Studio Manifesto

Thinking of a different meaning for a temporary pavilion, I wanted to focus on temporary condition as opposed to structure.  From studying precedents and the site, the pavilion will change seasonally, causing natural cycles to affect how the space is used.  In the winter, the pavilion will be frozen over, blocking entry in some areas and creating new spaces to go to in others.  The summer will create green screening to add privacy and functional spaces to the pavilion for use by tour staff and visitors.  The cyclical condition of the pavilion will
show the change that occurs every year and how each cycle, the pavilion responds differently.  Nature and weather will determine these variables, dependent on abundance or lack of rainfall, amount of snow, temperature, etc.  All the while, the structure remains acting as man’s footprint in the landscape.  The reflective properties of
the pavilion’s steel will always reflect the user and the landscape, comparing
and contrasting the landscape it is a part of and those that are “intruding” in
the space.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Comments from the Review

Items I need to further examine:

The site became too fragmented.  The circular sightlines diagram was a more appropriate choice.

Diagramming was more programmatic, less tectonic.  What happens at the ground? I need to study the actual pavilion more, diagramming the pavilion in relation to the site and not just the site in general.

Jumping to a final design too early.

Overall, the presentation on process was good.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Midterm Review

After looking at the site, the definition became clear for a temporary pavilion.

The temporary pavilion does not need to be a temporary condition of structure, but instead a temporary condition of form.

Focusing on a permanent structure, the pavilion uses seasonal cycles to make the form and use of the structure temporary.

In order to create a form of the pavilion, the site first needs to be understand.  I began by diagramming both the pavilion site and large site in general.  Focusing the function as a satelite site for campus tours, the diagramming began more programmaticallly.

I have yet to look at the weathering issues associated with the pavilion, setting this detailing aside until the form is better articluated.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Old Quad

Refocusing my attention to the site, I visiting a part of old quad.  My interest was peaked when viewing an older tree, much larger than the others.

This site has remained relatively unchagned since the early half of the last century.  If a temporary pavilion is to be placed, what makes it temporary?

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Early Sketch Studies

Beginning with the precedents, I began sketching my ideas relating pavilions such as Libeskind, Foster, SANAA, and the Ice Pavillion.  Merging these ideas, I began focusing on getting the imagery on paper.

After sketching several options, the discussion refocused on the materiality.  Steel can be reflective, so why not use that as an advantage showing the seasonal changes surrounding the structure?  Reflections of trees came in mind, focusing my site decision for the Old Quad.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Precedents

After the reivew, we were assigned to design a temporary pavillion.  The definition of  a temporary pavaillion was left open to interpreation but for now, I began looking at several different precedents.  focusing on aluminum/steel.  At first I began to look at only the materiality of the precedents.

At first I focused on the materiality and form.  The Pritzker Pavillion and Liebeskind Serpentine Gallery Pavillion tackle form and the refraction of light.  They also both tackle solid and void, Pritzker opening the form into a void while Liebeskind’s encloses the void within a shell.  The former is also curvilinear in form while the latter is angular.  I also looked at the Phillip Johnson Glass House, with steel creating the framework for tranparency, a visual void.

The next set of precedents focused on the manipulations of the material.  Looking at the Polish Pavillion, the steel is perforated with an intriquite design. Another pavillion studied is another Serpentine Gallery Pavillion, which focuses on a steel canopy, delicately attached to structural poles.   The canopy is also highly reflective, both visually and in light.  The Bean in Chicago uses this reflectivity to its advantage.  While The Bean is more of a sculpture, it still acts as a pavillion, reflecting the individual and the city surrounded.

The next precedent is Norman Foster’s UAE pavillion which focuses on verticality and horizontality, manipulating the ground plain and how the pavillion connects to the site.

The final pavillion found was the Ice Pavillion. Which focuses on the structure changing to the addition of the ice.  The interesting thing about this is the change to the pavillion through the year.  I could only imagine in the spring and summer greenery growing up and around the structure, changing it further.  This structure is permament yet temporary.  The steel is solid and remains static.  The seasons change the pavillion, creating temporary spaces.

This will be the focus of my pavillion while drawing on the study of light, reflectivity, solid, void, and manipulation of the ground plane.

The images below are displayed in the order they are discussed.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Studio Review

The studio review was last Thursday.  Most of the projects were received well while others were redirected in both process and end product.  Mine was a little bit of both.

The reviewers stressed over and over that I may not have the right form for the material I am using or the right material for the form I have created.  There were some issues with connects but they stressed there was no connection between shape and material with little structural support both horizontal and vertical.  While the form was weak when stood up, it was strong when layed flat.  This was the form I should look at, something horizontal versus a vertical application.

While I was focusing on the shape, form, and structure with the material I also tried to focus on the reflectivity of the material.  However, I was advised that if I wanted to focus on reflectivity I should use a different material.  This would mean starting over and while that would be a key aspect of the process of discovery, I feel I should stay with the same material and look at alternatives in studying both form and structure.  However, I need to find another form because the stength that was there was not conveyed in the screen-like construction I created for the presentation.

Related to structure, I stated that the strongest point was when the alumnium was rolled at the edges.  However, I did not use any of these in my studies and I was advised to look into it.  I also missed an opportunity with the edges that were created from the cuts in the material.  This was when I was questioned if there was a fold in the material that could make the structure even stronger so I think I should look at rolling the aluminum more than just forming the material into curved shapes.

I was praised on the study of the material’s memory and I feel I should incorporate this into the next step of the process.  Since this was such a success, my next phase will be the study of form, structure, and memory while applied in a larger scale.

I am still unsure what this will be but will begin to figure this out more in the next studio class.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment