BOOK
PROCESS
Design VI
I
Tectonic Sustainability
Julianne Grove I Selected Works
I
Spring 2022
02
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Tectonic Case Study
I
Growing the South Side
Air Research Center
I
04-07
I
08-13
14-19
Facade Building Analysis
I
20-23
Streetery Canopy I 24-27
Reflection I Page 29
03
TECTONIC CASE STUDY
Burr Street Elementary School I Fairfield, Connecticut l SOM l 2004 To set a precedent of what the semester would focus on, each student was given the chance to research a sustainable building and look into its tectonics. Looking into Burr Street Elementary School, it provided insight on how to efficiently alter material standards, challenge construction norms, set up runoff systems, orient the structure for optimal sunlight, and (most importantly) improve mental health through use of courtyards. To identify these environmental approaches by SOM best, a collage was made; informing viewers of important changes to make a technical building sustainable.
W
3 3
12 12
04
9
TECTONIC & SUSTAINABILITY COL
NOVEMBER
SEPTEMBER
JULY
MAY
20%
30%
10%
40%
E
E W 9
WINTER
LLAGE
SUMMER
05
SUSTAINABILITY SKETCH
Defining Sustainability I An effort to protect and conserve the environment. It is an organization of practical strategies that push to better the environment and offset the present conditions.
COURTYARD CUT-OUTS
CLASSROOM VIEWS N^
Primary Tectonic Concept I To connect each design level with the landscape. In order to do so, the architects coordinated curves and cut-outs which in turn left open space for internal courtyards and trees to grow within the building; unique entrances allowed for the disposal of a normal wraparound road, creating open views of the woods via classrooms.
IRRIGATION LOCATION N^
MATERIAL STANDARDS
Sustainable Strategies I Conserve the wooded area surrounding the school and make room for retaining trees in the courtyards. Alter material standards, offset water runoff through storm water and irrigation systems.
CONSTRUCTION CHANGES
06
Tectonic Decisions I Intentional changes were made to the quota of construction. Local stone was used to reduce transportation emissions, recycled materials helped to decrease waste, and the site was organized in a way that responded to the environment’s conditions.
TECTONIC MODEL
MATERIALS CLOSE-UP
SUSTAINABILITY MODEL
CONNECTION CLOSE-UP
07
GROWING THE SOUTH SIDE E 1st Street I Bethlehem, Pennsylvania
Taking the information found from the tectonics of Burr Street Elementary School, the next task was to design a structure with its architecture influences, but also create a new environment for the community of Bethlehem. After analyzing the site, there seemed to be a missed opportunity to help the south side of Bethlehem. Art programs scattered the site, but yet no career education programs or culinary practices to teach the low-income community how to provide for themselves. Growing the South Side thus was designed to provide just that while utilizing garden and produce space to create a healthy, joyful work and living environment that would be both sustainable and community oriented.
08
TERRACE PERSPECTIVE
09
$78,374 COLLEGE TOWN N^
46/50
LEHIGH RIVER
PRIMARILY WHITE
1 ARTSQUEST I ART PROGRAMS 2 LEVITT PAVILION I MUSIKFEST 3 BANANA FACTORY I ART CAMPS
HISTORIC
VT
WHITE AFRICAN AMERICAN ASIAN
“...not enough programming is offered to help the South Side Community.” -Resident
2
46
1
57.2% 8.4% 3.5% 57
19.7%
MULTIRACIAL 5.7%
WT
LIVE IN POVERTY
16%
3
9 PERFORMANCE & LEARNING
SUMM
ABANDONED
CASINOS & SHOPPING
ER 12
9
WINTER
3 3
12
UNAFFORDABLE HOUSING
$51,907
3/12
S
^
HISPANIC PACIFIC ISLANDER 5.6%
PRIMARILY WHITE
SITE ANALYSIS
FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0’ 5’ 10’
ROOF PLAN
10
0’ 5’ 10’ 20’ N^
20’
N^
THIRD FLOOR PLAN
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
ROOF (TOP-DOWN): 2” CORRUGATED METAL ROOFING 5/8” OSB 2 1/16” POLYSTYRENE INSULATION 1 5/16” METAL DECKING 1’ 3” WOOD TRUSS WITH BATT INSULATION 1/2” CEILING FINISH WALL (LEFT-RIGHT): 1’ STEEL I-BEAM 1’ ORIGINAL STONE CLADDING FLOOR (TOP-DOWN): 4” CONCRETE FLOOR FINISH 4”-8” POLSTYRENE INSULATION 2” METAL DECKING 1’ STEEL I-BEAM 1” CONCRETE SLABS LIVE ROOF MODULE (TOP-DOWN): 2 1/2” ENGINEERED SOIL 1 3/4” WOOD LITE MODULE WITH MOISTURE PORTALS 1/2” MODULE PLATE 7/16” EPDM 5/16” OSB 3/4” METAL DECKING 5/16: METAL SHEATHING 4” WOOD STUDS 5/16” METAL SHEATHING 5/16” CONCRETE SLAB
THERMAL WALL SECTION
WEST SECTION 0’ 5’ 10’
20’
N^
SOUTH SECTION 0’ 5’ 10’
20’
N^
11
PERSPECTIVES
12
BUILDING PERSPECTIVE
SITE MODEL
DETAIL SHOTS
TECTONIC CLOSE-UP
SECTION TECTONIC MODEL
13
AIR RESEARCH CENTER
19°01’22.1”N 72°55’54.6”E I Mumbai, India Group Partners I Micailah Cialella, Clara Newcome, Ari Podolnick To challenge the standards of architecture and understand tectonics and sustainability on a deeper level, project three involved studying on remote land in Mumbai. Working with team members, each were tasked to research Mumbai’s poor air quality and work together to design a tower that would combat the hazardous PM-2.5 pollution particles and inform residents of the current air status. For this project, model making and hand drafting were key to the design process and helped to generate a greater understanding of the design and its development.
14
SITE MODEL
15
SITE ANALYSIS
INITIAL SKETCH
16
FILTRATION DIAGRAM
STRUCTURAL & SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS
RESIDENTIAL (PRIVATE) FLOOR PLAN 0’
5’
10’
20’
N^
RESIDENTIAL (PUBLIC) FLOOR PLAN
LAB (DATA) FLOOR PLAN
17
SECTION AT 1000’ 0’
18
5’
10’
20’
N^
SECTION AT GROUND
SECTION MODEL CONNECTION CLOSE-UP
NEIGHBORHOOD DRONE MODEL
DRONE DETAILS
19
FACADE BUILDING ANALYSIS Technikerstraße 84 I Innsbruck, Austria Group Partner I Gabby Semana
Throughout the semester, aside from Design VI, Tech IV focused on the development of a facade that would respond to climate conditions in a sustainable manor. After studying the facade of the Housing Complex in Innsbruck, inspiration was taken to create an operable paneling system that would give residents comfort through Austria’s fluctuating weather patterns. The semester was spent designing in depth the complex facade system while learning new software and materiality importance.
20
21
https://www.usg.com/content/usgcom/en/desig
https://www.usg.com/content/usgcom/en/design-studio/roof-ceiling-assemblies/assembly-detail.20001.html
USG ROOF-CEILING ASSEMBLY E
https://www.usg.
NANAWALL WINDOW-SILL DETAIL F
MATERIAL KEY: 1. R5 THERMAL WALL INSULATION 2. OPERABLE SHUTTERS @ VARIOUS OPENINGS 3. INSULATED ALUMNUM WINDOW FRAMING 4. DOUBLE GLAZING TEMPERED GLASS 5. OPERABLE WINDOWS 6. TIMBER EXTERNAL CLADDING 7. PLYWOOD WALL & CEILING FINISH 8. GROUND LEVEL 9. UL P561 STEEL C-JOIST (LOAD-BEARING) 10. CONCRETE FLOOR SLAB 11. WALL REINFORCEMENT 12. CONCRETE BLOCK WALL 13. STRIP FOOTINGS
OAS FOUNDATION DETAIL F WALL SECTION
https://www.oas.org/pgdm/document/codedraw/sectionb.htm
WINDOW CLOSE-UP
https://www.usg.com/content/usgcom/en/design-studio/roof-ceiling-assemblies/assembly-detail.20001.html
ROOF CLOSE-UP
FOUNDATION CLOSE-UP
https://www.o
22
EXPLODED SECTION
PRE-FAB COMPRESSION CLIPS
NANAWALL WINDOW STRUCTURE
UL P561 FLOOR DETAIL
23
STREETERY CANOPY
Carmine’s Italian Restaurant I New York City, New York Group Partners I Jessica Forssell, Brandon Green For the final project of Visualization IV, the task was to create an installation that was scripted within Grasshopper and rendered using new software. Taking inspiration from trending streeteries, the Streetery Canopy outside of Carmine’s Restaurant served as a prototype for what streeteries could be. Wanting to appeal to customer’s needs, the scripts focused on three elements; taking annual precipitation data from New York and setting up a window panel system in response to those numbers, using data of temperature to operate roof openings, and designing a mechanical system that would change the material opacity depending on customers’ moods. All in all creating a comfortable eating area that serves the customers in a proficient way.
24
25
INTIAL SKETCHES
Input I Mood, Temperature, Rainfall data from New York Process I Mood: transparency of panels (determined by mood type) Rain: slider 0-12 operable and folding angles of panels (determined by average rain amount per month) Temperature: slider size of panel split (determined by temperature numbers)
Con t en t
Han g ry
Con t en t
Han g ry
CONTENT
HAPPY
HUNGOVER
HANGRY
HEARTBROKEN
MOODS & OPACTITIES
Output I Streetery canopy that responds to customers and climate needs
APRIL Ap ril MAY M ay
JuJUNE ne JuJULY ly Au AUGUST g u st Sep tSEPTEMBER em b er 0”
2”
0 In ch
4”
2
4
6”
8”
6
10”
8
10
AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION
FULL GRASSHOPPER SCRIPT
26
40
50
60
80
70
60
APRIL Ap ril
MMAY ay
JUNE Ju ne
JULY Ju ly
AUGUST
SEPTEMBER
AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE
Au g
Sep t
BAKE TO LAYER
MATERIAL ADJUSTER
OPACTITIES
3.27”
75
PANEL SYSTEM
OPERABILITY OF PANELS
ROOF SYSTEM
MOVEMENT OF ROOF
27
28
REFLECTION Throughout the semester, there was an immense amount of information on tectonics and sustainability taught and understood. With the use of model making, hand drafting, and learning new software like Grasshopper and Lumion, architecture became less of a concept and more of a reality. Before the semester, the focus was on understanding how to craft a narrative and design unique hypothetical structures. This semester really dove into how to use those previous design approaches and take them further by understanding materiality connections, thermal wall constructions, and sustainable efforts to design meaningful architecture that responds to environmental needs.
29