[ARCH421: GEOMETRIC MODELING] JEFF NADER WINTER 2012
[TABLE OF CONTENTS] BLOOM: Orchid Morphology......................................................................01
MORPH: Anamorphic Projection.............................................................03
FOLD: Geomorphic Disruption...................................................................07
SCAN: Shiitake Taxonomy...........................................................................13
[BLOOM: ORCHID MORPHOLOGY]
BLOOM: ORCHID MORPHOLOGY ARCH 421_Winter 2012 Faculty: Joshua Bard
Project:1.1
2.
3.
Media: Rhino, Illustrator
T h e m o d e l i n g o f c o m p l e x g e o m e t r y o f t e n c h a l l e n g e s m e a n s o f r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a t r e v e a l m o m e n t s o f t e m p o r a l i t y a n d m o r p h o l- o g y . F o r t h e f i r s t e x c e r s i s e in both scientific exploration and problem solving within the digital world we where asked to represent the stillness of a blooming flower. Floral taxonomy was the initial step in understanding the geometry behind the unfolding of the petals. Documentation of the process became a very important initial step in the construction of the various layers of folds. Organic forms on a micro level often show moments of inconcistancies within the geometry, that requires a multi-angle observation approach of the subject. Chosen moments of the bloom cycle must be captured from at least three andles (front, side and top view). Upon completion, Using Rhino Nurbs modeling software as the tool of simulation and representation allowed us to explore the potential and limitations of a single engine for complex geomtrical modeling. 1.
01
[1. Rendered [1 R d d Perspective P ti View] Vi ] [2. [2 Line Li Drawing D i - Front F t View] Vi ] [3. [3 Line Li Drawing D i - Side View]]
02
[FOLD: GEOMORPHIC DISRUPTION]
FOLD:
3.
GEOMORPHIC DISRUPTION
ARCH 421_Winter 2012
Project:3.1
Faculty: Joshua Bard | Media: Grasshopper, Rhino, Galapagos, Illustrator B e f o r e I b e g a n d e v e l o p i n g a d i g i t a l a l g o r i t h m , m y e x p l o r a t i o n f o c u s e d o n r e s e a r c h i n g e x i s t i n g m o d e l s t h a t c o u l d i n f o r m m e o f -a n e w a p p r o a c h t o t h i s subject. By consistently testing smaller folds of rigid origami models, It Was difficult to fold the pattern when the sheet reached it maximum curvature (completely folded). After reviewing a series of digital algorithm provided by brave origami folders before me, i became familiar with the possibilities and limitation of origami folding within the following computer aided programs; Rhinoceros, Grasshopper, kangaroo, and Karamba. Rhinoceros, as always is the visual output of a series of plug-ins running through grasshopper and other algorithmic engines. Kangaroo; as a physics engine, and Karamba for structural analysis. These different plug-ins were a big help in answering many of the unpracticed questions. The origami definition that i ended up exploring began with the idea of a tube or a down spout and eventually morphed itself with the idea of a meandering river. The aim was to explore how disruption of flow could occur thru these origami pieces. I also took on the challenge of incorporating Galapagos into the definition. Galapagos as i found it a new means of bridging the gap between parametric design and evolutionary computing. The purpose was to populate a series of the meandering gutters base on a series of parameters with the means being the volume of the system simply calculated by dividing the area of the origami by the volume.
4.
Process is more important than outcome
BASIC SHAPE MANIPULATION
"When the outcome drives the process we will only ever go to where we’ve already been. If process drives outcome we may not know where we’re going, but we will know we want to be there."
1. BASE CIRCLE
Bruce Mau, Incomplete Manifesto for Growth, 1998
ATTRACTION POINT “Y”
10 DIVISIONS
ATTRACTION POINT “X” + RHINO INPUT (BASE CIRCLE + 2 POINTS)
+ DEFORM GEOMETRY BY VECTORS
+ EXTRUDE (RANDOM HEIGHTS)
+ INITIAL SURFACE (BASE GEOMETRY)
MOVE 006 Y
2.
MOVE 006 X MOVE 005 Y MOVE 005 X MOVE 004 Y
MODIFICATION IN THE “Y” DIRECTION
MODIFICATION IN THE “X” DIRECTION
MOVE 004 X
MOVE 003 X MOVE 003 Y
MOVE 002 X
MOVE 002 Y
MOVE 001 X
MOVE 001 Y
GENE # 01326 [ SIDE VIEW ]
GENE # 01326 [ FRONT VIEW ]
[1. Conceptual Idea Sketch] [2. Grasshopper Definition] [3. Meandering River Research] [4. Origami manipulation Controls]
07
08
09
10
11
12
[SCAN: SHIITAKE TAXONOMY]
SCAN: SHIITAKE TAXONOMY ARCH 421_Winter 2012 Faculty: Joshua Bard
2.
Project:4.1
Media: 3D Laser Scanner, Grasshopper, Rhino Script, Illustrator
R e v e r s e E n g i n e e r i n g a s a g e o m e t r i c m o d e l i n g t o o l a l l o w s u s t o e x p l o r e e x i s t i n g p h y s i c a l m o d e l s t h a t h a v e n o h i s t o r i c a l d r a w i n-g s o r d o c u m e n t a t i o n s . 3D Scanners allow for such process to exist leveraging the role of Reverse Engineering as an accesible tool for design. First, the scanner generates a 3D model of the part, then, it uses specialized applications to generate a digital point cloud based on an existing polygonal grid. Software that comes supplied with the scanner facilitate the transfer from point clouds to 3D models through a number of widely used formats, which makes it considerably easier to transfer data between applications. The chosen object to be scanned for this assignment was a Shiitake Mushroom measuring approximatly 2 inches in length. we chose to scan at high fidelity in hope of caputring as much detail as possible from the sample at hand. Unfortunatley doing so resulted in a very large and highly dense mesh that made it impossible to reduce the mesh without loosing peaces of the geometry. With the time frame for this assignment we attempted to work with the mesh as is, operating on it with a series of Rhino script commands that utilize concepts of anamorphic projection explored earlier in the course allowing us to alter the physical mesh of the scanned shiitake mushroom. The result was highly organic in nature and very interesting in comparison to its natural geometry.
1.
This is a good mesh.
1.
Importants thing to consider with this mesh: Mesh has 5949 naked edges. Although this does not necessarily mean that the mesh is bad, naked edges can cause problems if the ultimate goal is STL output. General information about this mesh: Mesh does not have any degenerate faces. Mesh does not have any zero length edges. Mesh does not have any non manifold edges. Mesh does not have any duplicate faces. Mesh does not have any faces that could make it better if their directions were flipped. Mesh does not have any disjoint pieces. Mesh does not have any unused vertices.
13
ID: 865d4cb4-7bb6-460b-9a2e-82b159fc2fc5 (753) Layer name: Default Render Material: source = from layer index = -1 Attribute UserData: UserData ID: B0EE2168-8EC6-42ed-A962-26DEB8CC8F9A Plug-in: Rhino Render description: Rhino Renderable Object UserData saved in file: no copy count: 1 Geometry: Valid mesh. Open polygon mesh: 254283 vertices, 84761 polygons with normals bounding box: (-91.545,-40.269,310.005) to (-33.0416,14.3162,352.754)
[1. Rhino “checkmesh� Results] [2. Output From 3D Scanner] [3. Photographs of Scanned Samples]
14
SCAN: SHIITAKE TAXONOMY ARCH 421_Winter 2012
4.
Project:4.1
Faculty: Joshua Bard | Media: 3D Laser Scanner, Grasshopper, Rhino Script, Illustrator 1.
2.
-
3.
[1. Rhino “Inverter” Results] [2. Rendered Cluster ] [3. Anamorphic Comparisons] [4. Anamorphic Geometry]
15
16