1. Research
1.1. Current Issues
1.1.1. Greying Population
1.1.1.1. Wealthier Citizens
1.1.1.2. Cosmetics / Plastic Surgery
1.1.2. Medical Hub as an economic Driver
1.1.3. Tourism as source of foreign income
1.1.3.1. Medical Tourism Figures
1.1.4. Mandatory Greenbuilding Regulations
1.2. Crystal Ball
1.2.1. Pervasive use of technology
1.2.1.1. Computational Design (concept/schematic)
1.2.1.1.1. Input
1.2.1.1.2. Output
1.2.1.2. Building Information Modeling (D&D/construction)
1.2.1.2.1. Evolution
1.2.1.2.2. Intelligent Information
1.2.1.3. Smart Building Management system (Post-occupation)
1.2.1.3.1. Thermostat control
1.2.1.3.2. Night Purging
1.2.1.3.3. Solar Tracking
1.2.2. New paradigm
1.2.2.1. Thinking 4D, Building lifecycle
1.2.2.2. Environmental Concerns
1.2.2.3. Designing Relationships
1.2.2.4. Evolutionary Design
1.3. Casestudies
1.3.1. Medical Design International
1.3.2. Hybrid Urbanspace
1.3.3. Gleneagles Medical Centre
1.3.4. "Hospital of the Future"
2. Site
2.1. Site Parcel
2.1.1. Urban Design Guidelines
2.1.1.1. People Mover System reserve of 19m
2.1.1.2. public plaza integrate with the primary and secondary pedestrian routes as well as the public side tables and the open spaces on adjacent sites.
2.1.1.3. contiguous pedestrian shelter from the CCL entrance/exit to the primary pedestrian route
2.1.1.4. Covered Linkways & walkways
2.1.1.5. coverage of the built up or enclosed areas at first storey of the proposed development shall not exceed 60%
2.1.1.6. minimum 7m wide double storey high linear urban lobby to serve as the barrier-free primary route for pedestrians
2.1.1.7. Retail or F&B uses up to 2000 sqm GFA shall be provided along this key pedestrian spine link
2.1.1.8. Pedestrian Overhead Bridge shall be maximum 6.0m wide with minimum 4.0m clear width for circulation. intermediate structural supports for the bridge shall be located only within the green buffer area of parcel LX-2-15.
2.1.1.9. Action zone shall be connected to the through-block pedestrian spine and to the pedestrian overhead bridge across North Buona Vista Drive
2.1.1.10. 100% Built-to-line along North Buona Vista Road 70% Built-to-line along PMS reserve 50% Built-to-line along LX-1-2
2.1.1.11. The maximum height of the development shall not exceed 125m AMS
2.1.1.12. Landscaped sky voids shall be provided on the higher levels of the development fronting North Buona Vista Road and PMS reserve. An area equivalent to minimum 2% of the total GFA shall be used for provision of sky voids
2.1.2. GFA Requirements
2.2. One-North Masterplan
3. Program
3.1. Mediplex
3.1.1. Medical Suites
3.1.2. Serviced Apartments / Hotel
3.1.3. Shopping Center / Retail
4. CAD Tools
4.1. Rhino3d
4.1.1. Grasshopper
4.1.1.1. Pattern to Panel
4.1.1.2. Surface Sub-Division for Panelisation
4.1.1.3. Tower Twister
4.1.1.4. Wave Weaver
4.1.1.5. Solid Slicer
4.1.1.6. Quad Paneliser
4.1.1.7. 3d Polkariser
4.1.1.8. Excel-Link
4.1.2. Rhinoscript
4.1.2.1. Call Ecotect
4.1.2.2. Save/Load Ecotect Mesh Data
4.1.2.3. Voronoi Tessellation
4.1.2.4. Boolean Difference
4.2. Sketchup
4.2.1. Rubyscript
4.3. Revit
4.3.1. Parametrics
4.4. Ecotect
4.4.1. Luascript
4.4.1.1. Start/Save Simulations
4.5. Excel
4.5.1. AHP model
4.5.2. Cellular Automata
5. Algorithms : Design Techniques 'Form + Solving'
5.1. Form - Generating / Finding
5.1.1. Traditional
5.1.1.1. Line,Edge,Shade (Trend)
5.1.1.2. Precedent Studies (Vernacular)
5.1.1.3. Classical order (golden ratios)
5.1.2. Emergent
5.1.2.1. Re/Generative Processes
5.1.2.1.1. Fractals
5.1.2.2. Bio Mimicry
5.1.2.3. Morphogenetic techniques
5.1.2.3.1. L-system
5.1.2.4. Cellular Automata
5.2. Problem / Space - Solving
5.2.1. Multiple-Criteria Decision Making
5.2.1.1. Elements
5.2.1.1.1. Goals,objectives & criteria to be achieved
5.2.1.1.2. Needs to be fultilled
5.2.1.1.3. Constraints & requirements associated with and affected by decision
5.2.1.1.4. environment which the decision must be made
5.2.1.1.5. experience and background of the decision maker
5.2.1.2. Purpose
5.2.1.2.1. help decision maker to think sysmatically about complex decision problems and improve quality of resulting decisions
5.2.1.3. Methods
5.2.1.3.1. Weighted Scoring
5.2.1.3.2. Perference-based Techniques
5.2.1.3.3. analytic hierarchy process AHP
5.2.1.3.4. Outranking Methods
5.2.1.3.5. Goal Programming
5.2.2. Geometric Solving of Constraint Problems
5.2.2.1. Critical Path Method
5.2.2.1.1. Gantt Chart
5.2.2.2. Voronoi Tesselation
5.2.2.2.1. Average Neighbours <=6
5.2.2.3. Delaunay Triangulation
5.2.2.3.1. Landform approximation
5.2.2.4. Graph Plotting
5.2.2.4.1. Finding Maxima and minima for quadratic equations
6. TODO
6.1. Urgent
6.1.1. Solve Units
6.2. Important
6.2.1. Spatial adjacency
7. Critque
7.1. TBK
7.1.1. 20081007
7.1.1.1. MIT Simmons Hall
7.1.1.2. Parameters
7.1.2. 20081014
7.1.2.1. Visual Images to illustrate design technique
7.1.2.1.1. MVRDV - KM3
7.1.2.2. Program Requirements
7.1.2.2.1. Paragon Medical
7.1.2.3. Issue with coming up with the initial form
7.1.2.3.1. Workflow diagram for Interim
7.1.3. 20081114
7.1.3.1. Thesis Brief
7.1.3.2. Think about zone relationships
7.1.3.3. Thesis Prep Presentation Outline
7.1.4. 20090113
7.1.4.1. Schedule
7.1.4.2. Green - Environmental Factors
7.1.5. 20090205
7.1.5.1. Refine Thesis Qn
7.1.5.2. Sky Void Typologies
7.1.6. 20090217
7.1.6.1. Sketch Design of a single Cluster
7.1.6.2. Add Central Void to allow for ventilation on both sides
7.1.6.3. Try rules for single tier
7.1.7. 20090303
7.1.7.1. Tweak Cellular Automata Rules to get other non-rational alternatives
7.1.7.2. Start Site Model
7.1.7.3. Think about relationship of program and sky Parks
7.1.7.4. Rework Diagrams to Show Clarity
7.1.7.4.1. Esher Visual Illusion
7.1.7.4.2. Values for Simulation
7.1.7.4.3. Seperate different Iterations of simulation results
7.2. Interim 20081021
7.2.1. CKM
7.2.1.1. Document Process for presentation
7.2.1.2. When is the architect's intervention
7.2.1.3. What is the input
7.2.1.4. What is the evalutaion criteria
7.2.2. KK
7.2.2.1. Is there a final result
7.2.2.1.1. Job Interviews
7.2.2.2. Take on an existing brief
7.2.2.3. Can it be universally applied
7.2.2.3.1. Site specific environmental context
7.2.2.3.2. Site specific urban design guidelines
7.2.3. Others
7.2.3.1. HLM studio
7.2.3.1.1. Agent Based Pedestrian Simulation
7.2.3.1.2. Urban Program
7.3. Guest Crit
7.3.1. LLC
7.3.2. MTC
7.3.2.1. Thesis too complex and complicated
7.3.2.1.1. Reduce Scope
7.3.2.2. 5 Attributes of a good planner
7.3.2.2.1. Visionary
7.3.2.2.2. Socialist
7.3.2.2.3. Must have breath and depth of knowledge
7.3.2.2.4. "A Loving Heart for people"
7.3.2.2.5. The Loving Heart
7.3.3. PH
7.3.3.1. Change PMS route into Building
7.3.3.2. Tiered Retail Goundfloor
7.3.4. WW
7.3.4.1. Transfer floors 8m for 100m cantilever
7.3.4.2. Cross-bracing on facade instead of sheerwall
7.3.4.3. Mega Column at corner
7.3.4.4. 600mm for soil / 300mm for slab
7.3.4.5. 600mm-1000mm columns
7.3.5. JH
7.3.5.1. Water
7.3.5.1.1. Volume of water tank = 270units x 30 m3/mth / 30days
7.3.5.1.2. 5x4m Water Pump Room
7.3.5.2. Electricity
7.3.5.2.1. 8x3m Main distribution Rm (Ground)
7.3.5.2.2. 2x1m Switch Rm (per floor)
7.3.5.3. Aircon
7.3.5.3.1. 15x8m Chiller Rm
7.3.5.3.2. 8x6m AHU (per floor)
7.3.5.4. Fire
7.3.5.4.1. 500m3 Sprinkler Tank
7.3.5.4.2. 8x8m Pump Rm
7.3.5.5. Rain
7.3.5.5.1. 50m3 Rainwater collection tank
7.3.5.6. Others
7.3.5.6.1. 0.6-0.8 false ceiling
7.4. Thesis Prep 20081125
7.4.1. HB
7.4.1.1. No 'Spirit', Vision?
7.4.1.2. Architecture Program does not link with software Program
7.4.2. TTK
7.4.2.1. Wrong
7.4.2.2. Hospital too complex going to ground the project
7.5. Interim 20090210
7.5.1. HB
7.5.1.1. Services / Circulation Not considered
7.5.1.2. Need to set thesis assumptions clearly in the begining
7.5.2. TTK
7.5.2.1. Scripters only work for 'God'-like architects
7.5.2.2. Suggests Single Use Art Muesum
7.5.3. TBK
7.5.3.1. No point generating rubbish for the designer to correct later
7.5.4. Dennis
7.5.4.1. Consider Permutating Clusters
7.6. Interim 20090310
7.6.1. TBK
7.6.1.1. Color Scheme too dark
7.6.1.2. Need to demonstrate feasibility of design
7.6.2. JLEM
7.6.2.1. Locate different types of apartments around sky-parks
7.6.2.1.1. double access
7.6.2.2. Consider EW Site Orientation and Location of Voids
7.6.2.2.1. Block Sun and allow cool air for cross ventillation
7.6.2.3. Circulation
7.6.2.3.1. Different elevator shafts
7.6.2.3.2. Access to apartments / corridors
7.6.2.4. Household shelters
7.6.2.4.1. Use of staircase core
7.6.2.5. Shaping of Voids
7.6.2.5.1. Maximise light and ventilation access to apartments
7.6.2.5.2. Views to key vistas
7.6.3. KN
7.6.3.1. More Constrains
7.6.3.1.1. More programming Might not yield solution
7.7. Examination
7.7.1. Internal
7.7.1.1. TTK
7.7.1.1.1. Technically Fail as plans dont work
7.7.1.2. HB
7.7.1.2.1. Despite many many designs , it is the designer that gives intelligence to the design
7.7.1.2.2. Feedback is important because you might never know you are driving off a cliff
7.7.1.3. KN
7.7.1.3.1. Process can be done manually , but it is time consuming
7.7.1.3.2. resolution of sharp edges
7.7.1.4. TBK
7.7.1.4.1. technical issues
7.7.1.4.2. Plans do not show intention of sky-gardens
7.7.1.4.3. Process is linear, sometimes designers work backwards
7.7.2. External
7.7.2.1. CB
7.7.2.1.1. Project is about shape grammer
7.7.2.1.2. Bedrooms with internal views
7.7.2.1.3. Project could be better expressed as decay of a large mass
7.7.2.1.4. Disconnect between plans and perspective
7.7.2.1.5. Prevailing wind direction not considered
7.7.2.2. TGB
7.7.2.2.1. Forget about machine
7.7.2.2.2. Architects must design good plans
7.7.2.2.3. Spaces have no human scale