Yao jianqing (peter) 615245 finaljournal

AIR STUDIO -ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN- 2015 SEMESTER 1 JIANQING (PETER) YAO 615245

INTRODUCTION ------------ ------------------------------------------------------------- 4GET CLOSE TO DIGITAL DESIGN ----------------------------------------------- 5PART A CONCEPTUALISATION ----------------------------------------------- 7A.1 DESIGN FUTURING - ------------------------------------------------------------10PRECEDENT 1: Pearl River Tower ............ ..........................................................................10PRECEDENT 2: Shanghai Tower............... ..........................................................................14

A.2 DESIGN COMPUTATION ------------------------------------------------------18A.3 Composition/Generation ----------------------------------------------------- 26A.4 Conclusion ------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 30A.5 Learning Outcomes - ------------------------------------------------------------31A.6 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches --------------------------------------32Document reference (Part A): --------------------------------------------- 34Image reference: ----------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 35

PART B ----------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 39CRITERIA DESIGN -------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 39B. 1 Research Field ------ ----------------------------------------------------------- 40B. 2 Case Study 1.0 ------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 42LAVA - Green Void 2008 ...........................................................................................42

B. 3 Case Study 2.0 ------ ----------------------------------------------------------- 52Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surface - Schwarz’ P surface ............................... 54

Table Of Contents

B. 4 Technique: Development -------------------------------------------------------58B. 5 Technique: Prototypes -------------------------------------------------------64B. 6 Technique: Proposal -------------------------------------------------------------68B. 7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes --------------------------------------- 72B. 8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches --------------------------------------- 74Document Reference (Part B): ----------------------------------------------- 76Technical Software Used: ------------------------------------------------------- 76Image Reference: ---------- ------------------------------------------------------------- 77

PART C DETAILED DESIGN ------------------------------------------------------- 79C 1. Design Concept ------ ------------------------------------------------------------- 81C 1.1 Site Relocation ----- ------------------------------------------------------------- 82C 1.2 Design Proposal --- -------------------------------------------------------------84C 2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes ---------------------------------------98C 3. Final Detail Model --- ----------------------------------------------------------- 108C 4. Learning Objectives and Outcomes ------------------------------------- 122Document Reference (Part C): --------------------------------------------- 128Technical Software Used: ----------------------------------------------------- 128

4 CONCEPTUALISATION

INTRODUCTION

“WHO AM I?

I AM PETER YAO!”

My name is Jianqing (Peter) Yao, and currently enrolled in Bachelor of Environments, majoring in architecture in the University of Melbourne.

As a Chinese citizen, I decide to go abroad to deepen my knowledge and widen insight after finishing my secondary study. When it comes to the tertiary study, I dream to be an architect which is influenced by my father who is fully-experienced in architectural and construction field. Here as a full-time architecture student, I have followed on this track for 3 years from fundamental knowledge of architecture-related terminology to complex parametric architectural design by using computer-aided design software like Rhinoceros 5 with accompany of Grasshopper.

Unlike others who might be professional on using computer programs to produce digital architectural design, I am a beginner on using architectural design software which means all the works I have done before are paper-based and physically sketched rather than digital or parametrical. However, after watching how Rhinoceros and Grasshopper works on digital parametric design, I have grown a great interest in such new field of architectural design, and I am sure that I will certainly enjoy the learning in architectural design studio: Air.

CONCEPTUALISATION 5

FIG.0: EXAMPLE OF SHOWING THE RHINO & GRASSHOPPER ON COMPUTER SCREEN

To my knowledge of digital architecture, computer

programs such as Rhinoceros and Grasshopper are able to build model on a digital screen that can show all the properties of a design such as dimensions, shade areas, materiality and variability of all possible changes on a single design. Unlike traditional architectural design, computer aided design provides changeable possibilities which can vary the design by simply change the

parameter or data into the system, the design will convert into a new form. The Grasshopper here is the plug-in program working with Rhinoceros that Rhinoceros displays the image of the design while Grasshopper changes the parameters of that design.

Digital design is largely involved parametric thinking. As Oxman and Oxman (2014: 3) explain, “parametric design thinking focuses

upon a logic of associative and dependency relationships between objects and their parts-and-whole relationships”, and numerous variations of the design can be generated by changing the input parametric value.

Some of the extraordinary digital architectural design products that I know are Shanghai Tower and Pearl River Tower.

GET CLOSE TO DIGITAL DESIGN

6 CONCEPTUALISATION

PART A CONCEPTUALISATION

A.1 DESIGN FUTURING

• Precedent work: Pearl River Tower• Precedent work: Shanghai Tower

CONCEPTUALISATION 7

FIG.1.1 PEARL RIVER TOWER, GUANGZHOU, GUANGDONG, CHINA, 2013

10 CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.1.2 PEARL RIVER TOWER, GUANGZHOU, GUANGDONG, CHINA 2013

A.1 DESIGN FUTURING PRECEDENT 1: Pearl River Tower

FIG.1.3 DESIGN OF WIND FLOW THROUGH THE DYNAMIC BODY OF THE BUILDING, PEARL RIVER TOWER, GUANGZHOU, GUANGDONG, CHINA 2013

Pearl River Tower is located in Guangzhou, Guangdong, in China. This modern architecture that has 71 floors and 309 meters high is well-known worldwide by its original intention of design which is sustainability.

This commercial building is designed to maximize energy

efficiency and also to respond the call of sustainability. As a result, Pearl River Tower is built with wind turbines, solar panel, photovoltaic cells and energy-efficient heating and cooling ceilings which make this skyscraper one of the most environmentally friendly buildings in the world.

In order to achieve the goal of neo-energy concept, architects are trying to use as much renewable energy as possible. The dynamic body of the building with two openings at functioning

CONCEPTUALISATION 11

FIG.1.4 WIND TURBINE GENERATORS ARE PLACED AT MECHANICAL FLOOR OF THE BUILDING TO GENERATE ELECTRICITY FOR THE BUILDING. PEARL RIVER TOWER, GUANGZHOU, GUANGDONG, CHINA 2013

FIG.1.5 THE CONCEPT OF WIND TURBINE. THE TWO OPENINGS ON THE FACADE OF THE BUILDING FORM THE PATTERN OF WIND FLOW TO MAXIMIZE THE POWER OF WIND. PEARL RIVER TOWER, GUANGZHOU, GUANGDONG, CHINA 2013

floors allows wind to go through the building generating electricity. The whole façade of the building contains solar panel which uses solar energy as the provider of AC.

As one of the most energy saving commercial building, it is undeniable that Pearl River Tower is a revolutionary figure in architectural field by largely using renewable energy comparing with traditional architecture which

requires artificial energy supply.

Due to the growing concern of climate change, the concept of sustainability has been strongly emphasized. According to Dunne and Raby (2013: 2), “[f]aced with huge challenges such as overpopulation, water shortages and climate change, designers feel an overpowering urge to work together to fix them…”. Clearly, the theory of climate change is embedded in this project and this project is one of the human

actions against challenges in current world.

This architecture design provides a great idea about how renewable energy can be used through the mechanical function of a building. Pearl River Tower reveals the future possibilities on green energy use not only for the on-going energy consumption but also the building materials.


FIG.1.6: SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA, 2008-PRESENT



FIG.1.7 PERSPECTIVE EFFECT PICTURE OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

A.1 DESIGN FUTURING PRECEDENT 2: Shanghai Tower

One of the most extraordinary on-going high-rise projects,

Shanghai Tower, is going to be the second tallest skyscraper in the world after the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. The Shanghai Tower is a 124-floor and as tall as 632 meters skyscraper. According to Zeljic, AIA and Leed AP (2010: 1), the tower is designed based on triangle base and extruded from that base to form an organic curved surface. The tower is vertically rotated about “120 degrees and scaling at 55%

rate exponentially”. As a multi-functioning commercial building, Shanghai Tower portrays the same concept as Pearl River Tower which is Shanghai Tower’s “self-sustaining” (Zeljic, AIA and Leed AP 2010: 1) and Pearl River Tower’s “zero-energy” (SOM 2014: 36).

Being sustainable and environmentally friendly has become the current main gist for the civil development. Shanghai Tower gathers all different types

of users/people into a vertical city as it includes “office, boutique office, luxury boutique hotel, themed retail, entertainment and cultural venues at the podium, and the observation experience at the tower’s pinnacle” (Zeljic, AIA and Leed AP 2010: 2).

In designing this tower, the irregular shape of the body is a revolutionary challenge for the group as they have to calculate the exact value for the stability. To figure out the value, they did numerous investigations on the building structure. The figures on the next page show a brief presentation about loadbearing structure by using Rhinoceros and Grasshopper. Shanghai Tower shows its importance not only by holding the world’s second tallest high-rise laurel but also the new technology of double glazing curtain wall of the building façade which results in high energy efficiency through the whole building (Zeljic, AIA and Leed AP 2010: 10). Due to the challenges of climate change, the amount of natural resources is declining at an increasing rate. Energy conservation has to take into account because the building is preferable only when it saves natural environment.

The investigation the architects did is a great case for the future high-rises if they need to find out how to stabilize a more than 600-meter high tower. Indeed, the Shanghai Tower is a great design as it not only pleases our eyes but also innovates new design technologies for others to use for reference.


FIG.1.8 WIND TUNNEL STUDY ROTATION MODELS OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

FIG.1.9 WIND TUNNEL STUDY SCALING MODEL OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

FIG.1.10 GRASSHOPPER MODEL OF THE CWSS OF THE CROWN OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

FIG.1.11 PARAMETRIC STUDIES OF THE SCALING OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

FIG.1.13 MAIN STRUCTURE AND BUILDING SYSTEMS DIAGRAM OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA

FIG.1.12 PART OF THE FULL CWSS MODEL OF SHANGHAI TOWER, SHANGHAI, CHINA



A.2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

• Precedent work: Shanghai Tower• Precedent work: Riyadh 5 Star Hotel


A.2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

FIG 2.1 S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, Francesco Borromini.

FIG 2.2 San Lorenzo, Guarino Guarini.

Computational design has become an essential assistant

to design process in architectural field after computer was introduced and used in industries. According to Oxman and Oxman (2014: 2), with the help of computing technologies, “the expanding relationship between the computer and architecture … defines a digital continuum form design to production, from form generation to fabrication design”. This suggests that any types of design process can be transformed from a paper-based process to a more virtualized platform such as computer file. This transformation not only reduces the workload of design process but also the flexibility of that process. Unlike the traditional design which requires a huge amount of handwork and labor because one single mistake may result in redoing the whole process, computation design allows designers to make any kind of changes by only changing the parameter of that certain program in this process.

Additionally, computing further enhances the quality of representation of the designing process. In prehistory of Italy, the theory of algorithmic procedure was used by some great architects in their works, such as Francesco Borromini’s S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane (FIG 2.1) and Guarino Guarini’s San Lorenzo in Turin (FIG 2.2), with extremely complicated geometry and trigonometric functions. However, in the present, accompanying with computer-aid design programs, designing elements such as

curves or any kind of abstract shapes can be constructed easily and progressively showing the change of patterns and all the possibilities of a single design. Clearly, computing booms the creativity of designing process (FIG 2.3).

Since today’s designs tend to be more conceptualized rather than practical if we only focus on the idea of design, computing,

“Relation between creation and destruction is not a problem when a resource is renewable, but it’s a disaster when it is not.”------Fry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 4


FIG 2.3 Possibilities that computing generates for a single project of design. Source: OBJECT-E.NET

actually, does re-define our designing practice. As Oxman and Oxman (2014: 4) state, “[i]t is the period during which many of the leading architectural and structural engineering practices … began to form their own internal multidisciplinary research units that developed expertise in exploiting computational geometry in the mediated generation and analysis of digital designs.” It is true that computing has the ability to model designer’s idea and make it in a three-dimensional shape which facilitates both the designer and the audience to observe the idea at 360 degrees instead of reading black-white papers.

Besides that, computing, nowadays, is also used on testing the design whether it is practical,

constructible and rational or not. The majority of the current architectural design projects have mountains of research works as the foundation of the design such as Burj Khalifa in Dubai and 2 precedent I mentioned earlier the Pearl River Tower and Shanghai Tower. All of the design processes of these giant

“For the first time perhaps, architectural design might be aligned with neither formalism nor rationalism but with intelligent form and traceable creativity.”----Terzidis, Kostas (2006). Algorithmic Architecture (Boston, MA: Elsevier), p. xi

projects are computerized and calculated though elaborate plan on computers. Certainly, for modern architecture, computing re-defines our practice on the one hand and create potentials of designer’s theoretical ideas on the other hand.


“Computational thinking is the thought processes involved in formulating problems and their solutions so that the solutions are represented in a form that can be effectively carried out by an information-processing agent.”----Jan Cuny, Larry Snyder, and Jeannette M. Wing, “Demystifying Computational Thinking for Non Computer Scientists,” work in progress, 2010

In such a digital-centric era, computing and the theoretical ideas of human act in synergy to combat the threat of climate change while sustainability is the solution for this issue. It has been argued by Terzidis (2009: 20) saying that “it is possible to claim that a designer’s creativity is limited by very programs that are supposed to free their imagination”. This suggests that computing is not able to create new idea or solution because computer programs are set by program-writers based on human intelligence. As sustainability is an abstract concept, it requires the scientific help which works better by computing because designers need to find the critical point or threshold from a series of possibilities. Kalay (2004: 3) argues that:

“If we could find a way to take advantage of the

abilities of computers where ours fall short, and use our own abilities where computers’ fall short, we would create a very powerful symbiotic design system: computers will contribute their superb rational and search abilities, and we humans will contribute all the creativity and intuition needed to solve design problems.”

Computational technology allows designers to model and test their design on computer before trying to make the physical model or even start the construction mission which not only saves material but also the most importantly, time. The Shanghai Tower (FIG 2.4)as mentioned in Part A is the practice of this advantage. Computing allows the architect group of Shanghai Tower

FIG 2.4 Selection of possible and critical values from a group of potentials for Shanghai Tower, Source: Gensler.


“Algorithmic thinking is the ability to understand, execute, evaluate, and create algorithms.” ----Wayne Brown, Introduction to Algorithmic Thinking

to model the building structure through BIM (Building Information Modelling) which efficiently prevents the structure collisions (FIG 2.5). Building Information Modelling is computer-based technique helping designers to investigate and test the load, structure, critical threshold of the product by physically and virtually modelling the design. While designing the Shanghai Tower, Xia and Peng (2014: 20) claim that BIM modelling as a team member provides a great help to their design team in construction process because it is BIM which resolve the problem of structural collisions. Clearly, computation provides possibility on the range of conceivable and achievable geometrics.

In addition to the benefits of computing design of body

FIG 2.5 BIM Modelling of Shanghai Tower. Source: Gensler.

structure, computation also plays an essential role in design the performance of buildings. Taking Riyadh 5 Star Hotel project in Saudi Arabia (SOM 2014: 30-31) as an example, which is designed to be a highly advanced high-rise reducing a great amount of water and energy use while maintaining

its performance. According to SOM (2014: 30), the design of the Riyadh 5 Star Hotel emphasizes the sustainable use of water and energy. As a consequence, “waste treatment system” is planned in this project so that waste and gray water can be reused for flushing etc. Meanwhile, the idea


of this sustainable engineering is modelled in computer showing the performance of this building (FIG 2.7, 2.8, and 2.9). Indeed, with the assist of computing, these invisible factors such as energy and water use, anti-seismic degree that can be formulized and tested.

Apart from the contribution of computation to design process, one of the outstanding benefits of computation is to “extend [designer]’s abilities to deal with highly complex situations” (Peters 2013: 10). Furthermore, Sean Ahlquist and Achim Menges (2011, cited in Peters 2013: 10) emphasize that computation allows groups of data to negotiate and interact in order to produce several new complex form and structure. Such innovation by computing offers designers a great number of choices to a single project which further improves the quality of architectural theory.

FIG 2.6 The Riyadh 5 Star Hotel, Riyadh, Source: SOM


FIG 2.7 Light study of Riyadh 5 Star Hotel Project. Source: SOM

FIG 2.8 Light study of Riyadh 5 Star Hotel Project. Source: SOM

FIG 2.9 Illuminance Study of Riyadh 5 Star Hotel Project. Source: SOM




A.3 Composition/Generation

• Precedent work: Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China.• Precedent work: Metropol Parasol, Spain.


A.3 Composition/Generation

Although it has been said by Frazer (2006: 208-212)

that “design computation is still only seen by many as ‘just a tool’ and remote from the real business of creative design…”, the contemporary projects show that designers in architectural field are not limited in creativity but a new move towards the symbiotic relationship between human power and computer program. As an increasing number of big projects design by using computation procedure, algorithmic thinking are emphasized as the predominant knowledge base for new understanding of design. As Peters (2013: 10) defines that algorithmic thinking is to think forwardly to generate a new order and option of a program based on knowing and understanding the

existing algorithmic instructions.

Galaxy SOHO in Beijing designed by Zaha Hadid has become an outstanding landmark in Beijing’s CBD. Zaha Hadid discards all the traditional rules of Chinese architecture but have a strong interpretation of nature and reflection of Chinese culture. Galaxy SOHO revels a fluid and soft movement connecting each part of the building by stretched bridges. The building is inspired by the ancient Chinese terraced rice field forming multiple layers (Galaxy SOHO official website). Such a way of design is to script the Chinese culture into an architectural way of representation.

“When architects have a sufficient understanding of algorithmic concepts, when we no longer need to discuss the digital as something different, then computation can become a true method of design for architecture.“----Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 12

FIG 3.1 Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.

FIG 3.2 Shy view of Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.


FIG 3.3 Courtyard view of Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.

FIG 3.4 Interior view of Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.

FIG 3.5 Site plan of Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.

FIG 3.6 parametric design of Galaxy SOHO, Beijing, China. Source: Zaha Hadid Architects.


FIG 3.7 Metropol Parasol, Seville, Spain. Source: Wikipedia.

FIG 3.8 Night view of Metropol Parasol, Seville, Spain. Source: Wikipedia.


Another precedent project is the Metropol Parasol designed

by J. Mayer H. Architects in Spain 2011. As the largest wood structure in the world consisting 6 giant timber parasols spanning at a great distance, Metropol Parasol is a stunning case illustrating how parametric design works

and how fantastic the outcome it can be. The algorithmic thinking and parametric design of this project produce a great fluid transition from roots to the edge. Everything in this design is in their full function (tension and compression) which results in an stable position. Moreover, such

parametric design allows the facilitation of construction and deconstruction.


A.4 Conclusion

Based on the research of several precedent

projects, architecture is clearly becoming the product of computing program. With the booming development of technologies, computer-aided design contributes a great potential to

the contemporary architectural design. Algorithmic thinking and parametric design emphasize the pattern of design which allows it to change the shape at a certain rate by inputting different parametric values. Due to such

convenient method, an increasing number of architects begin to adopt computing design. And the outcome of such way of design will results in a same look which is “organic”. So many projects which use parametric design come


A.5 Learning Outcomes

with a curvilinear surface or fluid movement. It seems like having an organic surface or shape has become the main rule of parametric design which it is a must to my future design because such shape has the interpretation to

natural pattern that can be recognized as the pleasure of eyes.

Through parametric design, every single element work cooperatively performing its full function. Hence, to my personal point

of view, parametric design requires exact accuracy and high level of efficiency regarding to various circumstances so that the design could have its maximum performance to interact with surrounding environment.


A.6 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

The research especially the Shanghai Tower inspires me that algorithmic thinking and parametric design allows every element in the design to perform with their best capacity. To achieve such situation, the input of parametric value has to be accurate so that the shape could be able to reach its critical point.

The sketch I represented here is in its simplest form: a cylindroid shape generated by two circles with a loft surface. And then I rotate the upper circle at a certain degree to form a twisted form. Although this is a simple sketch, it reveals relatively the same ideology of Shanghai Tower. I adjust the parametric value of twist action to see when this cylindroid loft surface could reach its threshold. Then I found that when the loft surface has been twisted at its maximum value, there is hole leave in the middle which looks like a wormhole. This sketch can demonstrate a basic idea of the future design as it portrays the theory of tensional pressure which is essential for a web structure.

Algorithmic Sketch of basic shape, a cylindroid shape formed by 2 circle and a loft surface, Peter YAO 2015.


Front View of the Algorithmic Sketch of basic shape, a cylindroid shape formed by 2 circle and a loft surface, Peter YAO 2015.

Top View of the Algorithmic Sketch of basic shape, a cylindroid shape formed by 2 circle and a loft surface, Peter YAO 2015.


Document reference (Part A):Anthony Blunt, (1979) Borromini (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press), 13.

ARUP, (2014), Metropol Parasol, http://www.arup.com/Projects/Metropol_Parasol.aspx

Dunne, Anthony & Raby, Fiona (2013) Speculative Everything: Design Fiction, and Social Dreaming (MIT Press) pp. 1-9, 33-45

Frazer, John H. (2006). ‘The Generation of Virtual Prototypes for Performance Optimization’, in GameSetAndMatch II: The Architecture Co-Laboratory on Computer Games, Advanced Geometries and Digital Technologies, ed. by Kas Oosterhuis and Lukas Feireiss (Rotterdam: Episode Publishers), pp. 208-212

Galaxy Soho Official Website, (2014), Design & Architecture of Galaxy Soho, http://galaxysoho.sohochina.com/en/design

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

Ntovros Vasileios, (2009) “Unfolding San Lorenzo,” Nexus Network Journal 11: 482.

Oxman, Rivka and Robert Oxman, eds (2014). Theories of the Digital in Architecture (London; New York: Routledge), pp. 1–10

Peters, Brady. (2013) ‘Computation Works: The Building of Algorithmic Thought’, Architectural Design, 83, 2, pp. 08-15

SOM (2014). Sustainable Engineering + Design: Helping To Shape SOM’s Projects (Chicago: SOM), pp. 1-80

<http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.som.com%2FFILE%2F19252%2Fsom_sesbrochure_web.pdf&ei=F2MAVdbCE9Tj8AWcnIDICw&usg=AFQjCNHpQyfC2fM8M03YgDzZFqasXCUYDQ&bvm=bv.87611401,d.dGY >

Terzidis, Kostas (2009). Algorithms for Visual Design Using the Processing Language (Indianapolis, IN: Wiley), p. xx

Xia, Jun and Peng, Michael (2014). The Parametric Design of Shanghai Tower’s Form and Façade (Chicago: Shanghai Tower: In Detail), pp. 12-21 <http://ctbuh.org/Portals/0/Repository/Xia_2012_ParametricDesignShanghaiTower.65f34951-8ead-45fe-bc09-1cc349349e3d.pdf >

Zaha Hadid Architects Official Website, (2015), Galaxy Soho, http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/galaxy-soho/

Zeljic, Sasha Aleksandar, AIA and Leed AP (2010). Shanghai Tower Façade Design Process (San Francisco: Gensler), pp. 1-18 http://www.gensler.com/uploads/document/242/file/Shanghai_Tower_Facade_Design_Process_11_10_2011.pdf


Image reference:Cover Image: http://parapatricists.blogspot.com.au/2009_06_01_archive.html

Figure 0:http://blog.alexwebb.com/?p=1161

Figure 1.1:http://www.som.com/projects/pearl_river_tower

Figure 1.2:http://www.som.com/projects/pearl_river_tower

Figure 1.3: https://englishclas.wordpress.com/2012/10/23/pearl-river-tower/

Figure 1.4:http://www.gizmag.com/pearl-river-tower/14696/

Figure 1.5:http://blogdopetcivil.com/2014/04/04/pearl-river-tower-voce-ja-viu-algo-assim/

Figure 1.6:http://galleryhip.com/shanghai-tower-inside.html

Figure 1.7:http://www.ideasgn.com/architecture/shanghai-tower-gensler/

Figure 1.8:Zeljic, Sasha Aleksandar, AIA and Leed AP (2010). Shanghai Tower Façade Design Process (San Francisco: Gensler), pp. 1-18 http://www.gensler.com/uploads/document/242/file/Shanghai_Tower_Facade_Design_Process_11_10_2011.pdf


Figure 1.10:Xia, Jun and Peng, Michael (2014). The Parametric Design of Shanghai Tower’s Form and Façade (Chicago: Shanghai Tower: In Detail), pp. 12-21 <http://ctbuh.org/Portals/0/Repository/Xia_2012_ParametricDesignShanghaiTower.65f34951-8ead-45fe-bc09-1cc349349e3d.pdf >




Figure 2.1:Anthony Blunt, (1979) Borromini (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press), 13.

Figure 2.2:Ntovros Vasileios, (2009) “Unfolding San Lorenzo,” Nexus Network Journal 11: 482.

Figure 2.3:http://object-e.net/projects/glowingcloud




Figure 2.6:SOM (2014). Sustainable Engineering + Design: Helping To Shape SOM’s Projects (Chicago: SOM), pp. 1-80 <http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.som.com%2FFILE%2F19252%2Fsom_sesbrochure_web.pdf&ei=F2MAVdbCE9Tj8AWcnIDICw&usg=AFQjCNHpQyfC2fM8M03YgDzZFqasXCUYDQ&bvm=bv.87611401,d.dGY >




Figure 3.1:Zaha Hadid Architects Official Website, (2015), Galaxy Soho, http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/galaxy-soho/






Figure 3.7:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropol_Parasol

Figure 3.8:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropol_Parasol

END OF PART A CONCEPTUALISATION



38 CRITERIA DESIGN

PART B CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 39

B. 1 Research FieldFocusing Area: Geometry, minimal surface, mesh relaxation, new form finding.

Geometry, which is commonly used in some mathematical

situations to calculate the values of some certain parts, has been developed and used with new definition in a cross-boundary discipline. In the 21th century, an increasing number of new architecture emerged with irregular geometric shapes or unnatural pattern that are constructed with real construction materials. In the natural world, geometry or geometrical shapes can be found everywhere from flowers, particles, leaves and even stars etc.

When people are thinking of

geometry, the first image of geometry come up into head is very simple either square; rectangle; triangle or circle. However, it is these simple geometries that creates a great possibility of new form generation. Geometry has its potential to develop new form by using algorithmic simulation based on a certain type of order. For example, the VoltaDom (ThinkParametri 2015) designed by Skylar Tibbits “expand the notion of the architectural ‘surface panel’, by intensifying the depth of a doubly-curved vaulted surface, while maintaining relative ease in assembly and fabrication”. Clearly, a significant opportunity

of geometry is to find new form of a completely different geometry from that geometry.

Additionally, geometry allows designers to produce something that has new property while the surfaces remains minimal. In Case Study 2, I use the Schoen’s Hybrid project as the main example for analyzing minimal surface which means that the surface of geometry stays minimal and will not be effected by the random changes of the shape of geometry. Such idea can also be found in Green Void which I will investigate in more detail later in Case Study 1.0. When dealing with

40 CRITERIA DESIGN

geometry, the anchor points on the geometry itself is significantly useful for possible unpredictable surface finding because when the geometry is referenced in computational process, the surface which is bounded by nominated anchor points can be changed by simply dragging that anchor point anywhere and forms a new geometry. Meanwhile, when the Kangaroo definition is plugged in this process, the surface could also show the tensile character of the surface when the surface is in relaxation.

Furthermore, geometry has the potential to limit the range of material use and fabrication concerns due to its unique shape of surface. Projects like the Green Void, in order to achieve that kind of curve when it is under relaxation, the materials that has no tensile property will be unfit to fabrication whereas lycra can be the primary choice.

Fig B1.0, Complex facade design efficiency improved using parametric technique, Wintech 23/08/2011

Fig B1.1, From Soap Bubbles to Technology, Foha Rafiq, The Fountain Magazine 2010

Fig B1.2, From Soap Bubbles to Technology, Foha Rafiq, The Fountain Magazine 2010

CRITERIA DESIGN 41

B. 2 Case Study 1.0

LAVA - Green Void 2008

Statistic facts (extracted from the official website of LAVA.net): • Client: Customs House Sydney, Jennifer Kwok• Location: Sydney, Australia; Stuttgart, Germany• Partners: Mak Max; Peter Murphy; TOKO• Status: realized 2008• Size: Height 20m; Volume: 3000m3

LAVA’s Green Void is a digitally designed project which is

inspired from nature and it is designed specifically for “the central atrium of Customs House Sydney”

This 20 metre-high design is fabricated by using green lycra to achieve its lightweight characteristic so that it can be suspended. According to LAVA, Green Void occupies 3000cubic metres while its weight is only 40kg of material. The whole body of Green Void is suspended by strings and spans across 5 stories of the building. The main body of Green Void is formed freely whereas the circular openings are the fixed boundaries and placed in a three-dimensional space. Since it is made of flexible material lycra, the main forces is gravity and self tension of the material when it is in the resting position. With the further description by

Ethel Baraona Pohl (2008), the Green Void fills the space with “a 3-dimensional lightweight-sculpture, solely based on minimal surface tension, freely stretching between wall and ceiling and floor”. Pohl (2008) also discourses that the design concept of Green Void is the product of “simulation of complexity in naturally evolving system”. Taking the concern of sustainability into account, LAVA fabricated the Green Void with completely reusable material and reduce the usage of material by designing the minimal surface.

Fig B2.0, Green Void - LAVA 2008. Source @ l-a-v-a.net

Fig B2.1(upper left), B2.2(upper middle), B2.3(upper right), B2.4(lower left), B2.5(lower right) Green Void - LAVA 2008. Source @ l-a-v-a.net

42 CRITERIA DESIGN

Fig B2.1(upper left), B2.2(upper middle), B2.3(upper right), B2.4(lower left), B2.5(lower right) Green Void - LAVA 2008. Source @ l-a-v-a.net

CRITERIA DESIGN 43

B. 2 Case Study 1.0

Possibility Analysis / Iteration Sampling

Possibility analysis of potential geometrical form finding allows to push the geometry

form to its limits so that we are able to find the critical value and the maximum strength when the geometry is in a relaxed situation performed by the Kangaroo Physics of Rhino Plug-in. While I am playing the original Green Void grasshopper definition, I developed two more different types of restriction (iteration 2 &3) plus a free-form matrix (iteration 4) and a series of parametric changes of geometry (iteration 1). One of the two restrictions is that the geometry has a fixed spatial boundary (iteration 2) which limits the overall size while it is performing. This is a crucial condition as the selected site is a open field which has minor spatial limitation. Another form finding (iteration 3) is that the geometry contains a fixed intersection points which appears to be a radial form. Unlike the former one, this possibility allows infinite size of the geometry due to the changeable parameters of multiple lines by using the Exoskeleton definition in grasshopper. If these two possibilities combines together, an unlimited geometry would take place within a finite boundary which has the potential to maximum of the geometry’s performability. As for the free form (iteration 4), anchor points are dragged freely to form new geometry based on a formulated skeleton in 3D perspective.

ITERATION 1Sides = 3Radius = 5Node size = 20Knuckle = 10Spacing = 30Goal Length = 0.62

Sides = 4Radius = 10Node size = 20Knuckle = 10Spacing = 30Goal Length = 0.62







44 CRITERIA DESIGN









CRITERIA DESIGN 45








Sides = 6Radius = 11Node size = 0Knuckle = 10Spacing = 20Goal Length = N/A

ITERATION 2

46 CRITERIA DESIGN








Sides = 6Radius = 11Node size = 0Knuckle = 10Spacing = 20Goal Length = N/A

ITERATION 2

CRITERIA DESIGN 47









48 CRITERIA DESIGN









CRITERIA DESIGN 49

ITERATION 4

50 CRITERIA DESIGN

ITERATION 4

CRITERIA DESIGN 51

B. 3 Case Study 2.0

Fig 3.0 Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Srufaces - Schwarz’ P surface. Source @ http://www.susqu.edu/brakke/evolver/examples/periodic/hybrids.html

52 CRITERIA DESIGN

Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surfaces is the conceptual parametric design of a series of combinations of geometries and

these differentiated geometries are instructed to be viewed as “a central body in a polyhedron with tunnels extending out to various faces, edges, or vertices”. Minimal surface refers to minimize the geometry surface as much as possible while retaining the spanning feature from the geometry’s boundary. As for this conceptual project, Schoen investigates the “triply periodic” by reoccurring a “crystalline structure” in a three dimensional perspective. As a result, new geometries that contain triply periodic minimal surfaces can be generated. Schwarz’ P surface by Schoen is a single unit of a combination of two tubes which intersected at 90o angle within the cubic frame, and the surfaces are relaxed according to anchor point at the edges.

CRITERIA DESIGN 53

Reverse-engineering:

Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surface - Schwarz’ P surface

1. Brep of the geometry 2. Weaverbird’s Mesh Edges for “Springs From Lines”

3. Mesh Edges for “End Points”

54 CRITERIA DESIGN

4. End Points as the defining Anchor Points for “Kangaroo Physics”

5. Kangaroo Physics for Geometry Out

6. Mesh of the relaxed geometry

CRITERIA DESIGN 55

Comparing the original Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surface - Schwarz’ P surface with my reverse-engineered outcome, I believe that

the overall shape of my reverse-engineered geometry which is generated by manipulating the Kangaroo Physics for mesh relaxation is similar to the original one. The geometry is combined by using Boolean Union technique to produce a continuous surface so that this continuous surface can be converted into one triangulated mesh. However, even though the geometry is produced similar to Schwarz’ P surface, I found that the structural lines on the original geometry is different to what I produced on my geometry. The potential reason might be that the rule of geometry form-finding is distinctive to the definition I used.

This geometry has a great potential for new geometrical form-finding by either changing the edges or the combining geometries which will be presented in the next chapter B.4 Technique: Development. For my future development, the idea of this geometrical combination will be continually used with Kangaroo Physics but the shape will be different.

Fig 3.1 Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Srufaces - Schwarz’ P surface. Source @ http://www.susqu.edu/brakke/evolver/examples/periodic/hybrids.html

56 CRITERIA DESIGN

Fig 3.2 Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Srufaces - Schwarz’ P surface, 4 units. Source @ http://www.susqu.edu/brakke/evolver/examples/periodic/hybrids.html

CRITERIA DESIGN 57

B. 4 Technique: Development

58 CRITERIA DESIGN

• Deforming the geometry• Resetting the anchor points• Scaling the selected part of the geometry• Duplicating the initial geometry

CRITERIA DESIGN 59

1

2

3

4

5

6

a b c d e f g h i

3 sides 4 sides 5 sides 6 sides 7 sides 8 sides 9 sides 10 sides combined geometry

60 CRITERIA DESIGN

1

2

3

4

5

6

a b c d e f g h i

3 sides 4 sides 5 sides 6 sides 7 sides 8 sides 9 sides 10 sides combined geometry

CRITERIA DESIGN 61

Iterm: b-6, 4 sidesBasic geometry: 3 quadrangular tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space.

Iterm: e-6, 7 sidesBasic geometry: 3 heptagonal tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space.Description: reach its maximum threshold when the rest length = 0.02

Iterm: d-4, 6 sidesBasic geometry: 3 hexagon cubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space

Iterm: g-6, 9 sidesBasic geometry: 3 enneagonal tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle on x-y plane.Description: reach its maximum threshold when the rest length = 0.54

With the reference of the design brief which requires

of designing a web structure but no touching to ground or water and my initial imagination of geometry which will be supported by a cubic frame structure, these 56 iterations reveal a wide range of possible forms that can be integrated into the cubic frame. The b-6 4 sides geometry which is an epitome of my initial thinking demonstrates the idea of deformation from b-1 geometry but remaining the basic structure of three quadrangular tubes. As for the d-4 6 sides geometry, it revels the structure when the surface is greatly reduced to the edge points. In such way, the geometry will break into 2 parts instead of one geometry.

Additionally, e-6 7 sides geometry

62 CRITERIA DESIGN

Iterm: b-6, 4 sidesBasic geometry: 3 quadrangular tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space.

Iterm: e-6, 7 sidesBasic geometry: 3 heptagonal tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space.Description: reach its maximum threshold when the rest length = 0.02

Iterm: d-4, 6 sidesBasic geometry: 3 hexagon cubes intersect at 90 degrees angle in 3-dimensional space

Iterm: g-6, 9 sidesBasic geometry: 3 enneagonal tubes intersect at 90 degrees angle on x-y plane.Description: reach its maximum threshold when the rest length = 0.54

is generated by randomly placing the anchor points in the space. The displacement of the anchor points is restricted by its rest length, and this geometry collapses when the rest length equals to 0.02. Furthermore, the g-6 9 sides geometry which performs the idea of geometry duplication is created by combining 2 g-5 geometries together, and this geometry also has a limited rest length which is 0.54. When the rest length goes below that parameter, it collapses.

In conclusion, the process of making iterations helps me to test the strength of the geometry and also discover new geometries which will benefit my future design.

CRITERIA DESIGN 63

B. 5 Technique: PrototypesBased on the investigation of both Case Study 1.0 Green Void and Case Study

2.0 Schoen’s Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surface, our group’s design prototype inherits the main functionality of the geometry, mesh relaxation.

The selection of materials for the main structure has been concerned in three types:• Nylon • Lycra • Plastic which provide different possibilities such as stretching, bending, weight, texture, aesthetics. To achieve the aesthetic purpose, the material would offer various visual effects. For example, lycra is a very fine material that has great stretching effects and creates smooth surface after been stretched. To assemble the elements together, knot connection will be taken into account as the task is to design a web-like structure. The main structure will be held by the selected anchor points along the outer frame which is preliminary to be a transparent cubic framing structure. And this cubic structure will be suspended by two supporting columns sitting on both sides of the riverbed to prevent the structure from collapsing. Hence, this design is located above the Yarra River.

(Group Project)

64 CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 65

Prototype Model 1Required general equipment

• Laser cut mesh pads• A plier • Metal wires• A scissors

Material: Nylon

66 CRITERIA DESIGN

Prototype Model 2 Prototype Model 3 Prototype Model 4

Material: Lycra Material: Lycra Material: Plastic

CRITERIA DESIGN 67

B. 6 Technique: Proposal

Population Density Residential Community Vegetation Areas

68 CRITERIA DESIGN

Collingwood Childen’s Farm Inc

Restuarants

Yarra River

Approximate 3.5km from Melbourne CBD

Footpath River View of Selected Site

CRITERIA DESIGN 69

According to the site analysis, the location we choose is an open-view areas which has no restriction such as tall trees, playground, road and buildings. Thinking in a

contrast perspective, having an “invisible” determined frame such as a cubic, which is our prototype, as the geometry’s boundary would make a visually contrast feeling. In this way, our geometry would be able to gain more attention as people walk nearby. The “invisible” cubic frame can avoid blocking the view of surroundings while people are inside of the cube, but at the mean time, people would also have the feeling that they are inside a frame this idea is derived from the String Vienna which is a “self supporting inhabitable social sculpture” designed in 2014, Vienna. Thus, a completely transparent cubic frame is what we desired for our design because what we want to create a space that does not block the view. In addition to that, the square meshes are stretched according to the 4 corner points. This cubic frame could install at least 2 levels of square mesh surface (web) so that people are able to climb to the upper level or walk down to lower level. Clearly, the most significant of this design concept is to create a invisible cubic space which people can “float” in the air.

Design Concept:

70 CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 71

B. 7 Learning Objectives and Outcomes

72 CRITERIA DESIGN

It is no doubt that computational design is a great method to digitally model any forms of geometry on screen. Also grasshopper plays a critical

role here in my Part B work, it is so powerful working with Rhino 5 that I have to spend mountains of time to make it working. Reviewing the whole process of Part B, my skills of parametric design has improved a lot and understood what algorithmic thinking is and how it has been modelled by parametric calculation through Grasshopper. The Green Void as the first project I engaged for the study of mesh relaxation enlightens me on how a 3-dimensional geometry is structured surfaced by a series of fundamental geometries, and the most importantly, how the mesh relaxation is realized by using Kangaroo Physics. Hence, I have developed some new rules to generate my new form geometries for iteration but using the same Grasshopper definition. Although the iteration are similar, it helps me to further develop new things. With the inspiration of Schoen’s Hybrid TP Minimal Surfaces, I have tried to change the initial geometry, reset and scale the selected anchor points and also duplicate them to produce a matrix list of possibility. Each of them has its own limitation, I need to firstly ensure that the geometry is able to form one surface, secondly the anchor points I selected are able to hold the geometry while it is relaxed, and thirdly the rest length of duplicated geometry is in the available range so that it can be relaxed. If one of them failed, the geometry will collapse.

The prototype we created as a starting point of the final model works functionally at the moment, the next stage will be on how it can be further developed. Moreover, materiality choose for the mesh would become a further research as it could provide various performability. Indeed, the overall process is still developing and improving, being familiar with Grasshopper is a necessity for the next-stage design.

CRITERIA DESIGN 73

B. 8 Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

This algorithmic sketch was initially an alternative for the prototype.

The fundamental geometry is the combination of 2 bending surfaces connected at the turning line. Then the starting geometry is duplicated

8 times forming a 4x4 squared layout. This is because the prototype should be framed in a cubic structure. The anchor points are the focusing part of this sketch which has been selected 5 times to generate different relaxed geometries. Meanwhile, this algorithmic sketch uses the same Grasshopper definition of Case Study 2.0.

74 CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 75

• Rhinoceros 5.0

• Grasshopper Plug-in for Rhinoceros 5.0

• Adobe Illustrator

• Adobe Indesign

• Adobe Photoshop

• AutoCAD

LAVA, (2008) “GREEN VOID”, Design: Toko/Development: Damien Aistrope, accessed 17 April 2015. <http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/>

Numen, (2014) “String Vienna”, Numen, accessed 28 April 2015. <http://www.numen.eu/installations/string/vienna/>

Pohl, EB, (2008) “Green Void / LAVA”, Archdaily, accessed 17 April 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/10233/green-void-lava/>

Schoen, (unknown time) “Hybrid Triply Periodic Minimal Surfaces”, accessed 20 April 2015. <http://www.susqu.edu/brakke/evolver/examples/periodic/hybrids.html>

The Official Website of Victoria Interactive Map, (2015), Land Channel, accessed 22 April 2015. <http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/interactive.jsp>

ThinkParametric, (2015) “VoltaDom by Skylar Tibbits”, Design Playgrounds, accessed 16 April 2015. <http://designplaygrounds.com/deviants/voltadom-by-skylar-tibbits/>

Technical Software Used:

Document Reference (Part B):

76 CRITERIA DESIGN

Image Reference:Fig B1.0: http://www.wintech-group.co.uk/news/2011/08/wintech-improve-complex-facade-design-efficiency-using-a-breakthrough-parametric-technique/

Fig B1.1:http://www.compadre.org/informal/index.cfm?Issue=101

Fig B1.2:http://www.compadre.org/informal/index.cfm?Issue=101

Fig B2.0:http://www.l-a-v-a.net/projects/green-void/






Fig B3.0:http://www.susqu.edu/brakke/evolver/examples/periodic/hybrids.html



END OF PART B CRITERIA DESIGN

CRITERIA DESIGN 77

78 DETAILED DESIGN

PART C DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 79

"So here I stand before you preaching organic architecture: declaring organic architecture to be the modern ideal..."

---- Frank Lloyd Wright. In An Organic Architecture, 1939.

80 DETAILED DESIGN

C 1. Design Concept

Based on the critical feedback from Interim Presentation, our group has re-defined the design brief from general mesh relaxation to more systematic geometry form-finding. I have visited the site three times, each

time the site exhibits something different to the previous experience. The first time of the visit, I felt open because of the descending slope of the topography towards the Yarra River. The second time of the visit inspired me more in a social and environmental perspective such as the users who engaged with the site, the infrastructure and buildings constructed around the site and also the environmental thinking that is implemented on the site. Through the second observation, I noticed that the existing buildings are hidden behind the trees which in the contrast, the greenness and nature are the major objects on that site. Meanwhile, despite the existing construction, the restaurants there not only use natural materials to reconstruct parts of the interior such as wood, but also offer organic food to customers as the responds to the idea of sustainability. The third visit provides a completely new experience which is the dynamic feature of the landscape. As I walked around the site, the constant change of the ground slop allows me to obtain different views. These features re-inspired us in our new thinking of our design.

Firstly, we have re-selected the site location for our project moving it from river to the ground so that people are able to easily encounter our project. The new site is an approximately 18x14m area with three middle height trees growing on the both sides of the footpath. Meanwhile, this location has the panoramic view of a large vegetation area as well as the glimpse of the Yarra River.

Site Relocation: Secondly, the design concept has also been refined. We remain the application of Kangaroo Physics for mesh relaxation, but we reverse the outcome geometry forming a shelter-like structure fastened on trees so that it spans over the footpath without touching ground. The design will respond to the three concept we gained for the site: (1) be open, (2) be sustainable and (3) be dynamic.

Brief Re-thinking:

Thirdly, in order to achieve these 3 aspects, a new geometrical form is required. Due to the restriction of the existing trees, our geometry results into a triangular shape which one tree supports one point of the triangle. This triangulated mesh surface will be simulated to form a wave-like structure. The part that is over the footpath will be a parabola so that the geometry will not impede people passing through whereas when it is over the grassland, the geometry forms a naturally relaxed curve due to gravity where people can physically engage and play with the project. Such curvilinear geometry is inspired from the up-and-down landscape which forms an organic and dynamic geometrical shape.

New Geometrical Form Generation:Fourthly, we decided to use timber material cut into strips not only as the reflection of the idea of sustainability (Victorian Auditor-General 2013 ), but also due to the bendability of timber material. Apart from the existing buildings, the majority of the rest construction applies natural materials like timber which can be recycled and naturally degraded.

Material Selection:

Lastly, with the feedback from Interim Presentation in mind, we agree to use bolt connection to connect every piece of the structure as our design uses timber material which is cut into linear segments. In this way, the fabrication of our design can be realized and practical.

Fabrication Proposal:

DETAILED DESIGN 81

C 1.1 Site Relocation

Physical Aspect: approximately 20m x 20m square chosen area

82 DETAILED DESIGN

Collingwood Childen’s Farm Inc

Restuarants

Yarra River

Approximate 3.5km from Melbourne CBD

Circulation: Functional Areas:

River: Vegetation:

View of the Site: Population Density:

DETAILED DESIGN 83

C 1.2 Design Proposal

84 DETAILED DESIGN

In order to improve our design, the site conditions are constantly examined while we make any process so that we can maximize the

performance of our design and the interaction between the users and the design as much as possible.

Initially, we produce our new iterations based on the factors of aesthetics. Through changing the parameter of forces and the direction of the forces, the geometry is approaching to its best geometrical shape that associated with the site. But this unilateral thinking does not put reality into account. While we are trying to generate a smooth geometric surface, we have also considered the factors in reality such as the height of people, the reasonable elevation height of the project for users to engage with. With these factors in mind, we eventually figure out how much of the parabolic bending force should be so that people are able to walk underneath and how flat should the other part be, and meanwhile, the geometry can be as much related to the site as possible. Both way of thinking really helps us to produce better outcome. In addition to that, the model making is also under preparation. We are going to recur the site condition by making a contour site model with a 3D printed model at 1:200 scale showing the interaction between the design and the site.

Indeed, the computational design provides us various ways to present our design in many different ways so that we can explain our concept in a clearer way.

DETAILED DESIGN 85

Brep

Custom Mesh SettingsNumber Silder

Mesh Brep Weaverbird’s Split Triangles Subdivision

Weaverbird’s Split Triangles Subdivision

Panel Panel

Deconstruct Mesh

Weaverbird’s Vertices Component

Face Polylines

Springs From LineCurveNumber Slider


Weaverbird’s Mesh Edges Springs From Line

Number Slider Unit Z

UnaryForce

Explode Flip Matrix Explode Tree

Kangaroo Physics

PointBoolean Toggle

Mesh

WindCurve End Points

Vector 2Pt

Vector Display

VectorNumber Slider

Timer

Grasshopper Design Definition:

Basic Geometry Form Finding:

STAGE 1 STAGE 2

86 DETAILED DESIGN

Brep

Custom Mesh SettingsNumber Silder

Mesh Brep Weaverbird’s Split Triangles Subdivision

Weaverbird’s Split Triangles Subdivision

Panel Panel

Deconstruct Mesh

Weaverbird’s Vertices Component

Face Polylines



Weaverbird’s Mesh Edges Springs From Line

Number Slider Unit Z

UnaryForce

Explode Flip Matrix Explode Tree

Kangaroo Physics

PointBoolean Toggle

Mesh

WindCurve End Points

Vector 2Pt

Vector Display

VectorNumber Slider

Timer

STAGE 3

DETAILED DESIGN 87

RIGHT VIEW FRONT VIEW

UForce: xUForce Factor=35.296Wind Direction: Down

Wind Force=0.024


Wind Force=0.032


Wind Force=0.048


Wind Force=0.064

Iteration Testing To Find Expected Geometric Form:

88 DETAILED DESIGN

The geometry is applied 2 vector forces on the surface. One has the direction upwards to form the shape of parabolic shape. The other force

is pointing down to generate an opposite shape of parabola. The former one we use Uforce component which is a rigid force direction to simulate the anti-gravity force whereas the later one we choose the wind simulation component which allows changeable direction of the force to create the anti-parabolic shape. However, when we run the simulation, the problem occurs in where the red area is indicated. The down force is simulated successfully at this stage but the overall surface is no longer smoothly curved which means we need to change the direction of wind simulation.

DETAILED DESIGN 89


UForce: xUForce Factor=35.296Wind Direction: West

Wind Force=0


Wind Force=0.145


Wind Force=0.193


Wind Force=0.217


90 DETAILED DESIGN

This time we try to apply the wind simulation in the West direction. The problem from Down force is solved but the middle part become a weird

and sharp edge as we can see from the Right View. This problem is not be able to resolve no matter how we justify the 2 forces parameter. Hence, it is still the problem of the wind direction.

DETAILED DESIGN 91


UForce: xUForce Factor=87.296

Wind Direction: NorthwestWind Force=0.104




Wind Direction: NorthwestWind Force=0




92 DETAILED DESIGN

To further improve the geometric shape base on West force, we rotate the direction of wind force simulation towards Northwest. This time, the

desired outcome is almost emerged. The surface is no longer as sharp as that in West force. Nevertheless, we noticed that the geometry leans to one side which is also apparent in the Right View.

DETAILED DESIGN 93



Wind Direction: West to NorthWind Force=0.113



UForce: xUForce Factor=106





94 DETAILED DESIGN

By further adjusting the wind force direction, we make the direction towards the west but slightly turning to the north. The problem occurred

before are all resolved. However, the minor problem which is the area that is indicated in red still needs adjustment. We carefully reduce the UForce parameter so that the parabolic curve can be formed nicely.

DETAILED DESIGN 95

Final outcome:

Physical Aspects: (mm)

By further modifying the grasshopper definition, our group has created a series of iterations for the purpose of

finding a happy-medium outcome that is best-fitting to our ultimate goal. The simulation of UForce and wind force is only used for geometry finding. With the manipulation of these two forces, we are able to define how the load of this mesh is transferred through each strip.

Furthermore, taking some realistic factors such as human height and weight, and site conditions into account, this outcome reveals a reasonable acceptance as its physical aspects, fabrication feasibility and aesthetic achievement are within the tolerance range. To make it clearer, this geometry outcome has the physical aspects as shown on the right and the net height is 2 metres.

96 DETAILED DESIGN

1m

1m

Proposed perspective view of design positioning:

DETAILED DESIGN 97

C 2. Tectonic Elements & Prototypes

Joint Prototype Testing No. 1: Square Pattern Connection

When it comes to physical construction of our design, we

firstly consider the type of joint that can be used for our project. The first prototype of joints connection testing is the square pattern connection. This joints uses four strips by connecting one end of each strip by a single pin*.

(*Pin is used in joint prototype testing as the representation of bolt which will be used for real construction)

Figure 2.1 Square Pattern Connection

Figure 2.2 Square Pattern Connection under pressure.

98 DETAILED DESIGN

This type of joint has significant flexibility of movement at every joint connection which allows every strip to rotate 360 degrees. Moreover, this

prototype exhibits that it requires less elements to construct which results less materials are to needed for real construction. As a byproduct, the square pattern connection allows less cost of time of fabrication as it requires less materials. In the meantime, this joint prototype remains its performance of bendability. However, an undeniable problem of this joint structure is that it is very easy to deform due to its flexibility of every joint. Although this types of joint may provide some varieties of different shapes of each panel, this consideration failed as our project demands a strong structure.

DETAILED DESIGN 99

Joint Prototype Testing No. 2: Triangulated Pattern Connection

The second prototype joints testing is a development of the previous

one. In order to control the flexibility of the structure, we attempt to try triangulated pattern connection. This type of joint consists 6 strips which are connected at one end of each strip by a pin*. The envisaged construction process and bending performance is shown on the left and bottom.

(*Pin is used in joint prototype testing as the representation of bolt which will be used for real construction)

Figure 2.3 Triangulated Pattern Connection.

Figure 2.4 Triangulated Pattern Connection under pressure.

100 DETAILED DESIGN

Unlike square pattern connection, triangulated pattern connection

performs an absolute rigid structure without any movement of every single joints and strip. Meanwhile, this prototype shows that it requires more materials of strips and bolt to construct than square pattern connection. Due to its rigidity of triangulated structure, it cannot be deformed from at any direction and more importantly, it remains its overall structure stable when it is in bending condition and the bendability does not lost even though it is a rigid structure. As a consequence, this prototype is satisfied for our final model construction.

DETAILED DESIGN 101

Joint Prototype Testing No. 3:

The third joint testing prototype is more complex than the previous

two. Instead of connection the ends of the strips like prototype 1 and 2, this prototype portrays the idea of connecting triangular panels together along the edges by using two pins* and a plate which is placed underneath to fasten two triangular panels together.

(*Pin is used in joint prototype testing as the representation of bolt which will be used for real construction)Figure 2.5 Envisaged connection diagram.

Figure 2.6 Envisaged connection impact area

102 DETAILED DESIGN

While we are making this prototype, we realize that it is

not only required a lot of materials and elements like pins and plates but also it takes much longer time to make than square and triangulated pattern connection. When we start to test its structure performance, we found that it is as rigid as the triangulated pattern connection which is good, but the panel eventually lost its bendability and it only allows the bending performance to occur at the connection of the edges. Therefore, we ultimately reject this way of joint connection due to its inefficiency and infeasibility of fabrication.

DETAILED DESIGN 103

Real Material Prototype Testing @ 1:1 Scale Of A Portion Of The

Geometry With The Application Of Joint Prototype Testing No.2:

Real material prototype is aimed to show the performance of our design

in regarding to the real material at the 1 to 1 actual scale. Due to the limitation of the mechanical tools, we choose to use plywood that has 3mm thickness to test how timber material can be bent. This prototype applies the No. 2 joint prototype which is mentioned earlier as the triangulated pattern joint is the one we have confirmed to use in final model. In addition to the timber material, the bolt I choose is M8 bolt with the length of 35mm. Every single joint consists a M8 25mm bolt, a M8 hexagon nut and a matched M8 zinc plated washer contact. Figure 2.7 Proposed joint for timber prototype @ 1:1 scale.

Figure 2.8 Portion selected for timber prototype fabrication.

104 DETAILED DESIGN

• Upper left: renewable plantation timber material.

• Upper right: sawed strips in actual scale. Middle left: M8 bolt, washer contact and nuts.

• Middle central: bottom view of joint.

• Middle right: top view of joint.

• Lower left: joint demonstration.

• Lower right: 8mm dia. hole is drilled at each end of every strip; and naturally bending performance.

DETAILED DESIGN 105

Figure 2.9 Top view of timber prototype. Figure 2.10 Bottom view of timber prototype.

106 DETAILED DESIGN

Figure 2.11 Bending performance of timber prototype under natural force.

Figure 2.13 Detail side view of bolt joint (M8 bolt, M8 washer contact & M8 nut).

Figure 2.12 Bending performance of timber prototype under human force.

Figure 2.14 Close-up view of timber prototype under bending performance.

Figure 2.13 Detail bottom view of bolt joint. Washer contact is used to share the bending pressure at the joint and also fastening the bolt and nut.

DETAILED DESIGN 107

C 3. Final Detail Model

108 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 109

110 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 111

112 DETAILED DESIGN

Laser cut (boxboard) assembly workflow:

Scale @ 1:20

This 1:20 model with the assistant of laser cutting technology has allowed us to know how the geometry is formed and how each

line of the mesh can be connected in real life. After unrolling the mesh in Rhino and Grasshopper, this mesh geometry consist with 383 single strips and need to be assembled by using 155 bolts and nuts. Taking the thickness of the laser cut boxboard, the dimension of suitable bolts and nuts and the envisaged feasibility of fabrication into account, we make every strips cut into 10 millimetres in width with a 3 millimetres in diameter of hole at each end of every strip. Hence the bolt we are looking for is M3 bolt with the length at least 15mm. While we were waiting for the strips being cut, I went shopping for the bolts. Since we cut the hole in 3mm diameter, the suitable bolt is only the M3 hex-head bolt with the optional length of 15mm and 25mm. Eventually, I took the 25mm M3 bolt. However, the problems are encountered when we have collected our laser cut strips and start to assemble them all together. One of the most significant problem is that the length of some strip is too short that these strips cannot be bolted together due to their width. To resolve this issue, we have to overlay the edges of these strips so that each strip will not impede one another. Here I have to mention that, it is so lucky that I take the M3 Bolt with 25mm length, otherwise, we will not be able to continue to assemble our model if I choose the 15mm bolt. The other problem is that the materiality of boxboard does not have the same strong bendability performance as timber, as it is a paper product which can be folded while bending. Hence, we have to fabricate our model in a flat surface so that the strips will not be ruined.

Meanwhile, after we have assembled a few strips, we realized that it is easy to mix everything up as there are too many strips. So we decide to mark every strip at the back as the reference number so that we are able to track where we have been if we make a mistake in the progress.

After approximately 5 hours of assembling, the final model is finished which is identical to the digital model we modelled in the computer. The surprising outcome of this model is that the pattern that is created by a series of strips is clearly shown through the model which is less obvious to see in the computer.

Furthermore, after the fabrication of the model, we found that the model is able to form the shape that has been digitally modulated in our computer even through it is made of boxboard. Therefore, this model clearly and successfully illustrates the physical performance of bending and relaxation.

Figure 3.1 M3 Bolt and Nuts.

Figure 3.2 Referencing mark of each strip

Figure 3.3 & 3.4 top & bottom view of joint

Figure 3.5 Final model

DETAILED DESIGN 113

Proposed connection to the trees on the site - Type 1:

The type 1 connection is a typical connection that is designed for our

project to be fasten on the trees. This joint consists of two semi-circular timber strips with a supporting timber plate for the project to be bolted on as shown in Fig 3.7. These two semi-circular timber strips needs to be produced according to the girth of the tree on site and bolted together by attaching a steel cleat as shown in Fig 3.6.

This joint is an independent component which will not contribute any damage to the project and can be installed separately to the main project.

Figure 3.6 Top view of the connection on the tree.

Figure 3.7 elevation view of the connection on the tree.

114 DETAILED DESIGN

Proposed connection to the trees on the site - Type 2:

The type 2 connection uses the same bolt connection as that of the project. Unlike the type 1 which the connection on tree is an independent component, this method is a

continuation of the project which the strips and the bolt connection continue going along the perimeter of the tree trunk until the strips circle the tree and then bolted together as shown in the diagram above.

This joint acts as an extension of the geometry of the project which has the potential the project collapses if one of the joints is failed. However, the benefit of the joints is the flexibility of adjusting the strips to match the girth of the tree trunk.

DETAILED DESIGN 115

3D Print Workflow:

Scale @ 1:200

In addition to the previous physical model assembled with laser cut strips, our group decide to also use 3D print technology to produce a model

that is able to show more content of our design in relation to the site. Before commencing the 3D print, I have made a 1:200 scale physical site model. This site model consist the information of contours, building locations and trees which are the references for this upcoming 3D print model.

3D print model is at the scale of 1:200 and it only has the capacity to show the relevant site information associated with our project because the outcome of the 3D print is a solid piece that is only able to show the overall shape of the geometry but no performance of tensile or relaxation. Initially, the geometry that is produced by grasshopper cannot be printed as it is too thin whereas the printer requires at least 1mm thickness of the surface in order to print. However, the outcome is not as good as I expected because the product is too thin and very fragile. Hence I re-produce the 3D print geometry with the thickness of 2mm and use the highest infill resolution. The outcome is desirable. Putting this 3D print geometry in the physical site model allows to gain the information of how our design is located in respond to the surrounding elements.

116 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 117

Rendering is credited to our group member WengTeng (Venus) Ng 616221. Copyright © 2015 WenTeng (Venus) Ng. All rights reserved.

118 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 119


120 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 121

C 4. Learning Objectives and Outcomes

The third part of this journal has definitely pushed me forward in a great step from Part B since the

interim presentation where I gained the most crucial feedback of our group’s project. For the design proposal in Part B, our thinking was trapped due to lack of knowledge about the performance of mesh/net, limited skill in manipulating the algorithmic computational technologies. As a result, we were only able to create something that was lack of creative capability. However, in Part C, we re-design everything again so that we could have a fresh start. It is no doubt that the re-thinking of the design brief, site selection, new geometrical form-finding, and materiality have allowed us to manipulate the computational technologies such as Rhino and Grasshopper in a brand new manner. At the same time, by addressing the feedback from the critics that the thinking of reality and the real constructability need to be taken into account while creating the project. This is the most influential feedback which helped me in my further design development.

It is true that several challenges and also surprises were encountered throughout the design and fabrication process in Part C. It took a really long time to develop our new Grasshopper definition for our new design. We could apply a force on the mesh surface while using the Kangaroo Physics, but the challenge is that we were struggled with how to apply a second forces onto the same mesh surface. We were keep trying until we figure out that the cooperation of Uforce and the Wind Force can generate the actual digital geometry that we want. It remains me one of my favourite quotes of Albert Einstein “It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer”. Certainly, the flexibility of computational technologies helps us to discover new possibilities of geometrical forms and the performance of each possibility which eventually benefits our group in finding the final outcome. One of the most

significant learning outcomes that benefits me is that parametric modelling in Rhino with the assistance of plug-ins such as Kangaroo Physics, I can test the performance of the geometry in the computer which is simulated according to the real-life conditions.

In addition to that, I have realized that the scale is an important matter when using the computational technologies. It is important to remember the difference of the scale of the geometry in the computer and in real-life as problems such as wrong dimension of holes for bolts or fabrication barrier due to the wrong width of laser cut strips may encountered when physically fabricated the model. Clearly, when using the computational design technologies, precise pre-planning is required prior to the physical fabrication.

Finally, as the outcome that is created by computational design is quite complex, it is important to deliver enough contents so that the project can be understood by others. The contents of our project consists of several prototypes, a physical site model, a 1:20 laser-cut hand-assembled model and a 1:200 3D print model. These works allow other to understand firstly how the project works, secondly where the project is in relation to the site and lastly what is the overall geometrical shape of the project. However, these contents are still not enough for presentation. It is important that some good rendering images are also required to show how the project is engaged to people, to site, and to the landscape.

Hitherto, I have learnt an advanced skill of computational techniques which is a significant driver of change in the architectural profession. Through computational tools, creative designs can be generated not only just in form-finding but also the performance simulation.

122 DETAILED DESIGN

Objective 1: Re-thinking of the design brief allows our group to be closer to “interrogat[ing] a brief”, once the starting point is in a correct situation, the following process will be on the track.

Objective 2: With the knowledge base gained from case studies, we are able to generate a new definition that is associated with our design. Through a series of iterations investigation, I can find the desired geometry. This addresses “an ability to generate a variety of design possibilities for a given situation”.

Objective 3: This subject has allowed me to use Rhino and Grasshopper to develop “skills in various three-dimensional media”, and hereafter, I are capable to develop a 3-dimensional project through computational method and parametric modelling in some degrees. Meanwhile, the fabrication of our final model allows me to know how digital fabrication works.

Objective 4: Through this task, I have gained some knowledge and “an understanding of relationship between architecture and air”. Furthermore, I understand the idea of “air” as an abstract creative thinking of parametric design on the one hand, on the other hand, the ability of constructing the physical model in the air.

Objective 5: The prototypes our group created have helped me to develop critical thinking deciding which prototype has the capacity to be used in the fabrication such as the decision of Joint Prototype Testing. Indeed, I have developed “the ability to make a case for proposals”.

Objective 6: Through the study of case studies, I am able to understand how it is digitally constructed and also physically fabricated, and the conceptual idea behind the project.

Objective 7: At the end of this task, I have gained foundational understanding of the approaches for the digital geometry formation, and the structure of database for analysing the suitable parametric outcomes. At the meantime, being familiar with this type of programming which is totally different to that of studied before.

Objective 8: Finally, I need to admit that I need to take further study of algorithmic design in order to develop a “personalized repertoire of computational techniques”. However, through the design process of our group’s project, I can understand the pros and cons of computational design. It really facilitates the physical modelling but there might be some problems that will encountered only when the physical model is constructed.

Personal Performance Reflection to the Learning Objectives:

DETAILED DESIGN 123


124 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 125


126 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 127

Technical Software Used:

Hirst, K., (1970) “Plywood Bending”, Division of Forest Products, C.S.I.R.O, accessed 31 May 2015, < http://www.ewp.asn.au/library/downloads/ewpaa_plywood_bending.pdf >.

Victorian Auditor-General, (2013) “Managing Victoria’s Native Forest Timber Resources”, Victorian Auditor-General’s Report, accessed 31 May 2015, < http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/publications/20131211-Timber-Resources/20131211-Timber-Resources.pdf >.

AutoCAD 2014

Adobe Illustrator

Adobe Indesign

Adobe Photoshop

Grasshopper Plug-in for Rhinoceros 5.0

Rhinoceros 5.0

Document Reference (Part C):

END OF PART C DETAILED DESIGN

128 DETAILED DESIGN

DETAILED DESIGN 129

Documents

Yao jianqing (peter) 615245 finaljournal