DISTORTED REFLECTIONS
REALISING AMBIGUITY Module 4; Digital Design and Fabrication, Tutorial 6, Semester 1 2017 Amelia Rose Smith 697917
DIGITAL DESIGN + FABRICATION SM1, 2016 M1 JOURNAL Amelia Smith
CONTENTS
697917 Sia + Tutorial
M1_IDEATION
1.1 OBJECT 1.2 OBJECT & SYSTEM 1.2 VOLUME 1.3 SKETCH DESIGN PROPOSAL
1
M2_DESIGN
2.1 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
(CONCEPT) 2.2 DIGITIZATION & DESIGN V1/2 2.3 PRECEDENT RESEARCH 2.4 DESIGN PROPOSAL V2 2.5 PROTOTYPING & TESTING EFFECTS
M3_FABRICATION
3.1 FABRICATION INTRO 3.2 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 3.3 V3_DEVELOPMENT 3.4 V4_DESIGNING EFFECTS 3.5 V5_ DESIGN PROCESS 3.6FABRICATION SEQUENCE 3.7 ASSEMBLY DRAWING 3.8 DISTORTED REFLECTIONS
M4_REFLECTION
4.1 REVIEW
M5_APPENDIX 5.1 CREDIT 5.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Throughout Module One I struggled to connect the theoretical concepts involving material systems, design process and personal space presented in the lectures and readings to my own designed forms be they digital, sketched or physical. This is demonstrated strongly by the discontinuity between my measured drawings of the expandable mirror and my sketch designs, all of which failed to fully engage with the material system of panel and fold. Despite the shortcomings of the drawings and sketch model, the ideas behind the sketch designs were extremely strong and innovative. Sketch design #3 for example is not a visually stimulating or an alluring design, however the concept; to distort or make ambiguous the human silhouette through the use of reflective material and form, drew deeply both on Sommer’s (1969) assertion that personal space is at its core a psychological construct and with my own research into the difference between perception of personal space and the individual’s understanding of their own personal space. Another interesting element that came to light for me in M1 were the differences between analogue and digital forms of representation, and the limitations or principles of each. Throughout M1 I ended up keeping these processes quite separate even during the sketch designs which meant that often the results were disjointed and not articulated well in either 2D, digital, or physical form.
1.0 IDEATION
1.1 OBJECT
MEASURED OBJECT I found that Heath’s claim in ‘300 years of Industrial Design’ that the process of producing such an accurate and measured drawing forces the observer into studying and thus understanding every detail of the chosen object. There were levels of complexity present in the object that were essential to the usability of the mechanism which upon first inspection I had looked over. I significant reason for this is pointed to by Miralles () when the point is made that simply measuring and visually depicting the object cannot convey the essence or the experience enable by that object. In this way, I felt as though my initial understanding of the mirror was a highly abstract understanding more concerned with the feeling and the function of the object rather than detailed mechanism of it.
DIGITAL DESIGN PROCESS _04
_01
At points the extrude command did not produce the result that I was looking for, in this example I ended up using a combination of ‘Sphere’, ‘Surface’ and ‘Boolean Difference’ commands to create demispheres. Also soon is the progression from basic shape to nuanced ‘bolt’.
I started with the basic “wireframe” (Cheng, 2011, p.1) mode of modeling as this made it easy for me to directly draw on the measurements and analysis which I had already undertaken through the execution of 2D measured drawings.
_02
The next stage of the digital model required moving out of orthogonal views and starting to ‘make’ items in 3D space. This process started by extruding the profile curves that described the object.
_03
As seen here, whilst extruding profile curves into 3D forms, often the resultant object was not correctly detailed. I further edited objects by running chamfer commands to soften the edges of the objects.
_05
This close up of the side of the mirror shows the finished result of taking time to detail all of the different elements; the bolt, with the chamfered edge, the raised edge of the mirror etc.
_06
Again in this image the relationship between the initial ‘wireframe’ model and the developed 3D or “solid” (Cheng, 2011, p.1) model it demonstrated by the still visible profile curves.
PANEL With this sketch model I explored panels that were not rectangular or triangular as they seemed to be very common forms, instead trying the hexagon shape, which whilst being interesting was also unwieldy when I tried to fold or bend it.
FOLD
PANEL AND FOLD As a material system, I found it difficult to really understand the potential shapes, forms and materiality of panel and fold until I moved away from the mirror-typology and moved to exploring paneled surfaces which could bend, fold and were developable (Pottman et.al, 20).
The types of folds which I could generate with this sketch model were very limited and often would cause the paper to bend out of shape rather than fold with angular regularity. I moved away from the expansion joints of the mirror that we drew because it seemed like a very limited way of understanding the panel and fold system and lead me to creating Sketch designs that mimicked it too closely.
1.2 VOLUME
_Sketch Design 0.1
Physical Barrier; The Porcupine Effect Top View
This barrier technique is meant to physically create a zone around the user that is impenetrable. This form of tringular panels means that the design can be flexible, 3 dimensional, planar and structurally sound.
Expandable Panels “Webbing” under arms, this obscures the silhouette of the person, their gender and identity.
How does this respond to your personal space? This design engages with the physical aspect of personal space. It was designed with my individual use in mind- this informed the design by emphasising the need for a protective “skin” around areas which make me feel the most vulnerable when they are intruded on; the neck, chest and hips. This design aims to manifest the “invisible boundaries” (Sommer) which define one’s sense of personal space.
1.3 SKETCH DESIGN PROPOSALS
_Sketch Design 0.2
Visual Barrier; Distortion of Forms
The drop-down , wearable membranes are a series of interconnected panels which can be worn in conjunction with different infills. The barriers act like cladding for the body, creating a visual barrier between the wearer and the outside world. The infill panels can create many different effects by using techniques such as patterning to create images through the use of multiple infilled panels.
How does this respond to your personal space? The aim of this design is to block, or define the view of the body. By being a designable, changeable ‘skin’ it gives the wearer the ability to control the perceptions of others, psychologically giving the wearer the ability to define their personal space without the intrusion of others. The design is a series of infill panels, connected by pin joints, which form a kind of membrane barrier, covering the most sensitive areas in terms of personal space.
_Sketch Design 0.3
Exploiting Deimatic Behaviour
Side View
How does this respond to your personal space? This design engages with the conecpt explored in Sommer’s book, of personal space as ‘an attitude’ to engaging with others in the world. Rather than use a physical barrier that someone cannot enter into, the Deimatic deisgn aims to create a kind of psychological effect on the observer that keeps them at a comfortable distance from the wearer.
Plan Detail
Folds in the material can create intricate, beautiful patterns when viewed front on.
Deimatic Behaviour Many animals such as moths and octopuses, use colour and patterns as a way of threatening or startling potential threats. In nature the displaying of ‘eyespots’, acts as a kind of psychological barrier between predator and prey. This design utilises these concepts by generating a startling, and mesmerizing form and thus creating a desire in the potential intruder to create more distance.
Moving between M1 and M2 we decided as a group to work with the conceptual direction that I outlined in both Sketch Design #2 and #3. We further developed this through precedent research and experimental sketches as well as exploring our material system further, through physical models. We wanted to avoid the common design solutions to the Panel and Fold system which tend to use Paneling Tools and triangular panel forms to create developable surfaces which are able to be folded. This lead us to an exploration of Tetrahedron-like forms, repeated at different scales and levels of transparency to create a highly varied form that made the body’s form ambiguous.
2.0 DESIGN AMELIA SMITH KAI LIN LILY CHEUNG HERMIONE HINES
We proceded to use a methodology of measuring personal space which developed into our form finding exercise to see what areas of the zones tended to extend further away from the body. Upon reading Somer’s Personal Space (1969), in which he described the shape of personal space as “not being spherical in shape and not extending equally in all directions (people can tolerate closer presence of a stranger at their sides than directly in front)” - we became further interested in exploring how the tangible perception of personal space is in fact warped around the body. PERSONAL SPACE AS THE VISUAL/EMOTIONAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE
2.1 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
These diagrams illustrate the surfaces that we began developing from the personal space diagrams that we did as a group. The interplay between viewer and viewed played out in the LIMINAL zone between these two surfaces.
VIEWER This surface was made by lofting the profile curves of the viewers perception of personal space.
VIEWED Again, this surface was made by lofting the profile curves of self perception of personal space.
LIMINAL ZONE Exploring the intersections of these surfaces articulates these zones.
LIMINAL SPACE AND THE BODY The relationship between these volumes that seem to define the psychological perception of the body’s boundaries are mapped onto the mesh body.
EXPERIMENTAL FORMS Even though we didn’t continue these designs, it was important to explore different types of folds.
PANEL AND FOLD This image demonstrates the initial way in which my group responded to the P&F system.
2.2 DESIGN PROPOSAL V_1
We drew on Mathias Kiss’ installation we could see the possibility of reflecting the surrounding with mirrors, which correlates to our notion, that is to distract viewers’ ability to define the boundaries of personal space with reflections.
We explored different types of panels and folds and came up with this star shape. It is form by joining six small right-angled triangles with a small triangular cutout at the corner. We then transform the shape by folding the dotted edges to make it 3D. We experimented with attempting to generate a second skin using these star forms which created a delicate and beautiful pattern, yet based on the decisions about the star forms and their limitations, we decided to not develop this concept.
As we started on fabrication, we found that there was difficulty in joining this complex shape as these shapes can only be connected corner to corner.
2.2 DESIGN PROPOSAL V_1.2
DIGITAL
We tried to get away from the very static, two dimesional volume that the opening and colsing shapes gave us, instead looking to explore further the relationship between liminal space and developable surffaces.
SKETCHES AND DESIGN
Throughout the design process, we continued to handsketch ideas, inspirations and analysis as a way of further reducing the solution space discussed in the Week 3 lecture. Even though our material system, panel and fold, gave us an idea of the solution space it was not enough to give us a goal space. As the group continued to design and articulate elements such as site analysis and concept, we more aware of what the goal space for our project woud look like.
2.3 PRECEDENTS Blur Building LIZ DILLER 2007
Unlike entering any normal space, entering Blur is like stepping into a habitable medium. It’s formless, featureless, depthless, scaleless, massless, purposeless and dimensionless. The audience is dispersed, focused attention and dramatic build-up and climax are all replaced by attention that’s sustained by a sense of apprehension caused by the fog.
So here the world is put out of focus, while bring out our absolute dependence on the CONCEPT - Creating a haze master sense of vision is put into focus, and “ Architecture is nothing but a special-effects machine maybe share our kind of sensibility with our that delights and disturbs the senses” other senses. Upon entering Blur, visual and acoustic references are erased - there is only the experience of an optical Relates to our second skin in the sense that “white out” and the “white noise” of pulsating it explores HOW we navigate not only space, nozzles. The Blur Building is an “architecture of but each other through space. The effect of atmosphere” - a a blurring fog mass. There is nothing a haze distorts the viewers perceptions and to see but our dependence on vision itself. creates ambiguity.
Light illuminates from the centre of the artwork and reflects off the panels, thus projects a beguiling pattern of light and shadow onto the surrounding space. The reflections visible on the outer brass surfaces of the triangles slide and shift in dynamic response to the viewers’ active engagement with the work. The movement of people around the artwork continually reveals new perspectives of the complex form, causing it to appear as a flurry of movement and light. His use of illusions produced by mirrors and light that create pseudo-natural phenomena, and diverse visual experiences and experiments suggest new ways of perceiving, experiencing and responding to the shared world.
THE SHAPE OF DISAPPEARING TIME OLAFUR ELIASSON 2016
“When we see things as a continuous process of production and relation, we may also see their potential.” – we explore this through the notion of transcendence from solidity through to transparency that mirrors the continual morphing of personal space around the body. The effect of the light emphasises the transparency and creates a contrast between the ephemeral personal space, that we are trying to render tangible through the negotion of reality. This encourages people’s engagement and experience of being present in the work The second skin in this way may function as a mirror, reflecting a not-yet-verbalised emotional need to speak about personal space that we carry inside ourselves. We will use this concept further in our second skin because the light illuminating from the centre/the body through the skin will create these incredibly evocative effects that will trancend into the audience in the final showing. Ideas of colour spectrum, double perspective, tunnels, walking, can you see things when you move All the same textures but when the elements rotate there is a shifting of light - thus the more rotated the shapes are the more light is able to come through the spaces, in contrast the less roated the objects are the less light is able to come through. Patterns created by simple idea of rotating bricks and the differential effect is quite incredible. Olafur Eliasson: “The parliament of possibilities celebrates the fact that the world and our feelings about it are constantly changing” – this relates to our personal skin project because we are exploring the how individuals’ perceptions of themselves as well as others are never static because of the nature of human interaction.
ONE WAY COLOUR TUNNEL Olafur Eliasson 2007
Arched walkway that is constructed from triangular panels of colour-effect acrylic glass and acrylic mirrors. The panels are assembled into a rugged form, with the longest triangles at the base of the tunnel and the shortest triangles forming pyramidal outcroppings on the ceiling. As visitors move through the passageway, they observe a fluctuating display of varied hues caused by the colour-effect acrylic glass, which changes tone depending on how light strikes it. When they look back, however, instead of seeing the colourful environment they just passed through, they are met with the dull black backs of the panels, with only hints of colour escaping through the interstices. The work is often installed on a semi-transparent elevated walkway that reveals a surprising view of the tunnel from below.
MIRRORCUBE Tham & Videgård Arkitekter The structure is a mirrored glass box suspended round the trunk of a tree in Harads, northern Sweden. The exterior reflects the surroundings and the sky, creating a camouflaged refuge. The interior is all made of plywood and the windows give a 360 degree view. The dimensions are 4x4x4 metres. The base consists of a lightweight aluminum frame around the tree trunk and the walls are covered with the reflective glass. This concept was extremely important in our design in terms of the sensory effects of further creating a sense of distortion and disoreintation for the viewer when they look at the wearer and the second skin. It enables the wearer to render the liminal zone even more ambiguous.
MOVEMENT STUDY: ‘DAS TRIADISCHES BALLETT’
OSKAR SCHLEMMER, AND THE BAUHAUS
Deforming the boundaries of the body, ambiguity. Bauhaus, a modernist art movement that spawned from art schools in germany, and eventually spread throughout europe in the early 20th century. In 1922, Oskar Schlemmer used the human body as a medium, experimenting with pantomime and ballet with this performance (toured europe through mid 1930s). By incorporating costumes that reduced the human figure to geometric, formalist shapes, das triadisches provided strange and humorous imagery via dance and dress.
LIMINAL DIAGRAMS
In order to desig a response to the brief, our group started by articulating our concept diagrammatically. Tried to express the personal space of viewer/viewed.
PANELLED FORMS
Using physical models, and paneling tools, we experimented with making developable surfaces from our initial reference surfaces.
SURFACE MAPPING
Using the Picture Frame command in Rhino, I took the linework from these diagrams and started creating surfaces which articulate these spaces.
MAP TO POINTS
The solid, paneled tetrahedron form that we developed was then mapped to the points from the PT Grid command.
2.4 V2_ DISJOINTED TETRAHEDRA
PT. SURFACE GRID
Using the surfaces that articulate the users liminal space, I ran the Paneling Tools command to generate a grid of points from the surface UVs.
ORIENT
These solid shapes, then had to be orientated along each others planar faces, the was a part of our experiments with connections.
V2_RIGHT ELEVATION
M2_DIJOINTED TETRAHEDRA V2
V2_FRONT ELEVATION
2.5 PROTOTYPING
CARDBOARD
ADHESIVE MIRROR
We wanted to test the materiality as well as the constructibility of the cells, this one was successfully constructed but doesn’t blur effectively.
CLEAR POLYPROPYLENE
We decided to mirror the outside rather than leave the cells black, or just mirror the inside, the mirror amplifies the Blur effect.
We wanted to test the materiality as well as the constructibility of the cells, this one was successfully constructed but doesn’t blur effectively.
WHITE IVORY CARD
We were aiming to construct the cells with tab connections, to do this successfully we knew that we tested different tab lengths, 8mm was ideal.
2.5 TESTING EFFECTS
SCALE
VARIETY
We experimented with using the tetrahedra at different scales, using both digital and physical prototyping.
OPEN VS. CLOSED
We decided to experiment with whether the tetrahedra were fully solid objects, or whether their panels could be more or less transparent.
It was important for our concept that there was variety in the overall form of the design because of the intended visual blurring effect that we wanted to create.
CLUSTERED
The form of the clusters came about via using digital design in rhino to design quickly what the different combination could look like.
Moving from M2 to M3 there were several key issues with the design that had to be addressed before thinking about fabrication could start. This was also a product of our top-down design process, whereby our concept was extremely strong and articulate however we struggled to actually design the effects that we were aiming for. The point in the digital design that we identified as problematic were; the solid forms which didn’t engage well enough with the material system of Panel and Fold, the lack of variety despite changes in size and transparency of the solid tetrahedra. Experimenting with Paneling Tools and Grasshopper, as well as researching developable surfaces further inspired us to explore designing a single surface made up of cellular structures to generate the ambiguity of form central to our design.
3.0 FABRICATION AMELIA SMITH KAI LIN LILY CHEUNG HERMIONE HINES
Based on the feedback and review of M2, our group focused much more on defining a specific design criteria based on our intended ‘blur effect’ to inform all of the design decisions made throughout both finalizing the design and when making physical fabrication decisions. As is demonstrated in the following pages there were significant changes made to between version V3 of the design, which was based on using Voronoi 3D components in conjunction with predefined liminal surfaces, and the final digital design and model. A key precedent that heavily inspired the shift away from simple cellular structures of V3 to much more sophisticated versions of V4 and V5 was the Matsys Spore lamp precedent (2011). This precedent which was shown in the week 3 lecture, helped us think about a system that could generate ambiguity of form through the diversity of its component parts. Ultimately for the final stages, I used Grasshopper to generate an adaptive systems of cells with variable opening widths and cell length (V4). For the final design, we drew on Alison and Sia’s advise which was to further complicate this system by incorporating set rather than random parametersto define the variability between the cells. This strengthened the form of the design by making it seemingly more ambiguous. Once the design had been finalized we were able to start the fabrication process. This is a very top-down approach to design, however it seemed to work out well for us, mainly because we had such a well defined design criteria and mental image of what the design could potentially induce within the audience. The actual process involved the unrolling cells individually to layout for the laser cutter. This process could have been made more efficient by rolling out sections of cells. The material choices and systems were chosen because of their ability to exaggerate the distortion of the body’s silhouette produced by firstly the form, then the materiality (mirror) and lastly dynamic element of LED lights.
3.1 DESIGN ADJUSTING FORMS
M3 was a module which we had to approach to two parts; design and fabrication. Because of the top-down nature of our design, because of the intended effects and concept that we had were strong, the design process became disjointed, convoluted and unproductive at times.
In ‘Disjointed Tetrahedra’, faults lay in the form which was unwieldly and unable to be realised, as the panel and fold technique was not evident enough in the modules. There was also an unsuccessful realisation of variability in the design as modules were uniform, mostly solid and were joined by defective connections. These limitations prohibited the equivocal effect critical to our concept of blurring the viewer’s perspective of where the wearer’s body and personal space as an extension of their identity ends.
The need for a new more varied and complex form made us cast around for inspiration, ultimately leading us to explore the highly complex natural forms of cellular structures, like those found in plants as well as animals.
CELLULAR FORMS SKETCHED
NATURAL FORMS
LIGHT EFFECTS SKETCH
MATSYS SPORE LAMPS
3.2 DISTORTED REFLECTIONS V3
PROTOTYPING V3 CLUSTERED VORONOI CELLS
MIRRORING THE AMBIGUITY AND VARIETY PRESENT IN NATURE
3.3 DISTORTED REFLECTIONS V3
DESIGN CRITERIA
Form – silhouette -
blurring – emotional effect of ambiguity of the viewer
Successful because the variability of the individual modules in conjunction with our form finding exercise and the ability to translate these surfaces into rhino using commands such as loft and sweep, allowed for a curvilinear, yet deformed and intricately alterable surface which successfully explored our interpretation of personal space that surrounds the body.
Very successful due to our integration of the reflective surfaces on the modules which seek to further erase visual references of edges of the body and instead seek to blur together and thus distort the viewers perception. Light explores the notion of transcendence from solidity through to transparency that mirrors the continual morphing of personal space around the body.
panel and fold -
blurring – form and materiality
The effect of the light creates a contrast between the ephemeral personal space, that we are trying to render tangible through the negotiation of reality. The mirror explores the sensory effects of further creating a sense of distortion and disoreintation for the viewer when they look at the wearer and the second skin. It enables the wearer to render the liminal zone even more ambiguous.
Successful in V4 because every single element was created using the panel and fold system which was structurally sound and aesthetically pleasing.
digital fabrication to inform design
Successful because we were able to implement technologies of grasshopper to achieve desired effect.
variety – variable cells
This created increased diversity and uniqueness in individual cells that we needed.
DESIGN PROCESS
REFERENCE SURFACES
PLANAR FACES
AREA
OFFSET CURVES
SCALE CURVES
LOFT
These surfaces are the reference surfaces taken from the liminal space exercise we did as a group.
I offset the curves at a set but changeable distance, in the normal direction from the original curve.
By running a “facet� component command I was able to generate planar curves which followed the overall shape of the input surfaces.
The offset curves were then scaled to create openings in the cell.
I then found the area of these planar curves in order to create movement vectors.
These curves were then lofted to create the cell surface, punctuated by openings of variant size.
ALL BLACK CELL
We wanted to test the materiality as well as the constructibility of the cells, this one was successfully constructed but doesn’t blur effectively.
MIRRORED VS. BLACK
MIRRORED OUTSIDE
The mirror material that we used was highly reflective, creating an interesting reflections and adding to the blur effect.
We decided to mirror the outside rather than leave the cells black, or just mirror the inside, the mirror amplifies the Blur effect.
TESTING CAPS
We were aiming to construct the cells with tab connections, to do this successfully we knew that we tested different tab lengths, 8mm was ideal.
REFERENCE SURFACES
These surfaces are the reference surfaces taken from the liminal space exercise we did as a group.
3.4 DESIGN OPTIMISATION
POPULATE GEOMETRY
The liminal surfaces are popu geometry in order to find the cl curves.
ulated with losest planar
PLANAR FACES
By running a “facet” component command I was able to generate planar curves which followed the overall shape of the input surfaces.
VARIABLE SCALING of CURVES
Similar to the offset process, the variance in scaling was created with the “image sampler” component.
LOFT
AREA
I then found the area of these planar curves in order to create movement vectors.
The variable curves were then lofted to create multiple forms, aiming to avoid readable edges.
IMAGE SAMPLER to VECTOR
I created a set of variable vectors using the “image sampler” component to map the variance in a camouflage pattern, thus creating a blurred effect with form rather than colour.
CAPPING
An extra layer of complexity came by the need to cap objects in order to place the LED lights.
Length - 10
Length - 25
Apeture - 0.2
Length - 50
Apeture - 0.4
Apeture
Length - 75
Length - 100
Length - 125
LENGTH_ APERTURE_ MATRIX_ - 0.75
Apeture - 0.85
Apeture - 10
APPLYING CRITERIA
3.5 FINAL DIGITAL MODEL
3.6 FABRICATION SEQUENCE
3.7 ASSEMBLY DRAWING As I was designing the digital model, I consciously split the design into 10 sections, in order to facilitate the organisation of the model and also to speed up fabrication. This also helped delegate sections and tasks to group members, which was something which our group had struggled with in M2.
3.8 FINAL MODEL
Reflecting on the semester’s work has made me realize how far my design thinking and technical skills have progressed since the start of the year. This is demonstrated throughout the journal, but is most notable when comparing the sketch design proposals of M1 with the finalized and fabricated design. Not only is the communication of the design clearer through the development of technical (Rhino and Grasshopper) skills, but the articulation of conceptual ideas within the design itself is more sophisticated and clearer. I have learnt a lot about my own design process and thinking throughout this project. I have a tendency to work very conceptually, often reading key texts, experimenting with definitions and looking at precedents. However, I then often struggle to translate these ideas into sophisticated design responses, perhaps because I use physical models in a very limited way, and I don’t sketch out ideas enough. Using digital tools such as Rhino has helped me bridge the gap between concept, model, drawings and design by providing me a platform through which I can draw orthographically whilst maintaining an understanding of the form in 3D view. One of the not necessarily design related issues that I found challenging was managing the group work in the most efficient and fair way possible. It wasn’t until well into the fabrication stage of the project that the four of us really worked out what each others strengths were and how we could work together to strengthen our project. The difference that successful group work had on our design is noticeable at a glance between the results of M2, when we really struggled to work well together, and M3 where we produced a successful, and well made model that achieved the designed effects on the viewer. Overall, the design could be improved in several ways; firstly different materials could be explored to strengthen the model and increase its durability. This is something that should have been done throughout M2 and M3 but we simply ran out of time for. Dependent on this as well is the lack of experimentation with joining techniques, were tabs the most successful and efficient way of joining all of the cells together? I found the ideas expressed by Marble (2008) extremely interesting in terms of how he positions craft within the architectural profession. Marble draws on the historic shift between the master-builder and the architect as outlined by Leon Battista Alberti referenced in the week two lecture, to argue that new digital technologies could be repositioning the architect into the more craft based role of the masterbuilder through the drastically shortened design to fabricate process. Until this semester I had never considered how craft and architecture were aligned, however, I find that using non-CAD drafting and sketching techniques does make me feel less associated with the object that I am designing as a physical object, but rather as an abstract one. For me one of the most exciting elements of digital fabrication and design as a subject was the opportunity that it provided to physically make a full scale design. This is something which up until now I had never had the opportunity to do with other classes, often because of the nature of the things (buildings or installations) that we design are too large to be designed, resolved and fabricated in one semester, and the experience has changed the way in which I view design, and my role as an architect within the design process.
4.0 REFLECTION
5.1 CREDIT
5.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY Enric Miralles,Carme Pinos, 1988/1991, “How to lay out a croissant” El Croquis 49/50 Enric Miralles, Carme Pinos, En Construccion pp. 240‐241 Heath, A., Heath, D., & Jensen, A. (2000). 300 years of industrial design : function, form, technique, 1700‐ 2000 / Adrian Heath, Ditte Heath, Aage Lund Jensen. New York : Watson‐Guptill. Cheng, R. 2008. Inside Rhinoceros 4 / Ron K.C. Cheng. Clifton Park, NY : Thomson/Delmar Learning, c2008. Sommer, R. 1969. Personal space : the behavioral basis of design / Robert Sommer. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice‐ Hall, c1969.A Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. _2011_: Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 _4_, July, pp. 70‐79 Asperl et al, 2007,Surfaces that can be built from paper / In H.Pottmann, A.Asperl,M.Hofer, A.Kilian (eds) Architectural Geometry, p534‐561, Bentley Institute Press Kolarevic, B 2003, Architecture in the Digital Age ‐ Design and Manufacturing /Branko Kolarevic. Spon Press, London
Marble, S, 2008. Building the Future: Recasting Labor in Architecture/ Philip Bernstein, Peggy Deamer. Princeton Architectural Press. pp 38‐42 Rifkin, J 2011, The third Industrial Revolution. Palgrave Macmillan.pp107‐126