4-2. Space Reconfiguration
Fig 4-2,1: The Idea of Environmental Reductionism (by Author)
4-3. Electrical Controlled - Cybernetic Architecture
Fig 4-3,1: The Diagram of Electrical Circuits (by Auther)
Fig 4-3,1: The Diagram of Electrical Circuits (by Auther)
4-4. Flexible Structure: Kinetic Tensegrity Component (Drawing)
・Firstly, loading members are either in pure compression or in pure tension, meaning the structure will only fail if the cables yield or the rods buckle.
Hence, tensegrity’s lightweight characteristics make it suitable for adaptive architecture according to Korkmaz et al (Korkmaz, 2011) . Eleanor Hartley further points out that visual transparency contributes an important aesthetic quality to these structures. (Hartley, 2009) Theoretically, there is no limitation to the size of a tensegrity structure. Cities could be covered with geodesic domes.
fig 4-4,1: Kinetic Surface in Msc thesis at Bartlett UCL, 2008 (by Author)
Fig 4-4,2: The Early Model of Tensegrity Surface, 2010, by Author
During the development of the component based system proposed in figure 4-4,2, the author paid special attention to the development of the physical model. In the beginning of the experiments the components had binary behaviour – flexible or rigid. There was no space for an intermediate stage between the two behaviours. The malleability of the model became controllable over time and the final component can exhibit different levels of behaviour from flexible to rigid. The adaptive behaviour (in terms of rigidity of the component) was achieved by using different types of springs. The component would change according to the desired performance. The membrane, for instance, was evaluated according to the amount of shadow it could provide. The structure was evaluated according to the degree to which it is able to change its shape.
Fig 4-4,3 Self Stand - Recover Tensegrity (by Author and Y.Komiyama)
Fig 4-4,4 , The 1st Generation Model Parts at Kinetica Exhibition, 2010 (by Author and Shari*3)
This Picture shows every part of one tensegrity component. In this generation, still the number of parts are too much, so to make one components takes time and man's energy.
Fig 4-4,5 : Responsive Kinetic Tensegrity roof patch (by Author and Shari*3)
Fig 4-4, 6 , Manual Control Kinetic Tensegrity Roof Patch (by Author and Shari*3)
Fig 4-4,9 : 3rd Generation, Physical model and it's Parts Fabrication
Fig 4-4,10 : 4th Generation, Physical Model
Fig 4-4,11 : Drawings of the Components (Active Shading System)
Fig 4-4,12 : Drawings of the Components (Integrated Skin)
fig 4-5,1: Image Perspective Okayama Competition (K.Hotta and Shari)
A real world proposal is shown here to further illustrate the possibilities of PA. This proposal for a LRT (Light Rail Transit) station in Japan was for a competition held in 2010 in Okayama prefecture. This architectural paradigm diverges from the traditional architectural planning method. In Modern architecture functionalism was looking for an optimization of the space. The design needed to fulfill the maximum architectural function, whether a bedroom or toilet among others. In other words, the space was designed for a static and specific function. For example, when an architect designed a 'bedroom', he/she thought: it is better to have carpet than wooden pavement as for functional reasons silence is needed; a big window is not needed since the room is mainly used to sleep; the toilet should be close to the bedroom but the entrance hall which is a noisier place should be far away from this room, etc... Following such practical and functional decisions, the 'bedroom' functioned as required – a silent and dark place where one can sleep. For each programmatic function there were a set of parameters that one needed to control from the outset.
However the proposed PA, suggests that these relationships between function and the place should not be fixed, as outlined by the functionalist line of reasoning. More functional flexibility was allowed as the function of the space can change both in a cyclical fashion as well as over the lifespan of the structure, e.g. a bedroom can be a living room during different times of the day.
Fig 4-5,2: Screenshots of the movie of the OkayamaLRT(K.Hotta and Shari)
Fig 4-5,3: Plan and Elevation of the OkayamaLRT(K.Hotta and Shari)
Fig4-5,4:Section of the Okayama LRT (Station Mode)
Fig.4-5,5: Section of the Okayama LRT (Gathering Mode)
Fig.4-5,6:Section of the Okayama LRT (Scattering Mode)
Fig.4-5,7: Plan of the Okayama LRT
Fig 4-5,8: Cut Section of one leg of the Okayama LRT
4-6 . The Three Different Scales: Local- Regional -Global
Fig 4-6,1: Hierarchical System Diagram
Within PA, the architectural systems can be defined as a device which connects (mediates between) the environment and humans. When this system is placed in a dynamic-ecological world, various reciprocal actions can happen. The designer has the task of creating and planning how humans interact and engage with the environment. Depending on the place where this architectural system is placed the level and type of interaction would be different. For example positioned in the desert, it’s interaction with a sand storm would be more important in terms of performance, whereas if it is located on the surface of the moon, air pressure or solar radiation would be crucial performance criteria. These differences would be incorporated into the above definition of the system.
4-7 . The Compromise System Between Global-Local as Democracy-Socialism
The relationship between the two principles depends heavily on the dynamic capacity of the system. A key aspect of this dynamic system is the time axis, allowing temporal inputs and outputs to be empowered and to interact with each other. The actual algorithm used to implement this time axis will be explained in chapter 6 and 7, but the importance of the time frame is now briefly explained via illustration. For this example, the system is responding to strong wind at 10am so it attempts to minimize its surface area and thus its air resistance to avoid collapse. However, after one hour at 11am, with the sun rising to its highest point, a second requirement is revealed, and the system has to provide maximum shade so it needs to reconfigure itself. The situation becomes more complex if two requirements are present for instance if the strong wind hasn’t stopped at 11 am. The building has to withstand the strong wind, but also has to provide maximum shade at the same time. The system has to make complex decisions where one environmental requirement is in conflict with others. This kind of conflict can become more extreme when human input is added.
For example, the shape is optimized for strong wind at 10 am, but also a large domed space is needed underneath the kinetic roof for a lunch party with 100 people. The wind resistance shape and the dome request from human input will clash. The architectural system has to mediate and make a decision each moment along the time axis. These types of situations happen all the time, because architecture- both system and building – exist simultaneously on the environmental and social ecological realms that change with 'time'. The process of meditation is the most important issue here.
fig 4-7,1: System Diagram in Ecology (Drawn by K.Hotta)
4-8 . The Relation between Physical Model and Constructive Model
In the traditional architectural field, the relation between a 'physical model' and a 'constructive model' corresponds to the relationship between a building and its blueprint. However, with the recent computational enhancement of the 'constructive model', the new field is now evolving from there. For example, the blueprint was no more than an 'idea' of the building. The computational model in PA, however, is not just an idea. Thanks to computer’s program and physical engines, it works as an autonomous system which works beyond human ideas and planning. Furthermore, if this robotic 'physical model' and 'constructive model' communicate as they do in PA, the definition of and boundary between real and virtual are going to change.
For example when the structure needs to change, the constructive model executes the calculations in the computer, and when the optimum answer is attained it will be output to the physical model reducing the interaction time to a moment when the output is passed to the physical model. Then the physical model- the big roof-implements the necessary deformation. This effectively saves time and energy as it does not execute physically until a good answer is calculated in the constructive model. This difference in nature between physical model and simulated constructive model can be used in many situations to allow complex scenarios to be implemented with a minimum of time and energy.
Fig 4-8 ,1 The correspondence between simulation (construction model) and robot (physical model)
4-9 . Conclusion