architecture

Monday, December 31, 2012

Tree Receivers

[Image: "The Trees Now Talk" cover story in The Electrical Experimenter (July 1919); image via rexresearch].

Way back in 1919, in their July 14th issue, Scientific American published an article on the discovery that trees can act "as nature's own wireless towers and antenna combined."

General George Owen Squire, the U.S. Army's Chief Signal Officer, made his "strange discovery," as SciAm phrases it, while sitting in "a little portable house erected in thick woods near the edge of the District of Columbia," listening to signals "received through an oak tree for an antenna." This realization, that "trees—all trees, of all kinds and all heights, growing anywhere—are nature's own wireless towers and antenna combined."

He called this "talking through the trees." Indeed, subsequent tests proved that, "[w]ith the remarkably sensitive amplifiers now available, it was not only possible to receive signals from all the principle [sic] European stations through a tree, but it has developed beyond a theory and to a fact that a tree is as good as any man-made aerial, regardless of the size or extent of the latter, and better in the respect that it brings to the operator's ears far less static interference."

Why build a radio station, in a sense, when you could simply plant a forest and wire up its trees?

[Images: From George Owen Squire's British Patent Specification #149,917, via rexresearch].

So how does it work? Alas, you can't just plug your headphones into a tree trunk—but it's close. From Scientific American:
The method of getting the disturbances in potential from treetop to instrument is so simple as to be almost laughable. One climbs a tree to two-thirds of its height, drives a nail a couple of inches into the tree, hangs a wire therefrom, and attaches the wire to the receiving apparatus as if it were a regular lead-in from a lofty copper or aluminum aerial. Apparently some of the etheric disturbances passing from treetop to ground through the tree are diverted through the wire—and the thermionic tube most efficiently does the rest.
Although "40 nails apparently produce no clearer signals than half a dozen," one tree can nonetheless "serve as a receiving station for several sets, either connected in series with the same material or from separate terminals."

[Image: Researching the possibility that whole forests could be used as radio stations—broadcasting weather reports, news from the front lines of war, and much else besides—is described by Scientific American as performing "tree radio work." Image via IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation (January 1975)].

In a patent filing called "British Patent Specification #149,917," Squire goes on to explore the somewhat mind-bending possibilities offered by "radio transmission and reception through the use of living vegetable organisms such as trees, plants, and the like." He writes:
I have recently discovered that living vegetable organisms generally are adapted for transmission and reception of radio or high frequency oscillations, whether damped or undamped, with the use of a suitable counterpoise. I have further discovered that such living organisms are adapted for respectively transmitting or receiving a plurality of separate trains of radio or high frequency oscillations simultaneously, in the communication of either or both telephonic or telegraphic messages.
This research—the field of "tree radio work"—has not disappeared or been forgotten.

[Image: A tree in the Panamanian rain forest wired up as a sending-receiving antenna; from IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation (January 1975)].

In the January 1975 issue of IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, we read the test results of several gentleman who went down to the rain forests of the Panama Canal Zone to test "the performance of conventional whip antennas... compared with the performance of trees utilized as antennas in conjunction with hybrid electromagnetic antenna couplers."

The authors specifically cite Squire's work and quote him directly: "'It would seem that living vegetation may play a more important part in electrical phenomena than has been generally supposed... If, as indicated above in these experiments, the earth's surface is already generously provided with efficient antennae, which we have but to utilize for communications...' These words were written in 1904 by Major George 0. Squire, U.S. Army Signal Corps, in a report to the Department of War in connection with military maneuvers in the Pacific Division."

The authors of the IEEE Transactions report thus establish up a jungle-radio "Test Area" in a remote corner of Panama, complete with trees wired-up as dual senders & receivers. There, they think they've figured out what's occurring on a large scale, as signals propagate through the forest canopy, writing that we should consider "the jungle as a maze of aperture-coupled screen rooms. In the jungle case, the screens, in the form of vertical tree and fern trunks, and the horizontal forest canopy are of variable thickness, have variable shaped apertures, and are composed of diverse substances that contain mostly water."

[Image: Inside the Panamanian jungle-radio Test Zone; image via IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation (January 1975)].

The design implication of all this is that an ideal radio-receiving forest could be planted and maintained, complete with spatially tuned "aperture-coupled screen rooms" (trees of specific branch-density planted at specific distances from one another) to allow for the successful broadcast of messages (and/or music) through the "living vegetable organisms" that Squire wrote about in his patent application.

What other creatures—such as birds, bats, wandering children, foxes, or owls—might make of such a landscape, planted not for aesthetic or even ecological reasons, but for the purpose of smoothly relaying foreign radio stations or encrypted spy communications, is bewildering to contemplate.

In any case, this truly alien vision of forests silently crackling inside with unexploited radio noise is incredible, implying the existence of undiscovered "broadcasts" of biological noise, humming trunk to trunk amongst groves of remote forests like arboreal whale song, inaudible to human ears, as well as suggesting a near-miraculous venue for future concerts, where music would be played not through wireless headsets or hidden speakers lodged in the woods but through the actual trees, music shimmering from root to canopy, filling trees branch and grain with symphonies, drones, rhythms, songs, sounds occasionally breaking through car radios as they speed past on roads nearby.

[All links found via an old message from Shawn Korgan posted to the Natural Radio VLF Discussion Group of which I am a non-participating member. Vaguely related: The Duplicative Forest and Pruned's Graffiti as Tactical Urban Wireless Network. See also a follow-up post: Antarctic Island Radio].

Maymont, Richmond

Richmond is full of historic house museums as you've seen in my previous posts.  One last museum I'll share with you is Maymont.
Built in Romanesque style by architect Edgerton Stewart Rogers in 1893 high above the banks of the James River, the mansion and 100 acre estate was home to James and Sallie Dooley.
The house and grounds have been a public museum and park since 1925 when Mrs. Dooley passed away.
 The imposing stone facade hides a rather giddy and over the top Victorian interior.
 The grounds are beautiful with stunning views down to the river.
The original outbuildings of the estate survive and are used to this day in the maintenance of the house and park.
 I especially loved this carriage barn with service court. Wouldn't this make a charming house?
 The water tower is located right behind the carriage house.
The Dooleys are buried together on the estate on a bluff overlooking the James river in a beautiful mausoleum designed by William Churchill Noland.

Sunday, December 30, 2012

12 Favorite Projects of 2012

For this last post of 2012, here are my dozen favorite projects from the 60 that were featured on my weekly and daily pages in the last 12 months, listed in chronological order.

Pier 15 in New York City by SHoP Architects:
this       week's  dose

Childcare Center in Maria Enzersdorf, Austria, by MAGK and illiz architektur:
this       week's  dose

La Lira in Ripoll, Spain, by RCR Arquitectes:
this       week's  dose

Coverage of Archaeological Ruins of the Abbey of St. Maurice in St. Maurice, Switzerland, by Savioz Fabrizze Architectes:
this       week's  dose

Alésia Archaelogical Museum in Alise-Sainte-Reine, France, by Bernard Tschumi Architects:
this       week's  dose

Viewing Tower in Reusel, the Netherlands, by Ateliereen architecten:
this       week's  dose

Brooklyn Botanic Garden Visitor Center in Brooklyn, New York, by WEISS/MANFREDI:
this       week's  dose

Via Verde in the Bronx, New York, by Dattner Architects and Grimshaw:
this       week's  dose

Arts and Creative Platform in Guimarães, Portugal, by Pitágoras Arquitectos:
this       week's  dose

Butaro Hospital in Butaro, Rwanda, by MASS Design Group:
this       week's  dose

Francis A. Gregory Neighborhood Library in Washington, D.C., by Adjaye Associates:
this       week's  dose

Poetry Foundation in Chicago, Illinois, by John Ronan Architects:
this       week's  dose

Friday, December 28, 2012

12 Favorite Books of 2012

Here are a dozen of my favorite books from the 71 that I reviewed in 2012 on my weekly and daily pages, listed in chronological order. Note, these books weren't necessarily released in 2012; for my list of Notable Books that were released in 2012, with some overlap below, see my list at Designers and Books.

book-1 book-2.jpg book-3.jpg book-4.jpg book-5.jpg book-6.jpg book-7.jpg book-8.jpg book-9.jpg book-10.jpg book-11.jpg book-12.jpg

Anatole Kopp: Town and Revolution: Soviet Architecture and City Planning 1917-1935

Reviewed by Chen Xi
Anatole Kopp (1915-1990) was born in Petrograd (St. Petersburg)in 1915, but studied in France and America before returning to Europe. He was Professor at the University of Paris VIII,and became involved in the movement of Marxist planners from 1960-1970. This book has been described as 'the clearest and most convincing account yet of the relationship between the Russian Revolution and the modern architectural movement from 1917 up to the full deployment of aesthetic Stalinism around 1937.' Anatole Kopp shows in this book, through texts and quotes new ideologies in the projects selected, in significant events such as the competition for the Palace of Soviets, through the great achievements of the period (such as the university and metro in Moscow), and also through interviews with leading figures. Stalinist architecture is revealed to be deeply marked by social realism, and the "fear of the new." ' Introduction: Why the Twenties?Kopp begins by describing the rise of the Soviet modern period after the October Revolution and with that the new Bolshevik regime. He is primarily concerned with how the change in ideology effected the architecture of the former empire, and how its architects were able to creatively deal with this change. Kopp continues that these changes produced an artistic revolution as well as a political one. The artistic conventions of the West were free to be broken, and with the abolition of land ownership it was seen that architects could be unrestricted in their scope to create a new architecture in a new urban environment, all as a part of the new republic's ideology. This can be summarised as a "new way of life" - In which social and collective activities will take precedence over individual activities and "new architecture" - The rise of new technology, the rise of industry, and the new requirements of an industrial society. Architecture in Prerevolutionary RussiaIn the second half of the nineteenth century there appeared in Europe and the United States the first examples of a new architecture that rejected the traditions of the past. With the development of capitalism and an industrial society new needs arose. At that time, factories, stations, warehouses, stores and workers' housing were equally in demand. In writing of this period, Soviet architectural historians epitomize it in one word: eclecticism. It was simply to apply a given " style" to a structure engineered by others. 1920-1925: The Pursuit of Formal ExpressionIn this chapter, Kopp introduced four examples. They are "Tatlin's Tower", the Palace of Labour, the All-Union Agricultural Exposition and the Exposition of Decorative Arts. "Tatlin's Tower": Today the Monument to the Third International is known as "Tatlin's Tower", and it is a grand monumental building envisioned by the Russian artist and architect Vladimir Tatlin, but never built. It was planned to be erected in St. Petersburg after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, as the headquarters and monument of the Comintern (the Third International). Tatlin's constructivist tower was to be built from industrial materials: iron, glass and steel. In materials, shape, and function, it was envisaged as a towering symbol of modernity. It would have dwarfed the Eiffel Tower in Paris. The tower's main form was a twin helix which spiraled up to 400 m in height, around which visitors would be transported with the aid of various mechanical devices.
The Palace of Labour was designed for the center of Moscow. It is composed of a series of intercommunicating squares. There used to be a little island of buildings of various kinds and a whole network of narrow streets. This was the site chosen for the Palace of Labor. It was designed by the Vesnin brothers, and opened the way for modern architecture in the Soviet Union. In this building there were offices, one 8000-seat auditorium, museum, library, a restaurant and so on. The All-Union Agricultural Exposition: The object of the All-Union Agricultural Exposition was to display the first economic successes of the Soviet Union; there was also a large foreign section intended to restore trading relations that events had thrown into disarray. The Soviet Pavilion at the Paris Exposition of Decorative Arts was designed by Konstantin Melnikov, who had completed his studies in 1917. He was a young man with little experience. He designed Soviet pavilion, of which the conception was new. In this pavilion one could observe the interpenetration of interior and exterior space, which was to become the hallmark of modern architecture. 1925-1932: An Architecture for the New TimesIn 1925, in most of western Europe, modern architecture as a form of expression was still a minority movement. It was to hasten the realization of these latent possibilities that Le Corbusier demanded: " Let big industry take over building." In western Europe the basis for such a development already existed. In the United States, long before the twenties, not only were modern techniques being used by the building industry but entirely new types of buildings. For many architects it was no longer so much a question of inventing a demonstration, of creating a material structure that would both reflect and enrich the new socialist way of life. Between 1925 and 1932 the Association of Contemporary Architects appeared to be the strongest, the most ideologically united, and the O.S.A. described themselves as "Constructivists". These new buildings possessed an added social dimension; in particular, they were marked by a constant effort to give architectural expression to the new society under construction. Town and RevolutionIn this chapter, Kopp talked about the city planning and revolution. It introduced several different aspects such as: To Build New Cities, Urbanists and Deubanists, The Socialist Reconstruction of Moscow, and the New City: Magnitogorsk. Soviet city planning, though often primitive in its forms, was distinguished by a creative dynamism not to be found elsewhere in the world. The years 1929 and 1930 were marked by a keen debate which was to raise all the problems that are now implied by the terms " land use" and " regional planning". There can be no denying that the proposals of both " urbanists" and " deurbanists" were unrealistic, and that the total reconstruction of the country along the lines suggested by either group was clearly impossible. CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, Kopp evaluates the influence of the Soviet Union, and he argued that the modern period of architecture in the USSR between 1917-1935 had an equal effect on the European architectural style as the Bauhaus School Movement in Germany. Kopp talked about the sense of architecture's ability, especially through the toughest social and economic periods.

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Virginia House, Richmond

After my trip to Richmond I had one regret; I didn't schedule an appointment to tour Virginia House!
Located next door, literally, to Agecroft Hall, the house was also built of ancient materials imported from an old house in England as part of Thomas William's original plan to build an authentic Tudor Village in Richmond.
Virginia House was built by Alexander and Virginia (hence the name) Weddells but began life as a priory in 1109 built by Earl Warwick which was later remodeled in the 17th century.
 Much like their neighbor, Agecroft Hall, the house was purchased at a demolition sale.
The Weddells built their new old house in anticipation of it eventually becoming the headquarters and museum for the Virginia Historical Society.
Despite that plan, the house was built as a modern home albeit one of historical materials and importance.
While the materials began to arrive in 1926 via ship they were so waterlogged that they had to sit to dry out for 6 months before building could procede. The Weddells finally moved into their new old house in 1929.
If you didn't know this modern history of the structure you'd assume it was a 17th century house that had been well preserved for hundreds of years. Of course, nothing this grand was constructed in the New World at this time, particularly in Richmond!
Through the drive and to the back of the house you see the modern house emerge. A 3 car garage currently operates as the shed and workroom for the extensive gardens.
Henry Grant Morse was again the architect responsible for the reconstruction of the structure which was based on many different houses found throughout England.
Noted landscape architect Charles Gillette designed the gardens which are to this day spectacular, even in the middle of winter!
The land slopes steeply down to the James River so the gardens are terraced with the house rising high above the many garden rooms.
William Lawrence Bottomley was brought on by Mrs. Wenddells to design an outdoor garden loggia connected to the house from some more building remnants.
This is probably my favorite part of the house.
The ceiling of the Loggia came from a house on the grounds of Knole in England while the columns were salvaged from Spain.
The roof of the loggia is a patio to view the gardens and river from above.
The loggia shelters this private water garden from the rear gardens.
From the rear terrace one looks down upon the formal gardens as art and towards the James River beyond.
The structure of the gardens shows more clearly in their dormant period.
The springtime shows the gardens to their best advantage I'm told.
The grounds are dotted with lots of interesting sculpture such as this Egyptian frieze fragment found within a garden wall.
The Weddells used Gillette over a period of many years to design these extensive gardens which appear to have taken generations to compose.
My favorite sculptures however are these 2 funny little men standing about 5'-0" tall. Does anyone know anything about them?
Don't forget to book a tour before your visit to Richmond. I'll just have to go back to Richmond to tour Virginia House!