Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'evaluated'.
Found 1 result
I originally made a post in in the WIP section, but have finalised a selection of images that demonstrate the extent of the project at this particular time. Hope to get some tips, speculation and direction . The work started with an idea of looking into systems of growth and the procedural simulation of that growth. The question of landscape surveillance and 'fertility' arose - can a landscape (or object) topology be evaluated for growth? In this case the landscape would be a scanned model of a terrain, converted from pointcloud to mesh data and thus reinterpreted as a topology of points and primitives with certain inherent attributes: Position (vector), Normals (vector), and curvature (scalar) predominantly. The simulation can then search for 'flatness' and eliminate areas of surface beyond a limit of acceptability. The surface is then displaced whilst maintaining ties to the remainder, this seemed to mirror a process not too dissimilar to inflation (although much more noisy and undefined), always using the retopologised mesh (and thus recalculated attributes) as a driver for the next frame of growth. Generated or grown form is evaluated through a series of spatial explorations with particular functional characteristics in mind. Much like a single-surface-landscape produces the massing for proposed architectural volumes, these volumes are then reinterpreted as single-surface forms that morph into a typology of architecture defined by certain rules. The primary purpose of the interior volume is to house the program of an architecture. The height of the form is predetermined in the procedural algorithm of massing to produce volumes within a range of heights (for example between 3 and 20 meters). The nature of the form suggests an architectural language of evaluated skin as a means of facilitating architectural space. This is then differentiated to provide for the various requirements of a space of production - for example: how can the floor surface serve as a platform for plant growth; how can the side envelope serve as a mediator of thermal comfort; etc? A. There is a desired differentiation between roof and side envelope - key factors to be considered are the issues of transparency in form for light to enter the space below and the capacity to drain rainwater or melting snow. B. An impression of uniformly distributed structural frames is suggested as a method of holding up a dressing of skin not too dissimilar to ideas of bone to muscle tissue connections. C. The form is interpreted as a skin multi-functional, multi-material character. There is a desire for a thermal envelope mixed with porous characteristics that allow for breathability within the interior environment, light, and mediation from the harsh external environment. The following images are all excerpts of a fully procedural exercise; all grown; but in various stages of development of the same system.