ANTONY PAULO MAUBACH328962

TUTORIAL THURS 6.15-9.15PM W/ FINN + VICTOR

STUDIOAIRJOURNAL

SEMESTER 1 2014

CONTENTS

• INTRODUCTION P.1• PAST WORK P.2/3• ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE P.4 PART A:• A1: DESIGN FUTURING P.6/7• A2: DESIGN COMPUTATION P.8/9• A3: COMPOSITION/GENERATION P.10/11• A4: CONCLUSION P.12• A5: LEARNING OUTCOMES P.12• A6: APPENDIX - ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES P.13 • A7: REFERENCES P.16

//ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO AIR

BEnv (Arch) 3rd year

ANTONY PAULO MAUBACH

// ABOUT ME

INTRODUCTION

Antony is in his 3rd year of BEnv (Architecture) at the University of Melbourne, and has previously completed a BArts (Urban Develop-ment + Visual Culture) at Monash University. He is Melbourne born but spent the first few years of his life living in a small town in the swiss alps. He is fluent in German and tries to get over there as much as possible. He loves travelling!

After school Antony spent 12 months liv-ing in Berlin where he

worked as a construc-tion assistant for the art-ist Gregor Hildebrandt. He gained experience building large and small scale installations and learned alot through observing the design process and lifecycle of numerous art projects. Antony currently works part-time as a junior urban planner in a large multidisciplinary archi-tecture + engineering design firm. He often works closely with in house urban design-ers (many of whom are trained architects), and

has a strong interest in pubilc realm design including place making, sustainable develop-ment and community orientated design. As such, he keenly follows the works of architects/urban designers such as Jan Gehl, and more locally is interested in the works of organisa-tions such as Co Design Studio & Village Well to name a few.

1. FOLLY + VIEWING PLATFORM, MAUBACH 2009

PAS T

WO

RK

2. COMMUNITY CENTRE, MAUBACH 2010

Antony has very limited experience with computational architecture & considers himself a keen beginner when it comes to parametric architectural theory & design. He completed a first year computer engineer-ing elective at Monash University where he learnt basic coding in Matlab and Excel (VBA), and also completed calculus 2 as a first year Uni Melb breadth. Both have helped so far.

Antony has completed 2 first year and 2 sec-ond year architecture design studios leading up to AIR. He is familiar with AutoCAD, Sketchup, InDesign, Illustrator & Photoshop, & has a basic understanding of Rhino. He enjoys design development through sketch modelling (see 2.).

Studio AIR sees Antony using Grasshopper for the first time. Through his early algorith-mic sketch experimentations he has already begun to appreciate the vast new possibili-ties the program offers him as a designer.

He is excited to challenge himself & learn as much as possible from his fellow students and tutors.

DIGITAL DESIGNEXPERIENCE

PAS T

WO

RK2.

2.

2.

2.

2.

“The rise of new digital design technologies increasingly allows users such as myself to push boundaries and actively participate in the debate. We can all contribute to architectural discourse in our own way (for example through experimentations and discussions presented in this journal) by actively engaging with and challenging architectural ideas.”

MISSION STATEMENT #1 - ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE

The first studio AIR tutorial began with the question ‘what is architectural dis-course?’ This ultimately lead to the ques-tion ‘what is architecture?’ As a beginner in parametric architectural theory and design it is important to first understand how and why new digital design tech-niques fit into and compliment the study of architecture.

Ultimately, architecture can take on a plurality of meanings depending on the context. From an anthropological per-spective, architecture can be understood through Fry’s definition of design as “our ability to prefigure what we create before the act of creation...it defines one of the fundamental characteristics that make us human” (Fry, 2009, p.2). Thus, Fry’s under-standing of architecture highlights a reci-procity between the ‘state of design’ and the ‘state of the world’ (natural resource depletion, unsustainability).

Schumacker defines architecture as an ‘autopoietic system’; a distinct subset of communication within a broader, all-encompassing system of societal com-munication. For Schumacker, completed buildings are but one aspect of the archi-tectural communication network. This is due to the fact that “the completion of a new building is a rather rare occasion, and their immediate presence within the discourse - by being directly experienced during an architectural excusion - is so

rare as to be negligible” (Schumacker, 2011, p.3). As such, Schumacker high-lights the importance of architectural communication mediums such as draw-ings, photographs, lectures, books and blogs, all of which depend upon and reproduce existing societal communica-tion structures and ideas.

The aforementioned definitions move beyond a simplistic bricks and mortar un-derstanding of architecture. For Antony, they highlight architecture as a language. As such, it is the intent of this language to produce meaning, rather than its ultimate functional goal (eg. habitation), that defines architecture. Constructability and representation through more traditional architectural plan and section drawings do not necesarilly have to be the primary focus in order to contribute to the debate.

The rise of new digital design technolo-gies increasingly allows users such as myself to push boundaries and actively participate in the debate. We can all con-tribute to architectural discourse in our own way (for example through experi-mentations and discussions presented in this journal) by actively engaging with and challenging architectural ideas.

I look forward to challenging myself and contributing to architectural discourse in my own way through this journal.

// ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE

PART

A: C

ON

CEPT

UALIS

ATIO

N

A1: DESIGN FUTURING

// A1: DESIGN FUTURING

THEO JANSEN- STRANDBEEST(1990 ONWARDS)

Jansen’s ‘Strandbeests’ relate strongly to Fry’s notion that the ‘state of the world’ is linked to and a product of the ‘state of design’. Jansen is in essence try-ing to redesign his own world, which he calls “a new nature”. His creations are able to store wind energy as air pressure, and are thus powered by their surround-ing natural environment. He imagines that they will oneday survive on their own.

The Strandbeests help stimulate the imagination and the pos-

sibilities of reneweable energy systems. Their most valuable contribution to sustainable living practices are their inher-ent educational capabilities through viewer observation and participation. This is evidenced by the fact that Strandbeests are exhibited all around the world with exhibitions including public demonstrations. Furthermore, some Strandbeests have in-built handles enabling the visiting public to ‘walk’ and feel the Strandbeest’s energy system.

•ENERGY SYSTEM•INTERACTIVE•EDUCATION

Archigram’s ‘Plugin City’ ties in with Schumaker’s notion of architectural communication and the autopoetic system. As Schumaker asserts, “com-pleted buildings are but one aspect of the architectural communication network” (Schumacher, 2011, p.4). Though never built, Archigrams architectural discourse of over 900 drawings “provoked fascinating debate, combining architecture, technology and society” (Archdaily, 2014). This supports the notion that architectural discourse does not necesarilly have to be built to be succesfull.

‘Plugin City’ was a diagrematic experiment that proposed an alternative urban scenario and liberation from social consequences of modernism such as suburbia. The crain mounted living pods depicted in ‘Plugin City’ can be “plugged in wherever their inhabitants wish” (Archdaily, 2014). Whilst this work is of a different social and political context, it is interesting to note how Archigram playfully attempted to subvert traditional notions of the city and in particular the role of mobil-ity and connectivity in a city. In a similar manner, Antony envisages to use the LAGI competition and its reference to a 2025 carbon neutral Copenhagen to investigate cultural norms associated with energy use in citys.

ARCHIGRAM- PLUGIN CITY (1964-66)•ARCHITECTURAL DISCOURSE•HOW TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT•SYSTEM THINKING•CULTURAL NORMS

A2: DESIGN COMPUTATION

» Still frames of 2D animation of cell relaxation from pure voronoi network to relaxed voronoi network (vorlax)

Researching the role of computation in the overall design process of this biomimcry piece has helped Antony to see parametric design as a “new form of logic of digital design think-ing” (Oxman et al., 2014). Using programs such as Grasshopper, Kangaroo, Python and Lunchbox to in conjunction with parameters inspired by nature, Matsys were able to “input precise information with-out risking bias from the designer” (Matsys, 2014).

The notion of ‘setting parameters’ was initially quite a foreign concept to Antony, and he wasn’t quite sure what it all meant. However, it is quite clear through this experimentation that the designer was very much aware of the direction of the project as evidenced by the continuity from design inspiration to conception to construction. Whilst Antony’s early experiments with Grasshopper thus far have been quite random, he is beginning to see the value of creating direction through setting parameters.

As discussed in the week two tuto-rial, some argue that digital design trivialises design and takes it out of the hands of the designer. However, for Antony, this is but one project that disproves this notion and high-lights the extreme potential of com-putation an an accountable design tool (rather than a tool that simply results in random geometries).

MATSYS DESIGN- CHRYSALIS (III)(2012 PARIS)•CELLULAR MORPHOLOGIES•SELF ORGANISATION•SPRING NETWORK (MOVEMENT)•VORONOI NETWORK

Son-O-House by Nox was initially chosen as an exam-ple because of its relevence to the LAGI competition. The public pavilion is located in a large industrial park where “visitors can sit around, eat their lunch and have meetings” (Archspace, 2014). In addition, the structure itself is interactive with 23 sensors within the building allowing visitors to participate in the com-position of a musical experiment which can be heard within the structure. Antony’s team has been discuss-ing incoporating interactive elements into their LAGI competition design.

After further research, Antony realised this is in fact not a good example of computational design. In many ways, his choice of this building relates more to tradi-tional formal characterists of architecture such as loca-tion and function, which have been engrained in him through previous studios but which he wants to let go of in this studio. The building has thus been analysed as a learning exervcise to why it is not computational architecture.

Peters (2013) refers to ‘computerisation’ distincly from ‘computation’. ‘Computatation’ allows users to extend their abilities, imagine the unimaginable building, and go beyond a form they may have preconcieved in their mind. In contrast, ‘computerisation’ refers to the use of computers and technology to help realise ideas that are preconcieved in the mind of the designer. The design process of Son-O-House was first devel-oped through physical sketch modelling and later digitised. Thus, whilst computerisation may have played a vital part in enabling it’s construction, the design process involved was infact more traditional.

NOX -SON-O-HOUSE(2002 NETHERLANDS)•SOUND•INTERACTIVE•INDUSTRIAL AREA•PUBLIC ART

A3: COMPOSITION/GENERATION

Computational design, as opposed to computerisation, is defined by its ability to generate form beyond the imagi-nation of anything the designer could themselves alone concieve or draw. Thus, todays understanding of digital design sees a shift from composition to generation, whereby the computer becomes an integral part of the generation of a design rather than simply a tool to aid 2D or 3D repre-sentation of a preconcieved idea (as with Son-O-House). As Hanmeyer stated in his 2012 TED talk, “we are moving from an era where architects use software to one where they cre-ate software.” This notion is evident in Hanmeyer’s ‘Subdivided columns’. Here algorithms are key to the generation of the design. Algorithms are used as intelligent design agents to explore and discover endless iterations within Hanmeyer’s set parameters. “In each case I didn’t design the form, I designed the process that generated the form.”

An interesting byproduct of this type of digital fabrication is that unlike traditional architecture, the overall form and the minute detail are all fabricated as one. This throws tradition-al readings of form and ornamentation out the window and highlights the endless possibilities that could potentially be achieved when digital design and fabrication are eventually integrated into the mainstream construction industry.

“In each case I didn’t design the form, I designed the process that generated the form”

MICHAEL HANMEYER-SUBDIVIDED COLUMNS(2011/12)•ORNAMENT + FORM CONTINUOUS •ENDLESS PERMUTATIONS•LASER CUT 1MM THICK SHEETS

•ORNAMENT + FORM CONTINUOUS •ENDLESS PERMUTATIONS•LASER CUT 1MM THICK SHEETS

The generative computational meth-odology of Kokkugia’s experimentation is perhaps best explained by the artists own explanation of their work. “The articulation and reading of the project is inseparable from its methodology – it is a vivid expression of the intensive algo-rithmic process of its becoming” (Kokku-gia, 2014). It is clear that the generative nature of the computational algorithm and the design process is one and the same thing in the eyes of the artist.

» Prototype

KOKKUGIA - FIBROUS HOUSETEXAS- 2012•STRANDS •FIBROUS ASSEMBLAGES•COMPOSITE FIBRE TECHNOLOGIES

“The articulation and reading of the project is inseperable from its meth-odology - it is a vivid expression of the intensive algorithmic process of its becoming”

After brain storming numerous design approaches, our team has developed the following mission statement:

“A naturally oscillating mesh system aided by human interac-tion creating electrical energy through kinetic motion”

We have been exploring harvesting ocean wave (tidal) energy, which makes sense since the LAGI site is located in a harbour. We are also interested in creating an interac-tive environment where visitors so the site will help create energy through walking/climbing over/through/under/around oscil-lating surfaces that could be linked to the main energy harvesting system in the water. Experientially, visitors will ‘feel the tide’.

A4:CONCLUSION

» Simulated Wave Farmsource: World Ocean Review

At the beginning of the semester parametric architecture felt com-petely foreign to me. This is be-cause the formal design processes

that I have thus far become accustomed to, such as sketch modelling and sketching with a pencil, are no longer relevent to the design process. I am now coming to understand the role of computation and algorithms in the design process, and the importance of learning to ‘steer’ these by ‘setting param-eters’. I think ‘setting parameters’ needs to be our team’s focus in the coming few weeks.

A5: LEARNINGOUT COMES

A6: ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES

MY FIRST FEW ATTEMPTS AT CREATING AN ARRAY FIELD WEREN’T VERY VISUALLY APPEALING, THOUGH THEY HELPED ME GET MY HEAD AROUND GRASS-HOPPER. I GOT A HOT TIP FROM MY FELLOW GROUP MEMBER NICK LOVE ABOUT THE OCTI BLOCK FUNC-TION AND WENT AHEAD AND CREATED AN ARRAY WITH IT OVER A SIMPLE CURVED RECTANGULAR SURFACE.

SECTION TITLE

WEEK 1

WEEK 2

PERPENDICULAR FRAMES USED TO CUT THROUGH A LOFTED SURFACE AND THEN PIPED. BOTTOM RIGHT IMAGE SHOWS A PIPING ERROR

WEEK 3 360 DEGREE POLAR ARRAY USING DIVIDE COMPONENT

REFERENCES PART AFry, Tony (2008). Design Futuring: Sustainability, Ethics and New Practice (Oxford: Berg), pp. 1–16

Schumacher, Patrik (2011). The Autopoiesis of Architecture: A New Framework for Architecture (Chichester: Wiley), pp. 1-28

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

Ferry, Robert & Elizabeth Monoian, ‘Design Guidelines’, Land Art Generator Initiative, Copenhagen, 2014. pp 1 - 10

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

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

Rabee M, Reffat., Architectural Exploration and Creativity usingIntelligent Design Agents, University of Sydney,NSW 2006, Australia Theo Jansen, ‘Beast’, accessed 20/03/14 from http://www.strandbeest.com Michael Hansmeyer, ‘Subdivided Column’, accessed 25/03/14 from http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com

Kokkugia, ‘Fibrous House’, accessed 24/03/14 from http://www.kokkugia.com/fibrous-house Arcspace, ‘Son-O-House, accessed 22/03/14, from http://www.arcspace.com/features/nox/son-o-house/

Matsys Design, CHRYSALIS (III), accessed 16/03/14 from http://matsysdesign.com/2012/04/13/chrysalis-iii/ TED, ‘Michael Hansmeyer: Building Unimaginable Spaces’, accessed 24/03/14 from http://www.ted.com/talks/michael_hansmeyer_building_unimaginable_shapes#t-343509

ArchDaily, ‘The Plug-In City’, accessed 13/03/14 from http://www.archdaily.com/399329/ad-classics-the-plug-in-city-peter-cook-archigram/