FAB @kdfab-blog - Tumblr Blog

Despite multiple tries, my group was unable to get the foam to look like my renderings. First there was the issue of having set too few points in Grasshopper, causing a disappointingly “smoothed” appearance, followed by discovering that I had accidentally duplicated one of the cut files instead of producing the three necessary Kuka files. Despite setbacks, we got some interesting forms, including multiple different scale profiles of my own face.

Group members: Grace Earl, Henry Peters, Caroline Petersen, Kristina Dittrich

kdfab-blog

Here are some process photos of us working on the KUKA!

Each of us experimented with cross extruded human profile curves, this was my final simulated piece!

CAST:

Unfortunately, the narrowest point of our profile cast could not withhold the weight of the top and cracked in the middle. Perhaps with more time/material we could fill the solid areas with some foam to reduce weight. It was a good try and a fun exercise!

Exercise 7:

Our foam cut deviated slightly from the original rhino file but still came out cool! Seeing the result, we anticipated some trouble casting

Haraway

In Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective, Haraway explores the principles of traditional objectivity, its development, and its affect on point of view, arguing that the definition of ‘objectivity’ needs reevaluation. With support from social constructionists’ claims that accepted objectivity ideology is a poor method of understanding the establishment of scientific knowledge, she explains the difference between the perception of objectivity and the way it truly operates. Through a delineation of social American context throughout the mid-late 20th century, she posits that throughout history, it has privileged the “unmarked”, unobjectified members of the majority, speicifically rich white males, not considering the “marked” individuals: LGBTQ, women, certain ethnic groups, etc. She suggests that the groups working for the subjugation of the objectified populations, specifically Feminists, need a new mode of knowledge – a feminist objectivity in a world “organized by axes of domination” and offers “Situated Knowledge” – knowledge existing in cultural, hisotircal, economic, context, as a solution. There must be a critical understanding of the context in which these “marked” bodies fall in society which would produce a more accepting point of view and a greater connection between these two separate points of view: that of the marked and the unmarked individuals. Situated knowledge is active and engaged objectivity, and contests the assumption that scientific knowledge/work is objective.

In trying to connect this text to the course, we can question what the equivalent of the ‘marked body’ point of view is in architecture/ in this class? What bias has built the architectural foundations, if any, that we should question/challenge? Perhaps we need to question the development of the Digital Fabrication movement and the emphasis on its use. The concepts presented by Haraway can apply to this course in the way we deal with machines that are responsible for production and the changes that have occurred in the design process. Where does feminism come in and should we be viewing Haraway’s use of the word as a broader encompassment of communities seeking greater equality / understanding of truth?

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

Robots Technology Fundamentals - James G. Keramus

Keramus introduces the text with descriptions of the 3 different industrial automation methods. The first is ‘fixed automation’, which uses specialized equipment to produce high volumes of a single product. The overall cost is distributed amongst the large number of units, reducing individual cost. However, the specialized equipment is useless when the job is complete and if the anticipated quota is not met, the unit costs rise. The second is ‘programmable automation’ - used to produce a variety of products at low volumes. The adaptable equipment it employs is designed to perform a sequence of operations specific to each unique product. This is rather economical as the cost is spread over the large collective of small quantities. The final method is ‘flexible automation’, used for medium volumes. Flexible automation systems use interconnected workstations controlled by a central computer to complete various production tasks at the same time. The versatility allowed by this method is result of the central computer’s capacity. Although robots are examples of programmable automation, they are used in the other two method systems as well.

Keramus delineates the history of robots, from a Czech play written by Karel Capek to their realistic introduction in the 60’s, to the projection of their commonplace existence in the workplace by 2000. Robots are now made specific for a wide range of tasks, in a wide range of size, shape, speed, and capacity. An increase in their popularity is predicted in response to their growing affordability, increasing mass production, improved design, and greater intelligence. They will soon “move out of the factory and foundry and enter the domestic and business worlds” to become more closely related to the visions of old sci-fi movies (12).

A fascinating future prospect is that of outsourcing robots to different planets to work in self-reproducing factories – a possible solution to growing energy concerns. Nasa already has plans for a robot factory on the size of a football field on the moon.

Of course, there now comes the discussion of jobs replaced by robots. With resolved statistics of the significant money-saving potential of robots, the average skilled laborer is in a difficult position. Robots can make more, for less money, in less time, with greater efficiency; they have the capacity of not one worker, but four workers. This is obviously a concern, but industries/companies must keep pace with the advancing technological production landscape and once robots join the workforce, companies who don’t also incorporate them will be obliterated by the surging competition. The inevitable failure of entire companies who fall behind will result many more jobs lost than those lost to robots. Robots will increase production quantities while lowering costs and increasing sales - ultimately creating jobs and an improved quality of life for all.

Robots have far from reached the artificial intelligence of judgement, design-making, and sensory capability, but it is only a matter of time before we reach these nerve-racking, but incredibly exciting breakthroughs. It scares me that we are apparently around the corner from these advancements - we may be technologically prepared but I doubt that we are emotionally or mentally prepared as a society.

j-muney-blog1

The group consisted of myself, Kristina Dittrich, Alex Rossetti, and Henry Peters.

This project explores the making of both surface and space through a process of subtraction. The subtracting tool is indexed in the produced object, as the bit diameter is inscribed in the curvature of turn angles.

Milling this project on the CNC was an interesting process because of the way that it removed in layers, allowing us to really get a sense of how the surface is brought into the physical world. It is interesting to see it in reality because shape simplification and surface manipulation that was achieved with the sliders in grasshopper really come into effect on the real thing. Transitioning between the digital and scaleless to the physical object in reality really showed the subtleness and simplicity of the surface we chose, that almost looked more intricate digitally. Looking back, the curves could have had a more radical transition after realizing it as a pretty large scaled object in space.

Nicholas Carr: The Degeneration Effect

The Degeneration Effect is once again deliberating the effect of digital technology on our skills and design/construction capacity. This time, the approach is somewhat different - Nicholas Carr begins by confronting the general opinion that digital technology has taken over mundane tasks and has allowed us more time for the important tasks. He disagrees with this argument and explains that by allowing machines to learn, produce, and provide information/knowledge, we are putting ourselves at a severe disadvantage and losing potential for learned skill/ability. Carr explains the danger of this in various spheres of our modern world permeated by technological assistance. In support of this theory, Smith’s article analyzes past examples and techniques that have produced complex and beautiful forms without the help of digital technology and fabrication. This is a reminder of the capacity of the human mind and hand. What is more important: knowledge, skill, and capability? Or efficiency, speed, correctness? I think these things are difficult to compare - they are two separate worlds, two separate ways of thinking, and both have plenty of advantages and disadvantages. This perhaps is a subjective debate.

These readings were just another example of the ongoing dispute between the analog and the digital – a theme we work deliberately to reconcile throughout this course and throughout the field of architecture. I myself have experienced a microcosmic revolution as between last semester and this semester – I have moved into the digital realm. It has been difficult and sometimes confusing to abandon the tools and ways of working in analog for the computer. I do sometimes feel as though I am losing knowledge and skill – like learning a language and then not speaking it for quite some time you are bound to lose words and phrases. I can apply Carr’s theory in examples like grasshopper and rhino – we simply type commands that have a hidden formulaic action, that apply a process instantaneously that we are of no part. However, many things we are now capable of, and many things we are currently doing – were not possible without the computer and constructive technology to produce it. We may be taking a step back in understanding geometric and algorithmic productive process but we are taking leaps and bounds in design and building capability/capacity.

Reading Response 07 - Kolarevic

In “The (Risky) Craft of Digital Making” Kolarevic discusses the difference between manufacturing vs. craft by hand according to the level of risk each design process possesses. Craftsmanship is naturally more unpredictable because of the required decision making, discovery, and adjustment that occurs throughout production and Kolarevic agrees with Renzo Piano’s argument that digital media can be considered craft because of the opportunity of discovery it allows. The parameters in digital realm are loose enough to allow modification, discovery, and unpredictability of the final result – an idea that does not consider the reduced risk of time and material provided by the digital realm. We now have functions in our virtual building spaces that allow us to reverse mistakes, anticipate mistakes, and prevent mistakes. It may be that we are employing some level of craft in the digital but the way we approach designing, the attitude and care/caution we take has been transformed, thus transitioning the qualifications of craft from the involved risk to skill and experience with the particular digital tool. Virtually, the only risk exists in the reliability of the computer software, the stability of the computer itself and the safety of the files we save and share

Kolarevic and Klinger argue that a designer’s involvement in the fabrication process has grown because of the new knowledge we have access to about the digital and productive process. Yes, we now understand the formulas of production methods, advanced ways to produce an intended result, but there still exists an essential void between the idea and the result that has never existed before. The process is no longer hands on – it is no longer sensory, and designs can now sometimes be unfathomable. How do you design the unfathomable – how you even claim authorship over it and its design decisions? Digital fabrication has transitioned the design process to learning a code-like, circuit design format replete with formula and function instead of visual, sensory, and aesthetic design decisions. There exists plenty of experimentation with reconciling the two types of design processes, ones that have produced successful and effective results that utilize both realms and do not forsake aesthetics/senses but also take advantage of the incredible opportunities that exist in the digital.

Week 5: Unrolling a Developable Surface

For part two of this group assignment we were asked to Zund Cut two developable surfaces created in grasshopper and then construct the form we 3D modeled in Rhino. The first form that our group chose could unfortunately not be constructed due to the materials lack of flexibility - but this was a moment of learning that was just as informative as the second form that we were able to assemble. The experience is relevant to the many discussions we have had about the advantages and disadvantages of 3D modeling and the digital realm. We were unable to forsee the failure of the first form in the digital realm.

The included photos show various angles and the result of a pink light being reflected and refracted by the translucent material.

Reading Response 6 - Iwamoto

Iwamoto’s “Digital Fabrications: Architectural and Material Techniques” focuses on digital fab and production approach that close the gap between digital design and traditional skill/craftsmanship. She presents the use of section not only as a representational tool and basis for design, but a basis for construction and production as well. Iwamoto argues for the section’s effective ability to reduce larger forms to smaller ones and allow an easier, more maneuverable construction process. Architecture has largely moved into the digital and there has been endless debate over the relevance and importance of analog skill, craft, and traditional forms of representation. Iwamoto’s discussion is one example of a reconciliatory solution to this debate between design philosophy/approach by redefining and re-applying a familiar and traditional component of architecture in a new and innovative way. She suggests a fluid movement can exist between digital approach and traditional approach and encourages designers to take advantage of technology’s generative potential.

Mario Carpa: Alphabet & Algorithm

For the duration ol work and investigation in the architectural realm, there has been friction between old and new and efforts to reconcile them. Mario Carpa discusses the role of the allographic and autographic methods in architecture and the way the design process has shifted between the two. The autographic processes presented by the computer age have aroused skepticism and anxiety within certain philosophies of design. Carpa describes digital technology as a bridge between design and production and the way it has caused a transition to non-standard design: “Visual sameness is replaced by similarity”; this opportunity relieves the exclusivity of “one size fits all” and the problems for customers that don’t fit “physically or ideologically” to compensate for necessary customizations. Egalitarian attitudes argue this as a negative, but in truth – there is greater equality with greater variation, more universality, more individuals are happy and satisfied. This notion of a more inclusive design and production process, this diversity and opportunity for variation/option, is reflected in the idea of the digital as a whole – it can be an aid/tool to refine the design process, create iteration, play with geometry… it does not always need to be a production tool or the means to an end of creativity and tactility.Both processes – allographic and autographic are invaluable to the design world. Autographic developments and design precedents have provided the principles for desing, and autographic exploration has led us to where we are today. Carpa argues for digital technology/production as an aid in our social responsibilities as designers. We now have technologies that can work with materials we would be unable to otherwise. Our industrial world diminishes resource supply and constantly seeks alternatives for basic commodities. Digital technology can help alleviate economic/environmental stress on our society and world. It is important to see these advantages and consider not only the opportunities of the digital as a catalyst for important, necessary paradigm shift – but also the range of its possible use. It can be a tool of production, a tool of design, or simply an explorative compliment to either. The history of our extensive design world has facilitated endless investigation and now with new technology and a progressive social/political atmosphere, - almost anything is possible, it is incredibly difficult to be original. With the new resources and tools offered by the digital realm and the application of algorithm, we have reached a threshold where infinite opportunities exist in the realm of algorithmic production and design exploration.. For the length architectural work and investigation, there has been a struggle between old and new and efforts to reconcile them. The autographic processes presented by the computer age have aroused skepticism and anxiety within certain philosophies of design. Carpa describes digital technology as a bridge between design and production and has caused a transition to non-standard series of design. “Visual sameness is replaced by similarity”. This opportunity relieves the exclusivity of “one size fits all”, the customers that don’t fit “physically or ideologically…. must pay more to have what they need made to measure”. Egalitarian attitudes would argue this as a positive, but in a way – through greater variation, there is more equality, more universality, more people are happy/satisfied. This notion of a more inclusive design and production realm, this diversity and opportunity for variation/option, manifests in the idea of the digital as a whole – it can be an aid/tool to refine the design process, create iteration, play with geometry… it does not always have to be a tool of production or the means to an end of creativity and tactility. Both processes – allographic and autographic are invaluable to the design world. Autographic developments and design precedents have inspired innumerable explorations that have led us to where we are today.

Carpa argues for digital technology/production as an aid to our social responsibility as designers. We now have technologies that can work with materials we would be unable to otherwise. Our industrial world diminishes resource supply and constantly seeks alternatives for basic commodities. Digital technology can help alleviate economic/environmental stress on our society and world. It is important to see these advantages and consider not only the opportunities of the digital as a catalyst for important, necessary paradigm shift – but also the range of its possible use. It can be a tool of production, a tool of design, or simply an explorative compliment to either.

The history of our extensive design world has facilitated endless investigation and now with new technology and a progressive social/political atmosphere, - almost anything is possible, it is incredibly difficult to be original. With the new resources and tools offered by the digital and the application of algorithm, we have reached a threshold where infinite opportunities exist in the realm of algorithmic production and design exploration.

Exercise 4 – Unrolling a Developable Surface In this exercise we manipulated curves, number of sides/tabs and shape of tabs corresponding to a form and its unrolled parts. It was interesting to see the changes made in while manipulating the form in 3 dimensions.

Evans “The Projective Cast”

In Evan’s, “The Projective Cast,” he reformulates the relationship between architecture and geometry through notions of aesthetic, mathematics, physics, and imagination - revealing different processes of architecture and perception of space. He explains geometry as an active role in perception and the idea that geometric interpretation varies subjectively, thus how do our different perceptions of space compare? How do we consider the various perceptions when designing? Evans suggests that architectural geometry resides in the mind and projection is useful in its translation to the physical realm. The beauty exists in this translation - when the imagined becomes the real.

How are we treating geometry in design? The response to this must be subjective. There are different possibilities to approach geometry when designing, are we using geometry to produce our design? Are we affecting our designs with geometry so that when viewed, it can be more easily understood through our geometric intention?

The reading prompts us to question technology’s role in this translation. Digital software allows us to hyper-realistically realize what we produce in our mind’s eye, before it manifests in physical object. Where does the beauty/art exist in this new level of translation? Materiality and tactility of course still produce extremely different effect than can exist digital models, but technology has made it possible to make decisions before we can consider the sensorial effect produced by physical existence. Are we losing or gaining and how can we ensure we are not losing?

Exercise 3 Responsive Surface

Still trying to figure out how to make a GIF from these files! This was another exploit in Grasshopper. Here we configured the surface’s subdivision to generate curves that respond to a single point and then configured the system so that it responds to a curve.

The Construction of a Problem: Architecture Modelling after Descartes

This reading discusses the architectural shift to modern geometry and the challenges that exist when navigating these new architectural realms and model spaces. The argument is framed by philosophical references and architectural examples exploring three different modeling spheres: the conceptual, the operational, and the constructional.

Primarily, the transition has moved from emphasis on the final geometrical object to a focus on the “actively engendered generative system” in mathematics used to produce it – a concept seen in Descartes’ work (p. 16). Essentially, the emphasis on the activity of creation rather than the end result. The text explains how this shift has increased creative potential but has also created a lost degree of control – it is now possible to create space that is difficult to navigate even for the creator.

Another way to look at the shift is it being a transition from synthetic to analytic. This area of the text was a little difficult to understand but when it discusses the “generative and parametric systems in which it is the underlying systems that are manipulated rather than the form itself” I drew connections to our explorations in Grasshopper and the way we can adjust the number slider values even by 1 point and dramatically alter the entire system and end result. Is this an example of the way we can now work “one to many”? Is this the transition from “many to one”? This has transformed the process of architectural design; this is applying a code and a circuit-like organization to design and construction/modelling. Moving from the conceptual to the physical world, these “geometrical parameter values” like the number sliders – can have behavioral variables assigned to them, thus we now have the power, to some degree, to determine the effect/experience of a particular space through our power to rapidly iterate using different values/variables.

What’s interesting in this new realm is the opportunity for randomness. We apply restrictive parameters that ultimately produce a paradoxical random-but-controlled result. I agree that “a degree of randomness can enrich architecture”. With computation, design can be tested. In the example of the FabPod, the coefficient and frequencies of acoustics were tested and the results were computed/predetermined. However, randomness was found to maximize the frequency spectrum for scattering and to protect against the unexpected results of uniform pattern.

‘To construct’ has taken on a new meaning in our modern world, as well as the concept of modelling – the model has become a design ‘domain’; it can represent the design as a process/system. Designers must confront the challenges of this, model space moves beyond what can be easily visualized/conceptualized because it now exists as “one particular path amongst many approaches with limited opportunities to backtrack or move laterally within the same model”. It is difficult to move forward when you can only view specific isolated instances within the list of possible outcomes. The text asks the question: “Why assume that visualization is a significant way to apprehend space?”. From the text, it was difficult to grasp exactly what the suggested answer to this was.

The debate in geometry is now whether it is derived synthetically or analytically. This is the argument between Kant and Descartes. Does it come from pure logic or pure intuition? The text argues that perhaps both approaches can be reached by its opponent. Or maybe the issue here is that label as ‘opponent’ maybe ‘compliment’ is more appropriate in emphasizing new perceptions about geometry and its origins/how we produce and use it. Perhaps math can be used to deduce the spatial into a logic, a syntax can be applied rather than it being derived from a syntax.

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

FAB