Additive Envelopes: Robotic Volumetric Porous Bricks for Habitat Reformation

In Commons Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI:10.35483/acsa.am.111.4
Jonathan A. Scelsa
{"title":"Additive Envelopes: Robotic Volumetric Porous Bricks for Habitat Reformation","authors":"Jonathan A. Scelsa","doi":"10.35483/acsa.am.111.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The story goes that Lou Kahn, gathered his students into a room and began pontificating over personified bricks in what has now become a canonic conversation: “You say to a brick, ‘What do you want, brick?’ And brick says to you, ‘I like an arch.’ And you say to brick, ‘Look, I want one, too, but arches are expensive, and I can use a concrete lintel.’ And then you say: ‘What do you think of that, brick?’ and the Brick says: ‘I like an arch .’ While this rhetoric pronounced the brick’s structural potentials due to the intrinsic disciplinary problems of stacking volumes, it undermined the Brick’s other potential capacities inherent to its volumetric nature. As such, with the arrival of post-modern construction that transformed the architectural envelope into a series of monofunctional layers within a rainscreen, it is not surprising that brick became flattened into a ‘sticker’ as an image-oriented scenographic pursuit neutered of its structural capacity. A two-dimensional graphic element easily commodified by neoliberal corporate culture, as evident from the thinly applied arches in recent facadist developer minded gentrification practices.In lieu of complicity in this culture of thinning, the research pedagogy showcased in this studio championed a resistance to the thinning of the brick based on its volumetric capacity to perform other roles such as thermodynamics or playing host to ecology towards habitat restoration. The promise of this new constructive principle suggests a volumetric wall construction that rebalances the flora and fauna within the urban ecology, while simultaneously lowering the albedo of our buildings’ contribution to the Urban Heat Island. This advanced option studio worked closely with a brick heritage museum sited within a village historically associated with the manufacturing of brick for the 20th century. The studio worked closely with the docents and curators of the existing museum in the processes of site selection, immersive brick production history, and community engagement.","PeriodicalId":243862,"journal":{"name":"In Commons","volume":"153 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"In Commons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35483/acsa.am.111.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The story goes that Lou Kahn, gathered his students into a room and began pontificating over personified bricks in what has now become a canonic conversation: “You say to a brick, ‘What do you want, brick?’ And brick says to you, ‘I like an arch.’ And you say to brick, ‘Look, I want one, too, but arches are expensive, and I can use a concrete lintel.’ And then you say: ‘What do you think of that, brick?’ and the Brick says: ‘I like an arch .’ While this rhetoric pronounced the brick’s structural potentials due to the intrinsic disciplinary problems of stacking volumes, it undermined the Brick’s other potential capacities inherent to its volumetric nature. As such, with the arrival of post-modern construction that transformed the architectural envelope into a series of monofunctional layers within a rainscreen, it is not surprising that brick became flattened into a ‘sticker’ as an image-oriented scenographic pursuit neutered of its structural capacity. A two-dimensional graphic element easily commodified by neoliberal corporate culture, as evident from the thinly applied arches in recent facadist developer minded gentrification practices.In lieu of complicity in this culture of thinning, the research pedagogy showcased in this studio championed a resistance to the thinning of the brick based on its volumetric capacity to perform other roles such as thermodynamics or playing host to ecology towards habitat restoration. The promise of this new constructive principle suggests a volumetric wall construction that rebalances the flora and fauna within the urban ecology, while simultaneously lowering the albedo of our buildings’ contribution to the Urban Heat Island. This advanced option studio worked closely with a brick heritage museum sited within a village historically associated with the manufacturing of brick for the 20th century. The studio worked closely with the docents and curators of the existing museum in the processes of site selection, immersive brick production history, and community engagement.
添加剂包层:用于栖息地改造的机器人体积多孔砖
故事是这样的:卢·卡恩(Lou Kahn)把他的学生召集到一个房间里,开始对拟人化的砖块进行武断的说教,现在这已经成为一种经典的对话:“你对砖块说,‘你想要什么,砖块?’砖对你说:‘我喜欢拱形。’然后你对砖块说,‘看,我也想要一个,但是拱门很贵,我可以用混凝土门楣。’然后你说:‘砖头,你觉得怎么样?砖说:“我喜欢拱形。”虽然这种修辞强调了砖的结构潜力,这是由于堆叠体积的内在纪律问题,但它破坏了砖固有的体积性质的其他潜在能力。因此,随着后现代建筑的到来,将建筑外壳转变为雨幕内的一系列单一功能层,砖被扁平成“贴纸”,作为一种以图像为导向的场景追求,它的结构能力被中性化,这并不奇怪。一个二维的图形元素很容易被新自由主义的企业文化商品化,这一点从最近法西斯主义的开发商思想的中产阶级化实践中明显可见。代替这种细化文化的共通之处,该工作室展示的研究教学法支持基于砖块的体积容量来抵抗砖块的细化,以执行其他角色,如热力学或扮演生态宿主,以恢复栖息地。这种新的建设性原则提出了一种体积式墙体结构,可以重新平衡城市生态中的动植物,同时降低建筑对城市热岛的反照率。这个高级选项工作室与一个砖遗产博物馆密切合作,该博物馆位于一个与20世纪砖制造历史相关的村庄内。工作室与现有博物馆的讲解员和策展人在场地选择、沉浸式砖生产历史和社区参与的过程中密切合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信