Kinetic Wallan exploration into dynamic structure

by

Bryant P. YehBachelor of ArchitectureUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos Angeles, CaliforniaMay 1995

Submitted to the Department of Architecture inpartial fulfillment of the requirement for the degreeof Master of Science in Architecture Studies at theMassachusettes Institute of TechnologyJune 1998

@ Bryant Yeh 1998. All rights reserved

The author hereby grants to M.I.T. permission toreproduce and distribute publicly paper and elec-tronic copies of this thesis dgcument ig whole or inpart.

Signature of the Author

Certified by

Certified by

Accepted by

OF T:CHNOLO'-

jM1:71'9

Brant YehDepartment of Architecture

AMay45L 1998-

Takehiko NagakuraAssistant Professorof Architecture

William J. MitchellProfessor of Architecture& Media Arts and SciencesDean of the School ofArclitecture and Planning

Roy StricklandAssociate Professorof ArchitectureChairman,Department Committee onGraduate Students

Li~3RA hL'-)

Reader William L. PorterNorman B. and MurielLeventhal Professor ofArchitecture andPlanning

Support Ewan BrandaGraduate Student,School of Architecture

Clement YehBio-Mech, Stanford 96'

John WeatherwaxGraduate Student,Department ofMathmatics

Peter MoreleyDirector,MIT Central MachineShop

Thanks Kevin Fellingham, PaulKeel, Marios Christodou-lides, Anahid Tokes,"Lucky" @ Joe FactorSales, LA, Tako

4

Kinetic Wallan exploration into dynamic structure

by Bryant P. Yeh

Submitted to the Department of Architecture inpartial fulfillment of the requirement for the degreeof Master of Science in Architecture Studies at theMassachusettes Institute of TechnologyJune 1998

abstract

The existence and survival of an organism in anygiven environment is the ability to adapt and changeto that environment. Living entities are far moreadaptable to a changing environment than anythingproduced by human design. Buildings exist at a verylow level of sophistication when compared to anyliving organism. Living organisms are able to adaptto a changing environment with the aid of manyspecialized systems working in conjunction; circula-tory system, nervous system, structure system andmeans of motion.

For a building to exhibit this kind of sophistication,the integration and design of such active systemsmust be investigated. With new advances in theengineering of smart materials, computational controlmechanisms, and robotics, this is potentially feasible.

My research focuses on the development of one partof such a system; a computer controlled kineticsurface structure or kinetic wall. This system can beadapted to work as an sculptural internal spacedivider, a fagade for an existing building, or a largescale dynamic roof system. The current prototypeprecedes the development of a fully integratedsensory feedback system, which when added couldpotentially be a first step towards a truly activebuilding.

Thesis Supervisors:

Takehiko Nagakura William J. MitchellAssistant Professor Professor of Architectureof Architecture & Media Arts and Sciences

Dean of the School ofArchitecture and Planning

6

Contents

Abstract 5

Why do organisms move? 9

Concepts of Space 10relativity 12space, time, architecture 14

Boundaries of form 14Serra's Torqued Ellipses 15

Natural Form and the Human Hand 16Bone Structure 16Interossdous and Lumbrical Muscles 17fibrous flexor sheaths and tendons 17assesment 18

Surface explorarions 20Paper folding 20folds and resolution 21Scale-less form 22Recursive surfaceness 22Triangles and resolution 23Surface extension in 3d 23Curved shells & Hyperbolic Paraboloids 24Crossing patterns & Structure 26

Kinetic Wall 28Basic Structure 28One bay 29Two bay 29Four bay 29movement 29control 30Computational integration & Control 32Potential uses 33

Bibliography 36

8

Jeff Koudelka, The Urge to See, Prague, August 22,1968.

Why do living organisms move?

Living organisms move to survive. A universe inconstant movement forces bodies, inert and live intoaction. A planetary body's mass works for andagainst other bodies in space causing planets torotate, oceans, waves, weather, and man to move.

Space and form as twentieth century architecturalideas can be described as existing in three overlap-ping realms; perception, mimesis, and physics. Onecould argue that of them perception and mimesis arederivatives of physics but share a strange balance ofpower in the way we discern the formal characteris-tics of space.

To describe a space or its essence we often begin bylaying out its physical characteristics, color, shape,height, size, all definable physically determinatecharacteristics. To describe the experience of thespace beyond a physical based description, we oftentalk of analogous feelings or representations thatcome to mind. These descriptions are often analogiesor shared perceptions that we graft on to the one wewish to describe. Together they form a total percep-tion of a space and form.

Only in the last century has human perception ofmotion and movement begun to influence ideasabout form in architecture. These ideas haveundergone a transformation replacing metaphysicalviews of the world to one of science based percep-tual evidence.

It is this concept of space combined with a physicaldescription that begins to order perception of space.Perception of space is now inseparable and imper-ceptible without movement.

Concepts of Space

Pre-renaissance concepts of the universe were inequal alignment to architectural ideas of space.Often towns and buildings were conceived as theunequivocal center of the known universe. Forexample Rome and Vatican City as planned by popesixtus. Now concepts of space in architecture havestayed at a relatively low level ofNow the universe can only be understood in thediscrete language of mathematics and architectureand building are understood with pre-modernphysics.

The concept of space and its relationship to that of'form' have drastically changed since the renais-sance and modern cosmology began to reinterpretthe conditions of space and its nature. Space hasbeen one of many concepts that had its absolutemetaphysical origin reinterpreted into the realm ofsecular and science based interpretations. If we areto understand dynamic form, it is worth briefly goingover this transformation of the concept of space andits relation to movement.

Henri Lefebvre in his book The Production of Spacecharts the progression of space as a concept firstdescribed by Leibniz as 'infinite', 'indiscernible' andattributed to God and then transformed post-enlightenment into an idea purely of measure andscience. The experience of space and spatiality forLefebvre is not one of either realm; empiro-scientificor divine providence. It is one of dual modalities andonly truly experienced through spatial 'occupation'.Lefebvre explains this through perceptual experi-ence:

The observer stands perplexed before the beauty of aseashell, a village or a cathedral, even though what confrontshim consists perhaps merely in the material modalities of anactive 'occupation' - specifically, the occupation of space...The poetry of shells - their metaphorical role - has nothing todo with some mysterious force, but corresponds merely to theway in which energy, under specific conditions (on a specificscale, in a specific material environment, etc.), is deployed; therelationship between nature and space is immediate in thesense that is does not depend on the mediation of an externalforce, whether natural or divine. The law of space resideswithin itself, and cannot be resolved into a deceptively clearinside-versus-outside relationship, which is merely a represen-tation of space.

Enlightenment map of stars and skymade from projections

Fuller's illustration of relationships andnumerology

All this seems very obvious when a space of neutralvoid or emptiness is taken over it suddenly gainspresence by a form and its relation to the void. As inthe case of a cup and the water it fills. But Lefebrebrings up a more important point concerning itsexistential nature. What are the laws of space inrelation to this? If they are defined by the laws ofform and form is defined by the laws of physics? Thisis a quite trivial line of thought that ends with physicsand Lefebre rejects it. If the nature of space is in itssupernatural observation or occupied nature whatcan we use to define its boundaries?

If the sensation of space is indeed occupation andnot simply one of external versus internal relation-ships R. Buckminster Fuller takes this view one stepfurther asserting that not only does the idea of insideand outside not matter, space has relative propertiesonly definable as high-frequency events that all existwithin relative spheres locality.

"There is no universal space or static space in the Universe.The word space is conceptually meaningless except inreference to intervals between high-frequency eventsmomentarily "constellar" in specific local systems. There is noshape of the Universe. There is only omni-directional,nonconceptual, "out" and the specifically directioned,conceptual "in" We have relationships but not static relation-ships."

Again we get another similar interpretation concern-ing relative conditions in the terminology of scienceand this time directly pointing towards relativitytheory. Einstein's relativity Theory was a building onbuilt on Newton's view and Riemann's ideas ofelemental geometry and form.

Relativity

The important part of relativity theory is that itpoints towards one hallmark and central differencefrom the earlier Newtonian theories of spaceclassical mechanics: motion.

Motion in Einstein's Theory of Relativity is insepa-rable from time, and space. Discrete perception ofany one aspect of space or a body in space can onlybe taken as a whole and as a piece of a greatertotal event that is in itself relative to other entities inspace. This holistic view of space and the universewas drastically different from a Newton's universe ofdiscrete elements.

Newton separated different events within space, andaspects of it: position, mass, speed, and time wereseparately definable aspects. For example if youwere to examine a body in space you could charac-terize it as having a given location in space; x, y,and z coordinate point values in Euclidean space, amass, a velocity, and a specific time when theobject existed in space.(fig.1)

If you were to examine objects in this space eachobject would have its own separate characteristics.To describe one object we can visualize it in two-dimensional space having two coordinates and time.(fig.2)

For an object in Euclidean three-dimensional spacewe can rewrite the equation with each coordinatesquared plus time.(fig.3)

We have ordinate pairs in three coordinates andtime. Notice that 'time' is one dimensional since it isimaginary, linear and unknown.

In relativistic space-time the equation is rewrittenwith time and the speed of light as a constant.(fig.4)

With this we have coordinate position of the objectin space and its relation to spacetime.

figure 1

figure 2 x + y + t

figure 3 x 2 +y2 +Z2 +t

figure 4 x 2 + y2 + Z2 - (ct)2

(ict)2 figure 5

(-1)c2t2

I = x 2 + y2 + z2 - (ct)2

12 _(X 2 +y 2 +Z2)

figure 6

figure 7

The reason for the minus symbol is the sticking pointhere. With any given object in relativistic models ofspace time, time is always a function of the speed oflight. (fig.5) Since time is itself an imaginary conceptit has been given an imaginary number, hence theminus.(fig.6)

/ is the imaginary constant, c as the speed of lightand t as time.

Time is also relative depending on where you are inspace.

To solve for a given length or triangulate the locationof an object we can rewrite the equation solving forlength. (fig.7)

Transposing the equation and solving for time we cansee time as having a inverse and direct relationshipto the speed of light.(fig.8)

So for relativistic models of space we can look attime as a function of the speed of light and itsposition in space. Motion time and space itselfbecome inseparable for all events occurring in space.

figure 8

Sigfried Gideon:Space, Time, Architecture

Motion and modern conceptions of architecture runthrough Sigfried Gideon's interpretation of modernarchitecture in Space, Time, Architecture. Gideonsaw motion and time as aspects of architecture andspace that were fused into the zeitgeist of themodern epoch and its form-makers. If form andmotion were linked to space here was an architec-tural theorist and historian who saw that not onlywas it the underlying motivation, it was the commonlink.

Gideon viewed the forms in contemporary architec-ture as the manifestation of the freedom and motion Construction of Passenger Reception

Terminal, Idlewild Ariport, New York,of a free society. Eero Saarinen, 1963-65

Structural Engineering

Contemporary structural engineering advances weremoving away from simplified notions of form and themethods of engineering thosee forms:

Twentieth-century structural engineering is moving along adifferent path. The tendency to activate every part of astructural system instead of concentrating the flow of forcesinto single lines or channels continues to grow. Such systemscan expand with full liberty in all directions. This results incertain difficulties. The forces cannot be easily controlled:often they evade precise calculation. Only tests by means ofmodels and mock-ups can help. Construction merges with theirrational and the sculptural.

Boundaries of form

He goes on to speak of form and the past limits of it:Cement Hall, Swiss National Exhibition,

Forms are not bounded by their physical limits. Forms emanate Zurich, Switzerland Hans Leuzinger;and model space. Today we are again becoming aware that Robert Maillart 1938-39shapes, surfaces, and planes do not merely model interiorspace. They operate just as strongly, far beyond the confinesof their measured dimensions, as constituent elements ofvolumes standing freely in the open.

Sculpture and architecture were seen to fuse intoone.

Torqued ellipses

Torqued Ellipses, Dia Center for theArts, New York City, Richard Serra,1996-97

If space is indeed 'indiscernible' by itself and existingonly by virtue of its occupation one cannot find abetter example of this occupation than in RichardSerra's recent project "Torqued ellipses".Serra's installation consists of a series of threeellipsoidal arcs of two inch thick Cor-ten steel at aheight of twelve feet and average ellipse of twenty-nine feet by twenty feet. The third series of torquedellipses is an offset grouping of concentric ellipsoidalarcs that begins to describe a kind of architecturalmonument.

The torqued ellipses work by their pure existence inthe space of the open gallery. They are at oncerecognizable as arcs or tubular sections and thenseen in their apparently precarious state of cantileveror overhang. Because of the scale of the pieces theoverhang or twist of two ellipses on a central axisone gets the impression that they are about tocollapse.

The monumental presence of such simple butindiscernible objects that begin to occupy anddescribe the empty space of the gallery begins givethe viewer a sense of his own scale in relation tothese large objects. This sense of scale is clearlyvisible as the viewer walks around and inside theellipses. Serra has aptly titled the piece TorquedEllipses, giving allusion to the process of manufactur-ing or twisting the sheets of heavy steel as well asmotion or movement that the word torque' literallydescribes.

The Human Hand

The human hand is a highly specialized instrument.As mix of biology and engineering it far surpassesany attempt by man to mechanically reproduce it.The human hand

The human hand can be viewed as the model of aperfect robotic appendage. In the hand we have awide variety of specialized muscles, tendons andligaments that is combined with a set of sensitivenerves and sensory receptors. This allows the handto at once sense and manipulate objects and assumea number of different positions required to grasp,handle manipulate as well as create other objects.

This analysis categorizes it into four categories:muscle and tendon systems, bone structure, skinstructure and nerve and sensory systems. I specifi-cally avoid an analysis of the thumb and the musclesover the metacarpals 2 because I am looking at onlythe motor coordination and structure of the fourfingers for any clues that may help in the design of asimilar repetitive system. Nevertheless the opposablethumb' and the orchestrated combination of allsystems working in harmony is what produces thealmost transparent function and usage we experi-ence everyday.

Bone StructureThe bone structure of the hand as documented inanatomical texts looks at the structures of the handas groupings of ascending bones that make up thefingers. The main bones as extending from the baseof the smaller bones in the hand are called metacar-pals. Each metacarpal bone supports a set ofsuccessively smaller bones called phalanges. Thethree phalanges are termed proximal, middle, anddistal.

Bone structures in the hand are hierarchical andfollow a descending ordered progression from thetwo bones that support the wrist. The bone structuresof the hand each incorporate special connectionsthat allow each successive bone to support theattachment of muscles, joints, and tendons, as wellas the next bone it supports. In this way the bones

Tendon of flexor- digitorum profundus

Tendon of Flexordigitorum superficialis

1st dorsal interosseous

interossei

Abductor Adductor polli

digitieminimi m / Flexor pollicisbrevis mn.

Flexordigiti mnimi m -Abductor polli

Opponesbrevis .

digiti minims m Opponens poll

Flexor retinaculum Tendon offlexor corpi radialis m.

Tendons of Tendon offlexor digitorum pollicis longus m.superficialis m.

Deep Muscles of the Palm

collateral ligaments

Distal Intermediate Proximalphalanx phalanx phalanx

Metacarpalbone

Metacarpophalangeal and Interpha-langeal joints, with Ligaments.

M.

cis M.

cis

icis M.

1st lumbrical

Tendon offlexor digitorumprofundus mn.

Lumbrical Muscles

Control slip Extensor .ponsuuu Exten so

Loterl siod,gitxuu' tendon

vincocj,, ekero

Iungo T- endon of boi

Tenon of m./uflex- /9 gilnnccportic!Wis

Extensor Sheaths and the Long FlexorTendons

of the hand can be looked at as only one part of alarger system that cannot work independently of theothers.

Interosseous and Lumbrical Muscles

Often referred to as the "deep hand muscles" thelumbricals and interosseoi are the main muscles thatcontrol finger rotation around the base joint of thefinger or the top of each metacarpal. There are fourlumbrical muscles two originate from the lateral sideof the flexor digitorum profundus of the index fingerand the middle finger. The other two originate fromthe adjacent side of the flexor digitorum profundus ofthe other two fingers (ring-finger and pinky).

It is because they pass from the anterior or front ofthe palm to the dorsal or side of the digits, they canflex the fingers at the top of each metacarpal bone.

Fibrous flexor sheaths and tendons

On the lower or anterior side of the hand there arefive long flexor tendons that are enclosed in smoothtube like structures called synovial sheaths. Thesynovial sheath is simply a smooth fibrous sheaththat is incorporated into various tendons in the hand.Here the sheaths are anchored on each phlange orfinger bone. This anchoring by the fibrous flexorsheaths completely covers the lower side of eachphlange. This creates a cylindrical space in which thelong tendons can run through.

There are two tendons running through each fibrousflexor sheath on the anterior side of each finger.These tendons are called the flexor digitorumprofundus and the flexor digitorum superficialis.

This system of tendons effectively acts like a seriesof pulleys. Together with the lumbricals andinterosseoi, each tendon can control a separatefinger without interfering with the control or move-ment of any of the other fingers

AssesmentBuilding structures and other man-made structuresare often conceived as stand alone systems. In thehand we have a totalized system of structure,muscle, tendons, and joints all working in conjunc-tion to produce a unique indispensible part of thebody. In a building or manmade system this integra-tion is often piecemeal or by component parts thatare designed for general wide-spread use. The handis unique because the combination of the differentsystems is highly integrated and specialized. Can thiskind of integration and flexibility be achieved in aman-made object?

controlable complex trajectories or coupler curves gener-ated by relativley simple bar linkage systems

19

Skin explorations

Surface or skin has always been a major intent ofthis project. I intend any such kinetic system to bethin across its section or have a thickness to surfacearea ratio that approximated that of paper or fabric.I began by looking at surfaces that could be manipu-lated into curved or shaped forms. Paper, fabric,woven-metal screens and other materials basicallyapproximate this quality.

Paper folding

The paper folding and origami like constructions thatbegan with Heinrich Engel provide a valuable lookinto the problems associated with surface structuresand their design. I looked at various methods offolding and strengthening the surface by folding.One characteristic that I specifically looked for was adegree of movement and curvature that could beformed by a repetitive unitized shape. Geometry andform studies of Fuller reinforce the structural integrityof triangulated form. Taking this as a prerequisite forstable structures, I began with the triangle as basicshape. Engel also understood this and goes through arigorous set of case-studies of various foldedtriangularized sheet forms. I repeated the Engelstudies and looked at them from the viewpoint oftheir applicability as kinetic structures.

Engel views the fold as a way to control surfacestresses and their termination points. He also viewshis experiments as directly applicable as roof or spanmethods. In the case of a roof or long span structurethe stability and rigidity is made easier by the factthat they are assumed to be stationary. The designand conception also takes this to be a given. Theamount of stress on a given stationary object-formlike Engel's are also designed to terminate atstationary points. This makes the calculation andprediction of loads relatively simple.

Engels folded forms begin with repetitive unitizedorder and a diagonal triangulation. He then begins tomake more successive folds and triangulations whichsubdivide the form into a composition of smallertriangular folds.

4 aivisions, t aiagonais

8 divisions, 16 diagonals

16 divisions, 32 diagonals

20

4 divisions, 32 triangular surfaces

4 divisions, 64 triangular surfaces

Each triangulation creates a new point whereby thestresses or loads can be distributed. In this way thetotal load of the form is minimized as it as distributedover many points. This works the same way a boardof nails distributes load over many nails instead of afew.

When a paper folded form is torqued out of totalplanar unison, arbitrary stresses begin to generate atunpredictable points. These points stress, strain, andtear at the form.

The repeated stresses generated over multiple bendsand torques eventually cause the structure to looseall its structural integrity.

It is exactly this kind of motion that I am designingfor. In a kinetic surface structure these stresses willappear repeatedly and unpredictably. At these pointsof pressure only extending surface area can compen-sate for the stress. Stretching form.

Folds and resolution

One of the interesting parts of Engel's paper folds isthat they build on each other with complexity. Iftaken to extremes the successive folding will beginto create yet another flat surface. Like a Serpenskigasket, the folds can be multiplied over a hypotheti-cally large surface and reach a state of smaller butagain relative flatness.

Serpenski Sponge, a formwith infinite surface area

8 divisions, 12s triangular surtaces

Surface-ness and Form

Here we begin to see that surface-ness and form canbe seen as a function of resolution. When we thinkof structural form in architectural terms we beginthinking at a macro level of existence. We com-monly design structure to exist at this level becauseof our macro scale. We do not design for multi scalarstrength. A dynamic surface form must have inher-ent structural integrity. To have structural integrity ithas to have multi-scalar strength. For this we haveto look to the kernel of its form.

75 triangulated equilaterial surfacesScale-less form

A scale-less form is a form that can exist at multiplelevels of recognition. It is structurally recursive; thatis, the larger total form is a concentric scaled versionof the same smaller forms. This form when extendedinto three dimensions can be either a recursivesurface or recursive form.

Recursuve surface-ness and recursive forms

Recursive surface-ness is a repetitive fractal patternthat exists in a surface form but does not scale up asthe same three-dimensional form, as in bee honey-comb. A recursive form is a form that enclosesrecursive representations of itself within it andrepresents a larger version of the same form, as inthe Serpenski gasket. 150 triangulated equilateral surfaces

Recursive surface forms such as honeycombs andfractalized patterns all exist at a surface level. Mostrecursively scalable forms like the Geodesic spheresand domes do not allow surface deformation andmovement. They work like a Serpenski gasket.Structural integrity is maintained solely by hierarchi-cal recursive scaling. This gives the form totalstructural integrity at multiple scales but locks it intoa scaled up representation of its seed form.

The same series can be created with

22 square folds, but the level of curvatureis not as good as a triangulated surface.

Triangles and resolution

0B3

Hexagonal divisions of Honeybee cells demonstrating'close-packing' of shapes in one planar directon and itsthree-dimensional version the rhombic dodeched ron.

Side view of 75 surface form

Triangles retain a kind of ratio of acceptable rigidityto deformation. They can also be easily scaled upand down. In a recursive surface like a triangulatedsurface form, stresses are forced into direct lines thatterminate at controlled points as in the vertex ofeach triangle. Though a square patterned surfacecan also be scaled up and down easily, when youbegin to torque it out of planar unison, the stressesthat form begin to appear across the diagonals ofeach far vertex as well as adjacent vertexes. Thisbegins to slowly deform each square and bend itdiagonally across its face into two triangles. Thisgives rationality to using a triangular patternedsurface for any surface that will bend into three-dimensions rather than a square patterned surface. Italso spreads out the stresses across many pointsrather that a few.

The higher the resolution of the surface pattern, themore curvature or bending the surface can sustain.

Surface extension and three-dimensions

A repetitive patterned surface like honeycomb canonly be extended in a planar direction. If you createa three-dimensional version or rhombic dodecahe-dron it can be extended.

The same can be said of triangles. They can bebutted against each other to form tetrahedrons andextend indefinatley in three-dimensions. But theycan do this with a degree of inherent stability notafforded any other form.

Close packing of 14 sided polyhedra

Curved Shells and Hyperbolic Paraboloids

Curved Shell and hyperbolic parabolid structures allhave to maintain surface tension or rigid form ofinternal tension to be a structure. Without thistension the structure begins to distort and fail.Hyperbolic paraboloid structures are based on theinherent strength of the form and its ability to movethe stresses from the surfaces back to the groundplane. The sharper the curve the better the resis-tance the form has against downward stresses. Thisworks much the same way a cylindrical barrel vaultdoes.

These structures are very stable in a numerousconfigurations but will obviously fail in motion. If astructure such as the hyperbolic paraboloid could bedesigned from the standpoint of scale-less dynamicstructure what would be its constraints?

Plan, Secion and side projection ofHyperbolic Paraboloid showing straightlines as generators of its form

Section-surface model and plan, sectionand elevation of Hyperbolic paraboloidform.

V

Computer visualization of a curvedsurface form showing triangulation asmeans of curvature.

Diatom. Triceratium alternans.Magnified 1900:1

Crossing patterns and stretching

For a surface to create smooth curvature it must beable to expand in surface area as a piece of fabricwould when stretched and twisted. Multiple mem-ber configuration patterns can designed for differentforms of stresses such as streching or expandingsurface area.

A vertical stress or stretching pattern (fig. 1) canforce stretching and curvature in one direction.

A two way pattern (fig.2) allows stretching in twodirections but less curvature because of the oppos-ing diagonal members.

A diagonally crossed pattern allows two-waystretching and curvature.(fig.3)

The number of members at each node, diagonalpattern direction, and overall regularization of nodesall contribute to a patterns ability to form smoothcurvature.

Obviosly there are many possible configurations ofcrossing patterns that decompose into triangles but Ihave shown only three to show the possible ways tocontrol streching in different directions. For two-waystreching and curvature a one way diagonal patternworks best. Interestingly this is the same methodmany three-dimensional modeling programs use togenerate smooth curved surfaces. (fig. 00)

77

One way stretching pattern with sixmembers terminating at each interior node

Two way stretching pattern with eightmembers terminating at each interior node

77

Two way stretching pattern with sixmembers terminating at each interior node

One way stretching pattern

Two way stretching pattern

Two way stretching pattern with curvature

27

Kinetic wall

Scale-less form. Scale-less structure.

The prototypes represent an attempt to synthesizeideas of scalability, motion-control and form into afew working physical-prototypes. Each prototypeprogressively moves towards control and movementof a larger dynamic surface form.

The structure is basically an assembly of one primarycell design. Each 'cell' is a grouping of three equalsized members that form a equalaterial triangle. Alarger hexagonal unit of comprised of six trianglesgrouped together around a central mast, which formsa 'panel' unit. As more panels are added, thegrouping forms a kind of structural bay. As morebays are added a surface begins to form.

The masts of each panel are held in perpendicularintersection at the center point by a set of cablesthat terminate at the edge vertices of each cell.Additionally they are held in tension by a series ofsprings that force it into an angled position in relationto the next panel.

To facilitate motion, a cable is strung along the backof the two vertical members formed by each cell.This cable begins at the top vertex of each hexago-nal panel and runs through the top of the panel'smast and then back down the adjacent verticalmembers of each preceding cell.

This configuration allows individual control of eachpanel in relation to the adjacent panel. It also affordsthe ability to add more panels to create larger totalsurfaces.

In this way a controllable dynamic surface skin isformed. Control is achieved by a series of computercontrolled servos that control each cable.

Computer control is necessary to control the totalmovement and configuration of the surface. For alarge surface as many as twenty-four servo-mecha-nisms are needed.

One bay prototype

The one bay version demonstrates controlledmovement across three main panels. Form andmotion are the primary concerns.

Two bay prototype

The two bay version explores the relationship ofadjacent bays and form and movement across sixpanels. Skin or surface is proposed as a membraneor fabric to cover the structure.

Cables, Actuators and Control Methods

Three separate servo-motors acctuate each cableand are located below the base of each prototype.The servo-motors are controlled by a servo controldevice which is in turn controlled by a computerbased control interface. Each servo controls therotation of one panel. A controlled curvature can becreated by activating all three servo-mechanisms inunison.

A continuos skin or surface can be attached to theprototype creating an continous surface quality.Mechanics are inside the form and the skin is aseparate external surface.

Design goals for kinetic wall prototypes:

acceptable ratio of thickness to total surface area

scale-less ridgity of form

means of motion / acctuation

computer control of acctuators

Diagram of control and movement ofkinetic wall system

controlprogram

MotorizedBase

computer

WallStructure

acctuatorcontroller

acctuator

structure-torm

Four BayPrototype

30

Diagram of control and movement ofkinetic wall system with sensoryfeedback system

IN

I

computer

acctuatorcontroller

acctuator

sensor

structure-form

Computational integration and control

Integrated computer control is ideally done with anadvanced system of positional sensor devices orsimilar devices. Control is based on a feedback loopsystem.(Diagram 2)

Current prototypes are constructed with only oneway positional servo control.(Diagram 1) Thisprototype is essentially a Level 11 machine or amachine that exhibits multiple degrees of control andmovement, but is still essentially human controlledvia a computer inteface and control system.

kinetic wall asinternal spacedivider

Medium scale tour bay prototype

With the addition of a fully integrated sensor system,the system can gain the sophistication of a Level IVmachine and become a truly dynamic wall system.

I A level one machine can be described as a simple tool, lever,wheel, or cam. A level || machine can be described as asystematized version of a level I machine such as a bicycle, asewing machine, or farm machinery.

2 A level IV machine is described as a machine that hasmultivariable, automatic control, coupled with a heuristic orlearning capacity, such as an auto-focusing system, develop-mental artificial limbs, or expert-systems used to control thewing and surface of fighter-jets.

kinetic wall asdynamic buildingenvelope

Potential Uses

An architectural kinetic surface such as the Kineticwall prototype can be developed as a piece ofarchitectural 'hardware'. It can be used at threescales: small (interior space device fig.1), medium(new building surface fig.2), or large (dynamic roofstructure fig.3).

This system is mobile and can be controlled by eitheran active computer control system or by directhuman movement.

In the case of computer control it is envisioned thateither a set of pre-programmed configurations canbe the form generator or a minimal and maximalrange of form can be set and the control programwill control the form within these paramaters.

For direct manual control the control program can beset to allow free movement within various setparameters. This will effectivley let the users oroccupants activley control the form of the kineticwall.

In this fashion, the kinetic wall can respond to anynumber of human and environment generatedvariables: sun, wind, shade, light, shadow, whim,desire or impulse.

This project has always been an exploration of sorts.It is an incomplete project that only opens moredoors than it closes. The idea of smooth dynamicsurface form and its generation are novel for meonly if the form is active. This is the transformationof static to liquid.

kinetic wall asdynamic roofstructure

33

Al

4m

s

35

Design:

Banchoff, Thomas F. Beyond the Third Dimension: Geometrv Computer Graphics. and HigherDimensions. New York, Scientific American Library, 1990.

Banham, Reyner. Theory and Design in the Second Machine Age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1980.

Barr, Stephen. Experiments in Topology. New York: Crowell, 1964.

Cooke, Lynne and Karen Kelly Richard Serra Torqued Ellipses. New York, Dia Center for the Arts, 1998.

Fuller, R. Buckminster. Synergetics. New York: Macmillan, 1975.

Lefebver, Henri. The Production of Space. New York: Vintage, 1983.

McMahon, Thomas A. and John Tyler Bonner. On Size and Life. New York, Scientific AmericanLibrary, 1983.

Moholy-Nagy, Laszlo. Vision in Motion. Chicago: Theobald, Paul, 1947.

Morrison, Philip Powers of Ten. New York, Scientific American Library, 1994.

Thompson, d'Arcy. On Growth and Form, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1961.

Tufte, Edward. Envisioning Information. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press, 1990.

Tufte, Edward R. Visual Explanations. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press, 1997

Zuk, William. Kinetic Architecture. New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1970.

Structures:

Architecture Research Laboratory, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Architectural Research on the StructuralPotential of Foam Plastics for Housing in Underdeveloped Areas. Ann Arbor, Ml: Architecture Research Laboratory,The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1966.

Culshaw, Brian. Smart structures and materials. Boston : Artech House, c1996.

Engel, Heinrich. Structure Systems. New York: Praeger, 1968.

Gordon, James Edward. The science of structures and materials. New York: Scientific American Library, 1988.

Robbin, Tony. Engineering a new architecture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996.

Sklar, Lawrence. Space, Time, and Spacetime. Los Angeles, California: University of California Press,1977.

Underdown, Emma D. Clinnical Anatomy Principles. St. Louis, Missouri: Mosby, 1996.

Zerning, John. Design Guide to Anticlastic Structures in Plastic.

36

Materials:

Ansari, Farhad, Arup Maj, and Christopher Leung eds. Intelligent civil engineering materials and structures : acollection of state-of-the-art papers in the applications of emerging technologies tocivil structures and materials. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1997.

Center for AeroSpace Information. Smart structures and materials implications for militaryaircraft of new generation, North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Linthicum Heights,Md.: NASA, 1996.

Ove Arup Partnership.

Gandhi, Mukesh V.

Exploring Materials: The Work of Peter Rice, Royal Gold Medalist 1992.London: Ove Arup Partnership, 1992.

Smart materials and structures. New York: Chapman & Hall, 1992.

Kinematics / Mechanisms

Brown, Henry T.

Chironis, Nicholas P.

Garcia de Jalon, Javier. and

Gilbertson, Rodger G.

Molian, Samuel

Reshetov, Leonid N.

Soni, Atmaram H.

Five hundred and seven mechanical movements : embracing allthose which are most important in dynamics, hydraulics. hydrostatics.pneumatics. steam engines, mill and other gearing, presses, horologyand miscellaneous machinery, and including many movements neverbefore published and several which have only recently come into use18th ed. New York : Brown & Seward, 1896.

Mechanisms. linkages, and mechanical controls. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1965.

Eduardo Bayo Kinematic and dynamic simulation of multibody systems : the real-timechallenge. New York, Springer-Verlag, 1994.

Muscle Wires Project Book. 3 rd Ed. Ed. Celene de MirandaSan Anselmo, CA, MondoTronics, 1992.

Mechanism design : an introductory text. New York : CambridgeUniversity Press, 1982.

Self-aligning mechanisms. Chicago, Ill. : Mir Publishers, 1982.

Mechanism synthesis and analysis. Washington, D.C.: Scripta BookCo., 1974.

Computation:

Foley, J. and Van Dam, A. Computer Graphics. Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley, 1990.

Harrison, David and MarkHeinemann, 1996.

Neider, Jackie.

Jaques. Experiments in Virtual Reality. Oxford, England: Butterworth-

OpenGL programming guide : the official guide to learning OpenGL.Reading, Mass. : Addison-Wesley, c1993.

OpenGL Architecture Review Board. OpenGL reference manual : the official reference document for OpenGL.Reading, Mass. : Addison-Wesley, c1993.

Parsons, Ron Vincent. "Computer-aided synthesis of kinematic linkages." Thesis M.S.-Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1975.

Wright Jr., Richard S. and Michael Sweet. OpenGL Superbible: The Complete Guide to Programming for WindowsNT and Windows 95. Corte Madera, CA.: Waite Group Press, 1996.

4 divisions, 32 triangular surfaces

39

.. ......... .. .. .................... ........... .. .. ... . .... ........................ .........................

40

4 rjivisions, 64 triangular surfaces

41

8 divisions, 128 triangular surfaces

43

.......................................... ...... .......... .............. .... ......