I was just curios of how 3D printer might affect architecture students in studio classes. I know it might sound a bit crazy but can a student use a 3d printing machine to help form models?
It sounds like a lazy thing to do but that's what technology is. It makes our life little easier and making us take short cuts. I thought about this briefly and came up with a questions.
Can 3d printing become an significant use in building a model for studio classes?
Will professors have a positive reaction to this or is the current concept (creating a model with your own hands and ability) a better option?
In my opinion this will have a positive approach to building a model because now students won't worry about their ability of how to build it and they will have a better sense of design in their model. This what I believe, but however, I know there can also be negative aspects to this. But in the end I think it will save a big chunk of sleep for us architecture students and have us be more focus towards our field.
What are your opinions?
Can this affect architecture students?
Will professors have bright thoughts towards this new concept?
"3D printing for architects" thank you for NRI 3d Lab, great video
I've actually been 3D printing my models for the past few semesters and professors don't seem to mind, infact they all seem to find it "cool".
The problem with desktop 3D printing is that it's still in its infancy and more too often it is easier to make a model by hand than to print it. My makerbot constantly breaks down, the customer support is terrible and the repair bills just add up. Worse of all, it takes weeks not days or hours to print models at 1/16th or 1/8th scale
along the lines of wreky's comment, i wonder about the time-savings implied in your original post. any other commentators with experience want to contrast the time/ease ratio spent making a hand-model vs printing one out?
Making physical models means you have to be fully engaged and 3d printing, no matter how long it takes, it's not really your time, especially when the job is outsourced.
As a student, I do not see the merits in printing all your models. In fact, the major consumers of 3d printing are big corporations dealing with clients who do not care about the intrinsic aesthetic aspect of a model but merely what the product would look like. They are totally alienated from the making of the model and simply outsource the job to others so it is time and energy saving to some extent.
Maybe, not just for architectural model, but real-world manufacture of buildings. My professor has conducted a studio discussing about how 3D printing would change the process(form is a result) of architectural construction.
Jan 7, 14 1:09 am ·
·
"But in the end I think it will save a big chunk of sleep for us architecture students and have us be more focus towards our field."
Save students sleep? Ha ha hahaahahahahah. No. Regardless of the methods architects (and especially architecture sturdentas) will always be compellled to do more. Ask yourself, how much sleep was saved by other innovations such as computers and plotters? I'm guessing none.
And even if a student had the discipline to save some sleep, relying on machines tends to raise anxiety levels. How many have hit ctl-P thinking they were finished only to see the plot come out looking wrong?
A low tech approach that relies on your hands is actually less stressful because it is easier to control. When sitting at the desk with an exacto blade and some chipboard, you have total control over the materials and also benefit through a kind of tactile learning & understanding of the material through your hands.
Granted, 3d printing has a benefit of reproduciton (should you lose a model then it's easy to recreate) but I don't see much benfit to the student of mindless reproduction.
you're right in some parts, student will always be pushed to the limits with more and more expectation towards learning but from what you're saying "technology is unreliable" I believe most of experienced, senior architects will say stuff similarly to that because they had control over everything during their rookie years.
"how much sleep was saved by other innovations such as computers and plotters? I'm guessing none."
-probably a lot I believe, but these kind of technological innovations has also pushed architects for better uses. My point isn't about how much sleep innovations will save us because in the end it will always be huge fantasy for all architects&students.
Sry idk what happened in previous post. But to continue. When building models I believe that the 3d printer should only be used to either highlight certain areas or create parts that can't be done with chipboard. Plus when getting out of the computer and building hand models you must immediately begin to think about the building process. How it will hold up and what goes up next. With 3d printing you lose this experience
I don't like that everyone is discussing 3D Printing as only an architectural model building tool...Why can't we use our 3D modelling and fabrication skills to tap into fields like organ-printing and rapid product prototyping? Those synthetic organs sell for thousands of dollars! There is a huge potential for architects to seep into other fields of discipline with this emerging paradigm shift...the technology is there, it just needs some forward thinking people to move it where its necessary.
anyways, back to the models...I've only done a few prints, but from my personal experience, it all comes down to how well you can systematize the various processes and materials into a single composition. 3D printing offers range of fabrication that is not achievable by 2D laser cutting. Laser cutting can only work in two dimensions, but can be great for cutting or folding surfaces, slabs, columns and other "bases" in which you can detail out further via 3d printing or hand building. People that are "against" the craft of 3D printing just simply don't know any better, and I'm sorry if you're one of them but its true. The wider range of tools that you can operate, the more freedom you will have in the end and you won't be limited to the technology of the status quo.
With that being said...when I'm in the early design stage in school, I'm handcutting chipboard, museum board, cardboard, foam, or whatever it takes to push the project forward. If I need to get an idea of space or tectonics, I'll hand build the shit out of it. Its FUN! But if I'm doing a model for presentation, there's no point in hand building that thing like you're some kind of new-age craftsman (and believe me I've done it. It takes a long time)...use your 3D model that you've been working out details with and put it straight into production. The hard part is learning how to make all these mediums work in a way that is streamlined, efficient and ultimately a product of your mind rather than the machine. The medium influences the message and that goes without saying these days...lets adapt to these changes continue to make great architecture!
3D printing calls for a different level of precision in terms of digital modelling. You really have to think about how you build the digital model as well in order for the final 3D printed product to come out correctly and is in fact, printable. Unlike illusions you create in 3D studio for example, Rhino, as a fabrication tool calls your attention to the details in the geometry you are printing and so sometimes you need to resolve those issues before you can print.
3D printing is more about presenting a final product that is "set in stone" rather than an amorphous concept that is capable of changing. From this standpoint, in general I don't like students who 3D print study models because for me, architectural design is a process that is not linear. If they want to 3D print their final model and compliment it with a bunch of drawings that explain their process- great... but to just have some nice clean plans and a perfectly printed 3D model is not exciting as to see how the student arrived to the conclusion expressed in the form of the above described way.
I agree with rim035 regarding 3d printed models not looking great. My company uses color3dprinting to create very realistic models. 99% of the printers out there cannot achieve our level of printing, but many schools now have similar printers to our powder-based machine. We recently 3d printed a very ornate facade model for Chanel of their first boutique in Paris. They were ecstatic with the results, and I think this offers a good example of a 3d printed model that looks better than most scale models built by hand.
Bulgar's point about the geometry in the model being clean enough to be 3d printed is right on. You can get away with a lot when you're 3d modeling something in a surface modeling program for the purposes of rendering or animation. But when it comes time to 3d print, the software will call out any imperfections in the mesh.
My office offers discounts to students in the New York City area who 3d print on our machine. As a student, you could probably find a similar company in your area willing to offer a discount for students if your school doesn't offer its own service, or becomes overwhelmed with student work as is usually the case around finals or other big presentations.
In my opinion this will have a positive approach to building a model because now students won't worry about their ability of how to build it and they will have a better sense of design in their model.
I actually think hand made models are the least skill based method of building representation, which is of great benefit people early in their arch education.
old news. To be truly at one with architectural theory, for the best grades one must embrace documenting your design development with the most primitive of technologies. My degree was established on the foundation of regression, carving my final project onto stone tablets with a hammer and chisel. Any model making was undertaken with Egyptian slaves who I worked to death in the mold of the great Pharaoh architects. My hair shirt was a warm if not an itchy alternative to the traditional Mesopotamian loin cloth which is not best suited to a British winter.
I had a 3d printer in my studio for three weeks this summer. Ended up returning it. The amount of time spent getting it to print accurately was exasperating. Wasn't worth the loss of productivity. Might as well just order stuff from shapeways and make sure I set my meetings schedule to account for that (which can be challenging).
Speaking as a Berkeley CED dropout who, among other things, was sick to death of "Rhino/unrollsrf/print/tape/exacto/glue/repeat", I can't wait for 3D printing to replace Bristol models the way Rhino has replaced the drafting board, 30/60 triangles, and eraser shields. What instructors are most likely to do is what sea captains did when the GPS system went operational in 1990 (take that sextant and go shoot stars the old fashioned way ... that's what got me here!): protect their own experience in model building at the expense of both the art of architecture and the welfare of their students. There is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with sticks, paper, and glue. If you can't design, your 3D printed model will be an abomination; there are no shortcuts to good design so you'll just be able to create abominable designs faster. But having nimble little fingers that facilitate building gorgeous models (which I saw a massive amount of at Berkeley) is no substitute for good design, either.
PS: not claiming to be a great designer, either, but I know 'em when I see 'em!
If "There is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with sticks, paper, and glue" then by extension there is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with lumber, masonry, and so on.
That could have been done with traditional fabrication in a fraction of the time at a fraction of the cost. Aside from that the design sucks and is incomplete.
3D printing has zero economy of scale and is good for making things that are too difficult to easily manufacture via other processes.
Apr 28, 18 8:27 am ·
·
randomised
It couldn't have been done with traditional fabrication, how do you traditionally 3D print a digital computer model? And the costs are irrelevant, did you see the list of collaborators/sponsors ;)
Steel fabrication is about 2,000 years
old. Far more interesting, complex, and difficult works have been produced with this technology.
Use the digital model to generate plans. Bet you've never tried that before.
Apr 28, 18 9:43 pm ·
·
randomised
What's the point of doing such a bridge the old fashioned way when you are researching and creating the latest 3D printing techniques. It is not about the final appearance or the old fashioned techniques that would do something similar.
Architecture and 3D Printing?
Hey everyone,
I was just curios of how 3D printer might affect architecture students in studio classes. I know it might sound a bit crazy but can a student use a 3d printing machine to help form models?
It sounds like a lazy thing to do but that's what technology is. It makes our life little easier and making us take short cuts. I thought about this briefly and came up with a questions.
Can 3d printing become an significant use in building a model for studio classes?
Will professors have a positive reaction to this or is the current concept (creating a model with your own hands and ability) a better option?
In my opinion this will have a positive approach to building a model because now students won't worry about their ability of how to build it and they will have a better sense of design in their model. This what I believe, but however, I know there can also be negative aspects to this. But in the end I think it will save a big chunk of sleep for us architecture students and have us be more focus towards our field.
What are your opinions?
Can this affect architecture students?
Will professors have bright thoughts towards this new concept?
A lot of the students who can afford it seem to do it already.
but are the professors supporting this or are they against it.
I've actually been 3D printing my models for the past few semesters and professors don't seem to mind, infact they all seem to find it "cool".
The problem with desktop 3D printing is that it's still in its infancy and more too often it is easier to make a model by hand than to print it. My makerbot constantly breaks down, the customer support is terrible and the repair bills just add up. Worse of all, it takes weeks not days or hours to print models at 1/16th or 1/8th scale
yeah, i think that which can be done with 3d printing is typically well received.
usually i do not print the whole thing but rather components that i cannot build with bare hands.
3d print objects look rather raw and unfinished to me and i will further advance the model to a more sophisticated level with evident craftsmanship.
also, unjustified use of 3d printing is evidence of mindlessness. It makes your model look oddly cheap despite your expense.
along the lines of wreky's comment, i wonder about the time-savings implied in your original post. any other commentators with experience want to contrast the time/ease ratio spent making a hand-model vs printing one out?
Making physical models means you have to be fully engaged and 3d printing, no matter how long it takes, it's not really your time, especially when the job is outsourced.
As a student, I do not see the merits in printing all your models. In fact, the major consumers of 3d printing are big corporations dealing with clients who do not care about the intrinsic aesthetic aspect of a model but merely what the product would look like. They are totally alienated from the making of the model and simply outsource the job to others so it is time and energy saving to some extent.
Hi,
Maybe, not just for architectural model, but real-world manufacture of buildings. My professor has conducted a studio discussing about how 3D printing would change the process(form is a result) of architectural construction.
"But in the end I think it will save a big chunk of sleep for us architecture students and have us be more focus towards our field."
Save students sleep? Ha ha hahaahahahahah. No. Regardless of the methods architects (and especially architecture sturdentas) will always be compellled to do more. Ask yourself, how much sleep was saved by other innovations such as computers and plotters? I'm guessing none.
And even if a student had the discipline to save some sleep, relying on machines tends to raise anxiety levels. How many have hit ctl-P thinking they were finished only to see the plot come out looking wrong?
A low tech approach that relies on your hands is actually less stressful because it is easier to control. When sitting at the desk with an exacto blade and some chipboard, you have total control over the materials and also benefit through a kind of tactile learning & understanding of the material through your hands.
Granted, 3d printing has a benefit of reproduciton (should you lose a model then it's easy to recreate) but I don't see much benfit to the student of mindless reproduction.
@HandsumCa$hMoneyYo
you're right in some parts, student will always be pushed to the limits with more and more expectation towards learning but from what you're saying "technology is unreliable" I believe most of experienced, senior architects will say stuff similarly to that because they had control over everything during their rookie years.
"how much sleep was saved by other innovations such as computers and plotters? I'm guessing none."
-probably a lot I believe, but these kind of technological innovations has also pushed architects for better uses. My point isn't about how much sleep innovations will save us because in the end it will always be huge fantasy for all architects&students.
I don't like that everyone is discussing 3D Printing as only an architectural model building tool...Why can't we use our 3D modelling and fabrication skills to tap into fields like organ-printing and rapid product prototyping? Those synthetic organs sell for thousands of dollars! There is a huge potential for architects to seep into other fields of discipline with this emerging paradigm shift...the technology is there, it just needs some forward thinking people to move it where its necessary.
anyways, back to the models...I've only done a few prints, but from my personal experience, it all comes down to how well you can systematize the various processes and materials into a single composition. 3D printing offers range of fabrication that is not achievable by 2D laser cutting. Laser cutting can only work in two dimensions, but can be great for cutting or folding surfaces, slabs, columns and other "bases" in which you can detail out further via 3d printing or hand building. People that are "against" the craft of 3D printing just simply don't know any better, and I'm sorry if you're one of them but its true. The wider range of tools that you can operate, the more freedom you will have in the end and you won't be limited to the technology of the status quo.
With that being said...when I'm in the early design stage in school, I'm handcutting chipboard, museum board, cardboard, foam, or whatever it takes to push the project forward. If I need to get an idea of space or tectonics, I'll hand build the shit out of it. Its FUN! But if I'm doing a model for presentation, there's no point in hand building that thing like you're some kind of new-age craftsman (and believe me I've done it. It takes a long time)...use your 3D model that you've been working out details with and put it straight into production. The hard part is learning how to make all these mediums work in a way that is streamlined, efficient and ultimately a product of your mind rather than the machine. The medium influences the message and that goes without saying these days...lets adapt to these changes continue to make great architecture!
3D printing calls for a different level of precision in terms of digital modelling. You really have to think about how you build the digital model as well in order for the final 3D printed product to come out correctly and is in fact, printable. Unlike illusions you create in 3D studio for example, Rhino, as a fabrication tool calls your attention to the details in the geometry you are printing and so sometimes you need to resolve those issues before you can print.
3D printing is more about presenting a final product that is "set in stone" rather than an amorphous concept that is capable of changing. From this standpoint, in general I don't like students who 3D print study models because for me, architectural design is a process that is not linear. If they want to 3D print their final model and compliment it with a bunch of drawings that explain their process- great... but to just have some nice clean plans and a perfectly printed 3D model is not exciting as to see how the student arrived to the conclusion expressed in the form of the above described way.
I agree with rim035 regarding 3d printed models not looking great. My company uses color3dprinting to create very realistic models. 99% of the printers out there cannot achieve our level of printing, but many schools now have similar printers to our powder-based machine. We recently 3d printed a very ornate facade model for Chanel of their first boutique in Paris. They were ecstatic with the results, and I think this offers a good example of a 3d printed model that looks better than most scale models built by hand.
Bulgar's point about the geometry in the model being clean enough to be 3d printed is right on. You can get away with a lot when you're 3d modeling something in a surface modeling program for the purposes of rendering or animation. But when it comes time to 3d print, the software will call out any imperfections in the mesh.
My office offers discounts to students in the New York City area who 3d print on our machine. As a student, you could probably find a similar company in your area willing to offer a discount for students if your school doesn't offer its own service, or becomes overwhelmed with student work as is usually the case around finals or other big presentations.
Making Architectural Structures With our innovative ideas with the help of 3D plant design can develop successful model in actual.
Thanks for the article, it is very instructive. I found this website if you would like to read further infomation: http://www.archiexpo.com/architecture-design-manufacturer/3d-cad-software-10606.html
In my opinion this will have a positive approach to building a model because now students won't worry about their ability of how to build it and they will have a better sense of design in their model.
I actually think hand made models are the least skill based method of building representation, which is of great benefit people early in their arch education.
old news. To be truly at one with architectural theory, for the best grades one must embrace documenting your design development with the most primitive of technologies. My degree was established on the foundation of regression, carving my final project onto stone tablets with a hammer and chisel. Any model making was undertaken with Egyptian slaves who I worked to death in the mold of the great Pharaoh architects. My hair shirt was a warm if not an itchy alternative to the traditional Mesopotamian loin cloth which is not best suited to a British winter.
I had a 3d printer in my studio for three weeks this summer. Ended up returning it. The amount of time spent getting it to print accurately was exasperating. Wasn't worth the loss of productivity. Might as well just order stuff from shapeways and make sure I set my meetings schedule to account for that (which can be challenging).
Speaking as a Berkeley CED dropout who, among other things, was sick to death of "Rhino/unrollsrf/print/tape/exacto/glue/repeat", I can't wait for 3D printing to replace Bristol models the way Rhino has replaced the drafting board, 30/60 triangles, and eraser shields. What instructors are most likely to do is what sea captains did when the GPS system went operational in 1990 (take that sextant and go shoot stars the old fashioned way ... that's what got me here!): protect their own experience in model building at the expense of both the art of architecture and the welfare of their students. There is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with sticks, paper, and glue. If you can't design, your 3D printed model will be an abomination; there are no shortcuts to good design so you'll just be able to create abominable designs faster. But having nimble little fingers that facilitate building gorgeous models (which I saw a massive amount of at Berkeley) is no substitute for good design, either.
PS: not claiming to be a great designer, either, but I know 'em when I see 'em!
If "There is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with sticks, paper, and glue" then by extension there is no good to be had from designing digitally and then building with lumber, masonry, and so on.
3D "printed" bridge from steel.
Amazing
That could have been done with traditional fabrication in a fraction of the time at a fraction of the cost. Aside from that the design sucks and is incomplete.
3D printing has zero economy of scale and is good for making things that are too difficult to easily manufacture via other processes.
It couldn't have been done with traditional fabrication, how do you traditionally 3D print a digital computer model? And the costs are irrelevant, did you see the list of collaborators/sponsors ;)
Steel fabrication is about 2,000 years old. Far more interesting, complex, and difficult works have been produced with this technology.
Use the digital model to generate plans. Bet you've never tried that before.
What's the point of doing such a bridge the old fashioned way when you are researching and creating the latest 3D printing techniques. It is not about the final appearance or the old fashioned techniques that would do something similar.
I'd much rather see how pastry chefs would solve the bridge problem,
A bridge built from pastry dough will not be strong enough.
Ah yes, a croqueembridge with spun sugar reinforcements :)
tintt - it's reinforced with icing. Doh. I guess that's what spun sugar is.
Can we use spun sugar in place of carbon fiber?
Super mutant gluten, bred for structural qualities. Actually, those flour paste models kids do are a good idea.
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.