DDF M4 Journal, Zheng Wu 846736

DIGITAL DESIGN + FABRICATION SM1, 2017 “Breathing Silver”

Tirteen Zheng Wu 846736 Tutor : Siavash Malek Group E

1

2

3

4

1.0 IDEATION 1.1 Object 1.2 Object + System Analysis 1.3 Digital Model 1.4 Volume 1.5 Sketch Design proposals 1.6 M1 Reflection 2.0 DESIGN 2.1 Design Development Introduction 2.2 Refined Sketch models 2.3 Digitisation + Design proposals 2.4 Precedent Research 2.5 Design Development 2.6 Prototype + Testing Effects 2.7 M2 Reflection 3.0 FABRICATION 3.1 Design Focus 3.2 Design development & Fabrication of prototype V.2 3.3 Design development & Fabrication of prototype V.3 3.4 Final Prototype development + optimisation 3.5 Final Digital model 3.6 Fabrication Sequence 3.7 Assembly Drawing 3.8 Completed 2nd Skin 4.0 REFLECTION 5.0 Appendix 5.1 Bibliography 5.2 Credits

5

6

0.0 Introduction A silverish breathable deffensive skin.

A second skin reflects light, defends the sensitives.

In this design project, we have addressed the notion of personal space by designing a spectrum of spiky, permeable, and reflective modular forms which have been fitted to a female body. The overall effect is a strikingly metallic, spiny, and flexibly dynamism. The design defends the personal space around the sensitive parts with spikes of varying depths, without compromising the greater trnasparency at other parts.

7

8

1.0 IDEATION Introduction The first Module asked us to examine and analyse objects, quantifying their properties and structural mechanism for further design of a second skin. Through a detailed and logical measurement practice, I explored the Panel and Fold system of a folding fence.

Digital modelling was used to translate the object into Rhinos, allowing me to explore the folding mechanism and generate some inital sketch proposals.

9

1.1 Object 290 mm

17 mm

148 mm

310 mm

Plan (Squeezed) Scale : 1 : 2

10

0

20

40 mm

4.5 mm

Elevations (Squeezed) Scale : 1 : 2

0

20

40 mm

11

Plan (Transition) Scale : 1 : 2

0

12

20

40 mm

Original Sketch Plan (Full Expansion) (Not To Scale)

Height: 355 mm

Range: 1415 mm

Plan (Full Expansion) Scale : 1 : 5

0

50

100 mm

13

1.2 Object + System Analysis Folding Mechanism of One Unit of Rotatory System

One Panel with three holes can-

Two Panels with one Pin Joint form one

Two Panels with one Pin Joint in

not fold itself as it is made of

unit of Rotatory System.

rotatory transition.

wood.

14

Expansion / Volume :

This panel & folding structure has potention to cover a large volume via expansion.

Limb-like / Reacher :

It has a function of an arm. It can reach something at distance.

Flexibility / Rotation :

Pin joints enable it to flexibly expand or squeeze. When streched further, the structure gains more flexibility to bend sideways. However, this might casue permanent damnage to the wood. A more flexible material such as composite silica plastics can be used to enhance flexibility while maintaining its structural strength.

15

1.3 Digital Model

Lower-Layer Panels

Addtion of Upper-Layer Panels

After addtion of Pin Joints South East Isometric (Squeezed)

Plan (Squeezed)

Pin Joint

One Unit of Rotatory System

Side Elevation (Squeezed)

Front Elevation (Squeezed)

16

Elevation Detail South East Isometric

Front Elevation

Plan

17

1.4 Volume Making a curved, volume-occupying structure using a flat piece of paper, with some techniques of folding.

18

Folding a flat piece of paper into a panelised squeezable form.

Drilling holes on ice cream sticks to make expandable rotatory grids.

19

1.5 Sketch Design Proposal PROPOSAL I: Expansion / Boldness / Defensive / Shocking / Fluffy

Expansion in 360 degree, as personal space is equal in all directions in this context.

The eight expandable fences hidden in the large plastic cover can expand simultaneously to gain the maximum volume for my personal space when I want to show signs of boldness or defense, or to cirrculate the air inside my personal space.

Numerous tiny holes distributed over the plastic cover allow fresh air to enter when the second skin expands.

20

PROPOSAL II:

Night / Spherical / Calmness / Eruption / Angry Red laser lights mimic volcanic eruption

Many small shining light bulbs inside the triangulated paper sphere in the color of light basalt blue.

Push the limb-like structure for ‘eruption’

This second skin can express the person’s emotion from the visual experience of the personal space.

When the person in a calm mood, LED lights shine throught the transluscent basalt blue paper triangles of the sphere and some triangle holes of the triangle panels, creating an atmosphere of a sky at night.

When the person is angry, a system of limb-like structure push two red laser lights out of the sphere, like a volcanic eruption.

21

PROPOSAL III:

The paper shell can be substituted by waterproof plastic shell, so that it can protect the personal space from both the sun and rain.

The gridshell structure around the most intimate personal space serves as a protective, semi-transparent skin.

The gridshell is very flexible for rotatory movement, so the person can freely squeeze any part of the gridshell to expand or adjust the volume of personal space, depending on activities and surroundings.

22

Flexible / Bouncing / Semi-Transparency / Gridshell

1.6 M1 REFLECTION In this module, we were asked to choose an existing object, measure and analyse its form and structural system, so that we can thoroughly understand and incorporate the structural system into sketch designs that address personal space.

During the measuring exercise of the folding fence, I applied the method of tracing the outlines of it using tangential lines and angular divisions, as introduced by Miralles and Pinos (1988/1999, p.240 – 241), as well as the method of transferring the object’s lines perpendicularly to tracing paper. As a result, the actual sketching of the folding fence was very accurate. However, when I put the scanned sketching into InDesign template, I encountered the difficulty of getting the scale right, even though I tried to coincide the sketching with the physical object on a 27-inch iMac, resulting some inaccuracy in scales. However, such a process enriched me with the idea that ‘observation is a necessary part of creation’ (Heath 2000, p. 7 – 9). As I sketched the contraction, transition, and full expansion states of the folding fence, I realised the working mechanism of this type of panel and folding system. Hence, this practice invited me to generate sketch designs, in which panel and folding systems are intrinsically applied. Moreover, I realised that all of my three sketch designs stick to the notion that ‘invasion of personal space in an intrusion into a person’s self-boundaries’ and address the issue that individuals may be ‘too sick or too sensitive to repel invaders’, which was raised by Sommer (2000, p. 27 – 28). Therefore, with adequate application of the panel and folding mechanism, I ideated the second skin sketch designs to be expandable, flexible, and defensive in common, especially some of which showcased values of threatening, boldness, and eruption. Furthermore, I attempted to play around the panel and folding system with different materials, such as paper, cardboards, wood sticks, and metal wires, to explore different performance of pin joints, curvilinear strip joints, and ring joints in the system, as well as the quality and effect of the folding panels in different materials.

Indeed, after Module 1, I have embraced the observation process as a part of ideation and making process.

In essence, M1 enabled me a quick kickstart in determining the structural mechanism of my design within the project brief.

23

24

2.0 DESIGN Team E: Karina, Jenny & Tirteen

Introduction In this module, I cooperated with Karina and Jenny to develop design ideas based on Panel and Fold system. With the aid of 3D Modelling and 2-dimensional fabrication technology (lasercutting), we ptotopyed a series of developed designs in different materials to examine both performace and effects. The whole process is based on the notion of making as a method of design.

25

2.1 Design Development Intro

1.

2.

1.

26

From the module 1, we have taken the idea of the form of a lantern, where it consists of multiple strips connected together.

By having multiple strips, it allows for flexibity and transparency.

After our experimentation of the prototype of the latern, we discovered different qualities the protoype can produce by twisting, compressing and stretching it. Hence we have chosen to further develop this prototype because of the potential it has.

2.

The concept taken from this mo vary, similarily to the way it varie be viewed as a portable territor throughout our body. As shown second skin takes up more spac we may feel less comfotable wh pare to behind us. Further, diffe interpretation of personal space design through the expandable adjusted according to the user’

odule 1 is personal space should es according to our body. It can ry which is not equal in all areas n in this sketch design, there are ce at the front of the body, since hen somone is in front of us comerent people can have different e. This idea is convyed in this sketch e triangular shape which can be ’s needs.

3.

3.

This shell structure reflects the protective quailty of personal space. It comprises of multiple strips overlayed one another to form a grid pattern around the body. The concept behind this deisgn is to provide flexibility and allow one to adjust their personal spaces according to its surrounding environment. This form also allows for personal space to be semi-transparent.

Our concept of our second skin design derives from our 3 sketch designs from our module 1. In all 3 sketch design, personal space is percieved to be flexible and have the ability to be varied according to the user and their surrounding environment.

27

2.2 Refined Sketch Models

Prototype 1 (Curlicue)- paper

Prototype 2 (Eclipse )- paper/MDF board

Pros:

Pros:

-By twisting the 2-Dimensional sqaure, it can be turned into a 3-Dimensional shape -size of the square can be varied depending on the size of the paper

-High flexibility; can be folded in different directions Cons:

Cons: -difficult to join multiple sqaures together -when paper is folded multiple times, it is not flexible and can be quite rigid

28

-there are material constrains; only polypropylene can fragile and MDF board is too rigid

Prototype 3 - paper Pros: -High flexibility and can create different forms Cons: be used. Paper is too

-material lacks strength, therefore polypropylene may suit better

29

Refined Sketch Models

Prototype 4 - MDF

Prototype 5- MDF

Pros:

Pros:

-can be easily bended however, it is not as flexible compare to the previous prototypes

-has dimension

Cons:

Cons:

-constrained in terms of shape; can only create a cylinder form

-very rigid, cannot be transformed to 2-Dimensional form -many folds required and very tedious

30

Prototye 6- paper

Prototye 7- paper

Pros:

Pros:

-can be expanded and contracted

-can be create a surface from a strip -pin joint allows movement and flexiblity

Cons:

Cons: -limited variation -paper/ carboard only choice as polypropylene might be too rigid. However, by using paper, after multiple folds, it may wear out and loose its strength

-only allows movement along one direction

31

Refined Sketch Models

Prototye 8- paper

Prototye 9- paper

Pros:

Pros:

-When folded, it is of a 2-Dimensional triangle and when it is expanded, it creates multiple prism forms.

Hence is flexible and is quite compactible.

-can be expanded and pressurised -can be varied in terms of spatial a

Cons:

Cons:

-quite a solid shape and dosen’t allow for transparency - possibly be difficult to use polypropylene as it might be too rigid.

-cannot be contracted much -too soft and can get deformed ov

32

d with a bouncy effect arrangement to address diffrent parts of personal space

Prototye 10- white polypropylene Pros: -can be expanded and pressurised with a larger bouncy effect -can be flexibly varied in terms of spatial arrangement to address diffrent parts of personal space -does not deform over time, good strength due to short span of the strips -semi-transpatrency, breathablity, and smoothy curves Cons:

ver time and loose its strength -cannot be contracted much

33

Refined Sketch Models

Prototye 11- paper with glowing spray paint

Prototye 12- blue cardboard

Pros:

Pros:

-can be expanded and contracted -can glow in the dark to indicate personal space

-can be expanded and contracted -has greater strength than paper

Cons:

Cons:

-its form is too uniform around it -too soft and can get deformed over time and loose its strength

-its form is too uniform around it

34

Prototye 13&14- white polypropylene and clear polypropylene Pros: -can be expanded and contracted -has greater strength than cardboard -transparency -can create more layers of diffrent degree of transparency when overlapped Cons: -its form is too uniform around it and does not address diversity

35

2.3 Digitisation + Design proposal V.1

36

This proposed idea consists of multiple strips wrapped around the body. The strips are bound together by through a common band which is attached to each ends of the strips.

By moving and rotating the band around the body, the composition of the strips will vary and therefore will create irregularity. Depedending on the movement of the user, the composition of the strips change. Hence, suggesting personal space can alter to adapt to different kinds of people.

The two bands allow one person to loop the band onto another person, in order to form a common ‘personal space’ between the two. This creates a space formed by multiple flexible strips. Therefore reflects our interpretation of personal space which can be translucent, free flowing and malleable.

37

Design proposal V.2

38

Plan

Perspective

Front

Elevation

Analysis By arranging the sketch model in different angles to create different bend effects, a range of spatial organisations of flexible ‘petal’ strip can be achieved.

Sketch Model (Flat)

Sketch Model (Inter-twined)

This design convept is based on the sktech model of a continious strip that follows a regular turning pattern. The amazing thing is that it is just one single strip but it can create a lot of possible spatial organisations just by twining diffent parts of it.

In our experiment with this sketch model, a design concept accidentally surfaced. We discovered that this single strip can be arranged by creating tension and contraction between adjacent parts of it to form a floral arrangement. Each part of the strip between two turning points can be considered as a subdivision of the long strip.

By forcing together two parallel lines of two strips which have a gap between them, a bending effect is created in the strips themselves.

Therefore, it is proposed that the wearer of such a second skin can flexibly change the direction of bending of each strip at will, in accordance to the changing personal space.

39

Design proposal V.3

Plan

40

Front

Elevation

Perspective

For this proposed design model, we got the idea from the rainbow-like shape folding, because it is more flexible and it can be placed into more positions.

When the wearer moves his arms, the strips will rotate and become curve in a 3d form. This idea is the one we are always proposing, which is the transformation between the 2d form and the 3d form.

According to Sommer (1969), the personal space is a portable territory, so it should be flexible enough to allow a person either to let others in or to keep others out. Also, due to the different personalities of people, the personal spaces have different forms and sizes. For example, an introverted person prefers a relatively larger personal space than an extroverted person did (Sommer, 1969). The rainbow can provide different personal space for the people with different personalities. Moreover, different from a rigid or unified form of a pattern, the wearer can see through the interspace between two stripes and it also allows the wearers to have the outsiders see only parts of them. Therefore, this model also relates to a visual personal space, for which the wearer can protect and expand his individual view, choosing what he wants to see and what he wants to see more. Also, because of the high flexibility of these strips, the wearer can also easily show the outsiders whether he feels like being invaded or he wants to invite someone else simply by putting his arms into different positions. This will make the strips either surround his upper body to protect his personal space or closed and flat at his back to make him look less defensive.

If there are two people wearing this, the open form of this model can allow the strips tangle together, which can provide a private personal space for two people. Also, we think that a personal space is more important and more sensitive at the upper body than the lower part of the body, because when people interacts with each other, they are mainly focused on their upper body.

41

2.4 Precedent Research

Flexibility, Inclusiveness, Variable, Itimacy, Isolation,

The concept behind this project by GAIA is to allow one to create a personal space with another, hence a ‘space for personal intimacy’ (Veasyble, n.d).

This ‘wearable accessory’ consists of folded paper which is ‘bonded to polyethylene and fabric’ to enable strength and durabilty (Veasyble, n.d).

The notion of isolation and inclusivness is conveyed through this accessory’s ability to include another whilst excluding and blocking out the surrounding environment. The folded creases enables the user to expand and adjust it according to their individual need; as when it is not needed, it can be folded into a bag. This allows the accessory to be portable and user friendly- it is achieved through the employment of the panel and fold system. Not only does this provide personal space to two people, it can also be used to isolate the user from others (shown in the image on the left). Hence the function of it can vary depending on the user’s preference.

42

Precedent applied to design

Flexibility, Inclusiveness, Variable,ww Isolation, Transparency, Breath-

The Veasyble has shaped our concept behind our creation of a ‘second skin’. The concept behind our design is to create a wearable second skin which is flexible and can be varied to suit the user, in order to provide privacy which accomodates for one or two people. Our interpretation of personal space is that it can be used to exclude others and/or include others into it. By allowing another to enter one’s personal space, it conveys inclusivness and intimacy which can be viewed as inviting. Hence, have a dual purpose of both including and excluding.

Although both the precedent and our design are panel and fold systems, ours varies from it, as ours consists of multiple strips in order to allow breathabilty and comfort. Further, the strip form represents transparency which derives from the idea; personal space is something which exists, however can not always be defined and be seen physically.

43

2.5 Design development - Version #1 Top

Front

44

Isometric SE

Perspective

Parametric Operations in Grasshopper

Front (Expansion)

Top

Isometric SE

Parametric Operations in the Box Fix

The precedent’s concept of ‘engaging another person and exluding the surrounding in expansion’ is well applied to the parti, ‘flat strips form a lantern structure’ in this developed design. Moreover, this concept is improved by the breathability and semi-transparency of the gaps between lantern strips.

Firstly, multiple layers of the lantern strcuture of different radii are stacked together to address the personal space of varying radii around the wearer. As the wearer demands more personal space near the feet for walking at ease, and more personal space around the shoulder for changing the position of arms flexibly, the lantern structures around these spaces have larger radii. Secondly, the parts below the shoulder serves as a measure of protection for the abdomial and lower body from external invasion, and strings in tension are used to hold these parts in their maximum expansion, while the parts above the shoulder can be more flexibly expanded upwards to protect the wearer’s shoulder and head spaces from external invasion without blocking the eyes due to the semi-transparency of the lantern strips, as well as to expand along a projection line to engage another person’s upper body. This creates a ‘space of intimacy’ not only for the individual wearer, but also ‘a space of privacy’ for two persons in appropriate situations, such as when they are kissing, having private conversations, and isolating themselves from surrounding distractions.

Besides, Grasshopper is used to create the multiple lines between the corresponding points on every two adjacent circles. to construct the expansion state.

45

Design development - Version #1.2

Top (Contraction)

Isometric SE (Contraction)

46

Isometric SE (Expansion)

Top (Expansion)

Front (Contraction)

Front (Expansion)

Analysis

The precedent’s concept of ‘engaging another person and exluding the surrounding in expansion’ is also applied to the parti, ‘flat strips form a lantern structure’ in this developed design variation, as the upper part of the structure can be expanded to cover another person.

Moreover, the lower part of the structure is also expandable via rotation of the strips. The wearer can expand the lower part to protect the lower personal space from external invasion. However, this design is not as good as the version 1.1 in terms of addressing the personal space around different parts of the body, as the radii at different parts of the the structure do not have a siginificant difference.

In contrast, this design is better than the version 1.1 in terms of the flexibility of the lower personal space, as the lower parts of the version 1.1 are too rigid while that of this design is expandable.

Therefore, although this design reassures the varying radii in the version 1.1, the improved flexibility of the lower personal space should be valued.

Besides, Panelling Tool was used to create this structure, which is much easier than constructing it point by point, line by line.

Right (Contraction)

Right (Expansion)

47

Design development - Version #1.3

Front (Expansion)

Front (Contraction)

Top

48

Right (Expansion)

Right (Contraction)

Isometric SE (Expansion)

Isometric SE (Contraction)

Analysis In addition to the previous design values, this design variation explores the application of special and personalised pattern to the sketch idea of ‘strips form a lantern structure’.

In contrast to the straight and uniform strips of the structure in version 1.1, we create a pattern sine and cosine curves between two ring joints of each ‘lantern’ structure. This can create more intersting spatial organisation and texture to the wearer’s personal space. In this case, the wearer may perceive his personal space to be filled with the sense of geometry and trigonometric graphs. Moreover, this second skin may be used for submerge the wearer in the midst of trigonometric curves as a disguise.

The essential value of this variation lies upon the message and language expressed by the patterns through the second skin structure.

However, as a limitation, it is not good enough to have one fixed pattern shown on the surface of the second skin as it looks too rigid.

We have made a medium-sized prototype for this design, using laser-cut white polyropylene and strong, transparent, monofilament fishing lines to join the strip panels together, as well as to link two ring joints for hanging effect when the line bracings are in tension. However, after fabrication of it, we realise that its physical form is different from the ideal form because the panels are too loose due to gravity, too much flexibility of the material and the longer span of the panels. Hence, it would be too difficult and unsatisfactory to make its full-size prototype.

Prototype (Expansion)

Prototype (Contraction)

49

Design development - Version #1.4

Top

Front

50

Right

Isometric SE

Analysis

This design variation is successful in addressing the irregularity of personal space.

As different people with unique characters have their own personal preference of how to organise their personal space, the parti ‘ flat strips form a lantern structure’ can particularly address the diversity pf personal space in a spectrum of variation of the forms, which in other words, the spatial organisation of the strip elements.

For example, in this design, the spatial emphasis on the right shoulder and the left leg of the wearer is demonstrated by the asymmetrical form of the second skin. This suggests that this wearer prefer to expose his left shoulder and arm while his right shoulder and arm feels better in the protection of the second skin.

The essential value of this variation lies upon the infinite possibilities of the spatial organisation of strip elements among diverse sizes of personal space.

Perspective

51

Design Development - Version #2

Top (Character 1)

Top (Character 2)

Top (Character 3)

Top (Character 4)

Top (Character 5)

Front (Character 1)

Front (Character 2)

Front (Character 3)

Front (Character 4)

Front (Character 5)

Right (Character 1)

Right (Character 2)

Right (Character 3)

Right (Character 4)

Right (Character 5)

52

Analysis

Isometric SE (Character 1)

Isometric SE (Character 2)

Isometric SE (Character 3)

Isometric SE (Character 4)

Isometric SE (Character 5)

This design variation is successful in addressing the flexible irregularity of personal space.

As there are more layers of the concaved or bent ‘petal’ strips of various length, the diversity of personal space can be more comprehensively addressed in this improved design.

For example, the character 1 addresses regular lower personal space around the wearer, while the character 2 addresses both the upper and lower personal space with less screening for the lower space but more screening for the upper sapce, by changing the direction of the concaved ‘petal’ strips. The wearer thus can switch the character of the second skin according to changes in moods, preference, activities, and surrounding environments and people. Hence, this design enables the wearer to transform the dimensions of personal space whenever they desire so.

The essential value of this variation lies upon the infinite possibilities of the spatial organisation of ‘petal’ strip elements in tandem with personal needs.

We created a small prototype for this design, and discovered the physical form is different from the ideal form as it is very difficult to control the extent of bending for each ‘petal’ strip. Hence, it is too difficult to fabricate a real-size structure of the ideal form.

53

Design development - Version #3

Plan

Front

54

Elevation

Perspective

Parameter Space & Design Process

For the rainbow shape development model, we decided to make the 3d models first and then put it into flat for laser cutting. This method can make it easier for us to generate the digital and physical models from our minds and concepts without losing too much information and details (Scheurer & Stehling, 2011).

Actually, we had the physical prototype of this model first and then we made some variations of the prototype. Then we abstracted the essential concepts and general shapes from our ideas and then made the digital model. The main idea of the developed design is to have more stripes and more coverage of the upper body. This allow the wearer has more options for defining his personal space. Moreover, instead of having regular shape and repetitive movements, we make this model have many stripes with varied sizes and move towards different directions. Also, considering of the feasibility, we add two small rings around the wrists and elbows for the attachment of the body. As mentioned previously in the refined design part, we have made three version of the rainbow shape folding, for which we used polypropylene, ivory card and normal paper. Finally, we chose polypropylene, because we need a material which can be folded easily but also has good plasticity. This will make the second skin model not only has the flexibility when they are folded into different shapes to suit the different requirements for personal space, but also can stay in a shape until people want to change its form. The process of testing the materials allows us to develop a solution making each individual aspect work for all situations (Scheurer & Stehling, 2011).

55

56

2.6 Prototype +Testing Effects

Material: Polypropene, pin joints The prototype is attached to the body through a ring which consists of a band with multiple holes. To allow the diameter of the ring to differ in order to fit various people, there are multiple holes with around 1mm interval in between them. The pin joints serves to hold the band into a ring shape, which is looped around the person’s arms.

Through tesing the prototype we had found polypropene is not rigid enough to hold its shape. It is often found when it was worn on a person, the strips will fall back to its original shape without having a 3-Dimensional quality to it.

57

Testing Effects

58

59

2.7 M2 REFLECTION In M2, we explored different effects and performances to test our design ideas by building physical prototypes in different materials and Rhinos models. There was continuation of ideas from M1 as we developed folding strip panels that pop out, according to various spatial arrangements that address personal space in different ways.

We took a multi-branched approach in the design process to figure out the suitability of various popping strips’ designs in terms of physical performance and effect, even though none of them alone was sufficiently satisfying to reach our design goal (a flexible design that is sufficiently stable).

At this design stage, our design process was significantly aided by the use of Rhinos through various useful commands, panelling tool, and Grasshopper.

As Scheurer and Stehling argued that ‘complex shapes can only be handled digitally’ (2011, p.70 – 79), the software is necessary to generate accurate 3D digital representation of our design ideas and to enable us to manipulate and modify every single part of the design for different effects. However, I disagree with what Scheurer and Stehling raised that building only parts of a digital model would produce ‘meaningful results’ (2011, p.70 – 79), as one of the main shortcomings of digital and parametric tools is that various physical forces are not represented in Rhinos, and thus the performance of design could not be ensured in digital form. Hence, using handcraft techniques and the two-dimensional fabrication technology, laser-cutting, we carried out a lot of prototype testings to explore the relationship between panel dimensions and material. This enabled us to familiarise with physical strengths, qualities and availability of various materials for M3.

Even though we did not decide a sufficiently satisfying design idea for the upcoming Module 3, we have explored and been aware of all the impressive advantages and detrimental shortcomings of our major design ideas so that we could find a much more efficient solution in Module 3.

60

3.0 FABRICATION Team E: Karina, Jenny & Tirteen

Introduction After our feedback from M2, we have decided to not continue to develop the previous proposed design from M2. However, instead develop from two of the prototypes made from M2. The reason being is the proposed design didn’t accurately addressed the concept of personal space; as the user wearing the second skin had little control over the movement of the second skin.

We had realised the reason behind this, was because the second skin was only attached to the user’s body via the arms. Futher , the shape of the proposed second skin didn’t serve the purpose we had intended it to serve (being able to control its flexibility, having different functions based on the part of the body and also having the ability to involve another person).

61

3.1 Design Focus The reason for choosing these two prototypes were because its ability to converted to a three dimensional shape from a two dimensional shape. Its ability to be changed fits in to our concept of personal space being flexible and altered when needed.

Prototype 1.1 uses the mechanism of pulling a string to allow variation, whereas prototype 1.2 requires a twisting motion for it to become a 3 dimesional shape.

Two prototypes from M2 to be developed

One of the advantages of prototype 1.2 is it allows transparency through its composition. An advantage of prototype 1.1, its ability to be have volume through a pulling a string; which is user friendly to the person wearing the second skin. Further, it also allows the user to have control over its movement.

Hence, we have decided to combine these two prototype in order to develop our idea.

Prototype 1.1

Prototype 1.2

62

We have found after analysing personal space that different area of the body needs to be addressed differently, as some areas require more/ less personal space and the second skin may serve different functions according to the body area.

Although, we propose to have different variations throughout the body, we intend to use a universal folding system with slight variation to address different areas of the body.

63

3.2 Design developemnt &fabrication of Prototype V.2

Our group decided to integrate the idea of ‘popping out strips occupy a spectrum of volumes’ into the idea of ‘a system of modular panels flexibly define a space’, as modular panels are the best to definitely indicate and to stably construct around the personal space, while popping-out strips can contribute dimentional flexibility and specialised transprency with niche patterns to the modular panels as much as desired by different part of the personal space.

Basaed on the integrated design, we decided the shape of the modular panels should be hexagons in different sizes, We agreed to use smaller hexagonal panels in the lower part of the final design, and gradually increased sizes for the hexagonal panels in the upper parts.

Moreover, we decided to assign less popping out patterns to the lower hexagonal panels and make them impremeable, while the upper panels should perform with more popping out patterns to gain adequately desired transparency and ample flexibility, especially before the face area.

In terms of the overall composition of the second skin, we decided it to be asymmetrical and balanced, for example, the shoulders & neck space would be partially covered by the modular panels.

64

We chose paper board of 1 mm thickness as the material for the fabrication of Prototype V.2, because it is light, flexible without compromising holding strength, contrasted to the looseness and excessive flexibility of poplyropylene.

Instead of using white cotton strings to connect modular panels for flexible performance, we chose contineous linear etching lines to connect most of the panels which are supposed to display solidity and to achieve greater control of their form, while the rest of the panels are connected by short etching connections to create some gaps and therefore transparency at the two sides of the connections.

In order to achieve the effect of ‘popping out’ on modular panels, we discovered the method by which we use a transparent nylon fishing string to connect certain holes on a cut pattern of strips on a modular panel. Hence, we have gained control over the extent of popping out of the strips by pulling the string behind the panel, and by doing so, the cut pattern of strips can dramatically transit from a flat surface to a visually complex popping-out structre. We chose the transparent nylon fishing string for aesthetic reason and strength in tension.

65

digital model

PLAN

ELEVATION

66

PERSPECTIVE

67

Perspective Viiew

68 Viewing Outside

69

3.3 Design developemnt & Fabrication of prototype V.3 Variation 1 We have continued to further develop our previous idea (shown in the previous rhino model and design development) by aiming to create a form which was able to be transformed from a 2-Dimensional shape to a 3- Dimensional form with volume. In our process of creating our prototypes, we experimented with different patterns and its effect it was able to create.

Variation 2

Our concept behind the prototypes was to allow the user to create and control the degree of transparency through having fishing rods connected to each strp of the pattern. When the fishing rod is pulled, the strips will contract. As a result, this forms a pattern and transform a solid panel to a volumised form.

We have found, the level of transparency created and the volume is dependent on the pattern of the panel.

Evaluation of variations Variation 1- The amount of transparency was too large and it lacked control, as the strips were quite irregular.

Variation 2- The system did not create enough volume.

Variation 3

70

Variation 3- The form was too fragile.

After considering the different patterns of the different prototypes, we had decided to use this form of pattern for our final design (shown in the photograph below). As this pattern alllows creates the most volume compare to the others, whilst allowing for transparency.

The trinangular division within the polygonal frame allows for easier fabrication as it is a developable surface. The triangular surface is a developable surface, as the triangles allows a curvelinear surface to be created through dividing it into multiple triangles. Hence, this will assist and allow for flexibility for our later design idea because of the potential of a developable surface. Further, by dividing it into triangles, it is more feasible for the fabrication process.

Transition from closed (2-Dimensional form) to open (3- Dimensional form)

71

72

73

3.4 Final Prototype development + optimisation

Material: Print Paper

Material: Cardboard

From our module 2, we have found the material we had used previously lacked rigidity, hence also lacked control. However, after experimenting with our prototypes, we realised we needed a material which allows flexibility for it to fold and unfold. Hence we wanted to find a material which allowed for flexibilty to an extend, whilst having some degree of rigidity.

We had found by using printing paper, it did not hold its shape as it was too flexible (shown in image 1). We have considered using polyproplene, however it’ll mean we would have to ectch on the polypropylene to create the folding lines. We were concerned that if we folded the etched line repeatedly it will eventually break. However, folding the polyproplene without an etched line will create an unclean fold.

As a result, we have decided to use carboard (shown in image 2), as it allowed for folding and also had a degree of rigidity which allows for the form/shape to hold in place, hence create volume.

By having the fishing rods attached to the strips on each of the panel, it will result in having multiple fishing rods/strings hanging off the second skin. This will create an uncoherent aesthetic, therefore we are no longer used attachment (eg. fishing rods/strings) to connect the strips. But instead, to form the degree of transparency in the fabrication process and not providing the option for the user to adjust its transparency. -

74

effects After choosing to use cardboard, we narrowed down the choice of color. We had decided we wanted to use the material of our second skin to also reflect adaptability. This can be achieved through using a material which had a reflective quality to it. The metallic finish produces a reflective quality through capturing the light in the surrounding environment and radiating the light back into the environment. This alludes to the idea of which the second skin is something which can change and be adapted according to the environment. As the degree of reflectiveness depends on the amount of lght surrounding the second skin.

In response to this, we have narrowed down to two types of metablic coloured cardboard. In our final design, we have decided to use the second reflective material, due to its higher degree of reflectiveness, compare to the material 1.

Material 1: This cardboard is of a metallic white in colour and when light is shone upon it, the paper illuminates. an aqua/ green colour.

Material 2: This metallic cardboard has a higher reflective quality to it, compare to the metallivc white cardboard.

75

connections

Method 1: 3D Printed Joints Method 2: Taped

Method 3: Stapled

We have tried two ways of connecting the panels. The first method was to create 3D printed joints, by slotting the panels the two panels into it. However, we have found it created gaps between the panels.

The second method we tried was by placing sticky tape over the connecting tabs behind the panels and stapling it. However, the sticky tape doesn’t allow for a clean finish.

76

Holes in the tabs for the wires to slot

Wires attached

Tabs which became frail

In terms of putting on and removing the second skin off, it is wrapped around the body and secured on the body by connecting two tabs. The connecting tabs are located underneath the right arm.

At first, we attempted to connect the tabs by slotting the tabs into the holes. But we have found, after slotting it in and folding it into the holes, the tabs became frail.

For the final second skin, we had decided to thread wires and securing the wires with glue. We had also used masking tape to hide the glue and colouring the tape with a metallic silver to make it less visible.

77

3.5 Final Digital model

78

For the final design, we separated the 2nd skin model into 3 major parts. The orange part is the sensitive area, the green parts are the less sensitive areas and they are used as transition parts for the whole model, and the last blue part at the back is the defensive part. The sensitive parts are very spiky and has low transparency. The transition part has a smooth popping out form to connect the higher parts to the lower parts. The defensive part has more depth and more transparency, as back is not a sensitve area and it allows more transparency, but people cannot see it, so this area of the 2nd skin are still very spiky.

MAP- PERSONAL SPACE (3 DIIVISIONS)

79

3.6 Fabrication Sequence

For the hexagonal tesselation frame of our model, we used the Lunchbox in Grasshopper to generate the frame structure form the curvelinear surface.

80

After we made the frame from the surface, we created the panels for our final design, we divided each hexagon cell into triangles for the later laser cutting fabrication. This step is very important for our final design, for which it’s much more accurate to unroll triangles instead of hexagonal surfaces. Then we numbered the edges of the triangles for the later model assembling.

81

For doing the digital fabrication more effeciently, we used grasshopper for making the offsetting lines for laser cutting. We divide the panels into some smaller parts for the convenience of assembling and laser cut them separately to see the effects.

82

1. Laser cutted the panels 2. Cleaned the surafce of the panels to remove dust and finger prints.

3. Etched all the lines which were going to be folded again in attempt to make the folding smoother.

4. Located the location of the panels in relation to the body and matched which panels connected with which one, as each panel varies in terms of the size, lengths of each side and the number of sides. We had identified thewloaction of the panels through referring back to the rhino laser cutting file.

Etched the lines

Stapled the tabs

5. After the identifcation, we had stapled the tabs on the panels to connect them.

6. The other side of the surface had laser cutting marks which cannot be removed. Since the triangular strips will be pulled out in the final design, we had to address this problem.

Initially, we had decided to spray paint the other side, however due to the consistency and wetness of paint, we were concerned it was going to leak onto the other side through the gaps. We also considered spray painting it before laser cutting, however this won’t prevent the marks of laser cutting.

We decided to use a silver metallic marker to colour over the other surface.

Burnt marks from laser cutting

Coloured surface using silver metallic pen

7. Made the connection for it to wrap around the body.

Effect of panels co+loured in

83

3.7 Assemblage Drawing

84

85

3.8 Completed 2nd Skin

86

87

Appendix

88

3.9 M3 REFLECTION

In M3, we integrated two best design ideas from Module 2 to generate a flexible but sufficiently stable second skin structure.

This integration itself was actually a way of ‘experimenting and thinking by making’ – a crucial design process which is recently arising in design education (Charny 2012, p.30 – 37), as the making process in M2 served as the foundation for the new final design.

Through the readings, I realised that ‘technique, technology and workmanship’ (Lecture 7, 2017) had evolved from traditional crafting to the 21st century digital design and fabrication, largely aided by modern technologies. This is clearly evident in our fabrication process where we used both digital tools (including Rhinos and Grasshopper for digital design; laser-cutting for two-dimensional digital fabrication) and manual assemblage to construct our full second skin.

Great thanks to the Grasshopper we used, as its formulated parametric functions enabled us to tackle complexity in our final design, even though its functions are always restrained by the greater complexity of parametric formulation it created. As a result, we could utilise it for only some straightforward design steps that suit in all contexts of individual triangulated panels to save some labour, while we had to respectively apply it to all the unique panels, rather than applying at one go. Similarly, we utilised the convenience of Grasshopper in the process of drafting a two-dimensional design for laser-cutting, and this only save a small amount of time due to constrained convenience. In overall, we harvested deeper understandings about, as Kolarevic explained, the digital to physical step could be aided by modern technology (2003, p.30 – 54), such as Rhinos and Grasshopper to produce an overall product that corresponds to our core ideas with dexterity and accuracy (Pye 1968, p.241 – 249).

Moreover, cooperative teamwork played a crucial role in the workflow from drafting the digital design files, to purchasing the most suitable materials and transporting them to fabrication labs, and to manual assemblage. We have learnt that no great designers would stand alone.

89

4.0 REFLECTION Digital Design and Fabrication as a subject has expanded my horizon of design thinking as well as trained my various techniques of digital designing and making. As a year-one student with almost no prior experience with design projects, I have improved a handful of software skills, including Rhinos, Panelling tool, and Grasshopper, as well as experimented both traditional and cutting-edge ways of making at the completion of this subject. Moreover, by following the design procedures taught in this subject, I have embraced making as a way of designing, I have gained enlightening insights into the future of making, and I am so excited to await what I can learn and produce in future design studios along this mind-broadening path of design.

During the cooperative teamwork with Karina and Jenny in Modules 2 & 3, our final second skin design speculates on the creative potential through (hexagonal and triangular) tessellation of Grasshopper and exhaustive experiment of the inherent generative spatial organisations as a product of tessellation. We used multi-material based prototypes and computer-generated representations as conversational feedback mechanisms to gradually enhance the performance and effects of the collaborative design. Meanwhile, we were gifted by the convenience of parametric software to define the various advanced forms of design elements necessary to smoothly interconnect into one whole piece of craft. It is through this catalogue of possibilities that our final design became ‘generative, creative and truly affords the potential for varied and unforeseen outcomes’ (Woods 2008, p.10 – 11).

90

From this subject, we were truly gifted with the opportunity of ‘direct contact with construction processes’ and ‘the ability to construct our works ourselves’ (Kottas 2013, p.8 – 11), in which a set of digital tools played a vital role. Digital tools like Rhinos and Sketchup empowered designers to conveniently express ideas in digital form and to manipulate spatial and formal compositions of design. Moreover, parametric design tools, such as Panelling tool and Grasshopper, provided extraordinary convenience in formulating a design process for a ‘high-standard manipulation of parameterized schema that allows some kinds of transformations while restricts others’ (Abdullah 2014, p.7 – 9), and replace geometry with a new formal logic based on mathematics’ (Marble 2008,p.38 – 41). Furthermore, parametric tools also ensured the reusability or re-generation of our design to customise a similar and complex design for another model or context. However, several constraints are also evident in parametric design. Even though parametric tools are excellent in tackling the complexity of form, they ‘only allow changes on the level of parameters and constrains to compose a family of design instances which are eventually similar’ (Abdullah 2014, p.7 – 9). Moreover, sometimes, the process of using a parametric tool to formulate a complex design process may be more time-consuming than the tedious method of manual manipulation without parametric tools, thus an appropriate combination of both methods would be the more effective way to minimise time costs, even though both are tedious. In addition, there is at least one common limitation in all the digital design tools, that the performance of forms cannot be accurately and truly represented in the digital world, as those digital tools are unable to tackle the complexity of materials and the principles of the physical world.

Hence, the necessity of physical prototyping is proven true again, and craft is still an important component ;for the time being at least… perhaps not in a few years’ time (Bernstein & Deamer, 2008).

In overall, we successfully produced a complete second skin that contains our desired qualities, through several critical stages including 3D modelling, 2-dimensional fabrication, manual assemblage, multi-material prototyping and peer-reviewed feedback. This whole journey also strengthened our cooperative and professional skills in terms of teamwork, effective communication, and practical workflow. With all these convenient technologies of design and fabrication, collaborative interpersonal skills, and gracious help from peers and tutors, we can better envision the future and continue the legend of craftsmanship.

91

92

5.0 APPENDIX

93

5.1 Bibliography

Abdullah, H 2014, Parametric Design Procedures, Lambert Academic Publishing, Saarbrücken.

Asperl, A., Hofer, M., Lilian, A., & Pottmann, H. 2007, Architectural Geometry, Exton, Pa.: Bentley Institute Press.

Deamer, Peggy & Bernstein, Phillip (Phillip Gordon), 1957- 2010, Building (in) the future : recasting labor in architecture, Yale School of Architecture ; New York : Princet Heath, A., Heath, D., & Jensen, A. 2000, 300 years of industrial design: function, form, technique, 1700-2000, Herbert Press, London.

Kolarevic, B 2003, Architecture in the Digital Age - Design and Manufacturing, London: Spon Press.

Kottas, D 2013, Digital Architecture New Applications, Links Books, Barcelona.

Miralles, E, & Pinos, C 1988/1991, How to lay out a croissant, En Construccion.

Pye, D. 1968, The Nature and Art of Workmanship, London: Cambridge University Press.

Scheurer, F. & Stehling, H. 2011, ‘Lost in Parameter Space?’, Architectural Design, 81, 4, July, pp. 70-79.

Sommer, R. 1969, Personal space: the behavioral basis of design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.

Woods, L 2008, MORPHÊ, SpringerWienNewYork, Austria.

94

ton Architectural Press, New Haven [Conn.]

95

5.2 Credits

96

97

98

99

100