Issuu on Google+

DESIGN STUDIO AIR

TIMOTHY ALLAMBY STUDENT JOURNAL


STUDENT JOURNAL

TIM ALLAMBY (587964) ABPL30048: STUDIO AIR SEMESTER 1, 2015 THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE STUDIO 7, CHEN


CONTENTS

PART A

CONCEPTUALISATION

a.0 design futuring 6 a.1 design computation 8 a.2 composition/generative 12 a.3 conclusion 14 a.4 learning outcomes 14 a.5 appendix 15

PART B

CRITERIA DESIGN

b.1 research field b.2 case study 1.0 b.3 case study 2.0 b.4 technique development b.6 technique: proposal b.7 learning objectives/outcomes

PART C

20 22 28 34 38 42

DETAILED DESIGN

c.1 design concept 49 c.2 prototypes 61 c.3 final model 77

c.4 learning outcomes 99 c.5 photos

FRONT COVER: 11 FRAC CENTRE, MARC FORNES, THEVERYMANY (02) NEXT PAGE - LAGA EXHIBITION HALL


02


A

part.

conceptualisation

CONCEPTUALISATION 5


A.0 Design Futuring SPACE KITCHEN - OSTANG PROJECT [2014]

FIG.3 MODULAR KITCHEN W/ GARDEN, COLLECTIF ETC.

FIG.4 DINING & COLABORATING, COLLECTIF ETC.

Created during an exhibition in Mathildenhohe gardens in Summer of 2014. Germany. This project was a students realisation of the issue of future community spaces, and a questionable future of the abandoned space. This project was more of a design and construction experience with each new day a new space, use or furniture created to compensate the kitchen space that was constantly growing over the 3 week period the festival was held. The theme behind the festival and inherently the kitchen structure was of “living together”. It looked at ideas of communial living, if it could work in todays society and what spaces were “needed” in a community. The Kitchen was one set of structures design and built by a team of students, and it would

work in conjunction with other spaces such as: a Main Hall, a Central Square, Information Tower, Workshop House & 3 cabins for dwelling. Where the kitchen and dining spaces were also connected to a vegetable garden. This project took ideas of addressing issues with future proofing and sustainability in an interesting and engaging way. By implementing and needing the community to build it/for it to work. It was just a temporary structure, made up of simple modules of 2.5 x 2.5 metres, to then be pulled down and used for other things (precycling). Though the aspect of creating a system that works together as a “living” environment with the communities input I find very interesting.

Osthang Project: Space Kitchen Architect: Collectif Etc. Location: Darmstadt, Germany (Mathildenhohe Gardens) Year: 2014

6

CONCEPTUALISATION


PRECEDENTS ARROW

FIG.5 ‘ARROW’ IN LANDSCAPE, PHTR

FIG.6 LATTICE WINDOW COVERING, PHTR

This project “ARROW” brings aware the idea of design and spatial thinking into small everday architecture. Designed as a gallery for a family in Victoria’s central suburbs this project rethinks what is possible for the backyard shed. PHTR Architects designed this alien looking structure in a wooded landscape when a Melbourne family needed a gallery space that was secure and affordable. Above all though it told a story and created a design that leads you to think differently. A large arrow is not the typical garden shed structure, but it suited the family’s needs meeting some extremely simple ideas. I see this project as an innovative way of thinking about a commonly generic object. It has shown that it is possible, and even simple to be foward thinking with a structure as simple and barrenly practical as a garden shed.

By pre-selecting the builder, Carbonlite design & Build. the 32 square meter space could adhere to a budget similar to an off-the-shelf garden shed. This straight foward piece of architecture adds to a residential home, where it is now not only used as a gallery space but a ‘lattern’. It lights up the backyard of where it resides as well as the wooded reserve in the distance. Tony Reed and the other architects involved have taken a step to change a building culture, that in Australia is settled in it’s times. Something as elementary as a garden shed in rural Victoria can be progressive in how it’s using building technologies that are common, yet in a site specfic and interesting way.

Project: Arrow Architect: PHTR Architects (Tony Reed) Location: Macedon Ranges, Victoria Year: 2014

CONCEPTUALISATION 7


A.1 Design Computation BRICKTOPIA [2013]

FIG.7 BRICKTOPIA INTERIOR, EME3 FESTIVAL

This project ‘Bricktopia’ uses an innovative way of thinking about designing by quite clearly and purposefully combining traditional and contemporary construction techniques1. A vaulted brick pavilion, which is not a new form of construction, is created by utilizing the compressional material properties of the bricks. This fluid shaped pavilion was achieved by designers Map 13, using digital tools to optimise the structure through it’s geometry.2 This design illustrates some of the ideas and benefits behind using computation tools. A traditional technique that has been used for thousands of years in the same way has now been given a whole new

context due to computational tools. It has allowed an organic and interesting form and essentially design come from a static technique. It breaks this idea of conventional applicatoin of a spanish style of construction using software in Rhinoceros, additional the plugin Rhinovault. This use of computational techniques is important to highlight as it not only shows possibilities but can inspire completely new techniques to be formed in the future.

1 Dezeen, Brick Pavilion 2 Dezeen

Project: Bricktopia Architect: Map 13 Location: Barcelona Year: 2013

8

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.8 BRICKTOPIA CONSTRUCTION


PRECEDENTS EXHIBITION HALL

FIG.9

FIG.10

(LaGa Exhibition Hall) Meaning: Horticulture Show Designers: ICD, Institute for Computational Design, Prof A. Menges. ITKE, Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design, Prof J. Knippers. IIGS, Institute of Engineering Geodesy, Prof Volker Schweiger.

This Exhibition Hall used at a horticulture show in Germany is the first of it’s kind. The hall was created by a team of designers, engineers and structural specialists and has been optimised with digital tools through it’s geometty, similarily to ‘Bricktopia’ .

Project: Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall Architect/Desginers: ICD, Institute for Computational Design, Prof A. Menges. Location: Germany Year:

FIG.11

CONCEPTUALISATION 9


A.1 Design Computation REST HOLE [2012]

A simple rest area that was designed and built on the first floor of a university building. It was created as a place for relaxation and though it looks simple it is impressive in the features and technologies adapted to the space, that was once just a dark, ineffiecient space. The interior covers up the dark, “heavy” columns, and the timber panels create a more fluid feeling space that allows air and light to pass through it. The curved panels create a cave like space that isn’t imposing due to the materiality. Digital tools used for this project allowed for fast simple construction of panels and the fabrication. Architecture students were able to work with designing and building this space. As Fig.12 shows, with use of computational tools all the individual panels were able to flattened to a construction plan, once the design was made. This makes for efficient construction, due to the exactness of the plans and fabrication being completed directly from them. All the panels would be labelled and sent in the most efficient way to save time and money.

Curves are usually difficult to fabricate, but in this project as they were created using flat surfaces it quite easily becomes a possible design.

Project: Rest Hole Architect: UTAA & Architecture students Location: University of Seoul Year: 2012

FIG.12 PANELS LAID OUT IN PROGRAM

10

CONCEPTUALISATION


FIG.13 SPACIOUS, FREE FLOWING REST HOLE

CONCEPTUALISATION 11


A.2 Composition/Generative HYGROSKIN - METEOROSENSITIVE PAVILION The Hygroskin - Meteorosensitive Pavilion by Achim Menges is climate responsive architecture. The pavilion uses biomorphic systems to try mimic the simplicity of such a system found in nature. As climate responsive architecture is normally laden with countless technical systems and many mechanical devices this response is a fresh perspective. In the evolving technologies of computation design, there is a distinction between compositional and generative techniques. And a compositional tool will help designers solve complex problems that they are looking for solutions for, such as materiality that opens or closes depending on the humidity of the environment it is in. Generational tools help with creating forms or designs that directly respond to issues and inputs to what is trying to be solved, like possibly the geometry of structures that respond to biomorphic systems. The openings of this pavilion open or close when the humidity changes within a range of 30% 90%, which can practically respond to outdoor climates. It is an experimental project that shows the possibilities of designing in response to an problem where the form follows that result. Project: Hygroskin - Meteorosensitive Pavilion Architect: Achim Menges Location: Year:

FIG.14 HYGROSKIN, ACHIM MENGES

12

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.15 HYGROSKIN, ACHIM MENGES


PRECEDENTS NONLIN/LIN PAVILION - FRAC CENTRE “nonlin/lin pavilion� at the Frac Cenre in Orleans, France is a spacial experiement held by Marc Fornes and Design team Theverymany. This project was designed and created using the same computational tools as we will use in this studio. It used the 3D modelling software Rhinoceros, and plugins RhinoPython & Rhinocommon, to develop more complex scripting problems in the software. The designers created their own code for the design, and analysed the data with different components for form finding, form description and structural analysis. The idea of this project was to experiment with text based morphologies to then create linear composition from non linear data, an extremely complex issue that becomes an instant reality with generational techniques in the computational world. As already stated digital tools aid in fabrication and this project was fabricated with CNC machines that could drill, engrave and cut to exact specifications created by the computer. When constructed the experimental space becomes an impressive feat of design and construction that ignores humans in a strange way. It is neither a building nor an art installation yet it is structurally sound enough to hold its own weight with out assistance and hold people, being a scalable project. Project: nonlin/lin pavilion Architect: Marc Fornes Location: Orleans, France Year:

FIG.16 FRAC 11, MARC FORNES

CONCEPTUALISATION 13


A.3 Conclusion A.4 Learning Outcomes

A.3 CONCLUSION

A.4 LEARNING OUTCOMES

Most of the projects looked at in this journal so far are pavilions or installments that use the computational tools discussed have been experimental or developing ideas of using computational or generational tools. But by examining built projects as well and how they use digital tools it will create a more solid understanding in how designing can use both the functions at hand along with the knowledge about sustainable design and socially sustainable projects to create a space which has the theory of thinking about future designs in place behind it.

In this semester I have changed the way in which design can be thought about, and how these computational tools examined can play an important role in solving complex issues that have seemed impossible in the past. I hope to continue to explore innovative ways in designing with a more generative approach to design that responds to issues of a subject and working back to form from there. As well as improving algorithmic skills from where they already are to be competent in creating a project that can both be physically fabricated from the computer but also respond to some outside issues.

14

CONCEPTUALISATION


A.5 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketchbook

Some images taken from my algorithmic sketchbook, I created these forms when experimenting with different components of the grasshopper plugin for Rhinoceros.

CONCEPTUALISATION 15


PART A - References

References Collectif etc. http://raumlabor.net/osthang-project/ Arrow: http://www.phtr.com.au/projects/arrow/index.html http://www.bendigoadvertiser.com.au/story/2325168/ arrow-design-at-the-pointy-end-of-architecture/ A.1 Computation BricktopiaDezeen, http://www.dezeen.com/2013/11/26/ bricktopia-vaulted-brick-pavilion-barcelona-map13/ “Rest Hole in the University of Seoul / UTAA” 24 Oct 2013. ArchDaily. Accessed 20 Mar 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=440719> 11 Frac Centre, nonlin/lin pavilion, <http:// theverymany.com/constructs/10-frac-centre/>

16

CONCEPTUALISATION


Images 1. Frac Centre, Marc Forbes 2. The Landesgartenschau Exhibition Hall, ICD/ITKE/ IIGS, University of Stuttgart, March 2015 3. Osthang Project-Space Kitchen, Collectif Etc., http:// www.collectifetc.com/realisation/osthang-project/ 4. ilbid. 5. PHTR Architects, Arrow - http://www.phtr.com.au/ projects/arrow/index.html 6. Houzz, PHTR Architects, -http://www.houzz.com/au/ photos/15442855/arrow-studio-modern-melbourne 7. Bricktopia, Map 13, Eme3 Festival, -http://www. uncubemagazine.com/blog/10098883 8.Ilbid 9. LaGa Exhibition Hall 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. http://openbuildings.com/buildings/hygroskinmeteorosensitive-pavilion-profile-45827/media 15.ilbid. 16. Frac Centre

CONCEPTUALISATION 17


18

CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG.1 AWHC / MINIFIE NIXON


B

part.

criteria design

CRITERIA DESIGN

19


B.1 Research Field Material System: Geometry

FIG.2 NORTH GATE / SOFTLAB

Geometry will be the research field explored in part B of the project. This will involve focusing on a technique that can be explored in grasshopper. Geometry covers techniques that include ruled surfaces, parabaloids, minimal surfaces, geodesics, relaxation & general form finding and booleans. By studying precendents such as these 2 examples; North Gate and Canton tower, I will examine how the techniques can be used and what possibilities and constraints they hold. With the many different techniques geometry covers there are different ways to realise designs, to fabricate them and ways they can be used, examining these precedents will help understanding this.

Project: North Gate Architect: SOFTlab. Location: NYC. San Gennaro Festival Year: 2011

20

CRITERIA DESIGN

SOFTlab created an interesting outdoor space, North Gate in San Gennaro, using algorithms. The geometry is made up of 2 opposing torusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; that intersect, the entire surface is also perforated with the pattern changing depending of the extremeity of the curve [1]. The form created with a minimal surface, which is something that uses mathematics to achieve the smallest surface area possible. It has then been fabricated with thousands of Mylar plastic panels that can be fabricated quite simply. This type of fabrication I find interesting as it works simply and can be erected relatively simply to create a prominent, impressive design feature. On our site in the Merri creek this technique could be adapted and suspended between trees or structures.


FIG.3 CANTON TOWER/IBA ARCHITECTS

Canton Tower, a complex, curvy skyscraper has been achieved by use of computational analysis of materials and geometry to make this â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;puzzleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of a struture possible and fabricatable. This 600 metre tall building in Guangahou, China was the result of striving to create a skyscraper that was different to the usual, straight, rectangular and repetitive buildings. The building was designed with 2 ellipses, 1 at the bottom and 1 at the top, that by rotating them gives a tightening effect that becomes denser in the middle [2]. This lattice like structure was put under many tests of algorithms and computational analysis to evaluate the integrtiy of the design. Being a unique structure, these tests were even

more crucial in the construction of the project. The software and techniques used in this sort of analysis are constantly improving, and with more complex designs that break away from set procedures the more it will be needed. This use of physical testing as a technique could become useful in our project, helping to make it more realised. Throughout Part B I will continue to study precedents that use geometry and in particular techniques of minimal surfaces and geodesics. By creating iterations of the designs with the techniques that are used you are then able to find how far they can be pushed from that original form, using those similar techniques.

Project: Canton Tower Architect: IBA Architects Location: China Year: 2010

CRITERIA DESIGN

21


B.2 Case Study 1.0

The precedent to be used for case study 1.0 is Matsys Design’s “SG2012 Gridshell”, a timber frame structure created from geodesic curves and parabolic functions. The project is overall a simple one that was a 4 day workshop designed and built by the same team in New York [3]. This project uses simple techniques to create a dramatic effect, and the result of sticking to these simple techniques is something that can be fabricated (fig.6). Another aspect of this installation I found interesting was the low cost of build and minimal waste of materials. This aspect could be vital for later on in my project, as phyiscally representing an idea created in virtual space is essential in strengthening that concept. As Peter Brady’s arcticle about computational design at Herzog de Meuron describes, a physical model is vital in how architecture or a component of architecture can be constructed [4]. It is easy with the availability of computational tools to develop arbitrary geometries that have fabrication in mind, this can be extremely inefficient. By designing in conjunction with a digital workshop, the design will not only be buildable, but meaningfully buildable, buildable in a way that does not explode costs [5]. The final product will also be more integrated to the architectural idea.

This way of designing is similar to what the team at Matsys Design used. The techniques used meant the components could be easily laid out and fabricated (fig.4), and even precise allocation of connection points manufactured all through effective use of digital tools (fig.5). The project uses similar techniques that can be found in the grasshopper plugin, and so can be easily recreated. The use of point allocation functions to manifest geodesic curves around a geometry is the main idea behind it. The grasshopper definition I have studied uses rail curves to define the space and size with grasshopper to create the pattern using curves and points. The purpose of the matrix on the following page is to explore how far this definition can be pushed, and what possibilites this project can produce. An endless number of outcomes can be produced by changing the base geometry of the project, each time possibly giving a whole new concept to the result. By altering the algorithm exciting results have also been achieved, that completely move away from a simple demonstration of the technique being used.

Project: SG2012 Gridshell Architect: Matsys Design Location: New York Year: 2012

FIG.4 2D LATH LAYOUT

22

CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG.5 LATH DETAIL


SG2012 GRIDSHELL

FIG.6 SG2012 GRIDHELL /MATSYS DESIGN

‘the design is not only buildable, but meaningfully buildable, buildable in a way that does not explode costs’

CRITERIA DESIGN

23


B.2 Case Study 1.0 1

2

3

4

NO. OF CURVES

REDUCE CURVES

INCREASE CURVES

REDUCE ‘SHIFT’ OF CURVES

A

BASE GEOMETRY [35]

[15]

[100]

[-1/1]

[100]

[-1/1]

B

CIRCLE [35]

[15]

C

SQUARE

[35]

[15]

[100]

D

TOWER

[35]

24

CRITERIA DESIGN

[15]

[100]

[-1/1]


MATRIX: SPECIES // ITERATIONS 5 INCREASE ‘SHIFT’ OF CURVES

6

ONE SET OF CURVES SHIFT: [8] POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.2-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.1-1.0

7

SHIFT: [2/11] 2 SETS OF CURVES POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.08-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.1-1.0

SHIFT: [2/16]

8

POINTS: INSIDE - LINEAR, RANGE 0.0-1.0 OUTSIDE - BEZIER, RANGE 0.15-0.85 INVERSE

[-3/15]

[-5/18]

CRITERIA DESIGN

25


B.2 Case Study 1.0

B.5 - A highly repetitive form that uses a mathematical geometry of a circle would normally be a boring idea. Though this iteration uses the dynamic nature of the algorithm to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;shiftâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; the points in the model to make a form that seems progressive and changing. The use of repeating the same geodesic curves would also mean easy construction, and possible with flat pieces. This model could be used at a smaller scale for a seat or bench, with the density of curves changing of the structure.

26

CRITERIA DESIGN

A.3 - This iteration has been created with a simple addition of the number of curves used. The form has remained the same to the original design yet by changing the number of members used the structure becomes more refined and appears more like a surface. Though it is still made up of singular lines.


SELECTION CRITERIA: 4 ITERATIONS

C.8 - By shifting the the input points and adding layers of more geodesic curves give these unique outcomes with patterning created in the layers of curves.

D.6 - By shifting the input curves with a graph mapper the gradient of the points along the rail curves are easily adjusted, giving it more flexibility for design intentions. This option is in a Teepee form with openings at the front which dont obstruction the curves making up the geometry.

CRITERIA DESIGN

27


B.3 Case Study 2.0

The Australian Wildlife Health Centre (AWHC) will be looked at in Case Study 2.0. The centre was designed by Minifie Nixon in 2006, located in Healesville Victoria[6]. The form and function of this building is extremely unique and the main geometric space in the central room is a magical space, known as a costa surface. This sophisticated tensile surface is what I will be examining in case study 2.0. The surface that is the roof, ceiling and interior of the space all in one works with the entire concept of the building. It creates an organic and scientfic wonder that makes people feel like they are simulatenously outside as they do inside[7]. The design by Minifie Nixon Architects has been succesful I believe in creating a space for visitors and veterinarians to feel comfortable to converse and

28

CRITERIA DESIGN

exchange knowledge about the patients at this animal hospital[8]. The organically shaped roof structure, known in mathematics as a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;costa surfaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; uses interesting parametric techniques to create a double curving surface[9]. The feeling inside this geometry would feel very interactive and would make people question what the form is doing. The visitors would also be wondering whether they are inside or outside, an interesting element of the design that intrigues me. And with smart use of geometry could be replicated using the grasshopper plugin. At the time this building was designed and constructed the design techniques used by Minifie Nixon were not new ideas but the computational tools were simple and something being developed [10].


Australian Wildlife Health Centre (AWHC)

FIG.7: AWHC, GEOMETRY OF CENTRAL SPACE FROM THE OUTSIDE

Though now with computational tools constantly expanding the techniques used to design this are more available. This central geometry could’ve been produced in a software similar to grasshopper using components such as ‘kangaroo physics’ that puts physical forces on elements of a design, which can optimize a surface or structure such as a ‘costa surface’.

The main gallery has been created from minimal surfaces technique, which can be replicated with ‘kangaroo’. To reverse engineer this project I will examine the overall form from plans to generate a mesh that mimic the basic shape. A relaxation of that surface mesh will result in a geometry that gives the same effect. The technique will then be explored further and developed.

“the surface is the roof, ceiling and interior of the space all in one. It creates a scientifc yet organic wonder.” Project: Australian Wildlife Health Centre Architect: Minifie Nixon Location: Healesville, Victoria Year: 2006 CRITERIA DESIGN

29


B.3 Case Study 2.0

FIG.8: AWHC SECTION

Reverse Engineering this project was achieved by examining the schematic and architectural drawings from the building and realising that geometry in a basic shape. This shape was then created in Rhinoceros & Grasshopper using polysurfaces.

FIG.9: AWHC PLAN

Creating a cylinder by lofting a circle that can be adjusted with height and radius parameters, this will make definition flexible.

1>

Move next set of curves and loft to create the top â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;funnelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Surface split 1st surface with cylinders.

3>

2>

4>

Circular surface intersected with curves will create the first ceiling in the geometry. 3 circles placed evenly around central funnel.

30

FIG.10: SKETCH OF FORM

CRITERIA DESIGN

Move 1st surface to height of cylinders to create top of the geometry. Surface split function to be used again.


A.W.H.C / REVERSE ENGINEER

FIG.5 CRITERIA DESIGN

31


Diagram & Final Result POINT

SCALE - SURFACE

SURFACE SPLIT

CIRCLE MOVE LOFT

6 POLYSURFACES > BREP MESH TRIANGULATE > WELD

32

CRITERIA DESIGN

KANGAROO RELAX MESH


REVERSE ENGINEER

CRITERIA DESIGN

33


B.4 Technique Development 1

2

3

4

5

A Mesh in Rhino Relaxed Weaverbird triangulation

B Mesh in Rhino Surface Relaxed/ Exoskeleton

Using Quadmesh file matching up the UV surfaces of the different geometrie is another way of creating the mesh 1-2 moving the inp curves

C Quad mesh made from UV surfaces

D Mesh Relaxed - adjusting uniary force

E Adjusting Force Objects &Anchor Points

A:E/SPECIES 1:10/ITERATIONS 34

CRITERIA DESIGN


MATRIX: SPECIES//ITERATIONS 6

7

8

9

10 Increasing Level of Weaverbird Triangles

Adjusting Input geometry comparing Exoskeleton

e es

Change the UV making up the input mesh

put

Increasingly affected by Multiple Force Objects

Adjusting anchor points progressively

CRITERIA DESIGN

35


Selection Criteria - Successful Iterations

Mesh Subdivision - Weaverbird, creating quad surfaces. The mesh in this iteration has been evaluated to create quad surfaces. To construct a mesh structure such as this would most likely be inefficient though the pattern created is interesting and dynamic even though all division have the same number of edges.

In and out qualities of the form Interactive and at a scale that makes people wonder.

36

CRITERIA DESIGN


Polysurfaces remade - with UV meshes that are joined together. This simplifies the complex geometry to mesh it relatively smoothly. This iteration was developed by originally adjusting the input curves of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Species Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

CRITERIA DESIGN

37


B.6 Proposal Interactive Lookout Multiple schools in the area , high activity in the area USERS: walkers, school children, families Interactive space Lookout to aspects of site

38

CRITERIA DESIGN


pre-school

high school

primary school

CRITERIA DESIGN

39


B.6 Proposal

40

CRITERIA DESIGN


CRITERIA DESIGN

41


B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Merri Creek - WHere to now Overview 70 km long in Melbourne’s Northern suburbs Runs from Wallan to Yarra River (Dights falls) Was the site of heavy industrial use - ecosystem is highly damaged from waste and rubbish in area. Hosts some of the most threatened ecosystems in Australia. Storm water runoff is an understated problem for the ecosystem of the area and particularily Merri Creek area.

Critique of first proposal, where I could go from here: Re-think the site, somewhere that works better with the design agenda It’s not in place to maximise the potential Work on the idea of the in and out geometry that causes the people to ‘wonder’ What happens when it rains? will they get wet? or will the form make it sheltered even though they can look out?

Reasons for looking at site in first proposal: Users - the users of this first site could’ve been children from the local area/ the nearby schools, though the ‘lookout’ aspect was not optimised as theres not much to lookout to.

Interactive for children of the site (near the schools), in how they might want to touch and run around it.

FIG.6

42

CRITERIA DESIGN

FIG.5


CRITERIA DESIGN

43


Part B - References North Gate[1] Design Playgrounds. “San Gennaro North Gate by SOFTlab”, 2015. http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/sangennaro-north-gate-by-softlab/ Canton Tower [2] Archdaily. “Canton Tower / IBA Architects”. http://www.archdaily.com/89849/canton-tower-information-basedarchitecture/ SG2012[3] MATSYS Design. “SG2012 Gridshell”, 2012. http://matsysdesign.com/2012/04/13/sg2012-gridshell/ Smart Geometry. “sg2012 material intensities”, 2013. http://smartgeometry.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=a rticle&id=134:gridshell-digital-tectonics&catid=44 [4,5] Peters, Brady. “Realising the Architectural Idea” AD, (2013), pg 56-61 AWHC Minifie Nixon Pty Ltd. 2013. “Australian Institute of Architects / http://dynamic. architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20063001 Jackson, Davina. Next Wave/New Australian Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2007. Print. [10] Monash University Museum of Art, “Pavilions for New Architecture”. MUMA:2005. Print. [pg 32] Proposal-

44

CRITERIA DESIGN


Images Fig 1. - AWHC - http://www.archello.com/en/project/australian-wildlife-health-centre/image-3 Fig.2 - North Gate - Archinect. “Softlab”. 2015. http://archinect.com/softlab/project/san-gennaro-north-gate Fig.3 - Canton Tower, IBA Architects, www.iba-bv.com Fig.4 - 2D Lath Layout, SG2012Gridshell, Fig.5Fig.6Fig.7- AWHC - HTTP://ARCHITECTUREAU.COM/ARTICLES/AUSTRALIAN-WILDLIFE-HEALTH-CENTRE Fig. 8- AWHC Section Fig.9- AWHC Plan Fig.10- AWHC Sketch of form ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES -

CRITERIA DESIGN

45


46

PROJECT PROPOSAL


C

part.

detailed design

“architecture can be structure and ornament at the same time.” PROJECT PROPOSAL

47


48

PROJECT PROPOSAL


C.1 Design Concept C.1.1 - Form Finding / Spacial Qualities of Form C.1.2 - Form Finding Precedents C.1.3 - Natural Ideas - Gaudi / Otto C.1.4 - CERES Site of Interest C.1.5 - Water Management System

PROJECT PROPOSAL

49


Form Finding Precedents Looking at precedents that use computational tools to and physics tools in particular (kangaroo) showed me the types of forms that can be created, and the range of qualities and experiences they can create due to differences in, scale, material, application of software & design. Here are some of the major ones I looked at:

MATSYS - Shellstar Pavilion This pavilion by MATSYS design team uses a basic mesh that has been formed into an interesting/compelling geometry through the use of kangaroo physics, in the grasshopper plugin. The geometry is self-organised into the catenerary like structures, similarily developed by Antonio Gaudi and Frei Otto.

Marc Fornes - Chrysalis

This is another outdoor pavilion that uses structural form finding techniques to establish the geometry. This is an even more complex geomety at a glance, though from the use of and development of computational tools the possiblilties of fabrication are evident.

50

PROJECT PROPOSAL


Ernesto Neto - Installation Qualities & Experiences Expressed: Playing with scale/proportion makes it engaging for the user. Almost all the different senses used when experiencing this installation, adding to the level of engagement. Sinuous forms that are also confusing, making an enclosed but open space. Doesnt use computation, rather an art project, these are the qualities that would be good to try and achieve.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

51


Reminder of Precedents that influnce form

Northgate - SoftLAB Simple form with patterning aspect. Requires steel bars and rings to hold the form in place. Up and Down funnels.

Greenvoid LAVA Tensile fabric surface Uses â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;stripsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of the fabric to make up the form. Connects multiple spaces together. Interesting form of multiple components.

Tape Numen A complex form with fluidity between the areas. Requires a lot of suports to keep the form in space (scaffolding)

AWHC Geometry flows inside and outside. A large space that fills the space with light and wonder. 52

PROJECT PROPOSAL


Loom Hyperbolic Mixing art with spacial experiences. A unique alternative in materiality. It creates a fluid space with interesting patterns.

Workshop installation MENGES Tensile surface. Alternate/Unique Material technique of using knitting patterns. Creates an interesting form thats light.

Minimal surfaces that are developed with todays computational tools are essential the same architecture as discusses before these ease of computational tools came about, by architects such as; Frei Otto. It is going back to a primitive idea of architecture, where nothing is used to excess, and combining it with new tools that mean architecture can be structure and ornament combined. Self Forming Processes that are used in architecture, are using natural processes. So these artifical objects even as seen with precedents such as green-void, have natural components. PROJECT PROPOSAL

53


Merri Creek

CERES Environmental Park Area of Interest

54

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

55


CERES

COMMUNAL GARDENS

LEARNING CENTRE

CERES SITE MAP

56

PROJECT PROPOSAL


A

B

C

C

Dam

Communial Gardens

A B AREA OF INTEREST

PROPOSED SITE MAP

Learning Centre PROJECT PROPOSAL

57


Siting the Project The site of CERES, the community environmental park was chosen as the new location for the project. This site has more clear objectives that are trying to be achieved, and the use of such a site is under-used

The aspects of forms looked at in precedents can now been brought into the design agenda and site. Aspects such as the flow of spaces in and out. The proportion and scale being human based interaction, and also the materiality affecting the senses.

CERES Agenda - Set of Objectives

Application to Design Agenda

CERES Mission Address the causes of climate change, Promote social wellbeing and connectedness, Build local and global equity, and Embrace and facilitate rapid change

Community Based Water improvement facilities Interactive - touch, sound, smell, Wonder of water, spaces Flowing of in and out spaces Education - learning Benefical to Environment - improving water system

Water Management

Flow of Spaces

Proposed Site

58

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Community Based


Community Based

Water Management System

CERES is a place for learning and bringing together the community. CERES has 59,000 students visiting the site each year, their experience could be enhanced with an implentation on site.

With a water management system in place on the proposed site (48 sq m) and an average annual rainfall of 670mm (Preston Reservoir) which can be utilised in a way that demonstrates the possibilites of a water management system

Rain water sits on site making it unplesant/muddy.

With site manipulation of storm water management and correct intervention this can be improved. PROJECT PROPOSAL

59


60

PROJECT PROPOSAL


C.2 Tectonic Elements & Prototypes C.2.1 - Material System Precedents C.2.2 - Prototype 1 Realising Technique C.2.3 - Prototype 2 Developing Technique C.2.4 - Prototype 3 Pushing Technique

PROJECT PROPOSAL

61


Technique: Cable Ties / ZIP studio 400 A project by a group of architecture students in School: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Course: Studio 400 Year: 2013 Futures Plus. “Zip - Studio400”, 2013, http:// futuresplus.net/2013/02/14/zip-tie-studio400/

FIG.X:

62

PROJECT PROPOSAL

FIG.X:


ZIP

ZIP

PROJECT PROPOSAL

63


Technique: Cable Ties / Massimal D.O.T.S. Design Office Takebayashi Scroggin Zip Tie Massimal - 2011 Using a template to tie the zip ties. Behind the fabrication process: How will it be suspended? Use a support diagram The mesh elevations Unroll the templates in different sections Diagram of how those different sections (components) are arranged in physical space.

64

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

65


66

PROJECT PROPOSAL


This was the first prototype created in using the technique of cable ties fabricated into a surface

prototype1_realising the technique PROJECT PROPOSAL

67


Prototype 2 _Developing the Technique

68

PROJECT PROPOSAL


Prototype 2 looked out testing whether what was found in prototype 1 could be applied to a complex geometry such is this. This would inficate whether the in and out qualities could be achieved with the technique of cable ties.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

69


14.0

10

.0

11.0

3.0

9.0

2.0

30.0 13.0

7.0

22.0 12.0

8.0

1.0

21.0

20.0

0.0 17 23

6.0

.0 .0

16.0

19.0

37.0 18.0

25

.0

41.0

32.0

39.0

.0 42

40.0

36.0

27

.0

2 4.

33.0

0

43

26

.0

.0 29.0

38

5.0

70

28.0

31 .0

35.0

PROJECT PROPOSAL

.0 15.0

.0 34

4.0


PROJECT PROPOSAL

71


72

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

73


prototype3_testing materiality Prototype 3 was testing a way to make the cable tie surface functional in relation to the design concept. From the design concept: The structure can be used as a shelter for users on site, and a practical water diversion/management system. The aim was to find a waterproof membrane that would cover the areas of the surface used for water collection/diversion. And do this in a nonobtrusive way.

74

PROJECT PROPOSAL

We took multiple plastic based materials under consideration for this element. Settling on the idea to prototype transparent tabletone / vinyl, which would be cut based on the strip templates that made the overal geometry. By soldering these strips together a layer of plastic that represented the form was created. Downfalls to address: Attachment of plastic membrane to the cable tie structure. Too seperate from the geometry - taking away sinous qualities. A slow process to solder the individual strips


PROJECT PROPOSAL

75


76

PROJECT PROPOSAL


C.3 Final Model

C.3.1 Matrix of form development C.3.2 Storyboard of form development C.3.3 Image of Final Rhino Model C.3.4 Cable Tie Refinement C.3.5 Construction - Digital to Physical Final model for presentation User friendly construction instruction/pamplet

PROJECT PROPOSAL

77


Form Development Matrix

A

B

C

D

A - Experimenting with geometry of plane B - Fiinding qualities that enclose the space for users C - Adjusting Plane & Up/Down spouts D - Finding a form that is site specific

78

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

79


Story Board of Form Development

Qualities that enclose the space for scale and making the object one pe 2 funnels up for views out, the rest

Creating a plane that attached to multiple points and spreads over site - more horizontailty and surface area for water collection

Adjusting the plane so itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s more dynamic and connected with the site Only one plane can take away from complex form

80

PROJECT PROPOSAL


r users - playing with a sense of eople will want to interact with down for water drippingg

Adjusting of spouts position and direction makes it more site specfic Addresses the idea of directing storm water on the site.

A Balanced geometry that is large enough for a shelter, is site specific, funnels come down engaging users, and has a complex intersection of form/funnles in the centre. PROJECT PROPOSAL

81


Rain Water

Illustration of Design in context of site

Naturally filtered runoff

82

PROJECT PROPOSAL


The site is currently used mainly by school groups, the design would also act as a pavilion where teachers incorporate water management strategies into the space the are present.

The shelter would direct rain to the areas directly below the funnels. With an improvement of planting at these locations the water can be naturally filtered into the dam, thus improving the mud and quality of site for users.

PROJECT PROPOSAL

83


_Cable Ties _large cable ties make surface of mesh _small cable ties for connections cable ties are a easily avalaible material and will always be manufactured - meaning our design doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need any fabrication of material to achieve the form The amount of cable ties can be calculated accurately from the use of grasshopper _1430 large cables _1680 connection cable ties the only other thing needed is a printer, scissors + tape _the fabrication can still be optimised further and made more user friendly

84

PROJECT PROPOSAL


Iterations of Model based on the Cable Ties needed (Data obtained from grasshopper)

Iteration 1 - Maximum Complexity Size - 13.2m x 10.3m Mesh type - Quads subdivided into triangles

Cable ties (cells) - 4840 Cable ties (connectors) - 14,520 Min. Cable tie length - 312.5 mm Max. Cable tie length - 609.8 mm

Iteration 1 - Balanced Complexity Size - 3.9m x 3.0m Mesh type - Largest quads subdivided into triangles

Cable ties (cells) - 2746 Cable ties (connectors) - 4948 Min. Cable tie length - 87.0 mm Max. Cable tie length - 279.9 mm

Iteration 1 - Minimal Complexity Size - 3.9m x 3.0 m Mesh type - Quads

Cable ties (cells) - 1210 Cable ties (connectors) - 2748 Min. Cable tie length - 280.0 mm Max. Cable tie length - 1132.4 mm PROJECT PROPOSAL

85


86

PROJECT PROPOSAL


Images of Final Physical Model PROJECT PROPOSAL

87


0 3.

1. 0

3.0 1.0

0 8.

0.0

0.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

7.0 2. 0

7.0

9.0

8.0

2.0

9.0

Rhino Model - Exploded to Components (A-K) for clear construction

5.0

13.0

11

10.0

.0

8.0

9.0

7.0

11

5.0

6.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

0 4.

7.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

2.0

.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

8 4.0

6.0

7.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

5.0

3.0

2.0

.0

1.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

0.0

9.0

8.0

4

2

5

7

6

0.0

3.0 1.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

0.0

11.0

7.0

6.0

1.0

3

1

3.0

9.0

7.0

6.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

5.0

4.0

6.0

2.0 0.0

11

5.0

7.0

9.0

8.0

2.0

6.0 8

0.0

5.0

5.0

6

2.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

6.0 0.0

3

4

12.0

9.0

6

5

10.0

14.0

13.0

1.0

15.0

12.0

11

.0

10.0

8.0

9.0 9.

2

8.0

7.0

11

5.0

6.0

.0

7.0

1.0 3.0

4.0

2.0

5.0

3.0

0 4.

5.0

1.0

0.0

2.0 0.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

2

4

8

6.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

4.0

3.0

3.

2.00

2.0

1. 0

9.0

8.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

9.0

0

9.0

0.0

6.0

9.0

4.0

5.0

5.0

0

3.

7.0 9.0

9.

0

0

6.0 7.07.0 8.0

8.0

3.

8

4.0

6.0

0 5.

4.0

6.0

1. 0

1.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

1. 0

7.0

1.0

6.0

5.0

9.0

8.0

2.0

2.0

3.0

0 4.

4.0

.0

4

9.0

7.0 2. 0

3.0

3.0

3.0

2

0

7.0

8.0

4.0

6.

6.0

5.0

2.0

7.0

5.0

6.0 7.0

9.0

8.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

7.0

9 .0

8.0

9.0

9.0

0 8.

84 DETAILED DESIGN 0.0 2.0

5.0

4.0

0

PROJECT PROPOSAL .0 5 .0

6.0

0 8.

2.0

3.

5.0

3.0

3.0

9.0

8.0 7.0

7.0

9.0

4.0

3.0 1.0

0.0 4.0

3.0

1.0

0.0

10.0

6.0

6.0

2.0

2.0

8.0 7.0

11.0

.0

5.0

9.0

8.0

2.0

5.0

15.0

4.0

8.0 9.0

8.0

0.0

11

7.0

I

4.0

2.0

9.0

7.0 6.0

5.0

9.0

12.0

4.0

3.0

3.0

1.0

3.0

6.0

13.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

4.0

5.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

1.0

9.0

5.0

10.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

8.0 7.0

6.0

0.0

11..00

8.0

7.0 6.0

14.0

3.

12.0

5.0

1.0

1.0

5.0

.0 10

6.0

5.0 9.0

3.0

8.0

47.0 6

5 2.0

1.0

8.0

8.0

9 .0

1. 0

6.0

.0 10

2

H

0.0

3.0

2.0

7.0

4

1.0

77.0.0

5.0

0 8.

2. 0

3

1.0 0.0

0.0

1.0

4.0

6

0 5.

5

0.0

0.0

0.0

0

9.0

6.0

1.0

0.0

0

4

7

2

0.0

0.0

6.

8.0

1

0.0

5.0

7.0

2.0 3

0.0

0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0 12.0

4.0

9.0

10.0

3.

2.0

1.0

0.0 3.0

1.0

6

5

4.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

3

7.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

5

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

7

0.0

4

8

0 3.

4.0

5.0

0.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

7.0 6.0

8.0

9 .0

7.0

4.0

.0

4.0

3

1

7

10 .0

0.0

.0 10

1. 0

6.0

11

11.0

9.0

7.0

9.0

7

6

3.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

2.0

8.0

8.0

2

5

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

1.0

0.0

88

3.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

5.0

4

4.0

2.0

4.0

3

7.0

9.0

6.0

1

4.0

7

3.0

5.0

7.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

2

2.0

1.0

7.0

4.0

0.0

.0

3.0

2.0

9.0

6.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

0.0

0.0

0 8.

5.0

10 .0

2.0

9.0

3.0

6.0

1.0

0.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

8.0

1.0

11

10.0

0.0

A

0.0

2. 0

10 .0

12.0

9.0

6

5

9.0

2

4

8.0

7

3

1.0

11.0

2.0

3.0

5.0

0 3.

4.0 0

4.0

6.

7.0

0

7.0

0.0

0.0

0 5.

1. 0

9.0

3.

0 5.

6.0

3.0

10 .0

2.0

9.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

1.0

8.0

0.0

1.0

0.0

6.0

0.0

B

9.0

8.0

8.0

7.0 6.0

1.0

5.0

7.0

2.0

3.0

2.0

4.0

0

3.0

1.0

3.0

0

0 4.

10.0

0.0

2.0

0.0

6.

5.0

1. 0

12.0

9.0

6

5

5.0

4.0 0

2.0

2

4

3.

6.0

7

3

1.0

1.0

0.0

7

6

2.0

2

5

7.0

4

8.0

3

1

7.0

6.0

12.0

6.0

6.0

1. 0

14.0

1.0

1.0

5.0

2.0

3.0

9.

4.0

2.0

3.0

6.0

8.0

0.0

7.0

4.0

7.0

L

8.0

8.0

8.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

9 .0

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

K 15.0

4.0

.0 10

10 .0

9.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

8.0

C

11.0

2. 0

0 8.

0.0

5.0

7.0

0.0

8.0

9.0


.0

1.0

14.0

5.0

3.0

4.0

6

9.0

7.0

5.0

12.0

3.0

2.0

2.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

6.0

1.0

1.0

5.0

4.0

8.0

4.0

7.0

.0

10.0

8.0

9.0

7.0

0.0

8

11

12.0

6.0

7

7.0

13.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

5.0

6.0

6.0

0.0

0 5.

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

0 4.

14.0

0.0

5

10 .0

4

.0

9 .0

0.0 0.0

5.0

6

11

.0 10

2.0

7.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

6.0 10 .0

5

3

3.0

2.0

1.0

D

4

10.0

1.0

8.0

7.0

9.0

6.0

4

2

5

6

7

0.0

2.0

1.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

0.0

3

1

8.0

2

0.0

4

4.0

E

10.0 5.0

0.0

9.0

6

5

2.0

12.0

8

7

3

1.0

3.0

9.0

7.0

6.0

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

1.0

6.0 10 .0

9.0

7.0

8.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

2.0

.0

1.0 1.0

3.0

2.0

5.0

4.0

0.0

0.0

11

8.0

7.0

9.0

6.0

0.0

6.0

4.0

5.0

7.0

7.0

5.0

4.0

6.0

11 2.0

3.0

5.0

4.0

1.0

8.0

0.0

0 3.

3.0

1.0

8 4.0

3.

0

5.0

6.0

8 4.0

4.0

7.0

7.0

8.0

8.0

9.0

4.0

5.0

8.0

5.0

4.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

6.0

7.0

3.0

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

6.0 7.0

9.0

8.0

5.0 0 DETAILED DESIGN 0 85 6. 8.0 9.

7.0

2.0

3.0

0 4. 4.0

7.0

6.0

8.0

5.0

4.0 0

9.0

2.0

0.0

1.0

1.0

3.

10.0

15.0

2.0

.0

3.0 1.0

11

.0 10

9 .0

8.0

4.0

7.0

2.0

3.0

1.0

6.0

11.0

PROJECT PROPOSAL 0

89

12.0

5.0

9.0

7.0

6.0

1.0

0.0

0.0

0

9.0

5.0

0.0

9.

9.0

8.0

3.0

7.0

4.0

2.0

11.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

G

4.0 2.0

1.0

0 65.0.

6.0

5.0

9 .0

4.0

9.0 12.0 8.0

.0 10

1. 0

3.0

0 5.

0.0

3.0

5.0

4.0 0

2.0

6.0

0.0

0

7.0

4.0 5.0

4.0

1.0

2.0

0.0

3.0

3.

0 4.

0.0

0.0

3.

2. 0

2.0

1. 0

9.0

7.0

9.0

0 8.

J

0 8.

4.0

6.0

5.0

1.0 1.0

2.0

7.0 5.0

6.0

9.0

0.0

6.0

7.0

7.0

5.0 7

6

5

8.0

4

9.0

3

10.0

3.0

.0

2.0

11

1.0

8.0

1. 0

11.0

12.0

0.0

0.0

14.0

13.0

12.0

11

.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

0.0

0

9.0

8.0

0.0

0.0

9.

10.0

6.0

5.0

2.0

2. 0

9.0

8.0

6.0

0 3.

4.0

1. 0

2.0

0.0

3.0

7.0

2

3.0

11.0

8.0

9.0

8.0

7.0

6.0

4.0

6.0

1.0

1.0

0 5.

6

7.0

6.0

4.0

7.0

0.0 3.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

8

4.0

1.0 2

5

9.0

80 6..0

9 .0

0.0

2.0

3.0

4

7

2.0

6.0

.0 10

3.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

4.0

0 4.

3.0 3

1. 0

8.0

7.0

5.0

7.0

5.0

2.0 0.0

6.0

2.0

1

0.0 4.0

7.0

1.0

5.0

4.0

0

5.0

4.0

9.0

0.0 0.0

5.0

8.0 7.0

6.0

6.0

5.0

7.0

1.0

3.

6.0

3.0

4.0

2.0

2.0

1.0

3.0

3.0

0.0

0.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

2.0

1.0 2.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

0 8.

0.0 0.0

9.0

6.0

2. 0

8.0

7.0 6.0

.0

8.0

7.0

F

10 .0

5.0

5.0

11

3.0

2.0

8.0

2.0

1.0

9.0

3.0

2.0

11.0

9.0

8.0

1.0

7.0

9.0

10.0

0.0

6.0

5.0

8.0

1.0

0.0

12.0

9.0

6

5

1.0

2

4

2.0

7

3

3.0

12.0

10.0

0.0

9.0

6

5

5.0

0.0

4

3.0

2

3

0.0

4.0

5.0

7

1.0

1.0

7.0

6.0

1.0

7

6

7.0

2

5

10.0

0.0 0.0

0.0

4

9.0

8.0

.0

1.0 3

9.0

5.0

2.0

7

6

4.0

6.0

5.0

4.0

0 8.

2.05

1. 0

2

1

4

11

2.0

6.0

3

0.0

1

7.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

8.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

7.0

9.0

7.0

6.0

4.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

9 .0

7.0

.0

0.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

9.0

8.0

2.0

6.0

10 .0

9.0

8.0

1.0 3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

3.0

.0 10

13.0

12.0

11

.0

.0 10

9 .0 9.0

10.0

0

9.0

3

1

9.0

0.0

7.0

6.0

5.0

0 4.

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

9.

8.0

0

9.0

8.0

9.

8.0

15.0

7.0

8.0

11.0

10.0

9.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

0.0

0 M 6.

7.0

7

3.0

5.0

4.0 0

2

2.0

1. 0

3.

4.0

2

1.0

0.0

2.0

11.0

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0

15.0

9.0

7.0

5.0

11.0

11

0.0


Step 01 - Cut out paper template, which is used to create one strip of a component

Step 04 - Use short cable ties for connections between the already made cable ties 90

PROJECT PROPOSAL

Step 02 - Use large cable ties to fit the template cells

Step 05 - A connection cable ties will be placed at every circle that indicates it on the template


Step 03 - Cut off excess tie, and tape cable tie to template until all cells have a matched cable tie.

Step 06 - With multiple completed strips they can be matched up and connected together to the desired form. PROJECT PROPOSAL

91


Once establishing the desired form and qualities of the design it was time to take what has been learnt from the development of the technique from experimenting in grasshopper and especially prototype #2. The complex geometry as shown was split into individual components to then be reconnected at a later stage. These components were selected to ease in the construction process and eliminate confusion of strips locations experienced in prototype #2. Each component could be logical connected with a numerical order (eg. 0 11) of 12 strips for component A and so on. These individual strips oculd be completely seperated from the model and fabricated as an indivudual object, though to ensure all the strips would connect accurately and the cable ties would match up they were completed in the vicinicty of the other strips.

92

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

93


COMMUNITY BASED DESIGN From the Design Agenda of CERES For this design to be a community based project, and one that interacts with the users and community as a whole, this simple construction process can be made clearer and more user friendly so that it follows a simple set of instructions and anyone can construct a highly complex form. Where someone with no compuational knowledge or experience with Rhino could make it. This page shows an example of possible user friendly instructions - made easy to follow

4

1

2 5

3 94

PROJECT PROPOSAL


6

8

7

PROJECT PROPOSAL

95


96

PROJECT PROPOSAL


As a living system, this design will be self maintained and become part of the current ecological system in place. This design takes the idea of a community based project along with the computational tools developed in grasshopper to create a space thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interactive, engaging and complex in geometry. The design directly responds to the sites existing conditions and works with the possibility of improving those conditions. With a transparent material over the form that directs water on the site, it will add another level of site interaction as with time this will collect as well as rain, leaves and dirt, giving age over time. The design attracts life in terms of human interaction and education. Plants and animals will also be attracted to the site due to the potential improvement of environmental conditions of site.

Progression of Final Model to Presentation

PROJECT PROPOSAL

97


Final model Image - learning outcome Every stage of this design project was a big learning curve and lead to outcomes I could never have imagined. I see the major development in the project through the protoypes created to the final model. From intially gaining the idea of gaining cable ties to attempt to achieve a minimal surface structure to the process of finding a way that it can actually be done was extremely fulfilling and took the grasshopper skills I development in Phase B of the project to a whole new level. Rather than coming up with interesting and complex form with no context for them, Phase C took me through specific problems of creating a form that could be fabricated and with each step in the process, things were learnt and adding to this form development process to make it possible. Not to mention then tieing in the qualities of the form to be achieved based on the design concept.

98

PROJECT PROPOSAL

I believe up to the stage this project is currently at all the steps in development have been taken in an effective way, From addressing the site, and determining a agenda to be fulfilled based on what is currently needed / under utilised. Then trying the technique of connecting cable ties to create a form that would respond to the site and the design ideas addressed. Then by working on grasshopper scripts and prototyping them to develop and progress to a technique that with even more tweaking could be used as a construction technique the average person with no compuational experience could build - simplifying the idea right back to tieing a single cable tie and fitting it to a template.


PROJECT PROPOSAL

99


100

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

101


Special thanks to my group members: Cara Brongo, Derek Huynh & Daniel Kellet And to my Studio Tutor, Chen Cahui, who I learnt a tremendous amount from


104

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

105


106

PROJECT PROPOSAL


PROJECT PROPOSAL

107



Tim Allamby Journal