From X House to Cotacachi House,Continuity through Variation:Typology + Material

By arquitectura x

材料1

2008基多建筑雙年展時，我們舉行了技術和建筑研討會，會上Mauricio Rocha詳細敘述了他對一種簡單材料應用可能性的探索，并對施工開發(fā)和使用此材料構成的形式系統(tǒng)進行了熱情講解。他說的是瓦哈卡州藝術學院的夯土，當時該藝術學院仍在施工中，Mauricio的理念和該建筑都非常引人注目，我們對潛在的可能性充滿好奇。

但是，從表面上來說，這種材料和施工工藝與我們當時所進行的工作和發(fā)展方向似乎是對立的，我們應該以何種方式、在何種契機使用該材料和施工工藝呢？Mauricio肯定地告訴我們，未來我們會遇到一種情境，只有夯土施工才可解決其中的所有問題，當時機到來時，他會全力以赴地為我們提供幫助，當然，在像厄瓜多爾一樣夯土施工具有悠長歷史的國家中，這看起來是非常合乎邏輯的。

根據（可調整、非程序化、靈活且通用的）空間和（預先建造、組裝、靈活且通用的）建筑物之間的直接關系，怎樣將夯土施工融入到系列開發(fā)中？

Mauricio非?？犊蠓?，向我們展示了一處令人驚嘆的、且正在施工中的建筑，并向我們提供了改善和加強夯土所需的所有技術和事實信息，最重要的是為我們解決了一個關鍵性問題。

類型1

這個時候，我們正努力將通用房屋、x房屋的設計方法落實到其他地方的房屋施工中，房屋類型和規(guī)模有所變化。我們首先通過建筑物的構成系統(tǒng)對建筑物進行了解，或將建筑物分成：空間、組織、結構、外層保護、服務或更多相關系統(tǒng)來了解；然后，根據比如規(guī)模、用途或氣候因素，確定一個可以主導其他系統(tǒng)，并可決定建筑物運行方式、形狀及與環(huán)境關系的系統(tǒng)（或系統(tǒng)組合）。

因此，例如一個市場建筑由其結構系統(tǒng)和外層保護系統(tǒng)（屋頂、太陽能和通風控制）來決定，而對一處房屋來說，空間系統(tǒng)支配其他所有系統(tǒng)（公共和私人、內部和外部間的關系）；兩種情況中，主導系統(tǒng)都是建筑的形式系統(tǒng)。

這一工作方法主要側重于在建筑中應用非程序化和非造型式方法，以實現建筑物的開放性、滲透性、靈活性、可修飾性、可調整性或可逆性，使建筑物更好的應對用途、移動性、程序化限制模糊化、工作-生活關系、家庭或工作結構、城市更新-循環(huán)不斷提出的變化要求，增加公共空間和綠地空間的質量和數量等。

該方法的工作原理非常明確，但是我們發(fā)現在應用該方法時，仍然需要考慮許多隨意的決定，特別是當該過程中的客戶或專業(yè)人士提出表面、非實質性意見作為設計基礎時。為應對這一問題，必需從設計伊始，便確定好建筑物系統(tǒng)的構建原則和規(guī)律及其之間的關系，以保證從建筑理念到形式化再到施工有一個清晰、符合邏輯的過程。

這便又關系到x房屋及其通用性質，它的一系列通用理念是怎樣根據現場、環(huán)境、用途、施工和物質化被一步步落實的。

我們發(fā)現，在這種情況下將類型符合的通用建筑原理作為項目開始建造的主要工具，可以非常有效地去除設計過程中的任意和非實質性因素，尤其可將設計立即轉向基本元素，讓原始理念通過一個可靠的概念基礎，經過合理過程，發(fā)展成一個具體的建筑項目。

我們知道，通用原理來自于建筑學科和歷史本身，也來自于建筑中對我們來說作為整體經驗不可或缺或相關部分的提煉。所以我們提出了類型圖概念，通過抽象和目的作用將類型豐富化、精煉化和集中化到項目圖表中。這一策略可通過引入具體現實參數，改良從原理到圖表的通用（必要）元素，所引入的具體現實參數必須符合項目的時間和場地。

材料2

隨著項目的設計方法越來越清晰并形成嚴謹概念，形式化過程便與我們一直探索、并形成x房屋的組合、預先建造和干地施工系統(tǒng)密切相關，其中具有決定性作用的是施工元素和行為的簡化和減少。通過一系列關鍵決策，施工和物質化符合我們工作中的部分預測；這樣便可更有效地對建筑過程進行系統(tǒng)化，從而使更有效的應用設計方法成為可能：因為我們通過已驗證的系統(tǒng)對形式化過程有更多控制，我們便可更側重于類型或圖表的變化，將形式與施工系統(tǒng)統(tǒng)一起來。

Mauricio Rocha Oaxaca Arts School Mauricio Rocha 瓦哈卡州藝術學院

Earth construction in Cotacachi科塔卡奇夯土施工

x house x 房屋

設計過程是在實體化過程中，有效地融合具體現實因素的，讓其在項目的時間和地點方面具有連貫性、可行性和功能性。因此，材料和施工對建筑項目的邏輯形式化中發(fā)揮著關鍵作用，必須作為類型圖表決定方面的組成部分。我們的工作地點具備現成的干地施工工藝和預制材料，如果這些條件不存在時，應該如何應對呢？事實上，整個國家范圍內都可獲得這些材料，并可找到小型制造商，所以這不是當地可用性的問題，而是材料和技術的合理使用問題：與當地條件、現場和場地、氣候、可用勞動力、客戶需求相適應，但最重要的是與建筑項目的理念實體化相適應。

Courthouses projects: typical building and adaptation to "specific answer"法院大樓項目：典型建筑及針對“具體答案”的調整

類型2

科塔卡奇房屋的客戶是來自加勒比地區(qū)的一對夫婦，一段時間以來，他們一直為自己在科塔卡奇的第二套住宅尋求設計方案（科塔卡奇是位于安第斯山北部的一個小鎮(zhèn)，從基多向北兩個小時的距離）；他們需要在離開厄瓜多爾前的4天內收到設計方案，否則就將該地出售。

第一次見面中，我們對客戶的想法有了大體的了解：他們的首要關注點是房屋和安第斯山之間的關系及私人和公共空間之間的區(qū)分。但是，他們并沒有現場圖片或完整的總平面圖，僅有一張略圖，描繪了一塊海拔2470米位于山谷中的長矩形果園地塊，向東、向西分別為因巴布拉和科塔卡奇山脈。

當時，首要關鍵條件已經非常明了，其地基環(huán)境與我們x房屋的地基環(huán)境條件相同，所以這個項目也需采用同樣的parti，即一種可適用于所有特定現場條件的通用策略：一座透明的雙核庭院結構房屋，其空間限制因素為我們已知的山谷兩邊的山脈。使用了相同類型圖表地基。

同樣，通用因素概念在x房屋建造過程中也發(fā)揮著基礎作用，因為通用因素作為一套有效規(guī)則，對通用和具體因素起著協調作用，并且通用和具體因素之間形成了一個開放式的構架，在強化parti/圖表本質的同時，也可按照具體條件作出變化和調整。

類型+材料

我們需要將此基礎類型圖表植根于相應的現實環(huán)境中，在不失去parti/圖表形式（類型）特性的情況下，明確其細節(jié)，但是由于上述工作和時間限制，我們不得不迅速決定哪些具體因素從開始便需發(fā)揮作用并控制其他因素。

在這方面，客戶已提到科塔卡奇，第二個關鍵條件便已了然：夯土施工和Mauricio Rocha的經驗。這意味著對下列理念的有效應用，該理念強調材料和施工因素從一開始便在通用和抽象因素轉化為與當地條件相符的具體和統(tǒng)一因素過程中，及完成類型圖表的過程中發(fā)揮著關鍵作用。

夯土施工意味著要了解當地建筑傳統(tǒng)中蘊含的啟示，及其通過推理得出的、從項目開始便發(fā)揮關鍵作用的設計因素。如果從一開始便要做出決定，那從一開始我們就會面對更多的設計限制，但是，這也讓我們立即獲得一定自由，無需就審美或造型（表象）方面做出相關決定，重要的是，無需與客戶討論這方面的決定，我們從而可以嚴格按照材料性質規(guī)則、合理建造技術及符合圖表類型的形式規(guī)則，實現房屋的形式化。

作為一個初始條件，夯土施工有自己的一套規(guī)則，這套規(guī)則直接與形式和幾何結構相關，不允許工作邏輯中出現太大的變化。在厄瓜多爾北部地區(qū)的傳統(tǒng)方法中，夯土施工也直接涉及到一套建筑形式，這些形式幾乎全部基于庭院式建筑。因此，材料及其內在邏輯影響著建筑類型，并決定著形式的調整，及最終新類型圖表的形成。

類型+材料=變化中的統(tǒng)一：

當客戶肯定了我們首版方案，同時我們也收集完所有必要信息，并對項目的全部條件進行全面分析后，我們便可對初始原則做出最終決定，進而完成項目的類型圖表和總體框架：

在地震發(fā)生頻率非常高的地區(qū)進行夯土建造，意味著施工中必須嚴格遵守幾何結構規(guī)則，而這些規(guī)則不一定會讓房屋受到山脈限制，或產生變化，從而更加適應地勢、場地幾何結構、果園樹木和客戶提出的用途需求。同時，對當地施工工藝的完全遵守，也可能導致陷入造型元素和完全復制當地規(guī)范的風險。

通過當地傳統(tǒng)材料施工進行形式化，意味著在該過程中，采用了材料與環(huán)境整體相關的方式，因此無需在將通用因素轉化為具體建筑方面做任何決策。

若材料邏輯從一開始便影響圖表，那么我們就必須對此類邏輯進行抽象，了解當代夯土施工中幾何結構、形狀和建筑所必須保留的基本條件。大型統(tǒng)一墻面雙向分布，按要求加固＊，排列在開間中，形成了主要系統(tǒng)。（＊基本按照厄瓜多爾建筑規(guī)范和Mauricio Rocha的技術意見，混合水泥進行加固。）

傳統(tǒng)庭院房屋，第一層建造承重土墻，第二層和屋頂為木制，抽象為庭院式，在本情況下，由三個不同用途的開間形成：夫婦和客人共用的公共開間、庭院隔開的客人私人開間和在這兩個開間頂上供夫婦私人使用的第三間開間。形成庭院的兩個平行開間按照房屋受山地而不是本身限制的parti原則被移開。

主承重墻開間系統(tǒng)由次級輕型結構系統(tǒng)補充并與之相互作用，這一設計來源于當地的施工邏輯，即第二層和屋頂為輕型木制結構，建造于底座第一層的重型系統(tǒng)上；該系統(tǒng)由作為窗戶或屏幕的多層木材和玻璃及木梁構成，第二層和房頂的木梁中加入了薄混凝土板。

x house diagrams x房屋分析圖

按照材料邏輯進行的系統(tǒng)化過程，可讓工程專注于開發(fā)材料在形式和表現上的可能性，即真正通過實體化將理念形式化。通過這種方式，我們所完成的建筑不僅體現了具體因素，并且體現了當地和通用因素的綜合，即走向了一條變化中蘊含統(tǒng)一的路徑。

x house under construction施工中的x房屋

Donald Judd Chinati, Marfa, TexasDonald Judd，德克薩斯州瑪法鎮(zhèn)基安蒂

Donald Judd Chinati, Marfa, TexasDonald Judd，德克薩斯州瑪法鎮(zhèn)基安蒂

House, earth and wood construction, Cotacachi房屋、夯土和木構造，科塔卡奇

MATERIAL 1

In the context of the 2008 Architecture Biennale in Quito where we had gathered in a seminar to speak about technique and architecture, Mauricio Rocha shared with us in detail his venture into the possibilities of an apparently simple material,explaining with passion the development of a construction and formal system from this one material. It was the rammed earth for the Oaxaca Arts School, at that time still under construction, and both Mauricio and the building were so compelling we were left intrigued by the possibilities.

But how and when could we apply a material and construction technique seemingly opposed to what we were working on and developing at the time? Mauricio assured us we would be faced with a context where earth construction would be the right answer and offered all his help when the time came, of course this seemed very logical in a country like Ecuador where earth construction had a deep-rooted tradition.

How could rammed earth construction be incorporated into a line of development based on the direct relationship between adaptable, non-programmatic, flexible and generic space, and prefabricated, assembled, flexible and generic building?

Mauricio’s generosity had come in the form of showing us an amazing building under construction, and offering all the technical and factual information we could need to work with improved and reinforced rammed earth, but most importantly in the form of a crucial question.

TYPOLOGY 1

At this point in time we were working on implementing the design method of our generic house, x house, to any other house located in any other place, and taking it further to other building types and scales. We started by understanding buildings(and/or urban spaces) through the systems that constitute them, or by systematizing buildings into: spatial, organization, structural, covering - protection, services, or, as many systems as would be relevant; then, depending on scale, use, or climate for instance, determining a system (or a combination of systems) that would rule over the others and define the way the building worked, its form and how it related to its environment.

Thus for example a market would be defined by a structural system and covering- protection system (a roof, solar and ventilation control), whereas a house would have the spatial system rule over the rest (the relationship between public and private, inside and outside); in both cases, the dominating systems become at the same time the formal system of the building.

This working method focuses mainly in undertaking a non-programmatic and nonfigurative approach to architecture, in order to achieve open, permeable, flexible,modifiable, adaptable or reversible buildings, that respond better to the constantly changing conditions of use, mobility, ambiguity in programmatic limits, work-live relationships, family or work structures, urban renewal – recycling, increasing demands in quality and quantity of public space and green spaces, etc.

The method had very clear working principles but we found through its application we still depended on many arbitrary decisions, specifically when superficial,unsubstantial opinion appeared as a basis for design, either from the clients or the professionals involved in the process. To counteract this, the laws and rules established for the systems of the building and their relationships had to be present from the outset of the design, in order to ensure a clear and logical process, from idea, to formalization, to construction of the building.

This related us back to the x house and its generic nature, how it started out from a universal set of ideas to become specific as it adapted to its site, climate, use,construction and materiality.

We found that applying universal architectural principles, in this case conforming a typology, as a primary tool to establish the outset of a project, was a very effective way of eliminating the arbitrary and unsubstantial from the design process, but specially to focus immediately on the essential, allowing those initial ideas to be developed from a sound conceptual base through a reasoned process into a specific architectural project.

We understood universal principles had to come from architectural discipline and history itself but also from abstracting what is essential or relevant to all of us within architecture as an integral experience. So we developed the idea of typological diagrams, where typology is enriched, refined and focused by abstraction and intention into a diagram for the project. This strategy allows the universal (essential),as it progresses from principle to diagram, to be re-formed by introducing the specific parameters of reality that must define the project as an appropriate answer to its time and place.

MATERIAL 2

cotacachi house diagrams科塔卡奇房屋分析圖

As the design method for the projects became clearer and conceptually rigorous,the formalization process was strongly related to the assembled, prefabricated, dry construction building system we had been exploring leading to the x house, where simplification and reduction of constructive elements and actions was decisive.Through a series of key decisions, construction and materiality were limited to some predetermination in all of our work; this allowed for a more efficient systematization of the building processes which also led to a more efficient application of the design method: we could focus better on typological or diagrammatic variations as we had more control over formalization trough proven systems, unifying the formal with the construction system.

It is in the materialization that the design process effectively incorporates the specific aspects of reality that will make it coherent, viable and functional within its time and place. Material and construction are thus crucial to the logical formalization of the architectural project and have to be an integral part of the determining aspects of the typological diagram.

The work in our office had been located around places where dry construction technique and prefab materials were readily available, but what to do when they’re not? In all truth you could have access to these materials and small fabricators throughout the country, so it’s not really a question of local availability but rather of an appropriate use of material and technique: appropriate to local conditions,appropriate to the site and place, appropriate to climate, available labor, client needs, but most importantly, appropriate to the materialization of the ideas for the architectural project.

TYPOLOGY 2

The clients for the Cotacachi house were a couple from the Caribbean who had been trying for some time to have a design for their second home in Cotacachi, a small town in the northern Andes two hours north of Quito; they needed a design proposal in 4 days before leaving Ecuador, or they would sell the site.

On a first meeting we got a general overview of the client’s ideas: their priority was the relationship between the house and the Andes, and the division between private and public spaces. However, they had no site photographs or complete site plan,just a sketch that showed a rectangular, long orchard plot in a valley 2470 meters above sea level, located between the Imbabura and Cotacachi mountains, to the east and west respectively.

At that moment a first key circumstance became obvious, we had the same base conditions as for the x house, so this project required the application of the same parti, a universal strategy that could work for any particular site condition:a transparent house whose spatial limits would be the two mountains we know dominate the valley, with a binuclear courtyard organization. The same base for the typological diagram applied.

Also basic to the x house process is the concept of the generic as that space between the universal and the specific, the generic as a set of strong rules that mediate between the universal and the specific, acting as an open framework that allows variation and adaptation to specific conditions, while intensifying the essence of the parti/diagram.

TYPOLOGY + MATERIAL

We needed to root this basic typological diagram to its reality and make it specific without losing the formal (typological) attributes of the parti/diagram, but because of the mentioned working and time constraints, we had to very quickly determine which particular factors would act from the start and rule over the rest.

In this regard, as soon as the clients mentioned Cotacachi, the second key circumstance came into place: earth construction and Mauricio Rocha’s experience.This implied effectively applying the idea that material and construction were to be the key factors in making the universal and abstract, specific and coherent to its local conditions from the outset, completing the typological diagram.

Rammed earth construction meant understanding the implications of local building tradition and all that it inferred as a key design factor, from the outset of the project. If it had to be a determination from the start, restrictions for the design would be greater form the start, but at the same time this freed us immediately from having to make,and importantly not discuss with the client, decisions related to aesthetic or figurative(superficial) aspects, and allow us the freedom to formalize the house following strict rules inherent to the nature of the material and its appropriate building technique while following the formal rules inherent to the typology of the diagram.

As an outset condition then, rammed earth construction comes with its own set of rules related directly to form and geometry that allow very little variation in its working logic. In the case of traditional rammed earth construction in northern Ecuador, it also comes related directly to a set of building types, almost all based on the courtyard type. Thus the material and its inherent logics inform the typology and determine formal adaptations generating a new, final typological diagram.

TYPOLOGY + MATERIAL= CONTINUITY THROUGH VARIATION

After the clients accepted our first proposal, and once all the essential information was gathered and thorough analysis of the complete conditionings for the project was done, we could reach final determinations for the outset principles that would complete the typological diagram and general framework for the project:

Building with earth in a highly seismic region implies you have to work with very strict geometric rules that would not necessarily allow the house to be limited by the mountains, or vary to become more specific to topography, site geometry,trees in the orchard and precise needs of use by the client. Also, strictly applying local construction techniques carry the risk of falling into the figurative and literally reproducing vernacular codes.

Formalization through construction in a local traditional material means you also have implied within this process the way the material relates to its environment as a whole, so again you are freed from having to make certain decisions in making the universal into specific architecture.

If material logics were to inform the diagram from the outset, then we had to abstract these logics, understanding the essential conditions that had to be maintained in geometry, form and construction for contemporary rammed earth construction.Large uniform wall planes distributed bi-directionally and reinforced as required＊arranged in bays, became the primary system. (＊basically mixed with cement and reinforced according to Ecuadorian building code and Mauricio Rocha’s technical advice.)

The traditional courtyard house, built with loadbearing earth walls for the first story and wooden second stories and roofs, is abstracted to a courtyard type defined in this case by three bays determined by use: a public bay shared by the couple and guests, a private bay for the guests separated by the courtyard, and a third bay atop the other two for private use by the couple. The two parallel bays that define the courtyard are displaced, consistent with the parti principles of a house limited by the mountains and not within itself.

The primary load bearing wall bays system is complemented by, and interacts with,a secondary light construction system, derived from local construction logic of light wooden second stories and roofs that rest over the heavy system at the first story base; this system is constituted by layers of wood and glass that work as windows or screens, and by wooden beams with thin concrete slabs for the second floor and roofs.

Systematization according to material logic allows the work to focus on developing the formal and expressive possibilities of the material, that is truly formalizing an idea through materialization. This way we achieve a result that is not just specific but a synthesis of the local and the universal, a path open towards continuity through variation.