Edited by Hanif Kara and Andreas GeorgouliasForeword Tee esa Hanif Kara Andreas Georgoulias Sorte Preece ren eC FOA/ AKT ree as Francisco Izquierdo, Cae Ree Sead aeons MR EUR TL) Pa ery Aas eed Pea ne Sa Sey eer Ten Peel Fee eral Chris C. L. Wan coer ee eests eta oats edad Feilden Clegg Cee nas Comme) Creed Reece UAC Pee al Structure as Architectural Intervention Seca rere Ska Toward a New Sobriety: Rebel Engineering with a Cause Dee ec [teeters td fetoTn) Dene Key tong Design the Cloud: Cross-disciplinary Approach to Design [or ene tec Enhancing Prefabrication Design for Disassembly: Closing the Materials Loop MSc ed De Ae RUS eR DT in Computational Analysis of Site-Specific Architecture Masdar Institute of Science and Technology See ene eee i ord een eee ia Heelis - National Trust Headquarters Re eo aneseer) Jessica Sundberg Zofchak ener eee cs UP Corporation / AKT ered Nar eek? PaO Nee outed See Cea) Recast Ts Pee PLease a apter 4. The Energen Penne eer) ne eC Se VEE as Nec ea ues Sees peat Se Eolas] cee) Cec ig re en ee aca! Integrated Design: A Computational Approach ere mete ee Econo es ue ata Form Finding: The Engineer's Approach Ream ceed ecu ee esl cal ee ceeolerd Dams Oh ee ener eas Neu Disciplin Death of The Star Architect eee cesta h ada a ee ie i Mae en okey Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Sea eee nee ee eMedia) CENT Collaboration as a Working Process eRe eur iy Bridge Gallery Mee cma Climate Comfort Collaboration fen nny eee ea ieee6 Redesigning Attitudes Hanif Kara Architects and engineers both claim to be designers, though how they define design and the approaches they use to realize it vary widely. Their interaction, however, has created some of the world's most memorable, enduring, and impressive buildings. The explosion of digital technologies illuminates the complexity and nonlinearity of the process that these designers experience daily, while massively expanding the ability to visualize and repre- sent forms and to analyze their structural engineering behavior. Technology has obviously changed both architecture and engineering, and so also the potential for interaction. That is the subject of the research and discourse presented here. Ina course at the Harvard Graduate School of Design attended by graduate students in ar- chitecture and MIT graduate students in structural engineering and computation, students and instructors examined a series of built projects over several years to cover many different de- sign intentions, budgets, and purposes. What emerges is an appreciation of the breadth and depth of ways in which architecture and engineering can interact, rather than fulfiling the as- sumption that one might have held twenty or thirty years ago-that sophisticated engineering necessarily means complex forms, or that engineers cannot contribute to simple forms. Study- ing built projects where the instructor has personal knowledge can trace that interaction (proj- ect to project) and so provide a set of prisms for investigating the relationship between archi- tecture and engineering-and the nature of design itself. The projects and methodology used in the discussions provide a shared context to provoke thinking about design, develop new viewpoints, and, through communication across disciplinary boundaries in teaching, practice, and construction, unlock the potential to discover new meanings. Motivations and Intentions In the struggle for reinvention, all disciplines have tended to “peek” into each other's work during shrinking markets or major changes in the economic order (e.g., the industrial revolu- tion), redrawing disciplinary boundaries as a means of survival. The course we refer to started in 2006 as an experiment at a time when markets were expanding and architecture faced the challenge of responding to new popular imaginations, for little or no purpose at times. Many engineers have exploited this emblematic power of architecture to reinforce their own positions. In my view, this sometimes creates simple estimates of the work of architects in an atmosphere of unclear thought. f this misreading remains unanalyzed and unchallenged, it leads to a confused experience in practice. This narrative deals with a limited period, between 1996 and 2010, and a particular viewpoint, 80 the projects are recent and represent stages in the ongoing evolution of their architects’ oeuvres, as well as in the development of engineering techniques. It attempts to identify any confusion and correct it. For that reason, my long and deep immersion in the field of structural engineering is a more appropriate intellectual base for the discourse than a historical analysis, of the relationship between engineering and architecture. Although the knowledge acquired through that immersion becomes manifest in specific examples of engineering design, broad and not skewed by a quasi-moral sense of what constitutes “good” engineering." ‘Successful interaction depends on each participant having both a deep knowledge of his or her own discipline and a receptivity to the equivalent knowledge of others. | call this interdisci- plinary working because it encourages a better understanding of the nature of the interaction and an appreciation of when an understanding of one’s own discipline ceases to be appli- cable. This works well in an environment conducive to research, whether in practice or within a university. The potential for interdisciplinary working does not have to be realized, however, and more- over, it can be realized in many different ways. Rather than seeking to unravel the two disci- plines and define them in abstract terms, one has to examine the syntheses they have created. Andrew Saint pinpointed why architects and engineers need to leam about each other: “There is a deeper reason why architects learn something about engineering, Structure is a ba requirement for any design that is to be built. Because of that it has in some sense to be confronted, incorporated and, quite possibly expressed. In those terms an architectural design that does not address structure is incomplete or illogical. One of the many tasks of an archi- tectural education is to promote an informed attitude towards structure."' In my experience, engineering educators rarely think this way, while some architectural schools today also need to consider this. This research aims to reinforce such threads in the fabric of the relationship between the disciplines for the sole purpose of producing better buildings. The intention of the research is to refashion how this relationship can be seen, through projects that are them- selves filtered through my experience of learning as a student, teaching, studying, practicing structural engineering, and for fifteen years serving as a principal of a successful independent design studio that specializes in structural engineering design. Built Projects as instruments In “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell wrote: “The English language be- ‘comes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts.” In much the same way, this research tries with all humility to avoid “slovenliness" of abstract projects and hopes to find value with built ‘cases examined through different views. Itis important to distinguish the particularities of the structural engineering | refer to here. ‘Structural engineering needs some connection with mathematics, calculation, and analysis. For some engineers that is enough to generate a creative process, while others believe in the “grace of construction’-essentially the idea of designing the optimum structure and making it manifest in the design. Some prefer to be “structural artists,” as first popularized by David Billington when he said, “My first objective is to define the new art form and show that since the eighteenth century some engineers have consciously practiced this art, and that numer- ‘ous engineering artists were creating such works in the contemporary world of the twentieth century.”® But the subject we are interested in is how engineering can push the boundaries of architecture rather than its own limits; that means supporting architects and helping them understand how to get the best of their engineers. Purely engineering-led solutions, such as imposing a convenient geometry, have to be shunned in favor of opening up the concept of engineering rationality to embrace support for an aesthetic principle. The relationship between architect and engineer, historically, has always produced new and transformative work, but is it always good work? Or indeed is good work only produced when such a rela- tionship exists? What is the role of the client and the contractors? The projects studied here reflect a variety of positions taken by engineers in working with “design” to develop a space12 for interdisciplinary discourse without necessarily becoming “service models" to the archi- tects’ conception. The way architects should react to this evolving relationship, developing new pedagogical and practice models, has been part of the focus of the research. Knowledge of the engineer's role in design can produce benefits to the project. In the most “interdisciplinary” interaction, the conventions of one or both disciplines are expanded and improved through the encounter. But as both disciplines are professional, as opposed to purely academic, any “improvement” has a social dimension. That dimension will often take the form of the clients’ and users’ goals for a project (which are themselves distillations of social and economic factors). So the collaboration that makes up design invokes triangulation with the social context. This is one way of objectifying and calibrating the relationship between the two disciplines and making outcomes assessable in ways that avoid the merely self-referential. The violent economic swings of the last four years-since the course first ran—demonstrate the range of ways in which the two disciplines can interact, and how external forces can calibrate these possibilities. The research has been opportunistic in taking advantage of the insights that this situation offers in three specific ways: gauging implications for teaching; exploring whether it is possible to design a way out of recession; and acknowledging the dif ferent answers recession demands in reply to questions about sustainability and responsible use of resources. Teaching The discourse aims to be a direct preparation for practice. We try to reveal the false di- chotomy between traditional and new models of practice—the latter enabled by advances in technology-using a series of carefully selected projects studied by the class to produce a broad intellectual and educational impact. Its clear that today more (and longer) study is needed to cope with the advanced knowledge available to designers; past models of study are not always as relevant. (One could argue that students in architecture or engineering schools should focus their education on the confined boundaries of their disciplines, and that interdisciplinary thinking should be learned afterwards, as they begin to practice. We explicitly reject this proposition that students should not be exposed to interdisciplinary thinking, and we distinguish being interdisciplinary from being a generalist. During the research, project architects and engineers contribute to the teaching program allowing, for instance, discussions of 1) the approach of each architect, 2) differences between architects with a given method, and 3) the productive interplay between projects and architects. Technology has deeply affected the character of the work in the period we study and plays an important part in the teaching method in two ways. First, new software increasingly com- bines engineering-led analytical capabilities with visual representation. Many of the projects discussed would be almost impossible to deliver without recent developments in informa- tion technology and computer-aided design, and their relative accessibility gives students insight into how projects unfolded. This interplay of technology with core ideas of thinking, explanation, reasoning, finding things out, questioning, and taking content and evidence from real projects is developed through credible authority rather than a patronizing authoritarianism.8 Design and Technology Engineering is about making the best use of materials or other resources. Understanding how materials perform in ever-increasing detail-in part through better techniques of analysis—and even developing new materials (or techniques that combine thern) increase the range of possible solutions to any given problem. All this relies on sophisticated technology, research and development, analysis, testing, and modeling-which at times unlock unexpected char- acteristics or possibilities that may superficially be irrational, but in the rarified conditions of a particularly challenging project become rational. Technology acts here through its scientific, social, and symbolic dimensions. But engineering also demands an appreciation of the context in which solutions can be assessed and the most promising ones graded to pick an optimum. Mediating in this way between the modalities of physics and economics suggests that innovative engineering could indeed help to adapt construction proposals to recessionary conditions and might even con- tribute to changing those conditions. Another dimension comes into play when engineering aspires to contribute to design. The duality between physics and economics expands to include aesthetics and visual culture. This is not the place to trace the fraught but very real relationship between culture and eco- nomics, but John Kenneth Galbraith’s famous dictum that “In the affluent society, no sharp distinction can be made between luxuries and necessaries” implies how problematic it can be for an engineer to relate scarcity to necessity, and abundance to redundancy.* Where Galbraith placed such decisions in an economic and social context, design-oriented engineer ing integrates them with aesthetic thinking. ‘When engineering merges with architecture in a design concept, the myriad and sometimes ‘surprising possibilities that arise through technological thinking engender advanced aesthetic ideas. Saying that itis impossible to determine where engineering starts and architecture stops may sound like a cliché, but a project such as Phaeno or Highcross makes the observa- tion real, The results came from a genuine interaction between two disciplines, each prepared to absorb the ideas of the other to achieve something new. The origin of such projects has ‘sometimes been in a teaching environment. Affluence, Scarcity, and Resources Recessions fit with sustainability to the extent that they align economic and environmental parameters. Boom-generated explorations of possibility give way to responsibility, with a sharper focus on resource use. Again, the collaborations discussed here seek to expand the duality between economic and environmental factors by considering social and aesthetic ‘ones as well. The outcome emerges from a field of contingent factors that an iterative process consolidates into a real physical object, moving beyond superficial “greenwash.” In this sense it becomes difficult, potentially meaningless, and sometimes impossible to attribute particu- lar design features to environmental or economic priorities. Such goals may well have been clearly stated at the start, but each iteration will have contributed to a process of evolution that make any linear sequence from ambition to result extremely hard to trace. ‘An underlying theme of the discussions presented here has been to demonstrate how the context of the project, rather than abstract mathematical principles, determines the ratio- nality of the engineering solution. It would be absurd to apply a structural system devised for the flowing forms of a Zaha Hadid’'s Phaeno Center to the orthogonal geometries ofLearning from Design Andreas Georgoulias, Lessons trom design occur constantly during the process of articulation of specific solutions to given problems. Designers apply their tools to analytic, synthetic, and creative processes and, through constant feedback loops, at their optimal solutions. As designs evolve and more projects come along, several patterns occur and their observation and documentation provide information about a given preference or approach. In interdisciplinary design, multiple disciplines integrate and overlay their knowledge, creative and analytic capabilities, and preferred approaches to deriving solutions. The Harvard Graduate Schoo! of Design’s recurring course GSD6328 started in the Spring semester of 2006 as an experimental exploration of interdisciplinary design. Its subject is design thinking that, whether a priori or impromptu, works within the interfaces, overlaps, seams, or gaps between the disciplinary areas of archi tecture and engineering. Hence the course title: “In Search of Design through Engineers.” The name, howev does not tell the whole story. Our goal is always to look for design solutions, but the search is never through engineers or engineering only. Both among the instructors and, most important, among the students there Is a mix of architects and engineers. Taking advantage the proximity of the GSD and MIT's Department of Structural Engineering, we market the course to students from both institutions. Our intention in having both engineers and architects in the classroom Is to get as close as possible to a real design team. Sometimes the numbers balance, sometimes we have more architects in the class, sometimes more engineers. Designing Collaborative Processes (Our approach to discussion topics, class materials, and assignments follows a similar path. We tend to opt more for messy realism than for disciplinary clarity through abstraction. We always start from the class materials. Drawing from Hanif Kara's vast resource of projects, key stage reports are given “as is" to the olass. We take pride in the fact that a whole design report is made available, revealing un- published details about projects that may have seen the light of publicity several times. For a two-week: long case study we give three, even four, design reports, representing the various phases of project delivery. That can amount to more than five hundred pages of material per project. Some students find this disorienting: “Not everything that is given to us is required to solve the assignment,” one person told me in 2009; “it doesn't make sense, | don't know what to do.” Being the junior instructor in the class makes it easier to receive this type of feedback. However, addressing such comments is not easy at all. They force us to think deeply and question our assumptions. At one point it became apparent that certain pedagogical approaches had led people to expect that every decision point should come in a package with its solving elements and a “how-to” guide to applying them. That desire for neat an- swets conflicts with our goal of getting as close as possible to the real design process and prepare stu- dents for the professional field. We believe that one needs not only to be able to distinguish the impor- tant from the unimportant but to prioritize among the available data and generate something from nothing to create one's vision. Projects as Vehicles for Interdisciplinary Learning The assignments are one of our principal vehicles to guide student thinking. Articulation, composition, and the requirements of the assignments become crucial for what we receive as an outcome and What the students leam in the process of delivering it. In that process, we also learn from them. At the beginning of the course, we were issuing moredescriptive, more general, and more procedural tasks: “Which material(s) can you change to better reflect the architects’ concept, and how will you deal with the cost increase coming from this material change?” Such phrasing of the assignment, we experienced, may be too generic and can result in weak analytics and less exciting results. The early assignments didn't necessarily force the students, to arrive at a decision or propose a design solution. We reacted by simplifying and specifying what we asked for, by asking for design solutions, and by making it more radical: “Which two of the columns that support the Phaeno Science Center would you remove and why? What are the design implications of such a removal?" or “Redesign the Masdar Insti- tute of Science and Technology if we move it from ‘Abu Dhabi to Copenhagen’ or “The sponsor of the Phaeno Science Center asks to double the building program while you are designing. What would be the implications on the structural system and how an you address this challenge?” ‘Such pointed assignments force each student to take tougher decisions, and since all assign- ments are done in teams, to decide as a team. The team dynamics become very interesting as we ask students to explain their reasoning and how they arrived at their solution, say, to removing columns 2 and 6. At that moment, many of the differences, similarities, synergies, and overlaps between archi- tects and engineers would become apparent. Theit starting points and means of reasoning sometimes coincide, but in many cases are different. Architec- ture students use more spatial and qualitative, even formal arguments. Several times they attempt logical leaps that lead to inspiring alternatives. “We propose to use the void that results from removing the two columns to bring light into the basement of the build- ing-it's pretty dark as itis. And now that there is light in this uninhabited area, how about we change the floor material, insert some small plants and create a living space?" an architecture student would explain concerning their design development. Engineers will usually start from a purely quantitative analy- sis and employ their armature of software tools to demonstrate their argument: “Look how large the bridge deflection is!” an engineering student said v enthusiastically as he played an animation generated from the structural analysis software SAP. However, a concern is that the two methods of reasoning can be independent and develop in paral- lel. As most of the assignments have several parts, each team tries to efficiently allocate resources, and the architects will tackle the design parts while the engineers take on the calculation parts. That pattern becomes obvious during class presentations, as each team member presents his or her part. If tasks are divided this way, several parts of the assignment will have little connection to the ones before and after, and the whole presentation will not deliver a unified message, nor a solid approach. To achieve more collaborative approaches, one has to be more radical. For us, that sometimes requires arrang- ing the assignments in a way that determines who does what. At one point, it was tempting to start an assignment by asking the engineers to do the design part and the architects to do the engineer- ing analyses. The teams actually enjoy this and the subsequent assignments, where we do not specify who does what, become more integrated and roles change more often. This is certainly a moment of gratification for us. Students end up presenting a part of the assignment in pairs, and the way they interchange their talking points and how they com- ment on what their classmate just said signal to us that they had worked together. Unifying Patterns Through the years, we constantly reflect on and learn from the outcomes of the class. Student assign- ments, final papers, course evaluations, and verbal feedback from students and guest speakers, all come to our review board. As we are eager to deliver on our promise of interdisciplinary pedagogy, we want to learn from these sources and improve our message and approach. A.common thread we find over the years is a set of trajectories, or themes, that run through the dif- ferent assignments and case studies. Seemingly independent of a project's design approach or an architect's derivative position, these threads emerge every year and establish unifying patterns that we18 adapt to, learn from, and react to in different ways and intensities. One thing we cannot do, however, is ignore them. These patterns reappear in material coming from us. For example, we use them in case-study topic matrices for the students to elaborate in their final papers. It is through the realization of these unifying patterns that, in 2010, we decide to significantly alter the course and replace the final paper with a final design project-one that, instead of being a reaction toa case study presented in class, is an original challenge for the students to respond to using their creative and analytical tools, alongside the themes of the class. We use these unifying patterns to drive an interdis- ciplinary approach to design. We introduce them in this chapter, together with a limited but representa tive selection of student work that generated or expressed them. For each pattern, we use excerpts from student essays that frame, supplement, con- tradict, and nevertheless help define these thematic, areas. It has to be noted that all designs presented here are outcomes that respond to a given case study and a specific assignment, done in one or two weeks by a team of students taking a full course load at the master’s level. As such, each design present- ed here is probably the outcome of approximately thirty to sixty hours of work from a team of three to five individuals, dispersed across the two schools, and multiple disciplines. In each case, only a few samples of student work are presented. Structure and Design The materiality of architecture has determined the blood relationship between design and engineering. Even in Etienne-Louis Boullée’s utopian architec- ture, there is an instinctive thinking of material, grav- ity, and construction. People often talk about the iconic or geometric aspect of Boullée’s Cénotaphe 4 Newton. But there are also structural and mate~ rial indications in Boullée's proposal. In Boullée’s age, when steel frame had not come into being, a masonry dome or vault was the most efficient way of achieving long span. The circular thick walls held the spherical dome in the center and resisted push~ ing forces toward its periphery. However, the large opening on the circular wall presented the concep- tual or the modern part of the architecture, which was different from the Pantheon or the Colosseum. We can see that there is an interesting struggle and mutual influence between design and engineering even in utopian architecture. The engineering intu- ition somehow makes architecture grounded. From Xiao Yin, “The Return of Engineering” (2010 student pape) The grounding of structural engineering and archi- tecture is the core of our first unifying pattern. The interplay between structure and design, the layering of processes and diverse but intertwined approach €s to conceptualization, analysis, and construction emerge as architects and engineers delve deeper into their foundational base of knowledge and rene- gotiate the boundaries between their disciplines. In the case study of the Henderson Waves Bridge in Singapore by UP Corporation, llya Chistiakoy, Isabel Lopes, Murat Mutlu, Scott Silverstein, and Hunter Young in 2009 revise the single-arch concept and introduce a double-arch solution. The team posits that a double-arch scheme generates a more porous structure, allowing the bridge to better blend with the surrounding landscape. This design alterna: tive increases the deck stiffness and improves resistance to vibration, therefore making it possible to incorporate lighter support pylons. Finally, all arch members have a single curvature, making the fabrication process easier. The undulating aesthetics respond to this altered structural system in a similar fashion. A clear interplay unfolds between structure and form, and the team is agile in balancing the two in an optimal solution. Things start to become more complex in the FOA, projects, In the Shires project, the assignment is to redesign the glass facade system if it is not sus- pended from the roof, but rather attached to each concrete floor slab. Inherent in this challenge is the design problem of combining the differential deflec- tions of concrete slabs and glass panes and stee! trusses. Rosemarie Fang, Luis Aldana, Scott Silver stein, Murat Mutlu, and Mark Watabe in 2009 start with analytics and calculate the deflection of the‘Sketches and variations for a twin-arch bridge concept. UChistiakor, | Lopes, M. Muti, S, Silverstein, H. Young (2009) 6A a Rendering ofa twin-arch bridge concepl.IChistiakov, [Lopes M. Mutlu, S. Silverstein, H. Young (2008) Rendering ofa twin-arch bridge concopl. I Chistiakov, [Lopes M. Muth, . Silverstein, H. Young (2008) gallows frames that support the curtain-wall facade, testing its reduction if they add a diagonal member and still support the facade without attaching it to the slabs. Then they calculate the concrete slab’s deflection under different conditions of load. Their conclusion: the fagade needs to be redesigned if itis to be attached at the slabs. The roof frame alteration won't suffice The team continues the facade redesign by propos: ing a connecting spider system that accommodates differential deflection. They proceed and profit from the new freedom that the new facade system offer proposing a different ornate finish for the exterior skin—a woven steel cable in an Ammann bar grid. 19 Gallows frame, bending moment analysis. R. Fang, Aldana, S. Silverstein, M. Mutl,M, Watabe (2009) LS \ testing amen Adjusted gallows frame, bending moment analysis. R. Fang, Aldana, 8. Silverstein, M. Mutlu, M. Watabe (2008) ‘Sore ‘Seana Reinforced concrete slab deflection analysis. Fang, Aldana, S. Silverstein, Ml Mutu, M. Watabe (2009) The team responds to the core of the original archi: tect's idea: a continuous pattern, visual porosity, and uniqueness. In their solution, structure and design combine after the support system of the fagade changes. Song He, Conway Pedron, YueYue Wang, Anthony Sullivan, and Jarrad Morgan in 2011 reach a design outcome of the same order by following a very different path. An extruded metal solution for the facade “laces” essentially transforms the pattern from a glass panel print to a structural, load-bearing element. The team, having secured their aesthetic position and fabrication technique, continues its analysis on pattern design and optimization inPf . . a a so oe as Fagade design and detail for accommodati ion of slab. R. Fang. Aldana S Silverstein, M. Mutlu, M, Watabe (2008), ncept where pattern becomes structural, ‘element. Assembly diag 7 ton e diggram.S. He, A Sullivan, J. Morgan (2011) z at # 2 Facade desion for accommodation of slab detection Fang, LAldana S. Silverstein, M. Mutlu M. Watabe (2008) RuSraaineirace GSS IC sel. eine ality eee SRN Goer ee Sl Ae CO iYFacade concept where patter becomes structural, load-bearing, ‘lament. Perspective view. S.He,C. Pedron,Y.Wang, A. Sullivan, 3. Morgan (2011) relation to deflection of slabs, light penetration and insulation, and buildability and cost. Again, structural, considerations and design merge. The Ravensbourne College of Art and Design, again by FOA, presents a different challenge: the dynamics of design and fabrication of a struc- tural skin in relation to its fagade pattern. The same design team, from the project above, now focuses on incorporating a structural diagrid at the fagade, and compares it with a stepped column with a transferbeam solution. They point out that cou- pling the diagrid with a flat slab allows for minimum structural depth of the slab and maximum flexibility of window placement. The diagrid, an inherently more efficient structural system, provides lateral stability and minimizes the need for concrete shear cores. The team concludes that a rectangular floor plan and removal of the stepped slabs allows for a consistent diagrid wrapping around the building. By connecting the diagrid to the slab always at anode, they simplify the connection details and reduce the actual amount of connections required, ending with a more cost-effective solution than a vertical column arrangement. a structural systom analysis and comparison wit stepped columnOn the other hand, the contemporary design pro- cess diagram introduces a good example of non- linear design. By a parallel development of multiple ‘expressions’ of concepts from all key parties, the team demonstrates how interdisciplinary design can uncouple risks embedded in a linear and inflex. ible process, and demarcate roles and responsibili- ties in a highly collaborative formation. The role of o-. ° oO; Shires development. Nonlinear desion process diagram. M. Watabe (2010) technology and building information modeling in facilitating this process is evident in the identifica- tion of a single model, or depository of outcomes, from this multiple and interdisciplinary elaboration of design concepts. The idea of multiple and differential expression of concepts are further cultivated by Mark Watabe in 2010. The evolution of a building's concept de-sign is subdivided in different aspects of program, materials, structure, technology, etc.; in the diagram shown, each aspect, or expression of concept, is overlaid with all others in a constant interaction. Key moments in the delivery of the project are identi- fied through the incorporation of icons and project images, showing the evolution of design through pivotal decision points Watabe further develops the visual language to ex: press nonlinear design processes and interdisciplin- ary collaboration. Symbols and patterns express the primary idea generation, as well as the exploration of multiple concept alternatives. Design develo ment is represented either as a straightforward or an undulating path of discovery, amplification, or termination of ideas. Core design processes are differentiated from peripheral ones by a thicker line, to identify focal areas for each project. Escalation of a process line on the y axis signifies the escala- tion of project risk. As such, thicker and higher lines. show a larger risk concentration on important project dimensions than do lighter and lower ones that rep- resent secondary project dimensions. 35 The final diagrams have different representations of interdisciplinary design and nonlinear processes, as exemplified by case studies from the class. The Henderson Waves Bridge demonstrates the clarity of the central design concept as a straight line, with several design decisions on materials, manufactur ing, and construction means and methods as parallel branches of concept implementation. ‘The emphasis on the design stage is repeated in the Queen Mary Student Housing project, where a simple and clear design brief underwent an impor- tant design optioneering phase to determine its construction method and its alignment with the strict budget and schedule constraints that would subse- quently add risk to the project, as shown by a thick escalating line. ‘The Phaeno Science Center, on the other hand, demonstrates a continuous escalation of risk as the project unfolds; emphasis is on the construction phase, as several iterations on material properties, constructabilty, and manufacturing unfold from design throughout construction. 2007 200836 2001 2002 2003 2004 ‘Queen Mary Student Housing. Nonlinear design process diagram. M, Watabe (2010) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2008 2008 2008 Phaeno Science Center Nonlinear design process diagram. M. Watabe (2010)pes ®6 Et 2008 West Shiros development. Non! 2008 2006 1 design process diagram. M. Wata Finally, the Shires project diagram represents the mixed-use dimension of the program, and the several design implications that a certain program, as well as a given client, would have on design evolution and alternative concept exploration. Conclusion The journey of interdisciplinary design, as studied at Harvard Graduate School of Design and exem- plified through the case studies and assignments described within this chapter, doesn't end. We hope that this publication will help to clarify the issues, and provide operational ideas and methods to act upon. More important, itis our aim and expectation that these lessons from architecture and engineering may become an integral part of future design processes and lead to inspirational architecture and engineer ing, and more exciting built work. As practitioners. and educators, itis our mission to incorporate the aspect of implementation within design-as messy, 2007 2008 2009 2010) mundane, or banal as that may sometimes be. But a project has to get built to be really amazing and benefit everyone. Through the exploration of extremes, we strive to identify great ideas at both ends of the spectrum: the highly publicized projects, as well as those that were severely constrained by money, time, or circumstanc- es. Wherever you find yourself in the field, we hope that you will keep crossing the borders and rede- fining the boundaries of our industry-that you will redefine what started as a specialization but ended as disciplinary fragmentation. In this publication we cannot provide all of the answers about where the dynamics may end up. But we pledge to maintain the dedication to our beliefs, act upon them, and keep researching the possibilities. Projects that now keep us busy will become tomorrow's educational avenues, and future explorations will lead to more questions and, we hope, more answers.Ihe interplay between structure and design, the Layering of processes and diverse but intertuined approaches to conceptualization, analysis, and construction emerge as al their disciplines.r = ss : ie vom to iat40 Sabrina Leon planar, or a combination of these which a designer can intentionally use to reinforce or realize ideas. (...) Columns, walls and beams can be thought of in terms of concepts of frequency, pattern, simplicity, regularity, random- ness and complexity. As such, structure can be used to define space, create units, articulate circulation, suggest movement, or develop composition and ‘modulations. In this way, it becomes inextricably linked to the very elements which create architec- ture, its quality and excitement. ‘Angus J, MacDonald, Structural Design for Architecture, 32. The viability of an architectural idea is largely de~ pendent on structural design, despite being primarily evaluated in the context of aesthetics and emotion Yet, the need to consider structural aesthetics as an inherent component in the creation of beautiful architecture continues to be a subject of debate. Structuralists maintain that a building's beauty fol- lows from its structural efficiency; the more efficient the structure, the more beautiful the architecture. Most designers, however, disagree with this idea, believing that efficiency is an enemy of possibility. When considering the influence of structure on architectural aesthetics, it is important to differenti- ate between buildings where the expression ofits structure is relatively unimportant and those where it, is essential. The Eiffel Tower, for example, capitalizes on the exposure of its structure, and its beauty is both iconic and transcendental because of it. In fact, the structure is the architecture. In other buildings, the structure is merely a framework mechanism, not part of the architectural image, and thus is pur- posely hidden from view. Most buildings, however, lie somewhere within this spectrum and have structural systems that influence the architecture. Thus struc ture plays a significant role in shaping the quality and experience of the architectural space. Designing Structure for Architecture Most designers understand structural design as a two-part process. The first part, or preliminary design stage, entails the selection of the form and the general layout of the structure. The second part is concerned with performing structural calculations and determining the size of the various structural members. In buildings that employ structure as part of the architecture many of the decisions regarding the design arise through the determination of the form. Here, the devised form dictates both the type of structure to be adopted as well as its material. Therefore the initial design concept, where form and the relationships of solid and void are determined, is a major controlling factor in structural design. If one wants to pursue the creation of architecture through the manipulation of structure, it is crucial to understand both the types of relationships that can be created between structure and architecture and the different ways in which structure produces or interacts with space. Types of Relationships between Structure and Architecture Some architects believe that a preoccupation with technical issues, such as those concerning struc ture, inhibits the creative aspect of design. Others feel that architecture should aim to resolve conflicts between form and structure and not allow one toExterior view of Waterloo station rail terminal, London, Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners, 1993 dominate the other. This approach requires that the structural composition of a building be developed alongside all other aspects of its design; structural issues must be considered from an early stage and allowed to play a significant role in the determina- tion of the final form. The nature of the relationship established between structure and architecture strongly influences the final form. These relation- ships can be catalogued as follows: ornamentation of structure, structure as ornament, structure as architecture, structure accepted as form generator, structure ignored, structure symbolized, structure and architecture as synthesized forms, and structure and architecture as contrasting forms. ‘Ornamentation of Structure In this type of relationship, form is derived as an expressed structural armature, with minor visu- ally motivated adjustments. Here the architecture tends to be tectonic, and the formal logic is largely a celebration and visual expression of the struc~ tural technology of the time. There is no attempt to disguise the structure or adopt forms that cannot be expressed by available materials; Virtually everything visible is structural and techno- logically justified. The train shed of the International Rail Terminal at Waterloo Station in London by Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners and Anthony Hunt Associates is a good example of this particular relationship. The arrangement of the exposed steel structure recon- ciles both aesthetic and technical considerations. In particular, the innovative use of a tapering steel substructure architecturalizes a new understanding of cross-sectional member efficiency. Structure and Design a Interior view of Wateriog station rail terminal, London, Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners, 1993 Structure as Ornament This relationship features a design process driven by visual rather than technical considerations, focus- ing on the visual quality of structural elements and attempting to give them visual prominence within the architecture, This approach pursues a visual agenda that expresses the structure to produce an image that celebrates the tectonic aspect of the ar- chitecture. It differs from ornamentation of structure in that these structures are often judged as less than ideal from a technical standpoint, as their per- formance objective is no longer solely structural. The use of structure as ornament involves the creation of an unnecessary structural problem for the sake of visual drama. The process of finding an ingenious solution to the unnecessary problem is also the process that determines its architectural expression, Despite being visually interesting, many of the buildings that result from this approach are technically and structurally flawed. This is the case because the structures are expressed to convey the idea of technical excellence, but are not them- selves necessarily examples of technology serving a specific structural function. The Padre Pio Liturgical Hall in San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy, designed by Renzo Piano is one example where structure is used as ornament, The supporting structure is comprised of two interwoven rows of stone arches forming inner and outer rings. The arches of the outer ring are scaled-down ver- sions of those on the inner ring, which originate at the center, where the altar is located. The spans of the arches steadily decrease, following the cochlear shape of the roof.42 7 \ Zw g SA SS i Interior view of Pas Renzo Piano, 2004 Pier Luigi Neri, 1957 The visual drama created by the distorted shape of the arches, with shallower springing points at the center of the hall, produces the structural prob- lem of force lines or thrust lines that deviate from the arches’ cross-sections. To accommodate these force lines within the cross-section of each arch, as is required for structural stability, larger cross- sections had to be considered. Structure as Architecture In these cases, major decisions affecting the form are taken for structural reasons and are not compro mised for visual effect. It is quite common for build ings in this category to approach the limits of what is structurally possible. Such is the case with long-span buildings, very tall buildings, and portable/temporary buildings. For long-span structures, the technical problem of maintaining a viable balance between the load carried and the weight of the structure itself dominates the form. Form-active typologies such as the compressive dome and vault, and the tensile membrane, are among the most structurally efficient examples for long spans. Despite their structural ef- ficiency, these structures do have certain shortcom- ings. Their low mass makes them hard to design and build. In addition, they do not provide adequate ther- ‘mal bartiets, and their long-term durability, especially in the case of tensile membranes, is shorter than for most other building envelope types. The works of Felix Candela, Pier Luigi Nervi, and Frei Otto are among the most notable in the long-span category. Nervi’ invention of the two- way reinforced concrete space frame allowed for unprecedented thinness at great spans. Candela was notorious for the use of hyperbolic-paraboloid Otympie Stadium, Munich, Germeny. Fre! Otte, 1972 Sears Tower, Chicago, SOM, 1973 Hearst Tower, New York Norman Foster, 2008Structure and Design 43 IBM Europe Traveling Pavilion, section. Renzo Piano Building Workshop, 1986 geometries and thin reinforced concrete shells in his long-span structures. LOceanografic Restau- rant showcases his mastery of this method, Cable network structures such as Otto's Munich stadium represent another method of achieving long span lightweight structures, Tall buildings present other types of structural chal- lenges, namely the ability to support themselves and resist high lateral forces such as wind, The first issue could be resolved by creating a strong connection between the base of the building and the ground. This has rarely been expressed architecturally. In fact, most buildings maintain a uniform size of the structure throughout each floor. The second issue has affected the architecture of the tall building, Most architects have chosen to place the supportive structure on the exterior of the buildings, allowing them to behave as framed or truss-tube vertical cantilevers. The Hearst Tower in New York and the Sears Tower in Chicago are both great examples of this technique. In the case of the Hearst Tower, the diagrid structure expressed on the exterior allows for a virtually column-free interior. The Sears Tower tackles the lateral loads via an internal cruciform arrangement of walls and columns. The form follows the arrangement of the internal structure as well as the basic structural principle of allocating most of the building's mass at the base. The design of the lightweight/transportable building is heavily affected by the need to minimize weight and maximize assembly efficiency. This type of build- ing is thus almost entirely determined by technical criteria, The realm of temporary buildings has been dominated by the tent as an efficient tensile mem- brane structure. Compressive structures, such as Renzo Piano's IBM traveling exhibition building, have also been devised to serve this purpose. The topic of portable architecture has even sparked the interest of the housing industry. In the sum- mer of 2008, the Museum of Modern Art devoted an exhibition to the topic of portable prefabricated modern dwellings. ‘Home Delivery: Fabricating the Modern Dwelling” included Kieran Timberlake Asso- ciates' Cellophane House and 02 Village Architects’ MicroHouse. / Cellophane House, MoMa, gas! Micro home 026 eR IT™ Zurich, Switzerand, Horden Cherry Big Lse Architects, 2008 Interior view of micro home st Berkeley Square Landon, Horden Cherry Lee Architects, 2008Monchengladbach Museum, Germany. Hans Hollen, 1982 The roof structures of the Monchengladbach Mu- seum and Felix Nussbaum Museums both exem- plify the use of structure to reflect and diffuse light. The white roof beams of the Monchengladbach Museum behave as a screen that filters direct sunlight and reflects it back into the gallery space, providing a soft, diffuse glow. The zig-zagging beams of the Felix Nussbaum corridor reflect and diffuse the artificial light to give the space a sepul- chral glow—appropriate for a museum designed to showcase the work of a Jewish artist who died at Auschwitz in 1944, Finally, the McNamara Alumni Center in Minne- sota, Minneapolis by Antoine Predock provides an example of how structure can use light to alter its perception. Select solid wall planes are separated through a continuous glass strip ranging between 3 and 6 inches in height. The light penetrating through this strip dematerializes the wall plane by giving the illusion of weightlessness. Metlamara Alumni Center. Minnes Antoine Predock, 2000, Structure for Orgai and Layering of Space One of the most important roles of structure, aside from providing a building's supportive framework, is to organize, subdivide, and layer architectural space. Since the earliest works of architecture, structure, in its many expressions, has been used as an effective means of spatial intervention. It is as effective in creating subspaces within a large space as it is in defining their functional relation ship. Structure provides designers with the oppor tunity to create a variation of spatial experiences within the architecture. ion, Subdivision, The Museum of Contemporary Art in Barcelona pro- Vides a good example of how structure can be used to layer space. Three layers of structure inhabit the building's atrium or ramp-hall. First, a layer of thin rectangular columns, supporting the roof and glazed skin, defines the atrium's outermost boundary. Next, a free-standing row of columns, alternating between nonstructural vertical elements, supports the ramp- ing system cantilevering off of either side. Last, the atrium’s innermost boundary is defined by the additional colonnade located in front of the beams and balconies emerging from the main galleries. To- gether, these structures produce a layered reading of the building's interior that is both evident through and echoed on the building's facade. MACBA, Barcelona, Spain. Richard Meier, 1995Wohlen School, Switzerland. Exterior view. Santiago Calatrava, 1988 j Stadttor, Dusseldorf, any. Ptzinka Pink & Partner, 1998 Structure for Phenomenological Effect Structures can also interact with space by pursuing a phenomenological effect. Most often this effect is produced through the sculptural treatment of the form, the use of an exaggerated scale, or both. The unconventional form of Calatrava's Wohlen High School hall in Switzerland, articulated through a self-supporting ribbed folded-timber vault and enclosing concrete walls, is representative of the sculptural and dynamic qualities that consistently dominate his work. The sculptural treatment of the concrete pedestals supporting the vault and the moiré effect achieved through the rhythm, orienta~ tion, and finish of the timber render a visually stun ning interior space. Structure and Design 5 Woblen Schoo!, Swtzeriand Interior detail, Santiago Calatrava, 1988 Structures can produce dramatic interior spaces through manipulation of scale. The visual drama within the Stadttor Building in Dusseldorf, Germany, for example, is produced by the exaggerated scale of the two concrete-filled steel-tube truss towers located at diagonally opposite ends of the floor plan. The tower members appear massive in cross- section, especially next to the building's columns, which appear frail in comparison. The towers, which serve as the lateral bracing structures of the build- ing, run the full height of the building without any floor-slab interruptions and can thus be seen from Virtually anywhere. The architect purposely chose to isolate the lateral load-carrying system from the gravity-supporting structure to express its resulting massive scale, as if trying to visually articulate the relationship between the building's loads.Rem Koolhaes/OMA, Cass da Musica, Porto 2001-2005. Renderings of the concrete envelope and internal structure characteristics of ‘junk-space” and “junk-structure” in one building, Instead of trying to achieve the perfect ‘minimalist elegance,’ as Schumacher would say in a different context, he used all the insane apparatus made available to him to exorcise the junk-demons. Almost in parallel, the Phaeno Science Center by Zaha Hadid Architects sutfered from a similar schizophrenia of multiple systems (a main wattle slab, a Vierendee! roof supported by disproportion- ally “heavy” cones, prefabricated and cast in situ self-compacting concrete walls, metal columns on specitic spots of “instability"), even though in this case the ultimate aim was the creation of an elegance of complexity." The reasons for such a broad range of systems apparently derived from implications of feasibility and cost. The result is one of the most astonishing examples of architecture and engineering of the past decade, 2003-08 Horz09 & de Meuron, Belling National Stadium, even though Hadid's ruthlessly internal architectural logic demands a holistic design approach in every single detail. This in turn leads unavoidably to a blatantly overdesigned project, where every external intervention appears as a punishable cacophony. The critical inquiry here could question the necessity for such complexity or even the efficiency of such design and analysis processes. The most recent of all the phenomena that takes us back to the Bilbao Guggenheim would be the overtaking of the ornament. In the Beijing National Stadium by Herzog and de Meuron, the ormament is not just carried by the structure-it is the structure. The dimensions and optical characteristics of the ornament are intentionally designed to be practically indistinguishable from structure. As Koolhaas com- mented on the iconic project in *Venturian" terms: “It is the duck and the nest at the same time." As entertaining as this may sound, the Beijing National Stadium is perhaps the first example in recent years where the fusion of ornament and structure chal- lenge visual perception. It seems as if we've reached a point where almost “everything” is constructible in a very short time, and architecture is still indulging this moment in time. As we move forward, the digital paradigm will only continue to alter our fundamental notion of tecton- ics. In this light, the question is not if the ornament will disappear anytime soon, but what will be the new paradigm in its coordination with structure. Zaera-Polo argues that ‘A unitary theory of the building envelope may be an answer to the decou- pling of politics and nature." What is apparent is{Ali Rahie and Hina Jamelie/Contemporary Architecture Practice, Commercial High Rise, Dubs, 2007 Zaha Ha that the line between the envelope and its support will only become blurrier. According to Picon, it will become increasingly difficult to distinguish between the two, as new structures will get indeed rid of their armature in the traditional sense. The “recent death of the diagram" is a hint of what we should expect. After a century of increasing the layers, is it maybe time to reduce them? To create the new, more homogeneous and high- performance whole, one does not necessarily have to oversimplify and reduce these layers in number (‘Less is More") because it is impossible to go back to the romantically simple detailing of Modernism. Instead, these layers could be reconfigured and developed to make use of their attributes in multi- plicity ("More with Less"), We are confronted with the pressing need to find new ways of stratifying the layers of increasing complexity. Moussavi's notion of “expanded materiality” or “supermateriality” attempts to define the required “change in our approach away from an understanding of material as exclusively physical and tangible, to include both the physical and the non-physical; climate, sound or economics: Notes 1 Rom Koolhaas. “Poot modern anginsering?” in Rem Kool MeGetiek ode), Content (Kein: Taschen, 2004), pp. 614-515 2. Farohid Moussa! ot al). Tho Function of Form (Barcoiana; New Yor ‘Actar; Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University, Graduate Schoo! of Design, 2009),.7 3. Louis H Sullvan "The Tall ling Artistically Considered’, Lippincot's Magazine 87 (March 1898), pp. 403-8, cited in Kindergarten Charts and Other Vrings (New York: Witlenborn Art Books, 1976), 4. Moussa The Function of Form, p.® 5. Moussa, The Function Brendon in Koohaas Rem, Brendon MeGatrck (ede), Content (Koln: Taschen, 2004), pp. 85-87 7. Rom Koolhaas. ‘unk-apace’ in Rem Koolhaas. Brendon MeGetrick {ede Content Kain: Taschen, 2008), pp. 162.171 8.1 Structure and Design 69 Architects, Glasgow Museum of Transport, 2004-10, ‘Rxonometric section showing surtace build-up as well as wood, steel or glass." In this paradigm, assemblages of structure could perform in multiple ways simultaneously. Innovations in material technology can open up many possibilities, although what has been proven over time is that large-scale application will probably be one step behind. The ultra-high-efficiency materi~ als we know, or new materials we expect to create, will still have to be composed or assembled in a Way that creates synergies, drives performance, and facilitates large-scale implementation. We will have to continue in that direction before the new tools of each era are not merely mastered; where a ‘new sobriety" can be achieved and efforts are shifted from the surface to its actual depth. Instead of being a “rebel without a cause’, an innovative attitude of experimentation with a serious purpose is needed, where a balance between energy spent and actual outcome is attempted. Where intelligent design engineering will work to reduce the maintenance of this increased complexity and seek the “elegance of smartness." Where multiple layers and surfaces actually collapse in one, one day. 8, Notes trom course GED 4958: Architecture, Science and Technolgy, XVills Century Present, Pro. Antoine Pico, Harvard GSD, Spring 2010 10.Ceci Balmond (ot al) normal (Munich: Prostl,2002),p. 101 11. Patrik Schumacher. “Arguing for Elegance’ Elegance, AD (Arcitox tural Design), January/February, 2007 12."Flineurs in Automobiles: A conversation between Peter Fisch, Rem and Hans Ulich Obriat” in War Stadier, Martino Ser feds), i Las Vegas Stulo: images tom the archives of Raber Ven snd Denise Scott Brown (Zach: Scheidegger & Spiess, 2008), pp. 161.170 13. Alejandro ZaeraPolo.“The Politics ofthe Envelope’ Volume #17, Fal 2008 14, Antoine Picon Digital Culture in Architecture (Base: Boston: Birchauser, 2010) YB. Moussavi Phe Function of Form, 9. 8reer‘The John Lewis store and cinema at Hammerson’s Highcross Quarter shopping center in Leicester was designed by Foreign Office Architects and engineered by Adams Kara Taylor. The project demonstrates how development practice and attitudes are changing in fostering collaboration, as well as highlighting design and structure relationships in mixed-use buildings with a common aesthetic identity and diverse programmatic require ments. The client selected FOA through a design competition, and the delivery of the winning idea demonstrates the value of such an approach while showing the process. through design, contracts, and construction, Facing several challenges in combining a mixed-use program at a site with archeological remnants, design and engineering collaborated to address diverse typological and spa- tial requirements for the different program elements. Primary entrances to the building are either through an amphitheater at one corner-where one reaches the theater mul- tiplex-or by walking a 36-meter glass-and-steel footbridge that connects the shopping mall to a new multistory garage, spanning a six-lane ring road. The interior experience is created by a combination of goods, sensations, and structural ‘gymnastics. Several floors of seemingly structureless glass walkways rise through an atrium, and the comer itself stretches the potential of the reinforced concrete frame. The discussion on envelopes and pattems expands on the elaborate fagade design that interweaves structural analysis with formal expressions of algorithms and materials. Two layers of panels of fritted glass and cut sheet metal come together to suggest lacework, reflecting Leicester's and John Lewis's shared history in haberdashery.Francisco Izquierdo, Giorgi Khamaladze, Jarrad Morgan, and Stephanie MorrisonStructure and Design 7 | LW La brs Weight versus Lightness Harvard University as an intellectual and cultural institution carries significant weight. The name alone conjures images of solidity and permanence. But is this the correct image for the Harvard Graduate School of Design, an exhibition center for contempo- rary architecture intended to embody notions of openness, accessibility, and agility? ‘We propose to balance the prevailing impression of weight, epitomized by the heavy architecture of The GSD's Gund Hall, with an exhibition space that is an expression of lightness, drawing inspiration from the canopies of trees that occupy the site. Lifted into the canopy and playing with light and transparency, the center for exhibiting con- temporary architecture will reflect a current attitude to design practices that values ‘openness, transparency, and responsiveness-lightness itself. Harvard versus Cambridge Established in 1636, Harvard University is the oldest institution of higher learning in the United States. The school has continually expanded over the past 400 years throughout Cambridge, Massachusetts, and, not surprisingly, this has caused occa- sional tension between the institution and its host community. Conflict arose in 2008 over Harvard's proposed expansion in Allston, just across the river from Cambridge, project opposed by Allston residents. Although the University and the city hold dif- fering opinions on many issues-zoning, planning, garbage control, taxes, environmen- tal impact-the town-gown tensions in Cambridge are similar to those in other cities.08 Institutional versus Residential Fabric Harvard's academic and laboratory facilities are of a much greater scale than the surrounding residential fabric (much of this fabric is also part of Harvard's real estate portfolio). There exists a fine and tenuous balance in Cambridge between these two scales. To respectfully maintain the finer-grain residential scale (and good graces of the community), we will eliminate only one building to site the new GSD exhibition space. The building will sit toward the rear of Gund Hall, sharing its back lawn, and face Kirkland Street, where the public entries to the galleries will be located. At ground level, passage through the grounds will be both accessible and highly public. In response to the varied climate of Boston, we propose a twofold strategy to address environ- mental performance.Structure and Design ‘Thermal Cross-Section - Summer and Winter Adaptive Programming Closely tied to the operation of the Harvard Graduate School of Design, the new Center for Con- temporary Architecture will be subject to fluctuating use that reflects the academic cycle, yet the cycle of public engagement will follow a different course. During the semester, GSD Lite will serve primarily as an extension of GSD programs, offering a place for exhibitions, displays, and debates. In the summer, when Cambridge receives an influx of tourists, we propose to expand the center's exhibition and gallery program. ‘Wrapping the perimeter of the elevated plan, a linear gallery will be act warmer weather as a shaded, naturally ventilated transitional space—a verandah-providing some thermal buffer between the exterior and the more controlled microclimate of the interior spaces. During the winter, these programs contract and pull back to the core spaces in the center of the plan which are more heavily insulated and controlled, leaving the perimeter gallery to act as a ther- mal “buffer zone” providing an intermediate micro-climate between the heated interior and the cold Boston winter outside.Zaha Hadid Architects AKTStructure and Design 93ew irLy Discussions on the ground of intersection in disciplines related to Architecture or Engi neering give us the possibility to think outside the box and to consider how traditional disciplinary boundaries are formed; the notion of each discipline and inevitably the everyday constraints of our professional practices. We theorize on the potential benefits of multiple intersections and the merits that potentially exist These intersections already exist in many forms despite the judicial and business See ee eee eo eum me ee se Cet eee Cee eet hee ee eke Fan ecu Ceri eek cae any stereotypical parallel disciplinary approach Ihave to admit that my initial response to this writing was that there was no need for Feira eee esl ue meee Gene ‘Adams Kara Taylor have worked successfully on the Phaeno Science Centre-and other ORS eee eh es ee eee Rue ee ci! eee teen tt se cue ce Race ecg age Fee Ae en eu ese a ea Pun ee ue econ el ace ceca a) eRe neg eee eto Renee ens ae mR see UE toad ind problems of developing a cross-disciplinary collaboration discDespite its obvious bi-polar, Descartian origins, | have to admit that | was always fascinated by the notion that a work of art or design, from its inception to its realization is a transition between two worlds: From the virtual (sphere of pure thought) to the real (sphere of the corporeal) One way, in which this transition works, is by exchanging approximation (loose, fluid entities) for precision (stable, fixed entities) during the design process. This exchange is in essence the focusing of the concept to a particular manifestation which is enriched by the integration of multiple parameters, such as systematization, rationaliza- tion, materiality, material economy etc. While these latter mechanisms can exist in the sphere of the virtual as pure strategies, they are more effective in their ability to guide design concepts and transform them into real world manifestations. In that way they are effective devices for design development in that they can describe precisely the geo metrical and material characteristics of the object of design. The role of pure Research is crucial to Design. Technology and experimentation is a prerequisite to Innovation. However, one must also acknowledge that Innovation can be achieved both as product of “specialist” thinking and as a product of pure Necessity. Practice can be a very fruitful field for the development of such on-site research. Similarly, experimentation is crucial for developing knowledge integration skills, alternative design thinking methods and for testing innovative ideas and the plausibility of concepts.dene: UE i Ee un ao106 Changing Forms, Dimitris Papanikolaou Is it the form that dr mine forms? While often d Changing Processes 's the design and production process, or the processes themselves that deter- sign expression pushes engineering ingenuity to invent new solutions, it is typically technological innovation that offers the tools to designers to explore new formalistic domains. Through the course of history, design practice has been integrating technology, people, and materi- als to invent new methods to increase form customization while decreasing production costs. We are 1ssing a transformation within the building industry of what was previously known as empirical craftsmanship to today's highly controlled digital fabrication. Nevertheless, today’s digital technology seems to raise as many questions in design practice and research as it answers. The Industrial Revolution The industrial revolution established standardiza- tion, mass production, and prefabrication in the building industry. Large machines effectively replaced manual labor in simple, repetitive tasks, while skilled workers concentrated on the cog- nitively complex tasks of assembling, handling, and distributing. Spurred by the machines’ high setup costs, industries standardized components, processes, and shipping methods while produc tion volume increased dramatically to benefit from economies of scale. Prefabrication factories used more sophisticated production and logistical processes to remotely fabricate, preassemble, and deliver building parts to the construction site for final assembly and installation. Panelized modules with universal interfaces could be combined in multiple ways like Lego blocks and flat-packed inside shipping containers to decrease project delivery time and supply-chain costs. Suppli- ers and fabricators specialized in products and services, formulating collaborative alliance clusters in geographically larger market networks. Mass production and prefabrication systems cre- ated highly centralized supply chains, while their cost efficiency depended heavily on location and shipping volume. Design representation methods focused on Euclidean orthographic projections of floor plans, cross-sections and elevations to share technical information between contractors and designers, spreadsheets to order materials and estimate costs from suppliers, and perspective drawings or physical models to communicate ideas to clients. Furthermore, increasing standardiza~ tion and repetition of building forms disengaged designers from studying custom structural details, as most technical specifications were now pre- defined by the industrial suppliers and building contractors, who could often change the design outcome significantly. ‘The Digital Revolution The digital revolution has seamlessly integrated design and manufacturing, allowing designers to build a 3D CAD model on a computer and directly fabricate it using a CNC machine. Initially developed for the aerospace, naval, and automotive industries, digital design and fabrication are now transforming ‘the building industry, reshaping processes, forms, and services. Widespread availability and decreasing cost of personal computers, fabrication machines, and software packages is making digital design and fabrication increasingly accessible to designers, en- gineers, contractors, material suppliers, and building product manufacturers.Digital Design Computer-aided design (CAD) replaced hand drafting by allowing designers to automatically create, modify, and reproduce digital drawings on demand. The first CAD programs had a non-asso- ciative modeling approach, such that modifying a component of the model had no impact on the rest of the geometry. This made the design process rather tedious and time-consuming, as the de- signer had to manually adjust each component of the model. Modern CAD programs changed the designing process from a mere geometric repre~ sentation of unassociated forms to a functional description of processes that can generate those forms. This shift from representation of forms to description of processes is a fundamental con- cept in modern computational design practice, as computer programs now follow the design instruc tions and remodel the resulting geometry for different input parameters. Modern computational design thus eliminates redundancy and opens the doors of complex geometric modeling to designers. Computational modeling methods today can use either generative or parametric design approach- es; often, however, a CAD model will combine both of them. Generative design focuses on algo- rithmically creating geometric forms by program- ming a list of instructions in a scripting language that, once executed by a CAD compiler, pro- duces the resulting forms. The scripting language manipulates primitive geometric components such as points, lines, planes, and surfaces using variables, functions, conditional statements, loops, and grammar rules. Generative design deploys a bottom-up approach that can produce topologically different results, an aspect that makes it popular in form-finding and form-optimization techniques. Parametric design, on the other hand, is based on hierarchically associating geometric components of the model with mathematical equations such that modifying any input parameter of a component propagates changes in the entire model. Paramet- ric modeling has a top-down approach, moving from the ‘parent" components (often called the driving geometry) to the “child” components, while their topological structure remains unchanged. Contextual and systenic design 107 Often an entire parametric model can be encapsu- lated and used as a component in another para~ metric model. ‘A computational design model can thus be con- sidered a black box that takes input arguments and outputs a resulting geometry. Such black-box models can be linked to external databases to store and exchange properties that in turn can be further linked to other models, programs, or col- laborators, creating dynamic workflow chains that automatically update, each time a change in one of the links occurs. Designers thus can model complex geometric forms and instantly change the thickness of the walls, the profile curve of a beam, or the density of a structural grid, updating in real time the entire model and the exported properties, lists, without endless hours of rework. Computational modeling, however, is also an experience-based skill. In contrast to traditional non-associative geometric modeling, there is no single approach to building a computational model: ‘the same result can be reached by different para~ metric or scripting approaches, but the level of control will be different in each case. Selecting the appropriate design method to build a computation- al model depends on thoroughly understanding the design requirements and available data; availability of a clear project scope and contextual param- eters can distinguish a good modeling strategy from a bad one. Digital Fabrication Digital fabrication or computer-aided manufac turing (CAM) uses computers to digitally control high-precision fabrication machines (CNC) to build physical prototypes from CAD files. A special computer program translates the input CAD file into a tool path, while a control system in the machine drives the motors of the tool tip along the path during fabrication. Digital fabrication methods can be either subtractive or additive, depending on whether they remove material from a monolithic block (milling, laser-cutting, plasma-cutting, etc.), or instead deposit material into stratified layers BO printing, fused deposition modeling, etc).108 Digital fabrication production workflow CNC milled molds and formwork can be used to cast Depending on the number of axes and motors that move the tool tip, a fabrication machine can have two, three, four, or five degrees of freedom, with a significant impact on fabrication capabilities. Typi- cally the tool tip is moving relative to a stable bed, the dimensions of which limit the maximum size of a part that can be machined. However, research today uses autonomous mobile robots equipped with CNC fabrication machines and sophisticated geo-positioning systems that can navigate in space fabricate similar to the drawing turtles of the clas- sic LOGO language." Computers, digital fabrication machines, and as- sembly stations can be combined to create very efficient production systems. Workflow starts from the development of a master model, rationaliza~ tion and decomposition of the master model into detailed part files, distribution of the part files to the fabrication units for machining, shipping of the finished parts to the construction site, and final assembly. These processing steps can be linked through programs, computers, machines, and hu- mans, creating a dynamic production system that can make almost anything, anywhere, and at any time at a cost depending mainly on material, equip ment type, machining time, and shipping distance, The digital fabrication supply chain is spatially and functionally decentralized. As local fabrica~ tion facilities and internet communication means spread around the world, a CAD model being developed in North America can be electronically sent to fabrication shops in Asia for prototyp- ing and shipped to a nearby construction site for assembly, significantly decreasing transportation costs. Furthermore, as digital fabrication machines become smaller, smarter, and cheaper, an entire fabrication unit can fit inside a shipping container and be sent directly to a construction site, further lowering shipping and rework costs.Phaeno Museum in Wolfsburg: CNC milled formwork New Forms: The digital revolution has had a tremendous impact on both building forms and design strate- gies, giving designers new perspectives, but also creating new construction challenges. From the doubly curved titanium-clad forms of the Frank Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao to the interlocking plywood panels of the Instant House of MIT in the Museum of Modern Art in New York, the typical digitally fabricated building is a geo- metrically complex assembly of both customized and standardized parts. Generally speaking, the greater the number of standardized parts, the less flexible the design, but the easier the construction due to repetition and economies of scale; on the other hand, the greater the number of customized parts, the more flexible the design but the harder the construction. Based on this trade-off, a typical challenge in digital fabrication is to determine the line between standardized and customized parts in a geometrically complex design: at one extreme, complexity is uniformly distributed in the parts, such that each part is slightly different from the other; at the other extreme, complexity is stra~ tegically concentrated in few highly customized parts, while the rest of the parts are standardized and repetitive. Another design challenge in construction of free- form geometries is to ensure that all complex surfaces are decomposed into smaller develop- able surface panels that can be easily fabricated through cutting, bending, and forging flat sheet materials. This means that surfaces cannot have double curvature; their unidirectional curvatures should not exceed the maximum bending curvature Contextual and systenic design 109 r unt a0: Complex geometric forms decomposed into developable surfaces DDL pavilion in London: Complex assembly of interlocking planar parts that can be achieved by the available materials and techniques; the angles of polygonal panels should not be overly acute; and surface continuity between individual panels must often be retained to provide a smooth finish. Another compelling design constraint is to ensure that converging planar ribs at either the nodes or other boundaries of a free-form structural grid will retain to the greatest extent possible their topolog- ical and angular relationships as the overall driving geometry of the model is modified. This is neces- sary to simplify and standardize joint and fastener detailing as well as to transfer loads smoothly between parts. For example, often the planar ribs of a quadrilateral structural grid must be locally perpendicular to both the skin surface they sup- port and the other ribs that converge in the nodes. The list of constraints in computational design for complex geometries can be long, depending on the requirements of each project, making digital design and fabrication a highly specialized and challenging field.10 Contour Crafting illustration of 3D printed building complex development is the ability to vary what the machines can produce without sacrificing efficiency. CNC rout- ing allows for customized, individual components to be accurately produced in the same amount of time it would take to make several copies of a single com- ponent. It is possible to cut a range of materials, used for architectural applications including woods, aluminum, plastics, composites, and foam. In In- dustrialized and Automated Building Systems, the author explains the capabilities and range of robotic machines and how they can be coded to do anything from mixing and dispensing concrete to brick laying and even driling in fasteners.! These production machines are becoming reality. For example, research currently conducted in Loughborough University in partnership with Foster and Partners in the United Kingdom is developing a concrete printer. With the input of a digital model, full-scale components could be printed in mortar using material dispenser nozzle moving on a track. Similar technology is being developed by Behrokh Khoshnevis of Contour Crafting, who imagines this technology being engineered into full-scale printers capable of printing entire residential structures one after another. These technologies not only hold po- tential for sparking innovation in design but can also efficiently provide mass housing in times of need. ‘Automated building cuts down on material waste since error is teduced and cuts can be arranged to minimize scraps. By thinking of architecture in terms Notes 1A Wareszawsk, Industialized and Automated Building Systems (New 2, clmatexorg of components and customized large-scale products, one can build in features commonly found in the industrial design field, such as the ability to upgrade or interchange. Closing the life-cycle loop of con- struction materials has been ignored in the field of architecture and results in the production of for 20-25 percent of landfill waste.” According to the Environmental Protection Agency, construction waste includes concrete, wood, asphalt, metals, bricks, glass, plastics, and excavated trees from site clearing. Materials are thrown away during construction and buildings are demolished using methods that leave no chance for harvesting reus- able materials. The attention that is given to the assembly of a building can also be performed in re- verse. Products as simple as a flashlight and as com- plex as an airplane are designed to be assembled and also disassembled and refurbished. By consider- ing the end of a building's life cycle as much as the beginning, materials can be designed to be disas- sembled from components in a form intact enough to be reused or to be disposed of properly. Struc- tures almost always outlast the users or function of the building. The owner or operator of the building can change, or there may be a need for a different program. By designing flexible and interchangeable architecture, the life of a building can be extended. By rethinking the way we construct, architecture as a discipline can evolve. Considering the plethora of production and design tools available to designers today, we are now able to reconsider not only the forms we can create but how rich in purpose architectural work can be. Collaborating with other disciplines is easier as archi- tects, through their tools, can incorporate more types, of data during the design process. The old method of factory production is now more than the ability to make architecture in quality; itis an experimental platform where we can learn how to make better architecture. Instead of being limiting, our tools can finally be enabling. ‘Bibulograpny Bender, RA Crack nthe Rear View Minor: A View of Industinlized Bui: ing (New York: Van Noetrand Reinhold Company, 1879) “Habitat: Some Lessons. The Canadian Architect October 1967 Intemational Counc tor Buling Research, Studies, and Documentation, Towards Industalized Buildings (Ameterdam: Elsevier, 1068). Salto, Moshe. For Everyone a Garden (Cambridge, MA: Mataachosetts Inattute of Teohnolagy, 1974),Scott Silverstein No matter how well a structure is built, it will not last forever. Structural engineers long ago developed the idea of a “service life,” in which a structure is designed to be structurally du- rable for a given number of years after con- struction (commonly fifty years for buildings today).’ But modern buildings rarely last even that long—owners change, demands change, and there inevitably comes a day when a structure no longer serves its original purpose. Moreover, end of life for a building generally means end of life for the bulk of its constituent materials. Conventional construction methods create heavily integrated building systems that cannot easily be dismantled piece by piece, so most buildings are demolished, reduced to rubble, and sent to a landfill. The standard life cycle of a building is a linear process (from construction to useful life to de- molition), and eliminating waste and reducing demand for new materials requires convert- ing this into a cyclical process that maximizes reuse and minimizes waste of resources. Design for Disassembly (DfD), also known as Design for Adaptability and Deconstruction, is an emerging initiative that reflects this goal. In particular, DD believes that what happens toa structure at the end of its life should be considered in design. Given that a new structure will one day be torn down, designers havea responsibility to plan the building such that waste is minimized at the end of the building's life. Design for Disassembly: Closing the Materials Loop without Sacrificing Form Contextual and systenic design 119 Three facets of DfD will be addressed here. First is adaptability: a building's spaces should be easy to reconfigure for different uses, extending a build- ing's service life indefinitely. Second is decon- structability: it should be physically and financially possible to take a building apart and recover its constituent components. Third is reusability: the salvaged components of a building should be easy to use again, requiring minimal additional manufacturing. Notable among sustainable con- struction initiatives, DfD is particularly concerned with structural systems, which comprise more than 50 percent of the building weight and, traditionally, have the lowest potential for reuse.? DID stresses an increased collaboration of the architect with the structural engineer, as well as the service engineers (responsible for designing building utili- ties, HVAC, and other systems), to make reuse a viable option, Extending the Service Lite The term “service life” usually refers to the period for which a building's structural systems are designed to carry their loads: a technical upper limit on the building's useful existence. At the end of its technical life, a building is usually unsafe for habitation, and its structural components may have deteriorated such that they cannot be salvaged. But designers, as well as real estate owners and financial backers, may find it useful to define a second type of service life. This is the functional life, the period for which a building serves its in- tended purpose.’ DfD is concerned with extending a building's functional life through adaptability and also, by extension to the life of its components, through deconstructability and reusalConverted Ea 3m Factory Exterior as cheaply as possible to serve their intended purpose and with little regard to aesthetics, the buildings today evoke the quaint lifestyle of a bygone era. In modern developed countries, the building techniques used to build these factories are unusual: bricks, for instance, are applied as afagade but rarely as a load-bearing wall.” There- fore, the exposed bricks and concrete mushroom columns lend real estate value to the East Boston condominium units shown, and these components have a high salvage value as well. It is hard to imagine that a person could ever feel a similar nos- talgia for a hunk of steel, but one must distinguish between “sentimental” salvage value and structural salvage value. In the correct market, any element that can be detached from a building still In good condition has a potential for reuse. ‘Component-Level Strategies Finally, component-level strategies involve mak- ing individual elements of the building easy to separate, Proper connection design in particular can make the difference between a component that gets scrapped and one that is salvaged for reuse. Economically, connections represent up to half the cost of construction and are responsible for most design, fabrication, and erection issues.” Moreover, connection design may dictate the condition of the structural elements—columns and beams—when they are salvaged for reuse. Most connections use either mechanical fixings (such as bolts) or chemical fixings (such as welds and construction joints) or a combination. A chemical connection is difficult to remove cleanly. A me- ‘Converted East Boston Factory. Typical Condominium Unit, chanical connection is more desirable, though it often leaves holes that require patching to make the member complete again. Some connections require elements to be coped, or trimmed to fit in a certain position, while others keep elements intact. Accessibility of connections is another major is- sue that determines how easily a structure may be dismantled piece by piece. The challenge to engineers and architects is to satisfy strength con- straints while minimizing damage to the elements. Numerous component-level strategies are show- cased in a typical IKEA retail facility.® The basic structural system is a steel column and open-web truss system, Interiors are left unfinished, with structural members and connections exposed for easy identification and access. (The interiors simultaneously embrace the system-level strategy of defining spaces with nonstructural, reconfigu- rable partition walls.) In addition, IKEA facilities are built with a slab-on-grade spread footing where possible, which is not only cheaper to construct than a deep foundation but also permits faster, more economical deconstruction. Drilled shafts and driven piles, which are difficult to remove and almost impossible to reuse, are avoided in favor of this shallow foundation. Returning to the above ground portion of the structure, it may be noted that steel has an exceptionally high potential for reuse among theExposed Structural System in an IKEA Retail Facilty standard building materials today. Individual ste! members are versatile and durable, Extruded members are factory-made with low tolerances to a standard system of shapes, making it relatively easy to match a salvaged member with a buyer. Today, 11 percent of the world's structural steel! is reused after demolition. Of the remaining 89 percent, 87 percent is recycled and only 2 percent is sent to landfill’? One limitation of steel is its tendency to rust and deteriorate over time. If a bolted connection becomes rusted into place, disassembly will be hindered and may cause damage to the members, diminishing their usefulness as reusable parts. The same is true for clamped friction connections. Perhaps for this reason, a specialty steel system developed in the early 2000s, Quicon, has not received widespread market attention despite its proven ease of assembly. Developed by the Stee! Construction Institute, a consultant based in the United Kingdom, Quicon furnishes steel beams with integral shoulder bolts, and T-brackets to cre- ate connections. The T-brackets include a series of keyhole-shaped notches that slide onto the shoulder bolts on-site.”° Unfortunately, the main advantage of this system—a connection that can be deconstructed without damage to the mem- bers~may be overshadowed by an expectation that the connection will rust in place and defeat its purpose. With any system, designers can ease the Contextual and systenic deston 123 threat of steel deterioration by specifying galva- nized steel, cladding the members, or otherwise protecting structural components from the ele- ments. This principle applies to all steel construc tion, of course, but itis particularly relevant to DID. Concrete has a far lower potential for reuse than steel. There is no way to reorganize or reuse piec- es of a cast-in-place concrete structure, especially a reinforced concrete structure with a continuous rebar cage (virtually all concrete structures are reinforced in this way), because there are simply no distinct pieces. Even recycling concrete is not eco- nomically viable, at least in the usual sense of re- cycling, After a concrete building is demolished, or waste concrete from a new construction is broken down to be hauled away, whatever tensile strength the concrete had between particles is effectively gone. Concrete made from recycled aggregate is not as workable or durable as concrete made from virgin aggregate, yet it requires the same input of Portland cement, so decreases in energy input required or carbon dioxide released are trivial?" The best possible end-of-life scenario for cast in-place concrete is probably “downcycling’ to a fill or road base, which is better than a landfill but certainly does little to close the materials loop. There is hope, however, for precast concrete. In contrast to cast-in-place concrete, precast con- crete may be produced in regular-sized individual pieces that can potentially be detached from one another during disassembly, like steel members. (One way to ensure precast systems are de- constructable is by connecting the pieces with mechanical fasteners such as anchor bolts, leaving room for thermal expansion to allow cracking. Another tactic is to use pieces that naturally inter- lock, like tunnel forms, thereby avoiding the need for any additional fixing at all. The relatively com- mon practice of casting corbels into concrete col- umns, for example, allows almost a gravity support system for floor joists and roof purlins. No matter what material is used for the structural system, it is evident that architects must work closely with engineers to implement the principles that make DID a reality124 Conclusion The principles of DfD suggest many strategies for enabling the disassembly of a building through decisions made in the design phase. These decisions depend on the architect maintaining a dialogue with the structural engineer and the service engineers. All parties will be required to make concessions. The structural engineer might need to settle for a load-carrying system that is far from optimal—specifying a heavy bolted con- nection where a simple fillet weld would otherwise do the job; specifying an extended connection where a regular one would require coping of the beam flanges; pethaps specifying larger members than necessary to reduce the need for stiffeners. The service engineers must agree not to follow the standard practice of threading utilities through structural components, and instead to keep all systems independent to facilitate disassembly. Most of all, the architect must deal with a new set of constraints on what forms are physically Notes 1. Asko Saja. Intagrated Life Cycle Design of Stuctures (London: Spon Press, 2002), p. 18. 2, Mark O Webster and Danie! T Costello. “Designing Structural Systems Extend a New Budding’sUsell Life and Pre Bulking Structures” (Procaedings of the Deconstruction and Materials Reuse Conference, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2002) 4. Sara. lntograted Life Cyele,p. 24 ©, William Alin Storer. The Architecture of Frank Loyd Wright: & Com plete Catalog, updated third edition (Chicago: Unversity of Chicage Press, 2007) . 237, 6. Stewart Brand. How Buildings Lea: What Happens ater The (New York: Penguin Books, 1984), p. 88. 27. Webster and Costs, “Designing Structural Systems for Deconstrue tion” Durmevc and Brouwer “Design Aspects of Decomposable Bul ing Structures p. 20, 8. Webster and Coatela “Designing Structural Syste tion” po Ibid, 6 10. Bradley Guy and Nicholas Ciasimbol Bult Envtonment. City of Seale and Pennsyvani ve But for Deconstve possible, fulfilling each project's purpose yet al- lowing for adaptation or deconstruction should ‘that purpose change. But restrictions breed creativity, as the saying goes, and in close collaboration the architect and the engineers may discover elegant solutions that would never have been dreamed of otherwise. The gap between vision and reality, between beau- tiful, functional spaces and transparent structural systems easy to take apart, can be narrowed. The additional costs associated with separating building systems and with the actual process of dismantling can be reduced, to the point where DiD is competitive or even more economical than conventional design. Only time will tell how DfD will be implemented in a world of rapidly dwindling resources, but it is the duty of the architect to take the initiative to reduce the building industry's vast energy requirements through emphasizing ‘the simple principle of reuse. ntp://yourkingcounty govsoldwaste/greenbuilding/documents/Design_ {or Disassembly-quide pd (azcessed 17 June 2011), tural Desig for Adaptabilty and Deconsiruc: the Materials Loop and Increasing Bung '2007 ASCE Structures Conference, Long Beach, CA, 2007): p. 1. 18, Webs tion p38. 14 Ibid, 9 4 15 bid, 88 16, Graham W Owen tions (London: Butterworth, 1988), p. 128. 17. Guy and Ciarimbot. “Design fr Die 18, Elma Durmisevic and Nico Noor. "Re-use Potent of Steel in Buiiing 18, Construction’ (Proceedings ofthe CIB TG 39-Design lor Deconstruc tion and Materia Reuse Conference, Delt, Netherlands, 2003), 3 20, "Stoel Construction Intute” Mip:/www atos-ici org (accessed 8 May 2008), 21, Lauren Kun. “The Greening ofthe Concrete Industry: Factors Contributing to Sustainable Concrete” master of engineering thesis, MIT, 2008)». 3 22. Webster and Costalio. Designing Sirctual Syste tion” p10 snd Costello, “Designing Structural Systems for Deconstive for Deconatuc:Digital Tools in Azadeh Omidfar and Dan Yeissaan When your house contains such a complex of piping, flues, ducts, wires, lights, inlets, outlets, ovens, sinks, refuse disposers, hi-fi re-verberators, antennae, conduits, freezers, heaters-when it contains so many services that the hardware could stand up by itself without any assistance from the house, why have a house to hold it up? When the cost of all this tackle is half of the total outlay (or more, as it often is) what is the house doing except concealing your mechanical pudenda trom the stares of folks on the sidewalk? -Reyner Banham, “A Home is Not a House” (1965)' The discourse on semantics of “vernacular” is inconsequential. What matters is the localized knowledge base of climatic responsive formal techniques/operations at scales ranging from the body to the city that have been underutilized or “lost” since the advent and subsequent reliance on “active” systems, or those that rely on electri energy to produce environmental effect. Amos Rapoport, “Defining Vernacular Design’ (1990)? Design with Climate: The Role of Analysis of Site-Specif Contextual and systenic design 125 Computational c The proliferation of new digital tools for computa tional analysis in parallel with improved fabrication techniques enables the potential for radically rein- vented passive architectural systems, closing the long-standing schism between architectural and engineering design processes. These techniques may be based on either vernacular methodologies or wholly new forms yet untested. For example, the Hewlett Packard Software Campus in Bangalore, India, designed by Rahul Mehrotra Architects, and the DSW Building, by Sauerbruch Hutton in Berlin, both critically employ digital climate-design tools to create novel formal architecture. They employed “high technology” in the design phase to engage architectural form as the climate systems, and thereby reduced the necessity of mechanical/elec- trical technologies during the lifetime of the build- ings. In these cases architecture can be seen, from the moment of inception, as a technological device able to employ basic principles of physics in the design and construction of a finished architectural product. Through well-integrated design process es, such elemental principles as aerodynamics, optics, and thermodynamics can be integrated to “thicken” formal strategies and spatial organiza~ tions, instead of layered on as discrete systems, as lamented by Banham. One measure of contemporary architectural design is its effectiveness in creating positive environ- mental changes, whether the ‘silver bullet” of CO, emissions reduction or decreased dependence on fossil fuels and associated lowering of energy: A . . ‘ ' Li t Ld ae eal ees J134 ci ustainable Developments Chris C. L. Yan The start of the design process is usually signified by the execution of the design contract, followed by the design kick-off meeting. Everyone is introduced and the protocols for the design process are communicated, setting the ground rules. The client describes the project, sometimes provides a budget, and asks the design team to come back with a concept for approval. This process may suffice for traditional developments, but is not adequate for the successful design of sustainable develop- ments. Given the growing awareness of the potential impact of climate change, the transformation from traditional developments to sustainable developments has begun and is an issue of increasing focus in the public domain. To facilitate this transforma- tion, the client has a critical role to play to ensure that sustainable developments are actually sustainable. To increase the chance of achieving sustainable designs, the design process for the client starts well before the kick-off meeting. During this phase the client needs to set the brief, determine the goals, calculate the budget, assemble the design team, and set up an integrated design process environment. The role of the client in this respect is pivotal, enabling the whole design team to operate as a collaborative entity to achieve successful delivery of the design services. Clients come in many forms, from a single person with no building background to a property developer who employs a full suite of professionals. This essay is focused on the latter group of clients whose in-house professionals offer the potential to proac- tively contribute to the design process. Furthermore, | write from the perspective of building design to give my analysis a specific frame of reference.Contextual and systenic design 135 Setting the Without an end user, there would be no end product. Therefore one must start with the end in sight and develop a brief that describes the requirements of the end user. It should be noted that the end user may or may not be the client, depending on the business model of the project. The physical requirement of uses, functions, and dimensions provides the basis from which the design team delivers a design fit for the given purpose. ‘Such is the advancement in the building industry that numerous requirements are gov- ‘emed by prevailing regulations and codes. These requirements include thermal com- fort, ventilation, lighting, water supply, sanitation, use of safe materials, etc. Notably, these aspects reside in the environmental realm, which may give a clue to why environ- ‘mental requirements are commonly not discussed or included in the brief. As a result, environmental requirements are often seen as minimum requirements that comply with codes and regulations. Sustainable development needs to look beyond the mini- mum environmental requirements and exceed them, either by expanding the scope of the brief to incorporate them or by determining a set of goals specific for the purpose. Determining the Goal As in many areas of life, Pareto's 80/20 principle is useful when setting goals with a sustainable agenda. The principle is to determine how to produce the most effective goals with limited physical and financial resources. Maximizing output from minimum input echoes ideas of efficiency and performance. Indeed, sustainable buildings and high-performance buildings share the same parameters: environmental, economic, and social factors. Many design elements reduce energy demand with litle or no capital cost, includ- ing building form, orientation to the sun, prevailing winds, shading and microclimate impacts. Planning efficiencies need to minimize unused spaces that otherwise would create an unnecessary drain on energy. Even the color palette should be considered, not only from the point of view of reflecting radiant heat but also from a maintenance aspect. If fewer cleanings are needed to keep a building looking clean, then less en- ergy would be used. Water demand reduction is most easily achieved through low-flow fixtures and fittings. More challenging is the quest to design out water leakages from the system, since leakage is a major contributor to per capita water consumption. The role of the client in defining the project brief and leading its effective implementation remains critical to tackling such challenges. Construction waste is normally seen as an issue for contractors. However, the design team can take a proactive role in designing for minimum waste. Collaboration with the available supply chain for facade systems can inform the appropriate dimensional modules. A single design module that is fractionally larger than the standard module or exceeds the maximum transportation capacity will necessitate additional cutting and joints. Applied thought at the right time in the design process will have many ben- efits. For many structures the major contributors to their embodied carbon come from“4 The Center for Contemporary Architecture is constituted as a series of pavilions arranged along a path between Gund Hall and recently acquired GSD properties across Sumner Road. The scheme seeks to create a new zone of activity within the growing GSD campus while creating an open and welcoming atmosphere for the public. The cluster of various- sized buildings is intended to be a place to share, discuss, and learn about architecture, an architectural open house. Each pavilion is surrounded by intimate outdoor spaces to allow activity to spill out from the galleries.ILE NP | ml146 itl Each building is constructed of custom lightweight steel and structurally insulated panels. The structural panels allow for an extremely expedient construction process while provid ing a high-quality finished product. The insulated panels further provide high thermal ef- ficiency, reducing heat loads in winter and cooling loads in summer. The buildings are each given a custom corrugation pattern, adding stiffness and stability while allowing for lyrical reflections of the surrounding environment.(ibs aa The gallery spaces are situated along the main path between the GSD and the intersection of Kirkland Street and Sumner Road with the bar and offices situated at opposite corners of the lot. The bar sits along the more public Kirkland Street with the of fices situated along the quieter Sumner Road. The arrangement of the pavilions also creates a series of more intimate yards between them, to be utilized as an expansion of the gallery spaces on the interior. They are spaces to allow for discussion to spill out of the galleries in warmer months.icc ates Creating zero-carbon buildings and winning awards for innovation and sustainable design doesn’t happen every day. More often, it comes when engineers, architects, and the design team work closely together, encouraging an open-minded and enlightened client. ‘As environmental engineers, our role is to facilitate this-to push architects, clients, and Ce eC UR Ue se ea oe eee lca UO ee Re ee Rec cos ee Ree uh tee em a tar eae eee to both the local and global environment. Others may be interested in sustainable build- ing design, but perhaps they are either slightly misinformed or lacking in the necessary ‘education and experience. At the other end of the scale, there are architects who focus on producing iconic signature buildings; in these projects, our role becomes about working to influence the design to meet legislative requirements while providing a comfortable envi- Te ua Ue Reet a Runs 7 eee Tt nme nee eed cu aa eon oon the new headquarters for the National Trust, is instantly recognizable and pushed the Pee ede rune cae eee eu ek eee eed ee Nae Rec eon ee ety Regardless, itis important that architects have an understanding of the role passive design can play in reducing building carbon emissions and providing exemplary internal environ- DER aie en ne ky early as possible in the design process, influencing initial design concepts to respond to local site constraints such as noise or overshadowing, and considering predominant winds and solar orientation. Developing this approach to reducing carbon emissions without adding to the cost is fundamental. As a starting point, we need maximize the use of passive or bioclimatic design. Engineering the form, fabric, structure, and envelope of the building can do the majority, ‘of conditioning in its internal environment. This ranges from high levels of insulation and Cee ene Maan eee eesSeveral tools, software programs, concepts, | and-approaches-appear—and-reappear—as-teans— strive te: identify the optinal solution to | : i .(ey fh iu HI Fe) neg a moa Pe a ee a sialic Peli elt patie Lato yh SST LS SE GH aS SH SSS SE166 Algorithms in Des Uses, Limitations, and Development Lee-Su Huang The past twenty years have seen rapid advanc- es in the proliferation and application of digital technology to the architectural field, which have profoundly affected the way architecture is conceived and constructed. Traditionally, the essence of an unbuilt building has always been explored through the construction of physical models and drawings, conveyed to the contra tor through 2D representational techniques such as plans, sections, and detail drawings. New digital design technologies have made it possible to conceive a building from con- ceptual design development to construction management almost entirely within the virtual space of the computer. Within the realm of digital design, algorithms represent one of the forefronts being currently explored due to their potential application in the design and con- struction environment. The use and purpose of algorithms is being hotly contested within the design profession; questions have been raised about the authorship and authenticity of designs produced by a process-based program. Ultimately, algorithms are tools, logic-function processes that can be applied to simplify com- plex tasks, automate massively mundane and repetitive operations, and explore possibiliti unattainable (for all practical purposes) within ‘the confines of human cognition. This essay will discuss some of the possible applications of algorithms in architecture, citing examples that have been carried out or are under develop- ment, and also projecting into the future possi- bilities of its application within the architectural design and construction context. ilar Currently there are two leading trends in the use of algorithms within the architectural context: one deals with the overall strategies of schematic design in its many disparate forms, including generative form-finding processes, imizations responding to certain criteria, and emergent design behavioral systems that explore the use of algorithms in the larger con- text of the scheme as a strategic stance. The second major trend is the use of algorithms in the production phase of a project, as in the au- tomation of hugely repetitive tasks to increase efficiency and precision, or the translation of a predetermined schematic design into detailed fabrication documents for use in the digital fabrication production ch In parallel, construction automation and digital fabrication are also fields that have seen sub- stantial development in the past twenty years. Buildings such as the Bilbao Guggenheim by Frank Gehry demonstrate the mass-customiza- tion abilities of modern construction and fab cation technologies. However, as digitally driven forms and design explorations gain complexity, algorithms often present the only solution to dealing with the highly irregular geometries present in such projects. The technical aspects and digitally driven processes that are practi- cally impossible with manual human labor is what make the architecture truly digital, and al- gorithmic processes essential to its existence.Beijing National Aquaties Center PTW Architects, CSCEC, CCDI, Arup, 2004-2007 Case On Beijing National Aquatics Center The first example is the Beijing National Aquatics Center, also known as the Water Cube. A collabo- ration among the China State Construction and Engineering Company, Australia-based PTW Archi- tects, and Ove Arup Structural Engineers, the Water Cube is a space frame covered with ethylenetetra- flouroethylene panels configured as an array of polyhedra. The solution uses a configuration called the Weaire-Phelan structure, which mixes two cells of equal volume, an irregular pentagonal dodecahe- dron and an irregular tertrakaidecahedron, trun- cated at an arbitrary angle to convey an organic and random sense to the structure despite the overall array being totally regular. The discovery of the Weaire-Phelan structure or “foam configuration in 1993 by Trinity College Dublin physicist Denis Weaire and his student Robert Phelan was the re~ sult of running mathematical simulation software to find an optimal solution to the problem of partition~ ing space into equal-volume cells using the least interface area, or in other words what is the most efficient bubble foam? Translating this highly irregular structure into some~ thing buildable is a challenge best tackled with algorithmic processes. Using the wireframe model of the structural centerlines, a Visual Basic routine in Microstation was created to automate the pro- cess of translating the wireframe model into a steel structure model, bridging the link between the engi- neering and analysis model to the working 3D CAD model. With a total of 22,000 steel tubes, 12,000 nodes, and 4,000 different cladding panels, the project would have been practically impossible to produce with manual labor within the given develop- ment timeframe. By the conclusion of the project, the production process had been largely automated through scripting. One program generates the entire Conputation and Design Optinization 167 Facade: Construction phote geometry from scratch, based on the characteris~ tics of the Weaire-Phelan foam and the building envelope, while a structural optimization routine was written to assign member sizes to all steelwork and joints, and another to translate the structural analysis model into a 3D CAD model suitable for outputting construction drawings automatically Looking at this particular example and other similar schemes that apply algorithmic geometric principles as integral parts of the building fabric (such as the Serpentine Pavilion by Toyo Ito and Cecil Balmond, and the Beijing National Stadium by Herzog and de Meuron), an observation can be made regarding the overall characteristics of the designs: they all exhibit an homogeneity that, at the very least, facilitates the optimal application of algorithms to gene ate the bulk of the building's structural framework with minimal manual intervention. This purity of the architectural scheme inherent to the building typology makes possible the universal application of algorithms, while other more site-specific and function-specific building typologies would have required much more manual fine-tuning to allow the algorithms to respond to local conditions. itis appar- ent here that algorithms are suited to run through iterative processes of similar overall schemes, but are not as suited to adapting to localized variations where input parameters are so disparate that the expected reasonable outputs cannot be generated, such that the algorithm “breaks.”182 Fernando Pereira Mosqueira Optimization tools have suffered from a lack of a development during past decades. Before comput- ers, small problems were resolved analytically, and these studies led to research on methods to opti- mize any given function. Among the methods, conju- gate gradient method (CGM) and line search (LS) were proven to be the most efficient for structural optimization. Several software companies, such as Optistruct (Altair Hyperworks), implemented this type of tool, but the high price and the substantial knowledge required to use it limited the softwar high-tech engineers. Furthermore, the complexity of this type of software does not meet the require- ments of typical users, who just want to catch a glimpse of what kind of geometry and sizing would be optimum given a set of constraints. Here I try to explain a way to accomplish structural shape and size optimization at the same time in the MATLAB environment. The results are a variety of optimized structures, ranging from a simple 4 x 4 meter canopy toa long-span roof (double and single plane). to Structural System Space frames are structural systems employed when large spans are required either in one dimen- sion (bridges, buildings) or two dimensions (roofs). As three-dimensional structures composed of one~ dimensional elements, they are light, elegant, and transparent. This system was fully implemented after the industrial revolution, when steel was established as a construction material. As with any structural system developed through human history, it took some time to completely understand its idiosyncra- sies. Currently, concrete (reinforced and post-ten- sioned) and steel are the most widely used materials for space frames ‘(Clockoise from lef) Form Finding In contrast to the traditional method of designing a structure, in which elements are sized given the geometry and loads, form finding has a different approach. Given the structure's loads and constraints such as stresses, deflections, and geometry, form- finding methods search for the best geometry that achieves these conditions. Ton PA, Seve Ccomety Seles etiog Sees Loads sees eametry Detctons foorFedng Watbod Conceptual diference between form finding and conventional methods Methods Numerous form-finding methods have been devel- oped in recent decades, closely related to the devel- opment of computer-based structural software; here | will focus on two of them: the force density method and dynamic relaxation. Both are based on the finite element method. Force Density Method First, the space frame has to be relaxed to minimize energy while respecting several constraints such as fixed points and stresses. This method is one of, the simplest algorithms developed for form finding, The principle that drives this method to convergence is the nodal force equilibrium. Every node is affected by its neighbor nodes, which subject this node to forces. In the appropriate geometry, the result ofFMD node equilibrium Form-Finding: Sidney Myer Music Bow ‘Soap film adopting pure tansile shat Gaudi polyfunicular model Conputation and Design Optinization 163 these forces is equal to zero. Before convergence, however, the result will have a certain direction; this vector indicates the direction and distance to move this node. Because of the characteristics inherent to this method, perfect convergence is never achieved Thus accuracy for convergence has to be relaxed to get final results. For this method, mass is lumped at every node, and relationships between neighboring nodes are defined in terms of stiffness. As a result, the system oscillates under influence loads until convergence. The conceptualization of the method consists of several masses linked by springs. Furthermore, influ- ence loads are applied considering dynamic effect in the conceptual system. To accelerate convergence, adding some damping to the system is highly recom- mended: Difference between Structural Form Finding and Form Making It is important to point out the difference between structural form finding and form making. Form finding uses available computational tools to obtain efficient structural shapes (pure axial forces). Many methods are available, but all base their process and therefore the final shape on the use of pure axial forces in all of the members. Form making is the use of computational tools to add constraints to the design and rational ize, through a mathematical/physical artifact, the geometry developed. There is no objective func~ tion behind the whole process, however, and so the final shape cannot be claimed to be efficient in terms of structural design. Pure Optimization Approach The form-finding methods mentioned are based on regular grids to obtain tensile structures. How- ever, this does not always favor weight optimiza- tion because of the lack of sizing included in those methodologies. To get the optimal shape and sizing through the range of possibilities, optimization meth-104 ‘Comparison between Gradient Descont {arcen] and Conjugate Gradient Method [red] ods define an objective function (usually volume, price, or any efficiency coefficients desired for the structure), which will drive the design/optimization process. Among the optimization techniques are optimization by differential calculus (leads to mini- mize the weight or the cost of an element by solving differential equations), optimization by mathematical programming using graphical methods, and opti: mization by search methods, such as interpolation methods, conjugate direction and gradient methods, and direct search methods. Conjugate gradient method (CGM) is implemented in a general finite element method script to obtain optimum shapes for a range of structures. The main idea of the gradient method is to calculate the gradient of the objective function for every iteration (concentric ellipsoids) and move a certain step(s) parallel to this calculated gradient. For every step, constraints are checked. Convergence is achieved when the objective function is impossible to reduce while satisfying constraints. The conjugate method varies step size every n itera~ tions (user defined) and changes slightly the gradi- ent direction to accelerate convergence. The method starts at a point given by the user XO. Following the CGM pattern, the final solution comes to be X. Program Description As a simplification, the typologies of structures cov- ered were limited to reduce the number of problems solved. Next, assumptions and decisions are sum- marized for reader ease. ‘One-Dimensional Elements Considered There is a wide available range of commercially manufactured structural members. Cross-sections can be square, rectangular, or circular. This case deals with circular, hollow sections. Available radii and thicknesses are considered during the optimiza- tion process. Because of the nature of the software (MATLAB), a limited number of variables are pos- sible to optimize. Hence all of the elements have the same cross-section. Using a more powerful optimi- zation tool, complete size and shape optimization could be accomplished. This is considered to be more appropriate, but better software was not avail- able at the time of writing the script. Loads Considered Loading combinations increase enormously the num- ber of constraints to evaluate for every iteration. ‘As a consequence, a single load case of vertical loading is considered in the optimization, as it is ‘the most appropriate for the structures considered. For the larger structures, a distributed load equal to 400 kilos per square meter has been considered. However, 3,000 kilos per square meter has been considered for the smaller structures.Connections Pinned connections (truss) and moment connections (frames) are considered. Some of the problems are solved as a truss, while others are solved as a frame. ‘As a result, comparative analysis is important to un- derstand the different behavior of these two options. Constraints Constraints were chosen to be deflection and stress. A 50-millimeter maximum vertical deflection Results 444 mater canopy with moment connection and single diagon: Teralmase Cross-section thekress| aay mm Conputation and Design Optinization 185 is imposed, while stresses are limited to the Euler buckling load for compression (TP “EI/(6'L)) and to the steel yield stress for tension (285 MPa). Bis the effective length coefficient and varies from B= 1 (both ends pinned) to B = 0.7 (both ends fixed, moment connection). Objective Function For every problem, structural weight is the objective function to minimize. 414 mater canopy with pinned connection and single diagonal Totalmase ‘Groe-sectontcknese| Radius 3216519 mm 18mHenderson Waves: Eollaborati bitte Tgs (oe ere egy In 2004, the newly founded London-based UP Corporation began exploring in a systematic Dea eee aya eeu ecu Me Mea Se eis sions turned out to be large infrastructural interventions with complex structures and simple briefs. We started off fast, but there was a catch: with its simple structures and complex Pee ee eee oer a on nue ca eee aE Contradiction in Architecture, works exactly the other way around. To stay on the safe side, we gave ourselves a couple of years to understand our instruments before reversing priorities (the question is still open at the time of writing). Ree ae MMe cURL OR ee ac Taek eC men am on an oy Pd uC ca ean ec eae ere eR Island of Singapore. The master plan called for proposals to link the Southern Ridges, for Sen eee i Gene ee eta eek eg a ‘oramic views. The international bridge design competition launched in 2003 proposed two al- Ree Rm acu aU Re cha ee Ree a cece ee ee eee i eae eo eR eget mre} ee eer Rm Rec ceca Me In urban design terms, the proposal was simple too: it was to spring from a scenic point off Mount Faber in the foreground and land on the Southwest side of Telok Blangah hill, span- ning some 700 feet over a freeway. Our chosen location for the springing point maximized the visual impact of the structure over the gorge while minimizing its length. The proposed structure would bend gently toward the east and wrap around the peak. It would then recon- SMR et Meee een ite tte le ne Rca Alexandra Link. At the base of the loop, pedestrians walking across the bridge and moving west would pass under the deck to discover its underside. On the first site visit in July 2004 with AKT Director Paul Scott, we found that everything was buried in equatorial undergrowth, eee te Te ee ete ae ae Re Regu No gap-and generally speaking, to do everything-with only one equation. This was actually pos- sible, provided that one caved in a bit and subdivided the domain of application of our func- tions into discrete portions, to address issues as they came. The equation seed we eventually ‘went for was a direct application of IP's research in periodic transformations, as summarized ae = eRe eee Re Pai ee a keer haa are ce) obtained by composing one linear force with two periodic ones.Conputation and Design Optinization 193 The pillow is a classic product of three forces: the first force may be diagrammed as an oblique plane. The second is more complex and gives us a series of periodic oscillations whose surface plot flows in the wavelike course of a sinusoid. And the third (and hairiest, one), is a product of periodic out of phase oscillations that spread in perpendicular direc- tions. Its diagram looks like a weave-like arrangement of peaks and depressions: as the ranges vary, the pillow spits like a cell into two, three, or more swelling bulges, as if tightly held in several places by knots. Using equations, you can write anything you want, As we quickly found out, some of the results we obtained not only looked groovy, but reminded us-rather uncannily, in fact-of forms one could arrive at by more traditional means, say by using Rhino or Maya. Where , everything is possible, but in this case, specific structural considerations drove the process. We stayed away from fancy expressions. Following Paul Scott's advice, we went for a comparatively conservative scheme that maintained the structural integrity and load-bearing capability of the surface's longitudinal lines, a form we could diagram as a succession of arches and catenaries. In hindsight, this was not a bad move, as, having won the competition, we were also required to build it. The overall geometry of the steel structure was—and remains—far from simple: to cross the gap between springboard and landing without going over the prescribed slope, the bridge had to bend in plan, while rising steadily. It also had to undulate, and the deck had to be broken at regular intervals to allow wheelchairs to pause. As a result, somewhere in the background of the form, the periodic motions induced by the equations made it glide out of198 Collaboration Like all realized projects, Henderson Waves is the product of a complicated collaboration. Henderson Waves gave UP its first opportunity to nurture its instrumental priorities in the form of an open dialogue with its engineering colleagues from Adams Kara Taylor. The dialogue has nonetheless been open but tricky, as the engineer can be a closet archi- tect-and the architect a closet engineer. Each has something the other party clearly wants, but neither is willing to give up the perks and priorities of their discipline in the process. There are other demarcation lines. Architects who do not understand the physical mani- festations of structure (physical understood here in the sense of physics) may have a good sense of its mathematical nature, an equally complicated process that does not always. translate into material or sensible things. This is why our colleagues at Adams Kara Taylor are occasionally baffled by our inability to intuit the arithmetic of bending moments, when we are so comfortable with the integration and differentiation of complex equations. This apparent contradiction has nothing to do with adequate preparation or skill it simply comes down to attitude, At heart, the mathematical nature of things is only a game (albeit a ‘complex and risky one, at which one's academic standing, self-esteem, and career options may be gambled away ridiculously early), whereas the physical nature of things is simply a necessity, that is, an inevitable fact of (material) life: without it, buildings would collapse, and we would have nowhere to live. Architects seek out the artificial nature of complexity rather than its physical nature, and in this sense, with its continued emphasis on factual, material, structural, and economic behaviors, the great maturity of the engineering profession may forever elude us. Our contrasted priorities also help explain other apparent contradictions, such as the casual attitude our engineering friends display toward our shared disciplinary inheritance, mathematical geometry. To the enlightened engineer, mathematics after gradu- ation is merely a tool, banished to the fringes of the discovery process and increasingly con- fined to vocational training or calculation software. To the enlightened architect on the other hand, mathematics is not a tool, but an idiom, a language to speak in—and the engineer's conceptual speculations hardly a match for the powerful vehicle of discovery this language affords us, untrammelled by the need to be immediately evaluated and understood. Like all key choices in life, what we might call the ‘architectural and engineering attitudes” have contrastive benefits and trade-offs.Computation and Design Optinization 199 Coda In the early years, UP did not release any renderings of the bridge. Being iconoclasts ina literal sense, we avoided all imagery, especially of the synthetic kind (and even more so of synthetic imagery meant to depict the mathematical surface). What served us well in re- search (where our studios and design experiments were always rendering-free), turned out to be problematic in practice. Throughout the first four years, Henderson Waves received little coverage in Asia, even though the images of physical models we routinely sent to jour- nalists reproduced all the tropes of computer imagery: the reflection, the dynamic camera angles, the dramatic lighting. Our correspondents just couldn't relate to the conventional nature of these images any more than they could understand the hundreds of drawings produced. | suspect that they were finding us a bit unprofessional, perhaps even a bit incompetent. There was some kind of misunderstanding going on, but back then it didn’t, matter. We had waited long enough to get to this point, and could wait some more. In late 2006, the project entered a brief phase of difficult negotiations, and things got a bit tangled for a while. Construction began within eighteen months, and the project was successfully delivered in 2008. Henderson Waves received the Singapore President's Design Award 2010. The project has welcomed 200,000 visitors to date and is featured on more than a million websites. 2. George Lisropoulos-Legendre. UP: The Book of Su AAA Publications, 2003), p. 28 8. hipswwnce 3f Chew Fook Tim, Department of Bilogial Sciences, National University of ‘Singapore. Alea of interest an online artclepubliehed around the tine of UP's consultancy wih Certsoutce, which usee DNA test {oidentiy legal logs: htp/ wow ilegaltogginginfolitem. single. php? news 18/04/20 eource.couk! Assatant ProVera Baranova, Sophia Chang, and Bernard PengComputation and Design Optinization 207 {— Program distribution ve The project sits in the backyard of Gund Hall and frames four views. The main view focuses on ‘Gund Hall; it ocours at the bridge connection between the buildings. Since the connection from the GSD occurs through the bridge, a public entry exists on the north side, on Kirkland Street. ‘A ramping path wraps around the core, encompassing a continuous exhibition space and con necting the public entry to the bridge above. A view is framed by each of the ramp's three plat forms, looking out toward campus and back toward the neighborhood of Somerville,Computation and Design Optinization 203 Program distribution Materials These views are framed additionally by the ends of the office cores, which act both 1s cross-bracing and as part of the three-dimensional truss at the root. This truss sits on top of the core, pinned down by a structural diagrid to the north to support a large cantilever over the porch space facing the GSD backyard.f aie is218 Anelsie diagrams In the process of developing the hairs as exhibition cases that would carry the content of seeds yet allow light to enter the space and illuminate it, we focused our research on trans- parent materials that could act like fiber optics, such as acrylic, polycarbonate, and glass. With AKT, we did series of tests to understand the properties of a number of materials, that would represent the pavilion’s “hairs.” Tables of analysis guided us through options, which would affect the hairs’ length, thickness, and proximity. The tests were initially carried out in the United Kingdom and later in China; finally a material was chosen and incorporated into the overall design The engineers approached a company that would run a series of tests to validate its struc: tural abilities and its exact properties. In parallel, they developed a program that worked out the geometry of the pavilion based on a set of structural and aesthetic parameters. This program produced the drawings necessary to build the pavilion’s structural compo- nents. Together with the architectural and mechanical drawings, they formed the construc- tion set that the contractor would use to fabricate the elements. At the end of the development phase, the soft, hairy object had became a structure that encased the content and hovered above an unfolded, textured landscape, which would act as a park for visitors. Working with seed morphologists from the Royal Botanical Gardens of Kew, seeds found a new home at the tips of the transparent hairs and gave their name to the hairy object: A Seed Cathedral During the design development period numerous challenges appeared, and finding solu tions required long conversations among team members, stakeholders, and the client. The aim was to exhaust all options to be sure that the decision made was the most suitable and always integrated with the design. The team tried to avoid finding solutions that would make the project look fragmented and inconsistent or subvert the main goal of producing a unified piece of design.Computation and Design Optinization 219 Following the client's decision to to China to find contractors and fabricators. We worked with a contractor and built a piece of the structure to make sure that our intent had been communicated and also to develop some of the details in collaboration with them—making them feel part of the team through this process and embracing their approach. The material tests were repeated to reassure the Chinese authorities that the pavilion would be structurally sound and able to welcome 8 milion visitors in just six months. ynstruct the pavilion in Shanghai, the team traveled The team was in daily communication to make sure that all necessary tests were cartied out appropriately to minimize risks. Close collaboration with the contractor was key, as it helped us to identify solutions that would ease the budget and facilitate construction while assisting with the build methodology. Two notions were key in our design concept: “buildability” and innovation. The consultants (and specifically the engineers) tried to embed these ideas in every aspect of the project at every stage. Collaboration with the local design firm was also essential in ensuring that our design followed local rules and regulations. During the construction phase, when the main part of the team was formed in Shang- hai-the contractor, project manager, and local design/construction firm representa: tives-the engineers and other team members remained in London. The architect traveled monthly to Shanghai, attending meetings with the local authorities, fabricators, and contractors in China. What was crucial at this phase for us, as the consortium representatives, was to coordinate, lead, and direct these conversations that were hap- pening on a challenging geographical scale. Understanding and translating everyone's ideas, communicating the structural and environmental values of the design, and tack ling the social and political issues was part of our role at this stage.The fneroene 0 Ear ol eyTerms and Conditions of the Star Architect The following terms and conditions of the Star Architect are here by incorporated in and made part of the Agreement for Professional Services (mean- while celestial analogies concurrently demonstrate the limits of stardom): 1. The Star (hereafter referred to as ‘Star") Defined. in the context of Hollywood's television and film industry, a Star is someone whose fame is bright and all-consuming—recognized widely throughout national and global media, in which the name is synonymous with visibility. Publicizing the actress or actor ‘starting’ in the film is central to the market- ing strategy where the Star is a primary object of interest. The ‘star system” involved the creation of glamorous identities and even artificial perso- nas, in which names and personal histories were fabricated ex rihilo. Viewers are enticed to watch a film based solely on the known Star, for the image, not necessarily out of interest in the production or even the genre! 2. The Star Architect (hereafter referred to as *Star Architect") Defined. A version of this celebrity status is also found within the architectural profession. The Star Architect is an individual who generates media attention through the promotion of writings, lectures, philosophical agendas, and built works. Similarly to the Hollywood version of Star, it is not the quality or production of architecture on which value is placed. Rather, it is based around a perverse but pleasur- able obsession with a central figure. Collectors and clients concerned with image commission Star Architects solely based on the visibility their name provides. This subsequently attracts visitors to those buildings who are more fascinated with the exclusiv- ity of Star Architecture than the actual structure? This system of commissioning architecture further disconnects the architect from architecture. 8. The Starchitect (hereafter referred to as “Starchi- tect.” incorporating and expanding the terms of §2, *Star Architect,” above) Defined. A clever portman- teau, Starchitect labels an esoteric subculture of architecture where lingo is coded and privileged members are familiar with masonic handshakes. The Emergence of a New Discipline 227 The invention of this term came from within the discipline of architecture. It is a self-organized no- menclature, defining qualities of how the Starchitect envisions oneself. Identifying physical characteris~ tics of the Starchitect include carrying around thick volumes of personal monographs, sporting black clothing, and wearing large geometric eyeglasses despite still passable vision. Herewith, the Starchi- tect professes grand narratives in architecture (in which, of course, he is a major and defining figure) and is charged with taste making. 4. Fact. Within a celestial system, a supernova mo mentarily outshines an entire galaxy with increasing brightness. As seen through the telescope, visual hierarchy separates the massive glow of the super nova from that of the simple nova or star. A similar rank and hierarchy is found in architecture's star system—supernovas and stars operate on different terms. 5. Reasoning. The Supernova Architect radiates an extreme glow with timely energetic bursts, out- shining fellow Star Architects. Several conditions enhance the Supernova Architect's status includ~ ing number of buildings constructed, geographical boundaries surpassed, and recognition received outside of the architecture community. 6. Heretofore, differing positions regarding the role and relevance of the Star Architect (by said Star Architects themselves) are offered through the fol lowing claims: a. Facts: A noted Star Architect argues for full expo- sure-if architects take a stand against participating in the discourse of the profession and engage ment with a nonprofessional public—it diminishes the value of architecture.” In this argument the Star Architect is an advocate for the star system, claiming that the value of architecture or its cultural relevance hinges on an association between the public and the Star. In these terms, a vital role of the Star Architect is to play the part of a ubiquitous persona in the public eye. She or he must always perform—not professionally, but as the “Architect” strategically scripted onto public stages, expelling grand narratives.*236 RO man bela 1 a0 The Evolution of Architects’ and Engineers’ Roles The industrial revolution created a new way of looking at buildings and infrastructures. Industrial- ized steel began to be used in the building of entire structures and new technical universities created a cadre of experts trained to deal with the new materi- als: iron, steel, reinforced concrete, and pre-stressed concrete.' These events led to the emergence of an autonomous profession, engineering, which was previously a branch of architecture. Despite great late 19% century engineering works such as the Eiffel Tower and the Brooklyn Bridge that demonstrated engineers’ creative capability, form givers and city shapers, the role of engineers remained overshadowed in the mainstream architec~ tural scene. The Bauhaus under Gropius at the time barely recognized the tradition of structural engi- neering. According to a classic work on the Bauhaus, “Gropius included forty-five illustrations, not one of each shows any work of structural art”? Instead, the Bauhaus posited new thinking about technology and design from the perspective of architecture, not, structure. In general, engineering as an equally creative coun- terpart to architecture is not the case today. The architect is still perceived as a creative individual who shapes our built environment and focuses on aes- thetics, while the engineer is viewed as a “technician® who focuses on performance and efficiency, a kind of assistant to architects in solving problems and implementing design concepts. The rise of digital culture in the late 20" century, however drastically altered the educational mode and practice role for A Necessary Resistance Be Ua architects and engineers, which in turn changed the architect-engineer relationship. Further, the rise of sustainability as a global design issue has required a more collaborative relationship between the two dis- ciplines. With these sophisticated layers of change, how will the architect-engineer relationship evolve in the future? Collaboration between architects and engineers has become a frequently debated topic within the two disciplines. What problems does this, collaboration present? How should this collabora- tion be developed in the future? This essay will examine the fundamental differences between the architecture and engineering professions in terms of education and practice. | will also attempt to pro- pose potential changes in the education and practice system, and finally evoke the idea of resistance, which could possibly be embedded within future architect-engineer collaborations. ‘The Differences between Architects and Engineers: Education “Architects are creative, but egotistical, flaky, and self-promoting; Engineers are thorough, but inflex- ible, stubborn, and socially awkward” If these stereotypes are true to any degree, the causes of such tendencies are worth examining, beginning with a look at the differences between the architect's education and that of the engineer. Engineering education is structured linearly, provid- ing students with increasing levels of knowledge and skills, and waiting until all of itis absorbed before asking students to “design.” By rarely encountering ambiguity and uncertainty, engineering students often assume that problems in practice will have singular solutions and one right answer. With a mas-ter's degree in structural engineering, an engineer can analyze and size a predetermined beam or truss without the need to design them. From the initial learning stage, the idea of being a problem solver is embedded in the mindset of engineering students. The studio structure of architecture education, on the other hand, creates a different learning environ ment. Students often encounter problems that are ambiguous and uncertain. There are rarely right answers to their problems, only better or worse proposals. Students are encouraged to be creative and imaginative.' Architects and engineers are thus trained to position themselves in opposite roles, Recent Developments in Architectural and Engineering Education Since the rise of digital culture during the late 20th century, computers have played an increasingly essential role as the analysis tool for structural engi- neering, The graphical method—the only way to de- sign masonry and bridges in the 19" and early 20° century—has been largely abandoned® When the subject is presented through complex mathematical exercises on computers, without the use of visu- alization and approximation methods, engineering students tend to lose their intuitive understanding of structural behavior and are no longer trained to sim= plify problems visually. They become expert in analy- sis, but with litle fostering of their creative imagina- tion® Developments in computation technology have also provided design tools for architecture students. Yet instead of abandoning the visual, architecture students are becoming even more capable of visual- izing and representing design with three-dimensional modeling tools. tis not surprising to see students in architecture schools using elaborate analytical diagrams to illustrate sophisticated layering and as~ sembly of programs and spaces. The essence of this, obsession with visualizing design analysis and the exuberant use of diagrams may not be the factual representation of the performance and efficiency of the design, but rather relates to thepower of im- ages.’ Instead of being factual, these diagrams and images produced by computers are perhaps more “fictional” and even ‘ornamental’ in the realm of architectural representation, The Emergence of a New Discipline 2a7 The introduction of computation technology has changed architecture and engineering education drastically. Instead of bringing the two types of education closer, the technology seems to widen the gap: engineering students get more deeply involved with complex mathematical analysis, without thinking visually like architects; architecture students become focused on the visual, which does not ad~ dress factual and performance aspects. ‘The Differences between Architects and Engineers: Practice In general, when engineering students and architec- ture students leave school, they have already been inculcated with different career perspectives. Engi- neering students are trained almost from the start to be specialists, and join a large office. They are trained to do work of focused scope. They are heavily exposed to mathematics and hence to axioms, which cannot often be challenged. in other words, an aver- age engineering student learns not to challenge. Conversely, architecture students are trained to be more independent. They are told, “You will become a great architect and you should feel free to behave as one’ They are trained to challenge their critics and be proud of their architectural conceptions.® ‘When graduates with such different perspectives enter practice and work together on a project, they may clash. When the “great” architect meets with the. “modest" engineer, the latter does not dare to contra~ dict the architect's requests and is often compelled to find unjustifiable solutions for structures. Or the “great” engineer may meet with the “not-yet-great” architect and authoritatively deny him the realization, of his dream. In the majority of the cases, average architects meet with the average engineers; when professionals with such different approaches to the same problem have equal standing, a greater clash may be expected.° Recent Developments in Architectural and Engineering Practices Today the two professions are drawn together to col- laborate, driven by multiple forces that have emerged since the late 20" century. First, there is a great increase in complexity in the building industry.rr E a - aA me in ae | t | a ‘ual gem am Po al | ereee | be = —) =254 Collaboration Norag Tait Process is as vital to design as it is to production. When embarking on a project, all architects must define the rules of their engagement, and the limits and opportunities that exist. All pieces of work will then be a response that assimi- lates these constraints and opportunities. “Alford Hall Monaghan Morris Project Manual, 2004 ‘An Iterative Design Process There is a common (mis)conception that an architectural design emerges as a pure and able concept, arriving in almost mystical fashion from the mind of a sole genius. This model is often supported in education, as individual students strive to produce the most evolved ver- sions of their designs, to refine their proposals into the purest expressions of their concepts. Itis often perpetuated by the image of the architect in popular culture, and some architects, cheerfully reinforce this mystique. But even for the most brilliant of designers, design is a process, a series of steps that get to a workable solution without ever losing sight of the vision for the project. But how the process is shared, and what steps it breaks down into, varies from architect to architect. Architecture can be considered as art allied to function: it fulfils a briefed purpose as welll as being delightful. The architect's design skill comes in refining this building and program into an architecture with a coherent concept and execution. It requires a design vision, but one that has to resolve the functional aspects of a brief—spatially, structurally, financially, and in terms of construction. The build structure has to provide suitable spaces, allow people to use and inhabit it, be structurally sound, temper the environment-and be a good piece of architecture, offering delight to those who use it, visit it, and pass by it in the city. Design is rarely a linear, predictable process but rather an iterative one, involving analysis and identification of the parameters set for the design, in terms of brief, site specifics, statutory requirements, budgets. Each iteration then responds to and tests ideas, refining them so that an appropriate design and vision emerges. Collaboration In architectural terms, collaboration involves the design disciplines working together, often with the architect as lead designer-sharing knowledge, learning from each other, and building a project that reflects a consensus that this is the best solution. Collaboration among disciplines is an approach that acknowledges the process of design development; it depends on the analysis of the problems and an iterative feedback of design solutions and options to the entireThe Energence of a New Discipline 255 The Model Scheme The Site Specific Scheme at Adelaide Whart team, so that collective decisions are made at each stage. This requires a methodology of pre- sentation where the logic of design moves is explained-transparent and open for comment. In the case of Adelaide Wharf, collaboration involved the engagement of client and con- structor, as well as the design team in a client-led research project on a theoretical urban site, where all parties bought into the process and result. This study, financed by the client, was subsequently used in a competitive bidding process that led to the development of the Adelaide Wharf site. The client set a brief to develop a system for low-cost one- and two- bedroom apartments. This involved presenting each design development for discussion, to be questioned, tested, and commented ona valuable process, but not without its difficulties. Different working processes and expectations are exposed in a very direct way. Collaboration with Client and Engineers Designers generally understand the iterative nature of design, whether they are designing structures, services, or architecture. They expect that as information and parameters become clearer, potential solutions shift. This means that while each discipline is running its own pro- cess and feeding it back to the whole, itis not expected to be the final answer at each stage; a certain amount of abortive discussions are inevitable, and the process is not explicitly linear. With regard to structural and services engineering, without early input on the constraints, architectural design development inevitably falls back on what architects already know, drawn from rules of thumb or precedent, to fil the gaps; or they design optimistically, without under- standing the impact of design decisions, leading to compromises later in the process. Some- times those rules of thumb hold true, when the starting point is similar to projects already done. In the case of Adelaide Wharf, the earlier research project (with the same collabora tors) for the same client, First Base, had established these “rules” to a sufficient extent for the research model to provide a robust framework. The team had tested the design parameters, most of the brief was fairly clear for all parties, and the design was able to progress quickly. This meant that the team was working to established assumptions such as a grid size to suit the apartment module, a flat structural soffit, a repetition with an ease of manufacturing for the structure as well as the facade, and services zones established in the flat layouts for ease of installation and maintenance. But each project is inevitably a new brief, and some of those model rules unraveled in the face of the messy realty of an actual site. This building had to tum comers, respond to an actual context; the apartment sizes and mix had to meet the criteria for the social landlord, the plan-1 0 iiThe Emergence of a New Discipline 259 Without interfering with the perceptual interface between Gund Hall and the surrounding context, while at the same time maintaining the openness of the yard, a building that houses a flexible structural and programmatic system is created. Although the given programmatic functions of the building required a large open gallery space, a lecture space, a bar, and service spaces, these spaces seemed rather at odds with one another. To accommodate this, sectional manipulation is used. By sinking the building underground in the back, it not only allowed for the grass of the yard to extend onto the roof of the building, but also enabled a certain sectional rake necessary for a functional lecture-hall space. Though this space is. larger than what is necessary by programmatic needs, its primary strengths lie in its ability to accommodate gallery events through its large landings and flat walls.268 Supporting structureFive types of wooden panels with different window locations are used for the facade. The window size is limited to maximize the exhibition space inside. The structure system is partly exposed. The panel size follows the module of the main structure, so it can be easily plugged in to the structural system. The panels are randomly sequenced to give the fagade an integrated but rich look. The east-west orientation of the building could reduce the amount of the facade that faces the prevailing winter wind from the west, decreasing the building's energy consumption The building uses skylights as its main lighting strategy. Exhibition space, requiring indirect lighting is located at the low level and offices and public spaces are at the upper level. The roof windows can be partly opened for natural ventilation.Elinate Confort Eollaboration Eur Cog Achieving comfortable internal conditions alongside low-energy outcomes for buildings ee Ree oe eee eC eRe ee eee) pee eR eu eee nue belief in the necessity of an environmentally benign approach. There are many possible ways forward, which need to be discussed with the client. Maintaining appropriate internal comfort conditions with minimal carbon impact is a challenge that requires different solu: Pe ns a ee eu ee een eee Ce eae ac en ce us Believing in the argument, however, is of little merit without fundamental knowledge of the issues that affect the solution to these challenges. The architect must lead the design team toward a holistic design approach through knowledge of the relationships among climate, form, structure, and building services. Initial design decisions relating to building orientation, form, and passive environmental control can have a profound impact on the solutions. The methods of control and the level of active eau internal environments will be strongly influenced by the initial design decisions that affect Eee ac es An interactive design process is required to test concepts and strategies at an early stage Se US ee oe eC ue eer cantante operation of the building. This process requires the design team to have greater levels of understanding of the interactions between separate disciplines’ areas of expertise. The ar- Set ne eke cece Re cect the structural engineer has to be more aware of the thermal performance of the building COU eee eae ee card the role of the building fabric in moderating internal comfort conditions by passive means.Architects and engineers both claim to be designers, though how they define design and the approaches they use to realize it vary widely, Their interaction, however, has created some of the world’s most memorable, enduring, and impressive buildings. The explosion of digital technologies illuminates the complexity and nonlinearity of the process that designers experience I daily, while massively expanding the ability to visualize and represent forms and to analyze their structural engineering behavior. Technology has obviously changed both architecture and engineering, and so also the potential for interaction. That is the subject of the research and discourse presented here. In a course at the Harvard Graduate School of Design attended by graduate students in architecture and MIT graduate students in structural engineering and computation, students, instructors and practitioners have led an experimental exploration of interdisciplinary design. Its subject is design thinking that works within the interfaces, overlaps, seams, or gaps between the disciplinary areas of architecture and engineering.