        Kuykendall, Jason : AssignmentsEdit Kuykendall, Jason : Assignments here.Jason Kuykendall Ex6 Reflections 1) Skills acquired in former exercises that played significant roles in my project’s - potent lines of inquiry: sustained looking, perspective sketching, online and library research (1060 last semester helped there), drafting, problem solving ability within the design process (all year)
2) When working with my partner what helped the most were the different perspectives and skill sets we brought to the table. We admitted weaknesses and strengths up front and chose to capitalize on the interplay of those. That not only divided the workload pretty evenly, but it allowed us to effectively and efficiently follow the lines of inquiry we were fascinated by. The differences in opinions and curiosities allowed us to blend two lines of inquiry and solution into a powerful, feasible design which had all the qualities we intended as well as the potential for manufacture. We were proud to have worked well together and come up with an imaginative design that wouldn’t be impossible to make and install. If I had to do the assignment over again I would be more available for discussion with my partner. It got a little busy about halfway through and our process began to suffer. Our instructor was honest with us about how far off course we were, and we resolved to change our interaction, put in the requisite time working side-by-side so communication was seamless, and get back on track with more powerful investigations and ideas. So in the future with groups I’m assigned to I plan on insisting that lines of communication are always open and that as much work as possible will be done with everyone in attendance. 3) We first analyzed past boards for their good qualities and bad. Then we looked at our work (especially the final design) and prioritized information about the design and the process that went into its creation. Next we translated that list of priorities into visual data and tried to maintain the hierarchy through the lens of the board’s intended viewers. It took some time to get everything massaged into order so that the board said what it needed to say. 4) I feel like our board showed better process than some, but didn’t read in as easy a linear manner as some others. Also, it wasn’t as seductive when hung where it was – low and toward the left on the very first board underneath some others in the shadow if the staircase. Perhaps we should have thought about that when we were making and placing the “killer rep.” As far as interpreting windows differently, I think our research opened our eyes to plenty of perspectives, but there were some solutions to various problems that I certainly hadn’t thought of. 5) The window is an idea and phenomenon that can be broken down and addressed in several ways and by several disciplines. If the question is one of how each of the three COA disciplines may see the problem then the answers are simple and constrained by the goals of each. For instance, all a BC major may care about regarding the window are things such as “how is it installed?” “where does it fit into the building?” “how is it represented properly in blueprint form?” and possibly “how should it be made?” The ID, on the other hand, will be more in tune with the design questions surrounding the window. “What is the intent of the window?” “what does it say about x, y or z?” “what does the architect mean here?” and possibly “how is it made?”, but the ID may still be constrained by a persistent fascination with a slightly smaller scale. The architecture student is the one who is most likely the one who will be in tune with the intentions of the window’s designer. This is not to say that the window does not speak to anyone other than architect and architecture students, but simply that the other two majors in COA contain people who are most likely preoccupied with very different motivating questions. One could see these as the lenses through which they view the problem of “What is a window?” Jason Kuykendall Ex 6.1- Task 4 My Chosen Window  Interior of the Phillips Exeter Academy Library – Louis Kahn – 1971 Reason for choice/Fascination: issues of windows within windows, multiple frames, multiple views and changing views related to motion Analysis based on my DNA definitions: -Frame: besides the frames brought into play by the viewer (field of vision, social/cultural ideas, etc), the primary frame of the window is the large, circular hole in the interior-most wall. Within that frame floors of the building are visible that frame views onto each floor. Within these views columns and walls break up the view into sectors of each floor. Within each sector book shelves are visible that frame views down each aisle. -View: The information communicated through the windows created by the frame hierarchies is physical light information along with potential information for all other senses due to a lack of filtering material (eg glass, cloth, screens, etc.). The only degradation of the communicated views occurs due to the air inside the building and the positioning of the viewer. -Viewer: I’ll assume for the sake of analysis that the view is not through a photograph and that the viewer is in the building. Assuming that the building was designed by Louis Kahn for the role it currently fulfilling, the ideal viewer would be an average-sized student with fully functioning visual sensory attending the Academy and viewing the window from inside any of the building’s floors. Jason Kuykendall WINDOW DNA Frame: All windows are framed in some way…even “views” on life’s defining questions are “framed” by whichever circumstances lead someone to believe as they do. View: All windows relay a set of information that differs from the set of information relayed by the substance(s) forming the frame. This set of information, however, must not be generated by the window itself…it is strictly communicated through the window. This is even true of paintings, one’s personal beliefs, and of course physical windows in a building. View can be dynamic (eg. music played through speakers, view through the window of a moving car, a change of emotion or opinion relayed through speech, written word, facial expressions, etc.) and multilayered/multifaceted (eg. writings in a book, a view from a mountain top, music played through speakers). • Note: if communicated info is generated by the subject in question, then it is not a window (eg. the sun, a musical instrument, featureless objects by themselves like bricks, etc.) • Note: if information communicated through the subject in question cannot be differentiated from the information communicated by/through materials immediately surrounding it then it is not window since it is not framed by anything (eg. outer space as viewed from outer space Viewer: Because a window is partially defined by the information that is relayed through it this information must be perceptible to a viewer either by physical sensory, intellectual understanding, emotional empathy, or spiritual experience. If information communicated through the subject in question is imperceptible to a viewer it is not a window. In this case one would have a difficult time arguing that either the window or its frame even exist in the first place. However, if a viewer exists that can perceive (and logically or evidentially prove to within scientific/logical tolerances) the difference between the window and its frame then it must be concluded that this window exists. (eg. A blind man does not see light through a skylight nor may he ever know it’s there if he does not also feel the heat produced by its light. Perhaps to him this skylight does not seem to exist, but it clearly does exist. This is known because the viewers that can perceive it (both humans and scientific instruments) attest to its existence. However, a book were written in a language no one was capable of understanding would not be a window (into the mind of the writer, as books are often described) by definition until a reader is proven to exist. Regarding emotional or spiritual perceptions of phenomena such as “windows to the soul” a viewer is still bound by this principle of the need for sufficient logical reason or sufficient experiential evidence to report with absolute certainty that these windows truly exist or operate as windows by definition Jason Kuykendall Task 3 (Responses) To explore form and composition of a window, I might pick a window and try to figure out what effects of the window are directly related to its form or composition. For example, what role does size (or number of panes, what type of glass, shape, positioning, orientation, clarity, etc. ad nauseum) play in the sensory experience of the window? What role do the aforementioned attributes play in how effective the window is at achieving its intended purposes? I might explore these questions with sustained looking at a window of interest followed by diagrams that speculate based on changing variables in form and composition. To explore fabrication and assembly I’d simply want to try and isolate variables related to materials and processes for creating the window. I might build models of basic parts and try to fit them together in different ways or draw diagrams speculating on the consequences of using different materials in for the window. To explore use and operation I would need to devise a system and measure amount of use or simply document different ways windows are used. Inquiries may include sustained looking or ergonomics diagrams. Most questions of the window at the component scale would be answered in the above inquiries, but perhaps further investigation of the scale itself as it relates to the above would be helpful in understanding windows in general. Writing after sustained looking would be my first approach. Questions regarding the room/building scale are maybe the most numerous in these studies. I would explore these with all of the strategies mentioned in the filtered inquiries. Questions about windows at the urban scale may require some exploration of the city for a better understanding of the ways in which they work together. Perhaps drawn diagrams to communicate my ideas on the subject would be easiest here. Jason Kuykendall Ex. 6.1 Task 2 Regarding form and composition, how might skins be manipulated to converge or intersect in ways that serve the varying purposes of different applications/uses? Regarding fabrication and assembly how might the units that make up a building be changed or enhanced or put together differently to serve different purposes? Regarding use and operation, how might the skin be changed to alter the way in which in interfaces with human users and the surrounding world? At the component scale, how do changes in units affect the whole? At the room and building scale, what drives decisions governing where pathways form and how users interact with the buiding? At the urban scale, how do changes in the building affect its role within the context of the campus, and how far into the surrounding city do the affects of those changes reach? Jason Kuykendall Ex. 6.1 Task 1 Through the form and composition filter, I came to understand the skin as a convergence of intersecting zones (indicated in my drawings as glass boxes) that face and extend in different directions and layer on one another occasionally to form the usable spaces. Through the filter of fabrication and assembly, I came to understand the skin as a built system of units that fit together to form the walls of the usable space. Through the filter of use and operation, I came to understand the skin as an interface for the users of the space. At the component scale I came to understand the skin as an accumulation of smaller units of converging skins in a larger built system. At the room/building scale I came to understand the skin as a utilitarian device with planned points of user interaction and aesthetic themes that facilitated the uses and pathways desired by the designer. At the urban scale I came to understand the skin as a single unit contrasting but fitting in with other units that formed a campus community. Jason Kuykendall Ex. 5 Reflections 1) Early on the different media and filters were helping me understand the term “building skins” in different ways than my preconceived notions. I began to view the skin as a broader term that included a wide range of very dynamic ideas about how buildings exist in the space around them. During the drafting exercises I simply became more aware of the materials and processes used in creating such skins. Later during the path studies my broadened perception of the buildings’ skins and their various dimensions and layers allowed me to understand more accurately how I interpret the building space and design. My understanding grew from a one-tracked understanding of building skins and their design to a much more holistic understanding. My most significant discoveries were made in studying how the building was constructed. The exercise of drafting the axonometric view of an internal cut forced me to look into the building’s structure and skins to see how they’re made. Knowing that gave me a whole list of new considerations and constraints for design ideas and appreciating the mid-century modern style. This activity also produced the most surprising results for me as well. I was amazed at how some of the systems came together to achieve various visual effects. 2) I’m certainly better at investigations now. Not that it makes perfect sense to say I’m more focused in my investigation, but maybe it’s that I know how to expand my thinking out to a broader level now. I can generate new ideas about perceptions of objects and buildings a little more quickly now. Not fighting myself as much it seems. I still use the approach of varying media and viewing at different scales, but now it’s quicker and more emotional at first…then more focused and intentional analysis. Much more efficient I’d say. Discoveries differ depending on the object, but the nature of the discoveries has remained similar. I tend to change my perception of an object’s overall form by varying the scales of viewing and then varying the media. 3) I see now the exercise was structure in a way that guided us to go from broad descriptions of the buildings exploring new perceptions of them down to focused analyses of systems. Then we were encouraged to go back out and think again about our perceptions of the space using the new knowledge. It made for interesting discoveries and new understanding of the building style used in the 40’s and 50’s. My most surprising take away was an overall picture of the process by which I best generate new ideas and shift my perception of objects and buildings. I think I could do it much more efficiently and effectively in the future. And even if I’m wrong, the confidence to explore is there now. 4) Well, from here I could see taking the knowledge of the different aspects of the study and blending them via a similar process (iterating the same process using the prior studies as material instead of the actual buildings) to generate new ideas. I would assume these ideas would be tried out in a culminating building design. The bodily encounter of varied surfaces and materials would qualify as something I would try to use in a riffing process to generate some new ideas. Also, the findings I had about diagonal relationships in the window-grid system would work well. For me the questions would center on the window systems and the lighting. How does light affect the building occupants in various roles within the space? (teachers, students, janitors) How can light filtration be used to optimize performance of the space for its goals? (classroom lighting vs. hallway lighting vs bathroom lighting) How should the building be structured to include new optimized lighting? What if the walls themselves could change opacity? Jason Kuykendall 12-11-07 1011 EXIT REFLECTION ONE: I realize that I learned to talk-the-talk so to speak. I learned new phrases and ways of referring to things that I’d never used before. I guess even just talking to other design students I use them now, but it doesn’t stand out the way it does to me in writing. I know that early on I was trying to sift through all the new words and terms flying around trying to make sense of them and figure out how to progress with them in my tool kit. Simultaneously, though, I was trying to master all the new media forms I was being told to master. It was immersion learning, and it was exciting. In exercise two I had to learn about investigation and group work. I learned how to take the lead in a group yet be worth following. It was great when we finally were trusted to put our investigations to use in proposing design changes. Meanwhile our presentation skills were taking shape as we had to present our work so often in front of strangers. In the third and final exercise I learned how to be free again with my playful investigation of the material. It was a personal struggle, because exercise two had reeled me in and made me try to be very finite in my thinking so my models and drawings could be realistic. But I finally got there and made some great connections that were fun for me. I think overall I had good growth this semester and am ready to continue learning the ins and outs of the design world. TWO: What I will take from 1011 for use in the next studio class will be key to my education. I’ll certainly be taking the understanding of all the new media for use in communicating my ideas. I’ll take the work ethic. I’ll take the levels of sight and investigation learned in 1011. I’ll take presentation skills, group work skills, time-management skills and overall better decision-making ability than I had before. For me personally it would be a good idea to remain focused on improving composition and craft (specifically in sketching). I was weak in those areas at the end of 1011. THREE: There were different roles that were played by everything involved in the immersion learning process of this semester. They varied according to exercise. I’ll start with exercise 1. The instructor at this phase was one part drill-sergeant, another part master artist, and another part counselor. He held our hands, encouraged us, taught us the mastery of various media, and was hard on us when we needed pushing. The handouts in this exercise were king. Whatever they said was the goal to aim for. There wasn’t much in the way of review processes until the end when our work was curated together on a board and a guest analyst came to review us as we presented. The inquiry book was a chance to relax and playfully show what we had done and how we felt about all of it. Our fellow students were helpers, teachers, students and much-needed friends during this hard and confusing first leg of the journey. The studio space was an enabling environment at our disposal for creating and displaying our work. For exercise two some roles seemed to shift a bit. The instructor stepped back a little and allowed the assignments to become vaguer. The handouts reflected that new responsibility of freedom as well. The review process intensified and peer review was given more freedom. The inquiry book (at least for me) reflected a more group-oriented collective feeling of how the exercise had gone. Our fellow students were now co-workers especially if they were in our group. The studio space was now a lab as much as it was a studio space. The third exercise saw the instructor stepping out of the role of counselor completely and maintaining his presence only as a master of design and a cattle prod to keep us working hard the goals laid out in the surprisingly vague handouts. The review process was peer-driven everyday with a final critique coming from the instructor and guests allowed in at times to add to the chaos. Of course, the final review was an intense jury of professionals that rated the student work and awarded a winner. The inquiry book was an afterthought used only to help the judges of the competition decide how to rate us. Our fellow students were again friends in the midst of an arduous task, but this time they were also the competition from which ideas could be stolen and to whom assignments could be misconstrued. There was less help in my section than there was divisiveness. The studio space remained a lab and an art studio while adding a role as a battleground for this new element of competition. FOUR: I can certainly see how and why the exercises were laid out the way they were. First we had to be shacked awake into the world of design. We gained a new mindset, new sets of skills, new ways to communicate, new freedoms to be creative and a new way of seeing and making decisions. The second exercise (which was my favorite) made use of the new skills and thoughts which we had developed and harnessed them for investigation. The goal now was to learn how to study the world around us in a focused way so as to learn specific things about it. Creativity was encouraged the whole way through. The third and final exercise was where everything was brought back in to play so that a holistic view of the design process could be gained. Investigation took place in very creative ways that explored the limits of our imaginations, and then very calculated decisions were made to determine a final design proposal. Then we set out to win the competition with the most meaningful and attractive diptych. We had to know composition, craft, skill and a good design. I enjoyed the second exercise the most because the very linear way in which the investigations built up to a design revision played into my experience as an engineering and science student. Jason Kuykendall 12-9-07 EXERCISE 3 REFLECTIONS I. The exercise challenged me in a few ways. The first of which was to understand the metaphors used to describe the assignment. I had to figure out how to “play with the toys” in our sandbox of ideas. After that, another challenge was to let myself have fun playing and riffing with the concepts and visuals I had at my disposal. I didn’t ever get very good at this, but if I had to do it again I’d be freer and open to new media to use for it. The last big challenge with exercise 3 was to figure out how to create a diptych that was effective. I had never had to compose a diptych before, but in the process of trying to I learned a lot about photoshop and composition. My decision-making skills for composition still suffer, but I’m committed to improving them to the level that I can create presentations that effectively communicate. To figure things like composition and craft out I needed to use the skills I learned in the first two exercises. I think they played a vital role in preparing me for the third and final assignment. II. My entry into the competition took a large portion of my available time and energy. I took the DNA pieces from exercise 2 and used riffing to try and push, pull and mold them into something thought-provoking. I think the product I ended up with for the competition was lacking a clear connection to the original DNA pieces. I think it weakened my diptych for that reason. Another weak point of my diptych was the composition. I am still trying to learn to place information in such a way that it communicates effectively yet creates interest in the viewer. Where my entry was strongest was in its one large visceral image of the final product, the color scheme chosen and the diptych’s overall effect of “before and after”. The riffing could have been richer had I understood it fully at an earlier point in the process. III. Exercise 3 in relation to the exercise before it was both a breath of fresh air and a tall order. For me, exercise 2 took patience and grit. At times I had to just grit my way through endless measuring and proportion drawings. I finally found delight in putting my work to use, though, in the design variation portion of the exercise. However, in exercise 3 everything became very abstract for a while. I was excited and fascinated, but realized later I didn’t understand what “riffing” was until far too late to be effective for my diptych. I think the joy for me was using investigational skills learned from ex.2 for inquiries that related to ex.3. I agree with the curriculum’s structure in that we should not have had ex.2 without 3 or 3 without 2. Logically and practically they are symbiotic. Jason Kuykendall 12-9-07 1060 EXIT REFLECTION 1) My favorite lecture was the one covering the changes to Georgia Tech’s Campus. Hearing about how we’re trying to keep our campus on the cutting edge along with all the research we do here helped me take pride in my choice for college. 2) My favorite reading was the article on the happenings of New Orleans during and after hurricane Katrina. 3) The most intriguing assignment in my opinion was the essay about New Orleans during and after Katrina. 4) A- summarizing lectures: required notes and a memory, added incentive to stay engaged in the lecture classes B- summarize readings: required critical thought and retention of the material C- essay writing: required critical thought and practice composing good papers D- research project: required skilled team work, time commitment and critical decision-making E-final question: required reflection and critical thinking, practice composing and presenting thoughts 5) Preceptorials seemed unnecessary on some occasions. I can remember days when everything the TA had to say could’ve been sent in an email or posted on COOLX, but instead she said it in person and then kept us in class for 45 minutes without anything to do. In future I’d recommend holding preceptorial class only on days when it’s necessary. Also it’d be good to start the research project earlier in the semester. 6) It was eye-opening. I think we were asked o think this way for the purposes of learning to see the world around as a designer does. 7) Possibly. But I’d like it if they were more specific than the entire DBE. Maybe have a class about buildings and another about cars and another about cities and another about designed products. 8) I was most surprised with the idea that the position of ‘master builder’ might be making a come back with the integration of design and assembly industries. 9) “What is a designer?” My answer posited that a designer must simultaneously be a Student (ever-learning), a Teacher (learning through teaching), a Practitioner (learning through doing), and an Explorer (pushing boundaries to discover) 10) Cars. I don’t care if it’s interiors or exteriors, but ID at Tech is painfully weak on the automotive side of the industry. Don’t make me move to California to study car design. I want GT to be a leader there too. Jason Kuykendall 11-26-07 COA 1060 Report: 5th Street The Successes and Shortcomings of the renewed 5th Street Bridge The city of Atlanta is known for its level of difficulty to traverse by car. Its many one way streets and odd intersections confuse anyone who is not a local. However, each street in Atlanta has both character and a problem to solve. Each has its job description and a certain personality with which it fulfills its role. One example of a street whose job was at one time unclear and whose personality was caught up in an identity crisis is 5th Street spanning from the intersection with West Peachtree to Georgia Tech’s Klaus building. It was recently the focus of a large-scale rebuild that is part of the Georgia Tech campus master plan. In this report we will review 5th Street, its bridge and its intersections to analyze whether they successfully achieve their goals and with what personality. To begin we must realize that a street does not exist in one dimension. That is to say that it is simultaneously performing many functions both to travelers and viewers. People in different situations relating to the street may perceive the street to exist in several different ways that can be analyzed as layers or dimensions seen through different lenses. The first of these lenses to view the street through is perhaps the most obvious, but it is to see the street as a dimensionable space with particular physical and material characteristics. Next we must see the street as an urban form with a particular volume and section. From there we will view the street as a space with multiple functions and uses. Fourthly we will see that the street exists as a result of a prior framework or subdivision of territory. Along with these the street is also a public space, a theater activated by human performance, and a social institution. Firstly, we must take a look at 5th Street as a dimensionable space with particular physical and material characteristics. Obviously, the street has mass and volume whether we are the viewer or the user. 5th Street runs its course from its Midtown intersection with West Peachtree Street five city blocks to Georgia Tech’s Klaus Advanced Computing complex where the road curves Northward around the complex and is renamed Ferst Drive. The street crosses the 75/85 connector with a bridge to connect Tech Square and the Eastern side of the Georgia Tech main campus. Before the renovations the bridge was only long enough to span the freeway underneath (a flat concrete wall on either end holding it up with a support in the median) and only wide enough to accommodate its four lanes of traffic, a three foot sidewalk elevated about eight inches from the road surface, a concrete barricade on either side of the roadbed, and the requisite ten foot tall chain-link fence (rumored at the time to exist so Tech students did not try to escape their academic hardships with a jump onto the freeway). Below are some pictures of the old 5th Street bridge. Notice the sparse, utilitarian nature of the bridge and the overt placement of key utlities such as the power line, street lights, fencing, and highway signs. (photo collected online) Note the ratio of space designated for vehicle traffic to space designated for foot traffic. (photo collected online) Note the width of the old bridge. (photo collected online) When the bridge was rebuilt it took on a new form. The bridge itself was widened considerably and the road narrowed from four lanes to two (although each lane has a more clearly designated turn lane…one for each end of the bridge). The space added was used for eight foot brick and concrete sidewalks (the new standard for the whole campus) bordered by concrete benches overlooked by painted steel awnings (with young vine plants growing alongside them, presumably to eventually provide shade) that act as gateways to grassy parks on either side of the road. These sod-covered areas are backed by raised planter boxes containing several varieties of ground cover and shade plants that attempt to hide the new, even taller chain link fencing. Below is a picture of the present bridge after its renovation. Note the measures implemented to reduce proximity of pedestrians to interstate traffic. The second lens through which to see the street and the bridge renovation is as an urban form with a specific volume and section. Reviewing the pictures above we see that the 5th Street Bridge as it used to be was nothing special on the landscape of Atlanta. It was unremarkable and featureless with a personality of strict utility and minimalism. This was, of course, due to the fact that it was created first and foremost as an urban form for which one chief purpose was envisioned: provide vehicle access to Midtown from Georgia Tech. Its form followed this function so faithfully that any lesser function the bridge provided was seemingly an afterthought in its design. As I used to walk across the narrow bridge bombarded by the din of interstate traffic and coming dangerously close to being clipped by speeding cars crossing the bridge within inches of me I can remember thinking of the planners groaning as they penned sidewalks into the blueprints. Other functions seemed to take a backseat in the design process as a lone wire hung over the South side of the bridge and streetlights jutted upward from that same side lighting the bridge only dimly at night. These forms were purely urban and existed as such by necessity (either of cost cutting or the bridge’s perceived function at the time of design). In the redesign and rebuild of the bridge, it’s obvious some questions were asked that tried to relate the form of the bridge to its surroundings in the heart Atlanta’s concrete landscape, but still have it satisfy a new set of criteria for the benefit of the users. For example we see in the above photograph that the planter boxes are arranged in rectangular shapes with perpendicular lines echoing the use of concrete blocks and bricks in the buildings in the urban environment surrounding it. We see the awnings of steel and chain-link echoing the same materials found in vast quantities throughout the city. I am confident the designers would say that the design is intended to celebrate the forms of urban structures and construction and aims to blend it with organic forms such as grass and trees and the vines that should eventually grow to provide shade for those traversing the bridge via its wider sidewalks. Some living in Midtown might argue that the plants are an attempt to bring the Tech campus further into the city in a sort of Imperial march on Midtown. Tech administrators in charge of campus planning might rebut that the design is intended to invite occupants of Tech square onto the campus and act as a portal to safely pass thereto. So as an urban form my assessment is that 5th Street is evolving to fit the wants and needs of the invested parties to the applause of some and the chagrin of others. The third lens through which we can view 5th street is as a space with multiple functions and uses. This is certainly true that a modern street performs many tasks which go largely unnoticed. The street is on the surface a conduit for humans whether in motor vehicles, on bicycles or on foot. Also, beneath the surface it may be a pipeline for waste, a drainage duct for rainwater, it could contain power lines, internet cables and phone lines, and in the case of the 5th Street Bridge it is also a convenient place for interstate signage. However, these are just the physical functions streets like 5th Street can serve. There are plenty of underlying purposes and functions of streets. For instance, the 5th Street Bridge is a hot spot for tailgaters to set up tents and RV’s on football game days. This is a function it could not serve before the renovation. We may not know how many extra dollars in revenue this one function alone brings to the retail centers in Tech Square or the vendors on East Campus. It is also a clue that the park areas have been successful in inviting people to play and relax. Digging deeper, however, we find even more functions of the street. The street divides private property and defines public space (more on that later). The street also serves as a platform for viewing architecture and the surrounding environment. Its design interacts with the designs of the buildings and installations that surround and accompany it. In the case of the 5th Street Bridge the design of the new sidewalks is the new campus standard and is intended to tie the main campus to Tech square and act as a welcoming gateway to Georgia Tech. The wide sidewalks and architecture of Tech Square help to differentiate it from Midtown without separating it from the urban setting. The next lens through which we must analyze 5th Street is as a result of a prior framework and the division of territory. Below is a map of the Georgia Tech East Campus with 5th Street connecting the Greek sector to Tech Square. Note the Greek houses, the interstate and Tech Square and how they are aligned. In the above map we can see the way streets cut into the landscape and divide the land up into manageable and defined segments. The parcels of land on campus are seemingly divided by the buildings built on them and the streets seem to follow the patterns of those buildings. The roads are not wide and do not divide sections of the campus far enough that people perceive a separation in the territories. This might be achieved due to similar architecture, street design or signage. The interstate provides the largest inherent division in this map yet the job of the 5th Street Bridge is to negate that division and connect two areas that planners desire people to visit. An area where Tech Square meets Midtown. Note the familiar GT campus architecture cues on the right side (louvered outcropping bordering the top of the building) and the lack thereof anywhere else in the space. Here we see the division created by the 75/85 connector (photo collected online) The next lens sees the street as a public space. This is most evident when large scale events take place on 5th Street such as when it is used for the starting leg of the Freshman Cake Race in the early hours of Homecoming day. Students from every organization gather to watch the spectacle and the street is blocked to through traffic. The only car allowed on the road is the students’ own Ramblin Wreck – the symbol of Georgia Tech’s lively student body. At times like this the street is not the focus of the students’ thoughts, but is providing public space for the time honored tradition to play out. Without a street with enough space or an adequate representation of the people (the section of 5th Street used is lined with Greek houses that in and of themselves represent the traditions and archetypes of Tech’s student body) the celebratory tradition might lose its purpose or maybe worse – its feeling. This is the part of 5th Street used for the Freshman Cake Race. Of course events such as the Cake Race and various parades aren’t the only time when we use the public space offered by 5th Street. It is the space itself that divides buildings and businesses and utility installations and pedestrians. The space provides a buffer between people and the divisions which the group has decided upon. Along with this the public nature of the space also provides a culture for those living, working, playing or traveling along the street. The space itself with its openness might beg exchanges to take place. It might encourage exchanges as simple as that of a football or Frisbee passing from one student’s hand to another’s across the grassy park or the exchange of a product and the amount of its price from a vendor to a consumer in one of Tech Square’s restaurants or shops. Most important to this street’s culture, in my opinion, is whether or not it encourages the exchange of ideas. After all Georgia Tech is a premier institute of higher education in this country that values the exchange of ideas. The question is “in what ways does a street as a public space perform this function?” 5th Street seems intended to encourage idea and thought exchange in areas like the courtyard of the College of Management it borders in Tech Square and the outdoor dining areas of the restaurants nearby, but could do far better on the bridge to the Tech campus. The picture below highlights the usage of the bridge’s Northern green space on an average day in the early afternoon. One of the “parks” on the bridge. Notice the lack of people on a normal day (on game days this area is packed with tailgaters) The sixth lens we see 5th Street through raises questions about the street as a theater activated by human performance. Just like the stage of the Fox Theater is designed to frame the artists that perform on it a good public space like a street should highlight the action on street level if indeed it is designed to perform all the noble tasks mentioned earlier. This function is not just meant for big events like the Freshman Cake Race or the Atlanta stage of the Tour de Georgia bike race that used the 5th Street Bridge a year ago, but for everyday activity like exchanges, human interactions, commerce and travel. Below is a picture of the South side of the bridge framing the view of foot traffic as seen from the North sidewalk. Note the success of the framing function on this portion of 5th Street versus the next picture The lines seem to add the most visual weight to the road bed and vehicle traffic. The function of theater on 5th Street is most evident in Tech Square. There the building entrances are far enough from the curb to create a pedestrian space that frames foot travelers separately from vehicle travelers. Trees add a feeling of safety to the design and interspersed benches provide seating for an audience to the drama of humanity. All of this considered, 5th Street is not the grand promenade that it could be. I would suggest adding more Georgia Tech icons to the structures and facades in Tech Square and on the bridge itself. Another way to see 5th Street is as a palimpsest of past conditions and a projection of desired futures. 5th Street certainly derives its orientation within the city, its traffic flow, and some of its surrounding architecture from what it used to be before the bridge was rebuilt. It retains all of the utilities it carried before, but aims to hide them from view more skillfully. As a projection of desired futures it is muddy and unclear in concept. The campus planners say it will be the grand entrance to campus from Midtown, but the street’s design says it is destined to forever be a side door that has been decorated for an open house. This is not the fault of Tech Square’s design or the bridge to campus, but the blame falls more on the shoulders of the phenomenon that occurs when one crosses the bridge onto East Campus. There is no feeling of triumphal entry or a welcoming view. The fraternity houses adorning the intersection are not faced toward the arriving viewer and none of them follow similar architectural rules. The only welcoming sight in the whole field of vision is the shiny façade of the Klaus Building at the end of the 5th Street. This is found clearly in the picture below. Do the visitors entering campus this way feel welcomed at this point? Is this a special entrance? Lastly 5th Street is a social institution. It belongs to the people of Atlanta and the Georgia Tech community. It represents an opportunity to work together and create a space for everyone interested in visiting the Georgia Tech campus, engaging in commerce, idea exchange, study and recreation. It should provide a functioning conduit for safe and efficient traffic flow- either by car or on foot. Its look should convey the sentiments of the Georgia Tech community- welcoming those seeking knowledge and progress. Finally its essence and feel should evoke an excitement for the future of the service and progress that Georgia Tech and the people of Atlanta intend to pioneer. I assert that the bridge renovation was successful in that it was a needed upgrade from the bridge that was there before, but falls short of the expectations of the planners in creating for Georgia Tech a grand entrance from the Midtown area to East Campus. Jason Kuykendall 11-18-07 Optional Assignment 1060 section A Playback: The first lecture I’ll playback since I can’t manage to find this assignment on CoolX to know exactly which lecture to use is the lecture about the Atlanta Beltline. The lecture began with a general introduction to the idea of the beltline and announcement that a Georgia Tech grad had asserted the idea as a way to better connect Atlanta. We heard about who is involved in the planning and design of the project and who is involved in the various other stages of it. We were told about some specifics of the design and the way that people will be able to play, work and travel in and through the space provided by the proposed beltline. The speaker familiarized us with the state of the land that is to be used for the project and told us some of the issues involved in acquiring and reshaping it to be used for light rail and parks. Another part of the presentation related to Peachtree Street and it’s evolution as a main thoroughfare. Terms: I don’t actually have terms to define, because I recognized most of them. I could present a few relevant terms that I already know like ‘imminent domain’. Also the presentation was in a format I couldn’t open with my computer (don’t have Powerpoint07 so I can’t open a pptx file) Questions: One question I have is where the designers see a project like the beltline taking the city in the next ten or twenty years. Will it affect our socio-economic standings at all? What about crime rates? As for Peachtree Street, how does the look and feel of the road change our outlook on the social status of the area? Why is it that we are so judgmental of a place simply by its aesthetic? Lecture 11-12-07 Playback: The lecture was about the campus master plan for Georgia Tech. It began with an intro to how the campus has grown historically and where the proposed plan creates new green space. The presenters introduced the sectored approach to improvements on campus and when each will take place. They told us specifically what kinds of projects will take place and what the vision is for the future of the campus. We saw plans for the Eco-Commons, ILRC, softball field, North Ave apartment renovations, standardized sidewalks, campus gateway, challenge course, nanotechnology building, enlarged Yellow Jacket Park, Hill District improvements and the river on west campus. Also we learned that Georgia Tech desires to lead the way in building a completely zero-energy campus using various technologies like scavenged and recycled condensation water. Terms: The first term I didn’t know about was the word potable. It was used with regards to the water used in some form of technology to reduce our energy consumption (“potable water use”). Maybe it refers to the condensation water scavenged from the AC units on campus. After research it seems the term means water that is drinkable. The next term I’ll research is “performance landscapes”. It seems this term means a landscape built for a purpose…maybe better drainage or reduced heat-island effect. It seems I’m correct about its meaning. Performance landscapes are anthropogenic landscapes engineered to achieve a goal. The last term I’ll investigate is the word perpetuity. It’s a term that was used as a descriptive noun to describe the state in which performance landscapes will be maintained (ie. “in perpetuity”). Maybe it means perpetually? After research I see I was close. It means eternity or the state of being perpetual. Questions: Why does Georgia Tech desire to take itself off the energy grid? Does Georgia Tech realize the statements it makes by committing to a ‘green’ agenda? Who is the competition for Tech in the act of moving toward a zero-consumption campus? Are we in a good position to use this new campus to sell the Institute to prospective students and faculty? If we begin closing roads through campus where will the Ramblin’ Wreck drive to cheer up the students during hard weeks? If Tech students aren’t supposed to have cars on campus in the future what is to be said for the rite of passage of students traditionally owning broken down cars that they endearingly refer to as Ramblin Wrecks? Are the traditions important to the designers of our campus? Lecture 11-14-07 Playback: The lecture about campuses and neighborhoods began with the question “what is planning?” The presenter told us about his angle on the profession of city planning. He said he comes to the process from a qualitative perspective rather than quantitative. He presented his research at University of Pennsylvania regarding how the campus affects the neighborhoods of West Philadelphia where it’s located. He began with analysis of the demographics and the landmarks in the area. He gave an empirical model breaking down factors influenced by the University and those affected by outside forces. He gave the goals of the project and then went through a progression of the changes made to the campus describing them through a filtered qualitative analysis. He ended with some questions for the future. Terms: First I want to investigate the term ethnographic. It sounds like it would be demographics as they relate to ethnicity only. After research I now understand it to mean the study and systematic recording of human cultures. Next is the knowledge industry. I think it refers to schools like U Penn. After research it seems to refer to schools and libraries and even encyclopedias – anything where knowledge is traded or sold. The last term will be social integration. I think it means groups typically separated by class living and working among one another. After research it appears to be broader than that. It can be used to mean anything from ethnic groups to groups defined by political beliefs doing something together. Questions: How would Georgia Tech go about improving the surrounding areas of Midtown? Can we positively impact the surrounding community by doing what U Penn did, or would we need to approach it differently? How can we learn in CFY about which sorts of designs improve certain areas geographically or socially? Jason Kuykendall 10-28-07 1060 Lecture Summaries Lecture 10-10: 1)Playback: The lecture opened with the establishment of the fact that a work of architecture differs from an ordinary building in the fact that it answers the questions ‘how should we build here and now?’ and ‘what kind of world are we shaping?’ Examples were given regarding classical versus modern architecture and how they affect their environments. Next the point is made that our buildings shape us after we have finished shaping them. We were shown how they define spaces via access and style. Other elements were presented concerning the various philosophies regarding utilizing space and presenting ideas within architecture. New terms were brought up such as ‘nested hierarchies’ and ‘individualism within unity.’ More was said then about the program at Tech and how students prepare for the world of architectural business. Internships were mentioned and examples of relevant peripheral studies and research projects like the Solar Decathlon house were shown. We moved on to see some famous projects that have come from Georgia Tech grads such as the Atlanta Beltline and the World Trade Center Monument. We then talked about several opportunities awaiting graduates of Architecture programs such as countries that either have or need large numbers of architects and interdisciplinary studies that can be explored by students. We noted that the goal of GT architecture is to prepare new architects to better shape the environment of the future. Next we revisited Tech’s architecture education and the path that a prospective student can expect to follow. Also, more opportunities such as global learning were presented. 2)Look-Up: The first term that confused me was ‘nested hierarchies.’ It was presented next to a picture of a high end classically designed building with a stark white colonnade and a temple front protruding from it. The majority of the building was red brick. After research I understand that the term comes from the methods of Charles Darwin for classifying species. In this context a nested hierarchy refers to a category that contains other categories within it. A good example I found was that a bat is a mammal and mammals are vertebrates. Whales are mammals, though separate from bats. They are nested in the hierarchy. Perhaps, then in the context of architecture the presenter was referring to differences in styles of buildings that regardless their appearance or message are all part of the environment. The second term that interested me was multiple centers. It interested me because I didn’t think it possible for there to be more than one center to one object. Everything I know of has one center of mass, one center of gravity and one geometric center, and these are all absolute. However, after some meditation on the context of the term’s use I’m willing to understand that the architectural community sees everything as relative to its context. So perhaps multiple centers within a building could refer to multiple points where a façade or floor plan draws one’s attention or emotions. Maybe it could refer to a geometric center that is different from a visual center that is different from a center of color or center of style. The last idea I wanted to explore was the synthesis of common unity into the one word term ‘community.’ Obviously I’m aware of what community means, but I find it interesting that the presenter chose to focus on that synthesis of the two words ‘common’ and ‘unity’. The terms individually have different meanings that imply separate ideas. Common refers to anything that is readily available or possessed by everyone in a given group. Unity is the idea that everyone in that group acts as one entity. Together, though, they create a term ‘community’ that means a gathering with a sense of togetherness. In architecture buildings must stand near one another and have styles that may not overlap or dovetail, but must exist in the same space regardless. 3)Speculate: In the architecture world I notice a huge difference in buildings designed with a classical look and buildings designed under the modernist philosophy of playing with classical proportions, but leaving classical decoration. My first question is how does one work to unify the appearance of a classical building to be built next to a modern one? My other questions revolve around the world we live in. How does an architect design a building that encourages efficient use of energy? How does an architect design a building that encourages people to think or act a certain way? I see all of these as useful tools in the architect’s repertoire to be successful in the modern world. Lecture 10-15: 1)Playback: First the lecture on Building Contruction at Georgia Tech began by introducing each of the phases of a project; design, build and operate. Then we talked about who is involved in the process of completing a building. Next some examples were given of some high-profile building projects worldwide including those in Dubai and China. After this we revisited the phases of a project from need to build to maintain. This was expanded into a larger lifecycle timeline that included razing and rebuilding. Next we saw who the stakeholders are in a building project and how they relate to the different phases. We talked about the owner, the architects, general contractors, subcontractors and fabricators and building operators and managers. The relationships between all of these were explored along with their roles in the process. We then listed the types of buildings and saw examples of how those relate to the people involved and the construction process. A vision for the future was given and we talked about how things change in the design and building processes when integration is introduced. Differences were again highlighted between the current method of building and new methods. Finally, we moved on to talk about the programs at Tech for Building Construction. We talked about opportunities for BC grads from Tech and the careers that are available to them. We talked about the classes taken and the path followed by BC undergrads and then moved back into learning about the field of construction management. Class ended and cut off the rest of the presentation. 2) Look-Up: The first interesting term was A/E/C integration. I took it to mean an integration of disciplines into the building construction process. After learning about it I understand it’s not just the planning phases it refers to. It means that the whole project is a cooperation of interdisciplinary people at several levels working to optimize the process. The second term was general contractor. I’ve never heard of that job before. Now I know it means the person whose job it is to coordinate the different subcontractors to build the project quickly and efficiently. Thirdly, I didn’t know what a subcontractor did. Now I realize they take on a part of the project like roofing or plumbing or electrical aspects. They must be coordinated to properly complete the project. 3)Speculate: How does a student learn to lead a project? How do construction managers keep positive and productive communication between all the interested parties in a construction project? These seem like two very important questions for students to keep in mind as they’re educated in this field. Lecture 10-22: 1)Playback: The structure of the lecture began with a quick overview and then dove right into discussing the meaning of design. We learned the definition and processes of design in the modern environment. We discussed the IDSA and its definitions then its counterpart in Europe. Then we discussed the products that are being designed around the world starting with everyday objects and those for pleasure, then tools for working, computational devices, life preservation devices, household items for convenience, wearable items, sensual objects, transportation devices and environments. We noted interactive design and experience design and those differences. We then learned the foci of Good Design. We then moved into discussing the philosophy of Tech’s ID program and the areas of focus it places emphasis on. Then we looked at classes and methods for students of the program. We ended with some examples of work from students. 2) Look-Up: The first term that interested me was iterative adjustment. I didn’t know what that meant, but after re-reading the lecture I see it refers to the design process’s need to make design changes in an iterative fashion. This is aided by computers. The next term was humanization of technologies. I took this to mean technology that reflected human attributes but now realize that’s not totally what it means. It refers to making products that have relevance and meaning to humans in our daily lives and making those easier to use and make. The last term is just something I hadn’t heard at all before and didn’t understand. Applied Arts. I now understand it to refer to the aesthetics of an object. It is the essence of Industrial Design in its simplest form. 3)Speculate: What are professionals concerned with? How does a designer affect users’ opinions? How does a designer connect with the consumers? How does a designer help the engineers and the marketers save or make money while sincerely improving the user’s experience? Jason Kuykendall 1060 Library Assignment Bibliography 10.11.07 Bibliography Brown, Lance Jay. Gulf Coast update; rebuilding New Orleans. Occulus, 2006 Spring, v.68, n.2, p.42-43. New York, 2006. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bvh&AN=587498&site=ehost-live Brunsma, David L.; Overfelt, David; Picou, J. Steven, eds. The sociology of Katrina: perspectives on a modern catastrophe. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2007 Carpenter, Richard P. Big Easy wants tourists to come marching in. Boston Globe, September 9th, 2007. pg. M4. Chappell, Kevin. Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans Reflects and Rebuilds. Chicago, 2007. Deberry, Jarvis. Misconceptions Distort View Of Katrina. The Boston Globe, August 27, 2006 Sunday, Third Edition. DesRoches, Reginald, ed. Hurricane Katrina: performance of transportation systems. Reston, Va. American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006 Environmental health needs and habitability assessment: Hurricane Katrina response: Initial assessment. Atlanta, Ga.: Joint Taskforce, Center for Disease Control, US Environmental Protection Agency, 2005. http://www.bt.cdc.gov/disasters/hurricanes/katrina/pdf/envassessment.pdf Giroux, Henry A. Stormy Weather: Katrina and the politics of disposability. Boulder, Co: Paradigm Publishers, 2006. Holtzmann, Anna. Why are so many displaced residents of New Orleans being left out of the rebuilding process? Architecture, 2006 Mar., v.95,n.3, p.72 http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bvh&AN=583537&site=ehost-live Kennedy, Shawn; Murdock, James. Architectural Record, June 2007, v. 195, n.6,85 88,226. New York, 2007. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bvh&AN=601187&site=ehost-live Lessons Learned: EPA’s response to hurricane Katrina- evaluation report. Washington, D.C.: Environmental Protection Agency, October 3rd, 2006. http://www.epa.gov/oigearth/reports/2006/20060914-2006-P-00033.pdf Lukensmeyer, Carolyn J. Large-Scale Citizen Engagement and the Rebuilding of New Orleans: A Case Study. National Civic Review, Vol. 96. New York: Fall 2007. Miller, Karyn. Main hospital in New Orleans is a tent Doctors’ anguish over ‘Third World’ health care, eight months on from the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. The Sunday Telegraph (London). April 23, 2006 Sunday. Nicholson, Peter G. PhD. Preliminary Reconnaissance and Observations of the New Orleans Levee and Floodwall Failures be Independent Assessment Teams. Dep. Of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Univ. of Hawaii at Manao. Honolulu, HI, 2007. Nossiter, Adam. New Orleans of Future May Stay Half its Old Size. New York Times, Sunday, January 21, 2007, Late Edition. Ratard, Raoult. Public health after Katrina’s rule. Atlanta, Ga: Rollins School of Public Health, 2006. Schwartz, Jarvis. Category 5: Levees Are Pieces of a $32 Billion Pie. New York Times November 29, 2005 Tuesday. Late Edition – Final. Schwartz, John. One Billion Dollars Later, a City Still at Risk. New York Times, August 17, 2007. Late Edition – Final. Silva-Tulla, Francisco; Nicholson, Peter G. eds. Investigation of Levee performance in Hurricane Katrina: The New Orleáns Drainage Canals. Embankments, Dams, and Slopes. Denver, Colorado, 2007. Silva-Tulla, Francisco; Nicholson, Peter G. eds.). Investigation of Levee Performance in Hurricane Katrina: The Inner Harbor Navigation Channel. Embankments, Dams, and Slopes. Denver, Colorado, 2007. Silva-Tulla, Francisco; Nicholson, Peter G. eds. New Orleans vs. Katrina: Overview and USACE Preliminary Response (Emergency Operations). Embankments, Dams, and Slopes. Denver, Colorado, 2007. Sipes, James L. Rebuilding the Gulf Coast: how landscape architect can use their digital skills to pay a key role in the process. Landscape Architecture, 2006 Apr., v.96,n.4,p.84,86,88-95. D.C.:2006. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bvh&AN=586250&site= ehost-live Smolowe, Jim. Are They Killers? People. Vol. 68, Iss 11; 93. New York: 2007. Jason Kuykendall 1060 assignment 9.16.07 Lecture 9.10.07 Playback: Dr. Stephen Sprigle with Georgia Tech’s CATEA research center presented an overview of research and design of products relating to assistive technology. He began by introducing the concept of assistive technology and examples. Dr. Sprigle then went on to lay out the differences in universal and specialized assistive technology. The rest of the lecture outlined examples and detailed the processes and different disciplines involved in designing the products that fall under the category of assistive technology. Look Up: The first term that needed explaining was ‘assistive technology’. When I heard it I figured that maybe it meant things like wheelchairs and crutches, which it does include, but after Dr. Sprigle’s explanation I realize the term covers any product made with the intent to correct or aid in the correction of personal impairments. The second term was ‘universal design appeal.’ It struck me as a term I’ve heard before in CFY, but never had defined. I guessed it meant design that everyone would be likely to buy. After the lecture, though, I realize it refers to designs that every consumer can use. In the context of assistive technology it refers to designs that were intended for the disabled, but are used by a much wider consumer base. The third term was ‘specialized design appeal.’ I thought it meant designs intended for a unique task that only a few people need, and that’s pretty much correct. In the context of assistive technology it means products that have no use apart from the unique disability they’re intended to correct. Speculate: My questions in this lecture were raised out of curiosity. What is involved in an education for designers of assistive technology? Would they need a more in-depth knowledge of ergonomics or a more intimate knowledge of biomechanics? Also how closely do professionals work with the clients in this industry? Isn’t it difficult to create a product like a wheelchair to be universal enough to lower the costs and simplify manufacturing, but still specialized enough to cater to the different types of impairments that will be using it? Lecture 9.12.07 Playback: In this lecture we were introduced to the concept of integration in the construction industry. First, the presenter questioned whether construction should be called an industry or more of a segment of the economy. He gave a brief history and overview of how the process of constructing the built environment has evolved into what it is today and ended by speculating about where it will end up in the future. This is where the concept of integration came in. He hypothesized that integration in the curriculum, disciplines and professions of architecture, engineering and construction will merge as technology proliferates into roles that expedite and simplify the design and development phases of construction. Look Up: One word I’d heard before, but never have known the meaning of is litigation. It was used as a supporting argument for integration, but that’s the only clue I had in learning its meaning. After a simple dictionary lookup I found it to be almost synonymous with the word lawsuit. It’s defined as any legal contest by judicial process. So I’m guessing it’s meaning in the context of construction has something to do with liability and the possibility that integration will reduce the number of sides in any issue thereby reducing possibility of suing among entities involved. Another term I was curious about was “technocrat”. It was used to refer to a possible leader of design and development in future construction projects. So I though it might be someone that designs buildings based on the technologies incorporated such as HVAC layout, utilities and internet connectivity. After looking it up I find there are two definitions. The one intended in this lecture is ‘one who is expert in technology and exercises managerial authority’. The first definition listed, however, is ‘one who adheres to technocracy.’ This led me deeper into an interesting discovery: Technocracy is the philosophy of government by technicians. That idea is surprising to me, but interesting. I think it could be the way businesses (especially design and engineering firms) could evolve in the future. Speculate: My questions for the presenter of this lecture revolve around education. First, I realize the CFY at Tech is an attempt to spark integration-mindedness among the various disciplines responsible for the built environment, but what evidence do we have that it is working? Are students in the COA at Tech interdisciplinary enough to be leaders in integration once graduated? What more can we do to make sure the three majors are still training students to become leaders in their fields but with an understanding of the related disciplines so that if the production processes change Tech grads will be on the leading edge in adapting to the new methods? Is technocracy a possibility in design, and are Tech students being positioned to dominate the landscape of technical management? Lecture 9.14.07 Playback: In this presentation Dr. French gave an overview of the Center for Geographic Information Systems’ work at Georgia Tech. He first introduced the concept of GIS and how they do research. Then he moved on to the various technologies used and the environments they’re used within. Dr. French showed some examples including thermal imaging and one-meter-scan digital satellite photography of urban areas. He told us about projecting future trends and conditions of an urban area using series of data from technologies such as soil movement monitoring systems and growth charts of suburban districts. Later he showed us how Atlantic Station was planned and then presented his particular model for predicting the effects of natural disasters. He ended with opportunities to join the Center for GIS and then some questions. Look Up: A word that I knew but had never heard in this context before was ‘impervious.’ I know if an object is impervious to something it will not be affected by or allow to pass through whatever the object is impervious to. I suspect in this context he meant roads and parking lots impervious to weather conditions (rain water and debris). After research it appears that my definitions were accurate. Impervious can mean impenetrable and it can mean ‘unable to be affected.’ So my suspicion remains for this context of ‘impervious surfaces studies.’ Another term I had not seen before was ‘location-based services.’ It was presented as a component in the emerging environment. I think it might refer to services like utilities that depend on where the site of the building is. After research I now realize it refers to wireless internet and electronic media that transfer information to or about a specific location (such as finding a restaurant on your cell phone). The third interesting term was presented in the same context of what to expect in the future of GIS. It was automated data acquisition. My question was whether this refers to gathering data through technology or having technology decide which data to compile. After research I’m inclined to believe it is more the former – using technology to acquire data. Speculate: I wonder what future technologies will allow us to dig deeper into GIS. Also, I wonder how education itself will be changed by GIS. Perhaps there’s some form of irony in it, but maybe even some leading future professionals in the field of GIS will be educated through the use of methods or technologies made possible by GIS innovations. I wonder how our education at Tech will include the use of GIS in decision-making about what to make and how. Jason Kuykendall 1060 Assignment 9.09 Lecture 8.29 – New Degree Program: Master of Science in Classical Architecture. Playback: Georgia Tech has begun a new degree program for a master’s degree in classical architecture. In this presentation seven graduate students in the new program shared their experiences, summarized their careers and talked about why they wanted to enroll in the new program. Later there was a question and answer session in which four or five students asked questions pertaining to classical architecture. Some very interesting questions were posed in the session such as how classical architecture can fit with the modern concept of “sustainability”. An important term other than sustainability that was used more than once was proportion. A few of the presenters stood by the concept of classical proportion as the key to beauty even in modern buildings. Look Up: The first term “sustainability” refers to the degree to which a house can sustain itself apart from the traditional or regularly provided energy sources (which are perceived to be generally wasteful and possibly harmful in the ‘sustainability’ ideology). A good example came in the later lecture about the solar decathlon house. It attempts to sustain itself based on solar power, gray water scavenging and recycling, and a more energy-efficient layout and design. It does not, however, follow the classical architecture formula. The second concept was that of classical proportion. This refers to the proportions of a building based on the themes and formulas set forth by the classical architecture tradition. One example would be the placement or interaction of prominent features like doors and windows. The presenter asserted that even modern buildings should follow these ‘rules’ as a key to being aesthetically pleasing even if they don’t incorporate common traditional features like crown molding and stylized columns. Speculate: The presentation seemed to glorify classical architecture as something that is attainable and available for everyone with an answer for everything. But I was left with the question of how classical architecture can fit in with modern and post-modern design approaches. I feel like they’re in contrast rather than harmony. Also, I wonder if classical architects feel as if modern technicians and fabricators should be taught classical woodworking and other less high-tech crafts. Along the same lines can computers generate or inspire new wood-sculpting techniques that wood be accepted by the classical architect as a valid way to customize their clients’ buildings? Lecture 8.31 – Solar Decathlon Overview Playback: This lecture took the form of a presentation in which a graduate student in Georgia Tech’s architecture master’s program gave an overview of Georgia Tech’s entry in the Solar Decathlon competition hosted by the U.S. government. He started with an introduction and explanation of the goals of the Solar Decathlon and then moved on to a detailed break down of the processes employed in the project. He explained the design concepts for both the aesthetics and the vital systems of the house and detailed the materials used. Later, he reflected on the build and showed pictures of the progress before taking questions from the students. Some important terms that were new to me were clerestory, live wall, and louver. Look Up: The first term “clerestory” was used because the solar decathlon house has a prominent ring of windows above the living area that allows natural light into the living space. They have been used on buildings for thousands of years to help with lighting (though in the past the ‘windows’ were just holes or vents instead of glass panes) The second term is louver. A louver is any opening created by fixed or movable fins that are intended to control flow of light, heat or air while filtering out rain, wind or excess light. In the context of the solar decathlon house the presenter was referring to the siding on the house which curves around the perimeter of the house and on one side stands away from the wall to create a finned or vaned look that functions as a louver controlling lighting levels through a translucent wall into a living area. Speculate: My questions regarding the solar decathlon competition center around education. I’d love to ask if the competition has taught the students anything unexpected like coping with the differences between what is designed and what is built. Also, I wonder if this sort of sustainable design will enter the mainstream at any point in the future and what that will do to the current energy grid layout. If it’s projected to enter the mainstream and change the world then how do the professors plan on preparing this generation of designers, architects and contractors to drive that change or at least capitalize on it. Lecture 9.05 – Digital Design and Fabrication Playback: This presentation attempted to compare and contrast two different design processes used in creating the installations on campus (with the implication being that the rest of the world uses the two design processes as well). First Tristan, the presenter, explained the typical 20th century approach to design and then the emerging 21st century approach. He moved on to some detailed examples and outlined in depth the newer way of designing architectural pieces both for research and mass use. He finished by posing a question about the implications of the changing design and manufacturing processes on the make-up of the work force responsible for the built environment. Some key concepts were “linear design process” and “iterative design process” Look Up: The concept of the linear design process refers to an approach to design in which a designer or architect has an idea which is then developed through a series of studies, documented by draftsmen, fabricated by manufacturing personnel and assembled by a contractor. This was contrasted with the “iterative design process” which is a newer approach in which a feedback loop allows for separate ‘iterations’ of the design through the development phase. The idea is that a designer or architect first conceives an idea then begins to develop it, study it through simulations and prototyping, and then either choose to revisit the development phase for a subsequent iteration of the design or, if no further development is needed, the design can enter the production phase where high-tech equipment and computerized manufacturing processes lessen the number of people needed to fabricate and assemble the products. Speculate: I was left wondering what the answer to Tristan’s ending question was. Does iterative design and computerized manufacturing signal a return to the medieval profession of ‘master builder?’ If so, what should the people working as draftsmen, fabricators and craftsmen do to avoid being left behind? Won’t the students of today who will become tomorrow’s ‘master builders’ be missing anything such as craftsmanship or intimate knowledge of materials by designing and fabricating everything through computers? Master builders in the past were scholars of the arts as well as the engineers of their time. How do we teach students to be prepared for a shift where an architect or designer working as a master builder is expected to answer questions of engineering, technological limitations or breakdowns, or sensitivity to modern or classical artistic contexts. Jason Kuykendall 8-29-07 1060 A Two Architecture Installations Wood Installation Observation: The installation in the interior of the architecture building’s west wing is a three story tall sculpture made up of long, curved strips of pressed wood plies bolted together and set vertically and running parallel to one another forming what looks like a cascading “sheet” of wood that ends in a large, flared base that doubles as bench seating. The whole thing is about 45 feet tall, 20 feet wide and about five inches thick. Its weight is supported by brackets that connect the wood pieces to the balcony of the second floor and by the large base that juts forward from the bottom to meet the floor of the atrium. The phenomenological qualities of the installation are subtle and depend largely on the lighting and angle of the viewer. First of these is the shift in transparency that occurs as one circles the atrium and views the installation from changing vantage points. When standing directly in front of the object, one sees directly through the slats of wood to the wall behind it. This is more dramatic when standing on a higher floor where the viewer barely notices the object from straight on due to light from the third floor windows pouring through it and making it nearly invisible from straight ahead. From oblique angles, however, the installation is opaque but less clearly defined. The viewer sees it as a sheet and can note the undulations and dynamism in the curvature of the columns. During mid day the installation seems light and airy. It’s barely there, though for the site it’s on it creates a well defined boundary. People interact with it by using it as a bench for work or leisure and it seems to fit the role very well. The light playing off of its curves or through its gaps allow the wood’s amber glow to give passers-by the feeling that the installation is playful or joyful. Furthermore the bustling atrium is full of sounds as people work. The installation sometimes seems lost in the corner. Up close the implied movement in it’s lengths of wood seem to echo (not physically) the sound and business surrounding it. At night, however, when the building is quiet and still and no light comes in through the windows behind the installation its mood seems to change from playful to ominous. It’s more opaque and less bright so its size more easily noticed. The sculpture becomes darker and more imposing filling the space of the atrium like the silence. Speculation: The possible motivations for this wooden installation are many, but I’m inclined to think the creators of this project were wither fascinated by flowing water or draping hair. Either seems likely to me given the shape and structure, but the idea of hair is further evidenced by the color of wood chosen. Some of the images that came to mind upon viewing the installation were of other things such as a billowing sheet or the path frozen in time of a falling object or several falling objects. If this was my motivation for creating the sculpture my research questions might focus on finding out the structural characteristics of woods strips or the way they’re mounted. Also possible to explore would be how the flowing contours of the sculpture interact with the more rigid industrial surroundings of the atrium. If I had to guess at a name and personality for this installation I would say the designers might have called it something like “Cascade Bench” or “Rapunzel.” And maybe the personality would be something akin to a quiet teenage girl. It spends time reading and writing unaware of its own attributes and inherent beauty, but secretly it wishes to be famous…maybe on stage or outside like the other installation. Ploycarbonate Installation: Observation: The site for this installation is outdoors directly outside of the west wing of the architecture complex. There are concrete columns and terraces and a brick patio on which the installation sits immediately next to some green space bordered by trees, shrubbery and a brick wall. The installation itself seems to be made of long thin strips of a clear polycarbonate plastic folded in places and fastened together with bolts and wing nuts. The form begins at one end as stacked strips of the material fan outward toward the other end and then continue on to a section where edges of the strips meet one another and form box tubes with undulating proportions that eventually tear back apart into an explosion of curled, warped and twisted strands that continue upward to collect back together and come to rest uniformly on a terrace above. The size of the sculpture is about fifteen feet tall, maybe seven feet wide at its widest point and about fifty feet long. Some of the great phenomenological occurrences inherent with this structure have to do with light. First it seems to shimmer in the light of the mid day sun at a distance, but up close the same areas that shown brightly are actually roughly weathered and dingy. The object itself is laden in areas with collected dust and debris from wind and storms. The stacked portion, though made of the same material, appears opaque while the flowing portions are perfectly transparent allowing one to see directly through to the other side. The wildly curling portion, however, creates a third effect. Like water that is clear at rest but white when foamy the plastic curls refract light in so many directions that this portion of the installation appears translucent white from across the street. As for the interaction with its site, the installation dominates the space and refuses to go unnoticed by the passer-by. Either by sheer size or shimmering in one’s eye the sculpture will catch your attention as you pass. Speculation: The designers of this object were clearly using computers to model the structure, and they’re motivation could have been simply that – find out what beauty math can produce. But there’s also a striking resemblance in this installation to water flowing or possibly flame. So that could be the purpose of its form. The images evoked when viewing this structure range from white-water rapids or flood waters, to fire, wind or the path of leaves falling in autumn to the time-frozen vibrations of a plucked chord or even a flock of birds emerging from a cave and coming to light on a perch of some kind. I would imagine a name for this project might be something like “the current of progress” noting both the flowing form and the innovative way in which the object makes use of a modern material or “flow of ideas” noting the same points of interest. To project humanity onto this installation for a moment I would imagine the sculpture’s mood is intense and that it might be reliant on the attention of others. Perhaps it’s hiding something. It’s certainly hiding dust in its folds. Maybe at night it slithers around campus or goes swimming in the fountain. Either way it would dance openly in front of a crowd of on-lookers everyday if it could Link to this Page
|  | 
|