Higgins darcy 585345 journal

AIRJournal - Semester 2 2014Darcy Higgins 585345Group 1 - Philip Belesky

2

3

DARCY HIGGINSAbout Me

Hello and welcome to my Air Journal.

I’m a twenty one year-old from the outer eastern suburbs of Melbourne, currently studying in my third year of the Bachelor of Environments, majoring in architecture.

After studying Visual Communication & Design during my VCE, which developed a passion for design, the logical decision for my development, with some persuasion from my teachers in high school, was to pursue a career in architecture.

There is something about architecture that is more fulfilling than many of the other design disciplines. In a way I feel it is a combination of all of them into one. I also enjoy that architecture is more substantial than many other careers. There aren’t many opportunities for a person to make a mark on society or in history, like architecture provides. This is my main goal to one day have a building I can call my own that adds to a major city skyline or to create an impacting monument that becomes part of a cultural identity.

Apart from learning about the physical design of a building in

the studios I have completed so far, I have also become rather fond of the historical side of architecture. Going beyond what looks good and what doesn’t and delving into the reasoning behind certain styles throughout history, can be rather enthralling. It has helped me further my design ideology just as much as the studios have.

In terms of this subject I have had some experience with Rhino during Virtual Environments, but apart from that not much else. I would say I hope to learn a lot more about the computerised side of architecture. It is quite obvious that it is having a great impact on the direction that architecture is presently moving towards. Therefore it is necessary to understand how I can learn and improve my awareness of this discipline to have a more well rounded education.

Outside of university life I am an avid sportsman, enjoying in particular footy, basketball and cricket. It is something that keeps me healthy not only physically but also mentally, as it allows a break from the rigors that studying architecture can bring about.

4

CONTENTSPART A: CONCEPTUALISATIONA.1 - Design Futuring 6LAGI Design Competition - ‘TETRAS’ 8LAGI Design Competition - ‘FLUENT-FIELDS’ 10

A.2 - Design Computation 12Guggenheim Museum (1997) - Frank Gehry 14Modern Primitives - FENDI + Aranda/Lasch 16

A.3 - Composition/Generation 18Research Pavilion 2011 - ICD/ITKE Universitat de Stuttgart 20HygroSkin - Achim Menges 22

A.4 - Conclusion 24

A.5 - Learning Outcomes 26

A.6 - Algorithmic Sketches 28

Part A References 30

5

6

7

PART A

ConceptualisationA.1 - Design Futuring 6LAGI Design Competition - ‘TETRAS’ 8LAGI Design Competition - ‘FLUENT-FIELDS’ 10

A.2 - Design Computation 12Guggenheim Museum (1997) - Frank Gehry 14Modern Primitives - FENDI + Aranda/Lasch 16

A.3 - Composition/Generation 18Research Pavilion 2011 - ICD/ITKE Universitat de Stuttgart 20HygroSkin - Achim Menges 22

A.4 - Conclusion 24

A.5 - Learning Outcomes 26

A.6 - Algorithmic Sketches 28

Part A References 30

8

A.1 Design FuturingAnswering the design futuring question actually requires

having a clear sense of what design needs to be mobilized for or against. Even more significantly, it means changing

our thinking, then how and what we design[1].

”

“

9

Throughout history there have been many different architectural thinking or theories which have arisen for various reasons. In a similar way there has been a shift in our current way of design thinking. The idea of design futuring is a relatively new concept which has come about for a number of reasons. Unlike its predecessors, it is more than aesthetics and function, in the way that it must now incorporate the most immediate needs of the social world it belongs. But what must we change in our thinking?

In our current predicament, the world we live in and have known for most of our lives, will not be a part of our future. Our past behaviour has led to a lack of key resources and major damage has been done to parts of our environmental world that we cannot take back. A change is needed in the way we act, to protect and enhance the environment to allow for a better future. The importance of this dire need for change was outlined by Tony Fry:

“Even now, in our collective moment of criticality, a moment in which damage

to the planet’s climatic and ecological systems is still increasing and exposing life as we know it to growing dangers, our species’ auto-destructive mode of being is neither fundamentally recognized nor redirectively engaged.”[2]

It is now necessary to include the idea of sustainable development into our design thinking. Making the environment an integral part of our future designs will create a better world to live in and impact greatly on our potential prospects.

The means to do this however are left up to the designer, but one thing is for sure: the role of the architect in conventional practice must change for the greater good[3]. This idea will become the backbone for our exploration into the world of computerized design – whether it provides us with the means to attain this outcome will be determined.

10

A.1 Design Futuring

LAGI Design Entry 2010

‘TETRAS’Artist team: Ann Preston, Roger White, and

Noah Golden

Artist Location: Los Angeles, USA

Energy Technologies: Thin film photovoltaics

Annual Capacity: 20,000 mwh

Designed for site #3 in Abu Dhabi, on Airport Road near Masdar City

Fig. 1 Whole View Outside Perspective

Based on the idea of design futuring, the LAGI design competition is a perfect media to work on a concept that focuses on the areas as outlined on the previous page. The brief requires equal attention to be applied to the aesthetics, functional needs, as well as an environmentally friendly component, in this case the ability for the design to produce energy.

The first precedent from this competition, ‘Tetras’, incorporates all three key areas of design to create the form shown below. Focusing on the energy side of the structure, ‘Tetras’ utilises thin film photovoltaics, more commonly known as solar panels to gain its energy[4]. The panels are built

into the sculptural structure, shown below, but also flow outwards to cover almost all of the site’s landscape. In terms of its theory, there has been much thought put into the plan of the site with many different areas all working together to create one cohesive site which is both stylish, functional and environmentally friendly.

While there has been much thought put into the overall concept by the designers of a well integrated design, it is nothing more than a concept. While reading the notes provided, there is little evidence that this method would be efficient and no real proof has been provided about the actual method of transformation of energy from the sun

11

through to the actual quantifiable energy output[5]. This design is on the right track but requires a greater scientific emphasis before it can be proved to be a truly integrated energy efficient design.

Thinking about this structure from a more personal perspective, the design was quite striking at first glance and caught my attention immediately. The use of multiple shapes that seem to fill random, yet obviously engineered positions is dynamic. It is clear that some sort of mathematical formula is at work. From the little experience of working with rhino and grasshopper this is something that I know can be used in the programs and may possibly be something that is applicable to my design process later on.

In terms of the aesthetics of the design there is a feature that stands out above all. The texture of all the different panels is quite intriguing and gives the architecture an added element of dynamic and intricate patterning. It can be seen in the documentation and presentation that quite a lot of thought was out in by the designers to accomplish this level of textured patterning.

This is something that I think is vital to increase the level of a design and particularly that of computational. From my point of view I find that in certain designs there is a ‘coldness’ or lack of feeling in that type of design. To elevate this to a standard level the use of texture and the right colour palette could evoke a greater sense of overall design and make the space more inviting. If not, it will definitely make the architecture more eye-catching and something that people want to visit and in the case of our brief this is important to consider.

Fig. 3 Texture

Fig. 2 Internal View

12

A.1 Design Futuring

LAGI Design Entry 2012

‘FLUENT-FIELDS’Artist Team: Philip Jenkin, Monika Szawiola, Erik Thorson

Artist Location: Brooklyn, NY, USA

Energy Technology: Solar/Wind

Fig. 4 Overall Perspective

The ‘Fluent-Fields’ design from the 2012 LAGI design competition is a great example of a more thorough research effort into the possible energy production of a structure. The explanation of the solar and wind energy systems have been done well and I feel that this design could be relied on much more to provide a well rounded response to the brief.

It is easy to follow the simple process of energy conversion with the diagram provided by the designers (as shown in Fig 5.) giving a breakdown of the energy flow from start to finish. The design is also well more resolved in terms of the energy features being integrated into the actual structure more effectively. It does not rely on solar fields placed outside of the actual structure like the previous precedent, ‘Tetras’.

In terms of looking forward to our actual studio task and after further consultation with the LAGI brief and site, one immediate

chance for exploration (moving away from the theoretical idea of design futuring as discussed earlier) came to me.

The site is quite large and uninhabited with any landmark features, as well as being virtually flat. In this case I feel that it is necessary to think about the later design as an all encompassing design that alters the landscape significantly. This will make the overall feel of the place quite different to that which was before it.

Keeping this in mind the design for analysis known as ‘Fluent-Fields’ satisfies this in its design. The main idea is to create a new experience for the user as it completely dictates the landscape and movement of the user.

This could also be important in the energy producing side of things. As the main energy source is through solar radiation,

13

Fig. 4 Overall Perspective

it would gain more energy due to the large surface space resulting in more photovoltaic panels.

In theory this design covers a range of areas that our brief requires, although there is some improvements that could be made within the design. Even though there is a large area for solar radiation to occur, on further inspection the design of the wave like structures would not exactly maximise the sunlight it would receive during the day. It would be necessary to design it in a way that either has the structure set panels at the desired angle for maximum energy production or some sort of system that makes the panels move in accordance to the sun. This is something I feel could be easily corrected using Rhino and Grasshopper through a slightly more complex computational process.

Fig. 6 Plan View of design

Fig. 5 Diagram of energy flow

14

A.2 Design ComputationThe dominant mode of utilizing computers in architecture

today is that of computerization; entities or processes that are already conceptualized in the designer’s mind are entered, manipulated, or stored on a computer system. In contrast, computation or computing, as a computer-based

design tool, is generally limited[6].

”

“

15

After discovering exactly what it is we, as architects, need to change in the previous section, it is now imperative that we find the vehicle that will allow us to realise this goal of a more well rounded design approach.

With the advancement in modern technology, architecture as we know it has rapidly changed with a strong emphasis being placed on the computing process. Computing has become one of the more valuable technologies for architecture in modern times. It has engaged with the design process and transformed how we think about creating a structure[7].

There is a distinct change in the design process as information transferred on paper becomes materialised through the computer. It adds on another layer of refinement to the process. Many design practices are even starting the initial design stage on the computer, allowing a fully parametric design to eventuate[8].

This is where the topic of computing becomes more complex. The

struggle between computerisation and computation eventuates. This can also be referred to as the top down versus bottom up approaches[9].

There has been such a quick shift between what is conceived as traditional practice, through the use of sketching, compared to the production of challenging algorithmic programming, that it is important to understand the movement and therefore create a new direction in our design process[10].

This will be explored with the analysis of precedents directly relating to different ideas of computer processing.

16

A.2 Design Computation

Guggenheim Museum (1997) - Frank Gehry

To further understand the difference between computerisation and computational design it is important to give physical building evidence of the two. This famous design by Frank Gehry was made through a computerisation approach. It epitomizes the expansion of computer processing which was occurring during this period of time[11].

In the computerisation method a design is created by the architects through drawing and other early design techniques which provide a preconceived notion of the buildings outcome, before being passed on to other specialists who develop and refine a parametrically designed model of what was essentially created in the initial design process[12]. This is otherwise known as the top down approach where an overview of the whole system is established before being broken up into sub systems, in which their parts are

refined to create a greater whole[13].

Although this process of design is very familiar for our generation, you can notice in a range of ways how this has significantly changed/helped the process. The Guggenheim Museum in earlier times would have been dismissed as a final proposition for many projects/competitions due to the complex geometrical shapes providing significant construction challenges.

Using a computer for modelling purposes however has allowed for a construction system to be devised through the testing of different materials combined with complex mathematical formulae. Along with the ever changing advances in construction technologies the Guggenheim Museum was able to be completed as an optimised piece of computerised design.

Fig. 7 Outside view

17

Fig. 8 Initial sketches by Gehry

3-D design software CATIA allowed for this drawing above to be transformed into the current structure as seen in the picture to the left[14].

18

Aranda/Lasch is a design firm based in New York and established in 2003. The founding partners, Benjamin Aranda and Christopher Lasch, have based their architectural focus on the relationship between craft and computation. Furthermore they

are specifically interested in how geometry, patterning and mathematics affect this relationship[15].

As many of the design firms who practice computational design do, Aranda/Lasch have developed their own computational tools which assist in developing their ideas. It helps guide their design to be more inclusive of their personal interests and

individual, as they have their own code or formula which creates the basis of the concepts[16].

Fig. 10Fig. 9 Fig. 11

19

A.2 Design Computation

Modern Primitives - FENDI + Aranda/Lasch

This furniture installation for the Venice Biennale by Aranda/Lasch with help from FENDI’s handcraftsmanship shows an exploration into the new world of computational design.

The key to computational design lies in its ingredients. To put it in simple words, it involves the creation of a strategy of different ideas that come together in an information processing agent (ie. the computer) which produces an unexpected outcome[17]. This is also known as the bottom up approach where a grand emergent system is created from smaller systems that have been linked together in an earlier stage[18].

In this case it is no different. The computational design method is quite complex with Aranda/Lasch putting in research into various areas such as fractal geometry, quasi-crystals, the use of a single building element and the landscape object. The

computational approach gives life to these multi-disciplinary areas through the furniture installations as shown above and to the left.

The idea of computational design is interesting once historical theory of architecture is explored. It lends itself well to one of the most dominant ideas of architectural theory, ‘De Architectura’ by Vitruvius, where design is the combination of art, engineering and societal need in to one complete form[19].

In terms of Aranda/Lasch they are creating many unique objects discovered through the use of one single building block combined with algorithmic processing to satisfy a set of criteria that is based on style, structure and function. The idea of formation preceding form has satisfied one of the most essential historical theories.

Fig. 12

20

A.3 Composition/GenerationComputation also has the potential to provide inspiration

and go beyond the intellect of the designer, like other techniques of architectural design, through the generation

of unexpected results[20].

”

“

21

Following on from design computation we can see already, with our simple understanding of the computational method, that it has shifted thinking in architecture towards a new direction. Processes such as parametric modelling and algorithmic thinking have greatly affected our perception of architecture in its present circumstance. So how has this changed the way we think about the design process? The battle between composition versus generation arises.

With many past and current design practices, composition has been the main method in which ideas have been created during the early stage of the design process. A preconceived structure has been imagined and realised through simple sketching and then manipulated from there on. We have seen this was a key part of computing during it’s initial development. The idea of generation as a design technique has formulated from computational design, in which many proposals have been created unexpectedly from one set of complex rules.

Although it has been some what radical, it should be seen as a tool to make the design and the architect better off[21]. What we haven’t discussed is how computational processing is helping us.

Where is the new process taking us?Besides redefining the types of design practices, there are many other areas of design that can be more easily analysed and manipulated to create a more thorough and wholistic design approach. This in turn will provide the means to satisfy the idea of design futuring as developed in A.1.

Further research of precedents will show how and exactly what computational design has affected in the overall design process.

22

A.3 Composition/Generation

Research Pavilion 2011 - ICD/ITKE Universitat de Stuttgart

The main aim of this research pavilion was to create a structure which is designed through a computational approach to design, in which all components of the process have succumbed to this method.

The use of a biological phenomenon, in this case the sea urchin’s plate skeleton, has been combined with computer aided design to create form[22]. This is something we have seen and analysed in previous sections of the journal, so what exactly is so experimental about this design?

The recognised biological principles have been extended and performative analysis employed to create a number of optimised geometrical forms. The fabrication of the panels which are finger joints (shown in Fig. 15) has been adapted to perform similarly as the sea urchin’s finger like calcite protrusions which join their plate’s together[23]. Another integration from the sea urchin’s morphological properties

was that three plate edges always join at one point[24]. With these two computationally manipulated properties integrated into the design many advantages arise.

The high load bearing capacity created allows for this type of method to be applied to almost any geometrical structure, not just the one shown in the images. The fabrication process and materiality has also been customised to provide the most efficient results. Using custom programming, a robotic fabrication system was employed to cut the highly lightweight 6.5mm thin pieces of plywood[25].

Along with a range of more complex biological properties organised through the computational process the pavilion has encapsulated the true advantages of this method of design with fabrication, materialisation and performative analysis all being optimised to create a more complete structure.

Fig. 13 External view

23


This was a joint project between the Institute for Computational Design (ICD) and Institute of Building Structures and Structural Design, both apart of the Universitat de Stuttgart[26]. The research pavilion, in which a new one

is produced annually, is run primarily by Prof. Achim Menges who aims to create a

structure in which computational processing is the driving force behind all elements of the project. It could be said that the project has

established itself as epitomising a design practice that is based around a hybrid of

software engineers and architects[27]. They utilise personal scripting to simulate their

own needs for specific designs. This type of practice is becoming increasingly relevant.


Fig. 15 Tectonics

24

A.3 Composition/GenerationHygroSkin - Achim Menges

Similarly to the research pavilion as mentioned above, the project HygroSkin by Achim Menges experiments with biomimetic principles through a computational process to create the structure as seen in the images.

The basis of the design focuses on the spruce cone and its relation to humidity. A combination of properties including anisotrophy, the directional dependence of a material’s characteristics combined, and hygroscopicity, a substance’s ability to take in moisture from the atmosphere when dry and yield moisture to the atmosphere when wet, thereby maintaining a moisture content in equilibrium with the surrounding relative humidity, were researched over a long period of time[28]. Without getting into too much deep and complex thought about these areas of interests, in short, the focus of the design relates to a material’s intrinsic properties in relation to the external environment which respond accordingly,

in this case, the opening (when dry) and closing (when wet)[29].

Why is this so important? The natural properties of wood, one of the oldest and also environmentally friendly materials, satisfies the requirements outlined above. Using this approach to building along with the fact that this process requires zero sensory systems or motor function resulting in no energy consumption, a highly thought of sustainable outcome has been created through a computational process[30]. Like the research pavilion, the rest of the structure uses computational method to also define the materialisation of the structure, with plywood sheeting being developed in a way where the elasticity of the material is utilised to create a rigid self-forming structure[31]. The fabrication and construction is also formed through the use of complex coding which is input into industrialised robots to allow for more efficient design.

Fig. 16 External View

25

Fig. 17 Reaction of wood to humidity Fig. 18 Internal view

26

A.4 ConclusionThe use of a computational approach to design opens up new and exciting possibilities for the future. Part A has given me an understanding of the great potential that processing through the means of a computer allows. Through this new found sense of computational design the way that I will challenge the brief in the upcoming weeks has changed dramatically. It can be summarised in three parts, relating to the three sections explored earlier. These are:

- What do we need to change? - How are we going to facilitate this transition? - Where will this method take us in the future?

It is clear that a sustainable approach to life in general must be taken, as the environment becomes increasingly unstable. Design plays a critical part in this, as the built environment establishes a connection between its surroundings and the people of society. Creating a more well rounded approach is key. In this way the role of the architect is now greatly important, as we must balance three key areas of design: style, function and environmentally friendly development.

There has been many different styles of architecture throughout history. From the very beginning the idea put forth by Vitruvius of art, engineering and societal need has been idolised as the pinnacle of true architecture, yet there has been no real answer to this. This has been supplemented with the approach of design futuring as outlined above. Through the study of computerised and computational design in the precedents of A.2 we can see a possible real

outcome of these ideals have been reached. The quick rise of computing processes in design has given birth to a vehicle that will hopefully allow us the chance to succeed in creating a more well rounded society, through the built environment.

Although we have established that computational approach may reach these ideals, it was important to actually grasp a sense of the direction that it will be taking us in the present and into the future. In short, what are the advantages of computational design? We have seen that a complete shift in the design process we have come to know will occur in this model of design. There is movement from composition, involving hand drawn sketching, to generation, which involves algorithmic sketching in the sense of using programming and coding techniques to develop a design. This has enabled many other key parts of the design process to flourish. The endless possibilities of computational processing have given new life to these areas:

- Fabrication/Construction - Performative Design - Materialisation of complex geometry - Responsive technology

Computational design has changed significantly the present design practice and it can be seen that it will have great impact on future endeavours as well.

27

Fig. 19 ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2012

Although this project was not included in proper precedent analysis, it basically offers the same kinds of messages about the advantages that computational design instills into the design process, as outlined in A.3. I felt it was still worthy to include some images to show that computational design is not limited and in fact there are a wide range of projects being produced in our current architectural society.

28

Fig. 20 ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2012

29

A.5 Learning OutcomesApplying this thinking to previous design projects provides an interesting result.

In terms of being sustainable, there is some emphasis on this in previous studios, yet it is something that hasn’t been at the forefront of my mind. Much of the discussion in tutorials and the final outcomes rarely reflect any significant thought about making decisions that will affect the future for the better. It is more a product of the way the final presentation would be marked, considering that the tutors are going to be marking on the aesthetic of the design rather than in its actual implementation.

The design process for many of my previous works has also been quite traditional. Generally pencil and paper has been the main driver behind the generation and early refinement of the design. It is only at the end that using a computer to refine or finish off has been necessary.

This way of design has probably led to many of my designs being stagnant in the fact that I have had one idea from the start and carried it all the way through. With knowledge of the computational advantages it would lead me to creating many different design ideas and something worth exploring in the future.

30

A.6 Algorithmic Sketchbook

“Applied Learning”

Fig. 21 Week 2 work

During the algorithmic tasks set it has been interesting to see the theory of computational design become applied in its real form. Although it is only a brief introduction to some of the more basic features of grasshopper as a design tool there are already links being made from the precedents to the images shown to the right.

In the first weeks exploration of creating a building structure through a series of polylines, and in my further development of incorporating rounded curves as a substitute (Fig. 22), it was easy to see how this kind of processing would be used to create a model for hand drawn sketches, such as the Guggenheim Museum as studied in the precedents of A.2. I felt like I had a more firm grasp on what computerisation was and how it is performed.

In week two a different approach was taken. I felt that it took more of the form of computational processing as the algorithmic sketching involved creating a set of random numbers which were input into the algorithm to make the circles height and width vary randomly. Although we have set up the design before this, defining points and creating circles, the outcome after providing the random numbers is going to be completely unexpected. This feels like it was moving in a more computational direction.

31

Fig. 22 Week 1 work

32

1. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (United Kingdom: Berg Publishers, 2008), p. 62. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (United Kingdom: Berg Publishers, 2008), p. 23. Tony Fry, Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (United Kingdom: Berg Publishers, 2008), p. 44. ‘Tetras | LAGI2010’, landartgenerator <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/tetras/> [accessed 21 August 2014]5. ‘Tetras | LAGI2010’, landartgenerator <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/tetras/> [accessed 21 August 2014]6. Kostas Terzidis, Algorithmic Architecture, 1st edn (United Kingdom: Architectural Press, 2006) p. xi7. Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, eds. Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 1–108. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building Of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, p. 109.‘Top-down and Bottom-up Design’, princeton <https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Top-down_and_bottom-up_design.html> [accessed 21 August 2014]10. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building Of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, p. 1011. Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, eds. Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 1–1012. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building Of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, p. 1013. ‘Top-down and Bottom-up Design’, princeton <https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Top-down_and_bottom-up_design.html> [accessed 21 August 2014]14. ‘The Construction - Guggenheim Museum Bilbao’, Guggenheim Museum Bilbao <http://www.guggenheim-bilbao.es/en/the-building/the-construction/> [accessed 21 August 2014]15. Elsewhere Collective, From Control to Design Conversation, (Melbourne) Date and page unknown.16. Elsewhere Collective, From Control to Design Conversation, (Melbourne) Date and page unknown.17. Jan Cuny, Larry Snyder, and Jeannette M. Wing, “Demystifying ComputationalThinking for Non-Computer Scientists,” work in progress, 2010.18.‘Top-down and Bottom-up Design’, princeton <https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Top-down_and_bottom-up_design.html> [accessed 21 August 2014]19. Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, eds. Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge, 2014), pp. 1–1020. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building Of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, p. 1021. Brady Peters, ‘Computation Works: The Building Of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 2013, p. 1022. ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]23. ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]24. ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]25.‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]26.‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]27. ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 21 August 2014]28. Achim Menges, ‘Achimmenges.net - Achim Menges Design Research Architecture Product Design’, achimmenges <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> [accessed 21 August 2014]

Part A ReferencesFrom Text

33

Fig. 1Fig. 2Fig. 3

FIg. 4Fig. 5Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9Fig. 10Fig. 11

Fig. 12



Fig. 19Fig. 20

Part A References

Images

29. Achim Menges, ‘Achimmenges.net - Achim Menges Design Research Architecture Product Design’, achimmenges <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> [accessed 21 August 2014]30. Achim Menges, ‘Achimmenges.net - Achim Menges Design Research Architecture Product Design’, achimmenges <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> [accessed 21 August 2014]31. Achim Menges, ‘Achimmenges.net - Achim Menges Design Research Architecture Product Design’, achimmenges <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> [accessed 21 August 2014]

‘Tetras | LAGI2010’, landartgenerator <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI2010/tetras/> [accessed 21 August 2014]

‘Fluent-Fields | LAGI-2012’, landartgenerator <http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/E5M8P031/> [accessed 21 August 2014]

‘ARCH1390 Benjamin Knowles: A2: Case Study - Frank Gehry “Guggenheim Museum” Bilbao, Spain’, blogspot <http://arch1390benjaminknowles.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/a2-case-study-frank-gehry-guggenheim.html> [accessed 21 August 2014]

‘Phtgrphr@hrt: Frank Gehry’, blogspot <http://phtgrphrathrt.blogspot.com.au/2010/08/frank-gehry.html> [accessed 21 August 2014]

Modern Primitives by ArandaLasch - Dezeen’, Dezeen <http://www.dezeen.com/2010/08/30/modern-primitives-by-arandalasch/> [accessed 21 August 2014]

‘Modern Primitives by Aranda/Lasch’, Lancia TrendVisions <http://www.lanciatrendvisions.com/en/article/modern-primitives-by-aranda-lasch> [accessed 21 August 2014]

Achim Menges, ‘Achimmenges.net - Achim Menges Design Research Architecture Product Design’, achimmenges <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5123> [accessed 21 August 2014]



34

PART B

Criteria Design

35

TessellationThe process or art of tessellating a surface, or the state of

being tessellated[1].

An arrangement of shapes closely fitted together, especially of polygons in a repeated pattern without gaps or overlapping[2].

”

“

36

The design is a system of vaults that fill a defined space. In this case the entry soffit and two long gallery walls bind the Voussoir Cloud. A computational mixture of hanging chain models, derived from research of Frei Otto and Antonio Gaudi, along with form finding programs allowed the development of the purely compressive structure[3].

In terms of the research field, a Delaunay tessellation has been used in each vault to create a greater structural concept[4]. It is a relatively simple technique where the tessellation is devised in such a way where the ‘petals’ are either more dense at locations where the form is most structurally vulnerable such as the column bases and edges

of the vaults, or less compact at the upper parts where it is not necessarily at risk[5].

Furthermore the computational strategy employed creates a system of ‘petals’ that work together more effectively towards one another. Four different types of ‘petals’ can be seen which are defined by it’s size, edge conditions and position relative to the overall form[6].

From this structural concept thin wood laminate could be used as a material solution[7]. This goes against most historical construction methods, as the ‘petals’ which have been developed to be similar to voussiors, the building

B.2 Case Study 1.0

Voussoir Cloud - IwamotoScott


37

blocks of an arch, are usually made from masonry[8]. Breaking away from traditional practice through the use of the paper thin material would create many obvious benefits such as cost and time but it also allows a more responsive design scheme to be proposed, more in line with the computational approach.

Fig. 1 Internal View Fig. 3 Voussoir tessellation

Fig. 2 Defined space

38

39

Strips and FoldingStrips - A long narrow piece, usually of uniform width[9].

Folding - To bend over or double up so that one part lies on another part[10].

To make compact by doubling or bending over parts[11].

”

“

40

The Seroussi Pavilion is a unique design, very much opposing classical architectural design. It essentially has been born from the use of electro-magnetic fields, utilizing attractor and repulsion techniques to devise the distinctive plan as shown in the images above[12]. There is a rhythmic quality with the flowing lines creating a dynamic design. Structural form has then been found through micro-arching and applying the mathematical function of sine.

The strips and folding technique is evident in the ‘tiling’ system, which has been created through manipulation of many computational components involved in the entire process[13]. More specifically it has been achieved through the nature of the double charged trajectories in the electro-magnetic field, creating a interwoven continuous fabric to

Fig. 4 Model design

41

B.2 Case Study 1.0Seroussi Pavilion - Biothing

the structure, much like a cocoon[14]. The sine function provides different angles, orientation and size of the ‘tiles’ to form openings or apertures that allows light and shade to become manifest in the structure[15].

Another aim of the apertures is that it will also provide functional options in the design, with the idea that it will be a space for the combination of human and art. Art will be rearranged for different exhibitions, as the openings in the labyrinth like fabric provide different opportunities for art to be placed within them, depending on the factors of angle, orientation and size described above[16].

An interesting factor in the computational process is the input of an algorithmic component that makes the structure

“find ground”. This means it can be adapted to any local site conditions, basically allowing a completely universal design[17]. This is something that gives a mixed emotional response. On the one hand there is a clear advantage in terms of its ease of use in the application of the design to any environment, with a unique form generated depending on this location, yet the same aesthetic quality will seem apparent, no matter the form, creating a rather monotonous result if repeated. On reflection though this could be said about any architectural style, with the differences that allow the design to truly inspire coming from individual characteristics resulting from its functional use and inhabitance over time.

Fig. 5 Tile structure

42

B.2 Case Study 1.0ITERATIONS

VECTOR XYZ SLIDERSx: 0y: 0z: 67.2

VECTOR XYZ SLIDERSx: 0y: 0z: 0

VECTOR XYZ SLIDERSx: 0y: 78.8z: 0

VECTOR XYZ SLIDERSx: 48.8y: 0z: 0

VECTOR XYZ SLIDERSx: 20.1y: 23.8z: 67.6

SPRINGSStiffness: 1000





MOVE Z-AXIS SLIDER: -2.56SCALE FACTOR SLIDER: 0.36

MOVE Z-AXIS SLIDER: +4SCALE FACTOR SLIDER: 0.69

MOVE Z-AXIS SLIDER: +4SCALE FACTOR SLIDER: 0.69SPRINGSStiffness: 325



SPECIES 1:

BASED ON MANIPULATION OF KANGAROO PARAMETERS

SPECIES 2:

43

BASED ON MANIPULATION OF KANGAROO PARAMETERS

SPECIES 3: Series of different mesh components from weaverbird and kangaroo

44

B.2 Case Study 1.0ITERATIONSBASED ON MANIPULATION OF DEFINITIONS PARAMETERS

1st DIVIDE CURVE SLIDERCount (N): 5

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Bezier up

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Bezier down

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Conic medium

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Conic high

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Conic low




2nd DIVIDE CURVE SLIDERCount (N): 12

SPECIES 1: SPECIES 2:

45

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Gaussian

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Parabola +

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Parabola -

Existing curves scaled and manipulated to form new curvesBoth sets of curves joined

New curves set at beginning of definitionScale manipulated later

Curves used to add circles

Pipes added along curves

Curves patched

GRAPH MAPPERGraph Type: Perlin

46

47

B.2 Case Study 1.0Selection Criteria

The potential for the definition to explore solar technologyWill work towards changing the landscape of the LAGI siteProvides area for functional requirementsAllows for people to inhabit the space in a new wayGeometry has conceivable constructible/developable outcomeIncorporates light as a design feature

These four iterations were chosen due to them satisfying a selection criteria as shown below. This is a set of rules/ideas that are part of what I am looking to work toward in my final design. They have been developed based on the requirements of the brief and research into precedents earlier in the process, while also including a few criteria which aims to satisfy my own individual style. They are as follows:

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

48

B.2 Case Study 1.0Selection Criteria

Despite the chaotic look to it’s initial layout, I see potential for this to behave in some sort of piped system or incorporating some sort of connection between each element. With some tweaking and “cleaning” it may have constructible geometry. There is also an intriguing possibility to have the ends of some of the pipe elements open and use lights in them to create a certain effect on the site. It does seem though that it is rather clustered and cluttered and even with some trimming may have problems fulfilling part of the criteria of being a functional or usable space for users of the site. The piping elements also do not lend themselves well to incorporating a solar technology

This new surface mesh gives a more dynamic appearance to the previous smooth voussoir cloud shape. It is overwhelming in a good way, considering that I feel it could be used to take over the site and radically change the appearance from what it used to be. The jagged and pointy mesh completely contrasts with the flat and plain site. Creating conflict between the two has instant design potential. The faces on this design seem like they would be able to handle the use of solar panels as the energy technology although implementing lighting as a feature may prove more challenging.

EXTRAPOLATION

49

From a purely aesthetic stand point I see this iteration as the most successful. The flowing lines provide almost a mesmerising affect but do not overwhelm, rather working towards a calming influence. How this would move forward as a constructible geometry begs some questions. A possibility I can see is that it may be used as some raised bridge over the site, with each curve becoming a wire supporting the structure in real life. Solar technology may be hard to see working with the curved structure, unless some other more solid geometry is incorporated into the design.

This design speaks of a more functional design, while also maintaining some aesthetic quality. The two different sized curves joined together could create a series of many pavilions that take over the site. In my opinion they are almost like tepees, that could be spread out over the site and people inhabit the space inside them for varying activities. I feel this would also have a rather natural lighting quality whether it be during the day or night with the implementation of artificial light. Due to it only being curves there is a problem with implementing solar technology.

50

B.3 Case Study 2.0Projectione - Exotique

This project was created as a quick installation for Ball State University’s architecture building, with total design and construction process spanning a total of five days[18].

It incorporates a surface, which has been developed in Rhino and manipulated in Grasshopper through processes such as the application of a simple hexagonal grid and pattern applied to each cell[19]. Other techniques include the use of tabs on each cell that allow them to be locked together in the construction stage, creating a rigid structure where bending occurs in the actual cell rather than the edges[20]. This non-planar geometry has been catered for through the use of a polystyrene material[21].

Fig. 6 Ground View perspective of installation

51

PSUEDO CODE:1. Create curves and loft to create flowing and undulating surface2. Project hexagonal pattern onto surface3. Move hexagonal cells, according to the Z-axis, in a positive direction (in which it will be projecting above surface) 4. Define original cells and newly moved cells into individual curve components5. Patch original cells to create a surface6. Loft original cells and newly moved cells together7. Join and bake

52

B.3 Case Study 2.0DIAGRAMMATIC STEPS

STEP ONE:

Manually defined and manipulated curves constructedCurves lofted to create dome structure

STEP TWO:

Hexagonal cells projected onto surfaceMade U and V components of hexagonal cells both 25 by inserting slider

STEP THREE:

Hexagonal cells moved in Z-axis direction by translation vector of 0.1

53

STEP FOUR:

Curve components created and original cells and newly moved cells inserted into separate cruve componentsBoth curve components are flattened and graftedOriginal cells are patched to create base surfaceOriginal cells and moved cells are lofted together

STEP FIVE:

Surfaces are joined using join brep componentDefinition is bakedManually delete selected hexagonal structures on outside according to real life example

54

B.3 Case Study 2.0COMPARISON

There are a few differences in the structure. The first is that the original designers were able to achieve a patterned component on each of the hexagonal cells, something that I was unable to achieve.

In terms of fabrication, it would have been interesting looking into creating a similar hexagonal cell, with the tabs and other construction techniques applied to further

enhance the understanding of the design.

Although I feel it was more about the technique of the design affect and it more than efficient. The problem lies in the fact that the definition was rather simple to begin with. Will this hinder or help create more iterations, as the design is so basic that it could be manipulated and moved towards any computational direction.

55

Fig. 7 View from below

56

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentITERATIONS

57

58

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentITERATIONS

59

THE PREVIOUS CASE STUDY ALTHOUGH SIMPLE AND EFFECTIVE IN IT’S DESIGN WAS NOT COMPLEX ENOUGH FOR A RE-ENGINEERING PROJECT.

THEREFORE IT WAS DECIDED THAT ANOTHER PROJECT WOULD ALSO BE REVERSE-ENGINEERED TO SUPPLEMENT THE FIRST. IT WILL ALLOW MORE IDEAS TO FLOW AS ITERATIONS BECAME STAGNANT IN THE OTHER DEFINITION.

60

Fig. 8 External view

B.4 Technique: Development


Refer to previous analysis in Part A

61

PSUEDO CODE:1. Create curves and loft to create dome surface2. Project hexagonal pattern onto surface3. Scale hexagonal cells down4. Move hexagonal cells, according to the plane normal of the dome, in a positive direction (in which it will be projecting outside existing dome) and in negative direction (which will project on the inside of the dome)5. Separately loft the positive and negative hexagons with the original hexagonal cells projected on to the dome.6. Patch holes across scaled down hexagonal cellls for both positive and negative7. Create holes in faces of inside lofted hexagonal cells and join both inside and outside structures8. Bake

62

B.4 Technique: Development

DIAGRAMMATIC STEPS

STEP ONE:

Manually defined and manipulated curves constructedCurves lofted to create dome structure

STEP TWO:

Hexagonal cells projected onto the lofted dome surface

STEP THREE:

Scale individual hexagonal cells down by factor 0.5

63

STEP FOUR:

Found vector which will move scaled cells according to the plane normal of the structureMove scaled hown hexagonal cells in positive and negative direction through use of plane normal vector component

STEP FIVE:

Loft the positive and negative hexagonal cells separately with the original cellsPatch the scaled hexagonal surfacesDeconstruct the inside surfaces to explode into individual facesUse panel frame component to create holes in cells

STEP SIX:

Use join brep component to join all surfaces togetherBakeDelete necessary hexagonal cells to create hole in structure

64

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentCOMPARISON

In terms of the grid patterning applied to the structure I feel that I have come pretty close to the real life pavilion. There are a few differences that can be seen in this aspect. Some of the hexagonal looking panels in the ICD/ITKE pavilion are actually a mixture of five, six and seven sided structures whereas I was only able to use a basic hexagonal structure which sticks to six sides.

There was obviously a more advanced script input used by the designers of the pavilion which was simulating some naturally occurring phenomena as mentioned in precedent research above which creates this affect. This is something that is beyond my current skills, yet I feel that I have still achieved something very similar using a much simpler process.

Another problem is that the pavilion I created is not bound by the ground, and although it is covered up by the use of ground in the render, it does not have a flat bottom, and if it was constructed the hexagons would protrude into the ground creating a major construction problem.

There is also a difference in the holes of each face of the inner hexagonal structures. My design incorporates a standard scale factor, while it seems there is a a more random difference in the sizes for different faces of the real


65

pavilion design. I feel this could be changed with some more effort.

There is also an obvious difference in the domed shape of the structure. This is a result of the different processes, where the actual designers used the Grasshopper plug-in Kangaroo to create the form of their structure. This makes it a more well balances and also has its advantages from a construction standpoint as Kangaroo’s main function is as a physics tool and testing/simulating the geometry of certain outcomes. Mine however was created through manual construction of curves based on a circle and then lofted. It is a decent substitute but there are clear differences in the design in this way.

One way it could impact was that the real designers were able to create the circular hole more naturally and as part of the actual structure. I could only manage to go one-by-one and delete appropriate hexagonal structures to create a suitable hole.

In terms of the outside hexagonal structures I feel improvement could also be made to them by making their height and their direction of ‘extrusion’ more similar to the actual ICD/ITKE pavilion.

I would like to see where this definition goes once it has been applied to a much larger and possibly more complex shapes. It would also be important to include some sort of lighting factor into the design, through an introduction of another panelling technique as well.

Fig. 10 External View

66

B.4 Technique: DevelopmentSelection Criteria

EXTRAPOLATION

[1]

[3]

[2]

[4]

67

I decided to include these designs as the selected iterations for a number of reasons. I feel like they can be all combined to create the start of my design proposal for the LAGI brief. They have all slightly modified my intention or overall selection criteria.

[1]This is an interesting shape defined by created curves with the hexagonal cells projected onto it. It seems to handle the shape well. I feel like it has a flowing water aesthetic, almost like a wave to its shape and with the site being located so close to water is naturally a direction I could go with the design

[2]The programme I would like to influence onto the site through my design is a large scaled performance area suitable for holding festivals and the like. This iteration reminded me of a seating space that could be created in each of the triangular holes and this is where I want to move forward with the design

[3]I feel like this iteration expands on the hexagonal structure featured in the first iteration. Implementing this in a more complex but natural wave like structure could create more unique results

[4]Although this was not exactly an iteration, the reverse-engineered ICD/ITKE pavilion shows the direction I would like my design proposal to follow. I want to expand upon what I have already used here to allow my design to become a well rounded aesthetically pleasing, functional and constructible space

68

69

B.5 Technique: PrototypesIn this prototype testing I was looking predominantly at how the light and hexagonal structure work together. Although there is a nice effect, I feel like it can be more greatly enhanced in future designs to create a more aesthetically pleasing presence of light.

The projection of the hexagonal structures according to attractor points is something that may be used, while making the hexagonal structure more complex in terms of size and shape will make a more impacting design.

During fabrication of this model it was also quite apparent that some sort of more advanced construction method must be used to help allow for easier construction. The twisting shape in some of the hexagonal cells did not work well with the card and by using a simple triangulation technique I feel it will work better in testing next time.

Possibly playing with tolerance and angle parameters in the definition will also allow for a more efficient fabrication process.

70

B.6 Technique: ProposalCOPENHAGEN CULTURAL CENTRE

The design encapsulates a new cultural centre for Copenhagen. A space that can be used for large music festivals or just as easily as a city market. The design incorporates a wave like roof structure that flows and undulates all around the boundary of the site. This is combined with a new topographic surface defined in most of the central space of the site with areas located ‘in-ground’ of this for seating at big music events or just as easily a market stall for prospective local business.

71

72

B.6 Technique: ProposalSITE MAP

The current design only allows practical entrance from one direction, the south east. This is to cater for the bus stop that sits just outside the road and is where most people will be venturing in to.

I feel that the boat taxi dock would be fairly under utilised and in this case it has been blocked off. This may change in future design proposals.

As can be seen , there is a greater understanding of how the design dominates the landscape. There is great presence in its structure and I feel like it has already moved in the direction that I have set out for.

More tweaking with certain patterning features of the seating area, while also looking at extending the hexagonal wave structure around the boundary will further enhance the design.

73

74 Fig. 11 Below view

75

Reflecting on the design proposal and after taking in feedback from the interim presentation, there are some obvious aspects of the design that must be improved. I feel the overall design concept has some real potential to move forward from where it is, and that is really where the feedback starts. The design is simple at this stage of the process and will need further refining to become a more thorough representation.

Firstly the hexagonal cells need to be more developed as currently they sit very open and there is no varying affect to any of them. It impacts the design in a number of ways. As one of the main emphasis of my design is the affect of light on the site and the user, it currently leaves a rather generic impact, as found through some testing of prototypes. I feel this can be easily changed with a more thought out approach to the design of the hexagonal cells. Creating a more random hexagonal cell structure, in terms of it’s size and shape, while also blocking out certain cells, is the way to move forward. Using a recursive subdivision technique or perhaps looking back more at some of the steps during the reverse-engineering of the ICD/ITKE research pavilion may provide something more interesting.

Another option to change the play of light and also from a solar energy perspective is incorporating sun-responsive features in the design. I feel this is something that will benefit greatly and after looking at some tutorial videos this is definitely something that will enhance the design. I will be able to cater the size and shape of the hexagonal cells according to where the most sunlight hits the structure. This will allow me to maximize the efficiency of the design as only specific parts of the structure will feature the solar panels, while others will be focused on creating a more impactful design from an aesthetic point of view, as outlined above.

Other criticisms come in the form of the feel of the design. At the moment the seating area with the new flowing and undulating surface is rather bare and lacks some character. Once again I feel this is only a matter of refining the design more thoroughly and including different features. It was suggested that the grid structure applied should be changed from its current triangle grid, to a hexagonal cell. In one way it is better for the user in terms of the views. It was thought that site lines for the

different performance areas would be compromised in the triangular structure. The hexagon is not as restrictive in this way, and also it makes much more sense for a flow on affect from the roof/wave structure that already exists.

In terms of the design process and my learning, I have noticed a range of changes in the way I have thought through this process. I have done no sketching by hand, preferring the use of the computer as the main generation approach earlier in the process. It is interesting to put the theory from Part A into practice and see the benefits of computational processing. It is way more effective when tweaking the design slightly. The amount of different outcomes that wouldn’t have even been a conceivable shape or line that could be drawn has meant a new direction on design has been taken. In many previous design studios I have preferred to create more linear projects that deal with straight lines and sharp angles. In this case my design is predominantly curved, a complete opposite to what I usually would have designed by this stage.

Using computational processing has helped my design in a number of different ways, but one that stands out the most is the application of structure and aesthetics becoming an easier transition and at times merging as one. Many of the grasshopper processes rely on naturally occurring structure, for example the hexagonal grid that I have been developing through most of my design. There is a crossover between structure and aesthetic and many times throughout the design there is a fusion of these in an idea. As was discussed in Part A about the benefits of computational design such as fabrication and material responsiveness, I have found myself many times during the design process, while trying to create an aesthetic surface or geometry, thinking about what the best possible construction method will be to create this aesthetic or vice versa, thinking about how I can tailor an aesthetically motivated decision to conform with a material and fabrication of it later on. I feel in this way my design is already more thorough than in previous design studios.

B.7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

76

77

B.8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketchbook

WEEK 5

78

1. ‘Definition of Tessellation in English’: (Dictionary) <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tessellation?q=tesselation> [accessed 26 September 2014]2. ‘Definition of Tessellation in English’: (Dictionary) <http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/tessellation?q=tesselation> [accessed 26 September 2014]3. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]4. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]5. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]6. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]7. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]8. (IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]9. ‘Strip’ (strip) <http://www.thefreedictionary.com/strip> [accessed 26 September 2014]10. ‘Fold’ (fold) <http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fold> [accessed 26 September 2014]11. ‘Fold’ (fold) <http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fold> [accessed 26 September 2014]12. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]13. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]14. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]15. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]16. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]17. (Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]18. ‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]19. ‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]20. ‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]21. ‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]

Part B ReferencesFrom Text

79

Fig. 1Fig. 2

Fig. 3

FIg. 4Fig. 5

Fig. 6Fig. 7

Fig. 8Fig. 9Fig. 10

Fig. 11

Part B ReferencesImages

(IwamotoScott) <http://www.iwamotoscott.com/VOUSSOIR-CLOUD> [accessed 26 September 2014]

‘Voussoir Cloud’ (Voussoir Cloud by pleatfarmer on October 14, 2009) <http://www.pleatfarm.com/2009/10/14/voussoir-cloud-by-iwamotoscott-architecture/> [accessed 26 September 2014]

(Seroussi Pavillion « Biothing) <http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5> [accessed 26 September 2014]‘

‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]


‘EXOtique’ (EXOtique) <http://www.projectione.com/exotique/> [accessed 26 September 2014]

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

Documents

Higgins darcy 585345 journal