MODULE 2 STUDENT NUMBER : 586106 GABRIELLE CARRASCO
LIMITATIONS OF MODEL
In an attempt to challenge myself creatively, I soon learnt that the complexity of my model was difficult to replicate through NURBS surfacing tools. Due to my design being comprised of two parts, my model would have to be constructed separately and then joined. The aspect of my model that posed the most concern was the twisting of the inner shell. I was told that I would have to manipulate the twisting of the surface, which was supposed to wrap around the head of my model. The limitations of this model suggest that it would be a challenge to construct in Rhino, however the design was still highly achievable.
C O N T O U R I N G: D R A W I N G & C U T T I N G
Figure 1: 5mm drawn contour lines
Figure 2: Contour slices
After moulding my 1:5 scale model, it was refrigerated in order for minimal damage to occur during contouring methods. After the model was relatively hard, I decided to use the first contouring method of ‘tracing sectional slices’ as I judged this to be most appropriate for my design. Firstly, using 5mm intervals I used a marker to draw the slices. I found that on contour lines, the clay had already begun to deform (Figure 1). After the slices were drawn, I cut the shell using a Stanley knife. At this point due to the hollow shape, the clay wasn’t keeping its form. In order to rectify damage caused through cutting, I remoulded the slices to return the scale model to my desired shape (Figure 2). Following the instructions, the slices were then laid out and numbered from the left to the right of the model (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Contour sections
TRACING CURVES
After laying out the slices, I took a photograph, providing a top view of my slices. In order to import this image into Rhino the ‘Picture Frame’ command was utilised. This was after the image had been cropped and edited in order to be produced in the best quality. The picture was scaled in order for the 1:5 scaling of the physical model to be prevalent. Next, the sections were traced using the ‘InterpCurve’ command (Figure 4). This enabled each slice to be accurately traced through the use of as many control points as needed. Opposed to the approach taken in the tutorial, it was much easier for me to trace each slice individually, rather than copying, pasting and modifying the previous slice.
Figure 4: Tracing contour slices
CREATING FORM
The sectional slices were then placed directly over one another and moved vertically in order to fit with the desired scale. After scale was established, lofting was the next stage. All the layers were selected in their correct order. Before the surface was lofted, the direction of each layer could be seen through the arrows of figure 5. The arrows needed to be swapped around in order to create the desired space.
Figure 5: Initial stages of lofting 5:
Figure 6: Lofted Model
FINE TUNING
Figure 7: Stretched sliced model
Figure 8: Compressed model
Figure 9: Lofted compressed model
Figure 10: Twisted compressed model
After placing my sectional slices on top of eachother in compliance with the tutorial, my model was intensely stretched (Figure 7). After discussions with my tutor and similar problems with my peers, we came to the conclusion that the scaling of our models and the scale of the Rhino document had misaligned the sections, causing the stretching. To fix this the slices were simply moved closer together, creating an appropriate distance between them and leading to a more desired shape (Figure 8). After lofting, the next stage was to twist the model to fit the designed shape. In order to do this, the ‘rotate’ command was used from different viewports in order to achieve a twisted shell (Figure 10).
FINE TUNING
In lofting the surface after compressing scale and twisting certain slices a very organic form was created. In order to create straighter and more defined edges I used the control points to smooth out the lofted surface. I encountered many problems in attempting to create a more computerised, straight cut form of my model. After making many adjustments figure 11 was my final outcome. This model and the steps I had to take from this stage led to thinking about reduction and abstraction. I believe that since I didn’t have too many skills on Rhino at the time, an ‘optimal’ way of transferring my design onto Rhino was not taken and therefore my model was forced to change. I used the theory of abstraction to keep the key elements of my design. It was also this theory that led to the rebuilding of my model.
Figure 11: Edited, compressed, twisted and lofted model.
ADJUSTMENTS WHEN PANELLING:REBUILDING
Figure 12: Overcomplicated form
Figure 14: Rebuilt form
Figure 13: Lofted and overcomplicated form
Figure 15: Rebuilt form
Figure 16: Rebuilt form with spiral.
To avoid panelling problems and as advised by my tutors I used the ‘Rebuild’ command to simplify the shell (before and after can be seen in Figure 12 and 14 respectively). Through this command the amount of control points was reduced, thus producing a smoother form. After the shell form was finalised, the spiral had to be constructed. Due to the diameter of the spiral being equal throughout the whole form it was produced without using a contour method. To do this, a freeform spiral was drawn from the top view of the spiral, thus being wound around it. The spiral was then wrapped around the shell through moving control points using different viewpoints. After the spiral was wound into place, it was made three dimensional through the ‘Pipe’ command.
RENDERED MODEL
T R I A L L I N G P A N E L S: 2D AND 3D
Tribasic- 2D Panelling
Custom shape- Panel Custom 2D
‘Library Patterns’Custom 2D Panelling
Pyramid 1- 3D Panelling
Pyramid 1- 3D Panelling
Wedge- 3D Panelling
EXPERIMENTATION WITH PAPER
Figure 18- Golden Triangle
Figure 17: N A C R E The surface of nacre (which is part of my natural process of pearl formation) is my inspiration for the panelling of my spiral. The spiral is supposed to resemble the nacre making its way around the pearl in multiple layers. I felt as through the random series of shapes on the left figure 17 translate to the ;’super triangle’ (figure 18). This triangle is made up of multiple right angle triangles and has been tessellated to be used as a design on many designs such as Federation Square.
LIGHTING With the intention of using the Pearl’s nacre as inspiration for panelling, light would have to be incorporated heavily into this design: due to the iridescence that the nacre provides. In physically constructing this structure, I also plan to use cellophane in order to allow the LED lights to provide a sense of pearlescence. The photographs on the right depict the right angle triangle tessellation I intend to produce. With lots of windows and thin intersecting lines, the light beams through to the create an aesthetic of elegance and softness. In order to compensate for a lack of structure, thicker paper should be used, most likely 250gsm. The intentions of this panelling would be better suited to two-dimensional panelling due to the delicacy.
EXPERIMENTATION WITH PAPER
Figure 19- Shape representation of Oyster Rings.
SOLIDITY In order to contrast with the panelling of the spiral, I want to create quite a solid surface for the shell. The oyster shell itself is protective and strong, thus providing the same aesthetics as solid panelling. Through the use of a solid base, the light from the spiral will be intensified making it the focal point of the lantern which is my intention. My only aspirations for the panelling of this part of the design is to create the same aesthetics as the shell. I want to attempt to integrate the rigid lines of the oyster shell into the panelling.
Figure 21- 80gsm Paper
To see which material would be most appropriate to construct this part of the model, I tested out two lighter types of paper. Since this model is attempting to be quite solid, the paper will not need to be as strong as the spiral. Figure 21 (80 gsm paper) folded easily, however it also managed to lose it shape very quickly, thus being undesirable. Secondly, I tested figure 22 (210gsm paper) this paper held it shape and was easy to work with as long as it was only one layer. Before constructing the final model, tests should be made with paper around 150gsm. Figure 22: 210gsm paper Figure 20- Golden Triangle
S P E C I F I C T R I A L I N G O F P A N E L S: S P I R A L
Custom 2D patternIn this pattern I attempted to incorporate the ‘super triangle’. However, I found it slightly difficult to create this triangle. Instead I altered the shape to only have 4 triangles within it, these were not all right angles. This posed a problem with the tessellation of the shapes, however still produced a desirable outcome.
Custom 2D pattern with ‘Fin Edges’This panelling is definitely attempting to take on the consideration of light. Attempting to make the structure as open as possible, I used ‘Fin Edges’ to give a bit of weight to the connections. However, due to the circular shape of my model the panels took on a chaotic form. The aesthetic that this panelling provided did not fit my natural process.
Custom 2D pattern with ‘Extrude Edges’Through this panelling I was attempting to achieve the same aims as the last model. The extrusions of the structure were too harsh, detracting from its openness.
S P E C I F I C T R I A L I N G O F P A N E L S: S P I R A L
Dense 2D patternThis panelling delved away from the ‘super triangle’ inspiration, however I chose it because I believe it produced the same qualities in a calmer fashion. This panelling does not have windows for light, but this pattern was an integral starting point to the panelling I wanted to achieve.
2D pattern dense with ‘Extrusion of Edges’The same techniques from the previous slide were utilised to try and create a delicate frame for this ‘dense’ pattern. The extrusion of this panelling was slightly less chaotic than previous trials. However, with the width of the flaps, I think the effects of the light wouldn’t be performing at their highest capacity.
2D pattern dense with ‘Fin Edges’With this use of ‘Fin Edges’ I reduced the notch width resulting in a thinner frame. I think that this frame is thick enough and will also be able to communicate my goal aesthetics when installed with LED lights.
S P E C I F I C T R I A L I N G O F P A N E L S: S H E L L
3D Tube- Custom 3D Panelling This panelling was experimenting with the ring idea that sprung from the oyster shell. Unable to get my panelling grid to create a circular effect the desired effects of this panel were not achieved. I also thing that this panelling will be very impractical to physically produce.
Box- 3D Panelling I think this created a suitable contrast to the panelling of the spiral. This box shape allows for dips of the shape, however still manages to produce a very solid aesthetic. The incorporation of different sized boxes in this panelling creates some variation which will work well with the consistency of the spiral panelling.
3D Cone- Custom 3D Panelling The idea for cones branched from figure 19. Due to the dips and dives of the surface the panelling was relatively uneven. However, I think this lends to the character of the oyster and is in fact an advantage.
S P E C I F I C T R I A L I N G O F P A N E L S: S H E L L
Custom Shape- Custom 3D pattern This 2D panelling was literally taking the shape of figure 19. This type of panelling would be extremely difficult to construct. Due to the lack of solidity of the frame it doesn’t produce intended aesthetics. It should be remembered that this pattern was made with the intention to be modelled on a circular grid.
3D Donut Shape- Custom 3D pattern with ‘Extrusion of Curves’ This donut shape progressed from the previous trial. I wanted to create a three dimensional surface that produced more solid qualities opposed to the previous model. Again with Rhino not panelling some aspects of the form it led to a more desirable, rigid feel. Again this panelling would be highly difficult to produce.
Partition- 3D panelling This panelling branched from the box panels from the previous slide. I wanted to elaborate on it, this was in order to see if it worked in conjunction with the spiral. This panelling worked extremely well with the curves of the shell’s form. This model also embodied the rigid features of the oyster shell.
S P E C I F I C T R I A L I N G O F P A N E L S: C O M B I N I N G S P I R A L A N D S H E L L
Through the combination of the two forms, it was clear which was more appealing physically, aesthetically and of course in relation to the natural process of pearl formation. The model on the left contrasted a lot more which is what I aim to do. I believe that both of the elements take on their intended characteristics and work together to create whole as well. With the box shape being similar to the skeleton of the spiral a bond is formed between them. With the many windows in the spiral the panelling of the shell creates subtle intricacy to intrigue the audience. Despite being produced through angular lines the left model produces a less chaotic and smoother result. I have no doubt that this model fits all desired aims perfectly.
FINAL DESIGN TOP VIEW
PERSPECTIVE VIEW
FRONT VIEW
RIGHT HAND SIDE VIEW
PRECEDENTS FOR PANELLING
T H E H O U S E O N F I R E (SOUTH MULE CANYON, UTAH)This untouched ruin appears to have flame-like structures made from sandstone bursting out of the house, this natural phenomenon has relations to the bond between the shell and spiral of my design. The reason why I find this house extremely appealing is due to its contrasting properties. The ‘flames’ are boldly enhanced through the simplicity of the house. Despite these structures being opposite in form, they provide a harmonious bond.
T H E A T R E A G O R A (UN-STUDIO, THE NETHERLANDS)The Agora Theatre is aimed to revive Dutch towns from war through developing a focus on ‘artifice and enchantment’. I specifically chose this view of the theatre due to the way in which light is introduced. The light is focused and contrasting to the harsh angles of the walls and the strong red colour. In this way the gentle element is emphasised into something powerful. I aim to develop this same relation in my lantern and communicate light powerfully.
M O T O I Y A M A M O T O (ARTIST)As introduced in Module 1, Motoi Yamamoto, an installation artist inspires me through his use of pattern. Throughout my panelling I have kept Yamamoto’s balanced salt installations in mind. Through delicate and intricate patterns, he creates the exact aesthetics I aim to. I mainly look to Yamamoto’s artworks for decisions in regards to spacing and balance.
PROTOTYPE
In encountering Rhino problems when attempting to unfold and fabricate my model and not having time to seek assistance, I decided to attempt to recreate my model by hand. In doing this, (even though I didn’t get experience building from Rhino patterns) I got a better understanding as to how materials worked. Informed by previous trials, I decided to use 210gsm paper. I found that the strength of this paper held extremely well despite its thin frames. I was also able to observe the behaviour of light. This prototype communicated a gentle and elegant aesthetic which I was attempting to achieve. This was mainly due to the gentle dispersion of light. I also found that this light interacts with its surroundings in the same way as my precedent, Theatre Agora.
REFLECTION This module proved to be extremely challenging for me, mainly because I was forced to move from my comfort zone of analogue methods, into the digital realm. The fact that I didn’t feel comfortable with using Rhino does not mean that I don’t understand it’s benefits. As Scheurer and Stehling explain in ‘Lost in Parameter Space?’, computer aided design has a lot to offer . Developing the creativity of humans into an organised and precise form. As we are working with natural processes and underlying patterns, working with a computer that is able to easily replicate surfaces can be very beneficial. I believe it is only my beginner skills on Rhino that decrease my ability to translate my creativity exactly the way I want to. Through using panelling tools I was advised to simplify my model, change it into something with minimal points and clear cut lines in order for the computer to understand it better. I think the fact that I had to teach myself a lot of skills on Rhino and go through the consequent frustration that came with it, made the design process a bit un-enjoyable. From Module 1, my design has changed dramatically. However, I would not be able to say it has created a worse outcome. Using Rhino has allowed me to look at my process in a more simplistic way and take on a completely different style from what I’m used to. Another highly important aspects of the design process was the testing of materials. As discussed in the second reading; in the real architectural world, computers have the ability to apply the strength, compression, tension etc. of a material making real life construction highly simplified. In experimenting with paper, time only permitted me to experiment with 80gsm and 210gsm paper, anything higher than 250gsm and the moulding and cutting of the paper would have become too difficult. However, feeling and understanding different materials can develop a whole different dimension to a persons work, it also can make large changes structurally. In attending the lectures, I found the different perspectives from different fields interesting, especially week 5’s lecture on
composition. However, I feel that other than sharing possible precedents, the lectures were quite unhelpful in a module that had such a steep learning curve for Rhino. I have learnt so many skills from module 2 . Despite the frustration that I had to go through to grasp them ,these are skills that have changed my perspective on design software and will definitely be useful for future years.
REFERENCES •
•
•
•
•
•
A square full of triangles . 2012. A square full of triangles . [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.qedcat.com/archive/federation.html. [Accessed 30 August 2012]. House on Fire Ruin - Mule Canyon, Utah. 2012. House on Fire Ruin - Mule Canyon, Utah. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.naturalbornhikers.com/trails/houseonfire.html. [Accessed 1 September 2012]. Theatre Agora / UNStudio | ArchDaily. 2012. Theatre Agora / UNStudio | ArchDaily. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/100224/theatre-agoraunstudio/. [Accessed 01 September 2012]. Motoi Yamamoto "Salt Installation, Artist". 2012. Motoi Yamamoto "Salt Installation, Artist". [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.motoi.biz/english/e_top/e_top.html. [Accessed 8 August 2012]. Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 7079 Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51