NOX presentation selected images

Assignment 6

Assignment 5

Resubmittal: Reading 4, not as poor?

Blobs, or irregularly-shaped organic forms (generally complex and computer generated), allow for the formal relation between the homogeneous or general to the heterogeneous or particular. Blobs reconcile the gaps in representation that traditional forms are sometimes unable to alleviate. They “suggest alternative strategies” and provide different, innovative solutions to difficult architectural situations.

Blobs possess surfaces that can’t be reduced, each is unique, and they are simultaneously alien to contextual influence while being able to be directly and dynamically informed by it. Lynn introduces “blobbiness” by likening them and their forms to the actions of blob-creatures in horror films, by philosophical definition of like surfaces, and by contemporary design techniques.

Blob monsters are similarly alien to people as blob forms are to traditional architecture. Such architectural forms are like horror film creatures in the way they behave as surfaces. They’re forms that behave like liquids with fluid movements, and a sort of surface tension and viscosity. Their similar constant state of movement and fluxuating forms shared with blob monsters is an important difference that separates them from traditional Cartesian forms. They can also “absorb” objects, not into interior cavities but into their surfaces themselves, and they fluidly interact with their environments in this liquid sense. And finally they appear as a liquidus body that is connected through a singular inteligence but can be infinitely multiplied and distributed.

These fluid entities are often described as “quasi-solid.” These have been developed digitally as isomorphic polysurfaces often called blob models. These are defined in relation to other objects and forces that have fields of influence, which the models react to. They can mutually redefine their respective surfaces based on the quality of influence in a given environment. Each such solid, or “meta-ball,” continuously acts under these circumstances as a single surface. These solids are multiplicities in the sense they have multiple internal conditions and reactions to formal forces, though they are also singularities in terms of their unified surfaces. The interacting components and levels of organization directly affect scale of simplicity and complexity of these objects. This scale and meta-ball modeling as a whole does not oppose reductive Cartesianism, but instead incorporates more subtle and complex relations of reductivism.

Blob construction fights the notion that structures must stand upright as a reaction to human structure, and therefore fights the dogma that buildings should automatically stand vertically. This was based on an early belief and ease of design on behalf of architects who were expected to be “simple, crude and upright in their approach” to designing surface and structure. With today’s technology, many architects are investigating alternative solutions Cartesian volumetric spatial identities. Shoei Yoh is one such architect whose recent work exhibits an approach to enclose a diverse set of programs under one roof with innovative techniques. Using blob tectonics, formal repetition is still used, but elaborated upon and made to interact with programmatic forces more creatively. Interestingly, computer generated information is used alongside formal modeling and diagramming in the development of these forms.

Work such as Yoh’s masks the distinctions essentially between the Cartesian and blob methods of design through the creation of a new approach that utilizes elements of both, such as “blobular” form and repetitious, Cartesian construction methods. Structural members in a project are generally repetitiously similar but not identical. Construction of such projects requires a mixture of manual and industrial assembly methods in a sort of “custom assembly-line production.” This combination manifests itself as a new unique identity incorporating both, referred to as the blob.

assignment 4

Reading 4, let's blog some more

Blobs, or irregularly-shaped organic forms (generally complex and computer generated), allow for the formal relation between the homogeneous or general to the heterogeneous or particular. Blobs reconcile the gaps in representation that traditional forms are sometimes unable to alleviate. They “suggest alternative strategies” and provide different, innovative solutions to difficult architectural situations.

Blobs can’t be reduced, each is unique, and they are simultaneously alien to context while being able to be directly and dynamically informed by it. Lynn introduces “blobbiness” by likening them and their forms to the actions of blob-creatures in horror films, by philosophical definition of like surfaces, and by contemporary design techniques.

Blobs are like horror film creatures in the way they behave as a surface. They’re forms behave like liquids with fluid movements, and a sort of surface tension and viscosity. They can also absorb object and interact with their environments in this liquid sense. And finally they appear as matter that is singularly connected but can be infinitely multiplied and distributed.

These fluid entities are often described as “quasi-solid.” These have been developed digitally as isomorphic polysurfaces often called blob models. These are defined in relation to other objects or forces that have fields of influence, which the models react to. They can mutually redefine their respective surfaces based on the quality of influence in a given situation.

Blob construction fights the notion that structures must stand upright as a reaction to human structure, and therefore fights the notion that buildings should automatically stand vertically. This was based on an early belief and ease of design on behalf of architects who were expected to be “simple, crude and upright in their approach” to designing surface and structure. With today’s technology, many architects are investigating alternative solutions Cartesian volumetric spatial identities. Shoei Yoh is one such architect whose recent work exhibits an approach to enclose a diverse set of programs under one roof with innovative techniques. Using blob tectonics, formal repetition is still used, but elaborated upon and made to interact with programmatic forces more creatively.

Work such as Yoh’s masks the distinctions essentially between the Cartesian and blob methods of design through the creation of a new approach that utilizes elements of both, such as “blobular” form and repetitious, Cartesian construction methods. This combination manifests itself as a new unique identity incorporating both, referred to as the blob.

assignment 3

Reading 3

Utilizing rational and nonrational methods, computer generated logics to drive a design forward can be a highly productive for design investigations. Both analogue and digital processes instill an ordering discipline to their approaches, which used in tandem, can produce new design solutions.

The research discussed intends to build on the applications of rational systems and fundamental underpinnings for the evolution of software objects as assistive methods only. Designers use equipment to create their artifacts, such as digital modeling programs and digital printing devices. Digital software “assists” the design process and doesn’t dominate it. The computer doesn’t create autonomous designs but helps in the creation of more complex and unpredictable ones. It does this through the creation of unanticipated data that requires trial and error exploration. This requires designers to manipulate the products of such programs in a way to drive their designs forward. Such manipulation demands a cognitive adaptation on behalf of users to the requirements of program over time.

Different design approaches are discussed, starting with parametric design. This approach refers to a system where values are substituted “for a few parameters in order to generate variation from within a grouping of entities.” It is generation of form within a strict set parameters. To do this, a design program, calibrated on some interpretive and subjective levels, needs to be utilized in the design process. Through its nonrational technique and the rational contributions of the architect, more innovative designs can be achieved. Complex systems allow the designer to act essentially as an editor, applying choices that will shape the future of their designs.

Evolutionary design methods are initiated by the subjective ideas of the designer. These elements are embedded into the program code, which the designer then works interactively with. Morphological approaches, assisted by programs like , are ways of generating form through a seriew of iterations as mentioned. They play on the premise that nonrational combinations have the potential to be explored and implemented as useful solutions.

During the design process, the model goes from an iconic form of concepts and ideas to a symbolic, mathematical one then incorporates the fourth dimension of time. Morphogenesis describes structure as organization, saying that shape and form-producing pressures are embedded in all subsequent states of materiality. These pressures are then tapped and utilized alongside other parameters and variables. Experimental design research as a whole doesn’t necessarily have to produce something immediately useful, the article citing the United States patent office as an example, stating that most inventions aren’t used for their original purposes. At the most extreme can serve useful as a means of exploration and learning for new innovations that can carry over to completely different endeavors.

The next section discusses formal matters and virtuality as a generative process. The Cartesian grid was an early example as a virtual means of describing things abstractly in space according to vertical and horizontal coordinates. This occurred under the assumption that forms existed in preobjectified states and were not measured according to time. Today, new methods involving the dimension of time are being implemented into design. This added dimension is incorporated with numerous iterations to develop accumulating patterns and further design. There are two main perspectives on temporality: time as a concept and as an experience. Conceptually, time has been understood in relation to events, and then quantified as an abstract standalone measurement. In reality, time is the constant flow of events. All objects change over time, and every object can actually be viewed as an event. The author uses an example of a chair in a classroom, which when viewed over the course of a day, would appear to be animated

Scientifically, closed systems produced expected results, and likewise with traditional methods, often designers work in closed systems, parallel to their goals states. Like the relativity and complexity theories, this is where virtuality’s lack of concreteness can be played to an advantage, as it allows for deviation from the rational and expected. Virtuality is actualized in the interactivity between the designer and the programs, allowing for innovative new solutions.

Larry Sass Lecture

Larry Sass is an assistant professor at MIT who focuses on research and the advancement of digital fabrication processes. His main design interest is described as designing and constructing culturally sensitive community based buildings. He is anti-factory in production, advocates a no-paper design environment, and a user of low energy techniques. He effectively puts technique above style for the purposes of his research.

One of his major research questions is determining if participatory design work is possible. Can people without sufficient knowledge and training utilize a medium with which to make design decisions? He seeks to make such interaction possible and feels that such technology will be more prominent in the near future.

Sustainability is amongst his chief interests in design. He feels that a green economy is not possible with old homes. This leads his research to the fabrication of brand new, sustainable designs to the exclusion of the modification of existing buildings to meet more societal responsible requirements.

Error is prefabrication’s greatest weakness and one Sass goes to great lengths to conquer. Error can necessitate additional hand based manufacturing, high energy factory fabrication and delivery, and imprecise, low quality products. As an anti-factory designer who seeks to ideally do without power tools on the job site, Sass relies on digital printing and laser cutting techniques to shape materials almost exclusively. This eliminates an enormous amount of error in communication and shaping by hand. He uses materialization, which he defines as the creation of geometries for manufacturing from CAD data, to make this possible.

His techniques are pretty remarkable. He uses no fasteners and minimal glue in the creation of his buildings, which are held together primarily by friction. Interestingly enough, these buildings are sufficiently stable. Erecting such designs is essentially like the assembly of a three-dimensional puzzle. This requires minimal skill and equipment usage on behalf of the builders, whom Sass drafts amongst his likely inexperienced students who still more than capable of putting together such projects.

Overall, Larry Sass is utilizing thought provoking methods that are beneficial to architectural design as a whole. Though his focus on sustainable, participatory, and ultimately low-cost design seems narrow minded as his products lack similarly thought provoking modern special design, his work is remarkable. He is setting a precedent for other designers to take these techniques and utilize them in addition with what equates to more architecturally interesting endeavors. Give him a break for implementing his techniques with a traditional shotgun house; focusing on his lack of attention towards spatial design is missing the point.

Reading Two: Techniques, Technology, Temporality in Time

The first chapter deals with techniques and technology. It begins describing the feedback loop between technology and culture, where advances in one lead to more in the other. With potential for innovation like never before, architects must sieze opportunity to utilize new digital technologies to drive this process forward. They must participate actively in this feedback loop.

The loop consists of technologies, which lead to technical innovations, which then call for new techniques, which then create feedback. A technology can be defined as the “purely technical or scientific advance,” towards a cultural context with an overall aim at greater efficiency. New technologies result in technical advances, which are new innovations that continue to drive the process forward. The difference between a slow and a fast internet modem would be an example of such an advance. In response, new techniques are necessary, which are defined as skills and strategies that users must adopt to make the most from the technical. These lead to cultural feedback and fuel the process continuously.

The author praises new techniques and their adoption in architectural practice. New techniques incorporate feedback from culture, destabilize traditional practice to be more daring and innovative, are process-driven meaning they lead to new techniques, and are most importantly interdisciplinary, which allows for a greater amount of potential possibilities. Often what were once new techniques are detatched from this feedback loop and eventually become static and routine over time. Even three dimensional modeling programs have merely taken the place of traditional methods with only improved efficiency in mind. The author defines the best digital practices that are ultimately a part of the feedback loop and take more innovative approaches as “technological design practices.” The firm of Charles and Ray Eames serve as a good example. They used technological advances during World War II to produce a series of techniques that built on their past work so that the firm could produce much more innovative work over time. While many of their designs focused on efficiency and mass production, they constantly worked as part of the feedback loop to drive their technology and design process forward.

Contemporary technological practices “must fully engage the conditions and possibilities of the digital age.” Zaha Hadid leads a good example of such a firm. These firms must employ techniques that seek to be a part of the feedback loop that yields “catalytic cultural effects.”


The next chapter deals with temporality and time. Architecture has typically resisted time in consideration of design. The author suggests a different approach, embracing time as an “ally in the production of transformative design.” He argues that technological practices use “temporal techniques” to make innovative designs that engage with the feedback loop. Two theories of temporality are introduced: physical and thermodynamic. Physical temporality suggests that time is “reversible.” This means that there is no change in the fundamental properties of materials over time. From this perspective, time is reduced to a numerical aspect only. The past and future states of materials are symmetrical. This essentially describes stagnation over time. Thermodynamic temporality suggests that processes are “irreversible.” Unlike physical temporality, the past and the future states of materials are assymetrical. This is both quantitative and qualitative, containing a numberical component of time as well as a potential for qualitative change. This is essentially dynamic over time.

The default method for approaching time in architectural practice is similar to the physical theory is generally done subconsciously by ignoring it. Technological practices consider their approaches to designing with time closer to the thermodynamic theory, incorporating it dynamically. They consider themselves and their modes of practice as momentary configurations that are in a constant state of flux.

These firms employ “temporal techniques” which can continue to change objects even as they are built. Traditional practices develop their schemes by clarifying them with the end in mind through top-down approaches. Efficiency is a strong determinate in the design process for such firms. Technological practices see the design process as irreversible. Each development builds on the last and never is the final product known. These firms seek to “generate unanticipated catalytic effects.” Each step takes the design in a new direction.

Other similar techniques are then introduced: temporal, generative, and transformative. Temporal techniques seek to be a combination of traditional and technological practice methods, combining virtual and numerical components. Generative techniques borrow strategies and programs from other industries. Two examples of architects who use these are Greg Lynn of FORM and Lars Spuybroek of NOX. Both use a set of information, like contextual conditions and differences in program, to shape their projects through analyzing the unexpected outcomes that the computers produce. The programs do the drawings and designing, but the firms give them their directions based on trial and error approaches to those products. The transformative techniques change materials irreversibly in time, leading to enexpected results. In this approach, objects have zones of influence that determine the ways they interact and their resulting forms. This approach also reveals no clues of the final product.

Overall, the author feels that static design methods make static buildings. Working dynamically instead allows architects to produce catalytic works that in turn continue to fuel the feedback loop and lead to innovative possibilities.

assignment 2

Reading 1

The reading begins with a quote linking modern technology and its very close effects on architecture. It praises Joseph Paxton’s Crystal Palace as a bold building for its time, leaping forward technologically and materiality as an architectural marvel. This building saw criticism as not being “architectural” because of its method of design, materials, and assembly, which were all unconventional. Similar criticisms may be drawn to modern designs with heavy computer influence or complete conception.

Technology and its infinite abilities open up new dimensions in design. This is all fairly recent, only in the last few years has computer aided design made such great advancements and had the potential for such commanding influence on building design. Advanced programs help make very difficult and expensive buildings to design constructible. The author relents that initially, digital “architectures” reject conventional methods and influences, those contextual or functional, instead seeking to be experimental. However, this new style is not without precedent. It too tries to go break tradition and “establish norms of beauty and proportion in architecture.” Those two conditions can be met through parametrics, as explained later.

“Smooth” architecture, implementing curvilinear shapes, has been formally ignored or dismissed by many architectural forms for being difficult to spatially comprehend or construct. The author figures there is basically no excuse for this considering curvilinear forms are very familiar to us, in the forms of consumer products and spaces in the likes of cars and airplanes. “Blobs,” or smooth surfaces created digitally, and “boxes” should not be seen as completely independent of one another, but as similar forms on a “sliding scale of formal complexity.”

The author makes comparisons between ships and buildings, which are surprisingly similar from a design perspective. Designing each requires many of the same requirements, principles and methods, with a nod to shipbuilding in terms of complexity and difficulty. As such, architects have historically taken precedent from shipbuilding. “Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao would not have been possible without the local steel and shipbuilding industry.”

Architecture borrows techniques from other practices. Animation software, such as Maya, was originally developed for use in films, but is often put to work architecturally. Architecture borrows from product design, automotive, aerospace, and shipbuilding industries. Each large step in technology of these industries makes a considerable impact on the designs possible. The Boeing 777, which was “the first 100% digitally designed aircraft,” serves as a good example.

The next chapter deals with digital morphogenesis. Architecturally, digital media is becoming more frequently used as a generative tool for making forms only possible digitally, and not solely for representation. So essentially using computers to do the designing work based on specifications is becoming more common. When this is done, drawings like plans and sections don’t “generate” the design but rather seek to analyze it. This is a methodical shift from the “making of form” to the “finding of form.” In generating these forms, computers are concerned with topology, which is “a study of intrinsic, qualitative properties of geometric forms that are not normally affected by changes in size or shape.” Topologies “remain invariant through continuous one-to-one transformations or elastic deformations, such as stretching or twisting.” This differentiates them from curved surfaces.

Pre-digital architecture is limited by Euclidean geometric forms and simple shapes like lines, circles, and quadrilaterals. With this traditional method, constructing complex curves relies on the utilization of these simpler geometries to form them with greater complexity and difficulty. NURBS programs, which stand for Non-Uniform Rational B-Splines, bypass this. This system uses a combination of elements called control points, weights, and knots to define topologies. It can create a wide range of geometric forms, from simple lines and Platonic solids to much more complex surfaces. It is also an computationally efficient way to represent geometric forms.

Parametrics are tools that can help determine form by “describing a range of possibilities.” They are essentially rules computers use to generate form. As such, the design parameters are declared, not the shape of the form. Different objects can be created by assigning different values to these parameters. The International Terminal designed by N. Grimshaw and partners demonstrates this method in its irregular roof form. A parametric model was used to make the arches of the roofs instead of modeling each one individually. Parametrics profoundly change the entire nature of design. “For the first time in history, architects are designing not the specific shape of the building but a set of principles encoded as a sequence of parametric equations by which specific instances of the design can be generated and varied in time as needed.”

Parameter based design takes into account the unfolding of the internal system (program) and the enfolding of contextual information fields (responds to the context). Parametrics can accommodate both. Animation programs can be used to determine the forces that represent the unfolding and enfolding of different information fields. Greg Lynn did this first with animation software depicting the kinematics, or the study of the motion of systems of objects. This software sees forms as the reactions of forces, an idea echoed by D’Arcy Thompson in a book published in 1917.

Biological “rules” and genesis can be applied to the generative process for architectural form. Architectural concepts are expressed as a set of generative rules, which set up digital parameters. A morphological process basically takes different randomly generated designs that fulfill certain parameters and crossbreeds them with one another to create a sort of vertical evolution.

Performative architecture, which is beginning to take hold, is used for the design on cities, buildings, landscapes, and infrastructures. It places the performance and use of spaces above form making. It can be described as parametrics with an emphasis on program.

The reading ends on a note of caution to see digital design simply as a different method and not more than what it is. The author suggests that it should be scrutinized and considered on an equal platform as any other architectural methodology.

A1

Lars Spuybroek / NOX abstract

Lars Spuybroek undoubtedly stands on the frontier of the future of architecture. With his innovative designs, and unique technological methods, surely his digital design theory and contemporary developments are bringing the realm of design forward. In the city of Rotterdam, of the Netherlands, Spuybroek leads the NOX architecture studio, where he practices as both an artist and an architect. One of his most known works, “The Water Pavilion,” which is thought of as the first building in the world fully incorporating new media, earned him global recognition. In multiple interviews, Lars Spuybroek expressed his views along with the concepts that NOX revolves around on the different methodologies and theories used in the design and digital process of the firm. He believes that designs are created based upon the physical experience of the building, and although currently only small scale art structures have been completed, the studio anticipates and looks forward to larger full scale projects.

An underlying concept that Spuybroek's design process revolves around is the idea that his work focuses on activating the body; transferring movement into architecture. Designs are primarily about the experience and interaction between a person and the building. In his own words, “Instead of being a body in a space, the body is so charged with abstract movements that the way in which this is expressed in actions is the spatial experience. We are the extension of space, not the other way around.” Through this, the idea that form and aesthetics have no importance emerges. Ultimately, these only appear after the project has been completed. It is Spuybroek's belief, that due to the advancement of technology, all design will become “meta-design”, where people can actually ‘print’ an object through the use of digital information – objects can now be a range of objects, as he puts it, in a family or a species. None are the same, but are all similar enough to be read and recognized. NOX aims to design buildings that are economical, but at the same time, entirely unique from anything currently available.

As previously stated, “The Water Pavilion” was an entirely innovative design that set Lars Spuybroek apart from all others, and made his name common in the architectural world. This building was so monumental because of its style – “liquid” architecture, a theme that is a clear result of NOX's design process. In Spuybroek's words, “liquid architecture is a paradox, because the architecture can be liquid but the building is solid”. He believes that the building itself should be static, but the actual architecture aspect should never be at rest. This idea of “liquid architecture” is in direct relation to Spurbroek's idea of “motor geometry”. It’s ultimately the liquidizing of everything that has traditionally remained solid in architecture. Rather, it is the merging of wall and floor – object and environment, or action and form. It’s an attempt to connect one act to another. Nothing, no object or function of the design, is to remain isolated, and instead, all is brought to a continuous process of transformation. As he puts it, “Liquid architecture is not about nice and pleasing sculptural forms – because there is always a risk of toppling things over...and without that risk, in a more cultural sense, the act of architecture seems absolutely worthless”.

Spuybroek paid particular attention to buildings such as exhibitions and museums, noticing two fundamental elements: the floor, which allows for the movement, and the walls, which enables sight of spaces and works of art. The two, as he sees it, are very closely related, explaining his morphology of one into the other, and the very close relationships between the two. He believed that there doesn't really need to be a clear distinction between the two in his work, a very interesting concept that truly sets him apart from other designers.

When attempting to comprehend the philosophy behind the NOX architecture firm, the most important concept to understand is the digital work process. Spuybroek's use of the computer creates a wildly different route than most traditional architects. Originally, the procedure of design begins with a diagram, from which a design materializes, whereas Spuybroek attempts to avoid the use of lines, and instead digitally analyzes curves and irregular forms. He felt that there was a particular level of complexity of form that drawing by hand could never reach in architecture. As Spuybroek had said, “you can only draw with one hand, while with a computer you can work with tens of coordinated hands simultaneously”. He saw the computer as a vital tool, one that simple architectural tasks such as rotating, copying, and aligning are all a part of. You cannot 'do' computer and not 'think' computer – there is no fighting that belief. Along with this concept, the idea that diagramming being so much superior to simple sketching is a part of Spuybroek's digital practice. Through the use of a computer, he turns the design into a 'machine' which follows along a geometric system, all intertwined, with all aspects functioning together. None of this could be achieved without the use of computers, which help to create a 'matrix', along with a system of relations, which is unobtainable through the use of a pencil.

It is clear that Lars Spuybroek's work is truly innovative. Through his unique perception of what a building should be designed for, and his technological means of achieving this, he is able to push the limits in the world of architecture, standing at the frontier of what is to come in the future. The dominant role of the computer as a vital tool, experimentation with 'liquid architecture', and the attempt to connect visitors directly to the building that they inhabit sets him apart from all others, placing NOX in a important place among designers today.