Design journal

Virtual Environments Semester 1, 2013

DESIGN JOURNAL PAPER LANTERN INSPIRED BY NATURE MARIA KOZACHENKO

Student number 620628 Group 5

IDEATION

DRAWING INSPIRATION FROM NATURE

1. Simplify 2. Analyse underlying forces 3. Transform Poling, Clark (1987)

Cabbage head cut in two halves reveals beautiful pattern of white curvy lines (cut leaves) going from the center.

Outlining the contours of each leaf I got three spirals going outwards from the cabbage stalk (1,2,3). Connecting nodes(cut stems of leaves) I got the triangle I used this pattern as a base for my future model.

Following along the lines of weekly readings, I tried to extract the core pattern from the image of a cabbage. At first I used freehand sketching, but eventually decided that it is better to utilize straight lines in drawing software. Possibility to use layers in the software helped to produce a whole range of drawings without limiting myself Transformation process turned out to be very engaging and creative. Because it was difficult to start inventing my own recipes straight away, I decided to practice using those described in a weekly reading .

That helped me to produce a set of images and also gave me an idea of how to compose my own recipe

CREATING A RECIPE

Move Rotate Scale Mirror (Aranda, Lash, 2006)

1. Base shape (triangle)

Self-organised structures appear as a result of interaction of many forces (chemical or physical, cells growing) Ball, 2012

Weekly lecture had introduced several ways of further development of a pattern.

In billions of years of evolution Nature worked out a simple set of rules, that lay behind the variety of living forms. For my transformation process I decided to play with the core feature of the inspirational pattern: three spirals, which can be joined by a triangle

2. Scale the base shape

3. Rotate each scaled shape by 10% progressively

PAPER MODEL Making a paper model was not an easy task, I wanted to “extrude� my analytic drawing. Final model was exactly as I wanted it to be. But in the process of assembling I understood, that I should have thought of other ways to convey the same idea.

1. Draw circles of decreasing diameters (scale)

2. Cut circles out

3. Fold triangle envelopes

4. Stack in a pyramid An emerging model of a curved spiral consisting of 74 triangle envelopes folded from the paper circles

5. Repeat 1-4 to create a second, mirrored pyramid. Assemble wider ends, arrange a degree of rotation.

PLASTICINE MODEL

I created several plasticine models with different properties, some of them very intricate. But eventually I came to conclusion that at this stage it is better to focus an overall shape of my paper model instead of trying to depict every single triangle separately.

I experimented with plasticine models and tried to draw them in Rhino just to get an idea of how difficult it is going to be and what will it look like.

That was a useful experience, even though experiments took a lot of time.

It was difficult to develop my model and follow the planned direction because of obvious lack of technical skills. Practice makes perfect, and soon I could operate Rhino much better.

DIGITAL MODELLING

DIGITAL MODEL: TRACING CONTOURS, SURFACE OPTIONS

The next stage of the design process was transferring the shape of a physical model into the digital space. I started with a slicing technique, but it didn’t work right for my model. In order to get the exact shape I needed, I used tracing the edge curves. At first I put the cross-sections on them, but the result after lofting was too smooth. The model lost it’s edginess and sharp angles. That is why decided to combine digitizing from physical model with Rhino modelling techniques. I took the edge curves and put a surface between them. After some modifications resulting polysurface looked very similar to the physical prototype.

When I started panelling, I realised that it is better to work with a single surface. To make a single surface from the existing polysurface I took the edge curves, contoured them and used Loft command. Resulting surface became a base for future panelling explorations.

DIGITAL MODEL: PANELLING OPTIONS

When the base digital model was finally fixed, I was ready to depart on the exiting journey of panelling. Panelling is an important part of working with curvy surfaces. Because it is expensive and not always possible to fabricate a curved surface it is usually unrolled as a set of smaller surfaces (panels). To cut costs and use commonly used equipment rather that some unique machinery the panels should be flat (planar). To reduce costs further, they can be uniform, although in my case all the final panels were unique Generally I had a strong impression, that the triangle-based panels work better than others. That is because it is a rule of geometry: a plane could be put through any three points. Therefore, triangular panels could be used even for very curvy surfaces.

DESIRED LIGHT EFFECTS AND REAL LIFE PROTOTYPE

Picture source: http://www.e-architect.co.uk/spain/zaragoza_bridge.htm

Picture source: http://sandsof.com/2012/11/24/helene-binets-formingportrait-architecture-of-zaha-hadid-gabrielle-ammann-gallery/

Zaragoza bridge, Spain. Architect Zaha Hadid. A bridge was build to unite banks of river Ebro in Spain. What I particularly liked about this building is that the light effects are very clear, they create a distinctive picture on the floors and walls of the construction. The exterior of the bridge is smooth, organic, while the light effects are quite brutal and clear. That is a perfect combination which I would like to pick up and use in my own design.

DIGITAL MODEL: DIGITAL MODEL OF FIRST PROTOTYPE

For my first prototype I used the Tribasic pattern.

Making points disperse rather than dense I was able to keep overall shape quite rough. That was important as a part of my design concept, as it corresponds with all the rough, ‘broken’ lines and folds inside of a cabbage head, which was my inspirational pattern.

I used offset from the base Tribasic pattern, because I intended to start prototyping using the black card. The black card does not produce diffuse light as does the white one. This means that the model has to have cutting or slits to let the light shine through . I experimented with different sizes of offset. Then it came to my mind that the model is fully enclosed, which means that I might not be able to close it unless the holes are big enough for my fingers, so I put the offset equal to 1.5 cm.

I unrolled the first model lengthwise as I thought it will be easier to assemble it in this way. I found that having only 6 stripes makes it difficult to assemble the whole model together: unless glued precisely, parts will simply fall apart.

PROTOTYPING

PROTOTYPE 1 Narrow ends do not close

Strong tensions rip the seams

Prototype 1 : - 2D panels - Black card 300 - Card cutter - 1:2 scale

Openings are too big Glue is visible

leaves messy spots. I decided to use a thin flat brush instead of a cotton bud.

- The card is very rigid, so any inaccuracy in process of building may result in tensions and the card will eventually be torn in joints.

- I used 0.8 cm tabs, but found out that I could use even wider tabs. Tabs in the ends should be trimmed manually.

- Labelling was not really necessary for my Things that I found out while building model as it was pretty obvious how to put this model: - It will be difficult to put the model to- it together. gether unless the offset is big enough for -Length-oriented unrolling did not work my fingers. But with a big offset the model well. For the next time I decided to try unbecomes to open and it is impossible to rolling it in cross-sections. hide lights and wires there. On the other hand, big offset gives very clean, sharp light effects.

- I liked how this model was easy to unroll - only 6 large stripes.

- It is important to be accurate with the glue because even the clear-drying glue Prototyping is an important part of every construction process - it allows to explore properties of material in the real world (Gilbert, 2013). As every set of tools comes with it’s own set of limitations using several methods - digital and manual can help to identify weak links in design and assembly.

PROTOTYPE 2 Vivid light effects, the source of light is less obvious than in a previous model

Prototype 2: - 2D panels - White card - Card cutter - 1:1 scale For my second prototype I’ve chosen the ivory card. The model was still unrolled in long stripes.

The base pattern is a Tribasic, but this time I decided to leave the gaps partially closed with flaps. This was supposed to hide lights and add some volume.

However, there were a coupe of things that I did not liked about this model:

- Lack of volume, so I decided to try 3D panels -The white card produces diffused light, making shadows less sharp - The dashed lines are too visible. I decided to use score lines for folding.

- With the bigger model it is better to use 300 gr card

FINAL MODEL Final model: - 3D + 2D panels - Black card 300 - Card cutter - 1:1 scale

Elegant, almost flat spikes Large openings had to be covered by flaps

Narrow ends constructed from 2D panels 3D panels give desirable volume

For my final model I decided to use the 3D panels. Because the model’s tails are very pointy, the panels become tiny and messy even with the very small amount of points in a grid. That is why I eventually came to an idea of combination of 2d and 3d panels in my design. Together they empathise movement, growth. Final design also reflects rotation, twists and spirals of my inspirational pattern. Spikes represent messy angles and folds inside of the cabbage head.

On a lecture our guest speaker, Ben Gilbert (2013) told us how at some stage of work with his public sculpture “Longneck” he and his team had to switch between different software as they were not able to achieve desirable result using only one set of tools. In my case I found out that to achieve the V-shaped cuttings it will be easier to draw them manually on a cutting drawing.

FABRICATION

FINAL MODEL: ASSEMBLY DRAWING 1

2

4

3 1. Cut out unrolled pieces 2. Fold and glue the pyramids - three in each stripe. Two stripes make 1 crosssection 3. Glue two parts of a cross -section together 4. Assemble all cross-sections according to the scheme to get a final model

FINAL MODEL: ASSEMBLING

FINAL MODEL: INSTALLING THE LIGHTS

Lights attached to the ribs

Most of the wires attached to the ribs

Battery block

Switch button positioned close to cutting, easy to turn on/off

To light my model I decided to use LED lights preassembled in circuit. However, ready-to-use decision needed several improvements. Firstly, I had to change the switch from a testing-only (that keeps the light on only while the button is pressed) to normal switch. Secondly, it appeared that the circuit is too long and needs to be shortened in several places.

Thirdly, the cord was silver while I’d prefer a black one. So I used the black tape to mask it.

That was sort of a prototyping as well: I learned that with the amount of time spent on amending the lights it was easier to buy materials from the Fablab and use the exact amount of wires I needed without those unnecessary connections.

FINAL MODEL: LIGHTS ON!

FINAL MODEL: INTERACTION

REFLECTIONS

I enrolled in Virtual Environments because I wanted to grab digital software skills as early in my degree, as possible. It appeared, that I was right - we started to experiment with Rhino from the very start.

The long journey stared from exploring the rules on Nature. I find it amazing, that using a very limited set of rules - move, rotate, scale, mirror - Nature developed all the variety of complex structures. Every body of a living creature, every natural pattern originates from these simple guidelines. Using them I was able to experiment with different shapes until I found the one that reflected all the attributes of my inspirational pattern. Drawing from Kandinsky’s teachings, described

by Ball (2012) I discovered different ways to express the essence of my natural pattern in a metaphorical way cutting away all the excess information.

Moving on plasticine model was not easy - I tried to reflect all the tiny folds of my natural pattern in it. However, after some explorations I decided to extract the main shape, reducing amount of information in process.

Next stage was the digitization. Again, a made a few mistakes from the very start, choosing the wrong digitization technique. The resulting form was nothing like my plasticine model, so I had to start the whole process from the

very beginning. When the model was ready, I had to spent about a week on fixing all the errors in surface. Than I started panelling.

It was difficult to find suitable type of panels. When I made custom panels, I needed to assign very dense points grid, which made all the construction unnecessary complex.

Some of them just didn’t cover the surface well enough. Generally, that was a very time consuming process, but it was very interesting to see how the software is able to create a totally new object in mere seconds only using different type of a panel. I also understand the limitations better now: some prototypes looked amazing on the screen, but it was not possible to construct or unroll them.

ties - of materials and of the construction process itself. Trying different types of card I saw how it’s rigidity and transparency affected the whole design outcome. These features were hardly predictable before prototyping. Moving on to assembling the final model, I was happy to see a destination point of this long journey. I’ve put a lot of effort in my model and felt genuine satisfaction when I finished it. But the process of design is never finished, you immediately start to see directions for future improvement. New ideas and methods kept coming to my mind. The final parade, in which we took part, celebrated 10 weeks of hard work from creative idea to experiments to final piece of art. I realised a huge amount of work done by each student in his individual journey and appreciated that close communication and collaboration with other students brought me a couple of new friends.

This course simulated evolution of design for us - starting from manual work, than using digital tools, then testing outcomes, than amending it digitally. It is interesting how digital and manual means of design work together.

Every tool has an inherent set of limitations, even such a complex software as Rhino. I often felt that my creativity was limited not only by features of Rhino, but by my own small set of skills. With modern design software it is important to understand what rules, what type of geometry is it using, what is going to work and what will fail. ‘Program or be programmed’ (Roudavski, 2013) turned out to be Digital tools can help to create both cheaper true. mass designs or customise the outcome. With When the actual prototyping started, I dis- 3D printers becoming more popular there is a covered the importance of testing the proper- great chance that in future everyone will be a

designer. Products will be cheaper, more sustainable and totally unique. Emerging Third Industrial Revolution will bring collaborative economics, which will be dispersed by contrast with present economies. Everyone will be an individual energy producer, everyone will be an entrepreneur. This coming new world will be driven by individuals rather than by governments and manufacturing giants.

Looking back at my own experience, I can see that digital tools can significantly improve processes in architecture, design and manufacturing. Precision and flexibility give an opportunity to quckly change the product.

With digital fabrication tools prototyping is easy - designer can take a step back in every single moment and start the process again. By contrast, crafting the object manually brings a lot of risk: every uneven movement can spoil the final result. Personally, I feel that digital tools have a bright future, but currently the best results are achieved using both digital and manual tools.

REFEFENCE LIST Aranda & Lash 2006, Tooling, Princeton Architectural Press, New York.

Ball, P. 2012, “Pattern Formation in Nature”, AD: Architectural Design, Wiley, vol. 82 (2), no. March, pp. 22-27.

Bernstein, P. & Deamer, P. 2008, Building the Future: Recasting Labor in Architecture, Princeton Architectural Press.

Gilbert, B. 2013, Lecture week 7. Public sculpture. Virtual Environments. Semester 1, 2013, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Iwamoto, L. 2009, Digital fabrication: architectural and material techniques, Princeton Architectural Press, New York.

Kolarevic, B. 2003, Architecture in the Digital Age - Design and Manufacturing. Spon Press, London.

Loh, P. 2013, Lecture week 6. Power of Making. Virtual Environments. Semester 1, 2013, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Loh, P. 2013, Lecture week 8. Fabrication. Digital fabrication. Semester 1, 2013, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Poling, C. 1987, Analytical Drawing In Kandinsky’s Teaching at the Bauhaus Rizzoli, New York.

Rifkin, J. 2011, The Third Industrial Revolution, Palgrave Macmillan.

Roudavski, S. 2013, Lecture week 9. Augmented space. Virtual Environments. Semester 1, 2013, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.

Zaragoza Bridge, design Zaha Hadid Architects, picture sources: Binet, H. 2012, 24 November-last update, Zaragoza Bridge Pavilion [Homepage of SANDSof], [Online]. Available: http://sandsof.com/2012/11/24/ helene-binets-forming-portrait-architecture-of-zaha-hadid-gabrielle-ammann-gallery/ [2013, 05/04].

Zaha Hadid Architects 2008, 02 May-last update, Zaragoza 2008 Expo Bridge + Pavillion, Spain [Homepage of e-architect], [Online]. Available: http://www.e-architect.co.uk/spain/zaragoza_bridge.htm [2013, 05/03].