|
|
|
|
|
OVERALL WINNER
|
|
|
|
Cocoon Structure: Darwin Centre Phase 2, Natural History Museum, London
|
|
|
|
The ‘cocoon’ is the iconic centrepiece of
the western extension to the Natural
History Museum. It is formed with a
structural sprayed concrete shell at an
unprecedented scale. The Darwin
Centre, and specifically the cocoon, is
an excellent example of the efficient
delivery of a highly functional, yet
geometrically complex structure.
|
|
|
The brief for the building had three key objectives: to
provide a home for 20 million specimens, to provide a
working area for the research scientists and to enable the
public to interact with the scientists and the collections.
This has been achieved by providing visitors with an
opportunity to go on self-guided tours in and around the
cocoon, which gives glimpses of the research facility and
the extent of the collections.
The sprayed concrete shell is the perfect response to
the questions posed by the architectural form and the environmental
requirements. The cocoon literally protects the
botany and entomology specimens, analogous to the
cocoon protecting the pupa during gestation. Expansion
joints in the polished plaster finish extend this analogy,
appearing as silk threads criss-crossing the surface. The
surrounding C-shaped structure, which is constructed
from conventional flat slabs, columns and shear walls,
frames the cocoon in the cathedral-like atrium space.
The design team used a holistic design approach to
minimise the building’s impact on the environment, without
compromising its performance or aesthetics. It
demonstrates that close collaboration coupled with innovative
design and construction techniques can deliver
elegant yet highly functional buildings.
The benefit of the Natural History Museum to society
is immense in enriching and broadening our understanding
of the natural world and raising awareness of the
natural world in a very accessible way.
Richard Toy from the Natural History Museum and
project director, states that, “Arup has gone beyond the
requirements of its appointment to provide innovative and
cost-effective structural solutions for this important and
complex building, allowing the Museum to match its aspirations
to the funds available.”
|
|
|
|
