Andrew: The bottom part is conventional and boring. Let’s focus on the top part.
We have discussed the forces that would act on the skin and columns. To counter possible buckling of the 2d truss, we have have decided to make it a 3d truss, and try to parametrize it in location based on structural analysis in GSA and design preferences. Because all trusses are slanted in the same direction, we would have to counter the moment created by the tilt. The next phase would be to make an exact model in grasshopper with all variables and then export it to GSA and see how it reacts and perhaps find ways to optimize it structurally.
Joop has mentioned potential problems with the aspiration to get as light as possible. We should always keep in mind that the natural frequency of the structure. 1Hz to 5Hz (peaks a second), that usually imply a lightweight building, could be very problematic for resonance with pop songs and soccer cheers. The structure would be either lighter 1Hz of heavier then 5Hz.
Joop suggested a counter weight dumping system, based on a concrete block suspended on springs. This is the lightest solution to counter the effects of the frequency.
The division of the skin’s substructure should be tested for reaction to wind load in a non-perpendicular direction. A rigid system that would have the ability to react to these forces might be coarse and appear not light.
Another aspect needed to be thought of is the twist moment that the pretensioning of the fabric would create in the trusses. One solution could be to connect the trusses to each other using cables (Penetrating the membranes) to make a stable system.