STUDIO AIR ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK SEMESTER TWO. FINN WARNOCK JULIA WALKER
Table of Contents 4  Design Task #1 6 Design Task #2
Design Task #1 Week one design tast was to draw curves in rhino then to use Grasshopper to loft the curves and the fuction of the auto update of the transformations to obtain five differnt transformations of an object form three seperate curves. The first object obtained was FIG 1.2, with a slender base reaching up towards the upper two curves with a smaller distance togeather creating a slender curving lip to one side of the object. To see the oposing surface the middle curve was moved to the bottem of the object FIG 1.3, causing an expansion of the surface bolooning outwards and futher expression of the handle. FIG.1.1
Wanting to further FIG 1.2 rather than that of FIG 1.3 the middle curve was moved towards it inital position and the top curve moved towards and tilted on 15 degree and and in the X direction, the creation of lips opposing each other in direction on oppersit ends
FIG.1.2
4
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG.1.3
FIG.1.4
FIG.1.5
FIG.1.6
CONCEPTUALISATION 5
Design Task #2
FIG.2.0 GRASSHOPPER SCHMATIC “ HOW TO MAKE HOLES IN A SOLID”
Taking the surface devloped in Design Task #1. Grasshopper was used in the devlopment of creation of holes on the surface. The first stage of this process was to subdivide the surface into points, following this was the addition of spheres onto the points. Last was the trim comand was run minusing the spheres from the surface. The first problem was after baking the production of six different surfaces each with a different row of spheres minused (FIG 2.1), this was due to the seperation of the data in grasshopper indicated by the dashed line in the comand stream. The solution to the problem “flatting” the points coming out of the subdivide comand, following baking the trim comand led to Fig 2.2 (RIGHT).
6
CONCEPTUALISATION
The last stage was to creat a solid rather than a surface, this was done by the “extrude” by 1.968 in the X diriection, this lead to a solid being developed, the full stream seen in FIG 2.0 and its corresponding output seen in FIG 2.2 LEFT.
FIG.2.1 RHINO BAKING OUT PUT PIOR TO “FLATTING” OF THE SUBDIVIDE COMAND
FIG.2.1 RHINO BAKING OUT PUT AFTER FLATTING. LEFT: AFTER EXTRUCTION OF SURFACE. RIGHT: NO EXTRUSION OF SURFACE
CONCEPTUALISATION 7
Design Task #2
FIG.2.1
FIG.2.2
8
CONCEPTUALISATION
FIG.2.3
FIG.2.4
FIG.2.5
FIG.2.6
CONCEPTUALISATION 9
Design Task #3
Pattern This weeks task was to create pattern on a non uniform surface. Figure 3.1-5. When beginning this task a image of a classical tartan was used to base the pattern on. The idea of different threads interweaving in both the vertical and the horizontal where some are absence and others are present. The cull function was used to set three different true or false statements based on a set of eleven in both the u and v direction. The resulting product seen in figure 3.4-5 was based on a soft loft of curves following the rules according to the cull.
The second exploration was of a stiffer surface with sharp parabolas at the top and the bottom (Fig 3.3). based on a longer set of curves with greater division of the surface to view the extent of the tartan pattern created. with the further defined curve it gave the patterned surface less of a material atheistic, to off set the implantation of the sharper curves spheres where placed random on the surface.
10
CONCEPTUALISATION
The final pattern created was influenced by the hounds tooth, Figure 3.1 is the single repeating unit, this would like to be investigated further to explore the propagation along the surface and culling the pattern in true and false.
FIG.3.1: (SINGLE)
CONCEPTUALISATION 11
14
CONCEPTUALISATION
CONCEPTUALISATION 15