Byrnes Connor 699147 finaljournal

STUDIO AIR 2017, SEMESTER 2, Caitlyn Perry Connor Byrnes

WHO AM I?

Here is a short introduction into why I want to get involved in design, architecture and the like. During high school i was always very fond of communication design subjects and those which allowed me to express some of my thoughts and get them down on paper. It never really touched the idea of actual designing for buildings as such, but as I got to University my subjects led me in that direction. I hope to design in such a way where I can leave a positive urban footprint. Right now, learning methods on how to use proper materials and features is what I hope to follow through with in the future. I think it is an important role that designers should be taking, and break from the idea that design is simply for aesthetics (not saying everyone believes this but there are some who do). I hope to gain from this subject new ways to develop my design skills. My computer based skills are currently quite low so it is time for me to get an understanding on them. I feel as if within the design industry a lot of work is being done through technology now and I fear I will fall behind if I do not keep up. This subject already seems engaging enough that I will actually be able to enjoy learning these skills.

Table of Contents 1 PART A. CONCEPTULISATION 3 A.1 DESIGN FUTURING 4 A.2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

PART A. CONCEPTULISATION

A1. DESIGN FUTURING In regards to articles ‘Timberfabric: Applying Textile Principles On A Building Scale’ (Yves Weinand and Markus Hudert, 2010) & ‘The Khaleesi Tower: Aesthetics and Politics’ (Mark Foster and Gage, 2016) The Timberfabric project which has been undertaken by IBOIS (The Laboratory for Timber Fabric) has radicalised and is continuing to radicalise people’s thoughts and ideas on the use of timber moulded into use as a construction fabric. Transforming the properties of the wood from our ideas of it being a hard, solid and rigid material, their efforts to weave it and turn it into instead a ‘textile’ toys with the idea that it has a singular property or ‘set of rules’. This ties into Dunne and Raby’s 1 idea that we have pro-conceived ideas of how we use something and that it is difficult to break those pre-conceptions. It has bent our ideas on construction methods through the use of materials and how we can actually use them. Being a sustainable viable option compared to many other well used materials, finding it a new use in which it can be both sustainable and purposeful has woven in the idea of intelligent design as it is purposeful over multiple facets.

The process of design can be considered unique and perhaps revolutionary for this type of construction material. The process involves weaving two planar timber panels together which form a curved structural platform. I believe that although it is not perhaps the most groundbreaking idea to ever come out of design - and to be honest may be difficult in the present to integrate into modern design projects - it definitely gives the potential for new ideas and can perhaps have a shift in our approach to how we use materials. It leads into the Fry reading that we have to start designing around our environment, this new wave of ideas of how we can actually use the products around us has the potential to instigate change in the future. I personally hope to see this type of timber weaving become popularised as it could begin to provoke our thoughts on how 4

CONCEPTUALISATION

to use renewable materials and draw people’s attentions to timber plantations and the importance of such products for us and our future.

One reason I believe this project is so interesting is that it was actually built before it was designed.

Although no buildings or anything large scale has been produced yet, the team who led the design did so before using computers to create it. Now it is the difficulty to try and use this geometry and find coding for an element that has not been used before. I do not believe it is important however that there is not a building to show for this project, as this idea continues to be explored it gives it the opportunity and the time frame to form new ideas and perhaps challenge our thinking on other constructive materials and how we can use them.

FIG.1: THE INTRICACIES OF THE TIMBERFABRIC PROJECT (HTTP://BETA.MARKUSHUDERT.NET/)

Without want of repeating myself, I believe the idea of the timber weaving will only gain appreciation over time as it is a new theory which breaks the boundaries of how we believe we can use design and that perhaps some elements of design only have multiple uses.

Finding a flexibility to timber through this woven design allows it to be durable, I can see it in future being used like somewhere in Japan where Earthquakes are frequent - finding a strong construction material which can bend without breaking and hold its own could be incredibly influential in some areas of the world.

Thats why I believe it will have an impact - not just on timber itself, but the exploration and use of how we may begin to integrate other materials into the design.

The fantastic part of the future on this is that it is open ended. As it is style almost a ‘prototype’ sort of design, there are still many ways it can be explored.

For example, it is already mentioned how it can be used for furniture design as well as other markets.

As it is still in research phases it is difficult to answer how far they will explore the possibilities.

As it seems a durable and flexible approach to construction, I believe it will go down this path to try and integrate the timer into large scale commercial buildings, breaking away from our idea that commercial must be mainly steel, concrete and glass.

1. DUNNE, ANTHONY & RABY, FIONA (2013) SPECULATIVE EVERYTHING: DESIGN FICTION, AND SOCIAL DREAMING (MIT PRESS) PP. 1-9, 33-45

CONCEPTUALISATION 5

THE KHALEESI TOWER

FIG.2

FIG.1 THE KHALEESI TOWER PROPOSAL FOR BALCONY SPACE

THE KHALEESI TOWER PROPOSED FOR NEW YORK CITY BY MARK FOSTER GAGE ARCHITECTS PUSHES THE BOUNDARIES OF THE MODERN DAY SKYSCRAPER AND QUESTIONS WHAT WE BELIEVE TO BE OR NOT ‘AESTHETICALLY PLEASING’. IN A MODERNIST WORLD WHERE WE ARE USED TO SEEING THE CITIES LARGEST BUILDINGS OFTEN AS TALL, GEOMETRICAL, AND QUITE OFTEN AS JUST A ‘USE’, IT BEGS THE QUESTION OF IF IT IS THE CORRECT IDEA WHICH DESIGN SHOULD BE TAKING. AS STATED BY THE ARTICLE1, IT DEMANDS US TO RECONSIDER THE POLITICS OF ARCHITECTURE AND PUSHES US TO THINK OF NEW IDEAS AND WAYS TO TREAT OUR DESIGNS. IT TIES IN TO DUNNE AND RADY’S2 BELIEFS THAT OUR ATTITUDES ARE WHAT IS NEEDED TO BREAK THE IDEA OF WHAT WE ‘KNOW’ TO BE RIGHT, WRONG OR OTHERWISE. THE PROJECT PROVOKES THE THOUGHT THAT IN DESIGNING FOR SUSTAINABILITY, THE WAYS IN WHICH WE DESIGN AND OTHER FACTORS ARE STEMMING OUR WAYS OF THINKING AND THEREFORE PERHAPS HINDERING SOME OF OUR CREATIVE FLOWS. 6

CONCEPTUALISATION

THE KHALEESI TOWER HAS INCREDIBLY RADICAL UNDERTONES TO ITS DESIGN. THE FIRM THEMSELVES WANTED THE PROJECT TO BE THOUGHT PROVOKING NO MATTER WHICH WAY ONE LOOKS AT IT - WHETHER THE SUBJECT OF ADMIRATION OR HATE - THE FACT THAT IT IS A TOPIC OF CONVERSATION BELIEVES THEY HAVE DONE A CORRECT JOB IN ONE OF THE ROLES ARCHITECTURE PLAYS, TO BE SUBJECTIVE AND INTERESTING. WE CAN LOOK AT DUNNE AND RABY’S EXAMPLE OF ‘CRITICAL ARCHITECTURE’ AND THE ROLE IT PLAYS IN COMING TO THE AID OF A DESIGN. ALTHOUGH CRITICAL DOES NOT MEAN WE HATE OR NECESSARILY DISLIKE, IT AT LEAST OPENS A CONVERSATION TO HOW WE ARE FEELING AND HOW WE CONTRIBUTE TO THE SUBJECT. I WOULD LIKE TO HOPE THAT A BUILDING LIKE THIS CAN INSTIGATE CHANGE - AND BREAK THE NORMS OF HOW WE FEEL ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN MUST BE AND FIND WAYS TO ADAPT NEW IDEAS AND PRINCIPLES.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT IN THE MODERN DAY IN AGE IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A PROJECT SUCH AS THE KHALEESI TOWER TO BE BUILT. IT WOULD TAKE A PARADIGM SHIFT IN PEOPLE’S MINDS TO ACCEPT A BUILDING LIKE THIS AS WE ARE TOO CONDITIONED TO HOW WE IMAGINE A BUILDING TO LOOK LIKE OR BE. IT DRAWS ON FRY’S2 CONCERNS OF RUNNING OFF A TEMPLATE, THAT PERHAPS WITH THE TECHNOLOGY AT HAND AND THE TOOLS AVAILABLE TO US IT HAS BECOME TOO SIMPLE TO CREATE PERHAPS A GRIDDED FORM AND ELEVATE IT, WITH TWEAKS HERE AND THERE. PERSONALLY, I FEEL THAT THAT IS A STRETCH TOO FAR, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE FIRMS REASONING AS TO WHY THEY WANTED TO PROPOSE SUCH A BUILDING - IT HELPS TO CHALLENGE OUR IDEAS AND STEP AWAY FROM A TEMPLATE THAT SEEMS COMFORTABLE AND EXPLORE NEW WAYS TO INTEGRATE DESIGN. SO NO, I DO NOT BELIEVE IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT IT WAS NOT A BUILT PROJECT, AS IT SPARKED A CONVERSATION ON HOW WE NEED TO THINK OUTSIDE OF THE BOX AND TRY AND RENEW OUR CREATIVE THINKING. THE KHALEESI PROJECT WILL BE APPRECIATED AS IT ASKS MANY CULTURAL QUESTIONS - SOCIAL, POLITICAL, AND SO-ON. IT ASKS US TO BREAK AWAY FROM HOW WE KNOW THINGS TO BE, AND BEGS THE QUESTION OF HOW WE THINK THINGS CAN BE. IT USED THE THEORY OF CHANGE AND THE SOCIAL IMPACTS THAT WE HAVE ON MODERN DAY DESIGNS. WE EXPECT A BUILDING TO BE SOME WAY, THEREFORE IT SHOULD LOOK AND ACT THAT WAY. I BELIEVE A PROJECT LIKE THIS ASKS US TO THINK IN A MORE PRO-ACTIVE AND FORWARD WAY FOR THE FUTURE - NOT NECESSARILY IN A SUSTAINABILITY SENSE BUT INSTEAD THE PATH WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE DESIGN GO DOWN. THE DESIGN ITSELF AS IT IS FAIRLY RECENT HAS NOT ACTUALLY INSPIRED A NEW GENERATION OF BUILDINGS PER-SE, HOWEVER HIS USE OF LIMESTONE AND OTHER MATERIALS ON A MODERN BUILDING IS INSPIRING TO GRAPPLE WITH, AS IT SEEMS A FORGOTTEN FORM OF DESIGN ON A MODERN BUILDING. HAVING ‘GARGOYLES’ AND OTHER CARVED FEATURES GIVES AN ELEMENT TO THE FACADES THAT IS UNIQUE AND RARE IN THIS DAY AND AGE. DESIGNING DIFFERENTLY AND PUSHING FOR EXPLORATION IS A DYING ART WITHIN DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE. BY USING A STYLE TO EVOKE FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS BRINGS BACK THE IDEA OF ARCHITECTURE AS AN ART FORM. CREATING A UTOPIAN FORM, THE KHALEESI TOWER HAS OPENED THE FUTURE TO BREAKAWAY FROM HOW WE EXPECT A SKYSCRAPER TO LOOK AND FUNCTION, AND IMPLORES US TO PERHAPS DESIGN PURELY FOR AESTHETIC. I THINK IT BEGS AN IMPORTANT QUESTION OF WHETHER WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE DESIGNING TO A CERTAIN ‘SCRIPT’ AND INSTEAD ASK HOW WE CAN IMPOSE OUR IDEAS ON THE REST OF THE WORLD.

FIG.2 THE KHALEESI TOWER PROPOSAL AS SEEN FROM BELOW

1. MARK FOSTER GAGE, AESTHETICS AS POLITICS: THE KHALEESI TOWER ON WEST 57TH STREET, NYC., ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) ARCHIT. DESIGN, 86: 26–33 2. DUNNE, ANTHONY & RABY, FIONA (2013) SPECULATIVE EVERYTHING: DESIGN FICTION, AND SOCIAL DREAMING (MIT PRESS) PP. 1-9, 33-45 3.FRY, TONY (2008). DESIGN FUTURING: SUSTAINABILITY, ETHICS AND NEW PRACTICE (OXFORD: BERG), PP. 1–16

CONCEPTUALISATION 7

A.2 DESIGN COMPUTATION

POPULOUS AND THE JACKSONVILLE JAGUARS TRAINING GROUND AND AMPITHEATRE The Populous design team has integrated computing design into their sport arena projects for a substantial amount of time. Many of these projects, mainly looking at the Jacksonville Jaguars amphitheatre and training facility, have in fact relied on computing for completion of the project. By integrating building modelling and design programs such as Grasshopper and Autocad, the team at Populous managed to effectively see how the building was working as a system and integrate computing to techniques to make the needs and aesthetics work in harmony. Computing has allowed for the process to change from one which was simply following a brief to using software to implement certain features which would be almost impossible to either think of and construct if designing by hand. Having the ability to integrate multiple programs (Rhino and Dynamo) also allowed for the project to be designed and tested for its efficiencies quickly, without having to re-design and recalculate. This takes out a massive step in the time frame of finding problems and therefore having to find solutions.

Design practices and processes have continuously progressed for centuries. I believe computing can be merely the next step or next ‘norm’ for design. In some ways, it allows us to explore and integrate ideas and programs which previously were not possible. For example, having the ability to compare and utilise different materials against each other and see if they would work in the built form, is a process which otherwise beforehand would have taken many hours of manual calculation and labour. When looking at the Populous project, it has actually allowed the team to be able to continue working on the design whilst the project is under construction. This re-defines the idea of having a set of blueprints and working off, instead by integrating both the design and construction processes at the same time, it has the potential to reduce time constraints on the project whilst still allowing flexibility to the designer.

8

CONCEPTUALISATION

The design industry is experiencing a new wave of ways to think about our generation of design and the abilities in which computers and computer generated design can positively impact our generation process. There is a conception within the design field that perhaps computation limits our ability to be ‘creative’. However it is necessary to look at how perhaps instead they are just new tools and skills which need to be honed in order to create similar or in fact improved outcomes on previous design skills we have applied within the industry.

Computer generation has allowed for algorithms and geometries to allow for certain forms to be developed and create more calculated relationships between certain elements of the design. I believe it has made it easier to generate multiple designs to work in cohesion as the computer and programs let the user see where certain geometrical elements works or perhaps do not work. This further helps to develop multiple geometrics which either could not be created simply through drawing and mental design as the calculations are too sophisticated to conceive of otherwisee. When taking the Jackson Jaguars amphitheatre for an example, they managed to integrate the use of drainage, lighting, natural ventilation and the structural properties of the building by using real generations of the fabrics used to mathematically create solutions which may have caused problems during the construction phase.

It is necessary to look at how many old architectural theories believed in a model of strict planning to conceive of a design. Originally, construction was the design process, before off site planning became a practice and a notified skill. However nowadays i believe that the two are again beginning to exist alongside, as projects such as the one undertaken by Populous proves that the design process can still be integrated during construction. It allows also for the integration of designers over multiple platforms to work in synchronisation, by using the same if not similar programs to complete projects that deliver both aesthetics and solutions (such as architects and engineers), as proven once again by the team at Populous. Computation has allowed designers to mimic certain materials as well, allowing for better understanding of connections between the connection and building process. I believe this has allowed for accelerated design without necessarily cutting any corners. We can now use algorithms and geometries not previously thought of or being able to be used as it gives us a clearer understanding to “solving the puzzles” of a design.

CONCEPTUALISATION

9

ROSS LOVEGROVE Ross Lovegrove’s computer based designs break the idea of technological designs as being ‘un-organic’. His designs use advanced algorithms and geometrics to help create nature inspired and free-flowing features to his outcomes. Many believe that computing holds us back from the idea of form and makes every aspect of the design a mathematical equation rather than a design. However, it is evident to see that we can in fact have the best of both worlds. By using algorithms which mimic nature and its materials, we have in fact found a way to use computers to very beautifully re construct the world around us. First we must know how to understand the algorithmic process before we can put it into practice.

Looking at his design of Twin’Z electric car for Renault France,1 the unordinary car design could easily be mistaken for an insect we would find in the garden. I believe it proves that if we follow the patterns of nature, computation allows us to more easily generate a symmetrical piece of the living world.

This stage of computing has re-developed the idea of using the natural world to influence our designs. Too often we get stuck on a grid or ‘program’ which tells us how we must design and by following a set of guidelines or rules. I too think it is easy to get caught up in a computer and the wonders it can do and get carried away, but as Lovegrove has proven we must be the master of our designs and simply let

10

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.1 LOVEGROVE’S CAR DESIGN FOR FYAT

the computer take us to where we want to go. It re-defines the idea that it is limiting - in fact, it allows us to breathe life into new designs through mediums which we did not previously think possible. Lovegrove has mimicked the process of cells in nature and other forms of natures to help to generate these ideas. I do not personally believe these would be anywhere near as possible simply through pen and paper. Furthermore, although we may be able to figure out the algorithms, I do not believe that we could put them into practice by creating form. This is how computers have helped to re-define our design practices, as we can watch algorithms come to life.

One of the biggest changes we are currently facing is the ability to enhance our knowledge on textiles and materials within the design world. Fabrication through 3D modelling allows us to experiment with materials perhaps not commonly used within the architecture world. The idea of off-site fabrication and construction makes the design process coincide with the construction process. Lovegrove goes further as to say that the future is heading towards biologically growing and forming materials (such as a telephone). Perhaps it is his wild imagination and love with nature which makes it more of a wish than a foreseeable outcome, however the way in which the industries are heading with advancements like 3D printing and robotic fabrication perhaps makes it seem that little bit more real.

FIG.2 LOVEGROVE’S ALUMINUM CHAIR

As stated earlier, computation has given us a new platform to use algorithm to create form and further play with that form. I thoroughly believe that design should be an enjoyable process, and this is an interesting way to blend both mathematics, science, and creativity. We have achievabley turned mathematics into aesthetics, two words which normally would not blend together. Furthermore, Lovegrove’s projects highlight how these geometries are blending with materials not previously used for this field of design work. His project DIATOM, a parametric aluminium chair(fig.2), has used geometry to create a stronger connection between points on the chair to give it a greater strength without actually using any more aluminium than normal. The blend of geometry and materials allows us to further get the best result from a material and enhance our knowledge on how we can use those materials.

Lovegrove’s innovations and projects highlight to us that using intelligent algorithm we have the ability to get the best we can out of the materials and elements around us. By coming to understand nature and algorithms we can begin to use them in different ways to psoitively effect the performance of our designs in some circumstances. Lovegrove’s “Gravitational Shoes”(fig.3) use an effective algorithmic method of using “attraction and repulsion” algorithms to fully strengthen the shoe whilst still making it stable and stylish for the wearer. It is a two birds with one stone situation, by creating resilient shoes with a new-wave and futuristic aesthetic.

FIG.3 LOVEGROVE’S LONGITUDINAL SHOE DESIGN 1. ROSS LOVEGROVE, ‘SUPER-NATURAL’: PARAMETRICISM IN PRODUCT DESIGN. ARCHIT., ED.

BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) DESIGN, 86: 100–107

CONCEPTUALISATION 11

A.3. COMPOSITION/GENERATION

FIG.1THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS TO HELP DEVELOP COMPUTER PROGRAMMING FOR 3D BUILDING

12

CONCEPTUALISATION

FIG.2 BABAK BRYAN AND HENRY GROSMAN FROM BANG STUDIO’S COMPUTERISDE LINE WORK

COMPUTERISATION OR COMPUTER GENERATED DESIGN IS STILL A RELATIVELY RECENT ADVANCEMENT IN NOT JUST ARCHITECTURE BUT ALL BASES OF DESIGN. IN A WORLD WHERE ALGORITHMS AND GEOMETRY HAVE CREATED A NEWWAVE OF PARAMETRIC DESIGNERS, IT BEGS THE QUESTION AS TO WHETHER WE ARE ‘LOSING TOUCH’ WITH INNOVATION AS A MACHINE SEEMS TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE EVERYTHING WE CAN, IF NOT MORE. IN THIS DAY AND AGE, IT IS NECESSARY TO REMEMBER THAT WE MUST MERELY BE THE MASTER OF OUR NEW TOOLS AND NOT BECOME SLAVE TO THE MACHINE. FIRSTLY, IT IS NECESSARY TO DISTINGUISH WHAT EXACTLY IS GENERATION. IT IS NOT THE IDEA, BUT THE INITIAL CREATION OF A PROJECT. THE ACT OF BRINGING IT TO LIFE, WHETHER IT BE THROUGH ALGORITHM OR PEN AND PAPER. MANY WOULD ARGUE THAT COMPUTATIONAL GENERATION IS ‘CHEATING’, OR PERHAPS DESERVES LESS MERIT THAN GENERATING SOMETHING SOLELY USING YOUR OWN TOOLS WITHOUT TECHNOLOGY. BUT IS THIS NECESSARILY TRUE? WE MUST REMEMBER THAT THE USE OF ALGORITHM AND OTHER EQUATIONAL METHODS STILL MUST BE INPUT BY A HUMAN, WITH OUR PROCESS OF ALGORITHM HELPING TO GENERATE LINES AND MODELS PERHAPS PREVIOUSLY UNACHIEVABLE WITHOUT THESE TOOLS. NOT EVERY ALGORITHM WILL COME OUT THE SAME, EITHER. WE CAN USE A SINGULAR ALGORITHM IN A MULTITUDE OF WAYS, TO CREATE MULTIPLE GENERATIONS, EACH ONE DIFFERENT TO THE NEXT. THIS THEREFORE SHOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE A HINDRANCE OR LOOKED DOWN UPON WITHIN THE DESIGN PROCESS. IN FACT, IT COULD BE ARGUED THAT THIS STREAM OF PARAMETRIC DESIGN OPENS UP OPPORTUNITIES FOR CERTAIN OUTCOMES WHICH WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN POSSIBLE BEFORE. HOWEVER, DOES COMPUTER GENERATED DESIGN ‘LIMIT’ OUR ABILITY TO BE CREATIVE? NO, IN MY OPINION IT IS SIMPLY A NEW TOOL TO BE LEARNT. BABAK BRYAN AND HENRY GROSMAN FROM BANG STUDIO ARGUE THAT DRAWING IS AN ACT OF TIME, AND THE LINES WE ARE DRAW ARE INFINITE1. WHETHER BY HAND OR BY COMPUTER, WE HAVE GENERATED THESE LINES, THESE MOMENTS IN TIME, WHICH ARE GOING TO EVENTUALLY CREATE FORMS AND MODELS. THE DIFFERENCE IS, THEY ARGUE, THAT A COMPUTER SIMPLY ALLOWS US TO USE ALGORITHMS AND GEOMETRICS TO BEND THOSE LINES AND TRANSFORM THEM, A NEW MEDIUM TO WHICH WE CAN BEGIN TO GENERATE. SO WHETHER IT BE THROUGH A PEN TO PAPER OR US TELLING A COMPUTER WHAT TO GENERATE, EITHER WAY WE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE GENERATING THESE LINES AND FORMS AND ULTIMATELY CHOOSING HOW WE USE THEM. ONE OF THE EARLIEST USES OF COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN WAS AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IN 1967, IN WHICH A TEAM DECIDED TO TRY AND CREATE A MACHINE WHERE ‘‘A DESIGNER AND A COMPUTER CAN WORK TOGETHER AS A TEAM ON DESIGN PROBLEMS REQUIRING CREATIVE SOLUTIONS’’2. I BELIEVE THIS QUOTE STILL STANDS STRONG AS TO HOW THE TREATMENT OF COMPUTER GENERATED DESIGN SHOULD BE VIEWED - THE COMPUTER CAN BE USED AS A PLATFORM TO AID OUR DESIGN THROUGH MIMICKING FABRICS AND MATERIALS AS WELL AS GIVE US OTHER GEOMETRIC CALCULATIONS WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN TOO DIFFICULT TO CONJURE WITH PURE BRAIN POWER (OR AT LEAST ALLOW US TO SERIOUSLY SPEED UP THE PROCESS). ALTHOUGH THE ORIGINAL PROJECTS HELD BY THIS TEAM WERE OF COURSE VERY SIMPLE TO TODAYS COMPUTER GENERATION, IT NONETHELESS PAVED THE WAY FOR DESIGNERS TO SEE COMPUTERS AS A TOOL RATHER THAN SIMPLY JUST A MACHINE WITH NUMBERS AND ALGORITHMS. I BELIEVE THAT ALGORITHMIC AND PARAMETRIC DESIGN IS AN INCREDIBLE NEW PLATFORM FOR DESIGNERS. IT HAS OPENED UP A NEW WAVE OF IDEAS FOR GENERATION AND ALLOWED US TO EXPLORE IDEAS WHICH WERE NOT POSSIBLE BEFORE. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER TO TREAT CAD WITH CAUTION - AS NOT TO GO TOO FAR DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE AND BE CAUGHT HAVING THE COMPUTER DESIGN FOR US. IF WE CAN CREATE A BALANCE OR LEARN TO MASTER ALGORITHM, THEN THERE IS NO REASON WHY THIS NEW USE OF GENERATION CAN NOT HAVE ANY LESS MERIT THAN ANY OTHER USE. SIMPLY PUT, I BELIEVE COMPUTER GENERATED DESIGNS MUST BE RESPECTED AND HONED, OTHERWISE OUR CREATIVITY HAS THE ABILITY TO BE LOST AS WE CAN INSTEAD GET TOO USED TO HAVING THE COMPUTER DESIGN FOR US. WE MUST ALWAYS REMEMBER THE DISTINCTION.

1. BABAK BRYAN, HENRY GROSMAN, DRAWING IN TIME: PROCESSES OF DESIGN AND FABRICATION., ED. BY HELEN 1.

CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) ARCHITECTURE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 86, P. 98–107 1.

2. DANIEL CARDOSO LLACH, ALGORITHMIC TECTONICS: HOW COLD WAR ERA RESEARCH SHAPED OUR IMAGINATION, ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2013) OF DESIGN. ARCHIT DESIGN, 83: 16–21

CONCEPTUALISATION

13

A.4. CONCLUSION

Conceptualisation has proven that computer aided design and geometric and algorithmic design is a new-age design process which is exploring our ideas on how we conceive design and the ways in which we use the tools given to us.

Parametric design is currently seen as the ‘Avante-Garde’ style of architecture being popularised due to the paradigm shift toward computation and CAD. These algorIthmic and geometric design practices open the opportunity to explore new fabrication methods, materials, generatIon methods and textiles to a world which perhaps was previously limited to only a few certain methods. It has given us the freedom of using these algorithms in a multitude of ways to help to expand our designs and ease us into moulding the generation and construction process. It is a certain element of the future which is being generated now due to these new innovations and architectural styles which could not previously exist.

14

CONCEPTUALISATION

I intend to approach my design by trying to create a beautiful geometric design which could mimic the design of nature. I do not believe anymore that computational design has to be mere lines and shapes, but that we can use algorithms which copy the world around us to use its beauty to generate new ideas. I hope that my design will be so real that it is in fact surreal, beautiful enough that it looks surprising to be made by a machine. I believe it is necessary to try and find a balance in computational design whereas we do not get caught up in the fact that we are signing through a computer, and still generate designs which look real enough to belong in the real world. This could benefit by breaking the habit of idea that hand drawn and geometric generation can be easily differentiated between, and perhaps blur the line between one generation method to the next.

A.5. LEARNING OUTCOMES

Conceptualisation has proven that computer aided design and geometric and algorithmic design is a new-age design process which is exploring our ideas on how we conceive design and the ways in which we use the tools given to us.

Parametric design is currently seen as the ‘Avante-Garde’ style of architecture being popularised due to the paradigm shift toward computation and CAD. These algorIthmic and geometric design practices open the opportunity to explore new fabrication methods, materials, generatIon methods and textiles to a world which perhaps was previously limited to only a few certain methods. It has given us the freedom of using these algorithms in a multitude of ways to help to expand our designs and ease us into moulding the generation and construction process. It is a certain element of the future which is being generated now due to these new innovations and architectural styles which could not previously exist.

CONCEPTUALISATION 15

A.6. ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES - APPENDIX

SO FAR THE ALGORITHMIC SKETHBOOK HAS BEEN DIFFICULT TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND. I HAVE NEVER PREVIOUSLY USED RHINO OR GRASSHOPPER SO IT HAS PRESENTED A NEW EXCITING CHALLENGE. MY FIRST FEW DESIGNS LIKE TTHE DELAUNAY AND VORONOIDS ARE VERY SIMPLE, AS I STILL STRUGGLE GRASP A FEW OF THE CONEPTS. I WAS HAPPY TO MAKE THE 3D VORONOI WITHOUT A TUTORIAL, AND HAVE A GRASP ON THE ORIGNAL WEEK OF LOFTING, HOWEVER THE INPUTS AND OUTPUTS AND TRIANGULATION AND MESHING I STILL STRUGGLED WITH. I PLAN ON USING THE NEXT WEEK OR SO TO REALLY JUST GET A GRIP ON BOTH RHINO AND GRASSHOPPER. I BELIEVE THE SHAPES IVE MADE SO FAR ARE INTERESTING HOWEVER THEY ARE QUITE SIMPLE TASKS WITHIN THE PROGRAM. NEXT JOURNAL I HOPE TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE MORE COMPLEX SHAPES AND SYSTEMS AND TO HAVE LEARNT HOW TO WORK WITH MESH AND WRAP AROUND MESH SYTEMS AND UNDERSTAND THE TERMS WITHIN GRASSHOPPER AND RHINO MORE. I CHOSE THESE DESIGNS AS THEY ARE BASICALLY JUST MY BEGINNER WORK. AS I LEARN TO USE THE PROGRAMS, THESE PRETTY MUCH REPRESENT THE BEST HOW I STILL HAVE A WHILE TO GO. ALTHOUGH NONE ARE PARTICULARLY INTERESTING OR INTRIGUING, I AM GLAD AT LEAST TO HAVE GENERATED SOMETHING, HOWEVER I KNOW I HAVE A VERY LONG WAY TO GO.

16

CONCEPTUALISATION

BABAK BRYAN, HENRY GROSMAN, DRAWING IN TIME: PROCESSES OF DESIGN AND FABRICATION., ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) ARCHITECTURE DESIGN JOURNAL, VOLUME 86, P. 98–107 DANIEL CARDOSO LLACH, ALGORITHMIC TECTONICS: HOW COLD WAR ERA RESEARCH SHAPED OUR IMAGINATION, ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2013) OF DESIGN. ARCHIT DESIGN, 83: 16–21 DUNNE, ANTHONY & RABY, FIONA (2013) SPECULATIVE EVERYTHING: DESIGN FICTION, AND SOCIAL DREAMING (MIT PRESS) PP. 1-9, 33-45 FRY, TONY (2008). DESIGN FUTURING: SUSTAINABILITY, ETHICS AND NEW PRACTICE (OXFORD: BERG), PP. 1–16 JONATHAN MALLIE, EXPANSIVE WORKFLOWS: DOWNSTREAM COORDINATION IN THE DESIGN OF SPORTING FACILITIES., ED.

BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2017) ARCHIT. DESIGN, 87: 68–73 KALAY, YEHUDA E. (2004). ARCHITECTURE’S NEW MEDIA: PRINCIPLES, THEORIES, AND METHODS OF COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN (CAMBRIDGE, MA: MIT PRESS), PP. 5-25 MARK FOSTER GAGE, AESTHETICS AS POLITICS: THE KHALEESI TOWER ON WEST 57TH STREET, NYC., ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) ARCHIT. DESIGN, 86: 26–33 OXMAN, RIVKA AND ROBERT OXMAN, EDS (2014).

THEORIES OF THE DIGITAL IN ARCHITECTURE (LONDON; NEW YORK: ROUTLEDGE), PP. 1–10 ROSS LOVEGROVE, ‘SUPER-NATURAL’: PARAMETRICISM IN PRODUCT DESIGN. ARCHIT., ED. BY HELEN CASTLE, (JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2016) DESIGN, 86: 100–107 YVES WEINAND, MARKUS HUDERT, TIMBERFABRIC: APPLYING TEXTILE PRINCIPLES ON A BUILDING SCALE., ED.

BY HELEN CASTLE, ( JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD, 2010) ARCHIT DESIGN, 80: 102–107

CONCEPTUALISATION 17

PART B

B1. RESEARCH FIELD STRIPS AND FOLDING Strips and folding is a parametric technique which can be used in Grasshopper and Rhino (as well as other Computer Aided Design techniques) to help overlay and intersect different parameters of the design. The technique involves having many iterations of a similar design - perhaps only ‘tweaked’ through sliders and changing small components within the geometry - to create overall patterning and unison between the points.

I believe the idea is to use similar geometrics and find a way to create a beautiful patttern which does not look forced and manages to have an even flow. Some fabrication techniques may include cutting or moulding a similar shape and fitting them together either via pins or simply twisting and knotting through each other at certain points to generate effect. Much like the scales of a fish, there are hundreds if not thousands of individual pieces which stand alone, however through a set of neutral points or layers are managed to fit together into a single harmonius generation. Howver generation could also be considered very difficult asnot only does it require a multitude of elements working in harmony, it is also to find a way to join them with fluidity and grace.

As demonstrated by 10 Hills place by Amanda Levete Architects(1), strips and folding does not always require small strips working together (here larger glass panels were used). However, there is still the task of managing a way to weave the elements into unison. I believe it is a method which is probably more delicate than others simply due to the fact that each element must percetly co-incide with the next.

I hope to use the strips and folding techniques to try and find ways to create patterns through similar shapes. I believe the synchronisation can be very beautiful when it works well, but hsa the ability to also look jagged and messy if not used well.

Intricacies of the strips and folding techniques on a large schale at 10 Hills Place, London.

Image Source: https://www.dezeen. com/2009/09/10/10-hills-place-by-amanda-levetearchitects/

1 Rose Etherington, 10 Hills Place by Amanda Levete Architects, in Dezeen, https:// www.dezeen.com/2009/09/10/10-hills-place-by-amanda-levete-architects/ (accessed 1 September 2017).

B2. CASE STUDY 1.0 BIOTHING For the case study I chose the “Biothing” to explore and alter its peramters. I believe before I had even started it was already an interesting form to explore. As I played with different components I began to see how I could readily make changes. It was interesting to be given a ready-made Grasshopper definition to explore, it definitely opened my eyes as to how the program works and the way that multiple parameters can be used and pushed to create completely different forms from the same connections.

My matrix I decided on was; Smoothness, Curves, Spread and Extrusion.

All were graded out of four. Smoothness related to how well the ‘arms’ flowed together, or if they seemed to be pushing over the top of each other or not. The curves criteria was how much cirve there was in each of those arms. Obviously some went below and some were completely flat, so I was testing how to change that. Spread was the length of the arm and how far they seemed to travel - some looked like they would be ‘clinging’ as onto a branch of some sort, whilst others looked as if they were on a completely flat surface. Hence this criteria was to see whether or not they looked like they were bunching up between each other or spreading. The last was extrusion. This was to judge how each looked in comparison to height and in a sense as a pipe. Some of the iterations were quite jagged - by that I mean the base point started low and the curve went very high - creating a pipe sort of effect. That is how I judged my last criteria.

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

2 1 2 2

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 2 2 3

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 3 2 3

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 4 2 3

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

1 3 3 2

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

2 3 2 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

2 2 2 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 3 3 2

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 3 3 2

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 2 3 2

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

4 2 3 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

2 2 4 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 4 4 3

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

3 4 4 4

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

1 1 4 4

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

4 1 4 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

1 4 4 4

3 1 2 1

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

4 3 2 3

Smoothness Curves Spread Extrusion

2 4 3 2

B2. CASE STUDY 1.0 BIOTHING

1

2

I believe these were my four most successful iterations. In these I mainly changed the Graph Mapper to change the curves, asd the number slider for the range of length between the start and end points of the curves. I believe all are similar but unique in their own way also. Number 1 I believe looks the most natural, perhaps a leaf or piece of nature you could find on the ground. Number 2 was the most interesting in terms of the beggining points and where exactly the branches ended up. I liked how they made a sort of stem in the middle of each one with a flat top, like a branch. Number 3 I believed look like a tunnel, I think it was the one where the curves worked the most in unison to create one whole ‘looped’ or ‘piped’ form.

Number 4 seemed very heavy. With a lot more lines on each one it was much thicker, and the amount of extrusion also made it quite overpowering.

3

4

I think these have potential within design to be worked on as perhaps a pavilion sort of structure, or even a canopy or roof to somewhere (like perhaps a playground, public pool or pop up shop). I think each would have to be created on the large scale, as they are so small and intricate it would be hard to replicate. Perhaps fabrication through steel or even PVC piping could help to create these interesting forms. They would need to be strong to hold themselves without getting damaged by the elements. I do not think any of these could be quite a ‘finished’ design, however a few tweaks would not be far off their final potential.

B3. CASE STUDY 2.0 DOUBLE AGENT WHITE

Double Agent White. Image source: http://www.evolo.us/architecture/double-agent-white-in-series-of-prototypical-architectures-theverymany/

Double Agent White, designed and created by Marc Fornes and Theverymany(2), is a large singualr surface which contains 9 spheres to fit together with a delicate geometrical form over the top. Cut from aluminium, it uses double curved surfaces to generate its form and also give structural integrity. The double curved surface means there are two layers of points working in unison to create one form - one for structure and one to create the outer geometry. This further implements the computational process as being both useful whilst also creating interesting and beautiful structure.

It uses strips and folding throughout the structure to bring the spheres together into one form - again the geometry on each strip changes to help generate the pattern over the top. This means each indiviudal piece of alumiunim was cut and then fit together with the next, a process mere impossible without computer aided design techniques.

1 Jessica Escobedo, ‘Double Agent White in Series of Prototypical Architectures / Theverymany’, in Evolo, http://www.evolo.us/architecture/double-agent-white-in-series-of-prototypical-architectures-theverymany/ (Accessed 12 September 2017).

The first step in the process to re-enegineering was to create a Voronoid sphere. We created a sphere, popluated geometry and brepped the mesh to create the Voronoid cells over the sphere.

After we had created the Voronoid cells around the sphere, it was necessary to make sure the lines on the outer of the sphere were visible. So we created those polylines and made them thicker before lofting them to further extrude their pattern over the ball.

We then changed those lofts into a mesh surface so that we could further play with the parameters and change the look of the mesh over the Vornoid sphere to hopefully create different patterns.

Next necessary step was to use the Weaverbird plug in to smooth the mesh and conjoin them.

This mean the wholes were less rigid and geometric and much rounder and more pleasing to the eye. It also meant that there were no breaks in the mesh.

The final step was duplicating all of the same components over again ans setting a base point so that the spheres were all over and not in one spot. By changing the radious of the sphere it also gave it the effect of the Double Agent White.

Once all of the spheres were in place, all we needed to do was use the Weld Mesh component to make sure that like the Double Agent White they were all one surface. We could still then play with each individual sphere.

B3. CASE STUDY 2.0 DOUBLE AGENT WHITE

This was my final render of my reverse enginerr. It wasn’t perfect, however I am happy to have gotten an overall shape and pattern over the geometry. The pattern throughout was a bit rough, however I believe the double strips in the centre is also quite similar to that of the original. I hope to push this design by making use of the Voronoid patterna and also how the surface was meshed and lofted, I believe tweaking those parameters could create interesting outcomes.

B4. TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT EXPLORING ITERATIONS

B4. TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT EXPLORING ITERATIONS

To generate these iterations we took away the sphere at the start of the GrassHopper file and replaced it was a box. We then linked this to a Bounding Box component which generated the pattern over this surface. Then we tweaked the mesh thickness parameters to change the blood cell like form into a more sweeping, connected form.

The first two forms were created by changing the distance between the mesh and sphere parameters. By further changing the number of points, radius of the sphere and the smoothness of the meshes, it created the more spiky and chatoic sharper features. The third was created by getting rid of the sphere and instead referencing in an elipsoid geometry. We then piped the polylines on the elipsoid which created the vein like effect around the elipsoid. The last in this series was a simple Voronoid Sphere which we reduced the size of the mesh to again give it a mich slimmer and delicate look.

To create these forms we referenced in a boxed pyramid. By creating many points and changing the WeaverBird Smooth Mesh component it gave the Voronoid pattern a very smooth coral-like look. The second was again used be referencing in the boxed pyramid geometry, but the points were lessened and the mesh was thickened. It gave it the look of an olf bone fossil.

The first form came out much better after V-Ray than we had expected. By changing the distance of the mesh to the sphere automatically linked the points between the sphere and the mesh to generate an interesting pattersn between the lines. It looks as if the Voronoid Sphere is containing a much sharper and more dangerous inner sphere. The second iteration further pushed the mesh from the original sphere and put the mesh to almost full thickness. This created a much softer surface with less perferations.

The points within the sphere here were dramatically reduced as well as the radius of the sphere. This allowed for more more intricate, smaller forms. By changing the different thickness and smoothness of the mesh, it made the forms either harsher or smoother.

The points here were again referenced into a box. We then changed the number of Voronoid cells within the box.

This allowed for it to either be completely wrapped around or look ‘broken’.

B5. TECHNIQUES PROTOTYPES

The fabrication process began with 3D printing. It was Charlie and my first time using the FabLab/3D printers so this was always going to be a trial and hopefully not error process. We went through our iterations on Grasshopper and found one which we thought represented our ideas for the garment well. We then took these two ideas (one for a head piece and one for a bracelet/ring) and sent them to the 3D printer.

For the main body garment we decided we will use something like rope or electric cable to create our prototypes. The reasoning behind this is that it is a strong material however also flexible. It allows for push and pull and for the garment to have room to move. Through threading, knotting, looping and pulling, it allowed us to create interesting shapes and create some forms of patterning. The next step will be to generate these forms and find a way to loop and regenerate them over a garment so that it is continuous whilst still holding the same shape. Although we can allow for some random patterning throughout, it is hoped to have some sort of synchronisation and fluidity throughout the overall form. We are hoping to do this by creating a singular exoskeletal layer - perhaps through a thin bendable wood or plastic or even plater moulding, and then weaving the wire and wire patterns throughout it.

B6. TECHNIQUE PROPOSAL

Our proposal thus far entails our 3D printed geometries in a form which we called the ‘Exoskeleton’. We found that after rendering many of our final forms they looked quite beautifully composed into an almost bone like structure. The above design and render fitted on to site was merely a thought process as to where we could place these geometries and how they could be connected. It is not necessarily the direction we wish to take. By creating an ‘exoskeleton’ we hope to create and define a protective layer of the human body, which embelishes the idea of humans need of protection and of our nature. It blurs the line between human and other parts of nature and would transform one into another sort of being. This could bring out a confidence and let the wearer mould into a new life form as this new idea of outer protection keeps them safe.

We hope to continue to push this design by perhaps having a singular or multiple iterations which we repeat and ‘link’together. By creating almost a spine or jointed garment, it would allow for it to be flexible and worn by more than one frame of person. As someone would have the abilitly to slip in and out of the design it would help to transform each and every person if they are the wearer. By finding patterns through points we hope to continue our design to create a more succint and repetitive outcome which more represents an exoskeleton. So far it is quite broken up, when in we reality we would like a singular solid form. Above is the image of the site - the University of Melbourne carpark, and we hope to blend our design into the site. So far we believe the geometries are similar to the point where they work together in unison to help extensiate the design and bolden its look.

Image Source: http://www.alteredimages.com.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Melb-Uni-Carpark.jpg

B.7 OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES So far this semester I believe that my thoughts towards parametric design and modelling have changed. Although it does not always feel like it, I have seen my algorithmic design skills improve as well as parametric design and modelling. The work towards the brief has certainly started being implemented and I am happy at the progress so far.

Through the reverse engineering projects, the ability to generate for design possibilities has grown. I previously believed computational design was very shallow and one sided but I have very quickly been proven wrong. I see now the possiblites which would not previously have arisen if not for parametric and CAD. My skills have vastly developped over a multitude of platforms. Before commencing AIR I had not used either Rhino or Grasshopper, or anything out of the Adobe Creative Cloud. Therefore I am very happy at how much 3D modelling skills are improving - although there is still a long way to go, I can look back at where I started and be happy. Furthermore, I have now 3D printed objects and used this form of 3D fabrication which I had not previously used and now understand that skill and process.

Architecturally I have further developed an understanding of the use of 3D modelling and how computational design can be used in an architectural sense. I understand now it is more than just drawing squares and circles on the computer, and how we must apply different methods to fit to a design brief.

To fit to the brief, it has been nice to really see how far I can take iterations and push the boundaries through not just the programs but my critical thinking. Using a program like Grasshopper where it can often be simple to make a mistake, the problem solving has allowed me to push the architectural discourse as it encourges me to think about improvement onmydesigns and how I can make tweaks within my designs to push architectiural boundaries.

My concepts throughout the project so far have changed in been pushed.

When trying to fit to the brief it has not always been simple and there are still challenges which lie ahead. However, I have been able to analyse other projects and learn from them and try to see how I can learn from them and fit them to my own applications.

Although I do not believe I quite yet have my own computational style, I think there is one definitily developing as I further my skills. I am beginnning to know through Rhino and Grasshopper what I like and do not like, and form my ideas and generations around that. I am excited to see what the end project will look like as I believe it will be a good representation of my processes and thoughts and ideas on parametric and computational design and 3D modelling.

B8. APPENDIX ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES Here are some of my algorithmic tasks completed during these weeks. I am happy with how they developed from the start of the semester. However I believe my skills shone in the latter part of Part B when designing our own models.

The first two iterations are of box morphs and I think they highlight how I managed to use similar components to create two completely separate outcomes.

The line work is of field lines. I struggled a little bit to create completely beautiful geometry and push the boundaries howvere I hope to continue to practice them and generate more exciting alternatives.

The bottom three images are from when I image sampled Derrin Hinch and created three patterns with him. Although his face is not completely clear, I still believed that on a larger scale it is possible to see who it is and therefore a successful iterations.

I do not think my Grasshopper iterations are perfect, however I am still happy with how I have managed to learn and remember many of the steps. I look forward to continue learning these programs.

APPENDIX

Jessica Escobedo, ‘Double Agent White in Series of Prototypical Architectures / Theverymany’, in Evolo, http://www.evolo.us/architecture/double-agent-white-in-series-of-prototypical-architectures-theverymany/ (Accessed 12 September 2017).

Rose Etherington, 10 Hills Place by Amanda Levete Architects, in Dezeen, https://www.dezeen. com/2009/09/10/10-hills-place-by-amanda-levete-architects/ (accessed 1 September 2017).

PART C

C1. DESIGN CONCEPT ‘CONCREATURE’

Image Source: http://www.southeastasia-images.com/keyword/Car/i-FLxGRFc/A

We came to realise that our original design idea perhaps needed more of a background and a story. We were taking precedence and looking at Iris Van Herpen’s work which was very solid, rigid and resembled an outer body. We were taking our design idea down the path of an ‘exodkeleton’ - it also fit in with our geometry. However we decided to develop our concept.

We agreed that we wanted to take our design down the path of something that looks like it had grown, morphed or originated from our site (the Melbourne Uni car park). Being very solid, rigid, dark and with grey concrete, we began to develop an idea of the ‘Concreature’ - a garment which resembled a protective outer body layer for that which lived in the car park. Thus our design began taking shape as an apron like garment, with rigid and rocky geometry to represent an item which could protect. These 3D geometries were to stick out of the body in order to cast the body as another more vulnerable layer.

Our initial feedback also told us that we needed to perhaps extend on the use of tesselation and the geometry within the garment. It was perhaps too simple and did not actually use enough techniques to create something. Our feedback taught us to explore tesselation and see how we could create a more interesting shape through tabbing and tesselating the geometry.

If we could reference the geometry and use it to link with one another it could create not just an interesting pattern but also serve the purpose as a strong protective layer. Therefore we decided to experiment with 3mm Felt fabric in order to further the design and move away from 3D printing, which would not really have worked in furthering the garment.

TECHNIQUE DIAGRAM ‘CONCREATURE’ Take Base Geometry from GH

Loft curves to cover human body

Divide Surface into Po

Mesh Surface

Reference Geometry into Bounding Boxes

Morph Box

Merge components

Number and tag components

Bake Components int

CONSTRUCT DIAGRAM ‘CONCREATURE’

Rhino and Grasshopper

Laser C

Take unrolled components from Rhino

Laser cu

Use Grasshopper to reference tabs and slits

Use rhino to close geometry and number according to GH file

oints

to Rhino

Cutting

ut into felt

SubDivide Box on Lofted Surface

Bounding Box for Geometry

Multiply for even distances

Move geometries in X and Z planes

Unroll Geometries

Tab and Split

Fabrication

Close tabs, create components

Repeat until all we have all 45 components

Connect in accordance to GH file

C2. TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES

PROTOTYPE WITH FELT

The prototyping began by unrolling the component in Rhino and making it into 2D. By doing this, we had the ability to see all of the individual faces. Furthermore, it gave an understanding as to how it was going to be once we got the laser cut, and try and understand the different connections. We originally printed out a couple of the components onto paper, just so that we were sure where to put our tabs on the garment before getting it laser cut. Then once we were sure of the placement, we sent it to the Fabrication Lab so that we could see how a couple of the components would look once put together. We also put a slit into one of the sides to give it an opening - in this way we had the ability to group multiple components together like in Rhino and Grasshopper.

PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION WITH FELT

The original outcomes were not as successful as hoped, however it allowed us to understand what we needed to fix. Firstly, the size of the component itself was too small and difficiult to put together. Secondly, we did not consider enough the thickness of the slits for the tabs - as the felt was quite thick (3mm) we needed to allow for the tabs to be able to fit through, during this stage there were a couple of breaks due to having to force through the tab. Furthermore, there was not necessarily enough distance betwwen the opening and the end of the felt making it weak and had the possibility to tear due to strain. Furthermore, the triangle tabs did not give us the particular aesthetic we were after - they were very chucnky and took away from the original look of the component - a feature we wanted to change. Overall however I believe it was successful as it allowed us to see what needed changing and how, and gave us an insight into how the component might come together.

CONSTRUCTION WITH FELT

The above images show how the garment began to come together and was constructed. You can see how the 15 individual components were laser cut into the felt, with 3 different shades of grey to make an interesting contrast between components. Then it shows how we managed to bind them together after creating the opening with the tabs. We numbered them and ordered them in the same sequence that was generated through Grasshopper. After we had interpolated the three components which were the same (as there were 3 sets of the same 15) we could put them together and construct it into the Concreature.

C3. FINAL DESIGN MODEL ‘CONCREATURE’

CONCREATURE ON SITE

Above we have the final detail model on site and in the Melbourne Uni car park. We enjoyed using minimal lighting and more the use of the shadows throughout the carpark as it fit in well to the story of the Concreature and extentuated the narrative. As the model was to fit something which had been born out of the carpark, we thought it worked well to have the gritty dark side of the carpark for a creature which would not really see light and blend into the concrete surroundings.

GRASSHOPPER AND RENDER

Here are the final Grasshopper definitions used to create our garment. It includes the box morph process as well as how we managed to label and differentiate between the different components. Below as well is a render on site, so we had an idea of how the garment may have looked when fabricated.

C4. LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES

C4. LEARNING OBJECTIVES & OUTCOMES The feedback from the final presentation taught us to be a bit more time conscious and perhaps a bit more simple within our ideas. As the model was ‘3D’ - by that I mean each component and element folded up into a 3D shape instead of sitting flush with the body, it made it a difficult component to link and generate. If we had been more time effective we could have perhaps had more time in between prototyping and the final detail model, finding ways to have it link together nicely and look a bit less over the place and congested.

We believe the feedback for our narrative was much better than in the mid-semester presentaion which I was happy with.

We worked on our idea after that and it gave us a clearer direction to go towards, and believe our design was aided through that.

We also recieved feedback about the differences between Grasshopper and fabrication. Although something may be able to be generated on the computer does not necessarily mean it would come out the same when either laser cut or 3D printed or etc. therefore it is hard to always put something together and imagine it in real life. Thus why the protoyping process is so important which is definitely something I have learned, just to create more ideas and be more certain on some outcomes.

I think overall our feedback on our use of Grasshopper was not too bad for people who had not used it or Rhino before. Obviously there were aspects which were not perfect however I think we recieved relatively good feedback about our progress over the semester. Personally I am happy that we managed to generate something at all, and although the fabrication was not entirely succesful as hoped I believe it gave me good grounds to move forward with computational design in the future and broaden my usage of such ways to design.

I am happy with my progress in relationship to the objectives put out at the start of the studio. I believe we succesfully managed to optioneer a brief through using modern day systematic technologies and programs. Through finding an understanding of the task at hand, we were then able to fit a plan to our brief and work towards an end result, and in the end generate a form which was true to the brief and followed its guidelines whilst only usin digital modelling and fabrication through Rhino, Grasshopper and laser cutting.

It was a first time interacting with parametric modelling and algorithmic design also, and through practice and perserverance evetually developed the ability to generate a variety of design possibilities. Through learning the programs and further understanding their benefits I learnt the abillity to explore design through the parametric way and the computational way.

My skills in using 3D media have improved vastly. Before studio Air my experience with both 3D programming and modelling outside of SketchUp. Therefore this semester I am over the moon to have been taught how to use Rhino and Grasshopper and also been given the opportunity to test out both 3D printing and lasercutting - two avenues I am looking forward to exploring further.

It has furthered my critical thinking in terms of design as well. Previously I had brushed off the use of the computers as I saw it as too one dimensional. I can now see that the opposite and can give you so many more avenues to explore. I now understand also how to question some designs and further push my ideas instead of perhaps just becoming complacent. It has broadened my views to the opinions and design of architecture and furthermore our capabilities as designers.

APPENDIX PART C Photograph of Melb Uni Car Park http://www.southeastasia-images.com/keyword/Car/i-FLxGRFc/A