1

2

P A R TA

P A R TB

8-9:10-11:12-17:18-19:

20:21:

22-23:

26-27:38-31:32-33:34-35:36-37:38-39:40-41:

4-5:

A 1.01 A 1.02A 2A 3A 4A 5A 6

B 1B 2.01B 2.02B 3.01.A1B 3.01.A2B 3.02.A1B 3.02.A2

IT’S ME

3

42-45:46-53:54-55:56-57:58-65:66-67:

68

B 4.01B 4.02B 5.01B 5.02B 6B 7B 8

P A R TC

74-9394-95

96-121122-125

C1C2C3C4

4

5

I believe it is my family’s fault for my love of ar-chitecture- for the better or for the worse. I can spe-cifically remember my father acting as come sort of architectural tour guide when we visited the iconic buildings that shaped Hong Kong’s skyline. And since then, I have been keen on building and design, except for 2005 when I wanted to be a cat.

Architecture to me is a physical statement of one’s own flare. Whether it is a small house, or a famed sky-scraper, they are all testament to an architects’ sense of beauty and dimension. On a selfish note, I want to become an architect so that my flare and my percep-tions of beauty can be built so that everyone else can see and understand my mind- I suppose that is the ma-jor reason why I like architecture so much.

As I am sure I am able to produce designs by hand, this new journey of digital design, however, leads me into a realm of apprehensiveness and curiosity.

Let us see how I would fare.

6

7

8

9

A leap away from convention-al modernist architecture in the early 20th century was that of Antoni Gaudi’s works. Whilst others designed by style and perhaps geometry; Gaudi’s works were at times, concentrated on math-ematics. Although the method of sus-pending chains was not his invention, it was his execution of the elaborate sys-tems of hanging chains in order to de-termine the correct and elegant curves and angles of his works (fig.2), which bore his name into the realm of haute architecture.

The practice of catenary was a well- established method for mathema-ticians and physicists as a way of

determining the parabolic arc in order to determine angles of stress and com-pression. In Gaudi’s case, he applied this method into his architecture (fig. 3, fig. 4). His catenary models were both mod-els of design, but also a mathematical blackboard that which enabled to him to refine, perfect, rid errors and con-struct; physically. This was a huge break-through, as the construction of large arches and domes were conventional-ly designed from ground-up. However Gaudi’s employ of such system allowed him to analyse the stress and tension points of his buildings-to-be in a top-to-ground manner, which not only al-lowed for mathematical testing, but also gave birth to something entirely new.

fig.1

fig.2 fig.3 fig.4

10

The ICD/ ITKE Pavilion (fig. 7) is a breakthrough not only in digital design, but also in the production of the installation. In our contemporary fascination (although I am sure it will last) of parametric digital design, the pavilion was a project that was purely designed computationally. Not to re-veal an unknown revelation in the de-sign industry, the pavilion was pure-ly a testament to the current mode of technology in computational de-sign, which the University considered

it suitable as a piece that showed off the possibility of biomimetic design and computational technology. However, apart from the design element of this project, the creation of the pavilion it-self, primarily made up of winding and weaving carbon fibre and fibreglass fil-aments into a fabric-like surface (fig.5), was completely executed by robots (fig.6). This further proves the accessi-bility and flexibility of digital design in both the design process and in produc-tion.

fig.5 fig.6

fig.7

11

12

fig.8 fig.9

In many ways, computation-al design is on one hand a blessing to the imaginative, but also a lie to the unnoticing eye. In the contemporary climate of computational design, it is often heralded for its endless possibil-ities, flexibility, and approachability, and without a doubt, digital design in the 21st century has been able to chal-lenge the way one designs anything. However, the debate is suspended over the use of computational design- whether it is to be a tool to the imagi-native, or a brain for the interested; as both these concepts are not akin.

The former, where computational de-sign is merely a tool to aesthetically en-hance a piece of architecture, or where computational technology has been applied to realise of predetermined human conceptualised form (fig. 10), has been a popular choice with many Contemporary architects. Famous archi-tect Zaha Hadid, is a prominent individ-ual who has been able to convey many of her ideas of design through compu-tational devices. And surprisingly, many of her designs are actually executed and built (fig.9), proving that computational aided design is not only a novel invention, but also applicable to the ‘real’ world. Furthermore, Herzog and de Meuron, also applies parametrically designed

13

fig.10

algorithms, it has two particular effects. Firstly, without any analysis, computers are able to navigate complex sums and figures in striking speed and precision. When design is to be based entirely on algorithms, it may create some of the most complex and sophisticated de-signs that humans are not only unable to imagine in the first place, but would take a immeasurable amount of time if they were able to come define such complex algorithm in the first place. Many firms such as Digital Grotesque have been successful in creating so-phisticated shapes and forms (fig. 8, fig. 12), which are entirely created by a series of algorithms. These forms are not only complex, but in many ways,

facades to enhance the design of their structures (fig. 13, fig.14).

However, as pointed out, the issue is dis-puted whether architects are to design buildings which only uses computation-al design as a tool/ carrier to convey their ideas in a workable manner; or whether the designer is to rely on com-putational software to develop a design that is entirely based on computation-al algorithms. The debate is trying to weigh up the true prospect of computa-tional design, whether it is to be a tool, or to be the mastermind.

Alternatively, when computational de-sign is the based predominantly on

14

15fig.11

confusingly beautiful. However, in many cases, due to the sheer complexity of these forms, the concept of algorithmic based design is a concept that is hard to grasp and undesirable, thus putting the efforts of ‘pure’ algorithmic design in a level of research, experimentation, and as pure example, but not applicable as a desirable architectural system.

A chord is needed to be struck between these very different, very distinct, and very theoretical concepts of design, whether the real mastermind of design is to be computational technology, or the human brain.

Fortunately, the idea of applying compu-tational design is not ‘one or the other’, both can be able to complement each other. This middle ground is achieved by mixing the best of both fields, thus rede-fining the design industry in the manner of its algorithmic precision, accuracy, responsiveness, reliability (keeping re-cord of every movement), yet allowing the designer to have full control over the direction of the entire design.

As a loose example, computational de-sign is able to help set limitations of cer-tain elements concerning architecture (e.g., space constraints, stress levels, restrictions, etc.), whilst working with n the boundaries of the designer in the

fig.12

16

This system allows computational de-sign to flow freely according the design-ers’ will, where the initial shape maybe conceptualised by the said designer, but progressive alterations into forming a piece of architecture to be executed by algorithms which may also be predeter-mined by the designer. A related exam-ple would include MAD architect’s Abso-lute Towers (fig. 11), where the concept is carried out, resulting in a sculptural piece of architecture.

most flexible and complementary man-ner. Further more, concepts such as Su-performula, enables designers, and in many cases, architects, to parametrical-ly designs forms that navigates around generated algorithms (following equa-tions, parabolic functions, vectors, trig-onometry, etc.).

This process is achieved by firstly gen-erating a 2D form that is based on a su-performula to certain algorithmic pa-rameters determined by the designer. Then in increments, the formula chang-es slightly as it produces the next form, until a whole series of forms that that differs from the previous is produced progressively.

fig.13

17

18

sponsive to the potential of parametric design in regards to its ability to gener-ate according to algorithmic limitations.

Contemporarily, computational design is limited to the ambitious and academ-ic. As cited in A1.02, pure computational design is usually still in its infancy of be-ing recognized as a viable, aesthetically acceptable method of design, thus, when concerning the industry, it is viewed as rather apprehensive and too complex for appreciation, and currently is usual-ly seen as research installations. How-ever, this is not to suggest that the am-bitious and the academic are useless, in fact firms such as Digital Grotesque have tried to “create an architecture that de-fies classification and reductionism” in order to “create a form that appears at once synthetic and organic”. This is tes-tament that, although not sought after in the professional field, is nonetheless established as an art form/ design itself that many may find appealing (fig.12).

Although computational technology has been accepted in the wider design in-dustry and has been widely applied to constructed forms, script writing has a story of its own. Software designers have loosely applied basic and funda-mental applications for the user to flexi-bly adapt algorithms to their own design approach. However, since computation-al design is gaining popularity due to its responsiveness in problem solving and adaptability, computational technology

As suggested by Oxman, the con-trast of traditional design practices (that of pen to paper) and that of computa-tional digital design is the contestation of ‘formation preceding form’. This basic theory is more in line of those of compu-tational aided design, where the forma-tion of the design principle, that of com-puter generated/ aided algorithms and mathematics, would become the basis of the design. Adversely, in traditional pen-to-paper design, the form precedes formation in the way that an architect or designer realises a form, before solving the problem of how to execute the de-sired design.

In regards to ‘the industry’, the contem-porary climate for computational design is strong in architecture, but limited to a tool in enhancing design, thus only playing second fiddle. Renowned firms such as Fosters + Partners and Herzog and de Meuron are well known for their use of computational design in many of their architecture. However, for Foster, computational design is limited to aid-ing structural purposes of the general design; as for Herzog and de Meuron, the use if computational design is usu-ally nothing more than as a decoration on facades of their design, as could be seen in their De Young Museum (fig.14, 15). Furthermore, as suggested earlier, architects such as Zaha Hadid seems to place form/ parametric aesthetics be-fore and over functionality, thus ren-dering her approach seemingly unre-

19

is being tested in more and more dif-ferent realms and types of design. This leads to designers having to write algo-rithmic scripts of their own to fulfill their set requirements for whatever task they are to accomplish. This suggests that, although computational technology is ‘up to date’, it is obviously unable to ca-ter for every designer/ architect in the world, thus allowing designers the flex-ibility in writing their own algorithmic scripts in order to fulfill their require-ments, is another example of the flexi-bility, adaptability and user-friendliness of computational technology.

fig.14 fig.15

20

So, the debate stands fast: wheth-er computational design is a mere tool, or is it to become the ‘leader’ of design? ¿Por que no los dos? In the course of research and discovery, I came to the conclusion that the cooperation of both extremes of the spectrum in regards to the prospects to computational design would be most appropriate for address-ing the brief. Through parts A1, A2, and A3, I have become keenly interested by the process of replicating and alterna-tion in the approach of the superfor-mula. From my research, I believe that superformula based structures are nat-ural, striking, and expansive, making the whole approach deeply interesting and flexible to suit my own likings. Further-more, its simplistic nature that is gov-erned by algorithms proves logical and acceptable.

Personally I believe this is especially in-novative in the way that it bridges over the contentions of the debate. On one hand, it is able to respond to the design of the architect (in other words, it is able to retain a ‘human’ touch to the design, thus eliminating alienation and discom-fort); on the other, it is able to introduce the mathematical precision, flexibility, sustainability, and logic into parametric design, thus addressing the problems in the ‘smartest’ way possible, eliminating the occasional and overlooked possibili-ties humans tend to make.

As can be seen in the examples provid-ed, designs that are made when combin-ing the human designed principles then expanded and developed by logical and precise computational technology, can result in striking, practical and ‘useable’ pieces of architecture. In reference to the beneficiaries of this new technique of design, the groups that may gain from this practice includes architects, design-ers, landscape architects and engineers. Subsidiary beneficiaries may include the occupants of architecture (being able to use space that may be mathematically and scientifically designed to meet safe-ty and comfort standards).

In analysis, the list of direct and indirect beneficiaries of computational technol-ogy is in fact rather limited, simply due to the small impact, both positively and negatively, on society as a whole. Cer-tainly, with the advancement of compu-tational technology in the foreseeable fu-ture, it may give rise for other industries (perhaps in production, or software de-veloping) or even create industries that will benefit for servicing computational design. However, currently, as these said beneficiaries are yet to mature or to ex-ist, it is therefore difficult to comment on the effects of computational design as if it were a huge revelation to realms beyond that of design.

21

Throughout these several weeks of research, discovery and further ex-ploration into the topic of computa-tional design, I have been able to take a fresh perspective to the possibilities of computati0onal design. Originally, be-ing very sceptical and apprehensive on the potential of computational design, I considered it to be a mere tool as to con-veying the more interesting design of some individuals. However, through re-search and a huge learning curve, I have come to the conclusion that, although my original pretentions remain, I have also been able to understand the bene-fits of computational design in its abili-ty to navigate around parameters in the fastest and most logical way. Although it has the be said that I believe in the true value of human design in architecture, as opposed to forms built completely by set computational algorithms, I have learnt that, it is possible to incorporate the qualities of computational design in order to enhance side by side to conven-tional, desirable, pleasing, feasible, and functional pieces of architecture.

22

Following Week 2 exercise, the ‘basket’ I became more adventurous in ap-plying it to the twisting form that I had made for the previous week. The twisting effect is especially interesting. In making the latticed form, I recognised the shape and structure of the form to be remarkably similar to those of the Guangzhou TV tower, and Zaha Hadid’s proposed hotel design in Macau. Furthermore, I applied the exercise to a more simple shape with more lines to create a three-way weave of pipes. The outcome reminded me of Norman Foster’s British Museum Canopy, and the lattice shell design for the French Pavilion for the Shanghai Expo in 2010.

23

24

25

26

Sectioning is a popular mode of parametric design due to its simplicity in construction and in the effect it could achieve. Successful constructed exam-ples of the use of sectioning can be found from indoor installations, furniture, art, and in architectural pieces. Though the way a sectioned design is formed may vary from designer to designer, piece to piece, it nonetheless follows a basic rule, whereby individual pieces, or layers, are simply based off the previous layer, but only altered ever so slightly, so that the overall form is achieved in a gentle, sub-tle, but interesting and logical manner that the viewer and user may warm to.

fig.16

27fig.16

28

1.1 1.6

1.2 1.7

1.3 1.8

1.4 1.9

1.5 1.10

29

2.1 2.6

2.2 2.7

2.3 2.8

2.4 2.9

2.5 2.10

30

3.1 3.6

3.2 3.7

3.3 3.8

3.4 3.9

3.5 3.10

31

4.1 4.6

4.2 4.7

4.3 4.8

4.4 4.9

4.5 4.10

32

This is a simple extrusion from a set of sectioned curves that is controlled by an attractor line. The curves were responsive to the the height and direction of the line. This allows for greater flexibility in the way sections could be manipulated and therefore, provide more flexibility to the deisgn.

Focusing on the lines and the edges of the form, I began exploring the possiibilities of sectioning from that point of view. Apart from the interesting effect that is achieved, breaks away from the monotony of generic and basic sectioning methods used by various designers..

33

This experiment is to test the structural qualities if the inidividual sections and how I am able to manipulate it to find a viable, logical and interesting method of creating structure to help support the whole general form.

By changing the form of the individual extrusions into differing shapes, I am able to experiment the differing shapes and allow for more felxibility in my attempt to creat a dynamic and sculptural piece whilst being able to generate/ collect the

34

35

Completed in 2005, Denton Cork-er Marshall’s and Robert Owen’s iconic Webb Bridge utilizes a sectioning meth-od of faming the main structure of the design. Inspired by the shape and the weaving structure of eel traps first used by aborigines, the designers have creat-ed a sectioning method of initially fram-ing the bridge’s shape with an ovoid hoops made of steel arranged along the length of the bridge in a dividing man-ner (Fig. 19). The connecting filigree lattice arrangement (Fig. 17) which makes up the bridge sculptural element is arranged by a logical but seemingly irrational manner as to suggest the pat-tern of basket weaving.

fig.17

36

The main objective of revers-ing engineering the Webb Bridge is to create a overall hoops that acts as the main frame of the structure. Then, it is a matter of adding the a lattice shaped element onto the main frame. It is without doubt that in the design-er’s attempt to create this design, a similar process was made in the or

ganisation of the steel hoops and the corresponding lattice work. Further-more, in the construction process, it would also be logical for the main vertical hoops to be erected first be-fore the supporting lattice framework.By following this simple logic, I have tried to recreate the sectioning element of the Webb Bridge with relative suc-cess.

37

Base linesdraw curved lines accordingly

Match pointsdivide lines, then match lines to points

Add arccreate arcs accros each point

Add meshadd desired Grid using LunchBox

Change thicknessadd thickness to add weight

fig.18

38

39

these obstacles. Furthermore, specif-ic details to the whole office space, in-cluding door handles, computer vents, ventilation grilles, table texture, etc. (Fig. 16, 19) were taken into account in the parametric designing process, thus making the whole project into a realm of precise and bespoke design. Much of the final product was owed to the precision and the sophistication of the machinery that helped to manufacture these indi-vidual sectioning pieces. The precision and the digital process of manufactur-ing allowed for minimal waste and er-rors, which allowed the project to run smoothly.

The One Main Street project is an example of parametric sectioning sys-tem that was successfully conducted on a large-scale basis, creating an internal space that was subtly formed a fluid and dramatic topographic sculpture like in-stallation. Decoi Architects’s large-scale office interior remodel was created by parametric sectioning a form that was comprised of the ceiling plane and the floor plane (Fig. 19, 20). Constructed entirely of sustainable plywood sheet-ing, the design had to include conven-tional office interior design, such as lighting, partitioning, structural ele-ments, and thus, certain appointments had to be made to accommodate for

fig.19

fig.20

40

Create surfacecreate any desired surface

Divide surfacedivide into various points ready for

extrusion

Add pframescreate linear frame for longitu-

dal sectioning

Insert imagecreate appropriate image that is dependent on black and white

Change extrusion change vector definitions for various

heights/ angles of extrusion

41

42

1 6

2 7

3 8

4 9

5 10

43

11 16

12 17

13 18

14 19

15 20

44

21 26

22 27

23 28

24 29

25 30

45

31 36

32 37

33 38

34 39

35 40

46

41 46

42 47

43 48

44 49

45 50

47

51 56

52 57

53 58

54 59

55 60

48

61 66

62 67

63 68

64 69

65 70

49

71 76

72 77

73 78

74 79

75 80

50

81 86

82 87

83 88

84 89

85 90

51

91 96

92 97

93 98

94 99

95 100

52

In this form , I have started to use differing angles of sectioning to see wether the form woulf be any different from the previous iterations, and it has created an interesting wavy form with some ‘natural’ waffeling.

I have taken the angling aspect to further limits in creating a shape that resembles a mesh, where each section is 90 degrees from each other.

By moving the attractor line closer or further awy from the form, I have been able to create sections which responds to it by creating a varying den-sity in its arrangemnt.

53

I particularly like a form that is similar to this, where there is a clear distinc-tion between the differing angles of sectioning, yet having some sort of hegemon-ic form in the way that the different sections strips join as one. Furthermore, the shape creats lots of surface area, which is particularly beneficial when considering the aspect of solar energy absorbtion, where the larger the surface area, the more solar gain.

I have also taken extrusion of the sections and the number of sections into account of my form. However I believe a form like this with minimal sections loses its connection, or at least in regards to visual connection, to sectioning. But none-theless, this ribbon-shapped form is quite interesting and could be further devel-oped.

54

ability made the process quite difficult nd tedious, as little could be achieved from the small amount of changeable parametres. Furthermore, sectioning is heavily based on the movement (i.e. the rises and falls) of the shape or the sur-face of the shape, rather than any thing else. As a result, I tried to develop some-thing which provided more flexibility and less dependent on simple, and very ‘boring’ sectioning system.

The This simplistic prototype is based on conventional definitions of sectioning, as displayed in iterations 1-40. The somewhat mundane and uni-form shape is distinctively recognizable in many precedents, and such, in my opinion, leaves little room for imagina-tion for further explorations. Through-out the process of creating iterations in this form, the genuine lack of flexi-

55

56

57

waffleing in the simple sectioning devic-es first reverse-engineered and achieved in the previous prototype, making the overall structure and ‘skin’ a hybrid structure made out of more than one sectioning strategy. In regards to the ac-tual construction of the design, I plan to use plywood for the main structure to keep in theme of Scandawegian carpen-try, as for the main strips of the section, it could employ some sort of flexible so-lar film system.

The new model, compromising of angled strips, is a simplified repre-sentation of the new form of section-ing I have challenged myself to discov-er. The main purpose of this prototype was to test the ability of correct align-ment, structure, and my ability to con-struct the model, especially in the more complex overlapping and interconnect-ed element of many of thesectioning details in the strips. As a major step away from the previous prototype, this form is able to provide more surface area, which in regards to solar energy collection is a major advantageHow-ever, I would like to further develop this by taking away some of the struc.

58

With a major aspect of my design focused on logic and reasoning, I decided that the best way to respond to the solar energy generation aspect of the brief is by generating a form (that keeps in the theme of my research field of sectioning) that also maximizes surface area so that when solar energy collecting devices (solar film, PV cells, so-lar panels , etc.) could be generously applied to the form to generate the most solar energy. With the generic form of sectioning, the total surface area could in fact be optimal for maximum expo-sure to the sun, however, since the arrangement is tightly fitted together and where each section may cover the section previous, the form proves redundant and highly unsuitable to accomplish the task of solar collection.

Therefore as a response, the new design, where each section is extruded vertically, but arranged in a linear arrangement, enables the form to sup-port long strips of surface, ready for the said de-vices to be attached. As a sculptural effect that is produced via Grasshopper, I have chosen the form where two sectioning systems are joined into the one form, but in differing angles, which provides a visual contrast from the monotony of regular sectioning. Furthermore, I have decided that the main structural element for the sectioned strips is to be formed by another type of sectioning; the original lineal flat sectioning, because despite its lack of flexibility as a design field, it provides strong and very rigid structural properties which would be ideal in aiding to keep the flowing strips in shape and in place. Or alternatively, a simple sectioned waffling structure could be employed as the structural element of the design, as exem-plified by the Metropol Parasol in Seville, where a simple waffle structure provides very a strong frame that would suit my design.

5959

60

Keeping in mind of the immediate cultural surrounding of the site, I devised the inspiration of coastal ocean sprays and waves as the shape of my design. Not only does the shape keep in line of the design I wanted, but the shape could also be considered into attain the most solar energy ab-sorption by shaping according to correct angles.

60

6161

6262

63

In regards to scale, I believe that the scale/ size of my design is not the most important aspect in the whole task, con-sidering that surface area is the main goal. Certainly, the larger the scale equates to a larger surface area, and that would be op-timal in my goal. But, if instead of mass, I establish numerous smaller scale models, which in sum would produce a larger over-all surface area, and therefore obtain the most solar energy, it would be preferred over a large scale model (eg. pg. 64-65). Furthermore, to achieve optimal solar en-ergy absorption, my designs would have to be correctly aligned to Copenhagen’s solar angle throughout the year, which further points out that scale is not a ma-jor detail for consideration, as the scale of my project could be applied flexibly in re-sponse to desire and not necessity.

6464

6565

66

Throughout the course of Part B, (and through many many all-nighters!), the process from reaching from research and observation of theory, to the pres-ent stage of creating a form and design has been a valuable achievement to my belief. Though it has to be mentioned that throughout the weeks, many exper-iments have been fruitless and deeply challenging and confusing, especially with my initial inability to see past the flexibility of sectioning from its monot-onous and ‘overly done’ forms shown by so many excellent examples, the chal-lenges of creating numerous iterations has in fact deeply aided me in finding the limitations and the different avenues for further research and experimentations. One of the major reasons of creating so many iterations (I have created 100) is to fully experiment the possibilities in order to exhaust the limitations before I devise my final form. Originally I had little confidence in my work being up to an intellectually and visually stimu-lating design, considering that all the precedents were after all based on the similar approach of sectioning. How-ever, especially for iterations 40-100, I have tried to explore beyond the basic

sectioning by creating something rather different. Furthermore, in the final stag-es of Part B, I reminded myself of others’ successful (though more laborious and repetitive) precedents of sectioning, and as such tried to combine both the forms into my design- one as the main exterior shape, and the other as the in-ner formwork, since both has its merits.

However, the project is still yet of final-ization, especially in the consideration of scale and size. As mentioned, the siz-es of the design is not a major fact of the overall design, but the number of instal-lations still requires attention before final submission. I am currently con-sidering the positive prospects and the logical feasibility of designing my form in three differing sizes and placing them in an interesting manner across the site, as opposed to constructing a very large, but poorly justified mass.

Taking the comments of the crit guests after presentation, I am going to further my research to the differing precedents of sectioned installations, as to under-stand the designers’ rationale behind the reasoning of the sections, and why

67

hey chose the specific system, since I be-lieve focusing on the details of the qual-ities of the specific types of sectioning, and amalgamating them into the one form that I have devised would further justify my decisions of creating a hybrid structure employing only sectioning as a research field.Furthermore, I shall be carefully and exhaustibly considering the differing construction methods of my design and preparing for Part C.

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

Upon receiving feedback from Part B presentation, there were many points that I agreed with the guests on the problems of my design. Firstly, the experimental attempt of combining several methods of sectioning, i.e. rib-boning the form into horizontal strips and waffeling for supports, created a form that was visually and physically too complicated and seemingly ‘messy’. Secondly, there was little justification to the exact measurements to the shape and the scale of the entire design other than the principle of surface area. In re-lation to the brief and the provided site, if the form I created were to be ‘ran-domly’ placed without a firm reasoning, the project and its ‘justification’; would seem baseless and very detached.

Furthermore, there was an issue of ma-teriality and the choice of material for the supporting structure, which was also an issue of its own. Foremostly, I wanted a design that was thin and lightweight.

The ribboned section did provide this image of something that was malleable and thin, however in combination of the supporting structure, it did not achieve the overall lightness I desired. Further-more, in the model making process, I had difficulty in precisely attaching the ribboned strips into the exact places to the waffle grid, as the model was mostly achieved by guesswork.

After consulting my studio leader on possible solutions and plans for Part C, it was suggested that a particular form from my precedents (4.8, 4.9, 4.10) were worth revisiting for further devel-opment. Fortunately, despite not having saved a copy of the original file, the form was relatively simple was easily recre-ated. The components were simply pro-viding a chosen image to be extruded, then inserting a diamond grid to create the desired effect.

With the form finalized (with consider-ations to solar angles and optimal sun facing surface areas), fabrication was due.

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Imposing landscapes Construction and streuctural consider-

ation

Land site, size and perimeter Maximum solar absortion

76

I fabricated the complete form of my de-sign to realise the physical qualities of the effect, as well as the fabrication ma-terial choice. However, together with my studio leader, we considered the repeti-tive linear position a little boring. Fur-thermore, by including a design to the landscape was something that we both agreed would create an additional lay-er to the form, as to create an imposed parametric landscape a ‘genuine’ natu-ral landscape. The landscape could then be combined with circulation and meet-ing places, shelters, observation points, etc. For my form, the last piece formed a perfect diamond shaped frame. I there-fore took advantage of this, and replicat-ed four three times to create an extend-ed terrace that extends beyond the land and is above the sea. Facing the opposing bank of Copenhagen, the large pier-ob-servation deck could also be used for an array of activities for visitors.

I then made amends to this by imposing a simple and subtle angular arrange-ment

to each section, so that it would provide another layer of complexity to the form. Furthermore, I created an un dulat-ing landscape by imposing an exact re-verse image used to create the rises and troughs of the parametric sections, as to create opposing rises and troughs to the landscape.

I also created another prototype as to test the structural arrangement. I sep-arated each section by the direction of each diamond structure, i.e. pointing left in one layer and pointing right in the other. Originally, I was testing whether this arrangement could achieve a criss-crossing structure found in the Dunes-cape installation at MoMA PS1, howev-er, with the prototype; the form created was unruly and lacked the logical ar-rangement I desired. However, the pro-cess of prototyping was not wasted, for I saw this crisscrossing arrangement for its structural benefits.

Select shape and size of surface

Divide surface acordingly

Insert desired image for imprint

Apply diamond grid onto each extruded

section

Extrude divisions to desired/ appropriate

height

PARAMETRIC WORK FLOW

77

78

fig.21

79

By creating a crisscross pattern be-tween each section, the structure would be able to stand rigidly without using thick solid pieces of timber, the material I have chosen to use.

I especially chose timber (or some sort of local Danish/ Scandinavian wood) be-cause of its earthy and natural qualities which I believe would work especially well with softening the monumentality of my design, which therefore becomes more natural, local and therefore relat-able.

Furthermore, by using wood, it is rem-iniscent of dense Scandinavian forests with towering trees, which for my de-sign, is a stark juxtaposition of this very natural scene of artificial and natural landscapes coming into one.Additionally, as to fulfill the solar energy production requirement, rather than in-venting some sort of entirely new meth-od of energy production, I have simply left space to liberally apply solar cell technology as to capture the most sun-light, and therefore generate the most energy.

80

An undulating landscape was de-vised with specific rises and troughs. This was especially created to cre-ate a juxtaposing naturally inspired landscape in this very flat industrial landscape.

81

82

The original piece of land is layered with the ‘natural’ landscape, then impposed with the parametrical-ly created landscape. Vegetation is then incorporated as to give the landscape a sense of reality.

83

84

The design is foremostly shaped by solar angles and solar orientation. This is to optimise light collection as to generate the most solar energy as possible.

85

86

A very subtle angular arrangement of the sections is made as to pro-vide a playful aspect to the over-all design. From afar, the arrange-ment creates an interesting optical illusion.

87

88

Keeping in theme of ‘landscapes’, the main materiality of the struc-ture is to be constructed if timber. I have researched in a glulam and its structural properties as well as its flexibility in terms of size and shape (Fig. 22, 23), and have found it most suiting for a large-scale structure such as mine. Furthermore, the tim-bers for glulam beams are grown from farmed forests, making the wood especially environmentally friendly.

As an anchor to firmly attach the franed sections to the landscape, I have taken inspiration from Peter Zumpthor’s Steilneset Memorial in Norway (Fig. 24, 25), where timber beams are bolted to steel plates, which are anchored into (presum-ably) concrete blocks. This, I be-lieve, would be adequate for sup-poorting my structure, as well as keeping it firmly in the ground.

MATERIALITY

fig.22 fig.23 fig.24

fig.25

89

90

By employing a simple criss-cross-ing arrangement between timber beams, pieces of timber can be lengthened, and could be come constructable despite its size. Further-more, with this facet of the structure solved, the other major component is anchoring each section to the earth.

CONCRETE BLOCK

STEEL PLATES

STEEL BOLTS

TIMBER PLANKS

CONCRETE BLOCK

STEEL PLATES

STEEL BOLTS

TIMBER PLANKS

CRISS-CROSS ARRANGEMENT

TIMBER PLANKS

STEEL BOLTS

STRUCTURE

91

CONCRETE BLOCK

STEEL PLATES

STEEL BOLTS

TIMBER PLANKS

CONCRETE BLOCK

STEEL PLATES

STEEL BOLTS

TIMBER PLANKS

CRISS-CROSS ARRANGEMENT

TIMBER PLANKS

STEEL BOLTS

STRUCTURE

92

93

94

Various prototypes were made in preparation of the final model. As could be seen, since the major proto-type from Part B, Part C prototypes took a different turn away from form, struc-ture and arrangement. The main Part C prototype is an unscaled test to see the arrangement of the sections and how in preparation for the final model, how each piece would be attached. By arranging each section between piec-es of foam core, each layer was able to stand rigidly in full effect. Furthermore, the ‘tunnels’ created between longitudi-nally could accommodate walkways or parkway corridor which would be inter-esting. Furthermore, the material used was far too fragile, which suggested to me that for the final model, consider-ation for the thickness of each mem-ber was needed to prevent any damage. However, to my foolishness, the cost for the main prototype amounted to exact-ly a hundred dollars, which was a lot more than I anticipated, but it was only through prototyping was I able to learn from the mistakes and see room for physical improvement.

95

fig.26

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

Logical sequence dominates the theme of the Københaven IN.LAND, not only in aspects of structure, but in the very reasoning for its size and its shape. Firstly, by analyzing the site and its boundaries, and in direct relation to its location besides a major industrial park, the site is in every aspect a blank can-vas. It was my initial intention to utilize the whole plot of land for my design, as opposed to presenting a parametrically designed structure and then be present-ed on site. Furthermore, because of its proximity to the sea and its unique loca-tion in an industrial park, it was also my intention to create a juxtaposing land-scape to create more interest.

Since 1871 till 1960s, the site has been dull ship yard- one of many in fishing orientated Copenhagen. This propos-al is to transform the sleepy site into a landmark. Furthermore, it is also to accommodate solar energy technolo-gy and display the systems in a promi-nent manner as a salute to Copenhagen and Denmark’s world leading status of green-energy generation.

Due to the current function of the site, the location is not a venue of relaxation or recreation. This proposal is to trans-form the site into a point of interest for patrons all over the city, as a new public space. Additionally, taking advantage of its waterfront location and its pleasant views of the City, the design proposes major observation point for patrons to enjoy panoramic the views of the city. Furthermore, the site is poorly serviced by conventional transport, however, by including facilities for small watercrafts, including Copenhagen’s Harbour Buses (Fig. 28), it would allow the site to be more accessible.

In regards to form, the shape is hugely influenced by the idyllic landscape of the Danish countryside (Fig. 27). With undulating landforms, both natural and parametric, it juxtaposes the two dif-ferent landscapes into one design, as to add another dimension to the concept of landscape. By being able to explore the site by passing within the paramet-ric landscape, visitors are therefore tak-en into the landscape.

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

113

Furthermore, the ‘mountainous’ forms created by parametrically allows for space in between each section. This space could accommodate spans of so-lar energy generating technologies, and display them in a prominent and inter-esting manner.

In regards to human circulation, the landscape includes elevated walk-ways that lead visitors along designat-ed routes in, under, and interactively between natural and generated land-scapes. At the end of the structure, a large pier/terrace spans width ways, and allows for activities, perhaps even cafes, public meetings, and public art galleries, with the scenic views of Co-penhagen as a backdrop (Fig. 29).

The proposal is to be constructed of large timber members (glulam), where a simple crisscross arrangement will allow for the angular positions that is indicative of the parametric form. Fur-thermore, the timbers used reflective of distinctive Scandinavian forests, but represented in parametric form.

fig.27

fig.28

fig.29

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

Feedback from Part C crit was mostly very good and promising. It was commented that the imposed land-scapes created an interesting effect, which the design and the landform successfully morphed into one pack-age that was able to provide contrast to the immediate surrounding industrial landscape. Furthermore, as for the solar component, my choice of the liberal ap-plication of solar cells fulfilled the brief and was seemingly suitable and suc-cessful in capturing the most solar ener-gy. However, it was also commented that as opposed to leaving the whole design as a parkland as I originally planned, perhaps circulation in ways of paths,

meeting places and landscape furniture could be considered and added onto the entire design as to encourage more hu-man activity and make the entire land-scape more purposeful.

Throughout this turbulent and eventful semester, I have learnt about the possi-bilities as well as the limitations of para-metric design. Initially, I had miscon-ceptions of the usefulness of computer design. This is perhaps due to my inabil-ity to see logic in many parametric de-signs. However, throughout the course, and with my personal learning curve, I was able to see why this was a prevalent ‘problem’ in many pieces of design.

123

124

I noticed in many of my iterations, it began to lack logical sequence, despite my best intentions. It is solely due to the complexity of parametric software that allows design to venture into realms be-yond logical reasoning, or at least has evolved so many times beyond what could be considered comprehendible into something that is completely for-eign and beautiful.

Furthermore, as stated in Part A, I found that parametric design was only distin-guished by something was entirely com-puter generated or merely as a tool to execute human created designs. How-ever, through the process of designing my structure, I was able to have major influences over many of the details of the design. This allowed me to under-stand that parametric design can be used in conjunction with convention-al methods of design, and designers

and architects are still able to influence the outcome in a significant way, rath-er than being dependent on parametric methods. Overall, the learning outcome of this semester has seen many ups and downs, particularly with the amount of work and time required to ensure that the final was of a high standard. Howev-er, despite the late nights and an empty wallet, the process of learning and being able to appreciate and understand the opportunities and the ‘ease’ of paramet-ric design has been a real gain. Addition-ally, I also see the applicability and the usefulness of parametric functions and how it could be incorporated as a design feature, and possibly as structure.

Thanks Finn!!

125

126

IMAGEShttp://www.danieldavis.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/tragw-erkslehre082_Page_3.jpeg

http://cooksipgo.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Gaudi-La-Pe-drera-Hanging-Chains.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ee/Sagrada_Fa-milia_01.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Sagrada_Fa-milia_nave_roof_detail.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2013/03/dezeen_Research-Pavil-ion-by-ICD-and-ITKE_6.jpg

http://www.evolo.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Stutt-gart-ICD-ITKE-research-pavilion-04.jpg

http://fabricatedrealities.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/5136a95ab-3fc4bf0a800022e_icd-itke-research-pavilion-university-of-stutt-gart-faculty-of-architecture-and-urban-planning_icd-itke_rp12_im-age1011.jpg

http://designplaygrounds.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/digi-tal-grotesque03.jpg

http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/51e4638eea-b8ea7840000000/the-otherworldly-architecture-of-zaha-hadid.jpg

http://buildipedia.com/images/masterformat/Channels/In_Stu-dio/2011.09.13_edifici_torre_espiral/sketches_zaha_hadid_architects/edifici_sketch_03.jpg

http://www.peruarki.com/wp-content/uploads/importados/369/peruarki3.jpg

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Fig. 6

Fig. 7

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 10

Fig. 11

127

http://internet.henn.com/sites/default/files/styles/detail_land-scape/public/research/superformula-tower/images/cc.henn.study-imagessuperformulatower1.jpg?itok=GlySuJUm

http://www.iam-architect.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/IA-vgre-1.jpg

http://www.caad.arch.ethz.ch/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/installation4.jpg

http://piecedwork.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/080324-sanfran-cisco-114.jpg

http://www.detail.de/uploads/pics/Austellung_DAM_Modell_27.jpg

http://eliinbar.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/1233_zaha_sketch-8-edit.jpg

http://www.peruarki.com/wp-content/uploads/importados/369/peruarki3.jpg

http://piecedwork.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/080324-sanfran-cisco-114.jpg

http://zenandtheartoftravel.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/DSC_0104.jpg

https://acdn.architizer.com/thumbnails-PRODUCTION/ba/da/badae-b2e33a4a86dad048d1192831ab2.jpg

http://ds-lands.com/data_images/famous_places/webb-bridge/webb-bridge-02.jpg

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-OGFC_97uQAc/U-qaNN7WT-KI/AAAAAAAAJuc/Gg7F9YmOSEQ/w2048-h1367/Webb%2B-Bridge%2B2.jpg

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

Fig. 10

Fig. 11

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

128

http://www.cwkeller.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/cc12.jpg

http://www.cwkeller.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/002-Head-er-Photo-C-Change-CROPPED2.jpg

http://www.justwalkedby.com/wp-content/uploads/Forest-in-jut-land.jpg

http://studio-tm.com/constructionblog/wp-content/up-loads/2009/10/complex-glulam-blade-connection.jpg

http://img.archiexpo.com/images_ae/photo-g/glulam-wooden-truss-es-70349-4290051.jpg

http://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2011/12/dezeen_Steilneset-Me-morial-by-Peter-Zumthor-and-Louise-Bourgeois_1top.jpg

http://www.architecturenorway.no/render/w1368-h1368-c0-q85/2.projects/5.culture/22.witch-memorial-2011/6.003.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-NZzRnYl4kIE/ThcDgVPFaxI/AAAAAAAAAL0/7nRjCE_WDZU/s1600/dunescape_ch080509_sa.jpg

http://websta.me/p/844165427228661257_787132

https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4085/4951901075_3b987d96b3_z.jpg

https://a0.muscache.com/pictures/23143629/large.jpg

Fig. 19

Fig. 20

Fig. 21

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

Fig. 26

Fig. 27

Fig. 28

Fig. 29

129

REFERENCES“Gaudi: La Sagrada Familia Museum”, Adagio journal, last ac-cessed 20th August 2014 at http://adagiojournal.wordpress.com/2011/11/15/gaudis-hanging-chain-models/

“ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion”, Institute for Computational De-sign, last accessed 18th August 2014 at http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=7653

“Superformula Tower”, HENN, last accessed 19th August 2014 at http://www.henn.com/en/research/superformula-tower

“Parametric Bench”, Archello, last accessed 19th August 2014 at http://www.archello.com/en/product/parametric-bench

“‘Aggressive and banal’ -Zaha Hadid’s Serpentine Sackler Gala-ry”, bdonline.co.uk, last accessed 20th August 2014 at http://www.bdonline.co.uk/aggressive-and-banal-zaha-hadids-serpen-tine-sackler-gallery/5061185.article

“One Main Street”, dECOi architetcs, last accessed 5th September 2014 at http://www.decoi-architects.org/2011/10/onemain/

“Webb Bridge”, Australian Institute of Architects, last accessed 9th of September 2014 at dynamic.architecture.com.au/awards_search?option=showaward&entryno=20053006

1

2

3

4

5

6

7