The Eladio Dieste Symposia · The Eladio Dieste Symposia . Edward Allen, University ofOregon . [email protected] Eladio Dieste, arguably one of the finest structural engineers

Spring 2001 Volume X No1middot

The Eladio Dieste Symposia Edward Allen University ofOregon allenarchcompuservecom

Eladio Dieste arguably one of the finest structural engineers and architects of the twentith century died last summer at the age ofeighty-four leaving a legacy ofhundreds of remarkable buildings that range from long-span industrial roofs to two of the most poetic churches ever erected all of them made ofreinforced brick and tile masonry His death occurred just weeks before a previously scheduled pair of symposia organized in his honor by Stanford Anderson ofthe Massachusetts Institute ofTechno logy (MIT) The first ofthese took place in Montevideo Uruguay Diestes home town September 26 and 27 The second was held at MIT on September 29 and 30 The programs were nearly identical but the Montevideo symposium featured a two-day tour of Diestes buildings immediately prior to the event itself

The tour alone was worth the long flight Dieste is worthy of role-model status for architecture students He worked with one material only for his entire professional life He knew it intimately He exploited its strengths and converted its weaknesses into archishytectural character He designed and built special machines to meet his constructive needs He developed special details and calculation techniques He championed the cause of regionalism in architecture and disdained the importation of styles and materials from abroad He never cloaked his structures in other materials If they were to be taken as architecture they had to make it on the inherent beauty of their funicular geometries He (continued on page 2)

The walls of the Church ofAtlantida Uruguay are straight at ground level changing to sinusoidal at the top where they join shallow reinforced brick barrel shells to fonn two-hinged arches

Connector

bullbull bullbull H

(continued from page 1) wrote thoughtful essays on engineering arshychitecture town planning craft art ecoshynomics and philosophy He worked toward a self-defined goal of cosmic economy that is closely related to the ideas embodied in Schumachers Small is Beautiful and todays green architecture He never mounted the glitzy runway ofhigh fashion

The Church of San Pablo at Duranzo Uruguay was built to replace the old nave of the church which had been destroyed by fire It is composed of folded plates of reinforced brick masonry

or sought the fame that he could have atshytained easily He just built well He also built economically His structures were built beshycause they were the cheapest he was the low bidder

Eladio Dieste built buildings that touch the human spirit at the deepest level The stunning Durazno church of San Pablo a folded-plate brick phoenix rises from the ashes ofa burned church its brick roof floatshying like a whispered prayer on an astonishshying halo ofGods own light The voluptuous Atlantida church is made of nothing but bricks and mortar-floor walls roof stairs railings-everything but the translucent alashybaster slabs and bits of Venetian glass that serve as windows His own house for a

happy family with nine is children graceshyfully sheltered with low brick barrel shells comfortably arrayed around three garden courtyards

Stanford Anderson wisely set a broad theme for the symposia scientific innovashytion in structure and construction with trashyditional materials Highlights included Mark Wests presentation of concrete formed in cloth fabric Remo Pedreschis interpretashytions of the Dieste works Martin Speths experiments with reinforced brick shells and Julius Natterers presentation ofhis own wonderful structures all of them made of timber Most moving were the papers and talks by Diestes family associates and stushydents Antonio Dieste an accomplished enshygineer in his own right Gonzalo Larrambebere chief engineer in the Dieste office and Dieste student Lucio Caceres now minister of transportation and public works for the Republic of Uruguay who gave a heartbreakingly beautiful eulogy that was equally eloquent in Spanish and Enshyglish Informal tour bus conversations ofshyfered an opportunity to get to know these and several other extraordinary people reshylated to Eladio Dieste son and office dishyrector Eduardo Dieste engineer Ariel Valmaggia and tour leader Federico Sanguinetti a young architect in the Dieste office

For those unfamiliar with Diestes work and thought the most accessible source is his article Some Reflections on Architecshyture and Construction published in Perspecta volume 27 pages 186-203 Anderson is currently editing a book that will contain numerous contributions related to Dieste to be published in 2002

Posttensioned brick barrel shells balance delicately at midspan Agroindustrias Massaro Uruguay

Spring 2001 Volume X No1

I Bruno M Franck University ofMinnesota BrunoMFranck-3tcumnedu

American structural engineers must increase their awareness of design in orshyder to successfully integrate structural concepts into architectural aspirations Structural engineers could then practice the art ofstructural design and reestabshylish it as fundamental to creating culturshyally significant buildings I hope to inishytiate discussions among academicians and professionals in architecture and structural engineering Similar discussions could engage designers from the entire technolshyogy spectrum It would also be interestshying to discuss why few American archishytects take full advantage of the qualities ofa well-designed structural system This article however focuses on reasons why American structural engineers too rarely formstructural systems worthy ofrecogshynition by the design community

Designs are successful when archishytects and engineers collaborate This colshylaboration must start in schools by reesshytablishing the lost link between architecshytural and structural design a link that reshysulted in some of the greatest structures in the world Currently architecture deshypartments do a better job ofteaching strucshytural technology than engineering departshyments do ofteaching architectural fundashymentals Engineering students are rarely exposed to architectural issues that are (mistakenly) understood by engineering faculties as irrelevant to making reliable structural systems Schools of engineershying must close this gap Design aspirations for a building come from history cultural values societal needs and design styles They encapsulate the aesthetics and sershyviceability ofa building and consequently relate to its form To understand the reashysons behind the design of most building systems engineers must understand

bull The architectural program with its implications for internal order circushylation volumes skin and structure

bull How building typology and environshymental context correlate to structural requirements

bull The influence ofarchitectural aesthetshyics on the shape location and size ofthe structural system

Collaboration between architectural and structural engineering departments is limited because engineering schools deshyvalue practice-based teaching while archishytectural schools build it into the curricushylum A typical engineering teacher develshyops an academic career with few interrupshytions to acquire professional experience The subsequent publish or perish acashydemic environment prevents tenure-track engineering faculty members from gainshying practice-based experience The immeshydiate pedagogic outcome is that applied design and construction knowledge is virshytually absent from engineering curricula Even though a key societal justification ofengineering is to identify and solve real problems and even though those very problems are the genesis ofmost creative engineering little of the corresponding knowledge appears in contemporary textshybooks and curricula

In engineering education there is a heavy reliance on analysis to teach probshylem solving Students are exposed to wellshydefined structural problems the unique solutions to which are found using speshycific engineering analysis techniques Leshygitimate research investigations using computer or laboratory-based structural models often transform into ends in themshyselves rather than being means ofmodelshying and understanding components ofan engineering system Students are seldom challenged with ill-defined design probshylems for which there may be multiple and sometimes conflicting solutions

The techniques that shape structurally efficient building systems are found in the art ofengineering design the teaching of which is rarely considered a university reshysponsibility They were familiar to Eiffel Roebling Torroja and Maillart yet they have disappeared from most engineering curricula and are seldom included in modshyern comtemporary textbooks Structural

engineering teachers have been charmed away from teaching graphic statics by the Siren-like allure offinite element programs In abandoning one for the other they lost one ofthe gems at the heart ofengineering design and its teaching graphic form findshying Graphic form finding provides the techniques to shape and therefore design a structural system that can meet both enshygineering and nonengineering requireshyments It can address

bull Architectural form clearance and design-appropriate structural depth

bull Flow of forces in plane or space and corresponding strength requirements

bull Systems with built-in forces that meet specific materials requirements

bull Geometric constraints such as the size ofmechanical systems

Most structural engineering textbooks used in the United States teach sizing of common structural materials by closely following engineering design codes The code formulas become the basic references taught to the students As a result too many engineers view the building codes as allshyencompassing repositories of engineering knowledge They should instead of intershypret them as the minima that must be met by common systems built using standard construction techniques and designed for somewhat predictable conditions For stushydents to understand the possibilities and limits set by the codes engineering educashytion must go well beyond the codes and reemphasize fundamentals

It is only by understanding architecshytural concepts and recognizing their strucshytural implications that engineers will be able to collaborate with architects to parshyticipate in the design of building systems Students who begin to understand the deeper implications ofstructural design will be able to create innovative structural forms and to engineer systems that support broader design aspirations

Connector

Alison Kwok University of Oregon akwokaaauoregonedu

How did you get started teaching technology subjects Were you a gradushyate student instructor Did you receive mentoring or specific training in methods and curriculum development Are buildshying performance evaluations and case study development part ofthe curriculum at your institution

The US Department of Educations Fund for the Improvement of Post Secshyondary Education (FIPSE) recognized the importance of these questions with a S75OOO award to (l) evaluate the effects of the Vital Signs projects on teaching learning and curricular reform (2) test and evaluate two mini-regional training sessions for faculty-teaching assistant teams in the application ofthe Vital Signs approach (3) develop and expand this efshyfort into a three-year project

Students measure illuminance at the University Art Museum in Berkeley

Difficulties in Addressing the Needs for Reform in Architectural Education

In his article in Progressive Architecshyture Can This Profession Be Saved Thomas Fisher of the University of Minshynesota looked to the legal medical and

engineering professional schools for solutions to architectural education problems His hyshypothesis is that architectural education could learn from successful strategies provided by cohort professions Fisher concluded archishytecture schools need to offer a broad range of studies They need to instruct students in reshysearch methodology and post-occupancy evaluations and to provid more training for professional practice where building diagnosshytics will be a focus of architectural activity rather than the marginal activity it is now

Beginning architecture faculty members and teaching assistants receive little or no forshymal pedagogical training They are ill preshypared to provide rich and rigorous learning environments since they often are thrown into situations where they are engaging course concepts for the first time and cannot adshyequately master the material An assistant professor typically has a year or two ofteachshying experience usually as a teaching assisshytant (TA)

Environmental technology (active and passive building systems comfort energy use daylight air quality) is often regarded as a discipline completely separate from the deshysign process left to be handled by a small pool ofqualified yet segregated experts Curshyrently more than one-quarter of all architecshyture schools in the US are conducting searches for faculty members in this area While this circumstance may be a result of a vigorous economy there are strong indicashytions that not enough qualified instructors are available Training TAs will expand the pool ofqualified teachers

Teaching assistants the backbone of many large lecture courses require but lack specialized training for technology courses Most institutions employ one or two gradushyate student TAs to help faculty members teach environmental technology courses At some institutions undergraduates (whose sale qualishyfication is having done well when they took the course) assist faculty members In a reshycent straw poll of the Society of Building Science Educators (SBSE) eighty-five pershycent of the respondents replied that they teamed with teaching assistants but most said there was no specific training to prepare their

TAs in methodology and equipment use for building analysis Faculty members reported that TAs are often underutilized and rarely participate in active discussions and activishyties

Building on the Foundation of Prior Efforts

To better prepare future teachers and arshychitects as stewards ofthe built environment Agents of Change builds on a prior curricushylarreform effort-Vital Signs and the intrinshysic value of the unique role of TAs as both students and teachers In a recent paper preshysented to the European Association for Arshychitectural Education SBSE President Walter Grondzik of Florida AampM Univershysity wrote the Vital Signs project proshyvides an excellent vehicle for expanding stushydent views of the built envirolID1ent In adshydition the project provides a structure that can enhance student communication and team planning capabilities As establishing a methodology for a site investigation is esshysentially a design problem it could also be argued that the Vital Signs project can broaden students design thinking

Evaluation We engaged an independent evaluator

to assess the effectiveness ofthe Vital Signs project in terms ofcurricular reform and imshyprovement in teaching and learning since its inception eight years ago Because of the unique curricular context of architectural education the proposed evaluation methodshyology in contrast to traditional methods of evaluation will use sense-making techniques Sense making assesses the ability of a proshygram or series of practices to transport an innovation to the curriculum through the TAs by capturing as much of the story as posshysible using a combination of quantitative and qualitative tools These tools include inshytensive narrative interviews a web-based survey ethnographies and observations to assess the regional training sessions

Experiences from the Regional Training Sessions

In two regional training sessions-one at

the University of California Berkeley the other at the University ofWisconsin Milwaushykee participants learned the basics ofdata acshyquisition and gained hands-on experience meashysuring buildings and their environments Unishyversity of Oregon graduate teaching fellows (GTFs) teaching assistants and expert SBSE faculty advisers led teams through exshyercises protocols and the case study apshyproach Each days session incorporated peershyto-peer teaching The heart of the training inshyvolves developing hypotheses questions and methodologies to carry out in a nearby buildshying In Berkeley teams investigated visual and thermal comfort at the University Art Museum In Milwaukee infiltration condensation temshyperature stratification and glare were examshyined at the office of Kubala Washatko Archishytects On returning to their home institutions the trained faculty-TA teams will engage their students in case study investigations

Nick Rajkovich aVO GTF teaches Gwen Garrison and Jennifer Rachford (AOe evaluators) how to use a compass-clinometer

Attending the training session at Berkeshyley were faculty members and teaching assisshytants from California State Polytechnic Instishytute San Luis Obispo UC Berkeley and Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria Chile It was an action packed training and we learned that two days did not allow time for discussion critique and development of hypotheses The Milwaukee training session attracted teams from Lawrence Technologishycal University University of Idaho Univershysity of Wisconsin Milwaukee University of Michigan and George Armstrong School of International Studies (K-12) This training

session demonstrated that a three-day trainshying was the right length of time to synthesize information and network Winter conditions can provide provocative building performance issues and the timing (between terms) seemed to allow faculty members to make immediate changes to the curriculum while exercises were fresh in their minds

The lack of equipment does not preclude a school from developing high quality case studies Not only has the Vital Signs project agreed to give preference for its toolkit loan program to the Agents of Change teams the Agents ofChange project will assemble starter toolkits that will be available on loan Addishytional training materials will be downloadable from the project website Case studies and exercises will be posted on course websites at participating universities and linked to the project website

Scaling Up Data from the evaluation and the two brief

training sessions will provide direction for a future proposal to expand the training to inshyclude training centers in locations such as San Francisco Washington DC and Portland cities that are easily and economically accesshysible by plane and have available institutional resources peer-to-peer training and mentoring at SBSE retreats and travel scholarships for students to national conferences to present experiences and findings

This expanded program would train 180shy240 T As and faculty members produce more than 800 case studies and engage six to tweleve thousand architecture students This cadre oftrained TAs not only would train other TAs upon graduation they would become part of an expanding pool of direly needed applishycants for faculty positions in architectural techshynology These TAs and faculty members would be trained in architectural education that integrates technology and design As future arshychitects our students would be better able to align design intent with building performance Stay tuned with fingers crossed for news about the proposal

~$Msectsectf$- ~~ t~~~f~~~imiddotm1~~mmiddot middotmiddot~~t~-- ~~j1~~t~m~middot- ~t~~-middotmiddot middotltmiddot1~~~M~~~middot ~-- ~fui~~illr$j~~-middotmiddot ~i~reg~~~~~m~~~r~tmiddotmiddotmiddot -middotmiddotmiddotti~~~t~middotlttmmmiddotltmiddotj$amp$P4 ~i-lt~~~

Connector

Steve Badanes University ofWashington sbadanesuwashingtonedu

The standard lament of technology teachers is that we rarely get to teach our subjects in a meaningful design-based conshytext and that unless there is an immediate need for the knowledge we impart students will not retain it Design-build studios which have become popular in recent years at many schools provide an excellent venue for the assimilation of technical knowledge Inforshymation is acquired on a need-to-know basis and immediately applied to real world situshyations

I have taught a number ofdesign-build exercises where individual students or small groups tackle a series ofdesign problems in various media-wood concrete metal etc and fabricate their solutions Before beginshyning construction legible dimensioned working drawings must be signed off Howshyever edits and additions to the object are acceptable as long as they incorporate the original design concepts Hands-on conshystruction inevitably yields new information which impacts design decisions

These individual exercises are popular with students They are responsible for deshysign and consequently become more inshyvolved I avoid the difficulties and extra work inherent in a project that is designed and built by the entire group However I feel that group projects are worth the extra effort Group projects can be larger more service-oriented and provide experiences with real clients Architecture has always been a service profession but it has tradishytionally served only those who can afford it By working for clients who do not normally have access to architects students are exshyposed to community outreach and to the notion of society as our real client Many former students have entered careers in pubshylic service working for non-profits or comshymunity design centers

The traditional design studio reinforces some unfortunate assumptions about creativshyity most notably that practice is a solitary endeavor Students usually design indepenshydently and learn to defend their ideas against criticism In the real world however little happens without collaboration Teamwork is needed to achieve common goals

Bradner Gardens Park

We do our initial design work during studio time in groups using a consensus method with a facilitator (usually me) and a written group memory All voices are equal discussion proceeds by going around the table with all voicing pros and cons and we never vote We break into subgroups with drawings and models moving from group to group (people move as well) so that all share ownership in the design In my first attempt at a group design-build studio at the Unishyversity ofMiami in 1983 we used a compeshytition to decide what to build This resulted in enormous pressure on the winner and bitshyterness amongst the losers making the conshystruction phase a difficult experience The consensus method has resulted in more egalishytarian designs as well as shared responsibilshyity and more enthusiasm during construcshytion

Most students have never designed anyshything that has been built and many have no previous construction experience They learn that by working together our projects can happen if they commit themselves to making them happen They gain confidence in the power ofcommitment not just in deshysign and building We deal with design isshysues in a practical way in this studio and we learn building techniques and detailing but the real lessons involve self-motivation courage self-reliance perseverance teamshywork and service to others

Ive been involved in many design-build studios in diverse programs and locations

This article describes the studio Ive done for ten years during spring quarter at the University of Washington in Seattle The quarter is eleven weeks including exam week and there are usually ten to thirteen students in the studio which is open to undergraduate seniors and graduate stushydents in their final year Damon Smith a graduate of the universitys master of arshychitecture program and a designer-builder with SHED in Seattle co-teaches I feel its important for the students to complete the project(The clients appreciate this too) so I select something that we can finish in eleven weeks I choose a client in the fall and restrict potential clients to non-profit organizations Clients are responsible for securing a grant for materials Typical budshygets range from $5 to $1500000 I someshytimes help with the grant process

The class meets Monday Wednesday Friday afternoons and on Saturdays during construction If we fall behind Sundays also become workdays and exam week is always there for a final push if necessary On the first day students introduce themshyselves telling about their construction exshyperience or lack of and explaining their personal goals for the class The rest ofthe afternoon is spent on three short individual projects each using a sheet of 85 x 11 pashyper to build a bridge a tower and a founshydation followed by a tour of the shop foshycusing on safety issues An individual deshysign-build problem using another sheet material plywood is assigned for the folshylowing Monday This gives them something to build on their own some experience in the shop and an idea ofwhat they can do

On Wednesday we generally go to the site possibly visiting some past projects on the way to meet with the clients and commit to returning Monday ofweek three with a preliminary design We return to the studio share our initial reactions and if theres time begin group exercises I alshyways make a little speech about the imporshytance ofcoming to a group decision I genshyerally say that ifthe goal is to build someshything really cool maybe I should design it and they can build it This of course is toshy

tally unacceptable so its a short step to get the class to realize that it would be equally silly to build the idea ofa single class memshyber I split the class into two groups and ask each group to make lists of both the posishytive and negative aspects of working in groups This takes about twenty minutes We then list these on a large piece ofbutcher paper taking suggestions one at a time alshyternating between groups until theyre all listed Then they split into two different groups and make another list-how to reinshyforce the good qualities ofgroups and how to mitigate the bad ones This also takes about twenty minutes and the results are also listed on a large sheet of paper These lists are on hand in the studio during the group design process and represent a conshystant reminder of shared values Im inshydebted to Joel Loveland for this exercise He did it with my class in 1988 and Ive since done it with many groups Itgives stushydents a chance to focus on the group proshycess in the abstract before dealing with the problem at hand

Design work begins by splitting the class into three groups and having them brainstorm After a few hours (or whatever time period we agree on) we gather around a central table and discuss initial ideas Of-

Danny Woo Garden photo by Jared Polesky

ten well have a scribe list important points of agreement (group memory) We search for places of commonality and usushyally we can agree on quite a few We then split into different groups (very important) and continue designing using the new comshymon ground as givens The process continshyues as long as is necessary to reach consenshysus on the site plan structures etc We only work during class time and we try to move into two groups and finally into one My role is facilitator technical advisor and advocate for the client Its important for the instructor not to have a design agenda Its okay to be a part of the team and make an occasional tough decision (especially those concerning maintenance issues which usually become apparent after the students are down the road) but the design must come out of the group A neutral attitude commands the respect ofthe class and helps to synthesize ideas that appear different to their proponents but are really similar in many aspects

We review the plywood projects as a group on Monday of week two the atmoshysphere is informal the criticism construcshytive Usually by the middle or end of the second week we have an agreed upon dishyrection and can spend the weekend preparshying a presentation for Monday (models are best for non-architect clients) At this point the class begins to function as a team or small design-build office We do not present more than one proposal to the clients and let them choose We may have called them several times to clatify issues but when it comes time to present we are unified in our approach to their problem

Almost everything in an architectural studio is about communication drawings models critiques and presentations Our focus is on communication within the group finding common ground setting agendas priorities and managing time-basically communicating more efficiently The client and community meetings as well as occashysional presentations to city agencies require additional communication skills We reshyhearse our presentations since a polished effort helps mitigate doubts that students

have enough experience to build quality public projects The meeting usually goes well There are often some good suggestions which are easily incorporated into the scheme We spend the rest of the week doshying construction drawings engineering material take offs and pricing etc with the goal of breaking ground during the fourth week This gives us seven weeks to comshyplete the construction

For the sake of efficiency the class breaks into groups during the construction phase Group membership is usually selfshyselected however we all work together on big items like a concrete pour and students are encouraged to spend time on all aspects of construction to gain as much experience as possible There is an inevitable hierarchy that arises on site as students with more building experience take the lead and teach those with less but we have a group site meeting before each class to cover any isshysues that arise Students are responsible for material procurement fabrication and scheduling Damon and I work on site with the students but dont hog all the fun work using the opportunity to teach building methshyods and tricks I generally give the studepts a lower budget number than what is really available because of inevitable cost overshyruns Usually someone in the class takes on the role of bookkeeper although I like to keep a close eye on costs as well

Weve always finished and never gone over budget Low-income clients are genershyally grateful which is rewarding for the stushydents A ribbon cutting ceremony is usually scheduled to coincide with graduation so that parents and family can attend Everyshyone involved benefits Students work with real clients and learn something about buildshying Clients who cant even afford the mashyterials reap the fruits of student labor Corshyporate sponsors polish their image by doshynating the materials and the city and unishyversity receive credit for community service contributions without having to do very much Community based design-build stushydios are really about the power of commitshyment service to others and the lasting satshyisfaction of group achievement

Frederick L Walters University of Oregon flwarchopenorg

As a practicing architect focusing on exshyisting structures I spend a lot of time field surveying assessing and evaluating elements of the built environment Several years ago I was asked by the University ofOregon to teach some graduate level courses in the historic preservation program One course addressed the technology ofhistoric masonry structures ie stone brick and terra cotta The second course addressed a methodology for conductshying an assessment and evaluation of an existshying structure

My experience as a teacher was nil The best I could offer the students was the experishyence oftwenty-five years offieldwork While the classes are structured somewhat around the usual twice weekly seminars supported by lectures slides and technical handouts it is fieldwork that offers the best opportunity for the students to see or experience what one is trying to explain One can show slides of various brick patterns or stonework and the student just sees the slide A fIeld survey alshylows the students to make their own images In his book A River Runs Through It Norman MacLean describes the following conversashytion with his brother while out fly-fishing

He said they areeeding on drowned yellow stone flies

1 asked him How did you think that out

All there is to thinking he said is seeshying something noticeable which makes you see something you werent noticing which makes you see something that isn f even visible

To give the student the opportunity to make his or her own image and therefore beshygin to see things that were not visible beshyfore I know of no better way than to execute hand sketches on a field sheet Hand sketchshying in the field is more than an exercise in simple recording of what one sees it begins to make things visible that are not often apshyparent For example in the masonry course observation sheets were made for four historic masonry buildings on the campus with conshystruction dates ranging from 1876 to 1928 Each building exhibited a different type of brick coursing masonry assembly loading

bearing wall versus veneer use of arch work and other aspects of historic masonry techshyniques On the observation sheets the students were asked to record such information as brick size vertical measurement of eight courses and joints types ofbonds used on the structure locations where queen and king closhysures were used belt courses use of rubbed bricks types oflintels and sill types ofarches use ofmolded brick use ofspecial brick faces (ie shiner rowlock soldier sailor) type and character of cornice use of stone The inforshymation was augmented with not -to-scale field sketches ofelevations and theoretical sections ofeach element

Grades were not given on the precise acshycuracy ofdrawing or the accuracy of the secshytion (for example students were asked to try and surmise how the bricks were laid in the wall to achieve the character of say a brick cornice) The mere fact that they were in the field recording and drawing their own obsershyvations made much of the material in class more revealing and understandable

Brick observations by ParimaAmnuaywattana

A second exercise in the masonry class required the assessment and evaluation ofthe fayade ofan historic masonry structure Teams of two students were required to research the history of a building conduct an assessment of its existing masonry elements complete with sketches of all pertinent aspects and evaluate the present condition of the fayade Students had to address the original materishyals the critical physical aspects and perforshymance ofthe materials used in the system how they were assembled how they were originally meant to perform what changes have ocshycurred and how are they performing currently Conducting the field survey and making the field sketches were the primary elements of

11 Cornice

~ clampI4u

Brick observations by Parima Amnuaywattana

the exercise By the time a team of students had for example field sketched each piece of terra cotta on the four story building detailshying where cracks exist glaze is lost or mortar joints failing and then coalescing this inforshymation into a single sketch they begin to see things which were invisible when they started

In the class on condition assessment and evaluation a single structure was the subject ofthe course While the classroom time was a three-hour seminar once a week the students also had to participate in forty-eight hours of field survey work The goal was for the class to collectively produce a report roughly one hundred pages in length supplemented with drawings that addressed the major elements of the exterior envelope of the building roof system wall system fenestration building appendages (chimneys balconies etc) founshydation wall system and intersections amp tershyminations As part ofthe initial fieldwork the students were given an introductory walking tour around the exterior of the building and a tour of the interior To get the students accusshytomed to making observations and sketching they were asked to make a sketch of the floor plan and roofplan from memory immediately after the end ofthe tour The t100r plan had to show the basic room arrangements door loshycations and swings and window locations and type The roof plan had to show all ridges valleys penetrations and chimneys and locashytions of all downspouts if present One can easily say in the classroom that observation ofexisting conditions is very crucial in condishytion assessment but field survey exercises make the point much clearer After the plans the students were asked to make quick (not

more that fifteen minute) sketches of each elshyevation Again this was done to make each student look closely at the building It also provided the basis for the next step in the class Pairs ofstudents selected the basic systems of the exterior envelope to research assess and evaluate in more depth for the final report Their field sketches provided a basis for a disshycussion on what elements were in their sysshytems and for which they were responsible Once teams were comfortable with their role they concentrated on producing field sketches for their area of responsibility The masonry team identified the basic brick bonding patshyterns any specialty patterns the presence and character ofbelt courses arches window surshyrounds etc Understanding brick patterns combined with simple wall thickness measureshyments can often provide valuable information on the nature of a wall (whether veneer cavshyity cavity veneer solid load-bearing cavity load-bearing etc) which allows a greater unshyderstanding of how the system was meant to perform and how it is performing now This can all be taught in the classroom to a certain extent Allowing the student the chance to notice what she or he didnt see at first is easier to do in the field and can often make a more lasting impression

In the Fall 2000 issue of Connector Edshyward Allen said the combined aspects of arshychitecture are magical For students ofhistoric preservation a great way to share in that unshyderstanding is to have them observe sketch and describe what they see in the field Once they are asked to notice something closely by trying to draw it and noticing something then makes them see something that isnt even visshyible then the magic often emerges by itself

Connector

Kirk Martini University ofVirginia martinivirginiaedu

The arrival ofeasy-to-use highly graphic and completely free structural analysis software raises the question of how this software can and should be used in introductory courses By definition students in their first structures course dont have the knowledge to apply the softshyware skillfully in design but I have found that it is possible to use the software effectively in teaching several important lessons This article describes an exercise to introduce computer analysis to students in their first structures course

The Setup I give two lectures on the underlying theory of computer analysis introducing the tenninology of nodes elements boundary conditions and sign conventions Using RISA-2D and a computer projector I demonstrate examples I also emphasize the limits of linear analysis and give an example where the computer gives demonstrably wrong answers These lectures are followed by an assignment where students interpret printed computer output without using the computer drawing free body diagrams and identifying maximum displacements The objective is to make sure they understand the meaning of the numbers and pictures the computer proshyduces By this point most students are ready to get their hands on the program

Lab Day Students working in pairs have two tasks to perform during the ninety-minute lab session The first is a tutorial that I wrote modeling a very simple structure it shows step-byshystep what each screen looks like and what the results should be The second is a simple design problem

Consider the conceptual design of a structure to suspend a platform from a cliff face according t9 the geometry shown below

Il1 clifffacc

30 30I ~~~~~onnsNI-___--~ (q I platfonn I

fl I I The platform is to be supported by suspension rods that attach to the structure you will design cantilevered from the cliff face over the platform Assume each hanger rod exerts a force of20 kips (combined dead and live load) Use RISA to design the strucshyture using these highly simplified criteria

bull The maximum downward deflection of the structure should not exceed 2 inches bull No single horizontal reaction should exceed 60 kips bull No single vertical reaction should exceed 30 kips bull All members should be steel Wl4x74 wide flanges

Attempt to modify your design to make it the lightest structure in the class that meets the performance criteria and constraints

These constraints are of course highly artificial in particular they completely ignore the issue ofmember sizing This is a deliberate move to emphasize thinking about the relationship between structural configuration and behavior As students finish the tutorial and begin to deshysign the room fills with a buzz of conversation Typically the first attempt does not work Each pair of students must then change the structure to improve its performance Students typically analyze ten or more proposals by the end of the ninety-minute session and have engaged in

extended discussions (sometimes arguments) about structural concepts

The Follow-up Following the lab I spend time clarifying the following important points and limitations

The problem highlighted some important aspects of design bull Design is a process of search within a constrained space bull Design is iterative and cyclic not linear and direct bull Some things just dont work

The problem had good and bad points Good Allows broad exploration of design space focusing on behavior rather than

calculation details Bad The problem was pure model manipulation without any sense ofa real structure

and how it would be detailed for construction braced in three dimensions or how the structure would look in an architectural context It was a stress invaders video game

Good The problem allowed you to discover why trusses are used and how to look carefully at the assumptions and constraints of a problem

Bad The constraints were very incomplete since they did not include checking the strength of the members particularly buckling

Good The problem offers an opportunity to show the value of back-of-an-envelope calculations to make decisions about overall form Well look at this

I then go to the board to explain successful approaches Designs with lightest weight typishycally have a profile similar to those shown below

I derive the moment diagram for the load and span condition and show that the profile of successful structures is similar to the shape ofthe moment diagram in that its depth varies as the moment diagram varies The moment diagram can also be used to calculate the required depth of the structure at the support That depth times the maximum allowable horizontal reaction should equal the maximum moment for the cantilever This calculation is an example of a backshyof-the-envelope calculation that an experienced engineer would do interpreting the global statshyics of the situation to estimate bounds and overall form

Conclusions Ninety minutes is not much time to learn a computer program but learning to use the computer is not the main objective of this exercise Students develop familiarity with the program which allows me to use it to explain the behavior of trusses arches and frames Beshyyond the computer the exercise demonstrates in miniature that structural design is an iterative process ofgeneration evaluation and critical assessment a point that can be difficult to demonshystrate in an introductory course Ultimately this small example illustrates my personal stance toward calculating and computing We learn to calculate not to do complex calculations but to understand behavior and make informed high-level decisions leaving the more detailed calcushylations to the computer Each tool is more powerful used in conjunction with the other

Yr tmiddotOlfitwmiddotmiddotmiddot 4- middotmiddotmiddotl

A Forum for Teachers ofTechnology in Schools ofArchitecture

UNIVERSITY OF OREGON Department ofArchitecture 1206 University of Oregon Eugene OR 97403-1206

copy 200 I University of Oregon

An equal-opportunity affirmative-action institution committed to cultural diversity and compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act This publication will be made available in accessible formats upon request (541) 346-3656

Connector

Christine Theodoropoulos University ofOregon ctheodordarkwinguoregonedu

lntennediate studios are an ideal setting to address the deshysign ofbuilding technologies yet it can be difficult to convince students to focus on technical possibilities In their experience the design process usually begins with a site and a program The analysis of these givens uncovers so many issues to resolve that technical decisions are often delayed until the concluding weeks of the tenn when they compete with the time crunch of final presentations

Designing backwards is an instructional strategy that deshylays the introduction ofa building application until students have creatively addressed other challenges At the University of Oregon a studio on tensile structures taught by Scott Howe and Christine Theodoropoulos began by developing an understandshying of tensile structures through models and case studies Stushydent teams then designed a building system that could accomshymodate a variety of space types Specific sites and programs were not introduced until the final weeks of the tenn when stushydents tested their building systems in response to one of several design competitions

Collapsing frame with tensile membranes by Adam M Olsen

Volume X Number 1 Spring 2001_01