STUDIO
AIR
Rupert Reed - 925635
C Fabrication
78
(Dent, 2017)
79
C.1 Design Concept Northcote Town hall Design Development Floor Plan
GF
L1
GF
80
L2
L1
L2
Intention and Resoltuion - Option 1 For this concept we tried to take the feedback and questions asked in the mid-year presentation and resolve some of the critics concerns with our initial façade. Throughout our critique three things came up that we wanted to resolve – 1. The building looked too elongated 2. The Façade was too standard and done before, while we also wanted to address the question “what is a town hall”. We designed the building to have three levels helping it fit better into the context and break up the programs in the building. The third level was intended to be an open roof top terrace to encourage a sense of community where different people from different culture and backgrounds could interact; as we believe this addressed the question of ‘what a town hall is’. The inverted dome was intended to be the circulation path with stairs wrapping to it’s exterior so people could take a similar journey to the Purple Loosestrife seed – in being dispersed from single source (base of the dome) and travel in a circular motion up the building reminiscent of the seed dispersing downstream. Our columns were applied in a traditional arrangement with the short finned eel’s inspiration kept in mind. Upon review however this design still hasn’t addressing the second point in the critique, while the dominance of floor slabs is too strong and the façade need further articulation to distinguish itself and better portray the intended messages.
81
C.1 Design Concept Northcote Town hall Design Refinement Floor Plan
GF
L1
L2 - Terrace
Our main ambition for this building was to create a facade that linked with the column in a seamless manner, creating harmony between our two main design feature. In order to achieve this we had to alter our plant inspired algorithm to use the same script as that of the column - so there was consistent geometry throughout our design. While in addition the columns form had to tapper in at the top to permit for the facade to disperse from a singular point (being the ideas inspired by the Purple Loosestrife seed dispersal behavior). After resolving this linkage between our Eel inspired column and Loosestrife inspired facade we had to think about allowing light into the building, and how we would fill the areas between the detailed facade. For lighting we mapped glass in-between the piping on the facade and behind the column, allowing for natural light to filter through the facade and into the interior; creating interesting shadows throughout the day. While the concrete arches were designed to follow the language of our brass facade and their form, consequently further drawing the eye to the brass features at the forefront of the new Northcote town hall. Overall we are happy with the results of our design, especially in its ability to find harmony between our two main features, being the column and facade. With regards to the program of the building I think it has a strong core circulation path in wrapping the inverted dome.
82
Section
83
C.1 Design Concept Northcote Town hall Design Final
Perspective Render
84
Chunk Drawing
85
C.1 Design Concept Column Design Development Matrix
86
Attractor pt - 5266 Seed - 56 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 5
Attractor pt - 4125 Seed - 56 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 7
Attractor pt - 5101 Seed - 56 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 10
Attractor pt - 5200 Seed - 49 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 10
Attractor pt - 3950 Seed - 44 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 8
Attractor pt - 4210 Seed - 46 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 8
Attractor pt - 5055 Seed - 45 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.158 Curves - 14
Attractor pt - 4563 Seed - 56 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 7
Attractor pt - 4025 Seed - 44 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 7
Attractor pt - 3500 Seed - 28 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 7
Attracto
Attractor pt - 2591 Seed - 48 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 8
Attractor pt - 2894 Seed - 42 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 7
Attracto
Pipe R
Pipe R
or pt - 4200 Seed - 49 Offset - 2 Radius - 0.1 Curves -11
Attractor pt - 2879 Seed - 48 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 8
Attractor pt - 3150 Seed - 41 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 12
In addition to this the columns form and detail aids in telling two stories/ behaviors of the short finned eel, explored in previous models: Column detail - The column uses an attractor point algorithm, meant the base of the column is transparent although as the column grows it becomes opaque. This is inspired by the short finned eels journey; as when the eel is born it is transparent to avoid predators although as it grows (like the column) it becomes opaque.
Attractor pt - 3102 Seed - 42 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 Curves - 7
Attractor pt - 3200 Seed - 38 Offset - 2 Pipe Radius - 0.1 7
Column Form - The form of the column was inspired by both the migration of the short finned eel and indigenous eel traps. The Eel around mating season takes a unique migration path from fresh water rivers to the ocean to breed. Thus, the form of the column attempts to map this - as at the base the column is smooth and fluid like the river with little predators and currents. Although as the eel ventures up the river it comes to the mouth of the river (represented by the narrowest point of the column [the transition point]). As the Eel enters the ocean it enters a more dangerous and chaotic environment with currents, swells and predators all threats to survival; represented in the protruding elements of the column. However once the eel’s finally reach the breeding grounds a sense of achievement/relief is felt, seen in the chaos of the column coming to a narrow resting point in which the dispersed eels reunite.
Breeding Grounds Reunite Transition into the dangerous/chaotic Ocean
Fabrication Criteria: After deciding on the hololens technology as our fabrication method we knew the fabrication technique could not achieve as intricate design as if we were 3D printing or using machines to fabricate. Thus, through the selection of our column we decreased the attractor curve points to understand what was achievable with our fabrication method. From our test this form achieved the highest level of complexity in form while still managing to be reduced to a realistic number of points to fabricate using our method. All forms with more curves became distorted and almost unrecognizable when reducing points. Thus this column fitted into the fabrication selection criteria.
Mouth of River Transition pt
For the Final choice of our column two main criteria informed the decision making, its ability to be fabricated and transparency in emitting the stories that inspired its design.
Commencement of Migration from the calm river/creek
or pt - 3120 Seed - 53 Offset - 2 Radius - 0.1 Curves - 6
Final Column
87
C.2. Tectonic Elements & Proposal The Microsoft Hololens The use of the Microsoft Hololens is the most suitable and accurate measure of fabrication for our Design. The Microsoft Hololens is not a virtual reality system but rather you can see through the lenses and your environment. “The “lenses” in HoloLens are comprised of holograms, which makes them “holographic lenses.” Which projects a Virtual Three Dimensional Object. Using this technology we plan to use brass,steel rods with plyers and a soldering iron to model a detailed model of our column using the Virtual Three-dimensional Object as a reference point to inform our model making decisions. Through using this technology it should allow for accurate results at a chosen scale and speed up the model making process - as we will not have to reference elevations, plans or sections that we previously would have needed to have printed and used to make a hand made model. Through using the Microsoft Hololens we hope the create a large scale detailed model of our multi layered column, in an accurate and time efficient manner.
88
89
C.2. Tectonic Elements & Proposal Prototypes + Fabrication Testing 1
For our initial fabrication test we decided to model a sphere, to understand to basic functions of the Hololens on a familiar geometry. The accuracy of our fabrication was evidently off due to a multitude of reasons being, the most evident being in the way we displayed the Rhino file. The issue was in the rhino model, as it was the entire sphere being projected, causing for lines to overlap making it extremely hard to interpret and follow the lines in the foreground when modeling. For our next test I think we will divide our model into chunks to overcome this complication. Overall despite the inaccuracies I believe this is a great fabrication technique that allows you to really understand the form of your geometry, joining members and structure.
Test Model 1 Sphere
90
C.2. Tectonic Elements & Proposal Prototypes + Fabrication Testing 2
Our second fabrication test was undertaken with a rhino model that was divided into chunks. For this model we decided to use an iteration of a column made throughout the design faze, in order to test the rough geometry of what we would be constructing in our Final Detail Model. Through breaking the model up into chunks it was much easier to interpret the geometric hologram output from the hololens, and consequently easier to trace with the wire. Thus, the results are more accurate in the base geometry than from the sphere in our previous test model. However more complication were experienced throughout this fabrication, to do with scale, workspace and joining elements. The scale issue was to do with the cluttered detail in the rhino model being too extreme to replicate at this small a scale (Which will be overcome in the final detail model - as we will be fabricating at a larger scale). Our workspace was again hard up against a wall which poses an issue, as it is difficult to accurately model the geometry without circulating the hologram. Finally we were still not overly content with our soldering (joining element detail), although this can be overcome with more practise. Once again the process was rewarding and the hololens’ ability to permit for quick on the a massive strength it beholds, in allowing for the designer to refine the parametric model throughout the process of fabrication, in real time.
Test Model 2 Column Prototype
91
C.2. Tectonic Elements & Proposal Prototypes + Fabrication Testing 2 These images capture the 3 steps that were repeated throughout the design process of our testing, showing the context of our workspace and an indication of scale. 1. The Hololens’ projected a hologram as a reference to understand the geometry.
2. After seeing the projection we would align 2 pieces of wire to the hologram and trim the wires accordingly.
3. Solder the wire together using the soldering iron.
92
C.3 Final Detail Model
93
C.3. Final Detail Model Fabrication Process
Step 1 Place the Fologram screen within you respective space.
94
Step 2 Place the hologram of the column within your working space
Step 3 Line up the wire (red) with the hologram and take note of the length of the piece
Step 4 After measuring the rough distance mark on the wire made w pliers, double check wires length against hologram
e k with k the t the
Step 5 Once you have checked the length of your wire cut the wire accordingly
Step 6 Before lining up the cut wire, melt some solder onto the soldering iron.
Step 7 Finally line up the wire and solder the newly cut piece to existing joints.
95
C.3. Final Detail Model Finished product
Photos of fabrication process
Prior to starting the fabrication model we had to reduce the number of points within out column - which consequently decreased the density to a level of complexity that was achievable using the hololens technology. For the fabrication of the final column we were placed in a larger room due to our ambition to create a 1:2 scale - meaning the column would be 2 meters tall. Having the ability to circulate the working space 360* meant the use of the hololens was far more accurate, efficient and easy to use. In addition to this because of the larger scale it meant it was easier to accurately fabricate the intricate details of our parametric model, which we previously struggled to do in our 2 test models. The hololens as a fabrication method was a great initiative, as it allowed for us to understand the structural capabilities of our grasshopper model and adapt the model accordingly - allowing for it to become more structurally rigid. In addition, the hololens aided environmentally in reducing wastes as we found that offcuts (that in a normal fabrication method would be wasted) could be affectively used to further enhance the structure of our column. Overall the hololens was a great way to fabricate as it permitted for us to fabricate at a scale unachievable by any alternative method in the respective time frame and budget, while also allowing for us to make on the spot design decisions to better improve our overall column.
96
97
98
C.4. Learning Objectives + Outcomes Final Crit Feedback: The feedback from our final critique was to further push the ideas and rational of our project and continue working on the project after submission, in attempt to both aid MSD and fologram in documenting our experiences, to inspire other students to take advantage of this amazing technology. Being the first group to use the Hololense at Melbourne University I would like to be involved in further exploring the technologies capabilities and aid in further pushing this exciting and innovative concept. Whether it be in using diagrams like on page 94-95 to help people think of ways to use the hololense, or it be involved in liaising more directly with MSD or hologram itself. Conclusion: Studio Air has allowed me see not only to see architecture but also design and its process from a new angle – previously foreign to me, prior to studying this course. I have been pushed to learn alternate technologies that allow for parametric modeling and permit for one to experience the bottom up design approach. Initially this was intimidating, although it has taught me to be more open minded to alternative processes of design – for the outcome in my final column and façade would have never been a pure result from my rational thinking. In addition to the process and use of these technologies, having to think and physically produce a fabrication model of our complex design exposed me to another set of challenges. After research and support from my tutor Sean Guy we came to a resolution in a new technology called the Microsoft HoloLens. Using pipes, the HoloLens technology and a soldering iron we began to experiment with this new technology that allowed for us to navigate a virtual hologram and develop fabrications of the respective model. With our first fabrication, being the sphere I was once again skeptical with the accuracy, as it was significantly off the hologram. Although with more practice and critical analysis into the potential threats to accuracy (being scale and work space size) we moved onto experimenting again with a column at a slightly larger scale and managed to achieve better results – giving us confidence to continue this method of fabrication into our final detail model. Perhaps the biggest fear I had with computational architecture throughout this course was its ability to be applied into the real world, due to cost constraints of complex models that would never be feasible. However, our final detail model to my surprise proved my theory and concerns to do with the computational design process and parametric design wrong. The ability to produce a 2 meter column over 4 days of fabrication totaling to a final cost of $30 proved that with the correct fabrication method, appropriate technologies, testing and practice the fabrication of extremely detailed computational models are feasible and able to be fabricated with less waste and sometime even cheaper than a normal card architectural model. Both the design process to get to my final column and façade alongside physically fabricating the column has open my mind to an exciting new side of design, which previously I was close minded to. This subject has taught me to see design from a new perspective and inspired to let the process take over, rather than using the process to achieve a preconceived rational and I think this is something I will further use and explore in the future.
99
C.5. Appendix Image on cover page References Dent, S. (2017). Microsoft HoloLens is now certified protective eyewear. [online] Engadget. Available at: https://www.engadget. com/2017/11/01/microsoft-hololens-hard-hat-european-expansion/ [Accessed 24 May 2018].
100