Privacy Screen

Team Junyu Cao, Wanting She, Qiao Ding

The design of the privacy screen attempts to elaborate the process of fabrication and manufacturing. This concept can be traced back to the discussion of the computer-generated design, aka: Parametrics, versus human-hand-generated design. As a part of the requirement, we have to fabricate a full-scale privacy screen by hand after writing a Grasshopper definition. The combination of the two was read as the collaboration between computer and human-hands.


And to celebrate the harmony and contradictory, the design of the privacy screen intentionally shows the trace and marks during the fabrication. The size and thickness of the screen were determined by the accessible materials. The process of dividing chipboard was involved as well. Cracks at joint and relics of white glue and hot glue were kept. The opening on the side of the wall shows the interior structure of the wall and the taps that help gluing, while also helps our hands to go in and out during manufacture.


In addition to above, the design attempts to allow audience to perceive the screen in a more three-dimensional way; not only observe it from its back and front, from side to side, but also from top to the bottom. In order to achieve that, the inner triangle was tilted up, especially at the bottom rows, so that audience could observe the interior of the bottom from regular eye level.

Final Presentation


Aperture Strata Privacy Screen


By Pam Chaiyachakorn, Nina Djurkovic and Ana Vasquez

The Aperture Strata privacy screen was inspired by the naturally occurring veining found in leaves in nature and the work of La Voûte de LeFevre by Matter Design Studio.  By combining vornoi driven definition and attractors that control the opening of the apertures on the screen on a graphmapper, we were able to create variations of privacy by the movement of our attractors affecting aperture size.

Our team chose to use birch plywood for our material specifically for the richness and depth it would provide when the different layers of the plywood would be exposed.  We decided that having our screen CNC milled would be our best option in executing our design that includes a movement from sharp geometric shapes to soft organic shapes.  Due to the long milling time and limited hours at Pratt’s CNC mill, we did not have enough time to combine the panels below back to back.

Here are the variation of our panel: Final Group Presentation-Pam-Nina-Ana






Privacy Screen


By Aneesh Carvalho , Xiao Jing and Dineet Sapra

The project is inspired by the Warehouse renovation project by Archi Union Architects in Shanghai. We explored the gradual rotations of each brick block so that when built as a wall, it produces wave patterns.

The grasshopper definition includes a graph mapper that governs the curvature of the wall, so that different configurations can be analysed to reach a structurally stable curve wall. the rotation of each brick is computed by the “sine” mathematical function.

Each iteration provides a varying degree of privacy which can be manipulated by the variables in grasshopper as per the design requirement.

The main challenge for this project was the structural stability of each iteration. The material we used was 2 ply chipboard, which when joined together to form a 4-sided box, raked to the sides because of lateral forces. However, the varying rotation angles formed by the stacking of bricks provided stability to the finished wall.

A greater amount of structural stability can be achieved by using materials like wood for the indivual building blocks.


Presentation with design variations:




the Hexagon Hive

Our team’s privacy screen was inspired by static partitions that appear to have movement through their organic and undulating forms.  An important design consideration for us was that our screen not only provided privacy but varying levels of privacy from different view points, therefore adding to the sense of movement and creating variation in the overall screen composition.

We faced many challenges in getting our definition to work successfully.  While it seemed to work on Grasshopper, we printed numerous test models only to find out that this was not the case when attempting to assemble the individual cell components.  Surfaces that were supposed to go together according to the definition did not match up.  We spent most of the project trying to resolve this through trial and error and really working through the definition to identify the problem.  We were beyond thrilled when we finally resolved the issue and our model pieces actually fit together! The definition finally worked!

Because of the problems we encountered and the length of time it took to resolve, we ultimately ended up with a very simple definition with two design variables: cell count and input surfaces.  We experimented with numerous surface types and cell counts and found that a curved surface with a higher cell count was best to achieve the different privacy levels we wanted.

While our final screen does not have the type of movement and undulation as the partitions that initially inspired us, we were able to produce a screen that has the varying levels of privacy that we intended. Overall, our team is very happy with our final project and proud of the challenges we overcame and the work we accomplished.