Wednesday, June 20, 2012

WK14-15: Project Three Final Submission - Summary Statement

The theoretical notion of prosthetic architecture is a relatively pre-existent concept. However by combining such notions with architecturally responsive exoskeleton design principles are we able to begin defining architectural schemes which are no longer static representations of an individual’s needs, but rather a responsive extension.
The scheme presented within this presentation, titled “Prothetique” (French for prosthetic, hence drawn from prosthetics origins within the French medical discourse) is one which begins to explore the notion of a responsive architectural exoskeleton, prosthetically defined through the pure existence of occupants upon each floor of a central tower. Such allows for the development of an organic architectural form which contorts our pre-conceived notions of architecture space and order.
The scheme responds to the brief put forth by Sydney Council as part of the 2030 master plan for the city by combining three sectors; residential, commercial and retail within a single proposal occupying the corner of Castlereagh, King and Pitt Street. The foundation of the main tower, consisting five levels is a physical retail extension of the currently evident shopping district of the CBD centred on Pitt Street. A structure defined by unique dual facade portrays a conceptual and static extraction of the towers floors perpendicular to the exoskeleton. While the 25 storey tower defined by the prosthetic exoskeleton consists of commercial office space upon the lower floors, and residential units throughout the upper levels.
The exoskeleton, defined vertically through horizontal plane co-ordinates ranging between an inner and outer minimum and maximum, directly responds to the density of the occupants upon each floor and more particularly their position within the eight equal segments which form each floor. Thus when the density within a segment increases, the exoskeleton responds by moving perpendicularly outwards, drawing with it the floor and any attached walls with it in order to create additional space. The physical extension of the exoskeleton may be defined separately by the occupants, or may contort to the system developed for the scheme, which calculates the relative extension as a proportion of the estimated floor density.
The proposed system, parametrically developed within Rhinoceros and Grasshopper utilises modern architectural form development technologies to create a variably definable structure. Parametrics within this scheme allows the inner and outer boundary of each floor to be manipulated as well as the response of a density shift. Further, basic constraints such as floor height and spacing between each are able to be manipulated accordingly. While the number of floors and curvilinear responsiveness of the exoskeleton are further able to be adjusted, while remaining all interconnected.
The benefits and rationale for pursuing such a scheme are quite varied, however this particular project, beyond improving the quality of life for occupants of the tower by defining space directly through their spatial existence, identifies numerous eco-friendly benefits. Hence by directly defining space as an extension of density, energy is no longer wasted lighting, heating or cooling space which is not used at any one time. Further, due to the independently moving nature of each floor an external space is formed, of a height definable through further analysis, allowing natural access to lighting throughout the floor, as well as natural ventilation.

WK14-15: Project Three Final Submission - Final Presentation Poster


The image above presents my final project three poster presentation outlining my scheme. The poster incorporates visual renders of the numerous iterations as well as various description drawings outlining the conceptual operation of the proposed scheme.

WK14-15: Project Three Final Submission - Final Iteration Renders


The collection of images presented above represents my final collection of iterations regarding project three. They are divided into sets (rows), with three versions of each. Each set portrays a variation of the defined parameters, while each variation portrays an iteration due to the movement of people within the floor over time.

WK14-15: Project Three Final Submission - Grasshopper

The collection of images below outlines my final grasshopper scheme for project three. The images outline each stage of operation. Please note I was unable to produce a single image, as the exporter kept crashing due to the size of the file.

Stage One


Stage Two


Stage Three


Stage Four

Stage Five

Stage Six

Stage Seven

Thursday, May 3, 2012

WK6-9: Laser Cutting Test

The image above presents the two laser cut tests I completed. The top three images present the main experiment, with the lower one a second experiment considering different shape cams. The basic idea about these experiments was to test whether my idea of using elastic upon rotating cams to portray a contorting surface would work. The result was a fail, due to the excess tension which existed, limiting the rotation of elements. Therefore further testing is required considering different shape cams and elastic materials. While the image below presents the main file I used to cut the main test.


WK6-9: Grasshopper Experimentation Summary



The image above presents the latest version of my grasshopper file. It was a little difficult to post all experimentation files, simply due to the complexity of my project and the slight changes which occur. Thus such changes are only truly noticed by the creator due to these reasons.

WK6-9: Tier Two - 2 Additional Linkage Sources

Source One: Simulation-Based Design of Exoskeletons using Musculoskeletal Analysis -

Agarwal, P., Narayanan, M., Lee, L., Mendel, F & Krovi, V 2010, ‘Simulation-Based Design of Exoskeletons using Musculoskeletal Analysis’, ASME 2010 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, pp. 1-8.

Source Two: Post-spatial Architectures: The emergence of time like parametric worlds -

Senagala, M 2003, ‘Post-spatial Architectures: The emergence of time like parametric worlds’, SIGraDi, University of Texas at San Antonio, pp. 42-49.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

WK5: Project Two - Six Additional Sources

Design Sources –

1. Huiskes, R., Weinans, H., Grootenboer, J., Dalstra, M. Fudala, B & Slooff, T 1987, ‘Adaptive Bone-Remodeling Theory Applied to Prosthetic Design Analysis’, Pergamon: Biomechanics, vol. 20, no. 11, pp. 1135-1150.

Adaptive Bone-Remodelling Theory Applied to Prosthetic Design Analysis is an academic paper which considers the development and utilisation of computer simulations. Considering the methodology to predict bone remodelling in accordance to stress related factors, Wolff’s Law and the Finite Element Method.

2. Elsley, Richard, ‘Adaptive Control of Prosthetic Limbs Using Neural Networks’, Rockwell International Science Center, pp. 771-776.

Adaptive Control of Prosthetic Limbs Using Neural Networks is a paper which considers the manner in which prosthetic control and the inverse control is a result of internal functions. Therefore considering the manner in which prosthetics are only utilised once the functional control is identified.

3. Troncossi, Marco., Parenti-Castelli, Vincenzo & Davalli,
Angelo, ‘Design of Upper Limb Prostheses: A New Subject Oriented Approach’, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bologna, pp. 1-4.

Design of Upper Limb Prostheses: A New Subject Oriented
Approach intent is to question and develop innovative prosthetics upon bilateral
systems which consider predefined variable requirements. Thus outlining a
mechanical design of a prosthetic system which is subject orientated.


Experimental Sources -

1. Pitts, Greg & Datta, Sambit, ‘Parametric Modelling of Architectural Surfaces’, The School of
Architecture and Building, Deakin University, pp. 635-644.

Parametric Modelling of Architectural Surfaces is a paper which outlines parametric modellings ability as a design tool within architectural design considers the generative ability of complex geometrical forms generation using parametrics. Geometrical forms concentrated on surface development which considers relative variables such as lighting quality.

2. Peters, Brady, ‘Parametric Acoustic Surfaces’, Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, pp.
174-181.

Parametric Acoustic Surfaces considers the development of complex acoustic surfaces using parametrics. Thus responsive surfaces which consider the surrounding aural environment. Using parametrics to utilise absorptive and diffuser etc. qualities of surface architecture. Six Additional Source

3. Chiu, Yun-Ying, ‘How to Make the Soft Skin? A preliminary framework for the parametric design of the bionic soft skin’, Graduate Institute of Architecture, National Chiao Tung University, pp. 237-242.

How to Make the Soft Skin? A preliminary framework for the parametric design of the bionic soft skin is a paper which presents a preliminary framework for the design and fabrication of a bionic architectural surface. However considering a surface which potentially may be formed independent of the internal structure.

WK5: Project Two - Draft Grasshopper System

Within this conceptual grasshopper system the intent was to portray an external facade of a building which is defined by various variable points. Thus portraying the notion of prosthetic architecture, or an architectural form which is defined by human form, or perhaps more importantly the manner in which an architectural form defines the human form. Thus this system presents that start of a study into producing an architectural form which either defines or is defined by a single or a collection of human forms. Forms which are symbolised by points and an architectural form defined by numerous generative splines.

The image above presents the draft system I developed, which forms two squares, thus key boundaries, before then creating a spline curve based on the position of the vertices of each square. The resultant curve is extruded producing a geometrical three dimensional surface. Thus the image below presents four different architectural surfaces and forms based on the variable position of the points or human forms.

WK5: Project Two - Lexicon

1. Parametric and Algorithmic Form

2. Algorithmic Prosthetics

3. Parametric Exoskeleton Surface

4. Geometrically Bionic Surface

5. Topological Spatial Expansion

6. Prosthetic Architectural Stimulation

7. Intrinsically Responsive Geometry

8. Architectural Prosthetics

9. Subjectively Orientated Architecture

10. Prosthetic Architectural Expansion

WK5: Project Two - Images of Influence


Title: Signal Box – Architect: Herzog and De Meuron – Location: Basel


Title: Walt Disney Concert Hall – Architect: Frank Gehry – Location: Los Angeles


Title: Dynamic Tower - Architect: David Fisher - Location: Dubai

WK5: Project Two - Six Sources

Design Sources –

1. Wigley, Mark 1991, ‘Prosthetic Theory: The Disciplining of Architecture’, Assemblage, no. 15, pp. 6-29.

Prosthetic Theory: The Disciplining of Architecture is a paper which discusses the historical origin of the architectural prosthetics, a notion considering the relationship which exists between human form and architecture. Further the relative conceptual notions which outline its implementation within the modern architectural discourse.

2. Kerr, Heather 2001, ‘Prosthetic Architectures’, Journal of Media and AMP, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 97-102.

Prosthetic Architectures, presents the architectural notion of a relationship which exists between human form and architecture itself. However this paper presents such in a more conceptual state, considering ideas regarding the perceived interpretation of such a notion for example.

3. Weinstock, Michael & Stathopoulos Nikolaos, ‘Advanced Simulation in Design’, pp. 54-59.

Advance Simulation in Design, is a paper which outlines the practice and significance of simulations within the design process, however through a mathematical and algorithmic approach. An approach considering simulations which through such an approach analyses variables previously not considered.

Experimental Sources –

1. Coorey, Ben 2010, ‘Scalability: Parametric Studies from Exoskeletons to the City’, University of Technology, pp. 155-163.

Scalability: Parametric Studies from Exoskeletons to the City outlines through a philosophical, mathematical and computational background the interconnection between architectural design, multiplicities and their relation to dynamic theories.

2. Katz, Neil, ‘Algorithmic Modeling; Parametric Thinking: Computational Solutions to Design Problems’, Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, pp. 19-35.

Algorithmic Modelling; Parametric Thinking: Computational Solutions to Design Problems presents computational design techniques used within the design process, utilising parametric design methods including rule and variable incorporation.

3. Baerlecken, Daniel., Manegold, Martin., Kuenstler, Arne & Reitz, Judith 2010, ‘Integrative Parametric Form Finding Processes’, Imagine Structure, pp. 303-312.

Integrative Parametric Form Finding Processes is a study which considers recent developments within digital technology and contemporary design tools, thus parametrics and multiple geometrical simulations. Furthermore this paper examines a form finding approach based on aesthetically defined parameters as well as other internal and external parameters such as structure.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

WK4: Final Submission - Poster / Text



Swarm Theory, refers to the collective behaviour of decentralised, self-organising agents, and as a result their collective behaviour. A behaviour which, through various internal and external variables defines an overall geometrical form. Variables which internally regard the proportional and relative position and velocity between agents, the state of cluster density within the swarm, and the position of agents with regards to the defined central mass and external boundary. While the overall state of the swarm may be defined by the average velocity of the agents with reference to a particular point, and the swarms interaction with additional swarms, resulting in the swarm adapting the variables of influence experienced by the individual agents.


Utilising these variables as factors of consideration within my project in a conceptual manner, I produced a simulation which allows the responder to define an overall geometrical form based upon the physical movement of individual agents, or points. The external parameters of the swarm is defined through the average individually controlled velocity of clusters within the swarm, while the overall direction and focus is determined by the average position of points in the form of a perlin graph.


The internal mechanism of the swarm however is adjusted through individual clusters, centrally based upon the perlin graphs position in space. Where each agent’s velocity and relative position is definable against the central axis of the perlin graph. Furthermore the individual density scale of each agent is adjustable, allowing collectively with the other variables the scale of the swarm to be adjusted while exploring the influence of relative velocities, position and density.


The iterations which have been presented portray a selection of four separate swarms, which explore the altering of the various variables against one another within a three stage time frame. Through such, the responder is able to grasp the influence of such variables against each agent and their reaction within the swarm.

WK4: Final Submission - Grasshopper File





The image and file attached to this post are my final grasshopper files used to produce my swarm theory simulation. The system is broken down into four main components. Firstly the ‘swarm direction’ where a perlin graph is generated as a continuous curve, which the user is able to control the size and shape of. The next section is the ‘core points formation and attachment’ where randomly generated points are attached via a pull mechanism at different strengths to curves of numerous offset iterations. Following this is the ‘secondary point formation and attachment’ where more points are randomly placed and attached to offset curves, however this time curves which have been rotated. Finally is the ‘physics engine’ which controls the movement of all the points, stimulating cluster growth and applying spheres to contextualise the points.

WK4: Final Submission - Renders

The collection of iterations above presents my final renders, carried out on my swarm theory study. Each iteration is explained through the following documentation, moving from swarm one, position one in the upper left corner to swarm four, position three in the low right corner.

SwarmOne.PositionOne: Low central state density with limited movement results in minimal agent dispersion about the central perlin axis, as individual behaviour of agents remains stable.

SwarmOne.PositionTwo: Central velocity increase develops individual behaviour dispersion, as suggestive cluster formations begin to emerge.

SwarmOne.PositionThree: Developed emergence of individual clusters, alludes to variations between individual agents position and velocity, thus influence of variables emerges.


SwarmTwo.PositionOne: Increase in central state density, suggests immediate cluster formation, whilst individual position dispersion reflects swarm one.

SwarmTwo.PositionTwo: While the immediate position of individual agents reflects swarm one, as the central velocity increases the relative dispersion suggests a proportional cluster formation.

SwarmTwo.PositionThree: Developing increase in agent’s average velocity suggests position is proportional to time, and therefore behaviour and form is equally proportional.


SwarmThree.PositionOne: Increase of central state density results in quicker emergence of individual agent dispersion, while central behaviour of swarm reflects limited movement.

SwarmThree.PositionTwo: Although velocity and positional development expands cluster formations, the central state of behaviour provides a greater collective swarm about the central origin.

SwarmThree.PositionThree: Development of time frame expands dispersion of agents relative to one another and within clusters supporting general swarm behaviour theory.


SwarmFour.PositionOne: Immediate expansion of individual agents with minimal velocity and position development suggests stray agent’s possible movement is independent.

SwarmFour.PositionTwo: Strayed agents theory is enhanced, as cluster dispersion is based around central perlin axis as relative and proportional position and velocity reflects other swarms.

SwarmFour.PositionThree: Although increased central state density suggests emergence of individual agent cluster dispersion, a central mass remains constant with straying individual agents.

WK4: 12 Experimental Iterations / Images

The following images present experimentation carried out regarding swarm theory. These models are tests of adjusting the variables within grasshopper, and furthermore how successful it would be exporting them to 3ds Max, as each iteration file was between 150-380mb. Thus I was concerned 3ds Max would not be able to handle the import for rendering.


Set One

Set Two


Set Three

Set Four

WK3: Draft Poster

This draft is the layout concept behind my final poster. It consists of an offset title block, a block of spaced iterations, followed by a block of text beneath. Thus keeping the design simple, drawing focus to the work, not the poster layout.

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

WK3: Poster Design Research

The collection of posters above portrays some research I have carried out regarding poster design. I found these particular examples interesting due to their often simplistic and yet clear manner of presentation. Further I attempted to concentrate on examples presenting multiple iterations as my own will be required to do so, thus studying the manner in which similar items are able to be laid out while remaining to convey the difference between each example.


Image Sources: