Final Doc FAA

1DENSITY / MATTERS: A pavilion that regulates wind through varied density distribution.

Alican SungarFelix Tseng

Ashwini Ashokkumar

EMERGENT TECHNOLOGIES & DESIGNCORE STUDIO ONE[21st November -19th December 2014]

CONTENTS

CONTENTS

I/SITE ANALYSIS ----------------------------------------------1/ Context-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2/ Environmental Data-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3/ Ambition --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3/1 Variable wind break system 3/2 Rain shelter 3/3 Sway resistence

II/BIO INSPIRATION ------------------------------------------ 1/ Behaviour of trees -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1/1 Mass distribution 1/2 Mass damping 2/ Analysis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2/1 Branching & mass distribution 2/2 Branching & geometry variations

III/WIND BREAK PERMORMANCE ------------------------ 1/ Component parameters---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1/1 Elemental proportion 1/2 Branching Angle 1/3 Element Length

2/ Observations ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2/1 Density 2/2 Geometry

57

8

11

1315

15

17 19

23

IV/SYSTEM DESIGN -------------------------------------------------- 1/ Geometry Explorations ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1/1 Surface 1/2 Volume 1/3 Layers 1/4/ Form

2/ Aggregation possibilities-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3/1 Controlled aggregation 3/2 Random aggregation

3/ Architectural character ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3/1 Low density volume [Zone 1] 3/2 High density surface [Zone 2] 3/3 Variable density [Zone 3]

VI/CONCLUSION --------------------------------------------------------

2527

33

38

41

Alican Sungar | Felix Tseng | Ashwini Ashokkumar

EMERGENT TECHNOLOGIES & DESIGN CORE STUDIO I[21 November - 19 December 2014]4

0/ https://wharferj.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/isle-of-dogs.jpg

51/ SITE ANALYSIS

7CHAPTER ISite Analysis

1/1 CONTEXT

1/ SITE ANALYSIS

The Isle of dogs, situated in the East End of London, is nestled by the river Thames as it meanders around it. The Masthouse Pier lies South West of the isle facing Deptford.

The pier is used for passengers travelling two main routes east towards Woolwich and west towards Embankment. The pier currently has two embarkment/disembarkment points on either side of the deck. Boats travelling towards Embankment halt at the North-West point in the deck and those towards Woolwich at the South-East point.

In addition to points of embarkment/disembarkment there also is a sheltered waiting area in the North-west part of the deck that can house 5-7 people at a time. The approach to the deck is from Napier Avenue, the closest tube station being Mudchute on the DLR.

The deck is designed to absorb the vibrations caused by the movement of the waves with rollers attached to either end that move against the pillars to stabalize.

The deck measures 8m by 39m and rises to a maximum of approx. 6m above sea level at 0200hrs & 1400hrs minimum to approx. 2m at 0800hrs and 2000hrs according to tidal movement.

N

1/ Isle of Dogs

2/ Masthouse Terrace Pier

1&2: Points of embarkment/ disembarkment3: Sheltered waiting area4&6: Vibration absorption system7: Entry from Napier avenue Towards Embankment Towards Woolwich

N

1

2

3

6

5

7

4

1/ https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Isle+of+Dogs,+Greater+London/@51.4945125,-0.0154784,2252m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x487602bd52c9dbed:0x2/ https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Masthouse+Terrace+Pier/@51.4875184,-0.0223906,73m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x4876029340b3899d:0x8cfe473acca119ce



1/2 ENVIRONMENTAL DATA

In order to identify the concerns of the site that can be used as inputs in the design proposal, we studied the sun path diagram of the Masthouse Terrace pier, measured wind speed values and direction on site on two dates and that of London in general all year round.

From this data we find important clues on those aspects that need to be addressed in the design of the pavilion. It is seen that the South-West side of the deck recieves abundant sunlight all through the year. This area is also used as circulation and therefore can maximize on this quality. Therefore, the central portion of the deck can be left open while the extremes of the deck (also used for embarkment/disembarkment) can house the most sheltered regions.

Another important aspect that was experienced strongly on site was that of wind speed. The expanse of the water body not only creates increased wind speed but also reduces wind temperature adding to the discomfort. The predominant wind direction is south-eastnorth-west. This means that the south-east region of the deck (below the ramp) needs to house the maximum wind break performance.

Tidal action causes the deck to vertically oscillate this movement is dampened by way of the rollers that move along the edge pillars. However, as the rollers move along the pillars it collides disseminating vibrations through the deck.

1/ View of South-East region of deck

South-East:Maximum wind break

North-East:Wind & rainshelter

Central:Open-to-sky

9/ SUNPATH STUDY

2/ 15th March

4/ 15th September

3/ 21st June

3/ 21st December

CHAPTER ISite Analysis

4

N

4.5

2

2.5

2.53

2.5

32.5

4/ Local measurements with anemometer (wind speeds in m/s)

03 Dec 2014

09 Dec 2014

1.5

/ ON-SITE WIND DATA



/ LONDON WIND DATA

5/ First Half of the year

6/ Second Half of the year

11Alican Sungar | Felix Tseng | Ashwini Ashokkumar


2/Rain Shelter 3/ Sway resistence

1/3 AMBITION

As established through the previous studies, the 3 main qualities of space to be designed should primarily reflect a variable wind break system. This must also allow for variation within its parameters in order to achieve zones within larger zones that can break the wind further so as to creat a multi-layered space. This layering will depend on the speed and direction of wind.

Rain shelter and resistence to sway due to vibrations of the deck are also concerns that will be looked into in the design proposal.

1/3/1 Variable Wind Shelter:Since the Masthouse Pier is used by passengers in transit or users who may have to wait for a boat for a maximum of 30 mts it becomes important to create variations in spatial quality for one to explore depending on the weather at a particular time of the day/year. Since it is on the Thames it is also necessary that the sapce is not completely enclosed so as not to loose on views of the surrounding environment whilst also being well ventilated. Therefore, the main ambition of the system design is to allow for variations in wind break performance within its parametric definition.

1/3/2 Rain Shelter:A part of the pavilion must also be designed to provide for shelter during the rain. This area can replace the existing waiting area in the North-West corner of the deck.

1/3/3 Sway Resistence:The vibrations caused due to the collision between the rollers on the deck and pillars must also be addressed in the design of the pier. These requirements for the system design gives clues to investigate existing natural systems that behave similarly.

1/ Variable Wind Shelter

CHAPTER ISite Analysis



0/http://searchpp.com/real-life-fractal-tree/

1313CHAPTER ISite Analysis

2/ BIO INSPIRATION



In order to design a system that both, behaves as a wind shield as well as resists vibrations we investigated the structure and behaviour of trees. Trees, through branching are able to distribute mass to effectively dissipate wind and dampen its energy. These two aspects were studied, however, mass damping behaviour has not been taken further in the system design.

2/1/1 MASS DISTRIBUTION

Branching is a phenomenon wherein each iteration dictates the rules of growth with respect to its mother branch. Through this method trees are able to break their mass into smaller compartments after each iteration that contributes to its balance and enhances their exposure to sunlight. However, depending on the force and direction of the wind, this system can encounter failure [James, 2010].

Due to greater wind speeds in the higher regions of the tree large bending moments are experienced at its base [Niklas and Spatz, 2000]. This is counteracted by the branched roots. The complex behaviour of trees to withstand high wind speeds also rely on variated material properties within branches that exhibit some elasticity.

The aspect of branching, more importantly, mass distribution is further studied to understand wind break performance.

2/ BIO INSPIRATION

1/ Tree in the wind 2/ Wind breaking mechanism

3/ Effect on trees of winds at different speeds

1/ http://inthehallofmirrors.typepad.co.uk/.a/6a00d8341c345453ef01156f9ae8eb970c-popup2/ http://www.wired.com/2010/09/fractal-patterns-in-nature/3/ Pg 250, A DYNAMIC STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF TREES SUBJECT TO WIND LOADING. James, Kenneth Ronald. Melbourne School of Land and Environments, Oct 2010.

2/1 BEHAVIOUR OF TREES

15

Branching has two repercussions to the systems design: wind break performance and geometry. Depending on the branching angle we can proliferate elements that simultaneous increase density at every iteration and change its geometry. For the first test we studied 2 iterations of branching to see its effect on wind velocity at different heights.

2/2 ANALYSIS

2/1/1 MASS DAMPING

Trees ability to withstand earthquakes stems from the fact that each sister branch oscillates at different natural frequencies causing out-of-phase movement of the system as a whole thus shirking off the incoming energy. This phenomenon can be compared to a mass dampeners connected in succession, the sum of which is equal to their preceeding serie.

Therefore if a system has elements of varying masses connected to each other in a way that it is not looped we can achieve similar results. Though this aspect has been investigated, no detailed analysis has been made to document it in this report.

4/ Dynamic structural model of a tree, with trunk and branches represented as dynamic masses attached to each other.

5/ Branching iteration 1 6/ Branching iteration 2

4/ Mechanical Stability of Trees under Dynamic Loads. James, K., Haritos, N. and Ades, P., Journal of Botany, Vol. 93, No. 10 (2006),

1 1

1 2

2 2

3

3 3

1 2 3

2/2/1 Branching and wind break performance:

It is seen from figure 5 & 6 that by by adding a second iteration of branches the wind speed can be reduced. The measurement is taken from 3 points. [1: initial velocity; 2: centre of the branch; 3: behind the branch]

CHAPTER IIBio Inspiration



2/2/1 Branching and geometry variation:

Branching angle determines the various achievable geometries. According to the requirements of the site these angles can be manipulated to densify or rarify a given volume. Added to branching angle, length of sister branches also play an important role in varying the geometry. Some exploration shown below demonstrate the possibilities and limitaions of such a system.

This process demands an intuitive method that allows for pruning in order to manipulate the form as required. Through this method we can proliferate in a random order to achieve defined forms.

10901800

aa/2a/4a/8

0/ http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Vortex-street-1.jpg

7/ Proliferation 1 8/ Proliferation 2

9/ Proliferation 3

17

3/ WIND BREAK PERFORMANCE



3/1 COMPONENT PARAMETERS:

The systems individual component from which the growth process starts is first analysed. Since our main concern is achieving maximum wind break performance, a cyclindrical form is unfavourable. Therefore a study is made on various proportions of invidiual elements to find the best fit for wind break. Although in the actual scenario, neither is the direction of wind standard nor the ability of a branching algorithm to maintain the components directionality, it is still valid finding most robust elements for wind break at every step. The next is to find the most suitable angle of branching for a given volume and thirdly the length of individual elements and its response to wind break.

3/1/1 ELEMENT PROPORTION:

In order to understand the windbreak systems basic component dimension, we tested 5 variations of proportion and compared the flow effects when wind is passed through the testing object. We found the optimum ratio to be 2:5 and we later use it as our basic reference ratio. This ratio has a steady flow condition after testing object. The others testing models occurred much similar to the Krmn vortex street, which is caused by the unsteady separation of flow behind the object.

Dimension Test

Angle Test

degree: 60,120,180

1,2,3,4,5 : 5 2 : 5ratio:

Generate Geometry

same wind velocity

wind velocity: 3,6,10 m/s9 circumstantial types

1 2 3 4 5

1

5

10

15

19CHAPTER IIIWind Break Performance

5:5 1:5

3:52:5 4:5

2:5

Velocity: 10m/s

High Velocity Area:

2:10 2:152:1

1/ Elemental proportion tests



3/1/2 ELEMENT ANGLE:

We set the angles of fork in a local component between 60 degree to 180 degrees. In order to understand the performance of angles, three initial velocities were tested, which are 10m/s, 6m/s, and 3m/s. Each angle type provided different range of

3/ Dimension+Angle

Flow

flow area behind the fork unit. 1200 being the most optimum as it has less imapct area. Using this information we can manipulate branching angle to achieve specific wind break performance.

By using the combination of proportion unit and the angle range, the ideal geometry shape can be predicted. It helps us to move forward to think about the regional geometry prediction and the relationship between geometry and site condition.

2/ Elemental angle tests

21

3/1/3 ELEMENT LENGTH:

The basic geometry properties studies helped us understand the local component behaviours, to delve deeper, we investigated the relation between length and distribution. This manipulation of the regional level of geometry might be a significant control point to affect the performance of the windbreak system.

We set four variations that each one has the same volume (50cm x 50cm) and total mass, but the number of the segments is different, beginning from 10 segments to 80 segments (each variation has a half number of subdivisions difference). Due to the increase of subdivisions, the total area of surface rise because of the growth of cross section area. The increasing surface means the growth opportunity to disrupt the flow

D = M/V

of wind. The tests show that the lesser amount number of segments component has a concentrated decreased velocity wind area, blue (fig/4), however, the higher amount number of segments component has a much more equal distribution of low velocity wind area in each level.

According to the result of reorganization experiments, the mass distribution strategy alters the wind velocity and the flow condition, meanwhile, in terms of structural concern layer issue occurs in this experiment. The longer strut component might become the main structure, and the second layer arrangement could use another mass distribution strategy in order to apply to the structure proposes and deal with the windy problem concern.

Variation I Variation II Variation III Variation IV

Plan organization

50 cm10 lines

25 cm20 lines

12.5 cm40 lines

6.25 cm80 lines

3/ Mass and density distribution

CHAPTER IIIWind Break Performance



Level +40 cm Level +25 cm Level +10 cm

Variation I

Variation II

Variation III

Variation IV

4/ Wind flow analysis

23

3/2 OBSERVATIONS:

/DENSITY:

One of the main factors that affect the wind is the density of the volume exposed to it. A solid surface may stop the wind right behind the surface but may cause increases flow few meters away. Solid surfaces also increase the surface pressure causing failure. Therefore it is important to create porosity in such a way that less surface area is exposed perpendicularly to the wind.

Density can be achieved using smaller elements to fill up a volume. The best percentage of porosity for effective wind break is 33 %. It is also seen that inducing a combination of random angles to the system improves its performance in certain areas, and the more randomness is induced the better the system behaves.

/GEOMETRY:

From the test it is seen that certain parameter can be fixed for proliferation such as element dimension, growth angle and length of component. The most suitable proportion is 2:5 which suggests the use of sheet material for making the component. The growth angle can be grouped in families of acute, right and obtuse to study the variations we can achieve in geometry with them.

Geomtery can take a pseudo random approach wherein each components length and growth angle is determined but which components should growth and which ones should discontinue will be determined by site conditions.

6 & 7/ Saskatchewan Agriculture. Porous Windbreak Fencing, Plan S-104. March 1993

6/ Comparison of % porosity.

5/ Wind Speed and porosity

CHAPTER IIIWind Break Performance

25

4/ SYSTEM DESIGN

27

4/1 GEOMETRY EXPLORATIONS:

Following the studies on wind break performance we explored the various geometric outcomes using this information. By using different branching angle we can fill space or create volume, surfaces etc. within a given kit of parts. The kit of parts consist of 2:5 proportioned elements of length a & a/2 & three angle connectors 600, 900 & 1200. These can be used in combination with each other to grow in multiple directions.

We faced difficulties in transferring this data digitally, as forms cannot be predefined in this processs, they emerge out of local rules that are also manipulated to achieve desired effects. It will later be seen that a more pseudo-random approach is needed when tackling our system. The geometric explorations were important in showing us the various possible outcomes from the kit of parts and how each element contributes to form/ surface development. This information can later be used in determined density distribution.

By following certain rules for each exploration, such as fixed angle, fixed length or limited combination we were able to determine 4 types of geometric outcomes from this system:

Surface Layer Volume Form

CHAPTER IVSystem Design



Y jointsType A surface

6060

120120

Type A Type B

1. The geometric shape of the surface depends on the angle of the joints, which affect the direction of the struts and the overall form. Also, for the further development the angle of joints decides the proportion of porosity, which affect the efficiency of windbreak purpose. The bigger angle we use the bigger area of a signal hexagon geometry we get.

4/1/1 SURFACE:

2.Understanding different function of angles, the overall surface geometry can be achieved by using fork system and manipulated to cope with the environmental conditions in this windy site.

29

4/1/2 LAYER:

Curveture of the layersLayer test model

Joint

60 degree joints

The rangle of growth directionZ

X

Y

first layer

second layer

third layer 6030

-30

0

1. We used the fixed angle (60 degree) joints as this tests only pick out angle to proliferate the multi-layer surface and test the layering relationship by the way we manipulated those fixed joints.

2. The direction of joint decides the curvature of layer and the number of layer. Vertical Joint makes the strut goes toward up or down, and horizontal joint makes each layer increase area. Also we can predict the shape due to the fixed angle restrain the direction of overall development.

Layers




In-fill concept

109

109

1

Type A Type A

1. This test tried to increase the density inside a volume and achieve a logical assembly via infilling another small scale component inside the superstructure.

In-fill volume model Joints

In-fill concept

Four direction joints

main strut

In-fill object

2

3

4

2. The infill component be embedded into the superstructure by using slot joints, which define the size of the second structure because the definition of the range between each slot be defined on the superstructure already.

3. However, the slot joints make the strut become weak in terms of structure capability because it damages the structural continuity.

4/1/3 VOLUME:

31

4/1/4 FORM:

Type of units Type of joints

length=a length=a,b length=a number x1 number x3

A B C

120

1. To achieve a closed system, symmetry shapes and angle choices are the crucial components.We assembled the unit A, B, and C in a circular shape and repeated numbers of the units in a logic rule, which is A+C+B+C.... The geometry that emerged was domical.

Dome system Connection joint

2. We used the 120 degree joints for the basic connection joint, and also combined three of it to get the edge of the dome system, which alter the axis of the surfaces, which means 4 of this joints can achieve a circular shape with 4 main surfaces.




4/2 AGGREGATION POSSIBILITIES:

Understanding what the possibilities are with the angle and proportion of the elements we proceeded to explore aggregation possibilities. As this system has layers of repeated logic, the complexity multiplies at every stage. Hence it became important to revisit the relation ship between length, angle and density. Using this we can hope to proliferate in a way that responds to the density requirements of the site according to our previous studies there are three main zones that require a varied densities. These are dense on either side of the deck and rare at the centre. Added to this requirement the branching should reduce in size in order to increase density keeping the main the same to respond to the greater wind speeds at higher levels. With the information we obtained from all previous studies we explored two options for achieving the global form. One is a completely random approach where the connection angle is only determined for individual components and the overall aggregation is non deterministic, while the other is a more ordered aggregation method having fixed angle of connection at every stage.

1 2 0 O J O I N T S +1 . 6 m M E M B E R S

S U R F A C E C R E A T -E D W I T H 9 0 O & 6 0 O

J O I N T S

6 0 O J O I N T S +2 m M E M B E R S

5 m

f a m i l y o f a c u t e a n g l e s

h e i g h t m a n i p u l a t e d b y c h a n g e i n s t r u t l e n g t h

m a s s d i s t r i b u t e d b a s e d o n w i n d s p e e d s

L a y e r 1

L a y e r 2

L a y e r 3

f a m i l y o f o b t u s e a n g l e s

3 . 3 m

4 m

33

4/2/1 CONTROLLED AGGREGATION:

Through our exploration we understood that the system can be designed through two approaches: controlled and random. A pseudo random approach such that we define a growth pattern to create variable densities with varying length and angle increase fabrication complexity. In order to tackle both systems we simplified the controlled approach and added more complexity to the random approach.

As seen in the images above we can manipulate the density within a fixed volume & fixed growth angle by reducing the length of the component. This way we can group regions of higher required density and break the volume into a network of smaller components such as this.

We can further simplify the paramters of the sytem by having a space frame-like connection logic. Here the components are fixed based on angle and length and their proliferation is based on density attractors in the overall site.

Volume: FixedLength: 2 cmNumber: 16Joint angle: 1200

Angle

Scal

e



Component aggregation

Scale

Angle

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nulla et purus urna. Curabitur vehicula sed purus quis vehicula. Sed risus enim, tincidunt quis auctor id, eleifend ac quam. Nullam eu hendrerit lacus. Nullam lobortis nisl facilisis aliquet gravida. Vestibulum tristique purus quis laoreet porttitor. Pellentesque quis semper nisl. Sed hendrerit nisl ut vestibulum maximus.


Scale

Angle



Scale

Angle



Scale

Angle



Scale

Angle



Scale

Angle





sheltered space

protected open space

Sheltered(dense)

Sheltere(dense)

Open to sky(rare)

Sheltered(rare)

Site data and usage of deck, architectural proposal includes three space with different performances. According to previous research chosen branching angles applied on the system to procure intended space qualities. With the variations of 60, 90 and 120 degree angles with different beam lengths on multilayered surface system windbreak performance criteria adapted on the site. Layerin of surface is also varied according to sheltered areas. While system approach towards these areas number of layers and distances between layers increased to achieve %30 porosity.

For sheltered areas most dense system with 60 degree applied on multilayered system. For transition areas 90 degree with 1 to 4 branches applied on the system. Lastly for least dense area 120 degree and 1 to 3 branched system applied.

35

Shadow range of cluster_2 (21 June 9 AM)

Shadow range of cluster_2 (21 June 2 PM)

Shadow range of cluster_2 (21 June 11 AM)

Shadow range of cluster_2 (21 June 5 PM)




4/2/2 RANDOM AGGREGATION:

Another method that can improve the wind break qualities of the space is a random aggregation method. From previous studies on wind flow tests it is seen that by scattereing mass in random order we can increase the performance of a volume in blocking wind. To induce random in a controlled system increases the complexity of fabrication therefore an alternative method was explore such that the properties of individual components (length, angle etc) alter the system in the local level creating repercussions in the global geometry. The following tests show the manipulation of density within a fixed volume through changing geometry of local component.

Four different aggregates were used. 2 of strut size 8 cm, and 2 of strut size 4 cm. These components were of 6 struts each joined mutually perfendicular to each other in the first case and making acute/obstuse angles between them in the second scenario. It is oberved that we can achieve high density by randomly aggregating these components as well and relying on friction to determine the internal connections.

Aggregates in plan, manipulating density distribution

900600

Length: 4cmNo: 100

Length: 4cmNo: 25

Length: 8cmNo: 50

Length: 8cmNo: 10

37CHAPTER IVSystem Design

Aggregation of 4cm components in fixed volume

Aggregation of 8cm components in fixed volume

Variabledensity due to aggregation of 8cm and 4cm components

+

900

900

900 900



4/3 ARCHITECTURAL CHARACTER:

The studies in branching- geometry and wind break performance- gives us important clues on the organization of masses in the overall form to regulate wind. It is found that through local manipulation we can achieve desired results in overall density differentiation. Following are some views that aim to achieve this architectural quality via our system. The controlled and random method offer different spatial quality and the struggle to find a method that can combine both is a challenge. The following two options are using the controlled aggregation method

4/3/1 LOW DENSITY CENTRAL ZONE:

The central zone as it is used for circulation and recieves maximum exposure to sunlight is treated as a rarified wind break region.

Low Density Central Zone

39

4/3/1 HIGH DENSITY SURFACE NORTH-WEST REGION:

According to on site wind data it was found that the there is wind flowing from the thames path towards the deck. Therefore to respond to this a surface-like structure is created that blocks the wind at the same time does not take up more volume in order to increase density.

High Density Surface




Variable Density Zone

4/3/3 VARIABLE DENSITY REGION:

To achieve variable density within a single space we can use variable aggregate sizes and angle to manipulatedensity and create volumes. The image here shows an exploration using random aggregate method. The scale and number are not be accurate due to limitations of analogue modelling.

41

Through this study we have been able to effectively categorize the performance of various elements that emerge from a branching system in order of its performance against wind load. It has been seen that in order to create a robust wind break system we need to break a surface in random order so as to redirect the wind in different directions and dampen its energy.

The test relating to element size, proportion and angle show that if we choose the best performing component at the local level we can aim to amplify its effect in the global scale.

The geometry explorations show that by varying the growth angle we can manipulate form creating surfaces, layers, volumes etc. These in turn have implicit repercussions to the overall system. For example, acute angle can pack more struts within less volume, thus increasing its density.

Length of the component also plays an important role in the aggregation. As seen in the controlled and random method of aggregation changing the size of the strut and increasing its number can greatly increase density within a fixed volume.

The struggle has been to create a system that is similar to the intuitive process of creating form through branching angle wherein growth can be controlled in the direction required while the unneeded branches can we pruned. This method was replaced by two alternatives that achieve the similar effect. Here the branches are treated at individual components and their aggregation can be controlled or random depending on the fabrication method chosen.

/FUTURE POSSIBILITIES

Varying aggregate size and angle and its effect on density distribution can be further studied to be used as inputs in the overall design of the pavilion. Since these follow order of aggregation it is also important to study their manufacturing techniques and limitations. A digital model that emulates the randomness of this system can also be explored in order to manipulate densities provide specific dimensions for the aggregates.

1/ CONCLUSION

CHAPTER VConclusion

Final Doc FAA

Documents

Transcript of Final Doc FAA