Muhammad Saiful Rafif
5013201096
Forced based focus on factors or force that shaped the building form, but pattern based focus on
composition and typology that have been done before. Approaching design in terms of qualities and
relationships between forces can be seen as far back in architectural theory as the Renaissance architect
Leon Battista Alberti
The contrast of Alberti to Vitruvius can be found in the focus on arranging lineaments to shape
architecture.WhereVitruvius stressed patterns, rules-of-thumb, and past arrangements as the source of
decisions to be made in architectural design, Alberti looked to qualities, attributes, environmental and
social factors within a context.
Viollet le Duc state “code of morals [for architectural design] is possible, but we cannot establish
absolute rules in building; experience, reasoning, and reflection must therefore always be summoned to
our aid when we attempt to build”. According to Viollet le Duc, designing start by considering the goals,
then programming. After that, the site analysis and scale the size of the program. Then go to structure
and elevation. The conclusion is The framing and starting bias determines the priority of forces to be
extracted from the specific situation and translates them as constraints and assets.
Example 1
[IDENTIFY FORCES]
The design for the Seattle Public Library didn’t follow a standard method of identifying forces of
programmatic elements and site to create a formal proposal. The result, the force of this library is more
about social experience rather than book housing.
[PROPOSE FORMS]
Then with first principal reduction and convergent, this program rearranged. Several iterations are
needed to develop even a very early schematic idea of theproposal’s form. The first pass might be
Figure 9.15: Spatial diagram of formal relationships based on forces as divergent–convergent process in PROPOSE FORMS
focused on the relationship of elementsto site; the second pass would pull together programmatic
elements; while the third pass would need to negotiate between the clustered programme and larger
pressures of circulation and adjacencies.
Muhammad Saiful Rafif
5013201096
Once the major schematic inten- tions were clear, the proposal was refined for its massing and
relationship qualities. It is opened for a new forced that may not recognized when early proposal form
occur. In the end, identifying constraints, assets, and pressure from forces gives the architectural
designer a framework to explore early schematic work, but also a way to structure decisions throughout
the project since those decisions need to support intentions for design coherence.
Example 2 Time- and memory-based site forces
The second example looks at the proposal for Bowtie House, designed by LOOM Studio, the architectural
practice of Ralph K. Nelson. In this project, landscape forces based in cyclical and long-period natural events
are used to generate a design proposal.The identified forces used as a formal generator are topographical
composition through glacial action, tree growth, and fire activity as a cyclical event
[IDENTIFY FORCES]
Located near the lake. The interaction of human forces with natural forces began to shape the possi-
bilities for the architectural proposal. An ouitwash as a human circulation, trees as a landscape.
[PROPOSE FORMS]
Building as a connector that fill the gap of several forces that made up the environment.
[REFINE and ASSEMBLE SYSTEM]
Outwash forces were understood as pressures of movement and circulation, tree forces as constraints of
boundary and edges, and fire forces as patterns and structure.
The forces identified as priorities at the initial research ofthe project were carried through and
connected to decisions at various scales of development, beginning with placement of the building
footprint, and continuingthrough primary massing, elevation detailing, roof composition, and materiality
Muhammad Saiful Rafif
5013201096
Example 3 Infrastructural forces
Nature-City proposal of WORKac, a New York-based architectural, urban, and interior design practice led
by Amale Andraos and DanWood. Nature-City shows how larger-scale infrastructural forces can become the
catalyst for the organization of architectural form.
[IDENTIFY FORCES]
Since WORKac prioritize sustainable infrastructures, the identification of forces was based in these
infrastructural systems – transportation, water, renewable energy, recreation, landscape types, non-human
inhabitants, and food production. Basic environ- mental forces, such as the ones used in the last several
examples, were ignored, except where they had a direct impact on the infrastructure.
[PROPOSE FORM]
The first exploration analysed the context for natural infrastructures.
Figure 9.26: Left: Analysis of animal habitats and landscape resources. Right: How those elements might be shared
between human andnon-human occupation as PROPOSE FORM
The second study explored infrastructures that were artificial or human-based. The explored
infrastructures included those that were spatially located, such as existing transportation routes and
wildlife habitats, as well as those not yet fixed in space, such as food and energy production.
[REFINE and ASSEMBLE SYSTEM]
Once the infrastructures were explored, scaled, and connected, the designers used the systems this had
generated to develop the architectural scale. Since the desire was to develop new typologies, what was
important was not just the individual proposal,but understanding the system of development it implied.
Typology requires the ability to reproduce the formal relationships in other contexts. The architect then
connect the space of four rows.
[PROPOSAL]
The final proposal is coherent in its intentions. There is a clear line of devel- opment from the designers’
framing philosophy through the selections they madeto direct the design decisions to the formal
responses.
