Coral is a project that merges between both the Virtual Engagement and Materials Engagement classes. The goals of this project are: first, to translate the design from the digital environment into a physical object using knowledge and skills that we have developed in both classes during the past 14 weeks, and using state-of-the-art fabrication tools. Second, is to create a unit - part - that could be replicated and then put together in an assembly - product. The assembly's dynamic nature was delivered through its parts that could be rearranged in various ways to produce different assembly configurations, and the ability to adapt to its context. The overall effect is similar to how a coral - organically - grows contextualizing its environment. As mentioned, the project will highlight some of the skills that were gained throughout the term required to complete this project, and are organized below as the project's development phases:
1. Digital Environment:
1.1. 2D sketch and 3D model
1.2. Volume calculation (optimizing material use for the fabrication process)
1.3. Possible object configurations (done through DOE and selection made based on volume)
1.4. Assembly (parts are inserted and arranged within the product)
1.5. Product possible configurations through DOE.
1.6. STAAD analysis for both part and product.
2. Translation:
2.1. Unfolding of the unit
3. Fabrication:
3.1 Mold assembly
3.1 Mechanism used for connecting and rotating the parts to deliver the concept of varying and dynamic configuration.
3.3Casted object
1. Digital Environment:
1.1. 2D sketch and 3D model:
As seen in previous project, each design starts with a sketch - 2D geometrical composition. The sketch in this project, starts with the part. The part - unit - was designed through six sketches each on a different plane, some used the standard X,Y, and Z planes, and others were generated by projecting points and offsets from original planes.
Image 1: First sketch developed is the framework. This sketch helped in establishing the basic layout, the part's size, and acted as a reference for other sketches to follow. The two sides of the construction geometry (line on the left, and line on the top) include parameters that will help in examining the different design options when using the DOEs (Design Of Experiments) later on.
Image 2: in the second sketch, which is the upper part of the unit, the hexagon had two main features, first the parameter (type "Length") that will be used for the DOE operation and the straight line that stretches from the center to the circumference of the circle.
Image 3: in the third sketch, lower part of the unit. The same process was used in the previous sketch. But, what is noticeable in this sketch is the "output feature" (bold line). The O.F. is basically a geometry that is exported from the sketch to the 3D environment that will helps in the modeling process.
Image 4: in of sketch four, five, and six all of which are using the same process as the previous ones, except, they are generated through a plane that is created by projecting points from the framework; using a plane that is a"mean through points".
Image 5: is the "part", the unit includes three sides that are slanted for another unit to attach to. The rotated edge will help in creating a warping effect once another unit is attached to the previous one, and as the parts are added the effect becomes greater.
1.2. Volume calculation (optimizing material use for the fabrication process):
The second stage of this project is to calculate the unit's volume. As mentioned earlier, the unit will go through a process of fabrication after its design stage, and in terms of efficiently using material and managing cost, in this case plaster, the overall volume is calculated and then converted into Pounds. The assembly will include 75 pieces (parts) and the plaster bag includes 25 pounds of powder material. So, the first step is to calculate the unit's volume (ft3), which will be done through four parameters. Each of the first three parameters will calculate one of the three solids (top, bottom, and side), then a result parameter will add the values calculating the overall volume.
Image 6: the Volume parameters are shown her with the result parameter for the overall value. The unit's volume is 0.017 ft3.
The conversion calculation is added below:
1 cubic feet = 957.51 ounces then divided by 16 to get the unit in pounds.
So, 0.017ft3 X 957.51 = 16.277 Ounces
16.277/16 = 1.017 Ibs
So, the single part will be 1.017 Ibs if multiplied by 75, the total assembly will use 76.27 Ibs. The total weight of the assembly will be divided by 25 = 3.05 bags of plaster are to be used.
1.3. Possible object configurations (done through DOE and selection made based on volume):
After calculating the part's total weight and material required for casting, the process at this stage will examine the possible configurations of the same unit through algorithms with the same volume using DOEs.
Image 7: first, within the DOEs work bench, the parameters that are to be used in this process are imported with a number of 3 levels for each. The possible configurations -results - are 243. The ones that are used are within the range or include the same unit volume, and are shown in the following images.
Image8: shows the first out of three possible configurations of the unit. The unit was chosen, as mentioned, based on its volume. The unite's volume is marked in red.
Image 9: is another configuration including the same unit volume, and the value is marked in red.
Image 10: is not of the same volume but closer to the original unit's value (0.018ft3).
1.4. Assembly (parts are inserted and arranged within the product):
After going over the number of steps of analyzing the unit and the possible outcomes, what follows is the assembly. The units are imported into the Product work bench. The 75 piece assembly was created through three subsets of assemblies, the first included five main parameters, each includes a formula that is responsive to the previous parameter, so as the first parameter changes the rest will respond accordingly. This will help us control the assembly through changing the value of one parameter.
Image 11: is the first assembly, which includes 4 units and five parameters that are set between the connecting faces of the units. The parameters are of type "angle" that are set between the lines on the circle that was mentioned in the 2D sketch section.
Image 12: This is a process of testing the assembly at the first level. Notice how each part rotates in a different direction based on the parameter that controls the angle between the two parts at that point in response to the initial parameter.
Image 13: shows how the parameters are set through a formula to respond to the first parameter's change in value.
Image 14: shows the second assembly, this assembly includes 4 products of the first one created. The 20 piece assembly includes two parameters that are created to respond to the first parameter in the initial product, once again this helps in controlling the assembly through one single parameter.
Image 15: Shows the final stage of the assembly (third level), the overall number of pieces used are 75 with two additional parameters that are linked to the initial parameter in the first level.
Image 16: is a view of the coral's effect and complexity through the use of a single unit.
1.5. Product possible configurations through DOE:
At this stage after constructing the assembly and testing the model's performance as the project was progressing, now the assembly goes through an algorithmic process of generating possible combinations of its units that will result in a different overall configurations.
Image 17: first the new parameters are set as result parameters (level three) that respond to the parameters of the second assembly and the second assembly respond to the initial parameters in the first assembly.
Image 18: as seen in the DOE work bench, that the input parameter is the one from the first assembly and the output parameters are the ones in the final assembly. Another important value that was added into this process was the number of level, because there is only one main parameter that controls the assembly the DOE will not be able to create the number of possible outcomes. So, this number was manually added (100 total possibilities).
Image 19: is one of the 100 possibilities of different arrangements using the DOE on the assembly model.
Image 20: is another option for the assembly.
Image 20: shows a number of possible assembly configurations by applying algorithms through DOE operations.
2. Translation:
2.1. Unfolding of the unit
After the design has progressed for the unit to the assembly exploring the possibilities and details, then the unit is unfolded as a first step of translating the digital design to a physical model. The best solution here is to use a mold to produce and reproduce the unit. While the assembly basically consists of one unit then the best economical solution and to accelerate the fabrication process is to fabricate a large number of the same mold. Some of the considerations when fabricating the mold were: to have a mold that could be easily assembled and then removed from the casted piece, the mold should not leave an un wanted texture finish on the finished piece, and must correspond to the connecting mechanism used between the parts.
Image 21: is an imported file from Digital Project (IGS) to Rhino. The piece is divided into three parts with designed tabs to help in the process of assembling the mold. The unfolding processes of the piece could be done in either DP or Rhino, in this project, the unfolding was done in Rhino. For unfolding processes using DP visit this earlier post (http://dtbyemad.blogspot.com/2013/11/unfolding-from-digital-to-physical.html).
3. Fabrication:
3.1 Mold assembly:
In this phase of the project, the Rhino file was cut on a PETG (Poly-Ethylene Terephthalate Glycol) sheet using the Zund cutter (knife cutter). The Rhino model is designed to include both cuts and etches, which both will help in the folding of the mold.
Image 22: is of the assembled mold, notice the tapes on the side and end of each piece, they will help as mentioned earlier, in the process of assembling and disassembling of the mold.
3.1 Mechanism used for connecting and rotating the parts to deliver the concept of varying and dynamic configuration.
To help connect the pieces together and have that dynamic effect within the assembly (rotation, reconfiguration, and connection) the best solution was to use magnets. The rare earth magnets "Neodymium" were used to connect the parts For each unit, before the casting of the plaster toke place, a steel anchor was anchored at each of the mold's three sides. The anchors after the poring of the plaster will be imbedded in the unit's arms, after wards a 0.5" drill-bit will be used to create an opining for the steel to be exposed for the magnets to attach to. The magnets are 1" X 0.5", so each unit will have an anchor placed not farther from its surface than half of the magnets length.
Image 23: shows the magnet as it attaches it self to the units.
Image 24: shows the mechanical part in the mold. This steel anchor will be imbedded inside the final casted object for the magnet to attach to.
3.3Casted object:
The final object is shown in this section expelling how the pieces are assembled and connected to each other.
Image 25: shows the plaster parts.
Image 26: shows the parts being assembled.
Image 27: show the final assembly, as mentioned, this is one of an infinite options of assembly configurations as been tested through the DOE in the digital model.
Comments
Post a Comment