ADS:AJournal Week 04

Carl Madsen 357577

We began our design process by cre-ating and critiquing a matrix of compu-

tational design definitions in Rhino3D and Grasshopper, producing a wide breadth of candidates that we could explore further in hopes of finding a

base for our initial concept.

The matrix consisted of input defini-tions (how the space is arranged), as-sociative definitions (how the arrange-ment of space is modified) and output definitions (how the modified space is

represented).

CU

T D

EFIN

ITIO

NS

CR

EATI

NG

A M

ATR

IX

_04

COMPONENTS

ARBITRARY POINTS

EXTRUSION ROTATION

POIN

TAT

TRA

CTO

RC

UR

VEAT

TRA

CTO

RM

ATH

SFU

NC

TIO

N

MU

LTIP

LEM

ATH

SFU

NC

TIO

N

COMPONENTS

BOOLEAN PATTERNING

EXTRUSION ROTATION

POIN

TAT

TRA

CTO

RC

UR

VEAT

TRA

CTO

RM

ATH

SFU

NC

TIO

N

MU

LTIP

LEM

ATH

SFU

NC

TIO

N

Maths Function

EXPLICIT GRIDS Extrusion Rotation Component

Multiple Maths Function

Image Sampler

Curve Attractor

00 A R C H I T E C T U R E D E S I G N S T U D I O

SURFACE GRID

ATTRACTOR POINT + COMPONENTS CURVE ATTRACTOR + COMPONENT IMAGE SAMPLER + COMPONENT

ATTRACTOR POINT + EXTRUDE CURVE ATTRACTOR + EXTRUDE IMAGESAMPLER + EXTRUDE

ATTRACTOR POINT + ROTATION CURVE ATTRACTOR + ROTATION IMAGE SAMPLER + ROTATION

The components output produced a system of curves along another curve,

be it the same one ordifferent, scaling them based on cer-

tain associative definitions. It produced a wide array of varying

results; however they seemed to lack official clarity in their arrangement. Without an in-depth understandingof how they are produced, they risk

being inaccessible to an average audi-ence. Interesting

as they may be, these abstract quali-ties were not exactly in line with our

design focus. However, withfurther experimentation, these systems could align themselves with our focus.

A system of arbitrary points across a surface or plane was one we decided

to avoid after experimentationwith it. Not only did it contrast with the ideas of parametric modelling that we

focused on previously (byusing human decision to constrain the

design), but also did not appropriate with our consideration of the

directive nature of the highway, imme-thodical.

Two explicit grid as an input is the ar-rangement of points in a square and hexagonal fashion, andhow the associations and outputs react to this difference. When juxtaposed on top of one another,the hexagonal and square patterns create differing views as the perspec-tive on the grid changes,which relates to the experiential quali-ties we are looking to produce in our structure.

The image sampler association was the use of any image found to produce a varying result, based onthe colour or darkness of certain parts of the image. We felt similarly to the im-age sampler as we didto the input of arbitrary points; it was too constrained by human intervention. There was little orderinvolved in its representation.