ARCH 333 @emilydelius-blog - Tumblr Blog

A group consisting of Emily Delius, Mitchell Curtiss, Kyle Rossetti, and myself.

When choosing the line work to foam cut, I really wanted to experiment with the possibilities of achieving smoothness with curvature and transition. Though the curves are not the same, they are of a similar language and mesh quite cohesively. One is made up of more radical curves, while the other is not as sloped.

When wire cutting, we decided to cut into both sides to create a sort of wave wall. Unfortunately, it was not as smooth it was originally intended, however it still captures the essence of a “wave wall”. Increasing the speed might make the foam cutting more smooth, however the foam was too dense to do that, therefore they are a little rocky.

We were able to play with manual controls, as shown in the last photo of the foam, where we manually moved the kuka to interact with our programmed curved. The results were quite beautiful and the intersection of the rotational linear with our curvature provided for thin intersection points and powerful overlap. This exercise went very smoothly and was very enjoyable to experiment with both in the programming and designing stage with being able to anticipate results, and the mesh with manual controls.

Casting was a good experience, as we got to experience both the form as a lightweight foam object and as a solid concrete form. Now we have both, of contrasting materiality.

kristinadittrich

Playing with robots and light paths

We took photos from front and side view using 2 different colors.

The robot light path exercise was generally smooth. The only problem we encountered was arriving to a dead LED battery twice. Our final attempt we just quickly ran out for a replacement - problem solved. The robot itself is fairly easy to navigate once you locate the files and commands on the controller.

Our group chose a Josef Albers geometry study drawing which we then brought into rhino. We tried to pull the lines into separate dimensions to generate a more 3D light path but this wasn’t quite as successful as we hoped. Regardless, the drawing was very clear and accurate and we had some fun with photos/videos. We’ve spoken about perhaps trying again with other path explorations.

What if we produced one image from the front view and a different image from another view - all from the same coded light path? Could be an interesting experiment. Safe to say we are kuka fans - excited to do some more work with it.

#bots #nerds

Donna Haraway on Objectivity

Although much of this reading and its common (not-so-common) noun references I feel went over my head, I still found myself refreshed by the glimpses of clarity of knowledge that I received. In Situated Knowledges, Donna Haraway calls out those in privilege for using science to manipulate and narrate the world around them. She claims that "all boundaries of knowledge are theorized as power moves” and not as ways to hope to obtain an ultimate truth for the sake of the entire world. The objective data of what scientists say they do and what they really do are drastically different. Science is a "real game” in that it tries to persuade with an objective, un-argumentable power. In this game, “artifacts and facts are parts of the powerful art of rhetoric” and this rhetoric is used for manipulation. Ultimately, I believe that Haraway was trying to redefine the credibility of the scientist, because using current practices of science to rationalize things is way too overarching. It is not personal or human enough. In her new definition, “science becomes the myth”- it cannot be the book-closing truth; it is not the stand-alone thing that makes up knowledge. A person who is obtaining knowledge is actively critiquing itself; not passively standing above, calling out the data.

At first, I was unclear on the connections that this reading has to do with what we are studying in class. But this quote by David Hickey helps me better understand the links between Haraway’s writing and the architectural education:

“Art and architecture are practices, not sciences. The constructions of science aspire to universal application. Pictures and buildings need only work where they are.” -Dave Hickey

Codes, algorithms, assembly lines, and all of the other technological means increasing the architecture field to produce structures are of the science genre. However one solution does not fit all. We must not forget to keep critiquing the architecture itself as we move ahead into the future: in order to keep the connection between structure and human, the practice cannot simply rely on successful or unsuccessful data to tell us what has constituted as “good” architecture.

Part 1 of the Cut-Cast exercise involves a lot of multidimensional spatial understanding. Being aware not only of what each right and left curve will do to the wire, but accounting for the other cuts being made as well is a complex task. Checking and re-checking vigilantly helps assure that these drawing decisions work together coherently to make one autonomous form.

Matthew Crawford

Matthew Crawford on “The Jig” and Agency

Crawford’s argument in both pieces is very optimistic. Where many philosophers as of recent like to choose one side in the “human vs. technology” debate, Crawford nods to a content middle that humanity has found itself in. I sense that his proposed trajectory for humankind is to take the place of this middle ground; where we “jig” things in life in order to alleviate the monotonous or repetitive tasks, but we still enjoy and understand the authentic value of handy work. Much of the built up world we have today requires physics that allows little room for error, and this is another level of where technology and robots have the upper-hand on human capability. But this is not to discredit 1) all of the incredible work done by human hands in the past 2) the mind that has been able to create this technology in the first place.

The baker adding eggs metaphor is a good comparison to a designer using technology because adding eggs is mindless. In this education, we are given the Grasshopper code and the Rhino file and are asked to just “add the egg” by customizing a few parameters. But overtime- in the same way that the Betty Crocker baker begins to understand how much the amount of egg and oil changes the recipe- the designer begins to understand the parameters of Grasshopper code and are able to tweak them beyond the given instructions to their liking.

Keramas

Keramas’ Robot Technologies Fundamentals is essentially an introduction textbook to robotics - not too much ground-breaking provocations that we are usually presented with in the undergraduate education. One point that I found particularly interesting, however, was Keramas’ emphasis on the discomfort of humans doing mundane tasks and the existence of robots as human’s saving grace. He praises robots for being able to complete “repetitive tasks at a steady pace, be programmed to achieve and perform different unpleasant tasks” and “operate for long hours without rest or break periods.” One one hand, it’s easy to agree as a human that yes, doing repetitive, mundane tasks can cause discomfort and boredom. However, it is not true to assume that all repetitive and mundane tasks are not in some way preferable for some humans. With an increase in robots causing a decrease in blue-collar workers, the “robots as heroes”mindset does not truly mean saving grace for those who do not have access or the ability obtain a white-collar career. This problem is one that is still unfolding itself in real-time everyday and it is hard to tell where it will ultimately lead to. However, one could make a case that the recent increase in programmed machinery will only heighten the economic class divide that the industrial revolution sought out to omit.

For me, this exercise was an exploration in 2D and 3D configurations on the KUKA. The tight corners and curves of both original geometries dramatically changed the output of the final scrubs. Even after much resizing and tweaking, an exact outline of my desired shapes would not appear. Both the 2D and the 3D geometries were transformed at equal extents once connected to the robot. The largest axes of the robot do not afford these tiny parameters, which is a limitation that we, as users of this robot for our own creations, have to consider when considering designing with this machine, or even thinking about designing under this machine.

Carr & Smith

I will not even lie. Halfway through the Nicholas Carr reading, I could not help but itch to reach for my phone and flip through Snapchat or my texts, even just for five minutes. The irony of this feeling overcoming me while reading this piece I think speaks loud to and strengthens Carr’s argument about technology and its effects on appreciating artistry. His final line in the writing quotes, “When automation distances us from our work, when it gets between us and the world, it erases the artistry from our lives.” In this case, the writing was the artistry, and the presence of my phone was the erasure of the art. This connection may be a stretch to exactly what Carr was talking about, but it still demonstrates the alteration of time and care a person (me) has taken in engaging with a piece of art (the writing) when technology (my phone) is present.

The metal works of the past shown in Smith’s book give no indication of “mental laziness.” No technology was present to help short cut the details or distract the craftsmen in the middle of their meticulous work. I cannot even fathom a setup like this. Unsure exactly of what this means, it makes me appreciate the past’s appreciation and patience with detail.

jordan333blog

The CNC router has one interesting difference from the Zund cutter - while the Zund guides the blade along the x, y, and z axes, the CNC router guides the drill bit only along a rail and up and down, while the table moves back and forth along the remaining axis. I wonder if the scale ad weight of the equipment is the reason for this.

emilydelius-blog

It was no doubt exciting using this machine for the first time. However, we found ourselves not as proud of our work because we felt that we did not have complete ownership of it. Due to the format of the format of the assignment in which much of the Grasshopper file was pre-coded for us, the form, we saw, was not completely ours. Seeing half of our form as our original work is worthwhile, but it may be insightful in the future to followup this assignment with a tutorial on how to completely code the milling file on our own another time.

Kolarevic

This reading is essentially defending digital drawing as having “craft” status, on the same level that non-parametric design is held. This article seems to be written for some of the older generation who hold qualms about recognizing digital fabrication as a creative and complex art. Kolarevic tries to make it clear to doubters that understanding the complexity that occurs with parametric iterations is a knowledgable craft in itself, and should be regarded as such.

I agree completely with this belief. Personally, the infinite possibilities and ways in which to go about these “risks” is incredibly overwhelming. The classic situation of becoming “a jack of all trades, master of none” seems like a trap that we, as designers of 3D material surfaces, could easily fall into. Perhaps finding one’s own niche in the digital fabrication world is the most realistic approach, and the approach that produces the most thought out results. Because, when it comes to digi-fab, understanding the complexities is the art of the craft.

Iwamoto

The generation of complex form making is evident more than ever-with new mediums and modes of developing innovative forms being invented every day. At what point, however, do we stop and look at all of the forms that have been made and make something out of it? Or discover greater purposes for these forms other than installation, art, or research. If the post-and-lintel or cross beam construction of architecture are two of the most structurally sound forms of building, why expand beyond that if digi-fab only creates systems a step below their structurally-sound, classic counterparts?

One thing that keeps resurfacing to my mind in studying digi-fab, which we have not really addressed much in this course, is remembering that the entire world does not have access to this mode of design and construction. These complex forms that we see are unique to wealthy, more developed areas. It always strikes me as an interesting dichotomy, because as we question and go in circles on how to represent things and what the complexity of digital fabrication truly means and etc. etc., there are entire populations around the world that are creating architecture but do not have the access to these mediums in order to participate in these conversations. I guess my point is here is, although it is good to be looking ahead for the future and what is new, I think it is equally important to look back, so that one side of the world’s population does not move too far forward and end up dominating the conversation of digital fabrication while the rest of the world is just subjected to “catching” up to that pre-determined level.

In this exercise we discovered and learned ways of creating and sculpting forms from the use of an algorithm. We had control over the number of side, tab design, curve design, and much more, yet the computer was still doing it for us in a way. This was interesting because although the computer was doing the hard work we still had free control to create in any way possible.

~Carpo+DeLanda~

In his book “Alphabet Algorithm”, Mario Carpo states that with CAD and digital drawing, the architect is virtually “on site with their hands on the design,” almost like an artisan with his chisel and hammer. Being able to occupy architecture in the 3D through digital design, Carpo would argue is the same in many aspects as occupying the physical architecture itself- at least when compared to the 2D drawing and 3D hand-made model parameters of the past. Manuel DeLanda comes in with a slight critique of the current state of this (although he seems to praise the outputs of technology for the most part of the rest of his essay), stating that one downfall of these complex geometric forms being made in the digital is the absence of physics and gravity - the absence of what happens during the physical construction process. He settles down later, however, by having faith in future technologies in which complex forms would be able to be built and tested against physics almost simultaneously. The question is- if this action-reaction relationship is built into the everyday CAD design process, at what extent will it affect an architect’s design decisions? Will the design decisions made be smarter or more simplified? Would this drive architects even further away from the paper and pencil if *all* of the answers are !right there! on the computer screen simultaneously? It is hard to say. One prediction is that it could be on an architect-to-architect basis: much of what we seen today in the present architectural education. Some students thrive 100% off of Sketch Up and Rhino and others bounce back and forth between digital and pencil-and-paper methods. Only time will truly tell, and as we know, this could prove to be a downfall of the elongated timeline of the architectural cannon.

~Robin Evans~

So far in the undergraduate education, we have spent much time questioning and debating if the representation or the physical is the “real” in the realm of architecture. In these debates, I consistently find my mind wandering off and asking - who does this debate effect? The architects? The people occupying the architecture? Philosophers? The construction workers interpreting the designs? Often I find this debate stays within this circle of these named participants. But what about the people and the places that are cultivating the raw materials to make the building? The question: Where is “my stuff” coming from? What would an architectural drawing that considers who was cultivating the iron ore for the framing of a building look like? Is it fair to argue that THESE people and their impact on the earth are, in the end, the MOST effected when a building comes into fruition and their existence should be the main driver behind what is making our design decisions - not the people drawing the designs, interpreting the designs for construction, or philosophizing the designs? From my own personal standpoint, I find myself hesitant to bring this up in large class debate. Maybe this is a topic that becomes more prevalent down the line in the architectural education, and I’m just too early in my schooling for it to be presented to me. However, a part of me feels as though that due to the public service nature of architecture and the sheer gravity of effects that designing buildings has on this world, keeping the importance of humanities should be at the forefront of the architectural education.

~Burry+Descartes~

What is it that makes great architecture “great”? I think that Burry would argue, in its most elementary form, it is the effort and complexity (not to be confused with complicated). Anyone nowadays can go into Rhino and within minutes render a complicated and occupiable form that would have been unimaginable to create pre-computer era. So does that mean the average-Joe is suddenly a more genius “architect” than the Romans building the Parthenon? Obviously, no. So what differentiates a drawing of a commoner to an architectural master? I think this is where the big scare from the older generation is deriving from- and it is with good reason, too. I believe that every form we design should be able to solve a new problem. From many of my studio professors, we share the worry with computer generated drawings as that as the care for the individual lines go away with hand drawing and model making, so does the care for so many other aspects. Although this is not true for all situations, however the slippery slope of being ignorant to one part of a design can easily build into another, all the way from mechanical issues to social and political aspects. Architecture is in the public service sector, and it is a vital practice that we think about *all* things at all times when considering our designs.

Week 1 Exerecise 4, Renderings

My first time laser cutting proved to be a success! By altering the surface plane configurations, fragile ruin walls were able to be created when rested strategically on each other.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

ARCH 333