Product Family – Final

The design of this product family is aimed toward planters. I was inspired by images of existing planters with more of a geometric shape and pattern. I saw potential in using the simplistic geometric shapes to modify and create a new type of pattern. As I was developing my design, I decided to use the same base for all my final planters. This meant that they all have the same size and shape, however, the pattern it produces would be different. To achive this, I used a diamond tiling that enabled me to make a pattern that resulted in holding a bigger shape and held together by a small shape. Depending on the U or V count for the diamond, I was able to generate a variety of patterns that are very different. Because I wanted to make the design a little more exciting, I designed a ‘gradient’ effect, where as the diamond shapes get smaller toward to the bottom; it appears to make the top eventually blend itself to the bottom and creates a blurring between the big and the small.

In the process of 3D printing, I found out that my inital five final products is too thin and it would be too fragile to print. Later, I modified the design a bit further and played around with the thickness of the material more. This made the final 3D printed version of the planters. However, I really wanted to have the printed planters with more of the thinner thickness because I believe that the geometry of the pattern is able to be expressed more in the thinner iterations.

100 copy1.12345ezgif.com-gif-maker

Thread – Product Family

Reciprocal Privacy Screen – Katie & Lily

      In this privacy screen project the main goal was to create a freestanding privacy screen for children sharing a space. Using grasshopper and rhino we were able to make various different iterations of 3’ x 5’ privacy screens of which we chose 3 to build at ¼ scale. The screen is meant to be for preschoolers who are generally around 4’ tall or shorter.

This project consisted of two people and although we had different ideas for screens earlier on we did end up agreeing on one particular screen to build after discussing our ideas with each other.

      For our project specifically we wanted to work with the idea of reciprocals. Although we did not build a completely reciprocal frame that supports itself with no joints, we ended up borrowing the reciprocal form and placing it into our screen. This idea was born from the previous product family project as a continuation of the gridded reciprocal design.

      We wanted to work with this design not only because it was a challenge to build because all the pieces were really similar, but also because we wanted to see if we could make a very structured and solid system for the screen. This is needed because children often knock into things and we wanted to be able to ensure that this screen was able to stand well. In the case that the screen did fall, over we also wanted to make sure that the screen was not too heavy but at the same time would be able to support the child’s weight so that the screen does not break under the weight of the child.

      The screen has a clear slotting system that although tedious is reproducible, so as a product this screen would function very well as long as the numbers are there. There is no additional glue required for the screen and all the slots hold themselves up. In the case of mass production as long as the numbers on the screen are followed there would be no problem for most people to build it following instructions. In addition, the density of the screen allows for a lot of privacy especially when viewed form an angle but at the same time is very porous when viewed from the front. This allows parents to be able to easily see their kids while they are behind the screen yet still allow the kids to feel that they are in a private space.

      The final construction of the screen went fairly well building-wise however a problem we ended up having with the other two iterations of the screen where we changed the angle and the density of the screen, was that gravity ended up playing too big of a role on the screen and it began to squish the screen downward. This also had to do with the fact that we used Bristol to build the screen which is a fairly thin material. Although this was not what we had intended it does show that not everything that works in grasshopper will definitely work in the real-world. There still needs to be a lot of consideration that is put into material choice, size and function.

parametrics 1

 

parametrics 2

all
100 PRODUCT FAMILY

parametrics 3

P1

Thread

Final Presentation

Ummm… more help please!

The labeling works on the screen itself….

1

but doesn’t show up on laser cutting unfold when “Ei” is connected to “Item”

and it all shows up as null45

but when “En” is connected to item, there is line-like curve….. so there shouldn’t be anything wrong with “Edges” itself3

and it shows up here:2

also, A0 and A2 (and a bunch of other ones) is line-less but it intersects with other pieces…….

Screen Development (Katie & Lily)

We attempted the notch the various elements together and they seem to be working fairly well in terms of staying together individually . The main concern now is whether or not the entire screen will be able to stay together should it be on a larger scale. blog.jpg

The screen itself has no visible problems the main problem now will be notching everything together because most of the pieces look very similar.

Privacy Screen – Initial Ideas

Because the assignment is a children’s privacy screen, I wanted to incorprorate some type of interactive element to it to make it more interesting and playful. This could mean having moving pieces like pieces that flip or pull out.

sketches.jpg

Another idea follows more of the shape and geometry created from the previous product family project. I would somehow use the diamond shape design to connect pieces (overlapping, notch?).