Ted Bolte

3 Units: https://acc.autodesk.com/docs/files/projects/7a6d9404-5c50-4d49-acbd-cf67d7302936?folderUrn=urn%3Aadsk.wipprod%3Afs.folder%3Aco.xyTsIp5oRPmD2h9GFBZYXQ&viewModel=detail&moduleId=folders

For this first part of this Module, I used the twisting rectangular mass as the parametric tower. Here, I set up the node logic to evaluate how it would perform under different heights. The building form and node logic can be seen below. For this structure, the height inputs can be changed in the input node block to evaluate more heights or change the increments at which the heights will be evaluated. The parameter that is being evaluated could also be changed by switching “Building Height” to something else, such as “Twist” or “Building Base Width”, for example.

image
image

For the second part of this assignment, I created a new building form, which is a twisting hexagon. There are a few equations that are set up for some of the parameters to this form. The Mid Rotation is half of the Top Rotation, while the Mid Height is half of the Top Height. The Mid Depth and Width are 2/3 of the Base Depth and Width, while the Top Depth and Width are 1/3 of the Base Depth and Width. This was to provide a constant taper while the parameters are changed. As for the node logic for this part, two parameters were varied in this analysis (Top Height and Top Rotation), with another parameter (Base Width) available to be substituted for either by changing the node connections. There were a few different Top Height and Rotation values that were tested in different combinations. The height varied between 475 and 575 feet at increments of 25 feet, while the rotation varied between 0 and 120 at increments of 30 degrees. This resulted in 25 different possible combinations being evaluated for this structure. This provides a lot of different alternatives for the project manager to consider to fit into the project constraints. Images of this structure and the node logic that was implemented can be seen below.

image
image

The tables provided in the document titled “3Units_TedBolte_Results” show the different inputs that were altered for each of the two structures, as well as the the Gross Floor Area, Gross Surface Area, and Gross Volume for all of the combinations tested. It is important to note that none of the structures exceeded the height limit of 750 feet and their floor areas were within the desired range of 1,200,000 SF and 1,500,000 SF, with the exception of the two highest rotations tested (90 and 120 degrees) for the height of 475 feet, but there are still 23 other options that remain for the project manager to consider within the desired range.