Block Party Prototyping Workshop Booklet

P R O T O TY P I N G W O R K S H O P NAHMAD BHOOSHAN STUDIO 17/19

BLOCK PARTY NAHMAD BHOOSHAN STUDIO 2017-19

Architectural Association School of Architecture Design Research Laboratory Tutored by Shajay Bhooshan, Alicia Nahmad Vazquez Submitted by Taeyoon Kim, Atahan Topรงu, Bhavatarini Kumaravel MArch Thesis Prototyping Workshop Report

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

6

01

COMPUTATIONAL RESEARCH

02

FABRICATION PROCESS

35

03

BRICK ASSEMBLY

47

04

GAME PROTOTYPE

73

05

BLOCK PROTOTYPE

93

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

PRECEDENT RESEARCH BRICK GEOMETRY EVOLUTION CORBELLING TECHNIQUES TENSION MEMBERS

2.1 MATERIAL RESEARCH 2.2 MOULD DESIGN 2.2 CASTING TECHNIQUES

3.1 ROBOTIC ASSEMBLY 3.2 MANUAL ASSEMBLY 3.3 DIGITAL ASSEMBLY

4.1 GAME INTERFACE 4.2 LEVERAGING AUGMENTED REALITY 4.3 GAME ITERATIONS

5.1 PRECEDENT STUDY 5.2 FRAMEWORK 5.3 PROTOTYPE

9

10 15 30 32

36 40 44

48 63 66

74 80 84

94 94 102

5

ABSTRACT Aim of the workshop is the application of the computational research for the materialisation of prototypes of different scales exploring the full capacities of the material and technological system in relation to the forecast architectural applications.

We explore how far we can extend the principles of corbelling and dry stacking masonry units, in respect to their materiality, geometry, spatial capacity, structural performance, assembly process, and parametric relationship between the units. Through multiple iterations, we achieved compression only networks which do not require a single screw, adhesive or mortar. Different topologies and interlocking methods were tested. Robotic assembly has been researched as part of the process, and was explored in detail at Autodesk BUILD Space located in Boston, United States. Since then, we focused on enabling an assembly process without formwork or frames, to enable effortless assembly by a small group of residents themselves - with or without the help of robotic arms.

Prototypes were made and broken to test the theoretical principles and computational design - from small scale 3D printed masonry units to 1:1 scale units. Scaling up the prototyping activities were meant to explore in detail the behaviour of the material system, the logistics and timing of the production, and the assembly phase.

Through Augmented Reality game interface, users negotiate and construct their social/physical network. This idea was put to the test using our game/model prototype, which was played out and then analysed with quantified data to compare the results of iterations. The success of each iteration is measured by the satisfaction of the residents, and the spatial organisation of the outcome.

After analysing Cerda’s L’eixample plan of Barcelona, we extracted a set of rules, which we simulated and tested as digital prototypes in the game. Theses blocks are then made as physical models to illustrate how these set of principles can be implemented in London.

Our prototypes are fundamentally a physical extension and a test of our conceptual framework of person-brick, family-house, and community-block.

6

7

01

COMPUTATIONAL RESEARCH 1.1 PRECEDENT RESEARCH

1.1.1 MASONRY CONSTRUCTION WITH DRONES 1.1.2 GRAMAZIO KOHLER RESEARCH, ETH 1.2 BRICK GEOMETRY EVOLUTION 1.3 CORBELLING TECHNIQUES 1.4 TENSION MEMBERS

10 10 12 13 30 32

9

1.1 PRECEDENT RESEARCH 1.1.1 MASONRY CONSTRUCTION WITH DRONES A research project from UCL in collaboration with MIT explored the potential of construction by drones. Masonry Construction with Drones, is a project where the researchers made an attempt to redefine the brick, the beam, columns and the whole construction process with drone assembly in mind. While the feasibility of drone construction is low at this point, due to their sensitivity to weather conditions and other environmental factors, their approach to modifying the brick geometry to better suit transportation by the drones inspired us to rethink what a brick is. We began by trying to improve what these bricks could to and tried to build structures which could actually function as load bearing parts of a house. Our version of these bricks were cast and tested in Boston, at Autodesk BUILD Space.

Custom built drone is manually controlled to stack customised bricks. The drone is equipped with suction device to grip onto the bricks.

Source : Latteur P., Goessens S., J.S. Breton, J. Leplat, Ma Z., Mueller C., Drone-based Additive Manufacturing of Architectural Structures. IASS Congress, Amsterdam, August 2015

FIGURE 1.1.1.1 (left)

The brick which was identified to be the most compatible with drones. Sturcture assembly and simulation of load bearing. Source : Latteur P., Goessens S., J.S. Breton, J. Leplat, Ma Z., Mueller C., Drone-based Additive Manufacturing of Architectural Structures. IASS Congress, Amsterdam, August 2015

FIGURE 1.1.1.2 (right, top)

Drone compatible brick design by Caitlin Meuller. This particular geometry, which is optimised for corbelling, inspired us to attempt various geometries which could be assembled in different ways to maximise structural strength.

Source : Latteur P., Goessens S., J.S. Breton, J. Leplat, Ma Z., Mueller C., Drone-based Additive Manufacturing of Architectural Structures. IASS Congress, Amsterdam, August 2015

FIGURE 1.1.1.3 (right, bottom) 10

11

1.1.2 GRAMAZIO KOHLER RESEARCH, ETH

This was a 1:1 scale prototypical building structure made out of Styrofoam blocks in a four day workshop. All of the bricks are uniquely shaped and hot wire cut. The constraints of hot wire cutting method, together with the flow of forces and stability issues were considered. While our goal is not to create each unit a unique piece in assembly, this project gives us an insight to how assembly can be pushed to the limit with the constraints of fabrication.

Combined with the research papers regarding flow of forces in polyhedra from the Block Research Group at ETH, we wish to achieve bricks which can function like the components of funicular shell structures.

Packaged in a compact, modified freight container, R-O-B takes advantage of prefabrication with on site construction, utilising short transport routes. It allows for flexibility of fabrication methods and material, making full use of the versatility of the robotic arm. Although this project is almost a decade old, it stays relevant and provides a perspective into the automated construction and prefabrication.

This project shows as a real-life example of how mobile fabrication units can be deployed to sites to construct structures using robotic arm assembly. Hadrian X can be seen as an extension of this idea, and our project shares this construction method.

Smart Geomery Workshop, Explicit bricks, Barcelona 2018. Here they construct a structure out of styrofoam blocks. Source : http://gramaziokohler. arch.ethz.ch/web

FIGURE 1.1.2.1 (left, top)

A mobile fabrication unit, which can be deployed to sites. R-O-B, 2007-2008.

Source : http://gramaziokohler.arch. ethz.ch/web

FIGURE 1.1.2.2 (right, top)

22 meter long public installation. Pike Loop, Manhattan, New York, 2009.

Source : http://gramaziokohler.arch. ethz.ch/web

FIGURE 1.1.2.3 (right, bottom) 12

13

BRICK

UNIT

SOCIAL CONDENSOR/ CIRCULATION

COMMUNITY

BLOCK

LONDON

The brick is the beginning point of our system. The bricks assemble to create units, which create the community spaces, and together with social condenser spaces and circulation volumes create blocks.

FIGURE 1.2.0.1 (right) 14

1.2 BRICK GEOMETRY EVOLUTION Having studied the Caitlin-Mueller bricks from the research project by UCL and MIT, we began to investigate how we can create a brick that can be stacked using a robotic arm or a drone. The error tolerance of both methods are more than 5mm, and so we had to introduce slopes into the geometry. This is so that even when the robotic arm places the brick slightly off the coordinate, it will slide into place and stack properly. The brick was also designed for corbelling, allowing more flexibility in assembly.

After the brick design was finished, we designed the mould. We CNC cut the mould out of hard wood using the DPL facilities at the DRL studio. We chose wood as the first material for the mould in the hope that moulds could be reused multiple times for casting.

After our first cast, we quickly found out that is not the case. Reusing moulds was a bigger challenge than we had thought.

The initial brick was designed in this process to enable diagonal corbelling and vertical stacking at the same time, while having tolerance for errors of the robotic arm

FIGURE 1.2.0.2 (right, top)

After designing the brick, we designed the first mould for the brick. We introduced notches and grooves to make it easier to take apart after casting, as well as securing that the mould pieces assemble with precision.

FIGURE 1.2.0.3 (left,bottom)

15

We took the wooden mould to Boston, where we assembled the pieces and cast our very first brick. The mixture contained EPS particles to lighten the weight, but it destroyed details, and the de-moulding process was more difficult than we had anticipated.

The mould took some damage in the process, and we quickly shifted to the idea of creating multiple moulds in a quick and easy manner. The mixture would also have to change a lot in order to bring out the details of the brick’s geometry, which was quite intricate.

After the brick design was finished, we designed the mould. We CNC cut the mould out of hard wood using the DPL facilities at the DRL studio. We chose wood as the first material for the mould in the hope that moulds could be reused multiple times for casting.

After our first cast, we quickly found out that is not the case. Reusing moulds was a bigger challenge than we had thought.

16

From 3D printing to Casting. The first mould was CNC cut out of wood in London, and then assembled in Boston.

We cast our first brick and learned many lessons from our failure.

FIGURE 1.2.0.4 (left, top)

First proposal was to build an arch using bricks that had variants in slope angle

FIGURE 1.2.0.5

17

Second proposal, which we executed in Boston, was to build a cubic volume using the brick geometry we cast. No mortar is used.

FIGURE 1.2.0.6 18

COATED WITH PLASTIC

PAPER BRICK

Third proposal was to use build a volume using bricks that could be attached or detached usiing heat. The plastic coating on the outside is used as adhesive.

FIGURE 1.2.0.7

19

Initial set of brick prototypes designed

FIGURE 1.2.0.8 20

21

The second version of the bricks that we have cast, here at DRL in London, came from the inspiration of the geometry of the mosque architecture in Turkey. While the corbelling mechanism is similar to the previous brick, it stacks in a hexagonal pattern which enables a better efficiency in forming a structure.

Second version of the brick casted and assembled in London

FIGURE 1.2.0.9 (right)

While studying further into vaults and compression-only structures, we are exploring the possibility of merging the capabilities of RhinoVAULT and Dieste’s double curvature masonry structure to produce mortar-free assemblies, which can be made with bricks that are repeated throughout the whole structure. To redefine the brick for the automated construction is our goal.

22

Initial study into creating compression-only structure using bricks with limited variation. The study continues with the help of RhinoVAULT, a plugin developed by the Block Research Group at ETH.

FIGURE 1.2.0.10 (left)

23

Column Type

FIGURE 1.2.0.11

Wall Type

FIGURE 1.2.0.12

Truss Type

FIGURE 1.2.0.13 24

Column + Corbelling

FIGURE 1.2.0.14

Vault type 1

FIGURE 1.2.0.15

Big Corbelling

FIGURE 1.2.0.16 25

Vault Type 2

FIGURE 1.2.0.17

Vault Type 3

FIGURE 1.2.0.18

Column + Corbelling Type

FIGURE 1.2.0.19 26

Floor - Stairs and Roof Type 1

FIGURE 1.2.0.20

Vault type 1 + Vault type 2

FIGURE 1.2.0.21

V Column + Corbelling

FIGURE 1.2.0.22

27

BRICK A 28

BRICK B

BRICK C

BRICK D

STACKED VERTICAL

CORBELLING 29

1.3 CORBELLING TECHNIQUES

The conventional principle / definition of corbelling is that each extrusion cannot exceed half of the unit and the whole extrusion cannot exceed the entire thickness of the wall. We put this concept to the test, and tried to see how far we could take it – without mortar or adhesive.

One aspect we looked into had to do had to do with how these units could be accumulated. Through trial and error, then analyzing the successful outcomes, we found out that the angle and distance between the units played a fundamental role in how they can be stacked.

30

The basic principle / definition of brick corbelling

FIGURE 1.3.0.1 (left, top)

Mathematical relationship between the two units from our first brick prototype(Boston).

FIGURE 1.3.0.2 (left, bottom)

This the mathematical relationship between the units for our Brick 0.0 units. The diagonal angle (between A and X in the diagram) measured at approximately 45 degrees. The planar angle (between the two Xs) measured at exactly 45 degrees. The height difference (Z) between the two units was 0.95 times the horizontal distance (X) between the two. Through trial and error, we found out that when we increase this diagonal angle to above 70 degrees so the height difference (Z) becomes more than three times the horizontal distance (X), stacking becomes more successful and stable, with the weight travel becoming more efficient through compression.

This is the mathematical relationship between the two units in our brick type 2.0 and 2.1, and also evident in 1.0 and 1.1. As mentioned, the vertical angle is increased to be above 70 degrees, and Z distance is exactly three times the Y distance.

Mathematical relationship between the two units of our brick 2.0(London).

FIGURE 1.3.0.3 (right, top)

Parametric algorithm which utilizes the principle learnt from previous prototypes. This algorithm helps generate different shape/size/height of dry-stacking bricks.

FIGURE 1.3.0.4 (right, bottom)

Based on this finding, we extracted the successful parameters behind dry-stacking units, and made it into an algorithm. This algorithm enables the user to adjust the given parameters (base geometry, distance X, distance Y, base angle, height Z, vertical angle between 70 to 90 degrees, and rotation angle between the units) to generate iterations of bricks that enable successful dry-stacking.

31

1.4 TENSION MEMBERS

The idea of utilizing tension cable during fabrication process was implemented. This idea was derived from the fabrication process often used by the late Dieste. He often used what he called pre-tension tendons, which would hold the shell structure together and apply tension before they could be finalized in form with concrete, mortar and outer layer of bricks.

By implementing this fabrication method, people can build structures without any formwork, with very little to no planning in advance. The tension cables would group together a set of masonry units at the bottom, which act as the anchor weight. Then another set of bricks piled on top of this would also be fastened with the tension cable, and so they can be held mid-air without formwork.

Once this process is repeated and the structure is finished, the overall structure is held together firmly by the tension cable running through the entire structure, increasing its structural performance and its resistance to seismic load.

32

Tension cable running through the structure to enable construction/assembly without formwork.

FIGURE 1.4.0.1 (left, top)

This model was inspired by Calatrava’s tension study model, and was used to understand and test how our structure could be assembled using tension cable.

FIGURE 1.4.0.2 (right)

33

02

FABRICATION PROCESS 2.1 2.2

2.3

MATERIAL RESEARCH MOULD DESIGN 2.2.1 CNC MILLED 2.2.2 PAPER MOULD 2.2.3 RUBBER MOULD CASTING TECHNIQUES

36 40 40 42 44 44

35

2.1 MATERIAL RESEARCH Due to the intricate geometry of brick, the mould is to be designed in a way that makes the demoulding process easy and repeatable.

Likewise, the material study also played a crucial role in achieving the desired geometry as designed digitally. Through iterations an optimal mixture was found. The mixture in the chart n the right was liquid enough to give the shape of brick geometry. 7 different mixtures were tested with different ratios of cement, sand, nylon fibre and water. It has been seen that all these mixtures have a direct impact on bricks strength, colour, texture and geometry. Likewise, evaluation criteria of the mixtures were based on the physical features on the resultant bricks. By including superplasticizers and nylon fibres as ingredients of the mixture, we avoided cracks being formed in the bricks during curing.

During the exploration of bricks that can be assembled by robots, another aim was to make bricks light enough for the robot to pick and place with ease. First iterations of casting bricks resulted in excessively heavy bricks that were hard to be picked up by the robot.

Therefore, lighter bricks in same shape and volume were sought in further iterations. In this regard, lightweight foam block material was added into the mould during casting process. This method resulted in an effective 20-30 percent decrease in the brick weight.

We tested some fabrication techniques to find out the optimum process of producing these components such as paper folded moulds, CNC milled moulds and rubber moulds. Currently, we found out that paper moulds are more efficient in terms of production rate, cost and enabling flexibility in brick geometries.

Material samples

FIGURE 2.1.0.1 (left) 36

Material mixture ratios and results

FIGURE 2.1.0.2 (right, bottom) 37

38

Bricks catalogue

FIGURE 2.1.0.3 39

2.2 MOULD DESIGN 2.2.1 CNC MILLED Foamboard was used to produce moulds as they were cost effective. Using a low cost material was crucial to the aspect of mass production of bricks. Also, it was important to choose a soft foamboard to make the demoulding process easy.

CREATING A TOOL PATH Autodesk Fusion 360 was used to the define most convenient tool path of CNC machine in terms of time efficiency and quality.

The tool path design has played an important role in defining sharp edges and complex geometry of brick. In this context, Fusion CAM proved most helpful due to its great extent of work flows and cleaning strategies for milling. Pocket Cleaning and Parallel Cleaning were two of these strategies that have been used intensely in the milling process.

POCKET CLEANING Pocket Cleaning was used as a conventional roughing strategy for clearing large quantities of material quickly and effectively. The stock is cleared layer by layer with smooth offset contours maintaining climb milling throughout the operation.

PARALLEL CLEANING Parallel Cleaning was used as a finishing strategy in which the passes are parallel in the XY plane and follow the surface in the Z-direction. We were able to control the angle and stepover in horizontal direction to give exact shape to our moulds.

CNC CUTTING The generated tool path was uploaded in the Shopbot milling machine and the milling process is initiated. Two types of tips were used for two different types of cleaning. Pocket cleaning uses a thicker tip and Parallel cleaning uses a thinner tip.

CNC moulds out of foam

FIGURE 2.2.1.1 (right, top) Shopbot at work

FIGURE 2.2.1.2 (right, bottom) 40

41

2.2.2 PAPER MOULD

Different types paper moulds were tested to reach reliability in brick geometries. At the end of multiple tests with different paper and sheet types, polypropylene sheet moulds covered with resin gave the most reliable results in relation to the shape of the created bricks. Also, these moulds can be reused. That brought the cost of production almost long the same level as london stock bricks in the market.

CARDBOARD PAPER

SOLID WHITE PAPER

Unfolded paper mould

FIGURE 2.2.2.1 (left, top) Mould and de-moulding

POLYPROPYLENE PAPER 42

FIGURE 2.2.2.2 (left, bottom)

Cost calculation

FIGURE 2.2.2.3 (right) 43

2.2.3 RUBBER MOULD

Rubber mould was an another test we performed to produce bricks. Despite high costs of the silicon rubber material, the mould offered re-usability and easy labor in casting and demoulding. On the other hand this production technique was not seemigly convenient enough when compared to the paper mould technique due to its high cost of production.

2.3 CASTING TECHNIQUES The mould is composed of two pieces - a top and a bottom part.

Therefore, casting ought to be done from where there is a flat surface n the brick. In the initial iterations of casting brick type 0.0, concrete was casted from four holes on the top part of mould. For the mould of brick type 2.0, the same technique of pouring concrete from three holes on the top part of mould was employed. Moreover, after discovery of the paper mould, the casting technique was improved by opening a bigger hole on one of a flat surfaces. Therefore, the casting process became more time efficient and less laborious.

Rubber mould

FIGURE 2.2.3.1 (left, top) Casting techniques

FIGURE 2.3.0.1 (right) 44

BRICK TYPE 0.0

BRICK TYPE 2.0 MOULD TYPE 1

BRICK TYPE 2.0 MOULD TYPE 2 45

03

BRICK ASSEMBLY 3.1

3.2 3.3

ROBOTIC ASSEMBLY 3.1.1 GRIPPER DESIGN 3.1.2 ROBOTIC ARM SETUP 3.1.3 SOFTWARE FRAMEWORK 3.1.4 ASSEMBLY PROCESS MANUAL ASSEMBLY DIGITAL ASSEMBLY

48 48 50 56 60 63 66

47

3.1 ROBOTIC ASSEMBLY We attempted to leverage the potential of industrial robotic arms to assemble our brick system. Hence our brick design and gripper studies were focussed on facilitiating easier robotic pick and place.

3.1.1 GRIPPER DESIGN We started with simple grips coupled with bricks that have grooves for the gripper. We made a simple gripper using a linear actuator or a servo motor controlled by Arduino board. At this phase, we explored gripper design and brick geometry in conjunction.

Initial gripper studies and bricks in association

FIGURE 3.1.1.1 (left) 48

Robotic assembly speculation

FIGURE 3.1.0.1

49

3.1.2 ROBOTIC SETUP At the Autodesk BUILD Space, Boston, we used the ABB IRB 4600 and at the AA Digital Prototyping Lab, we use the KUKA KR30. We use pneumatic grippers to lift the bricks.

KUKA KR30 With a payload of 30kg, and reach of up to 3,102 millimeters and flexible mounting position (floor, ceiling, wall or inclined position), the six-axis robot is a true automation professional.1 Available as a pair in the Digital Prototyping Laboratory of the AA School of Architecture, KUKA KR30 provides the main experimentation tool for us to test the limits and constraints of brick assembly using robotic arms. The G-codes for assembly are generated using Grasshopper add-on Robots, which is a open-source software developed by UCL. Schools including the AA and ETH are utilising this add-on, adding to the robot arm library of the program.

1 KUKA company website - https:// www.kuka.com/en-gb/products/robotics-systems/industrial-robots/kr-30# Dimensions and reach of KUKA KR30, Source: www.kuka.com

FIGURE 3.1.2.1 (left, top)

Robot Cell at AA School of Architecture Digital Prototyping Lab, Source: www. aaschool.ac.uk

FIGURE 3.1.2.2 (left, bottom) 50

MHL2-20D GRIPPER At DPL, in combination with the KUKA KR30 robotic arm, we are using MHL2-20D pneumatic gripper, manufactured by SMC pneumatics. MHL air grippers are designed for applications that require a wide travel range of gripper fingers. The MHL is ideal for gripping many different sized parts. Finger motion is synchronized by a rackand-pinion mechanism. The double piston construction creates a compact gripper with large holding force.2

2 ‘SMC Pneumatics‘ www.smcpneumatics.com Picture and Drawing of SMC MHL2-20D gripper, Source : https://www.smcpneumatics.com/MHL2-20D-Y7PSAPC.html

FIGURE 3.1.2.3 (right)

51

ABB IRB 4600 The ABB IRB 4600 has Semi-shelf capability. It can reach up to 1.73 m vertically. It has flexible mounting possibilities, and can be mounted in various ways, on the floor, semi-shelf, tilted or even hanging. Payload of 60kg. The ABB IRB4600 was our initial starting point at Autodesk Boston BUILD Space, where we tested different brick assemblies and simple brick feed mechanisms for the robot.

The pneumatic gripper was provided from the Autodesk, and we had an opportunity to develop our first set of grippers which could grip and hold onto our initial prototype bricks, which were quite heavy – 5kg to 7kg.

ABB IRB 4600 reach diagram

FIGURE 3.1.2.4 (left, top) ABB IRB 4600 specifications from the ABB website - https://new.abb.com/ products/robotics/industrial-robots/ irb-4600

FIGURE 3.1.2.5 (left, bottom) 52

PZN-PLUS 160-1 GRIPPER At Autodesk BUILD Space, we had used pneumatic gripper PZNplus 160-1, manufactured by Schunk. This gripper is an universal 3-Finger Centric Gripper with high gripping force and maximum moments due to multi-tooth guidance.

The gripper drawings and specifications Source: https://schunk.com/us_en/gripping-systems/product/2076-0303314pzn-plus-160-1/

FIGURE 3.1.2.6 (right)

53

The pictures of the gripper Source: https://schunk.com/us_en/gripping-systems/product/2076-0303314pzn-plus-160-1/

FIGURE 3.1.2.7 (left, top)

Photograph of the gripper being attached to the Robotic Arm by Autodesk Staff.

FIGURE 3.1.2.8 (left, bottom)

The first set of gripper fingers designed.

They perfprmed well with the 3D printed plastic bricks, but weren’t strong enough to pick up the bricks casted out of concrete.

FIGURE 3.1.2.9 (right, first)

The gripper fingers were edesigned to grab and lift concrete bricks. The centric gripper was used like a parallel gripper by designing two of the fingers such that they come close together and grab one end of the brick, while the other finger grabs another. It was successful in lifting the bricks, however, the margin for error was quite limited.

FIGURE 3.1.2.10 (right, second) 54

GRIPPER 1

GRIPPER 2

55

3.1.3 SOFTWARE FRAMEWORK At Autodesk BUILD Space, we used a grasshopper algorithm version of Ex-machina, a plugin developed by the resident researcher Jose Luis GarcĂ­a del Castillo. Ex-machina acts as a bridge between the rhino platform and the RobotStudio software, translating the travel path into appropriate data input according to the model of the robotic arm. It also enables a feedback loop from the RobotStudio software, so that travel path can be adjusted accordingly. Here, we prepare an algorithm in Grasshopper to pick-up the brick from the brick-feed shelf and place it at a designated coordinate. Then we feed the prepared data through Ex-machina to RobotStudio, where we simulate the whole routine and check for errors. Once the travel path is confirmed, we transfer the data to the computation component of the ABB IRB4600, and execute it in real-life.

The grasshopper sketch to convert the brick pick and drop locations to the machine actions and the RAPID code using Ex-Machina for grasshopper.

FIGURE 3.1.3.1 (right)

The robot actions derived out of the Ex-Machina grashopper plugin which will get converted to the RAPID code to be processed by the robot.

FIGURE 3.1.3.2 (left)

Ex-Machina plugin for grasshopper is used to specify the various actions and generate the RAPID Code.

FIGURE 3.1.3.3 (pg 58, top)

The Machina Bridge App links the RAPID code from the Grasshopper interface to the Controller in ABB RobotStudio software.

FIGURE 3.1.3.4 (pg 58, middle)

When the connection between grasshopper and RobotStudio is established, the actions can be sent to RobotStudio to initiate a simulation. It helps to identify errors in the code before executing the code in the actual robot.

FIGURE 3.1.3.5 (pg 58, bottom)

Once the code is checked to be error free, the code is sent to the FlexPendant of the robot through a LAN connection and it is executed.

FIGURE 3.1.3.6 (pg 59) 56

57

58

59

3.1.4 ASSEMBLY PROCESS The Assembly process mainly consists of the robot picking up bricks and assembling them in place. To make sure the brick assembly is stable after each turn of pick and place, the order of assembly is crucial. Hence, the brick place locations are sequenced in this order and fed into the grasshopper logic.

The order of stacking comes down to the idea of corbelling. Two bricks in the lower level, placed adjacent to one another can hold a third brick stacked diagonally on top of them. We tested out these corbelling conditions by manually stacking the bricks, then testing out with the robot in jog mode and then embedded the order in the grasshopper logic. At every iteration, the logic was first tested virtually with a RobotStudio simulation for errors, before implementeing them in reality.

Gripper version 1 engaged and picking up the 3D printed brick.

FIGURE 3.1.4.1 (left, middle)

Gripper version 2 engaged and picking up the cast concrete brick.

FIGURE 3.1.4.2 (left, bottom)

Brick corbelling tested with three 3D printed bricks.

FIGURE 3.1.4.3 (right, top)

Vertical brick stacking tested with three 3D printed bricks.

FIGURE 3.1.4.4 (right, middle)

Brick corbelling tested with five cast concrete bricks.

FIGURE 3.1.4.5 (right, bottom) 60

61

BRICK CONVEYOR Initially, the assembly experiments consisted on unique pick-up locations for each brick. This works well in brick assemblies with a few bricks, but to scale up this process to larger assemblies, the pick-up location needs to be the same for all the bricks. To facilitate this, we designed a conveyor system. It is a ramp sloped at an angle of 24 degrees. Additional bricks can be loaded from the top end and they slide into position to the front end as the bricks in front get picked by the robot.

As a prototype, we made a small conveyor of length 703 millimeters, that can hold a maximum of four bricks. The grasshopper script was adjusted to have a singular pick up location, from the the front end of the conveyor ramp.

Conveyor ramp tested digitally.

FIGURE 3.1.4.6 (left) 62

3.2 MANUAL ASSEMBLY

Conveyor ramp feeder logic embeddd in the RAPID code and tested with the robot.

FIGURE 3.1.4.7 (top)

Brick 2.0 corbelling pattern.

FIGURE 3.2.0.1 (bottom)

The brick 2.0 was designed to be assembled quickly and manually. Due to its straightforward way of assembling, a stacking strategy with minimum use of blueprints or drawings is evolved. This also brings affordability in design in terms of time and low labor cost.

Images below demonstrates the process of manual assembly of bricks to create a hexagonal slab with the corbelling technique as in the image. Likewise, the second series of image shows the manual assembly process of hexagonal enclosure without using any scaffolding.

63

Physically testing corbelling behaviour in cast bricks.

FIGURE 3.2.0.2 (left)

Physically testing corbelling behaviour in cast bricks.

FIGURE 3.2.0.3 (right) 64

65

3.3 DIGITAL ASSEMBLY First series of iteration stacking was made in Rhino digital software. The digital assembly process of brick is sequenced as “design of brick”, “testing of digital stacking” and correspondingly “exploring various geometries”. This feedback loop is obtained from digital assembly process contributes geometric capability of our dry stacking bricks. Images below demonstrates some different digital assembly strategies that results with various structures such as columns, slabs, cantilevers.. etc. In the first example, hexagonal brick 2.0 are evenly distributed on top of bricks below them to create hexagonal slab to carry upper floors. Likewise, same strategy is used in laying of hexagonal brick 2.1 with a result of triangular slab as in the second example. Moreover, the third image is an example of how brick 2.0 can be layered as building cantilevers. In the example five, it is shown that if brick 2.0 is laid as rotating 60 degree in each layer, bricks naturally creates a spiral which becomes a part of curvy wall.

EXAMPLE 1

EXAMPLE 2 Digital assembly examples.

FIGURE 3.3.0.1 66

EXAMPLE 3

EXAMPLE 4

67

68

69

70

71

04

72

GAME PROTOTYPE 4.1 GAME INTERFACE

4.1.1 SNS CONNECTION

4.1.2 CREATING THE HOUSEHOLD

4.1.3 FINDING USER INTERESTS

4.1.4 LOCATING SITES

4.1.5 GAME GRID

4.1.6 SPATIAL CATALOGUE

4.1.7 SEQUENCE OF GAMEPLAY

4.1.8 COST CALCULATION

4.1.9 SATISFACTION SCORES 4.2 LEVERAGING AUGMENTED REALITY

4.2.1 CITY SCALE

4.2.2 BLOCK SCALE 4.3 GAME ITERATIONS

4.3.1 HOUSEHOLD TYPES

4.3.2 ITERATION 1

4.3.4 ITERATION 2

4.3.5 BLOCK LAYOUTS

4.3.6 ITERATION 3

74 74 75 75 76 77 78 78 79 80 80 80 80 84 84 85 86 88 89

73

4.1 GAME INTERFACE

The game interface facilitates users to log in to the game, enter their details, connect with other players and build their homes and communities. The initial sections of the game gather information about the household, and later the home building begins.

4.1.1 SNS CONNECTION The goal of the game being building houses along with building the community, it is important to take into account the interrelationships existing among people. Rather than explicitly collecting them, it is easier to set up a Social Network login for the game. We chose Facebook because, it is the most famous social network at the moment, and it has facilities to access the user’s connections.

The app requesting access to ‘facebook. com’ for the Sign-in

FIGURE 4.1.1.1 (left, middle)

The screen to create and enter the household member details.

FIGURE 4.1.1.2 (left, bottom) 74

4.1.2 CREATING THE HOUSEHOLD From the Facebook profile, the user’s name, date of birth, gender and friends’ list are collected. The first section following the login collects the household details of the user. The primary member would be the user who logged in and he/she is allowed to add more members. Occupation of the users are loosely classified into three categories - Employed, Student and Stay at Home. Users are given avatars to associate themselves with and they change with their age group and gender.

4.1.3 FINDING USER INTERESTS Since the game dwells on the creation of shared spaces between inhabitants, by means of matching interests, we have framed the interface to ask of the users’ interests right after they finalize their household setup. However, the interests that we inquire about cannot be arbitrary, and need to have spatial implications. Referring the book ‘Living Closer’ by Studio Weave, we came across several case studies of co-housing setups in the UK and the various shared social spaces they offered. We analysed the personal interests that lead upto the development and functioning of those social spaces.

Rather than explicitly offering these social spaces, by a top-down planning, it is better if they are created by the users themselves by mutual sharing. For that to happen, it is important that users with similar interests get together. More than just grouping them with their already existing friends and acquaintances, the game needs to have the sufficient intelligence to suggest users with the same interests and sharing preferences. Hence, we plan on deploying machine learning algorithms, to compute and locate users with similar interests. Since, this would involve trying to group users with similar interests, we use clustering algorithms like Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and t-distributed Stochastic Neighbour Embedding (t-SNE) clustering.

The screen letting the users to connect their respective avatars to the interest bubbles

FIGURE 4.1.3.1 (right)

75

Each social space is condensed to its basic need or interest backing which is then linked to its interest category. Spaces that are an outcome of utility such as Laundry spaces are left out since they do not invoke any personal interest of their own. The interests are grouped under five categories of Work, FItness n’ play, Garden, Entertainment and Food. The values of these interest categories are what will be used to compute the clusters in the machine learning framework. The game interface allows the user to connect all avatars to his/her personal interest bubbles.

4.1.4 CHOOSING SITES After collecting the details, the game interface proceeds to locate the household in the locality of their choice. By using the open source WRLD plugin for Unity3D, we could bring in the entire city of London in the game in 3D. Users could navigate through the city and choose the block they'd prefer to build their house in.

The app screen where the user gets to choose the block of choice.

FIGURE 4.1.4.1 (left) 76

4.1.5 GAME GRID After choosing the block, the actual game begins. The block displays the available grids in which houses can be built. As a preset, the ground floor features triangular grids and the upper floors consist of hexagonal grids. This is an outcome of the structural geometry.

Triangular Grid in Level 0

FIGURE 4.1.5.1 (left, first from top) Hexagonal Grid in Level 1

FIGURE 4.1.5.2 (left, second from top) Hexagonal Grid in Level 2

FIGURE 4.1.5.3 (left, third from top) Hexagonal Grid in Level 3

FIGURE 4.1.5.4 (left, fourth from top) 77

4.1.6 SPATIAL CATALOGUE Since the game has two grids - triangle and hexagons, the game has two sets of spatial catalogues - one to suit the triangular grid and one to suit the hexagonal grid. The triangular spatial catalogue has three kinds of spaces that occupying one-third, two-third and the whole grid respectively. Similarly, the hexagon spatial catalogue has two kinds of spaces that occupy one-third and a whole grid respectively. The spatial catalogue features a single bedroom, a double bedroom, a restroom, kitchen, corridors, communal spaces and gardens.

4.1.7 SEQUENCE OF GAMEPLAY The gameplay proceeds in four steps. First, a suitable grid needs to be located in the block. Next, a cell needs to be built on it. The player who builds this cell is assigned to be the owner of this cell.

Many players can collectively build and own cells too. After building the cell, a space can be created in it. Spaces can be chosen from the appropriate spatial catalogue. Finally, the human avatars of the current player are connected to the spaces created.

Sequence of gameplay with costs

FIGURE 4.1.7.1 (left, middle) Satisfaction calculation

FIGURE 4.1.9.1 (left, bottom) 78

4.1.8 COST CALCULATION The last three steps of the gameplay incurs costs. First, when building a cell, a small portion of the cost goes towards purchasing the grid from its owner, and the larger goes towards its construction. A grid is owned by the household directly beneath it. This is due to the fact that the cell structure of the lower floors enables the grid to be available on the upper floor. The grids in the ground floor belong to the entire community of house owners in the block. The second step where the space is screated involves the cost of the space. FInally the last step where the occupant is connected to the space, a monthly rent is incurred if the occupant doesn't own the space and shares it with someone else. Otherwise, if the occupant is the owner, no rent is incurred.

4.1.9 SATISFACTION SCORES The whole objective of the game is to keep the inhabitants satisfied. This is measured with the satisfaction score. When a human gets connected to a space his satisfaction score gets updated. We have classified spaces into two categories based on their need in a residential setup - primary and secondary. Primary spaces include bedroom, restroom and kitchen spaces. Each of these spaces contribute 20% each to the satisfaction score and these needs must be satisfied for each member of the household. Hence each member needs to have a minimum satisfaction score of 20%. Every space other than these are secondary and they contribute 10% each to the satisfaction score if the primary needs are satusfied. The average of the members' satisfaction scores leads to the household's satisfaction score and the average of satisfaction scores of all households leads to the block satisfaction score.

Satisfaction scores of the two spatial categories.

FIGURE 4.1.9.2 (right, bottom)

79

4.2 LEVERAGING AUGMENTED REALITY

Augmented reality is a simulated environment that overlays Computer Generated Imagery onto the Real world footage, through a compatible device’s camera. The advantage of AR over other forms of Artificial reality applications is that, it blends more into the real world. We have used the ARKIT plugin released by Apple for iPad and iPhone devices. Unity Engine also offers support through their Shared Spheres framework, where one of the users hosts the AR environment and others join it. This is particularly useful when many users want to co-build their houses.

4.2.1 CITY SCALE The WRLD plugin that was used to bring London into the app to choose the block, also supports ARKIT. Hence in AR compatible devices, the city can be overlayed on a table-top, panned, zoomed and blocks chosen from.

4.2.2 BLOCK SCALE The block is the scale in which the game is played. The grid is available on the block scale and the units are created on them. We tried to bring the block scale into AR as well. To relate it more to the physical world, we built a physical model of the site located at Jeffrey street, Camden, at 1:750 scale and super imposed the AR game onto it. To position the AR game grid in relation to the physical model, we have to anchor the grid to the physical object. Here we first used the feature of Image Anchor available in ARKIT version 1.5.

This detects a preset image from the camera imagery and achors the virtual game grid onto it. The image anchor we used was the Team logo we had on the bottom rght corner of the physical model.

Using the ARKIT in iPhone 6S to detect a plan and overlay the map of London on it.

FIGURE 4.2.0.1 (right, up)

The Shared Spheres framework, that lets users connect into a shared AR environment. Here, the green spheres are by User 1 and the blue spheres are by User 2, in the same shared environment.

FIGURE 4.2.0.2 (right, middle)

A screenshot showing the WRLD map built for iPad and displayed using Augmented reality

FIGURE 4.2.1.1 (right, bottom)

A photograph showing the AR environment where the map of London lies against the real world environment

FIGURE 4.2.1.2 (left, bottom) Block level gameplay in AR

FIGURE 4.2.2.0 (pg 80-81) 80

81

82

83

4.3 GAME ITERATIONS

Block level iterations are conducted on the site at Jeffrey Street, Camden. At every iteration we assume an initial set of rules, frame a set of households and play the game out. We then analyse the outcomes and fine tune the rules that we used to make the iteration.

This is how we find the right balance of the top-down rule system and bottom-up community building in the game space.

4.3.1 HOUSEHOLD TYPES To carry out the iterations ten different household types were frames under three main categories based on their sizes. These were derived from the Household statistics published by the Office for National Statistics, UK.

The types of household using in the iterations.

Information Source: ONS, UK.

FIGURE 4.3.1.1 (left) 84

4.3.2 ITERATION 1 The first iteration was carried out with 25 household and 61 members. It had no top-down frameworks. The rules of the game were purely cost based and satisfaction driven. All players were free to build in whatever grid they chose. The objective that every player achieves a minimum average satisfaction score of 60% was maintained. At the end of the gameplay, the major observations were that the circulation spaces were not continuous. Especially, the private units tend to block out the public circulation spaces. Also, the module health values, that depict the every cell's access to natural light and ventilation was low. Specialized communal spaces like gyms and work areas weren't formed.

Illustration of the Iteration 1 outcome.

Green represents the open garden spaces, brown, the circulation spaces, white living spaces and grey, the private units with no public circulation corridors.

FIGURE 4.3.2.1 (right, middle) Final stage of Iteration 1

FIGURE 4.3.2.2 (right, top) 85

4.3.3 ITERATION 2 To improve the module health and to ensure that all cells receive natural light and ventilation, we devised the garden rule. By means of this, every cell, when surrounded on two sides by built spaces, gets a garden on its third side. A garden cannot be converted into a built unit. Similarly, when a garden gets surrounded on two sides by built units grows into the third side. This way the gardens grow too. This iteration was carried out with the same set of 25 households from the first iteration. The outcome however demonstrated scattered living units that needed to be circulated through gardens.

Also, the density and built volume in the block was very low. Hence, the rule was discarded.

Garden rule.

FIGURE 4.3.3.1 (left) Final stage of Iteration 2

FIGURE 4.3.3.2 (right, top)

GARDEN CREATED 86

GARDEN GROWS

Illustration of the Iteration 2 outcome.

Green represents the open garden spaces, brown, the circulation spaces, white living spaces and grey, the private units with no public circulation corridors.

FIGURE 4.3.3.3 (right, bottom)

87

4.3.4 BLOCK LAYOUTS The previous iterations never demonstrated a communal area getting formed. So we tried frame a block layout that would have grids dediicated form communal areas. These grids will not be allowed to be converted into living spaces. We have made two gameplays with two different block layout. The first is a courtyard block, with corners dedicated to communal and circulation spaces. The second layout is derived from the block framework that will be discussed in the next chaper of this report. It is a row housing block with a communal garden in the centre and corners dedicated to communal and staircase areas.

Courtyard block layout.

FIGURE 4.3.4.1 (left, top) Row house block layout derived from the block rule.

FIGURE 4.3.4.1 (left, bottom) 88

4.3.5 ITERATION 3 The gameplay was made with 41 familes with a total of 109 members. Costs were calculated at every step. This iteration has a timescale of 2 years. By the end of 2 years we were able to achieve two storeys. We identified different clustering patterns varying with the household types. Also, we generated a chord diagram to visualize the cost transactions between the families at every month.

We observed that as the households share and interact more with each other, the ratio of the communal investment/cost reduces and more profit is returned to each household.

Stages of Iteration 3 - Layout 1

FIGURE 4.3.5.1 (right)

89

Illustration of the Iteration 3 - Layout 1 - ground floor outcome. Green represents the open garden spaces, brown, the circulation spaces, white living spaces and violet, communal areas.

FIGURE 4.3.5.2 90

The chord diagram representing the transactions between the families. It includes all cell building, space creating and monthly rents over the 2 year period. The black colour represents the investment of the residents as a community, while other colours represent each household.

FIGURE 4.3.5.3

91

05

BLOCK PROTOTYPE 5.1 PRECEDENT STUDY 5.2 FRAMEWORK 5.3 PROTOTYPE

94 94 102

93

5.1 PRECEDENT STUDY

We have looked at Cerda’s L’eixample extensively to analyse what makes this urban fabric flexible and so successful. By extracting a simple set of rules, we translate the process of creating these block presets into a parametric process.

Existing regulations and conditions in London’s urban planning, such as the 13 vistas of Central London, have been researched and implemented in the process.

5.2 FRAMEWORK

After analysing Barcelona and London, a set of simple rules were extracted. The pseudocode diagram is a summary of the process that each block is processed through.

First, each block’s corners are reserved for communal space, including commercial activity. The revenue generated from the rent of the commercial spaces are then returned to the residents as services or monetary reward. Possible programs of the blocks include; Community Gym, Café, We-work (shared rental office), Meet-up hosting places, Pub, Playground for children, Games hub ( Arcade / board games... etc.), Conference space, Garage-like workshop space for start-up companies and freelance artists/designers to prototype, Dance-halls, Indoor Boulder climbing, Childcare centre, Petcare centre / Pet-owners' café, Mall / Supermarket, Photographers’ studio space or black room, Architects / Architecture students’ workshop space much like Digital Prototyping Lab at the AA School of Architecture, Recording studios for musicians, Studio / Exhibition space for artists, Boxing / Kickboxing Gym, Pool/Darts/Ping-pong & Bar space for recreation, Study rooms, Tea room, Storage, Theatre, Cinema, Shared kitchen (cooking classes or utilized by residents), Restaurant, Community barbeque and gathering space, Community urban farming, Community garden, Reconfigurable-large-volume spaces that can be rented out for whatever occasion/purpose, Community's Instagram exhibition gallery, A space for hosting local market, Internet cafes, VR/AR rooms and more To guide and ease the residents through this process, t-SNE data analysis is used to collect data from the residents and visualise what programs the communal areas should house. Hence the program of these communal areas are parametric, and the residents are the flexible parameters that shift the outcome. This framework enables the communal areas to stay relevant to the group of residents that will benefit from these communal spaces.

The Barcelona model.

Source: http://projectivecities.aaschool. ac.uk/portfolio/yuwei-wang-barcelona-block-city/

FIGURE 5.1.0.1 (left)

The pseudocode for the Block Framework

FIGURE 5.2.0.1 (right) 94

Corners of the block are Social Condensers

Any adjacent block open? ( Plaza / Park ... etc. )

Yes

Open towards that block

No

Is the block in the way of London's vista?

Yes

Cut open and clear the way for the vista

No

Is the block central? ( < Zone 1 )

Yes

High-rise & high density block

No

Are the surrounding blocks all closed off? ( 1 mile radius )

Yes

Turn into public space

No

Centre courtyard block

95

t-SNE cluster of 10,000 data points with 5 interest variables.

FIGURE 5.2.0.1 96

97

Next steps include the block’s neighbour conditions. If the block is next to a public space block (parks, plazas etc.), then the block building mass has to open up towards that block(illustrated in the pseudocode diagram). Then it is checked if the block is in the way of London’s 13 vistas in the city. If it is, then the block preset volume has to be cut to make way for the vista. Then it is checked to see whether it is within zone 1 of London or not. If it is, then it becomes an extreme density, high-rise block. Outside Central London, each block is checked to see if all of the surrounding blocks are closed off (disconnected courtyard type) blocks in 1 mile radius. If they are, then the block turns into a public space, which will trigger adjacent neighbouring blocks to open up to it, and give the neighbourhood a public space. If other blocks already satisfy these conditions, then the block becomes a courtyard block typology. After applying all of these rules, the block is then assessed in inter-connectivity among its neighbours. Each block must be connected with inter-ways to at least one neighbour. If it isn’t then inter-way with the width of at least eight meters is established. When applying these set of rules to the Camden town neighbourhood as illustrated in the renders, the blocks’ original openings, connectivity, and their environmental factors (canals, railways and such) are considered and reflected. The public buildings which will be untouched (church, schools, train stations, tube stations, community centres and such) are taken into consideration. The height of the maximum building volumes will be lowered to match the elevation of the public buildings, so that public buildings are not surrounded by giant building masses that block the view. Finally, a 45 degree sunlight rule is applied, so that if any portion of the building volume is in the way of another volume’s sunlight trajectory, it is subtracted. The results are as depicted in figures 5.2.0.2 to 5.2.0.6.

98

Original layout of neighbourhood around 4-5 Jeffreys street (Zone 2). Blue buildings represent public buildings which will remain untouched.

FIGURE 5.2.0.2 (right, top)

Beginning with the courtyard blocks, each extruded height reflects adjacency to a public space block (parks, plazas etc.). The further away the block is from a park, the lower the building masses become. The corners are chamfered to allow social activity to take place amongst blocks. Certain groups of blocks can be designated as superblocks like Barcelona, to enable these corners to be utilised further for social activities among blocks.

FIGURE 5.2.0.3 (right, bottom) The blocks open up to the parks.

FIGURE 5.2.0.4 (pg 100, top) Then inter-connectivity with the neighbour blocks are checked.

FIGURE 5.2.0.5 (pg 100, bottom)

This is the final outcome after applying the set of rules. Note that height of the volume masses have been adjusted according to its conditions.

FIGURE 5.2.0.6 (pg 101, up)

99

100

101

5.3 PROTOTYPE

This is a model to illustrate the application of the set of rules in the Camden town neighbourhood, as mentioned previously. The acrylic layers above show the original planning layout of the existing conditions, and the 1 mile radius from the parks.

FIGURE 5.3.0.1 102

103

Aim of the workshop is the application of the computational research for the materialisation of prototypes of different scales exploring the full capacities of the material and technological system in relation to the forecast architectural applications.

We explore how far we can extend the principles of corbelling and dry stacking masonry units, in respect to their materiality, geometry, spatial capacity, structural performance, assembly process, and parametric relationship between the units. Through multiple iterations, we achieved compression only networks which do not require a single screw, adhesive or mortar. Different topologies and interlocking methods were tested. Robotic assembly has been researched as part of the process, and was explored in detail at Autodesk BUILD Space located in Boston, United States. Since then, we focused on enabling an assembly process without formwork or frames, to enable effortless assembly by a small group of residents themselves - with or without the help of robotic arms.

Prototypes were made and broken to test the theoretical principles and computational design from small scale 3D printed masonry units to 1:1 scale units. Scaling up the prototyping activities were meant to explore in detail the behaviour of the material system, the logistics and timing of the production, and the assembly phase.

Through Augmented Reality game interface, users negotiate and construct their social/physical network. This idea was put to the test using our game/model prototype, which was played out and then analysed with quantified data to compare the results of iterations. The success of each iteration is measured by the satisfaction of the residents, and the spatial organisation of the outcome.

After analysing Cerdaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;eixample plan of Barcelona, we extracted a set of rules, which we simulated and tested as digital prototypes in the game. Theses blocks are then made as physical models to illustrate how these set of principles can be implemented in London.

Our prototypes are fundamentally a physical extension and a test of our conceptual framework of person-brick, family-house, and community-block.

TAEYOON KIM BHAVATARINI KUMARAVEL ATAHAN TOPCU