Page 1

ARCHITECTURE DESIGN STUDIO

AIR ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK

ALICE KHOURY 587451 TUTORS: HASLETT AND PHILIP


W EE K ONE PAR AMETRIC AND ALGOR IT HMIC D ESIGN

VORONOI 3D TRIANGULAITON ALGORITHM

Parameter, in the most sense, is a factor that helps to define the overall limits and performance of a system PARAMETRIC DESIGN: - working parametrically - understand how data flows - divide a model into manageable parts - think Abstractly - think mathematically -think algorithmically

2

WEEK ONE


C UR V ES LOF T IN G IN GRASSHOPPER I created a series of 4 curves in rhino and lofted them to produce the form (left). Following this, I added these curves into rhino, which allows for the manipulaiton of the lofted form multiple tmes.

Lofted grasshopper forms, manipulated using control points. Loft: Nurb surface that is created through a set of curves

WEEK ONE

3


WE EK TWO UNDERSTANDING GEOMETRY, TRANSFORMATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS

CURVE MENU Creating a set of points then converting them to lines and curves in grasshopper

Interpolate curves

Examples of using curves in grasshopper as elements in ideas for our parametric model; drives a more complex geometry

Polyline

4

WEEK TWO


ORIENT C OM PON EN T 2 D R EP R ESEN TATION OF GEOMET RY

XY plane - 2D projection of surface. The image left describes a 2D representation of geometry which is good for working with 2D panels. Much fater to construct in grasshopper. It shows potential for use in the project proposal as a means of preparing for laser cutting.

Grasshopper component

Left image: orient component turned into hundreds of pieces, I only wanted about 20 to 30 to work with, so I employed a slider attached to the contour/grid and changed it from .250 to 5. The right image despicts this change in panels drasticall reduced. The image on the left slowed my computer down when I tried to work with it. WEEK TWO

5


WE EK TWO UNDERSTANDING GEOMETRY, TRANSFORMATIONS AND INTERSECTIONS

Rolled out components of original curved surface, much quicker than manually adjusting in Rhino like we did in Virtual Environments

Approximating 2D geometries using 2D elements placing a rectangular surface on the points within a curved plane. Links to ‘centroid’

6

WEEK TWO


Design iterations and playing with point reference to 2D shape. The rectangular component has been copied onto the curve here, and the centroid of the component is on the curve. X-Y planes have minimal rotation, just changing the position. Below: Baked component

WEEK TWO

7


WE EK TWO UNEXPECTED RESULTS When trying to experiment with 2D shapes on a curve, I ended up with this form and texture of a grid. I was not intendingfor the form to take this shape. During experimentation, I was trying to link ideas of 2D shapes to that of materiality, as computational design allows us to take those notions into account.

8

WEEK TWO


WEEK TWO

9


W EE K THR EE CONTROLLING THE ALGORITHM: LISTS, FLOW CONTROL, MATCHING

GRID SHELL

1

2

3

Construction phases of shell. 1 dividing curve, 2- arc loft then rebuild (missing component apparent in third image). All incorporating Grasshopper utilities of curve, shift and BANG

10

WEEK THREE


G RID SH ELL G R ASSH O P PER AND MISTAKES

Final grasshopper layout, provided for an interesting pattern on the grid shell

Attempt at creating my own form, Grasshopper didn’t like it but this bold shaped ball form was the result

WEEK THREE

11


W EE K THR EE CONTROLLING THE ALGORITHM: LISTS, FLOW CONTROL, MATCHING

CREATING POLYLINES FROM POINTS

Utilising voronoi components to create polylines for points. These patterns created were made by creating a sequence of numbers representing all of the indexes in voronoi list (cells)

The numbers are shuffled so cells are not stored in an order. The Jitter component shuffles numbers

12

WEEK THREE


SURFACE I T ER AT I ON S VOR ON O I C OMPONENT S

Partition list componet, where the cells were offset by -0.05, therefore linking some of the cells to one another. This component created the most interesting surface pattern

WEEK THREE

13


WE EK F OU R FIELD FUNDAMENTALS

The points in the field either atract their surounds or repel them, depending on their numerical value (ie positive or negative).

14

WEEK FOUR


FRACTAL T EC T R AH ED R A I R R EGULAR F ORM

Triangulated form

Variations within the form, manu ‘unbalanced’ outcomes

WEEK FOUR

15


F RACTAL T EC T R AH ED R A O U TC OMES

output of one function as input of new function deconsstruct brep

Baked component, aesthetically pleasing

16


EXP R ESSI ON S I R R EGULAR F ORM

Expressions - mathematical expressions, with notions of - input parameters - associative definition by scaling points on lofted surface using attractor point, then manupulate radius of circle

WEEK FOUR

17


EXP RESSI ON S I R R EG ULAR FORM

Small changes in circles, where a point attractor is used to make variations in the circle sequence

18

WEEK FOUR


EXP R ESSI ON S I R R EGULAR F ORM

WEEK FOUR

19


ITTERAT I ON S VOLTAD OM 10 ITERAT IONS Perspective View

20

Perspective View

Top

WEEK FOUR

Top


PAV I LI ON L AG I PAVILION EXPLORAT ION

From the VoltaDom precedent, I created 10 iterations from the provided script for the VoltaDom project. Some of the forms resulted in a maze like pattern, whereas others showed potential to be utilised in the LAGI brief.

The baked surface above was one of the more successful iteraitons of the 10, where a pavilion like structure was created. the circular shapes provide a sheltering from the external environment, and create a

WEEK FOUR

21


WE EK F IVE GRAPH CONTROLLERS

Base Y value from 0 to 1

The following patterns are all variations in graph mapper, where a series of infinite patterns could be generated.

22

WEEK FIVE


Graph Mapper script, allowing for many variations withing the patterning WEEK FIVE

23


IMAG E SAM PLI N G

Variable y=0.266, Surface divide component, then re-paramaterise

24

WEEK FIVE


IMAG E SAM PLI N G SOM ETHING HERE???

Low U and V count

Two images imposed on one another

Balanced U and V count of combined images

Green differentiates one image from another

WEEK FIVE

25


IMAG E SAM PLI N G TAN INPUT

Tan input expression to offset circles upwards

Iteration 1

26

WEEK FIVE


UNEXPECTED RESULT This was the second iteration, where a series of cones forms all projected to a designated point due to the tan input, producing a very strange form

Iteration 3 WEEK FIVE

27


EVALUAT I N G F I ELD S U SIN G P OINT C HAR GERS

Using positive point chargers, and curve division components, the points in space put lines through the fields.

The process of pushing points through the field and interpolating the design points, where a ‘field line’ component was utilised.

28

WEEK FIVE


Merge Field component

Chargers pushing the points away from field, line component utilised as opposed to circle WEEK FIVE

29


EVALUAT I N G F I ELD S L I N E CHAR GE Line charge component within the field, chargers pointing away from it. Provides variation within the overall form, where the baked from below looks split at the charge of the inserted line.

30

WEEK FIVE


Using line charge to create this field, both baked components, not merged with ‘Merge Fields’ WEEK FIVE

31


R EVERSE EN G I N EER I N G AT M O SP H ER I C TESSELLAT ION ASSU M ED D ESIGN PHASES PHASE ONE

PHASE TWO

Formulate the frame/skeleton on grasshopper

Populate a triangle surface with the ‘barnacles’. 3, four edged elements on each triangle.

Triangulate the surface

Combining the two creates the Atmospheric Tessellation installation

32

WEEK FIVE


ATMOSPHERIC TESSELLATION REVERSE-ENGINEER STEPS 1-4

1. Tri-grid, 2D grid with

2. Polygon Centre - area

3. Point Component fol-

4. Voronoi component,

triangular cells, size of 6, element X 10, element Y 7

lowing output of polygon centre, X and Y direction

WEEK FIVE

centroid of polygon shape focused on

plugged into region intersection

33


ATMOSPHERIC TESSELLATION REVERSE-ENGINEER STEPS 5-6

5. Scale component - objects were then scaled, creating a series of 3 four edges shapes within the triangles, just like the precedent project.

6. Loft - Following graft tree and region intersection, two lofitng processes occur. This is the underside.

34

WEEK FIVE


ATMOSPHERIC TESSELLATION REVERSE-ENGINEER STEPS 7-8

7. Loft - Upper loft, attaching to the underside

through a mesh component. The ‘simple mesh’ and ‘mesh join’ components need to be utilised.

8. Loft - Combining the two loft meshes together as one.

WEEK FIVE

35


WE EK S IX ARANDA LASCH CONTINUOUS PATTERNING

1. Previous fractal tetrahedra component

3. Bezier span, combined with ‘jitter’ component

36

2. Evaluate curve component, finds and connects the mid point of every edge to znother random edge. Creating a continuous pattern

4. Shift Paths, shifting the indices in all data paths, joining bezier span and unroll

WEEK SIX


ARAN DA LASC H U N R OLLING B REPS

Python scriptable component. Allowing the ability to work with the form in a 2D mode

WEEK SIX

37


TREE M EN U SH I F T PAT H C OMPONENT FIRST PHASE

SECOND PHASE

Surface Divide -sphere

Set three surfaces Divide Surface U-10 V-10

Polyline component {0;0} {1:1}

Surface Divide U-20 V-10

Polyline component {0;0} {1;1} {0;1}

Polyline component {0;0} set boolen true {1;1} {0;1} Average the points

38

WEEK SIX


Polyline component {0;0} {2;0} {0;2}

Polyline component {0;0} {2;0} {2;2} {0,2}

WEEK SIX

39


T R EE STAT I ST I C S AND VISUAL ISATION

Tree Statistics L=11 C=11 Next phase is to visualise how objects are stored in a tree

Simplify and Graft - alternatively (and much easier/ quicker) to just right click and graft

Text statistics component and text tag

40

WEEK SIX

Baked text tag


B ASE F OR M S R EVER SE EN GINEERED PR OJ EC T SCRIPT 1 CONSTANT QUAD SUBDIVIDE

BASE FORM

SCRIPT 2 HEXAGON CELLS

BASE FORM

SCRIPT 1 SUBDIVIDE TRIANGLES

BASE FORM

WEEK SIX

41


MAT R I X 5 0 IT ERATIONS PETRUSIONS

SPECIES 1

TRIANGULATED SUB PANEL SCAE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.560 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOOTTOM): 1 PATCH ENABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.450 Z FACTOR: 5 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM):0.371

TRI PANEL CONSTANT QUAD SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 2.3 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM) 0.41

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.225 Z FACTOR: 4 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.130

TRIANGULATED SUB PANEL SCAE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.560 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOOTTOM): 0.1635 PATCH DISABLED

TRIANGULATED SUB PANEL SCAE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.560 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOOTTOM): 0.162 PATCH DISABLED

U DIVISION: 1 V DIVISION: 3 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.488 Z FACTOR : 2 X FACTOR: 6 PATCH ENABLED TRIANGULAR PANELS

TRIANGULATED SUB PANEL SCAE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.560 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOOTTOM): 1 PATCH DISABLED

U DIVISION: 1 V DIVISION: 3 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.795 Z FACTOR : 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.914

TRIANGULATED SUB PANEL SCAE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOOTTOM): 1 PATCH ENABLED

42

U DIVISION: 1 V DIVISION: 3 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.488 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.846 Z FACTOR : 2 PATCH DISABLED TRIANGULAR PANELS

WEEK SIX


M AT R I X SPECIES 2

SPECIES 3

SOLID FORMS

HEXAGONS

5 0 ITERATIONS

TRI PANEL: CONSTANT QUAD SUBDIVIDE: 2 SCALE FACTOR 1 9TOP0: 0.853 Z FACTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM) 0.964 PATCH DISABLED

HEXAGON SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.417 Z FACTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 1.316 PATH ENABLED

HEXAGON SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.097 Z FACTOR: 15 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.854 PATH ENABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.548 Z FACTOR: 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.769 PATCH DISABLED

HEXAGON SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 3.4 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.264 PATH ENABLED

U DIVISION: 4 V DIVISION: 7 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.795 Z FACTOR: 4 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.914

U DIVISION: 10 V DIVISION: 15 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 7 Z AFCTOR: 3 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 1.3

HEXAGON SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.48 Z FACTOR: 3 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.8 PATCH DISABLED

HEXAGON SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 1 PATCH ENABLED

U DIVISION: 5 V DIVISION: 5 SUBDIVIDE: 1 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 Z FACTOR: 2 X FACTOR: 2 Y FACTOR: 2

TRI PANEL CONSTANT QUAD SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.189 Z FACTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.964 PATCH DISABLED

U DIVISION: 1 V DIVISION: 5 SUBDIVIDE: 1 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.908 Z FACTOR: 2

WEEK SIX

43


POD POTENTIAL

SPECIES 4

U DIVISION: 8 V DIVISION: 10 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 Z FACTOR: 5 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 PARAMETER (T): 0.75 PATCH DISABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.928 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.769 PATCH ENABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.680 Z FACTOR: 4 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.807

U DIVISION: 4 V DIVISION: 7 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.795 Z FACTOR: 4 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.914

U DIVISION: 8 V DIVISION: 20 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.0 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.7 PARAMETER (T): 0.8

REVSRF 3: REVERSE UV U DIVISION: 6 V DIVISION: 2 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.8 Z FACTOR: 7 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 PATCH ENABLED, SUBDIVIDED QUAD SKEWED QUADS T: 0

U DIVISION: 13 V DIVISION: 15 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 Z AFCTOR: 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 PARAMETER (T): 0.1, 0.3 PATCH DISABLED

U DIVISION: 6 V DIVISION: 8 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 Z FACTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 CAP HOLES, CULL FACES BOOLEEN (FTFFF)

U DIVISION: 13 V DIVISION: 15 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 Z AFCTOR: 4 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.869 PARAMETER (T): 0.1 PATCH ENABLED

U DIVISION: 6 V DIVISION: 8 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.6 Z AFCTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 PARAMETER (T): 0.75 PATCH ENABLED

44

WEEK SIX

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.555 Z FACTOR: 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.807 PATCH ENABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.000 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.908


U DIVISION: 5 V DIVISION: 8 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.488 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.846 Z FACTOR: 2 PATCH ENABLED RANDOM QUAD PANEL S:5

U DIVISION: 3 V DIVISION: 5 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.3 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 Z FACTOR: 5 PATCH DISABLED RANDOM QUAD PANEL S:1, SUBDIVIDE QUAD

TRI PANEL CONSTANT QUAD SUBDIVIDE: 1 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1 Z FACTOR: 1 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 1

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.555 Z FACTOR: 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.807 PATCH DISABLED

TRI PANEL CONSTANT QUAD SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1 Z FACTOR: 2 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.8 PATCH ENABLED

TRI PANEL CONSTANT QUAD SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.432 Z FACTOR: 8 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 2 PATCH DISABLED

EXTRUSIVE POD POTENTIAL

SPECIES 5

U DIVISION: 5 V DIVISION: 10 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 1.3 Z FACTOR: 5 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.3 PARAMETER (T): 0.9, 0.7 PATCH ENABLED

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.325 Z FACTOR: 6 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9

REVSRF 3: REVERSE UV U DIVISION: 2 V DIVISION: 1 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.3 Z FACTOR: 7 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 PATCH ENABLED, TRIANGULAR PANELS

SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.539 Z FACTOR: 3 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.899

U DIVISION: 3 V DIVISION: 3 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.3 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.9 Z FACTOR: 7 PATCH ENABLED SUBDIVIDE QUAD, SKEWED QUAD T=0

U DIVISION: 1 V DIVISION: 2 SUBDIVIDE: 3 SCALE FACTOR 1 (TOP): 0.427 SCALE FACTOR 2 (BOTTOM): 0.583 Z FACTOR: 2

45


SU CCESSFUL I T ER AT I ON S SEL EC T ION CRITERIA SELECTION CRITERIA - - - -

Ease of fabrication/assembly Aesthetically pleasing and interesting Differs from original base pattern Creation of suitable pod structure to house algae

In terms of feasibility and generation of the pod structure, our chosen successes in the iterative process need to be able to be applied to the concept of a ‘pod’. This pod pattern and form must be aesthetically pleasing and intriguing for the viewers of the pavilion, as the form generated will respond directly to the energy source of algae biofuel.

46

WEEK SIX


Second Definition - Hexagonal Pod Potential in tessellating hexagons, form and spatial diversity

clean

Third Definition - Blockwork Interesting surface pattern straying definition, limited pod use

from original

Second Definition - Pertrusions Spacing between pod structures

for possible pipes, interesting assembly

Third Definition - Valuted Interesting patterning that varies on top and bottom of design, pod structures evident

47


NO N T EACHING CLUSTERS - TRAVELLING SALESMAN

Populate a 2D surface, thinking about how to cluster a definition to a single point

Create a line between the two points, showing what we did ‘visually’ Cull Index - after list item, use cull index to search through points to find the closest point

Travelling Salesman - script for Cluster

48

NON TEACHING


GRAD IEN T D EC EN T R EC U R SIVE PAT T ERNS

3. New surface point and number comp. + Unit Z (-1 downwards)

1. Set one surface

4. Surface closed point. Then cluster

2. Surface divide and graft, keeps track of points

5. Continue Cluster for 5 times, then attach to NURBS curve

NON TEACHING

49


GRAD IEN T D EC EN T R EC U R SIVE PAT T ERNS

6. U+V count of 25

50

NON TEACHING


7. U=15 V=90

7. U=64 V=10

NON TEACHING

51


FO RM EXPLOR AT I ON C URVES

Applying the three different scripts to differnt sets of base curves to see the results. In general terms, the curves seemed weel supported by the tessellating patterns.

52

NON TEACHING


PO D S ON F OR M EXPLORAT IONS LUNCHBOX BAKED FORM

FORM VARIATION

Constant Quad Subdivide

Hexagon Cells

Subdivide Triangle

NON TEACHING

53


LARGER FORM GENERATION

54


GENER AT ED F OR M

T

his is a render of what we propose our final design to look twards, as it curves adjusting to the levels of sunlight throughout the day in a Southeen manner. the curved surface provides a visually interesting object to look at, where the pods can be seen in all of their presence. In terms of parametric design, Part B has encouraged us to push our boundaries and creativity to the absolute limit with the aid of Grasshopper, and many of the designs that both myself and my peers have come up with suggest that we have taken a lot away from this subject already in terms of computational design and thinking.

NON TEACHING

55


PA RT C DETAILED DESIGN

F

ollowing the interim presentation, we explored form variation at a greater level and concluded on a form that incorporated the pods, spacing for pipes and a steel frame to hold the structure together. The form

56

showed highlights the first major iteration we came up with, but this form was not optimized to our site just yet. We needed to develop our form in response to the sun and angle at which it hits the site.

PART C


PART C

57


58

PART C


PART C

59


FO RM EXPLOR AT I ON GR ID SHELL

SOUTHERN VIEW

EASTERN VIEW

This is the grid shell form utilized for the final of our design. In order to rationalize this form, we conducted a series of analytical tests, such as: - Radiation Analysis - Shadow Studies - Pod Studies

60

PART C

AERIAL VIEW


P R OB LEM PRINT FILE

In order to 3D print there had no be no revealed edges on the form. Therefore, on the open polysurface, the command ‘show edges’ was used, then ‘naked edges’ was selected to then ‘join edges’ to one another. This occurred on our polysurface.

UNJOINED EDGES

PART C

61


SOLUT I ON P R I NT F ILE

REVEAL EDGES NAKED EDGES JOIN EDGES

JOINED EDGES

62

PART C


OPEN SURFACE - NEEDS TO BE CONVERTED TO A MESH IN ORDER TO PRINT IN STL FORMAT

CLOSED MESH - ABILITY TO BE USED AS AN STL FILE FOR THE 3D PRINTER

PART C

63


P RIN T F I LE SIM P LIF ICAT ION

U

sing Meshlab, specializing with 3D objects and filters, I was able to simplify the mesh created for the print file. While our mesh was quite simple and small in size, reaching just over 10cm in length, the more simple the object, the faster it will print.

Using the filters tab, then remeshing, simplification and reconstruction, quadric edge collapse deformation, and specifying the percentage of reduction at 0.5, (by half) a simpler version of the mesh is created.

This mesh was too simplified, and did not give a smooth surface, such as the one that would be generated from the connecting pods. This mesh was reduced by a percentage of 0.5 four times.

This mesh was a better percentage of simplification than the first, as there are no hard edged peaks such as the one above has. The mesh was simplified throguh Meshab at a reduction of 0.5 twice.

64

PART C


POD S T EM P L AT E FOR LASER C UTTER

PART C

65


LADY B UG R AD I AT ION ANALYSIS

FIRST FORM - INTERIM PRESENTATION

66

SECOND FORM - GENERATION

PART C


THIRD FORM - FINAL FORM

LEVELS OF RADIATION HIGH

LOW

PART C

67


FINAL FORM - NO PODS

FINAL FORM - POD INTEGRATION

68

SOLAR RADIATION IN LADYBUG DEFINITION

PART C


LADY B UG R AD I AT ION ANALYSIS

This is the final form optimised with ladybug for solar radiation. The pavilion relies on the sun to promite alge growth, and the pods need the maximum amount of sunlight that they can access.

LEVELS OF RADIATION HIGH

LOW

PART C

69


LADY B UG SH AD O W ST UD IES

LADYBUG GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION

70

PART C


SOUTHERN FACADE

EASTERN FACADE

The lighter the shadowing, the less exposed it is to shade. These diagrams depict the final form over a shadow study of the annual amount of sunlight projected over the site (in a southerly direction).

WESTERN FACADE

NORTHERN FACADE

PART C

71


LADY B UG P OD SH AD OW ST UD IES

These are the projected sun paths of Copenhagen over 5 different pod shapes. We chose to cotinue with hexagons as they produced the least amount of shadowing onto surrounding pods. HEXAGONS

TRIANGLES

CIRCLES

TRI GRID SQUARES

72

PART C


K AR AM B A ST R U C TURAL ANALYSIS

1CM THICK

4CM THICK

2CM THICK

7CM THICK

Karamba was used to analyse the strcture, and yielding an 8cm steel system as effective to work across the paviion. By this stage, our framing traced the pod shapes in a hexagonal manner, differing from the form generated after the interim presentation.

KEY High in compression

Ideal range

3CM THICK

8CM THICK

PART C

73


STEEL ST R U C T U RAL D EF INIT ION

74

PART C


F OR M SU R FAC E D EF INIT ION

PART C

75


P OD S PAT T ER N D EF INIT ION - HEXAGONS

FINAL POD SURFACE PATTERN DEFINITION USING LUNCHBOX TO GENERATE HEXAGONAL POD SHAPES AND HEIGHTS

76

PART C


WESTERN FACADE

SOUTHERN FACADE

EASTERN FACADE

NORTHERN FACADE

PART C

77

Algorithmic Sketchbook  

Final

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you