ASSIGNMENT: 4b_Embodiment COMPETITION

IDEAhaus_4b_Embodiment COMPETITION (space models)

S15 ARCH 306_ASSIGNMENT 4B_EMBODIMENT COMPETITION

overview:

If plans and sections support the development of a design logic and regulating systems for your IDEAhaus in two dimensions, then models allow you to further understand and develop the experiential effect of these systems in three dimensions.

Building a large scale section and spatial model of your IDEAhaus will expand your exploration of  how  various systems can work, in concert, to shape experience (i.e.  spatial sequences, apertures, structures, envelopes, circulation, material qualities, natural and artificial illumination).  You might explore a singular and unified composition, or the  building could have various experiential “states” in response to shifting conditions, like: changes in activity, environment, season, metropolitan context, daylight.

The review for the large scale spatial models will be in the form of a DESIGN COMPETITION, to be held in Crown Hall, and judged by a panel of guest jurors and by yourselves. Further details regarding the design competition to follow.

objectives:

– understand the ways that space activates and engages your senses;

– improve your skills of narratively describing space and experience and criteria;

– further develop modeling skills and craft;

– explore the strengths of designing 3-dimensionally in section;

– continue working iteratively between physical and digital in your process;

– experience a competitive project working environment;

– accelerate your project development.

process:

Using the agendas,  plans, sections and models  developed over the past weeks, choose a portion of your IDEAhaus to demonstrate the spatial experiences of the building.  Models MUST be between ¼”=1’-0” and ½” = 1’-0” scale (with bias towards the larger) and should represent a plus or minus 5000sf portion of your design.  The model MUST be able to fit within a volume of 42”W x 30”D x 48” tall.   The model should be both sectional and spatial, and should capture both interior space, exterior enclosure and the site.

criteria/questions:

– Does the experience of your building contribute to its use in meaningful ways?

– Does your model capture/embody the primary design logic or concepts for your project?

– Does your design and modeling language embody your concepts and criteria for the design of your building?

– How might a detail be the genesis for discovering an overall concept or strategy for developing the rest of the building?

deliverables:

Design Competition / Friday April 10 2015 / Upper Core

Craft a high-quality physical sectional and spatial model using the parameters provided above to convey the essential and compelling nature of your project.

NOTE: The singular means of presentation suggest that you should exhibit your very highest levels of craft and care.

Advertisements

ASSIGNMENT 1: SMOOSH

F14_A305

ASSIGNMENT 1_SMOOSH

overview:

warmup:

A small scale exploration of irregular and uncommon adjacency and use.

As a warmup to the Fall semester, and as your first step towards defining Hybridity, combine two conventional spaces into a single space that in some way becomes more than just the sum of its parts.

objectives:

– Produce layered orthographic drawings.

– Use the act of drawing to define the act of designing.

– Build a quality presentation model.

– Break rules, be bold, get curious.

– Loosen up. Get to work.  Find fun.

process:

Thinking back to your Dwelling project from last semester, a Dwelling from your memory/childhood, or your current Dwelling, choose two discreet spaces to blend into a new single space.  The two spaces should not typically be adjacent to one and other, and they must require the body to be in different positions (sitting, standing, lying) or states (still or in motion).   They may be interior or exterior.

Some examples to consider:

A space to eat. A space to think. A space to bathe. A space to climb.
A space to transition. A space to sleep. A space to rest. A space to read.
A space to watch. A space to elevate. A space to cook. A Space to store.
A space to defend. A Space to create. A space to wait. A space to run.
etc… etc… etc… etc…

Start by analyzing the individual spaces through drawing(s).  Your objective is to analyze and deconstruct your chosen spaces into their most basic and essential elements by producing a single drawing or series of layered drawings.

Using two separate sheets of 18 x24 drawing medium (or similar size of your choosing), one for each of the two initial spaces, document the object orthographically (plans, sections, elevations).  Produce hardlined and measured orthographic plans, elevations, sections, and details by hand to document and analyze the spaces.   If you choose, you may use other methods of projection including Axonometric, Isometric or Perspective.  Next, find a minimum of two additional examples of each of your chosen spaces, and compare them to them to the spaces you have documented.  Based on this analysis, add or subtract from your initial drawings with the intent of adding more information/layers/meaning to the analysis of the initial spaces. Continue to add layers.  Consider the differences between the lines that the user of a space sees and all the lines and logics that a designer must see, interpret and reconcile while designing any space.  Add those layers to the drawing.   Consider tectonics, materiality, space, time and the body.  Do this by adding and subtracting from the initial drawing, by layering drawings on top of each other, through collage, by using mixed media, or through any combination of processes that you choose.

NOTE:  The drawings may initially appear messy. This is GREAT!  This is the intent.  If your drawing does not achieve this messiness, you are not digging deeply enough into the analysis.  Our objective is to teach you that the act of design is complex and messy, and that you need systems and processes to organize and find logic in that mess.  If a design problem appears simple, then you aren’t working hard enough to solve it.

Next, compare the drawings from your two spaces against one and other.  Find similarities and dissimilarities.  Compare similar layers and logics to one and other.  Work to find concepts for combining the spaces that have the most new potential in their final result.  In this instance, we are looking for 1 + 1 to equal something greater than two, and potentially even 4, 5, 6….  Explore a variety of potentials, and explore different gradients of hybridization by overlapping similar functions or elements.

Options for comparative iterations:

1. Drawing: On another piece of drawing medium, begin to overlay and blend the two spaces into a single space.  We would recommend using trace for the initial iterations.  Using the same techniques from your previous analysis, draw the two spaces together and into one single space.

2.  Modeling: Using scale models and using simple and fast modeling media (paper, chip board, cardboard), begin by selecting similar elements between your two spaces and modeling them individually.  Then, by making several additional models (make many; don’t keep changing one), explore how the layers of the two discreet spaces may be modeled into one.  Do this for several layers until you find the most compelling potentials.

REMEMBER:  It is essential to understand how the value of the resultant Smoosh is measured.  What YOU  like or what YOU want has very little value to your studio professor and ultimately your clients.  How is a compelling idea measured?  Define this system of value measurement early, and your results will be more compelling.   

Finally, draw a final projection drawing that describes the final resultant space.  This final drawing may be the drawing from Option 1 above or it may be a new drawing.  Once the final solution is developed, build a final scale model of the designed space.  The model should be to scale and very finely crafted.

criteria:

  1.  Scale:  The object/element/moment should be able to fit into approximately a 10’x10’x10’ area.

questions:

  1. What are the primary architectural elements of your space and how do they facilitate its primary use?
  2. How does the body operate in each of your spaces, and what are the physical requirements of that space?

schedule:

M 25 Aug Introduction

W 27 Aug Descriptive drawings of individual objects due

F 29 Aug Lecture “1 + 1 = ?”, Desk crits

M 01 Sep Labor Day_No Class

W 03 Sep Hybrid drawings/Models due – Desk Crits

F 05 Sep Desk Crits

M 08 Sep Desk Crits

W 10 Sep PRESENTATION

deliverables

PRESENTATION: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10TH, 2PM, UPPER CORE

A maximum of three (3) 18×24 (+/-)  drawings that graphically describe the design process.

One (1) 1”=1’-0” finely crafted presentation model of your final design made from a single material of your choosing.

 

KULTURHUS_spatial model competition

A few notes about the model competition tomorrow.

The competition will be held tomorrow afternoon, in the lower level of Crown Hall.   Starting at 1:30pm, you will be asked to place your models and pin up your drawings in the locations indicated on the attached document – S14_ARCH 306_Model Competition pin up assignment+.  This document assigns each of you a number (#) (no personal markings or names should occur on your boards as to keep the competition anonymous).  The locations for each number are also noted in the document, and locations will be marked with numbers on post it notes designating the locations for hanging.   Instructions and rules for setting up are simple.  Please pin up or tape up your drawings directly below the Post-it, leaving the Post-it with your designated number exposed.  Models should be placed directly below your drawings, on bases where possible.  Please begin to collect model bases sooner rather than later.  There likely are not enough model bases in Crown Hall for all 120 of us. If not model bases are available, please place your models on the ground.  The jurors will understand.  Please use the proper tape and adhesive dots to pin up. We will be taping up over the top of the glass windows into the library, so please do so respectfully as to not disturb people working in the library.

At 2:30, please convene in lower core.  The competition will be juried by several guest jurors beginning with introductions at that time.  The jurors will be selecting a shortlist of projects for final review (red dot), and you will be asked to participate by awarding winners in three categories for Best Project (green dot), Best Model(blue dot) and Best Drawing/Rendering (yellow dot).

At 3:30-3:45 pm, all projects should be taken down from their locations, and those projects with red dots should re-hang your projects and re-place your models in lower core.  Please remember to also bring your # designation with you so we have record of which projects belong to who.   All of us will reconvene in lower core at 4:15pm, along with the jurors, for final reviewing and awarding of final winners.

Space is tight and models are large, so please work together to get everything on display.

The pin up #’s and locations will be displayed on the doorways of our studios and in Lower Core tomorrow afternoon around 1pm.    If by mistake your name does not appear on this roster, please either contact me by email (atinucci@iit.edu) or see me tomorrow for a spot.

After introductions at 2:30, please see your studio professor for the stickers you will use to select the ‘audience’ awards.  You will receive three stickers – a green, a blue and a yellow, and you will be asked to vote for your favorite Project (green dot), Model (blue dot) and Presentation (yellow dot), by placing your stickers clearly on or adjacent to your selections.

After the winners have been announced, it is your responsibility to carefully remove your presentation and models from their displayed locations and return the lower level of Crown Hall back as we found it.

Good luck on the home stretch and can’t wait to see the work tomorrow!

Assignment 4: Space, Time, Body, Approach

“The rhizome is altogether different, a map and not a tracing. Make a map, not a tracing. The orchid does not reproduce the tracing of the wasp; it forms a map with the wasp, in a rhizome. What distinguishes the map from the tracing is that it is entirely oriented toward an experimentation in contact with the real. The map does not reproduce an unconscious closed in upon itself; it constructs the unconscious. It fosters connections between fields, the removal of blockages on bodies without organs, the maximum opening of bodies without organs onto a plane of consistency. It is itself a part of the rhizome. The map is open and connectable in all of its dimensions; it is detachable, reversible, susceptible to constant modification. It can be torn, reversed, adapted to any kind of mounting, reworked by an individual, group, or social formation. It can be drawn on a wall, conceived of as a work of art, constructed as a political action or as a meditation. Perhaps one of the most important characteristics of the rhizome is that it always has multiple entryways; in this sense, the burrow is an animal rhizome, and sometimes maintains a clear distinction between the line of flight as passageway and storage or living strata (cf. the muskrat). A map has multiple entryways, as opposed to the tracing, which always comes back “to the same.” The map has to do with performance, whereas the tracing always involves an alleged “competence.”” – G.Deleuze/F.Guattari

Amidst this fragment from the Introduction Rhizome section of philosophers Gilles Deleuze + Felix Guattari’s book Milles Plateaux are a myriad of important critical questions. Here the map is not one of representation but of construction. The map constructed In this way is also a facilitator for construction, and one that is “entirely oriented toward an experimentation in contact with the real”.

To begin the final design of the bath house you are asked to “Make a map, not a tracing”. More specifically you are asked to construct a mapping of the site’s most essential characteristics that will underpin the direction of your project.  This will require you to experience the site and to translate that experience into a construction.

 

  • Space – This mapping must encompass some portion of the space beyond the boundaries of the park through to a proposed siting of your future bath house. Contained within this space is the physical approach to the site. In addition to the environmental and material conditions, the sites topography is of utmost importance to the spatial mapping.
  • Time – This mapping must explicitly engage with the measure(s) of temporality which make space experiential.
  • Body – This mapping must elucidate the relativity of the body to the space and time of the site.  It is the body which concretizes the abstract condition into physical experience.


Deliverable:
In a medium, and at a scale, appropriate to the mapping you construct, combine section, plan, and experiential data into a single assemblage.  All constructions are expected to be presented at level of craft comparable to the precedent drawings.  In some respects the methodologies of this mapping are analogous to the precedent study only with site as subject.