Issuu on Google+

AIR ALGORITHMIC SKETCHBOOK RENEE JACOVIDES 585430 STUDIO 01 CAM + ROSIE


2


WEEK 01

3


W


WK.1

C U R V E S + L O F T I N G INITIAL CURVES

CREATING AN INTERESTING SET OF CURVES FROM WHICH TO LOFT A VOLUME. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE FORMATION OF THESE BASE CURVES REMAIN A RHINO FUNCTION, RATHER THAN GRASSHOPPER.

LOFT ITERATION 01 FIRST LOFT I CREATED WITH THESE CURVES. THIS WAS AFTER THE TESTING AND REJECTION OF MANY OTHER LOFTS. ISSUES WITH THE CURVE SIZES AND INTRICACIES ARE APPARENT.

LOFT ITERATION 02 TESTING THE LOFT ROTATED 90 DEGREES IN X-AXIS. ADDING NEW CURVES AND CHANGING THE LOFT STYLES CAME INTO PLAY HERE

5


WK.1 F I N A L

6

V O L U M E

+


P R O C E S S

GRASSHOPPER TREE: BASE LOFT

GRASSHOPPER TREE: GOING FURTHER - SUBDIVING INTO POINTS AND TRIANGULATING MESH

7


8


WEEK 02

9


A L G O R I T H M

01 // BEGINNIGN WITH A BASE CURVE IN RHINO 02 // DIVIDING THE CURVE INTO POINTS AND CREATING PERPFRAMES AT THESE POINTS. ALLOWED ME TO ORIENT THE CURVE TO EACH FRAME AND LOFT. 03 // FINAL LOFT ALSO INCORPORATED A POINT TO VARY THE SURFACE VOLUME/CURVE SIZE, DEPENDANT ON THE LOCATION OF THE POINT. 10


I C

S K E T C H B O O K WK. 2

11


WK.2 F I N A L

R E S U L T INITIAL LOFT

I CREATED THE LOT ENTIRELY WITHIN GRASSHOPPER, ORIENTING CURVES TO PERPENDICULAR PLANES.

INTERSECTION CURVES

CREATED AN INTERNAL CURVE, AND OFFSET. AVOIDING ‘KINKS’ WAS VITAL TO THIS STEP.

EXTRUDE

CURVES WERE EXTRUDED, MAKING SURE TO COMPLETELY ENVELOP THE LOFT.

SURF SPLIT

USED SURFACE SPLIT FOR THE FIRST TIME, INTERSECTING BOTH THE BREP AND THE EXTRUDED CURVES TO CREATE CURVED STRIPS

FINAL

TOP VIEW OF THE SURFACE SPLIT - THE FIRST TIME I ATTEMPTED THE ALGORITHM MY SURFACE WAS ACTUALLY FREE FROM ‘DEFORMITIES’ IN THE SPLIT SURFACE (OVERLAPPNG ETC.)

12

0


1

+

P R O C E S S

THE FINAL FORM WAS FREE FROM OVERLAPPING SURFACES, AS WELL AS KINKS IN THE OVERALL APPEARANCE. I WANTED TO EXPAND FURTHER AND CREATE JOINERY BETWEEN THESE ‘FLOATING’ STRIPS BUT CONSEQUENTLY WAS TIME/SKILL STRICKEN. I AM PLEASED I DECIDED TO CREATE MY LOFT ENTIRELY IN GRASSHOPPER - SOMETHING I WAS LACKING IN FIRST WEEK. THIS REALLY GAVE IT A DUNAMISM AND UNIFORMITY THAT SIMPLY LOFTING CURVES IN RHINO COULD NOT ACHIEVE FOR ME.

13


WK.2

WK.2 WITH THE TIME I HAD, I DECIDED TO CONTOUR THE LOFT I HAD MADE IN ADDITION, AND FOLLOW THE STEPS IN ONLINE TUTORIALS TO UNRAVEL THE GEOMETRY AND BEGIN THE FIRST STEPS OF ‘NESTING’ FOR THE LASER CUTTER.

14

F

C O N T O U R S


I N A L

R E S U L T

0 2 WK.2

15


16


WEEK 03

17


W.K 3 GRID SHELL

I CREATED MY FIRST GRIDSHELL WITH THE AIM TO DEVELOP THE TUTORIAL PATTERN ON A SURFACE THAT DIFFERED CONSIDERABLY TO THE MATSYS PROJECT. THIS SURFACE PROVED DIFFICULT TO WORK WITH THOUGH. I WENT THROUGH A NUMBER OF ITERATIONS TRYING TO ‘PERFECT’ THE GEODESIC ALGORITHM. 01 // APPLYING GEODESIC CURVES, TRYING TO ADJUST CONTROL POINTS IN RHINO TO ‘FIX’ THE CURVE PATHS. 02 // AGAIN CHANGING THE GRIDSHELL CURVES AND THE ALGORITHMIC SETTINGS TO GET A FUNCTIONAL GEODESIC. 03 // FRUSTRATION STIRRED! I MADE A CONICAL SURFACE IN RETURNING TO SOMETHING A LOT SIMPLER 04 // NEW LOFTED SURFACE ON AN UNDULATING PLANE. ALLOWED GEODESIC TO SPAN AS FAR AS POINTS WOULD ALLOW. THIS ATTEMPT WAS ONE OF THE MOST SUCCESSFUL.

[01]

18

[02]


B E G I N N I N G S + G E O D I S I C I T E R A T I O N S

[03]

[04]

19


W.K 3 P A T T E R N I N G

S U R F A GEODESIC

I CREATED A BASE LOFT AGAIN FOR THIS NEXT STAGE IN MY EXPERIMENTATION AND APPLIED GEODESIC CURVES. I ALSO OFFSETTED THESE CURVES AND ATTEMPTED TO PRODUCE EXTRUDED SURFACES.

VORONOI

I FOLLOWED THE TUTORIAL INSTRUCTIONS, BUT TRIED TO GO FURTHER BY APPLYING THE VORONOI PATTERN TO A SURFACE. THIS WAS RELATIVELY EASY TO MAP THE CURVE COLLECTION ONTO A LOFT WITH MAP SURFACE.

CUSTOM : TRIANGULAR INPUTTING TWO OVERLAPPING CURVES INTO GRASSHOPPER I WAS ABLE TO SUBTRACT THE DIFFERENCE, AND ARRAY THEM RECTANGULARLY. THIS GEOMETRY WAS THEN ABLE TO BE APPLIED THROUGH MAP SURFACE, WITH MUCH CONFIGURATION OF THE

SCALE AND OTHER SETTINGS.

FAILURE... CUSTOM : BOX ARRAY

20

I ATTEMPTED THE SAME PRINCIPLE WITH SURFACES, ARRAYED IN A BOX ARRAY SCHEME. I COULD NOT FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAP THIS TO A SURFACE WITH SURFACE MIRRORING / MORPHING TOOLS.


C E S

21


P A T T E R N I N G

S U R F A C E S CUSTOM : OCTAGONAL CURVE PATTERN

I APPLIED THIS MORE INTRICATE AND OVERLAPPING PATTERN TO THE SAME SURFACE AND WAS QUITE SATISFIED WITH THE RESULT. I WANTED TO EXPAND FURTHER BY CREATING SURFACES BETWEEN THESE CURVES BUT I REQUIRE SOME ASSISTANCE IN THIS AREA. I ALSO CREATED ANOTHER TUBULAR, CLOSED LOFT AND MAPPED THE SAME GEOMETRY. I TRIED TO EXPERIMENT WITH THE SCALE AT THIS POINT AND FORMED A NICE, CONSISTENT PANEL OF THE OCTAGONAL CURVES.

22


W.K 3

23


W.K 3 CUSTOM : VARIABLE CIRCLES

I CREATED THIS PATTERN DRAWING FROM THE TECHNIQUES IN THE RUTTEN WEBINAR VIDEO. I AM QUITE HAPPY WITH HOW THE PATTERN TURNED OUT. IT IS AN INTERESTING WAY TO FORM A MORE RANDOM, ADAPTABLE DESIGN. I APPLIED THIS TO THE LOFT AND HAD A PLAY WITH ADJUSTING THE SIZE OF THE DOTS. I WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND ON WHAT I CAN APPLY TO THIS SCHEME BESIDES MERE CIRCLES. I BAKED THE LOFT AND THEN EXTRUDED THE CURVES MAPPED TO SURFACE IN BOTH X AND Y VECTORS. THE RESULT WAS A DYNAMIC, SPEEDY LOOKING PATTERN OF CIRCLES. IDEALLY I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO EXTRUDE IN LINE WITH THE CURVE ON THE SURFACE, BUT I NEED TO SEEK ASSISTANCE HERE AS WELL.

24


P A T T E R N I N G S U R F A C E S

25


26


WEEK 04

27


W.K 4

TUTORIALS: AND BEGINNING THE TASK

ABOVE: THESE WERE MY OUTCOMES FOR THE EXAMPLES I FOLLOWED IN THE TUTORIAL. UTILISING TRIGONOMETRIC VALUES AND FORMULAE FOR PARAMETRIC CURVES AND VECTORS.

28


T U T O R I A L S

TUTORIALS: AND BEGINNING THE TASK

MAKING DIFFERENT ITERATIONS WITH FIELD FUNDAMENTALS. GOING FURTHER IN THE FINAL ITERATION BY PRODUCING A SOLID...

&

B E Y O N D


W.K 4 CUSTOM : RECURSIVE GEOMETRY

SPANNING ON FROM THE TUTORIAL I TRIED TO CREATE SOME FRACTAL-DERIVED GEOMETRY THAT DIFFERED FROM WHAT WE WERE ORIGINALLY SHOWN. THE DESIGNS I CREATED WERE QUITE CRYSTALIZED IN NATURE, AND I FOUND I COULDN’T REALLY DETRACT FROM THIS STYLE DUE TO THE ORIGINAL EXTRUSION TO A POINT IN THE SOLID. I EXTENDED BY CONTINUOUSLY REPEATING AND ROTATING THE GEOMETRY. I ATTEMPTED TO PATTERN THIS ONTO A LOFT BUT COULD NOT GET BEYOND A SIMPLE ‘STACKING’ ON HORIZONTAL PLANES. I WLL SEEK ASSITANCE IN THE AREA THIS WEEK. BELOW: THE FIRST FRACTAL GEOMETRY I ATTEMPTED. IT WAS A FAILURE DUE TO THE EXTERIOR SURFACE. I COULD NOT ENABLE IT TO TRIM WITH THE ELEMENTS IN THE CENTRE. GRASSHOPPER DEFINITIONS (OVERLEAF) FOR THE RECURSIVE GEOMETRY I CREATED SOLELY. I UTILISED THE HOOPSNAKE PLUG IN TO CREATE REPETITIOUS COPIES OF THE GEOMETRY. IT WAS A VERY CONVENIENT PROCESS.


R E C U R S I V E

G E O M E T R Y

31


32


WEEK 05

33


W.K 5

34


E V A L U A T I N G G O I N G

F I E L D S + F U R T H E R

VIDEOS ONE & TWO

Evaluating fields according to the tutorial task, exploring different types of graphs to denote the appearance of the form. Going further by exploring the Pipe component to create an architectural form which could be fabricated.. Perhaps out of a thick black polymer?..

35


VIDEOS ONE & TWO

Merging voronoi component with graph controllers, allowing the creation of very complex and variable patterns. I also connected the graph to the Voronoi Radius input to go further in the task, producing the more dense patterns below.

VIDEO THREE

36

I also mapped the pattern to a sphere with maptosrf. The result was quite fluid and interesting.

W.K 5


G R A P H C O N T R O L L E R S & I M A G E S A M P L I N G

VIDEO FOUR - IMAGE SAMPLING I explored this in week three by my own accord, but the methods in the video tutorial allowed me to understand the proces of image sampling much more coherently.

37


W.K 5

VIDEO FIVE - AOBE TEI: HITOSHI ABE Using image sampling to create similar patterns to the Aobe Tei restaurant interiors. I experimented with different settings in the image sampler component (including different colour channeling to define the pattern). It could be furthered towards a more tesselated direction.

38


A O B E

T E I

39


40 Rule Srf b/w NE and offset

Extrude Linear applied to Naked Edges, arbitraty vector in XY plne

5 Sided Polygons (R=3.0) Moved in Z

Dispatch B-Line wire to ShortList ‘B’

Trimmed Solid with polygon extrusion

Polygons extruded 5.0 in Z

Move Centres in Z: Factor 7.0 Extrude to Point | Srf 3 Z Factor: 12.0

I started the algorithmic task with a definition of origami patterning I downloaded on the grashopper 3D website. I went through a number of iterations attempting to push the definition to the limit, and explore our material system. Brep edge component added to all surfaces, Offset Naked Edges

ALGORITHMIC CHALLENGE 05

SRF 3&4: Polygon Centres to surfaces

Subdivided Srf

New Loft from Rhino;

True, False True True False True False True False True False

Boolean Change - Dispatch

From TriGrid – Con – Map Srf

True, False True True False

Boolean Change - Dispatch

W.K 5


Srf 3: Polygon pt at 2, R=4

Polygon Changed to Circles

Srf 3 Preview Off Cull ‘N’ = 4 Dispatch T,T,F,T,T,F

Edges from Srf Scale ‘EN’ naked edges x 0.5, Rulesrf

SubDivide U=18, V=11

Srf 4: Polygon pts at 2

SDivide U=10, V=11

Srf 4: Preview off

Pipe for 2nd & 3rd SRF4PT

Removed 1x Reverse Geometry Component

Same, as before, different smaller vector line

Cull Nth Element: N=5

Repeat Component D=0,1,2

SDIVIDE: U=16 V=9

Remove ‘Flip’ component b/w cull and dispatch

A L G O R I T H M I C T A S K 5

41


W.K 5

42


A L G O R I T H M I C

T A S K

PLEASE DISREGARD THE SEEMINGLY DYSFUNCTIONAL SLGORITHM. I TOOK A SCREENSHOT AFTER CLOSONG MY RHINO FILE

FINAL DEFINITION ALGORITHMIC CHALLENGE 05.

43


44


WEEK 06

45


W.K 6 01

Exploring how to create a grid using the series component and Cross Reference Component.

02

Grafting the series to experiment with flipping (not shown, apologies). Also utilised the ParamViewer component as a means of analysis.

46


I N T R O D U C T I O N T O D A T A T R E E S

03

Understanding how Surface UVs work, and how to alter them with rebuildsrf component and subsequently work with them. Moving the points with the aid of a series

47


W.K 6

04

Attempting to create frames in between the driftwood surfaces that I developed in Wk. 2, and referenced as a new Brep. This worked until I tried to create the ‘shifted’ brep, in order to attain jaggered edges. For some reason, I could not obtain the same result as in the tutorial video, despite mulling over the definition for quite some time. I will enquire with Cam regarding this issue.

48


A A D R I F T W O O D C R E A T I N G F R A M E S

49


WK.6 C O N T I N U O U S

50

P A T


T T E R N I N G

05

Creating Bezier spans between my recursive geometry (from Week 04’s sketchbook task) in order to create continuous patterning in the style of Aranda Lasch. I encountered an issue when unrolling, and this is because my ‘unroll’ component is different to the one utilised in the tutorial videos. I , along with others in the studio I have corresponded with, have searched relentlessly for this plugin, to no avail. Issues with python script were also occurring, regardless of how meticulously I copied the script in the tutorial :(

51


52


WEEK NTP

53


NTP

01

NTP was highly absorbed by the development of our own grasshopper definition, and progression of certain iterations for FABLAB cutting. On the left are the main iterations the definition went through duing this period. The definition on the right is quite messy (sorry) but delineates all efforts to unroll geometry in various ways, and develop a structural system inherently defined by the panelled tesselation.

54


E X T E N T O F G R O U P A L G O R I T H M E N D I N G W K . N T P

55


56


WEEK 08

57


W.8

GRAPH SAM TO RAISE HE TRIMMING CE

58


D E V E L O P I N G A L G O R I T H M

A

N E W

TRYING TO CREATE AN ‘ARCHITECTURALLY APT’ FORM. IMAGE SAMPLER USED TO GENERATE POINTS.

USING FIELD FORCES TO EXPLORE GENERATATING CURVES AROUND POINTS.

MPLERS EMPLOYED EIGHT DRASTICALLY. ENTRAL CURVES.

PIPING STRUCTURE AND CULLING CURVES DEPENDING ON THEIR LENGTH.

59


W. 8 D E V E L O P I N G

60

A

N E W


A L G O R I T H M

THE DESIGN WE CREATED WAS NOT EVENTUALLY USED, HOWEVER WAS GREATLY USEFUL IN CREATING OUR FINAL TECHNIQUE

61


W.8

62


D E V E L O P I N G A L G O R I T H M

A

N E W

63


64


WEEK 09

65


W. 9 W I N D SUMMER 0m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

A N A L Y S I S : SUMMER 20m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

SUMMER 70m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

WINTER 70m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

WINTER 100m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

SUMMER 100m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

WINTER 0m ABOVE SEA LEVEL

66

V A


S A R I WE BRANCHED OUT INTO ANOTHER COMPUTATIONAL PROGRAM, VASARI. WE WERE ABLE TO PERFORM EXTENSIVE SITE ANALYSIS WITH THE FRAMEWORK.

67


68


F O R M

F I N D I N G

W.9

69


W.9

70

[01]

[04]

[07]

[02]

[05]

[08]


W I N D A N A L Y S I S : V A S A R I

Finally, we were able to import some of our designs into Vasari, testing how each of them worked with the wind. We tested many initial failures with forms not appropiate for the wind conditions. The coloured imagery demonstrates the most successful option, with a form we ‘discovered’ using some of the computational methods from Studio Air so far (as mentioned in the previous few pages). It was successful over the majority of the heights.

71


F O R M

72

F I N D I N G


W. 9

73


W. 9

S O L A R ‘ B L I P ’ L A D Y B U G E X P L O R A T I O N S WE BRIEFLY RESOLVED ON CREATING A COMPOSITE SOLAR SYSTEM. LADYBUG WAS EMPLOYED AS A COMPUTATIONAL METHOD FOR CREATING SOLAR PANELS EXTRUDED TOWARDS THE SUN, ANALYSING SOLAR RADIATION LEVELS ACROSS VARIABLE FORMS. THE IDEA WAS DISMISSED, BUT INFORMED A LARGE PORTION OF WEEK 9.

74


FORM 01 - SUCCESS

FORM 02 - LESS SUCCESS

FORM 03 - SUCCESS, + CULL

75


L A D Y B U G

76

W.9


PLEASE EXCUSE MISSING LADYBUG COMPONENTS COMPUTER HAD A HICCUP ATTEMPTING TO RE-LOAD THE FILE.

77


78


WEEK 10

79


80


F I N A L I S I N G

W.10

81


F I N A L

82

A L G O R I T H M S W.10


83


84


F I N A L

A L G O R I T H M S

W.10

85


W.10

86


F I N A L A L G O R I T H M S

87


88


89


90


Jacovides_Renee_Algorithmic Sketch