《设计基础》课程教学资源（电子图书）Architecture Design Notebook

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN NOTEBOOK A.PETER FAWCETT Piess

ARCHTECTURE DES GNNOTEBOOK 2nd edition A.Peter Fawcett (Illustrated by the author) Architectural Press AMSTERDAM BOSTON HEIDELBERG LONDON NEW YORK OXFORD PARIS SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO

ARCHITECTURE : DESIGN NOTEBOOK 2nd edition A. Peter Fawcett (Illustrated by the author) AMSTERDAM BOSTON HEIDELBERG LONDON NEW YORK OXFORD PARIS SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO Architectural Press

CONTENTS 1 PREAMBLE 2 THE CONTEXT FOR DESIGN 3 3 ARRIVING AT THE DIAGRAM 13 RESPONDING TO THE SITE 13 CHOOSING AN APPROPRIATE 'MODEL 16 ORGANISING THE PLAN 23 4 CHOOSING APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES 39 STRUCTURE 39 SERVICES 42 HOW WILL IT STAND UP? 43 HOW IS IT MADE? 51 WILL IT BE COMFORTABLE? 58 WILL IT BE GREEN? 62 5 HOW WILL IT LOOK? 71 EXPRESSION V SUPPRESSION 71

CONTENTS 1 PREAMBLE 1 2 THE CONTEXT FOR DESIGN 3 3 ARRIVING AT THE DIAGRAM 13 RESPONDING TO THE SITE 13 CHOOSING AN APPROPRIATE ‘MODEL’ 16 ORGANISING THE PLAN 23 4 CHOOSING APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGIES 39 STRUCTURE 39 SERVICES 42 HOW WILL IT STAND UP? 43 HOW IS IT MADE? 51 WILL IT BE COMFORTABLE? 58 WILL IT BE GREEN? 62 5 HOW WILL IT LOOK? 71 EXPRESSION V SUPPRESSION 71

vi Contents ROOF 74 OPENINGS 77 ELEVATIONS 77 WALL MEMBRANES 78 THE CORNER 81 SCALE 83 6 THE SPACES AROUND 93 CENTRIFUGAL AND CENTRIPETAL SPACE 93 URBAN SPACE TYPOLOGY 101 7 POSTSCRIPT:A WORKING METHOD 107 TRADITION V THE VIRTUAL BUILDING 107 FURTHER READING 111

ROOF 74 OPENINGS 77 ELEVATIONS 77 WALL MEMBRANES 78 THE CORNER 81 SCALE 83 6 THE SPACES AROUND 93 CENTRIFUGAL AND CENTRIPETAL SPACE 93 URBAN SPACE TYPOLOGY 101 7 POSTSCRIPT: A WORKING METHOD 107 TRADITION V THE VIRTUAL BUILDING 107 FURTHER READING 111 vi Contents

1 PREAMBLE As we enter the twenty-first century,it has designer in the right direction towards prose- become fashionable to consider architecture cuting an acceptable architectural solution. through a veil of literature.Such was not This book,then,attempts to offer that support always the case;indeed,it could be argued by not only offering some accepted maxims or that the practice of architecture has rarely design orthodoxies,but also by suggesting been underpinned by a close correspondence how they can inform crucial decisions which with theory,and that designers have been face the architect engaged in the act of design- drawn more to precedent,to seminal buildings ing.The text is non-theoretical and therefore and projects rather than to texts for a creative makes no attempt to add to the ample litera- springboard to their fertile imaginations.This ture surrounding architectural theory;rather it is merely an observation and not an argument aims to provide students engaged in building against fledgling building designers adopting design with a framework of accepted ways of even the simplest of theoretical positions;nor looking at things which will support and inform does it deny the profound influence of a small their experiment and exploration during the so- number of seminal texts upon the development called 'design process'. of twentieth-century architecture,for there has The plethora of literature concerned with the been a close correspondence between some of 'design process'or'design methodology'is a those texts and icons which emerged as the fairly recent phenomenon which gained built outcome. momentum during the late 1950s.In these But even the most basic theoretical stance early explorations design was promulgated must be supported in turn by a few fundamen- as a straightforward linear process from ana- tal maxims which can point the inexperienced lysis via synthesis to evaluation as if conform-

1 PREAMBLE As we enter the twenty-first century, it has become fashionable to consider architecture through a veil of literature. Such was not always the case; indeed, it could be argued that the practice of architecture has rarely been underpinned by a close correspondence with theory, and that designers have been drawn more to precedent, to seminal buildings and projects rather than to texts for a creative springboard to their fertile imaginations. This is merely an observation and not an argument against fledgling building designers adopting even the simplest of theoretical positions; nor does it deny the profound influence of a small number of seminal texts upon the development of twentieth-century architecture, for there has been a close correspondence between some of those texts and icons which emerged as the built outcome. But even the most basic theoretical stance must be supported in turn by a few fundamen￾tal maxims which can point the inexperienced designer in the right direction towards prose￾cuting an acceptable architectural solution. This book, then, attempts to offer that support by not only offering some accepted maxims or design orthodoxies, but also by suggesting how they can inform crucial decisions which face the architect engaged in the act of design￾ing. The text is non-theoretical and therefore makes no attempt to add to the ample litera￾ture surrounding architectural theory; rather it aims to provide students engaged in building design with a framework of accepted ways of looking at things which will support and inform their experiment and exploration during the so￾called ‘design process’. The plethora of literature concerned with the ‘design process’ or ‘design methodology’ is a fairly recent phenomenon which gained momentum during the late 1950s. In these early explorations design was promulgated as a straightforward linear process from ana￾lysis via synthesis to evaluation as if conform-

2 Architecture:Design Notebook ing to some universal sequence of decision- dimensional organisation would be config- making.Moreover,design theorists urged ured in plan and section,represented in reality designers to delay as long as possible the crea- an early,if tentative,creative response to any tive leap into 'form-making'until every aspect architectural problem. of the architectural problem was thought to be The act of designing clearly embraces at its clearly understood.But every practising archi- extremes logical analysis on the one hand and tect knew that this restrictive linear model of the profound creative thought on the other,both of design process flew in the face of all shared which contribute crucially to that central experience;the reality of designing did not ground of 'form-making'.It is axiomatic that conform to a predetermined sequence at all all good buildings depend upon sound and but demanded that the designer should skip imaginative decisions on the part of the between various aspects of the problem in designer at these early stages and how such any order or at any time,should consider sev- decision-making informs that creative 'leap eral aspects simultaneously or,indeed,should towards establishing an appropriate three- revisit some aspects in a cyclical process as the dimensional outcome. problem became more clearly defined. These initial forays into 'form-making Furthermore,the experience of most architects remain the most problematic for the novice was that a powerful visual image of their and the experienced architect alike;what fol- embryonic solution had already been formed lows are a few signposts towards easing a early on in the design process,suggesting that fledgling designer's passage through these fundamental aspects of'form-making'such as potentially rough pastures. how the building would look,or how its three-

ing to some universal sequence of decision￾making. Moreover, design theorists urged designers to delay as long as possible the crea￾tive leap into ‘form-making’ until every aspect of the architectural problem was thought to be clearly understood. But every practising archi￾tect knew that this restrictive linear model of the design process flew in the face of all shared experience; the reality of designing did not conform to a predetermined sequence at all but demanded that the designer should skip between various aspects of the problem in any order or at any time, should consider sev￾eral aspects simultaneously or, indeed, should revisit some aspects in a cyclical process as the problem became more clearly defined. Furthermore, the experience of most architects was that a powerful visual image of their embryonic solution had already been formed early on in the design process, suggesting that fundamental aspects of ‘form-making’ such as how the building would look, or how its three￾dimensional organisation would be config￾ured in plan and section, represented in reality an early, if tentative, creative response to any architectural problem. The act of designing clearly embraces at its extremes logical analysis on the one hand and profound creative thought on the other, both of which contribute crucially to that central ground of ‘form-making’. It is axiomatic that all good buildings depend upon sound and imaginative decisions on the part of the designer at these early stages and how such decision-making informs that creative ‘leap’ towards establishing an appropriate three￾dimensional outcome. These initial forays into ‘form-making’ remain the most problematic for the novice and the experienced architect alike; what fol￾lows are a few signposts towards easing a fledgling designer’s passage through these potentially rough pastures. 2 Architecture: Design Notebook

2 THE CONTEXT FOR DESIGN It's a hoary old cliche that society gets the like,for example,mechanical engineering architecture it deserves,or,put more extre- (which,incidentally,thrived under totalitarian- mely,that decadent regimes will,ipso facto, ism). produce reactionary architecture whilst only This brings us to another well-worn stance democracies will support the progressive.But adopted by progressive architects;that archi- to a large extent post-Versailles Europe bore tecture (unlike mechanical engineering) this out;the Weimar Republic's fourteen-year responds in some measure to a prevailing cul- lifespan coincided exactly with that of the tural climate in which it is created and therefore Bauhaus,whose progressive aims it endorsed, emerges inevitably as a cultural artefact and modern architecture flourished in the reflecting the nature of that culture.Certainly fledgling democracy of Czechoslovakia.But the development of progressive architecture the rise of totalitarianism in inter-war Europe during its so-called heroic'period after the soon put an end to such worthy ambition and it First World War would seem to support this was left to the free world (and most particularly claim;architects found themselves at the the New World)to prosecute the new architec- heart of new artistic movements throughout ture until a peaceful Europe again prevailed. Europe like,for example,Purism in Paris,De This is,of course,a gross over-simplification Stijl in Rotterdam,Constructivism in Moscow but serves to demonstrate that all architects or the Bauhaus in Weimar and Dessau. work within an established socio-political Inevitably,such movements generated a framework which,to a greater or lesser extent, close correspondence between architecture inevitably encourages or restricts their creative and the visual arts so that architects looked impulses,a condition which would not neces- naturally to painters and sculptors for inspira- sarily obtain with some other design disciplines tion in their quest for developing new architec-

2 THE CONTEXT FOR DESIGN It’s a hoary old cliche´ that society gets the architecture it deserves, or, put more extre￾mely, that decadent regimes will, ipso facto, produce reactionary architecture whilst only democracies will support the progressive. But to a large extent post-Versailles Europe bore this out; the Weimar Republic’s fourteen-year lifespan coincided exactly with that of the Bauhaus, whose progressive aims it endorsed, and modern architecture flourished in the fledgling democracy of Czechoslovakia. But the rise of totalitarianism in inter-war Europe soon put an end to such worthy ambition and it was left to the free world (and most particularly the New World) to prosecute the new architec￾ture until a peaceful Europe again prevailed. This is, of course, a gross over-simplification but serves to demonstrate that all architects work within an established socio-political framework which, to a greater or lesser extent, inevitably encourages or restricts their creative impulses, a condition which would not neces￾sarily obtain with some other design disciplines like, for example, mechanical engineering (which, incidentally, thrived under totalitarian￾ism). This brings us to another well-worn stance adopted by progressive architects; that archi￾tecture (unlike mechanical engineering) responds in some measure to a prevailing cul￾tural climate in which it is created and therefore emerges inevitably as a cultural artefact reflecting the nature of that culture. Certainly the development of progressive architecture during its so-called ‘heroic’ period after the First World War would seem to support this claim; architects found themselves at the heart of new artistic movements throughout Europe like, for example, Purism in Paris, De Stijl in Rotterdam, Constructivism in Moscow or the Bauhaus in Weimar and Dessau. Inevitably, such movements generated a close correspondence between architecture and the visual arts so that architects looked naturally to painters and sculptors for inspira￾tion in their quest for developing new architec-

4 Architecture:Design Notebook tural forms.Indeed,Le Corbusier applied the formal principles of regulating lines'as an ordering device both to his Purist paintings and as a means subsequently of ordering the elevations to his buildings(Figures 2.1,2.2). Equally,Piet Mondrian's abstract painterly compositions found themselves reinterpreted directly as three-dimensional artefacts in the Figure 2.2 Le Corbusier,Regulating Lines:Villa at architectural projects of Van Eesteren and Garches,1927.Author's interpretation. Van Doesburg (Figures 2.3,2.4),and Lubetkin's iconic Penguin Pool at London theoretical models of such clarity and seduc- Zoo was informed by the formal explorations tiveness that designers have since sought to of Russian Constructivist sculptors like Naum interpret them directly within their 'form- Gabo (Figures 2.5,2.6). making'explorations.Such was the case But the architectural culture of the twentieth with Le Corbusier's 'Five Points of the New century was also characterised by a series of Architecture'published in 1926 where a tradi- Figure 2.1 Le Corbusier,Regulating lines,Ozenfant Figure 2.3 Piet Mondrian,Tableau,1921.From De Stijl Studio,Paris,1922.Author's interpretation. 1917-31:Visions of Utopia,Friedman,M.(ed.)Phaidon

tural forms. Indeed, Le Corbusier applied the formal principles of ‘regulating lines’ as an ordering device both to his Purist paintings and as a means subsequently of ordering the elevations to his buildings (Figures 2.1, 2.2). Equally, Piet Mondrian’s abstract painterly compositions found themselves reinterpreted directly as three-dimensional artefacts in the architectural projects of Van Eesteren and Van Doesburg (Figures 2.3, 2.4), and Lubetkin’s iconic Penguin Pool at London Zoo was informed by the formal explorations of Russian Constructivist sculptors like Naum Gabo (Figures 2.5, 2.6). But the architectural culture of the twentieth century was also characterised by a series of theoretical models of such clarity and seduc￾tiveness that designers have since sought to interpret them directly within their ‘form￾making’ explorations. Such was the case with Le Corbusier’s ‘Five Points of the New Architecture’ published in 1926 where a tradi- 4 Architecture: Design Notebook Figure 2.1 Le Corbusier, Regulating lines, Ozenfant Studio, Paris, 1922. Author’s interpretation. Figure 2.2 Le Corbusier, Regulating Lines: Villa at Garches, 1927. Author’s interpretation. Figure 2.3 Piet Mondrian, Tableau, 1921. From De Stijl 1917
31: Visions of Utopia, Friedman, M. (ed.), Phaidon

The context for design 5 Figure 2.4 Theo Van Doesburg and Cornelius van Eesteren,Design for house 1923(not executed).From De Stijl,Overy,P.,Studio Vista. Figure 2.6 Naum Gabo,Construction,1928.From Circle,Martin,J.L.et al.(eds),Faber and Faber. tional cellular domestic plan limited by the constraints of traditional timber and masonry construction was compared (unfavourably) with the formal and spatial potential afforded by reinforced concrete construction(Figures 2.7,2.8).Consequently 'pilotis','free facade','open plan','strip window',and 'roof garden'(the five points)were instantly established as tools for form-making.A cele- brated series of houses around Paris designed by Le Corbusier between 1926 and 1931 gave equally seductive physical expression to the five points'idea and in turn was to provide a collective iconic precedent (Figure 2.9). Similarly,Louis Kahn's theoretical construct Figure 2.5 Berthold Lubetkin,Penguin Pool,London Zoo, 1934.From Berthold Lubetkin,Allan,J.,RIBA Publications. of 'Servant and Served'spaces found an

tional cellular domestic plan limited by the constraints of traditional timber and masonry construction was compared (unfavourably) with the formal and spatial potential afforded by reinforced concrete construction (Figures 2.7, 2.8). Consequently ‘pilotis’, ‘free fac¸ade’, ‘open plan’, ‘strip window’, and ‘roof garden’ (the five points) were instantly established as tools for form-making. A cele￾brated series of houses around Paris designed by Le Corbusier between 1926 and 1931 gave equally seductive physical expression to the ‘five points’ idea and in turn was to provide a collective iconic precedent (Figure 2.9). Similarly, Louis Kahn’s theoretical construct of ‘Servant and Served’ spaces found an The context for design 5 Figure 2.4 Theo Van Doesburg and Cornelius van Eesteren, Design for house 1923 (not executed). From De Stijl, Overy, P., Studio Vista. Figure 2.5 Berthold Lubetkin, Penguin Pool, London Zoo, 1934. From Berthold Lubetkin, Allan, J., RIBA Publications. Figure 2.6 Naum Gabo, Construction, 1928. From Circle, Martin, J. L. et al. (eds), Faber and Faber

6 Architecture:Design Notebook Figure 2.9 Le Corbusier,Villa Savoye,1931.From student model,Nottingham University. equally direct formal expression in his Richards Medical Research Building at Philadelphia completed in 1968(Figure 2.10)where mas- Figure 2.7 The Five Points,Traditional House.Author's sive vertical shafts of brickwork enclosed the interpretation. 'servant'vertical circulation and service ducts in dramatic contrast to horizontal floor slabs of the (served)laboratories and the transparency of their floor-to-ceiling glazing. The adoption of modernism and its new architectural language was also facilitated by exemplars which were not necessarily under- pinned by such transparent theoretical posi- tions.The notion of 'precedent',therefore, has always provided further conceptual mod- els to serve the quest for appropriate architec- tural forms.Such exemplars often fly in the face of orthodoxy;when Peter and Alison Smithson completed Hunstanton School,Norfolk,in 1954,they not only offered a startling 'court- yard-type'in place of the accepted Bauhaus finger plan'in school design(Figures 2.11, 2.12),but at the same time offered a new Figure 2.8 The Five Points,Reinforced Concrete House. Author's interpretation. 'brutalist'architectural language as a robust

equally direct formal expression in his Richards Medical Research Building at Philadelphia completed in 1968 (Figure 2.10) where mas￾sive vertical shafts of brickwork enclosed the ‘servant’ vertical circulation and service ducts in dramatic contrast to horizontal floor slabs of the (served) laboratories and the transparency of their floor-to-ceiling glazing. The adoption of modernism and its new architectural language was also facilitated by exemplars which were not necessarily under￾pinned by such transparent theoretical posi￾tions. The notion of ‘precedent’, therefore, has always provided further conceptual mod￾els to serve the quest for appropriate architec￾tural forms. Such exemplars often fly in the face of orthodoxy; when Peter and Alison Smithson completed Hunstanton School, Norfolk, in 1954, they not only offered a startling ‘court￾yard-type’ in place of the accepted Bauhaus ‘finger plan’ in school design (Figures 2.11, 2.12), but at the same time offered a new ‘brutalist’ architectural language as a robust 6 Architecture: Design Notebook Figure 2.7 The Five Points, Traditional House. Author’s interpretation. Figure 2.8 The Five Points, Reinforced Concrete House. Author’s interpretation. Figure 2.9 Le Corbusier, Villa Savoye, 1931. From student model, Nottingham University