the topic will not be focus on ergonomics anymore

it is too furniture focus. period. it need's quite amount of attention to every minute detail.


so...the new sensibility is...INTER CONNECTIVITY
done so with a SHELL with the operation PINCH, INVOLUTION


the layout of the house is interconnected through use of depth.

actually nevermind

i just had a serendipity.

can anyone show me a modern sleeper car?

You need to study the user group first. measure every aspect of their bodies. how they use it and then come up with the best average and design accordingly. If you dont want to go through all that trouble, freeze your brain and revive it again in a couple hundred years when nantechnology will allow us to make programmable matter and objects which will automatically adjust to the perfect comfort of each user using that space.

i have already done so

i got that aspect covered

i want to see an modern or awesome looking sleeper car

^ and plus, im designing a universal furniture where the user will find their comfort zone. the program will not be so define specifically but more geared towards letting the user find their own comfort zone, finding their own shelves, their own beds, their chair, their own anything they want..

Quoting Bruce Lee:

"I said empty your mind:
Be Formless,
shapeless,
like water.

Now you put water into a cup,
it becomes the cup

You put water into a bottle
it becomes the bottle

You put water into a teapot
it becomes the teapot...

Be water my friend"


That, for me, is Ergonomics

ok.....so how do you want to design it psyarch?
this is what i got so far.
im thinking my house will be just straight...like a sleeper car train, and instead of having determined programs, it's up to the user to decide...
the walls have these specific profiles that just elongates to create every more variable profiles that a user can perceive as an object of furniture. At one moment of the house a chair could become a desk. There's no sense of what and where a bedroom is...

hhm...i think that should work...

vyan,

In the Bruce Lee quote I'm suggesting that the humans are the cup, the bottle and the teapot, and your building is the water.

Beyond that, I'm finding that your approach is based on creating multiple affordances, plurality in use, as a piece of cleverness. This isn't really a design philosophy.

I'm assuming that you incorporate some anthropometric / biomechanical data into your design, and detail the programme. e.g. why should I want an "invisible" bedroom? Is this a space constraint, a response to a desire to use less materials, a belief that the bedroom and its function as a boudoir should be more public?

What are the underlying conditions that you are trying to mediate / explicate in your design?

Are you doing this as a real research/design project? a pet project? or designing for today's context using today's technology or design a concept for the future? that doesn't seem to be clear. Define the context first then it'l be helpful to proceed.

Exact wording from a Handout:

Distributed Material Systems
Assignment 3A will be used to develop a formal language for your design project. Students will work on one of three material systems that are understood to come prior to architectural decisions but necessarily define architectural potential. Students will use slabs, frames , or shells as a primary material system capable of responding to programmatic, spatial, and site contingencies. Each student will define a narrow set of operations to perform on the material. The resulting material configurations will then provide an ordered environment within architectural decisions may proceed.

Process:
1. Define a Sensibility:
Select one of the chair case studies(I selected the Ray and Charles Eames wooden chair, which we determined it had an ergonomic sensibility)as a model of material behavior. Each chair, despite its function, emerges from a specific design sensibility. These sensibilities define a range of approaches to the distribution and organization of material. Below are some potential defininitions:

Continuity despite structural discontinuity
soft lining, rigid shell
Contained Aeration
Modularity breeds diversity
extreme seriality
from line to mass
lightweight mass

These captions keep material experimentation tethered to a trajectory. This trajectory is pointed toward a sensibility. This way of working is loose, open to contingency, allows post-analysis and reflection, rejects a priori diagram as the primary method of generating organization, and liberates mater from convention. Each of the chairs we studied in some way use sensibility to swerve matter toward a new configuration and in doing so, construct compelling objects.

2. Select one of the material systems below and yse one or more of the potential operations to meet the programmatic criteria outlined below. Other operations may be used as long as you can clearly define the operation and demonstrate the merits of its use:
material system potential operations
slabs slice, bend, stretch, pinch, modulate,perforate
frames shape, stretch, compress, thicken, multiply, array,nest
shells aggregate, involute, intersect, fold



I think I have given up my sensibility as my PRIMARY FOCUS in design. Like Psyarch said, it always considered in architecture but not be designed by it. I am just going to apply some sort of operation to a material and as I am designing consider the sensibility lightly and not as focus as I was before.

vyan:

regarding your assigment outline... this is just my take on that assignment:

my understanding of that outline is that it is an exercise in creativity and in a design process that uses those "sensibilities" as a tool to create a consistent architectural language from a detailed level to a room scale, to a building scale/ programmatic level... I think in that outline, "sensibility" isn't supposed to be something abstract or deeply personal, it's just an idea, an idea of assembly or of a type of operation in *what the chair does*. how the thing works.

the instructor is not trying to be very deep or make this something deeply personal about personal philosophy or anything... the "sensibility" can be anything, whatever you pick on the spot, but but it will become your tool that you use throughout your assignment... by "sensibility", he/she means... for example, details, details at different scales, how something is put together, what kind of language does the structure and walls and furniture have... how is *the space* doing something similar, consistent with those kinds of operations (i.e. that way of making the piece of furniture...)

Basically, what would mies' barcelona chair look like if you carried the idea of how it's made forward to a whole building?

The chair, it is basically two *flattened X's as structure... The flattened x's are tied together horizontally in certain places to support two flat rectangular cushions that have straps that allow them to be threaded to the structure..., so the seat cushions are simple and the soft part and an independent slab... What would that chair be, if you carried some idea of the way it works to different scales? What if the way you put that thing together was related to the way a whole building is put together? *maybe* you might end up with Mie's barcelona pavilion... (maybe something totally different, but who knows) Depending on how you approach it, maybe your idea ("sensibility") that came from an idea about heriarchical assembly, structure and slab material... There's something consistent between the barcelona chair and the barcelona pavilion...



every chair has a different idea about how it is assembled, and how they operate, how they respond to the human body, structurally, materially, etc. take any one of those chairs and ask yourself: "what would this chair be if it were a room? what would it be if it were a building?" (let yourself go, don't be too literal, focus more on what the chair does...)

IMHO, in a project like this, i wouldn't get bogged down in the *why*... (ergonomic, blah blah blah...) the why is something you can keep to yourself for now. the exercise is in creativity, in a particular way of thinking which I think focuses on the *how*...

Just let go and allow yourself to play with an idea: start with an idea about how something is put together, for example "soft lining, rigid shell" and that's the only limit... what that means is really an open question... It's an exercise in discovery... What is that? It can be anything, there is no right or wrong, but you are just using that "soft lining, rigid shell" as a starting place for exploration... what is that in the chair? and then what happens when you make it a room? how is it different? what is it when that is a program for a building? (use some examples of actual projects as precedents, that always helps)... just be clear what you are trying to look at... stay consistent as you work through the thing, and document your exploration... (so that at the end, your final presentation is how you carried this one "sensibility", one consistent idea of how things are assembled or come together, maybe details at different scales, and how it evolved to produce the building)...

While your projcet might already be complete, here are some fine words on the value and place of evidence-based design: Closing the Research-Design Gap