As suggested, I created new study models out of paper and clay. However this time I tried to keep it to scale in regards of the site.
This was the first paper model I made. However I checked the height and it didn't fit within the 85' limit of this site. So I made a second model.
I really like this second model. I've also had more control over the proportions of the pages. I've cute the pages to have the same ratio of typical paper sizes, like 8.5 x 11 or 11x17.
I created this clay model based off the second paper model. I only did the massing of the main building and not the plaza space.
I used a wire to cut it longitudinally, just to see how it would look in section.
This is a different approach for me. I usually design a building from the inside-out. Approaching from the outside-in is a different experience and I'm going to give it a shot.
It's a good idea to explore shapes and forms. But when you get to designing your conceptual building don't hesitate to combine or adapt your models to suit the needs of the buildings users.
ReplyDeleteAlways consider study models to be like pieces of ceramic going into the kiln. Nothing is sacred until it survives the firing and remains intact on the flip side. It is all too often that we hold onto a notion as sacrosanct only to find out too late that there was a flaw in the logic. Push your study models, cut shred, combine, splice, add and subtract with abandon. It is said that when Louis Khan was teaching, he would rip the first draft off of your board, even if it was perfect, to force development and continued investigation.
ReplyDeleteAll of that said, be exceedingly careful with clay as a study medium. Clay is NOT a tectonic material. The malleability is misleading and can lead architectural expression out of the realm of realistic achievability. Again, like the fabric you started with, clay can lead you into a level of complexity which is not readily clad and geometrically unconstructable within realistic means and methods. Clay also has a liquid quality wherein it is constantly in motion and morphing, especially in slab form which is how your model appears to be constructed.
The approach of maintaining aspect ratios of paper is brilliant. Even if it does not translate to the naked eye, there is a logic that is irrefutable embedded in the approach. Take a look at incorporating the standard architectural sheet sizes in full (A-letter, B-Tabloid, C-18x24, D-24x36, E-30x42). Also, take a look at the European paper conventions. Although the aspect ratios are slightly different, each paper size is sequentially achieved by figuratively unfolding each paper as if it was in half. Or conversely, from largest to smallest, each size is folded in half from "full sheet" to A4 (letter).
The completely "outside-in" methodology of design is relatively tricky in that you sometimes find yourself "stuffing a sausage." The shell can be the most beautiful formal expression but without logic or structure can have no spatial quality. Often you find great facades filled with rectilinear, vanilla spaces because the effort was wasted on formal expression only.
A suggestion would be to take a step back from the wrapper for a moment. Build each programmatic element as a volume. Start with rectilinear blocks. Use a color coded system. Use something relatively easy to cut and reconfigure such as foam, bass wood, stacked foam-core or gator board, etc. work your massing assumptions deployed on the side model as you did with the skin models. Once you get a good approximation of the massing you are shooting for, reapply your paper panels to the outside of the massing. You can then work back and forth between the programmatic/spatial quality of the building and the facades. This back and forth will inform both and allow you to solve the day-lighting issues, site organization and hierarchy simultaneously. You can also use this exercise to develop the extent to which the interior spaces are shaped by the envelope, and make decisions on where orthogonal deployments are more efficient.
You have a great construct here to REALLY investigate the idea of envelope.
I love where this is going. I know it is a struggle to understand where to lay the spaces, but I believe the next step is to lay out square footage's of your spaces.What is public and what is private? What needs light and what doe not? You are also need a core.
ReplyDeleteIn parallel to this. You should really start thinking about the building's materials. Is it going to be light or heavy structure?
ReplyDeleteWhat short of cladding? metal? ceramic?
Will it have a floating or more solid presence?
Different modelling materials can direct you to different paths regarding the aesthetics of your proposal. Clay and paper have contrasting properties for example.
Maybe try sheets of metal mesh (A4 size), they are easy to bent and can give interesting results.
It would also help to start combining the concept with the building programm of the building... Start with a "bubble diagram" of the connected spaces, one for each floor. Then see how it relates to the site and the form of the "scattered papers" model.
These models are so wonderful. Your process through the classroom and through your blog has shown a variety of steps and each time it becomes stronger. I would like to see you start stepping back and revisiting the program. Perhaps even take these images - print them and start drawing program over them.
ReplyDelete