[american institute of aeronautics and astronautics aiaa space architecture symposium - houston,...

1American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

THE ULTIMATE CONSTRUCTION TOY:APPLYING KIT-OF-PARTS THEORY TO HABITAT AND VEHICLE DESIGN

A. Scott Howe, Ph.D.President, Plug-in Creations Architecture, LLC

ABSTRACT

In space habitat construction, the application ofkit-of-parts concepts and construction robotics isof particular interest, due to flexibility,compactness of transport, and the ability to erectstructures in harsh, unsafe environmentsautonomously. In this paper, Kit-of-parts Theoryand automated construction principles arediscussed in depth, and some attributes andspecifications of a conceptual integrated space-based construction system are delineated.Special attention will be given to the discussionof the optimum scale of components, joint design,parametric pressure vessels, parametrickinematic mechanisms, and in-situ assembly /disassembly. The paper will conclude with somethoughts on the development of sustainable,closed construction systems that rely on in-situmaterials and manufacturing.

INTRODUCTION

Through the application of expandable designgrammars, shape grammars, and open-endedprocedural rules, flexible parametric kit-of-partssystems can be defined that are adaptable to anycontextual setting. A few cleverly designedprimitives can be combined in countless ways toproduce many different types of useful objectsand structures. In effect, after analyzing andidentifying common configurations in geometryand function, the kit-of-parts approach is a way to

formalize the essence of various artifacts in aquantified, repeatable, systematic way. Since awell-designed component can be mass-producedand used over and over again, fabricationprocesses can be worked out in advance forrobotic manufacturing and automated assembly.If we consider these processes as significantsteps in an artifact s life cycle, perhaps we canimpose another formal order on the timeline aswell, breaking up the myriad of minute influencesacting upon it into their composite primitives oftranslation, rotation, and spatial placement. Thisset of primitive events can be a parallel kit-of-parts consisting of time and motion forming theessence of the artifact s existence. Combiningthese two sets and formalizing the way they reactwith one another can provide a powerfullanguage of artifact creation that encompassesnot only geometry and function, but also life cycleprocesses for existence and behavior.

The author has explored concepts for roboticconstruction using kit-of-parts systems, and hasexperimented with concepts that use buildingparts as extensions of robotic mechanisms, andautomated construction hardware incorporatedinto building elements. Since vehicles,construction equipment, and robotic hardwareare also structures with an added kinematicdimension, an interesting challenge presentsitself: Can we derive useful universal genericdesign grammars and kit-of-parts systems thatinclude all building parts, structural components,and kinematic mechanisms for a completeintegrated space-based construction system?This paper will address some of these issues. Itshould also be noted here that several previouspapers by the author have been summarizedwithin this text for the readers convenience.

AIAA Space Architecture Symposium10-11 October 2002, Houston, Texas

AIAA 2002-6116

Copyright © 2002 by the author(s). Published by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Inc., with permission.


KIT-OF-PARTS THEORY

"Kit-of-parts Theory" refers to the study andapplication of object-oriented building techniques,where building components are pre-designed /pre-engineered / pre-fabricated for inclusion injoint-based (linear element), panel-based (planarelement), module-based (solid element), anddeployable (time element) construction systems.Kit-of-parts construction is a special subset ofpre-fabrication that not only attempts to achieveflexibility in assembly and efficiency inmanufacture, but also by definition requires acapacity for demountability, disassembly, andreuse.

Figure 1: Kit-of-parts system

The discussion of Kit-of-parts Theory will beginwith applications in terrestrial architecture.Principles learned in traditional applications willlater be applied to aerospace architecture.

Kit-of-parts Concept

Kit-of-parts architecture involves organizing themillions of individual parts and raw material in abuilding into assemblies of standard easy-to-manufacture components, sized for convenienthandling or according to shipping constraints.The construction of the building is carried out onthe assembly level as opposed to the rawmaterial level. The architect defines a partslibrary describing every major assembly in thebuilding. The assemblies are conceived in asystematic way, based on certain rules such asincrement, size, or by shape grammar. Standardconnections between the assemblies arecarefully defined, so the number of possibleshapes and appearance the parts can take islimitless (Figure 1).

Traditional versus Kit-of-parts: Intraditional construction methods, buildings areerected in what can be called "final line"construction, where raw materials, tools, laborand such are all gathered to the site andprocessed on the spot. The measuring, cutting,and processing of raw materials constitute themajority of labor in construction. Assemblingthese cut and processed parts into majorassemblies such as walls or floors consumeseven more time and labor on the building site.The use of prefabrication and kit-of-partsconstruction turns the entire building process into"assembly line" style, where many differentmanufacturing events can occur in parallel insafe, controlled environments, and the actualassembly on site of the resulting components isfast, clean, and safe, and lends itself towardautomation. The advantages of using kit-of-partsconcepts for the design of structures in harshenvironments, such as planetary or orbital space,are obvious since onsite human labor is difficult,time consuming, and awkward.

Appropriate for the Information Age: Kit-of-parts philosophy goes hand in hand withadvanced manufacturing, automation, andcomputer and information technologies. Handlingmultiple identical components as instances of amaster element is an efficient use of thecomputer in the planning stage, and use of


standard components can take advantage ofmass-production technologies.

In addition, spaces can also be thought of ascomponents as well, where digital blocks ofspatial volume have their own attributes andenclosing structure, allowing the use of object-oriented approaches for their management.

Kit-of-parts Background

Kit-of-parts construction is a special form ofprefabrication. The major difference between thetwo is that kit-of-parts components can beassembled and dismantled and used over andover again according to need. The majority ofprefabrication produces a set of components thatgenerally are permanently connected at the timeof construction and can become damaged andunusable when dismantled.

Prefabrication techniques arose from three basicneeds that traditional construction methods couldnot meet: the need to create shelter quickly withlittle effort, the need for unusually large numbersof buildings at a low cost, and the need forperiodic renewal. Since prefabrication lends itselftoward the "assembly line" model more than the"final line" process, large amounts of identical orsimilar components can be mass-producedquickly and cheaply. The "assembly line"technique allows the processing of raw materialsto be performed in advance, reducing the amountof time and labor needed to erect the structureson site. This is especially important in harshenvironments where workers must wear bulkyprotective suits that inhibit movement anddexterity.

Early Prefabrication: The need for quickor movable shelter and standardized buildingelements led to the long history of prefabricatedbuildings. This goes as far back as the inventionof bricks. The history of prefabrication includesthe Japanese tatami / ken system, panelizedhouses brought to the Americas in 1624 byEnglish fishermen, and cast iron units used byJoseph Paxton to construct the Crystal Palace in1851. By the early 1900’s prefabrication movedto more complex systems, producing plumbingand service stacks that were completely

standardized (Diamant, 1965). Entire dwellingunit-sized modules were also developed, rangingfrom LeTourneau s welded, all-steel houses in1937, Le Corbusier s experiments withmanufactured modules, Frank Lloyd Wright swork with contemporary mobile homes (Swaback,1970), and Buckminster Fuller’s DymaxionHouse (Marks, 1960). In the world ofprefabrication, Buckminster Fuller was clearlyahead of his time and his research has provideda great deal of basic concepts and knowledgethat influenced Archigram, the Metabolists, andthe Hi-tech movement.

Metabolism and Structuralism: Theevolution of prefabrication techniques into thedesign of ready-made blocks, modules, andvolumetrics brought kit-of-parts concepts to anew level, and introduced demountability. One ofthe most important design philosophies toemploy the use of module-based kit-of-partsbuilding concepts was the Metabolism movement,which began defining architectural volumes andbuilding systems conceptually based on naturalsystems that occur in nature, such as the cell,skeletal structure, and circulation systems.Traditional Japanese design concepts such as"ma", which means the void or space in between,combined with new ideas about prefabricationand industrialization produced exciting newdesign investigations.

The Metabolists not only explored module-basedbuilding systems, but considered the spatialvolumes themselves as cellular modules thatcould be added for expansion in any direction asneeded. The Takara Beautillion (Kurokawa,1977) erected for the Expo ’70 in Osaka, Japanas a prime exemplar of using a kit-of-partsskeletal structure to define space (this project willbe analyzed later in this paper).

Another post-war movement was the DutchStructuralism movement. As explained by VanHeuvel (1992), Structuralism also dealt withmodular volume generation and higher levelorganization principles, and resulted in excitingspatial transitions between interiors andimmediate surroundings. Exemplars ofStructuralism range from Hertzberger’s Headoffices Central Beheer of 1972 and PEN offices


of 1982 by Abe Bonnema. The Structuralismconcepts influenced the design of MosheSafdie s Habitat (Murray, 1996), which will beanalyzed later in this paper.

Both Metabolism and Structuralism advocatedopen-ended organization that can facilitate futureexpansion (or contraction), rather that one-offstatic designs. In orbital and planetary designswhere future needs cannot fully be understood,initial flexibility built into the system is a must.

Hi-Tech Movement: The Hi-techmovement is a special group of architects that,through extensive design investigations andresearch, have brought the aesthetic of thebuilding to the point of celebrating the kit-of-parts/ manufactured concept in its very appearance.Inspired by Buckminster Fuller, Archigram, theMetabolists and others, Hi-tech was born as aBritish movement. A Hi-tech building ischaracterized by exposed structural andmechanical systems, with plug-in utility modulessurrounding a simple orthogonal plan (Davies,1988).

Exemplar Hi-tech buildings include works byRichard Rogers, Renzo Piano, Norman Foster,Nicholas Grimshaw, and Michael Hopkins.Materials and manufacturing methods researchwas common among the Hi-tech group, andoften the architects went straight tomanufacturers in order to achieve custom resultson their exacting kit-of-parts standards. NormanFoster s Renault parts distribution center will beanalyzed later in this paper.

The Hi-tech movement also includes earlyconnections with aerospace architecture, whereJan Kaplicky used space technology in thedesign of pre-manufactured building modules(Pawley, 1993), and lightweight structures (Nixon& Kaplicky, 1986). The link between the Hi-techmovement and aerospace architecture does notstop at inspiration for terrestrial structures. SomeHi-tech architects have participated in aerospacearchitecture research and design projects andare known as aerospace architects (Nixon &Kaplicky, 1990). An exemplar of Hi-tech meetingaerospace architecture research is the spacearchitecture program at Technical University of

Munich headed by Richard Horden and AndreasVogler.

Contemporary Prefabrication: Today,prefabrication is a given. It can safely be saidthat there is probably no construction project thatdoes not use some form of prefabrication,whether it is the use of pre-cast or pre-curedmasonry units, precut lumber, or other pre-sizedbuilding materials. Since the use of parametricbuilding materials has become so common place,they are no longer considered to be within therealm of prefabrication. Today "prefabrication"means pre-cut or pre-assembled componentsdesigned to fit together in a certain way such thatno other processing of the raw materials isnecessary. In more advanced systems, entiremodules and major assemblies are producedusing mass production techniques, such asSekisui, Misawa, or Toyota Homes. In Japan,almost the entire housing industry has come touse these advanced prefabrication andsystematic assembly techniques. Thoseconstruction companies that do not have thecapability for advanced prefabrication techniquesare being pushed out of the market because theycannot meet competitive prices, time schedules,and quality.

The Structuralism movement has a modern daygrandchild called the Open Building or Support /Infill (SI) construction concept. The SI conceptstarted as early as the 1960’s when JohnHabraken talked about using permanentsuperstructures with less permanent infill in masshousing schemes. Contemporary examples ofthis are the Tokyo Gas Next 2000 project inOsaka.

The Hi-tech architecture concept is alsoexpanding and indeed has become a worldwidemovement, pushing architecture into theinformation age.

Kit-of-parts Categories

Kit-of-parts and prefabricated systems fall intofour main category types: joint-based, panel-based, module-based, and deployable, whichincludes pneumatic inflatable structures.


Joint-based (Linear Element): Exampleswhich fall into the joint-based category have cleardistinctions between the members and joints,and often celebrate the joint with some specialdesign or connection technique that eitherenhances the ease of assembly or speedserection time. These systems are characterizedby functional linear structural elements (oftenoptimized for size and sectional characteristics)that may fasten to a nodal joint element,reminiscent of point and line. Joint-basedsystems are appropriate for secondary supportstructures in space.

Panel-based (Planar Element): Panel-based systems essentially incorporate structureand wall / floor cladding and decks into one-pieceassemblies. An assembly consisting of rawmaterials becomes a discrete component thatworks as a single structure or cladding member.Upper-end panel-based systems often havespecially designed fasteners along their edgesthat connect to each other and ease theconstruction process. In panel-based systems,the design of the seam occurring between twopanels is critical to insure a successfulweatherproof enclosure. Since the panels act asboth structure and cladding elements at thesame time, gaskets or built-in devices forweatherproofing must be used. This is especiallycritical in space applications, since problems ofweatherproofing in enclosure are intensified withvast pressure and temperature differences. Adetailed discussion of joint design in spacestructures will be made later in the paper.

Module-based (Solid Element): Modulesare entire volumetrics or blocks that areassembled in advance and set into place at thesite. Because of the size and scope of eachcomponent, the number of necessary modulesrequired in a construction is usually much lessthan panel or joint-based systems. Module-basedconstruction can represent an entire self-contained building with a single unit. These solidelement structures are most appropriate forspace structures because of the ability to delivera working, tested module ready for use.

Deployable (Time Element): Deployablestructures consist of folding trusses, swing-open

modules, and inflatable structures. Variousingenious truss designs, including domes, spacetrusses and folding vaults for the purposes ofmaintaining a compact and / or lightweight profilehave been developed for instant site deployment.The division of service space and user space atvarious scales, from workstation to entirebuildings, map into various densities of hardstructure / installation versus void. Core elementsare denser, where corridors and spaces are lessdense. The superior advantage of deployable-based systems is that the less dense areas aredesigned to collapse at appropriate points in theirlifetime in order to greatly reduce volume ordouble and triple functions occurring in the samespace.

Included in deployable structures is thedevelopment of inflatable modules and structuralsystems which also are designed to belightweight, compact, and portable duringshipping and storage, but expand to appropriate-sized volumes when inflated (Herzog, 1976). Inspace architecture, inflatable structures havebeen proposed for planetary and orbitalapplications (such as the Transhab module) as ameans for creating larger spaces than arepossible with other schemes, due to shipping anddelivery constraints (Kennedy, 1999).

The use of folding truss and dome structures ismore appropriate as secondary supportstructures rather than primary habitat enclosure.Since they are so perfect and balanced, and theremoval of even a single member destroys theintegrity of the entire frame, it is difficult toprovide openings for entrances and other holes.

Another form of deployable structures may alsobe classed as furniture. Ambasz (1972)introduces a group of Italian designers that haveproduced swing-open modules and capsules thatrange from self-contained structures to packagekitchen units. Alberto Seassaro created a "centralblock" in 1968 that is a simple cuboid whenfolded up, and when deployed functions as thecore of a residence. Bed, table, wardrobe, toilet,and shelves all expand from the cuboid. JoeColombo designed a similar structure thatincluded kitchen appliances and entertainmentelectronics such as television. Another of


Colombo’s designs was the Mobile House, whichwas a compact package that could betransported on the back of a truck and droppedoff on the site, to expand to two or three timesthe stored size. In another project Colombodevised a series of block capsules with differentfunctions that could be stacked or rearrangedbeside or on top of each other to form a customdwelling. The capsules were targeted for use asemergency housing or by workers on large-scaleconstruction sites.

Hybrid Systems: Often elements fromseveral categories are used together in the samestructure. Kit-of-parts systems can be designedwith various types of elements, such ascombining linear element for structure and planarelement for cladding. This will be discussed moreunder the Higher Organization section in thispaper.

Digital Representation

Principles of digital representation andmanipulation are becoming more and moresignificant as computer application moves from amedia and technique to becoming completelyintegrated in the design / manufacture / life-cyclemanagement process itself.

Virtual Space: Though two-dimensionaltraditional media and digital computer designprocesses have many similarities, the fact thatthree and four-dimensional processes can occurin an environment selectively devoid of real-worldconstraints gives the designer a powerful tool.Because of this powerful new direction, therehave arisen two interesting tracks: designing forreality in a cyberspace environment, anddesigning for cyberspace in a cyberspaceenvironment. The former process has become afantastic extension of traditional techniques, butthe later has evolved into interesting realms thatsometimes parallel the design of structures in(real) space. Navigating in virtual models is acase in point. Often the models are isolated in aninfinite expanse, without reference to up or down.Some browsers and modeling software havebuilt-in orientation, but this is not always the case.Cyberspace designers have advocated thatdatum objects be established that generate

volume and can equate to a floor and ceiling fororientation purposes, but the rest of the structurecan be free to take on any shape or volumedesired (Pesce, 1995). In a kit-of-parts system,flexible designs for beams that can be rotated 90degrees to form columns, and wall panels thatcan function as floors increase theirmanufacturability, as long as the datum elementsare clearly in place.

Generic Object: There are manyadvantages to creating an advanced data-richmodel, especially when the object-oriented plug-and-play models represent real object-orientedkit-of-parts elements. A data-rich modelproduced by architects in the design stage canrespond to analysis the same way the actualbuilding would. Performance data can becompared with optimum mathematical models toproduce designs that need less artificial heatingand cooling, are naturally lighted, and saveenergy. A significant amount of research hasgone into the development of object-orientedprogramming models expressly for the purposeof representing kit-of-parts building systems(Howe, 1997).

Virtual Management: For advanced virtualmanagement, linking the digital element with thephysical element is the key. This can be done byinstalling smart sensors and actuators into eachkit-of-parts component, so that as the physicalelements are connected, a virtual representationof them are connected as well. Using DirectDigital Control (DDC) technology with standardssuch as LonWorks, a fieldbus network can beestablished with unlimited configurability. Theterm fieldbus refers to a series of nodesconnected along a single line. One signal goesout to all the devices, but only the summoneddevice answers. Just as computers are givenunique addresses, standards have beendeveloped which give each smart device aunique address in the system (Howe, 1998).Nodes are linked with controllers, sensors, andactuators so that all nodes broadcast or publishtheir information to all other nodes, andmessages are received only if they areprogrammed to do so.


If the modes of communication are robust andthe system is designed with some autonomy, thevirtual model can be accessed remotely, nomatter where the physical counterpart is located.This is especially useful for managing kit-of-partssystems in remote, harsh environments.

Higher Organization

Just as raw materials need to be organized andassembled into components, based on therequirements of the local conditions, kit-of-partselements must have rules and recipes foradvanced placement. These rules can includemethods for overall organization that dictatestructure, circulation, spatial hierarchy, pathsequence, and aesthetic principles. The rulescan also include methods that govern the waythe system interacts with the environment. Abrilliant set of components is not enough todefine a well designed kit-of-parts if there is noidea how the pieces can come together for ahigher purpose.

Organization Principles: In higher levelorganizational concepts, the kit-of-parts elementsare already defined with rules of interface witheach other, so that they can define any numberof volumes and spaces in a flexible way.Therefore the rules govern not the components,but the volumes and spaces. Primitives in thesystem have their own set of simple rules. Whenthe primitives are nested into more complexorganizations, the new entities formed have anew set of rules. These new entities can then becombined with each other to form even largerentities governed by their own rules, and so on.

Basic ordering principles for spaces includelinear, centralized, radial, cluster, nodal, and gridmodified by axis, symmetry, hierarchy, rhythm,datum, and transformation (Ching, 1996). Thebasic ordering principles can apply at any scale,including individual part design or bolt layout, allthe way to planning for entire cities. In kit-of-partssystem definition, it is understood that the sameelements may be used for a variety of situations.Therefore it is useful to begin with a set ofgeneric uses or ordering schemes that can beeasily modified or specialized through use. Thekey to achieving flexibility in the kit-of-parts

system is to choose an appropriate orderingprinciple at each level, and be consistent atapplying the principle. Also, compositional rulesthat are associated with each ordering principleshould be obeyed consistently.

For example, Table 1 might be a road map fordesigning a kit-of-parts system, where entitiesfrom each level are nested together to form anentity on a higher level in scalar jumps of cellularorganization. In Table 1, ordering principles werechosen randomly to illustrate the example. Thisparticular example uses workstations as agenerator of spaces, similar to the Japanesetatami system (the tatami is 90cm x 180cm, sizedfor the amount of space required for one personto sit and perform an activity). At each level, thesystematic principle governing the generation ofform or structure should be rigorously adhered toso that flexibility at that level is maintained.Switching ordering principles at level changesproduces dynamic variation. However, evenbetween levels it is difficult to find compatiblematches between ordering systems, so many kit-of-parts systems we see use the same orderingprinciple consistently at all levels. A clever kit-of-parts design will switch ordering methodsbetween levels, but will use the underlyingprinciples used in the organization of theprimitives to hint at what the next level will be.

Level Description Ordering principleL 1 Joint detail Grid rhythmL 2 Part primitive Grid datum

Radial transformationL 3 Workstation Grid hierarchyL 4 Workstation cluster Cluster hierarchyL 5 Room or space Radial symmetryL 6 Habitat enclosure

Habitat (mobile)Radial axisLinear symmetry

L 7 Block / street Linear axisL 8 Colony / city Grid axisL n Etc

Table 1: A sample roadmap for kit-of-partssystem design

In a healthy kit-of-parts system, there will oftenbe branches in the level hierarchy. This caninclude either multiple generic entities that


consist of the same nested primitives (such asLevel 6 in Table 1 that describes both habitat androver entities), or a branching of orderingprinciples in the same entity (Level 2 of theexample). An example of the latter can occurwhen kinematic elements are introduced into thesystem (kinematics will be discussed later in thispaper). A rotational element such as a wheelmay be insignificant in this respect, but a boomfor a crane or a major structure that deploys oropens up from a stored state may have multipleelements whose orientation to each other changeover time. In this case the ordering on onereference frame will invariably clash with theordering on other attached reference frames(Figure 2).

Figure 2: Clashing reference frames

Figure 3: Bridging between orders

This problem must be solved in a systematic wayif the kit-of-parts system is to be robust andflexible. The preferred way to solve the problemis to understand rules for composition associatedto the various ordering principles, and to usethose rules to bridge across the two referenceframes in every conceivable condition (Figure 3).Level 2 of the example in Table 1 solves theproblem of two clashing grids by inserting aradial transformation order at the hinge point sothe two grids need never interact with oneanother.

Environmental Sensitivity: Many kit-of-parts systems have shortcomings because theyare too perfect and can t handle imperfectionseither within the system or in the environmentaround them. This is critical, because thedesigner of the system has no power to order theentire universe beyond the boundaries of thesystem, but only the way the system will fit intothe universe. The ancient Japanese wereperfectionists in the way they applied the tatami /ken system to their architecture projects. Theirentire aesthetic value system was based onformal order at the core. However, there was abalance at the edges where the formal systemdisintegrated and met with unordered chaos.This can most easily be seen in the calligraphy,where the formal block characters are of the’kaisho’ order, and ’gyosho’ order provided forless formality but still fit into the grid. Finally, the’sosho’ order is completely free and not bound bythe grid.

shin gyo so

Figure 4: Shin-gyo-so ordering

Formal orders in each reference

frame

Awkward, non-repeatable geometry

can be formed where two orders

collide

Capacity for systematic, consistent

placement of primitives within

system is reduced

Variable relationships between

reference frames

Orders compatible with each other

form bridges between colliding

orders

Keep incompatible frames

separated by mitigating elements

Systematic, consistent placement of

primitives can occur in each

reference frame independent ofeach other


In architecture, these three orders translate to’shin’, ’gyo’, and ’so’ (Figure 4). ’Shin’ is theformal grid, ’gyo’ elements fit somewhat into thegrid but may include curves and othergeometries, and ’so’ elements have norelationship whatsoever with the formal geometry.This is one of the secrets behind the wayboundaries between formal structure andinformal gardens are blurred and borrow fromeach other. In kit-of-parts systems where formalorder is a basic tenement, there must be somerules and mechanisms that allow the system tofall apart at the edges gracefully. This is

especially critical in planetary habitat designs. Inharsh environments it is most likely not practicalto prepare the chaos of the existing site to meetthe formal kit-of-parts system even part way.Instead, the system must go all the way and dealwith the chaos.

Design Grammars: Buildings and otherartificially created structures have three-dimensional mass and volume, and consist ofsophisticated combinations of different shapes. Ifit were possible to extract the shapes in such away as to define a finite number of basicprimitives, a shape "alphabet" of sorts could bederived which could potentially be used todescribe the structure. If rules governing thevarious combinations of the shape primitivescould be established, an underlying shapelanguage which describes not only the originalbuilding, but other similar (and possibly non-similar) structures could be derived. In this way,each building and construction system has itsown language and grammar, whether formal orimplied in the design process.

Human habitable structures consist of multiplesystems organized in hypothetical tree structures,where the leaves do all the detail work andtransfer their loads to larger and larger branchesto the trunk until it is resolved at the ground.These systems include structure, circulation,spatial hierarchy, life support, and other systems.Grammars can be useful to define rules for howthe trees branch off and do their job, and alsohow the separate functions are integrated.

In numerous design exercises conducted by theauthor, both in practice and with students in

design studio, grammars have proved to beextremely powerful in guiding kit-of-parts systemdesign. Reflecting back on Table 1 as anexample, it was found that consistent applicationof design grammars can reduce the necessaryvariety of parts needed as primitives in each level.Some of the simplest and most beautiful designsuse multiple instances of a single primitive, plusone new element to help construct the nextlargest branch in the tree. If you set the scale ofthe tree to be an entire city, then a well-craftedgrammar slowly builds on itself from detail jointdesign, level by level in flawless harmony addingone single branch element each time until all thehierarchies are established at a large scale.

Design grammars not only provide a way todesign joint-based, panel-based, module-based,and deployable kit-of-parts building systems thatstand up to higher level ordering principles, butthey can also be used to guide the design of themachines and equipment used to assemble theparts during the construction process. This isespecially true if the machines and equipmentare also constructed out of the same kit-of-partssystem. The next section will discuss automatedand robotic construction, and how it canharmoniously fit in with Kit-of-parts Theory.

AUTOMATED CONSTRUCTION

Automated construction technologies have arisenout of the need to introduce greater efficiencyinto construction processes, incorporateinformation-based technologies, eliminatedangerous site conditions and address laborshortages. Though the industry has called forincremental development, the goal of theresearcher has been to produce a fullyautonomous design / construction system whichcan be controlled or monitored remotelythroughout the entire life cycle of the building.

To realize the dream of full autonomy, recentconstruction automation research not onlyattempts to establish feasibility and develop morerobust marketable systems, but also strives toorganize the digital representation of process,product, and machine. The eventual scenariodictates that the digital building model will knowhow to output its own real-world counterpart


through information infrastructures andautomated manufacturing systems much thesame way a word processing documentbecomes hard copy in a printer.

Due to the difficulty of using human labor inharsh environments, application of automatedconstruction technology to extraterrestrialbuilding sites is significant. It is important forspace architects to understand these basicprinciples in order to design self-containedautomated construction infrastructures that canbe packaged for lightweight transport andemployed at remote sites.

Automated Construction Research

Construction automation research has fallen intotwo camps. On the one hand real-world problemssuch as dangerous site conditions and the needfor greater efficiency in construction processeshas encouraged the development of task-specificrobotic equipment that can be employed in atraditional working environment. On the otherhand the desire to bring a traditionally low-techconstruction industry into the information age hasdriven the research and development of fullyintegrated automated construction systems. Theformer has dealt with individual tasks in apractical manner, often resulting in a marketablepiece of equipment or technique, whereas thelatter is more all encompassing and experimental.

Traditional Methods: While there are agreat many problems that need to be overcomein order to develop usable automated tools,studying possible applications to traditionalmethods is necessary because they are the mostfamiliar to us. Several groups have researchedthe potential of robotization of individual tasksrequired in construction, assuming that thefeasibility of automating the entire constructionsite would be dependent on need and wouldoccur gradually (Bernhold, Abraham, & Reinhart,1990).

Progressive Methods: Instead of adaptingautomation technology to traditional methods,some research is being conducted thatadvocates advanced construction methods trulyfitting for the information age. These construction

methods include kit-of-parts and prefabricatedbuilding techniques. These methods often useassembly techniques, which are optimal for usein automation or attempt to apply manufacturingtechnology for mass-production of buildingcomponents. There are superb examples ofprecedence in the use of kit-of-parts buildingsystem development (Kurita, Tezuka, & Takada,1993) and implementation including the work ofarchitects such as Fuller, Kurokawa, Foster,Piano, and Rogers who have hinted at the use ofautomation in manufacturing of components(Davies, 1988).

Material Handling: In considering newconstruction processes utilizing automatedconstruction, development of single-task, single-function robots in isolated environments or workcells is insufficient. Automated Guided Vehicles(AGVs), Automated Storage / Retrieval Systems(AS / RSs), robotics, and automatic identificationsystems are proposed which together constitutea material handling work cell (Skibniewski &Wooldridge, 1992). This work cell must physicallyoverlap all the work cells of the various robotsand construction machines to the point thatappropriate materials are delivered to each onschedule. Another outstanding exemplar inmaterial handling consists of a cellularautomated warehouse that considers the roboticmaterial handling work cell as a module that fillsup space (Sakao, Kondoh, Umeda, & Tomiyama,1996). Using the system, any material can bedelivered or placed in any location in space, andthe system can be reconfigured, expanded, orcontracted in a minimal amount of time.

Site Work: Where other industries areable to establish fully automated assembly linesin controlled conditions, the simple fact thatbuildings are uniquely fitted to the site hascontinued to be a difficult problem to overcome.However, the pressing need to developautomated equipment to eliminate dangerousconditions in mining operations and earthworkshas pushed the envelope in automated sitework.

One of the main problems has been theunpredictable character and consistency of soils.Automated sitework therefore requires a greaterdependency on sensor technology to provide


feedback in real-time than other processes inmore controlled conditions (Daoud, 1999).

Power and Communication: One of themost difficult aspects of a robotic supportinfrastructure is the need to maintain power andcommunication between the various membersand components of the system. The size andamount of cabling in automated factories can besignificant. In fixed factory work cells, flexiblecable races are prepared that changeconfiguration depending on the location of themoving parts of the robot. These assure thatthere is always enough slack in the line for thefurthest extent of the manipulator, yet prevent thelines from tangling caused by continuousmovement of the robot. In an overall system,cables can be reduced by using a fieldbussystem with unique addresses for each controlnode, such as that employed by the LonWorksstandard discussed earlier. The LonWorkscontrol nodes can be connected to each other viapower line, dedicated line, infrared, and wireless.In large construction environments, it makes themost sense to use as much wirelesscommunication as possible over the greaterdistances involved, while maintaining a certainamount of autonomy locally to handle repetitiveimmediate tasks such as mobility and navigation.It also makes sense to develop a line-of-sightmicrowave power delivery system for remoterobots in the system, or insure that they haveself-contained power supplies.

Reconfigurability: One frustration that iscommon with robotic systems is the inability tohandle some problems that were unforeseenduring its design and development. This not onlyincludes problems with programming, but alsoinadequate geometries or configurations of therobot itself. To counteract this problem, it isimportant that some flexibility be built in to thesystem for reconfiguration. Exemplary researchconducted at Xerox Palo Alto Research Center(PARC) has resulted in a modular robot that candismember or reconnect itself depending on theconfiguration needed for the task at hand (Yim,Zhang, & Duff, 2002). Independent moduleshave common interfaces for structural, power,and communication connection that are plug-and-play by nature. Controllers cause many

small actuators and sensors to work together inunison.

Implementation and Development:Automated construction systems that have beenfully implemented fall into three major categories:

• Collections of function-specific robots thatwork independently of each other

• Robotic systems which form a systematic"factory" that is stationary or fixed in thecontext of the site

• Robotic systems which form a systematic"factory" that moves itself along as itcompletes portions of the building

The first category covers robots that have beendeveloped for inclusion into manned constructionsites. Repetition, labor, or safety needs havejustified the use of robots. These machines havemostly been developed for adapting automationtechniques to traditional building methods.

Figure 5: AMURAD robotic constructionsystem

In the second category, a stationary factory isestablished on the building site with fixedmaterial handling routes that deliver pre-manufactured building components to the roboticsystem (Figure 5). The factory automaticallyassembles one entire floor at a time, and jacks

Partially completed building

lifted into place

Robotic support

structure

Six-ton

capacity lift jacks


the floor up one level when it is finished. The topfloor is constructed first, followed by the next-to-the-highest floor, and so on. As a result, afinished high-rise building is "extruded" up fromthe site. Upon completion of the building, theground-level factory is disassembled.

In the third category, a small core structure(which will become the building’s core) isconstructed conventionally to the height of a fewstories. A platform the size of an entire proposedfloor is attached to the top of the core. Theplatform contains a factory that proceeds toautomatically assemble the entire ground floor,and in parallel constructs another level onto thecore structure. When the ground floor iscomplete, the entire factory platformautomatically jacks itself up (using the corestructure) one level and repeats the process withthe second floor, and so on. Material handling isdone using automated lifts located in the corestructure, where factory assembled componentsare delivered to the ground level and areautomatically delivered to the factory. In effect, afinished high-rise building is "extruded" by thefactory as it jacks itself up floor by floor. Whenthe building is finished, the factory isdisassembled and removed from the top of thebuilding (Akinaga, 1993).

Figure 6: IT Condominium Field Factory

Yagi (1999) describes ten major automatedconstruction systems for high-rise buildings thathave been implemented to construct actualbuildings. These construction systems areholistic in scope, but are still experimental and do

not yet represent major trends in construction.However, since they are working, self-containedrobotic construction systems, knowledge gainedfrom these research exercises are sure to informthe design of orbital or planetary roboticconstruction systems.

Field Factory: In traditional constructionmethods, buildings are erected in "final line"construction, where raw materials, tools, laborand such are all gathered to the site andprocessed on the spot. The use of kit-of-partsconstruction turns the entire building process into"assembly line" style, where many differentmanufacturing events can occur in parallel insafe, controlled environments. One form ofassembly line style construction site is known asthe Field Factory (Figure 6). The InformationalTechnology (IT) Condominium project uses arobotic system that stacks module-based kit-of-parts units into a joint-based superstructure(Miyamoto et al., 1998).

Figure 7: LDS Building system construction

Multidirectional Assembly: Some nextgeneration robotic construction systems areunder development that not only assemble abuilding vertically, but can also expand in anydirection laterally as well. The LDS BuildingSystem uses a parametric block of space thatknows how to create an enclosure about itselfusing rule-based assembly and a genetic

Permanent swivel

boom frames

Lift cables

Premanufactured

space module

Block carriage

platform

Relocatable

cassette winch

Stacked component containers

Bridge-crane robot in waiting

position

Forklift

robot

Deployed

hydraulic jack robot

Foundation socket point


algorithm (Figure 7). The nature of the enclosureautomatically adapts itself in differentconfigurations depending on whether the block ofspace is adjacent to other blocks or not. Aconceptual robotic system has been developedthat can stack the blocks of space horizontallyand vertically. The LDS Building System will beanalyzed later in this paper.

Mechanism Types

Terrestrial architecture is getting more and morekinematic in nature, especially when we considerfacades and roof systems that actively respondto their environments. In the same way thatarchitects must understand basic principles ofstatics in order to conceptually design structuresthat will successfully stand up, it is alsobecoming necessary to have a basic knowledgeof kinematic principles to understand thesometimes complex behavior of these movingparts.

Kinematic Mechanisms: A kinematicmechanism can be defined as a structurecontaining two or more elements that have thecapacity to alter their configuration in relationshipto each other based on a known or giventransformation. The transformations consist ofeither translation or rotation, singularly or in anygiven complex combination. The transformationsare defined and constrained by the geometry ofthe elements in the structure.

Common kinematic mechanisms include simplemechanical devices such as rotary gear belt,chain, and gear systems, rack & pinions, class 1,2, & 3 levers, and reverse action / parallel actionlinkages. Other mechanisms can include non-mechanical devices that depend onelectromagnetic fields, innate elasticity of thematerial, temperature conductivity, and otherproperties that can be used to initiate controlled,predictable motion.

Robotic Mechanisms: A roboticmechanism is a structure containing one or morekinematic mechanisms, one or more actuators,one or more sensors, and a controller. Therobotic mechanism functions as a device toperform a predefined work such as to reconfigure

a kinematic mechanism according to outsideinstructions. The robotic mechanism works as afeedback loop: the controller receives externalinstructions to perform a certain work and directsthe actuator to perform it. Then the sensorcontinually senses the current state orconfiguration of the kinematic mechanism andnotifies the controller. Finally the controllermakes a continuous judgement as to whatdegree the work has been performed, andinstructs the actuator to continue or correct itself.When the work has been completed, the actuatoris stopped.

System-wide Work cells: Complexsystems consisting of multiple kinematic androbotic mechanisms require coordinatedbehavior and work areas. A robotic mechanismassigned to perform a certain work should besupported by other systems such as materialhandling systems. Construction sequencesshould be planned as to allow the various roboticmechanisms to work freely and have access tothe site. This simply means that parts which willbe buried under or hidden behind other partsshould be placed first while there is still access.System-wide work cells would include advancedconstruction techniques such as the FieldFactory approach or multi-directional assemblyconcepts. Since it is impossible for a designer tovisualize every possible configuration of such acomplex system, the design should proceed inan object-oriented manner, relying on Kit-of-partsTheory for local component design and behavior.

Mechanism Principles: Understandingkinematic principles is necessary for the designof robotic building systems. Simple translation orrotary kinematic mechanisms can be nested andlinked to create more and more complexassemblies.

A building site that uses the Field Factoryapproach, both terrestrial and off-world, would ofnecessity be spread out over a large area andwould include a variety of interconnecting andoverlapping work cells. Some of these work cellswould be defined by the functional limits of robotsthat are mounted on independent mobileplatforms that literally could stretch for manykilometers. Nested mechanisms fashioned into


an autonomous robotic mobile platform canbehave in an object-oriented manner, movingpoint to point. Once the platform has arrived ,the separate mechanisms carried by it that aredesigned for other purposes such as excavationor lifting can perform their work.

If architects understood these basic principlesthey can participate in optimizing the design ofboth the mechanisms and building modulesmanipulated by them. Indeed, such a task shouldnot be left strictly to mechanical engineers arespecialists, but should have heavy influence fromthe architect who can visualize the entiresystems integration strategy.

Designing for Automation

It has been suggested that there are two levelswhere designers need to incorporate ideas ofautomation into their design concepts:component level and machine level (Bridgewater,1993). Essentially, designers need to considerthe manufacture of larger parts in factories thatcan be assembled quickly on the site byappropriate construction machines. At thecomponent level, the direction of assembly issignificant, and at the machine level differenttasks must be contemplated in order to simplifythe assembly process. An understanding (or lackthereof) of these two levels can greatly influencethe entire nature of joints, structure, andassembly, even at the conceptual design level.

For example, two extremes of automation willgreatly effect the nature of a kit-of-parts system.At one extreme, robotic system A hasextremely tight and precise feedback andresponse, and can place a component to withinmicrons of its intended destination. At anotherextreme, the precision of system B is loose,and cannot guarantee accuracy tighter than tencentimeters. System A is extremely expensiveand requires precise sensor systems andactuators. A can be prone to problems ifsomething beyond its scope of function causesinaccuracies to creep in, such as dust or particlessettled between the joints of the components.

System B on the other hand is inexpensive andcan use less precise sensors and actuators.

Inexpensive devices designed into thecomponents themselves, such as bevels andguides can compensate for the inaccuracies ofthe system, and overcome unforeseen problemsdue to environmental influences. The presenceof bevels, guides, and more significant geometrythat simplifies the assembly process clearly willweigh heavily in the design concept stage.

Using Kit-of-parts: Buildings designed inthe conventional sense are optimized forassembly by human labor. Designing forautomation requires the architect to considerways of assembly that are optimized for roboticconstruction mechanisms. This includes thedesign of assemblies that are sized optimally forrobotic equipment to handle. Humans withcomplex, dexterous hands can pick up manysmall pieces and fit them together, bolting andscrewing each connection. Some of thisrepetitive work can also be done in a mass-production setting using sophisticated tools, butwork onsite is better completed with pre-manufactured large components that can simplybe pushed or snapped into place. The use ofjoint-based, panel-based, module-based, anddeployable kit-of-parts systems especiallyoptimized for robotic assembly goes hand inhand with automated construction concepts.

Unit width (basic grid)

Space Zone StructureZone

Multiples of grid

Unit widthMultiples of unitcenter to center

Figure 8: Grammar for both robots and parts

Grammars for Automation: In the designstage, the architect must remember that therange of volume within which a robot can reachor perform work is called a work cell. Work cellsdiffer depending on the design of the robot. Inbuilding construction, the multiple tasks requiredto complete the construction must be matchedwith corresponding work cells of appropriately


designed robots. Therefore, in the design stage itis appropriate to devise design grammars thatnot only apply to the kit-of-parts components andorganization, but also to the work cells of roboticconstruction equipment. Advanced kit-of-partssystems should consider the robots as part of thebuilding, and visa versa, include simple kinematicmechanisms into the components that can betriggered by the robot to assist in their assembly(such as latches and locking mechanisms).

In the LDS Building System, an orthogonal baygrammar was developed that corresponded withthe block of space mentioned previously (Figure8). The grammar also represents the work cell forthe robotic construction system, includingelements of an overlapping material handlingsystem work cell (Howe, 2000).

In the Mars Parametric Module project, agrammar was devised that corresponds withradial, linear, central, and cluster organization ofpressure vessels in a planetary outpost (Figure9). The grammar also reflects the work cell of theconstruction system used to place the modules(Howe & Howe, 2000).

Figure 9: Mars outpost organizationalgrammar

Principles of Design: In one experiment, amodel kit-of-parts was manufactured and aseries of automated construction simulationswere conducted. The experiment yielded anessential list of design principles that could applyto automated construction systems:

• Components should be designed tocompensate for inaccuracies of robot positionand orientation; bevels, guides, and snap-

together connections are necessary foraccurate assembly. All bevels and guidesmust be oriented in the strong axis ofassembly. This principle is coined as the"strong axis principle."

• It is advantageous to have a mountingmechanism in the building component itself,which either engages upon installation or isactivated and deactivated by the robot’s endaffector. This principle is coined as the"seventh joint principle."

• Design of grasp points on the component, aswell as design of the nature of the robot’s endaffector must be done in parallel. Thisprinciple is coined as the robot / component"interface principle."

• For the purpose of compact transportationand accessibility, the stackable storagenature of components could hold importancein many situations. This principle is coined asthe "stackability principle."

ANALYSIS OF KIT-OF-PARTS SYSTEMS

In order to design more efficient kit-of-partssystems, it is necessary to analyze variousprecedents in a quantitative manner. Initially aranking system is devised, based onconformance to kit-of-parts principles. Twelveprinciples are clearly stated that help define anefficient kit-of-parts system. These principles areby no means finalized, but should be subject todiscussion, and are established for the purposeof comparing and ranking kit-of-parts precedents.The twelve principles can also function as aguide to the design of future kit-of-parts systems.

Attributes, Principles, and Criteria

The analysis will proceed by assigning valueranges to the principles discussed in this paper.The values ranging from 0 - 4 will looselyrepresent the following: Opposing = 0, neutral =1, partially conforming = 2, well conforming = 3,and exceptional performance = 4. The principlesare summarized in this section.

Robotic platform drive path

Smooth regolith site pad

Parametric module in storage

position

Robotic platform drive path

Self-propelled robotic platform


Kit-of-parts Component Principles: Kit-of-parts systems can be categorized by geometry.An analysis will determine whether the system isjoint-based, panel-based, module-based, ordeployable. In cases where the system is ahybrid of two or more categories, an attempt willbe made to separate the system into distinctsubsystems that clearly fall into one of the fourcategories, and the value assessment will bebased on the highest order among them. Thus,the first principle of analysis is:

Principle 1: Category (no category = 0,joint-based = 1, panel-based = 2, module-based = 3, deployable = 4)

Representation Principles: Digitalintegration of design / manufacture / life-cyclemanagement processes has gone far beyondbeing a by-product. Advanced kit-of-partssystems are manageable through their virtual,digital counterparts. This includes the ability of asystem to work through simulated self-configuration scenarios automatically, based onexternal constraints and requirements.

Principle 2: Object-oriented (withoutrepresentation = 0, geometric 3D = 1,parametric 3D = 2, life-cycle 4D = 3, self-generating 4D = 4)

Principle 3: Virtual Management (notmanageable = 0, manual management = 1,digital control = 2, remote monitoring &control = 3, expert self management = 4)

Design for Automation Principles: Kit-of-parts components can be designed for efficienthandling and automated assembly. In theanalysis, system components will be judged onassembly axis concepts, their capacity toparticipate in their own manipulation, theirinterface with the robot affector (if any), andcapacity to compactly stack with others of its kind.Other concepts that will be analyzed are whetherthe system geometry and organization hints at itsown assembly sequence. It should be noted thatthese principles are more useful at a componentscale rather than a system-wide scale. Therefore,the principles relating to design for automationare:

Principle 4: Strong Axis (awkward counterdirectional = 0, neutral non-directional = 1,semi-directional = 2, single axis = 3, smoothmultiple axis = 4)

Principle 5: Seventh Joint (non-kinematic= 0, compatible with kinematic components= 1, passive kinematic = 2, active kinematic= 3, fully robotic = 4)

Principle 6: Interface (counter compatibility= 0, neutral = 1, graspable = 2, systematiccompatibility = 3, fully integrated = 4)

Principle 7: Stackability (unstackable = 0,neutral = 1, loose stackability = 2, integratedstackability with others of its kind = 3,integrated stackability with unrelatedcomponents = 4)

Kinematic Principles: Some kit-of-partssystems have higher-order components orgrammars that build in a capacity for deploymentor self-configuration over their lifetime. In theanalysis, systems will be judged on the presenceof kinematic systems for self-configuration,capacity for systematic re-configuration, capacityfor mobility, and capacity for self-construction.Also analyzed will be the higher-orderorganization of well-defined work cells andassembly sequences. It should be noted thatthese principles are applied to entire systemsrather than individual components. The kinematicprinciples used in this analysis are:

Principle 8: Kinematics (non-kinematic = 0,systematic reconfiguration = 1, self-configuration = 2, self-mobility = 3, self-construction = 4)

Principle 9: Work Cell (conflicting workcells = 0, separate work cells = 1, looselycoordinated work cells = 2, fully integratedwork cells = 3, fully re-configurable workcells = 4)

Grammar and Organizational Principles:A clever set of pieces is in itself not enough tocreate a robust, useful construction system.Meaning and grammar must be introduced forhigher order organization. Hierarchy includes


structure, circulation, spatial sequencing, andinfrastructure strategy. Grammar includes thepresence of meaning in higher order entitiesmade up of simpler primitives. Shin-gyo-soordering in formal / informal / chaos principlesinclude not only the pureness of a formal system,but also the presence of mechanisms that allowthe system to adapt to context or exist and eventhrive in chaotic environments. The principlesare:

Principle 10: Hierarchy (anti-hierarchical =0, neutral and equal = 1, semi-hierarchical =2, single level hierarchy = 3, open-endednested hierarchy = 4)

Principle 11: Grammar (meaningless = 0,neutral = 1, component-level meaning = 2,single level entities = 3, open-ended nestedentities & meanings = 4)

Principle 12: Formal / Informal / Chaos(chaos reigns = 0, neutral = 1, formal orderonly = 2, allows informal elements = 3,thrives among chaos = 4)

Contemporary Systems

Since these systems were especially selected fortheir exemplary conformance to Kit-of-partsTheory, very few of the systems, if any, will havevalues in the 0 - 1 range. The systems werechosen from not only architecture, but alsoexemplary construction toys and even nature asan inspiration and comparison.

Several of the chosen systems are physical,working systems, and the others exist in conceptonly. Values have been awarded to theconceptual systems based on computersimulations of how they are expected to performshould they be constructed. In all fairness, theseconceptual systems should be penalized for this.It is suggested that the reader understand thedifference between ideal concepts and actualworking systems, and mentally adjust the valuesaccordingly. In addition, the design constrains ofsome projects do not require the completeconformance to all the twelve principles in orderfor them to be exemplary and efficient to the end

that they were created. The comparison chartcan be seen in Table 2.

English Written Language: Language is acomplex system that has developed overmillennia. There are so many parallels that canbe made between language and Kit-of-partsTheory, that they cannot all be enumerated here.Some of the parallels have already beendiscussed. Though most languages have quirksand are far from being pure, the rules arenevertheless established and provide anenvironment wherein creativity can be expressedwithout having to reinvent the parts each time. Inthis exercise, the English Language has beenchosen for analysis. Though some of the twelveprinciples do not apply to language at face value,an attempt has been made to rate the systembased on equivalent performance.

First of all, the English language is not about asystem in its own right, but about ideas thatsomehow need to be reproduced in an analogform. Therefore, language starts in the virtual,pure conceptual world, and tries to create a real-world counterpart of itself. With the ideas alreadyin existence, the mechanics of expressing itconsist of the language. English has 26primitives in its kit-of-parts (a few more if youcount numerals and punctuation). The primitiveshave rules and ordering principles governing howthey can be arranged, and can be grouped intonew entities called words. Already at this stagemillions of possibilities present themselves. Thewords can now be grouped into phrases that area new entity level. The phrases can be groupedinto sentences, which can be grouped intoparagraphs, which can be grouped into chapters,which can be grouped into books, which can begrouped into genres, which can be grouped intolibraries, and so on. Another interesting thingabout language is that no matter what kit-of-partssystem is used, the underlying higher meaningscan be translated into entirely different systemswithout losing much of the intended concept.However, someone familiar with one system whocasually steps into a concept expressed byanother may not be able to relate to the higherorders that are present.


In this exercise, joint-based systems in languagecan be simple incremental systems such asthose used to tally amounts. The equivalent forpanel-based systems can be phonetic characters,and module-based systems can be ideograms.Deployable systems can be some other methodof communication that goes beyond that (we canvisualize such a system, but its unclear whetherthere are any cultures who have developeddynamic symbols that change over time). For thisreason we ve rated English as a 2 under the firstprinciple. The second principle deals with thevirtual representation of the idea. The languagesystem does not have an innate ability to removeor recycle used words, nor is there a method builtinto the system for self-generation. Therefore wehave given it a 2. The third principle also gets a2 since the system is not capable of remotemonitoring and control, or self-management.Principles five and eight were also rated low,since there is no capacity of the system for self-positioning other than manually. The twelfthprinciple was also given a 2 due to the fact thatmost languages have trouble with expressions orsounds that lie outside of their own formalsystem. Language has been crafted in order todescribe the order of the entire universe, whichcannot be done within the current system. Werated language with an overall 30 points out of apossible 48.

Western Music Systems: Music is similarto language in that many concepts already existin a virtual form, and they just need a method forexpression in the real world. However, using akit-of-parts that consists of notes, the beautycomes from the hardware used to manufacturethe notes, as well as the way the notes arearranged. A parallel to this might be what isadvocated in the Kit-of-parts Theory, where themethods and machinery for manufacture ofbuilding components are closely integrated withthe building system itself. Because of this, wehave rated the eighth principle a high 4,considering them to be equivalently wellintegrated.

In many of the categories, the values of musicand language are very similar. A big differencebetween the two might be the difficulty for musicto be translated from one system to another,

since the production of it is so well integratedwith the final product. Music rated 35 overall in ahigher value than language, achieving five pointsmore.

Figure 10: Lego Mindstorms

Lego Mindstorms: As most architects canattest, the Lego construction toy has proved tobe one of the most advanced kit-of-parts systemsever to be devised. The addition of the Technicand Mindstorm series has greatly increased thesophistication of the system, with kinematic andfully robotic plug-and-play capabilities. At thebase of the Lego system is a three-dimensionalgrid datum ordering system on the joint level.The flexibility comes from the presence of thejoint studs and receptors at every possiblelocation on the grid datum. The Technic series ofparts extended this capability to include alternateordering systems that deftly interface with theoriginal grid datum to allow non-orthogonalrelationships and a full range of kinematiccapacity. The Mindstorms series built upon the

Actuator

ports

Controller brick

Sensor ports

Touch sensor

mechanism

Light sensor

Test track


Technic foundation and added robotic capacityas well. It is highly recommended that anyarchitect or industrial designer who is seriousabout designing a robust, flexible kit-of-partsshould study the Lego system.

In our study, we constructed the off-the-shelfrover robot and tested it with the modular

programming system. The rover is essentially amobile platform that can be used as a base forother functional robotic systems. The controllerbrick has three ports for actuators and threeports for sensors. There is also a capacity formessaging between controller bricks forexpanded capabilities, but we did not test thisfeature. In the rover robot, two of the actuatorports are connected to right and left motors, andthere are various options for connecting sensors,depending on what kind of mobility behavior isdesired. The available sensors include touch,light, temperature, humidity, rotation, air pressure,current, wind speed, sound, and many others.Actuators include electric motors and hydraulicsystems.

On our robot, we used a right and left touchsensor and a light sensor. The light sensor ispointed toward the ground, and is triggered byvariations of light intensity due to dark and lightcolors. We tested the robot for robustness andaccuracy in the simple task of following a blackline oval test track approximately two meters long(Figure 10). The program for this is also off-the-shelf, but the software interface allows drag anddrop placement of higher level object-orientedprogramming blocks. In the first ten tries, therobot averaged 1.2 laps before a failure occurred.Most of these failures were caused by a loosedrive gear. After making repairs and gluing thedrive gear in place, the robot easily madeflawless trips of over 20 laps before shuttingdown manually. The initial failure was due to thefact that the Lego system is built on friction jointsthat sometimes are compromised when forcesare oriented parallel to the strong axis ofassembly.

The weak areas of the Lego system are in theninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth principlesthat have to do with overall system work cells,hierarchy, grammar, and ability to cope with

chaos. There are many recipes published forconstructing different types of robots, but thesystem lacks grammars or higher orders tohandle more complex problems. Lego 's apparentpurpose is to leave these things up to thecreativity of the user. But to give them credit, thehardware available and the plug-and-playcapacity rival even some advanced roboticsystems, though not as robust. On the softwareside it is a little primitive, but again, the drag-and-drop object-oriented programming techniquesemployed are quite advanced. Perhaps higherorder computer representation and expertsystems can be added to the Lego Mindstormssystem in the future.

Overall our rating gave it a 30, which surprisinglyis even higher than language (this discrepancymight be due to our judgement on the lack ofequivalents in robotic and kinematic capacity inlanguage).

Figure 11: Capsela construction toy

Capsela: This construction toy is amodule-based system that uses kinematicfunctionality as the main generating element(Figure 11). Clear plastic capsules containmotors, transmissions, differentials, U-joints, andpower supply. By simply plugging the capsulestogether, it is possible to make quite a largevariety of mechanisms based on need for torque,delivery, and power. As is the case with many kit-of-parts systems, some attributes are sacrificedfor efficiency of uniform size and modularity. In

Chains and gears

Motor housing

Plug-in

modules

Joints are both

structural and

kinematic


this case, each functional transmission ordifferential is encased in a uniformly sized clearplastic spherical module. In some instances thegears, motors, and axles fill up the volume, butsometimes a lot of empty space is left over inside.The clear modules are also the main structuralelement of the toy. The capsules that areavailable include a 9600rpm electric motor, a23:1 speed reduction gear, a 48:1 worm gear, a2:1 crown wheel, a 3:1 internal gear, a clutch, arotary switch, and a gearless transmission.

With only basic kinematic functionality, the higherorders of self-configuration or self-constructionare not possible. Overall the system rated 20 outof 48. Capsela has fallen victim to a lot of pitfallscommon in kit-of-parts designs, but the brilliantplug-and-play capacity of the kinematic elementsis well worth studying.

Takara Beautillion: Metabolist architectKisho Kurokawa designed the Takara Beautillion,which was erected for the Expo 70 in Osaka(Kurokawa, 1977). The joint-based / module-based hybrid structural system used a trusswhich was fabricated from 90 degree bent pipes,where the bends welded back to back formed anorthogonal node with the legs reaching outward.The legs, when bolted to legs of other trusses,became beams and columns in a volume-generating cuboid. The legs that were notengaged reached out in space as if waiting toclasp future truss additions. Module-basedcapsules enclosed within the cuboid baysdefined the interior spaces. The structure andmodules were fully demountable, allowing thebuilding to be dismantled after the end of theexpo. The ingenious part about the nodal truss isits ability to function in any direction, simplifyingthe manufacture of the parts. Also noteworthy isthe capacity for expansion of the structure, orease of disassembly.

The major flaws in the system are the lack ofhigher orders and governing grammars. Thepavilion as it was constructed may have alreadyreach expansion limits, because there is noinnate way to build in circulation and spatialhierarchies. The apparent system should be ableto expand indefinitely in all directions, but a lackof circulation hierarchy would severely curtail any

practical application. Since the Takara pavilionwas constructed in the late sixties, thetechnology for developing and maintaining avirtual computer representation for planning,design, and remote maintenance wasunavailable. Though an exemplar in kit-of-partsconcept, the Takara project ranks among thelowest in the systems analyzed in this study. Ourranking placed it at 17 points.

Renault Distribution Center: In 1983 Hi-tech architect Norman Foster designed awarehouse distribution center for the automotivemanufacturer Renault. Foster developed a kit-of-parts system that could be added on to in anydirection horizontally to enable future expansion.In its original state, 24m square, 9.5m high bayswere built 4 wide and 12 bays long (Nakamura,1988). The joint-based / panel-based hybridsystem is beautiful in its appearance, andremains a prime exemplar of kit-of-partsconstruction. The structure consists of linearmembers carefully designed to optimizecompression and tension forces in the materials.Panel-based cladding systems are offset fromthe structure using simple single-point mountinghardware.

The design of the distribution system performsbeautifully within the given constraints andexceptionally satisfies the designed end forwhich it was made. However, considering thesystem as a kit-of-parts that could be repeated inother situations, several limitations come to mind.Similar to the Takara pavilion, the Renaultsystem apparently is designed to expandinfinitely in any direction horizontally (contrary tothe Takara system, the Renault structure cannotexpand vertically). In reality however, the systemmay saturate itself with a small number of bayssince there is no apparent scheme for deriving acirculation hierarchy built into the system.

In this respect, the Renault and Takara systemsare remarkably similar. Both are strikinglybeautiful and simple in design, and both havesimilar limitations. Both are worthy of study bywould-be kit-of-parts system designers. In ouranalysis, the Renault system also got an overallscore of 17 points.


Habitat: Moshe Safdie designed a largeresidential complex in Montreal in 1967 inconjunction with the world fair. The complex wasdesigned for 1000 units but only 158 wereactually built (Murray, 1996). The fifteen types ofapartment units were constructed fromprefabricated concrete modules in such a waythat each unit enjoyed private garden space andplenty of light and ventilation. Both the layout ofthe individual apartments and the uniquestacking of the units were based on carefullyconceived design grammars. The result is anincredibly dynamic three-dimensional form.Included in the grammar was circulationschemes, structural hierarchy, and spatialhierarchy.

Using a volumetric module-based design,combined with carefully crafted design grammars,the Habitat system gets an overall ranking of 21points.

Figure 12: LDS Building System

LDS Building System: In 1994 the LDSBuilding System concept was presented to TheChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDSor Mormon) as a potential building solution fortheir Physical Facilities department. In recentyears the Mormon church has experienced agrowth explosion that has put strains on theirbuilding program, which must provide fivehundred to a thousand new buildings each yearin countries all over the world, under a myriad ofbuilding codes. The LDS building system wasconceived as a universal kit-of-parts (Figure 1)

that could be assembled via automatedconstruction technology, or by hand with aminimum array of simple tools. Power andcommunication lines can be integrated into thejoint, so they automatically connect when thejoints are structurally secured. An automatedconstruction system prepared for the kit-of-partsincludes three construction robots which fold uptogether into a shipping container that can bedelivered to remote flat sites and assemble thebuilding system automatically for mostconfigurations (Figure 7). The roboticconstruction system was conceived as alightweight successor to the Kajima AMURADsystem (Figure 5). Though the robotic systemcannot be employed on sloped sites, the kit-of-parts system can also accommodateconstruction on steep grades (Figure 12).

In the LDS Building System, design grammarsand rules were established for space planningand component placement. The design grammarhas a two-fold purpose: to prescribe the way thestructure should go together to supporthierarchies of space, and to exist as guidelinesfor automated construction system design(Figure 8). In addition, the grammars describedhow ordering systems could be applied tovarious levels of primitives and entities, so thatcirculation and structural hierarchy could bemaintained in larger structures or complexes.

Regarding our rating for the LDS building system,two things must be considered. First, thoughbased on working technology, the system wasnever taken beyond detailed simulations of thevirtual model in the concept development stage.Secondly, the design process proceeded withmany of the twelve principles already in mind.Object-oriented representation, virtual facilitymanagement, hierarchy and higher level ordering,grammars (for both building components andconstruction machine design), integrated workcell, and kinematic principles were all addressedfrom the start. With these concepts inconsideration from the start, our overall rating isexpectedly high at 38 points. However, since thesystem has not been through the stages of finaldevelopment and implementation, or overcomedifficulties that arise in the process of prototype

Flexible roof systems

Modular core elements

Joint-based structure

Adaptable to any site


manufacture, a mental adjustment may benecessary.

Mars Parametric Module: In 2000, theauthor developed a conceptual automatedconstruction system (Howe & Howe, 2000) thatcould be used to assemble a first outpost onMars (Okushi, 1996). Using a single grammar forboth robot and habitat design, a parametricpressure vessel was devised. The main elementsin the parametric space module are connectornode, 4m diameter semi-domed hard shellcylinder ends, simple tube-shaped flexibleinsulated membrane, and deployable box truss(Figure 13).

Figure 13: Mars parametric pressure vessel

The parametric module can be deployed bypulling apart the two hard shell end domes untilthe interior box truss snaps into place. The enddomes have integrated support structures, andthe box truss locks rigidly into place to keep theend domes from tipping laterally. The box truss issuspended entirely within the radius of thepressurized cylinder, preserving a spacebetween the hard structures and the inflatablemembrane.

The design of the parametric space module wasbased on a simple design grammar that placesall circulation, power connections and dataconnections at the connector node, and allows

the space to expand outward from it. Thegrammar was also used to solve the problem ofautomated construction, placement, anddeployment of the modules.

Similar to the LDS building system, the Marsparametric module was conceived on paper only,with the twelve principles in mind. Our rating forthe Mars system is a highly scored 40 points.

International Space Station: TheInternational Space Station (ISS) has manyattributes of an advanced kit-of-parts system, inspite of the fact that in actuality it consists of amultitude of systems and standards. First andforemost is the use of deployable elements andmodules, which rates the system highly in thefirst principle category. Though the ISS is notmanaged by a virtual copy of itself, it is almostentirely managed remotely, using advancedmonitoring and control technology. The ISS alsoranks fairly high in hierarchy and grammar, dueto the nested kit-of-parts systems in use (ISSrack system, deployable truss, node system, etc).In orbital architecture there is no local context, soan isolated kit-of-parts structure can remain purewithout having to respond to chaos. However,we ve given the ISS a high rating in the twelfthprinciple due to the presence of mitigatingelements that tie together modules andinfrastructures stemming from multiple standards.

One very impressive subsystem belonging to theISS is the Space Station Robotic ManipulatorSystem (SSRMS), which includes theCanadarm robotic arm. The Canadarm consists

of two linear members and multiple joints toachieve the minimum six degrees of rotationalfreedom required to match any orientation(NASA, n.d.). A system of grapple interfaceelements have been installed in various strategiclocations all over the ISS station in such a waythat no point on the station is out of reach of thearm. The grapples at each end of the arm arealso incorporated with power connectors, so thatwhen a structural connection is established,power and communication to the arm is alsoestablished. This means that the structural baseof the arm is actually a grapple end affector inthe grasping state, while the other end performswork with a similar affector grapple attached to

Deployable truss in storage

position

Support points for deployable

truss system

Inflatable membrane


various implements. The Canadarm has beenconceived so that it can move hand over hand inan inchworm fashion in order to get from onelocation to another on the station (NASA, 2001).This is an advanced example of the sixthprinciple, where both parts and kinematic /robotic mechanisms interface with each other ina highly integrated manner.

Overall, the ISS has been given an overall ratingof 34 points.

Figure 14: Micro-electronic parts

God 's Kit-of-parts (Nature): The mostinspiring and well-developed kit-of-parts systemis the hi-tech multi-level nested hierarchy that ouruniverse is constructed from. It is alwaysfascinating to consider that the entire universe ismainly constructed out of only two simpleprimitives: protons and electrons. God 's systemhas been a major inspiration for Kit-of-partsTheory, and most of the twelve principles werepartially derived with this system in mind. Adiscussion need not begin with the most basicbuilding blocks called quarks (or perhaps there issomething even more basic?) We can jumpstraight to the proton and electron, where agrammar calls for the combination of the twoprimitives in various ways to form a library ofmicro-electronic elements that are powered bylight and electromagnetic energy (Figure 14).The ordering of the primitives in relation to eachother is radial transformation.

Depending on the number of each primitive inany given combination, the rules for behavior ofthese micro-electronic elements change.Naturally they tend to gravitate toward each other.How close they become, and how they react toeach other is dependant upon the grammar rulesfor each type and the amount of energy theyreceive. At a higher level, the element atoms cangroup together to form molecules. The moleculeentities have their own set of rules as well, basedentirely on the combination of the atom elements.Sometimes the ordering of these molecules inrelation to each other is linear, sometimes radial,sometimes on a grid, and sometimes other forms.

At this stage there is already the capacity forincredible variation in molecule types. In Nature 'ssystem, a majority of these entities are roughlygrouped together in masses of raw material.However, molecules can be grouped together tocreate higher compounds in a greater level, andcertain compounds can become the buildingmaterials for extremely complex self-replicatingfactories (Figure 16).

Figure 15: Product model coding

These factories should be studied by seriousstudents of Kit-of-parts Theory, for they embodyevery ideal that has been discussed so far. Thefactories are originally generic building blocksthat can be applied to multiple structure types.They can exist singly or in simple groupings, orcan be assembled into complex organisms. Theutility of these factory building blocks comes fromthe mechanisms and processes surrounding the

Powered by electricity and

light energy

Well-defined function

Automated

Oxygen:

Solid -273 Gas -183

Hydrogen:

Solid -260 Gas -253

Water:

Solid 0 Gas 100

Complete geometrical

information library

Fully self-contained

attribute database


central processing unit, which guides thefunctionality and behavior of the factory. Withinthe central processing unit there is a virtualproduct model of the cell, containing completegeometrical and attribute information coding(Figure 15). The grammar rules that govern thecell factory provide for monitoring and control ata local level, with the product model DNAproviding instructions on behavior. Additionalfunctionality at this level includes the capacity forthe factory to manufacture an exact copy of itself.

Figure 16: Self-replicating factory

With the flexibility and functionality endowed inthe factory cell, higher level entities can beconstructed. Actuators, sensor systems,communication systems, material handlingsystems, waste management systems, structure,and protective envelope systems each have theirown set of rules in this stage of the grammar.These systems can then be integrated into self-contained organisms to form an even higher level.It 's interesting to note that at each of the levels,primitives are grouped systematically from simple

to complex to make sure no gaps occur in thesequence, and each primitive has its own uniquefunction or place. Atoms range from the lighthydrogen to heavy particles, compounds rangefrom simple to complex, and organisms rangefrom single-cell to human being. Single-celledorganisms reproduce exact copies of themselves,and thus propagate the species. Mothers in theirwombs also have the capacity to manufacturebrand new bodies in the greatest function ofautomated construction ever conceived. All theorganisms have a place and a specific duty tofulfil in the biosphere, which after all is one morehigher level in the kit-of-parts system. Thegreater system manages itself automatically,without waste, in complete sustainability. In ouranalysis of God s kit-of-parts, it s plain that eachof the twelve principles clearly rate with a perfectscore of 4, to make a total of 48 points.

After studying God 's kit-of-parts system, our hightechnology and advanced system designs seemcrude and feeble by comparison. It may takemany more centuries to achieve a level of craftand technology that could start to approach theadvanced level of this system. In our study ofnature we have one great advantage and hope.We 've seen it in action, we know it exists, we 'veobserved its robust sustainability, and we knowthat it works unfailingly. This can be ourinspiration to push further, our vision for what wecan achieve, and most of all a scourge to humbleus when we feel we 've somehow figured it all out.

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 TotalEnglish language 2 2 2 4 1 3 2 1 3 4 4 2 30

Western music 2 2 3 4 1 3 2 4 3 4 4 3 35Lego Mindstorms 2 2 3 2 2 4 3 4 2 2 2 2 30

Capsela 3 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 20Takara pavilion 3 0 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 2 2 17Renault center 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 1 2 2 2 17

Habitat 3 0 1 2 0 2 3 0 1 3 3 3 21LDS Building System 3 3 4 3 2 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 38

Mars Parametric 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 40ISS 4 0 3 3 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 3 34

Nature 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 48

Table 2: Kit-of-parts system ranking

Larger assemblies made

up of smaller assemblies

Free to act within functional

sphere

Actual shape defined by

virtual shape


SPACE-BASED CONSTRUCTION SYSTEM

NASA space architects have given arecommended roadmap for technology anddevelopment of planetary habitats (Cohen &Kennedy, 1997). The roadmap divides planetarysurface construction into three classes,coinciding with a phased schedule for habitation:

- Class I: Pre-integrated hard shell modulesready to use immediately upon delivery.

- Class II: Prefabricated kit-of-parts that issurface assembled after delivery.

- Class III: In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU)derived structure with integrated Earthcomponents.

Class I structures are prepared and tested onEarth, and are designed to be fully self-containedhabitats that can be delivered to the surface ofother planets. The only working precedent for theClass I structure is the Apollo Lunar Module, buta variety of other concepts have been proposedfor both the Moon and Mars, including the tunacan habitat proposed in the First Mars Outpost(FMO) (Cohen, 1996b). In an initial mission toput human explorers on Mars, a Class I habitatwould provide the bare minimum habitablefacilities when continued support from Earth isnot possible.

The Class II structures call for a pre-manufactured kit-of-parts system that has flexiblecapacity for demountability and reuse. Class IIstructures can be used to expand the facilitiesestablished by the initial Class I habitat, and canallow for the assembly of additional structureseither before the crew arrives, or after theiroccupancy of the pre-integrated habitat.

The purpose of Class III structures is to allow forthe construction of additional facilities that wouldsupport a larger population, and to develop thecapacity for the local production of buildingmaterials and structures without the need forresupply from Earth.

The erection of all three classes of structurewould not necessarily remain distinct in their ownphases of implementation, but would occur withsome overlap as each phase gradually convertsover to the next. To facilitate the development oftechnology required to implement the threephases, Cohen and Kennedy stress the need toexplore robust robotic system concepts that canbe used to assist in the construction process, orperform the tasks autonomously. Among otherthings, the roadmap stresses the need foradapting structural components for roboticassembly, and determining appropriate levels ofmodularity, assembly, and component packaging.The roadmap also sets the development ofexperimental construction systems in parallelwith components as an important milestone.

In this section, some aspects of a space-basedautomated kit-of-parts construction system willbe discussed.

A Space-based Kit-of-parts

Though kit-of-parts systems can be developedspecifically for a wide variety of space contexts,including orbital and planetary applications, thisdiscussion will set Mars as the stage for apotential robotic construction system. From theoutset, the distance and remoteness of Mars willrequire a long-term mission of at least 600 days(Cohen, 1996b). Because it is impractical toprovide regular support for an expedition at sucha remote location, an initial crewed visit to Marswould need to include as much in-situ resourceutilization as possible to help replenishconsumables for fuel, materials, and a Closed-loop Ecological Life Support System (CELSS).Therefore, the major elements of a Mars surfacehabitat would include power supply, ISRUtechnologies, consumables cache, life-supportsystems, habitat, greenhouses, rovers, and ExtraVehicular Activity (EVA) systems.

Cohen (1996b) gives four steps for initial Marsbase setup:

- Step 1: Gather data from precursor missions.- Step 2: Robotic base preparation and setup.


- Step 3: Human occupancy.- Step 4: Growth path.

A first outpost on Mars would include both ClassI and Class II structures. Okushi (1996)describes the overall site for the FMO ascovering over a kilometer, consisting of twoClass I core habitat modules with a variety ofClass II support structures and installations.These include greenhouses, inflatable hangersand garages, fuel and consumables caches,electrical storage systems, ISRU installations,and nuclear thermoelectric generator (TG).Initially, four cargo landers would land onrelatively flat natural landscape with the entirebase packaged in with robotic constructionequipment. A certain amount of surfacepreparation may be necessary to smooth outpads for the placement of the TG, greenhouses,and other installations. This earthwork, or shallwe say marswork , will be completed using fullyautonomous or partially teleoperated roboticconstruction equipment (Matsumoto, Yoshida &Ueno, 1992).

In the establishment of the FMO base, it will becritical to take a systematic approach for thedesign of both the habitat elements and roboticequipment, to allow future expansion and plug-and-play flexibility for unforeseen challenges.This means a well designed kit-of-parts withmulti-use elements will be critical to the successof the mission (Kennedy, 2002). The designgrammars for the system must be broad enoughto extend through all three classes of structures,including the capacity to allow the introduction ofin-situ derived elements, and also govern thedesign of the robots themselves. Throughout thegrowth scenario of the Mars base, the robotswould continually be retooled, dismantled, andrebuilt, with parts of the machines being reusedin the habitat, and parts of the habitatreassembled into useful machines.

Cohen (1986) discusses inflatables, membranes,deployable structures, fabricated structures, anderectable structure types that can be included ina space-based kit-of-parts construction system.In our kit-of-parts system, we will begin with theeleventh principle, and establish five open-

ended design grammars: organizational, supportstructure, pressure vessel, vehicle, and digital.

Organizational Grammar: Taking a hintfrom the ancient Japanese shin-gyo-so concept,the twelfth principle dictates that the design ofthe kit-of-parts grammar should start with thenature of a pure formal system based on one ofthe ordering principles. The system should thenallow for special components, and interface withthe surrounding chaos. The formal systemshould be chosen after a consideration of manylevels of potential tenth principle hierarchy,such as in the example shown in Table 1. Theexample used a workstation as a major elementthat influenced the nature of higher orders. In aspace-based system, we may use an abstractvolumetric workstation as an inspiration for thewhole system, in principle like the Japanesetatami, or we may use something entirelydifferent. However, a critical element to considerin this system is the nature of the pressurevessel. A flexible system might allow for multiplesizes of pressure vessels, organized in such away that each system tree completes itself with aclear hierarchy in mind. In other words,circulation systems, structure, scale, spatialsystems, and geometry should all begin with alocal leaf , and add capacity as it goes fromsmall branches to larger branches and finally tothe trunk. The late Dubbink (2002) discussesthese principles in terms of nodal organization orfeeder hierarchy with tributaries.

Support Structure Grammar: We considerour first principle of the Kit-of-parts Theory toinclude linear element, planar element, solidelement, and deployable systems in everincreasing levels of sophistication. Well-designedhybrid systems may include some or all of thesetypes and consider each step to be scalar jumpsin higher organization. In other words, planarsystems may be constructed of linear elements,solid systems may consist of planar assemblies,and so on. In all cases it should be noted thatdeployable structures, with the capacity tocollapse less dense volumes down to the barestcore elements, are superior in compactness andtransportability. In addition, the seventhprinciple calls for deliberate, planned stackabilityamong similar and non-similar components.


In the design of a support structure grammar,three points must be remembered. First, thestructure must interface with the pressurevessels, whatever form they may take. Pressurevessel design grammar will be discussed later.

Second, the joint design should conform with thefourth principle and be sensitive to strong axisassembly. This is important in planetary kit-of-parts design as it relates to dust control.Planetary dust has been found to be extremelyabrasive and over time ends up coveringeverything (Kennedy, 2002). The presence ofbevels, guides, and other directional devicesdesigned into the joint may help the system tostraighten and correct itself in spite ofinaccuracies caused by the buildup of foreignparticles. Another reason to include strong axisdesign elements in the joint is to help the roboticequipment with assembly. Even if the robot andsensors are able to pinpoint location accuracy towithin microns, unforeseen factors on the surfacemight dull these capacities. Dumbing down thesystem to make successful connection even ifthe robot is ten centimeters off will allow thecomponent to meet the robot halfway andincrease the possibility of success. It would helpeven more to have partially kinematiccomponents according to the fifth principle, sothe part itself is partially robotic to help the robotdeploy it.

Third, the structure should conform to the sixthprinciple and have plenty of interfaces commonwith the robotic equipment. This is for graspingand potential power hookups. Recall the SSRMSon the ISS, how the grapple / power points havebeen strategically located both for potentialmounting points for the Canadarm, and also forlifting and repositioning itself. The SSRMS is anelegant solution added late in the game. With aspace-based kit-of-parts system we have theopportunity to include these brilliant conceptsright from the start.

Pressure Vessel Grammar: The largestsingle component in a space-based kit-of-partsmost likely will be the pressure vessel, which isvery much influenced by the size of the launchvehicle required to transfer it into orbit or beyond.The pressure vessel significantly represents solid

or deployable elements in the first principle.There have been many proposals for very largestructures both planetary and in orbit that consistof panel-based systems, assembled on site, thatare expected in the end to function as apressurized volume. Unfortunately this isimpractical for several reasons. First, allspacecraft leak (Sherwood, 2002), and thetremendous difficulties of manufacturing, sealingjoints, ultrasound or ultraviolet testing forfractures, and finally testing at design pressurewould be increased by several magnitudes if ithad to be done in a harsh environment. Secondly,cross-joints are inefficient due to collidinginterests. Cross-joints are difficult to get righteven on terrestrial projects, as in the example ofFoster s Sainsbury design that ended up with thecreation of an enormous one-piece gasket toweather proof the cladding panels. Differences ofpressure in a harsh environment wouldcompound the problem and likely would not endup with a robust dependable joint. Third,expansion and contraction of materials intemperature extremes would require some sort ofexpansion joint strategy, further risking leaks.Fourth, depending too much on a large singlepressure volume would be disastrous in case ofa calamity. Large, panel-based pressure volumesshould be avoided within the foreseeable future.

Instead, multiple smaller volumes with aminimum of two points of egress are desirable.Adams & McCurdy (2000) discuss the habitabilityof three major types of pressure vessels. Thefirst type, mentioned earlier as the tuna canhabitat, is a short squat cylinder oriented with itscentral axis in a vertical position. Theexoskeleton tuna can is somewhat large indiameter, so it will not fit into the shuttle cargobay but would require a separate heavy-dutylaunch vehicle. The second type of pressurevessel, also an exoskeleton, is the ISShorizontally loaded cylinders that are sized to fitinto the shuttle payload bay. Finally, the thirdtype of pressure vessel is the TransHab type,which is an endoskeleton inflatable module thatfits into the shuttle bay while deflated, butexpands to a larger size once deployed. Adams& McCurdy rated the three types on separation offunctions, socialization, spatial quality, safety,reach envelope, maintainability, efficiency, layout


optimization, and suitability. For surface habitat,the tuna can rated the highest, followed closelyby the TransHab , with the ISS cylinder endingup a distant third. For the transportable aspectand flexible launch vehicle suitability, theinflatable pressure vessel appears to be superioras a surface habitat element.

Inflatable structures maintain rigidity by eitherpartial support of hard structural elements, orfrom internal air pressure that maintains aconstant surface tension. In addition, pneumaticstructures can be air inflated (a double wallcontains the high pressure required to maintainthe surface tension, regardless of the pressureinternal of the structure), or air supported(meaning the internal pressure exceeds theexternal environment pressure). Hybrid hard /inflatable pressure vessels are discussed byCohen & Kennedy (1997) and Howe & Howe(2000) for their ability to maintain compactnessduring transport but deploy on delivery. Fororbital schemes, the TransHab project (Kennedy,1999) and Konopek Sphere (Konopek, 2001) aregiven as exemplary designs that can be pre-tested on Earth, but expand to a volume muchlarger than the original payload size. Hublitz(2002) discusses the use of cable stays onplanetary surfaces to keep an inflated volumelow to the ground in a weighted ellipsoid form forgreenhouse design.

Tests have shown that a membrane sufficientlystrong and well-shielded would be considerablythick. Considering a separation of functions in theinflatable pressure vessel membrane, it may bepossible to use a thin membrane as a liner for aporous hard structure system. This is especiallysignificant in in-situ construction that may use acompression structure like an arch made ofregolith bricks. Also, our very large, leaky panel-based structure can benefit from deployable thinpressure bladders.

Also to be included in the pressure vesselgrammar are windows, door openings andfacilities for EVA activities (Cohen & Bussolari,1987). The need to enter and exit pressurevessels presents a problem and potentialweakness to its integrity. Cohen (1996a)describes the need for two types of openings or

ports: the pressure port and the airlock. Apressure port occurs between two pressurizedvolumes for the purpose of either maintaining adifference in pressure, or for isolating separatevolumes in case of an emergency. The airlock isused as a separate pressurized volume thatoccurs between two ambient pressures for thepurpose of facilitating passage between them(usually used for EVA, where the two pressuresare interior and exterior).

In our kit-of-parts design, the necessity ofopenings in an inflatable pressure vesselequates to an interface between the pliablemembrane and a hard element. The problemsposed are similar to the panel-based design forvery large structures mentioned earlier. However,the use of circular continuous joints rather thancross-joints gives us the opportunity to design amore robust joint in a localized area that can andshould be assembled and tested in controlledconditions. Therefore, whether the pressurevessel is a hard exoskeletal module, or aninflatable membrane structure, it is important tonote that manufacture and testing should not beconsidered in an extreme environment unlessthere is a guarantee that the controlledconditions available in Earth factories can beduplicated.

Finally, in a modular kit-of-parts system, thepressure vessel can be designed to have multi-uses. In one instance it can be used as a portionof a habitat, and in another instance the sameelement design might be used as the cabin for arover. The combined multi-use scheme providesplug-and-play flexibility in the system and helpsseparate functions for a variety of uses.

Vehicle Grammar: With a formalframework in place for kit-of-parts system design,the next step is to consider ninth principle workcell concepts. It is clear that in a hierarchy, theentire area surrounding the base would beincluded in an system-wide work cell belongingto the overall construction machine (indeed, thiswork cell can be extended to include most of theplanet surface if we consider additional functionsfor exploration). The function of the constructionmachine would be to construct the base.Breaking this machine down into its component


tasks, it may be useful to define a generic mobileplatform that has plug-in implements to performvarious work, according to the eighth principle.The construction machine would consist ofseveral of these platforms. Perhaps there is onemobile platform on each of the four landers, orbetter yet, the landers themselves convert intothe platforms. These platforms can work togetherin parallel, or individually by moving from onetask to the next and changing implements asthey go. Their individual work cells all overlapaccording to the tasks required to perform andcomplete the construction in the overallconstruction machine work cell. These

individual mobile platforms might have severalparallel schemes for power, includingmicrowaves sent from the TG unit, photovoltaics,wind turbines, and ISRU derived methane orhydrogen. The mobile platform 's job is simply toget from point A to point B, over whatever terrainmay exist, carrying the robotic implementpayload. Once it arrives, it stops and allows therobotic implement to do its job. The roboticimplements would include tools for lifting, drilling,excavation, material handling, surveying,earthmoving, ISRU, and dexterous arms andmanipulators.

Next, in our design we can break down eachmobile platform and robotic implement into itsconstituent work cells. These machines would beconstructed from the kit-of-parts supportstructure discussed earlier, with nested simplekinematic and robotic elements to perform eachtask. The designer should be aware of thesevarious functions, and understand the rules andgrammars that would be required for a mobileplatform entity to function in a robust manner.

Finally, each kinematic or robotic primitive can bebroken down into kit-of-parts pieces that arejoined together in a way to affect lineardisplacement or revolute motion through linkages,levers, wheels, etc. The greatest flexibility wouldbe achieved by considering these simplemechanisms as components in the kit-of-partssystem, perhaps inspired by the brilliant way theLego Mindstorms has solved these problems. Italso should be noted here that linear andrevolute actuators that are to perform in extremetemperatures and harsh environments must be

space-rated and therefore may be of a differentform than their Earth-bound cousins. Hydraulicsare not acceptable because of the potential leaksand poor performance in extreme temperatures.Electric motors must also be cooled if they are tobe used in a vacuum or in environments wherethe heat cannot dissipate properly. There aremany types of linear and revolute actuatorsavailable on the market that are space-rated, butthe designer should be familiar with their powersupply and communication scheme.

With several mobile platforms, each assembledfrom the same kit-of-parts system as the habitatenclosure elements, it may be an unnecessaryredundancy to also have separate pressurizedrovers. Instead, since the platform 's job is to getfrom point A to point B, an add-on portablepressure vessel can plug-in just as well as thepreviously discussed robotic implements. Thesepressure vessels would of necessity include adocking pressure port, and can be single ordouble volume depending on the scheme for theEVA airlock, or triple volume if a suitport is to beused (Cohen, 2000). The advantage of having adecoupleable pressure volume is tremendous.On expeditions or explorations, crew memberscan temporarily decouple the module to functionas a temporary field habitat, and use the roboticplatform by itself to perform other work.

Figure 17: Robotic platform schematic

Platform remains

level during

operation

60 deg 60 deg


In the Mars parametric module project, Howe &Howe (2000) proposed a self-propelled roboticplatform with an overhead frame that convertedfrom a lander, based on an earlier design byMatsumoto, Yoshida & Ueno (1992). Theplatform could hold two ISS-type cylinders underthe belly, to easily facilitate raising and lowering.

Digital Grammar: The LDS BuildingSystem was based on a parametric block ofspace that could be manipulated into a widerange of volumes and building types to fit avariety of sites. The kit-of-parts system had adigital representation that included geometry andbehavior of the robotic construction system.Watanabe (1999) describes a genetic algorithm(GA) that begins with a set of program andcontextual parameters connected with aspecified site, and works through hundreds ofiterations of block configurations in an attempt tofind an optimum design solution throughemergence. Once the right configuration hasbeen found, the robotic system can construct thebuilding autonomously, one block at a time. If wefollow the second principle in our space-basedkit-of-parts system design, the grammars wehave defined may allow us to deliver a packageof robots and components to any location, andallow the system to construct itself. The digitalmodel will drive the system to construct anoptimum habitat configuration no matter howmany rocks or hills are encountered. Granted,this may not be appropriate for the simplestructures needed in the FMO, but largersettlements may benefit from this technology ifthe original kit-of-parts is designed with this inmind.

Another advantage of having a rich digitalrepresentation of the kit-of-parts building systemis virtual monitoring and control conforming to thethird principle. The model can function as amathematically correct version its real-worldcounterpart, which can help govern the systemthrough the monitoring of habitat vital signs .Linking each component primitive to its digitalcounterpart, especially in the case of kinematicmechanisms, will help controllers quickly spotproblem areas.

The Unified Grammar: Applying thetwelve principles of Kit-of-parts Theory willfacilitate the design of a robust roboticconstruction system for both orbital and planetaryarchitecture. Building components, motionprimitives, robotic equipment, and digital objectscan be unified in one overall grammar that cancarry us through Class I, II, and III surface habitatconstruction phases.

Extended Applications

The construction of a wide range of Class IIstructures will pave the way for experimentationin the use of in-situ materials. Class III structureswill utilize in-situ construction techniques in orderto supplement the system and reduce thedependence on Earth resupply. The following area few thoughts on ISRU for constructionmaterials, and the eventual goal of approachinga closed, sustainable construction system.

In-situ resources: Recently the MarsOdyssey spacecraft detected significant amountsof water ice on the Mars south pole. Thepresence of water ice will allow us to supplementconsumables caches of oxygen and hydrogenused in the CELSS and for fuels, combined withmethane harvested from the atmosphere.Consumables may be the top priority in a missionto Mars, but ISRU technology can also beapplied to the preparation of building materials.Class III structures may begin with the use ofstone, concrete, bricks, and other course in situmaterials. Shimizu Corporation of Japan hasbeen involved with research concerning thefeasibility of producing concrete out of Lunarregolith (Matsumoto, Yoshida & Kanamori, 1999),and our colleague the late Dubbink (2002) hascited several proposals for the use of brick, lowergrade site-fired ceramics, and even ice structuresto form vaults. Other use of in situ rock and soilinclude the creation of simple building units byfilling bags with sand (Howe & Howe, 2000). Thesignificance of using these coarse materials isthat they are massive and are useful for radiationshielding, and also that we as architects havecenturies of experience using them.

This said and acknowledged, it must also bepointed out that as architects we have struggled


for decades to bring our craft out of the stone-age and into the information age. The argumentpresented for Kit-of-parts Theory is one effort toestablish a new paradigm for architecture toseparate itself from primitive constructiontechniques (well established though they maybe). Therefore, it is not our intention to gobackwards and depend almost entirely on coursebuilding materials and wet trades. Instead, themajor thrust of ISRU in construction should be tomaintain the high level of technology in our useof materials, structure, function, and aesthetics.In the Kit-of-parts Theory therefore, we shallrelegate the use of course building materials tolie within the definition of the twelfth principle asa means of assisting more formal systems tointerface with the chaos of an undeveloped sitein a harsh environment. Concrete, brick,sandbags, and stones may be used assupplementary elements that help the formal kit-of-parts to unravel gracefully at the edges andhelp it to fit into the landscape.

The availability of ores for the production of highperformance materials such as metals, glass,and glass fibers is quite high. So far, it isestimated that Mars soil contains 10% to 15%iron as compared to only 5% on Earth(Stefanescu, Grugel, & Curreri, 1998). The samestudy shows that titanium content ranges from0.4% to 0.7% on Mars compared to 0.5% onEarth. Other metals are also plentiful in Mars soil,but aluminum content is slightly less than Earth.Stefanescu et al. (1998) also describes severaltechniques for melting, processing, and castingmetals in low gravity environments. Anotherstudy describes the availability of ores in Lunarsoil for the production of aluminum, titanium,glass and glass fiber, silicon, and carboncomposites, and describes several methods forprocessing the raw materials into useable forms(Noever et al., 1998).

Knowing the types of materials available, andtheir processed forms is significant to a designer.During the course of Kit-of-parts Theory research,a fully functional deployable robotic kiosk wasdesigned and manufactured based on a limitednumber of materials, and using a specific set ofmanufacturing processes known in advance(Howe, 2001). The Digiosk kiosk was designed

from the start using the simple manufacturingprocesses as built-in constraints in the designspecification. Using these available materials,processes, and methods in the design andmanufacture of components on Earth, we caninsure a smooth transition from Class II to ClassIII structures without having to backtrack and relywholly on archaic building methods.

Sustainable System: In the world ofscience, the term closed system refers to acomplex system that exchanges only energy withits surrounding environment (Peet, 1992). Thesystem is in equilibrium so that matter withinremains. In some ways we can say that theultimate goal of a space-based constructionsystem is to reach a closed or quasi-closed state.As we approach a closed system, more andmore parts would be manufactured using in-situmaterials, and all the mechanisms andprocesses used to manufacture the in-situ partswould belong to the same kit-of-parts system. Inother words, a closed system would consist ofcomponents and mechanisms that could buildcopies of themselves and perform self-maintenance. The system would be closed if weassume that the processes, grammars,components, and mechanisms lie within the set(and by the way throw in the planet too), and thatthere is no longer any need to supplement it withEarth-manufactured components.

Attaining the state of closed system will requireconsiderable advances in ISRU technology alongthe lines of robotic mining and processing of rawmaterials literally from scratch, including theproduction of all chemicals needed for leachingand other treatments. A great number ofcompounds must be produced, and processespackaged before we approach this ideal.Considering the simple materials needed for astructure is within our reach now, but all thematerials and processes needed to produceelectrical conductors, insulators, high qualityoptics, sophisticated instruments, computercomponents, actuators, and sensors for a self-replicating kit-of-parts system involve problemsthat may seem insurmountable.

There are many questions to ask about thebehavior of such a sustainable system. Future


studies would need to simulate manufacturedquality in successive generations of self-reproduction. Several particular fields deserveattention in this respect. The study of CellularAutomata (CA) has potential for predicting multi-generation behavior given a finite set ofcomponents and contextual rules (Wolfram,1994). Some current research in CA uses simplesystems of squares placed in a grid, where thestate of one square is determined by thecollective states of all eight surrounding squares.Other research uses more advanced CA models,and it is conceivable that the components of ourconstruction system could be modeled using CAtheory.

Other future research should includenanotechnology and biotechnology, whererobotic mechanisms approach the scale andfunctionality of the coolly efficient God 's kit-of-parts that is already a closed system.Nanotechnology calls for the manufacture ofmillions if not billions of cell-sized self-replicatingmicro factories. For our purposes, we wouldneed the capability to program these factories tocreate copies of themselves using in-situmaterials, and also perform other tasks such asbuild larger components one molecule at a time.We can cross these hurdles when we get to them,but it is helpful to keep these future possibilitiesin mind when we design our space-based kit-of-parts construction system.

CONCLUSION

By understanding how both physical elementsand simple kinematic motions can be treated asprimitive building blocks, we will be able todesign an enhanced kit-of-parts building systemthat optimizes flexibility and robotic self-construction. Analyzing precedent, twelveprinciples of category, object-oriented, virtualmanagement, strong axis, seventh joint, interface,stackability, kinematics, work cell, hierarchy,grammar, and formal / informal / chaos werederived as key attributes in a universal space-based kit-of-parts construction system.Eventually we may be able to conceive of asystem that is entirely closed, where processesand mechanisms used to manufacture in-situ

parts are capable of building copies ofthemselves and performing self-maintenance.

THAT, is the ultimate construction toy.

REFERENCES

Adams, C.M. & McCurdy, M.R. (2000).Habitability in Advanced Space MissionDesign, Part Two: Evaluation of CurrentElements. Proceedings of the 29thInternational Conference on EnvironmentalScience (ICES). Warrenburg, PA: Society ofAutomotive Engineers.

Akinaga M. (1993, June 7). Four Firms StartConstruction in the Search for a NewArchitectural Manufacturing Paradigm. NikkeiArchitecture, pp.160-165. (Article inJapanese).

Ambasz, E. (Ed.). (1972). Italy: The NewDomestic Landscape, Achievements andProblems of Italian Design. New York: TheMuseum of Modern Art.

Bernhold, L.E., Abraham, D.M., & Reinhart, D.B.(1990). FMS Approach to ConstructionAutomation. Journal of AerospaceEngineering 3, 2, 108-121.

Bridgewater, C., (1993). Principles of Design forAutomation applied to construction tasks.Automation in Construction 2, 57-64.

Ching, F.D.K. (1996). Architecture: Form, Space,and Order (2nd Ed.). New York: John Wiley &Sons, Inc.

Cohen, M.M. (1986). Lightweight Structures inSpace Station Configurations. Proceedings ofthe First International Conference onLightweight Structures in Architecture(LSA86). University of New South Wales,Australia, 24-29 August 1986: Unisearch, Ltd.


Cohen, M.M. (1996a). Habitat Distinctions:Planetary versus Interplanetary Architecture.Proceedings of the Space Programs andTechnologies Conference, 24-26 September1996, Huntsville, Alabama. Reston, VA:American Institute of Aeronautics andAstronautics.

Cohen, M.M. (1996b). First Mars OutpostHabitation Strategy. In Stoker, C.R. & Emmart,C. (Eds.), Strategies for Mars: A Guide toHuman Exploration (pp. 465-512). San Diego,CA: Univelt, Inc. for the AmericanAstronomical Society.

Cohen, M.M. (2000). Airlocks for PressurizedRovers, NASA Tech Brief ARC-14557.Washington DC: NASA.

Cohen, M.M. & Bussolari, S. (1987). HumanFactors in Space Station Architecture II —EVA Access Facility: A Comparative Analysisof Four Concepts for On-orbit Space SuitServicing, NASA-TM-86856. Washington DC:NASA.

Cohen, M.M. & Kennedy, K.J. (1997). Habitatsand Surface Construction: Technology andDevelopment Roadmap. In Noor, A.K. &Malone, J.B. (Eds.), Government-sponsoredPrograms on Structures TechnologyNASA/CP-97-206241, (pp. 75-96),.Washington DC: NASA.

Daoud, H. (1999). Laser Technology Applied toEarthworks. Proceedings of the InternationalSymposium on Automation and Robotics inConstruction (ISARC16), 22-24 September1999, Madrid, Spain. London: InternationalAssociation for Automation and Robotics inConstruction (IAARC).

Davies, C. (1988). High Tech Architecture.London: Thames and Hudson.

Diamant, R.M.E. (1965). Industrialised Building 2.London: Lliffe Books Ltd.

Dubbink, T.B. (2002). Har Decher: Architecturefor a Settlement on Mars. Proceedings of the32nd International Conference onEnvironmental Systems (ICES2002), 15-18July 2002, San Antonio, Texas. Warrendale,PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Herzog, T. (1976). Pneumatic Structures: AHandbook of Inflatable Architecture. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Howe, A.S. (1997). A Network-based Kit-of-partsVirtual Building System. Proceedings ofCAAD Futures 97. 4-6 August 1997, Munich,Germany, pp. 691-706. Boston: Kluwer.

Howe, A.S. (1998). A new paradigm for life-cyclemanagement of kit-of-parts building systems.(Doctoral Dissertation, University of Michigan,1998). University Microfilms International, No.9909905.

Howe, A.S., Ishii, I., & Yoshida, T. (1999). Kit-of-parts: A review of object-oriented constructiontechniques. Proceedings of the InternationalSymposium on Automation and Robotics inConstruction (ISARC16). 22-24 September1999, Madrid, Spain. London: InternationalAssociation for Automation and Robotics inConstruction (IAARC).

Howe, A.S. (2000). Designing for AutomatedConstruction. Automation in Construction 9, 3,259-276.

Howe, A.S., & Howe, J.W. (2000). Applyingconstruction automation research toextraterrestrial building projects. Proceedingsof the 30th International Conference onEnvironmental Systems (ICES2000),Toulouse, France. Warrendale, PA: Society ofAutomotive Engineers.

Howe, A.S. (2001). Automated construction andthe power of the designer. In P. Telang(Chair), E-Space. Architecture / Engineering /Construction (AEC) workshop held in Mumbai,India.


Hublitz, I. (2002). Engineering Concepts forInflatable Mars Greenhouses. Proceedings ofthe 32nd International Conference onEnvironmental Systems (ICES2002), 15-18July 2002, San Antonio, Texas. Warrendale,PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

Kennedy, K.J. (1999). ISS TransHab architecturedescription. Proceedings of the 29thInternational Conference on EnvironmentalSystems (ICES1999). Warrendale, PA:Society of Automotive Engineers.

Kennedy, K.J. (2002). The Vernacular of SpaceArchitecture. Online proceedings of the 1stAerospace Architecture Symposium(AAS2002), 10-11 October 2002, Houston,Texas. Reston, VA: American Institute ofAeronautics and Astronautics. Availableonline at: http://www.aiaa.org

Konopek, A. (2001). Biologically Inspired FoldingStructure for Space Habitats. Proceedings ofthe 31th International Conference onEnvironmental Systems (ICES2001).Warrendale, PA: Society of AutomotiveEngineers.

Kultermann, U. (1970). Kenzo Tange:Architecture and Urban design 1946-1969.New York: Praeger Publishers.

Kurita, H., Tezuka, T., & Takada, H. (1993).Robot Oriented Modular Construction System- part II: Design and Logistics. Proceedings ofthe International Symposium on Automationand Robotics in Construction (ISARC10),(pp.309-316), Houston, Texas. Amsterdam:Elsevier.

Kurokawa, K. (1977). Metabolism in Architecture.Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, Inc.

Marks, R.W. (1960). The Dymaxion World ofBuckminster Fuller. New York: ReinholdPublishing Corporation.

Matsumoto, S., Yoshida, T., & Kanamori, Y.(1999). Construction of Bases from LunarRegolith. Proceedings of 50th InternationalAstronautical Congress, 4-8 October 1999,Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Paris:International Astronautical Federation.

Matsumoto, S., Yoshida, T., & Ueno, H. (1992).Getsumen Kichi Kansetsu Sagyo to Robotics(Construction Robots for Lunar Base).Proceedings of Robotics / MechatronicsKoenkai 92: Koen Ronbunshu (Vol. A). 16-18June 1992, Kawasaki, Japan. Tokyo: NihonKikai Gakkai.

Miyamoto, Ishii, Shibata, Dobashi, Howe,Yoshida, Takada, Ueno, Kunugi, Yagi,Nakada, Hatakeyama, Kikawada, Yomo, &Koga, (1998). A study on assembly processfor large scale structures. IntelligentManufacturing Systems (IMS) IF7 report.Tokyo: IMS Collaborative.

Murray, I.Z. (1996). Moshe Safdie: Buildings andProjects 1967-1992. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Nakamura, T. (ed.). (1988). Norman Foster1964-1987. A + U Architecture and Urbanism,May Extra Edition.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration(2001). Education Brief: Humans and Robots.EB-2001-04-004-JSC. Washington DC:NASA.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration(n.d.). Retrieved 18 June 2002 from spacestation , assembly , mobile servicingsystem on web site:http://spaceflight.nasa.gov

Noever, Smith, Sibille, Brown, Cronise, &Lehoczky, (1998). High PerformanceMaterials Applications to Moon / MarsMissions and Bases. Proceedings of the SixthInternational Conference and Exposition onEngineering, Construction, and Operations inSpace (Space 98), pp.275-285, 26-30 April1998, Albequerque, New Mexico. Reston, VA:American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).


Nixon, D., & Kaplicky, J. (1986 August).Aerospace Technology as a Resource forNew Lightweight Structures Concepts.Proceedings of the First InternationalConference on Lightweight Structures inArchitecture. University of New South Wales,Australia, 24-29 August 1986: Unisearch, Ltd.

Nixon, D., & Kaplicky, J. (1990 July). SpacecraftAccommodation Strategies for Manned MarsMissions, SAE 901418. 20th InternationalConference on Environmental Systems(ICES), 9-12 July 1990, Williamsburg, VA.Warrendale, PA: Society of AutomotiveEngineers.

Okushi, J. (1996). First Mars outpostarchitectural study I. Proceedings of the 26thInternational Conference on EnvironmentalSystems (ICES1996), Monterey, California.Warrendale, PA: Society of AutomotiveEngineers.

Pawley, M. (1993). Future Systems: The Story ofTomorrow. London: Phaidon Press Limited.

Peet, J. (1992). Energy and the EcologicalEconomics of Sustainability, (pp. 13-14).Washington DC: Island Press.

Pesce, M. (1995). VRML: Browsing & BuildingCyberspace. Indianapolis, Indiana: NewRiders Publishing.

Sakao, T., Kondoh, S., Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama,T. (1996). The Development of a CellularAutomatic Warehouse. Proceedings of the1996 IEEE/RSJ International Conference onIntelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 96):Robotic Intelligent Interacting with DynamicWorlds, 1, (pp.324-331), Osaka, Japan. NewYork: Institute of Electrical and ElectronicsEngineers (IEEE).

Skibniewski, M.J., & Wooldridge, S.C. (1992).Robotic materials handling for automatedbuilding construction technology. Automationin Construction 1, 251-266.

Stefanescu, D.M., Grugel, R.N., Curreri, P.A.(1998). In situ Resource Utilization forProcessing of Metal Alloys on Lunar andMars Bases. Proceedings of the SixthInternational Conference and Exposition onEngineering, Construction, and Operations inSpace (Space 98), pp.266-274, 26-30 April1998, Albequerque, New Mexico. Reston, VA:American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).

Swaback, V.D. (1970). Production Dwellings.Spring Green, Wisconsin: The Frank LloydWright Foundation.

Van Heuvel, W.J. (1992). Structuralism in DutchArchitecture. Rotterdam: Uitgeverij Publishers.

Watanabe, K. (1999). Emergence amplified soft-factory design and reconfigurable buildingmaterials, Intelligent Manufacturing Systems(IMS) Gnosis report, Tokyo: IMSCollaborative.

Wolfram, S. (1994), Cellular Automata andComplexity: Collected Papers. Reading,Mass.: Addison-Wesley.

Yagi, J. (1999). Automation and Robotics inConstruction in Japan - State of the Art.Proceedings of the International Symposiumon Automation and Robotics in Construction(ISARC16), 22-24 September 1999, Madrid,Spain. London: IAARC.

Yim, M., Zhang, Y., & Duff, D. (2002 February).Modular robots. IEEE Spectrum, 39, 2, 30-34.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many people deserve thanks for contributing tothis paper. Indirectly my wife Eiko Howe andchildren have made it possible through their longsuffering and curiosity, asking the right questionsat the right time. Also, Marc Cohen, ConstanceAdams, Ted Hall, and other members of theAIAA DETC Aerospace Architecture Subcommittee have provided valuable comments.Many others from NASA, Kajima Corporation,Shimizu Corporation, University of Hong Kong,and, University of Oregon (both faculty and


students) also deserve thanks but must remainunnamed due to lack of space.

CONTACT INFORMATION

A. Scott Howe, Ph.D., architectPlug-in Creations Architecture, LLC3762 West 11th Avenue #239Eugene, Oregon 97402-3010Voicemail & Fax +1 (360) 233-5355Email: [email protected]: http://www.plugin-creations.com/us/ash

A. Scott Howe, Ph.D., Assistant ProfessorUniversity of Hong KongDepartment of Architecture3/F Knowles BuildingPokfulam Road, Hong Kong, ChinaTel: +852-2859-2138

DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS ANDABBREVIATIONS

AMURAD: AutoMatic Up Rising AssemblyDevice; a working robotic constructionsystem by Kajima Corporation.

CELSS: Closed-loop Ecological Life SupportSystem; a life support system thatrequires minimal external resources formaintenance, to be used on extendedmissions away from Earth.

CA: Cellular Automata; finite elementsgoverned by finite rules in a closedsystem for the purpose of studyingcomplex systems.

DDC: Direct Digital Control; a technology thatallows remote mechanisms to becontrolled from a network rather than inisolation.

EVA: ExtraVehicular Activity; to exit aspacecraft or habitat into the vacuum ofspace or a hostile atmosphere.

FMO: First Mars Outpost.

GRAMMAR: Rules or recipes for definingrelationships between a finite number ofprimitives in a set.

ISS: International Space Station.

IT: Information Technology.

LDS: Latter-day Saint; an acronym for theChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-daySaints.

ISRU: In Situ Resource Utilization; the use ofmaterials found in off-world planetaryenvironments.

NASA: National Aeronautics and SpaceAdministration.

SEVENTH JOINT: Assuming that six revolutejoints correspond to six degrees offreedom, the seventh joint is anallegorical mechanism that belongs tothe object being grasped by a roboticmanipulator in order to assist the robot inits own assembly.

SHIN-GYO-SO: A traditional ordering techniquethat preserves formal systems at the core,but allows interaction with chaos at theborders.

SI: Support / Infill; a construction techniquethat distinguishes between long-life,permanent structural megaframes fromtemporary local walls, modules, andother elements supported by the frame.

SSRMS: Space Station Robotic ManipulatorSystem.

STRONG AXIS: Referring to devices, processes,and geometries that lend themselvestoward a strong axis or direction ofassembly.

TG: Thermoelectric Generator.

WORK CELL: The total volume defined by arobot 's work coverage area and therange of its manipulators.

[american institute of aeronautics and astronautics aiaa space architecture symposium - houston,...

Documents