A2

A L E X W O N G x A I R S T U D I O

EN

TE

R

CASE FOR INNOVATION

DESIGN APPROACH

PROJECT PROPOSAL

[ Architecture as a discourse ] 1

[ Computational architecture ] 2

[ Parametric modelling ] 3

[ Algorithmic explorations ] 4

[ Case for innovation Finale ] 5

[ Design focus ] 1

[ Gateway project: design concept ] 1

[ Case study 1.0 ] 2

[ Case study 2.0 ] 3

[ Technique: development ] 4

[ Technique: prototypes ] 5

[ Technique proposal ] 6

[ Learning objectives and outcomes ] 8

[ Gateway project: tectonic elements ] 2

[ Gateway project: final model ] 3

[ Learning objectives and outcomes ] 5

Introduction

References

CO

NT

EN

TS

0 0

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

0 1

INTRODUCTION

I was born in Melbourne but grew up in Hong Kong for roughly 10 years before mov-ing back (10 years anniver-sary in April). Being a simple and unobservant child I only saw Hong Kong as a place of densely packed towers. Until one day, hiking downhill from The Peak I was, somehow, captivated by the magnificence of architecture. My eyes were set on I.M.Pei’s Bank of China Tower.

Dad: “they are architects”.

That was it.I was 12.

A L E XW O N GC H U N Y I P

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

0 2

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

I first encounter computational archi-tecture and parametric design in Vir-tual Environments Sem2 2011. The project brief is to create a portable lantern that can be worn on the body or carried by one person. The lantern will be of curvilinear geometry with a panelized surface. It will be fabricated from paper or card.

I have chosen Movement of Praying Mantis as the natural process of anal-ysis. The praying mantis preying tac-tics, and their striking speed that cor-responds to particular angles between joints fascinated me. Through amend from weekly critics and collabora-tion with tutor Gwyll Jahn, my design was satisfied from long intense hours with Rhino and Grasshopper. The fi-nal outcome was a skeletal structure comprised over 250 different ribs con-nected by notches, and Voronoi de-velopable surfaces as a facade.

[Experience]0

Virtual Environments, University of Melbourne

Chun Yip Wong2011

0 3

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

BODY LANTERN

0 6

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

CASE FOR INNOVATION

0 7

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

[x]1

0 8

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

Let x = ARCHITECTURE AS A DISCOURSE

Discourse exploring the possibilities of responsive architecture to enhance positive human interactions.

[ ]

0 9

I marvel at the philosophical design ap-proach of Frank Lloyd Wright, to mold architecture into “a complete work of art”. Wright foresees every part of his building like it is every stroke to com-plete that perfectly composed painting. I believe that those who disengage with computational architecture may per-haps be under the general perception that it lacks the human spirit. I, in the course of AIR Studio, aim to explore and create architecture that is like a living organism. I believe that is what architecture should be, to have a direct

engagement with the general public, to redeem their appreciation beyond ‘just another building’.

By increasing positive human interac-tions through responsive architecture, I believe it goes beyond reshaping a city to become a better place to live and work. The extent of provocative sen-sory experience will become a lasting memory. Thus the architect is no lon-ger a profession to create space, but rather to “create time”. That, is what I called a complete work of art.

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

I always ask, Not what science could do for design, but what design could do for science.

[ ]

1 0

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

This is one of my most fascinated works by Neri Oxman. Beast is a lounge chair that responds like a liv-ing organism. Its organic-like entity created synthetically by the incorpora-tion of physical parameters with digital form-generation protocols can adjust to every muscle in our body. Such piece of art is a single continuous sur-face that acts as both structure and as skin. Oxman describes it as being “all about an efficiency of material, distrib-uting it according to your body load.”

I truly admire her works being a com-plex recipe of design, science, art and environmentalism. Beast is a com-plete work of art. Oxman’s philosophi-cal approach is to “think about how it behaves” rather than how something looks. Her works and many experi-ments pinpoint to the future of energy-efficient building materials. However, it will take many more years for it to realize her constructed models in full-scale architectural design.

When Beast is perceived as an aes-thetic object on its own, we call it art. By studying and evaluating its contribution to the pool of knowledge however, we come to realize a vast contribution to a new architecture dis-course. Thus can we elevate from art to architecture. The idea of designing Beast was first inspired by the curios-ity of human pain. This lounge chair can be used as a back pain reliever, made as if we are carrying a physio-therapist or a massage therapist on our back. So how is this relevant? Our sense of pain and its intensity are very different across each individual, yet through a wide range of data mapping of pain, Oxman created a develop-able surface that could cater for most users with different needs. Thus my proposal for the Wyndham’s Western Gateway should similarly be expe-rientially engaging and ambitiously, responding to each individual; in hope to provide a more personal visit hence encourage a sense of pride within the local community.

[State of the Art]1

Museum of Science, BostonNeri Oxman

2008-2010

John Ortved, ‘Art- Neri Oxman’, in David Yurman’s Interview, <http://www.interviewmagazine.com/art/neri-oxman/#_> [accessed 13 March 2013].Neri Oxman, ‘Beast’, in Project, (2011) <http://web.media.mit.edu/~neri/site/projects/beast/beast.html> [accessed 13 March 2013].PopTech, ‘Neri Oxman: On designing form’, (2009) <http://poptech.org/popcasts/neri_oxman_on_designing_form> [accessed on 3 April 2013].

1 1

BEAST

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

BEAS

T

This high level of integration of form, structure and mate-rial performance enables a direct response to environ-mental influences with no need for additional electron-ic or mechanical control.

[ ]

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 2

This research project by Professor Achim Menges of ICD University of Stuttgart, explores the possibility of utilizing the dimensional changes of wood in respond to the changes of relative humidity in the immediate environment.

The experiment consist of using veneer composite elements, and its respond is triggered by the changes of moisture content of the material therefore directly affects the struc-ture’s degree of porosity. Conse-quently, an increase in relative hu-midity causes the veneer elements to swell. The veneer might have been developed through a constraint satisfaction method, whereby key parameters such as fibre orienta-tion and ratio of thickness, length and width were in place in order to

achieve its behavior and form. Re-sponsive Surface Structure, like the Beast, is both structure and respon-sive skin in a passive fashion.

Parametric setup needs to cater for different constraints of manufactur-ing, construction, laser cutting and assembly; thus a seamless and most efficient fabrication procedure.

The word landscape, to me person-ally, has a direct connotation to the word natural. Such I am intrigued by this project because of its passive response, rather than an electronic or mechanically assisted system. I am leaned towards a passive design approach, as I believe that it can pro-vide a smoother blending between the sculptural element and its sur-rounding environment. Thus the us-

ers of the Wyndham’s Western Gate-way can perceive the installation not on its own standing or isolated from its landscape [art], but to recognize it as a whole [architecture]. Perhaps, by a passive response we embellish the dialogue between sculpture and landscape.

Material selection for its performance is critical in achieving a passive re-sponse. The composite materials implicated in this project are indu-bitably inapplicable for the Western Gateway. The lightweight veneer is not prone to Victoria’s frequent fluctuations of heat and rain. Mate-rial selection will play a considerable part in my design so that it meets the project brief in encouraging for the ease of maintenance as well as its longevity in its appeal.

[State of the Art]2

HfG, Offenbach, GermanyAchim Menges

2006-2007

Menges, A, 2008, Material Performance Castle, Architectural Design, Vol 72, no 2, London, Artmedia Press, pp 34-41. Prof. Achim Menges, ‘Responsive Surface Structure I’, in Design Research- HFG Offenbach, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4411> [accessed 13 March 2013].

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 3

RESPONSIVE SURFACE STRUCTURE I

RES

PON

SIVE

SU

RFA

CE

STR

UC

TUR

E I

[x]2

1 4

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

Let x = COMPUTATIONAL ARCHITECTURE

1 5

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

Architecture (parametric architecture) nowadays is transforming from the ‘making of forms’ to the ‘find-ing of forms’. - Branko Kolarevic

[ ]

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 6

[State of the Art]3

Seattle, WashingtonJason Kelly Johnson

Future Cities Lab2012

This interactive installation project was developed as a geometrically configured sensing envelope. The final full-scale prototype was made possible by the use of Firefly and Grasshopper. This mechanically driven facade responds to the prox-imity of pedestrians as they either walk towards it or moved across the site. Visitors will experience a direct interaction between themselves and the architectural installation; as their proximity triggers the rotation of hun-dreds of small illuminated crystalline components.

Cirriform, as a site-specific installa-tion, have exploited the advantages of using Grasshopper and the Firefly interactive prototyping environment (IPE). By using these tools, the en-tire project can be explored and en-hanced from early stages of concept, to interaction design, to testing simu-

lation, and to final manufacturing and fabrication. Whether or not the facade can be realized in a full-scale building design, I believe this project itself sparks the idea that computa-tional architecture can inhabit seam-lessly with our society through en-hancing our sensory experience and boosting the vibe of our cities.

Although I am keen to explore me-chanically driven responsive design, it may be too ambitious and over-whelming to engage with the kinds of interactivities such as Firefly and Ar-duino within a matter of weeks. This project however, still remains rel-evant in its context of lighting instal-lation. It is imperative that our design can make a statement not only at daytime, but also at nighttime view-ing. A well-designed lighting within the sculpture can replace banal road lights, and more importantly, it in-

evitably creates a focal point during nighttime that is accessible to a wide public audience. Furthermore, the sculpture lighting can act as a way to redirect our attention away from the unattractive imposing service center and signage in the surround.

I have lived in Hong Kong for long enough to realize how lighting plays an important role in its place-making aspects and qualities. As a city of the highest light pollution in the world, Hong Kong portrays itself as a city without stops; a vibrant and an en-tertainment world opens 24/7, 7 days a week. I strongly believe that a well-played lighting installation as part of the eye catching “entry” to Wyndham city can help elevate the significance of its place. Thus encourage a sense of pride within the local community and hopefully catches the eyes of potential future residents.

Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp 145-146. Future Cities Lab, ‘Cirriform’, in Projects- Cirriform, (2012) <http://www.future-cities-lab.net/cirriform> [accessed 18 March 2013].

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 7

CIRRIFORM RESPONSIVE FACADE

CIR

RIF

OR

M R

ESPO

NSI

VE F

ACAD

E

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 8

[ ]Novel simulation technologies are help-ing designers and planners to predict the ways in which people interact with their designs, as well as how to shape their designs to achieve maximum com-fort and experience.

[State of the Art]4

Exeter, United KingdomWilkinson Eyre Architects

2008-2012

The university design intent was ‘to inte-grate the variety of functions and movements within the entrance and foyer space, flexible mixed-use teaching areas for use by all de-partments, a new student services center, refurbished library and food court.’ By using a modeling application such as the Buro Hap-pold SMART Solutions team’s SMART Move, it was made possible to identify and map out the diverse, day in and day out movements of all users in the university. The data within the circulation spaces assist architects in de-signing elements such as stairs, corridors and entrances. Thus optimizing users’ safety and comfort in all horizontal and vertical circula-tory directions.

The modeling software took into account is-sues of spatial layouts, context, environment and interaction between users. The resultant data were parameters such as comfort levels, congestion, journey times and queue lengths; all can be used to determine the form and spatial configuration of the entire building. I believe the true art of this project lies in creat-ing such responsive architecture yet it is so “naked” to the eyes of the users. Thus it must not be mistaken that responsive architecture correlates to dynamic properties.

Exeter University is a fascinating project because through computation, it reaches a solution with a very rational system. It is an evidence- and performance-orientated de-sign, in which it allows the architect to present sophisticated properties of design elements and complex relationships between them. Thus the performance of the university design can be evaluated and its feedback can help inform and update itself as necessary. Such vast data processing is not achievable with traditional architectural practice. This project highlights our architectural practice today transforming from the ‘making of forms’ to the ‘finding of forms’. Not least to say that we are reliant on computation’s “extended creativity”, but rather it creates a framework for which ar-chitects can develop on; a framework that is fed by informed decisions and led to optimize performance.

In the design for the Wyndham’s Western Gateway, a personal performance criterion should therefore be created in order to evalu-ate and measure the success of the proposal, for example, how responsive and engag-ing is the sculpture to each individual users [qualitative] or measure the responsiveness of materials to its immediate environments [quantitative].

Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp 62-65. Wilkinson Eyre, ‘University of Exeter: Forum Project’, in Projects- Education, (2012) <http://www.wilkinsoneyre.com/projects/university-of-exeter-forum-project.aspx?category=education> [accessed 18 March 2013].

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

1 9

EXETER UNIVERSITY FORUM AND RECEPTION BUILDING

EXET

ER U

NIV

ERSI

TY F

OR

UM

AN

D R

ECEP

TIO

N B

UIL

DIN

G

[x]3

2 0

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

Let x = PARAMETRIC MODELLING

Parametricism implies that all elements of archi-tecture are becoming parametrically malleable and thus adaptive to each other and to the context. - Patrik Schumacher

[ ]

2 1

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

2 2

In an environment that is ever chang-ing, it is fundamental for designers to ensure the relationships between built components are flexible enough to accommodate unexpected chang-es. If the designer fails to compro-mise this, the ultimate price to pay is likely to completely disassemble the model and restart. The inflexibility of any project will cause unexpected delay while the relationships are be-ing re-organized.

The Dermoid project is an explicit ex-ample to showcase the differences between traditional and integrated architectural delivery. Rather than constraining the project by determin-ing its form, structural system or cli-ent requirements early in the design conception phase, Dermoid started

by exploring possibilities of patterns. The design team was clueless on the project’s construction method, its fi-nal form and details, and even where the project will sit on site. Dermoid was proclaimed to find its form only four days prior the construction date.

Thanks to parametric modeling, the design team was capable to chang-ing the form of the project so late in the process (compare to traditional practice). Structural complication of the project, the cost and time of delivery can be known immediately thus embrace the control and ef-ficiency that architectural practices demand to improve. The selection of this project is not based to support my discourse, but rather to illustrate how flexibility in producing Dermoid

can also assist in my production for the Gateway Project competition.

Although it is true that parametric modeling can enhance control and efficiency in an architectural deliv-erable, there are also some heavy shortcomings. For example, if the client requires a major change or shift in the design, it often requires a major change in the parametric model. These changes can become insolvable for many designers except the creator of the parametric model who understands it. Even so, the immense amount of changes by the creator can easily loose track on its progress in a short amount of time, therefore keeping records of change is vital.

[State of the Art]5

Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, Copenhagen, and RMIT University,

Melbourne

2011

Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp 128-131. Week 3 lecture- Introduction to Parametric Modelling by Daniel Davis, (on audio recording) [accessed 21 March 2013].

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

2 3

DERMOID

DER

MO

ID

2 4

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

2 5

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

[Algorithmic Explorations]4

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

2 6

Architecture rather like some music and poetry which can actu-ally be changed by the users, an architecture of improvisation. - Richard Rogers

[ ]

Rather than summarizing my argu-ment with the aforementioned prece-dents, I wish to conclude with this last card: Building 20, 1942.

Building 20 was a temporary timber frame structure erected in the midst of WWII, under the direction of the mili-tary to expand MIT’s Radiation Lab to cater for the development of radar technologies of fighter jets. Because it has always been regarded as tem-porary, the building has never been taken as architecture nor has it earned a formal name throughout its 55-year existence.

After the war, MIT decided instead of demolishing the building, they could utilize it as space for overflow. Argu-ably by chance, the building was thrust by a collection of eccentric groups of departments and groups consisting of Research Laboratory of Electronics, the Laboratory for Nuclear Science and the Linguistics Department. The result? An unbelievable track record of breakthroughs; including the first video game, the physics behind mi-crowaves, high-speed photography and modern computer hacking just to name a few.

It was by the time of finally demolish-ing the building in 1998,

But how is this achievable? Build-ing 20, as a simple structure without planned architectural impact, opti-mizes its chaotic nature to become a self-organized system. People in the building were often lost and ask for di-rections, people were hungry and pa-tronize the only fending machine, and people access through the long hall-ways. People inevitably run into each other, Building 20 in its confusing state forces its inhabitants to speak and in-teract. That was its magic.

Above all, the key ingredient to Build-ing 20’s success is the result of its temporariness. With that in mind, no one was interested in the build-ing’s longevity thus scientists felt the freedom to manipulate their spaces at will; whether it be knocking down walls or bolting equipment to the roof. The word permission does not exist in Building 20. Its utter flexibility and nonrestrictive nature undoubtedly nur-ture a building that is well alive and dy-namic. Building 20 were able to adapt to the needs of the users, survive the imposed impact and changes, embel-

lish growth of the inhabitants through interactivities and finally develop and stew the joint research of these scien-tists to become the next great innova-tion. Building 20 is no longer a static, awful timber structure, but one that is interactive and as such defines what constitutes a “living organism”.

Because of the success of temporari-ness, it raises my concern of the Wyn-dham’s Western Gateway project brief to appeal to longevity. If a temporary sculpture could contributes greater impact and change then I question the relevance of longevity. Like many projects exhibited in the World Exposi-tion, temporariness created a sense of curiosity and urgency. Thus it draws on the outsiders’ sense of need to pay a visit, to avoid being “missed out”. Such could inevitably overrate the significance of the sculpture, which potentially leads to an increase of visi-tors thus chances of human interac-tions.

To assume that the idea of temporary sculpture is forbidden, I believe that beyond my discourse to embellish positive human interactions through responsive architecture, the sculpture needs to respond both to the imme-diate needs of the users and to the ongoing changes of our time [Building 20 achieved this]. Will the design ap-proach to modularity be the answer? May I part with this question to ponder as I continue my search to an exciting architectural discourse.

Jonathan C. Molloy, ‘Can Architecture Make Us More Creative?’, in Interactive Architecture, (2013) <http://www.archdaily.com/353496/> [accessed 3 April 2013].Jonah Lehrer, ‘Annals of Ideas- GROUPTHINK, The Brainstorming myth’, (2012) <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/01/30/120130fa_fact_lehrer?currentPage=all> [accessed 3 April 2013]. Jeremy Till, 2009, Architecture Depends, Volume 55, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, p.99

[Case for Innovation Finale]5

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

2 7

Building 20 had become a legend of innovation, widely regarded as one of the most creative spaces in the world. - Jonah Leherer

[ ]

2 8

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

DESIGN APPROACH

2 9

A 2 M A R / A P R 2 0 1 3

[y]13 0

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Let y = DESIGN FOCUS

3 1

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Our team’s design focus is Biomimicry. The intention of Biomimicry is to study a natural process or system that can be translated and adapted into architectural solutions. We be-lieve this approach is innovative in a humble and respectful way, and as it is inspired by nature can the architectural outcome be gen-uinely relatable to the eyes of the users. In the following pages, I have chosen 2 prec-edents that demonstrate the achievements of biomimicry projects and to showcase their innovativeness that cannot be accomplished through other means. As we understand, bio-mimicry is as broad as nature can be; there-fore we must select a specific natural process to be the catalyst of this exciting design jour-ney.

We have chosen the phenomenon of flocking birds as our specific design approach, which leads to the natural process of swarming. For centuries architects have looked into nature for inspiration for architectural forms and to mimic nature’s absolute structural efficien-cies. The idea of flocking birds is particularly different than many biomimicry-inspired ar-chitecture because it is not a study on struc-

tural efficiencies rather we are interested in the sensory experience it creates. Such architectural effects should therefore be the core interest that leads to a talking point, and the gateway sculpture itself is not necessar-ily required to be mechanically responsive to create users’ interactivities. By taking the advantage of the speed of a freeway, we be-lieve driving through it can create frames of visual dynamics. These frames, like a cam-era, capture the changing phases of a ‘swarm of flocking birds’; as if to freeze music for a lasting entertainment.

Swarming is a complex phenomenon yet through self-organized system, each agent (birds) is capable to adapt in its environment avoiding collusion and create a dynamic dis-play of forms as a whole. Perhaps the direc-tion of our architectural effects is to mimic such organized chaos as we drive through the Wyndham Gateway but as we take a step back, the sculpture as a whole is of an elegant portrait showering an aura of confidence and pride; representing the people and the future dwellers of Wyndham city.

B I O M I M I C R Y[ ]

3 2

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

3 3

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

flocking birds. swarming.[ ]

3 4

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[State of the Art]1

Toronto, Canada2010

d3, ‘Canopy Toronto 2010’, <http://www.d3technologies.com/projects/canopy-toronto-2010> [accessed 28 April 2013]. United Visual Artists, <http://www.uva.co.uk/work/canopy> [accessed 28 April 2013].

CANOPY

3 5

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

The Canopy is an art sculpture and lighting installation that spans 90 meters on the front façade of the Maple Lead Square building in Toronto, Canada. The design was inspired by the experience of walk-ing through a forest’s dappled light. This is a mechanically assisted light-ing effect that utilizes thousands of identical modules in an abstracted form of a leaf geometry. The combi-nation of daylight and artificial light sweeping through this installation mimics the activity of cells mov-ing within a leaf, or leaves rustling across a forest canopy.

The purpose of the canopy installa-tion is in an attempt to help people escape the hard built environment of city and perhaps reconnect themselves with the ‘natural’ atmo-sphere. Although this is entirely arti-ficial, the idea prompt the possibility of using lighting design to enhance our experience and connection with nature. It is through visual environ-ments that allow us to engage such project as ‘natural’ and in respect replaces the environment of forest canopy.

3 6

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

3 7

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[State of the Art]2

University of Stuttgart2011

Amy Frearson, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart’, in Dezeen Magazine, <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 28 April 2013].

ICD/ITKE RESEARCH PAVILION

The Research Pavilion at the Uni-versity of Stuttgart was completed by joint effort from students, the Institute for Computational Design and the Institute of Building Struc-tures and Structural Design. This is a biomimicry-inspired project in which studies on the biological principles of sea urchin’s (sand dollar) plate skeleton are done and translated into an architectural form through computational and simulation meth-ods. By integrating the perfomative capacity of the biological structures, the pavilion was made possible to be built exclusively with extremely thin sheets of plywood (6.5mm).

This illustrates the innovation that comes with a biomimicry design approach. The structural system encompasses is of a unique tech-nique in both construction and prefabrication processes. Many new challenges are likely to appear when new methods of construction is used however Research Pavilion shown to be the state of the art, overcoming obstacles with robotic fabrication system.

3 8

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[ ]

3 9

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Top left hand corner is the initial form created by the Grasshopper definition provided. There are 3 ma-jor components in the definition in which allows me to manipulate their parameter values to create different forms. The overall form is deter-mined by defining the polygons size and the number of sides (faces). It is logical to comprehend that the number of sides can only be values of 3, 4 or 5; as 2 cannot create a volume and 6+ will break the equa-tion to create a tetrahedron module. The second parameter values I manipulated determine the density of these tetrahedron modules. My understanding is that the values applicable (0.1-0.6) are a scale or a percentage that creates tetrahe-drons at vertices and truncate the initial iteration. The third component

deals with the pattern curves via analyzing the geometrical form.

A set of iterations can be found through manipulating these 3 com-ponents. To add variations, I have piped the pattern curves to trans-form it to a volumetric pattern. As a result it became a kind of ornamen-tation or facade-like element. By scaling the density of modules and selectively terminate few modules, the outcomes translate the volumet-ric pattern curves into a structural-like element that surrounds or hold up the tetrahedron modules. The last 2 iterations were selected as accidental iterations as I attempt to use the mesh components; it cre-ated a plat 2D pattern that I found intriguing and somehow delicate.

[Case Study 1.0]2

Matthew Ritchie,Aranda LaschCAAC, Seville

2008-2009

The Morning Line

4 0

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[Case Study 2.0 Reverse Engineer]3

Pablo Miranda Carranza2010

Miranda C. P., ‘Swarm Architecture- research on dynamic behavioural design methods’, <http://swarmarchitecture.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/swarm-dynamics-pablo-miranda-carranza/> [accessed 28 April 2013]. Miranda C. P., Coates, P., ‘Swarm modelling’, <http://www.armyofclerks.net/Enactive/swarmintelligence.pdf> [accessed 28 April 2013].

SWARM DYNAMICS

4 1

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Swarm Dynamics is a research proj-ect completed at the CECA Univer-sity of East London. Their paper has discussed the development of sen-sori-motor intelligence and its par-ticular instance of the swarms. We have chosen this project to reverse engineer on as our interest lies in an architectural form that mimics swarming behaviors. Because we are not required to analysis and calculate the algorithmic complexi-ties and aerodynamics of swarming of flocking birds, the Swarm Intelli-gence plugin helps us a great deal in terms of creating motion points (boids) that potentially recreate a swarming effect.

The Swarm Intelligence definition provides a boundary box (which can be altered) to create a specific envi-ronment for the motion boids. This environment consists of the veloc-

ity, force, separation distance, co-hesion distance, alignment distance and the number of agent (boids) in its initial position. Through Data Re-cord component, boids are record-ed for 2 reasons. One is to create another agent which has the same properties as the previous agent and secondly the flow on effect of these agents will create what we are after, the swarming effect.

Using Line and Pipe component, the reverse engineer project was relatively easy to mimic (in terms of form only). It is through plenty of trials and errors to find a form ap-plicable (the render as shown on left down). It would be a mistake to assume the plugin to be the answer for our project as I have found there are plenty of flaws and difficulties to control boids which will be dis-cussed in Points Matrix.

[y]44 2

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Let y = TECHNIQUE: DEVELOPMENT

4 3

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Before jumping into exploring and de-veloping varies techniques, our team has discussed the design intent and the potential performance criteria. As a biomimicry-inspired design, we wanted users to have familiarity of its form and perhaps able to guess what it is (instant recognition does not appeal to us be-cause it is risky as it could be misun-derstood). The overall form needs to showcase the elegance and playful-ness of swarming phenomenon; which may be illustrated through a ‘disperse and gather’ layout. The architectural effect will immerse drivers to take par-

ticipation like being a bird amongst the swarm.

As I have previously stated, our emo-tional response and perception of the gateway sculpture should immensely differ from driving through it to viewing it at a distant. To create that ‘organized chaos’ we wanted to design modules that in one way represent each ‘bird’ and in the other be responsive to the environment (wind and sun). Catering these factors we may be capable of casting dynamic light and shadows.

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

4 4

[ ]

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

4 5

Using the Swarm Intelligence plu-gin, these are the selected iterations that have the most intriguing pattern and can be differ from one another. I have selected these base on its 3-dimensional pattern but for pre-sentation wise, it is captured on a neatly plan view. The usage of this definition to create an overall archi-tectural form for the site was criticized during mid-semester presentation; due to its capability to formulate ‘bil-lions of outcomes’. Although this may be true, it is also mere specu-lations. I have completed immense amount of trials and more than half of these experiments broke. Each agent (boids) is in motion according to the environment and its surround-ing agents. Yet, countless times has agent/s became linear or in motion completely separate to the swarm.

I also realized the swarming effect is displayed more genuinely when given a vast volumetric space. Such cannot

be compromised as the boundary box is confined by its potential siting sizes. Overcrowded agents in a specific re-gion is also not selected for the matrix as it is logical that such iterations will become messy as the design devel-ops and its potential failures and com-plexities in its structural application. Because it was a complicated task to produce an iteration that is suit-able for our design interest and its potentials on the site, I have ap-proached the definition differently. That is, rather than having the Swarm Intelligence to create how each agent moves in its space from one end to the other, I decided to only record segments of agents. I record a small segment of agents and bake it, then manipulated the parameter values and record and bake again; in hope to link these agents together to form a ‘disperse and gather’ layout. Un-fortunately, it also failed. This left me to ponder the applicability of the Swarm Intelligence plugin, if it

is at all assisting our design intent.

Despite that, our team must come to a conclusion to choose an itera-tion not as a final but one that could work towards our goals. We have chosen this iteration (blue bracket) for varies reasons. Driving through this we allow users in a car to view out their respective windows, to cre-ate frames of visual dynamics as the speed of the car assist in ‘chang-ing’ the form of the swarming effect. The central voids are beneficial as it reduces the stress loads on struc-tural components therefore reduces structural span that comes with costs. Sunlight hitting on both sides of the sculpture is optimal considering the modules that will be put in place. The sunlight and car headlights bounce off from these modules (will be dis-cussed) on an angle can be effec-tive; resulting in a dynamic display of lighting effect by day and night.

[Technique: Development]1

POINTS MATRIX

4 6

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

4 7

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

4 8

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

4 9

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

http://www.123rf.com/photo_7669014_singapore-esplanade-roof.htmlDP Architects Pte Ltd, <http://www.dpa.com.sg/projects/esplanade/> [accessed 05 May 2013].

[Technique: Development]2

MODULE MATRIX

Modules are created to represent each agent that forms an overall swarming effect. These modules are required to respond to the en-vironments in terms of wind forces and sunlight. Thus each module is required to be capable of catching the wind and rotate itself at its axis. A reflective material is attached to one side of the module; as it rotates itself by the forces of wind, sunlight or cars’ headlights are bounced off to unpredictable areas on the site/ road surface. We hope that through this technique a sense of playful-ness and excitement are simulated.

The initial form was generated through our second reverse engineer project, the Esplanade- Theatres on the Bay. Through parametric model-ing, the triangulated sunshades are precisely formulated in an organized format; thus the definition was inap-plicable to our chosen points itera-tion. Having said that, by reducing the entire façade system down to one individual module, multiple itera-tions were produced. Considering the amount of boids contained in our points iteration, we believe a simple and subtle form will bring us dyna-mism as a whole. The main goal is not to complicate the modules but to respond to wind forces and bounce light from its angulated wings.

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

5 0

[ ]

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

5 1

[Technique: Development]3

STRUCTURAL MATRIX

In order to secure each module in place, we are to enforce a structural system that requires for the rota-tion of individual modules and as a whole system still expresses the swarming effect. Using the major-ity of Points Matrix iterations, we attempted to explore space truss or space frame through the boids that form a swarming process. Such will be our third technique developments and will be a key factor that dictates future design developments and considerations such as detail joints, types of materials, footing positions, construction techniques, fabrication techniques, options of material de-livery to site and its potential costs.

These iterations were derived from a Truss component in the Lunch-Box plugin. In an attempt to create space truss through the majority of Points Matrix iterations, we hope to achieve unexpected structural forms/ outcomes rather than set-

tling our preliminary proposal from the one selected iteration. Such ex-ploration did however surprise us, as our chosen Point Matrix iteration still remains the optimal outcome. In many of other iterations, the span of a truss component is enormous thus inappropriate for real-life 1:1 applica-tion. While an iteration may has its elegance as combinations of boids, that image quickly fades when the structural system is in place; creating a messy mishmash of trusses and a form that is bulky and incoherent. We believe our chosen Structural Matrix iteration (blue bracket) still holds the essence of its initial form from boids. Rather than a ‘disperse and gather’ approach from one end to the other, we believe the overall form does remain its subtle flow of direction as a continuous ‘infinity’ cycle; a rather unexpect-ed comprehension of ‘longevity’.

5 2

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

5 3

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[y]55 4

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Let y = TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES

5 5

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

As previously mentioned, our prelimi-nary proposal will be the integration of these techniques, resulting in a space truss system and rotatable modules of different sizes and direction (depend-ing on the direction of a truss). Due to the complexity of our model, and as consultation session advices, it would be most manageable for our team to construct a section of the model by hand within the timeframe prior mid-semester presentation (for purpose of testing architectural effects). To allow the whole structural system to work, we

must design 2 types of detailed joints that are applicable in 1:1 fabrication. One type of detailed joint is catered for the end intersections of truss compo-nents and the second type is catered for the rotation of modules. These are further developed and will be discussed in Part C Tectonic Elements, but it is an important part that requires early con-sideration.

5 6

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

5 7

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

preliminary prototype[ ]

5 8

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

5 9

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

[State of the Art]1

Dae Song LeeDiploma Unit 4 [M. Hensel, A. Menges]

AA London2005-2006

Prof. Achim Menges, ‘Transitional Morphologies’, in Material Systems- Steel, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4387> [accessed 5 May 2013].

TRANSITIONAL MORPHOLOGIES

From the amount of truss system in our model, we aim for seamless joints that could blend in with its adjacent truss components. This is to avoid further complication on both the de-sign process and its final form. Weld-ing therefore became an applicable construction technique. This method however, may prompt significant la-bor force from welding sections of the model off-site as well as welding on-site. Having said that, we attempt to find a way so that the model is pos-sible to fabricate through FabLab; taking on its advantage of precision and speed. We believe a 1:50 final model is not appropriate to be done by hand and would defeat the pur-pose of computational architecture.

Transitional Morphologies uses an origami folding and cutting tech-niques to fabricate space truss/ frame of different sizes from a flat

sheet material. By scoring the sheet material in such a way (right), it as-sists folding the material in both di-rections and an overall space truss structural system is made possible. I am intrigued by this fabrication tech-nique yet its real world application remains welding of steel materials.

Further options developed besides welding consist of using ball joints and a unique joint component that secures each strut in position (left down). These joineries will be unique from one joint to the other as it caters for a specific strut only. These options will be further devel-oped in Part C Tectonic Elements. By using these types of joineries, fabrication is made possible by 3D printing each uniquely designed joint which can be labeled and struts can be prefabricated also in FabLab.

6 0

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

6 1

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

preliminary proposal[ ]

[y]76 2

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

Let y = LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES

6 3

A 2 A P R / M A Y 2 0 1 3

After mid-semester presentation, there are few issues raised on our structural system that needs to be amended on for the final Wyndham Gateway proj-ect. It is, as we understood it, the space truss system created a complex form that could be hard for users to compre-hend its original inspiration from swarm of flocking birds. Because of the truss’ angular geometries, it does not neces-sarily promote our design intent for an elegant display. What we now needs to consider is whether such space truss system is necessary or to move on to an alternative structural system. We must evaluate the implication of that decision and weigh it against our per-formance criteria.

Ending our second phase of this jour-ney, I have experienced many unex-pected results through the roles of com-putation in the design process. Even though outcomes may be surprising, it is not necessarily applicable or useful towards our goals. It is only there as a mean for further analysis and develop-ments. Due to each individual’s inability to manipulate grasshopper definition at will, our true design intent will inevita-bly cut short; though I believe this is a similar case amongst most Air Studio groups. I am content with the outcomes our team has achieved so far, as this is our first ever studio working in groups. Teamwork, delegation and commu-nication are essential to our team’s progress and I believe we pulled a good fight to select the optimal options amongst many ideas.

6 4

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

PROJECT PROPOSAL

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

6 5

[z]1

6 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

Let z = GATEWAY PROJECT: DESIGN CONCEPT

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

6 7

Mid-semester presentation was proved imperative to the assistance of our de-sign outcome. We realised the space truss structural system undermined the whole design intent, as its form configuration complexities became a source of confusion to the users; and ultimately undermined the term Bio-mimicry. Our preliminary proposal was taken in a design approach that was legible in terms of its elements, that is: Module + Structure; whether or not the modules can be comprehended as a flocking bird. We believed that this design approach has reached its dead end thus our continuation to modify the model will be futile and insignificant.

Here, we have taken substantial risk to deliver our final proposal in a mat-ter of 2 weeks. Our formula will no longer be Module + Structure, but

[Module x Structure]

We believed the moulding of these two elements can foster a sculpture of organic form; to contradict the cur-rent angulated form. Thus, we are not relying on rotatable modulated fins to create dynamism but rather the struc-ture itself will demonstrate such quality.

6 8

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

6 9

[The Swarm]1

SITEOur Gateway sculpture will sit on both site A and site C, creating a tunnel for the road users along Princes High-way (Maltby Bypass) and an exit lane to Geelong Road. We believe this is this is the optimal site to showcase our sculpture for 4 main reasons.

1. Geelong Road is the clos-est and more direct route to Wynd-ham City than Princes Highway and Princes Freeway. Thus for it to sit on site C has the greatest potential for the Wyndham City dwellers to con-nect with the sculptural tunnel expe-rience that is meant to represent not only the people, but also their future as an innovative and growing city.

2. Princes Highway is not simply a major road in Victoria; it ex-tends from Sydney to Port Augusta, South Australia via the coast through the states of New South Wales, Vic-toria and South Australia. Hence we should cater for interstate travellers, extending our potential for a wider publicity. This is in hope to create a ‘significant impact’, beyond the talking point from Melbourne locals.

3. From the given site and roads, Princes Freeway is the fur-thest and indirect route to Wynd-ham City. Although this is the case we could nevertheless work it to our advantage. The scale of our sculp-ture will be visible to users along this road, thus the appearance of its exterior will indirectly create a sense of interest to its interior ex-perience; just as we are fascinated by the internal environments of swarming and the external magnifi-cence of flocking birds phenomenon.

4. Due south of the proposed site is the internationally recognised Western Treatment Plant. Birds are migrating from all over the place to this area as their sanctuary. As indi-cated by the image, the analogy of flocking birds heading towards north-east is a metaphor to birds choosing Wyndham City as their sanctuary.

7 0

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

Biomimicry

FlockingBirds

Swarming

Emergent

BonesStructure

ExoskeletonVoxel

Sculpting

SwarmIntelligence

MeshLabSmoothing

?

+

=

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

7 1

[The Swarm]2

TECHNIQUE REFINEMENTThe self-organisation of a flock of birds is a form of emergent behav-iour, which appears when a number of simple agents (birds) operate in an environment, forming more com-plex behaviours as a collective. We have used Swarm Intelligence to recreate the phenomenon of a flock of birds through recording algorith-mically-driven motion boids; without realising that the motion from one boid to another possesses emergent properties, which is termed ‘growth’.

As such, I was motivated to move away from rigid structural system and was inspired to; somehow, cre-ate a structural system that grows. This led me to plunge further into Biomimicry, as I found bones struc-ture a great potential to realise this growth system in the process of swarming. By using the Exoskel-eton plugin, we hope to realise a structural system that dramatically reduce the rigidity and angulated joints. For initial trials however, we found that the definition will break given the immense number of struts to be performed and the accidental intersections of struts as a result.

During consultation, we were given recommendation to a different meth-od that could also achieve a similar effect to Exoskeleton. As illustrated from these processes, we have re-mained using the point matrix itera-tions but evolved our approach to the making of the structure. Firstly, we exported the baked piping from Rhinoceros to 3D Coat. The Voxel sculpting function in this program al-lowed us to manipulate these piped structures through surface deforma-tion, volume building and filling. 3D Coat has a powerful system of curve manipulation, which we have high hopes to achieve a sculpture of or-ganic form. Then it was exported to another program called MeshLab. This program processes and edits 3 dimensional triangular meshes, which we have utilised to “clean up” our sculpture through smoothing.

7 2

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

7 3[The Swarm]3

VOXEL MATRIXIn the following pages, I have illus-trated the exploration of such voxel sculpting method using the Point Matrix iterations. On the first few trials I realised the resultant forms were rather unexpected therefore I decided to perform on the full set of points. Some of these point itera-tions require manual manipulation so that once voxel sculpting is per-formed, it emerges a form with nec-essary footings for structural support. The above iteration was chosen as our team’s Gateway final project.

My decision was based on sev-eral performance criteria and its potential to meet the client’s brief.

Here is the overview (please see page 80-81):

7 4

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

7 5

7 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

7 7

7 8

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

7 9

8 0

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

WYNDHAM CITY COUNCIL & BRIEF

Exciting, eye catching instal-lation that could inspire and enriches the municipality

It will have longevity in its appeal

Encourage ongoing interest and further reflection about the installation beyond a first glance

It may capture a more ab-stract, aspirational intent and feeling; accessible to a wide public

It should explore place-mak-ing aspects and qualities

Create a focal point of iconic scale and presence and encourage a sense of pride within the local community

It should propose new, in-spiring and brave ideas, to generate a new discourse

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

8 1

DESIGN APPROACH & STRATEGIES

Innovative form-finding, lighting installation, material selection and colour finish

Material selection, colour fin-ish and sense of continuity

Sites, scale and architec-tural experience

“Abstracted Biomimicry” open for interpretation

Scale, use of metaphor or symbolism

Sites, scale, appeal to lon-gevity & futuristic qualities

Material selection, tectonic elements

THW SWARM

Demonstrates an organic form that is surprising and uncommon to many architectural projects of this scale. The unfamiliarity of form can triggers excitement and wonder upon users.

Fibreglass is used to highlight the seamless continuity of the sculp-ture and its low maintenance prop-erties prove to stand against time. Dark colour (black and blue) has a lower visibility to dirt and signs of aging.

As aforementioned (p.69), the lo-cation of the sculpture will be posi-tioned to trigger interest on all roads. The scale and its appeal to mass produce an overwhelming tun-nel experience (please see video)

The “lightness” of flocking birds and the “mass” produced by our tech-nique is a play on irony that opens to public interpretation. It still portrays our aspirational intent to depict inten-sity, unity and solidity of the whole.

Sheer scale creates an unexpected sense of monumentality which marks a place on its own. The analogy of flock-ing birds heading to Wyndham City is a metaphor to birds choosing the place as their sanctuary; however it is not an easily comprehensible quality for users.

Although scale enhances presence, it is through innovative form and experi-ence that produces lasting memories.

The form is difficult to achieve in real life construction therefore to overcome such obstacle, we hope to inspire and push construction innovation.

SATISFACTORY?

[YES]

[YES]

[YES]

[YES]

[NO]

[YES]

[YOU BE THE JUDGE!]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[ ]

[z]2

8 2

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

Let z = GATEWAY PROJECT: TECTONIC ELEMENTS

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

8 3

Due to our major change to our design approach, we must come in term with a design structural system capable to ca-ter for our sculpture. Our proposed conceptual structural sys-tem will be one that is uncommon in general practice today, yet it will be demonstrated how it could work with an innova-tive project Cast Thicket completed less than a year ago.

8 4

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

8 5

[Tectonic Elements]1

GLASS FIBREREINFORCED PLASTICCorrosion-resistance

GFRP is a long, effective service life material; there is no need for other forms of additional corrosion pro-tection as it resists to weathering and the environment. The material is even unaffected by acid rain, salt water and most chemicals thus has a very low maintenance costs. This will ensure its appeal to longevity.

Light weight

GFRP weights approximately 1/4 of ductile iron or steel and 1/10 the weight of regular concrete. This could potentially lower transport costs with more structures uploaded to truck on each delivery. It could also eliminate the need for expen-sive handling equipment.

High Strength

Because GFRP has a very high strength to weight ratio, it plays a major role in the design of the sculp-ture as it acts as part of the struc-tural system. It also means that we could emit unnecessary materials in building our sculpture of this size.

Economy

Although GFRP as a standalone ma-terial may not be economical com-pare to other materials, it is the most convincing material to achieve our architectural intent. When compar-ing materials for corrosion service, GFRP offer both a satisfactory solu-tion to corrosion problems with the lowest cost.

Extremely smooth finish

Having an extremely smooth finish helps minimize future slime or dirt build-up therefore can assists in low-ering cleaning costs. The clean gloss finish will enhance the seamlessness and continuity of materials, and main-tain its youth that portrays the power-ful phenomenon of flocking birds.

Versatility- Flexibility

GFRP allowed us to do things that cannot be done economically with other materials, as we could mould almost into any configuration. This is therefore essential for our design to achieve an organic form that is curved throughout.

8 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

8 7

CAST THICKET

Cast Thicket project is highly relevant to our project in which it has given us great hindsight to our construction processes. The construction method performed in this project is innovative and was completed only less than a year ago. Rather than hammering a list of construction steps, what is most important that I have learnt from this project is the parametrical-ly-driven formwork. The formworks are designed and are enrolled to be fabricated and laser cut into sheets. They are then tied together to cre-ate a volume, ready to be poured with tensile cement. Once it is dry, the removal of the outer formworks leave a structure of organic form.

By adopting a similar approach, I believe our sculpture can be done in real life construction. Although the cement used here is not of the regular aggregates mix, any form of cement may not be suitable for the scale of our sculpture. The use of glass fi-bre reinforced plastic, as I have ex-plained its qualities and applicability in our project, is unsuitable to simply follow the steps taken for Cast Thick-et project. On the following page, the diagrammatic construction pro-cesses will illustrate how our organic form sculpture can be achieved.

On the right is the construction pro-totype on a 1.20 scale. Taken from a small section of the model, we wanted to comprehend the sculpture as a physical object, something we could touch and feel than it is from a computer screen. We first consid-ered building our model to its true properties, of glass fibre reinforced plastic; however through a thorough research and consultation with pro-fessionals, we were recommended to substitute it with a sculpture mix. This is because fibreglass is a very difficult and health hazardous mate-rial to work with (similar to asbestos) in a non-industrialised environment.

[State of the Art]1

Kenneth Tracy & Christine Yogiamanyo_cy2012

8 8

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

Step 2 Step 3

Step 5 Step 6

[Phase]1 PREPARATION

[Phase]2 FORM-MAKING

[Phase]3 ASSEMBLY

Step 1

Step 4

Step 7 Step 8 Step 9

CONSTRUCTION PROCESS[Tectonic Elements]2

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

8 9

Step 1

Model is parametrically separated and unrolled into surfaces. This is then laser cut into polypropyl-ene sheets as components of the outer formwork. Steel bars are welded together to form the core of our structure and is also used for the attachment to the footings. It was noted during final presen-tation that steel bars might not be necessary due to fibreglass’ structural properties. However there is no solid verification as this type of construction method is uncommon in general practice.

Step 2

The polypropylene sheets are linked together to form a case-ment for the structure, and are attached to the internal steel bars bracing system. There are two possibilities in this step. One is a quick-fix and simpler solution, to pour fibreglass mix into the form-work as it is. The other solution is to laser cut foam and is to attach onto steel bars. We believe this is a more economical solution for the whole project because for

the scale of our sculpture, foam could reduce enormously on the amount of mix to produce; least to say fibreglass is substan-tially higher priced than foam.

Step 3

Polypropylene sheets are re-quired to be tied together to avoid fibreglass mix from bursting or sipping through sheeting gaps.

Step 4

Glass fibre reinforced plastic can be purchased as powder form. Once it is mixed it is to pour into formwork and leave to dry.

Step 5

Once the moulding is solidified the polypropylene formwork sheets can be removed. The finish does not require any form of sanding and is ready to be painted. Since we are using a pouring technique, we preferred to utilise this method by mixing a colour into the fibreglass mix thus eliminate labour for painting.

Step 6

The sculpture must be pro-duced by parts and each part will be allocated into a specific labelled casting box hence it can be made easier to load onto trucks and assemble correctly according to labels on the site.

Step 7

Parts of the sculpture are ready to be transported and allocate to its site location.

Step 8

Once unloaded onto site, parts that are allocated to be attached onto footings must be arranged and installed first.

Step 9

Connect all the parts by joints ac-cording to the labelled arrange-ment of the structure.

10mm polypropylene sheet formwork laser cut using digital fabrication

200mm THK GFRP, mix is pour and casted within formwork. Act as both facade and structural system

50mm (r) Steel bars for structural bracing

5mm protective membrane covering foam before fibreglass mix is pour

Laser cut shaped foam. Act as inter-nal volume building to reduce costs of pouring excessive fibreglass mix

9 0

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

STRUCTURAL DETAILA 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 2

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

PROTOTYPEA 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 3

9 4

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 5FINAL MODEL[ ]

9 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 5

9 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

SOUTH EAST ELEVATION

NORTH WEST ELEVATION

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 7

9 8

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

THE SWARMA 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

9 9

1 0 0

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

THE SWARMA 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 0 1

1 0 2

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

THE SWARMA 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 0 3

1 0 4

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

[Learning Objectives and Outcomes ]1

Architectural Design Studio Air has been a very challenging subject as I have very minimal exposure to com-putational architecture and parametric design. Over the course of this se-mester, our design project has defi-nitely influenced my view and under-standing of computation in the design process and its application to real life construction. While using computa-tion in the design process can be an innovative form-finding method, it of-ten results in a conceptual manner; whereby real life construction may not be applicable. Parametric model-ling can aid fabrication techniques thus a greater potential to optimise labour time and reduce costs. Yet, to produce tectonic assembly details parametrically is highly questionable.

Majority of the Learning Objects out-lined for this subject has been met. Objective 4 to develop “an understand-ing of relationships between archi-tecture and air” is rather a perplexing one. Flocking birds was indeed an idea sprung out of my head as I think of ‘air’, and later it became the sole Biomimicry idea from which our team took interest on. My understanding of this objective is that architecture can be seen like pollen, it carries on by the wind and leads to a place unknown to it and may become a seed open to a new life. This is the impact that our sculpture needs to be. It is a sculpture that is mesmerising and can bring sig-nificant impact beyond Melbournians.

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 0 5

1 0 6

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 0 7

1 0 8

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 0 9

1 1 0

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

A 2 M A Y / J U N 2 0 1 3

1 1 1

REFERENCES

1. John Ortved, ‘Art- Neri Oxman’, in David Yurman’s Interview, <http://www.interviewmagazine.com/art/neri-oxman/#_> [accessed 13 March 2013].

2. Neri Oxman, ‘Beast’, in Project, (2011) <http://web.media.mit.edu/~neri/site/projects/beast/beast.html> [accessed 13 March 2013].

3. PopTech, ‘Neri Oxman: On designing form’, (2009) <http://poptech.org/popcasts/neri_oxman_on_designing_form> [accessed on 3 April 2013].

4. Menges, A, 2008, Material Performance Castle, Architectural Design, Vol 72, no 2, London, Artmedia Press, pp 34-41.

5. Prof. Achim Menges, ‘Responsive Surface Structure I’, in Design Research- HFG Offenbach, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4411> [accessed

13 March 2013].

6. Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd,

pp 145-146.

7. Future Cities Lab, ‘Cirriform’, in Projects- Cirriform, (2012) <http://www.future-cities-lab.net/cirriform> [accessed 18 March 2013].

8. Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd,

pp 62-65.

9. Wilkinson Eyre, ‘University of Exeter: Forum Project’, in Projects- Education, (2012) <http://www.wilkinsoneyre.com/projects/university-of-exeter-

forum-project.aspx?category=education> [accessed 18 March 2013].

10. Castle, Helen, 2013, Computation Works- The Building of Algorithmic Thought, Architectural Design, Vol 83, Issue 2, publ. John Wiley & Sons Ltd,

pp 128-131.

11. Week 3 lecture- Introduction to Parametric Modelling by Daniel Davis, (on audio recording) [accessed 21 March 2013].

12. Jonathan C. Molloy, ‘Can Architecture Make Us More Creative?’, in Interactive Architecture, (2013) <http://www.archdaily.com/353496/> [ac-

cessed 3 April 2013].

13. Jonah Lehrer, ‘Annals of Ideas- GROUPTHINK, The Brainstorming myth’, (2012) <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/01/30/120130fa_

fact_lehrer?currentPage=all> [accessed 3 April 2013].

14. Jeremy Till, 2009, Architecture Depends, Volume 55, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, p.99

15. d3, ‘Canopy Toronto 2010’, <http://www.d3technologies.com/projects/canopy-toronto-2010> [accessed 28 April 2013].

16. United Visual Artists, <http://www.uva.co.uk/work/canopy> [accessed 28 April 2013].

17. Amy Frearson, ‘ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion at the University of Stuttgart’, in Dezeen Magazine, <http://www.dezeen.com/2011/10/31/icditke-

research-pavilion-at-the-university-of-stuttgart/> [accessed 28 April 2013].

18. Miranda C. P., ‘Swarm Architecture- research on dynamic behavioural design methods’, <http://swarmarchitecture.wordpress.com/2010/11/16/

swarm-dynamics-pablo-miranda-carranza/> [accessed 28 April 2013].

19. Miranda C. P., Coates, P., ‘Swarm modelling’, <http://www.armyofclerks.net/Enactive/swarmintelligence.pdf> [accessed 28 April 2013].

20. DP Architects Pte Ltd, <http://www.dpa.com.sg/projects/esplanade/> [accessed 05 May 2013].

21. Prof. Achim Menges, ‘Transitional Morphologies’, in Material Systems- Steel, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=4387> [accessed 5 May 2013].