Digital Design - Module 02 Semester 1, 2018 Jeremy Bonwick 697718 Han Li // Studio 16

Week Three

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

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

The three main types of digital fabrication Kolerevic outlines in his article are two-dimensional, additive and subtractive fabrication. The first â€” two-dimensions fabrication â€” involves the cutting of a material of varying thickness to create flat panel forms. Laser cutting is an example of this process, where a sheet of material is cut by a two-dimensionally moving head into digitally defined shapes. Additive fabrication builds up a digitally defined form in layers, the converse of which is subtractive fabrication, wherein a base material is milled down to a new form, removing mass by eating away at a material to give the desired shape. The possibilities of CNC techniques include the practice of iterations; it provides an automated, accurate and relatively inexpensive way of creating models of parametrically defined forms and overall giving a better understanding of the effects that changes in a given parametric definition have on its form in the physical realm.

2

Week Three

Surface Creation

The use of parametrics in grasshopper allowed for quick iteration of surfaces, using sliders to test different combinations of corner points. Grasshopper also allowed for more exploration in the panelling. The definitions to the left are for the final iteration of the paneled surface, with the first being split into 4 different sections and the second being split into two. The ‘dispatch‘ component was used along with the ‘greater/less than‘ component to split the surface panelling into streams on which new effects or components were applied. The ‘custom preview’ component was used to visually track which panels were in which streams. The variety of surface openings, base geometries is generated through these dispatch streams. (note: the image to the left was captured after the task’s completion when some referenced objects were no longer detectable by grasshopper resulting in the yellow and red components)

3

Week Four Panel Iterations

Task 01 Iterations

1. The base geometry in this iteration is an open pyramid and a highly angular pyramid, the later of which forms a scalelike texture across the highly twisted surface creating interesting spaces between panels.

1

2. This iteration explores an even more extreme twisting of the second surface, rotating almost 90° along its length. This is contrasted with its pair surface which takes on a much more linear form — this relationship was taken forward to the final iteration. The dispatch component was also used to create a rhythmic repeating

2

pattern in the right surface’s shapes. 3. The base lines that form the surface start at the extreme edges of the base cube in this iteration and rotate upwards creating a vortex-like interior space. The two surfaces here mimic each other and are in harmony in relation to their form and the panelling is similar apart from the openings.

3

4. This iteration focuses on the use of the weaverbird plug-in which can be used to create windows in the panels. This was distributed across a select number of panels on the surface via an attractor point and the ‘dispatch’ component.

4 4

Week Four

Panels & Waffle

Panelling

Waffle

The panelling, whilst visually quite minimalistic and simple, is built upon a complex code the breaks the main grid of 25 faces into different sections onto which different effects and grasshopper components are applied. The ‘dispatch’ and ‘larger/smaller than’ components are used based upon an a centralised attractor point. The openings in each face are controlled by another ‘dispatch’ component which sorts by the area and varies the opening size based off this area or only applying the opening (a weaverbird component) to larger faces.

The waffle structure is formed from a series of fins, 9 in the horizontal direction and 9 again following the form of each of the surface faces. The form twists at the top level as the two surfaces come together creating a visually interesting form. On reflection, it would have been better to space the fins so that they corresponded better with the openings in the panelled surface.

5

Week Four Laser Cutting

Before creating the final laser-cut file I created a prototype version of some of the panels to test the buildability. As a result I increased the tab size from 2mm to 3mm. In the future I would use tabs closer to 5mm as the construction had to be very precise with the 3mm tabs. The panels â€” being flipped â€” leave the etched fold marks on the front size which is preferable, something else I will carry forward into future laser-cut builds. To save money and material I attempted to have straight edges share one line in the laser cut, this could be expanded to more of the edges to further cut down on the time required to cut.

6

Week Five

Task Two

The definition for task 2 involved the use of attractor points to morph the base grid, this was iterated through the different versions. The base geometry for the final iteration was built inside of grasshopper itself with a base pentagon extruded to a defined point above and below to form a 10-sided diamond. The ‘dispatch’ component is again used to alter the geometries as in task 1. This time, the ‘rotate 3D‘ component was used to transform geometries below a certain volume. This was done because of the shape of the polyhedral shape which intersected only when scaled to larger sizes, the smaller shapes would not intersect in their vertical form so needed to be rotated 90° so they would intersect horizontally.

7

Week Five

Boolean Objects Task 02 Iterations

1. The very basic boolean of circles formed the basis of the first iteration. In this an exploration of the basic use of the attractor point was undertaken and how the regularity of the circle created interesting and almost predictable intersections in the final mass.

1

2. This iteration sought to move away from the predictability of the previous version. Here the circles have been morphed to fit the box grid in which they were contained, therefore each sphere was different, resulting in different elongations of intersections instead of only varying

2

scales in the first iteration. The result is very reminiscent of some obsidian formations 3. This iteration turned attention towards geometric shapes, almost like diamonds being excavated from a mine, leaving behind their imprints. This iteration also experimented with rotating the forms with an attractor point used as a varying rotation factor.

3

4. The final iterations look at how spheres and curved surfaces can be used in the boolean process and how this contrasts in harmony with the other geometric forms almost inverting the first iteration

4 8

Week Five

Isometric

3D Print Boolean Model

Elevation

The final form of the 3D print model is taken from the geometric shapes of my later iterations. By themselves these forms can seem quite harsh and angular, but when placed within the context of a curved or spherical container they take on a different quality, balanced with their opposites in the curve. Instead of boolean-ing with a square or rectangular section, the model takes a curved profile with a circular base. The remaining angular geometry creates a canopy of sorts at the from, an interior space which could be occupied. There are also openings to the back, which retains most of the curved circular form. The openings both provide aspects from the inside and also add a sense of intrigue approaching the form. The regularity and smoothness of the curved wall is broken by the angles of the opening, giving a glimpse into the dynamic intersecting faces of the interior â€” a major contrast.

Isometric

The heaviness of the overhead form create a great sense of enclosure and create a threshold around the perimeter. The circular form is bisected down the centre into the mass form (to the right in the elevation) and the open, trafficable area (to the left).

9

Week Six Task 01

Lofts

1.1

1.2

1.3

{0,150,150}

{0,150,150}

1.4

{0,150,150}

Key

{0,150,150}

{0t,60,150} {75,150,150} {0,150,150}

{150,150,150}

{0,0,150}

{150,150,150}

{150,150,150}

{150,75,150} {150,50,150}

{x,y,z}

{0,150,0}

{150,0,150}

{0,150,0}

{150,0,150}

{0,150,100} {150,150,0}

Grid Points

{150,25,150}

Obscured Lines

{0,100,0}

{150,150,0}

{0,0,0}

Middle Lines in Morphed Surfaces

{0,50,0}

{0,25,0}

Base Grid Areas {150,150,0}

{75,0,0}

{Index Selection}

t{150,0,0}

{Index Selection}

Paneling Grid & Attractor Point

2.1

{150,0,0}

{Index Selection}

2.2

{150,0,0}

{Index Selection}

2.3

{150,0,0}

2.4

{75,75,75} {75,150,75}

{0,150,0}

{150,150,0}

{0,0,0}

{150,150,0}

Paneling

{Curve Attractor}

{Point Attractor}

{Point Attractor}

{Grid Area as Movement Factor}

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

{Point Attractor}

{75,0,75} {150,75,75} {150,150,75t

{Dispatch every second pannel}

Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z) Attractor / Control Curves

{150,75,150}

{Dispatch pattern: Point Attractor}

{Dispatch pattern: Point Attractor}

{Dispatch pattern: Area}

Task 01 Matrix The iterations focus on testing the boundaries of grasshopper â€” looking at the surfaces (flatter or more twisted), gridoffset (using point or curve attractors) and panels (differing shapes)The final iteration, 3.4 builds upon everything from the pervious versions, looking at varying the panelling, openings whilst retaining a simple yet elegant form.

10

Week Six Task 02

Grid Manipulations

1.1

1.2

{0,0,150}

1.3

1.4

Key {x,y,z}

{150,150,150}

Attractor / Control Points (X,Y,Z) Attractor / Control Curves Object Centroids

{75,75,75} {100,120,80} {0,0,0}

{0,-20,0}

{Point Attractor}

{150,150,0}

{Curve Attractor}

Sphere Distribution

2.1

2.2

{Point Attractor}

{Point Attractor}

2.3

2.4

{0,150,150}

{0,150,150}

{75,75,75} {150,100,0}

{150,75,0} {150,0,0}

Sphere Transformation

{Curve Atractor}

{Curve Attractor}

{Volumetric Centroid}

{Point Attractor}

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

{75,75,75} {150,100,0} {0,-20,0}

{Point Attractor}

{Morph and Scale}

{Point Attractor and rotate towards point}

{Dispatch and rotate dependant on volume}

Task 02 Matrix The Task 2 iterations tried to create a sense of harmony between the different processes â€” morphing the grid, the geometry distribution and transformations in ways that create a sense of cohesion by maintaining a common attractor point or through symmetry. The iterations also explore four different geometries, the last of which was a triangularly extruded pentagon.

11

Obscured Grid Lines

Week Six Task 01

Task 01 Model

The final form of the model came together rather well. The waffle would have been better to have a spacing of fins that matched with the rows and columns of the panels which would see the openingsâ€™ views not obscured by the waffleâ€™s structure. The panels are only attached to the waffle in a few places meaning its surface does not stay flat to the waffle. Some sort of attachment system could be thought of to allow for a closer fit between the edges of the waffle and the surfaces.

12

Week Six Task 02

Task 02 Model

The 3D print works well to demonstrate the mass of the space. It gives a good sense of how the top of the structure would encapsulate any figures beneath. The openings also give the desired effect of providing views into the interior and of the angular faces. The quality of the model captures the intricacies well and clearly shows the contrasts between the curved exterior shape and the dynamic angular interior booleaned form.

13

{150,75,75} {150,150,75t

Week Six

{Dispatch every second pannel}

{Dispatch pattern: Point Attractor}

{Dispatch pattern: Point Attractor}

Task 01 Final Isometric

14

{Dispatch pattern: Area}

{Point Attractor}

{Morph and Scale}

{Point Attractor and rotate towards point}

{Dispatch and rotate dependant on volume}

Week Six

Task 02 Final Isometric

15

Appendix

Task 02 Spatial Qualities

16

Task 02 Renders

Exploring the spatial qualities of the 3D print through eye-level renders, imagining the space as a pavillion. Adding the human figure for scale, the effect of the overhaning structure can be seen. Also the aspects through into the interior from the curved side coupled with the views out through the openings. The latter of which shows how the interior will be quite secluded, enveloped and heavily shaded.

17

Appendix Process

1 1. The Grasshopper workspace for the construction of the base surfaces. The surfaces are created from lofting lines anchored along the edge of the 150x150x150 base cube. The sliders inside of the grasshopper interface allow for quick iteration of different surfaces â€” experimenting with overlapping and wild curving surfaces. Also visible in grasshopper is the panels, a tool used to see what data is being output, a useful feature for troubleshooting matching data structures in the more complex code definitions later in the module.

18

2

4

3

5

2. The basic grasshopper panelling definition which is adapted for different and varying results throughout the iterations. 3. Experimentation with creating perforations via weaverbird in grasshopper. Also using the dispatch component to create varrying effects across the surface. 4. Using a custom preview (also seen in 3) to differentiate between the two lists created by dispatching via a â€˜larger thanâ€™ component. 5. Unrolling faces for the creation of a laser-cutting file.

19

Appendix Process

6. Prototype of the unrolled panelling used to test the feasibility of the design in the physical realm. 7. Using a box mapping component inside grasshopper to morph the spheres to the constraints of the new grid. The result is that the spheres and compressed and expanded non-linearly creating a greater sense of variance through the grid of shapes. 8. Using weaverbird and lunchbox components inside of grasshopper to search for interesting geometries to use for the final boolean. The irregularity of these forms, whilst initially interesting created cut-out which were too articulated and multifaced. In the end a simpler shape was chosen to keep the form refined and not too cluttered.

6

7

20

8

10

9 9. Code for rotating of the geometries. Each of the shapes was rotated based upon its proximity to an atractor point. The result is each intersection is at a different angle, creating greater visual interest in the negative space. 10. Boolean iterations looking at using circles and cylinders. This was included in the grasshopper definition to allow for quick generation of iterations. 11. Working in illustrator to create the shading for the isometric drawings that feature on the pin-up. Depth is created by using line-weights between 0.05 and 0.25. Shading through Live-Paint helps convey the different faces which make up the diamond shapes.

21

11

Digital Design 2018 Module 02 Jeremy Bonwick

22

DIGITAL DESIGN // Module 2 // Jeremy Bonwick

Published on Apr 16, 2018

Journal from DD Module 2.

Advertisement