After intensive deliberations, deep philosophical pondering and a couple thrown punches we came to a mutual agreeable conclusion to wrap up the semester. Instead of backtracking and trying to redevelop everything from square one, the consensus was to continue on with the already strong plan_B and clean it up.
Since it is impossible to improve the effectiveness of an existing snow fence in the sense of functionality (snow off the road is snow off the road), we have to define ‘performance’ in another way. Based on the strength of our parametric process and research, the main benefit we have to offer is the ability to design the snow landscape itself in a completely customizable fashion. This means we could essentially have a product catalogue where a client can pick their own drift design -or- input site specific variables to get a unique fence. Since the wall would be constructed out of flat panels there could be a wide range of material options and price range -or- site specific salvaged material.
Project: ‘Unique Snowflake’ (…since every wall could be as unique as winter snowflakes…) wasn’t a well received name, so we have some work ahead of us. And instead of ‘item: 001138′ we have the option of giving each wall variation paint color names like ’sultry swirl’, ‘chirstmas eve’, ‘big sky blizzard’, and ’sleigh-ride drive-by’. Or not…
Basically we will be refining our existing work instead of doing more studies, which was deemed unnecessary. We will have teams for the following topics*:
I had an idea along for Ron’s idea of renovation. I saw this project in the July issue of Dwell magazine. The pieces are laser cut and weaved together to create a surface. I think this idea/technique can be totally adapted for us and it keeps with the idea of fabric. Just food for thought.
Source:http://www.tordboontje.com Title: Field of Flowers
To discover the properties of the way porosity, height, and orientation worked with snow. The DRIFT team mocked up a study using a wind tunnel constructed by Jake Ostilund for a fan to fit in. The tunnel would make sure the air flowing out would be in a linear fashion to focus blowing the sugar across the landscape.
The sugar was used as a substitue for its ability to flow and collect like snow.
While commandeering the Upper Gallery in Cheever Hall, Team DRIFT did 10 simulations using different wind fence mock-ups based on a porosity of 0, 25, 50, and 75%, a scaled fence height descending from 10 feet to 2 feet, and two iterations of using porosities of 0 and 50% but incorporating an angle of either 30, 60, or 90 degrees at the end of the fence.
Continuing the development of the project we have been working with cnc’d foam molds in which to create fiberglass forms. There are 3 components to the fiberglass: the fiberglass mat (or cloth), resin, and hardner. The mat or cloth is the actually material. The resin is what wets the mat/cloth, giving its structural value. The hardner is added to the resin before applying to the cloth. The hardner, just like the name implies, hardens the resin. Once dry, the combination creates a very rigid material.
The steps are fairly straight forward. CNC a form out of the foam blocks. Preparation for the to lay the fiberglass on the foam mold has two parts: cover the mold with a material to keep the resin from eating the foam. Once dry, a release agent is applied to the entire surface, allowing the hardened fiberglass to be removed from the mold. Fiberglass mat/cloth is cut into shape and laid over the mold. The mixture of resin and hardner is mixed and applied to the fiberglass mat/cloth with a brush. Multiple layers are used to give the finished product its strength and rigidity.
Our studies revealed a few points that will be key in our final design. First, the fiberglass mat/cloth can be laid over very complex shapes with relative ease. Second, the mixture of resin to hardner is very key in the cure time and strength of the final product. Third, great care needs to be taken with the creation of the initial mold, as the final product amplifies any imperfections in the mold.
Modified the previous grasshopper definition so that the individual panels are now associated with a larger base plane. Instead of having each panel independent of the rest, they are now better related. The panel size was reduced from 2×2 to 1×1 based on the fabrication prototypes (and this can be further adjusted as necessary), thus creating a field of 72 panels on a 8×9 test sample – all of which are controlled by nine adjustable points.
The rotation is still based on distance from the road, and the files are on the network under ‘control wall’.
Here’s an option for plan b dealing with height, depth, and varying porosity. This can be changed/manipulated based on whatever the other groups come up with, if need be. The surface would ultimately be milled on the CNC machine, and then the panels would be molded from that. They would have to be molded with tabs on all sides, and then the tabs could be screwed together. I did some quick sketches of possible supporting structure, and then an iso and a section of the CNC mold that would be created.
The last image is the same surface again, but broken up in different panel sizes. This could possibly be used in Andy’s parametric model with the porosity varying by the panel angle.
Alright, so after a good few hours I finally managed to time lapse the videos and upload them. I’ll post our gathered data soon after this. Let me know if you have any thoughts on these videos.
Working off the earlier development of adjusting surface area based on wall alignment to the wind, I multiplied the logic for 2×2ft panels. Removing the manual adjustment sliders, the rotation angle is now based on the distance from a fixed point (in this case the road). By adding a multiplier to the distance I was able to have further control over the scale ratio between rotation angle and distance.
I tried making the road the point that moves, but for some reason grasshopper logic went all screwy depending on which point plugged into ‘A’ and which to ‘B’. Essentially the whole thing wouldn’t work if I flipped the line direction of association (wall to road vs. road to wall) – couldn’t figure out why.
Next iteration will be to have diameter of openings adjust along a fixed wall. Bambalamb. Files on network as ‘ratio wall’.
