Digital Fabrication

Interior Render

Cube Transformations

UN Studio

(power point goes here ... if I can figure out how)

Blob Tectonics, or why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy.

In an excerpt titled Blob Tectonics, or why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy, from the book Folds, Bodies, & Blobs author Greg Lynn attempts to define the new emerging technology of blob tectonics. Historically speaking, when attempting to define tectonics of any sort one faces the perplexing dilemma of combining the particular with the general. This combination focuses on melding the traditional structural and special techniques with the overriding idea and parti of the project. Where the study of tectonics becomes slightly muddled is in respect to the blob. The blog is a formal complexity that has yet to be fully experienced. Blobs endeavor to provide “alternative strategies of structural organization and constriction that provide intricate and complex new ways of relating the homogeneous to the heterogeneous or particular.”(169)
There are many examples of artists and architects attempting to use this new and exciting formal strategy to help define art and the possibly a new movement in the architectural world.
One of the first examples of blobs is found not in architecture but in the artistic realm of the film industry. Simply titled “The Blob”, a 1958 original movie, which was later remade in 1988, introduces us to the very basic form and idea of a blob. In these movies a giant alien creature takes on the form of a blob and oozes its way around the city enveloping and digesting all in its path. While these movies present blobs as organisms that “slither, creep, and squirm [while] instigating disgust and queasiness” they also provide a very basic groundwork for the idea of blobs. That is they present an amorphous shape that is able to mold and conform to its surroundings based on a seemingly random set of values. This “complexity involves the fusion of multiple and different systems into an assemblage that behaves as a singularity irreducible to any single simple organization.”(173)
This idea and blobby shape has surpassed late 80’s horror films and entered into the world of architecture through the work of Alejando Zaera-Polo, Farshid Moussavi, Jesse Reiser, Nanako Umemoto to name a few. This exploration into the world of blog is most noticed in these architects’ proposals for the Yokohama Port Terminal. These proposals reveal “both the limitations and the potential of blob forms as built forms.” Unfortunately blob theory is far more advanced than actual blob construction. There still remains a large disconnect from what you can design using modern computer software and what can actually be built. In respect to the Port Terminal proposals the blog technology is limited in its construction aspects. The architects only use the blob tectonics only in respect to their roof plans. Until a more homogenous and applicable construction method of blob technology is developed we will be forced to see material blobs only in roof structures covering orthogonal and symmetrical plans.
There still exists a large gap between blog tectonics, the theory and design, with the actual construction techniques needed for blobby architecture. This gap is slowly closing but until more architects take chances on blob technology and form there will still be an awkward disconnect from construction and theory in terms of blob tectonics.

Assignment 3

Generative Systems: Evolving Computational Strategies

“Design, as understood broadly, is concerned with the process of form.” This quote summarizes the main point and argument that Therese Tierney is trying to make in her recent article titled “Generative Systems: Evolving Computational Strategies.” The design process is one of creating forms and structures, and has been implemented using various tools throughout the history of design. There are two parts to design; one being the physical design process and the second being the theory behind that design. So called “first generation design theorists (Bruce Archer, Herbert Simon, et al.) were concerned with how to rationalize the architectural product.” The second and third generation design theorists have shifted from this rational architectural product to a more integrated design approach incorporating the social aspects into the design process. Architectural design has become so much more than just “problem solving.” It has become an innovative and creative process focusing much more on invention. Whereas traditional architecture focused on the problem at hand and how to solve it, modern day architecture has shifted to a imaginative and hybridized system of design.
This shift in the design process has been largely brought about due to the advent of new computational strategies and new methodologies of design. Most of the time when talking about digital design the focus is on the software and hardware used in the specific design process. What many people miss out on is the theoretical components involved in the process. There is a large human component in digital design. Not just in the creation of new software but in the actual design process. These new digital means of design are simply new tools for a new generation of designers. It is a cognitive design process that involves a set of parameters, rules and guidelines of design. Digital design is an interaction between designer and computational systems. There is a general apprehension among older generations that digital design is taking away from the design process and that technology is now performing all of the design and the new generation of designers is merely clicking buttons and the design magically appears. This is far from reality. New design software is just another tool in the proverbial tool box of architectural and more broadly design practice.
Design theory and physical construction practices are becoming increasingly digital and this process is something to embrace not fear. There is a whole new world of design innovation and creative processes that exist if we only seek to take advantage of new digital software and digital practices. But there is one constant in any design be it digital or analogue, time. Time brings about change and this change can either help or hinder the design process given the designers approach to time. If viewed as a helpful presence and taken into consideration throughout the design process then the theory of time can aid in creating new and innovative design strategies and potentials. Change is the only constant and with the dawn of new digital production we are in an era of extreme change that needs to be embraced.

Techniques and Technology

With the advent of new technologies there comes a change in the culture that uses those technologies. No singular culture can be described or even classified as a culture without use and analysis of the particular technologies that are prevalent at that time. It would be impossible to classify Greek culture without studying the building technologies that created the monuments and building that are Greek “culture”. On the flip side of the coin, technology becomes obsolete if there is no culture to support it. One such example is obvious in the medieval dark ages. The culture of Western Europe did not allow for new advances in technology and thusly the culture went on a hiatus.

Author Ali Rahim communicates these principles in more modern terms and in relation to the field of architecture. Rahim also takes it one step further. Rather than just insisting that these two spheres of influences are solely interdependent on one another, he coins the term “feedback loop”, insisting that there is a never ending cycle of cultural influence on technology and technological development of culture. “Advances in technology have accelerated the pace of innovations in architecture, the arts, sciences, and media: these cultural developments have led, in turn, to new technological discoveries.”(10) Rahim also insists that architects need to take a more involved role in realizing the potential of cultural maturity through the use of technological innovation.

Rahim’s first chapter of his published work is spent entirely explaining the “feedback” loop in terms of the technology, the technique, and the technical. Terms which on the surface appear to be almost identical, once one peels back the outer layer become fundamentally different and three separate bases for the definition and realization of the “feedback” loop.

In the second half of the work, Rahim focuses exclusively on the theories of temporality and time. He illustrates the definition of time not in the rational, conventional sense of the word but rather through “two models of time from the sciences.”(22) He bases his first model of time on physics and classical mechanics and the second on the study and theory of thermodynamics. Or, in laymen’s terms the static never changing “reversible” verses the fundamental asymmetrical, “irreversible” past and future, respectively.

To more clearly illustrate the “feedback loop” Rahim starts by explaining the relationships within the technological side of the premise. A technology advancement can be defined quite simply “the application of a purely technical or scientific advance to a culture context.”(11) New technologies are constantly emerging in day to day life. But for these new technologies to be considered an advancement in the eyes of Rahim, they can’t simply be an improvement on a previous idea. Merely making a seat in a car larger and more comfortable does not make it a technical advancement because it does not “produce in users new patterns of behavior and levels of performance” it simply makes their particular car ride a bit more relaxed.

The next logical step from developing a true technological advancement is to create a technique for the use of that advancement. Before we could even begin to use the new and innovative technological advancement of the automobile we as humans had to develop the techniques for operating said automobile. “Techniques are behaviors and procedures that are systematic, repeatable, and communicable.”(12) Technique development can also carry over to architecture, the overriding emphasis of Rahim’s publication. There are two ways in which Rahim elaborates for architects to develop techniques to further the culture of architecture. There is the option within architecture to “rework existing methods” such as CAD programs in “experimental ways, or even by rewriting parts of the software and adapting it to entirely new functions.”(13) Secondly architects have the option to research other fields of professional study and use those tools to further the advancement of our own field of architecture. Aerospace, automotive, and film industries are just a few of the proverbial goldmines that architects can mine for useful tools. This has already started to happen with the uses of maya and CATIA.

In order to advance culture and innovation technology and technique must be simultaneously integrated. “Technical advances (such as the networking of computers) give rise to new uses or technologies ( such as the internet), leading users to create techniques ( designing interactive Web sites) that, in turn, demand technical advances (faster internet connections), which spawn new technologies (real-time three dimensional online communities)”(12). There is a never ending cycle of innovation that needs to be tapped by the architectural community.

Architects on a whole have an obligation to society to advance the human culture in a positive and innovative way. The only way for the field on a whole to do this is to accept, develop, and further explore those technologies that are already out there in existing fields as well as increasing our own technologies to further the design process on a whole. There is no scale too small to be using ground-breaking technology coupled with the design through fabrication process.

Contex Effect

Digital Morphogenesis

In a recent article by Branko Kolarevic titled “Digital Morphogenesis”, Kolarevic attempts to explain the reasoning behind the strange amorphous shapes often found throughout modern architecture and the methods and tools used to create this new “blobby” architecture.

One of the first points Kolarevic makes is to simply state that the sometimes highly criticized “blobby” architecture may be new and strange looking to the inexperienced eye but it is not without precedent. Kolarevic gives concrete examples of, in the more abstract terms, previous philosophers and scholarly writings that have had major influences on architects and have presented certain questions that have allowed this new style and form of architecture to advance. From the more conceptual writings of German philosopher, mathematician, and logician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and one of the most influential French thinkers of the twentieth century, Gilles Deleuze to the more concrete physical representations found in the Baroque, Neo-Baroque, and Art Nuevo styles of architecture. This new digital age has a plethora of precedent raging from the 17^th century all the way up and into the 1960’s and 1970’s.

From here Kolarevic moves to the physical tools of the digital age and how they are being used in professions across the boards. Architecture is not the only profession being affected from the emergence of new technologies and new ways of challenging traditional thinking. The truth is actually far from it. These technologies and new tools have been in use for many years in almost every industrial designer for the better part of a decade. To the trained eye the somewhat strange designs of “blobby” architecture have seen a surge of popularity in other industrial design situations. Almost everything we use from our toothbrushes to our toasters, even extending into the cars we drive, has been influenced by the new emergence of digital design tools. All of these products incorporate what many refer to as “blobby” architecture but would be better suited as smooth architecture.

What is so unique about this new push to the digital design is the emergence of a digital continuum. This process incorporates everything from the very earliest conceptual design to the rigorous construction drawings all into one simple to use and understand four dimensional model. This can be most clearly seen in the model for the Boeing 737 and for numerous large scale shipping models used throughout the shipping industry. The shipping model presents an interesting example due to the historical reliance of architects on the ship building industry. A past and present link, which should undoubtedly be examined more closely to further advance both professions.

The only way for this digital continuum to exist is through the use of a highly sophisticated set of tools that Kolarevic attempts to explain throughout the remainder of his study. The four examples of tools and methods of a new era of digital design that Kolarevic mentions that are the most interesting and somewhat easier to understand are parametrics, dynamics and fields of force, and performative architecture.

The first new tool that has already had a very scrupulous and practical application is that of parametrics. Parametrics is the establishment of formulas that allow a designer to create dimensionally different yet identically configured design elements. This has been put to use throughout many design proposals and consequent physical buildings. The most striking example can be found in the International Terminal, Waterloo Station located in London, UK and designed by architect Nicholas Grimshaw and Partners. For this project Grimshaw was presented with unique and challenging site considerations of the maze of tube rails and how to effectively cover all of them keeping the same typology. To solve this problem Grimshaw used a parametric equation to create “36 dimensionally different, yet typologically identical, bowstring trusses.” Through the use of parametrics we are allowed an explanation for the strange curvilinear shapes as well as a solution for many difficult design applications.

Another tool that is making its way into the design tool shed of the digital era is that of dynamics and fields of force. The study of dynamics is not as simple as one could be led to believe. It is not merely the design of a building and then the application of fields of force to that building. But rather a more complex design process that involves creating and designing while these forces are present. This is made possible through the materialization of new digital technology. To be put in a simple analogy, designing in the traditional sense of the word would be like building a sand castle and anticipating the rise of the tide (fields of force.) Where dynamics comes into play would be like building this same sand castle but rather than anticipating when and where the tide would come in one would actually build the castle while the tide was physically affecting the construction process. This has been made possible through digital applications and partly explains once again the strange shaped architecture pervasive in modern design.

One of the last relatively new digital applications being used in modern design is that of performative architecture. This is the knowledge and digital capabilities of creating an ideal response to all of the various site considerations and then inputting ones own design and watching it physically take on the form of the ideal structure. The capabilities to do this are at our finger tips and just need to be tapped in order to bring about and era of extreme sustainability and “ideal” architecture.

The last point Kolarevic makes is that these new digital tools should be used to aid in the creation of ideal architecture not replace the profession of architecture. They are means to an end. An end that has already been realized in numerous other professions and should be implemented in our own profession of architecture. Through the use of digital advancements we can explain and then in turn create our own ideal “blobby” architecture.

ADGM assignment ONE

Archi-Tectonics, and its leader, Winka Dubbeldam is one of today’s most technically savvy and innovative practices in the field today. The firm’s portfolio includes high-end urban spaces such as their Greenwich Street Project in New York City, as well as residential work, such as the Millbrook residence. The firm is also involved in experimental design competitions, including their massive restructuring of New York City by 2030. Lastly, the firm recognizes the potential for architecture in all forms, and has been seen in exhibitions, notably the Masonry Variations at the National Building Museum.

The motive is to reject today’s typical modern ‘blob architecture’ trend that has been associated with the latest technologies and animation software. For Archi-Tectonics, computers are used as generative tools, heuristic instruments that aid and frame complex problems for research. Their philosophy is to rethink, re-interpret and re-investigate the details of their projects. Doing so opens new windows into programmatic efficiencies, urban specificities and material innovations. The use of hybrid materials to create smart buildings is facilitated by the use of virtual programming that allows Archi-Tectonis to change the way buildings are perceived both as units and within the urban landscape. Using programs like Maya and Catia, Archi-Tectonics is able to create surface modulations once thought impossible. Furthermore, the digital creation of these files allows them to be FTF, or, file to factory, which allows these modulations to become tangible elements.

Innovative computer analysis allows Archi-Tectonics to alter the focus of their projects away from form and aesthetics and more towards performative and intelligent design, blurring the lines between architecture and industrial design. One unique way Archi-Tectonics challenges the distinction is with the definition of prefabricated structure. Where the term ‘prefabricated’ usually refers to the repetition of identical elements, Archi-Tectonics flips it on its side, defining the term as a series of varying elements that are developed based on their performance, not their shape. Or, for example, in the Greenwich Street lofts, a renovated warehouse wraps an inverted L-shape around an adjacent brick building, and a 10,000 square-foot curtain of bent-glass ripples as it cascades down the façade. Other innovations in Archi-Tectonics’ buildings are in their pragmatic function for the user. The firm believes that there is no reason architecture should mean a sacrifice of efficiency and ease of use, so innovations in geothermal energy, and robotics allow inhabitants of the developed spaces to be aided electronically in every possible way. Behind the recycled glass and brick facades that dip and dive and fragment, are robotic lighting and storage, which puts organization and allocation into the hands of machines that can systematically organize storage space and adjust solar panels so they are absorbing the maximum amount of light.

Future Archi-Tectonics projects include the projected reconstruction of New York City by 2030. This project involves the systematic organization of space on a large scale. One of the greatest untapped resources in New York is the surrounding water and the project fully takes advantage of its power. Separating the space and organizing the area and redefining new energies, such as tidal, solar and wind allow a much greener atmosphere. Because these energy sources are clean, the area around their production plants can be much better utilized. The island of Manhattan would be devoted to residential and social activity while small urban islands allow additional space for commercial and industrial function. One of the greatest struggles faced by New York is the need for additional transportation routes. The new plan activates the water as usable space for movement. Its ingenuity is unparalleled and could create a pragmatic and economically efficient urban center.

Here are some YouTube links showing some of Archi-Tectonics and Winka Dubbeldam's work.
They are from her lectures and provide interesting digital insight into the Practice's work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwtOIf9v9xk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIic8UIkig8