Stand Up Architecture: STRUCTURAL DNA

ARCHITECTURAL DNA: A genetic exploration of complex structures

2010-05-16T13:42:00.004+02:00

I am glad to announce that we've further developed our topic of Structural DNA. We submitted a new paper to Smart Geometry: The Evolution of Parametric Design and Practice. I added the abstract and some images of our new paper below.

Abstract

The approach demonstrated in this paper uses Evolutionary Computation (EC) to enhance and modify structural form based on biological micro structures. The forms are modified to conform to new boundary conditions associated with architectural structures. The process is based on a Genetic Algorithm (GA) which visually exposes for the designer a range of good performing solutions within the design space. The application of the GA is combined with parametric software, in this case Generative Components (GC). The program described here as ParaGen (Parametric Genetic Algorithm), uses a finite element analysis to determine the structural performance of the forms. This allows the designer to manipulate and optimize a parametrically defined model based on predefined criteria and parameters.

The opportunities and limitations of this design process are explored and evaluated based on an experimental case study using topologies based on radiolarian skeletons.

The design procedure described includes user interaction in the exploration of solutions that perform well both for the explicitly defined programmatic criteria (structural) as well as for the implicit criteria provided by the designer (visual aesthetic).

Keywords: structural morphology, parametric design, genetic algorithm, structural optimization.

ACSA Presentation - PPT slides

2009-12-02T10:43:00.006+01:00

Webinterface of dome generations

2009-09-11T23:56:00.002+02:00

click HERE to see the evolution process of the domes!!

GC - set-up

2009-08-06T18:22:00.014+02:00

I decided after some discussion and thinking, to use the right support configuration for the model. Since cellular structures in nature, tend to arrange perpendicular to stiffer surfaces. This is the most optimal way to distribute forces within a structure. This phenomenon is also seen within radiolarian skeletons.

40 rings model with higher densities of points

This image illustrates the way the points are projected onto the dome in GC.

Projection

Symmetric or almost symmetric?
Either symmetric or total a-symmetric...? For our topic, it might be best to use symmetric, because we decided not to focus too deeply on wind forces for now.

Perfect Symmetric configuration of 40 ring model

To explore the possibilities of having the rings regulated, I added some images of different amounts of rings below. each set is a screen shot of a different GC model. Within one model, the rings are limited to a specific amount. (5,7,10,10,20,40)

I still hope to find a way to integrate them into one GC model.

random results of configurations based on different ring densities.

It would be best to control the density of the rings in the same GC model. But until this point we cannot integrate this into one script.together with the point distribution variables. I hope we can manage to solve this. but we might will test different models for specific ring densities.

This is an example of a possible configuration of points based on a 40 ring model. This would be the most dense ring-density possible within the model. We defined 41 different variables to define independent point distribution along each ring. .

This image shows a model with different densities of points per ring (20 rings)
voronoi on top & delaunay below (based on same points)

Voronoi (above) vs Delaunay (below) GC

Voronoi Dome GC

Test Run

2009-08-06T02:12:00.004+02:00

This homogeneous hexagon dome is ready for a test run. The maximal values are illustrated in the pic below, all values in between are part of the "solution space"

test run

Comparing different tessellations for a dome shape

2009-07-25T21:18:00.010+02:00

What happens if you construct the three tessellations based on the same set of points?

Below you find 2 combined drawings. The hexagonal part is devided in two ways, the lower one comes closer in comparisation with the voronoi and delaunay part.
In these two dwawings the amount of points are chosen by using factors of 2. Thats why the structure is more regular. The second one is the best. Because the density of the hexagonal structure is more equal to the others.

For the research it would be interesting to test the three types of structures and compare them. In the next scheme, I defined a try-out set up of the comparisation.

These domes are all constructed based on the same set of points. The amount of points per ring are random. Thats why the Delaunay and Voronoi version are a bit irregular. The errors in the hexagon sample are because it took too long to draw all lines manually and I arrayed one quarter. but it gives an idea. The size of the dome can be a parameter as well!! (unlike i noted on this picture) But to compare them, the size should be the same for all 3 domes.

How to define the circels and points (in GC), which define the tesselations?

In the picture below is illustrated how a plane is projected onto the dome. the set-up size of the plane has a diameter of 32 m, while the dome itselves has a diameter of 20.37 m. I defined the plane first, in order to get a regular division of rings possible.
The overal size can be changed afterwards by adjusting the diameter of the projection plane.

RULES RINGS
The rings can vary in number. They are always linear distributed on the plane.
Number of rings: n_ring
Diameter of projection plane: d_plane
The max distance between the rings is 4 meter.
The min distance between the rings is 0.5 meter.
The formula which defines this relation is: 1/2 = smaller than: (0.25*pi*d_plane)/n_ring = smaller than: 4

RULES POINTS
The points on each ring can vary in number. They are always linear distributed along the ring.
A similar system rules the division of points onto the rings
Number of points: n_point
Diameter of ring: d_ring
The max distance between the points is 4 meter.
The min distance between the points is 0.5 meter.
The formula which defines this relation is: 1/2 = smaller than: (d_ring*pi)/n_point = smaller than: 4.

definition of the projection plane & rings

Diagram of GC hierarchy.

Proposal; More Details

2009-07-19T15:55:00.004+02:00

An other tessellation which is worth taking a closer look at, is the previous used hexagon diagram. In the version below, its a bit more compicated, in the sense that the density of the hexagonal structure varies between the circles. In this case, the radial division is set to 132 points in all sections. The circular division varies in density between the different rings.

other options of this one are:
- varying also the radial density between the rings.
- inserting a random factor when defining the points, to get a more unsteady look of the structure.

An other configuration, Hexagon Structure
The parameters are in this case:
n_c (number of main circels)
p_cALL (density of points along all circles)
n_cSEC_1 (circular density of secondary circles in between the 1st and 2nd circel)
n_cSEC_2 (circular density of secondary circles in between the 2nd and 3rd circel)
n_cSEC_n (etc)

The folowing image illustrates what happens if we construct the Voronoi Diagram, based on the same configuration of the model as in previous image of the Delaunay triangulation.

Same configuration, but Voronoi Diagram

Proposal

2009-07-19T01:48:00.010+02:00

Okay, here is my proposal: Since the wind trajectories are not steady enough to use as a starting point, I decided to keep the basic set-up a bit more general in order to have some freedom in the model it selves to develop during the optimization. In the way i propose now, I kept a few things in mind:
1. the aesthetic quality of the tessellation
2. the variabiliy of the model set-up
3. the basic structural needs of a dome structure (rings & ribs)
4. the basal connections to the ground

Since rings are one of the basic needs for a dome structure, I take circular distribution of points as a starting point in this proposal.
The bars defined by the Delaunay triangulation will automatically generate sets of "ribs" which will lead the vertical forces to the ground, the idea is that all irregular ribs will work together as a network of ribs.
The density of distributed points along the outer (lower) ring (not drawn in this picture yet), will define the amount of basal supports the dome will have.

Fig. Drawing of possible configuration Delaunay Triangulation:
amount of points circle1:20 (d_c1:20)
d_c2:40
d_c3:20
d_c4:15
d_c5:50
d_c6:80
d_c7:75
d_c8: invisible in this drawing

The setup is arranged in this way:
1. definition of the rings. they are based on regular vertical divisions of the dome, as pointed out in the drawing.
2. along each circle we set a variable amount of points. (Parameters in GC will be: point density circle1, d_c2, d_c3, ..., d_c9).
3. The points will be connected by a Delaunay triangulation. This will create a closed lattice structure. Each possible structure will look different and perform different.
4. We can optimize this model according to different load cases or even different dome shapes.

note: we can try the Voronoi diagram applied on this model as well, I want to keep this open as an option.
we can also try to play a bit with the amount of circels and distances between the circles, but this seems like a proper starting point.

I post some clear images of stresses in a dome structure caused by wind forces, below. This information made me, together with Peter's comments, decide to jump of the idea of using the stress trajectories, as i proposed before. Because it doesn't make too much sense, in a simplified way. It could make sense to try to work out how to adapt a building perfectly to wind forces, but that could be a complete study on its own.

Principle stresses by simple horizontal load - Staad plot

Dynamic stressed due to different speeds of wind

more tessellations

2009-07-14T02:34:00.009+02:00

I tried to combine some different types of tessellations for the dome, in order to respond to the wind forces and gravity acting on the structure.

The first three images are the combination of the wind trajectories, as discussed before, and "vertical" ribs to lead the self weight to the ground.

Vertical ribs

Compression ribs following trajectories and connected to get a Delaunay triangulation

Tension side added.

If we want to split the domes into a double layered dome, only vertical ribs won't be sufficient for the part of the dome that supports the weight of the structure, therefore I added rings. The rings are following the cross sections of the stress trajectories of the other dome. I also added a quick sketch of how a cross section could look like.
I want to note here, that I'm not sure if this option is do-able within the time span we have for this research. I expect that the connection of two domes, is quite complex. The connection part it selves probably needs a lot of study in order to get it reasonable realistic and working.
Solution could be to make a simple connection between both structures, by reducing the distance between both. (I'm not so sure about the aesthetic consequenses in this case).
Integrating both options in one shell also might work.

The next three images show the wind trajectories combined with a Delaunay triangulation. I think that a fine triangulation could work to transfer the self weight to the ground, as it acts like a homogenic shell.. only lighter, and optimized by the genetic algorithm.
In the first 3 images are created in this way: marked points on crossings of wind trajectories, added random points, drew the Delaunay triangulation, added the trajectories again.

If we want to integrate these two tesselations into a single dome structure, it would be better to try to create the trajectory lines, within the Delaunay, instead of "on top". I tried this in the next image. BUT it appeared not really possible in this way. You can see that the green marked triangulation is a correct Delaunay pattern. The red part, which I based on the trajectories, are messy and not correct. This system might work if the tesselation is more dense. In that case, the trajectories will be the main beams. In between this beams, will be a secondary and much denser structure created based on Delaunay triangulation. (I'll sketch it in next post).

This one is just a sketch of Voronoi diagram based on the same trajectories. In the right side I added some vertical ribs. The Voronoi adapts to it in a nice way.
But this doesn't seem to be an optimal structure to bear both loads. Since the lines are not following the stress trajectories any more. I expect that this will create unneccessary moments in the structure.

Stress Trajectories Wind on Dome

2009-07-13T19:08:00.005+02:00

As discussed in my report on rads, this image shows the schematic stress trajectories of wind in a dome shaped structure:

Source: Structures, D.L. Schodek

To explore the possibilities of adjusting the structure to the specific wind trajectories, i've made some sketches as seen below.

In the first sketch, I took one side of the trajectories (could be tension or compression). I distributed 9 points evenly along each line. I connected the points and created a Delaunay triangulation (red lines upper part). The lowerpart is the Voronoi diagram, based on the Delaunay triangulation. By connecting the points, we see that two additional line-sets are created. They look like the two sides of stress trajectories, but are not the same. This is because I distributed the points evenly and not accourding to the other side of the stress trajectories.

To check how this tesselation would work in 3d, I sketched the same lines onto a plastic dome shape. But distributed the points at the crossings of the two sides of stress trajectories. This causes a symmetrical image again. except that the thicker lines should resist to compression and the other set, to tension. I elongated the lines in order to get an enclosing structure. The way to close the structure can be more dense or adjusted in an other way.

Then I copied this line-set into illustrator, to get it more clear. The green lines, which appear when connecting the points, become clear ellipses.

I'm curious how this set-up would respond to forces at this point. Since I'm doubting if they can transfer the self weight of the building. We probably need to add an other line-set..

Focus on the Continued Research

2009-07-13T16:36:00.003+02:00

I mentioned in the report a number of ideas for possible proposals. For this particular research subject, as described in the previously posted abstract, my interest goes out to one main directions:

"IDEA: If a column free dome is the starting point, we could divide the dome structure in two shells, one resisting the wind loads, and one taking the deadweight of the structure. We could design the “deadweight shell” by distributing points onto the dome shape, and connect the points applying a Voronoi algorithm, in order to get a framework as light as possible, while at the same time being one integrated entity. The wind-shell could be constructed out of a frame following the stress trajectories due to wind loads (one main direction). The one shell should be connected to the other in a way, which is parametrically predefined."

To discuss this a bit further, I want to comment that, wind load is a tricky load case to use as a shape giver. Since it moves around and the force flow caused by the wind on the structure, very much depends on the shape of the structure itselves. To use this principle, we should at least stay to one type of shape of the structure.

Let's assume that we use a dome structure as a model. Based on the adaptive qualities of rads to their loadcases, we could consider to optimize the dome to one main wind direction. And make the dome able to rotate towards the wind direction. Other wise, the structure would collapse, as soon as the wind changes its direction. An other solution could be to over-dimension the structure of the dome in order to make it strong enough to stand wind form all directions, but in this case,this is not our aim, since we want to create a light structure which is as much optimized as possible to its surroundings.

The issue of two cooperating shells: In radiolarians we see that they have to deal with 2 kinds of load cases in general: 1) the distibuted pressure of the water surrounding them, and 2)Impact loads caused my predators or other objects in their environment. This way of dealing with both different types of forces, made them able to develop efficiently. The fine tesselation of their shells withstand the evenly distibuted pressure of the water. While the Impact forces are counter acted by the arm of spines connected to the shells.

If we want to translate this principle to a dome shaped structure, we first have to define our load case. The distributed loading acting on a building is it's selfweight, magnified by gravity. The impact force encountered by a building structure is wind force, although its partly distibuted.

The big question is: How can we integrate this into one structure?

Impact forces and distributed loads acting on radiolarian shell

Deeper Research Radiolarians

2009-07-13T15:49:00.006+02:00

I've been working to get a bit deeper in the radiolarian principles.. Via this link you can find a report of my work done. This report is my way to archive my findings for my own process. And its also a way to share it with my colleagues Michela and Peter and all others who are interested in the subject.

you can download the radiolaria report via THIS link

Abstract 2009 ACSA Conference

2009-06-20T16:40:00.002+02:00

STRUCTURAL DNA: Genetic Exploration of Biological Micro Structures for Architectural Applications

Abstract:
Complex biological structures, designed by forces of nature, frequently serve as inspiration for new developments in the field of building technology and architecture. Well know examples in the work of Gaudi, Paxton, Otto, le Ricolais and others demonstrate the inspiration of natural morphology and patterns for structural design. The use of digital technologies to investigate the translation of natural micro structures into architectural macrostructures offers a valuable exploration tool for both designers and engineers working in the field of architecture.
The approach demonstrated in this paper uses Evolutionary Computation (EC) to enhance and modify structural form based on biological micro structures. The forms are modified to conform to new boundary conditions associated with architectural structures. The process is based on a Genetic Algorithm (GA) which uncovers for the designer a range of good performing solutions within the design space. The application of the GA is combined with parametric software, in this case Generative Components (GC), to allow the designer to navigate through a range of solutions which follow morphological patterns taken from the biological form. The method, referred to in this paper as a GC-GA, uses a finite element analysis to determine the structural performance of the forms. This allows the designer to manipulate and optimize a parametrically defined model based on predefined criteria and parameters.
The opportunities and limitations of this design process are explored and evaluated based on an experimental case study using the forms of radiolarian skeletons. Radiolarians are a group of marine protozoa found in the open ocean which have ornate siliceous skeletons. The Radiolarians are analyzed in relation to their environment and special qualities. Based on these findings, a parametric model of an architectural, space enclosing structure is defined and used in the GC-GA exploration loop, taking into consideration new boundary conditions and load cases. The paper demonstrates how the GC-GA cycle of selection, recombination, and evaluation is used to optimize and explore a large range of solutions. Finally, there is a discussion of the quality of solutions found based on both structural and architectural performance. In conclusion, comments are made regarding the general application of design exploration methods like the GC-GA as design tools both in the context of practice and studio.

Keywords: radiolarians, nature, structure, genetic optimization, structural analysis, morphology.

First test in STAAD

2009-05-06T23:35:00.004+02:00

To explore the set up of the new process, we tested a basic hexagon dome structure, parametrically built in GC, on structural performance in STAAD. The results are clear.

the tension is obvious caused by the horizontal thrust, which would be most efficiently translated into vertical forces bij tension ring(s) in regular dome structures.. So the hexagonal grid automatically divides these forces among its members on the spot where its needed.
blue: compression
red: tension
supprt/load conditions: simple pinned supports and a 1 N/m2 load

the deflection is very clearly demonstrated in this movie:

next steps:

exploring radiolarian skeletons (relation between their shape and forces acting on them)
defining approach
modelling a new parametric model according to approach
testing, analysing different configurations
genetic optimization loop

get back to you soon..

One step back. Research Approach

2009-04-16T19:36:00.005+02:00

I looked back into the radiolarians in order to decide on a renewed approach for the dome project. Please check the image below for some key observations.

Radiolarian dome shape principles

If we want to use the dome shape for architectural purposes, it could be of interest to integrate some features in the parametric model as seen in radiolarians as well. Taking in consideration, the dead load, the gravity, and the supports,we already know that a combination of radial vertical beams in combination with rings and diagonal beams for stability will work in architecture (Geodesic dome Buckminster Fuller). what seems interesting to me, learning from radiolarians, is: In which ways would some of their basis principles work for architectural purposes? The first option is, to take one homogenic grid and manipulate the density and the overall shape. The second option focusses on dividing the dome in horizontal strokes, devided by rings while manipulating the different grids in between.

objective: achieve a structure which is as light as possible and at the same time stiff enough to stand the load cases.

Approach option 1:
use a fixed grid structure for example the combined hexagonal en pentagonal grid. (this principle based on the buckyball/c60 molecule is considered as an optimal manner to devide a sphere into planars or straight beams). What the interesting part could be in this case, is that while optimizing the overall shape of the dome, its environment can be taken into consideration. That could be the support of the structure (straight ground, inclined ground) and the load case, focussing on wind from one main direction. An homogenic structure has a high potential of being able to be fabricated out of a limited range of prefab elements.

parameters: shape of dome, density of homogenic grid
fixed: material, grid type, constraints and load cases
criteria: lightness of structure
results: different dome shapes with certain density of grid. Optimized for a specific situation. (i.e. an inclined site at the sea side).

Approach option 2:

Taking the applications of rings in the dome as a starting point, we could divide the grid into multiple horizontal strokes, as seen in radiolarian skeletons (see image 6th example). Generate separate grids structures in between the rings. In this case its an option to design the grid based on some well known mechanical behaviours of architectural shells and domes. (i.e. small density in top, mainly vertical beams in base, etc. )

parameters: density of each grid stroke, type of grid per stroke (! GC might could exchange grid types)
fixed: material, overall shape of dome, constraints and load cases.
criteria: lightness of structure
results: Different combinations of grid configurations within one dome shape.

I will do some more research of dome structures and discuss it with my tutors Peter and Michela, in order to decide.

To be continued..

2009-04-12T02:13:00.002+02:00

After the completion of the course Stand-up Architecture, I will continue the project in co-operation with Peter von Buelow and Michela Turrin. Based on the conclusions of my paper (posted in previous message), we will adjust the concept model into a dome structure and adjust the optimization loop. I hope to publicate and present the results on a conference in the end of the summer this year.

Set-up of dome structure in GC

FINAL PAPER

2009-04-04T00:07:00.001+02:00

You can download the pdf via this link: Research Paper Structural DNA

FINAL PRESENTATION

2009-04-03T23:25:00.008+02:00

Check here the slides of the Final Presentation | 23th of March:

Test phase 4 - Genetic Optimisation of structure

2009-03-20T02:17:00.008+01:00

Today and yesterday i've been randomly creating generation 0 of panels (see image of screen shot below) and breeding the 1st generation based on the best ranked members of generation 0.

Peter von Buelow ( http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pvbuelow/ ) has guided me intensively during this process. The constantly adjusted parameters of the members are being generated by his Genetic Algorithm linked to a customized website (image below). The website makes it possible to download a datafile, which can be read by GC. The dxf file of the panel is then loaded in the Finite Element software STAAD-Pro, which optimizes the construction applying different sizes of steel tubes. It calculates the total weight of the structure and the ratio of structural performance. This output is uploaded to the website again, which will visualize the new best ranked members.
This optimization loop can be repeated untill the results approach an optimum according to the previously defined criteria.

Link to the GC-GA Population website: http://www.frames.tcaup.umich.edu/radiolaria/

screen shot of breeding website white= gen 0, grey=gen 1

Test phase 3

2009-03-17T04:41:00.010+01:00

Wow, it is a bumpy ride I must admit!
I just generated a population called generation 0.
I realized after a few hours of breeding, saving, pasting, generating, that the GC file was a bit expired.

I've tried to generate a population for an updated combined configuration (see image below) too, but this didnt work, because the GA has to change first to get that properly done (and i'm not able to do this myself yet)

After an inner discussion I've decided to keep these results and finishing the GA process with them soon. These structures, are all squeezed (see image below). So it wont be possible to construct a facade with only these types of panels. I decided to calculate a few types of the stretched out panels (image below), manually in STAAD-Pro. Because I'm interested in the different structural behaviour of these two types.

configuration of squeezed panel

configuration of stretched panel

Note: Together these two types of panels could form a continuous surface (facade).

configuration of combined panel

I considered to calculate these kind of combined panels before, but I guess that the option of either squeezed and streched panels will work better structurally because they are more symmetrical than this example.

Of course, a radial structure will be the best, taking in consideration the nature of most radiolarian skeletons, but for this course I stick to these panels. It is a more zoomed in approach. So not a complete radiolarian, but a part of it.

Below you see stretched and squeezed panels forming a continuous surface. I prefer the lower one, because the grid is in the same direction.

continuous surface sketch

Applications/design/types

2009-03-15T22:36:00.004+01:00

This is a recording of the Spline Grid in GC. Playing with the variables and rotating the structure. This version will be structural analyzed and optimized this week. I recorded my laptop screen with a camera this time, while manipulating the variables.

I played with a radial gridsystem too in GC as you can see in the next videoclip. I will use the spline grid version to optimize within this course, but want to point out that there are more ways to manipulate the radiolarian structures.

Second test phase

2009-03-15T17:43:00.003+01:00

Currently I'm working on setting up the genetic algorithm to optimize the structure and linking this to the structural performance software Staad-pro and to Generative Components aswell.
Peter von Buelow who designed the GA tool, helps me to set up this optimization loop.

What is a Genetic Algorithm?

During the initialization phase a population is randomly created. This concerns the results of combining all possible values of the variables.

During the selection phase, a number of criteria have to be defined. The algorithm will test each member of the population on this criteria (fitness based process).

During the repoduction phase, the selected members of the solution population will be recombined (mutated) to breed a second generation.

The result of reproduction phase is repeated untill it is terminated mainly because 1: a solution is found that satisfies minimum criteria, 2: successive iterations no longer produce better results

What is the complete process of this course?

Analysing radiolarian skeleton
Extracting basic principles
Designing a simplified prototype structure
Defining the variables/criteria
Modelling the structure in Generative Components
Link data of variables via excel to Genetic Algorithm tool
Execute optimization loop as in next scheme:
Integrate the result of loop in design
Test hypothesis
Repeat cycle

Component Design - First test phase

2009-03-05T20:55:00.006+01:00

For the first Diana (structural performance) calulation, I took the GC model as one complete slab. (as the "big component" variant in sketch below) supported in the 4 corners (two with a role and two pinned)

comments on Diana results:
I will have to adjust the sizes in GC. because now the model was randomly created. (about 12 mm height!)I adjusted some values in Diana in order to get a bit more realistic results without starting all over again.
The results are based on the following values in Diana for now:

N and meters (this is a bit unlogical, but a quick temporary solution, it should be N and mm next time)
the height of the structure in Diana is 12 meter (too big, should be about 3 meter next time)
The materialization of the structure are all equal solid round glass beams with a diameter of 0,1meter. to start with a reference. I would like to test it for example glass tube system of steel to compare it later on. I also have to look into glass properties, the get to know what the max stress levels are for solid glass without failure.

Next week, when I'm in Eindhoven for the WAAS workshop, I will try to get more input and some progress of my project there. The topic is related, so may be it is an opportunity to work ahead. while being there.. But I dont really know what to expect yet.

Because I won't be able to work with Diana for the next 9 days due to licence problems, I would like to try setting up the GC loop sytem in the evening hours, after the workshop. But I have to discuss the feasibility with my tutors.

===================================================================================

I'm focussing now on a simpified planar facade component to start the testing in Diana tomorrow.
For the first structural analysis, I'm planning to use hollow glass beams and standard joints.

I still have to decide on a scenario to chose

Radiolaria applet

2009-03-04T12:38:00.007+01:00

I've found a java applet allowing us to manipulate a regular hexagonal grid which seems to react according to some basic principles of radiolarian skeletons!

Click on the image to play >

source: www.n-e-r-v-o-u-s.com

New GC model

2009-03-04T02:40:00.003+01:00

I've decided to model one module in GC.
I want to use my basic idea, but the lines of the grid should all be splines, in order to get a fluent tessellation. I will script a relatively simple hexagon script to add the tesselation to the grid. (see image).
Tomorrow I will talk to Fred Veer (ir. TU Delft) about the possibilities of glass beams as structural elements.

Midterm presentation

2009-03-04T01:07:00.004+01:00

Hereby a visual summary of the midterm presentation.

critics:

Plans are far too ambitious to be able to finish it untill a final presentation within 3 weeks.

I have to simpify my model to a module of the compete structural skin, in order to compete at least one compete loop of scripting, modelling, calculating and adjusting of the structure.

Do you want to generate a radiolarian structure or manipulate a given structure?

Start as soon as possible with testing a simple model in Diana (structural performance) while working on scripting more and modelling more in GC.

INTRO:

RESEARCH PROPOSAL:

TRANSLATION:

CLICK FOR G.C. ANIMATION >>

PLAN:

Possible future applications: Structural Skin

2009-03-01T00:24:00.002+01:00

I expect that double curved surfaces are feasible to be built based on radiolarian surface structures.

Two proposals.....What's best?!

2009-02-28T23:39:00.007+01:00

In both cases the focus of the proposals do not really lie in the spatial quality of the pavilion, but, for this course, more in the structural beauty of a built object. The result will not be a fully designed pavilion. But rather a structural object testing if my hypothesis is correct. Stating that:
1) the in approximitely 600 milion years evoluated natural forms/structures are enough to achieve pure beauty in an architectural context.
2) these by nature evoluated structures are able, after adjusting them with respect to other force impacts, to function with the same level of efficiency in architectural circumstances.

Proposal One - focus: STRUCTURAL SKIN

- magnify the rad. web structure so that it would be big enough to become a pavilion.
- add additional support elements in order to keep the pavilion standing. (inspire the shape on other rad. skeleton types)
- Fix these additional support element(s) as a boundary condition.
- try optimizing the rad. tesselation in order to achieve a structural skin (gc diana loop)
- the topology of the structural skin would be the input from the radiolarian side of research, while the additional support would be one of the architectural inputs.

Proposal Two - focus: MAIN LOAD BEARING STRUCTURE

- build the main structure based on rad. in gc
- test loop with diana to adjust the structure for building environment
- then add the tesselation. and optimize on the field of: using the least amount of material.

Intention Midterm presentation

2009-02-28T18:46:00.002+01:00

I'm planning to give my midterm presentation for next monday the following contents:

Hypothesis - research questions - testing
Input & output of research
Architectural input
Radiolarian input
G.C. sketch
Plan for the next weeks

After I spoke to Michela, Andrew/Elisa and Andre last thursday, I concluded after taking a little time to process their input, to keep the architectural image more in mind while proceding my research. I don't want to focus only on the tesselation of surfaces anymore, without having an architectural image of the output. But more on a complete spatial structure of a pavilion. I will keep in mind the possibilities of tesselating the surfaces and the knowledge I gathered on this specific subject. And apply them later on.

Exploring rules to be used in scripting

2009-02-26T00:00:00.006+01:00

Set of rules:

At each junction meet 3 lines. sum of angles equals concequently 360 degrees.
lines are always perpendicular to main branch.
wire frame consists of pentagons and hexagons
all angles between all lines are < 180 degrees
scale of polygons can relatively vary with a ratio of 1:2

Optimizing tool:

use the least total distance of lines to cover the surface
achieve the optimal configuration of pentagons perpendicular to main branch, pentagons and hexagons in between the boundaries of the main branches.
the surface of polygons is always outlined by the main branches. these will be the independent variables in GC.

Principles occuring in radiolarian structures

2009-02-25T00:27:00.013+01:00

Radiolarian structure analysis & basic principles:

the radiolarian structure (type: Litarachnium) I want to work with, can be abstacted in a basic set of a main skeleton structure, connected to a wireframe of hexagons and pentagons.
The first will be the input of the computational optimizing tool and the lather will be the output, reconfigurated by the computational optimizing tool. Please take a look at the next image for more explaination.

basic principles of litharachnium_polyhydrons

The C60 molecular structure is based on the same principle of the combination of hexa- and pentagonal surface parts. Please take a look at the next illustrations.

Icosahedral global minimal structures
(http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/~doye/jon/structures/Morse/paper/node6.html)

Process of transformation:

1. accept the fact that this structure functions optimal for this type of radiolarion in its own environment (to prove it in diana or GC (??) will cause a time problem).
2. Apply wind forces and dead weight on the same structure. analyse what the problem areas will be in the main structure. and re-define a new main structure to use as input.
3. create the model and the basic rules in GC. Implement the loop tool.
4. Re-arrrange and optimize the wireframe according to the new input (basic structure) with help of the finite elements loop tool. The loop tool will help to find the optimal configurations of the hexa- and pentagonal wireframe in combination with the new basic structure.

Possible future applications:

it will be able to import any basic shape of main skeleton into GC - loop tool. The tool will find the optimal configuation of the hexa- and pentagonal wireframe of sub beams.

Final final final goal:

Designing/building a pavilion constructed out of silicon (glass) and some type of raisin. Because, if my hypothesis* appears to be true, I would like to search for a way of building a structure in radiolarian style. And that would hypothetically be in a glass composite.

*Adjusted (has to be reformulated) Hypothesis:

It will be feasible to build a structure of a pavilion out of a glass-raisin composite (tested in Diana), if the basic principles of this specific type of radiolari are extracted, re-defined and optimized via a computational tool in GC.

Notes:

note 1: I'm planning to contact Fred Veer in order to discuss the materialization of glass-raisin. For this course I want to test the optimal structure materialized in glass making use of a Diana simulation. In order to test my hypothesis!

note 2: I also did try to understand an algorithm used to solve an issue called the Traveling salesman problem (TSP) using Simulated Annealing. This algorithm optimizes a travelling path.
Via the following link you can do a little game, using Simulated Annealing, to understand the principle.

http://www.math.uu.nl/people/beukers/anneal/anneal.html

I'm expecting that the loop tool in GC also applies a similar algorithm. is this right Michela?

note 3: today I visited Jaap Kaandorp, he is a professor in biology and works at the computational science department of the science faculty of the university of Amsterdam. He explained me quite some interesting principles concerning micro structures, like sponges and radiolaria. He helped me to get a little bit deeper into the subject and that made me able to extract some usefull principles to work on during this course.

Method of modelling

2009-02-19T22:39:00.002+01:00

I've decided to start modelling using lines and points in G.C. (taking Ardrew's advise into account)

Logarithmic Spiral?!

2009-02-19T11:32:00.005+01:00

Yesterday evening I've spoken to John Videler, a professor in maritime zoology (RUG). He pointed out that there are some interesting basis principles which are still not clarified by scientific research. One of them is:

http://mathworld.wolfram.com/LogarithmicSpiral.html

I'm considering this as an option for further research. The principle could be parametrisized in G.C and try to find out why this form seems to be a general principle in nature. Is there a link to radiolaria? And does it have the same qualities applied in the field of architecture?

Proposal of type 2: Lampromitra (nassellaria)

2009-02-18T21:12:00.002+01:00

Second proposal of a specific type to be further examined in my research

The last two days I'm trying to get in touch with an expert in this field (radiolaria). I've found some people doing research about topics like sponges, foraminifera or other protista. I will might visit Naturalis in Leiden next week, to see some real tests of protista and speak to an expert in sponges. I will revise my hypothesis in the weekend. From tomorrow 14:00 untill friday I will be in the faculty participating the 23-hours-workshop Built in Emotion.

Proposal of type 1: Pteroscenium (nassellaria)

2009-02-18T20:18:00.002+01:00

First proposal of a specific type to be further examined in my research

IN GENERAL about radiolarians

2009-02-18T03:01:00.014+01:00

Physiology of radiolarian

diagram of the relation between the soft parts within a radiolarian

I assume that there is a direct relationship between the soft- and the hard parts (skeleton) of the radiolarian. But I can not prove this yet. needs more research.

Orders, generations & family's of radiolarians
Within the extremely large number of existing radiolarian species, there are (at least) two major extant groups to be clearly distinguished.

Type I'm interested in
I have decided to base my research on either Spumellaria or Nassellaria. Those orders are the best known by geologists and in my opinion they have the most spatial qualities aswell. The Spumellaria could be used as a basis for an architectural roof construction while the Nassellaria could be translated into a complete pavilion. I will specify myself more on this in a later post.

first 3 sketches are spumellaria & last 3 are nasselaria

Some other basic principles:
Radiolarians exist for 600 million years. There lifespan lies between a few days and 2 weeks. Radiolaria evolve rapidly, that's why they are really usefull biostratigraphic (study of the spatial and temporal distribution of fossil organisms) tools. Because they exist out of soft and hard parts, the fossils are never complete, this applied difficulties in research.

Structural principles of skeleton:
- skeletal elements do not meet at the center even if they are radial symmetrical. - their are materialized out of minerals
- (i will get to the different types of radiolarians and zoom in for more info)

Growing principles of skeleton:
- Skeletal elements are covered with a layer of cytoplasm which is rapidly withdrawn if the organism is disturbed. It is suggested new material is formed within this sheath (cytokalyamma) and that it acts somehow like a dynamic mould.
- Almost nothing is known as to the hard parts of radiolaria, except that the vacuolated layer (see first diagram of this post) is able to secrete silica or other mineral substance.
- The evoluation of the skeleton of both Spumellaria and Nassillaria is described in the picture below.

evoluation process of Spumellaria (src: C. Moore, Treatise on Invertebrate Peleontology)

evoluation process of nassellaria (src: C. Moore, Treatise on Invertebrate Peleontology)

Starting the Research on radiolaria

2009-02-17T18:59:00.004+01:00

Thank you a lot for all this input! Ofcourse I'm very enthousiastic about making use of Peters expertise and try to build a complete system. We can get more into details next thursday. For me it's important to know the details of the possibilities and the requirements in order to use it. Do I need to contact Andrew and Elisa aswell, concerning this topic?

I talked to Karel Vollers today, he seems to be excited about my topic of research. I gathered more books and more sources and tried to contact a radiolarianexpert (via VU Amsterdam, Naturalis Leiden, Leiden University). which turned out to be not that successfull yet. Tonight I want to focus on my gathered documents & books (on the bottom of this blog you can find a "book list" where I try to list all of them), and hope to extract some clear information about the skeletons and growing process. I will make a selection of 3 types of them very soon (hope tonight) and find out how their skeletons work.

I was wondering about the way how to abstract their skeletons. For now I have two options in mind. I can either try to draw them in GC in points and lines (as junctions and beams) or look at them as a tesselated surface or volume where I can manipulate the way of perforating the material.

I'm planning to process your very usefull comments on my hypothesis, after I've made some initial progress on the skeletons tonight.

Speak to you soon, mv

Final Research Proposal

2009-02-16T17:06:00.003+01:00

Hypothesis:
Extracting the constructional basis (rules) out of radiolarian skeletons will benefit the architectural quality of a load bearing construction in architecture.

Research question:
How can I manipulate a micro structure of a radiolarian skeleton, in order to benefit a load bearing structure in architectural context?

Which type of radiolarian will I take as a subject within this research?
What are the constructional rules, this type of skeleton is based upon? And how will I apply those rules to architecture in the translation process.
For that, I have to ask: Which (main) rule of micro-construction will I use as a basic manipulation (parametrisation) tool in G.C.? I.e. density-, lenght-, position- or number of elements.
Did the translation process benefit the mechanical performance of the structure within architectural context? (Diana)

Methodology (plan):

Research on the mechanical features of skeletons of radiolarians. Consulting drawings, literature & professors in maritime biology.
Choose one type of radiolarian.
Model the radiolaria as it is in G.C. to get hold of the programm. & Try to find the most essential rule, which underlies in the mechanical quality of the micro skeletons of radiolarians
Test the radiolarian under is natural boundary conditions in Diana. Try to understand the logic of the construction. And try to find out the most essential RULE again.
Test the same radiolarian structure again, but then in an architectural context. What are the weak spots??
Model a tool in G.C . in order to translate the radiolarian structure into an architectural bearing structure (being aware of the basic principle(s) of the radiolarian skeletons!! use the RULE detected before)
Test results in Diana (make different G.C-Diana-loops if possible)
Evaluate results and link to hypothesis.

Research on radiolarians & GC sketching

2009-02-12T19:52:00.004+01:00

Today I've decided on how to start my project. This concerns 1| deeper research on radiolarians and 2| practice modelling in Generative Components.

1| Research on radiolarians

I will be focussing on the growing process of radiolarians and the specific constructional aspects of their skeletons in order to decide on the input of my research.

Inventory of different radiolarians. Which type has the most potential to be transformed into a building structure?
Analysis of this specific structure. What is the exact shape? (modelling in G.C.)
How did this skeleton grow? (link to production process of the architectural construction)
What different functions do the features of the skeleton fulfil? (are these functions also to be applied on a building structure? what modifications have to be made?)

2| Studying G.C.
I will be trying to model a simple radiolarion structure in G.C. in order to get used to the software and get aware of the possibilities. Later on I will make a link to the structural capacities of the results with the help of Diana.

some other examples of radiolarians (art forms in nature (1898): E. Haeckel)

Comment of Andre

2009-02-10T13:54:00.003+01:00

Comment of Andre via email:
"- are you interested in testing the translatability of specific radiolarian structures, or of categories/classes of radiolarians, or perhaps of some of their general characteristics?
- do you have a final scale and/or architectural role in mind for the translated structures? (e.g. single person/family dwelling, concert hall, airport terminal, etc.)"

Response:
- I thought of starting with one perticular radiolarian structure. And test how effictive the structure will work as a buiding structure in Diana (and also criticize the spatial qualities it can have).
Then try to make some sort of tool which "automatically" transforms the weak or not sufficients parts into well working structure which would be realistic to work for a building.
So, untill this point I am interested in testing the translatability of specific radiolarian structures.
- I quess that the first testing of the structure will end up in more knowledge about the possibilities. That's why I feel that I cannot yet define the outcome yet. Altough I would love to design a concert hall or palace in this way!

Some more explaination about my topic

2009-02-09T20:19:00.015+01:00

Okay, today is the day of the presentations, which i could't join because of the wedding of my little sister! It was a beautiful day.. but I regret that I couldn't get feed back on my proposal of course.

I will give some more explaination to my proposal here>>

I strarted to make a quick overview of what kind of structures we can find in nature and in architecture. I've tried to link the types of structures to each other in order to find the most interesting structures to be used as input and output in my research.

I've decided, based on this schedule, to use bone structures as a starting point to do research about. Because, according to my opinion, they are the most suitable and interesting natural structures to be used as a basis for the translation process into an architectural load bearing structure.

Of course there exist a wide range of bone structures, I wanted to specify my research to one kind of bone srructure. In my search for literature I bumped, among other things into: biological structures, bone structures, molecular cell biology and micro biology. The micro biology intrigued me! Looking further into that, I discovered microscopic prints of silicium bone structures of radiolarians. These ar one cell organisms with mineral skeletons to protect them selves. This is a, by the humans eye, invisible world of beautiful structures, created by evolution with an exeptional wide range of variety.

This is a picture of only a few SEM scans of radiolarians.

Using this subject as foundation for my research, I stated the following main research question:

Is it possible to design a tool to translate input retreived from the silicium bone structure of radiolarians into an architectural load bearing structure?

points of attention are:

What exactly are the differences between those two structures?

i.e. Architectural structures require resistancy against forces of gravity, wind loads, they need to be made out of an other material and we need some sort of components to be able to build it.

Do I need to simplify the input? And in which way?

3-d or 2-d, only the main structure? This part needs some more research about radiolarians!

HOW can I get a usefull input? and: HOW could I make a tool?? Which software would be suitable??

On which subjects will I criticize my output?

i.e. construction analysis, architectural/spatial quality, potential to apply it in a realistic way in architecture! Can it be build? What are the options and possibilities?

I also add a scheme I've made about te cicle of research I want to go on during this course.

This is an interesting reference project of P.L. Nervi. He based the design of the Palazetto dello Sport in Rome on a crustacean (schaaldier).

Presentation of Research Proposal

2009-02-09T00:05:00.003+01:00

Dear Students and Teachers,

I posted my presentation about the following subject on blackboard at Groups - File exchange.

"Is it possible to translate a micro structure into an architectural (bearing) structure, using a designed tool"

I'm looking forward to a discussion about my topic later this week and am open to all suggestions or critics.
Tomorrow I will update this blog according to my presentation.

Best,
Maria Vera

week 1

2009-02-05T13:02:00.000+01:00

My focus of interest is:

The potential of natural structures within building design concepts and construction systems.

Research proposal:

Plan:

1| literature research on natural structures (cell structures & flora phenomena)
2| analyze the structures and formulate (new) hypothesis
3| design scripts in GC to apply on digital units
4| build an architectural structure using the script
5| test the results according to the hypothesis
6| try another structure and repeat cycle from step 2.