Page 1

POSTGRADUATE COURSE ON COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN

POSTGRADUATE COURSE ON COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN ADDA 2011_Elisava School of Design Marina Villanueva Díaz


02


MASTER IN ADVANCED DESIGN & DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE Postgraduate Course in Computational Design ELISAVA Escola Superior de Disseny Universitat Pompeu Fabra March - July 2011

03


EDITION Postgraduate Course in Digital Design Master director, Jordi Truco Calbet ELISAVA, Escola Superior de Disseny, Barcelona. 2011 All contents and works in this book were fully created by Marina Villanueva Díaz and David Andrés León, architects. Edition by Marina Villanueva Díaz July 2011

04


COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY

MASTER IN ADVANCED DESIGN & DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE

contents

Teaching Staff

07

Introduction

08

Seminar_Genetic vs. Generative

10

Design Studio_ Intelligent Patterns

16

Workshop_ Fabrication Laboratory

44

Workshop_ Hybrid Prototypes

60

Thesis project_ Neuralnet

72

Acknowledgements

84

05


06


COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY

MASTER IN ADVANCED DESIGN & DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE

teaching staff & lecturers

Jordi Truco

MArch Emergent Technologies and Design, AA London. Director of the Master in Advanced Design & Digital Architecture. Co-founder of Hybrida. Pau de Solà-Morales PhD in Design from Harvard Design School. Professor at Universitat Rovira i Virgili. Roger Páez MSc in Advanced Architectural Design GSAPP, Columbia University. Professor at AA London. Co-founder of AiB architects. Marcel Bilurbina MArch in Digital Arts from Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Fernando Gorka de Lecea MArch in Advanced Design & Digital Architecture from Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Marco Verde MArch Biodigital Architecture from Esarq, Universitat Internacional de Catalunya. David Lorente Graphic designer from Universitat Pompeu Fabra. Professor at Universitat Pompeu Fabra.

Michael Weinstock Marta Malé-Alemany Neil Leach

Director of Research and Development & Director of Emergent Technologies and Design Graduate Program, AA London. MSc in Advanced Architectural Design GSAPP, Columbia University. Professor at DRL AA London & IAAC Barcelona. Director of IAAC. Architect. Professor at the University of Southern California.

07


introduction_Design Approach ADDA CoDeLab 2011_Jordi Truco

I

n recent years, the sudden growth of computational processes in most design fields has established a definitive changing point in the way architects and designers approach their projects. Not only do computers enable us to operate in optimal terms but they also allow us into new forms of logic. They let us research, experiment and create emergent and selfoperating systems, which can even adapt themselves to their surrounding environment and interact with it simultaneously. Hence, the Computational Design Laboratory focuses on the relevance that the new digital paradigm has and on its consequences on a design process based on the Deleuzian “thinking as doing� concept. We have studied morphogenesis through digital tools (scripting language and parametric software) and, in order to physically build the complex shapes that have emerged, fabrication techniques such as rapid prototyping and digital fabrication have been used. The idea of artificial intelligence from a Modern perspective is the study and design of intelligent agents. It is generally understood that an intelligent agent is a system that perceives its environment and takes certain decisions that increase its chances of success. 08


COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY

MASTER IN ADVANCED DESIGN & DIGITAL ARCHITECTURE

In this sense, evolutionary computation is a subfield of artificial intelligence in computer science that explores computational techniques based on the evolution of biological life in the world. In the branch of digital morphogenesis, processes to generate three-dimensional shapes and diagrams, such as autonomous agents or particle systems, are explored so as to achieve self-operating systems. These motioned systems are in turn controlled by a series of rules and digital algorithms that form what is generally known as a formal system. Animation is sought through computational design. As Greg Lynn claims, “the forms of a dynamically conceived architecture may be shaped in association with virtual motion and force, although this does not mandate that the architecture changes its shape. Actual movement often involves a mechanical paradigm of multiple discreet positions, whereas virtual movement allows form to occupy a multiplicity of possible positions continuously with the same form.� Therefore, the design approach of the studio is based on the research of patterns and computational strategies for the creation of complex architectural objects. For this reason, the set of tools used for the creation and development of this project required the use of parametric software, such as Processing, Grasshopper or Rhinoceros, and the use of a CNC machine, a laser cutter and a 3D-printer. 09


GENETIC vs. GENERATIVE SEMINAR_Theory on Computational Design Pau de Solà-Morales

MICROIMAGE by C.E.B. Reas


10.03.2011 - 15.07.2011

Douglas Hofstadter: Gödel, Escher, Bach: an eternal golden braid. Vintage Books: New York (1989). Terry Winograd & Fernando Flores: Understanding Computers and Computers: a new foundation for design. AddisonWesley (1987). Roger Penrose: La nueva mente del Emperador. Grijalbo-Mondadori (1991). Alan Turing: On computable numbers, with an application to the Entscheidungs problem. (1936). Rudolf Wittkower: Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism. Random House (1962). Colin Rowe: “The Mathematics of the ideal villa”. Published at Architectural Review (1947). William J. Mitchell: The Logic of Architecture: design, computer and cognition. MIT Press (1994). George Stiny: “Introduction to Shape and Shape Grammars”. Published at Environment and Planning B (1980). Volume 7. Peter Eisenman: “El fin del clásico: el fin del comienzo, el fin del fin”. Published at Arquitecturas Bis 48, 3/1984. Greg Lynn: “New Variations on the Rowe Complex”. Published at Any, magazine. Number 7/8 (1994). Fritjof Capra: The Hidden Connections. Doubleday (2002). Gilles Deleuze: “Rizomatic”. Introduction to Mil mesetas: capitalismo y esquizofrenia. Pre-textos: Valencia (1997). Edgar Morin: “El paradigma de la complejidad”. Published at Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Gedisa: Barcelona (1995). Jorge Wagensberg: “Complejidad e Incertidumbre”. Published at Mundo Científico 201, May 1999. Mark C. Taylor: The Moment of Complexity: emerging network culture. University of Chicago Press (2001). George P. Landow: Hypertext 2.0. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press (1997).


Session 01_Formal systems, Algorithms. Session 02_The Electronic Computer. Session 03_Process, Logics and Language in Architecture. Session 04_Generative Grammars. Session 05_Generative Architecture. Session 06_The Genetic Code. Session 07_Complex Systems. Session 08_Genetic Architecture: Architecture and Complexity.

12


course goals_Theoretical Basis and Contents SEMINAR Genetic vs. Generative_Pau de SolĂ -Morales

S

ince the Modern Movement began to fade away, which happened at the same time as markedly stylistic historicist revisions, the architectural theory has shown great interest in positivist design methodologies. Studies of architectural complexity and dynamic systems have stirred renewed interest in networks, bottom-up methods, adaptive systems, genetics and the automatic creation of form as the fundamentals of a new generation of design techniques. Furthermore, the widespread use of digital technologies in the last decade has made it possible, once and for all, to make the necessary verifications and to produce clear results of all this research. The seminar focused on new methodologies offering a wider range of possibilities for architecture, and set up solid bridges between theory and praxis by providing new ways of designing. This course aimed to provide a theoretical basis for new forms of generating architecture, by computational means whatever its methodology. It aimed to provide as well an introduction to computers and formal systems and relate this idea to the architectural trends and tendencies of the past half century. The course was based on the reading and later discussion of a series of texts representative of some of these theoretical ideas and architectural paradigms with which they are related. 13


critical essay_Thoughts on Computational Design

T

hese days, discussions on computational design are going on in the architectural field. This fact is the logic consequence of what has been happening around us since the technological revolution began in the 80s. The apparition and later inclusion of computers and computer based processes in our daily lives is a fact that cannot be denied, since computers have been opening new ways of development and research in almost all domains, from biology to philosophy, during the last decades, and of course, it has also concerned architecture. Therefore, architects have been facing new ways of exploring form through computerized processes that let them explore and visualize spaces in a very accurate way. In the very early stages of computer based design, most software was conceived as a mere tool for visualization, and they were mainly used to depict architecture. Often, this architecture being a continuity of the Modern Movement found in computers an easier way to manipulate and represent buildings within a top-down design framework, but this situation did not lead to a shift in its design approach. Nowadays, computational processes and software have greatly evolved from the first CAD tools, so we can claim that they do open up an actual possibility for a change. Not only a change in the way projects are approached, but also a whole new horizon in the way architects work and interact with their society. The autonomous role architects have played in our society until now generally involved a design process based on the designer’s personal criteria and sensitivity. Sometimes, such a professional profile made it difficult to create mixed groups of work or to simply implement projects with external expertise. That is why one of the keys for a new paradigm in architectural design is introducing collaboration within mixed groups of work 14


with a bottom-up working structure, so that knowledge from several fields is shared, design inputs are made more complex and resulting outputs are best interpreted. When it comes to the use of computers for architectural design, changes are even more significant. Parametric software and genetic processes completely affect and modify the approach architects take for the creation of spaces. Hence, the architect is no longer understood as the one that draws a form out of a concept, but it is the one that filters and organizes information around a concept. That is to say, the architectural design does not come any more from a pre-defined, top-down solution, but it lets the final form come out of a series of processes that include data selection, data manipulation and data interpretation. Therefore, the emphasis in this kind of design approach is mostly put on the way information is treated and computational processes managed. There is multi-layered work going on permanently that lets the designer organize information to go back and forth during the entire development of the project. That is why rapid fabrication techniques become an essential part of the architectural research, because they turn out to be a very useful tool to quickly test forms and get invaluable feedback. In the way we are challenged to work from now on, digital strategies and parametric rules are what the architect has to deal with to make computational design a truly interesting and powerful approach. The formal richness and geometric control that computerized techniques offer are out of the question, but it is essential to keep in mind that their value will mostly reside on the way architects manage their data and their computational processes, rather than on the appearance of their final result. 15


COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN LABORATORY DESIGN STUDIO_Intelligent Patterns Jordi Truco, Marcel Bilurbina, Gorka de Lecea, Roger Páez

T

he project we developped in the design studio was set in plaza Lesseps, Barcelona. This design studio was conceived so that students worked in pairs and it was organized in five clearly distinguished phases: phase 01_Data Collection phase 02_Operative Strategies phase 03_Animate Scenario phase 04_Intelligent Patterns phase 05_Digital Morphogenesis As a result, the work showed in this book comes from a collaboration between David Andrés León and me.


10.03.2011 - 15.07.2011


18


10.03.2011 - 24.03.2011

phase 01_Site Studies & Data Collection DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Marcel Bilurbina, Roger Pรกez

F

rom the very beginning, pedestrian flows captured our interest, due to the huge amount of people passing across the square every day. Whenever one starts analyzing this aspect of the square, one soon realizes how uncomfortable it might be for some to go from one point to another, so it became clear for us that our project should have to deal with this. Based on a thorough observation, we focused our analysis on the nodes people went through when moving around the square, and the possible trajectories they followed to reach their destination. The following diagrams show the evolution from a mere recognition of nodes and trajectories to a hierarchical interpretation of these points.

19


Concept Nodes’ position according to pedestrian flows.

20

Trajectories Possible trajectories between nodes


Frame Two-minute walk from the most centered node.

Hierarchy Node’s size according to number of converging trajectories

21


// VARIABLES DECLARATION///////////////////////////////////////////////// //VARIABLES VISUALIZATION // SCREEN SIZE final int WIDTH = 800; final int HEIGHT = 600; // OBJECT SCENE3D and SITEPLAN Scene3D scene; // declaration object Scene3D -> control camera and reference grid SitePlan site; boolean fill_site = true; SitePlan curveLimit; boolean fill_curve = false; //SitePlan constructionLimit; //boolean fill_const = false;

float F3_FLOCK1 = 0.0; float F4_FLOCK1 = 4.0; float F5_FLOCK1 = 1.5; float F6_FLOCK1 = 80;

// Cohesion // Avoid obstacles // Seek target // Seek attractors

// BEHAVIOUR PARAMETERS PVector TARGET = new PVector (300, 290, 0); // Target position int SEP_FLOCK1 = 15; // Separation between Boids int ATTR_DIST_FLOCK1 = 10; //13; // Obstacle distance float ATTRACTION_FACTOR = 1.0; int BOID_RADIUS_FLOCK1 = 15; // Action radius int SECOND_LEVEL_DIST= 20; // Distance for second level lines color BOID_COLOR_FLOCK1 = color(0, 0, 0); // Boids’ Color

// SET OF BOIDS: FLOCK/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Flock flock1;

// define the root of your project folder String root = dataPath(“C:/Users/Marina/ADDA_CoDeLab/03_Processing/00_base_01/ // Object Osc Osc myOsc; Data/”); int counter=0; // DATA OBJECTS //PolyStruct DataCloud cloud; PolyStruct Heights = new PolyStruct(); DataCloud cloud_2; //MovieMaker MovieMaker mm; // VARIABLES BOIDS ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // LIMITS float LIMIT_X = 450; float LIMIT_Y = 450; float LIMIT_Z = 25; // NUMBER OF ELEMENTS int NUM_BOIDS_FLOCK1 = 200; int NUM_ATTRACTORS = 27; int NUM_TARGETS = 1; int NUM_EMITTERS = 15;

22

// number of boids // number of obstacles // number of targets

// DEFINE FEATURES OF FLOCK 1 ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // FACTORS TO CORRECT BEHAVIOUR LAWS float F1_FLOCK1 = 7.0; // Separation, avoid collision between Boids float F2_FLOCK1 = 0.0; // Alignment, velocity

// ARRAY OF ATTRACTORS ////////////////////////////////////////////////////// /////////////////////// Obstacle[] attractors = new Obstacle[NUM_ATTRACTORS]; float [] ATTR_SIZE_1 = new float [NUM_ATTRACTORS]; color ATTR_COLOR_1 = color(200, 0, 0); // Color de visualization int minDist = 10; int maxDist = 30; boolean connection; boolean drawCircle; boolean height01=true; boolean height02=true; boolean closed = true; PFont font;

// booleans to switch from attractors[i].con


s

24.03.2011 - 12.05.2011

phase 02_Operative Strategies DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Marcel Bilurbina, Roger Pรกez

s

////////////////////////////

//////////////////////////////////////////

I

n the second stage of the design studio, we developped a series of operative strategies to process the data we had collected in the analysis, in order to create an animated polystructure with Processing. Digital swarm intelligence was used to create connections between autonomous agents and attractors through the definition of simple behaviour rules, so as to being able to use this data afterwards into our architectonic intervention. Therefore, we decided that in our case it made sense to set pedestrian nodes as attractors and make autonomous agents enter the square from the limits we had previously established.

nnection to flock1.projectLine() //

23


function 01: seek attractors

autonomous agents_Behaviour Rules

A

b

b

b

Processing initial settings Attractors and boids’ initial position attractors boids’ initial position

function 02: seek target

b

b

b

function 03: avoid collision b b

b

b

function 04: avoid obstacles

b

b

b

O

24

b


processing code_

// NUMBER OF ELEMENTS int NUM_BOIDS_FLOCK1 = 200; int NUM_ATTRACTORS = 27; int NUM_TARGETS = 1; int NUM_EMITTERS = 15;

// number of agents // number of attractors // number of targets // number of emitters

// FEATURES OF FLOCK 1/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // FACTORS TO CORRECT BEHAVIOUR LAWS float F1_FLOCK1 = 80; float F2_FLOCK1 = 1.5; float F3_FLOCK1 = 7.0; float F4_FLOCK1 = 4.0; PVector TARGET = new PVector (300, 290, 0); int SEP_FLOCK1 = 15; int ATTR_DIST_FLOCK1 = 10; //13; float ATTRACTION_FACTOR = 1.0; int BOID_RADIUS_FLOCK1 = 15; int SECOND_LEVEL_DIST= 20; color BOID_COLOR_FLOCK1 = color (0, 0, 0);

// Seek attractors // Seek target //Avoid collision between boids // Avoid obstacles // Target position // Separation between Boids // Obstacle distance // Blue line correction factor // Action radius // Distance for second level // Boids’ Color

// SET OF BOIDS: FLOCK Flock flock1; //PolyStruct PolyStruct Heights = new PolyStruct(); // ARRAY OF ATTRACTORS Obstacle[] attractors = new Obstacle[NUM_ATTRACTORS]; float [] ATTR_SIZE_1 = new float [NUM_ATTRACTORS]; color ATTR_COLOR_1 = color(200, 0, 0); //Display color 25


autonomous agents_Connection Representation

b

b

attractor - boid

b

blue connections

b

b

A

b

red connections

b

b

b

b

boid - boid

b

b

b

26

b

b

b

b


Some of the most significant iterations in Processing, giving different behaviours and results.

aa_09

aa_17

aa_25

aa_31

aa_33

aa_39

aa_46

aa_49

27


28


12.05.2011 - 31.05.2011

phase 03_Animate Scenario DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea

I

n this phase several interpretations of the emerging phenomenon in Processing were possible. Since what we intended to do from the first phase was to create spaces that responded to the pedestrian network system of plaza Lesseps, we focused our attention on the connections’ behaviour of our polystructure. Hence, we started up a deep study on how the different connection levels that had arisen at our previous stage could be interpreted. So, a permanent state of discussion over the meaning of the data the whole system was giving, was established at the team. This situation led us to a frenetic back and forth between the second and third phases, until we found a coherent valid scenario from which the creation of an architecture may be possible.

29


diagrams_Representation & Interpretation Initial scenario Boids moving around attractors following simple behaviour rules (functions 01, 02, 03 and 04)

First connection level Boids entering the attractor’s field and establishing a boid-attractor link

perspective view

perspective view

boid field boid field a.b.1 b.2

b.c.3

c.3

c.2

c.5

c.4

a.3

b

attractor radius

c

c

attractor radius

a

a

attractors atractors

30

c.1

b

attractor radius

1

blue connections branc branch


Second connection level Boids entering other boid’s field and connecting to each other if a first level link had been established.

Final scenario diagram Boids drawing a circle whose radius is proportional to the number of links established.

perspective view

perspective view c.3.1

a.b.1.1

c.2.1 b.1.

a.b.1.2

c.5

b.c.1

c.3.2

b.3.1

c.2.2

c.5.1

a.b.1 b.2

b.c.3

c.3

c.2

c.5

c.4

a.3

attractor radius

c.1

b

b c a

attractor radius

c

attractor radius

a

2

red connections branch b branc ranch

3

connection network connection type

31


final sequence_Iteration 50

32

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08


final state

perspective view

33


34


12.05.2011 - 31.05.2011

phase 04_Intelligent Patterns DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea

A

t this point our motioned polystructures in Processing had reached a certain degree of equilibrium and gave way to a further step into the development of our project. Therefore, the Design Studio plunged into the next phase and we proceeded to work in a new direction through which geometry and parametric design would let us define much more complex and richer morphologies. In the first place, we understood our polystructures vertically, as if each attractor defined a single unit (called tree) connected with each other at the second level. Eventually, we reapproached them horizontally and the main idea of the morphology shifted to a network which, in fact, made more sense regarding the initial concept of pedestrian connections.

35


connect3 project_First Attempt on Tectonics

A

s mentioned before, we started working with our polystructures from Processing in a vertical and individual way. We segregated each tree by selecting the lines we encountered starting from the attractor at the bottom and going up to the top through connections. The resulting group of lines was considered an independent unit with the particularity that it shared some of its branches with its neighbours. To create this morphology we used interpolated curves in Grasshopper with three control points. Their start always being the corresponding attractor, the rest of the points were those connected according to the original imported polystructure from Processing.

36


Interpolated curves From the final state in Processing, we used the original network to connect points from the bottom to the top.

Curves around circles We multiplied the interpolated lines considering the circle radius at each point.

Tree Finally, we used those groups of lines to create surfaces, understood as a strutural morphology.

interpolated curves

37


connect3 project_First Prototype

38


39


neuralnet project_Second Attempt on Tectonics

A

fter the Midterm Review, we reconsidered our first approach and went one step back to Processing so that our intervention could be clearly read as a network and allow more and better connections in the plaza. Therefore, we kept the original polystructure from Processing and gave volume to the lines. In fact, we oriented the circles from each point into the direction of the lines converging on it, and twisted the resulting cylinders in between. This geometric pattern let us define a versatile morphology and at the same time kept the structural meaning we had previously achieved.

40


Oriented circles From the polystructures in Processing, we oriented the circles into the direction of every line converging at each node.

Twisted cylinders We built a series of generative lines going from one oriented circle to another and shifted two positions.

Network Eventually, we created the polysurfaces around lines and circles and got an heterogeneous network, according to connections.

41


42


conclusions_Neuralnet: Ready for Fabrication DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea

F

irst of all, it is important to emphasize as a key feature of this course that although all phases of the studio were clearly differenciated, the process we followed was never meant to be linear. On the contrary, through the entire duration of the studio we worked simultaniously on several layers of information and included a constant revision of previous stages as part of our daily work. The end of this phase coincided with the start of the fabrication process of the Neuralnet prototype at the CADCAM workshop. So, what it was to be the last phase of the studio, the Digital Morphogenesis, was developped afterwards, during the workshops and the Thesis project. In fact, thanks to the two workshops on rapid fabrication techniques and prototyping, the project evolved greatly and could be much more detailed in architectural terms. This not only let us improve the definition of our structural network, but also lead us to the definition of interior and exterior spaces. Moreover, the inclusion of an architectural program and the design of the building as a realistic intervention with regards to plaza Lesseps were carried out as part of the Thesis project.

43


CAD-CAM FABRICATION LABORATORY WORKSHOP_FabLab Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea


05.05.2011 - 10.06.2011

T

he aim of the CADCAM and Rapid Tools workshop was to provide the students with the knowledge to fabricate some parts of their projects with digital manufacturing tools. Students were required to select a portion of their architectonic intervention and then learn how to complete the entire manufacturing process with a CNC machine. A feedback was to be extracted from the creation of these prototypes and then critically included as a key part of the whole process of design. Furthermore, both a theoretical and a practical part were included in this workshop. At the first one, students had to learn how to use the software RhinoCAM and then had to develop a strategy for a successful nesting process. At the second one, the prototype actual fabrication was carried out at Elisava’s facilities and the results were analyzed.


neuralnet prototype_CADCAM Process

T

he fist step being the selection of a portion of the whole project, we extracted a part of it so that the prototype would measure 65x65x30cm approximately in a 1:10 scale. This way, we would produce a 3D model with the CNC machine big enough to serve us as a training for the CADCAM process and also as a realistic representation of the generative system. The second step of the workshop was to find the best strategy to mill the pieces with a CNC machine. So, several ways of cutting the pieces were studied until finding the one that gave us the best result. After that, the milling tools and the stock were chosen and a RhinoCAM nesting process was to be defined accordingly. Eventually, the fabrication process was followed and supervised at Elisava’s workshop.

46


first step_Selecting the Prototype Selection In red, the portion of the project we selected for the CADCAM workshop.

47


second step_Cutting Method 1 Cutting the system Pieces were the result of cutting cylinders at their middle point.

48


Cutting the unit Resulting pieces had then to be cut by multiple planes in multiple directions

49


second step_Cutting Method 2 Cutting the system Regarding the difficulties we encountered with the first method, we separated nodes from axons.

50


Cutting the unit Resulting axons had to be splitted in halfs and nodes had to be again cut with multiple planes.

51


second step_Cutting Method 3 Cutting the system We decided to completely separate axons and spheres, and then split them in two.

52


second step_Final Method Cutting strategy Finally, what we did was to include the node into two converging axons, split the rest in two and set up a assemblage hierarchy.

53


third step_Assembly sequence Assembly 01 First assembly stage with pieces including a pair of axons and a node.

54

Assembly 02 Axons are added.


Assembly 03 Axons are added.

Assembly 04 Last axons are added.

55


fourth step_Nesting Process Prototype pieces Final pieces and assemblage hierarchy.

56


Front and Back faces RhinoCAM milling files.

Prototype nesting Optimized position at the stock.

57


final step_Fabrication Process

58


59


HYBRID PROTOYPES_FILEtoFACTORY WORKSHOP_FabLab Marco Verde, Jordi Truco

60


04.07.2011 - 09.07.2011

H

ybrid prototypes/File to factory y was an intensive computer-based design and fabrication research session within the ADDA Masters’ Degree Program at Elisava, conducted by Marco Verde. Starting from the existing state of the projects under development within the Computational Design Laboratory, the workshop aimed to integrate advanced manufacturing and smart assembly logics as intrinsic features of integral design intelligences. During the 5-day program, we were challenged to further understand fabrication and assembly constraints as parametric, operative variables of our designs and to develop novel fabrication and fast assembly strategies for our project proposals. The agenda of the workshop was to investigate “hybrid prototypes� that strategically combined different fabrication techniques and differentiated usage of materials to integrate multiple functionalities into their simple components. Special emphasis was placed on the implementation of integral solutions that, by means of high material and manufacturing intelligence, performed as structures, skins, environmental thresholds and habitable spaces at the same time. The final aim of the course was to detail, CNC fabricate, and assembly corroborative prototypes that were catalysts of a holistic understanding. 61


prototype 1.0_Morphologic Analysis Selected Prototype From the last tectonic test at phase 04 of the Design Studio

A

ssuming the geometrical analysis we had done at the CADCAM workshop, our initial point was a three-dimensional model in which two main parts could be distinguished. These two parts were called axons and nodes, as an analogy of what the main parts of an actual neural net are. Reducing the geometric problem to a single unit, our main concern during the previous workshop had been the way of cutting the piece so that the whole system could be solved by following the same procedure. In this workshop, though, another approach was suggested through the decomposition of the piece into its essential components.

62


Main piece Essential unit made of shifted cilynders converging on a sphere

Decomposed piece Essential unit made of wires and circular sections

b

b

a

a

c

e

c

e

d

d

63


prototype 2.0_Going Hybrid Transformed Prototype New prototype made out of planar pieces

H

ow to propose a new way to fabricate the same morphology? In our case, we chose to switch from a 3D milling process to a 2D laser cut one. The main reason being the fact that in this workshop prototypes were supposed to achieve a higher level of definition, the prototype 2.0 had to be thought as a system of several pieces working together. So, we studied on the one hand, the axons, and on the other hand, the nodes. In the case of the axons, we went back to the original lines that had been the guides for the turned cylinders and transformed them into strips. In perpendicular, we designed several rings with variable radius that would hold those strips and would serve to apport rigidity to the system.

64


planar pieces_Axon Decomposition Components Planar pieces forming the essential axon unit: rings and strips

Transformed main piece Essential unit made of planar pieces

b

strips

a

rings

c

e

d

65


66


planar pieces_Node Decomposition Geometry definition Parametric detailed design of the piece

Node Strategy Plane definition per every two converging axes.

b a nodes

c

e

d

67


neuralnet_Hybrid Prototype

68


prototype fabrication process

69


70


07.07.2011 - 14.07.2011

post-prototype_Workshop Conclusions DESIGN STUDIO Intelligent Patterns_Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea

A

fter the Hybrid-prototypes workshop it was time to take some distance and get a feedback from what we have produced. So, we soon realized that we had come to a result in which the axon components were far too important in relation to the node components. Taking into consideration the fact that our concept had departed from a pedestrian point of view and that the whole process had dealt with connections, it made sense that the nodes played the main role and the axons changed to be mere pieces for rigidity. So, from here on, we incorporated all these conclusions and started up the definition of an architectonic intervention that reflected better the sedimentation of all layers of information.

71


NEURALNET PROJECT THESIS_CoDeLab Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea, Marcel Bilurbina

72


03.06.2011 - 14.07.2011

73


74


03.06.2011 - 14.07.2011

neuralnet_Urban Intervention THESIS CoDeLab_Jordi Truco, Gorka de Lecea, Marcel Bilurbina

75


neuralnet_Program Distribution Urban layout Pedestrian trajectories and links with the public transport network.

F

rom an urban perspective, we proposed the relocation of one of the tunnel entries so that the busy traffic was taken out of the bounds of the square and it let the plaza become a much quieter place. In this sense, the shape and volume of the building itself let us split the square into two parts. A very dynamic one in the southern side, linked to the public transport and the most crowded trajectories, and another one being much more static, with green spaces and a playground area.

B B M

In addition, we planned a program distribution according to this two areas of the square, locating the housing lots next to the static areas and the public uses and offices as a transition from the dynamic to the static zone.

76


aptm1

aptm1

aptm3

aptm2

rehearsal rooms

offices

multipurpose room

aptm2

loft

loft

auditorium elderly housing

bar

conference hall

ground floor

second floor

first floor

aptm1 aptm3 duplex workshop

workshop

loft f

loft

offices office aptm3 duplex aptm3

duplex

aptm1 aptm2

third floor

aptm2

offices

fourth floor

aptm1

fifth floor

77


neuralnet_Sections Logitudinal section Relationship between the building and the plaza.

78


Transversal section Public ground floor and main entries to the building.

79


neuralnet_Faรงade Faรงade definition Proportional porosity depending on solar incidence.

80


North Elevation General logitudinal view of the project.

81


neuralnet_Pedestrian Views

82


83


84


course conclusions_Acknowledgements ADDA_CoDeLab 2011

T

his course was a great discovery for me both in architectural and in personal terms. It gave me a new point of view towards architecture and the use of computers for design. More importantly, it encouraged me to further explore this approach in the future and in my professional career. Also, after six months of an intense work, having learned, having worked and having spent long nights in front of our computers, I feel it is the time to say thanks to the people who were there to support us during these months at Elisava. To all my professors and coursemates, especially to David Andr茅s Le贸n, my friend and partner at the design studio, thank you.

85


POSTGRADUATE COURSE ON COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN

POSTGRADUATE COURSE ON COMPUTATIONAL DESIGN ADDA 2011_Elisava School of Design Marina Villanueva Díaz

Computational Design Thesis  

Research project on computational design in architecture from the Master of Advanced Design and Digital Architecture at Elisava design schoo...

Computational Design Thesis  

Research project on computational design in architecture from the Master of Advanced Design and Digital Architecture at Elisava design schoo...

Advertisement