BLOB STRUCTURES

M. Eekhout, W.Lockefeer
M. Eekhout: Chair of Product Development, Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft, Rotterdamseweg 200,
2628 AS Delft, NL | Octatube Space Structures bv, Rotterdamseweg 200, 2628 AS Delft, NL
W. Lockefeer: Architect and PhD student “Liquid Designs and Architectural Classics”.
m.eekhout@octatube.nl w.lockefeer@bk.tudelft.nl

Introduction

The form of structures is primarily related with the form of architectural design. Morphology can be
treated as a theoretical subject, independent from architecture, or from the development in the building
industries, but without a marketing connection morphology is bound to remain a theoretical subject. In
the last three decades the practice of Architecture and the development of morphology has experienced
many changes that have, interestingly enough, their roots in development in society.

The second half of the 20th century has witnessed the development of a number of spatial and
systemised lightweight structures: shell structures, space frames, tensile structures, cable net structures,
pneumatic structures, folded plate structures and ‘tensegrity’ structures. Most of these structures were
developed by dedicated pioneers in the 1950-ies who designed, analysed and built impressive amounts
of ever new concepts: Felix Candela, Frei Otto, Max Mengeringhausen, Richard Buckminster Fuller,
Zygmunt Makowski, Walter Bird, Peter Rice et all [EEK89]. The common basic idea was to minimize
the amount of material consumed, and in order to attain this, extensive intellectual investments in man
hours were necessary. Computer analysis programs assisted the accurate analysis of complex
geometries of the components in these three-dimensional though – in our current view - highly regular
3D-structures. Thanks to the further development of accurate analysis programmes based on non-linear
structural behaviour these 3D-structures can now be designed by structural engineers all over the
world. They reached a status of accepted and mature technology. Peter Rice (or rather: R.F.R)
introduced the intricate use of structural glass in buildings in the 1980-ies, based on regularity and
systemization in the serres of La Vilette, Paris in 1986 [RIC95].

Building means freezing dynamic in fixed and immobile materials. Fact is that the growing complexity
in society more and more gets its expression in buildings as well. This starts with Archigram and its
flexibility in built forms generated by mobility in function [COO72]. ‘De-constructivism’ has a
philosophical different approach to life. It will be continued in ‘Free-form architecture’. Will it develop
itself as a style or just as a variation on the ‘Mother of all Contemporary Architecture’: Modern
Architecture? The way of designing of free-form buildings is much more dynamic and not following
the rules of the previous generation any more. Classical proportions in building design are completely
forgotten. The discussion about good and bad designs will come up, inevitably when the amazement of
the visual ‘Blob’ or ‘Liquid Design’ presentations is brought back to a normal level. The growing
complexity of the building process and buildings as achieved results showed a diminishing concern
amongst architects for regular 3D-structures, putting an end to the pioneering era of lightweight
structures. The traditional tensile structures, pneumatic structures, shell structures, space frames, dome
structures, trusses and tensegrity structures will have to be mixed in their structural action in order to
result in structural forms as desired by fluid designing architects. All existing (sleeping or active)
knowledge on 3D-structural systems has to be combined. There are several causes for this rupture in
development: - Higher building budgets in the last decades (compared with the post-war era);
- The conversion from a producer- to a consumer-dominated building industry;
- The generation of young digitised architects seeking their own identity;
- Development from industrialisation/standardisation via systematisation to
individualisation/specialisation in design and engineering, accelerated by
powerful 3D-computer programs.

Architects got bored with regular systemised structures and building components, being designed by
industries and developed not by themselves, and having too clear a mark of the developing structural
designers. They now try to develop their own building technical design concepts, specific elements,
components and details, fitting in the totality of the building design at hand. By lack of design
experience in this field these technical designs are usually governed or overwhelmed by purely
aesthetical considerations. In order to place this architectural development of building technology in
perspective I will give a short overview of the different historical architectural styles, starting in the
19th century.

19th Century Iron and Steel Technology

The 19th century was the cradle of iron and steel technology. The refining of iron and steel, an ancient
technique, was improved and introduced in several industrial processes. Experiments were conducted
in system of load bearing structures, which were developed to compete economically, although the
structural analysis was still in its infancy. Minimal use of material and the use of cheap labor were
prerogatives in this development. Wrought iron profiles stimulated the railroads. They also demanded
fitting solutions for the early locomotives to cross valleys and rivers in the form of bridges. (fig. 1). The
Netherlands were not in the avant-garde, nor was it in the industrial revolution in general. France,
Germany, England and America were front runners (fig. 2). The Netherlands followed decades later.

Figure 1 and 2. Chocolate factory in Menier, France.

Figure 3 and 4. Firth of Forth Railway Bridge, Edinburgh, U.K.

At the end of the 19th century rolled steel was developed after cast iron and wrought iron. The Eiffel
Tower and the Firth of Forth Railway Bridge (fig. 3), both opened in 1889, mark that point in time. The
Eiffel Tower was made of wrought iron as it was only conceived for the short time of the World Expo
of 1889. Iron has minor corrosion problems. The life expectancy of the railway bridge was much
longer and hence the bridge was constructed of the best material available: steel. Both structures still
stand thanks to an elaborate maintenance servicing. The bridge had been constructed of tubular
structures and rolled open profiles in a system with large cantilevers (fig. 4). The big tubular
components were, in line with the technology of the steam engine and kettles, made as kettle cylinders,
hot riveted (fig. 5). Compression components were usually chosen from rolled open profiles. Only
seldom producers developed closed profiles with a special cross section design in order to enhance the
statical value. The French producer Zorès produced these hollow sections, made of specially rolled and
riveted plates. (fig. 6). These products were economy driven. Only around 1920 electrical welding was
invented and developed. From the beginning of the 1920-ies continuous strips were deformed and
rolled from thin strips on coils. First electricity conduit pipes were produced, later thicker water pipes.
In 1907 Alexander Graham Bell (1847-1922), the inventor of the telephone, had the first space frames
in history built in the form of lookout towers, to witness the aeronautic experiments of the younger
generation (fig. 7). His space frames consisted of solid rods. It would take until the Second World War
to have Max Mengeringhausen construct the first airplane hangers from his Mero space frame system.
The hangers were all bombed, but had introduced tubular structure in industrially produced structures.

Influence of Neo-Styles

In the architecture of the second half of the 19th century the revival of ancient architectural styles was
common. In the Netherlands many of the catholic Neo-Gothic churches were built after the freedom of
religion was politically proclaimed. In profane architecture important public buildings were built in the
Neo-Renaissance style, like the Rijksmuseum and the Central Station in Amsterdam, both designed by
architect Cuijpers and completed around 1889, the same year as the Paris Tower. Architecture and steel
technology were two different worlds, however. They seldom came together, like in the Paris Library
of Sainte Geneviève (1851). Architects did not want to be involved with ‘vulgar’ technology. They left
it to engineers and producers. The designers of the 19th century glass houses were all engineers and
even self-taught men.

Influence from Modernism

Modernism began after the First World War, both in the Netherlands in the artist group of De Stijl
around Theo van Doesburg and in the Bauhaus around Walter Gropius and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
(fig. 9). The architecture of the new post-war society knew austere use of material – primarily
reinforced concrete – the lack of any form of decoration, spatial transparency, sculptural experience of
space and facades which gave away the new technology of concrete, steel and glas. Among the steel
tubes, ultra-thin round steel columns that defied gravity were favorite. During the Bauhaus era the
famous ‘tubular chairs’ were designed (fig. 10). Construction design was primarily focused on
reinforced concrete. The Maison d’Artiste from 1923, designed by Theo van Doesburg and Cor van
Eesteren, was presented as a 1:50 model to the world in a Parisian exhibition (fig. 11). In a
reconstruction effort by my students in 2002 and 2003 a steel frame design from square tubes,
constituting the ‘passe-partouts’ was developed in a prototype scale 1:5 (fig. 12).

Figure 5. Original model of the Maison d’Artiste model (1923). Design: Van Eesteren & Van Doesburg.
Figure 6. Approximately 4 meters high Prototype (scale 1:5) of the Maison d’Artiste made by students
at Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture.

Constructivism could be described as the Modernism of post-revolution Russia (until Stalin gained
power, who did not want to have anything to do with it). In the 1920s en 1930s many idealistic Russian
and West-European architects designed projects in Russia. Some of these designs made use of slender
steel constructions. After 1940, partly because of the emigrated German Bauhaus architects Gopius,
Mies van der Rohe and Breuer a large international movement in architecture, called “International
Modernism” came to existence. In the U.S.A. this architecture primarily made use of reinforced
concrete. The architecture spread around the world, until it gradually lost its identity and got under
pressure of competing, evolutionary and revolutionary architecture styles, despite the heroic deeds.
(fig. 13-14)

Influence of Structuralism

Structuralism was a response to the analytical dogma of Modernism as posed by CIAM, whereas living
and working functions where strictly and architecturally separated. Structuralism placed man on the
agenda, all activities were designed to fit the human scale. Aldo van Eyck designed his
‘Burgerweeshuis’ in Amsterdam 1965 (fig. 15) in this manner and the office of Herman Hertzberger
built Centraal Beheer as an icon of Dutch Structuralism (fig. 16). The buildings were composed of
prefabricated reinforced concrete components.

Influence of Late-Modernism

The Late-modernists did not bother about the criticism of the Structuralists on Modernism and refined
Modernism by a better and more varying material use applied in current buildings with larger size. The
use of highly sophisticated materials for different materials was not avoided. (fig 18,19,20). In this
style I would place the work of the American Richard Buckminster Fuller (fig 18) and the pioneers of
lightweight structures. Starting with the Montreal pavilion from 1967 of Rolf Gutbrot (fig 21) and Frei
Otto and the Munich Olympic Games roof of 1972 by Günther Behnisch and Frei Otto (fig. 22).
Extremes of the development of cable net structures with compressed steel masts, resulting in an
experimental but very sculptural design. In München the final building costs were well over the
original estimates. Germany would never allow a high degree of building technical experiments
hereafter.

Figure 7 and 8. Olympic Stadium of Munich, Germany. Design: Günther Behnisch & Frei Otto.

Influence of Post-Modernism

A style of architecture is only considered a style when it has social consequences. Postmodernism was
a philosophic trend, which was humorously translated into material through a collage of semi-classical
elements. Greek columns experienced a short revival. Apart from the works of Dutch architect Sjoerd
Soeters, this kind of architecture has had no big influence in the Netherlands (fig. 23). This makes it
questionable whether Dutch architects are able to participate in a national philosophic debate.

Influence of De-Constructivism

De-constructivism also has its roots in philosophy and therefore connected to numerous aspects of
culture. Primarily initiated by French writer Derrida, De-constructivism is widely known in literature.
De-constructivism focuses on a revolutionary society of chaos. It is this kind of philosophy that
produced Daniel Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin and his recent design for ‘Ground Zero’ in New
York. Architect Bernard Tschumi designed pavilions in La Villette park, Paris. Dutch architect Ben van
Berkel also had his influence on De-constructivism. Initially one could identify his designs as ‘zig-zag
architecture’. The design of the Erasmusbridge in Rotterdam is based on the philosophy of De-
constructivism and the subsequent design-approach. The steel pylons can be considered as a specially
modeled and welded hollow tube structure. A real designer’s bridge.

Influence of High-tech Architecture

The Centre Pompidou in Paris, designed by Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers build from 1972 to 1976,
is generally considered as the real beginning of the High-tech architecture. This building proved to be
nothing less than a bomb in architecture (fig 27-30). Technology had entered architecture for good. No
escape possible. In the public debated fierce discussions came up between supporters and opponents. It
seems as though a middle position was not possible. The discussions in these days must have looked
like the discussions 80 years before about the Eiffel Tower. The bomb burst because it was an official
state contract, in the centre of Paris; because architecture was formed this time by the totality of the
activated building techniques and as the contrast with the surroundings were maximal. An oil refinery
in the midst of Paris. In the meantime the building suffered so much from the intense popularity that
after 20 years a large restoration had to be undertaken. But the world still trembles. The Centre
Pompidou was designed also after the ideas of Archigram from London, a group of designers around
Peter Cook, who seldom built himself, but whose ideas enchanted the world. Cook’s latest building is
the Kunsthaus in Graz.

Following the trail of Renzo Piano, a wide range of buildings that were dominated by the applied
technology appeared. Those were also called: “High-Tech” architecture (fig 31-38). After the first
“conquest” (Centre Pompidou) there was no need anymore to use a wide variety of colors in order to
deliberately polarize and change the fashion of architecture. From now on the visually present
technology would have enough spatiality and sculptural expression to be characterized by just one
main color.

My book ”Tubular Structures in Architecture” [EEK96] was written at the end of the High-tech epoch.
In architecture requirements became more complex in its program, the building technical solutions
became more complex as well, reason why parading with technology did not seem appropriate
anymore. Building became more complex on the inside. Technology went inside. High-tech
architecture was not based on a philosophical movement, but had many connections with the belief in
technology (fig 39-41).

Figure 9. Sainsbury Centre, Norwich, U.K. Design: Norman Foster.

Figure 10. Centre Pompidou, Paris, France. Design : Renzo Piano & Richard Rogers.

The best examples of high-tech architecture were also examples of the transition to the following phase
of fluid designed buildings: the Kansai Airport of Renzo Piano in Osaka is the perfect example of a
large scale and technical building with a beautiful, logical and fluent form in its cross section (fig 43-
47).
At the end of the 1990-ies many building designs had beautiful curves, and a number of these used
tubular structures. It also contained an end to the large-scale industrialization. From now on
industrialization was made applicable for smaller series with much more varieties. One could see the
extremity of this movement as ‘customized industrialization’: industrialization in lots of one!
Maximum flexibility in the engineering and industrial production process against only modest extra
costs.

Figure 11 and 12. Kansai Airport, Osaka Japan, design: Renzo Piano

Influence of Fluid Design Architecture

The last decade opened up a complete new world of design for architects under the influence of the
possibilities of the new 3D-computer programs like 3D-Studio Max, Rhino, Maya and Catia. Design
became more of styling. It is exceedingly easy in these programs to design forms of buildings without
the usual rectangular design grids. They can be bent and curved in one, two or even three dimensions.
By describing the building in the computer program, the geometry has been fixed and the total
geometry as well of the geometry of its components and elements can be calculated by the computer
without errors. Mistakes and failure costs, commonly manual production operations of 10 years ago,
can be reduced to a fraction nowadays. The extreme consists of ‘free-formed buildings’. These
buildings cannot be generated by mathematical formulas. They have been clayed on the computer, as it
were. We refer to these buildings in the Netherlands as ‘Blob-architecture”. Blob meaning the
contraction of Binary Large OBjects: computer data clouds with very large geometrical amounts of
data. (fig.50-53).

English language speaks about “liquid design architecture”. The building industry prefers to speak
about “liquid designed nightmares”, because of the problems arising in the engineering and producion
of individualized 3D elements and components and building them on the building site. It is clear that a
large gap is created between the free-form designing architects and the engineering, producing and
building industry. The industry does not know how to produce these special 3D-elements and
components, let alone how to position these complicated specially formed elements and components.

Multi-Modernism

The consequences of the influences of the different architectural main streams are not as simple and
logical as globally sketched above. Reality is much more complex. This is caused by the large time
variations encircling the architectural styles. Those vary per architect, per region or country or
education. Even per architect in his career. Dutch architect Abe Bonnema designed as a modernist, but
changed towards Structuralism in the 70-ies and ended his career as a Late-modernist.

Classic architects see Blobs in their usual language of “Space + Form + Size” in complete des-
orientation. Space, which is usually carefully built up, is now the result of the enveloped air inside of
the Blob volume. Form is derived without any regards to proportions. Size is not measurable as there
are hardly any recognizable scale elements. One of the components of ‘Size’ is ‘Margin’. Size in
classical architecture is composed of Margin, Type and Order in size. Specifically ‘Margin’ or the
smaller sized scale element, is the size that in Blob designs barely can make a connection with the
bigger part. It is the freedom of the designer or architect, the signature of the master (in the details) or
the style period (for example the Doric, Ionic or Corinthian style period): in other words signature or
ornamentation that makes the difference. When we apply this reasoning to Blobs, this ‘Margin’ or
signature has completely disappeared. From a classical architect’s point of view Blobs cannot be
measured. Blobs lack the specific character: ornament is not a detail anymore, but transformed into the
very goal. In general Form and Size are intangible quantities. The architectural judgement of Blob
designs has not yet been touched upon by architecture critics. This debate will, no doubt, surprise us.

The current architectural fashion influencing the use of tubular steel structures is best characterized by
a sum of the many different architectural styles and streams in all variables. May be a new name of this
multi colored architecture could be: “Multi-modernism”.

Figure 13. Historic influence of Architecture styles on steel technology

Conclusion

As a result of the current decreasing popularity of regular and systemised 3D structures as ready-made
system products and marketable structural systems, producers of 3D-structures left their standard and
system assortments of structural products to become highly specialised contractors for spatial
structures, in the last decade quite often with lots of structural glass. They became contractors instead
of producers, but of cause keeping their entire know how, insight and vision, involving a more flexible
engineering and production machine potential than ever before. They changed discipline and fixed
organisational routing for project based co-design and engineering and adaptable machine productions
available in a wide network of sub-contractors each being specialised in another niche.

In the newest trend the forms of ‘digital baroque’ buildings are non-rectilinear, non-repetitive and in
their conceptual stage only derived as clay-modelled sculptures, as it were, either by making concepts
really in clay or by modelling and generating them in a similar way on the computer. Computer
rendering programs like 3D design ‘Maya’ nowadays are able to juggle and generate all kinds of
geometric forms, including the ones without any regularity in its geometric patterns. In the conceptual
design stage, architects usually do not look for geometrical repetitive forms and systemised structural
schemes or behaviour at the same time, but design like artists a totally new building with a mega-
surprise for the entire world.

Structural engineers are initially paralysed when they have to develop a load bearing structure in the
contours of these geometrical forms in order to materialise the structural concept of the building’s
envelope. The same is valid for building technical engineers working these designs out more
elaborately onto the level of shop drawings. The question is how to reconciliate this ‘Computer
Supported Sculpturalism’ with sound structural design and industrial prefabrication principles in a
proper balance that revitalises the excellent and extensive experiences of 20Th century 3D-lightweight
structures. This should happen already in the conceptual stage, so that both existing know-how and
experience are activated and the cost prices of these buildings are less of a surprise. The relation
between pre-design principle and post-design application is at stake here. Principles were conquered
and gained by pioneers and scientists later, while architects, acting as composers, but sometimes with
the elitarism of prima ballerinas, do as they like in both surprising and pleasing society at the same
time. It raises the question of relationship between principles and applications.

‘Liquid Design’ buildings have been possible since the last decade because of the increase accuracies
and 3D geometries of computer hardware and software. The design & engineering is the core of the
operation and within this process the design decisions are most important. Complex issues can be dealt
with by an analytical engineering approach. There is not a problem that cannot be solved. The rules of
the game have to be played fair and open. These are the process requirements without which the
innovations in Blob Architecture and Blob Technology cannot be realized.

Figure 14 and 15. Guggenheim Museum Bilbao. Design: Frank O. Gehry

The new generation of ‘Digital Sculpturalism’ buildings with their computer designed arbitrary and
non-rectilinear form, are mainly generated out of sculptural considerations by architects. All lessons
from the past decades where systemized spatial structures and economical building industrialisation
were developed and their salutary regularities, do’s and don’ts were developed, seem to have been
forgotten. The structural and cladding components of these buildings require an enormous effort in
collaborative design and engineering. One would recommend that at least in the design phase the
concept of the building technical composition would be developed simultaneously with the
architectural concept. Both in the design & engineering phase as well as in the productions &
realisation phase an extremely high degree of collaboration between all able building parties
concerned, is an absolute necessity to reach the goal of successful ‘Fluent Design’ Architecture, that is
successful for all parties.

[COO72] Peter Cook (1999), “Archigram”, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, originally
published 1972 by Birhauser Boston U.S.A., Basel, Switzerland.
[EEK89] Mick Eekhout (1989), “Architecture in Space Structures”, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands.
[EEK96] Mick Eekhout (1996), “Buisconstructies in de architectuur”, CIDECT, Zürich, Switzerland.
[RIC95] Peter Rice, Hugh Dutton (1995), “Structural Glass”, E&FN Spon, London, UK.