Virtual Environments Module 3Jinwoo Jung 585694

Final Model Concept

The natural process that influenced my lantern design was the growth of tree barks – not just the barks that we commonly see on the surface, but also the inner bark as well. What I aimed to show through this design was to highlight the growth and development of the outer tree bark throughout time whilst also highlighting the transition of the inner bark to the outer bark as it is constantly pushed out by newly formed layers.

Design Problem 1: Joint of the 2-D and 3-D panelling shift

One of the many problems that I encountered during the finalisation of my model was the gaps that appeared between the 2-D section and the 3-D section which differed due to te change in size and the nature of the 3-D panels. This was resolved by adding in another triangular panel between the gaps by using the polyline tool with the OnSnap + Near command.Another option that I considered initially was to add in a whole new strip of triangulated panels between the joints, but was scrapped due to its impact on the aesthetics of the design.

Design Problem 2: fabrication of rectangular panels

Another problem that I faced occurred during the templating of the model onto a 2D surface. The rectangular panels that was meant to be the base surface of the 3D panels overlapped each other and hence could not be folded. Although small overlaps could be fixed, the heavily distorted panels meant that I had no other option but to triangulate the panels.

Because of this, the initial gaps between the panels had to be removed in the Rhino file, but they were manually cut out again after the printing process.

Template

Using 5 sheets of Ivory card, I was able to efficiently place all my panels without wasting too much material.

Another feature of my design is the double layering of every second panel. As seen on the picture on the left, the two panels that is grouped together with the main set of panels act as a tab for the neighbouring panels, which allowed more convenience during the fabrication because of the larger surface size.

But the more important role of this isn't just for convenience – what I aimed to do using this feature was to create different light intensities when the lights are put into place due to the different thickness level of the paper to create another dimension of pattern within the existing context.

Design Feature – Double-layered Panels

Prototype 1

In the initial stages of fabrication, I printed a section of my model in a much smaller scale to test out how to go about in gluing the materials together, testing out light effects, etc.

In the second major prototype, I faced several problems that I had to solve;- scale: size of the model was much smaller than what I expected, and had to be scaled up considerably- joint: there was an issue in joining the 3D and 2D panel sections together due to different size and tabs were too small and fragile- some of the 2D panels were flipped, hence issue in folding the cutlines and hence resulted in unclean form

Prototype 2

Prototype 2

To hold the panel sections together, I used paper clips to hold the double-layers as it was difficult to give enough pressure to let the glue hold by hand.

Once the 3D panel and the 2D panel section was completed, there was only the job of joining these two together; but the planned process of using the 2D base panels to act as a slot didn't work out due to lack of strength and difficulty in the slotting.

To fix the problem of the fragile joining base of the 3D and 3D panels, I reprinted the base panel onto a thicker mount board – But another problem arose; the base panel on one side did not fit into the 3D panel due to the size of the opening end being to small to fit the opposing end. I decided to glue this side and leave only one section to be adjustable, so I used the left over mount board to cut out the panels to act as tabs, and joined one side successfully and cleanly.

Prototype 2

Lights

This was a test to see how the overall model would look once the lights have been equipped to illuminate all the surfaces. At this point I am very pleased with the visuals. I think there is a good sense of hierarchy as the panel size decreases in size, which is the effect that I wanted.

Lights

I have tested the model with the 3 LED lights that I have bought from the Fablab. I have placed the lights primarily along the centre to emphasise the point of hierarchy.

Reflection

Module 3 was a very challenging section in the sense that it took up a lot of time and energy that, during the process, felt very stressful and not worth it. The hours taken up to set up the fab lab file and build up the prototypes proved to be a very time-consuming (a lot more than what I expected), but during the process I was able to develop lots of new and existing skills such as time management, using Rhino, utilizing the Fab Lab and critical self-analysis. Using the fab lab was a fun experience, and a new skill that would help me assist my future studies in Architecture. The importance of building prototypes to act as a ‘bridge’ to connect the virtual and real world together as mentioned by Fleishmann et al. (2012) was recognized. Identifying numerous problems such as the inability to join the 2D and 3D panel surfaces allowed me to think crucially about the type of material that must be used, which was also highlighted in the reading. Through all these usage of technologies to build up my final model, I couldn’t help but to be amazed by the high level of complexity and the major role of technology in modern designing processes. As mentioned by Roudavski (2012) in the lecture, I felt the need to really engage with modern technology in order to identify its advantage and disadvantage (e.g. efficiency of time vs the lack of ‘humanness’ that some designers acknowledge and prefer more), which would allow me to control it and use it to my advantage in future designs. Although there are still some more steps to go through to reach the completely finalized model to present at the parade, I’m very satisfied with where I am at the moment in terms of the design ideas and visuals that I have produced and will try my best to finish the year with a successful, satisfied design outcome.

Reference

Scheurer, F. and Stehling, H. (2011): Lost in Parameter Space? IAD: Architectural Design, Wiley, 81 (4), July, pp. 70-79

Fleischmann, M., Knippers, J., Lienhard, J., Menges, A., and Schleicher, S. (2012): Material Behaviour: Embedding Physical Properties in Computational Design Processes, D:Architectural Design, Wiley, 82 (2), March, pp. 44-51

Loh, P. (2012). Fabricating Spaces II. Presented at University of Melbourne on 10th September 2012