R      Y      S      L      E      R

Image

and

Detail

 

      R      Y      S      L      E      R

www.rysler.com

Image and Detail

Details as technical solutions and images as design expressions are interrelated. Not only do architects have to perect their ability toproduce the „what“ o a building – the power o visions and images – but also have to be in control o the „how“ – the expressiono technique.

Establishing the „how“ today demands more o an eort by the architect than in ormer times. First, the physical and material/technical complexity o detail problems has increased due to the increasing technical requirements and due to countless newbuilding materials. Second the structural changes within the building proession have resulted in a nearly complete lack o commontraditions and an absence o a general consensus in how to build and how to use a material.

I we speak here about detailing, we restrict ourselves to the simultaneously architectural and technically challenging details o thebuilding enclosure. Fascia, plinth, quoins, openings are, one is tempted to say „archetype“ places, at where solutions o technicalproblems leave traces which mark the „ace“ o the building, complete its „picture“. These are the places at which technicalproblems concentrate on closest area and which, since they are usually very exposed, are particularly sensitively noticed. Betweenappearance and unction respectively between the detail as an architectural solution o a design problem and the detail as atechnical solution o bringing together dierent building components, a relationship exists – a coherency. A second relationshipexists between the detail and the whole ensemble. As the expression o the tectonic orm produced by the detail can only existbeore the background o a design concept, the technical solution represented by the detail can be merged into a continuous overallperormance only in agreement with the construction concept.

Three details make all the dierence. Fascia, plinth, quoins, openings are „archetype“ places, at where solutions o technical problems leave traces which mark the„ace“ o the building, complete its „picture“.

Emil Rysler, Architect SIA

 

      R      Y      S      L      E      R

www.rysler.com

Model representation of the building enclosure

A way o thinking – a unctional analogy based on the essentials o the building enclosure – is proposed to enable architects tohandle both the development o design and technical decisions in their interrelationship at all depths o notional penetration.

In that way o thinking the enclosure is constituted o two main elements:

–The components o the building shell (e.g. roo, slab, wall) with their rules and specications

–The transitions between these components (e.g. wall – roo, wall – slab, wall – base) with their set o common rules. Break-outs incomponents (e.g. openings) represent a special orm o the transitions

In correspondence with the two elements two notional tools are proposed:

–Layer outline: With the help o the layer outline one can control on the level o components their unctional cooperating in general.

–Joint space: With the help o the joint space one designs the material linkage o the components in particular - the detail.

The always existing relationship between particular and ensemble, respectively between a material decision on the level o detail anda unctional decision on the level o components, remains always controllable by the reciprocal eect o layer outline and joint space.

 

Transition between the components roof and wall

   R   o   o   f   c   o   m   p   o   n   e   n   t

   i   n   d   i   f   f   e   r   e   n   t

   i   m   p   l   e   m   e   n   t   a   t   i   o   n   s

Wall component

in different

implementations

Set of common rules

 

      R      Y      S      L      E      R

www.rysler.com

Layer outline

The layer outline as a way o looking at the essentials o the building envelop was developed due to the observation that on thelevel o undamental construction decisions the characteristics o all components o the building enclosure – rom external thermalinsulation composite systems to the cavity masonry – can be suciently symbolised through three layers (support layer, insulatinglayer and acing or suracing layer). Three layers – our lines between inside and outside – are sucient or the rst geometricaldescription o the building enclosure. This opens or the architect in a project stage, in which the graphic resolution o the planscan not refect the mental penetration depth (e.g. scale 1:100), already the eld o his possibilities. Corresponding between rstarchitectural conceptions and rst technical assumptions these outlines – our three layers – can now be replaced by the unctionsthey represent (support, isolation and cover). The logic o dierent allocations can be reviewed in general, without being obliged tocommit already to a specic construction. Future problems o the transitions between dierent components respectively the linkageo their main unctions to a continuous perormance can be recognized in a very early project stage. I later on alternations have tobe made at on point the architect can immediately ollow its eects to the whole enclosure.

A sandwich – characterised by its three layers –remains unmistakable a sandwich despite thevarious maniestations o its llings and its bread. Wall component : Dierent unctional maniestations Wall component: Dierent material maniestations

and their technical characteristics.

Building components have an unmistakable character which can be symbolized by three layers.

Three layers – our lines between inside andoutside – are sucient or the rst geometricaldescription o the building enclosure. The logic odierent allocations can be reviewed in general,without being obliged to commit already to aspecic construction.

 

      R      Y      S      L      E      R

www.rysler.com

Joint space

The design o the transition rom component to component takes place in the joint space ater having dened the relations amongthe components with the help o the layer outline. The development o the joint space as a design aid is originated in the observationthat typical behaviours can be assigned to typical component transitions (e.g. wall – roo, wall – cover, wall – base). This means thatcommon experiences can contribute – abstracted as general behaviour rules – to the solution o a specic problem.

The transition between the components external wall, basement wall and slab shall serve as an example to demonstrate, how incorrespondence between controlling an architectural image and choosing building materials a technical solution develops. Threerules apply to this transition: the splash-water rule, the thermal insulation rule and the bearing rule.

The designer can now start to decide – with the help o these rules – which material can be led to where respectively has to bereplaced and what measures have to be met at the respective terminator points. Special parts (e.g. end proles) may help with thesolution o the technical problems.

Thus are apart rom the unctional (those o the layers) urther general denitions possible at the beginning o the design process.

Transition between external wall and roo with therules or:

- Roo projection- Water back pressure- Thermal insulation- Bearing rule

Transition between external wall and base with therules or:

- Splash-water- Thermal insulation- Bearing rule