Master Architect -3

The BMW Museum

Review by: Vahid Kiumarsi, Maryam Nouri

The BMW Museum, Story of a Success

The BMW Museum is one of the most popular company museums in Germany. And of all the companies’ sights in Munich, only the Deutsches Museum and the Neue Pinakothek (New Gallery) attract more visitors. Each year some 250,000 people from all over the world come the BMW Museum – a story of success for which there are good reasons, because the BMW Museum does not just present the history of BMW and the engines, motorcycles and automobiles manufactured by the company in the course of its first 75 years.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

The Architecture of the Primary BMW Museum

The BMW Museum was built at the same time as the Olympic Stadium with its famous tent roof and the BMW Building. Construction started in 1971 and the Museum was opened in 1973. It was conceived and planned by the same architect, who designed the BMW Building: Professor Dr. Karl Schwanzer from Vienna gave these two buildings a very different shape, but nevertheless created a unique blend of architecture.

The museum is designed as a “self-supporting body”: the reinforced concrete shell supports the roof. The spiral path inside the Museum rest entirely on the columns also supporting the four platforms which constantly increase in size the further up you go. The shell expands in size from a diameter of less than 20 meters (66 ft) to 41 meters (134.5 ft) at the top. In all – it is 19 meters (62 ft) high. Flying over the area in an aircraft you will see a huge BMW logo on the roof of the Museum.

Rather, the BMW Museum achieves an entirely different goal. It enables its visitors to marvel at the horizons of transport technology through the eyes of five generations, from the early days at the beginning of 20th century into the new millennium. Horizons which show the development of ideas, dreams, philosophies, work, society and the individual mobility made possible by technology. In this way the BMW Museum possibly makes it a bit easier to understand the present as the future of our past and as the past of our future.

New BMW Museum

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

The new concept behind the BMW Museum focuses on the importance of the BMW Museum as a brand museum and on the fascination exerted by the BMW brand and its products. The intention is for the history spanning more than 90 years to highlight thematic areas and extend beyond chronological presentations. Developments from the past are traced up to the present and future themes relevant for BMW are highlighted.

The museum brings the BMW heritage to life in an experience encompassing all the senses and invoking the spirit of the innovative, dynamic character of the BMW brand. The museum architecture, and exhibition and media design form an ideal setting to present the rich tapestry of themes in a very special way. The BMW Museum takes new approaches by integrating contemporary architecture with the historic buildings in the same way as the brand is always setting new and innovative benchmarks for engineering and design.

The Concept

Planning started in spring 2002. Essential renovation work commenced in 2004. The new concept envisaged a significant increase in the size of the museum to reflect the importance of the company as a global player and the continual increase in the product range. Firstly, the existing museum bowl was linked up with the adjacent low building to increase the exhibition floor space from 1,000 to 5,000 m². This expansion allows the new museum complex to offer sufficient space for presenting around 120 exhibits.

The concept is based on an idea by architect Karl Schwanzer who created the original BMW Museum in 1973. He defined the internal structure of this circular building as a continuation of the road in an enclosed space. This idea was expressed as a contemporary development and reinterpretation in the neighboring low building encompassing the vision of a “road in the enclosed space as a principle of dynamic architecture”.

Analogous to the structure in the circular building, where platforms are positioned along the road to emulate squares, the exhibition areas in the adjacent low building are also configured on a ramp as the central visitor route. However, the depth of the dynamic synthesis of architectural elements, ramps and exhibition houses varies.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

Circular building

The listed circular museum building – the bowl – is located directly adjacent to the BMW Tower and is the symbol of the BMW Museum. The building work carried out between 2004 and 2008 involved taking the structure back to the original state when first constructed in 1973. Architect Professor Karl Schwanzer had designed the museum “as a continuation of the road in an enclosed space”: A central visitor ramp within the bowl links up a system of suspended platforms.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

The interpretation of the ramp as a road and the exhibition areas as squares was transferred in the new concept of the museum to the adjacent low building: While the external facade of this rectangular building remains as the “historic wrapping”, the internal floors were removed and all structures were taken out of the interior. This created a large interior space and a new architecture was integrated comprising a continuous ramp and seven independent exhibition houses. This architecture made of glass and steel forms a deliberate contrast to the bowl.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

While the external appearance of the bowl presents the aspect of a monumental concrete sculpture and the character of an open-plan holistic space dominates the interior, the architecture in the low building takes on an urban character. The two building sections – circular building and low building – are linked together by a ramp which leads visitors to all 25 exhibition areas.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

While the bowl is reserved for temporary exhibitions, the low building provides an extended tour of the most important BMW themes. Based on seven major thematic areas, the same number of independent exhibition houses linked by ramps are designed and installed in the low building.

Media

The BMW Museum in Munich embodies a new approach to combining architecture and exhibition design, placing special emphasis on new media. BMW commissioned ART+COM with the museum’s spatial media design and interactive installations and Stuttgart’s Atelier Brückner with the architecture and exhibition design. The joint concept was determined by two underlying themes: mobility and dynamism.

ART+COM’s media concept is based on interactive, reactive and cinematic elements. Spatial choreographies of projections, light and sound create a dynamic backdrop for the seven “exhibition houses” and 25 rooms, appearing to animate the architecture and 125 exhibits. Interactive installations and so-called “auxiliary” formats help convey the museum’s content by providing in-depth information.

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

Interactive installations and so-called “auxiliary” formats help convey the museum’s content by providing in-depth information. One of the highlights of the museum is the Mediatecture, a 700 m² media façade surrounding the central BMW Square. Another is the Kinetic Sculpture. This mechatronic installation is a spatial representation of the form-finding process in art and design.

The holistic museum experience is supported by a unique sound concept based on an acousmonium, composed by Swiss audio designers idee und klang.

Services

Overall concept for the BMW Museum (with Atelier Brückner and the BMW project team), conception and development of the spatial media design and the interactive installations, media design, application programming, interface design and construction, audio planning, media technology planning, supervision of realisation of media technology, site management of media technology subsections, project management

Technology

Over 700 m² of video-capable, monochrome LEDfaçades with 60 Hz supply; 360° installation with a diameter of 40 metres; Kinetic Sculpture consisting of 714 metal spheres, individually controllable with millimeter accuracy; interactive installations with sensor surfaces (a total of approx. 30 m²); 50 beamers; 30 image recognition systems; 75 computers for relaying images/sounds; 270 audio channels with DSP and 540 speakers; acousmatic audio technology; reactive audio channels; KVM

matrix; CMS for media content; integrated control of all media; 20 control computers

Special features

The BMW Museum is a joint project of ART+COM (spatial media design, interactive installations) and

Atelier Brückner (architecture, exhibition design). Audio design: idee und klang; graphic design and visual identity: Intégral Ruedi Baur; LED-technology: G-LEC Europe GmbH; media technology: ict Technologies AG; technology of the Kinetic Sculpture: MKT AG

Accepted in :The Second International Conference on Architecture and Phenomenology-Kyoto-Japan

Abstract:

Phenomenological definition of architecture as “The Art of Place” highlights the importance of place in phenomenology of architecture. In this regard, there are valuable researches in architectural literature attempt to clarify aspects of this point of view. Back to the roots, Schulz indicated three natural centers; embodiment of Four-Fold. According to Schulz “existential purpose of building is therefore to make a place, that is, to uncover the meaning potentially present in the given environment”. In this case, phenomenological researches have been done to demonstrate how architecture meets this purpose. Researches on Wright’s houses are some of these significant inquiries illustrate how architectural form and space can unfold capacity of place. In Relf’s word, insideness and outsideness are two key phenomenological points which are especially crucial because they arrange relationship between person and world. Although the dialogue between inside and outside has been investigated through these studies, most of them are in western contexts that included only physical existence of inside in outside and vice versa.

In this paper we aim to offer different insight into this dialogue, uncover another form of this relationship: presence vs. existence. Objectives of this paper are: Phenomenology of reciprocal presence of inside and outside in architecture and finding out the characters of buildings which reciprocal presence is flowing through them. So two following questions are addressed: a) Can there be phenomenology of reciprocal presence of inside and outside through building? If yes, what is common among perceptions of individuals? b) Which qualities are concealed in buildings that set up this dialectic relationship?

Answering these questions some significant cases of Iranian desert architecture are discerned. Desert architecture has been chosen because of its remarkable phenomenological manifestation and novel representation of person/world relationship. Through case study, in addition to firsthand perception by authors, deep interview with different groups involved dwellers, tourists, and professionals including architects and photographers are taken. The results of all groups are compared and consequently, concluded for first question. For second, opinions of professionals are studied deeply.

This paper concludes that in spite of some differences, all groups speak of common physical elements and experienced qualities through perceiving reciprocal presence of inside and outside. Elements and qualities such as: reflection, presence of light and wind, openness and framing. This reciprocal presence is entirely different from mutual existence.

web: http://www.arch.usf.edu/arch-phenom2/callforpapers.html

 Reichstag in winter

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

History

The Reichstag building in Berlin was constructed to house the Reichstag, the first parliament of the German Empire. It was opened in 1894 and housed the Reichstag until 1933, when it was severely damaged in a fire.

(You can see complete history of building in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_building )

 The Reichstag building (1900)

 Reichstag after fire

Reconstruction

The building remained in ruins until the reunification of Germany, when it underwent reconstruction led by internationally renowned architect Norman Foster. After its completion in 1999, it became the meeting place of the modern German parliament, the Bundestag.

Competition

In 1992, Norman Foster won yet another architectural contest for the reconstruction of the building. His winning concept looked very different from what was later executed. Notably, the original design did not include a cupola.

The idea, as Foster explains, is rooted in four issues: the significance of the Bundestag as a democratic forum; a commitment to public accessibility; a sensitivity to history; and a rigorous environmental agenda. Emphasizing values of clarity and transparency, the glazed cupola is a new landmark for Berlin, and a symbol of the vigor of the German democratic process. (http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Projects/0686/Default.aspx)

Wrapping

Before reconstruction began, the Reichstag was wrapped by the American artists Christo and his wife Jeanne-Claude in 1995, attracting millions of visitors. The project was financed by the sale of preparatory drawings and collages, as well as early works of the fifties and sixties. (http://www.christojeanneclaude.net)

 

Christo and Jeanne-Claude, Wrapped Reichstag, Berlin 1971-95

Photo: Wolfgang Volz ©1995 Christo

Implementation

During the reconstruction, everything except the outer walls were took out, including all changes made by Baumgarten in the 1960s. The reconstruction, completed in April 1999, is widely regarded as a success. The Reichstag is one of the most visited attractions in Berlin, not least because of the huge glass dome that was erected on the roof as a gesture to the original 1894 cupola, giving an impressive view over the city, especially at night.

Reichstag dome

Public and politicians enter together through the reopened formal entrance. The public realm continues on the roof in the terrace cupola. Helical ramps lead to an observation platform, allowing the people to ascend symbolically above the heads of their elected representatives in the chamber. The dome has a 360 degree view of the surrounding Berlin cityscape. The main hall of the parliament below can also be seen from the cupola, and natural light from above radiates down to the parliament floor. A large sun shield tracks the movement of the sun electronically and blocks direct sunlight which might blind those below.

sdfsdfsdfphoto: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

Platform

Ascending helical ramp, people get a platform. The roof is open and there is monumental form just under the open roof. It is wonderful so you can find a strange similarity to the war memorial Neue Wache in Berlin.

Memorial sculpture

Memorial in front of the Reichstag, Berlin. Each slate plate corresponds to one of the 96 members left and centre eliminated by the Nazi after they grasped power in 1933.

 Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

 Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

 Links: 

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Projects/0686/Default.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_building

http://www.christojeanneclaude.net

http://archide.wordpress.com/2008/11/12/reichstag-german-parliament-by-foster-and-partners-berlin-germany/

http://blog.hansdezwart.info/2008/12/06/the-reichstage-dome-norman-foster-is-a-genius/

Photo: qmdesign ©2008 qmdesign

The Einstein Tower is an astrophysical observatory in the Albert Einstein Science Park in Potsdam, Germany designed by architect Erich Mendelsohn. It was built for astronomer Erwin Finlay-Freundlich to support experiments and observations to validate Albert Einstein’s relativity theory. The building was first conceived around 1917, built from 1920 to 1921 after a fund-raising drive, and became operational in 1924. It is still a working solar observatory today as part of the Astrophysical Institute Potsdam. Light from the telescope is brought down through the shaft to the basement where the instruments and laboratory are located.

This was one of Mendelsohn’s first major projects, completed when a young Richard Neutra was on his staff, and his best-known building.

The exterior was originally conceived in concrete, but due to construction difficulties, much of the building was actually realized in brick, covered with stucco.

It underwent a full renovation in 1999, for its 75th anniversary, to correct problems with dampness and decay that had meant decades of repair. It is often cited as one of the few landmarks of expressionist architecture.

Sometimes you look back, seeing a project, say: It’s really Timeless!

Award-winning architects Herzog and de Meuron are designing a new building that will be created on the south side of the existing Tate Modern gallery. Planning permission has now been granted, and the project is aiming for completion in 2012. The success of Tate Modern makes the new development necessary as they have around 5 million visitors a year and the present building was designed for half that number. As well as providing more space for modern and contemporary art, which will enable Tate to explore new areas of visual culture; the new building will give Tate room to develop much better visitor facilities.

New Development of Tate Modern. Exterior view from the south at dusk
© Hayes Davidson and Herzog & de Meuron

Tate Modern 2 visualisation from the river © Herzog & de Meuron

Turbine Hall, Tate Modern, 2008 Photo © Tate

web: http://www.arch.usf.edu/arch-phenom2/callforpapers.html

Accepted in :Third International Conference on Design Principles and Practices- 2009- Berlin, Germany.

Abstract:

Although participatory design theory has been widely defined and developed in last decades, evidently it has not been successful in practice. This problem has several causes. This paper attempts to illuminate fundamental one: Language. In other words, to answer the question: “What is the main reason of not succeeding Participatory Design efficiently?” it is claimed that the problem is the lack of common language between designer and user in design process. To achieve mentioned objective: First, running language among team members, especially between designer and user, is investigated. It is shown that in participatory design process, language is based on ordinary drawings, images and models, the same as un-participatory design processes. Then user’s perception of this language is called to question. It is clarified that they can not understand drawings and models; which are the words of this language. Moreover, they are not familiar with its structure; which is a conceptual model, outcome of training and experience. So, how designer and user can have an effective dialogue during design process? Finally, concluding with case study, it is shown that lack of this perception results to misunderstanding in design process between designer and user. Thus not only participatory design goals are not realized but also an integrated and harmonized design is not created.

web: http://g09.cg-conference.com/

The competition was organised in the framework of the UIA  Congress Turin 2008 , illustrating the theme: transmitting architecture. The aim was to create a UIA information point in the city of Turin, a place, dedicated to urban democracy where people can meet, relax.  IT should have been designed as a public house for architecture, of a maximum surface of 100 M2, of recyclable eco-friendly materials and be equipped with communication technologies.

Web Address:  http://www.infopoint.uia2008torino.org/