Dan Lamm - MIT Media Lab application

[Applicant Portfolio]

DAN LAMM

MIT MEDIA LAB Mediated Matter

REFERENCES 1 RESUME 3 STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES 6 NATURAL SYSTEMS 1 10

Technical Research Project (Fall 2013) - Analysis of the geometry and natural patterns of a leaf.

NATURAL SYSTEMS 2 48

Technical Research Project (Spring 2014) - A Pattern analysis of the foraging of bees and application of the observed parameters in the design of a computational system.

DIGITAL FABRICATION 66

MATERIAL RESEARCH 78

Design Research Project (Fall 2014) - Analysis and utilization of the principles of auxetic systems in the design of a deployable system through a range of scales.

PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN 98

Research Paper (Fall 2014) - A discussion of the transition from the design of forms to the design of processes.

RESILIENCY OVER SUSTAINABILITY 110

Research Paper (Spring 2015) - A discussion of the need for resiliency in the built environment for the long-term survival of our planet.

INSTILLING RESILIENCY 122

Design Research Project (Spring 2015) - An exploration of the use of drone technology to help remediate our planets waters of the mass amounts of plastics.

CONTENTS

5-day Workshop (Summer 2014) - Utilizing a 7-axis laser cutter to produce easy to assemble structures.

Stretchmarks Python Workshop CNC Design/Build

Kideney Architects, P.C. | Associate 716.636.9700 | rleccese@kideney.com

MICHAEL SILVER

University at Buffalo | Assistant Professor 716.829.5893 | mssilver@buffalo.edu

NICHOLAS BRUSCIA

University at Buffalo | Clinical Assistant Professor 716.829.5926 | nbruscia@buffalo.edu

REFERENCES

REGINA LECCESSE, RA, AIA, NCARB

DYNAMIC RESPONSIVE RESILENCY MULTISCALER VISUAL SCRIPTING PYTHON ARDUINO RASPBERRY PI BEAGLEBONE ROBOTICS COMPUTATION FABRICATION Foreign Endeavors Semester abroad in Tokyo, Japan May 2014 – July 2014 Structured architecture program

Semester abroad in Sorrento, Italy January 2011 – May 2011 Structured architecture program

Combat tour in Baghdad, Iraq January 2007 – March 2008 Experienced the Iraqi culture, architecture, and urban environment while conducting both combat and humanitarian missions

Daniel Lamm, LEED AP BD+C

(Currently taking Architecture Registration Exams) DLamm4@gmail.com | Buffalo, NY

Since graduating from the Situated Technologies Research Group, I have been focusing on transdisciplinary research and design of material systems, emerging technologies, advanced computation, and simulation. I am currently working professionally, teaching, and continuing my research on the integration of design and technology.

Research & volunteer work SMART - Robotics and Architecture Currently a volunteer in the SMART research program at the University at Buffalo, working with Mike Silver on synergizing robotics and the architecture

Architecture and Education Currently working with a Buffalo City School teacher and two UB students to educate high school students about dynamic and responsive architecture Drones - A Breakthrough in Digital Fabrication Research on the advancements and future possibilities of design and digital fabrication offered by drone technology (2015) The Current State of Architecture and Technology A research paper that focuses on the design of process over form and discusses the feed back loop required in designing for digital fabrication (2014) Technical workshops

Sex it Up: Making Sexy Graphics (Taught, 2015) Advanced Graphics (Taught, 2015) Modeling in Rhino (Taught, 2015) Video presentations (Taught, 2014) Diagramming with Revit (Taught, 2013) Hand Rendering (Organized, 2011) Sketching (Organized, 2011)

Combat tour in Tal Afar, Iraq September 2005 – December 2005

Scholarly Endeavors SUNY University at Buffal Degree: Master of Architecture Graduation Date: May 2015 | 3.6 GPA Design Excellence Award: 2012/13 Academic Year SUNY College of Technology, Alfred State Degree: BS in Architectural Technology Graduation Date: May 2012 | 3.5 GPA Honors Program: August 2011 – May 2012 Dean’s List: Spring & Fall 2011, Spring 2012 Nominee for SUNY Chancellor’s Award for Excellence

SUNY Erie Community College Degree: AAS in Architectural Technology Graduation Date: May 2010 | 3.8 GPA Dean’s List: Fall 2008, Spring & Fall 2009, and Spring 2010

Professional Endeavors Architectural Designer, Kideney Architects, PC Buffalo, NY | December 2012 – Present Assists in all phases of the design process Freelance Work, Studio D4 Buffalo, NY | August 2014 – Present Design and create 3D print ready models

Instructor, University at Buffalo Buffalo, NY | August 2014 – May 2015 Freshman Design Studio - Spring 2015 University at Buffalo Experience - Fall 2014

Infantryman Sergeant, US Army Fort Bragg, NC | August 2004 – July 2008 Team Leader of a four-man unit in both training and combat operations

OBJECTIVES

MEDIATED MATTER Neri Oxman

Since dropping out of high school in 2003, I have had a captivating Journey. During that time, I served in the US Army for four years, traveled extensively, and completed three collegiate degrees in the field of architecture. During the second half of my graduate studies I joined the Situated Technologies Research Group (STRG) where I was exposed to the wonderful world of emerging technologies and computation.

From the first course, I knew my career was destined to be in this vanguard of the field of architecture, where design, research, nature and technology are merging together, giving the world its first glimpse at a remediated and resilient future.

Since receiving my Master of Architecture, I have explored different avenues for continuing my focus on research and technology. While investigating the possibilities, I have sought to stay active by working, volunteering, and participating in academic projects.

I currently work full time at Kideney Architects, where I worked as an intern through the last two years of my graduate study. I was approved to sit for the Architectural Registration Examinations in August, 2015 and have successfully passed two to date. I plan to receive my architectural license within the next year.

I also volunteer for the AIA Architecture + Education program, where I work with high-school students in the Buffalo Public School District.

Several months ago, I contacted Assistant Professor Michael Silver, of the University at Buffalo, and volunteered to join the SMART research group, in which he is one of the leading faculty. I joined his research and development team, who are developing a construction automated robotic system. Upon graduating, I also became fascinated with the power of computation. This led me to enroll in two computer science and programming courses through Harvardx and MITx. These courses will prepare me to develop custom tools for the profession as well allowing me to contribute to the robotics research on a deeper level.

While I know that traditional architectural practice is not in my future, there is so much to learn by taking the exams and working in a professional office. I want to be a registered architect because of my commitment to the future of the built environment. In that light, having a solid frame of reference to the current axioms and methodologies will be invaluable to both my research as well as my accreditation when sharing my work, thoughts, and provisions to other members of the profession.

When my interest is sparked, I fully immerses myself in pursuing that interest. There have been times where I have stayed up for days working on something because I was too excited to sleep. Other times I have woken up in the middle of the night with an idea and had to get on my computer and start working, or at least grab a note book and write it down.

6 Statement of Objectives

Although I am a practical and realistic person, I also have a powerful imagination and sense of wonder about the future. Despite my enthusiasm for joining the profession, my appetite for exploring new ideas and methodologies is undeniable. The Media Lab is an environment that appears tailor made for my interests and I believe I would thrive in it.

As I have taken a different path than most, I am often asked If I could go back, what would I change?

Without hesitation I always give the same answer, “Absolutely Nothing.” The realist in me sees how my atypical journey has matured and developed me into the person I am today and has prepared me for the next chapter. Also, I am not blind to the fact that my five year hiatus from school caused my time in college to align with the current technology boom, which has become the focus of my career.

When I recently decided to continue my education, I had a list of about ten institutions across the globe that interested me. After speaking with mentors, self reflection, researching the institutions and their philosophies, cultures and faculty, my decision ultimately became clear as day. During the first couple of minutes of Joi Ito’s speech at the Media Lab 30th Anniversary, when he explained that he is an interest driven learner, that he didn’t think there was anyone else like him, and that there is actually a building that is completely full of those types of people; that was when I was certain of my direction. As for the specific research group, Mediated Matter stood out unmistakably.

The topic I intend to research is how to incorporate resiliency into the built environment. Although some research has been done on this topic, clear, unifying, and autonomous solutions have yet to emerge. I will pursue this investigation through experimentation with and development of intertwining natural, computational, and technological systems. Your own Silk Pavilion, Delft University’s Self-Healing Concrete, and the Delfland Sand Engine project represent for me the beginning of a conversation about resiliency that I wish to explore in greater depth. These projects span a range of scales and show undeniable promise for the ultimate long-term resiliency that our planet needs.

Recently I read about the scientists that are programming pigs to stop growing once they reach a specific size; imagine this concept applied to a structure. Can a structure be programmed to grow to a certain size? Can that structure’s growth be turned back on to increase its size at a later time? Can parts of the structure be turned off, so they slowly perish and return to the environment? What principals can be extracted from the live performance of bone density, which constantly changes to reflect the load and forces applied to it?

The research I conducted in the Situated Technologies

Research Group (SRTG) at the University at Buffalo has formed a foundation upon which I can build upon with more refined investigations. My project, FiberHinge, was a long and in-depth study of a deployable auxetic system with a high compact-to-deployed ratio, which could be applied to a range of scales. The subsequent project, Flock0, took the idea of a range of scales and applied it to a concept that involved a fully autonomous flock of drones. This new ‘species’ would fit comfortably into the environment with the task of collecting marine litter, relieving the natural birds and marine life of this duty and to slowly clean up, filter, and maintain the earths waters. The STRG also resurrected my interest in electronics, an early proclivity of mine.

One time in high school, just to see if I could do it, I ripped apart an old receiver and wired it up so that I could play a bass guitar through it. Now my interest in electronics, albeit just as fun, is more sophisticated and revolves around using micro-processors and sensor networks to create interactive environments and robotics.

with the Mediated Matter research group to develop processes and technologies that lead to experiments in ‘growing’ structures and in turn, habitable space. If something can be grown, it can die; when something dies it degrades and will revert back to the environment.

The book, Design for a Living Planet by Michael Mehaffy and Nikos Salingaros, has had a notable influence on my interest in resiliency in the built environment. The authors and contributors specifically question the viability of sustainable design as it exists today. I have insisted for years, among strongly dissenting colleagues, that sustainability has become nothing more than a fad or a trend. I felt quite alone in my opinions and observations until, in this book, a group of designers, scholars and scientists validated my position.

I want to address current issues as well as identify problems that will emerge in the future; then, I want to develop ideas, technologies, and solutions that will eventually permeate the profession, and ultimately change the world. I know I will succeed if I am working in an environment that fosters creative thinking, with people who share my drive. I have the motivation and passion to accomplish something significant, and I do not give up. I am asking for the opportunity to join your ranks, as a team member, not as an individual, to work together to challenge the canons of what is possible in the material world.

Despite my opinions relative to sustainability, I studied, took the exams, and became a LEED Accredited Professional (LEED AP). For the sake of this narrative, I will be using the LEED system as a representative of the whole modern sustainable movement. Through educating myself on the LEED system and it’s core principals, I realized the program is actually based on sound ideologies and principals. There are, however, a wide range of issues with the system. So many people, companies, and organizations are focused on obtaining LEED certifications for either political reasons or purely for marketing, rather than for the true purpose of sustainable design. The current scoring systems emphasize miniscule features rather than whole building design. Although there is some effort to address these issues by the Green Building industry, it is only beginning to scratch the surface of what is possible. With a holistic approach through human interaction with technology, buildings can be born of the ground and likewise return to it.

The book Next Nature by Hendrik-Jan Grievink and Koert van Mensvoort has also been a great influence on me for its philosophy on the relationship between nature and technology. Next Nature deals with the notion that nature is not a static entity being destroyed by human intervention and technology; rather nature is constantly in motion, constantly evolving, and humans and technology are part of that flux. An example of this relationship can be seen in network scientist Albert-László Barabási’s explanation on how the World Wide Web, which has been in existence for just over twenty years [and was created by man] exhibits the same network architecture as protein interactions or metabolic networks [both created by nature], which have been in existence for 4 billon years.

Website - StudioD4.com (coming soon)

The current paradigm promotes buildings that last longer, but are still being made out of the same non-biodegradable materials as their ‘unsustainable’ predecessors. These supposed sustainable buildings will become piles of debris that will require additional energy and resources to manage. I would love to work Mediated Matter 7

NATURAL SYSTEMS 1

10 Natural Systems 1

leaf analysis double your fractal, double your fun

The leaf, as a natural pattern, is made up two distinct yet unified patterns and has a finite growth limit.

The vascular system, which gives shape to the leaves as well as the plant as a whole, is created by a Lindenmayer (L) System also known as a branching pattern. As the vascular system branches within the confines of the leaf a voronoi pattern starts to emerge within the 4th generation of branching.

Professor - Chris Ramano|Course - Material Culture Research Group Technical Methods Seminar (Fall 2013)|Length of project - 15 weeks Project type - Natural materials and systems research|Critics - Chris Ramano (University at Buffalo) Nick Bruscia (University at Buffalo) Jin Young Song (University at Buffalo) Leaf Analysis 11

Zoomed Out

Zoomed In

12 Natural Systems 1

IMAGE STUDY Zoomed In x2

Zoomed In x3

Leaf Analysis 13

1. The Dermal Layer 2. The Ground Layer 3. The Vascular Layer

14 Natural Systems 1

RESEARCH PART 1 The Biological Make-up of Plants There are three main components to plants: 1. The dermal layer (the ‘skin’) 2. The ground layer (spongy middle layer) 3. The vascular layer (the structural system) Vein of Microphyll Leaf Trace Enation Protostele

Petiole Margin Midrib Leaf Blade Lobe

These components translate to the make-up of the individual leaves as well.

Leaf Traces Leaves start off as enations and gradually pull away from the stem and become separate appendages. The leaf trace is the vascular component that branches off the main vascular branch of the stem which passes through the petiole and into the leaf.

The petiole is the primary structural component and it connects the leaf to the stem. Veins are the secondary structure which subdivide repeatedly and branch throughout the center layer of the leaf.

Cuticle Sclerenchyma Fibers Stoma Upper Epidermis Palisade Mesophyll Spongy Mesophyll Lower Epidermis Vein Phloem

Veins Sinus

Xylem Guard Cells Cuticle Leaf Analysis 15

16 Natural Systems 1

study 1 Structural Analysis The vascular system functions as a skeleton that reinforces the shape of the leaf. It also acts as the vehicle that brings water up from the roots to the leaves as well as collecting food energy from photosynthesis to distribute to the rest of the plant.

First The petiole connects the leaf to the plant and turns into the midrib which supports the structural system of the leaf.

Secondary The veins give the leaf shape and set the growth limits. All branching from this point fills in the gaps.

Tertiary The next generation of veins hold the leaf together and stiffen it up as a whole.

Quaternary The voronoi pattern starts emerging in the forth generation and starts becoming dense.

Quinary The fifth generation continues in creating the voronoi pattern and building up density.

Voronoi The smallest portions of the vascular system manifest into voronoi patterns.

Leaf Analysis 17

study 2 Structural Branching This study looked at diminishing fractal branching and the possibility of using it to ‘grow’ the pattern.

Growth was achieved by utilizing the idea of selfsimilar patterns. Upon the conclusion of this study, it was determined that several unique characteristics of the leaf are: 1. That it is not symmetrical.

2. It does not follow a radial pattern.

3. It has directional growth.

4. It has a finite limitation.

18 Natural Systems 1

study 3 Finding Geometry In attempts to find a geometry that would allow the pattern of a leaf to expand infinitely in the x and y axes, the natural shapes were simplified into a parallel and linear system. A rotational array was applied to the simplified pattern at its base. Two big issues that were realized at the conclusion of these studies were that the pattern is not radial, it grows from an origin but does not perform a rotational array about it. Also, the pattern on a leaf is finite, it has perimeter limitations that prevent it from expanding out. In this study the pattern was simplified in search of geometry, but in doing so the alternating spudding of veins was lost, despite being an important characteristic of the growth of leaves.

Leaf Analysis 19

study 4 Fractal Growth This study looked further at the fractal relationship of the growth of a leaf. The leaf, like the plant as a whole, has two fractal patterns; the first in the long direction, and the second that grows out towards the side and merges at the point of the former. The following diagrams were an attempt to understand the relationship of the two patterns. After much analysis and studying, it was realized that not only are there two fractal patterns but they are not the same. The vascular structure is a branching fractal, which follows the laws of a Lindenmayer System; it grows to the limits of the leaf. The second is a voronoi fractal pattern which evolves out of the veins and fills the space between. The voronoi pattern continues to diminish in a self-similar way until the smallest microscopic level.

study 5 Create an Infinite 2D Pattern In the second attempt to create a two-dimensional pattern that could infinitely grow in the x and y axis, five rules were developed based on the information extracted from the leaf. There are several faults in this study. First, the leaf as a singular object does grow from an origin but not in a radial pattern. The radial characteristic applies to the global scale of a plant (when considering in plan view) but not to the individual leaves. Second, the use of fractals in creating the units for the following patterns was incorrect and resulted with a faux complexity.

Without the radial quality, the units are not able to be arrayed infinitely in the x and y axis.

20 Natural Systems 1

Rule 1 Material thickness is represented in components in resemblance to the structural hierarchy of the vascular structure of the leaf.

Rule 2 The elements of each unit array in a radial pattern.

Rule 3 The radial scheme of each unit grows from an origin.

Rule 4 As each unit spreads toward its edge, the pattern of the unit diminishes according to the law of fractals.

Rule 5 Each unit is repeated infinitely like a leaf to a plant.

Leaf Analysis 21

22 Natural Systems 1

unit 1 Leaf Analysis 23

24 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 25

26 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 27

28 Natural Systems 1

unit 2 Leaf Analysis 29

30 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 31

32 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 33

34 Natural Systems 1

unit 3 Leaf Analysis 35

36 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 37

38 Natural Systems 1

Leaf Analysis 39

RESEARCH PART 2 Fractal System Characteristics Fractals exhibit self-similarity and unusual relationship with the space the fractal is embedded. Fractals are characterized by fractal dimensions and have fine or detailed structure at arbitrarily small scales. They posess irregularity, both locally and globally through simple and recursive definitions.

The Fractal Dimension The concept of the fractal dimension rests on viewing scale and dimension in unconventional ways. A segment or group of segments are infinitely scaled at any integer or non-integer. koch curve This type of fractal takes a simple unit or shape and makes it very complex. The unit or shape does not grow in size but its perimeter grows in length. The complex shape that emerges is a classic iterative fractal curve known as the koch snowflake. Each segment is divided into three, producing four equal length parts and, theoretically, there are an infinite number of iterations.

L-systems An L-system, or Lindenmayer System, is a parallel re-writing system used to describe complex branching structures. They can be used to generate self-similar fractals such as iterative function systems where the form slowly grows and becomes more complex. As many rules as possible are applied at once and iterated. These systems have an infinite number of starting and ending points and can be scaled infinitely.

Algae explained Lindenmayer’s original L-system for modeling the growth of algae is as follows: Variables: A B Constants: none Start: A Rules: (A → AB), (B → A) Which produces: n=0:A n = 1 : AB n = 2 : ABA n = 3 : ABAAB n = 4 : ABAABABA n = 5 : ABAABABAABAAB n = 6 : ABAABABAABAABABAABABA n = 7 : ABAABABAABAABABAABABAABAABABAABAAB

40 Natural Systems 1

Or: n=0: n=1: n=2: n=3: n=4:

A

/\ A B

/| \ AB A /| | |\ ABA AB /| | |\ |\ \ ABAAB ABA

Simple Example In the following example, the systems shape is built by recursively feeding the axiom through the production rules. Each character of the input string is checked against the rule list to determine which character or string to replace it with in the output string. In this example, a ‘1’ in the input string becomes ‘11’ in the output string, while ‘[0]‘ remains the same.

Variables: 0, 1 Constants: [, ] Axiom: 0 Rules: (1 → 11), (0 → 1[0]0) Axiom: 0 1st recursion: 1[0]0 2nd recursion: 11[1[0]0]1[0]0 3rd recursion: 1111[11[1[0]0]1[0]0]11[1[0]0]1[0]0

We can see that this string quickly grows in size and complexity. This string can be drawn as an image by using turtle graphics, where each symbol is assigned a graphical operation for the turtle to perform. For example, in the sample above, the turtle may be given the following instructions: 0: draw a line segment ending in a leaf 1: draw a line segment [: push position and angle, turn left 45 degrees ]: pop position and angle, turn right 45 degrees

study 6 Fractal Grower Software 1 Fractal patterns are based off of complex mathematical formulas and relationships, so it is necessary to use computation to accurately replicate these types of patterns. These studies utilized the program Fractal Grower to study the growth and relationships of L-systems. These studies accurately describe the formations of leaves through diminishing self-similar generation.

Pattern: Big-H Variables Start angle: 0ยบ Turn angle: 90ยบ Growth: 1.5 Thickness: 4

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

3rd gen

Code Axiom: [f ]--f Rule: f=![+f ] [-f ]

4th gen

5th gen Leaf Analysis 41

Pattern: Maple Leaf Variables Start angle: 0ยบ Turn angle: 20ยบ Growth: 2 Thickness: 1

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

Rules Axiom: af Rule: f=! [---f] [+++f] ! [--f] [++f] ! f

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

Pattern: Bush Variables Start angle: 0ยบ Turn angle: 25ยบ Growth: 1 Thickness: 1

gen 0 42 Natural Systems 1

1st gen

2nd gen

Rules Axiom: f Rules: f=eff+[b+f-af-f]-[c-f+df+f]

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

Pattern: Weed Variables Start angle: 0ยบ Turn angle: 20ยบ Growth: 2

Rules Axiom: af Rule: f=![+f] ! [-f]+f

Thickness: 1

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

Pattern: Leaves on a Stem Variables Start angle: 0ยบ Turn angle: 30ยบ Growth: 1.54 Thickness: 1

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

Rules Axiom: sd Rules: s=sf [-sd] sf [+sd] s d=f-!++!++++!++!

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen Leaf Analysis 43

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

gen 0

1st gen

2nd gen

3rd gen

4th gen

5th gen

44 Natural Systems 1

pattern: leaves on a stem 1a variables start angle: 0º turn angle: 30º growth: 1.54 thickness: 1 code axiom: varies rules: s=sf [-sd] sf [+sd] s d=f-!++!++++!++!

study 7 Fractal Grower Software 2 Blurb Through experimentation with Fractal Grower, patterns started to emerge. The axiom ‘sd’ represents one unit that consists of a diamond and a line.

Each additional sd in the axiom yields an additional unit. By adjusting the variables, the pattern became more geometrical and was able to be expanded upon in CAD software.

After thoughts This study is also flawed because it goes back to the incorrect radial growth quality. Another issue was that the ‘pattern’ generated with the program had three-dimensional qualities which were corrected in the following study.

pattern: leaves on a stem 1b variables start angle: 0º turn angle: 30º growth: 1.54 thickness: 1 code axiom: sdsdsdsdsdsd rules: s=sf [-sd] sf [+sd] s d=f-!++!++++!++!

pattern: leaves on a stem 1c variables start angle: 0º turn angle: 30º growth: 1.54 thickness: 1 code axiom: dddddddddddd rules: s=sf [-sd] sf [+sd] s d=f-!++!++++!++!

Leaf Analysis 45

NATURAL SYSTEMS 2

Social Insects Many aspects of the collective activities of social insects are self-organized. Theories of self-organization, were originally developed in the context of physics and chemistry to describe the emergence of macroscopic patterns out of processes and interactions defined at the microscopic level. These theories can be extended to social insects to show that complex collective behavior may emerge from interactions among individuals that exhibit simple behavior: in these cases, there is no need to invoke individual complexity to explain complex collective behavior.6 Living in social groups has both advantages and disadvantages. Large colonies are especially vulnerable to the spread of contagious pathogens, nest sites may be exploited by "social parasites" who steal food or attack the brood, and member individuals must compete with each other for space and resources (e.g. food). But on the other hand, cooperative behavior can accomplish feats that would be impossible for solitary insects: construction of huge nest sites, widespread foraging for food, and constant vigilance against predation or parasitism. For social insects, the benefits outweigh the liabilities. In the final analysis, social behavior is an adaptation that promotes survival and reproductive success of the species.5 Relatively few insects are classified as eusocial, the distinction is limited to the following groups: Termites -- all species Ants -- all species Bees -- about 600 species in the family Apidae Wasps -- about 700 species in the family Vespidae1 Self-Organization Self-organization in social insects requires interactions among insects: such interactions can be direct or indirect.6 Direct interactions are the “obvious” interactions: antennation, trophallaxis (food or liquid exchange), mandibular contact, visual contact, chemical contact (the odor of nearby nestmates), etc. Indirect interactions are more subtle: two individuals interact indirectly when one of them modifies the environment and the other responds to the new environment at a later time. The latter type of interaction is an example of stigmergy. “In every example, the environment serves as a medium of communication” (for indirect interactions).6 Three important features of self-organization are as follows: 1.This is a promising first step to design groups of artificial agents which solve problems by replacing coordination through direct communications by indirect interactions is 48 Natural Systems 2

appealing if one wishes to design simple agents and reduce communication among agents.

2. Another feature is incremental construction, for instance, termites make use of what other termites have constructed to contribute their own piece (i.e. a new solution constructed from previous solutions).

3. Stigmergy is also associated with flexibility, when the environment changes because of an external perturbation, the insects respond appropriately to that perturbation, as if it were a modification of the environment caused by the colony’s activities. (i.e. the colony can collectively respond to the perturbation with individuals exhibiting the same behavior). When it comes to artificial agents, this type of flexibility is priceless, it means that the agents can respond to a perturbation without being reprogrammed to deal with that perturbation.

HONEY BEES

SOCIAL INSECTS | SELF-ORGANIZATION | FORAGING PATTERNS

Eusocial - [yoo-soh-shuh l] adj: The highest level of organization of animal sociality. To qualify as truly eusocial, a species must exhibit ALL four of the following characteristics: 1. Share a common nest site.

2. Individuals of the same species cooperate in caring for the young.

3. Reproductive division of labor; sterile (or less fecund) individuals work for the benefit of a few reproductive individuals.

4. Overlap of generations; offspring contribute to colony labor while their parents are still alive.1,2

Stigmergy - [stig-mur-gee] noun: A mechanism of indirect coordination between agents or actions.[1] The principle is that the trace left in the environment by an action stimulates the performance of a next action, by the same or a different agent. In that way, subsequent actions tend to reinforce and build on each other, leading to the spontaneous emergence of coherent, apparently systematic activity.

Stigmergy is a form of self-organization. It produces complex, seemingly intelligent structures, without need for any planning, control, or even direct communication between the agents. As such, it supports efficient collaboration between extremely simple agents, who lack any memory, intelligence or even individual awareness of each other.4

Self-organization - [self - awr-guh-nuh-zey-shuh n] noun: A process where some form of global order or coordination arises out of the local interactions between the components of an initially disordered system. This process is spontaneous; it is not directed or controlled by any agent or subsystem inside or outside of the system; however, the laws followed by the process and its initial conditions may have been chosen or caused by an agent. It is often triggered by random fluctuations that are amplified by positive feedback. The resulting organization is wholly decentralized or distributed over all the components of the system. As such it is typically very robust and able to survive and self-repair substantial damage or perturbations.3

Professor - Nick Brucia|Course - Situated Technologies Technical Seminar - Conditional Form (Spring 2014)|Length of project - 15 weeks|Project type - Research and analyze a natural system, create a computational form based on found parameters and variables, and instill fabrication methods in the model (script)

Figure 1.2 - A schematic representation of the cycle of a bee foraging.

Dances

Flies to food source

Unloads pollen at hive

I’m your private dancer, a dancer for honey

Collects pollon

dancing for A

foragers dancing for B

hive bees dancers

D

dancing for C

dancing for D

D3: Proceed to source A or source B? 50 Natural Systems 2

The System Worker bees stay in the hive and store the pollen brought back by the foragers. Dancers are foragers who found a food source and decided at [diamond D] to become a dancer (leader) to that source.

A pollen

Figure 1.2 - Shows a schematic representation of foraging activity; decision points (D1: become a follower?), (D2: become a dancer?), and (D3: proceed to source A or source B?) are indicated by the respective symbols.

B pollen

D pollen

C pollen

Honey Bees 51

Become a dancer and lead bees to the new food source

D

Continue foraging the new source by its self Forget about the new source and continue following the other dancers

Variables The system of foraging is constantly changing and fluxuating; the system always expands in the same way but each expansion that occurs varies. A certain percentage of bees in flight to a known food source will stray from the path of travel (either due to losing the trail or just drifting away) in turn discovering a new food source. The bee fills up on pollen, flies back to the hive, and unloads the pollen. The bee now decides (decision point )to either become a dancer and lead bees to the new food source, continue foraging the new source by its self, or to forget about the new source and continue following the other dancers.

Bees also conciously make the decison to go search for new food sources as current sources near depletion.

D

52 Natural Systems 2

pollen

D

Figure 1.2 - A foraging bee that strays away from the path to the food source which leads to the discovery of a new food source.

Honey Bees 53

Da’ crib

Da’ crib

Da’ crib

Da’ temporary crib

54 Natural Systems 2

Da’ crib

Parameters The main parameter associated with this system is that of hive relocation. There are two reasons for the creation of a new hive, because an external force has removed the current hive or because the colony of bees outgrew the hive. An example of the former is a person removing a hive from a tree in their backyard. In the latter, the colony divides in two and then in both cases the queen leads [one half of] the colony to a new temporary location (for example a branch on a tree) where the swarm huddles together tightly to maintain the hive temperature. Scout bees then seek out a new permanent location and once the new site has been chosen, the queen leads the colony there.6,7 References 1. (http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/tutorial/Social/) 2. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusociality) 3. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization) 4. (http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/10004/1/3z2fx4r7prqwob3vf dq.pdf) 5. (http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/tutorial/Social/) 6. (swarm intelligence, p. 6) 7. (http://www.asknature.org/strategy/209bfa3de3573d76df7 3854f1cd9dba#.UvbTP_ldWCk 8. (http://sdcbeeks.org/report-swarm/)

Da’ new crib

Honey Bees 55

Culling Operation - [kuhl-ing op-uh-rey-shuh] verb: Culling is the process of removing items from a group based on specific criteria. This is done either to reinforce certain desirable characteristics or to remove certain undesirable characteristics from the group.

Voronoi- [vo-ro-noi] noun: A voronoi diagram is a way of dividing space into a number of regions. A set of points (called seeds, sites, or generators) is specified beforehand and for each seed there will be a corresponding region consisting of all points closer to that seed than to any other. The regions are called Voronoi cells. It is dual to the Delaunay triangulation.

Skeletal Mesh - [skeledl - meh-sh] noun: a technique in computer aided three-dimensional modeling in which an object is represented in two parts: a surface representation used to draw the form (called skin or mesh) and a hierarchical set of interconnected ‘bones’ (called the skeleton) used to give the mesh shape.

56 Natural Systems 2

COMPUTATION Social Insects self-organization foraging patterns of honey bees 3D digital representation In the jump from research to modeling a system, the swarm is represented through a three-dimensional field of points. This field was expandable in the X, Y, and Z axis via the number sliders in the script. A culling operation was used to select an [adjustable] amount of random points; as the slider moved, different combinations of points were selected.

From there, a three-dimensional voronoi pattern was applied to the new field of random points. The geometry was offset and smoothed out to create a skeletal mesh. At this point the skeletal form would update in real time when the sliders were adjusted.

The architectural significance to this operation is that the programed out-put was a structure that occupied the contents of a specified boundary.

The object, the structure itself in this example, was able to be manipulated to achieve very [aesthetically] different results that in theory have the same exact function.

The morphing skeleton: The pink spheres represent the set of randomly selected point which determine the form of the skeleton. Each sphere, or point, is the the center of a void, in this case a voronoi, and together the voids create a negative space which the script manifests into the skeletal mesh.

Honey Bees 57

1 Point

2 Points

3 Points

5 Points

10 Points

20 Points

Variation 1

Variation 2

Variation 3

Variation 4

Variation 5

Variation 6

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

Stage 4

Stage 5

Stage 6

Scale Factor .2

Scale Factor .3

Scale Factor .1

58 Natural Systems 2

Scale Factor .4

Scale Factor .5

Scale Factor .6

Parameter 1 - Number of Points

30 Points

50 Points

100 Points

150 Points

This parameter controls how many points are selected from the field; in essence it controls how many voronois occur within the given field. As the amount of points increase, so does the density. As the number of points increase, the structure becomes thinner and appears more brittle. As the points increase the structure become thinner and appears more brittle.

Parameter 2 - Seeds

Variation 7

Variation 8

Variation 9

Variation 10

A fixed number of 50 points was used thruout this study. The seed parameter of this system selects a different set of points, based on the previous parameter ‘number of points,’ for each integer it displays. As the values are changed the shape morphs, changing its appearance but always keeping the same ratio of void to solid.

Parameter 3 - Mesh Density

Stage 7

Stage 8

Stage 9

Stage 10

This parameter controls how thick and meaty the stucture is. At one extreme the structure is very thin, like sticks, and as the value is decreased the tubes expand resulting in a heavier and more solid structure.

Parameter 4 - Mesh Thickness

Scale Factor .7

Scale Factor .8

Scale Factor .9

Scale Factor 1

Like mesh density, the mesh thickness papa rameter controls ‘how much meat is on the bones.’ As seen in the diagrams, a scale factor of 1 results in a more ‘stick-like’ structure where as a scale factor of .1 results in a more bloated structure where the individual members start merging with one another, blurring their independent distinction.

parametrics Honey Bees 59

Simplified Mesh: This is a composite image of the individual facets of the [95%] simplified mesh pulled away from its respective location on the original, smooth, mesh.

60 Natural Systems 2

Original mesh (2144 pieces)

Reduced 25% (1608 pieces)

Reduced 50% (1072 pieces)

Reduced 75% (536 pieces)

Reduced 90% (213 pieces)

Reduced 95% (107 pieces)

FABRICATION 1 Breaking Down the Joint A moment containing several joint conditions is blown up to allow for examination of its make-up and to be studied to see how it could be constructed as a panelized system. This study utilizes the reducemesh command in rhino (after baking the chosen portion of the skeleton from Grasshopper) to simplify its surface and begin to see how it could be built from sheet material.

The original mesh (clearly the smoothest) becomes more and more faceted as the mesh is reduced.

When the mesh [of this specific series of joints] is reduced 95% it only consists of 107 pieces which increases the practicality of it actually being built.

The main issue that arose in this process is that the form becomes so abstract that is it almost unrecognizable.

The End Result This exercise was leading to the analysis of joints and how to apply the studied techniques to larger scaled projects. In the end, the panelized method of constructing these types of joints will be applied to a more practical [and less arbitrary] form.

Honey Bees 61

Initial Mesh

Sub-Divide

7 3

4

8 1

Adjust Subdivision

Relax

Split

16 5

6

2

Top Top

62 Natural Systems 2

14

13

15 9

11

12

10

Bottom Bottom

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

FABRICATION 2 Developable Strips: The next step in this study was to examine and explore the concept of developable strips. In the previous study, the resolution of the mesh was reduced to arrive at a form that could be assembled using planar materials. As the resolution was lowered, the mesh lost more and more of its original shape resulting with a completely new, abstracted form.

Developable strips is a method developed by Daniel Piker, whose work was examined and used as a reference for the following study. With this method, curvilinear organic meshes can be computationally separated into strips with common seams and unrolled. At this point the broken down mesh is able to be exported to a planar fabrication machin such as a laser cutter, plasma cutter, water jet cutter, or CNC machine.

This study stepped away from the 3D voronoi pattern which was used as a starting point in developing the system. Instead, this study utilizes a more regular system of geometry as the basis of the structure.

The End Result: This exercise was the next, and final, step towards examining the composition of a complex joint system before building a full-scale planar structure.

Honey Bees 63

DIGITAL FABRICATION

66 Digital Fabrication

tri-par pavilion GRASSHOPPER | RHINO | 6-AXIS LASER CUTTER

Team: Nick Bruscia

This 5-day design/build workshop utilized 2” x 3/8” tube steel and a 7-axis laser cutter. All joints were designed to be attached and hold in place without the assistance of welds, bolts, or any other third-party attachments.

Daniel Lamm Lesley Loo James Kubinic Nick Traverse Michael Rigaglia Drew Barkhouse Zakaria Boucetta Ryan Macari Gabby Marie Louis Rosario John Sanchez Kyle McMindes

Professor - Nick Bruscia|Course - Technical Seminar|Gross square footage - 120 SF|Length of project - 5 Days|Building type - Pavilion|Project type - Advanced computational design & digital fabrication|Project location - SHIOYA Industry Inc, Japan|Photos courtesy of UB

joint A

joint D

joint B

joint E

joint C

joint F

68 Digital Fabrication

Tri-Par Pavilion 69

Planar Surface

1

Apply Gravity Force

2 3 4 5 6

Apply Gravity Force

7

8

9

Apply Gravity Force 10

Cut Edges Back

Tabs for Structure

Settings Mesh

Split into Strips 70 Digital Fabrication

Geometry Toggle

True

SimulationReset

Kangaroo

Force objects AnchorPoints

Out Iterations ParticlesOut GeometryOut

Mesh

stretchmarks GRASSHOPPER | KANGAROO | LASER CUTTER

1

This advanced computational design workshop focused on using the Kangaroo physics simulator (for Grasshopper) to create a pavilion type form and separate the surface into strips to be fabricated out of sheet material.

2 3

4

5 6 7

8

9

10

Professor - Nick Bruscia|Course - Technical Seminar|Length of project - 2 Days|Building type - Pavilion|Project type - Advanced computational design & digital fabrication|Project location - Fab Cafe, Tokyo, Japan

Top view

Front view

72 Digital Fabrication

python workshop rhino | python scripting | workshop

Professor - Peter Schmidt, Andrew Pries|Course - Intro to Designing with Python Scripting in Rhino|Length of project - 3 Days|Project type Advanced computational design|Project location - University at Buffalo

This course revolved around designing a large 3-axis CNC machine which we would build and program.

As a group we designed the whole machine and specced out all the parts but unfortunately we were unable to get funding to actually build it. To better understand the mechanics and programming involved in such a machine we built and programmed small 1-axis machines.

6

Team: Daniel Lamm Ana Hitaa William Quintana Cal Schilling Daniel Fiore Daniel Vrana Dirk Templeton Nick Traverse Robert Miller

Instructors: Peter Schmidt Andrew Pries

2 3

1

1. Single axis CNC machine 2. Modified power supply from computer 3. Wired controls 4. Arduino uno 5. Sketch wiring/programming 6. 4’ x 4’ bed size CNC mill (unbuilt) 74 Digital Fabrication

4

cnc design/build micro controllers | fabrication | programming

5

Professors - Peter Schmidt, Andrew Pries|Course - The Impact of Digital Fabrication on Designers|Building type - CNC Machine(s)|Project type Research, design, build, and program CNC machines|Project location - University at Buffalo digital fabrication lab

MATERIAL SYSTEMS

AUXETIC SYSTEMS

3

4

2

A basic [2-dimensional] auxetic system comprised of rotating rigid quadrilaterals

1

1 3 Folding armatures increase the distribution of the quadrilaterals 78 Material Systems

2

4

fiber-hinge deployable system

6 5

The fiber-hinge system rests in a dense, compact state and fills a much greater area when deployed.

6 5

Professor - Nick Bruscia|Course - Situated Technologies Research Studio (Fall 2014)|Length of project - 15 weeks|Project type - Material systems research |Critics - Axel Kilian (Princeton University) Brady Peters (University of Toronto) Michael Markert (Bauhaus University Weimar) Nick Bruscia (University at Buffalo) Jordan Geiger (University at Buffalo) Chris Romano (University at Buffalo) Billy Heywood (Staub Inc.)

1

2

0°

3

9°

1

4

18°

2

18°

27°

18°

6

36°

4

3 9°

9°

5

27°

5 27°

36°

7

45°

6 36°

45°

9°

18°

18°

9°

27°

27°

36°

45°

72°

11 90° 81°

72°

90°

90°

81°

63°

54°

45°

10 72°

63°

63°

54°

36°

90°

81°

72°

63° 54°

11

81°

9

8

54°

10

72°

63°

7 45°

9

8

54°

81°

90°

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

0°

9°

18°

27°

36°

45°

54°

63°

72°

81°

90°

Transition Zones

Rotation - Main Lines

Rotation - Secondary Lines

80 Material Systems

1

2

0°

1

2

1

3

2

0°

3

9°

1

2

1

2

1

3

2

1

2 2

2

4 4

2

3 3

3

5 5

3

4 4

4

4

5 5

5

5

6 6

7

6

7

8

6

7 7

7

7 7

7

8 8

8

8 8

9 9

9

9 9

11

10

9

11

10

10

11

11

162°

9

10 10

10

10 10

11

11

10

144°

8

90°

11

10

9

126°

11

10

10 9

9

11 11

81°

9

8

11 11

10

9

8

8

108°

6 6

8

7

90°

5 5

7 7

6

72°

4 4

6 6

11

10 10

9

9

11

10 10

72°

8

90°

10

9 9

8

8

10

9 9

63°

7

7

6 6

5

54°

3 3

5 5

4

36°

2 2

4 4

3

18°

1 1

3

3

2

0°

1

3

2

2

7

6

6

8 8

11

81°

9

9

8 8

54°

45°

5

5

7 7

10

72°

8

8

7 7

6

36°

4

4

6 6

9

63°

7

7

6 6

5

27°

3

3

5 5

8

54°

6

6

5 5

4

18°

2

1 1

4 4

4

7

45°

5

5

4

3

3

6

36°

4

4

3

2

2

5

27°

3

3

2

1 1

4

18°

2

2

1

Parquet Deformation The first part of this project was to select and analyze a hand-drawn parquet deformation with no computational assistance. I broke the pattern that I chose into three main deformation components as follows (shown to the left):

3

9°

180°

10

11 11

11

11 11

Transitions - In these transition zones the left line (of the four main lines) stays at the angle of the previous form, the other three are rotated to the angle of the next form.

Rotation of Main Lines - The four main lines start as one complete square and 1/4 of the four surrounding squares. The lines gradually rotate around their respective center points until reaching 90° whereupon each of the four lines make up 1/2 of four squares.

Rotation of Secondary Lines - As the lines rotate, the corners of the squares pull apart and a new line is formed keeping them connected. The newly formed lines increase in size and rotate, eventually becoming the secondary lines in the new squares. The same process goes in reverse starting from the left.

Fiber-Hinge 81

C

-”

22.5°

C

22.5°

C

45°

45°

°

45

-”

45°

45°

68°

68°

67.5

C

22.5°

°

45

-”

° °

° 67.5 67.5

°

22.5 67.5 -”

68°

°

°0

6”

°0

C

°

C

22.5°

°

68°

90°

90°

90°

90° 90°

6”

90°

22.5°

22.5

22.5

°

0°

22.5°

22.5 22.5°

° 45

0°

°

45

82 Material Systems 90° 90°

2” -”

-”

2”

Fiber-Hinge 83

h-A

p e

h-B

p e

h-C

p e

h-D

p e

h-E

p e

h-F

p e

84 Material Systems

Natural Displacement (previous spread - left) The displaced, or flexed, position takes up 200% of the area of the relaxed state of the system.

Augmented Displacement (previous spread - right) The displaced, or flexed, position takes up 750% of the area of the relaxed state of the system. The length of the armature dictates the amount of displacement.

Emergence of the Fiber-Hinge The fiber-hinge came about from experimenting with making the augmented displacement invisible and instilling memory within it. The sixth part of this experiment (bottom left) brought forth the first ‘fiber-hinge.’ The goal became to eliminate, or at least minimize, the square geometry in the system and let the fibers take over.

Fiber-Hinge 85

study 1

Position - 1

Position - 2

Position - 3

Position - 4

Position - 5

Position - 6

86 Material Systems

study 2

Position - 1

Position - 2

Position - 3

Position - 4

Position - 5

Position - 6

Fiber-Hinge 87

study 3

Position - 1

Position - 2

Position - 3

Position - 4

Position - 5

Position - 6

88 Material Systems

study 4

Position - 1

Position - 2

Position - 3

Position - 4

Position - 5

Position - 6

Fiber-Hinge 89

1

The first study in expanding the system behaved quite unexpectedly... in a really good way.

Both units in the system deployed simultaneously as opposed to one at a time as hypothesized.

2

3

4

5

6

90 Material Systems

1

2

3

4

5 The second expansion study had less satisfactory results, although there was an adequate ratio of collapsedto-open positions.

The amount of units connected together caused the system to exhibit net-like characteristics, causing significant loss of structure and stability.

6

Fiber-Hinge 91

1 The first largescale prototype withheld the operable characteristics of the small-scale studies while demonstrating a more rigid structure.

Although a greater amount of force was required to deploy the system, the deployment was just as smooth and easy.

92 Material Systems

2

3 4 5

6

Fiber-Hinge 93

The large-scale expansion study, again, showed loss of rigidity with the addition of a decrease in the ease of maneuverability. Although the space-filling goal was met, the rigidity and deployability goals were not met.

94 Material Systems

Fiber-Hinge 95

PROCESS DESIGN

THE CURRENT STATE OF ARCHITECTURE + TECHNOLOGY Communication Richard Poulin opens his book The Language of Graphic Design stating that anyone trying to communicate in a new language has to first gain a complete understanding of its fundamentals; the ABCs of that language – definitions, functions, and usage.10 Poulin also explains that visual communications, like written and verbal communications, involve analysis, planning, organizing, and ultimately, problem solving. When you write or speak you intuitively choose which words to use and how to use them together to effectively communicate your message. In visual communications, the same end result can be achieved.10 There are many languages used in the field of architecture such as graphic presentations, simulations, video presentations, architectural contracts, and construction documents. This paper focuses on the latter-most, as it is a cornerstone and absolute necessity for many of the other architectural languages.

Geometry functions as the nervous system of a design; geometry runs through every aspect of the design making it an essential part of renderings, drawings, and any other graphic representation.

Pottmann et al. explains how geometry underlies the main communication medium; namely, graphic representations obtained by precise geometric rules.9 They go on to explain how the variety of shapes that could be treated by traditional geometric methods has been rather limited, modern computing technologies have led to a real geometry revolution.9 In the book, Inside Smartgeometry, Brady Peters and Terri Peters quote Alan Kay as saying “the ability to ‘read’ a medium means you can access materials and tools generated by others. The ability to ‘write’ in a medium means you can generate materials and tools for others. You must have both to be literate.”1 Kay made this statement in reference to coding. Peters and Peters explain; As designers, we are influenced by the tools and techniques that allow us to realize our visions. It has been said that the tools determine the boundaries of art, and that it is the use of the right tools for the thing that one is making, and a deep relationship between the use of the tool and its formal results, that establishes the potentials of what can be made.

With computation the boundaries of what can be made just got a lot bigger. Parametric systems and computational tools have enabled the realization of projects that were previously inconceivable.1

Architecture is about communication, which has been primarily done though drawings for as long as the profession has been around. Peters and Peters project that the increasing ability to compute simulations is becoming more and more necessary to architectural design.1 They also explain that it is not drawings that define architecture but the ability to create an abstraction of the building though some means.1 Several examples of how simulation assists in the design process are lighting studies, spacial studies, and material studies as well as studying the pragmatic aspects of performance.1 There seems to be an endless number of tools being made available to assist in the creation of architecture today. Many of these tools allow the designer to create (and communicate) designs that would be impossible to do without advanced computation. Pottmann et al. point out that a gap has arisen between the new methods of geometric design and the technical possibilities. That is to say computation abilities are rapidly evolving but designers are not being adequately educated on the fundamentals of what they refer to as architectural geometry.9 In the forward to Inside Smartgeometry, Brett Steele calls up Herbert Simon, a Nobel Prize winning polymath who practiced at the time of the first CAD systems arrival. Simon proclaimed that the modern architect is the maker of instructions.11 Steele elaborates on Simons words saying the architect’s job isn’t the ‘making’ of things in a conventional sense – it is the recording of design intentions, ideas and ambitions in the form of documents (drawings, sketches, models etc.) whose real purpose is to tell others what to do.2 Form Follows Process Computation alone can be viewed as an extension of CAD type programs, but as the programs evolve, a disconnect between the user and the capabilities of the software proliferates. New construction technologies are also proliferating with heavy reliance on the evolving softwares, specifically digital fabrication. Pottmann et al. state that their book Architectural Geometry will give a solid understanding of geometry, which they are convinced will assist in more effectively meeting the arising challenges between design and construction technologies.9 They also explain how geometry books written for architecture mainly discuss elementary material or classical descriptive geometry whereas Architectural Geometry

Professor - Jordan Geiger|Course - Situated Technologies Intellectual Seminar (Fall 2014)

focuses on efficient CAD construction methods and uses CAD to support geometry teaching and understanding.9 Peters and Peters explain the conditions of CAD softwares in 2003 and how they were very conservative and based on ‘object-oriented programming.’1 They describe two types of ‘objects,’ the first being actual objects such as blocks or pre-existing building elements, and the second being pre-described tools, which stifle the users creativity and abilities in the various softwares.

Peters and Peters share a piece written by Lars Hesselgren (a co-founder of Smartgeometry);

…we wanted to build new design tools and founded Smartgeometry as a rejection of these conservative influences that promoted computer-aided-design solely as the organization of building components. In order to be free of these predefined tools and have a higher-level discussion of building form in terms of first principles, this led to a discussion of geometry and mathematics. As this is a more generic approach, thinking of architecture and form in this way allowed them to share computational tools between disciplines.

It allowed architects to design conceptually and create their own custom ‘objects’ rather than use the specified objects provided by their CAD software.1

Smartgeometry distinguishes a clear separation between detailed 3D models and the generative description of the building; they focus on the process of making the 3D model as opposed to the actual model itself.1 Although the realization that digital design leads to digital fabrication came beforehand, in 2010 the annual smartgeometry conference made digital fabrication and simulation a central feature.1 Peters and Peters sum up smartgeometry’s intention as not about form but how form is arrived upon.1 In his chapter Encoding Design in Inside Smartgeometry, Fabian Scheurer poses the question “who would use a complex digital system to solve a simple problem?”3 He concludes his chapter by stating when we move on from designing buildings to designing algorithms that design buildings, we are just changing the level of abstraction, but not the level of responsibility.3 Scheurer also explains that where powerful digital tools meet weak human design decisions, fashion emerges.3 This is why we have been seeing too many voronoi structures and UV-populated NURBS surfaces out there in the wilderness, which actually is a zoo, nicely fenced by downloadable tools.3 He goes on to explain that new solutions rarely emerge out of existing tools but rather the pursuit of new

solutions produce new tools.3 Scheurer describes the advances in design tools by analyzing the process of creating the Swissbau Pavilion, which he both designed and built. At the time, in 2005, the tools that are available today did not exist yet so in order to bring his pre-conceived idea to life he had no choice but to create his own tools. The idea for the pavilion was to create a sphere and grow a quadrilateral mesh from its center, the challenge however was that he wanted the edges of the quads to align to the edges of designated openings. He describes how after many iterations and tweaking to the code, his initial idea finally appeared on screen. There are programs and plug-ins such as Grasshopper [for Rhino] and Dynamo [for Revit] that contain pre-defined components that perform the same operations as the code he was writing from scratch. He states that although the availability of more sophisticated tools make it easier to test ideas, the development of these ideas, their verification, and iterative refinement still do not come for free.3 It is common in architectural design to pursue an existing idea in one’s mind, but it is the letting go and allowing the unexpected to emerge which produces some amazing, and unexpected, results such as in Michael Hansmeyer’s project, Subdivided Columns (discussed later).

Scheurer explains that one must find an unbiased definition of the qualities needed for a particular problem.3 During his TED Talk in 2012, Michael Hansmeyer speaks about the possibilities of forms we can design if we free ourselves from bias and preconceptions; seizing to work with references.12 He poses the question “what kind of form could we design if we could free ourselves from our experience…and education?”12 His next question is more intriguing, “then how do we go about creating something that is truly new?”12 He speaks in reference to his project Subdivided columns where the significance lies in the process of creating the columns. The process involves folding, which he demonstrates by physically folding a piece of paper, he explains how there are many ways you can fold the paper to create different forms but there is a limit on what you can do in an analog method. When that ‘paper’ is brought into the computer it can be folded many more times and much faster than is possible in the physical realm. Working with the digital model also allows for rapid production of variations which would be impossible to do without computation.12 The Current State of Architecture + Technology 99

Hansmeyer proclaims: Because we’re doing the folding on the computer, we are completely free of any physical constraints. So that means that surfaces can intersect themselves, they can become impossibly small. We can make folds that we otherwise could not make. Surfaces can become porous. They can stretch. They can tear. And all of this expounds the scope of forms that we can produce.12

Swissbau Pavilion - Trial and error scripting to find a solution http://www.designtoproduction.ch/content/view/11/43/

Swissbau Pavilion - Solution found http://wiki.arch.ethz.ch/twiki/bin/view/Main/SwissbauPavilionad02. html?skin=print

He stresses that he did not design the resulting form, but has created the process in which creates the form, which ultimately gives him control of the form by altering variables such as fold placement, fold angles, and number of folds.12 Like Scheurer, Hansmeyer points out that the subdivided columns were the end result of a very long trial and error period. Also, because he has designed a process, he can run the process over and over again to create a ‘family’ of forms.12 He also states that unlike traditional architecture, it’s a single process that creates both the overall form and the microscopic surface detail. These forms are [practically] undrawable. An architect who’s drawing them with a pen and a paper would probably take months, or maybe even a year to draw all the sections and elevations. He stresses that you can only create something like this through an algorithm, making the architect more in a position of being an orchestrator of all of these processes.12 Peters and Peters concur in their reference to the designer as a ‘steerer’ of material properties, and therefore architectural performance.7 Peters and Peters share Neil Katz explanation that the technology needs to disappear for it is the design intent and process that is more important than the tool itself.1 In 2008, Patrick Schumacher presented his Parametricist Manifesto which describes the coming of ‘the next style’, Parametricism, which has emerged in the architectural avant-garde discourse.13 He explains that the emergence of Parametricism has been facilitated by the development of parametric design tools and scripts that allow the precise formulation and execution of intricate correlations between elements and subsystems.13 He goes on to state that;

Swissbau Pavilion - Constructing a full-scale prototype http://www.designtoproduction.ch/content/view/11/43/

100 Process Oriented Design

The current stage of advancement within Parametricism relates as much to the continuous advancement of the attendant computational design technologies as it is due to the designer’s realization of the unique formal and organizational opportunities that are afforded.

Parametricism can only exist via sophisticated parametric techniques. Finally, computationally advanced design techniques like scripting (in Mel-script or Rhino-script) and parametric modeling (with tools like GenerativeCompnents) are becoming a pervasive reality. Today it is impossible to compete within the contemporary avant-garde scene without mastering these techniques.13

Bridging the Gap Peters and Peters go on to discuss how the smartgeometry group approaches bridging the gap between the digital and physical realms by exploring advanced simulation to digitally preview real-world performance and provide feedback on designs.1 In the Architectural Design article entitled Cortical Plasticity, Dan Farmer discusses the relationship between the advances in technology and the way in which architecture is represented in order to communicate. According to Farmer;

1

Technology and architecture have become synonymous. Digital media has become paramount in the practice of architecture, specifically within the context of architectural representation. Consequently, how we design, perceive and experience spatial boundaries has altered. Film production, as a timebased medium, grasps the potential to explore new possibilities of architectural representation and practice within a filmic experience. Since the beginning of the 19th century we have assumed that vision can be explained as a two-dimensional image projected on to the back of the retina, and architectural representation has followed this dogma. Cognitive science has progressed. So too must our concept of architectural representation. It is no longer enough to accept a two-dimensional image as a true representation of the environment that we physically occupy.15

2

In their chapter Working Prototypes: Creating Knowledge in Inside Smartgeometry Shane Burger and Xavier De Kestelie discuss bridging the gap between the digital and the physical in a manor other than just building what is on screen (referred to as a representational model). Designing processes over designing form, as mentioned earlier, involve not limiting one’s self to a readymade set of components/tools/or programs, instead it is often necessary to develop your own new components/tools/or programs. In that sense the same can be applied to technologies that are used outside of the computer. These technologies can be used to bridge the gap between computer models/simulation and the physical environment they would be a part of. Burger and De Kestelier state that reflective of the popular use of the word ‘mash-up’, computational designers have begun to re-appropriate software and hardware platforms that were never made for design into a unique ecosystem.4 They mention some of the technologies that can be manipulated to do these types of things include the Microsoft Kinect and the Arduino micro-processor. They also explain that; The last four years have seen a significant growth in the DIY culture of open-source hardware platforms like the Arduino microprocessor, as well as increased access to disparate commercial and web software applications through the public availability of APIs. These systems are often low-cost or free, well documented, and with strong user communities. Each of these factors lowers images from: http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com/projects/columnshtml?scree nSize=1&color=0

3

4

5 Subdivided Columns 1. Digital model 2. Full-scale prototype - 1mm thick laser cut sections 3. Digital model showing detail 4. Digital model showing the resulting geometry on the inside of the column 5. Close-up detail of full-scale prototype The Current State of Architecture + Technology 101

the barrier to access for the creative and curious. Our industry must engage with this as an opportunity to extend the design environment beyond the current operations, graphic representations and hardware interfaces provide by pre-built CAD tools and offthe-shelf computer workstations. The future of design environments is agile, extendable and most importantly, playful.

4

In their chapter Mind the Gap: Stories of Exchange in Inside Smartgeometry, CASE mentions the disconnects between education and the actual realities of practice and declare that as the industry begins to redefine itself in relationship to these new tools and processes, it is through the complex negotiation of these external forces that we believe that architects stand to gain or lose the most.5 They go on to discuss the social fabric that exists with-in the design and construction of buildings, including professions such as architecture, engineering, construction, fabrication, and owner/clients.5 These professions have yet to significantly change the way in which they operate since the emergence and evolution of these newer technologies.5 CASE explains that architecture has yet to capitalize on the process gains demonstrated in the manufacturing world, where many of the platforms currently used by the industry originated.5 CASE goes on to speak about how just a decade ago, advance computing was only circulating in the advanced computing and software development circles, but in the last decade it has emerged to many surrounding fields to include architectural design.

One of the significances of this is that the usage, experimentation, and development are not limited to specialized companies, CASE states that the next big thing could come from a heavily funded research group or a college dorm room.5 General Fabrication Knowledge Pottmann et al. describe the difference between rapid prototyping and digital fabrication/ manufacturing as follows; in rapid prototyping, digital techniques are used for quickly creating functioning prototypes of an idea while digital fabrication/manufacturing is when digital techniques are used to manufacture the final product at full scale and performance.9 Pottmann et al. separate digital making techniques into two categories, subtraction methods such as computer numerically controlled (CNC) machining where material is removed from a mass to achieve the desired form or artifact and additive methods such as fuse deposition modeling (FDM) in which material is added, or built up.9 In addition to adding and subtracting techniques, there is the decision of working with sheet material, linear material, or volumetric material.9 An extension of rapid prototyping, referred to as rapid manufacturing, is the process in which parts 102 Process Oriented Design

produced with CNC tools are directly usable as fully functional parts that obviate the need for mass production.9 Pottmann et al. give the following description of the term ‘Degree of Freedom;’

A degree of freedom (DOF) is a geometric definition of freedom of movement either along an axis in space or rotation about an axis in space in three-dimensional space, there are six degrees of freedom: three degrees for movement in the x, y, and z directions and three degrees for rotation about the x, y, and z axes Therefore, we would need a machine with only three degrees of freedom to reach any coordinate point in space. However, we would need a machine with six degrees of freedom to also orient a tool in any direction at any point in space.9

They go on to use the drill press as an example of the simplest of CNC machines, having only one degree of freedom (1-DOF), that being in the z-axis.9 A standard laser cutter, water jet cutter, or router are typical 2- DOF systems and 3D printers and basic 3-axis CNC mills are typical 3-DOF systems. Examples of 6-DOF systems are the 6-DOF robotic milling arm and the 6-DOF laser cutter (the latter was used in the design and construction of the Tri-Par Pavilion, discussed further on).9 The Subdivided Columns were fabricated out of a 2-DOF laser cutter. Hansmeyer explains that a point came where it became necessary to bring the column out of the computer and his team needed to choose a fabrication method.12 Hansmeyer first thought about 3d printing but the scale at which he wanted to build could not be printed unless it was broken up into many parts and the time and cost of print would have been astronomical, leading him to choose 2D laser cutting in which his team would stack the thin laser-cut sections to assemble the column. During the process of prepping the column for fabrication Hansmeyer noticed something completely unexpected, the digital column was hollow, and all the intricate detail on the exterior surface was also present on the interior surface. The Swissbau Pavilion was also fabricated by a 2-DOF system, albeit it being a CNC mill. Each quad consisted of four uniquely milled pieces of sheet material fastened together to form a module.

The modules were then stacked on top of one another and fastened.

The Tri-par Pavilion utilized a 6-DOF laser cutter to cut unique end conditions in the linear members.

The unique end conditions allowed for the structure to be assembled with no fasteners or welds; the pieces all dry-fit together and was designed for the weight of its members to hold itself in place. The ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14 (described in further detail in the next section) utilized two 6-DOF industrial robotic arms to weave fibers together to create modules that would be assembled by

stacking and fastening.

Advanced 6-DOF Robotics In his chapter Designing Robotic Assemblies in Inside Smartgeometry, Tobias Bonwetsch discusses one of the latest forms of digital fabrication that has made its way into the field of architecture, the industrial robot. Bonwetch notes one of the key features of industrial robots is their flexibility and that they, in a sense, are the next generation CNC machine, whereas the actual material manipulation can be customized.6 CNC machines are set up to perform one type of material manipulation, most commonly milling or laser cutting but any custom manipulation tool, called an end effector, can be fabricated, installed on the end of the arm of a robot, and programed to do any function. The variety of end effectors are endless, the robot can be programmed to use any custom tool the designer can think up.6 End effectors also are not limited to manipulation; they can be used to collect data by, for example, probing scanning or measuring.6 Bonwetsch describes another attractive feature is that the industrial robots lend themselves especially well to assembly tasks, putting them close to the actual reality of building.6 Bonwetsch states that Industrial robots can be understood as universal fabrication machines that can be adapted to perform nearly any desired material manipulation.6 He then states the comparison between the machine and the computer; whereas a computer can do next to anything you can imagine in the digital realm, the industrial robot can do just about anything you imagine and bring it into the physical realm.6 He also states that the robots establish the link between computational design and the actual construction of architecture.6 The robots cause the construction process to be integrated in the design process because it can inform design decisions.6

Tri-par Pavilion - Full-scale prototype - approximately 12’ tall

The reach envelope (as used in motion studies and robotics) is described by Pottmann et al. as the area reachable with-in the full set of degrees of freedom.9 For example, the reach envelope of a 2-DOF laser cutter would be the maximum limits of its two-dimensional cutting area whereas the reach envelope of an industrial robot would be the entire volume of space in which the end effector can reach. Pottmann et al. explain that one of the most significant aspects of robotic machining is that the robotic arms are capable of machining parts that are larger than themselves where as with most other fabrication methods the size of the product will be smaller than the machine itself.9 An example of achieving this ability would be by mounting a robotic arm on a track for lateral movement, now the reach envelope would be the original volume multiplied by the number of times it can The Current State of Architecture + Technology 103

be repeated along the track.9 They also state that some sort of assembly is ultimately required in most cases of architectural fabrication.9 Another example of the extended abilities of the robotic arms is the design and construction process for the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 201314 which utilized two collaborating robotic arms that faced each other.14 A robotic core-less winding method was developed uniquely for this project that entailed equipping each robot with a custom made end effector.14 The end effectors were designed with the ability to be adjusted to create different component geometry, allowing for one tool (or process) to create thirty-six different modules, all belonging to the same family.14 In terms of crafting and constructing, Bonwetsch compares the robot to a traditional craft approach; in the traditional craft approach, the knowledge of making is almost fully embodied with in the maker, with the robot all the knowledge of making is within the code.6 This code can contain an infinite amount of information and execute with perfect precision, from the smallest detail to the largest overall system.6 Scope and Skills It is important to note that digital making is used on a full range of scales, from small rapid prototypes all the way up to full-scale buildings and structural systems. They all share similar geometric techniques and machinery but aim at different goals and in turn are evaluated differently.9 They also state that for full-scale buildings, there are only very few experimental holistic fabrication approaches and that full-scale architecture is increasingly relying on digital fabrication for complex geometries.9 Pottmann et al. explain that one of the skills that needs to be developed to become successful at digital making is the ability to break a model up into pieces that are both able to be fabricated and assembled as easily as possible in an uncontrolled construction site.9 The Tri-par Pavilion is an excellent example of how this could go wrong. The pavilion consisted of nine unique linear members all of which were designed to fit together perfectly in the digital realm but as the team had no prior experience with the 6-DOF laser cutter, the machine precision and the way the members would have to be physically assembled together were not taken into consideration. Another fallacy was that the unfamiliarity with the machine resulted with one member almost braking the machine while being cut because the piece was not designed to drop away from the machine which caused the steel to not separate when the machine [attempted] to pull it apart. The erection of the pavilion also was not smooth, the team 104 Process Oriented Design

consisted on 13+ individuals and it took every single one to hold pieces in place (which were quite heavy) for long periods of time while other team members attached the connecting pieces. As previously stated, the precision of the machine and the ability of assembling the members to each other were not taken into consideration so it was a very difficult process to fit all of the pieces together. The Explicit Bricks project also ran into this issue when the team started assembling their first prototype and came to the realization that the way the pieces had been designed made it too difficult to manually assemble, causing them to go back and redesign how the pieces go together.

The constructibility of the final fabricated pieces is crucial, just because the parts fit together perfectly on the computer does not necessarily mean that the parts will be able to be assembled; another way to explain it is that how the structure will be erected needs to be taken in to consideration.

The assembly process needs to be thought of in a ground-up process during the design process.

Each piece needs to be designed to fit on and/ or connect to the previous pieces. Part of the assemblage considerations is the amount of people and the equipment available that will be constructing the final product. For instance, if the structure requires six people to erect and the construction team only consists of four people, there is going to be some unavoidable difficulties.

What Bonwetsch meant when he spoke about integrating the construction process into the design process can be summed up with this quote by him, “it is important not only to account for a structurally sound final structure, but also to ensure that a stable equilibrium is achieved in each step during the build-up process.”6 Bonwetsch led a workshop cluster entitled ‘Explicit Bricks’ at the Smartgeometry 2010 conference which focused on designing a structure to be built out of foam bricks that were all individually different. The teams first prototype failed because they did not take constructibility into account; manually assembling the blocks proved to be too difficult so the group went back and reworked their fabrication design and process to produce a set of bricks that could be manually assembled.6 Advanced Material Studies Bechthold also describes how the industrial robots have advanced to the point where they can be used to specifically explore and analyze materials as opposed to explore and analyze the abilities of the robots.8 The team designing the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14 went into the design already knowing the capabilities of the robotic arms, because of this they were able to focus on how they were going to use the robots and how the robots could manipulate a material in a way

that has not been done before. After designing their process, which involved the coding and the fabrication of the custom end effectors the team was able to experiment with different layering and combinations of materials. In the end, each of the thirty-six modules consisted of six individual layers of glass and carbon fibers wound by the specific robotic fabrication process.14 The team states that the first glass fiber layer defines the elements geometry and serves as form-work for the subsequent carbon fiber layers while the specific sequence of fiber winding allows to control the layout of every individual fiber leading to a material driven design process.14 The team also discusses the economic effectiveness of their research in that the core-less filament winding saves substantial resources through the needlessness of individual molds and also is a very material efficient fabrication process since there is no waste or cut-off pieces.14 They also explain that it is these reciprocities between material, form, structure and fabrication that are defined through the winding syntax which therefore becomes an integral part of the computational design tool, causing this project to fit Patrick Schumachers description of Parametricism.6,14 In their chapter Digital Crafting: Performative Thinking for Material Design in Inside Smartgeometry , Mette Ramsgard Thomsen and Martin Tamke use the term ‘Digital Crafting’ to describe what digital fabrication is evolving into.7 Thomsen and Tamke, discuss the understanding of material in reference to traditional craft and where it is taking on a more significant role in the advancing design phase.7 They explain how material, craft and performance become inherent queries present already at the start of the design phase and allows a greater focus to be put on actual material performance.7 Thomsen and Tamke explain that with this shift in focus, materials are being seen and explored in the abilities and capacities to perform whether it’s by bending, flexing, stretching, etc..7 They go on to explain how digital crafting is inadvertently leading architecture to new structural systems which correlates to Schumacher in that these new structural systems start becoming integral to the architecture; the structure is the facade, is the enclosure, is the environmental control systems (Parametricism). In his chapter, Design Robotics: new strategies for material system research in Inside Smartgeometry, Martin Bechthold states that;

Previously [to the 2012 Smartgeometry conference where [Bechthold] led a workshop cluster that utilized a 6-DOF industrial robot] having untrained individuals use a standard industrial robot within the space of four days would have been technically unthinkable 10 years ago (from 2012). Today the design to robotic manipulation process, once cumbersome and riddled with technical problems, has matured to a point that it permits exploratory design speculation... within the compressed time frame of a workshop.8

Explicit Bricks - Starting construction for prototype 2 http://www.greekarchitects.gr/images/news/smart.geometry.2010.04.jpg

Explicit Bricks - Prototype 1 http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2804/4478025645_42ff3fc28c.jpg

Explicit Bricks - Prototype 2 http://www.metalocus.es/content/system/files/imagecache/ blog_content_images/images-lead/110214_ExplicitBrick_ak%20 copy.png

Explicit Bricks - Every brick was uniquely cut http://www.rob-technologies.com/media/imgs/wirecutting/ExplicitBricks003.jpg The Current State of Architecture + Technology 105

Just the Beginning The cessation of Hansmeyer’s TED Talk closes this paper equally as well, He states;

There’s a huge disconnect at the moment still between the virtual and the physical. It took me several months to design the [subdivided] column, but ultimately it takes the computer about thirty seconds to calculate all of the 16 million faces. The physical model, on the other hand, is 2,700 layers, one millimeter thick, it weighs 700 kilos, it’s made of sheet that can cover this entire auditorium. And the cutting path that the laser followed goes from here to the airport and back again.12

1

Hansmeyer follows up with the statement that it is increasingly possible. Machines are getting faster, it’s getting less expensive, and there’s some promising technological developments just on the horizon.12

So where does this leave us? I think this project gives us a glimpse of the unseen objects that await us if we as architects begin to think about designing not the object, but a process to generate objects… In short, we have no constraints. Instead, we have processes in our hands right now that allow us to create structures at all scales that we couldn’t even have dreamt up. And, if I may add, at one point we will build them.12

2

3

mages from: http://www.archdaily.com/522408/icd-itke-research-pavilion2015-icd-itke-university-of-stuttgart/ 106 Process Oriented Design

4

ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2013-14 1. Duel industrial robots working in tandem to wind the fiber 2. One of the thirty-six unique modules 3. Assembly of the pavilion 4. Completed pavilion

References Brady Peters & Terri Peters, editors, Inside Smart Geometry: Expanding the Architectural Possibilities of Computational Design (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2013), 8-19.

Brett Steele, “Foreword,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 6-7.

Fabian Scheurer, “Encoding Design,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 186-195.

Shane Burger & Xavier De Kestelier, “Working Prototypes: Creating Knowledge,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 196-205.

CASE, “Mind the Gap: Stories of Exchange,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 206-217.

Tobias Bonwetsch, “Designing Robotic Assemblies,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 218-231.

Mette Ramsgard Thomsen & Martin Tamke, “Digital Crafting: Performative Thinking for Material Design,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 242-253.

Martin Bechthold, “Design Robotics: New Strategies for Material System Research,” in Inside Smartgeometry, ed. Brady Peters & Terri Peters (The Atrium: John Wiley & Sons Ltd), 254-267.

Helmut Pottmann, Andreas Asperl, Michael Hofer, & Axel Kilian, Architectural Geometry (Pennsylvania: Bentley Institute Press, 2007), I-IV, 567-598.

Richard Poulin, The Language of Graphic Design: An Illustrated Handbook for Understanding Fundamental Design Principles (Massachusetts: Rockport, 2011), 6-11.

“About Us,” Smartgeometry, accessed December 7, 2014, http:// smartgeometry.org/ Michael Hansmeyer, “Michael Hansmeyer: Building Unimaginable Shapes,” TED Talk, June 2012. Retrieved from: http://www. ted.com/talks/michael_hansmeyer_building_unimaginable_ shapes?language=en Patrik Schumacher, Parametricism as Style: Parametricist Manifesto (paper presented and discussed at the Dark Side Club 11th Architecture Biennale, Venice, Italy, 2008). Accessed on December 6, 2014, http://www.patrikschumacher.com/Texts/Parametricism%20as%20Style.htm “Institute for Computational Design,” Universität Stuttgart, accessed December 9, 2014, http://icd.uni-stuttgart.de/?p=11187 Dan Farmer “Cortical Plasticity,” Architectural Design Sep. (2009):70-79.

The Current State of Architecture + Technology 107

RESILENCY

“... the 20th century utopia had to do with short term ‘living the dream’ ideals that have made a catastrophic impact on our world,...”

A plant in the industrial era pouring its waste directly into the water system with no regards of long-term consequences.

110 Resiliency Over Sustainability

resilience over sustainability We as humans have altered the environment in significant ways which have caused many unforeseen issues that we now must face. Each solution, although will solve a significant problem, will inevitably cause a new problem of equal proportions to arise. The contents of this book serve as a base that explores ways in which the human species can work with nature to solve, sustain, and instill resiliency throughout to insure the long-term survival of the earth and all of its inhabitants. How can man interfere with nature to ameliorate the intense negative state at which we made it? Can we? How? Utopian Zeal Utopian ideals today revolve around the world being able to survive and not die out, whereas the 20th century utopia had to do with short term ‘living the dream’ ideals that have made a catastrophic impact on our world, in which the former are aimed at resolving. It can be said that this is the height of the Anthropocean Epoch, where humanity and its instrumentalities are the most potent and influential geological force (p.15).5 In the Introduction to book Next Nature, Bruce Sterling states “at its worst, though, our ignorance of the human effect on nature has Lovecraftian aspects. We became our own unnatural monsters, an erie half-glimpsed force of archaic destruction (p.16).”5 The current state of the environment and earth as a whole can be explained in part by Jevons’ paradox, a phenomenon that states: increasing efficiency lowers cost and increases demand, in turn increasing the rate of consumption, and wiping out the initial savings (p.30).2 As described on ourenergyfutures.org: The Jevons paradox (not to be confused with the Rebound Effect, which is the reductionist view of this phenomenon) states that if a system gains the possibility of using more energy, through increases in efficiency, it will use this opportunity to “do more” - exploring new activities and expanding the set of functions, which can be expressed - rather than “doing the same, while consuming less”. This paradox (more efficiency leads to more consumption), stated by Jevons in the first half of the 20th century, has proved right over and over in several applications.

This implies that it is very naive to expect that technical improvement in efficiency

will lead “per se” to lower consumption of energy. The truth is that sustainability is not a technical issue, but a cultural one.3 In essence, our culture currently holds ‘sustainability’ to high esteem although people are not as interested in actual proof of being more environmentally friendly than holding the title (bragging rights) of being sustainable. Once in possecion of the sustainable title, they continue on living as normal and pay less attention to things such as energy consumtion because the ‘sustainable’ title is worn as a sort of immunity cloak requireing them to not pay attention to their usage becuase no matter how much they use they cannot be offering a negative impact to the environment because they are being ‘sustainable.’

A New Material for the Environment In the essay Plastic Planet, Koert van Mensvoort states that the first plastic, Dakelite, was invented in 1907 (p.173).8 90 years after this [literal] world changing invention, a sailor, Charles Moore, ‘came across an enormous stretch of floating debris while traveling across the edge of the North Pacific Subtropical Gyre (p.173).8 What Moore ‘discovered’ was what is now referred to as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an area larger than France or Texas and is floating in the Central North Pacific Ocean, most of which consists of plastics (p.173).8 Plastics do not break down or biodegrade, almost at all, so they never actually ‘disappear.’ Mensvoort explains how 80% of the trash island is made up of waste that had been discarded on land. Mother nature, through wind, rivers and currents continually sucks thrash into seven different collections throughout our oceans (p.173).8 Mensvoort also points out that plastic has become part of the food chain throughout the planet, which is quite a horrendous problem seeing as there isn’t any species in the food chain that can digest it (p.176).8 It is well known that a large amount of marine life has, is, and will continue to be negatively affected by the presence [and abundance] of plastic that has infiltrated our earths water system. This is an astronomical problem, created by man, in less than 100 years. Man created a product that would tremendously help man [in the short term] and paid no attention to the disastrous long term effects to the environment, ecosystems, and their inhabitants. For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Mensvoort states:

Professor - Mark Shepard|Course - Situated Technologies Research Studio - Urbanism and the Anthropocene (Spring 2015)|Project type Preface (solely written by me) to a collaborative research book on the Netherlands and their use, and advancement, of technology

Plastic ends up in the stomachs of many sea creatures from fish, to turtles and albatrosses. According to the United Nations Environment Program, plastic is killing a million seabirds a year and 100,000 marine mammals and turtles. Next to the deaths from entanglement thanks to six-pack rings and discarded synthetic fishing lines and nets, a common cause for deaths in animals is choking and clogged digestive tracts, leading to fatal constipation (p.176).8 Mensvoort explains that plastic is a second nature, but it is also now a new material in the earths ecosystem (p.177).8 The discovery and development of plastic digesting microbes have emerged, however as Mensvoort warns, they can’t be used, as a quick fix. Plastic has become such an integral and essential part of everyday life, from everyday products in the home to the most mission critical products in hospitals, if such a plastic eating bug were to evolve and spread throw-out the world, our plastic issue might be eased, maybe even corrected, but we would have huge new set of problems to deal with (p.178).8 The Great Set-Back of Modernism Much of the issues we face today can be tied to the oil Interval, the main reason why modernism was ‘inherently unsustainable’(p.33).1 The architectural critic Peter Buchanon, states: Modernism was ‘inherently unsustainable’ because it evolved in the beginning of the era of abundant and cheap fossil fuels. This cheap energy powered the weekend commute to the early modernist villas, and kept their large open spaces warm, in spite of large expanses of glass and thin wall sections. Petrochemicals created their complex sealants and fueled the production of their exotic extrusions.

“Modern architecture is thus an energyprofligate, petrochemical architecture, only possible when fossil fuels are abundant and affordable (p.33).1 In the book Design for a Living Planet, Michael Mehaffy and Nikos Salinaros quote Albert Einstein as saying that a new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels (p.35).2 Currently, the buildings being designed “appear as exotic new wrappings for the same underlying (and non-resilient) structural types and industrial methods (p.35).”1 Mehaffay and Salinaros state: As they age, these buildings are destined to become less new and therefore less useful, not more so. The pristine 112 Resiliency Over Sustainability

20th Century Design individual buildings and entities New technological advances - the more used the better - the more used the greater depletion of natural resources - no end in-sight only concerned with ‘modern’ times 21st Century looking at the bigger picture correcting actions of the 20th century and machine age how can building and urban environments work together to effect the natural environment better focus on long-term survival of humanity and the natural environment Fig 101: The difference in ideals of the 20th and 21st Centuries.

[Image] Disaster at Fukushima The Fukushima 1 Nuclear Power Plant was hit by a massive tsunami causeing a meltdown in three of its six nuclear cores.

Modernist (and now Post-Modernist and Deconstructivist) industrial surfaces are destined to mar, weather, and otherwise degrade. The eye-catching novelties of one era will become the abandoned eyesores of the next, an inevitability lost on a self-absorbed elite fixated on today’s fashions. Meanwhile the humble, humane criteria of resilient design are being pushed aside, in the rush to embrace the most attention-getting new technological approaches – which then produce a disastrous wave of unintended failures.

This is clearly no way to prepare for a “sustainable” future in any sense (p.37).1 Mehaffy and Salingaros also explain how modernism is part and parcel of a remarkably comprehensive – even totalizing- project of aesthetics, tectonics, urbanism, technology, culture, and ultimately, civilization. That project has had a profound effect upon the development of modern settlement, for better or worse, and (especially visible in the light of resilience theory, which is explained in the coming pages) made a huge contribution to the current state in which we find our cities, and our civilization (p.37).1 Figure 101 shows an outline of the differences in ideals of the 20th and 21st century.

Vulnerability of Coast Lines Coast lines are vulnerable and we place unstable infrastructure on them, which is, and can cause, huge problems such as the disaster at fukishima (p.21).1 In 1953 the most recent large coastal flood struck the Netherlands and in 2008 hurricane Katrina hit and devistated New Orleans, in America.9 Both events totaled deaths in the 1800s, most of which were due to the subsequent flooding. In the aftermath of both cases it was deemed that the flood preventions in place were severly insufficient, sparking the constructions of the Delta Works and The Metro New Orleans Levees respectively, both of which were designed to better withstand severe storms and greatly reduce and/or eliminated any subsequent flooding. Mehaffy and Salinaros state that what we need is an inherent ability to handle ‘shocks to the system,’ of the kind we see routinely in biological systems (p.39).1 Mehaffy and Salinaros state: Biological resilience and sustainability require the capacity to endure, to adapt, and to maintain a dynamic stability in the face of sometimes-chaotic environments.

They require the cognitive flexibility that enables the genesis of technological innovations. We will have to think outside the modernist box to find new forms – and new uses for very old forms, just as natural

evolution does. It seems clearer than ever that the survival of our planet depends upon it (p. 49).1 More and more resilience is appearing in conversations obout long term survival of the earth, but also in the design to prevent and better deal with unexpected natural disaters.

Resilience theory In their paper ‘Resilience of Past Landscapes: Resilience Theory, Society, and the Longue Durée,’ Charles L. Redman and Ann P. Kinzig describe resilience theory as the study of the source and role of change, particularly the kinds of change that are transforming, in adaptive systems.12 They add that it is a theory of dynamic cycles that are linked across spatial and temporal scales.12 There is a large emphasis on systems that consist of a wide varieties of scales; the more uniform and interconnect a system is, the more it is prone to failure. Redman and Kinzig state that: These nested hierarchies may have a stabilizing effect due to the fact that they provide the memory of the past and of the distant to allow recovery after change occurs. They may also have a destabilizing effect when dynamics across scales become “overconnected” or “brittle,” allowing smallscale transformations to “revolt” and explode into larger-scale crises.12 They go on to identify four key features of ecosystems provide the underlying assumptions of resilience theory, summarizing that the key to enhancing system resilience is for individuals, their institutions, and society at large to develop ways to learn from past experiences, and to accept that some uncertainties must inevitably be faced.

First, change is neither continuous and gradual nor consistently chaotic.

Rather, it is episodic, with periods of slow accumulation of “natural capital” punctuated by sudden releases and reorganizations of those legacies. This episodic behavior is caused by interactions between fast and slow variables.

Second, spatial and temporal attributes are neither uniform nor scale-invariant; rather, patterns and processes are patchy and discontinuous at all scales. Therefore, scaling up from small to large cannot be a process of simple aggregation.

Third, ecosystems do not have a single equilibrium with homeostatic controls to remain near it; instead, multiple equilibria commonly define functionally different Resiliency Over Sustainability 113

states. Destabilizing forces are important in maintaining diversity, flexibility, and opportunity, whereas stabilizing forces are important in maintaining productivity, fixed capital, and social memory.

Lastly, policies and management that apply fixed rules for achieving constant yields, independent of scale and changing context, lead to systems that increasingly lose resilience, i.e., to systems that suddenly break down in the face of disturbances that previously could be absorbed.

Because ecosystems are moving targets, management has to be flexible and work at scales that are compatible with the scales of critical ecosystem and social functions. These critical scales may themselves change over time.12 There are three functions that have typically been observed in the change and adaption of ecosystems.12 The first is release in which the tightly bound accumulation of biomass becomes increasingly fragile until it is suddenly released by external agents.12 Secondly, there is exploitation which emphasizes the rapid colonization of recently disturbed areas. The third function is conservation which emphasizes the slow accumulation and storage of energy and material.12 Resilience theorists add a key fourth function, reorganization, in which resources are reorganized into a new system to take advantage of opportunities.12 The innovation here is that this “new” system may resemble its predecessor or have fundamentally new functional characteristics, i.e., be in the same or a new “basin of attraction” in a system that has multiple stable states.12 These four phases have been organized into an “adaptive cycle” metaphor that makes it possible to analyze specific ecosystem trajectories against this theory.12 Resilience theory has added two additional features to our understanding of system dynamics in general and of succession in particular.12 The first is that change is ultimately inevitable and repeated, although repeated cycles may not follow the same pathway or result in analogous systems.12 The triggering event of release can occur as the result of an internal change in the system, and the K phase is no longer viewed as a stable phase interrupted only by external perturbations.12 The second feature, as previously mentioned, is that these adaptive cycles appear to occur across scales, although not continuously.12 Next Nature In the Introduction to the book Next Nature, Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink explain how evolution continues nonetheless; 114 Resiliency Over Sustainability

how technology – traditionally created to protect us from the forces of nature – gives rise to a next nature, which is just as wild, cruel, unpredictable and threatening as ever.4 The impacts humans have had on the environment is unmistakable; Mensvoort and Grievink mention climate change, population explosion, genetic manipulation, digital networks, hurricane control and engineered microbes, most of which has occurred during the last century.4 Mensvoort and Grievink point out that our relationship to nature is changing.4 Sterling makes the accusation that: Nature is a nurturing entity that is harmonious, calm, peaceful, inherently rightful and all-around “good for you.”

This vaguely politicized attitude about nature never came from nature. It was culturally generated. Nature didn’t get her all-natural identity branding until the industrial revolution broke out. Then poets and philosophers were allowed to live in dense, well-supplied cities, where they could recast nature from some intellectual distance. Before that huge effusion of organized artifice, people lived much closer to the soil (p.15).5 Sterling also explains that this old view of mother nature- sweet, calm and soothing- has changed as she has ‘gotten ill’ from climate change and because there are no landscapes left that have not felt the hand of man (p.15).5 In lieu of correcting our mistakes of the 20th century, prehistoric forest are, as Mensvoort explains, being planted in locations designated by bureaucrats: our image of nature is being carefully constructed in a recreational simulation; a regeneration of our lost heritage (p.32).”6 It is rare to find a patch of earth, or nature that has been untouched by man, and none of them can be found in the Netherlands.

Two of the Netherlands most important nature reserves, the Oostvaardersplassen and the Green Heart were respectively an industrial site and a medieval industrial site (p.32).6 Mensvoort quotes Voltaire as saying “God created the world, with the exception of the Netherlands. That the Dutch created themselves (p.32).”6 He also refers to the atmosphere as tainted and claims that we’ll never see a pristine world again (p.16).5 Technology is Nature; Nature is the Solution In the essay ‘Real Energy is not Green’ Koert van Mensvoort states: You can buy specially engineered living beings in the supermarket. Human design has made nature more natural than natural: it is now hypernatural. It is a simulation of a nature that never existed.

It’s better than the real thing; hypernatural nature is always just a little bit prettier, slicker and safer than the old kind. Let’s be honest: it’s actually culture in disguise. The more we learn to control trees, animals, atoms and the climate, the more they lose their natural character and enter into the realms of culture (p.33).6 Take dogs for example, this domesticated animal breeds with one-another because that is what they are naturally programed to do. Our culture, however, dictates that these animals should be spade and nutured to eliminate unwanted breeding. To take it another step further, specific breeds are intentionally breed together to produce more desired breeds.

In the essay The Technological ‘Sublime,’ Jos de Mul states that the power of divine nature has been transferred to the power of human technology (p.147).6 Mul goes on to say that modern man is less and less willing to be overpowered by nature; instead, he vigorously takes technological command of nature(p.147).7 Mul states: However, with the transfer of power from divine nature to human technology, the ambiguous experience of the sublime also nests in the latter. In the era of converging technologies - information technology, bio-technology, Nano-technology and the neurosciences - it is technology itself that gains a confounding character in its battle with nature. While technology is an expression of the grandeur of the human intellect, we experience it more and more as a force that controls and threatens us. Technologies such as atomic power stations and genetic modification, to mention just two paradigmatic examples, are janus-faced; they reflect, at once, our hope for the benefits they may bring as well as our fear of their uncontrollable, destructive potentials (p.148).7 Mul also states that in the 21st century, man has been denied the choice to not be technological (p.148).7 We need to stop thinking only of the present and start thinking of the future in the sense of using technology to instill resilience into our environment (p.26).1 Sustainable does not Mean Sustainable Resilience is taking over sustainability, which has been abused as a flashy buzzword in recent years.1 Mehaffy suggests that we should design our environments to withstand natural destruction and be designed to bounce right back after unexpected and unfortunate events(p.18).1 We need our environments to be resilient for long-term

survival(p.18).2 We can look at rainforests as a case study as they are a resilient entity (p.21).1

Resilient aspects of rainforests Interconnected network structure Diversity and redundancy Distribution of different scaled structures They are self-adapting and exhibit selforganizing principles (p.21).2 Cities / Urbanism One way to start thinking about resilient design would be to broaden the diversity in cities. For example, structure, both hard and soft, can be implemented on multiple levels; from the smallest of buildings to the network of community organization.

When there is a diverse variety and range of scales of structure the network [city] as a whole can better absorb unanticipated shocks.

We can look to ecosystems in studying resilience because they have many diverse species whereas mono cultures are the opposite of resilience (p.22).1 Many of our cities exhibit and/or are based around the idea of a monoculture and that needs to change (p.22).1 The difference can be explained by comparing New York City to Tokyo; New York City is set up in a monoculture fashion with very few central downtown areas in Manhatten, whereas Tokyo is diverse, each of the major neighborhoods have their own downtown areas. Resilient cities exhibit the following characteristics: They have interconnected networks of pathways and relationships They have a diversity and redundancy of activities, types, objectives and populations They have a wide distribution of scales of structure And their parts can adapt and organize in response to changing needs on different spatial and temporal scales, and in response to each other (p.24).1 Over time cities evolved into non-resilient, “rational,” tree-like (top-down “dendritic”) structures. Efficiency became the driving force that demanded the elimination of redundancy while the machine age dictated the structural and tectonic limitations. Lastly, any use of genetic material from the past was considered a violation of the machine-age zeitgeist (p.26).1 Anti-fragility Anti-fragility is a postulated antithesis to fragility where high-impact events or shocks can be beneficial.10 Political economist Nassim Nicholas Resiliency Over Sustainability 115

“The geometries of those natural structures ‘evolve in context’ as complex adaptive forms, through a process known as adaptive morphogenesis...”

Rules of Six an installation designed by the collaboration of Aranda\Lasch architectural studio and material scientist Matthew Scullin. The project explores the notion of selfassembly where new material structures are ‘grown’ through simple interactions between components or molecules. Rules of Six is designed to multiply indefinitely without sacrificing stability. It is indifferent to scale; its sprawling construction could represent molecules, rooms, buildings or entire neighborhoods.14 116 Resiliency Over Sustainability

Taleb coined the term because he thought the existing words used to describe the opposite of ‘fragility,’ such as ‘robustness,’ were inaccurate.

Anti-fragility goes beyond robustness; it means that something does not merely withstand a shock but actually improves because of it.10 Taleb uses the example of weight lifting to describe this theory; when muscles are trained, they don’t just build up the ability to withstand heavy weight, but the strength of the body is actually increased as the body repairs the torn fibers in the muscles.

Economic Differentiation Economic differentiation can be measured by the index of economic differentiation which describes how the various industries are distributed within a particular area in relation to each other when the labor force in each industry is expressed in proportional terms.13 Minimum economic differentiation is obtained when all industry categories are evenly distributed-the proportion of each industry category is the same, in which case the index of economic differentiation value will be 0.13 The maximum economic differentiation, on the other hand, is obtained when the labor force is completely concentrated in one industry only and no others-the proportion of one industry category is 1 and all others 0, makeing the index of economic differentiation equal to 1.13 The Big Re-Think The Economy of Differentiation is mostly ignored today, with profound consequences(p.58).1 Differentiation creates diversity, which allows more efficient adaptation to varying conditions, as well as enhancing the potential to resist unforeseen problems. Differentiation is a key component of adaptation, the crucial process in the evolution of resilient natural systems. Adaptation is successful when this differentiation responds to adaptive pressures, and takes place in a small enough grain of scale. Unfortunately, our current human technologies are not very good at this – and therefore are not resilient (p.58).1 The term re-think is referred to and discussed throughout the book ‘Design for a Living Planet’ (p.59).1 Mehaffy and Salinaros state that in particular, a rigorous re-assessment is urgently needed – a ‘big re-think’ as some have termed it – of the foundational theories and assumptions of ‘modern’ (which is now almost a century old) tectonics, aesthetics, design, and even technology itself (p.59).1 They also state: And yet, as many people are well aware, we are entering an era of growing existential threat – caused, ironically, by our very technological successes. We are depleting our resources at unsustainable

levels, and creating unprecedented damage to the critical Earth systems on which prosperity and even life itself depend. Our own technology – including our economic technology – is triggering an interacting, cascading series of unintended consequences that degrade quality of life, and now threaten to become catastrophic. The most notable example (though by no means the only one) is anthropogenic climate change(p.62).”1 Also, they explain that in order to survive and prosper, we will need to change our fundamental relationship to the planet’s resources, and the ways we go about extracting, structuring, and transforming them (p.62).1 In the ‘Dutch Planning Practices: Observations of an Architect on Planning the Netherlands,’ Arnd Bruninghaus explains how the Dutch tend to feel uncomfortable in an unplanned environment and demand a high level of quality in the infrastructures of the built environment (p.1).”11 Bruninghaus also states: When in conversation with Americans the word planning often results in a jaw clenching back straightening reaction akin to the mention of communism. Planning in the Netherlands is not a yoke of rules imposed by a dictatorial government designed to erode personal freedoms, stifle growth and suppress market forces.

Planning in the Netherlands is a necessity.

Densely populated and with an intense network of infrastructures all players in the complex field of the built environment need a set of rules by which the optimal organization of land can be achieved.

The process is fiercely democratic. This, it must be said, to many planners chagrin (p.1).11 More recent scientific investigations reveal the richly complex geometry of living environments, including human ones. The geometries of those natural structures ‘evolve in context’ as complex adaptive forms, through a process known as adaptive morphogenesis (p.47).1 As a result of that process, living geometries have articular characteristics. They differentiate into a range of subtly unique structures, and they adapt to local conditions, giving such environments stability and resilience. They achieve great complexity and efficiency through their evolution, and great Resiliency Over Sustainability 117

“...they differentiate into a range of subtly unique structures, and they adapt to local conditions, giving such environments stability and resilience.”

Buildings of Living Organisms This image was created by artist Stephan Martiniere who states “I imagine our future in a holistic way, where urbanism could be a harmony between technology and nature. Buildings might be living organisms, grown and shaped to fulfill a multitude of purposes. Future architecture would result from a deep understanding of the surrounding ecosystem.”15 118 Resiliency Over Sustainability

beauty in the form of a perceivable deeper order (p.47).1

References 1. Michael Mehaffy and Nikos Salingaros. Design for a Living Planet: Settlement, Science, and the Human Future (Portland, Oregon: Sustasis Press, 2015).

He also claims that ‘normal failure’ in technological systems is as ‘natural’ as the sun rising (p.15).5 Now, when something is left to revert back to nature, it cannot as it could before, now abandoned areas inevitably will revert to next nature, becoming weird involuntary parks (p.16).5 Sterling states that “technology is not merely about us: it’s also about laws of Nature. Entropy requires no maintenance.

All technological systems must age and decay (p.16).”5 Sterling also states the mass extinctions of entire classes of objects and services go almost unnoticed (p.16).5 He puts it as our technology commonly manifests feral, eruptive, untamable qualities (p.15).5 Sterling states:

2.

“The Anthopocene Project. An Opening,” Haus der Kulturen der Welt, accessed February, 2015, http://www.hkw.de/en/ programm/projekte/2013/anthropozaen_eine_eroeffnung/ start_anthropozaen_eine_eroeffnung.php.

3.

“The Jevons Paradox,” Our Energy Futures, accessed February, 2015, http://ourenergyfutures.org/page-titre-The_ Jevons_Paradox-cid-25.html.

4.

Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink, editors, Next Nature (Barcelona: Actar, 2012).

5.

Bruce Sterling, preface to Next Nature, by Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink (Barcelona: Actar, 2012).

6.

Koert van Mensvoort, “Real Nature is Not Green,” in Next Nature, eds. Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink (Barcelona: Actar, 2012).

7.

Jos de Mul, “The Technological Sublime,” in Next Nature, eds.

Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink (Barcelona: Actar, 2012).

8.

Koert van Mensvoort, “Plastic Planet,” in Next Nature, eds.

Koert van Mensvoort and Hendrik-Jan Grievink (Barcelona: Actar, 2012).

9.

“The Disaster of the 1953 Flood,” Flood Site, accessed February, 2015, http://www.floodsite.net/juniorfloodsite/html/ en/student/thingstoknow/hydrology/1953flood.html.

We also have an exciting suite of new technical interventions –bio-chemical, genetic, robotized, nano-technological, which are poorly understood. They can all interfere radically in what we construe as the ‘natural order.’ They change nature faster than our ideas about nature can change. The result is tofflerian future shock with a leafy green tinge. It’s unclear whether there is any tenable way, or even any further need, to separate ‘nature’ from ‘culture,’ on the surface of this planet, anyway. That commingled, hybridized, chimeric future is already here, and awaiting distribution – width operators standing by (p.15).5

10. “Anti-Fragility,” Investopedia, accessed February, 2015, http://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/anti-fragility.asp.

11. Arnd Bruninghaus, “Dutch Planning practices Observations of an Architect on Planning the Netherlands” (2005).

12. Charles Redman and Ann Kinzig, “Resilience of Past Landscapes: Resilience Theory, Society, and the Longue Durée,” Ecology and Society 7:1 (2003): accessed February, 2015, url: http://www.consecol.org/vol7/iss1/art14/.

13. Eiji Amemiya, “Economic Differentiation and Social Organization of Standard Metropolitan Areas,” Journal of Regional Science 5:2 (1964): accessed February, 2015, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9787.1964.tb01467.x.

14. “Rules of Six,” Aranda\Lasch, accessed February, 2015, http://arandalasch.com/works/rules-of-six/.

15. “Today’s Best Science Fiction Writers Imagine The Future,” Project2Gether, accessed February, 2015, http://www. project2gether.com/todays-best-science-fiction-writersimagine-the-future/.

Figures Fig. 1.

20th Century Industrialization, taken from xxx, May 2015.

Fig. 2.

Fukishima Nuclear Meltdown, taken from http://

ekonomicky-denik.cz/inovativni-jaderne-reaktory-

prichazi-renesance-atomu/, May 2015

Fig. 3.

Rain Forest, taken from http://www.onemeteratatime. org/rainforestfacts/world-rainforests/, May 2015.

Fig. 4.

Rules of Six, taken from https://meowmeow0508. wordpress.com/2011/06/16/rules-of-six/, May 2015.

Fig. 5.

Buildings of Living Organisms, taken from http://www.

popsci.com/science/article/2013-06/dispatches-

future?single-page-view=true?src=SOC&dom=pin, May 2015.

Resiliency Over Sustainability 119

INSTILLING RESILENCY

122 Instilling Resiliency

FLOCK0

DRONES | MARINE lITTER | RESILIENCY

Professor - Mark Shepard|Course - Situated Technologies Research Studio - Urbanism and the Anthropocene (Spring 2015)|Length of project - 7 weeks|Project type - Research on integrating humanity, nature, and technology |Critics - Bradley Cantrell (Harvard University) McLain Clutter (University of Michigan) Laura Forlano (IIT Institute of Design, Chicago) Liz McDonald (BIG) Michael Piper (University at Toronto) Omar Khan (University at Buffalo) Mike Silver (University at Buffalo) Jordan Geiger (University at Buffalo) Nick Bruscia (University at Buffalo)

Abstract Marine litter is accumulating in the waters and on the beaches all along the coast of the Netherlands causing adverse effects to marine life and ecosytems. Marine litter affects the entire marine environment, but the extent of its effects are not fully understood.10 Marine litter is identified as any manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of, or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment.10 On a global scale, marine litter has many adverse affects on the marine ecosystems and coastlines, the major ones are: 1. Marine life is harmed through ingestion and/or entaglement.

2. The particles break down in size over time allowing them to ifiltrate many various organisms, allowing them to enter the food chain, ultimately being ingested by humans.

3. It allows various chemicals to enter the marine ecosystems.

4. It also allows for the spread of invasive and non-indiginous organisms 10 Marine litter comes from sea sources as well as land sources.

The main sources from land include tourism, sewage, flytipping, local businesses, and unprotected waste disposal sites and the main sources from sea include shipping and fishing (includes abandoned fishing gear).10 Allsopp et al. estimate that about 80% of the worlds marine litter is from land-based sources and 20% is from ocean-based sources. They break marine litter into the following four categories: Tourism related litter at the coast: this includes litter, left by beach goers such as food and beverage packaging, cigarettes and plastic beach toys.

Sewage-related debris: this includes water from storm drains and combined sewer overflows which discharge waste water directly into the sea or rivers during heavy rainfall. These waste waters carry with them garbage such as street litter, condoms, and syringes.

Fishing related debris: this includes fishing lines and nets, fishing pots and strapping bands from bait boxes that are lost accidentally by commercial fishing boats or are deliberately dumped into the ocean.

Wastes from ships and boats: this includes garbage which is accidentally or deliberately dumped overboard.18 According to Allsopp et al. 60-80% of marine litter consists of plastics.18 Depledge et al. define marine litter as any persistent, manufactured or processed solid material discarded, disposed of or abandoned in the marine and coastal environment.1 A blank 124 Instilling Resiliency

percentage of marine litter is plastic.45 Plastic litter is now almost ubiquitous in the World’s oceans, extending from the coast far out to the sea, and down onto the sea floor(Depledge et al.).1 Plastic Litter in the Sea is a report that was published following a workshop that was put on by the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) to establish what is officially known and what areas need further investigation concerning plastic litter in the sea.1 Depledge et al explain that [micro]plastics have been accumulating in oceans globally over at least the last four decades and have invaded even the most remote marine environments.1 They also state that [micro]plastics is one of the main global emerging environmental threats.1 On a macro scale, large pieces of marine litter makes its way through the waterways of the world and accumulates in the 7 ocean gyres (shown in the map). Once litter makes it to one of the gyres, it is broken down over time into smaller and smaller pieces of plastic which become one with the water, as the plastic can never fully be broken down. Depledge et al state: Fortunately the European Commission and other funding organisations around the World have at last begun to support research work in this area (see for example, EU projects such as CLEANSEA, MICRO, PERSEUS, MARELITT, MARLISCO, KIMO, etc.). Nonetheless, positive action to curtail and manage of the use of plastics and their disposal is still urgently needed. In this regard, within the European MSFD a proper descriptor (Descriptor 10) was dedicated to marine litter.

Leslie et al state the following: considering the current body of data available on microplastic litter in the marine environment, the experts in MSFD Task Group 10 on Marine Litter recommended that the overriding objective of the MSFD for Descriptor 10 (marine litter) of GES ‘be a measurable and significant decrease in comparison with the initial baseline in the total amount of marine litter by 2020’, including a reduction in ‘microparticles, especially microplastics’, as one of the GES indicators.6 The Netherlands has always had a strong relationship to the sea, as the country has 280 miles of coastline, all of which is directly on the North Sea.16 According to Holland.com, 26% of the Netherlands is below sea level, and with the rising sea levels that number will inevitably increase.17 Marine litter is accumulated and exchanged in and by both land sources and sea sources; the Netherlands constant interaction with the North Sea’s water involves the water pulling trash from the land while at the same time depositing trash from the water on the land.

While marine litter is not an issue unique to the Netherlands, throughout history the Netherlands have always been a leader in water management and innovation, aiding in setting the standard for many other countries. Given this context, the coastlines of the Netherlands is an appropriate site for the experimentation and development of a system aimed at clean-

1. The need to increase awareness of the scale and severity of the issue through public education programs 2. Clear identification of who is responsible for managing plastic production and levels of release into the environment, 3. Provision of guidelines on the safe disposal of plastics, 4. Development of regulations to ensure the safe disposal of plastic and their enforcement, 5. Reduction of the use of plastics worldwide through international agreements, 6. Finding environmentally friendly alternative to plastics, 7. Development and implementation of programs for the collection and proper disposal of plastics (for example, beach clean ups, collection for recycling and reuse, etc.), ing up, maintaining, and monitoring marine litter.

The Problem at the Global Scale In 2012, the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive held a workshop to discuss and analyze the current state of plastic litter in the sea. The journal, Marine Environmental Research, published a report on the event entitled Plastic Litter in the Sea. Depledge et al list the major reasons why plastic litter in the earths water systems is a global problem: 1. Plastic litter is present in most of the worlds marine environment 2. Plastic doesn’t completely break down, it never really goes away

8. Monitoring trends and effects of marine litter at sea, 9. Evaluation of the presence and effects of marine debris (particularly microplastic) in marine environment using marine organisms as sentinel species and applying new integrated monitoring tools.

The workshop also identified the following as areas that require further research to provide adequate answers: 1. How much plastic is getting into the marine environment each year?

2. What are the key sources?

3. Marine organisms and sea birds are significantly affected by plastic litter as it has entered their food chain

3. What are geographic distributions of plastic litter of different sizes?

4. The plastic (with its pollutants) works its way up in the food chain from the small organisms that are ingested by larger organisms and eventually ingested by humans

4. What are the relative proportions of macro, micro and nanoplastic entering the marine environment and which pose the greatest threat?

5. Plastic litter can facilitate the spread of invasive species into unaffected areas 6. The use of plastics is continually rising

5. Where do the different types of plastic litter accumulate?

7. Hydrodynamics and degradability result in all oceanic plastics being broken down into nano plastics

6. How long does each type persist?

8. The issues and adverse effects on the marine ecosystems has not been fully accepted by policy makers and politicians1

7. Is plastic taken up by marine organisms?

The following are some ideas that emerged from the workshop that can serve as a starting point for taking action on addressing these issues:

8. Is it damaging to them? Is harm well understood?

9. Which kinds of marine organisms are most impacted by macro and microplastics?

10. What are the mechanisms by which damage occurs?

Flock0 125

OSPAR Regions

NORWEGIN SEA

I

I - Artic Waters II - Greater North Sea III - Celtic Seas IV - Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast V - Wider Atlantic

NORTH SEA

II NORTH ATLANTIC OCEAN

V

III

IV

OSPAR

COMMSSION Protecting and conserving the North-East Atlantic and its resources 126 Instilling Resiliency

II - Greater North Sea Sweden Norway United Kingdom Denmark Germany Netherlands Belguim France

SWEDEN NORWAY

NORTH SEA

DENMARK

II UNITED KINGDOM NETHERLANDS

BELGIUM

GERMANY

FRANCE

Flock0 127

13

SWEDEN

No

NORWAY

t ren r u C tic lan t A rth

12

11

2 1

NORTH SEA

3

II

10

DENMARK

UNITED KINGDOM

4 9 4

NETHERLANDS GERMANY 6 7

8

FRANCE

128 Instilling Resiliency

BELGIUM

11. How does plastic interact with other environmental pollutants and influence their toxicity?

12. What is the extent of economic, environmental and human health costs resulting from the presence of plastic litter in the marine environment?

The Problem at a National scale As previously stated, the coast line of the Netherlands spans 280 miles and has been accumulating marine litter in recent history via land dumpage as well as depositation from the North Sea currents (along with the other countries bordering the North Sea). As shown in the diagram, the current of the North Sea travels in a counterclockwise direction and ultimately enters the Atlantic waters to the north along the Norwegian coastline. This results in marine litter being picked up from the south and deposited along the Netherlands coast. Land dumped litter on the coast of the Netherlands is also picked up and deposited on the northern North Sea coasts and sent out to the Atlantic to be collected in the Great Garbage Patch.

The questions listed above can be applied to a national scale. In the case of this research, the Netherlands, where the Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment to could fund the analysis and overlook the implementation of the solution strategy.

OSPAR Commission With the motto, “protecting and conserving the North-East Atlantic and its resources,� the OSPAR Convention is the current legal instrument guiding international cooperation on the protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic. Work under the Convention is managed by the OSPAR Commission, made up of representatives of the Governments of 15 Contracting Parties and the European Commission, representing the European Union.15 The commission is broken into five regions: REGION I - Arctic Waters REGION II - Greater North Sea REGION III - Celtic Seas REGION IV - Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast REGION V - Wider Atlantic

Fulmar Collection Areas 1. Sweden - Sotenas 2. Norway - Lista 3. Denmark - Skagen 4. Germany 5. The Netherlands 6. Belgium 7. France - Pas de Calais 8. France - Normandy 9. SE England 10. NE England 11. Orkney 12. Shetland 13. Faroe

The Netherlands falls within region II which consists of the following countries: 1. Belgium 2. Denmark 3. France 4. Germany 5. The Netherlands 6. Norway 7. United-Kingdom 8. Sweden Quality Status Reports OSPAR has made it an order to conduct and publish Quality Status Reports which are periodic holistic assessments of the marine environment.10 The most recent edition is the 2010 Quality Status Report which states that efforts to reduce land-based sources of marine litter is to improve waste management including waste reducFlock0 129

tion and recycling.10 Like the protocols for sea based sources, these regulations focus on preventative measures; there is still a mass amount of marine litter on the coasts. The report also proposes to extend marine litter monitoring on beaches to all 5 regions and make it an enforceable requirement under the European Union Marine Strategy Framework Directive.10 In 2013, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) passed the MARPOL Annex V which forbids any vessel from dumping any garbage into the sea.10 This is enforces around the globe, the Netherlands falling under the European Union’s juristiction.10 In 2006 the European Union enacted a directive to tackling the inadequacy of port reception facilities to aid in enforcing this policy.11 Although preventative measures are neccessary, there is still a large amount of marine litter in the water systems that needs to be cleaned up. The volunteer project Fishing for Litter, active in OSPAR regions II and III, is an initiative that gives vessels bags to collect litter they aquire while fishing. This trash is then brought to collection points at the ports and is collected, analyzed, and monitored.10 Currently there are 190 vessels participating between the two regions, which remove an average of 240 tons of waste per year.10 Fulmars as a Metric - Monitoring Progress Depledge et al state that large marine vertebrates such as large pelagic fish, sea turtles, sea birds, and cetaceans can, and will, be used to determine and monitor the environmental status of marine ecosystems.1 Leslie et al. list the Northern Fulmar along with Cod, Whiting, and Grey Gurnard fish as marine organisms that have been analysed for microplastic exposure in the North Sea Area.6 In October 2014, the Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, IMARES published a report on monitoring the quantities of plastics found in the stomachs of Northern Fulmars found on Dutch beaches up to the year 2013.2 The graph to the left shows that there has be a decrease in the amount of birds found with more than .1gram of plastic in their stomachs, but the decrease is very insignificant in reference to the goal of less than 10% of birds to be under the critical level (shown by the red line).2 Some level of plastic particles were found in an astonishing 94% of the investigated animals, and 52% were above the critical level.2 .1 grams of plastic has been deemed by North Sea governments to be the critical level.2 The Dutch developed a system of monitoring beach litter by examining deceased Fulmars that are found on beaches. The system, proving to be consistant and successful, was adopted for international monitoring by OSPAR as one of its EcoQOs (what is this mean) for the North Sea14 The Marine Strategy Framework Directive aims at reaching good environmental status by 2020, whereas his EcoQO is now acknowledged as an indicator for such, although the fulmar target may take longer to reach.14 The North Sea EcoQO on plastic particles in seabird stomachs, established by OSPAR, states that there should be less than 10% of fulmars having more that .1g of plastic particles in the stomach in samples of 50-100 fulmars found from each of 4-5 areas of the north sea over a period of at least 5 years.13 This is 130 Instilling Resiliency

not currently achievable in any of the five regions.13 The fulmar was chosen as the species to monitor for the following reasons 1. Fulmars are abundant in the North Sea area and are regularly found in beached bird surveys.

2. Fulmars are known to consume a wide variety of marine litter items.

3. Fulmars avoid inshore areas and forage exclusively at sea (never on land).

4. Fulmars do not normally regurgitate indigestible items, but accumulate these in the stomach.

5. Averaging pollution levels over a foraging space and time span that avoids bias from local pollution incidents.

6. Historical data are available in the form of a Dutch data series since 1982 and literature is available on other locations and related species worldwide.

Other North Sea species that ingest litter either do not accumulate plastics because they regurgitate indigestible remains, are coastal only and/or find part of their food on land (e.g. Larus gulls), ingest litter only incidentally (e.g. North Sea Alcids), or are too infrequent in beached bird surveys for the required sample size or spatial coverage.

The Institute for Marine Resources & Ecosystem Studies (IMARES) of Wageningen UR was commissioned by the Netherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment to produce a report on the monitoring of litter found in the stomachs of fulmars in the netherlands, report published in 201414 Wageningen UR has been monitoring plastic found in fulmars since 1980(was wageningen the data collecter always?).2 Current data for the netherlands, years 2009-2013, consist of 227 collected beached fulmars, 94% of which had plastic particles in their stomach. The average number of items per stomach was 28 with a mass of .3 grams surpassing the critical EcoQO value of .1 grams. 52% of the birds exceeding this amount. The 2012-2013 update states that the percentange of birds with greater than the critical value is the lowest it has been since the 1990’s, but there has been very little improvent over the last decade.14

Flock0 131

DENSITY PER SEASON

Winter

Spring

Summer

AVERAGE DISTANCE PER DAY 100 km

132 Instilling Resiliency

Fall

MIGRATION PATTERNS Summer Winter Year-round

SWEDEN NORWAY

DENMARK

UNITED KINGDOM NETHERLANDS BELGIUM

GERMANY

FRANCE

Flock0 133

RELEVANT BEHAVIORS Nesting Defense Flocking Brooding Foraging

134 Instilling Resiliency

Flock0 135

flock0 Whole System The FLOCK0 system consists of 28 zones, each with its own flock and collection point. Each zone is broken down into 2 sub-sections laterally and 5 sub-sections longitudinally; each zone consists of 10 sub-sections.

The length of longitudinal sub-sections decrease as they get further away from the coast to compensate the amount of flight and charge time required for the drones to travel the increased distance.

Individual Flock Each flock consists of 100 drones which will monitor one sub-section per day. In the most ideal conditions, a single flock will trawl and monitor its entire zone in 10 days. While trawling for litter, the drones also send out notifications when large debris is discovered, noting the size and location so that it can be collected.

Collection Point Each flock has its own collection point which serves as a receptacle, charging station, and display to promote public awareness. Running off of self-collected solar power, the drones are designed, in the light of diurnal activity, to ‘rest’ at the collection point. During the ‘rest’ cycle, they will be charged from solar energy collected by the collection point during the day so that they can re-deploy at dawn.

Individual Drone Each drone is connected to a network that allows for, and stores, live data that can be accessed at anytime. The units have 4 modes:

1. Flying 2. Foraging 3. Charging 4. Nesting

England

They are designed to fly to an area and land in the water and switch to forage mode. Once in forage mode they will trawl the zone sub-section in a pre-programed path and make alterations as the litter levels are monitored. The flock will operate with swarm logic so that if a particular drone senses an abundance of trash in a certain area others will congregate in the area to alleviate the area.

English Channel 136 Instilling Resiliency

s r s e r t e e t m e o m l o i l K i K 2 1 1

5 2 1

8 2

6 2

7 2

28 ZONES 28 FLOCKS 28 COLLECTION POINTS 2800 DRONES

8 8

s r e t e m o l i K

5 2 4 2

3 2

1 2

2 7

s r e t e m o l i K

2 2

0 2 1 4

s r e t e m o l i K

9 1

8 1

North Sea

7 1

1

0

1

5 1

s r e t e m o l i K

6 1

4 1

3 1

1

2 1 1 1 1

0 9 8

1

7 6 5

4

1

3 2

1

1

Netherlands

1 1

Belgium Flock0 137

8 8

e t e m o l i K

2 7

l i K

1 4

138 Instilling Resiliency

Z

s r e t e m o l i K

2 1 1

s r e s t r e e m t e o l m i o K l i K

5 2 1

1 ZONE 1 FLOCK 10 sub-sectionS 1 COLLECTION POINT 100 DRONES

Zo

4

3 2

1

1J one 1I e n Zo e 1H n o Z e 1G Zon e 1F n o Z e 1E n o Z

s r e e 1D n o Z e 1C n o Z

1

s r e t e m o l e 1B n o Z e 1A n o Z Flock0 139

Collection point

1 ZONE 1 FLOCK 1 COLLECTION POINT 100 DRONES 140 Instilling Resiliency

Solar Collectors

Charging Station

Trash Receptacle

Flock0 141

Tail and Feet

Use: Rudders for steering 142 Instilling Resiliency

Wings

RELEVANT COMPONENTS

Use: Propulsion in air and water

Air Propulsion

Sea Propulsion

Tube-Nose

Use: Excrete excess salt

Salt Excreter

Duel Stomach [and crop]

Use: Crop - stores food for later use Proventriculus - acid breaks down food Gizzard- digestion of food

Crop Proventriculus Gizzard

Flock0 143

REQUIRED DRONE ATTRIBUTES

1. Arial Propulsion 2. Water Tight 3. Sensors 4. Landing Gear 5. Solar Powered 6. Grab Objects 7. Carry Objects 8. Swarm Intelligence 9. Sea Propulsion

144 Instilling Resiliency

Flock0 145

DRONE DESIGN

1. Arial Propeller 2. Structural Frame 3. Steering Nozzle 4. Water Propeller 5. Screen 6. Collection Hatch 7. Storage Tank 8. Release Hatch 9. Collection Channel 10. Screen Hatch

146 Instilling Resiliency

Flock0 147

SCHEMATIC DESIGN

1. ‘Mouth’ 2. Structure ‘Rib Cage’ 3. Spine 4. 8” Propeller 5. 7” Propeller 6. Wing 7. Pontoon 8. Body

148 Instilling Resiliency

Elevation

Section

Plan Flock0 149

prototype - p1 Modeling A generic model of a seabird was used as a starting point in which the propellers, also generic, were added. This served as a base on which could be sketched and drawn over to start brainstorming how the proposed drone could be designed. After rebuilding the geometry of the body to better handle its task, the 3D model was then retrofitted with a generic rib-like structure. The faux-structure was 3D printed in order to quickly nascent a physical prototype out of the computer. The print allowed for analysis of actual size requirements to perform the necessary functions and house the required hardware.

Fabricating A Da Vinci 2.0 3D printer was used with a bed size of approximately 6” x 8” x 8”. The faux-structure was spliced into two pieces in order for its entirety to be printed at the same time. Unfortunately it was realized that this printer had issues printing objects taller than a couple inches despite the 8” tall print envelope. This was noted and taken into consideration when splicing P2.

1 Generic Bird Model

2 Rebuilt Body

3 Faux-Structure 150 Instilling Resiliency

Flock0 151

prototype - p2 Modeling Although the generic model was used as a starting point, all components were modified and continually evolved into P2. Extra depth was given to the body to provide enough room for structure, horizontal water movement, and storage capacity of trash. The overall geometry of the body was also completely reworked to house the motors and wing assembly.

The separate piece for the wing cap allows easy removal of the wing assembly, both for the design as well as the prototype. Extra room was given to wing assembly receiver for experimentation with wing movements and functions in the prototype.

Fabricating The 3D model was spliced into 33 separate pieces which were assembled into 14 3D printing files (as seen on the next page). The ABS plastic allowed for easy manipulation of the parts with a razor blade when needed and everything was held together with Plastruct Bondene, an ABS plastic cement. The adhesive did an amazing job of welding the pieces together. Small ceramic magnets were places along all edges that were intended to pull apart (P2 also acts as a section model) for easy separation and joining.

1. A Propeller - 6” 2. B Propeller - 6” 3. Pontoon Upper Receiver 4. Clockwise Motor 5. Counter-Clockwise Motor 6. Wing 7. Pontoon Lower Receiver 8. B Propeller - 7” 9. A Propeller - 7” 10. Wing Cap 11. Body 12. Sea Motor 13. Sea Propeller 14. Magnets

152 Instilling Resiliency

2

1 9

3

5

8

4 4

10 6 5

13 7 12

14

11

Flock0 153

13 11 13 7 14 7 14 12

12

8 10

9

10

9

8

11

12

13

154 Instilling Resiliency

14

6 4 6 7

7

5

5 1

3

2

3D Print Splicing Diagram

7

1

2

3

6

5

4 Flock0 155

8

7

6 4 5

3

156 Instilling Resiliency

1. Pontoon assembly 2. Lower wing receiver 3. Upper wing receiver 4. LCD mode display 5. Mode switch 6. Arduino uno 7. Solar panel assembly 8. 12 Volt power supply

2 1

PROTOTYPE P2 TEST OF THEORY

Flock0 157

5

4

3

158 Instilling Resiliency

1 2

PROGRAMMING 1. LCD mode display 2. Arduino uno 3. USB cable 4. Arduino IDE 5. Custom code

Flock0 159

1

8

7 6

5

160 Instilling Resiliency

MECHANICS

8

1. A propeller 2. Clockwise motor 3. Water intake 4. Storage cavity 5. Motor for sea propulsion 6. Water output 7. Counter-clockwise motor 8. B propeller 9. Wing chassis

9

1 2

3

4

Flock0 161

ELECTRONICS

1. 12v relay to propellers 2. 12v relay to rear propeller 3. Mode indicator LEDs 4. Rotary switch transfers 5. Print to LCD screen 6. 5v relay trigger 7. Trigger inputs 8. 12v in / 5v out 9. 4-way mode switch 10. Rotary switch circuit 11. Display brightness 12. LCD mode display

Y RELA T L 5 VO GGER TRI

S LT O 5V

5

6

9 VOLTS IN

8|7

LTS O 5V

9

10

11 162 Instilling Resiliency

4

1

SOL A POW R E BAT RED TERY IN

2

S LT O 2V

IN

1

UT TO O S LT S 12 VO L MOTOR A ARIE

3

PRINT TO

DISPLAY

12 SE VOL A M TS OT OU OR T T O

12

Flock0 163

Buffalo, NY

CONTACT

DANIEL LAMM, LEED AP BD+C

Dlamm4@gmail.com 910-916-2889