project12:Journal
From Msc1
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | Menu :: [[project12:Frontpage|Home]] || [[project12:Journal|Journal]] || [[project12:Challenge|Challenge]] || [[User:Linus|About Me]] | ||
| + | |||
<div style="height:70px; width: 100%; margin:0px; padding: 0px;"><html> | <div style="height:70px; width: 100%; margin:0px; padding: 0px;"><html> | ||
Revision as of 23:22, 15 February 2012
Menu :: Home || Journal || Challenge || About Me
Hyperbody Architecture Journal
by Linus Tan
13.02.12
14.02.12
14.02.12
Architecture Design Studio
W02.S02
W02.S02
16.02.12
Media Studies
W02.S01
W02.S01
17.02.12
Architectural Studies
W03.S01
W03.S01
21.02.12
[13.02.2012] Introduction to Distributed Systems
by Dr Stefan Dulman
Dr Stefan Dulman gave a short seminar about distributed systems in computer software. Some of the distribution systems he introduced were familiar to me, such as Cellular Automata, L-System (Lindenmayer System) and Particles System. These systems are very much Cantor Dust, Penrose Tiling, Sierpenski Triangle, Dragon Curve and Fractal Distribution.
The important question I find myself asking is how does all these relate to architecture? Although the examples he gave are interesting, such as the Healing Pools by Brian Knep or the Hyposurface by Jose Jurves, to me they are a subsection of architecture and not architecture itself. In my last semester studio at the University of Melbourne, I attempted to use the Fractal Distribution to direct my project, in both urban planning and architectural stages. However, I found it difficult to merge the systems with the construction practicality.
In this project, I will attempt again to associate the site with a distribution system, and hopefully design my project around it, allowing whichever system to determine the emergent architecture.
by Dr Stefan Dulman
Dr Stefan Dulman gave a short seminar about distributed systems in computer software. Some of the distribution systems he introduced were familiar to me, such as Cellular Automata, L-System (Lindenmayer System) and Particles System. These systems are very much Cantor Dust, Penrose Tiling, Sierpenski Triangle, Dragon Curve and Fractal Distribution.
The important question I find myself asking is how does all these relate to architecture? Although the examples he gave are interesting, such as the Healing Pools by Brian Knep or the Hyposurface by Jose Jurves, to me they are a subsection of architecture and not architecture itself. In my last semester studio at the University of Melbourne, I attempted to use the Fractal Distribution to direct my project, in both urban planning and architectural stages. However, I found it difficult to merge the systems with the construction practicality.
In this project, I will attempt again to associate the site with a distribution system, and hopefully design my project around it, allowing whichever system to determine the emergent architecture.
Notes
Complex interaction only needs 1 simply rule
Spatial Computing = Interactive Environments + Collective Desire
Decentralized Systems: Simple rules leading to intricate emergent behavior
Complex interaction only needs 1 simply rule
Spatial Computing = Interactive Environments + Collective Desire
Decentralized Systems: Simple rules leading to intricate emergent behavior
[14.02.2012] Introduction to Rhino
by Sina Mostafavi and Gary Chang
by Sina Mostafavi and Gary Chang
Rhino Commands
Surface Experiment: Array || FlowAlongSurface
Mobius Strip Experiment: Twist || Bend || ExtractSurface || CageEdit || BoundingBox
Folding Experiment: FoldFace || Smash
Surface Analysis: Divide || SurfacePoint || CurvatureAnalysis
Surface Experiment: Array || FlowAlongSurface
Mobius Strip Experiment: Twist || Bend || ExtractSurface || CageEdit || BoundingBox
Folding Experiment: FoldFace || Smash
Surface Analysis: Divide || SurfacePoint || CurvatureAnalysis
[14.02.2012] To Build or not to Build
by Msc1 Hyperbody Colleague
Collectively, what we found lacking, and an opportunity to develop, is the connectiveness of NDSM Werf and its subjects. In almost everyone's presentation, there was the mention of the connectivity (or lack of) from the micro, that is the designers and artists within the area, to the macro, how NDSM seems disconnected to Amsterdam, or in some other cases, Amsterdam Noord. However, the hard-pressing question is how should NDSM Werf continue to develop?
At this point the class seemed to take two sides. One, to enhance the programs on site and two, to introduce more programs to the site. It was a long and arduous debate as to which direction the NDSM Werf should follow, with both sides arguing that a lack of more programs will cause the site to die out slowly and that an increase in programs will cause the site to lose its sense of identity, and die out as well.
In my opinion, the debate felt like the head of a coin saying it does not have a tail and vice versa. Both sides of the arguments are valid. Obviously, there is no way to safely determine which is the best direction NDSM Werf should follow. After all, it is the users and activities within the site that will determine the success of the place. For us architects, we can only try our best to predict what is best for the site and pursue the ideology.
Personally, I will try to introduce minimal new programs as I like the 'desoluteness' of the place. I find that to be the attraction of the place, that it is away and 'disconnected' from the city. It allows me to dissociate from the city and into my personal creative haven. I believe that the artists feels like that too, since they themselves also created walls within the kunststad to hide themselves in their own studio so that they can concentrate on their own projects.
If I brought in too many programs such as a supermarket, more cafes or even an institute, it may become more convenient for the artists at the kunststad but I sure won't like to have strangers to knock on my studio every hour and disturb me.
To build or not to build? Minimally and delicately.
by Msc1 Hyperbody Colleague
Collectively, what we found lacking, and an opportunity to develop, is the connectiveness of NDSM Werf and its subjects. In almost everyone's presentation, there was the mention of the connectivity (or lack of) from the micro, that is the designers and artists within the area, to the macro, how NDSM seems disconnected to Amsterdam, or in some other cases, Amsterdam Noord. However, the hard-pressing question is how should NDSM Werf continue to develop?
At this point the class seemed to take two sides. One, to enhance the programs on site and two, to introduce more programs to the site. It was a long and arduous debate as to which direction the NDSM Werf should follow, with both sides arguing that a lack of more programs will cause the site to die out slowly and that an increase in programs will cause the site to lose its sense of identity, and die out as well.
In my opinion, the debate felt like the head of a coin saying it does not have a tail and vice versa. Both sides of the arguments are valid. Obviously, there is no way to safely determine which is the best direction NDSM Werf should follow. After all, it is the users and activities within the site that will determine the success of the place. For us architects, we can only try our best to predict what is best for the site and pursue the ideology.
Personally, I will try to introduce minimal new programs as I like the 'desoluteness' of the place. I find that to be the attraction of the place, that it is away and 'disconnected' from the city. It allows me to dissociate from the city and into my personal creative haven. I believe that the artists feels like that too, since they themselves also created walls within the kunststad to hide themselves in their own studio so that they can concentrate on their own projects.
If I brought in too many programs such as a supermarket, more cafes or even an institute, it may become more convenient for the artists at the kunststad but I sure won't like to have strangers to knock on my studio every hour and disturb me.
To build or not to build? Minimally and delicately.
