pdf - dmg - University of Washington

Transcription

An Architecture of Relationships Built on the Use of
Parametric Modeling and Evaluative Analysis in Design
Scott Crawford
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the degree of
Master of Architecture
University of Washington
2009
Program Authorized to Offer Degree:
Department of Architecture
University of Washington
Graduate School
This is to certify that I have examined this copy of a master’s
thesis by
Scott Crawford
and have found that it is complete and that any and all revisions
required by the final examining committee have been made.
Committee Members:
Brian McLaren
Mehlika Inanici
Rick Mohler
Date:
In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for a master’s degree at the University of Washington, I agree
that the Library shall make its copies freely available for
inspection. I further agree that extensive copying of this thesis is
allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use”
as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Any other reproduction
for any purposes or by any means shall not be allowed without
my written permission.
Signature:
Date:
Table of Contents
List of Figures
Introduction
Chapter 1 Design of the Process and Object
1
3
1.1 Integrated Design
4
1.2 Systems Thinking
10
1.1.1 Integration of Building Systems
1.1.2 Integration of Design Process
1.1.3 Summary
1.2.1
1.2.2
1.2.3
1.2.4
Systems
Modeling
Simulation
Summary
Chapter 2 Case Studies
14
2.1 Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center‌
15
2.2 Beijing National Aquatic Center 20
2.3 Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Center
25
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.2.4
2.2.5
Project Description
Integration of Building Systems
Evaluating the Design through Simulation
Analysis of the Design Process
Summary
Project Description
Integrating Building Systems
Generating the Design through Simulation
Summary
2.3.1 Project Description
2.3.2 Generating the Design through Simulation
2.3.3 Summary
i
iv
2.4 Swiss Re Tower
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.4.4
2.4.5
Project Description
Integration of Building Systems
Generating & Evaluating the Design through Simulation
Summary
Chapter 3 Simulation Software
33
3.1 Digital Morphology
34
3.2 Digital Performance Analysis
41
3.3 Iterative Design Process
45
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
The Element of Geometry
Creation of Systems through Geometry
Form Generation
Experience with Geometry
Summary
3.2.1 Analysis of Psychometric Parameters
3.2.2 Experience with Analysis
3.3.1 Adaptation of an Iterative Design Process
3.3.2 Limitations of Iterative Design Process
Chapter 4 Past Projects
48
4.1 Wallingford Library - Winter 06
49
4.2 Museum of Steel - Winter 07
65
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
4.1.4
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7
ii
28
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.2.5
Project Description
Rebuilding the Base Geometry
Analysis of Sun Penetration
Analysis of Lighting Levels
Analysis of Thermal Performance
Analysis of Acoustic Performance
Summary of Analytic Studies
Project Description
Initial Development of Geometry
Rebuilding the Base Geometry
Developing the Space Frame Component
Modeling the Systems of Geometry
4.2.6 Summary of Morphological Studies
Chapter 5 Design Project
5.1 The Concept
81
5.2 Role of the Definition
84
5.3 Iterative Design
90
5.4 Relational Kit of Parts
93
5.1.1 Building Concept
5.1.2 Site Response
5.2.1 Definition as Diagram
5.2.2 Flexible, Relational Geometry
5.3.1 Influence of Daylighting
5.3.2 Balance of Influences
5.4.1 Establishment of Rules
5.4.2 Possibilities through Digital Fabrication
Conclusions
Bibliography
Appendix A Site Analysis
Appendix B Lighting Analysis
Pocket Material: DVD of presentation/modeling files
iii
79
96
99
102
105
Table of Figures
Fig. 1.1 Puzzle as a metaphor for design
4
Fig. 1.2 Physical layering of building systems
5
Fig. 1.3 Visual integration of systems that reinforce spiralling geometry
6
Fig. 1.4 Performance integration of roof and mechanical systems in Kansai Airport by Renzo Piano
6
Fig. 1.5 Mutual reshaping of objective and subjective
7
Fig. 1.6 Nesting of architectural systems
10
Fig. 1.7 Breakdown of the components that make up the simplest form of a system.
11
Fig. 1.8 Interaction between desired and current state of a model
12
Fig. 2.1 Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center
14
Fig. 2.2 Beijing National Aquatic Center
14
Fig. 2.3 Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Center
14
Fig. 2.4 Swiss Re Tower
14
Fig. 2.5 Site Plan of the built design
15
Fig. 2.6 Local dwellings with post and beam structure
15
Fig. 2.7 Wood ribs connected by steel members
15
Fig. 2.8 Iroko wood structure and slats
16
Fig. 2.9 Diagram of the building response under conditions with strong winds
16
Fig. 2.10 Wind tunnel analysis
17
Fig. 2.11 Structural simulation analysis
17
Fig. 2.12 Transverse section of competition design
18
Fig. 2.13 Transverse section of built design
iv
18
Fig. 2.14 Rendering of Beijing National Aquatic Center (left) and Beijing National Stadium (right)
20
Fig. 2.15 Plan of Beijing National Aquatic Center
20
Fig. 2.16 Ventilation diagram illustrating the ‘greenhouse’ walls
21
Fig. 2.17 ETFE skin panels of the Water Cube
21
Fig. 2.18 Process of extracting structure from block of Weaire-Phelan foam
22
Fig. 2.19 Interior of the Water Cube
22
Fig. 2.20 3D model printed from the parametric model was used to illustrate structural concept to clients.
23
Fig. 2.21 Rendering of the building viewed from the SE
25
Fig. 2.22 Rendering of the building viewed along water
25
Fig. 2.23 Basic set of geometries from growth simulation
26
Fig. 2.24 Iterations from interaction of growth simulation and programmatic diagrams
27
Fig. 2.25 CFD study illustrating stresses induced by wind loads (red indicates highest stress)
28
Fig. 2.26 Diagram depicting the building form concept that was arrived at after CFD analysis
28
Fig. 2.27 6th floor depicting the triangular voids located between the offices ‘fingers’
29
Fig. 2.28 Spiraling thermal chimney 29
Fig. 2.29 Aerodynamic building form causes the air to travel is an smoother path compared to a typical tower
30
Fig. 2.30 Diagrid glazing system and building structure that has not yet received aluminum covering 30
Fig. 2.31 Physical model used to mock up preliminary ideas about the structure and mullion order
31
Fig. 3.1 Plan, section, elevation explored in serial sequence in the traditional design process
34
Fig. 3.2 Design tasks such as morphology, documentation, analysis, and representation are performed in parallel
34
Fig. 3.3 Polygonal surface created in Sketchup
35
Fig. 3.4 NURBS surface created in Rhino is smoother than the surface created in Sketchup
35
v
Fig. 3.5 Point cloud created in Grasshopper can be used to define multiple sets of relationships between points
35
Fig. 3.6 Example of a geometric system
36
Fig. 3.8 San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane - Borromini
39
Fig. 3.7 Camp Nou stadium by Foster+Partners
39
Fig. 3.9 Diagrams from Sun, Wind, & Light depicting rules of thumb for solar and wind orientation
41
Fig. 3.10 Examples of graphical illustrations produced by Ecotect. Lighting analysis (top) Shadow analysis (bottom)
43
Fig. 4.1 Second Floor
49
Fig. 4.2 Ground Floor
49
Fig. 4.3 Section Perspective 49
Fig. 4.4 Lighting model of surface geometry
50
Fig. 4.5 Thermal/Acoustic/Wind model of zone geometry
50
Fig. 4.6 Shadow studies and Sunpath Diagrams for the 21st of June, September/March and December
52
Fig. 4.7 First Floor - March 21st at 12pm
53
Fig. 4.8 Second Floor - March 21st at 12pm
53
Fig. 4.9 No Skylights - March 21st at 12pm
53
Fig. 4.10 Ecotect Lighting Study for June 21st at 8am, 12pm, 4pm
54
Fig. 4.11 Ecotect Lighting Study for March 21st at 8am, 12pm, 4pm
54
Fig. 4.12 Ecotect Lighting Study for December 21st at 9am, 12pm, 3pm
54
Fig. 4.13 Wall section layer properties in Ecotect
55
Fig. 4.14 Zone thermal properties in Ecotect
55
Fig. 4.15 Internal (hourly) temperature on hottest day of year
56
Fig. 4.16 Internal temperature on March 21st
56
vi
Fig. 4.17 Internal temperature on coldest day of year
56
Fig. 4.18 Hourly Internal Temperature (zone colors blue-central library space, green-storage, orange-meeting)
57
Fig. 4.19 Monthly Heating/Cooling Loads (zone colors blue-central library space, green-storage, orange-meeting)
57
Fig. 4.20 Passive Gains Breakdown
58
Fig. 4.21 Ventilation gains
58
Fig. 4.22 Gains Breakdown
59
Fig. 4.23 Direct Solar Gains
59
Fig. 4.24 Building Fabric Gains
59
Fig. 4.25 Interzonal Gains
59
Fig. 4.26 Central Library Space Passive Gains Breakdown
60
Fig. 4.27 Meeting Room Passive Gains Breakdown
60
Fig. 4.28 Initial attempt: Linked acoustic ray analysis of children’s area
61
Fig. 4.29 Second attempt: Linked acoustic ray analysis with addition of adult stacks to second level
61
Fig. 4.30 Reverberation time for wood ceiling
62
Fig. 4.31 Reverberation time for fabric ceiling
62
Fig. 4.32 Reverberation time for acoustic ceiling tiles
62
Fig. 4.33 Site plan
65
Fig. 4.34 Initial sketches of building form
66
Fig. 4.35 Early attempts at rationalizing roof form
66
Fig. 4.36 One of the final iterations of the base geometry
67
Fig. 4.37 Exploded axonometric of the final building form
67
Fig. 4.38 Decomposition of points into X, Y, Z coordinates, Z coordinates replaced with values from a sine function
68
vii
Fig. 4.39 Creation of rail and section curve
68
Fig. 4.40 Division of surface into a grid of points
68
Fig. 4.41 Steps for rebuilding the Level 1 Base geometry
69
Fig. 4.42 Paracloud surface created from points imported from Rhino
70
Fig. 4.43 Paracloud surface with added depth creating ribs
70
Fig. 4.44 Paracloud cell matrix for defining components
70
Fig. 4.45 Steps for developing space frame upon base geometry
71
Fig. 4.46 Development of Triangular grid
72
Fig. 4.47 Space frame component defined by two different sized intervals.
73
Fig. 4.48 Two versions of the space frame generated with the change of only the rail curve
73
Fig. 4.49 Wall space frame
74
Fig. 4.50 Ground plane and wall derived from perimeter curves of roof geometry.
74
Fig. 4.51 Ground plane reconfigured with a small number of changes to the cull pattern 75
Fig. 4.52 Roof panel cull patterning studies
76
Fig. 5.1 Competition program for elementary school
79
Fig. 5.2 Cascade Playground and Land Use of Surrounding Blocks
80
Fig. 5.3 Current site conditions
81
Fig. 5.4 Site Cleared for Design Project
81
Fig. 5.5 Site Butterfly Shadow Diagrams 8am-4pm Zoning Height 85’
82
Fig. 5.6 Sun angle diagram (points on curves represent mid-day)
82
Fig. 5.7 March Butterfly Shadow Diagrams over course of design
83
Fig. 5.8 Undeveloped plan
84
viii
Fig. 5.9 Week10 Grasshopper Project definition
84
85
Fig. 5.11 Week10 Grasshopper definition of gym roof structure and geometry it is dependent on.
86
Fig. 5.12 Parametric relationship of room area to length along curve and width of extrusion
87
Fig. 5.13 Examples of a bezier curves
87
Fig. 5.14 Adaptation of site to building form
88
Fig. 5.15 Week10 Building Program Layout
89
Fig. 5.16 Week10 Site Program Layout
89
Fig. 5.17 Evolution of Roof structure
90
Fig. 5.18 Analysis comparison of Useful Daylight Index 100-2000 lux
91
Fig. 5.19 Analysis comparison of Useful Daylight Index 100-2000 lux of classrooms and gym
92
Fig. 5.20 Sample of three steps for generating the floor structure
93
Fig. 5.21 Exploded axonometric of classroom 94
Fig. 5.22 Layers of classroom structure
95
ix
Acknowledgements
I would like to first acknowledge the mentorship, critiques, and friendship
provided by Professor Brian McLaren throughout this thesis project. From
the beginning of this process, Professor McLaren helped to guide me
through the development of my research without explicitly telling me what
to do. That flexibility helped me to grow greatly as a student of architecture.
I would also like to acknowledge the other members of my thesis
committee, Professors Mehlika Inanici and Rick Mohler. Without Professor
Inanici’s class on simulation and her feedback throughout the thesis much
of my work would not have been possible. Professor Mohler has always
pushed me to rationalize and understand the details of my designs and for
that I appreciate his involvement with this thesis.
I would also like to acknowledge Professor Rob Corser’s feedback and
insights into parametric modeling during the final four weeks of the thesis
project.
I would also like to acknowledge the Fall 2008 Architecture Thesis Cookie
Club for the delicious cookies, twice a week distractions, and mostly
importantly their friendship.
Lastly and most importantly, I would like to acknowledge my wife,
Christina, and daughter, Mikayla, whom were always patient with me
during these three years of school and especially during this final quarter
when I spent more time at school than at home. Without them to come
home to I would not have been able to complete this program.
Dedication
This thesis is dedicated to my father, Robert Dexter Crawford, who
introduced me to many ideas before I was capable of fully comprehending
them, but without those conversations I wouldn’t be who I am today.
Introduction
1
Design can be thought of as a process of exploring the establishment of
relationships between objects, forces, culture, context and other influences.
Geometric and proportional relationships are used to influence form. Rules
of thumb have been established which make suggestions for the relationship
of a building to its site. As time has past the number of these relationships
have increased both in number and scope, making the balancing of them
more difficult and all the more necessary.
Parametric modeling and evaluative analysis are two emerging design
tools that have the potential to further extend and unify this idea of
an architecture of relationships. Evaluative analysis offers a platform
for designers to move beyond simple rules of thumb and explore the
performance of their designs, while parametric modeling sets up a new
way of conceiving and manipulating geometric relationships. Both of these
types of software have capabilities beyond typical design tools because
they exploit the computers ability to do a large number of calculations in a
short period of time, making feasible tasks that would be unreasonable for
an individual to attempt on their own. This thesis is concerned with what
roles these tools can play in design, how their early integration changes the
design process, and ultimately their impact on architecture.
Before exploring the integration of these tools into a design process an
attempt will be made to establish what is meant by the term integration,
and how that applies to design. From that point a series of case studies are
explored which show how this takes place in an architectural setting. The
new capabilities brought by evaluative analysis and parametric modeling
create the necessity for the acquisition of new skills. This experience
2
was achieved by revisiting two past projects through the scope of either
parametric modeling or evaluative analysis. The final piece of this thesis
addresses the initial questions surrounding the impact of the integration
of these tools on design by attempting to use parametric modeling and
evaluative analysis software from the beginning of the design of a new
project.
Chapter 1 Design of the Process and Object
3
“The impulse to learn in children goes deeper than desires to respond and
adapt more effectively to environmental change. The impulse to learn at its
heart, is an impulse to be generative, to expand our capability.”
-Peter Senge, The Fifth Discipline
As buildings and design increase in complexity due to addition of new
elements it becomes necessary to develop a framework for integrating
these new elements with the old, rather than simply coordinating them
for the purpose of removing conflicts. Integration has the potential to not
only strengthen the relationships between elements but also to entirely
transform the elements of a building or design process by offering insight
into issues that may go unnoticed when examined in isolation. Systems
thinking offers a way of analyzing and breaking down a system into smaller
parts, thereby making it easier to study the interaction between elements.
Systems thinking applied to the design process analyzes the structure of
a design process and opens an understanding of how to integrate new
tools into the process. In the design of a building, systems thinking works
to investigate how systems interact with the goal of creating crossover
functions between systems that improve performance. Because neither
the design process or building is influenced by a single factor there is the
need for finding a way of balancing the various influences. Through the
investigation of these theories a design process model will be assembled
with the intent of integrating new elements into a design process or
building.
4
1.1 Integrated Design
concept
objective data
trimmed by concept
a) Integrate - combining with another to create a whole1
Integration is one of the main jobs of an architect who is responsible for
synthesizing a wide variety of information coming from different fields
such as engineering, art, or psychology. The process of integration can be
likened to the piecing together of a puzzle except the initial pieces have
not yet been cut to fit together. An architect uses their experience and
education to cut pieces into what is perceived to be an appropriate shape.
Leftover information is either discarded or later found to be necessary,
leading to a reformatting of the pieces either on a micro-scale that effects a
small number of pieces or a macro-scale that requires the majority of pieces
to be reconfigured.
Building systems are an area in which integration is a necessity. The
structural, mechanical, and other building systems must coexist to some
degree and even cooperate or strengthen each other. In the book Integrated
Buildings, Leonard R. Bachman classifies building integration into three
categories, physical, visual, and performance integration.2 Integration of
the design process is also necessary and often overlooked because of the
difficulty in defining its parameters. In general a design process can be
thought to consist of both objective and subjective information, a set of
tools that provide discrete information, and a collection of experiences
both individual and collective.3 Not only is integration necessary within the
design process and building systems but also between these areas.
fit by designer
Fig. 1.1 Puzzle as a metaphor for design
1 Oxford American Dictionary
2 Leonard R. Bachman, Integrated Buildings, Wiley & Sons, NJ, 2003, p. 3
5
When the various pieces of the design process become integrated they
have the ability to develop a stronger focus or ‘big idea’ for organizing and
integrating building systems. Without this integration the design process
and building becomes stratified into a series of steps or layers that only
add on to what came before rather than reshaping and strengthening what
was previously conceived. With integrated design the focus is on studying
the building through a holistic approach that tries to work with all of the
building systems starting in the initial phases of the design. The intention
is to understand how the systems interact with each other so that they can
be integrated which can take place in different ways.
Fig. 1.2 Physical layering of building systems
Physical Integration
Buildings systems are typically broken down into separate layers such
as structural, mechanical, or lighting. By separating the layers there is
removal of the possibility of interference between them but at the cost of
the need for additional space. Careful planning during the design process
can mesh these systems together, lessening the overall space they require.
This planning is typically difficult because of the complexity involved
with visualizing how these systems interact. Computer 3D simulation
has improved the ability of building systems layout by illustrating where
possible interferences may take place. Physical integration also deals with
systems on the scale of details where materials with different qualities need
to be joined together or kept separate. Here again 3D simulation allows
the designer to work at a variety of scales in one digital model. Before a
building is ever built the assembly and accessibility of connections can be
examined virtually.
6
Visual Integration
Separate systems combine to form the image of the building through
aesthetic factors such as color, size, shape and placement.4 When visual
integration does not occur the image of the building may suffer leaving a
building that is not experientially enjoyed and gains little value in the eye
of society. Computer simulation and the availability of rendering software
that takes advantage of realistic lighting and material properties allows
architects to work out the visual integration of their building during the
design process.
Fig. 1.3 Visual integration of systems that reinforce
spiralling geometry
Performance Integration
Components of a building must be able to work together or at least not
prevent other systems from properly functioning. Instead of only avoiding
interference it is possible to integrate two building systems into one thereby
replacing repetitive pieces. An example would be using a triangular grid
structure that removes the need for a separate lateral bracing system. This
type of integration has cost reduction implications as well as the ability to
lower the complexity of having to layer multiple systems onto each other.
Simulation analysis software can be used to understand the relationships
between building systems and may inform an architect as to how they
might be integrated.
1.1.2 Integration of Design Process
Fig. 1.4 Performance integration of roof and mechanical
systems in Kansai Airport by Renzo Piano
Integration of the Subjective and Objective
Architecture is a unique field because it requires the balance of objective
information, such as technology, performance and program data, with
7
objective
objective
bias
equal
reshaping
subjective
bias
subjective
Fig. 1.5 Mutual reshaping of objective and subjective
more loosely constructed ideas like concepts, aesthetics and intuition that
might be based on past experience. The architect takes on the role of both
artist and scientist and is responsible for determining what balance between
the two is most appropriate for any given design problem. The better an
architect becomes at integrating the subjective and objective parts of design
the less the building will resemble a collection of performance features
placed alongside superficial aesthetic concepts.
This balance does not take place with decisions about what should be kept
or discarded, but instead comes from understanding how to use the various
sources of information to reshape each other. A simple example would
be using objective data regarding the ‘most efficient’ building orientation
for solar performance and allowing this form to both influence and be
influenced by concepts related to circulation and program organization.
Neither one dictates the direction that the other should take but instead
the interaction between the two sources is manipulated until an acceptable
outcome is reached.
Comprehensive Toolkit
The integration of objective and subjective realms is partially dependent
on a balanced set of design tools. The information provided by these tools
can also be classified as either objective or subjective. If a toolkit is too
heavily biased in one direction then the design will likely lack in the other.
Computer simulation software has the ability to provide a subjective virtual
experience of a building design through animations and renderings, while
also offering the capability for form generation and manipulation. Other
simulation software provides more objective, quantitative feedback that
is associated with the performance of a design related to parameters such
8
as heating loads, lighting levels, or cost implications. In either case the
information provided by the software must be interpreted by the architect
in relation to the other data. If the other data does not exist because of the
lack of tools to address those conditions then the design may struggle to
bridge between these two realms.
Another issue is how and when to integrate these tools into a design
process. Generally speaking, the earlier a tool or information is
incorporated into a design process the more significant a role it can play.
Every tool cannot be integrated into the design process at the beginning,
but instead a judgement must be made concerning what tools would be
most effective during the initial design decisions. Lighting analysis would
not be appropriate at the earliest stages if a building form has not yet
been decided. An analysis of solar exposure or climate data may be an
appropriate starting position but explorations into form generation might
also be valid. In the end these decisions cannot be prescribed because they
are unique to the qualities, comforts, and intuition of each designer. The
importance of the comprehensive toolkit lies in being able to integrate the
early ideas generated through one medium with the feedback from another,
and continuing this regenerative process throughout design.
The Role of Experience (Individual and Collective)
Every designer has a unique background and mental framework that
informs their design process. In addition to these personal experiences
they have available to them the vast collection of experiences associated
with the history of architecture and the greater collection of experiences of
human history. Similar to the comprehensive toolkit these experiences can
be classified as either subjective or objective. The majority of an individual’s
9
design process may be shaped by subjective forces related to design
creativity or intuition, but their design will inevitably be influenced by
objective knowledge concerning codes, specifications, space requirements
and building program.5
On top of these individually held ideas there is a need to integrate one’s
ideas with the surrounding intellectual world in which they were shaped.
No idea is created on its own but instead evolves in relation to other ideas.
Rather than trying to isolate one’s ideas from an historical understanding,
an idea can be greatly improved by applying lessons previously learned,
skipping the vast field of errors that have already been confronted.
1.1.3 Summary
Integrated design is an approach that can be useful to an architect but
there needs to be an to be an idea of what is being integrated. The subjects
of integration can range from the systems of a building in terms of their
physical, visual, or performance integration or it can be about the design
process and the information, tools, and experience that are required within
it. Integration must occur not only within the design process and building
systems but also between the design process and the building systems.
Decisions made during the design will later impact how the building
systems perform. Likewise, the performance requirements of a building
system, such as the impact of gravity on the structure, influences activities
of the design process. In order for integration to occur these complex
processes and objects must be broken down into simpler pieces. Systems
thinking is a way in which to break down these pieces.
10
1.2 Systems Thinking
Systems thinking originated in the 1970s in response to the study of
ecosystems and other natural systems. During this time there was an effort
to describe how these complex systems functioned leading to the need
for a method of dissecting a system into smaller and smaller subsystems
while still retaining an understanding of how to reassemble them back into
a whole. In order to facilitate this understanding, systems thinking uses
models to simplify real systems and then studies these models through
simulation.
zone
space
component
assembly
site
Fig. 1.6 Nesting of architectural systems
Similar to natural systems, buildings can be thought of as having their own
“complex energy and material systems that have a lifespan.”1 The methods
of systems thinking can be applied to the field of architecture as a way
of understanding the range of systems that a building is part of from the
scale of urban systems to the individual detail of material systems. This
approach can also be applied to an analysis of the design process in order
to improve the understanding of how the process is carried out and what
subsystems might exist within it. In order for this to occur a system must
be defined, then a model generated which is then tested through simulation.
Each of these steps help to form an understanding of a problem and how
the variables interact. With this knowledge it becomes possible to tie
together aspects of the problem that may have previously seemed unrelated,
therefore opening up opportunities for transforming a project beyond what
may have been previously considered possible.
1 The Emergence and Design Group, Emergence in Architecture, Architectural Design, May
2004, p. 6
11
element
attribute
relationship
Fig. 1.7 Breakdown of the components that make up the
simplest form of a system.
1.2.1 Systems
Systems are composed of:
a) Elements - the parts that make up the system,
b) Attributes - the characteristics of the elements
c) Relationships - the associations between elements and
attributes2
Based upon this definition a wide variety of systems can be found within
a building such as the structural system, mechanical systems, or electrical
systems. A system can be considered to be an element of a larger system
as is the case with a structural system within a building system that then
fits into an urban system. The design process can also be described as a
system. A defining feature of a system is emergence, when the relationships
created in a system are not found in the attributes of the system’s elements.3
Systems can be classified into a number of different typologies, but for the
purpose of this thesis the types that are of most interest are:
a) Morphological system - understanding of relationships
between elements and attributes but little knowledge about
the transfer of energy
b) Cascading system - flow of energy from one element to
another is understood but with little knowledge about the
quantitative relationships between elements4
These two system types become important in the simulation of buildings.
2 Michael Pidwirny, Definitions of Systems and Models, http://www.physicalgeography.net/
fundamentals/4b.html
3 The Emergence and Design Group, Emergence in Architecture, Architectural Design, May
2004, p. 6
12
Action
1.2.2 Modeling
Gap
Addition
Current State
Desired State
A model is a ‘simplified representation of a system created to promote
an intentional development of understanding of the real system.’5 In
architecture, models can take the form of physical scaled models or virtual
digital models, even two dimensional drawings, sketches and diagrams
serve as models of the intended building. The accuracy with which they
represent the final building varies but each one is used to promote an
understanding of the real system. In modeling, a desired state creates an
action that produces an addition that creates the model or adds to the
current state, closing the gap between the model and reality over time. As
design progresses a model evolves to describe a more defined system that
comes closer to resembling what the final building will be like. In systems
thinking this evolution occurs is in response to feedback from simulation.
1.2.3 Simulation
Fig. 1.8 Interaction between desired and current state of a
model
Simulation is the ‘intentional manipulation of a model in order to
perceive interactions not apparent in real time or space.’6 The model is
then redefined in response to the feedback provided through simulation.
Feedback occurs in two forms:
a) Reinforcing - a change in one part of the system leads to
a change in another, which in turn, amplifies the change in
the first
b) Balancing - a change in one part of the system causes
a change in another part, which in turn, counteracts the
change in the first
5 Gene Bellinger, The Model, http://www.systems-thinking.org/modsim/modsim.htm
6 Gene Bellinger, The Model, http://www.systems-thinking.org/modsim/modsim.htm
13
Simulation takes place in different ways depending on whether the system
being modeled is a morphological or cascading system. In the case of the
morphological system, the model of the system is analyzed in terms of
formal and conceptual qualities. This analysis can be as simple as judging
whether a design aesthetically matches one’s design goals. The model
for a cascading system is analyzed in terms of flows and forces that move
through a building, for instance the loads experienced by a structural
system can be simulated to predict the building’s probable response. Here
it can be seen that a system, such as the structure of a building, can be both
a morphological and cascading system which is called a process response
system.7 In the end the most important part of simulation is the feedback
that it provides because this is what is used either to push the model
towards the desired state or redefine the desired state.
1.2.4 Summary
Systems thinking extends the idea of the building or a design task beyond
its immediate goal or context and establishes the larger framework in which
those elements exist. While certain conventions in architecture might
establish hierarchies that a building fits within, systems thinking offers a
way of exploring where, why and to what those relationships correspond.
When the ideas behind systems thinking become conscious to a designer
they possess the ability of intentionally exploring a problem through the
use of a model and simulation. Systems thinking must be adapted to the
specific dimensions of a design process or building in order to explore those
relationships.
Chapter 2 Case Studies
Fig. 2.1 Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center
Fig. 2.2 Beijing National Aquatic Center
Fig. 2.3 Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Center
Fig. 2.4 Swiss Re Tower
14
Through analyzing the design process and work of others it becomes
possible to see what characteristics shaped the design process and to
understand how simulation tools were incorporated. The following four
case studies share similarities in their design process such as building upon
a personal or collective set of experience or the incorporation of passive
heating and cooling strategies. However, distinctions can also be found in
how they arrived at their final design whether mostly through an artistic
concept related to past form or to a physical concept related to efficient
performance.
Each of the case studies depicts a different balance of the evaluative and
generative approaches to the use of simulation. In the first case study, JeanMarie Tjibaou Culture Center, the Renzo Piano Building Workshop utilizes
digital modeling and performance analysis for the purpose evaluating
a design that had already gone through conceptual and schematic
development. Peddle, Thorp & Walker in collaboration with Arup explored
the use of the computer as a generative tool with a focus on performance
analysis in their design for the Beijing National Aquatic Center. Generative
tools were also used by Zaha Hadid architects in the design of the Abu
Dhabi Performing Arts Center but for the purpose of exploring form in
relation to concepts of growth. In the last case study, Foster + Partners
combine the generative and evaluative approach into a cyclic process where
morphology is analyzed based upon performance which then redirects the
shaping of the form.
15
2.1 Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center‌
Location - Nouméa, New Caledonia, 1991-98
Design Team - Renzo Piano Building Workshop, Arup, Agibat Engineers
The design of this building is an example of an evaluative-dominated
approach to simulation. The simulation tools were used for the purpose of
validating a design that was nearly complete.
Fig. 2.5 Site Plan of the built design
Fig. 2.6 Local dwellings with post and beam structure
The design for the Jean-Marie Tjibaou Cultural Center began with a
competition held in 1991. Renzo Piano Building Workshop proposed
creating three functional “villages” arranged along a central spine. On the
southern side of the spine are ten wooden “cases” reaching to a height of
92ft(28m) while on the northern side there are three clusters of flat modern
“boxes” roofed in metal and glass. The vertical surfaces of the majority of
the spaces are clad in wood and glass louvers, part of the passive cooling
strategy. The wooden “cases” are the main focus of the design, drawing
inspiration from the vernacular architecture of the local Kanak people who
use natural materials such as palms and vines to construct their buildings.1
Piano’s “cases” abstract the local dwellings’ center post and spoke beam
structure into a double-skinned shell structure made of iroko wood. The
double shell is formed by a pair of laminated iroko ribs, one is curved and
the other is straight, held apart by horizontal steel tubes with stainless
steel cables diagonally spanning between members. The inner shell is
Fig. 2.7 Wood ribs connected by steel members
1 Sara Hart, Double Indemnity, Architecture, Oct 98, p.152
16
responsible for carrying the load of the roof and creating enclosure. The
outer shell ribs of each “case” are the framework for a series of horizontal
iroko slats spaced closely together in the middle of the shell, but spaced
more openly at the top and bottom to allow wind to pass through the
structure.
Fig. 2.8 Iroko wood structure and slats
Fig. 2.9 Diagram of the building response under conditions
with strong winds
New Caledonia has a humid tropical climate with annual average lows
of 64°F(18°C) and highs of 83°F(28°C) and humidity ranging from 60-90%.
There is a monsoon season during part of the year with high force winds,
heavy rain and the occasional hurricane. The wind typically comes from
two directions, on and offshore. The intention from the beginning of the
design was to use this wind to cool the building while also providing fresh
air.
The form of the double-skinned shells began as a reference to the local
buildings, but later became the mechanism for controlling natural
ventilation. The spacing of the horizontal slats on the outer shell were
controlled to allow wind to pass through the upper and lower portions
of the shells. Aluminum louvers on the inner shell coincide with these
openings allowing for a variety of configurations to be achieved for the most
efficient cooling of the building. The double-skinned shells are located on
the southern side of the building enabling their vertical extension to shade
the roof from direct sun, causing the air between the two layers of skins to
heat up and rise out of the cavity. When the wind is stronger the louvers
can be controlled to let wind create a negative pressure at the top of the
shell, pulling air out of the building or the louvers can be opened to allow
17
air to pass directly through.
2.1.3 Evaluating the Design through Simulation
After Piano’s competition entry was chosen the client agreed to pursue
the use of natural ventilation as long as it could be proven that comfort
conditions could be provided at least 90% of the year.2 The burden was then
on Piano to prove that their ideas could work.
Fig. 2.10 Wind tunnel analysis
The Renzo Piano Building Workshop is well known for their model shop
that strives to produce physical models that not only visually represent their
design intentions but also function as close to reality as possible. For the
analysis of the Jean-Marie Cultural Center a wood model was built with
functioning louvers for wind tunnel testing as well as a digital model to be
used for Computational Fluid Dynamics analysis. The initial analysis of the
models was disappointing, showing insignificant changes created by the
opening of the louvers. A hole was then added to the roof of the building,
creating the desired cross ventilation.3 Piano was not interested in placing
a hole in the roof and instead they began to explore where other openings
could be placed to facilitate air movement. The final decision was to create
a series of internal patios with operable windows. The lessons learned from
these model studies led to a computer program that controls the opening of
the louvers to achieve the desired air flow of 3.28ft/s(1.5m/s).
Another concern at the beginning of the design was whether the wood
shells, because of their size and distinctive shape, would be able to
structurally withstand the high winds and occasional hurricanes that hit
Fig. 2.11 Structural simulation analysis
2 Mark Chown, Building Simulation, 8th IBPSA Conference, 2003, p. 22
3 Sara Hart, Double Indemnity, Architecture, Oct 98, p.152
18
the area. This was studied both through the use of a wind tunnel and CFD
modeling software, showing that the structure would be able to withstand
the wind forces. Ove Arup Engineers and Agibat Engineering also built
and tested a full scale prototype of the laminated rib structure. The results
of this analysis were used to rationalize the complex curved geometry into
a structurally feasible assembly that in the end varied little from the initial
form.
2.1.4 Analysis of the Design Process
Fig. 2.12 Transverse section of competition design
Fig. 2.13 Transverse section of built design
Renzo Piano is known for his sensitivity to site and context, and being able
to blend this with his understanding of technology. Over the years his
projects have explored this approach to architecture and consequently he
has built up a large body of experience that allows him to apply his design
intuition in a manner that generally makes correct assumptions in the early
stages of the design process. This design intuition, shaped by a collection
of experiences, forms general rules of thumb such as the principles of the
size of openings and the distance between those openings necessary for
designing a space that takes advantage of natural ventilation. However,
these rules of thumb do not guarantee the desired performance levels but
instead are only a starting point that can be strengthened through the use of
simulation tools as was evident in the Jean-Marie Cultural Center.
Throughout the design of the Jean-Marie Cultural Center there was
a continual rationalization of the building form as can be seen in the
differences between the section that was presented at the competition
stage of the design and the section of the built design. The curved roof
disappeared from the main exhibit space, the mechanical systems were
19
removed, the structural ribs changed in profile and number. In the
competition entry these systems started as place holders or in terms of
modeling in systems thinking they represent the initial action or current
state. As development of the design continued, issues arose about the
building being too literal a translation of the local structures. This critique
was used as feedback in addition to the other feedback about the structure,
ventilation, fabrication. All of this feedback was used to bring the model
of the design closer to the desired state of which the final building is the
closest representation.
2.1.5 Summary
In this project the simulation tools were used mainly for evaluative
purposes applied to a design that had already been conceived to a fine level
of detail. Even though these tools were not used at the beginning of the
design process, the concept of natural ventilation and integration of the
building systems were included at the beginning of the design increasing
their potential influence on the final design. These concepts were likely
based on general rules of thumb and experience within the firm. Had these
ideas not been incorporated in the early stages of the design it might have
been difficult to integrate the strategies of natural ventilation into the final
design. If the simulation techniques had been incorporated earlier into the
design process there may have been a considerable amount of time saved
because of not having to redesign or the design may have developed to a
higher level of performance. A building or design process that is conceived
holistically from the outset has a greater ability of avoiding or foreseeing
issues that may arise later.
20
2.2 Beijing National Aquatic Center
Location - Beijing, China, 2004-08
Design Team - Peddle Thorpe & Walker, Arup, China State Construction
Engineering Co., China State Construction International Design Co.
The design of this building is an example of a generative-dominated
generating the building structure based on initially defined parameters.
Fig. 2.14 Rendering of Beijing National Aquatic Center (left)
and Beijing National Stadium (right)
The Beijing National Aquatic Center, nicknamed the Water Cube, is one
of the many buildings constructed for the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics.
When completed it will be the largest Olympic Swimming Venue ever
built. Beijing hoped to show that the Olympics could be environmentally
sensitive as well as a force to bring China into the realm of environmentally
responsible development. While the debate over the sustainability of
development on this scale is outside the scope of this thesis many of the
buildings, including the Water Cube, have employed design strategies to cut
the amount of energy and resources involved in their functioning.
At the outset of the project Arup outlined to the architects what they hoped
to achieve based upon their past experience with aquatic centers.1 Since
swimming pools need to be heated they came up with a technical concept
of turning the walls of the aquatic center into a greenhouse-like space that
would act as a buffer to the cold Beijing winters, build up usable heat from
Fig. 2.15 Plan of Beijing National Aquatic Center
1 Tristram Carfrae, Box of Bubbles, Ingenia, Dec 2007. pp 46
21
the sun’s radiation, and let in large amount of daylight. PTW Architects
approached the project with a symbolic concept of the balance between the
square and circle in Eastern culture with the Water Cube being the square
and the neighboring Beijing National Stadium, the Red Bird’s Nest, as the
circle.2
2.2.2 Integrating Building Systems
Fig. 2.16 Ventilation diagram illustrating the ‘greenhouse’
walls
Arup’s technical concept of creating a set of walls and a roof that behave
like a greenhouse merged several of the buildings systems into an holistic
system that has more advantages as an assembly than as individual pieces.
The 3D steel structure creates a wall plenum, 11.8ft (3.6m) deep and a roof
plenum, 23.6ft (7.2m) deep, that is used to capture heat between its two
layers of skin, preventing most of the sun’s radiation from penetrating the
interior. This heat can then be used for heating the swimming pools and
the rest of the spaces, lowering the demand on the heater.3 Cooling loads
are reduced because hot air is allowed to stratify and occupy the upper
portions of the large volume, holding the cooler air down around the
spectators. This hot air can then be evacuated from the space through the
roof. The walls and roof also allow large amounts of daylight to flood into
the space, potentially creating a 55% energy savings related to lighting.4
Other savings included not having to fireproof the 22,000 steel members
because the structure’s complex geometry was shown through computer
simulation to be able to withstand a worst-case fire scenario.5 In all it
Fig. 2.17 ETFE skin panels of the Water Cube
2 Tang Yuankai, Don’t Burst My Bubble, Beijing Review, Aug. 2007, p. 28
3 Tristram Carfrae, Box of Bubbles, Ingenia, Dec 2007. p. 50
4 ARUP, The Giant Greenhouse, http://www.arup.com/australasia/feature.cfm?pageid=3491
5 Tristram Carfrae, Box of Bubbles, Ingenia, Dec 2007. p. 49
22
was estimated that the aquatic center would use 30% less energy in its
functioning compared to a building of similar size, type, and location.
Fig. 2.18 Process of extracting structure from block of
Weaire-Phelan foam
Like the skin of the body the skin of the Water Cube is critical to its high
performance. The skin is made of ETFE (ethylene tetrafluoroethylene), a high
performance plastic that was developed in the 1970s for the aerospace
industry.6 The material is 1/100 the weight of glass, transmits light better, is
a better insulator, and is recyclable. In addition to these features the ETFE
protects the steel from the natural elements, avoiding costly maintenance
and corrosion over time. This material represents the integration of
properties usually attributed to different material but here the integration
of these properties allows for the useA downside is that the cushions are
inflated to keep them rigid, requiring an air pumping system to constantly
maintain the internal pressure.
The concepts for the Water Cube were developed early on in the design
process but it took time and research to generate the building’s structural
form. Initial attempts at defining the form lead to clumsy schemes
involving the stacking of cylinders that left many of the details unresolved.7
Further research into how the 3-dimensional wall and roof structure might
be designed led to the discovery of work done by two Trinity College
physics professors, Professor Denis Weaire and his assistant Dr. Robert
Phelan. The two professors were examining soap bubbles as a model for 3D
spatial optimization. In the 19th Century, Lord Kelvin did research into the
structure of soap bubbles leading him to the creation of a 14-sided shape,
Fig. 2.19 Interior of the Water Cube
6 Elizabeth Woyke, Material for an Architectural Revolution, Business Week, Apr. 24, 2007
7 Tristram Carfrae, Box of Bubbles, Ingenia, Dec 2007. pp 46
23
the tetrakaidecahedron. A century before that the Belgian scientist Plateau,
studied the structure of soap bubbles and developed a series of “rules for
the way they join together in three faces forming a line”8 Weaire and Phelan
were able to push their description of the soap bubble structure further
than their predecessors because of the use of advanced 3D modeling.
Fig. 2.20 3D model printed from the parametric model was
used to illustrate structural concept to clients.
The design team then took these findings and created a parametric script
that could virtually construct a volume of Weaire-Phelan foam in any size
that they required. From here they trimmed the virtual block of foam
down into a square plan that referenced the traditional Eastern quadrangle
courtyard.9 Interior spaces were carved out of the foam, leaving behind
the bubbles that would make up the building’s structure. Changes made
through the parametric model would automatically recreate the 22,000
member structure in roughly 25 minutes. The parametric model was
developed to automatically size the steel members, trimming as much
weight as possible to allow the roof to span the long distances. Physical
models were also able to be three dimensionally printed directly from the
parametric model.
The expertise that Arup brought to this project led to a design that
strategically targeted the performance demands of an aquatic facility.
However, the end product of the design was not simply an optimization of
structure, but instead became an artful expression of lessons learned from
a natural system. Natural systems typically hide the secrets to the way in
8 Tristram Carfrae, Box of Bubbles, Ingenia, Dec 2007. p 47
9 Tang Yuankai, Don’t Burst My Bubble, Beijing Review, Aug. 2007, p. 28
24
which they function within layers of complexities, making them difficult to
comprehend. The design team did not stumble upon the structural form of
soap bubbles through the use of the computer, but built upon past research
that was slowly developing a model of the system by discovering fragments
of information. A deeper understanding was made possible only recently
when the use of computer simulation allowed for a detailed investigation
into the complex structure of soap bubbles. Steve Pennell, who is in charge
of the structural drafting and CAD program at the Sydney office of Arup,
was quoted saying that “three years ago, computer power would not have
been able to cope with the aquatic centre because of its complexity”.10
2.2.5 Summary
The generative simulation techniques used in the Beijing National Aquatic
Center allowed for the creation and optimization of a structural form
that prior had never been built. Two concepts came forth early on in the
design, one for the treatment of the structure as a greenhouse and the
other as the image of the building as water, that were later unified to form
the image of the building. Within this integration there were many other
levels of systems integration that contributed to the building efficient
performance in multiple respects. As simulation techniques grow they will
offer new possibilities and directions that architecture can take. Things
that had once seemed too complex to solve may become feasible through a
designer’s collaboration with the computer. In order for this collaboration
to be successful, the designer or design team must have a reasonable
understanding of what the computer is capable of achieving.
10 Arup, Arup wins design award for Beijing’s National Aquatics Centre, http://www.arup.
com/australasia/newsitem.cfm?pageid=3488
25
2.3 Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Center
Location - Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2007Design Team - Zaha Hadid Architects
The design of this building is an example of a generative-dominated
generating the building form based upon growth simulation scripting.
Fig. 2.21 Rendering of the building viewed from the SE
Since the 1960s Abu Dhabi has amassed enough wealth to transform itself
from an area once inhabited by Bedouin encampments into a modern
capital of hotels and high rises. Plans are currently under way for a 670 acre
cultural district on Saadiyat Island that will showcase the work of many
well known Western architects such as Frank Gehry and Jean Nouvel, and
the Iraq native Zaha Hadid.1 Hadid has been commissioned to design the
Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Center to be located along the main axis of the
cultural district, reaching out into the Persian Gulf.
At 62m tall, the building will hold “five theatres- a music hall, concert hall,
opera house, drama theatre and a flexible theatre.”2 In a press release for
the project, Hadid described the building as “a sculptural form that emerges
from a linear intersection of pedestrian paths within the cultural district,
gradually developing into a growing organism that sprouts a network of
Fig. 2.22 Rendering of the building viewed along water
1 Nicolai Ouroussoff, A Vision in the Desert, New York Times, Feb. 1 2007
2 Marcus Fairs, Zaha Hadid in Abu Dhabi Update, http://www.dezeen.com/2007/02/02/
zaha-hadid-in-abu-dhabi-update/
26
successive branches.”
3
Fig. 2.23 Basic set of geometries from growth simulation
The form of the Abu Dhabi Performing Arts Centre’s is based upon
algorithms that simulate the flow of energy through natural growth systems,
similar to branching structures of trees and vines. For the Performing
Arts Centre this energy comes from the urban traffic along the pedestrian
corridor and the opposing flow of movement of the site out towards the sea.
Initially this algorithm was used to generate a set of basic geometries which
gave the designers an understanding of what was possible to achieve with
this tool.
Programmatic diagrams were then overlaid on top of these formal
investigations in order to give context to this growth. This was done
repeatedly in response to design discussions centered around the
aesthetics as well as the functional viability of a particular iteration. As
these iterations continued to develop, architectural systems of structure,
circulation, and glazing, were integrated into the model. The form of these
systems were based upon the overall form that was created in the growth
simulation
2.3.3 Summary
Unlike the other case studies, this project has not yet been built so there
is less available information. However, from the information provided,
the possibilities of this approach to design begin to surface. The use of
3 Marcus Fairs, Zaha Hadid in Abu Dhabi Update, http://www.dezeen.com/2007/02/02/
zaha-hadid-in-abu-dhabi-update/
27
the growth algorithm allowed the architects to generate a building form
in response to a particular energy or force while continuing to develop
other subsystems of the design. This growth of the building form was not
automatic, but contained as much design intention as any other design
decision. The architects were responsible for deciding that the use of a
growth simulation algorithm was an appropriate concept for the design of
a Performing Arts Centre. The firm likely had little experience with this
approach to design so the project serves as a design experiment in order to
test the validity of this approach.
There is also the conscious or subconscious interaction of the subjective
and objective decisions that occur within the design process, but which
are not found in natural processes. The architects needed to find a balance
between the desired aesthetics and the feasibility of the project in order
to develop an achievable design. For this project it seems as if the growth
simulation was being used for formal purposes, but it can be imagined that
the energy involved in this simulation could actually be tied to other areas
of performance such as lighting or thermal conditions and have a design
iteratively shaped in response. The choice of what force to respond to is
ultimately left up to the design team and their intentions for the project.
Fig. 2.24 Iterations from interaction of growth simulation
and programmatic diagrams
28
2.4 Swiss Re Tower
Location - London, UK, 2004-08
Design Team - Foster + Partners, ARUP
The design of this building is an example of a evaluative-generative
approach to simulation. Preliminary concepts suggested a direction that
was then analyzed with simulation tools. This feedback reshaped the
concept and the cycle repeated until a final design was achieved.
Fig. 2.25 CFD study illustrating stresses induced by wind
loads (red indicates highest stress)
Fig. 2.26 Diagram depicting the building form concept that
was arrived at after CFD analysis
Office space demands large amounts of fresh air, cooling, and light. At the
same time, office towers require large amounts of structure to resist the
increased force of wind experienced as they rise higher from the ground.
For the Swiss Re Tower, Foster + Partners worked to address this set of
demands with a design whose pieces take on multiple functions. Their
work built upon ideas first developed with Buckminster Fuller in the
1970s for the Climatroffice; a free-form glass skin building with its own
microclimate.1 The Climatroffice was never built because of the limited
technology available to support the complex geometry.
With the Swiss Re, the first few months of the design were spent exploring
the most “efficient structure for the site” studying, with Computational
Fluid Dynamics modeling, the impact that various forms would have on
the loads generated by wind forces. By the end of the analysis the design
team was looking at a tower that was circular in plan to make it more
1 Unknown, Swiss Re, Architect’s Journal, Apr. 15 2004, p. 65
29
aerodynamic and would use natural forces to provide ventilation. As the
design progressed the form was constantly refined in response to simulation
feedback, space layout and ideas related to the building fabrication.
Fig. 2.27 6th floor depicting the triangular voids located
between the offices ‘fingers’
A floor plate taken from the Swiss Re demonstrates the extent to which
various building strategies were incorporated into the overall form. Each
floor, circular in plan, has six radial fingers separated by triangular voids
that allow air circulation between levels and bring in added natural light.
Floors are rotated ten degrees from the floor below, creating a set of
spiraling thermal chimneys that “tap in to the building’s pressure differential
rather than just relying on the stack effect”.2 Fresh air is brought in through
the chimneys, warmed by the sun and delivered into the offices in the
winter. In the summer the chimney can be opened to the outside and the
offices opened up to the chimneys causing warm air to be pulled out. From
the exterior, the chimneys are evident with grey-tinted glass that has a highperformance coating to reduce solar gain. These strategies were predicted
to lower energy usage by 50% compared to a traditional office building.
Another benefit of the circular foot print was opening up the site for a
public plaza. Normally these types of spaces are inhospitable because of
the turbulence created by the wind hitting a flat facade. The circular plan
causes wind to flow around the building, reducing uncomfortable air flow.
The tower is tapered in section from the center towards the top and base,
permitting more light to fall on the public plaza. This tapering of the tower
alleviates the imposing experience of being next to a tower by making the
Fig. 2.28 Spiraling thermal chimney
2 Austin Williams, Round Peg in a Square Hole, Architect’s Journal, Sept. 26 2002, p.30
30
middle of the tower appear to be the highest point.
The building’s structure follows the same rotation of the floor plates,
forming a diagrid structure that laterally braces itself and thereby frees the
center of the building from needing a dense structural core. The diagrid is
further broken down with window mullions that occur every five degrees.
Curved glass panels would have been prohibitively expensive to fabricate
so instead 5500 diamond-shaped, flat glass panels of different sizes for each
floor were used to break down the building’s complex geometry.
2.4.3 Generating & Evaluating the Design through Simulation
Fig. 2.29 Aerodynamic building form causes the air to travel
is an smoother path compared to a typical tower
Fig. 2.30 Diagrid glazing system and building structure that
has not yet received aluminum covering
Beginning design studies focused on exploring what form would best
perform on the site in relation to functional concepts about daylight, natural
ventilation, and wind loads. Concepts were evaluated using CFD modeling,
which took into consideration surrounding buildings and the weather
data for the site and then applied this information to a variety of forms.
Generated feedback was in the form of false color graphics and animations
that showed the varying level of stresses that the building would experience
from wind loads. That information combined with feedback of the amount
of turbulence created from the wind hitting the face of the building further
shaped the form of the building. The building form was also influenced by
aesthetic considerations, particularly because of the fact that there are few
towers within London.
Once the general form had been shaped by this analysis the design team
moved into fine tuning the geometry. For this part of the project they
created a parametric model that controlled the overall form of the building
31
as well as the structural and mullion geometry. The design team did
not immediately happen upon the final design but instead there was a
progressive development of the project whereby one aspect of the project
would be informed by the previous analysis, a design decision would be
made and further simulation carried out. Use of the parametric model
made this process efficient because the model could automatically be
regenerated in response to changes input into the parameters.
Fig. 2.31 Physical model used to mock up preliminary ideas
about the structure and mullion order
Parametric modeling also made it possible to rationalize the complex
curved geometry, something that had previously prevented Foster +
Partners from being able to carry out their related Climatroffice. The
parameters are stored in a format similar to a spreadsheet which allows
the model to be automatically regenerated. The spreadsheet was also sent
to the fabricator who could then use those numbers to generate a set of
shop drawings that Foster + Partners would be able to check against their
original model. Tubular steel members were able to be designed with zerotolerance because of this precise method of form generation.
Foster + Partners came to the design of the Swiss Re Tower with concepts
that they had previously conceived in collaboration with Buckminster
Fuller. Through the use of technology they were able to finally realize
the potential of these concepts by incorporating simulation early on in
the design process. Simulation did not drive the design process though.
Concepts that were initially brought to the design shaped the approach
of the simulation analysis which in turn reshaped those original concepts
and occasionally generated new concepts. This cyclic process of moving
32
between the concept and simulation continued throughout the design.
A similar type of resonance occurred between the concepts of worker
comfort and optimization of building form according to site qualities. An
increasing understanding of the building’s response to wind loads suggested
ways that natural ventilation and daylighting could be integrated into the
building form. As this logic was followed through, other systems in the
building began to fall in line with these concepts such as the structural
system or even the aesthetic of the tower’s elevation. In the end a design
was reached where nearly all of the parts build off of the same framework,
integrating these various concepts and systems together.
2.4.5 Summary
Through the integration of the evaluative and generative approach to
design Foster + Partners were able to design an office tower that integrated
its many building systems together. Early on it might have been unclear
how the building would be informed by the initial concept of creating the
most “efficient structure for the site”, but as the design progressed each of
the systems grew around previous decisions. This was made possible by
generating an idea, evaluating it, and then regenerating in response to the
evaluation feedback, similar to the modeling loop previously discussed.
Foster + Partners have a history of technologically influenced design that
continues to evolve over time. This experience paired with simulation
as both an evaluative and generative tool, shortens the time frame for
achieving a deeper understanding of a building and its systems. Validation
no longer needs to wait until construction, but instead lessons can be
learned during the design, increasing the amount of knowledge that one
design can contribute to the designer’s overall experience.
Chapter 3 Simulation Software
33
When the computer first entered the architectural field it was used to
replace the mechanical drafting that was previously done by hand. The
method in which these digital drawings were created had few differences
from their predecessors except that updates were thought to be more
easily made. During its first few decades the computer did not significantly
change the architectural field, but the technology continued to evolve.
Digital two dimensional drafting, led to three dimensional modeling and
then to rendering, and more recently there has been the development
of software with the capability of going beyond three dimensional
representation to include form generation, performance analysis, control of
fabrication, and integrated documentation.
Software may address dimensions of form, performance, fabrication, or
documentation, but each piece of software will likely have strengths in
a particular dimension and be weaker in others. This thesis focuses on
software that address morphology and evaluative analysis. While these two
types of software perform a particular set of functions within the design
process, in the end there is the need for integrating both sets of tools into
an iterative design process.
34
Sketches/
Diagrams
3.1 Digital Morphology
Plan
Input
Section
Input
Elevation
Model
Fig. 3.1 Plan, section, elevation explored in serial sequence in
the traditional design process
Building form is most commonly explored and conveyed through two
dimensional drawings and models. A design might start with a plan which
then informs the production of a section, then elevation or back to the plan.
All of these are then used in conjunction to create a model. Separation
of the two mediums in the design process creates a cyclic relationship
where either the drawings or models suggest the form of the other whose
development then informs the regeneration of the initial media. A digital
design process might still begin with hand sketches but a digital model
allows for concurrently performed tasks that explore three dimensional
space on a continuous spectrum of scales within the same model rather
than the two dimensional, serially performed tasks traditionally used.
3.1.1 The Element of Geometry
Design Tasks
Model
Fig. 3.2 Design tasks such as morphology, documentation,
analysis, and representation are performed in parallel
If geometry is treated as a system then its basic element is the point.
Two points are connected through a relationship that defines a line. The
attributes of the points are their coordinates defined relative to an origin.
Traditional drafting uses the point for building up geometry as dimensions
are laid out, lines are struck between them leading to the creation of shapes
that represent a model of a building. Physical modeling references these
points, lines, and curves, but is composed of 3D surfaces and volumes.
Digital modeling is a combination of the two approaches, using both points,
lines and curves, and shapes, surfaces and volumes. Digital 3D modeling
software begins with the basic element of geometry, the point, and from
there different software allows for varying levels of interaction with the
geometry.
35
Fig. 3.3 Polygonal surface created in Sketchup
Fig. 3.4 NURBS surface created in Rhino is smoother than
the surface created in Sketchup
point cloud
ribs
tubes
Fig. 3.5 Point cloud created in Grasshopper can be used
to define multiple sets of relationships between points
The most basic interaction between points can be illustrated with Google’s
3D modeling software Sketchup. All geometry created in Sketchup is based
upon the line. Points are not created in isolation of other points but instead
become the defining attributes of lines. When a line is intersected with
another line the point relationships are reconfigured, splitting the original
line at the intersection into two lines. In Sketchup a circle is actually
an approximation of a smooth curve broken up into a user-determined
number of segments. This approach to 3D modeling is known as polygonal
modeling where all shapes are built from line segments.
In contrast, other software like McNeel’s Rhinoceros uses a system of
geometry definition known as NURBS (Non-Uniform Rational B-Splines) to
create lines and curves based upon a more complex set of relationships
between points. With NURBS, lines and curves are defined by an
evaluation rule that relates the degree, control points, and knots of a line
or curve. The focus here is not on what each of these variables does but
instead is about the level of accuracy with which Rhino can model complex
surfaces and curves. These digital models can then later be directly used
for form analysis such as an examination of a surface’s curvature or be used
to drive Computer Numerically Controlled (CNC) machines for fabrication
purposes.
Another approach to handling points can be illustrated with the Rhino
plugin, Grasshopper developed by David Rutten for McNeel Software like
Grasshopper uses a spreadsheet or database of points, known as a point
cloud, to define a surface in a variety of ways. These points can be edited
individually or rules can be applied to a selection of points or the entire set
to define the relationship for how the points interact such as creating lines,
36
Systems
Object
curves, or surfaces. Grasshopper also uses the relationships between four
adjacent points to define a cell inside of which additional geometry can be
positioned.
3.1.2 Creation of Systems through Geometry
Range of Scales
Components/
Groups
Surfaces
Lines
Elements
Fig. 3.6 Example of a geometric system
Points
After drawing a set of lines and surfaces a series of systems begin to
emerge within a model. As one learns to use the software and becomes
comfortable with digital modeling the distinction of these systems becomes
apparent in the organization of the model through the use of:
a) Groups - a collection of elements where changes to a
copy do not effect other instances.
b) Components/Blocks - a collection of elements where
changes to a copy effects all instances.
Groups and components may begin as placeholders in the overall model
but as the understanding of the project becomes more elaborate so do the
systems and elements contained within the groups and components. Each
program may label these classifications differently but the use of groups and
components has the ability to organize the building into discrete systems
that can be altered in isolation or in reference to the rest of the building. In
physical modeling and drafting, interactions between systems are analyzed
through a layering process of redrawing or modeling separate pieces upon
each other. A disadvantage to this approach is that the degree of influence
between systems is limited because of the narrow view that is provided by
a two dimensional plan, section or elevation. Digital modeling on the other
hand allows not only for viewing these systems three dimensionally but also
for switching between views of the entire building or isolated systems.
37
A more thorough understanding of the geometry of the systems is possible
through the use of sub-models of sub-systems that can later be reintegrated
into the overall model. Visual simulation feedback can be quickly achieved
by turning on previously hidden systems and viewing them against the
surrounding context. With this approach there is the ability to work with
the whole building at once or at the scale of smaller systems before seeing
how particular changes effect the whole building. A cyclic process is
created similar to the additive layering that occurs with physical drafting
and modeling but the digital model has the potential to receive a larger
range of feedback than its physical counterpart.
3.1.3 Form Generation
All digital modeling controls geometry through the use of parameters
which are defined as “a numerical or other measurable factor forming one
of a set that defines a system or sets the conditions of its operations.”1 In
the case of geometry, a parameter could be variable like the position of a
point, the diameter of a circle, or the color of a surface. Different software
allows for different levels of interaction with the parameters. As an example
Sketchup allows parametric control at the level of a line, while Rhino
allows parametric control at the level of a surface, and Grasshopper allows
parametric control of the all geometry. With this increased control comes
an increase in the number of decisions and steps that are necessary to
model a form causing a difference in the level of complexity that different
software is capable of producing.
1 Oxford American Dictionary
38
Software that allows for more direct control and manipulation of these
parameters has recently been gaining popularity. This control was initially
achieved through scripting which is expressing a set of instructions and
relationships for form generation in the code language of the software.
Scripting can be used for defining already conceived forms or unknown
forms can be generated from the relationships defined between parameters
such as fractal or growth patterns. Capabilities of tools available in the
original software are written through scripting so when a designer writes
scripts they are customizing the software and are creating tools that
perform a desired task.
As scripting started to gain attention, software was created to bypass the
need to learn the multiple scripting languages and instead a graphical
interface was used that allowed for the precise control of parameters.
Grasshopper is an example of logical modeling software. Relationships
between parameters are based on mathematical formula that can control
translation, scaling, rotation, and many other transformations of the
geometric relationships. One key to the use of this type of software is the
understanding of geometry and how to manipulate geometric systems.
Without this understanding one can become paralyzed when faced with the
long list of operations that are possible.
3.1.4 Experience with Geometry
Just as the limits of mechanical drafting and physical modeling determine
what can be drawn or built so does an architect’s understanding of
geometry and how it is manipulated. Borromini and other architects of
the Baroque period were able to create and build amazingly complex forms
39
using only 2D mechanical drawing and physical modeling, tools that were
available to their predecessors but whose understanding of geometry was
not available. Developments in the understanding of geometric systems
throughout history have brought along with them changes in other fields
such as architecture. This constantly evolving understanding can be seen
in contemporary architecture where the computer has opened up new
possibilities for how geometry can be manipulated and defined, leading to
buildings whose forms explore this understanding.
Fig. 3.8 San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane - Borromini
Fig. 3.7 Camp Nou stadium by Foster+Partners
A contemporary example would be Foster + Partners who are exploiting
the ability of the computer to aid in the generation and rationalization
of the complex forms. Forms similar to those that Foster + Partners are
exploring have been proposed in the past in lesser detail but in the end not
built because of a limited understanding of how to describe the geometry.
Without the expertise they have developed through their Specialist
Modeling Group, who are responsible for developing software within the
firm, many of their buildings would not be possible.
3.1.5 Summary
Modeling software is a critical piece in the design process because forms
that are created are in part generated by the definitions associated with the
tools of that software. For instance, in Sketchup a surface can be extruded
perpendicular to the plane of the surface using the Push/Pull tool but can
not be extruded in any other direction. This limitation is written into
the software for how that particular tool operates. The designer learns
these constraints over time and adjusts their design decisions accordingly.
Distinctions between modeling software leads to different possibilities for
40
what can be formally achieved. As architects begin to learn a particular
software the tools that are available to them open up new opportunities that
might have previously been unattainable, influencing not only what they are
capable of achieving but how they think and approach design.
Experimentation with software leads to an experimentation with form in
an attempt to understand what a particular tool is capable of contributing
to the design process. This experimentation might try to represent abstract
concepts such as time or movement through the form of the building
or the building might be shaped to portray the impact of invisible, nonphysical forces. Much of this initial experimentation through scripting,
trial and error, or chance will yield few applicable results in the beginning.
However, over time experience with the tools will focus one’s approach if
the experimentation is directed by a set of design goals that have developed
in response to the capabilities of the tools that are being used. Formal
experiments can lead to new considerations of what form can do other
than changing the building’s aesthetic appearance such as investigating
how structural stiffening can be achieved or manipulating a building’s form
and orientation to maximize solar response. In order for this to occur, an
architect must be able to analyze the building’s performance under these
conditions.
41
3.2 Digital Performance Analysis
Digital morphology can be considered the subjective side of the design
process though the formal characteristics of a design can be based upon
objective information, but where then does this information come from?
Architectural design strategy books like Brown and DeKay’s Sun, Wind &
Light present rules of thumb that designers can reference as starting points
for their design decisions, unfortunately, they do not predict anything
about the building’s actual performance. The danger with rules of thumb
is that they can be applied in the wrong way without realizing deficiencies
until the project is constructed. Another limitation is that they filter out
possible solutions before their validity was ever tested in the context under
investigation. This is where the use of performance analysis software can
help to strengthen rules of thumb, eliminate the adoption of irrelevant
rules, or inspire other appropriate unthought of solutions. There still exists
though the possibility of applying the tool of performance analysis in the
wrong way, creating meaningless results.
Fig. 3.9 Diagrams from Sun, Wind, & Light depicting rules
of thumb for solar and wind orientation
Physical models are often used to simulate the performance of a building.
These models and simulations are generally time consuming and inaccurate
because of problems with scaling the data. An example would be the use of
a heliodon to simulate daylighting levels but problems occur because of the
approximation of materials and quality of light besides which the heliodon
takes up a large amount of physical space and can be cumbersome to work
with. Digital performance analysis creates a digital model whose geometric
parameters are assigned additional parameters related to the properties of
materials. Like physical modeling, the digital model is only as good as the
definition of the material properties. Here the advantage is that a material
42
can be studied and quantified, and these physical parameters can then be
attached to the digital model.
Digital performance analysis looks at buildings as cascading systems
concerned with the flow of energy between systems and elements. These
flows of energy can arise from forces like the sun, wind, sound, and gravity.
In order to analyze the impact of these forces there needs to be an initial
understanding of what elements or systems they effect, and then what
parameters or attributes of the element or system can be controlled in
response to these forces.
3.2.1 Analysis of Psychometric Parameters
Psychometric parameters address the relationship between natural and
artificial forces that effect human senses such as lighting, acoustics, heating
and cooling. Research in the field of psychometrics has established
favorable performance levels for these parameters in terms of human
comfort. These levels act as the baseline against which the results of
performance simulation of a design is compared. The forces that are
commonly tested are:
a) solar - sun path, solar access, solar radiation
b) thermal - heating/cooling loads, occupancy loads, wall
construction
c) acoustical - form of space, materials
d) lighting - shadow studies, lighting levels, glare
There is a certain amount of overlap between these different forces and the
parameters that they effect. For example, solar analysis will also play a part
in understanding the thermal forces as well as lighting which creates the
43
need for being able to concurrently analyze each of these forces. One of the
better programs for performing this type of analysis is Ecotect, developed
by Square One. For each of these parameters Ecotect is capable of
producing graphical illustrations of analysis results, easing understanding of
the results. Performance analysis of different parameters requires different
considerations to be made when creating the digital model.
Performance analysis models are usually a simplification of a formal model,
removing elements that do not effect the parameters being tested. Instances
where analysis is dependent mainly on geometry such as solar, shadow
studies, and early lighting analysis, a model can be imported directly from
another piece of software. The geometry will need to be assigned material
parameters in the case of lighting analysis, but the relationships between
the geometry do not need to change. When analyzing thermal or acoustic
forces, which are both effected by volumetric parameters, there is the need
to create models that define enclosed spaces referred to as zones. These
models can be rather abstract representations of the building using only
surfaces to define spaces. Each surface has parameters that define the
materials and layers that might make up a wall, ceiling, or floor.
Fig. 3.10 Examples of graphical illustrations produced by
Ecotect. Lighting analysis (top) Shadow analysis (bottom)
3.2.2 Experience with Analysis
In order for analysis to be accurate and effective the software user must
have background knowledge about the factors that they intend to analyze.
Without a prior understanding of how environmental factors effect a
building’s performance the simulation has no basis for investigation.
Starting with general rules of thumb allows for the creation of a set
of hypotheses that can then be tested. These simulations produce
44
feedback that progresses the design, narrowing the field of options that
are acceptable. In some instances an architect may be unsure about the
feasibility of an idea but if there is knowledge of what should be tested for
and how to perform that analysis then there is the possibility for discovering
previously unthought of solutions. An architect’s understanding will
continue to be strengthened over time leading to reformulated rules of
thumb and criteria for what type of simulation is most appropriate for the
given context.
Performance analysis can have the largest impact when in is integrated
into the earliest stages of the design process. In the essay, The Digital
Design Ecosystem, Paul Seletsky describes this approach as pre-rational
design where one is “using advanced computation to impart tacit and
explicit experience into the earliest stages of conceptual explorations.”1
Design decisions can be tested to uncover their performance implications,
preventing unexpected issues that may arise later in the design process due
to delayed analysis. If performance analysis is delayed until the later stages
of design most design decisions have already been developed to a point
where redesign would be both time and cost prohibitive. In order for these
tools to be integrated into the initial stages of design they need to closely
interact with the tools involved in digital morphology, providing feedback
for possible future directions.
1 Paul Seletsky, The Digital Design Ecosystem: Towards a Pre-Rational Architecture,
AECbytes Viewpoint # 37, Apr. 8, 2008
45
3.3 Iterative Design Process
Coupling of digital morphology and performance analysis leads to a process
that expresses principles of emergence, the sum of the parts containing
properties not found in any one part. Parameters for form generation can
tend to be purely aesthetic considerations, but relationships can be created
between subjective and objective parameters of design. In this case the
parameters become the elements of a system and the relationship between
them are defined by formula. These formula can take on the objective
characteristics of a mathematical model, equating variables in relation
to each other or a subjective approach of intuitively balancing between
morphology and performance analysis. In either case the relationship that
is defined sets up a hierarchy of importance with regards to the parameters.
In an iterative design process the computer does not drive generation but
instead facilitates the understanding of the complexity of relationships
between parameters. A designer subjectively balances the influencing
forces of a design, though one will likely dominate over the others.
Project type, context, and concepts generated by the designer suggest
possible interactions between these elements and determine what is of
most significance to the final design. A museum will undergo different
considerations because of its role as a cultural symbol and a place for
viewing art whereas an office design would be driven more by performance
and employee comfort, leading to a difference in the type of simulation that
is appropriate.
46
3.3.1 Adaptation of an Iterative Design Process
Project differences also have implications for when the analysis of the
various parameters are integrated into the design process. A school
because of its large number of rooms and scale of the spaces would likely
not need in-depth structural analysis at the beginning of the design process.
However, because of the tasks that take place within a school, early analysis
of psychometric issues of lighting, thermal, and acoustic values would likely
be most beneficial. On the other hand, the design of an enclosed stadium
with a long span roof and the loads associated with the crowd of spectators
would benefit from early explorations into the structural performance of the
design.
This reordering of tasks and tools within the design process is something
that improves with time and experience. Flexibility of the design process
allows this evolution and the feedback associated with it to constantly
reshape the design process. Work that occurs early in an architect’s career
may be completely different with regards to the process that is used at a
later point in time. The development of the architect occurs through the
constant reformulation of the design process in response to particular
projects, the technology of that time and the accumulated experiences over
one’s career. There is not necessarily an ideal process that one is working
towards because the constraints and elements of the process are in constant
flux. The goal instead is establishing a means of analyzing and adjusting the
design process.
3.3.2 Limitations of Iterative Design Process
47
Currently communication between different software can be time
consuming or not possible making it difficult to integrate these various tools
that they each offer. As the use of the software continues to grow so will the
support and development industry, establishing common formats for more
efficient model exchange. There will likely still exist a difference in the way
in which a model is built in response to the analysis of either morphology or
performance. This can either be overcome with individual software taking
on more tasks or breaking the modeling process into a set of models where
each is used for a different type of analysis.
The approach of breaking the a building into separate models is the
current practice. Similar to the serially performed tasks of moving from
plan to section to elevation, the process of studying the form of the
building through one model requires then using that model to inform the
development of a model to be used for performance analysis. This can lead
to errors in translation of the model and large amounts of time that are
spent rebuilding that model. More comprehensive software is beginning
to be developed where performance analysis is incorporated directly into
the morphological software through the use of plug-ins. While this may
allow for the potential use of the same model there is still the fact that the
model must be conceived of and constructed in a way that allows analysis
to be performed upon it. These considerations have slight implications
when thinking about creating a model for lighting analysis but have
further reaching implications when a morphological model is to be used
for thermal analysis. Given the current tools it becomes the task of the
designer to balance these pros and cons when first planning how to go
about constructing the building model.
Chapter 4 Past Projects
48
Before attempting to integrate the parametric modeling and evaluative
analysis tools into a design process there must first be a baseline
understanding of what these tools are capable of. In order to develop this
experience, each tool was applied, in isolation, to a previously completed
studio design project. By removing the act of design and replacing it with
the act of reconstruction more attention can be paid to the way in which the
tool functions. Also by examining the tools in isolation of each other, the
strengths and weaknesses of each can first be identified before attempting
to balance their integration with each other as well as other pre-existing
design tools. Both projects are taken from previous studios project in the
University of Washington’s Master of Architecture program.
49
Study Room
4.1 Wallingford Library - Winter 06
Reading Area
Stacks
Study Room
Fig. 4.1 Second Floor
Staff Offices
Computer Area
Fig. 4.2 Ground Floor
Fig. 4.3 Section Perspective
Meeting Room
Children’s Stacks
This was the second studio project during the first year of the three year
Masters of Architecture program and was the first project where I used
digital modeling from the beginning of the design process. Throughout
the process of designing and modeling this project there was a focus on
the control and quality of light within the central library space, which was
explored mainly through the use of shadow simulation within SketchUp.
While these studies helped to direct the path of the design, in hindsight
they may have failed to acknowledge many of the other important
qualities related to natural light such as contrast, glare, solar radiation, and
appropriate lighting levels for specific tasks and ignored other experiential
qualities of space such as thermal, and acoustical.
This project is being revisited for the purpose of applying evaluative
simulation tools, specifically Ecotect, to understand the implications of past
decisions that were based largely upon intuition. Another purpose is to
explore how the information provided by these evaluative tools can be used
in shaping the future designs.
The program for this project was to design a community library in the
center of the Wallingford neighborhood of Seattle. In the final design,
the service areas which were the work spaces, meeting room, bathrooms,
computer area and offices were sheltered by the reading spaces and stacks
which were located adjacent to the roof. From early on in the design the
idea was to create an internally focused environment within the library,
50
filtering in views of the outside while bringing in light from above. This
concept came to be represented by the idea of trees being bent over a raised
platform, diffusing light into the interior of the central library space. A
series of scattered skylights were used in the attempt to create this effect.
The skylight placement was based on formal composition and a loose idea
of concentrating the direct light in circulation areas that would receive less
visually critical activity so that the light would then diffuse into the reading
areas.
4.1.2 Rebuilding the Base Geometry
Fig. 4.4 Lighting model of surface geometry
Fig. 4.5 Thermal/Acoustic/Wind model of zone geometry
Before the analysis of the previous design could begin it was necessary to
reorganize and in some instances rebuild the original SketchUp model.
Ecotect, an evaluative simulation software, performs two different methods
of analysis, with each having a different set of geometric requirements.
For analyses related to lighting the model needs to represent the geometry
and its spectral surface characteristics, which are assigned in Ecotect. The
more visually detailed this model and the more representative the surface
characteristics, the more accurate the lighting and shadow analysis will be.
Thermal and acoustic analysis requires a model that is divided into separate
zones, representing different areas of enclosed space such as bathrooms,
offices, or the meeting room. The central library space can be represented
as one large space because it is open between the different areas. These
models require a lot less geometry but the geometry must be much more
precise and create a zone that is “water tight”, meaning each zone must be
closed along all edges. Failure to achieve a “water tight” model will most
likely lead to inaccurate results.
51
4.1.3 Analysis of Sun Penetration
Early sketches in the design looked at how the form of the apertures
could be shaped to possibly bounce light into the space but this idea later
receded to the background because of the difficulty in understanding if
these solutions would actually work. Instead, a simpler approach of using
SketchUp to simulate how sunlight would travel through the space was
used. This exercise was useful through out the design process and I now
frequently find myself performing this task during design to quickly get an
idea of the range of movement of the sun but it has its limit. While the time
of day and day of the year could both be controlled within SketchUp, it was
only possible to visualize a single point in time, making it difficult to get an
holistic idea of the sun’s path.
The use of Ecotect allows for the visualization of shadows over the course
of an entire day, highlighting the sun’s path and areas that will experience
the most direct sunlight. This can be seen in the plan diagrams on the
following page, which were created for the summer and winter solstices,
and spring and fall equinoxes (both produce almost identical results). The
differing sun altitudes, high in the summer and low in the winter, and
corresponding rise/set points of the sun, north of E-W in summer and
south of E-W in winter, are depicted in the sunpath diagram. These images
show that several of the areas experience large amount of direct sunlight
such as in the stacks which would likely cause damage to the books, and in
the reading area, possibly creating visual discomfort due to glare and large
amounts of contrast.
Study Room
June 21st
Reading Area
Stacks
Study Room
September/March 21st
December 21st
Fig. 4.6 Shadow studies and Sunpath Diagrams for the 21st of June, September/March and December
52
53
4.1.4 Analysis of Lighting Levels
Fig. 4.7 First Floor - March 21st at 12pm
Fig. 4.8 Second Floor - March 21st at 12pm
Fig. 4.9 No Skylights - March 21st at 12pm
To get a better idea of what the natural light values are, measured in lux, a
lighting analysis of the central library space on the second floor was done
using the geometry from Ecotect and then processing the analysis through
Radiance because of its more sophisticated lighting analysis algorithms.
The lighting analysis starts in Ecotect after material properties have been
assigned, followed by the creation of an analysis grid of the area to be tested.
For this study the analysis grid was set to the footprint of the building but a
smaller grid could be set to do detailed studies of individual rooms. Once
the grid is established the geometry and grid are exported to Radiance
where the lighting level calculations take place, and when complete are
imported back into Ecotect and displayed in the images to the left and on
the next page.
Suggested lighting levels within a library are 540-810 lux for a reading area
and in a computer lab suggested levels range from 160-320 lux. The results
from the lighting analysis show that the levels within the reading areas are
600-1200 lux during December but can exceed 3000 lux in June, well above
the suggested levels of 540-810 lux. When the option of having no skylights
was analyzed it showed the natural light provided by vertical apertures
would not be sufficient to avoid the use of supplemental electrical lighting.
The large illumination difference between June and December suggests that
even though the skylights may need to be slightly smaller they must also
be capable of adjusting to the seasons by either a static or dynamic means.
These results in addition to the results of the shadow analysis show that
the skylights allow large amounts of direct sunlight into the central library
space, making it necessary to prevent overheating due to solar radiation.
54
Fig. 4.10 Ecotect Lighting Study for June 21st at 8am, 12pm, 4pm
Fig. 4.11 Ecotect Lighting Study for March 21st at 8am, 12pm, 4pm
Fig. 4.12 Ecotect Lighting Study for December 21st at 9am, 12pm, 3pm
55
4.1.5 Analysis of Thermal Performance
Fig. 4.13 Wall section layer properties in Ecotect
Fig. 4.14 Zone thermal properties in Ecotect
For the thermal analysis it was necessary to use the zoned model and to
obtain weather data for the city of Seattle, WA which Ecotect then uses
to calculate the effect of the weather on the building’s internal conditions.
Whereas the lighting model was mainly concerned with a material’s surface
characteristics, the thermal model requires the surfaces of the model to be
given wall section layers which define the thermal and acoustic responses.
In addition to the material properties, the properties of the zones must
also be defined which include the type of HVAC system, the comfort band
(range of accepted temperatures), the occupancy and schedule of use, internal
gains from lighting and electronic equipment, and the infiltration rate of
air between a zone and the outside. For the initial calculations the HVAC
systems were set to NONE in order to get an idea of how the building
would respond to the environment. Occupancy estimates were made for
the main library spaces that would receive the most use such as the meeting
room, offices, and reading areas. The rest of the properties were left at their
default levels to initially control the fewest number of variables as possible.
Once these settings were input then an interzonal adjacency was calculated,
determining the influence that each zone has on another due to behaviors
like thermal bridging or solar shading. The first analysis looked at the
internal hourly temperatures to get a sense of how the building was
responding to the environment. The following page contains images
depicting the hottest day of the year, the coldest day and March 21st as
a middle ground. In these graphs, the thick band of multi-colored lines
represents the all of the zones’ interior temperature fluctuations with each
zone represented by a different colored solid line. The dashed and dotted
56
Fig. 4.15 Internal (hourly) temperature on hottest day of year
Fig. 4.16 Internal temperature on March 21st
Fig. 4.17 Internal temperature on coldest day of year
lines represent the environmental conditions such as outside temperature,
solar radiation, wind speed. The red and blue bands indicate the upper
and lower extents of the comfort band which falls within the black. From
looking at these graphs and the data for the rest of the year it became
apparent that the interior of the building hovered around the average of
the daily minimum and maximum temperatures. By adjusting the building
materials these curves can be subtly shifted because of each material’s
different U-value, which is a measure of how well heat passes through a
material. During design, this type of analysis could be used to study the
thermal benefits of different materials as well as investigating the impact
of alternate orientations or aperture locations to limit the impacts of direct
solar gain.
After studying the building without any mechanical systems, HVAC
systems were assigned to the different zones and the heating loads for the
entire year were calculated. The loads are displayed in a vertical bar graph
where a bar for each month is divided up into segments that represent
the percentage of energy use for each zone. It is apparent from the results
shown on the following page that heating is the dominant load throughout
the year with the central library space requiring the most energy. Within
a design process, frequently repeated use of this type of analysis would
show how the performance of the design was changing and hopefully
progressing. Similar to the internal hourly temperature analysis, the
heating/cooling load analysis has the potential of showing how the choice
of certain materials could have energy implications. A situation could be
imagined where a more expensive, high performance material is tested
against a less expensive, conventional material in order to see whether the
cost difference would be offset by the energy savings.
57
Fig. 4.18 Hourly Internal Temperature (zone colors blue-central library space, green-storage, orange-meeting)
Fig. 4.19 Monthly Heating/Cooling Loads (zone colors blue-central library space, green-storage, orange-meeting)
58
In order to better understand how to improve the design there needs to be
an understanding of the thermal weaknesses and strengths of the building.
The graph of the Passive Gains Breakdown shows the gains and losses that
create the need for heating/cooling loads as a percent of the total energy
usage. There are six variables that are being tested for in the Passive Gains
Breakdown; Conduction, Sol-air, Direct Solar, Ventilation, Internal, and
Interzonal. It is not the intention of this thesis to explain what each of these
variables are but instead to show that major weaknesses of a design can
begin to seen through these graphs. In the case of the library, conduction
accounts for over 64% of the total energy loss, which again could be
mitigated by choosing a material with a lower U-value.
Fig. 4.20 Passive Gains Breakdown
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 hrs
watts
26000
4
6
8
0
2
-26000
Jan
Mar
May
Fig. 4.21 Ventilation gains
July
Sept
Nov
Each of these variables can then be examined in closer detail by producing
a graph that averages the energy use per day for each month. These images
offer a visual means of examining the complex relationships that occur
between variables. For example on the following page there are graphs for
direct solar, building fabric, and interzonal gains. In the building fabric
and ventilation graphs the red areas represent near zero gains because
the outdoor temperature is within the range of the comfort band due to
the solar radiation that occurs during those months as can be seen in the
direct solar graph. This then leads to the interior of the library not needing
heat during the day so the interzonal gains are negative, the blue patch in
the interzonal graph. Spaces with larger amounts of activity are giving off
or losing heat to the other zones while during the evening hours and into
the night these areas begin to absorb heat, the two yellow patches in the
interzonal graph, because temperatures have cooled off outside. Analysis
with the HVAC system set to none would make it possible to see how
thermal lag of materials effected diurnal temperature swings. All of the
59
Fig. 4.22 Gains Breakdown
watts
watts
47000
1600
0
0
0
4
6
8
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 hrs
watts
2800
-47000
2
-2800
Jan
Mar
May
July
Fig. 4.23 Direct Solar Gains
Sept
Nov
Jan
Mar
May
July
Sept
Fig. 4.24 Building Fabric Gains
Nov
-1600
Jan
Mar
May
July
Fig. 4.25 Interzonal Gains
Sept
Nov
60
analysis examples so far have focused on the interaction between all of
the zones but it is also possible to visualize a single zone at a time to see
whether it is gaining or losing energy. A comparison of the central library
space and the meeting room illustrates the difference in loads created by
internal activity in the blue band and the cyan band shows that the meeting
room is losing heat to other zones while the library is not.
Fig. 4.26 Central Library Space Passive Gains Breakdown
Fig. 4.27 Meeting Room Passive Gains Breakdown
For the use of thermal analysis tools to be effective they need to cross the
entire range of scales from that of the site to the layers that make up a wall
section. The larger of these scales represents systems of relationships whose
attributes are dependent upon subsystems. Along with this heirarchy there
must be the conceptual understanding of the physical principles that shape
the exchange of energy, which can then be used to relate various scales in
an effort to simulate an holistic model. The purpose is not to simply find
out how much energy would be necessary to heat a building but instead to
test forms, materials, or spatial arrangements in an attempt to enhance a
relationship between the internal and external environments. A difficulty
that arises in this approach to design are the implications that one area of
performance such as designing for thermal or lighting performance then
has on other variables such as acoustics.
61
Bounces
4.1.6 Analysis of Acoustic Performance
Fig. 4.28 Initial attempt: Linked acoustic ray analysis of
children’s area
Bounces
Fig. 4.29 Second attempt: Linked acoustic ray analysis with
addition of adult stacks to second level
Libraries are generally quiet places, allowing people to focus on a task
without additional distractions. For this reason the children’s area of the
library was chosen for the acoustic analysis in order to analyze how sound
from the children’s area would effect the rest of the library. Acoustic
analysis can happen in a variety of ways within Ecotect. Sound bounces off
surfaces similar to the way that light diffuses through a space meaning that
one of the ways for visualizing sound is to create a set of linked acoustic rays
that display the bouncing rays of sound. In this analysis the detailed model
of the surface geometry was used instead of the zone model because of the
design to have visually accurate results. To start the analysis a speaker is
placed within the model, in this case it was placed at about 3.5’ above the
floor in the children’s area, and then the acoustic variables of azimuth angle
(90°), angular increment (2°), and number of bounces (4) are entered. The
purpose of this analysis was to get an idea of the behavior of the sound in
the space rather than determining the relative decibel levels between spaces.
The initial attempt of this analysis returned results that at first glance
appeared unpromising. In the first figure, the sound originates from the
dense yellow group of rays within the children’s area and then because of
the surrounding walls and curved roof manages to reflect into the adult
reading area on the second floor as early as the second bounce (cyan lines).
The concave form of the roof focuses sound from the children’s area into
the adult reading area, which would likely lead to acoustical conflicts.
When this image was overlaid with the building section it was noticed that
many of these second bounces were intersecting the stacks which would be
full of books, a material that has good acoustic absorption characteristics.
62
Fig. 4.30 Reverberation time for wood ceiling
Fig. 4.31 Reverberation time for fabric ceiling
Fig. 4.32 Reverberation time for acoustic ceiling tiles
The stacks were placed in the Ecotect model and the analysis was rerun
creating a much different acoustic response. In the second attempt it can
be seen that few second bounces make it into the reading area and that the
majority of the third and fourth bounces remain near the ceiling. These
results seem much more promising than the initial attempt and suggest
the possibility of purposely controlling the parameters of the stacks, for
example the placement or height, in order to control the sound originating
from the children’s area.
Another type of acoustic analysis is to test the reverberation time (RT) of
a space. Reverberation is effected by the acoustic absorption of a material
meaning that a high acoustic absorption coefficient allows less sound to
bounce around the space. High RTs create an echo effect while low RTs
can cause sound to be perceived as flat, or lacking tonal balance. For this
analysis the zoned model was used because of the need for knowing the
volume of the space. Ecotect has the ability to use three separate algorithms
for calculating the reverberation time which are Sabine, Norris-Eyring,
and Millington-Sette. For this analysis the Millington-Sette algorithm was
used because of its ability to more accurately deal with a higher range of
absorption coeffecients. Originally the ceiling material was intended to be
wood slats but the RT analysis of this material showed did not fall within
the recommended blue band. As alternatives, two other calculations were
performed using fabric and then acoustic ceiling tiles. The results suggest
that a fabric ceiling material would offer the best balance of reverberation
times while the acoustic ceiling tiles were unable to hold the RT with the
recommended band.
63
While these calculations can give a general idea of what the RT will be, they
are not accurate enough to pinpoint the RT because they fail to account for
the actual shape of the space. However, they do offer quick studies in the
use of different materials that could be beneficial if coordinated with the
early explorations in form.
4.1.7 Summary of Analytic Studies
The omission of the stacks from the original model shows that the accuracy
of simulation is dependent upon the accuracy of the model, something
that was brought up in the previous section on systems thinking. The
more encompassing the scope of the model and the issues it addresses,
the more reliable the results will be. It is often thought that the earlier a
task can be performed within the design process the greater the influence
it can have on the end product, but with the evaluative analysis this does
not necessarily hold true. Instead, a certain type of analysis can only
enter into the design process when a sufficient amount of information is
present within the model to accurately simulate the performance in relation
to reality. Lighting and shadow studies are largely dependent upon the
geometry of the building while thermal studies can be as greatly influenced
by form as material considerations. Experience with the use of these tools
would establish notions of when it is appropriate to begin a certain type of
analysis but initially there is likely to be a trial and error approach in order
to establish those experiences.
As the analysis begins to examine multiple forces acting upon the building,
there becomes the ability to integrate solutions rather than piling the
solutions on top of each other. In this project the lighting analysis showed
64
that there were excessive amounts of daylight but also the need to control
the light between seasons while the acoustic analysis showed that the
wood ceilings would not give the desired reverberation times and instead
a ceiling made out of a fabric material might perform better. Rather than
address these two problems separately, it may be possible by looking at
them together, to use the idea of a fabric ceiling to manage both light and
acoustical forces, and then afterwards following up with an analysis of the
thermal response.
It would be difficult, if not impossible to achieve the desired response
for each of these forces because of possible conflicts between solutions.
Instead, varying weights need to be assigned to forces that are deemed
more important. These priorities are the subjective decisions of the
designer and heavily dependent upon the program of a project and directed
by one’s intuition and experience.
The software is not responsible for providing solutions but instead
the results of the analysis must be interpreted by the designer and this
understanding must then be shaped into a proposed solution. The software
also doesn’t dictate how or what should be tested but again these decisions
are left to the designer who must use their experience and intuition to
make an informed decision. Luckily what the software excels at doing is
providing instant feedback for the complex problems that it is asked to
analyze. The power of the computer as a design tool is dependent on how
this feedback is interpreted by the designer and then how it is applied.
65
Carrie Blast
Furnace
Hot Metal
Bridge
Fig. 4.33 Site plan
4.2 Museum of Steel - Winter 07
This project was an entry in the 2006-07 ACSA Museum of Steel Student
competition as part of the ARCH 501 Tectonic studio. The three studio
projects completed before this project all explored the use of the curve
as a linear extrusion, and with this project the goal was to further that
exploration through modeling more complex geometry. At the time of this
project, the digital tools that I was using were limited to SketchUp, making
it difficult to design and keep control of the complex geometry because
of the way that geometry is defined by the intersection of lines to create
surfaces.
A re-examination of this project serves two purposes related to
morphological simulation. The first is to gain experience with software
that I did not have at the time of the original project, and secondly, to look
at how the use of these tools might change the overall design approach of
future projects.
The brief for the competition called for the design of a Museum of Steel on
the site of the former Carrie Blast Furnace, located in Pittsburgh, PA. As
part of the competition the structure needed to be steel and the brief called
for the design of an iconic building. After site analysis and case studies of
precedents in steel construction, the concept was to create a steel structure
that appeared to spring from the landscape, opening itself up towards the
two Steel Industry artifacts on site, the blast furnace and hot metal bridge.
66
4.2.2 Initial Development of Geometry
Fig. 4.34 Initial sketches of building form
Fig. 4.35 Early attempts at rationalizing roof form
At first the form of the building was explored through sketches that later
became the base drawings that the initial digital model was built upon.
From the beginning there was an attempt to allow the geometry to appear
as if it were free form but would actually be derived from controlled shapes.
The first version of this approach was to take and cut a irregular section out
of a torus, a circle revolved around a circle to create a donut. When this
idea was then modeled and an attempt was made to extract a plan from
this geometry it became apparent that there was a disconnect between the
plan and form sketches. Neither one was informing the other which led
to trying to rationalize the base geometry of the roof to allow for placing
structure and walls.
From this point a cycle developed whereby an attempt would be made
at modeling the desired roof geometry and then explore how the
perimeter wall would fit underneath the roof until that model was no
longer functional. These obstacles usually forced a complete rebuild of
the geometry but each time this occurred, a greater understanding of
the elements and their relationships were brought to the next iteration.
Eventually the curved roof geometry became divided by a triangular grid
which dictated the angle of the enclosing walls. This triangular grid also
served as the base for developing a space frame structure that had to be
meticulously trimmed down to achieve the desired form.
Though the base geometry turned out to be fairly simple, the complexity
of constructing the geometry prohibited the ability to make large scale
changes later in the design process. There was also no convenient way
67
Fig. 4.36 One of the final iterations of the base geometry
of extracting the information from the model something that would be
necessary for fabrication were this an actual project. One benefit that came
from this approach was an introduction to understanding the individual
parameters that were effecting the geometry. For instance, by the end of the
design the number of segments in the profile circle was known and adjusted
to control the number of panels that spanned across the roof.
While the experience of constructing this model was invaluable it would
be beneficial in future projects to be able to consciously approach the
form modeling process , allowing for more control, and more freedom
in morphological design studies. For that reason, time has been spent
learning software like Rhino, which controls geometry with more accuracy
and abilities as well as learning Paracloud which allows for the population of
a surface with cellular components such as a space frame component.
4.2.3 Rebuilding the Base Geometry
Fig. 4.37 Exploded axonometric of the final building form
For the geometry rebuilding exercise with Rhino and Paracloud the original
design was taken as the point to work towards with no changes being made.
This started in Grasshopper which is a program that operates within Rhino.
In Grasshopper geometry is controlled through the use of components that
are connected together with wires similar to an electrical diagram. Each
component has inputs and outputs, but they can control a wide range of
parameters ranging from geometry to logic rules to transformations. The
first step was the construction of a line between two points that represented
the overall length of the base geometry. The x, y, z coordinates of these
points were defined individually with sliders to allow for easy future
adjustments. The next step was to divide the line into a number of points
68
Fig. 4.38 Decomposition of points into X, Y, Z coordinates,
Z coordinates replaced with values from a sine function
Fig. 4.39 Creation of rail and section curve
where the higher the number of points the smoother the rail curve with be.
These points are then decomposed (pComp) into their x,y,z coordinates
and the Z coordinates are replaced with a values from a trigonometric
sine (Sin) function. Because of the small value size returned from the sine
function it is necessary to then multiply (Mult) these values before applying
them to the Z coordinate. The range of the sine function as well as the
multiplication factor are both controlled with sliders to allow adjustment.
A curve is then interpolated through this new set of points to create the
rail curve. In the original design a circle or arc was used for the profile, but
here only a circle was used. To create a circle it is necessary to establish
the vector that the circle would be perpendicular to, a center point, and the
radius. The vector can be created by sampling the first two points (Item)
from the rail curve and drawing a vector (VecPt2) between them. The first
point of the rail curve is then used as the center point and the radius is
established with the use of a slider. At this point the circle (section curve)
and the sine curve (rail curve) are input into a sweep (Swp1) operation
where the circle will be pulled along the sine curve forming a tubular
surface. The last step in this sequence is to divide the surface in the U&V
directions (NURBS surface) in order to apply the space frame component
within Paracloud. It may seem like a lot of steps to create a simple piece of
geometry but it allows the freedom to transform, replace, or mutate any of
the original geometry at any step and have the end product regenerated.
4.2.4 Developing the Space Frame Component
Fig. 4.40 Division of surface into a grid of points
The division points that were created in the last step in Grasshopper are
then imported, through a direct link, into Paracloud as a point cloud that is
69
Fig. 4.41 Steps for rebuilding the Level 1 Base geometry
1 Creation of a line
2 Division of the line into 23 points
3 Substitute Sine curve for Z values
4 Creation of curve thru points
geometry created in
Rhino 4.0 using
Grasshopper
5 Creation of circle at first point in curve
6 Sweep of circle along curve
7 Division of surface in U & V direction
70
Fig. 4.42 Paracloud surface created from points imported
from Rhino
arranged in a spreadsheet and ordered based upon the number of division
that were assigned in the U&V directions. For the purpose of the space
frame the surface that was created needs depth added to it which is done
through the cloud processing tool. Depth can be added to the surface either
positively or negatively and in this case was projected normal perpendicular
to the surface at each point. This then creates a rib structure with the
specified depth that the space frame can be created within.
Within each of the quadrangular cells of the rib structure a component can
be placed. One way of doing this is by entering the points that define a set
of lines through a cell matrix. These points are then recorded and can be
populated onto the surface based upon different function. For the space
frame the points create lines that become cylinders whose diameters are
controlled by the Component column. Once these components are created
and populated to the cloud it is possible to graphically alter their pattern
through a spreadsheet to further shape the cloud.
Fig. 4.43 Paracloud surface with added depth creating ribs
Fig. 4.44 Paracloud cell matrix for defining components
The initial geometry had to be imported from Rhino, thereby breaking
the direct connection between the different systems of geometry because
two pieces of software were now responsible for form. While each of
these software has there advantages over the other, this break hinders the
effectiveness of this approach to design by limiting the immediate visual
feedback that might be possible if geometry was kept within one software.
Since Paracloud was only used for creating the space frame and trimming
the overall form it was decided to further explore how Grasshopper could
be used to create a single model of the different geometric systems.
Fig. 4.45 Steps for developing space frame upon base geometry
8 Geometry imported from Rhino
71
72
String of Points
Profile X
Profile Y
Starting Point
Cull Pattern: off-on-off-on
Point Order
Direction
List2
Starting Point
List1
Starting Point
Fig. 4.46 Development of Triangular grid
4.2.5 Modeling the Systems of Geometry
Reconstructing the space frame geometry within Grasshopper was at
first difficult because of the lack of experience with the software and the
unfamiliarity with its method for constructing geometry. Any space frame
is dependent upon a grid which can either be rather or non-rational,
but in either case there is a system of points that define the grid. In the
original SketchUp model the space frame was created by intersecting 3
sets of planes, each with a different orientation, with the tube surface.
The approach in Grasshopper is in one way simpler but in another more
complicated, however, once this grid is set up within Grasshopper the
points can then be referenced for creating the other systems of geometry.
The first step in creating the space frame was to establish a grid on
the surface of the tube similar to what had been done in the previous
exploration with Grasshopper and Paracloud. When the division points are
created on the surface there is a starting point and ending point though the
surface, such as a sphere, might be continuous. The list of points is ordered
based upon the U&V divisions, similar to dividing the surface into a series
of rows (string) and columns (profile). A string is made up of a fixed number
of points which are repeated as separate profiles along the surface. The list
progresses through all the points in a string before moving on to the next
profile.
The list of points can be used with all of its original values or the list can be
culled with an on/off pattern, in this case every other point is turned off. A
line or multiple lines can be created on the surface by pairing the original
set of division points with a copy of the list whose points have been shifted
73
to a value further along in the sequence. Lines of differing orientations can
be defined through this process to establish the grid of the space frame,
which increases in complexity as depth is added with an inset surface and
that is then triangulated between these two surfaces. The number of points
and cull patterns differed between the inner and outer surfaces in order to
get the vertices of the outer triangles to align with the center of the triangles
on the inner surface.
Fig. 4.47 Space frame component defined by two different
sized intervals.
Fig. 4.48 Two versions of the space frame generated with
the change of only the rail curve
The first attempt at modeling the entire space frame on the tube surface
demonstrated that the computer was struggling to efficiently handle
this large amount of information, and it was also unclear how the tube
surface would be trimmed to a final shape, similar to what had been done
in Paracloud. It was decided to readdress the definition of the overall
form and trim away a lot of the excess that was contained within the tube
definition. The original form was based upon a sine wave with a circle
swept along it, creating a lot of excess geometry. In the second attempt, the
form was still defined by the two types of curves for the sweep operation,
the rail and section curves, but this time the curves were used only to
create the final building form. The triangular space frame grid that was
previously developed for use with the tube could then be copied into
this new definition. With this setup, at any time the rail or section curve
could be adjusted in order to respond to site conditions, program, or other
parameters, and the space frame would adjust as well.
The difficulty with this form of design is that in order to maintain the
flexibility of the Grasshopper definition, the geometry must be controlled
through geometric rules rather than direct interaction. Increased
familiarity with the software allows for better planning and organizational
74
Fig. 4.49 Wall space frame
understanding of the model, making it easier for future changes at any level.
As the definition grows in complexity, changes to the early values, such as
the defining profile curve or the UV divisions, stop so that attention can be
given to the next level of detail. The benefit here is that the designer does
not have to be fully committed to all of the previous decisions in order
to proceed, but instead a well defined form has the possibility of being
radically altered at any level and at any time during the design process.
Once the roof form was roughed out, its geometry was used as the starting
reference for establishing the walls. By using a method similar to the
selecting of points for the creation of the space frame, a set of relationships
were defined that picked two strings of lines near an edge of the roof. The
X, Y coordinates for the points in these strings were then copied and a value
of 0 was substituted for the Z coordinates, making a copy of the strings of
lines at ground level. Surfaces, lofted between these pairs of strings, were
divided to align with the spacing of the roof grid, and in the same technique
that was used to model the space frame for the roof, the midsection
members of the space frame were applied to the wall. At the time when
the wall was being defined, the radius of the pipe for the wall space frame
was given a specific value but it was noticed that there is the possibility that
this radius could be controlled by a function that sets the radius of the pipe
based upon structural proportions of pipe length to cross sectional area
Fig. 4.50 Ground plane and wall derived from perimeter
curves of roof geometry.
One of the difficulties that was experienced when first designing this project
in SketchUp was coordinating the floor plan with the orientation of the
structure along the edges. Again using the points that defined the roof, a
series of point strings were pulled out and oriented onto the ground level.
A curve was then created from these points and offset to make different
75
levels. It became possible to not only control how the floor interacted with
the perimeter walls but also to follow the gesture of the roof with what was
happening on the ground plane. The reliance on the grid of points and their
order would sometimes make it difficult or nearly impossible to achieve
the desired form. An available alternative would be to manually enter the
geometry which would then be detached from the definition or to conceive
of intricate ways of extracting bits and pieces of the desired geometry
from the grid. The decision of whether to continue with the definition or
abandon it in favor of manually editing the geometry is likely to be partially
dependent upon one’s experience with the software. As familiarity with the
software increases so does the understanding of how to organize and use
geometric systems making it possible to more fully design the building with
an all encompassing definition.
Fig. 4.51 Ground plane reconfigured with a small number of
changes to the cull pattern
The last study that was performed was to create the roof panels and control
their patterning. When originally performing this task in SketchUp each
panel had to be selected individually, limiting the number of studies that
could be done. To create the panels in Grasshopper, the same points
that were used to create the lines on the roof surface were isolated into
three different sets that would then define the vertices of the triangular
panels. Once these panels were created, a cull pattern could be used to
turn panels on or off. At first, understanding the numerical relationship’s
effects on the pattern could be confusing, but by using the adjustable
sliders within Grasshopper a repeating interval could usually be found.
These values generally had some relationship to the original UV divisions
that first divided the roof surface, and once a specific pattern was found
its relationship to the overall geometry could be formulated to allow for
consistent updating if values were changed.
76
Fig. 4.52 Roof panel cull patterning studies
77
The pattern of the roof panels were controlled only by aesthetic
considerations, but this could be an area of design where Paracloud would
come in useful because of its ability to control geometry and the population
of a surface with components based upon data from a spreadsheet such
as the data that is used in the Ecotect graphics for lighting analysis. An
example would be to balance desired lighting levels with the placements of
the skylights. The model would initially be studied with no skylights and
the feedback of this analysis could then be used to arrange the placement
of the skylights. This process could be repeated a number of times until the
desired lighting conditions were established.
4.2.6 Summary of Morphological Studies
It initially seemed like a large amount of time was invested in the creation
of the definition for this project, but in the end this investment paid off
with the ability to derive multiple building systems from the same base
points and being able to make changes that updated the entire model.
There is definitely limits to this approach to design though the limits seem
to be related to one’s level of experience. Just as the analytical simulation
required a large amount of background information and experience to
create an accurate simulation so too does the morphological simulation.
The process of designing using a tool like Grasshopper is at the same time
drastically different and similar from how geometry is typically used in
design. Grids are often used in the layout of structures or the arrangement
of a curtain wall but they tend to be regular with systems manually laid out
upon them. Grasshopper requires another skill in addition to the typically
held visual understanding of geometry and that is an organizational
understanding of geometry which has visual implications but requires
78
numerical interaction. If someone is unfamiliar with this logic it can be
difficult to use the software or to even conceive of how it could possibly
be applied. However, once a familiarity is developed, the approach to
design becomes completely different and the building systems are integrally
conceived through the reasoning that must take place when deriving
different systems from a single base.
With the combination of the two forms of information, the morphological
and analytical, geometry can begin to develop a response to the
environment where adaptations would be made during the design process
in order to strengthen the relationship between these two areas. This is
by no means an automatic process but instead requires experience and
intimate knowledge of the software. The forms that are capable of being
created with the generative software have few bounds and superficially
complex geometry can be easily achieved. However, the power of this
software lies in the intentional exploration of geometry and incremental
building of complexity. By preventing a design’s geometry from becoming
fixed in the early stages, a designer can more freely and quickly explore
alternatives that might otherwise be unfeasible. This flexibility becomes
essential when trying to apply analysis results that will likely change as
the design progresses. This method works in contrast to the convention
of moving from one phase of design to another and instead allows the
conceptual phase of design, where the broad ideas that shape much of the
design are formed, to be pulled through all of the other phases of design. A
broad concept of organization can be used to direct the development of a
geometric definition that can respond to changes at any point in the design
process, thereby removing the pressure to solve the critical issues in the
early stages of the design process.
Chapter 5 Design Project
Elementary School Program
Number of Children = 400-450
Recommended Site Size = 5-10 acres
Front Office
Entry Lobby Administrative Offices 2 @ 120 s.f. each
Nurses Office Teacher’s Lounge Teacher’s Restrooms 2 @ 20 s.f. each PTA / Volunteer Room Public Restrooms 2 @ 200 s.f. each Gathering Facilities
Gym 50 x 84 Cafeteria Kitchen Music
Art Media Science Library Classrooms 500 s.f.
240 s.f.
150 s.f.
500 s.f.
40 s.f.
200 s.f
400 s.f.
4200 s.f.
2000 s.f.
1000 s.f.
500 s.f.
500 s.f.
500 s.f.
500 s.f.
2000 s.f.
3/grade @ 500 s.f. each 10,500 s.f.
Total Gross 23,730 s.f.
Total Net Square Feet Plus 10% Allowance
For mechanical areas, circulation, structure, etc.
26,000 s.f.
Fig. 5.1 Competition program for elementary school
79
The case studies previously analyzed offer insight into a range of approaches
that several architectural firms have taken when using parametric modeling
and evaluative analysis tools within their design process. The revisited
studio projects allowed for experimentation with the digital tools in
isolation of the design process. The last research area of this thesis explores
designing with the integrated use of parametric modeling and evaluative
analysis tools from the beginning of a project.
This investigation is concerned with how the tools are used within a
design process, what restructuring is necessary because of this, and what
implications these changes have on the practice of architecture. The
parametric modeling and evaluative analysis tools will be used to explore
a series of vignettes that implement these tools at a variety of scales, from
the scale of the site, down to the joint. Because of this process of working
at multiple scales, not all design decisions will be fully resolved, but rather
when enough information is present, the project will move on to another
scale of design.
The program for the design project comes from the 2008-2009 competition
entitled Life Cycle of a School, sponsored by the ACSA/AISC, which calls
for the design of an elementary school that takes into consideration issues
of prefabrication, disassembly, and reuse. The site location was left open by
the competition, and after an abbreviated period of site analysis the South
Lake Union region of Seattle was chosen for the school site, specifically the
Cascade neighborhood.
80
Parking Lot
Pon
t
H
ar
ris
on
St
ius
Multi Family
Mi
nor
as
om
Terminal/Industrial
Parking
Fig. 5.2 Cascade Playground and Land Use of Surrounding Blocks
N
Office/Retail
Th
School/Church
St
Mixed Use
Ave
N
Ave
N
81
ot
gL
n
i
St
k
Par rrison
a
H
Cascade People’s
Center
Av
e
St
or
Ave
N
N
P-Patch
N
Fig. 5.3 Current site conditions
om
as
in
ius
Th
M
5.1 The Concept
Pon
t
The Cascade Neighborhood playground and the adjacent parking lot to the
north are being used as the site for the proposed elementary school. The
functions of the playground will be added to the program of the school
including the P-Patch garden and Cascade People’s Center, which serves
as the neighborhood “living room”. In order to properly design a school on
this site, Harrison St. will be removed between Minor Ave N and Pontius
Ave N and the playground will be cleared of its current structures. While
there are urban and sustainability issues present within these decisions,
they are outside of the scope of this thesis because the focus is again on the
design process.
Before moving into the design vignettes it is important to explicitly address
the site response and chosen building concept. While one of the predicted
benefits of the use of parametric modeling is the ability to make large scale
changes late in the design, there are limits to how far back changes can be
made, and it is expected that this limit exists somewhere after the choice of
a building concept.
5.1.1 Building Concept
Fig. 5.4 Site Cleared for Design Project
For this project the building concept is to treat the large spaces of the
school, the library, cafeteria, and gym as light-wells that the classrooms
and other smaller spaces receive light from, naturally lighting as many of
the spaces as possible. This concept carries implications about the formal
relationships between spaces and thereby constrains the future possibilities
of the design, illustrating the importance the initial concept plays in design.
82
5.1.2 Site Response
As a continuation of the site analysis, a series of butterfly shadow diagrams
were created, which illustrate the pattern of shadows that fall on the site
over the course of a day. The solstices and equinoxes were analyzed during
school operation hours, 8am-4pm. All of the surrounding buildings were
set to their maximum zoning height of 85’. The diagrams on the left show
the shadow patterns while the lower diagram depicts the corresponding sun
angles at noon on each of the days. This analysis became the starting point
for the generation of the rest of the design. Areas of the site that typically
fell under shadow were used for locating interior spaces, while sunnier
locations were reserved for outdoor activities.
June 21
March/Sept. 21
Harrison St
Site
December 21
N
Thomas St
Fig. 5.5 Site Butterfly Shadow Diagrams 8am-4pm Zoning
Height 85’
Fig. 5.6 Sun angle diagram (points on curves represent mid-day)
83
This simple but effective analysis was used throughout the design, allowing
a continuous investigation of how the building and site could be shaped
in order to pull the site out of shadow. The lower diagrams show several
iterations analyzed during the course of the design.
Fig. 5.7 March Butterfly Shadow Diagrams over course of design
84
5.2 Role of the Definition
Fig. 5.8 Undeveloped plan
The use of parametric modeling was essential in being able to fluidly build
iterations upon previous design attempts like those shown in the butterfly
shadow diagram progression. From the beginning of the design process a
definition was created in Grasshopper which evolved over the course of the
design and in the end this definition represented every designed aspect of
the project from the landscape to the joint. During the early stages of the
design the definition had large sections that needed to be replaced. This
was partially due to changes in the design, but mostly caused by learning
how to efficiently model with this tool.
5.2.1 Definition as Diagram
One way that the definition proved useful during design was as a diagram
of the design process and overall design organization. The diagram on the
left, shown larger and labeled on the following page, begins to give a sense
of the interconnections between different pieces of the program such as
connections between the building form and landscape. The piece of the
definition within the dotted circle on the far left is the plan representation
of the original concept; natural light being shared by the smaller spaces
wrapping the larger spaces. The pieces farthest to the right of the definition
are entirely dependent on the left side of the definition for the creation of
their geometry. Their inputs may require surfaces, lines, points, vectors,
etc, meaning that any changes to the plan ripples through the rest of the
definition to the right.
85
Classroom
Gesture
Plan Layout
Gym
Roof
Cafeteria
Library
Site
86
Layout Curve
Gym Plan
Roof Center Pt
# of Structural Bays
Roof Edge Curve
Roof Ridge
Section Profiles
Cafeteria Plan
Ceiling Curve
Roof Ridge
Library Plan
Ceiling Curve
Roof Ridge
Fig. 5.11 Week10 Grasshopper definition of gym roof structure and geometry it is dependent on.
87
5.2.2 Flexible, Relational Geometry
extrusion
width
Fig. 5.12 Parametric relationship of room area to length
along curve and width of extrusion
Fig. 5.13 Examples of a bezier curves
The flexibility of the definition was used was to set up spatial, programmatic
relationships that controlled the division of the plan into the smaller spaces.
For this to occur a relationship was created between the square footage of
each room and the width of the extrusion which would return the required
length of the room along the curve. This length was not a rigid value but
once established could be altered in order to allow for a given amount of
error or to round the dimension a desired module. A key value to this
relationship is the width of the extrusion. If it was necessary to have this
width be variable along the length of the curve, then a different set of
relationships would need to constructed, likely negating the relationship
that had already been set up. The width of the extrusion was changed at
several points during the course of design in response to lighting levels,
suggested classroom proportions, and prefabrication/assembly delivery .
If the building had the possibility to constantly change in response
to feedback than it would be necessary to develop the landscape in a
similar way. In order to achieve this flexible, relational geometry with
the landscape, relationships were established between points along the
perimeter of the site and points along the edge of the building through
the use of Bezier curves. A Bezier curve is controlled by a vector at each
endpoint that determines the direction and magnitude of curvature from
the associated endpoint. If a Bezier is created with opposing vectors at the
end points then a S-shaped curve will be created. Within the Grasshopper
definition the length of this vector could be manipulated with a slider,
allowing a fine sculpting of the landscape. Once an overall gesture for the
landscape was established there was the ability to automatically update its
88
form in response to a new building form. The definition also allowed for
simple changes to be made to the landscape at any time without losing all of
the detail that had already been achieved.
Fig. 5.14 Adaptation of site to building form
89
bathroom
Cascade People’s Center
kitchen
classrooms
labs
offices
entry
offices
play
fields
library
classrooms
play
ground
entry
cafeteria
orchard
play
courts
gym
lab
entry
Parking Garage
P-patch
Cascade
People’s Center
Fig. 5.15 Week10 Building Program Layout
Green
roof
Fig. 5.16 Week10 Site Program Layout
90
5.3 Iterative Design
The greatest benefit of the flexibility made possible with the use of
parametric modeling was the ability to create iterations during the design
process and morph these iterations in response to feedback from evaluative
analysis. This process of iterative design is most apparent in the complex
geometry of the space frame roof structure which enclosed the gym,
cafeteria, library, and entry. A space frame structure was chosen because
of the geometry of the plan layout and their ability to rationalize a complex,
doubly curved surface by subdividing it with triangles. As the design
developed the form of the roof was influenced by programmatic, structural,
lighting, wind, and aesthetic concerns.
5.3.1 Influence of Daylighting
The goal to naturally daylight the school led to a system of panels within
the space frame that would bounce light into the interior, thereby avoiding
direct sunlight which would cause glare and undesirable lighting conditions.
In order to test the validity of this concept a series of lighting analyses were
done at different stages of the roof ’s evolution. The roof structure was
manipulated in several ways, over a range of scales in order to accomplish
the uniform lighting conditions, including the altering of the overall plan
geometry, differing patterns of paneling, and manipulating the orientation
of individual space frame cells in an attempt to aim light into the space.
The false color images shown on the following page represent the Useful
Daylight Index (UDI) which is the percentage of the year that lighting levels
fall within the range of 100-2000 lux.
Fig. 5.17 Evolution of Roof structure
91
Once the desired lighting conditions were achieved within the gym then the
classrooms were incorporated into the analysis and their design proceeded
in a similar process of analysis to iteration to analysis.
5.3.2 Balance of Influences
At the beginning of the design all of the spaces within the school were
provided with excessive daylighting levels. While all of the spaces were not
addressed during this research, the gym serves as an example of how these
0%
10
20
30
40
Fig. 5.18 Analysis comparison of Useful Daylight Index 100-2000 lux
50
60
70
80
90
100
92
levels can be brought into balance through the analysis of design iterations.
The areas of the design that were altered in order to achieve the uniform
levels within the gym would likely have repercussions on other areas of
performance such as structural, thermal, or fabrication. In the design of an
actual project the requirements of each of these forces would all need to be
brought into a balance of sorts which in the end is determined, somewhat
subjectively, by the design team and what they hold to be most important
to the success of the design. The ability to constantly manipulate a model
parametrically allows this balancing process to be explored from many
different perspectives, illustrating the ways that these forces can influence
each other.
Week 8
Week10
Fig. 5.19 Analysis comparison of Useful Daylight Index
100-2000 lux of classrooms and gym
93
5.4 Relational Kit of Parts
The final area of research of this thesis focuses on the idea of a kit of
relational parts rather than the traditional approach of a kit of standardized
parts. Within a parametric definition, the rules for creating a set of parts
and the relationships shared with other parts are laid out. If for example,
a set of rules are established for generating a structure from a base surface
then these rules can then be applied to an unlimited number of surfaces.
Because of the irregular form of the plan, each classroom ends up being a
unique shape, making it an appropriate testing ground for this idea of a kit
of relational parts.
5.4.1 Establishment of Rules
The classroom geometry began as two surfaces, the floor and the roof/
walls, which were provided from the subdivision of the plan extrusion. An
early concept for the classrooms was to be able to divide each classroom
into bays that could be stacked on top of each other and shipped as
prefabricated chunks to the site. This immediately set up a maximum
dimension for how wide each bay could be, resulting in a division of the
classrooms into three bays. From this point on this idea of three bays
shaped the design of the classroom structure.
Fig. 5.20 Sample of three steps for generating the floor
structure
The floor and roof structure are identical in terms of their system
of components; a beam runs down the center of each bay and holds
intersecting joists that cantilever out in both directions with their ends tied
together with two secondary beams. The generation of this structure came
from a series of the steps that further subdivided each bay along its length,
94
always taking care to create pieces that could be produced from flat sheet
material. These divisions progressed down in scale until reaching the scale
of the joint between materials. Each piece of the structure is notched to
allow them to slide together for assembly.
Within the parametric definition the depth, thickness, and angle of
intersection are all quantities that are taken into consideration, making it
possible to change any of these values and have the notched intersections
update in response. The use of intersecting planes to create the floor
structure made it possible to not only apply this definition to a plane but
a curved surface as well. Once the rules for this structural system were
established for the floor structure it was a simple matter of substitution to
create the same structure for the curved roof surface. Many of the rules
for creating these elements were conceived through hand sketches before
attempting to define the geometry within the parametric model. The intent
behind a sketch is to understand the relationships between pieces not to
numerically define all of the dimensions. A parametric definition can be
thought of as a recording of those relationships that were established in the
original sketch, leaving the dimensions to be fixed at a later time.
5.4.2 Possibilities through Digital Fabrication
Digital fabrication tools have made it possible to conceive of designing a
structure where every piece can be unique. It could be argued that the
shape of most buildings (flat surfaces) is largely influenced by traditional
fabrication techniques rather than structural performance, lighting,
solar exposure, etc. Digital fabrication tools have the ability to change
the balanced between these different forces and in doing so open new
Fig. 5.21 Exploded axonometric of classroom
95
possibilities within design. Structures could be designed in such a way
that material would be removed where it was not needed and added to
those areas needing additional strength, similar to the responsive growth
process of bones and trees. While this approach offers the ability to
optimize performance in response to a single force, the true power behind
the software is the ability to manipulate the performance of multiple forces
simultaneously.
Fig. 5.22 Layers of classroom structure
Conclusions
96
The goal at the beginning of this research was to integrate parametric
modeling and evaluative analysis into the design process. The design
project shows that not only was integration possible but also lead to
possibilities that are typically not found in design. An example is the fact
that an entirely new plan form was able to be generated at the end of the
design without a loss of the detail that had already been modeled. This was
not an effortless task, but required roughly four hours of work to adjust
some of the relationships within the parametric model. All of the analysis
that had been done up to that point was no longer valid since the building
form and its orientation had changed, but this example shows the potential
of making large scale changes late in the design process. There is a limit,
however, to how far back these changes can be made, and that limit exists
somewhere around the chosen concept. The concept behind the design
project influenced the shape of the building and how spaces interacted.
The relationships of the parametric model were then built upon this idea.
Changes could be made to the interaction of those relationships but a new
concept would likely not be able to be inserted at the scale of the overall
form while retaining the details that were built upon the previous concept.
These relational dependencies can be seen in the Grasshopper definition
and how the wires tie different systems of the design together. By
understanding what inputs are used to create a specific system it would
be possible to extract a section of the definition, connect it to a new set of
similar inputs and regenerate that system. This approach is similar to the
detail libraries that many firms use for their construction documents which
develop overtime in response to experience. However, the difference is
that this parametric systems library can be defined to adjust to the context
97
in which they are placed. Much more information must be put into a
parametric model to make this possible as well as a different approach to
design. The immediate context as well as the universal context must be
addressed for a parametric model to achieve this type of flexibility. The role
of experience does not diminish with the use of parametric modeling and
evaluative analysis, but instead is made more critical in the case of choosing
a concept or constructing a parametric model.
If experience is based upon the breadth of circumstances encountered,
then parametric modeling and evaluative analysis tools multiple the pace
at which experience can be gained. The power of parametric modeling
to aid in the rapid production of iterations allows an architect to better
understand the structure of the relationships they have established. More
powerful though is the feedback that is generated in response to these
iterations through the use of evaluative analysis. This feedback not only
allows for improvement in the performance of a design but gives an
architect a deeper understanding of these influencing forces. Rather than
designing based upon rules of thumb, the architect is establishing their
own rules of thumb that then inform their intuition and later response to
design problems. While the flexibility of parametric modeling might make
it possible to undertake evaluative analysis during later stages of the design
process, it is still most powerful in the early stages of design. It is at this
point that the concept or underlying framework of the parametric model is
established and by incorporating an early response to external forces there
will be more possibilities for addressing them in later stages of design.
The design project focused on a limited number of influencing forces,
mainly lighting, aesthetics, and structural organization. These forces have
98
an impact on other areas of design such as thermal performance, acoustics,
and cost. As experienced is gained with this approach to design it is
necessary to draw these other influencing forces into the design concept,
parametric model and evaluative analysis. Through the exploring of
iterations a hierarchy will be established that balances the interaction of
these forces. It is the role of the architect to use their experience, intuition,
and available tools to manipulate how that balance occurs. This approach
of high performance design also requires that architects move beyond the
role of organizer of information provided by consultants and instead begin
to establish a deeper understanding of the underlying forces and parameters
that each consultant or system is responding to. Imagine working with
consultants to establish a set of rules or parameters for the design of an
HVAC system. This HVAC definition might receive certain key inputs that
describe the overall form, total square footage, mechanical chase sizing,
and other variables necessary for the preliminary design of the system.
The expertise of the consultant has not been diminished but instead the
architect has made more of an effort to internalize the factors that influence
the HVAC system, thereby creating a greater potential for integration and
emergence between systems.
The role and capabilities of the architect changes when parametric
modeling and evaluative analysis are integrated into the design process.
These new capabilities open up directions in design that were previously
impractical, but also require a restructuring of the design process, including
they way that architects interact with consultants. The goal of these
changes is to allow for a more informed, flexible, and holistic exploration of
design, further the idea of an architecture of relationships.
Bibliography
Aranda, Benjamin, Chris Lasch, and Sanford Kwinter. Tooling. New York:
Princeton Architectural P, 2006.
Bachman, Leonard R. Integrated Buildings : The Systems Basis of
Architecture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
Blaser, Werner. Renzo Piano - Centre Kanak : Cultural Centre of Kanak
People. Trans. B. Almberg and K. Steiner. New York: Birkhauser Verlag
AG, 2001.
Buchanan, Peter. Renzo Piano Building Workshop Vol. 2 : Complete Works.
New York: Phaidon P, 1995.
Collins, Peter, and Kenneth Frampton. Changing Ideals in Modern
Architecture. New York: McGill-Queen’s UP, 1998.
Ednie-Brown, Pia. “Falling into the surface: towards a materiality of affect.”
Architectural design. Sept.-Oct. 1999: 8-11.
Hansmeyer, Michael. “Algorithmic Architecture.” Algorithmic Architecture.
Mar. 2008 <http://www.mh-portfolio.com/>.
Hart, Sara. “Double Indemnity - Featuring a Complex Structural System
and Automatic Louvers That Adjust to Shifting Winds, Renzo Piano’s
Tjibaou Cultural Center Is More Than Meets the Eye.” Architecture : the
AIA Journal. 87. 10 (1998): 152.
Hensel, Michael & Menges, Achim & Weinstock, Michael. Emergence :
Morphogenetic Design Strategies. New York: Academy P, 2004.
“Home Page.” Active Matter Research Group. Apr. 2008 <http://www.
activematter.org/wiki/pmwiki.php>.
99
100
Johnson, Steven. Emergence : The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities,
and Software. New York: Scribner, 2001.
Kalay, Yehuda E., and William J. Mitchell. Architecture’s New Media :
Principles, Theories, and Methods of Computer-Aided Design. New
York: MIT P, 2004.
Kolarevic, Branko, and Ali Malkawi, eds. Performative Architecture :
Beyond Instrumentality. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Lerum, Vidar. High-Performance Building. New York: Wiley, 2007.
Malkawi, Ali, and Godfried Augenbroe, eds. Advanced Building Simulation.
New York: Spon P, 2004.
Porter, Tom, and John Neale. Architectural Supermodels : Physical Design
Simulation. New York: Architectural P, 2000.
Radford, Anthony D., and John S. Gero. Design by Optimization in
Architecture and Building. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Incorporated,
1988.
Rahim, Ali. Contemporary Processes in Architecture. New York: John Wiley
& Sons, Limited, 2000.
Reiser, Jesse, and Nanako Umemoto. Atlas of Novel Tectonics. New York:
Princeton Architectural P, 2006.
Rotheroe, Kevin. “A Vision for Parametric Design.” Architecture Week.
July 2002. Mar. 2008 <http://www.architectureweek.com/2002/0710/
tools_1-1.html>.
Sasaki, Mutsuro, Toyo Ito, and Arata Isozaki. Morphogenesis of Flux
Structure. London: Architectural Association, 2007.
101
Steele, James. Architecture and Computers : Action and Reaction in the
Digital Design Revolution. Grand Rapids: Laurence King, 2001.
Terzidis, Kostas. Algorithmic Architecture. New York: Architectural P,
2006.
Willims, Austin, and Susan Dawson. “Round Peg in a Square Hole [Swiss
Re, London].” Architects’ Journal. 216.11 (2002): 26-35.
“WORKING DETAIL - Swiss Re’s Diagrid Perimeter Structure of Steel
Columns and Nodes.” The Architects’ Journal. 216. 11 (2002): 34.
Appendix A Site Analysis
102
Single Family
Multi Family
Other Housing
Mixed Use
Church
School/Daycare
Public Facilities
Gov’t Services
Office
Retail/Service
Entertainment
Industrial
Terminal/Warehouse
Utility
Parking
Vacant
Waterbody
Fig A.1 Land Use Map of South Lake Union Region of Seattle (site marked with black dot)
Open Space
Cascade Neighborhood
103
2005
2008
Single Family
Multi Family
Other Housing
Mixed Use
School/Daycare
Fig. A.2 Land Use Map of Residential development from 2005-08 in Cascade Neighborhood (site marked with white dot)
104
Parking Lot
Pon
t
H
ar
ris
on
St
ius
Multi Family
Mi
nor
as
om
Terminal/Industrial
Parking
Fig. A.3 Cascade Playground and Land Use of Surrounding Blocks
N
Office/Retail
Th
School/Church
St
Mixed Use
Ave
N
Ave
N
Appendix B Lighting Analysis
Wall1-Ceiling0
Wall1-Ceiling4
Wall3-Ceiling4
105
Wall0-Ceiling4
Wall1-Ceiling5
Useful Daylight Index 100-2000 lux
Useful Daylight Index >2000 lux
0%
10
20
Fig. A.4 Daylighting analysis of classrooms
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
106
Iteration in Response to Feedback
Initial attempt was to flood the gym with
light through large openings.
Structural bays were too large.
Too much light in center of gym.
UDI >2000 lux
UDI0%
100-2000 lux
10
20
30
Fig. A.5 Daylighting analysis of gym - Iteration 1
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
107
Next attempt slightly altered orientation
of the space frame units through their
extrusion vector. Opening the possibility
to aim the light.
UDI 100-2000 lux
0%
10
UDI >2000 lux
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
108
Third attempt decreased the structural
bay and the extrusion vector is again
manipulated to focus light in the center of
the gym.
UDI 100-2000 lux
0%
10
UDI >2000 lux
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
109
Fourth attempt covered half of the
openings thereby bringing the light to
within the desired levels.
UDI 100-2000 lux
0%
10
UDI >2000 lux
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
As an extension of the fourth attempt the
classrooms were added to the analysis to
determine how well the gym was feeding
them light.
UDI 100-2000 lux
0%
10
UDI >2000 lux
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100

pdf - dmg - University of Washington

Transcription

Similar documents

Page 1 Proving a triangle is a right triangle Method 1: Show two

How to Tie a Woggle

lnstallation - ConservationMart.com

Turkey - EOPOWER

Key - Scioly.org

RÉSoNANSS: a regional contribution to

Real Time Control of Hand Prosthesis Using Surface EMG

Kerntech Diagnose-System Loose Part Monitoring System

CoUNTerMEASURES CoUNTerMEASURES

PrimeFilm 1800 AFL Low-Cost 35mm Slide/Film Scanning Through