Page 1

1.

ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK Megan Rodgers 588229 ABPL30048: Design Studio Air Semester 1, 2014 The University of Melbourne Tutors: Haslette Grounds & Bradley Elias

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


2.

Week One

Lofting and State Capture

From three basic curves I referenced them in grasshopper and established a lofted surface between them. This surface was then baked.

From there I experimented with altering the control points of the orignal three curves to form varrying types of surfaces and baked them to view their differences.


3.

I completed the lofting processes using closed curves to view the different effect created.

I followed this by creating alternates of the one geometry by changing the ‘loft options’ The options I used were: uniform, stright, loose and tight.

I also experimented with this form through changing the control points of the original curves to form completely new shapes.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


4.

Week One

Triangulation Algorithms

Through first creating a box and filling it with points from the ‘populate 3D’ comand, I created an array of surfaces within using the tool ‘Voronoi’. This was then baked and could be manipulated to create an interesting form. Even its basic form, I was able to see ideas that could use this technology process to create building designs.

Through first creating a sphere and filling it with points from the ‘populate geometry’ comand, I used the tool OcTree in order to produce a square pattern from these points. This pattern could be altered changing the Square or Group number with the use of a slider. Patterning a spherical object with squares showed the potential for some very interesting forms.


5.

Week Two Curve Menu

I created two curves in rhino and referenced them in grasshopper. Using the curve menu and the Analysis - End Points command I established the end points of these two curves and created a closed shape through connecting these end points with lines.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


6.

Week Two

Transform Menu From two base curves I used the command of curve divide in order to create points along both curves. From these points I could produce arcs. These arcs could then be divided up with control points along their lengths as well which I varied using a slider.

Using the command ‘interpolate’ I was able to create a grid formation across the length of the arcs from the produced control points.


7.

From three base curves a surface was lofted and then contoured with lines across its surface.

From these contours a projection command could be used to replicate the shape of a flat XY plane. With this projection a lofted form could be produced between the original curved surface and the flat projection.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


8.

Week Two

Curve Intersections

Starting off with creating a sphere and populating it with points and creating circles from these points. This was done on two different layers of the sphere creating stripes of the same geometry. These were reduced in number and lofted between them to form the strips. With the idea of fabrication the intersections of all these circles were isolating and a line was drawn on the strips at all these points.


9.

Week Two Extra Task

I input a selction of points through grasshopper and connected each set with a curve. I then lofted this curve to form a surface from the orignal data of points. I then contoured this surface. I divided the contours up with points and and removed the previous surface and curves.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


10.

Week Three

Creating a Gridshell

Attempting to create archs between these three curves created a problem due to the numbering of the assigned points to the curves. I redrew the curves to align the numbers. This allowed the formation of simple archs. After completing more of the tutorial I established I could have used the shift list command in this instance.

I increased the number of points and therefore the number of archs and then lofted a surface between them all.


11.

I created straight curves across the surface from an increased number of points using the geodesic command.

These geodesic curves could then be manipulated by shifting points and changing the start and end points for different curve directions and to form a pattern surface as can be seen above. Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


12.

Week Three Extra Task

I created three curves in rhino staked above each other and referenced them into grasshopper. I divided up each curve with points and created a loft between them

I then experimented with creating arches between the divided points of each curve and lofting these arches to form a different result.


13.

I then played around with the original based curves; elongating the height of the form. Also to form more direct arches I shifted the points of the bottom curve. I then contoured the form, breaking the surface into more simplified geometry.

Alternatively I tried the command ‘Delaunay Edges’ with my three base curves and points to result in a completely different form. See my sequence of commands in grasshopper left.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


14.

Week Four

Fractal Tectrahedra

I first created a polygon in grasshopper to form an equalateral triangle. This triangle was then extruded to form a 3D shape. In order to ensure all faces and lengths were equal, an equation was used to determine the apex point.

This triangular form was then capped, exploded and then scaled by a third to create the four triangles in the corners which can be seen right. These triangles were then used to trim the shape to get the desired form.


15.

Sliders from the beginning of the sequence of functions in grasshopper could be altered to quickly produce different iterations of the same commands. The process could then be repeated on the smaller scale to produce identical forms radiating from the triangular faces of the original. See the complete command sequence from grasshopper below.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


16.

Week Four Extra Task

I created a surface “the site� on which to model on. Beginning with one curve trying to create a sculpture of motion that is dynamic I first scaled the curve and lofted between the two. I copied the 2 curves and surface upwards. I then populated both surfaces with points.

I connected all the points from the top surface to the bottom surface with a straight line. Using the command delaunay mesh, I created a triangulated surface connecting between the top surface curve and bottom.


17. I baked the deluanay mesh. It creates a a straight-edged form of a still dynamic shape.

Experimenting in a different way, I tried the voronoi command. This created flat square forms with certain covering geometry from the base curves. I felt that this became too far derived from the original shape and intention I created.

Going back, I baked the full the geometry of the lofted curve surfaces and deluanay surfaces. This sculptural form is dynamic and a form that can represent motion and creating renewable energy through motion (kinetic energy).

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


18.

Week Four

Iterations from VoltaDom Precedent

In this family of iterations I took the standard geometry produced by the defintion and altered; 1. original geometry 2. the number of points on the surface 3. altered seed number 4. height and radius 5. domain


19.

In this family of iterations I took out the geometry component of a cone and substituted it for a cylinder. I formed the geometry and altered; 1. cylinders replacing cones 2. formed cylinders 3. baked geometry from full definition 4. height and radius 5. domain

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


20.

Week Four

Iterations from VoltaDom Precedent

In this family of iterations I changed the base geometry from a plate sqauare plane to a 3D cone geometry. I populated this surface and altered; 1. starting to put cones over cone 2. increased point number 3. baked out definition 4. domain 5. domain 6. base cone geometry shape


21.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


22.

Week Five

Evaluating Fields From the evaluating fields video tutorial, I first created a set of curves referenced in grasshopper. I then populated these curves with points and then point charges. The decay of these point charges could be ultered by a slider. I then merged these fields.

Inserting the component ‘Field Line’ I was able to create this collection of lines radiating out from the point charges. This has created a similar affect to the precedent ‘Biothing’ and it does resemble certain natural aspects which could be taken to my project which is focusing on biomimicry.

I changed up the component by adding ‘spin force’ into the defintion. This a created a set of curves that spin out from the point charges, in a similar but varied fashion to the last outcome.


23.

Following this I altered the the overall geometry by changing the curve points slider and the point charge decay. This outputs very different results. See below the full grasshopper defintiion.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


24.

Week Five

Graphing Section Profiles

Following on from Evaluating Fields this tutorial showed how to produced these curved patterns into a more 3D effect by having the ends curve downwards. This was achieved using a graphing tool, which could be easily manipulated to produce different results. Image 2 shows altering the graph while image 3 is changing the multiplication of the graph for the Z unit to a positive rather than a negative. See the full grasshopper defintion below.


25.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


26.

Week Five

Reverse Engineering ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

To beginning reverse Engineerig the ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011 we created some basic curves which we lofted together with arches. This was to form a basic shape to represent the pavilion which could be modified to resemble the actual pavilion more closely at the end of this process. We managed to produce the voronoi pattern, used for th pavilion, across the surface of our form. This then had to be altered to ensure that all the individual voronoi cells were planar otherwise future steps would not work and it would not be correct to the actual pavilion. We than began trying to offset the voronoi cells to produce the pattern seen on the exterior of the pavilion.


27.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


28.

Week Five

Reverse Engineering ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

This process used a triangulated form across the produced surface. This was developed with an offset form, moved away from the surface and lofted between. This has created the basic design idea of the pavilion but instead of the use of hexagon it uses triangles. This algortihmic process resulted in this form but we were not able to adapt it into the right hexagonal form.


29.

Beginning with a new process, I created the hexagonal pattern across the surface of a form produced in rhino. I produed this with the use of kangaroo. I attempted to take this further using kangaroo to make these hexagon forms planar. However this did not produce the correct results.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


30.

Week Five

Reverse Engineering ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011

Using the hexagonal command from kangaroo I was able to produce the right form on a flat plane. I experimented with trimming the produced surface pattern in a similar way to the pavilion. I then started to manipulate the surface shape by using surface morph.


31.

Using the shown surface I was able to take the flat surface with pattern and create an arched form. However trying to manipulate the flat surface to the correct form of the pavilion and not just an arched form proved much more difficult. See full definition below.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


32.

Week Five

Reverse Engineering ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011


33.

All the iterations shown here have been produced from taking the patterned form and using box morph, I morphed it over a hemi-spherical form. The form shown right it the one that has produced the closest results to the pavilion from this particular defintion process. However it is still not acquate due the hexagon forms not being connected in the right manner.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


34.

Week Five

Reverse Engineering ICD/ITKE Research Pavilion 2011


35.

This illustrates the process I went in order to create a form some what resembling that of the ICD pavilion. Starting with a surface based off the form of the pavilion as a gide, I populated the hexagonal pattern over the entire surface. I then offset each cell around its centre. I moved the offset out from the surface following each cells normal vector and then lofted to create the same cell-like structure of the pavilion. I then capped all of these cells and using 3D forms manipulated to the right shape I trimmed the surface to resemble the openings found on the pavilion. This created my final form.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


36.

Week Seven Iterations

Following on from reverse engineering the ICD pavilion I moved to try and create a range of iterations by altering the same grasshopper definition. The example above shows the use of point attractors to change the size of the cell openigns or the height of the cell/the move offset distance. The use of point attractors in this way has a lot of potential for our design in making it site context related.


37.

Moving away from a square surface to a 3 dimensional sphere I populated the same geometry over it and used point attractors again to create very different forms. Alternative to the hexagon grid pattern I also used a diamond grid pattern which populated over this particular surface in a better way.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


38.

Week Seven

Design Development

Here I have played with combinning two designs/defintions created within our group together. A surface created from using knagaroo and surface relaxation techniques combined with the hexagonal or triangulated cell pattern. The hexagonal pattern (seen first) does not work as well to fit across this particular surface. Instead opting for a more simplified triangular shape, and reduced in populating numbers, the pattern could fit well across the surface (seen last).


39.

Seen above is a very basic attempt to bring some of my ideas together on the site with some thought to the context analysis. Using the hexagonal cell patterning I created semi-enclosed structures that lead users from the two site entery points along the main movement axes to another point of interest with a sculptural form.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


40.

Week Eight

Part B Proposal

This is the final proposal developed for Part B. It works using the extrusion of shapes populated across a grid. The extrusions and grid structure are based off data taken from our context analysis such as entry point, movement axes, view points, etc. For example the main circulation axes have no extrusion to allow users to walk through while areas of low movement have high extrusions and have the design structure populated at a high density.


41.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


42.

Week Nine

Design Experimentation


43.

These really basic sketch ideas were looking at the site in plan and sections to experiment with a range of forms and spatial arrangements using some of our existing ideas from Part B. Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


44.

Week Nine

Design Experimentation

These are very basic sketch models down up in Rhino to visual 3D form for some of the ideas initiated on the previous page. I was playing with scale and arrangement to determine some ideas to move forward with.


45.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


46.

Week Ten

Design Development

Initial design sketch for proposal to move forward with. Looks at hexagonal extrusions as base structure and as a canopy structure incorrporating wind energy generation. On the following page are basic diagrams drawn up for this particular design proposal that looks at design formation and construction process.


47.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


48.

Week Ten

Design Development Research: Little Mermaid:      

No. 1 tourist attraction in Denmark Over 1 million visitors every year Idea: set up boat taxi service directly from little mermaid to existing terminal Copenhagen celebrations on 23 August every year to celebrate Little Mermaids birthday Langelinie esplanade is where it is located Surrounding attractions; the Old Citadel, the Gefion Fountain, the Resistance Museum

To Copenhagen:      

800,000 – 1.6 million over night stays in one month Denmark – 8.7 million visitors 2010 Copenhagen – 4.9 million visitors 2004 250 cruise liners 850,000 passenger 2004 372 cruise ships 840,000 passengers 2012 Approx. 5.5 million every year

Events:       

Copenhell – 2012 8,000 people, 2013 11,000 people Electro music festival EDM Scandinavian Reggae Festival MAD symposium Refshaleoen music festival Asteroiden theatre festival Eurovision 2014

Boats:   

Docked at site: approx. 750 Major cruise ship dock just up from Little Mermaid Copenhagen Harbour Buses; public transport system, every 30 mins weekdays and every 45 mins weekends

Refshaleoen:    

Theatre Restaurants Art gallery yard Markets

Pavegen:  

Top 100% recycled rubber and base 80% recycled material 7 watts of energy per footstep


49.

     

Used stadium 50,000 people over 2 hours would power; fully charge 389 phones, light 80 LED’s or 14 floodlights or power a village in Africa for 2 hours Flex 5mm Paris marathon produced 4.7kWh 600x450x56 12 Volts DC Can provide live updates via phones, ipads, computers, of how much energy is being generated

Wind Generators:    

Bimorph Transducers that layers piezoelectric and a nonconductive material Created by University of Texas at Arlington (UTA) 5 – 10mW from 5-50mph wind speeds Costing less than $30 each

Wind Data:     

Mainly south-westerly winds Most dominant weed speeds 5 – 11m/s 0.2-5.0m/s – 42.7% 5.0-11.0m/s – 51.7% >11.0m/s – 3.6%

Calculations: Pavegen:      

Visitors spend average of 30 mins on site At a casual walking pace will take approx. 1500 steps Depending on pavegen layout will alter percentage of steps that will land on pavegen Final design is approx. 75% Extensive calculations to come to final conclusions; 30 mins – 1500 steps – 1125 land on pavegen – 7 watts per step – 500-800 visitors on average day = 3.93-6.3MW per day

Wind:      

0.2-5.0m/s – 42.7% = 10mW for 10hrs 5.0-11.0m/s – 51.7% = 50mW for 12 hrs >11.0m/s – 3.6% = 100mW for 2 hrs 10x10 = 100mW, 50x12 = 6000mW, 100x2 = 200mW 6.3Wh per day per wind piezo Total: 317kW per day, 115MW per year

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


50.

Week Eleven

Design Refinement Extensive Diagramming:

PROGRAM

Stage Standing/Mosh Built structure/seating

We have designed our structure to accommodate a music stage. This will allow the continuation of already existing music festival at this site, including; -Copenhell -Electro music festival -Scandinavian Reggae Fesitval -MAD symposium -Refshaleoen music festival -Asteroiden theatre festival The hexagonal structure will act as a seating or standing area. The activity of people from a music festival will greatly increase the energy produced from the Pavegen.

Energy Production from Pavegen Layout

Covering the entire site in Pavegen - Will produce the most energy because every visitors step will be on a Pavegen - However hundreds of Pavegen would be inactive in areas of the site with low circulation - Covering the entire site also takes away any space for natural grassed areas and would appear over-dominating on the site

Energy produced from an average day:

5250-8400Kw

3937.5-6300Kw

1312.5-2100Kw

2625-4200Kw


51.

Energy Production No People:

On days of bad weather or other factors resulting in no visitors, this will result in no energy production. This is an attempt to further encourage visitors to the site and get them involved in renewable energy production.

Average Day:

Approximately 500-800 visitors spending an average of 30 mins, taking approximately 1500 steps each, half of which land on pavgen. In one day this will produce 2.62 - 4.2 Megawatts This is amount of energy could power a large residential or commericial building.

Music Festival/Event:

Approximately 1000-1500 visitors to any music festival spending 3-4 hours on the site with approximately 6000 steps on pavgen per person. On these days this will produce 42-63 Megawatts This would be able to power many large commerical buildings

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


52.

Week Eleven

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

Design Refinement PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

Extensive Diagramming: PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

ODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODU

UCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK EDUCATIONAL PRODUCT


53.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


54.

Week Eleven

Design Refinement Prototype Models:


55.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


56.

Week Twelve Design Final Final Models:


57.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048


58.

Week Twelve Design Final Final Render:


59.

Megan Rodgers 588229 Design Studio Air ABPL30048

Computational Design; Algorithmic sketchbook  

Sketchbook of work while learning techniques of computational design using Rhino - Grasshopper, within Architecture Design Studio Air

Computational Design; Algorithmic sketchbook  

Sketchbook of work while learning techniques of computational design using Rhino - Grasshopper, within Architecture Design Studio Air

Advertisement