IME. DO NOT COMPOUND HAVING A LATE PROJECT WITH ALSO MISSING CLASS.
Readings/Discussion:
Digital Pin-Up
Class Dropbox Resources:
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/mv8ugl1pqu3x8vf/AADa0gbxpyKI_6VI8uYtZdap...
Exercise:
Kangaroo
Galapagos
Links:
The Bad Cafe
http://www.archdaily.com/796873/the-bad-cafe-nudes
50 Digital Joints
http://www.archdaily.com/797107/50-downloadable-digital-joints-for-woodworking
Fun DC Stuff This Week
http://dcist.com/2016/10/16_of_our_favorite_events_in_dc_thi.php
Lean Urbanism
http://leanurbanism.org/
Augmented Reality
http://www.archdaily.com/796616/limelight-projects-psychedelic-augmented-reality-lightshow-onto-the-romanian-parliament-building
Photovoltaic Facade
http://www.archdaily.com/796704/60-storey-tower-maximizes-energy-capture-with-photovoltaic-facade
New Office Pods
http://www.archdaily.com/796317/mit-and-google-team-up-to-create-transformable-office-pods…
http://www.pilkington.com/) dominates the planar market. Charges "around" 1K Euros per m2 for a "plain" system. Personally in bespoke projects I design my own stuff but due to economies of scale ... they cost a bit more (but they look far more sexier, he he) . On the other hand only in a bespoke project I could dare to suggest such a solution (for a large scale building we are talking lots and lots of dollars).
3. Several scales below (aesthetics) you can find static alu systems (either structural or semi-structural):
Or hinged systems (either structural or semi-structural) capable to adapt in contemporary double curvature facades/roofs/envelopes/cats/dogs etc etc ... pioneered worldwide many years ago by my best friend Stefanos Tampakakis (everybody in UAE knows that genius man: http://www.alustet.gr/company.html):
4. With the exception of some paranoid things that Guru Stefanos does for Zaha these days we are talking about planar "facets" (obviously a triangle is such a planar facet). The current trend is: the more edges the better (humans excel in vanity matters). But achieving planarity in, say, quads (like yours) it adds another "restriction" on what you are doing. Until recently Evolute Tools Pro was the only answer. But right now ... well let's say that in short time you'll be greatly surprised by some WOW things in this Noble Forum, he he.
5. MERO (and obviously custom systems) can adapt (at almost no extra charge) in anything imaginable. But in a bespoke building ... well.. you know ultra rich people: they don't want MERO anymore since "everybody" does MERO solutions. Vanity, what else?
6. Smart Glass would become a must in the years to come: Eco-Architecture MUST dominate everything you do. On the other hand spending millions to do some extra WOW stuff (Vanity) ... it doesn't look to me very Eco-Friendly/Whatever ... but let's pretend so, he he.
7. I'm Architect but a bit different from the norm: for instance I smoke cigars (highly politically incorrect stuff) I always talk openly (ditto) and I ride lethal bikes (ditto).
may the Force (as always the Dark Option) be with you: go out there and kill them all.
best, Peter
…
ag gets pinned in Temeswar)
7 days of training + exhibition and party!
During the the first 3 days we have prepared a training course where the participants will get acquainted with the basic notions and elementary algorithms in Grasshopper. Within the following 4 days you will have to apply your general knowledge in order to design and produce a 1:1 mockup of the digital model.
It’s going to be massive!
_ORGANIZERS AND TUTORS:
F-O-R
Oana Simionescu
Alex Cozma
DtArchLab + Idz
Ionut Anton
Dana Tanase
T_A_I
Irina Bogdan
_HOSTS:
EduKube Multimedia Center
Find out how to apply here and make sure to keep an eye on our blog. You cand also keep yourself updated by following our facebook page.
See you at EduKube, Timisoara on the 16th of July!
…
low cost fabrication techniques developed by RC6, a research laboratory based at UCL / The Bartlett School of Architecture. A part of Bartlett's BPro programme, RC6 traditionally engages in the development of design methodologies positioned at the overlap of digital and analogue computation, primarily investigating concepts which merge traditional, low-tech manufacturing processes and advanced technological concepts.Topic of this workshop - Composite Bodies - represents RC6’s ongoing research into hybridised material systems consisting of soft membrane materials and light-weight infill aggregates. In this particular case, from a material point of view, we will be looking into custom designed lycra pieces, filled with styrofoam beads and spheres and constrained with series of performative stitches. The resulting parts will be coated with latex and used to create series of interlocking components and surfaces.The workshop itself will consist of 2 stages. The first two days will be dedicated to intensive software training sessions. Students will be introduced to multiple digital platforms focusing on scripting in Processing and 3D modelling/sculpting in Maya/ZBrush. Aim is to enable students to understand algorithmic design processes and procedural modelling techniques and to help them to learn how to customize pre-made scripts and how to embed them in their individual workflows.The remaining five days will be dedicated to the fabrication of a spatial installation. Students will learn how to translate digital models into prototypical components and work alongside tutors to aggregate those into one large-scale architectural object which will be exhibited as part of SBODIO32 Exhibition for Milan Design Week 2017.Dates: March - April 2017 RC6 Program Director:DANIEL WIDRIGwith IGOR PANTICSTEFAN BASSINGSOOMEEN HAHMWorkshop Tutor:IGOR PANTICLead Designer at Zaha Hadid ArchitectsVisiting Lecturer at UCL Bartlett School of ArchitectureTeaching Assistants:Thomas Bagnoli, Evgenia Makroglou, Kalliopi Mouzaki, Darshan Singhaniaucl bartlett rc6 graduate studentsSoftwares: Maya, Rhino, Grasshopper, Processing*Previous knowledge of the softwares is not compulsory. Fabrication Tools: Lycra, Styrofoam beads, Latex, Sewing machines…
Added by Amrvitaloni at 9:38am on February 25, 2017
azione parametrica e generativa attraverso Grasshopper, plug-in di programmazione visuale per Rhinoceros 3D (uno dei più diffusi modellatori NURBS per l‘architettura e il design). Il workshop mira a gestire e sviluppare il rapporto tra informazione e geometria lavorando sui sistemi ad involucro in condizioni specifiche.La discretizzazione di superfici (pannellizazione Nurbs o Mesh), la modellazione delle geometrie attraverso informazioni (siano esse provenienti da analisi ambientali, mappe o database) e l’estrazione e la gestione di queste informazioni, richiede la comprensione di strutture di dati al fine di gestire completamente processo che va dalla progettazione alla costruzione.I partecipanti impareranno come costruire e sviluppare strutture di dati parametrici per informare geometrie ‘data-driven’ e come estrarre le informazioni rilevanti da tali modelli per il processo di costruzione.
Modulo 2 – Il workshop, volto a promuovere le nuove tecnologie digitali di supporto alla progettazione e alla fabbricazione, esplorerà l’integrazione tra design e prototipazione tramite processi di stampa 3d di materiale ceramico al fine di comprenderne allo stesso tempo sia il comportamento del materiale che i vincoli e le opportunità offerte dall’utilizzo di tali tecnologie.Infatti utilizzando grasshopper ed una macchina a controllo numerico i partecipanti apprenderanno le modalità per la generazione parametrica dei modelli e la creazione del codice per la loro prototipazione (Gcode creato direttamente in Grasshopper). Il workshop darà quindi ai partecipanti la possibilità di testare direttamente i loro elaborati digitali stampandoli in modo da comprendere come le informazioni articolate tramite tali strumenti di design producano specifici effetti sia morfologici che estetici.…
is also takes place in own system. However, this action can be also carried out successfully by a foreign reference, if this considers the focused system as own. Hence, these two criteria are considered in my reflexions, to make your criticism handier for me.
First the question must be put up, how is it in your case? Of friendly manner you answer this question perpetually with the statement that you are not a partial of the system of the architecture.
Furthermore the question would be appropriate, whether an external reference (eg CAD) determined architecture. This can be answered with no, because determining and influencing are different things.
Because you stress now your criticism as a foreign criticism, within the architecture the assuption must be put up, that this criticism is not unusual new on the one hand (because this condition were also in other times like that, and presumably also always so remain) and further more a lack of goodwill in your criticism comes to light, which perhaps distinguishes an external reference.
Based on your critique, it would be also desirable in the system of the architecture if the academic rules become satisfyingly followed, even if this is no guarantor for good academic works. Nevertheless, there is an aspect which at least tolerates the evident lack in the Interdiziplinarität of the architecture. This is the classical and still valid determination of the architecture, presumably regulates not only the actions of the architects, but also those who want to become it.
Many who stand in your criticism (the students, as well as the teachers, ... ), live in the awareness that architecture is a profession that combines as many areas around the topic of Building, and the architect is even only one dilettante among the external specialists. In this determination dilettantism is revalued rather positively, because this state the architects enables to assess the facets of a complicated building project better and to form thereby the whole result positively. To be a good architect, you should have circumspect specialists around yourself. And exactly this knows the system of the architecture, because "THE ARCHITECT" helps himself with the logic of other systems (to repair on the one hand his own deficits), and to create an artificial complexity, which ultimately aims to be the complexity of human beeing.
Here "THE ARCHITECTS" becomes a quality-spoken, which currently seems the external reference (CAD, BIM) would like to take claim for themselves.
........
If would not thought about it, this might be helpful:http://www.amazon.com/The-Alphabet-Algorithm-Writing-Architecture/dp/0262515806/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376920450&sr=8-1&keywords=mario+carpo"Finally, I’d like to restate my criticisms in general terms. If we are serious about moving architecture and urbanism away from purely artistic considerations and into a more rational arena, there has never been a better time than now. All of us have access to immense computational power which can be applied to problems that have been —until quite recently— intractable. But of course the garbage-in-garbage-out adage holds true; computation can be used to generate large amounts of complexity, but complexity does not equal worth. The only time when it makes sense to invoke computation in the design process is when there is some relevant data that needs to be computed" (David Rutton)I want to make it short, and just ask a few questions, and hope that the following questions are relevant also for you, and not be considered outside your system. i think that the weighting to such questions seem to be more valuable, not for the architects.1. What is wrong from a pure artistic intention?2. What is any sense in purely architectural discourse?3. strictly looked, can be determined sense generally in a purely architectural discourse?4. What is purely architectural discourse?5. What is Funktionalismus or Rationalismus without philosophical support? 6. Would not be the pure functional fulfilment empty ? 7. Would be not a critical position on the promise of purely rational algorithms applied?…
he first tree to the branch 1 ofthe second, then the branch 2 of the first tree to the branch 2 ofthe second,and so on ...
good if someone thinks something I appreciate in advance ...Thanks for your interest
hola a todos
tengo una pregunta, he estado tratando de hacer un weave con las ramas de dos arboles, es decir, los dos arboles tienen 7 ramas y los quiero convertir en un solo arbol de 14 ramas, pero intercalando la rama 1 del primer arbol con la rama 1 del segundo, luego la rama 2 del primer arbol con la rama 2 del segundo, y asi sucesivamente...bueno si a alguien se le ocurre algo se lo agradezco de antemano...gracias por su interes
…
and I here is what I have to share:
Thanks! Thank you for being awesome! When I released Ladybug two years ago I could never imagine how this project will take over my life! It has been such an invaluable experience for me so far and it wasn’t possible without you - so thank you so much.
What’s next? Recently I get this question more and more and here is my fairly long answer! Chris is pushing the boundaries with comfort tools. Chien Si is working on HVAC systems integration. Chris, Anton and Alejandra will figure out how to effectively get natural ventilation to be modeled. Patrick, Sandeep, Michal and Boris are working on their developments. I’m working on getting 3 Phase method integrated, and Butterfly will be out at some point, but... they are not going to be what makes the next step. The next step is up to you. It is what you will do with the development. So go ahead and let us know what’s next!
If you can help someone on the group please do! Doing so you are not only helping another person (and potentially yourself) but also the developers. The more you can help each other here the more we will have time for development and documentation.
Best place to send your questions is this group. If you are using the latest version from github then you may want to sent it to github. Please consider emails as the last option. Go back to number 3 again! Thanks.
Don’t be nice to us! Well, I mean don’t just be nice to us. I love your nice comments like anybody else and please keep them coming ;) but what we also need next to nice comments is your critiques, wishes and insight. I feel that recently we are getting less wishes and critiques than what it used to be. You can post them here in the group or on github and either way we will know about it. Thank you to all of you who has already done this.
Thanks again! Before I let you go I want to specially thank all of you who contributed to the project by your development, thoughts and support. You are great and I can’t thank you enough.
David Weinberger in his book “Too Big to Know” says: “When an expert network is functioning as its best, the smartest person in the room is the room itself.” Reading some of the discussions on the group gives me the feeling of staying inside a smart room. Thank you and let’s keep the room growing!
Cheers,
Mostapha
PS: To avoid sending another post, I just post the updates about the two upcoming workshops here:
I will lead a workshop in LA next Friday (Feb. 6) and there is still few seats left. If you want to learn more about energy and daylighting simulation with Honeybee here is your chance. Here is more information who to register: (http://www.facadesplus.com/technology-workshops/).
Chris will lead a 3 days intense and comprehensive Ladybug and Honeybee workshop in Mexico City this March. You have probably watched Chris’s tutorials and already know what you can expect from a workshop with Chris so I don’t have to speak for that! I would take this workshop if I was around that area. If you are around Mexico City or know a friend who might be interested please let them know. Here is more information about the workshop: (https://www.facebook.com/LadyBugforGrasshopper/photos/a.442320969114095.107084.413910668621792/919318878080966).
…
ies and ideas (in this case agent-based modelling) simply because they are the new cool thing to do and, if we think carefully about how the integration of agent-based modeling will improve the accuracy and usefulness of our models, we are more likely to make lasting contributions through their integration.
For example, it seems vital to me that such agent-based models be grounded in some clear quantifiable observations of human behavior in real buildings as opposed to relying on our own coefficients to represent how valuable we think certain things are to the occupants. I will give an example of two agent-based ideas that I have had - one of which has turned out to seem much more valuable in the long-run because of it's grounding in real-world data and I plan to implement soon.
To start with the more valuable example, ever since I read this awesome book on adaptive thermal comfort (https://books.google.com/books?id=vE7FBQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=adaptive+thermal+comfort&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjDmO6avNnJAhUD9h4KHXWVBuAQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=adaptive%20thermal%20comfort&f=false), I have had several ideas for how to integrate the findings of recent comfort surveys into our energy models. Generally, the focus of thermal comfort research seems to be shifting from theoretical human energy balance calculations to surveys of occupant behavior, giving us a lot of great data that helps incorporate these behavioral factors in our energy models. To continue one of the ideas that you mention, Theodore, here is a plot from the book that describes the window-opening behavior of occupants as the indoor temperature increases:
Currently, EnergyPlus does not easily allow you to set such a function for window-opening, as you point out but the incorporation of this behavior seems necessary to produce an accurate model of a naturally ventilated building (since opening all of the windows as soon as the indoor temperature hits 21 C is far from realistic). To get around this, I was thinking of including an option on the nat vent component that will put in a series of IF/THEN nat vent objects that approximate this smooth function through a step function:
IF 19 < indoor temperature < 20 THEN WindowOpening = 10%
IF 20 < indoor temperature < 21 THEN WindowOpening = 15%
IF 21 < indoor temperature < 22 THEN WindowOpening = 21%
IF 22 < indoor temperature < 23 THEN WindowOpening = 35%
...
I am hoping to implement this soon.
To describe the example that I have realized was not so helpful with time, when I was first drafting the idea for high-resolution comfort maps (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLruLh1AdY-Sj3ehUTSfKa1IHPSiuJU52A), I originally thought that I would develop computer models an animations of occupants moving around the thermally diverse space to make themselves more comfortable. Once I started to get into this, however, I realized that the social characteristics of a space usually have a much larger impact on where people place themselves than the thermal characteristics and it is not until the thermal characteristics become very uncomfortable or the presence of other people is completely removed that the thermal environment dominates the movement behavior. Thus, in order to model the occupant behavior, I would have to code in the relative importance of a large number of these social characteristics in relation to thermal comfort, which would have been a process of me simply making up coefficients to produce cool-looking but somewhat meaningless animations. It is only when my nicely-designed thermal environments were aligned with the social/programmatic characteristics of the space that I could argue that I was justifiably adding value since the thermal characteristics were not in contradiction to or being weighted against the social ones. So, in the end, realized that all I needed in order to produce a good design was to align the thermal environment with the placing of program and the agent-based modelling would not have enabled the production of a much better design. This is the reason why the human silhouettes are manually placed in the thermal animations on the youtube playlist in the above link and is the reason why I do not intend to incorporate agent-based modelling in this particular manner.
Let me know your thoughts on this as I realize I may also be looking at this from a narrow perspective that is not informed by all that agent-based modelling has to offer.
-Chris…
- nickname is rather the best approach - and not on active group, but that's irrelevant anyway).
Step back (assuming that you are talking about the "Tens_from_random_blah_blah" definition):
1. Engineering is the art of demystifying (or we are promising that anyway, he he). This means that you start defining (better: outlining) some topology for things based on some "generic" rules (like the ones applied for the masts,cables,cones etc etc). These things are kept in some kind of structure (Lists, DataTrees etc). Things are few in 99.99999% of cases (i.e. : even the biggest membrane "module" has, say, 20-50 masts per "module").
2. Then ... handling things "individually" (mostly modifying) becomes the most critical part. See this (an x "possible" solution by combining a myriad of "options" : a no cones membrane solution, in plain English):
3. But the above is impossible (for more than obvious reasons). You should deploy masts in some high/low sequence in order to achieve some meaningful convex/concave formation that could work.
4. This "works" : 5. This doesn't:
6. This works partially (the formation at the back is "flat" == undo able):
7. This is utterly kitsch (and faulty as the case6 - the back portion):
So it's quite obvious that without a (quite complex) capability to individually control things (in this occasion : mast heights) the whole definition is a waste of computer time. Additionally the more the solution is "demystified" (some curve is defined, some random points are created, some masts are in place, some cables appear etc etc) the more additional constrains are required in order to "narrow" the possibilities (In plain English : sliders should control other sliders as regards their min/max values, true/false, you/me etc etc).
Remember that we are talking about ONE (mast height) out of a myriad things that you should control "manually" (it's utterly pointless to mastermind some kind of "generic" rules - or use naive attractors etc etc) .You'll see the difference when I'll completely reform the definition by adding individual control upon anything.
PS: what about the blocks? (the real life stuff that actually make any solution possible). Can you imagine a 2nd set of "restrictions" imposed by "a child to his parent"? (Assembly/Component modeling , that is).
more soon
…