ENVS 1008

Virtual Enviroments

Semester 2/2013

Radical Dynamism

Arvin Lourdenadin

633846

IDEATION

IDEATION COMMENCEMENT IDEAS

From my new understanding of Profile and Sesction sys-tems, and my pre-concieved knowledge of personal space, I created a series of designs that could possibly act as second skins that could serve as the foundation of my design. The images are just sketches as to which could be further developed.

Design 1-This design shows similarity with the object because there is a defensive spiked lining along the longest vulnerable area (spine). It shows the imitation of a rib cage being sturdy and rigid in the front body and the birds eye perspective of your “portable territory”.

Design 2-The design revolves around the head, some refer to as the most important part of your body. Instead of a spiked threatening area, it simply is a barricade which conceals your head. Unlike a helment it gives you your personal space with your helmet. Birds eye view shows the advantage of using a circle shape as it covers all angles.

Design 3- Focuses on a more customisable design. All personal spaces vary dependant on each peron. So in starting with a cylinder as the frame (equal on all sides). The hangind of spiked geometrical shapes allows each user to personalise their own territory.

As is shown, I chose to take inspirations from animal char-acteristics due to their continual protective instincts nec-essary to survive in the wild. Additionally “animals learn individual distance in early years” However one problem I found was the restraint of movement a profile and sec-tion system had. This came to light as many protection systems animals employ are triggered by fear or when a predator will invade personal space. Without movement in design there will not be a triggered action but more of defensive armour with no life like a second skin should have.

IDEATION MATERIAL SYSTEMS

In introducing this module, we will be focussing on the core incentive/mission of the Second Skin Project’ and the ideologies of different material systems. Before we even started thinking about designing our second skin we primarily researched an exam-ple of a material system. This approach, aligned itself with the reading ‘ 300 years of Industrial Design’ where it states that “ob-servation is a necessary part of creation”.

BRIEF

PROFILE & SECTIONThe Stegosaurus Wood Kit presented my introduction into the material system Profile and Section. Through measured, plan, sec-tion and elevation drawings, the manipulation of form and structure and the delailed construction of the object , I was able to explore this material system on an intimate level.

The drawn observations were produced in different ways. As the object is supplied deconstructed it allowed me to measure each piece at the very beginning of the process. However the other drawings required the object to be constructed in order to be illustrated. In creating the orthographic drawings by scanning the object and then by using this as a foundation the image is built up into a more detailed diagram.

Photograph of the use of joints Illustration of rib cage Birdes-eye view of object Individula pieces

In order to experiment with volume and space I manipulated the object only using the original pieces. I took disregard to the option of introducing a new material in the manipulation as I believe that it would have been much more difficult to see the extents of which more or less volume can be created using the same resources.

IDEATION SUMMARY & ANALYSIS

I chose to take inspirations from animal characteristics due to their continual protective instincts necessary to survive in the wild. Additionally “animals learn individual distance in early years” However one problem I found was the restraint of move-ment a profile and section system had. This came to light as many protection systems animals employ are triggered by fear or when a predator will invade personal space. Without move-ment in design there will not be a triggered action but more of defensive armour with no life like a second skin should have.

The ideation process was vey much integrated with an intro-duction into the ideas of Personal space, as mentioned before Sommer’s reading was a fundemental part in defining my own personal space. From the lectures we assertain that personal space is exclusive to an individuals character and as Paul Loh mentioned it is also dependant on the relationship held with the intruder. Thus, our design must be exlusive to one person, I men-tioned before the possibility of including a adjustable design. However I believe that it places too many constraints on the project and put a harness on the creativity of our design

I was shown the significane of the internal and unseen areas of an object from the reading How to layout a Croissant’. Using this, allowed me to understand in depth different material sys-tems by unravelling, deconstructing and manipulating systems.

Ifelt that I had benefitted from this module in experiencing the groundwork of design. However due to the situation to come my design section was rendered useless as my materiall system was dropped.

DESIGN

DESIGN MATERIAL SYSTEMS

When moving into a group, the first thing addressed was which material system to move forward with as we all had different types. I found that there were an excess of reasons to drop Profile and Section thus we removed that from the options. Addition-ally Anna and Michael’s initial ideas seemed to strike distinct similarities even though one was based on Panel and Fold and the other was Skin and Bone. Thus we decided to combine characteristics from both.

DISCARDING A MATERIAL SYSTEM

PANEL AND FOLD SKIN AND BONEThe artichoke shows elements of defensiveness and thicker skin through the layers stacking together. Seemingly amazing that all the leaves uniquely different yet the overall object creates a nearly symettrical geometric shape. Ideas that were gained from this object are, overlapping elements, stacking to create strength, repetition and aesthetically pleasing through shape.

The giraffe specifcally demonstrate integrating move-ment into the design. The use of a skin and bone system showed very beneficial options that we should use. A primary benefit was the objects ability to return to its original shape after its form had been manipu-lated. However one specific trait which would not be relevant to our design was the inconsistency in how the form was manipulated each time.

DESIGN PERSONAL SPACE

After reading Sommers study on Personal Space. I used aspects of it and my own personal conceptions to formulate a physical drawing for the areas in which I feel is my “invisible boundar[y] surrounding [my own] body into which intruders may not come”.

INDIVIDUAL CONCEPT OF PERSONAL SPACE

Sometimes I feel that instead of protecting your vul-nerable areas, you can take a different approach by enhancing other parts of your body to protect these areas. In this way you can see how rugby player take tackles with their shoulders. Therefore you can also defend your personal space if you design around your strongest parts of your body.

“Unwanted social Inter-couse”

“Defensive measures againts invasions”

“Individual territory”

DESIGN PERSONAL SPACE

BEHAVIOURAL INSTINCTSAssociated with personal space, it was essential that we investigated the natural reac-tions that one foregoes when personal space is intruded. If we can build a design, which triggers from these actions, it will be able to dispatch when your space is intruded. By doing this it stops being a separate entity to your body but integrates itself to be an extension of your actions.

When reffering to the natural movements caused by the intru-sion of one personal space, the precednt “wings” can prove to contain relevant ideas”. Dukno Yoon’s wings exhibition provides us with mechnical objects designed to imitate the movements of birds. The objects appealed to us due their beauty through sim-plicity. The wings were all triggered by the minimal movements of either the wrists, fingers or arms. The pivotal system used allows minimal body movement to translate into a much larger me-hanical motion. By doing this Yoon elaborates on the idea that the piece becomes an extension of our body similar to a sec-ond skin. Yoon’s mission behind these pieces were purely from a visual art perspective. However by understanding the basic pivotal structures used we were able to adapt this into our de-sign to create a practical use rather than art. Thus, when some intrudes your personal space the second skin is triggered by the users natural reaction.

RELEVANCE OF PRECEDENT

DESIGN INITIAL DESIGN

The first design is a basic design to show where we were going to start. The basic geometric shape that we aimed to achieve was a ‘spiked kite’. The design shows reopetition of the kite panel and the area in which we de-cided to use.

DESIGN INITIAL DESIGN ALTERATIONS

Using the design of the first panel we created a baisc proto-type from paper due to its ability to be manipulated easily. However what we found was that stability was lost when re-stacking the panels. In order to relinquish this problem, a indent was introduced closer to the pivot. Thus when re-stack-ing the panels, it made it physically chaleenging for the panels to be in the wrong allignment. As a new panel was created a new rendering of the final design was acreated however very little aaesthetic appearance changed.

DESIGN MECHANICAL PROTOTYPEOnce the general panels were designed, it was essential to move hastily alonmg to designing the mechanical system. Unlike Yoon’s pieces, our second skin was on a much largter scale. However we decided to create a system which would work on each series of panels (3 panels), then link them to the same movement once this was accomplished.

Our original sketch shows the basic ideology behing the move-ment,The pulling tension of a string, to lift up the panels in a simultaneous action. As the string slacks the the panels return to their stationary stacked position.

However with mechanical design, it is necessary to create a ophys-ical model as only then will you be able to confirm its functioning perfomance.

The result of this protype was generally a sucess. However as said previopusly the instability of the panels and the, inconsistent lateral movement led us to creat panel #2. The mechanism itself needed additional alteration to the pivot as it was a hand-crafted piece. This would prove a problem if we did not create a geneic pivot, as one was needed for every series of panels. The generic pivot meant that all series would lift together as the pivot would be the same tightness.

DESIGN SUMMARY & ANALYSIS

This was the first time when we started to experiment with Rhino deeply. We set our selves up to create more complex render-ings from the Ideation stage but the ele-ments of our design are very simple. The panel is a common geometric shape and apart from that we enhaced a lot of repe-tition. Where our design reaches complex-ity is in the mechanism stage. It is difficult for us to design a moving prototype only on computer because we need to see its real life functionality. This is why our first mechanical prototype is included in the design stage, only after we observed this, we could alter the design.

One of the dominat inspirations of our design actually was the TED talk by Thom-as Heatherwick. This speech, described his ‘Seed Cathedral building. What interested me the mosdt was his ability to give his building an everchanging persona from every angle through the use of material. The design utilised heavy repetition in or-der to create an illusion that the building moved. Even though, our design physical-ly moved, it allowed us to think about the choice of material we needed to give off the threatening and striking characteristic we desired.

Our success in the physical protype pre-pared us for the panel fabrication process well. However I feel that we should have explored into linking the panels together and even maybe make a large proto-type. As illustrated in the reading ‘Lost in Parameter Space’, ‘complex shapes unleashed by digital design tools’, did not always flow well when put into manufac-ture. This worried me, as our vision was to create complexity through multiple min-imalistic elements. The idea that it would work as a single series but not as a series of series. This is why I feel that in the me-chanical side, our overlooking of how to link the panels left me in doubt of fabrica-tion success.

FABRICATION

FABRICATION PROTOTYPE #1

Using the new panel to form this protype we were able to see if our adjustments had made a significant imact. The new fold in the panel improved the design significantly by creating a neater movement, a more stability and added a degree of sophistication.

To create this prototype, we did not use the laser cutter. Instead we handcrafted it by using pasteboard. The change in material gave the prototype a completely different feel. There was more rigidity and the panels looked much smarter. However the weight of the material made the movement not as we visiualised.

The other material chage was string to fishing wire. This was a much more positive change. The fishing wire was very concealed and hard to see and practically it was much stronger making sure it could lift the heavier panels.

This protype was a good start as it provided an averag eperformance. Additionally we learnt that we must be very careful with our material choice as it will significantly affect our desired motion.

FABRICATION PROTOTYPE #2

Once we had figured out how one series of panels would work we decided it was time to create multiple for the whole arm. In this prototype we decided to utlise the laser cutter, however we made a decision to increase the range of panels by creating smaller and larger ones. A problem we quickly found when consructing was that we did not include a pivot hole or an etched line for folding the panels. This had to be done by hand individually.

We also had to face the problem of how we were to attach each panel to the arm. The most practical way was to yuse velcro straps because they are adjustable and easy to remove.Lastly when all the panels were created we had to link them into the one body movement. This was achieveing by attaching all the wires to a central point at the same tension. However we found that when remobving the skin , it became tangled quickly. This problem needed to be addressed for the final design, otherwise at-taching the design each time would becom a great hassle.

A mistake we made in this design was that we did not create a generic pivot,the pivots all worked well but visually was very dis-pleasing.

FABRICATION REFINEMENT

Before finalising our design alter-ations to elements were needed. The first of these being the pivots. To create a more reined and elegant pivot which was the same for each set of panels, we used thicker wire that was moulded usiong cicular pliers. One option that we chose to ignore because of the constraints of time and material was digitally fabricating pivots. In saying this our final pivots had no issues and were extremely successful.

The second alteration needed was the reorganisation of the panels on the arm. By splitting the panels into three sections, it allowed two things; no tangling when removed from user and a neater and less ob-structed pulling of the wires which resulted in a more efficient and smoother lifting of the panels.

Lastly additional rings to secure the lower panels were attached. This meant a tighter pull and less flaping of the lower panels. As these were all attached, the increased stability of the lower panels meant a chain reaction, thus the whole arm be-came more stable.

FABRICATION FINAL PIECE

After learning in protoype #2 the importance of material in relation to the movement of the opanels, we chose to use 0.6mm polyproylene. This was a good choice as it was flexible, strong and extremely light. The colour we chose was black , giving it a smart, suave and serious look, also to blend with the black clothing.

This was actually the easiest piece to construct because all of the pivot holes and etchings had been laser cut. The material was easy top form and we used a different gluing agent (contact adhesive), for a stronger bond.

FABRICATION SUMMARY & ANALYSIS

Throughout our fabrication process, the sytem evoled from the simple, heavy and messy proto-type to the clean and sharp , fully functioning sec-ond skin, we cal Radical Dynamism. Our stages of fabrication have really been just to refine every element at each stage of prortyping, to leanr from our mistakes of material choice and to always not stray too far from our original visiona nd design. Particular notice can be paid to ‘Architec-ture in the digital age’. This is because it aided us in understanding the ecclectic range of methods used in 2D & 3D models. Our experimentation with laser cutting did have many benefits. It severely re-duced the time of construction but also provided a much cleaner and qualty finish. The only nega-tive aspect we encountere was the burning of the underside of the material. This could have been an issue but luckily the colour of our material is black and the underside is rarely seen in our design. This module was definitely our most chal-lenging but also the most learned. The drastic im-provement gained from using digital and comput-er manufacturing, really opened my eyes ito why handcrafted manufacturing is slowly being lost in todays time. It is clear from both the lecture on the architecture industry and the challenges we had with handcrafting, that there are an exces-sive amounts of benefits in digital manufacturing. Generally it is in a new league of efficiency and quality.

REFLECTION

REFLECTION Virtual Enviroments has been a long, enduous but very rewarding semester. This is hands down one of the more challenging subjects that I have en-countered. I am not saying this because of its ac-ademic difficulty but because it challenges you to transition through many stages of the mind in one assessment. You are constantly moving from thinking creatively, to practically, to balancing the both. In this semester you were forced to constantly think on how every stage affected the final product. I feel this way because it is an easy task to design an object, but when you have to finally create this object you do not get carried away with the impossible absurdities that crea-tivty can lead you to illustrate. Instead you have to precisely reach the meeting point between “craft of design and craft of manufacturing”.

In completeing the design, one of the realisations overcoming me was the importance of ground-work. The stages of Ideation where the signifi-cance of observation and formal recordings of research are important. It is also very necessary because in order to not stray away from task, a strong Ideation is clear for referral at any time in the project.

When reflecting on Design, the ideology of tran-sitioning from a flat surface to a 3D object should always be core in the inital designs. The use of Rhino was very effective in assuring our group that we were on the right part aesthetically.

. However, due to the nature of design residing mainly on mechanical movement, I do not be-lieve that we were able to use Rhino to our full potential. If redone, a mechanical system could be designed on Rhino and elements such as the pivots.

In regards to Fabrication I believe that the only way in which we achieved relative success was through continual trial and error. As we do rec-ognise the benefits of digital manufacture, there is something unique about an intimate hands-on experience which allows you to create more ideas and improvements through the prototyping stage.

The Final Second Skin in itself was a relatively suc-cessful product. Of course there are improvement that could be made to the appearance, the con-sistency of the mechanism and the attachment/de-attachment of the the system but in the time constraints I believe that its perfomance in pro-tecting ones personal space is great.

In concluding this assignment and this semester, I believe that the subject and the seconds skin project in particular has taught me a considera-ble amount of knowledge. My attitude towards digital design has been altered considerably due to my personal improvements in Rhino and devel-opment in these areas has set me up to improve in the future of this course.

REFERENCES Heath, A, Heath D & Jensen ,A 2000, 300 years of industrial design: function, form, technique, 1700-2000 Watson-Guptill, New

York, Selected Extracts

Heatherwick,T (March 2011) Thomas Heatherwick: Building the Seed Cathedral {Video} http://www.ted.com/talks/thomas_heatherwick.html

Iwamoto, L 2009, Digital Fabrications: architectural and material techniques, Princeton Architectural Press, New York , Exclusive Extracts

Kolarevic, B, 2003 Digital Production in Architecture in the Digital Age- Design and Manufacturing, Spon Press, London

Miralles,E,Pinos C ‘How to layout a Croissant” El Croquis, 49/50 pp38-42

Scheurer,F,Stehling, H 2011, “Lost in Parameter Space?”AD: Architectural Design, vol 81 pp-79

Sommer,R 1969, “Spatial invasion” in Sommer ,R, Personal Space : behavioural basis of design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J,pp.26-38