Christiansen, Karl

Gammelgaard Nielsen, Anders

English

Research in Architecture, Design and Conservation

1Individual cast concrete elements, part II, Berlin
- a workshop on the workability, optimisation and production of concrete
2
3Content
Preface      4
Introduction     6 
The assignment     8
Sketching   10
Mould making   16
Casting    23
De-moulding   25
Mounting   27
Summary   28
4Preface
As the second in a series of international workshops, that studies the physical and aesthetic potential 
of the material concrete in architecture, a workshop was held at Technische Universität in Berlin in the 
period 8th – 13th October 2007.
The workshop took place in one of Peter Behren’s AEG turbine halls, which now function as a 
concrete laboratory for the university’s Fachgebiet Massivbau. Here 10 students of civil engineering 
from Technishe Universität in Berlin met with 10 students of architecture from the Aarhus School of 
Architecture, and cooperated in solving a common assignment.
The metaphorical point of departure for the assignment was a contemporary interpretation of the 
Brandenburger Tor in an architectural, technical sense. The basic, classical architectural and static 
principle of the bearing and the borne – columns and beams were to be submitted to existing and 
future concrete concrete technological and form-related potentials. 
It was a “hands on” experience where the students created architecture by specifically sketching, 
developing and finally casting concrete elements in full scale.
The result reflects the interdisciplinary effect of the workshop, namely the cooperation between engi-
neers and architects. Static stability and the course of the forces has been expressed as architectural 
form.
The workshop was arranged and completed in cooperation with Aalborg Portland Group as part of the 
research into concrete at the Aarhus School of Architecture.
Karl Christiansen  Anders Gammelgaard Nielsen
5
6Introduction
This workshop has been embedded in research program with the title ‘industrialized individuality’. 
The research program is currently carried out at the Aarhus School of Architecture by Professor Karl 
Christiansen and Associate Professor Anders Gammelgaard Nielsen
The research program takes it point of departure in the reality of the new production methods of today. 
Briefly described, previous production methods were based on craftsmanship. From an architectural 
perspective this resulted in designs of great variation and individuality. The ‘Arts and crafts movement’ 
resounded the essence of this production method (Mackintosh). 
With the industrial revolution, the production method changed from craftsmanship and individuality 
to mass production and standardization. For the architectural design this change in technology led 
to repetition and rationality. The design components were not individually designed, but came out of 
standardized fabrication. Architecture lost its previous individuality and became standardized (Mies). 
In contemporary production methods, a shift of paradigm has arisen. Due to the computer and robot 
technology CAD CAM, it has suddenly become possible to produce objects and building components 
with individual forms. This technology rapidly developed in the car industry and is today a reality in 
many areas of the building industry.
In the research program, we are specifically focus on the technology embedded in pre-cast concrete 
industry. 
Through a preliminary research program, it has become evident that the pre-cast concrete technol-
ogy lacks the embedment of the new technology. A survey reveals that the industry is still in the era 
of standardized mass production, and even this does not seem to be the entire truth. What was to be 
expected today would be a production characterized by a large number of identical elements cast from 
the ‘mother’ mould. The reality in numerous concrete industries is, however, that only a few elements 
are cast from the same mould. This requires a large number of moulds and therefore an extensive 
degree of craftsmanship in the production. In other words; there is to a large extent an individual 
production method in the pre-cast concrete industry, it is just not based on industrial techniques but 
mainly on craftsmanship.
From this reality arises the paradox that a lot of new buildings aesthetically radiate the era of tradi-
tional mass production, but their real production is in fact based on craftsmanship. 
The aim of our research program is to develop a series of techniques for the embedment of custom-
ized mass production in the concrete industry - or to be more specific: to develop moulds that are 
capable of producing a large number of different elements. This requires a crossover between different 
technologies, and that is why our aim is primarily to demonstrate that such a technology is plausible.
To embed a workshop  in the research program, necessitates a more broad approach to the subject in 
order to give the student a basic knowledge and competence. As a result we have decided to broaden 
the focus in such a way, that it is not only concerned with the technologies related to the casting of 
concrete, but also to the casting of materials in general. This offers the candidates the opportunity to 
learn about many different casting techniques and at the same time to become familiar with the aes-
thetic and technical potentials of a large number of materials. 
7
8The assignment
The aim of the workshop has been to cast a structure consisting of a number of concrete elements. 
After the workshop, the achieved knowledge and competence are to be transferred into building 
projects that the students have programmed themselves. This has resulted in student projects with a 
much higher degree of tectonic understanding and integrity. The study program has therefore been 
consistent in its aim: to emphasize the development of architectural projects that gives an under-
standing of basic relations between materials, their technical transformation, and the potential of the 
architectural form. 
The intended construction will relate to the Brandenburger Tor in the sense that it will be a load bear-
ing system consisting of columns and beams. In terms of design it will also relate to the Brandenburg-
er Tor in the sense that it captivates the historic and symbolic importance of this work of architecture in 
Berlin.
The construction will consist of a total of five members, - tree columns and two beams. All the mem-
bers are to be designed individually, but in a way so they together form a totality (this is one of the 
most important purposes of the workshop). Each member has to respond to the overall construction, 
and at the same time it has to be optimized as a construction member (all unnecessary material has to 
be “carved away”)
The five members will be designed in five groups of each four students (each group consisting of two 
engineer students from TU and two architect students from AAA).
The five members are to be cast in five individually designed moulds. These moulds will consist of an 
inner core of polyurethane foam and an outer formwork of plywood. The polyurethane foam will be cut 
with a hot wire. 
All materials and tools necessary for the workshop will be supplied and paid for by Aalborg Portland. 
The concrete will be delivered from a supplier in Berlin (We will need one truckload 4.5 kubicmeter).
9
10
Sketching
This page, opposite page
During a process of sketching by hand drawing and 
model making the five groups of students developed 
a series of design proposals for the structure. These 
proposals were constantly revisited and elaborated 
through a number of critiques, at which different design 
aspects were discussed (context, production tech-
niques, static and stability performances, junctions e.g.)
11
12
This page
Various design suggestions for 
structures. Sketches made in 
polystyrene in scale 1:5.
Opposite page
Critique and evaluation of 
design suggestions. Critiques 
were handled as “open spaces” 
for students and teachers, in 
order to facilitate the optimal 
situation for new designs.   
13
14
15
This page
The designing and making of full scale templates 
for the cutting of the polystyrene blocks. All 
templates necessary for the structure are finally 
displayed of the floor. 
16
Mould making
This page
Top. 
All polystyrene moulds 
necessary for casting the 
structure. 
Bottom
 Polystyrene moulds for the 
casting of the top beam.
Opposite page
Mounting the templates on 
the polystyrene blocks. Cut-
ting the polystyrene blocks 
with a hotwire using the 
templates as guides. 
17
18
This page
Core, cut out of the polysty-
rene block. Detail showing the 
junction between column and 
beam. 
Opposite page
Cores cut out of the polysty-
rene blocks. All members of 
the structure.
19
20
21
Treating the inside of moulds with a 
wax-oil solution. 
Assembling the formwork. Mounting the inside 
polystyrene moulds in an outside load bearing 
structure of plywood and rafters. 
22
23
Casting
Pouring the concrete in the form-
work. Top illustration show break 
down of formwork, due to improper 
reinforcement of outer load bearing 
structure.
24
25
De-moulding
Removing the formwork, the outer load 
bearing structure and inner polystyrene 
mould.
26
Mounting
Mounting the structural elements. 
27
28
Summary
The advantages are many when study programs are embedded in research. 
Some problems may, however, occur due to the differences in the nature of research and teaching. 
Research has by nature a well defined point of departure – the hypothesis. In opposition to this, it does 
not have the same predefined results – the conclusion. If the conclusion was known on beforehand, 
there would be no research. In other words, research follows the rule: if we know where we are going, 
there is no need to go. 
In our opinion study programs should follow the same rules. In order to stimulate the students’ creative 
and innovative potential, study programs should have no predefined results, nor should they have a 
predefined road to follow: only an initiating point of departure and the supporting environment. So far 
research programs and study programs follow by the same rules. 
The differences occur mainly in the way they zoom in on the study object. Where research is free to 
zoom in anyway it pleases, study programs in general have an obligation of a more broad approach. 
This is to ensure that the candidate has a general knowledge of the different aspects of architecture, 
and that he can orient himself in these aspects. 
During the study program, including the workshop, the students have constantly been informed about 
the progresses and results of our research program. At the same time they have had the possibil-
ity of contacting the same concrete industries that we have been in contact with. This has given the 
students access to a lot of knowledge that has been accumulated in these companies. 
At the same time the companies have supported the students financially which, in terms of the work-
shop, has been essential. 
In other words; the students have benefited from both our research program and the companies that 
we have been involved with. At the same time we have in relation to our own research program ben-
efited from the study program in the way that it has inspired us, and uncovered new ways to follow in 
future research programs. 
Seen from a pedagogic point of view, the aim of the workshop was to focus on the complexity of team-
work in the professional world of today’s building and construction. 
Secondly it was the aim to give the students the experience of going trough a full architectonical proc-
ess from beginning to end; from the primarily freehand sketches, trough the adjustments of the design 
due to the various design parameters, to the real making of the forms, and finally to the inauguration 
of the construction. An experience that is only rarely possible to give students because of economical 
and practical reasons. Unfortunately, one may say, because it is the only experience that fully open the 
eyes of the students towards an understanding of the integrity of the architectural process. 
As a conclusion of the workshop it is to be said that the students were fully confronted with the 
complexity of today’s teamwork. The large number of design parameters that were brought into play 
forced the students to keep the design process open and dynamic. In the beginning this brought about 
a number of discussions and negotiations between the groups, as well as internally in the groups; 
discussions, that in many ways paralysed the design process. As a result the designs were constantly 
redesigned, and with a deadline that was rapidly approaching these disagreements became a valu-
able source for finding architectural solutions. This was perhaps the most valuable experience of the 
workshop as the students discovered the possibilities in a problem, that from the beginning seemed 
impossible to solve. 
     Professor Karl Christiansen
     Associate Professor Anders Gammelgaard Nielsen
29
30
Participants


Individual cast concrete elements, part 2. Berlin:a workshop on the workability, optimisation and production of concrete

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research in Architecture, Design and Conservation