Category Archives: Featured Article

4D Environments and Design: Prototyping Interactive Architecture

Posted on by

Kihong Ku, Philadelphia University

Jonathan Grinham, Catholic University of America

Originally published: Grinham, J. and Ku, K., (2012). 4D Environments and Design: Towards an Appliance Architecture Paradigm, Digital Aptitudes + Other Openings, Proceedings of the 100th ACSA Annual Meeting Conference, March 1-4, 2012, Boston, MA

INTRODUCTION

In his book ‘Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age,’ a study of the new media culture, Clay Shirky (2010) presents an anecdote that illustrates a paradigm shift within our modern culture. Shirky recounts a friend’s story of his four-year old daughter suddenly rising to her feet mid-movie and beginning a vigorous search behind their television screen. The friend, from his own childhood experience, assumed the child was searching behind the screen for the people she was seeing on-screen. When asked, ‘what are you doing?’ the child responded, ‘looking for the mouse.’ This anecdote is used by Shirky to represent the new media culture in which we live; a culture that, in many ways, is more perceivable to a four-year then it is to previous generations. Shirky states, “here’s something four-year olds know: a screen without a mouse is missing something. Here’s something else they know: Media that’s targeted at you but doesn’t include you may not be worth sitting still for.” The four-year-old protagonist represents a societal and generational shift from a culture of media consumers to a culture of media producers. More importantly, the four-year-old represents the inescapable future of a culture whose members expect malleable, interactive and user-oriented environments. Shirky’s story establishes the tone for this paper, which readily accepts that architecture, both professional and academic; currently exist within this new media culture.

The proliferation of household appliances with embedded microprocessors such as fridges, washing machines, or smart handheld devices such as the iPhone or tablet have changed the interaction space with computers beyond the computer screen and mouse. With the notion of ubiquitous computing which Weiser (1991) characterized as the ‘internet of things’ objects occupy both physical and virtual space (Dade-Robertson 2011). Within this context we examine interactive architecture to explore the convergence of robotics, architecture, and open source computing to ask the following questions: Can architecture actively and dynamically change physical environments in real time while becoming a social medium? Can architecture connect the virtual and the physical? Can architecture become an interface to connect what were once thought to be disparate ideas and worlds?

RESEARCH APPROACH

The first author established in the fall of 2009 the PARTeE (Prototyping in Architectural Robotics for Technology enriched Education) Lab as an interdisciplinary design group that explores the implications of interactive architecture through integrating computationally driven physical kinetic systems and components into buildings and spaces to meet changing human needs. The laboratory was initially funded by the Center for Creative Technologies in the Arts and Design at Virginia Tech. This endeavor currently continues at Philadelphia University and its outcomes and methods have been adopted and grown through a series of design studios and projects led by the authors.

Theoretical explorations and case study research on related projects such as the REEF project by Rob Ley and Joshua Stein offered initial conceptual insights. Practical explorations of architectural scenarios involved design experimentation and prototyping through model construction. Various digital media and techniques were utilized for rapid prototyping purposes such as 3D modeling with the Rhino software, laser cutting, solid deposition 3D printing and a variety of robotics technologies (e.g., photoresistors, thermosensors, LEDs, servomechanism, etc.) and architectural materials (felt, polystyrene, acrylic, wood, etc.).

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Research in the field of user-to-user and user-to-object interactivity has established a large body of literature which describes the intricacies and evolution of the many studies of interactivity, responsiveness, and computational intelligence. In the field of architecture interactive design is popularly described as an emerging field, however, it is more accurately described as a ‘re-emergence.’ We must look at a brief history of interactivity as it relates to architecture to understand this re-emergence and its significance to the questions established above.

The term ‘interactive design’ was coined in the late 1980’s by Bill Moggridge of IDEO and Bill Verplank of Xerox. However, the first emergence of interactive design can be found in the studies of cybernetics in the late 1960’s and the formation and continued research of MIT’s Media Lab. In his 1969 article, Toward a Theory of Architecture Machines, Nicholas Negroponte, the founder of MIT’s Media Lab, asked, “Can a machine deduce responses from a host of environmental data?” (1969). This question and others developed in the Media Lab sought to realize the computer and its algorithmically driven logic as a partner or “associate” to its human design counterpart, ultimately developing a theory of “humanism through machines” (Negroponte, 1970). The exchange of data, introduces an essential element of interactive architecture—the feedback loop. Interactivity describes systems that have the ability for a participant (either human or computer) to exchange information while evaluating the received information against a regulatory system, rationalize about the data and produce a given exchange of data. Typically, these exchanges are considered to show intelligence. This reading of intelligence must be clarified. In its most root form the computer shows a form of intelligence, what is described as the ability to solve problems through a codified set of procedures or rules; however, unlike humans the computer is not aware of, nor able to reflect upon this action (Terzidis 2008). The need to program the intelligence by a human counterpart presents a fundamental problem in the study of interactivity. Tristan d’Estrée Sterk of the Office of Robotic Architectural Media & Bureau for Responsive Architecture [ORAMBRA] describes that early studies and development of interactive architectures struggled to find its foundation due to the architect’s inability to construct the computational and structural systems needed to realize the vast complexity of interactive architectures. Instead, the studies found residency in the fields of mechanical, electrical and structural engineering (2003).

Understanding how the architect approaches the opportunity of programming intelligence provides a two-fold framework for this paper.

Intelligence and Interactive Architecture

We first examine two approaches that show the programming of intelligence in an architectural context. Two studies began in the late 1990s. MIT’s House_n and University of Colorado’s Neural Network House established frameworks for understanding a ‘smart’ or intelligent home. Both studies recognized that a completely autonomous, pre-programmed intelligence has potential pitfalls in relation to decision-making and end user operability. As stated by both lead researchers of the projects, Stephen Intille and Michael Mozer, these systems carry a complexity that lacks transparency, are considered too complicated to be programmed by the user, require professionals to adjust and maintain the system and each user (home) requires customization to address the nuances of day to day decision making. For these reasons the two studies strived to provide a more efficient user-to-object exchange.

The University of Colorado’s Neural Network House uses an autonomous system; however, the research focuses on the capacities of a heuristic mechanism within the programming. In this scenario the house’s programmed intelligence is able to learn about the habits and needs of the user through a series of subtle user-oriented tests (i.e., if the lights are left on before entering a room, will the user immediately turn the lights on?). From this data the system measures the needs of the inhabitant against those of conserving energy, in what Mozer calls an ‘optimal control policy’ (Mozer 1998). This framework uses an algorithm to measure the dollar cost of energy conservation against the dollar cost of the relative discomfort of the user. The two data sets are evaluated and a decision is made based on the relative ‘cost’ of a system’s actions. The result is an autonomous home which is capable of learning the habits of its users, associating a real world cost to those habits and making a calculated decision based on opportunity cost.

MIT’s House_n takes a different approach to object-to-user exchange. In addition to the issues of automation identified above, Intille (2002) identifies the need to empower people with information that facilitates decision making while reducing the feeling of loss-of-control, which he explains can be psychologically and physically debilitating (Intille 2002). The House_n, therefore, approaches the smart home as a ‘teaching home’ (Intille). This scenario illustrates a pervasive physical computing system which instead of actively making decisions and producing given responses, uses algorithms to display an indicator of how the home could be working more effectively (i.e., an LED on a window indicating that current conditions would be a good time to use passive cooling). If the user responds to this indicator, the systems then projects information graphics about potentially more efficient configurations. This system works to both produce a more efficient control of the house’s energy as well as allow the user to make decisions which could be too complex for an algorithm to control and ultimately empowers the user to feel a sense of control.

The research of the PARTeE Lab identifies and adopts these two frameworks as important references in the design of user-to-object interactivity. Adapting these models, we developed ‘a2o’ a physical prototype and explain in the next sections how this system weaves object intelligence through a user-driven hierarchy that facilitates user-to-object interactivity. It is also illustrated how the use of social tools, such as Second Life (a free 3D virtual world where users can socialize, connect, and create using avatars, http://secondlife.com/) and Twitter (a social networking tool, https://twitter.com/) enhance user operability.

The New Generators and Open Source

To study the re-emergence of interactive architecture and its social implications, the PARTeE Lab studied the resultant effect of Negroponte’s ‘humanism through machines’ on our modern culture. In one way the re-emergence of interactive design can be thought of as a ‘self-fulfilling-prophecy.’ The study of interactivity seeks to create easier exchanges of information between users and objects. Therefore, one would hope, it could solve its own problem, ‘the architects’ inability to construct the computational and structural systems needed to realize the vast complexity of interactive architectures.’ The solution, or emergence, is the new media culture that has produced communication technologies capable of enabling and facilitating user-to-user interactivity, as well as interactivity between user and information at an exponential rate. Henry Jerkins, a leading researcher in the field of new media notes in his publication (Jerkins et al., 2006), ‘confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century’.

According to a 2005 study conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life project (Lenhardt & Madden, 2005), more than one-half of all American teens—and 57 percent of teens who use the Internet—could be considered media creators. For the purpose of the study, a media creator is someone who created a blog or webpage, posted original artwork, photography, stories or videos online or remixed online content into their own new creations. Most have done two or more of these activities. One-third of teens share what they create online with others, 22 percent have their own websites, 19 percent blog, and 19 percent remix online content.

Thus interactive architecture resides in a new media culture driven by younger generations. Within the new media culture, a major shift is the decentralization of knowledge to online participatory / user communities. This shift produces a two-fold paradigm change that is essential to the understanding of the re-emergence of interactive architecture. First, it represents a culture, specifically ‘Generation I’ (internet generation) that has grown, or emerged, into an environment of interactivity. The new media culture’s communication technologies have enabled and facilitated user-to-user interactivity resulting in a new generation that has come to expect an open flow of data, social interaction and adaptable user-oriented devices, products and environments. David Marshall (n.d.), Chair of the Department of Communication Studies at Northeastern University in Boston, describes the new media culture, ‘These cultures, in their dynamic relationship with products, networks, hardware, software and practices are constantly changing in sometimes profound and sometimes banal ways’. Architecture, through its design processes, its adoption of computer software and its formation of global design communities, has become a nodal point in the complex network of information exchange within the new media culture. Not only has social media influenced the ideological concepts of architecture but also architectural form has become a host to a culture whose members expect malleable, interactive and user-oriented environments. Ingeborg Rocker of Harvard University’s Graduate School of Design explores social implications of Partick Schumaker’s early writings on parametric architecture (a design ‘style’ within which interactive architecture resides). She states, ‘Architectural and urban form were thus to be comprehended as an aesthetically condensed intelligence as the materialization of the logics of inhabitation, and ultimately as the materialization of the new social relations that those logics began to set forth’ (Rocker 2011). Second, the shift has produced a new perception of who the producers of information are and who possesses authoritative view of its content. This shift is especially important as a research framework adopted by the PARTeE lab. The new media culture, specifically open source hardware and software such as Processing, Grasshopper, Wiring and Arduino have increased accessibility to electronics and physical computing, and their user generated forums and ‘wikis’ have provided architects with a new capacity to design complex systems within interactive design. These computational open source technologies paired with the computerization of fabrication such as computer numerically controlled (CNC) cutting systems and 3D printers allow for a new and fertile architectural research platform— interactive design.

PROTOTYPING

Architectural Scenario

The physical construct, a2o [eh-too-oh], was developed as a full-scale prototype designed using Michael Fox’s classification of dynamic kinetic structure (Fox and Kemp, 2009). These systems are understood to be singular systems able to actively influence localized climates within a building system. In the case of a2o, the design was based on the narrative of a sun-shading interface and focuses on weaving autonomous decision-making intelligence with a user controlled feedback loop. During the course of this research another layer of ‘social-emotive’ interactivity emerged through the use of social media environments, in this specific case the Second Life virtual environment and Twitter. The weaving of these systems required an intelligent, user-oriented hierarchy which produced a series of rule based relationships to real-time sensory data and physiological and psychological needs of the user. However, before understanding this relationship we must first introduce the physical architecture. The actuation of programmed intelligence requires equal physical logic and necessitates interdisciplinary research; the result is new micro-morphologies within the study of architecture. Contemporary architecture can be understood to be the architecture of the diagram (Eisenman 2010). Within our research the superposition of the architectural diagram with the physical computing diagram results in an emergence and synergy wherein the computational structure informs the architectonics of the project.

When approaching the physical design of the prototype the team envisions a bottom up design for the physical construct within a layered hierarchical computational logic. This approach identifies multiple factors. First, a plug and play nodal design is adopted, narrowing the scope of the project from a building to a part of the building. We focus on a fenestration element that collects data from localized spatial and environmental conditions. Second, the part-to-whole diagram matches the computational logic diagram. a2o is composed of a series of units, or ‘pixels,’ containing dedicated sensors [proximity, haptic and light] and dedicated actuators [servomechanism, RGB LED, speaker]. Sensory data collected by each individual unit is relayed to a master controller - in this case an Arduino microprocessor – which controls an array of units. This master controller is itself a ‘slave’ to a master controller at a higher level resulting in a series of pixels within pixels. This laying of physical computing logic structure, described as cellular automata, allows for the partial system to be expanded as each pixel within the system becomes a unit within the subsequent pixel. Ultimately, this structure becomes the base for the computational hierarchy of a2o’s object-to-user exchange.

Passive / Active Autonoumous intellegence

The first level of user-to-object interaction is what we consider a passive /active autonomous system that seeks to produce an architecture that is capable of making low-level decisions relative to spatial conditioning and energy conservation. As stated above these systems tend to lack programming transparency as well as a capacity to encapsulate all the parameters of decision-making. Therefore, the system uses a swarm agent model to produce a low-level passive autonomous response, what could be considered as the system normative state. Swarm intelligence produces collective behaviors of unsophisticated agents interacting locally within their environment, causing coherent, functional global patterns to emerge (Maher & Merrick, 2005). Through localized light sensors the system measures the light levels falling on individual units. Throughout the day as light levels increase individual units respond by contracting embedded linear servomechanisms, resulting in a compression of the polymer shell which produces a differentiated shading pattern across the field of agents, responses that could be associated or read as blossoming or flocking. In turn, the blossoming effect increases the units profile and reduces solar gains falling on the surface beyond.

At a slightly higher level of intelligence, the individualized response of the agent models allows the system’s intelligence to actively respond to the user’s need. In this scenario the system makes an assumption that the proximity of the user to the window infers a desire for a viewing (Figure 1). The system then uses a gestural interface to allow for controlled mitigation of solar gains while also producing isolated views and privacy. The use of a gestural interface produces a novel understanding of phenomenology and anthropomorphic within design. Rather than turning a system ‘ON’ or ‘OFF’ or prescribing a daily routine, the gestural interface allows for an adaptive, playful and user-defined interaction, the result is a kinesthetic, haptic and optical reading of the a2o that is understood as awareness, intelligence and otherness.

Figure 1: a2o prototype reacting to user vicinity and creating shades of gradient

Social Medium

The importance of new media to both cultivate and produce a re-emergence in interactive architecture also begs the question whether architecture is or, can inherently become, a new form of social media. Within this layer of intelligence a2o is capable of being aware of user interaction relative to time. Therefore, if the system has not been active within a given time, or it begins to recognize patterns of low or no interactivity, for example if the user is away, the system can seek out the user’s ‘digital-self.’ Figure 3 illustrates the data connection scheme of a2o and the Second Life and Twitter environments.

The first level of social interface allows the user to tele-operate and tele-monitor the system. a2o uses Pachube, a real time internet data host, to connect to Second Life. The use of the Second Life virtual environment allows users to remotely operate and monitor the status of a2o through their avatar (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Second Life representation of a2o

Second Life, currently the most popular general-purpose 3D virtual world, was used as a proof-of-concept test. Buildings or objects in a 3D virtual environment are more expressive and intuitive because of the one-to-one proportional relationship to the real world, whereas 2D graphic user interface (GUI) methods such as web interfaces or typical computer applications, although popular, provide a less easily visualized environment and therefore lack a transparent one-to-one understanding of virtual and real world stimuli. a2o in Second Life asks how will we virtually interact with physical environments in the future?

The second level of research explores the capacity of emotive data. Connecting to Twitter allows for a new social awareness. Not only can a2o ‘tweet’ emotive statements called from a pre-program vocabulary that is algorithmically prescribed relative to environmental and interactive conditions. For example, when no users are present a2o can playfully [subject] tweet ‘come out come out wherever you are.’ a2o can also ‘follow’ friends (users), parse their tweets for recognizable emotive words, and produces a given spatial response through kinetic movement and RGB kinetics. As an architectural interface, twitter may allow for a proactive physical response. If the system recognizes that the user(s) current Tweets contain a majority of negative words, the system can preemptively open the units of a2o to provide the user a more well lit and inviting environment upon return, potentially improving the user’s physiological well-being. Through the connection of a2o and Twitter we ask how data flows related to social media will be expressed architectonically.

Figure 3: a2o connection to Second Life and Twitter

User Override

The use of interactive design subassemblies required that their program and function be transparent and malleable. Much of the media culture within which interactive research resides presents data and information through GUIs, tablets, pads and screens. Through its program, ubiquity and materiality, architecture invites a more transparent one-to-one interface capable of enabling its users to feel a sense of control.

Kinetic memory allows users to physically train the actuation of a2o. Through a series of kinetic sensors, an action placed on a single unit, such as compression, can be mapped proportionally to the actuation of the servomechanism producing a one-on-one replay of the action by the other units in the field. The kinetic memory is analogous to the simple act closing the blinds. Although a2o’s intelligence may be understood as complicated by a user, kinetic memory is a form of user override and represents the highest level of the system hierarchy (this is not to say the most intelligent, rather it overrides all other controls). Interactions can also be stored in the memory of the Arduino microprocessor allowing the user to record an action placed on one of its units in a given period of time and replay the action over variable time intervals and intensities. The result is a user-oriented physically programmable surface capable of emergent patterning that can be described as fluid, pulsing, wave-like or bubbling. We suggest through kinetic memory new possibilities for forms of individualized creative expression.

CONCLUSION

The PARTeE approach focused on combining computation, robotics, and virtual worlds with rapid prototyping. Through the prototype we presented a way to understand how architecture as 4D environments can be conceived, designed and produced. As architecture seeks out a post-digital ‘ism,’ it realizes the tools that have been developed for architects have allowed its process to become analogous to those of fashion and the new media culture it resides in. a2o and the work of PARTeE does not seek to answer what architecture is, but rather ask what can it do? The ever-expanding toolkit of off -the-shelf robotics, open source computing, and user generated information communities have lowered the barriers-to-entry for designers to explore this question. a2o’s development as an advanced working prototype provides a construct in which questions can be asked: Can architecture actively and dynamically change physical environments in real time while becoming a social medium? Can architecture connect the virtual and the physical? Can architecture become an interface to connect what were once thought to be disparate ideas and worlds?

REFERENCES

Dade-Robertson, Martyn. The architecture of information: Architecture, Interaction Design and The Patterning of Digital Information. London: Routledge, 2011.

Eisenman, Peter. “Diagram An Original Scene of Writing.” In The Diagrams of Architecture, by Mark Garcia, 92-103. West Sussex: Wiley & Sons ltd, 2010.

Fox, Michael, and Miles Kemp. Interactive Architecture. New York: Princton Architectural Press, 2009.

Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. Science of Logic. New York: Cambridge Unversity Press, 2010.

Intille, Stephen S. “Designing a home of the future,.” IEEE Pervasive Computing, April-June 2002: 80-86.

Jerkins, Henry, Ravi Purushotma, Kathrine Clinton, Margaret Weigel, and Alice J Robison. “Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century.” New Media Literacies. The MacArthur Foundation. 2006. http://www.newmedialiteracies.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf (accessed 12 10, 2010).

Leddy, Thomas. “Moore and Shusterman on Organic Wholes.” 49 (1991): 63-73.

Maher, Mary-Lou, and Kathryn Merrick. Agent Models for Dynamic 3D Virtual Worlds .

Marshall, David. New Media Culture. http://www.newmediacultures.co.uk/.

Mozer, Michael C. “The Neural Network House: An Environment that Adapts to its Inhabitants.” American Association for Artificial Intelligence Spring Symposium on Intelligent Environments. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, 1998. 110-114.

Negropnte, Nicholas. The Architecture Machine. Massachusetts: The MIT press, 1970.

Negroponte, Nicholas. “Toward a Theory of Architecture MAchines.” Journal of Architectural Education 23, no. 2 (1969): 9-12.

Rocker, Ingeborg. “Apropos Parametricism; If, in what style should we build?” Log, Winter 2011: 89-100.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus. New York: Penguin, 2010.

Sterk, Tristin. “Building Upon Negroponte: A Hybridized Model of Control Suitable for Responsive Architecture. Digital Design.” 21st eCAADe . Graz (Austria), 2003. 407-414.

Terzidis, Kostas. “Design inside the Chinese Room.” International Journal of Architectural Computing, 2008: 361-370.

Weiser, Marc. “The computer for the 21st century,” Scientific America, 265, no. 3 (1991): 94-104

Iterative Resilience: Synchronizing Dynamic Landscapes with Responsive Architectural Systems

Posted on by

Meredith Sattler, Louisiana State University

The Disaster-Rebuild-Disaster Cycle

On September 1st, 2008 six foot waves hit Grand Isle, Louisiana, destroying numerous buildings in their path. Caused by Hurricane Gustav, the storm surge rolled right over most of this seven foot high barrier island. This storm, the sixteenth to cause major damage to buildings and infrastructure on Grand Isle since the 1893 hurricane (which killed nearly 2,000 people with 130mph winds and 16ft storm surge), not only devastated the island, but shifted its entire landmass northeast. A week later, Hurricane Ike made landfall, delivering another round of destruction (see Figure 1).

Figure 1: Grand Isle is 7’ Above Sea Level at its Highest Point
On a typical day (above) most of Grand Isle’s land mass is within feet of sea level, but maintains defined boundaries between land and water. After Hurricanes Gustav and Ike (below), those boundaries dissolved as water and sand penetrated into the interior of the island. U.S. Highway 1 is seen here completely inundated with former beach sand (from the left side of the image).

Between major hurricanes, Grand Isle is hit by smaller storms on average every 2.2 years,i rendering it a particularly challenging geography for permanent occupation. Yet close to 1,300 people still insist on calling the island home, and thousands choose to vacation there. Historically, Grand Isle was an island paradise full of orange groves, exotic birds, and resort hotels where wealthy New Orleanians would escape summer malaria-transmitting mosquitos. Today, people are drawn to the island by its relatively cool offshore summer breeze, abundant fishing and crabbing, and its beach, the only “resort beach” in the state. It is as close to an island paradise as one gets in Louisiana.

But this paradise of devastating forces, unstable ground, and cyclical change is one where residents experience geologic time unfolding in seasons, not centuries (see Figure 2). Under the assault of these forces, structures and infrastructures that typically last decades are rendered temporary. The environment demands an alternative architecture, one that can mitigate and adapt to the island’s fluctuating conditions. By developing a prefabricated, mobile architectural system, deployed seasonally by gantry cranes, we create an adaptive, resilient solution to shifting sedimentation and settlement patterns on Grand Isle. This solution generates a contextually sensitive form of permanent habitation while simultaneously breaking the “Disaster-Rebuild-Disaster” hurricane cycle that much of the delta, with the assistance of FEMA, currently engages.

Figure 2: Grand Isle is Dynamic in Plan and Section Due to repetitive flooding and steadily increasing sea levels (attributed to climate change) Grand Isle’s physical morphology continually shifts. Flooding creates a sectional condition of extreme instability, where water occupies elevations from sea level to 22’ above sea level. In plan, as the western end of the 7-mile island grows thinner due to land loss, land accretion is occurring on the south-eastern end, causing an apparent “rotation” of the landmass. The combination of unstable soils, typical barrier island migration, and hurricane forces require a reconceptualization of architecture and its relationship to the groundplane.

The Risk - Time Relationship

Risk of storm damage is determined by a probability known as “recurrence interval”: the chance of being hit by a certain magnitude of storm within a certain amount of time. Based on recurrence interval terminology, it might appear that a “100-year storm” would be a storm that happens only once in every one hundred years, which is somewhat misleading. In actuality, it is the chance that a certain severity of storm, determined by historical data for that geography, would occur once within a one hundred year period; in other words, that a storm of that magnitude would have a one percent chance of occurring in any year. This results in a building having a twenty-six percent chance of flooding during a thirty year period (the life of a mortgage). 100-year storms can occur in consecutive years, and can occur multiple times within a one hundred year period.ii

Recurrence intervals are utilized to determine the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM’s) which specify Base Flood Elevations (BFE’s) for 100-year storm events in specific geographies. BFEs are minimum recommended lowest floor elevations for buildings, taking into account storm surge wave heights and stillwater flood elevations. However, in order for many coastal communities to qualify for the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), their buildings must be elevated higher than the BFE. This elevation is called the Design Flood Elevation (DFE) and consists of the BFE height plus “freeboard” which is either two feet or a somewhat arbitrarily determined additional number of feet added to BFE for good measure.

In order to achieve DFE, traditional coastal construction practices place buildings on piles which elevate them above floodwaters, in particular, the devastating high-energy storm surge caused by hurricanes. It is well documented that most structures hit by the intense wave energy of storm surge at or above their lowest floorplate are no longer structurally sound, rendering proper DFE elevations critical for breaking the disaster-rebuild-disaster cycle. In almost all cases, it is too costly to build low enough and strong enough to withstand storm surge loads.

Ironically, recently Louisiana updated its wind building code requirements. On Grand Isle, buildings must now be built to withstand 147 MPH winds.iii However, flood code has not been revised to the same standards, so many structures are destroyed by flood long before the winds ever reach critical strength, rendering the extra labor, material and expense unnecessary.

Inspired by the above, our team examined FEMA and ACSE’s methodologies utilized to generate existing modeled flood elevation heights and BFE’s. We reconstructed the 700- and 1700- year flood elevations for Grand Isle using existing data from Flood Insurance Studies (FIS) and Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS, effective date of Grand Isle FIRM and FIS is March 23, 1995) provided by FEMA. We then re-model flood elevation heights using extreme value functions and came to the conclusion that the current BFE’s for Grand Isle are misleadingly low, in some cases as much as nine feet too low (see bottom of Figure 2). Based on our findings, we developed a new methodology that more accurately determines flood elevations for higher flood levels and longer return periods (see Figure 3). This results in buildings which are far more likely to flood than the specified one percent probability per year, leading to dangerous misconceptions regarding risk.

Figure 3: Determining the Design Flood Elevation (DFE) The DFE is the elevation to which buildings in the regulatory floodplain are built. The minimum requirement for this elevation in NFIP communities is the Base Flood Elevation (BFE). In areas where a higher degree of protection is promoted or required, a freeboard is added; in this case, the DFE is some height (1, 2, or more feet) above the BFE.

Cyclical Scales of Destruction and Occupation

Grand Isle is particularly subject to dramatic temporal variation on two distinct cyclical scales. Hurricanes only appear in season, from June 1st to November 30th, but their probable trajectories cycle on a much longer duration. The Gulf of Mexico receives a concentration of direct hits approximately ten years out of every thirty. Within the Gulf, Grand Isle has consistently been targeted by dramatic storm events. Because of its location within the Gulf-bowl, and the fact that it is a barrier island, it gets hit first and hardest, resulting in an increase in permanent populations for approximately twenty-five years which then drops dramatically toward the end of each thirty year cycle. Depending on the number of structures that sustain massive damage, and the amount of land lost, this can result in an abundance of derelict properties.

Because Grand Isle is a summertime tourist destination, its temporary population bulges between May and November. This bulge balloons during the International Tarpon Rodeo, the oldest fishing tournament in the United Statesiv, where typically the population increases twenty-fold near the end of July. Ironically, late summer is also the time when hurricanes are most active, creating a potentially disastrous situation in which the island population is at its greatest during the time of maximum probability of hurricane hits. It is during this time that the community is most vulnerable economically as well: most of the annual income is generated while hurricane risk is highest.

With the Landscape, the Built Environment Must Move

In addition to the event driven cycles of “pulsing” disturbances described above, Grand Isle experiences long-term and persistent land loss due to the chronic “pressing” disturbances of subsidence, erosion, and deposition.v Consistent with all barrier islands, Grand Isle is migrating. Storm events roll the island northward with dramatic speed. Daily tidal shift and Gulf currents gently push the island northeast.

Grand Isle’s “land” is composed of loose particulates usually referred to as sand, but in this case, the particulates are composed of deposited Mississippi River sediment which originated in the fertile organic prairie soils of the North American breadbasket. Often referred to as silt or sediment they are the consistency of soft snow, and require saturation in water or plant roots for stability and structure. This sediment cannot be considered terra firma as it does not naturally bind together; it is extremely porous, and regularly swells and shrinks with water saturation. This localized shrinking is exacerbated by regional subsidence, the decomposition and compression of deltaic sediments under their own weight. Between localized shrinking and regional subsidence, it is estimated that subsidence rates can be as high as several millimeters per year.vi

The sinking land is further exacerbated by sea level rise, which is regionally higher than global averages in Grand Isle. As the land sinks, the water rises, and the sediments dissolve away. The island loses coastline on all sides except the southeastern-most corner, where deposition is extremely active. This pattern of movement makes the island appear to rotate clockwise.

Thus Grand Isle is in constant motion. Waters roll the island northeast and rotate its landmass in the x,y axis. High energy storm winds and water shift the occupiable elevation of the island in the z axis during hurricane season. The island is adrift in both plan and section.

Grand Isle’s spatial and temporal land-shifting stresses traditional fixed construction methodologies. Piles, cast into a slab of concrete, are a common foundation strategy on Grand Isle. This method facilitates a degree of structural stability, with the bonus of creating living space/driveway underneath, but is subject to intense scouring during storm events. These uprooted shelves of concrete unintentionally index and measure the continually fluctuating landscape. In this environment, it is necessary to utilize the landscape’s natural patterns and processes to determine architectural design parameters.

Resource Extraction

Resource extraction has driven the settlement of the southern Louisiana Delta, in spite of its inhospitable geography. For hundreds of years the estuary has proved one of the richest sources of seafood, oil, natural gas, and other products that have come in and out of use. Specialized equipment and tools have been invented and iterated to mine these resources and to deal with the challenging environmental conditions, creating a rich toolkit from which the project draws.

Today, the delta is populated with these specialized manmade structures and devices that exist predominantly at two scales: landscape and human. The Army Corps of Engineers flood control structures are typically massive ribbons of concrete inserted into profiles of the landscape. Oil and Gas rigs, jack-barges and stacks penetrate the sky; the equivalents of massive skyscrapers in the delta’s saturated flats. The shipping industry’s trans-oceanic tankers are small floating cities, and the bridges that facilitate auto travel across water bodies on which they float are high, necessary to provide clearance for these large nautical vessels.

These massive landscape elements are juxtaposed against modest family homes in small fishing villages which still bear the name of their founding ancestors. There is a “normal” scalar relationship in the delta, the result of an intensely working landscape, that does not occur many other places in the developed world. It is into this world of super and sub sized elements that the Gantry Crane becomes the logical insertion, facilitating a new architecture of iterative resilience. It is its intermediate scale that links the small, remotely prefabricated residential units to the rhythm of the shifting landscape that becomes their home.

A New System of Habitation Requires a New Settlement Pattern

Today, when coastline in Louisiana is submerged, the property rights are taken by the State, resulting in property owners simply losing their land. We propose that going forward, Grand Isle’s property holdings will be converted to a percentage-performance based system which can maintain property and values in a shifting landscape, and away from a geographically based prescriptive system, which cannot. In order to achieve land ownership equity and equality on this shifting island, we propose that property holding will be frozen on a specific day (to be determined). On that day, the exact landmass of the island will be determined via survey, and property owners will transfer their exact plots into a percentage of ownership of the overall island. From that day forward, each owner will hold a percent of land on the island, not a specific plot of land. Subsequently, as the island shifts, property lines will adjust, parametrically shifting to maintain ownership percentages island-wide, while not necessarily maintaining originally purchased plots.

Simultaneously, we propose a “pile grid” plan be established based on existing conditions. This precise grid would be twelve foot by twelve foot on center, and is designed to support new residential unit modules. No new traditional coastal construction will occur on the island; as older residences are destroyed or abandoned, they will be fazed out and converted to the new prefab modular system that utilizes the pile grid. This way, slowly the island’s grid is built up and occupied. Because it is uniform island-wide, the pile grid facilitates shifting property lines and forgives shifting landscape features: residences can easily be moved up and down, and over one grid square at a time, so that all can keep their residence on (above) their current land holding. As the residence units shift, and the landscape moves, an index of pile grid remains, visibly measuring the change.

In traditional residential coastal construction scenarios first piles are driven and then the concrete slab is poured. The lowest floorplate is built as a rigid structure, then attached to the pile-foundation with rigid connections. The attachment point is predetermined at a DFE elevation above the BFE and the rest of the house is framed via conventional construction techniques. In a severe storm event, if the building is subject to a storm surge hit at or above the lowest floorplate it will suffer enough structural damage to be rendered uninhabitable, and must be rebuilt. If demolished and rebuilt, the new structure will likely be placed on or near the footprint of the prior structure, and will often be rebuilt stronger and higher. In the event that this new building survives the next major storm event, and the coastline below it is permanently submerged, the state takes the land and the building must be demolished (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. Breaking the Disaster-Rebuild-Disaster Cycle
The mobile modular method utilizes pile grid logic in conjunction with the Gantry Crane to shift residence locations in both plan and section in relation to the transforming landscape of Grand Isle.

In contrast, the proposed pile grid system facilitates utilization of x, y and z axis logic. We start with a longer (higher) pile to increase the modules elevation options, and allow for them to be lifted above predicted storm surge heights. In the iterative resilience construction scenario, the grid piles are driven in island pre-determined locations. The Gantry Crane delivers the units, one by one, and attaches them to the grid at the appropriate height. When out of hurricane season, the units are configured low to the ground, stair stepping up to take advantage of views and breezes, while still maintaining connection to the groundplane. At the beginning of hurricane season, the Gantry Crane lifts the units into their storm ready position, well above the BFE, and in-line. Additional stair units and intermediary decks are attached to connect the units to the ground. In their elevated position, the units weather the storm above the surge, and are ready to be lowered again once the season ends. Similar to the scenario above, this next storm event may take out the coastline. In this event, all property lines on the island are adjusted, and the units are rolled back in the grid, realigning with the moving landmass. At the beginning of the next hurricane season, all other residences adjust accordingly, so the settlement pattern rolls with the natural movement of the island (see Figure 4).

Once new units fabrication is complete, they are delivered via small ships and received at the harbor located on the northeast end of the island. There they are off-loaded by Gantry Crane and directly transported, via new Gantry Crane roads, to site. These Gantry Crane roads are a shared system of crane/bike/pedestrian circulation that is placed within the pile grid to facilitate non-automobile movement around the island. This circulation network introduces novel transverse connectivity across the island from bay to Gulf.

Through time, development on the island is slowly concentrated onto the highest ground, which is also the pivot point of the island’s rotation, near its center. Non-development zones, geographies which would result in quick taking by the state, are expanded. Some of this land becomes vegetated buffer zones/water conveyance systems that are developed along the island’s longitudinal edges in order to stabilize edges and move water from higher ground, when necessary.

A New System of Habitation

In a landscape whose composition is as much water as “land” it is necessary to reexamine habitation through the lens of nautical architecture in order to utilize the intelligence of its performative characteristics. As discussed above, the aqueous conditions in the southern Louisiana delta has fostered a robust tradition of retooling marine forms, adapting them to shallow waters and high-energy forces. Tapping into specialized local knowledge, labor, resources, and modes of transport is strategic in this remote geography, resulting in an overall increase in the residential system’s resiliency.

We propose that the modular housing units are produced within existing shipbuilding facilities because they specialize in large force/water-tight construction. Units would deliver directly from factory to site via boat. Historically, there have been large ferrocement shipbuilders in both the nearby ports of Mobile, Alabama (F.F. Ley and Co.) and Houston, Texas (McCloskey and Co),vii in addition to smaller shops scattered across the Gulf. With some retooling, shipbuilders in the region have the facilities and knowledge to manufacture these units.

Once complete, delivery utilizing marine transport directly from shipbuilder-manufacturers to Grand Isle, is highly efficient both in terms of fuel usage and logistics. The island has a sizable marina where the units will be off-loaded by one of three dedicated gantry cranes, which then delivers them to nearby storage, or directly to site.

The residential units are timber framed shells, built in compliance with the latest hurricane wind code standards, and sheathed in ferrocement, which is inexpensive and highly durable in maritime conditions. This structural shell is analogous to a ferrocement boat hull, rotated one hundred and eighty degrees along the z-axis, and sealed onto the unit floorplate-deck; essentially creating an up-side-down boat. It is highly resistant to transferring wind and water to the interior and tends to buckle, not crack or tear apart, when put under failure inducing stresses. The shell shape is that of a simple gabled roof house (without overhangs that catch wind updrafts that lead to roof uplift) which reference much of the current housing stock on the island (see Figure 5). Ferrocement takes paint beautifully, so units can be colored to match the bright and pastel pallets typical of Grand Isle residences.

Figure 5. Mobile Modular Unit Construction and Attachments Take Inspiration from Maritime Methodologies
Lightweight and resilient ferrocement boat hull technology is adapted to create a solid structural shell, resistant to hurricane forces. Apertures are secured with a layered storm shutter system that unfolds to embrace the idyllic natural environment of Grand Isle. When hurricanes arrive, the building transforms: retreating/repackaging itself by refolding.

Apertures in the rigid shell are sheathed in operable, folding layers, analogous to hurricane shutter systems. The main views and source of breezes on the island are toward the Gulf, and secondarily toward the bay, so the largest apertures and adjoining outdoor deck spaces are oriented accordingly. These spaces literally fold-out into the idyllic natural environment via sets of hangar doors, hinging decks, and railings, creating an expanded hybrid interior-exterior living space. But they are shipped, and weather storms, in their folded/closed position (see Figure 6).

Figure 6. A Mobile, Modular Architecture Facilitated by the Gantry Crane
Three module types (kitchen, living/bath, bedroom), linked by interior and exterior circulation, can be configured in multiple arrangements.

Once on-site, units are positioned into the twelve foot by twelve foot pile grid with the precise controls of the gantry crane, the height of the unit depends on the season and the site’s DFE. The units are attached to the pilegrid via an adapted mast-clamp friction style connector with a steel pin that runs through the pile. These customized adjustable connectors, in combination with the folding apertures and decks, constitute the soft-adaptable components of the system which contrast the hard-fixed shell component. Both are necessary to withstand the temporal and energetic fluctuations of hurricanes.

Once installed, adjustable stair units are attached, then the unit decks, and finally the unit apertures unfold, literally blossoming into their living configuration. Twice annually, at the beginning and end of hurricane season, the units are re-folded and their heights repositioned. At the start of the season, units are raised above the BFE, to the DFE, where they will remain high above destructive storm surge forces (somewhere between fourteen and twenty-two feet depending on specific Grand Isle location). The units are floating, almost inline, with one stair tread of elevation difference between them. After the season finishes, units are dropped down and staggered to facilitate ease of use and connection to the groundplane. The lowest unit sits five feet above the ground, and each unit stacks an additional three feet above the one adjacent to it. Sets of accordion stairs slide out to facilitate circulation.

There are three unit types which can be configured in various ways: kitchen, living/bath, and bedroom. Each is sandwiched between decks which increase square footage and provide additional circulation: the larger deck expands living space via sets of hangar style doors which fold up to free the groundplane and provide overhang shade, while the smaller deck is used mainly for circulation. Kitchen units are equipped with island bar-style seating, refrigerator, electric stove, running water/wastewater disposal, small on-demand electric hot water heater, and exhaust fan. Living/bath units have a vestibule space for sofa or chairs which opens directly out onto the large deck, and a bath that contains running water/wastewater disposal, small on-demand electric hot water heater, and exhaust fan. Bedroom units are equipped with an exhaust fan and electrical outlets.

Since Grand Isle is remote, and has one of the most temperate climates in Louisiana, every attempt has been made to reduce active environmental control system loads via bioclimactic strategies. This not only promotes sustainable consumption, but is also a strategy for resilience, as grid power is not often reliable, especially during storm events.

Units are typically grouped into 3-packs or 6-packs. A 3-pack is designed for a couple or single and contains one kitchen, one living/bath, and one bedroom unit. A 6-pack is designed for a larger family and can be configured according to the individual family’s needs. The 6-pack unit includes a large common deck space between the two rows of units. Additional platform-deck and stair units can easily be added into the system, increasing living space, circulation, and connection to the outdoors (see Figure 6).

Iterative Resilience

Traditional buildings operate as fixed elements within dynamic landscapes that weather, and ultimately destroy them. As our global climate continues to change at an increasingly rapid rate, it becomes harder to predict what types and severity of weathering will occur at which locations across the globe, and ultimately how this weathering will affect buildings. The dynamic coastline of Grand Isle provides an ideal test geography for future coastal conditions because its local sea-level rise rates are greater than the global average (now estimated at over 3.1 mm annually.viii) Additionally, its fluctuating barrier island coastline condition, and regular exposure to dramatic storm events, allows us to experience geologic time in less than a generation, providing key data about how buildings perform in these conditions. These generate circumstances with which we can build scenarios and speculate about how necessary new forms of architecture might behave within these conditions.

Through a year of scenario building and design speculation, we have found that mobile prefabricated structures, linked to an infrastructure capable of regular relocation in x, y, and z axes, provides a necessary spatial-temporal linked solution. Utilizing inspiration from nautical architecture, the units can be built at regional shipbuilders, shipped to site, and positioned to withstand storms, while simultaneously responding to local island vernacular character. As the units shift across the expanding grid of friction-pile structural foundations, readjusting their location relative to the transforming landscape, they “nestle” into post-disturbance configurations leaving a pile-forest index of their former positions; an index of the former land. This adaptable modular design creates an integrated built environment, in an unforgiving landscape, expanding architectural scope and agency through the process of reconfiguration.

Project Team:

Dr. Carol Friedland, Assistant Professor of Construction Management
Meredith Sattler, Assistant Professor of Architecture
Dr. Lynne Carter, Southern Climate Impacts Planning Program, Coastal Sustainability Studio
Dr. Melanie Gall, Department of Geography & Anthropology
Elizabeth Chisolm, PhD student in Engineering Science
Frank Bohn, Graduate student in Construction Management
Ben Buehrle, Graduate student in School of Architecture
Carolina Rodriguez, Undergraduate student in School of Architecture
Megan Harris, Undergraduate student in School of Architecture
Elsy Interiano, Undergraduate student in School of Landscape Architecture

i “Grand Isle History,” Hurricane City, accessed August 18, 2012, http://www.hurricanecity.com/city/grandisle.htm.

ii Federal Emergency Management Agency, Coastal Construction Manual FEMA P-55 (2011): 1, 6-4, accessed February 2, 2012, http://www.fema.gov/library/viewRecord.do?fromSearch=fromsearch&id=1671.

iii “Wind Speed By Parish,” Department of Public Safety, Louisiana State Uniform Construction Code Council, accessed August 20, 2012, http://lsuccc.dps.louisiana.gov/pdf/parishes/Jefferson.pdf

iv “Grand Isle Tarpon Rodeo,” accessed January 25, 2012, http://tarponrodeo.org/GITR/Home.html.

v Scott Collins, et al., “An Integrated Conceptual Framework for Long-Term Social-Ecological Research,” Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment: 2011; 9(6): 351–357, accessed December 9, 2012, doi: 10 1890/100068.

vi T.A. Meckel, U.S. ten Brink, S. Jeffress Williams, “Current Subsidence Rates due to Compaction of Holocene Sediments in Southern Louisiana,” Geophysical Research Letters: 2006; 33(L11403).

vii “The Ferro-Concrete Builders List,” accessed August 22, 2012, http://www.mareud.com/Ferro-Concrete/f-c-list.htm.

viii Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Fourth Synthesis Assessment Report: Climate Change (Geneva: IPCC Secretariat, 2007), accessed August 20, 2012, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/contents.html.