In nature, form is the result of several forces acting over an object. When the study of nature was done trough mere description by using words, in On Growth and Form (1917), D’Arcy Wentworth Thompson developed an analytical and mathematical method that allowed the study of organic morphology. He introduced a theory of transformation and a way of studying nature that was ahead of his time. The biologist and mathematician proposed a method using  the coordinate system and the laws of mathematics to understand the process of growth and form. Using this method, objects could be drawn in a grid and transformed into other similar objects through the distortion of the system. The lines change from their original place, however, the relation between them remains. Using this method, he was able not only to study a range of organism, but also to interpolate evolution and even found missing steps into it.

Through the study, the transformation was seen as a causal process resulting from the application of specific forces, and this last could be found by analyzing the transformation. This means that, for instance, depending on the environment, an specific object would get a shape adapted to the forces presents in it. In this sense, Thompson’s theory looks for understanding  where the shapes in nature come from, always studying general cases by saying “keep the type in mind and leave the single case with all its accidents alone”.

In spite of the lack of accuracy and the limitations in the method, where only objects from the same family can be studied together, Thompson’s work can be considered as a major contribution in Architecture: The basis of parametric design have been started establishing centuries ago.

In an era where every discipline is influenced by a number of doctrines, architecture is every day more outright influenced by biology and the natural process and how these can be a model of new patterns, shapes and functions in the manmade structures. By understanding the complexity of basic functions in nature, this first can be reproduced and adapted for a more efficient design. The idea of multiplicity described by Thompson can be perfectly related with the parametric design where, just like objects in nature are modified according existing forces in a determined environment, a design can be adapted and transformed to comply site parameters.

In the previous decades more and more buildings are being designed following parameters. However, with the popularization of the technique and the form-finding method, there are some that only succeed creating a parametric “facade”. The Watercube, constructed for the Beijing’s Olympic games (2008) by following a sophisticated procedure for form-finding achieves the individualization of parts in its structure made of 22.000 individual pieces, algorithm relations by the use of Euclidian’s units and variation on 12.000 joints. It is true that it innovates in structural design and has minimal operational costs because of its sustainable design, nevertheless, it is an imposed voronoi-square shape whose materials,  make it sustainable and unsustainable at the same time. ETFE, used for the entire facade, in spite of capturing solar energy, does not match Beijing’s pollution, being too expensive to be cleaned. In my opinion the basic parallelepiped shape was not submitted to the right parameters or to any parameter at all.

As a personal research, I am interested in studying known cases on parametric design, placed in different environments, by using digital tools to, instead of using the 2D, generating a 3D coordinate system and understanding the forces of parameters that originated the different forms.

Image source: www.inner-leaf.com

Studio House & Conditioned Outdoor Room

Advanced Architecture is about complexity, and this last, far from being complicated, is the ability of combining or establishing simultaneity relations between the different layers of information available. The more relations are established, the more advanced the design will be.

By the other hand, the traditional architecture looks for the opposite, by depurating, minimizing and tranquillizing the complexity of a site.

However it indispensable to understand that “advanced” does not necessarily is translated in outlandish shapes. Complexity goes beyond forms to create relationships.

In the case of “Studio House” by F451 Arquitectura, designed in 2011 and located in Spain, the design merges from an hybrid typology, the combination between a modern house and an industrial warehouse. Its specific program requires 4 independent and different uses in a single volume.

In spite of being so inner, given that it does not interact too much with the outside views, this house responds to the positional relation, by its connection with the ground, from where it emerges, aligns and detaches. By the other hand, in this house it can clearly be seen  environmental relations represented in the management of the main techniques for a sustainable design. A hallway that emerges from its center works not only as a space for relations between the different uses, but also as a climate regulator, allowing crossed ventilation, light and double orientation. Other aspects as water recollection, a green roof and the use of light from the north are also present. The atelier, whose illumination comes from the north, relates with the atmosphere by opening diagonal to the sky, introducing it as part of the composition, a ceiling that changes along with the environment. All these elements make the Studio House advanced.

To the naked eye it seems that the Advanced Architecture concepts are relatively new in the frame of the society. Nevertheless, some theoreticians started to think about them decades ago and such is the case of Bernard Rudofsky. The Conditioned Outdoor Room (1955) is focused on the garden as an habitable space. Historically, the garden has been considered as an habitable and private space. As an example of it, the materials used in the Roman gardens were no different for those used in the interior spaces, this made the garden another living room in the house, only this time with the sky as its ceiling, adding an atmospheric relation to their living spaces.

Through the years, the use of the garden evolved until becoming an ornament and an unoccupied space. The “spectator garden”, how the author calls it, is reinforced by the lack of control of the basics elements that allow habitability. Nowadays gardens are not longer private and comfortable spaces, on the contrary, they are totally open to the streets and susceptible to an uncontrolled climate.

As the author describes it, modern glass walls has contributed to the deformation on the concept of gardens.  In this matter, I do think that the purpose of transparent walls may have intensified the new typology, however I think not everything needs to be controlled, and a piece of nature can be part of the indoors without the needs to close to the beauty of natural and spontaneous growth. Both can be achieved.

So far, climate control seems to end at the doorstep, man tends to feel more comfortable in spaces they can control. In spite of all the new technologies, climate control further have not been possible. However, Rudofsky takes as inspiration Pompeii ruins, where incomplete walls creates the best balances between the control achieved by manmade structures and nature. The wall seems to be the key element that provides privacy, physical container, aesthetic elements and the climate control by creating a protective area from wind and acting as a heating panel.

In this sense, it is needed to take a step back to the roots, to make the garden evolve in the right way and go back to be part of the house composition.

Personally I would like to focus research on self-sufficient architecture by studding not only the most recent designs but also its development for being able to find new alternatives to the existing methods.

Image from: grahamfoundation.org