DESIGN STRATEGY & TYPOLOGY
The “Morpho” Residences originated from the a top down approach, this means that the algorithm behind it uses predefined sets of rules to create its geometry.
The “Morpho” Residences originated from the a top down approach, this means that the algorithm behind it uses predefined sets of rules to create its geometry.
The typology we have chosen is a mixed-use block residential typology. Such a typology offers many advantages, specially considering the global trends of high urbanization rates, climate change, biodiversity loss and scarcity of resources.
Three core principles are to be found throughout the whole project. Adaptivity by allowing change in the living spaces and typologies, Resiliency by presenting different approaches to different climate scenarios and Community by focusing on the well being of the inhabitants through quality spaces and contact to nature.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF VEFRNACULAR TYPOLOGIES
Here we see how the algorithm can adapt to different settings. The iteration runs over different climates and inputs, such as higher or lower FARs and the distribution of the apartment type ratios. The diagrams show that the ratios for urban spaces adapt to the new inputs, allowing more green spaces or more public infrastructure. We can see as well how comfort metrics in a given location are directly related to the energy demand and the energy production of facades and that depending on the climate have balconies, a double skin or pointed roofs.
Furthermore, it is visible how differently the building scales towards the top depending on the climate, either increasing or decreasing the compactness of the block. Lastly to help the designer choose the materiality wisely, different material alternatives for the structure are shown. Through a literature-based research , best practice benchmarks for grey emissions were stored into the climate presets, favoring a more vernacular approach in the building creation.
CONCRETE vs TIMBER
For simplifying the exploration, materials have been assigned to each investigated climate. For instance, for hot-humid climates, concrete has been set as main material construction, specially due to its applicability in the local markets and for its use in the selected FAR (4).
SINGAPORE
REYKJAVÍK
The density of concrete is around 4x more than the timber. This might have some negative effects on the dimensioning of the structure. Heavier structures require bigger cross-sections.
Same as for the density.
Compared to Concrete, Timber shows great advantages to reverse global warming. Timber serves as carbon sink and at the end of its life it can be turned into a carbon neutral fuel.
Concrete requires for its production only small quantities of water. On the other hand, the water resources employed in the production of timber are immense.
Non-renewable energy necessary to produce concrete is very high. The production of clinker is an energy intensive process that requires high temperatures.
The use of renewable energy for the production of timber is around 4x more than for concrete. Nevertheless, this energy is extracted in a clean process from the sun via photosynthesis. For concrete, only artificial systems can be employed.
CONCLUSIONS
Timber exhibits clear environmental advantages over concrete, particularly in terms of GWP, PENRT, and PERT, positioning it as a sustainable material in reducing carbon emissions and energy consumption. However, its higher water depletion potential and lower density may require careful consideration based on the specific application. Concrete remains a superior material for heavy-duty, high-strength applications but comes with significant environmental trade-offs, especially in carbon and energy impacts. This analysis highlights the importance of context-driven material selection in construction projects to balance performance and sustainability.
