http://www.mediafire.com/?99txfk24cgi9mv1
Link to grasshopper description file
Friday, June 24, 2011
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Views on the project, and changes
After the second presentation, instead trying to find a logical explanation for the physical application for the model, although I made changes to the description file so it can be easily to modified into any type of building site, for example, the Bennelong Apartment.
But I do feel this project created a much more conceptual model, which is reflective of its topic, iterative design and Self Similarity. The model, instead of having an exterior attractor point, each point of the model is attracted and relates to each other. So in terms of relations with the environment, the relationship comes from the boundaries of the site and initial attractor point is created from the site, and from that, each other relative point is created and spawn from there.
As for fractal geometry, instead of continue focusing on that, I decided to sift the topic to fractal art, but as a sub-topic under self similarity.
You can see in my feel high quality renders, how the light reflecting off the building creates the idea of fractal art onto ground.
Photos of constructed Physical Model
Basically I'm very happy with how the laser cutting went, although I have to make changes, such as taking out the really small thin tower, since the scale of the model make that tower redundant in terms of quality, when I was making this model I also understood the physics and proportion of the digital model really well, I actually used to experience and refer it back to my model to make changes.
In terms of quality of the model, the Acrylic glue was really difficult to control and it did made some mess around the edges. As for the void space model, the quality turned out to be excellent, although some of the pieces broke during laser cutting, since the heat of the laser kind of melted the acrylic a little and deformed the edges, causing it to break my I had to take the pieces out.
As for the aesthetic of the model, I liked how my physical model are very similar to my digital renders, this was one of my major concerns from the start, to create a physical model that is very easy to relate back to my digital model.
Images of final digital model
After 10 years of hard work and trial and error......... I have got the caustics to work in Vray, and the solution was ...... amateur mistake >.<
Below is my final rendered model at 640x480
I'm having a larger render with all my iterations going on right now, will post it asap.
Task 12 - design development for Assignment 3
In my description, based on the feedback from my physical model, I decided to add an extra set of graph mapper to the 4th point of the shapes, because in my physical model, the smallest piece of the 5 towers were become redundant in terms of quality, and it just didn't display any kind of value, so with this change, I can vary the 5 pieces' ratio more significantly, instead of restricted into a ascending order of area.
Also I finished the laser cutting layout here, creating a void space model and re-orient each sections in the Z direction onto a 2D plane.
Images of final model for laser cutting
These two models are the ones that I will be laser cutting, initially my idea for the laser cutting model is to reduce the amount of changes need, then I wanted to also show the negative of the space, so in my third image, I showed the proposed model of the void space model, along with the 2D geometry that is to be laser cut.
Task 11 - design development for Assignment 3
At this stage, I started looking at how to layout the laser cutting file, I wanted to cut out my material but also uses the inverted space of the cutout to form another model, so I needed to fabricate the entire layer of sections onto a 2D view in order to achieve that.
In this version you can see I tried to create a series of points that represents as refernce points to re-orient the geometry into the 2D plane, didn't work that well.
TAsk 10 - design development for Assignment 3
In this development, moving from breaking down a long series of points to create a set of curves and loft between three layers to create a single surface, I started to play around with closed curves and shapes, this idea of closed curves represents a much better idea in terms of architectural idea of space and structure.Also rearranging a few modifiers, I can bypass the previous problem of having to split my list of points manually into multiple sections and join as a curve.
Preliminary exploration into geometry for laser cutting
The proposed aesthetics of the model will be purely made out of Acrylic perspex. The material thickness will be at 6mm thick and of dimensions. If possible, having multiple colours as layers of the building. I wanted to create a model that doesn't require much altercation for it in order to be laser cut.
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Model Proposal
My two research topics are fractal geometry and parametric modelling. So by default, I looked into ideas of parametric modelling. I tried to recreate a very simple concept of the interaction between parametric modelling and fractal geometry. Using two basic forms of parametric modelling, parametric truss and parametric columns, I attempted to show the self similarity between each step of the parametric modelling. In my grasshopper definition, I created three of the same structure of a parametric truss, but its resulting geometry are different based on the parameters set for each truss, so displaying the basic idea of parametric modelling, where we apply modification to one single geometry and be able to create theoretically limitless amount of iterations.
Then to represent the fractal geometry’s idea of self similarity, I first created a rail curve from the geometry of the truss, and then using the sweep function, created a parametric column based on the two dimensional shapes created in each of the three truss as sections of the sweep. This shows the idea of self similarity between each columns because if you look at one column from the resulting geometry component, the ‘part’ will resemble the ‘whole’, each column is self similar to each other. Also self similarity can be found each sections of the columns. Each sections at every level of a column are self similar to each other, they are all generated from one simple geometry, thus referring back to the idea of parametric modelling, generating iterations based on a single component.
As for the physical applications, the site that I have chosen for Assignment 03 is the Bennelong Apartments near the Opera House, I have taken into account the design of the Opera House and the vicinity of the environment, to blend with the other architecture around, I chose to use a quadrilateral shape as my base geometry to compliment the surround structures.
Tier 2 Research + Sources
Parametric modelling and fractal geometry share a lot of similarities between each other. They both focus on the idea of self similarity and replication of geometry to create and extend the design process from one single, and mostly simple geometry.
Parametric modelling is a methodology for exploration of possible designs generated from the use of one single model. Initially intended for the aeronautical industry, they were introduced into the architectural domain due to their ability to support a powerful framework for the conception of design. As Carlos Barrios had described, “a parameterization is presented as a fundamental tool for design exploration, which allows the reproduction of original shapes..., and the generation of a large set of new designs.”[1] Parametric modelling also presents a freedom to the restrictions normally presented in traditional CAD systems, it provides parameters of the geometry to be freely modify, to satisfy the idea of design exploration.
Fractal geometry is geometry whose spatial form is not even nor fluid, hence irregularity across many scales in its structure. It is a portrayal as geometry of nature. This is evolved from the hypothesis which objects with geometry whose structure is irregular in terms of Euclidean geometry, but within this irregularity lays a pattern which is as order as those in simpler objects composed of straight lines. Fractals are based on the notion of repetition and scalar ambiguity, any part of fractal, regardless of size and scale, presents more or less the same structure of geometry as a whole, the architectural forms or urbanistic models that are derived from them are characterised by a scalar ambiguity.
The one rule of fractals is that fractals are always self similar, or at least in some general sense. Self similarity is the idea of replication of one single geometry, across many scales although not down to the exact details, but in a very general and broad idea. Therefore on an enlarged or reduced scale, ad within a given range, you examine a fractal, it will always appear to be similar to the whole, with some degree of irregularity. In fractals, the whole will always be manifest in the parts. A great example is looking at a piece of rock that broke off from a mountain. You will see the mountains in the rock to some degree of familiarity.
The idea of self similarity is very related with parametric modelling, in terms of its notion of repetition. Parametric modelling suggest and conceive design concepts based on alteration and modification to one single modular component replicating and developing the idea in a parallel fashion. Whereas fractals focus on the similarity of structure within its geometry, to create order within seemingly irregularity. Both concepts relies on the idea of replication to broaden their design concepts. Due to the nature of parametric modelling, the process which each modification yields a result, contrasting with the traditional CAD modelling, each modification applied to the geometry produces an instance of the newly created geometry, so it is evident the similarity between the original geometry and the newly created geometry differed by only the applied configuration.
This leads to the fractals’ concept of hierarchy. Sometimes, fractals are portrayed in terms of a hierarchy of self similar components. Fractals, in order to display the order within its irregularity, presents a hierarchy structure that ‘regulates’ the geometry. Hierarchy of fractals can be seen across many scales and tree is a very classic example of ‘branching out’. Being a literal interpretation of the term ‘hierarchy’, it presents the most fundamental structure of fractals. Looking at twigs and its structure will create a familiarity with the branch structure, even if twigs is a partial form of a branch. Similarly from branches to trees, one branch of a tree will resemble the structure of a tree.
Other interesting example is the structure of cities, as Michael Batty and Paul Longley explained in their book, “Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function”, the structure of cities seems to be unordered and seemingly without regulated structure, but at closer examination, districts of cities creates a self similarity between themselves. As the writers described, “The organisation and spacing of cities as central places is such an order while the configuration of districts and neighbourhoods, and spatial distribution of roads and other communications are hierarchically structured”[2], if roads and neighbourhoods are turned into geometry, ignoring the materiality of the buildings and constructs, we can easily identify the repetition of structure within cities.
Referring back to parametric modelling, parametric models are often seem irregular at first examination, but each individual geometry is spawn from a previous geometry, and the relations between the two geometry can be explained and visually described. This idea of modelling, similar to fractal geometry, provides a relationship between multiple geometries. Since a parametric model is created from one simply geometry, for example, a twisted tower is spawned from one single enclosed shape, copied and transformed into multiple instances of the shape, then joined create a loft between the shapes. Each section of the tower will create a familiarity between each other, because each section is originated from one single enclosed shape. Similar to the hierarchy structure of fractals, where twigs resembles branches, and branches resemble the tree.
Both of the ideas, fractal geometry and parametric models, after the discussion of hierarchy, gives an impression that it is very rigid in process and not very maneuverable. But in fact, both ideas present a very flexible system of creating geometry. Parametric model is modelling based on parameters of geometry, such as length, control points, and surfaces. We can apply modifications to the geometry as long as it is defined within the parameters, thus creating a theoretically limitless amount of configurations from using one single geometrical component. Fractal geometry, as discussed before, based on the idea of self similarity. This is similarity is not restricted down to exact detail, therefore allowing freedom to creativity to the construction of fractals within a particular boundary, restricted by only purposes of the design and the intention of the designer.
The intersection of fractal geometry and parametric modelling are mostly based on its idea of familiarity between each section of the geometry, each newly created instanced of geometry are similar to the previously created geometry, differed by only the modification applied to the component.
[1] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models: A Case Study on the Sagrada Familia Columns (2006) Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA p. 1
[2] Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994) p.60
Unreferenced Sources
· Carl Bovill, Fractal Geometry in Architecture and Design (Birkhäuser Boston, 1995)
· Shaoming Lu, Hidden orders in Chinese gardens: irregular fractal structuve and its generative riles (Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2010, volume 36, pages 1076-1094
· Stephen Demko, Laurie Hodges Bruce Naylor, Construction of Fractal Objects with Iterated Function Systems (New York, USA, Proceedings of the 12th Annua conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 1985)
· Jonathan Chapuis, Evelyne Lutton, ArtiE-Fract: Interactive Evolution of Fractals (International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 2006)
· Mai Abdelsalam, Digitizing Architecture: Formalization and Content [4th International Conference Proceedings of the Arab Society for Computer Aided Architectural Design (Manama, 2009) p. 297 – 304
· Tristan Al-Haddad, Parametric Modulations in Masonry, (CAADRIA 2008) p.221 – 228
· Fabrizio Apollonio; Marco Gaiani; Cristina Corsi, A Semantic and Parametric Method for 3D Moels used in 3D Cognitive-Information System (Zurich 2010) p.863 – 872
· Ayman Almusharaf; Elnimeiri Mahjoub, A Performance-Based Design Approach for Early Tall Building Form Development (Morocco, 2010) p.39 – 50
· J.S. Gero and F. Sudweeks (eds), Shape pattern recognition using a computable shape pattern representation, (Artificial Intelligence in Design '98, Kluwer, Dordrecht), pp. 169-188
· Ediz, Özgür, “Improvising” Architecture: A Fractal Based Approach, Computation: The New Realm of Architectural Design, (Istanbul (Turkey) 16-19 September 2009), pp. 593-598
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Fractals Geometry
Fractal is a term coin by their originator, Benoit Mandelbrot, in 1975. They are objects whose spatial form is not even nor fluid, hence irregular in nature, but in essence its irregularity as a non-smooth form repeats itself geometrically across in many different scales. The distinctive feature of fractals is that they are ‘self-similar’. It is the geometry of such object which is fractal, and any system which can be visualised or analysed geometrically, can be fractal if it inherit these characteristics.
Fractal geometry is a portrayal as geometry of nature. A geometry of nature evolved from the hypothesis which objects with geometry whose structure is irregular in terms of Euclidean geometry, but within this irregularity lays a pattern which is as order as those in simpler objects composed of straight lines.
A coastline or mountain ranges are examples of natural fractals. These fractals displays a sense of irregularity which characterises these objects, but is not entirely without order. Any part of a fratal, if enlarged or reduced in size, presents more or less the same appearance as a whole, the architectural forms or urbanistic models that are derived from them are characterised by a scalar ambiguity, by what we might call an “self similarity”[1].
Geometry is no longer composed and conceived by straight lines, the geometry of Euclid, but can now admit irregularity without abandoning continuity. Objects composed of a multitude of lines which are nowhere smooth may well manifest order in more accumulative terms than the sorts of simple objects which are dealt with in mathematics. This order can be discovered in fractals in terms of the following three principals.
Firstly, fractals are always self similar, at least in some general sense as this is the bases of its definition. On an enlarged or reduced scale, and within a given range you examine a fractal, it will always appear to be similar to the ‘whole’ with some degree of irregularity. The ‘whole’ will always be manifest in the ‘parts’. A great example is looking at a piece of rock that broke off from a mountain. You will see the mountains in the rock to some degree of familiarity[2].
Secondly, fractals can sometimes be portrayed in terms of a hierarchy of self similar components. Fractals are ordered hierarchically across many scales and the tree is a classic example. In fact, the tree is a literal interpretation of the term hierarchy and as such, it presents the most fundamental of fractals. Looking at the twigs on the branches of a tree and you can see the whole tree in these twigs, even thought at a much reduced scale. The organisation and spacing of cities as central places is such an order while the configuration of districts and neighbourhoods, and spatial distribution of roads and other communications are hierarchically structured[3].
The third principles relates to the irregularity of form. In terms of irregularity, we mean forms which are continuous but nowhere smooth, hence non-differentiable in terms of calculus. Take coastline as an example, “if you measure its length from a map, the map will have been constructed at a scale which omits lower level detail. If you actually measure the length by walking along the beach, you will face a problem of knowing what scale or yardstick to se and deciding whether to measure around every rock and pebble.” In the end, you will obtain a length that is relative and very dependent on the scale of measurement, and as the scales gets finer and finer down to the microscopic level, the length of the coastline will continue to grow. Therefore we are forced to conclude with the idea that the coastline’s length is ‘infinitely’ long or rather that its absolute length has no meaning and the length given is always relative to the scale of measurement[4].
[1] Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994) p.59
[2] Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994) p.60
[3] Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994) p.60
[4] Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994) p.60
Parametric Modelling
“Transformation on Parametric Design Models” is an academic paper written by Carlos Barrios to present a research in progress in the development of parametric models for generation of complex shapes using parametric design, and introduces a methodology for exploration of possible designs generated from a single model. It also provides a case study on the designs of the Spanish architect Antonio Gaudi and examines the fundamental rules of form generation of the lateral nave columns of the Sagrada Familia temple in Barcelona. “A parameterization is presented as a fundamental tool for design exploration, which allows the reproduction of the original shapes designed by Gaudi, and the generation of a large set of new designs.”[1]
Barrios introduces the Parametric Modelling CAD systems as initially intended for the aeronautical industry, but later “making their way into the architectural domain since they provide a powerful framework for conception of design, allowing the description of multiple instances ad possible designs from a single modelling schema.”[2] Barrios further explains the breakthroughs posed by the introduction of parametric modelling system, as it overshadows the traditional CAD systems in terms of expanding the design process beyond current limitations, hence Experimental Modelling.
He states the principal advantage of a parametric model is the level of flexibility it provides to perform transformations that would result in different modifications and configurations from using one single geometrical components, creating an instance of a parametric model. It is important to note that parametric modelling creates an instance for each of the modified geometry component, thus allowing the designer to perform alterations and reconfigurations of the geometry without erasing and redrawing.
Barrios further explains the scope of design instances that a parametric model can generate, will be dependable on a balance between the parameters, the constraints of the geometry and the freedom or choices provided by the parameters. “The parameterization schema will determine which are the attribute subject to parametric transformations, in other words which components of the model will vary ad which components of the mode will be fixed.”[3] The range of the parameters can vary is determined by the step value of the parameters, along with its constraints.
Barrios moves onto discussing the parametric model for the columns of the Sagrada Familia. He observed Gaudi’s design rule are regulated by his architects’ intuition and interpretation of natural forms, as oppose to scientific knowledge of mathematics and geometry. Even though there are four initial shapes, the parametric model does not determine what kinds of shapes are valid. In terms of potential result and modification, the parameterized possibilities are infinite, as long as the shape is closed. He explains parametric combinations by stating “the number of design instances will not only depend on the number of shapes, but the possible combinations among them.”[4]
Barrios reinforces that the generation of a parametric model requires a level of design and planning deeper than just the presentation of an idea, but resulting a very powerful and versatile framework for design exploration. In the context of architecture, “most cases have used applications of parametric models in the context of design development, where most of the design decisions have been made”[5]. He then evaluates the purpose of parametric design and concluded that a well defined parametric model can serve as the means of creating designs in a particular purpose, while discarding other than do not fit the criteria.
Barrios finishes off with speculate how many possible designs a parametric model can generate, since all of the designs are obtained through altering and changing the initial shapes of the parametric model. “Design space (DS) of the parametric model equals to the sum of number of parameterized entities (PE) , and the step value of the parameters (SV), multiplied by the number and types of constraints (CN) which determines the degrees of freedom. “[6] He concluded that the number of designs generated by the parametric model is directly proportional to the number of parametric entities. “If we were to consider that design representations, such as plans, elevations, and 3D models, are geometrical models in an explicit representation, we must conclude that they are subject to parameterization. This proves that there is a great potential for applications in architectural design that has yet to be explored.”[7]
[1] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models: A Case Study on the Sagrada Familia Columns (2006) Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA p.1
[2] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.1
[3] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.2
[4] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.7
[5] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.7
[6] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.8
[7] Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models p.8
10 sources
2 Major Sources
- Carlos Barrios, Transformations on Parametric Design Models: A Case Study on the Sagrada Familia Columns (2006) Department of Architecture, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
- Michael Batty, Paul Longley, Fractal Cities: A Geometry of Form and Function (London, Academis Press Limited, 1994)
8 Sources
- Carl Bovill, Fractal Geometry in Architecture and Design (Birkhäuser Boston, 1995)
- Shaoming Lu, Hidden orders in Chinese gardens: irregular fractal structuve and its generative riles (Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2010, volume 36, pages 1076-1094)
- Stephen Demko, Laurie Hodges Bruce Naylor, Construction of Fractal Objects with Iterated Function Systems (New York, USA, Proceedings of the 12th Annua conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 1985)
- Jonathan Chapuis, Evelyne Lutton, ArtiE-Fract: Interactive Evolution of Fractals (International Journal on Artificial Intelligence Tools, 2006)
- Mai Abdelsalam, Digitizing Architecture: Formalization and Content [4th International Conference Proceedings of the Arab Society for Computer Aided Architectural Design (Manama, 2009) p. 297 - 304
- Tristan Al-Haddad, Parametric Modulations in Masonry, (CAADRIA 2008) p.221 - 228
- Fabrizio Apollonio; Marco Gaiani; Cristina Corsi, A Semantic and Parametric Method for 3D Moels used in 3D Cognitive-Information System (Zurich 2010) p.863 - 872
- Ayman Almusharaf; Elnimeiri Mahjoub, A Performance-Based Design Approach for Early Tall Building Form Development (Morocco, 2010) p.39 - 50
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Design Inspiration
3 technical aspects of complex geometry
Rhizome
divided into two main principles:
- Principles of connection and heterogeneity, by which point of the rhizome can and must be connect with any other point.
- Principles of Multiplicity, which the rhizome can break all contacts wit the central unit and treat multiples as a substantive, ie: multiplicity
Genetic Algorithm
Several equilibria can coexist and different problems can be resolved simultaneously. Break down project can create multiple starting point that in turn generate new series of orders.
Fractural
A more adaptive system of exchange and integration of information that can be used to model dynamic scenarios of development, such as dynamic scenarios of development, such as generative process or the definition of programs, formalised as analogical models of natural phenomena.
Pierluigi Nicolin, Lotus International quarterly Architectural Review (Via Santa Marta 19/a 20123 Milano) edition 127, Diagrams
3 Design Aspects
Gothic Architecture
Gothic Architecture is a style flourished between the Romanesque Architecture and the Renaissance Architecture period, very successful within the Medieval Period. This type of architecture is mainly used churches and castles in that period. It places a very heavy emphasis on height, to create a majestic feeling to all worshippers, demonstrating might of God or its related religion. One of the main stylistic feature that is shown predominating on most Gothic Architecture is the use of arches, you can see the evident showing of arches on every aspect of the architecture.
Modernist Architecture
Modernism is a period formatted during the early 1900s. "This notion of 'modern' architecture was in turn roots in developments of the late eighteenth century, in particular the emphasis on the idea of progress."
Blob Architecture
Blob Architecture was first to sense and to investigate the creative possibilities of solid modelling software, characterised by its strong emphasis given to complex forms.
Sources
William Curtis, Modern Architecture Since 1900, (London: Phaidon Press, 3rd edition, 1996)
Pierluigi Nicolin, Lotus International quarterly Architectural Review (Via Santa Marta 19/a 20123 Milano)
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Submission UPloads
http://www.mediafire.com/?yw6pmqgmdb7mfar
This contain my interactive PDF and grasshopper definition, my whole model is generated from grasshoppper, so no rhino file is needed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)