Tuesday, April 16, 2013
Team 3 - (Pre)Final Presentation
http://www.slideshare.net/michelaturrin/xxl2012-g3-pre-final-presentation
Friday, March 30, 2012
work in progress
A brief summary of the integration of disciplines:
architect: working on functions,
at urban scale --> flow of people / parking / integration
building scale --> working with structure designer to decide extension in diverse areas, acording to functions intention, but with the understanding that dramatic changes in the curvature of the canopy may involve significant changes in the structure.
3d model --> the algorithm for the stadium is composed of several parts:
1- c value. Number or rows per stand
2- sweep along a curve, to create the surface of the stand.
3- extraction the border lines of the previous surface. The goal is get the lines that shape the grandstand, and then count the number of seats. So, getting the lines, culling every even. Then trim with a boundary line to dispatch those parts with bad visibility (acording to fifa stadia 5* regulations), and acording architect intentions (in this case, one side of the stand rises higher than the other as explained in previous days because of the climate approach for the wind flow and solar captation intentions). Finally count the sits that fit in those lines.
This part is also linked to a evolutionay solver, to iterate c value, number of rows and number of seats.
Next step creates border line of the stadium, that would become an input for shape, that is the main input for structure. Structure also takes the grandstand section as input. Together with the architect the columns and floors are arranged throught the building. This section becomes an input to the main algorithm.
This section is populated along the straight parts of the grandstand within a distance, and another solution is being studied now for the movable pitch part in which side no columns from the grandstand can go to the ground.
Therefore, the border line of the grandstand and the arrangement of functions would be the outputs of this part, and they would constitute an input for the canopy. The structure is taking a minimal surface from this input, and together with the architect, modifying in several parts acording to design intentions, but being aware of the changes in the curvature. Subdivision, height of the space frame, and components are being compared with GSA analysis.
Envelope is working on the subdivision of the surface for paneling, and also in materialization, because the weight of the panels is an input for structure. Besides he is studying solar panel technology and question wether using a market solution, or propose a customized one for our design. Also, we are facing the problem of paneling a double curvature.
Climate is then analyzing the wind flow, radiation, and lighting. The first of them, is giving the architect a new input, and the other two are inputs to the envelope. The wind may reshape some parts of the building, and/or make changes in urban decissions. Therefore, all the process has to be repeated. Most of the parts are working through algorithms, so only a few manual operations are required.
As digital designer, I am trying that this workflow goes smooth, and to maximize the iteration of the diverse algorithms. We have created an excel chart, so everyone is explaining what is uploaded in their dropbox folders, and it is easy to search by keywords what the others are doing. For the upcoming days, a new folder is created with the daily "achievements".
There are a few operations, like triming, or the optimization of the minimal surface (transformation, because minimal is optimal, but the design concept is reshaping it, so we try to transform it acording to architect's concept, but without a major change in curvature).
For my personal research, I am working together with the structure designer on several input conditions, as:
- division: cuadrangular vs triangular ---> structure results
- element: compare choosing diferent beam types vs one single for the overall structure. Structure implications and constructing consequences.
- type: by analyzing the structure, we can asign then beam types to compressed members and cable to tensioned.
- height: study on the height of the frame and its influence on the stresses.
- section: design of own profile: feasibility, implications and process. If, and only if, the results of the previous conditions result in high concentrated stresses, I may study the posibility of designing a profile that would solve them in a better way that the standardize available profiles in the market.
Also trying now, http://www.oasys-software.com/gsa-suite.html, to use form finding for optimization of the surface.
Uploading folders in the infobase with the work in progress files.
friday 30032012
architect: working on functions,
at urban scale --> flow of people / parking / integration
building scale --> working with structure designer to decide extension in diverse areas, acording to functions intention, but with the understanding that dramatic changes in the curvature of the canopy may involve significant changes in the structure.
3d model --> the algorithm for the stadium is composed of several parts:
1- c value. Number or rows per stand
2- sweep along a curve, to create the surface of the stand.
3- extraction the border lines of the previous surface. The goal is get the lines that shape the grandstand, and then count the number of seats. So, getting the lines, culling every even. Then trim with a boundary line to dispatch those parts with bad visibility (acording to fifa stadia 5* regulations), and acording architect intentions (in this case, one side of the stand rises higher than the other as explained in previous days because of the climate approach for the wind flow and solar captation intentions). Finally count the sits that fit in those lines.
This part is also linked to a evolutionay solver, to iterate c value, number of rows and number of seats.
Next step creates border line of the stadium, that would become an input for shape, that is the main input for structure. Structure also takes the grandstand section as input. Together with the architect the columns and floors are arranged throught the building. This section becomes an input to the main algorithm.
This section is populated along the straight parts of the grandstand within a distance, and another solution is being studied now for the movable pitch part in which side no columns from the grandstand can go to the ground.
Therefore, the border line of the grandstand and the arrangement of functions would be the outputs of this part, and they would constitute an input for the canopy. The structure is taking a minimal surface from this input, and together with the architect, modifying in several parts acording to design intentions, but being aware of the changes in the curvature. Subdivision, height of the space frame, and components are being compared with GSA analysis.
Envelope is working on the subdivision of the surface for paneling, and also in materialization, because the weight of the panels is an input for structure. Besides he is studying solar panel technology and question wether using a market solution, or propose a customized one for our design. Also, we are facing the problem of paneling a double curvature.
Climate is then analyzing the wind flow, radiation, and lighting. The first of them, is giving the architect a new input, and the other two are inputs to the envelope. The wind may reshape some parts of the building, and/or make changes in urban decissions. Therefore, all the process has to be repeated. Most of the parts are working through algorithms, so only a few manual operations are required.
As digital designer, I am trying that this workflow goes smooth, and to maximize the iteration of the diverse algorithms. We have created an excel chart, so everyone is explaining what is uploaded in their dropbox folders, and it is easy to search by keywords what the others are doing. For the upcoming days, a new folder is created with the daily "achievements".
There are a few operations, like triming, or the optimization of the minimal surface (transformation, because minimal is optimal, but the design concept is reshaping it, so we try to transform it acording to architect's concept, but without a major change in curvature).
For my personal research, I am working together with the structure designer on several input conditions, as:
- division: cuadrangular vs triangular ---> structure results
- element: compare choosing diferent beam types vs one single for the overall structure. Structure implications and constructing consequences.
- type: by analyzing the structure, we can asign then beam types to compressed members and cable to tensioned.
- height: study on the height of the frame and its influence on the stresses.
- section: design of own profile: feasibility, implications and process. If, and only if, the results of the previous conditions result in high concentrated stresses, I may study the posibility of designing a profile that would solve them in a better way that the standardize available profiles in the market.
Also trying now, http://www.oasys-software.com/gsa-suite.html, to use form finding for optimization of the surface.
Uploading folders in the infobase with the work in progress files.
friday 30032012
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Final Presentations
Final Presentations will take place on Thursday the 5th of April, starting at h. 14.00 - Berlage Zaal 1 - Faculty of Architecture. Final presentations are public and everyone is very welcome to attend them. Three student Teams of 5 people each will present their projects. Each presentation will take 25-30 minutes max and 20-30 minutes discussion will follow. The program will end at h. 17.00.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)