W13 - FINAL REFLECTION ( TE2.3, CC3.4, C4.2 , C4.4)

Final Reflection on Advanced Building Technology

"The relationship between building technology and design can be traced back to the Enlightenment and the industrial revolution, period when advances in technology and science were seen as the way forward, and times of solid faith in progress [...] As technologies multiply in number and complexity the building profession started to fragment. Increases in building activities brought about social and cultural changes" - Stephen Emmitt

I thought it was very apt to start with the quote above to begin my final reflection on my research and experimentation over the preceding assignments of the Advanced Building Technology module. Prior to embarking on this new strain of architecture learning, I was more into the abstraction of form and space as the primary means of architecture while acknowledging technology only as mere instruments for realisation. It was a preconceived position, backed by my overzealous enthusiasm on the derivation of architectonics from human senses and capabilities, which undermines the fact that technology also affects architecture. I was mostly sceptical by the capability of technology to be able to contribute to architecture in satisfying our social and cultural needs.

After learning through this module, I am now aware that technology and form and space have long bounded by a synergy that produces architecture, and that the three elements are intrinsically developed and innovated throughout the architectural evolution for our civilizational progress. However, it has not always been perceived as such, due to the fact that the role of architecture is constantly changing. For example, architecture throughout the nineteenth century refused to have anything to do with industry; it had been concerned solely with monumental projects glorifying the state and giant civic structures expressing the pride of its people through religious, social and cultural values. There was more to the philosophical interpretations through theoretical approaches, and technology was merely an instrument to achieve these aspects.

This however, all changed with the dawn of the twentieth century where Industrial production became an integral part of modern society and a new relationship was forged between man and machine. From the nineteen hundreds on, architecture was viewed in this new light as a result of Modernism and the optimistic belief that architecture could change the future of society through a synthesis of science and technology. It reflected a new ideal for humanity - one that linked man to a new rational culture in tune with mechanization and efficiency. Technology directly affected architecture and the built environment by facilitating the creation of new materials with which to build.

These new materials freed the architect from engineering limitations of the past and allowed for new rational designs based on a building’s function. But most importantly, these designs were given form by a new optimistic ideal, which is that rational design would make for a rational society. Technology transformed architecture into a tool for social and cultural reform. As a result, the industrial revolution gave three new materials to the architect of the 20th century: reinforced concrete, steel and glass. The new materials were inexpensive, mass produced and flexible to use. These affected American cities profoundly by allowing greater density through higher buildings. Imagine the typical office floor plate as we know it: open space with a few columns.

From these understanding, coupled by what I have learned throughout my 7 years as an architecture student, I can separately define architecture and architectural technology. Architecture is the art of building in which human requirements and construction materials are brought to bear in a practical as well as aesthetic solution. It is a form of passion as well as a science and a business that has been described as both a social art and also an artful science. Architects look at the big picture and through Architecture they aim to look at the environment and how this impacts the society in which people live in. It involves the design of buildings, cities and spaces, whilst taking account of culture, history and innovation to produce new architecture as a mark of the society.  Architectural technology, however, focuses on the technical and functional elements of design. In other words, it stresses on the function and buildability with the intention of providing efficient and effective solutions to the design and construction of buildings. Therefore, Architectural technology focuses on the technical aspects and tools involved in the construction of a building whilst Architecture focuses on design and how this fits within the boarder context of society.

But there appears to be a paradoxical understanding on whether architecture is a derivation of technology or vice versa. On one hand, architecture cannot mould the built environment without the limitations of the availability of technology. For example, the typical rigid geometrical essence of the form and space that we are so familiar with is mainly resulted from the constraints of our technological capability from producing flexible organic form and space. On the other hand, certain technologies do not come into existence without the innovative requisites for architecture’s functional optimization of the time. There have always been building designs that are derived from the technologies that were innovated to optimize the intended functionality, more so in this modern age where technology appears to form the fabric of our daily lives.

The advent of Parametric Architecture reconceptualises the relationship between architecture and technology, in a way that technology encompasses almost all of the architectural design process of the building with little human intervention on the design process, as oppose to the conventional architecture approach. It is made possible by the use of computational parameters imposed on the design to identify limitations, and through computer-generated simulation, enables architects to come up with a design solution that enhance functions through quantitative analysis, rather than qualitative. This innovative method in architecture produces the revolutionary architecture movements from Deconstructivism to Parametricism and allows the practitioners to claim their invention as an epochal style for the future. It is a clear indication that technology is capable of deriving architecture by being able to articulate form and space without any structural and constructional limitations in order to achieve functional optimization in terms of social, phenomenological and semiological aspects as Patrik Schumacher, one of the leading Parametricist asserts.

It is constantly argued that the notion of relying fully on technology as a new agent between the configuration of architecture and humanity may result into the neglecting of human values and individuality. Lars Spuybroek, who was once a Parametricism practitioner understood the importance of human association in design and dedicated his time to study on and clarifying the characteristics of Goth Architecture as a product of human imperfection and intuition and the resulting beauty that it projects. By limiting the role of technology from engaging on the human well-being through architecture, he allows both active and passive interactions between the built form and the user in his architecture designs. In one of Spuybroek’s prominent project called the “D-Tower”, he put an emphasis on human reaction and incorporates it in his design through active interaction between the user and his built environment. By allowing human feelings to determine the design character of the structure, he connects the users with their built environment and making the structure represents the locals’ behaviour. The structure itself is designed to subtly resemble a silhouette of an organic being, thus removing the distinction of characters between itself and the human users. Technology in this approach merely contributes towards allowing the man-architecture interaction to be realized without affecting the form and space of the design, as opposed to the style of Parametricism.

Nevertheless, Parametricism has indeed the capacity to be the epochal architecture style of the future and today’s generational technology is undeniably useful to optimize architectural functionality. However, without the consideration of the integration of human values and association within the architectural product, as emphasized by the architecture of the past, future generations may not apprehend the significance of our human existence, nor will they appreciate the meaning and capability of our human skills and intelligence. By perceiving the role of architecture and technology through this argument, it has to be the case that technology is the derivation of architecture, since it is an instrumental response of architecture to fashion form and space and not the other way around. But is this always the case during the evolution of architecture throughout the 20^th century? Have form and space always been the direction of which technology is derived to meet the human needs? By taking on a case in regions where form and space could not be the main justification for the architecture and building designs, such as the ones in the extreme contexts, there is clear evidence that technology is the catalyst of the regional architecture evolution.

The built environment in the Antarctic region has experienced the most consistent change within a short time period, all due to the hostile climatic character of the region that renders the contemporary building design unsustainable. In this context, the configuration of form and space is insufficient to sustain the built environment without any sense of technological innovation in architecture. Moreover, the use of technology as a catalyst from which the design is derived has created the kind of built projects that are only relevant in their respective regions, which makes them a context-related form of architecture. The Halley Research station evolution is a good example because of its location in the region that has more unstable condition compared to other Antarctic region where built environment exist, which is the Brunt ice shelf. As a result, the evolution of Halley research station experienced more substantial changes that led to the award-winning design of Halley VI.

Almost all of the building designs in Antarctica face the same problem throughout the region which is the accumulation of snow that gradually destroys the building structures and eventually bury them. Halley Research Station had to go through 4 types of design products to provide solutions for this issue until finally able to produce the design of Halley V that enables the station to sustain itself on snow for almost 20 years. The innovation that led to this accomplishment is the jackable leg system. While the revolutionary design of Halley V was able to depart the building significantly from the approach of the previous four stations (Halley I, II, III and IV), there was a need of mobility and flexibility, as well as to improve its self-sustenance in terms of producing energy sources by itself.

Three key design criteria have I found most consistent throughout my studies on the evolution of Halley Research Station are the effectiveness of the building's base and foundation to allow it to be on top of the build-up snow, the mobility of the building to allow it to be relocated periodically across distances of many kilometres across the Brunt ice shelf as well as the reduction of environmental footprint of the research station through renewable energy sources and clean burning of waste. By addressing the issues of mobility, flexibility and to minimise the build-up of snow, the Hydraulic Leg Jacking System becomes one of the leading innovation for Antarctic designs since no other buildings like Halley VI has ever been attempted before. In addition to that, the configuration of eight different modules also provide flexibility for the building to be movable by being designed to be separated, towed across the ice shelf by bulldozer, then reconnected again at the new site. Halley VI Research Station is a good example of how technology becomes a vital element in achieving the sustainability of the people through architecture. It is a product of more than half a century of design evolution that had gone through trial and error in the course of architecture innovation.

Given that technology is also capable of deriving architecture, another fundamental question should be raised: to what extent does technology contributes towards good design? If technology assumes the role of fashioning architecture, its improvements have to consider the design aspects that lead to appropriateness in terms of architectural language. By looking at the architecture of today, good design has always been achieved by the concept of “Less is more”, which is the notion that simplicity and clarity lead to good design. Despite the complexity of Parametricism, its approach to convert ornamental configuration into form and space and the minimalist character of its material use are recognizably similar to the concept of less is more. Form and function becomes inherent with each other and the post-modernist ideas are becoming obsolete. The same can be seen in the design of Halley VI where its simplicity in terms of form and mechanism is noticeable if compared to the previous Halley V design. The modern world is highly receptive towards the notion of less is more since it has been proven to be intrinsic with success in design, not just in architecture but also in the industrial and product design.

In conclusion, building technology can be interpreted as a medium that can both derive architecture and be derived from architecture depending on the circumstances in which the built environment is imposed. The term “building technology” can be defined as the knowledge of the technical processes and methods of assembling buildings to achieve its intended function.  Designing built forms requires understanding of building technology and identifying conflicts between the construction and the way things are being built. Knowledge of building technology is an important part of the practice of architecture and it is an area in which I as a master architecture student have to comprehend in order to achieve optimization in design to contribute towards the future of architecture. 

(word count: 2280)

W11 - Poetics of Etreme Context Part 2 ( TE2.3, TE 2.5, CC3.4, C 4.2, C 4.4)

What are the key design features that affect the evolution of Halley Research Station to Halley VI?

• How does the surrounding context affected the design evolution of Halley Research Station?
• How is the Hydraulic Leg Jacking System of Halley VI a context-related solution? 

1. What are the main context-related elements needed to be considered in Halley's design?

Context: The Brunt Ice Shelf

Since the mid-1950s, Halley Research Station has been placed on the Brunt Ice Shelf of Antarctica, which is a 100-m-thick floating area of ice that is fed mainly by ice flowing from Dronning Maud Land. As it moves several hundred metres a year towards the ocean, it takes Halley station with it. As a consequence, the station drifts northwest by half a kilometre each year. Once the ice shelf reaches the Weddell Sea, it is put under strain from higher temperatures and the motion of tides until parts of it eventually break off into icebergs.

An Envisat image featuring the Brunt Ice Shelf lying against the Weddell Sea on the coast of northern Coats Land in Antarctica. Source: "Photo: Brunt Ice Shelf as Seen From Orbit", Spaceref. Extracted from http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=36679

• 
  

Halley Statistics

• Temperature extremes +4° C to -55.3° C
• Annual mean -18.5° C
• Monthly mean: -28° C July (midwinter), -24° C Jan (midsummer)
• Average wind speed 13.3 knots (15.3 mph - 24.6 kph)
• Peak gust 80 knots (92 mph - 148 kph)
• Elevation 30meters above sea level, (98 feet)

Due to the fact that the temperature of the region is mostly below absolute zero, the land where Halley research station is located often experience no melting at all and so all of the snow and ice that falls accumulates continuously. The average wind speed is also fairly high and the unpredictable weather of the Antarctica is notably aggressive. This contextual element is well-known in the Antarctic Peninsula and affected most design evolution of the regional built environment.

Main context-related elements needed to be considered in Halley's design:

• the build up of snow since the snow doesn't melt
• mobility for the research station since the ice-shelf keeps moving towards the ocean

2. How does the evolution of Halley design deal with these context-related elements?

Early Solution

Halley I, II, III and IV

Base design - huts on snow surface, became buried over time due to snow build up

This accumulation of snow was anticipated when such bases were built, and in the case of the UK base at Halley Bay first built in 1956, the construction was particularly strong to take the weight of the accumulating snow and ice which had almost completely covered the original (conventional style) buildings at the end of the first year. The snowfall at Halley accumulates at the rate of around 1.5m (5ft) per year.

Original Halley station, a simple collection of wooden hut. (1956 - 1967)

New buildings that were added the following years were also buried by snow, forming a multi-level complex below the surface.

Life below "ground"

Access was by a regularly dug-out slope down to the doors until it became impossible to keep these clear. At this point access became via a hatch in the roof. As snow and ice build up continued, so the height of the access hatch increased to reach the surface.

Eventually in 1967 after 11 years this first base was abandoned due to a  difficulty of access but more importantly as the buildings were being crushed. Parts of the base were 30-40 feet under the surface level at this time.

A new station was built to replace the original complex. Halley II was also made up of a series of wooden huts, but the roofs were reinforced with steel supports to help support the weight of the snow. Unfortunately this proved no more successful than the original design and the station had to be abandoned after just seven years.

Halley II after its first winter.

Halley III was the first station specifically designed to be able to cope with being buried by the ice. The buildings were prefabricated huts surrounded by corrugated steel conduits, which helped prevent the movement of the ice from crushing the structures inside. Halley III lasted for 12 years before it was abandoned in 1983. By this stage it was becoming too deep to access safely. Also, heat escaping from the buildings increased the movement of the surrounding the ice, which crushed the steel tubing and distorted the structure of the base.

A similar design was chosen for Halley IV, though this time of insulated plywood panels time making two large tubes interconnected in a H-shape that would insulate the huts they contained better than the metal had done which gave problems of its own when snow and ice touching the tube in the warmer parts of the base caused melting. This lasted four years and then in 1989 a different approach was attempted.

Halley III - construction of the corrugated steel conduits.

The entrance shaft of Halley III after being buried by snow.

Construction of Halley IV using the interlocking plywood panels
with specially constructed air gaps to prevent heat from the station
from escaping into the ice which was the problem experienced in Halley III.

Halley IV station.

Halley V - a solution for the snow build-up

Base design - supported on jackable legs above the snow surface

Rather than a base that would be buried and inevitably lead to its destruction and waste, a base was planned that would be on the surface and stay on the surface. It would be held off the ice surface by legs which would be "jackable" that is they could be jacked up slowly by operating a mechanism similar to a car jack.

Haley V with its jackable legs above the snow surface.

In this way the base could be kept above the snow as the level grew higher beneath it, all that would be lost would be the metal legs left behind in the ice. Similar solutions had been used successfully on a smaller scale before with cabooses (essentially kitted out shipping containers) being treated this way at Halley.

It was the most successful base in that it lasted 20 years and led to less frequent disruption from re-builds. In fact it could have had a lifespan longer than this. The reason it was replaced was that as it was situated on a moving ice-shelf, it slowly moved closer to the sea and there was a danger that a large ice break-out could have  left it and it's base compliment of scientists and support staff floating on an ice berg. Worse still the station could be situated on a future break-up zone itself and suffer a disastrous loss of the base and possibly of life.

W12 - Poetics of Etreme Context: REFLECTION ( TE2.3, TE 2.5, CC3.4, C 4.2, C 4.4)

What are the key design features that affect the evolution of Halley Research Station to Halley VI?

The Halley Research station evolution was chosen for my study because of its location in the region that has more unstable condition compared to other Antarctic region where built environment exist, which is the Brunt ice shelf. As a result, the evolution of Halley research station experienced more substantial changes that led to the award-winning design of Halley VI.

Almost all of the building designs in Antarctica face the same problem throughout the region which is the accumulation of snow that gradually destroys the building structures and eventually bury them. Halley Research Station had to go through 4 types of design products to provide solutions for this issue until finally able to produce the design of Halley V that enables the station to sustain itself on snow for almost 20 years. The innovation that led to this accomplishment is the jackable leg system. 

While the revolutionary design of Halley V was able to depart the building significantly from the approach of the previous four stations (Halley I, II, III and IV), there was a need of mobility and flexibility, as well as to improve its self-sustenance in terms of producing energy sources by itself. Three key design criteria have I found most consistent throughout my studies on the evolution of Halley Research Station are:

1. The effectiveness of the building's base and foundation to allow it to be on top of the build-up snow
2. The mobility of the building to allow it to be relocated periodically across distances of many kilometres across the Brunt ice shelf
3. The reduction of environmental footprint of the research station - renewable energy sources and clean burning of waste

Halley VI appears to achieve these three design criteria by applying the jackable and ski-based building design and the use of incinerators for the clean burning of waste as well as renewable energy source from Solar-thermal and photovoltaic cells systems. These are the design features that distinct itself from Halley V, which was the most successful design of Halley station so far.

Halley VI Research Station is a good example of how architecture had always been the vital elements of the sustainability of the people in the Antarctica. It is a product of more than half a century of design evolution that had gone through trial and error. By addressing the issues of mobility, flexibility and to minimise the build-up of snow, the Hydraulic Leg Jacking System becomes one of the leading innovation for Antarctic designs since no other buildings like Halley VI has ever been attempted before. In addition to that, the configuration of eight different modules also provide flexibility for the building to be movable by being designed to be separated, towed across the ice shelf by bulldozer, then reconnected again at the new site.

Looking back throughout the whole century of the evolution of the built environment in Antarctica, I found the dedication of the scientists in finding solutions to maintain their presence within the icy wilderness as a source of inspiration for me as an architecture student. I also believe that technology is the leading instrument for architecture innovation that leads to optimum design solutions. 

(525 words)

W12 - Reflection : Symposium VCA, Singapore

For almost 7 years as an architecture student, I have been passionately in tuned to the idea of “Architecture for Humanity”. By using architecture as an instrument, I have always believed that man is capable to rejuvenate humanity that appears to be undermined due to the current social, economic and cultural conflicts of our time.

Prior to attending the Singapore Vertical City Asia (VCA) symposium, what I understood about the urban issues in Asia is that they are constantly related to the rapid urbanisation that promotes rural exodus into the Asian city centres. As a result, the social, cultural and economic gaps between communities continue to widen and severely neglect those who couldn’t keep up with this civilizational configuration. My enthusiasm was well-facilitated with the hope to understand how the participants and the juries of the international competition held by the NUS School of Design and Environment addressed these issues.

The subject of the competition was a one square kilometre territory which is located in Mumbai. Although I had little knowledge on the current issues that are encountered by India, I was mildly aware of its infrastructural failure in accommodating its rapid population growth and the socio-economic disparity that is resulted from its rapid urbanisation. My thoughts on Mumbai and the design approaches that I imagined would be discussed in the symposium were very focused and narrowed down towards very specific issues that relate to its urban density.

As I went into the hall where the participants’ design products are exhibited, I was astonished to see the variety of approaches that they’ve developed. The approaches that I found most revealing are the ones that addressed nature and ecology, social structure as well as density and verticality. They did not leave out any investigation that ranged from urban density, domesticity and infrastructure, all the way to food, culture and work.

It was astonishing to see how receptive the participants are towards the regional issues of Mumbai in order to successfully develop their urban design products. I admire the undertakings that they upheld in undergoing the researches needed and the syntheses they had come up with within the given time. It humbles me to observe the standards that they’ve set and how far I am as a student to be at par with the rest of them.

After attending the VCA symposium, I am now more aware of the importance of being exposed with these levels of architecture events. I understood now what it means to be a master student of architecture, the responsibility that I have and the effort that I need to go through to be able to contribute to the idea of “Architecture for Humanity”. 

(450 words)

W10 - Poetics of Etreme Context Part 1 ( TE2.3, TE 2.5, CC3.4, C 4.2, C 4.4)

Extreme Context: Antarctica

Overview map of Antarctica by Natural

Environment Research Council.

Source: http://lima.nasa.gov/pdf/A3_overview.pdf

Terra Australis, the mythical land of the South

Antarctica, on average, is the coldest, driest, and windiest continent on Earth. About 98% of Antarctica is covered by ice of at least 1.9km in thickness which extends to all but the northernmost reaches of the Antarctic Peninsula (British Antarctic Survey, 2013). With annual rainfall of only 200 mm along the coast and far less inland, it is considered as a desert with a land mass 1.3 times as large as Europe.

Although here are no permanent human residents, around 1,000 to 5,000 people reside throughout the year at the research stations scattered across the continent. Only cold-adapted organisms survive, including many types of algae, bacteria, fungi, plants, protista, and certain animals, such as mites, nematodes, penguins, seals and tardigrades.

Antarctica has no indigenous population. Because of its hostile environment, lack of resources and complete isolation, the continent remained largely neglected until the 20^th century and there is no evidence that it was seen by humans until the 19^th century. After the first recorded and confirmed landing was made in Antarctica in 1895, the southern land was frequently being visited and temporarily settled ever since, mainly by researchers. 

A cutaway view of Antarctica and its ice sheets.

Source: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/120831-antarctica-methane-global-warming-science-environment/

What is so important with Antarctica?

A key to understanding how our world works, and our impact upon it

1. Global climate and Human impact on Earth's atmosphere

Scientific investigation is the predominant human activity in Antarctica. The number of science and support personnel working in Antarctica each season provides a crude estimate of the level of this activity. States Parties to the Antarctic Treaty report on the numbers involved in an "Annual exchange of information" required under Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting agreements (UNEP/GRID, 2007).

Antarctica is important for science because of its profound effect on the Earth's climate and ocean systems. Locked in its four kilometre-thick ice sheet is a unique record of what our planet's climate was like over the past one million years. Antarctic science has also revealed much about the impact of human activity on the natural world. The discovery in 1985 by scientists at British Antarctic Survey (BAS) of the hole in the ozone layer above Antarctica revealed the damage done to the Earth's atmosphere by man-made chemicals.

Since regular activities began, the number of people participating in Antarctic scientific programmes grew steadily up to 1989/90. Associated with an increased number of people participating in Antarctic activities was an increase in both the number of countries represented and the number of operating stations.

Levels of science and support activity, 1941/42 to 1989/90

Source: Data from J. C. N. Beltramino, The Structure and Dynamics of Antarctic Population (New York, Vantage Press, 1993)

2. Tourist Attraction

As well as being the world's most important natural laboratory, the Antarctic is a place of great beauty and wonder. Around 30,000 tourists now visit the Antarctic each year to experience what life is like in the Earth's last great wilderness. Antarctic commercial tourism has undergone a period of accelerated growth in the last decade, both in the number of passengers on ships and, more recently, in overflying aircraft.

Levels of Antarctic tourism activity, 1980/81-1995/96

Source: Adapted from D. J. Enzenbacher, "Tourists in Antarctica: numbers and trends", Polar Record, vol. 28, No. 164 (1993), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, "Recent developments in Antarctic tourism", Information Paper 13, XIX ATCM, Seoul, 8-19 May 1995, International Association of Antarctic Tour Operators, "Preliminary overview of Antarctic tourism", Information Paper 96, XX ATCM, Utrecht, the Netherlands, 29 April-10 May 1996.

Antarctic Bases and Buildings Evolution

1. Early buildings along the Coastline

Buildings have been built in the Antarctic ever since the early 20^th century as science bases where scientific experiments are made. One of the earliest Antarctic buildings can be exemplified by the Discovery Hut of Ross Island which was built in 1902. The structure is a good example of the early building construction for Antarctic buildings with the use of natural materials such as timber and stones. Another similar design can be seen in the Mawson's Huts which was erected by the Australians in 1912.

Discovery Hut.

Mawson's Huts.

Most of the earlier land-based Antarctic buildings are not feasible to be used permanently due to the unsustainability of their conventional construction materials within the Antarctic climatic condition. The Argentinian Orcadas Base, however, is known to be the first permanently inhabited base in Antarctica, although its recognition is rendered possible due to its location on South Orkney Islands which is at the far tip of the Western coastline, far from the hostile conditions of the Antarctic mainland.  

Orcadas Base (Argentina), built in 1904, is considered to be the first science station in the Antarctica and remained as the only station on the islands for 40 years.

The McMurdo station, built by the U.S is the largest community in Antarctica, capable of supporting up to 1,258 residents, and serves as the United States Antarctic science facility. All personnel and cargo going to or coming from Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station first pass through McMurdo. The station illustrates the sense of permanency of the built environment in the Antarctic land and has successfully evolved into the modern context with additional facilities provided such as a harbor, airfields, heliport and the continent’s only ATM which is provided by Wells Fargo Bank. 

McMurdo Station, a U.S. Antarctic research center established in 1955 and located on the southern tip of Ross Island. 

Artist ’s conception of the long-term plan for McMurdo Station. The McMurdo Long-Range Plan is currently in the concept stage. The purpose of the development is to increase the logistical effectiveness of the science base. It is clear that the built environment in the Antarctica is undergoing developments that allows permanency in human settlements in this remote iceland which was once impossible to achieve.
Credit: U.S. Antarctic Program/National Science Foundation
Source: http://iamwilderness.org/2013/03/21/nsf-to-streamline-antarctic-science/

2. Buildings on the Ice-shelf and the South Pole

While coastal regions in Antarctica experience the melting of snow and ice in the summer months, regions that are further inland often experience no melting at all and so all of the snow and ice that falls accumulates continuously. Bases that are built in such places therefore become slowly buried in the snow and ice (BAS, n.d.).

Some research stations in the Antarctica are required to be located at the more inhospitable areas due to the purpose of the scientific studies that are conducted. A good example of this scenario is the Halley Research Station of the British Antarctic Survey which is located on the brunt ice shelf floating on the Weddell Sea (Meier, 2014). 

View of Brunt Ice Shelf from the maiden flight of Operation IceBridge's Antarctica 2011 campaign with NASA's DC-8.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunt_Ice_Shelf#mediaviewer/File:Brunt_Ice_Shelf.jpg

Being revamped six times during its service, Halley Research Station has contributed towards extremely valuable record of atmospheric composition and weather patterns over the last 50 years, which can be used as a baseline to help understand the impact of human pollution on the planet. The permanent presence of this research station on the brunt ice shelf, despite being on one of the most unstable location in the Antarctic is therefore considered crucial.

The Halley VI centre consists of series of four-legged pods which stand on moving ice and can be raised to keep them above the snow which builds up

Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2353858/British-Antarctic-research-station-nominated-global-archticture-award.html#ixzz37Kq7onE7 

Another place in the Antarctic where there was once no permanent human structure at all and very little human presence is the South Pole. It was not until 1956 that this southernmost place on the Earth becomes frequently occupied by human activities with the erection of the Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station, which is a US scientific research station. It is at the only place on the land surface of the Earth where the sun is continuously up for six months and then continuously down for six months, which makes it an ideal place for astronomical observations. Also, due to its location which is farthest from any cities, the buildings are considered to have the highest carbon footprint, since they are nowhere near manufacturing facilities for building construction and the high cost of delivering the construction materials into the area.

Amundsen - Scott South Pole Station's main entrance port.

The earlier version of The South Pole station built in 1956 by the U.S Navy, where the second level were built atop the first since the first level would be covered with snow drift within a few years.

Source: http://glacierexplorer.com/2013/01/amundsen-scott-south-pole-station-oasis-in-the-desert/

It appears that the building design of each research stations in different locations in the Antarctica have their own typologies. But the ones that are located at the more hospitable part of the Antarctica are more distinctive, by which they experienced more evolutionary process in terms of design than the others in order to maintain their presence in the region. There are a few research questions that come out from my interests which will be discussed on the second week of the blog post:

1. What are the key design features that affect the evolution of Halley Research Station to Halley VI?

• How does the surrounding context affected the design evolution of Halley Research Station?

2. What are the key design features that affect the evolution of Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station?

• How does the Amundsen-Scott South Pole station respond towards the snow build up that constantly buries the building?

Reference:

UNEP/GRID, 2007, Role of Antarctica in The Global Environmental System

http://www.gridc.canterbury.ac.nz/unga/role_of_antarctica.html

British Antarctic Survey. Bedmap2: Improved Ice Bed, Surface and Thickness Datasets for Antarctica. The Cryosphere journal. p. 390. Retrieved 6 January 2014.

British Antarctic Survey, "Why Protect Antarctica?"

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/about_antarctica/environment/why_protect_antarctica.php

"Facts About the United States Antarctic Research Program". Division of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation; July 1982

National Science Foundation, The Environment, Antarctica

http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/antpanel/3enviro.htm

"Mawsons Huts and Mawsons Huts Historic Site (entry AHD105713)". Australian Heritage Database. Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities. Extracted from http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahdb/search.pl?mode=place_detail;place_id=105713

Meier, A. C. (2014) The Architecture of Antarctica: Designing for The Extremes of Our Planet And Beyond. Extracted from http://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/wonders-of-polar-architecture.

British Antarctic Survey, "Who We Are", Introduction to BAS.

http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/about_bas/our_organisation/who_we_are.php