Page 1


ABSTRACT This project contains a design proposition for the Hatlehold church in Norway. The competition was presented in 2008, which demanding new facilities for churchgoers in the surrounding area. This design proposal was designed with a tectonic approach, which creates a symbiosis between the form and the technical aspects regarding acoustics and construction. Using this integrated design process the goal is to create a building that creates the appropriate atmosphere for churchgoers to gain the religious experience expected from a church. Furthermore one of the main priorities is to create a functional building complex that takes the employers into consideration. The main idea of the project is to create a complex that complimented the site, a building that melts together with nature, an expression that wipes out the line between outside and inside. The journey through the forest approaching the building should activate all of your senses, in order to intensify the journey towards the sacred place. A sacred place that creates an intimate and atmosphere with a Nordic expression that is shown in form and honest use of material and construction. The result of the final church design, is a complex that fits into the context of the site and creates a blurred line between the inside and outside, and thereby forms a close connection between the individual human and the nature. A space where thoughts can be gathered away from the busy life. The main church building creates a majestic expression in the inside by the use of big timber frames spanning over the whole roof construction, which complies with the simple and clean Nordic expression created on the exterior of the building.


Ana Habijanec

Jonathan Judes

Mikkel Nørgaard Pedersen

Pelle Jin-Woo Ziersen

Totto Tamás Rátkai


Title:

Hatlehol Church

Project module:

Tectonic Design: Structure & Construction

Period:

20.10.14 - 16.12.14

Group:

ARC 11

Semester:

MSc01 ARC

Supervisors:

Isak Worre Foged, Assistant Professor, Aalborg University

Technical Supervisor:

Søren Madsen, Assistant Professor, Aalborg University

Number of pages:

xx

Number of Chapters:

7

Number of copies:

9

Aalborg University:

Department of Architecture, Design & Media Technology


01

|

Intro

03

03

Location

34

Design Parameters

03

Site History

36

Design process

04

Surrounding churches

38

Preliminary Studies -

06

Nordic Architecture

Placement

08

Tectonics

10

Theories

Exterior

12

Methodology

|

40 42

Design process

Preliminary Studies Preliminary Studies -

Interior

02

|

Analysis

44

Room Function

46

Acoustics

16

Mappings

50

Construction

16

- Vegetation

54

Facades Studies

18

- Infrastructure

56

Model Studies

19

- Noise

58

Light Studies

20

- Building functions

22

Climate

04

26

Case study: Louisianna

28

Case Study: Bishop Edward

62

Strategy

64

Vision

King Chapel 30

Summary

|

60

Concept Concept diagrams


05

|

Presentation

07

Master plan

70

Plans

diagrams

60

Renders

104

Calculations

70

Sections

104

- Acoustics

70 AA

108

- Construction

72 BB

119

- Japanese Joint

74 CC

120

- Parking

76

Elevation

Workshop material

76

1 - North-West

List of references

78

2 - South-West

List of Illustrations¨

80

3 - East

82

4 - West

68

84

Materials

88

Details

06

Epilogue

|

94

Conclusion

Reflection

95

|

98

Appendix Surrounding church


This chapter contains a short introduction to the project, and presents the basic knowledge which has been gathered in order to get a better understanding for the surroundings and the site.


Intro

01


LOCATION

Ă…lesund is both a municipality and a town in the North-eastern part of Norway, where the municipality without suburbs has close to 45.000 residents. In 1904 an incident cause a major fire outbreak which ignited almost the entire city, made of many wood constructions, leaving approximately 10.000 people without shelter. After this incident the city was rebuilt, heavily influenced by Art Nouveau in brick.

ILL. 1 - MAP OF NORWAY

2

Intro


SITE DESCRIPTION

The site is located 16 kilometers south-east of Ă…lesund, in a suburb called Hatleholen. Having the north side bordering up to the RV60, this is the direct connecting between Ă…lesund and Bergen running along the bottom of hill. On the south side of the site, there is a rather large residential area, which is a part of the Hatleholen city, where centrum is located only 1 km east of the site. The site is a green patch, with dense forest, of approximately 16.000 m2 being closely connected to the already existing graveyard of Hatleholen. Being at the bottom of a hill, the site itself is falling 10 m in height over a 160 m span, towards the Flisfjord that is located 1.5 km south of the side.

site border - north

site border - south

ILL. 2 - SITE ILLUSTRATION

cca +30,00 m.a.s.l. cca + 20,00 m.a.s.l. ILL. 3 - LONGITUDINAL TERRAIN SECTION

Intro

3


SURROUNDING CHURCHES

Researching the medium and big sized Lutheran

decrease in the numbers of visitors, put a big tone

churches of the 20th century was as an atempt to

to be more social and general. To avoid churches

get a better understanding of the basic forming fac-

acting only as a „Sunday building”, many new cul-

tors, sizes, materials and function schemes.

tural function got introduced to the room program, such as meeting rooms, music classes, children

After the big fire that destroyed the most of the

care, which were followed by the necessary admin-

town in 1904, a general „building boom” hap-

istration and comfort places (offices, kitchen, cafe,

pened in Ålesund, creating a standard urban view

toilets).

in art nouveau style. Along this wave the main church of the town was rebuilt, on the site of the previous one. The architect Sverre Knudsen created a building that fits to the new image of the town. It has a historical, neomedieval style using the matching materials for this view (stone+marble outside, wood+white plaster inside). The floor plan is an exact copy of this old system, after entering the church, there is a big nave that continues in a smaller chapel orientated to west. The visitors (800 people) sit in parallel benches facing the altar. Since the next churches were built 70 years later, the area missed the revolution of the modern and postwar protestant architecture, brutalism and its anti-movements. The state church, in the attempt to modernize the institute and to stop the strong

4

Intro


There were only two churches in the Ålesund munipalicy built in the 70s and 80s. The first one is Volsdalen church (Ill. 6), a wood construction church built in 1974 by Leif Olav Moen. Instead of having both a chapel and nave, there is only one sacred room, the nave, which is designed for 500 visitors. The office of the parish is situated

ILL. 4 - ÅLESUND CHURCH, 1904 - 09

in the basement, utilizing the steep slope on the site. The second church, Spjelkavik church, is a brick building, built in 1987 by Alf Apalseth. Situated next to the new shopping district in town, the brick building stands from its context. The hexagon shape of the floor plan, inspired by traditional Israeli tents,

ILL. 5 - SPJELKAVIK CHURCH, 1987

has been divided into three functions, public – sacred – administration, accommodating up to 600 visitors. Two smaller churches were built in the late 20. Century, in this case they are only analyzed in terms of room programs and flow, since they are not relevant building wise, compared to their size. ILL. 6 - VOLSDALENS CHURCH, 1974

Intro

5


NORDIC ACHITECTURE

Nordic architecture started as a concept in the in-

Along with some national identity which often can

ternational context in the early 1900s, created by

be seen in e.g. local materials, small references to

modernists. In relation to the architectural perspec-

history and traditional building styles. Many Nordic

tive, it was a concept that also influenced other

architects have also been known for the way they

products of design such as, furniture, lamps etc.

played with the role of the light in their architecture, and some for experimenting with how the lack of

Amongst the front runners that represented the

so, somewhere could emphasis it elsewhere, which

Nordic countries as a whole in the beginning of the

can be linked to the Nordic climate, and its lack of

1900s, was Lars Backer (NOR), Sven Markelius

light, as the winter months approaches.

(SWE), Poul Henningsen(DEN), and Alvar Alto (FIN)

Nordic architecture can be seen everywhere in the

all of which were strongly inspired by the modern-

world, and can be designed by anyone no matter

ist, especially the European scene and architects of

nationality, but got it’s name because of a few peo-

their time. Nordic architecture became known for

ple’s way of designing was influenced by their sur-

the Minimal decoration, preferences for function-

roundings and communities.

ality over form, and simplicity. Among some of the other keywords that was used to describe the Nordic concept was “social” which was reflected in the welfare systems of the countries today.

6

Intro


“There is no longer need for Pastiche details, but in-

stead for, practical homes, bright working spaces, show windows and illuminating advertising… But there is still room for national identity, based on climate, needs and individuality”. - Lars Backer, 1927

ILL. 7 - SVENNE FEHN PAVILION

Intro

7


TECTONICS

Tectonics in architecture means a relationship be-

over time by internal (material) and external (social)

tween design and structure, integration between

factors. Frampton refers to it from a distance in his

aesthetic and technology, a bridge among form,

system Critical Regionalism which is a progressive,

material, structure and construction. It is influ-

non-instinctive approach between global and local

enced by the technological, social and cultural en-

architecture, tied in modern tradition but tied to

vironment. [Parigi, 2014]

its geographical and cultural context. [Frampton,

The word ‘tekton’ means ‘carpenter’ in Greek (lat-

1983]

er also: ‘poet’), it also creates a word ‘arki-tek-

b) The Master-Builder – the figure that leads the

ton’=’master-builder’. Gotfried Semper started us-

construction of complex architectural bodies. It has

ing it again while he was researching the primitive

skills to keep in hand all part of building (aesthet-

people’s native architecture. [Semper, 1860] In the

ic-engineering-construction), do a synthesis, relies

20th century it was rather about phenomenology

on intuition. (Examples: Medieval cathedral build-

and clear, readable constructions „the poetics of

ers, Gaudi, Nervi)

construction that is later an abstract discourse on

In 21st century tectonics are complex models that

surfaces, volumes and planes.” [Frampton, 1997]

develop toward a new use of advanced geometry

There is a difference between tectonic (construc-

and technology. Based on the two concepts above,

tion) and stereotomic (spatial) terms. [Cornel,

tradition and intuition, today’s challenge is to use

1996] One is the external appearance, clearly

tectonic models in the designing process. Instead

readable; the other is suspended and hollowed, so

of form-making, do form-finding, with different vari-

basically they are mostly found together.

ation of solutions for one task by using digital sim-

The two fundamental concepts in tectonic philoso-

ulations and real-time feedbacks already during

phy are [Parigi, 2014]:

design process. [Nilsson, 2007]

a) Vernacular architecture – the local building tradi-

There are dissolving differences between structur-

tions of a place, an instinctive tectonism perfected

al skeleton and enclosing surfaces, which causes

8

Analysis


closer collaborations between architects and engi-

of instant feedback. The more information that is

neers. [Nilsson, 2007; Oxman, 2010] It also helps

known in the beginning of design process the eas-

to involve outsiders (individuals or groups) into the

ier is to predict and prepare for optimal details.

process, or makes an effect on it with the tools

[Parigi, 2014]

ILL. 8 - GC PROSTHO MUSEUM RESEARCH CENTER, KENGO KUMA & ASSOCIATES

Analysis

9


THEORIES PALLASMA – THE EYES OF THE SKIN

Choosing to use Pallasmas theory and thereby ob-

The quantity use of big glass facades and opening

taining a tool for emphasizing the connection be-

in this time, deprives our building volumes from

tween indoor and outdoor spaces.

intimacy, Pallasma mentions that the shadow cre-

“It is evident that ‘life-enhancing’ architecture has

ates the intimate atmosphere that defines the line

to address all of our senses simultaneously…” [Pal-

between public and private. He states that this in-

lasmaa, 2012]

terplay between the dark contours of the shadows

Architecture today is mainly designed to satisfy the

and the light creates depth, shape and life to the

sense of sight. Pallasma argues that the suppres-

elements.

sion of appeal to the other senses has led to an

“Natural materials express the age and history, as

impoverishment of our environment, which further

well as the story their origins and the history of hu-

leads to alienation and detachment.

man use.” [Pallasmaa, 2012]

“The ultimate meaning of any building is beyond

Pallasma encourages the use of natural material

architecture; it directs our consciousness back to

that gives the surfaces some texture, which has a

the world and towards our own sense of self and

more authentic expression compared to the flat-

being. Significantly architecture makes us experi-

ness of some of the materials nowadays. These

ence ourselves as complete embodied and spiritu-

materials are weakened in their sense of material-

al beings. In fact, this is the great function of all

ity, and doesn’t show any indications of their story

meaningful art.” [Pallasmaa, 2012]

and origin.

“In our time, light has turned into a mere quantita-

Pallasmas theories about activating all senses will

tive matter and the window has lost its significance

be used to empower the experience and the at-

as a mediator between two worlds between en-

mosphere of the place and thereby extending the

closed and open, interiority and exteriority, private

building as a part of the nature.

public, shadow and light.” [Pallasmaa, 2012]

10

Intro


ILL. 9 - FOUR SENSES ILLUSTRATION

Intro

11


METHODOLOGY

The project is based on integrated design process,

formation about site, users, climate, functions

which is divided into five phases. The approach to

etc. gathered through various types of analysis.

these phases are iterative which makes it fairly

Through the information extracted from the anal-

complex, a simplification of the process is illustrat-

ysis, different design criteria’s of the project are

ed in (Ill. 10, the repetitive process of the phases al-

set up. Based on the parameters the “sketching”

lows the project to be optimized through knowledge

phase is started, here are ideas shaping the proj-

sharing. The professional knowledge off architects

ect created through sketching, modelling and 3D

and engineers are gathered into one symbiosis,

visualization. The following phase is the “synthe-

which takes both technical and esthetic aspects

sis” here is all the knowledge from the analysis and

into consideration. The first part of the project

sketching reduced into an almost settled design,

is the “problem” phase, where the problems and

which is optimized through the final calculations

challenges in the project are pinpointed.

regarding the construction and energy framework.

To get a better understanding of the project, the

The finished project is then presented, through a

second phase “analysis” is initialized. Here is in-

report, models and visualizations in the last phase

12

Intro


Problem

Analysis

Sketching/ Concept

Synthesis

Presentation

ILL. 10 - INTEGRATED DESIGN PROCESS DIAGRAM

Intro

13


This chapter contains a selection of the most important basic research done throughout this project, in order to better understand the surroundings, and to make an integrated design.


Analysis

02


VEGETATION

The high vegetation in the area represents a forest

forest is its role as a sound barrier which protects

which is considered as a great value and ecological

the site from the traffic noise of RV60 road on the

resource in Norway. It consists of the three most

northern border of the site. Since spruce is the eco-

common species in Norway: Norway spruce (40%),

nomically most valuable specie in Norway, and due

scots pine (30%) and birch (30%). Tree heights

to its good properties and low weight, it is going to

vary from 10m to 20m in a mixed semi-dense order

be used as the main constructive material for the

on the site. Another important value of the existing

new building.

LEGEND: HIGH VEGETATION LOW VEGETATION SITE BORDER

ILL. 11 - VEGETATION MAPPING

16

Analysis


ILL. 12 - SPRUCE - PICEA ABIES

ILL. 13 - PINE - PINUS SYLVESTRIS

ILL. 14 - BIRCH - BETULA PUBESCENS

Analysis

17


INFRASTRUCTURE

The surrounding area is dominated by heavy traffic

meant for pedestrians and cyclists connecting the

roads. The norwegian national road - RV60 is lo-

surroundings to the site. The northern areas are

cated on the north site border connecting different

connected by two pedestrian and bicycle bridges

parts of Aalesund and acting as the main artery

west and east of the site. More direct pathways

branching out to the residential neighbourhoods.

could connect the site better to the context.

Bus stops are located near the site going in both directions along the main road giving good opportunities for public transportation. There are few paths

Motor vehicle roads Pedestrian and bicycle paths Public transportation

ILL. 15 - INFRASTRUCTURE ILLUSTRATION

18

Analysis


NOISE

The Norwegian national road - RV60 - on the north

8-12dB. The effectiveness of noise reduction also

site border, represents the main noise source with

depends on the density of the tree stems, branch-

sound levels of up to 70-75dB. In order to reduce

es and leaves, so the best solution is to have com-

the noise to a desirable level of 50-55dB it is cru-

bination of coniferous species which are effective

cial to keep and even enhance the existing tree belt

noise barrier all year long. On the site, the different

which serves as a noise barrier. The existing belt

species are Norway spruce and scots pine for that

of trees and shrubs stretches between 25-35m in

purpose, also in combination with birch.

width which and can reduce the sound levels by

70 - 75 DB 65 - 70 DB 55 - 60 DB 50 - 55 DB < 50 DB

ILL. 16 - NOISE LEVEL ILLUSTRATION

Analysis

19


BUILDING FUNCTIONS

The surroundings of the site are dominated by residential neighbourhoods, divided into four major housing areas: Blindheim which is located towards north-west, Myrland towards west, Ramsvika towards south, Hatleholen towards south-east together with an additional smaller housing area north of the site. Sports facilities are located next to the site towards west and a cemetery is connected to the site on the east side only interrupted by the parking lot in between. Two schools are located near the site, Blindheim youth school north-west of the site and Borglund primary school south-east of the site. All of which is more or less in distance of a 1000 meters making it possible to arrive to the site by bicycle or on foot.

20

Analysis


COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL

Education EDUCATIONAL Industrial RECREATRIVE Commercial Residential Recreative

600 m

400 m

200 m

ILL. 17 - DISTANCE & FUNCTION ILLUTRATION

Analysis

21


CLIMATE - PRECIPITATION & WIND

Hatlehol is a small city in the area of Aalesund

fjord, this makes the wind a significant factor that

which is placed in the tempered climate zone in

should be taken into consideration. The wind di-

the northern Europe. The area is characterized by

rection is mainly from southwest but also from the

having a lot of precipitation, throughout the whole

northeast and the speed in the area is between

year. The site given is placed about 1 km from the

5-10 m/s.

Precipitation

300mm

Precipitation

150mm

0mm

Jan

Feb

Mar

ILL. 18 - PRECIPITATION FOR Ă&#x2026;LESUND ILLUSTRATION

22

Analysis

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec


Wind direction distribution in (%) NNW

N

12

NNE

10

NW

NE

8 6

WNW

ENE

4 2 0

W

E

WSW

ESE

SW

SE SSW

S

SSE ILL. 19 - WINDROSE FOR SITE ILLUSTRATION

Analysis

23


CLIMATE - TEMPERATURE & SUN

The hours of sun on the site varies significant

through all seasons. According to the diagrams itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

throughout the year, as it goes from a few hours a

seen that the sun is positioned in the south/south-

day in the winter period, to about 19 hours a day

east during the high masses.

in the summer. This is very important to take in consideration, in order to create the right lighting

Temperature

20 0 C

Max temp Min temp

10 0 C

0 0C Jan

Feb

Mar

ILL. 20 - HIGH & LOW TEMPERATURE ILLUSTRATION

24

Analysis

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec


N 330

300

Jun.

23:37

03:37 30

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

21

60

06

W

E

09

18 12

15

Dec.

120

240

09:32 120

12

15:02 S

12

10:05 150

ILL. 21 - SUN LIGHT ILLUSTRATION

Analysis

25


CASE STUDIE LOUISIANA

Lousiana was founded by Knud W. Jensen and

The building volumes are connected in a roughly

opened in 1958. From the beginning it was intend-

circular form by glass corridors, connecting the dif-

ed to be a venue for cultural gathering and debate

ferent spaces and associates the inside and the

and became a museum attracting international ex-

outside in such a way, that the visitors gets the feel-

hibitions and artist that few other museums could

ing of walking in the middle of nature as were they

match. Louisiana is considered a major part of the

on a covered saunter.

danish modernist architecture, and were designed by the architects Jørgen Bo and Wilhelm Wohlert.

The design consisted of exposed structures, white-

They took inspiration in the simplicity of traditional

washed walls, laminated wooden ceilings, tiled

Japanese architecture which they elegantly trans-

floors. The glass panels are opening up to the sur-

ferred into the danish settings. Two factors were

roundings, giving an unique architectural lightness.

said to be crucial for the architecture which were

Jean Nouvel said the following about the museum;

coherence and gentleness. â&#x20AC;&#x153;At Louisiana, each thing is directly felt, and everyThe museum is based on an old villa and the idea was to link the architecture with the natural surroundings. The design presents itself as horizontal with an understated building complex which fits harmoniously and intimately together with the landscape.

26

Analysis

thing is at homeâ&#x20AC;?.


ILL. 22 - LOUISIANA

Analysis

27


CASE STUDIE BISHOP EDWARD KING CHAPEL

The Oxfordian chapel was designed by Niall Mc-

The designers tried to combine the best quality

Laughlin Architects, built in 2013; it is a good ex-

materials that have a matching world of colors,

ample of pure religious design and how to use ear-

to reach the proper atmosphere. Niall McLaughin

lier references correctly and adding contemporary

says: “If you get up very early, at sunrise, the hor-

technical features to make the idea valuable. Ear-

izontal sun casts a maze of moving shadows of

ly medieval vaults’ spirit appears in the diagonal

branches, leaves, window mullions and structure

crossing wooden frame structure of the roof, how-

onto the ceiling. It is like looking up into trees in a

ever the elliptical form and the space organization

wood.” [Trada Timber Industry Yearbook 2014)

rather follows the masters of the 20th century (i.e. Rudolf Schwarz, Peter Zumthor). The building is full with analogies and symbols. Like a stranded boat it creates a social room in a stone shelter. The building is ten meters high but simple standardized shape frames create a self-supporting tree-like roof system without requiring restraint at the top. It allows making a never-ending window between the wall and roof, similarly to Zumthor’s Saint Benedict chapel. The columns make a transparent division between the main chapel and the ambulatory. In each section 3 pieces of elements are bolted together, their cross-section sizes are 60 x 300 x 560 mm.

28

Analysis


ILL. 23 - BISHOP EDWARD KING CHAPEL

Analysis

29


SUMMARY

Analysis contain basic research of the relevant as-

ing forward the design. While the vegetation and

pects of the site. All of revealed factors and results

noise studies directed the building placement in

of the analysis predesignated the building place-

less-tree populated area, the sun analysis influ-

ment and design progress. Gathered information

enced the openings in the church taking into con-

served as a guidelines in the design process, but

sideration the proper lightning.

also as a restrictions, so that the building would

All this aspects are necessary to proper under-

be properly integrated into the site. Analysis are

stand the building context and ensure that new in-

revealing the site qualities and influencing the

terventions would respect surrounding landscape

design process in order to explore and enhance

and correspond to userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s needs.

the surrounding landscape. After summarising the accumulated knowledge, priorities have to be settled in order to provide clear guides for push-

30

Designprocess


Designprocesss

31


The following chapter is an attempt to give the reader an insight in the process that, that the project has gone through, before coming to an end, and to give an insight in what have influenced the decision making.


03

Design process


DESIGN PARAMETERS

Design parameters

34

-

Axial connections through site

-

Separated volumes

-

Integration and respect of the sites surrounding nature

-

Acoustic performances

-

Maintain sound barrier of the surrounding trees

-

Hierarchy in the building functions

-

Honest use of material, in which the tectonics from Nordic

architecture is showcased

-

Strong relation between interior and exterior spaces

-

Nordic architecture style

-

Enforcing use of more senses than only vision

Designprocess


Designprocesss

35


DESIGN PROCESS

At the beginning of this project, there was an in-

putting it together parametrically.

troduction to three different workshops that was

After this there were a little break, where the proj-

supposed to give a more scientific approach to the

ects were supposed to be evolved to a level where

design process, all with different focus. The first

it was possible to start drawing details and think

workshop was about working with the acoustics,

about the small scale things. The last workshop

exanimating how different forms would affect the

was about detailing buildings and thinking about

acoustics of the major rooms. As the process went

the many connections between every part of the

along and the results were compared with numbers

buildings.

that were considered good acoustics for a church

The challenge was to figure out how to solve the de-

room, a basic knowledge regarding shapes and vol-

tail around the roof, as the design proposal at the

umes for design an important part of the project

times had a doublet pitched roof, in which there

were gained.

were some complications.

Second workshop was about working with the structure, it was not mandatory to work with the previous result from the first workshop, but in order to make sense of everything , these two workshops was closely linked, as there were a mutual interest to imply the structural visible inside and trying to give it an acoustic effect. The workshop, was evolved about parametric design, and was about experimenting with different shapes and afterwards analyzing them in Karamba, which is a plugin for the 3d modelling program Rhinoceros3D which is able to analyze the construction as you are

36

Designprocess

The workshop was


ILL. 24

ILL. 26

ILL. 27

ILL. 28

Designprocesss

37


PRELIMINARY STUDIES

The preliminary studies started with some sketching of the masterplan, in order to ensure that the functionality of the spaces, creates a flow, according to the employees and the guests. Here axial paths are taken into consideration to meet the requirements acquired through the analysis phase.

ILL. 29

ILL. 30

38

Designprocess


ILL. 31

ILL. 33

ILL. 34

ILL. 32

Designprocesss

39


PRELIMINARY STUDIES

40

Designprocess

ILL. 35

ILL. 38

ILL. 36

ILL. 39

ILL. 37

ILL. 40


ILL. 41

ILL. 42

ILL. 43

Designprocesss

41


PRELIMINARY STUDIES

ILL. 44

ILL. 45

42

Designprocess

ILL. 46

ILL. 47


ILL. 48

ILL. 49

Designprocesss

43


ROOM FUNCTION Room type

Amount

Area (m2)

Capacity

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

750 75 40 80 40 12 25 12

300-500 15-30 20-30 20-30 5-10 people 2-5 people 2-5 people 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

16 100 60 80 150 45

20-30 50-100

8 1 1 1 1

6 25 30 35 10

8 8 -

2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

25 25 35 10 12 20 10 28 30

10-15 persons 10-15 persons -

Sacred functions Church room Mezzanine Children's chapel Chapel Sacristy for baptism Cloister room Meeting room Sacristy for artifacts Community area Additional sacristy Entrance hall Storage for chairs and benches Church hall Congregational hall Kitchen Administration Offices Meeting / dining room Cloakroom Technical room Staff toilets Other functions Classrooms Music room Activity room Storage Refuse Workshop Laundry room 5 public toilets Cloakroom

44

Designprocess


FUNCTION DIAGRAM SACRED

SACRED

MAIN ENTRANCE

ADMINISTRATION

EDUCATION

ADMINISTRATION

MAIN ENTRANCE

EDUCATION

CLOAKROOM

CHILDREN’S CHAPEL

STORAGE

ADDITIONAL SACRISTY

CHAPEL SACRISTY

PUBLIC TOILETS

KITCHEN

ENTRANCE

BAPTISM

CHURCH ROOM

ENTRANCE HALL CONGREGATIONAL HALL

REFUSE

CHURCH HALL

CLOAKROOM

CHILDREN’S CHAPEL

CLOISTER ADDITIONAL

STORAGE

SACRISTY

CHAPEL SACRISTY

PUBLIC TOILETS

KITCHEN KITCHEN

OFFICES ENTRANCE HALL

CONGREGATIONAL HALL

MEETING

TOILETS

REFUSE TECH ROOM

DINING

ENTRANCE

CLASSROOM

BAPTISM

CLASSROOM MUSIC ROOM CHURCH ROOM

CLOISTER

CHURCH HALL

WORKSHOP

STORAGE

ACTIVITY ROOM

ILL. 50 - ROOM FUNCTION ILLUSTRATION

Designprocesss

45


ACOUSTICS

Considering the project requirements and function

obstacles it can respond as reflection, absorption,

of a church, the acoustics play an important role

diffusion or diffraction. The diagrams below show

in the design process. In order to achieve â&#x20AC;&#x17E;good

how the sound ray can be distributed and reflect-

acousticsâ&#x20AC;? it must be defined which kind of ambi-

ed when reaching different shapes in ceiling and

ent wants to be achieved in the church. The first

walls. Different angles are distributing the sound

tests of acoustics start with reverberation time,

differently, so the aim is to achieve a surface which

which various depending on different types of mu-

will distribute the sound equally to the audience.

sic and speech. Taking into account that the church is supposed to be used for preaching, organ music

Considering the section of the room, when the ceil-

and choir singing, the targeted reverberation time

ing is decreasing in height from the source, it is

is set to be approx. 1.4 to 2.4 seconds (See appen-

distributing the sound most efficient. And convex

dix fig. 15).

shape, while a stepped ceiling is good for sound diffusion.

In order to understand how the sound is distributed in the space, different shapes have been explored

While exploring the shape in plain view, the function-

in section and plan.

ality of the church has been considered in terms of

Sound is a longitudinal wave which moves through

positioning the altar, audience, entrance, choir and

the air (or other medium) and when reaching the

the area needed. Accordingly, the diagrams start

Fig. 1.1. Flat ceiling

Fig. 1.2. Decreasing slope

ILL. 51 - ACOUSTIC REFLECTION ILLUSTRATION

46

Designprocess

Fig. 1.3. Increasing slope

Fig. 1.4. Concave ceiling

Fig. 1.6. Convex ceiling

Fig. 1.7. Stepped ceiling


with basic rectangle as an optimal and functional

tion (D-50), clarity (C-80), both are indicators telling

shape with gradually changing the angles of longi-

how the sound can be distinguished usually used

tudinal and opposite walls. Diagrams show that the

for testing speech, and clarity for music. [Long,

best distributed sound is in the trapezoid which is

Marshal: Architectural acoustics, 2006.] and echo.

decreasing in width (Ill. 28.) and right trapezoid (Ill.

The results are presented through analysis of three

28.) which led to final shape of the church.

sound sources in the church: the priest, organs and

Acoustical simulations and experimentation with

the choir, and measured with two receivers simu-

acoustical possibilities were run in the software

lating: the audience in front and in the back.

called â&#x20AC;&#x17E;Pachydermâ&#x20AC;&#x153;. Different parameters were tested such as: reverberation time (T-30), the time which it takes the sound to decay by 60 dB, defini-

receiver 0 the priest

receiver 1

the choir

the organ

SOUND SOURCES ILL. 52 - ACOUSTIC SOUCE & RECIEVER ILLUSTRATION

Designprocesss

47


The aim was to get lower reverberation time around

The final test was showing how much echo can be

1.3s to 1.8s for the priest, which is better for speech

found in the space. Echo is the late sound which

and higher RT for organ music (from 1.8s to 2.6s)

appears after 70ms which corresponds to sound-

in order to reach desired atmosphere. When using

waves that travels more than 17m. When using

basic rectangle shape the reverberating time was

only reflective surfaces, the calculations show that

mostly from 1.3s to 2s. Tilting side walls caused

echo is present in almost all frequencies (Fig. 17 –

better sound distribution, but still quite low rever-

var 3). In order to decrease the echo, the parallel

beration time. Removing the big tilted wall and

walls have been avoided, and absorptive materials

making „free standing“ boxes for secondary func-

are applied to the back wall in order to avoid fur-

tion, the trapezoid shape remained but increased

ther bouncing of the late sound.

volume caused longer reverberation time from

Applying different materials can provide various

2.3s to 2.8s (results see appendix fig. 16). The

acoustic effects such as reflection, diffusion, scat-

aim was also to reach the highest definition (D-50)

tering or absorbing. The high dimensioned roof con-

possible, preferably between 30-40% in the front,

struction formed as a „waffle“ grid are scattering

since it is the indicator of how the sound can be

the sound from the side walls, while the windows,

distinguished for the speech.

stone floor and enclosed wall panels mostly reflect the sound. The back wall is furnished with fabric which is covered with wooden rafters which results in absorbing the sound.

Schroeder integral

Logarithmic Energy Time Curve

Sound Pressure Level (db)

0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 -60

Time (s)

ILL. 53 - PACHYDERM GRAPH ILLUSTRATION

48

Designprocess

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0


priest

priest

priest choir

changing shape

ap dif m

increaasing volume

organ/choir organ/choir

organ

var. 1 62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

var. 2 62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

var. 3 62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 800

T-30

0.9 s

1.36 s

T-30

1.63 s

T-30

1.5 s

D-50

42.12% 48.32% 42.87% 40.01% 34.25% 33.45% 37.91% 2.27 s

D-50

39.17% 38.77% 22.81% 26.2% 43.6% 27.5% 38.32% 20.07%

D-50

26.4% 37.85% 24.4% 18.1% 19.75% 21.7% 14.63% 14.

1.32 s 1.65 s

1.63 s

1.99 s 1.57 s 1.75 s

1.49s

2.11 s

1.55 s

1.54 s 1.96 s 1.4 s

1.34 s

echo 10% False (speech)

priest

priest

True

True

2.38 s

True

priest choir

pe

1.41 s 2.17 s

choir applying different materials

increaasing volume

reflective material diffusive material

organ/choir

absorptive material

organ

organ

var. 2 62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

var. 3 62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

final

62.5 hz 125 hz 250 hz 500 hz 1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

T-30

1.63 s

T-30

1.5 s

2.38 s

T-30

0.9 s

D-50

39.17% 38.77% 22.81% 26.2% 43.6% 27.5% 38.32% 20.07%

D-50

26.4% 37.85% 24.4% 18.1% 19.75% 21.7% 14.63% 14.9%

D-50

44.14% 44.76% 29.46% 28.17% 29.297% 28.76% 24.37% 31.46%

1.49s

2.11 s

1.55 s

1.54 s 1.96 s 1.4 s

1.34 s

echo 10% False (speech)

1.41 s 2.17 s

True

True

2.38 s

True

2.78 s 2.91 s 3.07 s

True

True

True

True

echo 10% False (speech)

0,95 s 1.65 s

False

False

1.89 s

False

2.49 s 2.65 s 2.66 s

False

True

True

2.05 s

True

ILL. 54 - ACOUSTIC SIMULATION

Designprocesss

49

2.78 s 2.91 s 3.07 s

True

True

True

2.3

Tru


CONSTRUCTION

The architectural concept contained to have a tower as landmark in the building, which shall be an integrated part of the form. The evolution of the structure follows the thin tectonic hierarchy of the concept, starting from the „shoebox” basic contour, differently lifted corner points at the roof which creates a doublecurved surface, despite it’s still built up from straight lines in all parallel sections. The architectural concept contained to have a tower as landmark in the building, which shall be an integrated part of the form. Pairing the concept of shoebox with the result of acoustic experiences: strict exterior, curved hyperbolic interior. Creating the proper structure(s) for a form cannot be random while using the tectonic methods. In this case the form’s main properties were already

ILL. 55 - STRUCTURE PRINCIP ILLUSTRATION

50

Designprocess

ILL. 56 - STRUCTURAL ILLUSTRATION


given, just like the wish to use timber as struc-

the church nave.Thus the form finding was based

ture material. The solution shall be a system that

for the nave and happened in Karamba software

can be easily adopted to each building of the pro-

which allows to get instant general feedback of a

gram, however the „source” of it shall be found in

parametrized system:

ILL. 57 - STRUCTURAL ILLUSTRATION

Shifting of beams

0

1

2

3

Max. Distance

33 m

16 m

8m

4m

Cross-Section (mm)

675x2250

440x1460

360x1200

300x1000

Volume of timber(m3)

835

353 ½

290

245

Columns dimension

2 x 11

2 x 11

2 x 11 + 2 x 1

2 x 11 + 2 x 2

Designprocesss

51


Fitting different solutions to the form, reaching ra-

ings the first solution fits the most.

tio=1.00 (= utilisation 100%) with only self-weight

The static scheme is a totally fixed frame structure

The fourth explored variation became chosen for

(in the nave in a diagrid organisation) supported

the church room which serves both the structural

with hinged ubstructure for the wallsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; strifness.

and aesthetical needs. For the small other build-

ILL. 58 - STATIC SCHEME OF STRUCTURE

The deeper analysis happened in Autodesk Robot

applied: 400 x 1250 mm for the church nave and

which is a well-detailed software for final-element

200 x 500 mm for the other buildings.

methods (FEM). Concluding static, economical and

The chosen material is glue-laminated Norway

aesthetic views, two regular cross sections were

spruce (Pieca abies) form local raw material.

52

Designprocess


For the design of joints the main basic aspects

- location of extensions shall be at the zero-points

were:- the elements shall be produced in factory in

of bending moments

smaller pieces, transported to the site and assem-

- it shall keep the fixed system of the structure

bling easily there

Chosen solution are three variation of steel plate connections:

ILL. 59 - JOINT ILLUSTRATION

Designprocesss

53


FACADE STUDIES A facade study was explored during the workshop 3 in terms of aesthetics, functionality and indoor/outdoor relation. Different proposals was investigated and applied for further investigation. Wooden slats were implemented on the facade and technical details were examined.

ILL. 60 -

ILL. 61 -

54

Designprocess

ILL. 62 -


ILL. 63 -

Designprocesss

55


MODEL STUDIES A model study was examined in order to get a better understanding of the scale and the interior spaces aswell as solving specific design issues. In our first design proposal of the church volume, the interior space was divided by a transverse wall going on the longitudinal direction, creating spaces for the chapel and additional sacral rooms. A design issue with this proposal, was that it divided not only the interior spaces, but also the structure of the roof which was unfortunately for the aesthetic and the tectonic expression. Therefore we redesigned the interior space, placing boxes to create spaces both within the box and inbetween the box and the walls. The backwall was also redesigned, so that it follows the construction of the transverse beams, creating spaces, but still maintaining the view of the structure.

ILL. 65

ILL. 64

56

Designprocess

ILL. 66


ILL. 68

ILL. 67

ILL. 69

Designprocesss

57


LIGHT STUDIES

58

Designprocess

ILL. 68


ILL. 69

Designprocesss

59


This chapter is the result of the previous ones, and contains a description of the main concept, which is derived from the design parameters and also the integrated design process.


Concept

04


CONCEPT

„An ideal architecture is an outdoor space that feels like an indoors and an indoor spacethat feels like the outdoors.”

ILL. 70 - CONCEPT ILLUSTRATION

62

Concept

- Sou Fujimoto


STRATEGY

Boxes divided by function

admin

sacred

education

public

Orientation towards center

Connection inbetween functions

Circulation inbetween buildings

Access from context

Indoor-outdoor relation

ILL. 71 - DESIGN STRATEGY ILLUSTRATION

Concept

63


VISION

64

Concept


The vision for the project is to create a church that invites the community to be involved in the use of the buildings. Buildings in which the atmosphere are closely related to the surrounding context, where the users are feeling connected to the nature, also when inside. The building should be designed with a tectonic approach, which creates integrity between form material, structure and construction. It is strived for to achieve a Nordic expression, this is applied to the esthetics as well as the Nordic building tradition regarding construction. Furthermore the goal is to use parametric design tools to calculate and verify the construction.

Concept

65


This chapter contains the presentation of the final proposal made, including, renders, section, elevations etc. to give a detailed description of the project.


05

Presentation


MASTER PLAN

68

Presentation


ILL. 72 - MASTERPLAN 1 : 1000

Presentation

69


ILL. 73 - FLOOR PLAN - GROUND FLOOR 1 : 500

70

Presentation


DW

ILL. 74 - FLOOR PLAN - FIRST FLOOR 1 : 500

ILL. 75 - FLOOR PLAN - SECOND FLOOR 1 : 500

ILL. 76 - FLOOR PLAN - THIRD FLOOR 1 : 500

Presentation

71


RENDER 1

72

Presentation


ILL. 77

Presentation

73


RENDER 2

74

Presentation


ILL. 79

Presentation

75


RENDER 3

76

Presentation


ILL. 80

Presentation

77


78

Presentation


ILL. 81

Presentation

79


80

Presentation


ILL. 82

Presentation

81


SECTION AA 1:300

82

Presentation


ILL. 83 - SECTION 1 : 300

Presentation

83


SECTION BB 1:300

84

Presentation


ILL. 84 - SECTION 1 : 300

Presentation

85


SECTION CC 1:300

86

Presentation


ILL. 85 - SECTION 1 : 300

Presentation

87


ELEVATION NORTH-WEST

88

Presentation


ILL. 86 - ELEVATION 1 : 300

Presentation

89


ELEVATION SOUTH-WEST

90

Presentation


ILL. 87 - ELEVATION 1 : 300

Presentation

91


ELEVATION SOUTH-EAST

92

Presentation


ILL. 88 - ELEVATION 1 : 300

Presentation

93


ELEVATION NORTH-EAST

94

Presentation


ILL. 89 - ELEVATION 1 : 300

Presentation

95


MATERIALS

The main material used in this project is wood

great choice for structural solutions. Also, it is eco-

which was applied in a way to focus on its tectonic

nomically most important and most common tree

potential. When choosing between various types

species in Norway.

of wood, different aspects have been considered,

The roof and facades of all church buildings are

such as: characteristic strength of the wood, resis-

covered with vertical rafters (70x30 mm) of Siberi-

tances to weather conditions, colors and textures.

an larch (Larix sibirica). It is a very dense wood with

Priority was also set for locally produced materials,

moderate durability and resistance to rot and fun-

taking into account energetic sustainability.

gal attack which makes it ideal for outdoor spaces.

Materials used in this church are divided into four

It’s natural honey-brown color usually turns more

main categories: loadbearing construction, exteri-

grey over one to two years of UV exposure. Also,

or, interior and corridor materials.

charring creates a layer of carbon which extends it’s lifespan of 30-50 years or more.

Loadbearing construction (Fig. 54) – spruce picture Norway spruce (Picea abies) was the most logical

Interior walls and ceiling of the church are covered

choice for construction due to its good properties

with birch (Betula pubescents) plywood (20 mm).

and local availability. The construction columns

It’s commonly used for interiors and also meets the

and beams are made of glued spruce laminates

desired criteria as a clean and light surface which

which can be easily produced for required cross

fits in between the loadbearing columns. Birch is

sections of the structure. It’s lightweight, relative

also one of the most common tree species in Nor-

strength; long length and straightness make it a

way which means it is available as a local product.

96

Presentation


ILL. 90 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

ILL. 91 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

ILL. 92 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

Presentation

97


Floors in the church are tiled with grey stoneware tiles which are made by grinding the stone material and storing them into slots to unify their properties. Loadbearing frames and rafters in the corridors are using the same material as the church building, while the floors and roof are different. Floors are paved with gravel tiles in order to create a boundary space between inner (stone tiles) and outdoor (natural paths and pavements) spaces. Flat roof on top of the corridors are predicted as green surfaces as an extensive green roof with planted succulents plants. Flat roof on top of the corridors are predicted as green surfaces as an extensive green roof with planted succulents plants.

98

Presentation


ILL. 93 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

ILL. 94 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

ILL. 95 - MATERIALS ILLUSTRATION

Presentation

99


DETAILS

In order to ensure the best performance of the

church room with loadbearing columns, connection

building, all materials has to be considered and

between two walls, window detail and placement of

their mutual connection developed. Crucial details

a facade cladding. Detail 2. is showing complete

of the building have been defined such as: detail-

section from the foundation to the roof, where

ing the envelope, defining types of surfaces and

drainage has been considered and window detail

textures, and detailing the openings. Details are

where it meets the ground.Detail 3. presents con-

containing wall and floor layers list with all defined

nection between encoded wall and facade which is

materials. Detail 1. is showing plan view of the

meeting the ground.

ILL. 96 - WALL 1 : 25

100

Presentation


ILL. 97 - DETAIL OF FOUNDATION + WALL 1 : 25

Presentation

101


ILL. 98 - FOUNDATION 1 : 25

102

Presentation


Presentation

103


Epilogue

06


CONCLUSION

Based on the competition brief for the Hatleholen church, there has been designed a proposal for the church that shall serve as a religious landmark of the city. The church complex including the communal function is designed in a way that compliments the side and takes the context into consideration, in a way that makes the architecture a prolongation of the nature. This enhances the feeling of being outside when being inside, which is the main design parameters. The paths of the entrances to the church which are derived from the analysis, creates a walkthrough the forest which activates all of your senses. The urban planning ensures that visitors, experience nature at its fullest, and experience the architecture, in a human scale due to the height of the corridors in relation to the towering church. The church expression is of Nordic expression, and is made in wood from the local area, the type and origin of the wood ensures sustainability. The construction is true to the material and is made from a tectonic point of view, which fulfills both the aesthetic and technical aspects of architecture.

106

Appendix


REFLECTION

Looking at the project we can say that the result is more of a progress than a specific solution. Integrated Design Process helped to collect all the perspectives to solve the problems in acoustics and statics and let us offer a result that satisfies both aesthetic and technical requirements. The suggestions in the two theme above are proved by different simulation progresses and explorations. Using the tools of digital fabrication allowed to parametrize and study different variations of every system, however the amount of time was fairly not enough to have all the analyses and finalize the proper details for them, thus the some missing in the report can be found. Smaller difficulties were observed also because of the beta versions of these experimental tools, in spite of this it is uncontroverted that reaching these softwareâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s border helps to fix and improve them in the future. Despite these, the results gotten are valid and show the process of a tectonic design and could be easily developed in case of a bigger time capacity.

Appendix

107


Appendix

07


SURROUNDING CHURCHES

FIG. 1

FIG. 2

110

Appendix


FIG. 3

FIG. 4

Appendix

111


FIG. 5

112

Appendix


FIG. 7

FIG. 8

Appendix

113


FIG.9

FIG.10

FIG.11

114

Appendix


FIG.12

FIG.13

FIG.14

Appendix

115


CALCULATIONS ACOUSTICS 1)

The tables with results (T-30, D-50, C-80)

for different receivers (receiver 0 and 1)which were

The tables below shows all given results from

relevant for showing, how definition is much high-

Pachyderm, according to frequencies and sound

er when receiver are closer to source. Positions of

sources. The main parameters which are taken into

sound sources and receivers are shown in figure xx

consideration are: reverberation time (T-30), defini-

(picture section with sources in report part).

tion (D-50) and clarity (C-80). There are also results

T-30, D-50, C-80

FINAL RESULTS from Pachyderm T-30

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

priest

0.9 s

0,95 s

1.65 s

1.89 s

2.49 s

2.65 s

2.66 s

2.05 s

organ

1.2s

1.26 s

2.05 s

2.4 s

2.47 s

2. 74 s

2.88 s

2.27 s

choir

1.07 s

1.07 s

1.64 s

2.17 s

2.45 s

2.47 s

2.81 s

1.99 s

D-50 priest organ choir

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

rec.0

44.14 % 44.76 % 29.46 % 28.17% 11.67 % 12.45 % 20.37 % 20.59 %

rec.1

25.35 % 34.05 % 29.3 %

rec.0

39.93 % 31.36 % 22.75 % 25.45 % 13.74 % 18.78 % 15.11 % 25.05 %

rec.1

57.74 % 58.34 % 43.05 % 43.65 % 43.61 % 37.38 % 37.51 % 30.42 %

rec.0

63.02 % 65.63 % 55.98 % 39.98 % 35.22 % 43.05 % 37.89 % 47.51 %

rec.1

40.5 %

C-80 organ

7.63 %

38.56 % 19.73 % 9.58 %

21.32 % 14.82 % 22.98 % 11.94 %

6.34 % 19.3 %

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

rec.0

2.27 s

2.3 s

-1.76 s

- 2.71 s - 5.89 s - 4.5 s

rec.1

2.94 s

2.77 s

0.63 s

0.86 s

9.3 %

3.81 %

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz 1.77 s

- 5.91 s - 3.97 s

- 0.08 s - 0.11 s - 1.22 s

MATERIAL absorption and scattering coefficient Appendix 116 coeff.

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz


2)

Mapping pictures and legend

Mapping of reveberation time is sligtly different

Using Pachyderm mapping tool, some results from

from results acording to frequencies. The pictures

the analysis can be shown graphicaly. Relevant pa-

are showing the T-30 is almost equaly distirbuted

rameters in this analysis were sound pressure level

along the audience, while audience closer to the

(SPL), reverberation time (T-30) and definition (D-

source have always slightly lower reverberation

50). The color graph is placed to the audience in or-

time than the audiance in the back.

der to show results allong the whole audiance surface, depending on the three sources: the priest, organ and choir. SPL pics Sound pressure level is indicator of acoustic wave strength and it can be interpreted as human preception of loudness [Long, Marshal: Architectural

D-50 pics

acoustics, 2006.].

Deffinition (D-50) graphs show good sound distin-

T-30 pics

guishing allong the whole audience. The most of the public are reaching 40-50%, while the ones closer to source are aproaching 70-80% of the deffinition values. 3)

Material coefficients

FIG.16

Appendix

117


FINAL RESULTS from Pachyderm T-30

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

priest

0.9 s

0,95 s

1.65 s

1.89 s

2.49 s

2.65 s

2.66 s

2.05 s

organ

1.2s

1.26 s

2.05 s

2.4 s

2.47 s

2. 74 s

2.88 s

2.27 s

choir

1.07 s

1.07 s

1.64 s

2.17 s

2.45 s

2.47 s

2.81 s

1.99 s

D-50 priest

rec.0

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

44.14 % 44.76 % 29.46 % 28.17% 11.67 % 12.45 % 20.37 % 20.59 %

rec.1 25.35 % 34.05 % 29.3 % 7.63 % 21.32 % 14.82 % 22.98 % 11.94 % In order to perform acoustic analysis in Pachyderm, 4) Audience

all surfaces must have properties rec.0applied 39.93material % 31.36 % 22.75 % 25.45 % 13.74 % 18.78 % 15.11 % 25.05 %

organ

as absorption and rec.1 scattering the % The scattering coeffitiens are%calculated follow-% 57.74coefficients. % 58.34 %In 43.05 43.65 % 43.61 % 37.38 37.51 %as30.42 tested model there were four types of assigned maing: rec.0

63.02 % 65.63 % 55.98 % 39.98 % 35.22 % 43.05 % 37.89 % 47.51 %

choir terials, which had assigned absorptive coeffitiens

f = c / (d * 4)

“Audience and Chair Absorption in Large Halls,”

f = the frequency above which the scattering coef-

40.5 % 38.56 % 19.73 % 9.58 % from the sound apsorption tabels [L.L. Beranek, rec.1

6.34 % 19.3 %

9.3 %

3.81 %

Journal of the Acoustical Society America, will be 90%,hz and2000 belowhzwhich thehz scattering C-80 62.5 hzof 125 hz Jan250 hz ficient 500 hz 1000 4000 8000 hz uary 1969.]: coefficient will be 20% or lower;

organ

rec.0

2.27 s

2.3 s

-1.76 s

rec.1

2.94 s

2.77 s

0.63 s

1)

Reflective walls/roof – (no.17.)

2)

Apsorptive walls – (no. 24.)

3)

Floor – (no.28.)

- 2.71 s - 5.89 s - 4.5 s

- 5.91 s - 3.97 s

d= average dimension of irregularity;

0.86 s

1.77 s

- 0.08 s - 0.11 s - 1.22 s

c= speed of sound in air=343 [m/s];

MATERIAL absorption and scattering coefficient coeff.

62.5 hz 125 hz

250 hz

500 hz

1000 hz 2000 hz 4000 hz 8000 hz

reflective walls/roof

absorbtion

42 %

42 %

21 %

10 %

8%

6%

6%

10 %

scattering

20 %

20 %

20 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

absorptive walls

absorbtion

15 %

15 %

26 %

62 %

94 %

64 %

92 %

60 %

scattering

20 %

20 %

20 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

absorbtion

1%

1%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

2%

scattering

20 %

20 %

20 %

20 %

20 %

20 %

20 %

20 %

absorbtion

15 %

25 %

35 %

45 %

55 %

55 %

50 %

45 %

scattering

20 %

20 %

20 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

90 %

floor audience FIG.19

118

Appendix


Appendix

119


CALCULATIONS STRUCTURE

1. Calculations 1.1.

Snow load

Ă&#x2026;lesund â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 3

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

http://www.fig.ol.no/~atso0701/NS%20tabeller/NS-EN%201991-1-3%20pkt.%20NA.4.1.pdf

đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; = đ?&#x153;&#x2021;đ?&#x153;&#x2021;đ?&#x2018;&#x2013;đ?&#x2018;&#x2013; â&#x2C6;&#x2122; đ??śđ??śđ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; â&#x2C6;&#x2122; đ??śđ??śđ?&#x2018;Ąđ?&#x2018;Ą â&#x2C6;&#x2122; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x153;&#x2021;đ?&#x153;&#x2021;đ?&#x2018;&#x2013;đ?&#x2018;&#x2013; = the snow load coefficient = evenly distributed load 0,8 for â&#x2030;¤ 30° đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; = the characteristic snow load on the ground = 3 đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;â &#x201E;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

đ??śđ??śđ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; = the expositor coefficient = Windswept topography, where đ??śđ??śđ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; = 1,2

đ??śđ??śđ?&#x2018;Ąđ?&#x2018;Ą = the thermal coefficient = 1

đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020; đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;đ?&#x2018;&#x2020;88

120

Appendix

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2


1.2.

Wind loads

(see pdf02)

đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? 0 = 28

đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; 

Basic wind velocity:

đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018; = 1

đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  = 1, transportable structure Peak velocity pressure

đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? = đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018; â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? đ?&#x2018;&#x153;đ?&#x2018;&#x153;

đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? = 1 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 1 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 28

đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; = 28 đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; 

đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? (đ?&#x2018;§đ?&#x2018;§) = đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 0,613 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?2 Terrain category lll Average height z = 11.36 đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; = 1.8 - 4.10 eurocode_1_1.4

Appendix

121


Basic wind velocity: đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? = đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018; â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? đ?&#x2018;&#x153;đ?&#x2018;&#x153;

đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018;đ?&#x2018;&#x2018; = 1

đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  = 1, transportable structure Peak velocity pressure

đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? = 1 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 1 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 28

đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; = 28 đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;  đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; 

đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? (đ?&#x2018;§đ?&#x2018;§) = đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 0,613 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; đ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;Łđ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?2 Terrain category lll Average height z = 11.36 đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;&#x2019;đ?&#x2018;&#x2019; = 1.8 - 4.10 eurocode_1_1.4

FIG.20

đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;?đ?&#x2018;? (đ?&#x2018;§đ?&#x2018;§) = 1.8 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 0,613 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; (28

đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; 2 ) = 865 2 = 0.865 2 đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161; đ?&#x2018; đ?&#x2018; 

Line loads on elements

FIG.21

External pressure coefficients for monopitch roofs â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 7.3a eurocode_1_1.4 122

Appendix


External pressure coefficients for monopitch roofs â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 7.3a eurocode_1_1.4

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;

G: đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;¤đ?&#x2018;¤ = â&#x2C6;&#x2019;1.9 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 0.865 đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2 = â&#x2C6;&#x2019;1.125

H: đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;&#x17E;đ?&#x2018;¤đ?&#x2018;¤ = â&#x2C6;&#x2019;1,3 â&#x2C6;&#x2014; 0.865

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

= â&#x2C6;&#x2019;0.779

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC; 7 đ?&#x2018;&#x161;đ?&#x2018;&#x161;2

External pressure coefficients for vertical walls of rectangular buildings â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 7.1 eurocode_1_1.4

Appendix

123


A: 𝑞𝑞𝑤𝑤 = −1.2 ∗ 0.865

B: 𝑞𝑞𝑤𝑤 = −0.8 ∗ 0.865

C: 𝑞𝑞𝑤𝑤 = −0.5 ∗

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 0.865 2 𝑚𝑚

D: 𝑞𝑞𝑤𝑤 = 0,8 ∗ 0.865

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

= −1.038

= −0.692 =

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

E: 𝑞𝑞𝑤𝑤 = −0,5 ∗ 0.865 2 = 0.433 𝑚𝑚

124

Appendix

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 −0.433 2 𝑚𝑚

= 0.692

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑚𝑚2

FIG.22


1.3.

Load combinations

ULS ∑ 𝛾𝛾𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺𝐺 ∙ 𝐺𝐺𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 " + "𝑌𝑌𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄 ∙ 𝑄𝑄𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 " + " ∑ 𝛾𝛾𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄 ∙ 𝜓𝜓𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 ∙ 𝑄𝑄𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗

𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

SLS ∑ 𝐺𝐺𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 + 𝑄𝑄𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 + ∑ 𝜓𝜓𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 ∙ 𝑄𝑄𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾𝐾 𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗

𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

The factors for each load combinations have been found in Eurocode0, and been applied in grasshopper and then exported to Robot.

ULS – Snowload dominant ∑ 1,35 ∙ 6,85 𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 + 1,5 ∗ 2,88 2 ∙ (4𝑚𝑚) ∑ 1,5 ∗ 0,6 ∗ (4𝑚𝑚) ∗ 0,769 2 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

SLS ∑ 6,85 𝑗𝑗𝑗𝑗

𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 𝑘𝑘𝑘𝑘 + 2,88 2 ∗ (4𝑚𝑚) + ∑ 0,6 ∗ 0,769 2 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑚𝑚 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖

Appendix

125


2. Model in Karamba Model settings: All loads vectorized after the calculations above. Support restraints: Tx, Ty, Tz, Rx, Ry, Rz Bending beams: True Bending columns: True Bending sub-structure: False Utilization results: -95.7% to 90.8%

126

Appendix

Bar number

M_y

results

maximum

(loadcomb.leading:snow) bar 345

995.618121 kNm

bar 278

995.435759 kNm

bar 365

990.897599 kNm

bar 289

990.755788 kNm

bar 551

99.870923

kNm

bar 453

98.542101

kNm

bar 463

98.032865

kNm

bar 339

977.975859

kNm

bar 281

977.955717

kNm

bar 410

968.396291 kNm

bar 465

96.416467

kNm

bar 401

95.796338

kNm

bar 367

942.966775 kNm

bar 290

942.691944 kNm


3. Model in Robot Loads, supports and bar properties are set after the Karamba settings. M_y results (illustration attached06)

Appendix

127


Ratio results (illustration and table attached07 08 09)

Bar tag

Section tag

Material

Lay

Laz

RATIO Load case

129

sectionbig2

C24

1.38

4.48

1.00

3 snow

131

sectionbig2

C24

2.61

8.49

0.98

3 snow

133

sectionbig2

C24

3.85

12.50 0.96

3 snow

204

section big

C24-karamba 6.93

21.65 0.95

3 snow

135

section big

C24-karamba 5.28

16.51 0.94

3 snow

153

sectionbig2

C24

0.94

151

section big

C24-karamba 4.78

155

sectionbig2

C24

159

section big

C24-karamba 1.32

4.13

0.91

3 snow

157

section big

C24-karamba 3.92

12.24 0.91

3 snow

80

section big

C24-karamba 14.69 45.90 0.90

3 snow

8

section big

C24-karamba 14.87 46.46 0.90

3 snow

16

section big

C24-karamba 14.73 46.02 0.90

3 snow

14

section big

C24-karamba 14.63 45.73 0.89

3 snow

65

section big

C24-karamba 14.68 45.88 0.88

3 snow

77

section big

C24-karamba 14.69 45.92 0.88

3 snow

15

section big

C24-karamba 14.66 45.80 0.87

3 snow

17

section big

C24-karamba 14.85 46.41 0.87

3 snow

64

section big

C24-karamba 14.64 45.74 0.87

3 snow

81

section big

C24-karamba 14.79 46.21 0.86

3 snow

128

Appendix

2.10 6.26

6.82

3 snow

14.94 0.92

20.36 0.92

3 snow

3 snow


5

section big

C24-karamba 14.63 45.73 0.85

3 snow

6

section big

C24-karamba 14.66 45.81 0.85

3 snow

63

section big

C24-karamba 14.64 45.76 0.85

3 snow

293

section big

C24-karamba 6.93

21.65 0.85

3 snow

7

section big

C24-karamba 14.74 46.06 0.85

3 snow

66

section big

C24-karamba 14.77 46.17 0.85

3 snow

78

section big

C24-karamba 14.64 45.75 0.84

3 snow

68 Timber Member_68

section big

C24-karamba 6.98

348

sectionsmall C24-karamba 59.58 74.48 0.83

3 snow

137

section big

C24-karamba 6.57

20.52 0.82

3 snow

4

section big

C24-karamba 14.66 45.80 0.82

3 snow

19

section big

C24-karamba 15.24 47.64 0.82

3 snow

271

section big

C24-karamba 6.93

21.65 0.82

3 snow

210

section big

C24-karamba 6.93

21.65 0.81

3 snow

148

section big

C24-karamba 0.45

1.40

0.81

3 snow

79

section big

C24-karamba 14.64 45.75 0.80

3 snow

18

section big

C24-karamba 15.02 46.95 0.79

3 snow

125

section big

C24-karamba 5.80

18.12 0.79

3 snow

76

section big

C24-karamba 14.80 46.24 0.78

3 snow

67

section big

C24-karamba 14.92 46.62 0.78

3 snow

149

section big

C24-karamba 6.93

3 snow

21.65 0.77

21.81 0.83

3 snow

Appendix

129


130

Appendix


JAPANESE JOINT

The structural system allows to integrate two kind of joint types. The primary one is a modern reinterpretation of traditional Japanese technics that allows to create a fixed connection between two bars wothout using any metal or other helping tool, only the own material transmit loads. (ill.1) This is suggested to use between those elements that are assembled on the ground before craning.The secundary one is the steel plate technic that was already presented in the structure chapter. It is for assembling smaller elements during craning, in the air.

Appendix

131


CALCULATIONS PARKING

There are 52 parking places on the eastern en-

Total number of parking places are 201, which

trance plato of the site, and 149 parking places on

meets the parish criteria and capacity of the church

the southern plato adjacent to the graveyard area.

for 500 people.

132

Appendix


Appendix

133


WORKSHOP ADD. SKETCHES

134

Appendix


Appendix

135


136

Appendix


Appendix

137


138

Appendix


Appendix

139


140

Appendix


Appendix

141


LIST OF REFERENCES

Cornel E., The Space in Architecture (1996) Frampton K., Towards a Critical Regionalism (1983) Frampton K., Studies in tectonic culture (1997) Juhani Pallasmaa, Eye of the skin: architecture and the senses, 2007 L.L. Beranek, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Audience and Chair Absorption in Large Halls,â&#x20AC;? Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, January 1969. Marshal Long: Architectural acoustics, 2006 Nilsson F., New technology, new tectonics? - On architectural and structural expressions with digital tools (2007) Oxman R., Morphogenesis in the theory and methodology of digital tectonics 2010 Parigi D., Performance Aided Design (IASS-SLTE 2014 Symposium) Semper G., Style (1860) Trada Timber Industry Yearbook 2014

142

Appendix


Appendix

143


LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Contents

Ill. 22 - http://traveljapanblog.com/wordpress/

Ill. 1 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

wp-content/uploads/2008/07/img_6262trim.jpg

Ill. 2 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 23 - https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/

Ill. 3- OWN ILLUSTRATION

commons/8/8b/Bishop_Edward_King_Chapel_

Ill. 4 - Ã&#x2026;lesund church, 1904 - 09

5

(inside)-130928.JPG

Ill. 5 - Spjelkavik church, 1987 5

Ill. 24 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 6 - Volsdalens church, 1974 5

Ill. 27 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 7 - Svenne Fehn pavilion

Ill. 26 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

7

Ill. 8 - GC Prostho Museum Research Center, Kengo

Ill. 28 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

kuma & Associates

Ill. 29 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

9

Ill. 9 - Four senses illustration 11

Ill. 30 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 10 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 31 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 11 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 32 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 12 - Spruce - Picea abies 17

Ill. 33 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 13 - Pine - Pinus sylvestris 17

Ill. 34 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 14 - Birch - Betula pubescens

17

Ill. 35 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 15 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 36 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 16 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 37 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 17 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 38 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 18 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 39 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 19 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 40 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 20 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 42 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 21 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 41 - OWN ILLUSTRATION Ill. 43 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

144

Appendix


Ill. 44 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 68 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 45 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 69 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 46 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 68 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 47 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 69 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 48 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 70 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 49 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 71 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 50 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 72 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 51 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 73 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 52 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 74 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 53 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 75 - OWN ILLUSTRATION1

Ill. 54 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 76 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 55 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 77 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 56 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 79 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 57 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 80 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 58 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 81 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 59 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 82 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 60 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 83 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 61 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 84 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 62 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 85 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 63 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 86 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 64 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 87 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 65 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 88 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 66 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 89 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 67 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 90 - Materials illustration 97

Appendix

145


Ill. 91 - Materials illustration 97

Ill. 95 - Materials illustration 99

Ill. 92 - Materials illustration 97

Ill. 96 88 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

Ill. 93 - Materials illustration 99

Ill.

Ill. 94 - Materials illustration 99

Ill. 88 - OWN ILLUSTRATION

88 - OWN ILLUSTRATION 101

Appendix Fig. 1 110 Fig. 2 110 Fig. 3 111 Fig. 4 111 Fig. 5 112 Fig. 7 113 Fig. 8 113 Fig.10 114 Fig.11 114 Fig.9 114 Fig.12 115 Fig.13 115 Fig.14 115 Fig.16 117 Fig.17 118 Fig.18 118 Fig.19 118

146

Appendix


Appendix

147

HATLEHOL church AAU msc.ark 1/15-16  
HATLEHOL church AAU msc.ark 1/15-16  
Advertisement