bitMAPS was initiated through a client’s interest in the internally driven Pop Panel, developed as an inexpensive pattern generating wall system. We have been able to expand from an initial prototype to an effective product over the last two weeks, working on material testing and production design, while also focusing our efforts on the design of an integrated console, light/vent switch, the pattern generation, and mold creation. This iteration does not utilize Bubble Wrap as the inexpensive base mold; instead, we have created a custom plastic mold, acknowledging specific edge conditions, and the need for each panel to meet up perfectly with another. The base mold is based on a hexagonal grid of milled cavities which allows us to insert positive, flat, and negative plugs in order to efficiently form highly complex patterns. This patterning is generated by decomposing a bitmap into a list of values that is translated (parametrically) into the three plug types. The integrated console combines many of the objects in a bathroom within the panel piece including: embedded switches, magazine rack, toilet paper holder, and iPhone shelf. The light switch utilizes a capacitance sensor and Arduino Mini microcontroller that is placed behind a panel so that there is no visual interruption of a standard switch.

This project is currently between the Investigation and Testing, and Informed Design phases of our process. The design is evolving as we receive feedback from our various fabrication and materials tests. Production should begin within the next week.

This project has provided an opportunity to develop an idea into a feasible product, which incorporates building systems and various functional elements while serving to define space. The integration of a unique, potentially client-driven, pattern into this system adds another layer of meaning into the finished piece that addresses a client’s specific needs. Hopefully, this process will lead to future clients and further development of the system.

__________

PROJECTiONE has developed a position on how we would like to practice through self reflection and trial by fire execution of client-based work. As seen in our client-based strategy post, we have developed more appropriate definitions and descriptors of our processes. These descriptions have evolved over time and through reflecting on our experiences with actual clients. We used this process as the basis for generating our contracts. It was immediately apparent to us that our work could not be contained within a single contract or practice structure and we therefore developed the following client relationships/contracts. They are: Product to Client, Process to Client, and Seed Money. These relationships are described in more detail in the following diagrams, but they allow for a greater degree of flexibility in dealing with clients with varying expectations. It is expected that our clients may be traditional owners, fellow designer, or manufacturers looking to invest into innovative usage of a material or process.

This comparison was developed as a means of best understanding the internal PROJECTiONE process. By reflecting on our process over the course of our work together we developed this set of descriptions which represent us. This thought experiment has served as the basis for the development of our client relationships and our own practice structures. The comparison is not intended as a critique of traditional practice structures but it is a standard against which our practice can be most clearly represented.

In this structure the client is interested in a sketch or prototype previously developed by PROJECTiONE. They realize the potential of the design and would like to adapt it to fit their needs. During the development of the design, the client approves the product after the Informed Design phase before moving into the Production, and Assembly and Installation phases.

PROJECTiONE is commissioned by the client to apply design thinking/processes to their unique problem. The client approves the design after the Critical Thinking phase and again after Investigation and Testing, and Informed Design.

PROJECTiONE partners with a Manufacturer/Designer/Venture Capitalist/Investor to provide seed money used to develop an initial concept. PROJECTiONE then interrogates the material/process/idea, investigating innovative technologies, methods, and applications. The deliverable of value is typically the knowledge generated.

This version of Bodhi Tree was customized and designed for a residence in Evansville, IN. The clients originally articulated the desire to replace an existing plastic tree, with something more expressive and elegant. The system was reinterpreted for this specific application, consisting of more than 3,000 wood veneer components, which were redesigned at 2/3 scale of the original piece for residential use, increasing the complexity of the overall pattern and rigidity of the system. The wood species and pattern chosen was based on existing color tones and design of the space. In order to streamline the installation process, the components were prefabricated, sorted, and packaged offsite and brought to the client.

We considered Bodhi Tree for this application due to its necessary involvement between designer and client. Over a two-day period the system was installed with the direct involvement of the family members, who helped with the overall design intention and assembly of the final piece. In this way, Bodhi Tree became more than a foreign object placed in their living room. It became an experience that the family will remember as well as an object that redefines how their space feels and is used.

We found this interaction between client and designer/fabricator interesting as it relates to our process. The client’s direct involvement with the design and assembly changed how value was placed on the project, as they became more than a consumer. They were part of the assembly and decision making process, directly affecting the outcome of their project. Assembly became more than labor, and design became accessible. We hope to continue engaging in this type of client relationship in the future.

__________

This is a prototypical process growing out of our previous experiment CNC Pen, combining precision digital tools with loose analog tools. This method has been further developed as a study of the relationship between these tools. The process includes translating a raster image file into vector format, separated into various color levels. These vectors are then turned into surfaces and translated into g-code for the router. In this instance we have used a 3-axis CNC router to drive 12 Copic Ciao markers on museum board. The precision of the machine is offset by the bleed of the marker and the porous nature of the board. Feed rate and Z values relate directly to speed and pressure of the hand. The image chosen is of the Ponte Vecchio bridge in Florence Italy from our time there this summer, specifically for its character and color. The nature of this technique and of the place seemed to align. While a certain level of precision is maintained through this process, the inevitable inconsistencies of markering transform the product into something looser. This close relationship between the digital and analog and the innovative use of these tools grows directly from our design platforms.

The product took over 12 hours of file prep and 16 hours of machine time (with testing), embodying our feelings on efficiency. The result was not created faster than a hand rendering, nor does it appear to be machined. The method allows for a new way of making. Repetition and customization are provided for in the process, as well as a dialogue between digital and hand craft. We are happy with this result and look forward to pursuing the next step. For us this piece represents the very important first step in the process.

In an attempt to begin understanding the marketing of our process and design thinking, we have decided to market and sell this outcome. The hope is that the documentation and representation of process will allow a consumer to understand its making, becoming less concerned on only the outcome. The product gains value through its process of making.

This prototype is for sale on ebay here.

__________

Information about the wood was collected through a Computed Tomography (CT) Scan. This technology is traditionally used for visualizing structures within the body. The CT scan takes X-rays of the wood in section using increments as small as 5 millimeters. The scan of curly maple (above) reveals the grain of the wood.

This data was translated into three-dimensional information by tracing a single grain line in Rhino. The resulting vectors were lofted to create a surface which represents one year of growth in the tree’s history. This process was incredibly time consuming; over 125 sections were analyzed to produce an outcome that was as accurate as possible. Once the surface was generated it was translated into G-code using Mastercam for our three-axis CNC router.

The evenly milled surface was achieved using a half inch bull nose bit with a 1/100th of an inch step over taking over an hour and half. Due to the complex nature of the grain, the milled surface did not precisely follow a single grain line as we had intended. A sanding process was necessary to remove imperfections and smooth the surface. The final piece was finished with Tung oil which protects the wood, enhances the patterns in the grain, and expresses a much richer wood tone.

Although the results from the curly maple were beautiful, using a wood with a looser grain would have been a much better fit for this process. The challenge came from manually interpreting the imaging data into vectors; because the grain was tight it was easy to confuse the grains from one image to another. The juxtaposition of the natural form of the tree’s curvatures and the rigid edges of the sawn lumber makes a statement about the conflict between industrial processing and the materials natural tendencies.

It reminds us of Michelangelo’s slaves; in each unfinished sculpture the curvature of a human body emerges from a large cube of marble. The project embodies the concept of the value of inefficiency. Although this process was tedious, the final outcome is much more valuable because of the time and care that went into making it. The only way to produce this was through a CT scan repetitive tracing, and cautious sanding. The result is a beautifully worked piece of wood that a passersby cannot resist touching.

__________

Pop Panel is an exploration in the relationship of mold creation and customization. The manufacturing of molds for vacuum forming is often the most cost intensive process, making it difficult to create mass customized objects. Bubble wrap is an inexpensive and fun material to work with that solves many issues of customization. It can be popped in selected patterns and vacuum formed much easier than traditionally made molds, providing variation across a panelized system.

The panels are created by vacuum forming .02” clear acetate over the selectively popped bubble wrap. A piece of MDF is placed beneath the bubble wrap to create an edge condition and allows the panels to match their neighboring panels. The clear acetate can be painted on the inside, allowing for further customization.

The edges of each panel fit into grooves that have been milled from plywood. Between these grooves are large holes that allow access to the panel from behind. Once the panels have been placed onto the plywood, each cavity is filled with expanding insulation foam (Great Stuff). This creates a rigid system and allows the formed panels to adhere to the wood.

The pattern tested was derived from an abstracted photograph, however, the system or idea could be deployed in a manner that users/customers could submit images and graphics that could be translated into Pop Panels. By designing a system of production and allowing others to create the pattern, we can produce a flexible, mass customized product.

also…
this is fun too.
__________

Hiroshi Ishii and Brygg Ullmer created a vocabulary for Human Computer Interfaces (HCI) and Tangible Media in their paper “Tangible Bits: Towards Seamless Interfaces between People, Bits and Atoms”. They describe “foreground” interfaces and “background” interfaces which are distinct in that foreground interfaces allow users to “grasp and manipulate” where background interfaces are ambient and do not require direct user interface. We are focusing on the idea of foreground interfaces which connect the user to their surroundings.

plyLight is a rapidly developed prototype made up of 44 hand soldered circuit boards. Each board contains three LED’s, a photoresistor, a Darlington transistor, and various resistors and capacitors. By using only analog electronics components, plyLight does not require a processor to function. These boards, which are powered by 12 parallel 9V batteries, are embedded between two milled pieces of plywood. Cavities for the LED’s and photoresistors are milled into the plywood leaving only a thin veneer between the components and the surface allowing the exterior of the object to appear as a plain piece of plywood.

When a user swipes a hand across plyLight the photoresistors are shaded and turn on the three LED’s clustered around it. The LEDs illuminate circles on the board’s surface and the previously simple plywood becomes a display interacting with the user. These discrete interactions take place across the board allowing the user to leave a trace of glowing LED’s behind their hand. The LED’s fade after a hand moves across the board and the effect is that of visual tracers of sparklers at night or of drawing on wet sand which quickly fades back to a flat surface.

The implications for this interaction are not bounded by a singular idea or function. The interface was developed with the understanding that this could be implemented for multiple projects and purposes. The boards could be wired to a microcontroller which communicates with a computer and could begin initiating lighting sequences on its own or in relation to a building system’s function (e.g. control of lighting, sound, or actuated surfaces).

__________

Our Design Platform is a set of values and concepts that exist to further explain our thesis framework. They give insight into processes of working, designing, and thinking within our collective, providing a foundation to work from and consider throughout design and fabrication.

Value of Inefficiency
Craft and innovation often emerge from time and energy intensive processes. When this concept is applied to seemingly mundane materials the results can transform them into valued pieces. The care involved in this process is evident in the final product and exposes latent beauty and subtle characteristics. This goes beyond a monetary gain in value and elevates the product into something that carries emotional or psychological value for the user and for the designer.

Digital Hangover
In response to the certain digital fabrication movements, we are interested in addressing the notion that designers are able to seamlessly translate a digital model into a physical form with very little effort. It is a rare occurrence that entire assemblies “snap together” without complications, that wood which is fresh off the mill doesn’t need hand finishing, and that tectonics are developed without extensive testing. Instead we acknowledge these processes and embrace them as part of the digital analog exchange. Furthermore, digital manufacturing tools are no longer the avante garde of design. They exist at a level equal with analog fabrication processes and the understanding of their relation must now be explored.

Loosening Precision
Materials often directly inform designs and the processes involved in production. We aim to allow for circumstantial results, loosening precision. While tectonics and details are often tied to materiality, a greater understanding of the material is developed by closley working with it and the resulting knowledge informs design. This approach also applies to the processes involved, as methods play just as an important role in developing design.

Post-Design Design
Because we design, fabricate, and assemble there is an understanding that the design will develop as it is produced. We can anticipate certain results, but the process of making often reveals unforeseen challenges and opportunities. Post-design design is more than just troubleshooting, it is the understanding that the initial idea is flexible and will most definitely adapt. Often in our early design process unknowns are understood and expected, anticipating that a solution will later be inserted into these gaps.

High Intensity/Low Duration- Throughout the next two weeks we will be rigorously designing and creating. The purpose of this quick set of crafted objects is to take the Design Platform and embody those within a physical format. Each project, though highly different from the next, carries the same platform as the next.

woodScan
popPanel
plyLight

FABRICATION>>
Over the past year PROJECTiONE has been engaged in an ongoing project, focused on innovative fabrication techniques paired with traditional materials, in partnership with the Institute for Digital Fabrication. reBarn began in November of 2008 with a large donation of reclaimed barn wood from the Newton family’s local “Pennsylvania-style” barn. Working with the Muncie parks system, West Side Park was chosen for its potential to enhance the public recreational trail along the White River in Muncie, Indiana. reBarn aims to provide single or multiple users with a semi-programmed platform that is suitable for a variety of uses. While its use is not specifically determined, a sense of human scale and proportions is embedded in the layout of the panels, and its form is pulled specifically from the site as it creates a third levee above the river.

It was important for us to use the wood as efficiently as possible, maintain the history and quality of the material, and employ innovative strategies for its application. Rather than completely removing all imperfections, we made the decision to utilize the uniqueness of each piece and expose this on the project’s surface. In order to make milling of the barn wood viable, each piece was de-nailed, power washed, and any area that was unusable was removed. Each board was then numbered and its species, length, width, depth, and interesting characteristics were recorded. The quantity of stock totaled 275 pieces, averaging at 80 inches long and 6.5 inches wide with a consistent depth around1 inch for a total of about 300,000 square feet.

Cut files for each wood component were created using an unrolled version of the 3D model in Rhino. This catalog of digital dimensions of available wood allowed us to efficiently and precisely nest the digital cut files into the stock. Because each board was a different size and many were torqued or bowed, a unique process was developed to secure the wood to the bed of the router. Using the table’s suction a sheet of plywood became the waste board, while each piece of barn wood was drilled down to the waste board with several screws, securing every part nested in the board. The position of each of these screws had to be carefully determined before the milling process and written into the files.

Connections between individual wood components and panels were informed by a partnership with Zahner Metals. In order to offset the traditional material and hidden fabrication techniques, we involved Zahner in the process early on. We visited their shop in Kansas City to discuss materials, tolerances, and processes. The continued discussions with their engineers via phone and email allowed our team to finalize the aluminum components. This resulted in five water jet cut aluminum surface panels, and over 350 variable aluminum joints.

Each three or four sided wood panel is made up of a series of individual components, connected by a continuous dovetail joint that runs around the perimeter. The wood panels are connected to each other by aluminum joints, embed in the assembly process. Each aluminum joint accommodates the specific angle between one panel of wood and its adjoining panel. Consideration of the sequence of assembly and fabrication was equally important as the development of the joinery techniques.

All pre-assembly and fabrication has been completed. In-site installation will take place in November.

INSTALLATION>>
reBarn began as a dialogue between the history of its primary material, barn wood and contemporary tools such as CNC technology. This dialogue balances digital and analog processes, natural and man-made materials, and traditional and innovative details. The assembly tectonic was informed by the traditional cross-bracing that occurs behind the skin of a barn. This technique was employed using a locking dovetail system, creating a framework to begin developing the form.

The overall form was developed with special consideration for the site, retaining a relationship between nature and the user. Placed within a man-made levee created by the Army Corp of Engineers, the installation has a directional flow which references the movement of the river. As users adjust into the multiple positions for sitting and reclining they have the opportunity to recognize the small rapids in the White River, the sycamores directly upstream, and the public passing by along the adjacent White River Trail.

Subtle details were employed to express the age of the wood. The precise filleted space between each board references the way barns age naturally. The expansion and contraction of the exterior wood creates gaps in the siding, resulting in a uniquely filtered quality of light on the interior of the barn. This weathered quality of old barns is embedded within reBarn.

The depth of each piece of wood deviated slightly.  Because we wanted to maintain the aged surface of the wood and avoid time consumed to plane each board. The dovetail tectonic allowed for the variations in wood to be accounted for within the tip surface. The final assembled panels are not exactly in plane but this variation is synonymous with classic wood barns.

reBarn was installed over a seven-day timeframe. We utilized a list of coordinates generated from our digital model, determining the site placement of the structural concrete elements with a traditional two point / arc intersection method. The barn wood and aluminum panels were connected using custom aluminum components cut by A. Zahner Metals.

In order to support the shell structure during installation, temporary structural support for the panels was needed as the aluminum components were bolted together. Because of the extensive prefabrication, installation and assembly of the panels on site took little time. In order to increase the rigidity of the shell structure, it was necessary to add sub-structure and cross bracing to the original design. This phase of the installation was the most time consuming, but was required to insure the longevity and safety of the project. Ten minutes after completion a group of ten children “stress-tested” our project and proved it successful.

The material’s history is highlighted by the old boards creaking as you walk over the structure. Its regionalism is expressed by the inherent textures and character. Some boards retain the initials of the barn’s previous owners; other boards show places of wear from animals. These features tie the wood directly to its origins – the Newton farm in Cambridge City, IN. The contrast between aged materials and the precisely patterned aluminum panels strengthens the effect of each creating a richer whole. This relationship also provides for a direct connection between the analog and digital worlds.

reBarn has been a year in the making. If you are in the Muncie area, we are having an opening this Thursday, November 19 at 5 pm to celebrate its completion.

__________

Over the past weekend we took on the task of moving Arcus Animus from its site in the Architecture Building to the Center for Media Design in the Letterman Building on Ball State University’s Campus. Arcus Animus was originally completed as part of an Inconvenient Studio’s exercise lead by Philip Beesley from the University of Waterloo/PBAi and sponsored by the Institute for Digital Fabrication.

The animation of Arcus Animus responds to the movement of users under and around the installation. The system is comprised of six infrared sensors, four Arduino microcontrollers, fifteen solenoid valves, and fifteen air muscles. Communication between these components is driven by processing-based code, which animates a mesh of impact-resistant acrylic, silicone, bamboo, and mylar.

In order to accommodate the new site, and hide wiring or tubing it was necessary to drill through drywall and remove small sections of ceiling tile. Working over the weekend has allowed us to avoid the University politics involved with this type of building modification.

The most challenging aspect of the work was the reconfiguration of the installation to a fit a linear space. In order to make the system operational again, components had to be replaced, and most of the bays rewired. The process tested our soldering skills as well as involved our past experience with Arduino programming. Further development the code, allowed us to reprogram the system and heighten the level of response to the user.

Arcus Animus will make its debut at the IDMAa Conference the first weekend of November.
__________

We just returned from the annual ACADIA Conference (Association for Computer Aided Design in Architecture) at the Art Institute of Chicago. There were some very informative lectures and we were fortunate to network with many of the designers and academics present. This year’s conference was entitled reForm(), exploring how architects, engineers, artists and designers are using HARDWARE, SOFTWARE and MIDDLEWARE technologies to transform the ways in which buildings and spaces perform, act and operate. Many interesting lectures were centered on computer-human interface and augmented realities.

Kai Strehlke: Head of Design Technology, one of the keynote speakers, spoke about Herzog and de Meuron’s design process, contrasting most of the other presentations. He emphasized that their use of technology does not control the design process; instead, they seek tools to realize designs, many of which come from cultural and social concepts rather than complex algorithms.

It was exciting to hear Robert Aish speak about his history within the field of computer programming and parametric design. Aish described his experience developing computer models for the ship building industries (which had developed parametric models before the advent of computers). He is currently developing a programming language (D#) for Autodesk in order to produce new forms of parametric scripting. He showcased some examples of the language and the developing software.

Achim Menges presented research on wood veneer and hygroscopic reaction. He is currently continuing that research, studying wood’s reactive/sensory characteristics relative to moisture and humidity. Experiments were set up to determine how much deflection veneer could produce in low / high moisture environments. These studies are translated into some larger scale design schemes. It was exciting to see the research existing outside of the computer, in the analog world.

We have been following the ongoing work at the ETH in Zurich (specifically that of Gramazio and Kohler). Their approach to an additive design process has taken them from bricks to wood construction. They are continuing to develop a relationship between their robotic arm and standard miter saws for full scale building skins. Their no-holds-bar approach to creative uses of digital and analog tools has similarities to our own, and it was interesting to hear their perspective.

The last keynote lecture was unexpected, dealing with the developing use of robots in the military. Peter W Singer is a writer and researcher for 21st Century Defense Initiative – Brookings. The presentation was an awakening exposing some of the ethical implications of this research and development. Robots in Iraq with loaded cannons are taking on a major role, sometimes malfunctioning and firing at our troops, other times saving lives. This raises concerns of liability: who is to blame if a robot kills a civilian: the programmer, manufacturer, commander in chief? It also raised moral questions about the replacement of the human in warfare.

The conference included a diverse collection of papers but did not maintain any consistent thread across them. Somebody made the comment that ACADIA is alive and kicking but doesn’t necessarily know in what direction. This isn’t to say that the diversity wasn’t appreciated but we need to ask, what are the implications of these projects and research on the field and on our future?

We enjoyed our MegaBus adventure to Chicago.

__________

To frame PROJECTiONE’s [n. proj-ekt wuhn] position in the fields of digital design and fabrication we are examining our projects relative to current theories and the critical positions of digital designers and fabricators. We have followed trends in digital theory and executed a series of interviews in New York City to understand what current leaders consider to be relevant to their practice.

We find design potential in the areas of overlap and creative use of analog and digital design and fabrication methods. PROJECTiONE was created within this framework. New understandings of design and fabrication tools, through iterative use, reveal potential in materials and processes providing innovative solutions to design problems and expressions of craft. PROJECTiONE resides in the space between digital and analog.

Over the past two years we have collaborated on a variety of projects, from exhibition installations to reactive architecture. Our work has been displayed in various print, web, and built forms, all remaining within an academic setting. This collaborative history was based on a shared love for internal dialogue and critique parallel to making and experimentation, driving each of our projects. PROJECTiONE is our collective thesis. We have chosen to examine our similarities and past methods of collaboration in order to reposition ourselves within the design and fabrication communities this year and into practice.

“It is a collective which exhibits emergent behavioral patterns that are unpredictable by examining the behavioral patterns of its parts. Beyond simple collaboration, which is the result of an alignment of interests, an emergent network can create new and complex coherences out of divergent interests.” (Wiscombe 2006)

We do not intend to define specialists within our group. We are not a group of individuals that coexist to form a collaborative. While we have different backgrounds that affect our perspectives, we are not completely separate parts under the label of a whole. As Wiscombe explains, this has allowed for unpredictable and unforeseen results in the synthesis of our ideas and interests. However, unlike these clear definitions of collaboration and collective, our interests fluctuate between divergent and aligned. Our ideas, skills, and interests may differ, but they also overlap toward a common goal. We do not formulate individual ideas that the group supports, rather the group reformulates individual ideas to a point where the individual is indistinguishable from the group. This is our collective. This is PROJECTiONE.

Our opportunities to work together in the past have focused on using digital and analog design and fabrication tools. To frame our position in this field, we contrast that experience against current theories and the critical positions of digital designers and fabricators. We have followed trends in digital theory and executed a series of interviews in New York City to understand what current designers and fabricators consider to be relevant to their practice. Our questions highlighted their perspective on the relationship between digital and analog tools and processes.

Two significant theories that have informed digital practice are concepts of versioning (parametric design) and its implications in a new industrial or manufacturing approach, neither of which accurately describes our position. Sharples, Holden, and Pasquarelli’s (SHoP) Introduction to the series of essays in the Architectural Design (AD) issue titled Versioning (Sharples, Holden, Pasquarelli 2002, 7) set the framework for this parametric theory. They describe the shift away from representational design towards a form of design that embeds information through the use of parametric modeling and versioning which, “can be characterised by a set of conditions organised into a menu or nomenclature capable of being configured to address particular design criteria”. There was an emerging understanding of the model becoming rapidly adaptable and flexible based on contextual and formal criteria. This model could directly integrate with fabrication techniques, as defined in Manufacturing and Material Effects (Kolarevic and Klinger 2008, 28). Kolarevic and Klinger’s approach takes on industrial models as guidelines for a shift in practice. They claim that digital and computational technology has allowed architecture to move towards a systemized, accurately calculated method of assembly. While this can be true, it is most often not realized in products of architecture. The validity of this manufacturing mentality is in question, as this attitude is incongruent with practices of craftsmanship and the development of truly unique components, (not necessarily mass-customizable components) incorporating digital tools, hand craft, regional materials, and labor.

In our New York interviews, we sought individuals who are recognized for their contributions to digital design and architecture, yet many of their responses indicated sensitivity towards the human involvement in these practices. For example, Chris Lasch of Aranda/Lasch spoke of a Native American weaver suturing two scripted components together. However, when questioned about the weaver’s involvement in creating the suture hole spacing, a parameter of the script, Lasch said that he made the decision without thought of involving the weaver. While he was sharing information with the weaver in development of the scripted components, he missed, what we find, a critical step in the process that could have been explored with a specialist’s expertise. This is not a criticism of the idea or the outcome, but of the specific relationships and process of this collaboration. A direct connection between the digital parameters of the script and the analog methods of the weaver was missing; instead the design was “handed-off” to the maker, exhibiting two skill-sets within an idea, rather than a truly informed idea created through collaboration.

In an interview with John Nastasi of Nastasi Architects, he described a master plasterer who skim coated a CNC milled wall for one of his projects. What was important to Nastasi was the way in which the digital methods allowed for a streamlined process, and most importantly, a result that was “absolutely beautiful”. While this integration allowed for great results, the process remained linear. We are interested in how the plasterer’s expertise could feed back into the formal development of the model. How could the analog process change the way that the wall is developed digitally? How can this relationship and dialogue take on within a more integrated and cyclical model? Can the techniques of the artisan be implemented in conjunction with the CNC operations, not simply in preparation for finishing?

The existing relationship between digital and analog tools is linear and an extension of traditional processes. The designer defines the parameters (materials and methods) while the craftsman, contractor, or assembler is charged with working within the confines of those rules. Arguments have been made for integrated project delivery which involves these people in design decisions early on, but we are not focusing on that idea. What is critical to us is how those interactions take place, not whether they take place.

When asked, some of the [digital] fabricators described analog tools as finishing tools, mainly relying on digital tools for precise shaping and surfacing. Jefferey Taras of Associated Fabrication told us, “[E]verything gets sanded on some level. It’s perfect when it comes off the mill and then it’s never that way again.” This is an attitude towards fabrication and finishing which is commonly held within the digital design community. There is little appreciation for the abilities of analog tools, yet an unyielding reverence for digital tools. Taras went on to say, “The drill press rarely gets used. We use the chop saw, we use the table saw. They’re all used for select processes, maybe to make a jig but not really as a final piece. We might use it to make stock.” We are in opposition to this perspective, reducing analog tools to a diminished status. However, Associated Fabrication recognizes their specialization in CNC tools and will send out work which requires analog tooling to traditional fabricators (e.g. large panel saw cutting).

Analyzing and critiquing these firms’ view of their tools and processes has brought PROJECTiONE closer to an understanding of our own values and position on these issues. The differences have been highlighted in order to define ourselves through negation.

Some groups we interviewed, such as Tietz-Baccon, find value in the relationships of digital and analog, often using CNC machinery to create jigs for crafted analog fabrication. They exhibit their craft through the use of all tools, recognizing that creativity and precision can still occur within the analog. Others, like Gramazio and Kohler at the ETH in Zurich are exploring this relationship in a different way. Though they are experimenting with a seven-axis robot, they have no intent of eliminating the human, remaining largely integrated into the process. [West Fest Pavilion in Switzerland] In this process, the robot picks up a piece of wood and places it on a table, where a student cuts it to a CNC-specified length with a miter saw. After cutting, the robot positions that same piece of wood in a specific place, while another student secures it with a nail gun. It is a mutually constructive machine-human relationship and an integrated use of this technology.

Similar to these groups, we completed a quick design/fabrication project entitled Projection that we used to analyze our internal methodologies and help define our position. Critical relationships existed throughout the project between the analog design (measurement of Cartesian coordinates) and the digital model (insertion of coordinates in digital space). This was made possible by our understanding of the required digital inputs that informed how we modeled and measured using analog tools. During fabrication, our analog techniques (steel cutting, and welding) informed the shape and information embedded in templates (laser-cut cardboard). These templates were designed to wrap around steel angles so that they could easily be held in place while marking and cutting, but also carried with them information regarding the steel pieces’ length and orientation. An interrogation of analog and digital space in this project allowed a unique and continuous transfer of information between the two.

This example highlights the thinking that is intrinsic to our process, relying on an intimate understanding of a variety of tools, both analog and digital. This knowledge can then be applied in developing innovative relationships (coordinate mapping, and laser-cutting templates). Unlike some of the designers and fabricators interviewed, we remain open to new uses of both analog and digital tools. We don’t place any undue importance on either new technologies or traditional means, and we rethink the relationships that exist between them.

Software and hardware should not just make designing or fabricating easier, streamlining the design process. They should not exist separate from the human. They should provide opportunities to change the way designers think. They should allow us to design differently; more precisely, more creatively, and with greater intent. This can be done through an interrogation of the tool’s purpose. Every tool has a purpose or material associated with it, but that purpose should be continually challenged. PROJECTiONE was created within this framework. We find design potential in the areas of overlap and creative use of analog and digital design and fabrication methods. In every project we intend to innovate. We develop new techniques. We rethink traditional techniques. We creatively force tools to do what they weren’t intended to do. Our ideas and methodologies are based on an interrogation of relationships between the individuals of PROJECTiONE and the tools of our craft. This concept is not unique to us, but its execution and results highlight our position in digital practice. PROJECTiONE resides in the space between digital and analog.

Within the framework of our thesis, we are presenting our position at multiple scales and levels of complexity. This first semester has been research based, relying on a few small scale projects to convey our ideas. Our research has helped to iteratively define PROJECTiONE’s position within design and fabrication. We have looked back at previous projects and developed new projects ranging in scale from our own business cards, to a graphic representation of our trip to New York and a system that can receive projection of our work, each exhibiting our position in a different way.

The next stage for us will be examining the marketing and development possibilities of PROJECTiONE in the field of product design. This will introduce new parameters to influence our methods, specifically a program that is developed for several users and the physical production of multiple products that retain the processes we value. This product should embody the cooperative integration of analog and digital throughout its design and production. Our intention is that this methodology becomes transparent and easily understood to a market and specific users. Our secondary goal for this product is the development of supplemental income generating research funding for our work next semester.

PROJECTiONE is currently developing a “Call for Work” in order to begin networking with potential clients and partners. By expanding the scope of our thesis work to include a full scale client based design problem, we will provide a demonstration project within our critical position. We have presented the invitation to those interested in our work to contact us with their unique design problems and opportunities. This project will primarily take place next semester and is intended to explore the development of an external program-based architectural application that frames our thesis work. Previously, our project development has been internally driven, based on our own interests and generated programs, and we realize that for our position to be understood outside of an academic context we must connect with and design for others. Additionally, we are looking towards manufacturers and material suppliers that could benefit from our skill-set in rebranding themselves and rethinking their methods or purpose. Our processes are often influenced by the integration of materials and industry early on, creating the potential to drastically change the way established techniques or materials are used in design and construction. We look forward to engaging this scale of work and interacting with clients with an aligned interest.

Next semester we plan to expand the scope of our thesis work to include a full scale client based design problem, we will provide a demonstration project within our critical position. We invite those interested in our work to contact us with their unique design problems and opportunities. This potential project will primarily take place next semester and is intended to explore the development of an external program-based architectural application that frames our thesis work.

Previously, our project development has been internally driven, based on our own interests and generated programs, and we realize that for our position to be understood outside of an academic context we must connect with and design for others. Additionally, we are looking towards manufacturers and material suppliers that could benefit from our skill-set in rebranding themselves and rethinking their methods or purpose. Our processes are often influenced by the integration of materials and industry early on, creating the potential to drastically change the way established techniques or materials are used in design and construction.

Please contact Elizabeth Boone if you are interested in working with PROJECTiONE.

__________

Past Industry Partners

A. Zahner Metals
Arrowhead Plastic Engineering
Indiana Limestone Fabricators, Inc.
Midwest Metal Products

Past Sponsors

Buente | Buente Architects
Capstone Real Realty
LHI Lighting
The Estopinal Group
VPS Architecture

Past Material Donations

David R Webb Co
Laird Plastics