Studio Air Journal Part A + B

M I T C H E L L S U . 6 6 0 1 9 2A B P L 3 0 0 4 8 . S T U D I OA I R . 2 0 1 5 / 1


P R E F A C E ……… II N T R O D U C T I O N

P A R T A . 1 ……… 0 1D E S I G N F U T U R I N G P A R T A . 2 ……… 1 1D E S I G N C O M P U T A T I O N P A R T A . 3 ……… 1 9C O M P O S I T I O N / G E N E R A T I O N P A R T A . 4 + 5 ……… 2 9T H O U G H T S / C O N C L U S I O N S

P A R T A . 6 ……… 3 1A P P E N D I X

R E F E R E N C E S ……… 3 3B I B L I O G R A P H YF I G U R E S

P A R T B . 0 ……… 3 7C R I T E R I A D E S I G N

P A R T B . 1 ……… 4 1S T R U C T U R E

P A R T B . 2 ……… 5 3C A S E S T U D Y 1 . 0

P A R T B . 3 ……… 5 7C A S E S T U D Y 2 . 0

P A R T B . 4 ……… 7 7T E C H N I Q U E D E V E L O P M E N T

P A R T B . 5 ……… 8 9P R O T O T Y P E S

P A R T B . 6 ……… 9 3T E C H N I Q U E P R O P O S A L

P A R T B . 7 ……… 9 9T H O U G H T S / C O N C L U S I O N S

P A R T B . 8 ……… 1 0 1A P P E N D I X

R E F E R E N C E S ……… 1 0 3B I B L I O G R A P H YF I G U R E S

I . S T U D I O A I R . P R E F A C E

P R E F A C EI N T R O D U C T I O N

1. Uo

M W

ater Studio

Kew

Bo

athouse - B

oathaus.

One half of my family is your traditional Christian Malaysian Chinese family with conservative view on the world. On the other hand, my other family was a liberal Filipino family who were more than happy to let me choose my own path. Because of these contrasting family dynamics, I’ve ended up in a conflicting middle ground for many of my approaches in life.

Being stuck in a world of middle ground has been the continuous status quo in my education from kindergarten all the way up to now in university. In high school I went to an art school but always had a leaning interest more towards clear cut subjects like mathematics and science.

Even in my time in architecture, I find a studio like Air incredibly challenging given the emphasis on digital methods from ideation all the way to fabrication. With this studio I hope to find a happy resolution to this conflicting reluctance to rely on digital methods of design.

F R O M B R I S B A N ET O M E L B O U R N E

Hi I’m Mitchell and am a third year architecture student at The University of Melbourne. Having come from a racially and culturally contrasting family, I find myself in a world of middle grounds in many aspects of life.

B.

A.

S T U D I O A I R . I N T R O D U C T I O N . I I

1. U

Q A

rchitecture Studio

1 Part 1 - Burnett B

eacon Lanterns.

2. UQ

Architecture Stud

io 1 Part 2 - B

urnett Laneway Interventio

n. 3. U

oM

Earth Studio

- A Place fo

r Keep

ing Secrets.

4. Uo

M V

irtual Enviro

nments Seco

nd Skin - Panel and

Fold

C. D.

E.

F.

0 1 . S T U D I O A I R . P A R T A

P A R T A . 1D E S I G NF U T U R I N G

1. WO

HA

Architects, 2010, B

ras Basah M

ass Rapid

Transit Station (A

trium).

2. WO

HA

Architects, 2010, B

ras Basah M

ass Rapid

Transit Station (C

onco

urse Level).3. Jam

es Co

rner Field O

peratio

ns and D

iller Scofid

io +

Renfro, 2014, N

ew Yo

rk Hig

h Line Section Three.

In an increasingly human-centric world, it has been recognized that the current status quo for designers is an unsustainable process. We have long assumed that designing must be a grand gesture to appease to the masses - that democratic design must appeal to the lowest common denominator and that holistically designing only involves the tangible process of translating resources from one form to another.

However, time in itself creates an uncertainty within this - that longevity is no longer guarantee and our future is not so definite. Where design comes into this paradox is best embodied within Dieter Ram’s ‘Ten Principles for Good Design’. Design is not merely just about creating the tangible, but is also by approaching a problem and finding a solution or a conclusion that we ultimately leave the world better than we found it. This encompasses how we source our resources, what effect the conclusions we make leave on society and even what happens when something approaches redundancy.

A B O V E + B E L O W

Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station (Circle Line)

WOHA Architects, 2010

65 Bras Basah Road, Singapore, Singapore, 189561

1.

2.

S T U D I O A I R . D E S I G N F U T U R I N G . 0 2

A B O V E

New York High Line Section Three

James Corner Field Operations and Diller Scofidio + Renfro

New York, NY 10011, United States

3.


P A R T A . 1B R A S B A S A HM R T S T A T I O N

4. W

OH

A A

rchitects, 2010, Bras B

asah Mass Rap

id Transit Statio

n (Basem

ent 4 Co

ncourse).

5. WO

HA

Architects, 2010, B

ras Basah M

ass Rapid

Transit Station (G

round

Level Site Plan).

4.


L E F T

Station Atrium in Basement 4

A B O V E

Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station Site Plan (Not to Scale)

5.


6.

7.


The Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station is a peculiar juxtaposition of grand civic gesturing along with a humble respect of local social contexts. Within this contrast however, lies a considered outcome that largely provides a net benefit to the local area in terms of environmental, intrinsic and cultural value.

At station level, commuters are greeted with a mood lit cavern that offers a peek into the main atrium through punctured holes in the uniform surface treatment of the platform level cavern. Once leaving the platform level of the station, it opens up into the main atrium, revealing the grand gesture of the skylight above. This almost serves as a celebration of public transport, with the the complex ultimately being a social good.

The skylight itself serves the basis for a large reflection pool that covers a

significant portion of the station’s volumetric footprint, serving as an extravagant and almost indulgent filter for sunlight entering the atrium cavern. While somewhat excessive, this is not without purpose. The reflection pool filters not only sunlight, but also the heat energy from the sun, providing a means of passive cooling.

Curiously enough, the ground level of the station and its surroundings are humble and unassuming compared to the grandiosity of the station’s interior. The reflection pool sits almost flush with the street level, creating an unobtrusive teaser into the commuters hurrying below.

In regards to Design Futuring as a text, the humble role of public transportation is quintessentially a social good that leaves a lasting positive benefit. In taking a considered yet bold approach,

we find an outcome filled with contrast - a s e e m i n g l y h u m b l e o u t w a r d appearance that does not offend nor diminish the existing value of the urban environment, but is grand in its bold gesture that celebrates the everyday.

In turn, the complex adds to the overall value of the area, providing amenity and permeability without drastically altering the historical value for the worse.

T O P L E F T

Ground level of station during the day.

B O T T O M L E F T

Ground level of station at night.

R I G H T

Basement 1 concourse atrium

8.

6. WOHA Architects, 2010, Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station (Ground Level at Day).7. WOHA Architects, 2010, Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station (Ground Level at Night).8. WOHA Architects, 2010, Bras Basah Mass Rapid Transit Station (Basement 1 Concourse Atrium).


P A R T A . 1N E W Y O R K H I G H L I N E

9. James C

orner Field

Op

erations and

Diller Sco

fidio

+ Renfro

, 2014, New

York H

igh Line Sectio

n Two

.10. Jam

es Co

rner Field O

peratio

ns and D

iller Scofid

io +

Renfro, 2014, N

ew Yo

rk Hig

h Line Section Tw

o.

11. James C

orner Field

Op

erations and

Diller Sco

fidio

+ Renfro

, 2014, New

York H

igh Line Sectio

n One.

The New York High Line is an example of urban regeneration and adaptive reuse that takes into deep consideration the purposes of public infrastructure once it has reached the end point of conventional usefulness. The High Line was once a an elevated rail line for the western side of Manhattan in New York that was used largely for freight and industrial purposes. With the redevelopment of Manhattan in the late 20th century towards a more services oriented economy and the industrial yards surrounding the high line slowly disappeared and it’s purpose became redundant. Consequently, debate over the future of the High Line intensified with a strong argument to demolish it and replace it with commercial developments.

9.

10.


T O P L E F T

New York High Line Section Two Bench Detailing

B O T T O M L E F T

New York High Line Section Two

11.

A B O V E

New York High Line Section One


Rather than demolish the structure of the original High Line, the structure was recycled into an urban green spine with parks and public spaces as its main programming. With it, the a greater sense of social amenity appeared in the local urban environment, serving as a catalyst for urban regeneration. Old buildings in the High Line’s surrounding vicinity were rehabilitated, property prices rose and more importantly, street activation occurred at a higher level than previously observed with more people spending time outdoors. Part of this decision to repurpose rather then demolish the structure was how over time, nature had taken its course over the surface of the elevated rail line and a compact ecosystem of vegetation entirely different from the rest of the urban landscape.

Had the line been demolished however, the end outcome could have potentially been far different from what has been observed so far. There is also the reality that merely demolishing the High Line and replacing it with unspecified development would have had a negative net benefit to the city. The sheer waste from demolishing the structure and then sourcing new resources to build new developments would be profligate and extravagant. In this pursuit for the new and for constant change to creating something tangible, we lose part of our history and in turn the intrinsic value of history’s past.

If we consider design in a more profound manner - one that is sustainable and considers implications of every decision made from cradle to grave like what is suggested in Design Futuring, the High Line is a fundamental shift from how we approach development against the conventional Modernist approach. Rather

than to abandon and express a rejection of the past, we find an appreciation for it and seek ways to engender a sense of longevity. Although the design of the High Line’s repurposing can be considered democratic in that a consensus was reached in the final outcome, the overall implications can be considered a net benefit to society in the value it adds not only to the lives of those in New York, but also to the condition of the environment.


12.

12. James C

orner Field

Op

erations and

Diller Sco

fidio

+ Renfro

, 2014, New

York H

igh Line

Architecture in itself straddles a peculiar line when it comes to considering it as part of the design practice. It is both creative yet deeply rooted in rational thought. We dream on an enigmatic scale of grand visions that are only limited by our own minds yet are so deeply limited by practical constraints such as site conditions, budget, building codes and among a plethora of issues.

To overcome this constraints, designers come fall back consistently upon intuition and creativity - an innate awareness of ‘knowing’ rather than a strict pragmatic response. However, unlike in traditional creative fields such

as fine arts, seldom does intuition lead to more than satisfactory results.

This is where computational design comes in. Computers are particularly adept at analyzing and completing instructions. If one were to create a perfectly sequenced line of code, a computer would be able to follow it flawlessly. However, computers lack that sense of ‘intuition and creativity’ mentioned earlier that is essential in the field of architecture.

It is a curious paradox that whilst the human brain is by far more powerful than the fastest computer chip, we grow

tired and unamused by rote tasks much faster than a computer would. So rather than rely on one or the other, the middle ground that architecture sits upon should treat neither as mutually exclusive. Rather, they should be used in tandem with each other as a harmonious synergy.

Before the Renaissance, architecture was more craft than practice with buildings constructed and ‘designed’ on an ad hoc basis. After that period, architecture became more of a codified practice with an emphasis on detail, on multiple levels of careful reiteration to achieve an acceptable outcome. In this did we finally create a tangible difference between conception and construction. However, this was an excruciating process from start to finish wherein an architect risked being distracted by the mundane and tedious.

With the advent of computational design, this process has not only has been accelerated, but is also beginning to experience a profound change. Computers can rapidly draft through iterations of a design to reach the most optimal design as desired by the architect. At the same time, there has been a shift from a focus on the craftsmanship of details to the bigger p i c t u r e w h i l s t l e a v i n g s u c h considerations to an automated process.


P A R T A . 2D E S I G NC O M P U T A T I O N

“ DESIGN IS THE EPITOME OF INTELLIGENT BEHAVIOR: IT IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ABILITY THAT DISTINGUISHES HUMANS FROM OTHER ANIMALS. “

- JACOB BRONOWSKI

S T U D I O A I R . D E S I G N C O M P U T A T I O N . 1 2

More than ever is it easy to come up with increasingly complex and elaborate structures. We however risk in handing over too much of our own practice in the architectural field to computation rather than through our own imagination. After all, design is by all intentions and desires meant to be purposeful activity that reaches goals and creates outcomes.

In this ever increasing blending of the digital world and architecture, new technologies have emerged that blur the difference between what we can considered designed in the traditional sense verses something that has been generated through an arbitrary and automated line of code.

W i t h a p p r o a c h e s s u c h a s parametrization, the mathematical constraints of Euclidean geometry no longer sets a definitive limit on what is feasible in a design with computers capable of handling more complex operations that allow for more free form

geometries whilst maintaining a logical formation.

With computerization in terms of parametric design, there is a more distinct emphasis on the concept of a s s o c i a t i o n s a n d d e p e n d e n c y relationships between objects with each element having a flow on effect to other linked objects in an operation/design. Though we risk letting computerization handle too much of the design process, these concepts of relat ions and dependencies is where we can find a middle ground in achieving an optimal design on multiple parameters.

With each element of a structure’s design being explicitly interrelated and causative on each other, it is possible to use parametrization as a means of optimizing a building’s performance in terms of sustainabil ity, structural integrity, budget constraints, etc. In terms of sustainability and structural integrity, a potential scenario could entail using computer software to optimize the quantity of materials used to construct a design whilst setting quantitative parameters of what is considered structurally acceptable.

By setting these guidelines and leaving it to automation to handle, we do not necessarily compromise a design, but rather enhance the over all performance

of the structure without ruining the creative intentions of a designer.

The use of computers to aid in finding these optimizations and outcomes also potentially addresses the age long discourse between architects and structural engineers over the relation between form and function. We not only can create unusual forms and structures, but can also do so without requiring exhaustive and profligate structural solutions.

In many ways, design computation as part of contemporary architectural practice shifts the process to a more scientific and pragmatic approach. We no longer just design within the unknown, with intui t ion; but by researching and synthesizing data into a tangible form.


P A R T A . 2B E I J I N G N A T I O N A LS T A D I U M

13. Herzo

g &

De M

euron A

rchitekten (2008), Beijing

Natio

nal Stadium

(Interior D

etail).14. H

erzog

& D

e Meuro

n Architekten (2008), B

eijing N

ational Stad

ium (Facad

e Detail).

15. Herzo

g &

De M

euron A

rchitekten (2008), Beijing

Natio

nal Stadium

(Overview

).

The Beijing National Stadium was designed by Herzog & De Meuron Architekten in collaboration with Chinese artist Ai Wei Wei for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. The structure’s exterior shell is evocative of the Chinese culinary delicacy called ‘bird’s nest’. It has connotations of luxury and prestige as it is rarely consumed save for special occasions such as the Lunar New Year.

However, as uncanny to the likeness of a ‘bird’s nest’ as the stadium’s exterior shell may be, it serves are a far more critical purpose in terms of the stadium’s structural integrity and environmental envelope. Simply using traditional methods through countless calculations and drafting would not have been enough to design a feasible structure, which is where computational design comes in.

13.

14.


15.

The exterior shell of the stadium is a lattice of steel that not only serves an aesthetic purpose, but is also entirely structural. The architects met this conclusion in the design process because of the mutual dislike of the traditional cantilevered roof of most stadiums across the world. At the same time, the general form was already predetermined early on, resulting in significant spacial constraints on top of the existing structural challenge posed by the steel frame.

The resulting steel frame faced a number of challenges - the weaving nature of the frame would twist in a number of directions as a result of the shape, the frame had to be earthquake resistant to some degree and more importantly, it had to maintain the predetermined aesthetic silhouette. In terms of function, the structure also had to accommodate for the sight lines of

spectators at the highest seats and be as unobtrusive as possible to the circulation spaces in between the internal and external structures.

In order to achieve a feasible design, the designers had to rely heavily on parametrics to optimize the steel frame. The steel frame started initially with mul t ip le ‘L’ shaped beams that interlocked with each other in the arrangement of a lens aperture to create a stable working base framework. This served as the primary structural components that the designers could work off.

Subsequently, secondary and tertiary members were added to the primary members in a randomized order using parametric software, taking into account points of greatest stress as well as curvatures in the design’s form. Although the resulting arrangement

appears to be haphazard in placement, each beam and column is critical to the overall structural stability as calculated through parametrics.

To complement the weaving nature of the steel frame, ETFE membrane panels cut to size based on openings in the frame of the stadium were fabricated for protection against the elements. In this instance, parametrics serves more as an optimization of resource usage as well as labor costs by minimizing wastage along with fit out costs.


P A R T A . 2F L I N D E R S S TS T A T I O N

16. HA

SSEL + H

erzog

& D

e Meuro

n Architekten (2014), Flind

ers Street Station Red

evelop

ment.

17. HA

SSEL + H

erzog

& D

e Meuro

n Architekten (2014), Flind

ers Street Station Red

evelop

ment.

16.


L E F T

Station Entrance at Swanston and Flinders Street

A B O V E

Flinders Street Station Site Plan (Not to Scale)

17.


18.

19.


The Flinders Street Revelopment Project is a proposed overhaul of the existing Flinders Street Station in Melbourne by HASSEL in collaboration with Herzog & De Meuron Architekten. The proposal entails restoring as well as adding to the existing precinct as well as adding mixed use programs above the platform level area.

Within the site, there are a number of constraints that required what would most likely be computational design. Firstly, the original heritage structure (16) would be difficult to integrate with the proposed design due to uneven geometry. Secondly, the platforms in the station as well as rail lines have been added over time without consideration of consistency and future needs, resulting a complicated station layout. Thirdly, the proposed concrete weave pattern on the vaulted arches by the architects would be difficult to replicate

with such varied geometry across the length of the station by hand.

Based on working drawings as well as documentations by the architects, there was an intention to replicate the visual form of the original Flinders Street S t a t i o n a rc h e s , b u t i n a m o re contemporary fashion. However the intended form would require heavy assistance of parametrics to execute. It is presumed the optimization of the final proposed form developed as follows - Firstly, the general curvature profile of each vaulted arch was developed by hand or at least visualized. Then, points where structural columns as well as points of the minimum of each arch were plotted along usable points along the station floor level while keeping in mind the structural limits of the arches.

At this point, the basic geometry of each arch has been extrapolated from the

points in order to generate a continuous arch structure across the length of the station. In order to add the weaving pattern, it could be assumed that a gridshell of some means was applied to generate a tessellating tile pattern on a three dimensional scale while adjusting itself for the random geometry of the curvatures.

However the process was most likely not as simple as this and required a number of iterations to reach both a structurally and aesthetically pleasing solution as shown in the images (16-20).

T O P L E F T

Station entrance from Federation Square

B O T T O M L E F T

Platform level of station

R I G H T

Rooftop function space

20.

18. HASSEL + Herzog & De Meuron Architekten (2014), Flinders Street Station Redevelopment.19. HASSEL + Herzog & De Meuron Architekten (2014), Flinders Street Station Redevelopment.20. HASSEL + Herzog & De Meuron Architekten (2014), Flinders Street Station Redevelopment.


P A R T A . 3C O M P O S I T I O N / / G E N E R A T I O N

21. Zaha Had

id A

rchitects (2013), Hayd

ar Aliyev C

enter.22. M

AD

Architects (2014), N

anjing Zend

ai Him

alayas Center.

T O P R I G H T

Haydar Aliyev Center, Zaha Hadid Architects (2013)

B O T T O M R I G H T

Nanjing Zendai Himalayas Center, MAD Architects (2014)

21.

22.

S T U D I O A I R . C O M P O S I T I O N / G E N E R A T I O N . 2 0


Generative design opens up a range of possibilities to architects that have generally been out of the question for them until the advent of the digital age. As a general rule of thumb, this has made the creation of complex geometries as well as high concept data modeling a more common approach to the design process. However, the use of the word ‘possibilities’ in terms of generative design does not necessarily denote just solely positive nor negative outcomes for the architectural practice.

To begin with, generative design allows us to effectively accelerate the design process from inception to construction at a pace that is not humanly possible. Given the right hardware and definitions in a a program such as Rhino, it is possible to iterate through designs multiple times to reach an optimal design in just days compared to what would normally be a week long process with conventional methods. This is possible because of the relationships and dependencies concepts of computational design whereby changing one definition results in a near instantaneous adjustment as needed to other definitions, resulting in a new iteration.

A further advantage to generative design is the complex geometries and data analysis possible that would otherwise requi re h ighly specia l i zed mathematical knowledge that is general out of the abilities and scope of the general public. Complex curves such as Bezier curves and NURBS are difficult to calculate by hand, let alone multiple curves all with varying points of interpolation. With a computer, this can be done at a rate that is humanly impossible.

On the other hand, with an increasing reliance on computation and generation - all of which are founded

upon algorithms and definitions, we find a plethora of ethical and somewhat existential issues to the architectural practice that we have yet to particularly address. Generative design is not a process that does not necessarily fall under the notions of democratic design that is championed vigorously in the design practice in contemporary society. It is not accessible to the masses in that it requires specialized knowledge and software that has a perceived high opportunity cost individuals.

Another issue we face with generative design is the possibility of intellectual property ownership issues which is in turn stemmed from a potential creation of a monotonous aesthetic given the rigidity of generative design. Because of the current state of technology in terms of software as well as hardware capabilities, the aesthetic scope of generative design is rather limited and many outcomes from it have similar curvilinear aesthetics. This is the due to the reality that generative design is nothing more than merely a line of code, a set of definitions that can be made by anyone in theory. This begs the question, does the architect who generates a particular ownership truly own it as their own design when a majority of the design process is not controlled by them, but merely directed? It is a question that is yet to be answered as generative design has not reached the same wide stream practice that computative design has.

The following two precedents of Zaha Hadid’s Haydar Aliyev Center and MAD Architect’s Nanjing Zendai Himalayas Center take a visual exploration into the possibilities and issues with generative design.


23.

23. Zaha Had

id A

rchitects (2013), Hayd

ar Aliyev C

enter.


P A R T A . 3H A Y D A R A L I Y E VC E N T E R

“ THROUGHOUT HISTORY, THE WORK OF AN ARCHITECT HAS BEEN LINKED TO THE USE OF DRAWING AS A DESIGN TOOL. LIKE DRAWING, ARCHITECTS WORKING WITH COMPUTERS AND WITH COMPUTATION STILL WORK THROUGH A MEDIUM OF REPRESENTATION. “

- BRADY PETERS


24.

The Haydar Aliyev Center in Baku, Azerbaijan is designed by Zaha Hadid architects. The form of the structure is a textbook example of generative design in that data is used as an input into an algorithm successively to generate a form that can be used as a basis for the final design of the center.

The data used was extracted from the architect’s study of the pre-existing topography of the site. It was mentioned that the site once contained a sudden sheer drop in the landscape and formed the basis of the striking curved moment of the exterior facade. It is assumed that that data from the structure was used to create some sort of interpolation of points and flipped to give this form, creating a generated form. After the form was noted to have been further rationalized to make it a feasible project in terms of ease of construction.

I n s o m e w a y s , t h i s c o m p l e x interpretation of data is almost a contextual response to the environment that would otherwise be impossible to do by any other means in such an explicit manner. It is sensitive to the landscape in that its own form is derived from it.

However, as stated earlier, we do risk the possibility that designs generated through this process continuously will ultimately result in a monotonous array of designs that stylistically do not deviate too far from each other. This is particularly adept to Zaha Hadid’s other later works which seem to have a near identical and consistent aesthetic thread woven through one another. However, much of this is the result of sinuous blending of forms and for as long as the original geometries are purposeful, their intention and functionality will not be particularly offensive.

A B O V E

Main entrance of the complex

Zaha Hadid Architects (2013), Haydar Aliyev Center.


25.

A B O V E

Hallway near main entrance.



26.

A B O V E

Main entrance as viewed from interior.



P A R T A . 3N A N J I N G Z E N D A IH I M A L A Y A S C E N T E R

27. MA

D A

rchitects, 2014, Nanjing

Zendai H

imalayas C

enter.28. M

AD

Architects, 2014, N

anjing Zend

ai Him

alayas Center.

The Nanjing Zendai Himalayas Center is a master plan proposal by MAD Architects. Their work largely represents their signature aesthetic of a contemporary interpretation of natural forms. In this instance, it is the forms of mountain peaks that can be recalled by the form.

The basic forms of the peak appear to be based largely off topographic data much like with Zaha Hadid’s work previously with interpolation or some form of an attraction field applied to create a cohesive form. Subsequent ly, i t appears that sectioning and profiling has been used to give the final outcome for the design.

Compared to Zaha Hadid’s work, this design seems to use generative

design to a lesser degree with generat ive forms not ent i re ly dictating the final design of the proposal. Rather, it serves to be more as the main compositional feature of the project.

However with such a large scale design and such a significant degree of reliance over generative design, the architects have risked creating structurally unrealistic proposals that may have overlooked crucial details. As with automation of any kind, the software written for it is only as good as the individuals who wrote it and undoubtedly there will be flaws contained within it.

28.

27.

T O P L E F T

Overview detail view

B O T T O M L E F T

Plaza level detail view

R I G H T

Overview detail view


29.

29. MA

D A

rchitects, 2014, Nanjing

Zendai H

imalayas C

enter.

In Part A, we have seen how design can be used as an agent for good in the world. In Design Futuring we have seen how design cannot only be just about turning resources from one form to another and call it design. Rather we know that we are a turning point wherein design needs to be considered in a holistic manner from cradle to grave as well as being sensitive to context of its environment and/or use.

In the Bras Basah Station, the design was all about designing in a highly contextual manner that respects the local urban environment. On the other hand, the New York High Line was about adaptive reuse and how demolishing an old structure does not always constitute as progress in itself.

For design computation, the benefits of computational design allow us to optimize structures to a certain

parameter and achieve geometries that were not as easily possible to recreate before. For once we are able to take advantage of performative design without speculation and assumptions, and actually know in good faith what the outcomes will be in a design’s overall performance.

With the Beijing National Stadium, computational design was used to create a frame that was not only structurally sound, but also to fit a certain aesthetic look and form that was predetermined. In the Flinders Street Station Redevelopment Project, we see how computational design was used to create a form that was evocative of old Victorian style train stations in a more contemporary context.

In Part A.3, generative design has raised a number of issues both positive and controversial. The issue that we may be

handing over too much control of the creative process and the true nature of IP rights in terms of generative design and algorithms are yet to be addressed but it also opens a range of possibilities. It is interesting to note that rather than taking months to achieve a design that is refined and resolved, it is possible to do this in a matter of days and weeks through rapid iterations on a computer. This aids in accelerating the design process and is creating a profound change in how we approach design as a practice.

In Zaha Hadid’s Haydar Aliyev Center, the natural topography that once existed on the site was used as points of data to create an extrapolated form that was exaggerated in form to create a dramatic structure. For the Nanjing Zendai Himalayas Center, the same process was applied but in a more explicit form and on a larger scale. To


P A R T A . 4 + 5T H O U G H T S // C O N C L U S I O N S

“ GOOD DESIGN IS AS LITTLE DESIGN AS POSSIBLE. LESS, BUT BETTER – BECAUSE IT

CONCENTRATES ON THE ESSENTIAL ASPECTS, AND THE PRODUCTS ARE NOT BURDENED WITH NON-ESSENTIALS. BACK TO PURITY,

BACK TO SIMPLICITY. “- DIETER RAMS

S T U D I O A I R . T H O U G H T S / C O N C L U S I O N S . 3 0

30.

some extent, this is a very contextual approach by obtaining data from the natural environment and generating them into a form, creating sinuous but useful geometries to build a structure.

Going ahead in this studio, my own personal design approach is to see what in Merri Creek is lacking in social amenity and how we can leave the site in a better place than we left it. However the nature of this approach is yet to be decided between one of permanence or an ephemeral existence. However as discussed earlier, it is not just about designing with the goal of c reat ing a f ina l fo rm, but a l so considering the social impact for the local residents of Merri Creek as well as environmental impact we would be making given that the creek is such a sensitive biome next to an urban area.

In terms of learning outcomes, I found a lgo r i t hm ic computa t ion to be challenging as it was a large shift from how I approach design. No longer did I have something tangible to manipulate, but rather just a screen in front of me. The definitions of Grasshopper really forced me to consider the process in wh ich a fo r m came in to be ing compared , much like a mathematical equation where there are strict orders of operations.

In mentioning these challenges, I also found it convenient that it is possible to use large quantities of data with such ease compared to manual calculations. For example, calculating all the catenary curves in the Week Two sketchbook task would have been poss ib le , but incredibly tedious and time consuming. On the other hand, using Grasshopper accelerated this process with changing the variables in the definitions being as

simple and instantaneous as adjusting a slider. In many ways this reflects not only the tangible limits of the human brain mentioned in Part A.2, but also the possibilities available with algorithmic computation.


P A R T A . 6A P P E N D I X

The Algorithmic Sketchbook provided a number of interesting outcomes for me and a particular few caught my attention.

In the Week Two task, the pavilion’s options for turning it into a fully fledged solid provided interesting insights in to the mechanics of Grasshopper. It was of notable interest that many of the experimented outcomes all relied on similar process initially and only deviated later on strongly towards just before the baking process.

In particular, the pipe extrusion that followed a mesh generated along the surface of the pavilion produced an aesthetically pleasing outcome that reflected the way in which curves are generated to some extent in generative design.

32.

31.

S T U D I O A I R . A P P E N D I X . 3 2

The Week Three tasks piqued my interest the most in terms of what I learnt the most from the sketchbook. In the pattern above, we relied on lists to create a pattern. Generating a cohesive, tessellating and repeating pattern was rather challenging as it required a deeper understanding of the nature of how we use lists and how their series and sets can vastly influence the pattern generated.

It would be interesting to explore how this pattern could be influenced to some degree in a 3D space given its tessellating nature the possible geometric faces that could be generated through further experimentation.

The second pattern that caught my interest was where an image was used as a base to generate data based on what was essentially a scale between 0 to 1. Grasshopper read the greyscale intensity in the image with these values and used them to determine the radii of circles along corresponding points on a grid overlay on top of the image.

I would be curious to see how this same process could be used to analyze and visualize data from an environment and reinterpret it into a tangible form much like the use of topological data in Zaha Hadid’s Haydar Aliyev Center.

33. 34.

‘HASSELL + HERZOG & DE MEURON, Flinders Street Station Design Competition Winner’, Projects Victoria, 2014, <http://vote.majorprojects.vic.gov.au/entrant/hassell-herzog-de-meuron> [accessed 18th March 2015]

Kalay, Yehuda, Architecture’s New Media: Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer Aided Design (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5-25

Kolarevic, Branko, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing (Spon Press, New York; London, 2003), pp. 3-62

‘MAD presents nanjing zendai himalayas center at venice biennale’, Designboom, 2013, <http://www.designboom.com:8080/architecture/mad-architects-nanjing-zendai-himalayas-center-venice-biennale-06-05-2014/> [accessed 19th March 2015]

Peters, Brady, Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought, in Architectural Design, 83 vols, 2, (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd) pp. 8-15

‘Out of the Blocks’, The New Yorker, 2008, <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2008/06/02/out-of-the-blocks/> [accessed 19th March 2015]

‘Take a Walk on the High Line with Iwan Baan’, ArchDaily, 2014, <http://www.archdaily.com/550810/take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan/> [accessed 16th March 2015]

‘WOHA, Bras Basah MRT Station’, ArchDaily, 2009, <http://www.archdaily.com/40802/bras-basah-rapid-transit-station-woha/> [accessed 16th March 2015]

‘Zaha Hadid, Heydar Aliyev Center’, ArchDaily, 2013, <http://www.archdaily.com/448774/heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects/> [accessed 19th March 2015]


R E F E R E N C E SB I B L I O G R A P H Y

S T U D I O A I R . R E F E R E N C E S . 3 4

1. ‘UoM Water Studio - Final Product’, Authors private image, 2014.

2. ‘UQ Architectural Design Studio - Final Product’, Authors private image, 2013.

3. ‘UQ Architectural Design Studio - Final Product’, Authors private image, 2013.

4. ‘UoM Earth Studio - Final Product’, Authors private image, 2014.

5. ‘UoM Virtual Environments Studio - Final Product’, Authors private image, 2013.

1. ‘Bras Basah MRT Station’, <http://www.woha.net/images/project_images/136299329497/gallery/brasbasah-01.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]


3. ‘New York High Line’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/543299f3c07a80548f000620_viewing-a-city-in-motion-from-the-high-line-s-third-phase_542194d8c07a80a9910000a4_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

4. ‘Bras Basah MRT Station’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/1258122411-083-pbh-09-bw-small-1000x719.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

5. ‘Bras Basah MRT Station’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/1258122564-site-plan-1000x706.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]




9. ‘New York High Line’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/54219451c07a800de50000dc_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan_1418_high_line_at_the_rail_yards___photo_by_iwan_baan-1000x666.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

10.‘http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/5421a726c07a800de50000f6_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan_west_chelsea-530x795.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

11.‘New York High Line’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/5421a8bfc07a800de50000fc_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan_gansevoort_end__plaza__and_stairs-530x353.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

12.‘New York High Line’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/54219439c07a80a9910000a0_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan_aerial_view-530x795.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

13.‘Beijing National Stadium’, <http://www.newyorker.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/080602_r17406_p646-290-150.jpg> [accessed 18th March 2015]

14.‘Beijing National Stadium’, Authors private image, 2011.

15.‘Beijing National Stadium’, <http://cdn.homesthetics.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/The-Chinese-National-Stadium-in-Beijing-–-The-Bird’s-Nest-Stadium-homesthetics-7.jpg> [accessed 18th March 2015]

16.‘Flinders Street Station Redevelopment Project’, HASSELL and Herzog & de Meuron Arkitecten, 2014.

R E F E R E N C E SF I G U R E S





21.‘Haydar Aliyev Center’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/52852292e8e44e8e72000162_heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects_hac_photo_by_iwan_baan_-7--530x795.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]

22.‘Nanjing Zendai Himalayas Center’, <http://www.designboom.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MAD-Nanjing-Zendai-Himalayas-Center-designboom08.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]

23.‘Haydar Aliyev Center’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/5285244ae8e44e8e72000166_heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects_hac_interior_photo_by_hufton_crow_-3--530x884.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]

24.‘Haydar Aliyev Center’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/52852152e8e44e8e7200015f_heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects_hac_exterior_photo_by_hufton_crow_-1--530x267.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]

25.‘Haydar Aliyev Center’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/5285236fe8e44e8e72000164_heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects_hac_photo_by_helene_binet_09-791x1000.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]

26.‘Haydar Aliyev Center’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/528524b4e8e44e524b0001b7_heydar-aliyev-center-zaha-hadid-architects_hac_interior_photo_by_hufton_crow_-1--1000x666.jpg> [accessed 19th March 2015]




30.‘New York High Line’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/5421a728c07a8086fc0000f6_take-a-walk-on-the-high-line-with-iwan-baan_falcone_flyover-530x353.jpg> [accessed 16th March 2015]

31.‘UoM Air Studio - Vase 1 Closeup’, Authors private image, 2015.

32.‘UoM Air Studio - Pavilion 1 Closeup’, Authors private image, 2015.

33.‘UoM Air Studio - Pattern 1’, Authors private image, 2015.

34.‘UoM Air Studio - Pattern 4’, Authors private image, 2015.

35.



S T U D I O A I R . R E F E R E N C E S . 3 6

3 7 . S T U D I O A I R . P A R T B

P A R T B . 0C R I T E R I AD E S I G N

35. Toyo

Ito (2001), Send

ai Med

iatheque.

36. Foster+

Partners (2003), 30 Street Mary A

xer.

T O P R I G H T

Sendai Mediatheque, Toyo Ito (2001)

B O T T O M R I G H T

30 Street Mary Axe, Foster+Partners (2003)

35.

36.

S T U D I O A I R . C R I T E R I A D E S I G N . 3 8

Designing through criteria encompasses a broad array of measures to achieve a satisfactory outcome. Firstly, a brief is set and requirements a design must meet or achieve are outlined. Secondly, options through brainstorming or of the like become what is called ideation. After such, a combination of prototyping and evaluat ing is conducted to determined whether or not the design meets the anticipated outcomes of the design brief.

In Woodbury’s ‘How Designers Use P a r a m e t e r s ’ , i t i s a rg u e d t h a t parametrics change the way the design process is conducted and the pace in which it occurs. Initially, designing with brainstorming and prototyping was essentially about starting with a basic principle form and adding to it continuously in an additive - and

sometime subtractive - process that in turn leads to an outcome that is increasingly complicated. However, it is this additive process that makes truly exploring the design process a difficult and cumbersome task.

Once an idea reaches a sufficient level of complexity, it is increasingly difficult to make modifications on a more radical scale due to the significant level of reworking required to make these changes. This is due to the fact that these parts that have been both added and subtracted to the process are independent components, all items that are mutually exclusive to each other.

With the inception of computers, the modus operandi of such means became somewhat easier through ‘copy, cut and paste’ - the quintessential object based manipulation of data to most individuals in contemporary society. This made the notion of adding and subtracting components more scalable and efficient,

permi t t ing the advent o f rap id prototyping. However, the fundamental issue of mutually exclusive parts that m u s t b e c o n s t a n t l y r e m o v e d , reconstructed and then subsequently attached again to the overarching design remained.

Woodbury has argued that with parametrics, the key and most crucial difference in contrast to conventional design is how parametrics relies so deeply on creating relat ionships b e t w e e n c o m p o n e n t s . T h e s e relationships creating a more dynamic approach to designing, allowing for a change in single component of a design reflect into every other subsequent component. In effect, it reveals the logic that binds together a designs becoming, rather than abstracting it through the complexity of multiple parts.

Although this does have ramifications for the design process and does reduce the burden of cycling and revisiting an idea through the design process. The opportunity cost of parametrics is rather high. Understanding the fundemental concept that the outcome is formed through the relationships between processes, not by simply adding them together is a difficult concept for many to understand.


“ IF EVERYONE IS BUSY MAKING EVERYTHING, HOW CAN ANYONE PERFECT ANYTHING? “

- APPLE

S T U D I O A I R . C R I T E R I A D E S I G N . 4 0

At this point, design to some extent approaches being more akin to science or mathematics rather than an art. For many this is difficult transition to grasp and understand. In the world of parametrics, these processes can be imagined as an algorithm with data flowing through a range of inputs and outputs, being modified through an array of transformations.

Because these transformations are linear in process in that one goes from point A to point B with all streams of data converging upon each other. It is imperative to consider the ramifications of the reality that each and every transformation that has been added or changed has a cumulative effect on the overall outcome of the data stream’s end result.

A s d i f f i c u l t a s d e f i n i n g t h e s e relationships may be and the change in thinking required to achieve this, parametrics does to quite a large extent

provide the opportunity for a more rapid means of iterating through ideas to reach an ideal outcome based on a design brief.

For as far removed as parametrics sounds in relation to the status quo for many in the design world, being able to d e s i g n w i t h p a r a m e t r i c s a s a methodology is still deeply steeped in analog means. It might be appropriate dismiss this as an ephemeral step in transiting towards parametrics, however, without understanding the fundementals o f t r a d i t i o n a l , m o re b e s p o k e n approaches, it is difficult to continue onto more digitized approaches.

For example, in a house, there are a number of rooms within and altogether they contribute to a total floorspace and to ta l pe r imete r va lue o f wa l l s . Conventional wisdom would suggest that these rooms are individual modules that have been added together and as such many would view the house in a compartmentalized manner. However in contrast, parametrics seeks to expose the reality that each of these rooms can be developed in a more efficient manner with each one having a relation to not only the adjacent room, but the total house in itself.

At the very least, parametrics serves as a means of abstracting ideas down to

principles, dividing them down slowly to find the necessary data and constructing it into something meaningful. Although the author argues that parametrics by means of computerization and of the like leads to a more efficient workflow that succeeds the status quo, it can be argued that conventional methods still hold their place in the world.

One cannot even begin to design with parametrics without being able to visualize processes and understand their fundamentals. Often these processes mimic real life physical actions that have been translated into a digital form and labelled differently, this adding to the confusion of changing mediums. Ultimately, without first grasping ana logue fundamenta l s , i t i s a nonsensical challenge to even attempt trying to understand parametrics.


P A R T B . 1S T R U C T U R E

37. Shigeru B

an, 2000, Japan Pavilio

n.38. Shig

eru Ban, 2000, Jap

an Pavilion(Exp

lod

ed A

xono

metric).

37.

S T U D I O A I R . S T R U C T U R E . 4 2

L E F T

Japan Pavilion Interior.

A B O V E

Japan Pavilion Structural Analysis.

38.


Structure as a research field and as the basis of criteria design is in many ways the unification of function and form as well as the rationalization of the many performance and aesthetic envelopes of a building. This research field makes use of lightweight tensile or compressive lattice structures to create a holistic load bearing frame. This can take form through an array of means such as geodesic domes, gridshells, thin shell structures, hyperboloid structures and amongst others.

For the purpose of the design criteria, the focus of initial explorations will be gridshells and the various patterns that can be applied to create a holistic structure. A gridshell is an extension of a thin shell structure with that it is a continuous surface that dissipates loads down to the ground. The difference with gridshells however, is that gridshells consist of discrete members connected at nodes that are positioned along an imaginary continuous surface. It is the fact that these nodes sit along the imaginary surface that a gridshell functions in a very similar way to a thin shell structure.

Extending upon the structure of a gridshell, the stength of the structure also stems from the curvature of the shell’s connections between nodes. By having this curvature occur in multiple directions, efficient paths of load distribution are possible with the least number of connections and the least level of torsion. Because of the nature of load distribution and the rigidity of the

form itself, no additional intermediate vertical members such as columns or frames are needed to maintain structural integrity.

The gridshell’s functionality can also be considered an expression of simplicity - the form in itself is the optimization of many structural aspects and a reduction of such to its most basic elements. In many ways, structure as a research field - and gridshells in particular - merges the disparate envelopes of facade and frame into a simple, efficient and elegant expression.

S T U D I O A I R . S T R U C T U R E . 4 4

39.

39. Shigeru B

an, 2000, Japan Pavilio

n.


P A R T B . 1S E N D A IM E D I A T H E Q U E

40. Toyo

Ito (2001), Send

ai Med

iatheque (C

eiling D

etail).41. To

yo Ito

(2001), Sendai M

ediatheq

ue (Section C

ut).

40.

S T U D I O A I R . S E N D A I M E D I A T H E Q U E . 4 6

L E F T

Column detail of structure.

A B O V E

Sendai Mediatheque Section Cut Elevation (Not to Scale).

41.


42.

43.

S T U D I O A I R . S E N D A I M E D I A T H E Q U E . 4 8

Toyo Ito’s Sendai Mediatheque employs structure in a rather interesting way that veers away from usual implementations. The cusp of the supporting structure of the mediatheque relies on a collection of column like structures that pierce through each floor slab.

Rather than using solid concrete columns, a lattice like structure is employed. These columns use a welded steel method to create a rigid but hollow column that is arguably more efficient than employing concrete columns given the building’s context.

Firstly, the floor slab of each level is rather large and lighting requirements for such large floor slabs are normally considerably high. To compensate for this, the void in the lattice structure columns allows for a skylight at the top floor, dispersing light throughout each level’s floorspace.

Secondly, the location of the building, Japan, is a seismically active region prone to earthquakes. The use of the lattice column structure makes it easier to implement a more resilient structure compared to the typical concrete slab and column typology.

The lattice pattern allows for lateral forces to influence the movements of t h e c o l u m n w i t h o u t s e v e r e l y compromising the building’s structural integrity. At the same time, this structural system allows each floor to move independently to one another, further increasing the bui lding’s resilience to earthquakes.

By minimizing elements through optimization and using lightweight structures, the resulting design is one that is not only highly resilient, but also one that is particularly efficient in terms of material usage in comparison to an

equivalent concrete slab and column structure system.

In this instance, structure serves as a pract ical a l ternat ive to common structural conventions. Additionally, it r e p r e s e n t s a m o r e p r a c t i c a l implementation in comparison to gridshells for example, which somewhat have limited feasible implementations in an urban environment.

T O P L E F T

Structural detail of column to floor slab connection.

B O T T O M L E F T

Interior view.

R I G H T

Entrance exterior face.

44.

42. Toyo Ito (2001), Sendai Mediatheque (Structure detail).43. Toyo Ito (2001), Sendai Mediatheque (Interior).44. Toyo Ito (2001), Sendai Mediatheque (Front Exterior.


P A R T B . 13 0 S T R E E TM A R Y A X E

“ THE GHERKIN’S PROMINENCE AS AN URBAN ICON STEMS IN PART FROM ITS SUCCESS AT ENGAGING WHAT WE MIGHT CALL RISK IMAGINARIES: THE DISCOURSES, REPRESENTATIONS, AND PRACTICES THROUGH WHICH WE UNDERSTAND AND CONCEPTUALIZE RISKS. “

- JONATHAN MASSEY

S T U D I O A I R . 3 0 M A R Y S T R E E T . 5 0

45.

30 Street Mary Axe by Foster+Partners is an another project that implements structure through unusual means. Rather than the grid-like frame being the sole supporting structure for the building, it is used to optimize for a more efficient and aesthetically pleasing outcome.

The building itself still follows the same conventions of a skyscraper for the most part in that there is still a concrete core column from the foundations to the top floor and the floor of each level is a still a concrete slab. However, to minimize, or in some instances, completely reduce the use of concrete support columns, a diagonal diamond brace frame has been enveloped on the outside of the building.

The bracing frame not only serves as a load bearing structure, but also as the primary frame for an active window

system that is used for passive cooling. However, it is more important in the context of structure as a research field how this brace frame reduces the number of columns required between floor slabs. The frame is based on triangular geometry that increases the rigidity of the frame. It is this rigidness that allows for a significant amount of load to be dispersed from the floor slab to the exterior frame.

Much like what was discussed earlier, 30 Street Mary Axe serves as an insight into o n e o f t h e m o r e p u r p o s e f u l implementation of the structure research field. It combines multiple performance, aesthetic and structural envelopes into a single unified system that in turn creates optimizations and efficiencies.

A B O V E

30 Street Mary Axe in the background.

Foster+Partners (2003), 30 Street Mary Axe.


46.

A B O V E

Entrance on ground level.

Foster+Partners (2003), 30 Street Mary Axe (Entrance).

S T U D I O A I R . 3 0 M A R Y A X E S T R E E T . 5 2

47.

A B O V E

Atrium and facade structure detail.

Foster+Partners (2003), 30 Street Mary Axe (Interior).


P A R T B . 2C A S E S T U D Y 1 . 0

48. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Case Stud

y 1.0.49. A

uthor’s Private Im

age, 2015, B

raced G

rid Pattern.

50. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Case Stud

y 1.0 Iterations.

Case Study 1.0 looks into the implications, opportunities and complications associated with the structure research field. Although no particularly case study building is being taken in mind with this section, it is perhaps more apt to look at the nature of gridshells and the physics behind them. It is particularly important to look at how gridshells are formed and how different lattice patterns influence the form of a gridshell - especially with post formed gridshells.

By using Kangaroo which is a physics computation engine for the Rhino Grasshopper plugin, a form finding approach will be taken towards studying the nature of gridshells. Using similar parameters but different lattice patterns, it is anticipated a wide variety of outcomes will be produced.

48.

49.

S T U D I O A I R . C A S E S T U D Y 1 . 0 . 5 4

50.

For Case Study 1.0, the five species chosen were five different lattice patterns that are expected to give somewhat different results despite the same parameters.

The first species is single braced grid pattern that effectively creates two triangles from a single square. It is expected that this will produce the most rigid and form resistant structure. This is due to triangles having the least number of edges required to make a closed 2D surface and hence the least number of opportunities for torsion to take effect.

The second species is a triangular tessellated mesh that makes four triangles out of one square. Although triangles are relatively resilient as a shape, a more flexible form may be the final outcome through the form finding process due to the denser pattern compared to the first species.

The third species is a regular gridshell lattice. Overall, nothing in particular is expected of this species. However, it is most likely to be less rigid than the first two species due to more members being required to create an enclosed shape.

The fourth species is the same as a the third species but oriented to a different direction within the same boundary constraints. The results of form finding in this particular experiment are expected to be quite similar to Species Three with few deviations.

Finally, the sixth iteration is a hexagonal grid tessellation set within the bounds of a square. With this particular pattern, form finding experiments should reveal a very flexible and somewhat weak structure that creates formations that lack uniformity. This is due to the number of members required to create

an enclosed plane relative to the other four species.

To test through the iterative process, the first four iterations will test the load bearing of each pattern and the deformations created as a result. This will be done by using values of force that are multiples of the force of gravity.

The last three iterations will consist of piping, vertical extrusion and mesh operations through the Weaverbird plugin on Rhino grasshopper. Through this, fabrication options will be discussed and the feasibility of each iteration in relation to each of the five species presented.


S P E C I E S O N E

Perpendicular grid with single diagonal bracing between two points

S P E C I E S T W O

Triangular tessellated mesh in grid formation

S P E C I E S T H R E E

Perpendicular grid with no diagonal bracing between

S P E C I E S F O U R

Diagonal grid with diagonal bracing between two points

S P E C I E S F I V E

Hexagonal grid placed on diagonal axis

9.8 m/s2 of Force Applied















51.







Piping Extrusions Applied




Extrusions Along Z-Plane Applied




Weaverbird Mesh Thicken Applied




Piping Extrusions Applied Extrusions Along Z-Plane Applied Weaverbird Mesh Thicken Applied


Through form finding analysis and iterative process, a few peculiarities and expected results were found in the 35 iterations produced. Firstly, the first and third species performed as expected, producing relaxation forms that were not far off initial postulations. Both have are implemented quite commonly in real life examples and the form produced through them tend to be quite similar between projects.

In Species Two, the relation of the pattern proved to be far less rigid than what was expected. Instead, the overall form produced a gentle tapered curvature towards the mid point. This may be due to the small connection lengths and the sheer number of nodes present in the same spacial constraints as other species. This would most likely result in a more flexible structure that would have a potentially uneven reaction to the the relaxation process.

With Species Four, the pattern did not produce the same even curvature as Species Three in spite of their similarities. The curvature produced by the relaxation process produced tangent angles that progressed in the opposite direction of Species Three. If the third species’ curvature could be described as parabolic, the fourth species produced something more along the lines of a gaussian or bezier curve.

In terms of Species Five, the hexagonal lattice pattern proved to be the least form resistant of all the species, showing a far greater degree of deformation in the relaxation process. With this pattern, it is possible hat using a hexagonal lattice would be impractical in creating a post formed gridshell and would likely need to be a rigid prefabricated construction if ever implemented in a practical situation.

In terms of extrusion processes to determine suitable fabrication opportunities, piping to created a fabrication solution seemed to be the most practical amongst all five species in creating a feasible construction method. It is imagined that in regards to piping as a method, fabrication could occur via two main methods.

The first would be to create pipes cut to the length of each member and connected through a hub and spoke method with a joints system at node points. A second method entails cutting members to particular lengths and welding each of them together to a create a single continuous rigid structure. The first would allow for more flexibility and ease of construction compared to the second one which is more resilient but far more specialized in fabrication.

For extruding along the Z Plane, the first four species would be highly practical fabricate through this method either via a woven strip method with timber or a waffle slot grid system that could be done with a number of materials. However with the sixth species, a more specialized plate joint system would be required to create a practical implementation. Another possibility to this would be to use methods employed with reciprocal structures to create a stable gridshell.

By using mesh thickening processes in the Weaverbird plugin within Rhino Grasshopper, interesting extrusions were created that resulted in unconventional solid forms. however, many of these would be difficult to fabricate - especially with Species Five - and would most likely be done by creating a skeleton that is then clad over to resemble the generated form, thus defeating the design intention of a gridshell overall.


52.


P A R T B . 3M A T E R I A L I T Y+ T E C T O N I C S

53. Bo

hlin Cyw

inski Jackson, 2011, A

pp

le Store Fifth A

venue.54. H

erzog

& D

e Meuro

n Architekten (2009), Tate M

od

ern Extension (Interio

r).55. B

ohlin C

ywinski Jackso

n, 2011, Ap

ple Sto

re Shanghai.

Materials for the longest of times have had stereotypes that ground them to very particular purposes or implementations. Stone has represented mass and solidity, adding a sense of determination to a design. Wood has long been associated with aging and a bespoken approach to craftsmanship and construction. It’s these long standing approaches to materiality that have at their very essence grounded society to have incredibly specific connotations of materials when they see them and hence one would have preconceptions that can be deliberately shaped by the designer.

53.

54.


T O P L E F T

Apple Store Fifth Avenue

B O T T O M L E F T

The Modern Extension Interior

55.

A B O V E

Apple Store Shanghai


As of late, computerization has led to architecture pushing the boundaries of form and function in regards to buildings. This shift towards the digital has led to a greater capacity in regards to the manipulation of form. Many structures as of late have veered more to the sinuous and curvilear, or simple geometric envelopes with incredibly detailed ornamentation. However, many tend to be a blended approach to the two as well.

To meet these approaches, it is not just enough to simply generate a form and construct it so blatantly as if the building would hold up with resilience. At the same time, materials and construction methods need to change as well. With computerization, it is possible to directly investigate the properties of materials and push their performative boundaries.

For example, the iconic glass facades of the Apple Store is the result of this computational analysis of glass and bending conventional implementations of it. The glass facades of the Apple Store are not only an aesthetic purpose, but also are structural in nature. The glass facade is not just a facade, but serves a load bearing face. This is done by the computation of load distribution of the roof through to the ground. By doing so, it is possible to determine the right composition for the glass as well as the type of lamination required for a more resilient structure. In doing so, the conventions of glass being just a decorative element are broken, representing a rethinking of materiality and tectonics.

Many firms such as Herzog & de Meuron take a highly a highly analytic approach that is both pragmatic and individual. Each project has software that is designed and developed for a tailored approach to parametrics. Their technology office, The Digital Technology Group,

is tasked with taking this tailored approach to developing software for each project. Each application written for a design is a one off production. Each of these programs are meant as a tool for rapid iteration and prototyping.

However, as technology centric this approach is, there is still an emphasis on more traditional approaches. The emphasis of The Digital Technology Group is not to be perfectly adept at the creation of free form surfaces as described earlier, but to develop a unique approach to the design process for each project. Each person on the team has an individual specialty such as BIM, parametric design, scripting or more, but none of these overrides this overarching goal.

The end result of this in many of Herzog & de Meuron’s projects lean towards the kind of computerized forms involving simple geometric envelopes with complex perforations and ornamentation (Figure 56). Many of the designs feature a scale of decoration and ornamentation that is highly variable. However, many of these visual aesthetics serve a deeper purpose than to just look pretty. At the same time, many of these concepts are developed on a practical level in terms of their feasibility in fabrication and function.

Computerization has led to many opportunities in regards to the development of forms. At the same time, these developments have led to the impetus of further manipulating the properties of materials and breaking the conventional connotations of them in terms of materiality. Consequently, these materials are implemented in unusual and cur ious ways, representing a melding of ornamentation to a more meaningful and functional implementation.


56.

56. Herzo

g &

De M

euron A

rchitekten (2009), Tate Mo

dern Extensio

n.


P A R T B . 3H A E S L E Y N I N EB R I D G E S G O L F C L U B

57. Shigeru B

an, 2010, Haesley N

ine Brid

ges G

olf C

lub (Interio

r).58. Shig

eru Ban, 2010, H

aesley Nine B

ridg

es Go

lf Club

(Section C

ut).

57.

S T U D I O A I R . H A E S L E Y N I N E B R I D G E S G O L F C L U B . 7 2

L E F T

Interior View

A B O V E

Haesley Nine Bridges Gold Club Section Cut Elevation (Not to Scale).

58.

!"# "$#

%$$#

&$#

!"#!"#!"# "$#

%$$#

&$#

!"#!"#


59.

60.

S T U D I O A I R . H A E S L E Y N I N E B R I D G E S G O L F C L U B . 7 4

Shigeru Ban’s Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club is a continuation of his work into gridshells and the implementation of simple materials into more complex structural applications.

The main structure of the roof is a timber gridshell system that is a pre formed structure. The pattern is not a traditional lattice pattern normally seen in a gridshell structure and instead, emulates the pattern of a triaxial weave. The triaxial weave is at its very essence a reduction of the triangular grid. It is formed by removing certain points in the pattern to create the appearance of a triangle and hexagon tessellation.

Structurally, this is a somewhat ‘good enough’ approach to the gridshell structure. As shown in Case Study 1.0 (B2.0), the hexagon pattern is not a particularly rigid and resilient pattern. By leaving triangular members in the

lattice pattern, the overall rigidity is increased just enough to create a more stable gridshell.

This state of equilibrium is the result of the patterns’ properties of sheer resistance, isotropy and lightness. The sheer resistance occurs from the rigidity of the triangular members within the pattern that can withstand the tensile forces from the hexagonal members. At the same time, the pattern is isotropic in theory as each member span is the same length in spite of the varied pattern, allowing for an even load distribution. To add to this, the reduction of members relative to a triangular grid results in a lighter more efficient structure.

In order to reverse engineer the structure, it is important to deconstruct the roof into its constituent parts. The roof is broken up into 32 square

segments with 21 columns holding the roof up. The triaxial weave is broken down in relative ratios as shown above in Figure 59 against a grid form. The beams of the roof are angled in such a way that they sit tangent or at the normal angle to a projectedsurface the represents the boundaries of the roof.

The difficulty of the weave is this angle of the columns and beams which appear not to be the result of a gridshell relaxation and rather an extrapolation based on a form finding process. Additionally, the columns and beams are continuous, resulting in beams that twist based on its position on the projected surface.

T O P L E F T

Analysis of Triaxial Weave Pattern.

B O T T O M L E F T

Exterior View

R I G H T

Roof Canopy Detail

61.

59. Author’s Private Image, 2015, Triaxial Weave Pattern Analysis).60. Shigeru Ban, 2010, Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club (Exterior Facade).61. Shigeru Ban, 2010, Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club (Canopy Detail).


P A R T B . 3C A S E S T U D Y 2 . 0

62. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Case Stud

y 2.0.63. A


age, 2015, D

efinition Flo

w C

hart.64. A


age, 2015, V

isualized Pro

cess.

The reverse engineering of the Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club can be broken in to six discrete steps. First, a section of the roof is extracted - a square. Secondly, the roof is then divided into a grid that represents the tile ratio of Figure 59 to form the basis of the pattern. The intersection points of the grid are sorted into to lists, and cross referenced again using the various ratios from the pattern analysis to give the basic triaxial weave and cleaned up.

Fourth, to develop the curved surface, a lofted operation was used to create the tapered roof to column transition and will also serve as the projection surface for the column and beam system. On the fifth step, the step three result is projected onto the

lofted surface of step four. This will serve as guidelines for the columns to follow.

In the final step, the normals of multiple points along each line of the projection are mapped. Using these re fe renced no r ma l ang le s , a referenced curve based on the profile section of a timber segment is oriented to fit these mapped angles. Afterwards, the profiles are lofted to create a single surface.

Subsequently in Part B.4, the same form is used but optimized further and other patterns of varying complexity are applied in the iterative process to determine a suitable fabrication

62.

!"#"$"% &"'"(")"*"%"& +"#"*",","#"&"-

#"&"."*"/"&

%"0"(")"$"+"1"2"&",

("#"*"3"&"+"2"$"*"4

%"&"5"#"&"(

!"&"*"."&"2"#"6 &"4"%""""#"&","0")"2)"*"-"2"$"4"! )"*"-"2"$"4"!

&"'"2"#"0","$"*"4

("#"*"-"$")"&

."1"(""""2"1"4"!"&"4"2

4"*"#"."1")",

1")"$"!"4

+"0"#"/"&",

+"0"#"/"&"""""

*"4""""("*"$"4"2

63.


64.


P A R T B . 4T E C H N I Q U ED E V E L O P M E N T

65. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Iteration 1.

66. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Iteration 5.

67. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e, 2015, Iterations 01-05.

Materials for the longest of times have had stereotypes that ground them to very particular purposes or implementations. Stone has represented mass and solidity, adding a sense of determination to a design. Wood has long been associated with aging and a bespoken approach to craftsmanship and construction. It’s these long standing approaches to materiality that have at their very essence grounded society to have incredibly specific connotations of materials when they see them and hence one would have preconceptions that can be deliberately shaped by the designer.

65.

66.

S T U D I O A I R . T E C H N I Q U E D E V E L O P M E N T . 7 8

A B O V E

Iterations 01-05 (Left-right/top-bottom).

The first set of five iterations is a further exploration on case study 2.0. The first three in particular are optimizations of

the original Grasshopper definition to produce a more malleable code that can be worked with to find more unique forms.

The next two iterations are explorations into extrusion that can be thought as

investigations into converting them into a fabrication.

The fourth considers the possibilities of denser pattern from the existing version. This would be an unideal solution for the criteria and the mere fact that the pattern is so

d e n s e w i t h t h e s a m e parameters, the end result would be unstable.

The fifth one of flat planar surfaces should be easy to construct but risks being an unstable structure given the thinness of each member.

67.

Initial Case Study 2.0 Definition Optimization 1 (33% More Efficient)

Sweep ExtrusionDense Pattern

Definition Optimization 2 (66% More Efficient)


A B O V E


T h e s e c o n d s e t o f f i v e iterations considers other fabrication options of the first five iterations.

A l t h o u g h p i p i n g w o u l d produce the most convenient opportunities for fabrication, it does not produce the most aesthetic solution given the complexities of joining circular profiles through methods such as welding or joint connectors.

The seventh iteration creates a more stable situation amongst iteration four. Thickness of the material profile would be a significant consideration as well as producing a consistent extrusion before fabrication.

The last three species explore Weaverbird plugin mesh thickening definitions as well as Delaunay meshes that are more exper imenta l than anything. Creating meaningful fabrication methods through t h i s p r o c e s s w o u l d b e exceedingly difficult.

68.

Piping Extrusion Sweep + Offset + Cap

Weaverbird Mesh Thicken (Carpet)Weaverbird Mesh Thicken (Picture Frame)

Delaunay Mesh Abstraction


A B O V E


Iterations 11 through 15 replace the existing pattern present with a voronoi mesh that has had its face edges

extracted and used as a base geometry.

F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f fabrication, the most feasible option would be to employ iteration 13 which uses a piping extrusion that could be done through welding or joints

at member intersections. Both options are not particularly aesthetic solutions that could be problematic in terms of creating a seamless structure.

More planar solutions such as vertical extrusions in iterations 11,12 and 14 would be quite

difficult as each member of the geometry is rather unique and p r e s e n t s a f a b r i c a t i o n challenge overall.

69.

Loft Along Curves’ Normals Sweeping Extrusion

Weaverbird Mesh Thicken (Picture Frame)Sweep + Offset + Cap

Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


The third set of iterations switches to a less haphazard random pattern to a delaunay mesh that is derived from

points along the grid originally developed for Case Study 2.0 in Part B.3.

The end result is a structure that is more rigid than what was originally derived from a voronoi mesh pattern given each boundary area is limited

to have three s ides - a collection of triangles at its essence.

A l though an in te res t ing solution, a problem again with th i s concept o f random generation is the sense of arbitrary to it which lacks

meaningful geometry as well as the reality that fabricating so many unique elements on such a scale is exceedingly difficult to produce.

70.



Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


In this set of iterations, rather than choosing a random pattern, a regular grid has

been used to explore the form produce from such.

The regular square gr id produces something that is rather easy to fabricate but again. the challenge is that this form does not create a sense of meaningful geometry and

as a result in somewhat mundane in nature.

In terms of fabrication, it is fairly easy to explore most options with this given the somewhat uniform nature of each member. Planarizing each member rather than

sinuous curves could also be an option that would ease fabrication.

71.



Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


Iterations 11 through 15 replace the existing pattern present with a voronoi mesh that has had its face edges

extracted and used as a base geometry.

F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f fabrication, the most feasible option would be to employ iteration 13 which uses a piping extrusion that could be done through welding or joints

at member intersections. Both options are not particularly aesthetic solutions that could be problematic in terms of creating a seamless structure.

More planar solutions such as vertical extrusions in iterations 11,12 and 14 would be quite

difficult as each member of the geometry is rather unique and p r e s e n t s a f a b r i c a t i o n challenge overall.

72.



Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


The above set of iterations also furthers explores uniform g e o m e t r y t h r o u g h t h e hexagonal grid. The geometry in itself is much less rigid, presenting a concern for p r o d u c i n g a s t a b l e construction.

With all of the iterations, the p r i m a r y c o n c e r n i s t h e difficulty of fabrication once more. The geometry does not o f f e r a n y p o s s i b i l i t y o f fabrication through continuous members, the need for very stable bracing given the torsional forces present as well

as the curvilinear members as well as the need to use one of f a b r i c a t i o n s f o r s o m e members in certain iterations.

73.



Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


Iterations 36-40 explore the use of the jitter function as well as cull pattern to create a somewhat ordered chaos that

can be perceived as a random pattern.

The pattern is based on setting points on two parallel lines, with points removed on each of them in a pattern and woven with the jitter function. Afterwards, the pattern is

rotated at 90 increments to create a geometry that is circular in an abstract nature.

With regards to fabrication, this has a far more feasible solution compared to other random generations through fabricating linear beams that

intersect with each other to create a stable surface.

This would be most easy to do with iterations 36,37 and 38 given the rectangular nature of their extrusions profiles.

74.



Piping Extrusion


A B O V E


Further extending upon this geometry, form finding using Kangaroo plugin relaxation was employed to discover how well the form responds to loads applied to it. Using increments of 1, 5, 10, 50 and 100 as multiples to the force of gravity, observations were

m a d e o n t h e o v e r a l l d e f o r m a t i o n c a u s e d . I n comparison to Case Study 1.0 (B.2), the overall deformation that occurred was surprisingly minimal.

The members in all of the geometry did not bend as

much in spite of a force of 980m/s2 applied to it, implying an unexpectedly resil ient structure.

75.

Relaxation (9.8 m/s2) Relaxation (49.0 m/s2)

Relaxation (980.0 m/s2)Relaxation (490.0 m/s2)

Relaxation (98.0 m/s2)


A B O V E


After experimenting with the form finding process, attractor points were used to deform surfaces in unusual ways with the random pattern geometry being projected upon it.

T h e o v e ra l l re su l t we re p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g

typologies that could present themselves as interesting geometries for a final concept.

Fabricating these, although while straightforward would employ some sort of waffle grid system with slot joints. However, these would be

somewhat challenging given the many intersections were multiple beams intersect as well as the random intervals at which these intersections occur.

76.


A B O V E

Iterations 39, 45 and 50

From Case Study 2.0, the most meaningful geometries and forms produced came from the iterations starting at n u m b e r 3 5 w h e re i n t h e randomized geometry was introduced. The geometry is a combination of both uniform grid patterns as well as more

randomized patterns such as delaunay meshes and voronoi meshes.

The pattern has the regularity of constant linear lines from a grid pattern that allows for ease of fabr icat ion, but m a i n t a i n s a n i r r e g u l a r

distribution that reduces visual monotony in the gridshell.

77.


P A R T B . 5P R O T O T Y P E S

79. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e (2015), Proto

type 3 (To

p V

iew).

80. Autho

r’s Private Imag

e (2015), Proto

type 3 (D

etail View

).81. A


age (2015), Pro

totyp

e 1.

Given the complexity of the iterations developed in B.4, some form of pipes or a slot joint system were deemed to be the most feasible to implement. However, using pipes to be welded together would also be a very complex form of fabrication for such a randomized pattern. This stems from two issues; firstly, the circular profile section of the pipes make it difficult to weld or fabricate appropriate junctions, and secondly, each member is of a different length and at such a scale would be rather difficult to worth with.

As a result, creating a set of long beams and columns that intersect with each other using a slot joint system would be most appropriate with fabricating a form with a randomized weave pattern. Even at this point the challenge of joining sections with multiple intersecting points remain.

78.

79.

S T U D I O A I R . P R O T O T Y P E S . 9 0

80.

The above image, Figure 81, represents the s ing le success fu l prototype developed using a halved joint system. This was done by referencing a surface into Grasshopper and mapping UV grid along the surface. The form was then extruded along the Z axis and no offsetting was occurred. This was because a laser cutter was used to fabricate the components for assembly.

The only instance where panel thickness was a considerat ion was in the subsequent step. At the intersection points of each surface, a notch was generated to create the halved joint system.

Once processing the panel outlines through a laser cutter, the pieces were then assembled. The margin of accuracy afforded by the laser cutter provided an additional benefit that wou ld not have been ach ieved

otherwise - the lack of adhesive required in the final assembled form. The slotting nature of the joints meant that each panel interlocked so tightly that once fully assembled, the final prototype was relatively stable and did not fall apart.

Placing the prototype upside down revealed a rather stable structure still and did not show any signs of stress. A further advantage of this system was that the most minimal number of parts were used to create the whole design and as a result showed few signs of sagging as well as a high degree of rigidity.

The challenge going further with this prototype is the rudimentary nature of it and creating more complex variations. The halved joint system is generally intended to be used at intersection points that are essentially perpendicular.

In the coming pages, the challenge associated with this will be seen in one failed prototype example that shows the difficulty of doing so.

A further exploration into creating a joint assembly was to create prefabricated extrusions that could have been joined together but did not work out as intended. The failure of this particular prototype was the culmination of a number of issues that will be addressed subsequently. Additionally, more defined operations will need to be explored in order to address the failures in using applying complex geometry to current Grasshopper operations.


81.

A B O V E

Failed Prefabrication Prototype

It was proposed that the random pattern could have been cons t ruc ted us ing prefabricated components using a 3D printing process or another additive/subtractive 3D fabricating process with multiple components joint together to create a cohesive

structure. However this has not worked out as intended.

Part of this was due to the 3D printer not registering the input file properly as well as not being able to handle such a geometry competently. F u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s

required to produce feasible components and using a powder bed printing process rather than an extrusion process printer should be c o n s i d e re d i n o rd e r t o p r o d u c e h i g h e r q u a l i t y components.

S T U D I O A I R . P R O T O T Y P E S . 9 2

82.

A B O V E

Failed Random Halved Joint Prototype

Continuing with the halved joint system as a means of assembly, a more complex geometry was applied to the set of definitions used to generate an assembly system. A more simplified version of Iteration 50 from Part B.4 was used to test the fabrication.

H o w e v e r , m u l t i p l e complications arose in the process.

In spite of all surfaces being planar along the Z-axis, not every intersection point was developed into a halved joint system. Subsequently, the fact

that the intersections were no longer perpend icu la r in n a t u r e , t h e w o r k i n g components did not join together as intended, resulting in a half finished prototype as shown above.


P A R T B . 6T E C H N I Q U EP R O P O S A L

C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N C L I F T O N H I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L LH I L L

F A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L DF A I R F I E L D

S T U D I O A I R . T E C H N I Q U E P R O P O S A L . 9 4

83.

The site proposed for this Studio centers around the area adjacent to the old Thomas Embling Hospital Site as well as a large residential area in the vicinities of Clifton Hill and Fairfield.

Upon closer inspection of the site, a number of issues were observed, mostly concerning in the areas of urban form and connectivity;

1. Merri Creek is both an organizational spine and a divisive factor for the urban form. It provides a green spine for the area but is not intrinsically welded together with the area.

2. Connectivity was mostly concerned about north-south movement which was partially due to the 1km gap between creek crossings.

3. T h e re a re m a j o r c o m m e rc i a l , educational, recreational sites on the old Thomas Embling Hospital Site that are d i rect ly severed f rom the

residential areas around Clifton Hill and Fairfield.

These issues provide the opportunity to create a design that can not only connect the two sides of the creek, but also create a public space that invites people beyond those amongst the fitness demographic to linger longer within Merri Creek.

Additionally, it is intended that the concept for the site is not a standoff between nature and architectural form. Instead, it is hoped that the form is complementary to the landscape and blends somewhat into it through the use of a more organic sense of materiality as explored in preview sections of Part B.

A B O V E

Map of Clifton Hill locality around Merri Creek.

1. Clifton Hill Train Station2. Creek crossings3. Old Thomas Embling Hospital Site (Now redeveloped)4. Residential area5. Parkland around Merri Creek6. Proposed Site

6.

2.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

5.


The proposal for the site along Merri Creek is a bridge constructed using principles discovered in the structure research field. Although the implementation of the bridge is a somewhat mundane and typical typology to implement in the site, it is intended that the bridge will not just be a bridge in the typical sense or linking two sides, but also a place for gathering and lingering - a social space for those living, working and playing in the site.

By using a vertical stacking methodology for the programming of the site, it is possible to create distinct levels of use. It is imagined that the top most level would serve as a succinct link between the two sides of the river. The bridge component will use glass as a structural element, forming the decking cladding, providing a sense of floating to those crossing the bridge. The middle level of programming would be for those on the ground where the vertical connections of the bridge serve as small, intimate pavilions for lingering within. The lowest level of programming would be the river level for those passing under the bridge. The weaving nature of the bridge would serve as a filter for light going through the bridge, giving the impression of a porous structure.

This approach is preferable to other options possible in that structure, namely gridshells, provide the opportunity to create a thin shell structure that is lightweight and not so heavy in massing compared to a bridge constructed through other forms. It is innovative in the sense that the bridge uses an irregular geometry as the basis of not only the concept’s form,

but also its structural capacity. Furthermore, wood and glass would be used in a structural capacity and scale that can be considered somewhat as an uncharted territory.

The choice of wood as the main material of construction gives a bespoken feel to the bridge and softens the harsh geometry of its structure. Additionally, it is this very choice of material that denies the bridge a sense of the determinant - the material will over time, due to the elements, age and develop a patina that will require the bridge to be scrapped or replaced. Glass as the bridge’s decking would test the traditional connotations of it as a material and make for an interesting evocative experience. However, challenges associated to this concept are numerous, especially in terms of creating a structurally stable bridge given the irregular geometry being applied as well as fabrication.

Wood being used structurally in such a manner is difficult, especially since many of the members of the bridge will not be planar in nature. At the same time creating an optimized form that has multiple points of inflection will require significant testing to find an appropriate form. Glass being used structurally as a decking member will also pose a significant challenge as the glass would have to be thick in order to support both point and distributed loads as well as have a tactile surface to prevent people from slipping while walking upon it.

These structural challenges also present themselves as a fabrication challenge but can be overcome through multiple techniques. The wooden members of the bridges structure could be constructed using a CNC milling process to create unique members that can be joined together as end to end connections. Though costly, this is possibly the most ideal option in terms of creating a structurally resilient assembly. In regards to glass, the glass could be a multi-layered lamination process with some form of reinforcement added within these layers, doubling as a reinforcement to the added filtering effect.

L E F T

Massing Diagram of Concept

1. Deck goes upwards to first inflection point2. First inflection point and column support area3. Second inflection point at depression and column support area4. Deck slopes upwards in arch like geometry5. Third inflection point and column support area6. Deck slopes downward towards path


84.

85. Locality M

ap o

f Clifto

n Hill (A

pp

le, 2014)

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

6.

85. Locality M

ap o

f Clifto

n Hill (A

pp

le, 2014)


!"#"#"$"%"&

'"(")"*"+"("*")"%

,")"-"."%

/"0"-"'"'

1"-"&"%"0

/"0"-"'"'

1"-"&"%"0

/"0"-"'"'

1"-"&"%"0

0"-"."2"&"-"("%

0"-"."2"&"-"("%

!"#"#"$

."#"*"&"(

85.

86.


87.

88.

T O P L E F T

Example of typical topology of bridge.

B O T T O M L E F T

Example of typical glass deck to frame connection.

R I G H T

Possible pattern generation using jitter and cross referencing.

B E L O W

Possible fabrication joints for assembly.

Part B was a particularly challenging approach to designing a project compared to previous studios, especially when it came to developing a concept from something nebulous to a more tangible proposal.

Making the case for a proposal was something that in general was fairly straightforward and could be easily applied to any design brief. It was important to identify and a need initially, i.e. how there is a lack of connectivity along Merri Creek. Extending upon this is was important to canvas options on how to approach this. However, the nature of Part B made this a very difficult

process to ach ieve, resu l t ing a somewhat substandard proposal.

A t the same t ime , mak ing the connection between the conceptual to the phys i ca l was an i nc red ib l y challenging task to achieve in Part B. Regardless of all the analysis and evaluation done throughout each stage, in a number of instances, theory did not relate well to practice.

Part of this could stem from the challenges associated with the discourse between architecture or design and computation. There has and always been a distinct split between the

physical and the digital, with it so apparent when applying computation and parametrics within the field of design.

With computation and parametrics, technology offers a convenience and increase in efficiency unlike what has ever been seen before. However, it is the very cusp of that fact that causes us as designers to have a degree of uncertainty about how to use this technology in a meaningful rather than arbitrary manner.

In many of the approaches towards developing a technique and process in Part B revolved around iterative design. When combined with parametrics, it is unexpectedly easy to get carried away with computational tools and let automation supersede human ingenuity. The automation associated with technology and the digital age has the potential to remove the humanistic aspect of design, weakening that relation between the tool, the designer and the outcome.

With many of the iterations produced, a number of them could be considered as arbitrary more than explorative. This is not so much a fault in the process, but more of an example of excess. However, part of this has occurred due to the ease of dismissing one design


P A R T B . 7T H O U G H T S // C O N C L U S I O N S

“ AUTOMATION WEAKENS THE BOND BETWEEN TOOL AND USER NOT BECAUSE COMPUTER CONTROLLED SYSTEMS ARE COMPLEX BUT BECAUSE THEY ASK SO LITTLE OS US. “

- NICHOLAS CARR

and moving towards the next by simply changing a parameter. The speed and precision afforded by computational tools allows for this to occur by making it far too easy to dismiss both the failures and the successes with one’s own explorations.

With a particular focus with the initial sec t ions o f Pa r t B , the use o f computational tools was a somewhat questionable approach to ideation and conceptualizing. The contrast of designing by hand verses using parametric tools reveals are large disparity in outcomes. Designing by hand through sketching for example allows the exploration of the problem space and subsequently, a solution that meets the parameters of this space can be found.

On the other hand, designing with parametrics requires a precise and i n n a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e relationships present in a design.

Because of the solution to a problem in a design brief is still in a more loosely conceptual stage, these relationships are not particularly explicit. Consequently, it was important to iterate rapidly and approach each step in an abstractive manner as outlined in Part B.1. In some facets, the design process suffers overall in terms of quality given that this razor sharp precision is not advantageous at this point.

This felt particularly true for Case Study 2.0 when developing iterations that would eventually form a meaningful geometry that could be the basis of the technique. It was hoped that all 50 iterations would be an addition to the previous iteration but this was far from the reality. Instead, the iterations ended up only culminating towards the end to produce a viable technique to move forward.

On a final note, it was found to be especially difficult to approach a design brief by focusing on developing a technique first then using that technique to find a solution in the site. On many levels, this felt incredibly forced and distracted from developing a meaningful outcome and proposal for the site in Part B.6. To remedy this, it was suggested that data from the site such as topological data be integrated into the proposal’s computational script.

However, even this felt excessively arbitrary and almost ‘cookie cutter’ like in nature, lacking intimacy and site specific context.

Moving forward, this will present itself as a challenge in regards to further developing the Part B.6 proposal into a more intimate and bespoken form that softens the harsh precision associated with parametrics. Overall with all of this in consideration, it is paramount to consider computational tools and of the like as just tools to aid the process, always bearing in mind not to get carried away and letting the computer do all the work.

S T U D I O A I R . T H O U G H T S / C O N C L U S I O N S . 1 0 0

1 0 1 . S T U D I O A I R . P A R T B

P A R T B . 8A P P E N D I X

89.

S T U D I O A I R . A P P E N D I X . 1 0 2

91.

The week five Algorithmic Sketchbook task was a particularly apt at developing both Case Study 1.0 and 2.0 further into more meaningful outcomes. The task involved developing a simulation of a spider web through the use of field charges and magnetic fields as the basis of of geometry generation.

In many instances, relaxing the spider web revealed a litany of problems. However, by using the Param Viewer as well as Panel Viewer, it was generally possible to diagnose each issue in a pragmatic process. Additionally, baking the Grasshopper definition at certain steps afforded a simple but effective means of confirming any problems with the definition.

For example, in Case Study 1.0, there were instances where the geometry would not relax properly, but instead create what was the appearance of an

explosion of lines. This was generally the result of duplicate lines as well as a Unary Force preset that was far too high for the geometry to handle. Other instances was the result of loose geometry which required culling data.

Extending upon this discovery, culling data - specifically lines in a geometry, offered opportunities to refine a geometry even before it was generated, offering a higher degree of certainty when relaxing the geometry. In one such instance, the Kangaroo Plugin indicated an error of ‘non-zero lengths.’ This issue was remedied by using the panel view and searching for lines or other geometry that was considered null or below the absolute tolerance value of Rhino.

To remove this data, this was simply a matter of drawing upon knowledge from the week three and four tasks that

centered around managing data. By screening for data that did not fall into either of these categories, it was possible to dispatch data that was considered ‘optimal’ for use as a geometry to process through relaxation.

Additionally, this task also offered an insight to generating patterns in a meaningful way from data, combining more controlled means such as field charges with ones more arbitrary such as voronoi mesh generation, providing an interesting platform to explore random patterning further as shown in Part B.4.

‘Are Computers Bad for Architecture?’, ArchDaily, 2015, <http://www.archdaily.com/618422/are-computers-bad-for-architecture/> [accessed 25th April 2015]

‘A Selection of Shigeru Ban’s Best Work’, ArchDaily, 2014, <http://www.archdaily.com/489222/a-selection-of-shigeru-ban-s-best-work/> [accessed 17th March 2015]

‘Flashback: Sendai Mediatheque / Toyo Ito’, ArchDaily, 2013, <http://www.archdaily.com/118627/ad-classics-sendai-mediatheque-toyo-ito/> [accessed 17th March 2015]

‘Is Apple Fifth Avenue's glass cube able to withstand thrown rocks and other physical vandalism?’, Quora, N.D., <http://www.quora.com/Is-Apple-Fifth-Avenues-glass-cube-able-to-withstand-thrown-rocks-and-other-physical-vandalism> [accessed 31th March 2015]

Kolarevic, Branko and Kevin R. Klinger, Manufacturing Material Effects: Rethinking Design and Making in Architecture (Routledge), pp. 6–24

Moussavi, Farshid and Michael Kubo, The Function of Ornament (Actar) pp. 5-14

‘MSD DESIGN STUDIO 20 – VIRTUAL BECOMES REAL’, Designito, 2015, <https://designito.wordpress.com/msd-design-studio-20-virtual-becomes-real/> [accessed 26th March 2015]

Peters, Brady, Realising the Architectural Intent: Computation at Herzog & De Meuron, in Architectural Design, 83 vols, 2, (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd) pp. 56-61

Peters, Brady, Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought, in Architectural Design, 83 vols, 2, (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd) pp. 8-15

‘Nine Bridges Country Club / Shigeru Ban Architects’, ArchDaily, 2014, <http://www.archdaily.com/490241/nine-bridges-country-club-shigeru-ban-architects/> [accessed 17th March 2015]

‘Stand-offs’, Stella, N.D., <http://www.stellaglasshardware.com/products/stand-offs> [accessed 16th April 2015]

‘The Untold Story of How the Apple Store Cube Landed in Midtown’, New York Magazine, 2014, <http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/09/story-behind-the-apple-store-cube.html/> [accessed 31th March 2015]

‘The Gherkin: How London’s Famous Tower Leveraged Risk and Became an Icon’, ArchDaily, 2013, <http://www.archdaily.com/445413/the-gherkin-how-london-s-famous-tower-leveraged-risk-and-became-an-icon/> [accessed 17th March 2015]

‘The Gherkin: How London’s Famous Tower Leveraged Risk and Became an Icon (Part 2)’, ArchDaily, 2013, <http://www.archdaily.com/447205/the-gherkin-how-london-s-famous-tower-leveraged-risk-and-became-an-icon-part-2/> [accessed 17th March 2015]



Wilson, Robert A., Definition of ‘Algorithm’, in The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, 83 vols, 2, (MIT Press, Ltd) pp. 11-12

Woodbury, Robert F., ‘How Designers Use Parameters’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture, by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (Routledge) pp. 153–170

1 0 3 . S T U D I O A I R . P A R T B

R E F E R E N C E SB I B L I O G R A P H Y

S T U D I O A I R . R E F E R E N C E S . 1 0 4

35.‘Sendai Mediatheque’, <https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/99/e2/2b/99e22b2ecb7646de68d7944a3c821e55.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015].

36.’30 Street Mary Axe’, <http://www.fosterandpartners.com/media/Projects/1004/img12.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015].

37.‘Japan Pavilion’, <http://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_llcos48KBt1qea09ao1_1280.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015].

38.‘Japan Pavilion’, <https://clarewashington.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/japanese-pavillion_2.jpg?w=1168> [accessed 17th March 2015].

39.‘Japan Pavilion’, <http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GJtO_79Ht54/T9VuA0_lzWI/AAAAAAAAADM/OWg3MiFBn_Q/s1600/img059.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015].

40.‘Sendai Mediatheque’, <http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group1/building2580/media/4c6a9b33a27d91.81936014.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015]

41.‘Sendai Mediatheque’, <http://c1038.r38.cf3.rackcdn.com/group1/building2580/media/SectionA-A%20200%20A3.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015]

42.‘Sendai Mediatheque’, <http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MedGVi__wF4/TY6AhGi5lxI/AAAAAAAAAz0/cHk4SyOW_qE/s1600/Sendai-3.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015]

43.‘Sendai Mediatheque’, <http://causeineedit.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Toyo-Ito-2-Sendai-Mediatheque.jpg> [accessed 17th March 2015]

44.Sendai Mediatheque’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/1299694123-sendai1.gif> [accessed 17th March 2015]




48.‘UoM Air Studio - Braced Gridshell’, Author’s private image, 2015.

49.‘UoM Air Studio - Braced Gridshell Pattern’, Author’s private image, 2015.

50.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 1.0 Species 1’, Author’s private image, 2015.

51.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 1.0’, Author’s private image, 2015.

52.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 1.0 Examples’, Author’s private image, 2015.

53.‘Apple Store Fifth Avenue’, <http://images.apple.com/retail/store/galleries/fifthavenue/images/fifthavenue_gallery_image2.jpg> [accessed 31st March 2015]

54.‘Tate Modern Extension Project’, <http://i2.wp.com/aasarchitecture.com/wp-content/uploads/Tate-Modern-Extension-by-Herzog-de-Meuron-13.jpg?zoom=2&resize=474%2C212> [accessed 31st March 2015]

55.‘Apple Store Shanghai’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/1279035414-royzipstein-apple-shanghai01.jpg> [accessed 31st March 2015]

56.‘Tate Modern Extension Project’, <http://i0.wp.com/aasarchitecture.com/wp-content/uploads/Tate-Modern-Extension-by-Herzog-de-Meuron-10.jpg?zoom=2&resize=474%2C444> [accessed 31st March 2015]

57.‘Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/53325859c07a806c360000aa_nine-bridges-country-club-shigeru-ban-architects__mg_1497-666x1000.jpg> [accessed 31st March 2015]

58.‘Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/


uploads/2014/03/533259c5c07a806c360000b0_nine-bridges-country-club-shigeru-ban-architects_sectional_detail-1000x814.png> [accessed 31st March 2015]

59.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Pattern Analysis’, Author’s private image, 2015.

60.‘Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/533257dac07a806c360000a8_nine-bridges-country-club-shigeru-ban-architects__mg_2202-1000x666.jpg> [accessed 31st March 2015]

61.‘Haesley Nine Bridges Golf Club’, <http://ad009cdnb.archdaily.net.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/53325861c07a80cb6b0000a2_nine-bridges-country-club-shigeru-ban-architects__mg_1798-666x1000.jpg> [accessed 31st March 2015]


63.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Definition’, Author’s private image, 2015.

64.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Process’, Author’s private image, 2015.


66.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Pattern’, Author’s private image, 2015.

67.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Iterations 01-05’, Author’s private image, 2015.










77.‘UoM Air Studio - Case Study 2.0 Iterations 39, 45 and 50’, Author’s private image, 2015.

78.‘UoM Air Studio - Prototype 3’, Author’s private image, 2015.





83.‘UoM Air Studio - Merri Creek Locality Map’, Author’s private image, 2015.

84.‘Map of Merri Creek’, <http://www.apple.com/au/ios/maps> [accessed 21st April 2015]

85.‘UoM Air Studio - Proposal Typical Bridge Topology’, Author’s private image, 2015.

86.‘UoM Air Studio - Example Structure Detail’, Author’s private image, 2015.

1 0 5 . S T U D I O A I R . P A R T B


S T U D I O A I R . R E F E R E N C E S . 1 0 6

87.‘UoM Air Studio - Example Pattern Generation’, Author’s private image, 2015.

88.‘UoM Air Studio - Proposed Fabrication joints’, Author’s private image, 2015.

89.‘UoM Air Studio - Week 5 Task 3’, Author’s private image, 2015.



Documents

Studio Air Journal Part A + B