STUDIOALVINA LAY 558471

2015, SEMESTER 1 TUTOR: ALESSANDRO

AIR

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTIONS

ABOUT ME & PREVIOUS WORKS

PART A: CONCEPTUALISATION

A.0 DESIGN FUTURING

A.1 DESIGN COMPTUTATION

A.2 COMPOSITION/GENERATION

A.3 CONCLUSION

A.4 LEARNING OUTCOMES

A.5 APPENDIX ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

REFERENCES

PAGE

4 - 5

6 - 11

12 - 17

18 - 23

24

25

26 - 27

28

INTRODUCTIONABOUT ME

I am presently undertaking my studies within the Bachelor of Environments majoring in Ar-chitecture. It is definitely a field that I have great interest in and am always motivated to explore and take it further throughout the years that pass.

Currently I am also working with the Australian Institute of

Architects under their subsidiary company called Archicentre. I continuously enjoy working and communicating with a large number of architects and clients on a daily basis. Getting to know what clients are after and seeing the work that architects with many years of experience are able to produce makes me grateful to have an insight into what I may be involved with in the future.

Throughout this course I have broadened my understanding of the history of design and it is clear to see we have progressed extensively over the years and it is clear to see that it is only going to keep moving forward. We have all these new tools and our skill set is expanding with all these programs made available to explore our creativity within a digital context of design. I have familiarised myself with a num-ber of programs which include InDesign, Photoshop, AutoCAD, Revit and now I will be look-ing more into Rhinoceros and Grasshopper.

PREVIOUS WORK

The most recent studio I under-took prior to studio AIR was studio WATER. Throughout this subject I broadened my knowledge with the use of programs such as Revit and Sketchup. It was a new learn-ing curve but was definitely one that needed to be explored.

The aim of the project was to design in the manner of a great architect in which I had been as-signed Alvaro Siza.

Siza was a simplest when it came to his designs but this concept was more to do with the external façade, when you lookat the in-ternal work it played a much more sophisticated role in the design. He is able to do a lot with very lit-tle in the way he plays with simple geometry and frames perspective views and these were a few of the factors I took on board with my final design.

DESIGN FUTURINGARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE

Architecture as a discourse communicates by way of interpreting our ideas, thoughts and emotions and creativity into a built form. It allows architecture can communicate effec-tively to evoke different emotions.

By physical form it acts to be influential and holds an innovative appeal which communi-cates to its audience or users.

Architecture allows one to express their ideas and thoughts to others through various means beginning with sketches, notes and expanding colours, textures, materials, lighting and various other forms found within this idea of design futuring.

The following two precedents chosen are built projects that show us that this move towards a digital form of design is possible and is something that architecture is mov-ing towards. The two projects explored were designed and constructed in 2012 so they were not a revolutionary as this process of digital architecture has been in play for quite some time now but of course is bettering itself year after year with all the advancements. Furthermore, new light is being shed on how people view architecture; it is growing and moving away from dense and monumental styles in architecture to innovative projects such as the Shellstar Pavilion and the Drift project precedents.

The Shellstar Pavilion is a space created close by to popular festivals to draw in people to bring them into a different dimension of space; it acts as a spatial vortex that draws many passers-by in. It was produced through the use of parametric software including Grass-hopper and Kangaroo.

The Drift entrance contributes to the site by allowing users to relax and be covered by the shading provided from the inflated tubes and to also transition the users into different spaces. Due to the choice of materiality, a dense suspended design was made possible and is another stepping stone to the future of algorithmic architecture.

DRIFT

Architect : Snarkitecture, 2012

Location : MIAMI BEACH, USA

Designed by Snarkitecture, this entrance pavil-ion constructed for Design Miami in 2012 mar-velled many with its “floating environment”1. It is constructed with five hundred long cylindri-cal inflated tubes made of white vinyl which of course blended in with the rest of the exhibi-tion space made with the same material. These tubes are grouped together in suspension to form a floating topological landscape. Due t the filtering of the light that passes through these tubes creates a “space both interactive and contemplative.”2 As the material is light-weight it has enabled easier and faster instal-lation but it has also allowed for a dense mass of the installation to be put into suspension.

This design is simplistic however it is effective, it is a unique transition through space and it’s a movement in the positive direction of algorith-mic computation. It resonates with the idea of an innovative design and showcases perfectly what you can expect throughout the Design Miami exhibition of modern and contemporary design.

The Shellstar Pavillion allows the audience to perceive architecture in a different light. It is an exploration of circulation and geometry through computerisation aided with the use of Grasshopper and Kangaroo. These programs enable architecture of today expression with-out limits, these two dimensional ideas can be transformed into these three dimensional virtu-al spatial organisations in a short span of time.

From an idea to fabrication of the final creation the complete process took six weeks. It is a de-sign composed of one thousand five hundred in-

dividual translucent corrugated plaster cell-like-structures, nylon cable ties, PVC, steel reinforce-ment arches and steel foundation. There was minimal structural material used and this allowed for a free flow and optimized the surface area.

It clearly displays a change from past architec-tural forms and has turned it into an abstract and intriguing form which it uses to draw pas-ser-by’s attention and interest. It attracts them through this spatial vortex that journeys one through a different dimension of space but brings them back out into the larger scale site.

SHELLSTAR PAVILION

Architect : Matsys & Andrew Kudless, 2012Location : WAN CHAI, HONG KONG

DESIGN COMPUTATION“New architecture have become more subtly attuned to the differentiat-ing potential of topological and parametric algorithmic thinking and the tectonic creativity innovation of digital materiality” [pg 7, Oxman, 2014]

Computing design has vastly changed the process of the way we de-sign; it has allowed us a substantial amount of freedom and flexibility to

produce forms that are curvilinear, complex in geometry and has also pushed for a better understanding of topological spaces.

There are ongoing changes that are taking place and this is something that will continuously take place. During the first decade of computation design Rivka and Robert Oxman look at how the evolution of the digital within that time frame focussed more on “material shift and fabrication”

1 being the dominant contributors but talks about how in this second phase our aim is in designing naturally with influence from the natural

world.

To be provided with an opportunity to engage with contemporary com-putational design techniques benefits architects by allowing us generate form that is informed by performative design, tectonic models and dig-ital materiality. This continuity in the design process and the further de-velopment of these systems between these models and concepts allows

us to better understand the principles of nature and to build towards this idea of a second nature.

This 2012 project resulted from a four day work-shop at the University of Minnesota School of Architecture. It was a project looking at nature specifically structures of shells and allowing the students to explore the digital realm of design so that they could get a better grasp on how it would be possible to build structures within four days.

Through these programs they looked at the “design, simulation, and fabrication of a con-temporary thin shell structure”3 and were able to produce a shell structure made from cor-rugated cardboard within only four days. This just shows us how far architecture has come, from the initial idea through to the assembly of the final design the turnover time has been reduced drastically with the aid of computa-tional design and new fabrication methods.

CATALYST HEXSHELL

Architect : MATSYS, 2012Location : MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA

The design of the ‘Bubble’ by Franken and Ar-chitekten in 1999 saw an innovative movement in the world of architecture. It was one of the first few built structures to be built from the use of com-putational/digital mediums from the initial idea through to the construction of the final design.

This was designed for the BMW group and the initial idea was taken from the form of a water drop and this idea of moving in a more sus-tainable manner of clean energy found in water.

Bi-directional contouring was the method used to produce this curvilinear form which involved subtractive methods for the CNC production. It was a ground breaking movement that saw ar-chitects in a different light by bringing making these architects masters of building and design.

BUBBLE

Architect Firm: Franken/Architekten, 1999Location : FRANKFURT/MAIN, GERMANY

COMPOSITION/GENERATION

This shift from composition to generation shows a movement from simply modelling the design to the modelling of the logic behind the design. Through the generative processes of algorithmic thinking, parametric mod-elling and scripting cultures we have seen this shift take place with ease. The use of these new techniques by architects can allow us to gain more control over the final form of the design and it also allows for much complexity.

With any digital tool or techniques found within algorithmic thinking, par-ametric modelling and scripting cultures there will always be factors that need to be considered. This digital realm may provide us with more insight and freedom into structural and material aspects of the design but with any digital tool, the software cannot control aesthetics and this will still be in the control of the architect. In combination with all these new digital tools we are able to see the architect’s role expand and grow as the “master builder.”

The following precedents look onto the generative approaches of design and looks at the issues we may face but can overcome with the help of algorithmic thinking, parametric modelling and scripting. These tools al-lowed for the design of the Heydar Center to overcome complex issues circulating around the buildings envelope and it allowed for the Research Pavilion to be built with the use of fibre reinforced polymer structures.

GENERATION

The Center, designed to become the pri-mary building for the nation’s cultural pro-grams, breaks from the rigid and often monumental Soviet architecture that is so prevalent in Baku, aspiring instead to express the sensibilities of Azeri culture and the op-timism of a nation that looks to the future.

The concept idea derives from a want and need to create a space of continuity and fluidity, the developmental process of the exterior façade/skin was the “most critical yet challenging el-ements of the project.”4 The architects want-ed to create a continuous flow throughout the building that I would seem homogenous.

o achieve this homogeneity, the project team explored a range of digital tools that allowed them to look at “different functions, construc-tion logics and technical systems”5 so that they can incorporate them all together to achieve the exterior envelope that was desired. This is where we find that advancements in technol-ogy where design is relevant hasenabled this scripting culture to look for varying “func-tions, construction logics and technical systems among the numerous project participants.” 6

HEYDAR ALIYEV CENTER

Architect : Zaha Hadid Architects, 2013Location : BAKU, AZERBAIJAN

This is another research pavilion by ITKE and ICD showcasing the possibility of “nov-el design, simulation and fabrication pro-cesses.”7 This project went from concept to finished construction within the time span of a year and a half, it was a collaborative ef-fort of professionals ranging from “biologists, palaeontologists, architects and engineers”8

This material design focussed on the use and development of “novel robotic fabrication methods for fibre reinforced polymer struc-tures.”9 The idea was to allow as much ge-ometric freedom as possible by using materials that bring formwork to a minimum and with

that they underwent extensive analysis. They looked into biomimetic analysis, logic of dif-ferent materials and structures, robotic wind-ing processes and then went into prototyping.

Conclusively the project team constructed the final design with thirty six individual fibre rein-forced polymer structures which were based on structural principles surrounding an elytra beetle. It is a movement in the direction of a continuous link in our computation process of design that starts from a file to factory production or CNC production, it’s moving forward in the way we design by looking to create a “second nature.”10

ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION

Architect : Archi Menges, 2013-2014Location : STUTTGART UNIVERSITY, GERMANY

CONCLUSIONLooking at architecture as a discourse has enabled me to see how one can com-municate in various forms our ideas thoughts, emotions and creativity to drive our initial concept right through to completion. Looking at design computa-tion I have gained a better understanding of how it has changed the way in which we design, compose and generate. It has provided us to think and de-sign in an algorithmic format, parametrically model our work and has changed scripting cultures. We have revolutionised the role of the architect with the use of these performative skills and simulation techniques which has brought us to a new level of not only design but also functionality and optimisation.

I will intend to design with respect to the users and existing surrounds of Mer-ri Creek, looking at material design and studying this thought of a ‘second na-ture’ and how it can be applied into my final piece. I will further my research and look into more precedents and proceed with more explorations on Grass-hopper to improve my skills in design computation specifically in paramet-rics. The use of this medium will allow me to expand my design capability and hopefully produce something that is aesthetically appealing and functional.

LEARNINGOUTCOMES

Going through these precedents and learning more about the theories and practice of architectural computing I have found that there is a different way of architectural thinking and that this method can give us a continuum from design to production. This digital realm allows us to control the aesthetics but it pushes us to also renew our “interest in materialization and fabrication.” All these var-ying processes of architectural digitization worked together push one’s ability to design with greater knowledge of the principles of our natural environment.

Had I looked more into these concepts and models with my previous stu-dio work, I definitely could have taken on a much better approach it would have allowed me to overcome quite a few limitations that tectonics of mate-rial design may have clarified. I feel it definitely would have allowed me more creative freedom and would have bettered my understanding of how a de-sign process can flow much more than my staggered previous approaches.

APPENDIXALGORITHMIC SKECTHES

These are a few of the algorithmic tasks that I have experimented with however there is still a lot of further experimentation required on my behalf. Here I look at scripting to alter vases by shifting sliders, then I look at grids and play with image samplers and finally I explore voronois.

REFERENCES1. Snarkitecture, Drift Design Miami, 2012 http://www.snarkitecture.com/projects/drift/2. Snarkitecture, Drift Design Miami, 2012 http://www.snarkitecture.com/projects/drift/3. Matsys, Catalyst Hexshell, 2012 http://matsysdesign.com/2012/04/13/catalyst-hexshell/4. Archdaily, Heydar Aliyev Center, 2013 http://www.archdaily.com/448774/heydar-ali-

yev-center-zaha-hadid-architects/5. Archdaily, Heydar Aliyev Center, 2013 http://www.archdaily.com/448774/heydar-ali-

yev-center-zaha-hadid-architects/6. Archdaily, Heydar Aliyev Center, 2013 http://www.archdaily.com/448774/heydar-ali-

yev-center-zaha-hadid-architects/7. Archi Menges, ICD ITKE Research Pavlion, 2013-2.014 http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=57138. Archi Menges, ICD ITKE Research Pavlion, 2013-2.014 http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=57139. Archi Menges, ICD ITKE Research Pavlion, 2013-2.014 http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=571310. Rivka Oxman & Robert Oxman, 2014 ‘Theories of the Digital in Architecture’ (London, New

York, Routledge), pg 1-10

Image Refences:

Drift by Snarkitecturehttp://www.snarkitecture.com/projects/drift/

Shellstar Pavilion by Matsyshttp://matsysdesign.com/2013/02/27/shellstar-pavilion/

dgeCatalyst Hexshell by Matsyshttp://matsysdesign.com/2012/04/13/catalyst-hexshell/

Bubble by Frankenhttp://www.franken-architekten.de/index.php?pagetype=projectdetail&lang=en&cat=3&para-m=cat&param2=21&param3=0&http://www.grasshopper3d.com/photo/bmw-pavilion

Heydar Aliyev Center by Zaha Hadid Architectshttp://www.archdaily.com/448774/heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects/

ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILIONhttp://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5713