Digital Design - Module 02 Semester 1, 2019 Lucas Becerra
910143 Jun Hun Fong + Studio Number
Critical Reading: Kolerevic B. 2003. Architecture in the Digital Age
Kolerevic described three fundamental types of fabrication techniques in the reading. Outline the three techniques and discuss the potential of Computer Numeric Controlled fabrication with parametric modelling. (150 words max)
Kolerevic’s three fundamental types of fabrication are described as additive, substractice and formative fabrication techniques. Each technique allows the fabrication of parametric modelling to be achieveable with accuracy. Subtractive fabrication is essentially the process of removing material from a volume. Moreoever, Additive fabrication is simplistically the technique of adding materials in layers to produce a solid volume. Lastly, Formative fabrication refers to the formation of forms through reshaping or deformation by applying forces such as heat or steam. Overall computer Numeric Controlled Fabrication has greater potential to provide more accurate measurements and forms closer to the intended parametric model than would otherwise be possible.
2
SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Surface Creation
The process of creating these surfaces initially depended on creating a solid set of surfaces which would later be connected by a waffle structure. To achieve extreme curves, the surfaces have been given values on two different ends of the spectrum creating really dramatic curvavture. The zoomed in image shows the process of creating the projected surfaces. The other part of the script was no longer necessary as the surfaces could be plugged into a brep. This allowed to iterate many surfaces freely with no limitations on having to bake the surface to save progress. The bottom right photograph shows the many interations of surfaces.
3
4
SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Surface Creation
The first interation of the script had only one set of surfaces and no change in 2D and 3D. The second image had incorporated a weave into the design to allow the creation of both 2D and 3D surfaces for the model. The complexity of the 2D panelling in this instance somewhat detracts from the prominance of the 3D panelling and ruins the overall aesthetic of the design which is why later on in the model the 2D panel was simplified. Lastly, I chose the third one as this was the first instance where I tried out an attractor point within the panelling. The attractor point was an interesting concept, as it had a similar effect to creating a bounding box over a pyramid but slightly more dramatic. however, the design once implemented with 2D panelling lost its appeal somewhat and was ultimately left out for the final model.
5
Isometric View
The panelling of these surfaces was manually done. This allowed for greater control of the flow and aesthetic of the overall design. This is a somewhat of an indicator of how digital design and the designer can work symbiotically.
The Waffle was made entirely from the script. Initally some parts of the waffle were believed to be unecessary but due to the way the panelling overhangs it would be needed to ensure the physical model would be able to connect stablly to the waffle.
6
SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Laser Cutting
Due to time limits every part of the laser cut was done inividually. However, upon doing so there was an easier way to unroll the panelling through using the join command to ensure that most panels would unroll as a group. Nevertheless, through unrolling individually I was able to gain greater leway with parts of the model fitting together. In addition due to the size of the model there was no need to use unnecessary tab creations and by creating manual tabs I was wable to ensure all the tabs would fit nicely in the model. Also to ensure cost was reduced the labelling was done digitally and while physically making the model was done in steps to ensure each piece was in its correct position.
7
SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Matrix and Possibilities
Lofts
1.2
1.1
Key
1.4
1.3
{0,0,0}
Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z) Attractor / Control Curves
{0,1549,135}
{120,440,150}
{0,1213,135}
Grid Points
{150,1699,150}
{0,1549,135}
{0,290,135}
{150,1699,150}
{150,1213,150} {0,1318,0}
{0,1654,0}
{0,1654,0}
{0,290,5}
{150,395,0} {120,1213,0}
{Index Selection}
2.1
2.2
Paneling
Paneling Grid & Attractor Point
{Index Selection}
{150,1549,15}
{150,1699,150} {Index Selection}
{Index Selection}
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
{-4741,2795,189}
{Attractor + Detractor Point Location}
{No Attractor Point}
3.1
3.2
+
{Attractor + Detractor Point Location}
The matrix initially starts off with a general exploration of the panelling. It then plays around with attractor points, however, for the final design the attractor point was left out. The panelling was essentially the focus. and then the last section of the matrix explores the variation in panelling.
8
EXPLODED ISOMETRIC The isometric details the layers of the model. The various elements of the design are annotated.
To better show the model each surface has been rotated slightly. the points of connection are detailed by the dashed lines.
While there is a 50:50 ratio of flat to 2d throughout the model. this surface has significantly less 3D panelling as the curvature allows for the 3D panel to direct the eye down from corner to corner
The model is on a 5x5 grid however, the 3D panel is devided into two different shapes allowing variation on the patterning diagonally.
Scale 1:1: mm 0
5
15
35
70
9
10
SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Photography of Model
The models slanted and dramatic panelling is accentuated by the consistency of the extruded panelling throughout the model. The curvature was hard to capture through images but the intrigue still remains. The playfull ness of the structure within is highlighted by the movement of the forms within. The model looks to be warping and contorting throughout every level. Part of the struggle with the design was that by creating a split 3D panel which could be divisible and creating a new dynamic within the model through the use of diagonal lines. Although the 5x5 grid remains the possibilities within have been expanded upon. This also meant that the 3D panels would directly overlap with some points of the 2D grid panels which essentially made the modelling a little harder as while the 3D has flat bottom surfaces the 2D panelling contorts and rotates a bit further causing a sheer force throughout some areas of the deisgn making it a bit difficult to stick together. Overall the models striking features and imposing points are very interesting.
11
Visual Scripting of Parametric Model
THe script details how the Boolean form was created. The key differentiation in this script is the addition of attractor and detractor points for the grid. This allowed the cluimping of the Boolean objects wihtin the cube itself. This variation could be built upon later with the addition of attractor and detractor points which dictated the size of the shapes within the cube depending how close or far away they are to the point. This allowd for variation on the model. While Rhino was where I was able to change the shapes more freely, there was still room to experiment with Grasshopers cone function and the creation of two cones stack onto each other to create a semi diamond cone throughout the model with the same scripting which dictates size.
12
SOLID AND VOID Surface Creation
Initially the use of circles provided quite interesting organic forms, however by replacing these forms with something a bit more geometric such as a pyramid or square the variation within the cube became more organised yet interesting for some. As such I decided to create a more geometrically focused shape within this stage of the module. As such the pyramids within the cube have been shown to signifiy the exploration process.
13
SOLID AND VOID
SECTIONED ISOMETRIC
Isometric view
This details the overall model from which the 3D print model was taken from
The consistency of shapes and the grid in the corners of the model allowed the diamond prisms to create clear pathways in some areas with alternating pathways in others.
Multiple direction changes within the model create an intersting visual tension.
The model has a futuristic aesthetic but could be considered a playful gym/hiding hole for children depending on the scale of the model itself.
Scale 1:1: mm 0
5
15
35
70
14
SOLID AND VOID Isometric view
The model is definetly porus and permable. The lightness of the structure is accentuated by the multiple holes which penetrate all the way through the model going from top to bottom. This was caused by the grid in some corners remaining regulatory which allowed this effect.The permability of the model can be seen in how there are alnost no connections from level to level. Yet the substantial mass of the forms which connect the levels creates a unique juxtaposition and tension within the model itself.
15
Cube Grid Manipulation
1.1
1.2
1.3 {2980,2232,0}
{-377,1041,150}
Key
1.4
{0,0,0}
{-65, 1734, 150}
Grid Points
{-527,891,150}
{2703, 2331, -100} {208,1783,-150}
{2703,2231,-150}
{2703,2231,-150}
{2850, 2290, -259}
{Index Selection}
{Index Selection | Attractor and Detractor Point}
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
{Centroid Distribution}
Experimental Boolean With Circular Spinning Tops
Double Cones Inverted. Rhino Could Not Boolean Size also was increased to create greater differentiation
Sphere Boolean
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
Booleaned sphere option with alterations in sizing
Booleaned diamond option with alterations in sizing
Pyramids stacked to create diamonds with variation in size
Booleaned Options
Boolean Concepts
{Index Selection | Attractor Point}
Boolean Concepts
Centroid Distribution & Boolean Concepts
{Index Selection}
Sphere Boolean with Adjusted sizes of Spheres
Task B Matrix The first part of the matrix essentially outlines the thought process of creating the grid and deciding to keep the grid somewhat simple as I wanted to focus the experimentation of the shapes. The second section is just interations of using different shapes and sizes of shapes manually changing some aspects to get a more personalised take on the development, ultimately settling on the diamond prism shape which has formed the design itself.
16
Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z)
SOLID AND VOID Fragment Print
17
18
SOLID AND VOID
Photography of Model
The interesting aspect of the final model is the strong lines and geometry which gives the fragment a sense of weight. Whereas the circular itterations have less weight and feel very light and non-impactful.
19
20
Appendix
Process
21
Appendix Process
These images show some of the trials undergone while panelling as well as the different shapes and forms I attempted to use wihtin my design. There are some sucesses and failures throughout the designs, some like the first image shows how when the pyramid was rotated accidentally the entire deisgn was affected and would not be craftable. while the bottom right shows a line up of all the shapes which where developed further as surfaces.
22
Appendix
Process
The fragment was made using the DD settings and was listed to take 1hour and 52 minutes. However this model was placed onto a tray with classmates models on it as well to cut down overall cost and printing time. The model also was rotated 90 degrees to limit the amount of filament needed.
23
Appendix
Process
Overall these two images show the process in its entireity. Each file wound up being a couple of GBs as the iterations would just have many various alterations from time to time eventually producing the two physical models. Ultimately the process of this module has been a unique insight into the world of Digital Design and how tools such as Grasshoper can be utilized to create designs that would’ve been previously uncalcuable. The accuracy in geometry and vision seen in things like 3D printing only further this process of creating extremely complex geometeries.