MODULE 4Reflection

Dylan Morgan 587256 Semester 1/2012

IDEATIONForm vs Context

Saunders’ Case MothConcept Overview

Concept 1 - growth like cocoon

Concept 2 - involvement of light

Concept 3 - contrast of stages in the cycle

Concept 4 - contrast of the caterpillar and its cocoon

The week 1 lecture confused me at first, jumping straight into the idea that through patterns similari-ties exist between natural landscapes and urban environments. Throughout the semester this con-cept has become clearer, but more complicated at the same time.

This journey began through the exploration of the natural process undergone by the Saunders Case Moth, and the four following aspects of the transition that occurs.

Encompassing cocoonConcept 1

Aesthetically, the most signifigant and prom-enant aspect of the case moth is its cocoon. It is woven and conforms to the insectm, encom-pasing it with the incorporation of sticks.

Relating this to a form may seem straightfor-ward, however I found that this raised the ques-tion of to what degree can a process or natural form be abstracted before all relevance is lost. While the all encompassing trait of the case moth’s cocoon can translate quite literally to a design, I felt that it was necessary to maintain, to a degree, in order to hold onto the aesthetic essence of the natural process.

This link between form and context is difficult to balance, as I discovoured through Module 1 in particular.

Figure 1.1- Black Narcissus‘Black Narcissus’ designed by Gabriel Esquivel and David Hernandez highlights the ability to physically represent an uncontrollable natural occurance. It refers to narcissism as a natural condition of self-admiration and the idea that we become as beutiful as what surrounds us (reflected in the film of the same title. Similarly the Case Moth builds a

cocoon that reflects its surroundings. This demonstrates the importance of the link between form and context. A literal interpretation of the emotional phenominon explored by the designers would be almost impssible and equally unecessary. Context has influenced form appro-priately, proving the need to manage this relationship.

Figure 1.2Initial sketches exploring a growth like form that surrounds its inhabitants. I noted that a form similar to these would be difficult to fabricate, requiring a great deal of accuracy. I therefore decided to involve to concept to a less significant extent towards the fabrication stage

The Involvement of LightConcept 2

Partial light Minimal light All light (emerging)

Figure 1.4

Partial light

Figure 1.5

Minimal light

Figure 1.6

All light (emerging)

Stage 1: The first 1-2 years of the cycle involve the caterpillar living in its case, however they are able to manipulate it in order to enter and exit to find food. Therefore light is partially involved at this stage

Stage 2: The second stage (pupation) lasts ap-proximately 1-2 months, at which time the cater-pillar seals itself inside the cocoon and begins

metamorphosis. It can be seen that at this point there is absolutely no light

Stage 3: This final stage lasts only a short while and involves the male moth emerging trium-phantly from its case, to live free from the burden of attempting to defend its fragile caterpillar state. This involves a flourish of natural light until the end of the life cycle

Upon discovouring the need to delve deeper than the external aesthetics of the processes of nature, i began analysing the less physical, aspects of the life cycle of the Saunders Case Moth. More specifically, aspects that evolve through the cycle.

Through the idea of sampling information to represent patterns in both natural and urban environments (pre-sented in an early lecture) I noted the involvement of light at significant stages in the caterpiller / moth’s devel-opment.

Figure 1.3- Metro Station 20, SofiaThis proposed metro station in Sofia, Bulgaria, was designed by Peter Ruge Architekten to bring the underground space up to the surface. A focus of this canopy that emerges from the underground

train line was to bring light from above, down into the station. It filters and interrupts the sunlight, similarly to the inconsistant involvement of light throughout the life cycle of the case moth.

This raises more questions over the relationship of context and form. While a context such as a natural process can physically influence form, on many occassions it can more significantly dictate form through it’s non-physical and non-measurable attributes.

This allows contexts to be further deconstructed and abstacted, thereby possibly blurring the line between rep-resentation and interpretation.

Contrasting States in the CycleConcept 3

This discovery enabled me to further develop my concept, in line with with the tangiable, and seemingly more significantly, the non-tangiable aspects of the case moth’s life cycle.

I noted that while the insect physically changes through metamorphosis, it also emotionally evolves. Not so much in terms of its feelings, but in terms of its freedom and vulnerability.

Ptior to metamorhposis the caterpiller is defensive and vulnerable, which can be represented via a rigid form. Following its transformation into a moth the vibrantly coloured male leaves its cocoon for good. The freedom of this new creature can be physically repre-sented with a fluid form.

The fluid state of the insect emerges from the rigid state, providing a con-trast that can be further explored.

Figure 1.7Sketches exploring the contrasting forms (fluidity and rigidity). At this point the possibility of having contrasting colours (black and white) became relevant.

Figure 1.9Sketches exploring the contrasting forms in context

Figure 1.8- Vaillancourt FountainThis San Francisco fountain by Ca-nadian artist Armand Velankur more appropriately conveys the contrast-ing forms I hoped to create.

Contrasting the rigid and harsh spouts is the water that flows through them and emerges from the open-ings

Figure 1.10Early modelling of possible lanterns utilising

this concept

Contrast of the Caterpillar and its CocoonConcept 4

The idea of contrast exited me, however I still felt the need to maintain an appro-priate relationship between my form and the natural process.

This drew me back to the physical at-tributes, and visually the most significant contrast. The harsh exterior of the case and the bright life form that exists inside it (the caterpiller).

Figure 1.11- La Fabrique Sonore, France“La Fabrique Sonore”, designed by artists Ali Monemi, Robin Meier, and architect Hyoung-Gul Kook, acoustically amplifies the sound of champagne bubbles in the French underground system of corridors. The audio system creates a continually evolv-ing sound environment, with the help of the basic geometric pattern of the form.

This piece relates specifically to my intention not only in its appearance, but the fact that life exists inside the comparatively dull exterior of the structure in the form of sound, providing a contrast similar to that of the caterpillar and itʼs case. The use of light aids this affect, breathing more life into the dreary environment of the French underground.

Figure 1.12Experimenting with the physical contrast of the caterpiller and its cocoon. I par-ticularly liked the interaction of the two forms shown in this last sketch, as it fully exaggerates the contrast.

Ideation conclusionConsolidation

While each of the four conepts I had interpreted from the natural process mirrored a significant aspect, alone I found they were either slightly too abstract, or slightly to literal.

I therefore went about consolidating the ideas to best reflect the process, and maximise the relationship between context and form. This raised both new questions and a sense of closure on the topic.

I had started the design process unsure of how to extract a rep-resentative form from the life cycle of a breed of moth. While the idea seemed foreign it soon became more involved. How is it that design can represent non-tangiable patterns and processes in nature, and how can these contexts be interpreted in the most justifiable manner.

I think in the end I had answered my own questions through blind exploration, to arrive at the idea that amlifying and exaggerating one aspect of a chosen context may be unsuccesfull, but iden-tifying the most relevant attributes, while being anchored to the desire to maintain an appropriate balance, will result in the most fitting form.

Context and form interact and influence each other in many ways, often without knowing it. I think losing sight of the core of either one will result in a loss of di-rection. Whether its a literal or abstract interpretation, there is always a balance, which can be maintained.

Figure 1.13Sketches incorporating all four concepts developed:

An all encompasing form

The evolution of the involv ment of light

constrasting emotional states

physical contrast of the caterpiller and its case

Figure 1.14Final modelling for Module 1. Note: does not include the intricacies initially desired (evident in Figure 1.15)

Figure 1.15Modelling of the desired interac-

tion of the two forms

DESIGNDigital Media and its Possibilities

Simplifying the conceptModelling

Figure 2.1Following the initial stages of the design process and moving into the digitisation process I discov-oured my modelling was ambitious in terms of my limited experience using Rhino (as I had predicted).

It was therefore appropriate to simplify the design to a certain degree, with the hope of incorpo-rating the intricate aspects (dem-onstrated in figure 2.2) later on.

Figure 2.2Intended form, yet to be explored digitally

Approaching the refinement of my lantern concept (through digitisation) I was unsure of the possibilities of model-ling the form in Rhino.

I was yet to understand the limitations of various media, specifically virtual media, in relation to my design inquir-ies.

While drawing had allowed me to explore forms more widely, the early digitisation process seemed to be restricting the possibilities

Modelling in RhinoDigitisation

Figure 2.3Digital modelling method 1. This

approach was unsuccesfull, due to the shape of the form and what

I was trying to do

Figure 2.4Digital modelling method 2. I had more success with this, however I was still faced with the problem of creating an opening.

Figure 2.5Digital modelling method 2, with a more appropriate form. This was the most succesfull as it allowed for the creation of an opening on the flat surface by manipulating the panelling.

Already I was experiencing limitations, but not necessarily with digital media, moreover I was limited by my initial ability.

This forced me to step back and think in more depth about the limitations of various media.

With the birth of more advanced vir-tual media in recent years we are able to explore many possibilites, and with further advancements we may only be limited by our own abilities.

Modelling in RhinoDigitisation

Figure 2.7Early exploration: Box / cube panelling

Figure 2.8Early exploration: 3 dimensional triangular panelling

Figure 2.9Further exploration: customised shape

Figure 2.10Further exploration: pyramid panellling

Figure 2.12Further exploration: Pyramid panel-ling, fewer control points

Figure 2.11Further exploration: ribbed panel-ling

Figure 2.13Further exploration: pyramid panelling, larger offset, and ptOff-setFacesBorder comand

Figure 2.14Further exploration: more offset with ptOffsetFacesBorder com-mand

Figure 2.6Manipulating control points to cre-ate an opening in the panelling, to allow for the development of the fluid form

Filtering LightDigitisation

Figure 2.15

Partial light

Figure 2.16

Minimal light

Figure 2.17

All light (emerging)

At each step now I was reinforcing the original concepts I had developed. I was able to represent the rigidity of the outer form I had hoped for, and began developing the light filtering prop-erties I planned using the ptOffsetFacesBorder command and segregating the model.

In this way it can be seen that through virtual media design enquiries can be fully explored, and later on translated to a physical model.

Figure 2.18- Motril Footbridge, Spain

The parametric design of this Spanish footbridge (located in the town of Motril) displays the possibilities of filtering light. Built in 2011, the bridge was designed to close the gap between the gardens of the Explanadas and the Park Pueblos de las Américas. It is a continuous curve constructed with rigid shapes, as is the panelled form I developed in Rhino. I am particularly interested in the use of glass as well as the lighting underneath. The glass is inserted in each panel, like the paneling of my design.

In addition LED lights are used to link the panels underneath the structure to those with the glass in them. The glass incorporates the natural light, while the LED create artificial light. This precent is therefore particularly relevent, and also provides me with an understanding of the potential of using openings in panels to filter light.

Fluid FormDigitisation

Through various attempts at creating a panelled form that retained fluidity while being constructed of rigid panels I was finally able to loft individual pieces from a flat surface placed within the existing form.

The greatest obstacle in creating this contrasting form was, as mentioned, the balance between rigidity and fluidity. While sketching allowed me to easily exploit this concept, it was an-other story with virtual media.

Once again I was faced with the need to conform my concept to the virtual modelling and fabrication possibilities (in line with my ability in these areas)

Figure 2.19Lofted fluid form, modelled through a great deal of trial and error

Figure 2.21Images demonstrate the section that the fluid form was lofted from (red to exaggerate contrast- will actually be black and white)

Figure 2.20- Cosmic Leaf

Cosmic Leaf by British designer Ross Lovegrove features a fluid form illuminated by a light source above the meshed skin.

This demonstrates the ability to create a fluid form using a harsh, rigid material.

SummationDesign

voured) can exist through the user’s ability (which may have been the case with me). But does this mean that virtual media is limited? I don’t think that is the case.

Rachel Gottlieb (Figure 2.22) has proved that it is possible to generate a complex system from simple forms. Her work is based on a grid of repeated wooden forms that are joined with elastic to cre-ate fluid forms from rigid lines. Interaction with the objects creates further complexity as each user can redefine the object’s meaning.

From this it can be summarised that different media are beneficial in their own distinct manner, and al-low for different inquiries in design.

It became clear through the transition from physical media to digi-tal media that different media support different design enquiries. While they are different, thats not to say that they are necessarily limited.

Sketching allows for a vast exploration of concepts, however it is often not optimal for refinement. Physical modelling on the other hand is useful for refinment in addition to development. When faced with the need to convert physical models to virtual media problems arrose, requiring the simplification of my concept.

I guess I took from this the fact that virtual media can limit the ex-ploration of design enquiries, when hoping to fabricate. Often we cannot replicate the natural, and I suppose imperfect designs that we can to a certain degree create by hand.

However limitations, when it comes to virtual media (I have disco-

Figure 2.22Simplicity to complexity- form stud-ies (Rachel Gottlieb)

FABRICATIONPossibilities and Constraints

ContentsFabrication

Digital - Unrolling panelling

Virtual - Initial prototyping

Virtual - Scale prototyping

Virtual - Final Lantern

Unrolling panelled formsVirtual

Figure 3.1Reference image of unrolled panel-ling for the fluid form

Figure 3.2Reference image of unrolled panel-ling for the rigid outer form

Unrolling Panelled FormsVirtual

Figure 3.3Unrolled sections, cut out to con-truct protoype models

Partial prototyping, scale 1:4Physical

Figure 3.4Scaled prototype 1:4 (partial- used to identify flaws)

Figure 3.5Pieces and sheets used to construct model (printed on A3 and cut manually)

Through the manual construction of prototypes I noted that the particular method of fabrication we had all undergone allows for fabrication that can be simple or even very complicated. While there are various avenues that this method of fabrication makes possible it is also limited.

Structurally speaking, we are limited by the materials we use (in this case paper). In addition we are limited to a degree to rigid forms.

Full Scale Prototyping, 1:1Physical

Figure 3.6Prototype to scale, printed on A0 paper than cut manually

Figure 3.7Full scale presented problems

(paper was heavy and floppy in open section)

Figure 3.8Similar to Figure 3.7

Proposed solution: structural ribbing

Figure 3.9Panelling was not offset enough

on panl 1.7, meaning that part of it overlapped and the panel did not

fit the section.

Proposed solution: offset panl 1.7 more

Problems Discovoured:

Final Model Construction, 1:1Physical

Figure 3.10Unrolled panels for fluid form cut

out (note- black paper as, intended originally)

Figure 3.11construction of fluid form for final model, piece by piece

Figure 3.12Fully constructed fluid form at-

tached to panel 1.7 on final outer rigid form model

Final Model Construction- Lighting, 1:1Physical

Figure 3.13Images showing wiring for lighting of fluid form (single LED in each piece- placed in parallel)

Figure 3.15Fluid form with rigid form surround-ing it (note: light escaping from ends of individual pieces

Figure 3.14Lighting details (2 double A bat-teries in pack- with switch, with 10 LEDs)- should be replaced after a couple of hours of use.

Figure 3.16Fully constructed model with lights

Note: problems that arose in 1:1 prototyping have been resolved

with structural members in the opening, and improved panelling in

section 1.7

Reflection

Through the design and construction of this lantern, more than anything representations at each stage have lead to the eventual succes of the model. But can it be said that representations and material reali-sations are mutually dependent?

I think it comes down to the idea of virtual versus physi-cal. The most emazing concepts can be concieved and designed, but in the end we cannot discount the restrictions of real world modelling when digitising any concept for eventual construction.

Virtual conceptualisation can be limited. In the construction of my lantern I discovered this. While on Rhino the form holds rigidly in its position, paper does not necessarliy perform this way, requiring me to revisit the opening of the outer form and construct structual members to maintain the desired form.

This reafirmed to me the importance of prototyp-ing, but more importantly for future studies and even careers the idea that there is a clear division between the possibilities of virtual and physical conceptualisa-tion.

They are, I think, mutually dependant, and therefore cannot be considered separately, or the succes of a design will be jeapordised.

http://www.contemporist.com/2009/04/16/cosmic-leaf-by-ross-lovegrove/

http://www.crookedbrains.net/2008/12/studies.html

http://www.evolo.us/category/design/

http://www.evolo.us/architecture/la-fabrique-sonore-acoustically-amplifies-thesound-of-champagne-bubbles/#more-15717

http://www.evolo.us/architecture/black-narcissus-is-parametric-designedin-stallation-based-on-contemporary-fashion/#more-15473

http://www.evolo.us/architecture/sofia-metro-station-proposal-peter-rugearchitekten/#more-15723

http://funsterz.com/2012/02/28/ten-of-the-most-amazing-fountains-in-theworld-10-photos-10-videos/

References