PROTOTYPICAL STRATEGIES
// OBJECTIVES
Architectural Massing is an effect. It is part of what separates architecture from building. Instead of the building representing its actual material or structure, illusionistic principles are applied to produce varying sensations of massing. Qualities like “thickness” are no longer literally thick and structure not always that which bears load in architecture. The way in which architectural qualities are perceived is at the root massing, as a building is never one single mass.
The purpose of this exercise is to define, understand and discern some of the underlying principles of massing through three parallel strains of experimentation; Form, Visualization and Materialization. Projects are paired up across strains based upon initial assumptions about potential relationships between them. The purpose of each individual student’s experiment is to test, tinker, operate on and explore the potential of their prototype in an effort to postulate a theory about massing; post operandi. Each prototype and each strain biases certain parameters; however all are fundamentally dependent on optical, formal and somatic effects that are a result of the combination of each strain. For example, there are different ways in which a prototype might suggest office layouts or circulation, ways in which the enclosure might conceal or exposes structure, shed/absorb water, reflect/absorb/emit light, work with transparency, opacity or integrate color and ways in which each architect might visualize a project using colors, lighting effects, camera angles, optical, material and aggregate effects. All of these parameters allude to ways in which what is naively understood as surface (enclosure) and structure (cores) has the potential to be amassed.
This exercise is a design experiment. It must exhibit a clear set of 3D modeling, visualization and material techniques which must be visually demonstrated to the class (at large) through models, drawings, renderings and diagrams. Associated images of the project may prove useful.
In most cases, it is best to approach this exercise with little if any reading about the project, solely examining it from as many “base” documents as can be found; plans, sections, elevations and photos. If any context is to be provided, it should be within the larger discourse on massing and enclosures, citing specific innovations and thoughts from our readings.
// THREE PART EXPERIMENTATIONS
Similar to Bach’s “Two and Three Part Inventions” students will be working on design experiments in parallel in an effort to study how they “play off” of one another. Each student will select their given strain to work with for the semester. Initially students will be encouraged in groups of three or four discussing the differences and strategies within strains in an effort to comparatively articulate the differences of each prototype. Each student will familiarize themselves with their individual prototype as well as begin transforming it in the first week.
The second week will devoted to combining aspects of the three strains within each design team. Students will test methods of integrating all three strains based lessons and evaluations of the first week’s experiments.
// STRAIN A: FORM
Working with one of the four massing prototypes begin studying in plan, section and axonometric the assets and potentials of the prototype. Examine what types of circulatory assets it has as well as organizational assets. Begin transforming the interior mass/atrium space and test different possible routing scenarios of office goers, subdivisions of the tower for possible users, densities of office furniture, structural potentials and most importantly its massing effects. Articulate each prototype to amplify its unique characteristics and maintain its autonomy from the other three prototypes. Devote the second week to refining the prototype, integrating aspects of materialization, visualization and examining how it meets the ground.
// STRAIN B: MATERIALIZATION
Working with one of the four materialization prototypes begin digitally modeling a select region of your prototype that captures its most crucial transformations and complexities. Examine what types of materials are being used, what the structural, environmental and optical role of the enclosure is within the overall mass. Develop and use unrolled elevations to show the larger scale optical effects. In week two, begin transforming the enclosure adapt it to your formal prototype. Test and study technical issues related to the massing such as aperture densities, corners and terminating points as well as potential optical effects that augment or camouflage the massing.
// STRAIN C: VISUALIZATION
Working with one of the three visualization prototypes begin dissecting 3-5 stills of each image looking at camera angles, materials, methods of rendering, lighting, narrative and mood. This is more apparent in some projects and less in others. As a result this exercise may require varying degrees of “projection” on the part of the students in order to elicit clear visualization techniques. Using a music video or film artist, adopt the scenography and narrative aspects of the film prototype to the architectural project. The characteristics of the company are less important than the characteristics of the architecture and how it can be transformed. Develop new versions of 1-3 stills adopting the sensibility of the film director. Using post production techniques insert other projects, invent other camera angles, change the color, materials of the façade, the tempo, mood and narrative of the project. Devote the second week to developing these characteristics visualizing the form and materialization prototypes.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
THE MASSING COMPLEX
// OBJECTIVES
Architecture discourse on office space is among the cannons of mid twentieth century modernism. The obsession with un-programmed spaces that are loaded with information and imbued with dynamic organization underpin some of the most innovative office buildings, such as The Lever House, The Seagrams Building and The John Deer Headquarters. These projects are reflective of the image, brand identity, economic and intellectual capacities of the companies that are housed within. Office buildings were among the first to establish the criteria for architectural branding. In dense cities, office buildings such as the Woolworth building and the Gherken use their silhouette by day and their lighting by night to distinguish themselves among the skyline. Meanwhile, in suburban environments, office parks flip the identity away from the silhouette to the site. The office parks, including the landscape and surroundings of each individual (somewhat generic) office box, produce the identity of the company - office work with a lifestyle. One part recreation, one part seclusion, office parks house some of the most creative businesses of the 21st century such as Apple and Nike. Each use the office park as a way to induce and incubate creative thinking and collaboration. As the role of creative offices becomes more competitive, more collaborative and more production-oriented in the early 21st century, the separation of office and lifestyle will continue become ever more collapsed. Traditionally, both office parks and office towers have placed more emphasis on the appearance from the outside than their associated interior lobbies and atria - a reflection of the commodification of office floor space. Exceptions such as Roche Dinkeloo’s Ford Foundation (all interior atrium) and Norma Foster’s Gherkin (the tallest atrium) hint at the idea that there may be “value” in larger interiors within offices; that there is a potential lifestyle component to them. The Massing Complex will examine how the office complex has become more lifestyle oriented and examine how this impacts its visualization, form and materialization. Atrium, core and curtain wall relationships will be reexamined in an effort to entangle the three into a rich mass of organizational and lifestyle space that coordinates new creative types of work space in the 21st century.
// OBJECTIVES
Architectural Massing is an effect. It is part of what separates architecture from building. Instead of the building representing its actual material or structure, illusionistic principles are applied to produce varying sensations of massing. Qualities like “thickness” are no longer literally thick and structure not always that which bears load in architecture. The way in which architectural qualities are perceived is at the root massing, as a building is never one single mass.
The purpose of this exercise is to define, understand and discern some of the underlying principles of massing through three parallel strains of experimentation; Form, Visualization and Materialization. Projects are paired up across strains based upon initial assumptions about potential relationships between them. The purpose of each individual student’s experiment is to test, tinker, operate on and explore the potential of their prototype in an effort to postulate a theory about massing; post operandi. Each prototype and each strain biases certain parameters; however all are fundamentally dependent on optical, formal and somatic effects that are a result of the combination of each strain. For example, there are different ways in which a prototype might suggest office layouts or circulation, ways in which the enclosure might conceal or exposes structure, shed/absorb water, reflect/absorb/emit light, work with transparency, opacity or integrate color and ways in which each architect might visualize a project using colors, lighting effects, camera angles, optical, material and aggregate effects. All of these parameters allude to ways in which what is naively understood as surface (enclosure) and structure (cores) has the potential to be amassed.
This exercise is a design experiment. It must exhibit a clear set of 3D modeling, visualization and material techniques which must be visually demonstrated to the class (at large) through models, drawings, renderings and diagrams. Associated images of the project may prove useful.
In most cases, it is best to approach this exercise with little if any reading about the project, solely examining it from as many “base” documents as can be found; plans, sections, elevations and photos. If any context is to be provided, it should be within the larger discourse on massing and enclosures, citing specific innovations and thoughts from our readings.
// THREE PART EXPERIMENTATIONS
Similar to Bach’s “Two and Three Part Inventions” students will be working on design experiments in parallel in an effort to study how they “play off” of one another. Each student will select their given strain to work with for the semester. Initially students will be encouraged in groups of three or four discussing the differences and strategies within strains in an effort to comparatively articulate the differences of each prototype. Each student will familiarize themselves with their individual prototype as well as begin transforming it in the first week.
The second week will devoted to combining aspects of the three strains within each design team. Students will test methods of integrating all three strains based lessons and evaluations of the first week’s experiments.
// STRAIN A: FORM
Working with one of the four massing prototypes begin studying in plan, section and axonometric the assets and potentials of the prototype. Examine what types of circulatory assets it has as well as organizational assets. Begin transforming the interior mass/atrium space and test different possible routing scenarios of office goers, subdivisions of the tower for possible users, densities of office furniture, structural potentials and most importantly its massing effects. Articulate each prototype to amplify its unique characteristics and maintain its autonomy from the other three prototypes. Devote the second week to refining the prototype, integrating aspects of materialization, visualization and examining how it meets the ground.
// STRAIN B: MATERIALIZATION
Working with one of the four materialization prototypes begin digitally modeling a select region of your prototype that captures its most crucial transformations and complexities. Examine what types of materials are being used, what the structural, environmental and optical role of the enclosure is within the overall mass. Develop and use unrolled elevations to show the larger scale optical effects. In week two, begin transforming the enclosure adapt it to your formal prototype. Test and study technical issues related to the massing such as aperture densities, corners and terminating points as well as potential optical effects that augment or camouflage the massing.
// STRAIN C: VISUALIZATION
Working with one of the three visualization prototypes begin dissecting 3-5 stills of each image looking at camera angles, materials, methods of rendering, lighting, narrative and mood. This is more apparent in some projects and less in others. As a result this exercise may require varying degrees of “projection” on the part of the students in order to elicit clear visualization techniques. Using a music video or film artist, adopt the scenography and narrative aspects of the film prototype to the architectural project. The characteristics of the company are less important than the characteristics of the architecture and how it can be transformed. Develop new versions of 1-3 stills adopting the sensibility of the film director. Using post production techniques insert other projects, invent other camera angles, change the color, materials of the façade, the tempo, mood and narrative of the project. Devote the second week to developing these characteristics visualizing the form and materialization prototypes.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
THE MASSING COMPLEX
// OBJECTIVES
Architecture discourse on office space is among the cannons of mid twentieth century modernism. The obsession with un-programmed spaces that are loaded with information and imbued with dynamic organization underpin some of the most innovative office buildings, such as The Lever House, The Seagrams Building and The John Deer Headquarters. These projects are reflective of the image, brand identity, economic and intellectual capacities of the companies that are housed within. Office buildings were among the first to establish the criteria for architectural branding. In dense cities, office buildings such as the Woolworth building and the Gherken use their silhouette by day and their lighting by night to distinguish themselves among the skyline. Meanwhile, in suburban environments, office parks flip the identity away from the silhouette to the site. The office parks, including the landscape and surroundings of each individual (somewhat generic) office box, produce the identity of the company - office work with a lifestyle. One part recreation, one part seclusion, office parks house some of the most creative businesses of the 21st century such as Apple and Nike. Each use the office park as a way to induce and incubate creative thinking and collaboration. As the role of creative offices becomes more competitive, more collaborative and more production-oriented in the early 21st century, the separation of office and lifestyle will continue become ever more collapsed. Traditionally, both office parks and office towers have placed more emphasis on the appearance from the outside than their associated interior lobbies and atria - a reflection of the commodification of office floor space. Exceptions such as Roche Dinkeloo’s Ford Foundation (all interior atrium) and Norma Foster’s Gherkin (the tallest atrium) hint at the idea that there may be “value” in larger interiors within offices; that there is a potential lifestyle component to them. The Massing Complex will examine how the office complex has become more lifestyle oriented and examine how this impacts its visualization, form and materialization. Atrium, core and curtain wall relationships will be reexamined in an effort to entangle the three into a rich mass of organizational and lifestyle space that coordinates new creative types of work space in the 21st century.
// SITE
One of the most innovative regions for creative technologies and businesses is Taiwan. Cities like Taipei are now competing at an international level in branding Design as part of its cultural capital. The emphasis on design as a cultural product is reflected in how Taiwan has nurtured companies like Giant (bicycles) and HTC (phones) to become international leaders in their respective fields. Projects such as the Taipei Pop Music Center, Taipei Performing Arts Center and Taichung City Opera are similarly supporting Taiwan’s reputation as a design leader in Architecture.
Working with a consortium of academic, commercial and civic partners The Massing Complex will look at how the existing Taipei Train Depot could be converted into a mixed use creative park, harboring some of the most vibrant creative capital of Taipei. The site, located in the hip and emerging Hsinyi district, is under consideration for redevelopment as one of the city’s 26 Urban Regeneration Sites (URS). This particular site is a large tract of land (roughly 16.5 hectares) that is sandwiched between two large event venues – The Egg (a sports stadium designed by Toyo Ito) and The Taipei Pop Music Center (designed by Reiser Umemoto Reiser). Seen as a counter point to the surrounding large event venues The Massing Complex considers how a network of office tower prototypes can be understood as a “cultural park.” The goal of the studio is to produce a collection of intimate, exclusive, small scale micro-cultures that leak into and out of the office complex.
// DESIGN METHODOLOGY
// DESIGN METHODOLOGY
The studio will be developing office tower prototypes based on one of four massing diagrams. These prototypes will be integrated into a “complex” of masses that organize various regions of the site. The complex will be seen as part of the recreational and cultural landscape of the site. Multiple types of mass will be identified and utilized with an emphasis on large scale interiors. Each mass must be understood as a multi-valent “agent” with active participation in the site-landscape. Meaning, it both absorbs resources on the site and generates resources for the site.
The Massing Complex will investigate how masses might manage human activities by both absorbing the cultural resources from the site and emitting office resources into the site. Given that office towers are among the largest consumers of energy the massing will also have to be understood as “generator.” The massing of the core, curtain wall and/or double skins will be enmeshed to consider ways in which each office tower prototype can absorb the surrounding resources and produce generative characteristics – powering themselves and/or filtering the contaminants on site.
A combination of formal, graphic and fabrication strategies will be explored in each team project. Students will be using physical model-prototypes at three different scales combined with renderings, montages and animations to study and develop design strategies. Different from studios where these media may be used toward the end of the design process, students will begin working within each of these media in the first week. A series of rapid “design experiments” comparing massing models, structural models, façade models and renderings will allow students to understand the cultural and architectural potential of their designs in relation to office space and the site. Using each medium, a combination of high tech and low tech practices, manual and machinic processes students will sketch out, repeat experiments and refine design strategies. Brainstorming and post rationalization - drawing upon the results of these early design experiments - will be crucial in forming the conceptual, technical and cultural underpinnings of each design proposal.
//COLLABORATIVE ENTRPRENEURIALISM
This studio is taught by David Erdman with a team of associated Architects including Clover Lee (principal davidclovers), Camille Gaven (davidclovers) and Steven Ma (davidclovers/HKU). The studio is also working in collaboration with Michael Speaks (critic and Dean of the University of Kentucky) and Angie Co (Assistant Prof UKY) and David Tseng (Professor NCTU and Advisor to the Taipei Mayor). The 3 teams from HKU, UKY and NCTU will be developing schemes for the Taipei City Government to consider. By working directly with an office, students will be exposed to methods of rapid design experimentation. Workshops and working directly with the davidclovers’ team, students will gain a clear understanding of how various media can be deployed to assemble and brainstorm on ideas quickly and precisely.
The entire studio will go to Taipei over Reading Week, present work, visit the site and attend seminars by various members of the community. A number of tours are planned collectively for all students and within each strain of each team’s three areas of expertise (see Format for more details). The goal of the trip to Taipei is not only to become familiar with the site, but also to brainstorm with other studios about the project. The culminating work from the studio will appear in an exclusive issue of the Taiwanese Architectural journal DA and will be presented to the Mayor in June 2013.
// STUDIO FORMAT
The structure of the studio is unique. Each of the three University teams will have a different bias - Income and Commercial (HKU), Cultural and Branding (UKY), Civic and Recreation (NCTU). The intention is not to develop a combined Master Plan but for each studio to show how (by biasing one of these areas of interest) the site might develop differently. Each studio project will be developed in teams. Student’s will have a different role within their team focusing on either visualization, form or materialization; each with respectively different media and methods of engaging the problem. Visualization will focus on branding, rendering, layout, graphics and post production. Form will focus on structure, massing, digital modeling and animation. Materialization will focus on facades, fabrication, prototyping and physical modeling. These three areas of focus will be supported by workshops and back and forth exchanges with the studio assistants.
// SCHEDULE
The tentative schedule of the semester is included below and subject to change.
Studio hours are every Tuesday and Friday from 2:00pm to 6:00pm, unless otherwise noted.
A seminar with David Tseng (Advisor to the Mayor)Shu Chang (Architect Taipei), Michael Speaks, a site visit, meeting with the Mayor of Taipei and a series of discussions will take place in Taipei during reading week. Attendance and punctuality is mandatory. Students are expected to work in studio during studio hours.
No comments:
Post a Comment