Style of Design

Arhitektura d.o.o. received second prize for their proposal for a competition sponsored by the city of Maribor in Slovenia within the European Capital of Culture. They managed to put the bridge in one leap across the 120 m wide river.

More images and architect’s description after the break.

The bridge was shaped as a sincere response to the highlighted urbanistic and structural parameters of the design competition task. The result of such an approach is a structure which does not wish to conceal or embellish in any way the form so created. Also, in the detail, the design pursues the same parametric logic. A special detail emerges only where it is indispensable. Greater care has been dedicated to the design of the attachment of the glazed raised railing which, in terms of plane, is made uniform to the exterior plane of the parapet structure.

The proposed footbridge could be included in various concepts of the riverside arrangement, as it has no trendy fashionable label, being a result of engineering aesthetics. In conceiving the structural design that should correspond to the aforementioned premises, we came upon three apparently insurmountable obstacles. On the one hand, the problem of extremely low river banks (asymmetric heights) which will have to enable direct access to the bridge, and on the other hand, the demand for the navigability of the river with a bridge-height clearance of 360 cm. Thirdly, there was a requirement for a max. 5% inclination in view of enabling the crossing for people with reduced mobility. In order to attain these objectives, we sought an innovative structural design which incorporates into the static height of the bridge beam an 80cm-high parapet railing.

At the same time, we gained the missing metres of the path by means of fan-shaped endings on the bridge, as greater lengths at their margins lower the slope. Due to the differing heights of the river banks (approx. 1.5m height difference) the ground plan of the bridge has the shape of an asymmetric ‘hourglass’, which is the result of the location’s varying conditions and gives the bridge a particular character. Considering all the input parameters, the result is seemingly simple, but at the same time, a complex and dynamic spatial form which can be realised only by means of contemporary technology and computer aided design. It is a language of art which indirectly speaks of the time in which the structure was built.

The bridge is thus dematerialised with the lyrically softened lines of the bridge elements and the choice of the light sky-blue colour, which further reduces its tectonic features. Being so dematerialised, it may become, besides its fundamental purpose, also an abstract idea, a symbol and a new icon of the place. Light-coloured bridges make solemn, airy, sunlight and light impression in the space. Owing to the desire to keep intact the city view at night and preserve an unhindered view of the starred sky, the illumination of the bridge deck is foreseen just from the low lights hidden in the parapet railing.

The only exception is the discrete lighting of the lower face of the bridge arch, whose unique shape creates a recognisable image in the city’s night panorama. The pedestrian lane is formed similarly to the deck of a sailing ship, gently curved and protected against the river by railings possessing a touch of the nautical In the bar of the carrying parapet railing, there is a handrail for pedestrians which is discretely lit along the entire length of the bridge. The carrying parapet railing is 80cm high. The railing is raised to the height of 120cm by means of a 40cm high belt of two-layer hardened steel incorporated into the parapet structure. In this way, a sense of greater airiness is achieved, and also small children may enjoy an unhampered view from the bridge.

Arhitektura d.o.o. received second prize for their proposal for a competition sponsored by the city of Maribor in Slovenia within the European Capital of Culture. They managed to put the bridge in one leap across the 120 m wide river.

More images and architect’s description after the break.

The bridge was shaped as a sincere response to the highlighted urbanistic and structural parameters of the design competition task. The result of such an approach is a structure which does not wish to conceal or embellish in any way the form so created. Also, in the detail, the design pursues the same parametric logic. A special detail emerges only where it is indispensable. Greater care has been dedicated to the design of the attachment of the glazed raised railing which, in terms of plane, is made uniform to the exterior plane of the parapet structure.

The proposed footbridge could be included in various concepts of the riverside arrangement, as it has no trendy fashionable label, being a result of engineering aesthetics. In conceiving the structural design that should correspond to the aforementioned premises, we came upon three apparently insurmountable obstacles. On the one hand, the problem of extremely low river banks (asymmetric heights) which will have to enable direct access to the bridge, and on the other hand, the demand for the navigability of the river with a bridge-height clearance of 360 cm. Thirdly, there was a requirement for a max. 5% inclination in view of enabling the crossing for people with reduced mobility. In order to attain these objectives, we sought an innovative structural design which incorporates into the static height of the bridge beam an 80cm-high parapet railing.

At the same time, we gained the missing metres of the path by means of fan-shaped endings on the bridge, as greater lengths at their margins lower the slope. Due to the differing heights of the river banks (approx. 1.5m height difference) the ground plan of the bridge has the shape of an asymmetric ‘hourglass’, which is the result of the location’s varying conditions and gives the bridge a particular character. Considering all the input parameters, the result is seemingly simple, but at the same time, a complex and dynamic spatial form which can be realised only by means of contemporary technology and computer aided design. It is a language of art which indirectly speaks of the time in which the structure was built.

The bridge is thus dematerialised with the lyrically softened lines of the bridge elements and the choice of the light sky-blue colour, which further reduces its tectonic features. Being so dematerialised, it may become, besides its fundamental purpose, also an abstract idea, a symbol and a new icon of the place. Light-coloured bridges make solemn, airy, sunlight and light impression in the space. Owing to the desire to keep intact the city view at night and preserve an unhindered view of the starred sky, the illumination of the bridge deck is foreseen just from the low lights hidden in the parapet railing.

The only exception is the discrete lighting of the lower face of the bridge arch, whose unique shape creates a recognisable image in the city’s night panorama. The pedestrian lane is formed similarly to the deck of a sailing ship, gently curved and protected against the river by railings possessing a touch of the nautical In the bar of the carrying parapet railing, there is a handrail for pedestrians which is discretely lit along the entire length of the bridge. The carrying parapet railing is 80cm high. The railing is raised to the height of 120cm by means of a 40cm high belt of two-layer hardened steel incorporated into the parapet structure. In this way, a sense of greater airiness is achieved, and also small children may enjoy an unhampered view from the bridge.

Read the rest of Finalists Announced for FreeGreen Affordable Green Home Competition!

Permalink |
Add to del.icio.us | digg
Post tags: affordable homes, Design Competition, eco design, freegreen, freegreen.com, green design, green home design competition, green homes, sustainable design, who’s next?

One Prize is launching this competition in the context of larger issues concerning the environment, global food production and the imperative to generate a sense of community in our urban and suburban neighborhoods.

From Mowing to Growing is not meant to transform each lawn into a garden, but to open us up to the possibilities of self-sustenance, organic growth, and perpetual change. In particular, they seek specific technical, urbanistic, and architectural strategies not simply for the food production required to feed the cities and suburbs, but the possibilities of diet, agriculture, and retrofitted facilities that could achieve that level within the constraints of the local climate.

Calling all future-forward architects, urban designers, planners, engineers, scientists, artists, students and individuals of all backgrounds. For more information click here. Seen at Death By Architecture.

One Prize is launching this competition in the context of larger issues concerning the environment, global food production and the imperative to generate a sense of community in our urban and suburban neighborhoods.

From Mowing to Growing is not meant to transform each lawn into a garden, but to open us up to the possibilities of self-sustenance, organic growth, and perpetual change. In particular, they seek specific technical, urbanistic, and architectural strategies not simply for the food production required to feed the cities and suburbs, but the possibilities of diet, agriculture, and retrofitted facilities that could achieve that level within the constraints of the local climate.

Calling all future-forward architects, urban designers, planners, engineers, scientists, artists, students and individuals of all backgrounds. For more information click here. Seen at Death By Architecture.

One Prize is launching this competition in the context of larger issues concerning the environment, global food production and the imperative to generate a sense of community in our urban and suburban neighborhoods.

From Mowing to Growing is not meant to transform each lawn into a garden, but to open us up to the possibilities of self-sustenance, organic growth, and perpetual change. In particular, they seek specific technical, urbanistic, and architectural strategies not simply for the food production required to feed the cities and suburbs, but the possibilities of diet, agriculture, and retrofitted facilities that could achieve that level within the constraints of the local climate.

Calling all future-forward architects, urban designers, planners, engineers, scientists, artists, students and individuals of all backgrounds. For more information click here. Seen at Death By Architecture.

Opening Monday, March 15th in Long Beach, CA, EcoTopia is a competition and exhibition highlighting new concepts in green product design. The show will feature a variety of eco-products from designers that are all focused on fostering a healthy ecosystem and more sustainable society. The 20 products included in the juried exhibition will be available for viewing in Nectar Design’s Studios from March 15, 2010 to April 15, 2010.

Read the rest of EcoTopia: New Concepts in Green Product Design

Permalink |
Add to del.icio.us | digg
Post tags: eco design, Ecotopia, green design, green design competition, Green Exhibition, Juried Exhibitions, Nectar Design, sustainable design, Sustainable Design Competitions, Sustainable Exhibition

This Competition concerns the development of the architectural conceptual design of the building to house the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, intended to become a new identity landmark of the City of Gdansk, and the conceptual site landscape design commensurate with the nature, status, and location of the site.

The purpose of this Competition is to arrive at the architectural concept of the building to house the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, appended with the site landscape design, that will be best in terms of its city-planning, architectural, functional, aesthetic, and operational aspects, and recognise the site’s nature, status, and location, and to obtain recommendations from the Competition Jury with respect to awarding the public contract to the winner of the Competition.

Registration deadline is March 26, submission deadline is August 13. For information on the requirements, go to the competition’s official website. Seen at Death by Architecture.

This Competition concerns the development of the architectural conceptual design of the building to house the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, intended to become a new identity landmark of the City of Gdansk, and the conceptual site landscape design commensurate with the nature, status, and location of the site.

The purpose of this Competition is to arrive at the architectural concept of the building to house the Museum of the Second World War in Gdansk, appended with the site landscape design, that will be best in terms of its city-planning, architectural, functional, aesthetic, and operational aspects, and recognise the site’s nature, status, and location, and to obtain recommendations from the Competition Jury with respect to awarding the public contract to the winner of the Competition.

Registration deadline is March 26, submission deadline is August 13. For information on the requirements, go to the competition’s official website. Seen at Death by Architecture.

The air is full of excitement as we gear up for today’s final event: the live judging of this year’s Greener Gadgets Design Competition! We’ve followed this year’s 18 finalists from the get-go, and now it’s up to the audience to decide this year’s top design.

The first item on display is the Go Mechanical Charger, which empowers people to charge their mobile phones. Judge Julian Lwin says its a “Go”, but Sarah Rich says its a “No Go.” She’s not sure it makes a lot of sense for people in rural/developing areas and wonders how long it takes rolling a charger up and down one’s leg to charge a phone – it seems impractical. Andrew Wagner also says “No-Go.” “Do we need more stuff?” he asked, “I’d rather see this developed into an element in your mobile phone instead of a stand-alone device.”

The next item up was the InCharge Battery Station by Pensa, which brings battery charging out from the workbench, providing a simple, beautiful and an elegant solution. Andrew Wagner says ‘No-Go”- “Are these things ever good looking?” Sarah says “If you’re someone who is going to be recharging batteries, you are already going to be recharging batteries – why do you need to make it beautiful?”

Next up was the Empower, a glider style chair for charging electronics in public spaces using kinetic energy. Andrew Wagner says “Go”. “If we could make everything generate power in this way, that would be really cool. I like this – I think its cool! Actually it makes me think why is this not already being utilized? – and that kinda pisses me off. Personally I don’t want this thing in my home, but lets put it in public places”

The Corky by Adele Peters was the next contender up for evaluation. This little cork mouse uses no batteries, and instead is entirely powered by the motion of your hand – the shell is also made from recycled cork. Sarah says “I give this a go. I’m a Corky fan. The cork is an added bonus, but since you are already moving your mouse, I think it is a great idea to harvest this energy.” Andrew had reservations about the feasibility of the piezo technology. “I’m not sure there is enough motion there to charge the battery – it would suck to have this thing give out on you and have to shake it violently to make it work. I do like the idea to try to improve the idea of the mouse.”

Next up was the Automan 500 Subwoofer by Bon Eco, a subwoofer made from recycled tires by hand, using “solar powered hand tools”. Andrew Wagner says “No Go”. Julian Lwin wonders how deep the bass would be in this product, and says “No Go”. Sarah Rich says “This isn’t a great example of upcycling”. “Just because something is trash doesn’t mean that it needs to be made into a product. This is too complicated an intervention.”

The Illumicharger, a grid-less, light-powered charger that makes use of interior lighting, was up next. It’s somewhat like a photovoltaic classroom calculator, to charge small devices like cellphones. Sarah Rich says: “I approve of this device – I think it is a nice use of wasted energy. I don’t know much about the engineering specs of this device, but it is a nice idea.”
(Inhabitat note: we’re pretty sure this would not work, but we like the idea – can any engineers enlighten us?)

Andrew says “This is the one that I want to see merged with the Corky. Most mice spend their lives sitting in horrible interior office light. If this thing sucked up that horrible light, then we’d really be talking. We have to get these two together. Maybe the logo could be different.”

Next was the Orange Solar Tent by Kaleidoscope, a solar-powered tent where you can charge your gadgets and is illuminated at night by the charge that it picks up during the day. Julian Lwin says ‘It looks cool and slick at first glance – but having been to Glastonbury and knowing what goes on at Glastonbury, I can’t see this think lasting more than two seconds. Drunken revellers would be drawn to it like a glowing beacon, and it would get trashed in minutes. I’m also confused about the material itself. What I see in the rendering is a hard photovoltaic structure – how could that be portable as a tent? Sarah Rich says “It seems so impractical – it looks really heavy, so it would be hard to tote around, and most people go camping to get away from all their gadgets, so why would you want to bring this thing with you. It doesn’t seem like a “green” product – it seems more like a weird, unnecessary luxury product.

The AUG Living Goods program was a bit of a breath of fresh air. It’s a concept of localization of living goods through bar coded product directory that tells you where it came from and if it’s. Andrew said “I think it is great not a big app guy, but if that info could be readily available that would be useful. I really like it and I think it is great.” Julian said “It empowers you to know about where your food comes from. Great concept. Yes.” Sarah said”There are apps that do pieces of this that do not scan bar code but give information. Like two directional thing makes it more complex then just providing info. Go!”

Last, but not least was the Energy Hub Dashboard. Andrew says “No, – why can’t we make this an app? Why do we need another piece of plastic?” Julian and Sarah Rich also say “No – I think this would be better as an app.”

Now that all of the finalists have been presented, the clapometer is about to begin!

And it looks like the top 4 finalists are: The Corky, Empower, Illumicharger, and the AUG Living Goods Program!

To recap the prizes:

1st place winner will receive $3000
2nd place winner will receive $2000
and the 3rd place winner will receive $1000

And after much clapping… we have a winner! This year’s Greener Gadgets Design Competition winner is… the AUG Living Goods Program!

The final score is:

In 3rd place: The Illumicharger
In 2nd place: Empower
In 1st place: The Living Goods Program by John Healy

Congratulations to John Healy for his win of $3000 – and thank you to all of the judges and the people who submitted entries to this competition!!!

Read the rest of GREENER GADGETS LIVEBLOG: Greener Gadgets Design Competition!

Permalink |
Add to del.icio.us | digg
Post tags: “energy efficiency”, clean tech, green design, green electronics, green gadgets, greener gadgets conference, renewable energy, sustainable design, sustainable technology, Yves Béhar