Structural cladding /clad structures: studies in tectonic building practice

Bidragets oversatte titel: Strukturel beklædning / Beklædt struktur: Studier i tektonisk byggekultur

Publikation: KonferencebidragKonferenceabstrakt til konferenceForskningpeer review

Resumé

With point of departure in the present challenges found in the construction industry, which concern a reduced use of energy in buildings and consumption of material resources – this paper forms a tectonic inquiry into contemporary building practice. The aim is to look at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the use of materials, the structural features and the construction details of building systems in selected architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solutions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. The research questions address the following issues: How to learn from traditional construction principles: When do we see limitations of tectonic maneuver; how does the performative logic challenge the heavy building constructions.

Due to a growing attention towards the use of energy in buildings and the consumption of material resources in the construction industry – we see a tendency, both at an international level as well as in local legislation, to ask for more restrictive building codes. As an example, in Denmark there are series of increasing demands in the current building legislations that are focused at enhancing the energy performance of buildings, which consequently foster rigid insulation standards and ask for improvement of air tightness in constructions. At the same time a need for longevity and effortless maintenance have lead to contemporary architectural structures, where the exterior walls and the building envelope most often are made of several layers of advanced materials and separate building elements. In most contemporary building constructions each material layer serves specific needs – and they are optimized, developed, designed and put together in accordance to individual performative properties of the construction.
Because of this prevailing tendency traditional heavy constructions made of stone, masonry or concrete are facing difficulties, when they have to meet similar high-performative and specified demands. Yet traditional heavy constructions often form a synthesis of performative properties that act together in a fine balance due to the inherent nature of the materials. This may be a combination of structural, thermal and protective properties as we find them in solid masonry wall constructions. As such, each of the different performative contributions may be difficult to define and thereby to analyse. When only focusing at energy performance and insulations stand-ards these construction types are dismissed and their other material qualities are not taken into consideration. In that sense there is a need for a much more holistic perspective which include a higher grade of complexity that correspond to a more advanced understanding of building constructions; their numerous physical attributes and not the less their deep rooted cultural dimension.
These various circumstances that rule the building industry at present are primarily driven by political agendas, which are brought into effect by various bodies of public administrations subsequently. As governing institutions serving general societal objectives they do not necessarily take specific constructions features, building practices and traditions or cultural dimensions into consideration. Also when new guidelines for construction and building codes are defined they most often refer to other professional stakeholders in the construction industry, but the architectural field. In that sense – a fundamental understanding of tectonic aspects and a culturally rooted building practice is not included in this ongoing evolutionary course of building constructions.

Also, there exist very abstract and an almost purely mechanical understanding of how the mate-rials perform when built into constructions. This seems to foster a specific set of ideas in terms of how to develop building constructions for the future – these may provide the required solu-tions in term of e.g. increased insulation standards, but they also cause a number of problems which are not yet taken into account. These relate to the use of materials, tectonic aspects and the loss of culture in today’s building practice.
According to Adolf Loos, one of the most radical thinkers in modern architectural theory there seems to be found a ‘tectonic imperative’ linked to materials. It may be defined as specific building cultures/practices, where the material, the building technology and the architectural form are interdependent and follow certain well defined logics. In his text, Prinzip der Beklidung/ The Principle of Cladding he states: “Every material possesses its own language of forms, and none may lay claim for itself to the forms of another material. For forms have been constituted out of the applicability and the methods of production of materials. They have come into being with and through materials. No material permits an encroachment into its own circle of forms.” (Loos. 1898)
Clearly, Loos addresses the question of how materials are understood, handled and manifested when dealt with in architectural work and thus in building constructions. The question of ma-terial nature, the embedded properties and how materials perform when applied and transformed into constructions have been a central guiding rule or shared premise across architectural form making and building practices throughout centuries. However – today quite different regimes of thought define how building construction are to be designed and constructed. These are primarily driven by economic interest or environmental considerations dealt with at a global or national level. How to bring the knowledge, material evidence and cultural dimension, which exist in traditional building practices into play with present day hardcore technocratic demands in the construction industry and in building construction, seem be
With point of departure in the challenges previously described this paper forms a ‘tectonic enquiry’ into contemporary building practice by looking at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the structural features and the construction details of selected building systems and architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solu-tions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. Some closer linked to a mindset of tectonic thinking than others.
Tectonic thinking is here defined as: “A central attention towards the nature of the making, and the application of building materials (construction) and how this attention forms a creative force in building constructions, structural features and architectural design (construing).” (Bech-Danielsen et al. 2012)
The underlying thesis of the paper is that tectonic thinking can be used to identify and refine strategies for improving contemporary building industry. The research questions linked to the underlying thesis of the paper fall into different parts:
- How does contemporary building culture/practice change the fundamental understanding of (traditional) construction principles linked to the exterior wall constructions?
- Does the shift from the ‘structural cladding’ represented by the heavy building constructions towards the ‘clad structures’ represented by the light weight building constructions may result in limited tectonic manoeuvre?
- Do we see a tectonic setback when the heavy building constructions are expected to hold the same sort of performative logic as the layered and thereby fragmented light-weight constructions?

OriginalsprogEngelsk
Publikationsdato15 dec. 2012
Antal sider2
StatusUdgivet - 15 dec. 2012
BegivenhedICSA 2013: Structures and architecture - ICSA, Guimarães, Portugal
Varighed: 24 jul. 201326 jul. 2013
Konferencens nummer: 2

Konference

KonferenceICSA 2013
Nummer2
LokationICSA
LandPortugal
ByGuimarães
Periode24/07/201326/07/2013

Emneord

  • tektonik
  • byggekultur
  • Konstruktionsforståelse
  • konstruktionselementer
  • byggematerialer
  • byggeteknik

Kunstnerisk udviklingsvirksomhed (KUV)

  • Nej

Citer dette

Beim, A. (2012). Structural cladding /clad structures: studies in tectonic building practice. Abstract fra ICSA 2013, Guimarães, Portugal.
@conference{a5939f138ebd4a34ad0e0d62fde9be37,
title = "Structural cladding /clad structures: studies in tectonic building practice",
abstract = "With point of departure in the present challenges found in the construction industry, which concern a reduced use of energy in buildings and consumption of material resources – this paper forms a tectonic inquiry into contemporary building practice. The aim is to look at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the use of materials, the structural features and the construction details of building systems in selected architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solutions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. The research questions address the following issues: How to learn from traditional construction principles: When do we see limitations of tectonic maneuver; how does the performative logic challenge the heavy building constructions. Due to a growing attention towards the use of energy in buildings and the consumption of material resources in the construction industry – we see a tendency, both at an international level as well as in local legislation, to ask for more restrictive building codes. As an example, in Denmark there are series of increasing demands in the current building legislations that are focused at enhancing the energy performance of buildings, which consequently foster rigid insulation standards and ask for improvement of air tightness in constructions. At the same time a need for longevity and effortless maintenance have lead to contemporary architectural structures, where the exterior walls and the building envelope most often are made of several layers of advanced materials and separate building elements. In most contemporary building constructions each material layer serves specific needs – and they are optimized, developed, designed and put together in accordance to individual performative properties of the construction. Because of this prevailing tendency traditional heavy constructions made of stone, masonry or concrete are facing difficulties, when they have to meet similar high-performative and specified demands. Yet traditional heavy constructions often form a synthesis of performative properties that act together in a fine balance due to the inherent nature of the materials. This may be a combination of structural, thermal and protective properties as we find them in solid masonry wall constructions. As such, each of the different performative contributions may be difficult to define and thereby to analyse. When only focusing at energy performance and insulations stand-ards these construction types are dismissed and their other material qualities are not taken into consideration. In that sense there is a need for a much more holistic perspective which include a higher grade of complexity that correspond to a more advanced understanding of building constructions; their numerous physical attributes and not the less their deep rooted cultural dimension.These various circumstances that rule the building industry at present are primarily driven by political agendas, which are brought into effect by various bodies of public administrations subsequently. As governing institutions serving general societal objectives they do not necessarily take specific constructions features, building practices and traditions or cultural dimensions into consideration. Also when new guidelines for construction and building codes are defined they most often refer to other professional stakeholders in the construction industry, but the architectural field. In that sense – a fundamental understanding of tectonic aspects and a culturally rooted building practice is not included in this ongoing evolutionary course of building constructions.Also, there exist very abstract and an almost purely mechanical understanding of how the mate-rials perform when built into constructions. This seems to foster a specific set of ideas in terms of how to develop building constructions for the future – these may provide the required solu-tions in term of e.g. increased insulation standards, but they also cause a number of problems which are not yet taken into account. These relate to the use of materials, tectonic aspects and the loss of culture in today’s building practice.According to Adolf Loos, one of the most radical thinkers in modern architectural theory there seems to be found a ‘tectonic imperative’ linked to materials. It may be defined as specific building cultures/practices, where the material, the building technology and the architectural form are interdependent and follow certain well defined logics. In his text, Prinzip der Beklidung/ The Principle of Cladding he states: “Every material possesses its own language of forms, and none may lay claim for itself to the forms of another material. For forms have been constituted out of the applicability and the methods of production of materials. They have come into being with and through materials. No material permits an encroachment into its own circle of forms.” (Loos. 1898)Clearly, Loos addresses the question of how materials are understood, handled and manifested when dealt with in architectural work and thus in building constructions. The question of ma-terial nature, the embedded properties and how materials perform when applied and transformed into constructions have been a central guiding rule or shared premise across architectural form making and building practices throughout centuries. However – today quite different regimes of thought define how building construction are to be designed and constructed. These are primarily driven by economic interest or environmental considerations dealt with at a global or national level. How to bring the knowledge, material evidence and cultural dimension, which exist in traditional building practices into play with present day hardcore technocratic demands in the construction industry and in building construction, seem be With point of departure in the challenges previously described this paper forms a ‘tectonic enquiry’ into contemporary building practice by looking at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the structural features and the construction details of selected building systems and architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solu-tions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. Some closer linked to a mindset of tectonic thinking than others. Tectonic thinking is here defined as: “A central attention towards the nature of the making, and the application of building materials (construction) and how this attention forms a creative force in building constructions, structural features and architectural design (construing).” (Bech-Danielsen et al. 2012)The underlying thesis of the paper is that tectonic thinking can be used to identify and refine strategies for improving contemporary building industry. The research questions linked to the underlying thesis of the paper fall into different parts: - How does contemporary building culture/practice change the fundamental understanding of (traditional) construction principles linked to the exterior wall constructions? - Does the shift from the ‘structural cladding’ represented by the heavy building constructions towards the ‘clad structures’ represented by the light weight building constructions may result in limited tectonic manoeuvre? - Do we see a tectonic setback when the heavy building constructions are expected to hold the same sort of performative logic as the layered and thereby fragmented light-weight constructions?",
keywords = "tektonik, byggekultur, Konstruktionsforst{\aa}else, konstruktionselementer, byggematerialer, byggeteknik",
author = "Anne Beim",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "15",
language = "English",
note = "ICSA 2013 : Structures and architecture ; Conference date: 24-07-2013 Through 26-07-2013",

}

Beim, A 2012, 'Structural cladding /clad structures: studies in tectonic building practice', ICSA 2013, Guimarães, Portugal, 24/07/2013 - 26/07/2013.

Structural cladding /clad structures : studies in tectonic building practice. / Beim, Anne.

2012. Abstract fra ICSA 2013, Guimarães, Portugal.

Publikation: KonferencebidragKonferenceabstrakt til konferenceForskningpeer review

TY - ABST

T1 - Structural cladding /clad structures

T2 - studies in tectonic building practice

AU - Beim, Anne

PY - 2012/12/15

Y1 - 2012/12/15

N2 - With point of departure in the present challenges found in the construction industry, which concern a reduced use of energy in buildings and consumption of material resources – this paper forms a tectonic inquiry into contemporary building practice. The aim is to look at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the use of materials, the structural features and the construction details of building systems in selected architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solutions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. The research questions address the following issues: How to learn from traditional construction principles: When do we see limitations of tectonic maneuver; how does the performative logic challenge the heavy building constructions. Due to a growing attention towards the use of energy in buildings and the consumption of material resources in the construction industry – we see a tendency, both at an international level as well as in local legislation, to ask for more restrictive building codes. As an example, in Denmark there are series of increasing demands in the current building legislations that are focused at enhancing the energy performance of buildings, which consequently foster rigid insulation standards and ask for improvement of air tightness in constructions. At the same time a need for longevity and effortless maintenance have lead to contemporary architectural structures, where the exterior walls and the building envelope most often are made of several layers of advanced materials and separate building elements. In most contemporary building constructions each material layer serves specific needs – and they are optimized, developed, designed and put together in accordance to individual performative properties of the construction. Because of this prevailing tendency traditional heavy constructions made of stone, masonry or concrete are facing difficulties, when they have to meet similar high-performative and specified demands. Yet traditional heavy constructions often form a synthesis of performative properties that act together in a fine balance due to the inherent nature of the materials. This may be a combination of structural, thermal and protective properties as we find them in solid masonry wall constructions. As such, each of the different performative contributions may be difficult to define and thereby to analyse. When only focusing at energy performance and insulations stand-ards these construction types are dismissed and their other material qualities are not taken into consideration. In that sense there is a need for a much more holistic perspective which include a higher grade of complexity that correspond to a more advanced understanding of building constructions; their numerous physical attributes and not the less their deep rooted cultural dimension.These various circumstances that rule the building industry at present are primarily driven by political agendas, which are brought into effect by various bodies of public administrations subsequently. As governing institutions serving general societal objectives they do not necessarily take specific constructions features, building practices and traditions or cultural dimensions into consideration. Also when new guidelines for construction and building codes are defined they most often refer to other professional stakeholders in the construction industry, but the architectural field. In that sense – a fundamental understanding of tectonic aspects and a culturally rooted building practice is not included in this ongoing evolutionary course of building constructions.Also, there exist very abstract and an almost purely mechanical understanding of how the mate-rials perform when built into constructions. This seems to foster a specific set of ideas in terms of how to develop building constructions for the future – these may provide the required solu-tions in term of e.g. increased insulation standards, but they also cause a number of problems which are not yet taken into account. These relate to the use of materials, tectonic aspects and the loss of culture in today’s building practice.According to Adolf Loos, one of the most radical thinkers in modern architectural theory there seems to be found a ‘tectonic imperative’ linked to materials. It may be defined as specific building cultures/practices, where the material, the building technology and the architectural form are interdependent and follow certain well defined logics. In his text, Prinzip der Beklidung/ The Principle of Cladding he states: “Every material possesses its own language of forms, and none may lay claim for itself to the forms of another material. For forms have been constituted out of the applicability and the methods of production of materials. They have come into being with and through materials. No material permits an encroachment into its own circle of forms.” (Loos. 1898)Clearly, Loos addresses the question of how materials are understood, handled and manifested when dealt with in architectural work and thus in building constructions. The question of ma-terial nature, the embedded properties and how materials perform when applied and transformed into constructions have been a central guiding rule or shared premise across architectural form making and building practices throughout centuries. However – today quite different regimes of thought define how building construction are to be designed and constructed. These are primarily driven by economic interest or environmental considerations dealt with at a global or national level. How to bring the knowledge, material evidence and cultural dimension, which exist in traditional building practices into play with present day hardcore technocratic demands in the construction industry and in building construction, seem be With point of departure in the challenges previously described this paper forms a ‘tectonic enquiry’ into contemporary building practice by looking at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the structural features and the construction details of selected building systems and architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solu-tions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. Some closer linked to a mindset of tectonic thinking than others. Tectonic thinking is here defined as: “A central attention towards the nature of the making, and the application of building materials (construction) and how this attention forms a creative force in building constructions, structural features and architectural design (construing).” (Bech-Danielsen et al. 2012)The underlying thesis of the paper is that tectonic thinking can be used to identify and refine strategies for improving contemporary building industry. The research questions linked to the underlying thesis of the paper fall into different parts: - How does contemporary building culture/practice change the fundamental understanding of (traditional) construction principles linked to the exterior wall constructions? - Does the shift from the ‘structural cladding’ represented by the heavy building constructions towards the ‘clad structures’ represented by the light weight building constructions may result in limited tectonic manoeuvre? - Do we see a tectonic setback when the heavy building constructions are expected to hold the same sort of performative logic as the layered and thereby fragmented light-weight constructions?

AB - With point of departure in the present challenges found in the construction industry, which concern a reduced use of energy in buildings and consumption of material resources – this paper forms a tectonic inquiry into contemporary building practice. The aim is to look at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the use of materials, the structural features and the construction details of building systems in selected architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solutions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. The research questions address the following issues: How to learn from traditional construction principles: When do we see limitations of tectonic maneuver; how does the performative logic challenge the heavy building constructions. Due to a growing attention towards the use of energy in buildings and the consumption of material resources in the construction industry – we see a tendency, both at an international level as well as in local legislation, to ask for more restrictive building codes. As an example, in Denmark there are series of increasing demands in the current building legislations that are focused at enhancing the energy performance of buildings, which consequently foster rigid insulation standards and ask for improvement of air tightness in constructions. At the same time a need for longevity and effortless maintenance have lead to contemporary architectural structures, where the exterior walls and the building envelope most often are made of several layers of advanced materials and separate building elements. In most contemporary building constructions each material layer serves specific needs – and they are optimized, developed, designed and put together in accordance to individual performative properties of the construction. Because of this prevailing tendency traditional heavy constructions made of stone, masonry or concrete are facing difficulties, when they have to meet similar high-performative and specified demands. Yet traditional heavy constructions often form a synthesis of performative properties that act together in a fine balance due to the inherent nature of the materials. This may be a combination of structural, thermal and protective properties as we find them in solid masonry wall constructions. As such, each of the different performative contributions may be difficult to define and thereby to analyse. When only focusing at energy performance and insulations stand-ards these construction types are dismissed and their other material qualities are not taken into consideration. In that sense there is a need for a much more holistic perspective which include a higher grade of complexity that correspond to a more advanced understanding of building constructions; their numerous physical attributes and not the less their deep rooted cultural dimension.These various circumstances that rule the building industry at present are primarily driven by political agendas, which are brought into effect by various bodies of public administrations subsequently. As governing institutions serving general societal objectives they do not necessarily take specific constructions features, building practices and traditions or cultural dimensions into consideration. Also when new guidelines for construction and building codes are defined they most often refer to other professional stakeholders in the construction industry, but the architectural field. In that sense – a fundamental understanding of tectonic aspects and a culturally rooted building practice is not included in this ongoing evolutionary course of building constructions.Also, there exist very abstract and an almost purely mechanical understanding of how the mate-rials perform when built into constructions. This seems to foster a specific set of ideas in terms of how to develop building constructions for the future – these may provide the required solu-tions in term of e.g. increased insulation standards, but they also cause a number of problems which are not yet taken into account. These relate to the use of materials, tectonic aspects and the loss of culture in today’s building practice.According to Adolf Loos, one of the most radical thinkers in modern architectural theory there seems to be found a ‘tectonic imperative’ linked to materials. It may be defined as specific building cultures/practices, where the material, the building technology and the architectural form are interdependent and follow certain well defined logics. In his text, Prinzip der Beklidung/ The Principle of Cladding he states: “Every material possesses its own language of forms, and none may lay claim for itself to the forms of another material. For forms have been constituted out of the applicability and the methods of production of materials. They have come into being with and through materials. No material permits an encroachment into its own circle of forms.” (Loos. 1898)Clearly, Loos addresses the question of how materials are understood, handled and manifested when dealt with in architectural work and thus in building constructions. The question of ma-terial nature, the embedded properties and how materials perform when applied and transformed into constructions have been a central guiding rule or shared premise across architectural form making and building practices throughout centuries. However – today quite different regimes of thought define how building construction are to be designed and constructed. These are primarily driven by economic interest or environmental considerations dealt with at a global or national level. How to bring the knowledge, material evidence and cultural dimension, which exist in traditional building practices into play with present day hardcore technocratic demands in the construction industry and in building construction, seem be With point of departure in the challenges previously described this paper forms a ‘tectonic enquiry’ into contemporary building practice by looking at specific performative tendencies, which can be traced in the structural features and the construction details of selected building systems and architectural works. With a particular focus at heavy constructions made of solid wood and masonry, and light weight constructions made of wooden frame structures and steel profiles, it is the intention to analyze, compare, and discuss how these various construction solu-tions point out strategies for development based on fundamentally different mindsets. Some closer linked to a mindset of tectonic thinking than others. Tectonic thinking is here defined as: “A central attention towards the nature of the making, and the application of building materials (construction) and how this attention forms a creative force in building constructions, structural features and architectural design (construing).” (Bech-Danielsen et al. 2012)The underlying thesis of the paper is that tectonic thinking can be used to identify and refine strategies for improving contemporary building industry. The research questions linked to the underlying thesis of the paper fall into different parts: - How does contemporary building culture/practice change the fundamental understanding of (traditional) construction principles linked to the exterior wall constructions? - Does the shift from the ‘structural cladding’ represented by the heavy building constructions towards the ‘clad structures’ represented by the light weight building constructions may result in limited tectonic manoeuvre? - Do we see a tectonic setback when the heavy building constructions are expected to hold the same sort of performative logic as the layered and thereby fragmented light-weight constructions?

KW - tektonik

KW - byggekultur

KW - Konstruktionsforståelse

KW - konstruktionselementer

KW - byggematerialer

KW - byggeteknik

M3 - Conference abstract for conference

ER -

Beim A. Structural cladding /clad structures: studies in tectonic building practice. 2012. Abstract fra ICSA 2013, Guimarães, Portugal.