Methods and Analysis BK8040Methods and Analysis BK80402007/20082007/2008

ir.Marc Koehlerir.Marc Koehlerir. Erno Langenbergir. Erno Langenberg

ir. Ali Guney ir. Ali Guney Dr. Karina Moraes Zarzar, PhDDr. Karina Moraes Zarzar, PhD

ObjectivesObjectives

The objective of “Methods and Analysis” is that:

1. Students are introduced to essential terminology, concepts and numerous aspects (such as context, program of requirements) of the architectural field.

ObjectivesObjectives

The objective of “Methods and Analysis” is that:

2. Students develop programmatic and typological knowledge in architecture through the study of relevant cases.

ObjectivesObjectives

The objective of “Methods and Analysis” is that:

3. Students learn how to use and adapt design precedents in the creation of innovative designs through the analysis of an architect’s oeuvre.

Some questionsSome questions

What means Analysis?What means Analysis? What means Methods?What means Methods? Why should you analyze something?Why should you analyze something? Does it help you during design?Does it help you during design? Does it help you in developing your position Does it help you in developing your position

as architect?as architect?

HowHow can you analyze a can you analyze a building/project?building/project?

You can analyze it by: You can analyze it by: Visiting the buildingVisiting the building Studying visual material: Studying visual material:

– technical drawingstechnical drawings– perspectivesperspectives– Via photos, videosVia photos, videos

Reading about itReading about it

2 Approaches2 Approaches

Approach 1:Approach 1: You don’t have written material You don’t have written material about a particular buildingabout a particular building– You base your analysis on the physical aspects You base your analysis on the physical aspects

of the building of the building – You study the drawings (maybe also visit the You study the drawings (maybe also visit the

building)building)– You start your explorative (almost exhaustive) You start your explorative (almost exhaustive)

analysis according to the methodsanalysis according to the methods– You make the synthesis of all the partsYou make the synthesis of all the parts

2 Approaches2 Approaches Approach 2:Approach 2: You know something from the You know something from the

architect’s position and want to know how some architect’s position and want to know how some

aspects are expressed in his designsaspects are expressed in his designs

– You study the drawings (maybe also visit the building)You study the drawings (maybe also visit the building)

– You start a specific analysis on the physical aspects of You start a specific analysis on the physical aspects of

the building to uncover the specific themes found in the the building to uncover the specific themes found in the

architect position)architect position)

– You present a partial synthesis in explaining the specific You present a partial synthesis in explaining the specific

themesthemes

2 Approaches2 Approaches Both ways:Both ways:

– You need METHODS to REPRESENT your You need METHODS to REPRESENT your

findingsfindings

To compare with other buildings To compare with other buildings

To communicate with other peopleTo communicate with other people

– You will understand how to “read” a You will understand how to “read” a

project/buildingproject/building

ObjectivesObjectives By the end of the course, students should be able to: By the end of the course, students should be able to:

– Bring together an adequate Bring together an adequate documentationdocumentation of projects of projects

– Understand basic Understand basic architectural conceptsarchitectural concepts

– Understand basic Understand basic principles of compositionprinciples of composition

– Critically perform a Critically perform a descriptive analysisdescriptive analysis of a precedent through: of a precedent through:

numerous methods: Ching, Clark and Pause, Steadman and in particular numerous methods: Ching, Clark and Pause, Steadman and in particular

the F(m).O.P) the F(m).O.P)

and diverse approaches: composition, function, context, construction - and diverse approaches: composition, function, context, construction -

according to Leupen’s according to Leupen’s Ontwerp en AnalyseOntwerp en Analyse

– Make a Make a comparison of projectscomparison of projects

– Analyze the oeuvre of architectsAnalyze the oeuvre of architects in relation to their worldviews in relation to their worldviews

(themes), their use of precedents (themes), their use of precedents

– Make a Make a proper presentationproper presentation of the analysis of the analysis

– Be able to Be able to transfer their knowledgetransfer their knowledge from precedent analysis to design from precedent analysis to design

Course StructureCourse Structure

The course is subdivided into 7 seminars of 4 hours each and a series of 7 lectures on methods.

Lectures = Lectures = – general relevant terminology general relevant terminology – methods methods – Study of the Oeuvre Study of the Oeuvre

Seminars = Seminars = – discussion about selected architectural aspects discussion about selected architectural aspects – discussion about lectures discussion about lectures – exercisesexercises

The Assignment:The Assignment:1.1. The students select (groups of 4 students):The students select (groups of 4 students):

1.1. The architect (from proposed list)The architect (from proposed list)2.2. The themes (at least 2 themes)The themes (at least 2 themes)3.3. Two representative projects of this architect Two representative projects of this architect 4.4. Apply Method(s) (to be learned during the lectures and seminars) to analyze, Apply Method(s) (to be learned during the lectures and seminars) to analyze,

describe the findings, produce the parti, describe the findings, produce the parti, 5.5. Compare the two buildings Compare the two buildings 6.6. Analyze the oeuvre in relation to the selected themes: re-use, transformation Analyze the oeuvre in relation to the selected themes: re-use, transformation

and shiftsand shifts2.2. Result: Poster (format: A0) of the analysis Result: Poster (format: A0) of the analysis

1.1. Introduction about the selected architect and his/her position(s)Introduction about the selected architect and his/her position(s)2.2. Documentation of two projects of one architect: drawings, sketches, Documentation of two projects of one architect: drawings, sketches,

perspectives, pictures, texts perspectives, pictures, texts 3.3. General description: primary and secondary elements, topological + functional General description: primary and secondary elements, topological + functional

representation and partirepresentation and parti4.4. Comparison of these projects referring to the selected themes. Comparison of these projects referring to the selected themes. 5.5. Study of the oeuvre referring to the selected themesStudy of the oeuvre referring to the selected themes6.6. Conclusion: reflection of the whole analysisConclusion: reflection of the whole analysis

3.3. Attention: Attention: 1.1. results are always delivered in a CD as well as in a printing version. results are always delivered in a CD as well as in a printing version. 2.2. Groups: max. 4 students.Groups: max. 4 students.

Poster Lay-OutPoster Lay-Outon the blackboardon the blackboard

List of Architects:List of Architects:

James Stirling James Stirling Tadao Ando Tadao Ando Herman Hertzberger Herman Hertzberger Louis Kahn Louis Kahn Frank Llyod Wright Frank Llyod Wright Rem Koolhaas Rem Koolhaas MVRDV MVRDV Jorn Utzon Jorn Utzon Jo CoenenJo Coenen

Hendrik Petrus BerlageHendrik Petrus Berlage Richard MeierRichard Meier Aldo RossiAldo Rossi Norman FosterNorman Foster Renzo Piano Renzo Piano Toyo ItoToyo Ito Peter ZumthorPeter Zumthor Zaha HadidZaha Hadid Alvaro SizaAlvaro Siza

Seminar Course: Method and AnalysisSeminar Course: Method and Analysis

Seminar 1:ConceptsIntro. FOPChingAspect: Theme

Seminar 2:ConceptsChingClark & PauseAspect: Prog. Of Req.

Seminar 3:Clark & PauseSteadmanAspect: Design concept

Seminar 6:Aspect:Design Precedents and identity

Seminar 5:Aspect: Typology;Design Precedents;Oeuvre

Seminar 7:Presentation of the comparisson of two buildings + oeuvre

•Terminology•Introduction to F.O.P.•Ching:Sp. RelationsSp. Organiz.

-Ching: •Movement•circulation •-Program of Requirement-Clark and Pause: •Geometry•Light Fall•Structural System

-Clark and Pause: •Hierarchy•Massing•PARTI-Steadman:Topological Relations

Analysis

F(M) – O- P

Design

Precedents and Innovations

Precedents and Identity

Lecture 1:ALI

Lecture 4: Erno

Lecture 2:ALI

Lecture 3:ALI

Lecture 6:KARINA

Lecture 7:KARINA

Lecture 5: ALI

-Materials, Structures and Details

Seminar 4:F.O.P.

Seminar 4:Aspect: Materials: Sensorial, texture, esthetic System & ConstructionArchitectural Details

Course structure per seminarCourse structure per seminarSEMINARS

Discussing Architectural Aspects: 30 minutes

New Assignments5 minutes

Discussing lecture “n” 30 to 60 minutes

Work in Sub-groups(exercises) 1:15 hr

Round table40 minutes

Sem

inar

Literature

Analysis

CritiqueNot all seminars

LiteratureLiteratureREQUIRED LITERATURE:REQUIRED LITERATURE: Leupen, Bernard et al. 1999. Leupen, Bernard et al. 1999. Ontwerp en AnalyseOntwerp en Analyse. Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010. . Rotterdam: Uitgeverij 010. Ching, F.D.K. (1979) Ching, F.D.K. (1979) Architecture: form, space and orderArchitecture: form, space and order Clark, R.H. and Pause, M. (1985) Clark, R.H. and Pause, M. (1985) Precedents in ArchitecturePrecedents in Architecture Steadman, J P. 1989. Steadman, J P. 1989. Architectural Morphology-Topological (graph theoretical) representations of plansArchitectural Morphology-Topological (graph theoretical) representations of plans Tzonis. A. 1992.Tzonis. A. 1992. “Huts, ships and bottleracks: Design by analogy for architects and/or machines”. In: “Huts, ships and bottleracks: Design by analogy for architects and/or machines”. In:

Research in Design ThinkingResearch in Design Thinking. Edited by: N. Cross, K. Dorst; and N. Roozenburg. Delft: Delft University Press: . Edited by: N. Cross, K. Dorst; and N. Roozenburg. Delft: Delft University Press: pp 139-164.pp 139-164.

Tzonis, A. Tzonis, A. and L. Oorschot. 1987. Frames, Plans, Representation, Conceptdictaat inleiding programatische & and L. Oorschot. 1987. Frames, Plans, Representation, Conceptdictaat inleiding programatische & functionele analyse. Delft: TU Delft, Faculty of Architecture, Art.nr. 236functionele analyse. Delft: TU Delft, Faculty of Architecture, Art.nr. 236

Meiss, Pierre von. 1990. Meiss, Pierre von. 1990. Elements of architecture; from form to place .Elements of architecture; from form to place . New York: E & FN SPON, An Imprint New York: E & FN SPON, An Imprint of Routledge. (of Routledge. (Oorspr. titel: De la forme au lieu, 1986Oorspr. titel: De la forme au lieu, 1986))

Moraes Zarzar, K. and A. Guney (Editors). 2008. Moraes Zarzar, K. and A. Guney (Editors). 2008. Understanding Meaningful EnvironmentsUnderstanding Meaningful Environments. Research in . Research in Design Series, Volume 4. Amsterdam: IOS Press under the imprint Delft University PressDesign Series, Volume 4. Amsterdam: IOS Press under the imprint Delft University Press

Moraes Zarzar, K. 2003. “Breaking the Type”. Milan: GA2003Moraes Zarzar, K. 2003. “Breaking the Type”. Milan: GA2003 Moraes Zarzar, K. 2004. “Precedents and Identity”. Milan: GA2004Moraes Zarzar, K. 2004. “Precedents and Identity”. Milan: GA2004 Christian Nobert-Schulz. 1976. “The Phenomenon of Place”. In: Kate Nesbitt (ed.). Christian Nobert-Schulz. 1976. “The Phenomenon of Place”. In: Kate Nesbitt (ed.). Theorizing a New Agenda Theorizing a New Agenda

for Architecture, an anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995for Architecture, an anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. . New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 1996, pp. 412-4281996, pp. 412-428

DVD series: Architectures. Art Video. Vol. 1/2/3/4/5DVD series: Architectures. Art Video. Vol. 1/2/3/4/5RECOMMENDED LITERATURE:RECOMMENDED LITERATURE: Jong, T.M.d. and H. Engel. 2002. “Typological Research”. In: Jong, T.M.d. and H. Engel. 2002. “Typological Research”. In: Ways to study and research urban, architectural Ways to study and research urban, architectural

and technical designand technical design. Edited by: T. M. d. Jong and D. J. M. v. d. Voordt. Delft: Delft University Press .. Edited by: T. M. d. Jong and D. J. M. v. d. Voordt. Delft: Delft University Press . Jong (2002) Mathematical models 24.14 Graph theoryJong (2002) Mathematical models 24.14 Graph theory Moraes Zarzar, K. 2003. Use and Adaptation of Precedents in Architectural Design, toward an evolutionary Moraes Zarzar, K. 2003. Use and Adaptation of Precedents in Architectural Design, toward an evolutionary

design model. Delft: DUPdesign model. Delft: DUP Leupen, Bernard. 2002. Concept and typeLeupen, Bernard. 2002. Concept and type Leupen, Bernard et al. (1999) Design and TypologyLeupen, Bernard et al. (1999) Design and Typology Meiss, Pierre von. 1998. Meiss, Pierre von. 1998. Elements of architecture; from form to place. Elements of architecture; from form to place. London, Spon (First Edition: London, Spon (First Edition: De la De la

forme au lieu, 1986)forme au lieu, 1986) Rossi, A. 1966. Rossi, A. 1966. The Architecture of the City. The Architecture of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.MIT Press. Tzonis, A. and L.. Lefaivre. 1986. Classical Architecture, The Poetics of Order. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Tzonis, A. and L.. Lefaivre. 1986. Classical Architecture, The Poetics of Order. Cambridge, Massachusetts:

MIT Press MIT Press