Rumoer #65 - Experimentation

periodical for the Building Technologist
BOUT
PRAKTIJKVERENIGING
student association
for building technology 65. Experimentation

3
Experimentation RuMoer #65
2nd Quarter 2017
23rd year of publication
Praktijkvereniging BouT
Room 02.West.090
Faculty of Architecture, TU Delft
Julianalaan 134
2628 BL Delft
The Netherlands
tel: +31 (0)15 278 1292
fax: +31 (0)15 278 4178
www.praktijkverenigingBouT.nl
rumoer@PraktijkverenigingBouT.nl
Printing
www.drukbedrijf.nl
ISSN number
1567-7699
Credits
Edited by: Pim Buskermolen
Article editing: Pim Buskermolen
Allard Huitema
Antigoni Lampadiari-Matsa
Layla van Ellen
Quirine Henry
Popi Papangelopoulou
Cover design: Pim Buskermolen
Cover image: BeyondBendingatArchitectureBiennaleVenice
© Nick Krouwel / ETH Zurich
RUMOER is a periodical of Praktijkvereniging BouT, student and
practice association for Building Technology (AE+T), at the Faculty of
Architecture, TU Delft (Delft University of Technology). This magazine
is spread among members and relations.
Circulation:
The RUMOER appears 3 times a year, with more than 150 printed
copies and digital copies made available to members through online
distribution.
Membership
Amounts per academic year (subject to change):
€ 10,- Students
€ 30,- PhD Students and alumni
€ 30,- Academic Staff
Single copies:
Available at Bouw Shop (BK) for 5€.
Sponsors
Praktijkvereniging BouT is looking for (main) sponsors. Sponsors
make activities possible such as study trips, symposia, case studies,
advertisements on Rumoer, lectures and much more.
For more info contact BouT: info@praktijkverenigingBouT.nl
If you are interested in BouT’s sponsor packages, send an e-mail to:
finances@praktijkverenigingBouT.nl
Copy
Files for publication can be delivered to BouT in .docx or .indd, pictures
are preferred in .png or .jpg format.
Disclaimer
The editors do not take any responsibility for the photos and texts
that are displayed in the magazine. Images may not be used in other
media without permission of the original owner. The editors reserve
the right to shorten or refuse publication without prior notification.
RUMOER #65 Experimentation
Interested to join?
The Rumoer Committee is open to all students. Are you a
creative student that wants to learn first about the latest
achievements of TU Delft and Building Technology industry?
Come join us on our weekly meeting or email us @
rumoer@praktijkverenigingbout.nl

4
RuMoer #65 Experimentation
General
4 BouT board presents itself!
42 Events overview
Engineering Articles

6 (ETH Zurich) Armadillo Vault
-an interview with Philippe Block
12 (TU Delft) Glass laboratory for BT
- Tom Scholten
16 (Peoplehouse) Intrapreneurship in the
technology industry
20 (TUDelft)GlasstrussbridgeintheGreen
Village - Rob Nijsse
Graduation Projects
28 Roof for Qatar Stadium
- Andreja Andrejevic
36 PD-Lab
-Jeroen van Veen
>Interview
about the Armadillo Vault <
CONTENT
>> PD-Lab at the Faculty
of Architecture of TU
Delft <<

5
EDITORIAL
With the instalment of the new BouT board, I
take over the role as editor-in-chief of Rumoer
from Popi Papangelopoulou. For the coming
year I will be aiming to reach higher exposure
with the magazine, to create
an even bigger platform for
Building Technology.
Beforeyouliesthe65theditionof
Rumoer: EXPERIMENTATION.
This issue shines light on several
projects that are innovative in
their own way, such as building
method or their use of material.
The magazine is a collection
of articles from different fields
and contains student articles,
interviews, academic articles,
and graduation projects.
Enjoy reading!
Pim Buskermolen
Editor-in-chief Rumoer 2017-2018
Rumoer committee

6
BouT Board 2017-2018

7
Charley Meyer – Chair 
Pim Buskermolen – Secretary & Media 
Thomas Liebrand – Finances & Acquisition 
Michael Cobb – Education 
Yufe Wong – Events
For the new Master students; we advise you to subscribe
for a membership via the website of BouT. Via the
newsletter you will be updated on the latest news and
developments within Building Technology. And most
importantly: you can join many trips and activities for free!
If you know of projects that could be interesting for us
or if you are interested in joining one of our committees,
please do not hesitate to contact us!
On behalf of the BouT-board,
Charley Meyer
Chair 2017-2018
Dear BouT members and relations,
Time flies! It has been a few months already since we
started as the new BouT board and we are still full of ideas
and enthusiasm! After some time to figure out our tasks,
we identified opportunities to improve the organisation.
Our predecessors did a great job and achieved a lot in the
past year, but there still is great potential for us to grow.
We set our long term and short term goals during our
policy weekend and soon we will pick a moment to look
back at what we have done so far. With great enthusiasm
we are working on new projects, organising diverse trips
and activities and we are definitely learning a lot from
each other.
We are a group of five BT students with an interesting
mix of nationalities and study backgrounds. This leads to
different contacts, very diverse interests and many great
ideas.
THE NEW BOUT BOARD
PRESENTS ITSELF!

8
Interview
Figure 1: The Armadillo Vault at the Venice Biennale. © Iwan Baan
On the 28th of February we had the chance to interview
Philippe Block of ETH Zurich about the Armadillo Vault
at the 2016 Venice Architecture Biennale. Not only the
development of the Vault, but also Prof. Block’s passion for
historic structures will be unravelled in this interview.
1. Your first thesis at MIT was about masonry
structures. Your company Ochsendorf DeJong & Block
and the Block Research Group at ETH Zurich also focus
on shell structures like cathedral of the middle ages.
What construction aspects fascinated you about these
types of structures?
In the beginning I studied Architectural Engineering at
the VUB in Brussels, Belgium. After that, I went to MIT
THE ARMADILLO VAULTBy Popi Papangelopoulou & Allard HuitemaAn interview with Prof. Dr. Philippe Block of ETH Zurich

9
expecting to do high-tech engineering, but instead I met
John Ochsendorf. He became my advisor for my master’s
degree and also ended up being my PhD supervisor. His
speciality is in historic preservation and structural design
with a particular passion for old masonry. I learned that
there is really a lack of understanding of the stability of
unreinforced masonry structures. Even though these
constructions have been standing for many centuries,
people barely understand why,how and to what extent
they are safe. That intrigued me. Unfortunately, there
is often ignorance among engineers, who in a very
detrimental way basically destroy historic structures
because they don’t know how they work.
When John Ochsendorf showed me the beautiful
fan vaults of the Kings College chapel at the University
of Cambridge, I realised that this structure was standing
there in compression without any reinforcement,
proportionally as thin as an egg shell. Ochsendorf was
teaching what is needed to be able to explain these
sensational cathedrals, which are so thin and nonetheless
work with very humble and traditional materials. This
incited my curiosity and excitement. Coming to ETH and
starting the Block Research Group, my main focus was the
question: what can we learn from the analysis of historic
structures? The ability to explain why something is stable
helped us to achieve more controlled and powerful design
methods.
2. Could you explain briefly how the Armadillo
Vault integrated such aspects?
There are multiple things. Let me first explain why we
did the Armadillo Vault. The main theme at the Biennale
was ‘Reporting from the Front’. Architects and other
professionalsrelatedtothearchitecturalfieldwereinvited
to tell their stories about what they face in real life and
what battles they fight in order to push architecture to the
next level. What we wanted to achieve with our exhibition
was to demonstrate that we have the feeling that most
of us are at the pinnacle of engineering, that we know
everything, but in fact that may not be true. We should
more carefully go back and not forget what these master
I strongly believe that
elegance comes by starting
from constraints.
builders could do. In current education, if you learn about
the arch, learn about the shell, then this is very little and
you don’t really know how to safely design these things
anymore. Methods like graphic statics are discarded as
naïve methods by many professional engineers because
they believe they are irrelevant. This is a bit weird because
all the big structural designers of the 19th century like
Brunel, Maillart and Eiffel knew graphic statics inside-
out. These engineers didn’t seem to think that these were
naïve methods; they actually allowed them to discover
goodstructuralform.Andsothemainmessagewewanted
to share in our exhibition is what can you achieve when
you follow where the forces want to go in compression.
We showed this in the floor systems, in the form and force
diagrams and in our graphical tools. The Armadillo Vault
brought all of this together. How much more extreme can
you go than an unreinforced, cut stone vault, with nothing
keeping it together other than geometry to convince
others that these methods are still relevant? But, to return
to your question on how do these historical aspects come
in: first, you need to have a good structural form. It should
have good double curvature to take all the live load cases;
the cutting of the stone needs to be such that you don’t
have obvious sliding at the open edges so that the stones
are being kept in compression. For the Biennale project,
we only had one month to fabricate all of this, so we used
new architectural geometry and fabrication optimisation
to make a general geometry such that the stones could
be cut in a limited amount of time. What we tried to do
with the Armadillo is something that the master builders
had to do. They had constraints of material and they had
constraints of labour. Some architects start with a grand

10
Interview
Figure 2: Constructing the vault. © Nick Krouwel / ETH Zurich
sketch that then somehow gets materialised. We wanted
to start the other way around - to start from the extremely
hard constraints of budget, time and historic context.
I think that this is very much in the spirit of what people
used to be able to do. I strongly believe that elegance
comes by starting from the constraints.
What our research group also tries to
demonstrate is that you can work with humble and weak
materials and that you know where a material wants to
be placed. For example, for a project in New York we
used just compressed Tetra Pak. For the Seoul Biennale,
we are planning a structure made entirely of cultivated
materials (mushrooms). If you control where the forces
go, you can actually start to use alternative things. So you
don’t have to resort to steel and concrete, the materials
that basically are endangering our planet. I believe that at
a certain point people will no longer be able to ignore that
we are just wasting resources.
3. In what way(s) do you think the Armadillo Vault
has triggered further discussion on compression-only
structures?
For me the Armadillo Vault stood for much more than just
a stone vault: it represented new opportunities in design.
So, in a way it’s a very extreme, large-scale, convincing
structural model of doing things differently. It shows
that one can start to combine flowing, exciting curves
and expression together with efficiency; that was very
important to us. In the exhibition, we also demonstrated
an unreinforced concrete floor of only two centimetres’
thickness for a project that we are building near Zurich.
It replaces a typical floor plate, saving more than 70
percent of material. Imagine putting this in a high-rise!
The additional material/weight savings on the primary
structure and the foundations would be sensational. Why
do we build 70 percent too heavy? One wonders, right? I
mean in New York you have beautiful tile vaults in Grand
Central Terminal. These tile vaults are unreinforced, and
they carry millions of passengers coming in and out. No
one seems to be nervous or wondering about the safety
of these vaults because they are historical. But now, when
you propose an unreinforced concrete floor system with
tensions ties, then people are getting a little bit nervous
and think that it’s not safe. What about the historic
structures? Why are you suddenly worried? I hope that
this makes people curious to look back and investigate
why these historic structures are still standing.
4. Are there some principles/techniques from old
compression structures that are still today a mystery on
how they were made?
I think we start to understand how they were constructed,
what the constraints were and so on. But still, finding
ways to safely assess their behaviour is very challenging.
5. Your structures at the Biennale were exhibited
indoors. How well will these resist outdoor weather
conditions or earthquakes?
We already built the Armadillo once before in Austin,
Texas. This was to train the masons and to check all the
tolerances. The Armadillo Vault was taken apart after the
Biennale and will move to a public location outdoors. We
had to design this structure for other loading cases than
only being in an exhibition. So, it is actually designed
for outdoor use, and it is designed for hooligan loads,
meaning that people might want climb the structure. It
is designed for moderate earthquakes and of course you

11
be – in compression – and that you then can use humble,
recycled, cultivated, weak, and/or local materials, but
also that you’re really facing the hard constraints of
integration that architecture needs to embrace.
7. Modern architectural theory discusses the
need for architecture to be able to change state and
place. Do you think the Armadillo Vault could be
referred to as a prototype for temporary architecture,
and if so, how?
What you describe is convertible: you can take something,
adapt it and relocate it or make it relevant to a new
context. Another way is actually to design something
that is very temporary, something that can be recycled or
thrown away without much impact. Maybe the Armadillo
itself is not relevant in this context, but using the masonry
model to be able to assemble, to have something that is
stable and that has simple connections that can be taken
apart and its different parts reused. I’m not going to say
that all of this was the point of the Armadillo. However,
many of these thoughts are in there, and in fact we are
actively pursuing this research. Perhaps, what’s more
relevant than the Armadillo is the project in New York I
mentioned earlier. It was an extremely light-weight series
of arches made out of Tetra Pak, which allowed us to just
Figure 4: The underside of the concrete floor.
© Anna Maragkoudaki / ETH Zurich
Figure 3: The unreinforced concrete floor.
© Nick Krouwel / ETH Zurich
design for a certain context, in this case for areas with
a seismic risk similar to Venice’s. So, you don’t want to
move the Armadillo and reassemble it in Turkey or in San
Francisco. There, it would collapse.
6. You mainly design pavilion structures. Do
you think your principles could work for a permanent
building? What changes should then be applied?
People have asked me: “Okay, and now what? What is the
next step?” A project in Switzerland that we are designing
now is called NEST HiLo. It has unreinforced concrete
floors as one of its features and a flexibly-formed,
gigantic, extremely thin concrete shell as a roof structure.
An alumnus of TU Delft, Diederik Veenendaal, was a key
designer of this roof.
One of the main challenges for a permanent
building is how to interface between elements, that is
the detailing for building physics, for example; how we
can start to include the integration of functions, media,
heating, cooling, building physics, and interfaces
between glass and roofs while avoiding thermal bridges. I
think that is when the real challenge will happen and what
we are pushing ourselves to do in this project. We don’t
just focus on the provocative demonstration of what you
can achieve when you place a material where it wants to

12
Interview
Figure 5: The Droneport.
© Nigel Young / Norman Foster Foundation
stack it without needing any glue, any screws – nothing
mechanical. That meant that after the three days of this
temporary pavilion, we could take it apart. It was nicely
held together in compression during its (short) lifetime.
We could just take it apart and re-shred it and put it back
into the recycling loop. This model doesn’t need any form
materials. One of the challenging things about concrete
is how to separate the steel from the concrete and how to
regrindit.Peoplehavestartedtodothat,butit’sexpensive
and it takes a lot of energy. The pureness, the simplicity
and the cleanness of a masonry project is that you can
keep it stable without needing all these other things that
make it hard afterwards to separate the elements and the
materials.
8. The structure is already very impressive. Is
there something that needs to be improved further?
I can fairly and objectively say from a stone engineering
standpoint that I don’t think we can go much further than
this. We used methods and techniques that came fresh
out of research and that are new ways of designing, new
ways of assessing, new ways of demonstrating stability.
The Armadillo had spans of sixteen metres with only five
centimetres in most areas of the shell, going to only eight
centimetres at the supports. I think we hit the limits there.
Of course you can go thinner. People asked: “What about
Isler, what about Candela? They did things thinner.” And
I said: “Yes, but that is in reinforced concrete.” Of course
youcangothinnerifyouhaveanotherwaytoaddstiffness,
to resist the live load cases. For me, the Armadillo is very
much a place-holder for the opportunity to start to merge
efficiency, expression and constraints. Basically, it’s kind
of Gothic master builder meets Zaha Hadid Architects.
9. Would you like to mention other projects that
you are most proud of and why?
I talked about these floor systems a lot and I think that is
where we go beyond masonry, beyond literal translation
of the material in a modern context. We applied structural
principles to materials that make sense in our context
and we apply these also in very different contexts. The
concrete floor is relevant for a Swiss context, but if you
propose this in an African context, there it no longer
makes sense because they don’t have cement, and they
don’t have the financial resources to make double-sided
moulds. However, they have a lot of labour and locally
available soil, so in Africa these principles are relevant.
What I’m excited about is that when I started my PhD in
the assessment of historic structures, I never would have
imaginedendingupworkingtogetherwithNormanFoster,
Patrik Schumacher and Zaha Hadid. Thomas Heatherwick
maybe wants to find a way to use our principles. But, at
the same time we can make a meaningful contribution by
actually applying our principles to an African context with
theprojectsthatwehavedoneinEthiopia,Tanzania,South
Africa and now with the Droneport project (see figure 5) in
Rwanda that hopefully continues with Norman Foster and
his foundation. This application of our principles is also
something that I teach my students. Perhaps there is an
unproportional emphasis on funicular form, meaning on
compression-only or tension-only form, in my teaching,
but the reason for me is actually to demonstrate that you
can make unique contributions with these shapes and
geometries.
10. Finally, do you have any advice for architecture
students that now start their career?
There are several alumni that came from your school to
Zurich, who ended up being my PhD students. I would
say it has helped me and everyone in my group to expose

13
Take any opportunity to
challenge yourself, and try to
learn about as many different
things as possible.
Philippe Block is Associate Professor at the Institute of Technology in Architecture at ETH Zurich,
where he co-directs the Block Research Group (BRG) together with Dr. Tom Van Mele; deputy director
of the Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) in Digital Fabrication; and founding
partner of Ochsendorf DeJong & Block (ODB Engineering). Block studied architecture and structural
engineering at the VUB, Belgium, and at MIT, USA, where he earned his PhD in 2009. Research at the
BRG focuses on equilibrium analysis, computational form finding, optimisation and construction of
curved surface structures, specialising in unreinforced masonry vaults and concrete shells. As part of
the NCCR, the BRG develops innovative structurally informed bespoke prefabrication strategies and
novel construction paradigms employing digital and robotic fabrication. With the BRG and ODB Engineering, Block applies his research
into practice on the structural assessment of historic monuments and the design and engineering of novel compression structures.
Figure 6: The Armadillo Vault. © Iwan Baan)
yourself to other aspects of design. Try to not just do
architecture for the sake of design, but also enrich your
design skills. You don’t necessarily need to be an expert,
but you need to have sufficient knowledge. I myself
always bounced back and forth between structural
engineering and architecture. That allowed me to create
unique constructions and to feel I had made a difference.
Another example could be to also embrace more building
physics and simulation skills. Maybe that is a very obvious
thing to say, but I think, certainly as a student, take the
opportunity and freedom you still have to challenge
yourself and to try to learn about as many things as
possible, because once you go into practice then you
will be doing what you need to do for the job. Expose
yourself to these other things. Many students want to or
have the ambition to become the next starchitect. I mean,
good for you that you’re ambitious and have the drive, but
there is only a handful of starchitects, so maybe you need
another plan, at least a good plan B! I’m thankful for my
background at the VUB in Brussels that it was this mix
between architecture and engineering, because that gave
me some sort of an openness, both from a basic skill set
and from a certain attitude. It allowed me to be able to
learn things about and specialise in different directions.
If you don’t do that at the start of your studies and you
don’t arm yourself with sufficient base skills to be ready to
explore different things later on, then you’re kind of lost,
I think. You want to do this when you’re still a student, so
challenge yourself. Take all these classes that enrich you.

14
Academic article
T
echnoledge is a series of six elective courses that
are mandatory in the Building Technology master
track. Out of these six courses you must pick two
that excite you the most. This year, however, was a little
different than usual since me and my fellow students
were only twelve, just enough to fill two of the six
elective courses. That’s why a special course setup was
introduced: a collaboration between Design Informatics
and Structural design. For this occasion we were assigned
to make a design proposal for a new laboratory for the
building technology department, made entirely from
glass. The approach was to design and build an innovative
glass structure with 3D printed connections and sun
shading in full scale. This proved to be challenging, given
that we had only 8 weeks to accomplish this.
The project started with a short individual phase,
designs were proposed to each other and the most
promising one was picked. After we selected a winner
we divided ourselves into teams: design, construction
and detailing. The teams design and construction may
be obvious, but we found that a team specializing in
connections was necessary since there was an emphasis
on 3D printing these connections. This happened all fairly
quick in the first week of the project. Given the short time
GlasslaboratoryforBT
Technoledge Design Informatics & Structural Design workshop
Figure 1: Design of the new Building Technology laboratory (© Tom Scholten)
by Tom Scholten

15
frame we had to get up to speed as soon as possible.
The exciting part was the part of actually building
a piece of the design in full scale, hoping to impress the
dean in such a way that he had no other choice than to
give the green light to have it built. Building a prototype
from actual glass is not cheap, so we where given a strict
limit in how much material we could use. Also glass comes
in standard sizes of 3.2x6m and this is something that
you have to take into account when building with glass.
Therefore the detailing team wrote a grasshopper script
that automatically created a grid that fits components no
larger that the maximum sheet size. In addition to this, the
construction team advised the use of a cross beam grid
to disperse the loads as equally as possible since glass
does not like peak tensions. This was also added to the
script, which integrated nicely with the existing grid of the
panels.
Meanwhile the construction team was making
calculations to get an idea of how glass behaves when
put under loads. First by hand, but later in Diana using
FEM (Finite Element Method) because the geometry
got complexer as the design team was generating new
proposals.
One of these proposals was derived from a design from
the concept phase: a tree like column that had branches
where it was exposed to loads. This concept was
interesting to develop because the glass that we would
use for the model was cut with a water jet, therefore we
had a lot of design freedom and organic shapes are one
of the many possibilities. The idea behind using these
tree-like columns is that material can be used only where
necessary, or better said: material can be saved. One
column has four fins, each parallel to a direction of the
grid. Depending on the span of the beam or other loads
the gap in the fin or branch is larger or smaller, this makes
every branch in the building unique.Figure 2: Three dimensional image of the tree like structure
(© Tom Scholten)
Figure 3: FEM model of one of the columns (© Tom Scholten)

16
Academic article
the different pieces in groups, this took some time but
was easy to do since every piece is unique. Now it was like
putting a big puzzle together.
Besides glass there are other components that
play an important role in the structure. The majority is
3D printed, this was essential because we needed this
design freedom for the connections between different
components. In some locations the loads are just too
high for PLA. This was were steel came into play. The
connections disperse the peak loads away from the
glass, the connections were bolted so the pieces needed
to be laminated between the layers. We made the steel
connections ourselves at the DreamHall from 6mm
flatbar steel. These were laminated in the columns and
beams and secured with two-component epoxy glue.
Last but not least the connection from column to floor
was also made from steel, steel square tube to be exact.
The supports were also laminated into the column, the
steel tube was 20mm in width which was equal to three
Unfortunately, because we had little time,
we could only make few alternatives by hand and test
them using FEM. The ideal situation would be to let the
computer build the ideal shape.
When the work behind the computer reached its
end, it was time to start building. We pulled quite a crowd
when unboxing the delivered watercut glass pieces. The
design team thought of a way to assemble the prototype
as quick and precise as possible given the resources we
had available. Each column was made out of five layers,
the beams out of three. Connecting sheets of glass in such
a way that loads can be transferred is to laminate them
with PVB sheets, this process requires heat and pressure.
Two things we had no access to, so we improvised and
used special 3M double sided clear tape.
A template was printed and placed as an underlay under
the glass sheets, to show where the straps of tape needed
to go. Prior to the building week, the design team sorted
Figure 4: Connection of the glass sheets (© Tom Scholten)Figure 3: Lamination (© Tom Scholten)

17
Figure 6: Structure up close (© Tom Scholten)Figure 5: End result (© Tom Scholten)
layers of glass including tape. The square tube was then
bolted with L-brackets to the floor. This worked fine for
the prototype, but the real situation would be an elegant
clamped connection in the floor.
Thisisonlyaveryshortsummaryofwhichstepsweretaken
to go from individual concept to collaborative design.
TomScholteniscurrentlygraduatingwithintheBuildingTechnologytrack,nowfocusing
on acoustics and additive manufacturing. He continues working on a component scale
level where he feels most comfortable, but traded glass for acoustics because he wants
to learn more about it before he graduates.
After he graduates he wants to work for a company that develops products
for the built environment, following his passion for testing and prototyping new technologies with a hands-on
approach. Which one he does not know yet, there are so many to choose from...
Besides this we all are now very comfortable in designing
glass strutures. Glass has unique characteristics, which
may seem scary at first glance but are not once you know
how to take benefit from them. We made considerable
progress in just eight weeks, which got all the supervisors
smiling, including the dean.

18
Industry’s Article
conducted research on the trends and needs of the
engineering industry. 112 engineering companies
were questioned about the way they try to distinguish
themselves from other companies. With a little over 70
per cent ‘quality’ turned out first, closely followed by
‘creativity and innovation’ (65 per cent).
So the willingness is certainly there. But the execution
often turns out more complex. In ‘Werkverkenners’ (a
Dutch cross-media programme about developments
on the job market), big companies were compared
with oil tankers, which also steam slowly. After all, the
bigger the organisation, the less agile it is. And that
is the essence here. Companies know they will miss
the boat if they do not act in the area of innovation and
technological development. To reinforce their place
in the market, they must embrace new opportunities
and reinvent themselves over and over again. But how
to achieve that? In ‘Werkverkenners’, an independent
advisor suggested the following initiative: “Position five
teams of five people at the borders of your organisation.
Give each of them a budget of five thousand euros. The
teams are fully heterogenous, intern, extern, young, old,
from all departments of the company. Let those teams
go ahead with new ideas, and let them do so freely. By
disconnecting a bunch of people from your organisation,
you bypass internal barriers and encourage creativity”.
If one aims to enhance innovation and creativity, one
will have to let go of old structures and give employees
freedom in self-control. For that, however, another kind
Who refuses to innovate, is left behind. Big companies
are dying for employees that not only possess specialist
knowledge, but are also innovative and creative. But
do those companies also offer the challenges that
entrepreneurialtalentisafter?
H
ow many times have you heard the word ‘innovation’
today? At least once, I suppose (unless you read
this in the morning, but then it will probably come).
It is the word of the day, often used in combination with
terms like ‘creativity’, ‘refreshment’ and ‘change’. In
the meantime its use is so widespread, that you would
almost forget how important it really is for the technology
industry.
Progress stands or falls with innovation. Or like Ir. Paul
Oortwijn (former CEO of NLingenieurs) once said: ‘In
this industry, change is the standard’. A company that
fails to innovate, will sooner or later lose its right to exist,
particularly as a technology business. Trend research
tells us that organisations no longer ignore digitisation
and other technological developments, instead they
give these developments a significant role within the
organisation. At many a company, ambitious phrases
and enthusiastic plans frequently find their way into the
meeting room. In fact, however, that has been happening
for many years. In 2011, Deltek and NLingeneurs
WANTED: INNOVATIVE SPECIALISTS
WITH ENTREPRENEURIAL QUALITIES
‘How the profile of the technical employee changes’
by Peoplehouse

19
this group has different interests, and therefore demands
an entirely different approach. A manager of a large
engineering company formulated it as follows: “You don’t
just manage those young professionals, but you offer
facilities and the freedom to fill in projects themselves.”
For years, companies mainly focused on efficiency and
productivity. The workspace offered little space for
fulfilment and self-development. But the new generation
wants nothing to do with ‘to measure is to know’. They
are in search of challenges in a place where they can
work on personal development too. Modern business
management aims less at productivity, hierarchy and
numbers, but is adjusted to the belief that employees
are intrinsically motivated. And with that: more freedom
and responsibility to fill in their own working days and
of employee is needed. Technical Jack-of-all-trades
that not only possess specialist knowledge, but with this
knowledge can also make a difference. In that fashion,
Erik Oostwegel, CEO of HaskoningDHV, recently told
‘Financieel Dagblad’ that ‘he needed less draftsmen and
calculators’. Instead, he is looking for more conceptual
thinkers. People who can come up with innovative ideas
and execute them; entrepreneurs.
With that in mind, it does not come as a surprise that
companies are especially investing in human capital.
In the coming years, the generation of baby boomers
will disappear from industry. The success of companies
hinges on the recruitment of a new generation of
employees. And that is not easy. The new generation of
employees is usually less loyal to one employer. Besides,
© Peoplehouse

20
Industry’s Article
activities. And that is essential. Big organisations almost
always have to deal with hierarchical structures and
internal regulations that form an obstacle for this new
way of working. Besides, which experienced employee
that has been doing ‘A’ for years, is waiting for a recently
graduated newbie who suggests that ‘B’ could work too?
It is no surprise that many young talents rather work
independently after graduation. While companies are
eager for their entrepreneurial mindset and creativity, the
graduates struggle with the question if they would not
rather be self-employed. After all, as an entrepreneur
you have complete freedom to fill in your work process
the way you like. No managers, teambuilding-days
or colleagues telling you to do something differently
‘because that’s the way things go here’. But, as romantic
as it may sound to be self-employed, starting a company
is challenging. The numbers are as plain as day. Out of
127.000 entrepreneurs that start their own businesses
yearly, half quit within five years. About two hundred of
those enterprises can truly be considered start-ups. And
of those two hundred, only 1 out of 10 turns out to be
successful.
Leonie Ebbes, founder of accelerator ‘Peoplehouse’, is
not surprised by these numbers. “Many young talents
start an enterprise directly after finishing college.”
However, they often lack the basic knowledge of starting
and operating an enterprise. They think to have found
an interesting solution, but forget to validate if there
is even a problem to start with. Often, a potential client
has not even been identified. Many mistakes are made
in the starting phase, which – with the right knowledge
– could easily have been avoided. It is for that reason
that Ebbes connects young entrepeneurs to established
companies who are in search for exactly such people. As
intrapreneur (entrepreneur that works within a company)
they can start up within existing organisations. “In doing© Peoplehouse

21
so, the established order gets the creative and innovative
input they need to survive in a fast-changing market. And
the youngsters thus learn the ins and outs of the industry.
After two years, someone with sufficient accumulated
know-how can decide whether he or she wants to embark
on a project independently, or do so inside an existing
company.”
By connecting the young and the old that way, forces
are joined. A bridge is created between the established
order and the new generation of entrepreneurs and
intrapreneurs. To realise that bridge, big companies
must focus on opportunities rather than threats. And with
that: giving entrepreneurial employees the freedom and
responsibility to fill in their work each in their own way.
Young entrepreneurs, in turn, will have to realise that
having an enthusiastic idea alone does not make for a
successful company. And that a career as intrapreneur
can be just as satisfying. If the established order and
the young talents learn from and with each other without
constraints, then the Netherlands will become a breeding
ground of innovation experiments. And that is of benefit
to everyone.
Learn more? On June 7th Peoplehouse in cooperation
with the engineering firm DPA Cauberg-Huygen will
also be present on the Debut Event in the Orange Hall
at the Faculty of Architecture of the TU Delft.
www.people-house.nl
Leonie Ebbes and Anne Cowan (© Peoplehouse)
Are you the founder of your own
start-up? Or do you prefer the role
of intrapreneur within an existing
company? In two years, Peoplehouse
will give you the entrepreneurial experience that equals a decade. We believe in the enthusiasm, the innovative
view and the creativity of entrepreneurial talents. Peoplehouse provides the fundament for (practical)
entrepreneurial knowledge, a validated business plan and a good network. In a well composed Entrepreneurial
Program by Peoplehouse, the young entrepreneur gets the opportunity to get important work experience at well
reputed companies. Besides this, every two weeks on Friday, the young entrepreneur will work on their personal
development and their entrepreneurial skills guided by experienced coaches and professors.

22
Academic article
It is a well-known fact that structures are always
considered to form a continuous collaboration between
the structure itself and the foundation. Especially in the
Netherlands, where these pedestrians/cyclists bridges
are to be constructed, the soil is so weak and unsuitable
that the integration of soil and structure is necessary
to control the required safety- and- deformation level
of this integrated design. Chosen in a limited design
competition, the bridge constitutes a shallow arch made
from glass blocks. This experimental bridge has to be
seen, regarding its structural behaviour, as an integrated
design of a glass arch and the foundation: concrete and
soil. After completion, a set of test loads and regular
control of deformations will take place to insure the
required safety level of these public bridges. To construct
a glass arch bridge, a temporarily supporting structure is
required. For this purpose, a steel-glass lenticular truss
was designed. To safely construct a glass arch bridge, a
lot of testing in the Stevin II laboratory in Delft is required.
Also, something very important is a good price for the
circa 2200 special shaped cast glass stones for the arch,
which is difficult to negotiate with the few companies able
to make them in a good way. Therefore, we chose to make
the temporary bridge a semi-permanent bridge in order to
solve all the questions regarding safety and finance.
DesignofthebridgetotheGreenVillage:The
shallowglassArch“Prototype2”
The Green Village is a terrain on the campus of the
Delft University of Technology (DUT), where all kinds
of technical, sustainability-related, features will find a
home. Between the Green village and the campus, there
is a 14-meter-wide Dutch canal over which a new bridge,
2.2 meters wide, has to be constructed. Of course a bridge
Figure 1. render image of the bridge
Glass Truss Bridgeby Prof. Ir. Rob Nijsse

23
Figure 2. the Green village, location of the bridge Figure 3. render image of the bridge
to the Green Village has to be Green as well. Therefore,
the Green Village worked out a strategy to build, a new
bridge every five years, as sustainable as possible in the
time frame of each moment. The old bridge is of course
to be recycled (figure 1). For the first bridge, a limited
design competition was conducted for the employees of
the DUT. Since the department of Structural Design of the
Faculty of Architecture of the DUT had a good working
experience with an experimental façade, made from
cast glass blocks, for the Chanel shop in Amsterdam, it
was decided that the same building material, massive
cast glass blocks, were to be used for this Green Village
bridge as well. Glass is a good choice for a Green bridge,
for glass is a very sustainable material; it is made from
sand (lots of it in the World), it is inert (no corrosion/rot)
and it is 100% recyclable without any loss of quality. And
glass is transparent, a beautiful property that makes it
shine and sparkle and adds an interesting esthetical value
to the bridge. The glass blocks in the Chanel façade were,
however, glued together for structural integrity. Adhesive
is not a preferred sustainable connection method and
since the bridge has to be dismantled after five years,
gluing (adhesive) was not an option in this location.
Therefore, a choice was made for an arch, to be working
under compression at all circumstances. It had to be a
shallow as possible arch to prevent people from sliding
and slipping when crossing this bridge. Shallowness in
arches has a big structural price: large horizontal forces
on the supports of the arch and in combination with
the Dutch soil, peat up to 20 meters deep, led to the
decision that long concrete piles were needed too. This
is an unfortunate and possibly dangerous combination;
large horizontal support forces and long concrete piles.
The Structural Design group of the DUT was however
convinced that with a clear awareness of this dangerous
combinationandtheappropriatestructuralmeasurements
this challenge could be tackled. We are happy to report
that our design won the first prize and was selected to be
the first sustainable bridge of the Green Village.
Designoftheconcretefoundationoftheglass
archbridge
Between dream and reality stand practical objections; to
start with the (adequate) foundation of this shallow arch
composed of, loose, special shaped, cast glass blocks.
Telesilla Bristogianni, who is doing a PhD research on the
structural, cast glass elements, was responsible for that,
along with the engineering firm Royal Haskoning DHV
(RHDHV) that was selected to be the structural advisor for

24
Academic article
these two foundation blocks. In close collaboration with
the Structural Design group of the Faculty of Architecture
and the Building Engineering group of the Faculty of
Civil Engineering of the DUT the following concept was
worked out (figure 4). Two big, cast on site, reinforced
concrete blocks on concrete piles was the most suitable
choice when weighing cost and efficiency with practical
possible foundation techniques. The concrete piles had to
be 23,75-meter-long to find a good firm standing in the
bearing sand layers under the first 20 meters of non-load
bearing peat. The piles measured 400 X 400 mm and were
driven in the soil. Each concrete foundation block rests on
8 piles. Two piles, close to the supports of the glass arch,
are placed vertically; the other six are placed under an
inclination of 1:5, an angle of about 11 degrees. This has
been done to have as much capacity as possible for taking
up the huge horizontal forces from the glass arch.
Calculationoftheconcretefoundationblocks
The loading on the foundation blocks was provided
by the DUT, which had made FEM calculations of the
shallow glass block arch composed of loose glass blocks
400 mm deep. These calculations and of course the
validation of these FEM calculations by tests in the Stevin
lII laboratory, are the PhD work of Ate Snijder. Dictating
loads were the dead load of 1000 kg/m2 (= 10 kN/m2)
(!) due to the glass arch and a live load of 500 kg/m2 (=
5 kN/m2), that could be placed eccentrically. As a special
load case a maintenance vehicle had to be taken into
account. Taking just the characteristic dead load of 300
kN of glass blocks leads to a horizontal force of 480 kN
on each abutment of the arch bridge. This is a static load,
always there, pushing the concrete blocks! If we add to
this the characteristic load resulting from live load, like
pedestrians and cyclists, a maximum vertical load of 443
kN and a maximum horizontal one of 718 kN result. This
last load that occurs only for a limited time, therefore,
leads to different pile deformation behaviour!
An important remark has to be made to the Standard
producing authorities: real life tests on (driven and un-
driven) piles have to be executed to provide reliable
structural properties for calculations. This counts for
static, dynamic and long-term loadings on piles. If the
engineers don’t validate the data, their calculations are
not more than an educated best guess: an unacceptable,
Figure 4. Sketch of the bridge with the piles reaching the sand level

25
unsafe situation!
The uncertainty regarding the spring stiffness of piles,
especially horizontally, led to the following precautions.
Directly from the delivery by the contractor the situation
was carefully measured and during the building process
and, further on, during the life cycle of this glass block
arch bridge these actual measurements will be guarded.
If the displacements of the bridge are measured to be
larger than the maximum of 10 mm that the DUT arbitrarily
established, stiff steel cables can be attached horizontally
between the concrete foundation blocks. DUT will make
the final FEM calculations of the glass blocks arch bridge
with this movement of the abutments taken into account.
Thesteellenticularbridgewithglass
diagonals:“Prototype1”
To form a firm support to construct the experimental
glass arch bridge upon it, a stiff and efficient structure is
required. For a 14-meter span, heavily loaded by people/
cyclists and/or massive glass stones of a thickness of 400
mm, the most efficient structural shape is a steel truss in
a lenticular form: depth (lever) in the middle, shear force
resistance at the supports. As an indication for the depth;
1 to 10-15 ratio of the span was used and 1.20 meter was
chosen. As an upper chord, a steel profile HEA 120 was
selected, resistance against secondary bending between
the nodes of the truss and resistance against the out of
plane buckling were also essential. For the lower chord,
a steel strip was chosen, since a large tensional force
can be withstood by this element. To reduce as much as
possible the deformation (elongation) of this chord, a
massive steel strip, of a width of 200 mm by a thickness
of 30 mm, was designed. The required circular shape for
these two special elements was created, by rolling the
profiles between heavy presses, realised by a specialised
firm; Kersten Amsterdam.
To emphasize the fact that each part of the Green Village
has to be both sustainable and innovative we decided to
make the diagonals from glass. Faidra Oikonomopoulou
of the DUT is making a PhD study on how to create a safe
structural solution for this diagonal glass column. Two
choices were made to guarantee this structural safety,
the first choice is making not one glass massive bar but a
bundle of small massive glass bars; failure of one or more
does not immediately lead to collapse, the second choice
is to put in the centre of the bundle a steel bar; a steel bar
is hard to break with a sledgehammer. The last choice
also provides the possibility to transfer tensional force
through a bundle of glass bars, a very useful property
since an eccentrically placed live load will result in a
change of diagonal forces from compression to tension or
vice versa. So, we were able to make structural safe glass
diagonals for all the diagonals of our lenticular truss. The
glass bars are glued together with UV hardening adhesive.
To integrate the steel bar in our glass bundle a special
shaped central glass element was used in the shape of a
hollow glass star. In the opening of the glass star a steel
bar was placed.
To make a firm connection between this one steel bar and
the six glass bars surrounding it, it was decided to pre-
stress the steel bar and thus put a permanent compression
load on the glass bars. The pre-stress force was chosen
to be identical to the maximum possible tensile force in a
diagonal. So, in reality, the glass will never be loaded in
tension; a stress situation unfavourable for the material.
The bearing capacity at the supports of the slender ends
of the truss presented an issue for the designers, but
the capacity near the support was improved by welding
a vertical steel plate between the upper and the lower
chord. However, an important requirement for publically
used Structures mentioned in the Eurocode bothered us:
the demand that one element of the main structure may
fail to function without leading to a progressive collapse.
For our situation this meant that each diagonal may fail to
whatever cause; a mad student with a sledgehammer for
instance. With our FEM computer programmes we could

26
Academic article
prove that indeed (almost) each diagonal could fail and
not result in fatal collapse (with the safety factor on loads
reduced to one). “Almost” was mentioned because failure
of the diagonal close to the supports proved critical;
very large deformations occurred due to shear force
action in this part of the truss. To place at this position
a glass diagonal, even though with an inner steel bar,
was considered too much of a risk. So, we decided to
put an all steel hollow section as diagonal close to the
supports. One crucial esthetical fact has to be mentioned;
when looking at the realised bridge the steel bar inside
the glass bundle diagonals will not be visible. This is
the result of the fact that, after long pondering on this
esthetical problem: a very visible black steel bar inside a
transparent, and beautiful, glass bar bundle, we decided
to chromise the steel bar so that it becomes reflective and
“invisible”! One last issue regarding these glass diagonals
is that there is no Code or Standard for these innovative
and experimental elements. So how can we prove to the
client, and the people that use the bridge, that it is a safe
structure? Hence, we decided to test each element in the
Stevin II lab in Delft with doubling the highest possible
load for duration of half hour. If a diagonal can survive
this ordeal, it is, therefore, considered to be suitable
for structural use in this experimental bridge, which we
call now “Prototype 1”. “Prototype 1” as predecessor to
“Prototype 2: the all glass Arch”.
Connectionoftheglassdiagonalstotheupper
andlowerchordofthelenticulartruss
The most interesting, and difficult (!), detail of this bridge
is the meeting point of the two glass diagonals and the
upper- or the lower chord of the lenticular truss. First
starting point was that all forces in a connecting detail to
meet at one point; no eccentricities. Second staring point
was that the diagonals can be either compressed or under
tension, depending on the load case on the bridge. Third
starting point was that the detail should be as transparent
(=glass) as possible. The first idea we tried out was a
Figure 5. the glass and steel diagonals meeting the upper
and lower chord of the lenticular truss
Figure 6. detail of the meeting point of the glass diagonal
with the lower chord of the lenticular truss
Figure 7. detail drawing of the meeting point of the glass
diagonal with the upper chord of the lenticular truss

27
cast glass node, a very appealing design that would have
looked very exciting. We managed to cast a prototype,
but practical problems and lack of time to test this out
properly, forced us to follow another direction. We still
had a number of cast glass blocks left over after the tests
for the Chanel project. Why not re-use them in the new
bridge? So we came up with the detail that is realised. A
semi-circular steel strip was welded to both steel profiles,
the upper and lower chord of the truss. The space inside
the semi-circle was filled in with waterjet cut glass blocks.
In this way compression forces in the diagonals simply
press against the semi-circular steel strip and the glass
blocks inside the semi-circle, while tension forces in the
diagonals are transported by the inner steel bar inside the
glass bundle diagonal that is connected with a steel bolt
to the structure of the truss (figure 5-7).
Buildingandinstallingonlocationofthe
lenticularsteelbridgewithglassdiagonals
It was decided to build this bridge, prototype 1, entirely
inside the Stevin II lab in Delft. Under inside conditions
the bridge had to be assembled as a kit of parts from all
the elements that it is made, mostly steel and glass. The
lower and upper chords of the truss were prefabricated
in the correct circle shape. The diagonals were glued
together in a bundle of 7 massive glass bars (diameter:
D=20 mm). In the middle, a hollow star shaped central
bar exists, through which a steel bar of a diameter of 12
mm was placed. On both outer sides of the glass bundle,
a soft aluminium circular plate (thickness: t= 2 mm) was
placed and the inner steel bar was preloaded with a force
of 16 kN, depending on the position of the diagonal. The
semi-circular steel strips were bolted to the steel profiles
of the truss and with a double-sided, transparent tape the
waterjet-cut-to-fit glass stones were connected inside
the steel strip. A silicone joint closed off all possible gaps
in this detail. In the waterjet-cut glass stones holes with
a diameter of 12 mm were made. Through this hole the
lengthened steel bar was positioned. A bolt secured the
steel bar at the steel profiles. On top of the two completed
trusses a corrugated steel plate was mounted that forms
the basis of the walking platform of the bridge (figure 5).
On the two concrete foundation blocks, steel shoes were
placed to form a support for the prototype 1 bridge. These
steel shoes were made from steel plates (thickness: D=
12 mm), which were interlocked with waterjet-gutted
nudges that transported all the shear forces and left the
required welding to a minimum. The four times two shoes
for each support of the two trusses were connected
to the cast in anchors in the foundation blocks and an
extra check was done of all the essential sizes like span,
horizontal position etc. to be sure that the bridge would fit
into the situation.
The completed bridge was lifted by a crane inside the
Stevin II lab and positioned on a truck to be transported
to the close-by building site of the Green Village. The
transportation was conducted by a professional firm,
Zwatra from Rotterdam. The whole operation from inside
the Stevin II lab to its final, secured, destination in the
Figure 8. transportation and position in place
Figure 9. glass bridge in place

28
Academic article
Figure 10. dancing test (© Karlijn Spoor)
Figure 11. marching test (© Karlijn Spoor)
Green Village lasted around three hours. It was carried
out without any problems or complaints, thanks to a
good scenario, good communication with all the parties
involved and the craftsmanship of Zwatra (figures 8&9).
After this procedure, glass panels, 600 X 300 mm were
installed at both edges of the bridge, connected by steel
angles at two levels with the corrugated steel plate on
top of the trusses. On top of the corrugated steel plate a
layer of 300-400 mm earth is placed. The glass panels at
the edges of the bridge hold this mass of earth in place.
Grass and stepping-stones are installed so that it is really
a Green Bridge for the Green Village.
On the 15th
of May 2017, a group of 50 students
volunteered to be the testing load on the “Prototype 1”.
To take good and accurate measurements a large number

29
Figure 12. walking test (© Karlijn Spoor)
Prof.Ir. Rob Nijsse is a Senior Consulting Engineer. In 1979, he started working
as a structural engineer at ABT. At the time, he already worked as a project
manager of small projects. In 1985, he became manager of larger projects
and was also responsible for the structural design. In 1991, he was appointed
consulting engineer (now senior consultant). In 1997, he became managing director Structural Engineering at
ABT, but in the first place he remained a structural designer. Since 2007, he works part-time as a professor in the
Technical University Delft in order to be able to pass on his knowledge and experience to the new generations.
of strain gauges and acceleration measuring devices are
placed. Also, a set of reflective dots is glued to the lower
and the upper steel chord of the bridge. By taking pictures
during different loading types we can make a computer-
added image of the bridge during resulting deformations.
The loading by students began with a static load; bridge
full (=uniform loaded) and half full (=eccentric loaded).
Then, they marched over the bridge; we were interested
in the dynamic behaviour of the bridge during this test
load of marching people, which is always a hot issue for
bridges. Last but certainly not least, there was a dance
party on the bridge and once again the dynamic behaviour
of the bridge was measured. After all the tests we used the
required data to validate our FEM computer programmes
(figures 10-12).
How to continue with the Glass Arch bridge,
whatistheultimategoalofthisoperation?
In the near future, after all the necessary tests will have
been carried out in the Stevin II lab, the cast glass stones
of the Glass Arch bridge, prototype 2, will be placed
directly on top of the corrugated steel plate (on a layer
of wooden panels). After the last stone is put in position,
the Arch will be completed, and the supports connected
to the concrete foundation blocks of prototype 1 will be
lowered and recycled/ reused at another position. Then
we will see the image that the computer-made rendering
showed us; a shining, shimmering Glass Arch spanning
mysteriously the 14-meter canal.
Special thanks to the team:
General Design and supervision: Rob Nijsse
Technical Drawings, Structural Validation, Experimental
validation: Ate Snijder
Construction: Kees Baardolf, Ate Snijder, Wan-Yun Alice
Huang, Rafail Gkaidatzis, Lawrence Brooks, Eli Padmos,
students minor Bend and Break

30
Graduation Project
The graduation topic discusses the design analysis
process of designing a maximum transparent roof for a
stadium in order to create the most optimal semi indoor
stadium climate. To conduct such research, the following
main question had to be asked: How can a maximized
transparent roof for the Khalifa International Stadium (KIS)
in Qatar, with efficient use of energy, create an optimal semi
indoor climate in extreme summer weather conditions?
The research on creating a comfortable micro-climate
in stadia started in the early eighties, where at the time
knowledge in this field was very little. During the nineties,
more information came available on creating micro-
climates in large semi-indoor spaces. Thus academic
experimenting began on the quality of air, lighting and
acoustics in stadia. This resulted in new stadiums built
with new techniques from these academic analyses.
In the zeros one discovered a lot of inconveniences in
the findings of the nineties and started to improve the
academic research on stadia. With the rise of computers,
it was a lot easier to conduct more complex and feasible
analyses. Which brings us till today, where climate
adaptation with complex forms can be tested and actually
be made with the use of new kinds of materials. Because
of the help of computers, designs are becoming much
easier to predict, which makes us challenge ourselves
to design in the most extreme situations where efficient
and sustainable engineering can be achieved. Designing
a roof for a stadium or a whole stadium gives new insights
in different use of materials, smart climate/ structural
design and the quality of sustainable building.
Designing a roof for the Khalifa International Stadium
(KIS) gives a clear insight in the complexity of the
structural demands of a stadium and the relevance of
climate adaptive building. From a climate till a structural
perspective the design has to balance between
both disciplines, without exceeding one another’s
preconditions. For such roof, a wide range of design and
engineering analyses is required. By conducting wind,
heat and lighting analyses certain design requirements
are imposed. Resulting in an interesting primary structural
roof design based on the wind and an interesting
secondary structural roof design based on heat and
lighting. A roof where climate design meets structural
design and vice versa.
The design of a maximized transparent roof structure,
to create the most optimal micro climate for the Khalifa International
StadIum in Qatar
By Andreja Andrejevic
‘‘
‘‘
Figure 1. Khalifa International Stadium

31
Climate Design Research
The research on Semi-Indoor Environmental Quality
in stadia discusses three types of qualities, namely
Aerothermal Quality, Lighting Quality and Acoustical
Quality. Where the research on Aerothermal Quality
elaborates on the comfort of the users (players and
spectators) and the importance of roof geometry on
climate design [2]; the research on Lighting Quality
elaborates on the amount of light needed for natural
turf growth [3] and lastly the research on Acoustical
Quality digs into the importance of backward and forward
reflection in stadium semi-indoor spaces [4]. As a
conclusion, climate design restrictions were set out of the
researched literature.
By looking at what challenges on stadium climate were
encountered, I can get a better insight on designing a
suitable climate adaptive roof.
Figure 2. Geometry in relation to aerothermal quality
Figure 3. Acoustical quality
Figure 4. Lighting quality

32
Graduation Project
Figure 4. Original design for the office building at the
Casuariestraat made with Soda Lime glass, http://www.fokkema-
partners.nl
Structural Design Research
The structural design research discusses the possibilities
of large span structures applied to stadium roofs. Starting
with the possibilities of applying steel as a primary
structure followed by a comprehensive explanation on
the use of glass roofs in the architectural practice [5].
The third part of this chapter discusses different types
of glass, glass production and glass treatments. At the
end, the last chapter discusses two different types of
smart hybrid glass structures that can be applied on the
primary steel structure for the stadium. The purpose of
this is chapter is researching the maximum possible span
with glass as a secondary structure within the primary
steel structure [6]. This way the primary structure can
be executed with a minimum amount of steel, while the
secondary structure will supply maximum transparency/
translucency and seek for its maximum span possible.
Figure 5. Structural possibilities of applying different geometries in glass

33
Roof Design Analysis
After determining the climate and structural restrictions
out of the research, the total analysis can be conducted.
Most of the design and analysis process will take place
in Rhinoceros+Grasshopper, with the help of several
plug-ins. However, to get realistic wind simulations, wind
tunnel model tests were conducted to compare them to
the computer analyses.
Starting with the climate analysis, 3 form findings
from Rhino and Grasshopper will be put through a
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analysis in
Autodesk Flowdesign and a real time wind tunnel model
test. These analyses will run in Grasshopper with the help
of the earlier named program, that act as a Grasshopper
plugin. The outcome of this plug-in analysis is linked
to Autodesk Flowdesign, which will generate data into
useful values. To test the veracity of the CFD analysis,
wind tunnel model tests are conducted to compare the
methods. Finally, these values can be measured to the set
climate design restrictions [7].
With a proper wind analysis, the best variant can be
determined and used as input for the design of the
primary steel structure. With designing a load bearing
structure, the form and the structural behavior needs to be
understood [8]. With the help of Kangaroo and Karamba,
which are both plug-ins for Grasshopper, a parametric
optimization can be made for the design of the primary
structure [9].
After these analyses, the first actual form can be
determined, where the next step is a heat and lighting
analysis. These analyses will also run in Grasshopper with
the help of the GECO. The outcome of GECO is linked to
Upper structural layer
Lower structural layer
Hot air gets mist-cooled between two structural layers which will result in cold air
Through roof cooling it is more efficient to cool the whole stadiumFigure 6. CFD Analysis and windtunnel testing
Figure 7. Structural behaviour primary structure
Figure 8. Structural analysis primary structure

34
Graduation Project
Figure 11. Buckling behaviour analysis
Autodesk Ecotect, which will generate data into useful
values. The generated heat and lighting data can give an
indication where the roof should be opened or closed,
based on a certain heat and lighting input. The result of
these inputs will be translated into a so called ‘adaptive
roof’ [10]. The adaptive roof gives a clear base to design
the glass structure.
Same as with the primary structure, the heat and lighting
analysis gives input for the design of the glass structure,
that is going to span between the primary structure [11].
This structure will also be tested on materialization (CES
Edupack), form behavior (Kangaroo) and FEM (Finite
Element Method) (Karamba) analysis [12]. With the FEM
analysis it is possible to calculate through the whole
structure, giving a clear insight of the total structural
behavior of the roof. After a positive FEM analysis
outcome,thefinalstructuralpropertiescanbedetermined
and translated into a design.
In the end, the final concept has to be the perfect balance
between climate and structure and the right output to
elaborate on the technical design.
Dead load = 0.5 kN/m
2
Side load = 0.5 kN/m Side load = 0.5 kN/m
Figure 9. Heat and lighting analysis
Figure 10. Structural behaviour secondary structure

35
Climate Design
Direct sunlight gets diffused by two layers of PTFE fabric,
while natural diffuse light gets slightly filtered by one
layer of PTFE fabric. This way the right amount of PAR can
be reached [13].
The get air into the stadium, the west side of the roof has
air inlets to catch wind and accelerate the air through its
aerodynamic form to subsequently blow it as cold air into
the stadium. To get a certain velocity of air circulation,
the air is mechanically extracted at the east side of the
stadium [14].
Air that gets via the wind can have a temperature of
around 40˚C in summer, to cool this air down to around
20˚C, water vapor of 5˚C gets used. This principle is
called ultrasonic mist cooling [15].
Direct sun light
Direct sun light gets filtered and diffuse light is allowed to go through
Diffuse light Diffuse light
The mist cooling system humids the air (with 5 ˚C water) in the cavity and will lower the temperature of the hot wind up to 25 ˚C
The cooled wind fals down into the stadium through small openings between the arch structures
Wind can get in roof cavity due to inlets at the west side of the stadium
To make air circulation possible the air has to get mechanically extracted at the east side of the stadium
Figure 12. Roof light and cool principle
Figure 13. Hybrid air circulation principle

36
Graduation Project
Structural design
The hybrid glass arches span between the primary
structure beams, which helps the primary structure
stabilizing, next to the bracing, even more and makes the
roof a complete structure. With a wind force coming from
the, a possible divided load can occur in the middle of
the roof. Resulting in the glass arches absorbing mostly
compression forces, which causes upper compression
and lower tension in the beams, which remit the forces
to the stability and the stadium. The wind pressure also
makes the suspension and the outer arch cables pull,
where to stabilize the structure, half of the cables absorb
tension and half of the cables become zero-forces [16].
Design
In the earlier mentioned process of the climate and
structural design, Rhinoceros+Grasshopper played the
key role in making the outcome of the analysis and the
design parametric. The reason why these early stage
analyses can influence the design very easily is because
of the input and output flexibility parametric design can
cope with. All analysis and design aspects influence one
another and can easily adapt and integrate in modern
technology, due to algorithmic based parametric design.
This new feature of designing, engineering and analyzing
will make the design process in practice more efficient,
faster and less error driven. As a building technologist
standing in the middle of design and engineering, this tool
is the language between designers and engineers of the
future.
On the right: Figure 15 to 17. Total design with complete structural
behaviour

37
Andreja Andrejevic graduated Cum Laude in MSc Building Technology in January 2017. He
is currently working as a trainee Young Entrepeneur Building Sciences at Peoplehouse from
where he operates as a Junior Consultant at DPA Cauberg-Huygen. As a trainee to become
an entrepreneur, Andreja tries to seek for innovation and possibilities in the established
building industry. He hopes to run his own start-up within two years, where he will be trying
to give an answer to future problems in the built environment.

38
Graduation Project
That is what is being asked constantly. Time to explain.
There is a lot more behind it than you may have thought.
As many may have seen, a small white building on
a scaffolding has suddenly appeared at BK city: the
PD-lab. It has been built in a short time with the help
of a CNC milling machine, many industrial partners
and students of the faculty. It may not seem to be
innovative for its architecture but it certainly is from a
technical point of view.
Before you start wondering. Product Development
Laboratory, that is what PD-lab stands for. Why do
we need a laboratory for product development? Most
buildings nowadays actually consist of many standardized
products screwed and glued together. Buildings are
turning more and more into products. The building industry
is often referred to as conservative. However, it does what
is possible. The PD-lab aims to broaden the possibilities.
Where Industrial Design once originated from the faculty
of Architecture, now the building industry can learn a lot
from product development.
The PD-lab is both an experiment where various
products and techniques come together as well as a
platform for building products to be tested in and on.
Building the lab by ourselves was the ultimate learning-
by-doing experiment. One of the goals of the lab is to
encourage new ways of thinking on how to build. It is going
to be used for house experiments concerning innovative
façade, sun shading and building services. Because the
building is based on a modular system, it is relatively easy
to adapt to adjustments and updates for the testing of
specific products.
The pavilion is completely built out of CNC-
milled building components including the facade and
roof. The front and back facade of the building are built
in a traditional way to explore the possibilities of the
application within the current building methods. All the
components are prefabricated in the workplace of The
New Makers in Delft, where the plates of wood were milled
with high precision and detail to make prefab assembly a
Figure 1. Visualization of PD-lab in front of
the faculty of Architecture (© PD-Lab)
‘What is that white thing on the
parking lot of BK city?’
PD LAB
By Jeroen van Veen

39
piece of cake. All elements fit into each other in only one
way, so no mistakes can be made during the assembly
process.
Building looking for facade
The realization of the PD-lab is made possible by the
4TU.BOUW federation of the four technical universities
in The Netherlands. Every year the 4TU.BOUW organizes
a competition to let universities present new innovative
ideas within the building sector. At the end of each year
all the selected projects show their ‘proof of concept’.
The PD-lab was one of those. When the proof of concept
was exhibited at the Gevelbeurs in Januari 2016, the team
was convinced to be able to realize the building system in
the shape of a small pavilion placed next to the faculty.
However, to be able to do this some help of the industry
was welcome to overcome the “budgetary challenges”
and to be able to test the idea by combining it with existing
building products. Therefore, we introduced our small
Figure 2. Design concept drawing (© PD-Lab)
‘Building looking for façade’ campaign and enthused ODS
and PolyNed to provide us one of their building products
to complete the building with two facades.
Production pioneers
Throughouttheprojecttherewasalwaysonekeyquestion:
how far can we go? We had the ambition to approximate
car-like precision and finishing for the building as an
experiment of how far we could go minimizing tolerances
and building a building like a manufactured product. As
a commonly used cladding material, Arconic (formerly
Alcoa) provided us with a supply of a Reynobond panel.
These aluminum composite panels bring another
dimension to the CNC fabrication process. By milling
away the 0.5mm interior layer of aluminum and the 3mm
PE core with a v-shaped tool, the panels can be folded by
hand. In this way, an origami-like façade can be created
with a precision of 0.5mm. We decided not to go crazy
folding the panels in all different shapes, but took another

40
Graduation Project
direction. By extending the modular set-up of the building
into the façade system, technical innovations try to seek
for the boundaries of precision and tolerances. By taking
a modular approach it pays off to invest in complex, well-
thought-through technical solutions to accommodate all
the needed design features. By integrating a gutter system
in the panels the façade is not only the building’s make-up
but at the same time a fashionable raincoat, which can be
placed without any screws and approaches the precision
of a car.
Endless modular possibilities
By using CNC techniques, it doesn’t matter if ten wall
components are produced today and a staircase is created
tomorrow. Complexity is not an issue for the machine.
Components are cleverly engineered with certain variables
like width or height. By putting a lot of effort in the design
and engineering of the components to make them smart,
integrated and easy to build a modular approach pays
off. With only a few standardized components which can
be used and placed at various locations within a building
configuration, there are almost endless possibilities of
combinations. At the same time this approach minimizes
the risk of failures on the building site, which is a large
expense within the building industry at the moment.
Mass customization
To take this idea to the next level an online building
configurator has been developed at TNM to let people
puzzle their own home together. Like digital Lego you
could stack wall, floor and roof components on top
of each other to form a building. Wall with a window,
floor with a staircase or a roof with a chimney. The
simplified components you see on your screen are,
behind the scenes, linked to complex CNC drawings,
so the components can be produced by the push of a
button. Next to that the user is given useful information
of his or her creation real-time. Production time, costs,
environmental impact, weight; all can be compared
in different configurations. This really illustrates and
Figure 3. A renewed approach to building
(© Jeroen van Veen)
Figure 4. Diagram of production process of PD Lab (© PD-Lab)

41
invigorates the potential of such a building system.
New techniques, new challenges
When building with tolerances of sometimes only 0.5
mm or smaller, you can run into problems that you
never knew existed. When we ordered the OSB plates
of 5,0x1,2m, we discovered during prototype assembly
that the thicknesses of the plates were sometimes off by
1.0mm, meaning some parts did not fit or were too loose.
The manufacturer was a little bit surprised when he was
confronted with the message that his material was 1 mm
too thin. That was something that would have never been
a concern when building, until now.
The future
The most effective sustainability is efficiency
When buildings are designed, it is unlikely that there is
thought about what will happen when the building does
not satisfy its users anymore, when something is broken
or when the building or part of it just gets too old. When
you would tell this to an industrial designer he/she would
probably look a little bit askance at this way of designing.
While buildings are demolished producing tons of waste,
the car industry thought carefully of how to reuse as much
of the components and materials as possible to increase
efficiency. That raised the question: Why can’t buildings
be designed within this philosophy? We need buildings
to adapt to people’s needs when necessary and allow
for changes throughout its lifetime without demolishing
valuable elements. Buildings become more like products.
Which, lets make this clear, does not mean all buildings
should become standardized products which one could
buy off the shelf, but the industry can certainly learn from
facets of product manufacturing. One of the key aspects
in this is how to deal with dis- and re-assembly within the
design and building process of buildings.
The promising future is you
I was really amazed by the number of enthusiastic
students of the faculty who were willing to help us with Figure 5. Student team that helped building the pavillion
(© Marcel BIlow)
assembling the prefab components as well as building
the lab on-site. In my opinion this is illustrative for the
growing interest among students in building and making.
By building and manufacturing your own design you
receive highly valuable feedback to improve both the
design as well as the process. At that moment, it becomes
clear what the designer imagined on the drawing board
is actually functioning on the building site. Sometimes a
smart solution is not as smart as you would think on the
first hand. Within this philosophy we, at TheNewMakers,
develop all our products and designs. When there is a
new idea, this can be produced immediately to receive
feedback of the manufacturability, the fit or the look of the
design. By working so closely together in the workplace,
designing and making are merged into a natural process.
In my opinion that is where good design starts. While
we were building the lab, version 3.0 is already being
developed and prototyped. It is a continuous, never-
ending learning cycle. Is there a lack of building and
making within the education at the faculty? Let’s be
honest, the manufacturing process is not just a yummy
sauce you can put on your design at the end, but is key
to understand and integrate within, and from the very
beginning of, the complete design process.

42
Graduation Project
Special thanks to the team:
Marcel Bilow, Tillmann Klein, Pieter Stoutjesdijk, Nick van der Knaap and TheNewMakers and of course all the partners for making
it possible: Aldowa, FabFac, Festool, FMVG, Guardian Glass, Heco, IsoVlas, Lerobel Glass, Luning, Maasstad hout&plaat, ODS,
PolyNed, Reynobond, Rojo steigerbouw, Rollecate, Triton, Verwij logistiek
Construction process (© Marcel Bilow)

43
Jeroen van Veen completed his Master of Science at Building Technology one year
ago, in 2016. For his graduation project he worked on a file-to-factory modular
façade system for the PD-lab.
Jeroen is currently working at TheNewMakers in Delft, developing innovative
products from the scale of a chair to a town. He has a passion for making and is
always searching for a dialogue between technics and architecture/design.

44
UPCOMINGEVENTS
DEBUT.event
The Building Technology company case day. More info on debut-event.nl
07.06.2017
June
MASTERCLASS EVENT: Peoplehouse
A case day with accelerator Peoplehouse, including lunch lectures from inspiring speakers and a
start-up market.
More info to follow, or contact media@praktijkverenigingbout.nl
04.07.2017
BT BEACH VOLLEYBALL
Come play against the RuMoer comittee in the afternoon and have drinks and snacks in the evening.
Want to join? Send an email to: layla.vanellen@hotmail.com
01.07.2017
July
BOUT
PRAKTIJKVERENIGING
student association
for building technology
COMMITTEE EVENT
For all their work and effort, we are thanking the members of each committee with a boat tour and
drinks after at the Koperen Kat in Delft! More info to follow soon...
22.06.2017
BOUT
PRAKTIJKVERENIGING
student association

45
13.11.2017 - 19.11.2017
November
SUMMER SCHOOL of ARCHITECTURE, WROCLAW
Work and chill
More info on: http://ssa.pwr.edu.pl // Registrations: ec@praktijkverenigingbout.nl
09.07.2017 - 30.07.2017
September
October
August (summer holidays)
STUDY TRIP: BILBAO
The Building Technology annual study trip.
More info to follow, or contact studytrip@praktijkverenigingbout.nl
BouT BBQ
Come meet and chill with your fellow BT students!
06.09.2017
BOUT BBQ

46
Alumni event
15.01.2017
Opening & Testing Glass Truss Bridge
15.05.2017
12.05.2017
Excursion: Bolsward Broerekerk
24.05.2017
PD-Lab Opening
PASTEVENTS

GUARANTEES
• In twee jaar tijd word jij klaargestoomd
voor het ondernemerschap.
• Na het doorlopen van het Peoplehouse
Entrepreneurial Program heb jij een killer
business plan en gegarandeerde funding
voor jouw eigen onderneming.
• Blijkt uiteindelijk dat ondernemen binnen
een bedrijf beter bij jou past? Dan
beloven wij jou een baan bij een
Nederlands topbedrijf dat innovatie en
techniek als speerpunten heeft.
WAT IS PEOPLEHOUSE
Peoplehouse stoomt jong talent klaar
voor het ondernemerschap. Met het
Entrepreneurial Program brengen wij in
twee jaar tijd de ondernemerslessen bij waar
normaal gesproken tien jaar werkervaring
voor nodig is. Wij koppelen daarnaast onze
young entrepreneurs building sciences aan
een gerenomeerd ingenieursbureau om zo
.neodetpogniravrekrewegidonedkoo
Peoplehouse werkt als een accelerator voor
jou.
VOOR WIE IS PEOPLEHOUSE
Jij levert de creatieve en innovatieve input
die de gevestigde orde nodig heeft om
overeind te blijven in een snel veranderende
markt. Jij signaleert de noodzaak tot verdere
innovatie. Ergens in je achterhoofd speel je
met de gedachte om deze input, nu of ooit,
om te zetten in een eigen businessplan. Het
ondernemerschap spreekt je aan. Maar is
nu het juiste moment? En beschik je nu al
over de juiste kennis en competenties om
sky-high te kunnen gaan als ondernemer?
Peoplehouse biedt voor jou het fundament
om antwoord te geven op deze vragen.
SIGN ME UP!
START
Zero
to
one
experience
BusinessModel
Canvas
STAP 1
Personal
Roadmap
Entrepreneurship
Hackaton
Marketingtools
STAP 2
Customer
journey
Know your
product
Know your
customer
FINISH
Pitch/
DragonsDen
STAP 3
Start your
own
business
Shareholders
Legal
boundaries
INTRAPRENEUR? ENTREPRENEUR? WE ACCELERATE YOU!
WWW.PEOPLE-HOUSE.NL

Cabinet 02.West.090
Faculty of Architecture
Julianalaan 134
2628BL Delft
The Netherlands
+31 (0)15 278 1292
www.praktijkverenigingbout.nl
rumoer@praktijkverenigingbout.nlBOUT
PRAKTIJKVERENIGING
student association
BOUT CONNECTS!

Rumoer #65 - Experimentation

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Rumoer #65 - Experimentation

Similaire à Rumoer #65 - Experimentation (20)

Plus de Booosting platform voor koplopers in bouwinnovatie

Plus de Booosting platform voor koplopers in bouwinnovatie (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Rumoer #65 - Experimentation