Precedents and the Start of a Solution

I was able to find some interesting studies and articles concerning human social behavior (distance relationships and sight lines specifically). I have used these resources to create a series of diagrams which will help me arrange the courtroom in a purely circular fashion. Here they are:

 This first diagram is on social behavior within certain distances, this helped me decided what parties in the courtroom should be closer than others.

This diagram represents those distance relationships around the circle

This diagram represents each parties "Isovist" or their field of vision. The human eye has a total visual field of 150 degrees with comfortable "optimum" vision occurring within a 60 degree view! Basically I wanted to make sure everyone could see everyone without even turning the head (this will help in the acoustics!!!)

This is a sub-diagram of the one above, it shows a crucial comparison between the attorney tables and the jury. In a traditional courtroom layout many attorneys favor the tables closet to the Jury...it has been proven that it can have influence (sometimes significant) on the jury's decision. My arrangement has eliminated this bias since in any direction, both attorney areas are equidistant to the jury! 


I also found precedent for the use of a circular layout in a justice setting! Native Americans have a form of "Traditional Dispute Resolution" in which restorative justice is accomplished through the use of peacemaking circles. The article stresses the differences in the American Judicial System and this traditional system as the following:

"The differences between Native American and mainstream Western justice and concept of law can be explained in terms of the concepts of "horizontal" and "vertical" justice. Under this framework, the adversarial system of mainstream American justice can be classified as a vertical system. In a vertical system, the legal structure is situated upon ascending levels of hierarchies and power. Judges in an adversarial system have the power to determine the outcome of conflict, a decision that results in a win-loss situation for the parties. The parties to a dispute or criminal action, based on their low position on the hierarchical structure, do not have any significant power in determining the outcome of the dispute...The existing retributive criminal justice seeks to answer the following questions: (1) "What laws have been broken?"; (2) "Who did it?"; and (3) "What do they deserve? A restorative justice approach, on the other hand, asks: (1) "Who has been hurt?"; (2) "What are their needs?"; and (3) "Whose obligations are these?""

The great thing about this system is Native American Tribes are still practicing these behaviors today on through their system of law. While it is not an exact translation, it does prove that such a move in our system could work!  

So I have a viable layout for arrangement in a circle, I have proof that a similar system is in place and works. Next, it's time to plan out the courtroom based on these diagrams...then things will really get difficult, it'll be time to test the acoustics of these arrangements! 

My Work Stations for the semester

So this is just a quick peek of my "dual command stations" for this semester. I'll be splitting my time between the Music Technology building AKA Couch 220 and my desk in Hinman AKA Alvin's desk haha.

Here they are, both are already the victims of my work and they will progressively get dirtier as the semester keeps going

Couch 220

 Couch 220

 Notebook

 Alvin's Desk

 Alvin's Desk

Alvin's Desk

Preliminaries...why the Circle is bad for Speech

So here is what I know so far about acoustics in a circular shape... short story, they are terrible for speech.

Sound waves reflect, and loosely speaking they reflect infinitely until they completely decay. Of course human ears can only hear a certain frequency range (around 20Hz -20kHz) so after a while we can't hear them. However, it is important to note the frequency range of human speech is approximately 300Hz - 3000Hz. To summarize and simplify many things, reflections for speech are generally a bad thing; reflections increase the energy build up in a room and cause the Reverberation Time (RT) to increase. A desirable RT is highly dependent on the function of the room; a general RT for speech settings (lecture halls, classrooms, and yes, COURTROOMS!!!) should stay within .3 - 1 second.

Speech Intelligibly (SI) is a measurement which determines how well words are understood by the human ear; it is exactly what the name suggests haha! One of the metrics used to determine SI is Speech Transmission Index (STI). STI is a scale from 0 - 1, 0 being unacceptable and 1 being excellent.

So let's review before the next part. We want an STI closer to 1 and an RT between .3 and 1 second. Here is what the results of my preliminary tests were. In these tests, many things were assumed to get to the "root of the acoustic problem!" Here are the results of Circle Room "A1"

The RT of a Circular room "A"

Remember our speech range of 300Hz-3000hz, the RT in this range is well above our 1 second maximum. NOT GOOD!

So the majority of our speech is not even at .5. Remember we want close to 1! NOT GOOD!

A 3D distribution of the STI metrics on Circle Room A1

Notice all of the reflections in Circle Room A1. NOT GOOD! 

Why a Circle?

You might have asked why I am choosing to tackle the shape of a circle for the courtroom layout? Why not say a rhombus?

Last year, I went with my studio to the AIA AAJ conference in Miami, FL to present our projects for the design of a U.S. Federal Courthouse. This annual conference is where the AIA's Academy of Architecture for Justice recognizes big advancements, obstacles, and players in this market sector of architecture. There were some insightful ideas that I will always remember from the conference, much of it had to do with the effectiveness of rehabilitation in our current justice system. The most insightful/interesting thing I remembered from the conference was an odd taboo towards the idea of a circular courtroom...

I discovered the taboo when two of my classmates presented their project which featured circular courtrooms in the design. After they were finished much of the criticism was on the design of the courtroom and in particular, the decision to make it in a circle. Why? Many of the members asked. The general consensus among these professionals was that many architects had played with the poetic purity of a circular courtroom and fallen victim to this design's traps; terrible acoustics, resolution of a successful layout, and disintegration of traditional courtroom decorum. One comment even stated that "if the great Frank Lloyd Wright himself could not successively resolve this issue it can't be done. It has been tried and it does not work. Plain and simple."

Think of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. The idea of circle poses a substantial social theory in the courtroom, everyone is a part of the process and hierarchy (not order) is minimized. Of course some would argue that their is hierarchy in the courtroom for a reason...and I agree there should be. Hierarchy doesn't have to be through intimidation though, it can also be through mutual respect. More on this later!

Intro: The Beginning of Something Unkown

Hello! 

This time of year will always be a special time for me, four years ago I had the opportunity to experience studying abroad with Clemson University's Barcelona, Spain program. I kept a blog during my time abroad and I enjoy vicariously reliving those days by re-reading my blog posts. Doing this allows me to see how much (or little) I have changed since that time, and it is an eerily effective way of self evaluation. Perhaps I am being dramatic, whimsical, or just plain weird but it gave me an idea...what if I kept a blog about my experience this semester???

What is so special about this semester you ask? Well, this semester, my FINAL semester of higher education; I will be completing an independent studio project as a part of my Masters Program requirements for Georgia Tech. Just in case there is anyone reading this post who is not familiar with how architecture education works, I will very briefly explain: 

Studio = the most fun, stressful, exciting, angering, inspiring, depressing, wild, overwhelming, and creative 6 credit course I have and will ever take! 

What is my independent studio on? Simple, how can the courtroom be re-thought to work architecturally and acoustically to fit within a circular layout? What social ramifications could this have on the current decorum of the U.S judicial system and its associated processes? While I have an idea, this will be among the things I intend to discover.  

So while there won't be any "magical" posts about Breakfast in Barcelona, Ventures in Valencia, Romping in Rome, or Grandeur in Germany, there will be careful accounts of my findings, successes, and setbacks over the coming four months. Hopefully the blog will become more colorful, interactive, and informative as we progress. Should I find a viable solution it might turn out to be a big deal or it could be humorously insignificant! Who knows? Regardless, I am glad to be blogging again, and glad to have an audience, however big or small it may be.

Enjoy this journey with me...