Studio AirPart a

Leila Creagh-Molino

6 A1. Design Futuring

10 A2. Design Computation

13 A3. Composition/Generation

18 A4. Conclusion

19 A5. Learning Outcomes

18 A6. Appendix

22 Bibliography

a b26 B.1 Sectioning

28 B.2 ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion

30 B.2 AA Driftwood Pavilion

32 B.2 AA Driftwood Iterations & Selection Criteria 36 B.3 Digital Origami Emergency Pavilion

38 B.3 Reverse Engineering 40 B.4 Technique: Development 48 B. 5 Technique: Prototypes 49 B.6 Technique : Proposal 52 B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes 54 B.8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches 58 References

A . 1 Previous SubmissionsThe Seif Light Project

The Seif Light Project is a conceptualisation of several small objects creating a greater whole. It uses modern ‘solar, balloon-like forms’ developed by Sphelar to create a solar energy harvesting landscape. The panels are positioned to reflect the Seif sand dunes in the Rub’al Khali dessert. The density of panels is in relation to the topography of the site; the greater the distance above sea level, the greater the density of panels and thus energy can be harvested efficiently. [1]

The design intent of the student group is strong. There is analysis into a range of occur-rences involves synergy. Examples of this in-clude the daffodil field, the individual dots that create a line or colour, the folds of skin and the stars that collaborate in giving us the milky way. There is meaning in their final design because of this; there is a sense of relevance which allows a user or a financier to relate to the project with ease.

However, practically the proposal has seem-ingly little merit. There has been no mention of how these pins will stand

against the wind of the landscape and how they will be reinforced in the porous, sandy ground. Access to the point is limited and yet there has been mention of a car park and scale with little acknowledgement of how the user will traverse the space.

Also, the presentation lacks realism. The site plans and elevations are unclear or incom-plete. This means that any evaluation of the final ideas in the project will be limited and perhaps invalid. Given that it is unlikely that opportunity arose to visit the site it is under-standable that there was limited knowledge of the site and its interaction with the built elements. Therefore, this draw back may have been overlooked.

Holistically, the proposal aims to achieve an environmentally sensitive and sustainable design. It has employed new solar technolo-gies and thus demonstrated some innovation into a largely uncharted industry. Furthermore, the attention given to the existing site shows a considered approach to environmental mat-ters which involves past and present ideas in creating a liveable future.

1 2

5

A . 1 Previous SubmissionsAdaptive MutationsAdaptive Mutations by Joseph Sarafian is a public installation of a ‘biofriendly’ form. Primarily, the design harvests solar energy via photovoltaic cells to not only power its own lighting but also to feed into the grid. The structure is multipurpose, acting as strategic shading and seating. [2]

The uniqueness of this design is in it’s ability to produce energy. Sarafian has developed a method to slow the counter productiv-ity of conventional energy systems in urban communities through optimising the surface area of photovoltaic cells to natural sunlight. The proposed scale of the design is menial but personable and as such may be, in Fry’s (2008) words a ‘world shaping force’ [3] for this particular community in relating the advantages of sustainable design to groups of people.

One disadvantage of the design is in the lack of communication to the user regarding the creation and production of electricity. The most powerful tool an architect has, aside from developing a structure that will success-fully produce technology, is simultaneously

creating a dialogue between it and the user about it. Yes, the form is largely organic and plays around a preformed path, gently engag-ing with people walking through, but this is not enough because it doesn’t state ‘why’.

The concept of progressive change is key in design futuring. Fry describes design as a pro-cess of redirection according to circumstance or situation [3]. As a result, it is no longer the final form of architecture which is most im-portant but the way in which the building is equipped to respond to its neighbouring systems. In the adaptive mutations proposal, the designer intends for engagement with all people invested in the realisation of the proj-ect. There is a definite openness to change and the knowledge that the proposal is a DNA structure for sustainable design rather than an answer. This attitude is one way of ensuring a future for our global community because it beings with a blank slate and open ear for innovative, collaborative and creative ideas to push sustainable practice to new limits.

3 4Page 7

Fusion occurs at the core of the sun and is translated as warmth and light. That is to say, fusion power is what gives us life. Currently, ITER is intended to create fusion power arti-ficially using a ‘tokamac’ device. Within this device, more energy is produced that what is consumed. [4]

The tokamac device essentially transfers the energy generated by the fusion reaction into electricity. The reaction occurs between two Hydrogen isotopes and results in one helium nucleus, a neutron and energy. The neutron is absorbed by the walls of the tokamac and their energy transferred into heat. This heat is then used to produce steam and then, through turbines, produce electricity.

Presently, fusion power is still in the develop-mental phase. ITER is the leading body inves-tigating the production of the source and estimate that by 2040 the technology will be applicable to the grid system [4]. In the mean time, this resource offers numerous hypothet-icals in powering commercial and residential establishments, industry, national security, global environmental sustainability and inno-vative design in general.

The major benefit of fusion power is that it produces no green house gas emissions. There are no pollutants injected into the air we breath nor smog to clog our rain water and water systems. The production cost is unaf-fected by scale. Whether the energy is created to cater to a city, a country or the world, the demand will be met with relative ease [4].

Conceptually, fusion power may offer oppor-tunities to investigate a futuristic way of life. It suggests a technologically savvy society. It hints at a sophisticated and mature approach to the resources we currently rely on and lightly glazes over the possibility that we are, at present, merely children playing with toys, learning basic concepts, rules and conse-quences for a much greater and more pow-erful tool.

A . 1 Design TechnologiesFusion Power

5

5

A . 1 Design TechnologiesVertical Access Wind Turbine

Copenhagen currently produced 3% of it’s city power using wind powered energy [5]. This suggests consistent wind patterns that may be harvested on a more personable scale on land. Vertical access wind turbines (VAWT) are tall and slender, the main motor shaft located close to the ground for easy mechan-ical repairs, and the generator located at the height of the tower. They are advantageous for a small scale project because the do not need to be facing the direction of the wind and because their efficiency may be increased when there is greater density of units in an area. [6] However, in gusty winds, the system has been known to stall. This is a major disadvantage when applying the technology to Copenha-gen. Furthermore, the blades may experience stress in response to fluctuating wind patterns.

The VAWT system is perhaps a more prac-tical design technology than fusion power for a human use in one city. It will engage the natural weather patterns of the area and so profess the idea of sustainable interaction with resources that are immediately available. The visibility of the technology will also be important in creating a dialogue between the design form and the users about how energy can be created from natural weather patterns. The flexibility of placement on site will be most advantageous in terms of translating the tech-nology to the design process and form.

6

Page 9

A . 2 Design PrecedentsInternational Biennale, Prague

There are many perspectives regarding the inte-gration of technology and design. One agenda of the debate, suggested by Terzidis [7], is that the ‘dominant mode of utilising computers in ar-chitecture today is that of computerisation’. He goes on to describe this use as the communica-tion of preconceived ideas of the architect using computers and apparently disdains computa-tion as limited design tool. Perhaps Terzidis sees design programs as a translation of the conven-tional pen and paper – tools manipulated by the architect as a way of showing other people an idea or design. In contrast, Peters [8] suggests computational design as a means to ‘augment the designer’s intellect’ by making necessary our understanding of the parameters that will make the design buildable. One example of computational design is The Parasite research project, proposed by the Inter-national Biennale of Contemporary Arts, Prague, 2005 [9]. The project was a multimedia instal-lation involving visual-audio elements and in particular, a wall installation (Figures 7-9) consist-ing of two organically shaped surfaces, consist-ing of geometrically unique cells [9]. This wall installation is the result of a series of parameters designed primarily to fit in the transitional space of the stair well. Detailed parameters may have involved the degree of ascent, the frequency of movement and the type of movement as leverage to skew dimensions and density. What computation offers in this instance is a unique response the environment that in many ways enhances the elements involved in its realisation. It is true that a human mind is capable of resolv-ing the conflict between parameters however, what computational design may achieve is the integration of simple data sets to produce a po-tential unimagined or unimaginable form.

There is also a biological or morphogenesis element to The Parasite wall design – the integration of natural, organic process in the form finding process [9]. We begin to see the mutation, evolution and regenerative patterns that contribute to resolve a form. This, I believe is the result of layered data sets, interacting, engaging and developing with a non-repeti-tive result. This is a unique process because it produces a performative-place design which caters to the habitat rather than prioritisa-tion of the building [10]. In The Parasite, the ‘unique geometry’ is not unique because someone imagined a form with hundreds of individually shaped cells but because every single geometry is calculated according to its physical and conceptual data parameters. It is algorithmically justified and is as such a mean-ingfully created, responsive form. Computational design certainly has its strengths. It can resolve parameters within seconds, it can propose buildable geometry to the designer and can offer the necessary tools to that same person to proceed with construction. This is somewhat of a gift to a creative mind, unsure of the reality of indus-try and economy. However, computational design also has weaknesses. It can destroy your eye site, if your imagination runs a little too wild it’s likely your computer’s processing unit will actively cling to the door frame, so to speak, like a child being dragged to the den-tist, and if you don’t save your work before this time, your likely to find that the last five hours have mostly been in vain. Kalay [11] says that ‘searching for a design method is a practice in itself’ so it’s pertinent to highlight computa-tional design a just one of the design methods available, albeit a commonplace one.

7

8

9

The Inhabitable Bridge (Figures 10-11) in To-kyo, Japan aims to ‘algorithmically generate a turbulent space’. Studio Roland Snooks intend for this to cause the ‘harnessing and intensifi-cation of the discrete flow of the two neigh-bourhoods’ that the bridge engages. [12] The three part process involved firstly observ-ing and recording movement of people & cars was modelled using vector field. Secondly, connections between vectors were release to represent movement patterns. Finally, Studio Roland Snooks developed a self-organising patter to propose paths according to the field ‘turbulence’. [12]Each step of this form generation is a param-eter that has been presented in response immediately to the brief and the site. As the algorithms designed by the architects run in an orderly fashion, their simple composition derive the complexity of a layered set of data. While computers may lack creativity [13], technology certain encourages imagination in people, simultaneous instigating an attention to practicality. The definition creates a form that can be built in a structural language and as such, empowers the design to be realised with further fabrication techniques.

The Inhabitable Bridge is an example then, not only of parametric design but also demon-strates how this technology can change the role of the architect from designer to design and builder/fabricator. In a modelling sense, the bridge’s form of complex, curvilinear ge-ometries lends itself to 3D printing. The design-ers here are empowered in terms of achieving their digital model in the real world – they are given the opportunity to test materiality, struc-tural strength and load endurance. The generative approach employed by the Studio’s Team executes a progressive and provocative form. The form does not exactly resonate aesthetically with its surrounding environment. Effectively, the algorithmic pro-cess has responded in an alien, non-human way, decisively not considering how to fit it or synthesise its façade. This may be an incred-ible opportunity in developing the city skyline and learning how to construct in a voluntary sense. Alternatively, it creates discontinuity of habitable areas and permeates the existing en-vironment as an obnoxiously loud statement. More to the point, the technologies employed in the project are being tested and played with and in doing so, creating challenging, intellectually engaging discourse over how to initiate, apply and implement parametric design effectively to achieve ‘good design’.

A . 2 Design PrecedentsStudio Roland Snooks

10 11

The inherent role of the architect, in any project, is to problem solve their way to an eloquent built expression [8]. The computa-tion of design is in many ways a reiteration of the problem-solving skill – the architect develops a program that is able to solve the design problem and the program can explore modifications through parameters set by the architect [8].

Computation is ‘the processing of information and interactions between elements which constitute a specific environment, it provides a framework for negotiating and influenc-ing interrelations of data sets of information, with the capacity to generate complex form, and structure’ [8]. What makes computation viable is the set or rules, known as algorithms, which define the information and the inter-actions between the discrete elements. The algorithms when run create a logical, genera-tive process which articulates the complexity of the design parameters and subsequently, its resolved form [8]. It is important to realise that an algorithm can be written for anything. What makes the algorithm useful or relevant is the

A . 3 Computation/GenerationUNstudio

ability of the designer to identify an appropri-ate question/approach to write it. Is Three Museums, One Square (Figures 12), by UNstudio is a visual example of how dis-crete environments can be mapped and in-terconnected by using computational design. The studio group applied cultural, historical and environmental parameters to their pro-gram in order to generate their resolved form. What makes the form complex is that this triad of factors is considered simultaneously in all elements of the design. The role of the design-ers here was to determine in which direction the data would be skewed to generate, debat-ably, good design.

Take, for example, the bridge that connects the Museums courtyard paths to the opposite bank over the traffic (Figure 13). The paths are angled according to the demand for access to place [14]. They guide views to the green centre of the landscaped garden. They also discretely direct the visitor to one of the three museums. Their role is multifunctional as a result of the algorithmic sets applied by the architect.

12 13

Page 13

Generative architecture has incredible aes-thetic opportunities. Typically, the ‘fluid logic of connectivity’ [15] has offered up some highly intricate reflections on the composition of nature [16]. Christoph Herman’s practice embodies this perspective fairly brilliantly in a range of artistic lighting and façade proposals. Importantly, the practice values the fabrica-tion opportunities afforded by the roll out of programming in design and have developed numerous techniques to ensure that their virtual models boisterously cross the concep-tually notoriously overgrown garden hedge from idea to reality.

A . 3 Computation/GenerationChristof Herman Studio

However, the lamp as a furnishing is an artistic application of generative design. Its play in the consumer market highlights the possibilities of mass production but simultaneous, mass customisation. A slight adjustment to the parameters may change the form drastically to perform optimally in the alternative setting [16]. A more involved process of algorithmic design is the Liquidkristal glass wall, also by Lovegood. The wall is a ‘highly informed code based on movement properties of fluid dynamics and glass as a pure and optical medium’ [18] (refer also to Figure 15). It is highly customisable to develop optical effects within the water over large scale pattern adaptations. It is also a fairly direct example of how the study of patterns in nature can be comprehended at a reduc-tionist level and applied non-organically and studied further [19].

Firstly, New nature (Figure 14) by Lovegrove, is the resultant form of harnessing and project-ing light according to its characteristic polymer material [17]. Aesthetically it is fairly organic yet achieves its role as a passage way of light without consciously mimicking biology. What strikes a chord is that this design doesn’t seem to work expect, perhaps, in already rather dim lighting. With one light source and limited reflective material (the polymer acts to reflect but not to the same extent of glass or the like).

14

15

16

While both these examples are, in the scheme of practi-cal design, perhaps trivial applications of a highly oppor-tunistic technology, they articulate the ability to create performative design. Both New Nature and Liquidkristal manipulate light with a determined narrative. The further exploration of adapting parameters within their own schema of relationships is resulting in a ‘digital link-age of form generation and performative form finding’ [16]. Generative projects are beginning to be guided now by the effectiveness of the final form in relation to its immediate environment which opens doors to highly sustainable and intelligent design.

17Page 15

A4 Conclusion

A5 Learning Outcomes

Instability, according to the preface in the exploration of design futuring, is one key driver for devel-opment of design and the processes it involves. Instability relative to the design brief for Studio Air is most relevant to that of the environment, the natural and the habitat that we form and that is formed around us. If design is a ‘process of redirection’ [3] then the architect has the responsibility to direct, or perhaps be directed by, the world which is integral to our survival. The transition from a monologue approach of sorts in hand draw sketches to the writing of algorithms redirects the majority of the architect’s efforts to the finding of form rather than the building. The dis-course of design begins to detail the form as an (interactive) part of a landscape and so more than a shelter and protection from the natural elements. To a great extent, the aims of studio air are emphasized through computation design. The course encourages exploration into the definition and rationalisation of algorithmic design and in doing so proposing a solution to environmental change. Concurrently, with the perhaps strategically chosen, in-dustrial site for development, the LAGI design brief will direct the engagement of technology in design as a tool for communication, adaptation and development of form.

A computer can be used as an extension of paper yet this does not take advantage of the greater op-portunities technology can offer good design. It seems that the computer can be used as an aid to the designer – a platform for discourse around a topic which can translate information into a reasonable solution. The lack of creativity embodied within the giant binary box is giving people opportunities to reach further into their imaginative abilities. The skill set necessary to engage in computational design is, I am beginning to realise, almost never ending and almost certainly expanding constantly and infinitely, though well connected and rippling with friendly hints and prompt advice. The online tutorials have been solid building blocks for learning basic principles and from there, linking each tutorial to synthesise various components has deepened my understanding of how to create form. Still, there is discontinuity between what I wish to achieve in terms of defining rules and what I can achieve – primitive forms. Undeniably, generative, computational design is a powerful tool which at the moment is relaying the potential to break down highly complex situations, such as the formation of the natural environment, and represent it from a non-organic origin.

A6 Appendix

18: Contouring of Brunswick Street Data

This tutorial demonstrated the opportunity to translate real data into a digitalised form. I sourced topographi-cal data from land.vic.gov and created a NURBS surface accordingly.

At this point, I did not take advantage of the opportu-nity to generate the surface parametrically. Instead, I punched in the heights manually.

Srf > Contour

A6 Appendix

19: Geodesic Curves

These Curves demonstrate my limited understanding of data organisation in GH. Firstly;

Crv > DivideCrv > Arc (Z-zxis) > Loft

Using the loft I attempted to pattern the surface using geodesic curves. The result was with limited cohesive success. However, I continued to explore the result, de-veloping three iterations.

I suspected that the cause for the warped curves was related to the data structure of the initial curve points. Alternatively, the proximity of the initial curves and their curvature with respect to each other may be rel-evant in the component reaction.

Page 19

Further attempts to manipulate data structures led to the creation of a vase. I wanted a simple waffle grid structure, Similar to the Metropol Parasol by Mayer - Hermann.

Crv > Loft > SDivide > List Item > Interpolate Curve

This experimentation was guided by a previous Air Student, Bhargav Sin-dra, and introduced me to specific data manipulation of lists. I applied panels with commands to dictate line generation.

20: Data Structuring

20: Data Structuring

Page 21

Part A Reference List1 ‘Seif Light Project’, LAGI, Last modified 2010, http://landartgenerator.org/ LAGI2010/wohc83/ 2 ‘Adaptive Mutations, LAGI, Last modified 2012, < http://landartgenerator.org/ LAGI-2012/jk598vb2/ > 3 Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16 4 ‘ITER: The worlds largest Tokamak’, ITER, Last modified 2014, https://www.iter.org/ mach

5 Johanne Gabel and Rune Stæhr, 2003, Environmental stories from Copenha gen - The Environmental Capital of Europe, R98, Copenhagan, viewed on 28 April 2014, <https://web.archive.org/web/20070706184255/http://www.cece.dk/ EE0911AA-D9A1-49E8-9CA2-332E37BBA568>

6 Crawford, M, 2012, Vertical-Axis Wind Turbines: Time for a Comeback?, ASME, viewed on 28 April 2014, < https://www.asme.org/engineering-topics/articles/tur bines/vertical-axis-wind-turbines-time-for-a-comeback> 7 Terzidis, Kostas (2006). Algorithmic Architecture (Boston, MA: Elsevier), p. xi 8 Peters, Brady (2013). Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought from Architectural Design (AD) Special Issue - Computation Works V83 (2), p. 8-15 9 Performative Places, 2005, visited 5/5/2014, http://perfomativeplaces.expressives pace.org/index.php?/project/the-parasite/

10 Roudavaski, S, 2009, Towards Morphogensis in Architecture, International Journal of Architectural Computing, viewed 5/5/2014, http://www.academia. edu/208933/Towards_Morphogenesis_in_Architecture 11 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Meth ods of Computer-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25

12 eVolo, 2011, EVOLO, visited 7/5/2014, http://www.evolo.us/architecture/algorithmic-architec ture-inhabitable-bridge-in-tokyo/ 13 Kalay, Yehuda E. (2004). Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Com puter-Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 5-25

1 Kit Chow et al, 2010, Title Page

2 Google Maps, 2014, Seif Dunes

3-4 Joseph Sarafian, 2012, Adaptive Mutations, LAGI Submission

5 Chow, The Sun. 6 Hsu, 2009, Taiwan Savonius Wind Turbines 7-9 Performative Places, 2005 10-11 eVolo, 2011 12-13 UNstudio, 2013 14-16 Lovegrove, 2012 17 Lovegrove, R, 2013

Figure Reference List

14 UNstudio, 2013, Three Museums One Park, UNstudio, viewed 11/5/2014, http://www.unstu dio.com/projects/three-museums-one-square 15 Lynn, Greg, ed. (1993), Folding in Architecture, AD (Architectural Design),Wiley-Academy, West Sussex, UK 16 Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10 pdf 17 Lovegrove, 2012, Artemide, New Nature, viewed on 10/5/2014, http://www.christoph-her mann.com/generative-design/artemide-new-nature-lovegrove/ 18 Lovegrove, 2012, Lasvit, viewed 10/5/2014, http://www.christoph-hermann.com/generative- design/lasvit-liquidkristal/ 19 Lovegrove, R, 2013, Lasvit Liquidkristal, Lasvit, Czech Republic, viewed 10/5/2014, http://www. edilportale.com/upload/prodotti/prodotti-101458-catc27b1c67441940099e49341a853291ea. pdf

Part B Criteria DesignB.1 Research FieldB.2 Case Study 1.0B.3 Base Study 2.0

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentB.5 Technique: Prototypes

B.6 Technique : ProposalB.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

B.8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

Part B Criteria DesignB.1 Research FieldB.2 Case Study 1.0B.3 Base Study 2.0

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentB.5 Technique: Prototypes

B.6 Technique : ProposalB.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

B.8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

B1 Research Field

SectioningIn Daniel Davis’ lecture, he discussed the idea of control in parametric design. He spoke about control as ‘the maths…the coordination of parts…and the final model being to 0.01mm precision [1]. It might be said that sectioning is one method of design and construction that actively achieves this element of control in parametric design. Sectioning is the reduction of a form into planes or contours. An example of this is the Digital Origami Emergency Pavil-ion by LAVA Architects [Figure 1]. The hori-zontal contours of the pavilion rely on spacing blocks to create dimension and also to ensure the interaction of the exterior space with the torrential rains and cyclonic winds prevalent in an emergency weather scenario. Another application of sectioning is the waffle grid. Planes are intersected to create a structural framework. An example of this is the Digital Weave by Iwamoto [Figure 2] where the use of sectioning has allowed the structural integ-rity of the built form to be inherent in the ar-chitectural design through the interconnected planar surfaces. Some opportunities of sectioning design are professed unanimously by dECOi Architects, Denton Corker Marshall and SYSTEMarchitects. Firstly, sectioning allows for highly accurate prefabricated parts [2][3][4]. This translates to a financially predictable and time efficient building process to a fairly large extent. Fur-thermore, the designer has greater control over the reduction of material wastage[2]. In the case of One Main St by dECOi Architects [Figure 3], the contours were nested carefully to reduce

material consumption throughout the project thus achieving some elements of sustainable design [2]. Another advantage of sectioning is its ability to create the illusion of smoothness and curve. This is particularly important for One Main St and the Webb Bridge [Figure 4] both of which were simultaneously afforded a seam-less and sinuous form through the discrete reduction of their overriding form and timely, cost effective buildability [2][3]. Finally, the application of this architectural ap-proach provides opportunities of integrating the structure of a building with the aesthetic and detail of the interior space. SYSTEMarchi-tects’ Burst* [Figure 5] residential house has used the waffle grid to implement natural lighting and ventilation in the interior living spaces [4]. The effect is an ambient interior climate as well as a structurally sound skeleton for the home. Extrapolating on these opportunities it is pos-sible to imagine the applications of sectioning in wider architecture. It may be used to create an interactive landscape that engages the ex-isting environment and enhancing it through framing views, channelling light and wind and directing movement. Conceptually, it could be interesting to experi-ment with being in as well as in a form and thus challenging the perspective of the user as to how they exist in their immediate space.

Limitations of the sectioning are perhaps rel-evant to questions of scale. It seems that section-ing in a structural sense works best on a small scale. The Digital Pavilion demonstrates this well. It would seem that the bending of the plywood planes would cause problems at a larger scale. Furthermore, there is an inherent repetitiveness to the technique. Visually, there is a risk of mo-notony which would detract from the overall conceptual approach as well as the phenom-enological experience. However, the Webb Bridge is perhaps an example of a challenge to this draw back. It’s grossly curved form is encour-aged by the curvilinear sections and then the grid like connecting straps.

In conclusion, sectioning is a highly useful technique for architectural design and con-struction. Of most interest to this project is its ability to create the illusion of seamless curve. Also, the ease of construction is a significant asset as an accurate and time efficient meth-od.

31

2 4

5

Page 27

6

7

7

7

B2 Case STudy 1.0

The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion [Figure 6-7] , is an example of ‘material-oriented compu-tational design, simulation and production processes in architecture’[5].

The material behaviour of plywood was digi-tally collated and adopted as the parameters of form generation. The data was based on physical modelling of the ‘deflections of elasti-cally bent plywood strips’ [5].

As such, the form is dependant on internal stress and tensile strength of the material and is therefore parametrically developed. The re-sult is a lightweight curved form which oper-ates with great material efficiency. [5]

Furthermore, the Pavilion is an example of generative design which has analysed ma-terial behaviour in tensile and compressive conditions being the rules or algorithms to define the form. Davis (2014) iterates the necessity of mathematics and coordination of the final parts with maximum precision as integral factors of algorithmic thinking. The pragmatic approach to design produce high quality structure and buildable parts, as dem-onstrated here and in the RMIT Pod Room [1].

The Research Pavilion operates as an example of future opportunities for structural develop-ment applications. It addresses questions of structural integrity, the pavilion is guaranteed under oblique loads including snow and wind loads. It is responsive to the current uproar for sustainable building devel-

opment - fabrication is cut for minimal waste from a fairly replenishable birchwood ply. Finally and perhaps just as pertinent, is the question of aesthetic. There is sense of comic dialogue between this sandy coloured, curved form, 3 meters high and the towering, linear grey blocks. It’s as though a small creatures has scurried into a quiet, urban village to jiggle the predetermined notion of what an efficient building is to look like. It’s form and appear-ance is arguable more organic that is neigh-bours and scale more personable. It may not be long before it’s engineering parents inject it’s code into the fabric of the larger city.

However, this project is a visibly simplistic use of materials. It raises concerns as to how a more involved material selection will be ap-plied to the same algorithmic development process. As Davis (2014) described with regards to the RMIT Pod Room prototype fabrication, a parametric system can be bro-ken without the knowledge of the designer in cases when not all rules are monitored manu-ally. Essentially, the Pavilion is a good example of the basic principle of computational design but does not stretch the process in terms of complex interactions of discrete data sets.

ICD/ITKE Research PAvilion

Page 29

B2 Case Study 1.0

AA Driftwood Pavilion

The AA Driftwood Pavilion [Figure 10] was de-signed by Danecia Sibingo, a 3rd year student of the association. ‘Sibingo’s ideas were manifested through a computer-generated script which manipulated the movement of lines in a continu-ous parallel fashion, creating line drawings which formed the basis of a plan.’ [7]

Extrapolating this further it is apparent that the form responds to the site. The ‘points’ of the pavilion are related to the corners of the pedes-trian path and the long, curved sides bow to the bypassing car traffic. Furthermore, the form hugs around the pre-existing street lamp, contrasting the tradition aesthetic with its own sleek panels [Figure 11]. Also, the scale is small and relevant to human height.

Whatsmore, the points at which the curves rise and fall may be directed by existing regular move-ment paths on site.

Alternatively, the diversity of levels may be intended as a way of encouraging new move-ment on site but inevitable engage the prima-ry users of the space nonetheless.

As such, it might said that these site consider-ations were recorded as rules or parameters and used to generate the dimensions and directions of the form. Assuming this, the pavil-ion is perhaps a highly relevant installation to Bedford Square in terms of its interaction with users, passing traffic and pre-existing facilities. In a parametric sense, the visually loud and dy-namic form is resolved within its environment.

Here, sectioning emphasises the movement of the form. The plywood layers are in torsion, held by a concealed interior frame network called ‘Ketro’ [8][Figure 12].

8

9 10

Page 31

B2 Case STudy 1.0

Iterations of AA Driftwood Pavilion

1. 3D geometry on 2D sectioning plane (box, cone, pyramid)2. Spheres on a 2D sectioning plane3. Box on a 2D sectioning plane4. 3D geometry in Pop3D sectioning5. Manipulation/torsion/twisting of lofted cut-ting plane6. Attempt to orient Driftwood Brep to plane and use it as the cutting line7. Parametric cutting plane

Page 33

B2 Case Study 1.0

Selection Criteria1. Parametric TechniqueDoes the definition allow adequate adaptations?Does the definition allow real data input?Does the definition respond the a changing environment?

2. BuildabilityIs the form buildable? Consider load path, materiality, spanning distances and weather patterns.

3. Sustainable Technology IntegrationWind power is the focus of our sustain-able technology. Is there provisions for wind to be har-vested?Can the capacity to harvest wind be improved?Has the orientation been considered to optimised energy production?

4. Aesthetic Innovation How will visitors receive the appear-ance in their city?Does the form join the current environ-ment? If not, does it contrast it? Is this an advantage of the building?Does the aesthetic challenge ideas of what a sustainable building might be?

A

B

C

D

A 1. Parametric. Sectioned according to Brep planes2. The sections can be organised on a single plane using grasshopper, nested and sent to the FabLab and printed us-ing the card or laser cutter. 3. Sustainable technology integration is not an immediate factor of this design. However, perhaps including cone line cutting geometry through the length of the form may allow for wind channel-ling. 4. Aesthetically it is too much like the original pavilion to be innovative. How-ever, it is suggestive of a skeletal system which could be one line of exploration.

B1. Parametric technique is limited. Cut-ting plane is independent of original Brep. Limits the material relevance. 2. Difficult to replicate using section-ing. Must resolve non-planar surfaces in order to produce using sectioning technique. 3. The particular design evokes ideas of water harvest and storage. Admittedly, the Copenhagen environment does not demand such technology thus not relevant to this activity. 4. Aesthetically it is an improvement upon iteration A. The non-planar curves suggest movement and flow.

C 1. Parametric technique is somewhat limited. Spheres sectioned can be adapted according to input diameter. Independent of original Brep. Locations may be appointed according to wind/sun/rain loads and paths, specific views on site etc. 2. May replicate as string, wires or mal-leable paper strips connecting the sectioned geometry. Some degree or randomness in fabrication is expected. 3.Limited technology integration. The pavilion doesn’t lend itself easily to this criteria. Perhaps the wire frame can be adapted into piping which channels hot water and uses this heat to regu-late interior temperatures. To generate energy perhaps solar panels can be placed on south faces. 4. The chaos seems to move in an en-ergetic way. Has potential to convey design brief for energy production

D1. Limited parametric technique. Alight boxes according to grid on site then abstract according to movement, sites, weather patterns, contours etc2. Non-planar geometry and lack of in-ternal structure lends itself to 3D printing. 3. It appears that solar panels may be appropriate on the angles faces. Orient accordingly to the south. Space faces to ensure maximum sun exposure. 4. Varying thickness of faces is interest-ing. Further exploration may involves parametrically setting depth according to sun exposure, tilt and relevance to topology (lower faces are given greater depth).

Page 35

11

The Digital Origami Emergency Pavilion

The Digital Origami Emergency Pavilion [Figure 8-9] exemplifies sectioning architecture. This is demonstrated in the very struc-ture of the design as well as its aesthetic and detail. The use of this computational fabrication method is in response to ease of assembly. The pavilion is de-signed to be erected quickly and offer a cave like shelter for victims of ‘great natural disaster’. The current scale is reduced as a prototype but further iterations intent to increase scale to ac-commodate two adults and a child for daily activity use (meals, washing and resting). The geom-etry is also designed to fit with neighbouring units thus enabling a community of shelters. [6]

The design intent has been achieved to a great extent because the form is transportable and simple to construct. However, layering the plywood cutouts may be more time consuming that is practical. Comparing it to traditional structures, though, this design may be most efficient.

The prototype fails to show inhabitants will be protected from wind and rain or fire, major factors of discomfort and danger in times of natural disaster.

The form is an inviting play between geometric lines and a curved natural form. The contrast suggests a strong and pragmatic exterior and a comfort-ing, welcoming interior. It’s playfulness may ease some stress in times of natural disaster.

B3. Case Study 2.0 12

Page 37

B3. Reverse EngineeringDigital Origami Emergency Pavilion

In my first attempt to re-engineer the pavilion, two arbitrary forms were used to represent the exterior and interior environments. The first was a 12 face polygon and the second a series of closed curves lofted to a closed surface. The two forms were intersected and then referenced into Grasshopper.

Image 1 shows the surfaces referenced in Rhino with the offset series of cutting planes. Remaining are the iterations developed from this initial articulation. Image two shows the surface split command operating only on the

lofted surface. This was useful in that it made me rethink what I was trying to define; what was the space that I want-ed to be sectioned and what were the bounds of this space?

Image 3 shows the effect of the ‘Shift List’ command, used in AA Driftwood Pavil-ion Re-engineered Model [4]. The intent was to shift the data so as to isolate the space between the geometry and the lofted surface. The result was not com-pletely disappointing. There were

1

2 3 4

now sections of both the geometry and the lofted surface, though unworkable either in Grasshopper or using Rhino ‘Trim’ as the curve and surface were not touching.

Image 4 was one of the last ‘dead-ends’, for want of a bet-ter term, in the trial and error of the re-engineering process. It was a form which had recognised the negative space between the two shapes and was to vary-ing degrees of success, possible to work with to articulate the space. This form quickly let to those that are to the right.

The forms to the right are iterations of each other. They mimic the principles of design which evolved into the Digital Origami Pavilion. A form is nested within a larger one and scooped out in order to provide a shelter space. The exterior is angular and the interior is curved to create a livable, desirable living area. The form is sectioned making it possible to fabricate, given the development of a connecting frame.

Page 39

Above1. Sphere Radius (R), 12. R, 53. R, 10

Above1. D, 12. D, 2.53. D, 5.0

Above1. Control Points (P), 62. P, 173. P, 20

Above1. Sphere Movement(M), y=02. M, y=53. M, y=10

B4 Technique Development

The base geometry is a simple hexagon. This was chosen as the initial shape to eliminate complications when cutting between two breps. The second geometry is a sphere. Undeniably, the effect is visually monoto-nous but the experimentation is key in de-termining appropriate iterations and tools in creating complex form. As such, the inter-action between the forms is observed, but not necessarily challenged.

The benefit gained here is a growing awareness of what it means for a design to be parametric. Completing the iterations, the consistency of shapes demonstrates the

non-relationship between it and grass-hopper. The stagnant forms limit the creativity and scope of design and therefore, in future, will be developed purely on a point or single curve basis.

Furthermore, it’s saddening to see that the main change throughout the exam-ples above are the relocation/move-ment of surfaces by an integer. These are necessary experiments to carry out but should not be so heavily relied on. It’s boring. No one wants to see this.

Above1. Sphere Movement(M), y=02. M, y=53. M, y=10

Page 41

1. Distance (D), 0.22. D, 0.53. d, 1.04. d, 2.55. d, 5.0

1. D, 1, Radius (R), 12. D, 1, R, 33. D, 1, R, 54. D, 1, R, 8

1. D, 1, R, 5, Loft Type Loose2. D, 1, R, 5, Loft Type Normal3. D, 1, R, 5, Loft Type Straight4. D, 1, R, 5, Loft Type Tight

1. Y, 02. Y, 103. Y, 204. Y, 30

B4 Technique Development

The first column shows changing the distance between cutting planes. This parameter is useful in fabrication according to material thickness. To improve this parameter, it will be nec-essary to have an input which defines the thickness of material and sections the geometry accordingly. One way to do this might be to find the total depth and divide it by the material thickness.

The second column shows the growth of the diameter of the cutting geome-try. This parameter is useful when con-sidering the capacity flow of people moving through the space. Addition-ally, this might be a useful tool for ex-perimenting with wind pressure through the space. Weather patterns in Copen-hagen show prominent Easterly winds and so this may be harvested through the tunnel. The analysis of the diameter will be necessary in optimising energy generation.

The third column demonstrates the aes-thetic of changing loft forms. The final column shows the reposition-ing of the initial curves within the lofted geometry. This parameter is adapted as a means of engaging with the site. The form is extrapolated outside of its

bounding box and in so doing may be-come a more visually dynamic form.

Holistically, this attempt at Reengineer-ing the Digital Origami Emergency Pavilion is limited in its success. Visually, it does not represent the project at all. Furthermore, the conceptual angular, strong exterior is neglected.

However, the model is a useful tool in furthering my understanding in para-metric design. The algorithms that run to create this form allow more flexibility of form and the opportunity to input real life data, such as the material thickness and people capacity).

Page 43

B4 Technique: DevelopmentDesign Criteria AdaptationThere is a growing demand in the course to refrain from the purely con-ceptual and experimental and to move towards resolving ideas to be relevant, responsive and buildable pieces of de-sign. This is apparent in the upcoming B6 Prototyping task. Because of this, we have adapted our design criteria ac-cordingly.

We have made technology integration our second point and more specifically, the engagement of the structural func-tion of the form in enhancing opportu-nity wind energy.

Furthermore, we wish to engage more with the population of visitors to the site. This is imperative because for any de-sign to be successful it must have some effect on the people using the space, whether it be positive or negative. As a result, we have made our third criteria to address the ability of the pavilion to enhance human interaction and ac-cessibility.

Finally, the positioning of the form is of utmost importance as it is relevant harvesting wind energy from the East, to connection with the water and the industrial buildings behind and to the paths of people between these spaces.

The updated criteria is such that

1. The form must be buildable

2. The integration of technology must be relevant to form

3. There must be an awareness, un-derstanding and sensitivity to human interaction and engagement with the chosen technology and the form

4. The orientation must be considered according to site parameters such as wind paths, existing environments and the movement of people between these existing spaces.

B4 Technique: Development

Sheer Wind’s INVELOX, which aims to increase wind velocity, is a power generating wind turbine, recognized all around the world, and is based on the idea of collecting, concentrating and accelerating air to create a more ef-ficient wind turbine. It generates power more cost efficiently than usual, by producing 600% more electrical energy and reducing installation capital costs to $750 per kW. It contains noise and vibration and is able to continue pro-ducing energy even with wind speeds as low as 2 mile per hour. These attri-butes allow for Sheerwind’s turbines to be more efficient than other turbines.Unlike other generators, INVELOX fun-nels wind energy from all directions through to ground-based generators, which allow for safer and easier main-tenance. [9]Our design proposal is situated so the turbines capture the prevailing winds which are then funneled and directed through into a main chamber. The air than tapers through passageways, picking up speed, and drives an en electrical energy generator. The air than flows out via smaller channels, having produced kinetic energy and returns back into the environment.

13

Energy Precedence

Page 45

B4 Technique Development

B4 Technique Development

B5 Technique: Prototype

The model shows the fabrication method of sectioning, the visual geometry of the sphere cut into the rectangular prism and how light is captured, translated and warped as a result of these factors.

The model demonstrated the load bear-ing properties that our design potentially has. This is a necessity if we investigate wind energy further. Copenhagen is sub-ject to gusty winds and so the structure must have a high dynamic load capacity.

The model emphasise how simplistic our form currently is. The obvious geometry creates a non-innovative aesthetic. Noth-ing is left to the imagination and there is little relevance to the heritage or environ-ment of the industrial, water boarded, open site.

Light has become an interesting factor as a result of fabrication. It is one aesthetic consideration that was not realised until now and may be explored further in re-gards to atmospheric lighting at night/during daylight as well as a communica-tion tool of energy produced.

Notably, there has been progress in our digital design which we are not yet able to fabricate. We are having difficulties using a blob form to cut the bounding geometry.

B6 Technique: Proposal

To design a site responsive form which uses wind energy to power itself as well as the grid.

To apply Sheer Wind INVELOX as a design precedent as the method for harvesting wind energy

To address the global issue of climate change on a small, human scale by using local resources to create energy for Copenhagen.

To allow opportunities for community involvement in integrating the built form into the existing environment by resolving orientation, scale and appearance to be adapted by visitors or users post-construction.

B6 Technique: Proposal

B7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

Strengths of our proposal include that it is totally parametric and that it is build-able. Weaknesses of our proposal is that the exterior form is overly simplistic and non-engaging either culturally or architecturally.

There has been somewhat of a struggle to integrate aesthetic with buildability in our design. May disheartening hours have gone into trying to achieve a presentable and functional form with little to show. It has been important to maintain perspective and to learn the limitations of grasshopper. Primarily, as shown in B6 with the blob form, we are on the right track and are set to resolve our design proposal with fair execution and skill.

The design Proposal Interim Presentation Feedback

Our design proposal must have justifi-cation for its form and must have per-formance criteria. The form is overly simplistic and doesn’t reflect the inte-gration of technology nor the oppor-tunities of digital, parametric design. To demonstrates my response to this feedback, I’ve (hesitantly) included a non-computerised annotated sketch which is a development of our present-ed proposal. It is intended to be further integrated with the existing proposal and shows algorithmic enhancements rather than total change.

Below is my response to the feedback.

1. Abstract the form of the Sheer Wind precedence. Intent is to optimise po-tential to harvest wind. It adopts the heights, openings and tunnel like struc-ture for air flow of the original INVOLEX design.2. Openings concentrated to the East as it is the primary direction from which winds travel3. Height of openings to be controlled parametrically according to [1] the optimal height for capturing wind and, in order to achieving varying heights and visual diversity, [2] topography [3] reflect heights of existing buildings

Now, the design is informed by the wind technology. The openings and heights are two essential components in the way the technology works and will be manipulated according to wind data from the Copenhagen, Denmark (Wind) Case Study [10].

In terms of identifying optimal condi-tions on site, the performance criteria must be resolved. Perhaps our group can investigate response to gusts of wind, the angles of each funnel in opti-mising wind pressure and performance of the technology during low wind seasons.

Arrangements on Site:1. Create a square grid on site2. Push and pull the grid according to topography. Perhaps increase grid density at high points.3. Adapt grid according to proximity to water. Increase density with proximity to water.4. Increase density of grid according to projected human movement. Greater density for greater movement (in or-der to encourage people to move throughout the space where installa-tion exists).5. Experiment with different arrange-ments on site. Being with a single form and place according to grid density. From here, experiment with creating a ‘farm’ of the wind tunnels according to grid density.

Page 53

1. Crv > Loft > DivideSrf > InterpolateCrv > Offset > Cull Pattern > List Item > Loft

Personal Exploration of Data manipulationIteration on Initial vase Exploration

2. Crv > Loft > DivideSrf > InterpolateCrv > Offset > Cull Pattern > List Item > Loft > Mesh Iteration

Above; Grasshopper Definition of List Manipulation

Page 55

Cull Pattern1. n,92. n, 403. n, 80

Cull Pattern1. Generic2. No Cull3. Odd Divide

Cull Pattern1. TF2. TFFF3. No Cull

Cull Pattern1. n,22. n, 503. n, 100

Wk 5 Cull Pattern

1. Controlling Individual Points2. Flip Matrix 3. Offset4. Joining Curves exprimentation5. Lofting between sets.

List Manipulation

2

3

1

Aranda Lasch

1

2

3

4

1. Fractal Geometry2. Culled Pattern 3. Connecting with Polyline (Alternative to [2]4. For fabrication

4

5

Page 57

Part B Reference List

1 Davis, D, 2014, Parametrics, Lecture Recording, University of Melbourne, Mel-bourne. 2 dECOiarchitects, 2011, dECOiarchitects, Boston, viewed 28/4/2014, http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain 3 Denton Corker Marshall, 2005, Webb Bridge, Australian Institute of Architects, Mel-bourne, viewed on 28/4/2014 http://www.lib.unimelb.edu.au/recite/citations/harvard/ref242-elecSourceWebDoc.html?style=2&type=4&detail=2

4 SYSTEMarchitects, 2007, SYSTEMarchitects, Sydney, viewed on 28/4/2014, http://www.systemarchitects.net/proj/burst01.html 5 Institute of Computational Design 2010, Universitat Stuttgart, Stuttgart viewed 5/04/2014, <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=4458>

6 Design Boom 2011, LAVA, Sydney viewed 4th April 2014, < http://www.design-boom.com/architecture/lava-digital-origami-emergency-shelter/>

7 e-architect, 2014, viewed on 2/5/2014, <http://www.e-architect.co.uk/london/driftwood-pavilion-design> 8 Arch2o, 2009, viewed on 2/5/2014, <http://www.arch2o.com/2009-summer-pavil-ion-the-architectural-association/ 9 Sheerwind, 2012, viewed 1/5/2014, < http://sheerwind.com/technology/how-does-it-work > 10 EMD, 2000, viewed 29/4/2014, < http://www.emd.dk/Projects/Projekter/20%20De-tailed%20Case%20Studies/Case%20report03%20-%20Copenhagen_Denmark.pdf >

1 LAVA, 2011 2 Iwamoto, Digital Weave, 2014 3 dECOi Architects, One Main St, 20114 Denton Corker Marshall, Webb Bridge, 20055 SYSTEMarchitects, Burst*, 20076 ICD/ITKE, 20107 ICD/ITKE, 20108 AA School Website, 2009, London 9 Fairs, 2009, visited 2/5/2014 < http://www.dezeen.com/2009/06/25/driftwood-by-dane-cia-sibingo/ > 10 Fairs, 2009, visited 2/5/2014 < http://www.dezeen.com/2009/06/25/driftwood-by-danecia-sibingo/ > 11 LAVA, 201112 LAVA, 201113 SheerWind, 2012, visited 1/5/2014, < http://sheerwind.com/technology/how-does-it-work >

Figure Reference List

Page 59