Previous in this tread someone asked if I knew nothing about the fancy laser and router N.C. works students been doing the past year at various mashin shops, just want to add the name routed was done with a Roland dxy , way back before any of you romans even realised there was hippies -- do you even realise how many years this are ago ?
You see back then you had to have a drive to borrow such 3 axis from the importer, I borrowed one for a month had a lot of fun ,even had to write a 3D router driver as the thing didn't carry any software just a manual. Nono of your lazyworks Romans.
Im'e quite sure what's wrong with you Romans are, you are lazy.
Lazyness seem to undermine honesty.
In a further attempt to contribute some meaningful direction (mostly out of Lyssophobia!), I have attempted to condense the ultimate truths out of the most recent discussions.
Per - your response to chameleon dated 05/12/05 4:25
chameleon, don’t bother reading the entire thread.
Just know that this is just about being able to form and shape with Solids in a CAD program.
You just press a button and the structure appears.
I know of no one that has developed such a concept / methology / realisation / divine conception.
It’s totally different to anything you know of in CAD
“mainly are just how things was done before computers just rewritten into fast reliable codeâ€
To me, I remember reading something you wrote earlier about the last 1.5 years and making hundreds of computer renderings about this 3D-H. However, I have not seen any advancement, progress, or growth with your system. It seems like the same stuff, placed in different environments, and the biggest problem is that most of the time the environment is ambiguous.
I think, or I hope, that is has been a joke. This is my first time reading this thread, and i have been laughing non-stop. Maybe you'd be a better comedian than architect? The difference between the laugh-ability of Archigram's work and yours, is that their humor is taken very seriously. THere is a diligance, study, social commentary, and beauty to their work that is not shown in yours. In other words, add depth to your 3D-H, where it's intellectual discourse, communicational legibility, visual stimulation, programmatic addition, etc.
To me, I remember reading something you wrote earlier about the last 1.5 years and making hundreds of computer renderings about this 3D-H. However, I have not seen any advancement, progress, or growth with your system. It seems like the same stuff, placed in different environments, and the biggest problem is that most of the time the environment is ambiguous.
I think, or I hope, that is has been a joke. This is my first time reading this thread, and i have been laughing non-stop. Maybe you'd be a better comedian than architect? The difference between the laugh-ability of Archigram's work and yours, is that their humor is taken very seriously. THere is a diligance, study, social commentary, and beauty to their work that is not shown in yours. In other words, add depth to your 3D-H, where it's intellectual discourse, communicational legibility, visual stimulation, programmatic addition, etc.
tman I think the reson why the concept been unchanged just have been the challance -- to say that what will make ths thing walk must be the addisional develobment and at the same time say that this just solve one porpus , to act to replace the walls ,floors, building structure in a way where the designer don't need to give it a thought, how the engineer must put the trivial materials together , not to be restricted by the demands of the profiles and stringers, but to be able to focus on the forms and shape , the leadway's for powergrid and pipework , well spaces are more than just what architects percept it is also the trivial leadway's the elevator sharfts and aux. rooms --- these are no spaces architects normaly find interesting while I do.
Humor is strong but it also challance the one that use it it work both way's and loose it's power very easy .
Thank's for the nice words, but the real challance is to develob further and be able to scrap when that is the only real progress, then the thing you put in place offcaurse must ask the same care the same further develobment, but realy from the start it was just an idea that the matter the materials shuld just form and interlock ,without a bricklayer without a scrap bundle and in a way where new materials would find a place beside the obvious new technikes, the robots that many think are just a replacement of someone thighting a nut or welding a route --- this is just one way the future robotic will work , 3D-H show another way where the robot is something quite else ,but maby the future will show simple one function robots that can do just one thing when it in the right posision , guess at that time they forget about placing bricklayers in space.
Per - while I argree with the laziness of the romans argument, can you show us some of your built work? Boat hulls? Something to make the romans salivate with jealousy of their lack of engineering prowess?
BOTS,
you forgot something. u can`t answer the next question.. HOW? so its something related to software (some innovation in CAD) development for designers.. is`nt it? so its about the software and not about the design? if designs pop out with the press of a button.. what are WE for?
sorry had to ask you..
oops sorry u meant the recent discussions and not per`s ideas. i still can`t get myself to read the posts per posted.. afraid i might get even more confused. but will read it soon tho`..
Right now I am refitting a small sailboat I had as testbench ,well not one single line in the plans are made the tradisional way so I guess you can see that it's an old project. Problem was that the rudder that I welded into the Alu aft end got stuck even it was made with the right bearing nylon and it was a small engineering project in itself , -- got stuck , my own foult as when it started getting a bit heavy ,this idiot gave it a few drops of oil , and the bearing plastic that are ment to be lubricated with plain water, took the oil expanded just a hundred of a millimeter and got stuck.
Now I thought I would need to re-place the rudder another place and simply cut the rudder but as a last attempt I tried to soak the bearing in phosforus acid and then after a day the rudder started moving again. Now I can restore the dinghie named "Dizzie" and instead of mooving the rudder I can make some new waterline calculations ,to find the geometric points for forces of the rig and instead of mooving the whole rudder system, I can try see what calculations will be, underwater hull water sections, compared size of the rudder.
--------- You see this dinghie are quite a remarkable craft, it carry some of my favorite boat lines and is at the same time one of those boat types you see all over the world ,the cheapest build the type that is made for rough use and made to be easily repaired and even this type of hull been around for centuries I seen wonders build based on the same simple design --- now Dizzie are quite special being only 5 meters and with a Pirat dinghie rig a drop keel , front and aft plus to "plank" and drop-keel trunk in Aluminium and rest of planking in larch, in Larch.
You see the boat has been laying useless around for quite a number of years, so it's a pleasure to experience that underneath the first millimeter of dirt there are a very fine and in very good condision exiting small sailboat design --- offcaurse all done with a simple CAD program and a few of my own applications ; those for even being able to draft such fine masked computer mesh , those that make a thing you Romans would never emagine a computer program to do ,a lapstrake , zig-zag planked hull --- no You Romans wouldn't ever realise the trouble it make that all computer meshes are smooth when you want to unfold a surface that go zig-zag as the hull paneling of a clinker build boat do.
Now first I must make the waterline sections and do the volume calculations, do the geometric points of forces ,and then use my experience to either develob a rudder with potential extra draft or just calculate when the surface of the rudder in that place, ballance the two forces I need to cover. Anyway it say something about the quality of what they made in the old day's, that a rudder like that offcaurse not was realy stuck just needed a bit care.
And sorry, it's still a bit to early before I can write something that make you realise that your bid on that Pony was the right one, --- not so soon now but still have to just wait :))
I would imagine the connectivity part would be the use of the computer as study aid to help visualize the carpentry approach to building these hulls - however there is a 1:1 with 3d honeycomb - still not clear. Like cad cam and 3 axis milling?
per, i am not sure about the tiller to rodder connection on your boat. it seems very vulnarable to heavy seas and eventually tiller would sag to cause friction. the loads on the rudder would weaken the bearing also. can you tell me if this is not so? thanks. i've never seen one like that but maybe it is due to my lack of knowledge on scandinavian boats. is it for lake sailing?
Like the fin on a fish the rudder might bend, and the plate connection to the tiller should resist the torsion, also the flex will distribute through the would handle?
Hi
It is for lake sailing ,when new it was round 4 Cm. in the water at the deepest point. The rudder is all Alu but quite heavy walled , a heavy tube fitted into a nylon bearing that fit within another tube welded into the aft Alu boat part --- the rudder are som 12 mm Alu welded onto the tube and quite strong . The design worked perfect except the rudder that made a to wide turning curve, my first aproach was that the rudder are to way aft something that can be a good thing on long runs but when the rudder stuck and the whole boat need a total refit , I decided to simply cut the rudder and make a new further front near the outboard well but, I think I try experiment with a smaller and deeper rudder--maby make the rudder change shape to make it work more efficient . It can all be calculated but the hull act so unexpected anyway ,caused by the basic design aproach that is, that the clinker edges and the angles at the ends , plus a few other details will make it run on air. ------ True going along there are a blanked of various size air bobbles following the boat, and when you look out the side then you say "well the boat are surely mooving", but when you look at the water at the aft, you wonder if the boat go reverse, as the water acturly run the wrong way . Now it is a dsign working on an edge, it's only 5 meter long but so extreemly stable that it will carry 3 adults sitting in one side of the boat and you can just reconise the load on the boat. On the rear side thebottom are a huge arear and it is not a boat you would under rig -- give to small sails-- but It is prepared for fine tuning by the dropkeel trunk being made way to long , so there are a lot of room for ballancing with the drop keel that is a 10 mm. Alu sheet.
Now the design deal with an idea to be able to build a boat from ready made parts -- front and aft are unfolded from the computer drawing and the planks that could be wood or plastic are just rivited onto the ready made ends, still as an inventor can be 20 years ahead his times, he can also be 40 years behind, as even this solve the most expensive and troublesom about tradisional wooden bouts building, the expensive parts of building the hull, the aft and front ends, -- then no one want to buy wooden boats, esp. not hybrids even this represent just a further step in refining an old craft, no wooden boats must be made by hand with tar and as they was allway's made.
Yes it is copper rivited but the wierd thing is realy the fact that the clinkerbuild surface also had to be drawn in real and 3D to be able to make a true unroll of the individual planks that then was plottet full-size , spray glued onto the raw larch planks and cut from the lines on the drawings. You see all other software that promise an unfold, can not produce this, as if the software even do an unfold and is not just the tradisional old way's where you on site measureup the shape of the plank, -- then most of this "software" do a way to rough unrolling of the panels, and then there are no way around writing your own software. Still what I will do now is to find the drawings and see if a rudder added extra draft can be the right solution. As the rudder and that whole part of the boat are so strong that it will never break ,I think it is sad just to cut it off, if it turn out that I just need to "see" the rudder as a pover that turn the aft end one or the other way : you see it seem that the trouble are rather the size of the rudder as it hinder the boat to skate sidewerds at the aft ,making a fast turn.
--------- with it's enourmous stability . -I never seen so effective stability curves ever on such small a boat -- and added the ability to move freely it could be a boat I myself would not dare test in a fresh wind, ----- You see you can trust what people say when they see the hull, and that comment most often are , "that's made for speed" , well as a side effect true, But will it be in the water or in the air ;))
i cant believe its still going....................................................................................................................................
................................................... and that you are perpetuating this ................................................................................................like me.
If so there are lots of resons the project was scrapped, -- all this great firm can envision are a substitude for the lame old polygon meshes ,a prof that they don't even understand the 3D-H concept ,that we do not need any more zero thickness 70' polygon meshes .
Beside that a Patent building can not be renewed with something stolen from an inventor, shuld have been obvious.
Wow.. so, at this point you can already sue Eduardo Soto de Moura, Alvaro Siza, Cecil Balmond, Lars Spuybroek, Juergen Mayer H, and now no less than Sir Norman Foster... either you're the ultimate arch genius or you have lost your mind completely... you'll be fighting no less than two Pritzker laureates... Per, wake up.
If you go back just 5 years, round the point where I first started to document the 3D-H , discuss the multible options with a computergenerated structure that ask no fiddeling and act a new architecture, all you would see was 70' computer meshes ,zero thickness shells. A "thinking" that was the old technikes a way to view a structure bound in the old materials the old manufactoring lines , an idea that to build one house you must build two ; one for the "shell" and one to offer the floors and walls. --- 5 years ago all the architects you mention was into that kind thinking.
At that point this would be the natural solution ;
Since then, I heard all sorts of arguments ---- from "This is impossible" to "This is great" , German architects that "did not know did not see" , architects that left in one structure but suddenly changed it into a 3D-H , "Great" firms that don't realise that the world is bigger than they emagine and that it realy is no good advertising, that you rob a great idear.
Medit I been promoting 3D-H for so many years, sadly you think these architects achived anything by just replacing the old polygon meshes with something they at the same time will say "is no different" but at the same time will chose, ---- fact is that still none of these have even reconised the fantastic options , and fact is that I published and documented the method for so many years.
Now what do that say about architecture --- what do it say about these architects, when the projects left in was polygon meshes , that suddenly changed into 3D-H ?
Medit write ;
"Wow.. so, at this point you can already sue Eduardo Soto de Moura, Alvaro Siza, Cecil Balmond, Lars Spuybroek, Juergen Mayer H, and now no less than Sir Norman Foster.."
------ As master theaf, As master intelectural property robber ???
Wonder if he know, but he soon will .
Sue ,sue, sue ---- is that all you can see ? Is architecture inovation ,great idears , the new architecture, the new fantastic houses only a matter about sueing someone ,well if the guy who invented the transistor had patened it, an Am. radio today would have costed you a farm . Do you realy think that money is the measure in arts, well maby among CAD personel, but you see you ain't seen nothing yet.
Per, I know you've been promoting the 3D-H for so many years.. because even before I discovered Archinect -and that was 2 1/2 years ago- I already heard about you (and your WTC proposals and seen your not-so-fancy graphics) in other arch discussion forums on the net... but you should admit -for what I've read- that you've been receiving much more positive feedback and sincere interest for your 3D methods in Archinect than anywhere else..
but still you insist in calling people Romans and denouncing, through internet boards, practicing architects who are actually building things (even dead people who built things with similar approaches to your 3D-H some decades ago) of plagiarizing your ideas...
I frankly don't care about who invented what... a good project of architecture is usually permeated with multiple ideas from very different sources... you're just providing a tool to create structures, but a project needs much more than that to be successful... me, personally, I don't call Le Corbusier descendants' lawyers every time I design a long horizontal window... ideas flourish here and there from different minds everytime...
beta, you've been listening to the Misfits lately? ;)
oh go possession of the mind is a terrible thing it's a transformation with an urge to kill not the body of a man from earth not the face of the one you love, 'cause well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh well, i turned into a martian today i walk down city streets on an unsuspecting human world inhuman in your midst this world is mine to own, 'cause well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh well, i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh well, i turned into a martian today go go well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh well, i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh turned into a martian woah oh oh can't even recall my name oh, won't you tell me what the fuck is my name, martian woah oh oh woah oh oh
When I was at the architect acadamy no one spoke about anything but thin polygon mesh shells, so many attemts was made to fold the digital wonders into something that acturly made a house, all that came from it, was bad measures and impossible projects ---- now wasn't that a challance ?
For years I seen the architecture debate being a debate about dead artists and what "we" could achive before the computers, when anything happened and you looked closer into it, then you found that most was just the old methods rewritten into computer code.
Now I don't so much blame architects to grap a brilliant new idea, one that acturly bring that promise of a real structure, some architects thought the early computer meshes would bring, but I blame those who look for a minute and uses it for just what is allready there -- ignoring the fact that with 3D-H you get the intire foundation ,the structure for the walls what carry the floors --- all that that was missing and still are in the organic formed metal hulsters , what I blame architects that would never never never never accept just the tinyist "borrow" of any of their great visions is, --- that they don't even se how harmfull it is to a great idea, when someone just grap what he understand and copy it into a whole where it have no place. Where it make no sense either in terms of the work or in particular oposed what this particular architect made just a week ago.
3D-H is _more_ than just a fantastic new tool to create the structure from a Solid, --- it is all that that the lame computer meshes was missing, and you can not say that creating that, can be done in less than 10 years. Now today's western architects can as it seem, only see this as a porpus for making a smart ( read manufactorable ) polygon mesh replacement, ---- maby you find it wierd that a boat designer shuld come up with this great idea and spend so many years promoting it, but did you see the effords to tame the lively polygon meshes the trouble the academics had making it sense ? If you did you would know that what manufactoring was missing was something with a core something with a hands-on aproach ,something that make a house at a third the cost four times as strong --- with foundations for walls and floors, now nighter mr. mosiour, sir or Hr. have even grasped the actural power of an actural new conception, let them stay in the old world creativity will move from where academica replaced true skills.
"I frankly don't care about who invented what... a good project of architecture is usually permeated with multiple ideas from very different sources... you're just providing a tool to create structures, but a project needs much more than that to be successful.."
Why is that ? --- is there a natural law about creativity or just an academic arogance. How can you say such things and make yourself a judge ,just like those who declared that "nothing heavier than air can fly" ?
Listen do you even reconise originality and that "thinking outside the box" is acturly possible and by defination can not be put in _your box ,that the ability to create new is not bound in academic ruling and architecture are _more_ than social skills .
Medit my vorry are the trend of making architecture into a criminal art. Like I used the word FAGOT , and forgot to show how I understand the word "FAGOT" --- I understand it in the sense that if someone that never,never,never,never would accept the tinyist "borrowing" , claims public that a method that only carry the foult that _he did not ofcaurse invent it, let such double standard. To be progressed that in architecture, the matter are _not_ about develobing new tools and widen the digital options, na measure are good old bullyworks, Academics allow this to mirror the angle to innovation and solid programming, na we rather have nice caves than fine apartments.
Rather architecture as the art of crime violating the most obvious measures for intelectural property, ---- a FAGOT you are, when trying to destroy others quality work replace your own bid.
What are your bid -- an overall moral that being a good architect, you are counted in muggings ?
Eh --- that's me saying this, don't be surprised artists do often have a strict aproach about their versus "others" work FAGOT is when your works are simply destroying others creation, without putting in a better option --- 3D-H are about manufactoring what are your's ?
So Fagot is not a 100 pct. positive word, in architecture and in academics it is a well known thing.
Just to add, that inventing ,develobing an actural system, no one before envisioned to extract the potential in digital si not a craft you progress young naive students into, --- unless mentioning the crime scene and the harsh arts is now progressing from a new trend.
Like we autodidacts alway's say "how can beauty grow"
Now why shuld I even care beside I already done my work, what about your work ? Is that only about fighting persons while you never ansver a strait argument. The least thing I vorry are who is the greatest robber please don't you think I had a look behind the scene, before I decided for my challance . The thing carry it's own price, if you make a wonder you made a wonder, if what you do is to replace that with academic fagotism stealery as art ,all you get is a bad reputation in history and in real and in real and in real, 3D-H you maby never will realise, and only see it as your 70' computermesh replacement forever, you will suffer in your creativity as architect, so realy I shuld be sorry for Mr. Mosiour, Hr and Sir, as obaying the creativity and act so Fagot, are no ideal , how can it be anything but what it is ,and so be judged by history --- is that what you want ??
BTW. Merit, my WTC proposal was the idea to build around, to make the towers stand as emty spaces within a greater structure, like subtracted a greater structure, --- ofcaurse in different scale and material sheets. Combined and surrounding other structures, but first of all my suggestion about the rebuild, are that of new jobs and a new architecture.
I provide even the tool to do that, 3D-H that is the only method that do a direct link production, strait from screen to manufactoring mashin, --- now as your crafts seem to relate to words, please do the faviour to make them nice ; architecture are about that you see, making beautifull things ,such as the wonders 3D-H will provide.
Now your suggestion oposed a new method that will provide a new architecture are what ? Well will that build a house at a third the cost will it bring just a bit honesty ?
"oh go possession of the mind is a terrible thing it's a transformation with an urge"
Exactly , I just love you guy's you know the truth and meaning with arkimedes, all the greak temples halve the Romans and that the pyramides are made from concrete not by hippies. Now all you need to know is that the computers was made to work on their own terms, not by copying things as they allway's was done , and that computers in fact are increadible efficient, when doing sense things --- that's not tighting a nut.
So don't send bricklayers into space the houses there will not be made from bricks, --- is this a surprise ?
Hi all you fancy graphics lovers
Look ret the more you post about his links, the more he gets vistors and keep thinking it's because they like it. You're not helping Per, ret.
is Archinect technically capable of resisting a 1000-message thread?
because Per's a juggernaut, he's unstoppable... he's in a sacred mission and he knows no limits...
Fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster, fillibuster,
Hi All You Fancy Graphics Lovers...
let me tell you...these images by students in Florence that were posted in the gallery...I picked one for my desktop. Fucking BRAVISSIMO!
now thats what I call fancy!
it's the best one i've ever done. it took me like four hours to render the robot.
this feels like the longest thread ever known to Archinect.
Hi
Previous in this tread someone asked if I knew nothing about the fancy laser and router N.C. works students been doing the past year at various mashin shops, just want to add the name routed was done with a Roland dxy , way back before any of you romans even realised there was hippies -- do you even realise how many years this are ago ?
Whole picture ;
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/router-3.jpg
You see back then you had to have a drive to borrow such 3 axis from the importer, I borrowed one for a month had a lot of fun ,even had to write a 3D router driver as the thing didn't carry any software just a manual. Nono of your lazyworks Romans.
Im'e quite sure what's wrong with you Romans are, you are lazy.
Lazyness seem to undermine honesty.
Why couldn't I resist opening this thread? After so many months of avoiding it. Why? It's like watching a car wreck, as they say.
he's going for speed.
So the guy say "I didn't know, I have not seen" -- now what nasionality do you think this architect belong ?
She's all alone
all alone, all alone in a time of need
Because he's racing and pacing and plotting the course
He’s fighting and biting and riding on his horse,
HE'S GOING THE DISTANCE
sorry had to get my post on this magnificent thread
In a further attempt to contribute some meaningful direction (mostly out of Lyssophobia!), I have attempted to condense the ultimate truths out of the most recent discussions.
Per - your response to chameleon dated 05/12/05 4:25
chameleon, don’t bother reading the entire thread.
Just know that this is just about being able to form and shape with Solids in a CAD program.
You just press a button and the structure appears.
I know of no one that has developed such a concept / methology / realisation / divine conception.
It’s totally different to anything you know of in CAD
“mainly are just how things was done before computers just rewritten into fast reliable codeâ€
A revolution in Architecture.
The images speak for themselves.
Per
To me, I remember reading something you wrote earlier about the last 1.5 years and making hundreds of computer renderings about this 3D-H. However, I have not seen any advancement, progress, or growth with your system. It seems like the same stuff, placed in different environments, and the biggest problem is that most of the time the environment is ambiguous.
I think, or I hope, that is has been a joke. This is my first time reading this thread, and i have been laughing non-stop. Maybe you'd be a better comedian than architect? The difference between the laugh-ability of Archigram's work and yours, is that their humor is taken very seriously. THere is a diligance, study, social commentary, and beauty to their work that is not shown in yours. In other words, add depth to your 3D-H, where it's intellectual discourse, communicational legibility, visual stimulation, programmatic addition, etc.
Thanks for the hundreds of laughs and counting...
Per
To me, I remember reading something you wrote earlier about the last 1.5 years and making hundreds of computer renderings about this 3D-H. However, I have not seen any advancement, progress, or growth with your system. It seems like the same stuff, placed in different environments, and the biggest problem is that most of the time the environment is ambiguous.
I think, or I hope, that is has been a joke. This is my first time reading this thread, and i have been laughing non-stop. Maybe you'd be a better comedian than architect? The difference between the laugh-ability of Archigram's work and yours, is that their humor is taken very seriously. THere is a diligance, study, social commentary, and beauty to their work that is not shown in yours. In other words, add depth to your 3D-H, where it's intellectual discourse, communicational legibility, visual stimulation, programmatic addition, etc.
Thanks for the hundreds of laughs and counting...
And the Pritzker of 2006 goes to .....
Hi
tman I think the reson why the concept been unchanged just have been the challance -- to say that what will make ths thing walk must be the addisional develobment and at the same time say that this just solve one porpus , to act to replace the walls ,floors, building structure in a way where the designer don't need to give it a thought, how the engineer must put the trivial materials together , not to be restricted by the demands of the profiles and stringers, but to be able to focus on the forms and shape , the leadway's for powergrid and pipework , well spaces are more than just what architects percept it is also the trivial leadway's the elevator sharfts and aux. rooms --- these are no spaces architects normaly find interesting while I do.
Humor is strong but it also challance the one that use it it work both way's and loose it's power very easy .
Thank's for the nice words, but the real challance is to develob further and be able to scrap when that is the only real progress, then the thing you put in place offcaurse must ask the same care the same further develobment, but realy from the start it was just an idea that the matter the materials shuld just form and interlock ,without a bricklayer without a scrap bundle and in a way where new materials would find a place beside the obvious new technikes, the robots that many think are just a replacement of someone thighting a nut or welding a route --- this is just one way the future robotic will work , 3D-H show another way where the robot is something quite else ,but maby the future will show simple one function robots that can do just one thing when it in the right posision , guess at that time they forget about placing bricklayers in space.
Per - while I argree with the laziness of the romans argument, can you show us some of your built work? Boat hulls? Something to make the romans salivate with jealousy of their lack of engineering prowess?
BOTS,
you forgot something. u can`t answer the next question.. HOW? so its something related to software (some innovation in CAD) development for designers.. is`nt it? so its about the software and not about the design? if designs pop out with the press of a button.. what are WE for?
sorry had to ask you..
oops sorry u meant the recent discussions and not per`s ideas. i still can`t get myself to read the posts per posted.. afraid i might get even more confused. but will read it soon tho`..
Hi
Right now I am refitting a small sailboat I had as testbench ,well not one single line in the plans are made the tradisional way so I guess you can see that it's an old project. Problem was that the rudder that I welded into the Alu aft end got stuck even it was made with the right bearing nylon and it was a small engineering project in itself , -- got stuck , my own foult as when it started getting a bit heavy ,this idiot gave it a few drops of oil , and the bearing plastic that are ment to be lubricated with plain water, took the oil expanded just a hundred of a millimeter and got stuck.
Now I thought I would need to re-place the rudder another place and simply cut the rudder but as a last attempt I tried to soak the bearing in phosforus acid and then after a day the rudder started moving again. Now I can restore the dinghie named "Dizzie" and instead of mooving the rudder I can make some new waterline calculations ,to find the geometric points for forces of the rig and instead of mooving the whole rudder system, I can try see what calculations will be, underwater hull water sections, compared size of the rudder.
--------- You see this dinghie are quite a remarkable craft, it carry some of my favorite boat lines and is at the same time one of those boat types you see all over the world ,the cheapest build the type that is made for rough use and made to be easily repaired and even this type of hull been around for centuries I seen wonders build based on the same simple design --- now Dizzie are quite special being only 5 meters and with a Pirat dinghie rig a drop keel , front and aft plus to "plank" and drop-keel trunk in Aluminium and rest of planking in larch, in Larch.
You see the boat has been laying useless around for quite a number of years, so it's a pleasure to experience that underneath the first millimeter of dirt there are a very fine and in very good condision exiting small sailboat design --- offcaurse all done with a simple CAD program and a few of my own applications ; those for even being able to draft such fine masked computer mesh , those that make a thing you Romans would never emagine a computer program to do ,a lapstrake , zig-zag planked hull --- no You Romans wouldn't ever realise the trouble it make that all computer meshes are smooth when you want to unfold a surface that go zig-zag as the hull paneling of a clinker build boat do.
Now first I must make the waterline sections and do the volume calculations, do the geometric points of forces ,and then use my experience to either develob a rudder with potential extra draft or just calculate when the surface of the rudder in that place, ballance the two forces I need to cover. Anyway it say something about the quality of what they made in the old day's, that a rudder like that offcaurse not was realy stuck just needed a bit care.
Whole picture ;
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/dizzie-1.jpg
P.C.
And sorry, it's still a bit to early before I can write something that make you realise that your bid on that Pony was the right one, --- not so soon now but still have to just wait :))
So...Yeah...Back to the issue of connectivity...
?????????
I would imagine the connectivity part would be the use of the computer as study aid to help visualize the carpentry approach to building these hulls - however there is a 1:1 with 3d honeycomb - still not clear. Like cad cam and 3 axis milling?
per, i am not sure about the tiller to rodder connection on your boat. it seems very vulnarable to heavy seas and eventually tiller would sag to cause friction. the loads on the rudder would weaken the bearing also. can you tell me if this is not so? thanks. i've never seen one like that but maybe it is due to my lack of knowledge on scandinavian boats. is it for lake sailing?
Like the fin on a fish the rudder might bend, and the plate connection to the tiller should resist the torsion, also the flex will distribute through the would handle?
Per - do you use treenails? Chinkings?
Hi
It is for lake sailing ,when new it was round 4 Cm. in the water at the deepest point. The rudder is all Alu but quite heavy walled , a heavy tube fitted into a nylon bearing that fit within another tube welded into the aft Alu boat part --- the rudder are som 12 mm Alu welded onto the tube and quite strong . The design worked perfect except the rudder that made a to wide turning curve, my first aproach was that the rudder are to way aft something that can be a good thing on long runs but when the rudder stuck and the whole boat need a total refit , I decided to simply cut the rudder and make a new further front near the outboard well but, I think I try experiment with a smaller and deeper rudder--maby make the rudder change shape to make it work more efficient . It can all be calculated but the hull act so unexpected anyway ,caused by the basic design aproach that is, that the clinker edges and the angles at the ends , plus a few other details will make it run on air. ------ True going along there are a blanked of various size air bobbles following the boat, and when you look out the side then you say "well the boat are surely mooving", but when you look at the water at the aft, you wonder if the boat go reverse, as the water acturly run the wrong way . Now it is a dsign working on an edge, it's only 5 meter long but so extreemly stable that it will carry 3 adults sitting in one side of the boat and you can just reconise the load on the boat. On the rear side thebottom are a huge arear and it is not a boat you would under rig -- give to small sails-- but It is prepared for fine tuning by the dropkeel trunk being made way to long , so there are a lot of room for ballancing with the drop keel that is a 10 mm. Alu sheet.
Now the design deal with an idea to be able to build a boat from ready made parts -- front and aft are unfolded from the computer drawing and the planks that could be wood or plastic are just rivited onto the ready made ends, still as an inventor can be 20 years ahead his times, he can also be 40 years behind, as even this solve the most expensive and troublesom about tradisional wooden bouts building, the expensive parts of building the hull, the aft and front ends, -- then no one want to buy wooden boats, esp. not hybrids even this represent just a further step in refining an old craft, no wooden boats must be made by hand with tar and as they was allway's made.
Yes it is copper rivited but the wierd thing is realy the fact that the clinkerbuild surface also had to be drawn in real and 3D to be able to make a true unroll of the individual planks that then was plottet full-size , spray glued onto the raw larch planks and cut from the lines on the drawings. You see all other software that promise an unfold, can not produce this, as if the software even do an unfold and is not just the tradisional old way's where you on site measureup the shape of the plank, -- then most of this "software" do a way to rough unrolling of the panels, and then there are no way around writing your own software. Still what I will do now is to find the drawings and see if a rudder added extra draft can be the right solution. As the rudder and that whole part of the boat are so strong that it will never break ,I think it is sad just to cut it off, if it turn out that I just need to "see" the rudder as a pover that turn the aft end one or the other way : you see it seem that the trouble are rather the size of the rudder as it hinder the boat to skate sidewerds at the aft ,making a fast turn.
--------- with it's enourmous stability . -I never seen so effective stability curves ever on such small a boat -- and added the ability to move freely it could be a boat I myself would not dare test in a fresh wind, ----- You see you can trust what people say when they see the hull, and that comment most often are , "that's made for speed" , well as a side effect true, But will it be in the water or in the air ;))
i cant believe its still going....................................................................................................................................
................................................... and that you are perpetuating this ................................................................................................like me.
Hi
Did anyone say 3D-H
If so there are lots of resons the project was scrapped, -- all this great firm can envision are a substitude for the lame old polygon meshes ,a prof that they don't even understand the 3D-H concept ,that we do not need any more zero thickness 70' polygon meshes .
Beside that a Patent building can not be renewed with something stolen from an inventor, shuld have been obvious.
Wow.. so, at this point you can already sue Eduardo Soto de Moura, Alvaro Siza, Cecil Balmond, Lars Spuybroek, Juergen Mayer H, and now no less than Sir Norman Foster... either you're the ultimate arch genius or you have lost your mind completely... you'll be fighting no less than two Pritzker laureates... Per, wake up.
Hi
If you go back just 5 years, round the point where I first started to document the 3D-H , discuss the multible options with a computergenerated structure that ask no fiddeling and act a new architecture, all you would see was 70' computer meshes ,zero thickness shells. A "thinking" that was the old technikes a way to view a structure bound in the old materials the old manufactoring lines , an idea that to build one house you must build two ; one for the "shell" and one to offer the floors and walls. --- 5 years ago all the architects you mention was into that kind thinking.
At that point this would be the natural solution ;
Since then, I heard all sorts of arguments ---- from "This is impossible" to "This is great" , German architects that "did not know did not see" , architects that left in one structure but suddenly changed it into a 3D-H , "Great" firms that don't realise that the world is bigger than they emagine and that it realy is no good advertising, that you rob a great idear.
Medit I been promoting 3D-H for so many years, sadly you think these architects achived anything by just replacing the old polygon meshes with something they at the same time will say "is no different" but at the same time will chose, ---- fact is that still none of these have even reconised the fantastic options , and fact is that I published and documented the method for so many years.
Now what do that say about architecture --- what do it say about these architects, when the projects left in was polygon meshes , that suddenly changed into 3D-H ?
When will the "Hi all you fancy graphics lovers" t-shirt be available?
I suggest it should be made of thick yarn and knitted using the 3D-H technique.
Hi
Sorry I must add ;
Medit write ;
"Wow.. so, at this point you can already sue Eduardo Soto de Moura, Alvaro Siza, Cecil Balmond, Lars Spuybroek, Juergen Mayer H, and now no less than Sir Norman Foster.."
------ As master theaf, As master intelectural property robber ???
Wonder if he know, but he soon will .
Sue ,sue, sue ---- is that all you can see ? Is architecture inovation ,great idears , the new architecture, the new fantastic houses only a matter about sueing someone ,well if the guy who invented the transistor had patened it, an Am. radio today would have costed you a farm . Do you realy think that money is the measure in arts, well maby among CAD personel, but you see you ain't seen nothing yet.
die, die, die, die, die.....you horrible thread, die.
Per, I know you've been promoting the 3D-H for so many years.. because even before I discovered Archinect -and that was 2 1/2 years ago- I already heard about you (and your WTC proposals and seen your not-so-fancy graphics) in other arch discussion forums on the net... but you should admit -for what I've read- that you've been receiving much more positive feedback and sincere interest for your 3D methods in Archinect than anywhere else..
but still you insist in calling people Romans and denouncing, through internet boards, practicing architects who are actually building things (even dead people who built things with similar approaches to your 3D-H some decades ago) of plagiarizing your ideas...
I frankly don't care about who invented what... a good project of architecture is usually permeated with multiple ideas from very different sources... you're just providing a tool to create structures, but a project needs much more than that to be successful... me, personally, I don't call Le Corbusier descendants' lawyers every time I design a long horizontal window... ideas flourish here and there from different minds everytime...
beta, you've been listening to the Misfits lately? ;)
oh go possession of the mind is a terrible thing it's a transformation with an urge to kill not the body of a man from earth not the face of the one you love, 'cause well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh well, i turned into a martian today i walk down city streets on an unsuspecting human world inhuman in your midst this world is mine to own, 'cause well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh well, i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh well, i turned into a martian today go go well, i turned into a martian woah oh oh well, i can't even recall my name woah oh oh times i never hardly sleep at night woah oh oh turned into a martian woah oh oh can't even recall my name oh, won't you tell me what the fuck is my name, martian woah oh oh woah oh oh
Medit
When I was at the architect acadamy no one spoke about anything but thin polygon mesh shells, so many attemts was made to fold the digital wonders into something that acturly made a house, all that came from it, was bad measures and impossible projects ---- now wasn't that a challance ?
For years I seen the architecture debate being a debate about dead artists and what "we" could achive before the computers, when anything happened and you looked closer into it, then you found that most was just the old methods rewritten into computer code.
Now I don't so much blame architects to grap a brilliant new idea, one that acturly bring that promise of a real structure, some architects thought the early computer meshes would bring, but I blame those who look for a minute and uses it for just what is allready there -- ignoring the fact that with 3D-H you get the intire foundation ,the structure for the walls what carry the floors --- all that that was missing and still are in the organic formed metal hulsters , what I blame architects that would never never never never accept just the tinyist "borrow" of any of their great visions is, --- that they don't even se how harmfull it is to a great idea, when someone just grap what he understand and copy it into a whole where it have no place. Where it make no sense either in terms of the work or in particular oposed what this particular architect made just a week ago.
3D-H is _more_ than just a fantastic new tool to create the structure from a Solid, --- it is all that that the lame computer meshes was missing, and you can not say that creating that, can be done in less than 10 years. Now today's western architects can as it seem, only see this as a porpus for making a smart ( read manufactorable ) polygon mesh replacement, ---- maby you find it wierd that a boat designer shuld come up with this great idea and spend so many years promoting it, but did you see the effords to tame the lively polygon meshes the trouble the academics had making it sense ? If you did you would know that what manufactoring was missing was something with a core something with a hands-on aproach ,something that make a house at a third the cost four times as strong --- with foundations for walls and floors, now nighter mr. mosiour, sir or Hr. have even grasped the actural power of an actural new conception, let them stay in the old world creativity will move from where academica replaced true skills.
Hi
Medit write ;
"I frankly don't care about who invented what... a good project of architecture is usually permeated with multiple ideas from very different sources... you're just providing a tool to create structures, but a project needs much more than that to be successful.."
Why is that ? --- is there a natural law about creativity or just an academic arogance. How can you say such things and make yourself a judge ,just like those who declared that "nothing heavier than air can fly" ?
Listen do you even reconise originality and that "thinking outside the box" is acturly possible and by defination can not be put in _your box ,that the ability to create new is not bound in academic ruling and architecture are _more_ than social skills .
Medit my vorry are the trend of making architecture into a criminal art. Like I used the word FAGOT , and forgot to show how I understand the word "FAGOT" --- I understand it in the sense that if someone that never,never,never,never would accept the tinyist "borrowing" , claims public that a method that only carry the foult that _he did not ofcaurse invent it, let such double standard. To be progressed that in architecture, the matter are _not_ about develobing new tools and widen the digital options, na measure are good old bullyworks, Academics allow this to mirror the angle to innovation and solid programming, na we rather have nice caves than fine apartments.
Rather architecture as the art of crime violating the most obvious measures for intelectural property, ---- a FAGOT you are, when trying to destroy others quality work replace your own bid.
What are your bid -- an overall moral that being a good architect, you are counted in muggings ?
aw.. shit.. I knew I shouldn't have posted anything... my bad.
No offense waiting make you bored.
Eh --- that's me saying this, don't be surprised artists do often have a strict aproach about their versus "others" work FAGOT is when your works are simply destroying others creation, without putting in a better option --- 3D-H are about manufactoring what are your's ?
So Fagot is not a 100 pct. positive word, in architecture and in academics it is a well known thing.
Just to add, that inventing ,develobing an actural system, no one before envisioned to extract the potential in digital si not a craft you progress young naive students into, --- unless mentioning the crime scene and the harsh arts is now progressing from a new trend.
Like we autodidacts alway's say "how can beauty grow"
Now why shuld I even care beside I already done my work, what about your work ? Is that only about fighting persons while you never ansver a strait argument. The least thing I vorry are who is the greatest robber please don't you think I had a look behind the scene, before I decided for my challance . The thing carry it's own price, if you make a wonder you made a wonder, if what you do is to replace that with academic fagotism stealery as art ,all you get is a bad reputation in history and in real and in real and in real, 3D-H you maby never will realise, and only see it as your 70' computermesh replacement forever, you will suffer in your creativity as architect, so realy I shuld be sorry for Mr. Mosiour, Hr and Sir, as obaying the creativity and act so Fagot, are no ideal , how can it be anything but what it is ,and so be judged by history --- is that what you want ??
BTW. Merit, my WTC proposal was the idea to build around, to make the towers stand as emty spaces within a greater structure, like subtracted a greater structure, --- ofcaurse in different scale and material sheets. Combined and surrounding other structures, but first of all my suggestion about the rebuild, are that of new jobs and a new architecture.
I provide even the tool to do that, 3D-H that is the only method that do a direct link production, strait from screen to manufactoring mashin, --- now as your crafts seem to relate to words, please do the faviour to make them nice ; architecture are about that you see, making beautifull things ,such as the wonders 3D-H will provide.
Now your suggestion oposed a new method that will provide a new architecture are what ? Well will that build a house at a third the cost will it bring just a bit honesty ?
Hi
Beta write ;
"oh go possession of the mind is a terrible thing it's a transformation with an urge"
Exactly , I just love you guy's you know the truth and meaning with arkimedes, all the greak temples halve the Romans and that the pyramides are made from concrete not by hippies. Now all you need to know is that the computers was made to work on their own terms, not by copying things as they allway's was done , and that computers in fact are increadible efficient, when doing sense things --- that's not tighting a nut.
So don't send bricklayers into space the houses there will not be made from bricks, --- is this a surprise ?
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.