Brandon J. KearseDesign Portfolio

Fall 2014

2 - Brandon Kearse

TABLE of CONTENTS

1. Deciphering Drift - Drawing Machine (2014) 4

2. Creation and Dissipation of Tension (2014) 12

3. A Body in Motion (2014) 20

4. Exercises in Engineering 34

a. Battle Bot (2007) 36

b. Medical Transport Motion Isolator (2009) 38

5. Iterations on a Generative Form (2014) 40

NOTE: All drawings and line work are hand drawn.All models and sculptures are hand crafted.All photography is my own, unless otherwise noted.

BRANDON JEFFREY KEARSE 287 Harvard Street, Apt 64 brandon.kearse@gmail.com 1817 Pine Log Road Cambridge, MA 02139 803.646.2707 Aiken, SC 29803 WORK EXPERIENCE SUMMIT PARTNERS (VENTURE CAPITAL/ PRIVATE EQUITY) Investment Associate – Technology Team (Boston, MA) July 2013 – September 2014

o Investment sourcing – Developed pipeline of >1000 potential investments ($10 million minimum) through proprietary research, including one-on-one calls or meetings with 30+ CEOs/entrepreneurs per week

o Financial modeling/ Deal execution – Prepared projected cash flows and returns analyses, conducted industry and customer research, and performed customer and operational analyses, for nearly 20 potential investments

MCKINSEY & COMPANY (MANAGEMENT CONSULTING) Infrastructure Senior Analyst (Singapore & Washington, DC) July 2012 – June 2013

o McKinsey Global Institute – “Infrastructure Productivity: How to save $1 trillion a year” (research report) Key contributor and research leader for report on infrastructure strategy and international best practices

o Federal Aviation Administration – Organizational strategy Designed a “delivery unit” to empower administrator, address organizational silos, and improve execution

Business Analyst (Atlanta, GA) February 2011 – June 2012 o Mobile Telecom Provider – Construction procurement

Redesigned procurement processes and categories for $250+ million in savings in cell tower construction o Freight Railroad – Operations improvements Reduced transportation time of broken locomotives by 10% at a Class I freight railroad

o Chemical Manufacturing – Post-merger transformation Trained internal consulting team to implement program of operational, cultural, and safety improvements

MARTA (METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT AUTHORITY) Urban Planning & Transit Graduate Fellow May 2010 – December 2010

o Supported regional planning, including successful $60 million TIGER II grant application for new streetcar o Managed distribution of $25 million to regional municipalities for transit-oriented streetscape projects

EDUCATION, HONORS & AWARDS

RHODES SCHOLARSHIP – FINALIST Fall 2009 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (Cambridge, MA) Coursework: Introduction to Architecture Design September 2014 – December 2014

o Taking introductory architecture studio coursework as preparation for grad school applications GRE Scores: Math: 170/170, Verbal: 168/170, Writing: 5.5/6.0 (98th percentile in each) August 2014

GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (Atlanta, GA) M.S. in Civil Engineering (Transportation Planning) – GPA: 4.0 December 2010

o American Public Transportation Foundation (APTF) Gilstrap Scholarship (Top Award & Best Essay) B.S. in Mechanical Engineering – Highest Honor, GPA: 4.0 May 2009

o Woodruff School Chair’s Award – Top graduating mechanical engineer o Minor in German (Conversational); Certificate in Entrepreneurship; 1st-Generation College Graduate

LEADERSHIP & COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT NuVu Studio, Innovation School January 2015

o Intern – Will coach and mentor middle and high school students on educational design projects Georgia Tech Young Alumni Council July 2009 – November 2012

o President, 2011 – Reorganized 30 person volunteer group; established new young alumni newsletter Competitive Running / Philanthropic Biking

o Pan-Mass Challenge 2014 – Biked 160 miles in 2 days to raise $4000+ for cancer research o Atlanta Thanksgiving Half-Marathon, 2010 – Top 1% finisher (55 of 8,888)

Ramblin’ Reck Club February 2005 – May 2009 o Ramblin’ Reck Driver, 2008 – Club co-president; primary caretaker for 1930 Ford Model A mascot

- Laid groundwork for new $100,000 endowment, alumni board, and transport truck donation o T-Book Co-editor, 2008 – Revived printed handbook of Georgia Tech history and traditions

Student Government April 2005 – May 2009 o Chief Justice – Oversaw student conduct hearings; Revised code of conduct; Advised President

Undergraduate Learning Center, Student Planning Board March 2008 – May 2009 o Chair – Created advisory group that brought about design changes in new $80 million academic center

The ANAK Society (Highest and only “secret” senior honorary) March 2008 – December 2010 o Organized centennial celebration and endowment; Worked behind the scenes to improve student life

3

4 - Brandon Kearse

DECIPHERING DRIFT

MIT - 4.021 - Intro Design StudioInstructor Elle GerdemanFall 2014

5

6 - Brandon Kearse

DECIPHERING DRIFT

The objective of the project was to develop a code set with an optional tool, by which to author drawings at the hands of other users, while inducing a modicum of “drift” between partcipants.

Focus here was placed on developing a unique tool. Based on a harmonograph, the machine was carefully designed with two pendula capable of low-resistance motion in 360 degrees, connected by two rods to an ink pen at the vertex.

As the pendula are swung in independent harmonic motions, the ink pen captures the interference patterns as a drawing.

[A] Drawing machine set up in studio environment[B] Detail of dual-pivot hinge allowing 360 degree motion[C] Connecting rod attached to free swinging pendulum[D] Ink pen attached at vertex of two connecting rods

[A]

[B]

7

[C] [D]

8 - Brandon Kearse

DECIPHERING DRIFT

A code of choreographed motions was created to facilitate the use of the drawing machine by participants.

Careful experimentation determined optimal input motions for the pendula, in terms of amplitude and direction. Diagrams of two sequences of four input motions were provided to participants, each to repeated four times for a total of 8 composite drawings.

After each input, the pair of participants was to record the type of drawing observed, and thus decipher for themselves the “drift” between various iterations.

Though similar, no two composite drawings were ever the same.

[A] Panning stop motion of the machine in action [B] Stop motion of swinging pendulum creating drawing[C] Sample of the provided code, and user recorded observations[D] Pair of participants providing a new input motion

[NEXT PAGE] Iterations of composite drawings. Each column represents one pair of participants, each row is a differentation iteration of the same composite drawing. The left half is the first sequence of four motions, and the right half is the second sequence.

[A]

[B]

[C]

9

[D]

10 - Brandon Kearse

11

12 - Brandon Kearse

CREATION and DISSIPATION of TENSION

MIT - 4.021 - Intro Design StudioInstructor Elle GerdemanFall 2014

13

14 - Brandon Kearse

CREATION and DISSIPATION of TENSION

A set of linear, radial, and angular measurements of the body were recorded and abstracted first into a “bent figure”, which is in turn pulled into a wire form. The specific body here is that of a runner, simultaneously tense and linear.

A choreography of linear and rotation movement was abstracted from a subset of the same measurements. Held in front of a light, the shadows of the moving form were cast upon a wall and traced at five distinct points.

A flattened representation was selected to capture the traced shadows, depicting both the dimensionality of the motion while emphasizing the tension of the form.

[A] Drawing of bent figure[B] Measured choreography of motion[C] Wire form casting first shadow behind choreography[D] Drawing of flattened shadows creating tension (ink on vellum)

[C]

[B]

[A]

15

[D]

16 - Brandon Kearse

CREATION and DISSIPATION of TENSION

Nine related segments from the flattened shadows were selected to represent the tension created.

A pattern of holes representing the segments was drilled into plexiglass, rotated, and connected with twine, thus pulling the figuring into three dimensions, and dissipating the tension.

The hole patterns were also used to create a line drawing, bringing the 3D figure back into two dimensions.

Heavier line weights accent the original 3D figure as part of a larger whole, while finer line weights extend the figure indefinitely, representing the final full release of tension.

[A] Outline of original shadow figure with 9 segments highlighted[B] 3D figure oriented to highlighted new twisting volumes

[NEXT PAGE]Two-dimensional line drawing representing the 3D twine sculpture (hand drawing: ink on vellum)

[A]

17

[B]

18 - Brandon KearseHand drawing: Ink pen on vellum

19

20 - Brandon Kearse

A BODY in MOTION

MIT - 4.021 - Intro Design StudioInstructor Elle GerdemanFall 2014

21

22 - Brandon Kearse

A BODY in MOTION

The expandable cube abstracts the sequential and staggered movement of a person travelling through spaces in an airport.

Pace, closeness of luggage, and distance between people were used as measurements to represent the various spaces, and then served as the basis for the dimensioning of invididual blocks.

Sketch models of blue foam were used to explore the expression of different motions and experiences encountered: concentric sequences, staggered progression, and compartmentalization.

The final form wholistically represents how sequences of similar motions result in a linear staggering, as it transforms from a compact cube into an elongated suspension.

[A] Foam sketch model exploring concentric sequences[B] Foam sketch model exploring staggered expansion[C] Foam sketch model exploring comparmentalization[D] Final closed cube form[E] Slight expansion of cube to highlight first key piece[F] Further expansion of cube to highlight second key piece

[C]

[B]

[A]

[D]

[E]

23

[F]

[D]

[E]

24 - Brandon Kearse

25

26 - Brandon Kearse

A BODY in MOTION

As illustrated, a sequence of similar motions allows the form to slowly stagger down the side of the pedestal.

Composed of 3 pairs of two pieces, the solid cube unfolds one pair at a time through simple rotations and sliding movements. Each subsequent pair allows the extension of the previous pair.

Careful attention was given to the orientation, carving, and joinery of the woodwork, particularly along the central “edge”, in order to reinforce the staggered linearity, the 90 degree rotations, and the alternating suspension. Precise construction allows for the lowest piece to cantilever beyond the base.

[A] Fully expanded cube on stand[B] Backside of fully expanded cub

NEXT PAGE:[C] Side elevation highlighting cantilever[D-F] Details highlighting woodcarving and joinery

Photography assistance provided by Elle Gerdeman

[A]

27

[B]

28 - Brandon Kearse

[C]

[D]

29

[D] [E] [F]

30 - Brandon Kearse

A BODY in MOTION

Elevations of closed and open state of cube highlight the complexity of the form and itricacy of the pieces, while enabling a deeper understanding of the relationships within.

Varied light weights both add dimensionality and allow the repositioning of the individual pieces to be better visualized.

[A] Elevation of closed cube (hand drawing, ink on vellum, no photoshop)[B] Elevation of expanded cube (hand drawing, ink on vellum, no photoshop)

[A]

31

[B]

32 - Brandon Kearse

A BODY in MOTION

Axonometric and exploded views of the open state of the cube underscore the detail of the individual pieces and illustrate how these components reconnect into the expanded form.

[A] Axonometric of expanded cube (hand drawing, ink on vellum, no photoshop)[B] Exploded axon of expanded cube (hand drawing, ink on vellum, no photoshop)

[A]

33

[B]

34 - Brandon Kearse

EXERCISES in ENGINEERING

Georgia Institute of TechnologyB.S. Mechanical Engineering2004-2009

“Ramblin’ Reck” Georgia Tech’sModel AMascot

35

Figure 2.1

Pretty in Pink

Ball Storage

Controller

Box

Swinging

Arms

36 - Brandon Kearse

EXERCISES in ENGINEERING: BATTLE BOT

Georgia Tech - ME 2110 - Design LabDr. Jonathan S. ColtonSpring 2007 (Group Project)

The purpose of this project was to design an independently operating “robotic” machine for participation in a competition with three other machines, wherein different tasks had to be completed to score points and “battle” the competition.

Bowling pins and different sized balls represented different obstacles and objectives. Pneumatic and electromechanical systems were operated by a microcontroller programmed to operate in a certain manner based upon input conditions.

[A] Robotic machine on game board in competition[B] Diagram of key components of machinei in “closed” position[C] Digram of key components in “fully deployed” position[D] Close-up of robotic game machine in final form

ATTRIBUTION:Member of 3-person collaborative design team.I drove the conceptual design and was the primary constructor of the machine. Renderings provided by fellow team members Nicole Miller and Carly Queen.

[A]

[B]

Figure 2.1

Pretty in Pink

Ball Storage

Controller

Box

Swinging

Arms

Figure 2.2 Pretty in Pink

Deployed

Tilting

Double Slide

Arm

Air Tank

Bracket

37

[A]

[D][C][B]

RA RB RC

x = 11in. x = 11in.25in. 25in.

lb/in. 2.4372

175 q ≈=

V (lb)

26.729.231.6

-26.7 -31.6-29.2

24in. 24in. 24in.

11in. 11in.25in. 25in.

-147

58.5

-147-116

58.5

M (lb-in)

38 - Brandon Kearse

EXERCISES in ENGINEERING: MEDICAL TRANSPORT MOTION ISOLATOR

Georgia Tech - ME 4182 - Senior DesignProf. Bert BrasSpring 2009 (Group Project)

The purpose of this device was to reduce the amount of shock and motion suffered by injured patients being transported on ambulance stretchers or hospital guerneys.

A pneumatic system was designed to counteract the motion of the stretcher or vehicle, by rapidly pumping air in and out of pistons in opposition to the motion detected by various sensors.

The team was responsible for identifying both a unique problem and novel solution. A pending patent was filed.

[A] Prototype on display illustrating key components[B] Diagram of structural forces used to determine design parameters[C] Rendering of pneumatic and structural systems

ATTRIBUTION:Member of 5-person collaborative design team.I collaborated in the conceptual design, performed the structural analysis, and was the primary constructor of the prototype shown here. Renderings were provided by fellow team members Drew Hess, Matthew Eicholtz, Ben Goldsmith, and Ji Kim.

[A]

[B]

RA RB RC

x = 11in. x = 11in.25in. 25in.

lb/in. 2.4372

175 q ≈=

V (lb)

26.729.231.6

-26.7 -31.6-29.2

24in. 24in. 24in.

11in. 11in.25in. 25in.

-147

58.5

-147-116

58.5

M (lb-in)

39

[A]

[B] [C]

40 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

Massachuestts College of Art & DesignEDAD 561 - Form, Material, and SpaceDean Paul PaturzoFall 2014

Graphite on bristol paper

41

42 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

The term “hollow” can be used to describe the relationship between two people. It can also be used to describe a box.

Here, the term “hollow” serves as inspiration for initial form, from which key elements emerge, notably basic geometries pulled in tension to create curvilinear forms.

These notions of tension, curvilinearity, and simple geometry serve as guiding principles as the intial form is iterated and a system of generative components emerges from which an entirely new form emerges.

[A] Final bristol paper form[B] Concept ideation: hollow emerges from supportive[C] Inital hollow cube as inspiration of generative form[D] Iteration through combinations of form[E] Final iteration selected

43

[A]

[B] [D]

[C] [E]

44 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

The principles of tension, curvilinearity, and simple geometry are held constant as the form is reintpreted through different materials (bristol paper, museum board, basswood).

With each new material, a new system of construction emerges, allowing the form to be improved and optimized through a process of continuous iteration.

Eventually, the form is applied to basic concepts of space and place, introducing considerations of scale, program, and site, for which the form must once again be reinterpreted.

[A] Iterations of a new wooden structural form (hand cut basswood)[B] Inital iteration was simply a skeleton to mimic the initial shape[C] A new structural system emerges that pulls the wood into tension[D] Various iterations exploring differnt curves and material thickness[E] Final selected basswood form

45

[B] [C]

[D] [E]

[A]

46 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

Reinterpreting the form into museum board required a new structrual system to yield a similar tension and curvilinearity.

Rather than attaching four individual pieces each tied back to a beam, a unitary retaining structure was created.

Notched “clips” were used to pull back the squares, which were held by frontal and lateral force.

[A] Final musem board form (hand cut)[B] View highlighting diagonal structural system[C] Detail of tension “clip” used to retain form[D] Overhead view

[A]

[B]

47

[C] [D]

48 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

A potential program of a beach pavilion was introduced as the form moved from museum board to basswood.

The wooden form was optimzed to provide shade from the sun while permitting the flow of an ocean breeze. The space below as minimal enclosed to maximize flexibility.

Note the subtle variations in joinery and structure between the simplifed support forms and the more intricate main form.

[A] Final basswood form (hand cut)[B] Detail of joinery atop secondary form[C] Detail of joinery atop primary form[D] Lengthise view from underside

[A]

[B]

49

[C] [D]

50 - Brandon Kearse

ITERATIONS on a GENERATIVE FORM

The “hollow”, tense, and curvilinear essence of the preceding forms was finally applied to a site of a rolling downward slope in a nature preserve.

The monumental sun shade was scaled down to become a minimalist wind screen, while the natural contours of the site were exaggerated to create a protective hollow.

The same notion of a curve pulled into tension was used to create a new generative system of horizontal elements, stacked in incrementally increasing size to create the shelter.

[A] Musem board reinterpration on carved plaster site (hand sculpted)[B] Overhead view of subtly carved hollow and stairs[C] Detail of structural alignment of new “generative form”[D] Frontal view of shleter structure

[A]

[B]

51

[C] [D]

Brandon Kearse

Thank You.