Extracting the constructional basis (rules) out of radiolarian skeletons will benefit the architectural quality of a load bearing construction in architecture.
Research question:
How can I manipulate a micro structure of a radiolarian skeleton, in order to benefit a load bearing structure in architectural context?
- Which type of radiolarian will I take as a subject within this research?
- What are the constructional rules, this type of skeleton is based upon? And how will I apply those rules to architecture in the translation process.
- For that, I have to ask: Which (main) rule of micro-construction will I use as a basic manipulation (parametrisation) tool in G.C.? I.e. density-, lenght-, position- or number of elements.
- Did the translation process benefit the mechanical performance of the structure within architectural context? (Diana)
- Research on the mechanical features of skeletons of radiolarians. Consulting drawings, literature & professors in maritime biology.
- Choose one type of radiolarian.
- Model the radiolaria as it is in G.C. to get hold of the programm. & Try to find the most essential rule, which underlies in the mechanical quality of the micro skeletons of radiolarians
- Test the radiolarian under is natural boundary conditions in Diana. Try to understand the logic of the construction. And try to find out the most essential RULE again.
- Test the same radiolarian structure again, but then in an architectural context. What are the weak spots??
- Model a tool in G.C . in order to translate the radiolarian structure into an architectural bearing structure (being aware of the basic principle(s) of the radiolarian skeletons!! use the RULE detected before)
- Test results in Diana (make different G.C-Diana-loops if possible)
- Evaluate results and link to hypothesis.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePS: for the optimization process (Peter von Buelow) in loop with GC (mentioned during the today class), you can in the meanwhile have a look at
ReplyDeletehttp://www.concrete.tcaup.umich.edu/
Hi – sorry, since colors were not shown, the previous comment became difficult to read and connection pointed out by colors were lost. Here I am posting it again by better clarifying by words.
ReplyDeleteHi Maria, here below your text reviewed. I tried to make suggestions (green color – not sure it will appear green due to comment form.. however I hope you can read/recognize them clearly). Do not take them as “how it has to be”. It is just a step further in the discussion. Feel free to change it back or further as you think better). Some part still will need some work, but I think research frame starts being clear. Now, by Thursday, absolutely make your choice on the radiolarian type and starts model it in GC. Get immediately into it.
Hypothesis: you formutaled: 'Extracting the constructional basis (rules) out of radiolarian skeletons will benefit the architectural quality of a load bearing construction in architecture' Are you going to test that there are benefits or are you going to test how/a possible way to achieve these benefits? From the today discussion it seemed to me the second one. From your hypothesis here it seems the first one.
Notice that you can divide what you assume as assumption (certainness you are not going to test) from the specific hypothesis you are testing. If you set as hypothesis the benefits achievable by using radiolarians models, then you are supposed to test they are true. (i.e. You are going somehow to compare a structure designed from radiolarians with a structure which is not) If this is not your idea, then, you should better move this point out of your hypothesis and take it as assumption. In this case your hypothesis assumes as true there are benefits and move the issue you are going to test further on in a more focused issue. Example:
Hypothesis’ background/assumption: Structures in Nature result from long term evolution which optimized them in order to use less material as possible to efficiently perform their functions. Among natural structures, Radiolarians offer a (….what do they offer as special quality? Why are you choosing radiolarians? Here you should specify what they have as special quality. It is just the fascination of their variety of shapes, are there other relevant aspects?) In Architecture, structural design can benefit from investigating their geometry and structural principles. Extracting the constructional basis (rules) (constructional basis? Rules? What do you mean more precisely? Are you talking about geometry, about material about what?) out of radiolarian skeletons will benefit the architectural quality (architectural quality? What is architectural quality for you?) of a load bearing construction in architecture. In order to design structures using radiolarians principles (rules..), investigation of variations are needed. And then you come here to the more specific formulation of the hypothesis: example: their exploration can be done still within radiolarians principles; or: exploring the need adjustments by following radiolarians principles is possible and of help in the design process; or radiolarians principles can be used not only to extract a starting geometry, but also to define and understand rules of support in exploring design variations. What will better fit your aim, but moved a step further then the overall general benefits achievable by using them as model. In this case, the problem statement would be what pointed out today:
Problem statement (here you could describe the problems are necessarily tackled when designing a structure by using radiolarians as model)
Designing load bearing structures by following geometrical (constructional? …? ) principles extracted from radiolarians structures provides support…etc. However, structures in architecture are subject to different conditions than the radiolarians’ ones. Particularly:
- they are required to react to load conditions that are different than the load conditions for which radiolarians developed them selves;
- scale factor is different; materialization have to be taken into account;
- architectural functions/aspects/needs might required variations on the overall shape;
- etc. (These are just examples, feel free to add more, change them, and so on – the important thing is that you point out factors that make radiolarians not directly and literally translated into structural form for architecture)
While working in structural design by following radiolarians’ models, various adjustments are therefore required. These adjustments are sometime a difficult task to achieve.
Rules are extracting from radiolarians to support this task. Parametric design (i.e. GC) integrated with structural analysis software can support the investigation of these required adjustments; however, to do it, a solid and clear model is needed.
Research question:
How can a micro structure of a radiolarian skeleton be manipulated in order to benefit a load bearing structure in architectural context?
• Which type of radiolarian will I take as a subject within this research? (I do not think this is a relevant sub-question for your main research question. This is an important choice you have to make in order to restrict you field of investigation – to make your work feasible. This is therefore part of your methodology – not part of your research questions)
• What are the constructional rules, this type of skeleton is based upon? (once more: constructional?)
• How will I apply those rules to architecture in the translation process?
• How can this translation be represented through a parametric approach?
• How can the needed adjustments be represented through a parametric approach? What are the relevant factors that need to be parameterized? (I.e. density-, lenght-, position- or number of elements). How can they be parametrically investigated in a loop with structural performances analysis?
• Did the translation process benefit the mechanical performance of the structure within architectural context? (Diana) (See discussion of hypothesis: if this is a research question, you need to test the benefits. And you should therefore add in the methodology how you are going to test them. A possible way is by comparison. If you are not going to do that, than you could remove this question by assume there are benefits and moving this point out of your hypothesis. Testing indeed what needed (i.e. adjustments) to achieve these benefits. And how to support the design process. )
Methodology (plan):
• Research on the mechanical features of skeletons of radiolarians. Consulting drawings, literature & professors in maritime biology.
• Choose one type of radiolarian.
• Model the radiolarian as it is in G.C. to get hold of the program. & Try to find the most essential rule, which underlies in the mechanical quality of the micro skeletons of radiolarians
• Test the radiolarian under is natural boundary conditions in Diana. Try to understand the logic of the construction. And try to find out the most essential RULE again.
• Test the same radiolarian structure again, but then in an architectural context. What are the weak spots??
• Model a tool in G.C . in order to translate the radiolarian structure into an architectural bearing structure (being aware of the basic principle(s) of the radiolarian skeletons!! use the RULE detected before) I think here you mean that you would like to parameterize the variations (a system to parametrically investigate the adjustments which are required to a radiolarian structure to properly work in architectural context: maybe still vague for you how it works in GC, please, let’s talk about that on Thursday – and in the meanwhile start immediately working with GC in order to get the basic skills about it)
• Test results in Diana (make different G.C-Diana-loops if possible)
• Evaluate results and link to hypothesis.
Hi Maria, I spoke both with Axel and Peter von Buelow. if you whish, there is the change of getting the GA system developed by Peter running in connection with the GC model you are going to develop. This would mean you develop your own parametric approch in exploring radilarians structures, you woud build your own parametric model in GC, you would define your own structural criteria to explore the variations of your structure - but instead of running FE structural analisis separatly, you could connect your GC system with the optimization loop developed by Peter (who can make it available on line for you). This would support the last part of the process you described in your methodology. However due to both things need to be set to make it available and some criteria you should take into account while building your parametric model if this is going to be looped with the mentioned system, it might be good if you think now (let's talk on Thursday) if you are interested or not in using it. Michela
ReplyDelete