AIrPArt b: critEriA DEsiGn

Marta Elefterijadis

2015

University of Melbourne

Tutor: Brad Elias

ABPL30048

1

C O N T E N T S B.1. RESEARCH FIELD 3

B.2. CASE STUDY 1.0 7 B.3. CASE STUDY 2.0 12

B.4. TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT 16

B.5. TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES 20

B.6.TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL 23 B.7.LEARNING OUTCOMES 28

B.8.ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK 30

BIBLIOGRAPHY 35

2

B.1.

RESEARCH FIELD

1

GEOMETRYParticular focus: ruled surfaces, paraboloids, minimal surfaces, geodesics, relaxation and general form finding, booleans.

As discussed throughout Part A, the methods of design in the field of architecture is now increasingly geared towards the use of computational software that allows the designer to digitally create and manipulate deign ideas through the use of parametric modeling and algorithmic systems. As such, we have seen a shift towards geometric design as one of the main design solutions, able to produce complex geometry as well as custom geometric forms in order to provide further opportunities in terms of materiality and efficiency in the given setting.I have chosen to focus on Geometry as my research field, as this is a field that offers a look into the constructability of the designed form, and how this - despite it being considered to have quite a minimal surface and rigid form - can influence both the materiality and sustainability factor of the overall design. I believe that this is a fundamental way of not only utilising computational software for the purposes of this project, but also of seeing what can be achieved using digital fabrication processes.

Such dependance on fabrication and construction then calls for experimentation in regards to materiality, and a material’s ability to respond to the designed form and function and hopefully at to its efficiency and intended use. There will of course be limitations to what can or cannot be used, again based on the final form as well as the capabilities of the materials.

Geometry is not necessarily a new form of design, its aesthetics and form being used by the likes of Frank Gehry in his famous Guggenheim Museum, or alternatively in his design for the Dancing House, as well as by LAB architects in their design for Melbourne’s own Federation Square.Despite this, it is a form of deign that has in recent times undergone huge changes, all thanks to the new possibilities of modern technology.

With digital tools such as Rhino and Grasshopper, various aspects of geometric design can be explored and generated. Particularly, the explorations could focus on the relationship between materiality, its patterning and its capabilities and the strict form of the resulting structure, and how the two can work together to create a functional and working solution to the brief.

4

Fibrous TowerKokkugia2008

This tower consisting of an exoskeletal structure aiming to mimic and conform to the shapee and contours of the core building itself, is made of a fibrous concrete shell that has been algorythmically generated through a cell division procedure. The shell geometry not only responds to that of the core, but also provides both a performative and ornamental function.It has been described by the architects as being a load bearing shell, allowing the interior to be free from any structural support elemenets such as columns.Despite its complex appearance, it has been designed to still be able to be created and moulded using conventional formwork techniques in order to construct such a dynamic and complex shell.

In this way, this project is an excellent example of how computational software can be used in the field of geometric design in order to create complex yet somehow simple desigs able to respond to the many factors of the everchanging outside world and inner life, while still allowing for free spacial designation as well as complying with basic and standard construction practices.

5

Taichung Metropolitan Opera HouseToyo ItoTaichung2015 (projected end of construction)

The Taichung Metropolitan Opera house is located within a densely packed urban setting, yet still manages to incorporate nature and the outside environments within it as with all of Ito’s designs.Dubbed the “Sound Cave” by Ito himself, the opera house consists of both a horizontally and vertically continuous network of curved spaces.The entirety of the project was also considered with three main areas of sustainability in mind: Rainwater collection and re-use from the roof, the use of recyclable materials throughout the structure in order to minimise carbon dioxide output during construction in particular, and shading techniques utilised so that the building can be energy efficient within as well as on its exterior. These considerations all required the architects and designers to produce specific geometric designs that would in a way “fit” to the prescribed brief requirements regarding sustainability. Particularly in the design of the facade, this can be seen through Ito’s curved window sections that span onto the roof as well in some case, providing light and shade simultaneously, as well as a sense of connection with the landscape outside.The facade here too is load bearing, and again allows for a free interior, which as can be seen from the images is again designed in a distinctly continuous geometric curve.

6

B.2.

CASE STUDY 1.0

1

Green VoidLAVASydney, Australia2008

This project consists of a 3D lightweight structure focused on exhibiting minimal surface tension capabilities within an indoor void of 20m in height1. This is particularly interesting as it highlights the object’s ability to be sustainable and use a minimal amount of materials and time for fabrication in order to produce maximum visual and aesthetic effect within a large space.

In this case while the form is not quite rigid, the framing and skeletal structure of the object gives the main say on the types of materials able to be used, as well as limiting this to materials that will achieve minimal surface area and maximal volume. As such, the Green Void is a structure made out of specially treated high-tech Nylon (with lighting elements), giving it a surface area of 300 sqm, and a total volume of ten times its surface area, in other words, 3000 cubic m 2.

This achievement can be seen to have been achieved primarily through the use of parametric modelling and design in the field of Geometry, and the playing around or manipulation of it.

8

SPECIES 1

SPECIES 2

SPECIES 3

SPECIES 4 & 5

9

- EXOSKELETON- THICKNESS- SIZE OF NODES

- EXOSKELETON- VARIED GEOMETRY- SIZE OF NODES

- KANGAROO- REST LENGTH- POSITION OF ANCHORING POINTS

- VORONOI- OCTREE- FACET DOME

- SPRINGS AND STIFFNESS

10

11

The four iterations as seen above were those with the most developable opprotunity. As well as this, two of them presented a look into the capabilities of anchoring points, which will be particularly useful on my site, and one presented a new form that would work well on site, found through the experimentation with various components in Grasshopper.

B.3.

CASE STUDY 2.0

1

The Munich Olympic Stadium, known as the Olympiastadion in German was a revolutionary structure in its day, utilising algorithmic geometry along with the use of materials such as acrylic glass and steel cables for its canopy.The canopy in particular was designed to simulate the form of the Swiss Alps, and to mimic their peaks and undulations in its geometry.

By using lightweight materials in its design, the canopy was able to achieve a hierarchy of volumes underneath it as well as a variation of space among the seating sections. Besides providing shelter for spectators, the canopy’s use of predominantly transparent materials allows for a connection with the outside as well as with the rest of the Olympic park surrounding the structure.

The canopy was constructed as stated above using lightweight acrylic glass and steel cables, which were mounted on large steel poles in order to hold the canopy up. Working predominantly with tensile forces, the canopy is an excellent example of a type of almost rigid mesh relaxation technique on a large scale, while the use of the engineer Otto’s algorithmic designs allowed for a more controlled outcome of the fabrication processes, something that was innovative for its time.

Such a structure achieves complex and dynamic form in its design, while also creating a new sense of ornamentalism through geometric design.

OlympiastadionGunther Behnisch & Frei Otto

Munich, Germany1972

13

1. 2.

Create a rectangular planar mesh.

Triangulate the mesh.

3. 4.

Reference the mesh into Grasshopper as a geometry, and use Weaverbird join and edges components to then successfully convert mesh into set of lines (ref. to Grasshopper screengrab).

Use springs component and simultaneously connect set of lines to Kangaroo Physics.

Reference first set of anchor points (shown in green).

5. 6.

Reference second set of anchor points (shown in blue).

Reference third set of anchor points (shown in orange).

14

7.

Shift each set of points in the y-axis as shown in the diagram to the left.

Incorporate simulation toggle and timer.

15

B.4.

TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

1

A B C D

1

2

3

4

17

E F G H

5

6

7

8

18

19

Here the four chosen iterations all provide quite developable surfaces and meshes, and are all created out of a relaxed mesh. The first gives an insight into the possibilies of draping a material over a predetermined form while anchoring the remaining material, while the other three again show what can be achieved using anchoring points.The last form is of particular interest, as it shows how the design could look when anchored to the circular sections on the front of the bridge, and on the trusses underneath.

B.5.

TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES

1

21

prototype:- created to form a shell geometry, designed to mimic an open cocoon shape.- design would ideally be anchored on three points to above bridge trusses and openings.

elements/materiality:- prototype created out of 0.5mm acrylic elements in three different shapes: X, Y and I.- held together using splitter pins, to give rotational ability while still maintaining an element of rigidity given predominantly from the individual acrylic pieces.

22

B.6.

TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL

1

THE BRIEF:

Implementing the idea of self-commissioned architecture, pro-pose an architectural intervention that will express, support, amplify or question continuous relationships between technical, cultural and natural systems.

SPECIFIC IDEAS:

- cannot touch ground or water- can sit anywhere along/over Merri creek- to suit 1 to 10 users- can be temporary or permanent- need to consider aspect of use and therefore impacts on materiality and structure- need to consider element of sustainablity

Highlighting geometry as the chosen research field, the design should consider not only materiality as an important factor in form finding, durability as well as simply the aesthetics of the structure, but also needs to consider outside forces such as weather (as it is an open air design), vibrations (as is apparent through the factor of the site being underneath a railway bridge), and again durability, which - tied with materiality - is an important factor when looking to allow the design to last within its temporal frame for all users considered.

24

My chosen site is the Clifton Hill Railway bridge located on the south bank of the Merri Creek, between Rushall and Clifton Hill railway stations.

The bridge itself consists of a steel structure of trusses, supported by large concrete bases as seen from the photographs to the right.

The underside of the bridge is currently predominantly used by cyclists and pedestrians on the south bank, and by skaters and the like on the north bank, as this is also the location of a prominent skate park built specifically for the site by the architects of this project.

KEY REASONS FOR SITE CHOICE:

- Accessible to a wide range of people due to proximity to main road, housing estates and train stations.

- Already a widely used skate park on the other side of creek – wide exposure – and may bring more from different target audiences.

- Adversely, the specific areas on site to be used have been underutilised unlike the skate park.

- Opportunity to hang and anchor design from many points of both the bridge and the staircases/supporting structure.

- Opportunity to incorporate the built and natural environments present on site.

25

26

My focus will be on a specific part of the site, within a nook under the bridge seen after the first flight of stairs when escalating from the Creek up to the streets above.

As the bridge has many opportunities to hang and anchor a design, a form such as the one shown here would be ideal for this particular site choice.

27

B.7.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

1

The explorations done in Part B have demonstrated the lengths to which a design can be stretched with regards to factors such as geometry (predominantly), composition and efficiency.Looking at the work done for each case study, as well as that done for the reverse engineering of case study 2.0, it is clear that they are greatly tied with the experimentations done each week within the algorithmic sketchbook.

With this in mind, I am very happy with my choice of geometry as the chosen research field, as this has allowed me to explore beyond simply the form of the object, and incorporate elements of design from many other research fields presented to us.While this is the case, it is worthwhile to look a only a small set of factors in Part C, as this will greatly help me to hone in on a single design that I will then explore further and eventually refine.

In completing Part B, I have come to a greater understanding in the operations of not only Grasshopper as a general tool, but also Weaverbird and Kangaroo plugins as a means of furthering both my designs and explorations.

In saying this, it has become very apparent to me that such tools are infinitely useful in the world of architecture, engineering and also the practice of creating sustainable and efficient design.

29

B.8.

APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK

1

WEEK 4

Explorations in the field of fractal geometry.

Here the created tetrahedron has been booleaned from a triangular pyramid as the initial shape, and subsequently transformed according to the algorythm to create the three distinct patterns seen below, all of which come together to form the shape seen here on the right.

31

WEEK 5

As my initial reverse engineering try, I chose to recreate a gridshell through the 7 steps as seen from the diagrams below.

While this was not used as the final case study 2.0, it nevertheless provided a good practice ground for the subsequent work.

32

WEEK 6

Pattern lists as explored here can be useful later in my excersises in creating the pattern geometry that will create the subsequent mesh for my design.

Here I have played with a number of wire-like patterns, and next I would like to explore patterning on a 3D level.

33

WEEK 7

Using the evaluation filed excersise and algorithm, I have created a more or less draping structure in various densities.

This could be a good opportunity to further explore the inverse of my proposed design, in that such a form could be hanged or anchored from its vertex as opposed to from the ends of the fiorm.

34

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• Architizer, ‘Fibrous Tower’, 2015 <http://architizer.com/projects/fibrous-tower/> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• L-a-v-a.net, ‘Green Void » LAVA’, 2015 <http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• Munich Olympic Stadium, 2014 <”2014 Olympiastadion Munich” by 2014_Olympiastadion_Munich_l.JPG: M(e)ister Eiskalt2014_Olympiastadion_Munich_m.JPG: M(e)ister Eiskalt2014_Olympiastadion_Munich_r.JPG: M(e)ister Eiskaltderivative work: Hic et nunc - This file was derived from:2014 Olym-piastadion Munich l.JPG2014 Olympiastadion Munich m.JPG2014 Olympiastadion Munich r.JPG. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014_Olympiastadion_Munich.jpg#/media/File:2014_Olympiastadion_Munich.jpg> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• Pohl, Ethel, ‘Green Void / LAVA’, ArchDaily, 2008 <http://www.archdaily.com/10233/green-void-lava/> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• Rice Gallery, ‘Soo Sunny Park | Unwoven Light’, 2015 <http://www.ricegallery.org/soo-sunny-park> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• Rinaldi, Marco, and Marco Rinaldi, ‘Taichung Metropolitan Opera House By Toyo Ito’, A As Archi-tecture, 2014 <http://aasarchitecture.com/2014/08/taichung-metropolitan-opera-house-toyo-ito.html> [accessed 28 April 2015]

• Synthesis-dna.com, ‘SDA | Synthesis Design’, 2015 <http://synthesis-dna.com/projects/articulated-tensions-univ-of-calgary> [accessed 28 April 2015]

35