1.
See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331260597
Yale University Art Gallery vs St. Louis Art Museum
Preprint · February 2018
CITATIONS
0
READS
636
1 author:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
essay Louis Kahn View project
Tetiana Bondar
Politecnico di Milano
1 PUBLICATION 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Tetiana Bondar on 06 February 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

2.
Yale University Art Gallery, 1950-54
Louis I. Kahn
Saint Louis Art Museum, 2005-2013
David Chipperfield Architects
Student Tetiana Bondar
Matricola 10556463
Politecnico di Milano, History and Theory of The Twentieth Century Architecture B
Prof. Christoph Grafe, assistant Giulia Ricci

3.
The purpose of this work is to investigate, analyze and compare two buildings belongs to
different periods, distant in time about of 50 years. One is Louis Kahn’s Yale University Art
Gallery, built in 1950-54 in New Haven, USA and other represents early 21st century is Saint
Louis Art Museum of David Chipperfield Architects, realized during 2005-2013 in Saint Louis,
USA.
Luis Kahn, Yale University Art Gallery
INTRODUTION
In 1951, after Kahn went back from Italy to USA, where he was a resident architect at the
American Academy in Rome, he was commissioned to design the addition to the Yale
University Art Gallery, collegiate gothic structure designed by Egerton Swartwout, which would
also temporarily house for the Department of Architecture and Graphic Design. It had to be the
first important building constructed at Yale since the war, and Kahn's first important and truly
prestigious assignment, that proved to be a turning point in his career. By the mid-1950's the
creative associations of the architect have become more complex. Kahn vision of architecture
was a researching of the history of materials and structure enhanced by a practical application
of contemporary scientific thinking. The influence of geodesic structural systems of Buckminster
Fuller (Kahn, however, was less interested in the technological and economic advantages of
three-dimensional construction than in its spatial, structural, and formal potentials) and the
experience, gained during his stay in Europe, significantly affected the distinctive style for which
Kahn would become known. His singular philosophy of architecture affected by his emotional
response to the way light engaged with the ancient, monumental forms.
INSPIRATION
Kahn got inspiration from the subtle structural integrity and convincing visual order of Gothic
structures, so the architect of the new Art Gallery set himself the task of creating a space in
which the structure and the mechanical equipment-lighting, acoustical and climatic-would all live
one life and would become the basic means of artistic expression. His first objective was
creation of integral unity in form, second objective was permanence. The uses of the building
were to be varied-exhibition space, offices, drafting rooms, lounges, workshops. All the future
uses could not possibly be anticipated. A building tightly fulfilling the present requirements
would quickly become obsolete. Was to be created a universal space, easily adaptable to new
patterns of use. Therefore, building was to modern loft structure with extremely flexible space
that could be freely subdivided at will to accommodate a host of functions.
DESIGN
Kahn design is characterized by a series of anonymous loft spaces. Rectangular volume in plan,
animated by a cylindrical form with a central service core containing stairs, elevators, duct
shafts, and toilets (in his subsequent works Kahn continued to develop the idea of a cylinder as
the servant and the rectangle as the served element into the dialectic of a general architectural
theory). The 12 meters span between the columns frames the loft spaces, leaving them free of
structural intrusions and allowing the different functions of gallery, office, and studio to be
composed as it was required by project. The four floors above the basement have windows to
the north and west and these facades have much in common with the prevalent window-wall
detailing of Mies Van der Rohe. Whereas the south façade on the Chapel Street has no
windows and its solid brick wall, relieved only by insertion of limestone stripes which highlight
each floor, has impressive but sympathetic respect for the older Art Gallery. From outside this

4.
building present little out of the ordinary and it is only up until entering that one becomes aware
of the major feature which distinguished it – the ceiling design.
An idea of the geometry of the ceiling came later in the development of the building project and
only after the initial plan had been established. Initially Kahn considered a conventional post-
and-beam structure with widely spaced concrete columns and concrete floor slabs. Suspended
acoustical plaster vaults were to span the preconceived rectangular spaces from east to west.
The spaces above the vaults were to accommodate the building’s mechanical systems.
Because the vaults determined the position of the room dividers, the architect eventually reject
the proposal. Strive to find more compelling and innovative solution for the project of the Yale
Art Museum, Kahn for the first time applied triangulated space frame geometry in combination
with the interstitial mechanical services. Affected by three-dimensional constructions of Anne
Tyng, ideas about change from “plane” to “space” Kahn came up with tetrahedral grid made of
concrete – a layer of three-sided concrete pyramids, joined at their bottom corners and
supporting an overhead slab at their top vertices. The concrete’s solidity offered visual
concealment for lights and ductwork and natural fireproofing. It also lent the celling a gravitas,
as well as, the grid’s porous nature provided some measure of acoustic baffling. The triagrid
floor functions both as a structural network and as distributive membrane. In the hollow
channels running between beams, Kahn threaded tubular air ducts for the electrical and
ventilating systems. The mechanical equipment become an integral part of the structure’s
hollow fabric. Kahn’s desire to integrate the mechanical with the structural system was a
pioneering idea, and one that modern architecture had largely ignored. Kahn wrote:
“Integration is the way of nature. We can learn from nature. How a space is served with light,
air, and quiet must be embodied in the space order concept which provides for the harbouring of
these services. The nature of space is further characterized by the minor spaces that serve it.
Storage rooms, service-rooms and cubicals must not be partitioned areas of a single space
structure; they must be given their own structure. The space order concept must extend beyond
the harbouring of the mechanical services and include the “servant spaces” adjoining the
spaces served. This will give meaningful form to the hierarchy of spaces. Long ago they build
with solid stones. Today we must build with “hollow stones”.”1
Kahn used the integration of the piping distribution with the nature of the brick and concrete
structural element to express the above mentioned "hollow stone" concept. By creating voids
and interweaving the structural element or independent facility spaces constructed by voids he
exemplified his tectonic belief that enabled the scale of the "hollow stone" space to adopt
multiple spatial flexibilities.
Tetrahedral floor structure required for inclined concrete beams braced by V-shaped elements
covered by thick top slab spanning 40 feet. The faces of each concrete tetrahedron are concrete
diaphragms capable of tension, compression, shear and bending in multiple directions. The
integral slab atop these pyramidal shapes sit on them as on a bed of nails, with hundreds of
points of connection. Floor loads are transferred from slab to tetrahedron, and from there
throughout the network of concrete diaphragms and steel reinforcing to the beams. Concrete
tetrahedral grid geometry of the truss’s bottom frame created a provocative rhythm and pattern,
repeating a statically efficient triangle across the sweep of the ceiling. The triangle as a figure
and as structural concept appears on the cylindrical tower of the main staircase and creates the
1 Kahn, Louis I., “Order and Form”, “Perspecta 4”, The Yale Architectural Journal, (1957)

5.
impressive contrast to the heavy concrete structure, acting in the same time as a sculptural
element in the center of the gallery space. The idea was to create an unusual, abstract form,
“hollow column” that would attract users' attention, as physical and spiritual core of the building.
Kahn adopted a volume of concrete cylinder to contain the series of triangular ramps, oriented
in different directions, which strives upward to the circular void with triangular solid slab on the
top, glowing in diffused natural light.
LIGHTNING
Yale Art Gallery successfully integrates ambient light and artificial lighting. The stark geometry
of the building and its interplay of surface textures, light, and shadow are obvious. Creating a
lightweight structure triangulated in all three dimensions without cladding or an environmental
system, it represented an elegant and sophisticated structural idea. Kahn’s ceiling system act as
integral lighting fixtures within the beam’s depth, curved to reflect and diffuse light onto the walls
and floors below. All the illumination is provided by two types of lighting fixture, which are
mounted within the tetrahedral cavities on trolley duct fittings, permitting instantaneous removal
of attachment of any unit at any point of the ceiling. The overall ceiling impression is an exciting
pattern of triangles of light. Through the manipulation of light and space, Kahn created visually
compelling spaces that change through the day. Louis Kahn held the specific views about the
importance of natural light to the buildings. In one of his lectures Kahn expressed his light
perceiving in the following statemen:
“I sense Light as the giver of all presences, and material as spent Light. What is made by Light
casts a shadow, and the shadow belongs to Light. I sense a Threshold: Light to Silence, Silence
to Light – an ambience of inspiration, in which the desire to be, to express crosses with the
possible.”2
His poetic and spiritual understanding of architecture goes far deeper than simply constructing
buildings and all compositional elements of Yale Art Museum have strong symbolic meaning
and destination. The achievement of this design is reconstituting natural lighting in a controlled
enclosure without either destroying its essence. Kahn’s architectural atmosphere brings in a
spiritual mood, influences the emotional state of the person, encourages interaction between the
environment and its occupant.
David Chipperfield, Saint Louis Art Museum
INTRODUTION
British architect David Chipperfield worked for Norman Foster and Richard Rogers before
establishing his own practice in 1984. The works of Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe and a
modern Japanese architecture, in particular Tadao Ando’s sculptural asceticism had an
important influence on him. As Louis Kahn at the time, he was professor of Architectural Design
at Yale University. Chipperfield made his name in Germany, where his designs for the Museum
of Modern Literature in Marbach and the Folkwang Museum in Essen, Berlin's Neues Museum
and his masterplan for the Museum Island in Berlin all garnered acclaim. American author Philip
Jodidio wrote about the architect: “David Chipperfield observes a carefully crafted minimalism in
which volumes and light come together in fine harmony. The architect aspires to an architecture
2 Louis I. Kahn, “Architecture, Silence and Light”, Guggenheim Museum, New York, December 03, 1968;
Louis Kahn, “Essential texts”, edited by Twombly, R., W.W. Norton & Company, New York 2003, pp. 228-252.

6.
founded on collaboration, ideas, and excellence and he less concerned with an immediately
recognizable, individual style. His buildings are intended as physically immediate spaces in
which a sort of ordinariness becomes special, and the individual structure co-exists with
broader concepts. His approach to historical remains widely recognized as much more than just
a skillful response to a challenging professional theme”3
. And Italian architect and historian
Fulvio Irace describes David Chipperfield in these words: “He revealed his remarkable empathy
for historic settings and landscapes. He sees the context not as an active field of possibilities.”4
INSPIRATION
In 2005 an international competition was held to expand the museum complex by completing
the new eastern building, and David Chipperfield's bureau won the right to design the structure.
An expansion had been considered necessary due to exigency to place the increased
encyclopedic collection of the museum stored at the warehouse. One of the project's primary
aims was to solve the infrastructure crisis the museum suffered from with its original building. A
second issue Chipperfield faced was the need to create a design that would be contemporary
but sit well next to the existing structure, which in itself has a strong architectural value (original
building was designed by architect Cass Gilbert in 1904, who took inspiration from the Baths of
Caracalla in Rome). Other aspects for David Chipperfield to consider were a coherent
circulation between the two wings - the old and the new - and the importance of organic
integration into the landscape of Forest Park, the main city park in the center of which is located
the museum. Based on these requirements, the architect organized a complete renovation of
the museum: restoration of the historical part, construction of a new building with an area of 9
000 m2
and logical connection between them.
Before beginning the project, Chipperfield collaborated with historians, public advisors,
conservationists, engineers and museum authorities. Chipperfield once has expressed next
statement: “I’m not obsessed with the idea of a clean sheet. I think we are in a continuum and
that our responsibility is to find clues in memory and context.”5
Rather than simply replicating
what had been built by Gilbert, Chipperfield decided to create new design elements, which
anyway harmoniously stood in smoothed contrast to the building's original design.
DESIGN
The new rectilinear East part of the building respects the focal position of the original one in the
park, a significant part of building is located underground, and above presents itself as a single-
storey structure. The pavilion in its outline steps out and back in four directions from one point,
keeping its visual impact on the nearby surroundings and its wider environment to a minimum.
The pavilion sits on a low plinth that integrates the surrounding topography of the park while
also aligning its internal level to the main floor of the Gilbert building, facilitating a seamless
transition between old and new. It also establishes two connections through existing south-east
and south-west doorways at this unifying level, respecting the existing axiality. The floor-to-
ceiling glazing has a clear reference to Mies van der Rohe. Four large panoramic windows offer
3 Jodidio, Philip, “David Chipperfield”, Taschen GmbH, Cologne, Germany, December 23, 2015;
4 Irace, Fulvio , “David Chipperfield”, Mondadori printing spa, Verona, Italy, 2011, p. 7.
5 Caruso, Adam and St John, Peter, A Conversation with David Chipperfield, El Croquis, 87: David Chipperfield
1991–1997, 1997, p. 8

7.
unique view towards the Grand Basin and gives a more direct experience of being in the newly
landscaped garden. The façades are panelled with dark polished concrete, lending the pavilion
a solid presence among the nature.
The building is tectonically and spatially robust. The structure is largely composed of polished
concrete with local river aggregate, dredged from the Missouri River to speckle the dark grey walls
with fragments of the same sandy-coloured stone that Gilbert used to build his museum. The
material continues in the building’s unifying formal element: a concrete-grid ceiling canopy
covering the entire space. Structural and mechanical systems are embedded only in the North-
South walls, East-West part can be reconfigured, that allows for the internal walls to be
relocated according to the module of the ceiling grid, creating a degree of flexibility for the
arrangement of the galleries. The thresholds between the gallery spaces are defined by the
absence of wall and doorways, allowing for long views through the galleries and out to
the landscape beyond. The geometry of the grid slab is rigorous: 1,5x3 meters voids, dubbed
coffers, are partitioned by 30 cm thick concrete ribs. The 1,2 meters tall slab was poured on site
after the vertical structure of columnar supports and concrete exterior walls (which serve as
shear walls) was already in place. 5,5 meters above the floor slab was built a temporary
plywood platform to carry out an “aerial pour”. Disrupted only by the column caps that would
connect with the ceiling slab, the platform formed the base for the formwork. David Chipperfield
wanted the materiality of the coffers to be as natural as possible, for this reason was used self-
compacting concrete, which after getting dry formed in a smooth surface and sharp corners—
important details for the largely exposed final result.
The final result was a continuous structure that was left to harden in the elements for several
months while the rest of the building was constructed; UV exposure lightened the concrete to its
final, pale color. A metal roof system was installed roughly 90 cm above the coffers, leaving
room for air returns, plenum barriers, lighting systems, and other infrastructure. While many
areas, including the café and temporary exhibition galleries, have an opaque ceiling over the
coffers, the permanent exhibition galleries and the public spaces have skylights that allow
natural daylight to filter in.
LIGHTNING
An elegant coffered ceiling is a key element in the lightning design. In addition to its role as a
structural grid, it modulates and filters daylight into the spaces. Ceiling bounces light off the
structure's highly reflective concrete. Sunlight comes through skylights composed of triple-
glazed translucent glass with a UV-resistant interlayer. Within each of the ceiling's 1,5x3 meters
openings is a framework of aluminum extrusions that supports a horizontal light-diffusing resin
panel. Around the top of that is the halo, a raised collar that blocks any residual direct sunlight
that might seep through. The distance between the artefact and the light source is crucial, and is
factored in to the height of the internal space; the gradual oscillation of daylight creates spaces
with a distinct character. Guided by an astronomical clock working with rooftop photo sensors,
two layers of vertical shades control light levels in the galleries. A light-reducing shade allows
views out to the park when down. More opaque, diffusing shade allows little light transmission
and is typically set about 2 meters above the floor, descending completely only when the sun is
very low. The shades are operated by the control system, which has been modified to meet the
specifications of the museum.

8.
Average light levels tracked over the course of the year in order to balance daylight with
conservation needs. Blackout roller shades directly beneath the skylights are deployed when
the museum is closed, decreasing average daylight quantities. Electric lighting is used when
sunlight levels are low—in the winter or when the museum is open at night. Fluorescent tubes
tucked above the coffers provide cool ambient light, while halogen spotlights on a track built into
the framework around the light spreader animate artworks.
Financial Times gave a positive review to the Chipperfield’s work:
“It is a building designed to glow inside and out, one that is more about the intangibility of light
than about mass reinforced by shadow.” And “The concrete glows. It is difficult to reproduce in
photos but the quality of light is outstanding; even and surprisingly gentle considering the often
fiercely blue summer skies outside.”6
East Building addition represents a space exploration through the effect of light. Structural
design and possibility to change program circulation allow infused day lighting opportunity
throughout the galleries. Dispersion of coffers permits ambient light during the day and its
language is extended throughout the building. Phenomenological experience of space seems to
be highlighted with cooperation of light and material.
CONCLUSIONS
During the period of twentieth century the design process in architecture went through some
major transitions, one of which was to transform the character and ambiance of the everyday
spaces. New materials were introduced, and the improving technology provided innovative ways
to use them in the construction of the buildings. Glass, steel and concrete became the most
used materials for constructions. Freeing of the outer skin from the inner structure made a
strong impact on the internal layout and the expression of different spaces for any type of
building. The openings of various sizes and orientations used to transform the light entering the
building gave these spaces a unique character.
Both the architects, L. Kahn and D. Chipperfield, give an importance to the nature of materials,
structural quality and functional use. By making a deeper parallel between the work of Louis
Kahn and David Chipperfield we can find that, even if due to the geometry used their works
differ in appearance and final spiritual perception, the way they approach the spiritual sensation
and the method of work with the space and the nature have some common intersections. In all
of Kahn’s architecture, light is always a main component of design, he made the light a primary
instrument for the evocation of feelings. In Yale Art Gallery design of the rigorous, mathematical
ceiling bring the plain interior to life. Kahn’s manipulation of space, material, and light and
shadow create a memorable impact on the human senses. The diamond openings establish a
strong visual focus on the source of light. The power of light enhanced with strong geometry
pattern creates a sensation of deep refined monumentality and a mystifying quality space with a
sense of eternal. Whereas the quality of light inside the Saint Louis Art Museum is soft, diffused,
and uniform resulting from the controlled penetration allowed by the daylight system at the top
of the coffered ceiling. Kahn’s Yale Art Gallery is a work of art that need to be experienced by a
human body moving through the space to be fully understood. The Chipperfield’s design does
not attracts as much user’s attention to the details of the building, but gently redirect their focus
to the art exposition and to the pleasant feeling of being in the Forest Park. The variation in the
light quality inside the museum is due to the different intensity of light at the various moment of
6 Heathcote, Edwin, “St Louis Art Museum extension: an age of enlightenment”, Financial Times, July 03, 2013.

9.
the day. It could even be possible to appreciate light intensity to variate at the passage of a thick
cloud that covers the sun. The results of the comparison show that both projects employ similar
design principles to achieve some of the common effects of light, and that the characteristics of
light affect the overall perception of the space even if the final outcome is diverse. This
difference represents how architectural ambient affects human perception. In the case of Yale
Art Gallery it is sharp and powerful, whereas in Saint Louis Art Museum it has a soft and blurry
quality. The character of an interior space depends on the way the designers bring the light into
the space. Architecture is designed to serve the needs of human activity, and therefore, creates
a relationship between human senses and the building to transform emotion.

10.
Yale Art Gallery. First Floor Plan
Yale Art Gallery. Reflected Ceiling Plan

11.
St. Louis Art Museum. Ground Floor Plan
St. Louis Art Museum. Ceiling Plan

12.
Yale Art Gallery. Ceiling Detail
St. Louis Art Museum. Ceiling Detail

13.
Yale Art Gallery. Section
St. Louis Art Museum. Section

14.
Yale Art Gallery

15.
St. Louis Art Museum.

16.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Cummings Loud, Patricia, “Louis I. Kahn. I musei”. Milano, Electa, 2006
Frampton, Kenneth. “Modern Architecture: A Critical History”. London, Thames and Hudson Ltd,
1985.
Frampton, Kenneth. “Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and
Twentieth Century Architecture”. Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press, 1996.
Futagawa, Yukio (edited and photographed by). “Global Architecture Book 9. Museums”. Tokyo,
Co., Ltd., A.D.A. EDITA, 1981
Gabriel, Jean–François. “Beyond the Cube: The Architecture of Space Frames and Polyhedra”.
USA, John Wiley & Sons. October 27, 1997
Gargiani, Roberto. “Louis I. Kahn. Exposed concrete and hollow stones. 1949-1959. Treatise on
Concrete”, Spain, EPFL Press, July 14, 2014
Holl, Steven, Juhani Pallasmaa, and Gómez Alberto Pérez. Questions of Perception:
Phenomenology of Architecture. San Francisco, CA: William Stout, 2006.
Irace, Fulvio. “David Chipperfield”, Verona, Mondadori printing spa, Italy, 2011.
Leoni, Giovanni. “David Chipperfield”, Milano, Motta Architettura srl, 2007
Leslie, Thomas. “Louis I. Kahn: Building Art, Building Science.” New-York, George Braziller,
September 07, 2005
Long Kieran and Bevan Robert. "Architects Today”, London, Laurence King Publishing, August
07, 2006
Pushkarev, Boris. “Yale University Art Gallery and Design Center”, Perspecta, № 3, 1955, pp.
46-59.
Sanderson, George A. “Extention: University Art Gallery and Design Center” Progressive
Architecture, Vol. 35, May-August 1954, pp. 88-101.
Ford, Edward R. “The Details of Modern Architecture: 1928 to 1988”, Volume 2, Mexico, MIT
Press, January 06, 2004
Minutillo, Josephine. “Architectural Record”, USA, New York, August 16, 2013
https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/7686-saint-louis-art-museum-east-building?
View publication stats