Sunday, March 22, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
Patrick Franke
“Blob Tectonics, or Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy”
After centuries of simple geometric forms dominating the architectural scene, the avant-garde practitioners of today are beginning to explore amorphous shapes that cannot be classified as easily as squares and circles. These explorations in topology have sparked a heated debate between two groups; on one hand, these new forms are needlessly complex and adhere to no rules or guides. However, the “blob” shapes have the ability to be manipulated in ways that Cartesian geometries cannot.
In the article “Blob Tectonics, or Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy,” Greg Lynn uses three areas of focus to analyze the idea of the “blob” as it relates to architecture. These subjects are science fiction, philosophy, and current construction techniques. Within these viewports, Lynn is able to define the basic qualities and workings of the “blob”.
The article begins with a description of science fiction blob monsters as being “all surface”. This is due to the fact that the blob does not have a mouth, but rather is a continuous, all-encompassing mouth. The “all surface” claim is supported philosophically in the article through description of how blobs are formed. Lynn states that blobs “can actually fuse into one contiguous surface defined not by the summation or average of their surfaces and gravities but instead by the interactions of their respective centers and zones of inflection and fusion.” In this way the blob becomes one continuous surface.
While blobs are continuous, their surfaces are formed through an interaction between multiple separate factors. Lynn states that blobs are “neither singular nor multiple,” and are therefore some combination of the two. They are singular in that it is in fact a continuous surface. While it lacks consistency, all areas of the blob are connected to each other.
The multiplicity of blobs comes from the presence of separate fields that define the differentiation. Just as gravity pulls planets towards each other, separate areas of a blob can attract and, similarly, repel one another. The nature of these fields varies in their transformative effects; what remains constant is the fact that the blob as a whole is changed.
These fields of definition create another opportunity for control. The relative complexity of the overall blob can be increased or decreased as desired. By adding more fields, the complexity of the whole will rise, and by taking away fields, the overall complexity lessens. This gives the blob’s creator greater ability to manipulate.
A final characteristic of science fiction blobs is that they “depend on contextual constraints or containment for their form.” One of these constraints is the number, placement, and nature of the defining fields within the blob. These fields act as a constraint of the blob’s ability to pull away from itself. Perhaps a more influential contextual restraint on a given blob is the program that it is occupying. As seen in Zaera-Polo and Moussavi’s design for the Yokohama Port Terminal, there are various “pressures of program” that require different spatial qualities. In blob architecture, this is usually a strong factor in the ceiling height. A large atrium will need soaring ceilings, while a private space such as a bathroom would require a much lower, modest roof. These programmatic concerns become the field pressures, and the blob begins to conform to its context.
“Blob Tectonics, or Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy”
After centuries of simple geometric forms dominating the architectural scene, the avant-garde practitioners of today are beginning to explore amorphous shapes that cannot be classified as easily as squares and circles. These explorations in topology have sparked a heated debate between two groups; on one hand, these new forms are needlessly complex and adhere to no rules or guides. However, the “blob” shapes have the ability to be manipulated in ways that Cartesian geometries cannot.
In the article “Blob Tectonics, or Why Tectonics is Square and Topology is Groovy,” Greg Lynn uses three areas of focus to analyze the idea of the “blob” as it relates to architecture. These subjects are science fiction, philosophy, and current construction techniques. Within these viewports, Lynn is able to define the basic qualities and workings of the “blob”.
The article begins with a description of science fiction blob monsters as being “all surface”. This is due to the fact that the blob does not have a mouth, but rather is a continuous, all-encompassing mouth. The “all surface” claim is supported philosophically in the article through description of how blobs are formed. Lynn states that blobs “can actually fuse into one contiguous surface defined not by the summation or average of their surfaces and gravities but instead by the interactions of their respective centers and zones of inflection and fusion.” In this way the blob becomes one continuous surface.
While blobs are continuous, their surfaces are formed through an interaction between multiple separate factors. Lynn states that blobs are “neither singular nor multiple,” and are therefore some combination of the two. They are singular in that it is in fact a continuous surface. While it lacks consistency, all areas of the blob are connected to each other.
The multiplicity of blobs comes from the presence of separate fields that define the differentiation. Just as gravity pulls planets towards each other, separate areas of a blob can attract and, similarly, repel one another. The nature of these fields varies in their transformative effects; what remains constant is the fact that the blob as a whole is changed.
These fields of definition create another opportunity for control. The relative complexity of the overall blob can be increased or decreased as desired. By adding more fields, the complexity of the whole will rise, and by taking away fields, the overall complexity lessens. This gives the blob’s creator greater ability to manipulate.
A final characteristic of science fiction blobs is that they “depend on contextual constraints or containment for their form.” One of these constraints is the number, placement, and nature of the defining fields within the blob. These fields act as a constraint of the blob’s ability to pull away from itself. Perhaps a more influential contextual restraint on a given blob is the program that it is occupying. As seen in Zaera-Polo and Moussavi’s design for the Yokohama Port Terminal, there are various “pressures of program” that require different spatial qualities. In blob architecture, this is usually a strong factor in the ceiling height. A large atrium will need soaring ceilings, while a private space such as a bathroom would require a much lower, modest roof. These programmatic concerns become the field pressures, and the blob begins to conform to its context.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Patrick Franke
Abstract
The importance of digital technology continues to grow in the field of Architecture, making paper a thing of the past. Where drafting equipment was used previously computers are now implemented; however, the role of digital production does not stop there. Machinery is steadily taking over the design work as well and is no longer merely a tool used to simplify the path to realization. The article suggests that the digital element is used differently from office to office, and that digital technology is capable of assisting the designer in a variety of capacities. The use of digital programs in this sense- as a kind of genius assistant to the designer- is profoundly beneficial. However, a problem develops when the software program takes dominance and the designer becomes the subordinate.
As discussed in the reading, computer programming takes on various duties in a given design. One of these roles involves using computer technology and simulation abilities to perform precise, accurate site analysis. In this context the use of digital software is completely appropriate. Data is entered regarding the site which is then analyzed in a way that a person cannot do without the computer. This data includes zoning law information, wind and sun patterns, as well as preexisting topographical conditions.
When used for site analysis, digital technology gets along quite well with the designer. The computer has a clearly defined (and limited) role, and the data to be entered is entirely objective. The software program is simply performing tasks that would be difficult if not impossible for a designer. It is providing useful analysis for the design, and is therefore indirectly influencing the final product.
Digital technology is taken one step further in the next type of use. This involves using computer programs to create the structural system for the design. The computer is no longer providing useful information but is now becoming involved with the design process in an active way. The structure of a building is a part of the building’s overall aesthetic, and if it is being designed by a software program then a significant portion of the project is disingenuous. In the issue of structure, however, efficiency is the main objective. A computer is capable of creating a much more efficient structure than the designer is alone. This is a quality that is too valuable to write off as an act of laziness; the computer is able to help save raw materials and in the process cut costs down.
In the most extreme case, digital software can be used to generate the form of a design itself. In this process, the designer enters in parameters that act as restrictions or restraints on the computer’s design possibilities. The more stringent the parameters, the more similar the result will be to one another. In this process the designer has been all but removed from the design. It is no longer the product of a person with the ability to think; it is now less of a design and more of an enormous math equation.
I feel that the complete involvement of digital programs in the generation of a design results in a building that is lacking in life. While it may be visually stimulating and organic to the point of being naturalistic, it does not have the consideration of a human creator. A software program is not able to imagine itself in different spaces, nor is it able to gauge comfortableness. A building should be the manifestation of a designer’s vision, not a model of efficiency engineered by a computer.
As the article describes, the role of digital generation applied to architecture can be divided into two parts. The first is objective, which simply involves storing and rearranging data so as to be of greater use and value. The second category deals with the digital program taking on subjective design work. In this instance, the digital program is taking responsibilities from the designer and as a result the final product suffers. The role of digital generation should be limited to assisting and not the main instrument of design.
Abstract
The importance of digital technology continues to grow in the field of Architecture, making paper a thing of the past. Where drafting equipment was used previously computers are now implemented; however, the role of digital production does not stop there. Machinery is steadily taking over the design work as well and is no longer merely a tool used to simplify the path to realization. The article suggests that the digital element is used differently from office to office, and that digital technology is capable of assisting the designer in a variety of capacities. The use of digital programs in this sense- as a kind of genius assistant to the designer- is profoundly beneficial. However, a problem develops when the software program takes dominance and the designer becomes the subordinate.
As discussed in the reading, computer programming takes on various duties in a given design. One of these roles involves using computer technology and simulation abilities to perform precise, accurate site analysis. In this context the use of digital software is completely appropriate. Data is entered regarding the site which is then analyzed in a way that a person cannot do without the computer. This data includes zoning law information, wind and sun patterns, as well as preexisting topographical conditions.
When used for site analysis, digital technology gets along quite well with the designer. The computer has a clearly defined (and limited) role, and the data to be entered is entirely objective. The software program is simply performing tasks that would be difficult if not impossible for a designer. It is providing useful analysis for the design, and is therefore indirectly influencing the final product.
Digital technology is taken one step further in the next type of use. This involves using computer programs to create the structural system for the design. The computer is no longer providing useful information but is now becoming involved with the design process in an active way. The structure of a building is a part of the building’s overall aesthetic, and if it is being designed by a software program then a significant portion of the project is disingenuous. In the issue of structure, however, efficiency is the main objective. A computer is capable of creating a much more efficient structure than the designer is alone. This is a quality that is too valuable to write off as an act of laziness; the computer is able to help save raw materials and in the process cut costs down.
In the most extreme case, digital software can be used to generate the form of a design itself. In this process, the designer enters in parameters that act as restrictions or restraints on the computer’s design possibilities. The more stringent the parameters, the more similar the result will be to one another. In this process the designer has been all but removed from the design. It is no longer the product of a person with the ability to think; it is now less of a design and more of an enormous math equation.
I feel that the complete involvement of digital programs in the generation of a design results in a building that is lacking in life. While it may be visually stimulating and organic to the point of being naturalistic, it does not have the consideration of a human creator. A software program is not able to imagine itself in different spaces, nor is it able to gauge comfortableness. A building should be the manifestation of a designer’s vision, not a model of efficiency engineered by a computer.
As the article describes, the role of digital generation applied to architecture can be divided into two parts. The first is objective, which simply involves storing and rearranging data so as to be of greater use and value. The second category deals with the digital program taking on subjective design work. In this instance, the digital program is taking responsibilities from the designer and as a result the final product suffers. The role of digital generation should be limited to assisting and not the main instrument of design.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
LARRY SASS LECTURE NOTES
-Culturally sensitive community-based design
-Digital fabrication as opposed to factory fabrication
-factories fail because the facility must be maintained. this includes energy and employment
costs.
-affordable design, the "Toyota" of architectural design
-Demand for new to replace old
Standardization
-Walter Gropius and Joseph Wachsmann
-standardization of parts as a failure because of requirement for professional installment
-example Kiernan-Timberlake (2004)
-pre-manufactured components leave no room for error during installment, and there is
always a marginal error
Use of CNC
-replaces need for a factory
-assembly does not require professional skill
-panels fuse together after exposure to the elements
-MoMA installment project
-withstood hurricane-strength winds
-built expediently
-minimal costs
his work is more an exploration of a building methodology and has less to do with formal considerations
-Culturally sensitive community-based design
-Digital fabrication as opposed to factory fabrication
-factories fail because the facility must be maintained. this includes energy and employment
costs.
-affordable design, the "Toyota" of architectural design
-Demand for new to replace old
Standardization
-Walter Gropius and Joseph Wachsmann
-standardization of parts as a failure because of requirement for professional installment
-example Kiernan-Timberlake (2004)
-pre-manufactured components leave no room for error during installment, and there is
always a marginal error
Use of CNC
-replaces need for a factory
-assembly does not require professional skill
-panels fuse together after exposure to the elements
-MoMA installment project
-withstood hurricane-strength winds
-built expediently
-minimal costs
his work is more an exploration of a building methodology and has less to do with formal considerations
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)