Page 1

Digital Design - Module 02 Semester 1, 2019 Jessica Bourke

992621 Alison Fairley, Studio 20


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

Kolerevic described three fundamental types of fabrication techniques in the reading. Outline the three techniques and discuss the potential of Computer Numeric Controlled fabrication with parametric modelling.

In Kolerevic’s chapter Digital Production (Architecture in the Digital Age, 2003, pg. 30-53) three fundamental types of digital fabrication techniques: subtractive, additive and formative. Subtractive techniques involve the removal of material from a surface or volume in an electrical, chemical or mechanical manner. The axial capabilities of the cutting head and the moving bed limit the complexity of the forms that can be synthesised. Additive techniques involve the slicing of the form into 2D layers, which are then created sequentially by the processing head. A plethora of materials such as melted thermoplastic wax, plastic filament, layers of ceramic powder or metal powder can be utilised in this additive process. Finally, formative fabrication is based on using restricting forms, heat or steam, to create a product through reshaping or deformation. This technique can be applied to large scale applications, seen through Franklin’s exhibition pavilions in Geneva (2000). Computer Numeric Controlled fabrication (CNC) creates a “file to factory” environment where the idea of constructability becomes redundant; replaced by the focus on maximising the possibilities of new technology. This thereby increases the accessibility, then prevalence of parametric modelling.

2


SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Surface Creation

Use Contour to construct fins, DeBrep of box to source points. Adjust Distance to 30 so waffle aligns with faces

Create a box, then extract edges using DeBrep

Use Item and Divide to adjust vertices, Ln to join

ReMap PtOffsetGrid using Domains to increase control of module output

Orient waffle on XY plane using a Rectangular Grid, preparing to laser cut.

Create and Extrude rectangles for notches

Use CullIndex to clean fins, ensuring that edges do not coincide with edges of panels

Explode Tree contour data then Trim to create final waffle

Text Tag 3D to allow for ease of construction

Use Brep | Brep and Entwine to create planes for notches Use PtSrfDomNum to create 5 x 5 grid on surface, use PtOffsetGrid and PtCrvAtts to offset points

Iterating the panelling through Grasshopper was conducted in three stages: 1. Surface Creation 2. Waffle Creation 3. Panelling Creation The panelling was approached through multiple lenses, included PtMorph3D and Weave, PtMorphList and Morph3D Mean. In the end, PtMorphList was chosen as the user did not fully dictate placement of the modules, in essence highlighting the ability of parametrisation to creating unexpected and intriguing outputs.

PtMorph3DList translates modules to surface using 2 grids, DeBrep of modules and BoundingBox.

Modules are meshed after DeBrep to ensure no collisions with rectangular faces

3

Final waffle de-constructed and organised using Cocatenate and Series

Z0 X1


Exploring levels of permeability using WeaverbirdPictureFrame effect on pronounced quadrangular form. The iteration loses the directionality I seek with the cut outs, parallel to their respective faces.

Investigating the notion of colliding the flat sided modules. Whilst this creates a step like, nuanced form, realistically the construction methods inhibit its actualisation.

4


SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Surface Creation

The visual script was developed with the intention of exploring...

The tension between quadrangles and curvature. I chose to explore this notion as... 1. Quadrangles have no clear ‘front’, leading to compelling surfaces regarding circulation. 2. Their manipulation leads to flat surfaces which can be appropriated for multiple uses. 3. A clear horizontality / verticality can be developed through the parallel lines, creating a meandering circulation pattern. The cut outs developed aim to further emphasise this motion through parallel lines. 4. When used en masse, the quadrangular forms can appear almost curved; this interplay could be used at multiple scales.

By increasing the number of triangular prisms per grid space, the otherwise harsh, linear geometry works in harmony with the curvature of the surface. At at smaller, human scale, the stepping could be appropriated for rest.

5


Isometric View 1:2

Adjusting Distance of Contour Lines ensures fins correlate with intersecting modules, allowing for ease of construction and clear view from cutouts

Sense of direction created in edges of modules through OffsetGrid andPtCrvAtts, perhaps working in conjunction with other focal points.

Seamless transition between 4 modules through implementing PtMorphList.

Alignment of prisms creates larger form which overrides standard 5 x 5 grid

Fracturing of triangular prism into triads creates strong sense of horizontality, encouraging complete circulation, and possibility for appropriation through seating, stepping, etc.

Riff between somewhat parallel surface in plan and horizontality of the panelling.

0

1mm 0

1mm

2mm 2mm

Regular Cutouts ensure consistent air circulation and sense of permeability between interior and exterior.

3mm 3mm

6


SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Laser Cutting

Tabs 3mm with 2mm recess

Where possible, modules are grouped to increase efficiency of fabrication process

Panels are nested tightly to compensate for individual module fabrication

Selected tabs etched to prevent taping of laser cut panels Etch lines correspond with fold lines, allowing for crisp panels

7

Creating a laser cut model for fabrication involves: • ptUnRoll faces of polysurfaces • ptTabs with distance 3mm, recess 2mm • Make2D to remove overlapping linework • Adjust layers to etch and cut As the panelling shapes were irregular, ptUnRoll initially caused major overlaps. This was mediated by exploding the individual panels, joining particular edges and then repeating the command to test. The process of unrolling panels dramatically restricts the complexity of the modules utilised, as the meshes must be simple enough to fold. I focused on striking a balance between overall effect and constructability.


Lofts

1.1

1.2

{0, 150, 150}

1.3

Key

1.4

{0, 90, 150}

{60, 150, 150} {120, 150, 150} {150, 150, 150}

{150, 150, 150} {150, 90, 150}

{120, 150, 150}

{120, 150, 150} {150, 90, 150}

{0, 150, 30}

{150, 0, 150}

{0, 150, 0}

{90, 0, 150}

{90, 150, 0}

{150, 0, 150} {90, 150, 0}

{150, 150, 30}

{0, 30, 0}

{0, 30, 0}

{60, 0, 0} {120,0, 0} {150, 0, 0}

{30, 0, 0} {150, 0, 0 }

{150, 0, 90}

{50, 150, 0}

{150, 0, 0}

{150, 60, 0}

Paneling Grid & Attractor Curve

{Index Selection}

{Index Selection}

{Index Selection}

{Index Selection}

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

{-180, 250, 0} {-120, 150, 0} {150, 0, 0} {100, 90, 30}

{120, 0, 25} {-50, 0, 90}

{70, 40, 10}

{-50, 0, 0}

{Attractor Point Location}

{Attractor Point Location}

{Attractor Point Location}

{Index Selection}

Panelling Modules

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

Domains

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

{Domain X 2 }

{Domain X 4 }

{Domain / 4}

Task A Matrix

8

{Domain X 8 }

{150, 150, 90}

{0,0,0}

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


Lofts

1.1

1.2

{0, 150, 150}

1.3

SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE

{0, 90, 150}

{120, 150, 150} {150, 150, 150}

Matrix and Possibilities

{150, 150, 150} {150, 90, 150}

{0, 150, 30}

{150, 0, 150}

{0, 150, 0} {90, 150, 0}

{120,0, 0} {150, 0, 0}

{Index Selection}

Paneling Grid & Attractor Curve

2.1

{-120, 150, 0} {150, 0, 0}

{150, 150, 30}

The panelling matrix further explores the {60, 0, 0} tension between quadrangular forms {150, 0, 0 } and curvature in adjusting: {Index Selection} • Surface Lofting • Offset of Grid • Panelling • 2.2 Adjustment of domains within offset grid I found that as a the curvature of the {-180, 250, 0} surface increased, as did the inability to mesh the quadrangular forms, with regular collisions. The final adjustment of domains in row {-50, 0, 0} 4 distinctly effects the tension between rectangularity and curvature... as the {Attractor Point Location} domain range increases, as does the amalgamation of both notions.

{Attractor Point Location}

Panelling Modules

Further iterations of 3.1, adjusting order of panel input and bounding boxes to generate variety.

{0, 30, 0}

3.1

{30, 0, 0}

{Index Selection}

2.3

{70, 40, 10}

{Attractor Point Location

3.2

3.3

4.2

4.3

The final result was extracted from module 3.1, due to its strong horizontal focus, constructible surface, and alternating modules.

Chosen matrix form to iterate further Domains

4.1

9


The shelter potential of the panel is explored. Its twisting surface creates nuanced pockets for play.

10

A detail of the panel offers seating appropriation through flattened faces. The scale of the form could be increased to create more varied affordances, such as tables for communal gatherings.


SURFACE AND WAFFLE STRUCTURE Photography of Model

The lasercut model explores the notion of discovery and inhabitation through prevalence of horizontal surfaces. The prevalence of parallel lines through adjacent surface faces, cut outs and module form creates a panelled form with a strong sense of directionality. This correlates with the idea of discovery and intrigue when interacting with the form, with a childlike sense of ‘play’. The implications of cut outs re shadows were explored, but it was found they were more effective in encouraging circulation.

A closer detail reveals the practicality of aligning modules in creating longer, accessible space. The sense of horizontality here is walkway-like.

11


Visual Scripting of Parametric Model

Construct initial grid using Domain Box, extract one face using DeBrep and organise into 3 x 3 grid with Surface Domain Number

Use PtCrvAtts to alter point grids based on curve Use Cellulate 3D grid with point grid input to create faces for grid boundaries

Input chosen Geometry with Distortion and Scale factors sourced from Remapped Values.

Extracting Centroids of grid forms basis for boolean manipulation

Create an XY, then YZ Plane between Centroids and remapped values. Rotate geometry based on Remapped Values.

Cascade Move grids, dividing box into 3 x 3 x 3 grid of points

Iterating the boolean surface through Grasshopper was conducted in three stages: 1. Box Creation and Division 2. Boolean Geometry Creation 3. Boolean Difference / Intersection in Rhino interface. 2 sets of geometry were utilised, stemming from truncated meshes in LunchBox and the Simplex Noise Plugin, which were manipulated in terms of scale, distortion levels, and rotation from a single point.

Using the endpoint of a chosen curve as a starting point, find Distance between Point and Centroids. Remap these values for scaling, distorting and rotating geometry.

12

When Remapping values for rotation, set domain from 0 to 2Ď€ for correct translation to radians.

For geometry 2.2-2.4, Mesh Sphere, then Deconstruct Vertices, Faces, and Normals into Simplex Noise Plugin. Control Time, Scale, and Volume based on Remapped Values. Import Geometry into XY and YZ Planes for Rotation.


SOLID AND VOID Surface Creation

The manipulation of boolean geometry revolved around the notion of

multiple facets of transitional manipulation based on a focal point.

Initially I began with regular, truncated geometry from Lunchbox. I found that the variation in spatial qualities was lacking, then implementing change of scale alongside distortion factor and rotation on two planes. Further iterations explored a drastic ratio between solid and void, however I found the cube then became the unwanted focal point. Organic geometry using the Simplex Noise Plugin allowed, although visually compelling and suggestive of varied spatial qualities in matrix form, did not allow for a certain gradation of spaces I seeked, and the single control point was indistinguishable. In the end, I utilised the initial truncated geometry for its defined facets fulfilled my aim for a definitive control point and gradation in form.

13

I chose to explore this notion as... 1. The possibility for thresholds, entry, circulation to be dictated by a single point. 2. A gradation in form creating both pockets and larger spaces which can be appropriated for varied experience.


SOLID AND VOID Isometric view 1:2

Gradation between solid cube and expansive space. Bookendlike structure draws parallels to Toyo Ito Serpentine Pavilion.

Multifaceted nature of form lends itself to varied light and shadow interplay that is temporal

Creation of nestled pockets through scaled forms, allowing for privacy and reflection.

Rotation of geometry creates inbuilt affordances encouraging rest.

Larger, more expansive space allowing appropriation for shelter and feeling of enclosure

Gradation in form results in areas in distinct sun and shadow

0

1mm

2mm

3mm

14


SOLID AND VOID Isometric view

Focus Area 1

The chosen solid and void boolean was developed due to its: • Fractal qualities, allowing for nuance in light, shadow, and experience • Clear gradation in form • Three distinct focal areas with varied experience, actualised through 3D printing

Focus Area 2

Focus Area 3 When rotated, the spatial experience is drastically altered. The single, all encompassing ‘interior cell’ is now constantly exposed to light. The form draws parallels to a dramatic terrain.

0

1mm

2mm

3mm

15

Focus Areas 1. Contrast in facet size, flat face which can serve as base, negative space which infers circulation. 2. When extracted from one side strong sense of horizontality, contrasting to notion of shelter in focus area 1. 3. Somewhat regularity in form, contrasting to other areas, perhaps providing sense of relief / comfort to user


Point Grids based on Curve

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

Key {0,0,0}

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

[Curve Selection]

{Curve Selection}

{Curve Selection}

{Curve Selection}

Geometry

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

Distortion + Scale based on Endpoint

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.4

[Endpoint Selection]

Rotation based on point

4.1

[Endpoint Selection]

Task B Matrix

[Endpoint Selection]

4.2

[Endpoint Selection]

[Endpoint Selection]

4.3

[Endpoint Selection]

16

[Endpoint Selection]

4.4

[Endpoint Selection]


Geometry

2.1

2.2

2.3

SOLID AND VOID Matrix and Possibilities

Distortion + Scale based on Endpoint

The solid and void matrix further explores the manipulation of geometry through a 3.2 control point with... • Varied point grids • Choice of geometry • Scaling and distortion • Rotation on XY and YZ Plane

3.1

[Endpoint Selection]

I found that as the organic nature of the forms increased, the distortion of form pictured grew in complexity, and when [Endpoint Selection] combined was visually unresolved.

Rotation based on point

Therefore, I chose 4.1 as the form to 4.2 develop further, as there is a clear control point, variation in light and shadow through many facets, and a creation of varied pockets which could be appropriated further.

4.1

[Endpoint Selection]

Chosen matrix form to 3D print

Row 3 focus- detail of distortion as distance changes.

17

[Endpoint Selection]

3.3

[Endpoint Se

4.3

[Endpoint Se


Focus Area 2

Focus Area 3

18


SOLID AND VOID

Photography of Model

Focus Area 1 The 3D printed parts primarily explore the allowances for both private and public activity, mediated by the rotated, scaled and distorted geometry. The geometric forms extracted from the final boolean model were most successful in capturing these nuanced activities. The organic contours of geometries 2.2-2.4 were restricted by physical capabilities regarding meshing and printing curvature.

19


Appendix

Process: Developing Panels

Mesh after PtMorph3DList. Modules collide and inhibit construction.

Simple Mesh before PtMorph3DList. Modules no longer collide.

Exploding individual faces and using JoinEdge to manually determine folds results in cleaner, constructable panels.

20

Initial PtUnrollFaces result in overlapping surface in top view. Mesh is too complex and edges are not recognised.

PtTabs with 3mm width and are applied to Make2D of surface. Surfaces are labelled and layered into Etch and Cut.


Appendix

Process: Constructing Panels

Lasercut 290gsm Ivory card A1 Sheet. Clean burn lines with water.

Organise module names based on Rhino file.

Fold etch lines of each module using ruler.

Join tabs of each module using PVA and tweezers.

Join modules, using bulldog clips to fasten.

Clean tabs in order to attach waffle.

Construct waffle using PVA glue. Test stability.

Attach edges of panels to waffle using super glue.

21


Appendix

Process: Script Development.

Initially Weave and Dispatch was utilised to manually dictate positioning of modules, using a true false panel. However, I found that the regularity of the result prevented variation of experience.

Weaverbird PictureFrame was trialled to create a frame-like set of panels, almost fully permeable. Yet again, this command did not allow for variation in opening width and hence overall intrigue.

A Pinch n Spread grid fram Pufferfish was trialled, however the visual result was almost identical to adjustment based on curves.

22


Appendix

Process: 3D Printing

Import STL File into Makerbot. Adjust Orientation to maximise efficiency.

Select Digital Design Custom Settings and Estimate / Print Preview.

A series of 3D models creating using Rhino and Makerbot Print.

23

With supports on, a time is indicated. This file was 4h9min.


Appendix

Process: Photography

Experimentation with light and shadow. Whilst with one panel, the result is speckled, by introducing both faces the shadows become incredibly dark, lending itself to a poor microclimate.

Profile for JESSICA BOURKE

Digital Design Module 2 Journal  

Digital Design Module 2 Journal  

Advertisement