xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam 2200385Ka 4500
controlfield tag 001 002046374
007 cr mnu|||uuuuu
008 100106s2008 flu s 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E14-SFE0002654
Cox, Christopher Emilio Emiliucci.
Living chassis :
b learning from the automotive industry; site specific, prefabricated, systems architecture
h [electronic resource] /
by Christopher Emilio Emiliucci Cox.
[Tampa, Fla] :
University of South Florida,
Title from PDF of title page.
Document formatted into pages; contains 89 pages.
Thesis (M.Arch.)--University of South Florida, 2008.
Includes bibliographical references.
Text (Electronic thesis) in PDF format.
ABSTRACT: Suburban Americans suffer from homes built with: a low standard of craftsmanship, poor efficiency of construction, excessive use of material resources and a disregard for their site. Architectural diversity is at a low, driven by a consolidation of homebuilders and fewer floor plans. The current home production workflow from commission to build pales in comparison to the automotive industries solutions. Influenced by heavy machinery and hot swappable computers, ideas are born for a better way to build houses. These ides evolve though understanding the principles of several successful vehicles, analyzing census data, and studying floor plans. The flexible autonomous systems house (FASH), involves a 900mm x 900mm framework and a kit of parts that engages our industrial ability and maintains architectural values of space, form, materiality and site specificity. FASH is about bringing a logic and simplification of technique to building that allows quality and reuse to become reality.
Mode of access: World Wide Web.
System requirements: World Wide Web browser and PDF reader.
Advisor: Michael Halflants, M. Arch.
x Architecture and Community Design
t USF Electronic Theses and Dissertations.
Living Chassis: Learning from the Automotive Industry; Site Speci c, Prefabricated, Systems Architecture by Emilio Christopher Emiliucci Cox A thesis submitted in partial ful llment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture Department of Architecture and Community Design College of Visual and Performing Arts University of South Florida Major Professor: Michael Hal ants, M.Arch. Nathan Crane, Ph.D. William Rapp, M.Arch. Date of Approval: November 21, 2008 Keywords: Modular, Prefabricated, Prefab, Chassis, System, Home, House, Residential, Architecture, Design Copyright 2008, Emilio Christopher Emiliucci Cox
DEDICATIONThis thesis is dedicated to my mother, Linda Sue Cox, who is always one step ahead of wherever I am going.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI would like to thank: Professor Michael Hal ants for his refreshing honesty and dedication to design excellence. Professor Stanley Russel for teaching a rare combination of exploration and execution. Carol Trent and Mary Hayward for keeping the boat oating in choppy waters. I am continually appreciative and amazed by my friends at the School or Architecture and Community Design. My success is directly correlated to them. Words canÂ’t describe the understanding and patients my family and friends have had with me during this time. Special thanks all of them.
LIST OF FIGURES ii ABSTRACT iv INTRODUCTION 1 1.o THINK_iDEA 2 Introduction 2 Inspiration 3 2.o MOVE_reSEARCH 5 Introduction 5 Background 6 Current State of Affairs 6 Perception or Modular 8 Automotive vs Housing Work ow 9 Precedents 11 Automobiles Introduction 11 Unimog 12 Jeep 13 VW Beetle 14 Architecture Introduction 15 Pompidou Center 15 Emotive Study 20 Design Research 21 Sizing and Grid 21 US Census 22 Precedent Studies 26 3.o DO_deSIGN 36 Early Process 36 Language 39 Spine 39 Organs 40 Bones 41 Veins 42 In ll 43 Relic 44 Design Interations 45 Open Source 50 Statesman 54 The Fish 57 APPENDIXES 64 Appendix A 65 Appendix B 79 iTABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURESii Figure 1.1. 2005 BMW z4 concept 2 Figure 1.2. Destroyed Home 3 Figure 1.3. IBM Blade 3 Figure 1.4. Lego Tractor 3 Figure 1.5. Structure and systems delivery on grader 4 Figure 1.6. Rear differential on articulated truck 4 Figure 1.7. Wheel loader 4 Figure 2.1. Eames House 5 Figure 2.2. Suburban track homes 6 Figure 2.3. Mobile/Trailer home 8 Figure 2.4. PLM based, Catia software 9 Figure 2.5. Above. Home construction work ow chart 10 Figure 2.6. Below. PLM, central data query work ow 10 Figure 2.7. Unimog in Dakar Race 11 Figure 2.8. Unimog with detachable street sweeper 12 Figure 2.9. Willys Jeep 13 Figure 2.10. VW Beetle Section 14 Figure 2.11. Pompidou Center Plaza Elevation 15 Figure 2.12. Pompidou Center Detail 15 Figure 2.13. Pompidou structural detail. 16 Figure 2.14. Section diagram 17 Figure 2.15. Grid Study 21 Figure 2.16. Square feet of new one family houses 22 Figure 2.17. Bedrooms in one family houses 22 Figure 2.18. Bathrooms in new one family houses 23 Figure 2.19. Stories in new one family houses 23 Figure 2.20. Multifamily units by square feet per unit 24 Figure 2.21. Multifamily units by number of bedrooms 24 Figure 2.22. Multifamily units by number of bathrooms 24 Figure 2.23. Air-conditioning in houses 24 Figure 2.24. Loblolly House 26 Figure 2.25. Loblolly House oor plan study 27 Figure 2.26. Eames House oor plan study 29 Figure 2.27. Eames House section study 30 Figure 2.28. Mobile Home oor plan study 31 Figure 2.29. Mobile Home section study 32 Figure 2.30. Floor Diagram 1 33 Figure 2.31. Floor Diagram 2 33 Figure 2.32. Japanese Tatami 33 Figure 2.33. Tatami Diagram 33 Figure 2.34. Ceiling height study 34 Figure 2.35. Plenum grid study 35 Figure 2.36. Plenum grid study 35 Figure 2.37. Plenum grid study 35 Figure 2.38. Plenum grid graphic 35 Figure 2.39. Plenum grid study 35 Figure 3.1. Structure graphic 36 Figure 3.2. FASH graphic 37 Figure 3.3. Process Graphics idea 37 Figure 3.4. The Hump diagram 38
Figure 3.5. The Plenum diagram 38 Figure 3.6. Spine Collage 39 Figure 3.7. 3/4Â” = 1Â’ Plenum wall model 40 Figure 3.8. Organ, plug and play 40 Figure 3.9. Bone spine connection 41 Figure 3.10. BOSH extruded aluminium pro les 41 Figure 3.11. Structural bay for vein panel 42 Figure 3.12. Vein panel diagram 42 Figure 3.13. Structural base with in ll panels 43 Figure 3.14. Mock up joint, hex in ll panel 43 Figure 3.15. Relic section perspective 44 Figure 3.16. Relic collage 44 Figure 3.17. Design iteration collage 45 Figure 3.18. D001 Board 46 Figure 3.19. D002 Board 47 Figure 3.20. D003 Board 48 Figure 3.21. D001 Graphic 49 Figure 3.22. Open source diagram 50 Figure 3.23. Bag of parts given to open source team 51 Figure 3.24. Chipboard sites given to open source team 51 Figure 3.25. Open source handout 1 52 Figure 3.26. Open source handout 2 53 Figure 3.27. Statesman south elevation 54 Figure 3.28. Statesman section perspective 54 Figure 3.29. Statesman oor plans 55 Figure 3.30. Statesman perspective 56 Figure 3.31. Fish exploded systems 57 Figure 3.32. Fish interior perspective 58 Figure 3.33. Fish oor plan 58 Figure 3.34. Fish section perspective of oor system 59 Figure 3.35. Fish spine and bone structure 59 Figure 3.36. Fish section perspective interior space 59 Figure 3.37. Fish east elevation 60 Figure 3.38. Fish main perspective 61 iii
LIVING CHASSIS: Learning from the Automotive Industry; Site Speci c, Prefabricated, Systems Architecture Emilio Christopher Emiliucci Cox ABSTRACT Suburban Americans suffer from homes built with: a low standard of craftsmanship, poor ef ciency of construction, excessive use of material resources and a disregard for their site. Architectural diversity is at a low, driven by a consolidation of homebuilders and fewer oor plans. The current home production work ow from commission to build pales in comparison to the automotive industries solutions. In uenced by heavy machinery and hot swappable computers, ideas are born for a better way to build houses. These ides evolve though understanding the principles of several successful vehicles, analyzing census data, and studying oor plans. The exible autonomous systems house (FASH), involves a 900mm x 900mm framework and a kit of parts that engages our industrial ability and maintains architectural values of space, form, materiality and site speci city. FASH is about bringing a logic and simpli cation of technique to building that allows quality and reuse to become reality. iv
1 INTRODUCTIONThis document is broken down into three main Sections: THINK, outlining the ideas and inspirations MOVE, documenting the research and processes at work DO, visualizing the execution of this thesis process Appendix A open source gallery Appendix B model gallery
2 1.o THINK_iDEAIntroduction Â“I think that only daring speculation can lead us further and not accumulation of facts.Â” Albert Einstein This process started with an appreciation for the ef ciency and beauty of automotive design and production. Since FordÂ’s Model T in 1908, cars have pushed the limits of design and production, while maintaining a high level of performance, reliability and safety. Manufactures like Toyota and BMW spend millions on research and development in order to streamline production, nd niche markets, increase quality and understand the role of cars in the future. Meanwhile, Suburban Americans are suffering from homes built with: a low standard of craftsmanship, poor ef ciency of construction, excessive use of material resources and a disregard for their site. The housing market still relies on a labor intensive model, in exibility and limited reusability. By focusing on developing a new language for the construction of single family homes, we can harness our industrial ability and maintain architectural values of space, form, materiality and site speci city. Figure 1.1 2005 BMW z4 concept
3 Inspiration Inspiration can be drawn from many places, but it all starts with the decision to make things better. After seeing enough homes destroyed with almost nothing salvaged, itÂ’s obvious that there is a better solution. There is a lot to learn from purely purpose driven designs, like a steam roller, front end loader or server computer. Through observing heavy machinery, photographing connections and understanding part interactions, ideas were born. The current in ux of plug and play ability in the computer industry was of special interest. Trends toward exibility and Â“Hot SwappabilityÂ”, allow computer parts to be exchanged, added or removed without delay. These plug and play concepts have direct implications to the way homes can be built. Figure 1.2 Destroyed Home Figure 1.3 IBM Blade Figure 1.4. Lego Tractor
4 Figure 1.5. Left. Integrated structure and systems delivery on grader Figure 1.6. Bottom. Rear differential on articulated truck detailing a swing arm Figure 1.7. Right. Wheel loader tells an honest story with clear structural articulation
5 2.o MOVE_reSEARCHIntroduction Research is broken into three main areas: background, precedents and design. Background research investigates the current home building market. This background created a setting for other research to stem. Next, a 50 person survey was conducted on the perception of modular and prefabrication in home construction and automobiles. This comparison of home construction and automobile production was carried further in a work ow study. Precedent research starts with three automobiles; the Unimog, Jeep and the VW Beetle; then is followed by several houses. The next stage of research is design oriented. Design research is conducted with speci c goals, so that conclusion reached are directly translated to design decisions. Figure 2.1 Eames House Steele, James, Charles Eames, and Ray Eames. Eames House : Charles and Ray Eames London: Phaidon, 1994.
6Background Current State of Affairs Â“Most of the roughly 1.5 million houses built every year are pieced together in a wasteful, antiquated way that has changed remarkably little in 150 yearsÂ”, says Tedd Benson of Fine Home Building Magazine. According to US census data, 95 percent of 1,654,000 US single family homes completed in 2006 where site built (Characteristics of New Housing). Site built homes are entirely built at the building site. They conform to all state local and regional building codes at the site location. 2 percent of American single family homes constructed where modular (Characteristics of New Housing). Modular homes are built in sections in a factory. They are built to all state, local and regional building codes at their destination. Sections are then carefully transported from the factory to the site and assembled by local contractors. Well built modular homes should have the same longevity of site built homes, increasing in value overtime. Site built homes take more time than modular homes to be constructed. Â“Our factories will be able to produce and deliver the home within four to 12 weeksÂ”, said Palumbo of Custom Modular Designs (Smith). While a tradition site built home would take 8-12 months. This time advantage helps investors by shortening the time they pay interest. Developers bene t by having the ability to respond to market demands faster than their competitors using onsite construction. Good labor is hard to nd, especially went its 95 degrees and raining. According to the 2006 Construction Quality Survey by Portland, Maine-based consulting company Criterium Engineers, the number of new homes with Â“signi cant problemsÂ” rose to 17% in 2006 (Roney). In October of 2003, University of Central Florida conducted a study on 406 site-built houses in the Orlando area (Tracy). The study found 386 of the homes had serious defects, including; faulty foundations, dangerous moisture intrusion, and inadequate framing (Tracy). Much of this is caused by unskilled labor and poor site conditions. Tedd Benson says, Â“From experience, I know itÂ’s hard to do good work when you canÂ’t feel your ngers, or when youÂ’re ankle deep in mud, or when itÂ’s been raining for ve days straight and youÂ’re spending most of your time tying down tarpsÂ” (Benson). Site constructed buildings open themselves up to common problems like sick building syndrome from rain and moisture. Factory built homes are constructed in a controlled environment. This allows for fewer accidents less mistakes and more Figure 2.2 Suburban track homes. Â“Markham Suburbs.Â” .
7predictable time frames. Material use in on-site construction is much less frugal than factory built. With Modular Construction, Â“You typically have 30 percent more material that goes into the home with 30 percent less wasteÂ” (Smith). You have a much more ideal work environment and more means to recycle. TodayÂ’s track homes are constructed with little regard for their site. Newness is encouraged as a way of life, at the expense of reuse, frugality and quality. Their orientation doesnÂ’t respond to an ef ciency of use, but rather ef ciency of economy. With the consolidation of the home builders fewer oor plans are available in an effort to make more money. Homes are sited with unprotected southern facades because of repeated oor plans. Local ecologies are disregarded and wetlands are lled disrupting complex ecosystem and watershed alignments. Â“We can raise the standard of home building as high as we want. We could increase the average life expectancy of homes vefold. We could reduce energy requirements by 50% to 100% and all but eliminate waste of time and materials in the building process.Â” Modular/Prefab construction has its many advantages, which have not yet fully translated to the market. It will take entrepreneurs willing to take risks, and manufacturers with the knowledge and technology to back them. The auto industry is best aligned to take on a modular housing project of this nature.
8Perception or Modular Perception is reality. People react more toward their perception of reality than reality itself. Therefore the perception of modular and prefabricated construction in America has a great effect on its success or failure. People have been jaded by bad examples of prefabricationÂ…trailers. The majority of people are uninformed. Figure 2.3 Mobile/Trailer home Â“Abandoned Mobile Home.Â” .
9Automotive vs Housing Work ow 78% of all new single-family homes completed were speculatively-built [house and land are sold together as part of the same transaction], up from 65% in 1986 (Characteristics of New Housing). Speculative builders rely on a limited number of oor plans and a repetitive construction technique to reach economic ef ciency. Contractor to Subcontractor relations are a commonly associated with inef ciency. Keeping 20 subcontractors organized expensive, time consuming and exhausting. It is impossible to control delays caused by nature and almost as hard to control that many subcontractors. A study done over several years in the Phoenix area showed that 25% to 40% of a site built houses construction time is spent on building operations (Benson). Howard Bashford says, Â“The activity that occurs most often on a building is nothingÂ” (Benson). With all these trades ghting for space on a job, in all kinds of weather, it looks crazy! Kent Larson from MITÂ’s open source building alliance said, Â“Building homes entirely on site now makes as much sense as building a car in your drivewayÂ” (Benson). With more sophisticated costumers and greatly more complex products comes a need for greater knowledge and expertise for developing products. Car manufactures are quick to adopt new ideas. From the Henry Ford with the assembly line, to Toyota with the lean production model, car manufactures are constantly evolving with market needs and technologies. With the creation of Computer Aided Design [CAD] systems in the early 1980Â’s engineering reach a new era (Ameri). Each new release offered more than the previous. In the mid 1980Â’s came Product Data Management [ PDM] (Ameri). PDM proved effective as a Figure 2.4 PLM based, Catia software is capable of calculating part stress and strain in real-time, streamlining coordination efforts and empowering designers with accurate structural analysis. Â“Park Machinery.Â” < http://www.fer-mec. com/cart_eng/parco_macchinari_eng.htm >
10 database for engineers, but did not include any other disciplines. In the later 1990Â’s came Product Life Management [PLM] with the goal of moving beyond the design and engineering aspects of a project creating a, Â“shared platform for the creation, organization and dissemination of product related information [cradle to the grave] across the extended enterpriseÂ” (Ameri). Car manufactures are taking advantage of PLM [product life management] solutions, allowing a more streamlined process from design to manufacture. PLM is the process of streamlining the ow of information about a product from concept to manufacture to service and disposal. At the core of PLM is a central knowledge base. From the knowledge base all questions are answered and solutions realized. Bene ts include: Reduced time to market, improved product quality, reduced prototyping costs, savings through reuse of original data, reduced waste and savings through complete integration of engineering work ows (Ameri). The adoption of these ideas and technologies is urgent. Our current system of information management from client to building is antique. Most rms are still collaborating drawings in 2d! With currently available technologies todayÂ’s architect is more equipped than ever to tackle any project. Figure 2.5. Above. Home construction work ow chart. Â“Process Performance Solutions.Â” < http:// ftq360.com/Solutions_Builder.htm >. Figure 2.6. Below. PLM, central data query work ow. Â“Seven steps to complete PLM.Â” < http:// machinedesign.com/ContentItem/69211/ SevenstepstocompletePLM.aspx >
11Precedents Automobiles Introduction Websites, cars shows, conventions, endless press coverage and competitive races have all created a culture of enthusiast for cars. Cars are more accessible that houses, yet the cars that many enthusiast lust for are hopelessly out of reach. These enthusiast cultures create more informed consumers and motivate others to learn more about their hobby. Single family homes have not created enthusiast cultures similar to the automotive industry. This lack of enthusiast is in part related to the complexity, in exibility, scale and cost of changes to a home. One of the only enthusiast groups for architecture is with skyscrapers and this enthusiast group relates more the hopelessly out of reach car fans of the car world. When looking at the automotive industry, a few cars stand out among enthusiast, consumers and time; like the Unimog, Jeep, and VW beetle. These three vehicles hold the longest production lives of any vehicle type (Wand). Through understanding their history, design intent, and enthusiast cultures a new outlook can be brought to home design. Figure 2.7 Unimog in Dakar Race. Â“2008 Dakar Rally Cancled.Â” < http://howdywilcox.org/ ?m=200801&paged=2 >.
12Unimog What is the Unimog? People have described the Unimog as, Â“A cross between a tractor, a tank Â– recovery truck and a tug boatÂ”; others call it the Â“Swiss Army Knife of Trucks.Â” George Wand, of OffRoad.com calls it, Â“the European version of a Hammer, John Deere Gator, Oshkosh truck and several others Â– all blended into one pretty, powerful, precision-built vehicle.Â” Relatively unknown by Americans, Unimogs are now becoming available at limited truck dealerships. The Unimog holds the third longest production life of any type of vehicle. The name Â“UnimogÂ” was identi ed at the beginning of its life as a Â“motor-power universally adaptable machine for agriculture.Â” Its current name is a contraction of Universal Motor Gerat. The German word Â“geratÂ” translates to; apparatus, equipment, gadget, implement, machine and more (Wand). The Unimog de nes beauty through technical appropriateness. The product line, has models raining is size, power and use. It has been said that the Unimog can be con gured eight million different ways (Wand). The Unimogs origin lies in post World War II Europe. After the war, European car manufactures Porsche, Lamborghini, and Mercedes, in an effort to capitalize on war torn EuropeÂ’s need for agriculture turned to making farm tractors. It was Albert Friedrich, a top designer and chief engineer for engine development at Mercedes Benz that rst studied the idea of an all wheel drive agriculture vehicle. Design Intent: It was to be a four wheel drive, vehicle with equal size tires and two lock differentials. The design speci ed high ground clearance portal axels, a small loading platform, a cab with a folding roof, and second seat for a helper. The vehicle was to be driven at low speed in the elds, and high speeds on road for transporting. All models included a front center and rear power take off (PTO) as well as front and rear 3 point hitches. This vehicle is important because of its unmatched exibility. It can do anything and has. From plowing the elds to ghting res, no vehicle has seen so many roles. The exibility, is from an early design decision to include 3 standard connections allowing implements to be simply attached. It is also durable enough to pass down for years. Figure 2.8 Unimog with detachable street sweeper. Â“Schwarze Industries.Â” < http://www. schwarze.com/PressReleases/A7UNIMOG. html>.
13Jeep The Â“jeepÂ” was commission for the United States Army. The rst prototype Bantam BRC was created by American Bantam and then followed by two other prototypes by Ford and Willys. American Bantam was the rst to produce the vehicle to speci cation, but its engine was underpowered, additionally the Army decided that American Bantam was too small of a company to handle the production needs of the War. There were 1500 of each prototype produced for exhaustive eld testing, then a competitive bid. The JeepÂ’s original design intent was clear: Carry men and Equipment through all kinds of Terrain. Weigh less than 1300 pounds so that it can be easily freed form terrain by a few men. 4 wheel drive 80Â” wheelbase This vehicles success is in its mass production, customization and availability. Where the Unimog saw exibility through attachments, the Jeeps strength is mass standardization. Its standardized parts and economic accessibility have allowed large numbers of people to become enthusiast. Figure 2.9 Opposite. Original Willys Jeep. Â“Old Jeep Photos and Advertising.Â” .
14VW Beetle The beetle idea dates back to Ferdinand Porsche and his vision for a mass produced vehicle that was affordable for the average citizen. This idea was mirrored by then young car enthusiast Adolf Hitler. In 1933 at the Berlin auto show, Hitler showed his intention to build the vehicle and choose Ferdinand Porsche to design it. Hitler gave Ferdinand Porsche these speci cations: designed for two adults and three children operate at 100 km/h get 33 mpg sell at the price of 1000 Reichmarks be as simple as possible (Dean). The Beetle hit the US at time when horsepower and chrome ruled the land. This new beetle was a very small car and comedians where constantly making fun of it. The car was slow, it had trouble climbing steep hills, but it was reliable. This car made transportation available for those who couldnÂ’t afford the larger alternatives. The car was spot-on; it was a great democratic concept, from a very un-democratic mind. The beetle success lied in its simplicity and availability. This why it was adopted by a generation. Figure 2.10 VW Beetle Section. Â“1966 VW Beetle.Â” .
15Architecture Introduction Today Americans are changing residence more than ever and their homes are as in exible as they have ever been. An estimate 22 million people moved to new residences between March 1999 and March 2000 (Characteristics of New Housing). This need for exibility is also evident in the 226.4 billion dollars spent on residential repairs and improvements (Characteristics of New Housing). This mobile lifestyle will only become more common in our ever changing global economy. Pompidou Center Why should one study a massive museum when trying to design, a house? The answer is actually quite simple; Changeability. Museums are in constant change, a sort of hotel of the arts. Curators must change spaces to accommodate each new exhibit. Not to unlike future homes under constant change from new residents, technologies and weather patterns. Renzo PianoÂ’ and Richard RogerÂ’s Pompidou Center (Beaubourg) captured the spirit of change best. The building was programmed to be a center for the concentration of cultural information. Beaubourg was conceived as the ultimate exible space. Did BeaubourgÂ’s exibility aid it in accommodating art humanity and its unforeseen path? Figure 2.11. Above. Pompidou Center Plaza Elevation. Figure 2.12. Below. Pompidou Center Detail Silver, Nathan. The Making of Beaubourg : A Building Biography of the Centre Pompidou Paris. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1994.
16Beginning Two ideas came from President Pompidou: to hold an international competition and to build a museum. On December 11, 1969, the President of France, Georges Pompidou decreed that Paris was to have a Â“Centre erected in the Heart of Paris, not far from Les Halles, devoted to the contemporary artÂ” (Silver). In July of 1970, the competition became a reality. Ted Happold, an executive partner at Arup [engineering rm] in charge of structures 3, read about the cultural center competition in Paris and immediately sent in for the design package (Bosma). Happold discussed the competition with his colleges then decided to lure Richard and Su Rogers on the project. After deliberation the group, including Peter Rice, Ted Happold, Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano entered the competition for Beaubourg, Centre de Pompidou. Design Rogers and Piano started to assemble their design team. The design team sought, Â“a right to suppose that invention, resourcefulness, and reason were the proper sources of architectural beauty, or truthÂ” (the ethic rather than the aesthetic) (Silver 22). The exibility began from the start involving a core of engineers and architects. Peter Rice and Ted Happold, from Ove-Arup [engineering rm] joined in on the brainstorming, contributing a page dedicated to the steel in the competition entry (Silver 29). Rogers and Piano had an un inching belief in rational design as the only secure guiding principle. The team outlined fundamental considerations, including easy accessibility, and exibility (Silver) Â“The CentreÂ’s exibility should be large [great] as possible. In living in a complex organism such as the Centre, the evolution of needs is to be especially taken into accountÂ” (Silver ). The idea evolved into pushing out all the interfering things so that the inside would remain as exible as possible. Out of the 681 valid submissions, their design was selected. It was decided on a vote, 8 of 9 jury members selecting RogersÂ’ and PianoÂ’s scheme. As Listed by the jury, the top reason for selection was the designs Â“functional, exible, polyvalent construction that is as adaptable as possible to needs, means, and tastes that are changeable and unforeseeableÂ” (Silver 45). Figure 2.13 structural detail. Silver, Nathan. The Making of Beaubourg : A Building Biography of the Centre Pompidou Paris. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1994.
17Construction The construction was a tremendous enterprise occurring in factories and workshops far from the site (Silver 129). It was estimated that 2-3 times more makers, supplies and trades were employed because of the construction type (Silver 129). These inef ciencies are to be expected when created a rst of its kind building. Ventilators and mechanical pieces that where designed speci cally for Beaubourg had to be inspected and checked by re authorities. The site work was to be an assemblage of prefabricated parts. The structural steel was conceived as a giant toy kit, each piece relating to another in a simple way. Site welding was to be avoided requiring that some pieces be very big (Silver 131). The pieces when up fast and without major problems, taking eight Figure 2.14 Section diagram showing servant and served space (yellow). Silver, Nathan. The Making of Beaubourg : A Building Biography of the Centre Pompidou Paris. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1994.
18months to erect the entire steel frame including oors (Silver 132). Original ideas of two movable mezzanine levels, changed to one interchangeable level as a cost savings. Two years after the project was completed the client was asking for more mezzanine levels, showing the successful exibility of the building (Silver 158). In retrospect the design team would have further bene ted from more time developing the plans and a less frantic construction. However, he building was completed within budget and on time (Silver 169). Conclusion The exibility of Beaubourg can be looked at two scales. First, at the scale of the expansive column free oors have which were designed to allow full exibility of exhibit design. Bene ts of this system in comparison to traditional museums are not well documented; however large scale exible spaces in the Tate Modern not only changed the way we display art, but also the way are is created. Similar characteristics can be noted for Beaubourg. At the larger scale the success of the building is not currently through its physical exibility, but rather the spirit of the idea. In 1997, the Pompidou Center called on Rogers and Piano to update Beaubourg. Renovations included the addition of mezzanine levels and repairs from overuse. The Mezzanine levels, although easier to install than on a traditional buildings did not show time or cost savings over traditional construction. Â“The inside out of BeaubourgÂ’s mechanical equipment was exposed partly for re safety, partly to keep the interior free and exible, partly for expression, and partly through the recognition that it was the major building element likely to be soonest replaced, upgraded, adapted, or made more energy ef cientÂ” (Silver 148). Other long life buildings have shown the need for mechanical accessibility; however the exposure of mechanical equipment was a bad decision. Weather resistance on this equipment was a concern, electric lines had to be water tight, water lines had to prevent freezing and sheet metal ducts had to be nished to resist rust. Many of these problems were solved through readymade xes; however the nishing was crucial and costly. These problems in addition to wear and tear from over success closed Beaubourg for 27 months in 1997 (BBC). The separation of servant and served spaces are well executed in the total inversion of the building. This decision gives curators the exibility of massive column free oors to work with. The spirit of Beaubourg is un inching, from the young energetic architects who designed it to the street performers currently in the plaza. Beaubourg is a celebration of the arts, like the iPod is a celebration of personal music. They may not be the most economical, or most functional but they embody the spirit more than any of their predecessors. That is why we love them. It may take 200 years before we realize the potential of this design. A time when we see traditional buildings torn down and replaced wasting precious materials and costly labor; and Beaubourg continually growing with each generation. Translation to the home Ideas learn from the design and construction of Beaubourg can be translated into designing and constructing a home. Collaboration with different disciplines early is a most. RiceÂ’ and HappoldÂ’s early involvement bene ted the project in many ways. It was crucial to them winning the competition and constructing the project. The Ove-Arup [Rice and Happolds rm] collaboration
19gave the comity con dence in the relatively unknown Piano and Rogers to build the project (Silver 42). The strong bond and clarity of concept created early between the design team allowed them to stay true to their design through tough times in construction. The complexities of the Beaubourg design where not able to be understood by one person. It wasnÂ’t a heroic architect creating a masterpiece; it was several likeminded people learning to make rational decisions. This method of working was effective and ef cient, considering the complexity and newness of the design. The separation of servant and served space is especially applicable to housing. The idea of potential a wall or service core would lend well to ideas of prefabrication while allowing in ll or the incorporation of a relic. Lessons Learned: Keep dreaming a good idea lasts forever Collaborate Â– not one person can fully grasp todayÂ’s modern buildings Surround yourself with good people Â– Ted Happold, enlisted the brilliant Rice, and sought after Rogers. Rogers enlisted Piano. Great ideas may not be fully realized till long after they are created.
20Emotive Study John Habraken is a Dutch architect, educator, and theorist. The focus of his career was not from the view point of architect as an artist, but rather a designer for the millions of ordinary people. In the 1960Â’s Habraken studied mass housing in the Netherlands, nding monotony and a lack of occupant participation. After seeing this he devised a system of support and in ll that would essential split the construction of mass housing into two parts; the communal [support] and the part of private responsibility [in ll]. Â“A support structure should be interpreted as an autonomous, durable structure, comparable to a highwayÂ” (Bosma 92). The support structure should contain connections for electric, sewer and other general connections (Bosma 92). The support structure is extremely durable and will outlive the in ll. The in ll is created and commission by the occupant allowing each in ll to be unique. Habraken says that the rst step is to consult with the authorities and all parties involved, requiring cooperation from municipalities (Bosma). The second step involves the creation of a prototype, along with clear regulations and high quality standardized parts (Bosma 106). After these steps are taken the most dif cult part will be changing the opinions, and clearing up misconceptions (Bosma 106). Â“Housing does not require a masterpiece of design; what it needs are freedoms to grow and changeÂ” (Bosma 92). HabrakenÂ’s ideas are very important issues for inhabitants of the house. It takes a humble designer to incorporate human needs and desires so well, in such a large context. Though this thesis will deal with repetitive elements, it will be at smaller scale that many of HabrakenÂ’s studies. The idea of support and in ll is essential tied to the creation of an enthusiast for the home. Just like Jeep owners modify their trucks, to their needs and style, the LiveIn Chassis will support aftermarket parts and user add-ons. People like to personalize their VW Beetle after all. The studies outlined above have already begun to carve a path toward a more clear thesis. Understanding the background of on objects design and the original intent, is paramount to understanding a process. In looking back, many of the case studies highlight the need for rules of design; from HitlerÂ’s command for the beetle, to the Unimogs connections of necessity. When looking at the ideological work ow of home construction, the need for a paradigm shift is evident. Other industries are paving the way, the building industry must rst learn, then act. Most importantly, the human must be at the center of all of this. After all that is who we design for.
21Design Research Sizing and Grid To design the most exible system you donÂ’t design objects, you design rules. Objects are designed through arrangement and adornment, rules can be designed within. This case study focuses on setting a grid [rule] for the FASH house. First looking at US Census data, then precedent studies to understand the scale of homes. Conclusion: The home should not be designed to a standard size but rather have a standard set of pieces that accommodate a variety of conditions. The Plenum wall acts as an expandable spine. The exibility possible in a FASH system will allow homeowners to scale their house as needed. Instead of buying a large home in expectation or a large family, inhabitants will be able to quickly add on as needed. The scalability will bring an economy to living, where we are using what we need. Conceptually similar to the scalability of computing found in the IBM Blade Center, where modular computer Â“bladesÂ” are exchanged and updated as needed into a larger chassis. A base grid of 900mm x 900mm will be used as a base dimension for many building competents including the; oor system, plenum wall, and in ll system. Figure 2.15. Grid Study.
22US Census The most common single family home since the 70s has been the 3 bedroom 2 bath. This con guration is marketed to both the low and high income brackets. There are noted trends moving toward more square footage, more rooms and more bathrooms. These trends are not linear; it seems that there are two markets in housing as show by the double bell curve in gure 1. This gives a 1600 sq. ft. module the ability to take part in both the 1600 Â– 1999 sq. ft. and 3000 or more sq. ft. markets by simply modulating two units. The trend toward more space, rooms, and bathrooms will be affected by the housing crash of 2007 and the energy crisis. These two factors could produce a shift away from larger homes back toward a more clearly de ned double bell curve. The most universal house for single family America is a 3 bedroom, 2 baths, approximately 1600 sq. ft. core with potential add-ons for more square footage and the ability to work two units in tandem. There are several trends to note in gure 2.16. First, the double convex curve forming around 1600-1999 sq. ft. and 24002999 sq. ft. showing the most common square foot ranges. This double hump is showing two distinct square footage groups in 1976 [dark blue], that slowly are becoming less severe in 1981, and 1986. The next trend starts in 1991, when the 1600-1999 sq ft curve is maintaining and the second hump levels off showing a change toward larger square footage homes. This trend become more evident through 2006, when a de ned hump is seen at 16001999 sq ft transforming to a progressive rise toward homes 3000 sq ft and more. The 1600 ft home has historically proved itself as lasting trend in housing. By doubling the 1600 sq. ft. module (3200 sq. ft.) this system is positioned to capture the growing trend for larger 250 300 350 400 450 i n thousands)Square Feet of Floor Area in New One Family Houses Completed 1976 1981 0 50 100 150 200 1200 or less1200 15991600 19992000 23992400 29993000 moreNumber or Houses ( i Square Feet 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006 NbfBdiO FilHCld 800 900 N um b er o f B e d rooms i n O ne F am il y H ouses C omp l ete d 700 800 500 600 i n thousands) 1976 1981 400mber of Houses ( i 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 200 300Nu 2001 2006 0 100 0 2 beds or less3 beds4 beds or more Number of Bedrooms Figure 2.16. Square feet of oor area in new one family houses completed. Figure 2.17. Number of bedrooms in one family houses completed.
23homes. Figure 2.17, shows an evident peak at 3 bedrooms, and a growing trend toward 4 bedrooms or more becoming more evident in 2006. Figure 2.18, displays a clear peak at 2 bathrooms and a growing trend toward 2.5 and 3 or more as the graph gets closer to 2006. Figure 2.19, shows the growing trend for multi story homes. This can be for a few reasons. One might think the rise in land value has caused the trend. But US Census data highlights that there has been a consistency in land size for single family homes. If we are building on the same size land and our homes are getting bigger there is only one way to go, up. The average size home built in 2006, before the housing crash of 2007, was 2,469 769 sq. ft. up 769 sq. ft. from 1976. Figure 2.20 highlights several trends in multifamily housing. The great rise in multifamily housing in 1980, focused on units sized between 800 and 999 sq. ft. This 800-999 square foot trend was growing since 1976. Starting in 1991, the square footage curve starts to atten out, as larger units become more popular. In 2006, units took a sharp toward the 1200 and larger bracket showing the rst convex curve. This trend is noted before the housing bust of 2007, but can be expected to be on the rise with the rising energy costs, and the eminent growing cities. NbfBhiNO FilHCld 700 N um b er o f B at h rooms i n N ew O ne F am il y H ouses C omp l ete d 500 600 400 500 i n thousands) 1976 1981 300mber of Houses ( i 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 200Nu 2001 2006 0 100 0 1.5 or less22.53 or more Number of Bathrooms NbfSiiNO FilHCld 900 1000 N um b er o f S tor i es i n N ew O ne F am il y H ouses C omp l ete d 800 900 600 700 i n thousands) 1976 1981 400 500mber of Houses ( i 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 200 300Nu 2001 2006 0 100 0 12 or moresplit level Number of Stories Figure 2.18. Number of bathrooms in new one family houses completed. Figure 2.19. Number of stories in new one family houses completed.
24 NbfMlifilUiCldbSFUi 250 N um b er o f M u l t if am il y U n i ts C omp l ete d b y S quare F eet per U n i t 200 150 n thousands) 1978 1981 100 u mber of Units (i n 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 50N u 2001 2006 0 0 600 or less600 799800 9991000 11991200 or more Square Feet NbfMltifilUitCltdbNbfBdUit 400 N um b er o f M u ltif am il y U n it s C omp l e t e d b y N um b er o f B e d rooms per U n it 300 350 250 n thousands) 1978 1981 150 200umber of Units (i n 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 100N 2001 2006 0 50 0 efficiencies123 or more Number of Bedrooms NbfMltifilUitCltdbNbfBthUit 400 N um b er o f M u ltif am il y U n it s C omp l e t e d b y N um b er o f B a th rooms per U n it 300 350 250 n thousands) 1978 1981 150 200umber of Units (i n 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 100N 2001 2006 0 50 0 11.52 or more Number of Bathrooms PfAi CdiiiiNO FilHCld 1600 P resence o f Ai r C on di t i on i ng i n N ew O ne F am il y H ouses C omp l ete d 1200 1400 1000 i n thousands) 1976 1981 600 800mber of Houses ( i 1981 1986 1991 1996 2001 400Nu 2001 2006 0 200 0 with air conditioningwithout air conditioning Air Conditioning Figure 2.20. Number of multifamily units completed by square feet per unit. Figure 2.21. Number of multifamily units completed by number of bedrooms per unit. Figure 2.22. Number of multifamily units completed by number of bathrooms per unit Figure 2.23. Presence of air-conditioning in new one family houses completed.
25 The most common single family home since the 70s has been the 3 bedroom 2 bath. This con guration is marketed to both the low and high income brackets. There are noted trends moving toward more square footage, more rooms and more bathrooms. These trends are not linear; it seems that there are two markets in housing as show by the double bell curve in gure 1. This gives a 1600 sq. ft. module the ability to take part in both the 1600 Â– 1999 sq. ft. and 3000 or more sq. ft. markets by simply modulating two units. The trend toward more space, rooms, and bathrooms will be affected by the housing crash of 2007 and the energy crisis. These two factors could produce a shift away from larger homes back toward a more clearly de ned double bell curve. The most universal house for single family America is a 3 bedroom, 2 baths, approximately 1600 sq. ft. core with potential add-ons for more square footage and the ability to work two units in tandem. Conclusion: The home should not be designed to a standard size but rather have a standard set of pieces that accommodate a variety of conditions. The Plenum wall acts as an expandable spine. The exibility possible in a FASH system will allow homeowners to scale their house as needed. Instead of buying a large home in expectation or a large family, inhabitants will be able to quickly add on as needed. The scalability will bring an economy to living, where we are using what we need. Conceptually similar to the scalability of computing found in the IBM Blade Center, where modular computer Â“bladesÂ” are exchanged and updated as needed into a larger chassis. A base grid of 900mm x 900mm will be used as a base dimension for many building competents including the; oor system, plenum wall, and in ll system.
26Precedent Studies Three precedent studies were selected to further understand the scale of inhabitants, ultimately seeking to design the grid through research. Loblolly House The rst precedent study looked at Kieran TimberlakeÂ’s Loblolly House. Kieran TimberlakeÂ’s practice is run as a sustained research project, with over 50 architects in their Philadelphia of ce. The Loblolly House is aimed at rethinking architecture in regard to new industrial production techniques. Their research touches on the digital collaboration capable with new BIM, Building Information Modeling practices. Their approach deals with the creation of complex and diverse parts assembled into units before delivery to the site for assembly. They continue the modern tradition in separating frame and in ll. The Loblolly House is located in Taylors Island, Maryland. Summer time temperatures reach over 100 degrees Fahrenheit and 75% humidity. The house is designed to use as little mechanical air-conditioning as possible. Figure 2.24. Loblolly House. Kieran, Stephen, and James Timberlake. Loblolly House : Elements of a New Architecture 1st ed. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008.
27 Figure 2.25. Loblolly House diagrammatic plans.
28 The house is crafted from aluminum, glass, poly carbonate and timber. The elements of a house are arranged into 5 areas, in contrast to CSIÂ’s 50 sections; site [piles and utilities], scaffold [structure of frame], oor/ceiling cartridges [wood-shethed oor, ceiling and roof panels with integrated mechanical and electrical systems], block [bathrooms enclosed in wood, with mechanical rooms and integrated xtures, equipment, piping, wiring an ductwork], and wall cartridges [wood-shethed panels with integrated windows, insulated, cement board, and vapor barrier]. As seen in gure 2.25, the Loblolly House is broken down though an underlying 12Â’ grid. This is evident in the overall room sizes 12Â’x16Â’, 12Â’ x24Â’ etc. Another important dimension is the total width of the building, being 24Â’. This dimension allows for rooms and bathrooms to coexist horizontally, as seen in the rst oor plan above. If the dimension were to get any smaller than 24Â’, both the room and the bathroom would lose their proportional relationship, leaving an elongated room or cramped bathroom. The yellow portions of the plan show the fully prefabricated cartridges as sitting in the scaffolding.
29 Figure 2.26. Eames House oor plan study..
30 Figure 2.27. Opposite. Eames House section study.
31 Figure 2.28. Mobile Home oor plan study.
32 Figure 2.29. Mobile Home section study.
33 Figure 2.32. Above. Japanese Tatami. Â“JackÂ’s Crisp.Â” < http://www.jackcrisp.com/ store/productimages/tatami1900.jpg >. Figure 2.30. Floor Diagram 1 Figure 2.31. Floor Diagram 2 Figure 2.33. Below. Tatami Diagram. After looking at US Census data and precedent studies, the next step was to start designing the grid. Knowing that the approximate 24Â’ width for a home was the best scale of space for economy and proportion, I started looking at the metric equivalent that would bring logic to the project. This logic needed to be evident at both the scale of the building and also the scale of the individual. 24Â’ equals 7315.2mm. This dimension can be rounded up to 7400mm [3700, 1850,925] or down to 7200mm [3600, 1800, 900]. The simplicity of 7200 at the large scale is equal at the small scale. Additionally 900mm equals 35.43Â”, a workable size that is good for scaling space in a 2 dimensional oor plane and in a vertical plane, where 35.4Â” is equal to the standard working counter height. Ironically a 900mm x 900mm system is not new to the construction world. The Japanese have been working with 900mm x 1800mm Tatami for over a thousand years. This system has proved to be a great module for scaling rooms while keeping human proportion close at mind. Once the 2d grid of 900mm x 900mm was set, the next step was to determine a good ceiling height. Figure 2.34 shows, several common widths of space and how they are affected by different ceiling heights. The top row, 2300mm, shows a comfortable proportion at a width of 1750mm, but is cramped at the other widths. After analyzing the chart 2600mm, is determined to be the best ceiling height showing good proportions in larger widths with only a marginal loss of proportion in the 1750 width.
34 Figure 2.34. Ceiling height study.
35 Figure 2.35. Plenum grid study Figure 2.36. Plenum grid study Figure 2.37. Plenum grid study Figure 2.38. Plenum grid graphic Figure 2.39. Plenum grid study
36 3.o DO_deSIGNEarly Process Design starts as soon as the problem is identi ed. In order to let the project properly evolve from its in uences, the designer must be clear of preconceived notions. The process of disconnecting from preconception is dif cult and near impossible. In attempt to disconnect from these notions, early visioning sketches take place. These sketches models and ideas are recorded for the purpose of mind cleaning. After a mind clean the designer is ready to move on to other ideas. This mind clean gives the designer a proper mind set to create a controlled balance between intuitive design and analytical design. Allowing early intuitive process sketches to evolve into schematics through research. Figure 3.1. Structure graphic
37 A crucial part of design is identity. An easily identi ed name and graphic adds necessary continuity and closure to any design proposal. Early in the process the F.A.S.H. name was adopted, representing the goals of the project, FLEXIBLE AUTONOMOUS SYSTEMS HOUSE. This identity continually sparked interest amongst those who came in contact with the project. Figure 3.3, is of early process sketches. The sketch circled marks the instant the design was born. The plug and play ideas clearly seen. Figure 3.2. Below. FASH graphic Figure 3.3. Right Process Graphics, idea.
38 These two images depict different typologies for residential systems architecture. Figure 3.4, Â“The HumpÂ”, is based on the diagrammatic function of a car; with the engine, delivery and use happening separately in a linear model. This highly ef cient separation of functions loses strength when attempting to modulate space architecturally. Figure 3.5, Â“The PlenumÂ”, was a major step in the project. The systems architecture now serves both as spatial module and systems module. This idea is at the heart of the FASH system. Figure 3.4. Left. The Hump diagram Figure 3.5. Above. The Plenum diagram
39Language The plenum wall idea evolved with research noted in the Move chapter into a clearly de ned language. This language is the basis for understanding the FASH system. The FASH is made from a kit of parts de ned by: Spine, Organs, Bones, Veins, In ll and Relic Spine The Spine: Base 900mm x 900mm grid De ned by stackable zinc coated steel cubes The spine cubes have three sizes 900mm x 900mm standard 900mm x 1800mm large 900mm x 500mm used for spinal cord Figure 3.6, shows the teal connector plates located at the corners of the spine cubes. These corners are where other parts connect to the spine. Figure 3.6. Spine Collage
40 Organs The organs plug into the spine. These organs can be appliances, HVAC, water puri er, cabinets, mainframe computers or anything. Figure 3.7. Top. 3/4Â” = 1Â’ Plenum wall model Figure 3.8. Right. Organ, plug and play
41Bones The bones are bolt together extruded aluminium forms, that provide exibility and longevity. These bones are a manufactured form by BOSH. This system is commonly used in the construction of manufacture processes. It has proven itself as a strong exible system that out weights its initial cost. This extruded aluminum framing is the same system seen in Kieran TimberlakeÂ’s, Loblolly House. Figure 3.9. Below. Bone spine connection Figure 3.10. Right. BOSH extruded aluminium pro les, 90x90, 90x180
42Veins Veins are a hallow space frame oor system that allow delivery of hvac, electricity and water. This system is similar to raised oor plenums seen in of ces. Veins panel sizes: 7200mm x 3600mm 3600mm x 3600mm 1800mm x 3600mm The vein panels plug into the bays formed by the bones. Figure 3.11. Left. Structural bay for vein panel Figure 3.12. Bottom Left. Vein panel diagram
43In ll The system is enclosed through modular in ll panels. SIP [structurally insulated panels] are used to counter sheer and enclose the building in the most common application, however the 900mm x 900mm grid suits itself to local material adaptions. Figure 3.13. Left. Structural base with translucent in ll panels Figure 3.14. Bottom. Mock up joint, hex in ll panel
44 Relic The relic is an element that physical and mentally anchors the structure to the site. The relic can be made from a site speci c nd or can be designed as a site cast pour. Figure 3.15. Top. Relic section perspective showing cistern Figure 3.16. Right. Relic collage
45 Design Iterations Once the systemÂ’s language was set, quick 3d models were produced. Each model started with a simple idea in order to test the kit. It was clear that the roof, was going to be a place where customization per resident and climate wanted to happen. The next several pages outline the rst design pursued for the Florida Cottage Competition, fall 2008. The project submitted was presented in Miami at the Emerging Professionals Conference, tieing for rst prize. Figures 3.18, 3.19 and 3.20 show the evolution of house D001. The series starts out with a couple in a 1 bedroom house, Figure 3.18. D001 evolves to a 2 bedroom house when the coupleÂ’s rst child is born. By designing exibility into the house, you empower inhabitants to meet their needs much more speci cally. Figure 3.17. Design iteration collage.
46 Figure 3.18. D001 Board
47 Figure 3.19. D002 Board
48 Figure 3.20. D003 Board
49 Figure 3.21. D001 Graphic
50 Open Source The open source model of operation and decision making allows concurrent input of different agendas, approaches and priorities, and differs from the more closed, centralized models of development. The idea of open sourcing this building system came after reading about GoogleÂ’s opens source software models. Platforms like android empower many through a common language while simultaneously stimulating further development of the platform itself. This open source mentality is also used with ApplesÂ’ iPhone application store. The application store gives development tools to users so that they can create and sell their application on AppleÂ’s iPhone platform. There is a platform plug-in relationship occurring in many of these open source models. In the appleÂ’s case the iPhone acts as the evolving platform, and the plug-ins are created by anyone who can learn the development language. This platform plug in relationship is similar to the way the FASH spine acts as the platform and the organs act as the plugins. Now, the language becomes the 900mm x 900mm grid and hardware connections to it. Any developer or craftsman can create plug-ins for the system and harness the FASHÂ’s common spine platform to distribute it to many users. For the Â“Build a FASHÂ” open source project, 14 similar Figure 3.22. Open source diagram
51kit of parts bags were made from the basic FASH language. Each bag included 2 instructional pages, spine cubes, lengths of bone structure and vein squares. 7 of the kits where distributed to the Open Source Team at USFÂ’s School of Architecture and Community Design. The remaining 7 kits were retained and design by me, Chris Cox. Open Source Team: Kuebler Perry [student] Logan Mahaffey [student] Mario Rodriguez [student] Joshua Sperduti [student] Tim Keepers [student] Dana Neilsen [student] Mark Weston [professor] Figure 3.23. Brown bag of parts given to open source team Figure 3.24. Brown bag and chipboard sites given to open source team
52 Figure 3.25. Open source handout 1
53 Figure 3.26. Open source handout 2
54 Figure 3.27. Statesman south elevation Figure 3.28. Statesman section perspective Statesman After designing 7 sketch models with the open source project. 2 houses were selected for further development. The statesman, named after its grand north elevation was chosen for further development. This home integrates a covered car port, wrap around porch and 2 level exterior space. The south elevation is well covered while the north elevation opens to the site. Figure 3.28 shows the vein systems hollow oor panels as well as the plenum wallÂ’s chase space. SEE APPENDIX B for model photos
55 Figure 3.29. Statesman oor plans
56 Figure 3.30. Statesman perspective
57The Fish The Fish was selected for its absolute function driven design. It is the purest expression of the kit of parts ef ciency. The design starts with 2 plenum walls anchored by a monumental relic cistern. The west plenum wall serves as the kitchen, while the eastern wall serves as storage. Figure 3.31 shows all the elements involved in the construction of a FASH. SEE APPENDIX B for model photos solar array mounting posts shed roof integrated truss 90mmx90mm aluminium post glazing SIP walls vein Structure wood Panels bamboo 180mmx90mm aluminium beam coquina Stone ext. panels Spine System 24,000 gallon cistern Figure 3.31. Fish exploded systems
58 Figure 3.32. Bottom. Fish interior perspective Figure 3.33. Right. Fish oor plan
59 Figure 3.34. Top Left. Fish section perspective of oor system Figure 3.35. Top Right. Fish spine and bone structure Figure 3.36. Bottom. Fish section perspective interior space
60 Figure 3.37. Fish east elevation.
61 Figure 3.38. Fish main perspective.
62Â“1966 VW Beetle.Â” . Â“2008 Dakar Rally Cancled.Â” . Â“Abandoned Mobile Home.Â” . Ameri, Farhad, and Deba Dutta. Â“ Product Lifecycle Management: Closing the Knowledge Loops.Â” Journal of Computer Aided Design & Applications 2.5 (2005): 577. Benson, Tedd. Â“A Dismal Standard [Building].Â” Fine homebuilding 2006 Spring-Summer, n.179 (2006). Bosma, Koos, Dorine van Hoogstraten, and Martijn Vos. Housing for the Millions : John Habraken and the SAR (19602000). Rotterdam; New York, NY: NAI Publishers; DAP/Distributed Art Publishers distributor, 2000. Â“Characteristics of New Housing.Â” US Census Bureau 2008. . Deam, Shane. Â“ History of the Beetle .Â” . Â“JackÂ’s Crisp.Â” . Kieran, Stephen, and James Timberlake. Loblolly House : Elements of a New Architecture 1st ed. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2008. Kunz, Martin Nicholas, and Michelle Galindo. Best Designed Modular Houses Stuttgart: AVedition, 2005. WORKS CITED
63Â“Markham Suburbs.Â” . McGinn, Daniel. Â“Home Sweet Gadget.Â” WIRED January 2008: 33. Â“Old Jeep Photos and Advertising.Â” . Oliver, Paul. Built to Meet Needs : Cultural Issues in Vernacular Architecture 1st ed. Amsterdam ; Boston ; London: Architectural, 2006. Â“Park Machinery.Â” . Â“Process Performance Solutions.Â” . Roney, Maya. Â“ForeclosureÂ’s building problem.Â” 2007. . Sack, Florentine. Das Offene Haus : Fr Eine Neue Architektur. Berlin: Jovis, 2006. Â“Schwarze Industries.Â” . Â“Seven steps to complete PLM.Â” . Silver, Nathan. The Making of Beaubourg : A Building Biography of the Centre Pompidou, Paris. Cambridge Mass.: MIT Press, 1994. Smith, Elizabeth. Â“Cutting Costs with Modular Construction.Â” 2007. Steele, James, Charles Eames, and Ray Eames. Eames House : Charles and Ray Eames London: Phaidon, 1994. Tracy, Dan. Â“BUILDING HOMES: BUILDING PROBLEMS.Â” 2003. . Wand, George. Â“History of the Unimog.Â” 2006. .
APPENDIXAppendix A. Open Source Project SouthNorth EastWest 65 1
SouthNorth EastWest 66 2
SouthNorth EastWest 67 3
67 4 South North East West
SouthNorth EastWest 69 5
SouthNorth EastWest 70 6
SouthNorth EastWest 71 7
SouthNorth EastWest 72 8 Tim Keepers
SouthNorth EastWest 73 9 Joshua Sperduti
SouthNorth EastWest 74 10 Mario Rodriguez
SouthNorth EastWest 75 11 Mark Weston
SouthNorth EastWest 76 12 Logan Mahaffey
SouthNorth EastWest 77 13 Dana Neilsen
SouthNorth EastWest 78 14 Kuebler Perry
APPENDIXAppendix B. Models79