Re: Fluid Architecture
- fluid architecture seems to refer to a flowing feeling you get from
curve or free form structures, imho, while movement is another
thing. calatrava has tried and successfully related fluidity with
movement with his shadow machine and milwaukee art museum- which
features a winglike finned sunscreen that can be raised and lowered
to control the temperature/sunlight of the glass walled reception
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, manzer mirkar
> Interesting,regarding the interpretation of motion in Architecture... we came to
> We were having a general discussion at UCLA a few days back
the conclusion that the term 'motion' in the architectural context
today has a referential meaning than a literal one... which
according to me is sad.
>forms strongly read as objects paused in motion. So does Hadid's and
> Gehry's architecture is termed as frozen motion... I agree, his
Libeskind's to an extent. Greg Lynn has done some work in the same
field too; but if any of the architects are asked about actual
motion as a characteristic of their building, the answer would be to
a great extent unanimous- "ofcourse the building cannot move, its
architecture after all"!
>capabilities in terms of animation software and technology in terms
> To me thats unfortunate; as an architect with the latest digital
of structural innovation we should be far away into the future
already; Architecture lacks the exponential progression seen in the
other fields today; there are many universities out there that are
doing a lot of ground breaking research in technology- Cornell,
Columbia, AA ...(UCLA to an extent), and a lot more beyond these
obvious names. We have greats lecturing us at institutes- Gehry,
Hadid, Mayne, Greg Lynn, Eissenman, so on and so forth. With such
input and resources there should certainly be something out there on
>application of actual motion in architecture out there and I'd be
> I'm sure that there must be some research pertaining to the
very interested to look at anything relating to it. I am also
interested in this topic but have myself not done much research on
>one designer who has pushed the realm of architecture on to a
> An inspiration I refer to from time to time is Calatrava, He is
completely different level. I refer to him as an equivalent to Gaudi
who too was a visionary for his time.
>small scale (the shadow machine) to more large scale projects. I
> Calatrava has some work pertaining to motion in architecture-
also understand that he had done his Phd in the subject of motion in
architecture... I might be wrong in that, but he sure is one to look
>incorporated motion dynamic as part of its function... till that we
> It would really be great to see built architecture that
can only dream!!!
> - manzer mirkar
> hannahhux <hannahhux@y...> wrote:
> Do not forget Concert Halls. Architecture's response to music and
> dance. Frank Gehry's Disney Hall in L.A. is a dynamic example of
> architecture in motion. Good luck.
> --- In email@example.com, "Jeff"
> > I am a student of architecture at Virginia Tech and my work has
> > brought me to the motion of architecture. Architecture can do
> > many things known and unknown but I am searching for thoughts
> > about movment. The dance of Architecture. The concept cube
> > model that I am working with contains pin connections on its
> > walls which allows them to move up and down. Thoughts
> > on the subject would be appreciated as well as any architectual
> > studies on movment (light, sound, or other wise)
> > I have reached the point where I know but I do not understand.
> > It is through architecture that we are allowed to grow
> > thank you
- hi i am a student of architecture.
and i was planning to do my seminar dessertation nthesis on fluid
architecture... architecture that moves with time..!
the buildings that we make r static.. i am interested in making a
building with pivots,hinges,steel sections that are movable.! thats
the basic idea.
Well i do need help! and thats why i am here!! any sort of links to
websites .. or any info will be greatly appreciated!
- Fluid, Moving, Flexible, Animated Architecture
Motion in architecture has been a big discussion in
architecture for some time now; unfortunately most of
the 'animated' architecture produced today is more
about the notion of motion rather than actual
animation. What follows below is from my own
accumulation on the same interest- architecture that
can move- fluid architecture, something I call-
CAPTURING MOTION IN FORM
Hadids architecture best describes a static
architecture which tries to deliver some sense of
motion, her paintings are still better examples than
her built projects. Many other architects such as Greg
Lynn have expressed an interest in the animation
(not motion) of architecture, his book- Animate Form
exemplifies on this theory. Then there is the
Guggenheim in Bilbao by Gehry, this project also
delivers a notion of movement, but here the concept is
jumped a slight notch higher. The titanium panels used
for the cladding are approximately 2ft by 3ft in size
and just 0.38mm thick. This causes the skin to
flutter on windy days, a fluttering that can be
perceived by the human eye, a fluttering that causes
an animation of the skin. Unfortunately all these
examples do not incorporate an actual movement in the
MOVING PARTS THAT ARE PART OF A LARGER SYSTEM
Moving into the realm of actual moving parts and you
will see that there isnt much to see. Most examples
arent even architectural, they are more engineering
based. For example, look at the Ocean Dome in Japan or
the World cup 2002 stadium (again in Japan) or for
that matter many other examples these have a large
moving roof, a first hint at large scale movement
within a built form. Still not good enough examples,
these movements arent challenged, they are simple
two-dimensional transformations that have the
slightest architectural impact. Then there is another
segment of architecture where individual components
within a static system are motive.
Diller+Scoffidios Eyebeam Museum of Art & Technology
competition 2001 is such an example.
The actual architecture is static, but an alien detail
has been added to the program- a robotic spider moves
on the outside of the facade of the structure, its
movements are a reaction to the people inside.
Although not exactly part of the building, its sensor
motivated movement is in reaction to the program
within the building and is in fact a part of the whole
A MOVING TRANSFORMING SYSTEM
Finally to the actual movement of structures,
transformation in architecture. Try searching for
examples and there are hardly any left. The only
architect (that I know of) who actually incorporates
actual movement in architecture is Santiago Calatrava.
His sculpture WAVE (located at the Southern
Methodist University in Dallas, Texas) is a good
example of movement. The best example I think is his
Milwaukee Art Museums Quadracci Pavillion, it
incorporates louvered sunscreens (a movable wing) that
rise from the building like giant wings and move to
control light. If it is ever possible to get your
hands on the mechanics behind his projects, like the
use of hydraulics or gears, then this would be the
place to start.
NOX has come close to a moving architecture,
unfortunately they have used their concept only to
create a flexible mould. A rubber like sheet is used
as the surface (skin), below this at regular intervals
pistons are attached. The pistons can then be
tweaked within a certain degree of flexibility to
alter the rubber surface; the rubber surface can
transform itself within the limits of its
stretchability into various forms. What NOX has done
is used this concept to form a flexi-mould that can
transform itself to become a cast for several
different surface forms. The book Machining
Architecture describes this process.
There are so few examples that inspiration has to be
drawn from un-real environments. Watch Transformers
the movie and you will witness a whole city
transforming itself into a more attack ready
environment. Or watch the veritechs in Robotech
transform from aircraft to robots. As unreal these
seem, there is some semblance to the concepts behind
such fantasy. The designers behind these cartoons work
on a much serious, almost practical level than what
the cartoons show; a lot on the concept of moving
parts, transformable elements, use of hydraulics or
other force-application systems can be understood by
giving a second look at the making of such concepts.
THE PAST AND THE FUTURE
ARCHIGRAM had proposed the Walking City and the
lesser known Auto Environment, both incorporated
actual movement. The past has thought of movement and
the future is too. Some of the craziest ideas of
movement can be found in the proposals possible by
Nano-technology. A scenario where nano-bots are
constantly deconstructing and reconstructing a built
form to suit the purpose of that exact moment in time.
Well, almost all of the above isnt very useful when
it comes to the actual application of movement, but I
hope it helps. Ofcourse there are other issues about
movement- how practical it is or how affordable, how
necessary it is, but I think these are secondary
issues over the fact that it is possible and in what
ways it is possible.
Attached here is a gif animation of my own final year
(construction) project, something I almost got failed
for because of its non-practicality. The movement in
this project was achieved using hydraulic pistons
although gears would have been more suited.
Best of Luck!
Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your partner now. Go to http://yahoo.shaadi.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- even before i question the practicality of your thesis topic, i would
like to ask, why fluid architecture at all? but then as manzar says,
the topic of fluid architecture has to a large extent been conceptual
and never been proved right...
- sounds like you are in danger of trying to revisit "modular"
architecture, or rather that you are trying defy the first rule of
building ----the foundation. it may seem that you are trying to design
something in anticipation of a future "retrofit"....much like we say
the clever re-use of warehouses in modern days.
i suggest you look at LeCorbusier's design in the stuttgart, germany
housing design at Weißenhofsiedlung. He utilized movable partitions and
i would make observation......at what point does this fluidity deny
itself of ever being anything at all?....perhaps fluid architecture is
better seen thru building types rather than a singular building?
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "pickie23"
> hi i am a student of architecture.
> and i was planning to do my seminar dessertation nthesis on fluid
> architecture... architecture that moves with time..!
> the buildings that we make r static.. i am interested in making a
> building with pivots,hinges,steel sections that are movable.! thats
> the basic idea.
> Well i do need help! and thats why i am here!! any sort of links to
> websites .. or any info will be greatly appreciated!