Final journal Catherine Demetriou

REFLECTION CATHERINE DEMETRIOU

STUDENT NUMBER: 641497 TUTORIAL GROUP: 8

IDEATION MODULE 1

ANALYTICAL DRAWINGS -IDEATION-

BALANCE 1. Pick angle 2. Plot one point at d degrees (d=137.5) from the origin 3. Plot another point at d degrees from the last point on a concentric circle that is slightly bigger than the circle before it

MOVEMENT 1. Base element 2. Move and rotate base element 3. Reduce scale

The first stage of my analytical drawing identified with stage 1 of Kandisky’s teaching of Analytical Drawings. Having begun with a shell that consisted of a complex structure and pattern I, with the help of the Aranda/Lasch reading, created a simple and succinct drawing of the structure of my shell. The outcome of my first drawing was exemplifying and emphasizing the shape of the object by creating a focal point and dividing it into 5 sections that followed route of the spiral.

This stage was mainly based upon the notion of balance.

The second stage, however, varied in that I aimed to show the movement of the shell through encapsulating not only the shape of the object but also its pattern and the way in which in moved. This stage of my analytical drawing would most definitely apply to the third stage of Kandisky’s teaching where by there would be “a variety of structural possibilities” (Poling, Clark 1987) shown through the ammonite’s abstract and rotating pattern.

Finally, the third stage of my analytical drawing was based upon the concept of symmetry whereby, after magnifying the picture, I was able to identify the symmetrical pattern that was hidden inside the spiral of the shell. This, I believe enabled me to recognize the importance of characterizing “individual parts of the still life both in isolation and in relation to other parts” as quotes in the Poling, Clark reading (Poling, Clark 1987).

SYMMETRY I saw obvious symmetry in the way in which the abstract pattern repeated itself within the spiral yet gradually increase in size with the opening of the wall chambers

In attempt to emphasize the ongoing spiral of the shell, I cut a strip of paper that had a gradual increase in width from one side to another. To extrude the piece, I cut a spiral into the paper using my scalpel knife, frayed the end of the strip and stuck the frayed edges into the cut paper. I then wanted to identify the hidden pattern that was within the spiral through creating an oval shape piece of paper and gluing it to the walls of the spiral.

I began this model by choosing a focal point (the exact center of the spiral). I then cut 5 strips of paper, each slightly longer and thicker than the other, glued them together to create a circular objects and pinched the ends, making 5 leaf-like structures. Finally, using the focal point, I placed each piece (from smallest to largest) at d degrees and glued the walls of each strip together to create a spiral effect. The areas in which the ovals extrude are made to represent the increasing wall chambers of the shell.

The models presented in the photos below demonstrate the begining of my design process.

Within each design I aimed to focus on both the first and third stages of my analyticle drawings, otherwise known as “balance” and “symmetry”.

I primarily did this in each design by chosing a focal point on the page and then creating a spiral like figure to encapsulate the repeated pattern that gradually increased in size as the wall chambers of the shell extruded. In doing this, I attempted to give emphasis on the ongoing spiral figure of the shell.

After the lecture in week 3, I decided to experminet with the concept of layering. I was inspired by Olafur Eliasson’s “Invented Berlin Sphere” 2005, due to the simple but striking geometric shapes that bounce of the wall.

The layered skin of the light liberates the triangular shapes from the two dimensional world, giving this once very ordinary room vibrancy, warmth and originality. It was this effect that I wanted to project within my final project.

Below: Experminetal Lighting Sketches

The only obstace in which I faced when using Eliasson’s lamp as inspiration was that it carried very little relation to my three analyticle drawings and this was ultimately effecting the way in which I designed my model. Keeping this layering concept in mind, I decided that I needed to focus more on the three staged that I created earlier.

DESIGN MODULE 2

PROCESS OF MODELING -DESIGN-

As stated in Module 1, my fascination with my natural pattern was the ongoing and never-ending effect that the shell gave in the center of its structure and this was something I wanted to emphasise in the making of my lamp.

To do this I focused on the wall chambers on the shell where I noticed its curved wall gradually decresed in size from the edges to the center to create a somwhat cone-like figure. This concept was greatly correlated with my second analyticle drawing “movement� and it was this that prompted me to begin the actual design of my model using a cone shape.

While still maintaining the cone-like structure in the center of the design, I curved its edges to enable a more organic structure.

I began the creation of my base model using using a series of circles layered an equal distance ontop of one another. I thought this would be the easiest way to form the skeleton of my model as it took a somewhat spherical shape.

After doing this, I simply used the “loft” command in order to make the once skeletal figure, whole.

After lofting the surface, I was taught how to use the command “cage edit” whereby I was able to modify my polysurface by lengthening surfaces and making them take the organic figure that my clay model undertook.

Finally, it was important that I was able to incorporate the cone strucure in the center of my model. I did this by virtually creating a cone and using the “boolean”

command .

Above are 3D pannels whereby I merely expermented different shapes to view what sort of panneling suited my model. I found the first three models (from left to right) had the least relation to that of my natural patterns and analyticle drawings and although I found them very amiable, they had no use in contributing to the creation my model.

Nevertheless, they did aid me in concluding that, in order to get the lighting effect that I wanted, my panel could not be a solid object. The last model presented on this page, I found, had the most relation to both my natural pattern and to the second stage of my analyticle drawing “movement”. Like in the creation of my model, I wanted to represent the wall chambers of my natural object by being able to show that gradual decrease in scale as the shell reaches the center point.

Like in the creation of my model, I wanted to represent the wall chambers of my natural object by being able to show that gradual decrease in scale as the shell reaches the center point.

Yet I did not want to do this by creating a circualr cone-like figure as I had done in the creation of m model. I wanted to present in a more abstract manner by using a somehwat cubic manner.

I thought that this process greatly related to the concept of “abstraction” in the reading Lost in Parameter Space by which the author touched on idea of “parametic modeling”. This idols the notion of untangling “interdependencies created by different requirements” and “finding a set of rules that is simple as possible” (Scheurer F, Stehling H 2011). In essence, this is what I had done in creating my panel.

Close up of panel

After having created the pannel in which I found most amiable, I found that it was very similar to that of Le Corbusier’s “Notre Damne du Haut” in Paul’s lecture.

Like my natural pattern, the extruded squares not only take on an ongoing and constant illusion but they also complied with my second analyticle drawing “movement”.

What I found most effective, however, was the lighting effect that such simplistic figures could produce. The bright lights contrasting against the dark walls produce a somewhat heavinly effect, the shining streams of light producing an ambiance of hope.

It was this effect that I wanted my own lamp to have in its final product.

After unfolding and putting together the four panels from mo model, I began testing lighting effects.

I began by layering two of the same four pannels together, however, I found that having the second layer blocked the light effect that I desired.

Taking off the second layer, I then inverted the panel in order to test varying lighting effects. I found that this enabled a more focued outline of the panel itself, showing botht the outlined and inner square structure.

FABRICATION MODULE 3

Problems Faced with Module Two Design After attempting to modify the panels of my model, I came across numerous issues as the surfaces on the panels were not in fact joining. This was primarily due to the way in which I had made my base polysruface and although it unrolled perfectly in the virtual world, it would be physically impossible to make in the real world.

During the alteration of my model, I further examined Le Courbusier’s Notre Damne and began to take notice of the different scales he used in creating the windows of the building and the way in which this created varying lighting effects. This effect was what I wanted to incorporate this into the making of my model.

BEFORE This was my base polysurface before having been re-made. It was believed that its sharp surfaces on the bottom and in the cone-like figure was making it difficult for the pannels to join both neatly and succintly.

AFTER After using the “trace” and “revolve commands” I was able to create another version of my polysurface. The edges of this re-created surface are far more rounded in comparison to the previous base surface. Despite these curved edges it still maintains a strong relationship with that of my second analytical drawing “movement” where by the scale of the shell walls create a cone-like figure.

Above are figures showing two pannelised polysurfaces, one being from the older base surface (left) and the other being the newer base surfae (right). Using both the 3D mesh command and pt Triangular surfaces, the second figure was far more successful in terms of creating pannels that joined rather than being misplaced.

Furthermore, the new model enabled me to experiment with the scale of the squares as they followed down the curve as shown in Le Corbusier’s Notre Damne du Haut.

I found that this tranformation of my model complied greatly with the reading “Digital Fabrications: architectural and material techniques” by Lisa Iwamoto where she claims that working digitially “enables movement from one representation format to another”(Iwamoto, Lisa 2009).

Before unrolling my final model, I labelled each section so the position of each section was clear nesting.

This was done by creating 20 layers each that has its own colour. Instead of doing these layers in a horizontal manner, they were separated vertically as I thought this would be physically easier in the making of my model.

Above is an exploded version of my model that demonstrates how I separated my model in order to unroll.

PROBLEM 1

When preparing my model for the card cutter, the lines connecting the tabs were put as cut lines instead of score lines. This inevitably meant that, when printed, the tabs were not attached to the pannels and made it very difficult to stick together. Before returning to Rhino, I overcame this problem by merely attaching clear tape at the back of each panel to secure the tabs.

Having used a water based glue such as PVA was the most crucial mistake in creating my first protoype.

Not only did the PVA take a long time to dry but it also weakened the thickness of the carboard, making it very easy to tear and simply fall apart.

Furthermore, it also distracted from the round curvy shape that I desired my lantern to have.

PROBLEM 2

PROBLEM 3

In assinging the cut and score lines to the parts of my unfolded model, I did not realise that numerous of the score lines would need to be dash lines due to the inverted mannerisms of my model.

As a consequence, the fold of each panel was untidy and this seemed to further distort the shape that I desired for my model.

After my previous protoype, I replaced the PVA glue with that of Tarzan glue.

This made a large difference in the strength of the paper and the way in which it aided the curvacious form that I desired.

Nevertheless, more problems arised after I was faced with many of my unfolded peices lacking tabs.

FULL PROTOYPE -FABRICATION-

Edges of cone not matching the edges of the rest of the mode, ultimately leaving gaps.

After having returned to Rhino and fixing all the mistakes I had previously made, I began the fabrication of my first protoype.

Once it had been through full fabrication, it was noted that the craftsmanship of the actual model was somewhat poor. For example, edges did not meet with edges. It was then that I concluded that I would re-fabricate more carefully.

FINAL MODEL -FABRICATION-

SIDE

FRONT

BOTTOM

In the fabrication of my final model, it was essential that the craftsmanship would significantly improve. In my first protoype, clothing pegs were used as means of holding pannels together while the glue dried. While they were very useful, I found that they often dirtied and weakened the white paper.

In the creation of my final model (shown below) the clothes pegs were replaced with small bulldog clips. These were far more useful in that they help the paper together neatly and cleanly.

The cone-like shape in the center of my model was another area that needed improvement. In my full protoype, the edges of the cone were not meeting up with that of the rest of the model, leaving unwanted gaps and tears. The bulldog clips aided me to overcome this problem as they allowed for a firm grip upon the each section. This inevitably removed all gaps that were in the prototype.

After having finished my mdoel and creating a circut for the light, I wanted to make the battery pack and the switch more subtle as acted as a distraction to the rest of my model. To solve this issue, I firstly spray painted the cords, the battery back and the switch white so it would somewhat camoflage with the colour of my model. To secure the battery pack into the model itself, I placed it in a peice of cardboard which I had also sprayed a white colour. This not only hid the batteries but it prevented the pack from falling out of the mode.

In comparison to that of my protoype, my final model demonstrated improvements in terms of craftsmanship. The edges were cleaner and more succint, however, I was not able to perfect it to the amount I desired merely due to time constraints.

When illuminated, I found that my model took on a completely different character. I found that the square pannels when lit up did have a large resemblance with that of the Notre Damne du Haute, however the abstract shape gave it a sense of originiality.

Furthermore, the objects projected from the light itself somehwat illustrated a large contrast to that of the model structure itself.

Unlike my model where the square pannels enable a distinct and structural form, the projected light conveyed no structural pattern. It was this paradox that I found to be ambiable.

REFLECTION MODULE 4

The entirety of Virtual Environments, particularly the design and fabrication of the lamp, has been a rewarding journey of learning and personal growth. From the debut of the course, students were introduced to the concept of how technology has not only shaped society in our modern era but also the ways in which it has greatly aided in the speed and efficiency of the design process for contemporary architects (Macmillan, Palgrave, Rifkin, Jeremy 2011).

After having chosen my natural pattern as a shell, the three stages of Kandisky’s analytical drawing process (balance, movement and symmetry), enabled me to perceive my pattern in a completely different manner. Due to these three strategies, I was able to dissect my pattern and find various other forms and characteristics that are not as obvious at first glance. It was these subtleties that enabled me to begin my long and somewhat complicated design process. I found that the stage that was most useful to me in the process was stage two “movement” as it heavily complied with the spiral and somewhat-cone like figure that I envisioned for my final model (Poling, Clark 1987).

Using the software Rhino to virtually create my design, however, was the most challenging area in my design process. With very little knowledge in computers, it was difficult to adapt to the varying commands and the ways in which the software seemingly worked. Nevertheless, watching tutorials and attending tech sessions for assistance often resolved the problems in which I faced when virtually building my model. As I became more confident with Rhino, I began to realise that advantages of being able to use such technology in the process of design. While altering the form or shape of a design would have taken days less than a decade ago, it now only takes a matter of minutes, which proves to be very efficient when under time constraints (Iwamoto, Lisa 2009).

The physical fabrication of my model, proved to be unexpectedly difficult as it exposed many flaws in my model that were possibly virtually but impossible in real life. This obstacle brought greater meaning and understanding to Michael Speaks “design intelligence” where by he claims “thinking and doing, design and fabrication and prototype and final design become blurred, interactive and part of a non-linear relationship”(Iwamoto, Lisa 2009). In this sense, I found prototyping interacted greatly to my final design as it enabled me to discover what varying materials would be utilised to enable and expose the best of my design. It was learning processes such as this that made Virtual Environments a truly rewarding subject.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

IWAMOTO, L., 2009. Architectural and Material Techniques. Digital Fabrication. New York: .

MACMILLAN, PALGRAVE, RIFKIN, JEREMY, 2011. The Third Industrial Revolution. pp. 107-126.

POLING, C., 1987. Kandkisky’s Teaching at the Bauhaus Rizzoli. Analyticle Drawing. New York: pp. 107-122.

SCHEURER F, S.H., 2011. Architectural Design. Lost in Parameter Space. Wiley: pp. 70-79.