qin wendy 584012 part1 journal pages

H E A D I N GS U B H E A D I N G

North Adelaide, as for most inner precincts of Australian cities, continues to transform

from established older residential building stock to larger and more contemporary commercial build-ings. In the case of Melbourne Street the predominant character of single storey buildings has long been under pressure due to the limited commercial accommoda-tion available in close proximity to the adjacent Central Business Precinct.

As a direct result the established patterns of narrow sites with stand alone residential buildings provid-ing a mix of both residential and commercial activity is now less de-sirable; especially given an increas-ing awareness that consolidation within such existing frameworks offers a more appropriate approach to sustainability and environments more suited to present day usage. With a 1970’s three storey brick commercial building to the east and a single storey early circa 1900

former residential building to the west the building is more than just a response to the Developers’ brief to maximise the potential of the site within the requirements of the Development Plan. The building construction, more akin to ware-house construction, is not uncom-mon for this type of commercial building. The scale of the built form respects both adjacent buildings with the

impact of the apparent mass reduced by an applied timber screen layer that, in conjunction with a large established Jacaranda tree, also provides protection from sunlight. Straddling the site, car parking is concealed and the under croft entry visible but understated.

The introduction of this suspended screen wrapping up against the street facade facilitates the transi-tion from the street and reinforces the sense of entry. With timber used in its natural state in conjunc-tion with South Australian Mintaro

slate flooring materials previously used in this locality are referenced yet counterpoint the concrete, glass and black painted steel. Build-ing services are to a commercial standard as required by the current market. Where this building differs from many in this area are in higher levels of thermal insulation, passive solar control offered by the entry screen and in the collection of storm water for re-use.

Internally the experience of transi-tion is further highlighted by the ever changing dappled light pene-trating the screen coupled with the tenuous balancing of the wrapping structure one walks under to reach the yellow entry door. Simple and understated, 195 Melbourne Street comfortably sits within the transi-tional streetscape and provides a glimpse of what is possible.

S T U D I O A I RJ O U R N A LW E N D Y Q I N | 2 0 1 3

3

C O N T E N T S .Introduction

PART A. Conceptualisation

A.1. Design FuturingA.2. Design ComputationA.3. Composition/GenerationA.4. ConclusionA.5. Learning OutcomesA.6. Appendix - Algorithmic Sketches

References

PART B. Criteria Design

B.1. Research FieldB.2. Case Study 1.0B.3. Case Study 2.0B.4. Technique: DevelopmentB.5. Technique: PrototypesB.6. Technique: ProposalB.7. Learning Objectives and OutcomesReferences

PART C. Detailed Design

C.1. Design ConceptC.2. Tectonic ElementsC.3. Final ModelC.4. Additional LAGI Brief RequirementsC.5. Learning Objectives and OutcomesReferences

4

5

610141818-

19

21

2225303238404243

45

466473809091

I N T R O D U C T I O N .My Name is Wendy, I have been in Melbourne at the University of Melbourne for the past 3 years completing a Bachelors of Environments majoring in Architecture.

I have moved around a fair bit in my lifetime, born in Shanghai, I grew up between Auckland New Zealand and Sydney. After finishing high school in Auckland, I de-cided to make the move across the ditch to Melbourne for tertiary education.

I have always been a huge fan of good design, however you want to define that. From publication layout to fur-niture design, interiors and of course architecture. There is also a deep appreciation of the craft of building and I guess what architecture appealed to me was the oppor-tunity to create something more than a pretty picture to look at - an actual building.

Growing up, I loved art. I loved to draw and create things. I would do almost all the media for school and college from cards to magazines and poster work. This interest also extended into graphic design and hard technology.

The decision to pursue architecture at a tertiary level was never a completely concrete one. With both parents in the building industry it seemed to be the right choice. This course has sparked a passion for the built environ-ment from my studies. It is fascinating, incorporating design, history, science and sociopolitical factors.

Aside from architecture and design I am also into music, I love learning new instruments and also any outdoors and water based activities.

5

P A R T A .C O N C E P T U L I S A T I O N

L A G I P A S T E N T R I E S 2 0 1 2

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

Tony Fry’s book: Design Futuring urges people to ex-amine design critically and asks “how can the future be secured by design?”[1] Applying Fry’s criteria to the LAGI 2012 New York competition entries brings out interest-ing points and criticism to bad design.

The precedents I found most compelling were the designs which encouraged interaction with the com-munity. How do these examples match up to Tony Fry’s design criteria.

One important point raised is that “Design, as an anthro-directive, profoundly secular and omnipotent practice has displaces the ‘invisible hand of God’. While unequivocally bonded to a human-initiated act, design takes on a determinate life of its own - designed things go on designing (be they designed to do so or not).”[2]

‘The Beauty of Recycling’ (FIG.2.) [3]takes recycled prod-ucts to create solar generators which float above the water during sunlight hours and then retreat under-water during evenings and perform a spectacular light show.[4] Recycling materials does bring to light the ‘dialectic of sustainment’ in these projects although only on a very superficial basis. “As change has to be by design rather than chance, design has to be in the front-line of transformative action.” [5]Solar panels creat-ing a light show and recycling materials is unfortunate-ly not the biggest progress in design.

‘Inefficiency can be Beautiful’ (FIG.1.)[6] takes an unusual approach to the design brief focusing on the genera-tor technology from a an interesting light. It is seen as a celebration of the advancement of clean energy generators and how they have improved but at the same time a reminder of the progress yet to come. Although the energy generated from the installation may be lower than others, it is informing and educating the public to be critical of design which is a key step the city of Copenhagen needs to take if they wish to go carbon neutral by 2025.

What this project has which the other example lacks in is the connection with the site in a more complex way. They have considered that this new park used to be a landfill and their design takes influence from that. This installation is not only interactive with the history of the land but is also interactive with the climate as the transparent solar panels change colour depending on thermal properties and therefore I see this as a much more developed design than ‘The Beauty of Recycling’. It will influence future designs in a beneficial way.

7

FIG.1. Inefficiency can be Beautiful

FIG.2. The Beauty of Recycling

K I N E T I C .

Energy FloorsEfficiency: 50%

Looking for interactive ways of generating energy I came across the ‘Sus-tainable Dance Floor’ which uses the kinetic energy of people walking or dancing to generate electricity that lights up the floor or can be fed back

into the grid. This is a way in which the public can see a direct result of the generators working creating a fun and encouraging atmosphere.

This particular product can not only be used in a dance floor scenario but also along busy public footpaths and even roads.

Additionally, most generators convert other forms of energy into kinetic. With less energy transformations, this type of generator energy is already

more efficient.

It works using a piezoelectric sensor which measure changes in pressure, acceleration or force by turning it into electricity. Therefore when pressure is applied to the square, the floor module will flex slightly, a small internal

generator takes that movement and transforms it into electricity. Each floor module is 75x75x20 and can produce up to 35Watt sustained output.

5-20Watt per person. 4

9

FIG.3. Technical DiagramFIG.4. Car part example

FIG.5. Energy generating floor modules used to generate electricity for the street lamps

M I C H A E L H A N S M E Y E R

Computational design is a new strand of design thought emerging with the increased ability of tech-nology to process complex data sets. In comparison to computerised design, computational methods allow design to go beyond the mind of the designer. It al-lows the designer to process complex sets of informa-tion at a remarkable speed and accuracy.

Work of programmer and architect Michael Hansmeyer illustrates the complexity of which algorithmic design can reach. His designs aim to “create an architecture that defies classification and reductionism. They ex-plore unseen levels of resolution and topological com-plexity in architecture by developing compositional strategies based on purely geometric processes.”5

In the Digital Grotesque project, (FIG.6.)6 is an experi-mental project which takes algorithmic design into the real world using an additive layer system, using CNC (computer numerically controlled) to 3D print complex designs accurately to an 8 cubic metre scale. It truly shows how computational design breaks down the barriers for information. The level of complex-ity that is able to be achieved is microscopic, design takes over the material properties and construction all together. This acknowledgement of the new level of power design holds can change the entire way design is thought about.

Hansmeyer’s work is very much research based, exploring the possibilities of computational design and thus not much of his work is fabricated. The use of computational design methods is largely based on algorithmic structures derived from nature such as his work on L-Systems. These methods are genera-tive rather than compositional “thus strikes a delicate balance between the expected and the unexpected, between control and relinquishment. The algorithms are deterministic as they do not incorporate ran-domness, but the results are not necessarily entirely foreseeable.”7 Many of his other projects mimic nature and do illustrate a complex randomness which is quite beautiful as well as imitating a nature’s rational logic of structure. “Natural Design is more than imitating the appearance of the organic. It is learning from natural principles of design how to produce form in response to the conditions of the environmental context.”8

With the growing ability of computational design technology, it changes the nature of design. With 3D printing and more accurate fabrication methods, the scale of design can me almost microscopic. It crosses into the material realm; opening more opportunities and complications

Hansmeyer’s work shows computational design in its purest form and fully explores parametric, algorithmic and generative design processes. Projects such as the

A . 2 . C O M P U T A T I O N A L D E S I G NFIG.6. Digital Grotesque










11Other Projects by Michael HansmeyerFig.7. Columns (subdivision)Fig.8. L-SystemsFig.9. VoxelsFig.10. L-Systems

L-Systems, Voxels, Platonic Solids are all fantastic explo-rations of this new language of design.

The possibilities of computational design have men-tioned future possibilities of creating a ‘second nature’ where buildings can process information, grow and be responsive to changing environments and needs.

Another precedent: the Spoorg; a photosensor/sonic installation commissioned for the Gen(h)ome exhibi-tion at the MAK Center for Art and Architecture in LA. Spoorg stands for “semi-porus operable organism” and models off a primitive, usually unicellular and often en-vironmentally resistant, dormant or reproductive body produced by plants and some micro-organisms. At-tached to the interior and exterior of a window opening, these Spoorgs “allows the cultivation and decoration of domestic space by distributing and expanding shad-ing and sound into a cellular, semi-porus membrane. Through this form of cultivation, new behavioural pat-terns emerge.”10 Similar to how Spoorg cells can operate individually as well as collectively by forming aggregate systems through stacking and clustering as well as through cell division, fusion or nesting with other cells to create new individuals unlike the parent cells. This installation mimics this process in the way it can com-municate to each cell using wireless communication and its ability to receive sounds and light levels to then produce responses. Interactive systems of information shows the next step in design and the ability now for designs to be responsive rather than static.

The overall form is also generated using parametric modelling of angles and the distribution of wireless and radio signals.

This project showcases the possibilities of complex de-sign aided by computational softwares and algorithmic design not only restricted to architecture.

S P O O R G

FIG.11.

13

FIG.12. SpoorgFIG.13. SpoorgFIG.14. Diagramatic mapping of signals

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

N A V I G A T I N G T H E C O M P U T A T I O N A L T U R N

Generative design methods differ from traditional compositional design methods in the way that end design is reached is a method which goes beyond the designer. Often the final form is completely unknown when the designing first starts. By using computa-tion to analyse complex datasets the design process is bottom-up rather than squeezing a design out of a set of restrictions. After the process of experimentation the final forms can be reassessed against design briefs and then put through the process again.

Much of computational design can be difficult to translate into built forms due to other “non-geometric parameters such as social, economic and engineering.” 11

UNStudio produces work using computational design which do become fabricated into built architecture while still applying a bottom up design approach allowing them to use algorithmic design techniques.

Small projects such as the Burnham Pavilion in Chi-cago (2009) (FIG.15, FIG 16)12 are “key testing grounds for computational strategies.”13 This relatively simple parametric design already faces a number of obstacles, an essential one is how it will stand.

Another precedent: Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport Terminal 2 structure by SOM showcases a compositional design approach rather than generative. The signature concrete roof clads an extensive structural system (FIG.17, 18).14 In compari-son to another project by SOM, Tianjin’s High Speed Rail Station, embraces the generative design process and thus manages to successfully overcome barriers to generate a roofing structure which is uniquely effi-cient, lightweight and economical (FIG.19).15

“It is clear now that computation is ubiquitous, and form-making and form-controlling are no longer its most expedient uses. Whether it is through proprietary

FIG.15. Burnham Pavilion in Chicago (2009)FIG.16. Burnham Pavilion, simple geometries

15

FIG.17. Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji International Air-port Terminal 2 (2014) SOMFIG.18. Engineered structure underneath hidden

and customised software or a single piece of code, computation’s primary potential lies in its flexibility to communicate design across multiple disciplines via associative data”16

The Tianjin High Speed Rail Station illustrates an effi-ciency and speed of being able to test out and modify algorithmic designs. Much of this design method is based off natural systems. The rail station is too derived from growth patterns found in nature, proven to be structurally efficient. The lines adopts a lenticu-lar form, defined by a parametric model. In addition to creating a structurally efficient model, this roof also lets in light into the underground train station. Pictured above (FIG.19, 20), the Tainjin train station design does not look too far from the patterns gener-ated onto the Mumbai Termial 2 structure. The design process is however different.

It is not to say compositional design is inferior because the Terminal 2 structure does hold a much richer cultural and historical design response. The patterns

in the concrete represent the patterns on a peacock (FIG.20),17 a national bird and the overall shape of the columns reference the form of traditional pavil-ions. The design is well thought out and a beautiful, resolved solution. Where generative design is more efficient in the way it can break down information barriers, that does not replace a certain distinct human artistic quality.

The possibilities opened through parametric design is overwhelming. However, much of the limitations lies in fabrication technology, for now we cannot 3D print an entire building.

As parametric generative design is still developing, it is vital that generative design is developed into an integrated art form rather than an isolated craft. The balance between generative algorithmic scripting and human initiated design decisions key to creating integrated design resolutions while still exploring the future possibilities of this change in design thought.

S U B H E A D I N G

17

FIG.19. Tianjin High Speed Rail Station (2012) SOMFIG.20. Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport Terminal 2 (2014) Precast concrete pattern resembling peacock feathers

A . 4 . C O N C L U S I O N

A . 5 . L E A R N I N G O U T C O M E SMy new understanding of computational design has pushed me to think about design and architecture in a new light. This is the future of design and it chal-lenges all of our traditional way of thought. In theory the concept of generative computational design holds possibilities that can be hard to imagine. The possibility to create a ‘second nature’ is a thought rather frightening. But for now what is important is that these ideas are becoming possible. With the research and technology that could be the future.

In practice it has allowed complex projects to be generated. We are now living in an information age where the speed and accuracy at which we are able to process complex datasets is incredible. This com-puter power also makes it possible to break down information barriers. Designers can work from the conceptual realm into the engineering and construc-tion all using the same parametric model.

“Computation’s primary potential lies in its flexibility to communicate design across multiple disciplines via associative data”

Taking this new understanding of design processes, I now have the opportunity to design in a whole new way. My designs can develop into much faster and complex forms, it will become easier to incorpo-rate structure into my design and create functional efficient structures. All of this links back to our first section: Design Futuring. This new way of design needs to be smarter if we wish to do less damage to the environment.

My intended design approach for the LAGI competi-tion will be one which encompasses a bottom-up design approach. I want to experiment with compu-tational and parametric design possibilities without forcing restrictions upon my design too early on in the process. I would be interested in trying out some of the generative process Michael Hansmeyer adopts such as L-Systems and subdivision process. Ideally I would need to develop my level of technical skills to avoid the algorithms taking over control of my design.

I look forward to adopting these design approaches to push myself out of the normal comfortable idea of compositional design. Additionally, I look forward to be able to work with much more complex datasets then I was able to comprehend before and by do-ing so hopefully my end design will be much more resolved and efficient than what I would be able to produce without the use of computation.










R E F E R E N C E S .Beckett, Richard and Sarat Babu. ‘To the Micron: A New Architecture Through High-resolution Multi-scalar Design and Manufactoring’, Architectural Design, 84, 1 (2014), pp.112-115

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

Ferry, Robert & Elizabeth Monoian, ‘A Field Guide to Renewable Energy Technologies’, Land Art Generator Initiative, Copenha-gen, 2014. pp 1 - 71

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

Hansmeyer, Michael. ‘Projects’, Michael Hansmeyer, Computational Architecture, <http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com/pro-jects/projects.html?screenSize=1&color=1> [accessed 20 March 2014]

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

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

LAGI. Review: Land Art Generator Initiative Competition Entries, 2012 < http://landartgenerator.org/LAGI-2012/> [accessed 20 March 2014]

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

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

Servo. ‘Projects: Spoorg’, Servo Los Angeles <http://www.servo-la.com/index.php?/projects/spoorg/> [accessed 28 March 2014]

SOM. ‘Tianjin High Speed Rail Station’, SOM: Projects <http://www.som.com/projects/tianjin_high-speed_rail_station> [ac-cessed 27 March 2014]

SOM. ‘Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport – Terminal 2’, SOM: Projects <http://www.som.com/projects/chhatrapati_shivaji_international_airport__terminal_2> [accessed 27 March 2014]

SOM. ‘Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport – Terminal 2 – Structural Engineering’, SOM: Projects <http://www.som.com/projects/chhatrapati_shivaji_international_airport__terminal_2__structural_engineering> [accessed 27 March 2014]

Van Berkel, Ben. ‘Navigating The Computational Turn’, Architectural Design, 83, 2 (2013), pp.82-87

19

21

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

B . 1 . R E S E A R C H F I E L D

B I O M I M I C R Y

People have often turned to nature for inspiration especially in architecture. This influence from nature can range from the physical aesthetics in ornamenta-tion to the structural systems. Now with the urgency of sustainability designers have been looking deeper into understanding how these complex systems with-in nature work. It has developed from simply being a physical abstraction of a tree-like building into using nature to try find what works and what is sustainable and adaptable. This method of designing influenced by living systems is termed biomimicry. [1]

Biomimicry is an innovation method that seeks sus-tainable solutions by emulating nature’s time-tested patterns and strategies, e.g., a solar cell inspired by a leaf. The goal is to create structures that influence new ways of living—that are well-adapted to life on earth over the long haul.

This process of design instruct us to build from the bottom up, self-assemble, optimize rather than maxi-mize, use free energy, adapt and evolve, and use life-friendly materials and processes, engage in symbiotic relationships, and enhance the bio-sphere. By follow-ing the principles life uses, you can create products and processes that are well adapted to life on earth. Not only that but nature is a system refined over 3.8 billion years with proven performance and success.

Biomimicry in computational design is the focus of part B. This field includes mimic nature, fractals, voro-nois, hexagons, etc. [2]

The design of this 3000 square feet exte-rior building skin is influenced as a think interstitial environment (the empty space between spaced of full matter). [3] The densities of the porous meshwork are layered based on the building’s interior program. The aim of the design is to in-vent an architectural system that performs similar to the demolished green strip as well as creating an atmospheric protec-tion. [4] “Airspace Tokyo is a zone where the artificial blends with nature: sunlight is refracted along its metallic surfaces; rainwater is channeled away from exterior walkways via capillary action; and interior views are shielded behind its variegated and foliage-like cover.” [5]This design refer-ences the previous natural facade system of dense vegetation and replicating that artificially. It goes beyond simply appear-ing like vegetation but to also filter light and moisture in the same way.

F a u l d e r s S t u d i o - A i r s p a c e T o k y o

23

A r a n d a L a s c h - M o s t t h i n g s

Aranda Larsch are especially interested in working with octahedron structures and fractal patterns, [6] taking the shape and repeating the geometry with infante variations. These designs are influenced by crystal structures that are modular and repetitive, drawing from the process of reproducing, populating and decaying. This precedent focuses on the generative architectural qualities of de-signing from nature but not the other possibilities of designing from biomimicry.










B . 2 . C A S E S T U D Y 1 . 0V o l t a D O M S k y l a r T i b b i t s

This particular project is for MIT’s 150th Anniversary Celebration and FAST Arts Festival. It populates a cor-ridor of the MIT campus. It is compiled of hundreds of vaults which reference the great vaulted ceilings of historic cathedrals. [7] The vaults provide a thickened surface articulation and a spectrum of oculi that pene-trate the hallway and surrounding area with views and light. VoltaDom attempts to expand the notion of the architectural “surface panel,” by intensifying the depth

of a doubly-curved vaulted surface, while maintain-ing relative ease in assembly and fabrication. [8] This is made possible by transforming complex curved vaults to developable strips, one that likens the assembly to that of simply rolling a strip of material.

25

P l a y i n g a r o u n d w i t h d i f f e r e n t i n p u t s i n G r a s s h o p p e r

A.

B.

C.

29

E v a l u a t i o n

I selected these as being the most successful itera-tions from the matrix.

The process of finding new forms and patters using computational methods proved to be an interesting challenege. It does differ a lot to the standard pen to paper technique and requires a different way of thinking around the geometries.

I found this exercise rather frustrating due to my lack of understanding of what the program was capable of producing but I tried to push around this issue by watching more tutorial exercises and linking it back into the definition.

I understand that the first time will always feel a bit forced but it has already helped a lot in devel-oping my understanding of how to use Grasshop-per in computational design.

A. Distributes the cones along curves and varies the individual properties of each cone based on their location. I admire the ability to create com-plex patterns using this technique.

B. One of the more experimental iterations. This again populates the cone geometry around points along curves to generate an interesting shape and pattern.

C. Once again, I found the ability to repeat a geometry over a number of patterns the most suc-cessful part of this exercise.

B . 3 . C A S E S T U D Y 2 . 0I T K E R E S E A R C H P A V I L I O N 2 0 1 1

The project explores the architectural transfer of biological principles of the sea urchin’s plate skeleton morphology by means of computer-based design and simulation methods, along with computer-controlled manufacturing methods for its building implemen-tation. The design principals of this project derives itself from a biological system of the plate skeleton morphology of the sand dollar, a sub-species of the sea urchin (Echinoidea), became of particular interest and subsequently provided the basic principles of the bionic structure that was realized.[9] High load bearing capacity is achieved by the particular geometric ar-rangement of the plates and their joining system and therefore allows for extremely lightweight construc-tion using 6.5mm sheets of plywood. Three plate edg-es always meet together at just one point, a principle which enables the transmission of normal and shear forces but no bending moments between the joints, thus resulting in a bending bearing but yet deformable structure and unlike traditional lightweight construc-tion, which can only be applied to load optimized shapes, this new design principle can be applied to a wide range of custom geometry. [10]

Besides these constructional and organizational principles, other fundamental properties of biological structures are applied in the computational design process of the project:

Heterogeneity: The cell sizes are not constant, but adapt to local curvature and discontinuities. In the areas of small curvature the central cells are more than two meters tall, while at the edge they only reach half a meter.Anisotropy: The pavilion is a directional structure. The cells stretch and orient themselves according to mechanical stresses.Hierarchy: The pavilion is organized as a two-level hierarchical structure. On the first level, the finger joints of the plywood sheets are glued together to form a cell. On the second hierarchical level, a simple screw connection joins the cells together, allowing the assembling and disassembling of the pavilion. Within each hierarchical level only three plates – respectively three edges – meet exclusively at one point, therefore assuring bendable edges for both levels.

31

R e v e r s e E n g i n e e r e d i n G r a s s h o p p e r

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

E v a l u a t i o n

I selected these as being the most successful itera-tions from the matrix.

A. I selected because it incorporates the cell struc-ture and structural efficiency which comes with it. It takes an interesting geometry and adds to it by applying a surface pattern/texture. It is flexible in a lot of ways.

B. Embodies an amorphous quality in the struc-ture which creates a dynamic experience through patterning and layering.

C. Is an algorithmic design highly influenced by the input parameters which I have imputed as site specific parameters. This opens possibilities of feeding in many other layers of information into the design.

A.

B.

C.


37

After trialling various methods to reverse engineer the ITKE re-search pavilion, we were struggling with a definition that was

rather temperamental and not very flexible. At this point we took a step back to looking into the LAGI brief, site context, clean en-

ergy technologies and architectural precedents. Two precedents which influenced our next step are the Kengo Kuma Sensing Space

Exhibition and the most recent Serpentine Gallery Pavilion by Sou Fujimoto. The amorphous quality of these structures create a really

beautiful spatial experience very unique to each individual. The method of repeating a geometry across the site to create a dynamic

patterning effect sparked a lot of possibilities using grasshopper and prototyping, playing around with lighting effects, layering, etc.

K e n g o K u m a S e n s i n g S p a c e E x h i b i t i o n

2 0 1 3 - 2 0 1 4

S o u F u j i m o t o S e r p e n t i n e G a l l e r y

P a v i l i o n 2 0 1 3

B . 5 . T E C H N I Q U E : P R O T O T Y P E S

Our first prototype was recreating a simple box grid structure and experimenting with lighting and material effects such as infilling panels at ran-dom. Our second prototype took a more irregular structure; extruded hexagons varying in radius and distances. Our second prototype embodies the amorphous quality and we can start seeing a development of unique dynamic architectural experience with variations in patterning.










39

M A T E R I A L I T Y R E S E A R C H

During the research phase of possible materials that could be utilised in this project, we came across elec-troactive polymers which is a material painted in sili-con layer, acrylic polymer film and a conductive layer that when a current is run through, flexes into a pre-remembered form and then flexes back into its origi-nal shape. This material does not require a particularly high current to create movement and is economic to produce as well as being lightweight, adaptable and flexible. [11](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XGVMXCxBNA)

From our prototyping, our original concept was to populate the LAGI site with these extruded hexagons which would vary in height and radius depending on site related parameters such as circulation paths, views and sun path. Electricity generated from the current circulation on the site from the 2 main walking paths (from the ferry terminal) using the piezoelectric tiles. However, when a user steps off the main circulation path onto a tile adjacent, the current generated from that impact would create movement of the extruded hexagons. These would move up or down to shift the overall form and open new paths for the individual to explore, generating more movement and thus more clean energy.

This concept would embrace our main selection crite-ria:- movement- awareness of the environment and environmental issues- clean energy generation- site and context relevant

By creating a direct visual manifesto of the clean energy generation leads into creating a dynamic and educational spatial experience unique to each user. Also the idea that this creates opportunity to generate more movement and more clean energy is one which seems relatable back to biomimicry and taking advan-tage of a positive feedback loop.

From this initial concept, we had to refine to maximise energy generation and efficiency as well as struc-tural integrity. Instead of moving the entire extruded geometry up and down which seemed unviable. From this we decided to make use of these elecrtoactive polymers which create movement using very minimal energy input. We saw opportunities to make the cyl-inders expand when energy is produced, creating and closing off paths which would dictate movement as well as serving as an visual indication of clean energy generation.

It was also raised that we should be taking more advantage of the opportunities to generate clean energy, more than just pedestrian movement. Because we are working with kinetic and piezoelectric and considering that the LAGI site in Copenhagen is also in a high wind location. Pairing that with piezoelectric technology which is sensitive enough to pick up tap of my finger would be sensitive enough to pick up wind energy higher up the structure as well as harnessing the pedestrian traffic below.

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

Our proposal for the LAGI brief is to create a open structure using a 2 step algorithmic design pro-cess. This design populates extruded hexagons across the LAGI site in Copenhagen and changes the radius depending on input parameters such as distance from main circulation routes. This clears out paths on the ground level and then inverses the algorithim to create a canopy above.

This algorithim still needs a lot of further refine-ment - to create spacing between the cylinders so people can move across and also to create a canopy that occupies the entire site. There is still more opportunity to play with patterning.

The design takes advantage of a lightweight

structural frame that conducts a current through-out when energy is being generated.

An electroactive polymer fabric will be wrapped around this conductive frame which flexes when a current is run through it. These extruded hexa-gons will expand and contract throughout the site to generate patterns and open/close access paths to create a dynamic architectural experi-ence for each user.

Electricity is generated using peizeolectric panels which will be distributed across ground level and also on the tops of the structure to harness kinetic energy from wind and pedestrian traffic.

The inverse relationship between the 2 algorithms shown here. This design is mainly influenced by the 2 main movement paths already identified on the LAGI site from the ferry terminal.










The method of repeatedly populating a surface with a geometry to create patterns is illustrated well in this prototype, we hope to carry this archi-tectural quality throughout our design.

42

B . 7 . L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S A N D O U T C O M E SDesigning based on a bottom up approach is one that has been challenging and different but has given us some interesting results. Our design response focused on applying real world parameters and design require-ments that goes back into feeding which direction our design takes. With our rhino and grasshopper skills still at the beginner levels of development, it was more familiar to use real world parameters.

Our group has produced a proposal which takes a generative algorithmic approach to form that also generates a unique architectural response to the brief. From our intrim presentation, what seems to be lack-ing so far is material research to make our proposal viable and convincing.

That will be our next focus in the design process. We have enough research to believe it is viable - what we

are hoping to do. It would be great to prototype actual electroactive polymers and see how they move with current and also to make advantage of wind energy generation as well.

Another refinement which needs to be made is to our grasshopper definition. There are more parameters that can be inputted to maximise wind power genera-tion, lighting effects, views, etc. However, we have come a long way from first working with flat 2D pat-terning into extruded 3D forms.

But for now we have the bases of our algorithm and a clear architectural direction which will guide the rest of our design process.










R E F E R E N C E S .Biomimetic Architecture. “Biomimetic Architecture - Biomimetics and Architecture: Images and Ideas.” Biomimetic Architec-ture. <http://www.biomimetic-architecture.com/> (accessed May 5, 2014).


Ferry, Robert & Elizabeth Monoian, ‘A Field Guide to Renewable Energy Technologies’, Land Art Generator Initiative, Copenha-gen, 2014. pp 1 - 71


ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011. “ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 Institute for Computational Design (ICD).” Institute for Computational Design (ICD). <http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=6553> (accessed May 5, 2014).

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

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


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

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

SJET. “SJET.” <http://www.sjet.us/MIT_VOLTADOM.html> (accessed May 5, 2014).

43

45

P A R T C .D E T A I L E D D E S I G N

C . 1 . D E S I G N C O N C E P TD E S I G N R E S P O N S E T O L A G I B R I E F

The brief asks to design and construction of public art installations that have the added benefit of large-scale clean energy generation.

- Presenting the power plant as public artwork which stimulates and challenges the mind of visitors on ideas about sustainability- Distribute clean energy into the electrical grid at a utility scale (equivalent to the demand of hundreds or thousands of homes)- Be pragmatic and constructible and employ technol-ogy that can be scalable and tested- Be well informed by a thorough understanding of the history, geography, details of the design site, and the broader contexts of Refshaleøen,Copenhagen, and Denmark;- Simultaneously enhancing the community- Increase livability and stimulate local economic de-velopment

The entries to the LAGI competitions prove that re-newable energy can indeed be beautiful and that pub-lic artwork can have an ecologically positive impact over its life-cycle. The LAGI competition design entries would stand as a positive amenity to the public spaces of any city. [1]

- LAGI Copenhagen 2014










47

R E F I N E M E N T

Part C of this journal focuses on the refinement pro-cess of the design. This looks into materiality, tectonic connections, and the suggested program of the scheme.

Moving forward from Part B we went through the refinement stages to our definition. We needed a more faceted design. Our design response was to create a dynamic design of hexagon modules going up and down forming a jagged mountain landscape shown in the concept sketches. This meant tweaking the grasshopper definition to take in multiple inputs to jagger the extrusions. We establishes the access paths we experimented with drawing them in with curves as well as image sampling in diagrams. We ended up using curves due the ease of manipulation with the definition.

Our material selections changed around also. With the realization that piezoelectric polymers do not gener-ate a great deal of electricity - not enough to move structures. We thought up of other ways of giving us-

ers a visual representation of the energy generated.

The canopy was also struggling to find justification in our design. So first we removed it and that is when we came to the idea of having a solid extrusion up to 2m then the frame continuing upwards to hold a panel at the top which collected kinetic motion from wind.

It shows that designing also takes place outside of the computational realm. We needed to pull back from the grasshopper definition and put pen to paper to try and figure out a solution.

These concept sketches illustrate the architectural qualities and spatial experiences of our design we tried to carry throughout - the organized grid struc-ture morphing into a more confusing pattern the more you populated at different angles. I wanted it to be organic and adaptable wile still maintaining a logic to it all.

49

FIG.Process of sketching, prototyping and tectonic connection brainstorming

Our response to the design brief was to create a dynamic and intriguing landscape - a structure that could serve as a platform for clean energy generation. We chose to focus on harnessing kinetic energy using piezoelectric. The theme of movement and kinetics is one which carries throughout our design process. Using parametric design processes, our design takes in a range of real-life and site-specific parameters. The hexgrid populated across the given site responds to existing paths, views and program.

The proposed structure is adaptable - across a range of programs including several stage settings used to host music and cultural festivals and performances. Using culture as a platform to connect the community to ideas of clean energy generation.

This design not only harnesses the kinetic motion of foot traffic but also have piezos on the frame to capture the motion of wind - which is very present in Copenhagen. The structure is inhabitable and is designed as a giant playground for people to climb over. Once dark, the Pavegen tiles light up in a way that gives a direct visual manifestation of the users contribution to generating clean usable energy. By giving users direct indication of their contribution not only brings forward the burning issue of how we plan to sustain our planet and energy consumption but will also encourage more movement across the site, creating more clean energy - a positive cycle of clean energy generation.

STEPPING STONES

D E S I G N R E S P O N S E










The parametric model of this design proposal is made up of 3 key parts.

1. Piezoelectric paths which are populated over the main access paths. These generate a current when walked on. It is largely flat and includes only a few of the extruded panels which form the climbing structure.

2. Climbing structure: these are not populated with piezoelectric panels for material efficiency purposes but form a dynamic climbable landscape up to 2m in height for safety. The height of each panel is related to the distance from the paths. Portions of this become large open stage areas.

3. Wind structure: above the 2m mark the panels are extruded up further with a copper piped frame which users can walk through. These frames hold a wind capturing piezoelectric panel at the top. These extrusions are dependent on the distance from the paths and can reach up to 10m in height.

51

INPUTS- Paths: drawn in using curves taking in the ferry termi-nal, views across the site and- Stages: illustrated by the circles in the diagram below, these were placed in ‘dead zones’ of circulation and open up the space using the cull tool- Size of panels: set by the number of polygons across the x and y axis of the surface- Width of the path cut out: using a curve CP tool- Number of piezos on the path: cull smaller than x distance from paths and stages- Max height of climable structure: set by distance plane is moved (2m)- Max height of wind piezo frame

With all these inputs into the definition, it becomes very easy to change the design by referencing more or different paths and stage areas. It is possible to put more piezoelectric cells across the site by setting a higher distance from the curves to cull which would also open up the space a lot. The maximum heights are all variable as well.

This makes the design very adaptable to the use of the site as well as the number of piezoelectric cells. We can use this to calculate which formation of cells would be the most efficient. It is a simple design however the scale at which it is put across makes it almost impossi-ble to figure out numbers and change the formations without the use of grasshopper and parametric tools.

D E S I G N I N G U S I N G P A R A M E T R I C T O O L S

WATER TAXI TERMINAL

VIEWS OUT

VIEW

S O

UT









Internally the experience of transi-tion is further highlighted by the ever changing dappled light pene-trating the screen coupled with the tenuous balancing of the wrapping structure one walks under to reach the yellow entry door. Simple and understated, 195 Melbourne Street comfortably sits within the transi-tional streetscape and provides a glimpse of what is possible.In reference to part A of this journal, this

design process illustrates how using com-putational design allows the designer to create ‘smart’ structures that achieve more than aesthetic qualities.

53

KINETIC

FOOT TRAFFICWIND

ELECTRICITY

P I E Z O E L E C T R I C S E N S O R T E C H N O L O G Y

- Foot Traffic: Panels flex 5mm to capture kinetic energy and stored in a lithium polymer battery

- 7 Watts per step per person

- 50% energy efficiency

- Stage panels: 10-20mm flex to generate 5-20Watts of power per person

- Although the power generated from a single Pavegen is insignificant. Power generated from thousands of Pavegen could be powerful enough to collect significant amounts of energy

- It’s advantage is that its harvesting energy that is already there, as the development around the site grows with the planned introduction of cafes and entertainment complexes, there will be an increase in foot traffic through the site, allowing us to install even more panels.

This clean energy technology is based on the found-ing principals of piezoelectricity: an accumulation of an electrical charge in crystals from applied stresses. [2]

FOOT TRAFFIC

The pressure of a foot step on the panel (made of PVDF material) will cause a deflection in the material which will induce an electrical current.

WIND

Piezoelectric cells in long straw forms are attached to the structure are designed to move with the mo-tion wind. Material costs are low and populated over the scale of the LAGI site can generate a generous amount of usable energy.

CURRENT PRODUCTS

Pavegen [3]- 7 Watts per step per person- Top is made from 100% recycled rubber and the base slab is made from 80% recycled materials

Energy Floors [4]- Flexes more to accommodate bigger forces (10-20mm)- Up to 20 Watts per step per person- Connected to LEDs in each panel










55

W I N D P I E Z O E L E C T R I C B U I L D I N G P R E C E D E N T

The wind piezoelectric technology is based on a project done by Swedish stu-dio: Belatchew Arkitekter and their project ‘Strawscraper’.[5]

The top of the building is covered with bristle like piezoelectric straws that move with the motion of the wind. The benefits of this technology is that it doesn’t concern people and animals with noise of the sight of wind turbines. It vibrates in the wind rather than chopping it up like wind turbines. [6]

“The idea is to fix a piece of PVDF film on the backside of a cylinder bluff body, when the wind cross this bluff body, it will lead a vortex shedding, then the periodic pressure difference from the periodically shedding vortex could drive the Piezo-Leaf to be bending in the downstream air wake, synchronously, we collect the AC signal from the flapping Piezo-Leaf which is working on a peri-odic bending model, and store the electric energy to capacitor or other stor-age after rectifying it by a full-wave bridge.” [7]

Our design makes use of the same technology. It also possess poetic archi-tectural qualities when blowing in the wind and ties in well with our dynamic design scheme. Click on the link below to see how this building moves with the wind.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYcIn1Fj4ow

Copenhagen has high strong winds which made this technology a logical choice. Although the energy generated from each piezoelectric panel is small, populated over a large site like the LAGI site, this technology has the potential to improve in efficiency to harvest the kinetic energy from Copenhagen’s con-stant strong winds with low material costs.

STRAWSCRAPER

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

WIN

D P

IEZ

OS

GR

OU

ND

PIE

ZO

SA B C

166kW 166kW

90% of steps onto Pavegen tiles1 000 000kW

1 000 166kW a year

133kW


1 000 133kW a year

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

WIN

D P

IEZ

OS

GR

OU

ND

PIE

ZO

SA B

166kW 166kW


1 000 166kW a year

59

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

C

133kW


1 000 133kW a year

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

I T E R A T I O N S

A. 14832m of frame

PER DAY934.5 kWh

B. 12208m of Frame

PER DAY769.1 kWh

B. 987 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 43.4%

C. 6450m of Frame

PER DAY406.3 kWh

C. 1656 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 25.8%

D. 2552m of Frame

PER DAY160.8 kWh

D. 2414 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 17.8%

E. 2884 PIEZOS

EFFICIENCY 14.9%

D E

105kW

57 % of steps onto the Pavegen tiles1 000 000kW

1 000 105kW a year


1 000kW a year

Wind

Each piezoelectric cell generates 0.0001W in wind speeds of 4m/s [8]Wind speeds in Copehagen average out at 15-20m/h at 2m in height

As these piezoelectric polymers will be placed at heights ranging from 2-10m in heightThe wind speed at the average height of 6m is 20m/h

A single hexagon panel can hold up to 200 individual piezoelectric cells which will flap with the wind.There are 1897 panels across the site which will hold the wind piezoelectric cells.

166kW per year

E N E R G Y G E N E R A T I N G C A P A C I T Y

61

Currently the technology is still under development and data is from early experiments but it gaining in popularity over the short time it has been around. Hopefully within time of building this structure, a more developed product comes to the market fulfilling the potential of this scheme.

Paths

300 visitors a day each taking roughly 200 steps during their visit. On special events we expect up to 7 000 visitors each taking roughly 1000 steps during an event.Average outs to 147.5 million steps a year generating 1 000 000 kW of power a year.

Pavengen products are much more developed than the wind piezoelectric technologies and thus generates energy much more efficiently.

All together this provides 1 000 166 kW of clean energy for the city of Copenhagen.

S U G G E S T E D P R O G R A M

3

2

1

5

4

STAGE- Festival venue for music con-certs & performance stage- Harness kinetic energy of in-creased foot traffic and pressure- Connecting the public to the issue of clean energy through culture

FRAME- Harnessing kinetic energy from wind power- Stronger wind the higher up- Users can walk through

PATH- Access to water taxi and across the site- Harnessing kinetic energy from foot traffic along paths

AWARENESS- When stepped on surrounding panels light up as a direct mani-festo of the process of clean energy generation- Sense of ownership

CLIMBING STRUCTURE- Encourages more movement; more clean energy to harness- Engagement with the site- Raising awareness - Dynamic landscape










63

C . 2 . T E C T O N I C E L E M E N T SG R O U N D P I E Z O P A T H S A N D C L I M B I N G S T R U C T U R E

Due to the massive scale and number of these extrusions that are populated across the site, it is essential for these structures to be easy to erect.

With the benefits of parametric tools, it was possible to formulate a tectonic proposal of how the design would be put together.

With the hexgrid pattern, there are 3 edges meeting at a single point which gives the frame strong structural integrity. Three plate edges always meet together at just one point, a principle which enables the transmission of normal and shear forces but no bending moments between the joints, thus resulting in a bending bearing but yet deformable structure.

The set up of the piezo paths and climbing structure is a lightweight metal frame on which the plywood clads onto. On the top would sit the piezoelectric cell with a recycled rubber outer layer for protec-tion. On the climbing structure without the piezos, the top would be clad with plywood instead.

65

RECYCLED RUBBER COVER

PIEZOELECTRIC POLYMER

TOP FRAME

INTERMEDIARY FRAME

PLYWOOD CLADDING

POWER STORAGE

BASE FRAME

Here is a close up of the frame where 3 edges meet at a point. The structure locks together and creates a very rigid joint. Thus eliminating the need for extra components.

Close up render of the joint shows how it forms a rebate for the cladding to sit up against.

This was achieved by moving points along the hexagons to the corners, joining the points to create a closed curve and extruding it to the height of each module.

J O I N T 1










67

This approach is much more mechanical but structurally very rigid. It aims to keep the modules locked into place. It is rather difficult to construct but begins to explore possibilities. This shows the con-nection between 3 modules connecting at a point. However, with the angles at which the edges meet, the locking of the structure is sometimes a bit difficult to achieve. It may be more efficient to reduce the number of tabs that will still perform in the same way.

J O I N T 2

WIND PIEZO

JOINARY

COPPER PIPE FRAMING

COPPER PIPING

WOODEN PANEL

W I N D P I E Z O F R A M E

This frame sits above the climbing structure. It consists of a cop-per piped frame which holds and protects the wiring from external environments. This frame also holds a panel populated with piezo-electric cells which vibrate in the wind.

The main connection in this structure is between the pipes.Again, due the sheer number of these populated across the site it is important to use prefabrication techniques to simplify the construc-tion process.This joint, unlike the others is exposed and has an impact on the ap-pearance of the scheme. It is integral to keeping the angles in place and the rigidity of the frame.










J O I N T 3

Allows for connection between 1, 2 or 3 pipes.With this model it is possible to adjust the material thickness, sphere radius length of the sockets

There are 6 x 1897 of this joint across the site.

71

C . 3 . F I N A L M O D E L

1:10 TECTONIC BASE FRAME MODEL


1:10 TECTONIC 3D MODEL


1:1000 SITE MODEL

C . 4 . A D D I T I O N A L L A G I B R I E F R E Q U I R E M E N T S

Our proposal to the LAGI competition is a dynamic sculptural landform - a structure that’s main purpose

could serve as a platform for clean energy generation and education of the public. We wanted an fun and interactive space that heightened people’s awareness of clean energy generation.

We chose to focus on harnessing kinetic energy using piezoelectric. Although the electricity generated is less

than other options, the theme of movement and kinetics is one which carries throughout our design process.

Using parametric design processes, our design takes in a range of real-life and site-specific parameters. The hexgrid populated across the given site responds to existing paths, views and program.

The proposed structure is adaptable - across a range of programs including several stage settings used to host music and cultural festivals and perfor-

mances. Using culture as a platform to connect the community to ideas of clean energy generation.

This design not only harnesses the kinetic motion of foot traffic but also have piezos on the frame to capture the motion of wind - which is very present in Copenhagen. The structure is inhabitable and is de-signed as a giant playground for people to climb over. Once dark, the Pavegen tiles light up in a way that

gives a direct visual manifestation of the users contri-bution to generating clean usable energy. By giving users a sense of ownership of their contribution not only brings forward the burning issue of how we plan to sustain our planet and energy consumption but will also encourage more movement across the site, creating more clean energy - a positive cycle of clean energy generation.

The proposed design is made up of 3 key parts.

1. Piezoelectric paths which are populated over the main access paths. These generate a current when walked on. It is largely flat and includes only a few of the extruded panels which form the climbing struc-ture.

2. Climbing structure: these are not populated with piezoelectric panels for material efficiency purposes but form a dynamic climbable landscape up to 2m in height for safety. The height of each panel is related to the distance from the paths. Portions of this become large open stage areas.

3. Wind structure: above the 2m mark the panels are extruded up further with a copper piped frame which users can walk through. These frames hold a wind cap-turing piezoelectric panel at the top. These extrusions are dependent on the distance from the paths and can reach up to 10m in height.

81

The materials needed for the construction of this design are: - light weight metal internal frame for 2884 hexagons- 2884 x 6 4mm plywood cladding panels- 987 Piezoelectric hex cells- 987 recycled rubber hex top- 1897 5mm plywood top clad- 12208m of piped material with a copper coating- 1897 x 6 prefab joint #3- wires and individual power storage units

Wind- 10 mW from 15-20m/h wind speeds at 2m- 200 cells populated across a panel- 1897 panels populated across the site- Panels average 6m in height- Gernerating 166kW per year

Paths- 300 visitors a day each taking roughly 200 steps during their visit. - On special events we expect up to 7 000 visi-tors each taking roughly 1000 steps during an event.- Average outs to 147.5 million steps a year gen-erating 1 000 000 kW of power a year.- 7W per step- Generating roughly 1 000 000 kW a year

All together this scheme produces1 000 166 kW a year

Environmental Statement.

The purpose of this design is mainly to raise awareness and to get people to question the future of energy consumption in Copenhagen and around the world. This is done by giving indication that user’s own move-ment is the direct cause of clean energy generation, we want to give people a sense of ownership of the problem and the solution.

The changable nature of this design is the other major selling point. The more people come to the site over time with other major developments in the area mean there is justification to populate more piezoelectric cells across the site.The panels can be replaced with better technology over time and can serve as an ever going experiment for clean energy technology. The cells can be moni-tored, giving us valuable feedback for the future in energy generation and consumption.

It needs to be understood that our world is always changing and a key aspect of biomimicry is learning about how organisms learn to adapt to survive. We aim to create a ‘platform for clean energy production’ by producing a frame which can change technology and function. Serve as a platform for research, devel-opment and experimentation for products that can be populated across an even greater scale and hopefully will make a real difference in the future of our planet.

C . 5 . L E A R N I N G O B J E C T I V E S A N D O U T C O M E S

Objective 1. The brief given posed more than just a design criteria. It asks to take in energy generation and broader envi-ronmental issues. I took onto this brief with a compu-tational mindset. It was difficult at first, it felt like I was just producing meaningless shapes and patterns. It took a combination of computational design methods and standard design techniques to bridge the gap. It helped to explore materiality and also researching precedents to feed back into the design process.

Objective 2. Throughout the semester I have learnt a range of skills within the computational design world. It was clear that my limitations in being able to design using grasshopper is mainly linked to my lack of under-standing of the software. They say you need to learn the craft before you can design. After expanding my skills through the weekly sketchbook exercises, using computational design methods was like incorporating another number into the equation. If I became stuck in form finding I would research into materials and technology applications, if I became stuck with that I returned back into experimenting with grasshopper, sketching or model making.

Objective 3. The refinement process was when parametric mod-elling became the most helpful. The logic translates smoothly into model making, fabrication and dia-gramming. The site analysis diagrams of access paths and views directly fed into the grassshopper model which in turn lead to the fabrication process.

Objective 4. Due to the nature of my proposal, the design can only be realized properly when seen in whole. This is why

physical models played a big role in the process. As rendering proved to be a very slow and problematic process with the sheer number of pipes and meshses, in the end it was the physical model that communi-cates the overall product the best.

Objective 5. The proposal needed to be conceptually, technically and pragmatically convincing meaning itwas also necessary to think critically about the approach to cre-ate a scheme that was efficient, sculptural, enjoyable, inhabitable and logical.

Objective 6. The additional criteria of having generate energy gave the design another dimension. It helped guide the design process as well as giving it a benchmark to design against. Calculating efficiency levels and the amount of energy generated was data that lead to the final form.

Objective 7. By putting in more parameters into the model allowed me to achieve a more complex surface geometry. However it required an understanding of data struc-tures and how they worked.

Objective 8. After reaching an end point in case study 2.0 I decided to rain back to a much simpler algorithm. I understood that my lack of understanding of the program during the early designing stages was a huge limitation in the overall design process. By taking real like parameters into the grasshopper model gave me direction in the design process. By understanding the limitations of the allowed me to find other ways to move forward.










91

R E F E R E N C E S .Cornell University. “Flapping Piezo-Leaf Generator for Wind Energy Harvesting.” Cornell Creative Machines Lab. <http://creativemachines.cornell.edu/node/116> (accessed June 12, 2014).

Energy Floor “Sustainable Energy Floor.” <http://www.sustainabledanceclub.com/products/sustainable_energy_floor/> (accessed June 12, 2014).


Ferry, Robert & Elizabeth Monoian, ‘A Field Guide to Renewable Energy Technologies’, Land Art Generator Initia-tive, Copenhagen, 2014. pp 1 - 71


IEM. “Copenhagen Site Wind Roses.” IEM :: Site Wind Roses. <http://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu/sites/windrose.phtml?station=EKRK&network=DK_ASOS> (accessed June 12, 2014).


Pavegen. “Technology.” <http://www.pavegen.com/technology> (accessed June 12, 2014).

qin wendy 584012 part1 journal pages

Documents

type of commercial building

building construction

entry screen

c o n t e n t s

lw e n d y q i n

d i n gs u b h e

d i n gnorth adelaide

s t u d i o