While there is no proof, it is quite likely that the forms of eggs inspired the first human-made domes, and in this sense biomimicry is far from being a recent idea. Pioneers such as Leonardo da vinci and Antonio Gaudi had their visions of biomimicry hundreds of years ahead of their contemporaries.More recently there are some well-documented examples such as the invention of Velcro around 1948, and in the last decade there has been a phenomenal flourishing of biomimicry as more and more designers respond to the demand for sustainable products.

The inspiration from nature is driving force in architecture, resulting in majestic works of architecture. Biomimicry is about solution refined and developed by nature. For any sustainable building design, need to consider structural efficiency, water efficiency, zero-waste systems, thermal environment, and energy supply. Biomimicry is about solutions. Biological organisms refined and developed by natural selection over a billion year research and development period can be seen

B2.0 CASE STUDY 2.0

The TWA terminal at JFK Airport, New York, in which Eero Saarinen used biomorphic forms to capture the poetry of flight.

Figure 1. TWA Terminal

Figure 2. Johnson Wax Building

Frank Lloyd Wright likened the columns in the Johnson Wax building to water lilies and, while they create a spectacular space, they have nothing functionally in common with lily leaves.

Figure 1. Burdock Burr

Burdock burr were the source of inspiration for the invention of Velcro. After some recent frustration with zips, he noticed the way that burdock burrs clung to his dog's coat and, after studying them with a magnifying glass, designed the first version of the now ubiquitous fastening

B1.DIGITAL MORPHOGENESIS

Morphogenesis is a concept used in a number of disciplines including biology,geology, crystallography, engineering, urban studies, art and architecture.

In architecture, morphogenesis is understood as a group of methods thatemploy digital media not as representational tools for visualization but asgenerative tools for the derivation of form and its transformation often in an aspiration to express contextual processes in built form. In this inclusive understanding, digital morphogenesis in architecture bears a largely analogous or metaphoric relationship to the processes of morphogenesis in nature, sharing with it the reliance on gradual development but not necessarily adopting or referring to the actual mechanisms of growth or adaptation.

Recent discourse on digital morphogenesis in architecture links it to anumber of concepts including emergence, self-organization and form-finding[9].Among the benefits of biologically inspired forms, their advocates list thepotential for structural benefits derived from redundancy and differentiationand the capability to sustain multiple simultaneous functions.

Figure 4. Corbusier's Bathroom Design

Le Corbusier appears to have made delibrate reference to the cleansing function of kidneys in the design of the washrooms for the unbuilt Olivetti Headquarters project.

PRECEDENTS

Some interpreted biological motifs aesthetically, as ornaments and decorations. Others utilized its symbolic interpretations asphilosophical, metaphorical or spiritual foundations of their practice. Pragmatically, many attempted to inform their designs by learning from the organization of natural structures and more recently, an increasingly growing number of practitioners and researchers aim to understand and reinterpret naturally occurring functionalities, behaviors or processes of growth and natural selection.

Seroussi Pavilion was “grown” out of self-modifying patterns of vectors based on electro-magnetic fields (EMF). Through logics of attraction/repulsion trajectories were computed in plan and than lifted via series of structural microarching sections through different frequencies of sine function. The plan of the pavilion differs greatly from a classical notion of architectural plan drawing _ it is a dynamic blueprint closer to musical notation _ deep ecology of imbedded algorithmic and parametric relationships are the seed for possible materialization procedures and adaptation to the site conditions.

SEROUSSI PAVILLION

B2.0 CASE STUDY 2.0

Figure 4. Water Cube

Figure 5. Melbourne Recital Centre

Figure 6. ANAN Japanese Noodle Bar

MORPHOGENESIS EXAMPLES

Figure 7. Seroussi Pavilion

SPECY ONE

SPECY THREE

A*B-20

A*B-15

A*B-10

A*B-5

A*B-3

A*B-1.5

A*B2

A*B5

A*B7

A*B10

A*B15

DIVIDE CIR

5

DIVIDE CIR

10

DIVIDE CIR

15

DIVIDE CIR

40

DIVIDE CIR

50

DIVIDE CIR

70

DIVIDE CIR

80

DIVIDE CIR

100

A*B-7.8

DIVIDE CIR

75

SPECY TWO

SPECY FOUR

SPECY FIVE

SPECY FIVE

A*B5

DIVIDE CIR

50

A*B-1.9

DIVIDE CIR

60

DIVIDE CRV

3

A*B-1.9

DIVIDE CIR

60

DIVIDE CRV

4

PChargeCHARGE

10

10 PChargeDECAY

PChargeCHARGE

10

10 PChargeDECAY

DIVIDE CRV

5

PChargeCHARGE

10

10PChargeDECAY

PChargeCHARGE

1

2 PChargeDECAY

A*B-1.9

DIVIDE CIR

60

DIVIDE CRV

3

PChargeCHARGE

20

20PChargeDECAY

DIVIDE CIR

30

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CIR

50

A*B-3.5

DIVIDE CIR

30

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CRV

4

PChargeCHARGE

20

20PChargeDECAY

DIVIDE CIR

30

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CRV

5

DIVIDE CIR

30

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-3.7

DIVIDE CRV

5

DIVIDE CIR

30

A*B-11

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-11

MOVE-->Z AXIS-->0.5

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-11

DIVIDE CRV

5

DIVIDE CIR

70

A*B-10.2

DIVIDE CRV

5

A*B4.2

A*B-4

A*B-4

B2.1 ITERATIONS

B2.3 SELECTION CRITERIAB2.2 FOUR SUCCESSFUL ITERATIONS

1. -Double layer of structure -Variation of Form density -Demonstrates an Integreted outcome -Three different spaces shown (out, semi-out,interior) -Aesthetically most appealing

2. -With the most variation in form, reversed and change in height - More function could been adapted into this one

3 . -Could be hang ing from ceiling, and growing down, etc. -Visually interesting, looks like reciprocal structure study model

4. -can have the most people using the space under the canopy -canopy shades and define the public space underneath

-POSSIBLE FOR VEGETATION TO GROW

-FORM NEEDS TO PROTECT WHATS INSIDE

-EACH SEPARATE SPACE NEEDS TO BE INTER-RELATED

-SHOULD HAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR GROWING VEGETATION

- N E E D S T O H AV E C O N T I N O U S CIRCULATION

-Sunlight needs to penetrate through the space

-form should fit in with the surrouding landscape

Selection Criteria

B2.4 EXTRAPOLATE

1. -Inner form could grow vegetations, the space between could serve as circulation-High enough for growing vegetation-Circulation connects each room-Inner structure might block sunlight -overall shape could fit in with landscape topography-Could be used as exhibition gallary-Two layers for protection

2. -upper form could collect rainwater for watering the vegetation down-upper layer cou block sunlight-No continous circulation could be put-big enough for growing-could be used for storag function, with closed protection

3. -Difficult to fit in with the site, as it is difficult to find something to hang-difficult to grow trees, bushes, etc.-space separate plants from human -could be used as ceiling decoration, as well as serving the function of load bearing wall

4. -Vegetation can only grow on the canopy roof-continuous circulation and inter-related public space underneath the canopy-vegetat ion can d irectly enjoy sunlight-could use as train station, resting pavilion in park, etc. where canopy form prov ides protect ion and shading

STRUCTURE-SUB FIELD

+

_

-Structure can provides platform for vegetation-Easy to define space-Possible to play with the light effect through howllow structure - D i r e c t ly d e a l i n g w i t h t h e construction method-Lightweight, achieve more space with less material

-Structure itself does not include surface covering material, etc. -Might be hard to construct, construction method can limit the result-Have to research in connection d e t a i l , l e s s t i m e s p e n d o n developing overall concept

Figure 8. Hexagonal Structure

Montreal biosphereThe Montreal Biosphere is Canada’s first water museum dedicated to the the Great Lakes – St. Laurence ecosystem. The Biosphere was designed and created by visionary architect Richard Buckminster Fuller as the US pavilion at the Montreal Expo ’67.

His holistic and cosmic understanding of the world and life and his unmistakable deep understanding of our place in the universe led Buckminster to dedicate his life to making the best use of technology while improving humanity.

The Biosphere was the synthesis of his philosophy and art: through the geodesic design, built from triangles – the perfect form for Buckminster – he demonstrated that it was possible to create a livable space using only one fifth of the materials normally used in conventional architecture.

Figure 9. Montreal Biosphere

B3 CASE STUDY 2.0

icosahedron drawn to find the position of starting points

O n e s u r fa c e o f the i cosahedron was d i v ided into equilateral triangle

triangles extruded to point to intersect with sphere surface, which shares the same center w ith icosahedron

I n t e r s e c t e d tr iangular shape on sphere surface, covering 1/20 of whole surface area

surface on geometry

connect divided points

Extrut and intersect

Orient

Rotate

Final DOme

Oriented vertically u s i n g 4 o f 2 0 s u r f a c e s f r o m i c o s a h e d r o n , covering 1/5 of the whole sphere

F INAL GEODESIC DOME-Rotate 4 times us i ng ang l es o f 0.4/0.8/1.2/1.6 Pi to cover the whole

B3.1 Other Attempts

Start with a semi-s phere dr awn i n Rhino

Divide surface then draw rectangle grid using relative item

T r i a n g u l a t i n g r e c t a n g l e s b y d r a w i n g c r o s s diagonals

Offset the original sphere to add a layer

Final dome structure with two layers, but the grid appears to be d i f ferent from the p i c ture where every traingle is the s a m e s i z e a n d n o rectangles are found

Sphere

Divide Surface

Text tag

Surface offset

relative item

Final DOme

B3.2 Discussion

Similarities: Both have equal size of triangular division

D ifferences: The Montreal Biosphere has two layers of spheres but this one only has one. The grid connects two layrs of the real project. 20 pieces o f t r i a n g u l at e d s u r fa c e j o i n e d toge ther r ather than div iding the whole surface.

Similarities: Both Have two layers of structural grid

D ifferences: The g r i d c onnec t i on is different from the real project, wh i ch has equal triangular division

FURTHER DEVELOPMENTThis geodesic dome structure could be adapted to other free form surfaces, not strictly to sphere. I could use other methods to find the form of the surface then use this division method on the surface.

Figure 10. Biosphere View From Inside

B4 Iteration

B4 Iteration

B4 Iteration

B4 Iteration

1. Difficult to build the scattered pieces floating 2. Not enough protection3. Not intact shape could be metaphor of endangered species

1. Free form geometry better fit in with landscape2. Double Layer provides better protection

1. Circular patterns allow most poss ible sunlight2.

1. Similar pattern with sunflower, generated f r o m F i b o n a c c i ' s array(0;1;1;2;3;5...)2.Using biomimicry to generate the pattern

1. Adapting finding in case study 1 with double l ay e r o f d i f f e r e n t densities

1. Free form geometry b e t t e r f i t i n w i t h landscape2 . D o u b l e L a y e r p r o v i d e s b e t t e r protection

1. Light weight Grid Shell structure2. Plants could grow on structure

1. Difficult to build the scattered pieces floating 2.

B4.2 Discussion

B5 TECHNIQUE: FOUR PROTOTYPES

O n e p i e c e o f the intersected s u r f a c e g ener at ed b y I c o s a h e d r o n e x t r u d e d t o sphere center.

Two types of connection detail of the geodesic dome.

Hexagonal Weaving using wires with no extra support elements for connection.

B5.1 PERFORMANCE TEST

Light Effect test of the structure shading on ground.

Hexagonal weaving can support its own gravity

Compression test

The connection technique is very useful to be adapted in the design proposal. It is suitable for the brief because the detail design can largely determine the final outcome of the structure. Different methods would result in different outcome. It is important to start looking joint detail at the beginning. However, my prototypes did not test full scale connection, further problem might not be identified because of this.

Problem with the hexagonal weaving is it does not deal with gravity test. However, this technique could be used to achieve brief by using lightweight materials such as bamboo stirps.

Problem with the hexagonal weaving is it does not deal with gravity test. However, this technique could be used to achieve brief by using lightweight materials such as bamboo stirps.

B5.2 Technique relates to brief Recapture of selection criteria

-POSSIBLE FOR VEGETATION TO GROW

-FORM NEEDS TO PROTECT WHATS INSIDE

-EACH SEPARATE SPACE NEEDS TO BE INTER-RELATED

-SHOULD HAVE ENOUGH SPACE FOR GROWING VEGETATION

- N E E D S T O H AV E C O N T I N O U S CIRCULATION

-Sunlight needs to penetrate through the space

-form should fit in with the surrouding landscape

Site topography

B6.0 SITE ANALYSISCERES Community Park

-Organic Farm

-Workshop

-Organic Market

-Honeylane Garden

-Propagation

-Primary School Trip Education

-Having Lunch Outdoor&Indoor

Existing Feature

Activities Along Trail

Site: Lawn next to Merri Creek Trail Near Ceres

-Bicycle Riding

Scale of Building:Cover half of the Lawn at the conner of Merri Creek Trail and Entrance of CERES Park

This lawn is at the turning point of the site: from busy ceres park to tranquil and pristine merri creek. People jogging or riding bikes could slow down by the designed structure or rest here.

-Tranquil and Pristine creek runs through

-Connects CERES Park

-More people passing by than staying in the park

-Dog Walking

-Jogging

-Walking

-Sketching Landscape

-Picnic

-Children playing on lawn

Site Sun Diagram

B6.0 SITE ANALYSIS Green House Effect

The most basic greenhouse would be a simple box made out of solid, transparent material, such as glass or clear plastic. When sunlight shines through the transparent walls of the greenhouse, it heats the material inside.

Radiation energy from sunlight heats up the greenhouse floor. The floor releases some of thisRadiation energy from sunlight heats up the greenhouse floor. The floor releases some of thisthermal energy, which heats the layer of air at the bottom of the greenhouse. Warmer air islighter than cooler air (that is, it has a lower density), so the heated air rises to the top of thegreenhouse. When the heated air rises, cooler air replaces it at the bottom of the greenhouse. Thisair becomes heated by the floor and also begins to rise.

This process is going on in our atmosphere all the time. When the sun shines on an area, it heatsthe ground, which heats the air above it. The heated air rises through the atmosphere, coolingdown as it moves upward. This is why air near the ground is warmer than air higher up -- the airnear the ground hasn't had as much time to cool.

B6.1 Design Proposal

A s t r u c t u r e t h a t protect endangerd plants which focuse on solving performance of greenhouse effect.

Possible Endangered Species to grow in structure

Grimshaw's starting point was the geodesic system made famous by the american architect Fuller, who designed the Montreal Biosphere in Canada. before Eden, grimshaw had designed a s im il ar structure for waterloo internatioinal station in london. The geodesic concept provide for least weight and maximum surface area on the curve-with strength.

Using BiomimicryThe clay pit was still being mined when the biomes were designed. Bubbles adapt to any surface they settle on. And when two or more bubbles join, the line of the join is always exactly perpendicular (straight up&down). Basing the 'Lead-to' biome structures on soap bubbles was a perfect way to build on the uneven and shifting sands of the pit.

Tumut Grevillea

Button Wrinklewort

Bindoon Starbush

Davies Waxflower

Figure 11. Eden Project

SURFACE MEMBRANE GREEN HOUSE eFFECT Soap Bubble FIT INTO LANDSCAPE

"initiate and support environmental sustainability and social equity with an emphasis on cultural richness and community participation." --Ceres theme

Add Value to CERES theme

B7 Learning Outcomes B8 Algorithmic Sketches

During the reverse-Engeneering part, by trying to write our own algorithms, I have learnt grasshopper much more than several weeks befoere, not just follow the video and understand what they do.

Different from previous design studio, the design proposal came out quite late. And I feel like the design proposal is largely influenced by the grasshopper definition in two case studies. With the parameter manipulation, a much larger amount of design possibilities are generated than previous generated by hand. This method is quick and more likely to find a interesting resuit, but some iterations are meaningless and hard to develope further for site. Sometimes I find the fact that not familiar with grasshopper tool can slow down my design process and limit the design outcome.

Looking more deeply into case studies, by manipulating their definition and trying to recreate them, I developed a deeper understanding of how computational design has been achieved in real life. And by prototyping this has been put to reality, solving similar architectural problems like we dealt before(e.g. connection and joint detail).

However the limitation of part B is that only using one research field is absolutely insufficient to solve complex design problems. It is more like learning grasshopper and be more familiar with computational design.

Images References

1. Kolarevic, B., Digital Morphogenesis and Computational Architectures, Proceedignsof the 4th Confernece of Congreso Iberoamericano de Grafica Digital, SIGRADI 2000 –Construindo (n)o Espaço Digital (Constructing the Digital Space) [ISBN 85-88027-02-X], Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) 25-28 September 2000, 2000, 98-103

2. Kolarevic, B. and Malkawi,A., Performative Architecture: Beyond Instrumentality, SponPress, New York; London, 2005.

3. Hensel, M., Menges,A. and Weinstock, M., Emergence: Morphogenetic Design Strategies,Wiley, London, 2004.

1.Unknown, 2010,http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5189.[accessed 4 April 2015]2. Perez, Adelyn,2011"AD Classics: TWA Terminal / Eero Saarinen" 02 Jul 2010. ArchDaily. Accessed 30 Apr 2015. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=66828>3.Unknown, 1954, http://www.printcollection.com/products/johnson-wax-balcony-sw-view#.VUMZePmqpBc. [accessed 4 April 2015]4.Unknown, 2008, http://bolidtbooster.com/beijing-water-cube.html. [accessed 4 April 2015]5.Unknown, 2010, http://johnmaddenphoto.com/portfolio/melbourne-recital-centre-mtc/. [accessed 4 April 2015]6.Unkown. 2011,http://www.decodir.com/anan-japanese-noodle-bar-in-germany-by-hosoya-schaefer-architects/371/. [accessed 4 April 2015]7.Unknown, 2008, http://www.biothing.org/?cat=5. [accessed 6 April 2015]8.Unknown, 2009, http://hexnet.org/content/eden-project-geodesic-domes. [accessed 6 April 2015]9. Unknown, 1964, ht tp : / /en.wik ipedia .org/wiki /Montrea l_Biosph%C3%A8re, [accessed 7 April 2015]10. Unknown, 1964, http://maltedmedia.com/people/bathory/waam-20071012.html, [accessed 7 April 2015]11. Unknown, 2008, http://www.emeraldcornwall.co.uk/activities/gardens/eden-project/, [accessed 20 April 2015]