s2_2012_fabrication_student journal

MODULE THREE: FABRICATIONSTUDENT JOURNALS

SEMESTER 2, 2012VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

Faculty of Architecture, Buillding & Planning, University of Melbourne

CONTENTS

SHIVY YOHANANDAN

DANIEL CAGAROSKI

JILLIAN RALEIGH

XEYIING NG

ZHENZHEN ZENG

HENRY CHHEN

KA YAN STEPHANIE NG

JINGLE CHEN

AUDREY DESIREE ONG AI LI

MITRAN KIANDEE

Faculty of Architecture, Buillding & Planning, University of Melbourne

SEMESTER 2, 2012VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENTS

3

25

44

54

78

97

122

149

174

196

MARK II PROTOTYPE (TOP)

FINAL DESIGN (FRONT)

FINAL DESIGN (TOP)

IDEATION & DESIGN. REVIEW

Phyllotaxis is best appreciated

from above. Module 1

introduced the natural process

of leaf arrangement around

the structure of a plant in order

to maximize sunlight absorption

and rainwater channeling.

My idea was to mimic this

process but in reverse in order

to explore the effects of light

and projection from the leaf

arrangement.

I then attempted to design this

intangible concept using

tangible materials and tools in

Module 2.

After digitizing the analogue

clay model and modeling it

using Rhino, I built the

prototype using 150gsm white

card and tested out various

elements of the resulting

prototype.

The left series of images explore

the effect of lighting and

diffusion through the structure.

PRECEDENCE. REVISITED

The panels of the Mangal City

skyscraper appear to be

arranged phyllotactically

around the main structure,

which branches into three sub-

structures.

Their 3D shape was most

appealing to me because it

means they would diffuse light

in an interesting way.

Close-up of individual panels

shoes a bead-like translucent

structure which would allow

light in and out. I want to

recreate this using 95gsm

tracing paper. These cup-shaped leaves

resemble the panelling of the

Mangal City skyscraper. I like

how the light diffuses as a

gradient through the semi-

translucent tissue of the leaf. I

want to mimic this by creating

folds in my leaflets.

The 2D phyllotactic panel arrangement of the Eden Project

educational building model has successfully mimicked the

spiral formation that converges at the centre (tip in most

cases).

The orthographic view of my final design has attempted to

mimic this as well. But instead of rectangular (or rhombic)

panels I had to settle for tribasic because of the complexity of

my shape and form.

I had to be mindful of fabrication limitations!

.DESIGN. HYBRIDIZATION

Design obtained using 3D

custom variable panelling

along a spiral (Rhino Spiral

function) curve attractor.

Design obtained by tweaking

control points from wireframe

structure of digitized clay model and

lofting pairs if curves separately.

Mark II Prototype Design obtained

by tweaking control points from

wireframe structure as well as

removing panels from tips of main

leaves to create opening for leaflets.

I was encouraged by my tutor to try

and merge the two designs (on the

left) as well as to stick with a single

colour: white. I am very pleased with

the result!

I also took my tutor's advice and did-away with the holes at the edges of the first (Mark I)

prototype. I thought this was going to make assembling the structure very difficult since the holes

would weaken the structure and it would not be structurally sound and collapse like jelly.

A matrix displaying

different screen grabs

of the Mark II

prototype design.

.FABLAB FILE. FOR MARK II PROTOTYPE

60

0m

m

900mm

I experimented with different 2D

variable panels with holes

resembling stomata around the

base of the 2nd full-scale

prototype.

For simplicity, I manually created

these perforations on my

unfolded nets.

I decided to use the FabLab laser

cutter for precision work (since

there were so many strips to cut

and some were less than 5mm).

.CONSTRUCTION. MATERIALS

I used Scotch’s quick-drying Tacky Adhesive since it claimed to bond card-to-card in under a minute. It was also clear after drying which meant the overall finish would have a clean look.

I decided to experiment with double-sided tape but it was not able to hold card-to-card that well. The glue was much stronger even though it took a minute to bond each paid of tabs!

I Ended-up using it for attaching the battery pack to the inner wall of the base.

Very sharp and effective ‘snap-off’ blade cutter for releasing strips from the cutting sheet.

Stainless-steel ruler used for straight cuts as well as going over weak score lines.

This was overkill and didn’t turn out as well as I had planned. I should’ve gone with bulldog clips instead…but all in the spirit of experimentation!

They were used to fasten tabs once I coated them with glue.

.CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. OF MARK II PROTOTYPE (1:1)

I constructed a full

scale prototype to

test assembly,

materials as well as

the overall

construction

process.

My assembling strategy was to either assemble three separate

sections and then put them all together (just like the super-block

assembly technique mentioned in the lectures), or to start at the

bottom and work my way up to the top, leaving an open seam

that I could then 'zip-up'.

I ended-up however taking the bottom-up approach but instead

leaving a seam the entire length to zip-up; I zipped-up every 5 or

so layers.

.DESIGN ADJUSTMENTS AND REMODELLING. OF MARK II PROTOTYPE

Planar curve transformed to best-fit

by 3D custom paneling tool

Tribasic 2D paneling from 3D custom

panel

Unrolled leaflet panel for

nesting and fabrication

Creating the light-emitting

leaflet panel: design-to-

fabrication

I made the point grid smaller (30 X

20) which subsequently increased

the 2D tribasic panels larger.

I closed the holes at the tips and

replaced them with the custom 3D

leaflet panel.

20 X 20

30 X 20

(Final

model

)

30 X 30

40 X 50

(Mark II

prototype)

The tip (and a few joints in the mid-

section) got cinched & shredded by

the laser cutter even though it has a

very acute tolerance. The tabs were

also far too small for me to glue them

manually using my fingers.

I also ended-up removing the holes

and perforations because I thought

they obstructed the overall look &

feel.

.UNROLLING. FINAL MODEL

GENERATING TABS WITH GRASSHOPPER

AUTOMATIC NESTING WITH RHINONEST

I used grasshopper to create tabs and

score lines. I used the Grasshopper plugin

(GH08X_MakeTabs.gh) to add tabs, folds

and cuts to each unrolled segment.

After some experimentation with the

parameters of the MakeTabs.gh plugin I

settled for the parameters shown in the

screen grab (RIGHT).

I spent some time researching auto-nesting scripts and plug-ins for Rhino to see if I could get

the computer to automatically nest the pieces so as to minimise material (and time)

wastage.

RhinoNest optimizes position and rotation for cutting and is accessible as a plugin which can

be downloaded from TDM solutions from within Grasshopper. RhinoNest can also

automatically create labels for each unrolled surface!

I nested segments within the recommended 900 X 600 (mm) rectangle(s). At first I used

RhinoNest but this didn’t seem to work for me so I ended-up manually nesting to the best of

my ability (and patience!).

EXPLODED AXONOMETRIC VIEW (BOTTOM HALF)

Step 1: I grouped the panels in

each horizontal segment

together and colour-coded

them.

Step 2: I used the panelling

tools Unroll Faces command

to unroll one segment at a

time. Sometimes I would get

overlapping panels which I

then had to separate further

into sub-strips.

Step 3: I used the Grasshopper

plugin (GH08X_MakeTabs.gh)

to add tabs, folds and cuts to

each unrolled segment.

When unfolding the model I

noticed that the tip had some

errors. This might have been a

result of non-planar faces

created during the lofting

phase of the contoured

curves. I then got rid of the tip

and decided to keep it open

at the top because it looked

better this way.

I initially tried unrolling using a

seam but this failed because

Rhino refused to unroll

regrouped segments.

EXPLODED AXONOMETRIC

VIEW (TOP HALF)

.FABLAB FILE. FOR FINAL MODEL

29

7m

m

210mm

I marked end-tabs and

narrow corners as score

lines in order to minimize

tearing by the laser cuter

as well as to make sure all

the pieces remained

intact on the card for

easier constructions.

METHOD OF CUTTING

Just like the

prototype, I used the

University of

Melbourne’s FabLab

to laser cut the

unrolled and tabbed

surfaces. I decided

not to use the card-

cutter because I

overheard a few

other students

complaining about its

accuracy as well as

its poor reputation at

keeping cut pieces

on the card.

I wanted to use

mount board but

ended-up using ivory

card because it was

thinner and more

flexible which is what I

wanted for my

lantern. Ivory card

was also more

translucent and would

therefore let more

light through. It is a

lantern after all!

I used the same

95gsm tracing paper

as before (for the

Mark I prototype) and

nested the panels

and sent it off to the

FabLab for laser

cutting.

LEGEND

.CONSTRUCTION MATRIX. OF FINAL MODEL

.LIGHTING. MATERIALS & CONSTRUCTION

RIGHT The LED’s are spaced

along the circuit based on

the Fibonacci series. This

ensures that light diffuses

through the translucent

leaflets optimally.

Standard gain colour-

coded copper electrical

wire for the circuit.

2 x AA (3V total) battery

pack with ON/OFF switch

to neatly house batteries.

9 x 5mm clear 3V 120° LED’s. I

chose clear and 120° because

it light’s-up a larger volume of

the inside of the lantern as

opposed to a smaller angle

which would focus a narrow

beam which is undesirable.

I chose these batteries

because I needed a

longer-lasting power-

source since I arranged the

LED’s in parallel.

Masking tape for insulating

naked connections as well

as safety.

LEFT I decided to arrange

the LED’s in parallel in order

to minimize the number of

batteries required as well as

to maximize the output

performance.

.LIGHTING. EFFECTS

.SHOTS. ON LOCATION

I was tempted to test the lanterns (Mark II prototype and final) side-by-side in my own living-room. They added an organic

element to an otherwise contemporary setting. I was pleased with the results!

.MODEULE 3. REFLECTION

Upon reflection, the fabrication process to me was a question:

How does an idea become realised using current tools & techniques?

- Macfarlane, B

The idea in my case was the ability of a phyllotactic formation to throw light in an interesting way, and the ability to turn 2D card

material into a 3D lantern that realises this idea is the ultimate realisation.

I initially had concerns about the limits of the laser cutter in terms of turning the smaller and more precision unrolled panels into

shredded paper confetti as well as my own limitations when it came to putting it all together. But I learnt to have more faith and in

technology and trust in my own abilities. I used a laser cutter for precision work (since there were so many strips to cut and some

were less than 5mm). I also liked the score lines left behind as it adds a somewhat rustic effect to the overall appearance.

I was considering using the stock 250gsm white mount-board for better structural support but then read another student's journal

that claimed she struggled with this and that she had to do a lot of rework in going over score lines and cut lines.

A more zoomed-in revisit of precedence revealed a key to my final panelling design, and the lectures really stitched together the

fabric of the fabrication process. I really enjoyed the learning curve!

.CRITICAL. READINGS & ANALYSIS

Lectures

Power of Making lecture (10/9) introduced challenges in working with 1:1 scale. Showed how making things is a universal trait. Spoke about industrialization and factory (mass)-

made things. How robots have changed the process of fabrication & how we can all one day have our own fab-plant. Physical manifestation of virtual environments. Purpose of

prototyping. Accumulating materials in assembly vs. integrated systems. Superblock.

I liked the quote by Daniel Cahrny about serendipitous innovation through making without knowing exactly what it is one is making.

Differentiated between certainty, uncertainty (risk) and free workmanship. The privilege of prototyping comes with indulgence in some extra money in the project. A prototype is a

trial that the designer uses to test various things. Simulate the reality as close as possible even with a significantly scaled-down model. Showed a physical and digital prototype,

which tests effects. The shadow effects that the table produced was similar to what I wanted to do with my lantern.

Through the looking glass project was wonderful.

Digital & autonomous lecture (01/10) by Guest Lecturer Stanislav Roudavski talked about our co-habitation with other living things and how architects are working towards a

sustainable environment. He showed preference to not use computers in an artistic discipline because it takes away too much of our creative freedom. The series of short videos

were very interesting, in particular, the pre-fabricated brick facades built by autonomous flying robots ("Builders Of Tomorrow") as well as the standard 6-degrees of freedom robotic

arm. The lecture also encouraged the new generation architect to learn how to program computers, therefore bridging the gap in limitations and flexibility of CAD authoring tools

and software. My take-home message from this lecture was that form follows software and the limitations of our knowledge.

Module 3 readings

Making Ideas by Macfarlane, B.

The article asks the question: how does an idea (form) become realized using current tools & techniques? One option suggests reverse engineering an idea in architecture could be

the smarter way to go about the design process. For example, designing a building that smiles could be interpreted as "what if a smile could produce the architecture".

Their Mason T project was interesting because statically represents growth of the occupants. The Georges restaurant project was interesting because its organic skins were only

possible after transitioning over into the digital architecture realm. They kept referring to "volumes" of pockets within the development area where different compartments that make

up the restaurant. Migrating their architectural skills into a digital space, they were able to virtually model the entire design process from conception to fabrication while physical

models were built only to test out the physics in the physical world.

Lastly, the bookstore was interesting because the idea of using an average-sized book for designing the small contents of the enclosure as an incremental space-maker was great!

Gershenfeld, Neil (2005): Subtraction; Addition; Building Models.

This article compared a variety of cutting and fabricating technologies – the other end of the modeling program that we use to design and realize an idea. The technology behind

the laser cutter was most innovative: invisible amplification of radio waves through invisible carbon dioxide gas emitted an invisible laser that was only visible when the material it

was cutting started to burn. The ability to vary the power of the laser enabled the cutter to etch, mark or cut the material.

Subtractive fabrication however wasted material unless special care was taken in arranging the cutting outlines in order to minimize waste. Additive fabrication included 3D printing

where material used-up goes straight into the product. A third approach was equality fabrication where the “idea was to deform one part around another part, ending-up with the

same amount of material in the new shape.”

http://app.lms.unimelb.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-3558595-dt-content-rid-10815520_2/xid-10815520_2

http://app.lms.unimelb.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-3558595-dt-content-rid-10815519_2/xid-10815519_2

MODULE THREE FABRICATION

DANIEL CAGAROSKIStudent No: 583059 Semester: 2/2012 Group: 15

REVISED PANELLING

The initial panelling pattern caused problems with grid alignment. The

‘triangular’ pattern skipped every second grid point. This caused

problems when creating 3D panelling as gaps would exist between the

3D panels and the 2D panels.

One attempt to solve this problem was to group selected points

together, however Rhino was not able to correspond these points with

the offset grid. Another attempt involved custom drawing the 3D panels,

which did work to a certain extent, however, this method did not utilise

the more advance capabilities of Rhino and was extremely time

consuming.

A final solution was to re-panel the entire model using a different pattern.

By using the ‘tri-basic’ pattern, a more uniform pattern utilising

triangulation was achieved and Rhino was able to correctly create the

3D panels without gaps (as shown on the next page).

REVISED PANELLING

I took a different approach with

designing the 3D panelling for

the model. I wanted to map the

muscles of the arm by using a

variable set of pyramids which

are larger towards the biceps

and triceps of the arm. I also left

the remainder of the 2D

panelling exposed to represent

the fat of the arm.

This approach of 3D panelling

used a complex set of point

attractors and calculations to

vary the sizing of the 3D

pyramids. Points in the 2D grid

were selected individually at

areas of the muscles, and offset

using the point attractors. By

doing this, 3D panelling was able

to be executed through the

base grid and the offset grid.

REVISED DESIGN

Previous Design Revised Design

The revised design made better use of the capabilities of Rhino than the

previous design. In the previous design, 3D panels were manually created,

which did not allow for a complex and interesting design. 3D panelling was

too uniform and resulted in producing unaesthetic qualities to the model.

I think the creation of an abstract model should be something that is

interesting and stimulates curiosity. The 3D panelling failed to create this as

each side of the model looked nearly identical. The variation of 3D panelling

in the revised model created something that was more interesting as each

side of the model was different.

UNFOLDED CUTTING TEMPLATE

The initial unfolded cutting template involved taking horizontal strips from the model. This created complications in which strips would become very long, and

would not fit onto the 600x900 mm card for fabrication. As a result, the model had to be cut into sections, which created confusion as to where components

were to be connected. Colour references were use to resolve this issue, however due to the large number of strips throughout the model, all colours had been

exhausted which would create further confusion. In addition, this method of unrolling was not economical as there was too much wasted space on the card.

Logical unrolling: colour correspondence and wasted space on card 3D model: colours used as reference


Panelling was revised and set out logically and economically.

The first strip represented the strip of panels at the bottom of

the model, and each sequential strip was to be connected to

the previous. The use of confusing colour correspondence and

labels were eliminated.

Unrolling the strips vertically rather than horizontally made

efficient use of the card as each strip was uniform in shape,

and able to be clustered together. Intersecting strips in spiral

form were eliminated, making the layout of the panels quite

simple.


By using Rhino to calculate the area of the surfaces of the unfolded cutting template, the wastage was able to be calculated and compared to prior

unfolded cutting templates. In the original cutting template, a wastage of 73.7% occurred. This was due to inefficient unfolding techniques, particularly from

unfolding horizontally. Each strip of panels varied in size, and this made it difficult to compress the strips on the template.

By revising the unfolding technique so that the panels were unfolded vertically resulted in a linear arrangement of strips that were easily compressed on the

sheet of card. As a result, the wastage was much less at 56.1%. This is a saving of 17.6% of material. Additionally, only three sheets of card were required

compared to five sheets in the original template. Left over bits could be used in the original unfolding for manual cutting of 3D panels, etc. This is perhaps not

practical in the revised unfolding as there are no practical areas to make any further cuts or use of the waste.

Original Unfolding Revised Unfolding

Total Surface Area 7,096.94 cm2 7,105.15 cm2

Wastage = [(60 x 90) x 5] - 7,096.94

= 19,903.06 cm2

= [(60 x 90) x 3] - 7,105.15

= 9,094.85 cm2

% Wastage 73.7% 56.1%

Comparison


Tabs were removed from the left side

of each strip. This allowed each strip to

overlap when glued together.

Prototyping (as shown in the next

section) explores this.

The windows in the spine had originally been

set to etch, rather than cut. To eliminate

manually cutting the windows (as this would

create a rough cut), the spine was recut with

the correct cut settings.

Black lines = Cut, Red lines = Etch

These tabs were removed as other

tabs would connect to these

sections. In addition, it would be

difficult to add tabs in these

sections as they would intersect with

other tabs.

In order for the strips not to disjoin

from the card after being cut, etch

lines were set on each side of the

strip. To enhance precision of the

cut, the etch lines were set on the

tabs, which would later be hidden.

Tab width was set to 8.5

mm as this was the width

of the glue

tape (8.4 mm +

error margin)

PROTOTYPE 1

I was initially concerned that the ivory card would create a structure that was too flimsy. After creating a partial prototype, I was

able to confirm this. By applying light force onto the model, the model was able to severely damage. The greatest amount of

stress was on the spine of the model (which contained the windows). I found that some of the larger windows were unable to

withstand the stress placed on the structure. In addition, I found it very difficult to work around these areas. Connecting panels

to the larger windows was very tedious as the windows were very prone to tearing. In modifying the design of the model, I would

have to reduce the size of these windows.

Using the card cutter produced rough cuts, particularly on the score lines. I was concerned that this would impact the final aesthetics of the model as it

contains a large number of score lines. The laser cutter may therefore be a feasible option in eliminating this problem (in the use of black card, as the laser

cutter will produce burn marks on white card).

The biggest problem with ivory card was when the model was illuminated. The tabs were able to be seen through the card, distracting the viewer. This

eliminates the possibility of using ivory card in the final fabrication.

Larger windows caused structural problems Card cutter produced rough results Tabs seen through card

Material: Ivory Card

Weight: 250 gsm

Machine: Card Cutter

PROTOTYPE 2

This partial prototype explored a different system of connections. I found gluing pairs of tabs together created stress problems

on the panels. Tabs had to be bent at 90 degree angles, and gluing them together was therefore very difficult. I wanted to see

how the model would connect by using an overlapping system of connections. This replaced TAB-TAB connections with TAB-

PANEL connections. The results were much more effective in holding the structure together. It also allowed for neater joints

where tiny gaps produced by TAB-TAB connections were eliminated.

Using super glue was very time consuming and created messy results. It also produced glue smudges on panels. I wanted to try a different method of adhesive:

glue tape on a roller dispenser. This reduced fabrication time by an enormous amount. All tabs on a panel strip were able to be connected at once,

compared to individually gluing each pair of tabs using super glue. In addition, it was much neater in which glue smudges were eliminated.

Gaps were eliminated from TAB-PANEL connections Less stress was imposed on tabs

Material: Paper

Weight: 80 gsm

Machine: Inkjet Printer

PROTOTYPE 3

A full prototype was constructed from black card using the laser cutter. I had opted for the cutting template to be cut on 300

gsm black card, however, the FabLab had stocked the card incorrectly, and as a result, cut it on 200 gsm card. Due to time

and transport constraints, I was unable to wait for another cut on the correct card. This perhaps emulates what happens in the

fabrication industry where suppliers do not provide the correct materials. Fabricators have the option the wait for the correct

materials to be provided (leading to project delays) or work with what has been provided.

Constructing this prototype was very time consuming, however, identified a number of issues. The card was far too thin to withhold the stress of the structure. It

was not able to stand upright. This prototype also used TAB-TAB connections, which were unable to properly connect the structure given the stress caused by

the 90 degree connections. It was essential to implement TAB-PANEL connections in the final model, as experimented in Prototype 2.

The model was unable to support itself The connections were under stress, and failed as a result

Material: Black Card

Weight: 200 gsm

Machine: Laser Cutter

ADHESIVES

Bostik GluTape

Provided the quickest and most

efficient method of gluing

tabs together

UHU Super All-Purpose Adhesive

Took very long to glue tabs together. Very

messy, and was a thick paste

Bostik Super Glue

Thin glue that set very

quickly. To be used in

high stress areas that

required strong adhesive

Papermate Repositionable

Adhesive

Quick method of glue,

however, provided very

weak support

Weld-On Solvent Cement

Strong glue, however

had a very strong odour,

difficult to work with

✔

✔

✘

✘

✘

FINAL FABRICATION

The final fabrication involved cutting the unfolded template on 300 gsm black card, using the laser cutter. In addition, 3D

panelling was cut on 200 gsm black card, as it allowed for greater flexibility in bending the card. The 3D panelling does not

provide any structural support to the model, and so the structure will not suffer from this.

300 gsm card provides the structural support to the model, while allowing the card to bend into place (thicker card such as

mount board was found to be difficult to bend into place). Black card was also used as it would eliminate tabs to be seen

through the card when the lantern was illuminated and would not suffer from burn marks (as was the case with ivory card).

A combination of glue tape and super glue was used to connect the panels together, and a TAB-PANEL connection system was incorporated in the final

model.

The final fabrication involved four stages:

1. Constructing the 2D panelling

Glue tape was applied to tabs Strip was curved to form shape of model Sequential strip was attached

Material: Black Card

Weight: 300 gsm

Machine: Laser Cutter

FINAL FABRICATION

Inspection of connections was made Shape of model gradually started to form

2. Attaching the spine

The model at this stage was not rigid, and needed the support of the central spine. This spine also has windows to allow light to pass through.

Model was not rigid without central spine Spine was connected using a combination of tape and super glue

FINAL FABRICATION

3. Attaching the 3D panelling

3D panelling was constructed out of 200 gsm card allowing for high stress bends. The glue tape was not strong enough to hold the tight bends of the 3D

panelling. Super glue was therefore used to attach all 3D panelling. The panels were folded together and then attached onto the model.

4. Adding the light circuit

LEDLEDLED

BatterySwitch

All three LEDs were linked together in a circuit. A switch was added to enable easy functioning of the LEDs. The circuit was attached to the interior wall of

the model to allow the arm to fit inside the model. I had wanted to implement an addition six LEDs to the other sides of the interior walls, however, supply

constraints restricted this.

FINAL MODEL

REFLECTION

Module 3 has proved to be the most difficult, but rewarding module. It has tied in everything that has been developed to this point. When I first started Virtual

Environments, I had no background or idea about design. I found it difficult to understand why I was being asked to draw ideas from nature to design a

lantern. Prior to this, I would have picked up a pen and paper and drew a square - that would be my lantern. I am now amazed at what I have achieved and

what could be made possible using advance software such as Rhino. This subject has completely changed the way I think about design.

Fabricating my model was extremely time-intensive and tedious. Prototyping was such an important tool in achieving my final design rationale and developing

my fabrication technique. Many lessons were learnt, and each sequential prototype was improved from the previous, ultimately resulting in my final model.

I found Stanislav Roudavski’s lecture on augmenting space to be very interesting as it opened my awareness of how computers and technology have aided in

the creation of extraordinary designs and structures. The work produced by algorithm editors such as Grasshopper has inspired me to experiment with the

software, and understand how the automated tab script works. Further experimentation into the software allowed me to create simple 3D designs, which

could act as a innovative aid in future design and development.

The Macfarlane reading focused on creating ideas and using technology to influence design. The case study on Restaurant Georges demonstrated particular

constraints faced by architects, and how the aid of computer technology can overcome this by providing a much more advanced method of design and

analysis that would perhaps not be able to be done manually. The capabilities of Rhino have allowed designers to create innovate and complex models, that

can be easily communicated across to engineers and builders. Rhino has allowed me to produce something that I would not have been able to create

without the use of technology. The complex calculations in creating my model (from lofting to panelling to unfolding) would have been impossible to do

otherwise. Technology is further developing and I think it is important to develop skills in this area to achieve radical results and outcomes.

In the Gershenfeld reading, different types of fabrication techniques were explored. This included subtractive and additive techniques. This method of

fabrication for this project is a subtractive form of fabrication. This, as a result, produces waste and prompted me to think about how I can limit the amount of

waste produced. It is important to achieve an optimal fabrication layout that will reduce waste and increase efficiency in the use of materials.

One of the most promising additive fabrication techniques is 3D printing. This revolutionises the way designers and engineers can prototype their projects. These

services are becoming more affordable and after investigating, I found that 3D models can be submitted online to be fabricated and delivered within a few

short weeks. This would be highly productive in prototyping future projects (small models of buildings, furniture, etc).

virtual environments


jillian raleighstudent no. 583168|semester 2, 2012|group 3

module 3fabrication | week 9


the growth rate and structural character of coral is influenced by: fluctuations in sea-levels light intensity (photosynthesis) water temperature carbon dioxide concentration pH + salinity, and ocean currents (delivering nutrients)

coral growth is cyclical, varying according to the season: growth rates are higher and the coral structure less dense in summer than in winter (due to increased water temperature and light intensity)


natural process & abstraction

radiograph of coral growth bands (lighter, wider bands represents low density summer growth & darker, narrower bands indicates

high density, winter growth)

concept sketches

clay modelof final design

derivation of design:the form represents seasonal variation in coral density

coral growth

a highly complex and intricate process.emerging 542 million years ago, coral organisms are not single entities, but colonies of geneti-cally identical polyps (microscopic spineless animals) structural vari-ation is generated by the genetic characteristics of the particular polyp species inhabiting the form.

mechanisms

coral is built by the accumulation of calcified polyp ‘skeletons’ and through reproduction, both asexual and sexual.. asexual reproduc-tion budding (chipping a tiny portion off a whole polyp) or division (halving of a polyp).. missing parts regenerate and the process is repeated. sexual reproduction releasing gametes during a synchro-nous spawning event.. gametes fuse to form planulae, fertilised and micrscopic larva that eventually settle on a solid surface to begin a separate coral colony.

coral have evolved to spawn during calm conditions, with reproduc-tive periods varying according to regional wind and current pat-terns.

the date of the spawning event is controlled by the lunar cycle and the time by the solar cycle, not by a ‘circadian rhythm’:coral spawn at sunset on the full moon on sunset.


final rhino model


material consumption4 x A1 sheets required forcomplete 1:1 prototype

digitalisation & fabricationpanelling, unrolling & laser cutting

random grid pattern + 3D custom panel setmedium grid density (20 x 30) with point attractors

rhino fabrication files

virtual environmentsvirtual environments

prototypingassembling 1:1 prototypes

materials

masking tape PVA glue + toothpicks

stanley knifemetal rule

cutting mat5mm white LEDs

wire2 x AAA batteries

various 1:1 experimental prototypes

attempted to minimise waste by minimising space between panels... still, a substantial amount of black card wasted: approximately 25%

total sheets consumed in prototyping process: 9

cutting elements free from fabricated sheet

folding and gluing elements

partial model of final form


prototype 1trialling feasibility of placement on bodywhite 200gsm cardcard cutter

prototype 2trialling structural integrity + aestheticsblack 200gsm cardlaser cutter


reviewproblems encountered & subsequent revisions

manually adjusting the panels in the rhino model to achieve a cleaner finish and more rigidity in the lower portion of the structure

rescaling (x1.15) to allow a little more comfort for the wearer

decreasing space between unrolling segments to reduce waste: no increase in the total number of A1 cards (4), despite the increase in scale

increasing the material thickness from 200gsm to 300gsm to improve rigidity (300gsm card is also more resistant to ripping than the lighter gauge)

more difficult to achieve a clean fold on the slimmer segments and the ‘reverse’ bends with 300gsm card than with the 200gsm

final model

catastrophy:

some elements missing, lost somehow in the fabrication process, structurally undermining the entire form. successfully constructed the halves, but unable to connect with the additional elements.

refabrication in progress...


response to readings/lectureson the theme of fabrication

gershenfeld:

equality fabrication

while not strictly ‘equality fabrication’, material consumption can be optimised by arranging the 2D elements in such a way as to leave as little negative space on the cutting template as possible. sharing lines between the elements might be a way to achieve ‘equality’, but it would restrict the object geometry to a symmetrical or repetitive form.

after my initial prototypes, i was able to reduce the spacing between the elements.. having some experience with the card/laser cutting process, i was better able to judge the limits of the fabrication tools in terms of the minimum spacing needed, and therefore reduce the wasted material.

digital design and the division of labour

digital modelling and fabrication challenges the division of labour by dissolving the boundaries between conceptualisation, representation and construction. in other words, digital design tools empower the designer and allow involvement in every step of the process of creation.

macfarlane:

making ideas

parallels with macfarlane’s digital design philosophy:1. inability to express the model in traditional 2D format.. a 3D digital model allows the designer to specify complexities of surface and geometry with far greater freedom.. 2. working “fluidly with conventional and digital media”, switching from hand sketching to computer modelling and back agin throughout the design process.

my ideas were in a constant state of fluctuation, exploring variations on my original concept right up to the fabrication stage.

event as generator of form

in designing the interior of the Florence Loewy Bookshop, macfarlane based the form on an imaginary circulation route, modelling on a 3D grid, informing the location of the book “islands”

Xeyiing NgStudent No. : 596296 Semester 2/2012 Group 14 Module 3

Hello people! I am Petals. Welcome to my life!

Standing with imperfections…Module 2 Development

Prototype I

2. Four-sided Trench FacesThe trench faces in their four-sided polygon form did not lie on the same plane, hence when unrolled in the same form and constructed physically the polygons did not fit into each other.

1. Scattered LightsThe triangular holes allowed too much light to penetrate, scattering lights in all direction without highlight-ing the spiral trench.

When better is possible, good is not nearly enough.Design Optimisation

Stone Spray is an on-site robotic 3d printer that creates architecture out of soil. The technology uses sand as the major material in creat-ing structures. A series of experiments were conducted on the propor-tion of materials that would achieve the best end results, one which is strong and yet a minimum amount of setting time. Very much like the project, the model made out of paper experimented with the different thickness of paper. A thicker paper provides a more rigid structure but is more difficult to create a clean bend especially with small triangles, and thin paper works the other way round. Using the 200gsm card has allowed a fairly rigid structure to be formed with a minimum amount of creases at bends. When working with materials, testings are often required to fully understand the properties as they vary with usage. Reading the technical diary, it was realised that one of their major con-cern was with the drying system. The wet sand when piled together requires a long period of time to dry and hence to improve the system, while building, the team started shaping holes-structures to let the ma-terial solidify faster. In building the trenches of the petal with paper, the paper due to its’ properties causes the structure to fail to close pre-cisely. Not able to change the properties of paper or sand, the struc-ture was changed. Gaps were inserted in between the trench to allow spaces for the paper to move around hence avoiding the failure at the connections.

Precedent : Stone Spray ProjectArchitects : Petr Novikov Inder Shergill Anna Kulik

Location : Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia

a. Triangulate Trench Faces The four-sided trench faces are triangulated as triangles do not deform and remains on the same plane under pressure.

b. Messy Trench GapsThe spiral trench do not exactly fit with the outer surface leaving gaps and squashed faces at the connections, although it was possible to close the surface.

Trenches

Stone Spray Project Models.

c. Redesigning the TrenchThe redesigned trench not only inserts gaps into the trench but gives a uniform direction of triangles resulting in a neat and clean trench surface. With the new design, the trench and the outer surface connections no longer leave gaps and squashed faces.

1. Close trench gap with surfaces, mesh and join to form one mesh.

2. Offset mesh to 2 different distances.

3. Join outer surface with trench faces in pattern shown.

4. Delete mesh, close base with surfaces.

Lightingsa. Triangles to ArrowsThe triangular holes were converted to arrows. The change reduces the surface areas of holes, reducing the amount of light penetrating the surfaces to allow more lights to focus on the spiral trench.

Arrows were attempted to be populated on the surface using the ‘Custom 2D’ and ‘Create 2D Pattern’ options, which turned out unsuc-cessful as the arrows did not fit and point in the correct direction on the diamond-gridded triangle faces properly.

From petal 1 to 5 (left to right), the direction of the arrow varies, with the principle ‘hot matter rises while cold matter sinks’. Petal 1 and 2 at the higher temperature end has arrows pointing upward, vice versa. Petal 3 whereas has a mixture of upwards and downwards arrows.

1. Triangular holes with varying density were populated on the surface using the ‘pt offset faces borders’, applying the ‘point attractor’ option.

2. Drawing lines on the unrolled strips, the triangles were manually changed to arrows.

b. White to BlackEven though with the reduced holes of the outer surface and the increase in gaps at the trench, the spiral effect of the pet-al was still not highlighted. To further to reduce the penetration of lights on the outer surface, black paper was used instead.

Using the same amount of lights, the black and white model disperses less light but creates obvious spots of lights on the surface. The contrast between the trench and the outer surface is however clearly highlighted in the black and white model.

b. Supporting ColumnsColumns are added to the individual petals to allow the petals to be hung securely without tearing the material.

Overall Structure

The columns allow lights to be attached hence creates a distance between the lights and the surface, creating an evenly distributed lighting without obvious spots of light on surfaces as seen in the previous image.

a. HandleIn order to hold the structure in it’s angles, a bar is used to hang off the structures. The bar has a similar structure as the column.

a. Outer SurfaceUnroll outer surface according to the colour of the rainbow.

b. Trench Surfaces

Bottom

Middle

Top

Unroll top and bottom trench faces according to the colour of the rainbow and label.

Unroll middle trench faces individually. Using panelling tools ‘Unroll faces’ option, label the edges of the faces.

Label individual pieces according to their sequence.

Part 2 : Cutting me out.Fabrication

The unrolled strips are nested and sent to the fab lab for fabrication. As no dash lines were needed and the ‘rust’ ef-fect of the laser cutter on white cards was undesirable, the card cutter was used instead.

Part 3 : Putting me togetherConstruction

Step 1 : Trenches

a. Referring to the digital file, label and cut strips. b. Score card where folds are reversed and fold in the correct direction.

c. Glue the individual middle trenches to the bottom trench. d. Piece the top trench in place.

NoteCut and glue the in-dividual piece to its’ position before cut-ting the next piece to avoid confusion.

Step 2 : Columns & Lightings

a. Fold score lines. Referring to the petals, mark and cut out LEDs’ positions. b. Glue edges together.

c. Make needle holes for LEDs’ posts and tape where holes are made. Insert LEDs’ into designated positions.

d. Strip wires and connect LEDs in parallel. Connect all positive posts and negative posts to separate wires.

NoteTaping the surface prevents the hole from further tearing.

NoteTwist stripped wires to avoid messy circuits.

NoteMark positions so that LED faces trenches.

f. Bend LEDs’ posts. Insert papers pieces in between LED posts.

g. Test circuit by connecting to power supply. Close surface to form a column if all LEDs light up, leaving the circuit connected until surface is fully closed.

e. Leave a fair amount of wire at the end of the circuit for the power supply connection.

h. Tie a knot at both ends of the column using needles and fishing lines.

NotePaper pieces sepa-rates the opposite posts preventing short circuit.

Step 3 : Outer Surface

a. Referring to the digital file, cut and label the strips. b. Piece strips accordingly to the trenches. c. Leave the last strip and the trench unglued.

d. Insert column with LEDs into petal. d. Piece the last strip and the trench together, leaving the wires and fishing lines out at the top.

e. Glue end triangles to close model.

Step 4 : Overall Structure

a. Construct handle with the construction steps of the columns exculding the sitting postition .

c. Connect all positive ends of petals together, vice versa. Bind all fishing lines together in the middle.

b. Construct cylinders using strips of paper. Place cylinders into columns.

d. Extend wires from both positive and negative ends to battery pack.

e. Hang petals from handle using fishing lines. f. Mark and cut in on handle to form ridges for lines.

Better is always possible.Further Improvements

a. Messy Wire ConnectionsMost wires can be hidden inside the model rather than left outside.

b. Crumpled SurfaceDue to the thickness of the card and the large holes, the card crum-ples instead during folding. A thinner card should be used for such situation.

c. Crooked HandleThe handle requires stronger reinforcement to withstand the weight of the model.

d. Non-uniform petals colour2 petals are a mixture of black and white while the rest are plain white. The black and white petals were initially prototypes and as it brings out the trench pattern better, all white petals would be changed.

e. Variation of lightsAlthough the number of LEDs varries from 15 - 9 between petals, the effect of the change in light intensity is not obvious.

My growth Chart.Module 1 to 3 Development Progression

Module 1

Module 2Module 1

Reference ListReflection Module 3 was basically making lots of prototype, it is a vicious cycle, you built then realise something is wrong, turn back to the digital file, change and built and then realise something else is wrong now… Having built pro-totype after prototype, I wonder if it was at all possible to see it all from the digital file or at least with the first prototype, the flaws and the improvements required without building one after another. The digital software are such so-phisticated programs and yet they fail to help you realise that the model just would not work when constructed physically. As troublesome as the process was, I came to realise that it is this prototype-making process that has allow the development of ideas and if it wasn’t for the process, some ideas might never occur. It is the experience gained that has broadened our views help-ing us come up with tangible solutions. Then again, this process has revealed the limitations of the digital program and that it can only bring a design to a certain level and the real properties of the material can only be fully tested and understood by prototyping.

And while immersing in the prototype-making process, changing and adjust-ing for the better, there can never be an end to it. At some point, you’ll have to pull yourself out from the cycle and start moving on to the next stage. There are other factors besides ‘perfection’ that needs to be considered such as time and cost. Although not in the business industry, and money does not exactly equal to time yet, we are still bounded by deadlines and the cost of making the prototypes. Thou there is no real way to tell when one should stop, mine was the submission date.

www.stonespray.com Nature Pod Project, Vane-Farm RSBP Loch Leven

Module Three

Student Name: Zhenzhen ZengStudent ID: 567005 Semester 2/2012 Group: 6

1st Prototype – Unrolling & Nesting

When I was unrolling the first prototype, I selected each surface one by one without any other help to distinguish surfaces on different strips. This not only took me a large amount of time and energy, but also led to a big mistake which I didn't realize until I was building up the prototype.

1st Prototype - Construction

1st Prototype - Light Effect

Although only the 2D part is completed, the light effect is still tested. The shadow of the bottom part casted to the ground is similar to my expectation. But It seems that little light can go though the upper part of the model.

1st Prototype - Problems & Potentials

The most important problem with my first prototype is that one of the strips cannot fit with others. This is because I selected the surfaces of the adjacent strip when I was unfolding the model. So I think I need to change each separate component of the model to different colour before I select the surfaces and unroll them.

By observing the light effect of the 2D part of the first prototype, I find there is not much light going through the model when it comes to the two ends. Since the original design of the 3D part is fully closed, thus even less amount of light will go though the model, which is different from what I expect. I want more and more light going through the model from two ends towards the bottom of the model. Thus I decide to change my paneling design.

A large amount of space on paper the is empty and wasted. Thus The nesting of strips for the 2D part can be rearranged closer to each other so that waste of material can be minimised.

Precedents

Mangal City by Chimera

The designer of this skyscraper get inspiration

from mangroves. There are a number of

individual office/residential "pods" sit on

"branches" that actually twist towards the sun to

maximize warmth, light and photovoltaic (solar

energy) potential. These little spaces extruding

from the hollows of the inner structure of the

building tries to express “the emergent logics of

adaptation and evolution that are constitutive of

ecosystems in nature”, both physically and

functionally.

2nd Prototype – Design Optimization

The precedents mentioned above inspires me to recreate the 2D and 3D paneling of my model. I enlarge the hollows on the 2D paneling surface so that more light can go through it and cut off half of the original pyramid 3D pattern.

In this way, the amount of light coming out from the lantern is no longer controlled by the the 2D paneling surface but the semi-closed 3D structure.

In addition, the 3D structure also creates a sense of flow and movement, which makes the structure of my model stands out.

2nd Prototype – Unfolding & Nesting

Fablab File - Ivory Card White

2nd Prototype - Construction

2nd Prototype - Light Effect

The light effect of the second prototype is closer to my expectation, which has small pieces of light scattered at the top and a web-like shadow at the bottom. But I find the 3D structure still blocks too much light at the top.

Also, the 3D structure is not emphasized enough so that it can be easily distinguished from the 2D part. My design aims to show how adaption happens from at individual level to the species level. Thus the 3D part of the model, which is made up by a number of small modules, should stands out and then fuses with the 2D part. So I think the 3D part needs to be further modified.

2nd Prototype – Problems & Potentials

Since I build up the 3D modules on the fully completed 2D surface directly, sometimes I have to rotate the whole model so that I can get those modules stuck to the 2D surface. During this process, the 2D surface has to experience unnecessary pressure, which leads to cracks between some strips. Also, I cannot really make these modules get strongly stuck to the paper underneath so I have to use tapes to hold the 3D structure from falling off, which really damage the external beauty of my model. Thus I think in the final model, I'll separate the strips that have 3D structure on it from others, so that the damage to the 2D part can be minimized and the 3D part can be built more easily.

Precedents

Project of documenting the Philips Pavilion

The project was initiated by documenting Le Corbusier's Philips Pavilion (1958) through Rhino as a mean to investigate the materiality and non-linear geometries. What really attracts me is how black and white interact with each other and then produce an quite expressive look of the material behaviour of water under sound wave. The use of different colour adds complexity and diversity to this building.

Final Model – Design Optimization

Inspired by the precedent mentioned before, I decide to use black card for the 3D part. Since black card can block more light than white card, I recreate the 3D paneling with a series of custom 3D patterns that have different sizes. The 3D custom structure gets smaller when it move downwards from the two ends. Thus more and more light can go through the model from the top to the bottom and a gradually changing shape of shadow is expected.

This design also reflects my natural process, mutualism, by emphasising how adaption starts from individuals and spread to the whole species.

Final Model – UnrollingFor the 2D part, each strip can be identified in two ways, the colour and the label. Different colours help me to distinguish small surfaces belonging to different strips when I'm selecting surfaces to unroll them. The labels help me to assembly these strips together in the correct order. In addition, the starting and end triangles of each strip is tagged with their name so that it is easier for me to follow the model to fold each surface in the correct way.Grasshopper is used for generating tabs for each strip.

Final Model - Unrolling

For the 3D part, each unfolded module can also be identified by the colour and its label. Since there are only a limited number of strips in the 3D part, so the colour is used for indicating the sequence of modules in one strip rather than specifying strip the module belongs to.

I also use grasshopper to generate tabs for each unfolded module. Although there are only two tabs needed for each module to connect with the 2D paneling surface underneath, I choose to keep all the four tabs in case I delete the wrong tab because the

length of the sides of these modules are very similar.

Final Model - Nesting

Each line is allocated to a specific layer with a corresponding color. Red lines are in "score layer" and green lines are in "cut layer". Also, these unfolded components are nested to be as close to each other as possible to minimise the cost and waste.

Ivory Card White – 2D part

Black 200gsm – 3D part

Final Model - Construction

Final Model - Light Effect

This is the final outcome of my design. Both of the physical structure and the light effect express the my natural process, mutualism. Particularly, I want to show how the interactive adaption of two species that rely on each other for survival and how the adaption starts from individual level and become important for the whole species.

From the top to the bottom, The black 3D modules get smaller and closer to the 2D surface and the light changes from patches to a web- like shape.

Critical Analysis & Reflection

In the third module, we are required to transform our digital model into a physical paper model by going through the process of unfolding and fabricating each component of our design.

The lectures and readings introduce a variety of computerised controlled cutting tools, some of which are used for cutting our template as well. I think these advanced technologies play an really important role in the fabrication process in modern world. They significantly improve the efficiency of the building process in terms of time and material use. Since we can arrange what needs to be cut on the computer, it minimizes the possibility of mistakes and thus the waste. These tools acts like the basis for a making successful model.

During Module 3, I also have an experience of learning from practice. Gershenfeld's paper (2005) discusses the distribution of labor in the process of making an object. It has been a fact for a long time that designers, engineers and builders are in charge of different stages of this process but with the advent of 3D modelling, the boundaries between them are blurred. I feel a strong sense of agreement with this statement when I'm working on the module 3 task. When I am building my model, I can feel which part is hard to connect to the others, which part is less stable than other ones or which material is better for constructing certain component. Building actually helps us to find out problems and encourages us to test different solutions. So I not only care about the external look of my model but also the internal structure and the viability of my design, just like an engineer or builder. Building something up can provide designers with different perspectives to judge his/her design and give them more inspirations to modify its design.

Henry Chhen Student No: 586676 Semester 2/2012 Group 5

Module 1 + 2 recap

My natural process are the dance of spiders. The curvature nature of such dance is shown through my design form. The patterns developed are from the growing veins of mould slime. Through the teachings of Kandisky, the veins are broken down in simple rectangles to form the pattern above.

Change in pattern

I realised that using the first pattern would present many problems. Being ‘boxed’ – walls on every side, these walls

would over lap with neighbouring walls. To overcome this issue, I simply removed the side walls, and planned on

manually adding such walls when needed.

Final form

This form is much easier to make

compared to the first one shown in

module two. There are no overlaps, and

the ‘cuts’ are smaller, thus much more

easier to handle.

Layering

Firstly I layered the model horizontally, with both and bottom segregated. It was done horizontally as it would

be the most easiest to construct, as told by the teachers in the rhino tech section,

I spited the top and bottom in half to present any possible overlaps,.

Tabbing

Before unrolling each sections, I wanted to know which tabbing system I needed to use. After experimenting

with both the tabbing options in panelling tools and grasshopper, I found that both produced tabs within the

area. I need tabs only on the outside,. After speaking with the teachers in the Rhino tech session, I found it

was better if I manually drew all the tabs.

Unrolling

Image above shows the entire structure unrolled. The original unrolled section is kept next to the one

prepared for print – ones altered primarily due to overlaps within the panels. The original one is kept to act as

reference

Unrolled sections

*note: each image are positioned in chorological order, from left to right

Unrolling back hand

Unrolling finger pieces

File prototype for Fab lab

Changed to A4 size

After some misunderstanding with Fab tech, I thought the only option for me to cut this is via hand, as my pieces were too small to cut on both laser and card. I only found out after that I could only use laser. This is why I fitted all these pieces on A4 boxes, so I could print at home

Building full scale prototype

Spent two weeks of my holidays manually cutting and gluing each pieces. This method is extremely time consuming, hence in the

future I will try to avoid this approach.

The errors I found were misalignment, missing tabs, and tabs that were too big or small. I adjusted such on rhino. I also decided not to

include the panels that formed the wall in the cuts. These just took too much time and effort to connect.

Building full scale finger prototype

Building the finger prototype had many issues. Being a 3D curved form, the bottom of the structure won’t properly attach to its

neighbouring sections. Not only that, due to tits small size, gluing and folding was extremely difficult and took a lot of time. To resolve

this issue, I decided to make this 2d instead of 3d, by simply removing the bottom section.

Building the circuit

Location of diodes and direction of light Simple circuit Simple circuit adjusted to fit fingers

Had to use a combination of both series and parallel in order for the

circuit to work using a 9v battery. If I only used series, only 3 diodes can

be installed. And if I only used parallel, the diodes will overload in volts.

Series and parallel is done to adjust volt input and to have more diodes

in the circuit

The LED I used are white 3mm diodes with min 3V and 3.4 V typ.

Building the circuit

Through calculations using the basic laws governing electricity and circuits, I was able to successfully create the circuit –

all the diodes light up. However this circuit used a lot of power. With a fresh out of the packet 9v battery, the circuit only

lasted approx. 5 seconds before the battery died out. I need to think of a more efficient way to light up my model.

Building final

Final model

Reflection

Model 3 was primarily based on constructing the model, which was a great learning experience. By

virtually designing the model, and then constructing it in real life, I learnt the great importance of

producing prototypes. Despite calculations, and having things look ‘right’ on the software, these

results cannot match those of building a real model. I spent a great amount of time constructing my

model as accurate as possible on the computer, but building it showed many of my calculations

were off. For instance, I did not take into consideration the thickness of the paper, the flexibility and

the folding behaviour, which made my unrolled sections quite inaccurate.

Through the reading ‘Making ideas’, by B. Macfalane, I learnt the great influence virtual plays on the

design world. Physical designing have some form of limitations. Accurately visually presenting what’s

in your mind, correcting mistakes, adjusting certain aspects are all large hurdles to overall through

basic physical design means. However, virtual design overcomes such limitations, and opens to a

greater vast of possibility.

I also experience such effect whilst working on rhino. The more I worked, the more I learnt of the

possibilities rhino gives. From converting hard mundane task, to a quick stroke of a button really

makes rhino a enjoyable software. Not only that, the knowledge gained allowed me to think of more

patters, more designs I could potentially use.

Building my final, I did encounter some issues. The paper for the final was much different to the paper

I used to create my prototype. It was stiffer, thicker, less flexible and stronger than my prototype

paper. From this it lead to a few complications. The solutions used to resolve issues for the prototype,

are only for the prototype. It does not greatly affix to the final due to different papers. Whilst the

prototype was able to fit in correctly together, due to the thickness of the final, some areas did not fit

as perfectly as desired, leaving gaps and imperfect folds. Next time I would use the same paper for

both prototype and final.

In all, I learnt the importance of testing and reflecting. Only through these are the problems

effectively solved. No software or calculations can accuracy mimic the means of reality. If given

more time, I would spend a great deal of it constructing more prototypes to get the design spot on.

Ka Yan Stephanie NgStudent No.: 582283 Semester 2/2012 Group 3

Natural Process

Life Cycle of Butterfly

Movement

Contraction and Release

‘up and down‘

A triangle overlapping

Repeatedly overlap

Experiment with forms by offsetting faces border distances:

0.1

0.3

0.50.7

0.9

1.2

Each offset faces border distance do make model rigid enough or not. I have tested the distances to be 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, 0.9 and 1.2. I consider either 0.7 or 0.9 is the best.

4 views and isometric views:

NE NW

SE SW

Perspectives:

Pattern of holes tryout:

random curve spiral up and down lines up and down lines in zic zac way

The reason why the up and down lines pattern will be my final hole pattern is because this is actually my original pattern about the flying process of butterfly. The distribution of the holes will be allocated according to whether the lines are passing through or not, therefore, it is pretty random too.

My up and down lines are not drawn evenly but instead, some parts are having more holes and some parts are having fewer holes as I have applied the case to the situation when I wear it. Because I’m going to put my hands through it horizontally, if there is going to be holes at the top part of the model, they will still be covered by my hand, that is why I did not create a lot of holes but rather put more at the bottom as it will look a lot nicer if the shadow comes out from the bottom and lights shine through the holes and reflect the pattern on the floor.

facing top

facing the floor

Fabrication of prototype

--Fabrication--Prototype 1

First of all, after unrolling the surfaces, most of the surfaces overlap each other, I have separated them into pieces and created 1cm thick tabs.

Justification of using paper cutting for white papers and laser cutting for black cutting, reasons as below:• the natural process is related to the theme of contrast,

being up and down, I want the colours of the strips to show the contrast as well. As the colour of the paper will turn brown after using the laser cutting, I have chosen the paper cutting for white papers.

• the black papers have dash lines, time taken for cutting dash lines is faster in laser cutting than paper cutting.

ERROR IMPROVEMENTThe side of each panel is not same length so that the strips cannot be stick together

(This is related to triangulate faces) Triangulate faces before unrolling which is triangulate it when it is still a model but not strips

The tabs are too obvious Make the thickness of the tabs to less than 0.5cm instead of 1cm

Paper clips are too easy to be re-moved accidentally

Use Fold Back Clip

Time consuming as the problem of not continuing the make the model is found after cutting, folding and sticking all the individual strips

Cut, fold and stick the first two strips first so that it can be confirmed that it can be continued

The strips and holes and everything seem too big as the scale seems not very accurate and has to be justified

Re-scale the whole model before unrolling and making tabs

The surfaces of the model has switched back to front and front to back

Because of forgetting to flip it, it becomes the main reason why the whole model has to be made again

--Fabrication--Prototype 1

After failing the prototype 1, each step will be double-checked more care-fully so that no more wrong path is walked. I have gone back to the main concept which is the flying pattern of butterfly and added more surfaces to the model.

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [idea generating]

Justification of the 3 spheres:• Ball bouncing curve is just like butterfly fly-

ing up• The higher the butterfly flies, the smaller the

butterfly is, just like the sizes of the 3 spheresThe whole model (include the biggest part) shows how a butterfly flaps its wings flying up to the sky

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [paneling]

The panels in sharp green colour represents that they have not been flipped

Because the two models are overlapped, I have used a line to cut through all the surfaces of the sphere and trimmed it. After that, I have added another strip of panels to connect them.

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [unrolling and nesting]

Using colours which have big contrast will minimize the error of identifying whether that strip should be in black or white.

As the 3D pattern is de-signed in this way, I have gather two strips for one group and total as 15 horizontal/spiral groups of strips and 2 vertical strips as the opening and clos-ing of the model. I tried to unroll it by group but does not work, end up I unroll one by one.

Colour representationgreen: blackpurple: white

yellow: connection stripblue + red: black

purple+ light blue: white

orange: blacklight green: white

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [creating tabs with grasshopper]

Grasshopper is a really good program to use as time has consumed a lot that I do not have to create tabs by myself. And also, the angle of each edge of the tabs is the same and therefore, it is a lot easier as the tabs will be stick fully while no sides or angles come out as if the thickness of the tabs are different.However, sometimes the lines connecting are not allocated to the right spot which I have to delete the lines and make the right ones to the right spot.

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [unrolling and nesting]

During unrolling, this time is a lot easier than the last prototype as not many pan-els overlap each other, so that the strips do not need to be broken down into pieces.

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [assembly]

Assembly tools:• cutting mat• Scalper (Artificial cutter)• Scissors• Ruler• Paper clips• Fold back clips• Forceps• Cutter• Glue• Toothpick

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [constructing1]

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [constructing 2]

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [lighting effect]

After putting lights randomly on the model, I think I have to create a lighting pathway or system with reasons behind. Why am I putting the lights in that particular areas? What is the significance of that? Can I relate or connect back to my concept?

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [lighting testing 1]

The three spheres are con-nected to each other and they have to be closed after putting the LED lights in, that is why I chose to make the electrical circuit for them first.I was considering whether to use the fishing lines or not to connect them to-gether, however as even though I do not like the linking lines to be visible, the wires which are used to connect the LED have to be put, that is why wire is replaced the fishing lines.

--Fabrication--Prototype 2 [lighting testing 2]

As for the biggest part of the model, there were lots of consideration to be made as lighting test was done.1. Whether lights will be blocked after my hand

is going through the model2. How many lights have to be used and what is

the distribution of them3. Whether to hang the lights or stick them to

the surfaces of the panels

Lights on the model on fig. 1 are hanged inside the model without touching the surfaces which creates a clearer pattern of shadow than the one which lights are attached to the side of the surface, making the shadow a bit messy or disperse.

1 2

I was going to put 16 lights on this big part of the mod-el which 2 lines of lights are constructed with one left and one right because my hand will be put on top, if the lights are attached on the top, my hand will block all the lights. And the rea-son why it is 16 is because I am going to attach the lights on the upper black surface which lights will then shine through the holes and dash lines to the ground, making shadows with different shapes.

Buddhism Temple | Miliy Designhttp://www.arch2o.com/buddhism-temple-miliy-design/

The outlooks of these two precedents, Buddhism Temple and M-City are very similar to my model design. It was good as I could have a look at these and consider where my lights should located in order to show this twisted curves. Both models are in spiral, but this temple is constructed as continuous curve in a strip but mine is constructed with numerous strips. It shows here that I can actually try to have my lights setting up in spiral so it can emphasize the twisting more for my model.

M-City by Vladimir Plotkin and Roberto Meyerhttp://designsandprojects.com/m-city-by-vladimir-plotkin-and-roberto-meyer/

Precedent

fInal prototype

As time taken for one prototype was very long, I did not manage to do a final model before the submission of module 3. This prototype will still look the same as the final one but the final one will be changed a little bit of the construction and design of the tabs and strips.

Overall, I have used the parallel circuit to put the lights which means all the positive side is connected with 1 wire and negative side is connected with 1 wire. There are 16 lights in the biggest model with two 2 light strips, 8 each. 3 lights are put in the first sphere, 2 lights are put in the second one and lastly also 2 lights are attached in the last and smallest sphere.

This model is just way too big than my expactation so my final model will be constructed again after resizing it.

ERROR IMPROVEMENTAs both FabLab’s and my prob-lem, the 300gsm black laser cutting cards printed is mistakenly used in-stead of 200gsm

Make sure 200gsm is used otherwise the dash folding lines would not look nice and hard to fold and stick

The tabs are too thin Make the tabs as 0.5 for both white and black cards

After folding the dash lines and stick-ing two strips together, all the glues are very obvious and the cards cannot be fully sticked together

Use score lines instead of dash lines as lights will not travel through be-cause there are two layers overlap-ping making it blocked

The last two vertical strips are way too hard to stick which end up tabs are facing out

1. Making the tabs thicker2. DO NOT make any vertical strips, instead, make all 15 strips as hori-zontal

The PVA stained left over after using too much

Try UHU but need extra care as well as there are glue thread will make the surface dirty

The module turned out bigger than expected

resize the whole model before un-rolling

fInal correction

100 word response to the lecture and the reading

Reflection from week 8 lecture

The topic of this week’s lecture was Power of Making by Paul Loh. He started with a quote from Daniel Charny that drew my attention and from the quote, there are few words that were very memorable that I might not forget. “Making is something everyone can do.“ I always think during the making process, I can come up with many inspirational ideas for my design. It is a lot more powerful than just use a pen and a paper to generate ideas.

This week’s lecture improved my knowledge of how prototype should be and how important it is. Paul introduced different de-sign processes to us in both certainty and uncertainty ways from assemblage to prototype. Testing and spatial type link together and physical prototype and digital prototype links together. They are all performance and effects separately. Furthermore, I con-sider the procedures of fabrication techniques are also very cru-cial for me in the future as to guide me through. First with genera-tive or additive procedure, following by subtractive procedure and lastly with transformation procedure. It is good to keep fol-lowing these procedures as when digital fabrication is on.

Reflection from reading From this week’s reading, Brendan Macfarlane’s Making Ideas, I have gained more knowledge of generating ideas and from generating ideas to fabrication.

Nowadays, everything is used in digital, we use digital to express our ideas and belief and how it then influences us to think through a project and by using the project to influence others. Good way of presenting is another key to be influential. As the technology becoming more developed, digitalization becomes a more es-tablished, more essential technology advancement, it has been a trend now.

This digital concept for virtual model is complicated yet powerful in the way of generating and expressing ideas.

100 word response to the lecture and the reading


This week’s lecture, the guest speaker, Stanislav Roudavskii in-troduces the idea of programming in design. Architecture is not only about construction building but also other sorts of area. Pro-gramming can assist us in solving complicated task when time is limited, it is a really quick and accurate system especially when designing is needed. It is very interesting how human set up pro-grams to improve the quality of time in designing. I think of our fantastic FabLab as it helps me in cutting most of the strips of my model so I can save some times going through those assem-bly processes but instead, trying out more prototypes with good quality.

Before the lecture, I totally did not notice robots can actually be used more than we think in labour and human activities. They can totally do those work which we perceive as impossible.

‘Program or be programmed’

Reflection from reading From this week’s reading, Personal Computers to Personal Fabri-cation, different computer-controlled cutting tools in fabrication, Subtraction, Addition and Building Models are introduced.

The idea of Equality fabrication is to deform one part around an-other one, ending up with the same amount of material in a new shape. It is introduced as a process without waste is because it is not both subtraction and addition fabrications which must pro-duce waste. Ways to reduce waste while fabricating the model using card or laser cutter are:1. Minimize the space between each unrolled piece2. Do not throw the left-over papers after cutting the pieces out,

use them efficiently3. For the first 1 or 2 prototypes, use paper cutting instead of laser

cutting as it is less costly and laser cutting is high power con-sumption

100 word response to the lecture


As our week 10 and also our last lecture, the lecturer did an overview of the work process of this subject from the first week. The lecturer mentioned the working process on the right which I found very important to the work-ing process for the future design project. By generating different angles of perspectives and voices, we are able to design some abstract work and together with all the presence of lectures and tutorials, the whole process will go a lot smoother.

When the lecturer was introducing the material choices such as light, wind, sound and motion together with showing us video clips, I started thinking about how to express my model with perfect lights reflecting shadow with a meaning inside. In the clip, the shadow generated in the lighting test, movement and sound of people are presented. If I’m sticking my lights on the upper black card paper, it might be seen through the holes by the audi-ence which is too bright to shine. Therefore, long consideration time has to be prepared as lights are so important to this model, it has to be expressed in a lantern form, how could a lantern work without lights inside?

multiple perspectives

multiple voices

from abstrat to tangible

learning by doing, comulative, reflective

lectures: exposure to wider body of ideas & ambitions

tutorials: testing out ideas in miniature, bounded exercise

REFlection

Over the past 4 weeks including the spring break, I have been focusing on this fabrication, this is the most rewarding moment as I can see my final model after all the 6 weeks of staying up late and running out of ideas.

I still remembered the most depressing time when I printed out my first full-scale prototype and because the surfaces were over-lapped to each other, I have to separate them out, unrolled them, using the laser cutting to print them and stick them back into one strip and that was the time when I found the model would not be able to be constructed as I forgot to flip the sur-faces and also I did the triangular faces after unrolling but not before. That took me the whole first week of my spring break.

Although this model turned out alright with the linking back to the concept and the effect of using black and white and the reason behind, I would still need to redesign and reconstruct the whole model in order to prove the reason behind and have a

neat and fix the mistakes such as the problem of the tabs and the thickness of the paper.

The analysis and giving reasons parts in this module seems take up a very important place, it is a platform for us to explain the best we could to show how this model is transformed before leading to module 4.

I don’t know it is because I have been with this model everyday for the last 4 weeks, I started found out the layout is too com-plicated and it feels like it is a bit messy. Unfortunately, I cannot redo the whole thing. I would if I had enough time. Anyway, this module is still my favourite one even though it is also the most time consuming one.

References:• ReadingsMacfarland, B (2005): Making Ideas. In Architecture in the Digital Age, B. Kolarevic (ed.), Spon Press, London, pp. 182-198

• Review of “Power of Making“< http://humanfingers.wordpress.com/2011/11/27/review-power-of-making-va-curated-by-daniel-charny/ >

• Definition of Superblock< http://www.linfo.org/superblock >

• M-City< http://designsandprojects.com/m-city-by-vladimir-plotkin-and-roberto-meyer/ >

• Buddhism Temple<http://www.arch2o.com/buddhism-temple-miliy-design/>

• Jim Campbell Exploded View<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-fNalstA2k>

Jingle Chen MODULE 3 -FABRICATION

Semester 2/ 2012 Student Number- 584256 Group 1

FROM IDEATION TO DESIGN

UNROLLING

I decided to unroll my three sections- A, B and C and their matching edges separately.

The Extrusion- Section C surface and finned edges The tubes- Sections A + B surfaces and finned edges

PRECEDENT:SPECTRA BY SHARON GOH

The designer was interested in the patterns geometric

patterns formed in kaleidoscopes and what would happen

when these were projected through lights. I found this related

to my design because by panels are also triangular and can

have the same effect, depending on where I place my light.

She has placed her light in a central position and the

shadows are symmetrical and radiate out from the center.

I’m not sure whether I want this effect or a more asymmetrical

lighting effect.

PRECEDENT: COSMIC QUILT, THE PRINCIPALS

This project is an interactive installation made to respond to its environment and users by

sensing movement and responding to it. Materials include paper, aluminium, According to

The Principals, "The project aims to answer the question 'What if architecture responded to

our presence?' This project is a realization of our ultimate ambition, which is to design

spaces and objects that expand upon our understanding of the built realm without

abandoning its history.“

The way that the lighting creates an overlapping effect is interesting and can influence my

placement of lights. For example, should I place it in fold to create the layering effect to

create this effect or on a smooth part where there is no overlaying of shadows?

My method of unrolling sections A + B included

grouping a seam e.g. A01, before grouping ring

around the seam before colour coding and

labelling. Below is an example of the unrolling

method I used for the prototype. However, this

method was unsuccessful and a different method

was used.

UNROLLING

(PROTOTYPE)

Colour Coded Section A

Colour Coded and labelled parts

UNROLLING- SECTION A

FRONT BACK

A1

A2 A3

A4 A5

A6

A7

A8

UNROLLING-SECTION B

FRONT

BACK

A1

A2 A3

A4

A5

A6

A7 A8

UNROLLING SECTION C

D

E

F

G

J

H

I

Colour Coding (Interior)

Colour Coding from end

Colour Coding for Section C

Section C was grouped into strips, colour

coded and labelled. A problem arose here of

how to make the finned edges? In order to

fabricate them they must be triangulated,

but this changes how they look and makes

the design too bulky.

C1/D C2/E

C3/F C4/G

C5/H

C6/I C7

C8

C9

C10

C11 C12

C13

C14 C15

C16 C17

C18

C19 C20/J

The solution? Each strip from strips from C1

to C6 and C20 were renamed strips J- I (

these were the only ones I wanted to have

the finned edge effect) They were split into

their constituent triangles and labelled.

Large tabs (3cm) that were90degrees from

the edge were created on grasshopper.

The idea was to construct these strips with

the tabs on the outside to create a “finned

edges effect”. To the left is an example of

how a strip was split into triangles and

labelled.

To construct the strip,

the numbers on the

labels were matched up

by looking at the digital

file (above)

NESTING In total there were 6 sheets of A2 200gsm ivory card

used. I chose to use this type of card because it was

sturdy enough to give the lantern form, but thin enough

to get the lighting effect I wanted. It was also a good

thickness to glue together to create a curved effect.

Triangles of Section C- Ivory Card White- 200gsm, Scale: 1:32

Ivory Card White- 200gsm, Sections A, B and C unrolled, Scale: 1:32

FABRICATION Need:

Cutting mat, Bulldog clips, adhesives (PVA glue, superglue,

needle and thread, fishing wire), Pencil, Stanley knife, Metal

ruler, Fablab file

Construction of Sections A + B- using bulldog clips to hold the pieces together while the glue dries

Construction of Section C- Pieces were cut out and glued with edges facing upwards, on the exterior. All the triangles in a

strip were joined together before the strips too were joined together, all held by bulldog clips. The “finned edges” were

then cut to desired width.

LIGHTING

Materials: LED lights x 8, Battery pack/ switch x 2, 4 x AAA batteries, Wire (white) approx 5m, Stanley knife, Scissors, Cutting mat, Ruler, Masking tape

The wire was cut to appropriate lengths before the plastic was shaved off the ends to expose the

copper wires. These were joined in a parallel circuit with LED lights and secured with masking tape.

Two simple parallel circuits were made. I chose to wire the lights in parallel so there would be equal voltage across each light, making them

project the same light intensity. These were inserted into the lanterns during construction.

TECHNICAL PROBLEMS

1. Problems with

Fablab file

Some sections where

the line was meant to

be etched was cut

instead. This was fixed

by gluing a strip of

card on the back to

join these together.

2. Some sections did

not join together

properly. This occurred

using when making the

first prototype, so I

unrolled the sections

using a different

method or I hand-cut

pieces to close the

holes

3. It was very difficult to join some of the

smaller, fiddly parts together. So I used

superglue and/or fishing wire and

thread to hold the smaller pieces

together.

FINAL PROTOTYPE

REFLECTION

In the fabrication module, I learnt two important things: (1), that your final design is highly dependent on the tools and materials you use and (2), that no matter how much technology develops, manual hands-on construction is essential for a designer.

“The tools are an undeniable part of the product” In my case, the tools were the rhino program, the fablab laser and card cutters, stanley knife and scissors. A limitation was the time it took for my file to be cut, and the effects of the different machines. For example, the laser cutter produced burnt edges, and this was not a desirable effect in my case. This is why I decided to make two prototypes in this module- because the pieces with burnt edges did not look aesthetically pleasing with those of the card cutter. On the other hand, the card cutter was much slower. The materials included the card and adhesives such as glue, superglue, fishing wire and thread. The properties of the materials such as the weight, layers, ability to stick limit what can and cannot be physically made. The smaller pieces were especially hard to connect and superglue was used for this. However, the superglue is very inaccurate, leaving you no room for error. The paper was difficult to bend and twist and only planar sections worked and looked clean. The digital model could not be reproduced exactly because of this. For my final prototype I think I will make my pieces bigger, use the card cutter and a stronger glue to get the desirable effect.

I also learnt that no matter how much work a machine or technology can do for you, the process of fabrication is still very labour intensive. Technology just speeds up the process, and because of this, more and more possibilities are available to us. I was fascinated by the different digital technologies such as the water cutter and injection moulding. These can influence the project by opening new areas of exploration, new possibilities and speeding up the process, allowing more time for more design iterations. However, at the end of the day, we must still construct the model ourselves, so we can never be fully dependent on technology, no matter how helpful it may be.

READINGS AND LECTURE RESPONSES

Macfarlane (2005):

Macfarlane talks about how about during the process of fabrication, concepts change and you must go back and forth between the conventional method and digital method. Use either or and both. New ideas emerge and these can be incorporated into the design. I agree with his idea of “making ideas” and how using a different tool e.g. digital technologies can help open our eyes up to new possibilities. My concepts evolved and changed during construction as I had to design around some problems such as pieces not fitting together. In a virtual model it is difficult to get the feel of the structural properties because you can’t feel it in your hands, so that is a limitation of digital technology. Also, alterations were made to the physical model to look better, or when the virtual model did not translate exactly onto the paper.

In MacFarlane’s projects, he used “events as a generator of form” The “event” is a problem that arises which the architects must respond to and includes in the brief. For example, the event that occurred in the renovation of the Maison T house was the growing up of the boys in the family and their needs and wants, as well as the existing roof where the extension was planned. These factors dictated the form of the final product- which conformed to the limitations of the existing roof, the views, privacy and space the boys wanted.

Gershefeld (2005)

In Gershenfeld’s reading, he introduces “equality fabrication” as a process without waste, and laser cutting/card cutting is a “subtractive” method which is not as efficient. In order to maximise the efficiency, the pieces were nested in a way to reduce the number of pieces of card needed. Furthermore, hand pieces were cut from the scraps. Other ways of reducing the waste could be to incorporate scraps into the lantern or to make another, smaller lantern out of the scraps.

When he mentions the “traditional division of labour”, he is talking about the roles of humans and machines and how machines are now crossing over into what the traditional roles of humans such as building and manufacturing. Digital design and fabrication challenges this notion by becoming increasingly similar to humans in terms of their roles in building and manufacturing. These fabrication techniques can reduce the volume of work a human has to do in order to get the same outcome- example- prefabricated houses. On the other hand, these technologies also open up new possibilities that are not possible using traditional methods.

Lecture 7: Unfolding

This lecture informed us of the “how-to’s” of using fablab. It was very useful and servd as a practical step by step guide as to how I would commence unrolling and sending to fablab. When unrolling my model I incorporated all the steps into my process. I was also introduced to Grasshopper and amazed by how easy and quick it was to use. I also started to think about how I would split my model up into sections for construction.

Lecture 8: Paul Loh/ Power of Making

“Making is the most powerful way of solving problems.” Paul

gave a lecture on the history of construction and where some of these digital technologies originated. Most come from the automobile/ airplane construction industries, and I suppose this shows how important it is to work with and look for inspiration from other fields of study. It was fascinating to learn how The making process is a learning process- we learn and think at the same time we make. We can test the aesthetics and functions of a model. I am beginning to see the importance of prototypes and how this design process is really designing back and forth physically and virtually.

Lecture 9: Augmented Spaces/ Stanislav Roudavski

Stanislav talked about how technology does not limit our creations, but is instead, our knowledge of the programme that limits our creativity. He highlighted how understanding is backwards- we must understand how the software works in order to know how to use it. He challenged the idea of “function dictates form” with the alternative, “form follows software.” These are both true, whilst the concept “function dictates form” gives the design a purpose, it does not necessarily have to dictate the form- the design is limited by what the software can do. This was a good reminder of the brief to make a lantern that fits on the body and a personal reflection of whether I was fulfilling this brief. He also showed us some examples that were quite inspiring, such as the wall building robots and an interactive structure, forms that could not be possible without digital technology.

REFERENCES

• http://mocoloco.com/archives/027224.php

• http://dandelion.idasia.org/exhibition-content/

• http://www.theprincipals.us/projects/

http://mocoloco.com/archives/027224.php

http://dandelion.idasia.org/exhibition-content/



http://www.theprincipals.us/projects/

��

��

�� !�"�#�$�"��%��&��'��!��

(� )��%��*��

+��)��,� ��)��%��)��*��-�.)�� %��,��)��%%��%��*��-�.)��*��)��*��*�)��)��)�� )�"�!��*�!��%��)��/��%��!)��%��"��-�

��0� �!�"�#�� 1�'��

2�� %�"��

��0� �!�"�#�'��

��

��

��

��

��

��

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�3�� )��'�&��4�(��%�2�� #�2��3

��

�

��

�

�

�

�

! "

#$

%

&'

� ( )

��'�&��4

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�3�� )��'�&��4�4�!��%�2�� #�&3�+� ��+��4

�)��!��!)�!��"�!��)��"�� )��*�%��%�� )��*��*�,)!)��!��,)!)��*�,��*��!�� )��-

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�3�� )��0��"��!�� #�&��*��*��1��"5��6��*�!�� #��

'*

'�

'�

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�3�� )��4��!��*�!�� #�&��*��

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�&��

4!��#��

+��!��2��0�� !��

(�*�!��%�(��!��"��"��#�&��

4!��#��

.�"��%��#+��!��2��0��

.�"�� )�1�*��#�)��+��

(�*�!��%�(��4!��'��"��#�2��!��

(�*�!�� .��#�4��%�'7��8��2�� '�"��!�"

'��!��!��#��9� ��!)��!��*��:�!��"�

.)�!��"��,��"��%��*��%�%�� ,��)�"��)��;"��)��)�� %�!��"��%�*�!��!)�/��-�$��"��%��<!��"��,��"�!��)��,��%;��"��!��=��*��)��,�� -�$��)�� )��)�,�� "��$��=��-

(�*�!��%�(��4!��'��"��#�.�!)�!��!��

4��"�%��!��!��%��'��#��-�2��!��"�!�0-�� !!�� *��-�(�� !��>-�8��*�� )��"��!��,�)�"�"��!�"��-�8��)��%��"�� )��,)��""�!�*��%��"�-�8��"��!)��)��?-�8��"��!��*�9��,��":�

(�*�!��%�(��4!��'��"��#�.�!)�!��!��

4��"�%��!��!��%�0��'��#��-�2��!��"�!�0-�(�� !��-�8��%�"�� )��,)��""�!�*��>-��!)��!��*��-��!)��)��0��"��-��!)��"��,)��""�!�*��

(�*�!��%�(��4!��'��"��#�.�!)�!��!��

4��"�%��!��!��%� *�#��-�2��!��"�!�0-� ��%��!��!)��,)��-�@��"�!�� )��

�� "��#�4��!��

�� )�� )��6�� *� �)�� *�� ,��!��!��-� $� %�� )�� )�� ,��!�� ,�)�� )�� *� �� )�� )� �)�� -�5�� )��*� �)�� %�� )�� "�� "� �%� �)��"�*��*�!��)��%��"��"��-�

$��!��*��*��0�,)!)�,��)�� *�� *�� )�� )�� *�!��)��%��;*��)��<�!��-�$��%�� $� )��%��)��)��*��)��6��*��"�� )��)��<�!��-�$�� )�� "��"�� )�� !�� *� �� )��*�� !��%��)��,��*��,)!)��)��!��,��9.�"��%��'!��:-�$��)�� %�� $� �� )�� !�� *��)��%��""��-

$��)��/��!��%�!��!��)��$�!��!)��)��"��)��*��!��%��)��"��"��-�$��)��"��"��$� ��)��"��,)!)�,��%%!��"��"��-� $�� )�� )�� =�� !�� "��)��!��9+��%�:

�*�� )��,�)��"��!��*�,��)��"��*��%�� 9+�� )�:��*�� 9��"�� )�:� $��)��!��)��*��!��A��%%��:

�� "��#�2��

�%�� !�� %�� $��!��!)�� )��!��%� �)�� !��*� %��,)�� *��!�-� .)� �� )�� )�� !��*�� ,�� *�� )�� %��-�

$��!��)!��!��9�� :�%�� )�� "�� )�� %%�� %� �)��-

$�,�!)�� '7�� %�353� �� "�� "�� )�� /�� !��%��)��-�

�� "��#�� )��

'��%�� )�

'�� %�+��

'�� %�4,�!)

�� )�� !��!�� %� �)�� %�� $�"�� )��,�� $� ,�� "��)�� )��,�)��)��-�

$� �� %� �)�� !)�� )��!�� *� �� ,)!)� $� !�� ,�� )�� )-� $� !�� )�� ,��"� �)�� !��!��,�� )�� ,�� )�� !�!��)�� )��)��-�

.)��!��!��%��)��"��!��%��)�� )�� ,�)�� )�� )�� *�� *�!�� "�*�� !)��)�� %�!�� "��%� �)��!�� )��*��%��!��!��-

.�!)�!��!��

(��#�.�!)�!��!��4�/��!��%�!��!��*� �� %��!��

(��#�.�!)�!��!�� )��

.)��!�!��$��"�!��%��,)�� )�B�>� �� *�� )�� 7B� �� B� ��,�!)��,)��,��-�

�)�� )��!��!�� "��-� $�!)�� "�� !�!�� %� �� !�!�� *�!�� )�� ,�� ,�� *�� *�� )�� )�� )�� *�� ,�!)� ,)!)� ,�� *�� "�� )�� !��%��)��-

$�!)��,)��,��*�!��)��!��%� �)�� ,)�� )�� ,�� ,�� *�� *��!��%�,)��*-��

�%��!��

��

��

��

��

�� !��

��"��!��

�� "��#��

� �� $��

�� $��

��$��$�� %��

��

��

�� $��

��&��

��

��$� ��'��

��()$�� *�� "��

�� $��$��'�

�� "��

��

�� "��

Student No: 581651 Semester 2/2012 Group 1Mitran M Kiandee

MODULE THREE FABRICATION

MODULE ONE PLASTICINE MODEL

Design DivisionThis fi nal design from module 1 is a compilled and multilayered outcome from the whole ideation process. I have developed a design that connotes the moon as mysterious yet supernatural as well as a multi-scaled matter.

MODULE TWO DIGITAL MODEL

Front View

Back View

Left View

Back View

Top View

Perspective View

DigitalisedThis fi nal design from module 2 is an extension of the fi rst module. The form shifted from being a solid component into a hollow matter that consist of a network of panels that are sporadically distributed on the body. This replecates the event of crater for-mation whilst focus is given on the orientation, size, shape and distribution.

DIGITISATION LAYERINGSeperation

This was an attempt to divide model into different layers vertically to ease of unfolding process.Horizontal splitting should provide better structural support of the paper.

The seperation however proved to be redudundant, messy, and lacked order. Also, the difference in connection created overlaping surfaces when unfolding.

DIGITISATION ALTERNATIVE LAYERING

Second Layering

Reapproached layering process After seeking advice, I was told that with my design, it would be better to create horizontal rings. I therefore seperated them into large rings and then segmenting each ring into smaller easy to understand pieces.

Clarity was enhanced by removing the visibility of isocurves. This enabled me to see the digital defects of that arise prior to unrolling the surfaces.

First Layering

DIGITISATION STRUCTURAL BASE

RepairsWith a better unfolding order, the process of layering seem to have revealed several design fl aws.

Panels that are too tight and disporpotionate were replaced with fl at faces.

Problems arise at the surface joints and some disorientated fold lines.

The solution was simply to reconnect them at their end points and changing the diagonal

End Points

diagonal direction

diagonal directiondiagonal direction

DEVELOPMENT BASIC PANELING

Moving ForwardUpon a satisfactory unrolling, I joined the surfaces and started to create tabs and edit dodgy panel structues.

DEVELOPMENT TABS

Grasshopper tab settings for layers A to I

Grasshopper tab settings for layers J to N

ShortcutUsing available grasshopper templates, I have craeted the tabs and score lines for the unfolding process.

Panels were split into two regions where the bottom half require smaller tabs to fi t adequately.

Since I had 66 faces, I reevaluated the plugin function. I used the template for paper cutter and simply changed the line type into ‘dashed’ to cater for my laser cutting process that I decided to use.

Along the way, I deleted, replaced and adjusted some cut and score lines to ensure that the fabrica-tion of my fi rst prototype is smooth and easy.

After grasshopper automation of tabs and score lines, I needed to do some fi nal tweaking for overlapping tabs, changing line types, cut outs and to removeunnecessary lines.

FABRICATION CUTTING TEMPLATE

The TestFrom Module 2 prototyping, I have decided to use 220gsm black and white cards because they seem to have inherent strength and allows a generous amount of light penetration.

The fi rst attempt to create a template was simply dropping the panels into the frame of my material.I felt that this is poor material effi ciency.

I therefore rearranged and rotated the panels to create minimal paper waste. This does not cre-ate confusion when cutting because panels are individually labeled and the joining tabs are fairly systematic.

With this prototype, I mirrored image half of the cards to see what would the panels look like if I used the back surface of the laser cut outs. I would like to use the burn marks to my advantage.

Second PrototypingAfter implementing some drastic simplifi cations and reor-dering, I decided I have to test the physical possibility of the design.

The unrolled panels fold up supposedly fold up into a ring from the model. However, the distribution seemed raher complicated to follow.

Therefore, for future references, I decided to fabricate each panel individually with folding reference to the base panels.

PROTOTYPING UNFOLDING

PROTOTYPE ONE PROCESS

Points

Below are a few points that I noticed lacking on the fi rst model:

• folding technique• double tabs.• double fl aps.• dotted vs solid.• dirty hands.• black vs white contrast coordination.• missing tabs.• fl imsy.• thin paper. • burnt back.• scale.• insert lighting

1: Split tabs. Unspotted grasshopper mistake

3: Dirty hands make dirty panels

4: Unnecessary tabs

2: Some panels are too big to fi t in

Technical Hitches

A: laser cut B: Score and fold panels

C: Connect panels

The tools of trade

D: Connect rings

PROTOTYPE ONE ASSEMBLY

ConnectivityThis process was done in two parts; the top and the bottom.

Top

Bottom

PROTOTYPE ONE COMPLETED

Physical Deformaties Despite being quite aesthetically pleasing, the prototype revealed several design and mate-rial fl aws.

Corrections were noted on my journal and the CAD fi le was revisited and the lines were manually fi xed.

White surfaces illuminate while black surfaces merely chanel light out. With a physical model at hand, I could easily rearrange the colour of each panel on the digital fi le.

Above all, the most critical issue I discovered was the fl imsy and unstable form this fi rst full scale prototype has.

1: Distorted panel misfi ts. 2: Flaw with the dashed line system

3: Sensitive Glued edges. 4: Missing and extra tabs

PROTOTYPE ONE DEFECTS

STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT RIBS

SkeletonOne option I’ve considered was to create ribs for thte paper model using mout board.

However, this Idea revealed fl aws; uneven non-planar surfaces, overlapping ribs, irregular symme-try, and diffi cult to integrate with panels.

Distorted fi ns Intersecting ends 3-Dimentional connection

PRECEDENT GOLDEN MOON

Lee Kum Kee Lantern Wonderland 2012 Design “Golden Moon” by Kristof Crolla & Adam Fingrut 21 metres in diameter and 18 metres in height. It is constructed with a steel frame, bamboo, stretch fabric, LED lights and suspended lanterns. A light-weight steel geodesic dome forms its primary structure. Using traditional bamboo scaffolding tech-niques, bamboo is bent around the geodesic dome to form the secondary structure.

This design impresses me with its scale and structural strength. I extracted the concept of how they position central lighting at the centre instead of on the inner surfaces, how they used tensile materials to offer a better physical support and how their material choice allows the illumination of light. Upon moving forward, I have decided to create a core system that could both house my light circuit and give panel support.

partnernet.hktb.com

AMENDMENTS REVERSE ENGINEERING

Weighing OptionsI have considered several options to resolve the structural fragility. With a few attempts on each idea, I decided to proceed by creating an outlined offset frame in intervals of two rings. This integrates the concept of portal frames as well as providing a space to attach my light circuit.

2: Tab networking1: PVC or Arcylic inner layer

Current Model exhibits light beautifully but is structurally weak

3: custom hand made supporting light box

4: rings that outline panel grids

AMENDMENTS PROBLEM ROOTS

Dashed DashDot Special Dashed

After Due Consideration

A major problem to fi x was the line type, especially the presence of score lines at the end joints. It potentially causes the card to tear apart and weakens the structure.

Having a fair amount of confusion with the available Grasshopper templates, I decided to consult tutors for a better tabbing solution. Although changing the defi nitions did not work, we resolved the issue by creating a custom pattern, ‘Special Dashed’.

Before After

FABRICATION SECOND ATTEMPT

MaterialityWith the same process as the prototype, I had a second set of laser cut panels with amended properties as mentioned before.

Also, I shifted to 300gsm cards for better inde-pendent support. This is a compromise between structural and material properties.

In addition, I enlarged the model by a scale of 1.3 for easier construction, especially at smaller panels.

FABRICATION IMPROVED

The tools of trade

Intricate DetailsWith the same process as the prototype, I had a second set of laser cut panels with amended properties as mentioned before. Quality control was critical at this stage. Also, I shifted to 300gsm cards for better independent support and enlarged the model by a scale of 1.3 for easier construction, especially at smaller panels.

Bulldog clips as reinforcementsduring assembly

Scored cut-out panel Connecting the panels

Moving ForwardWith satisfactory ammendments, I pro-ceed with the assembly process in the same way as before.

The assembly process halted midway to allow the installation of structural support and lighting Wcircuits.

FABRICATION PROCESS

LIGHTING CIRCUIT

Current RisksI decided to create my own electrical circuit. The bare minimum 3V supply only lits the LEDs dimly. Testing the lights to their maximum revealed that: Vmax=9V

Therefore, to maximise the Power of the 9V battery, it is best to install LEDs in parallel pairs whereby each LED will recieve 4.5V (refer circuit diagram).

Voltage in Parallel:VT=V1+V2+V3+...+Vn

Current in Parallel:IT=I1=I2=I3=In

Resistance in Parallel:1/RT=1/R1+1/R2+1/R3+...+1/Rn

By Using Ohm’s Law (V=IR), I calculated, for LEDs to shine brighter, current has to increase. For the circuit to be safe, I would require a 10Ohms resistor.

Electrical tools of trade

Circuit diagram

With 3V With 6V

LIGHTING INSTALLATION

Systems AffairThe installation of the circuit was done simply with masking tape. Appearance was not a particular issue as the circuit was hidden.

The main focus was how light distributed evenly and differentiate between the panel form and paper colour.

The lighting effects, together with material and structural implementations fl ow through the concept of ‘mysterious vs supernatural’.

Hidden switch

The LEDs and rings

Problem: visible messy wires Solution: Cover with sheet of card

Open heart surgery: space for installation.

Location of LEDs

FINAL MODEL

CRITICAL ANALYSIS

I believe that Module Three has been the epitome of Virtual Environments. It is the bridge that connects the physical realm and the digital dimension together to form a tangible design. It has been much fun and excitement to manipulate my conceptual ideas.

Much my process has resemblance with Macfarlane’s (2005) Restaurant Georges in Pompidou centre. Their iterations, given their technological limitation at that time emphasises the importance of making a prototype as they analyse the shape, support and material interaction with light. With my design, the prototype enabled me to critique and decide fi rsthand the material distribu-tion and strength. I discovered that thicker card has better inherent strength but less sensitive towards light. Also, black card is opaque whilst white card not only emits light but glows itself. I applied these properties to the advantage of my original moon crater elemental concept. Amendments were done through ‘reverse engineering’, by modifying the internal design to produce the fi nal outcome (Lecture 9).

The process of unrolling has been confusing and chaotic to begin with. Through, consultation and recommendations, the imple-mentation of this phase becomes organised and understandable. When people speak, we are taught to listen. When people read, we are taught to write. And when computer programs were invented, we are taught to use it. Instead of using technology, many a time we are used by it (Lecture 9). This theory resonated through the unfolding of panels. It has come to my realisation that CAD programs are designed to ease and hasten the design process, not to stumble designers. Hence, I approached the overlapping panel problem with a keen eye to look for the possible misfi ts and fl aws. It is fruitful to see how simply reordering the diagonal vertices and connecting the end points solved the problem. Further, I am also reminded that I work in both the digital and the physical medium. Where problems are seemingly unsolvable on screen, I could leave it aside and create a physical prototype. The physical assembly simply accentuates the fl aws that were unspotted on the digital model. Modifi cations are then later included to the fi le.

Knowing my tools reduces challenges and thus increases effi ciency. Gerohenfeld (2005) addresses the way Ghery (draws no straight lines) and Larry (keep to the basics) move forward and convey their ideas. They have an ‘equality fabrication’ that resembles the assembly of proteins. Every intricate detail is considered. This prompted me to consider minor details that shape my physical model, from the possibility of using minimal material and type of machine (laser or card cutter) to the defi nition of my score line types. These pointers are not only cost effi cient but also adds to the high quality design and fabrication as well as longevity of the model.

Lighting is a vital component of a lantern. After being through many design processes, it is natural to forget the importance of a small design portion. In Lecture 8, Loh informs us that our lanterns are objects that comprises of an assembly of individual compo-nents. They are always adjustable. I did not include a circuit in my full scale prototype. Only moments after the last tab is glued did I realise that clipping LEDs on 3V cells are simply inconvenient, risky and unacceptable. Motivated to be a ‘professional’ worker, I persevered and fi nd ways through it. I revisited my former science knowledge and created a technical circuit sup-ported with comprehensive calculations and conceptual understanding. This moment resonates the importance of knowledge; learn as much as possible and remember them.

Overall, it is undeniable that the course stimulates students to learn techniques to apply on a larger scale future design (Lecture 9). This module highlights the importance of testing, analysing, refl ecting and solving problems to produce the best possible outcome.

REFERENCES

Background Information

Readings & Lectures

Gershenfeld, Neil (2005): Subtraction; Addition; Building Models. In FAB: The Coming Revolution on Your Desktop--From Personal Computers to Personal Fabrication, Basic Books, pp. 67-76; 93-101; 103-113 Macfarlane, B. (2005): Making Ideas. In Architecture in the Digital Age, B. Kolarevic (ed.), Spon Press, London, pp. 182-197

Lecture Seven: Fabricating Spaces/Fab Lab Overview, Annie WalshLecture Eight: Fabricating Spaces II, Paul LohLecture Nine: Augmented Spaces, Stanislav Roudavski

Precedence

‘Golden Moon’ by Kristof Crolla & Adam Fingruthttp://partnernet.hktb.com/pnweb/primg/LKK%20Wonderland%20winning%20design%20E-Final.pdf

s2_2012_fabrication_student journal

Documents

prototype design

mark i

final design

ideation design

translucent structure

hybridization design

main structure

resulting prototype