Next Generation Design by Scale Rule

NEXT GENERATION DESIGN A COMMUNITY AND EDUCATION PROJECT TO DESIGN AND BUILD A PAVILION

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Scale Rule strives to broaden access to the built environment professions with clever, fun projects designed for school students.â&#x20AC;?

TODAY’S STUDENTS ARE THE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS OF TOMORROW – THEY ARE THE NEXT GENERATION OF DESIGN. THE NEXT GENERATION DESIGN PROJECT FOCUSED ON GCSE STUDENTS STILL IN THE PROCESS OF CHOOSING THEIR A-LEVEL SUBJECTS AND THEIR POTENTIAL CAREER PATH. OVER THE FIRST WEEKEND OF THE SPRING HALF TERM 2017 WE RAN A TWODAY WORKSHOP FOCUSED ON EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING OF THE DESIGN PROCESS FOR A PAVILION.

CONTENTS

FOREWORD

Tempting Talent

PART 1_INTRODUCTION

Learning Design 12 Brief 14 Concept 16 Design Proposals 19 PART 2_DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

Prototyping

PART 3_FABRICATION

PAVILION, CREDITS AND SPONSORS

Foreword TEMPTING TALENT Well, I was impressed. And I was having a good time. There we were, we judges, summoned to the otherwise empty Grimshaw offices on a Sunday to meet some kids who’d been designing – what, exactly? A pavilion of some kind, in a place I knew – the gardens of St. James’s Church behind Clerkenwell Green. I’d been told that the groups of GCSE school students had been working on their projects over the weekend, making drawings and models, mentored by architects and structural engineers from the Next Generation Design project, run by Scale Rule. AKT II and Grimshaw are top design firms and it is a high level of mentoring but still – what could they achieve, in that time, from a standing start? Then the presentations began, in a congenially lively atmosphere, and project after project came forth. Some of the groups were better at presenting than others, some were remarkably polished, some a bit embarrassed in front of their peers, there were even fits of giggles but all had clearly thought through the problem they had been set, sorted themselves into teams of complementary skills, and applied some very fresh thinking . And as someone who has sat through a lot of presentations from adult architecture students and very experienced designers of all kinds – especially architects – I can say that this was a whole lot more fun, and had an often higher level of original thought, than many of those. And they stuck to the timings, pretty much. Remembering it now, it’s close to extraordinary that the rudiments of professions that normally require years of training can – with judicious guidance – be picked up by bright youngsters in a few hours. It is even more encouraging that the winning design – which was one of the most ambitious we saw, by a group of three girls from schools in Newham – is perfectly capable of being built. The concept of a building that is also a bridge and a sculptural element in this ancient corner of old London proved strong

enough for the professionals to take over and – with an eye on the regulations that govern such things – make. This is fascinating because – unlike many an “ideas competition” – this is rooted in the real world. As an exercise for the students involved that makes the whole thing that much more compelling. They did not have to do this but they did because it interested them as a challenge. It was especially good to see the interaction between the various members of the teams, and the reaction from the other teams – good natured rivals, who cheered each other on. Design in the built environment is supremely important for all of us. It’s easy to get downcast about the pressures designers face. But after that day rich in ideas, enthusiasm and humour, I was energised. There is a lot of talent there. If some of that talent is tempted into the professions as a result of this initiative, then the futures of all of us are just that little bit brighter. Forward!

Hugh Pearman | Editor RIBA Journal | ribaj.com

SECTION

1 INTRODUCTION

Introduction NEXT GENERATION DESIGN

WHO ARE SCALE RULE?

Next Generation Design is a series of student workshops to teach the principles of engineering and architecture through the design process, aimed at GCSE students still in the process of choosing their A-level subjects and a potential career path. The brief: to design a pavilion of social interaction to engage the weekday working community of Clerkenwell and the local residents alike. Starting with seminars, conceptual design, drawing, model making and presentations, each team completed the workshops by producing a final concept design and presenting their thoughts to a panel of industry, academia and media judges. Following the workshops in February, the selected concept design was developed, fabricated and assembled for construction for the end of May – launching for Clerkenwell Design Week 2017 and staying in place for the summer.

Scale Rule are engineers, architects and designers who like teaching, designing, building and learning. We are a collective that seek to promote diversity and public engagement in our built environment by encouraging better representation in the industry, and community participation on new projects. We engage people from all works of life in the design process, and provide opportunities for professionals to be better informed about the people for which they design. We do all this with the fantastic support from volunteers, who help us teach, design and build each project.

For something so influential on our everyday experiences, our built environment is designed by only a small subset of society, and with limited engagement from the rest of it. In the 1760s James Otis proclaimed “Taxation without representation is tyranny”. In the 2010s we proclaim that “A built environment without representation is tyranny”. Or if not tyrannical, then counterproductive: we believe a diverse design industry will make for better balanced spaces, structures and societies. Next Generation Design is not about technology or ground breaking innovations; it is about young people. Today’s students are tomorrow’s architects and engineers, the Next Generation of Designers. Do we want the next generation of designers to be the same as this generation – drawn from a small self-selecting predominantly white, male and middle-class group? To broaden the next generation of designers, we engage with groups who are not traditionally drawn in to architecture and engineering. The best way for them to learn is to do. Scale Rule allow people to explore the design process through small accessible projects.

PA RT 1

While we’re teaching, we’re still learning. The projects we engage in allow us to adopt different roles in the design and construction process than those that we usually hold; transforming engineers and architects into teachers, project managers, general contractors or joiners. Through these experiences we gain further insight into the holistic design process which is not readily available in a more traditional design team structure. PARTICIPATING SCHOOLS: Lister Community School City Academy Hackney Lilian Baylis Technology School Hornsey School for Girls Clapton Girls’ Academy Central Foundation Boys School Haggerston School

Participating school locations

INTRODUCTION

Learning Design PAVILION DESIGN WORKSHOPS The Next Generation Design Workshops were held over two days at AKT II’s offices in Clerkenwell. Seminars on architecture, engineering, drawing and construction aimed to provide the students with an insight into the day-to-day of the various professions along with a ‘crash course’ in each topic. Due to the previous year’s success, a similar format was maintained where seminars were interspersed with group workshop time. Hearing and learning about how to draw plans and sections was immediately followed by application during the pavilion design sessions with the invaluable help of volunteer mentors on hand to guide each student in producing a concept design. A series of lectures were given including: OUR FAVOURITE STRUCTURES WHAT IS ARCHITECTURE? HOW TO BE SUSTAINABLE WHAT IS ENGINEERING THE BASICS OF CONSTRUCTION LEARNING HOW TO DRAW AND PRESENT IDEAS

All the seminar presentations are available at scalerule.org to allow others to host similar workshops. SITE VISIT The students worked in teams of 2-6 to develop the design of a pavilion for a site in St. James’s Church garden, Clerkenwell. Following a visit to the site, where they studied the various architectural constraints the students developed their designs through concept sketches and 3D models accompanied by plans, sections and construction details explaining how to build it.

PA RT 1

Philip Buckingham teaching ‘presentation drawing’

Ed Durie and Jonny Hawkshaw teaching the basics of construction

Students visiting the site to understand scale and the area

Richard Winter reviewing architecture

LEARNING DESIGN

Brief (for the students) WHAT

HOW

Your task is to design a pavilion which will be located in an area outside St James’ Church, Clerkenwell. The pavilion should provide seating for the public and some form of shelter from the elements.

After a design has been chosen the project will be developed, engineered and actually get built! This means really thinking about what it is made of, how it will be made, and then how it will be assembled.

• • • • •

It is to cover an area of 30 m2 It should be no taller than 4 m It will be in its location for up to 6 months You should provide some form of seating for the public to use It should be accessible and available to all including the disabled

WHY The pavilion’s concept should be to form a focal point for social interaction. Think carefully about how it will achieve this. Does a certain activity take place within it? Does its shape or form make people respond in a certain way? • How will the pavilion encourage this interaction? This is for you to decide! • What is the ‘idea’ or reason behind the pavilion? • Who is it designed for and why will people want to visit it? WHERE The area where the pavilion will be located is shown on the site plan. After analysing the site, you will need to work out where you want the pavilion to sit and how it will fit in, both within the park area and its wider context. • How is the pavilion informed by its surroundings? • Where do people tend to like to sit? Think about which areas are naturally busy or quiet • Does the pavilion relate to any particular aspects of the churchyard? • Think about the ground conditions and any structural support required • Analyse any environmental influences – the sun, wind, trees (remember the area will be leafier and greener when it’s built in May!) 14

PA RT 1

• What possible materials could you use to build the pavilion? Perhaps there are multiple materials? • Could it be made of sheet material, strips, planks or perhaps utilise some ‘found’ materials? • Is it made of small or large parts? Think of how a brick is a hand-sized building unit • Are the individual units identical or all different? Some questions to ask yourself to get you thinking... • How big is 30 m2 in reality? Is the pavilion a single structure or more than one? • Does the pavilion stimulate any of the senses, such as smell, touch or hearing? • Does the structure affect the quality of light around the pavilion? • What is the form of the pavilion? Is it jagged and orthogonal? Smooth and organic? • Think of which colours or finishes the pavilion has – or are the materials left exposed? • Does the pavilion change over time? • Consider any sustainability features you may want to include • Can the pavilion or its materials be reused when it’s dismantled? • Maybe there are a variety of spaces you want to create with different qualities

SEKFORDE STREET

E AC PL

LE R KE N W EL L

G R EE N

DS AR YW HA

Red dotted line shows the site next to St James’s Church

Padlocks on bridges propagating like barnacles

Shropshire’s Iron Bridge art installation, 2015

BRIEF

Concept CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT Each group tabled three concepts at the end of the first day, no mean feat for a few hours’ work! This forced the students to brainstorm rapidly and get ideas on paper no matter how wild they seemed. Each team’s favoured design was taken forward for refinement and presentation on the second day. The deliverable for the second day included plans, sections, elevation and perspective drawings of the proposed design, a model built to scale and a presentation by the team. In addition to presenting their proposed concept the teams had to specifically address how their design met a number of criteria outlined in the brief, including constructibility, sustainability, inclusive design, accessibility and social interaction. It was often noted that the students completed in a weekend a semester’s worth of an architectural or engineering university project! TEAM DELIVERABLES – Plan, section and elevation drawings – Perspective sketches – 1:20 Model – Basic construction ideas – Oral presentation

PA RT 1

CONCEPT

MODEL MAKING Constructing small maquettes is an important part of both the learning and presentation processes. Through attempting to realise a design in three dimensions, the way spaces interact and structures work becomes much more tangible. They are also valuable tools in conveying a concept design intuitively in a short space of time.

PA RT 1

A scale model also helps highlight where more structure might be required â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the magic of hot glue can only do so much...

Design Proposals

TEAM NORTH LIMITED Concept A magic carpet hung between the trees framing a communal bench for collaborative work and lunch breaks. Materials Reclaimed drinks bottles, food dye, timber, rope

DESIGN PROPOSALS

TEAM THREE Concept An interactive sensorial adventure in three parts, inspired by the late David Bowie’s ‘Sound and Vision’ Materials Found objects, timber

PA RT 1

TEAM MEY Concept An auditorium which invites movement and chance meetings, with walls that let you leave your mark. Materials Timber, chalk boards, recycled sweet wrappers

DESIGN PROPOSALS

TEAM NOAHâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S ARCHITECTS Concept The remains of a boat hull stranded in the centre of Clerkenwell forming three separate pods. Materials Red-stained plywood

PA RT 1

TEAM EMPHASIS Concept A place to come, collect your thoughts, and make a wish â&#x20AC;&#x201C; tying on a ribbon as a reminder. Materials Timber, acrylic, sweet wrappers, fabric

DESIGN PROPOSALS

TEAM BALANCE Concept Two walls coming together to form a dome with an oculus at the top, and a plastic bag storage library infilling the walls. Materials Timber, pipes, plastic bags

PA RT 1

TEAM CONNECT Concept A looping promenade that rises and falls, creating impromptu encounters around semi-concealed corners. The structure morphs over time, with splashes of colour added through ribbons tied by each visitor. Materials Timber, fabric

DESIGN PROPOSALS

PRESENTATIONS Each group had 5 minutes in front of their peers at Grimshaw’s offices to present to a Judging panel, their weekends’ design output, and respond to questions.

PA RT 1

DESIGN PROPOSALS

JURY COMMENTS The finale of this year’s workshops saw our seven teams of students presenting their design ideas to a panel of professionals from industry and academia. From dome structures bringing people into a central space, to amphitheatres and colourful tree hung canopies illuminating games spaces below, this year’s pavilion designs displayed a high level of spatial understanding and creativity. Freed from the knowledge of project constraints that experience provides, the students’ designs exhibited creation and ingenuity.

PA RT 1

Listening to the presentations were a fantastic panel of judges from across our built environment industries: Hugh Pearman – Editor, RIBA Journal Caroline Cole – Founder, Colander Associates Sarah Fray – Senior Teaching Fellow, UCL David Knight – Senior Engineer, COWI

“ The conceptual thinking behind WINNING DESIGN The selected design from Lister Community School was an infinity bridge which sought to promote social interaction through people being able to write messages on ribbons and tying them to the pavilion. It was chosen due to its ability to create a scintillating and changing pavilion which could be walked over, under, sat on or performed in. The judges were particularly enamoured with the quality of the team’s engaging presentation to a room of their peers, practicing architects, and engineers.

each proposal was surprisingly sophisticated, addressing the brief with clarity and imagination. Intriguingly, the quality of the presentations by the students would have put many professionals to shame.”

Caroline Cole, Colander Associates

DESIGN PROPOSALS

PA RT 1

2 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

An asymmetrical weighting of the pavilion's S-curve plan allows for a seating area which opens up to the site.

Original â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;infinityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; form (left) 32

PA RT 2

Design Development FORM EVOLUTION AND SITE ARRANGEMENT

Orientation against site boundary

More purposeful site orientation

Views from pavilion

Movement through pavilion

Movement through site

Visual links to church / back towards pavilion

Based on the chosen concept of a looping ‘infinity’ form, the pavilion design was developed with a standard width of 1.2 m throughout, allowing a a bridging element which allows movement through the site along with the incorporation of a seating area, resulting in an asymmetrical arrangement. Working with this basic plan arrangement the pavilion was oriented on the site intentionally to form a ‘gateway’ to the rest of the park, allowing movement both through and around whilst creating a relationship with St. James’ Church.

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

FORM DEVELOPMENT AND COMPUTER SIMULATION Working with a fixed plan form, a series of different design strategies were tested and explored in which to realise the pavilion. This looked at multiple material strategies and approaches, aiming to minimise construction time and maximise pre-assembled components.

Study into framed stair construction

Studies into constructing the pavilion from stacked sheets of plywood

Evaluating the feasibility of building on top of wooden pallets! 34

PA RT 2

Study into four-way vertical jointing construction

Testing variations within stair sizes and angles

Using only horizontal plywood sheets used a large amount of material

Timber frame and metal scaffolding were evaluated as possibilities

Rotated and hollowed ply sheet study DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT FACTORS

MODULAR CONSTRUCTION

In developing the design for fabrication, two factors were prioritised: the use of a readily available material and a simple construction methodology to enable unskilled labour to construct the pavilion. Consequently a disproportionately large amount of uniformly dimensioned timber is specified in the design. To allow for future flexibility and reuse the primary fixings are bolted. This will allow the structure to be partially disassembled for reassembly on another site at the end of the summer, or for total disassembly and potential reuse of the pavilion’s constituent timber parts.

The pavilion is modular in its construction, comprising three key different assemblies. A small and a large helical stair are connected with a viewing platform; all treads within each stair are identical and rotationally symmetrical with the only varying element being the length of vertical timber members.

The structural system is a series of bolted H-frames, each formed of 6”x2” timbers connected together through timber blocking, plywood treads and handrails.

Construction Sequence showing H-Frame unit and CNC-cut ply tread forming a single modular element

PA RT 2

Plan showing repetitive and modular nature of the pavilionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s construction, made up of two helical stairs, a connecting deck and a seating area nestled within the larger stair.

Helical step unit Bridge deck Seating area

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

CONNECTION DETAILS To ensure the curved geometry is set out correctly, the accuratelycut CNC plywood treads are notched so as to receive the supporting timber H-frames and thus set the pavilion out accurately

Plan diagram showing typical stair tread and relationship with vertical timber members

PA RT 2

Adjacent interlocking step component

Handrail comprised of 6 mm plywood strips, fixed back to alternate vertical elements

12 mm plywood tread with notched edges to receive H-frames

Anti-slip nosing H-frame vertical and horizontal elements, 50 mm x 150 mm sawn timber

4 no. bolted connections at each joint

H-frame vertical and horizontal elements, 50 mm x 150 mm sawn timber Dovetailed interlocking base plates

Notional centrepoint of helical stair

Step assembly drawing showing interlocking modular step component and adjacent steps with setting out point of helical stair. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

PA RT 2

ISOMETRIC OVERVIEW In addition to the tiered seating area within the larger helical stair, the framed structure also allows for the subtle inclusion of two seats underneath the viewing platform for a different perspective.

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION

SEATING AREA Designed as an ‘insert’ within the larger stair of the pavilion, the seating area faces and relates to St. james’ Church whilst being derived from the pavilion’s radial geometry. It is constructed of a simple plywood waffle structure, reinforced with offcuts of the standardised timber elements and covered in 12 mm plywood.

Plywood seating

50 mm x 150 mm standardised timber cross members

12 mm plywood waffle support structure

Plywood risers

DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

SOCIAL INTERACTION Inspired by Japanese prayer flags, ribbons formed a key concept to the chosen pavilion design and are integral to answering the brief regarding the encouragement of social interaction. The idea of the public being able to attach ribbons with their own messages written on allows the pavilion to change over time, growing over the course of the installation and reflecting its visitors wishes, wants and ideas.

PA RT 2

Prototyping 1:1 STEP MOCK UP After developing the pavilionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s H-frame construction system, a fullscale mock up of one of the modular step units was constructed. This aided the design process through testing material availability, ease of construction, as well as the disassembly process. Materials were ordered from a local Jewson and delivered within the hour. After measuring and cutting the materials by hand the step component was assembled in a total of a couple of hours then disassembled in 15 minutes. Materials were stored to be reborn as raised planting beds! When working with a unique and unusual design, there is considerable value in full-scale 1:1 testing. The physical act of making allows the design to be tested as it will be in reality, flagging up constructibility issues with materials, fixings and general construction logistics. Lessons learned can then be fed back into the final construction and assembly process.

The completed step assembly and physical testing PROTOT YPING

PA RT 2

Illustration by Philip Buckingham

SECTION

Part-assembled stair, using spiral stair treads to align vertical elements

Process with laser cut plywood sheets to build the model

A numbering system was developed to identify every component individually

PA RT 2

During model making parts were handily unrolled and neatly left in the correct order

MODEL MAKING Alongside drawing and sketching, model making is an integral part of the design process. The complexity of the design was interrogated and refined through the model making process. Initially a test model was made, building a number of stair units to evaluate the construction principles and their modular nature. For example, the model making process flagged up the simple yet vital issue of component numbering! The act of organising the multiple unique lengths of vertical elements proved tricky, leading to a bespoke numbering and labelling system for all pavilion components. Finally a 1:20 model was produced from the working drawings and cutting list to test for any errors or sequencing issues within the final design information. The preparation of laser cutting files informed the manufacturing process, allowing for CNC-cut plywood to be efficiently nested on sheets to minimise material wastage.

Initial model making allowed for an understanding of the modular step units and how they interconnect

PROTOT YPING

PA RT 2

PROTOT YPING

Final 1:20 pavilion model, built from 3â&#x20AC;&#x2030;mm plywood sheets 52 PA RT 1

SECTION

PA RT 1

3 FABRICATION

Fabrication MAXIMISING EFFICIENCY + MINIMISING WASTE The pavilion is formed of two primary assemblies prepared for fabrication from a shared parametric computer model. The toothed plywood steps and jigs were CNC cut from a nested cutting pattern and delivered to site ready for assembly. This machine fabrication transferred much of the skilled labour in production away from the unskilled construction team. The variable height H-frames however needed to be cut manually from the provided stock timber lengths. This required a cutting list for 219 individual lengths to be prepared, with a tagging system identifying each cut piece's location within the structure, and where it was to be bolted to other cut elements. Over 1â&#x20AC;&#x2030;km of wood was measured, remeasured, tagged, sawn and drilled, producing less than 5â&#x20AC;&#x2030;% wastage.

PA RT 3

FA B R I C AT I O N

FABRICATION – CNC CUTTING LIST CNC-cuting list showing total of thirty two 12 mm and six 6 mm plywood sheets to be cut, all from 1220 mm x 2440 mm sheets

12 mm plywood stair treads and leftovers to be used as jigs for setout during construction

PA RT 3

12 mm plywood components for seating area

Interlocking 12 mm plywood soleplates to be levelled on site and act as a base

6 mm bendable plywood strips for handrail construction FA B R I C AT I O N

PA RT 3

FA B R I C AT I O N

3D Image by Philip Buckingham 62 PA RT 1

SECTION

#NextGenDesignPavilion in numbers

1.022â&#x20AC;&#x2030;km length of timber used 512 hours of labour constructing 631 timber cuts 120 square metres of plywood 1,352 bolts used 154 hot drinks consumed during construction 2,704 holes drilled 64

Pavilion DESIGN Students Philip Isaac Richard Winter Laura Hannigan Dan Bergsagel Sinead Conneely Steve Kennedy Annabel Koeck

JUDGES Caroline Cole Hugh Pearman Sarah Fray David Knight

TUTORS Alison Horton Massimo Toesca Iain Bleakley Jeg Dudley Johnny Hawkshaw Joseph Eyles Ed Durie Sean Davis Suran Qutbi Harriet Browning Emma Shaw Phil Buckingham Scarlett Williams Nathan Cunningham Radu Gidei Jenny Song Catherine Howe Antonia Moscoso Cat Mellor Jeff Blaylock Grace Richardson Antoine Amphoux Marlies Boterman Martina Uffridi

Credits EDITORS Annabel Koeck, Richard Winter

ART DIRECTOR Erica Yunwook Choi

PHOTOGRAPHY Erica Yunwook Choi, Richard Winter

TECHNICAL DRAWINGS Tim Murphy

MODEL Gaudre Znutaite

ILLUSTRATOR Philip Buckingham

PRINTER ABC Imaging UK

SUPPORT Gary Davison Ed Moseley Tony Macey Carlo Diaco Edris Farhat Andrew Baughen Julie Haworth Dave Banbury Malcolm Westwood ... and all the volunteer helpers during construction!