An Ecological Site Study: Narragansett Bay, RI

In analyzing Narragansett Bay in terms of ecological and environmental changes over time, data can be extracted from various scientific studies. Changes in the amounts of nutrients (nitrogen, carbon, phosphorous) that enter the bay affect wildlife and the bay ecosystem in general. Changes in temperature, precipitation, and wind speed over time also contribute to a changing Narragansett Bay ecosystem. These factors that are unique to the area help define localized conditions. With the added temporal component, time and movement can also inform a rationalized process. In what ways can this data influence the basic module? How does a site's evolving nature be used as added criteria in the design of a modular system? Does the system react to it or be influenced by it? Click here to view the study and read the findings.

Landforms and Movement

In geological terms, what we refer to as landscapes are expressions of a larger process in the shaping of landforms. We know that the earth’s surface is a dynamic and complex result of the interactions between the atmosphere, hydrosphere, and the earth’s surface.
The diversity of terrains found on earth influences the patterns of human occupation, use, and the built environment. Landforms are defined as natural terrain units that, where developed under similar conditions of climate, weathering, erosion, and mass wasting, will exhibit a predictable range of physical and visual characteristics. This means that distinctions can be made between terrain types so that we can describe unique topography, composition, or structure.
These shaping process works over long periods of time before most landforms show significant change, although some of these processes, some influenced by man, can significantly influence the landscape at a much faster rate. If we begin to think of landscapes as dynamic elements in terms of time and motion, measurable and quantifiable data can be extracted. Performative aspects of a site can be used as parameters in a rationalized design process.

Readings and Images:
Douglas Way. Terrain Analysis.
McIntyre, Eilers, Mairs. Physical Geography.
Kim Sichel. To Fly.

Evolving Modular Techniques

In investigating modular systems in terms of systems of proportion, the scale of rationalization centers on human interactions and movement. The extent of modular parameters takes the living unit as a basic module although dimensions may vary based on locally informed decisions of the designer. We have seen in Habitat 67 that structural considerations, connectivity, and methods of aggregation can also influence the basic module, although within the framework of the human scale. What if we extend these influences beyond that of the human scale and begin to understand that landscape as part of a system also informs us of unique interactions and movement? Understanding that landscape is integral to creating a system that is both universal in technique but localized in response is the first step in a modified process of modular design.

Case Study #1: Habitat 67

Moshe Safdie’s use of a repeated modular system to create Habitat 67 can be examined in terms of its dimensioning logic, aggregation logic, materiality, his attitude towards site, and his position regarding social issues and urban communities. Click here to view pdf file.

Data Visualization

If we take the three dimensional number system described previously, the numbers can be input into a 3D drawing tool to get a visualization of their relationships. This initial probe examines ways to take numerical data and translate them into visual representations using a scripting language. The first step was to recreate the table by employing mathematical functions in an array. Three arrays were created based on the three ‘plates’. To represent objects in three dimensional space, x,y,z coordinates were taken from each of the three plates, creating twenty five planes in space. Simple forms were generated with dimensions based on the same three coordinate numbers to show their relationships in space.

Three Dimensional Number System

In 1956 Ezra Ehrenkrantz proposed a three dimensional numbering system based on the Fibonacci sequence coordinated with the doubling and tripling of the numbers in a three dimensional table. What resulted is a more flexible numerical system of dimensions due to the number of 'choices' available for use. Each dimension is logically referenced to each other which makes scaling possible in a number of ways.

Standardization, Rationalization and Modularization

Standardization refers to an act of conformity to an authorized or agreed upon system of measure. It can bring together an otherwise unrelated system or process to be compatible with each other. Manufacturing and fabrication methods benefits from standardization to streamline their processes and reduce waste. Mass production of consumer products and building materials are possible due to standardization in their respective industries. Rationalization is a logical approach to a given problem, in the process eliminating unwanted or unneeded elements to achieve efficiency. In this sense, we can say that standardization and modularity are solutions based on the rationalization of a given process. Modularity removes inconsistency and therefore introduces a way to create a logical framework to achieve a desired outcome. Modularity depends on standardization in order to work efficiently. A unit of measure based on a standard informs the design of the base module. This way the module, as designed, can be scaled proportionally without losing conformity to the standard.

Governing Logic

A modular system that is scaled anthropometrically has dimensions based on human proportions. The human scale is the basic parametric input in its dimensional logic and thus the system builds upon a certain set of rules governing it. We see this in furniture design, fixtures, doors, windows, etc. Building materials can also dimensioned based on handling and maneuverability by humans such as wood and glass products.
Similarly, prefabricated modules in the scale of a room or living unit takes into account the logistics of transportation and delivery to the site. The parameters governing their logical dimensions are based on limitations set by roadway and transport regulations.
What other governing logic can be used as parameters in modular dimensions? Do these parameters always have to result in a static and fixed outcome? If parameters were based on localized conditions and desires, we can begin to vary some aspects of its base logic. A process where parameters can be varied in the design of a modular system can result in a more sensitive response to a localized condition.
Again, standardization of the means is different from standardization of the end.

Building Blocks

Through the centuries brick has been used as a building block, its dimensions influenced by the need to be small enough and light enough to be handled with one hand by the bricklayer. In ancient times the dimensions corresponded to a ratio of 4:2:1 and has not changed much. In the US the standard sizes come in 8”x4”x2 1/4” but can also come in other sizes. In terms of scale, the brick as a module was small enough and versatile enough to form cylinders, arcs, and curves. This was possible only because of the mortar that allowed for variations in the distances between each brick. Without mortar, the modular characteristics of the brick would only allow it to be aggregated vertically and horizontally in each direction.
How could a module be dimensioned to allow for variation? In reference to the previous readings, a module can be varied within the rules of the numbering and proportional systems in use. The modules remain in proportion as each instance of the module is varied in scale.

Modules and Scale

The question of modularity and modular coordination so far reveals a common desire to develop a system of measure that would simplify the design and construction of buildings in an effort to reduce costs and reduce waste. It was also recognizable at that time that industrial processes and methods of manufacturing were advancing and that no common standards existed in the building trade. The question returns to the argument of standardization and its limiting factor in the freedom of design. It could be said that the basis of architectural design are rooted in proportions of differing scales, as demonstrated throughout history. An architectural order guides the designer through the variants of the process, allowing his concept to be revealed on his own terms. In his book The Evolving House, Bemis says, “Houses will not be built of modules, but the module must be a practical unit for the specific design of structural parts.” Modularity itself should not limit the ability for expression of a conceptual design, unless it is the intent of the designer to do so.
This brings us to the question of scale. The dimensioning systems so far are based on the human scale, where proportions are based on the human body. Le Corbusier’s Modulor are based on anthropometric measurements, as well as Schindler’s system that considers the basic measurements of human height, room height, and door height. Also, building elements that conform to a basic modular dimension were considered to be easily handled and maneuvered by humans. Since the basic axiom of a modular system is its ability to increase dimensions proportionally, can the system be used on a larger scale such as the scale of a site? If the design of a building uses the scale of the site as the regulating factor, what parameters of the modular system need to be modified?

Proportions in Space - Modules defined Cont'd

R.M. Schindler’s ‘reference planes in space’ leans more towards the creation of volumetric space rather than the specification of dimensioned elements per se. An example of its use can be seen in his 1928 Wolfe House. Volumes are subdivided in increasing complexity depending on program, but proportionally the grids are in harmony in both plan and section. The abstracted diagram in 3d volumetrically illustrates this point as well.


Images:
Leon, Ana Marie. Website

How can a module be defined?

In reference to this thesis, the definition of a module is warranted to target a specific system of measure and proportion, to provide a basis whereby an inquiry as to its variants can be tested. Konrad Wachsmann defined a module as “the abstract fundamental unit of measurement which, by means of multiplication, subtraction or division, numerically determines the geometrical system of a given modular order.” Two dimensional modules can be differentiated in the horizontal and vertical planes, with each having different modular units. However, a three dimensional unit with consistent three dimensional measurements constitutes an ideal case where it is possible to advance in any direction in relation to any other part. Albert Farwell Bemis used a cube as the basis for his modular system, the properties of cubes forms part of his studies in the rationalization of the housing industry. Theoretically, the basis for the cubical module is its potentiality of volume, symmetry and surface. Bemis sites these potentialities to be optimal for standardization and interchangeability of similar parts.


Konrad Wachsmann’s studies adds that the determination of a basic module in a truly universal system calls for a number of investigations in different areas. The universal module should develop from the relationships of these modular categories:
Material module
Performance module
Geometry module
Handling module
Structural module
Element module
Joint module
Component module
Tolerance module
Installation module
Fixture module
Planning module
These categories are explained in his text and is the basis for his “Package House” project with Walter Gropius. The universal module then, in this case can be said to be the actual dwelling itself, that when completely assembled, represents the modular relationships of all elements combined.

Readings and images:
Bemis, Albert Farwell. The Evolving House
Wachsmann, Konrad. The Turning Point of Building

Standardization and Systems of Proportions

In discussing standardization previously, examples of systems that have been proposed can show different approaches that all aim to simplify and reduce costs in manufacturing and construction, among other things. Some other ‘requirements’ of modular coordination include non conflict with present industrial processes, and aesthetic neutrality to allow freedom of design. It should also take into account the properties and limitations of the materials themselves, which means the system should flexible.


In 1936, Albert Farwell Bemis suggested a standard base dimension of 4” for all building elements, suggesting that dimensions of all house parts can be manufactured in multiples of the base dimension. Limiting the number of sizes allows for clarification. Obviously there are some limitations to this scheme due to impractical sizes that would result such as column sizes for a large scale project since there were no provisions for sub-dividing the dimension.


Le Corbusier’s ‘Modulor’ uses a proportional approach similar the Fibonacci series that is additive and uses a constant ratio (Golden Ratio) instead of a fixed dimension. In this way pieces can interlock regardless of size, and would always remain in proportion with each other. The additive values are very limited due to the logic of the series, meaning that choices for building products manufactured in these dimensions will be extremely limited.


R.M. Schindler’s ‘reference frame in space’ is another system of proportions based on a cubical dimension of 48”. The aim was to simplify the development of plans and facilitate construction easily. The 48” dimension can be subdivided and fractioned accordingly, giving the designer a wider range of dimensions since the number 48 is the seventh highly composite number. Multiple combinations of its divisions can easily adapt to different proportional systems, including musical proportions.

Ezra Ehrenkrantz proposed the three dimensional number pattern in 1956, taking three related number systems, the Fibonacci series, Tripling, and Doubling, in a three dimensional grid. By providing a wide array of combinations of related dimensions, the availability of choice becomes useful for manufacturers and designers. Choices for nominal dimensions of product sizes can be achieved with this system while maintaining modular coordination between different manufacturers of building elements.

Readings and Images:
Bemis, Albert Farwell. The Evolving House, Vol. III
Ehrenkratz, Ezra. The Modular Number Pattern
Le Corbusier. The Modulor
Leon, Ana Maria. Website. http://undertow.arch.gatech.edu/homepages/gt7267a/Background.html
Wachsmann, Konrad. The Turning Point of Building

Modular Coordination and Systems of Proportions

Efforts to reduce waste and avoid non matching systems in the building industry have resulted in a number of propositions regarding modular coordination and systems of proportions. The idea of modular coordination offers a guideline where in different building elements such as windows and walls, or different materials such as wood and brick, can be manufactured in coordination with each other. The assembly of these elements and materials would be streamlined and avoids having to modify them onsite.
Modern machinery that mass produce parts of buildings often dictate the limits in dimensions and sizes of parts, but the idea was to have a standardized system of proportions that would allow for a more efficient way to assemble them together as a whole.
The idea of having standard sizes brings into discussion the ‘freedom’ of a designer to be creative and original. The argument was that standardization would result in works that were at best banal and undifferentiated. The designer, only having to pick and choose from a catalogue of standard sizes and materials would inevitably have a design lacking expression, and would end up looking like any other. This results in the “weakening of the individualist element of our environment.”
The argument for standardization is that the artist can be more expressive if his freedom of expression is more dependable, in that the relations and outcome are clear and known. A ‘proper’ type of standardization is proposed, stating that a distinction can be made between standardization of the end product and standardization of the means.
…TO BE CONTINUED

The DP Probe

Two weeks into the seminar course, an abstract study of the conceptual thesis idea was presented to a panel of faculty members.
The analysis I was interested in was an inquiry into a different kind of data gathering tool. An emphasis on 'site specificity' was considered and asked: How could qualitative conditions be translated into quantitative data? The 'tool' itself would be affected by natural phenomena unique to a given site, such as wind patterns, quality of light, etc.
In concept, the abstract tool would be reacting to and be powered by wind, thus creating a unique relationship with the site. Based on Theo Jansen's kinetic sculptures, the 'tool' would leave traces of its path on the ground, leaving an artifact and an imprint unique to the site. This imprint is the basis for qualitative conditions that could inform a set of quantitative parameters.

Reconsidering Modularity

Can a universal modular system be responsive to specific and localized conditions? In architecture, modules can take on different scales and forms; from a single brick to a complete prefabricated living unit that is delivered on-site, or a complete structural unit as part of a larger high-rise. The nature in which these modular architectural systems are conceived rely on accepted industry standards of form and (human) proportions but lack the criteria to engage landscape . Responsive variation based on site specificity is the basis for reconsidering modularity. A reactive module seen as a cellular system of enclosure, envelope, and structure made responsive to the environment becomes a universally applied process that allows for dynamic variability.
This thesis relies on the development of a procedural design process that taps into the computational, geomorphological and ecological fields. The process goes beyond the influence of the human scale and begins to understand that landscape as part of a system also informs us of unique interactions and movement. Understanding that landscape is integral to creating a system that is both universal in technique but localized in response is the first step in a modified process of modular design.
By employing research methods in computational design and data driven analysis, the relationship between the particular and the universal is explored and methods of assembly are generated. The process allows for a system that derives its importance from its context and also reacts and adapts to evolving site conditions. Intelligent modules can allow reconfiguration, mutation and modulation in response to site.

By incorporating technology, new materials, prototyping, and new fabrication techniques, this thesis aims for an efficient, waste reducing, streamlined modular production that addresses our current need for sustainability and a minimized carbon footprint.
Through the use of 3D software programming and scripting, variations of studies will be generated, while environmental analysis software and datasets will be used bring in site information. Prototypes through the use of available digital fabrication methods on campus will generate iterations to help understand volumetric and spatial relationships.

The proposed architectural project is demonstration of how the process of modularity can be at once universal and specific to the site. The scope of the project can range from an entire modular building or focus on specific building parts such as the skin. The program that will be developed will be one that is influenced by the chosen site and be benefited by an intelligent modular system.