Tube Fabrication Assignment

Interior Rendering

DAP Presentation Slides: Coop Himmelblau

VIENNA ATTIC CONVERSION


BMW WELT


AKRON ART MUSEUM

Assignment4: Interior Cube Transformations

Reading #4: Blob Tectonics, or Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy, Greg Lynn

In this article, Greg Lynn discusses “the blob” which is the type of form that digital software enables architects to make now. Because there are infinite variations on the “blob” form, since it is inherently neither singular nor multiple, general or specific, it introduces a multitude of challenges to the tectonics of actually making the form, and making it structurally sound.

 

Because blob forms have no definite shape or resting point, they imply movement and change, and their specific geometries are not defined by the kind of properties that make spheres, prisms, or any of the “conventional” polysurfaces. Rather, blob properties are dependent on its relationship to other objects or conditions. This means that there are many components that dictate the form of any given “blob” so the forms are complex and not necessarily stable. Blobs can move through both space and time, defined by their environment and their movement.

 

Lynn also describes blobs in terms of their properties in horror films. They can absorb other objects, incorporate them into their own mass, and make them part of the greater whole. This quality, Lynn says, is what makes them so disturbing in films like “The Thing”. They do not absorb or eat their victims in a human way, by injesting them into an internal cavity, but rather swallow them and make them part of the blob.

 

But how to construct these blob forms? Contemporary ideas of construction dictate that perpendicular loads and upright structures are the only way to construct real forms, but in reality, there are other methods of thought than the Cartesian method of gravity that would allow blob forms to be constructed in different ways. Instead of Cartesian volumes, topological surfaces could be organized to construct these forms. This kind of construction is still in very early stages of development, so blob construction is still highly criticized especially in regard to the roof condition. Because no effective method has been developed to enclose buildings with a continuous surface that becomes a roof, traditional methods are still being used to top blob forms. Currently, the most successful architectural explorations of this problem have been conducted by Shoei Yoh. His recent work tends to have all parts of the program organized under a continuous roof form that utilizes repetitious fabrication but still adjusts to the specific needs of each area of the building.

 

Though the technology is not quite advanced enough to seamlessly construct blob architecture en masse, I am sure that soon methods will be developed to allow it. However, is that in fact the direction that we want architecture to move in? Just because we can construct a landscape of blob buildings, does that mean we should?  Will cities of skyscrapers and towers and traditional, orthogonal buildings eventually be replaced by urban gel? These are the questions that we must ask ourselves critically before we, as architects of the future, must ask critically before proceeding with the technology that will enable this to happen.

Assignment 3: 3D Transformations

Reading #3 from "Abstract Space" by Theresa Tierney

Design, architectural or otherwise, is the an involved process that integrates social and environmental conditions, as well as the designer’s subjective preferences into a set of rules or parameters that guide the formal qualities of the product. Whether or not the design is processed digitally, it is always subordinate to this set of rules, but the recent developments in digital design have allowed these rules to be more than simple problem-solving decisions. If successfully executed, architect’s digital parameters can now theoretically generate spatial experiences and intangible qualities that architecture strives to achieve.

 

It is important to note that digital software is intended to be used not to design but to help expand the tools architects can use to design. It is also not appropriate for all aspects or kinds of design. In this reading, Therese Tierney focuses only on the generation of form. In digital design, the element that helps generate form is called the solution field, a set of parametric equations that mathematically alter and manipulate form at the will of the designer. The results of these manipulations are most significant when parameters overlap and intersect, producing random occurrences that thereby generate even more parameters, forcing the form to evolve. This process is therefore referred to as evolutionary design.

 

In evolutionary design, software helps the designer see how parametric manipulations effect form, but first the architect must choose how parameters are set. The tasks that go into this process include defining problems that must be solved architecturally, determining the criteria of how solutions are chosen, and defining rules/parameters regarding form generation. Then, using the software, designers can develop and evaluate models that are produced virtually. The next step using digital technology is to take the 3d forms and animate them across time using 4d modeling.

 

With regard to designing both form and temporal architecture, Therese Tierney argues that architectural design is inherently virtual, and computer technologies have illustrated that condition. Virtuality is that which is created by actuality, but it also has real existence by the fact that it creates affects. Even before the modern idea of the virtual existed, virtuality always existed in the desire to design experience that is expressive which is what makes architectural design greater than the sum of its parts. Before the Renaissance, the virtual was conceptualized as varied and complex phenomena and cognitive perceptions of space/time. Later on, Einstein’s relativity again raised the question of what was not yet known as the virtual, by claiming that space/time is relative and manipulatible based on the individual and his experience in it relative to its actuality. In 2002, Brian Massumi supposed a new understanding of organic systems that are linked in a kind of virtual matrix. Virtuality as a parametric guide of architecture exists as its own parameter, but also generates new ones in an evolutionary manner.

 

Because the virtual is an abstract and not a concrete quality, designing in the virtual affords even more opportunity for manipulation than more concretely-defined parameters. It refers to but is not limited to generation of form. Instead, designing within virtual parameters is a way of kind of closing the gap between subjective design decisions and the systematic rules that guide design otherwise.