Issuu on Google+

Studio Air | CAITLYN BENDALL | 2016 | 

|  GROUP MEMBERS  |  CINDY LYU, GRACE JIANG, JOANNE QIU, KIMI WANG  |


02| 

FRONT COVER|  CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH  BACK COVER|  CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH ABOVE IMAGES|  SOURCES AT INDIVIDUAL LOCATIONS IN JOURNAL


Hello, it’s me FIGHTING TO FINISH MY FOURTH YEAR OF A BACHELOR OF ENVIRONMENTS MAJORING IN NO SOCIAL LIFE, I MEAN ARCHITECTURE STUDENT CAITLYN BENDALL

My experience with digital design is somewhat comparable to having to attend swimming lessons as a child; In the long run I could see the benefits, but a reluctance to learn led to a large amount of screaming and crying whilst it was happening. In addition, as I have grown up I have learnt cuss words, which have frequently been used when trying to understand Grasshopper. Having attempted this subject before I know the basics of both Rhino and Grasshopper, although I have never used either to produce a final. I am also aware that digital architecture is constantly developing and becoming a more integrated part of the design process, in some ways changing the timeline altogether.

In particular through the subjects of Design Studio Air and Environmental Building Systems, I have a keen - yet unexplored - interest in the field of Biomimicry and how technology is allowing this field to grow much faster than it would without it. However, I think it is hard to create a project in this field without extensive research. A traditionalist at heart however, I prefer to work with paper and pencil, especially in the initial stages of an idea. The ability to quickly produce a variety of different iterations from a single concept has not yet swayed me into an overwhelmingly positive attitude towards digital design. Maybe this Semester will completely change my viewpoint; I know it would be useful if I learned to love this subject!

|  INTRODUCTION  03

ABOVE|  PETRA CROOT, CAITLYN ON SAND DUNES, PHOTOGRAPH


Contents 03| Intoduction Part A: Conceptualisation 06|  Design Futuring 10|  Design Computation 12|  Composition VS. Generation 15|  Conclusion and Learning Outcomes 16|  Algorithmic Sketches 20| References Part B: Criteria Design 22|  Research Field 23|  Case Study 1.0 25|  Case Study 2.0 30|  Technique: Development 34|  Technique: Prototypes 40|  Learning Objectives and Outcomes 42|  Algorithmic Sketches 44| References Part C: Detailed Design 46|  Design Concept 48|  Tectonic Elements & Prototypes Module Exploration Connection Exploration Material Exploration Form Development & Exploration Final Model Exploration

| 49,50,52-54,56-63 | | 51-53, 85 | | 55 | | 65-69 | | 72-85 |

Presentation Model Final Model Exploration Final Model

| 86-89 | | 92-93 | | 94-97 |

98|  Final Detail Model

86|  Learning Objectives and Outcomes 99| References


| CONCEPTUALISATION | 


30 St. Mary Axe AN AWARD WINNING EXAMPLE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SUSTAINABLE WORKPLACE DESIGN, COMPLETE WITH A COOL NICKNAME ARCHITECTS FOSTER AND PARTNERS

Colloquially referred to as The Gherkin,1 Foster and Partners’ modern Swiss Re Headquarters erupts amongst London’s classical office buildings. Making a statement in both the public eye and the architectural world, it became the benchmark for future office tower designs after its completion in 2004.2 30 St. Mary Axe brought the need for, and benefits of, sustainable office buildings to the forefront of discussion. With its sustainable design having the dual effect of providing psychological benefits for workers,3 it was deemed to have “made the greatest contribution to the evolution of architecture”4 over its opening year. The Gherkin received, by unanimous judging, the RIBA Stirling Prize, the first office building to do so.5

06  DESIGN FUTURING  |

Focused in its iconic, computer generated shape and facade6 the building has an energy footprint fifty percent less than comparable air-conditioned office buildings.7 By combining operable windows (Opposite Page, Bottom Left) and an atrium that runs internally along the facade (Opposite Page, Bottom Right), passive cooling and ventilation are achieved. The modelling of “local environmental conditions”8 - in particular the direction, path and force of wind determined the location of the windows that would maximise air infiltration, and in addition influenced the tapered base and tip, to avoid creating wind tunnels at ground level.9 The air that enters the building is distributed to each floor through the atrium (stack ventilation). Communal work spaces face outward to the atrium, and skylights are cleverly positioned to filter light into the inner depths of the tower. This is a purposeful response to psychological research on workplace environments.10 30 St. Mary Axe aimed to create an office building with little to no negative environmental impact, something that had previously been seldom explored. Since, it has spurred a revolution of conscious building, reflected in Melbourne’s CH2 and Seattle’s Bullitt Centre.

ABOVE|  30 ST MARY AXE IN ITS CITY LOCATION (SOURCE ON OPPOSITE PAGE)


| DESIGN FUTURING 07

ALL IMAGES SOURCE|  FOSTER AND PARTNERS, PHOTOGRAPH <HTTP://WWW.FOSTERANDPARTNERS.COM/PROJECTS/30-ST-MARY-AXE/> [ACCESSED 23 FEB 2016]  1|TOP LEFT TOPMOST POINT OF THE TOWER  2|TOP RIGHT  FACADE OF BUILDING  3|BOTTOM LEFT  OPERABLE WINDOWS ON FACADE  4|BOTTOM RIGHT  INTERNAL ATRIUM OF BUILDING


08  DESIGN FUTURING  | 

1|TOP LEFT NATIONAL PARKS BOARD SINGAPORE, ENVIRONMENTAL LOOP OF THE GARDENS, DIAGRAM <HTTP://WWW.GARDENSBYTHEBAY.COM.SG/CONTENT/DAM/GBB/THE-GARDENS/ ABOUT-US/DP01-1-2-GRAND-ASSOCIATE-PROGRAM-1500X800-V2.JPG [ACCESSED 3 MARCH 2016]  2|MIDDLE LEFT  JERVIS MUN, GARDENS BY THE BAY, PHOTOGRAPH <HTTPS://WWW.FLICKR. COM/PHOTOS/MARINABAYSG/7240262446/IN/ALBUM-72157629827357308/>


Gardens by the Bay

MEDITERRANEAN PLANTS IN THE TROPICS AND SOMETHING CALLED ‘SUPERTREES’; WHAT IS SINGAPORE’S “CITY IN A GARDEN”1? ARCHITECTS GRANT ASSOCIATES/ IN ASSOCIATION WITH WILKINSON EYRE/ ATELIER TEN/ ATELIER ONE

With similar attributes to The Eden Project in Cornwall, Gardens by the Bay explores the technological possibilities of creating transportable ecosystems. The design created by a multidisciplinary team of landscape architects (Grant Associates), architects (Wilkinson Eyre), structural engineers (Atelier One), and environmental consultants (Atelier Ten)2 - a new approach towards designing - involves biome domes akin to those in the UK, providing suitable environments for both Mediterranean and tropical mountain flora that would otherwise perish in Singapore’s tropical heat.3 Gardens by the Bay goes one step further however in “generat[ing] an enhanced ecosystem for the site”4. The conservatories are in themselves an ‘ecosystem’, as an almost completely closed system of energy generation and consumption. The trees that line Singapore’s streets and the plants on display provide fuel to power the cooling systems of the conservatories through horticultural waste. The exhaust fumes from the process of turning this into biofuel are released through chimneys, hidden in the structure of the Supertrees. Waste heat from this process, as well as stratified heat from inside the domes, is used to regenerate liquid desiccant which de-humidifies the dome air, making it easier to cool.5 This “holistically integrated [solution]”6 (Opposite page, Top left) may solve potential future problems regarding Earth’s loss of biodiversity, whilst not contributing to other marked problems of energy consumption, in a ‘possible future’ described by Dunne and Raby.7 Sustainable features of the shape and material of each dome “reduce energy consumption by at least thirty percent”. 8 The gridshell facade (double glazed and e-coated) allows a carefully calculated 45,000 lux of light to enter as 65% incident daylight and only 35% solar heat. This amount was determined by several years of experimentation and caters to the plants needs without unnecessarily impacting the cooling load.9 Gardens by the Bay defies logical thought in that, as a proposal, it would require large energy input in an age where resources are being conserved. The innovation of a closed system is “an outstanding example of sustainability in action”10 earning the project recognition on a global scale, with design and tourism awards both locally and overseas.

  |  DESIGN FUTURING  09

1|OPPOSITE PAGE, BOTTOM LEFT  NATIONAL PARKS BOARD SINGAPORE, TOP OF A SUPERTREE - PHOTOVOLTAIC PANELS, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.GARDENSBYTHEBAY.COM.SG/ CONTENT/DAM/GBB/THE-GARDENS/ABOUT-US/DP01-1-2-GRAND-ASSOCIATE-PROGRAM-1500X800-V2.JPG [ACCESSED 3 MARCH 2016] 2|OPPOSITE PAGE, RIGHT SIDE GRANT ASSOCIATES, SUPERTREES, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.GRANT-ASSOCIATES.UK.COM/PROJECTS/GARDENS-BY-THE-BAY/> [ACCESSED 3 MARCH 2016]  


Fondation Louis Vuitton

TURNING AN ORGANIC GEHRY VISION INTO A FEASIBLE STRUCTURE, THROUGH A SINGLE DIGITAL MODEL. ARCHITECTS GEHRY PARTNERS

Frank Gehry typically uses digital technology in the final stages of his projects, to digitally model analogue creations. This method limits architects from the vast possibilities that technology supports such as, digitisation of the design process, parametric modelling, and embedded information in 3D models.1 Although Fondation Louis Vuitton began with computerization methods (Above, Top Left), its complex organic form required computation methods to develop a buildable structure. Gehry Technologies built a digital program2 that defined the twelve sketched roof ‘sails’ of the building, using curve fitting and least squares algorithms3 based on the dimensions and maximum curvature allowances of the glass and concrete panels to be used.4 The

10  DESIGN COMPUTATION |

design was framed by the initial drawing but the material properties determined the final shape, through “self-optimization”5. Through data translation the precise nature of the computer model became buildable, with each piece mass customized and individual to its location. Fondation Louis Vuitton’s location in Paris presented a logistical problem for Gehry’s practice based in Los Angeles and the many collaborators on the project. The use of technology in creating and using only a single digital model, across several servers6, synthesized all of the information of the project and allowed concurrent work flows from all parties involved. This project succeeded by combining the form finding efficiency of the computer with the creative genius of Gehry.

1|TOP LEFT  FRANK GEHRY, INITIAL SKETCH, DRAWING<HTTP://WWW.FONDATIONLOUISVUITTON.FR/CONTENT/FLVINTERNET/EN/L-INSPIRATION.HTML> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016] 2|TOP RIGHT  FONDATION LOUIS VUITTON, GLASS ROOF STRUCTURE, STRUCTURAL DIAGRAM, < HTTP://WWW.ARCHDAILY.COM/555694/FONDATION-LOUIS-VUITTON-GEHRY-PARTNERS/5437484BC07A80F87C0000AC-STRUCTURE-DIAGRAM-FONDATION-LOUIS-VUITTON> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016] 3|BOTTOM LEFT  L’OBSERVATOIRE INTERNATIONAL, FONDATION LOUIS VUITTON LIGHTING, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://LOBSINTL.COM/PROJECT/FONDATION-LOUIS-VUITTON> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016] 4|BOTTOM RIGHT  FONDATION LOUIS VUITTON, BELOW THE FLOATING SAILS, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.FONDATIONLOUISVUITTON.FR/EN/LA-FONDATION/FRANK-GEHRY.HTML> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016]


HygroScope and HygroSkin IS IT A BIRD? IS IT A PLANE? NO IT’S... METEOROSENSITIVE MORPHOLOGY?

ARCHITECTS ACHIM MENGES/ IN ASSOCIATION WITH INSTITUTE FOR COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN

Achim Menges has embraced the “age in which digitally informed design can actually produce a second nature”1 showcased through his responsive architecture. Both Hygroscope and Hygroskin embody the potential of inherent material properties, when combined with computational morphogenesis2, to replace climate responsive mechanical processes. Morphogenesis in nature is the biological process by which organisms develop their shape3, but the process is quickly becoming dominant in architecture, where human programmed algorithms are being used to generate final designs. Menges’ projects take a biomimetic approach to this, focused on the spruce cone (Above, Bottom Left). Unique components are digitally fabricated from a veneer that is physically

programed with hygroscopicity mimicking the spruce cone’s ability to shape morph in response to changes in humidity levels within the environment; opening and closing the apertures they make up, without the need for external energy input.4 The design is based not on geometry but on material behavior5, embedded in the digital program that creates each piece. Not only the apertures but the shape of the HygroSkin Pavilion (Above, Bottom Right) follows this; the bending capacity of plywood sheets developing the design of the structure from a simple box.6 The digitised form of the design also allowed each individual piece to be fabricated by a robot through the use of code.7 Digital technology informed by material property is entering unexplored architectural possibilities.

|  DESIGN COMPUTATION  11

ABOVE, TOP IMAGES SOURCE| ACHIM MENGES AND STEFFEN REICHERT, HYGROSCOPE: METEOROSENSITIVE MORPHOLOGY, PHOTOGRAPH <HTTP://WWW.ACHIMMENGES.NET/?P=5083> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016] 1|TOP RIGHT  APETURES CLOSED 2|TOP LEFT  APETURES OPEN ABOVE, BELOW IMAGES SOURCE|  ACHIM MENGES, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.ACHIMMENGES.NET/?P=5612> [ACCESSED 10 MARCH 2016] 3|BOTTOM LEFT  BIOLOGICAL PRINCIPLE: SPRUCE CONE REACTING TO CHANGES IN MOISTURE CONTENT 4|BOTTOM RIGHT  METEOROSENSITIVE PAVILION AS EXHIBITED IN THE ARCHILAB 2013 EXHIBITION AT THE FRAC CENTRE, ORLEANS 


12| 

ABOVE, TOP IMAGES SOURCE| UNSTUDIO, DIAGRAM < HTTP://WWW.DEZEEN.COM/2013/03/12/ARCHITECTURE-IS-STILL-IN-THE-WALKMAN-PHASE-UNSTUDIO/> [ACCESSED 16 MARCH 2016] 1|ABOVE, TOP LEFT  KNOWLEDGE PLATFORM TOPICS 2|ABOVE, TOP RIGHT  KNOWLEDGE PLATFORM POTENTIAL COLLABORATIONS 3|ABOVE, MIDDLE  SIEBE SWART, ARNHEM STATION BIRDS EYE VIEW, PHOTOGRAPH < HTTP://WWW.ARCHDAILY.COM/777495/ ARNHEM-CENTRAL-TRANSFER-TERMINAL-UNSTUDIO/564E67D0E58ECE8C4200039C-ARNHEM-CENTRAL-TRANSFER-TERMINAL-UNSTUDIO-PHOTO> [ACCESSED 16 MARCH 2016]


Knowledge Platforms Arnhem Central Station

AHEAD OF THE CROWD, UNSTUDIO LIKED COMPUTATION BEFORE IT WAS COOL ARCHITECTS UNSTUDIO

The uptake of advances in digital technology has been slow among many architects. The dominant use of technology for a long time has been analogue design transferred to a digital model in its final stages, however many architects now embed information in their models that allow for easier fabrication and construction. Still the potential of technology to be used throughout the entire design process is going unexplored by many, as generation is seen as dissolving creative practice. If the computer is creating all the solutions to the problem, when is the designer designing? UNStudio is more than just an architecture firm, with a multidisciplinary team; their designers are also coders. UNStudio’s knowledge platforms embrace digital design, allowing for problems to be solved through the creation of digital programs and algorithms. These algorithms are then shared between their team and developed further, or in a completely different direction.1 Communication of information like this is integral to the growth of computation and generation, as it expands understanding of how to better utilise this technology. “Computation does not replace inspiration or an idea, nor the operation of a design model”2, an algorithm is only as useful as the person programming it. If architects do not discuss computation then it cannot be pushed further. UNStudio’s Arnhem Central Station is an example of the firms ready uptake of new technology, as it began in 1996.3 The Central Transfer Hall roof design is defined by fabrication restraints of mould size, anchor positions, and geometric optimization, through an autonomous digital process.4 Each restraint interacted with the others as abstract components simultaneously, achieving a more efficient design in less time than if each task was performed by a person. This digital tool was seen as useful and retained by the firm to be used later or futher modified for future designs.5

|  COMPOSITION VS. GENERATION  13

  1|OPPOSITE PAGE, BOTTOM UNSTUDIO, ARNHEM STATION CENTRE TRANSFER HALL ROOF, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW.UNSTUDIO.COM/PROJECTS/ARNHEM-CENTRAL-TRANSFER-HALL> [ACCESSED 16 MARCH 2016]


Void: Thread Installation

ROBOTS ARE TAKING OVER, BUT NOT TO WORRY HUMANS ARE STILL IN CONTROL ARCHITECTS KOKKUGIA/AA SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE

Swarm behaviour is the focus of Kokkugia’s experimental architecture; programming autonomous elements that embody certain aspects of a design with natural swarm behaviour seen in nature.1 The results are self-organising structures produced by algorithms with set parameters. Optimised structures that analogue design would rarely produce. It has been particularly useful in their urban planning projects, the bigger a design is, the greater its complexity and the more useful autonomous development becomes.

spatial constraints of the room, and programmed anchor and connection points. The robots assess these factors in real time and autonomously interact with each other.2 The potential of this experimental design is an ability to transfer this design to any site through reprogramming.3

The Void installation combines swarm behaviour with a developing construction method in architecture, the robot. Robots or machines are already used in the fabrication process programmed through algorithm and the exploration of this is continuing into construction. Using aerial robotics, a weave is formed based on the

14  COMPOSITION VS. GENERATION  |

ABOVE, ALL IMAGES SOURCE| KOKKUGIA <HTTP://WWW.KOKKUGIA.COM/AADRL-AERIAL-ROBOT-THREAD-CONSTRUCTION> [ACCESSED 17 MARCH 2016] 1|ABOVE, TOP LEFT  FINAL INSTALLATION, PHOTOGRAPH 2|ABOVE, BOTTOM LEFT  AERIAL ROBOTS IN PROGRESS, PHOTOGRAPH 3|ABOVE, RIGHT  DIAGRAM OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAMMING PROCESS AND OUTCOMES, DIAGRAM


Design Approach

AFTER THREE WEEKS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE AM I AN EXPERT IN DIGITAL DESIGN YET? SUMMARY PART A

1. A SUMMARY AND A PROPOSAL Reviewing the precedents presented in Part A, sustainability and the way it is displayed in designs is prominent in the specific examples I chose. Not only have I learnt more about the continuously evolving architectural discourse but I have also gained insight into the purpose I desire for architecture. Foster and Partners’ 30 St Mary Axe, Grant Associates’ Gardens by the Bay, and Achim Menges exploration of hygroscopicity all share the design quality of their most innovative aspects also being the most prominent aesthetic features. The idea of the eye catching detail of a design delivering information to its audience is intriguing. It enhances public access of issues effecting not only architecture but the world.

Architecture has been seen in the past as a purely aesthetic venture, but these precedents exemplify the new path architecture is taking; building based not purely on form but on information. This is the approach I wish to explore. In combination with biomimicry, perhaps people could be persuaded by architecture based on animal or plant behaviour, that humans are not the best at everything. 2. HAVE I LEARNT ANYTHING Digital Technology in architecture it would seem, is still not being used to its full capacity. I relate to this quite strongly, as most of the time the algorithms I attempt to build end up a very angry red colour. Persistence is the key though; as many architects who use computation to produce innovative designs increase interest in the methods, looking at different algorithms and tutorials, and testing inputs and outputs, encourages my Grasshopper skillset. A key point of the theory I have studied is the need to combine the most effective part of human abilities with the most effective part of digital abilities, allowing “design [to become] the thinking of architectural generation through the logic of the algorithm.”

|  CONCLUSION AND LEARNING OUTCOMES  15

  1|ABOVE  GUDA KOSTA, ‘ROOD MET WITTE STIPPEN’, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW. GUDAKOSTER.NL/FOTO/STIP> [ACCESSED 20 MARCH 2016]


16  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES  | 


|  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES 17


18  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES  | 


|  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES 19


References 30 ST. MARY AXE

1|  James S Russell, ‘In a city averse to towers, 30 St. Mary Axe the ‘towering innuendo’ by Foster and Partners, is a big eco friendly hit’, Architectural Record, 192 (2004) 218 2|  Foster + Partners, ’30 St Mary Axe’, <http://www. fosterandpartners.com/projects/30-st-mary-axe/> [accessed 29 February 2016] 3|  Foster + Partners, ‘30 St Mary Axe’ 4|  The Royal Institute of British Architects, ‘St Mary Axe, The Gherkin (2004)’ <https://www.architecture.com/StirlingPrize/ RIBAStirlingPrizeWinners/StMaryAxe%E2%80%93TheGherk in(2004).aspx> [accessed 29 February 2016] 5|  The Royal Institute of British Architects, ‘St Mary Axe, The Gherkin (2004)’  6|  Russell, 218 7|  Foster + Partners, ‘30 St Mary Axe’ 8|  Russell, 218 9|  Russell, 218 10|  Foster + Partners, ‘30 St Mary Axe’

GARDENS BY THE BAY

1|  National Parks Board of Singapore, ‘History and Development’, About the Gardens, <http://www. gardensbythebay.com.sg/en/the-gardens/about-us/historyand-development.html> [accessed 1 March 2016] 2|  Atelier One, ‘Gardens by the Bay, Singapore’, ISTRUCTE Structural Awards Submission, pp1-7, <https://www.istructe. org/getmedia/e8f33300-c603-4675-9c7f-fc5e07a54b6d/ Exemplar-Submission-2.pdf.aspx> [accessed 1 March 2016] (p1) 3|  Atelier Ten, ‘Strategy’, Gardens by the Bay, Singapore, < http://www.atelierten.com/2012/projects/gardens-by-thebay/#> [accessed 1 March 2016] 4|  Meredith Davey, ‘Gardens by the Bay: Ecologically Reflective design’, Architectural Design, 81 (2011), 108 - 111 (p110) 5|  Atelier One, p1-2 6|  Davey, p111 7|  Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby, ‘Beyond Radical Design’, in Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction and Social Dreaming, ed. By Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2013), pp. 1 – 9 (p6) 8|  Marina Bay Sands, ‘Gardens by the Bay’, Singapore Visitors Guide, <http://www.marinabaysands.com/singapore-visitorsguide/around-mbs/gardens-by-the-bay.html [accessed 1 March 2016]> 9|  Davey, p110 10|  The Royal Institute of British Architects, ‘The Best New International Buildings - RIBA Lubetkin Prize Shortlist Announced’, <https://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Contactus/ NewsAndPress/News/RIBANews/News/2013/> [accesssed 1 March 2016]

FONDATION LOUIS VUITTON

1|  Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, ‘Introduction: Vitruvius Digitalis’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (Routeledge, 2014) pp. 1 - 10 2|  Fondation Louis Vuitton, ‘The Story of the Construction’, < http://www.fondationlouisvuitton.fr/en/la-fondation/laconstruction.html> [accessed 9 March 2016] 3|  Tobias Nolte and Andrew Witt, ‘Gehry Partners’ Fondation Louis Vuitton: Crowdsourcing Embedded Intelligence’, Architectural Design, 84, (2014), 82 - 89 (p. 87) 4|  Tobias Nolte and Andrew Witt, pp.84 - 85 5|  Tobias Nolte and Andrew Witt, p.82 6|  Tobias Nolte and Andrew Witt, pp.86 - 87

HYGROSCOPE AND HYGROSKIN

1|  Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, ‘Introduction: Vitruvius Digitalis’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (Routeledge, 2014) pp. 1 - 10 (p.8) 2|  Achim Meneges, ‘HygroScope - Meteorosensitive Morphology’, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5083> [accessed 9 March 2016] 3|  Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, p.2 4|  Achim Menges and Steffen Reichert, ‘Performative Wood: Physically Programming the Responsive Architecture of the HygroScope and HygroSkin Projects’, Architectural Design, 85 (2015), 66 - 73 (pp. 68 - 70) 5|  Achim Menges, ‘HygroSkin - Meteorosensitive Pavilion’, <http://www.achimmenges.net/?p=5612> [accessed 9 March 2016] 6|  Achim Menges and Steffen Reichert, p.70 7|  Achim Menges, ‘HygroSkin’

KNOWLEDGE PLATFORMS - ARNHEM CENTRAL STATION 1|  Ben van Berkel, ‘Navigating the Computational Turn’, Architectural Design, 83, (2013), 82 - 87, (p.83) 2|  Ben van Berkel, p.83 3|  Ben van Berkel, p.86 4|  Ben van Berkel, p.86 5|  Ben van Berkel, p.86

VOID: THREAD INSTALLATION

1|  Kokkugia, ‘Swarm Urbanism’, <http://www.kokkugia.com/ swarm-urbanism> [accessed 17 March 2016] 2|  Kokkugia, ‘AADRL Behavioural Production: Thread’, < http:// www.kokkugia.com/AADRL-aerial-robot-thread-construction> [accessed 17 March 2016] 3|  Kokkugia, ‘AADRL Behavioural Production: Thread’, < http:// www.kokkugia.com/AADRL-aerial-robot-thread-construction> [accessed 17 March 2016]

CONCLUSION AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

1|  Yehuda Kalay, ‘Introduction’, in Architecture’s New Media, ed. Yehuda Kalay (MIT Press, 2004) pp. 1 - 25 (p.3) 2|  Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman, ‘Introduction: Vitruvius Digitalis’, in Theories of the Digital in Architecture ed. by Rivka Oxman and Robert Oxman (Routeledge, 2014) pp. 1 - 10 (p.3)


| CRITERIA DESIGN  |


Structure

HOLDING IT ALL TOGETHER FEATURES LATTICES AND GRIDS

Essentially structure is the supporting frame of a building, but as shown in these examples, it can be both functional and aesthetically pleasing. This field of research provides a lot of opportunities in terms of model making experimentation, as an integral part is ensure that it works in real life. There is a potential to push the limits of thickness of lattice structures in order to create something that looks as if it should not be possible.

22  RESEARCH FIELD| 

1| TOP LEFT FOSTER AND PARTNERS, GREAT COURT AT THE BRITISH MUSEUM, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW.FOSTERANDPARTNERS.COM/PROJECTS/GREAT-COURT-AT-THE-BRITISH-MUSEUM/> [ACCESSED 28 MARCH 2016]  2| TOP RIGHT JULIA JUNGFER, NATIONAL OLYMPIC STADIUM BEIJING, PHOTOGRAPH, [HTTP://WWW.FBBVA.ES/TLFU/TLFU/MICROS/ING/ATLAS/ASIAPACIFICO/GALERIA.JSP> [ACCESSED 28 MARCH 2016]  3| BOTTOM LEFT HIROYUKI HIRAI, JAPAN PAVILION, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW.ARCHDAILY.COM/608506/12-THINGS-YOU-DIDN-T-KNOW-ABOUT-PRITZKER-LAUREATE-FREI-OTTO/55008DB8E58ECE81290000E5-1-JPG > [ACCESSED 28 MARCH 2016]  4| BOTTOM RIGHT METROPOL PARASOL, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW.DEZEEN.COM/2011/04/26/METROPOL-PARASOL-BY-J-MAYER-H/> [ACCESSED 28 MARCH 2016]


The Morning Line

A “RUIN FROM THE FUTURE... WITH NO SINGLE BEGINNING OR END”1 ARCHITECTS ARANDA/LASCH

Born as a collaboration with Arup and artist Matthew Ritchie, The Morning Line was destined to involve algorithmic thinking in achieving non-linear geometric patterning2. The structure consists of modules that are interchangeable, allowing adaption of the overall geometry at different locations3, creating new experiences. The building block is a fractal tetrahedron, “the simplest and most rigid solid in nature”4, which is scaled and manipulated to form the structure. The basic nature of the piece is a patterned solid which creates a specific transparent feel.

Given the initial precedents under the Structure field of research did not provide a starting base, The Morning Line will offer a basis to manipulate using the Grasshopper Lunchbox plug-in. Aranda/Lasch’s project relates well to the projects researched in Part A: Conceptualisation, with its connections to Biomimicry. The geometry is lattice-like; creating a pattern from solid strips and adjacent voids, capturing interest in itself. The Morning Line contributes to development of a concept in multiple ways; as a base to apply the field of structure to, as a connection to previous area of interest - Biomimicry, and as a distinctly structural project in its own right.

ABOVE|  ARANDALASCH, THE MORNING LINE IN INSTANBUL, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://ARANDALASCH.COM/WORKS/THE-MORNING-LINE/> [ACCESSED 30 MARCH 2016]

|  CASE STUDY 1.0  23


Matrix

MANIPULATING THE GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION TO CREATE NEW ITERATIONS AND DIFFERING GEOMETRY

SPECIES 1  | 

SCALE FACTOR:  0.3

SCALE FACTOR:  0.5

24  CASE STUDY 1.0  |

SCALE FACTOR:  0.1

SCALE FACTOR  1ST: 0.5 2ND: 0.25 3RD: 0.125

SCALE FACTOR 1ST: 0.125 2ND: 0.25 3RD: 0.5


South Pond Pavilion

A ZOO-PER DESIGN TO IMPROVE THE ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATE THE PUBLIC ARCHITECTS  STUDIO GANG

Studio Gang developed the South Pond Pavilion in conjunction with a boardwalk running alongside the Lincoln Park Zoo’s South Pond. The Project as a whole is sustainably focused1; improving the condition of the pond and subsequently enhancing the aquatic life within it. Specifically the Pavilion provides a linking space between environmental systems and the urban, as a place for education. Studio Gang wanted to change the urban scene through conscious architecture with a small impact2. The fibreglass coverings of the structure were inspired by the tortoise shell3, showing an attempt to incorporate Biomimicry into the design. The structural members are prefabricated plywood strips4.

With the intention of the structure to act as an outdoor classroom, the structural ability of the members, as well as the overall arch shape, allows for a column free structure. This shows important consideration of materiality to withstand structural forces. The ‘tortoise shells’ allow infiltration of light whilst also providing protection from the environment. The open nature of the structure also allows for a wide range of views that immediately connect the information learnt to the surrounding environment. South Pond Pavilion successfully facilitates learning whilst also encouraging other interactions with nature; such as Yoga classes5.

ABOVE|  STUDIO GANG, SOUTH POND PAVILION AT NIGHT, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://STUDIOGANG.COM/PROJECT/NATURE-BOARDWALK-AT-LINCOLN-PARKZOO> [ACCESSED 5 APRIL 2016]

|  CASE STUDY 2.0  25


Reverse Engineering

UTILISING THE HIPSTER TREND OF ‘DECONSTRUCTED FOOD’ TO FIGURE OUT A POSSIBLE GRASSHOPPER CODE

SURFACE

DIVIDE SURFACE

DIVIDE CURVE AT INTERSECTION POINTS

SHATTER

COPY/MOVE & LOFT BETWEEN

26  CASE STUDY 2.0  |

CREATE GRID OF LINES

DIVIDE CURVE

JOIN CURVES ON EACH SIDE

MAP CURVE PATTERN TO SURFACE

GRAPH MAPPER - SIN CURVE

CREATE INDIVIDUAL CELLS\ REBUILD CURVE


MIRROR - REVERSE VECTOR

LINE

MOVE POINTS - X VECTOR

END & MID-POINT

CREATE NEW CURVES - POLYLINE

MOVE MID-POINT - Z VECTOR

ARC THROUGH POINTS

|  CASE STUDY 2.0  27


28 

1| TOP LEFT STUDIO GANG ARCHITECTS, AXONOMETRIC, AXONOMETRIC DIGITAL DRAWING, <HTTP://WWW.ARCHDAILY.COM/83676/LINCOLN-PARK-ZOO-SOUTH-POND-STUDIO-GANG-ARCHITECTS/AXON-3> [ACCESSED 5 APRIL 2016]  2| TOP RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, REVERSE ENGINEERING FINAL, DIGITAL LINE DRAWING  3| BOTTOM LEFT STUDIO GANG ARCHITECTS, SOUTH POND PAVILION CONNECTION DETAIL, PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTP://WWW.ARCHDAILY.COM/83676/LINCOLN-PARK-ZOO-SOUTH-POND-STUDIO-GANG-ARCHITECTS/HR_LPZ_14>


Comparison and Speculation

A VERY UNCOMPLICATED GAME OF SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

Compared to the built South Pond Pavilion, the end definition from the Reverse Engineering is incomplete. 1. INCOMPLETE TORTOISE SHELLS The ‘tortoise shells’ were not included in my definition and subsequently the structure is simply that, the structural components. This lacks a certain three dimensional component to the structure and takes away a defining element. Speculation: Either develop a covering and manipulate this to contrast the curving structural form (with sharp, pointed shapes) or mirror it  OR  Narrow the focus of development to the structural element of the design and its qualities. 1. NOT BUILDABLE The outcome of the Grasshopper definition allows for manipulation but not fabrication. There is no width to the panels which would change the positioning of elements and how they interact with each other. Speculation: Look into the materiality of the original structure and its thickness. How would using a different material effect the overall look of the structure as well as its ability to retain its shape. 1. NO CONNECTION CONSIDERATION The connection system of the Pavilion looks very simple with nailing or bolting the panels to adjacent ones. The difficult part of the system is its connection to the ground. As only the basic structure outline was discovered through Reverse Engineering, connections should be considered in further development. Speculation: How would different connections effect the structural qualities of the structure (Wood Pavilion - Opposite, Bottom Right Images)? Where could each connection be placed, and how could this change the shape? I am particularly interested in looking at manipulating the patterning of the underlying structure and how this can create an intriguing geometry. I aim to look at the connection between the overall geometry and the geometry of a single module.

1| OPPOSITE, BOTTOM RIGHT, TOP WING YI HUI AND LAP MING WONG, WOOD PAVILION, PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.DEZEEN.COM/2010/07/07/WOOD-PAVILLION-BY-WINGYI-HUI-AND-LAP-MING-WONG/> [ACCESSED 7 APRIL 2016]  2| OPPOSITE, BOTTOM RIGHT, BOTTOM WING YI HUI AND LAP MING WONG, WOOD PAVILION CONNECTIONS, DIAGRAMATIC PHOTOGRAPH, <HTTP://WWW.DEZEEN.COM/2010/07/07/WOOD-PAVILLION-BY-WING-YI-HUI-AND-LAP-MING-WONG/>

|  CASE STUDY 2.0  29


Matrix

MANIPULATING THE REVERSE ENGINEERING DEFINITION TO CREATE NEW ITERATIONS AND DIFFERING GEOMETRY

SPECIES 1  |  OVERALL PATTERN

PATTERN OVERLAP:  11.5

PATTERN OVERLAP:  50

NO. OF CURVE POINTS:  10

NO. OF CURVE POINTS:  11

SHIFT LIST:  10

SHIFT LIST:  3

JITTER

RHINO GEOMETRY: 2 INTERSECTING CUBES

RHINO LOFTED SURFACE:  3 PENTAGONS OF VARYING HEIGHT AND RADII\CLOSED LOFT

SPECIES 2  | STRINGING

DIVIDE:  POINTS ALIGNED

SPECIES 3  |  BASE GEOMETRY

SPHERE

RHINO LOFTED SURFACE:  3 CURVES

30  TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT  |


NO. OF CURVE POINTS:  17

GRAPH MAPPER: SINE CURVE

GRAPH MAPPER: BEZIER

GRAPH MAPPER: PERLIN

DIVIDE:  EACH SIDE CURVE OF THE MODULE JOINED THEN DIVIDED

FLIP MATRIX ON DIVIDE CURVE:  20 DIVIDE CURVE:  20

FLIP MATRIX ON DIVIDE CURVE:  2 DIVIDE CURVE:  20

FLIP MATRIX ON DIVIDE CURVE:  4 DIVIDE CURVE:  4

RHINO LOFTED SURFACE:  3 CURVES PRECENDENT GEOMETRY:  OF VARYING RADII AND HEIGHT STOCKHOLM PUBLIC LIBRARY LOFTED IN INCORRECT ORDER

RHINO LOFTED SURFACE:  3 CIRCLES RHINO LOFTED SURFACE:  5 CIRCLES OF VARYING RADII AND HEIGHT OF VARYING RADII AND HEIGHT


Matrix

MANIPULATING THE GRASSHOPPER DEFINITION TO CREATE NEW ITERATIONS AND DIFFERING GEOMETRY

SPECIES 4  | COVER

SOUTH POND PRECEDENT HEIGHT OF ARC POINT: 10

HEIGHT OF ARC POINT:  50

32  TECHNIQUE DEVELOPMENT  |

BOX MORPH TRIANGULAR GEOMETRY TO SURFACE BOX SIZE - X:  5  Y:  5  Z:  5

CURVE EXTRUSION HEIGHT:  10


CRITERIA 1: CRITERIA 2: CRITERIA 3:

CRITERIA 1: CRITERIA 2: CRITERIA 3:

CRITERIA 1: CRITERIA 2: CRITERIA 3:

CRITERIA 1: CRITERIA 2: CRITERIA 3:

33  CASE STUDY 2.0  | 


34  TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES  |

ALL IMAGES ABOVE AND

OPPOSITE| CAITLYN BENDALL, PROTOTYPES, PHOTOGRAPH


Prototype 1

THE PROTOTYPE THAT SURPRISINGLY WORKED AND WAS A SIGN OF HOPE MATERIALS CARDBOARD\THREAD

The aim of this process was very simply to create a physical outcome of the Grasshopper model. This was to assess the plausibility of the model in real life. TEST 1.  Width:\Length: Result: The shape of the module deformed when one end of the string was pulled. The test successfully showed that string connected in the middle, and to the sides of, the strips could be used to apply force to the strips. This resulted in pulling apart the strips, although not uniformly due to the string pulling only from one side (the right side).

|  TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES  35


36  TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES  |

ALL IMAGES ABOVE AND OPPOSITE| CAITLYN BENDALL, PROTOTYPES, PHOTOGRAPH


Prototype 2

THE PROTOTYPE THAT SHOULD HAVE WORKED BUT DID NOT, AND DESTROYED ALL THE PREVIOUSLY ACCRUED HOPE MATERIALS  MASONITE PACKING STRIPS\M5 BOLTS & NUTS\1.5MM CRAFT STRING

These masonite strips were precut which made them more accessible than Plywood, as well as appearing more flexible, curving to about 45 degrees when held below 1 metre of the 2 metre long strip. A significant downside however is the coloured strip on one side of the material. To replicate the initial cardboard model, holes were drilled along the strip and the ends were fixed connections using bolts and nuts. The drilled holes gave a messy appearance and this is something that could be fixed by adding them to the Grasshopper model and having them laser cut. As this was just to test whether or not the same patterning/stringing would work to create bending in functional materials

as it had in Prototype, the finished product was not as important. The aim was to discover whether the two joined ends of the module could be forced together using string connections. TEST 1.  Thickness: 4mm\Width: 25mm\Length: 150mm Result: Was not able to pull apart using hands. Did not attempt stringing TEST 2.  Thickness: 4mm\Width: 25mm\Length: 300mm Result: The string pulled through the hole when attempted pulled. When pulled the module would close. Was not successful Interestingly when tested by hand, a strip on its own curved to a height of 35mm from straight. When held open by another piece of masonite the module could open to up to 35mm wide (highest tested). A 300mm strip pushed to its limits failed directly at the midpoint of the strip. The force required to created bending in both strips by pushing the two ends together was too much to achieve by a stringing pattern at this length. The only way an opening was achieved was through pulling the strings perpendicular which is not a feasible option as there is nowhere to secure them.

  |  TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES  37


Prototype 3

THE POINT WHERE AN UNDERSTANDING OF PHYSICS WAS LOST AND AN APPRECIATION OF ENGINEERING WAS GAINED MATERIALS PLYWOOD\M6 BOLTS, NUTS & WASHERS\1.5MM CRAFT STRING

The Plywood was cut with the top grains of the wood crossing the strip horizontally. Basing off the previous prototype, this prototype aimed to assess whether the previous material was the cause of failure. Instead of holes running the length of the strip however, the string was wrapped around each end connection to concentrate force. The curvature of a single strip was 44mm above straight. TEST 1.  Thickness: 3mm\Width: 25mm\Length: 300mm Result: When the string was pulled on at each end, little effect was recorded on the strips Testing further I discovered that using the fixed connection of the bolt was restricting the bend capacity of each strip individually. Further tests looking at a flexible joint could improve the success of future prototypes.

38  TECHNIQUE: PROTOTYPES  |

ALL ABOVE IMAGES| CAITLYN BENDALL, PROTOTYPES, PHOTOGRAPH


Collingwood Children’s Farm

|  TECHNIQUE: PROPOSAL  39

ALL ABOVE IMAGES| CAITLYN BENDALL, COLLINGWOOD CHILDREN’S FARM, PHOTOGRAPH


Personal Reflection

HAVE I BEEN FLOATING ON ‘AIR’ OR AM I HEARING CRICKETS (GRASSHOPPERS) IN TERMS OF SUBJECT SUCCESS

OBJECTIVE 1.

OBJECTIVE 2.

OBJECTIVE 3.

OBJECTIVE 4.

Did I successfully interogate the Brief? By researching precedents that had close connections to Biomimicry or sustainability I believe this has supported my interaction with the brief of analysing the relationships between natural and built. My site choice in the Collingwood Children’s Farm offers a wide range of stakeholders with plenty of opportunity for active relation to the Project.

Was I able to produce a wide variety of iterations using Grasshopper? The iterations produced go beyond changing the degree of set elements. Especially the idea of Species 2 in Case Study 2.0 (Page 36) starts the idea of merging algorithms to create an entirely new one. A variety of iterations were produced, however most of them were quite ‘safe’ in terms of exploration.

Did my skills in Grasshopper develop from Part A to Part B? My knowledge of how an algorithm could be structured to achieve a certain geometry has evolved, however I still do not have enough experience to solve problems in an algorithm. Some gaps still appear between how I think something can be created and all of the components needed to actually creat it.

Do I have an understanding of the interaction between air (space) and the physical? It is interesting to consider such a physical relationship when majority of the designing is done through computational methods. Because of this divide between design and realisation most of my Prototypes (Pages 42-46) failed. This is an area that needs a lot more development.

40  LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES  |


OBJECTIVE 5.

Am I able to argue the purpose of my design and respond to critique? This is an area that needs a significant amount more work. The design concept is currently very lose and so cannot be argued well. However with improvement on Objective 4. I will be able to justify the physical properties and geometry of the Project well, as it will have been tested to find the best working model.

OBJECTIVE 6.

Do I have the ability to critically analyse contemporary design projects? I have been very successful in this regard. I am able to understand why a certain feature of the design is evident more than others. In particular I have discovered a new path in architectural discourse where buildings are becoming much more than an aesthetic. I can now more easily tell apart architecture that claims to have benefits, and architecture that does.

OBJECTIVE 7.

OBJECTIVE 8.

Has my understanding of algorithms and computational methods developed? I have gained an appreciation for the numerous ways in which digital technology can be, and is currently used in architectural practice. I understand the workability of an algorithm to allow quick and easy changes to a design. I have not however mastered the transfer of a digital model to digital fabrication.

Am I aware of how I can best use digital technology to aid my own design process? I can become frustrated with an incomplete algorithm and my lack of knowledge as to how to fix it. I now know that it is important for me to first figure out potential ideas, pathways or algorithms to create before I start the process in Grasshopper. The same applies for hand making models before recreating them with digital technology.


42  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES  | 


|  ALGORITHMIC SKETCHES  43


References THE MORNING LINE

1|  Aranda/Lasch, ‘The Morning Line’, <http://arandalasch. com/works/the-morning-line/> [accessed 30 March 2016] 2|  Daniel Bosia, ‘Long Form and Algorithm’, Architectural Design, 81 (2011), 58 - 65 (p.63) 3|  Aranda/Lasch, ‘The Morning Line’ 4|  Daniel Bosia, ‘Long Form and Algorithm’

SOUTH POND PAVILION

1|  Studio Gang, ‘Nature Boardwalk at Lincoln Park Zoo’, <http://studiogang.com/project/nature-boardwalk-at-lincolnpark-zoo> [accessed 6 April 2016] 2|  Studio Gang, Nature Boardwalk at Lincoln Park Zoo by Studio Gang Architects, 2014 <https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=OFIyg0MbFe0> [accessed 6 April 2016] 3|  Architonic, ‘South Pond’, <https://www.architonic.com/en/ project/studio-gang-south-pond/5100764> [accessed 6 April 2016] 4|  Studio Gang, ‘Nature Boardwalk’ 5|  Architonic, ‘South Pond’


| DETAILED DESIGN |


Interim Presentation Feedback and Design Brief Analysis THE PEOPLE GAVE ME ADVICE

The critiques suggested that I had too many ideas fitting into the one design and that I should choose to focus on just one and develop that further. They favoured the above exploration of ‘stringing’ and proposed using prototypes to research whether this could be used to create the leaf-like shape of a single module. With this advice I have chosen to focus on creating the leaf-like structure using string to pull two strips of wood apart. I will need to focus on material that will bend, and attempt to look greater into the physics of the structure.

46  DESIGN CONCEPT  |

In considering the site further I have realised that I have not considered overall form enough to know where the design could fit within the site. However this may not may as if I am testing the properties of a material it could be considered a Tectonic Study without a finality to it.


Technique Diagram

‘GO FORTH AND MULTIPLY’, CREATING A RESOLVED TECTONIC SYSTEM FROM AN INITIAL ELEMENT

MULTIPLE CURVES

DIVIDE CURVES

SPLIT CURVES

MOVE POINTS USING GRAPH MAPPER

INTERSECTION POINTS

MOVE POINTS USING GRAPH MAPPER

INTERPOLATE CURVE

POINT ALONG CURVE MOVE VERTICALLY JOIN MODULES

EXTRUDE VERTICALLY

CREATE HOLE FOR CONNECTION

Construction Process Diagram

“[THIS] DOESN’T EVEN GO HERE” WILL NOT BE SAID IF THIS PROCESS IS FOLLOWED CORRECTLY

  |  DESIGN CONCEPT  47


Core Construction Element

IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO GET ABDOMINAL MUSCLES, PLEASE LOOK ELSEWHERE

The core construction element chosen is the leaf like shape which will be a single module that can be populated on a surface geometry to create a beautiful pattern. Because of this, the module does not need to be complicated but more so in simplicity will be most effective as the pattern may become complex. This will essentially be both the structural component and the aesthetic component of the design.

48  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

1|ABOVE CINDY LYU, PROTOTYPE DIAGRAM PROCESS, DIGITAL DIAGRAM


Module Exploration

THE VERY FIRST BREAKING POINT MATERIALS PLYWOOD\M6 BOLTS, NUTS & WASHERS\1.5MM CRAFT STRING

With the initial tests of the string method not achieving enough force to create bending in the plywood I thought a lesser width may require less force to bend. Using the great physics knowledge of my older brother I also looped the string multiple times around the bolt to create distribution of force over the string. TEST 1.  Thickness: 3mm\Width: 12.5mm\ Length: Xmm Result: Pulling on the string did not result in the strips moving apart. Applying force directly did create bending however both strips bent in the same direction. TEST 2.  Thickness: 3mm\Width: 12.5mm\ Length: Xmm\Holes: X holes at Xmm apart Result: The stip broke upon pulling because the holes weakened the material. (The holes were intended to be used to create decoration through, as per Technique Development - pg.30 Matrix options). This technique could be tested further with some mechanism of applying the force that would increase my own natural strength.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  49

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| CAITLYN BENDALL, PROTOTYPE STRING WRAPPING, PHOTOGRAPH


Module Exploration

MDF WAS THE WRONG CHOICE MATERIALS  MDF\M6 BOLTS, NUTS & WASHERS\1.5MM CRAFT STRING OR 8 STRAND BRICK LAYERS LINE

PROTOTYPE 5.  Width:25mm \Length: 300mm Method: I used the same method as in Prototype 4 to see if this would work using a different material Result: The MDF was even harder to ease apart and because one side of the wood was already slightly bent, each side did not move apart evenly PROTOTYPE 6.  Width: 25mm \Length: 300mm Method: This involved pulling appart the pieces of wood by hand whilst they were held by bolts and tying the piece of string at one end to secure the length. Result: A more even shape was able to be gained, however the process of tying the string was very difficult. This would need to be improved in the future. PROTOTYPE 7.  Width: 25mm \Length: 300mm Method: In attempt to use physics as an advantage, this method involved looping the string in the same way as Prototypes 4 & 5 but instead of pulling it by hand the string was tightened by attached it to a pencil and turning the pencil. Result: Unfortunately this method only resulted in a large amount of twisted string between the bolt and the pencil that meant the string between the two bolts was not actually tightening.

50  50 DESIGN TECTONIC FUTURING  ELEMENTS | & PROTOTYPES  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

1|LEFT, TOP TWO AND BOTTOM TWO IMAGES CAITLYN BENDALL, MDF STRING LOOP PROTOTYPE AND PENCIL MECHANISM TRIAL, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|LEFT, MIDDLE TWO IMAGES JOANNE QIU, MDF PROTOTYPE, PHOTOGRAPHS  


Connection Exploration

3D PRINTING IS COOLER THAN 3D MOVIES MATERIALS LUAN PLYWOOD 4MM THICK

The connections that would force the wood to retain its shape needed to be simple in order to keep each module clean and not bulky. 3D connections were tested as they could be made to any shape. PROTOTYPE 8.  Width:25mm \Length: 300mm Result: The 3D connections allowed the wood to be well secured within the connection and opposed to in Part B allowed for better bending because it is not a fixed connection. However, especially the sphere, was much larger than anticipated. This may cause problems when connecting to connect modules together. In addition to this, the two strips of wood were not forced apart by these connections, and would only stay apart when held in the middle.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  51

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| CINDY LYU, 3D PRINTED JOINTS, PHOTOGRAPHS 1|ABOVE XXXX  ALL IMAGES ABOVE| XXXX


52  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, ARROW CUT PLYWOOD TESTING AND NORMAL PLYWOOD BENDING COMPARISON, PHOTOGRAPHS


Module and Connection Exploration THE ARROWS POINT (TO A) BREAK

MATERIALS LUAN PLYWOOD 4MM THICK\ M6 BOLTS\BUILDERS LINE

To incorporate digital production into the model, this Prototype focused on using the Melbourne University FABLAB and the material available to create the Module. Because the material needed to have both strength and flexibility, and as some previous prototypes had used Plywood (sourced from Bunnings) this material was chosen. As examples had been seen were cuts in material could increase flexibility, both cut and uncut strips were laser cut for experiment. Connections were also created from plywood that would work to secure the module, and allow it to connect to other modules. As in previous Prototypes - pg. 50, string was used to pull apart the strips, and bolts to secure the ends. The same method used in Prototype 6 - p.50 was used to create the desired shape. PROBLEMS  The connections were created from 4 pieces and were very difficult to assemble. The middle piece slipped from it’s ‘box’ because it was not secured. When the Module was inserted into the connection, the distance between the strips decreased (Shown in the Right hand side column). Although the arrows cut into the material did increase its flexibility compared to uncut plywood (Shown in the Right hand side column, bottom image), it made it more prone to breaking. The method of holding the two strips apart by string has potential, however after only several minutes of sitting, the distance between the strips decreased a lot (Shown in Bottom Left image, compared to Top Right image). The problem appears to be mostly in the material itself. The Plywwod is difficult to pull apart and can only be done by hand, but will also (almost immediately) revert back to its preffered flat state, stretching the string in doing so.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  53


Module Exploration

BALSA(MIC VINEGAR) IS EVERYONE’S FAVOURITE (SALAD DRESSING) MATERIALS BALSA WOOD\STAPLES

This prototype is based on the project Reciprocal by Lianne Clarke (Shown Left), where a star-like form was created from wood. Reciprocal exhibits similar bending angles desired, but the form differs in its interpretation of securing these angles. Reciprocal uses each separate module (leaf shape) to push apart the others (Similar to the added wood rectangles in Prototype 8 - pg.51), requiring close attention in construction. PROTOTYPE 10.  Width: 25mm\Length: 300mm This method works effectively, however the greatest height achieved is determined by the width of the wood. Balsa wood is also not strong enough for the idea of the model so it would require further testing with a different material.

54  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

1|ABOVE, TOP GRACE JIANG, BALSA PROTOTYPE, PHOTOGRAPH   2| LEFT, ABOVE AND BELOW LIANNE CLARKE, RECIPROCAL PROJECT, DIGITAL DIAGRAMS AND PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTPS://WEWANTTOLEARN.WORDPRESS.COM/ CATEGORY/RESOURCES/INSPIRATION/STRUCTURES/RECIPROCAL/> [ACCESSED 28 MAY 2016]


Material Exploration

IF IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR AN AIRPLANE, IT IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE MODEL MATERIALS AIRPLANE GRADE BIRCH PLYWOOD 1MM THICK

Due to various materials being tried and tested, a further exploration of materials with the searched for properties was required. Branching out but still sticking to plywood as the closest matching material so far, Airplane Grade Plywood was discovered. This was sourced from a shop in Seaford classified as Marine Plywood but with the same qualities.

This will become the main material used in all Prototypes from this point on, due its superior bending capacity to strength ratio, and thinness. These properties come at a cost however, with a 1200mm x 1200mm sheet of the material costing $110. Therefore part of the project will be focused on maximizing model components to available material; minimizing material wastage.

As shown above this material has decidedly greater bending capacity than the previous materials tested. Pushed to its limits it creates a greater gap than wanted between the strips - cut at 2.5mm width and 300mm length as had been determined to be the most workable size. This means that theoretically it will be able to create the shape needed.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  55

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, BIRCHWOOD PLYWOOD TESTING, PHOTOGRAPH 


Module Exploration

TWIST AND SHOUT (BECAUSE ANOTHER MODULE DID NOT WORK OUT) TESTING  ALTERNATIVE METHODS TO TIGHTENING AND SECURING STRING TO HOLD APART THE STRIPS

The use of FABLAB was retired indefinitely in light of this new material, as it is expensive so the need to not waste any through mistakes in laser cutting is important. It is also easy to hand-cut, so time is not wasted. Strips of 25mm width and 300mm were used in these prototypes. Because the new Plywood is only 1mm thick, smaller and shorter bolts were found as the previous bolts were quite bulky. These bolts are 1/8inch bolts at 12mm long. Fishing line was used as an alternate material to white string in an attempt to focus attention on the wood and the shape it was creating, as fishing line would appear ‘invisible’. However fishing line is extremely difficult to pull/apply force to by hand. This methods were tried to test if fishing line was an actual possibility to be used.

56  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

PROTOTYPE 11.  Pencil Twist Tightening Method Above, Top This method was used in Prototype 7 - pg.50 but deserved to be retried with a more flexible material. Result: Again a large twisted stack of fishing line collected in the bolt, but the strips were actually pulled apart! The twist also acted as a knot when the pencil was cut off. However when this happened the distance between the strips decrease to a too small size. PROTOTYPE 12.  Paper Clip Twist Tightening Method Above, Bottom This method attempts to solve the problem outlined above. Result: The shape created is very thin and also somewhat uneven, not reaching the width created by the pencil. This may be due to the difficulty of turning the paper clip and keeping the string from slipping off. It does however provide a possible connection to other Modules.

1|ABOVE, TOP ROW CAITLYN BENDALL, PENCIL TWIST TIGHTENING METHOD, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|ABOVE, BOTTOM ROW CAITLYN BENDALL, PAPER CLIP TWIST TIGHTENING METHOD, PHOTOGRAPHS  


Module Exploration

over one bolt and the other strip secured, then only one string bent so that the bolt on the opposite end could be placed within the loop of the string. Ultimately longer string lengths had to be used because the strip would not bend enough, creating a very thin module.

“NEVER GONNA GIVE [FISHING LINE] UP” BUT IT IS PROBABLY GOING TO “LET [THE MODULE] DOWN”1 TESTING  ALTERNATIVE METHODS TO SECURING FISHING LINE

PROTOTYPE 14.  Fishing Line Melted & Combined with Cable Tie Above, Bottom To increase the gap of the module, two loops of melted fishing line - at tested lengths to reach close to the middle - were placed over each bolt and connected by a cable tie. The cable tie would be shortened bring the loops and bolts closer, forcing the strips apart. It can also adds an element of control. Result: When the cable tie was tightened, too much force was placed on the melted end of the loop and it came apart, every single time.

Wanting to keep with the idea of having the element providing structure be invisible, other methods of ‘tying’ fishing line were attempted. PROTOTYPE 13.  Melting the Fishing Line together Above, Top The fishing line was secured by melting two ends together, with the string at the required length - 260mm - to create the amount of bending desired. Result: Even though the string length had been tested to ensure that the material could bend to that length, the module was very difficult to create. The string had to be placed

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  57

1|ABOVE, TOP ROW CAITLYN BENDALL, FISHING LINE BURN, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|ABOVE, BOTTOM ROW CAITLYN BENDALL, FISHING LINE BURN COMBINED WITH CABLE TIE, PHOTOGRAPHS 


58  TECTONIC DESIGN FUTURING  ELEMENTS| & PROTOTYPES  | 1|ABOVE XXXX  ALL IMAGES ABOVE| XXXX  1|

REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

ALL IMAGES ABOVE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, CABLE TIE MODULE, PHOTOGRAPHS


Module Exploration PULL THE OTHER ONE

TESTING  CABLE TIE METHOD OF EXPANDING THE MODULE

Although the fishing line continued to break in Prototype 14 - pg.57 the use of the cable tie is actually a good way of creating an even force across both strips as it is pulled tighter. Using string tied in two loops and attached to either bolt this method was retested. PROTOTYPE 15.  Cable tie and string tightening method As is shown across the top row, the cable tie easily pulled the flexible material apart, however there came a point where the cable tie became very difficult to tighten further. By redoing the cable tie starting from a different point it did not catch on the string as much and was tightened easier. Note that two cable ties of the same length created extra bending. The cable tie achieved the desired shape, however aesthetically it may not look all that nice, as the cable tie stands out. Testing its flexibility however the module can be pushed and warped into itself. Bull clips were used to secure each strip further close to the bolts and this created curvature in two directions. This is the first successful module made so far and this technique should be explored further.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  59


Module Exploration PULLED TOO FAR

TESTING  CABLE TIE METHOD OF EXPANDING THE MODULE

Using the same successful method from the previous project, tested yet again on fishing line. Rather than tie it exclusively within itself, it was discovered that if tied around something a bolt - the line would form a strong knot. PROTOTYPE 16.  Cable tie and fishing line tightening method When method worked as successfully as previously it had, however when the cable tie became more difficult to pull, it was accidentally over-pulled and the material bowed outward. This demonstrates that perhaps cable ties do not provide the control that they were previously thought to. Even though this form was an accidental discovery, it offers another element to the shape that turns it from something two dimensional into something with presence.

60  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

ALL IMAGES ABOVE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, CABLE TIE MODULE OVER-PULLED, PHOTOGRAPHS


|  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  61

ALL IMAGES ABOVE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, WIRE AND BOLT MODULE, PHOTOGRAPHS 


Module Exploration

LOOKS A BIT LIKE A BOAT AND A FISHING LINE ALL IN ONE TESTING  CABLE TIE EXPANSION METHOD AND BOWING

The accidental bowing that occured in the previous module was explored further and it was found through careful cable tie pulling that bowing began to occur when the distance from the centre of the string to the strip edge was 38mm. This prototype also attempted to solve the problem outlined in Prototype 15 - pg.59 of the aesthetics of using a cable tie. The cable tie was replaced by a bent piece of thin metal. PROTOTYPE 17.  Cable tie method, Wire fixing & added bolts Pulling the cable tie was much easier and it was pushed further to see how much bowing would occur in the module. However it was extremely time consuming securing the metal holder between the two tightened wires. Results: As shown in the images, the wire also resulted in a loss of some force and hence bowing. As it takes a lot of time to achieve and does not guarantee a certain shape each time, it may not be the best choice. In addition to the bowing produced by the cable tie, further experimentation similar that trialled in Prototype 15 pg.59 occurred. This involved a nicer alternative to the bull clip, which also matched the two end connections. Bolts were placed 30mm from the already existing bolts, and on the strip edges that were already close to each other. When tightened the shape produced was both slim and yet full. This is the most appealing module so far.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  63

ALL IMAGES ABOVE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, WIRE AND BOLT MODULE, PHOTOGRAPHS 


64  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

1| ABOVE, TOP CINDY LYU, OVERALL FORM DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM  ALL OTHER IMAGES ABOVE AND OPPOSITE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, THREE CONNECTION MODULE OF MODULES, PHOTOGRAPHS


Connection Exploration: Form Development THREE IS NOT A CROWD

TESTING  CONNECTION OF MULTIPLE MODULES

The next step is to contemplate how each of the modules might fit together in order to create a larger form, populating a conceived geometry. Two modules connected would generate very linear and generic forms and would not allow anything other than lines. Without pushing to far past this, three modules connected together was tested. Each of the modules was connected together using a strip 170mm in length and the same width. Extra holes were drilled into each module at one end, so that these extra strips could be fitted to the outside using bolts. A problem was encountered at this stage as some of the existing bolts on the modules, and the tightness of the ends, meant that new bolts were almost impossible to secure. In the future, if the bolts used to secure the

ends of each module were also used as the bolts for the connecting strips, this problem would not occur. The next problem encountered was that the strips connecting the modules had a significant amount of force through them, some stronger than others. This resulted in a very precarious stabilization of each connecting strip remaining parallel. To combat this, cable ties were secured at each module end to combat twisting. Although successful this solution is not aesthetically pleasing. To conclude, fishing line was wrapped around the existing bolts of the modules and strung in a triangle form around the middle connection in order to pull the strips together. This created relatively similar bowing to the modules. This method of connecting modules while a great idea is currently very bulky and would need significant refinement before using in a final model.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  65


66  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |


Overall Form Exploration SEXY HEXY-A-GON

TESTING  CONNECTION OF EACH MODULE

This model acts as a theoretical construction of how each module could be combined in order to create an overall form. This method would require a six sided joint in the middle of each hexagon and the corresponding grasshopper file could calculate the other connection numbers, depending on the population of hexagons. The use of string to attach each module could be a successful method, but only in tandem with the string around the outside, otherwise each module would be free to swing. This is something to continue looking at as the model progresses.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  67

1|OPPOSITE, ALL IMAGES JOANNE QIU, FORM FINDING HEXAGONAL MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|OPPOSITE, UNDERLYING IMAGE CINDY LYU, OVERALL MODEL FORM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM 3|ABOVE, TOP CINDY LYU, OVERALL MODEL FORM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM  4|ABOVE, BELOW CINDY LYU, MODEL DEVELOPMENT DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM 


68  TECTONIC DESIGN FUTURING  ELEMENTS| & PROTOTYPES  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| CINDY LYU, PROTOTYPE OF PRECEDENT, PHOTOGRAPHS 


Connection Exploration: Form Development

A LOOK BACK AT THE BALSA PROTOTYPE TESTING  CONNECTION WITHIN EACH MODULE

This is an exploration furthering that of Prototype 10 - pg.54 and adding the precedent of Entwine (Above, Top). The end connections designate a specific angle that each strip will sit at and the strips remain in this fashion without any string. The progression of this experiment follows that of the precedents, however further exploration could be done on the end connections, which would allow for each 3-part module to attach to the next. If the connections were mirrored it could become increasingly more interesting. As with the previous prototype however this form is not changeable as each module supports the bending of the other modules.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  69

1|ABOVE, TOP ROW LIANNE CLARKE, ENTWINE-BURNING MAN PROPSOSAL, DIGITAL RENDERS, < HTTPS://WEWANTTOLEARN.WORDPRESS.COM/ CATEGORY/WORK/PROPOSALS/>  2|ABOVE, BOTTOM ROW LIANNE CLARKE, RECIPROCAL PROJECT, DIGITAL DIAGRAMS AND PHOTOGRAPH, < HTTPS:// WEWANTTOLEARN.WORDPRESS.COM/CATEGORY/RESOURCES/INSPIRATION/STRUCTURES/RECIPROCAL/> [ACCESSED 28 MAY 2016]


Core Construction Element Development

IF YOU HAVE READ THE LAST 21 PAGES AND ARE STILL LOOKING FOR ABDOMINAL MUSCLE WORKOUTS, YOU MAY AS WELL KEEP READING

With 17 Prototypes and various form explorations completed the initial Core Construction Element has developed. The single ‘leaf-shaped’ module will continue to be the main component of the model, however it will become part of a larger module that will appear as the diagram above. This was the most successful of both prototyping and form exploration, although other form explorations will be involved later on in the process. It will be based on Prototype 17 pg.63, however the method of using a cable tie will be replaced by simply tying the string, as it gives a better aesthetic. Bolts will be used, and as tying is involved, string will be used over fishing line. The material will

70  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

remain as airplane grade birch plywood - 1mm thick, 25mm width and 300mm length. These measurements worked well and when attached will not be too large. The structure will look as if three modules are connected together, and these Modules will then be connected to one another. From this point on Module will refer to the structure shown above, and Single Module will refer to those created during Prototyping To create this structure, instead of creating each Single Module, individually, each side of the Module will become a single strip of material, so there will be only three strips involved. To make sure that the desired shape of the structure is achieved, the following aspects will be tested and the best outcomes incorporated into each single strip. These will be: Testing the length of the string, Testing the placement of secondary bolts, and Testing similar bowing/curvature can be created in the middle connections.

1|ABOVE CINDY LYU, PROTOTYPE DIAGRAM PROCESS, DIGITAL DIAGRAM


|  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  71

1|ABOVE CINDY LYU, OVERALL FORM DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM


String Length Testing Matrix

TIGHTEN THE STRINGS, PULL THE WHOLE THING APART TESTING  EFFECT ON THE OVERALL CURVATURE OF THE MODULE

TEST 1. STRING LENGTH: 220MM

TEST 2. STRING LENGTH: 250MM

TEST 3. STRING LENGTH: 270MM.

This string length bows the material but also pushes the strips outwards a lot further than expected. It gives a lot of height to the module which would impact the ways that it could be connected.

This length bows the material whilst not pushing it too far outwards. The shape created has continuous smooth curvature

This did not curve the material enough to make it look like a purposeful curvature. This would be easy to connect however.

72  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

ALL IMAGES OPPOSITE AND ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, STRING LENGTH TESTING, PHOTOGRAPH  


TEST 1.

TEST 2.

TEST 3.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  73


Bolt Placement Testing Matrix XXXX

TESTING  EFFECT ON THE OVERALL CURVATURE OF THE MODULE

1cm

12.5mm

Vertical Grain

7.5mm 5mm

3cm

10mm 10mm

10mm 10mm 300mm

12.5mm 12.5mm 7.5mm 7.5mm 5mm 5mm

Vertical Grain Vertical Grain

BOLT POSITION (FROM INITIAL BOLT): 10MM 10mm 30mm 10mm 40mm WOOD GRAIN: With the Grain 300mm

30mm 40mm

10mm 10mm

300mm

This bolt placing did not change the overall shape of the module enough to be able to tell apart from a distance from one without. The extra bolts are redundant.

12.5mm

Vertical Grain

7.5mm 5mm 10mm

30mm

30mm

10mm

300mm

BOLT POSITION (FROM INITIAL BOLT): 30MM WOOD GRAIN: With the Grain 12.5mm

This placing was the same as in Prototype 17 - pg.63. It provided the same 7.5mm 5mm shape balanced between curvature and slimness.

1cm Vertical Grain 3cm

10mm 10mm

10mm 10mm 300mm

12.5mm

Vertical Grain

7.5mm 5mm 10mm

40mm

40mm

12.5mm

10mm

300mm

10mm 10mm BOLT POSITION (FROM INITIAL BOLT): 40MM 300mm WOOD GRAIN: With the Grain

1cm Vertical Grain

7.5mm 5mm

3cm

10mm 10mm

This placing (As shown on the Opposite Page) resulted in a very dramatic change from parallel strips to bowed strips. The smoothness aspect of the 12.5mm module was lost. 7.5mm

Vertical Grain

5mm 10mm

40mm

40mm

10mm

300mm

74  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

1|ABOVE, RIGHT HAND COLUMN CAITLYN BENDALL, BOLT POSITION STRIP DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAMS  2|ABOVE, LEFT HAND COLUMN JOANNE QIU, BOLT POSITION TESTING, PHOTOGRAPHS


COMPARISON OF 10MM AND 30MM PLACING It is somewhat difficult to tell apart these two modules in photos, however it can be seen that the gap between the strips is much larger in the 10mm placing than in the 30mm placing. In real-life this difference is more pronounced.

COMPARISON OF 40MM AND 30MM PLACING Again the main difference between each module is the distance between the strip edges. The 40mm placement is much smaller than the 30mm placement. Rather than being simply thinner, the 40mm placement also creates a different overall feel in the module.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  75

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, BOLT POSITION TESTING, PHOTOGRAPHS


Middle Connection Hole Position Testing Matrix IMAGES PRESENTED ON FOLLOWING PAGE

TESTING  EFFECT OF - A) THE POSITION OF HOLES AND B) TYPE OF CONNECTING MATERIAL USED BETWEEN THEM- ON THE CURVATURE, WARPING AND STABILITY OF THE CONNECTIONS BETWEEN MODULES AND WITHIN THE MODULE ITSELF

Horizontal

5.5mm 7.5mm

10mm

50mm

25mm

25mm

50mm

10mm

170mm

Vertical Gra

Horizontal Grain

5.5mm

12.5mm 7.5mm

10mm

50mm

25mm

25mm

50mm

10mm

10mm

50mm

50mm

12.5mm

TEST 1. HOLE POSITION - FROM INITIAL BOLT: 50MM - FROM WIDTH OF STRIP: 7.5MM WOOD GRAIN: ACROSS THE GRAIN

10mm

50mm

50mm

7.5mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

12.5mm

TEST 3. HOLE POSITION - FROM INITIAL BOLT: 50MM - FROM WIDTH OF STRIP: 12.5MM WOOD GRAIN: WITH THE GRAIN

Vertical Gra

5.5mm

10mm

10mm

Both cable ties and bolts were used to secure the holes in this test. The bolts added continuity to the connection, however they did not add to the curvature of the connection, so did not match the Modules’ aesthetic. This was a similar outcome when cable ties were used. 10mm

10mm

Vertical Grain7.5mm

170mm

5.5mm

50mm

170mm

170mm

10mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

10mm

170mm

Horizontal Grain

Both string and cable ties were used in this test. String did not pull the strips together at all but did provide an interesting pattern bellow the connection. Cable ties allowed the coming together of the strips Vertical Grain to be controlled, but also could have potentially been pulled further. They were not due to fear of the strips breaking. 12.5mm

10mm

58mm

34mm

58mm

10mm

170mm

7.5mm

10mm

65mm

20mm

65mm

170mm 170mm

5.5mm 7.5mm

TEST 2. (SINGLE HOLE) HOLE POSITION - FROM INITIAL BOLT: 75MM - FROM WIDTH OF STRIP: 12.5MM WOOD GRAIN: HORIZONTAL This test was ill-conceived as the cable tie really required 2 holes to go through on each strip. Because of this the cable tie looked bulky when tightened. String created a quite nice aesthetic however, and as the hole was on the edge created curvature that mirror that of the Module. If used the ‘tie-off’ method would need to be resolved.

10mm

65mm

20mm

65mm

Vertical Gra

5.5mm

This method of connecting the strips also resulted in the strips slipping into alternate angles - similar to problems faced in Connection Exploration: Form Development, p.65. This was predicted to be due Vertical Grain to the placement of the hole in the centre width of the strip.

10mm

170mm

76  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

ALL IMAGES ABOVE AND OPPOSITE|  CAITLYN BENDALL, BOLT POSITION STRIP DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAMS

10mm


Horizo

5.5mm 7.5mm

10mm

50mm

25mm

25mm

50mm

10mm

170mm

Horizontal Grain

5.5mm

Vertica

12.5mm

7.5mm

10mm

50mm

25mm

25mm

50mm

10mm

10mm

50mm

50mm

170mm

50mm

10mm

170mm

12.

Vertic

5.5mm

Vertical Grain7.5mm 12.5mm 10mm 10mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

10mm

10mm

Horizontal G

170mm 170mm

12.5mm

10mm

58mm

34mm

58mm

10mm

170mm

Vertica

Vertical Grain 5.5mm

5.5mm

7.5mm

7.5mm

10mm

50mm

50mm

50mm

10mm

10mm

5.5mm 7.5mm

10mm

TEST 4. HOLE POSITION - FROM INITIAL BOLT: 50MM - FROM WIDTH OF STRIP: 7.5MM WOOD GRAIN: WITH THE GRAIN 65mm

20mm

170mm

65mm

20mm

65mm

10mm

170mm

170mm

65mm

TEST 5. HOLE POSITION - FROM INITIAL BOLT: 65MM - FROM WIDTH OF STRIP: 7.5MM WOOD GRAIN: WITH THE GRAIN

Vertical Grain

10mm

This test when compared with Test 4 clearly shows that the position of the hole in regards to strip width does make a difference. This created curvature that matched the Modules. Cable ties were pulled quite tight on this, leaving a gap of 30mm between the strip edges (side without ties).

The cable ties were left quite un-pulled on this test, due to the holes being very close to the centre of each strip and fear of breakage. This meant a lack of curvature.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  77


TEST 1.

TEST 2.

78  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

TEST 3.

1| TEST 1  KIMI WANG, 50MM HORIZONTAL GRAIN CONNECTION, PHOTOGRAPHS  2| TEST 2  CINDY LYU, 75MM HORIZONTAL GRAIN CONNECTION, PHOTOGRAPHS  3| TEST 3  CINDY LYU, 50MM-12.4MM CONNECTION, PHOTOGRAPHS


TEST 4.

TEST 5.

COMPARISON OF TESTS TEST 2. VS TEST 3.

TEST 4. VS TEST 5.

TEST 1. VS TEST 5.

4| TEST 4  KIMI WANG, 50MM-7.5MM CONNECTION, PHOTOGRAPHS  5| TEST 5  CINDY LYU, 65MM CONNECTION, PHOTOGRAPHS  6| COMPARISON OF TESTS  KIMI WANG, TEST 2. VS TEST 3., PHOTOGRAPH  6| COMPARISON OF TESTS  JOANNE QIU, TEST 4. VS TEST 5. AND TEST 1. VS. TEST 5., PHOTOGRAPHS


80  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |


Middle Connection Hole Position Testing

THE IMPORTANCE OF GRAINS, NO NOT FOR FIBRE, FOR FLEXIBILITY EXPLORING  THE EFFECT OF WOOD GRAIN ON FLEXIBILITY

It was discovered that the orientation of the grain significantly influenced the flexibility of the wood. This occurred in an effort to conserve material for prototypes and an accidental cutting of the strips opposite to the way they had been previously cut. This way has been termed ‘across the grain’ and the all other material previously has been cut ‘with the grain’. Initially, although the prototypes cut on the ‘wrong’ grain were not discarded, there were thought to not be useful, or in line with the progression of the model. However when attempting to bring ‘with the grain’ strips of the connection together using both cable ties (Top Row, Left three images) and bolts (Bottom Row - Left two images) the material was prone to splitting and breaking. The strips could not be bent to the desired shape when cut ‘with the grain’. This lead to testing of a single strips’ flexibility when cut both ‘with’ and ‘against’ the grain - shown in the middle row. This showed that against the grain had an increased flexibility. This was also proved by comparing flexibility in the connection made, by applying force by hand (Bottom Row - Far Right Image. Because the connection was intended to be manipulated in a certain manner that could not be achieved using strips cut ‘with the grain’, the decision was made to create connections using strips cut ‘against the grain’. This did not influence any other part of the model, as these connections are not intended to be structural.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  81

1|ABOVE AND OPPOSITE, TOP, FIRST THREE IMAGES FROM LEFT KIMI WANG, COMPARISON OF MIDDLE CONNECTIONS, PHOTOGRAPHS 2|ALL OTHER IMAGES ABOVE AND OPPOSITE JOANNE QIU, COMPARISON OF MIDDLE CONNECTIONS, PHOTOGRAPHS


7.5mm 5mm 7.5mm 5mm

10mm

30mm

82  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |

230mm

30mm

1|ABOVE, TOP CAITLYN BENDALL, THREE STRIP MODEL - STRIP DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM 2|ABOVE, MIDDLE ROW, FAR LEFT KIMI WANG, THREE STRIP MODEL PROCESS, PHOTOGRAPH

65mm


65mm

20mm

230mm

30mm

30mm

10mm

Three Strip Model

THE CULMINATION OF METHODIC MADNESS IN PROTOTYPING EXPLORING  STREAMLINING BOTH THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AND THE AESTHETIC OF THE MODEL

270mm

610mm

270mm

The Final dimensions chosen from the above testing were: String Length:  250mm (Revised 270mm) Bolt Placement:  30mm Middle Connection Hole Placement: 65mm

610mm

These dimensions are shown in the strip diagram above, which indicates how each of the three strips connect together.

270mm

The process involved drilling and marking the holes on each of the strips, and then bolting the bolts between the Single Modules and the middle connection. This held the strips at the right shape so that each Single Module could then be constructed by adding an end bolt and pulling and tying the string. During this stage there was concern that the material may break with too tight a string, and so the initial string length of 250mm was revised to 270mm. This created a very similar shape to the tested 250mm Single Module, so there may be a differentiation factor in using the single strips. Secondary bolts were then added, and cable ties were used to control the connection curvature.

610mm

As shown in the diagram to the Left, the triangle created from the plan view of the Module gives a ratio of strip length to overall side length of 750mm:610mm. This can be used in the Grasshopper model to change the length of lines on overall geometry that will link in the above ratio to produce required strip lengths.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  83

3|ABOVE, MIDDLE ROW, FAR RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, MODULE RATIO DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM 4|ABOVE, BOTTOM ROW CINDY LYU, THREE STRIP MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS  5|ALL OTHER IMAGES ABOVE AND OPPOSITE CAITLYN BENDALL, THREE STRIP MODEL PROCESS, PHOTOGRAPHS


84  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, SIX SIDED CONNECTIONS, PHOTOGRAPHS


Vertical Grain

10mm

Horizontal Grain 12.5mm

Horizo

12.5mm

10mm

58mm

34mm

58mm

10mm

170mm

10mm

35mm

35mm

10mm

150mm

Vertical Grain

10mm

Vertical Grain

10mm

Connection Exploration

CONNECTING MODULES LIKE A BIG PUZZLE

In further revision and contemplation of being able to attach the modules in a variety of different ways the possibility of other sided connections was explored. The 6-sided connection was made first, to make a cleaner, simpler version of the star joint. This was then followed by a 4 and 5 sided joint as any more than 6-sided joints were thought to be too complicated when building an overall form. The only problem with these joints was that they faced the same slipping problem identified in Form Development - pg.65.

The testing of the Middle Connection - pg.76 was intended to also work as the connection between each module to retain continuity with the overall form. The initial idea was that it would be confusing how big the actual Module populating the form was. This idea developed into wanting to populate the form more densely and the idea of the 6-sided star joint (Above left and Opposite Left) was developed. To create this joint two 3-sided joints as previously tested were joined together by adding slits in each strip (Shown in the diagram Above, Left). To achieve the same size as the tested 3-sided joint, with curvature, the slit position was 68mm from the initial bolt.

Both joints will be explored further in the process.

  |  TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES  85

1| ABOVE, TOP CAITLYN BENDALL, SIX SIDED CONNECTION STRIP DIAGRAM, DIGITAL DIAGRAM  2| ABOVE, BOTTOM CINDY LYU, COMPARISON OF 6 SIDED CONNECTIONS, DIGITAL DIAGRAM


86  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |   1| REFERENCE NUMBER ONE

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| JOANNE QIU, MODEL FLAT, PHOTOGRAPHS


Presentation Model

PATTERNS! PATTERNS! PATTERNS!

In connecting the modules the initial form was conceived as a structure that could sit on the ground or be attached to a wall, or curved surface, offering another dimension to the area. This created an intriguing pattern that could be replicated with more modules (Opposite Page) but that lacked the added dimension that could be seen in the difference between Protoype 15 - pg.59 and Prototype 17 - pg. 63. With this in mind, each module that surrounded the centre module (Opposite, Bottom Right) was ‘turned up’ into a point, creating a pyramid like structure. The middle Module was removed as it created resistance to this form. This also meant a conversion back to 3-sided connections which worked more efficiently. The digital model images shown on the following pages do not exactly correlate to this Module but it will be further explored how the two can combine into an overall cohesive form.

  |  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  87

1|ABOVE, TOP KIMI WANG, PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH  2|ABOVE, LEFT CAITLYN BENDALL, THREE DIMENSIONAL MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS


Presentation Model

PROPOSAL - NO NOT OF MARRIAGE - OF USE FOR THE PART MODEL CONSTRUCTED

88  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |

ALL IMAGES ABOVE| CAITLYN BENDALL, PRESENTATION PROPOSAL, DIGITAL LINE DRAWINGS


|  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  89

1|ABOVE, LEFT HAND COLUMN JOANNE QIU, PRESENTATION PROPOSAL, DIGITAL RENDERINGS  2|ABOVE, RIGHT HAND COLUMN CAITLYN BENDALL, PRESENTATION PROPOSAL, DIGITAL LINE DRAWINGS


Final Presentation Feedback ‘MMM WATCHA SA-AY-AY’

The crit panel was overall pleased with the design and acknowledged the amount of work and thought that had been put into the final outcome. They did warn however, not too become too focused in the details of the project that the overall reasoning and outcome of the project were forgotten. A problem identified in this was that there was no have formal proposal for the use of the structure. The crits did identify that a Tectonic Study was acceptable as and of its own but a suggestion of possible use would not go astray. This is therefore something that may need to be accounted for. There were not many other suggestions offered in terms of progression of the projects form, apart from the preference of the star 6-sided joint over the other option. Therefore further exploration holds unlimited opportunities.

90  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |


790

600.00

600.00

410 Final Model Digital Construction LASER CUTTING THE FINAL

For the final form the Module and Connection lengths will not differ, and the only small change was eliminating the cable ties used in the middle of the connections. This was to harmonize the overall structure as they stood out significantly. The strip sizes sufficiently used the material with minimum waste, as they are simple linear pieces, and the beauty in the design comes from their ability to be bent into curving. The additional benefit of having opposite grain pieces means that extra space can be filled. These are the two material sizes submitted to fablab to cut. Double of each will be created meaning that 15 Modules should be able to be made.

  |  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  91


92  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |

1|ABOVE, TOP LEFT & 3RD ROW FROM TOP, RIGHT JOANNE QIU, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|ABOVE, BOTTOM LEFT GRACE JIANG, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH  3|ALL OTHER IMAGES ABOVE CAITLYN BENDALL, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH  2|ABOVE, TOP RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH


Final Model Exploration STACK THEM UP

The Final Model was created in the same fashion as the Presentation Model, with a faster process as the practice had become familiar. The final form was decided to be the same form as the Presentation Model repeated, as it was known to work, and could stand up on its own. However when this was created, by stacking one pyramid on top of the other, many of the strips began to break and some completely cracked. Possible reasons for this could be because of a reduction in strength from having laser cut the material. As we had no chance to test laser cutting this was an unforeseen problem. Alternately the cracking could have been due to a difference in the way the model was being constructed - angles used for example. Thirdly this model reverted back to the initially chosen string length of 250mm as it was believed that the material could sustain this. Whilst majority of the strips did, some did not.

The modules looked good on top of one another, but would not remain in that position without a supporting structure. A decision was made to go back to a more ground based structure whilst keeping a single element of the three dimensional aspect, one pyramid. This resulted in the ultimately quite complex and mesmerizing form on the following pages, a kind of lotus, octopus shape. Because of the symmetry in this end form, it could be described as the next Module, that would then be repeated across a surface. Three modules in one model!

  |  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  93

1|ABOVE, LEFT JOANNE QIU, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS  2|ABOVE, RIGHT GRACE JIANG, DOUBLE PYRAMID MODEL, PHOTOGRAPH


94  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |

ABOVE AND OPPOSITE| JOANNE QIU, FINAL MODEL, PHOTOGRAPHS


|  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  97

1|TOP CINDY LYU, FINAL MODEL - MIDDLE DETAIL, PHOTOGRAPH  2|BOTTOM, LEFT AND RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL PERSPECTIVE DETAILS, PHOTOGRAPHS  OPPOSITE, TOP| CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL - SIDE VIEW, PHOTOGRAPH


98  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  |

1|TOP LEFT CINDY LYU, FINAL MODEL - MODULE DETAIL, PHOTOGRAPH  2|TOP RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL - MODULE DETAIL, PHOTOGRAPH  3|BOTTOM LEFT AND RIGHT CINDY LYU, FINAL MODEL - STAR CONNECTION DETAIL, PHOTOGRAPHS


|  FINAL DETAIL MODEL  99

1|TOP RIGHT CAITLYN BENDALL, FINAL MODEL - PERSPECTIVE, PHOTOGRAPH  2|BOTTOM LEFT GRACE JIANG, FINAL MODEL - PYRAMID, PHOTOGRAPH  1|BOTTOM RIGHT CINDY LYU, FINAL MODEL PERSPECTIVE THROUGH, PHOTOGRAPH


Personal Reflection

“PATIENCE, YOUNG GRASSHOPPER”1

XXXXX

100  LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES  |


References TECTONIC ELEMENTS & PROTOTYPES

PAGE 57 1|  Astley, Rick, Never Gonna Give You Up, RCA, 1987, Record

LEARNING OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES

1|  Kung FU, United States of America: Jerry Thorpe, 1972, TV Show



Studio Air: Journal