During the summer of 2014, a unique pedagogical prototype was initiated and tested during a short five-week digital design build studio lead by Prof. XXXX and Prof. YYYY at the XXXX State University in XXXX, XXX. Unlike the typical design studio typology, which starts by introducing a program and a site, the XXXX digital design build studio did not supply either within the initial studio brief. Instead the framework was defined by a budget. The project was required to be realized in full scale and had to re-explore the relationship between structure and envelop through a “digital lens.” The studio was structured around weekly goals that had to be accomplished in teams. The course structure allowed students to switch teams, break up into smaller think tanks or entirely reconfigure all teams. This created an organizational structure that could adapt quickly to varying parameters and problems that emerged throughout the design process. It also allowed for the gauging of effectiveness of individual teams as well as the effectiveness of individuals moving between teams.

Throughout the course of the semester, not only were students immersed deeply within the ethos of computation and digital fabrication, but the format also allowed students to formulate their own course direction, group configurations and emergent projects. Throughout the five weeks, students self-organized into small autonomous groups focused on the overall goal of creating a unique and innovative full-scale pavilion prototype. Through software testing in environments such as Daniel Pikers Kangaroo Physics plug-in in conjunction with full-scale prototyping, students quickly tested and eliminated design and research directions.

In addition to the typical expectations within a design studio, students were pushed to autonomously create an overall formal structure composed of smaller think tanks which not only created designed artefacts, but also raised funds and in-kind donations, connected with outside community groups and material suppliers as well as fully documented and publicized their works leading to publications, publicity as well as a full-scale gallery show post completion.

This paper examines the course format, the student’s self-organizational abilities and follies, emergent interdisciplinary qualities and proposals, as well as novel projects, prototypes and methodologies that developed through the utilization of this unique pedagogical prototype that led to the creation of the highly recognized XXXX pavilion. In addition to the successes, this paper also examines the hardships, failures and mishaps associated with this novel studio approach.

Introduction:

The XXXX digital design build studio was initiated as a student lead, intense, five-week Digital Design Build workshop consisting of eight graduate students and two facility whom functioned as collaborators or “Intellectual Venture Capitalists” (Senagala 2009) rather then top-down leaders.

To meet the complexities of the students proposed project, extremely tight schedules initially created by the class. Although students created a rigid course organization to maximize time, it still allowed for a high level of flexibility in design opportunities as no initial formal constraints were given.

Throughout the first week, the students self-organized into a series of four collaborative research based think tanks. Based on research interests and the distribution of unique skills, each research group created a general proposal that identified novel aspects of computational design and fabrication in relation to envelope, structure and material that they wished to take further. Initial presentations insured that initial research directions were completely unique from each other and allowed for groups to clarify their ideas with the others before investing in research over the rest of the week.

Following the first week’s completion, the think tanks presented their outcomes as finalized proposals. As an overall research body, the class decided that they were interested in further investigating the creation of a novel tensile fabric clad, tensegrity structure. Rather then relying on the traditional model for tensegrity structure design based on physical form finding, students decided to investigate novel processes through the formulation of new digital methods of structural simulation by utilizing the tools Rhino 3d, Grasshopper and Kangaroo Physics.

During the second week groups were reconfigured, forming four new unique think tanks: Team A investigated novel methods for the computational programming and calculation of tensegrity based systems. Team B investigated materials, performed cost analysis (based on numbers calculated by Team A) as well as tested full-scale structural mock-ups for structural and fabrication feasibility. Team C specialized in fabrics for the skinning of the pavilion (typologies, material properties and modelling). And finally, Team D investigated techniques for the creation of both digital and physical representations of tensegrity structures. Over the course of the week, a body of research was compiled which would allow for the design, materials purchase, fabrication and construction of a novel tensegrity system as soon as a design was chosen.

The design process began on the third week, when students again reconfigured into design based think tanks. Through a series of intense design charrettes, in-class workshops, critiques (with outside experts in the field) and structural engineer consultations helped finalize the project’s formal and materials pallet. As the third week progressed and projects individual design ideas were either taken further or left behind, students continued to reconfigure groups. Groups of discontinued projects dispersed filling the knowledge gaps within the remaining groups until only a single project remained.

Simultaneously with the design process, students continued developing their office responsibilities such as but not limited to: publicity packages to initiate the searching for land to build the pavilion upon, gain funding opportunities for materials, fabrication and transportation costs as well as create press releases for the opening and potential gallery shows.

During week four, students acquired funding, materials and prepared for fabrication of the full structure. A fabrication process was designed, tested and planned for the coming weeks work. Small and large-scale prototypes were tested from standardized materials allowing for the rapid prototyping of various module typologies. Environmentally friendly materials, long-term durability and material efficiency all became major criteria during the final selection of the construction materials. After many intense studies, students selected aluminum pipes for the compression struts, galvanized steel cables for the tension members and Elastane, an elastic membrane for the envelope.

The fifth week was utilized for in-house fabrication, structural testing and initial assembly. Completed by the students in three days, three individual teams first prepared all of the module’s components: Team One fabricated all Aluminium Compression Members. Team Two oversaw the preparation of all tension members and Team Three fabricated all tensile fabric components. Students setup fabrication and assembly spaces throughout the Department that allowed for them to collectively and rapidly assemble and structurally test all the modules and elements in teams of three.

On site assembly was accomplished in only two days. Bundling of the module’s cables and struts before transporting allowed for quick and easy re-assembly of the modules on the site. Finally, the modules were assembled, joined and skinned.

Although in the end students created a physical artifact, the highly regarded “XXXX Pavilion” the process of how students reinvented themselves and the design process through autonomous and self-organizing principals is truly a novel solution. Through the further development of this paper, we will show not only the positive workflows and outcomes described there, but also the struggles, failures and follies associated with the creation of this pedagogical prototype for the XXXX digital design build studio.