Digital Design and Fabrication - Second Skin

DIGITAL DISIGN + FABRICATION Tet Wey CHEN 828678 Tutor: Amanda Masip 2017, Semester 1

1

2

3

4

1.0 Ideation

1.1 Object 1.2 Object + System Analysis 1.3 Volume 1.4 Sketch Design Proposal 1.5 M1 Reflection

2.0 Design

2.1 Design Development 2.2 Design Proposal v. 1 2.3 Design Proposal v. 2 2.4 Precedent Research 2.5 Design Development v. 1 2.6 Design Development v. 2 2.7 Further Design Development 2.8 Digital Process 2.9 Prototype v.1 + Testing Effects 2.10 M2 Reflection

3.0 Fabrication

3.1 Fabrication Introduction 3.2 Design Development 3.3 Rhino Modification 3.4 Prototype v. 2 3.5 Prototype Development 3.6 Prototype Optimisation 3.7 Final Digital Design 3.8 Assembly Drawing 3.9 Fabrication Sequence 3.10 Second Skin 3.11 M3 Reflection

4.0 Reflection 5.0 Appendix

5.1 Credit 5.2 Bibliography

5

6

0.0 INTRODUCTION Throughout the semester, students were asked to design and create a second skin that uses the human body as a site to explore, measure and negotiate our boundary of personal space.

We will be going through a series of modules, namely Ideation, Design, Fabrication and Reflection. This journal will be documenting our progress from early stages of sketch ideas to finalised digital design and fabrications.

7

8

1.0 IDEATION 1.1 Object 1.2 Object + System Analysis 1.3 Volume 1.4 Sketch Design Proposal 1.5 Reflection

9

1.1 OBJECT The expanding folder is a typical example of panel and fold. The object comprises 5 folded panels on its exterior, along with folded panels on each side that allows it to expand.

Through careful measurements on the sides of the folder with a metal ruler, I was able to quickly work out the overall dimensions of the object and translate it onto a piece of paper. This process was quite straightforward as the object was mostly made out of straight edges. As for some of the filleted corners on the folder, a record of radius length were documented so it could be referred later on when recreating the object on Rhino.

The digital model was first made in separate panels which was later joined and rotated into place. The more challenging step would be modelling the expandable panels as they are not made out of flat surfaces. For this I have used the loft tool to create the twisting panel.

10

Measured Drawing

Scale 1:4

11

Digital Model

Front Elevation

12

Side Elevation

Isometric

1.2 OBJECT + SYSTEM ANALYSIS The external panels were made of polypropylene, a type of synthetic plastic that allows it to be extremely flexible and tough at the same time. The expandable side panels as well as the internal compartments are made of thin semi-transparent plastic sheets.

The expandable system is basically achieved by dividing the sheet into equal lengths and folding them in a zig-zag manner. This allows one side of the fold to be expanded and retracted, which closely resembles the membrane of a hand fan. The limit of its expansion highly depends on the length of the plastic sheet attached to the external panels.

13

1.3 VOLUME In the making of my reconfigured model, I explored a more complex folding technique in an attempt to create volume. Since the folding components on the expanding folder are only folded parallel to the edges, I tried folding an X-form on a A4 sheet of paper. An angle of 120° between the strokes of each X are folded to achieve the pattern featured on the right. This allowed me to achieve a parabolic form when folded correctly.

The progression of folded angles spanning across the top created a form which resembles a canopy, it reminded me of how multiple triangles bounded together by fold provides unity of strength to the overall structure. I was extremely intrigued how a flat surface was able to create a tessellated volumetric form.

14

15

1.4 SKETCH DESIGNS Sketch Design #1

This design was focussed on a defensive stance of personal space where it has sharp rigid modules to evoke fear amongst the surrounding people when the wearer is being threatened.

The basis of the module is folded into 4 panels with a single piece of rigid surface. The module can vary in sizes as long as it maintains its identical folds. The flat panels allow multiple modules to stack on top of another to create a form of armour.

16

Sketch Design #2

The sharp rigid panels create a sense of fear and urgency when one wears the armour. It provides the wearer a better protection and will not feel threatened in any way.

This design took a more gentle approach on personal space, it uses a ruffle system wraped around the body. A ruffle is a strip of fabric tightly pleated on one edge.

The ruffle pattern can only be achieved by using extremely flexible material. Not only will it be lightweight, but it could be stretched into different forms around the body.

Sketch Design #3

Since the folds have no crease, it makes the wearer look a lot more gentle and harmless in a way, it gives the wearer a friendlier look.

People will not feel threatened when they are being approched and at the same time maintaining its own boundary.

This sketch design was inspired by the Kerf Pavillion in MIT, it explores the bending properties of a material by wood kerfing. Each module has a mutual trangulation with a fillet on each corner to give a sense of continuity.

When the modules are brought together, it will create a rigid system that will be difficult to move. So the skin will be positioned on the upper torso to maintain a freedom of movement.

Depending on where you look at the modules, some openings may look denser than others.

The wearer is able to protect his personal space without giving up too much surface area on the skin. This is made possible by the play with perspectives. It makes interactions with the wearer a lot more inclusive as the wearer is exposing his personal space to others.

17

1.5 REFLECTION Module 1 marks the beginning of my exploration of panel and fold, it was interesting that many material systems such as mine can be found in every corner, I found mine just sitting beside my study table. When asked to do precise measurements of our object, in my case an expandable folder, it was crucial that we take close observation and familiarise the object, emphasised in the reading “300 years of industrial design” (Heath, Heath and Jensen, 2000), only then we are comfortable to reproducing a detailed drawing of the object. Recreating the expanding folder in Rhino also refreshed my modeling mastery as I have not been using Rhino for quite a while. It also further refined my understanding of the object and material system in preperation for later stages.

After reconfiguring the folding system, I became fascinated by the effects of tessellation created from simple x-folds.

Sommer refers personal space as ‘invisible boundaries’ around a person’s body (Sommers, 1969), and may experience discomfort when intruded. In response to that, I explored different ways in my sketch designs to protect ones personal space, ranging from a defensive armour to playing with perspectives. However, feedback from Module 1 suggests that I develop my reconfigured model further as my proposed sketch designs have slowly drifted away from my material system, which I agreed.

18

19

20

2.0 DESIGN 2.1 Design Development 2.2 Design Proposal v. 1 2.3 Design Proposal v. 2 2.4 Precedent Research 2.5 Design Development v. 1 2.6 Design Development v. 2 2.7 Further Design Development 2.8 Digital Process 2.9 Prototype v.1 + Testing Effects 2.10 M2 Reflection Tet Wey Chen Emma Fitt Ashley Liu

828678 832356 825712

21

22

2.1 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT In collaboration with the others, we have further defined our personal spaces that revolves around the upper body, especially our head, chest, and back. We also find that based on our emotional and physical experiences as we grow up, we have particular needs when it comes to our personal space. For example, Emma is uncomfortable having people behind her back, so she wants a bit more coverage in that region to protect her personal space, this idea can be seen in the initial proposals of our design.

Besides physicsal intrusion, another important aspect of our design was involved with visual invations. This was evident in Ashley’s sketch design of a shy headress. An overhanging fringe covering half of the face that serves partial enclosure to the wearer by hiding away from direct sight and exposure.

My technique of creating organic forms using simple x-folds to create volumetric tessellation as it encloses the physical human body became the basis of our initial designs. We will also be exploring the effects of pattern variation which creates visual manipulation to the viewers as they apporach the wearer. The following 3 modules with different apertures will be the basis of our design development for experimentation.

23

2.2 DESIGN PROPOSAL v. 1 Looking back at the sketch design development, the idea of creating an enclosing volume for greater privacy was refined. The previous sketch drawing has an awkward bump at the bottom left of the form, so we removed it and maintained some of its original quality.

We wanted to experiment how we could use the tesselation of pattern spanning across the form to manipulate one’s perception on an individual. By varying the apertures and depths based on our personal space, we could potentially create an interesting effect to our design.

In recreating the sketch model in Rhino, we were more able to understand the form and shape of the design in 3-dimension, and also create surfaces we never thought would be possible. The form was made using loft on a series of ellipses around the body to conceal the entire upper body. Also having a hump at the back as a feature to protect our personal space on the upper rear side.

24

2.3 DESIGN PROPOSAL v. 2 The proposal of having partial enclosure on the face opened several opportunities for us to explore the effects of different density of apertures to create different levels of privacy. We also wanted to carry on the idea of concealment to the parts of the body that are more important to us in terms of privacy.

During the transition from the sketchook to Rhino, we had difficulties in replicating the same shape we wanted, and ended up with two awkward segments of the second skin, one being the headress and the other the body concealment. This means that we were not able to produce a seamless flow for the pattern to work. It will be a challenge for us to explore different techniques to achieve a more seamless surface.

25

2.4 PRECEDENT RESEARCH

PUPPET THEATRE

by Huyghe + Le Corbusier

ORGANIC/RIGID/INTERLOCKING/PATTERN

The form of Puppet Theatre comprises triangular modules tessellated in an organic shape to create a volume that encloses the theatre and its entirety. The joints are connected by a system of interlocking polycarbonate panels to create a rigid structure which could work extremely well with our second skin model. The organic form is achieved by a combination panels with different shapes and sizes most evident on the transition from the wall to the undulating ceiling (Iwamoto, 2009).

The use of a glossy finish on the panels also worked extremely well from disguising its rigidity, the reflective properties on the surface created a seamless appearance that looks like one continuous form.

26

Precedent Applied to Design

With a system of interlocking panels, it could potentially solve our issue with our model not being able to support itself. In terms of materiality, we needed a much more rigid material that can hold itself up when applying curvature on its form.

With a strong enough support, we can then apply a variation of apertures to our pattern to accentuate levels of privacy without worrying it to lose its form.

27

PLATO’S COLLECTION

by Amila Hrustic DISTORTED/MODULAR/REPETITIVE/FLEXIBLE/

Here the designer embodies a repetition of tetrahedron created from paper, attaching the modules to a fabric in different configurations.

The projects explores the concept of geometrically arranged in relation to the human body and their personal space. Depending on the lightsource, we are begining to see an interesting effect it creates from the transition of light to dark which we can also take into account on our design.

The beauty of the form lies behind the fabric, which enables the whole concealment to have a greater flexibility. Not only it allows the wearer to move freely without any constraints, it responds well to the protection of our personal space and serves as a barrier from both physical and visual invasion.

28

Precedent Applied to Design

When applying the concept of a modular yet flexible form to our designs, we can already discover some very similar properties in terms of its materiality and the technique of folds.

Instead of a rigid form, this tecnhique has given us an option to embrace the flexibility of the material and allow it to form its own shape on the wearer’s skin. Materials like polypropylene, boxboard and mountboard were considered. However, out of the three, polypropylene stood out for its flexibility.

29

2.5 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT v. 1

Variation 1: The first variation of version 1 tests our idea of how our form would look like with a depth of 30mm and different ratios of aperature. We extracted some modules to make way for the openings and areas of personal space with less concern.

The result was a very fragmented look on the overall model, it also exposed itself more to the outside and aesthetically did not work very well.

30

Variation 2: The second variation we tested turned out slightly better than the first variation. We reduced the depth to 20mm and we only extracted the modules that was in the way for the arm to move around freely. Curve attractors are added to regions of the form that has the least concern with privacy, thus larger aperture.

It turned out nicer and it has better continuity on the model. It also had a slightly better privacy compared to the first variation.

Variation 3: The third variation had all the same depth and curve attractors, besides the direction of indentation. Since variation one and two explored the effects of the form when the modules are goin inwards, we wanted to see if it creates a different effect when we flip the direction of indentation.

It produced a rougher surface from the bumps on each module and it has lost the fluidity of the form.

It created a much more private enclosure from the spikyness it had throughout the form, acting as a sort of defence mechanism.

Variation 1

Least Private

Variation 2

Variation 3

Most Private

Through this experimentation, it became clear to us that different variation allows us to achieve certain degrees of privacy for our first design.

31

2.6 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT v. 2

Variation 1: The first variation of version 2 explores the composition of the overall model with a depth of 30mm and varying ratios of aperture. Again, we extracted modules for openings and regions of the body with the least concern of privacy.

Similar to the first variation of version 1, it created a fragmented look on the model and did not work very well as a whole.

32

Variation 2: The second variation we applied a depth of 20mm and extracted the modules that was only in the way for the arm to move around freely. Modules with bigger aperture are set closer to the curve attractors which concerns with the least private.

Without the extractions and a shorter depth, it formed a smoother organic shape that flows well across the model.

Variation 3: For the third variation, we flipped the direction of the indentation while keeping the same depth and curve attractors of variation 2. It created a rather spiky appearance and lost some of its original fluid form.

These trials shows us that different variation allows us to achieve certain degrees of privacy for our second design.

Variation 1

Least Private

Variation 2

Variation 3

Most Private

If we were to carry on the second proposal for our final design, the base surface for our Version 2 Design needs to be reworked. Since the surface was broken down into two segments, it was difficult for us to attain a seamless pattern as it overlaps with one another.

33

2.7 FURTHER DESIGN DEVELOPMENT As a group, we have decided to stick with version 2 of our design develpoment. The final development of our second skin was further refined to a base form that compliments a continuous tesselation of our pattern. For better aesthetics, we have also converted the original rectangular grid to a diagonal grid, giving us a diamond pattern as we applied panel custom 3D variable. Curve attractors are carefully placed at selected regions on the surface to maintain a balance between private and public. We have also decided that the bottom part of our original form was serving no purpose and thus insignificant to our design, so we removed it. Openings for the arms and face were trimmed off from an extrusion to avoid fragmentation in the pattern.

The model at this stage was much more slender and elegant in relation to the body and it reflects well to our personal space.

Isometric

34

Front

Right

Back

Left

35

2.8 DIGITAL PROCESS 1. A series of ellipse were arranged based on our ideas of personal space, and was lofted to create a seamless surface.

2. The surface was rebuilt to achieve its simplest form, creating a much more organic flow that benefits us when applying panel and grid.

3. Grid from surface domain number allows us to use the base NURB surface to generate a base grid. The grid was converted to diagonal before trimming off the bottom part and points are offsetted from base surface.

4. Attractor curves are added on areas where we want the most apertures on our module to cluster.

5. Panel custom 3D variable from two bounding grids allows us to achieve the depth of concavity while creating apertures in relation to attractor curves.

6. Openings on the face and arms are trimmed off from an extrusion to allow the wearer to interact and move freely.

[1]

36

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

37

2.9 PROTOTYPE v. 1 We wanted to experiment with the effects of our modules, so we started creating sketch models using modules that responds to exclosure and exposure.

When we joined the modules together, we were easily able to move it around to create undulating surface and volume. This is due to the materiality of the sketch model since we only used paper. We need to test different materials for a better result. Another issue we have encountered was the fragility of the folds, because the sketch model was not able to support itself, it would be difficult for us to achieve a desired form.

Readdressing the issue of materiality, we looked at box card and polypropylene.

We applied box card for the next two prototypes we have created. The only difference was the size of the modules: 100mm, 50mm. The material provided a stiffer build to the shape, but was still too weak to support itself.

Polypropylene was applied to our next prototypes at a module size of 100mm and 50mm. As a result, the structure became much more rigid compared to the previous materials. Illumination was an aspect we were interested in exploring for this materiality as it gives a delicate glow on the surface when light was shining on it.

38

Testing Effects We began testing if the modules we have put together was able to achieve different levels of privacy through varying apertures of our mudules and whether the lighting was suitable for the overall composition.

We found that the arrangements of aperatures worked well in controlling the amount of interaction and exposure from the outside. The transition from open to private was clearer to us when referring back to our personal space. We also find that the variation curves controlling the aperature worked nicely in managing visual penetration from the outside by contrasting the body colour with our model depicted from the illustration featured on the right.

We also found that the illumination gives the polypropylene a gentle glow on the surface that could bring out the inner beauty of the material itself. And by changing the colour of light, it could also convey certain moods to the surrounding.

The shadows formed under the light and onto the skin can also be manipulative to the viewers.

39

2.10 M2 REFLECTION It was only after the precedent study we had a better understand to how we can possibly fabricate the highly complex form from our latest design development (p. 34-35). The importance of materiality to support the the model became evident after we have tested different materials during prototyping phase. Not only that, a stronger joint is required to hold the modules together because we were only using masking tape at this stage. Learning from the Puppet Theatre in the reading by Iwamoto, they have used unfolded panels on the sides of each cell, and are easily bolted together when assembled (Iwamoto. 2009). We will try incorporating tabs to connect cells together on M3 prototyping and eliminating any masking tapes.

In the readings by Scheurer and Stehling, we can understand that as we transition from our sketch ideas to the digital model, it is an abstraction of information. This step was extremely useful for us to be able to communicate our complex ideas through digital design.

Complex forms and patterning are made possible for fabrication to create developable surfaces with the help of Rhino. “NURBS allow the precise definition of complex shapes through control points”. This meant that working with the digital model became much more efficient for us users.

To refine our digital model further, we used reduction to eliminate any redundancies and optimizes our efficiency without changing too much of our original content. This involves removing unnecessary control points on a curve or surface to maximize efficiency, making it as simple as possible. This is evident in our previous design models, where the base shape was not reduced to its simplest form, the outcome was drastically different to the further design model where we applied ‘Rebuild’ to our base shape.

40

Unfolded panels of Puppet Theatre (Iwamoto, 2009)

41

42

3.0 FABRICATION 3.1 Fabrication Introduction 3.2 Design Development 3.3 Rhino Modification 3.4 Prototype v. 2 3.5 Prototype Development 3.6 Prototype Optimization 3.7 Final Digital Design 3.8 Assembly Drawing 3.9 Fabrication Sequence 3.10 Second Skin 3.11 M3 Reflection Tet Wey Chen Emma Fitt Ashley Liu

828678 832356 825712

43

3.1 FABRICATION INTRODUCTION In this module we will focus on further refining our digital design and finally moving onto the fabrication process.

Reminding ourselves again, our main idea of our second skin project is to create a form that hides the necessary parts of the personal space which we focused on our head, chest and the upper rear part of our body. The material system we use is panel and fold which uses the modules of 3 different aperatures.

We initially developed 2 base shapes and experimented with 3 different variations for each base shape and finally got to the finalised form we wanted. Our idea involves using the 3 base modules with different size of the aperture that could provide a increment of opening.

It was not until the end of M2 we realised that there was not enough complexity in our model from the 3 basic modules, so we will be shifting our technique in developing our different sizes of the aperture for different hierarchy of the personal space.

44

3.2 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Feedback from M2 design suggests that we need to work on our fabrication technique and method. Our guest critique suggested that we use cable ties as our connection since the biggest concern at the end of M2 was how the polypropylene will maintain its form.

Key words we noted in our feedback was keeping a sense of direction by pointing the modules. Keeping the flexibility of the material was also mentioned which is why we will stop using stiff balsa wood supports for our next prototype.

Due to the speed of individually cutting the modules and its lack of precision from the previous prototype, we decided to utilise laser cutting in FABLAB to speed up our production later on.

45

3.3 RHINO MODIFICATION Another issue towards the end of Module 2 was whether our design was fabricatable. We were having difficulties in unrolling the modules as they were overlapping with one another. Plus, the modules on the neck part was oddly shaped. So we decided to modify our model with Rhino’s grasshopper while keeping some of the properties we already have, elevating the complexity of the apertures, not only applying the three basic modules.

Reusing our base form, we were able to generate a more fabricable version where it has a better sense of direction for the modules and can hold its shape on its own due to the 351 unique modules.

We also found that the trimmed openings from previous model was difficult to fabricate, and since our developed model are much more refined, it was much easier to remove panels to achieve our openings without having it look too fragmented.

46

Original

Developed

3.4 PROTOTYPE v.2 For this prototype, we focussed on the arched back portion of the design as it was one of the sections with the most curvature. Our primary concern when we were testing this prototype was whether the polypropylene could maintain its shape and curve as much as we desired because there are pieces that curve in two direction We shifted our methods of connection to the use of cable ties in long strips of modules instead of having each cell with tabs around it. This approach will help us reduce the amount of connections needed and it speeds up the fabrication process. Another thing we need to take note is that there is a tendency for our cells to break easily because of the way our cells are structured. Although we had an extra tab connecting the module together, the indentation of the cell is causing tensile stress and it kept going back into its natural form, which is a flat surface.

It was due to the adhesive that have been using for this prototype. Polypropylene is a form of synthetic plastic and only specific adhesives works with the material. We will further refine our methods in prototype optimisation.

47

3.5 PROTOTYPE DEVELOPMENT Our main concern was improving our method of connecting so that we could be as efficient as possible during the actual fabrication. In addition to cable ties, we tested out using strings only to find that string was much slower to work with and did not pull the strips close enough together.

When we were fabricating our second version of our prototype, some cable ties were overly visible as we hadn’t pulled it tight enough. So particular care has to be taken when fabricating our final model to ensure that cable ties are properly fastened in order to avoid exposing cable ties.

This particular model was also where we started using plastic glue instead of super glue. It involves the use of primer and the adhesive to hold the modules together. The new adhesive provided a stronger bond in the modules which was much easier to assemble.

48

3.6 PROTOTYPE OPTIMISATION From the beginning we wanted to include lighting as our effect hence why our original prototypes were all white. Later we decided to explore just adding in different coloured modules to add interest. We quickly realised that by doing this we were making more connections than was necessary.

49

Prototype Optimisation In our second version of prototype, we have incorporated rectangular tabs, and during the fabrication process we found that the rectangular tabs will result further issues because they were overlapped and it will break the tabs joining the modules together. In order to solve this problem, we added a 2.5mm recess to each side of the tabs.

Initially we were planning to manually punch holes on the tabs to allow the cable ties to connect the strips of modules.

However, this method was proven to be extremely time consuming and extremely inefficient, so for our final model we would will be letting the laser cut to do all the work. By drawing 2mm lines from each side of the tabs and offsetting it outwards by 0.5m for the thickness of the cable tie to fit.

50

Prototype Optimisation As a group. we divided the structure into three parts for each member and used different colours for each part to easily distinguish them. The image featured on the right is an example of the unfolded green segment. For each major segment, it was again divided into smaller pieces so fabrications are more manageable.

With the amount of strips we have to keep track of, it is important to have lables on each strip so we can refere back to, his was especially emphasised in week 5’s lecture in working with numerous pieces of material. For every segments we named them with aphabets, and for the smaller pieces in the segment we given it a number. And for every strip within the piece, we numbered it according to its order. For instance: C1_1, C1_2, C1_3, etc.

There will be parts that needed to be cut and parts that needed to be etched.

For the laser cutter to distinguish them, we needed to layer the lines according to their options, i.e. cut lines are black and etch lines in red.

51

Prototype Optimisation We have also been discussing the matter of material tolerence across our digital modelling process. We were supposed to offset each edge of the module which needed to join with another strip taking into consideration of the material tolerance. However by doing so, we encountered a greater issue for the tabs joining the strips when we tried assambling them.

Images on the right shows that the original dimension of the tabs was 25.66mm. In an attempt to offset them, one of the dimension became 25.38mm and the other one became 24.65mm. This issue will result in a difficulty when joining the strips together because the tabs are not alligned with another. So we decided to embrace the material tolerence for the strips to connect.

52

3.7 FINAL DIGITAL DESIGN

Plan

Side Elevation

Front Elevation

53

3.8 ASSEMBLY DRAWING

54

3.9 FABRICATION SEQUENCE The fabrication sequence of our second skin begins by submitting the complete strips of modules with added tabs with cavities and properly layerd into cuts and etches.

Once the laser cutting is done, the next stage is to fold them into shape then cable tieing the strips together into smaller pieces. As we were joining the pieces together, the strips are starting to curve the opposite direction which became increasingly problematic. However with the help from a few more hands, we managed to join the pieces together.

Another issue we encountered that was not noticed until we were joining the segments together, the cable ties were too big for some areas to bend. Minor adjustments were made including replacing some of the cable ties with staples to allow the material to bend in place and adding strings in places to stop modules from pointing out.

55

56

57

3.10 SECOND SKIN

Front

58

Left

Back

Right

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

3.11 M3 REFLECTION There has been tremendous progress since the beginning of this module, especially on the refinement of didital model and our version 2 prototype. Problems were discovered and resolved to a point that greatly benefited us for our final second skin model. In completing our latest prototype, it further emphasised the importance of fabrication as mentioned in week 5’s lecture, which highlighted the significance of testing ideas as well as labeling. Labeling the strips of modules proved to be effective in keeping track of numerous strips we were dealing with, I could not imagine how lost we would have become without it.

In the reading by Kolarevic, I became aware of the different techniques available in digital fabrication. The technique of two-dimensional fabrication that involves two-axis motion of the sheet of material relative to the cutting head (Kolarevic, 2003) and other techniques involves additive and subtractive. We were fortunate enough to have the facilities such as FABLAB available for us to utilize the laser cutting. It was especially useful as we needed some parts to be scored, which might have been otherwise difficult to control by hand. It has proven to be extremely efficient and consistent for our fabrication process.

Due to human errors in the laser cutter submission, we misplaced a couple of the layers of etch line with cut lines on the Laser cut template.

Luckily the issue can easily be resolved by cutting out two-way tabs on some spare polypropylene to join the modules back together. Although we discovered new issues half way into our final second skin model, I was glad that we were able to fix it by adapting a different connection like staplers and strings.

66

67

4.0 REFLECTION This subject has deepened my understanding of the relationship between digital design and digital fabrication. It made me realise that with the help of advance technology, many design that seemed conceptually impractical was made possible by new digital avant-garde. The subject has also taught me the importance of collaboration with my team. It was not easy at the start, but our hardwork and determination overcame the challenges and I was proud of what we have accomplished throughout the time. The subject pushed us to the limits in helping us realize the potentials of design and the experience will be extremely rewarding.

The idea of abstraction and reduction was elaborated by Scheurer and Stehling’s “Lost in Parameter Space”. Abstraction indicates the process of simplifying the information while reduction is to eliminate any redundancies and optimizes our efficiency without altering the original idea. The abstraction of idea was utilised as I was examining the expanding folder earlier in Module 1, it helped me understand the material system thoroughly. Then, we applied reduction of our concept by reconfiguring the material system using similar logic to build our sketch model that delineates volume.

Throughout the design process, I found myself heavily relying on digital modelling, which had a significant impact on our design and fabrication.

It helped us translate our initial two-dimensional sketches into a three-dimensional model, this

68

process is referred to as “reverse engineering” (Kolarevic, 2003), where digital technologies were used as a medium of translation rather than conception. We also found ourselves applying digital modeling tools as way for design, where forms are found and experimentations are carried out, designing and adjusting until we achieve a desirable outcome. The use of Rhino, Paneling Tools and Grasshopper not only enabled us to create complex forms, but it can be easily transformed and adjusted which could not be done by simply using sketches and models. This began to establish an intriguing relationship between what we interpreted our ideas on hand-drawn sketches and what we generated in Rhino. This is evident when comparing our initial sketches at the start of Module 2 and towards the end of Module 2. I also found that by digitally designing our project, it greatly reduced our fabrication time. At the end of Module 2, hand-making our initial prototypes were proven to be extremely time consuming and the results were not as precise as we wanted them to be. Although a lot of time was also spent in unrolling the strips of modules and adding tabs along them, we achieved a greater outcome with higher level of precision and professionalism for our final model.

However, though there are countless advantages digital modeling, it still requires element of hand making and physical assembly as emphasized

by Stan Allen in his article, “the practice of architecture has always been in paradoxical position of being invested in the production of

real, concrete matter yet working with tools of abstract representation” (Bernstein and Deamer, 2008). At the start of Module 2, we devoted most of our time in perfecting the digital model, and little time was spent in prototyping and testing effects. This became an issue at the start of Module 3 as many features of our original model were not fabricatable. The early prototypes were still effective as it helped us revise our decision on material selection and connections. With the newly discovered issues, we then went back to modify the model and came back with a highly refined digital model. And again, we prototyped a second version based on a fraction of the modified model that was unrolled and laser cutted. We were now able to test out the tabs, connections and folds which the digital modeling was not able to achieve, further emphasizing the importance of craft and digital tools. The fact that our highly complex model has hundreds of unique individual modules, it can be overwhelming when it comes to fabrication. With my proposal of fabricating the modules in strips not only greatly reduced our time of assembly, it also reduced the need for connections. High quality of craftmanship was also vital in fabrication process even with the help of digital fabrication like laser cutting. The final product to me is the most important aspect of the process as it represents all our time and effort in the project. Thus, constructing it with care and precision remains the objective throughout the assemblage to successfully communicate our idea of protecting ones personal space.

Nevertheless, I was glad to be able to experience the rapid workflow that this subject offer. It expanded my design techniques, thinking and understanding of the processes. It enhanced many of my skills involving communication, collaboration, digital modeling, model making and photography. Digital design and fabrication willl truely benefit me in my future design studios.

Many thanks to my group mates for being cooperative and supportive, also special thanks to our tutor Amanda who has guided us throughout the semester.

69

70

5.0 APPENDIX 5.1 Credit 5.2 Bibliography

71

5.1 CREDIT

72

5.2 BIBLIOGRAPHY Architecture.mit.edu. (2012). Kerf Pavilion | MIT Architecture. [online] Available at: https://architecture.mit.edu/architecture-and-urbanism/ project/kerf-pavilion [Accessed 12 Mar. 2017].

Bernstein, P. and Deamer, P. (2008). Building the future. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, pp.38-42.

Heath, A., Heath, D. and Jensen, A. (2000). 300 years of industrial design : function, form, technique. New York: Watson-Guptill.

Iwamoto, L. (2009). Digital fabrications: architectural and material techniques.

New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

Kolarevic, B. (2003). Architecture in the digital age - design and manufacturing.

London: Spon Press.

Mos.nyc. (2017). Pavilion, No. 1, Puppet Theater. [online] Available at: http:// www.mos.nyc/project/puppet-theater [Accessed 25 Mar. 2017].

Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011). Lost in Parameter Space?. Architectural Design, 81(4), pp.70-79.

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

Warmann, C. (2017). Plato’s Collection by Amila Hrustić. [online] Dezeen.

Available at: https://www.dezeen.com/2010/11/23/platos-collection-byamila-hrustic/ [Accessed 23 Mar. 2017].

73