Because all architecture is unfinished and can morph to its use and surrounding my degree project
is about the study of how change can be allowed or prevented through the creation of new means
to integrate all architecture elements in terms of their degrees of permanence and mutability.
I have been observing closely how people interact with objects that allow them to create system that can become as expandable and flexible as they wish. the nature of the pieces that i have created allow for an infinite growth in many different directions. the primary directions of growth are horizontal and vertical.
that is why the focus of my first case study is the research of the relationships created in the order in which pieces are added and removed from the systems, and not so much the chaotic growth that can develop.
conclusions drawn from the observation of different combinations of building pieces are generalizations that can be applied into the study of our time's construction principles. construction materials have been given a hierarchy based on its use and durability. is it possible to re-think these principles of constructions and create fully flexible and mutable spaces?
the term durability indicates that all materials have a lifespan. this lifespan can be renewed by the replacement of by repair. however, within the lifespan of building materials people also change alongside the rusting metal, deterioration of piping, replacement of floor surfaces, etc. is it possible to include the human factor in this time based cycling of materials?
test #1
three way expansion created with multi directional piece at the base
test #2
two way expantion made more permanent by making a closed interwove system
charlie: so, mateo when do i know if i finished or not?
me: you can stop whenever you want
charlie: ok, them i'm going to make a closed loop! you didn't see that one coming
test #3
three way system that uses multi directional piece to create division of vertical versus horizontal expansion
me: you can't rotate the pieces
yena: why not?
tests #4 and #5
#4: four way system maximizing use of flexible multi directional piece. I have composed this one to create interior space and exterior space. because of the way in which pieces were connected a very regular way of substraction was allowed. top surface, side surfaces, and then the core were removed in that order. this study helped me figure out how to make the structure for case study #2 which tries to revert that order
#5 is an example of how the structure does not allow for the substraction of pieces in an order that the user wanted. structure and permanence of pieces need to be addressed simultaneously
