2
3
Table of Contentsp4 ASSIGNMENT 1: THE VASE
p10. ASSIGNMENT 2: PAVILLION
p14. ASSIGNMENT 3: PATTERNS
p22 ASSIGNMENT 4: KANGAROO
p24 ASSIGNMENT 5: MAGNETIC FIELDS
P26 ASSIGNMENT 6: STRUCTURAL
P42 ASSIGNMENT 7: REVERSE ENGINEERING
P48 ASSIGNMENT 8: PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
P50 ASSIGNMENT 9: BRIDGING MERRI-CREEK
4
First attempt at using the ‘GRASSHOPPER’ plug-in to rhino, using simple circular geometry to experiment with the different loft functions available and the variations of radius and levels of the object.
Through this first attempt at ‘GRASSHOPPER’, I learnt the uses of the various connections and how sliders are useful tools to quickly adjust the perimeters of the geometrics used.
Main tools used were the ‘MOVE’ function, which allowed ease in positioning the circles; and the ‘LOFT’ function which connected all the circles together creating the vase variations.
I did experiment with lofting different shapes, the results produced were illogical and had no functions of a vase. It was a good experiment however to test the behaviour of ‘GRASSHOPPER’.
FIG 1.1
FIG 1.2
FIG 1.3
FIG 1.4
FIG 1.5
5
Second attempt at using the ‘GRASSHOPPER’ plug-in in rhino, this time using a different shape to construct my tower and also using more modules to allow more specific adjustments to the overall look and design of the product.
This time the main function that produced these designs was the ‘ROTATE’ function which allowed me to rotate specific square to produce a twist in different degrees and variations.
The slider was used to vary the angle instead of the size of the base shape which I did in the previous definition.
‘LOFT’ was once again used to complete the look of the vase. I did try over twisting the shapes which resulted in a cluttered twist at the top of the object. In other words it was as if a rubber band was over twisted and the design simply collapse on itself making it unrecognisable and some what obscene.
FIG 2.1
FIG 2.2
FIG 2.3
FIG 2.4
FIG 2.5
6
Third attempt was a simple one which started with a basic shape drawn in rhino, then referencing it to the geometry tool. Using ‘LINEAR ARRAY’ to create more of the same shapes along the ‘Z’ axis that would later allow me to twist each one systematically and achieve the desired form.
Using the ‘ROTATE’ tool to rotate each one individually with the help of the ‘RANGE’ tool that would systematically rotate each by a slight degree each time.
The trouble with using certain shapes like this oval was that at certain twist or rotations, when the modules rotate to abruptly and too close to each other, it loses that hollowness within the form. Had to be careful in ensuring it still could function as a vase.
FIG 3.1
FIG 3.2
FIG 3.3
FIG 3.4
FIG 3.5
7
Fourth attempt was based on a ‘POLYGON’ which was arrayed in a series along the ‘Z’ axis, there should be another way to array but this is the one I used. Seemed very logical and straight forward.
After the multiple arrays have been done, I added sliders to allow me to control the ‘STEPS’ and ‘COUNTS’. I learnt that ‘STEPS’ will affect the spacing between each geometry and that ‘COUNT’ affect the number of geometric shapes used in the vase. The ‘COUNT’ value has a limit to how low it can go before the figure starts to deform and twist around itself.
Next I rotated the various shapes systematically by using ‘RANGE’ which rotated each one by a small degree which was controlled by sliders attached to the ‘DOMAIN’ and ‘NUMBER OF STEPS’ which is not to be confused with the previous ‘STEPS’ used to control spacing.
This ‘NUMBER OF STEPS’ slider controlled where the twist or rotation starts in the vase, as seen in fig.4.2, the rotation can start from which ever height I choose. The ‘DOMAIN’ slider controlled the torque and amount of twist put into the structure. Comparing fig.4.3 and fig.4.4, one is obviously more torqued than the other creating two very different designs.
FIG 4.1
FIG 4.2
FIG 4.3
FIG 4.4
FIG 4.5
8
The fifth and final attempt was my favourite because it was formed up in my mind before I started to figure out how to have the shapes and forms to be constructed my way. I started out with a 6 sided polygon and wanted to have a thicker wall than before. Since the polygon had 6 sides, it could be surrounded by itself in a ‘honey comb’ like form.
To get this array I simply used the ‘POLAR ARRAY’ tool which allowed me to adjust the number of polygons around the center shape and also control the radius of the array. Once I had this starting template, I arrayed it along the ‘Z’ axis and lofted the form to get an enclosed vase.
The twisting and rotating is the same as previous attempts, using the ‘RANGE’ and ‘ROTATE’ tools, I could twist the form into the desired form.
Apart from that, I could still adjust the individual radius of the polygons which allowed me to create openings through out the twist and rotations. Along with the ‘RANGE’ tool, I formed the various vases.
FIG 5.1
FIG 5.2
FIG 5.3
FIG 5.4
FIG 5.5
9
10
THE PAVILION
FORMTHE FORM OF THE PAVILION WAS SHAPED WITH
2 CURVES AND 1 ATTRACTOR CURVE WHICH THE
FORM WOULD REACT TO. BY FACTORING THE
DISTANCE BETWEEN THE ARC AT THE TOP OF
THE FORM AND THE BASE, THE ATTRACTOR WAS
ABLE TO CHANGE AND VARY THE HEIGHT OF THE
FORM AT DIFFERENT AREAS. A THIRD CURVE WAS
ALSO USED TO LIMIT THE HEIGHT OF THE FORM.
DIVISIONNEXT I DIVIDED THE SURFACE IN TO SEGMENTS
WHERE I WOULD LATER APPLY THE DESIRED
PATTERNING VIA MORPH METHOD. THIS
WAS DONE BY DIVIDING THE DOMAIN OF THE
LOFT CREATED AND ADDING SLIDERS TO
VARY THE NUMBER OF SEGMENTS IN THE
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DIRECTION.
11
MATERIALISATIONI WANTED TO CREATE PERFORATION OF A SPECIFIC GEOMETRY THAT WOULD FILL UP THE SURFACE OF
THE FORM. THE DEFINITION ALLOWED ME TO USE THE MORPH FUNCTION TO MULTIPLY THE GEOMETRY
ONTO THE SURFACE. A PROBLEM I FACED WAS THE INABILITY TO ‘BAKE’ THE FINAL PRODUCT, I’VE
TRIED BAKING THE GEOMETRY, THE SURFACE, THE LOFT, BUT THE FORM WOULD NOT COME OUT.
12
THE PAVILION
FORMTHE FORM IS BASED OFF THE SAME
CURVES AS PAVILION 1. THE PRACTICE
WAS AN EXPERIMENTATION ON THE
DIFFERENT TYPES OF MATERIALISATION
TECHNIQUES THAT COULD BE APPLIED.
DIVISIONDIVISION WAS DONE BY DIVIDING THE SUB-
SURFACE AND USING SLIDERS TO CONTROL THE
NUMBER OF HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL DIVISIONS
WHICH WOULD LATER VARY THE FREQUENCY
OF TRIANGULAR PATTERNING ON THE SURFACE.
MATERIALISATIONTHE METHOD OF MATERIALISATION USED WAS
THE TRI PANEL SYSTEM WHICH BASICALLY
MULTIPLIED THE TRIANGLES ACROSS THE SURFACE
OF THE GIVEN FORM. THE TRIANGLES VARY IN
SIZE AND DENSITY BY THE SLIDERS ATTACHED
TO THE DIVISION OF THE SUB-SURFACE.
13
14
PATTERN 1 FORMUSING A SIMPLE PLANAR SURFACE THAT WOULD
BE DIVIDED BY A SERIES OF POINTS INTO SECTIONS
DEPENDING ON THE ‘CULL PATTERN’ ASSIGNED.
CONNECTIONSAS I FOLLOWED THE TUTORIAL VIDEO ONLINE,
I REALISE THE VERSION OF GRASSHOPPER
THEY USED WAS VERY DIFFERENT, EVEN
AFTER I’VE FOLLOWED EVERY STEP
CAREFULLY SEVERAL TIMES, THE ‘VORONOI’
TOOL HAD A CONSTANT ERROR MESSAGE.
EVEN THOUGHT I COULD NOT COMPLETE THE
ALGORITHMIC PROCESS, I UNDERSTAND THE
FINAL OUTCOME AND TECHNIQUE USED TO
CREATE THE FINAL PRODUCT IN THE VIDEO.
TECHNIQUEAFTER THE SERIES HAVE BEEN CREATED, THE
‘JITTER’ COMPONENT WOULD SHUFFLE THE POINTS
INTO RANDOM AREAS, THE ‘RUNION’ WOULD THEN
CONNECT ANY REMAINING POINTS THAT WERE
SIMULTANEOUS AND NEXT TO ONE ANOTHER. THIS
WOULD CREATE A RANDOM PATTERN THAT COULD
BE ALTERED BY CHANGING THE PARAMETERS.
15
16
PATTERN 2 FORMUSING A SET OF GRIDS WITH MULTIPLE
POINTS, THEN CONNECTING CIRCLES TO THEM
WITH VARYING DIAMETERS ACCORDING TO
THE PATTERN OF THE IMAGE SAMPLER.
CONNECTIONSTHE DIAMETER OF EACH CIRCLE IS DETERMINED
BY THE BLACK AND WHITE AREAS OF THE
IMAGE. THE SIZES ALSO VARY ACCORDING TO THE
DENSITY OR GRADIENT OF THE TWO COLOURS.
MATERIALISATIONPROJECTING IT ONTO A SURFACE THEN USING
IT AS A CUTTING TOOL TO PERFORATE THE
SURFACE WITH THE PATTERN. SOME OF THE
MANY USES OF SUCH TECHNIQUES ARE FACADE
ORNAMENTATIONS AND SUNLIGHT CONTROL.
17
18
PATTERN 3 FORMINSPIRED BY TOYO ITO’S SERPENTINE
PAVILION, I VISUALISED THE CONNECTION OF
POINTS TO CREATE A SERIES OF SURFACES
THAT COULD BE DELETED OR ADDED TO
SUIT THE INTENTION OF THE DESIGNER.
CONNECTIONSFIRST EACH CURVE WAS DIVIDED INTO POINTS,
THESE POINTS WERE THEN RANDOMLY
CONNECTED TO OTHER CURVE POINTS. THIS
RANDOMNESS WAS STILL CONTROLLED TO
ONLY ALLOW CONNECTIONS ALONG A SINGLE
AXIS OR FACE. THE LINE CREATED WAS THEN
PROJECTED ONTO THE SURFACE AND USED
AS A CUTTING TOOL TO DIVDE THE FORM.
MATERIALISATIONMUCH LIKE THE ORIGINAL PROJECT
BY TOYO ITO, THE PAVILION HAD A
SIMPLE LOFTED SURFACE WHICH I ALSO
INCOPORATED INTO THIS PATTERN FORM.
19
20
PATTERN 4 FORMSTARTED OFF FROM SIMPLE CIRCLES OF
DIFFERENT DIAMETER WHICH WAS DIVIDED
BY POINTS OF VARYING NUMBERS.
CONNECTIONSBEFORE ANY CONNECTIONS WERE MADE, THE
REFERENCED CURVES WERE MOVED INTO
DIFFERENT LEVELS IN THE ‘Z’ AXIS. CONNECTIONS
WERE MADE BY USING THE ‘CROSS REFERENCE’
COMPONENT. BY CONNECTING ONLY THE
LEVELS DIRECTLY ABOVE THE OTHER, A SPACE
COULD BE CREATED WITHIN THE FORM.
MATERIALISATIONTHE SURFACE WAS MAD BY USING THE
WEAVERBIRD MESH COMPONENT WHICH
ALLOWED ME TO CREATE MESHES OUT OF LINES.
LASTLY, THE MIDDLE SECTION WAS LEFT WITHOUT
A MESH AND INSTEAD MADE INTO ‘PIPES’. THIS
WAS AN EXTRA STEP TO VISUALISE HOW THIS
ALGORITHM COULD DETERMINE THE PATTERN
OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS AND HOW THE
MESH COULD BE VISUALISED AS CANVAS THAT
HAVE BEEN TENSIONED BY STEEL CABLES.
21
22
KANGAROO RELAXATION
WITH ANCHOR POINTS
23
KANGAROO RELAXATION
WITH TENSION CABLES
24
KANGAROO RELAXATION
& MAGNETIC FIELDS
25
26
ORGANIC STRUCTUREINSPIRED BY CORALS AND ITS DESIGN AS
INDIVIDUAL STRUCTURES HELD STRONG BY A
LAYER OF HARD SKIN. THIS DEFINITION AIMS TO
CREATE A BENDING STRUCTURE FRAME CAPABLE
OF HOLDING MOST OF ITS LOAD BY ITS FORM
AND RELYING THE REST ON ITS MATERIALS
27
CURVATURE IN STRUCTUREINSPIRED BY THE WAVES AND CURVES MADE
BY RIPPLES, THIS FORM SEEKS TO FLOW GENTLY
BUT MAINTAIN A STRONG STRUCTURAL LOOK.
28
DOME LIKE STRUCTUREDOMES ARE ONE OF THE BEST
FORMS THAT CAN EASILY
SUPPORT ITS OWN WEIGHT AND
SHEAR FORCES. IT IS STABLE
AND EVEN IN ALL DIRECTIONS.
29
30
ABSOLUTE
TOWERSCREATED BY A SERIES
OF ROTATING OVALS
JOINT TOGETHER BY
AN ORIENT CONSTANT
INTERNAL STRUCTURE..
31
ROTATIONEACH OVAL ROTATES BY A SET DEGREE AND PRODUCES THE TWIST
LOOK OF THE BUILDING. THESE OVALS ARE BASED OFF THE ORIGINAL
FLOOR OVAL AND CAN BE UNIFORMLY CHANGED IN SIZE AND RADIUS.
STRUCTURETHE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF THE TOWER REMAINS IN
ONE ORIENTATION BUT HAS BRANCHES OF BEAMS AND
STRUCTURAL WALLS THAT EXTEND AND RETRACT TO THE
EDGES OF THE OVALS DEPENDING ON THE ROTATIONS.
32
FORMCREATING THE OVALS AS A START
BASE THAT CAN BE EASILY CHANGED
WITH PARAMEER INPUTS.
33
TORQUE & TWISTGRAPH PARAMETER TO CHANGE
THE INTENSITY OF THE TORQUE AND
THE START/ END OF THE TWIST.
MATERIALISATIONTHE SLAB IS A THICKENING
OF THE BASIC ARRAYED
CURVES. THE GLASS IS
AN EXTRUSION OF THE
EDGES. THE GLASS IS A
SET BACK EXTRUSION
AND PANAELISED.
34
BRIDGE OF PEACEA BRIDGE IN GEORGIA THAT IS ONLY SUPPOERTED
AT BOTH ENDS, IT SPANS 150M AND HAS A
SEPARATE ROOF STRUCTURE THAT SUPPORTS
ITSELF WITH THE HELP OF ITS STRUCTURAL
FRAME AND THE FORM IT TAKES.
FORMTHE INTERSECTIONS OF 2 CURVED SURFACES
CREATES THE FORM AND SHAPE OF THE ROOF.
THIS CAN BE CHANGED ACCORDING TO THE
PARAMETERS OF THE 2 ORIGINAL SURFACES
DIVISIONBY DIVIDING THE SURFACE, POINT ARE
ATTAINED AND LATER USED TO CREATE THE
FRAME WORK AS WELL AS THE PANELS
THAT WILL CLAD THE STRUCTURE.
FRAMEFRAMES TRAVEL HORIZONTALLY AND
VERTICALLY ACROSS THE FORM. ONE
DIAGONAL DIRECTION IS ALSO CREATED TO
ACT AS BRACING FOR THE STRUCTURE.
GLASS PANELSTHE POINTS OF THE DIVISIONS ARE
USED TO CREATE 4 POINT SURFACES
THAT WILL BE STRAIGHTENED AND
PANELLED ACROSS THE FRAMES.
35
36
FORM2 SEPARATE DEFINITIONS THAT ARE
RELATIVELY SIMILAR BUT OVERLAP
EACH OTHER TO CREATE A NEW FORM.
37
GLASS PANELSUSING THE 4 POINTS OF
EACH ISOTRIM, THE PANELS
ARE FORMED AND MADE
INTO STRAIGHT PANELS
INSTEAD OF CURVED ONES.
STRUCTURELINES DRAWN FROM CONNECTION
OF THE POINTS CREATE THE
FRAME WHICH IS THEN ‘PIPPED’
TO CREATE STEEL TUBES.
38
BEIRA-RIO STADIUMA STADIUM IN BRAZIL CONSTRUCTED
OUT OF STEEL FRAMES, A PTFE
MEMBRANE AND GLASS AS A SKIN.
FORMCHANGES IN FORMS CREATED BY VARIATIONS IN
HEIGHT, WIDTH AND RADIUS OF THE BASE OVAL.
39
FUNCTIONCHANGES IN FORMS ALSO AFFECTS THE
FUNCTIONALITY OF THE STRUCTURE. THE
ROOF HAS TO ALWAYS HAVE SUFFICIENT
COVER OVER THE SPECTATORS.
CONCLUSIONFROM BUILDING THIS DEFINITION, SEVERAL LESSONS
OF GEOMETRY CAN BE LEARNT AS WELL AS
STRUCTURAL PRINCIPLES. A 3 AXIS SUPPORT AS
COMPARED TO A 2 AXIS SUPPORT, AND CIRCULAR
NETWORK OF FRAMES CAN ACT AS A BOND FOR
ALL STRUCTURAL MEMBERS AND BECOME MORE
STABLE WITH A SMALLER FOUNDATION FOOTPRINT.
40
FORM3 SETS OF OVALS USED TO
CONSTRUCT THE BASE AND HEIGHT
AS WELL AS THE EXTENT OF THE
VERTICAL CURVES OF THE FRAMES
THAT WILL BE MADE LATER.
41
FRAMETHE FRAME IS CONSTRUTED BASED OFF A SINGLE CURVE
WHICH IS ROTATED ON AXIS ON BOTH SIDES THEN
CONNECTED BY A SERIES OF POINTES AND THEN “PIPPED”.
MEMBRANELOFTS ARE CREATED
ALONG THE FRAMES TO
SIMULATE MEMBRANES.
42
CANARY WHARF
CROSSRAIL STATIONFORMA VISUALISATION OF THE FRAME WORK
REVEALS THE SIMPLE INTERSECTIONS OF
VARIOUS DIAGONAL LINES THAT WRAP THE
FROM CREATING THE STRUCTURAL FRAME.
ETFE PILLOWS CREATE THE SKIN THAT
LAYS ON THE FRAMES. THIS CAN BE
SIMULATED WITH PANELS OR FURTHER
MATERIALISED BY KANGAROO PHYSICS.
PARAMETERSSOME PARAMETERS THAT MUST BE
ABLE TO CHANGE IS THE CURVATURE
AND DENSITY OF FRAMES.
43
IMAGE REFERENCETHE PROJECT IS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION
AND THERE WERE NO AVAILABLE PLANS TO
REFERENCE OFF. THE ONLY RELIABLE SOURCE
WERE PHOTOS FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL
FIRM AND FROM THE INTERNET. A ROUGH
FORM CAN BE CREATED AND NUMBER OF
FRAMES CAN ONLY BE SPECULATED.
44
STEP 1CREATING A SERIES OF CURVES
THAT COULD BE PARAMETISED
TO BE ADJUSTED LATER.
STEP 2ROTATING THE EDGE CURVES TO
FORM THE END SHAPES OF THE FORM
SIMILAR TO THE CASE STUDY.
STEP 3LOFTING THE ENTIRE FORM TO CREATE THE
BASE FORM. THIS WILL LATER BE USED
TO CREATE THE SURFACE MATERIAL AS
WELL AS THE FRAME THICKNESS.
STEP 4THE FIRST DIVISION OF THE LOFT IS
CREATED TO MAKE A SET NUMBER
OF POINTS AND DIVISIONS.
STEP 5DIAGONAL LINES ARE DRAWN BY FINDING THE
CENTER OF EACH SQUARE GRID. THIS FRAME IS
DRAWN IN BOTH DIRECTIONS OF THE DIAGONALS.
STEP 6A MESH IS CREATED WITH THESE
LINES TO JOIN THEM AS ONE PIECE.
45
STEP 7AN OFFSET CREATES THE DEPTH OF THE
FRAME AND BOTH LINES ARE LOFTED
TOGETHER TO SIMULATE THE DEPTH OF
THE BEAMS IN THE STRUCTURE.
STEP 8USING THE WEAVERBIRD PLUG-IN, THE
LOFT IS THEN THICKENED TO CREATE THE
WIDTH OF THE BEAMS OF THE STRUCTURE.
STEP 9THE CORNERS OF FRAME
INTERSECTIONS ARE THEN USED TO
CREATE TRIANGULAR PANELS.
STEP 10IN THE FINAL STEP, THE PANELS ARE PLACE TOGETHER TO CREATE THE SKIN OF THE FRAMES.
THESE PANELS CAN BE REMOVED OR ADDED BASED ON THE DESIGN CRITERIA. AN IMPROVEMENT
THAT COULD BE ADDED WAS THE MATERIALISATION OF THE PANELS INTO ETFE PILLOWS
THAT ARE INFLATED. THIS REQUIRES A FURTHER STEP IN THE KANGAROO PLUG-IN.
46
CURVE PARAMETERSTHE GRAPH ALLOW EASY MANIPULATION
OF THE CURVE USED TO CREATED
THE FORM OF THE ROOF.
CREATING THE LOFTED FORMEND CURVES ARE ROTATED
OUTWARDS AND A LOFT IS
CREATED WITH THE CURVES.
47
PANELING SURFACEFROM THE DIVIDE POINTS, THE COORDINATED OF EACH
POINTS ARE SPLIT INTO 4 (0,1,2,3) WHICH CAN BE
SURFACED TO CREATE INDIVIDUAL TRIANGUAR PANELS.
FRAMEWORKWITH THE DIVISION OF THE LOFT,
THE POINTS CAN BE CONNECTED
IN THE HORIZONTAL, VERITCAL
AND DIAGONAL DIRECTIONS
TO CREATE THE FRAMEWORK
SIMILAR TO THE CASE STUDY.
48
Karamba Form FindingThe use of anchor points, forces and point positions to alter and create variations of forms with different outcomes.
RIVER LINK PODSFROM THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPOSAL AT MERRI CREEK, THE STRUCTURE
SEEKS A FLUID FORM BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF A GRID SHELL STRUCTURE.
49
Form FindingUse of Grasshopper plug-ins such as Karamba to simulate loads and stresses on different forms.
Structural BracingA set algorithmic process that calculates number of elements needed to for the bracing of each form.
Membrane ApplicationUsing points on the form to create a simple surface that can later be made into different materials.
Mesh into Space FrameA set algorithmic process that creates a space frame from any form..
50
BRIDGING MERRI-CREEK V1.0A DESIGN BASED ON THE INFLATION OF THE KANGAROO PLUG-IN TO CREATE A ORGANIC FORM THAT IS STRUCTURAL AND DESIGN BASED.
ALTHOUGH I’VE EXPLORE MUCH INTO DIFFERENT PARAMETRIC DEFINITIONS AND TECHNIQUES, I FOUND
THAT A SIMPLE DEFINITION USING KANGAROO’S INFLATION WAS SUFFICIENT IN CREATING MY DESIGN.
A SIMPLER MORE CONSTRUCTABLE DESIGN IS BETTER THAN A COMPLEX UNBUILDABLE ONE.
51
52
BRIDGING MERRI-CREEK V2.0A SECOND DESIGN ALSO USING KANGAROO’S INFLATION ALSO UTILISED GRAVITY AND THE INFLATION TO CREATE SMOOTH CURVES THAT BRIDGE ACROSS THE RIVER.
53
54
BRIDGING MERRI-CREEK V2.0A SECOND DESIGN ALSO USING KANGAROO’S INFLATION ALSO UTILISED GRAVITY AND THE INFLATION TO CREATE SMOOTH CURVES THAT BRIDGE ACROSS THE RIVER.
55