Design • First year

The Magic Mats

This was a mind game. An exercise on conceptual thinking ‘on plan’, focusing specifically on geometry and cost within a fixed framework. 3d design studies shall be formed only from combinations of a 1.2×2.4m ‘mat’ or module.  This mat has magic properties and comes in different spatial types with their corresponding conditions, properties and cost.

The task is to be able to see through all challenges and constraints, and find the best design solution to showcase the versatile use of mats either as schools, small commercial facilities such as shops,  cafes or offices.

In the beginning, the stockpile lists of constraints and conditions are quite overwhelming. If I focus on the rules first, it will be too constraining and limiting in design. The quickest route I found was to first identify what is needed to achieve at the end, established a concept, and deliver the idea within the rules. Working backwards gave me a sense of direction and a bit of freedom in design. When I knew I was set towards a day care centre, it was easy for me to determine the numbers and the types of mat that are necessary, applying only the rules where it is relevant. My strategy was to create four very basic clusters and then combine or repeat these clusters to form an even larger space. By doing so, I only had to solve the simplest problem with least constraints at a time. :-)
Children are the main user of the day care centre. Their curious minds never let them travel a straight line. Their "path of curiosity'' captured my attention and is the main inspiration of my final design of this project. I positioned my basic clusters on the focal point of the curious path and from here emerges a unique complex structure of 49 mats. I further challenged the idea by testing them in two quite contrasting organisation. The linear and the radial. I struggled at first with the radial. When it comes to the orientation of my basic clusters, they have to follow a curve line. Nevertheless after thorough examination, I discovered that the most economical way was to only cut the corners diagonally where necessary. By doing so, this shifts one entire basic plan to an angular orientation with a very minimal cutting cost.
The two organisation have similarities and distinctive differences. Similarly, the rooms follow the path of curiosity alternately shifting from an axis. This plays with perception and expectation. You will not know what is in the next room until you travel through it. The pattern is engaging. It feeds the children's little inquisitive mind which is essentially important in day care centres. The differences falls on orientations, views, and cost. The linear organisation offers limited views due to a straight room orientations. However, A large outdoor area is shared by everyone at the rear of the building. Shaded and plenty of space to run around. On the other hand, the radial presents multiple views due to angled room orientations. As a result, outdoor areas comes in small patches which can be assigned by rooms exclusively.
Finally upon reviewing the cost, the additional cutting cost incurred by the radial, surprisingly, did not made a huge difference in comparison to the linear cost. Because some floor mats were cut, the wall and roof mats that goes along with were also cut off the budget. Also, there were some cutting cost incurred in linear which could be another reason why there is only a slight difference of roughly 6 grand. So which one is the best organisation for a day care centre? I will leave it to you. :-)
My take away from this project was learning how to look at all possible avenues to solve the problem in the quickest route but not sacrificing design. However, thinking in the simplest way was the real gamechanger.