johndevin the accustic is said to be good in that round interiour of that Opera --------- but from what I know some details been added to soften the sound , anyway I have not heard that the sound is impossible that the rounded interiours .
Now the final build is very different than that of a 3D-H ----- what I did after inserting the 2D sections into their right place in a 3D drawing, was to realise how stupid things work when no one realy understand the new options, there was a 3D router to work what thy thought a 3D drawing would bring, but the seven mile jump, from "how we allway's did" to even understanding a 3D-H structure ,bringing something with just a bit vision about 3D works, was simply to great a challance also in this build.
Eh --johndevin if you want to see these 2D sections I can point to a Yahoo group where I left them at display. They are trivial 2D sections and I only used the outlines to shape that Solid, ---- just to show that there are another way to perform a structure, another way as the resulting "how we allway's did it". -------- Problem proberly is that "they" thought that as there was a 3D router avaible then that router shuld just be forced to do things "as they allway's was done" , and so it worked.
The whole issue only deal with how dificult it is for builders with modern digital projecting, but I don't know if my english are good enough to describe this absurd story. Anyway the section detail planes are avaible in a Yahoo group, these are not my drawings so they only are there as graphics.
good, good read.
ask me why see many gold crown on camus, kierkeyard, big, big writes- these writes bowed down by men square hat black/rat tail? funny, funny.
now driftwood- man stand high, write, look away, look again his write- fire of sun in eye into mind- fly bird. yes, driftwood on ladder high.
"Its a dessert!"
"No, its a building!"
"Its a dessert!!"
"No, its a building!!"
"Hang on you two, its both a dessert AND a building!"
(accolades will follow)
Did all this discussion produce just one relevant alternative, did one single argument make any of the thousands that see some real visions in this change their minds ------- did any sigle opponent show anything that was not just a lame copy a lookalike that don't even carry the truout vision that change the architecture offer fantastic new tools and allow the computer as a real creative tool ------- now make up your mind and tell me if architecture must protect the old 70' or if there ever be room for creative thinking and an honest aproach towerds intelectural rights.
Oposed the new ------ now the new cover the whole process from sketch to 3D model strait to calculated building part and acturly producing the individual building part.
Sorry I forgot the big advanteage being able to add the real graphics, I try again ;
What you see here is the old perception
Oposed the new ------ now the new cover the whole process from sketch to 3D model strait to calculated building part and acturly producing the individual building part.
SORRRY BUT THE NEW MUST ALLWAYS FIGHT IT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THE OLD. -------- DON'T BLAME THE NEW VISIONARY FOR THAT FACT, THEIR TIME WILL HOPEFULLY COME TO.
Per,
I see two variations on a basic form in your examples (old and new), but I don't see a paradigmatic difference as you suggest.
The 'old' version easily be fed into a CNC machine (I assume that's what we're talking about) and produced without further documentation, couldn't it?
Aside from your 'new' version being slightly more rigid due to the orientation of the frames, but even then at the expense of a greater volume of material, there doesn't seem to be that much of a difference.
The rest of you,
Sorry for extending the agony, but if he's actually got a kernal of a good idea, I'd like to see it.
Hi
freq_arch you are quite right the amount of material , the need for the right CNC mashin and the trouble you can meet when spending hours to catch just that covered frame that need to be translated from polyline into Solid entity , --- it is many troubles and new ground but ; even the old version can easily be fed into the same CNC , when you realise what happen when detail after detail you just subtracted as Solids, and the thing turn out as the most exiting structure where so simple means double the strength and make detail you can spend hours just to understand --- and the thing is real not just on the screen. Ontop when you tried the old, know the trouble and how you often must depend on your skills to fiddle, oposed the attitude that you form and shape freely where with the old you wait and solve the problems when they occour.
Yes "the new" are more rigid but as everything fit down millimeter and trouble with the old are the fact manual cutting and fitting ----- also please remember that I keep things simple as I know that it is easy to add transverse members later ,members that you at first think must be there as othervise you think the structure must be "soft" in one direction ---- still try look at one of those structures where you think this "softness" occour, and then emagine the bottom frames dug into concrete, now nothing will move even a millimeter will it ?
Sorry again I realy don't like using the example "old versus new" in this context. But allready in the serpentine pavilion you don't only have more types of materials, you also use one plane more. Fact is that if you follow and count the planes, there are atleast 3 planes in "the old" where the new show only 2 planes ----- then dig the bottom part of the frames solid into concete, and you will se a very strong and very rigid structure , proberly somthing like 4 times as strong and ontop something anyone can project on screen, something where each frame could offer floors at various levels, build-in furniture --- now that is a quite different perception only made possible with the computer, the old could easily be done without but do it show a new form language ?
What happens if your 3d-H structure is damaged? Due to the interlocking nature of the components it seems like at least a serious chunk would have to be dismantled so that the damaged pieces can be replaced in their entirety.
Hi
Yes , the logistic alone will count not just price but number of feet cut ,also a very imortant issue part number and it's place in the assembly , still in particular about logistic it is so sweet that you beforehand have all oppotunity to calculate not just cost but also weight , area and if it shuld make more sense ,the option of nesting or further refining software, that can spot free area or free area on cutoff pieces ------- all this beside it is it's own well defined world not dependand on avaibility of say one specific mean needed to be ordered and found month ahead , shuld make the attitude the method more interesting.
The fact that basicly you don't work with a number of special profiles or special fittings, but make the "goof meaterial" replace both the extruded profiles, it's fittings and fastenings ,plus the free aproach that offer you floors at various levels and foundations for upper floors that go in one with the frames to support the walls, ---- that ease logistic. ..... beside it is allready in the computer, the entity allready are well organised and can be collected easy yielding both weight mass and cost , plus I guess if you had the right system ,when.
Assembly --- true it is a very primitive system I display, but think about it this way, that just the guy who develob a universal join ,one that by automatic cut away material from the projected frame, one that while the frame are cut ,get the holes cut ready to place inbetween two frames, -------- Ok now you proberly say "but now you are not keen about your basic system, now suddenly you talk about an assembly slot fitting" --- True but think about what such thing would offer ; it will all dependant of how it is made ,allow for the frames to move just slightly, wouldn't that be just nice case an earthquake ?
Deviations are not among my 500 english words , but replacebility with a chainsaw or just a flame cutter are acturly supported by the attitude ; in 200 years ,as long as you either have the original 3D drawing or can 3D measure the structure, then you can not just replace a huge lump of frame assembly no, you can acturly make the structure grow a compleatly different form, and just melt it into the framework.
But true ------- the mashins and the process are different ; the manufactoring are acturly simpler than today's 20 different production lines , fact is that a 2D flame CNC cutter is not a very sofisticated piece of mashinery , the math. behind and the processes are 20-40 years old ; but isn't that just great --- that it also mean a quite simple and easy to understand Math. Also this could be done with an 8 bit computer, it do not ask very high level technology and ontop you get what you project, down millimeter.
Then ofcaurse you can emagine problems here and there, but if you ever build a boat, if you ever build a house, you will know how much efford are saved with a fact reliable account , one that reflect better in the computer drawing, than how things work with toay's logistic that is acturly just small symblos on a screen, connected to a primitive database.
If part of a structure are dameaged be sure that just any of today's steel-grid systems, would make more trouble being repaired.
With this system as I ansvered a-f , you have "original spareparts" in 200 years from now ; as long as you can either measure the structure 3D or have the original basic 3D drawing, then you can even make the repaired section better with better sheet materials.
In fact this deliver the organic grown architecture, it can over time change form without you can see where the new lumps of building core been inserted --- ontop the mashin to manufactor the building frames can be placed on site, the materials being just sheet material, allow for further develobment of better sheet materials even green.
----------- But as I allready said, I try keep the structures simple ; emagine a combine of different types of framework material different "scale" cube size , and just this ; the sheet material itself made as 3D-H frames .
"...you have "original spareparts" in 200 years from now..."
So who controls the diaper changing on the vast army of computer monkeys that's going to work to keep those 200 year old computer drawings up to date and current with the latest technology?
this stuff is already being done, has been done, and is nothing new. Read the latest issue of Architecture and there is a steel structure project that is actually built.
Yes jasoncrose proberly in the method it been my pleasure to develob even realise, I prometed this method freely and openly, ever since I realised, what increadible options this realy is ---- going from the not digital projecting, directly to controlling the mashins that acturly bring you a cabin at a third the cost --- but realy ; are and were they ,the architects and designers I knew , realy nothing but paralysed by the fame ,that is what I wonder.
See the architects I met never had a clue , the most beautifull things was allway's made by the greatest svine , still I early realised that a bright idea are bound to meet a frigid Faggot , the best visions even they deal with progress and democracy act nothing, compared the wanted spetacular feasts and all that drinking, still you know the price ; the class bully the web as ,not the mean of educating , rather the tool to progress just that dishonesty the whole issue was about burying.
And jasoncross I examinied the tradisional architect application, I know the code in the lame architect applications, but if the core are rotton , why even deal with architecture that are made for feast willing mayers , in all the spetacular brave speaches about the future ; they shuld consider the headake tomorrow , ------- If this grow the new jobs if the avereage architecture student start being a bit less smartass, and realise the art is not only a social game.
Im'e glad when architecture start profit from as trivial mean as forming digital building elements , glad to make a difference.
--------- Still why have the few attemts been so single minded ; a lookalike no one would buy even as a garden shed, an undulated replacement of a computer mesh this time in 3D-H but sadly, misunderstood, as 3D-H damn can provide better than the only thing you can emagine ---- are we here to develob feast project architecture, producing structure only for a spetacular arts presentation ?
Reality just as displayed 3D on your screen, a Cabin at the third the cost, now in two thirds the tradisional structure , as this cubing are stronger than that of a card house. ----------- If you think a 3D-H ask to much sheet material, go restore that fact, make a better house and you see. Various levels floors ,thru that is made before, but never on a foundation in just one material, that cuntinue in frames ,that also farry the stairs and floors , do the same in a rigid steel boxwork and you have the same forms, but are stuck in develobment. This make all.
wow - 1000 posts. in celebration of this accomplishment(?) i would like to initiate a competition to design a "hi all you fancy graphics lovers" t-shirt. it will be judged by you, the public. the winner will win 5 of the t-shirts and a $100.
Hi all you fancy graphics lovers
johndevin the accustic is said to be good in that round interiour of that Opera --------- but from what I know some details been added to soften the sound , anyway I have not heard that the sound is impossible that the rounded interiours .
Now the final build is very different than that of a 3D-H ----- what I did after inserting the 2D sections into their right place in a 3D drawing, was to realise how stupid things work when no one realy understand the new options, there was a 3D router to work what thy thought a 3D drawing would bring, but the seven mile jump, from "how we allway's did" to even understanding a 3D-H structure ,bringing something with just a bit vision about 3D works, was simply to great a challance also in this build.
Per: thanks for this elucidation. Two interesting articles in today's Guardian about Danish life & culture:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1522019,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0,11710,1522358,00.html
This I hope will help us all to understand you better.
Eh --johndevin if you want to see these 2D sections I can point to a Yahoo group where I left them at display. They are trivial 2D sections and I only used the outlines to shape that Solid, ---- just to show that there are another way to perform a structure, another way as the resulting "how we allway's did it". -------- Problem proberly is that "they" thought that as there was a 3D router avaible then that router shuld just be forced to do things "as they allway's was done" , and so it worked.
The whole issue only deal with how dificult it is for builders with modern digital projecting, but I don't know if my english are good enough to describe this absurd story. Anyway the section detail planes are avaible in a Yahoo group, these are not my drawings so they only are there as graphics.
good, good read.
ask me why see many gold crown on camus, kierkeyard, big, big writes- these writes bowed down by men square hat black/rat tail? funny, funny.
now driftwood- man stand high, write, look away, look again his write- fire of sun in eye into mind- fly bird. yes, driftwood on ladder high.
i want to congratulate you all for turning this thread into pure, beautiful substance.
i want to congratulate myself for laying another brick in the 3D-H edifice.
there.
done.
next?
I want to congratulate myself for coming up with the next Archinect T-shirt...
<< Someone has just responded to "Hi all you fancy graphics lovers" at Archinect.com You can see the full thread here: http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=8091_900_42_0 >>Imagine a plain, white, Hanes Beefy T with the following emblazoned on the front:
(you guys are all so brilliant it makes me feel as if I have drunk the finest champagne...)
Crap... Hit the wrong button.
To remove yourself from receiving further notifications from this thread, click here: ]http://archinect.com/members/members.php?p=rmv&id=8091&m=7821"Archinect" and the logo would appear on the left sleeve. The back would have this:
There would be a generic version for the layperson, but Archinect members would be able to personalize theirs with their member number...
And after he gets his t-shirt, johndevlin can draw arrows from the link on the front and back that points down to his pants!
Because that'd be funny.
now THAT is one of the funniest posts i've ever seen.
or better yet, as in my case, an image of someone getting ready to hang themselves when the:
To remove yourself from receiving further notifications from this thread, click
here:
]http://archinect.com/members/members.php?p=rmv&id=8091&m=7821
doesn't seem to work on a particular post.
"Its a dessert!"
"No, its a building!"
"Its a dessert!!"
"No, its a building!!"
"Hang on you two, its both a dessert AND a building!"
(accolades will follow)
There are to much talk to many words to little graphics.
Make architecture into what it realy shuld cover, true visions and exiting new solutions.
Did all this discussion produce just one relevant alternative, did one single argument make any of the thousands that see some real visions in this change their minds ------- did any sigle opponent show anything that was not just a lame copy a lookalike that don't even carry the truout vision that change the architecture offer fantastic new tools and allow the computer as a real creative tool ------- now make up your mind and tell me if architecture must protect the old 70' or if there ever be room for creative thinking and an honest aproach towerds intelectural rights.
I totally agree...
What you see here is the old perception
http://www.ohmdesign.com/siza/projects/Serpentine/full/04_Serpentine_Gallery_Pavilion_2005_Interior_Final_02.jpg
Oposed the new ------ now the new cover the whole process from sketch to 3D model strait to calculated building part and acturly producing the individual building part.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/lade-2.jpg
Sorry I forgot the big advanteage being able to add the real graphics, I try again ;
What you see here is the old perception
Oposed the new ------ now the new cover the whole process from sketch to 3D model strait to calculated building part and acturly producing the individual building part.
SORRRY BUT THE NEW MUST ALLWAYS FIGHT IT'S RIGHT UP AGAINST THE OLD. -------- DON'T BLAME THE NEW VISIONARY FOR THAT FACT, THEIR TIME WILL HOPEFULLY COME TO.
Per,
I see two variations on a basic form in your examples (old and new), but I don't see a paradigmatic difference as you suggest.
The 'old' version easily be fed into a CNC machine (I assume that's what we're talking about) and produced without further documentation, couldn't it?
Aside from your 'new' version being slightly more rigid due to the orientation of the frames, but even then at the expense of a greater volume of material, there doesn't seem to be that much of a difference.
The rest of you,
Sorry for extending the agony, but if he's actually got a kernal of a good idea, I'd like to see it.
Hi
freq_arch you are quite right the amount of material , the need for the right CNC mashin and the trouble you can meet when spending hours to catch just that covered frame that need to be translated from polyline into Solid entity , --- it is many troubles and new ground but ; even the old version can easily be fed into the same CNC , when you realise what happen when detail after detail you just subtracted as Solids, and the thing turn out as the most exiting structure where so simple means double the strength and make detail you can spend hours just to understand --- and the thing is real not just on the screen. Ontop when you tried the old, know the trouble and how you often must depend on your skills to fiddle, oposed the attitude that you form and shape freely where with the old you wait and solve the problems when they occour.
Yes "the new" are more rigid but as everything fit down millimeter and trouble with the old are the fact manual cutting and fitting ----- also please remember that I keep things simple as I know that it is easy to add transverse members later ,members that you at first think must be there as othervise you think the structure must be "soft" in one direction ---- still try look at one of those structures where you think this "softness" occour, and then emagine the bottom frames dug into concrete, now nothing will move even a millimeter will it ?
Sorry again I realy don't like using the example "old versus new" in this context. But allready in the serpentine pavilion you don't only have more types of materials, you also use one plane more. Fact is that if you follow and count the planes, there are atleast 3 planes in "the old" where the new show only 2 planes ----- then dig the bottom part of the frames solid into concete, and you will se a very strong and very rigid structure , proberly somthing like 4 times as strong and ontop something anyone can project on screen, something where each frame could offer floors at various levels, build-in furniture --- now that is a quite different perception only made possible with the computer, the old could easily be done without but do it show a new form language ?
Per, there are reasons for splitting up a frame in different parts, and it's not because of inexperience with CNC:
- production
- logistics
- assembling
- deviations
- replaceability
What happens if your 3d-H structure is damaged? Due to the interlocking nature of the components it seems like at least a serious chunk would have to be dismantled so that the damaged pieces can be replaced in their entirety.
the anithesis of per's method
now if only all that concrete could float in mid air (say 36" above the ground)
btw, i too made the mistake of having the "notify when someone replies" box checked when this first started.
my fancy graphic lovers bulk mail folder is stuffed.
Hi
Yes , the logistic alone will count not just price but number of feet cut ,also a very imortant issue part number and it's place in the assembly , still in particular about logistic it is so sweet that you beforehand have all oppotunity to calculate not just cost but also weight , area and if it shuld make more sense ,the option of nesting or further refining software, that can spot free area or free area on cutoff pieces ------- all this beside it is it's own well defined world not dependand on avaibility of say one specific mean needed to be ordered and found month ahead , shuld make the attitude the method more interesting.
The fact that basicly you don't work with a number of special profiles or special fittings, but make the "goof meaterial" replace both the extruded profiles, it's fittings and fastenings ,plus the free aproach that offer you floors at various levels and foundations for upper floors that go in one with the frames to support the walls, ---- that ease logistic. ..... beside it is allready in the computer, the entity allready are well organised and can be collected easy yielding both weight mass and cost , plus I guess if you had the right system ,when.
Assembly --- true it is a very primitive system I display, but think about it this way, that just the guy who develob a universal join ,one that by automatic cut away material from the projected frame, one that while the frame are cut ,get the holes cut ready to place inbetween two frames, -------- Ok now you proberly say "but now you are not keen about your basic system, now suddenly you talk about an assembly slot fitting" --- True but think about what such thing would offer ; it will all dependant of how it is made ,allow for the frames to move just slightly, wouldn't that be just nice case an earthquake ?
Deviations are not among my 500 english words , but replacebility with a chainsaw or just a flame cutter are acturly supported by the attitude ; in 200 years ,as long as you either have the original 3D drawing or can 3D measure the structure, then you can not just replace a huge lump of frame assembly no, you can acturly make the structure grow a compleatly different form, and just melt it into the framework.
But true ------- the mashins and the process are different ; the manufactoring are acturly simpler than today's 20 different production lines , fact is that a 2D flame CNC cutter is not a very sofisticated piece of mashinery , the math. behind and the processes are 20-40 years old ; but isn't that just great --- that it also mean a quite simple and easy to understand Math. Also this could be done with an 8 bit computer, it do not ask very high level technology and ontop you get what you project, down millimeter.
Then ofcaurse you can emagine problems here and there, but if you ever build a boat, if you ever build a house, you will know how much efford are saved with a fact reliable account , one that reflect better in the computer drawing, than how things work with toay's logistic that is acturly just small symblos on a screen, connected to a primitive database.
Per's 'method' would also increase the amount of material used in construction by at least ten times.
Sounds like a bad idea if you're increasing construction and maintenance costs...
ten times the material = no LEED certification
Actually, I'm not sure that's necessarily true... Scarily enough...
I'm still reading up on my ver.2.1.
Pixelwhore ;
If part of a structure are dameaged be sure that just any of today's steel-grid systems, would make more trouble being repaired.
With this system as I ansvered a-f , you have "original spareparts" in 200 years from now ; as long as you can either measure the structure 3D or have the original basic 3D drawing, then you can even make the repaired section better with better sheet materials.
In fact this deliver the organic grown architecture, it can over time change form without you can see where the new lumps of building core been inserted --- ontop the mashin to manufactor the building frames can be placed on site, the materials being just sheet material, allow for further develobment of better sheet materials even green.
----------- But as I allready said, I try keep the structures simple ; emagine a combine of different types of framework material different "scale" cube size , and just this ; the sheet material itself made as 3D-H frames .
So who controls the diaper changing on the vast army of computer monkeys that's going to work to keep those 200 year old computer drawings up to date and current with the latest technology?
per,
if you ever come to america, you are welcome to stay at my place.
by the way, you don't happen to know a danish dancer named charlotte jorgensen, do you?
this stuff is already being done, has been done, and is nothing new. Read the latest issue of Architecture and there is a steel structure project that is actually built.
Yes jasoncrose proberly in the method it been my pleasure to develob even realise, I prometed this method freely and openly, ever since I realised, what increadible options this realy is ---- going from the not digital projecting, directly to controlling the mashins that acturly bring you a cabin at a third the cost --- but realy ; are and were they ,the architects and designers I knew , realy nothing but paralysed by the fame ,that is what I wonder.
See the architects I met never had a clue , the most beautifull things was allway's made by the greatest svine , still I early realised that a bright idea are bound to meet a frigid Faggot , the best visions even they deal with progress and democracy act nothing, compared the wanted spetacular feasts and all that drinking, still you know the price ; the class bully the web as ,not the mean of educating , rather the tool to progress just that dishonesty the whole issue was about burying.
And jasoncross I examinied the tradisional architect application, I know the code in the lame architect applications, but if the core are rotton , why even deal with architecture that are made for feast willing mayers , in all the spetacular brave speaches about the future ; they shuld consider the headake tomorrow , ------- If this grow the new jobs if the avereage architecture student start being a bit less smartass, and realise the art is not only a social game.
Im'e glad when architecture start profit from as trivial mean as forming digital building elements , glad to make a difference.
--------- Still why have the few attemts been so single minded ; a lookalike no one would buy even as a garden shed, an undulated replacement of a computer mesh this time in 3D-H but sadly, misunderstood, as 3D-H damn can provide better than the only thing you can emagine ---- are we here to develob feast project architecture, producing structure only for a spetacular arts presentation ?
Reality just as displayed 3D on your screen, a Cabin at the third the cost, now in two thirds the tradisional structure , as this cubing are stronger than that of a card house. ----------- If you think a 3D-H ask to much sheet material, go restore that fact, make a better house and you see. Various levels floors ,thru that is made before, but never on a foundation in just one material, that cuntinue in frames ,that also farry the stairs and floors , do the same in a rigid steel boxwork and you have the same forms, but are stuck in develobment. This make all.
actually the article did not mention you at all you arrogant fool.
5
come on 1000!
and yet again Faggot rears its ugly head!
come on now, lets hit 1000 without any name calling...
damn you beta for beating me to it!
I forgot what this thread was all about months ago. C'mon 1000
Are we there yet?
now we are
Yep...
t-shirt goes to A
Huh...
I was expecting something much more...
Orgasmic. However, it was completely unsatisfying. I feel used.
wow - 1000 posts. in celebration of this accomplishment(?) i would like to initiate a competition to design a "hi all you fancy graphics lovers" t-shirt. it will be judged by you, the public. the winner will win 5 of the t-shirts and a $100.
more info will be posted soon.
Awesome.
I now have a purpose...
do you have the facilities to make a t-shirt out of 3d-h? cause it obviously is superior to standard cotton t-shirt fabric construction.
but in any case...
sweet!
the invention of the t-shirt contest is on of the best thing out of this post if not the best.
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.