designbuild: fabricating installation

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T

ASSEMBLY: N.T.S.DESIGN / BUILD

PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCTPR

OD

UC

ED B

Y A

N A

UTO

DES

K E

DU

CA

TIO

NA

L PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PRO

DU

CED

BY

AN

AU

TOD

ESK

ED

UC

ATI

ON

AL

PRO

DU

CT


PRO

DU

CED

BY A

N A

UTO

DESK

EDU

CA

TION

AL PR

OD

UC

T


PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES 2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS4

PROJECT DESCRIPTION5

PEOPLE10

PROCESS12

DESIGN20

PROTOTYPE26

FABRICATION32

CONFIGURATIONS36

BUDGET56

POST-SCRIPT58

3

Acknowledgements

THIS PROJECT WAS MADE POSSIBLE WITH THE GENEROUS SUPPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FUND FOR INNOVATIVE UNDERGRADUATE TEACHING.

We would like to also thank our colleagues at USC that have assisted us in this effort and special thanks to:

Ian McCully, Facilities Coordinator, USC School of Architecture Anders Carlson, Assistant Professor, Structural EngineerChristoph Kapeller, Adjunct Assistant Professor, ArchitectJanek Dombrowa, Assistant Professor of Practice, Architect

4

Design - Build thinking through making

There has been an increased interested in teaching involving “project based” learning

techniques. The School of Architecture had always had this emphasis in our design

studio based curriculum. However design studio pedagogy has been transformed by new

technologies that allow for the use of virtual modeling, which in spite of its potentials has

significant limitations – not, the least of which is the absence of scale a de-emphasis of

materiality, and a lack of tectonic sensibility. Virtual Modeling is dependent on constantly

evolving software and suffers from a “craft backlash” both in the design process and

ultimately in the buildings produced from such a process. This issue becomes much more

significant when it is understood that professional degree programs deploy the design studio

as a precursor of what is happening professionally. Our course model employs a project

methodology that provides an archetype for design significantly different than that currently

used by most of the profession. By investigating the design process through the complete

cycle of a design build project – the course will look at craft from the design process through

fabrication and deployment. The course will enrich the learning experience including the

practicalities of budget, construction and client by focusing on the development of a project

through the conceptual and practical implementation, and ultimately the prefabrication and

installation of “built work” that serves as an example for both students and community.

5

“An Architect must be a craftsman. Of course any tools will do. These days the tools might include the computer, an experimental model and mathematics. However it is still craftsmanship- the work of someone who does not separate the work of the mind from the work of the hand. It involves a circular process that draws you from an idea to a drawing. From a drawing to an experiment, from an experiment to a construction, and from construction back to an idea again.”

Renzo Piano 1992

6

Background Information The course is initiated with a series of material design meetings to identify issues of

construction and fabrication to organize collaborative efforts with the constituents. The

team will develop systematized components and integrate these elements to define the

total installation, merging the technology of design and construction. The completion

of projects will allow for an investigative methodology that is currently unavailable in our

existing hypothetical studio format.

The larger format for studio instruction will provide for flexibility in structuring project

efforts and efficiencies in addressing collective issues. The project will be collaboratively

designed and executed by the team who will construct and install the design, the result

of an integrative design methodology synthesizing the design process with fabrication and

producing an architecture that intrinsically relates material, tectonic and form.

Understanding the critical importance of construction on the field of architecture and the

expansion of this impact from conceptual information management into actual fabrication,

a mastery of these techniques becomes essential in the emerging models of contemporary

practice. The ability to engage material and tectonic through a complete stream of project

development and execution provides the opportunity for learning through hands-on building

projects. Hands-on learning is vital for architectural students. Our courses at the School

of Architecture cover a wide breadth of topics ranging from cultural history to structural

engineering, design theory to environmental conditioning, life drawing to professional

practice. While the profession increasingly encourages specialization, all of these areas need

to be familiar to all architects. This course proposal studies how design-build can provide a

new way of integrating these issues, and to validate the process through construction.

7

InnovationsWe initially proposed to reintroduce building craft into our design studio courses to explore

design, materiality, tectonics and construction using cutting edge technologies. Southern

California has unique resources in these types of technologies and we can engage them

in the studio environment. By requiring the design process to engage construction, the

traditional relationship between design and craft can be re-introduced into architectural

education with a different perspective that integrates current methods of digital fabrication

into the studio environment. Design / Fabrication exploration will demonstrate emerging

building technologies and materials and evaluate their effectiveness.

The opportunity for students to physically create, engage in one-on-one conversations and

present, discuss and defend their ideas is an intensive learning environment. By introducing

a hands-on projects into the curriculum, this proposal can both enrich the educational

environment and explore procedures, which potentially help re-define our professional role

in society.

Introducing a hands-on material project in class directly addresses the need as expressed

by students for more in-depth study of materials and fabrication relative to the design

process. The exposure to new technological approaches in presentations to the full topic

studio enrollment will benefit the whole professional curriculum. By physically creating a

built project, students will learn via doing and demonstrate the relevance of these new

procedures and techniques. With the project constructed at the School of Architecture,

students not enrolled in the class will see their fellow students actively engaged in a building

project and learn about both innovative and traditional material options. Having an accessible

completed project will provide a public forum for sharing the outcomes with the broader Los

Angeles Community.8

Timeline and Project Description Due to the only partial award of funding, the scale and format of the design-build has

been altered to better accommodate new parameters. This course format will be a three

week intensive special topics ARC 499 course offered May 15th thru June 4, 2010. This

scheduling will allow the students participating to take advantage of the ability to focus on

the course without other academic conflicts. The project will be the design and fabrication

of mobile presentation furniture for the school of architecture. Focusing on movable walls

for drawing pin-up and digital projection [with both indoor and outdoor accommodations]

and model podiums for the display of three-dimensional objects, students will identify the

needs of the student community, identity the practical and material requirements of the

design, and then collectively design and fabricate the final products. The collaborative design

method, along with the engagement of design through the full cycle of schematic, design

development, construction documentation and construction allow for the full engagement

from idea to construction.

This short-course will demonstrate design-build to the USC School of Architecture and ignite

a precedent for future larger scale and more involved investigations.

9

BORDENPRO-at-EVERYTHING

LAGRECOFEARLESS LEADER

FACULTY

Gail Peter Borden, AIAAssistant Professor of Architecture

Charles Lagreco, AIAAssociate Professor of ArchitectureMacDonald and Diane Becket Professorship in Community Design

10

CARLOS GUTIERREZB.ARCH_5TH YR

DAVID HOFFMANB.ARCH_4TH YR

GABE MASONM.LARCH_2ND YR

ADRIAN SUZUKI M.LARCH_2ND YR

SEAN HSUB.ARCH_5TH YR

TEAM

Gail Peter Borden, AIAAssistant Professor of Architecture

11

PROCESS

12

6'-8"6'-5"

0'-3"

DESIGN

20

plan1/16”=1’-0”

114"

1'-912" 2'-0"

4'-0"

21

exploded axon1/16”=1’-0”


1/2” HOMASOTE

1/2” PLYWOOD

STEEL FRAME1 1/4” STEEL ANGLES

22


STEEL FRAME1 1/4” STEEL ANGLES

CASTERS (4)3” PJ SWIVEL TYPE

1/2” PLYWOOD

23

LOWER CORNER SECTION DETAIL 24

UPPER CORNER SECTION DETAIL25

PROTOTYPE

EXPERIMENTS:VARIOUS MATERIALS AND DETAILS WERE BUILT AND TESTED AT FULL SCALE BEFORE THE FINAL PROTOTYPE WAS CONSTRUCTED

26

EARLY PODIUM PROTOTYPES:FOCUSED ON EXPERIMENTS WITH FORM RELATED TO ISSUES OF STORAGE

MATERIAL PROTOTYPES:AFTER ESTABLISHING A VERSATILE FORM, THE EXPERIMENTATION WAS WITH VARI-OUS MATERIALS AND DETAILS

PODIUM

28

FINAL PODIUM PROTOTYPE:

DURABLEVERSATILESTORE INSIDE EACH OTHEREASY TO BUILD/MAINTAIN

31

FABRICATION

32

PRE.MO [PRESENTATION MODULE]POSSIBLE ASSEMBLIES

37

BALCONY WALL

CREATES A 3RD WALL ALONG THE BALCONYMORE WALL SPACE CLOSES UPPER ROSENDIN

UPPER ROSENDIN PRE.MO CONFIGURATION 1


SEPARATION WALL

DIVIDES UPPER ROSENDINMORE WALL SPACE POSSIBILITY FOR MULTIPLE REVIEWS

40


CORNER

DEFINES A SPACEDIRECTS TRAFFIC AROUND REVIEW SPACE

42

LOWER ROSENDIN PRE.MO CONFIGURATION 1

CORNER

DEFINES LOWER ROSENDIN AS A SEPARATE SPACELESS INTERFERENCE TO REVIEWS FROM CIRCULATIONDOUBLES USABLE WALL SPACE

44


EXHIBITION

BETTER SUITED TO EXHIBITIONSMEANT FOR VIEWING RATHER THAN REVIEWSPROVIDES MORE WALL SPACE

46


NESTED

MODULES ARE DESIGNED TO FIT INTO THE HALLWAY GROTTOES

48

COURTYARD EXHIBITION

FOR OUTDOOR EXHIBITIONSCREATES ACTIVE AND PASSIVE SPACES IN WATT COURTYARDALLOWS REVIEWS TO OCCUR OUTSIDE

WATT COURTYARDPRE.MO CONFIGURATION 1

SCATTERED

FOR SEPARATE REVIEWS OR EXHIBITIONS

COULD SUPPLEMENT LARGER OUTDOOR EXHIBITIONS + EVENTS


52


CORNER

DEFINES A SMALLER SPACE WITHIN WATT COURTYARD FOR MEETINGS OR REVIEWS

54

BUDGET

56

Description Quantity Cost Per Unit TotalMetal cutting 84 $2.14 $180.00

Joint Connector Nuts 125 $0.26 $37.46

Joint Connector Bolts 125 $0.15 $23.54

Steel Angles 20 @ 20’-0” $13.75 $274.92

Plywood 19 @ 1/2” 4’X8’ $34.60 $657.47

Homasote 10 @ 4’X8’ $23.04 $230.39

Casters 21 $10.98 $230.48

Painting 5 $75.00 $375.00

Miscellaneous Tools $681.20

Fabrication $2000.00

Publishing $309.54

$401.85 PER SET $5,000.00

57

POST-SCRIPT

Conclusions

thinking through making

The basic premise of the investigation was that the physical act of making involves a creative

process quite distinct from the conceptualization of the object because it has to confront the

tangible impact of materiality and the discipline of craft which necessitates an appreciation

of the construction process. This exposure is commonly only imposed on the architectural

profession by the numbing imposition of type where the repetition of building elements and

the exposure to the variables and impact of the implementation process has a resultant

impact on the design process. The impact of new technology goes beyond its visualization and

suggests a new virtual connection between the description of things and their fabrication. By

integrating the design and building efforts, there exists the both the potential of merging the

two activities and at the same time loosing the feedback that comes with an understanding

of the implications of that potential proposition – to paraphrase Rem Koolhas , “now you can

build anything.”

If one is concerned about the implications, as well as excited about the potential, then it might

be reasonable to consider the return to a more tangible connection between the design build

dialogue in order to be able to more clearly see the limitations of new technologies as well as

their more obvious advantages. The class offered in the summer session had the advantage of

highly accessible and underused facilities as well as an intensely focused effort concentrated in

a full time three-week schedule. This was somewhat tempered by the lack of student exposure,

as only a few were in school on special projects during the first three weeks of summer. A

more rigorous testing of the relationship between virtual and actual modeling might have been

possible in a full semester studio context but was not attempted in this course. And while there

are certainly many unique technological leading edge resources, the lack of lead time did not

58

allow us to explore that potential application to the project. The construction experience was

somewhat ironically more limited by the students own skills and exposure and by the easily

available and affordable resources found in the school and surrounding community.

The scale and scope of the project was entirely appropriate and allowed for a reiterative

process to test premise and precedent before the final implementation of the designed

components. It seems that the decision to fabricate enough units to test their application to

the school exhibition spaces, created a ambiguity between prototype and product. If there

had been more time, a full prototyping and evaluation would have occurred before all five

units were fabricated and instead all were fabricated at once to meet the deadline. This did

provide a clear indication of the limitations of the initial premises on cutting and welding

the frame as well as the use of connectors and panel materials but did not allow for a

demonstration of the lessons learned.

Part of that input will involve the use of the system in presentations throughout the school in

the rest of the summer and in the fall regular course schedule. That evaluation will provide

further insight into the process and its potential application to our curriculum. 06 | 15 | 2010

Gail Peter Borden, AIA

Assistant Professor of Architecture

Charles Lagreco, AIAAssociate Professor of Architecture

MacDonald and Diane Becket Professorship in Community Design

59









ASSEMBLY: N.T.S. DESIGN / BUILD

PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8










PLYWOOD BACKING

PLYWOOD

MATERIAL 2

HOMASOTE

STEEL ANGLES

STEEL TUBES2x2x1/8

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

1/2”

2x2x1/8

60

designbuild: fabricating installation

Documents