Mediated Representations

MEDIATED REPRESENTATIONS SAMANTHA LEEPER

1

PROJECT ABSTRACT Gothic and Parametric Architecture each flourished at drastically different periods of time with drastically different means of technology. However, when explored together, there is a clear compatibility between these two types of design.

Both styles are centered around detail, pattern, and shape. Intricacy is something both Gothic and Parametric do very well.

Originating in the Middle Ages of Europe, Gothic architecture is lavish in detail and shape. The buildings are innately heavy on the bottom with ceilings, domes, and pointed arches reaching its weight up to the sky.

Parametric Architecture derives from ‘algorithmic processes’ usually consisting of repeating shape to make truly magnificent textures and patterns. Current technology allows parametric architecture to soar both structurally and visually.

The two do indeed differ in many ways. Parametric is a much more uniformly designed style due to the algorithmic design process. Gothic Architecture is asymmetrical and very diverse throughout the entire structure detail-wise. Gothic designs had to have been meticulously planned and carved out considering the lack of technology available at the time.

I set out to combine Parametric’s extraordinary use of pattern with the variety and commitment to detail in Gothic Architecture.

The project goal was to design a new space combining ideas from two different architecture styles, two different precedent plans and two different precedent sections.

After creating a final plan and section inspired by our precedents, we were challenged to create a transformative drawing that offered multiple different possibilities for the imagined space.

This iterative process continued onto 3D modeling where we created different spaces, honing in on one to eventually arrive at a finalized building design.

Iteration, iteration, iteration is the catalyst to every step in this project. There is always a new angle to look at something, always another element to push, always another creation waiting to be discovered.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS PROJECT ABSTRACT

2

PART 1 - Experimenting in Plan Drawing Space

4

PART 2 - Experimenting in Section Drawing Space

10

PART 3 - 3D Experimentation and Fabrication

14

PART 4 - Site Hybrids, Synthesis and Program Proposal

20

REFLECTION

35

3

PART 1 Toledo Cathedral Master Martin Pretrus Petri designed this cathedral combining both Gothic and Mudéjar, an Arab style of architecture.

Construction of the Toledo Cathedral took more than 250 years, containing 5 naves, 88 columns and endless ornate details.

4

PRECEDENT PLANS

Louvre Abu Dhabi

Built by Jean Nouvel, Louvre Abu Dhabi is a museum made up of 55 different buildings all housed under one overarching dome.

The shallow dome consists of a layered star pattern allowing light to stream into the space below.

It’s placed on an island with water divvying up the space, enhancing the ‘neighborhood’ feel.

The Parametric elements show their full beauty when the sun shines through the dome and reflects off the water, creating a starry night pattern throughout the area.

5

1x1 PLANS The two precedents are similar in that there’s a plethora of separate spaces in what would technically be considered one ‘building.’

5Initial design was very abstract

3Drew from elements like shape, line, connection, and began applying them to create walkable/buildable structures6

Loved the balance between division and connection in both buildings, and wanted to carry this idea into my plans.

Utilized many physical traits of Gothic like flying buttresses, domes, arches as well as aiming to keep a consistent use of pattern texture in the walls similar to Parametric.

I wanted to experiment with the wall designs of both precedents.

Toledo Cathedral contains various geometric shapes jutting in and out of its thick walls while Louvre Abu Dhabi has thin, straight lined walls creating a much sleeker geometric look.

Looking at the Louvre Abu Dhabi plan, I was drawn by the various buildings that were tilted ever so slightly to break up the xy axis the rest of the buildings adhere to.

6

2x2 PLAN

The clean lines of the walls made the configuration of the separate buildings so interesting to look at, and yet still cohesive in spite of the space between them. Still, I couldn’t stop imagining how magnificent the interior of the cathedral would be to experience, with so many angles, shadows, little crevices, secret rooms even.

Wanting to combine both elements, the final plan has straight exterior walls, while including the intricate shapes of the cathedral walls on the interior.

The final plan contains partitioned spaces all connected by a circular arched pathway.

This pathway holds many openings balancing out the thick unmoving walls that separate each building portion.

This allows for easy movement while still maintaining that separation and abundance of smaller spaces in one building.

The inner circle is designed as a courtyard with many entrance and exit points to bring that ‘neighborhood’ into one communal space.

7

TRANSFORMTIVE 2x2

8

For the transformative piece, I first took away the outward facing walls of the plan as a base layer.

I then layered the complete final plan directly on top, cutting out the paper or “space” within the walls of the floor plan.

The continuous circular path allowed me to spin the top layer over the base layer and create an infinite amount of transformations for the plan while still maintaining entrance and exit points for every newly created space.

9

PART 2

Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore The church was designed by Arnolfo di Cambio, but left unfinished.

Filippo Brunelleschi built the dome without any supporting structure--a significant innovation at the time.

5Brunelleschi’s creation consists of an internal dome and a thinner external dome with ribbing in between placed in a herringbone pattern to hold the two together.

Louvre Abu Dhabi 10

PRECEDENT SECTIONS

1x1 SECTIONS

5Designing in section allowed me to explore arches in the traditional gothic sense but also in the sense of shape as I used it for the supporting structure in the section above .

The division of space with a common connection remained a central idea when moving onto section design.

6The floors create division, offering access to a new space with each flight climbed.

Section was more challenging than plan design in my mind. Structures had to be thought out more deeply, and it’s much harder to understand a building’s layout from only a section.

11

TRANSFORMTIVE 2x2

12

This is a two part transformation where the arched halls are folded left or right to reveal stacked square buildings, resembling those in the Louvre Abu Dhabi.

A vertical strip of paper is attached to an arch on each floor, so when brought to the front, the halls become supporting arches for the buildings above.

The section changes from a traditional Gothic looking building into more of a hybrid style moving the weight up off the ground rather than on the bottom.

13

PART 3

14

INITIAL MODELS

This project is my first experience using rhino to model.

I first extruded my drawings to get a better three-dimensional sense of their layouts, then began to explore other ways of enhancing the space.

15

16

INITIAL RENDERINGS

I developed the models further adding domes, stairs, balconies, using comands like twisting, revolving, trimming, etc.

5After speaking with my professor, I chose to hone in on the plan inspired model. We found that what had been added was diverting from the beauty of the original plan more than accentuating it. So it was time to go back to the drawing board, and continue iterating.

17

18

REVISED MODEL

The roof design highlights the intricacy of gothic walls while creating a parametric type pattern.

I created a second floor while keeping the center space open allowing air, light, and space to flow throughout. I went back and forth between stain glass or clear glass for the walls.

I wanted weight at the base of the building but also hoped to avoid the building feeling too flat from the outside.

Now that the second floor was added, the model needed stairs.

19

PART 4 FLOOR 1

1/8”=1’ 0”

20

FINAL PLANS FLOOR 2

1/16th=1’ 0”

Rather than all building walls being made of glass, the walls on the first floor wound up being removed completely, surrounded instead by stairs mimicking the original plan’s asymmetry.

The top floor keeps its thick indented walls, while the bottom expands out under the shelter of the stairs offering a more fluid space for coming and going.

Considering the layout, I designed the building to be a market where food vendors can set up shop with plenty of space below the stairs, and visitors can eat their food with plenty of options for seating.

21

FINAL SECTION

22

The slight gaps between the roof layers allow the sun to stream into the building, flooding it with streaks of natural light much like the Louvre Abu Dhabi.

After getting food, visitors can sit on the ground floor, sheltered by the floor above, on the vast stairs soaking up the sunshine, or of course on the second level where there are a plethora of tables and chairs. Additionally, all those little crevices in the walls allow people to house their belongings far from the danger of getting stepped on, but close enough to still keep an eye on.

23

SITE

The building is set to be in the Grand Canyon offering a lunch spot for tourists during their travels. The spot is reached by a ramp stretching across a valley offering some truly breathtaking views of the surrounding environment.

24

25

26

FLOOR 1

27

28

FLOOR 2

FINAL MODEL

natural light

29

30

seating everywhere someting about how its more accesiblethan earlier plans

31

PHYSICAL MODEL

32

33

34

REFLECTION I really enjoyed the freedom of this project. It was truly amazing to look back on what we started with leading to what we ended with. It was also so interesting designing a plan and section without knowing exactly what the building would look like from another view.

I’m not sure if architects ever design like this, but I thought it was a really cool way to approach designing something. I think not having a perfect picture of the complete building gave way to lots of possibilities and creative ideas.

One of my strengths during this project was my ability to take the big ideas from the original precedents and make something new from it. I’m not one to be redundant, and so I had a lot of fun seeing someone’s ideas and then putting my own personal original spin on it. I loved that method of creating, because it narrowed my focus just enough to give me direction, then allowed me to create something I never could’ve imagined before. Another thing I think I did quite well was imagining the space I was designing, and putting myself in the shoes of the people experiencing it, to consider the pros and cons of certain choices.

One weakness I became quite aware of is my resistance to change. Although the design progressed quite a lot from its original form, every time I ran into something I needed to change I hit something of a wall. A lot of work goes into making even the tiniest of tweaks to a design, especially when using a brand new tool like Rhino, but it can have enormously positive impacts on the final product and on your learning. I’m very happy with how many changes I made to the original idea even if it may have taken some encouragement from my professor.

As for changes I made after the review: • Corrected mistakes on my final plan drawing--missing stairs, missing poche, and changing lineweights.

• Added more people into my section displaying its use more, added line weight, and the formation of light as it would shine into the real space.

• Edited my interior renderings in response to feedback during my review that they printed too dark to see clearly.

• Redid my site’s texture after receiving feedback that it ‘wasn’t beautiful’, and I think it looks much more realistic now.

• Edited my tranformation plans/sections to present better • Set out to 3D print the top of what’s missing in the physical model. You will notice that the physical model’s roof doesn’t come to a point as the renderings show. I lasercut the pieces of the model horizontally, gluing each layer onto the next which accounted for over 100 layers. Because I scaled down the roof outline each layer, the pieces of the roof get very very tiny towards the top. I lasercut the entire model, and at a certain point the lines became so small the laser cutter burned them up. As I said, after the review I set out to 3D print the missing portion. I went through certification, got filament, and split up the portions of the roof to print in Rhino to put into the 3D slicer program, and even made a plan to print them at an angle so supports could be applied easier. I showed up to print on Sunday, showed the consultant in the makerspace my stl file, and was informed that the pieces were too fine and intricate even for the 3D printer. This was disappointing, but I think the model does succeed in showing the precise detail I wanted if not the perfect roof formation.

Overall, it was a really special project and changed my approach to design completely. issuu precedents: Ranjeet Das | School of planning and Architecture Delhi | Architecture Portfolio | MIT Architecture Urban Design & HKU Landscape Architecture Portfolio Spring 2022 | Bryan Bvyn Wong

35