ARCH 410 Digital Fabrication

ARCH 410 DIGITAL FABRICATION FALL 2024

Madison Young

1 1 MODULE DIGITAL DESIGN TO 3D FABRICATION Vase Print Wall Print Infill Print Gradient Forms

2 APPENDIX 2 MODULE 3 CONNECTIONS AND MODULE PRINTING AND PROCESS DESIGN

PHOTOS

Tolerance Test Module Prototype Final Module Architectural Scale

Infill Print Process Gradient Forms Process Tolerance Test Process Module Prototype Process Final Module Process Architectural Scale Process

1

MODULE 1 DIGITAL DESIGN TO 3D FABRICATION

1

VASE PRINT

fig. 1

| 001

VASE MODE PRINTING

fig. 2

| 10

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 3

VASE PRINT Process and Method

The form of this print stemmed from a series of six circles evenly spaced up a four inch line. Each circle with the exception of the base was rebuilt with a set of 10 points. The circles were manipulated to form a rounded pentagon shape, rotated alternating directions, and scaled differently to create an undulating curved shape that serves as the walls of the vase.

Going back and forth between the Rhino workspace and the slicer, small adjustments were made to prevent gaps in the walls caused by too extreme of a rotation at the base. After a few attempts and rounds of manipulation, the initial curves at the bottom of the vase no longer separated from the base.

The printer used to create this print was the Bambu Lab X1C, resulting in a relatively fast print at around 35 minutes, due to the technology of the printer and the single wall thickness of the vase.

1_ Initial form linework 2_ Lofted geometry from linework 3_ Sliced geometry 4_ Vase model photo 5_ Vase model photo, top view 6_Vase Model Photo

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 4

1_ Initial form linework 2_ Lofted geometry from linework 3_ Sliced geometry 4_ Vase model photo 5_ Vase model photo, top view 6_Vase Model Photo

| 11

fig. 5

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 6

1

WALL PRINT

fig. 7

| 002

PERIMETER AND INFILL PRINTING

fig. 8

| 12

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 9

WALL PRINT Process and Method

Initial ideas for the form of the wall started from a series of points connected through lines to create a set of polygons. The linework was mirrored to create a symmetrical wall. The polygons were extruded and pushed and pulled to add a sense of dynamism to the form.

The printer used to create this print was the Original Prusa i3 MK3.

The print itself had no foreseeable errors with the exception of the points and valley at the top of the wall. The slicer preview showed a fairly noticeable gap in the center and smaller gaps at each point.

However, the print went smoothly and the gaps were filled in the printing process.

7_ Diagram, workflow process 8_ Initial digital model 9_ Sliced geometry 10_ Wall model print 11_ Wall model print, top view

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 10

7_ Diagram, workflow process 8_ Initial digital model 9_ Sliced geometry 10_ Wall model print 11_ Wall model print, top view

| 13

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 11

1

INFILL PRINT

fig. 12

| 003

INFILL ONLY PRINTING

fig. 13

| 14

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 14

INFILL PRINT: 1ST ITERATION Process and Method

Taking the same wall geometry previously generated and mirroring it, a larger wall to test the scale of infill and capacity of the printer was created. This first pass at the infill print was see how the infill would fill in the varying extrusions in the wall as well as its stability.

In the slicer print settings, the perimeter fills were all set to zero

with the infill density set to 20%. The infill pattern used for this print was the triangles.

The Prusa printer, same as the previous print, was used. No major failures occurred during the print.

Aesthetically, however, the print looked as though the filament had melted together in some areas and does not have very “clean” edges.

Though the scale and temperature at which the print was set to prevented any stringing with the filament.

12_ Infill pattern and density 13_ Initial digital wall model 14_ Sliced geometry 15_ Wall infill model photo 16_ Wall infill model photo, top view

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 15

12_ Infill pattern and density 13_ Initial digital wall model 14_ Sliced geometry 15_ Wall infill model photo 16_ Wall infill model photo, top view

| 15

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 16

1

INFILL PRINT

fig. 17

| 004

INFILL ONLY PRINTING

fig. 18

| 16

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 19

INFILL PRINT: 2ND ITERATION Process and Method

Reverting back to the initial, smaller wall shape, a different infill density was tested to see if any of the aesthetic issues would be solved The same printer was used as before, however the infill settings were altered slightly with a density decrease from 20% to 5%. The same infill pattern was used.

The finalized print ended up with a set of new issues not encountered with the previous iteration. The distance of the peaks in the wall created some stringing between.

There was also some mild pulls in the filament around other areas of the infill pattern. Overall, this print was far more delicate, most likely due to the lack of density and single thickness wall.

17_ Infill pattern and density 18_ Initial digital wall model 19_ Sliced geometry 20_ Wall infill model photo 21_ Wall infill model photo, top view

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 20

17_ Infill pattern and density 18_ Initial digital wall model 19_ Sliced geometry 20_ Wall infill model photo 21_ Wall infill model photo, top view

| 17

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 21

1

GRADIENT FORMS

| 005

GRADIENT PRINTING

| 18

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 22

fig. 23

fig. 24

fig. 25

GRADIENT FORMS Process and Method

To create the initial form for this print, Rhino Grasshopper using plugins Dendro, Pufferfish, and Crystallon, started with the initial boundary representation of a 4”x4” cube. The dodecahedron shell infill option was used to generate the curvature and 3D pattern repetition inside the cube. The dodecahedron infill pattern alternated both inside and out, beginning with diamond-

like shapes that evolved into cubes and back. This, combined with a gradient pull generating thicker to thinner forms, not only created an interesting, complex geometry on the inside, but allowed for a unique surface on each side of the cube.

Due to the surfaces along the cube, the object was not flush with the ground plane. As a result, the

geometry needed to be pulled down in the slicer in order to maintain a stable base. However, one corner of the gradient cube was not touching the plater which caused a slight failure. This ended up being a minor obstacle and the rest of the fourhour print went smoothly.

22_ Gradient pattern geometry sections 23_Initial boundary representation 24_Digital model 25_ Sliced geometry

| MADISON YOUNG

| 19

fig. 26

fig. 27

fig. 30

fig. 28

fig. 29

fig. 32

26_ Model photo, side view 27_ Model photo, side view 28_ Model photo, side view 29_ Model photo, side view

30_ Model photo, top view 31_ Model photo, zoomed into partial failure 32_ Model photo, texture

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 31

2

MODULE 2 CONNECTIONS AND MODULE DESIGN

2

TOLERANCE TEST

| 006

TOLERANCE TESTING

| 20

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

0.3 mm curve offset

fig. 33

fig. 34-35

TOLERANCE TESTING Process and Method

This module focused on creating a set of interlocking shapes to test the offset tolerance to be able to fit together. To accomplish this, a repeating pattern was formed from a series of rectangles and circles which created a set of puzzle-like pieces that slide and lock together.

The curves were trimmed and joined to created individual shapes which were then offset in either

direction by 0.15mm, 0.3mm in total, to allow for a slight gap in between each object. The curves were then extruded to generate a threedimensional form to be printed.

Once the geometry was imported into the slicer, the pieces were individually spaced further apart to prevent any potentially bleeding or merging during the printing process.

The print ran smoothly with no errors. The final model was fairly loose-fitting and the tolerances between could have been smaller.

A lower tolerance or offset of curves and shapes will be explored in further iterations.

33_ Pattern progression diagram 34_ Digital model of curve extrusion 35_ Sliced geometry

| MADISON YOUNG

| 21

fig. 37

fig. 36

36_ Model photo, top view 37_ Model photo, side view 38_ Model photo, tolerance close up

fig. 38

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

2

MODULE PROTOTYPE

| 007

INTERLOCKING MODULES

| 22

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 39-44

INTERLOCKING MODULES Process and Method

The initial idea for a series of modules that lock together was created through a pattern generated by the Grasshopper plugin Parakeet.

The boundary shape was a hexagon which was then populated by zig zag lines to form the base geometry.

To create a void in the center, the module was identified from the lines joined, then offset. The loft command in Rhino was used to get

a tapered edge on the interior sides of the shape. The exterior walls were left perpendicular in hopes of creating a tight fit between modules.

To connect the modules, a set of solid and voids were placed around the form to lock into one another.

This shape was rectangular and was offset 0.08mm to allow for a slight gap or tolerance in the printing

process. Each rectangle is 5mm tall, 8mm long, and 2mm wide. These were placed alternating solid and void around the three “sides” of the geometry.

39_ Hexagon boundary 40_ Pattern fill 41_ Pattern 42_ Pattern module 43_ Offset 44_ Extruded geometry

| MADISON YOUNG

| 23

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

6 mm

6 mm 12 mm 6 mm

0.08 mm offset fig. 45

45_ Overall form 46_ Connection close up and dimensions 47_ Axon of connections and geometry

fig. 46

fig. 47

2

MODULE PROTOTYPE

| 007

INTERLOCKING MODULES

fig. 48

| 24

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 49

INTERLOCKING MODULES - CONT. Process and Method

There were no issues in the printing process. The geometry was relatively simple with no major overhangs or bridging, resulting in a clean print.

The tolerance between the two modules proved to work well. The modules tightly snapped together, however the male and female connections are fairly small and will

be made larger to accommodate a larger scale moving forward in the design process.

48_ Rhino geometry 49_ Sliced geometry

| MADISON YOUNG

| 25

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 51

fig. 38

fig. 50

50_ Model photo, top view 51_ Model photo, tolerance close up 52_ Model photo, connection side view

fig. 52

2

FINAL MODULE

fig. 53

| 008

FINAL INTERLOCKING MODULE

| 26

fig. 54

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 55

FINAL INTERLOCKING MODULE Process and Method

The final module design took the prototype geometry, modified the connections, and added a mesh to the interior of the same pattern the module was generated from. To create the geometry for the mesh, the initial pattern was offset and turned into a solid using the mesh pipe component in Grasshopper.

The pipes were cropped to the interior with a slight overlap with the bottom of the exterior walls to ensure adhesion when printing. Two layers of the pipes were placed on the interior for varying thickness.

These modules were printed on the Bambu X1 Carbon printer. This allowed for a higher precision of printing for the interior mesh as well

as the tolerances between the connections. The print time for each module was 2 hours and 8 minutes.

The four modules printed had few issues between the connections.

The scale however, makes it slightly difficult to get the modules to lock together. Though when they are connected, the modules are tightly secured.

53_ Interior mesh geometry 54_ Final geometry of modules 55_ Exploded axon of pattern layers

| MADISON YOUNG

| 27

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 58

fig. 56

56_ Model photo, four modules 57_ Model photo, connection close up 58_ Model photo, tolerance close up 59_ Model photo, single module

fig. 57

fig. 59

2

ARCHITECTURAL SCALE | 009 MODULE AT ARCHITECTURAL SCALE

fig. 60

| 28

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 61

MODULE AT ARCHITECTURAL SCALE Process and Method

The architectural application for this module is thought to be either a screen for shading or a partition wall.

A partition-like wall was printed at 1”=1’ architectural scale. Due to the delicate, thin nature of the geometry, the print was not as smooth or precise as previous prints. The printer used to fabricate this was the

Prusa i3 MK3. The bed adhesion during this print was weak. A few lifts occurred after the first pass of filament, one at the base and a few dispersed throughout the wall.

As a result of monitoring this design at this scale printed on the Prusa, the mesh fill of the full scale module would be incredibly difficult to achieve with these printers.

60_ Screen application 61_ Exploded axon of screen to window

| MADISON YOUNG

| 29

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 63

fig. 62

62_ Model photo 63_ Model photo, close up 64_ Model photo, minor failure close up 65_ Model photo, minor failure base close up

fig. 64

fig. 65

3

APPENDIX PRINTING AND PROCESS PHOTOS

3

APPENDIX

| 010

PRINTING PROCESS

| 30

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 67

fig. 66

fig. 68

Infill Only Print 66_ Finished print 67_ Printing process 68_ Printing process

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 69

Gradient Form Print 69_ Finished print 70_ Printing process

| 31

fig. 70

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

3

APPENDIX

| 010

PRINTING PROCESS

| 32

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 61

fig. 71

fig. 72

Tolerance Test Print 71_ Finished print 72_ Printing process

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 73

Module Prototype Print 73_ Printing process 74_ Printing process

| 33

fig. 74

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

3

fig. 75

APPENDIX

| 010

PRINTING PROCESS

| 34

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 76

Final Module Print 75_ Initial mesh print failure 76_ Printing process

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 77

Final Module Print 77_ Printing process 78_ Finished print

| 35

fig. 78

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

3

fig. 79

APPENDIX

| 010

PRINTING PROCESS

| 36

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24

fig. 80

Architectural Scale Print 79_ Printing process 80_ Printing process, close up of print bed lift

| MADISON YOUNG

fig. 81

Architectural Scale Print 81_ Printing process, close up 82_ Printing process

| 37

fig. 82

| ADVANCED DIGITAL FABRICATION F24