help with structure

[manc]

i am wanting to do design a house like this, with the concrete structure only at the front, cantilevered columns holding an infill wall and roof, (or at least give the impression of this! the front structure would terminate at ridge

behind this facade the rest of the constriction will be timber, prob sips or suchlike.

any structural minded people amongst us who can give me a hand (pretty urgent as need to do project for next week then have a couple of weeks to present it? (its not got to be exact, just give impression it can work.)

I am pretty desperate for advice as most of my tutors seem to have and dissappeared (think they've gone on strike) and i need to show this project to external moderators in a month finished.

so any help would be greatfully recieved

Thanks,

Manc

[manc]

the project is called generic type local specificity....the house can be 1, 1 and half, 2, 2 and half and 3 story and be either be a detatched, semi-detatched, or terraced row house.

The point of project is that the front is heavyweight and permanent yet the facde material can change to fit into any locality.

the back is timber and can react to functional changes patterns of living etc and can be replaced extended etc.

[manc]

appologies for rushed images and typing, I have 3 papers due in this week, so i will be trying to resolve this project over the weekend with help that anyone can offer me on here.

The project is more of a polemical one....it is questioning the ubiquitous nature of the state of english house typologies.

Having said that it has to work "in principle" and i have'nt got time to start doing the needed fancy visuals until know the basic Chassis structure works...

Thanks...


Anyway back to my thesis, only 3000 more words to go! then another paper to write tomorrow :(

[manc]

another image......obviously this is only a sketch but it is the nearest i can get to the idea of it looking like this (the columns would be spaced at 5M or 2.5 metres on facade)

an idea of colimn sizes and shapes would also be good...

i know this is cheeky, but i am seriously in need of some advice

Thanks

[ryarch]

Anything is possible! And without the constraints of budget...this should be fairly easy to draw. It seems that your are proposing a vertical cantilever. You can do what you are showing, but the footings (you should show them as semi-transparent) have to go WAY deep into the ground.A rule of thumb could be the posts (footings) need to go twice as deep into the ground as you show them above ground.

The other option is that the footing below ground needs to spread out toward the center of the building to counteract the force trying to topple it over.

Post the skp file and I can drop in a couple ideas.

Good Luck and keep drinking coffee. We've all been there.

[manc]

cheers Ryarch, skp attatched feel free to draw all over.... :)

[imasayer]

Is this what the final product will look like? Guess I don't quite get what you are looking for. With more information about what you are trying to achieve I think that you would get more good suggestions.

If this is kind of a mass produced (thus, affordable) unit then the deep footings are not the way to go.

[ryarch]

Imasayer has a good point. Is this an affordable project? Mass produced? If so, you may have to rethink your concept. If not...have at it! No budget, No problem!

[manc]

thanks, I will post more over weekend when handins are out of the way on friday.


but in the mean time, any thoughts on getting towards original concept in visual but constructed in terms of budget?

manc

[imasayer]

thanks, I will post more over weekend when handins are out of the way on friday.


but in the mean time, any thoughts on getting towards original concept in visual but constructed in terms of budget?

manc

I will help when you offer more information. What are you trying to achieve? What is the look you are after?

[ryarch]

I don't really want to address your issues with cost, program, and design right now. If you offer us more info on these items, we will be glad to talk about them. With the info that you have given us, I am posting a pic of one way to structure you design. It is not the only solution, and it needs a great deal of refinement at the connections of the peices, but it is a start. I would suggest that you start looking through crane design, or some of Clatrava's work.

Please still take a minute and give us the specs on your project.

[manc]

i will get some visuals done and posted over the weekend.

cheers

ps could it be done out of reinforced concrete?

[wizum]

i will get some visuals done and posted over the weekend.

cheers

ps could it be done out of reinforced concrete?

? concrete? with something similar to what ryarch is suggesting? In my opinion, no way... concrete is great for compression but it seems there would be a great deal of tension in this design... if so why are you wanting to use a material for something that its not "naturally" good at?

Anyone else see what I am seeing based off Manc's last comment? I am by no means a structural engineer :) hell, I barely got past structures... :)

ps... I am confused as well as to what you are trying to achieve..

[digdoi]

...I don't quite get what you are looking for. With more information about what you are trying to achieve I think that you would get more good suggestions.

I'll reinforce imasayer's comment. Please give us more info on what do you want to achieve.

[Hotrats]

if so why are you wanting to use a material for something that its not "naturally" good at?

I would say it's just how materials have been used historically and the way that this influences your perceptions of the material's 'natural' properties and integrity that's the issue.

Calatrava's based his life's work on getting materials to do the unexpected.

[arv]

? concrete? with something similar to what ryarch is suggesting? In my opinion, no way... concrete is great for compression but it seems there would be a great deal of tension in this design... if so why are you wanting to use a material for something that its not "naturally" good at?

Anyone else see what I am seeing based off Manc's last comment? I am by no means a structural engineer :) hell, I barely got past structures... :)

ps... I am confused as well as to what you are trying to achieve..

Reinforced concrete as good as you want it to be in tension with limitations of the materiality of the material and the cost . Like Ima said earlier if we dont know what are we getting at we dont know what to tell you

[manc]

What i want to do is a houing system that allows local specificity in a generic type. A house that can be dropped anywhere and fit in

I want the front to be permanent and of heavywight material with thermal mass etc, yet the facade can be changable with infill panels for the front part of roof and the front facade. this then can have features plugged onto it such as decoration in order for it to fit into context........

behind this permanent facade i want it to be lightweight timber, sips or something like that so as functional need changes the house can be reconfigured. I am interested in developing an architecture of obsolescence, one that acknowledges that there are differing cycles withing a house and also allows the facade decoration if the perception of that style becomes stigmatised within society.....also one that accepts the twin ideals of the non-professional housung consumer who wants an antique for living and a machine for living within that vernacular traditional facade

at the moment its v polemic and is based on a lot of dutch research into cycles of obsolescence......

[danbush]

What i want to do is a houing system that allows local specificity in a generic type. A house that can be dropped anywhere and fit in

I want the front to be permanent and of heavywight material with thermal mass etc, yet the facade can be changable with infill panels for the front part of roof and the front facade. this then can have features plugged onto it such as decoration in order for it to fit into context........

behind this permanent facade i want it to be lightweight timber, sips or something like that so as functional need changes the house can be reconfigured. I am interested in developing an architecture of obsolescence, one that acknowledges that there are differing cycles withing a house and also allows the facade decoration if the perception of that style becomes stigmatised within society.....also one that accepts the twin ideals of the non-professional housung consumer who wants an antique for living and a machine for living within that vernacular traditional facade

at the moment its v polemic and is based on a lot of dutch research into cycles of obsolescence......

Why is the thermal mass important at the front of the house? What if the house faces north? If this is to be truly generic, you can't design in such an obvous limitation. Also, concrete is not a material one often associates with this type of product. Once again, generic means "able to readily build in accordance with local materials and craftsmen". Concrete doesn't really meet that criteria in some parts of the world.

If you're concerned about energy usage, thermal mass is not the only way to beat the sun: Proper orientation, landscaping, overhangs, etc. are all time tested and less expensive - almost free - ways to accomplish energy efficiency.

I would focus on one or two locations you are familiar with and develop a structural system and "vernacular traditional facade" that would be suitable for the areas and then explain how you're providing for flexability in other locals.

[imasayer]

What i want to do is a houing system that allows local specificity in a generic type. A house that can be dropped anywhere and fit in

I want the front to be permanent and of heavywight material with thermal mass etc, yet the facade can be changable with infill panels for the front part of roof and the front facade. this then can have features plugged onto it such as decoration in order for it to fit into context........

behind this permanent facade i want it to be lightweight timber, sips or something like that so as functional need changes the house can be reconfigured. I am interested in developing an architecture of obsolescence, one that acknowledges that there are differing cycles withing a house and also allows the facade decoration if the perception of that style becomes stigmatised within society.....also one that accepts the twin ideals of the non-professional housung consumer who wants an antique for living and a machine for living within that vernacular traditional facade

at the moment its v polemic and is based on a lot of dutch research into cycles of obsolescence......


There is an example of what you are talking about in this book...modular timberframe with panels that can be inserted into the frame. Check it out if you can, or I will try to post it when I have more time.

[manc]

cheers, if you can scan it in, it would be great.......going to get my head around this project and resolve over the weekend as i am snowed under with a stupid amount of written papers.....got to get 10,000 words done for tomorrow morning and even got my girlfriend sat in a hotel in switzerland proof reading the first half this morning before her meeting!.......and got to do second half today....nightmare! at least after the summer no more dissertations or thesis when i'm back in practice!!! :)

[Mark Timms]

I understand where you are coming from providing a thermal mass but a concrete frame isnt going to be very sustainable. It cannot be recycled and is harder to dismantle compared to steel.

A steel frame also provides the benefit of being recyclable, reused/moved to other sites. It can also be errected easily by bolting together. I'm thinking of self-build type projects where the rest of the house is constructed using local materials. A thermal mass can always be incorporated regardless of the structural material.... just a couple of thoughts!

:)

[Richard]

The idea behind you is certainly sound thinking though I have to question your need to so much complicate the manufacture, erection and positioning toward such minimisation of support elements. You have already some grid, units or attached dwellings will likely be compartmented at that grid or multiple of due mostly to that of fire and the likelihood that such support would have to be common to the bound of each unit. I therefore see little benefit in such a drastic reduction in support to gain minimal additional flexibility.

[manc]

if i were to use steel for the facade, how would the infill panels integrete into it?

for instance could you hang a lighttweight facade off it, or if needed would it take heavier prefab? depending on environmental context the house is placed?

[manc]

am now on the home straight of my thesis only the conclusion to write and going to do visuals while watching the european cup final :)

(while my girlfriend proof-reads it in her hotel in Switzerland and emails it back to me......what did we do before email and the internet!?)

[arv]

I don't quite get the logic of your scheme . You are talking about specificity in a generic situation and at the same time talking about obsolence . If you are looking for a housing scheme where regional/local specificity and evolution is to be a factor prefab is not the way to go . That is only going to bog you down to the structure and the manufacturer of prefab panels . I suggest you look into something like a site and services kind of housing . The idea is that the site is plotted and only the essential services are place on the site . With time , with the availability of resources people add to the core resulting in housing that is dynamic and vibrant .
Here is a link to Aranya Township in India (http://www.mcgill.ca/mchg/pastproject/aranya/) .

[arv]

This is quite different to waht you propose but it doesn't hurt to learn something from a different world .
Another link to Aranya (http://archnet.org/library/sites/one-site.tcl?site_id=1124)