S2_2012_Design_Student Journal

MODULE ONE: DESIGN STUDENT JOURNALS SEMESTER 2, 2012 VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Faculty of Architecture, Buillding & Planning, University of Melbourne

CONTENTS SEMESTER 2, 2012 VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS MITRAN KIANDEE

3

SHIVY YOHANANDAN

25

JINGLE CHEN

41

JASMINA MCKENNA

64

TONY HUYNH

90

HUANG SHEN SHEN (APPLE)

104

JINWOO JUNG

125

XEYIING NG

144

AUDREY CAVALERA

160

DANIEL CAGAROSKI

181

SAMUEL BELL

203

JILLIAN RALEIGH

218

BO WEN

230

DIAN MASHITA EDDY SURYONO

265

Faculty of Architecture, Buillding & Planning, University of Melbourne

Mitran M Kiandee Student No: 581651

Semester 2/2012

Group 1

FINAL DESIGN SCALED MODEL Design Division This final design from module 2 is a compilled and multilayered outcome from the whole ideation process. I have developed a design that connotes the moon as mysterious yet supernatural as well as a multi-scaled matter.

Simplification

Left View

Top View

To digitise my conceptual plasticine model, it is necessary to simplify the layout first to ease the process.

The detailing will be produced through 2D and 3D paneling tools.

Model is at 1:5 scale and tweaked at some points to fit my body.

Right View

Back View

DIGITISATION PLASTICINE MODEL Tracing Profile Curves

Top Elevation

Bottom Elevation Front Elevation

After taking ortographic views of the model and scaling the images, I tried to use the thrid contouring method because my form is very organic and curvy.

At first glance this attempt seemed successful, however upon measuring the dimensions, it was evidently clear that the length proportions were out of order.

Side Elevation

Back Elevation

The dimensions were disproportionate.

DIGITISATION STRUCTURAL BASE

Tracing Outline

I really wanted to get the dimensions right. So I created a base for my model and drew over the replica surface to produce the form.

Later, I twisted and stretched certian points to then give a similar form with my original design. This proved to be fruitful in terms of aesthetics as well as dimensions.

DIGITISATION COMPUTER DRAWING

Messing around with layers individually proved to be a very useful tool despite being quite tricky to initiate.

Outline made with Autocad

Digital Modeling The previous two methods were very successful but I tried to model directly on computer. With AutoCad , I improved the design proportion and dimensions. They are not only exact but extremely flexible to adjust with the right ratios, especially with the use of layers. This form allows instant modifications in case parts of it do not panel properly. Therefore, I progressed to paneling with this form.

The Base Form

Aerial View

Right Elevation

Front Elevation

Left Elevation

DEVELOPMENT BASIC PANELING Volume The issue of how I would volume up my model has been prolonged since module one. Using a thin surface has helped me in generating the virtual mould.

I felt that it would be quite unique if I merely gave the design a volume simply by paneling. With the 2D box paneling development below, I realise that there would be structural rigidity issues. 3D paneling would generate the need to create a framework to support the extra material and it would be done best by having an empty internal volume.

By stretching the base form freely, I retain its organic nature and also keep adequate proportions.

I scaled the skeleton according to my shoulder length and simply used the gumball to stretch, rotate or pull the mould of my lantern model.

I found it useful to use basic shapes to test the functionality of the control points whilst i edit the mould and alter the number of control points as well as its point attractors.

http://nickguth.com/ skeleton picture

DEVELOPMENT TEXTURE

I wanted to create at lease three different segments to reproduce the concept of the supernatural and mysterious nature of the moon that is present in multi-scales.

1

3 So the first paneling move I attempted after comprehending the tutorial videos were the 3D custom variable paneling.

I tried to panel with custom shapes and create a sequential aray of texture with point attractors.

However, I soon realise that my custom panels are too complicated and will be dificult to manufacture.

I felt the urge to divide the mould into three segments where I can continue on with the initial idea embedded on the plasticine model.

2

My first idea was to create three individual paneling bodies and then select part of the regions that I want which I would then merge together.

I found it difficult to select points. Selecting individually would be too time consuming and I would select the bottom surface as well when I select in groups.

PRECEDENT A’BECKETT TOWER

A’Beckett Tower by Elenberg Fraser won a National Commendation for Residential – Multiple Housing at the 2011 National Architecture Awards.

This is unashamedly high-density living in the city, yet it is intent upon nurturing a strong aesthetic quality, not only through the north face but also through applied decoration on the south facade (by John Warwicker of Tomato) and a sequence of interior finishes and installed objects.

I took this as a precedent because I like how they create individual frames for each unit as they cohesively form an appealing exterior. Each unit has been modified to orientate towards the sun .

In regards to my lantern, I wanted to extract the extruded nature and the angular orientation of the design. Instead of recieving light, I intend to emit light distributively through my panel orientations.

http://www.archdaily.com/150062/a%E2%80%99beckett-tower-elenberg-fraser/

PRECEDENT ‘LIGHT FORM’

This intricate and captivating sculptural design was conceptualised from origami by designers, Francesca Rogers and Daniele Gualeni Design Studio. It consists of wooden panel modular lighting systems that can be flipped to expose energy-efficient electroluminescent lights.

I am attracted towards the light play, colour tone and shape in particular. I think the designers have created an efficient juxtaposition between dark unattended surfaces and bright unfolding regions.

I would like to adopt the simplicity in their differentiation between dark and bright spaces in my design.

This will flow with the ‘supernatural vs mysterious’ idea that was from Module 1.

http://inhabitat.com/light-form-gorgeous-wood-wall-panels-flip-up-to-reveal-light/

PRECEDENT KWANPEN

Project Name: KWANPEN Design: Betwin Space Design / Hwanwoo Oh, Junggon Kim

Korean firm Betwin Space Design to showcase crocodile-skin handbags in Seoul.

KWANPEN express its brand identity itself through the space communicates with urban space and influences its immediate environment.

The shop’s exterior façade is clad in a relief comprising irregular prism shapes.

In order to communicate the brand identity, a modular material of crocodile skin is created to cover the whole closed façade surface.

Individually these panels seem completely abstract but collectively, they form a unique pattern that although solid, they still illuminate and express light.

I can really appreciate how instead of focusing on bright regions, they intentionally create dark regions to give the texture that strong contrast.

http://www.annakaran.com/?p=436

DEVELOPMENT PANELS

Concept One: Various crater shapes and size

Pattern To further extend the concept from my selected natural process, moon craters, I wanted to re-explore the ‘entrophy’ within the distribution of the craters.

I idealised the collisions as trianglulated holes in reference to Lecture 2 about them always being two dimensional planes. This theme follows through as I explore:

Concept Two: Various size and geometry

-sizes of craters -shape of craters -concentration of craters -angular collision -Untouched surfaces

Concept Three: Diversity in angle and concentration

CONCEPT EXTRUSION

The Panels were Overlapping and it was not possible to form a connected strip through the surface.

Flawed Design

I was very pleased with the final outcome at this stage. However, upon unrolling, I discovered several issues.

The surfaces were bent, the panels overlap, the panels are disproportionate and possibly structurally unstable. With the motivation and mindset of Micael Hansmeyer featured in lecture 6, I moved on to “design the process not the form to produce a family of forms.� I adjusted the source of the defect; the panels.

DEVELOPMENT BUILDABILITY

Panel Shape

Surface Type Rhino has provided its users with various options under paneling tools. I explored the affects of control point density and different surface types (i.e. mesh, face borders, flat faces) I chose mesh as advised by tutors because the surface will be flat and possible to unroll. The above images show how the asymetrical nature of the shape prevents panels from matching, My next concern was how the panels would distribute. I tried using MeanMesh but Rhino is unable to decipher the shift from a 2D to 3D panel.

As a consequence, I simply used point attractors and developed sequential panels that they could shift into.

Learning from the mistakes from the first design concept, I began to create rather simpler forms that were still inspired by crater formation.

In the end, I minimalised the panels into basic triangle surfaces, even the openings were triangles.

FURTHER CONCEPTS Repetitive Iterations I spent some time testing the panel selection and distribution features. I mixed solid and hollow surfaces, varitey of shapes and geometry. At this stage I settled with one that comprises of basic polygons; triangle, square, and pentagon with full opening holes.

Settled design comprises of basic polygon openings

PROTOTYPING PANEL PROPORTIONS

First Prototyping I was quite pleased with the proportion and structure of the digital model and so I wanted to test how it would work in physical form.

I made 1:2 prototype panels. With these 3 unfolded panels, I instantly discovered that the triangulation are a bit overwhelming to fabricate and also to stay structurally sound.

FINAL CONCEPT

Random I wasn’t so pleased with the way the panels populate in an orderly manner. Thus, as an alternative, I omited the flat surface as a panel and generated a random distribution. After several Attempts, I felt that there was one which captivated me. The model on the right shows the random distribution of ‘craters’ that I am fond of.

Although it contrasts from my initial layout idea, it still does convey the battle between ‘mysterious vs supernatural’.

MODIFICATION DETAILING Refinement Being happy with the panel form and distribution, I continued on ammending huge and small components of the grid.

The ends were closed up manually and the base was made flat to reduce laborious work.

Also, some panels at the corners were removed as it seem out of place. Other panels were stretched and scaled using ‘CageEdit’.

PROTOTYPING UNFOLDING

Second Prototyping After implementing some drastic simplifications and reordering, I decided I have to test the physical possibility of the design.

The unrolled panels fold up supposedly fold up into a ring from the model. However, the distribution seemed raher complicated to follow.

Therefore, for future references, I decided to fabricate each panel individually with folding reference to the base panels.

PROTOTYPING MATERIALITY

Third Prototyping After understanding how the surfaces can be unfolded, I wanted to explore more about material options.

Immediately I decided that i want the centre to be a mix of both black and white materials whilst the ends as white. This prototype has been driven by the recurring themes in Fleischmann et al. (2012), Material Behaviour.

Although the basic A4 80gsm paper does justice to the buildability of the panels, it did not firmly support its own shape. From the plethora of paper types, I decided to use ‘Ivory Card’ both black and white because this material has the resistance from bending due to its own weight and external forces.

The creases and cuts are done with ease and has inherent strength.

However, it is opaque and therefore does not have the potential to illuminate when light shines on it. So, to move forward into Module 3, I will use a mix of simple A4 paper and Ivory card, as I fabricate my design.

EXPERIMENTATION ILLUMINATION

Front View

Lighting Effects Without having to laboriously cut through each panel to create a whole model, I explored the rendering features that Rhino has and exploited the lighting effects.

These images clearly show how the model successfully differentiates the mystery and the superiority of moon craters. It conveys the concept not only through the paneling textures but also through the shadow effects.

It represents how a belief can extend through physical boundaries.

Aerial View

Top View

REFLECTION AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS Module 2 overall has been a great excitement for me. It shifted my design into the next level. With the user friendly features of Rhino, I managed to create a digital model. The area where I find most complications lies within the connection between the digital and the physical realm. In between these two spaces, I had to use a lot of my imagination to break down the design into individual components, the way the program would work.

Generation of ideas have been a difficult task for me. I felt that Paul Loh’s Pavilion was a remarkable depiction of panelling capabilities and thus it motivated me to focus on custom panelling. With prompt points from Lecture 5, Design Spaces by Alex Selenitsch, I used his step by step process of composition, assemblage, emerge, parentage, and resolution to tackle the design progress of my lantern. In addition, the bird flock behaviour shown in Lecture Six: Design Practices particularly struck my mind. It is fascinating to see how they coordinate with 3 simple rules: separation, alignment, and cohesion to form an emergence of shapes. For me, I think it is a hint of how I could approach my panelling system; the distribution, shape and form. By associating these two with my lantern form, I revisited Kandinsky’s method in ways that I could analyse once again the distribution of craters on the moon.

Panelling Tools have ultimately influenced my final form. I discovered a few snitches and hitches within the Artificial Intelligence of Rhino. Whilst my initial design may look amazing on the screen, it could not possibly be fabricated on simple 2-dimensional paper. A relatable example would be from lecture 6: Design Practices which featured digital columns by Micael Hansmeyer. He urges to “design the process not the form to produce a family of forms.” This effectively changed my thinking cap because rather than looking at the endpoint, it seems better to move forward with a set of rules that can be adjusted accordingly to create something that could even be ‘unimaginable’.

I did not stop there because I was still not satisfied with the final design. I did uncountable iterations of the same panels and finally got star struck with one particular layout. This process has shown me the underlying truth of designing. Digital modelling has inarguably hastened and eased the design process. But unforgettably, it is also important to create physical prototypes due to the fact it will eventually be of physical form. Fleischmann et al. (2012) created my focus to analyse material’s inherent strength as well as perceiving the lighting effects with different colours and geometry.

In summary, the study materials in Virtual Environments have been continuously fascinating me and I will inarguably accept the future challenges from the complexity of my design which will soon become reality.

Front View

Right View

Back View

Left View

REFERENCES

Background Information Readings & Lectures

Poling, Clark (1987): Analytical Drawing. In Kandisky’s Teaching at the Bauhaus, Rizzoli, New York, pp. 107-132 Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51 Lecture Two: Imagining & Sampling Space Lecture Three: Abstract Spaces. Guest lecture - Mathematical Art Lecture Four: Material Spaces. Guest Lecturer: Paul Low Lecture Five: Design Spaces. Guest Lecturer: Alex Selenitsch Lecture Six: Design Practices

Michael Hansmeyer: Building Unimaginable Shapes

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/michael_hansmeyer_building_unimaginable_shapes.html

Bird Flock Pattern

http://www.lalena.com/ai/flock/

Skeleton Picture

http://nickguth.com/ skeleton picture

Precedence KWANPEN by Betwin Space Design/Hwan-woo Oh, Junggon Kim http://www.annakaran.com/?p=436

‘Light Form’ by Francesca Rogers and Daniele Gualeni Design Studio. http://inhabitat.com/light-form-gorgeous-wood-wall-panels-flip-up-to-reveal-light/

A’Beckett Tower by Elenberg Fraser

http://www.archdaily.com/150062/a%E2%80%99beckett-tower-elenberg-fraser/

DIGITIZING PHYLLOTAXIS SHIVY YOHANANDAN Student Number: 558316 Semester: 2/2012 Group: 9

MODULE 2: DESIGN

IDEATION. REVIEW I ended-up choosing phyllotaxis from module 1 as the natural process I plan on transforming into a lantern.

My goal is to highlight the arrangement of openings in my lantern design and maximizing the output of light by tweaking various design parameters.

I also want to investigate the effects of angle and light intensity as suggested by my tutor, Angela.

Of the various types of phyllotactic arrangements, I will stick to an asymmetric radial distribution of my „leavesâ€&#x; (see image on LEFT).

FROM

I wanted to break the symmetry because my design was becoming too mathematical and definable. I wanted to give it organic freedom which would result in a much more interesting design.

Therefore each of my light-emitting leaves would sit alone at each level on the main structure (LEFT).

My final design should be wearable on my head (RIGHT) and should also have enough room to house the lighting and circuitry.

FROM ANALGOUE TO DIGITAL. I removed the leaves because it was going to make the process of contouring and digitization of analogue model easier.

Clay model was segmented in 1 cm slices.

Remaining structure was fairly simple and straightforward to use slicing technique to digitize from reference image in Rhino

I then stretched control-points after digitizing the clay model to arrive at a more organized form.

I used TWO reference points for contouring.

DESIGN ALTERNATIVES. PANELLING PRECEDENCE

http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/mayaug06/bridges/Eden.jpg LEFT: A model of the new educational building for the Eden Project, designed by Joylon Brewis of Grimshaw Architects in collaboration with Peter Randall-Page.

I chose this as precedence because of the phyllotactic arrangement and increasing panel size divergent from the center.

RIGHT: Mangal City skyscraper by Chimera, London (http://www.archivenue.com/mangal-cityskyscrapers-by-chimera/) I like how it opens out like a fruit with scales on the outside following a phyllotactic pattern. I like leaf-density and arrangement.

LEFT: Semester 1 2012 lantern project by Nicola Leong.

I like how the lighting is scattered. I also like the inconsistency in the perforation size and openings. I would like to employ this effect in my lantern with some extra diffusers to further diffuse the diffracted light.

EXPERIMENTING WITH FORM

A typical plant step has several nodes that twist and bend as the plant grows. I want to introduce this into my design because the phyllotactic arrangement is not a perfect vertical line.

EXPERIMENTING WITH STANDARD 2D & 3D PANELS

Ribbon form: this was an experiment to see if I could create the „leaf‟ effect without panelling.

The problem was that I would have to create each section separately.

RHINOâ€&#x;S SPIRAL FUNCTION I re-created the parabolic cone (and scrapped the digitized model) in order to maintain a higher level of accuracy since phyllotaxis is very a precise process.

I created my offset control points based on a curveattractor which is how I managed to get a bellshaped differential in gridpoints.

I wanted to recreate these cup-shaped leaves as my light-emitting leaves that are phyllotactically arranged around the main stem structure.

I then used an in-built Rhino function (Spiral) that takes parameters such as centre, diameter, number of turns, pitch, etc. and let Rhino preview some panelling samples!

I used my previous template and chose black because it adds a contrast to overall lantern

EXPERIMENTING WITH VARIABLE CUSTOM 3D PANELLING I custom-created these 3D (and 2D) panel to use, together with the Spiral function and my digitized form, to create my design alternatives.

MORE EXPERIMENTATION WITH CUSTOM 3D PANELLING

FINAL DESIGN:. ORTHOGRAPHIC & PERSPECTIVE VIEWS OF FINAL RHINO DESIGN Top elevation

Right elevation

PERSPECTIVE VIEWS

BUILDING THE .PROTOTYPE.

I measured the circumference of my head to determine the size of my base section approx. 60cm

The hand-made cutting-sheet was very difficult and time-consuming.

I will definitely opt for laser cutting for the final model.

PROTOTYPE IMAGES

PROTOTYPING:. TESTING LIGHT, SHADOW & MATERIALS I experimented with different materials (80gsm paper, 250gsm card, greaseproof paper, folded greaseproof paper, 95gsm architect tracing paper).

The purpose of this variety was to see the effects material had on diffusion of light.

80gsm white paper

LIGHT I introduced another essential element of phyllotaxis: stomata opening and closing. This mechanism is a companion process to phyllotaxis. The condition conducive to stomatal opening is high light intensity (the higher the intensity, the prettier the diffusion pattern projection).

LEFT: diagram showing how light beams are reflected on the 45-degree angled plane of the leaf towards the tip of the structure.

Plain greaseproof paper

Folded greaseproof paper

LIGHT & SHADOW EFFECTS

I Tested pattern projection onto 95gsm tracing paper.

CROWN OF RA

I finally decided to draw some precedence from ancient Egypt. Ra is the Egyptian sun god, and this crown symbolises him absorbing energy just like a plant absorbs light from the sun using phyllotaxis.

REFLECTION. In lecture 6, Prof. Bharat reminded me that letting go of an idea and trying something new is sometimes the best thing to do. I took his advice and reviewed some of the previous lectures. I was really drawn towards the math lecture. But, in order for me to try something new, I had to crawl out of my comfort zone and venture into more creative territory.

“

Design is never a straightforward process”

I explored my design space and experimented with different forms and effects. At first, I employed generative logic (just like Michael Hansmayer Unimaginable Shapes) and ended-up building a mathematical model of my analogue model. I then fed Rhino some design parameters based off this model and saw the digital model take shape and form.

“

Computational design is a great way to maximize design alternatives without exhausting material resources and time. It allows you to preview entire samples

at the click of a button!”

But this really limited the creative potential that lies in phyllotaxis and therefore I decided to give more of my natural creative input by pulling on the odd reference point and eye-balling the rest of the design process. While module 2 was primarily focused on digitizing my analogue clay model, I decided to spend more time with panelling variations as well as lighting and material effects. I found that „random‟ decisions added much more flavour and creativity to the overall design process. I was very happy with the resulting texture in my lantern. It still maintains the intended form but now the random creative input has breathed life into what used to be a simple, parabolic cone.

Rob Ley & Joshua Stein's 'interactive' reef exhibit was amazing. I was tempted to animate my lantern design but was reminded of how little time I have. I wanted to animate the stomatal activity through a light sitting on a motorised turntable and as the light rotates, the diffraction and diffusion angles through the holes and tracing paper would become 'alive'.

Readings and lecture responses The reading by Fleischmann & Schleicher was of particular interest to me because it emphasized on the power of algorithms and computational design. It tied-in well with Michael Hansmeyer‟s unimaginable shapes (beautiful intricate patterns, folds, etc. in columns). This type of design involves more computer input (more of random as well as algorithmic nature) and then finally gets processed by a human (with human tweaking by filtering out ugly & meaningless designs, almost like a Quality Analysis). The power of simulation as well as robotic fabrication praises computational design.

But the main emphasis was that architectural design is NOT solely left in the hand of computational design and human input is therefore inevitable (for now at least).

The readings also touched on how a material really behaves when undergoing changes in form compared to what we think it undergoes.

You can feed a computer material behavioural parameters and it will reshape and reform material to its limits.

Parameter modelling saves designers from manually modelling thousands of components. It allows designers the luxury of testing different designs at the click of a button instead of manual experimentation (tedious and time-consuming). You give a modelling function an input and you get an output within seconds that would've otherwise taken hours, maybe days to do! But because its automated, it could lack a human element in its intricacies.

Abstraction is the development of a generalized solution for a designerâ€&#x;s initial idea by PERMENANTLY removing unnecessary and unwanted information and then building a parameter model that can detail it without too much human effort. The details are lost forever.

Reduction focuses on re-describing a concept so that it can efficiently use system resources. It involves TEMPORARILY removing redundancies (such as repeating patterns / units that can be substituted by more compressed sets of rules) and then retrieving them back when reading. The details are retrieved after an intermediate state.

Therefore, reduction is a somewhat better option if you want to maintain a more natural influence as opposed to abstraction, which results in a more artificial, parameter-driven result.

The lecture “On Composition & Matter� was so much about abstraction that even the lecture seemed abstract! Prof. Alex Selenitsch introduced himself as a multilingual, poetic architect. He attributed his ability to work in different realms to his convoluted background.

He proposed that science, philosophy & art bring different kinds of creativity to the table. He highly favoured ambiguity in a creation, suggesting that it immortalizes a composition by not tying it down with a specific interpretation.

He also discussed how matter and form are somewhat interchangeable and that you can make form out of matter (chaos) and matter out of form (order).

This broadened the precedent that we have for our design inspirations. His work seemed very abstract and impressive!

REFERENCES. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoma http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refraction_of_light http://treesandshrubs.about.com/od/pruning/a/plant-nodes-internodes.htm http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/may-aug06/bridges http://www.archivenue.com/mangal-city-skyscrapers-by-chimera/ Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 70-79 Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51

Jingle Chen Module 2- Design Virtual Environments

Semester 2/ 2012

584256

MODULE 1 SUMMARY

In module 1: Ideation, we analysed natural processes beyond their physical elements to use as inspiration for a three-dimensional form. My natural process was the diffusion of ink into water and I used Kandisky’ s method of simplification, analysis and transformation to analyse it. My final model consisted of a thin, curvy tubular shape. I initially thought about positioning it over the shoulders, but later decided to hang it over the hips and include an extruded section for variability.

End

Left

DIGITIZATION: ORTHOGONAL VIEWS

Right Top

Front

DIGITIZATION: FROM MODEL TO RHINO

(1)

(4)

(2)

(5)

(3)

I drew the contours onto the clay model, varying the spacing and cutting along the lines. However, I forgot to stick a skewer into the model. This resulted in difficulty when trying to align the contours in Rhino. It was also difficult to trace the contours because there were so many. Instead, I drew contours that didn’t follow the contour curves of my clay model, but according to the hypothetical model in my head. Finally, in rhino, I used the transform > flow along curve command to distribute the contours evenly along the curve, which I traced from orthogonal views of my clay model.

(1), top view, (2) & (3), ends, (4), contours aligned, (5), contours flowed along curve

BASIC MODEL

I used the loft tool to create the 3D surface and adjusted the seams so there were no twists or overlaps. However, I found the initial model was too complicated with too many folds and twists (1), and simplification of the model by decreasing the amount of contours was necessary. The result was picture (2).

(1)

I also realised the problems that could arise when panelling and making the model such as uneven distribution of panels on the extrusion and the narrow tube so I decided to make the lantern in sections.

(2)

2D PANELLING I trialled several pre-set 2D panels, such as the ‘BoxX’, ‘Wave,’ and ‘Diamond’ on the tubular section of my model. I also tried the different triangular panels-these were the most aesthetically pleasing because they kept the ‘curviness’ of the shape. In ‘Diamond,’ the ends were interesting, but not exactly what I had in mind. I wanted the tubular section to remain as ‘flowy’ as possible in reference to my natural process. I also think the contrast between the sharp geometric shapes up close and more organic lines from a distance is intriguing. I also experimented with custom 2D panelsthese were not particularly successful.

Some of the panels showed gaps and holes. Structurally, this is not suitable.

3D PANELLING AND OTHER EXPERIMENTS

This page shows my experiments using a variety of pre-set 3D panels, custom 3D panels, fin edge tools, and extrude edge commands. Overall, the 3D panels were too bulky and did not represent the fluidity I wanted my model to portray. The smoothness of the basic shape could not be maintained. Furthermore, for some of the panels, the elements were not joined together, meaning a weak structure.

However, I really liked the aesthetics of the finned edges and I thought about how I could incorporate this into my model. I realised they could also provide structural support.

PRECEDENT 1: TAIPEI PERFORMING ARTS CENTER B+H ARCHITECTS

(2)

(1) 3D Model of structure and skin (2) & (3) Exterior Renderings

(1)

The performing arts centre’s organic form is inspired by three dimensional projected sound waves. Sound waves, like ink also have a fluid, curvy characteristic. I chose this example because the relationship between its structural support and skin is very similar to our lanterns- the sound wave curves are projected into three-dimensional space before the skin is put over the top (1).

The windows created are also curved in shape, and randomly distributed. I want to use this curved shape as inspiration to create three dimensional panels in my model. However, I am uncertain about whether or not the material properties of paper will allow for the curved shape to maintain. They may also cause structural difficulties if the openings are too large.

(3)

PRECENDENT 2: HYBRID HOTEL, DUBAI BARBARA LEONARDI + OLIVER DIBROVA

(1) Patterns produced from standing waves (2) & (3) Translations into 3D models (4) Close-up Rendering from interior

(3)

(1)

This hypothetical hotel located in Dubai is also inspired by a naturally occurring process: the Singing Dunes, a phenomenon found in desert environments where sound waves are produced on the surface of the dunes, producing noise. The architects analysed standing sound waves, recording the patterns (1) before translating it into a three-dimensional form (2) and (3). In particular, I like the detail of the cross over latticework (3).

(2)

(4)

CREATING 2D VARIABLES USING 3D PANELLING TOOLS I realised that there was no quick method to create holes other than the shape of the panel such as using the ptoffsetborder tool. So I decided to use 3D panelling tools to create a custom two dimensional panel with a variable hole. I tried various shapes such as swirls, crescents, circles and waves. I quickly realised there were many limitations: you could not create a gradient of different sized holes, and the panels had to be a shape that could tessellate such as squares, rectangles and parallelograms. Furthermore, the form was bulky and many panels resulted in un-joined edges, which would not have enough structural support.

PROTOTYPES 1&2

In these two prototypes I used conventional, photocopy A4 sheets of paper (not too sure of weight). I experimented with geometric holes (1) and curved holes (2). The curved holes were very tedious to cut by hand, so if I end up deciding to use curved holes, the use of the laser/card cutter is essential. Also, the paper was very translucent, and not very strong. A small amount of pressure could deform the structure. This suggests that a thicker, heavier type of card should be used for the final design

(1)

(2)

EXPERIMENTS WITH PTOFFSETBORDER TOOL I decided to stick with using 2D triangular panels so that the organic form of my model could be maintained. Furthermore, I experimented with the ptoffsetborder tool to punch holes for lighting in my design. I used random distributions, curve attracters as well as a helix spring-like curve for an attracter. I settled on using the helix as well as a normal curve for my final model. There were structural issues where the borders were too thin, and this was adjusted.

(1)

(1) thin borders at end (2) fixed (3) curve attracter and helix attracter at end (4) helix curve attracter

(2)

(3)

(4)

PROTOTYPE 3 I unrolled a section of my tube and experimented with curved holesthese were very tedious to cut. I used white 200gsm paper- this was sturdy enough to stay in shape, but allowed bending and sharp edges when scored. I tried to use PVA glue to stick it together, but it was not very effective and I decided to use doublesided tape instead. Images (1), (2), and (3)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(1)

(2) (4)

EXTRUSIONS I wanted a graded distribution of the different holes. I used the ptoffsetborder tool and used various curve attracters and point attracters. I wanted there to be bigger holes for centre of the extrusion.

(3) (5) (1) Ghosted view, (2), Curve attracters at top, (3), two curve attracters on surface, but borders too narrow, (4), final model design- three curves, two on surface, (5), random distribution, (6), curve attracters, curves away from surface.

(6)

FINNED EDGES I really liked the aesthetics of finned edges such as how they produce latticework and also their potential structural strength. For this this reason, I decided to incorporate them into my design. I used them on the extrusion to create contrast in texture between the extrusion and main tubular section. To make them vary in width, I experimented with point attracters and curve attractors. I panelled the surface, making edges, before ungrouping the edges and grouping the components I wanted to create extrusions on. This was difficult as it was hard to easy to confuse the components with each other. In the end, I used point attractors at both ends of the extrusion so the centre of the extrusion had larger fins.

I had difficulties when the edges formed on the inside of my surface (2)- I solved this by flipping the surface.

(1)

(1) Rendering of Final Extrusion Design (2) Problems with finned edges (3) Ghosted view of curva attractors along two lines (4) Rendering of a trial (5) Final Design- top view

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

FIRST ATTEMPT

(1)

(2)

I quickly realised how the distribution of the panelling grid is warped when I just used a single surface for the entire lantern. In my first attempt I split my model in two separate components, the extrusion being like a glove and wrapping around the central tube (3). As you can see in (1), there was no flow from the extrusion to the tube, resulting in a large hole. I tried making the extrusion with smaller ends but there was the practical problem of how to physically attach the extrusion onto the tube. I contemplated using strong structural wires to connect it, but then these would be visible through holes in the panels. I decided either I would have to create two more new surfaces to hold the extrusion in place (2), or split the lantern into three components.

(3)

(1)

SECOND ATTEMPT (2)

(4)

I decided to split the model into three components and use the same style of panelling tools. This would allow for a more controlled distribution of control points and therefore, panels. I used this for my final design.

(5) (3) (1) Top orthogonal, (2) Right orthogonal, (3) Front Orthogonal, (4) Creation of three sections, (5) Final Design- three sections

RENDERINGS (1)

(3) (1) Detail on end, (2) From front, (3) End, (4) Front

(2)

(4)

PROTOTYPE 4 My fourth prototype was a section of my final model. On rhino, I grouped the small section I wanted to create before unrolling it. I then traced it onto 200gsm card, cut it out with a Stanley knife and stuck it together using double sided tape. This was an intense process- I think in the future instead of cutting it manually, I will use the fablab facilities. I think some stronger sort of glue may be needed- such as superglue, although it could potentially be messy. I liked the way the light dispersed through the holes, creating patterns and the way the prototype turned out similar to the digital model.

(1)

(4) (2)

(6)

(3)

(5)

(1) Lighting, (2) 3D virtual model, (3) prototype, (4) lighting patterns, (5) Unrolled faces, (6) Side view

REFLECTIONS Rhino-specific Reflections: Using rhino is like having a mediator between your mind and the final product. In the same way that some people find it difficult to display a concept visually on paper, I found it difficult to portray my concept on Rhino. I suspect this is because in a way, I haven’t found a way to be very precise, for example, drawing a curve in Rhino would be too long, or too stretched, but on paper, it could be the exact shape I wanted it to be. It took me an hour to adjust the seams on my contours so that the final surface would not be twisted. But I think this is like any other subject in that…the more you use the same tool over and over again, the more you become familiar with the tools, you memorise the steps the faster and more accurate you become. I think the power of using a 3D modelling programme lies in the many iterations of the same concept that can be quickly reduced.

Final Model: In my final model I contemplated balancing many elements such as simplicity and detail, lots of holes or no holes, an interesting texture using 3D panelling or a smooth surface and the intensity of the possible light. Should I take a minimalistic approach? Is less really more? In the end, I decided on three ’pillars’ I wanted to balance in my model: the aesthetical, structural and connotations. Aesthetically, I decided the focal point would be the extrusion and I wanted the model

to remain as ‘flowy’ and curvy as possible to portray the physical properties of my natural process. I also wanted to utilise repetition and contrast between the extrusion and main tube. I used minimal three dimensional panelling in the tube to prevent bulkiness, and more in the extrusion to emphasize it as a focal point. Also, the meaning behind the lantern is important: it must refer to the original natural process. I specifically wanted to portray the fluidity, diffusion and spontaneity of the process of ink dispersing in water. The diffusion can be represented by the holes in the panels and the proposed lighting. The randomness can be represented by the contrast between the extrusion and the main tube. Structurally, as long as the panels fit together, and the edges were not too thin, I was satisfied, but several times I had to alter different panels because they did not connect or to make borders thicker. I also thought about the appropriate weight of card for panels that function differently, for example, thicker card for structural elements and thinner card for the skin.

General: Using a computer programme has made me realise the wide smorgasbord of possibilities that technology can bring. I am accustomed to designing and making by hand, and the

use of Rhino to model a concept for me was like trying to communicate to a German through a Japanese person. I guess I’m what you would call, ‘computer illiterate’. I experienced many technical difficulties- for example, my internet crashed, my PC attracted a virus, my laptop did not have a cd drive, and I didn’t know what ‘nurbs’ meant, although it is a very lovely word and fun to say in an American accent. I overcame these problems by seeking help, talking to other people and googling my technical problems. I have learnt that asking for help does not make you look stupid, even though you feel it. I got over my pride and am humbled by all the amazing models I have seen. I have accepted my computer illiteracy and I guess at some point or another, computers are going to take over the world and developing skills in programmes such as Rhino now, rather than later is an advantage for me. Most of all, I have learnt that patience is a virtue, as cliché as that sounds.

LECTURE AND READING RESPONSES Reading 1: Scheuer & Stehling (2011) Any representation of the “real thing” is an abstraction, ranging from realistic models to forms that are incomprehensible. In the context of this subject, abstraction is an individual’s interpretation of a natural process. On the other hand, reduction is finding the most efficient way to represent the model, using the least amount of elements without altering the aesthetics of the model. In rhino, reduction may be using less control points to make the same shape, or using fewer contours to loft the same form.

The ideas in this reading are similar to Kandisky’s method of simplification, abstraction and transformation, but reverse. In three-dimensional modelling, you are representing your concept by making a digital model- and hence, abstracting it. Then, through simplification and refinement, you are reducing it. This highlights how designing is a cycle of constantly constructing, reviewing and modifying.

I don’t think ‘well-defined parametric space’ limits design outcomes. I think algorithms are just a way of putting a finite number to the number of possibilities out there, but the number of methods and the number of the combination of these methods is so extreme, that it doesn’t limit the creativity, rather, the size of the file/ amount of information you need to represent the concept. This allows us to focus more on the process of designing as opposed to the end product. Using three dimensional modelling, we are able to make many iterations of the same form and represent many different possibilities.

Reading 2: Fleischmann et al. (2012) ‘Material behaviour computes form’. This statement expresses how the properties of a material (such as elasticity and strength) can influence the way it is used to make a form. Some forms are physically impossible to be made using certain materials- a building cannot be made using bubbles. The role of designers may be to consider the properties of materials and use it to their advantage and to the greatest efficiency.

In virtual environments, we are using paper to make our lanterns. The properties of paper must be considered when designing: the weight, opacity, strength, colour, flexibility of the paper all influence what type of lantern can be designed. For example, a lantern with many ribs must use thicker, more robust card for structural support, and a more transparent lantern may use thinner paper for translucency.

Lecture 4: Material Spaces This lecture once again, highlighted the importance of patterns as a part of nature and a method of humans to understand the world in different scales. Paul took us through the process of how to analyse a pattern in nature (specifically, a leaf) and use it to make a product- the portable pavilion. Again, the connections between mathematical equations and design were stressed- with many 3D dimensional modelling programs, such as Rhino, based on mathematics. He also showed the benefits of 3D design, especially in the prefabrication stage.

Lecture 5: Design Spaces Once again, the differences between abstraction and reduction were analysed. Alex suggested that abstraction is a transformation of the ‘real thing’. I think throughout this designing process we have been ‘abstracting’ our concepts many times, and it is part of the refinement of an idea.

By changing mediums to represent the same concept- first from paper to physical clay model to virtual rhino model to the paper prototype, we are able to abstract our concept and recognise alternative forms.

Lecture 6: Design Practices This lecture reminded me of the importance of scale: simplicity at one level may not mean simplicity at a closer level. We need to make obser vations of the lantern shape both holistically and in detail. A good example was shown of virtual pillars, where there were patterns on multiple levels, the more he zoomed in, the more complex the pillars seemed. This, in itself, was an example of a fractal pattern.

Before, as there was more focus on the overall form, there was more focus on how to produce detail, in particular, in the panelling. I am thinking about the possibilities of different types of geometries, openings, paper type, light diffusion and joints. This has also allowed me to think about the question: How much is too much? Some people say that ‘Less is more’. Is this opinion valid for this project?

References Taipei Performing Arts Center, 2010, at Archilinked, blog, accessed: 2012, <http://architecturelinked. com/profiles/blogs/taipei-performing-arts-center> Hybrid Hotel in DUbai is inspired by SInging Waves Phenomenon, 2011, at evolo, blog, accessed: 2012, <http://www.evolo.us/architecture/hybrid-hotel-in-dubai-is-inspired-by-singing-dunes-phenomenon/> Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51 Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 70-79

Virtual Environments, Module 2

Design

2012 SM2, Weeks 4-6

The Spider’s Prey When the spider’s prey entangles in the web it is impossible to escape. As the spider notices its catch in the strings, one might imagine that the spider’s slow motion approach is a way to torture the captured victim. The spider enwraps the insect with such elegance and diligence that its handling seems almost benign. It could even be compared to a mother who holds her child with parental affection.

The lantern’s form will be similar to the shape of a pouch that is held close to the body to represent the spider’s intimate handling of its victim.

substance worn close to the body

light source in the center if the object (the part with the most volume)

smaller; transparent surfaces shrink in number larger; transparent surfaces increase in number; position of the light source

emotional attachment, value, protection The obejct holds somethin of value, which is represented by the source of light positioned in its center.

The incaptivated thing of value is incaptivated in the object. Symbolically the lantern captures the light.

smaller, transparent surfaces shrink in number

The lantern is made of durable material. It is transparent in parts but it is impossible to have a clear vision of the inside. Therefore its content remains unknown.

The Spider’s Prey When the spider’s prey entangles in the web it is impossible to escape. As the spider notices its catch in the strings, one might imagine that the spider’s slow motion approach is a way to torture the captured victim. The spider enwraps the insect with such elegance and diligence that its handling seems almost benign. It could even be compared to a mother who holds her child with parental affection.

The lantern’s form will be similar to the shape of a pouch that is held close to the body to represent the spider’s intimate handling of its victim.

substance worn close to the body

light source in the center if the object (the part with the most volume)

smaller; transparent surfaces shrink in number larger; transparent surfaces increase in number; position of the light source

emotional attachment, value, protection The obejct holds somethin of value, which is represented by the source of light positioned in its center.

The incaptivated thing of value is incaptivated in the object. Symbolically the lantern captures the light.

smaller, transparent surfaces shrink in number

The lantern is made of durable material. It is transparent in parts but it is impossible to have a clear vision of the inside. Therefore its content remains unknown.

My first attempt to digitalize my physical model did not turn out the way I intended it to. Even though I managed to stack and loft the digital curves that I drew from the contours of the model, I decided to try a different approach to the process of digitalization. It turned out to be easier to draw contours from the 2-sided photo box, to allign and merge them and finally to create curves that gave my digital model its form and volume.

The contoured physical model

The lines on the cley model are not paralell to each other to adapt to the bent form of the pouch. To achieve the straightest possible lines I used yarn to contour the model.

The sliced model aligned on grid paper.

It indicates the scale of the physical model, which is useful information when digitizing the form.

Elevations from right top corner to left bottom corner: front vie, back view, top view, side view 1, side view 2

My first attempt to digitalize my physical model did not turn out the way I intended it to. Even though I managed to stack and loft the digital curves that I drew from the contours of the model, I decided to try a different approach to the process of digitalization. It turned out to be easier to draw contours from the 2-sided photo box, to allign and merge them and finally to create curves that gave my digital model its form and volume.

The contoured physical model

The lines on the cley model are not paralell to each other to adapt to the bent form of the pouch. To achieve the straightest possible lines I used yarn to contour the model.

The sliced model aligned on grid paper.

It indicates the scale of the physical model, which is useful information when digitizing the form.

Elevations from right top corner to left bottom corner: front vie, back view, top view, side view 1, side view 2

Digitalization of the physical model using Rhino

The two photographs showing the top and side view onto the physical model function as guideline for the placement of contours.

With the help of four contours (top, bottom, left and right side) I constructed the most basic spinal lines of my model. I alligned and merged these lines in order to create three-dimensionality.

The four spinal lines were used to construct curves that define the model’s form and volume. The curves create the base skeleton and are essential in the process of lofting.

Digitalization of the physical model using Rhino

The two photographs showing the top and side view onto the physical model function as guideline for the placement of contours.

With the help of four contours (top, bottom, left and right side) I constructed the most basic spinal lines of my model. I alligned and merged these lines in order to create three-dimensionality.

The four spinal lines were used to construct curves that define the model’s form and volume. The curves create the base skeleton and are essential in the process of lofting.

These are screen-grabs of the skeleton from the top view and the perspective view. As to be seen in these images I struggled to close the form on both ends using spinal lines and curves. Apart from that the model already shows a great amount of detail in it’s basic form.

With help of my tutor I was able to close the form by extruding the end curves to a selected point. As the top end (on the left in the upper image) is very pointy, I might have to remodel it as I advance in the panelling process to adjust the form to the panels and the material.

These are screen-grabs of the skeleton from the top view and the perspective view. As to be seen in these images I struggled to close the form on both ends using spinal lines and curves. Apart from that the model already shows a great amount of detail in it’s basic form.

With help of my tutor I was able to close the form by extruding the end curves to a selected point. As the top end (on the left in the upper image) is very pointy, I might have to remodel it as I advance in the panelling process to adjust the form to the panels and the material.

In the next step I created a point grid on the surface of my model. I determined the amount of dots and their distance from each other. This data is important in the recreation of the surface using geometrical shapes.

Triangular Panel

Paneling Tools

Basic Triangle

Experimenting with

In the next step I created a point grid on the surface of my model. I determined the amount of dots and their distance from each other. This data is important in the recreation of the surface using geometrical shapes.

Triangular Panel

Paneling Tools

Basic Triangle

Experimenting with

Dense Triangle

Further explorations with 2D and 3D Paneling

Dense Triangle

Further explorations with 2D and 3D Paneling

Using a triangular panel shape, I experimented with attractor points to distribute the panel in a more concentrated way in some parts than in others.

The idea of having larger panel elements around the thickest part of the lantern came along with the aim to make this section the one with the strongest lighting.

Triangular Panel

Brick 2D Panel

During my explorations, I created these panels, which remind of raffia basket binding. I liked this design because it does not allow the beholder to look into the lantern, even though there are visible openings. I was interested to see how light would influence the shape if installed inside the lantern and what kind of shadws it would create.

Using a triangular panel shape, I experimented with attractor points to distribute the panel in a more concentrated way in some parts than in others.

The idea of having larger panel elements around the thickest part of the lantern came along with the aim to make this section the one with the strongest lighting.

Triangular Panel

Brick 2D Panel

During my explorations, I created these panels, which remind of raffia basket binding. I liked this design because it does not allow the beholder to look into the lantern, even though there are visible openings. I was interested to see how light would influence the shape if installed inside the lantern and what kind of shadws it would create.

Prototype, Lighting & design choices

It is not possible to directly look into the inside of the lantern. The value of what is caputured inside makes it desired and vulnerable and therefore needs to be protected from the beholderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sight.

I used Japanese Washi paper, which has an organic and fibred look to it and thus ties back to the natural pattern of the spider web.

smaller; transparent surfaces shrink in number larger; transparent surfaces increase in number; position of the light source

smaller, transparent surfaces shrink in number

The transperancy of the object increases towards the thickest part of the lantern, which is closely to be held to the center of the body. It will thereby be the brightest part of the lantern and represents something of value that is captured in the object. The center of the body and the center of the lantern that holds the valuable (the captured light) are aligned when the object is worn.

This stands for the emotional attachment of the holder to the valuable, captured inside.

Prototype, Lighting & design choices

It is not possible to directly look into the inside of the lantern. The value of what is caputured inside makes it desired and vulnerable and therefore needs to be protected from the beholderâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sight.

I used Japanese Washi paper, which has an organic and fibred look to it and thus ties back to the natural pattern of the spider web.

smaller; transparent surfaces shrink in number larger; transparent surfaces increase in number; position of the light source

smaller, transparent surfaces shrink in number

The transperancy of the object increases towards the thickest part of the lantern, which is closely to be held to the center of the body. It will thereby be the brightest part of the lantern and represents something of value that is captured in the object. The center of the body and the center of the lantern that holds the valuable (the captured light) are aligned when the object is worn.

This stands for the emotional attachment of the holder to the valuable, captured inside.

Final Model

- Orthographic Views

I use the trapeze as basic shape of my panel as it repetitively occurs in the pattern of the spider web.

I used 3D paneling to create these surfaces. In principal these two panels are exactly the same. I just added a diagonal fold through the trapezes of the panel in the bottom image. Thus I created triangles, which could be cut out to be replaced by more transparent paper. The paper used for the rest of the lantern would have to be rather thick to maintain the lanterns form and to provide some basic stability.

Top view 1

Top view 2

It will be necessary to connect the individual strings of paper with another to make sure the lantern does not fall apart.

I coupled the strips by cutting into the intersecting points.

It might be necessary to further stabilize the lantern in a different way.

Top view

inside view

Front view (open)

Final Model

- Orthographic Views

I use the trapeze as basic shape of my panel as it repetitively occurs in the pattern of the spider web.

I used 3D paneling to create these surfaces. In principal these two panels are exactly the same. I just added a diagonal fold through the trapezes of the panel in the bottom image. Thus I created triangles, which could be cut out to be replaced by more transparent paper. The paper used for the rest of the lantern would have to be rather thick to maintain the lanterns form and to provide some basic stability.

Top view 1

Top view 2

It will be necessary to connect the individual strings of paper with another to make sure the lantern does not fall apart.

I coupled the strips by cutting into the intersecting points.

It might be necessary to further stabilize the lantern in a different way.

Top view

inside view

Front view (open)

Precedents - Inspriational Design

Back elevation

Perspective Shadow Game of the Japanese Architecture, Tamamo Park, Kagawa, Japan by Marser

Paper Architecture & Paneling Side elevation

Perspective

Precedents - Inspriational Design

Back elevation

Perspective Shadow Game of the Japanese Architecture, Tamamo Park, Kagawa, Japan by Marser

Paper Architecture & Paneling Side elevation

Perspective

Paper Architecture - continued

Paper is a very strong material and architects have tried themselves in making use of it on the big scale. Paper is also recycable and easy to transform, which has led the Bricolage Architects to built a “temporary place”. I like the idea of mobility and flexibility, which the material paper provides. Last but not least, it is characterized by its broad range of transparency depending on its thickness and kind. I tried to incorporate different thicknesses of paper into my lantern prototype to emphasie the significance of the object’s center.

Aragon Pavilion by Olano Y Mendo Architects, Expo 2008, Spain These images show examples of architecture inspired by the pattern of a woven baslet. I was both interested in the way the light falls on this kind of pattern from the outside and how light shines through from the inside as seen on the image at the left.

Paper Church by Shigeru Ban, Kobe, Japan Temporary place on the lawn, Bricolage, Cambridge, England

Pavilion of Spain, EMBT MIrallesTagliabue Studio, Better City, Better Life Expo 2010

Paper Architecture - continued

Paper is a very strong material and architects have tried themselves in making use of it on the big scale. Paper is also recycable and easy to transform, which has led the Bricolage Architects to built a “temporary place”. I like the idea of mobility and flexibility, which the material paper provides. Last but not least, it is characterized by its broad range of transparency depending on its thickness and kind. I tried to incorporate different thicknesses of paper into my lantern prototype to emphasie the significance of the object’s center.

Aragon Pavilion by Olano Y Mendo Architects, Expo 2008, Spain These images show examples of architecture inspired by the pattern of a woven baslet. I was both interested in the way the light falls on this kind of pattern from the outside and how light shines through from the inside as seen on the image at the left.

Paper Church by Shigeru Ban, Kobe, Japan Temporary place on the lawn, Bricolage, Cambridge, England

Pavilion of Spain, EMBT MIrallesTagliabue Studio, Better City, Better Life Expo 2010

Reflection and Analysis

The Art of Digitilization Zaha Hadid: Common Ground - Concept Animation, the Digitalization of a sculpture Animation video: http://vimeo.com/47521035 In this short video Zaha Hdid Architects show how a complex structure of panels is created using computer program like Rhino. The process is very similar to what we just learned to do with Rhino.

It would be impossible to built a physical model without having created a virtual model in advance.

The video shows how the individual elements are flattend before the material can be cut by a laiser machine.

Module 2 has presented to me a lot of challenges concerning the appropriate use of Rhino and the further development of my design concept. Since I had trouble to represent and visualize the design idea based on the analogy of the spider and its prey in Module 1, I spoke to my tutor about possible solutions to this problem to make sure that I would successfully cope with further development issues. He advised me to formulate my concept and describe all characteristics of my analogy without having to mention any terms related to the actual spider, its web and the prey in its cocoon. This helped me tremendously as the approach of verbal formulation helped me to clarify some of the design features that play a significant part in making my lantern effective. I have learned that verbal formulation can also be used as abstraction tool and in my case it proved to be more applicable than the abstraction through drawing or modeling. As my design concept is based on the emotion of attachment and value, the verbal formulation facilitated the translation of something intangible into a physical form. This ties back to the reading by Scheurer and Stehling (2011) who looked into

the subject of abstraction and reduction â&#x20AC;&#x201C; two related design approaches through which one aims to cut down on unnecessary detail and information.

However, the two methods vary from each other in a couple of points: Reduction is about finding the optimal way to transport information without altering the content and by maintaining the original functionalities of a model.

Abstraction in contrast aims to reduce detail to an extend that information might be altered, e.g. to emphasize certain components more than others.

As I progressed in the development of my digital model, I was amazed by what computers enable a designer to do, but also found myself frustrated at times when I realized how restricting the computational para-meter space is. Scheurer and Stehling (2011) rightly state that creativity and the design freedom of a designer is limited because the computer always generates outcomes and solves problems with the same underlying scheme.

Limitations do not only occur in the virtual world of computing but also when modeling with physical models. Fleischmann et. al (2012) point out that a designer must often adapt his design to the material used as different substances behave in different ways. Producing prototypes as we did also informed me about the influences of light and shadows on the shape of my design.

Reflection and Analysis

The Art of Digitilization Zaha Hadid: Common Ground - Concept Animation, the Digitalization of a sculpture Animation video: http://vimeo.com/47521035 In this short video Zaha Hdid Architects show how a complex structure of panels is created using computer program like Rhino. The process is very similar to what we just learned to do with Rhino.

It would be impossible to built a physical model without having created a virtual model in advance.

The video shows how the individual elements are flattend before the material can be cut by a laiser machine.

Module 2 has presented to me a lot of challenges concerning the appropriate use of Rhino and the further development of my design concept. Since I had trouble to represent and visualize the design idea based on the analogy of the spider and its prey in Module 1, I spoke to my tutor about possible solutions to this problem to make sure that I would successfully cope with further development issues. He advised me to formulate my concept and describe all characteristics of my analogy without having to mention any terms related to the actual spider, its web and the prey in its cocoon. This helped me tremendously as the approach of verbal formulation helped me to clarify some of the design features that play a significant part in making my lantern effective. I have learned that verbal formulation can also be used as abstraction tool and in my case it proved to be more applicable than the abstraction through drawing or modeling. As my design concept is based on the emotion of attachment and value, the verbal formulation facilitated the translation of something intangible into a physical form. This ties back to the reading by Scheurer and Stehling (2011) who looked into

the subject of abstraction and reduction â&#x20AC;&#x201C; two related design approaches through which one aims to cut down on unnecessary detail and information.

However, the two methods vary from each other in a couple of points: Reduction is about finding the optimal way to transport information without altering the content and by maintaining the original functionalities of a model.

Abstraction in contrast aims to reduce detail to an extend that information might be altered, e.g. to emphasize certain components more than others.

As I progressed in the development of my digital model, I was amazed by what computers enable a designer to do, but also found myself frustrated at times when I realized how restricting the computational para-meter space is. Scheurer and Stehling (2011) rightly state that creativity and the design freedom of a designer is limited because the computer always generates outcomes and solves problems with the same underlying scheme.

Limitations do not only occur in the virtual world of computing but also when modeling with physical models. Fleischmann et. al (2012) point out that a designer must often adapt his design to the material used as different substances behave in different ways. Producing prototypes as we did also informed me about the influences of light and shadows on the shape of my design.

Reference List: Japanese Shadow Game: http://ysvoice.tumblr.com/post/1621603342/shoji-screen#.UEX-WY71coY Paper Church by S. Ban: http://therepublicofless.wordpress.com/category/simple/page/3/ Temporary Place on the Lawn by Bricolage: http://therepublicofless.wordpress.com/category/simple/page/3/ Aragon Pavilion by Olano Y Mendo Architects: http://maisdcharlottes.blogspot.com.au/2010/06/aragon-pavilion.html Pavilion of Spain by EMBT Miralles-Tagliabue Studio:: http://www.bie-paris.org/site/en/Shanghai%202010/pavilions/185-spain-fromthe-city-of-our-parents-to-the-city-of-our-children.html Common Ground by Zaha Hadid: http://vimeo.com/47521035

MODUL E2MODUL E2MODL E2MODUL E2MODUL E2M

MOD U L E 2 D E S I GN T ONYHUYNH585188GROUP12

CESSNAT URALPROCESSNAT URALPROCESSNAT URAL

ENT ROPY-SUMMARY Ent r opy;t hes econdl aw oft her modynami cs ,i st heamountofener gyt hati sunavai l abl e i nas ys t em f ort hecont ai nedel ement st oi nt er act .

Ast i megoeson,as ys t em wi l l l os eener gyt hr oughi t si nt er act i onsandr eachan equi l i br i um;‘ T heS t eadyS t at e. ’

t i me

equi l i br i um T op-T her el at i ons hi p bet weent i meand t hes t at eofas ys t em

T heconceptwasder i vedf r om t heanal ys i sofas i mpl es ys t em ofi cecubesi nagl as sof hotwat er .Par t i cl esofdi f f er entt emper at ur ei nt er actandar edi s per s edunt i l t hegl as si s event ual l yatas t at eofdi s or der ,whi chs i gni f i est hati thasr eachedas t eadys t at e.

T hei deast hatmydes i gnadr es s esi st hef l ow ofener gyovert i me,asi tbounces ar oundunt i l i tul t i mat el ydi esdown.

I nt hi shi ear chy,al s oex i s t st het r ans i t i onbet weent hei nt er act i vechaot i cs t age andt ot hes t eadys t at e,t obeex pl or edi nt hepanel l i ng.

L ef t-Chaos ; i nt er act i onof . el ement s

Ref i nementoft hei ni t i al concepti ncl udedt hees t abl i s hmentof abet t erdef i nedhi ear chyandt he‘ f l ow’ofener gy.

Ri ght-Repr es ent at i on oft hehi er ar chi al gr aph +t heconceptof i nt er act i on.

I tl eadt ot he i ni t i al f or m oft he l ant er ndes i gn.

DI GI T ALMODELDI GI T ALMODELDI GI T ALMODELDI GI T

CONT OURMODEL I appr oachedmycount ourmodel i nadi f f er entwayt os i mpl i f y t hepr oces sf ormydes i gn.I madet hegener al s hapeus i ng mas k i ngt ape,at1: 1s cal et or educet heamountofs cal i ng needed.

T hepat t er nwast hendr awnandt op,cut ,andt hes ect i ons wer et henr et r acedt os how wher et hel i neswer e,ass hownon t hel ef t .

Cur vesoft hes ect i onswer emadef oreachr i bbonass hown bel ow,andar er eadyt obel of t ed.

T op-L ayer eds ect i ons ,t obet r acedagai n wi t hcur ves .

DI GI T ALMODELDI GI T ALMODELDI GI T ALMODELDI GI T

RHI NO MODEL

L i mi t at i ons-Cons t r ai nt s T hel of t i ngs equencewasi nhi bi t edbyt heabi l i t yofr hi not odeducet her i bbon f or mst hatI hadi magi nedduet oi t smi ni mal amountofopt i onst of i tt hel of t ed s ur f acet ot hecur ves .L oos ewast ool oos e,yetnor mal wast oot i ghtofaf i t .

S cheuer&S t ehl i ng’ sL os ti nPar amt erS pace?( 2011)t ouchedont het hei dea oft hel i mi t st hatapr ogr am i nher ent l yhas ,coul dbeachok epoi nt ,butcoul d al s obeanoppor t uni t y.T het i ght nes soft her es ul t i ngr i bbonscaus edt he ‘ s t eadys t at e’t obenar r owert hanf i r s tconcei ved.

Oppor t uni t y

T her edevel opmentoft hehi er ar chy, emphas i s edbyt hewayt hatRhi no . j us twor k s

I ns t eadofr emodel l i ng,I l ook edf orades i gn t oex pandt het ophal f .

Goi ngbackt ot hei mpor t anceofhi ear chy and‘ l ayer s , ’T heconceptofent r opyi nany s ys t em s pansmany‘ l ayer s , ’notever yt hi ng wi l l i nt er act .T ak i ngt hi si dea,I devel opeda s econdl ayerovert het op.

L i mi t at i onsoft hes of t war et hatcaus ebl ock s , canal s oactast henex tques t i ont of ur t her i nt egr at emor eandmor ei deasi nt ot hedes i gn.

L ef t-I ni t i al l of tmodel Bel ow -Model af t er changes

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

PANEL L I NG I ni t i al panel l i ngi deapl aysont het r ans i t i onf r om t hechaot i cs t at eoft he el ement s ,t ot hes t abl es t at e,us i ngl i ghtands hadow t ocas tt hef or m.

T os t ar t ,t hes hapeoft hedes i gnwoul dbepanel l edi nt hi sway,butaf t er t hei nt r oduct i onoft her i bbonsofâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC; f l ow, â&#x20AC;&#x2122;t her andom s hapescoul dbe madet hr oughacombi nat i onofhol esi nt hepanel l i ngandt hegaps t hatr es ul ti nbet ween.

Ei t her way,t her i bbonsneedt obepanel l edi nawayt ocapt ur et he t r ans i t i onofchaost obal ance.

REF I NEMENT T hef ol l owi ngconceptwast hel eas ts pont aneous ofpanel l i ngi deas ,chaoshasver yheavy connot at i onsofs omet hi ngbei ngbr ok enandt he actofdes t r uct i on.

Gl as st hens er vedast hei deabehi ndt hi sopt i on, wi t ht hechaot i cs i der es embl i ngs har dsofgl as s , whi l et hehoneycombes quehex agonscons t i t ut e t hes t eadys t at e,whi chi sder i vedf r om t hemol ecul ar s t r uct ur eofs omegl as s es .

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

ABST RACT I ON&REDUCT I ON

Repr es ent i ngt hes har dst hr ough poi nt s ,andt r i angul at i ng

Abs t r act i on: “ Aper f ectmodel doesnotcont ai nasmuch i nf or mat i onaspos s i bl e,butasl i t t l easneces s ar yt o des cr i bet hepr oper t i esofanobj ectunambi guous l y. ” Reduct i on: “ ,i snotaboutr educi ngt heamountofi nf or mat i on butr at heraboutf i ndi ngt heopt i mal wayt ot r ans por t i t ,hencer ewr i t i ngt hedes cr i pt i onwi t houtal t er i ngt he cont ent . ”

T hecus t om panel cr eat orl i mi t edt hepat t er nst obecr eat edonagr i d,andt or epr es entmycr ack edgl as s t ohoneycombr es ul t edi n numer ousf ai l swhent het heact ual panel l i ngwasat t empt ed.T hemai nr eas onf ort hi si sduet ot hecompl ex i t yt hatI wast r yi ngt oconvey i nt ot hepat t er n,aswel l asami xofnotbei ngabl et ocr eat et hes hapest hatI want ed,whi chi ni t i al l yr es ul t edi nt hepat t er nss hownont he pr evi ouspage,f i r s ti mage.Agai n,f r om S cheur erandS t ehl i ng’ spi eceonI Tpar amet er s ,i twascr uci al t hatI ‘ s i mpl i f ed’how t hei nf or mat i on wasdi s pl ayed,t hr oughAbs t r act i onandReduct i on.T hel i mi t st hatwer epl acedonmewer et heus eoft hegr i d,andt hewayt hatt hegr i d ar r aysover l ayont op,I f i nal l yr eal i z edt hati thadt obeabs t r act edi nt ot r i angl es ,andt hatt het r i angl escanonl ybej oi nedt oot herwhol e t r i angl es .Evenaf t erk nowi ngt hi s ,numer ouspanel l i ngat t empt sf ai l edbecaus et her ewer et oomanys ur f acesf ori tt obepr act i cal .

Butt hr oughf ur t heropt i mi s at i onandr educi ngt hei deadownt oamanageabl el evel .

Paul L ow’ sl ect ur eonMat er i al S pacess hownanex t ens i vephas eof i deagener at i onwi t ht hei rpanel l i ngequi val entoft hepl antl eaf s t omat a.Recogni s i ngf aul t sandbl ock swher et her edoes n’ ts eem t o beanyi si mpor t ant .I nt heend,how t hi st hi ngwi l l bebui l t ?I nmy s i t uat i on,l eavi ngi tatacer t ai ns t ageofpanel l i ngwoul dhavel ef t t hef i nal pr oductt ohavet oomanys ur f aces .Goi ngbackandf or t h, andaddr es s i ngi s s uesi sal s oawayofgener at i ngnew i deas ,and s omet i mes ,i ti sj us tasi mpor t antt ot ak eas t epbackwi t hwhatone hasandt or et hi nki tt hr ough.

Mys har di deabehavess i mi mar l yt oL ow’ spavi l i i onaswel l ast he I CD/ I T KERes ear chpavi l l i on.T hecons t r uct i onoft hes t r uct ur ef or t hes t r engt hcanbeat t r i but edt ot hef actt heedgesonl yt ouch ONEot heredge,whi chi ss omet hi ngt hatI r eal i z edl at ert hanI hadhoped.Bot hpr ecedent sr econs ol i dat et hatt hi ss t r uct ur ei s pos s i bl e,i fi t ’ spos s i bl easa3m bui l di ng,i ts houl dbeok ayonpaper .

T opI CD/ I T KEPavi l l i on Ri ght-Unr ol l edS t omat aPavi l l i on, i tex hi bi t sdi f f er entt hi ck ns s es ,whi ch i ss omet hi ngI woul dl i k et oat t empt .

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

Panel l i ngwi t houtk nowi ngt hemechani cs ; r es ul t edi nwei r df ol dsands hapes ,cl i ppi ng, bads t r et chi nget c.

Cus t om Panel sandPanel l edRes ul t .

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

PANEL L EDDESI GN

CL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPC

CL EANUP&MAT ERI AL SPI NE Duet ot henumer ousf ol dsi nt hepaper ,i tmi ghtbeneces s ar y t or ei nf or cei t .

I ex per i ment edwi t has i mpl ef ol dofpaper ,andf oundt hati t i ndeeddoess agovert i me,butt hechal l engewashow t oadd t hebr acewhi l ek eepi ngwi t ht het hemeands t yl e?

T hank st ot hehow t hepanel l i ngt ur nedout ,t hes ever t i cal br aces coul dbeadded,j us tt r i angl esi nbet weens ect i onst ohal t ver t i cal movement .

MAT ERI AL

Des i gni ngEnvi r onment sf i r s thal fpr oj ecti nvol vedmak i ngmodel s .

I hadpr evi ous l yus edcar dandgl ue,andel ement soft hi sdes i gn wer ehel dt oget heronl ybet weent het ens i onoft woot herpi eces whi chwer eonl ygl uedatt hebas e.

Paperi saver yl i ghtmat er i al ,andwi t h1mm t hi ck ,i tcanbequi t es t r ong,butwi t hi t ,abi tofwei ghtwhenus edi nex ces s .

F l ei s chmannetal .t al k saboutt hemat er i al i nf l uenci ngt hef or m.Whi l et hi si ncont r as tt ohow mat er i al sar eus ual l ychos en, wher et heyar echos ent ocompl i mentt hedes i gn, t hi st ak eonmat er i al appl i cat i onact ual l yr ef l ect sours i t uat i onofhavi ngt o us epaper .Pr oper t i esoft hecar dl i esi nt hes t i f f nes s ,asi ti squi t et hi ck .However ,t hecar dcoul dbepr onet oj umpi ngback af t erf ol ds ,t hi swoul dcompl i mentmydes i gn’ spanel s ,whi chf ol di nbot hdi r ect i ons ,whi chcoul dadds t r engt ht oi tt hr ough t ens i onbet weenpanel sast heyt r yt omove,butar eunabel t o.AsF l ei s chmannetal .t ookadvant ageoft hepr oper t i esof woodi ni t ’ sbendabi l i t y,paper ’ ss t i f f nes scanal s obeadvant ageous l yus ed.

CL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPCL EANUPC

T het eal col our edpanel ss how t hecl eanuppanel s ; r ei nf or cementandr ebui l di ngcl i ppedar easet c.

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

SHADOWSANDL I GHT As mal l s et upwascons t r uct ed ofover l ayi ngs har dpanel st o ex per i mentwi t ht hequal i t y oft hes hadows ,andt hes hapes t hi sr es ul t edi n.

T hecut out sadds mal l s mal l er det ai l ,whi l egapsi nbet ween emul at et hemor eer r at i cs hapes t hatI haddes i r edatt hebot t om.

PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L I NG PANEL L

PANEL L I NG

KANDI NSKY T hr ought hedes i gnoft hi sl ant er n,I hadencount er edaf ew r oadbl ock s ,andt ogot hr ought hem,r equi r edmet ochangemy appr oach,evenwi t ht hepanel l i nghol es ,t heywer eul t i mat el ychangedt omos t l yanar r ayoft r i angl esduet or es t r i ct i onswi t h t hes of t war e.T hes er oadbl ock shadi nadver t edl ychal l engedmet oabs t r actwhatI hadi nt hef i r s tpl ace.I nt her eadi ngof Kandi ns k yâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sanal yt i cal dr awi nggui de,i ti ss ai dt hatt hepr oces ss howsal otofi ndi vi dual i t yi nt er msofs t yl esandmot i f s .

S of ari nt hedes i gnpr oces s ,I havecomet oappr eci at et heabs t r act i ongui det hati st aughtbyKandi ns k yandi t smer i t s .

As hamet hati twaspr obl emswi t hmyi deast hatl eadmet os t r i ppi ngi tdown,andt henr eappl yi ngdef i ni ngpoi nt s ,whi chI di df orex t r apanel l i ngt oi ncr eas et henumberofi nt er es t i ngs hadows .

F I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NA

F I NALDI GI T ALMODEL

SI DE F RONT

PERSPECT I VE T OP

F I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NALF I NA

F I NALDI GI T ALMODEL

MODULE 2 - DESIGN

Huang Shen Shen @ Apple Student No.: 551099

Semester 2/2012

Group 13

REBUILD OF FINAL CLAY MODEL

Initial model For my final model developed in Module 1, I have designed a clay model following the process of snowflake forming from dust particles to a fully shaped snowflake

I've decided to rebuild the clay model into a solid one so that it is easier to digitalis compare to my initial model.

The twisting effect will be formed through the contour lines of the solid model in Rhino.

DIGITISATION: COUNTOURING PROCESS

Since my model is non-parallel, I have decided to use the contouring method and by using reference images, a more accurate 3D model can be formed.

Firstly, I drew the contour line on the model.

Then, I took pictures of the top and side view of the model as references.

After that, I cut the model into sections and placed them on a grid paper in order to help me scale my model into 1:1 in Rhino.

Then, I took photo of the sections for tracing in Rhino

Top view

Side view

DIGITISATION: TRACING AND ARRANGING CONTOUR LINES

For the digitizing process, I imported the cropped image of the section cuts and traced them in Rhino.

Using picture frame command, I've placed and scale the reference images according to the scale bar to get the right size.

Based on the reference images, I slowly rotated and move the contour lines in place. After the contour lines are done, surface Is created using the loft command

DIGITISATION: LOFTING PROCESS

After lofting the initial contours,the shape turned out to be irregular and not smooth.

Thus, I hid some of the contour lines and played with different options given to try and get a smoother surface.

The picture below shows the progress of this process

FUTHER DEVELOPMENT: FIXING USING CONTROL POINTS AND CAGE EDIT

Besides that, I've tried to build a twist effect using the lost command by adjusting the seam point.

Figure 1

However, I could not form a regular twist around the model. I realized this is because of the irregular distance between the contour lines (figure 2).

Instead of putting back the missed contour lines, I inserted an extra set of control points on the surface in this area (figure 3).

Also, I have noticed the geometry is not very smooth and irregular.

By using the cage editing command, I've managed to fix the shape.

Figure 2

Figure 3

I find this command really useful and easy to use.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT: TWISTING EFFECT

Figure 1

Using the same contour lines as the initial clay model and used 'mirror' command to form the second half of the tail (figure 1). I started to work around with the control points to get a nice twisting tail. However, I am still having trouble merging the head and the twisted tail together.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT: TWISTING EFFECT (REARRANGING OF CONTOUR LINES) Since I had problem trying to fix the 'tail' and the head together, my tutor has advised me to change the arrangement of my contour lines. As shown in figure on the right, I allow the contour lines to flow from the bottom of the tail up to the head and back down to the other tail (following the red line). Thus, I was able to create a full surface in order to panel my model.

Although I was able to loft my model into one complete surface, the scale and position was completely wrong since I've rotated and scale the contours individually. So, I took orthographic picture of myself and using the command 'pictureframe' to scale my model to the correct size. I was having quite a lot of trouble trying to fix my model correctly. This can be reflected through Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H.'s (2011) reading about how computer programs are all planned out and it might not go according to what we want. Every move that I make, affects another subject. This shows that there is a limit to programs since it is very sensitive to every move that we take.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT: FIX TO SCALE

In order to get it to the correct places, I moved the control points row by row using the command 'SelV'. After the model is fitted onto my body using the reference images, I fixed the surface using control points and 'smooth' command to get a complete surface.

Orthographic view of the final model

Top view

Front view

Side view

Back view

DEVELOPMENT: BASIC 2D AND 3D PANELING

After I've managed to get a nice and smooth surface for my model, I moved on to trying out the basic paneling options on it.

I was surprised at how different it looks after the panels are on it.

I've tried the box, diamond, and also some 3D panelings like pyramids.

After that, I explored with the 'offset border faces' command to put holes in the panel to give it a complete look

DEVELOPMENT: PANELING PRECEDENTS

Using the natural process that I've chosen to explore in Module 1 (snowflake), I began to look at different types of paneling that is able to represent the natural process.

From the lecture by Dave (2012) on how patterns can be looked at in different scales, I began to explore the shapes that form snowflakes from a very small scale to a big scale.

At a close distance, spikes and needle-like shapes can be seen in a snowflake. In a larger scale, its form is bounded by a hexagon-shaped plate.

DEVELOPMENT: CUSTOM 3D PANELING AND PROTOTYPES Drawing from the precedent's and Dave's (2012) lecture on how things can be seen in a different scale, I started to explore with shapes and different patterns that represent the natural process I have chosen (snowflake).

So, I moved towards the idea of spikes as of how snowflakes are seen in close scale (figure 1). I find this pattern really interesting and it looks similar to the Reef panels that move according to heat that was shown in the lecture. Maybe the idea of moving panels can be really interesting to show the process of snowflakes falling down.

To build the prototype, I folded one section of the model as shown on the left and printed out in scale 1:2. The shadows that formed by the prototype shows the effect of snowflakes branching out and also the spiky effect.

Figure 1

What I find difficult is the material since paper is really soft and fragile. This reflects to Fleischmann et al. 's (2012) reading where materials are the substances that form our virtual model in reality. And it is something really important in order to form a rigid and stable model.

In a larger scale, snowflakes are seen in different sizes of geometries (pentagon, hexagon, octagon).Inspired by the lecture by Dave (2012) and also Kandisky's (Poling: 1987) concept of analytical drawing, I began to draw out some geometries that can be formed in a geometry in different scales. I started to explore with pentagon and paneled it onto my model From the built prototype, I was able to see the shadows that contains different sizes and shapes. I explored with the angle of light shining through the panels and was really surprised by how each sides form different types of shadow.

Again, from Fleischmann et al. 's (2012) reading, since the model must be built using paper, how each cube connects is important. And the material must be strong enough in order to build the whole model. I realised that pentagons are very hard to be connected through their edges because the shape cannot fit in the grid system in Rhino.

Figure 2

DEVELOPEMENT: CUSTOM 3D PANELING From the two paneling ideas I came up, I decided to try to merge the two ideas together.

At the same time, developing from my initial concept of snowflake forming from in different shapes as they fall from the sky. I have created three different objects to panel into my model using 'custom 3D paneling' command.

Flowing from object 1 to 3, I managed to create the effect that I wanted initially.

The only problem is how the panels are going to connect together. I have tried creating fins but it did not turn out nicely. The next step is to figure out how to put the pieces together for fabrication.

2

3

1

DEVELOPMENT: CUSTOM 3D PANELING To consider the building of my model using only paper, the patterns are very important as of how there are going to connect and stick together to form a complete surface. I moved on to try paneling using hexagon since they are able connect together along the edges in a more parallel way unlike pentagons. However, I was struggling with the custom paneling because my panels are not connecting together in grids as shown in figure 1.

Even though I was able to make the hexagon pattern connect at some point but some corners are still not connecting to each other as shown in figure 2. I realised this is because of the difference in grid position that cannot match with my panels. Thus, I have decided to work with an octagon instead because octagons have equal sides that are able to connect on the edges in a grid as shown in figure 3.

Sketches are drawn to think about how I might want to connect each panels together. And also how I can bring different shapes into one panel to form a different perspective and composition.

Inspired by Selenitsch (2012), he talks about how abstraction and perception is important in a composition due to different culture and ideas adapted by people. Thus, it is important to look at different composition and how might different geometries exist within a geometry.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

DEVELOPMENT: CUSTOM 3D PANELING AND OFFSET BORDER

I have chosen to panel 3 types of modules to represent my initial concept of the formation of snowflake. The first module (octagon) represents the fully developed snowlfake, 2nd module (pyramid) represents the transition between module 1 and module 3 (spikes) representing snowflake in a close scale.

By using the command 'custom 3D variables', I managed to developed the panels on my model. It was challenging trying to get the attractor points in the right place so that the panels are distributed equally.

As mentioned by Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011), computer programs are very detailed and planned out precisely. So, every movement that I make makes a differences.

Using the command 'offset faces border with the options of ''point attractors'', I have tried to create different sizes of openings on my panels using the point attractors option. This is to ensure that my lantern has different light density and not to be too opened. Also,, to provide space to put my LED lights in. The differences in offset also can show the transition between the panels representing the transition of snowflakes as it falls or grows.

By doing so, I have to make sure the maximum offset distance of my panels is not too big to ensure that it is rigid enough to build.

PROTOTYPES

Photo 1

1

2

Photo 2

3

Photo 3 Figure 4

I've unrolled the three types of custom panels to build the prototypes to test their rigidity by using paper and ivory card. I used the command 'fin edges to produce a set of fine for the octagon panel so that it can be connect easily with the other set of panels.

For the paper prototypes, the panels are very fragile and will deform even with small movement like bending it. Also, the sharp corners of panel one also tore (photo 1). I built another prototype using ivory card and the result is much better (photo 2) However, what I have found through the prototypes is that one of the sections that needed to be folded did not work very well cause the distance was too close as show n in photo 3.

I have decided to offset my second grid further and created a new panel with bigger distance as shown in figure 4 so that it is easier to build in the future.

Besides that, I have also tried to build my prototypes using black card to test the reflectivity and whether shadow density would be different as compared to white card.

It is clear that white reflects the light better but there is no difference in terms of the density of shadow. I've decided not to use black because I want to emphasize on the flow of snowflakes formation and do not want to bring a contrast to my model

FINAL MODEL: ORTOGHONAL VIEW

Top

Front

Side

Back

EXPERIMENTATION: LIGHTING

I explored with the render tools in Rhino and also build some prototypes from the different modules to look at the different shadow can be formed through the paneling.

These shadows portrayed by the model clearly shows how the different geometries can be formed through the paneling. The model successfully show the different kinds of patterns of snowflakes can formed in different level of humidity. Also, an abstraction is formed through the panelings where they can be perceive in many different ways which is inspired by Selenitsch's (2012) lecture on composition and matter. The octagon panels also formed fractals in the shadow, this relates to my concept in module one as well.

PROGRESSION

REFLECTION Module 2 was a really challenging process for me. Not only did I have to deal with the design ideas but also trying to create my model virtually as well as in reality. What I'm really amazed by is how powerful a computer program can be. As mentioned by Scheuer & Stehling (2011), architects nowadays begin to look at things in a more abstract way and using different ideas and that seem impossible to form in reality. But with the help of computer programs, things that seem impossible can be very promising virtually. However, Low (2012) demonstrated how materials can bring different outcomes and form into a design. As mentioned by Fleischmann et al. (2012) that materials are the most important part to represent the virtual model in reality. This links to how the prototypes I built affect my paneling decision and how I might connect the panels in order to be built with paper more easily. This shows that there is a limitation to virtual world in terms of not being able to determine how the model would react in reality.

Besides that, I was facing quite a bit of trouble trying to digitise my model due to the lack of planning for my model. Since computer programs are all planned out and every move that they take is determined by different options inserted into the program itself, it is essential to understand how each options do and understand how different command works (Scheuer & Stehling: 2011).

After I managed to figure out the solution with the help from my tutor, I moved on to developing paneling ideas. Inspired by Dave's (2012) lecture on Design Practices, I began to draw on how I might look at snowflakes in different scales. From there, I developed my paneling ideas together with module 1 concept of snowflake formation as well. Also, I thought about how different shapes can be formed within geometries inspired by Selenitsch's (2012) lecture on composition and matter. I began to draw different geometries that can be formed within hexagon, pentagon and octagon so that the shadows portrayed by them can be seen in various ways. Learning from that lecture as well, I looked at how these shapes can also formed different perspective through abstraction in composition. One limitation I had was trying to fit the panels into the grids, I realised that this is one limitation of computer programs where things are set out very precisely and cannot be changed in a more flexible way. Thus, I had to stick with octagons because they can be connected in grids through their edges.

Working together virtually and in reality was really challenging, not only did I learn how to function a program but also uses the program to create something real. Also, learning from strength of materials and how they behave is also very significant because it helps me to determine my design.

Overall, this module is very important for my final outcome in determining the type of material I use and how I connect my panels together in reality. And this module also helps me to visualise the shadows and light coming through my model in the future when it is built.

REFERENCES

Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51 Poling, Clark (1987): Analytical Drawing. In Kandiskyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Teaching at the Bauhaus, Rizzoli, New York, pp. 107-132 Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 70-79 Dave, Bharat. 2012. Design Practices. Presented at University of Melbourne at 27 th August 2012 Low, P. 2012. Material Spaces. Presented at University of Melbourne at 13th August 2012 .

Selenitsch, A. 2012.. Design Spaces: Composition and Matter. Presented at University of Melbourne at 20 th August 2012. http://forums.cgarchitect.com/15503-new-moebius-ring-torolf-17.html http://inhabitat.com/hwkn%E2%80%99s-massive-spiky-wendy-pavilion-coming-to-moma-ps1-this-summer/ http://inhabitat.com/3500-spiky-plant-filled-vases-clad-the-firma-casas-walls-in-brazil/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/ironrodart/4049563295/

Virtual Environments: Module 2 Jinwoo Jung 585694

Final clay model

The final proposal using the clay model. It has been altered in order to be able to fit on the shoulders more effectively. For the sake of contouring, the spikes had to be removed to digitise the basic underlying form.

Transferring Model

In the initial form digitisation process, I attempted to create the form using parallel contours and faced a problem of uneven and distorted surfaces. By using ringlike non-parallel contours, I was able to have a much more defined contours as well as the digitized form.

Digitising form

By using the PictureFrame command in Rhino, I inserted the photos of the contoured clay model and scaled it. I then aligned the contour outlines to create a 'rib' and lofted it to digitise my basic form.

Basic 2D Panel Exploration

The nature of my design's form meant that some panels were unsuitable to be adapted into the specific shape. Whilst problems like the example below can be reduced by increasing the offset points, I didn't want to make my design too 'crowded'

Basic 3D Panel Exploration

Panel Exploration

I explored the panelling tools further by attempting to make custom 3D shapes, playing around with different layout such as fixed/point-attractors/vectors etc. The example on the left seemed like a very good idea for the 'inner bark' section, but was too literal to be adapted.

Panel Exploration: Rib Structure By notching, I was able to create a rib structure of my form. But I encountered the problem of the rectangular panels being distorted due to the unparalleled offset points. This was resolved by using the TiangulateFace command, which divided the rectangles into triangles and hence created parallel flat surfaces.

Panel Exploration

I also tried to make use of finned surfaces, using the FlatFaces command. It allowed faces to show small gaps on one corner due to uneven offset points, and would allow light to go through.

I went on further to offset the faces on this finned surface and add in the rib structure. Whilst the outcome looked very interesting, it seemed way too complex to be constructed.

Precedents: John Curtin School of Medical Research - ANU

This remarkable facade was designed by Lyon, a Melbournebased architectural practice. It is one of many examples of modern architecture that has utilised digital rendering to create a very expressive design.

What I really like about this is its use of glazed panellings . The gradual shift of each aligned panels creates a sense of movement, almost like an example of chronophotography. This effect of fluid motion is what I wanted to adapt in my design to represent the gradual transformation of the cellular 'inner' bark to the outer bark.

Precedent: Times Eureka Pavillion & GEOtube The GEOtube is a very interesting concept in that the web-like saline skin frame actually 'grows' down over time. This is because it is planned to be made out of salt, and as water evaporates, they accumulate onto the frame.

A good example of representing 'growth' in a seemingly static design.

The Times Eureka Pavillion, which was discussed on the week 4 lecture, was very relevant to my design both contextual wise and concept wise. The cellular structure of plants which influenced this design gave me some good indicators of how I could approach my panellings â&#x20AC;&#x201C; offset faces, ribs, etc.

Generating Final Design

By dividing the offset points up and plotting the offset faces in one half and leaving the other, I was aiming to distinguish the 'inner bark' and 'outer bark' as the inner bark showed cellular spores with gaps that made it transparent. I realised that simply relying just on such characteristics is quite literal.

Generating Final Design

Another challenge that I faced was the illumination of the front 'outer bark' section. If I kept this section non-transparent, then there would be an unpleasant contrast of lighting between the two sections when the LEDs are put into place. So I decided to offset the whole surface, gradually decreasing the size of the offset faces as it approached the front.

Whilst constructing the prototype, I realised that the initial offset faces were too thin (Set on 0.2cm) and was vulnerable to breakage.

For my final design, I changed the minimum distance to 04cm, and the max to 1.2cm.

Final Model

The final model consisted of a fusion between a 2D panel and a 3D panel, incorporated together via the offset face border. The aim is to create a sense of organised chaos through the several angles of illuminations to resemble the seemingly random but organised structure of a tree bark.

Unrolling Surfaces

At this stage, I decided to try and make a paper prototype (of just a basic panel In order to unroll the panel surfaces I had to colour code each vertical columns to make sure I didn't get confused in the physical reconstruction.

An alternative method of unrolling, which was to select the whole model at once, proved to be very difficult to tell which section is which (below).

Prototype/Material Analysis

The first prototype was made primarily in order to experiment material characteristics and also to test out how the actual model could be unrolled and constructed. This basic panelled surface is made with every-day printing paper.

One feature that I like about this material is that because of its thinness, it is able to illuminate light without having to cut out panels. However it showed many limiting features that restricted it from being used like the fragility and lack of rigidity. Non the less it helped me to grasp an understanding of how my model will be constructed.

Prototype/Material Analysis For this prototype of a section of my model, I have included the offset faces to test out its illumination and shadowing effects. I have used thin card paper to construct this section, which proved to be a lot more rigid and easier to get desired shape.

Prototype/potential development In order to try and create a more emphasised feeling of organised chaos, I have attempted to only partially cut the offset faces and lift them up to intercept the light coming through to another different angle. This method could also be used to dampen the light transfer in the 'outer bark' area and create an effect of only the outlines being illuminated.

Reflection

Module 2 was a very tough yet entertaining process that allowed me to not only produce a defined digitised model, but also allowed me to grasp some important designing tactics and ideas that could be utilised in the future.

The readings and the lectures proved to be a very helpful resource in my development process, providing me with precedents such as the Times Eureka Pavillion. The reading on material behaviour that was discussed in week 5 gave me a deeper insight on the process of digitisation, and motivated me to further analyse how my natural process can be depicted through my lantern, such as the sense of organised chaos by the usage of lighting.

I also felt that through discussions and examples on how models doesn't have to be static, that whilst I won't be able to actually produce a non-static model, I could attempt to unveil properties to make it seem like it is.

I am still exploring Rhino- and am also realizing that the more I engage with it and put in effort to learn it, the more ideas become available to me. I will constantly put in effort to familiarize it with myself even more to expand upon greater skills and ideas.

I am very much looking forward to Module 3 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; generating prototypes may take a long time and be quite troublesome, but will all be worth it in the end.

Xeyiing Ng Student No : 596296

Semester 2/2012

Group 14

Module 2

Model Simplification Precedent : Lost in Parameter Space, Scheurer.F & Stehling H. As presented in the reading, a perfect model is one that contains as little information as necessary to describe the properties of an object unambiguously. To achieve ‘perfection’, the model undergoes abstraction and reduction yet maintaining its’ quality at the same time. In the reading, the idea was applied to minimise data storage and to maximise the efficiency of the process in terms of computation, instead, the same idea was used to modify the design of the model. It came to light that all the details in the previous model would not be effectively projected in Rhino, hence losing the initial purpose of the design in representing the concept.

Using abstraction, reducing the infinite complexity to a level where it can be described easily, and reduction, finding the optimal way to present the concept, the design was simplified to ‘perfection’.

Module 1 final design.

The petals show the progression in waves from hot water to cold water. While abstracting the model, the petals were reduced in number to reduce the complexity. The circle in every petal is then converted into a sphere with waves going around its’ equatorial axis hence ‘solidifying’ the petal. A digitalized model is better presented as a solid geometry. The polygons indicating the temperature change were removed as its’ feature would be more distinct if panelled on to the model.

Simplified design for further development in Module 2.

Model Digitalisation 1. Slicing the plasticine model The optimum way to slice the model so that itsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; original outline is retained is to slice the petals individually. The model was sliced with a 1cm interval and placed on graph papers. Photographs of the sliced model on graph papers were taken and inserted into Rhino.

2. Tracing the slices The slices of the model were traced in Rhino using polylines. Initially, the tracing was done closely referring to the photograph, however after the first surface was lofted, the outcome was not desirable. It was then realised that the physical shape was to ideally mimicking a circle, due to the squashing during slicing and the imperfection of human-hands, the slices were distorted. Therefore, the tracing was then done using the photographs only as the radiusâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reference.

Photograph 1- Traced slices of model in Rhino.

Sliced model.

Photograph 2- Traced slices of model in Rhino.

3. Lofting The curves were stacked above each other with equal distance in between and then lofted to form petals shaped like two cones joined together at the base. To close the top of the surface, a point was added on each end of the petals and then lofted together with the curves.

Curves traced from the sliced model.

The lofted surface of the petals.

4. Editing and Refining` The petals are placed together at the common point, each titled at a specific angle. The petals are however not physically joined together as the support would not be strong enough. Ideally, the petals vary anticlockwise from a large radius and short petal to a small radius and long petal. Some of the curves were adjusted in order to achieve corresponding heights.

The digitalized Module 2 model.

Design Concept The design of the model focuses on the changes in waves as they progress from hot regions to cold regions. In the designs, the highlighted key features of the concept are, 1.

2.

3.

4.

The change in temperature The spiral movement of wave particles on the surface of water The change in amplitude of the waves as they progress The molecular structure of water in different phases

The change in amplitude of the progressive waves is presented by the varying sizes of the petals hence the panelling of the model will focus on the other three features.

Precedent : Virtual Environments, Sem 2 2012, Lecture 6 As mentioned in the lecture, there are a few ways to develop a concept and one of them being to create a family of design based on the same logic instead of one single design. As the concept for the model has already been decided, a family of designs was built around it. Although similar, each design is unique and shows certain features more predominantly.

Idea 1 Idea 2

In Idea 1, the designs focus on the changes in the molecular structure of water. As mentioned in Module 1, the change in molecular structure represented by different polygons reflects the change in temperature. Moving from hot to cold regions, the polygons change from triangles to hexagons.

Idea 2 concentrates on the use of lights to highlight the features of the concept. In this case, the varying light intensity is used to demonstrate the change in temperature. Using spiral movements up the petals, the design shows the movement of the water particles on the surface of waves.

Idea 1 Panel 2D Grid

The first petal panelled with triangles.

Panel 3D Grid

The first, third and fifth petals were panelled with the basic shapes provided in panelling tools. To show transition in the second and fourth petals, new patterns were created to incorporate two different polygons on a surface.

The cone shape of the petals however complicates the process. While creating new patterns, the decreasing surface area towards the tip has to be taken into account and failure to do so would result in holes in the surface where the panels just donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t fit. During experimentation, it was realised that the best solution is to use simple repeating units to form the pattern and to adjust the grid points accordingly.

3D panels were experimented with the structural change concept. The 3D panels however do not fit the other polygons except triangles forming pyramids. The pyramids stand out and would enhance the lighting effect but it did not justify with the initial concept and hence was not further developed.

The fifth petal panelled with hexagons.

The third petal panelled with diamonds.

3D panels of pyramids.

The second petal panelled with diamonds and triangles.

The fourth petal panelled with diamonds and hexagons.

Idea 2 Precedent : Virtual Environments, Sem 2 2012, Lecture 6 Among the many ways of developing a concept as mentioned in the lecture, the use of lights should enhance the concept. The shadows formed and the intensity of light are great ways to vary the design.

Lights Two types of spiral lightings were tested, one with a strip cut out and another with folded indents. The stripped prototype allows more light to pass through, giving a brighter source and produces a shadow effect, whereas the folded prototype clearly highlights the spiral movement.

The hollow strip prototype was less stable as compared to the folded prototype.

The stripped light prototype.

The folded light prototype.

Fin Edges To create the spiral movements on the surface, fin edges were used while basic triangles representing the basic structure of water were used to panel the surface.

Although it clearly shows the movement, the finned edges seemed disconnected from the whole model. The varying light intensity is shown by varying the sizes of the holes made on the panelled surface.

Finned edges along curve attached to surfaces with different panels.

Final Design The final design is a combination of ideas; it brings together the panelling concept of Idea 1 and the lighting effects of Idea 2.

Precedent : On Compostition : Form/Matter, Virtual Environments, Sem 2 2012, Lecture 5 .

In this lecture, the lecturer gave a very important formula at the end of the lecture which is 1 + 1 = 1, where all 1sâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; differ from each other. The main point is that when a combination between two different matters takes places, a whole new idea is resulted. Building this family of design has allowed the process of composition to occur. The similarity of each idea allows the design to blend together naturally, while the uniqueness of the designs creates a fresh idea.

Precedent : Lost in Parameter Space, Scheurer.F & Stehling H. As discussed in the tutorials, algorithms and computational programs in general require a well-defined parameter space which in turn results in the limitations of the design outcomes.

The fact that every single move of the program is predictable limits the flexibility of the design.

In Idea 3, the consistency of the computational program prevented the development of the design according to itsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; sketch. Understanding the limitations that it is almost impossible to recreate materials in the physical world perfectly in the virtual space, the design was simplified.

The ideal design of the petal.

Precedent : 30 St Mary Axe Architect : Norman Foster Location : London, UK The 30 St Mary Axe building is also known as the Gherkin is a tower of 180m tall with 41 floors and stands on the site of the former Baltic Exchange. The building is similar to the final design in three ways.

1.

It is made out of triangular patterns The building is one without extra reinforcements. The triangles allows the building to achieve a certain amount of stiffness. This precedent uses the triangles which moves up in a spiral, installs confidence that in constructing the model, using the appropriate materials, the model will have the required strength to maintain itsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; shape.

2.

The building uses a diamond grid instead of a square grid In panelling the surface, a diamond grid allows a smooth spiral to take form. Using the diamond grid, the spiral movement was successfully incorporated into the design without the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;disconnectionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as show in Idea 2.

3.

The building has a similar overall shape.

With similar patterns and similar shape, the building providing a guide in unrolling the panels in the model, as shown in the figure below.

The 30 St Mary Axe Building in London.

The unrolling of the panels of the building.

Panelled Surface The model is panelled by a new pattern consisting only of repeating square triangles units. A 2D panelled surface was adopted for the final design to enhance the indent in the model. The panelsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; grids were converted to the diamond grid. Together with the repeating triangles, allows a uniform pattern to be formed which then provides a guide for the spiral groove to move up the petal. Applying the method described, the density of the spiral grooves can be easily varied using different number of grid points.

Indented Grooves A spiral groove which sits below the panelling surface maintains the structural strength of the model, highlights the spiral shape and allows more light to penetrate from beneath. The indent was created using â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;fin edgesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; options under the panelling tools, following the lines of the triangles. Both ends of the finned edges are then connected by additional surfaces below the 2D surface. The surface panels are then ungrouped and the panels sitting above the groove are deleted. The intensity of lights varies across the petals by the density of the spiral around the petal.

The top view of the first petal.

The digitalised design of the first petal.

The digitalised design of the fifth petal.

Orthographic Views The right view of the final design.

The front view of the final design.

The isometric view of the final design.

The topview of the final design.

Prototyping The model was unrolled and printed on paper, cut out and glued together. The prototype was not much of a success as several problems with the design were discovered. Only the outline of the model was successfully built but the details were not established. Besides the design, the paper used in making the prototype was too thin, the model did not have much structural strength, but will be resolved when thicker and harder materials are used.

The design was unrolled and printed with tabs.

The panels were cut out, labelled and folded in by the tabs.

The panels were glued together by the tabs to form the model.

The prototyping process was generally an unsuccessful one and has uncovered flaws in the current design.

1. Grooves The finned edges of the grooves are constructed by four-sided polygons and when tracing the lines on the surface of the petals, the polygons were pushed and squashed such that the four corners no longer lie on the same plane. During the physical construction of the model, the polygons do not fit into the designated spot. The four-sided polygons used in the finned edges should be converted into triangles as all corners of a triangle remains on the same plane under all conditions. The added surfaces which join both of the finned edges should to be converted into triangles for the same reason stated. This allows consistency in the shapes of the surfaces.

The upper fin edges (marked in numbers)do not fit in itsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; designated positions, causing weird openings and bends.

2. Lightings The holes of the surfaces are too large, the penetrating lights are too scattered and not concentrated at the grooves. The holes on the surface should be reduced and holes should be added to the lower finned edge. This would allow lights to concentrate at the grooves.

Lighting effects of the prototype.

Reflection Module 2 takes away the hands-on modelling, bringing it to the virtual modelling before its’ being assembled. Most of the time, this process takes the fun out of designing as adjustments has to be constantly made, and at times due to the limitations of the program, we’ll have to just compromise, leaving the design outcome far from the sketched one. However, this process has increased the accuracy and consistency of the design that no human hands can achieve, allowing the model to be viewed thoroughly before production, recreated again and again with precision. As much as the process ‘throws’ out most of the initial ideas, it sometimes allow better designs to form. From my point of view, the current design of the lantern is far more better than the design in module 1 as the module 2 design brings out the concept with simplicity.

Throughout the weeks in Module 2, the focus placed on familiarising and grasping the key concept of Rhino has allow further investigation of the form of the model. The current design of the model clearly does not support its’ self-weight as all the petals are only connected at one point. To produce a self-supporting model, a cage will have to be developed in the coming weeks to hold the petals in place.

Shadow effects of the protoype.

Reference List http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/30_St_Mary_Axe http://www.architecture.com/WhatsOn/Exhibitions/AtTheVictoriaAndAlbertMuseum/Room128a/2005/RIBAStirlingPrize/2004.aspx http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehouse/details?mid=781ce1834d20d5957535eedf3ecccc95 Scheurer.F, Stehling, H (2011), Lost in Parameter Space? IAD : Architectural Design, Wiley, 81(4), July, pp. 70-79 Fleischmann M., Knippers J., Menges A., Schleicher S. (2012), Material Behavior : Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Desgin Processes, D: Architectural Desing, Wiley, 82(2), March, pp. 44-51 Lecture 5 ,6 (2012), Virtual Environments, Sem 2 2012

Audrey Cavalera # 587616 Semester 2, 2012 Group 15

Final Model Inspired by previous experiments on tanglement.

This piece represents the formation of mess from a neat sphere, thus relflecting the tanglement of the Welwitschia Mirabilis plant.

Contouring Method The contouring method was trialed to convert the plasticine model into a 3D version on Rhino, however, this method didn't work and another method needed to be trialed.

Method 2

Distorted Architecture Distorted structures are used as inspiration, as they represent irregularity, mess and thus tanglement, which is a natural process of the Welwitschia Mirabilis.

Panelling Trials

Panelling Trials

Panelling Trials

Panelling Trials

Tanglement of Shadows This experiment explores how the lantern may be able to depict the process of tanglement through light.

Light and Shadows Inspiration is gained from these designs through identifying the different ways in which light and shadows can be directed. Light may shine in one, straight direction, or in various, distored directions.

These concepts may be used to represent tanglement through light and shadows.

Light and Shadows Inspired from examples shown by guest speaker Paul Loh. Panelling may be used to create a tanglement of shadows for the final lantern. The busyness of the panelling creates a light form which may be used to relfect the process of the Welwitschia Mirabilis.

Final Lantern

A combination of 3D and 2D panelling is used to reflect the mess of tanglement. This also allows a diverse range in which light may shine, once again resembling tanglement.

Experimentation

Tanglement of light and shadows

Reflection Module two has further deepened my new fascination with patterns. The idea that nature and natural processes are derived from pattern formation, thus meaning what appears as spontaneous nature is, in fact, the result of underlying mathematical processes was further explored in this module. The reading by Scheuer and Stehling (2011) describes how mathematics has now become further intensified in the processes of design through the invention of Computer Aided Design (CAD).

Looking at my own process, I can identify how in module two, due to the use of Rhino, my design has undergone a much more structural and thus, mathematical process. Whilst reading this piece by Scheuer and Stehling (2011), I noticed the words “mathematics” and “abstract concepts”, which reminded me once again how of the underlying order of nature appears rather random aesthetically. Another key word identified in this reading was “abstraction”, which is described as the process of creating a piece that is a result of a process from which complexities from the natural world are reduced, or specified, and represented. For example, the complex natural process of the Welwitschia Mirabilis is broken down, and then represented through my lantern design. Guest speaker Alex Selenitsch also discussed abstraction, and described it as the transformation of the object or concept the designer is inspired by. Alex spoke of how there are also different kinds of creativity, such as the work of scientists; the formula e= mc2 is a form of abstraction. “Reduction” was also discussed by Scheuer and Stehling (2011), and was described as identifying the best way to “transport” this design idea, which can be done, and I have been doing throughouth this module using CAD. Guest speaker Paul Loh also discussed the link between design and mathematics, and consequently, pattern and pattern formation. Paul explained how patterns can be used through design and interpreted in many ways, and that patterns contain both lateral and literal information. Pattern formation may be used as a spacial device in architecture, and also as material organisation. I was inspired by some of his examples, the To and Fro Table, and the Times Eureka Pavilion. These designs caught my eye due to the effect of light and shadows made from their surfaces, which is what I needed to explore for my own lantern during this module.

Another point of exploration throughout this module has been materials, and I have been assessing and deciding which materials I am to use for my lantern. As discussed in the reading â&#x20AC;&#x153;Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processâ&#x20AC;?, materials heavily influence design possibilities. This reading mentions how through a computational design process on material behaviour many opportunities and processes arise, such as the design's unfolding performance capacity. During this module I have identified that my CAD design must be able to be successfully fabricated, this influencing decisions throughout my process. Also, the aesthetic side of materials I have also considered, and am looking at creating a lantern that is composed of black and white material, to represent mess, and therefore, tanglement. The use of black and white shall also be used to depict light and dark, and the section of the lantern that contains white and black material shall represent tanglement through light and shadows.

The last lecture of module two looked back and reflected on the last six weeks of Virtual Environments. The key words that caught my attention were pattern formation, analytical drawing, material behaviour and parametric space. These have been concepts used throughout the design process so far, and indeed much knowledge has been gained due these explorations.

This lecture also discussed useful tips for the fabrication stage, and student's work that was displayed I found interesting and also very useful, as rhino is still a new program to me, and it's always benefitial to get more advice and examples. I am excited for the fabrication stage, I feel that it will be very rewarding once my lantern has been completed, however, I have also enjoyed the past two modules, as they have pushed me to explore new design processes and forms of analysis, and I have been inspired and motivated due to this new knowledge.

References http://www.torontostandard.com/the-sprawl/surreal-architecdigitally-distorted-architecture http://wherewedesign.com/2012/01/ghery-partners-llp/ http://www.trekearth.com/gallery/Europe/United_Kingdom/England/London/photo66214.htm http://inhabitat.com/gorgeous-hanging-sculpture-by-thomas-heatherwick-greets-visitors-to-londons-victoriaalbert-museum/ http://www.worldarchitectnews.com/architecture-concept-of-the-spiraling-library/the-structure-design-give-filternatural-light-to-the-interior/ http://faculty.etsu.edu/kortumr/09rome/htmdescriptionpages/14pantheon2.htm http://www.yanondesign.ir/2011/05/eureka-pavilion-by-nex-and-marcus.html http://michalpiasecki.com/2010/11/22/nex-architecture-to-fro-table/

MODULE TWO DESIGN

DANIEL CAGAROSKI Student No: 583059

Semester: 2/2012

Group: 15

CONTOURS SLICING & TRACING I was unsure whether contouring my model was an appropriate method in digitising it. There were different methods in contouring such as: â&#x20AC;˘ Method 1: slicing the model into sections to trace â&#x20AC;˘ Method 2: drawing contours onto the model, photographing them and tracing them â&#x20AC;˘ Method 3: using reference photos and orthographic views to construct four profile curves I decided to try the first method. Slicing the model proved very difficult as the material I had used was air-dry clay. This resulted in very rough and undesirable cuts. Eventually I was able to place the sections on graph paper, and trace them. From here, I placed the tracings into Rhino, ready for alignment and lofting.

The model sliced up and placed on grid ready for tracing.

The model traced onto grid paper and ready for alignment and lofting.

CONTOURS LOFTING The lofted model turned out to be very undesirable and different from the original clay model. It was still interesting to observe the shape that it had taken.

The model displayed very free flowing curves, as I had used the ‘loose’ lofting command. Using’ straight sections’ when lofted produced very unnatural results.

As expected, using this method of contours did not allow indentations of the model to be mapped. Further, it provided a very non-geometric form that forms that base of the spiral clay model.

Clockwise from left: Top, Perspective, Front

GEOMETRIC APPROACH INITIAL DESIGNS Pro: Width of

Pro: Width of

spiral gradually

spiral gradually

grows

grows

Con: Size is too uniform

Con: Gap size is

Con:

Pro: Uniform

Pro: Uniform

Polysurface

sized gap

sized gap

(unable to

not uniform

panel)

Initial Design 1

Initial Design 2

Skeleton used for Initial Design 3

Initial Design 3

I had initially played around with different geometries of spirals, and adjusted parameters such as diameter, pitch and turns. What I really wanted to retain was a uniform sized gap between each turn (to represent the cucumber tendril), but also maintain an increasing pitch (showing greater stresses of fat and skin thrusting out). In the Initial Design 1, I was able to create an increasing pitch, but the gap size was not uniform. In the Initial Design 2, I was able to maintain the uniform sized gap, but the pitch was too uniform and unnatural looking. Creating the spiral was difficult to construct in Rhino as each turn had to be manually drawn. There were no parameters in the Spiral command to create this.

Eventually I was able to solve the two problems by manually drawing each turn of the spiral. This resulted in the closest representation to the clay model possible (as shown in Initial Design 3). I began with a skeleton and used a variety of lofting and 2 sweep railing methods. The major downside was that the final model was a polysurface, which I was not able to panel. I had tried advance techniques such as polar arrays and section lofting, however, it had again created a polysurface. I then decided to completely change the modelling process.

GEOMETRIC APPROACH RETHINKING THE PROCESS I was finding the geometric approach was creating models that looked too unnatural. I then rethought the whole process and simplified things. I first drew the spiral structure which incorporated an increasing pitch. I then copied this skeleton and moved it up. I drew a cross section that I thought would more closely represent the shape of the fat and skin. I then produced a sweep 2 rail and ended up with a much more organic model. I think this model more closely represented my natural process, and further tweaking (such as bending the model) really produced the model that I wanted to be working with.

Step 1: Rails and cross section

Step 2: Sweep 2 Rails

Step 3: Bending the model

GEOMETRIC APPROACH FINAL MODEL

Top

Perspective

Front

Right

FINAL MODEL COMPARISON Although the 3D model is not identical to the clay model, I have intended it to be this way as I think it represents my natural process more accurately.

Working with clay was somewhat cumbersome and through using 3D modelling, I felt as though I had more flexibility in producing my model.

Revisiting one of my earlier sketches helped me portray my natural process more expressively through the 3D model.

Clay model

3D model

Initial Sketch

PANELLING TRIALS 2D Panelling

Panels are too small,

Panel sizes are

and this would be

favourable allowing The shape of the

for shape retention of

structure is lost

model and easy

due to oversized

construction

complicated to construct

panels

Further panels manually drawn in and experimented

Loose Grid

Medium Grid

Dense Grid

PANELLING TRIALS 3D Panelling

Pyramids provide an interesting and neat

Shape of structure also Similar to pyramid

appears to be lost in

panelling option.

the complicated 3D

Construction of cones

shape structure of the

may be tedious.

panels. Almost mechanical feel to

panelling option.

model.

Construction may be difficult.

Pyramids

Custom Cones

Custom Truncated Pyramids

PANELLING TRIALS Fin Edges

Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m not sure where I could incorporate Fin Edges into my model. The effect provides a quite busy look, distracting the natural form of the spiral. I feel as though this method would also hinder the structural performance of my model. Although I could use Fin Edges for lighting windows, I feel it would not be the best option.

Looser

Denser

PANELLING EXPLORING LIGHT OPTIONS I wanted to use the gaps as an opportunity to provide windows of light. This required the tedious task of custom panelling the entire gap with a series of triangular panels. I then Lower stress;

thought about ways to create these windows of lights. I used the command â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;offset faces

smaller windows

bordersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to create these windows.

In determining the size of these windows, I wanted it to somehow relate to the energy or stress caused by the cucumber tendrils onto the skin and fat. In areas of high stress, I wanted to express it by incorporating larger windows of light in these areas. Areas of lower stress would therefore correlate with smaller windows of light.

Higher stress; larger windows

PROTOTYPING PREPARATION I had decided to fabricate my prototype using the FabLab facility, as I was hoping that this would help me prepare for Module 3, and identify any flaws in my design that had to be resolved.

Preparing the model for fabrication took a long time, as I had to make sure all the panels were logically set out, and fit onto the sheet of cardboard.

Initially, when I had unrolled the model, all the panels had overlapped, so I had to think of a way to avoid this. I decided to use strips of panels that spiralled around the model. In order to avoid confusion, I had colour coordinated each strip, and placed them on separate layers. This worked particularly well, as I was able to use the 3D model as a reference as to where each strip would go. There would be instances however where the panels would start overlapping again.

As I am only prototyping a small section of the model, this wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t a major issue. However, when unrolling the full model in Module 3, I assume that the spiral strips itself would start overlapping, and I would have to perhaps unroll the strips in the vertical direction, rather than the horizontal direction.

Initial unrolling: overlapping

Logical unrolling: colour correspondence

3D model: colours used as reference

PROTOTYPING PREPARATION After removing the faces of the model, and the duplicate lines (duplicate lines would force the laser cutter or card cutter to trace the line twice), I had to created tabs so the panels could connect to one another. I had thought it would be quite tedious to manually create the tabs for my prototype. Even so, I was concerned that manually creating the tabs would skew the geometry of my model somehow (through irregular connections). I decided to use the Grasshopper script to automate the process. The process worked flawlessly, and I had outputted the results to separate layers: RED (for scoring) and BLACK (for cutting).

PROTOTYPING TESTING MATERIAL I went to the FabLab to inspect the different samples of materials available for the model: ivory card, mount board, black (300 gsm) and black (200 gsm). I hadn’t made a final decision whether my model would be white or black. Nevertheless, I though I would test the white card and see how it performs. Due to the small geometry of the panels in the prototype, I thought ivory card would be my best option so the tabs would fold easily. I also decided to use the card cutter as this would avoid burn marks that the laser cutter would create (the burns marks however wouldn’t be visible on the black card).

Although the cutter cutter generally produced clean cuttings, the score lines looked very messy. In addition, some areas had torn, where the blade of the card cutter was not able to effectively cut. Perhaps these areas would need to be scored instead, and then I could manually cut them with a knife. Overall, I wasn’t too pleased with the results with the material and the card cutter.

PROTOTYPING TESTING STRUCTURE I was initially concerned that the ivory card would create a structure that was too flimsy. After creating the prototype, I was able to confirm this. By applying light force onto the model, the model was able to severely damage. The greatest amount of stress was on the spine of the model (which contained the windows). I found that some of the larger windows were unable to withstand the stress placed on the structure. In addition, I found it very difficult to work around these areas. Connecting panels to the larger windows was very tedious as the windows were very prone to tearing. In modifying the design of the model, I would have to reduce the size of these windows.

Another problem I faced was that certain strips were not aligning with each other. I was then concerned that the strips were not glued to the correct side.

After referring back to my digital colour coded model, I found that many strips looked very symmetrical and I would not be able to tell which side was ‘up’.

Connecting the first few panels worked without problem, however, subsequent panels were not aligning properly, leading to structural irregularities. It would therefore be important to label the ‘start’ or ‘end’ of a panelling strip in my final fabrication.

Front view of prototype

Larger windows caused structural problems

Some panels did not align correctly

PROTOTYPING TESTING LIGHT When I was testing the light, I discovered a major problem. The thinness of the ivory card allowed light to reveal the tabs throughout the model. I found this effect very distracting to my overall design concept. In addition, I found the light that was emitting from the lantern too scarce. This restricts the functionality of the lantern and I would therefore have to add more opening to allow light to pass through.

I did favour the patterns of that were emitting from the model. When incorporating further windows into the model, I will try to make sure that they do not interfere or clash with the patterns.

Perhaps I could incorporate a way to reflect the light into another direction.

PROTOTYPING ADJUSTMENTS Increase scale of model I found the scale of the prototype to be smaller than required as I was not entirely able to fit in on my arm. I would have to measure the diameter of my arm and scale the model accordingly. I would also have to make sure that the dimensions set in the assignment requirements are not exceeded.

In addition, I found that working with a smaller scale was difficult. It was hard to access the interior of the lantern, and thus many panels were not glued properly. In order to create a model that is fabricated without flaws, I would have to consider the accessibility of the interior of the model.

Decrease window size In order to improve the structural strength of the model, I would have to ensure that the spine is strong enough to support the attached panels. Thus, I need to reduce the maximum window size to accommodate for this. Reducing the window size will also be easier for the card cutter to cut, reducing any change of tear in the material.

Add 3D panelling In order to create better dispersion of light, I will have to incorporate more opening in the model. The addition of 3D panelling would be a good idea, where I could implement pyramid panelling, and remove certain panels to allow light to come through. The shape of the pyramids will also help disperse the light in a different direction from the pattern of light created from the spinal windows.

Use black material After not being impressed with the results of the card cutter, I wanted to use the laser cutter for a smoother finish. However, I was concerned with the burns marks produced by the laser cutter on white card. Using black card will help eliminate the visual imperfections caused by the laser cutter. In addition, using black card will also eliminate the tabs from being seen. Light will not be able to penetrate through the black card, thus making it a better choice.

Use thicker material Using a thicker material will aid with structural support and rigidity. I wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t happy with the thickness of the ivory card, so I would opt to use a thicker card for my final model. In addition, a thicker card will help eliminate tabs from being seen when light is emitted.

PRECEDENT 30 ST MARY AXE 30 St Mary Axe London, UK, 1997-2004 This building uses an array or triangulation to create what is known as a diagrid. The use of a computer model was crucial in the design process as design changes could quickly be calculated and updated in the model. The use of this technology vastly improves the design process and allows architects to be more innovative than without the technology.

The spiral features of the buildings mimic elements of my model. One of the interesting features on this building are the protruding triangular panels (which act as air vents). Perhaps I could incorporate this into my model, but use it as an opening for light. This ties in with the proposed 3D panelling that I wanted to incorporate into my revised model.

The design as modelled in Rhino and Grasshopper

PRECEDENT ETCH WEB LIGHT Etch Web Light Tom Dixon These lights use a set of complicated geometries that mesh together to create the web. What I find interesting is how these lights cast shadows and how the shadows mesh together.

In relation to my model, I was concerned how the pattern of shadows cast by the central spine would clash with other shadows projected from extruding panels. Perhaps it is not something that has to be avoided. The mesh of shadows does create something that is quite interesting.

PANELLING FINAL

Top

Bottom

Front

Right

PANELLING FINAL

Perspective

Isometric

REFLECTION Paul Loh’s lecture raised my awareness of pattern, and how it can be incorporated into architectural design. He explored the concept of ‘biomimicry’ which is studying nature’s processes or systems and using its elements as inspiration for human needs. It is very much the case of what we are doing in this project.

Initially, I was unsure why we were studying natural processes to develop a design for a lantern, but now I’ve learnt how useful it is to develop a design that is both innovative and functional.

Alex Selenitsch’s lecture focuses on the different creativity of people. I immediately thought of our class, and the different levels of creativity people came up with abstracting their model. Most interestingly was when one of the Science students used the physics of sound waves to develop their model. I thought it was a great way to learn from others, and expand my thinking in a multi-disciplinary manner.

The reading of Scheuer & Stehling (2011) focused on two main areas: abstraction and reduction. These are two closely related design processes where abstraction focuses on representing only the important things, while reduction is about finding the ideal way to represent information (rather than remove it).

These processes were both used in my process development in Module 1. In the case of implementing cucumber tendrils in the development of my model, I portrayed only what I thought was important: the act of strangling. In some areas, I thought of different ways to represent what was happening (creating a relationship between strangling strength and energy, and determining window size accordingly).

Fleishmann (2012) raised some important notes about how material can influence the design process, and how we need to consider constraints not only in the virtual world, but also in the physical world. This very much ties in with the material selection of my model, and ensuring that it will be able to be fabricated from the available materials. Prototyping was an important step as it identified important refinements to the model that were needed to accommodate for the available materials. Thinking about material behaviour is what designers must constantly consider when developing their projects, as material limitations will prevent the physical reality of a design from being made.

Overall, I’m quite satisfied with my final model, but even more surprised how far the design of my model has progressed. I feel proficient in using a complex program such as Rhino and am proud that I was able to deal with such a steep learning curve. I’ve learnt many skills in designing and digitising my model and I look forward to fabricating my model (which I know will be a very lengthy task, but rewarding too).

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Samuel Bell Student No: 585096 Semester 2/2012

Group 16

MODULE TWO DESIGN Development

These three images depict the final stages of my lantern ideation process. It shows the desired shape and form that I can hopefully acheive through difitalisation using Rhino.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Scale model

In order to transfer my lantern design into Rhino, I created a physical plasticine model at a scale of 1:2. I did this by warming the plasticine to make it more plyable and then moulded it and cut it (cutting knives) into my desired form. Then, in preparation for the contouring process, put it in the freezer to stiffen it. These images show a perspective view and side view of the model.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Creating Contours Creating the contours of my model was quite a tedious process and was only achieved through the stepby-step tutorials provided.

The first step was to cut the model into 1cm layers and them line them up on gridline. By then photographing this, I was able to accurately trace each contour in Rhino and produce a replicated, digital model.

MODULE TWO DESIGN Digital Model Adjustments

After the contouring process was done, the lines had to be turning into a form. This was done with the Loft command. By selecting each contour in order, the loft tool produced a surface which connected all the curves created by the contours.

Initially, my lofted surface was quite complicated with lots of sharp ripples. After a long period failing with Panelling tools, I realised it was my complex shape that was causing the problem and I had to simplify it. I did this with the Rebuild command. By changing the amound of control points I was able to simplify my model to something that was still recognisable as the original, but able to be panelled.

MODULE TWO DESIGN Digitalised model

Top View (Above)

Control points allowed my to do basic manipulations of the form.

Front View

Side View

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Panel Experimentation

The next stage of the process was working with Panelling Tools, to create a buildable lantern from my model. This part of Rhino required many hours of playing around in order to learn the huge number of abilities the program has.

After creating a point grid on the surface I was able to panel it. Above and to the left are images of the 8 preset panel shapes available to use. I trialled all of these, however, I became apparent almost immediately that triangles were the only shape that would be easily used. While these models all seem to be successful, they were all set to allow the panels to bend. Something which is not possible when making a physical model from card. The only shape which did not require bending was the triangle.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Custom Panelling Panelling tools has a huge number of functions and one of these is the ability to customise your own panels. As well as the 2D shapes seen previously, it is possible to also use 3D panels.

These are examples of my experimentations customising my own 3D panels. The two top images depict the building of the panels and the two below show the model with the customised panels.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

While I liked the aesthetics of this panel on my model, it required an enormous number of surfaces and would also be difficult to wear.

(Left) The model on the right was a trial of ribbing the surface, a process required for more serious modelling.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Panel structure

After deciding upon triangles for my panels, there were still many possibilities and choices to make. The quantity of panels that cover the surface has a large influence on the complexity and time required for the fabrication process, and also the look of the model. Changing this was done by adjusting the points on the panelling grid. The images below show the results of different sized grids.

Surfaces:

108

145

204

312

660

Number of U points:

28

30

35

40

45

Number of V points:

4

5

6

10

15

MODULE TWO DESIGN Finalising Model

After deciding upon the complexity of the panels in on my model (second from the right on previous page) I felt I still needed to do more to make the model interesting.

Taking inspiration from previous examples, I decided I wanted holes in the panels to allow the light through. Using the ptOffsetBorder tool I was able to do this. There were a number of settings with this tool to decide the size and positioning of the holes. I used point attractors to do this.

I played aroubd with this tool for a while before I got it right. The two images above are examples which I thought I needed to adjust. I didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t want the holes too large and I wanted a more even spread. The model on the right is my final panelling proposal.

MODULE TWO DESIGN First look at fabrication

After finalising my model, I watched multiple tutorials on how to unroll the surface for fabrication. Following the steps, I was able to print the net for a small section of the bottom tip of my model to be used as my prototype.

After printing the sheets I cut out the holes in the surface and the outline around the tabs and scored the folding lines. Then I constructed the piece of the lantern by simply gluing the joining tabs together.

MODULE TWO DESIGN Prototype

These are images of the prototype for my lantern. While it is just a small section of the whole model, it allowed me to much better visualise the scale that my lantern would be, the time required and difficulty of assembling the final lantern. It also clearly showed how the form and holes in the panle surfaces would produce shadow and let the light escape from the lantern.

MODULE TWO DESIGN

Precedents Hearst Tower in New York uses triangulation as form. While they are all equal in dimesions, it still produces a funtioning building with triangles as its main framework. The corner of the building show how the shape is managable in creating a closed form like the for I created with triangles in Rhino.

The image below shows traingles being used to allow light in and out of a space. This is relevant to my lantern as I created holes in many of my panels to make the most of the light that will be contained in the lantern.

MODULE TWO DESIGN Reflection

The picture below depicts a building that has used triangulation to create a rounded shape. While the traingles I used for my lantern will remain flat, this is a perfect example how repitition of the shape allows fluid curves to be produced.

Whilst being sometimes tedious, temperamental and extremely time consuming,the digitalisation and elaboration process via Rhino has been a very rewarding one. In Module One, physical modelling proved the most efficient and suited to ideation.

Using those honed ideas, the digital medium is a very effiicient means of furthering the design process. Whereas, in the procedure, where it is very difficult to test several variations quickly, the computer allows us to make more rapid changes and view and document them from all angles instantaneously. This is supremely useful when we are to trying to hone th final design for fabrication in Module Three. It is only through this process that I have been able to create a range of possible design concepts which I intend to refine further over the following weeks when I am fabricating my model.

This assignment, the lectures and the readings all say to me how prevalent the importance for technology in design is becoming and also how mathematics and digitalisation are bothhugely influential tools in design.

virtual environments

module 2 design

jillian raleigh student no. 583168|semester 2, 2012|group 3

virtual environments

process research & analysis of natural phenomenon NATURAL PROCESS coral growth the growth rate and structural character of coral is influenced by: 1. fluctuations in sea-levels 2. light intensity (photosynthesis) 3. water temperature 4. carbon dioxide concentration 5. pH + salinity, and 6. ocean currents (delivering nutrients)

interpretive sketches

coral growth is cyclical, varying according to the season: growth rates are higher and the coral structure less dense in summer than in winter (due to increased water temperature and light intensity)

radiograph of coral growth bands (lighter, wider bands represents low density summer growth & darker, narrower bands indicates high density, winter growth)

DESIGN RATIONALE form represents seasonal variation in coral density module two: generating a dynamic form with sufficient opportunity for light filtration, while avoiding excessive perforation..

virtual environments

stimulii response to lectures, precedents & readings LECTURES form & matter Lecture 5: Alex Selenitsch composition is form and/or matter within a boundary that is: attractive, coherent, ambiguous, representative.. strategies for coherent composition..

1. single gesture (1 + 1 = 1) 2. assemblage.. hint at conceptual origins)

design: a cumulative process.. multilayered analysis, abstraction of concepts, varyiation in scale and constant reevaluation of design concept. the design must be allowed to evolve.

ARCHITECTURAL PRECEDENT exploration of surface and skin by contemporary melbourne architects.. panelling inspiration.

patterns in architecture: RMIT swanston academic building patterns in architecture: times eureka pavilion

design evolution Lecture 6: Bharat Dave

READINGS abstraction vs. reduction Scheuer & Stehling (2011)

patterns in architecture: RMIT design hub

abstraction is the process of transforming reality into an unambiguous digital model & reduction is the optimisation of information contained in the digital model. essentially a similar approach to analytical drawing.. the simplification of a complex system. material behaviour computing form Fleischmann et al. (2012) while traditional architectural design approaches prioritise geometry over materiality, computational design methods enables the incorporation of material properties into models, allowing material behavious to influence the form.

patterns in nature: â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;brainâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; coral

patterns in architecture: waffle urbanism

virtual environments

digitisation contouring & importing physical model

contouring reducing 3D to 2D: contours traced onto physical model in pencil, model sliced along the contour lines to form 10 segments

tracing transforming 2D into 3D skeleton: segments arrangement on graph paper and photographed in plan, image imported into rhino & traced in 2D.

orienting elevation image of model imported, traced elements moved and rotated to correspond to contour lines of the image

virtual environments

malleability selection of forms representing the design alternatives afforded by lofting and panelling tools in rhino: trialling various combinations of the contoured form, grid generation methods and panel geometries..

exploring digital design alternatives

FORM adjusting loft style and contour size or location to produce a form emulating the organic, random coral growth process.

straight loft

straight loft + manipulation of selected contours

loose loft + manipulation of selected contours

original contours

adjusting contours, experimenting with shape

identical contours. too poorly defined to reflect the fluctuations in coral growth rate and density. virtual environments

tight loft + manipulation of selected contours

tight loft + uniform increase in contour size

identical contours with improved definition.. appears contrived, not organic.

more contrived.. too ordered. too ugly.

tight loft + lateral manipulation of contours preferred form less regular.. more organic and a more appropriate allegorical representation of the coral growth process. just the right kind of ugly. virtual environments

increasing the light penetrating the lantern at locations corresponding to summer growth and spawning period of coral reefs. achieved by clustering panels with a greater degree of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;opennessâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;?

conceptual sketches

PANELLING panel geometry: triangular or pyramidal form inspired by the tentacle of the coral polyp..

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel A

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel B

medium grid density (20 x 60) with point attractors set for panel A3, pictured above, far right. lacks structural integrity, with panels not having adequate common edges.

identical grid with panel group B. more organic and structurally improved, but curvature of panels results in complex triangulated form.. difficult to fabricate.

virtual environments

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel C

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel D

random grid pattern + 3D custom panel D

wider contours and medium grid density (20 x 60) with uniform panels.. too cumbersome, too static

loose loft and tighter grid density.. pattern dominated by the visual noise of tiny panels

narrower, laterally offset contours and random grid (20 x 60).. very organic and dynamic effect.. too messy? time consuming to fabricate?

virtual environments

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel set E medium grid density (20 x 60) with point attractors for panel E6, pictured above, right.. reduced penetrations resulting in a more dramatic lighting effect? unfolding triangulated form very difficult

regular grid pattern + 3D custom panel set F selected design

identical contours with regular lighter grid (20 x 40) and point attractors for panel F3, pictured above, far right. improved clarity and variation in light penetration. increase grid density?

random grid pattern + 3D custom panel set F preferred panelling

medium grid density (20 x 30) with point attractors set for panel F3.. too complex to fabricate: difficult to unroll. therefore, select previous design iteration

virtual environments

prototyping material performance & design evolution

structure 370mm diameter base is too large.. a) difficult to handle in fabrication, b) increased structural instability, c) unecessary for aesthetic effect or wearability..

reduce to 80% of original size:

300mm base and 210mm

minimum diameter

FABRICATING triangulating and unrolling panels for laser cutting.. observing material behaviour and adjusting design accordingly.

light LEDs reveal structural imperfections in white card.. tabs, gaps. perforations too large to create a dramatic effect?

consider reducing panel size

for more intricate lighting.

minimise tabs attaching to

external walls.

fabrication unrolling in patches proved more time consuming and prone to error..

unroll in strips.

5mm width and tabbing one side of each strip results in difficult assembly.. tabs occasionally protrude past edges, visible through penetrations. card cutter produces slightly torn edges compare with laser cutter..

tab both top and

bottom edges of

each strip.

laser cut final design.

10mm tab minimum.

circular base difficult to balance on shoulders. mould base of lantern to fit the body.

colour though white has additional luminescence due to partial transparency of the material.. black preferred: accentuates penetrations.

virtual environments

design current digital model

PERSPECTIVE

PLAN

ORTHOGRAPHIC

FRONT ELEVATION

RIGHT ELEVATION

virtual environments

credits art RMIT swanston academic building by lyons: http://theredandblackarchitect.wordpress.com/2012/08/27/thered-black-review-swanston-academic-building-building-80-rmit/ RMIT design hub (CUB building) by sean godsell architects: http://www.seangodsell.com/rmit-design-hub waffle urbanism by domus: http://www.domusweb.it/en/architecture/waffle-urbanism/ times eureka pavilion: http://www.archdaily.com/142509/times-eureka-pavilion-nex-architecture/image-final-a/ ‘brain’ coral: http://www.freeimages.co.uk/galleries/nature/underwater/slides/brain_coral_polyps_5002.htm

science Bauman, A, Baird, A, & Cavalcante (2011), ‘Coral reproduction in the world’s warmest reefs: southern Persian Gulf (Dubai, United Arab Emirates)’, Coral Reefs, 30, 2, pp. 405-413.

Fleischmann, M, et. al. (2012), ‘Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes’, Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), pp. 44-51.

Klein, R, & Loya, Y (1991), ‘Skeletal growth and density patterns of 2 porites corals from the Gulf of Eilat, Red Sea’, Marine Ecology-Progress Series, 77, 2-3, pp. 253-259.

Scheurer, F, & Stehling, H (2011), ‘Lost in Parameter Space?’, Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), pp. 70-79.

virtual environments virtual environments

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

module 2 - Bo Wen #583060 Semester 2/2012 Group 5

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

The model which was produced at the end of module 1 was not entirely satisfactory for progression into the digitization stage, and I set out to develop it until it I felt that it was suitable for module 2.

As a final step in my preliminary design process, I combined two conceptual models and sketched the overall outline of the resulting form. This sketch will be produced into a scale plasticine model and digitized for further development.

Although the resulting form is not what I expected and desire in for my final product, it offers a starting point from which I can begin to once again incorporate ideas from module one to change and manipulate the form to best suit my requirements. This model may not be perfect, but I will still use everything Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve learnt from the numerous experiments in module one to improve its aesthetic form.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Scale Model 1:5 After critique and evaluation with my tutor, it was decided that this would NOT be the model to be digitized into Rhino. The form created here is a result of the surface appearance of a 2D sketch. There is more to be extracted from the form than this surface observation; different forms at varying depths, spaces and gaps in the medium also need to be accounted for.

The next page will attempt to explain these factors.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Top: Each line represents a form at different depths as the previous model did not explore the form as a 3D object, but rather a 2D one. What other possibilities exist?

Middle: Recognizing that there are spaces in this 3D shape is another step towards developing a model that has depth.

Bottom: A simplification of this photomontage shows the 2 simple elements of the sketch.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

When manipulated, the model can be interpreted both as a coherent whole and a structure made up of individual parts. Each part of the model is a result of the process of abstraction that subtly echoes the original natural process of DNA. In a way, this model makes sense to me because it still retains the fluid organic form of the helix, separated with spaces that are visible in the original structure. However, it also feels as if the model is on the verge of being purely an illogical, abstract form. Each of these photos represent a different configuration, with many still left to be explored, so why would these particular ones be the most ideal? In general, I recognize that the previous model to be digitized was in most aspects; uniform and quite symmetrical, the exact qualities which I stated to be undesirable in my final product. The existence of the spatial qualities to each model must also be incorporated into my next and final model before I digitize. Despite all the indecisiveness, a decision has to be made.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

The development of the models had led me to experiment with abstraction to such an extent that I was in danger of losing the essence of the original DNA process. Thus, this series of photos show the composition of the final model.

Using the first model made from the photomontage which was intended for digitization, a second element was attached, symbolizing the second half of the double-helix.

This was then refined into 2 coherent structures which almost exist independently of each other. It must be noted that the exact positioning of the exterior attachment is not â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;set in stoneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and is open to re-interpretation in the digitization process. This simple concept of 2 unified parts is suitable for the next step of development.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS This is my final conceptual model before digitizing into Rhino. It is composed of two elements; the inner structure and the twisting exterior shell.

The model echoes the formal characteristics of the doublehelix DNA, and combines the two structures seen in the helix. It also incorporates my personal response to an analysis of DNA form and precedents. The model explores asymmetry and irregularity, breaking away from conventional interpretations whilst maintaining the core essence of the original natural process.

Scale Model 1:5

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Following the contouring method â&#x20AC;&#x153;tracing sectional slicesâ&#x20AC;?, I proceeded to begin to slice my model with 5mm intervals. Despite having been left in the freezer for a substantial amount of time, the model began to de-form and break-up as I cut through the body. As I had already made an attempt to cut into sectional pieces beforehand with the same results, I simply could not afford to waste any more time by re-freezing the model, and proceeded to finish cutting the sectional pieces.

Although the first step of digitization had not gone according to plan, it was of little significance because this model was far from what I intend to produce as a final model, and so the induced inaccuracy due to a deformed model not important.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

From left to right: Shows the traced sectional pieces of the photo imported using picture frame. Where the model has deteriorated, an estimate has been made to approximate the dimensions of the section. As mentioned before, the accuracy of the section is not of great importance.

The next two screengrabs show the rebuilt curves and lofted surface. The resemblance to my physical model is not great but manipulation using control points can change this.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Control Point Simplification: the number of control points was reduced to 5 for easier manipulation of form. However I still found difficulty in attempting to resemble the physical model.

The second model was built without the tracing of sectional slices and provides an alternative to modeling. Top and bottom views are shown which points out the open ends of the polysurface which needs closing.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

left: shows the simplified model and attempts to close the spaces on the model. The middle photo was achieved using the gumball manipulator while the right photo used the ‘cap’ command.

left: use of gumball manipulator to close the open end of the surface. It offers more control than the ‘cap’ command but is still limited for my use.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

FORM of element 1 I found that it was crucially important at this stage to not lose the elements of the original process, and to also keep in touch with the discoveries I made in module 1.

Above shows the first stage of formal development. Images on the right serve to keep the manipulated object â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;on trackâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and not stray from what I set out to achieve before digitization; fluidity, movement, etc.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

FORM of sub-structure The sub-structure of the model was then drawn and moved into place using â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;gumballâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Various aspects of it was then further manipulated, experimenting with spacing, rotation and form etc.

Now that the initial base for the model has been constructed, the form has to be developed to compliment each other, and respond accordingly.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

ROTATION I experimented with various degrees of rotation for both the structure and the sub-structure as a whole, and also with only the sub-structure rotating.

Some will not be physically/structurally viable as there has to be some cantilever or counterweight to balance the offset of weight. But varying paper weights may possibly solve this problem.

At the present time, this investigation did not bring to attention any exciting possible ideas as I felt it would only detract from the strength of the concept.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

VARYING RADIII When constructing the pipe from curve, I can modify and vary the radius of the pipe at different points.

This explored what effect each thickness would have, and how it would behave alongside the main structure, it would also have practical implications such as difficulty of construction, physical weight to support etc.

Erik Dahlgren Allen Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

EXPLORING MOVEMENT & CONNECTION ZAHA HADID Top: Heydar Aliyev Centre, Baku, Azerbaijan The building emerges out of the ground seamlessly, simultaneously connecting itself with the context and its subsequent elements. In order to truly be ‘frozen motion’, the design would have to be be flawless.

Each of Zaha’s designs personify the expression of ‘motion’.

Left: “Aqua”, Design Installation, London.

Zaha references the London Aquatics Centre with this piece, with the movement of water.

Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

“Back to the drawing board” - Clarification of concept and justification for design exploration Based on everything I’ve done up to this point, I revised the basic conceptual idea for my model, making sure that I understood what it was that I was developing. I also took the chance to sketch a few ideas from Zaha’s precedent, thinking about how the two structures should not bind each other, but rather appear as one coherent form, effortlessly flowing around one another just as the original double helix had done.

Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

How many times should the sub-structure wind around the main body? What would the appearance of 1,2 or 3 iterations be? A simple exercise was conducted to explore this idea.

Depending on the number of wraps, the substructure influences the ‘feeling’ of the general model. E.g; 3 wraps gives a constricted effect while 1 frees the main structure up in a more liberal sense. Should 2 be the number chosen? It relates more directly to the double helix, but shouldn’t the main structure represent the other half of the helix?

To avoid unnecessarily over-complicating the main concept behind the development of this model, 1 ‘wrap’ was chosen. But what if the arrangement of these sub-structures were different?

Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

The two photos show different views of a more irregular means of arranging these substructures, with 2 models testing the addition of a 3rd structure to weave between the 2nd structure. However, I feel that as long as the basic concept of the model is right, there is no need to add more structures to the model. A simple idea, if executed correctly, should be the best way to proceed. Also, physical/structural constraints must be taken into account, will the model stay upright if another structure is added?

What about time constraints?

Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

This final step before applying panelling tools shows the detailed contouring of both structures to compliment each others geometry. The third photo from the left shows a quick experiment with a d e f o r m e d s u b - s t r u c t u re , b u t w a s rejected due to possible structural issues.

As a result of this stage, the sub-structure was slimmed down, and development occurred so that the two structures reciprocate each otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pushes and pulls. With panelling tools, this symbiosis can be improved and developed more.

Student No: 587557 Semester: 1/2012 Group: 10

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

ZAHA HADID architects

Parametric Tower Research This exhibition at the AIT ArchitekturSalon features the architectural theoretical research of Zaha Hadid and Patrik Schumacher. The extensive models which are exhibited show the countless permutations and combinations of a model that is possible. Using the photo below, the foreground of the photo shows an array of similar towers with subtle differences. Height, placement of abnormality, depth of intrusion, orientation of form.

The photo to the immediate left shows how vital the role of light is in influencing the mood that the model portrays. Different densities of mass are also important when considering the overall form of the product.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Based on parametric tower research by Zaha Hadid, I took the basic options available for panelling 2D and tried all combinations and permutations for the model.

LEFT: Some were more successful than others, chosen for their more coherent shape in the combined structure. The structure to the right shows the most promise as the panels have created the idea of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;grooveâ&#x20AC;? for the substructure to sit in seamlessly.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

These were the panelling options that resulted in the more unwanted effects for my model.

Left: The created panels for my main structure do not give an effect that is consistent with my idea for the project. These highlight the differences between the panels, rather than the idea to minimize the joints and create harmony.

Bottom: None of the basic panelling options were satisfactory for the sub-structure, and detract from the fluidity of its form.

Some would be a construction nightmare, and others are too basic. Whilst some give an effect of a continuing form at the ends of the shape, which may be useful.

I have concluded that it would be counter-productive to continue using this method to develop ideas, and will therefore produce a customized set of panels to compliment my idea.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS ZAHA HADID

Szervita Square Tower, Budapest, Hungary.

The design speaks about transparency, a contrast of patterns and the display of an internal structure in parametric architecture.

It is ‘porous’, ‘accessible’ and ‘welcoming’.

Developed as a response to the surrounding context which features closed and secretive buildings, this tower exhibits its opacity to stand out in its environment.

I see the combination of patterns and textures, and the use of opacity as a means to display an internal structure. It is also interesting how there are contrasting areas of transparency.

Ideas are beginning to form for use on my own model from this design.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

ZAHA HADID architects

Burham Pavilion, Chicago, USA. A temporary pavilion designed and erected in Chicago’s Millennium park as part of the Burham Plan celebrations-reflecting Chicago’s long tradition for embracing cutting edge architecture in an intricate but fluid structure that incorporates hidden traces of Burham and Bennett’s original 1909 plans to redevelop the city.

I think the pavilion is similar to our project in that it is one coherent parametric structure. Zaha Hadid architects have experimented with the oscillations of patterns on the surface of the body, and explored the positioning of various openings in the pavilion. A viewer can see into the interior of the structure, which highlights the need for consideration of interior design as well as exterior. This is a useful concept to introduce into module 2 of my project.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Unfolding & Light Experiment Using a relatively simple shape in Rhino, I unfolded the surface and added tabs, printed the surface our and constructed it. Light studies were then conducted by placing the LED lights at various points around the model, to replicate what would possibly happen on my real model. As panelling options have not been realized yet, it is hard to predict what the behavior of light will be on those surfaces, but I found that I can use the light of the LED to contrast the joining points of the two structures, and if bright enough, blur the two elements together, forming a kind of â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;bondâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

3D Panelling with simple geometry

Point Attractor Offset Border

2D vs 3D Panelling

Custom Panel & Fin Edges

These simple experiments have shown which methods are useful to apply to my concept.

However, as I have 2 independent structures there is the possibility of building â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;layersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; of patterns upon one another. There is also the added difficulty of finding 2 panelling patterns that do not detract from the intertwined nature of the model before the panelling process.

Findings: More points created in the panelling grid allows the model to retain some fluidity.

The more emphasis on geometry the panels show, the more the model strays from the desirable elements outlined originally.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Various custom 2D surfaces

As is shown by this photo and explored in the previous page, any panelling will detract from the fluidity of an un-paneled model; the only decisions now lies in: how to panel the surface so that it retains as much of the original â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;fluidityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; as possible & creating the panels to be as structurally sound as possible

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

8x8

10x10

12x12

Triangulated fin edge

Final Structure The combination of fin edges for support, with an added flat triangular face for the main structure is to provide maximum physical support for the sub-structure.

Additionally, pieces of the faces can be opened up to allow the sub-structure to be connected to the main body.

3D panels were not chosen because it disrupts the natural flow of the model.

3D? No.

2D

Box or Triangle?

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS Sub-structure Using the same technique as before, the sub-structure similarly would have to be constructed with fin edges and flat faces in order to be connected somehow to the main body.

From this point on, it was a matter of finding the optimal grid points to be constructed to represent the form as fluid as possible.

The models to the left experimented with direct 2D panelling, but how would it connect? Simply not ideal.

6x16

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS Offset border Left: To allow light to pass through the structure, I decided to use the offset border command, with varying distances.

0.1

0.5

0.8

Bottom: I then realized that using point attractors would allow me to customize each section to best suit the model as a whole, complimenting the curvature of the main body.

Therefore light would be brightest closer to the body, this infusion of light should blend the two surfaces together and create cohesion.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Offset border To create maximum contrast between the bright and the dim on the sub-structure, I decided to only offset the borders of the faces closest to the main structure, leaving the further faces un-touched.

This is the final step in the design process for module 2.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Top

Perspective

Final orthographic views The design decisions that have driven my development process in module 2 is a result of the findings of module 1.

The form of the two structures and their relationship to one another has been influenced by my decision to retain as much fluidity and unity as possible. The double helix is after all, one intertwined structure, and itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s important to remember this. Further prototypes will be created in the next module to test the idea of light interplay between the two structures, as I propose to use light as the bonding element.

Front

Right

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Reflection Throughout the weekly lectures, I was introduced to many concepts and ideas, some of which I have applied to my concept and development process in module 2. Although the first lecture of this module was not specific to our subject, there were some generally useful ideas to note. The speaker spoke about the role of designers among the context of scientists, philosophers and artists. Another interesting point was that the only thing that changes through time is material, because everything (architecture) has been done before, and we continue to build upon these precedents to further our knowledge.

The week 6 lecture provided more relevant information to our projects, and made me realize some important points to consider in the development process. We should not be afraid to start over again if we are not content with the model, because we would only grow to dislike the project, leading to negative design implications. He also spoke about the depth of detail, and the possibility of producing patterns at varying scales. Although this is an exciting idea, I think it would be hard to realize because we are not equipped with any knowledge of algorithms.

In week 7, we were introduced to some useful methods to help us in the fabrication stage of the project. Various advantages and disadvantages were presented with manually cutting the faces, using the paper cutter, and the laser cutter. I think I will need to spend a large amount of time testing more prototypes and making sure that the model is structurally sound, as there will be 2 structures to attach to one another. It became apparent that I will have to use a thicker card base, such as a 220gms paper for the main structure, in order for the sub-structure to not imbalance the model. Possible combinations of black and white paper can be used to give strong contrasting effects between the elements if need be.

Finally, the two readings in this module were interesting as they provided a context for the use of Rhinoceros in this process.

Although I didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t understand some of the mathematic content in the parameter space reading, I got the general idea of the need of NURBS software in modern architectural practices. As technology has progressed to allow us to build more fluid forms, software is required to accurately describe this data for construction, otherwise the architect may have to spend too much time to replicate these drawings. Certainly I can see for example how Frank Gehry & Zaha Hadid rely on this software for their deconstructive and parametric buildings. The ICD/ITKE Pavilion in Fleischmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reading explored the various processes and methods behind the construction. A different design outcome can be acquired as a result of focusing on material behaviour instead of geometric shape, one that is innovative and efficient. While this is useful for exploring materials, I think it will be difficult to explore these ideas extensively due to the restrictions placed on materials in this subject. These various ideas have been applied throughout the design process in this module, and have influenced the panelling and form options of the project.

VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Zaha Hadid Architects ‘Form In Motion’ http://www.zaha-hadid.com/design/form-in-motion/ Zaha Hadid Architects ‘Parametric Tower Research‘ http://www.zaha-hadid.com/design/paramtric-towers-research_ait/ Zaha Hadid Architects ‘Burnham Pavillion’ http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/burnham-pavillion/ Zaha Hadid Architects ‘Szervita Square Tower’ http://www.zaha-hadid.com/architecture/szervita-square-tower/

MODULE TWO DESIGN Dian Mashita Eddy Suryono

Student No: 560645 Semester 2/2012 Group 9

MODULE ONE REVIEW: CHOSEN CONCEPT

Bubbles

The fragile beauty As mentioned in Module One, the Bubble concept has been chosen for the final concept in building the final lantern in this semesterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s project.

My interest in the recent scientific discovery of the daughter bubbles generation when a parent bubble popped, led me to draw out the time-lapse diagram of a bursting bubble.

The overall fragile life of a bubble due to an external force fascinates me because I felt like it had a correlation with a human life in general.

The constantly changing shape of a bubble due to an input and its nature of always seeking for the most energy-efficient shape somehow are relatable to this module task; the problem-solving process of designing.

After a consultation with the tutor in Rhino Tech Session, there are a few adjustment made onto the first sketch clay model to fit the function of the lantern better.

In the final stage of this project, I would want my lantern to be hanged or held to portray the external force that influences a bubble.

Top L-R: Figure 1 Bubble, Figure 2 Sketch clay model representing phases of bubble from birth to burst Bottom L-R: Figure 3 Time-lapse drawing of bursting bubble due in air & on surface, Figure 4 Lantern form proposal and function

And there would be a double layer lantern, which the inside layer would be able to rotate in a vertical axis and constantly changes the light projection.

MODULE TWO: DIGITISING Since my lantern form is pretty symmetrical, I decided that the most convenient method to digitize it would be the tracing profile curve method.

First, I took a picture of the top and side profiles of my physical model then I used the PictureFrame command to import it into Rhino (Figure 5). Then I scaled up the pictures to a scale of 1:5.

Secondly, I traced the profile curves and ensure that they are aligned by using the AlignProfiles command.

Then, I made cross-section curves through the profile curves (Figure 6) to generate contours on the digital model.

After lofting the surface, the tutor taught me to rebuild and use Gumball to achieve the curvy opening of my physical model.

Figure 6 Generating contours using Cross-Section Curves (Csec) command through the previously created profile curves

Figure 5 PictureFrame command and tracing of profile curves

Figure 7 Creating loft surface from the previously made crosssection curves.

Figure 8 Using Gumball to simulate the curve at the mouth of the physical model

2D Panelling Experimentation I tried out some of the preset 2D-panelling tools but somehow I don’t quite like the overall form of the lantern.

It seems to have too many curvatures and might not represent the simplicity of a bubble’s life; birth, bubble, burst.

Tribasic

Triangular

Boxx

So, I decided to revise my physical model to achieve the simplicity concept of the bubble’s life and try to portray the emergence of the daughter bubble generation through the lantern’s lighting effect.

Custom 2D Shape 1 Figure 9 2D-panelling trials

Physical Model Revised I decided to remove the end part of my physical model. I think it portray the life of a fragile bubble better this way.

It might look like a trivial adjustment but I hope the impact would be the opposite, because sometimes, less is more.

Figure 10 The revised physical model with the end part removed

Digitising + Variations

As the previous method, I used the Picture Frame command to trace the profile curve of the physical model.

However, this time I just traced the side profile and did a full circle revolve.

The first 3 variations resulted in enclosed shapes. Even though I am quite satisfied with how the top part resembles like the ripple of water or bubble tearing down during bursting, I need an open lantern that I could fit another smaller scale version in it and rotate vertically for the light projection effect.

In the end I adjusted the profile curve so that it generates an open-ended form.

This large opening with a larger neck would fit another smaller scale version in it.

Thus, I proceeded the design process with this one.

Further Development Again, by turning on the control points and enabling Gumball, I made an alteration on the opening to simulate the curvy opening of my physical model.

There is no exaggeration in the pulling of surface because I want the effect of light to portray the bursting phase.

Then, I rebuild the model to intensify the simplicity of a bubbleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life. The result was a smoother transition between each phase (birth, bloat, burst) and the fluidity of the form resembles the underlying pattern of a bubble when seen in macro.

Figure 11 Initial form from revolve command

Figure 12 Initial form rebuild its u-v number with the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;mouthâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; curved using gumball

Figure 13 Rebuild again to produce a simpler & more fluid form

Paneling Experimentation - 2D The next step after finalising the digital model form is to panelise it. I created the paneling grid using Surface Domain Number command and set the ‘U’ grid as 17 and 10 on ‘V’ grid. I started the paneling trial using a preset 2-D panel grid ‘Boxx’ (Figure 13).

However, a gap is created which is undesirable (Figure 14). Upon consultation with the tutor (Anne), I increased the number of grid on each axis until it is sufficent for complete triangulation or coverage of the chosen preset panel (Figure 15)

Figure 14 Close-up of the gap

Figure 13 Panelised form ‘Boxx’ with formed unwanted gap

Figure 15 After u-v amount adjustment

Similar problem occured as I used the preset 2-D panel triangular. But instead of altering the grid number, I swapped the u-v direction and it resulted with a closed form (Figure 17) and a more jagged effect at the ‘mouth’. I like the result of this because it intensified the portrayal of the bursting effect. Then, I tried the tribasic panelling and I like the smoothness of the surface.

Figure 16 Recurring gap using preset 2-D triangular

Figure 17 U-V direction swapped. Intensified bursting effect at the ‘mouth’

Figure 18 Preset 2-D tribasic panelling

Paneling Experimentation - 3D

Figure 19 Preset 3-D paneling “Box3D”

Figure 20 Preset 3-D paneling “Partition”

Figure 21 Preset 3-D paneling “Wedge”

Then, I tried out 3-D panelling my digital model.

However, I think by going 3-D, the form seems to appear as more rigid and hard, which is the opposite of the nature of a bubble.

In addition, the “Pyramid2” preset had the same gap problem as created by preset 2-D triangular.

I would not delve into fixing that because I think 2-D paneling would portray the fragility of a bubble better.

Figure 22 Preset 3-D paneling “Pyramid 1”

Figure 22 Preset 3-D paneling “Pyramid 2”

Custom Paneling Experimentation - 2D & 3D Even though I am pretty set with using preset paneling for my lantern, I did some custom panelling to test out the aestethic aspect.

I do not want to use a custom paneling as it involves a further step and I do not really want to integrate complexity in the process of my lantern design as it will oppose the intended simplicity of my initial concept.

Although I have to acknowledge the differing perceptions toward simplicity and complexity.

From the previous experimentation of the preset 2-D panelling, I would grab the features that I like from “Boxx” paneling for the first 2 phase of my digital model (birth, bloat) and try to incorporate the jagged effect at the ‘mouth’ for the bursting effect using “triangular” paneling into one form.

fd Setting up paneling grid at 17 for u-direction and 15 for v-direction.

Ungroup the points.

The rest of the previously unselected points are now selected and grouped.

Selected points are grouped, u-ve direction swapped and created 2-D paneling ‘triangular’ to generate the ‘burst’

The ‘burst’ panels are now hidden. The newly selected points are grouped and rebuild with 18 points at u-direction and 15 for v-direction

The ‘burst’ is duplicated twice and the first, scaled down, the second, scaled up as shown above.

From the paneling grid points, 2-D paneling ‘Boxx’ is generated.

The highlighted faces are grouped and hid as it will be redundant.

The left over faces are then grouped as the ‘bubble’ and ‘birth’ form of the lantern.

Now the 3 ‘burst’ forms are shown. Plus, the layering of ‘burst’ forms also define the charasteristic of a bubble’s surface which consists of a layer of water sandwiched between 2 soap layers

Figure 23 Exploded version of the lantern in parts - birth, bubble, burst

PRECEDENT RUEBEN MARGOLIN Upon stumbling to his talk on TED website, I find Reuben Margolin’s kinetic sculptures very inspiring and fascinating.

His kinetic sculptures combine the logic of math with the sensuousness of nature.

To create his kinetic sculptures, there are a logical systematic order that needs to be developed before the result is apparent on the elements involved.

Margolin’s work was the influence of one of my initial concept proposals “wave”. I loved the idea of mechanic forces moving the kinetic sculptures. As I chose the “bubble” as my chosen concept, I decided to make my lantern hanged and moveable by an external force (ie: hand). Although the mechanic of it would be developed further in the next module: Fabrication.

Figure 24 “Connected” theatre. A collaboration of choreographer Gideon Obarzanek & Reuben Margolin. Operated with strings attached to their bodies, the undulating sculpture moves in sync with the dancers.

Figure 25 T: The motors that mechanically creates the “Tule Wave”s undulating movement.

C: The The “Tule Wave” up-close B: The “Tule Wave” shadow projection

PRECEDENT NERI OXMAN

This prototype by Neri Oxman incorporates physical parameters with digital form-generation protocols.

The variation in thickness, pattern density, curvature and translucency inspire me to think of the various aspects my conceptual lantern would have.

The fluidity of this object somehow portrays dynamism just as how I intended my lantern to be later. This object is made of composite materials. Just like in this module, we have to test out the variation of material to build our lantern..

Prototype for a Chaise Lounge 2008-2010, Acrylic Composites Museum of Science, Boston Photos: Objet and Yoram Reshef

The seemingly randomized pattern of the prototype surface resembles the pattern made by a group of bubbles on a surface constantly shaping to the most energy-efficient pattern.

Panelling Development 1

For my conceptual lantern, perforation is essential to portray the visualize some part of the bursting effect. It also plays a role in visualizing the constantly changing spectrum surface on an enclosed floating bubble.

2

Bubble

3

Burst

I think analysing the processes for each phase of a bubble would be a good systematic way to produce a rational outcome.

One method of analysing the lanternâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perforation/lighting effect as suggested by my tutor (Angela) was to look at it in terms of gradient.

I decided to use the gradient of air content in each phase of bubble.

Birth

As a bubble forms, it receives air and thus has an inclination in its volume. So the perforation should be increasing in size as it goes upwards As a bubble is enclosed, it forms a sphere which uses the least energy to form compared to other form (ie: cube, cone). Hence, as shown in graph, it can also represent maximum efficiency. The perforation should be at its maximum size in this region

When bubble pops due to external disturbance, daughter bubbles are generated. There is a drastic change in volume here. As shown in the graph, the perforation of panel in this region will be very small. Although, the tearing movement of a bursting bubble might require large holes.

A B C 1

Distance method=CurveAttractor, MinDistance=0.4, MaxDistance=0.7 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=CurveAttractor, MinDistance=0.4, MaxDistance=0.7 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=PointAttractor MinDistance=0.4, MaxDistance=0.7 AttractMethod=Towards

A B C 2

Distance method=Random, MinDistance=0.2, MaxDistance=0.8 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=CurveAttractor, MinDistance=0.2, MaxDistance=0.8 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=CurveAttractor, MinDistance=0.2, MaxDistance=0.8 AttractMethod=Towards

A B C 3

Distance method=Random, MinDistance=0.6, MaxDistance=1 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=Random, MinDistance=0.6, MaxDistance=0.8 AttractMethod=Towards

Distance method=Fixed, Distance=0.7

FINAL DESIGN

ORTHOGONAL PROJECTIONS

30.42 cm

SIDE ELEVATION

16.88 cm

FRONT ELEVATION

The final design is the combination of 1C, 2A and a new part 3 which I used fixed method with distance of 0.8. I think this final design suits my overall direction of the conceptual lantern design.

BACK ELEVATION

PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION

Figure 26a: ‘Burst’ part of the digital lantern model

Figure 26b: Unrolled faces of the ‘burst’ part

Figure 26c: Part of the unrolled faces with added tabs for light testing

To test out the lantern’s buildability, I unrolled the faces of one ‘burst’ form and exported the lines to Adobe Illustrator.

I printed out a much smaller scale version and tried to build it. It turned out fine for this rough testing.

I then, added tabs to test the lighting effect for some potential materials that could be used later.

The first paper (Figure 28a) is made of matte-like but transluscent material. The LED light appears to be diffused on the material, compared to the second paper (Figure 28b), which is a normal 80 gsm copy paper, which have a more directional projection of light (ring of light can be seen).

(Although I have to acknowledge that the dissimilar position of light direction could cause the difference in light projection) Figure 27 Buildability testing at smaller scale

Figure 28a Matte-like material light effect testing Figure 28b 80gsm copy paper light effect testing

As my lantern would be hanged, I figured that it is important do a form test. In Figure 29a, I did a very quick form testing to see the general outcome of the lantern.

And in Figure 29b, the fishing line used is able to steadily lift the rough lantern (made of 80gsm copy paper) form altogether. Although, this might not be the case if I were to use a heavier material.

Further development for its fabrication and mechanics of lifting it up have to be done in the next module.

Figure 29a General form testing

Figure 29b Lifting testing

REFLECTION & CRITICAL ANALYSIS

In this module, there were quite a number of obstacles that I have to tackle. The first was exploring Rhino software within the tutorial contents and beyond as well. In terms of design, there was countless possibilities of the outcome however I had always to keep in mind of the rationality and practicality in fabrication.

As mentioned in the reading by Scheuer & Stehling (2011), when designing, I cannot let the machine delegate and control the outcome. As the designer, it is important that I understand the digital and parametric relationship as part of the design and communication process. I too, have to always keep in mind when it comes to practicality and buildability of the lantern, I should create prototypes from various materials to understand the strength and weaknesses of each material that might enhance or deteriorate the design outcome.

As I go along with designing digitally, the intended design outcome might not be interpreted by audiences in parallel. In Week 5, Alex Selenitsch talked about the difference between art and design. From my understanding, as compared to art, design is the step-by-step process laid out by the designer which allow audiences to interpret accordingly, based on the instructions laid out; whereas art is visually feeding the audiences.

Another aspect that was challenging to me; the digital translation from physical model. It was challenging when upon translation, the intended concept might get lost.

When Scheuer & Stehling (2011) talked about ‘abstraction’ and ‘reduction’ in their article, I was at lost until I did the design hands-on. It was important to bear in mind the limit of abstraction so that nothing essential is lost when the superficial or astethic appearance is formed.

Again, to reiterate, this module taught me that the softwares are merely tools to help in designing; the designer still takes the whole responsibility of the process and the outcome.

REFERENCES

LMS Module Task http://app.lms.unimelb.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-3558612-dt-content-rid-10815508_2/courses/ ENVS10008_2012_SM2/Module%20Tasks/Mod2_tasks.pdf Neri Oxman http://web.media.mit.edu/~neri/site/projects/beast/beast.html Reuben Margolin http://www.ted.com/talks/reuben_margolin_sculpting_waves_in_wood_and_time.html Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 70-79