Module IVCallum Morrison 590473 Semester 1/2012Group 7

Module IV : Freefalling

Standing on the edge of the abyss I prepared to launch myself, headlong, into my first foray in the virtual world. Unprepared and unaware of what awaited me, I braced myself for the impact to come.

Regaining my feet, twelve weeks after I commenced my initial plunge, I am still left disorientated. My journey over these past twelve weeks has been one of vacillation, filled with triumphs, challenges and defeats. Yet through this cacophony of experiences I emerge having engaged in an antagonistic conflict fitting of my project. Finally finding an equilibrium between my conceptual vision and physical realisation.

My project and thinking process in themselves has very much resembled a process of natural selection. My initial diverse and abstract ideas, conflicting with each other, and chastened by physical and material limitations along the way, were thus forced to adapt and evolve through this antagonism. Eventually, culminating in the pinnacle of this evolution, my final form.

This metaphorical interpretation of my journal is quite fitting, with my final forms evolution quite rightly being the direct result of a conflict of ideas. The following pages document these conflicts and my journey through the abyssal depths of a virtual reality and the struggle I had to reenter the physical realm.

“Creativity makes a leap, then looks to see where it is.”

-Mason Cooley

Overproduction“more offspr ing are produced than wi l l survive”

Natural SelectionConceptual Research

“the gradual, non-random process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of differential reproduction of their bearers. It is a key mechanism of evolution.”

- Natural Selection

Commencing my process of natural selection with an examination of the concept itself seems somewhat ironically fitting. However, representing the temporal nature of natural selection with a non temporal medium soon proved to be a major challenge. Turning to time-lapse abstractions and constructs I began attempting to commune the temporal adaption of a species to it environment.

Through an examination of this gradual adaption I came to realise that the relationship between nature

With a theoretical understanding of natural selection and evolution established I began contemplating how they could be represented visually as I began to toy with the following ideas:

> The development of shapes from constituent parts into an optimised agglomerated shape

> The gradual increases in the complexity of forms

> The provision of the younger or earlier species as a building block/base that a species evoles through. Gradually becoming better adapted to their environment

“the gradual development of something from a simple to a more complex form”

- Evolution

Left : A graphical representation of the process of natural selection over time. The weaker/lighter shaded dots eventually become extinct over time being replaced by stronger darker dots.

and biological forms was one where the eventual evolution of a species was inevitable. So, I began considering how I could envision or construct a form/concept that was not static but could evolve and develop in synchrony with my design vision, capturing the adaptive qualities that lead to an evolution of form.

Overproduction : Ideation

Overproduction : Ideation

Natural SelectionAbove : The image explores the concept of the style of the Cocoon HQ and how variations in natural selection ultimately end up as manifestations in the best variant. This could also be explored in reverse with the central point representing the origin of evolution from which adaption spirals out from.

Idea Explorat ion

Above : The sketches above explore how a form might evolve over time. Concentrating on an increase in: a) complexity b) suitability to the environmentI felt aspect b) was captured well by the triangles as there is a sense in the change from the original jumble to an almost tessellating form of increasing cohesion. Aspect a) is far better captured by the vertices. This sketch plays on the idea of vertices as the basis of an increase in com-plexity. This sketch also manages to best capture the temporal nature of an evolution of form.

With a solid grounding in the concept of natural selection established I began to explore and experiment with abstract and metaphorical ways of representing the conceptual aspects I had highlighted in my research.

In forming these visual representation of conceptual ideas I drew inspiration from the Cocoon HQ in Zurich (World Architecure News 2012). There were two aspects of this building that caught my eye. Firstly, the construction of the building as if it has evolved and developed from a central point, which I began to explore on the left. Secondly, the continuity between levels. Camenzind Evolution has seemingly defied construction norms creating a building which exists as one singular floor, divided into a number of segments. The realisation of the metaphor for a number of individuals forming a whole, inspired a series of time-lapse sketches exploring how form may evolve and increase in complexity over a temporal scale and through interaction with one another (on the right).

Overproduction : Ideation

Antagonistic Muscles

Below : A biopsy of the tricep and bicep.

Conceptual Research

“Muscles having opposite functions, the contraction of one neutralizing the contraction of the other”

- Antagonistic Muscles

To improve the strength of my concept relating to natural selection I began to consider how the conflict between parts could form a conclusive whole. This consideration lead me to consider the idea of antagonism, using the relationship between antagonistic muscles as a segway into the concept.

Looking at the interaction of the bicep and tricep, what really defines this relationship is the collective opposition that exists between them. As one contracts the other is forced to relax, creating almost a to-and-fro, pulsating, action. What is most interesting, and conceptually intriguing, is that whilst these muscles pose a direct opposition to one another, paradoxically, there opposition creates union with the arm being able to function with a full range of movement due to it.

To now pull together my two conceptual threads, the correlation I have interpreted between natural selection and antagonism is the process of weaker species engaging in conflict through a variety of antagonistic relationships, any ones success dependent on the others failure, until only the strongest species emerge to reproduce; ultimately increasing the strength of the species as a whole.

Above : Shows the most common antagonistic muscle pair, the bicep and tricep. Note how that as the bicep contracts the triceps is forced to relax and vice versa.

Antagonistic Muscles

Below : An example of the fractals exhibited in Jackson Pollock’s work. When compared to the muscles fibres similar properties can be seen.

Idea Explorat ionOverproduction : Ideation

With this theoretical conceptual grounding established, I endeavoured to capture these same concepts is a visual sense. Aspects of the antagonistic muscle relationship I found were of interest were:

> The interaction of the muscles with each other over time

> How the muscle attached itself to the bone

> How the opposition of the muscles ultimately results in the greater strength of the limb in question as a whole

> The texture and interwoven appearance of the individual muscle fibres, appearing almost fractal like in behaviour.

In further exploration of the fractal properties exhibited by muscles fibres I found that, much like the mathematical chaos of Jackson Pollock’s work, muscle fibres appear to hold the same texture regardless of the scale they are viewed on. This concept of individual smaller scales coming together to form a cohesive whole, whilst simultaneously existing in their own right, compliments the concepts of both natural selection and antagonism.

Overproduction : Ideation

Ideation

Below : The original clay form. The spiral arm was too literal and distracted from the conceptual undertones with its literality.

Conceptual isat ion

Amalgamating my ideas and conceptual research into one definitive concept I envisioned a conflict between opposites with individual constituent parts opposing each other but paradoxically working together to increase the strength or functionality of the form as a whole.

With this basic concept established my focused turned to integrating and establishing

the conceptual grounding within a physical form. My initial vision

consisted of having a single organism or form that then grows

in complexity, developing and adapting to its environment until it reaches a perfect form. In this

case my body would be the environment the form must adapt

to. The interaction between the two being one of antagonism,

involving a conflict between that of context and form.

When this vision finally took on a physical form I was left feeling under whelmed. The conceptual links were there with a conflict between form and body up the arm with a peak in evolution on the shoulder. However, I was struck by the literality of my design. The movement of the two forms up the arm appeared to be a literal representation of two muscles and rather than being in antagonism with the body appeared to be interwoven in perfect harmony.

The Concept

The Vision

Real isat ion

Overproduction : Ideation

Conceptual Reevaluation

Above : A sketch by Da Vinci abstracting the form of water to communicate its mechanics and flows rather than its true physical form.

Conceptual isat ion

After the disappointment of my previous form I set about redefining my concept and how it could be envisioned. For inspiration I turned to a Phillip Ball (2011) reading entitled ‘The Man Who Loved Fluids’ which explores Leonardo Da Vinci’s attempt to visually communicate the mechanics and forms of water. What Da Vinci struggled with, as I had been, was representing not just the visual form of water but communicating how water actually acted and its mechanics. Da realised that a representation of water in the classical sense revealed nothing of its true nature and so began exploring abstraction of form to communicate the mechanics of flow. It was this communication through abstraction that I used to reconsider my concept.

By reevaluating my concept I identified the following misrepresentations:

> An antagonistic relationship is one fraught with tension. This needs to be communicated in the design. Rather than work in harmony with the body, as my designs have to this point, the form needs to attacks the body which in turn must fight back; evolution only occurs through conflict.

In the dynamic environment that we inhabit Man in his growing arrogance is attempting to rise above natural selection and force the environment to adapt to his whims and desires; placing his “footprint” on the environment. However, the environment, not to be out done, is fighting back with adaptations such as global warming. The result, these two systems coexisting in an antagonistic relationship, locked in conflict, yet part of the same collective global system.

A New Vision

Real isat ionConsider our dynamic and changeable environment to be a ball of clay, malleable and moldable. If the idea of man’s footprint on the environment is interpreted literally and applied to this ball of clay we are presented with the analogy of man attempting to impose his dominance over nature. Then, reinjecting my original concept, two forms emerge from the trampled ball and wind there way up the ankle slowly engulfing the leg until they meet in a point. Nature’s retaliation.

Misrepresentat ion

> The environment we inhabit is a dynamic and constantly changing. It is this change which natural selection allows species to adapt to and even we as humans are not to immune to these changes.

ReflectionAbstract ing the LiteralOverproduction : Ideation

The relationship between form and context is one immersed in complexity. To consider this relationship in a more comprehendible way the term context will be examined through a consideration of how a form interacts with its environment and how its function is affected by this environment.

When we talk about “form” there is no concrete shape or object being made reference to. Rather, form is dynamic, changing and morphing to its environment, its function and societal norms. Nature is often referred to as being “form” in its raw form, and to a large extent it is. By looking at the evolution of natural forms over a temporal scale and seeing how they have been adapted and changed in synchrony with their environment, it can been seen their is a direct relationship between the evolution of form and its surrounding environment. This relationship between form and environment is explored by Ball in his text “Shapes: Nature’s Patterns” (2011) where he examines the tendency of form to move towards “shapes that were best adapted to the demands that their environment made on them.” Ball further comments that this adaptation to the environment creates a certain aura of purpose around these forms, that they are that way to fulfil a function.

This brings us to the second facet of context, function. Ball commented that form appears to adapt itself to better fulfil functional requirement. Function thus becomes a criterion that form is constantly striving to meet, which I do not entirely agree with. Up to this point

we have discussed what can only be described as a one way relationship with form being “poked and prodded” until it has changed to better fulfil a function or exist in its environment. However, this neglects the ability a form has to revolutionise function and its environment. The invention of the spoon and fork, whilst only a simple form, it has revolutionised the way we eat food, the culture around food and the parameters on what food itself can be produced. With this in mind the relationship between context and form takes on a new connotation with a relationship not based on context dictating to form, but an equality of interdependence with both evolving and changing together.

It is this antagonistic coexistence between form and context that I have attempted to capture in my design, a tussle between the context of my foot and the belligerent form engulfing it. My main struggle with this ideation stage was to what extent you could explore this abstraction of form and concept before the result became too abstract and the essence of the original idea became lost. This struggle between the abstract and literal became my bane. However, finally, I believe I managed to overcome this challenge with my final form finding a fine balance between abstract realisation and literal representation, a balance that I struggled to preserve through the later stages of my design process.

“in biology, it is natutral to expect that form follows function”

- Philip Ball

Struggle to Survive“only the strong survive to pass on trai ts to future generat ions”

Digitization

Left and Below : The initial lofted surface generated from the contouring and referencing process. The poor outcome of this first attempt had me return and manually edit the contours to produce the far more accurate form below.

Contour MappingStruggle to Survive : Design

Beginning the process of mapping my analogue model into digital space I struggled to find a method that was appropriate to the shape. The multi- planar form of my model meant that location of a point on all three axes was critical to mapping any kind of contouring process. With this in mind I used a combination of contour tracing and reference imaging to transfigure my analogue model into a digital form.

The success, or lack of, of my initial lofted and mapped form was, I discovered, entirely dependent on the accuracy and precision of my orthographic reference images, contouring process and vector tracing. Whilst examined individually there were only minor errors in their measurement, however when these small errors were all added together they resulted in much larger errors that compromised the integrity of the final lofted form (see left).

Evaluating my process on hindsight, I wish I had spent more time perfecting and reducing error in the initial stages of the process; now knowing how quickly they add up. This realisation of the importance of precision stuck with me through the rest of the project and I was careful not to repeat my careless mistakes.

From the multitude of ideas and concepts, the “struggle to survive” began. Engaged in conflict, triumphing over one foe, only to fall victim to another.

Remodeling

Above : To fix the twisted mess where the spiral joined the base of the model I began to edit the control points on my surfaces and gradually began to line up the vertices on the surfaces. This meant that when I went to merge the surfaces the vertices would link up easily rather than twisting the form to do so.

Refinement of FormStruggle to Survive : Design

Taking my raw unrefined initial lofted form, I set about refining and modifying it to meet the set of parameters and rules Rhino imposes on form. In this way digital modelling is a paradox in itself. While it allows design unconstrained and free from the limitation of the physical, it places its own set of restraints on the design of form.

With a completed NURB model I ran a quick panelling test with the results being disastrous (see bottom right). As a result I was forced to modify my design to fit within the parameters and laws of the Rhino software. Thus, rather than being a conceptual evolution of form, conceptual integrity was compromised for pragmatic purposes. With my experience as an example, consideration of this ideal on a wider scale leads to the questioning of whether the emergence of digital design has really revolutionised design, freeing it from the constraints of the physical form, or it has just redefined the constraints. Yasha Grobman, an architect, holds a similar view arguing that digital advancements in architecture are not “a true revolution, but rather a stage in the natural evolution (of design that has been) influenced by the development of the computer” (2003). With this in mind I realised the need to exercise caution in the design of my form, remaining mindful that whilst it is designed within Rhino’s parameters the final form must exist in the physical world, and is answerable to its laws, not those of Rhino.

Left : My original panelling test. The top a basic 3D panel the bottom a 2D. I put the issues down to:

a) the open curve on the bottom of the base of the form (its removal can be seen in the image above)

b) the segmented construction of the model, which meant that the panelling grid was irregular, thus so was the panelling. To fix this the surfaces had to be merged (see above).

Final

Above : The final NURB model with a regular panelling grid laid out on the surface.

NURB ModelStruggle to Survive : Design

Left : A quick prototype I constructed to test how the final NURB model might exist in physical space.

Panelling

Left and Below : A render of the final form of “Solar Shift”. The development process of the installation is also shown below. This acted as a benchmark for my design process.

Experimentat ionStruggle to Survive : Design

Searching to direct my design back to focus on the constraints posed by the physical world, a regular tessellation of geometries had to be applied to the theoretical curved NURB surface to allow it to be fabricated. It must be panelled. However, rather than using panelling as merely a tool to realise my design, I wanted it to add something to and enhance the design.

Through an examination of the precedent “Solar Shift” I was able to observe an example of good practice in transmuting a NURB surface to a panelled design (see right). The addition of the triangular surface seen in the final design has turned a theoretical and unpractical design into something that can quite manageably be constructed; I actually find the panelised form more aesthetically appealing than the original surface. It is this transformation and grounding of a concept into the physical world without compromise to the design vision that acted as a benchmark for me as I attempted to accomplish the same feat.

My initial basic 2D panelling, however, fell far short of this benchmark. Rather than enhance or catalyse my form, this initial panelling sought only to turn it into something actually buildable.

Basic 2D Tri Basic Paneling

Basic 2D Triangular Paneling

Basic 2D Tri Basic Paneling

Basic 2D Angled Box Paneling

Above : The basic 2D panelling experimentation I conducted. The variety of panelling grid densities I tried can also be seen, progressing in increasing density from right to left.

PanellingExperimentat ionStruggle to Survive : Design

Basic 3D Wedge Paneling

Basic 3D Box Paneling with Fin Edges

After falling so flat with my first set of 2D panels I decided to be a bit less pragmatic with this experimentation, trying forms that would be impractical to make, but were aesthetically interesting and conceptually strong. I was extremely interested by the patterns and textures created by the panelling and was excited by the prospect of how light might interact with it.

3D Panelling : The circular appearance tied in nicely with the form as a whole, but didn’t work for the spiral.

3D Panelling : The ruggedness conveyed a sense of conflict and unease. However, I found the regularity limiting.

2D Panelling with Finned Edges : Created a sense of organised chaos that I found both intriguing and slightly disconcerting at the same time.

2D Panelling with Offset Boarders: This was my favourite iteration. I liked the contrast between the base and spiral, especially how it is graduated, which picked up on concept of adaption.

PanellingReevaluat ionStruggle to Survive: Design

During my unchecked experimentation with panels and form I began to feel that the conceptual undertones I had strived so hard to create in the ideation stage were being lost, with aesthetic fulfilment becoming the driving factor in my design. The uniformity and regularity of the panelling was too harmonious and failed to capture the metaphorical antagonistic conflict between the natural and man made. In an attempt to reinvent my design and steer back towards this underlying concept I returned to the reading “The Shape of Things” (Ball 2011).

In his text Ball explores the visual associations we make to the natural and man made. He suggests that we are inclined to associate curves and more random/organic forms with the natural world and more rigid and angular forms with the man made. These subconscious associations presented a unique opportunity to incorporate an antagonistic conflict between the angular and curvaceous in my design.

I began exploring the conflict between regularity and the curvaceous by creating a distinction in the panelling; panelling the base in an angular fashion, then contrasting it with the accentuated curves of the spiral.

Above and Below : Below are exerts from Ball’s article and serve to demonstrate the contrast between natural and man made forms. Note the organic and flowing nature of the shell compared the angular more symmetrical star. This contrast between the angular and curvaceous is continued above in my own panelling experimentation.

In my struggle to survive the reasons for my survival became muddled

Panelling

Above : A render of the possible lighting effects created with the cutouts.

Reimaginat ionStruggle to Survive : Design

After the reevaluation of my design emphasised the need to remain grounded in my conceptual vision. I established a set of criteria that I deemed it necessary for my design to fulfil:

> Communicate a conflict between the base and spiral of the model, possibly through use of contrast in panelling (curves vs angularity).

> Retain a degree of simplicity in the panelling so as to not distract from the form itself.

> Communicate a change or adaption as you progress through the model.

> Keep in mind that the model actually has to be built so a degree of pragmatism must be maintained.

With a standardised set of criteria established to compare my design iterations to, I reexamined my previous forms, amalgamating the aspects that met the criteria to create a final form.

The effectiveness of this form was in its ability to communicate the antagonistic conflict with the block like structure and regularity of the base, forming a strong contrast to the curves of the spiral, whilst still maintaining a degree of connection with the gradual phasing out of the cutouts up the model. Additionally, the simple surface of the model allows the form of the model to stand out rather than being complicated or lost in complex, superfluous, panelling.

FinalPanel led ModelStruggle to Survive : Design

Front

Back

Side

Top

ReflectionA Digital Revolut ion?Struggle to Survive : Design

“We live in a digital age” Steve Jobs

It has been this digital world that we have been violent thrust into, up the creek without a paddle, as we attempted to navigate the treacherous rapids on our way to transforming our analogue visions into a digital reality. It is this convergence of analogue and digital media that has been the major focus of the digitization/design stage and what I will focus my response on.

The evolution of digital design practices has seen the transition of what was a predominantly analog based industry into one with a growing dependency on digital technology. It is this apparent metamorphosis of design that has split opinions as to whether this digital revolution is beneficial to the design process. From my experience using digital media I have found it to be both a blessing and a curse. It has allowed the production of a number of variations in form over a very short period of time, with successful evolution of design an inevitable outcome from this ability to conduct such varied and rapid experimentation. This aspect of digital design is, I believe, the main appeal as it also offers such a diverse range of options to a designer, from elaborate experimentation to precise modification and refinement, it offers such an ability to develop and rethink ideas that it has seemingly optimised the design process.

REFERENCE- Grobman, Y 2003, ‘The Digital Era- Revolution or Evolution’, Architecture of Israel Quarterly, October, pp. 10-12.

“up the creek without a paddle, as we attempted to navigate the treacherous rapids on our way to transforming our analogue visions into a digital reality.”

Where it holds limitations is in the unique and digitally specific set of parameters computer aided design (CAD) software imposes on a designer. During my design process it can be seen I had no end of problems with Rhino and digitizing my model, resulting in endless hours spent fiddling with control points and vertices to make my design panelable. Why I mention this is that for this entire time my sole focus was to create a model that worked within the constraints of Rhino. I lost perspective on my design and concept and became totally focused on creating a model that obeyed the laws of the digital realm. This loss of perspective was to the detriment of my design and I was forced to re-evaluate my current direction and backtrack through the design process. Despite identifying the perils of this “digital dementia” at the outset of the digitization stage, I was still unable to avoid its perilous clutches. From this experience I have come to accept that oppositions to the proponents of the digital design movement do have a valid point. There is a need for digital design to be held in check by the more traditional analogue process, because it is ultimately these process that develop an understanding of the context and realities of the environment a design must fit into. If this contextual understanding lost, we run the risk of loosing touch with who and where our designs must please and fit.

Genetic Variation“Those with desireable trai ts wi l l reproduce”

Design Reintegration

Below : Lianna’s forms are shown to not just sit on the body but extend and reimagine the very form itself.

“The Foot”Genetic Variation : Fabrication

The development of my form throughout the digitization phase was in isolation from the originally proposed context of the foot. Seeing my design as a freestanding object I began to question whether the inclusion of a foot in my design was necessary, as the design appears to stand well on its own accord. However, after great consideration I came to the conclusion that the foot was an integral part of the conceptual undertones of my design and any exclusion of the foot would compromise the conceptual integrity of the conflict between form and foot.

Taking this into account I set about reintegrating the foot back into my design, using the fashion design of Lianna Sheppard as a precedent. Lianna’s work attempts to redefine the norms of traditional clothing, creating something that does not just sit on the body but instead acts as an extension of the body, accentuating and extending parts of the human form. Application of this thinking to my design highlighted the need to shift the focus from producing a form that just fits to my body to using the form as an extension of the body itself, to communicate the conflict between man and nature.

PrototypeUnfoldingGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Rather than attempting to adjust my digital model to fit my foot I resolved to construct a full 1:1 scale prototype to test ergonomics with my foot, construction techniques, methods for unfolding, practicalities of the FabLab and the physical realisation of my design. The surrounding nets show my initial unfolding using colour coding to identify segments and allow for easy assembly.

PrototypeNestingGenetic Variation : Fabrication

After unfolding my model I decided to go straight into using the Fablab to cut out my nets. I made this decision to familiarise myself with the Fablab before cutting my final, identifying any possible issues early.

So, I proceeded to add tabs to my nets using a combination of Grasshopper scripts and manually offsetting them. This combination of techniques proved to be effective as, whilst Grasshopper did save a lot of time, it got confused with tabbing the smaller panel of my model and did not take into account the variation in my model between the base and spire.

PrototypeConstruct ionGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Assembling my model, I constructed it in the three segments it was original designed in, finally fitting them together at the end. The model was constructed at a 1:1 scale.

PrototypeFinalGenetic Variation : Fabrication

The final fabricated prototype compared to the original digital model. Whilst not completely accurate, the accuracy is acceptable for an initial prototype. The main issue is the base being too wide which is caused by the weight of the spire and its form applying outward pressure on it.

Left : An initial look at how light interacts with the model. The shapes projected onto the walls and floor show promise and should be developed further with some more specific lighting experimentation.

Prototype

Below and Above : The front curve of the model is shown to not be positioned correctly to allow my foot to slot in. This is probably due to an incorrect assembly of the curve because of the lack of a robust referencing system.

Reflect ionGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Examining my design in a physical form I was not taken in by it as much as I had hoped. The antagonistic conflict between the natural and human appeared absent, with the surface looking bare and plain. I felt an element of aggression needed to be injected back into the model.

The other main issue was how the model interacted with the foot. In the image on the right it can be seen that the model does not really fit the foot, and due to it being rigid, could not be changed. This ability to fit to the foot is crucial in communicating my concept. With this in mind the implementation of a dynamic or adaptable system of constructing the spiral need to be examined with further prototyping and precedent research possibly offering a solution that can be made to fit to my leg, or even more ideally, could be made to fit anyones leg.

Construction of the prototype was difficult from the outset. The first issue I encountered was a lack of any system to orientate the nets to each other. This made construction of the spire extremely difficult and resulted in a compromise in the finished product. For the final careful planning at the start and documentation of how segments fit together is a must.

The thickness of the card also proved a problem, especially in fitting together some of the smaller segments. After pondering why these segments didn’t fit properly I went back and examined my Rhino model. I suddenly realised that Rhino assumes an infinitely small material thickness when modelling. This fact must be allowed for in the final construction with extra space being left on smaller more delicate segments, such as the point of the spire.

Using the Fablab proved to be a good decision with the time taken to cut out segments reduced exponentially. The scoring of fold lines also allowed for the prototype to be relatively easily assembled, with only the lack of a referencing system slowing down the process.

Design

FabLab

Construct ion

Left : The tip of the spire and the point where the two curves meet proved to be the hardest parts to fabricate.

ElaborationLeft : The final refined digital model of the base. I felt it communicated the antagonistic conflict far better than the previous flat form, whilst simultaneously being a more aesthetically interesting form.

RedevlopmentGenetic Variation : Fabrication

In light of the reflection on my prototype I decided to redevelop my design attempting to capture more of the hostility and conflict from the underlying concept. To do this I decided to use spikes on the base, further enhancing the contrast between the spiral and base (seen on the right).

Two of the variation of spikes I experimented with are shown to the left. Both looked effective, however, after the experience gained from building my prototype the bottom variation appeared too complex and impractical to build. With the form of the refined base established I decided to reincorporate

the offset edges from the original prototype into the new aggressive form. This spiked form had a hostility about it with the manual movement of individual grid points creating a randomness and lack of order in the spikes. I hoped this chaotic hostility, when seen in context with a human foot, would communicate the antagonistic conflict between my form and the human body. Hopefully, with the form becoming an extension of the body itself, such as in Sheppard’s designs.

Elaboration

Below : The product of my lighting experiments. The image on the left is able to create a similarly dimensionally free effect to Trubridge. Despite the flat appearance of the paper patterning the projected form appear to grow exponentially in size and decrease in intensity. This gives the impression of depth in what is otherwise a flat object, tricking the viewer with the distortion of ones perceived perspective.

Light ingGenetic Variation : Fabrication

With a redeveloped form established I turned my attention to how light might interact with it. I like the effect of projected shapes that my prototype had produced and wanted to explore this further through the artwork of David Trubridge.

Trubridge’s installation the “Three Baskets of Knowledge” effectively used cutouts and shadow to produce intriguing textures (David Trubridge 2009). Not only were these shadows intricate in their patterning, but they were also not confined by dimensionality with the shadows appearing as a different and unique 2D image, when compared to the baskets they were generated by. This playing with shadows and perspective inspired me to experiment with achieving a similar effect myself (see left).

Having gained confidence in my understanding of lights and shadows I began to consider how I could use light to communicate the antagonism of the concept. The solution I came up with was to have the light be controlled by my foot. As I stamped my foot down the light would go on and off, representing the sinusoidal nature of antagonism. To realise this idea I would be required to wire a circuit through the model with a switch under the foot.

Technical DocumentationMaster GuideGenetic Variation : Fabrication

1

2

5

6

4

311

9 8

7

14

12

17

16

15

18

10

13

Master Guide

With the experience of the prototype behind me, I dived straight into producing FabLab files to be cut. The material used for the construction was 280gsm, 60x90cm, white ivory card.

To improve the referencing system of nets to the digital model I created a master guide with the placement of panels able to be determined by cross referencing the panel number with the master guide above.

Technical DocumentationConstruct ion GuideGenetic Variation : Fabrication

1

2

5

6

4

311

9 8

7

14

12

17

16

15

18

10

13

To further prevent any problems during fabrication I constructed the following page of drawings to show how each of the individual segments fit together. This should hopefully eliminate the problems I had in the prototype construction of segments not fitting together properly or not being orientated correctly.

Master Guide

Strips JoinEnds JoinEnds Join

Key

ConstructionThe BaseGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Prototype

Above : The paper testing of a spiral segment. It can be seen that whilst the form could be straightened out it was the bending of the paper that allowed this, not a scaling of the segments. The range of movement was also limited to a single direction.

The SpiralGenetic Variation : Fabrication

With the base completed I began to consider how I could build the spiral of my form. There was one major attribute I wanted to incorporate into the spiral. Adaptability. I wanted the spiral to be adjustable and able to morph and bend to a number of user’s legs, not just mine.

I set about achieving this feat of engineering by examining Predator, an installation piece of artwork constructed of 35 rings linked together with a transparent covering placed on the frame. The construction of this piece, with the skeletal semi adjustable wire frame, served as a precedent for my prototyping experiments. Using Wire segments I attempted to replicate the structure of Predator. This replication was successful with the prototype produced functioning as required. However, when a surface was applied to the frame the results were not so promising. Cutting a segment of the spiral up into its constituent segments, leaving it attached at one point. However, the degree of movement was limited and was predominantly due to a deformation of the paper, which would not be allowed by a more rigid card.

With the failure of successive prototypes and experimentation I decided that in this case my quest for conceptual realisation compromised the aesthetic integrity of the design to too greater extent and had to be abandoned.

“my quest for conceptual realisation compromised the aesthetic integrity of the design to too greater extent”

Below : The wire frame I constructed, based on the Predator frame, proved effective in its own right but the limits of the surface materials meant it could not be utilised.

Technical DocumentationMaster GuideGenetic Variation : Fabrication

With the failure of an adaptive system for the spiral I returned to Rhino and modified the spiral with measurement from my foot, making everything slightly bigger to allow for other people’s feet and margin for error.

With a specified spiral for my base I proceeded to unroll and nest it. Having further learnt from my construction of the base, I decided to add one panel from next segment of the spiral to the previous net to make assembly of the segments even easier.

Genetic Variation : Fabrication

Technical Documentation

With my new system for assembling the spirals, identifying the connections between nets became far easier and I wasn’t forced to rely so heavily on this construction drawing, compared to the construction of the base.

Construct ion Guide

Strips JoinEnds Join

Key

Genetic Variation : Fabrication SpiralConstruction

Final FormOverproduct ionGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Final Form

Left : A timelapse of the pulsating lighting effect of the model controlled by the switch under the foot.

Interact ion With FootGenetic Variation : Fabrication

Reflection

Right : The fabrication failure of the Predator. Through examination of this bad practice I was able avoid similar issues with a thorough prototyping process.

Fabricat ing the FutureGenetic Variation : Fabrication

The fabrication stage of the design process saw a transition from the virtual space of Rhino into the physical realm of the real world and its laws. Transposing our models from this virtual space we were forced into a jarring adhesion to these laws. Our digitally perfect models became chasten by material limitations. Simple things such as the thickness and malleability of materials suddenly seemed like immovable barriers in the way to conceptual realisation. However, it was here that the benefits of digital technology really shone through. It gave the ability to edit and adapt designs to account for these material limitations. This allowed a rapid prototyping process to test these iterations and iron out any kinks before wasting time and money on production of a final product that is unbuildable. This prototyping and “hands on approach” to my design allowed me to develop a far better understanding of my form and what had previously been lines and dots on a computer screen I suddenly began visualising as real materials with physical qualities. Looking at the Predator installation the consequences of not carrying out thorough prototyping and material testing can be seen (Inside Installations 1999). In this case the installation was designed to be self supported but due to a lack of testing it was found the structure was too weak and had to be supplemented by aluminium supports. This proved costly in both time and materials and ultimately ended up compromising the conceptual and aesthetic qualities of the piece.

The above examination highlights the disconnect between the digital and physical worlds of design. It is an appreciation of this fact that I have found, during my foray

into digital fabrication, is imperative for designers to understand. It is far too easy for designers, myself included, to become so fixated on realising our conceptual vision that we choose to ignore the restraints of physical laws. This results in a design outcome that may be conceptually brilliant but ultimately ineffective because it is through physical form that it must communicate its message. Fabrication technologies attempt to bridge this gap between designers conceptual visions and their physical realisations.

Despite this apparent disconnect between the physical and virtual, I have found during my fabrication experiences there to be a paradoxical interdependence between the two. At the outset of this module I was sceptical of whether my form would be buildable. However, my initial 1:1 prototype, using the FabLab, opened my eyes to the possibilities that digital fabrication held and allowed me to go back and redesign my final form, creating a design with a complexity that I would never have dreamed I could physically produce. My experience here exemplifies how fabrication technologies are not solely limitations to conceptual visions but may enhance and inspire elaboration through the opportunities they allow. Understanding modern fabrication and digital technologies is thus becoming imperative in being able to push the limits of design, as these technological advancements continuously redefine what is and isn’t possible. As a result designers must never become complacent in their knowledge of technology and materials. Rather, they must remain constantly vigilant of technological advances, for it are these advances that have the potential to reshape the physical world we all live in.

Successful Reproduction “Matur i ty to adulthood and reproduce”

Successful Reproduction : Reflection

Reflection

“Good design is obvious. Great design is transparent.”-Joe Sparano

When I first saw this quote two years ago I thought it was stupid. A designers job is to create something that is obvious and able to capture the attention of people at a glance. However, over the last twelve weeks I have begun to think about the next ten seconds. Those ten vital seconds where there is that glisten of spontaneity as you subconsciously analyse and subliminally interact with a design, a whirlwind of emotions and thoughts with your perception materialising from the cacophony. I began to realise that it is very easy for a design to capture ones attention, but very hard to hold it. It is the ability to hold a persons attention

Conceptual Real isat ion

and capture their imagination, that a great design is able to do. This is what I have come to see as transparent design.

So, it sounds simple, capture people’s imagination...

But, as I have realised in the past twelve weeks, whilst it may sound simple it is exceedingly hard to do. You may have the most ingeniously imaginative and engaging concept, or none at all. In the end it really makes no difference, unless you are able to realise it physically. People do not see or engage with the concept of a design, they interact with the physical form they see in front of them. It is when this form encourages them to imagine, to speculate, as to what the conceptual under currents of the design may be that you begin to

capture their imagination and your design moves from being good to great.

It is this ability to communicate my conceptual vision in a physical form that I have struggled with through out my design process. In a way my final form is a good representation of my design process, locked in an antagonistic struggle with material, digital and conceptual limitations as I tried desperately to transmute my conceptual vision into a physical form. However, looking back on hindsight, after reflecting in this journal, I am beginning to believe it was this perception of these elements as limitations to the realisation of my vision that ended up being so self destructive. Rather, designing with an adaptability in mind and allowing these challenges to test

my concept and design making it more robust would have allowed a more linear and successful design process. This loss of direction can be seen throughout my modules with my almost desperate reevaluation, like clockwork, halfway through every module when I would take a step back from my current enigma and consider the overall direction my project is heading and lament at how my tunnel vision has lead my design astray. It is this lesson I have learnt the hard way throughout the semester. The ability to retain a holistic view of a design and design with adaptability in mind are two of the things I will take away from this subject.

Having conquered the masses, and survived the successive fracas; reproduction finally ensued, with the eventual evolution of form inevitable.

ReflectionLooking to the FutureSuccessful Reproduction : Reflection

Continuing to look at the learning experience throughout the semester, whilst frustrating at times, I am left feeling a strange sense of satisfaction. The hours, and hours, and hours, of time spent in front of Rhino tested my perseverance and resolve, as I obstinately pushed through the challenges I faced, learning the value of being adaptable through an experience that really tested how much I wanted to follow a design based career path. Despite being moments away from throwing in the towel, now, standing reformed at the end of my journey into the abyss, I am reminded why I fell in love with design in the first place. The satisfaction of standing back and looking at where you started and where you now are is a sensation that will never get old. Virtual environments really highlighted this

for me and it are these feeling that will act as motivation for me as I struggle through future design endeavours with only the memory of the sense of fulfilment I have now and the knowledge that there is a light at the end of the tunnel to keep me going.

Regardless of how difficult or frustrating the challenges we faced were, they were neither futile nor theoretical but identical to those we observed in our precedents. The NOX “Son-O-House” faced an almost identical set of challenges as I did with architect Spuybroek’s initial concept of currents of water flows being constrained by material and physical limitations (Spiller 2006). Spuybroek was forced to approximate his form with 14 elliptical spheres that had been shaped

by fluid deformation. The ease with which Spuybroek adapted his concept from flows to fluid deformation exemplifies the adaptability that I must develop in my design thinking moving forward. The other aspect of Spuybroek’s design that I found engaging was how embracing the physical and material constraints he was able to select a material that would resonate when wind past through the structure, adding an auditory dimension to the buildings form. This extra dimension further enhanced the structures ability to communicate its concept.

Spuybroek’s willingness to engage with both the conceptual representation and its material realisation then integrate the two created a form that captured my imagination. This great

“standing reformed at the end of my journey into the abys, I am reminded why I fell in love with design in the first place.”

piece of architecture demonstrates how representations and their material realisations are very much interdependent of one another and having an ability to realise this fact makes the evolution of a design from good to great inevitable. It was my initial inability to realise the mutual dependence of the two that saw me vainly attempting to overcome physical and material limitations rather than embracing them as a means to evolve me design.

Appendix

David Trubridge 2009, David Trubridge, Auckland viewed 17 May 2012, <http://www.davidtrubridge.com/news/milan-2009-the-three-baskets-of-knowledge/>Spiller, N 2006, Visionary Architecture, Thames & Hudson, London, UK

Ball, P 2011, ‘The Man Who Loved Fluids’, Flow: Nature’s Patterns, Oxford Univerity Press, pp. 1-18.

Ball, P 2011, ‘The Shape of Things’, Shapes: Nature’s Patterns, Oxford University Press, pp. 1-35.

Grobman, Y 2003, ‘The Digital Era- Revolution or Evolution’, Architecture of Israel Quarterly, October, pp. 10-12.

Inside Installations 1999, Netherlands Institute for Cultural Heritage, Holland viewed 20 May 2012, <http://www.inside-installations.org/artworks/artwork.php?r_id=147>

World Architecture News, World Architecture News, Los Angles viewed 18 March 2012, <http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=12692>

ReferencesSuccessful Reproduction : Reflection