Objective:

The third segment in the digital fabrication class is Milling.  Milling is “the machining process of using rotary cutters to remove material.” (wikipedia) Milling is a tool that has a variety of options and can be used on multiple scales.  Inspired by the city and the architecture of Barcelona, the prompt for the milling machine exercise was to design a hexagonal tile, 40mm deep with 144mm sides.  Constraints for the top face of the tile allowed students to explore variations in the depth up to 7mm.

3D Model + RhinoCam:

Students were encouraged to create a topography for the movement of water through a network of tiles. Each group’s tile had specific geometrical edge conditions where their tile would connect to their neighbours via the flow of water. Since each tile would be replicated, and each pair of edges had their own inlet/outlet parameters, it was important to trisect the hexagon to achieve cohesion within a set of 7 (of their own) tiles as well as within a tile network.

Inspiration

Fractal like shapes, reflectional symmetry, rotational symmetry, and self-similarity and the finite subdivision rule drove our initial design.  Recursive subdivision is something that is widely used in tile making and milling but we wanted to tell a different story.  Our group is comprised of engineers and architects and exploring “advanced” topics recently we have been exposed to and are interested in electronics.

Printed Circuit boards (PCB) have been around since the 1850’s, metal rods connected large components mounted on wooden bases.   Circuit boards are in all electronics and some of the most used components and have been around since the 1920’s.  The first circuit boards were hand soldered, and the movement of the wire is that of “sweeping curves” denoting freehand design.  Today, circuit boards are rectilinear, and “printed” on the surface on insulating boards. There are single-double-and multi layered boards made up of layers of printed circuits.  The components are connected through plated and drilled holes to the appropriate circuit layer.  This adds greater circuit simplicity and a beautiful geometry.  Each board is unique, printed for its function and designed to perform each function within an allotted space.Our tile reflects the evolution of the circuit board.

Physical Model

Made from a high density polyurethane foam,Made from  50mm thick high density polyurethane foam the  single mould was created using CNC Milling machine. Three different ball machines were used i.e. 3mm ball mill , 6mm  ball mill , 12mm ball mill for creating different finishes . The mould was then applied with 4 coats of sealant at the time gap of every 20 min and let to dry completely. Once the sealant was dried out completely , a layer of Vaseline was applied to prevent the cement block from getting stuck to the foam.The next step was to pour the concrete mix with proportion of  800ml of cement , 2400 ml of aggregate and 480 ml of water and 100ml of accelerator and dry for 12 hours. The tile was then taken out and allowed to set for next few hours. The process was repeated and a total of 5 tiles were casted. The concrete tile was further processed with hot water to remove the vaseline and oil was applied to give a polished finish.

The Lotus Flower it’s a kinetic and dynamic structure.

The goal of the exercise was to producing 3d printed pieces and explore the design opportunities arising from the potential and limitations of the technology to create a dynamic assembly with 2mm diameter rods linked together by 3d printed pieces.

Our idea was to design just one joint. This joint should had the capabilities of generate through the connections between themselves and with the help of the elastic nature of the tubes in order to form two geometrical moments, one that’s goes up and another one than goes to the sides.

The dynamic nature of the joint allows a level of movement between the rods themselves in a translation system by moving the rods in to a circle to move within itself and transfigure into a bigger or smaller structure.

Group 16 has constructed a tower through a process of experimental design & highly adaptive problem solving.

Our initial design was far too complex. We attempted to create something so different and innovative that we lost sight of our goals . We over-complicated.

The original main structural component.

After breaking many, many lengths of plywood, drastic re-design was imminent.

Attempting to bend the pieces.

We only cut 3 different pieces – two of which were designed for the failing aspect of the design. We simplified our structure, taking out the problem pieces that continued to break, and designing a tower that could stand with just the one replicated piece – a 38mm x 7.5mm length, with a small 5mm notch cut into both ends. This piece was twisted to add aesthetics and add in the flowing spiral form – a point which led to more problems.

Soaking the plywood was initially a major set back. We didn’t achieve the twist we anticipated as we were too hurried to assemble the pieces, and did not allow sufficient drying time. Furthermore, after finally drying, the property of the plywood has changed, making it more brittle.

Soaking the plywood.

Finally we constructed a very simple, elegant tower. This is when we reach the next major set back. Height.

Twisting the lengths.

Building up the first tower.

Standing Tall.

As our tower was now taller than the door, we realised we would have to move it outside to continue construction. Although successful, the tower suffered irreparable damage – a benefit in hindsight, as hidden structural faults exposed themselves.

First tower – on the road to ruin.

We soon realised that the tower became very unstable when we made the diameter of the ring (in plan) too small. We had to keep this diameter maximised to spread the load and centre of gravity over a larger area.  We also believed the structure was too simple (and we had 300+ spare 38mm lengths of plywood), so we decided to add an outer ring. this ring, although loosely woven, provided us with a better understanding of the structure and the options available to us.

Disaster.

The morning after, the tower had collapsed. A quick rebuild led to our second tower (& third design), where we experimented with bracing and tension. This tower had many of the same flaws as the original tower – the inner ring had too smaller diameter to support itself correctly, and wavered in the slightest breeze.

The second tower – experimenting with bracing.

Disaster (2.0).

Again, the tower failed to last through the night. Leaving us with as much knowledge of what not-to-do as we could fathom.

The final tower stands at around 3.8 meters tall, with two rings, each made of 10 members, braced against each other. The load is distributed directly down to the base, and also through the outer ring, which acts as a buttress.

(Click here to watch the assembly video)

Basking in the shadow of the tower.

movie fabrication final day from Ian Mann on Vimeo.

Lessons Learnt.

Amongst the lessons about structure and load distribution, as well as material transformation and durability, we have learnt a lot about teamwork. There were many instances in our project when a member has needed a third hand – promptly supplied. Through all of our failures and endeavours, we were able to overcome our stresses, and develop a project which has adapted to the situation and circumstances surrounding every aspect of it’s creation.

The final outcome – through a testing and triumphant process – has used only 190 lengths of 38mm x 7.5mm plywood members. This is less than two of our boards. If we would have developed the final outcome as our initial design (and only cut 2 out of our 4 boards), we could have halved the material use. Our structure stands tall and strong, using only half of the prescribed materials, only one repeated component & one connection.

The 4 Plywood Boards.

The left overs