Hello and Welcome!
My name is Alexis Rodriguez and this blog has been set up to demonstrate my work done in Design VI, if there are any questions feel free to post a comment on any post and I'll respond as soon as I can.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Alexis Rodriguez Assignment 5: Light, Geometry and Structural
Your diagrams are nicely crafted. The geometry studies are straight forward enough. With regard to the light distribution diagrams, find some sections of the building and investigate how the light penetrates the space and if it affects other aspects of your analysis: programme, hierarchy, etc. Likewise, for the structural diagrams, pointing out the planometric locations of structural elements is useless unless there is something to be learned. A true analysis of the structure addresses the approach and tectonic system which expresses structural thinking geometrically. Take for example the columns in Frank LLoyd Wright's Johnson wax building. Look to the expression of force vectors in any Calatrava building. Look to Ito's library to see how the structural system can become more than the columns and walls that hold up the roof
Thank you for your input, I actually also had the thought there was something I should have added to my structural diagrams but I just wasn't clear as to what. Your idea on analyzing their position instead of just locating them is a great idea and I will edit those images to be more useful.
Alexis, Your analysis above is quite concise, if a little simplistic. Geometry is formative...and can be suggested or precise. It can be seen as an overall massing, as elevation, plan (per above) or section. Good architecture often replicates similar or complementary geometry in each. (As in the Exeter example from the handout). As seen in the first two building above, and just from the graphics above to inform me: the W. Chester has an inverse version of the elevational (and perhaps sectional) geometry to the 'form' you have illustrated in plan...do you think this is intent or happentance? The same could be said for the Arapahoe, regarding the curves used in section and plan. It is really fun to try and discover what the architectural intent might have been...you can not be expected to know for sure, but to voice an opinion based on your research forces you to not only discover the posssibility but to condense your understanding of the buildings. As to natural light, the light will obviously enter the building through the glazed areas, but there is a temporal aspect to light penetration -the degree or amount being very dependent on angle of light and orientation of the building. As an example a massing that runs predominently east west is subject to saturation of sunlight through the east, south and west facades at different times of the day (and the depth changes seasonally depending on the solar azimuth), however the north light will still penetrate, if to a lessor degree, the spaces with fenestration on the north side. Are some of the program elements placed so as to gain from these limitations/saturations? Have additional light wells been introduced to allow for additional penetrations? Have light reflecting materials been used purposefully at the building perimeters to augment the reflective properties -or to absorb some of these same properties? As mentioned above, do other building or vegetative growth impact the temporal penetrations. Additionally, the opportunity to learn from the structural choices made in the buildings above are plentiful. Several buildings show how a grid can be used to establish a 'structural pattern' and then edited -subtractive- to open up ('celebrated space'?) or to re-inforce the repetition (even at various scales) to impose the order as a wayfinding or directional schema (long hallways as 'colonades' or penetrating and extended 'thresholds'?). You are doing some great analysis, take the time to summarize -even abstractly- your findings.
Your diagrams are nicely crafted. The geometry studies are straight forward enough. With regard to the light distribution diagrams, find some sections of the building and investigate how the light penetrates the space and if it affects other aspects of your analysis: programme, hierarchy, etc. Likewise, for the structural diagrams, pointing out the planometric locations of structural elements is useless unless there is something to be learned. A true analysis of the structure addresses the approach and tectonic system which expresses structural thinking geometrically. Take for example the columns in Frank LLoyd Wright's Johnson wax building. Look to the expression of force vectors in any Calatrava building. Look to Ito's library to see how the structural system can become more than the columns and walls that hold up the roof
ReplyDeleteThank you for your input, I actually also had the thought there was something I should have added to my structural diagrams but I just wasn't clear as to what. Your idea on analyzing their position instead of just locating them is a great idea and I will edit those images to be more useful.
DeleteAlexis,
ReplyDeleteYour analysis above is quite concise, if a little simplistic.
Geometry is formative...and can be suggested or precise. It can be seen as an overall massing, as elevation, plan (per above) or section. Good architecture often replicates similar or complementary geometry in each. (As in the Exeter example from the handout). As seen in the first two building above, and just from the graphics above to inform me: the W. Chester has an inverse version of the elevational (and perhaps sectional) geometry to the 'form' you have illustrated in plan...do you think this is intent or happentance? The same could be said for the Arapahoe, regarding the curves used in section and plan. It is really fun to try and discover what the architectural intent might have been...you can not be expected to know for sure, but to voice an opinion based on your research forces you to not only discover the posssibility but to condense your understanding of the buildings.
As to natural light, the light will obviously enter the building through the glazed areas, but there is a temporal aspect to light penetration -the degree or amount being very dependent on angle of light and orientation of the building. As an example a massing that runs predominently east west is subject to saturation of sunlight through the east, south and west facades at different times of the day (and the depth changes seasonally depending on the solar azimuth), however the north light will still penetrate, if to a lessor degree, the spaces with fenestration on the north side. Are some of the program elements placed so as to gain from these limitations/saturations? Have additional light wells been introduced to allow for additional penetrations? Have light reflecting materials been used purposefully at the building perimeters to augment the reflective properties -or to absorb some of these same properties? As mentioned above, do other building or vegetative growth impact the temporal penetrations.
Additionally, the opportunity to learn from the structural choices made in the buildings above are plentiful. Several buildings show how a grid can be used to establish a 'structural pattern' and then edited -subtractive- to open up ('celebrated space'?) or to re-inforce the repetition (even at various scales) to impose the order as a wayfinding or directional schema (long hallways as 'colonades' or penetrating and extended 'thresholds'?).
You are doing some great analysis, take the time to summarize -even abstractly- your findings.