pattern_physical construct

These are an assortment of the physical construct of the first tile pattern I produced. I wanted to document the actual artifact to prove it actually came out of the 3d printer - many of the individual modules have already fallen off because they are too thin or have zero support on the ends. The bottom of the tile is luckily very flat (as opposed to the irregular geometries on the top face) so transport to shoot some photographs was easy.

pattern_b_02

pattern_b

pattern_abstraction

These images are more of an experiment; a test to see if a pattern is apparent without the glossy colors and renderings. I think a pattern is still visible, even when the source object has been "flattened" into a two dimensional image. Isolated elements being to form lines of varying rhythm. This is inversely related to project a in 470 last semester, when we were asked to abstract a pattern and to inform a space.

pattern_surface

Each of the isolated elements is compacted in two directions to a form a tile of very high density. A grid is established with rows that vary in rhythm. When observed as a fragment, the form of the isolated element lends itself to a translucent (but physically dense) pattern.

pattern_construction

I've been working on the pattern tile for class tomorrow in formZ. In order to construct a pattern, I scaled the initial object and replicated it a number of time in different directions. When I attempted to scale it back down, of course, it was massive and complex. Anybody else have problems or a good construction method?

aside: joining the objects works a little faster

versioning, an introduction by SHoP

According to SHoP architects, ‘versioning’ is a process-driven, open, and fluid shift that has occurred in both design theory and practice with the advent of technology. Its’ proponents are “second generation” architects who allow themselves to extract ideas over a multitude of disciplines in order to conceptualize how space is conceived and constructed. SHoP refers to this as the difference between “horizontal integration” and “vertical integration.”

Versioning as a design methodology relies on vector-based information, instead of pixel-based simulation. To conceptualize how this changes and challenges design-thinking, one may think of a straight line set by two CV’s in either a pixel-based or a vector-based computer application. If one of the control vertices were to exert a force (in one direction, of any magnitude) on the line, the form would change. Within vector-based programs, this mutation immediately and accurately reflects the difference between forces acting on the vertices; a new line is "drawn" according to a precise mathematical equation. Pixel-based applications are called simulations, however, because the existing line is defined in space by a series of dots instead of a finite equation between two vertices. It would be a close approximation, at best, to draw the resulting line. What’s more, the approximation isn’t even the actual line... it’s the image of where the line would be in pixels.

And this is a single line, manipulated in one direction in space by two control points. Imagine that one line was connected to a series of lines, in three dimensions. Versioning and vector-based information allows designers to quickly change geometries that adapt to fluctuating resultant forces on either one or a number of points. This allows for a non-linear, vertical process whereby information can be transformed and changed with computational power immediately.