Page 1

Digital Design - Module 02 Semester 1, 2018 Amasha Samaratunge (911317) Xiaoran + Studio 08

Week Three

Reading: Kolerevic B. 2003. Architecture in the Digital Age

Kolerevic described three fundamental type of fabrication techniques in the reading. Outline the three techniques and discuss the potential of Computer Numeric Controlled fabrication with parametric modelling. (150 words max)

Kolerevic outlines the three fundamental fabrication techniques as subtractive fabrication, additive fabrication and formative fabrication. Subtractive fabrication refers to the process of removal of a specified material volume from a solid in various methods. In contrast, additive fabrication is a layering process which adds additional material, rather than subtracting it. Formative fabrication however deviates from these processes. It is a reshaping/deforming process which aims to change the existing forms into a desired shape. Computer Numeric Controlled fabrication (CNC) can be used for parametric modelling via a data input method which is imputed from its original program directly into the fabricating machine to produce the final model. This potentially eliminates the need for technical/ manufacture drawings resulting in a less-time consuming process.


Week Three

Surface Creation

Final iteration surface script.

Four surface iterations including final chosen surfaces.

When scripting in Grasshopper it was found to be a very experimental process of trial and error. Once one surface iteration was baked into Rhino, another repetition of the process of changing the number sliders was completed until a second surface was formed and then baked. Creating a relationship between the surfaces was an important consideration, resulting in the final two surfaces shown being chosen for the model.


Week Four Panels & Waffle

Isometric of chosen 2D and 3D panels.

Isometric of the waffling structure.

The 2D panel consists of a geometry cutout that resembles the opening seen in the 3D panels. Although flat, the 2D panel’s triangulations provide the panels with more depth to match the curve of the surface. The 3D panels extrude out much more, creating a dynamic facade.

The waffle structure coveys the relationship between the two chosen surface iterations. While one side is very open, the other is quite narrow, creating this sense of gradual progression and transition from a large space to a more contained space.


Week Four

Laser Cutting

Laser Cutting Nesting The materials for laser cutting differed between my waffling structure components and my panels.

For the 2D and 3D panels, the Laser Cut file was set to 290gsm Ivory Card. The constraints of Laser Cutting include the inability to cut very fine detailing. For this task in particular, the detailing was not too


For the waffling structure, the Laser Cut file was set to 1mm Mountboard material.

fine and therefore the process was less difficult and straight forward. Clear cut and etch lines were an important thing to consider.

911317 Amasha Samaratunge

Sheet 01 of 01



Week Five

Chosen iteration boolean script.

Boolean iterations including final chosen iteration.

Comment on the process of scripting and designing your boolean form. Label your images here. Use white colour background in Rhino only. The scripting process was again an experimental phase in Grasshopper. The dodecahedron form was chosen due to the harsh and jagged lines it produced. This created interesting intersections and very defined openings and thresholds.


Week Five


Isometric of Boolean geometry.

The final iteration was chosen due to the more consistent presence of larger openings and interesting intersections found in the top and bottom faces of the cube. Due to the clear connections between most points, the 3D print process seemed fairly convenient for the structure.

The spatial qualities of the model are very contained and defined. If applied to or within a pavilion design, this fragment would add a dynamic space with various forms of openings and light sources. The hard edges would offer a more directional source of light, creating an interesting and structural atmosphere within the space. The porosity of the model with the many thresholds it offers emphasises the structural and solid qualities created.


Week Six Task 01

Task 01 Matrix When lofting the iteration process was dictated by the evaluation of how successful the interaction between two surfaces was. 1.4 was chosen for development due to its similar curvature and heights that allowed a smooth connection. The panelling grid was randomised experimentation and resulted in trying to find a dynamic composition of points which would create interesting intersections. The panelling process also played with the idea of creating a cohesive facade and form. The final two panel variations (2D and 3D designs) were chosen due to the similar shape of opening.


Week Six Task 02

Task 02 Matrix The grid manipulation process seeked to iterate a unique and challenging grid which would help develop the boolean geometry in later steps. Once the dodecahedron form was chosen, both curve and point attractors were used to find the more suitable arrangement. The development of 2.4 was chosen from the same attractor points in 1.4 to create a more consistent distribution of the dodecahedron forms. The transformation chosen was a product of careful consideration of some factors. The ideas of thresholds and open space were a major contributing idea.


Week Six

Final Isometric Views




During beginning stages of Task 1, the boundary box of 150x150 in which the surface iterations would be contained within, was created. Using different number sliders and variables in the XYZ planes, this stage involved the iterative process of creating different surfaces.

After the two final surfaces were chosen and both the 2D and 3D panels were created. Curve attractors had been applied to both the 2D and 3D panels which were applied to each surface. In Grasshopper, Weaverbird options were trialled in the development of the 3D panels. Due to impracticality, the original 3D panels were developed as their original Morph3D forms.


Appendix Process

The first two images depict the numbering system used with PtUnroll/UnrollFaces. The numbers were later used in the modelling process to inform the assembling of the netting from the FabLab printed panels. The use of layers and colour coding for each grouped 3D set of panels also assisted this stage.

The last image similarly shows the development from the 2D panelled surface to its netting forms. The tabs added (PtTabs) are also included in this image.




This last image is shows the later stages of the manual modelling process. To the left of the image, the Task 2 model and its sanded off/cut off portions as well as the base of the 3D model show the elimination process. This resulted in the final sanded-down version of the Task 2 model.

The rest of the image shows a small process during the model making-process in which bull nose clips are used. Earlier, when joining both the 3D panels into one surface and the 2D panels into the second surface, these clips were also used in conjunction with glue in order to clamp the tabs together to apply pressure to stick. At this stage, the PVA glue had been applied to the waffle after its assembly and then the panelled surfaces were attached to it. String was used in certain parts to create a stronger connection along the waffle between panels. The bull nose clips were being used to do final glueing/prepping.


Digital Design - Module 02 Journal  
Digital Design - Module 02 Journal