Module 4 skin and bone thi khanh hoa phan 705931

DIGITAL DESIGN + FABRICATION SM1, 2015 CLOSE YOUR EYES

THI KHANH HOA PHAN 705931 Tutor: Michelle James

“ Living is easy with eyes closed ...”

- John Lennon

IDEATION 6

IDEATION With the umbrella as studied object, I was fastinated by the expanding machanism that acts as a bone to hold the fabric. Hence, my design process revolved around this core idea. To execute this expanding system I studied some other relevant precedents, such as Hoberman Sphere, which not only brought about inspiration but also help me to refine my design later on during my fabrication process.

7

UMBRELLA- STUDIED OBJECT

MEASURED DRAWINGS

As umbrella is a component-based objects, I decided to measure each part separately. I used a convential way to measure those pieces, which is to pull everthing apart and use measuring tape to physically measure them.

1 5

NATURE OF MATERIAL

2 6

3 4

7

Bone: umbrella ultilizes metal for its basic structure due to its strength; and plastic sticks at the end of the arm to increase flexibility (as the tip has to hold the fabric).

Skin: This part has many variations depending on specific design. Most of them are made of inelastic fabric, some has transparent skin, which makes the umbrella look almost invisible.

1 2 3 4 5

EVALUATION

6 7

8

After doing the measure drawing and digitalization of the umbrella, I found that the basic element of the umbrella, which is the arm, is the logic behind its operation. Thus, my analysis focused mostly on this feature.

ANALYSIS OF EXPANDING MECHAMISM 2 metal wires Strong and Flexible

Runner (to direct force)

Metal Strong material to support structure

Fabric acts as a constraint

Plastic stick Elastic. This part of the structure recieves an unbalanced force (as shown in the picture), so if it’s not elastic, the element will break in half.

VOLUME GENERTATED BY THIS EXPANDING SYSTEM 1

2

3

One of the most interesting features of the umbrella is its volume. When collapses, the objects does not create visible volume. However, when opens, its volume is not only visible but also big enough to host several person inside.

9

RECONFIGURED OBJECT

10

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

PERSONAL SPACE Sommer (1969) pointed out that introverts seem to need more personal space than extroverts. This reminds me of the book ‘Quiet’ by Susan Cain, which is about the power of introverts. The interesting thing is, while extroverts need crowd to fit in, introverts need space to thirve.

In the society where everyone tries to blend themselves in the crowd, people standing alone might seem akward, yet lots of the world’s most famous people are introverts.

It is important for reserved people to have plenty of personal space, so that they can observe and think freely. I want to dedicate my future design to this special group.

FEEDBACK AFTER M1 I received the the feedback that my notion of personal space should be less abstract and explore more with physical volume.

DESIGN RESPONSE In my later design process (in M3), while I were looking for inspiration, I came back and reviewed carefully my initial design and feedbacks in M1. I started to realize what I should have done was not to abandon my idea while it was not fully developed, but to take the feedback and keep working on it. Thanks to that enlightment, derived from the idea of introverts’ personal space, I came up with the design that when I shut my eyes, my personal space will extend. My personal space measurements were reconducted and mapped as shown on the left.

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

11

DESIGN

DESIGN GROUP 1 - DAEL SIM - THI KHANH HOA PHAN Both of us embraced the idea of expandable structure.

After teaming up, we decided to develop two different approaches to second skin design. Mine is a floating cloak. Dael’s approach is a sphere around the body which took the idea of hobeman sphere. Interesingly, I came accross a toy which has hobeman sphere structure behind it during my exploration in week 3. Yet I found it’s too risky to embrace the idea of a huge expandable structure like hobeman shpere, because when fully expanded, it volumn is 3-4 times larger than a closed one. Dael, however, was so obsessed with the idea that I was then interested in, too. We found that the hobeman sphere has so much potential to make a fantastic expanding design.

13

SECOND SKIN PROPOSED DESIGN V.1 My very first prototype was to replicate the basis of expandable structure. Dael then successfully modelled our final design in Rhino and produced a 1-1 prototype.

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

REVISED DESIGN V.2 We decided to have a layer wrap around the structure.

This will not only produce visual effects, but also acts as a constraint to the structure (like how the umbrella works).

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

15

FABRICATION

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

FABRICATION -

MAKING IS AN ACTIVE WAY OF THINKING

As Michael Speaks precisely put it, ‘Making become knowledge or intelligence creation. In this way thinking and doing, design and fabrication, and design and final prototype become blurred, interactive, and part of a non-linear means of innovations’. Indeed, the fabrication of early prototypes has greatly affected the way I designed.

In the process of producing prototypes, I realized many opportunities to develop more complex geometry. For example, when I became comfortable with balancing the force of the string, I found that the ruled surface itself was quite simple and straightforward. Thus, I change my lofting surface so that it has more enhancing visual effects than the original one.

Rhino is very helpful because it not only create the geometry itself but also control the logic behind it. Thus, to subtly change the geometry, I did not need to recreate the whole thing, just gave my desired input and Rhino will automatically update the design.

It also enabled me to make change to my design without worrying too much about precise calculation. At the beginning when I was not familiar with Rhino, I did not make the element precise, even in milimeter. This, however, was not a problem because whatever measurement I input, as long as I model it correctly, it will always fabricatable.

17

REVISED DESIGN

TOP VIEW FINISHING POINT

After splitting from my group, I made several major changes to my design.

FRONT VIEW

1. Keep the basic elements I only adopted the basic structure of the design. I think the really cool part of our design is down to its very basic elements, which looks like boomerang shape. This element helps the design to gain its variation in outward directions.

ISOMETRIC VIEW SIDE VIEW

2. Redefine personal space Due to my observation, I realize that when someone’s vision is obscured, they tend to defend for their personal space by extending their arms in different directions. The aim of my design is to visualize that extended space.

FABRICATION OPTIMIZATION FABRICATION PROCESS THAT OPTIMIZES MATERIAL USAGE The cutting files were nested in such a way that optimized material usage and cutting time (by arranging position of elements as well as removing duplicate lines)

Some subtle refinements were made in the design so that it reduces cutting time and material waste.

19

FIRST PROTOTYPE 1. Shape of the basic elenment Understanding that the curving structure was generated by the shape of the smallest elements, I decided to simplify that part by make it smaller and eventually it looks much nicer than the previous one.

PROTOTYPE FABRICATION AND REFINEMENTS

2. Material testing for bone structure I tested 3 types of materials for : boxboard, MDF and perplex. Analysis of material capacity is attached.

SECOND PROTOTYPE 3. Hinges optimisation I used different types of bolts and nuts to get the best effects.

4. Finishing points for arms I customized the finishing of the arms so that it looks nicer. This optimization can be seen at the final design.

5. Change the length of the handle As I realized the length of the handle was quite long, it made the whole structure more fragile and uncontrollable. thus, I decided to shorten it.

FINAL PROTOTYPE 6. Different experiments with RULED surface When I felt more comfortable with strings, I was tempted to try more complex surface other than just regular lofting surface.

I experimented with different way of lofting surface and find that the reverse lofting was asthetically more attracting and complex, so I decided to go for that one.That was the biggest change in the final 1:1 protoype.

7. Experiments with different string type I used 4 types of strings. At the final design, I did try to use elastic string. It worked fantastic at the beginning, but then broke. Thus, I then used the other one.

8. Big issues resolved after digital model was updated Digital model was updated, which let me realize there was inherent problems with the way I fabricated the design. After the digital design, the fabrication was much easier and more precise, produced my desired effects.

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

IMPLICATION OF DIGITAL FABRICATION

1. Two-dimentional fabrication allows the realization of DEVELOPABLE SURFACE After the reading, I found the developable surface really interesting, especially the ruled surface as it has the most direct connection to my design. I, thus, went on testing many effect that I can produce with the skin.

I think the most advatage of this type of method is it’s affordable and quick to get the pieces (1 day, compared to other method, 3D printing and CNC cutter an take 2-3 days).

2. The amount of prototype I was able to produce with the aid of laser cutter Actually, I think my design is basically not so complicated so I just use the basic fabrication process, which is two-dimentional fabrication. My basic structure (hereby referred as the bone) was cut completely by laser cutter. Thanks to the machine, I was able to make large amount of prototypes in reletively short time (once a week).

1. Because it has certain thinkness, I have to use several pieces at the same position to get the desired thickness (strength) One dominant example from my design is the part that is attached to the body. This is a lesson learnt. I should have considered to use other fabrication method for this part at the early stage of the design process. My mistake is to frame the 2D cutter in my mind, and only design so that it’s cuttable with laser cutter. This proved to be inefficient and caused a lot of troubles during my fabrication process.

2. The tiny holes are cut nicely and precisely that makes my fabrication process a lot easier The little tiny holes I used for strings were cut nicely and precisely that I though I would be hard if I manually use drill or anything. And also, imagine that job was done manually, it will take a lot of time just to mark the position of the holes before really cut them, and can not make sure whether they’re in the right position or not.

3. With the fact that laser cutter can work with different materials, I was able to test my design with boxboard, MDF and perplex (clear) It’s so nice that I can get all 3 materials cut at the same time and get to decide which material to go with in just 2 days.

Although laser cutter is quick and precise, It has many constraints.

- MDF leave a really ugly marks at the back, which is an important reason why I tried to use spray. Yet spray texture was quite uneven. Thus, I decided to change to perplex. Perplex has a protective layer at the back, so it produces a nice finish on both sides of my design.

3. When it comes to joints and notches, it quickly becomes unexpectable Because it’s 2D fabrication, when it comes to joints and notches, the problem is to get all the pieces connected at the precise position, or else it would not work. This, too, has affected my design a lot.

4. As I have to work with strings, it involves the precision in balancing forces.

When I first tried to put the string in the design, I encountered many problems.

- How to get the string through the hole. Because the diameter of the hole is 1mm, and the diameter of the string I used is estimated to be 3/4 of that size, it turned out to be quite challenging to pull it through. I was then, lightly burned the end of the string, and this method was efficient that in my final design, I was able to (Hoa Phan, 2015)

21

FORCE ANALYSIS

The top end of the upward arm is extremely weak. Ideally, the arm should get smaller in size from beginning to end, resembles how the tree grows, or like the structure of umbrella. I did try to reinforce this part by increase form 2 to 3 pieces, but eventually did not make big difference.

This part of the design is very fragile and always has tendancy to break. In my early prototype, this part was the first element to break.

The, during fab process of further prototype, I approached a different fabrication precedure, which prevent this part from moving intenstively.

This part of the design is weak due to the arm itself. Thus, this part will break if balancing the force was not done properly

F

F

This part of the design is strongest part of the design, referred to the explainaition last slide. The design takes advatage of this part to hold the upward arm so that it holds at place

This part of the design is problematic.

As the outer arms do not have any force to balance with the string, they tend to move inwards. This remains unsolved in my design

F

This part of the design is very fragile because it has to hold the upward-extensive arm. Also, because the material here is not continuous (due to the hinge), so it tends to break apart.

The hinges are generally strongest part. One important reason why I lofted the surface other way round is to take advatage of the strength of this part

This type of connection is relatively week. This part, however, is not a big concern because not much movement is happening here.

F

FABRICATION SEQUENCE I anticipated some bad situation that might occur. First, as perplex is very fragile, I spared few pieces so that I can subsitute them if necessary.

This was indeed the case. There were, many situation I did not expect, such as performance of the string. Luckily, as I fabricated 3 days before submission, I was able to switch to another type of string. It ended up OK in the end, but I wish I had more time to retry the elastic string. My

handles

a few pieces were broken

broken string

arm when collapses

arm when extends

all good, proceed with the rest

first string line

finishing line

a day later, string broke

I tried to reconnect, but there were so many

finish

effect

find the reason. It’s the material itself that did not work, not the fab process

change material

arms are connect with handles

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

23

EXPLODED ASSEMBLY

25

DETAIL 2

FINAL DESIGN

Front view

Top view

27 Side view

Isometric view

SECOND-SKIN PROPOSED FINAL DESIGN - DIGITALIZATION My final design in perspective.

VISUAL EFFECT Front elevaton

SECOND-SKIN PROPOSED FINAL DESIGN - REAL IMAGE My final design in perspective.

(Hoa Phan, 2015)

VISUAL EFFECTS

REFLECTION

REFLECTION After completing the fabrication of my final design, I have to say I am really happy, because it looks exactly the same as my Rhino model, as well as 90% of what I imagined. Yet the only thing that I feel not so complete, is that I was not able to fully reflect my initial intent of my design,x which is the expandable structure. My design looks good visually when fully expands, but how it opens/closes is not well refined and well executed yet. I soon realized that my understanding of the expanding structure is not thorough enough, such as where is the anchor point of the whole structure? To what degree can the arm rotate?

How can I control its rotation? Why the 2 handles do not align?

These are my major troubles that I stuck with during my design process. The reason why I could not resolve them back then mainly because I could not visualize that problem; ‘imagine’ how it works is just too hard for me due to my limited experience with expandable structure. Thus, during the last 2 weeks, I spent time explore Grasshopper as a tool to simulate how the expandable structure will work in real-life performance. Now I wish I started to use Grasshopper earlier, because it basically gives answers to all my questions.

33

I started exploring The Hoberman sphere, as this is our biggest precedence, and host my initial idea.

After successfully modelling the umbrella in Grasshopper, I realized even the umbrella has 2 types of expanding mechanism. The arm expansion, which I studied earlier, actually has 2 anchor points, or as I termed it, ‘lateral direct force’; while looking the object as as a whole, the umbrella expansion has only 1 anchor point (body runner).

It is interesting to see how it might ‘look’ the same to the naked eyes, but actually not the same at all.

After reviewing my design, I understand why it did not perform properly. It is because I originally chose the wrong type of expansion. While Hoberman sphere is 1-point direct force (my major precedent), I used 2-point direct force in my design (like with the arm of umbrella). That means, I should have kept 1 handle anchored, and only move 1 handle; which will definitely make the peformance predictable.

35

I can control: - how it open/close - number of string - length of most of the elements

FINAL DESIGN GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION This is the grasshopper definition for my final design. I could not, however, model the exact detail (the primary element), but because I were exploring the expanding mechanism, I voluntarily skipped it. Also, I know for sure I can definitely improve it, because currently there are many redundancies, but I am happy with what I have learnt and accomplished with Grasshopper and grateful for this exciting and mind-opening road. It really useful because digitalization not only acts as a supporting mean to visualize my design but actually a tool in the design process, resolving problems, and also help me parametrically control my design without having to come back and model it from scratch. Now the vague notion of digital design has made perfect sense to me, as it is undoubtedly powerful.

37

PARAMETRIC DESIGN

THIRD INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION In the reading Third Industrial Revolution, the author visualized a future which the distributed and collaborative business model are going to change the way we think about manufacturing. He emphasizes the role of lateral power that is transforming the manufacturing economy of the world.

While the old method of mass production requires centralized and hierarchical command and mechanism, the new trend of distributed manufacturing rely on network system, where everyone can become a manufacturer, in their own home. This transformation is achieved through technology combining computer-aided design and manufacturing, in which 3D printing is a leading germ. Rifkin imagines the world that ‘customers will routinely download digitally manufactured, customized products and print them out at their business or residence’. This method of manufacturing not only reduces logistics costs, but also offers a customized version of the products, or so-called mass customization. Imagine the future that we do not need to go to the physical store to buy shoes just to realize our size is out of stock; but we can ‘download’ our favorite style and 3D print it to our size at home. How amazing is that. Personally, I find the idea of 3D printing really fascinating. When I first heard about 3D printing 4 or 5 years ago, I always thought that was a high-end technology that I can never touch, let alone use. The world has changed so much since then. I am now not only able to use it, but can probably own it as the commercial desktop 3D printer is now only around AU$900. As the method of lateral manufacturing is more and more affordable and widespread, this third industrial revolution is ever nearer

39

MANAGING RISKS Major lesson in managing risk

RISK IN DESIGN PROCESS The process requires certain craft technique that outside my design experience.

This put me in constant risk throughout my fabrication process.

However, the level in which risk may affect my design decreased through time.

By that I mean, when I fabricated the first prototype, I did it with almost 80% risk that it might not work the way I wanted it to. It turned out to be exactly the case, because the length of the handle was too long and it would not hold the structure. It was not predictable as I thought it ‘looked good’ with 3D model. However, by this time, I was able to ‘feel’ and test different materials, which helps me to decide which material to go for with my final design. When it came to my second prototype, now with less risk, because at least I could make sure that the bone would work, but now 80% risk with the string. I never tested it before, and once again it caused problems because string is naturally easy to get tangled. Also, how to fabricate the string needs certain craft skills. Although it looks quite simple and straight forward, it requires certain understanding of the loft surface (how to distribute strings evenly). Only after really hand on the making process, I come to realize how much I appreciate the Undo command offered by computer software. I recalled the time when I had to redo the entire string because I skip 1 hole instead of 2! That is to say, the quality of the final product enormously relies on the dexterity and care I put on it.

Abstract representation (poor Rhino model) might lead to abstract method of making, which eventually lead to failure to produce the model with desired effects This is reflected in my whole design process. Unlike many other fellow projects that put focus on static form and geometry, mine is a movementoriented object, even the notch is rotatable. The fact that I was back then not able to produce a real-life simulation of the structure made me feel the need for proper Rhino model and consider the digital model as only a method for visualization. I now come to realize I was completely wrong because whenever I updated details in my Rhino model, and later experiment with Grasshopper, I always found certain faults that caused my model to malfunction. Thus, my poor representation of my design hindered my fabrication process.

The aim is to reduce risk as much as possible before fabrication.

I have to say I spent quite a lot of money on the fabrication process, 50% of which is mere carelessness. The common mistakes are because in my digital file was not thoroughly reviewed before submitting the job. As Paul pointed out, we should spend hours with our digital model to make sure it’s correctly modeled instead of spending hundreds of dollars for a poorly-refined model.

This is extremely true, because our project is just university-scale, if it comes to larger scale, where the budget for testing prototypes is limited, the risks should be reduced to the minimum.

Having said all of the above mistakes I’ve made during the design and fabrication process, the whole journey of design and fabrication is just delightful for me. Hours after hours spent in Burnings not only helped me to find the right bolts and nuts for my design, but also to explore many other types of materials and its capacity which I have never heard of. As a designer, I now feel the need to not only deliver my design ‘intent’, but also how it works, the exact measurement and assembly instructions associated with the design. In that process, the experience of handing on and working with real materials and improving craft skills are undoubtedly necessary.

CREDITS Page Cover

Drawings

Computation

Model Fabrication

Model Assembly

Photography

Writing

Graphic Design



 

6 7





8





9













10



11





12 

13



14 15



16



 











 









17 18





19 20







21



















22 

23 24 25











26











27



28



 













29 30



31 32



33 



35







36







37







38







39











34

40 41 Dael Sim Hoa Phan

41

REFERENCE Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space : the behavioral basis of design / Robert Sommer. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall, c1969 Architecture in the Digital Age - Design and Manufacturing /Branko Kolarevic.

Spon Press, London, c2003 Digital fabrications: architectural and material techniques / Lisa Iwamoto. New York : Princeton Architectural Press, c2009.

The third Industrial Revolution / Jeremy Rifkin. Palgrave Macmillan, C2011.pp107126 Building the Future: Recasting Labor in Architecture/ Philip Bernstein, Peggy Deamer. Princeton Architectural Press. c2008. pp 38-42