processes for the students to explain their work, in fragments or in full, and receive feedback.

The conventional methods of presenting final work are fundamentally deficient for the level of depth the projects are required to achieve, for this reason, significant changes to the review format and the final submissions have been undertaken over the years.

There are several processes the students go through and they are as follows: a-Round robin In the initial stages of the process, when the students are beginning to articulate thoughts on the project, a series of roundrobin presentations are set up.

In these presentations, the students from both sections have to present information to each other, ask questions and evaluate the material at different levels. The process of presenting and critiquing happens several times within the review period, which helps the student fine-tune how they explain the information.

Also, the process helps the students learn to be objective critics of material they are not familiar with. b-Gallery review In the earlier years of teaching Integrated Project Design (known then as Comprehensive Project Design), there was an initiative to expose the students to the leadership of Sasaki Associates, a firm I was part of for 17 years. The thought being that it was a good way for the students to receive criticism from people in practice while being able to showcase what they were capable of, and potentially be considered as an employee upon graduating.

What began as a standard, full-day review, evolved into a more agile system in which a more diverse group of critics could participate.

The review evolved into the structure that follows today.

The 24-26 students of both sections, set up at SMMA office in Cambridge, MA. Each student has 4 critique sessions of 30mins with pairs of critics. By the end of the day, each student has received valuable feedback from 8 to 10 different critics and has addressed questions covering all the layers of their design. All the reviews run in parallel, therefore we invite an average of 50 to 55 critics (to ensure pairs for each session).

From a pedagogical standpoint, this format helps the students learn how to present their work in a concise manner, synthesizing all those elements that shaped their decisions.

Round robin, Lausanne studio

Round robin, La Antigua studio

Round robin, The Hague studio

Round robin, The Hague studio

T. Mitchel presenting at Gallery Review

K. Matzco presenting at Gallery Review

M. Guzzio presenting at Gallery review

A. Daza presenting at Gallery review

Poster at SMMA

K. Cunningham presenting at Gallery review

Gathering at the end of the gallery review at Sasaki

Following the presentations, there is an open conversation among all the participants to discuss general observations, address particular questions and have more informal conversations between students and critics.

It is also important to note that the reviewers are from important offices around Boston and New England, and many are principals and senior associates tasked with hiring for their respective offices.

The review is an opportunity to showcase the work the students do and possibly generate important professional connections leading to internships and full employment. c-Final review The standard architecture reviews are relatively brief, 2030mins or so, with a group of architects arguing about different observations on the project.

In Integrated Project Design, this set up leaves the student with very little relevant feedback. For this reason, the reviews in this course are ‘Gallery Style’. This means that each student meets individually with one or two critics at a time, for a longer period of time. The critics are selected to cover the different areas of study, from the conceptual to the technical.

The reviewers come from a variety of disciplines and they include landscape architects, urban designers, technical architects, design architects, interior designers, structural engineers and envelope specialists.

Students and critics during final review

Held at RWU, this review follows a similar format to the gallery review but with more precise focus. In this review, the 24 students are divided into 2 groups of 12 (6 of each section of the course). Each student receives two sessions of 40-45 minutes with individuals or pairs of critics each time. One session focuses on general design matters, the other on technical matters.

The reviewers are given a series of guidelines of evaluation to ensure the students don’t omit information and to help the instructors gauge where the deficiencies might be and make corrections prior to the final submission of the work, typically 10 to 15 days following final review. In this format, the students go in much more depth into every layer of study.

Given the duration of each session, the conversation between student and critic helps the students further address any lingering questions they may still have and receive specialized feedback on different matters.

Final review of technical layers

Final review of technical layers

Final review

Final review

1. Dima Khairallah, principal SKP Consultants Beirut, Lebanon 2. Ruben Segovia, TEC Monterrey/Founder of LS-Lab, Monterrey, Mexico 3. Daniel Quesada, Architect Mexico City, Mexico 4. Andre Passos, architect E2A Architects, Zurich, Switzerland 5. Ivana Beijan, architect Gigon Guyer, Zurich, Switzerland 6. Roger Bechtigger, principal Bechtigger Architekten, St. Gallen, Switzerland 7. Adam Bresnick, architect Madrid, Spain 8. Jo Ruoff, Hs-Koblenz, Germany 9. Gilberto Rodriguez, principal GLR Arquitectos, Monterrey, Mexico 10. Nicolas Bares, principal BBBSA, La Plata, Argentina 11. Florencia Schnak, principal BBBSA, La Plata, Argentina 12. Federico Bares, BBBSA, La Plata, Argentina 13. Hernan Maldonado, principal KLM Arquitectos, Buenos Aires, Argentina 14. Max Rohm, architect, Buenos Aires, Argentina 15. Nicolas D’angelo, architect, Buenos Aires, Argentina 16. Martin Ibarlucia, architect, Buenos Aires, Argentina 17. Steve Brittan, Director of SACCI, Florence, Italy 18. Franco Ghilardi, principal Ghilardi Hellsten Architects, Oslo, Norway 19. Erik Stenman, principal Ghilardi Hellsten, Architects, Oslo, Norway 20. Jeff Brock, principal Moneo-Brock Arquitectos, Madrid, Spain 21. Hans Schwarz, principal Taller ACA, Guatemala City, Guatemala 22. Russell Stevens, architect, Roberts Limbrick LTD, Gloucester, UK 23. Jean Francois LeJeune, architect, Prof. University of Miami, FL 24. Franco Pisani, architect, Florence, Italy 25. Diana Giambiagi, architect AECOM, Buenos Aires, Argentina 26. Gabriela Bojalil, principal DAFdf architects, Mexico City, Mexico 27. Paul j. Van der Voort, principal DAFdf architects, Mexico City, Mexico 28. Robyn Reed, Landscape architect, LSU, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 29. Lucio Morini, principal Morini Arquitectos, Cordoba, Argentina.

30. Emiliano Lopez, principal, Lopez-Rivera Arquitectos, Barcelona, Spain 31. Emily Goldenberg, design director, MASS design, Kigali, Rwanda.

32. Christopher Hardy, MASS design, Kigali, Rwanda.

33. Roberto de Oliveira Castro, architect Fidelity Group Boston/ Lausanne 34. Daniel Bonilla, principal Bonilla Arquitectos, Bogota, Colombia 35. Marcio Kogan, principal Studio MK27, Sao Paulo, Brazil 36. Gabriel Kogan, architect Sao Paulo, Brazil 37. Fernando Brave, principal Brave Architects, Houston, Texas 38. Fernando Teruya, principal Fernando Teruya Architect, Dallas, Texas 39. Ian Scherling, Lansdcape architect, Sasaki Associates, Watertown, Massachusetts.

40. Igor Andersen, urbanist Lausanne, Switzerland 41. Nadine Gherez, architect Beirut, Lebanon.

42. Jerolim Mladinov, University of Oregon 43. Michael Kyes, principal SMMA, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

44. Cheryl Wolf, architect Perkins and Will, Boston, Massachusetts.

45. Russell Feldman, principal TBD Architects, Boston, Massachusetts.

46. Matthew Manke, senior associate Hacin and Associates, Boston, Massachusetts.

47. Chris Winkler, associate, Sasaki Associates, Watertown, Massachusetts.

48. Steve Lacker, senior associate, Sasaki Associates, Watertown, Massachusetts.

49. Lucila Rosso, senior associate, Sasaki Associates, Watertown, Massachusetts.

50. Mark Rukamathu, professor at BAC, Boston, Massachusetts.

51. Adam Mitchel, principal Cambridge Seven, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

52. Phillip Keil, principal Ruman Keil Architects, Austin, Texas 53. Erik Tellander, architect William Rawn Architects, Boston, Massachusetts.

54. Pablo Nistal, architect/urbanist Dumont-Jenks, Boston, Massachusetts 55. Mark Careaga, principal Mark Careaga Architects, Boston, Massachusetts.

56. Damon May, architect, Boston, Massachusetts.

57. Mick Kennedy, architect, Boston, Massachusetts.

58. David Martin, NBBJ, Boston, Massachusets.

59. Steve White, Dean, Roger Williams SAAHP, Bristol, Rhode Island The era of COVID brought new opportunities to reach out to critics all over the world. In the spring of 2020, a world wide gallery review was organized with 63 critics connecting from different continents.

The result was so fruitful that the format has remained in the semesters that followed.

d-Video presentations Throughout the semester, as the project is evolving, the students are asked to video-record themselves presenting the project and then evaluate their performance.

The presentations follow different lengths of time, 2, 5 and 10 minutes, meant to learn how to prioritize aspects of their projects.

The video is a useful tool once combined with a written critical assessment from the students. It has been an important tool in preparation for both the gallery and the final reviews.

In addition, by presenting many times, the concepts consolidate and the verbal communication becomes more precise.

Students learn how to speak in positive terms, with lyricism, about their projects, an almost essential requirement for future architects dealing with nonarchitect clients and consultants. e-Documentation: Written and graphic communication and technical skills are presented in two formats, mandatory for every student: a monograph of the project and a black and white formatted set of drawings.

Monograph: It is a document that explains all the ideas behind the project, from the early stages to the final version. The intention is for the students to create a compendium of their work that is self-explanatory.

It must clearly articulate all the ideas behind the decisions they have taken, the evaluation process to get to that decision and the final implementation of those decisions.

The monograph is constructed throughout the studio and it is used as a way of clarifying ideas. It combines written and graphic information.

In order to facilitate the focus, the students are given an Indesign template for the different assignments that they fill in. This way we can ensure a level of depth in the construction of the arguments. Each assignment will give them a foundation from which to construct the full conceptual framework.

During the moments of consolidation, the students have more flexibility to organize the different findings of the assignments into a cohesive document.

Video presentations, Malmo studio

Karita Lipdo Arc513 Sept 29 2018 Roberto Viola

Review on Assignment 3 Formal Design Presentation, Sept 28 Overview of Presentation Presenting my work for the first time came with several points to ruminate over. From the overall visual layout to the content on the pages and the verbal presentation all brought into my conscious awareness the state of my work currently. The visual layout of my presentation could be developed further to follow the book layout so that it is more coherent with the arc513 standard layout. The connections between my architecture concepts and the images created were lacking. When Images and text are laid on the page in the correct format, One is more clearly able to draw connections between schemes. The study on Lewerents and the pondering behind his use of neo-classical form is strong. It has the potential to be developed further, making the concept of the project stronger.

Presentation In presenting, I think it was clear that I had a lot of things to say all which were relevant to the construction of my work. However, the vocabulary and sequence of methodology were missing from my general presentation. I think it was clear that a lot of though had gone into the work, further development on the clarity of the scheme is necessary for progression of the project. The main concept my project is trying to depict stems majorly from the work or the architect Lewerentz. The main concept is has an ambition to bring life through sound and reverberation onto the site. ​The idea that sound (as Lewerentz uses light) can be used to honor the dead and yet brings peace to those living​. With sound, the project aspires to use harmony (the classical melody of sound) to bring healing to those who are grieving. Melody can in fact cause great cheer for all. I would like to explore the way Lewerentz uses light in his neoclassical architecture to create similar outcomes using sound.

My presentation failed to articulate the concept in a clear and concise manner. It focused a lot more on the process of findings that is in the process of leading to a concept. This has a potential of being remedied through the further design exploration.

Future Presentation I think I can further enhance my verbal presentation by producing more research to clarify details of my concept and what I hope to achieve with my architecture. I believe in the classical form of architecture and I would like to reflect that in my design as Lewerentz did on the Chapel of Resurrection. He uses a series of proportion, balance and rational to create his masterpiece. I hope to use contemporary understanding of architecture to modernise Lewerentz work as he did to fit the context he was designing for.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Video presentation, The Hague studio

Video presentation, La Antigua studio

Video presentation, Zurich studio

Black and white set: Formatted at 36inx48in is a set that documents the whole project. The drawings are organized following a typical organization used in practice. It is as follows: • A0’s series: General reference o Site plan o Relevant renderings o Code evaluation • A1’s series: Building plans • A2’s series Building elevations and sections • S0/S1’s series: Structural o Narrative o Structural plans o Structural axon • M0/M1’s series: Mechanical o Narrative o Mechanical Plans o Mechanical Axon o Integrated axon (mechanical + structure) • A3’s series: Building envelope o Composite assembly  Typical Wall section  Detailed plan (at wall section)  Detailed Elevation (at wall section) o 3d Axonometric assembly (partial).

Site model by C. Winkler

Rendering of final version by C. Winkler

Preliminary rendering of facade by D. Contelmo

Roger Williams University

2 A2-03

A

B

C

D

F

E

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

Q

232' - 5" 11' - 3"

4' - 11"

7' - 10"

16' - 2"

10' - 10"

21' - 0"

24' - 0"

24' - 0"

24' - 0"

15' - 10"

8' - 2"

6' - 9"

17' - 3"

9' - 6"

16' - 5"

14' - 6"

SAAHP ARCH 513.01 COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO FALL 2013

A2-02 1

General Notes

33' - 8 3/8"

17' - 8"

1

16' - 0"

2

0' - 1 3/16"

3

3' - 0" 2' x 2' Chimney

7' - 1"

4' - 0"

Electrical Equip.

Water Fountain

Reclaimed Wood Floors

Bath

5

010

Cooling Tower Sup. / Ret.

Stained Wood Fixed Seating

20" x 88" Exhaust 20" x 68" Main Supply

- 0"

5'

ø

20' - 0"

36' - 0"

8' - 11"

4 Stained Wood Fixed Seating

20" x 68" Main Return Reclaimed Wood Counter 72' - 0"

ø

5'

Cooling Tower Sup. / Ret.

0' - 0"

2' - 0"

ø

A2-01 2

20" x 54" Main Return

Main Nave

4' x 10' x 1' Polished Marble Resting Bed

001

ø

20" x 54" Main Supply

5'

- 0"

5'

6

- 0"

1 A2-03

- 0"

3' x 8' Fixed Aluminum Trim Window

36' - 0"

24" x 70" F.A. Intake DN

Bath 009 2

198' - 0"

7' - 4"

- 0"

7' - 1" 8"

Polished Concrete Finish Floor

Date

6"

25" x 45" Main Return

'24

'15

70" x 20" Main Return

1'-6" x 5'-2" Glass Screening

Description

5' ø

10

019

005

007

No.

Key Plan

10' - 11"

18' - 0"

8 9

015

Confessionals Sacristry Services

0' - 0 1/2"

006

011

Janitor's Closet

8' x 8' Stone Pavers

A2-02

Daycare

Bath

Water Fountain

- 10 "

0' - 0 1/2"

DW 37' - 10"

Bath 017

12

8' x 8' Stone Pavers

26" x 48" Main Supply

12" High Polished Marble Slab

Caretaker Mechanical

30" x 35" MainSupply

1 A2-04

Waiting Area

018

REF.

15' - 2"

008

8'

Caretakers Residence

014

8' - 7"

11 Guest Bed

003

13

Master Bath 016

Circulation

Master Bed

004

013

15

Vestibule

Skogskyrkogården Funerary Chapel

52.00 °

012 Stained Wood Fixed Seating

0' - 0"

2

002

A2-04

'20

Z

9"

36' - 5"

36' - 5"

The Woodland Cemetary Sockenvägen 492 122 33 Stockholm Sweden

Funerary Chapel

Designed By

'14

3"

'51

0"

Ground Plan

Y 16

1"

X

U

Date

Alex Schweitzer Roberto Viola Ochoa

Checked By

W

V

0701457 9/15/2013

Project Number

Drawn By

T

A2-01

A1-02

N Ground Plan 1/8" = 1'-0" 0'

4'

8'

16'

11/20/2014 6:37:44 AM

'16

1

1/8" = 1'-0"

Scale

Formatted black and white set by A. Schweitzer Roger Williams University A

B

C

D

E

F

G

5' x 22' Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

SAAHP ARCH 513.01 COMPREHENSIVE STUDIO FALL 2013

Q

5' - 11"

Three Coat White Stucco Smooth Finish

5' x 10'-6" Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

Level 6 60' - 11 3/32"

General Notes

Level 5 55' - 0"

20' - 0"

6' X 7' Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylights Tower Tech TTXL Cooling Towers

6' x 7' Aluminum Trim Skylight

Level 4 35' - 0"

/ 1'-0"

5/8" / 1'-0"

1/2" / 1'-0"

1/2" / 1'-0"

1/2" / 1'-0"

1/4" / 1'-0"

10' - 0"

2 3/4"

28" x 38" Aluminum Trim Skylight w/ Vent

1/4" / 1'-0"

Level 3 25' - 0" 10' - 0"

Vertical Reclaimed Wood Boards Horizontal Reclaimed Wood Boards

17" x 20" Return Branh

001

Stained Wood Fixed Seating

24" x 12" 12" x 12" Return Supply Branch Branch

Polished Concrete Finished Floor

Daycare

15' - 0"

Main Nave

Stained Wood Fixed Seating

Framing Plan 15' - 0"

3' x 8' Fixed Aluminum Trim Window

34" x 20" Supply Branch

006

Bath 009

34" x 18" Main Fresh Air

Level -1 -5' - 0"

Level -2 -13' - 0"

4' - 0"

020

Level 1 0' - 0"

5' - 0"

FW-9 Crown Boilers

8' - 0"

Mechanical Basement

54" x 20" Main Return

42" x 10" Main Fresh Air

Vision 040 Modular Air Handler

Level -3 -17' - 0"

Section 1 1/8" = 1'-0" 0'

4'

8'

16'

No. 16

15

13

12

11

10

9

8

6

5

4

3

2

Description

Date

1

Key Plan

5' - 11"

5' x 22' Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

Level 5 55' - 0"

6' x 6' Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

3 1/2"

20' - 0"

Stucco Wrapped Parapet

" / 1'-0

Level 4 35' - 0" 10' - 0"

One Coat White Stucco Smooth Finish 1'-0"

Level 3 25' - 0" 18" x 12" Return Branch 12" x 12" Supply Branch

Funerary Chapel Stained Wood Fixed Seating

12" x 12" Supply Branch

22" x 12" Return Branch

Conf.

002

024

Stained Wood Fixed Seating

The Woodland Cemetary Sockenvägen 492 122 33 Stockholm Sweden

Framing Plan 15' - 0"

6' - 0"

Concrete Paving

Designed By

1'-6" x 7'-2" Glass Screening

70" x 32" Main Supply

Skogskyrkogården Funerary Chapel

Polished Concrete Retaining Wall

10" x 12" Supply Branch

Main Nave 001

Circulation 004

Roof Drainage

10" x 12" Supply Branch

25' - 0"

18" x 12" Supply Branch

18" x 12" Supply Branch

Mechanical Basement

68" x 20" Main Supply

Level 1 0' - 0"

Sheet Name

Level -2 -13' - 0"

Project Number

Level -3 -17' - 0"

Date

Sections

020

Drawn By Checked By

2

Section 2 1/8" = 1'-0" 0'

4'

Alex Schweitzer

8'

16'

0701457 9/15/2013 Alex Schweitzer Roberto Viola Ochoa

A2-03 Scale

11/20/2014 6:39:02 AM

1 7/8" /

Level 6 60' - 11 3/32"

5' x 10'-6" Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

6' X 7'Sloped Aluminum Trim Skylight

13' - 0"

1

4' - 0"

1

Alex Schweitzer

Sheet Name

4' x 10' x 1' Polished Marble Resting Bed

1/8" = 1'-0"

Formatted black and white set by A. Schweitzer

Typical spread of project monograph by C. Winkler

Typical spread of project monograph by C. Winkler

Typical spread of project monograph by D. Sadowniczyk

Typical spread of project monograph by D. Sadowniczyk