Brad Elsbury Sabine Vecvagare Robotic Bending

This booklet includes ITECH 2016 / 2017 Computational Design and Digital Fabrication semester projects.

Starting from basic tasks such as long-exposure light sculptures, tests with Arduino, and building up to KUKA end effector design. The main project theme is robotic bending of metal sheets. Several iterations of possible designs are proposed, mainly using electromagnets and separate brake piece to achieve the bending.

WINTER / 2016 - 17 / 49781 / CDDF

Abstract

Robotic Bending

CDDF 2017 Semester Report

Design Research - Computational Design and Digital Fabrication Module Number: 311230500 Term/Year: Winter 2016/2017 Examination Number: 49781 Examiner: Prof. Achim Menges Tutors: Oliver David Krieg, Marshall Prado, Tobias Schwin, Maria Yablovina, Oliver Bucklin Institute: Institute for Computational Design and Construction (ICD)

Brad Elsbury Sabīne Vecvagare UniversitätStuttgart Stuttgart Universität

Institutefor forComputational ComputationalDesign Design Institute Institutfür fürComputerbasiertes ComputerbasiertesEntwerfen Entwerfen Institut

1

CDDF 2017

Semester Report Design Research - Computational Design and Digital Fabrication Module Number: 311230500 Term/Year: Winter 2016/2017 Examination Number: 49781 Examiner: Prof. Achim Menges Tutors: Oliver David Krieg, Marshall Prado, Tobias Schwin, Maria Yablovina, Oliver Bucklin Institute: Institute for Computational Design and Construction (ICD) Brad Elsbury Sabine Vecvagare

2

3

Contents Chapter 01: Previous Projects_____Page 05 Chapter 02: Midterm and Final Projects_____Page 23

4

5

Chapter 01

6

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Fig. 3

Pt1

Pt5

Pt4

Fig. 4

Pt2

Pt3

Pt6

Fig. 5

FIGURE 1, 2, 3: Task Realization Process (Source: S. Vecvagare, M. Rieger, M. Razzhivina).

FIGURE 4: Arrangement of Points for Light Geometry (Source: S. Vecvagare, M. Rieger, M. Razzhivina).

FIGURE 5: Finished Light Sculpture (Source: S. Vecvagare, M. Rieger, M. Razzhivina).

CHAPTER 01

7

FIGURE 6: Finished Light Sculpture (Source: S. Vecvagare, M. Rieger, M. Razzhivina).

LONG EXPOSURE LIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY WITH KUKA / SABINE For this assignment we explored the long exposure possibilities for making light sculptures / geometries.

We were particularly interested in using some of the KUKA programmable features, such as adding points and modifying the approximation settings for point to point movement.

Our general idea was to define certain amount of points for the initial drawing, and then repeat the motion buy with modified approximation. Also by increasing acceleration and velocity we wanted to achieve differed strength of light in certain parts.

We programmed a point to point movement, using a geometry obtained from the Elytra pavilion done by ICD in V&A museum. The shape would have six edge

points of a hexagon (Fig. 4) and we would move the light source (a simple flashlight for end effector) in a certain order through these points. We traced the points on the ground and then modified the base plane of movement to be vertical and turned to the camera.

Using these six points and moving through them (in order: p1, p2, p3, p1, p4, p5, p6, p3, p4, p6, p2, p5) in the same order for multiple iterations we then added an increase in acceleration and velocity, and the approximation radius of the movement between points, to achieve a geometry with a gradient of differed radia (the script on the next page). The result was brighter than expected, however the settings could be modified in further explorations of the project.

8

CHAPTER 01

KRL CODE ;ENDFOLD (USER EXT) ;ENDFOLD (EXTERNAL DECLARATIONS) DECL BASIS_SUGG_T LAST_BASIS={POINT1[] “P1 “,POINT2[] “P1 “,CP_PARAMS[] “CPDAT40 “,PTP_ PARAMS[] “PDAT4 “,CONT[] “C_DIS “,CP_VEL[] “2 “,PTP_VEL[] “100 “,SYNC_PARAMS[] “SYNCDAT “,SPL_NAME[] “S0 “} DECL E6POS XP1={X -7.11265421,Y -364.566895,Z -0.143058598,A 0.516165376,B 0.964779317,C -1.18030298,S 22,T 50,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT FP1={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL PDAT PPDAT1={VEL 100.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_MODE #CPTP} DECL E6POS XP2={X -292.07489,Y 154.025894,Z -0.125434607,A 0.513319016,B 0.93131268,C -1.17073095,S 22,T 51,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT FP2={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL PDAT PPDAT2={VEL 100.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_MODE #CPTP} DECL E6POS XP3={X 305.95401,Y 153.9431,Z -0.166587204,A 0.513356209,B 0.97438848,C -1.181692,S 22,T 51,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT FP3={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL PDAT PPDAT3={VEL 100.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_MODE #CPTP} DECL LDAT LCPDAT1={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT2={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT3={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT4={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL E6POS XP4={X 305.905212,Y -180.546402,Z -0.195874199,A 0.518370628,B 0.981741011,C -1.18208599,S 22,T 50,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT Fp4={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL PDAT PPDAT4={VEL 100.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_MODE #CPTP} DECL LDAT LCPDAT5={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL E6POS XP5={X -292.920288,Y -180.695297,Z -0.237080693,A 0.51175952,B 0.949972808,C -1.18424106,S 22,T 50,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT Fp5={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL LDAT LCPDAT6={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL E6POS XP6={X 6.34223986,Y 334.967987,Z -0.1643181,A 0.509069085,B 0.956583083,C -1.17075598,S 22,T 51,E1 0.000556269777,E2 0.0,E3 0.0,E4 0.0,E5 0.0,E6 0.0} DECL FDAT Fp6={TOOL_NO 1,BASE_NO 4,IPO_FRAME #BASE,POINT2[] “ “,TQ_STATE FALSE} DECL LDAT LCPDAT7={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT8={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT9={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 40.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT10={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 40.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT11={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT12={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT13={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT14={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT15={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 70.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT16={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT17={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT18={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT19={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT20={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT21={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT22={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT23={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT24={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT25={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT26={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT27={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 150.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT28={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT29={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT30={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT31={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT32={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT33={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT34={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT35={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT36={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT37={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT38={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT39={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL LDAT LCPDAT40={VEL 2.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 220.0,APO_FAC 50.0,ORI_TYP #VAR,CIRC_TYP #BASE,JERK_FAC 50.0} DECL PDAT PPDAT5={VEL 100.0,ACC 100.0,APO_DIST 100.0,APO_MODE #CPTP} ENDDAT

CHAPTER 01

9

FIGURE 7: Tests With Long Exposure Light Sculptures (Source: B. Elsbury, R. Weber).

LONG EXPOSURE LIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY WITH KUKA / BRAD As an introduction to handling robotic workflows and to create a better understanding of 6-axis robots, the first assignment was to create a light sculpture using a KUKA KR 125 Robot with a custom endeffector. The used light source for this assignment was a vertical acrylic rod with flashlight attached to its end (1 meter long in total).

The first tests were done with hand movements and CANON camera to see the movement of the light rod by movement of its base (Fig. 8 - 13). These observations were promising in the fact that small movements led to interesting long exposure results. Later the actual KUKA was used.

By jogging and programming certain points and point

to point moves, we used the KUKA to observe the light movement, as shown in Fig. 14 - 20. Minimal moves by the robot resulted in larger movement from the light rod, as it was secured only in one point to the robot.

Therefore the resulting long exposure images produced a dramatic effect.

The KUKA robot was programmed to move along a circular path. Three points were taught to the robot manually, and the movement was done by moving along the circular curve. The KRL code is shown in the next page. Further experimentation was done with manual jogging of the robot to create a wiggling motion.

10

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 11

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

FIGURE 8 - 13: Tests with acrylic rod and flashlight (Source: B. Elsbury, R. Weber).

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 14

Fig. 15

Fig. 16

Fig. 17

Fig. 18

Fig. 19

Fig. 20 FIGURE 14 - 20: Finished Light Sculpture Experiments with KUKA (Source: B. Elsbury, R. Weber).

11

12

CHAPTER 01

KRL CODE 1 &ACCESS RVP 2 &REL 11 3 &PARAM TEMPLATE = C:\KRC\Roboter\Template\vorgabe 4 &PARAM EDITMASK = * 5 DEF lightsculpture( ) 6 ;FOLD INI 7 ;FOLD BASISTECH INI 8 GLOBAL INTERRUPT DECL 3 WHEN $STOPMESS==TRUE DO IR_STOPM ( ) 9 INTERRUPT ON 3 10 BAS (#INITMOV,0 ) 11 ;ENDFOLD (BASISTECH INI) 12 ;FOLD SPOTTECH INI 13 USERSPOT(#INIT) 14 ;ENDFOLD (SPOTTECH INI) 15 ;FOLD GRIPPERTECH INI 16 USER_GRP(0,DUMMY,DUMMY,GDEFAULT) 17 ;ENDFOLD (GRIPPERTECH INI) 18 ;FOLD USER INI 19 ;Make your modifications here 20 21 ;ENDFOLD (USER INI) 22 ;ENDFOLD (INI) 23 24 ;FOLD PTP HOME Vel= 100 % DEFAULT;%{PE}%MKUKATPBASIS,%CMOVE,%VPTP,%P 1:PTP, 2:HOME, 3:, 5:100, 7:DEFAULT 25 $BWDSTART = FALSE 26 PDAT_ACT=PDEFAULT 27 FDAT_ACT=FHOME 28 BAS (#PTP_PARAMS,100 ) 29 $H_POS=XHOME 30 PTP XHOME 31 ;ENDFOLD 32 33 ;FOLD PTP P1 CONT Vel=100 % PDAT1 Tool[2]:torch1 Base[10]:torch play;%{PE}%R 5.5.31,%MKUKATPBASIS,%CMOVE,%VPTP,%P 1:PTP, 2:P1, 3:C_PTP, 5:100, 7:PDAT1 34 $BWDSTART=FALSE 35 PDAT_ACT=PPDAT1 36 FDAT_ACT=FP1 37 BAS(#PTP_PARAMS,100) 38 PTP XP1 C_PTP 39 ;ENDFOLD 40 ;FOLD CIRC p2 p3 CONT Vel=2 m/s CPDAT6 Tool[2]:torch1 Base[10]:torch play;%{PE}%R 5.5.31,%MKUKATPBASIS,%CMOVE,%VCIRC ,%P 1:CIRC, 2:p2, 3:p3, 4:C_DIS, 6:2, 8:CPDAT6 41 $BWDSTART=FALSE 42 LDAT_ACT=LCPDAT6 43 FDAT_ACT=Fp3 44 BAS(#CP_PARAMS,2) 45 CIRC Xp2, Xp3 C_DIS 46 ;ENDFOLD 47 ;FOLD PTP HOME Vel= 100 % DEFAULT;%{PE}%MKUKATPBASIS,%CMOVE,%VPTP,%P 1:PTP, 2:HOME, 3:, 5:100, 7:DEFAULT 48 $BWDSTART = FALSE 49 PDAT_ACT=PDEFAULT 50 FDAT_ACT=FHOME 51 BAS (#PTP_PARAMS,100 ) 52 $H_POS=XHOME 53 PTP XHOME 54 ;ENDFOLD 55 56 END ENDDAT

CHAPTER 01

13

FIGURE 21: Wooden Joint Making Process (Source: S. Vecvagare, S. Leder, I. Jimenez).

WOODEN JOINT

/

SABINE

For the KUKA and spindle assignment the group of Sam, Sabine and Ivan started with a research about possible joints that could be interesting to fabricate.

This led to the idea of four way joint, as it is more challenging and could result in more advanced project.

Fig. 22 - 25 show some of interesting existing four way joinery methods. We were particularly interested in Japanese joinery, which includes sliding and locking into place for each element of the joint.

Choosing the desired outcome of the joint we modelled it and proposed it as parametric joint (Fig. 27, 28) with section 100 x 100 x 100 mm. By parametricizing some of the aspects of the sliding and locking four way joints, we created it in grasshopper. The design process took some time, as we wanted to try various joint designs

and conclude which could work the most efficiently. The toolpath for the spindle was a bit harder to generate, however the task was done by dividing each member of the four way joint to be produced by each member of this group.

Digitally the toolpath was working perfectly, however there were some issues when generating the code for KUKA, which later we found out was a problem with ground plane definition.

Overall the assignment was very productive, and it would have been beneficial to actually fabricate these wooden joints in real life.

14

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 22

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 25

FIGURE 22 - 25: Various Wooden Joint Designs (Source: Fig. 22: [1], Fig. 23: [2], Fig. 24: [3], Fig. 25: [4]).

CHAPTER 01

FIGURE 26: Wooden Joint Making Process (Source: S. Vecvagare, S. Leder, I. Jimenez).

FIGURE 27: Wooden Joint Assembling Concept (Source: S. Vecvagare, S. Leder, I. Jimenez).

15

16

CHAPTER 01

FIGURE 28: Parametric Joint Concept (Source: S. Vecvagare, S. Leder, I. Jimenez).

CHAPTER 01

17

FIGURE 29: Wooden Joint Toolpath in Grasshopper (Source: B. Elsbury, J. Zindroski, R. Weber).

WOODEN JOINT

/

BRAD

Deepening our understanding on robotic workflows we developed a joint to be milled in wood by the 6-axis KUKA KR 125 robot. With the axis freedom of a robot, compared to a regular 3 and 4 axis milling machine it was possible to increase the geometrical complexity of the joint. Using the constraints of a 10 x 10 x 100 centimeter piece of wood we designed a ball joint, depicted in figure 01. The bottom piece (grey) has a simple circular hole inside that can also be created using a standard drill bit in a manual drilling process. Acting as a base for the joint the milled middle piece (green) with the spherical head (or the thrid piece) can slot in to it. The third piece (blue)is built from two mirrored pieces that encapsulate the middle piece and that could be fixed together by

sliding into a second bottom piece (grey) or circular hole. The 3d model of the joint created in Rhino was processed with custom Grasshopper components to create the tool paths for the Robot.

Parametric control of the definition allowed for variant drill bit sizes, spacing of the toolpath and speed of the robotic movement. The milling process was optimized to allow as little material waste as possible. A virtual safety plane was introduced to differentiate the speed of the robot inside and outside of the wood material.

A first rough cut was used to cut away most of the wood. In a second step the surface would then be smoothened with a second pass with a finer drillbit and tighter spacing of the toolpath.

18

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 31

Fig. 32

Fig. 33

Fig. 34 FIGURE 31, 32, 33: Wooden Joint Making Process (Source: B. Elsbury, J. Zindroski, R. Weber).

FIGURE 34: Grasshopper Workflow (Source: B. Elsbury, J. Zindroski, R. Weber).

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 35

Fig. 36

FIGURE 35, 36: Wooden Joint Fabrication Process (Source: B. Elsbury, J. Zindroski, R. Weber).

19

20

Fig. 37

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 38

Fig. 39

Fig. 40

Fig. 41

Fig. 42 FIGURE 37, 38, 41: Ultrasonic Sensor Ardiuno Project and Sketch Script (Source: S. Vecvagare, I. Luna Miño, B. Elsbury).

FIGURE 39, 40, 42: Ultrasonic Sensor [5], Servo Motor [5] and Diagram of Complete Setup [6].

CHAPTER 01

Fig. 43

21

Fig. 44

ARDUINO PROJECTS

During the start of electronics part of the seminar, we were asked to produce various iterations with Arduino tests. In these two pages are displayed only two of multiple projects created, as they are more relevant to further applications. First is a test of ultrasonic sensor, which then reacts by turning on Servo motor. This we found could be later beneficial for robotic movement, when something has to be picked or touched.

The second project is using a Flex sensor, since we found it relevant to our studio topic of bending active tensile hybrid system. We wanted to explore whether

it could be possible to sense the bending, as in for our pavilion could happen in rods. The tests worked fine, however the Flex sensor was a very rough measurement device, as it only reacted to extreme bending and did not detect smaller increments of bending. If in later projects a Flex sensor would be used, then it should be improved, and most likely not be a commercial one.

This part of the seminar was very useful for developing further projects and eventually moving on to the end effector design proposal.

Fig. 45

Fig. 46

Fig. 48

Fig. 47

FIGURE 43, 44, 48: Flex Sensor Arduino Tests, Arduino Sketch (Source: S. Vecvagare, I. Luna MiĂąo, B. Elsbury).

FIGURE 45, 46, 47: Servo Motor [5], Flex Sensor [7], Arduino Setup for Flex Sensor [8].

22

23

Chapter 02

24

CHAPTER 02

FIGURE 49: Grasshopper Setup for Programmable Formwork (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 50: Iterations of Programmable Formwork (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

25

FIGURE 51: Iterations of Possible Formwork for Fabrication (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

REPROGRAMMABLE FORMWORK

Part of the assignment was to create this project out of paper. Our desired method of fabrication was origami, however the whole geometry could not be reduced to a single sheet of paper. Breaking up the overall object and having pieces that only needed to be folded in one of two direction.

We generated the folding patterns needed to realize the object from paper. Using a 0.4mm museum board that was laser cut from the patterns, we built a paper model of the design iteration you see below (Fig. 12). Some of the issues we encountered was the complexity of the shapes. The process of creating this model took more time than anticipated. A solution was too divided the three dimensional model into quarters. From that point we were able to create the origami pieces in modular parts that were then glued together.

For us having to create the model out of paper had been a greater learning experience. Especially with computational modeling were the simplest solution to typically produce those models is by 3D printing. It was an alternative method of considering the fabrication process by being constrained to a material type.

26

Fig. 52

Fig. 54

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 53

Fig. 55

FIGURE 52: Fabrication Process (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 53: Parts of the Working Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 54, 55: Electromagnet of 5kg Force [9] and 8 Relay Board [10].

CHAPTER 02

27

FIGURE 56: Bent Metal Sheet (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

END EFFECTOR

Part of the assignment was to create this project out of paper. Our desired method of fabrication was origami, however the whole geometry could not be reduced to a single sheet of paper. Breaking up the overall object and having pieces that only needed to be folded in one of two direction.

We generated the folding patterns needed to realize the object from paper. Using a 0.4mm museum board that was laser cut from the patterns, we built a paper model of the design iteration you see below (Fig. 12). Some of the issues we encountered was the complexity of the shapes. The process of creating this model took more time than anticipated. A solution was too divided the three dimensional model into quarters. From that point we were able to create the origami pieces in modular parts that were then glued together.

For us having to create the model out of paper had been a greater learning experience. Especially with computational modeling were the simplest solution to typically produce those models is by 3D printing. It was an alternative method of considering the fabrication process by being constrained to a material type.

28

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 57

Fig. 59

Fig. 58

FIGURE 57: Origami Steel Chair by Brian O’Neill [11].

FIGURE 58: Vertex Chair by Karim Rashid [12].

FIGURE 59: ORI Stool by Jakub Piotr Kalinowski [13].

CHAPTER 02

29

FIGURE 60: End Effector and Brake Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

AIM AND PROCESS

Part of the assignment was to create this project out of paper. Our desired method of fabrication was origami, however the whole geometry could not be reduced to a single sheet of paper. Breaking up the overall object and having pieces that only needed to be folded in one of two direction.

We generated the folding patterns needed to realize the object from paper. Using a 0.4mm museum board that was laser cut from the patterns, we built a paper model of the design iteration you see below (Fig. 12). Some of the issues we encountered was the complexity of the shapes. The process of creating this model took more time than anticipated. A solution was too divided the three dimensional model into quarters. From that point we were able to create the origami pieces in modular parts that were then glued together.

For us having to create the model out of paper had been a greater learning experience. Especially with computational modeling were the simplest solution to typically produce those models is by 3D printing. It was an alternative method of considering the fabrication process by being constrained to a material type.

30

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 61

Fig. 62

Fig. 63

Fig. 65

Fig. 64

FIGURE 61 - 65: First prototype for Effector Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

magnet to pick up and manipulate metal sheets

base for wider range of movement while bending

connection to KUKA

base for wider range of movement while bending

magnet to pick up and manipulate metal sheets

connection to KUKA

Fig. 66 FIGURE 66: End Effector Iterations (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 67: 60kg Door Electromagnet Lock Used in Final Prototype [14].

Fig. 67

31

32

CHAPTER 02

FIGURE 68: Wooden Brake Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

rotated bending as end effector

plates for support for bending

slot to instert the plates for bending

supporting structure for increased stability

integrated magnets to hold the sheets in place while bending

slot to instert the plates for bending

attachement to base with support

FIGURE 69: Iterations of Brake Designs (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

33

34

CHAPTER 02

FIGURE 70: Wooden Brake Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 71

Fig. 72

Fig. 73

Fig. 74

Fig. 75

Fig. 76

FIGURE 71, 72, 73: Test Bending Metal with Magnet (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 74, 75, 76: Test Bending Metal with First End Effector Prototype (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

35

36

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 77

Fig. 78

Fig. 79

Fig. 80

Fig. 82

Fig. 81

Fig. 83

FIGURE 77- 83: Metal Brake Prototype Fabrication Process (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

FIGURE 84: Metal Brake Components for Fabrication (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

37

38

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 85

Fig. 86

Fig. 87

Fig. 88

FIGURE 85, 86, 88: End Effector Fabrication Process (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

FIGURE 87: Arduino Setup with 8 Relay Board [15].

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 89

Fig. 90

Fig. 91

Fig. 92

FIGURE 89 - 92: Fabrication Process (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

39

40

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 93

Fig. 94

Fig. 95

Fig. 96

Fig. 97

Fig. 98

FIGURE 93 - 98: End Effector Picking up a Metal Sheet (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 99

Fig. 100

Fig. 101

Fig. 102

Fig. 103

Fig. 104

FIGURE 99 - 104: End Effector Picking up a Metal Sheet (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

41

42

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 105

Fig. 106

Fig. 107

Fig. 108

Fig. 109

Fig. 110

FIGURE 105 - 110: End Effector Securing the Metal Sheet with Additional Plate (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 111

43

Fig. 112

Fig. 113

Fig. 114

Fig. 115

Fig. 116

Fig. 117

Fig. 118

FIGURE 111 - 118: Sliding the Plate in the Brake and Bending (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

TESTS AND RESULTS

Part of the assignment was to create this project out of paper. Our desired method of fabrication was origami, however the whole geometry could not be reduced to a single sheet of paper. Breaking up the overall object and having pieces that only needed to be folded in one of two direction.

We generated the folding patterns needed to realize the object from paper. Using a 0.4mm museum board that was laser cut from the patterns, we built a paper model of the design iteration you see below (Fig. 12). Some of the issues we encountered was the complexity of the

shapes. The process of creating this model took more time than anticipated. A solution was too divided the three dimensional model into quarters. From that point we were able to create the origami pieces in modular parts that were then glued together.

For us having to create the model out of paper had been a greater learning experience. Especially with computational modeling were the simplest solution to typically produce those models is by 3D printing. It was an alternative method of considering the fabrication process by being constrained to a material type.

44

CHAPTER 02

FIGURE 119: Grasshopper Script for Bending, Geometries and KUKA (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 120

Fig. 121

Fig. 122

Fig. 123

Fig. 124

Fig. 125

Fig. 126

Fig. 127

FIGURE 120 - 127: Workflow Process - Bending of Metal Sheet (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

45

46

CHAPTER 02

Fig. 129

Fig. 128

Fig. 130

Fig. 131

Fig. 132

Fig. 133

FIGURE 128 - 133: New Ideas for Robotic Bending and Brake Function (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CHAPTER 02

47

FIGURE 134: New Ideas for Robotic Bending and Brake Function (Source: B. Elsbury, S. Vecvagare).

CONCLUSION / FURTHER IDEAS

Part of the assignment was to create this project out of paper. Our desired method of fabrication was origami, however the whole geometry could not be reduced to a single sheet of paper. Breaking up the overall object and having pieces that only needed to be folded in one of two direction.

We generated the folding patterns needed to realize the object from paper. Using a 0.4mm museum board that was laser cut from the patterns, we built a paper model of the design iteration you see below (Fig. 12). Some of the issues we encountered was the complexity of the shapes. The process of creating this model took more time than anticipated. A solution was too divided the three dimensional model into quarters. From that point we were able to create the origami pieces in modular parts that were then glued together.

For us having to create the model out of paper had been a greater learning experience. Especially with computational modeling were the simplest solution to typically produce those models is by 3D printing. It was an alternative method of considering the fabrication process by being constrained to a material type.

48

CHAPTER 02

CHAPTER 02

49

References [1] Wooden Joint: http://woodworking.stackexchange.com/questions/2144/joining-corners-in-a-loft-bed [Date accessed March 2017] [2] Wooden Joint: http://www.vormen.be/en [Date accessed March 2017] [3] Wooden Joint: http://makezine.com/blog/2012/03/11/make-flickr-pool-weekly-roundup-98/ [Date accessed March 2017] [4] Wooden Joint: http://leibal.stfi.re/furniture/nw2/?sf=vwrkkpl#aa [Date accessed March 2017] [5] Ultrasonic Sensor and Servo Motor: http://www.instructables.com/id/Arduino-servo-control-using-Ultrasonicsensor/ [Date accessed March 2017] [6] Diagram of Ultrasonic Sensor and Arduino: http://www.toptechboy.com/arduino/lesson-18-distance-meterusing-ultrasonic-sensor-and-arduino/ [Date accessed March 2017] [7] Flex Sensor: https://cdn-shop.adafruit.com/1200x900/182-00.jpg [Date accessed March 2017] [8] Arduino Setup with Flex Sensor: http://cmuems.com/2013/b/sensors/ [Date accessed March 2017] [9] Electromagnet with 5kg Force: http://www.first4magnets.com/magnet-materials-standard-assembliesc150/20mm-dia-x-15mm-thick-electromagnet-with-m3-mounting-hole-2-5kg-pull-3w-0-13a-p9714#ps_1-9981 [Date accessed March 2017] [10] 8 Relay Board: https://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?topic=431646.0 [Date accessed March 2017] [11] Origami Steel Chair by Brian O’Neill: https://www.1stdibs.com/furniture/seating/lounge-chairs/origami-steelchair-brian-oneill/id-f_3779822/ [Date accessed March 2017] [12] Vertex Chair by Karim Rashid: https://www.architonic.com/de/product/vondom-vertex-stool/1255242 [Date accessed March 2017] [13] ORI Stool by Jakub Piotr Kalinowski: http://weburbanist.com/2011/02/04/unfolding-interior-design-origamiinspired-furniture/ [Date accessed March 2017] [14] 60kg Door Electromagnet Lock Used in Final Prototype: http://www.electro-tech-online.com/threads/ electromagnet-door-lock.123197/ [Date accessed March 2017] [15] Arduino Setup with 8 Relay Board : https://forum.arduino.cc/index.php?topic=379303.0 [Date accessed March 2017]