Design stuDio: Air

Sam DunkleyTutorial 16: Cam and Victor

2014

tAble of Contents 3 Introduction

4 Part A: Conceptualisation

5 A1. Design Futuring

8 A2. Design Computation

10 A3. Composition/Generation

12 A4. Part A Conclusion

12 A5. Learning Outcomes

14 Part B: Criteria Design

15 B1. Research Field

16 B2. Case Study 1

20 B3. Case Study 2

20 B4. Technique Development

28 B5. Technique: Prototypes

30 B6. Technique: Proposal

40 Part C: Detailed Design

41 C1. Design Concept

66 C2. Tectonic Elements

72 C3. Final Model

78 C4. Additional LAGI Requirements

3

introDuCtionI came into the Bachelor of Environments without having any previous experiences in any of the subjects I undertook in first year. Every one of my first year subjects (even my breadth) I felt as though I was struggling to catch up with people who were already far ahead of me. Until I began using Rhino in Virtual Environments. While at first I found the concept of this program as confusing as my peers, I soon began to understand the way it was put together, and began to adapt the way I approached my other subjects to try to allow my use of it. Unfortunately, my learning came slower than the course, and it was only by the end of the semester that my Rhino skill were up to scratch -too late for me to do well in the subject or be proud of what i created, but I had learnt enough to feel comfortable in Rhino.

In addition to Rhino, I am going into this studio with relatively in-depth knowledge of the standard set of design programs: the Adobe Creative Suite and Autodesk’s AutoCAD and Revit. As well as building on my skills with these, I would like to get some experience with StudioMax and Maya.

Before my pre-semester research into Grasshopper, I had never heard of it or considered the usage of “explicit history”. It seems like a very valuable tool which could make many tedious parts of Rhino much less so -automation of repetitive tasks allows a deeper investigation into each design -being able to easily make changes without having to do the whole thing again seems like a great way to achieve better designs.

In 2013 I took a leave of absence from the university, and worked as an IT technician. While I didn’t do all that much scripting, I did come to understand the workings behind programs -much as Grasshopper seems to directly interact with the workings behind Rhino. I hope I will be able to put my software knowledge to good use throughout the semester.

PArt A: ConCePtuAlisAtion

5

A1. Design futuring In his book Design Futuring, Tony Fry investigates where design should go in the future. Much abbreviated, his opinion is that designers and the public should mobilise in response to climate change, with the goal of ‘sustain-ability’ as the central motivation. It is difficult to disagree with his assertion that this is where designers should look, however there are several drivers which will influence the more pragmatic, short-term motivations of designers.

Sustain-ability

The ability to be sustained -designs will have to respond by either being long-lasting enough to be worth putting in the large amounts of energy and resources it takes to construct, or they must be designed to be recyclable, re-usable, to deconstruct and reconstruct without wasting resources or energy.

Social

As much as we might think otherwise, designs are for people. In the future, designers will find ways of justifying their work. Analysis tools are becoming more available and easy to use, which allows a designer to show users the why of the design, as well as simply the what.

Technological

With the increasing availability, ease of use and reducing costs of both parametric software such as Grasshopper and fabrication tools such as 3D printing and laser cutting, designers will have much more scope for design. While previously, designers would often only use these tools if it were an integral part of their design, in the future they will become available to virtually all designers -like the advent of printing and CAD in addition to hand drawing.

6

In this project, Loop.ph aimed to explore the use of renewable biofuels on a small scale. The Algae Curtain pumps algae-filled water through a series of plastic tubes to harvest the sunlight coming in through the window. As they photosynthesize it, the algae produce a sort of clean biofuel which can be used for heat and electricity generation. The Nannochloropsis algae requires a nutrient, and the structure consumes electricity through the pump, however these environmental costs are outweighed by the volume of renewable energy which is produced.

I would assume that the designers used a form of parametric analysis to understand what they could and couldn’t do with the materials. For example, there would have been restrictions on the minimum and maximum distance the algae can travel through the sunlight and the radius of curvature for the pipes. These appear to have driven the final design outcome. The designers did not explain in detail the actual basis for the pattern, but I believe there is a scope here for parametric design in this situation.

If this project was to inspire a commercially viable option of using this system in homes or commercial buildings,, it would change the face of energy production wildly. I find this realistic (though possibly unrealised in its current form) application to be the most appealing part of this project.

Future Fruits: Algae CurtainLoop.pHEDF 2012

ImagesLoop.pH, “Loop.pH,” Loop.pH Web Page, 2013 <http://loop.ph/>

[accessed 10 March 2014]

7

LichtströmeLoop.pH

Koblenz, Germany

This project was conceived with the notion of bringing together science and architecture. The group aimed to create environments where people can recognise and understand the scientific ideas on a reasonable, tangible level. Inspiration was drawn from the German scientist Ernst Haeckel, and his work in microbiology.

The physical form is taken from Radiolaria - tiny skeletons of oceanic micro-organisms.

The other side of the architects’ program is integrated these scientific ideas with the people who are observing them. Drawing on this idea of connection to the community, they chose to base their fabrication methods on Archilace - Lace-making.

The final product is an eerie, entrancing network of inter-linking geometries, lit and coloured with a dynamic fluorescence.

The way they took inspiration for form quite directly from these natural systems is one approach which is often employed in parametric designs. While it produces an intriguing structure, I would question its relevance. I believe that using an existing form as the basis of a parametric design in some ways defeats the purpose -why not just recreate the form exactly?

Lichtströme Loop.pH http://loop.ph/portfolio/lichtstrome/ accessed 26/2/14

Lichtströme Loop.pH http://loop.ph/portfolio/lichtstrome/ accessed 26/2/14

“Phaeodoria”, Kunstformen der Natur (1900), From BioLib.de, 2007http://caliban.mpiz-koeln.mpg.de/haeckel/kunstformen/high/Tafel_001_300.html Accessed 26/2/14

ImagesLoop.pH, “Loop.pH,” Loop.pH Web Page, 2013 <http://loop.ph/> [accessed 10 March 2014]

8

A2: Design ComPutAtion

Made in 2004, Matsys’s honeycomb structure is an example of computation. The basis of the project was to create a structure which used the material’s properties to the fullest extent. This goal refutes, at least in the designer’s view, the way many industrial systems are put together today, and mimics instead the natural world where evolution eliminates any imperfections in the way things fit together. The “Manifold Installation” pictured above is not the final outcome of the design -it is merely an application of the tool which the designers created. The tool uses computational analysis to formulate a design based on a honeycomb shape, combined with the structural properties of the material -these are the parameters used which alter the final outcome.

It could be argued that there are some elements of computerisation in the Manifold structure. It is likely that the designers had the idea of the ‘honeycomb wall’ in their heads, then found a way of using the tool to create a design which fit their preconceived ideas of the outcome they desired. However, by this argument there would be very few projects which are complete computation.

This project represents one of the main justifications for parametric design: a certainty of efficiency. Assuming that the original algorithm was sound, Matlab can quantifiably say that any structure created by it is without a doubt using the material to its fullest potential.

ComputationHoneycomb MorphologiesMatsysLondon, 2004

Images:MATSYS, “Honeycomb Morphologies,” MATSYS Web Page,

2004 <http://matsysdesign.com/category/projects/honeycomb-morphologies/> [accessed 17 March 2014]

9

ComputerisationBurnham Pavillion

Zaha HadidChicago, 2009

While this Pavillion appears to be a product of some kind of computation, it should in fact be considered computerisation. The structure is based on an aluminium frame, wrapped with an interior and an exterior fabric skin.

The computerisation component of this design process is apparent in the fact that no two pieces of the aluminium framework are identical. Once the form had been established Hadid (or more likely one of her under-architects) digitised the design and used the computer’s analytic abilities to work out the necessary bends and dimensions of the frame and the fabric.

This contrasts with the Matsys project, and therein lies the difference between computerisation and computation. Hadid used the function of the computer as a tool to fabricate her work, while Matsys created a tool which creates a design for them.

In making this contrast, one must make a judgement on the merit of each approach. In what way is one method better than the other? Hadid created a beautiful pavilion, however its efficiency can be questioned. How well the structure “works” is entirely subjective. The simple fact of the hidden structure wrapped with a skin shows that the aluminium has been used to fit the design, and as such is not utilizing the material to its fullest potential.

Oxman and Oxman describes this difference. “Formation before form” Computer aided vs computer integrated.

http://www.laphil.com/wdch10/wdch/architecture.html

Images:MATSYS, “Honeycomb Morphologies,” MATSYS Web Page, 2004 <http://matsysdesign.com/category/projects/honeycomb-morphologies/> [accessed 17 March 2014]

10

A3. ComPosition/generAtionFabricationGantenbein Vineyard FacadeGramazio & KohlerFläsch, Switzerland, 2006

The use of computation and parameters can be combined with fabrication machinery to produce outcomes which would be too expensive, too difficult or too labour-intensive to be created with traditional methods.

Gramazio & Kohler’s facade employs the parametric in various ways. To begin with, the patterns which were to be created were based on the digitisation of “Falling Spheres” into the “basket” of the existing concrete frame-inspired by the grapes which, provide the livelihood of the wine-makers and, in turn, the funding for the project. Using the parameters of the spheres’ radii and starting locations combined with the constants of the basket’s size and the effect of gravity, the individual angles of each brick was generated.

While the designers did use a generative algorithm to construct the form, it could be argued that it was more computerisation than computation: the designers had a form which they wanted to create, and then used the digital tool to model it. Likewise, it could be considered somewhat superficial or literal -modeling an image on the skin of the building almost like a mural.

While it was created to allow light through by leaving a gap between the bricks, I believe there was scope for more analysis on thing such as the exact amounts of light which would be let through -for example at different times of the day throughout the year. A form modelled with that in mind could be considered more interesting and constructive than a simple representation of a picture.

The use of the parametric model extends to a further use: fabrication. Utilising a robot arm to construct the panels, they generated an algorithm (or set of instructions) as to the exact movements required by it for the fabrication. Working from this algorithm it would pick up the bricks, apply the two-part bonding agent, and lay them with precision.

Automation of the fabrication process is something which many industries have been utilising for decades, however smaller-scale architecture projects have not entirely embraced it for various reasons. Now that the technology is beginning to become more available and user-friendly (to an extent), there is much more scope for a wider adoption of these methods.

ImagesGramazio, Fabio, and Roger Kohler, “Gramazio & Kohler”, 2006 <http://www.gramaziokohler.com/web/e/bauten/52.html> [accessed 20 March 2014]

11

ResponsivenessHygroSkin

Achim MengesFRAC, Centre Orleans

2006 Achim Menges’ “Meteorosensitive Pavillion” focusses on the use of their materials’ inherent responsiveness to its external climate to alter their internal space. By making the size of the perforations into the space reactive to the humidity of the air, they have made the space inside naturally responsive to the environment.

Taken from spruce cones, this is one form of biomimicry which I find completely justified and useful -instead of just mimicking the form of the natural system (as did the Vineyard), the designers used the function of the natural system to their advantage. They copied a natural system to make their building more efficient and effective, while having a completely passive system.

This took incredible engineering, which was achieved through the use of parametric software. Individual pores within the plywood respond to the humidity to change the shape of that piece of wood. There is a set of physical rules which governs this shape change, so the designers could define a parametric link between the rules and the final shape which each panel would be. From these rules, another instruction set was created for their 7-axis robot to complete the fabrication.

Through this project, Achim Menges has used ingenious integration of architecture, biology, and climate science to discover one of the most effective realised exploration into parametric design I have seen.

Images:Achim Menges, “HygroSkin: Meteorosensitive Pavilion,” achimmenges.net, 2013

<http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5612> [accessed 22 March 2014]

12

Throughout my studies of Architecture, I have always found a strong divide between two ideologies with which undergraduate students are presented. They could be called the scientific and the artistic, the rational and the irrational, or the pragmatic and the abstract. In many cases and subjects, the dichotomy of thought between these two approaches to architecture and design is not really addressed. Tutors and coordinators who focus on construction techniques, sustainability and material efficiency are disdainful of those who embrace the artistic and abstract phenomenological aspects of architecture. Likewise, many lecturers and studio leaders appear to be of the opinion that the actual feasibility of a building doesn’t matter, only the artistic background of the proposal.

One of the challenges of architecture is resolving this conflict. Using algorithmic programming to shape the design allows one to justifiably assert that their outcome has merit -so long as their definition is sound.

Coming from a background of science and technology, I have always observed the appeal of the rational, justified means of building. Some of the more artistic aspects I have simply skirted around, struggled through or had to work hard at; whereas I have been more comfortable with the representational and practical problem solving. Kalay (2004) states that “design problems... often do not contain enough information to be solved rationally”, and therein lies my problem. Using parametric modeling does not eliminate this uncertainty, but it creates a situation where designers have the ability to break many problems down into manageable, measurable components which can then be combined to produce a result.

Putting this ability in the hands of architects is, in my opinion, a good thing. Having the tools to model and analyse many of the physical situations which will affect a building quickly and easily decreases the chance of bad architectural decisions.

While this is, to me, perhaps the most appealing use of parametric design, it is neither the most obvious nor the most employed. Oxman and Oxman’s ideas that “architectural culture [is attempting ]to divest itself of the representational as the dominant logical and operative mode of formal generation in design”. Interlinked with this is the distinction between computation and computerisation. Throughout the subject so far, it has been implied if not openly stated that computation over computerisation is the more justified, valuable method of form generation. This can be true, however it is not always the case. I propose that designs such as Loop.ph’s Lichtströme have little justification beyond the simple visual appeal. A parametric system can be a useful tool, however I do not see the value in creating such a tool to simply model an entirely irrelevant structure. In this situation, I would prefer drawing the inspiration for a form from the imagination of a master architect or a brilliant historical precedent, rather than some arbitrarily chosen natural process. I believe that since we have in Grasshopper the tools to justify our decisions, we must make them based on scientifically infallible reasoning rather than a cool shape someone else saw under a microscope.

A4&5. PArt A ConClusion AnD leArning outComes

13

Instead, I propose a new method of design: to take Oxman & Oxman’s Vitruvian Effect (2014) to its logical conclusion: that an architect’s job is to define a “Digital Continuum” from the beginning to the end of a project -to define an algorithm with adjustable parameters of context, budget, client choices, the building’s function and so on, which then justifiably defines the outcomes of everything from fabrication methods to the building’s layout and orientation to what sort of louvers should be placed on the windows for the most effective sun utilisation. All these things are simply a digitised version of the processes which go on inside an architect’s head -each decision changes the later decisions based on a huge number of explicit and implicit factors.

My ‘Universal Definition’ is, however, beyond the scope of this assignment. What I expect to create in this studio is a small portion of the Definition -perhaps like Matsys I will find the most effective use of a material and its properties. Perhaps I will create a parametric definition which, when given a GPS co-ordinate, re-orients my design to the most efficient sun use. That will come in part B.

Achim Menges, “HygroSkin: Meteorosensitive Pavilion,” achimmenges.net, 2013 <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5612> [accessed 22 March 2014]Centennial, The Burnham Plan, “Burnham Pavilion by Zaha Hadid Architects,” The Burnham Plan Centennial Web Page, 2009 <http://burnhamplan100.lib.uchicago.edu/multimedia/image_gallery/

category/Burnham+Pavilion+by+Zaha+Hadid+Architects/> [accessed 16 March 2014]Gramazio, Fabio, and Roger Kohler, “Gramazio & Kohler”, 2006 <http://www.gramaziokohler.com/web/e/bauten/52.html> [accessed 20 March 2014]

Issa, Rajaa, Architecture as Autopoietic System, Second Edi (Robert McNeel and Associates, 1995), pp. 1–42Kalay, Yehuda E., Architecture’s New Media: Prinicples, Theories and Methods of Computer-Aided Design, MIT (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004), pp. 5–25 <http://medcontent.metapress.com/index/

A65RM03P4874243N.pdf> [accessed 26 March 2014]Kolarevic, Branko, Architecture in the Digital Age: Design and Manufacturing, 2003 <http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=L-p4AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Architecture+in+the+Digital+

Age:+Design+and+Manufacturing&ots=Q22pAGce-z&sig=U4jHa5Z0XhMla5jRKMWlgPHsqs0> [accessed 26 March 2014]Loop.pH, “Loop.pH,” Loop.pH Web Page, 2013 <http://loop.ph/> [accessed 10 March 2014]

MATSYS, “Honeycomb Morphologies,” MATSYS Web Page, 2004 <http://matsysdesign.com/category/projects/honeycomb-morphologies/> [accessed 17 March 2014]Oxman, Rivka, and Robert Oxman, 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, 8–15Stueber, Kurt, “Art Forms of Nature (1900),” www.biolib.de, 2007 <http://caliban.mpiz-koeln.mpg.de/haeckel/kunstformen/high/Tafel_001_300.html> [accessed 10 March 2014]

Wilson, Robert A., and Frank C. Keil, “Definition of ‘Algorithm,’” in The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (London: MIT Press, 1999), pp. 11–12

A4&5. PArt A ConClusion AnD leArning outComes

PArt b: CriteriA Design

15

b1. reseArCh fielD

The team decided on the Research Field of “Strips/Folding”. Through our research, we focussed on generating a form, breaking it into developable strips, and looking at methods of fabrication.

In many architectural applications from digital design tools to traditional pen-and-paper, there has often been discontinuity between the conceptual design and the final building of the project. Many students have developed a wonderful form in Rhino, only to become stuck as to how to translate that into something which can actually be built.

We tried to approach this project with the goal of creating a developable design ingrained in the making of the form itself.

From observing other designs which utilise strips of material, several points become apparent:

• Strips can only be curved in a single plane. To achieve curved in two planes, each strip must be built curved, for example by warping a thermoplastic polymer or 3D printing the strips. These take a lot more effort for fabrication, and can be avoided through good digital design

• Most designs which utilise strips seem to use them as ‘ribs’, for the structure. Our team chose instead to focus on methods of converting a surface into strips for fabrication.

16

Seroussi PavilionAlisa Andrasek As part of her Biothing project, Alisa Andrasek developed the Seroussi Pavilion. The main focus of the definition provided was the use of vector fields, which really had little bearing on our final outcome. However it was the only option for Case Study 1.0 in our chosen research field, so we worked with it. Working with this definition helped me understand how fields work, as well as various ways to manipulate surfaces and curves.

b2: CAse stuDy 1

17

Original

Increased start points

Large central circles

Additional field lines

Longer field lines

Altered curve gradient

Altered original curves

Altered original curves to 3D

Elliptical original curve

Variations -curves

Original curve is a field line (iterative)

18

Pipes

Variations -Surfaces

Mirrored and lofted

Creating developable surfaces

19

20

Archipelago PavilionChalmers Uni Tech

Developed by architecture students, the Archipelago Parametrically Designed Pavilion is an exploration in the integration of digital design with fabrication techniques. I found this very appealing as it is a method of using computation to reduce cost and time of construction of relatively complex structures. By taking the principles explored in by the team, there are many real-world applications which could be utilised very easily.

b3 AnD 4: CAse stuDy 2 AnD teChnique DeveloPment

21

22

Method 1This method was a good starting point, as it showed me how difficult it was to manage the data streams though the Grasshopper Definition. After some manipulation, however, I rejected it: there was no continuity between the top and bottom halves -the mirroring process made for a poor match between them. In addition, the final form was much more restricted, as the starting curve was the only manipulable input geometry.

Created arcs through the curves

Divided into threeStarting Curve Scaled and raised

Lofted arcs

Mirrored to form shape

23

Narrower secondary curves

Altered control points

Totally broke it

Wider secondary curves

Further altered control points

Shifted secondary curves to twist arcs

Altered original curve in three dimentions

24

Method 2With this method, I aimed for a much simpler definition. This was more restrictive since I couldn’t alter many input parameters at all.

Created arcs through the curves

Rotated to form three circlesStarting Circle Introduced edge curves, created top lines

Lofted to form shape

25

Higher top lines Lower top lines Altered side curves

26

Method 3Another tact was creating a more holistic definition -each arc spans from the top to the bottom, making for a much smoother outcome. However this structure as it is would be very difficult to fabricate as each surface is curved in two planes.

Created arcs through the curves

Divided into three and raised top oneStarting Curves Rebuilt, scaled and raised to midpoint to form mid curves

Lofted Divided curve using arcs

27

Curves from previous definition

Strips are guaranteed to be buildable using Ruled Surfaces

Nested each strip onto card, and added tabs to aid in fabrication

Curves are intersected with vertical planes

Unrolled each surface

Arcs are created from these intersections

28

An early attempt to observe ways in which we could utilise strips in our designs. As each piece is made from paper curved in only one direction, fabrication was very easy.

b5. PrototyPes

29

After completing the digital replica of Archipelago, we printed and cut the pieces in order to make a scale model. This model was not a success in terms of its own structure and stability, however we learned valuable lessons from its creation. Since the whole structure is to be held in tension, it needs to be held together tightly, otherwise cracks will appear between the panels. The tabs which I created in my digital definition were not sufficient at that scale, giving us a decent idea of what will be required. In addition, we have settled on the use of 1.8mm Aluminium strips, which will be curved after cutting. These are light and strong, and will hold their shape much better than the paper due to their pre-curved nature.

30

b6. ProPosAlEnergy Generation As a method of “harnessing natural energy”, we looked to the users themselves. Harnessing the energy put out by exercising humans is a great way to engage people and make them think about what energy (and therefore electricity) actually is, and how it affects us.

Historically, we have harnessed energy from human movement in many ways, from pottery wheels for manufacturing to palanquins for transport. We looked to these methods for inspiration.

One easy method of energy generation from people is to have them walk over piezoelectric panels, which changes the vibration energy into electricity. These, however, are very expensive to manufacture, and only produce a tiny amount of power unless they are in an area with extreme numbers of people walking through.

We instead chose to utilise human’s mechanical energy by implementing a rotating treadmill-type device, with a dynamo in the middle which converts rotational energy to electrical. This can be fed back into the grid with use of a converter and an inverter. We looked into other alternatives, such as an exercise bike which fed into the dynamo, however the treadmill proved to be the most efficient.

Food

People

Kinetic (rotational)

Electricity

Main Grid

Energy Flow

31

32

Empower Playground http://www.gizmag.com/empower-playground-merry-go-round/29253/pictures#1

Empower Playground generator http://www.gizmag.com/empower-playground-merry-go-round/29253/pictures#2

In Ghana, Empower Playgrounds have designed an energy generation system which we could utilise in our project. Beneath the spinning platform there is a re-purposed wind turbine energy generator, which transforms the kinetic energy of the playing children into electricity.

By putting people in this situation, we aim to make them think about what energy actually is -it is not just ‘feeling energetic’, or the kilojoules in food, nor is it just electricity or a spinning wheel: it is all of these things.

33

http://subsite.kk.dk/sitecore/content/Subsites/CityOfCopenhagen/SubsiteFrontpage/LivingInCopenhagen/ClimateAndEnvironment/CopenhagensGreenAccounts/EnergyAndCO2/Consumption.aspx

Energy Production

34

Design Brief

The design site boundary encompasses the Sønder Hoved pier section of Refshaleøen and some of the surrounding waterways. The pier is an old landfill that is partially comprised of material from buildings that used to exist on the now empty site.

There are no LAGI 2014 design restrictions on foundation depth or type. The proposed artworks can exist anywhere within the site boundary, but must not break the plane of the site boundary at any height. The design proposals must not exceed 125 meters in height at any point (height measurement is not an average but an absolute limit).

There are some other design considerations to note. At the southwest corner of the site there is a water taxi terminal which is to remain. There are plans to develop the waterway to the south of the site with houseboats, and boat access into the channel north of the site must also be maintained.

35

Environmental Factors in Copenhagen

Source: http://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu/sites/windrose.phtml?station=EKRK&network=DK_ASOS

Winter Spring Summer Autumn

Wind

Wind

Source: http://www.gaisma.com/en/location/kobenhavn.html

36

Site Analysis

Refshaleøen sits at around 55.67°N. This high latitude, means summer days are very long while winter days are short. The climate is very cold during winter, but in summer months there is much outdoor activity from Copenhagen’s residents. Denmark is well known for its healthy outdoor exercising lifestyle, especially walking and bike riding. As such, our design aims to harness the healthy energy by providing a recreational space for this outdoor activity to take place.

Despite Refshaleøen’s heritage as an industrial zone, the demise of the B&W shipbuilding company in 1996 paved the way for a great change. It is now home to many cultural and recreational locations, notably venues for music performance. In addition, the developers are interested in making a “climate-friendly neighbourhood”. As such, we believe there an opportunity for a design which blends with the surrounds -to interact with the bike paths, the music concerts, and the creative people who live and work there.

Currently, the site appears as a flat expanse of grassland. We will keep this idea, but tame the vegetation to our own purposes -to create a lush, grassy terrain where people can go to experience the greenery and views.

VisitCopenhagen, “Life on Refshaleøen”, http://www.visitcopenhagen.com/copenhagen/sport/life-refshaleoen

Ugenserhverhv “Gammelt industriområde skal være ny klima-bydel i København” (Old industrial area must be new climate-district in Copenhagen) http://www.ue.dk/byggeri/25650/gammelt-industriomraade-skal-vaere-ny-klima-bydel-i-koebenhavn (translated with Google Translate)

37

38

After settling on a form generation method and a means of producing energy, the next challenge was to integrate these two ideas.

Form Proposal

39

Circular Treadmill

Hand Holds

Bearing Hub

Dynamo and Grid Inverter

Stormwater Collection

Our design proposal, seen here in situ at the LAGI site.

PArt C: DetAileD Design

41

C1. Design ConCePtAfter receiving feedback from the guest critics at our Interim Presentation, it was clear that we needed to refine our design more. The following questions were posed, and needed to be addressed during Part C:

Where will we go from here to improve and refine our design? How can we make the design more original, rather than being so similar to the Archipelago Pavilion?

How can we provide more integration between the energy generation mechanics and the actual pavilion?

Where is the integration with the site? Why do we have just a single pavilion in the middle of a huge flat site?

Why aluminium as a material? What fabrication implications does this have?

42

Integration with SiteAs it stands, our design has virtually no interaction with the site itself. Firstly, instead of having a single pavilion, we can to create a series of them across the site. We can then vary them in terms of size and function. A footpath will link each into a whole circuit which encompasses the site.

In addition, we will alter the site itself to create a more integrated design outcome. The topography of the landscape will be redesigned to fit with the contours of the pavilions.

Refined DesignAs was suggested in feedback from the guest critiques, I began to use the Kangaroo Physics add-on for Grasshopper. This gave me a wide range of additional tools to work with. As a starting point for learning the capabilities of this system, I looked at the Developable Strips tutorial made by Daniel Piker. In this tutorial, he gives an example of a physical relaxation of a form, followed by “stripping” and unrolling it. By utilising the “Kangaroo Physics”, “stripper” and “unroller” components, we could improve our design dramatically.

43

Integration of Energy and FormSince our chosen method of energy generation is kinetic energy in the form of rotation, we chose to use the ideas of spinning and spirals as a theme for the design. As the people will be walking on the spinning treadmill, the pavilion will be based on a spiral design, which will in turn be situated in a site where rotation is the theme on which the landscape is based.

MaterialsPreviously, our chosen material was 1.6mm Aluminium sheeting from which to cut our strips. The reasoning behind this was simply that it was similar to the steel used in the Archipelago Pavilion. We need a material which is easy to cut, easy to bend into curves without snapping, and lightweight. For these reasons, we settled on 1.2mm Polypropylene. This has many benefits over the aluminium, and other material options such as plywood or acrylic:

• It can be cut with a laser rather than the CNC Router. This in itself is a huge saving on time and cost, and allows much more accuracy in terms of small lines for joinery systems. Most Router jobs are cut with a 6.35mm bit, whereas a laser beam is usually less than 0.5mm (University of Melbourne MSD FabLab CNC Router Guidelines, 2014).

• Aluminium strips must be pre-curved into the shape they will finally rest in (as seen in the picture. This makes the entire fabrication much more intensive, because the gradient at each point of each curve must be determined, and a rolling device must be used to create this. In the Archipelago Pavilion, the gradient of the curve is the same the whole way along each panel. Our design requires variable gradients, which require a rolling machine which can continually adjust while rolling -not to mention fit our large strips. Polypropylene is light enough that it will be able to be bent by human hands as the on-site construction takes place. In addition, the pieces will be able to be transported flat, which is a large bonus.

• Polypropylene is much lighter and easier to work with on a human scale. Even the biggest pieces that we will use can be comfortably carried by one or two people.

Archipelago Pavilion construction video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tF44sU7elOw

44

Design Process

Begin with the site plan provided in the LAGI Brief

45

Populate the site with a series of points. These are essentially random, however they are places with restrictions: no point can be too close to the edge of the site, nor to close to any other point. We elected to use eight points, to take up a good amount of the site without becoming crowded. These points are numbered in an anti-clockwise pattern starting from the North-eastern corner of the site.

At each of the points, we created a force and force lines, similar to our Case Study 1 example -Alisa Andrasek’s Seroussi Pavilion. However, these forces are rotational forces rather than simple point forces. This integrates with the rotational energy theme on which we based many design decisions.

46

From the force lines generated, the algorithm creates a path across the site. It begins at the North-Eastern corner of the site, picks the nearest field line, then follows that line to the first point. It then chooses the next line based on the most direct route to the second point. At the point where this line meets one of Point Two’s lines, the path jumps to that line. This portion of the algorithm repeats for each point, as well as the Ferry Launch location, before finally ending at the South-Eastern edge of the site.

The algorithm then takes each of the field lines and raises them, making each a ridge in the terrain. In addition, it has the restriction that each edge must remain at the same height above the water -so no permanent formwork is required.

47

A circle is drawn around each of the eight points, and all lines inside these circles are isolated.

48

The spin forces are much stronger nearer to the points.

Note that all the following steps are repeated for every pavilion, however the form generation process is the same.

The lines are elevated according to a Bezier curve which is easily adjustable. This idea was inspired by the Case Study 2.0 provided to us.

49

To get from these NURBS curve to a buildable structure, we needed to convert it to a set of flat panels. The first step of this process was to reduce the smooth curves back to straight lines.

Surfaces are built around each of the lines. The algorithm allows for alterations as to how far the ‘roof’ extends.

50

Using Kangaroo, we begin to perform a ‘relaxation’ on the structure. Instead of large flat panels, the surfaces are smoothed out into curvilinear geometry.

The relaxation continues. If we let it go to too far, it first looses the ‘rotational’ aspect which we want, before finally relaxing into a flat blob.

The relaxation process means that it is a tensile structure.

51

Using Kangaroo’s ‘Stripper’ component, the structure is divided into strips

Each of these strips can now be unrolled into a flat surface. Note that this is not changing any of the dimensions of the strips, nor the edge curves -this is important because they need to stay consistent if it is to be built.

52

Now completely unrolled, the flat strips are virtually ready. The point of this definition is that the unrolling process is reversed during fabrication. Each strip will fit together with its neighbours perfectly, if it is built with accuracy. This will be achieved with the joinery techniques.

53

The pieces are nested on sheets of the material.

A joining mechanism is added. At this stage they are simple tabs, which fold inside the structure, to be unseen when joined.

54

Construction Process

Site:

1. The earthworks will be constructed with the help of an engineering firm. These will be based on the maximum heights along each ridge and the minimum heights of each trough

2. Connect the relevant points to the Copenhagen electrical grid using underground cabling.

3. The path and pavilion footings will be made from recycled aggregate concrete, poured into formwork created at the same time as the earthworks

4. Build the rotational treadmills on the necessary points

Pavilions:

5. Begin with polypropylene sheets and digital strips file

6. Laser cut the plastic into strips

7. Transport to site

8. Fold each of the tabs as necessary (see part C2)

9. Using the co-ordinates of each point in relation to the site, begin building inserting the folded tabs into their respective slots

10. Builders must start from the peak, as they will need to be able to access both the top and bottom portions of the structure at the same time.

11. Once the bottom has been reached, secure the pavilion to the concrete footings

55

56

57

58

Relaxation

Sculptural

Ferry Launch

Pavilion Functions:Energy Generation

Two main pavilions will include the energy generation system as described earlier.

Amphitheater

To embrace the cultural context and bring more people to the site, our largest pavilion will be made into an amphitheater for musical and dramatic performances. It can also be used

Relaxation

These pavilions are designed as meeting spaces, or places for the creative locals to practice art or enjoy the summer sun.

Sculptural

The smallest pavilions are for aesthetic purposes, to give the meandering footpath some definition and reference.

59

Power Generation

Relaxation

Sculptural

Amphitheater

Power Generation Sculptural

Connection to existing path

Connection to existing path

60

Energy Generator-Main Pavilion

61

Energy Generator-Main Pavilion

62

Ampitheater Pavilion

63

Ampitheater Pavilion

64

Relaxation Pavilion

65

Relaxation Pavilion

66

C2. teCtoniC exPerimentJointing MechanismTo further improve the design, a mechanism for joining the strips must be designed. While it would be possible to simply have tabs which can be joined with rivets or bolts (as in the C1 example), I chose to improve on this design with an interlocking, self-supporting system which would not require the use of any extra components.

In the examples below:

• Black lines indicate cuts

• Red lines indicate scoring for easier folding

• Grey lines show the surface of the material

Joint 1

These basic tabs worked well for the small-scale models we were building, however once built up to a larger scale they begin to become impractical -the joins begin to pull away and create gaps, as the seen in the section view. In addition, this sort of joint allows for much movement between the strips.

Joint 2

These same tabs can be offset to form an interlocking structure. This is good because it provides a very stiff, strong bond between the two strips. It needs either a rivet or a bolt to construct, however. In addition, the two strips will never sit perfectly, as seen in the plan view. This problem could be solved with more alterations to the definition, however I wanted to achieve a bond without the use of additional elements

67

Joint 3

These joints lock together by sliding one panel horizontally against the other. As the bases of each ‘arm’ of the pavilions would be locked to the ground, the joints would be locked together. However even with the base locked down, there is still too much movement between strips, and this method creates large gaps between strips.

Joint 4

With this method, I aimed to continue our theme of rotation and spirals into the joinery. it was not a success.

68

Joint 5

Similar to Joint 3, however there are only protrusions on one side of each strip, whereas the other side has perforations through which the ends of each strip goes. This poses more technical difficulty when writing the algorithm. Also, the strips are only held fast in one axis (labelled Y), and still allows much movement in the other (X).

Y

X

Joint 6

This joint is a very effective joint: it is very stiff and strong, it does not create gaps, and it is quite appealing visually. However, it requires the use of bolts, which must be held from the inside. When building a closed structure like ours, this makes fabrication increasingly difficutlt.

69

Joint 7

We elected to utilise this jointing system for our final design. It creates a strong bond between the two strips due to the overlapping interconnected tabs. It is easy to fabricate, once the preparatory folding along the scored lines is completed. 50% of the tabs can be seen on the outside surface of the structure, but these do not look bad -as can be seen on the model, they appear as a nice design feature. It does create points where the force is concentrated, however the higher density of tabs negates this by spreading the load.

One negative of this approach is that there are relatively more lines to cut compared to other methods, which increases the time and therefore cost of fabrication.

70

71

72

C3. finAl moDel

73

74

75

76

77

78

C4: lAgi brief requirements

Description The design embraces the location to provide an engaging experience for all visitors. The site has been built up by a network of earthen ridges and valleys, which culminate at eight points arrayed across the site. At each of these points, a pavilion is formed to continue the contours of each ridge. Two of the pavilions will harness the energy of the site’s users, having them walk on a rotational treadmill, similar to a merry-go-round, which converts the kinetic energy into electricity to feed back into the grid.

To further integrate with the locality, one of the pavilions is an amphitheatre for musical and drama performances. Others are built for sitting and relaxing, or as a meeting place for friends.

TechnologiesPolypropylene -Strong lightweight polymer, easy to source recycled.

Laser Cutting -while standard laser cutters are relatively common, this project requires use of a very large one, such as PrimaPower’s Maximo cutter (http://www.primapower.com/en/products/thelaser/maximo-en/).

Wind Turbine and Gearing System

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine#mediaviewer/File:EERE_illust_large_turbine.gif

79

Energy Production

MaterialsRecycled Polypropylene: The largest pavilion requires 146m² of Polypropylene. The pavilions require a total of 912m² of polypropylene. The ratio of wasted material to used material is about 2:1, so we will need a total of 2700m². This totals 45 6x10m sheets of Polypropylene.

Earthworks: as much as possible, the earthworks will be built from the surrounding site, however an estimated 42000m³ of additional soil will need to be imported onto the site (to be confirmed by engineer)

Concrete Aggregate (high recycled content) for path and footings

Grass for replanting

Maximum Environmental ImpactRecycled Polypropylene: Polypropylene is probably the easiest plastic to recycle, as there is already much infrastructure in place for this. It is a thermoplastic polymer rather than thermosetting, which means it can easily be melted and reshaped. This reduces the environmental impact, especially with all the wasted material which comes from the off-cuts.