One car. Seven connected layers.

The body layer describes outer form, surface transitions, openings and the places where panels meet seals and supporting structure. A conceptual change is judged by how it alters proportion, access and the visual continuity of the complete silhouette.

It also provides a boundary for airflow and heat without claiming measured performance. The study asks how a surface decision could affect systems behind it while keeping the base vehicle’s identity legible and unbranded.

This layer reads the glasshouse as a connected boundary rather than a collection of panes. Visibility, frames, sealing relationships and the surrounding body openings need to remain coherent for the cabin to feel visually light and protected.

Noise and water are discussed only as qualitative consequences, not measured outcomes. A change at one edge can travel into trim, body alignment and cabin atmosphere, making the interface more important than any single material.

The conceptual cabin connects seating, steering, instruments and primary touchpoints without prescribing a component layout. Ergonomics is treated as a relationship among posture, sightlines, reach and the clarity of information.

Materials support that relationship rather than compete for attention. Visual weight is kept low so the driver can read the car through consistent interfaces, while electrical routing, glass boundaries and structural constraints remain present in the brief.

The chassis layer represents supporting relationships and mounting logic without reproducing a frame or dimensioned drawing. Its purpose is to show that local component choices cannot precede an understanding of the complete structural context.

Movement elsewhere depends on this common datum. Body alignment, powertrain reaction, brake and suspension response and cabin confidence all draw meaning from how the supporting relationships are understood together.

The layer shows a qualitative flow of reaction through the vehicle rather than a specific assembly. Cooling space, supply, routing and later access are considered alongside the supporting chassis and electrical systems.

Its character is judged by the complete use brief, not a performance figure. A proposal that appears mechanically attractive may still be rejected if it overwhelms the car’s identity, complicates serviceability or creates pressure in adjacent layers.

This layer describes progression, stability and the control of body movement in qualitative terms. It stays connected to tyres, supporting geometry and the way the complete car is intended to communicate with its driver.

A single component cannot define the result. The study instead considers how response arrives through interfaces and whether one change would create imbalance, visual noise or an expectation unsupported by the wider brief.

The electrical layer represents continuity among supply, protection, routing and diagnosis without becoming a real circuit diagram. Its paths remain abstract so the visitor reads dependencies rather than instructions or component locations.

Legibility is part of the design direction. Electrical choices meet heat, movement, cabin controls and future access, so added capability has value only when those relationships stay clear and the complete system remains understandable.