investigations in architectural systems thomas keiper

investigations in architectural systems

scale: small

large

table of contents

living pod

pavilion 1.0

pavilion 2.0

pavilion 2.1

house 2.0

chapel

proposal for renovations

natatorium

tower

future city (infrastructure) study

4

14

18

20

24

28

36

44

50

54

living podcritic: a. perez- mendezlocation: se united states site: n/ayear designed: 2012

The living pod project investigates the possibilities of mo-bile architecture. It is essentially a small house that can be closed up and transported, and reopened when it is placed in a new location. It is only 10ft. wide and 22ft. long when it is in the closed position and thus it can be transported using various means. The design of the pod addresses the problems of existing types of mobile living: the mobile home, the R.V. the pop-up camper – all of which are relatively internal. One goes to a new location to experience that location, but none of these typologies have a good relation to the surrounding landscape in which they are placed.The thesis of the pod is that through flexibility/operability, good design can drastically improve the experience of mobile living. The living pod opens to extend itself into any land-scape, while also allowing the landscape to flow in. Large decking systems swing down on both sides of the pod to provide more useable space. Overhangs swing up to shade the interior, and operable fins regulate privacy. Also a sleep-ing box slides out to increase the interior space.

4

closed open

5

sleeping boxfold out decking

fold out overhang

operable finsprimary structure

secondary systemroof surface

subtropical humid

The living pod is designed primarily for areas in the south eastern United States for climatic reasons. However, during certain months of the year different places around the globe present climates similar to those in the specified region, and thus, the pod can travel to those areas for a limited time.

wc door swings out to contain the shower and prevent water from entering the primary living area

hot plates fold into the cabinet to save space when not in use

the t.v. swings out to allow for viewing from both the sleeping and living areas

the back of the seating folds to become a hard surface next to the bed (night stand)

a table extends out of the floor to provide a formal eating space

a panel in the floor opens to allow for extra storage

pavilion 1.0critic: a. perez- mendezlocation: none site: n/ayear designed: 2010

Pavilion 1.0 is a study in the tectonics of concrete. Typi-cally, one associates concrete with solid, plastic, monolithic constructions. The focus here was to challenge the ste-reotype. The primary structure of the pavilion is a concrete “exoskeleton.” Conceptually, the structure was imagined as slabs of concrete aligned like dominos; when the slabs are pushed they slip through each other until finally resting at a point along the length of another slab. (This action is performed again in the other direction, and the two are in-tersected). The resulting geometry is inherently structural, and all loads are transferred diagonally to the ground.The slabs also make an extremely interesting overhead condition; the intersection of the slabs creates a grid - this is also reflected in the floor. The skin is made up of concrete fins that filter light, shading the interior, and a glass and mullion system. The mullions communicate with the language of the exterior structure.

14

15

concrete primary structureconcrete fins glass and mullion system

pavilion 2.0critic: a. perez- mendezlocation: nonesite: n/ayear designed: 2011

equilateral triangle tessellation (identifying verti-ces)

moving vertices to create openings in the facade

x

xz

resultant jeweled facade

identifying the cen-ter and triangulat-ing (this operation also moves in the y direction to create a pyramid effect)

The pavilion 2 series is an exploration in the de-velopment of a façade. The goal was to produce a faceted effect to create depth within the skin. The façade began with an equilateral triangular grid. Selected vertices were moved to create openings for entry/exit and view. The resulting distorted grid was populated with triangular, translucent units which are positioned at a distance from the glass enclosure system, shading the interior space and allowing the skin to breathe. Once the strategy for the façade was decided, the challenge was to develop a structural system that would create a dialogue with the skin. Two different possibilities were studied:

Pavilion 2.0 makes use of an external wooden struc-ture that lifts the pavilion off the ground, allowing one to enter from underneath. The columns are grouped into threes. At one end, the columns are positioned tightly together; on the other end, the columns are spread apart. This action produces a triangular geometry that provides stability to the columns and overall structure, while also relating to the geometry of the skin. The end of the column grouping that is tightly together is alternated (bottom to top) across the facade to create connections to the roof system.

18

The generator is simply the desire to create a facade that is faceted/jew-eled, similar to an amethyst, as a srategy to diffuse light.

19

pavilion 2.1critic: a. perez- mendezlocation: nonesite: n/ayear designed: 2011

Pavilion 2.1 utilizes a metal structure that is sand-wiched between the glass system and the trans-lucent, faceted screen. The structure geometry is a series of x’s across the façade that interlock to increase the rigidity.The glass system is faceted to fit around the x’s of the structure, and when the glass bends in, it provides opportunities in the secondary system for hammocks to connect.

indicates con-nection points afforded by the secondary system

20

21

typical hammock connection

clips (connect the secondary to the primary structure)

beam system (supports the glass system)

primary structure

glass system (undulates around primary structure)

beam system (supports the faceted facade) faceted screen

primary structure

scuppers

roof structure

roof glass

glass system faceted facade

House 2.0 explores the potentials of prefabrication. The goal was to design a home that would function well for a site in the south eastern Unites States. The design is essentially a modulated glass box with protective shading devices. A large undulating waffle roof shades the building from all directions while still allowing ample light into the spaces. The curved translucent panels that make up the skin are extended from the glass box to filter light and reduce heat gain. Another benefit of the panels is that they are a standardized unit that easily can create variability in filtering light, allowing for views, and providing privacy. The majority of the structure is accom-plished by four groupings of three columns that split at the top to accept curved beams that follow the contours or the roof. Also some of the walls are loadbearing. The plan is organized by a system of curvilinear walls that we derived from the wrinkles in fabric. The layering of curved walls that structure the central stair, elegantly glide through the plan, dividing the primary public space from the more private spaces.

house 2.0critic: a. perez- mendezlocation: se united statessite: n/ayear designed:2010

24

25

waffle roof

columns (grouped in threes hold the roof structure)

curved walls slide through the interior,deviding the spaces

glass box

secondary structure

1st floor 2nd floor3 6 12

translucent curved panels

columns (grouped in threes hold the roof structure)

curved walls separate the public and private spaces

possible site

“ribbon”beams weavebetween the columns

The chapel assimilates the fundamental concepts integral to the life of the town and its people, and manifests them in a bold architectonic expression (specifically through the form and tectonics of the building). The (re)construction of the ground of the plaza allows for the engagement of the building, reinforcing its assertions. The concepts engaged include, but are not limited to: visual landscape issues, agricultural/landscape issues, social/cultural issues, religious (catholic) issues, anthropological issues, and climate related issues.

The foundation of the chapel seemingly floats on a pool of water; alluding to Jesus walking on water, this action subtly recalls the miracles present in religious doctrine.

chapelcritic: a. perez- mendezlocation: san martin de las cañas, tequila valley, mexicosite: small lot and adjacent plaza and bullfighting ring year designed: 2011

adjacent plaza

specific building site

site entry

site entry

site entry

existing irrigation stream

bullfighting ring/plaza

28

The formation of the mountains and valleys provide a unique defini-tion to the town’s current existence and pragmatic operation; the mountains are integral to the town’s identity and the identity of the people. The site for the chapel looks northwest to the mountains that contain the valley; the roof of the chapel is directly derived from this visual landscape. Expressed as a fragmented mountain range, the exaggerative aesthetic identifies more clearly the valleys (which are responsible for directing water from the mountains to the town).

29

Bullfighting Ring/Plaza Del ToroViewing Area For Bullfights/Public Seating Area

the soul of the chapel is contained in the triangular volumes and expressed openly at the altar

the roof and floor geometries emphasize entry and view

the skin expresses the human scale and the levels of occupation

roof

entry view

skin/enclosing membraneheight referenceentry floor levelmain floor level

anthropological window

soulaltarchoir

baptistry

mound/base

Site Entry Bridge Crossing Water To Entry

secondary system: holds skin

primary system: plinth, columns, and roof

vertical louver skin with frosted glass system

triangular volumes define programs: bathrooms, choir, and baptistry.

proposal for renovations: the architecture building at the university of floridasupervisor: a. perez- mendezlocation: gainesville, flsite: architecture building on the university of florida campusyear designed: 2011

proposal 1

proposal 2proposal 3

36

The school of Architecture at the University of Florida is interested in renovating the atrium space of the current architecture building. To raise interest and excitement in the project, they asked for a schematic proposal. The proposal was developed under Alfonso Perez-Mendez. The goal was to transform the atrium into a more use-able space, allowing for a range of opportunities: the gathering of students to relax and spend time outside the studio; the ability to hold critiques of student work; the ability to hold events, such as lectures in the space; etc. Ultimately, the project was subdivided into 3 separate proposals which operate individually, but also dovetail together. This subdivision allows for parts of the project to be constructed at different times depending on bud-get and time issues. Proposal 1 is a glass roof over the atrium. The new glass allows for light to still enter the space, and because it is lifted off the existing roof slightly, it also allows for ventilation. The roof protects the space from the rain and solves the issue of pooling water on the ground.Proposal 2 uses decking technology to create a softer landscape with more areas for sitting. It also helps to define the central space more, and it provides a more comfortable edge to many of the walkways.Proposal 3 allows for critiques to be held in the atrium space. Metal panels swing out to create individual rooms for discussion. When the panels are folded up, they can still be used to pin work/posters/flyers on.

37

water

water

gap for ventilation

radial structure to accomplish the angle

irregular corners make a repeated geometry difficult

?

connection with existing supports (to be determined)

structural frame

valleys

diamonds

diamonds run water to the valleys, controlling runoff and dividing rain load equally across the roof

walkway before walkway after

atrium after

atrium before

view of the lawn before

view of the lawn after, with pin up panels folded

view of the lawn after, with pin up panels unfolded and in use forcritiques

10.5ft.

9ft.

natatoriumcritic: g. petersonlocation: orlando, floridasite: old amway arena blockyear designed: 2010

44

The building of the natatorium was designed as an abstrac-tion. The façade is reminiscent of the movement of water down an undulating surface or over rocks - the water dances back and forth. The structure recalls this idea, but creates an interesting contrast between its own rigidity and the fluidity of the water contained inside in the pools. The louvers empha-size the concept; they increase in density as they move down the façade, creating the illusion that they slid down from the top, while also providing an interesting shading method. The interior space is intended to feel light, voluminous and airy so as to provide a comfortable environment for large numbers of people during events. White translucent pan-els on the roof diffuse the natural light and brighten up the spaces, while preventing direct harsh light which is not ideal for divers doing flips turns and twists in the air.

45

The construction of a Natatorium on the site is intended to serve as a focal point and resource for the surround-ing community, as well as an event space that could draw people from further away. The necessity to revitalize the area brought rise to the systematic concept of hurricanes, whirlpools, etc. where all of the energy in such systems is circulated around and drawn into a single focus. Utilizing the Natatorium as that focus, the rest of the site is intended to subtly rotate around it, creating a variety of paths that connect to the surrounding community.

structure

wooden louvers

secondary rod system

glass system

cross bracing

glass system

rigid columns

study model

towercritic: d. cohenlocation: milwaukee, wisconsinsite: downtown blockyear designed: 2008

The initial view of the tower focused on the relation-ship between the history of the city of Milwaukee and how the city is used today. Further investigation of this notion, lead to the idea of a multilayered city and to the condition of cohabitation. When the idea of cohabita-tion was applied to the tower program, it became im-portant to decide how to keep the various and distinct cultural programs in their entirety and still have them exist peacefully together. Enjambement is mainly a literary technique used in poetry to connect sequencing stanzas fluidly. This technique can be used to make the reader feel un-comfortable, and/or it can be used to convey a “flow of thought.” Architecturally the term refers to overlappings of elements of similar potency. The idea is to design the tower in a way that will structure the program through a sequence of sensorial enjambements. The concept of using sensorial divisions came from a brief analysis of how one notices the city. Ones overall perception of a city is created through the subcon-scious summation of all the senses. The tower pro-gram isolates the senses (but overlaps adjacent ones) to give the occupant a more acute sensation of the city.

50

context study (section):

context study (plan):

51

present

3m rise

60m rise

1m rise

6m rise

overlay

future city (infrastructure) studycritic: w. foklocation: orlando, floridasite: above the cityyear designed: 2011

It is undisputable that earth’s sea levels have been rising as a result of Global Warming. And scientists have proven that the situation is only going to get worse. One prediction by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) states that the sea level could rise 0.8m by 2100, and although it is more difficult to project accurately further into the future, it is a possibility that the sea levels could eventually rise 40m or more. As sea levels rise, tidal shifts become more drastic. In rela-tion to a 40m rise in sea level, it would not be unlikely to have tidal shifts of 10m; thus raising the sea level to 50m at highest tides. For cities in the southeastern United States (specifically Florida), where ground level elevations are low, sea level rise poses a threat to longevity. Cities that are interested in their future existence must start developing systems in preparation for total catastrophe. Cities such as Miami, Jacksonville, and St. Petersburg will confront the reality of flooding relatively soon due to their low elevations; it could even be hypothesized that it is already too late for these cities. Orlando is an ideal city to start develop-ing and implementing forward thinking infrastructure. The city of Orlando sits 30m above sea level in comparison to Miami which is less than 1m above sea level.Surface 2 is the future Orlando: as a response to the inevi-tability of flooding, the project proposes the construction of a new City directly on top of the old one, thus raising the city’s effective elevation above sea level. Surface 2 will act both symbolically and literally as a safe haven on high ground.The project focuses greatly on the foundational and infra-structural needs of a future city. The establishment of a second “ground” will take time, and there will be a period of transition in which both levels are inhabited. Eventually, old Orlando will be underwater and “normal” existence will con-tinue above. The scope of the project focuses specifically on the time period in which the original surface is phasing out. The foundation of Surface 2 is constructed from semi-regular modules that stack up from the Earth’s surface below. Vary-ing arrangements of these modules allow for gaps in which infrastructural systems (transportation, waste control, water supply and recycling, electricity, etc.) can pass through. The project will also examine briefly potential architectural typolo-gies that can begin to form from this foundation.

“emergents layer”50-60m

“canopy layer”30-40m

“shrub layer”<5m

rainforest strata diagram

300,000 people

orlando (30m above sea level) construction of columns

54

winter parkorlando

kissimmeedisney world

construction of new surface

45m

75m above sea level on top surface

construction of new city orlando floodspopulation moves up to new surface

55

system and module development:

The hexagon-triangle unit was developed by creating a connection between two basic geometries to form a solid. The solid’s dimen-sions are proportional; if the length of one of the triangle legs is 1 unit, then the height is 0.5 units. The nature of this proportion, in relation to the solid, creates limitations in the assembly of multiple solids.

hexagon-triangle v0.1

Moving forward with the solid would require the altering of the proportion. The height of the piece was raised to accommodate 4 equilateral triangle faces; the equilateral triangles allow for more con-nections between multiples of the solid. Because efficient production is driven by the constant possibility for rela-tionships, the new solid’s ap-plication in forming structures is more appropriate.

hexagon-triangle v0.2

The hexagon-triangle units utilized regular geometries, but as an assembly they pro-duced fairly irregular results. The process of maximizing the connections resulted in nonstructural forms. It is possible to produce structure-making units, but this produc-tion limits variations in the assembly.

The moon rock unit was the result of randomly cutting a cubic form. Stacking the unit produces regular forms that that are self-supporting. The connection methods however are inefficient; the random development of unit creates ‘wasted faces’ (faces where connections are not possible).

moon rock v0.1

The capsule unit is a variation on the hexagon-triangle v0.2 unit; it was created by con-necting 2 hexagon-triangle v0.2 units on the hexagon faces with the bottom unit rotated 60.̊ The capsule unit allows for the possibility of connections on all of the 8 equilateral triangle faces with any other equilateral triangle face of another capsule. The assembly of multiple capsules results in a regularized and structural form. This unit will be used for the continuation of the project.

hexagon-triangle capsule v0.1

40ft.

60ft.

6ft.

museumshopping mall

movie theater school

restaurant

transit hub

apartments

movie theater

public transit system

museum

office tower

old building from the original orlando (still in use)

study model

water collection units

transportationsystem

walkabilityunits/“streets”

upper levelcanopy units (primarilyoccupiable)

lower level canopy units (primarilyinfrastructural)

retail units or “gateway” units to other systems

park/greenspace units

integrated component systems:

infrastructural components:

growth (repeat module)

water collection module

water collection

walkability system

transportation system

park system

walkability module park module

large scale trasportation energy grid

=10,000

intersection

bridge

plan and section key

10 50 100

jourdona lafate

wearing awesome hats! (designed by me-thomas keiper)

kimmel chamat

to be continued…