Smooth Transitions, 2007

As the first image to post-in, I chose the cover image for our DRL Final Thesis Book. Perhaps we chose this for our cover page because it had a texture-like quality in it! Though now it seems a bit loose to me in bottom-right part of it, at the time it was acting as the main smooth / gradual geometrical transition diagram that I used almost in the entire prototyping part of the project.

Here is the first implication of the diagram above in some small pieces of subdivided space. For beginning, technique is easy: attractors located between Potential Surfaces make the subdivisions. As here like everywhere else in this project I used MEL scripting for generating the space, I had plenty of factors to control the generated space. Location of the attractors, their Power, Pre-Tessellation of the surfaces, Smoothness Formula, etc. were all helping to generate different types of tessellations, potential for different programs from highly tessellated Residential to highly open Pavilion Spaces.

By reducing a bit of the previous complexity, accumulating our surfaces in height, and harmonizing the whole system a bit more, we can get the same kind of result for Tall types too.

Those little factors in the image above are the factors used in the formulas in MEL which differentiate the towers Tessellation from each other.

This is a section from the more realistic implication of the previous images in a proposal for Shanghai Expo 2010. Each tower is supposed to be locating different kinds of space/programmes in it, juxtaposition of which is highly clarified by [infra]stractural in-between sub-geometries.

I used my attractors for something more than only Subdividors. By changing the formulas and the way that I used to look at them, I could make them organize the space around them in a higher level to define Zonings and generate Circulation, but still through the same system and by using the same technique/materials.

This is a catalogue which shows the ability of the system to make a variety of Landscape Textures, embedding infrastructure in them.

This is almost a sample of combination of all what I showed previously, in a low-dense fully-scripted piece of architecture (if we can call it like that). The Architectonic emerged by using the same system/technique for almost all the aspects of the space helped me to achieve a seamless connection between the landscape, infrastructure, structure, and texture while keeping all the geometrical bottom-up details of the connections/subdivisions.

This is the result when you challenge your system to generate a Super-Block; A super-high-dense space which shows off by its capability to respond to the super-complexity of juxtaposition of different Types of space / programmes in a singular object, though leaving a lot of quality-related questions open for further investigations. Can you imagine leaving in this block?

I also like to show this failure image here to share some problems of Smooth Transitions with you. Simply speaking if you put something small just beside something big, you will never have a smooth transition. So you always need enough material/quantity/in-betweens to be able to get it, which not necessarily always you have.

For not ending up to a fragile geometry as Patrik Schumacher once described this image, you need to have a more global view at what you want to achieve. I've seen a lot of similar kind of projects which produce a lot of redundancies, only to be able to keep the harmony in their system.

This is an attempt by my teammate, Galo Cazares Fernandez, for building the same kind of system in Catia, through which he wanted to control the porosity in a tectonic skin.

He also built some physical models to test the reliability of his achievements,

Or how more realistically it could be structuralized.

BACK TO RZ-A