Turorial 3 - Emergent Form

______________________________


from the project brief.......

//Intent//
The intent of tutorial 3 is to introduce the Product Workbench. You will begin to see how the part and product might be used interactively to shape a structure or assembly. The Assembly Model offers the possibility in which the parts might define the overall form, a bottom-up method of working.

//Tasks//
Again use an existing project that might reuse a set of parts to defi ne an overall form. A masonry arch might be the simplest example of this way of thinking. Develop at least 3 different parts and begin aggregating.

You can use the video capture tool in DP or you can link a series of screen captures together. Upload a video or series of stills to your blog. Again, the representation will be instrumental in describing the method. Consider an animation and methods for showing what is moving and what is static.

to begin this project, i explored a number of options for creating a base element that could be adaptable, including subtracting from a mass, booleaning multiple masses to creat one form, and ultimately creating a twisting brick using the 'multi-section solid' command, running along a spine.

______________________________


brick 1:

process: i created this brick with a number of parameters present, including linking the width to the length, as well as controlling the twist, both vertically and horizontally by creating angular parameters and incorporating the functions into the sketches. by creating a spine, on an angle, the plane for the top of the brick is allowed to be created on a new axis system plane, adapting as the angle parameter is modified. an interesting note was the inherent issue of the multi-section solid extrusion shifting the matching corners from the base profile to the top, resulting in a severe twist in the solid. i was able to fix this by using the 'coupling' command in the dialogue box, matching each corner on the base to the appropriate corner at the top. i chose to keep the initial twsted form as a second option to contrast the coupled result (see brick 2 below).

______________________________


brick 1 moebius:

process: the twisting form of the brick allowed for a moebius-like configuration, which was enhanced and blurred by changing the set parameters that i gave to the brick, those of width and lenght, and angular rotation.

______________________________


brick 2 moebius:

process: brick 2 creates a severe twist, as the initial form offsets the alignment of corners (as mentioned above) producing an extremely exaggerated twist that produces much more severe turns with the same parameter changes as in brick 1.

______________________________


brick 1 + brick 2 hybrid moebius:

process: the final form is a hybrid of brick 1 + brick 2, as they alternate one another throughout the form.

______________________________


moebius edit:

process: this video shows the linking and configuration of the brick 1 moebius, and how the overall from, size and configuration can be changed by adjusting the radius of the spline controlling the twist in the brick.

Tutorial 2 - From Flat to Form

from the project brief.......


//Intent//
The intent of tutorial 2 is to introduce the translation from a flat sketch to 3d form. This assignment will also attempt to create a parametric form where the plan geometry results in varied but controlled associated form.

//Tasks//
You can continue with your work from tutorial 1 or you can work with a different project for this assignment. Again use a project that has (or should have) a strong connection between plan operations and the section or spatial volume.

this project posed a number of issues, partially because of some complexities in projecting 3d, such as getting lost in lines and sketches and projections, but also in trying to create a parametric situation from the plan for the glass pavillion. in the end i chose to use this tutorial as an exploration exercise in how to create a surface, first from extrusion of the walls, to ultimitaley an adaptable roof structure that responds to the sizes and relationships of the various spaces in the pavillion.

______________________________


exploration 1: extrusion.

process: for the extrusions, i began with the plan, made the spaces into object features, which allowed me to extrude them to desired heights. i explored two options for contolling the heights; first was to offset a plane with which to align the extrusion, and second was to extrude to a dimension. both the plane offset and dimension extrusion are linked to my parameter 'roof height 1,' allowing easy linked adaptations later.

result:

______________________________

exploration 2: roof surface 1.

process: this surface test created a simple stucture by projecting the middle point of each space to a height determined by the distance of a diagonal across the room, divided by the 'height divider' parameter i created.

result: two results are posted, the first from the above process, and a second with an added point to the sides of the surface in order to add more articulation.

______________________________

exploration 3: roof surface 2.

process: this surface test added more points in the shaping of the ceiling, by including points at the edges of the room, in addition to the center. at the ends of the rooms, the distance from the corner of bend in the space, through the interstitial zone to the bend of the next room is determined and given the same formula as the center points (length/height divider parameter). a central room was also extruded to the surface in order to enable a split to occur, creating a void in the surface. the 'height divider' number was then adjusted to provide a number of different surface conditions.

results:

Tutorial 1 - Sketching the plan

DISCLAIMER: upload overload!
since i'm a newbie in terms of digital project (and blogging for that matter) these first few tutorial posts may be heavy in images, as i really want to document the process i went through in order to achieve the final outputs, primarily for my future benefit in understanding the characteristics and capabilities of the program.

______________________________


from the project brief.......

//Intent//
The intent of tutorial 1 is to introduce basic navigation and basic organization for the CATIA environment. Almost everything developed within CATIA (and other parametric software) is driven by the sketch. The sketch is defined by a flat plane whose location can be clearly defined. This is a key fact as there are many ways (and locations) to define a plane, and therefore a sketch. Three dimensional surfaces and solids can then be created using various sketches in multiple locations.

//Tasks//
You are to create a plan for building, urban space, or object that you consider to be parametric in conception. Similar to the Borromini plans discussed in class, you must draw a diagram that shows the rules / logics of the bays and subdivisions. Before you start you should consider how the parameters might affect the variations. You must show 5 variations of the plan and explain the implications on the project.

for this assignment, i chose to draw the toledo glass pavilion, by sanaa. i chose this building primarily because of the (apparent) proportional relationships between the various room sizes and corners, and also because i felt it offered a strong exercise in learning to draw in digital project, incorporating curves, offsets, alignments, etc. i chose to draw a portion of the building, the northwest corner creating relationships between the proportions of the gallery spaces through creating formulas relating the lengths, widths and radii within each room, as well as linking the formula back to the previously drawn rooms, thus creating a totally linked sketch. below is the step by step creation of the base layout for the northwest corner of the pavilion.

final plan.......



______________________________


variation 1

adaptations:

changed the gallery 1 space from a length of 20ft, to 8ft.

result:
the proportions of all the rooms shrink in relation to the change in gallery 1, as they are all linked, while the interstitial gallery space also shrinks to adapt to the new proportions and constraints.

______________________________


variation 2

adaptations:

changed the gallery 1 space from a length of 20ft, to 1000ft.

result:
the proportions of all the rooms grow in relation to the change in gallery 1, as they are all linked, while the interstitial gallery space also grows to adapt to the new proportions and constraints.

______________________________


variation 3

adaptations:

removed the constraint of a common distance factor between the rooms, removed the horizontal and vertical restraints on the interstitial gallery space, and changed the length of gallery 1 from 20ft to 100ft.

results:

the sketch was still "over restrained" thus resulting in a situation where the gallery spaces, which are linked to one another proportionally adapt without any problems, however the interstitial gallery can not match the new layout due to its over restraint. (this issue is fixed in variation 4).

______________________________


variation 4

adaptations:

in order to fix the over restraint, i removed the constraint requiring the start of the corner arcs for the interstitial gallery space to be coincidence with start of the arcs of the rooms that they wrap around.

result:
removing the constraints allows the interstitial space to float free from the corners of the rooms, and the scale and proportion of the entire plan adapts according the the increase in scale.

______________________________


variation 5

adaptations:

removed the corner coincidence restraints from the interstitial gallery space, removed all vertical and horizontal restraints from all entities, provided some instances of parallel restraints, and distorted the gallery one form to create a non linear element.

results:
the resulting spaces begin to take on the angles created from the change to gallery 1, as a result of the parallel and offset restraints.