Archinect
anchor

Hi all you fancy graphics lovers

Sep 28 '04 1455 Last Comment
Per Corell
Sep 28, 04 3:21 pm
 

kyll
Sep 28, 04 4:00 pm

we've been through this before....

this "new" building system of yours right? that animation has yet to prove it to be structurally sound- or any other kind of sound. how do building systems work with it? how does the interior/exterior elements of a building integrate with it?

not to sound too pessimistic or anything, but these things gotta at least be addressed.

Pimp Minister Pete Nice
Sep 28, 04 4:53 pm

Note to self: Don't ever do what Per does.

bloodclot ARCattack
Sep 28, 04 5:49 pm

i agree...

needs some work

b3tadine[sutures]
Sep 28, 04 9:01 pm

no what it needs is to be ignored for the shit that it is....no really everytime i get suckered into looking at a link per posts, i see practically the same image - what appears to be a 21st century gothic cathedral....

per if you want some relevant discourse at least show some process, some context, some historical reference to back this shit up. architecture does not exist in a vaccum.

joek
Sep 28, 04 11:31 pm

I agree with all above - it looks like a load of crap to my eyes, it looks like a cathedral - as beta says, but one that has twice the amount of structural mass than those of old. What the hell is the point in that? Why make copy something but make it LESS beautiful that the thing you copied?

I also object to it being labelled 'fancy graphics'. That looks as though it was done about 20 years ago. Take a look around you - that doesn't compare to anything happening, graphics-wise, nowadays (KDLab for example - now theres some skilled 'fancy' graphics).

bothands
Sep 29, 04 3:08 am

calling it a cathedral is giving too much credit, and its certainly not gothic with those round arches, what it is closest to is a lamella truss (dia-grid vaulted roof of criss-crossing members) -- which is actually a very cool structural system -- in the end the gross form and lame animation/rendering do indeed seem sadly pointless though...

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 3:24 am

Hi

You are all right this is different --- it is cery different.
It is not the just forming the useal glass and steel, it is one material only, it is different as each building part go strait from 3D CAD to the mashin that acturly cut the piece it is different as not one single piece of paper is needed , it is another form language.

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 3:39 am

Hi
Forgot to say

It is different as it do not just create an emty mesh but a structure where the floors are suddenly just there no one placed the floors.
It is different as it is not just surface attitude but structure it is one material not 20 different, it form square as organic it is different as it is super strong it make a new technology it promise new jobs it is different as it build cheap houses and support new sheet materials, it can only be made with computer that way it is very different as with this computing ,it is not about the fancy sales renderings, but about the enginering structure . It is different for what it support it cover the old forms but don't support the old way's.

This is new ofcaurse it is different you can't blame it for that and realy all you do is blaming it for being different.

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 3:56 am

Must I realy name artists that was blamed for being different then this page is not long enough.

punkt
Sep 29, 04 6:20 am

Dear Per,

At first I was amused by your numerous rants and terribly broken English. I actually spent a whole evening searching for, and reading through any threads in which you participated. I am now however, torn between amusement and embarresment on behalf of all danes, and danish designers.

A word of advice: It's obvious that from a communication standpoint you are not succeeding in delivering your amazing idea in a convincing fashion. You should perhaps go work on some material (a website for example) which actually describes the idea in a coherent and detailed fashion.

Until that work is done, please get of the internet and go work on proving us all wrong.

I wish you the best of luck
Love a fellow dane

b3tadine[sutures]
Sep 29, 04 7:13 am

Per

Are you looking for a discussion or are you looking for people to bow down and kiss your feet, and then raise you on their shoulders carrying you around like you are the king of architecture?

Respond to questions or shut it down. You are looking pretty dumb regardless of the language barrier. Provide some context, show how this "theory" works in a real world situation. Your waffle structure still requires other materials, sheathing, windows, doors, MEP systems, flooring, and lest I forget PEOPLE. You have these "skills" so show some people interacting with your things. Show some process, process, and more process. Your work without an understanding of process is meaningless.

Please don't pull the artist card on us, most of us know that artists - Must I realy name artists that was blamed for being different then this page is not long enough. [by the way this is a bullshit statement] - don't have anything to do with your work.

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 8:25 am

Hi

This is not about "me" as I do not have any drive in the direction of being any master architect, ---- guess a lot people will think so, but this is not so, I use computers I write my own applications I build ontop a life long experience in arts and crafts I know the tools.

Also I find architecture being stuck in a lead that progress nowhere, I know the code in today's architect applications and se these, as nothing but the old way's just written into computer code, from my poitn of view this is no progress no new tool but a splendid standstill.

--------- Realy do anyone think that to become famous is the only drive possible.

This is just a tool. but it is an easy one to use , I do not expect any other credit than what you expect when providing a new tool that solve the problem providing the first true direct link, 3D CAD to manufactoring.

I find that this tool provide exact measures down millimeter, at the same time challancing an architecture trend, that seem to lead only to more cold glass and steel forms. Forms without thought of structure ,forms becomming more and more fancy ,just for the attitude of it, --- not for the quality or even for the use of technology, what I show here, is even the most simple options with this construction idear, If I displayed the top of it, it would be so sofisticated that you would not belive your eyes, But I am not fighting to be famous, I am fighting to promote relevant new digital tools and from my years at the architect acadamy and the time I spended climing the stairs acturly building what the programs generated, I know what I am up against, what you Romans don't realise is, that I develobed these tools for you that I am a designer not an architect.

These tools is develobed for you to form Solids make them hollow, add the floors and stairs, se how the interiour can go in one with the walls, how beauty will show when structure become planned when two planes replace 3 planes. --- The progress must be clear for anyone who know architecture, know the actural tools master these. Unless you do so, you are only blaming your own perception of what you think I make.

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/index.htm

b3tadine[sutures]
Sep 29, 04 9:21 am

ugh.

Pimp Minister Pete Nice
Sep 29, 04 9:39 am

wow, he really can't be saved

archiphreak
Sep 29, 04 9:47 am

per,
for the love of god, Please, offer some validity to the "thing" it is you are trying to validate. because right now it is just that, a "thing", and nothing more. the structure is way over done, to actually think that anyone would want to "experience" a structure of this kind is rediculous. the whole point of architecture is for people (the real kind, not the kind you get from a cd) to use and experience the "things" that we make. the computer is a wonderful thing, but if you can't take your ideas any farther than that then you had better just pack it up and become a seamstress or something....my 2 cents

archiTEKE
Sep 29, 04 9:53 am

i think designing on the computer is for people that do not know how to design. all designs start on paper! cad is just a finishing tool

French
Sep 29, 04 10:26 am

Wow, Per you are weird.
The problem with the drawings and animation you post is preciselythe fact that it doesn't relate to any intersting architectural background. The reason why it hasn't been used in architecture before is probably that it's not a very intelligent solution in terms of habitability vs structure. In architecture, intelligence is beauty. And you're system is not intelligent because it doesn't allow a wide range of formal expression and it reduces the space given to the body at the benefit of what looks like a cheap plywood structure. I really don't get the point.

a-f
Sep 29, 04 11:06 am

Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). I'm not so interested in the formal aspects or the aesthetics which seem to bother everyone anyway, but rather the pragmatics behind your method. I fail to understand the newness of it, because to me it seems like traditional structural thinking.

SurfaceS
Sep 29, 04 11:32 am

It looks like it'd be kind of leaky in a rainstorm. And hard to walk across that floor in stilettos.

gustav
Sep 29, 04 11:35 am

I must stand by Per on this one, aleph.
Kladd i sin vackraste kilt, besokte han Den Enda, och nu skulle det ske!

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 12:53 pm

Hi

Thanks for all response I think every post is very valuable, If I can not use all this response I shuld not deal with design this is my attitude.

3D-H is pressing a button having an intergrated framework generated, this ask deciding the scale of the "mesh" and deciding the materials, but please exchouse that I keep things simple, that when not two different scales or materials work together, things can look a bit primitive, ----- but if I made things more complicated, some would say this is impossible and it's not. This tool screem for further develobment trying out combining instead of standing alone, but this ask skilled folks visionary craftmen or architects who belive in arts or crafts and who is looking ahead to the day ,when they can say to the engineer how things must be assembled.

bothands
Sep 29, 04 12:55 pm

Now that i've seen per's other examples on his homepage I get it --the 'newness' he's claining, its not the lamella truss paradigm I mentioned above, so much as the basic dia-grid egg-crate structure that every architect and their brother is doing (as can be found in such books as Architecture in the Digital Age ed. by Kolarevic, Digital Tectonics by Niel Leach, Praxis 6: New Technologies/New Architectures or such buildings as OMA's Seattle Library or H&DeM's Prada Tokyo) but here he's claiming the floor is integral to the shell (2 planes vs. 3 to complete a building) -- the problem is he doesn't have very compelling forms and/or any apparent response to program, but it might have potential in better hands...

Punkt, you shouldn't be embarrased about all recent Danish design though, have you seen Bruce Mau's huge new exhibition, Too Perfect: Seven Possible Denmarks with such sharp/hip young Danish firms as Plot;

and archiTEKE: its sad if you think the computer is only usefull as a 'finishing tool' -- you obviously haven't looked very carefully into some of the most interesting work of the last decade, or haven't used a 3D modelling program to its potential, or are just trying to be funny...

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 1:13 pm

Hi

A-f ;
"Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). "

You are very close, But the amazing thing is that what you produce as 3D-H is in only two planes, not the tree planes we are used to only two.
These two planes are 90 deg to eachother to make a simple assembly notch possible-- a halve notch where two sections intersect.
Now the two planes forming the framework do not need to be just 45 deg rotated, they can be 45 deg rotated according to the tradisional xy plane but interesting things happen , when at the same time, they are 45 deg. rotated to the xz plane , those I published lately are simple ones only rotated 45 deg according to tradisional xy plane and this way the "waffle" assoc. come closer where rotating further by any other plane remove this expression. So 3D-H is as logic as the tradiaional top-front-side planes 3D-HoneyComb just carry it's own cooerdinate system where there are alway's 90 deg inbetween the two planes where the offsets describe the planes for each frame.

Sorry about the spelling, this is the best I maneage.

archiTEKE
Sep 29, 04 1:22 pm

WELL SINCE IM STILL TRYING TO GET MY UNDERGRAD IM NOT ALL THAT FAMILLIAR W/ THE GREAT 3D PROGRAMS THAT ARE OUT THERE...YET. AND ONE THING I DO KNOW IS THAT WHEN A BUILDING, SPICIFICALLY A BUILDING IS BEING DESIGNED WITH OUT ANY FREE HAND SKETCHS - DWGS, OR MODEL MAKING...THE RESULT IS A DISASTER. THE BUILDER IS CALLING THE ARCH. EVERY 5 MIN. AND IT TURNS INTO A DESIGN AS YOU BUILD. LAME AND INSUFICENT! LIKE I SAID THE COMPUTER IS JUST A TOOL JUST LIKE MY PENCIL!
I ACTUALLY WENT TO THE NETHERLANDS FOR 10 DAYS THIS PAST SUMMER-THERES SOME INTERESTING WORK

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 1:36 pm

Hi

A-f ;
"Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). "

You are very close, But the amazing thing is that what you produce as 3D-H is in only two planes, not the tree planes we are used to only two.
These two planes are 90 deg to eachother to make a simple assembly notch possible-- a halve notch where two sections intersect.
Now the two planes forming the framework do not need to be just 45 deg rotated, they can be 45 deg rotated according to the tradisional xy plane but interesting things happen , when at the same time, they are 45 deg. rotated to the xz plane , those I published lately are simple ones only rotated 45 deg according to tradisional xy plane and this way the "waffle" assoc. come closer where rotating further by any other plane remove this expression. So 3D-H is as logic as the tradiaional top-front-side planes 3D-HoneyComb just carry it's own cooerdinate system where there are alway's 90 deg inbetween the two planes where the offsets describe the planes for each frame.

ArchiTEKE this tool was develobed after I spended years building boats with the same concept that formed bilbao ,atleast back then they pointed to plain mesh entities to be the basics , but after years of fighting the foults you experience with unfolded surfaces and strait line meshes with double curved faces , and even I solved all those trouble, I had to realise that this asked a compleatly different aproach, that making sections was part of it and that making each frame support any other was the right aproach then develoable surfaces can cover this but you shuld simply not try using unfolded surfaces without a 3D-Honeycomb foundation as that and only that and not a transvers fiddled pipework, will make the measures.
3D-H is the tool you want, you can sketch with Solids, but after making the first few clumpsy structures, you will start refining your expression chose the right scale or material do the nicest forms create the frame of the spaces and make the stairway go in one with the waals, and make the holes fit standard window frames down millimeter pressision.


Sorry about the spelling, this is the best I maneage.

jmac
Sep 29, 04 1:55 pm

umm. its almost like per isn't human. there is such a consistency to the responses, such imperviouness to all the scathing critisism, that they surely must have been produced by a machine.

jmac
Sep 29, 04 1:56 pm

that's it! 3d-h is not the script. per was the script the entire time!

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 2:02 pm

Hi

Susan Surface :

"It looks like it'd be kind of leaky in a rainstorm. And hard to walk across that floor in stilettos. "

First if it came down to that, I would shape a building the same way as these shoes. ------ Any shape any size even buinding size.
Second ,will you find that if the structure catch 50 pct. of the rain it will change the climat under -- will 75 pct make a difference , anyway the open cubes can be pointed the direction you want, leading in light from only one direction ans "seen" from other directions the structure offer a multiple layered bullit prove structure impossible to penetrate as soon there be another layer or frame. Also you can place several framework in different cube directions within eachother, then you will have a house with no roof being weather proven as each shelll will catch some rain.
You are right about walking across the floors, but please note, that no one layed the floor, no one placed any floor beams as they just grew as by magic, but on the other hand, you can be sure that the floor plane is absolut plain and any paneling will be carried by multible frames and when paneled both sides, a real Honeycomb structure is the result, at that point you can start reducing the materials --- when paneled.

Pimp Minister Pete Nice
Sep 29, 04 2:21 pm

Maybe you should submit this idea for the Architectural Record Avant Garde Issue.

jmac
Sep 29, 04 2:23 pm

yes! you see? a script!

el jeffe
Sep 29, 04 2:39 pm

Per,
You're modelling all of your projects as if they were made out of some homogeneous stuff. Architecture simply isn't because of the scale. Architecture is forced by scale to acknowledge the connections of similar and dis-similar materials. Any "revolutionary" structural system is really a system of connections because of the magnitude of the forces. If you want your ideas to have legitimacy, you'll need to focus on the connections. Try taking ONE project and working it though the details instead of spinnning your wheels on rendering the 3d-h models...
Either that or fess up that you're really Phillip R.K. Nixon and you just got a Dell....

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 2:40 pm

Hi

Now buildings and building structures is not the only issue covered by a new method ;

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/fig3.jpg

bigness
Sep 29, 04 3:00 pm

jeee, per, seriously, it looks like someone set you loose on a free copy of maya.

what is that image supposed to mean? that you can model an f14 in wiremesh? i dont see the novelty...shell structure is already been done, and to a degree of detail that is certainly not the one you got in your renderings. seriously, give up and move on, is very unimpressing and rather disturbing being here and discussing it...

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 3:10 pm

Hi

el jeffe ,botton line is that also in this, there are a great part social skills involved, Anyway develobing crashing good promising attitude towerds modern manufactoring must be the attitude if you want to make a difference, ---- then with myself I know I can not make anything else I done so my whole of a life. Still Im'e happy.

I am happy as there are so much beauty avaible, and if you need a bad exchouse to make art, then beauty if you find it is worth the intire 54 year old trouble , things can only become better but I am not an architedt but a designer I do not draw as nice as many others, this I know.

TED
Sep 29, 04 3:21 pm

i always understood weed was much stronger in denmark. apparently it is.

French
Sep 29, 04 3:34 pm

Look, I'm starting to like his sense of humour guys. it's hilarious.

French
Sep 29, 04 3:35 pm

Does anybody know this guy? Is he for real?

thefauxed
Sep 29, 04 3:57 pm

it is so in our face if per gets a priztker

kyll
Sep 29, 04 4:09 pm

oh man....where do i start

innovative idea- yes, per...

at just about the same time as when introducing janet jackson on the facts of life was an innovative idea.

you say you are a designer, not an architect. you cannot convey your ideas well enough for anyone- ANYONE- not just architects- to comprehend (or buy into) your "innovation". a designer- a half accomplished one- would be able to at least convince ONE person that their idea is feasible, sensible, and plain believable for that matter. you cannot do that.

i was in that last discussion where you were involved with in you showing this "innovative" structural system and the SAME exact thing happened then that is happening now- no one is convinced- even less some are down right pissed off.

it DOESN'T integrate with ANY thing dealing with architecture or engineering. some points are possible, but not necessarily any more advantageous than a traditional method to suit. the honeycomb deal? been done- recently by Rem K. nothing is "innovative" or money saving, time saving, more aesthetically pleasing about your system than other methods both old and new. NOTHING.

and a point of criticism: the renderings & little animations are straight-up juvenile- not even 1st year level of rendering- no sensitivity to any scale proportion or composition. no direct attack on you or your cronies, but it may attribute as to why we're totally rejecting anything you have to say.

language? F the language barrier man- what you're saying has no real coherence towards the questions and comments posed, so you could misspell all day long or spell like martha stewart in a parole request letter- you're not saying anything either way.

per, please regroup and gather all elements of design, architecture, engineering, and art- display them with your renderings or whatever, and then and only then come back and post...

and by the way bhands- i agree with the achiteke kid- the computer is pretty much just a tool. just like a pencil....the generator of design, idea, technology comes from the dome, not an advanced super hi-tech resin casting 3d forming program...

gustav
Sep 29, 04 4:20 pm

I think you have got something Per. Those who don't open their can of beer, won't know what color it is.
Ja, roligt blir det inte. Ska vi se efter pa termometern hur varmt
(kallt) det ar har i dag?

Per Corell
Sep 29, 04 4:38 pm

Hi

Richard ;

"what is that image supposed to mean? that you can model an f14 in wiremesh? i dont see the novelty...shell structure is already been done, and to a degree of detail that is certainly not the one you got in your renderings. seriously, give up and move on, is very unimpressing and rather disturbing being here and discussing it..."

I don't se it that way, realy a craftman wish for a reliable structure and as you know, this replace multible different building elements with one only ,that ontop doh't need to be solid timber or special fittings ,that do not ask those cheap universal steel fittings you bang full of nails ,beside this realy use the computer and a tool is not just somthing that by itself do your things, you need to use the tool be able to master it acturly create your works, it is a tool but the result depend on the material used and your skills how can it be different. Make it in cromeplated gold or eco sheet plywood replace, it will be two different things. Also the color of your choice will make a difference, make it good it will work, make it bad don't say the method is bad.
---------- Anyway I think any one that must build with this, will prefere it by simple resons ,it acturly create a usefull honeycomb structure it is accurate down millimeter, it go direct from CAD drawing to manufactoring mashin. No one will chose the vorse option if there was an honest choice but this tool must be very different from the tradisional ; please do anyone expect it to be different, that a new tool must look like somkthing we already know - then it is not new, but what we expect when did we start to dictate arts.
Still there are no bended timbers in 3D-H and from a crafts point of view ,this is an important issue ,it is a building method where there are no trouble with floor trusses, hangers and knee's ; there are no trusses hangers or bolts, and it hold better than fiddeling or fighting the materials as how you se in Disney cew concert hall ,acturly this ansver the measures and must not be fiddled and realy it as just one side effect offer a foundation for even an unrolled paneling, as the framework is cut exactly from the 3D form that define the unrolled surface ---- don't try this with a mesh entity as bilbao ,the world consist of different things than zero thickness vectors. 3D-H is very different don't challance it unless you have an open mind as you could be in the situation that a craftman will prefere that, being better than tradisional means, I develobed all design tools from unrolling to 3D transforming just to have the design tools, but still the old ribwork was never better than an intergrated framework. Now use it or use the tradisional means ,anyway this make a new option, one that don't describe the building element in codes on paper, but as ready N.C. codes any scale, to acturly build the wonder it will be, when skills made it happen.

Now watch out Romans Per Corell is out there to get you ;))

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/

kyll
Sep 29, 04 4:58 pm

"those who dont open their can of beer wont"- WHAT??

i dont get your f'd up analogy man...unless you're being sarcastic. so, gustav- back up your reasoning as to why per is on to something

and per-

are you actually typing this? or is it scripted? its just more babble with no backing....

oh- wait! everyone run! "watch out Romans Per Corell is out there to get you"

TED
Sep 29, 04 5:13 pm

i think paul should consider a new discussion filter.... 'per'

el jeffe
Sep 29, 04 6:16 pm

more like John Cleese's line "people called romanis they go the house"

French
Sep 30, 04 5:21 am

You might be a Monty Python fan if...your friends show off their house and you say: "It's only a model."

a-f
Sep 30, 04 5:54 am

Ok, I understand that the 3D-H can be very useful for boat hulls, but your renderings have a completely different scale. You wouldn't be able to manufacture let's say 50x50 m big sheets out of wood or steel, less cut them with a laser cutter, and well... transporting them to the site and raising it could only be done with the combined effort of a small country's airforce. You can of course split the structure in different parts, but you would then have something of an ad-hoc solution, completely similar to a wooden frame building. There would also be difficulties with windows, openings and paneling, particularily since you make structural elements that are aligned to an *arbitrary* grid and not normal to the facade surface. This means, in short, that you would need to make universal or tailor-made joints that connect the structure to the facade, most likely complicated twisted laths.

Aaron WilletteAaron Willette
Sep 30, 04 8:02 am

I agree with a-f, the implications for boat hulls is 100% obvious, but architecture is a completely different animal. I think the artist in Per is getting the best of him, and doesn't understand what it would be like to inhabit the space, to have to deal with it on a daily basis. Per, I think if you want to push this, step outside of the 3D realm and start building. You say it would be amazingly simple to do this, then do it. Do some installation sculpture pieces where you show people experiencing the space. Then build a small building out of this system, show that it works. The partial beauty of computer modeling is that you can make nearly anything 'seem' feasible, but architecture is a physical built art. All you have to show for this idea is basically a very long string of 1s and 0s. If you want this to be recognized for the new concept that you seem to think it is, you gotta take it to the next step.

Give us something physical, and then maybe more people would buy into it.

Per Corell
Sep 30, 04 8:14 am

Hi

The issue workplane to small for cutting large frames are easy solved, in the various 3D-H groups you will se several suggestions, from cutting a lock as soon as the frame extend the workspace to double layer sheet tom make butt join overlap. Realy this is already develobed for the porpus of using waer and laser cutters for large pieces, also as long as you re-callibrate the workpiece there are no limits for how big pieces that can be made, but the automated cut in lock system suggested make everything work beside already this shuld be a limitation with what is already made and cut in steel shop industrie and is not.
But please look further into where standard window frames are subtracted the Solids, then you will se that within these holes there will be an exact fit for the window frame and what you havn'e seen yet , is that how the framework is generated as by magic solve the problems you think will surface, ------- look closer and you se very interesting details about how a 3D-H form walls you addesd and holes you subtracted please check this graphic ;

http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2573.jpg

Now don't blame me for the looks, this is maby to tight a framework maby to wide frames, but these graphics is not here for the looks of it but to show the concept, --- please do not judge this concept from my ability to design the forms, this is not what it is about, as if you do that, you blame a new promising technike by the artistic skills of the inventor. Cars look very different today as what they did at the start, wouldn't it be sad if they was scrapped becaurse they scared the horses ?

Per Corell
Sep 30, 04 8:32 am

Hi

Just want to add that when I say "this is possible" please remember that I do so with my experience of boats building and furniture building , you just was pointed to Cyber-Boat site, here is a sample of carpentry ;
http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2498.jpg

About the orientation or waffleness of a 3D-HoneyComb structure, please check this sample ( another one just being a sample not a design but an illustration) ;

http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2422.jpg

Please again this is a concept not a design, but use your emagination and this method unfold multible side effects.

French
Sep 30, 04 8:37 am

Maybe we can try to guess what the issue is, or at least I can try to explain why it is still not convincing to me. I don't believe a concept can exist outside of it's formalisation, which in that case are a bunch of not too good drawings and a very difficult to undestand verbal description. From what I undestand, the most interesting right both for Per and for us is the verbal description. The last post tries to emphasize on a distinction between a technique of conception and the resulting object itself, explaining that even if this object contains more problems than it solves, it doesn't prove that the conception technique is bad. I don't buy this distinction. The only thing that could start to interest me is a nice project prooving the qualities of this technique, and its "newness" or originality or simply difference with others.

  • ×Search in:


Please wait... loading
Please wait... loading