Module4 sohan mitra 791380

DIGITAL DESIGN + FABRICATION SM1, 2016 Envelope Sohan Mitra

(791380) Lyle Talbot + Group 5

1

2

3

4

CONTENTS 1.0 Ideation 1.1 Object 1.2 Object + System Analysis 1.3 Volume 1.4 Sketch design proposal

2.0 Design 2.1 Design development introduction 2.2 Digitization + Design proposal V1 2.3 PRECEDENT RESEARCH 2.4 Design proposal V.2 2.5 Prototype V1+ Testing Effects

3.0 Fabrication 3.1 Fabrication introduction 3.2 Design development and fabrication of prototype 3.3 Final Prototype development + optimization 3.4 Fabrication sequence 3.5 Final Digital model 3.6 Assembly Drawing 3.7 Completed 2nd Skin

4.0 Appendix: 4.1 Reflection.

4.2 Credit: 4.3 Bibliography

5

6

0.0 Introduction Abstraction, Analysis and Construction are the three words that I would use to describe this subject. Firstly we were assigned to groups and given a material system (Panel and fold) associated with an object (Pineapple) to investigate upon and abstract an Idea to be analysed. I went on to investigate how I would transform the fruit-lets into a digital built parametric unit that can be eventually used to build a second skin. Then using 3D modelling software (Rhinoceros) we constructed a digital model and later after series of prototyping we built a full scaled model. Construction of the model was done with the help of laser cutters where the unrolled versions of the units were cut and then folded with hand to construct the model.

7

8

1.0 IDEATION In the Ideation module we were given an option to choose from three objects: a model dinosaur, a pineapple and an umbrella. I chose the pineapple which was associated with the panel and fold system. Eventually I had to build a wearable architecture model with the help of two other group members.

9

39.7MM Photograph of the Pineapple

10

9.5 MM

Measured drawing

Longitudinal section

1.1 Object The Pineapple was first laid on a table and accurately measured using a scaled hand ruler. The measurements were then used to draw the fruit elevation and section in 1:1 scale for analytical purposes. These measurements were then applied to make a 3D model of the fruit in Rhinoceros using the panelling tools plug-in.

Axonometric view of the 3D model.

Plan of the model.

11

Drawing of the Pineapple skin.

A close view of the pineapple skin.

12

1.2 Object+System Analysis Upon looking closer at the pineapple and the florets I decided that it needed to be panelled in the digital model as pentagonal pyramids to be the closest representation of the real in the digital model considering the resources and skills present. The leaves in the shoot of the fruit were made using the sweep 1 rail command and then arranged in concentric circles based on the size using the circular array command.

13

Physical model was constructed to understand the idea of the units to be used in the panel system. Here I have made some basic pyramids using paper and tried to perforate the sides and jon them with other units.

14

1.3 Volume This model represents the very first replication of the idea that would be experimented on. Constructed with wire and paper it represents the use of panels that encapsulated the body as a second skin that protects personal space. The studio exercise of joining printouts to make a volume inspired this model. However, there is not real volume represented in here thus further work was done to bring about a real volume.

Model

In class exercise to understand the panel and fold system.

15

Sketch Proposal #1 ‘Shield’

Defence This design is based on protecting the view of your personal space. The design approach came about by observation in public transport, personal space shrinks as the crowd increase and living in a modern world we need to stay connected thus the use of cell phones.

Often it is seen that people peek into others phones in public transport and thus this designed to cater for those who wish to have a shield to protect their personal space around their neck and form a space where the view of the cellphone is blocked by others sitting at the sides.

16

1.4 Sketch design proposal

Sketch Proposal #2 ‘Envelope’

Encompass This design has been inspired by the assigned reading on personal space by Sommer. R. and specifically on fundamental basis of design idea was the motivating factor behind this design proposal. As humans we only let our close associated into our personal space thus this design of second skin caters to embracing the close associates into the personal space. This embracing function is seen in two places of the model one in the upper body near the neck which opens up to wrap around the neck of another person standing just beside the user and the other portion is at the bottom which opens to shield a pet or a child held by hand.

Sketch Proposal #3 ‘Explode’

Offence This design proposal explores the technique of scaring others to protect ones personal space. In nature it is seen that animals and plants have evolved to make offensive mechanisms to protect itself. The porcupine and the cactus are some to mention. This design proposes research into the aspect of visual offense in defence of personal space using the panel and fold system.

17

18

2.0 DESIGN Sohan Mitra Simrat Kaur Mehta Ragnhild Holio Ongstad

19

This diagram shows the personal space, the lighter portion is the most vulnerable and the other places towards the outer portions is for the public.

20

This diagram investigates the various places where movement is necessary for the user. The circled portions have been identified as places where movement is required.

2.1 Design development introduction

Development of the pentagonal dodecahedrons.

In the Design development module we took forward the design proposals #1 and #2 based on appreciation in the critic session. We decided to focus on the embracing aspect again because it was well received in the first critic session. For a second design scheme we decided to go with the shield because it was conventional yet different in design from the first choice. It was in here that we developed our volumetric units and decided to work with pentagonal dodecahedrons.

21

TOP VIEW

CLOSE UP FRONT VIEW FRONT VIEW

22

AXONOMETRIC

2.2 Digitization + Design proposal V1

Design proposal developed from sketch deign #1

Here as it is seen that we have used pentagonal dodecahedrons to make a volumetric shield. The dodecahedrons are arranged based on the perforations on their sides. They are arranged in the order where dodecahedrons having no perforations are in the inside and near the body and moves to decahedrons having perforations and larger perforations going away from the body. This is to show the variation in personal space.

BACK SIDE

23

24

2.3 Precedent research

Description of precedent The Chrysalis III focuses on the intended movement of barnacle like particles on an underlying substrate.

The elements freely move on the substrate until it finds a stable position, thus an amoebic movement is exemplified in the model. The surface elements are made of veneer, digitally unfolded and are hand assembled. The model was made using Rhino and various Rhino plugins such as Grasshopper, Kangaroo, Python, Lunchbox and Rhino script.

25

TOP VIEW

CLOSE UP FRONT VIEW FRONT VIEW

26

AXONOMETRIC

2.4 Design proposal V.2

Design proposal developed from sketch deign #2

Again, based on feedback we used the volumetric units: pentagonal dodecahedrons to construct this digital model in Rhinoceros. The interesting part here is the presence of hinges with movement angle of 58.8 degrees to allow another person or animal can come in.

BACK

SIDE

27

These were laser cut and then glued.

28

Tabs as shown in this design was not aesthetically good.

The very first prototype that we created was made of 0.5mm polypropylene, some of the problems associated with this design include sticking: we had to use super glue to stick together, tabs: we used arrow like tabs that were sticking out and was not good for the aesthetics and it took a lot of time to construct even one unit from the cut outs.

2.5 Prototype V1+ Testing Effects

1

4

2

5

3

1,2,3,4,5

a sequence showing the process of testing the flexibility of the material and its movement at its point hinge point.

29

30

3.0 FABRICATION SOHAN MITRA RAGNHILD HOLIO ONGSTAD SIMRAT KAUR MAHTA

31

32

3.1 Fabrication intro: After M2 we decided to go forward with the design #2 because of its unique nature of embracing others into the private space. In terms of using material we finalized on not using polypropylene as it did not achieve the necessary quality standards that we were striving for. So again on advice from the studio leader we decided to use ivory card, it was cheaper, easy to glue and achieved our desired standards, so we settled for ivory card 290gsm.

33

2nd PROTOTYPE

1ST PROTOTYPE

POLYPROPYLENE ARROWS FOR TABS CON: PROJECTED OUTWARDS; UNTIDY

34

PROGRESSED INTO

IVORY CARD 290 GSM STRAIGHT TABS; SUBTLE PRO: CONTAINED WITHIN THE UNIT;NEAT;HIDDEN

As shown we moved from Polypropylene to Ivory card but ivory card possessed its own set of problems, first few results were not good in terms of gluing, we were using UHU glue and it was time consuming and not strong enough, resulting in constant breakage. So we increased the tab sizes and used hot glue to stick the units together, now it was sticking fine but we had made the units using UHU glue thus in bearing the weight the inner joints in the units started breaking, so it was another challenge.

3.2 Design development & Fabrication of prototype

Another set of problems were the alignment of hinges for the desired result. In the prototyping the upper hinge section did not bend back to the back of the body as planned and it was corrected in the final design model.

35

SIDE

36

AXONOMETRIC

FRONT VIEW

BACK

3.3 Final Prototype development + optimization

The Final prototype built had a lot of glue marks and was breaking at certain points as identified as stress points in this image, so we decided to solve this problem by reenforcing these points with extra sides cut out from other units.

This ensured that there was extra strength in these points. Further hinges or movement points as shown in the image were also points for stress as the hinge was bearing the load of the units below it. This problem was resolved using the extra sides stuck on the hinges thus relieving some amount of stress from the existing hinge.

TOP VIEW

37

38

1

2

3

ii

4

5

6

iiiiii

ii

1,2,3,4,5,6

The Photographs in the Arabic numerals represent the hinge movement in the lower part of the model, capable of partially accommodating a pet or a child held by hand.

iV

I,II,III,IV

The Photographs in the Roman numerals represent the hinge movement in the upper part of the model, capable of accommodating another person.

39

19 18

19 18

19 19

18

19

18

19

19

40

19

19

The above image shows a portion of the fablab submission for laser cutting. The red lines are etch for bends, at the hinges we excluded the etch and hand etched it when after it was laser cut.

19

3.4 Fabrication sequence

41

42

Here It is shown how the design can bring another person into the model. In the design process based on feedback we included a gradual increase in the perforations, not more than 20%.

43

AXONOMETRIC

44

SIDE

FR

Final Digital model

TOP VIEW

The Final digital model successfully had the top hinged extension bend and hide at the back. Further, it was also a used to implement the gradual increase in the perforations from inside to outside, we increased the size of the perforations at the rate of 20%.

BACK

RONT VIEW

45

Fabrication sequence taken from various stills from a time-lapse video taken.

46

3.6 Assembly Drawing

MAIN BODY

SHOULDER

UPPER

CONNECTING STEM

HINGE

OPEN SURFACE AT THE EDGE

47

48

3.7 Completed 2nd Skin

49

50

51

52

4.0 Appendix:

53

54

4.1 Reflection.

It was interesting to see how a design inspiration from a fruit could be translated to a wearable architecture model that is digitally fabricated. It was my first time using Rhinoceros so extensively and was a really nice experience.

At the beginning it seemed a bit funny how we were analyzing a pineapple. But then it evolved into a much bigger challenge, I could not imagine how I would complete this project but as we progressed and with the help of supportive group members it eventually became reality. I am quite happy with the design outcome, however I wish there could be mannequins provided, our model was such that it had to be stored carefully on a chair and twice it was broken because the chair was moved inappropriately though we covered it with plastic and put a sign on it.

The 3D modelling stage was fine but the real challenge was building the model, It was so time consuming that I had to come in every weekend to finish. However, if it had not been for the extremely good team members that I got, this outcome would not have been possible. Ragnhild took over the 3D modelling part and Simrat did most of the reflections and the writings.

However, it was Simrat’s sketch design that got a better review so we decided to work towards making it into a volumetric model. It was in the pineapple that the fruitlets represented pentagons as the closest geometric shape so we decided to make a volumetric solid of pentagons and much our surprise it was called pentagonal dodecahedrons. Not to forget the technical help received from the Rhino expert and also our studio leader, Lyle Talbot. It was Lyle who taught us about the unrolling and the hinges. The only regret that I have is that the subject discontinued Grasshopper, the units that we aligned in Rhinoceros took long and with grasshopper it could have been easy, Raggi was working on her Mac and since Rhinoceros is still in its testing stage in Mac grasshopper was not out, so we discontinued that thought of using grasshopper. Another thing that could be good for this subject is that if a separate photo studio could be set up to be used throughout the semester. The existing one is more for model photography and is difficult to shoot people and the photo shot day at the open theatre was very fast, desired shots are not possible in such a short time.

Having said that the subject taught us to take calculated risks, digital modelling and also budgeting. Many teams spent an exorbitant amount of money and did not achieve the results they were striving for. It is a truly inspiring and challenging subject and a must take as an elective for architecture and design students.

55

CREDITS

Page Cover 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50

Drawings

x x x x x

x x x x

x x

x x

x x

Model Fabrication Model Assembly

Photography x

x x x

x x

x

x

xxx

xxx

x

Writing

Graphic Design x

x

x x x x x x x

x x x x x x

x

x x

x x x x

x x x

x x x

x

x x x x

x x x x

x

x

x

xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

x x x x xx x x

xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx

x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x

x x x x x x x x x x x x x

x

x

x x

xxx x x

xx x x

xxx

xxx x x x

Sohan Mitra

56

Computation

Simrat Mehta Ragnhild Ongstad

x x

xxx

4.2 Credit:

4.3 Bibliography Sommer, R. (1969). Personal space; the behavioral basis of design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

Cheng, R. (n.d.). Inside Rhinoceros 4. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Learning.

Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011), Lost in Parameter Space?. Archit Design, 81: 70–79. doi:10.1002/ad.1271

57