Spatial Experiences

Objectives
Designing modular systems to created 3D structures and considering how interaction happens within spatial experiences.

developing geometries
experimenting with forms
designing interactions
prototyping solutions
communicating ideas

Keywords: Form, Scale, Lighting, Perception, Interaction

4/12 Project Introduction: Building 4 structures using 2 module variations

I started my brainstorming first by exploring different shapes I could create using grid relationships and circular relationships within the square grid.

I also referenced some pictures I saw online of modular 3d structures.

reference: Pinterest

The process of elimination was dictated by how difficult the curves would be to replicate in a visually cohesive manner, and how visually interesting the structure could be. Admittedly, I lacked alot of foresight because I just couldn’t visualise how the tabbing would cause the structures to converge/diverge/twist&turn etc. I thought it was best to just start cutting shapes and I experimented with a variety of shapes from basic squares, hexagons to some irregular looking ones.

At the end, I decided to have one module experiment with a basic shape (a square) but different tabbing positions (diagonal lines rather than those that ran parallel to the edges). The other module I wanted to try with a more blobular/curvilinear shape that still maintained some regularity/symmetry. For this second module, I used illustrator to create the shape as I wanted to make sure that the curves weren’t just by estimation as I know when cutting I would already create some irregularity.

Module A:

Module B:

4/14 Crit + Work session

For today’s crit session we had ~80 models split between two tables. On the first table we discussed our individual definitions of balanced vs unbalanced and ordered our models along this spectrum.

— What is Balanced? Here were some of what I thought were valuable discussion highlights

• Symmetry — is it correlated with sturdiness or stability?
• Regularity and Predictability.
• Are contrasting elements balanced or unbalanced? I find that there is some balance in reconciling opposing adjectives in one structure. For example, dense at the top and light at the bottom.
• Aarnav mentions the “volatility of closing the circle” in reference to forms that closes in on itself. I like how they look visually especially if they appear to interlock but I understand his point on how it may seem limiting or restrictive. Personally I find the closure appealing and cohesive but the lack of implied ‘potential’ could be a drawback. By implied potential, I speak of the additive nature of such abstract, patterned structures.

We also talked about perception: as with the previous project on clay modelling for the hybrid form, we must consider how it looks from all perspective despite this structure having a definite base in its eventual form. As we aren’t (yet or fully) creating with intention, what do our forms look like when we tilt/flip them upside down?

On the second table we ordered our models along a spectrum from “standard” to “experimental”. I think our class was the most divisive on experimental, especially with alot of the “experimental” pieces (in my opinion) being centered in the middle of the spectrum.

— What is Experimental? Discussion Takeaways

• Visually/Structurally “avant garde” or unexpected?
• Aarnav brings up a great point I agree with — disagreeing with the semantics of our discussion. It seems as though there is a ‘preferred’ adjective: standard < experimental. Technically, everyone experimented with the form. There is intentionality within experimentation although I think the difficult part is allowing others to perceive this intentionality. Personally I want to think of it as more fluid — even within the structure. I think if I can reconcile intention with experimentation, I would have succeeded in my goals for this project.
• Is experimentation about proving a point? learning something?
• Moving unto the next part of the project, we also briefly discussed the idea of whether our forms are more of a Sculpture (object you gaze at; place on a pedastal) vs Interactivity (something you move through, climb on etc)

NEXT STEPS:

1. Create up to 3 modules (15–25 total pieces) to use in a single form. Scale up slightly to 1.5–2in x 2in.
2. Create figures to determine scale of form.
3. Generate a verb that will describe the interaction with the form — dance, climb, jump.
4. Draw this interaction

4/17 Creating Modules and First Structure

I started on Illustrator and experimented with creating different modules based on grouping geometric shapes next to each other. When creating these compositions, I knew I wanted to create a structure that is dominated by transparency — as in there are alot of holes of different sizes, an organic ‘growing’ structure etc. Something hive-esque and related to ‘fostering community’.

illustrator shapes

I printed out the shapes on a4 paper (about 2in*2in in size) and ended up only using the squarish X-shaped module because I felt it was the best shape for creating a tessallation.

Below are some process documentation of how I came up with the tabbing rules and overall hive shape. The cut down the middle was an initial experimentation with sliding two pieces together in a 3d cross but it didn’t allow for branching/growth. While tabbing the pieces together diagonally I realised that creasing the paper so that it had more flexibility helps create versatility and adjustability.

As I continued tabbing this first module, it came to a point where I couldn’t continue as there wasn’t enough space. I had to create a fitting second module:

Process Shots

The rest of the day was mostly spent growing and cutting out modules as I saw they fit towards the direction and manner in which I wanted my structure to branch. With my intention of using this structure as a community space for people underneath it, I needed to make sure that there wasn’t an “inaccessible” or “useless”/”accidental” upper space created or sectioned off by a module. This meant I had to sometimes break the ‘tabbing rules’ I initially relied on and other times it meant I had to take some pieces apart and reposition them by either a) using a different ‘leg’ or b) ‘flipping the module around so that it can face a different direction.

Materiality

I used conservation board (2 ply) for this prototype and while it is the right thickness for my purposes, the paper didn’t crease well or react well to scoring/bending. It responded to wear and tear easily, as seem below. I think the issue is more how I scored and bent it (in the wrong direction), and hopefully so because chip board and 4ply conservation board is too thick.

Situating our structures within context

I went into creating this structure with the verb/interaction “dance” in mind. It helped inform the shape I wanted my modules to be (like a blobular human with their limbs outstretched mid jumping-jack). With “dance”, I was thinking about the common sighting of ‘group square dancing’ in parks in China. They are usually 40–80 year old aunties and uncles who dance to music or exercise programmes they blast really loud on the radio and on the side, daylight mahjong/chess gambling happening between the grandpas. Sometimes these activities get in the way of passerbys. It would be nice if they had a designated pavilion for them, that would also shield the aunties/uncles from the scorching summer sun by providing slits of shade. The pillars/legs of the structure would then serve as a resting wall or seating for those playing mahjong.

Although I was pretty set on ‘dance’, I also wanted to explore scale of figures. If people were almost as tall as this structure, this seems more like a playground structure that people could sit on, climb on/through, of hang from. When asking my peers which they preferred, people seemed to lean towards play as it seemed more “right” and “adhering to the form of the modules”.

first prototype photographed with drawn shadow figures

second figure scale experiment

Main class crit takeaway was that scale matters in how the object is perceived.

Next steps (GROUP WORK):
1. Decide on a mood, pick three adjectives to supplement it
2. Create 2–3 structures based on the same (up to) 3 modules
3. Play with color/pattern and scale and lighting
4. Photograph your structures with color/scale/lighting
5. Ask people outside of design what mood they think this structure evokes

4/19 – 4/20 Creating 2–3 modules and structures

1. Synthesising our structures and coming up with a mood

Caleb and I have spherical/curved shapes for our modules, while Anna and Felix have triangular shaped modules. Synthesizing the two types, we decided on something that had curvilinearity to it. We started with a batwing shape (sketched below) with potential forms being a very “swift” and “directional” overhanging structure.

With this in mind, we came up with the following words:

bold
confident
swift

However after some brainstorming we realised that this would be hard to have structural integrity, and may be too predictable/cliche or just sort of limited (in a negative way). We also needed a more geometric way of constructing these modules. Daphne also mentioned that the words we come up with should describe places and not people.

We decided on bold and got rid of the rest, then added
dominant
intense
expansive/organic (suggesting growth)

Caleb sketched this on the board with the element of environment in mind:

and I really liked the idea of something that looked like a symbiote exploding in a small room/filling up a cramped space to assert its dominance and intensity. For color, we decided on red as a bold and assertive color — vibrant, strong and eyecatching. We also wanted to try a structure without any color just to have a side by side comparison for the impact of color.

2. Coming up with modules + forms

Using the grid and circle design approach from before, Caleb came up with the following modules on illustrator that when flat hooked into each other.

After cutting about 20–40 modules of each (enough for us to play around with for 3 structures), we each individually explored different tabbing possibilities (in terms of length of the slit) to control how much the pieces intersect and also tried creasing some pieces for versatility (so pieces can begin converging into each other for better structure).

We bought canson paper and glued two pieces together for appropriate thickness and used that for a piece that would be entirely red. It was unfortunately only after we took all our pictures that we thought having one side be sharpied black would add more dimension and depth to the structure. That would be our next step if given the chance.

Working collaboratively within the 2 given days was difficult and alot of it was learning to make decisions by yourself in the constructing process fully based off of an initial group conversation (that dictated only the general direction).

Below are the structures we came up with in the end (unedited):

Structure 1: Color, with spiralling pattern and a ‘canopy’

Structure 2: trying to create something visually cohesive (more than structure 1, less than structure 3)

Structure 3: Patterned spot color, relied on tabbing whatever pieces that were close to each other, not visually cohesive but is organic/dynamic

When deciding on the direction of our iterations, our first attempt was the least visually cohesive one — we simply tabbed pieces that were close together and added pieces based on directionality of the shapes. As we made more forms, we wanted to move towards adding more intentionality and visual cohesion/pattern. With the angularity of our modules, I was thinking if there was a way we could recreate a form inspired by the cube capsule hotel in Japan:

capsule hotel in Japan

But we realised that the heights of our modules didn’t correspond to each other in a manner that would allow us to achieve this. The staggeredness of each module’s relative height partially contributed to the visual chaos when piecing them together.

Taking pictures (environmental context, light)

To take our pictures, we built a box out of foam core so that we could demonstrate an indoor structure + experiment with how lighting would cast shadows/reflect color and create a coloured ambiance.

4/21 Professor mid-proj Critique + Iterations

We showed our professors our three iterations and perspective shots and had a conversation with Kyu + Daphne on mainly the red structure as it had the most visual cohesion and was also the most eye-grabbing.

Couple issues:

• SCALE: Structure is currently 6 stories tall, and INDOORS, which is unlikely and unideal. There also isn’t much of an interaction besides the user gazing/looking. Perhaps inverting the orientation of the structure (so that the canopy becomes a sitting area) and scaling up the figure can help
• MOOD: Is red the way to go? It certainly fulfills the mood of Bold, but we also got responses such as daunting, overwhelming, intimidating. Also, is ‘bold’ a common mood people would think when they see a structure?
• WORDS: Organic and Bold seems to go against each other, at least in most contexts.
• More fluidity in our structure would be better; with alternating shape/size with our holes. Getting rid of unnecessary angles and protuding shapes in our modules would help with visual clarity, but cutting it down to just one repeating shape (alternating between a creased and uncreased version) is also a little bare boned.

Changes we made:

We went back to the drawing board, (although ruling out a hard restart) to derive a new form with a new interaction. First we relooked at our words. Changing the mood adjective to playful and making bold a supplementary adjective would help broaden up the versatility of what we make/make things easier.

After toying around with the existing structure and trying to find ways to build OFF of it, we were quickly getting stuck and hitting dead ends. So we took it all apart and restarted. Isolating just one module that seemed the most viable, we kept tabbing it in a way so that it would spiral onto itself. Eventually we came to a tunnel like structure below.

The current color of our structure (unintentional) made it look like a kinder surprise which I found amusing, but at this point Caleb and I were also pretty delirious with all the endless module-ing.

Looking at the holes created by tabbing the semi angular edges of the modules together, it was irregular and took away from being able to perceive the overall form/adding visual noise, chaos and was distracting. So we took a flat view to rethink the shape of the modules, keeping where the tabs were the same. On Procreate I came up with these two rough shapes. They are more organic and fluid, and will create alternatively sized/shaped oblongs for our structure.

Caleb then imported this into illustrator to trace/convert it into a vector shape. We printed this out with our new colors (green/pink, inspired by Felix’s Marc Jacobs Heaven jacket and also was still bold, vibrant, and fun — encouraging interaction with it from both children and adults alike).

There would be a side that didn’t contain the holes in the middle to communicate a base. Also so that people would not be falling through the uneven ground.

The organic shape of the module with the pink also seemed a little unappetising? inappropriate? Either ways we decided to go with a design orange for the interior instead.

We ended up with 3 main modules we would be using:

Laser Cutting (1.4 mm)

Laser Cutting in the P Studio

Spray Painting, Construction and Context Photography:

Spray painting had the best coverage and it was the most efficient way of colouring our pieces especially since we wanted to had each side be a different color (green/orange). We did get feedback that this color palette looked like a frog.

Spray painting

Created more dynamic figures to better demonstrate how children will interact with our structure. crawling, handing, climbing

structure in context (outdoors)

Bringing our structures to ‘life’: Cardboard Again

We had to break our structure into parts that we could hot glue together and then piece together or else it would have had no structural integrity because of the weight of cardboard not being able to hold itself up with the very shallow tabs. Our ‘fort’ ended up being selected by Daphne’s kid as being the most playable :-> but it was also at the constant risk of collapsing onto him with one strong gust of wind.

fort + titan caleb

Concluding thoughts