# Massachusetts Institute of Technology (William)

### Archived

Sep '04 - Feb '05

• anchor

By fuzzyalmighty
Feb 25, '05 2:11 PM EST

ooooh, a double entry today.

I've spent a good few hours trying to figure out how to make a point curve a certain way in Rhino. I always seem to want to do the exact thing that falls in the cracks between two different tools. Can anyone recommend a good Rhino resource? books or advanced tutorials?

Script libraries would be cool too.

We finished up the INstallation project for studio (photos are STILL on their way) and the final pinup involved proposing a final version (though unrealized). I focused on making a very clear proposal, at the expense of my presentation and the actual design in the three days we had to do it. Of course I got banged for that, but it could have been worse. Our representation course (required for all Level I's) is focusing on diagraming (Tufte, et all.) and is by design running extremely parallel to studio. It's all about parametrics folks and the final diagram presentation of The Intervention is Monday. I'll post what I come up with then. It's interesting to consider diagramming as distortion. How the parametrics of Graphs and maps can be distorted by linking and un-linking certain metrics. I've just started some research into Mathmatical topologies as related to surface wrapping and discovered just how vast and abstract that field is.
Has anyone brought this strongly into architectural design yet?
As a technique of computer modeling?

cheers
Wm.

• a-f

I did some research on topology and computer-aided modeling a few years ago, and what helped me a lot was just studying mathematics to fully understand what I was doing. A generally good web resource is MathWorld or the Geometry Junkyard. First, you need to script a program to generate or analyze topological relationships, i.e. nodes and edges with inherent connectivity; trees, grids, rings etc. Then, you need a way to bind the points together with geometrical surfaces of specific characteristics - something which is never automatic. It's tedious work, so be careful not to end up scripting general methods without actually thinking of the design. What I did myself was to implement a method called shape grammar (by George Stiny at MIT, incidentally), but not for its original purpose (analyzing/generating art and architecture) but to produce complex topologies in a bottom-up kind of fashion.

wyoming81

Most of the work that brings topology is largely superficial but I know Steven Holl has a few projects that utilize topology as a generator of the form. (I believe the new dorms at MIT do something to that effect or were at least supposed to-see "Parallax") My biggest criticm when work I see utilizes topology is that one, the architect tends to look at the results of topology and not the process and secondly, there is little integration with previous architectual design & geometric concepts like proportion, rythum, anthropology, etc. which I think seems to be a better way of studying the effects of this relatively new mathematical branch (in math terms) on the built space. It really is a facinating language and I have always wanted to bring into my designs but as of yet I have not had the oppurtunity. Remember mathematics is a much philsophical as any abstract language. Let us know how your project works out, I am curious to see which direction you take.

General Dissarray

Has anyone ever tried making a physical model, with your own hands. Its much more accurate than that computer stuff and there no need for maths. And as a bonus you get a real 3d model, and not just a 2d printout.

Try using plaster or clay.

Are you actually learning architecture or how to use Rhino?

fuzzyalmighty

Thanks for the feedback. It all started from making an undulating surface from vectors in rhino and trying to "drape" or "wrap" it around a cylindar. not an overly difficult proposition with real materials. I was mostly curious because, as is being constantly reinforced by the demands and unreal timelines throughout arch. education, of the expediency and transferability of digital representative media.

1) that "virtual" practice and theory have so pervaded (clouded?) professional practice/debate that one would assume physical modeling is an "afterthought". (read my Bio and you'll see just how into materials I am/was/is/willbe)
2) That if I'm gonna be part of this community I need to show some pics of my stuff whether it sucks or not.

thanks again for the comments. And as for whether or not I'm learning architecture, your guess is as good as mine.

cheers

Wm.

# Block this user

Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

• Back to Entry List...
• ×Search in:

## Authored by:

• fuzzyalmighty