Page 52 - 건축구조 Vol. 28 / No. 04

Feature
F
atur
e
e
Innovation in practice
thestructuralengineer.org
Inno v a tion in pr actice thestructuralengineer.org
해외작품소개

cien
ocess o
v
t
tion mor

ffi
e e
f inno

a
process of innovation more efficient. .
pr
The client and project team were also
The clien t and pr oject team w er e als o
all commit ted to deliv ering the pr oject
all committed to delivering the project
a
aspirations and the necessary innovations
aspir
a
tions and the necessary inno
tions
v
tha t en tailed. Due to the importance o f the
that entailed. Due to the importance of the
as alr
pr
om
, funding w
eady av
project, funding was already available from
oject
ailable fr
the client for significant innovation.
the clien t f or signifi c an t inno v a tion.
The team w or k e d w ell toge ther t o deliv er
The team worked well together to deliver
to
ions, o
te in
f
t
e
the s
the solutions, often sketching late into
en sk
olut
ng la
t
chi
the nigh t . This commitmen t w as in part
the night. This commitment was in part
pers onal, arising fr om a desir e to deliv er the
personal, arising from a desire to deliver the
YIORGIS YEROLYMBOS
YIORGIS YEROLYMBOS
commitment of the wider project organisation. N N as t f err ocemen t
oject vision, but als
o as a r

espons
pr
project vision, but also as a response to the
e to the
Figure 4
Figure 4
commitment of the wider project organisation.
Pr
Precast ferrocement
ec
panels with lapped
dark br
meshes (
meshes (dark brown/black)
wn/black)
o
Time
Time panels with lapped ation
ar applic
t
aiting mor
a
awaiting mortar application
w
While the pr oject its elf had a r ela tiv ely long
While the project itself had a relatively long
lif espan (2006– 16), the decision to de v elop
lifespan (2006–16), the decision to develop
or the r
equir
ed design
e f
and w
as ceramic, but without the joints.
ould surviv
anop
t c
as no
ocemen
olution w
t
err
y s
the ferrocement canopy solution was not as cer amic, but without the join ts. and would survive for the required design
the f
Once it became clear that there needed to
made until October 2010 after a critical
made un til October 20 10 af ter a critic al Once it bec ame clear tha t ther e needed to lif e . The pr ocess des cribed belo w is br oadly
life. The process described below is broadly
al r
espons
e f
w s
tructur
be a ne
y
the sequence followed, but some overlaps
or the c
anop
r review of the first developed solution. be a new structural response for the canopy, , the s equence f ollo w ed, but s ome o v erlaps

f the fi
w o

vie
eloped s
v
t de
e
olution.
rs
between stages occurred.
the design team went about the process
ed f
our mon
ths in
to
This change occurred four months into the design team w en t about the pr ocess be t w een s tages occurr ed.
This change occurr
f s
ching f
olution. The design
or a ne
w s
ear
the s
truction
the schedule for detailed construction o of searching for a new solution. The design
chedule f
or de
tailed cons
th surf
ts and a
, no join
or a smoo
Initial summary of challenges
inf orma tion. While the impacts on the pr oject c called for a smooth surface, no joints and a Initial summar y o f challenges
information. While the impacts on the project
ace
alled f
y s
slim perime
er
t s
tages o
ocess w

rs
eries
f the pr
. Man
e
er
The fi
olutions w
e a s

ter edge
t w
orbed, the clien
timeline could be absorbed, the client was slim perimeter edge. Many solutions were The first stages of the process were a series
as
timeline could be abs

er

ta
tions.
clear that the tender documentation would be e explored, but all suffered from limitations. o f initial sk e t ches which summaris ed the k e y
of initial sketches which summarised the key
tion w
ould be
ed fr
clear tha
om limita
ed, but all suff
xplor
t the tender documen

anop
y iden
e the idea f
f the c
Ultima
aspects o

asn
tifi
ed the k
’t clear wher
y
y
, it w
or
e
. The
tely
ogr
issued, on pr
11.
amme
, in July 20
issued, on programme, in July 2011. Ultimately, it wasn’t clear where the idea for aspects of the canopy. They identified the key
ar
eas wher
elopmen
v
, and
e special design de
Therefore, the time available for the
Ther e f or e , the time av ailable f or the the f err ocemen t c anop y come fr om, s eeming areas where special design development, and
the ferrocement canopy come from, seeming
t
e cr
e
om the collectiv
es
our
ea
tiv
ce commitmen
ge fr
ould
t
to emer
, w
hence time and r
f the c
anop
xplor
a
tion and design o
olution
exploration and design of the canopy solution to emerge from the collective creative hence time and resource commitment, would
y s
e
be r
ams to
uir
w
as limited, put
endeavours of the group. This highlights the
ed and allo
d the design te
ting bo
e
w
was limited, putting both Expedition and endeav ours o f the gr oup . This highligh ts the be required and allowed the design teams to
eq
th Expedition and
plan and coordinate their delivery schedules.
degree of collaboration and cooperation
essur
pr
RPB
to
RPBW under significant time pressure to degr ee o f collabor a tion and cooper a tion plan and coor dina te their deliv ery s chedules.
e
t
n
a

W under signifi
time
c

anop
ery o
This planning stage was important in
y
t ther
deliver. The timely delivery of the new canopy which took place. Had anyone sat there and This planning s tage w as importan t in
which took place
deliv
y
w c
. The timely deliv
one sa
er
e and
f the ne
. Had an
tions and
thought about it themselves, the ferrocement
ery e
ting pr
oject deliv
t
xpecta
e
design w
ted b
f
design was facilitated by the existence of though t about it thems elv es, the f err ocemen t s setting project delivery expectations and
xis
as f
tence o
acilita
y the e
’t hav
ts within the
ch budge
xibility and r
ear
y simply w
e
es
flexibility and research budgets within the canopy simply wouldn’t have happened. pr eparing the clien t and team f or the w ork

fl
ouldn
anop
c
preparing the client and team for the work
e happened.
a
equir
Collabor
the
ed an openness to
w
o
t two organisations. However, the scale of the Collaboration required an openness to ahead, ensuring tha t ther e w as a commitmen t
ahead, ensuring that there was a commitment
tion r
s
or
ganis
c
of
,
ale
the
ations.

However
ed mean
pr
xplor
to deliver the scheme vision.
v
e and e
en if the
t while the tender
tes
testing required meant that while the tender propose and explore new ideas, even if they to deliv er the s cheme vision.
opos
equir
w ideas, e
y
e ne
ting r
t tha
documentation was delivered on time, a later might not end up being the right solution. Having established the general solution, the
al s
documen
t end up being the righ
olution, the
ta
t no
olution.
as deliv
ter
tablished the gener
Having es
, a la
t s
migh
ed on time
tion w
er
team then needed to con
On an initial inspection, the f
ed with further de
t
ocemen
addendum was required with further details On an initial inspection, the ferrocement team then needed to convince themselves
err
addendum w
es
equir
elv
tails
as r
vince thems
y design
ed to r
on the design o f the c anop y . s solution appeared to resolve the key design tha t the f err ocemen t c anop y s olution could
on the design of the canopy.
e
e the k
olv
es
that the ferrocement canopy solution could
olution appear
o
ection
viding a thin edge s
work to deliver the technical and aesthetic
aced – pr
issues f
issues faced – providing a thin edge section w ork to deliv er the technic al and aes the tic
equir
Pr ocess o f inno v a tion and a smooth finish. Renzo Piano had worked requirements for the project. .
r
nish. Renz
Process of innovation
and a smoo
emen
or the pr
ts f
ork
ed
th fi

oject

o Piano had w
t be
with f
ocemen
f
e
or
, and the Expedition
Sear ch with ferrocement before, and the Expedition
Search
err
From the very outset, the architect’s plans
F r om the v ery outs e t , the ar chitect’ s plans team w as aw ar e o f the ma terial and its k e y Pr eceden t sear ch
Precedent search
team was aware of the material and its key
F
err
included a slender c
y supporting a
properties. As a result, it was agreed that
included a slender canopy supporting a pr operties. As a r esult , it w as agr eed tha t Ferrocement is not a new material. The
anop
w ma
ocemen
t is no
t a ne
terial. The
photovoltaic arr ay . However , during the Expedition and RPB W should e xplor e the Exped ition pr ojec t team w as aw ar e o f th e
Expedition and RPBW should explore the
Expedition project team was aware of the
photovoltaic array. However, during the
ed a s
olution us
design de
en
terial, but having no
t tha
design development it became apparent that idea further. This solution used a series of material, but having not used it previously, ,
t
t us
ed it pr
ma
e
viously
elopmen
idea further
f
. This s
t it bec
eries o
v
ame appar
precast, ribbed, ferrocement panels which
vidence to con
ough
vince
team members s
t e
the steel tensegrity frame initially proposed
the s t eel tens egrity fr ame initially pr opos ed pr ec as t , ribbed, f err ocemen t panels which team members sought evidence to convince
t it could be made to w
es tha
asn
er on all
and de
’t able to deliv
and developed wasn’t able to deliver on all w er e s titched toge ther with full-s tr ength themselves that it could be made to work. .
v
eloped w
ork
thems
were stitched together with full-strength
elv

o f the la tes t design, access and technic al splices and fi nished in situ in to a monolithic A few built precedents were identified:

ts w
ed:
A f
tifi
of the latest design, access and technical
splices and finished in situ into a monolithic
e
eceden
e iden
er
w built pr
functions r
, the
publications on ferrocement structures in
equir
ed o
functions required of it. For example, the monocoque s tructur e (Figur e 4) . The pr oposal public a tions on f err ocemen t s tructur es in
monocoque structure (Figure 4). The proposal
x
f it
ample
or e
. F
f access w
ervice the
s
inclusio
vie
to manufacture the panels at ground level
inclusion of access walkways to service the to manuf actur e the panels a t gr ound le v el the Middle East were reviewed and site visits
t w
w
ed and site visits
n o
e r
ays to
alkw
er
e
the Middle Eas
panels
before lifting them into place was adopted
s
olar
solar panels compromised the visual lightness be f or e lif ting them in to place w as adop ted w er e made to s ee a f err ocemen t bridge in
were made to see a ferrocement bridge in
the
ed
ligh
tness
omis
visual
compr
owever
the UK
. H
tir
ely
bec
wer
ecedents
s
in situ
olution
aus
f
ed b
ound
e
y the original design. A ne
e an en

ould

,
no
equir
olution w
w s
r required by the original design. A new solution because an entirely in situ solution would the UK. However, no precedents were found
pr
hav
of building structures made with ferrocement
e had an unaccep
w as needed. have had an unacceptable impact on the o f building s tructur es made with f err ocemen t
was needed.
table impact on the
in the manner proposed; highly loaded, large-
t tens
A number o
olutions
f v
arian
A number of variant tensegrity solutions pr oject timeline . in the manner pr opos ed; highly loaded, lar ge-
project timeline.
egrity s
e consider
tr
ale
er
eam cons
, mains
truction.
ed, but none w
were considered, but none would deliver This represents the use of known s scale, mainstream construction.
This r
er
w
es
f kno
epr
wn
ould deliv
e o
en
ts the us
c
the appr
te aes
the appropriate aesthetic which had been cons tit uen t ma terials in a ne w con te x t a nd
the
opria
tic which had been
constituent materials in a new context and
gur
oduction and
w pr
tion, using ne
confi
a
de v eloped b y RPB W to addr ess the per ceiv ed configuration, using new production and Building the team

Building the team
developed by RPBW to address the perceived
ymen
ale
oposal. This
e
shortcomings of the previous proposal. This deployment techniques. Due to the scale U n a b l e t o fi nd appr opria te pr eceden ts,
deplo
shortcomings o
t techniques. Due to the s
c
f the pr
vious pr
Unable to find appropriate precedents,
to
t amoun
, a signifi
equir

akin
th fi
elty

Expedition then set about gathering insight
ne
new vision required a smooth finish akin to of novelty, a significant amount of evidence Expedition then s e t about ga thering insigh t
v
an
vidence
o
w vision r
ed a smoo
t o
f e
f no
nish

c
a
t
on
ach
y
was needed to demonstrate that the solution
a
the
to
loc
’
site
s
hull,
that on a yacht hull, a nod to the site’s location w as needed to demons tr a t e tha t the s olution and e xpertis e on the ma terial. Se v er al
and expertise on the material. Several
nod
tion
t
tha
a
ork
. It needed to be as dur
academics and practitioners who had
near the harbour. It needed to be as durable could work, could be tendered and built, , ac ademic s and pr actitioners who had
near the harbour
could w
ed and built
, could be tender
able
18 18 January 2017 | TheStructuralEngineer
S
17 |
T
he
January 20
l
r
a
tru
ctu
Engineer
50 건 축 구 조 2021 _ 07 _ 08 제28권 / 제04호
TSE61_14-21 Feature-Innovation in Structural Engineering.indd 18
TSE61_14-21 Feature-Innovation in Structural Engineering.indd 18 15/12/2016 10:44
15/12/2016 10:44