Module 4 final submission 583889

Amaya de Silva583889

Semester 1/2012Virtual Environments

Module 4 Final Submission

P h a s e 1IdeatIon

This process of ejaculation from a point of stillness is what defines this idea of a splash. And thus was ex-

plored using the geometry of a splash. The idea that a single explosion can create thousands of geometry.

From a single moment of an object entering the still liquid, whether it be a bomb, a belly flop or a clean dive,

the geometry of the splash both above and below the water is spectacular. Above the water is an the crea-

tion of a new dimension of the body of existing still water. And looking below the water is an extension of the initial dive.

A splash begins with a single object. It ends with an explosion of energy and liquid.

Below: Three forms of a splash.

A bomb, a belly flop and

dive, each which gives a dis-

tinct pattern and individuality.

Below: The relationship between both the splash and the

idea of an explosion. As the object hits the liquid, there

is an outward explosion from a single point of origin.

Left: The action of a splash above

and below the liquid. The geom-

etry of the splash as it explodes.

P h a s e 1

   From theliteral idea of a splash (right)

To an explosion (left), and the above and below idea of a splash (below)

From the first few stages of modelling, there was a an ambiguous discus-

sion as to literal nature of the natural process. After this was defined to

more extent, a circumscription as to what the tutors were looking for was

found. This enabled a more specific but subtle illustration of the natu-

ral process. When this was not defined it was difficult to specify the con-

cept of being above and below the water. Through this definition of the

context of the natural process, it was possible to model the splash easily.

P h a s e 1

P h a s e 1

In the reading, Ball says that “a pattern is a form in which particular

feature occurs recognisably and regularly.” and I found this extremely

interesting as it addresses the idea that there is a functionality to each

object and what we expect from each form. For example, a chair

is used to sit on, but it can also be used a form of art and display.

Ball also looked at the idea of mathematics in eve-

ryday life, and how if everything is mathematical-

ly defined, how do we create or design anything at all.

As shown in the diagram below, there is a mathematical relation-

ship to each form, with a shell for example being so perfectly ma-

terialised as a logarithmic spiral as a naturally occurring process.

Reflection

Module 1 is the most crucial module in

the entire project as it provides the ba-

sis as well as the means to continue on

with the chosen natural process. With

my chosen natural process of a splash,

I wanted to explore this idea further as

a geometry. Below, in the design of a

structure inspired by a splash, shows

the unnatural geometry of a splash.

Through this module, I was able to learn

that there is more to the idea of a form

than what is first thought. It is harder to

think of an idea, than to pursue it. From

Module 1 I was taught that without a un-

derstanding of the idea behind a natu-

ral process is difficult to understand the

geometries of it. The lectures in the first

2 weeks of this subject were the funda-

mental spores of information to get us

on our way to creating a lantern from a

natural process. Bharat’s advice about

keeping your eyes wide open and your

imagination wild, helped me immense-

ly to explore the process of a splash.

P h a s e 2desIgn

P h a s e 2

Refinement of an idea is predominantly a characteristic of the tools used to model the form.

By using tools within Rhino, the model was refined to the extent that it was possible to mod-

el the natural process easily while still keeping the authenticity of the natural process.

Inquiring the relationship between the different the forms of media used to mod-

el this natural process allows us to individually define the purpose for each of them.

Panelling experimentation - 2D

Above: Modelling the clay model on Rhino. It

was a lot smoother than anticipated.

Creation of a design always has to come back to the underlying idea that there is always a context and purpose to

the form. The idea behind using the above 2D panelling for fabrication was because of it’s triangular geometry and

the effect of the little triangles trough the centre , and thus towards the ends of the model. It was basically an easy was

to portray the idea that a splash extends outwards form a single origin point. Using offset borders, I was able to manipulate the siz-

es of each of the triangular holes to make the splash appear as if it was extending. This idea was however changed later once ad-

vice from Loren suggesting that there should be more “oomph” in the design, as it is about a splash, and not a stationary object.

2D panelling was prefered over 3D panelling

P h a s e 2

Panelling experimentation - 3D

Many attempts were made at creating and designing a panelling system that would be related to the natural process of a splash. In many of the at-

tempts, there were times, where the design may have looked aesthetically pleasing but did not satisfy my efforts at relating the explosion theme to the model.

From the simple 3D panels that were given by Rhino to some 3D custom panelling, there were many options that I had in choosing a 3D panelling system for

me to fabricate. However, there was an issue with the idea that my concept of “splash” would not give off the effect I anticipated. And therefore, I decid-

ed to keep it to just 2D panelling and play with the effects of lighting instead. This was however later rejected as being too soft, and changed in Modules 3 and 4 .

P h a s e 2

Panelling Experimentation - 3D Custom

Ribbing

Above: Other 3D panelling ideas were also taken into account, but as discussed earlier, dismissed for not having the effect I was looking for.

Left: Ribbing was also attempted but it seemed too weak to fabricate, and did not sat-isfy my criteria of being a splash.

P h a s e 2

The second reading for this module was the most in-

teresting, Dahan-Dalmedico was able to draw to-

gether the concept of mathematics and creation in

one. From the lectures, we were able to draw con-

clusions as to how much of the world we actually

crease and how much is mathematically created.

What is human, and what is made by a computer.

Space was also discussed and this relates to the

Module 1 readings of how to define context and

form, and their relationship. Geometrically, there

are thousands of possibilities to each design but

practically there is more to the design as it must

somehow fit the context and purpose of the form.

I attempted to use this in my design, but it ended

up being just more organised than messy at all. This

was a large flaw in my plan to create a natural pro-

cess of a splash lantern, and if doe again, would be

changed completely to incorporate the idea of “un-

organised beauty”. Skyhook design’s explosion, on

the right, shows the messiness of a form, but show’s it

regularity and order in an extremely abstract way.

I particularly found this interesting as I want-

ed to explore this same concept in my model.

Right: Skyhook Design

In the lectures of Module 2, we were able to see the design in

the real world. We were able to witness design of a lighting sys-

tem by Earl Pinto being fabricated, modified, and eventually sold.

It gave quite a lot of inspiration to me to understand that for some-

one learning architecture, there is potential to move into various fields.

From the second lecture we were shown the idea of patterns and spa-

tial dimensions in the real world and how to model them. Using multiple a

weather map, or the plan of a house, a model can be created that re-

lates to human activity, cloud cover etc. This was inspiring as it let me re-

alise that there is more than just finding a literal interpretation of a natural

process. The Eureka pavilion was just amazing in it design, construction

and Paul and his team’s ability to work around the problems they faced.

Left: British Museum, graph of spatial ratio of people

Messy and irregular with a

hint of order

Reflection

Module 2 was the beginning of the extension of the design that we begun in Module 1. Through the skills that we

learnt in being able to analyse thoroughly in Module 1 we were able to create a model in Rhino that would be

symbolic and representative of our natural process. In this module I was taught to keep experimenting and per-

sisting at searching for what you are looking for as you will not be happy with something you don’t want.

I also realised that I should have done something more risky early on (in this Module) and used more experi-

mental 3D custom panelling, to create a more “splash” like look. It would help the final model to become a

more vibrant model and actually get up to the standards of others in the tutorial and in Virtual Environments.

Due to the very safe playing of my model, it seemed very plain and boring in Module 4 even after 3D panel-

ling was added to the model. When deciding which panelling to use, it difficult to understand what the tutors

were looking for. From what angle did they want us to approach this, an abstract, risky way, or a logical, safe way.

It was this that made my decision about 3D panelling go to waste, and why I used only 2D panelling for the first prototype.

If I has more of an idea about what I should be doing, there would more high of a chance that it would have ex-

perimented with more abstract designs. If we had also given more direction in the use of Rhino and the way to

make more complicated designs , with out having to spend hours attempting to discover Rhino tools for our-

selves, I know that I personally would be more likely to have a larger, more complicated panelling system.

P h a s e 3FabrIcatIon

P h a s e 3

Going back to Module 2 after elaborative advice on the purpose of the initial model, iterations were undertaken to change

the deign of the model on Rhino. Cage edits and control points were used to individually control area of the model.

After the advice, more conceptual elements of the model were decided upon. For example, as I was tend-

ing to move away from the natural process, more care was taken in the modelling of the splash the second time

around. Thus, the model was turned upright to imitate the idea that there is a splash both below and above the water.

Left: Model after being morphed

Below: First prototype model on Rhino

Modelling a splash, both in the digital and real worlds

P h a s e 3

The fabrication of this model, firstly comes from the digitali-

zation of the model on Rhino. Using a colour coding system

to divide up each of the groups of elements of the model

enabled me to assemble the model from card easily.

Starting from the bottom of the model a systematical meth-

od of colour coding was used to go up the model and use

one strip at a time until the middle was reached, at which

point a different method was used. For the top half of the

model, a completely different method was used; a “clump”

of panels were connected together, as there were three

of the same shape that went around the whole model.

Grasshopper was used to make the tabs for the model after it was unrolled. This made it a

lot quicker and easier, instead of individually creating each of the tabs. The program was

easy to use and very efficient. Once nested it was also easy to remove unwanted tabs.

P h a s e 3

With everything set out and organised,

a clear goal and plan was set to put the

model together. The nesting tutorials

and exercises were crucial to the de-

velopment of the project as it provided

the necessary skills to submit the file to

Fab Lab. With the Fab lab, there were

some issues relating to the rips in some

of he model and also the time-frame

at which we had to submit the file.

There were some limitations that were

found once commencing the construc-

tion of the model. The materials used

for the back of the panels included

acetate, plastic, tracing paper and a

paper bag. While the initial idea of put-

ting a panel on the back of each hole

was good, once materialised it was

very difficult to fabricate. It was very fid-

dly when attempting to cut each of the

very small panels and sticking each of

them onto the already thin cardboard.

Due to the heaviness of the plastic, it

was difficult to stick on the cardboard

and produced sagging in the panels.

P h a s e 3

The first photo on the left, illustrates the fact that there was an issue seeing elements of the model that was

supposed to be concealed from sight. This created issues as it was not aesthetically pleasing, and was very

difficult to conceal anyway, while still leaving enough room for the lighting. The lighting in this first prototype

was also very unjustified and messy. It didn’t provide the effect I was looking for and was held back even

further by the fact that the see-through paper on the back of the panels did not let enough light through.

On the photo above to the right,it is evident that there is a weakness in the joints at the point where

the two halves meet together. This is due to the thin cardboard layer that is very loosely stuck to the sin-

gle panel. Overall the first design needed a lot of changing before the final model was presented.

Material limitations - weakness in joints

Material limitations- Card cutter tear

Design limitations - Being able to see elements of model meant to be hidden

Each material has a limitation, a barrier that makes you question it’s purpose.

P h a s e 3

Right: C4 facade by Niento Sobejano

Vesak lanterns

The C4 facade is a design that is supposed to spread from a sin-

gle point of origin to become less obvious. I attempted to use this

idea of transparent lighting. This building shows that through the use of

lights a gradual decrease in the effect of the lighting from the origin.

Vesak lanterns are used in the Buddhist religion as a sacred referral to Buddha’s birth-

day. Each of these lights use very thin tracing paper, to allow light to pass through it

easily and effectively. The use of the material in my lantern, the tracing paper bag,

acetate and plastic were all used to somehow allow different amounts of light out.

By allowing different amounts of lights out that differ from one area of the lantern to

another allows a story to be told. It essentially gives rise to the idea that it is not just

the materials used to create the lantern, but what is used to supplement it, the light-

ing and the backs of panels, also provides some design perspectives. While this

idea was almost completely removed for the final model, there was some ele-

ments of this that was kept. This idea that there is a gradual change from the mid-

dle of the model to the ends, was kept, by the use of the gradually expand-

ing triangles, which meant the lighting gave very different angles to each of the

triangles. The 3D panels were also larger towards the top and bottom of the model.

P h a s e 3

Reflection

Throughout this particular module, there were a few decisions that

had to be made, that would basically make or break the Final mod-

el. The first decision was whether or not the model will be held by hand,

worn or kept on the ground. With this decided it was easier to decide

on the panelling again and confirm that. It also made it possible to de-

cide what kind of card you wanted to use. I used Ivory card because it

seemed the most practical. I didn’t want to use black card as I do not

believe that a splash is a particularly dark process. In hindsight, I now real-

ise that I should have experimented with using both white and black card

to emphasize the irregularity of a splash and to give it more excitement.

The second design decision that had to be made was organising

fab lab submission, which caused dilemmas for many people in re-

gard to getting it back, and machine issues. However, once sent in,

it was finished. To get it into the fab lab, the weight of the card also

had to be decided and for the first prototype, I went with the given

weight of 220gsm. For the final model, 300gsm Ivory card was used.

For the submission, to test out the thickness of Mount board, I also sent in a

file using mount board. Once receiving it I realised how thick and dens it was

and that it would not provide the flexibility to mould the model to the way

I wanted and thus was discarded. The lighting was the final crucial deci-

sion. The use of the lighting was obviously due to the context of the lantern.

The individual’s use of the lantern however, varied from project to project as it

depended on the effect that the person was looking for. Using the inspiration

I received from the precedent of the C4 facade, I was fond of the idea of light

dispersing from a point, just as a splash does both above and below the water.

Fabrication of our model was dependant on

the limitations and constraints that we had. We

were only allowed to use Ivory, black or mount

board card, and this meant that we had to

think about the overall impact of the lantern.

The construction of the model was impacted

by the ability for certain card to fold well, or

not leave burnt marks by the fab lab laser cut-

ter. When we are given the opportunity to take

risks and experiment with the supplies of fabri-

cation techniques we have available, the most

should be made to try to use each one and

find the flaws and qualities of each material.

Using different weights of card also enables

less light to get through, but provides more

stability and strength to the model. All of these

technologies can either restrict or allow us to

continue the design as planned or change it

to fit the criteria. For example, the card was

kept white, because the black would not al-

low as much light through. Two light were

used in my model to provide the amount of

light I wanted to get. If needed I would have

used more than one, but there was need to

as this would be too bright, and the disper-

sion of the light would not be as significant.

P h a s e 4reFlectIon

P h a s e 4

After even more elaboration from Loren’s advice

about the material limitations of my first prototype,

a completely new model was made. This incor-

porated Loren’s criticism that there needs to be

3D panelling to really give the model the effect

of being a “splash”. And due to this, 3D panelling

was added to the top and bottom of the mod-

el, to show that there is a slight difference in the

splash both below and above the water, but it is all

generally defined in the same geometric design.

The construction of this final model was a lot easier

than the prototype as it was less fiddly and I used

300gsm ivory card. This was a clearly a lot strong-

er, and while it was sometimes difficult to fold,

provided the perfect stability for the final model.

The lights were installed using a simple circuit

of two LED’s, two batteries, a switch (that con-

nected to the outside) and was all hidden and

taped to the inside of the model (the centre

area, which was designed for this purpose).

Through this last module, I learnt what I should

have learnt at the beginning of Module 3. And

this was that I should have taken more risks in the

design of my panelling, while still relating back

to the natural process of a splash. By the end of

the Module I found that my final model design

was very simple compared to that of other, and

it was due to the worry that I had about mak-

ing my model overly complicated. While Loren

had previously asked me at the end of Module 3

(for my prototype) to make it more complicated

with some 3D panelling, I did not follow her ad-

vice as well as I now realise I should have. I should

have elaborated on the splash idea on my mod-

el, making it more vibrant and sophisticated.

The final readings for Virtual environments

consisted of one reading that addressed the

virtual world,and this cam back to the rea-

son why we are studying virtual environment.

It used the idea of avatars and media to

show that there is just as much importance in

the virtual world as there is to the real world.

The geometry of a splash was defined vaguely

P h a s e 4

Reflection:

Module 4 is the final module. It is the module in which all out lessons have been learnt and the final submission must be submitted. It is the time of the semester where all our work

is complete and all we have learnt has to be reflected upon. But in this Module, we must also analyse each of our actions as an outcome of the final model, the lantern. It is how

we have represented out final model, with it’s and how the world perceive it that we must be vary of when presenting our lantern. From the idea and creations that we have

pursues over the course of Virtual environments we take this into the real world. To be mutually dependent is to be constantly in need of the other half. In this case, how we have

represented our form, and how it has turned out after fabrication and construction is what makes the lantern so difficult. The question is raised for each project, did your idea turn

out the way you wanted? For me, It did not. I initially anticipated a more vibrant form that would be a more literal shape of a splash, that would somehow replicate its messy and

irregular structure. In the end however, the final model, was quite tame and unjustified. These two processes must work together to ensure that there is an contrast in the nature

of representations and insights and allow the human to create and design something in the virtual world that can be translated into the material world without any limitations.

From this entire semester of work, I have learnt what could not have been learnt or taught in any other subject. It is such a unique subject that without the freedom that we had in

all our decisions, this would be just another subject. The fact that we were new to Rhino meant that we had to try very hard to dodge the learning curve and go straight to what we

needed to know to get the job done. I am thinking of studying architecture in the future, as I had been since I was about 10, but after this subject, I began to judge my decisions

as a ten-year-old. I began to worry that if this is what architecture is, I will struggle with the abstractness for my whole career. And in the first tutorial, when Lyle asked everyone what

we wanted to major in, a majority of us said architecture and he said don’t be too sure, because a lot of people end up changing. So in regards to further study in this subject, yea

there may be areas where I may struggle in, but I now understand what this subject is about. With more guidance in this subject through the lectures and tutorials, I may have been

able to grasp this concept earlier on in the course. Without this understanding, it is difficult to say the extent of relevance of this subject to my studies in the future. The programs

that we were able to learn, Rhino, grasshopper, InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, were crucial to the outcome of the final model. And this will be eternally invaluable no matter what

career we choose to pursue. I know for a fact that all of these programs will be necessary in the future, if wanting to continue with architecture as a major. The other reason that

there may have been an issue with my learning cure in this subject is because this was veery new and a sudden jump into a very complicated subject from no experience with

design previously. From my school, we had no design subjects, the closest being Art or Textiles. And this meant that I couldn’t perform in this subject to my true potential, possibly.

I hope that if given this subject again I would be able to do exactly what I wanted, with a natural process that I would was sure of, and a Rhino model that would correctly model

my natural process, with 3D or 2D panelling that could be compared with to others. While I am proud of my efforts in this semester of work, I am certain that with persistence, I

would be able to produce more formidable work, Throughout the learning of this subject, I have learnt more than I learn tin any other subject and I am grateful for this experience.