Tutorial 5 - Rules For Subtraction

______________________________


from the project brief.......


//Intent//
The intent of tutorial 5 is to introduce the Document Template as different form of advanced replication, that allows for the use of solids (and surfaces). In addition to the Document Template, the use of rules will be folded into the discussion.

//Tasks//
Model the parts of a project that use a series of related solids. In addition to the part being defined by the framework are there ways the part might be additionally defi ned by external dimensions or points?






Zaha Hadid Blog

Patrik Schumacher - "Parametricism - A New Global Style for Architecture and Urban Design"

i was interested in using Zaha Hadid's proposal for a urban development pattern as it offered a lear idea for a grid layout with variations in the treatment of heights and thicknesses. after completing the tutorial using two flat planes to define the base and top of the created columns, i was interested in using a more complex form to determine the heights of the buildings, as well as an exaggerated base grid to test the limits of the inserted document template. unfortunately their were a number of issues resulting in the final completion.


______________________________

framework.

i first set up a simple grid in which to insert the created block units. the grid was purposely skewed and aligned to provide a number of options of plan type.



in order to contriol the heights, rather than using a flat plane, i chose to create a multi-section surface related to height parameters i created.




______________________________

block set-up.

to create the block, i started a new part file and copied the four point from the base and multi-section surface and "pasted special" into the new file, clicking on the "as result".



with the reference in place, i created the base by projecting the bottom four points into a new sketch and creating a polyline for the outside. i then offset the profile to create a void space. the void space's corners are coincident with diagonals across the block, and the distance from the corner is defined by a created parameter.



to create the top, i inserted a plane through the mean of the four points, and similarly made an outline with a void tied to a different parameter.



i then made the sketches into output profiles, and created a multi-section solid from the outside profiles along a guide from corner to corner in order to avoid the bending it tried to create. for the void, i created a multi-section sold removal from the interior points.




______________________________

results.

the final block piece.



revised parameters.



reulting massing with document template insertions.


a problem existed with a number of the blocks appearing to be to constricted as a result of the base grid/height combo, so i tried going back into the framework sketch to make changes, however the overall product would not update. i tried this a number of times, and even built new blocks and frameworks, all resulting in the same problem of updating the product.


i'm wondering if the fact that i created the base and top surfaces in a sketch within the block part file was the reason for it lacking adaptability? if i had created the block directly in 3d space would it have resulted in a better file? i chose to do sketches since i had trouble determining certain parameters in the 3d space initially.