Sorry but the previous foto of the Epidiaskop did not fir the page, here you see both lenses ; the 400 millimeter Leitz Epis 1:4 for projecting slides and the 800 millimeter Leitz Epis 1:3.5 lenses .
Need two to just carry it being the top lenses in the serie I guess this could be the, if not one of the few ,surving Epidiaskop's , ---- now a combine of mastering the tools and having a vision with it, could produce wonders with such monument.
maybe beta, but it looks like per now has some students posting 3dh inspired work in the student image section. the dog is a great touch, i wonder how it relates to this though...
speaking of T-shirt competition, what happened!? Was a winner ever ever announced?
oh, just a pointless thought...i used to have a t-shirt with a picture of an unfriendly character from the 70's wearing a t-shirt that read "detroit sucks"...it was my favorite t-shirt; i wish i could buy a t-shirt with per wearing the architecture sucks t-shirt....
the t-shirt competition has been hijacked by the man. i currently working underground to make some copies of my own design which apparently nobody liked
and the though of per in an "architecture sucks" shirt has made my day...thank you, simples
I add a detail description of the 3D-H method
----------------------------------
When Innovation is a must Efficiency come as a side effect.
In the continuous process refining the building process, design is today only partly profiting, the efficiency we must add, soon face serious barriers, it is not so easy to transcribe the methods from before the computer into fast code, without at some point realizing, that to do that “seven mile jumpâ€, it really matter that you know the crafts, and you know the progressive new methods are the only right answer to the call for new efficient design, you’ll know what I mean, when you see it; this is new, different, and unique. These qualities make it a vision, more than just refining the old methods.
There will be no greater answer to efficiency, than when a new, unique method, question the old methods, pointing to the fact that too often, software is just the old methods rewritten into fast computer code.
The new technology made to support old techniques, instead of the obvious innovation that must go into it to make the real change, the new architecture, the new techniques. The real progress start in the details, it must be carried by a true feel and true innovation, because today’s production must be more efficient, there’s a need for true new visions, something really different something that will build the house, at a third the cost, four times as strong, furthermore it should progress a new technology, and develop new techniques, opening the world of opportunities in a completely new way, same old methods can be further refined into a whole new lead. The best measures for this in architecture are beauty and innovation. The vision is the proof.
For that purpose I developed 3D-Honeycomb: A new exiting building method, a system that is simple and at the same time, involves the entire design process, it makes a direct link from 3D drawing to the CNC cutter. That produces the individual construction part in a complex but very logical new building method. The best designs - the most beautiful things, are made in a process where the artist have hands-on as much as possible. The most efficient designs are those based on a simple production line with as few materials as possible and the process is CNC controlled. Projected and made in a direct link from plans to manufacturing.
Now, this 3D-H method explains many of these issues, even the idea and method, is still at experimental state. Several attempts been made to prove the method and several structures is already projected just from the graphics you will recognize, when shown displaying the new architecture. What you project with the 3D-H concept, is a computer generated structure, sort of a woven structure consisting of sheet materials, cut to form an assembly structure, where each frame are supported by all other frames in the structure. The design process for such 3D-Honeycomb structure is quite simple, it involves a CAD program, and a simple CNC controlled laser or water cutter. But first I must explain why most architect applications in this genre, ended in sort of a dead end, and what could be wrong with the traditional attitude consisting of projecting the old 2D way, compared to the obvious gains of real Direct-Link 3D projecting - how 2D projecting simply is another world than, a Direct-Link production opportunity. Staying with the traditional BOM is the attitude, which makes an architect application into just doing things, as they always have been done, just rewritten into computer code. When projecting a modern building structure, you work with many different materials but as we saw with the WTC collapse was, that all structures have a weak point. With the twin towers that weak spot was the hangers and girders that gave away in the fires. Then to learn from the this you can take different stands - you can further refine and secure those parts of a building, if you want to build again like this, or you can develop a method that simply do not carry hangers and girders. This is the attitude of 3D-H. An attitude that makes it possible to make the foundations for floors, and internal walls in a way that replace 20 different steel profiles, special fittings, and other building parts with a assembly structure cut from the simplest material, just sheet materials. On top you now work directly with a true 3D model of the lattice or rather framework.
You now work directly with the actual structural model, and then you can combine it with the traditional projecting systems; the basic 3D model is now what carry the actual CNC codes.
The individual building frames as you can see in the 3D drawing, is now real construction parts, with the correct coordinates, cut directly out of the information in the 3D model drawing. What is surprising is when floors, and walls magically appear while assembling the structure, from the ready cut frames; with this method the WTC for example wouldn’t have been supported by these hangers, beams and girders, while the sections are cut from other planes, crossing perhaps multiple floors, walls, and so on. the individual frames will redefine a structure acting, against forces, like wind, weakened points, all parts supporting each other, instead of some beams holding a floor, and others the walls, the whole building can now be one unit, consisting of all these assembled parts.
All in one piece with no knees or weak points, on their way crossing other frames and in that way being carried and acting as structural support for other frames that transverse the structure.
Now projecting such structure, you work with a simple 3D CAD system that support Solid modeling. You form and shape the building, as solids and give the walls and floors, the actual projected thickness, but not with the goal to end with an architectural rendering or just floor plans, the result is not just to display or sell the project, no, you work in detail and use the Solid modeling to actually shape the walls and floors, the basic structure in detail. The reason is, that the solid model when showing the thickness of the walls and floors, the inner walls and even stairway's and elevator shafts, are used to calculate the sections for the real framework assembly this done by simply sectioning, but sectioning from two new planes, 90 deg to each other but independent compared to the traditional 3 construction planes. This is a very different attitude from just using the solid model for a walkthrough, using the digital options just to create nice renderings.
After processing the new sections, being the frames, the basic structure, the actual framework is now the 3D model where each section can go strait from 3D drawing, to the manufacturing machines. You can say that this expand the Lego way of thinking, but where the traditional blocks are equal of fit in a grid, there now are a grid with all different blocks, that fit together by being processed from same solid model. You could call it a more flexible "Lego construction" where each block shape to form the framework, shaping the model/structures final shape and at the same time, interlocking every frame at each cross point, distributing the forces to all sections, Leading the forces down any frame, which now supports its own weight, carries the forces by traditional vertical shape due to gravity etc., each frame distributes the forces by the entire framework. The framework do not consist of 20 different profiles and special fittings, each requiring their own production line, but one simple material cut to form and replace these parts, in plain sheet material, the individual section is accurately measured and its position in the building numbered exactly, the structure’s now, not just vertical and horizontal frames, but form a honeycomb structure, a structure where forces are equally distributed, and each frame can be directly manufactured to support any other section you want to add the structure.
Necessaries like water pipes, power grid, and so on, also requires a new point of view - you now have a nice side effect to profit of, this unique 3D modeling method allows, that for example simply subtract a long cylinder or Solid box from the Solid model, where you want to place water pipes or wires, and when frames are cut, you will see leading ways for cables and pipes, cut out in the frames at same instance as the frames form are cut.
The author of this paper, are fully aware that this is a great challenge, but this new method not only promise a stronger and cheaper structure, one that invoke a new technology, this is simply a new tool, from simple rules both draw out each building frame, and offer the designer visual real-time modeling, the method will produce a much stronger basic structure, and amongst other attractive side effects, the method learns the designer/architect to use the computer in a way that show a result instantly on the screen, a model that allow a much better detail projecting and a better entrance to the modern technology.
Efficiency then come in new ways, you don't need 20 different production lines one for each standard profile or special fitting, as these profiles and fittings are replaced with a building framework, made from plain sheet steel or other sheet materials by your choice - this point to development of even green new materials. You already have the CNC flame cutters, water and laser cutters, but realize that these work in the traditional techniques, The only minor challenge now, is getting these machines to produce 3D-Honeycomb frame assembly, which is very easy to fit together, because shaping/cutting plain material have been done, for many years now, by CNC machines.
An innovation is often not just a new perception, but also the means. As 3D-H is a structural method you can ask why it have not been tried before the answer is simply, that the calculations are to complicated, to being efficiently done "by hand", no one would try make the calculations from the traditional front, side and top plans of a traditional construction drawing, the outcome would, with traditional projecting have a doubtful outcome, as the traditional plans do not carry the Direct-Link opportunity, which is offered with modern CAD/CAM systems, it simply would be irrational to try project a 3D-H structure before the computer, as the calculation of the sections that make a 3D-H would be so complicated and numerous, that an engineer would turn to the traditional construction planes, and produce the sections from these in the traditional way.
Now a 3D-H structure is sections on two construction planes in 3D, two planes that meet differs at 90 deg. From each other but none of them follow any of the traditional planes. How this little trick can mean so much, which it revolutionizes the construction and architecture is better seen in the graphics, but the way efficiency profit, must be explained by the attitude of the method, is the Direct-Link method, the method that links together the computer drawing, and the CNC manufacturing machine.
As you now, don't have 20 different lines of production for the various profiles and fittings, but can focus on calculating the right dimensions for the framework, and focus on constructing the right assembly slot fitting.
When you look in detail at this framework, you would think that the rigid overlap, where two frames meet could be a cause of trouble - now please remember that in huge steel structures like ship hulls, you also have a sort of honeycomb structure, and there a tight weld are obvious, but with a framework structure for a building, there would be several reasons to add standard fittings, allowing the ability for the structure to damp minor vibrations and forces within certain amounts, maybe even make the basic structure more or completely earthquake safe.
--
Adding such assembly slot fittings, also profit the efficiency while building up the framework, as in hands-on works, to avoid too much “stiffness†in the structure, fittings can be inserted at the points the frames are assembled, a standard fitting will in this case solve several purposes.
--
In this application it is also very simple to ensure that the frame that is cut, will hold this fitting, as when at each cross point in the framework, the 3D model of the fittings are subtracted from the frames, you will see that material are cut away, to make room for the fitting, and even holes for bolts or rivets will be made, while the shape of each frame are cut.
Efficiency in terms of manufacturing is not the whole issue, you also must consider that this method offer a brand new perception of the structure. That detail projecting will profit when floors and walls appears suddenly, and projecting will be expanded with 3D tools, that ensure that the measures hold, and when you question the method, consider how the traditional methods have been refined and developed throughout centuries, before the capacity computers and software offered, running a system like this would be unthinkable. - Now every entity in a 3D computer drawing, already contain enough information to show the object on the screen, and when this information is enough to feed the manufacturing machine, the CNC flame, laser cutter, the water cutter or pouching machine, this put the traditional architect application in a new light, - the "block" is already there as a 3D entity, that, in the basic CAD program will make the link to the production, now each part is not described by the information added the block insert, the production machine do not need any additional information, but the information you will add can still be contained the 3D drawing. Each frame numbered, calculated for weight mass and geometric information can even produce holes for attaching the wires, transporting the frame, its place in the structure and "number" can still be added the entity name, and the information yielded when you point to the entity, the frame. Still try to compare this with the approach you see in most architectural renderings - this make both the renderings and the detailed structure assembly, not just the pictures, it make the foundations for floors and walls, the 3D model follow the building process, from start to finish but it represent a new architecture, and a new perception. Which doesn’t hide its structural appearance, one that create a new architectural vision.
In terms of computer skills, what I suggest with this method is to add a new dimension, while the program keep on an accurate account, just by the drawing database the architect can freely shape a geometric, or organic shaped building, the rooms within a rounded building can be kept square, it is a return to qualities in architecture that was almost forgotten, the difficulty combining the architects and the engineers skills, now is eased by offering solutions to structural challenges, in a way that carry it's own form language, a method that more smooth will make the visions true with a structure you don't need to hide as it carry it's own structural beauty. A structure you know will not be possible to draw in 3D unless it can be made in real, opposed to the 2D projecting that make no guarantee that the architects vision can be made in 3D.
In fact you don't need to take one single measure with 3D-H, you draw 3D one-to-one and the production machine cut the frames one to one - no centimeters no Inches or feet, this is a complete new world and a new architecture that work with computers, without being the old methods re-written into computer code, but you can still make each frame into a block and project the structure from a traditional architect application, this way you can store calculated values and properties in attributes within each frame block.
Still this is technology on the technology's own terms, making new techniques, creating a curved building not by fighting rigid steel profiles that never was made to be curved, just adding cost and waste of effort, curves are simply shaping the original solid model to generate simple cut frames with a different attitude than how you traditionally change the materials to meet your demands, not one single frame in a 3D-H need to be bended to form a rounded structure, you cut flat sheets you don't bend anything.
If you want to project a house, is not very efficient first to build an outer shell, and to get the floors and walls, then build another house inside - the first computer mesh structures was a fight to make use of the traditional steel rods and profiles, the polygon meshes 20 years ago was made from straight lines, but when the workers translated the drawings into the real thing, the straight lines went curved and from that point, you couldn’t even unfold any huge surface to cover the rods and stringers. 3D-H requires no "translation" from sketch to manufactured building frame, you do not build a house inside a shell to get the floors and walls, you don't build two houses when you want to build one, the whole basic structure is there, with floors and walls and you can continue the detail projecting from each well defined space, - measures will hold. So this is a method that answered the challenge, and delivered the missing structure of the early computer mesh structures, it is not just a thin shell that need to be formed with available rods and stringers, even if you form a completely round structure, you never bend any of the structure.
For many architects it is a natural attitude, to envision the spaces and forms, but it has always been a problem to communicate this, and very often the tool for this have been the architects sketches, the architect being more artistic minded and the engineer being the technically minded who must translate the vision, in this way they shared a very limited "language" as the sketches and details can be a great challenge, while the architect tend to envision the great scene where the engineer must make the scene work in detail and in systems.
While more architects with the CAD options possess a greater hands-on opportunity to form and shape out environments.
The computer, digitizer and keyboard do not always fit smooth in the hands of the architects, this was obvious to me, to focus on the main issue, the structure the wish to form and shape with no thought of the structure as you see how the early computer meshes sketched.
To answer the demand - my own and other designers demands, for a relevant tool that ensure the structures integrity that also leave room for structural beauty, was to make sure that when the designer point to a certain form, that there also will be a reliable structure underneath, that this should be generated by the program or method, which should not be a trouble for the architect but a challenge, when the architect understand the concept and see the nice side effects of this method understand the form language.
Understand the side effects as the options to add spaces, and frameworks in other scale or materials, the incredible new form language and ways to develop a new exiting tool that brings exactly the spaces you imagine, as soon you understand the method and how easy it shape both geometric and organic forms, not just as the outside expression but also the internal attitude.
With 3D-Honeycomb you are as near to what many architects would wish; you can form the solids as clay on the screen and besides that the "clay" will hold it's form on the screen, and not collapse under it's weight in reality, you can shape and hollow, knowing that the mass will be replaced with a reliable framework showing the exact form and internal spaces, the ideal tool for shaping not just the organic forms but will add spaces for more trivial items, such as water pipes and electrics, foundations that fit exactly to heavy loads, just any angle wall, just any window frame will melt into the framework.
The standard window or the specially designed window-wall will just subtract it's shape into the framework and be locked into the structure that will fit around, and support as you plan it to, even the foundations for stairs or "build-in furniture†or floors at various levels is among the fantastic yet smooth options.
Now this can be a challenge for some architects, but guided and working together with CAD experienced designers, this open for a brand new architecture where in future the feel and understanding of the 3D digital environment will produce wonders. It will produce the strong "new Lego-block", the new production line and a new architecture, but please understand, that I am just the designer I am not the architect to shape these wonders, but the designer who create the tools that make this possible.
My role as artist and designer have been to spend 12 years, to offer the world this new opportunity. This have been a continuous development on top my education in traditional crafts, my years at the architect academy in Copenhagen and in particular, the projects I worked at the States workshops for Arts and Crafts in Copenhagen and during all this time, listening to the wishes and demands of visionary architects, of furniture designers, many different designers and architects all with their perception of the new digital options, demands that I refined into a new tool, a tool that must be so different, that when uncovered, though seems so easy when you know it, still requires an innovative approach.
Remember that this is also just a framework, for further development, keep in mind that this is the basic idea, what I show must be simple as the whole attitude are so different from the traditional structural thinking, still, it reveals a relevant answer, a direct link from projecting to producing the individual building element and it does not fight, but shape itself under the demands of other building components, - the standard window frames will not ask altering, you can place a traditional huge steel profile in the center of the structure, it will just shape around and even lock the profile in place. When you place the engine in the engine room, the foundations will shape exactly around the engine foundations, when you add a tank the framework shape around and support it, this framework work in maxi and micro size it work with many other structures than just those of buildings, the limitations are only in your mind and the manufacturing is digitally controlled.
You must understand that it must be my attitude; even I agree that I would like to use my knowledge and feel about these new options to shape and form, but to be the designer have already been a huge task, to listen and develop to take apart the 3D computer meshes, and figure out what they were missing. If this could be compensated, a completely new attitude was the only true vision. I find my critic about the early polygon mesh structures well described, to offer the architect and designers a relevant tool, you must ensure that this must generate the structure, and not just produce a thin shell moving the trouble to the engineer, to make everything except the outer shell the responsibility of the engineer, but to make sure that the production will be as efficient as what the digital projecting promises. My critic and attitude is about that it requires a new approach not just a re-write of the old method, those even used before the computer - even these offers a more reliable account. My claim is that 3D projecting must be more than an account with on-screen symbols or small isometric drawings, referring the inserted block, but that calculating and volumes must be available, and possible in the basic 3D drawing - But mainly my approach is, that the digital opportunity in production, requires a new architecture a new vision about the build works, the projecting and the way we envision the enormous changes in perception and production.
There are a few practical things to consider; CNC controlled cutters are not just restricted to the work plane, you can move the work plane, recalibrate and this way expand the work plane as you wish, beside this don't mean that a frame have to be cut in one piece, you can easily place the frame contours on a standard size plate in a CAD system on a screen, joining several pieces together can be done, in the drawing on top a grid of standard sheets, making you prepare assembly of these, making you place calibration points to be made with the cutter - not only do you at the same time as cutting the frame in shape cut holes for whatever fittings the frame must carry, you can at the same time prepare for several sheets to form one frame. Now some of these issues are just standard CAD work for some, but it is often asked questions.
This is a new architecture, a new perception and a very different structural approach in engineering the structure engineering, you will find structures that at first view, can show similarity, but remember that this is a structural concept, no single part ever bends to shape the framework, they do in other structures still these are not 3D-H Every piece are cut from sheet materials and if any piece are forced in shape or bend, then this is no 3D-Honeycomb structure - the concept was developed 12 years ago where I was first authorized application developer with the AutoCAD platform. The method and description have been published in public architect contests, most important at a contest about IT and architecture the digital options in the building industries in Denmark year 2000.
Further developed at the Danish States workshops for Arts and Crafts for furniture design, but originally developed as a method to produce a framework for ships and boats; in this application as a tool to profit naval design, as a mean to generate the structure for any shape you can shape a craft ,by Math.or traditional skills, at that point FAA, the Federal Aviation Agency, suggest the method as: "an attractive method to build small commercial aero planes", but beside this and the obvious use in general building construction, the method works in so many other applications.
The fact that the framework itself replace multiple special fittings if you would build with tradisional methods and you avoid the weak spots describe the method as innovative and make an ansver for the call of further digital controlled manufactoring and efficiency , the ability to form around and carry loads, the flexibility in combining different scale structures and the enormous freedom in designing, and the new architecture, the method point to will together with the many further developments, ease the breakthrough of the method. In near future you will se how this new approach will shape wonders, as Innovation is a must Efficiency come as a side effect.
This method was developed by the Danish designer Per Corell.
This is 3D-H in Cninese.
A full article 5000 word translated into chinese and printed in a chinese architecture/engineering magazin. 10 full pages 5 pictures english and chinese text.
Well this happy announcement obviously wasn't made for you driftwood, --- in fact others say CONGRATULATION , you don't and instead of realising that 3D-H now entered China with an article in both english and chinese, you add a saur reply ; no Congratulation from you it seem .
In fact the two pictures --- one of a cheap easy build structure and one of a much more complex 3D-H structure, display just nice with the Chinese writing .
per is back, and he's reincarnated himself as.....you guessed it, an equally unintelligible preacher of all things 3D-H. Yikes. And just when I thought this thread was dead....
Hi
Yes I spend a lot of time Congratuelating ,yself for that winn to have a 5000 word description, of a digital direct-link method published in english and Chinese.
Beside I find the article well displayed , it's just so sweet to see your name in Chinese ;))
You Romans forget how much design compare material , that there are no other way than the old rigid , when a 3D device deliver a toy fighter jet " made exactly as in real" they acturly deliver a plastic toy model not a cheap safe new home.
You Romans forget that the world _can_ be the opposite of what you pray ; a place with nice new jobs and a new architecture ; go read it in Chinese , mail me the spell foults no, Per Corell is not "Back" , maby he just started .
A few CONGRATULATIONS would be nice , If you Romans is not tho give them why shuld I care. Continue build your houses with strait edges, keep em away from the digital thin,
Chinese maby are more open minded than Romans.
and the romans were some of the most innovative builders
in history...
perchance you'd prefer to say 'ludites' or something
of that nature...'ostriches' maybe.
in 12 pages has there been any explanation as to how this is
a) cheaper?
b) easier to build? (i mean how does a duct run through
honeycomb? seems as though as soon as you do that the
structure loses its strength.)
c) not a more expensive version of geodesic dome technology
that's been around for decades?
This link describe the method it's attitude and also tell a lot today's projecting tools , I think these words explain the method so you understand, that it is not the useal profiles and timbers but a fact new perception of the structure, --- side effects like develobment of possible cheap green building materials, the fact this offer a better entrance to the new digital tools, how this is just the basic idea.
3D-H do not get rid of gravaty where do you pick that obscure argument ??
Just like all other structures forces like gravity vertical or horisontal forces, are distributaded even better, thru a 3D-H structure, even better than how it is done in tradisional buildings where some building parts are there just to carry others , nothing like this with 3D-H ---
Realy larslarson where do you pick wierd "arguments" like that one ,where you out of I don't know where , ask as _if_ 3D-H have a problem with gravity ; have you even read the link ;
1. your honeycomb pretty much requires that all members remain
basically in tact in order to carry loads. in order to run ductwork
through your structure you'll most likely have to remove part of
your honeycomb...it doesn't appear as though it would be at all
easy to run any kind of system through your structure since there
is no clear, continuous pathway for these systems to run through.
2. this system being called 'cheap' is a complete misnomer.
your models seem to show a structure that would most likely use
at least double the amount of material that traditional structures
would use. on top of that it seems as though there are many more
connections than a normal structure so that labor would be far
more intensive and therefore far more expensive than the normal
structure. plus your fantasies show no cladding system which would
have to be more expensive or invented...
basically i look at your models and read what you say and see what
everyone else sees here...a system that could be interesting, but in
no way matches the advantages and benefits that you claim it does.
i'd take this a bit more seriously if you'd show just one construction
detail..for instance how these magic honecomb members are
attached at their intersections...how they're clad...how the whole
system is waterproofed...how a window is inserted easily...a door...
anything that made this construction typology seem more real
and viable...heck we could start with a scale figure so that we can
all understand how thick these members are..
now i'll run this through babbelfish into danish and back into english
so that it'll make more/less sense.
I think there allready are a war between the old and the new. But one great side effect with 3D-H is that it offer you to make more use of the computer and in a different way, beside it promote develobment of new materials ,materials that then is plain sheet material and not 200 different building parts, all asking their own production line.
But 3D-H work well even holding tradisional building elements, such as windows , doors or intire walls of other types of building elements --- 3D-H will just form arounnd, exactly as how you project the final result, and bring a number of assembly frames, 3D-H work perfect with tradisional building compoments , you can even lock a number of frames close into the structure, --- anyway it work different than today's projecting tools it work better with computers .-- What I think is a great disadvanteage of the tradisional architect applications is, that somehow the agenda is, that if you can just describe the building in rows and collums and numbers then you can make great architecture. The great advanteage of 3D-H is that it acturly calculate each and every building frame and allow full hands on control . I would think that this is just the start of it that 3D-H is just showing the way, that it's on time that digital provide the cheap houses and new jobs, I see no reson fighting anything new, esp. not with thought arguments that never are relevant .
No one can blame me promoting a method that bring cheap new houses and a solution to the calls you see ,for new safe cheap houses all over the world. Some of you think such concept are just envisioned in a glimpse and that it don't take atleast 12 years to make, --- wonder "who" is irasional and unrealistic here ?
Hi larslarson go read the papers all your arguments are taken care of there. Anyway look at what you write here, even I carefully in the papers tell how ;
". your honeycomb pretty much requires that all members remain
basically in tact in order to carry loads. in order to run ductwork
through your structure you'll most likely have to remove part of
your honeycomb...it doesn't appear as though it would be at all
easy to run any kind of system through your structure since there
is no clear, continuous pathway for these systems to run through"
No you did not read the description, even it clearly explain how, you try put words in my mouth without even reading what you complain.
Then you write ;
"It clearly print in the description that you obviously _did not_ read before this sili argument , that to do that pipeworks you prepare the way you from start subtract for instance , a long cylinder or a long box, from the basic solid model -- so when frames are cut, leadway's are cut in the sheets, at same instance their other shape are cut.
---------- You seem to invent arguments ,now I want to se how you react when I explain that problem _is_ solved, the free spaces for wirering and tubes ARE made , and I tell how in the papers
"'d take this a bit more seriously if you'd show just one construction
detail..for instance how these magic honecomb members are
attached at their intersections...how they're clad...how the whole
system is waterproofed...how a window is inserted easily...a door...
anything that made this construction typology seem more real
and viable...heck we could start with a scale figure so that we can
all understand how thick these members are.."
Yes I know it is difficult, guess this is the reson I spended 3 years at the architect school, made 3 profesional projects and ontop spended 12 years to develob it. Anyway it also seem that you did not read how I carefully explained what a epecial designed universal fitting could build into a 3D-H framework, how a huge steel ship are a very tight structure with many cubes and allway's a tight weld , but where buildings can profit from the right assembly fitting, in such a way that you can emagine much more earthquake safe or totaly earthquake safe houses , that's just up the bright one who can invent such ideal assembly fitting.
how is this cheaper. just because it is cut from one source
material that doesn not equate it being cheaper. just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses...
simply repeating the same arguments and providing the same
links to your manifesto does not make things any more clear,
or you any more correct.
how is this cheaper. just because it is cut from one source
material that doesn not equate it being cheaper. just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses..."
Well it is only one material , the simplest you can emagine and that make a choice of materials ; the special cromed-gold fitting don't offer this ,and is maby dependend of 500 various lines of production, each requiring a multible --- here there are one material forming a structure the way it work, so it replace much more expensive building compoments.
"simply repeating the same arguments and providing the same
links to your manifesto does not make things any more clear,
or you any more correct."
Maby if you acturly read the words and looked at the graphics and realised, that this is about cheap buildings and a promising new method not, fame.
"you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses..."
Listen I don't know where this went wrong, but I have ansvered your questions and proven my thing right, why do you then keep argue when you havn't even seen the pictures and wanted the great new jobs the splendid new houses. ---- you write ;
just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
WHAT ---- "you can't make things cheaper just becaurse you now can use a computer for it" do you realy claim this, that by porpus it is nono good if a computer is used for it ?
Tell me what the "new" thing is, in rewriting the old way's into fast computer code, just where do it get more beautifull becaurse of that.
I kind-a admire Per's enthusiasm. I think he is just trying to force feed us his work (he better never pull that stunt of images in the titles again).
I'm not entirely sure if this is a game, the grammar and spelling mistakes seem like they are purposely done. Im sure that even in Danish people know how to use comas and periods.
Anyway, Im not sure if you are saving the world with your stuff, learn when and where to display it. Do your work and let it speak for itself.
Driftwood --- as long as this is about nice ,cheap new houses and a new architecture this will not start a new war, there are one there allready between old and new, then think about how long time it have been, since something realy happened within architecture ( realy I mean this) , and how close you are to it ,and then how do you tread that.
Hi
+q the strange thing is that just issues like this, is not like how you tradisionaly are critic to whatever they try navigate you, --- in arts it is so that there are naive persons, that when they discover a new way , then offcaurse all manking must be told. --- there are no second agenda, and that even make some paranoid, as "what" is the thought "behind" just giving so fantastic things away".
Still that is the way it is, I have no second thoughts, Iam not trying to fool you it is all in your emagination if you think so.
+q understand that there once was real artists, people who realy could feel something for beauty. For me 3D-H was just a tool I had to unvent to make specific designs, why shuld a new method be anything else ----- if it was to project the spetacular splendidness of emty metal boxes would it then be better now where it instead offer safe cheap houses and a fact new perception of the build works.
Hi all you fancy graphics lovers
It is such hardware that was used to display this , the Episkop part of the projector ;
Early Pop Art.
Sorry but the previous foto of the Epidiaskop did not fir the page, here you see both lenses ; the 400 millimeter Leitz Epis 1:4 for projecting slides and the 800 millimeter Leitz Epis 1:3.5 lenses .
Need two to just carry it being the top lenses in the serie I guess this could be the, if not one of the few ,surving Epidiaskop's , ---- now a combine of mastering the tools and having a vision with it, could produce wonders with such monument.
this thread lost something after 1000. time to call it done.
maybe beta, but it looks like per now has some students posting 3dh inspired work in the student image section. the dog is a great touch, i wonder how it relates to this though...
[img]http://www.archinect.com/gallery/albums/userpics/normal_Free%20form%20001.jpg[img]
sorry
now those are fancy graphics, and in my opinion would've been great for that t-shirt competition.
speaking of T-shirt competition, what happened!? Was a winner ever ever announced?
oh, just a pointless thought...i used to have a t-shirt with a picture of an unfriendly character from the 70's wearing a t-shirt that read "detroit sucks"...it was my favorite t-shirt; i wish i could buy a t-shirt with per wearing the architecture sucks t-shirt....
apparently, it was lester bangs, rock critic, wearing the detroit sucks t-shirt...
the t-shirt competition has been hijacked by the man. i currently working underground to make some copies of my own design which apparently nobody liked
and the though of per in an "architecture sucks" shirt has made my day...thank you, simples
Aaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!!!
bump
Hi
I add a detail description of the 3D-H method
----------------------------------
When Innovation is a must Efficiency come as a side effect.
In the continuous process refining the building process, design is today only partly profiting, the efficiency we must add, soon face serious barriers, it is not so easy to transcribe the methods from before the computer into fast code, without at some point realizing, that to do that “seven mile jumpâ€, it really matter that you know the crafts, and you know the progressive new methods are the only right answer to the call for new efficient design, you’ll know what I mean, when you see it; this is new, different, and unique. These qualities make it a vision, more than just refining the old methods.
There will be no greater answer to efficiency, than when a new, unique method, question the old methods, pointing to the fact that too often, software is just the old methods rewritten into fast computer code.
The new technology made to support old techniques, instead of the obvious innovation that must go into it to make the real change, the new architecture, the new techniques. The real progress start in the details, it must be carried by a true feel and true innovation, because today’s production must be more efficient, there’s a need for true new visions, something really different something that will build the house, at a third the cost, four times as strong, furthermore it should progress a new technology, and develop new techniques, opening the world of opportunities in a completely new way, same old methods can be further refined into a whole new lead. The best measures for this in architecture are beauty and innovation. The vision is the proof.
For that purpose I developed 3D-Honeycomb: A new exiting building method, a system that is simple and at the same time, involves the entire design process, it makes a direct link from 3D drawing to the CNC cutter. That produces the individual construction part in a complex but very logical new building method. The best designs - the most beautiful things, are made in a process where the artist have hands-on as much as possible. The most efficient designs are those based on a simple production line with as few materials as possible and the process is CNC controlled. Projected and made in a direct link from plans to manufacturing.
Now, this 3D-H method explains many of these issues, even the idea and method, is still at experimental state. Several attempts been made to prove the method and several structures is already projected just from the graphics you will recognize, when shown displaying the new architecture. What you project with the 3D-H concept, is a computer generated structure, sort of a woven structure consisting of sheet materials, cut to form an assembly structure, where each frame are supported by all other frames in the structure. The design process for such 3D-Honeycomb structure is quite simple, it involves a CAD program, and a simple CNC controlled laser or water cutter. But first I must explain why most architect applications in this genre, ended in sort of a dead end, and what could be wrong with the traditional attitude consisting of projecting the old 2D way, compared to the obvious gains of real Direct-Link 3D projecting - how 2D projecting simply is another world than, a Direct-Link production opportunity. Staying with the traditional BOM is the attitude, which makes an architect application into just doing things, as they always have been done, just rewritten into computer code. When projecting a modern building structure, you work with many different materials but as we saw with the WTC collapse was, that all structures have a weak point. With the twin towers that weak spot was the hangers and girders that gave away in the fires. Then to learn from the this you can take different stands - you can further refine and secure those parts of a building, if you want to build again like this, or you can develop a method that simply do not carry hangers and girders. This is the attitude of 3D-H. An attitude that makes it possible to make the foundations for floors, and internal walls in a way that replace 20 different steel profiles, special fittings, and other building parts with a assembly structure cut from the simplest material, just sheet materials. On top you now work directly with a true 3D model of the lattice or rather framework.
You now work directly with the actual structural model, and then you can combine it with the traditional projecting systems; the basic 3D model is now what carry the actual CNC codes.
The individual building frames as you can see in the 3D drawing, is now real construction parts, with the correct coordinates, cut directly out of the information in the 3D model drawing. What is surprising is when floors, and walls magically appear while assembling the structure, from the ready cut frames; with this method the WTC for example wouldn’t have been supported by these hangers, beams and girders, while the sections are cut from other planes, crossing perhaps multiple floors, walls, and so on. the individual frames will redefine a structure acting, against forces, like wind, weakened points, all parts supporting each other, instead of some beams holding a floor, and others the walls, the whole building can now be one unit, consisting of all these assembled parts.
All in one piece with no knees or weak points, on their way crossing other frames and in that way being carried and acting as structural support for other frames that transverse the structure.
Now projecting such structure, you work with a simple 3D CAD system that support Solid modeling. You form and shape the building, as solids and give the walls and floors, the actual projected thickness, but not with the goal to end with an architectural rendering or just floor plans, the result is not just to display or sell the project, no, you work in detail and use the Solid modeling to actually shape the walls and floors, the basic structure in detail. The reason is, that the solid model when showing the thickness of the walls and floors, the inner walls and even stairway's and elevator shafts, are used to calculate the sections for the real framework assembly this done by simply sectioning, but sectioning from two new planes, 90 deg to each other but independent compared to the traditional 3 construction planes. This is a very different attitude from just using the solid model for a walkthrough, using the digital options just to create nice renderings.
After processing the new sections, being the frames, the basic structure, the actual framework is now the 3D model where each section can go strait from 3D drawing, to the manufacturing machines. You can say that this expand the Lego way of thinking, but where the traditional blocks are equal of fit in a grid, there now are a grid with all different blocks, that fit together by being processed from same solid model. You could call it a more flexible "Lego construction" where each block shape to form the framework, shaping the model/structures final shape and at the same time, interlocking every frame at each cross point, distributing the forces to all sections, Leading the forces down any frame, which now supports its own weight, carries the forces by traditional vertical shape due to gravity etc., each frame distributes the forces by the entire framework. The framework do not consist of 20 different profiles and special fittings, each requiring their own production line, but one simple material cut to form and replace these parts, in plain sheet material, the individual section is accurately measured and its position in the building numbered exactly, the structure’s now, not just vertical and horizontal frames, but form a honeycomb structure, a structure where forces are equally distributed, and each frame can be directly manufactured to support any other section you want to add the structure.
Necessaries like water pipes, power grid, and so on, also requires a new point of view - you now have a nice side effect to profit of, this unique 3D modeling method allows, that for example simply subtract a long cylinder or Solid box from the Solid model, where you want to place water pipes or wires, and when frames are cut, you will see leading ways for cables and pipes, cut out in the frames at same instance as the frames form are cut.
The author of this paper, are fully aware that this is a great challenge, but this new method not only promise a stronger and cheaper structure, one that invoke a new technology, this is simply a new tool, from simple rules both draw out each building frame, and offer the designer visual real-time modeling, the method will produce a much stronger basic structure, and amongst other attractive side effects, the method learns the designer/architect to use the computer in a way that show a result instantly on the screen, a model that allow a much better detail projecting and a better entrance to the modern technology.
Efficiency then come in new ways, you don't need 20 different production lines one for each standard profile or special fitting, as these profiles and fittings are replaced with a building framework, made from plain sheet steel or other sheet materials by your choice - this point to development of even green new materials. You already have the CNC flame cutters, water and laser cutters, but realize that these work in the traditional techniques, The only minor challenge now, is getting these machines to produce 3D-Honeycomb frame assembly, which is very easy to fit together, because shaping/cutting plain material have been done, for many years now, by CNC machines.
An innovation is often not just a new perception, but also the means. As 3D-H is a structural method you can ask why it have not been tried before the answer is simply, that the calculations are to complicated, to being efficiently done "by hand", no one would try make the calculations from the traditional front, side and top plans of a traditional construction drawing, the outcome would, with traditional projecting have a doubtful outcome, as the traditional plans do not carry the Direct-Link opportunity, which is offered with modern CAD/CAM systems, it simply would be irrational to try project a 3D-H structure before the computer, as the calculation of the sections that make a 3D-H would be so complicated and numerous, that an engineer would turn to the traditional construction planes, and produce the sections from these in the traditional way.
Now a 3D-H structure is sections on two construction planes in 3D, two planes that meet differs at 90 deg. From each other but none of them follow any of the traditional planes. How this little trick can mean so much, which it revolutionizes the construction and architecture is better seen in the graphics, but the way efficiency profit, must be explained by the attitude of the method, is the Direct-Link method, the method that links together the computer drawing, and the CNC manufacturing machine.
As you now, don't have 20 different lines of production for the various profiles and fittings, but can focus on calculating the right dimensions for the framework, and focus on constructing the right assembly slot fitting.
When you look in detail at this framework, you would think that the rigid overlap, where two frames meet could be a cause of trouble - now please remember that in huge steel structures like ship hulls, you also have a sort of honeycomb structure, and there a tight weld are obvious, but with a framework structure for a building, there would be several reasons to add standard fittings, allowing the ability for the structure to damp minor vibrations and forces within certain amounts, maybe even make the basic structure more or completely earthquake safe.
--
Adding such assembly slot fittings, also profit the efficiency while building up the framework, as in hands-on works, to avoid too much “stiffness†in the structure, fittings can be inserted at the points the frames are assembled, a standard fitting will in this case solve several purposes.
--
In this application it is also very simple to ensure that the frame that is cut, will hold this fitting, as when at each cross point in the framework, the 3D model of the fittings are subtracted from the frames, you will see that material are cut away, to make room for the fitting, and even holes for bolts or rivets will be made, while the shape of each frame are cut.
Efficiency in terms of manufacturing is not the whole issue, you also must consider that this method offer a brand new perception of the structure. That detail projecting will profit when floors and walls appears suddenly, and projecting will be expanded with 3D tools, that ensure that the measures hold, and when you question the method, consider how the traditional methods have been refined and developed throughout centuries, before the capacity computers and software offered, running a system like this would be unthinkable. - Now every entity in a 3D computer drawing, already contain enough information to show the object on the screen, and when this information is enough to feed the manufacturing machine, the CNC flame, laser cutter, the water cutter or pouching machine, this put the traditional architect application in a new light, - the "block" is already there as a 3D entity, that, in the basic CAD program will make the link to the production, now each part is not described by the information added the block insert, the production machine do not need any additional information, but the information you will add can still be contained the 3D drawing. Each frame numbered, calculated for weight mass and geometric information can even produce holes for attaching the wires, transporting the frame, its place in the structure and "number" can still be added the entity name, and the information yielded when you point to the entity, the frame. Still try to compare this with the approach you see in most architectural renderings - this make both the renderings and the detailed structure assembly, not just the pictures, it make the foundations for floors and walls, the 3D model follow the building process, from start to finish but it represent a new architecture, and a new perception. Which doesn’t hide its structural appearance, one that create a new architectural vision.
In terms of computer skills, what I suggest with this method is to add a new dimension, while the program keep on an accurate account, just by the drawing database the architect can freely shape a geometric, or organic shaped building, the rooms within a rounded building can be kept square, it is a return to qualities in architecture that was almost forgotten, the difficulty combining the architects and the engineers skills, now is eased by offering solutions to structural challenges, in a way that carry it's own form language, a method that more smooth will make the visions true with a structure you don't need to hide as it carry it's own structural beauty. A structure you know will not be possible to draw in 3D unless it can be made in real, opposed to the 2D projecting that make no guarantee that the architects vision can be made in 3D.
In fact you don't need to take one single measure with 3D-H, you draw 3D one-to-one and the production machine cut the frames one to one - no centimeters no Inches or feet, this is a complete new world and a new architecture that work with computers, without being the old methods re-written into computer code, but you can still make each frame into a block and project the structure from a traditional architect application, this way you can store calculated values and properties in attributes within each frame block.
Still this is technology on the technology's own terms, making new techniques, creating a curved building not by fighting rigid steel profiles that never was made to be curved, just adding cost and waste of effort, curves are simply shaping the original solid model to generate simple cut frames with a different attitude than how you traditionally change the materials to meet your demands, not one single frame in a 3D-H need to be bended to form a rounded structure, you cut flat sheets you don't bend anything.
If you want to project a house, is not very efficient first to build an outer shell, and to get the floors and walls, then build another house inside - the first computer mesh structures was a fight to make use of the traditional steel rods and profiles, the polygon meshes 20 years ago was made from straight lines, but when the workers translated the drawings into the real thing, the straight lines went curved and from that point, you couldn’t even unfold any huge surface to cover the rods and stringers. 3D-H requires no "translation" from sketch to manufactured building frame, you do not build a house inside a shell to get the floors and walls, you don't build two houses when you want to build one, the whole basic structure is there, with floors and walls and you can continue the detail projecting from each well defined space, - measures will hold. So this is a method that answered the challenge, and delivered the missing structure of the early computer mesh structures, it is not just a thin shell that need to be formed with available rods and stringers, even if you form a completely round structure, you never bend any of the structure.
For many architects it is a natural attitude, to envision the spaces and forms, but it has always been a problem to communicate this, and very often the tool for this have been the architects sketches, the architect being more artistic minded and the engineer being the technically minded who must translate the vision, in this way they shared a very limited "language" as the sketches and details can be a great challenge, while the architect tend to envision the great scene where the engineer must make the scene work in detail and in systems.
While more architects with the CAD options possess a greater hands-on opportunity to form and shape out environments.
The computer, digitizer and keyboard do not always fit smooth in the hands of the architects, this was obvious to me, to focus on the main issue, the structure the wish to form and shape with no thought of the structure as you see how the early computer meshes sketched.
To answer the demand - my own and other designers demands, for a relevant tool that ensure the structures integrity that also leave room for structural beauty, was to make sure that when the designer point to a certain form, that there also will be a reliable structure underneath, that this should be generated by the program or method, which should not be a trouble for the architect but a challenge, when the architect understand the concept and see the nice side effects of this method understand the form language.
Understand the side effects as the options to add spaces, and frameworks in other scale or materials, the incredible new form language and ways to develop a new exiting tool that brings exactly the spaces you imagine, as soon you understand the method and how easy it shape both geometric and organic forms, not just as the outside expression but also the internal attitude.
With 3D-Honeycomb you are as near to what many architects would wish; you can form the solids as clay on the screen and besides that the "clay" will hold it's form on the screen, and not collapse under it's weight in reality, you can shape and hollow, knowing that the mass will be replaced with a reliable framework showing the exact form and internal spaces, the ideal tool for shaping not just the organic forms but will add spaces for more trivial items, such as water pipes and electrics, foundations that fit exactly to heavy loads, just any angle wall, just any window frame will melt into the framework.
The standard window or the specially designed window-wall will just subtract it's shape into the framework and be locked into the structure that will fit around, and support as you plan it to, even the foundations for stairs or "build-in furniture†or floors at various levels is among the fantastic yet smooth options.
Now this can be a challenge for some architects, but guided and working together with CAD experienced designers, this open for a brand new architecture where in future the feel and understanding of the 3D digital environment will produce wonders. It will produce the strong "new Lego-block", the new production line and a new architecture, but please understand, that I am just the designer I am not the architect to shape these wonders, but the designer who create the tools that make this possible.
My role as artist and designer have been to spend 12 years, to offer the world this new opportunity. This have been a continuous development on top my education in traditional crafts, my years at the architect academy in Copenhagen and in particular, the projects I worked at the States workshops for Arts and Crafts in Copenhagen and during all this time, listening to the wishes and demands of visionary architects, of furniture designers, many different designers and architects all with their perception of the new digital options, demands that I refined into a new tool, a tool that must be so different, that when uncovered, though seems so easy when you know it, still requires an innovative approach.
Remember that this is also just a framework, for further development, keep in mind that this is the basic idea, what I show must be simple as the whole attitude are so different from the traditional structural thinking, still, it reveals a relevant answer, a direct link from projecting to producing the individual building element and it does not fight, but shape itself under the demands of other building components, - the standard window frames will not ask altering, you can place a traditional huge steel profile in the center of the structure, it will just shape around and even lock the profile in place. When you place the engine in the engine room, the foundations will shape exactly around the engine foundations, when you add a tank the framework shape around and support it, this framework work in maxi and micro size it work with many other structures than just those of buildings, the limitations are only in your mind and the manufacturing is digitally controlled.
You must understand that it must be my attitude; even I agree that I would like to use my knowledge and feel about these new options to shape and form, but to be the designer have already been a huge task, to listen and develop to take apart the 3D computer meshes, and figure out what they were missing. If this could be compensated, a completely new attitude was the only true vision. I find my critic about the early polygon mesh structures well described, to offer the architect and designers a relevant tool, you must ensure that this must generate the structure, and not just produce a thin shell moving the trouble to the engineer, to make everything except the outer shell the responsibility of the engineer, but to make sure that the production will be as efficient as what the digital projecting promises. My critic and attitude is about that it requires a new approach not just a re-write of the old method, those even used before the computer - even these offers a more reliable account. My claim is that 3D projecting must be more than an account with on-screen symbols or small isometric drawings, referring the inserted block, but that calculating and volumes must be available, and possible in the basic 3D drawing - But mainly my approach is, that the digital opportunity in production, requires a new architecture a new vision about the build works, the projecting and the way we envision the enormous changes in perception and production.
There are a few practical things to consider; CNC controlled cutters are not just restricted to the work plane, you can move the work plane, recalibrate and this way expand the work plane as you wish, beside this don't mean that a frame have to be cut in one piece, you can easily place the frame contours on a standard size plate in a CAD system on a screen, joining several pieces together can be done, in the drawing on top a grid of standard sheets, making you prepare assembly of these, making you place calibration points to be made with the cutter - not only do you at the same time as cutting the frame in shape cut holes for whatever fittings the frame must carry, you can at the same time prepare for several sheets to form one frame. Now some of these issues are just standard CAD work for some, but it is often asked questions.
This is a new architecture, a new perception and a very different structural approach in engineering the structure engineering, you will find structures that at first view, can show similarity, but remember that this is a structural concept, no single part ever bends to shape the framework, they do in other structures still these are not 3D-H Every piece are cut from sheet materials and if any piece are forced in shape or bend, then this is no 3D-Honeycomb structure - the concept was developed 12 years ago where I was first authorized application developer with the AutoCAD platform. The method and description have been published in public architect contests, most important at a contest about IT and architecture the digital options in the building industries in Denmark year 2000.
Further developed at the Danish States workshops for Arts and Crafts for furniture design, but originally developed as a method to produce a framework for ships and boats; in this application as a tool to profit naval design, as a mean to generate the structure for any shape you can shape a craft ,by Math.or traditional skills, at that point FAA, the Federal Aviation Agency, suggest the method as: "an attractive method to build small commercial aero planes", but beside this and the obvious use in general building construction, the method works in so many other applications.
The fact that the framework itself replace multiple special fittings if you would build with tradisional methods and you avoid the weak spots describe the method as innovative and make an ansver for the call of further digital controlled manufactoring and efficiency , the ability to form around and carry loads, the flexibility in combining different scale structures and the enormous freedom in designing, and the new architecture, the method point to will together with the many further developments, ease the breakthrough of the method. In near future you will se how this new approach will shape wonders, as Innovation is a must Efficiency come as a side effect.
This method was developed by the Danish designer Per Corell.
Best regards
Per Corell
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
More explanation please - that looks familiar - everything old is new again.
um, what exactly am i looking at?
are you giving us a hint?
Hi
This is 3D-H in Cninese.
A full article 5000 word translated into chinese and printed in a chinese architecture/engineering magazin. 10 full pages 5 pictures english and chinese text.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
Holy crap, I just realized I've got so many other way more important things to be doing.
Thanks for helping me realize this thread is still a waste of my time!
Well this happy announcement obviously wasn't made for you driftwood, --- in fact others say CONGRATULATION , you don't and instead of realising that 3D-H now entered China with an article in both english and chinese, you add a saur reply ; no Congratulation from you it seem .
In fact the two pictures --- one of a cheap easy build structure and one of a much more complex 3D-H structure, display just nice with the Chinese writing .
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
wtf? per is back. ughhhhhhhhhhhh
you know what, it seems easier to understand in Chinese.
i agree with beta and i think if ever, thats where per will get his big break.
per is back, and he's reincarnated himself as.....you guessed it, an equally unintelligible preacher of all things 3D-H. Yikes. And just when I thought this thread was dead....
per might not be popular in america, but he's huge in china.
Hi
Yes I spend a lot of time Congratuelating ,yself for that winn to have a 5000 word description, of a digital direct-link method published in english and Chinese.
Beside I find the article well displayed , it's just so sweet to see your name in Chinese ;))
You Romans forget how much design compare material , that there are no other way than the old rigid , when a 3D device deliver a toy fighter jet " made exactly as in real" they acturly deliver a plastic toy model not a cheap safe new home.
You Romans forget that the world _can_ be the opposite of what you pray ; a place with nice new jobs and a new architecture ; go read it in Chinese , mail me the spell foults no, Per Corell is not "Back" , maby he just started .
A few CONGRATULATIONS would be nice , If you Romans is not tho give them why shuld I care. Continue build your houses with strait edges, keep em away from the digital thin,
Chinese maby are more open minded than Romans.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
now we have you congratulating yourself in english and chinese.
嗨.
是的我花费很多时间 Congratuelating，让 5000 用言语表达描述的用于那 winn 的 yself，一种数字直接联系的方法中在英语和中国人中出版。
旁边我发现好地被显示的文章，它正是如此是甜的看你的在中国人中的名字；))
你古罗马人忘记多少设计比较材料，没有其他方式较之老人严格，当一个 3D 设备给予“被使变得一丝不差的â€一架玩具喷气式歼击机的时候“如在真â€他们 acturly 接生一个塑料的玩具模特不是一个廉价安全新的家。
你古罗马人忘记那世界 _can_ 是你请求的对立面；带好新的工作和一种新的建筑的一个地方；去读在中国人方面的它，邮件我一段时间的 foults 没有，每 Corell“回â€不是他刚刚开始的 maby。
一些祝贺会好，如果你古罗马人不是对面的给他们为什么 shuld 我操心。继续跟海峡一起造房缓缓移动，继续使离开数字变稀疏，
中国 maby 是比古罗马人更虚心的。
and the romans were some of the most innovative builders
in history...
perchance you'd prefer to say 'ludites' or something
of that nature...'ostriches' maybe.
in 12 pages has there been any explanation as to how this is
a) cheaper?
b) easier to build? (i mean how does a duct run through
honeycomb? seems as though as soon as you do that the
structure loses its strength.)
c) not a more expensive version of geodesic dome technology
that's been around for decades?
Hi
This link describe the method it's attitude and also tell a lot today's projecting tools , I think these words explain the method so you understand, that it is not the useal profiles and timbers but a fact new perception of the structure, --- side effects like develobment of possible cheap green building materials, the fact this offer a better entrance to the new digital tools, how this is just the basic idea.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
so i guess the answer is no.
how does 3DH get rid of gravity?
3D-H do not get rid of gravaty where do you pick that obscure argument ??
Just like all other structures forces like gravity vertical or horisontal forces, are distributaded even better, thru a 3D-H structure, even better than how it is done in tradisional buildings where some building parts are there just to carry others , nothing like this with 3D-H ---
Realy larslarson where do you pick wierd "arguments" like that one ,where you out of I don't know where , ask as _if_ 3D-H have a problem with gravity ; have you even read the link ;
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
I don't think so.
Have you even looked at the cheap ,easy build structure at the far right in this graphic ?
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
i wonder what the Dear Leader has to say about all of this. so help me Per if your being published starts WWIII, i will give you such a pinch!
ok per
i wish i spoke danish...
1. your honeycomb pretty much requires that all members remain
basically in tact in order to carry loads. in order to run ductwork
through your structure you'll most likely have to remove part of
your honeycomb...it doesn't appear as though it would be at all
easy to run any kind of system through your structure since there
is no clear, continuous pathway for these systems to run through.
2. this system being called 'cheap' is a complete misnomer.
your models seem to show a structure that would most likely use
at least double the amount of material that traditional structures
would use. on top of that it seems as though there are many more
connections than a normal structure so that labor would be far
more intensive and therefore far more expensive than the normal
structure. plus your fantasies show no cladding system which would
have to be more expensive or invented...
basically i look at your models and read what you say and see what
everyone else sees here...a system that could be interesting, but in
no way matches the advantages and benefits that you claim it does.
i'd take this a bit more seriously if you'd show just one construction
detail..for instance how these magic honecomb members are
attached at their intersections...how they're clad...how the whole
system is waterproofed...how a window is inserted easily...a door...
anything that made this construction typology seem more real
and viable...heck we could start with a scale figure so that we can
all understand how thick these members are..
now i'll run this through babbelfish into danish and back into english
so that it'll make more/less sense.
Hi
I think there allready are a war between the old and the new. But one great side effect with 3D-H is that it offer you to make more use of the computer and in a different way, beside it promote develobment of new materials ,materials that then is plain sheet material and not 200 different building parts, all asking their own production line.
But 3D-H work well even holding tradisional building elements, such as windows , doors or intire walls of other types of building elements --- 3D-H will just form arounnd, exactly as how you project the final result, and bring a number of assembly frames, 3D-H work perfect with tradisional building compoments , you can even lock a number of frames close into the structure, --- anyway it work different than today's projecting tools it work better with computers .-- What I think is a great disadvanteage of the tradisional architect applications is, that somehow the agenda is, that if you can just describe the building in rows and collums and numbers then you can make great architecture. The great advanteage of 3D-H is that it acturly calculate each and every building frame and allow full hands on control . I would think that this is just the start of it that 3D-H is just showing the way, that it's on time that digital provide the cheap houses and new jobs, I see no reson fighting anything new, esp. not with thought arguments that never are relevant .
No one can blame me promoting a method that bring cheap new houses and a solution to the calls you see ,for new safe cheap houses all over the world. Some of you think such concept are just envisioned in a glimpse and that it don't take atleast 12 years to make, --- wonder "who" is irasional and unrealistic here ?
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
Per:
Why the new name? Didja really think we wouldn't know it was you?
Hi larslarson go read the papers all your arguments are taken care of there. Anyway look at what you write here, even I carefully in the papers tell how ;
". your honeycomb pretty much requires that all members remain
basically in tact in order to carry loads. in order to run ductwork
through your structure you'll most likely have to remove part of
your honeycomb...it doesn't appear as though it would be at all
easy to run any kind of system through your structure since there
is no clear, continuous pathway for these systems to run through"
No you did not read the description, even it clearly explain how, you try put words in my mouth without even reading what you complain.
Then you write ;
"It clearly print in the description that you obviously _did not_ read before this sili argument , that to do that pipeworks you prepare the way you from start subtract for instance , a long cylinder or a long box, from the basic solid model -- so when frames are cut, leadway's are cut in the sheets, at same instance their other shape are cut.
---------- You seem to invent arguments ,now I want to se how you react when I explain that problem _is_ solved, the free spaces for wirering and tubes ARE made , and I tell how in the papers
"'d take this a bit more seriously if you'd show just one construction
detail..for instance how these magic honecomb members are
attached at their intersections...how they're clad...how the whole
system is waterproofed...how a window is inserted easily...a door...
anything that made this construction typology seem more real
and viable...heck we could start with a scale figure so that we can
all understand how thick these members are.."
Yes I know it is difficult, guess this is the reson I spended 3 years at the architect school, made 3 profesional projects and ontop spended 12 years to develob it. Anyway it also seem that you did not read how I carefully explained what a epecial designed universal fitting could build into a 3D-H framework, how a huge steel ship are a very tight structure with many cubes and allway's a tight weld , but where buildings can profit from the right assembly fitting, in such a way that you can emagine much more earthquake safe or totaly earthquake safe houses , that's just up the bright one who can invent such ideal assembly fitting.
That's not bad.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
PH.
I realy don't like to comment on that.
per.
how is this cheaper. just because it is cut from one source
material that doesn not equate it being cheaper. just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses...
simply repeating the same arguments and providing the same
links to your manifesto does not make things any more clear,
or you any more correct.
just draw a detail already.
Funniest. Statement. Ever.
Funniest. Statement. Ever.
Funniest. Statement. Ever.
No, seriously. I mean it.
Hi
"per.
how is this cheaper. just because it is cut from one source
material that doesn not equate it being cheaper. just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses..."
Well it is only one material , the simplest you can emagine and that make a choice of materials ; the special cromed-gold fitting don't offer this ,and is maby dependend of 500 various lines of production, each requiring a multible --- here there are one material forming a structure the way it work, so it replace much more expensive building compoments.
"simply repeating the same arguments and providing the same
links to your manifesto does not make things any more clear,
or you any more correct."
Maby if you acturly read the words and looked at the graphics and realised, that this is about cheap buildings and a promising new method not, fame.
"you're still going to have to draw as many if not more details
of this system as any other...humans are still going to have to
build these houses..."
Listen I don't know where this went wrong, but I have ansvered your questions and proven my thing right, why do you then keep argue when you havn't even seen the pictures and wanted the great new jobs the splendid new houses. ---- you write ;
just because
things can be calculated in the computer 'easier' does not make
things cheaper...
WHAT ---- "you can't make things cheaper just becaurse you now can use a computer for it" do you realy claim this, that by porpus it is nono good if a computer is used for it ?
Tell me what the "new" thing is, in rewriting the old way's into fast computer code, just where do it get more beautifull becaurse of that.
Per - you are becomming a martyr for your cause.
I couldnt read all 1200 posts on this, but....
I kind-a admire Per's enthusiasm. I think he is just trying to force feed us his work (he better never pull that stunt of images in the titles again).
I'm not entirely sure if this is a game, the grammar and spelling mistakes seem like they are purposely done. Im sure that even in Danish people know how to use comas and periods.
Anyway, Im not sure if you are saving the world with your stuff, learn when and where to display it. Do your work and let it speak for itself.
Driftwood --- as long as this is about nice ,cheap new houses and a new architecture this will not start a new war, there are one there allready between old and new, then think about how long time it have been, since something realy happened within architecture ( realy I mean this) , and how close you are to it ,and then how do you tread that.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/kineserier.jpg
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
Per, you've got Moxie baby!
Hi
+q the strange thing is that just issues like this, is not like how you tradisionaly are critic to whatever they try navigate you, --- in arts it is so that there are naive persons, that when they discover a new way , then offcaurse all manking must be told. --- there are no second agenda, and that even make some paranoid, as "what" is the thought "behind" just giving so fantastic things away".
Still that is the way it is, I have no second thoughts, Iam not trying to fool you it is all in your emagination if you think so.
+q understand that there once was real artists, people who realy could feel something for beauty. For me 3D-H was just a tool I had to unvent to make specific designs, why shuld a new method be anything else ----- if it was to project the spetacular splendidness of emty metal boxes would it then be better now where it instead offer safe cheap houses and a fact new perception of the build works.
vindper, will you employ me if you get huge projects in china??? please do, ive been dying to work with you, sir
did per get banned or something and is coming back as vindpust?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.