Digital Design -

Digital Design - Portfolio Semester 1, 2019 Kate Johnson

999456 Junhan Foong Studio 7

1

email: kjjoh@student.unimelb.edu.au

Content:

Education: 2017 - 2018

Bachelor of Design (Architecture) Queensland University of Technology

03

Precedent Study

2018-current

Bachelor of Design (Architecture) The University of Melbourne

04

Generating Design Through Digital Processes Work Experience:

15

Queen Victoria Garden Pavilion

2019

Alter Atlas Student Position

2016

Brand and Slater Architects

Skills:

During the semester of Digital design, I was able to grow my parametric software skills. This subject strongly encouraged a fast-paced learning environment and encouraged students to push past their comfort zones and try to utilise the parametric software.

Personally, I believed I gained a good understanding of the importance of time management in this subject, as fabrication deadlines created predictable obstacles between deadlines.

For the duration of the subject I tried to explore variation in form and challenge myself to push past pure functionality. When modelling my designs, I ensured I was taking into consideration the users experience and interaction. This can be seen from my work in Module two both Part A and B as well as my final design for Module 3, the Victoria Gardens Pavilion.

As an architecture student it was interesting to look at design from a parametric digital perspective as apposed to the traditional rigorous concept design which

Rhino Grasshopper Unreal Adobe Suite: Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign Fabrication; 3D printing & Laser cutting SketchUp ArchiCAD MYOB Microsoft Office: Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Outlook

2

is encouraged in the studio environments. I believe as I improve my understandings of these design processes and my knowledge specifically of Grasshopper I will be able to manifest creative and thoughtful designs into my latter years of architecture.

MODULE ONE: DIAGRAMMING DESIGN PRECEDENT ATION

Isometric of ALA Pavilion

During Module One I was encouraged to explore the ALA MPavilion from 2015, designed my Amanda Levete Architects. This pavilion was well suited to the site in Melbourne, Queen Victoria gardens, as it was inspired by the form of a tree canopy. The light structure nests carefully into the park and appears very fragile much like the biodiversity of a canopy.

The pavilion was interesting to model as it has a beautiful patterns seen in the petal like canopy tops which rotate and connect through the light fiberglass structure. Overall the pavilion had a very lose circulation system and the threshold eased into the park to encourage light lose movement.

3

MODULE TWO: PART A

Generating Ideas Through Process

4

Design Matrix

Lofts

1.1

1.2

{0.4,149,0}

{30,150,0}

1.3

{120,298,0}

1.4

Key

{-150,270,0}

{0,0,0}

{105,150,0}

{-149,159,0}

{-0.1,299,0}

{190,0.5,0}

{-60,148,0} {58,150,0}

{-16,150,0} {0.5,150,0}

{0.5,150,0}

{45,150,0} {60,150,0}

{150,-1,0}

{74,151,0}

{-2,15,0}

{0,0.15,0}

{0.1,4.5,0}

{149,148,0}

{0.3,14,0} {150,45,0}

{0,0,0}

{150,104,0} {150,90,0} {149,-1.4,0}

Paneling Grid & Attractor Point

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

{183,176,0} {99,103,0} {68,73,0}

{64,90,0}

{136,52,0}

{33,-12,0}

Paneling 2D

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

Paneling 3D

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

5

Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z) Attractor / Control Curves

{13,285,0}

Grid Points

Module Two for me was where I began to explore the concept of variation. My triangulated panels were harmonious in their undefined differences, creating a very enticing and evocative form. I liked the density of the waffle which complimented the dense variation of the panels. Overall, I used parametric software as well as manual rhino processes to manipulate the surface to create movement and variation in the overall composition. Later, when exploring the spatial quality of these panels at different scales, I focused on how these forms could be interacted with.

6

Surface and Waffle

Computation Workflow

When completing my paneling there were lots of iterations to select the geometry whcih achieved my desired aestheic. Then after selecting the geometry there was careful manipulation of attractor point and curves. These variant surfaces were baked out and manually manipulated to create the final surface as I felt this approach best suited my design style. There was some exploration of using grid manipulation in grasshopper however I wasnt able to achieve my desired panelled surfaces using these. During the manual process I experimented with different shapes. Instead of using a single pattern and a signle geometry, I created 2D surfaces from ‘softer’ attraction points and a smaller offset magnitude. This allowed for an interesting panel as it is technically all 3D yet there is a clear element of patternation from the softer shapes.

To create my final two surfaces I manually selected specific elements of the multiple panelled surfaces I created. I carefully selected elements to create an overall composition which showcased my central theme for the entire project, variation. I wanted each of the surface elements to be juxtaposing and contrast, creating an overall visual unity from the interesting movement of all the elements.

When deciding my waffle elements I was interested in keeping the structure quite dence as I believe this worked well with my complex geometries. It also was necessary to ensure the waffle was strong as my panels contained quite large elements which needed structural support.

7

Laser Cut Model

8

Laser Cut Workflow

While creating the lasercut file I ensured my geometry was on all the appropriate layers. I also followed the advice of tutors and kept some of the cut lines as etch lines to ensure my geometry didn’t need to be taped. Since the ivory card is so fine I believe taping it would have been a risk of them ripping and therefore the precision of the shapes being comprimised.

9

MODULE TWO: PART B

10

Solid and Void

After exploring the subtraction process many times, I experimented within the cubes what area the 50x50x50 cube could have the most interesting intersection.

This was experimented many times while ensuring I kept a record of where I subtracted from so that I could alter this iteratively until I found an intersection which had enough variation to continue my design theme.

This iteration process allowed me to produce a final cube which incorporates my design theme and is somwhat an imagined space which has a high level of complexity.

11

Design Matrix Point Attraction

1.1

1.2

1.3

Key

1.4 {694,1293,0}

{694,1293,0}

{0,0,0}

Grid Points

{160,-50,0}

{-116,-121,0}

{-91,303,0} {281,199,0}

Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z) Attractor / Control Curves

{486,434,0}

{-19,-134,0}

{-19,-134,0}

Sphere Reaction

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

Shape Variation

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

Small Extractions

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

12

{84,-7,0}

Computational Process

During the grasshopper stage I explored how I could edit the cube from the various steps provided in the matrix to see what effect this would have. My intention in grasshoppe was to manipulate the different forms I used (sphere, weaverbird and rectanglular prisms) to see the space I could create. The process involved a lot of testing and iterations.

13

3D Printing

Image of your final model or other process

Annotation

Image of your final model or other process

Annotation The solid and void process was very interesting as it was pretty much all digital. I have used 3D printing at the NEXTLab for other subjects so I had some knowlege of the process however I learnt about reducing material usage, time and therefore saving on printing costs. I was able to share the costs with some friends by submitting cubes in small groups.

When selecting my 3D prints I had to ensure the cube could be printed without being to brittle and snapping. I used the thickness analysis which we were shown in the workshop to check my cube thicknesses.

14

MODULE THREE: VARIATION

My pavilion for module three is inspired by the form that emerges in my module two and therefore this concept of variation has been further explored.

Through my exploration of variation I decided to include a folding panel so the space itself cour vary depending on the clients need. For my design I wanted the space to be informal and not dictated to by a specific program, much like my precedent study.

The space caters for both the evening quartet and the lunchtime seminar and the flexibility of the central moveable panel allows the space to be split use throughout the off periods if necessary, as well.

The closed panel accompanied by the landscaping features, encourages a circulation path which is completely different to what is suggested when the pavilion is completely open. Various movement is therefore encouraged, and the space becomes more interesting because of it. The tiered stairs encourage informal inhabitation and actually allow more people that depicted in the brief to interact and relax amongst the pavilion. Much like ALAs pavilion I wanted hints of the concept to appear to trickle out into the park, encouraging inward movements from all outside factors.

The strong geometric forms are softened with the wooden materiality and soft opaque material used in tradition Japanese design, known as Shoji. The concrete ground condition contrasts the grass and garden which eases into the tiered seating. This pavilion becomes a central place for various people to meet and engage in various activities therefore the pavilion is true to its conceptual intention.

15

Isometric

Triangulated wooden panels undulate from the glass roof, creating variation of form.

This is better accentuated through light manipulation.

The pattern and form of these panels is emphasised with warm lighting. This showcases the modulation but also makes the pavilion inviting at night

a folding panel divides the space and encourages different circulation patterns.

The site is able to be used in various ways as well as allowing it to be interacted with to suit the users needs.

Textured surface provides a greater sense of variation within the panelled structure, it plays with scale and encourages the users to view the pavilion at different scales.

Reflective ground surface promotes the intent of variation and encourages different views and interactions with the triangulated form seating leans towards the pavilion, hinting at the focal point and suggesting movement towards there Tiered informal seating allows multipurpose space and informal interaction. The combination of concrete and grassed surfaces encouraged different usage of these spaces and they are ot limited to being a bench. The strip lighting illuminates these surfaces at night

16

The pavilion is centered in the site encouraging users to focus on the pavilion but also allows engagment within the landscaping

1: 125

Threshold and Circulation Analysis Key Context

Threshold

Site

Circulation Seating circulation

Initial Threshold

Site internal circulation External to internal

Pavilion External Pavilion Internal BUSINESS

SPORT

Plan: sliding door space ARTS

Plan: extended PARKLAND

Plan: closed

Plan: Open Context Plan 1:25000

Threshold Plan 1:250 1:200

1:20000

125000

17

Circulation Plan 1:250

Design Iteration

My initial concept was these intersecting forms within the 5000x5000 space, which were shaped by the external influences to the park. I decided this idea needed to be expanded on and the pavilion could take some of this form but further explore variation.

This design was more complex than my initial iteration however the pavilion elements were too disconnected and therefore it did not achieve what I was trying to create, harmonious variation.

18

This third iteration became my stepping point for my final design. I was able to take elements of this space and incorporate it into my final pavilion. It had both complexity and unity wihtin the design and overall the space was interating and I wanted to explore this further in my final pavilion.

Unreal Renders

View from St Kilda road pathway, highlighting the variation of the panels

Details of the pavilion

19

Model Photography

20

Model imagined space

21

Computational Process I used my knowlege from module two to panel the surfaces and the ground. I utlised attractor points to create a sense of movement.

For the panel exploration of kangaroo and oragami structures was where I began however I couldn’t execute this. I decided to test my own knowlege and look at creating patterns on a surface.

Task 01 Grasshopper Script Showing input - associate - output

22

Fabrication process

For my final pavilion sectional model I used a combination of 3D printing and laser cutting. I think the model could have better represented my idea if I laser cut all the triangulated elements. Furthermore this would have showcased the paperlike quality of the structure and accentuated the variation in the panels.

23

360 Image Output

This 360 shot from unreal showcases the mood and movement that is sensed in my design. THe variation of the trainglated forms creates an interesting spatial quality which is complimented by rich lighting and soft materials.

24