This is the final studio (Border Conditions) project for msc2. Though quite a lot of parametric techniques went into the making of it, they were subservient to rather than defining the project’s outcome.

This project embodies a virtual study of the process of folding with its conjectural actions (re-folding, unfolding).

The shift from a deterministic view of the world to one dominated by chaos and complexity has had (and still has) huge implications in both philosophy and science – two main tools of architecture. Before, we thought the sphere as being the perfect shape – now we consider it a mere theoretical possibility. Architecture used to be deeply rooted in the smooth, unchanging and abstract Cartesian space, described by its three axes meeting at 90^o angles in an universal Origin point who’s meaning different religions didn’t hesitate to speculate and impose upon it various connotations[i]. Jumping over a few decades of history, we now no longer understand space as the previously pure, abstracted medium.

Space is filled up by potentials. Space folds, bends and warps around itself and into itself into a topological revelry. We now no longer differentiate space with fixed, impossible boundaries: we have renounced the mathematical constructs of lines and planes as being limitations which we now no longer need to perceive the world. The demarcation mechanism is now based on differences of intensities, on gradient fields merging one into each other. As DeLanda notes, there are no different entities per se, just different manifestations of one modulation coexisting and relating to each other in a field of intensities (DeLanda, 2000).

There is much more to it that can be published here – basically a semester’s worth of branching, merging and killing explorations and various experiments, both digital and analog. You can maybe catch a glimpse in the following time-line, which tries to schematically represent and trace the overall design process.

Here’s the final portfolio booklet, which goes into more detail and shows a more coherent picture of the project:

Here are some pictures of the model(s):

Assembly: Bogdan Badila, Vlad Pop, Georgiana Hlihor, Denisa Lula, Robert Veber, Zoltan Vaida, Imre Vekove, Ciprian Colda, Mihai Pascalau, Calin Negret, Bogdan Borbei, Iustin Nechiti, Dan Ioanici, Razvan Luca, Stefan Grosariu, Ioana Suceava, Alexandra Man, Andreea Darac, Irina Mates, Oana Bogatan, Andrei Varga, Radu Badila, Elza Sandor, Alex Greceniuc, Oana Matei, Alex Vladovici, Marcel Oprean, Ioan Pop, Vlad Rusu, Ioana Tomoioaga.

Location: Cluj, Romania Date: 4-7th May2011

Photographs: Patrick Bedarf, Georgiana Hlihor, Daniel Bondas, Georgeta Macovei Text: Dimitrie Stefanescu

Intro

The project started out as an ambitious student-powered endeavor to design and fabricate at a 1:1 scale the flagship pavilion for the ZA11 Speaking Architecture event in Cluj, Romania. While at the same time integrating into its historically-charged context, the design (which was elaborated to a concept stage during a week-long workshop) boasts a strong representational power which was much needed in order to fulfill its main goal: attracting passers-by to the event. At the same time, the object, through its tectonic characteristics, tries to make legible the new ontology which is slowly defined by computational architecture and thus becomes a showcase for the design processes empowered by digital tools.

Process

The design was elaborated during a week-long parametric design workshop (CLJ02) specifically geared towards its production which, in theory, was seen as a continuation of the previous event (CLJ01: Parametric Desing Workshop, organized by Ionut Anton and myself). We were faced with the harsh requirements of creating an actually working design with just the material and tools available from sponsors (over which we hardly had any choice) while at the same time fitting costs inside a budget dwarfed by its expectations. Subsequently, the creative exploration agenda was constrained to a relatively limited approach which, most importantly, was scalable in terms of materials and fabrication techniques. The realization of the design was made possible by advanced use of parametric design techniques (using Rhino+Grasshopper), with the help of which the whole process was controlled from exact geometry generation to piece labeling, assembly logic, actual fabrication (CNC milling) and, of course, cost control.

SuperConnect in action. We have plans for releasing the whole Grasshopper definition and Rhino file used for the project – stay tuned!

Here’s a time-lapse video of the assembly process:

As an educational exercise it completed the design phase and proved to be invaluable in terms of actually understanding and working with the constraints encountered in real-life. Varying material thickness (and subsequent extra flexibility and less joint stiffness), rain and wind posed many challenges which had to be resolved on-site as quickly as possible so as to meet the assembly deadline.

Conclusions

The ZA11 Pavilion emerged as a powerful urban attractor which managed to engage the local society on all levels. Interest was aroused in both young and senior citizens, both professionals and non-architects by the completed pavilion as well as during the act of its construction, thus proving to be more than an indifferent temporary shelter. Furthermore, it successfully provided a flexible and comfortable space for the different events pertaining to the event (temporary bookshop, open-air cinema, tea party, jam sessions and a small concert + sleeping in the sun) to unfold.

The first of its kind in Romania, the ZA11 Pavilion can be definitively called a successful architectural experiment. Designed and assembled only by students (with little preliminary outside help), it successfully met all expectations and proved to be an invaluable experience in blending avant-garde design techniques on a relatively large scale with a low budget and a skeptical professional context.

construction

construction photos

Special thanks to: Mircea Stefanescu, Dan Brasoveanu [Graphtec], Nejur Andrei, Rares Dragan [Atelier RVD]
Sponsors: Graphtec, Holver

A nifty little tool for creating connectors between pretty much any kind of planar surfaces which intersect themselves at the edges.

What it basically does is to output in a ordered structure the intersecting faces (as tree branches) and their intersection line. From there on you can continue to build up your own connectors however you like.

The example file contains the Grasshopper definition, Connector-Notch Script and an example Rhino file. Read below for more.

The workflow is as follows:

1. Select the faces you want to make the connectors for and input them into the Grasshopper definition.
2. Bake on separate layers the offset faces and the connectors.
3. Run the script provided and provide the necessary inputs in the correct order (connectors, faces and material thickness).
4. Enjoy.

Troubleshooting:

There will be errors. They always are. Here’s how and where to look for them:

• Faces might actually not intersect, even if they seem so. To check, manually select the faces causing problems and use Rhino to detect their intersection (type intersect). Sometimes things are not as it seems.
• If the radius of a connector exceeds the faces’s size, the script will go berserk. Try reducing the connector radius and things should start looking up. You can also improve the script to use adaptive connector radii in respect with the face size.
• If the material thickness is too big or too small, geometry will start crashing.
• Cull faces which are too small – you might have a little face somewhere which is 0.0004 m^2 and causing problems.
• Check the units you’re working on. The definition’s parameters are set for meters.
• Otherwise, you can email me. Take note that this is a free, spare-time, no-guarantee, as-is service – don’t send me three emails just in case i didn’t get the first one

Download: 110615 SuperConnect.zip (2.21 mb)

SuperConnect working in real-life (spoiler for the future)

Second part of the previous project, this time exploring the possibility of scaling up the same design process to the level of a facade design.

The wetgrid principle (based on Frei Otto’s wool thread experiments) evolved to into a hybrid hanging chains experiment – on the basis of one algorithm connections were merged while the other insured a theoretical optimal distribution of forces.

Final build-up diagram illustrating adaptive shading possibilities along the main structural elements.

3D printed models (below).

Project focused on the formal exploration of ornament and tiling, mainly based on the formal language derived from the wetgrid experiments.

The projects explores the possibility of creating a structurally sound three dimensional lattice which can present multiple stacking and tiling possibilities. This results in several possible variations which can form different patterns with different porosity qualities.

Fabrication-wise, the W*TILE is meant to be cast (mold-injection) into a flexible plastic resin which would allow for flexibility outside its original plane, thus allowing for the creation of different curvature shapes.

The aesthetic of the tiling configurations reminds of an intricate late-gothic visage (above). 3d prints of the models (below).

A few weeks ago CLJ02,  the second workshop centered around parametric design, happened in Cluj. Setting it alongside previous similar events in Bucharest and Iasi, we can clearly see an increasing attention being dedicated to this ever expanding side of architectural practice and theory in Romania. Though still yet to be adopted in the official curricula of the local architectural schools, the response we got was quite staggering – while last year for DTAL’s CLJ01 workshop we barely filled up the 20-odd places, this year we had to stop counting around 60 and were forced to disappoint one third of the applicants.

The event itself was organized by ASTA Cluj (by Bogdan Hambasan and Anamaria Androne) as an integral part of the Zilele Arhitecturii 11 event which will take place at the beginning of May. It was tutored by Patrick Bedarf and myself, both of us being heavily involved in the computational architecture scene since its early days. The main goal of the workshop was to produce a working design for the ZA lounge pavilion. This assignment with its inherent very strict feasibility requirements was mainly the key to the success of the workshop. It is said that creative ideas sprout from constrained freedom and we didn’t prove the saying wrong. To elaborate on the feasibility requirements mentioned before, I would like to start by first saying that parametric design or, more generally speaking, computational architecture can prove to be an architecturally treacherous space. The creative freedom allowed by computers and subsequent software packages is immense and, left to itself, can generate results which, though aesthetically pleasing to the eye, are unbuildable architectural objects. On the other hand, we were faced with the harsh requirements of creating an actually working design with the material and tools available while at the same time fitting inside a budget dwarfed by its expectations. Therefore we constrained the creative exploration agenda to a relatively limited approach which, most importantly, is scalable in terms of materials and fabrication techniques. I won’t go into technical details, since “adaptive surface subdivision”, “diagrid-based deep facet” or “multiple facet intersection connectors” would probably start to bore a few people, and usually I try not to beat people into submission by using complicated jargon. Suffice to say, we enforced and detailed some effective parametric techniques which would have the highest chances of producing manageable projects. Participants gained the knowledge to create their own tools to manage complex geometry from a design phase all the way to fabrication phase – or what is called a file-to-factory process. This implies that you create the design which is then directly fabricated using different CNC machines and digital crafting techniques. Assembly becomes thus a giant 3D puzzle. These techniques scale up from models to the most innovative airport designs and have basically reshaped the construction industry throughout the world and, on a theoretical level, have prompted some to state that reality becomes a diagram and the diagram becomes reality (Deleuze) due to the seemingly free of interference translation from a digital, virtual, product to a real, material object.

Computational techniques have been and still are undergoing a serious settling-in process inside architectural practice and education. Though still in a “volcanic” stage, both theoretically and practically, parametric design has been widely adopted throughout the world and almost all universities consider it an essential part of architectural education. Romania can now benefit from all the advantages of a late adoption of these practices – essentially skipping out several steps in the formation process and embracing the already proven and tested ways. Furthermore, the statement mentioned above regarding reality as a diagram and vice-versa, has to be treated with caution – more often than not we see projects which amount to little more than disembodied data. Given the local “no-bullshit” economic and social scene, where better to start finding meaningful computational approaches than here? As a final word of wisdom, with which I would like to conclude this text, I will mention a phrase coined by Douglas Rushkoff regarding the current information age in which we seem to be: “program or be programmed” – extrapolating from this we can say that, as an architect, you can either let yourself be controlled by the software you use or you can control it to your own ends.

Dimitrie Stefanescu, Delft, 2011

Team: Patrick Bedarf, Tomas Kozelsky & Dimitrie Stefanescu.

This is our entry for the Evolo ”11 competition. Update: We seem to be among the finalists. I’ll leave you to judge for your own: you can see the winning projects on their website. It is a consciously speculative project in which our main goal was to push parametric design techniques as much as possible into an as experimental direction as we could allow.

From the competition statement:

The deforestation rate of a country describes the annual destruction of natural forests. With 11.5% in 2004, Brazil lost over 10.722 square miles and marks therefore the highest rate globally. This massive destruction of local woodland area has many different causes and brings negative impacts on local and global ecosystems. Besides the irreversible destruction of the natural environment, diverse ecosystems and rare animal species, deforestation is mainly driven by and feeding the status of poverty in rural regions. Furthermore, in socio-political dynamics of high population pressure and stagnating economic conditions, the sale of land is mostly the only option for poor farmers.

Confronted with this acute challenge of solving the phenomena of deforestation we propose a high-rise building as prototype for the usage of wood in a sustainable and innovative manner and the raise of global awareness of the problem at hand. In combining the two realms of research and tourism, the projects aim is to act as stimulating keystone for establishing a vital loop of raising global awareness and supportive funds as well as educating visiting interested parties and local natives.

The introduction of the novel technology of laminated wood construction acting as load-bearing and space partitioning thick lattice, displays the vast possibilities of the natural resource of wood while underlining a sustainable application of long-lasting flexibility. Specific programmatic and technical requirements are provided by a modular system based on conventional and easy transportable shipping containers and are selectively integrated. Therefore, the symbiotic system demonstrates the sensible usage of material resources and their inherent performance capacities in addressing sustainable use, reuse and recycling cycles.

C:Strip is best described by an attempt to translate the environmental qualities of the proposed site into a meaningful architectural geometry that can accomodate and maximize the performance of an adaptive and fluctuating programme which focuses on producing and distributing information through the use of informal societal behaviour.

The developement and subsequent use of different computational techniques allowed for the collage of the several dimensions of environmental and programmatic datascape into a finite three dimensional architectural object. The developement and subsequent use of different computational techniques allowed for the collapse of the several dimensions of environmental and programmatic datascape into an finite three dimensional architectural object. Thus, the windspeed and solar insolation grid was processed with the help of Ecotect. The visibility analysis, crucial for our later functional distribution was explored in DepthMap. The traffic density was elaborated using an elaborate circulation analysis programmed in Processing/Java, whose starting parameters were informed by local observations of pedestrian and bycicle flows in different key points of the site.


The detailed programme description underwent a series of evolutionary changes which were based on the interpretation of the given assignement in relation with existing conditions and as well as a macro-analysis at an urban level and subsequent scale detailing of the aforementioned process. Thus, we shifted from an information distribution centric set of functions to a leisure-oriented setup which would favour not only the spread of data, but would actually become an place for the creation of new information through informal social mechanics.

The project evolved into two systems which cater to two different requirements: the areas which required adaption are empowered by a flexible system of interlocking umbrellas which can fold and unfold individually and comprise energy harvesting systems such as greywater extraction and photovoltaics, based on locally sensed conditions; the areas which emerged as having no need for physical adaption are hosted inside a cracked landscape with punctuated apertures whose geometry result from the ventilation and lighting conditions required by the program underneath. Videos by Patrick Bedarf:



By thus splitting the process into two individual parts, we were able to maintain the local topological qualities of the site while at the same time we enhanced them without disrupting the existing local circulation flows and visual parameters.

During the 15-17th of December I will be tutoring at the automatic architecture event at the TU Delft. Here’s some info from the official site:

Automatic-architecture is a three-day workshop (15th-17th December 2010) open to architects and students in order to show the use of computational design for architectural development by cross-fertilization of knowledge. The cases for the workshops has been collected from a real estate developer and, in cooperation with the University of Delft this case has been translated into workshop material.

Costs: Euro 75,- for three days.

Automatic-architecture offers room for thirty participants. The workshops will be held at the Technical University of Delft starting Wednesday December 15.

Here’s a movie of the thing in action (realtime):

Importing geometry (lines) from Rhino+GH into Processing, then switching back. Springs are rendered via a nifty hack, ie inverse proportional to the tension inside them. This corresponds to the most cluttered areas where particles get together more. The attraction force is good ‘ol newton’s law.

Of course, you can use it in 2d as well for any number of geometrical network relaxation uses you may find it useful for (street networks, for one, infrastructure at a more abstract scale, city planning, fancy urbanism projects, the like).

For the more architecturally inclined, here’s what happens when gravity enters the mix:

Nice, isn’t it? A nifty form-finding algorithm for a fancy support system of, well, any surface you please (I used a rectangle in example, a bit dull, but aren’t you fed up of double curvatures?). Here’s some screen grabs:

The structures presented here are self-normalizing, ie they reach an equilibrium at some point in the system. However, this is achieved via a delicate balance of quite a few parameters in the processing sketch: path resolution, spring strength and damping, world physics damping & min distance for the attraction force. I strongly recommend taking a look at traer’s physics lib documentation before starting to juggle the values (and to know where to look to juggle the values).

Enjoy & share alike!

We parametrically explored possible future configurations for the study area (450ha large, at the intersection of two main planned road-infrastructure extensions) and tried to push for a solution that would maximize performance (density, height, shading, access to natural elements and connectivity) of the whole region while leaving ample potential that allows for unplanned emergent evolution.

Our goal was to envision an urban tissue that could flexibly respond to all local input factors as well as accommodate desired (planned) goals. An universal 130m by 130m grid was proposed and then deformed to differentiate and create a unique lattice that allows for surprise and yet is easily mapped due to its inner space-partitioning algorithm.

We iteratively cycled through several circulation analysis (using Depthmap) and continuously changed the main axial map of the area to maximize integration.

The text on the boards is in romanian, sorry about that – hopefully the explanations given around the post should be enough. Here are the final boards, reduced:

It was great to work on this project, and also great to find recognition for an approach that is considered risky by our faculty’s standards   We used Rhino and its parametric plugin Grasshopper for the main work and Depthmap for the integration analysis.

Project teachers: Tiberiu Florescu, Sebastian Guta.

Jury was composed of:

prof. arh. Dorin Stefan (DSBA)

arh. Bruno Andresoiu (igloomedia)

Anne-Line Citrene (DuPont France)

Gabi Rottes (DuPont Germany)

Some pictures from the exhibition, which can be seen at the University Underground Passage until the 7th of December (09):

Here’s the outcome: judge it lightly since the overall design was conceived with a specific public in mind during a brief four hour period, including plotting.

Man, this post is definitively sarcastic. I’m working on improving that (as in downplaying the sarcastic note).

My vision concentrated on issues relating to the poor visibility/readability of the overall area (and the necessity of a landmark) and the lack of “free” public urban space. The functional program was mainly derived from the observation that most historic centers (Lipscani being a prime example in this) loose their initial cultural and traditional economic value in favor of the over-dominant bar/cafe. This leads to a certain repetition of fluxes (economic, cultural, pedestrian) which harms the respective area.

Geometry-wise, my proposal respects local aspects of the area, namely its porosity and the way the urban tissue coagulated around narrow winding streets and small interior courtyards in a constantly surprising lattice.

In respect to this approach, i considered the lot as a solid volume on which forces are applied in respect with the openings and general director lines of the site. Performing a “structural” analysis on the site revealed the patterns by which these forces would naturally flow towards given points of rest (namely the designated openings of the courtyards).   Using topological optimization techniques these patterns were transformed into geometry which was later subtracted from the original body thus giving the overall shape of the building.

By following this design method I ensure an optimal circulation flow through the built site, encouraging interaction and furthering the development of the local urban tissue in a manner very close to its characteristics (gained by spontaneous evolution) thus fully integrating the new implant.

That’s wrapper of the last month, give or take.

Grasshopper’s scripting capabilites are now a huge super cool feature, especially if you’re coding in visual studio (c#) and then pasting the shit or making dlls. I did this some time ago when i suddenly realized that you can declare your own static variables inside scripting nodes (and these guys hold up their values during the updating procedure). And the vector math is already there too.

This is an implementation based on Craig Reynolds‘s neurons, and a little bit on Daniel Shiffman’s processing example (which was updated and used some time ago for this.

Now, if somebody will be nice and implement some collision detection…

PS: I will upload the def. soonish (i have to clean it up a bit first). Ok i didn’t clean it up; here’s the link.

Here’s a new 10 day link: http://dl.transfer.ro/boidsT-Transfer_RO-16Nov-ad56f6.zip

Final link, stable and sound: http://improved.ro/Grasshopper/boidsTCAV.zip

The line-up includes:

Ioulietta Zindrou, Maite Bravo, Verena Volger, Luis Fraguada (of Barcelona/IAAC fame);
Yours truly Dimitrie (of Bucharest fame);
Henning Rambow, Patrik Bedarf (Leipzig crew);

I haven’t been that productive lately due to the many things happening all the time, but hopefully I’ll be able to get back on the research track in summer.

(27.05.09) The Symposium takes place at 18:00 in the Geodätenstand 6 O.G. TU Berlin Hauptgebäude, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623 Berlin.

The Rule Based Design Symposium highlights contemporary academic and practice based research employing CAD, CAM, Coding/Web tools in addressing & communicating architectural design intents & constraints. The research spectrum ranges from theory to the digital crafting of buildings and their components.

Organized by Christophe Barlieb.

Flexibility in thought and expression is vital to all creative fields. The power of a new generation of parametric and bespoke CAD tools lies in the ability to negotiate and communicating the design intent clearly. This streamlining saves time, materials while integrating architecture, engineering and fabrication over the course of the entire architectural design process.

The symposium features research works by young contemporary academics in the fields of mathematics, architecture and fabrication

Schedule:
Time Speaker Affiliation Theme
18:00 Gisela Baurmann TU Berlin RBD Opening Statements
18:05 Kristoffer Josefsson TU Berlin Mathematics in Architecture
18:25 Dimitrie Stefanescu U.Bucharest Scripting Architecture
18:45 Christophe Barlieb TU Berlin Integration of Engineering & Design
19:05 Norbert Palz CITA Rapid Prototyping in Architecture
19:25 Martin Tamke CITA Fabrication of Architecture
19:45 Baurmann, Barlieb, Pfeiffer TU Berlin Discussion with Speakers & Public
20:00 PARTY

Deprecated. Here’s the new version.

More as a scripting experiment, when i was mucking about trying to make the delaunay triangulation work in grasshopper i somehow found the wonderfully complex qhull library which i promptly set to push and pull to get it to work with grasshopper. As advised on their website, the best way to do it is to call it as an external program, which is exactly what i’ve done:  no files are written or read, no dos windows pop up, everything’s smooth.

Given that you don’t have many complex operations in grasshopper after the solution is generated, you’ll be able to handle quite an impressive amount of points (say 200 on my three-year old toplap) in real time. If you add the simple planarSrf operation, then say 60-70 and it gets sloppy.

What you’ll need to do to get things rolling:

0. Download the 3dvqhull definition and example file, and remember not to use it for commercial purposes, share-alike whatever you do with it and take the time to give the proper credits: 

1. Download qhull, and unzip it in a folder of your choice.

2. Get going and search for “System.dll”. What you’re interested in is the 2.0 version which you’ll usually find in here: “C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.5[...]\”. If you can’t find it, I’m amazed grasshopper works for you. Anyway, you can find and install it from here.

3. Add the newly found System.dll version 2.o as a referenced assembly of the qhull component in the definition file.

If it turns orange, it’s cool.

4. Write in the panel that is linked to the “path” input the full path to the qhull program qvoronoi. You don’t need to add the .exe extension, but you can do it if you feel confortable.

5. There’s just one more thing you should know: facets that contain the infinite vertex are omitted altogether, without remorse. So as to have as little facets tending towards infinitum, I always add the corners of the points bounding box to the input sites.

You can scale the bounding box in respect with its center, or you can just call the whole thing off – it’s your choice.

I think this just about covers everything. Take care and have fun.

didi out.

PS: Qhull does more than voronoi. So if you have the time to explore and test, please do – the package is very powerfull and it can be used for more than this.

I talked about some projects I did (some together with Veronica Popescu) over the last two years, always insisting on the computational approach and detailing the techniques used.

I presented scripting approaches and more interactive (parametric) grasshopper based modeling. Some  Processing based approaches were presented and I insisted on the necessity of using multiple open tools that can be made to communicate between one another.

I tried to clearly mark out the relationship between fabrication and the overall design – how material properties and building techniques inform the design and viceversa.

Reactions were good, and it seems computational approaches are definetively stirring people up.

Thanks are required to Patrick Bedarf, who made this possible and is proving to be an excellent host in Leipzig, and also to prof.  Henning Rambow for all the support.

Also if you are reading this from Leipzig and are interested in joining us tommorow at 16.oo @ HTWK computer pool for some hands-on grasshopper work, there’s  no one stopping you.