Promiscuous Collisons [_v2]

Morphed Geometry

As I continued experimenting with Grasshopper, I was concentrating on using my existing surfaces from the motion study and applying a geometry to it. The last attempt used a surface that resulted in a fish-scale looking surface, and this time I used a sphere as my original geometry. These choices were more random than studied, yet the output was still intriguing  and allowed me to study how Grasshopper para metrically controls geometry.

definitions for each surface

Iterations of the morphed geometry surface

As seen in the image above, I captured moments of adjusting the sliders that controlled the U and V values for the division of the surface.

In these two iterations, the left surface has more divisions than the right. 

In these two iterations, the adjustments I made were of the direction of the geometry, either above the surface or below.

What was interesting was that the way in which I created the definition, the surface was divided in even increments regardless of the geometry of the surface, rather than being based on the geometry of the surface. This resulted in the applied geometry to be morphed unevenly to the surface.  It is almost a battle of geometry. There is: 1) the geometry of the motion surface, which is more complex in some spots than in others, 2) the geometry in how the surface is divided in the U and V direction, and 3) the geometry of the applied object and how it reacts to the divided surface.

Promiscuous Collisions [_v1]

Project 2b: Initial Attempts at Grasshopper

This project is my first foray into the world of Grasshopper. After watching some tutuorials, I tried to attempt to create a definition that subdivides a surface and applies it with a morphed geometry. I have used one of the surfaces of my original motion of a cartwheel as a base for this exploration. 

I created a simple lofted geometry in Rhino that I applied to the surface of motion. Using sliders, I was able to control the size of the applied geometry as well as the amounts of divisions within the surface.

exploration of surface manipulation

series of morphed geometry with original surface

While this exercise helped my familiarity with the tool, I quickly realized while working that this does not relate to the concepts of time in space/ space in time that we are examining.  I realized I needed to re-examine the conceptual agenda of my project to get an idea of what I wanted to accomplish with a parametric tool. This cartoon explores my thoughts of what I would like to examine within the study of the motion of a cartwheel. The motion is about both a combination of limbs moving individually to form an overall holistic movement and the irregularity that exists in what seems like a cyclical motion.

My next attempt with Grasshopper is to parametrically control a surface with data points or curves from the surfaces I created that capture the motion of a cartwheel in space and time.

Project 2a- Animation

Surfaces of Motion

From the contours of motion studied, I generated surfaces of individual limbs, then compiled them to create a three dimensional component to the 2D drawing.

Individual surfaces

perspective view of overlapped surfaces

 

Front view wireframe

Virtual Projection

Re-presenting motion of the human body

motion of study: the cartwheel

composition of frames of video

motion of right arm

motion of left arm

motion of right leg

motion of left leg

Beginning to examine contours of motion without context of human body:

Versioning

response to Versioning: Evolutionary Techniques in Architecture

SHoP

SHoP begins their introduction by providing a definition for versioning as "an operative term to describe recent, significant shift in the way architects and designers are using technology to expand... the potential effects of design on our world." I appreciated their introduction as it cut to the chase and provided a robust overview of this idea of 'versioning'. Before this reading, I was not exposed to this ideology that has formed from current technological advancements, or as SHop put it, "an attitude not ideology." 

The idea of testing and adapting sets of conditions is similar to Angelil's view of education as research oriented-- designed by probing questions and challenging norms. SHoP views this approach as a "process product" where the focus is on the fabrication process rather than a final image, also similar to Angelil's critique of architecture's focus on object. "Here the form, the forces that shape it, and the assemblage of materials in which we execute the ideology are part of the same gesture."

SHoP's Dunescape at MoMA PS1

Office dA

Monica Ponce de Leon and Nader Tehrani

Representing their approach to versioning as a reciprocal and codependent relationship between surface and space allows the exploration of the relationship between geometry and tectonic systems. Their goal is to have the skin and interior space(s) of buildings to read as one, rather than two separate systems. For most of architectural history, these two can be seen as separate systems, as discussed, such as load-bearing Renaissance construction in which the facade is read as an applique pasted onto a heavy building mass. 

"Precision becomes the operative technique for manipulating the membrane that materialises or represents the contents of the spaces of buildings." This idea was illustrated through Kahn's Exeter Library and Eladio Dieste's Church of Christ the Worker. Kahn uses the unit of a brick as patterning, but it becomes a system independent of the structural system, whereas Dieste combines surface and space into a singular entity, yet the geometry of the tectonic units is sacrificed. Geometry and patterning are in opposition in both of these works. Office dA attempts to address these simultaneously, such as the example they give of  their Hookah bar at Mantra. Plywood 'bricks' are employed as the unit of structure. This might simplify the relationship between geometry and tectonics, but it complicates its reading. The beauty I see in Dieste's Church is the advanced geometry used to create a skin simplistic in materiality yet rich in character and experience.

Compositional Surfaces

For 1c, I examined the matrix that I have been working on and was interested in the surface that looked like  frayed ribbon, with curling edges.

I selected the last three surfaces from the series of morphologies of the original object to further study the geometries of surfaces. From these three surfaces, I chose the end segment (in red) to isolate. 

I then isolated the pieces from their parent surfaces, rotating them and seeing how they morphed from one to the next.

When I turned on the control points for the surfaces, I was surprised to find the control points for the entire original surface embedded in the segments. 

Below are the surfaces I am 3D printing. I want to see, physically, how the added complexity in control points affects the surface as it morphs.

Physical manifestation of surfaces

Externalization and Experimentation

response to Inchoate: An Experiment in Architectural Education by Marc Angelil

I found Inchoate to be a read that is very relevant to the questions being asked by architectural education today. I was really drawn to the comparison of education and the Apollonian- Dioysian dichotomy, studied by Friedrich Nietzsche. Both teaching and learning can be seen as a split between promoting and questioning an area of study. 

"With the Apollonian propensity for harmonious entities a sort of positivity is exerted, in terms of asserting a body of ideas, of understanding commonly agreed upon ways of thinking... At the other extreme, the Dionysian tendency to shatter established codes acquires a type of negativity probing into aspects that seem to defy logical underpinnings, scrutinizing foundations, transgressing boundaries."

 This brings to mind the lateralization of brain functions, generalized to left brain and right brain, that have been represented visually, as seen below.

Externalization

Angelil identifies the internalization of the field of architecture as an impediment to the progress of the field through the focus on: visual appearances, authorship, and the object. 
The biggest obstacle I see in this triad is the focus on authorship, and more specifically the 'starchitect' concept. These days, architecture needs to move in the direction of cross-disciplinary collaboration. Its importance has been recognized, especially when discussing sustainable building practices. With so many fields of such narrow specialization it is increasingly important for these fields to work together. Another successful example of externalization is IDEO and their aprroach to Human Centered Design that relies on an interdisciplinary group of people working towards empathetic design solutions. Part of externalizing is questioning the role of architecture and architect. What is the role of architecture? The notion of 'architect as artist'? Are buildings to be seen as objects in the landscape? Ways of negotiating space? 

Frank Gehry

vs.

IDEO's Human Centered Design

Experimentation

Questioning the role of architecture is precisely what Angelil sees as the basis of architectural education. Teaching and learning can be seen as a type of inquiry: research that proposes, tests, and reevaluates hypotheses. They "constitute acts of transgression, interrogating from both within and without...emerging unexpectedly into new positions". This goes back to the Apollonian- Dioysian dichotomy in which you must both gain knowledge and then question the foundation that knowledge is built on. By questioning both knowns and unknowns within and beyond the field of architecture, the field can expand beyond traditional boundaries and propose new solutions. 

Time, Culture, and Loops

response to Contemporary Techniques in Architecture by Ali Rahim

If there is one outstanding observation from this piece it is the emphasis on the culture and time. Some key phrases in their relationship with technology were:

Cultural proliferation, production, and transformation

Temporal processes, organizations, and cycles 

Rahim outlines his perception of contemporary techniques: their processes and effects. He argues that  technology is essentially a development of cultural progression. It is a feedback loop of constant evolution that cannot be defined by a single moment, but rather as a "qualitative set of relations that interact with cultural stimuli". To see technology through a lens of reactions to cultural interactions, he sees the computer as an object that can only be understood in its context, as a technological object that exists temporally. It is part of a "continuous temporal organizational process of cultural proliferation."

Creation lies in the possibility of what does not yet exist and these possibilities can be discovered through the use of technology. I really like this idea that Rahim brings up. The power of technology doesn't exist in its speed of completing otherwise lengthy operations, or its crisp appearance, but instead, it is able to do so much of what architects used to do by hand that now we can take full advantage of discovering the possibilities that can be accomplished with this extremely powerful tool. 

While I understand many of the points Rahim repeats throughout this reading, my one critique is that his entire passage is focused on (and entitled) "Contemporary Techniques" yet not once does he stop to give any attempt at defining/ specifying these somewhat ambiguous terms. I received some answers towards the end of the piece, with the example of Variations (a residence in Islamabad) in which he uses inverse kinematics to asses temporally changing programmatic elements and opportunities. This multi-faceted use of water he discusses, and the way it can serve as both a swimming pool and a retention pool is a unique opportunity that is available with contemporary technology.

I am most interested in the discussion of materiality and technology's opportunity for digital fabrication. Properties of materials such as density and porosity can move from stagnation to more dynamic effects. 

"The threshold of the line is moved to a gradient so that opaque, translucent and transparent effects can occur in one surface in continuous variation."

MoMA Installation- Contemporary Architecture Practice

MSK Lobby Wall- LTL Architects

The flexibility and freedom that contemporary technology gives us can enable us to find solutions that are more responsive to the ever-challenging demands of our time.

Constructed Morphology

For the manipulation of a surface of the object I have been modeling, I chose the surface of the handle of my water bottle. I chose this surface because it is the most complex, moving in the x,y, and z directions along the control points.

original surface

For the transformation, or morphology of this surface, I wanted to go about it in a logical, rational way. I transformed control points of the surface beginning with the y direction, moving onto the x direction, and finally the z direction. The matrix can be read as a gradual process of morphology starting in the top left corner and ending in the bottom right.

top view of matrix

process

front view

side view

 By the end of the transformation, I felt as I was loosing control of the surfaces. Manipulating the shape of the surface became challenging as the curves and folds of the surface were more and more complex. I hope to regain control and reduce some of the unnecessary complexities.

After stepping back to capture images of the matrix, I realized I unconsciously transformed the handle of the water bottle into surfaces that fold like fabric, which is a particular surface I love studying through drawing. 

Progress of Model

Continuing work on my model of the water bottle cap, I identified the several surfaces in colors that add up the whole. 

The one addition I was able to make was of the mouthpiece. I used the boolean2objects command to subtract the volume of the mouthpiece from surface.

I am still having trouble with the spots I was last week. If anyone has suggestions, please let me know.

The Perspective Hinge

response to Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge: Prelude- Mapping the Question by Alberto Perez-Gomez and Louise Pelletier

Translation vs. Transcription

What is the hinge between intent and interpretation? This is the question I thought of as reading the beginning of this prelude. The answer I got from Gomez and Pelletier: the drawings that architects produce. We rely on projections as formal deliverables that serve as the set of instructions to pass along to have our ideas become reality. I guess the authors are questioning whether the entirety of archtiects' intentions in fact are translated through standard architectural drawings, or are they merely transcribed? Or if there is perhaps a better way to communicate our thinking (perhaps through digital means)?

hinged section- Travis Rozich

 I didn't really get a sense that the authors wanted to challenge this question as the remainder of the prelude boiled down to a history of representation.

Architectural Meaning and the Tools of the Architect

Where I thought a discussion in contemporary tools, those used for projections versus digital tools would take place, I instead found a history, beginning with Medival and Renaissance construction methods. I thought the architects/builders of the past were not given due credit by the authors. The builders of the Gothic time are referred to as "bands of stone masons" and those from the Renaissance are mentioned as "magician-architects". In an age where representational standards did not exist, these expert master builders and architects relied on their knowledge of construction to create masterpieces.  

Chartres Cathedral

Vision and Light

Looking at a history of vision Gomez and Pelletier begin with the Ancient Greeks, with Euclid and "The Optics". It is interesting how one idea can begin to embed so many meanings throughout time. The study of vision began with the Greeks who saw it as an understanding of mathematics, yet as it was translated (or transcribed) to the Middle Ages, its focus was shifted to theology. The light of God is then translated to built forms that allow people to not only understand the light of God spiritually but experience it physically (or at least heighten their spirituality). Gomez and Pelletier here make mention to Hagia Sophia and Chatres Cathedral to illustrate how it was not the structure that was important to the builders of these magnificent buildings, but the way in which they used light to create spaces of heightened spirituality. Light can be dramatic, it can be playful, it can be serious, and poetic. It is all up to the way that the architecture of a space captures it.

playful light in Sagrada Familia

Points, Curves, and Surfaces

To construct this model, I began with the simplest part: the cylindrical base. I  traced circles of varying diameters and then lofted them together. For the lid, I traced a contour in profile and revolved it 360 degrees. The tricky part was modeling the handle, as seen below.

drawing control point curves from images to construct handle 

To construct the handle, I broke it into surfaces to model individually. I traced the base images with control point curves that moved in the x,y, and z planes to the desired contour and then lofted the curves to form the various surfaces that form to make the handle.

Editing surfaces with control points

This process of editing included a curvature analysis, in which I adjusted the number of polygons that comprise the surface.

curvature analysis

The problem I am having is creating surfaces from open curves (the surface edges).  This image below shows the back of the object, where I need a surface to form the backside of the handle. 

Problem creating surface
Below are some rendered views of the model thus far with some basic materials, experimenting with the level of reflection.