This post is **the third installment of sort of trilogy**, after *Shapes, Fractals, Time & the Dimensions they Belong to*, and *Developing Space-Filling Fractals*. While it’s not important to have read either of those posts to follow this one, I do think it adds a certain level of depth and continuity.

Regarding my previous entries, it can be difficult to see how any of this has to do with architecture. In fact I know a few people who think studying fractals is pointless.

Admittedly I often struggle to explain to people what fractals are, let alone how they can influence the way buildings look. However, I believe that this post really sheds light on how **these kinds of studies may directly** **influence and enhance our understanding **(and perhaps even the future)** of our built environment**.

On a separate note, I heard that a member of the architectural academia said “forget biomimicry, it doesn’t work.”

Firstly, I’m pretty sure Frei Otto would be rolling over in his grave.

Secondly, if someone thinks that biomimicry is useless, it’s because they don’t really understand what biomimicry is. And I think the same can be said regarding the study of fractals. They are closely related fields of study, and I wholeheartedly believe they are **fertile grounds for architectural marvels to come**.

As far as classification goes, shells generally fall under the category of **two-dimensional shapes**. They are defined by a curved surface, where the material is thin in the direction perpendicular to the surface. However, assigning a dimension to certain shells can be tricky, since it kinda depends on how zoomed in you are.

A strainer is a good example of this – a two-dimensional gridshell. But if you zoom in, it is comprised of a series of woven, one-dimensional wires. And if you zoom in even further, you see that each wire is of course comprised of a certain volume of metal.

This is a property shared with many fractals, where **their dimension can appear different depending on the level of magnification**. And while there’s an infinite variety of possible shells, they are (for the most part) categorizable.

Analytic geometry is created in relation to Cartesian planes, using mathematical equations and a coordinate systems. Synthetic geometry is essentially free-form geometry (that isn’t defined by coordinates or equations), with the use of a variety of curves called *splines*. The following shapes were created via Synthetic geometry, where we’re calling our splines ‘*u’* and ‘*v*.’

These curves highlight each dimension of the two-dimensional surface. In this case only one of the two ‘curves’ is actually curved, making this shape **developable**. This means that if, for example, it was made of paper, **you could flatten it** completely.

In this case, one of them grows in length, but the other still remains straight. Since one of the dimensions remains straight, it’s still a single curved surface – **capable of being flattened** without changing the area. Singly curved surfaced may also be referred to as *uniclastic* or *monoclastic*.

These can be classified as *synclastic* or *anticlastic*, and are **non-developable** surfaces. If made of paper, **you could not flatten them** without tearing, folding or crumpling them.

In this case, both curves happen to be identical, but what’s important is that **both dimensions are curving in the same direction**. In this orientation, the dome is also under compression everywhere.

The surface of the earth is double curved, synclastic – non-developable. “The surface of a sphere cannot be represented on a plane without distortion,” a topic explored by Michael Stevens: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lR7s1Y6Zig

This one was formed by non-uniformly sweeping a **convex parabola along a concave parabola**. It’s internal structure will behave differently, depending on the curvature of the shell relative to the shape. Roof shells have compressive stresses along the convex curvature, and tensile stress along the concave curvature.

Here is an example of a beautiful marriage of **tensile and compressive** potato and wheat-based anticlastic forces. Although I hear that Pringle cans are diabolically heinous to recycle, so they are the enemy.

In terms of synthetic geometry, there’s more than one approach to generating anticlastic curvature:

This shape was achieved by sweeping a straight line over a straight path at one end, and another straight path at the other. This will work as long as both rails are not parallel. Although I find this shape perplexing; it’s double curvature that you can create with straight lines, yet non-developable, and I can’t explain it..

The ruled surface was created by sliding a plane curve (a straight line) along another plane curve (a circle), while keeping the angle between them constant. The surfaces of revolution was simply made by revolving a plane curve around an axis. (Surface of translation also exist, and are similar to ruled surfaces, only the orientation of the curves is kept constant instead of the angle.)

The hyperboloid has been a popular design choice for (especially nuclear cooling) towers. It has **excellent tensile and compressive properties**, and **can be built with straight members**. This makes it relatively cheap and easy to fabricate relative to it’s size and performance.

These towers are pretty cool acoustically as well: https://youtu.be/GXpItQpOISU?t=40s

These are singly curved curves, although that does sound confusing. A simple way to understand what geodesic curves are, is to give them a width. As previously explored, we know that curves can inhabit, and fill, two-dimensional space. However, you can’t really observe the twists and turns of **a shape that has no thickness**.

A ribbon is essentially a straight line with thickness, and when used to follow the curvature of a surface (as seen above), the result is a plank line. The term ‘plank line’ can be defined as a line with an given width (like a plank of wood) that passes over a surface and **does not curve in the tangential plane,** and whose width is always tangential to the surface.

Since one-dimensional curves do have an orientation in digital modeling, geodesic curves can be described as the one-dimensional counterpart to plank lines, and can benefit from the same definition.

The University of Southern California published a paper exploring the topic further: http://papers.cumincad.org/data/works/att/f197.content.pdf

For simplicity, here’s a basic grid set up on a flat plane:

We start by defining two points anywhere along the edge of the surface. Then we find the geodesic curve that joins the pair. Of course it’s trivial in this case, since we’re dealing with a flat surface, but bear with me.

We can keep adding pairs of points along the edge. In this case they’re kept evenly spaced and uncrossing for the sake of a cleaner grid.

After that, it’s simply a matter of playing with density, as well as adding an additional set of antagonistic curves. For practicality, each set share the same set of base points.

He’s an example of a grid where each set has their own set of anchors. While this does show the flexibility of a grid, I think it’s far more advantageous for them to share the same base points.

The same principle is then applied to a series of surfaces with varied types of curvature.

First comes the shell (a barrel vault in this case), then comes the grid. The symmetrical nature of this surface translates to a pretty regular (and also symmetrical) gridshell. The use of geodesic curves means that these **gridshells can be fabricated using completely straight material**, that only necessitate single curvature.

The same grid used on a conical surface starts to reveal gradual shifts in the geometry’s spacing. **The curves always search for the path of least resistance** in terms of bending.

This case illustrates the nature of geodesic curves quite well. The dome was free-formed with a relatively high degree of curvature. A small change in the location of each anchor point translates to a large change in curvature between them. Each curve looks for **the shortest path between each pair** (without leaving the surface), but only has access to single curvature.

Structurally speaking, things get much more interesting with anticlastic curvature. As previously stated, each member will behave differently based on their relative curvature and orientation in relation to the surface. Depending on their location on a gridshell, **plank lines can act partly in compression and partly in tension**.

While geodesic curves make it far more practical to fabricate shells, they are not a strict requirement. Using non-geodesic curves just means more time, money, and effort must go into the fabrication of each component. Furthermore, there’s no reason why you can’t use alternate grid patterns. In fact, **you could use any pattern under the sun** – any motif your heart desires (even tessellated puppies.)

Here are just a few of the endless possible pattern. They all have their advantages and disadvantages in terms of fabrication, as well as structural potential.

Gridshells with large amounts of triangulation, such as Buckminster Fuller’s geodesic spheres, typically perform incredibly well structurally. These structure are also highly efficient to manufacture, as their geometry is extremely repetitive.

Gridshells with highly irregular geometry are far more challenging to fabricate. In this case, each and every piece had to be custom made to shape; I imagine it must have costed a lot of money, and been a logistical nightmare. Although it is an exceptionally stunning piece of architecture (and a magnificent feat of engineering.)

In our case, building these shells is simply a matter of converting the geodesic curves into **planks lines**.

The whole point of using them in the first place is so that we can make them out of straight material that don’t necessitate double curvature. This example is rotating so the shape is easier to understand. It’s grid is also rotating to demonstrate the ease at which you can play with the geometry.

This is what you get by taking those plank lines and laying them flat. In this case both sets are the same because the shell happens to the identicall when flipped. Being able to use straight material means far less labour and waste, which translates to faster, and or cheaper, fabrication.

**An especially crucial aspect of gridshells is the bracing**. Without support in the form of tension ties, cable ties, ring beams, anchors etc., many of these shells can lay flat. This in and of itself is pretty interesting and does lends itself to unique construction challenges and opportunities. This isn’t always the case though, since sometimes it’s the geometry of the joints holding the shape together (like the geodesic spheres.) Sometimes the member are pre-bent (like Pompidou-Metz.) Although pre-bending the timber kinda strikes me as cheating thought.. As if it’s not a genuine, bona fide gridshell.

This is one of the original build method, where the gridshell is assembled flat, lifted into shape, then locked into place.

Having studied the basics makes exploring increasingly elaborate geometry more intuitive. In principal, most of the shells we’ve looked are known to perform well structurally, but there are strategies we can use to focus specifically on **performance optimization**.

These are surfaces that are locally area-minimizing – surfaces that have **the smallest possible area for a defined boundary**. They necessarily have zero mean curvature, i.e. the sum of the principal curvatures at each point is zero. Soap bubbles are a great example of this phenomenon.

We can simulate surface tension by using a network of curves derived from a given shape. Applying varies material properties to the mesh results in a shape that can behaves like stretchy fabric or soap. **Reducing the rest length of each of these curves** (while keeping the edges anchored) makes them pull on all of their neighbours, resulting in a locally minimal surface.

Here are a few more examples of minimal surfaces you can generate using different frames (although I’d like stress that the possibilities are extremely infinite.) The first and last iterations may or may not count, depending on which of the **many definitions of minimal surfaces** you use, since they deal with pressure. You can read about it in much greater detail here: https://tinyurl.com/ya4jfqb2

Here we have one of the most popular examples of minimal surface geometry in architecture. The shapes of these domes were derived from a series of studies using clustered soap bubbles. The result is a series of enormous shells built with an impressively small amount of material.

Triply periodic minimal surfaces are also a pretty cool thing (surfaces that have a crystalline structure – that tessellate in three dimensions):

Another powerful method of form finding has been **to let gravity dictate the shapes of structures**. In physics and geometry, catenary (derived from the Latin word for chain) curves are found by letting a chain, rope or cable, that has been anchored at both end, hang under its own weight. They look similar to parabolic curves, but perform differently.

A net shown here in magenta has been anchored by the corners, then draped under simulated gravity. This creates a network of hanging curves that, when converted into a surface, and mirrored, ultimately forms a catenary shell. This geometry can be used to generate a gridshell that **performs exceptionally well under compression**, as long as the edges are reinforced and the corners are braced.

While I would be remiss to not mention Antoni Gaudí on the subject of catenary structure, his work doesn’t particularly fall under the category of gridshells. Instead I will proceed to gawk over some of the stunning work by Frei Otto.

Of course his work explored a great deal more than just catenary structures, but he is revered for his beautiful work on gridshells. He, along with the Institute for Lightweight Structures, have truly been pioneers on the front of theoretical structural engineering.

There are a few different terms that refer to this practice, including biomimetics, bionomics or bionics. In principle they are all more or less the same thing; **the practical application of discoveries derived from the study of the natural world** (i.e. anything that was not caused or made my humans.) In a way, this is the fundamental essence of the scientific method: to learn by observation.

Frei Otto is a fine example of ecological literacy at its finest. **A profound curiosity of the natural world greatly informed his understanding of structural technology**. This was all nourished by countless inquisitive and playful investigations into the realm of physics and biology. He even wrote a series of books on the way that the morphology of bird skulls and spiderwebs could be applied to architecture called Biology and Building. His ‘IL‘ series also highlights a deep admiration of the natural world.

Of course he’s the not the only architect renown their fascination of the universe and its secrets; Buckminster Fuller and Antoni Gaudí were also strong proponents of biomimicry, although they probably didn’t use the term (nor is the term important.)

Gaudí’s studies of nature translated into his use of ruled geometrical forms such as hyperbolic paraboloids, hyperboloids, helicoids etc. He suggested that there is no better structure than the trunk of a tree, or a human skeleton. **Forms in biology tend to be both exceedingly practical and exceptionally beautiful**, and Gaudí spent much of his life discovering how to adapt the language of nature to the structural forms of architecture.

Fractals were also an undisputed recurring theme in his work. This is especially apparent in his most renown piece of work, the *Sagrada Familia*. **The varying complexity of geometry, as well as the particular richness of detail, at different scales is a property uniquely shared with fractal nature.**

Antoni Gaudí and his legacy are unquestionably one of a kind, but I don’t think this is a coincidence. I believe the reality is that **it is exceptionally difficult to peruse biomimicry, and especially fractal geometry, in a meaningful way in relation to architecture**. For this reason there is an abundance of superficial appropriation of organic, and mathematical, structures without a fundamental understanding of their function. At its very worst, an architect’s approach comes down to: ‘I’ll say I got the structure from an animal. Everyone will buy one because of the romance of it.”

That being said, modern day engineers and architects continue to push this envelope, granted with varying levels of success. Although I believe that **there is a certain level of inevitability when it comes to how architecture is influenced by natural forms**. It has been said that, the more efficient structures and systems become, the more they resemble ones found in nature.

Euclid, the father of geometry, believed that nature itself was the physical manifestation of mathematical law. While this may seems like quite a striking statement, what is significant about it is **the relationship between mathematics and the natural world**. I like to think that this statement speaks less about the nature of the world and more about the nature of mathematics – that math is our way of expressing how the universe operates, or at least our attempt to do so. After all, Carl Sagan famously suggested that, in the event of extra terrestrial contact, we might use various universal principles and facts of mathematics and science to communicate.

Following my last post on the “*…first, second, and third dimensions, and why fractals don’t belong to any of them…*“, this post is about documenting my journey as I delve deeper into the subject of **fractals, mathematics, and geometry**.

The study of fractals is an intensely vast topic. So much so that I’m convinced you could easily spend several lifetimes studying them. That being said, I chose to focus specifically on **single-curve geometry**. But, keep in mind that I’m only really scratching the surface of what there is to explore.

Inspired by Georg Cantor’s research on infinity near the end of the 19th century, mathematicians were interested in finding** a mapping of a one-dimensional line into two-dimensional space** – a curve that will pass through through every single point in a given space.

Jeffrey Ventrella writes that “a space-filling curve can be described as a continuous mapping from a lower-dimensional space into a higher-dimensional space.” In other words, an initial one-dimensional curve is developed to **increase its length and curvature** – the amount of space in occupies in two dimensions. And in the mathematical world, where **a curve technically has no thickness and space is infinitely vast**, this can be done indefinitely.

In 1890, Giuseppe Peano discovered the first of what would be called space-filing curves:

An initial ‘curve’ is drawn, then each element of the curve is replace by the whole thing. Here it is done four times, and it’s easy to imagine how you **can keep doing this over and over again**. One would think that if you kept doing this indefinitely, **this one-dimensional curve would eventually fill all of two-dimensional space** and become a surface. However it can’t, since it technically has no thickness. So it will be as close as you can get to a surface, without actually being a surface (I think.. I’m not that sure..)

A year later, David Hilbert followed with his slightly simpler space-filing curve:

In 1904, Helge von Koch describes a single complex continuous curve, generated with rudimentary geometry.

Around 1967, NASA physicists John Heighway, Bruce Banks, and William Harter discovered what is now commonly known as the Dragon Curve.

You may have noticed that some of these curves are better at filling space than others, and this is related to their dimensional measure. They fall under the category of fractals because they’re neither one-dimensional, nor two-dimensional, but sit somewhere in between. For these examples, their dimension is often defined by exactly** how much space they fill when iterated infinitely**.

While these are some of the earliest space-filling curves to be discovered, they are just a handful of the likely** endless different variations** that are possible. Jeffrey Ventrella spent over twenty-five years exploring fractal curves, and has illustrated over 200 hundred of them in his book ‘Brain-Filling Curves, A Fractal Bestiary.’ They are organised according to a taxonomy of fractal curve families, and are shown with a unique genetic code.

Incidentally, in an attempt to recreate one of the fractals I found in Jeffery Ventrella’s book, I accidentally created a slightly different fractal. As far as I’m concerned, I’ve created a new fractal and am unofficially naming it ‘**Nicolino’s Quatrefoil**.’ The following was created in *Rhino *and* Grasshopper,* in conjunction *Anemone*.

You can find beautifully animated space-filling curves here:

(along with some other great videos by ‘3Blue1Brown’ discussing the nature of space-filling curves, fractals, infinite math, and more)

It’s possible to iterate a version of the Hilbert Curve that (once repeated infinity) can fill three-dimensional space.

As an object, it seems perplexingly **difficult to categorize**. It is a single, one-dimensional, curve that is ‘bent’ in space following simple, repeating rules. Following the same logic as the original Hilbert Curve, we know that this can be done indefinitely, but this time it is transforming into a volume instead of a surface. (Ignoring the fact that it is represented with a thickness) It is a one-dimensional curve transforming into a three-dimensional volume, but is never a two-dimensional surface? As you keep iterating it, its dimension gradually increases from 1 to eventually 3, but **will never, ever, ever be 2??**

Nevertheless this does actually support a statement I made in my last post suggesting “*…***there is no ‘first’ or ‘second’ dimension.** It’s a bit like pouring three cups of water into a vase and asking someone which cup is the first one. The question doesn’t even make sense…“

In the case of the original space-filling curve, the goal was to fill all of infinite space. However the fundamental behaviour of these curves change quite drastically when we start to **play with the rules used to generate them**. For starters, they do not have to be so mathematically tidy, or geometrically pure. The following curves can be subdivided infinitely, making them true space-filling curves. But, what makes them special is **the ability to control the space-filling process**, whereas the original space-filling curves offer little to no artistic license.

Let’s say that we change the criteria, from passing through every single point in space, to **passing only through the ones we choose**. This now becomes a well documented computational problem that has immediate ‘real world’ applications.

Our figurative traveling salesman wishes to travel the country selling his goods in as many cities as he can. In order to maximize his net profit, **he must make his journey as short as possible**, while of course still visiting every city on his list. His best possible route becomes exponentially more challenging to work out, as even just a handful of cities can generate thousands of permutations.

There are a variety of different strategies to tackle this problem, a few of which are described here:

The result is ultimately **a single curve, filling a space in a uniquely controlled fashion**. This method can be used to create single-lined drawings based on points extracted from Voronoi diagrams, a topic explored by Arjan Westerdiep:

If we let physics (rather than math) dictate the growth of the curve, the result becomes **more organic and less controlled**.

In this example *Rhino* is used with *Grasshopper* and *Kangaroo 2*. A curve is drawn on a plain, broken into segments, then gradually increased in length. As long as the curve is not allowed to cross itself (which is achieved here with ‘Collision Spheres’), the result is a curve that is pretty good at **uniformly filling space**.

The geometry doesn’t even have to be bound by a planar surface; It can be done on **any two-dimensional surface** (or in three-dimensions (even higher spacial dimensions I guess..)).

Additionally, *Anemone* can be used in conjunction with *Kangaroo 2* to continuously subdivide the curve as it grows. The result is much smoother, as well as far more organic.

Of course the process can also be reversed, allowing the curve to flow seamlessly from one space to another.

Here are far more complex examples of growth simulations exploring various rules and parameters:

In the interest of creating something a little more tangible, it is possible to increase the dimension of these curves. **Recording the progressive iterations of a space filling curve** allow us to generate what is essentially a space-filling surface. This new surface has the unique quality of being **able to fill a three-dimensional space** of any shape and size, while being a single surface. It of course also shares the same qualities as its source curves, where it keep increasing in surface area (and can do so indefinitely).

If you were to keep gradually (but indefinitely) increasing the area of a surface this way in a finite space, the result will be **a two-dimensional surface seamlessly transforming into a three-dimensional volume**.

Here is an example of turning the dragon curve into a space-filling surface. **Each iteration is recorded and offset in depth**, all of which inform the generation of a surface that loosely flows through each of them. This was again achieved with *Rhino* and *Grasshopper*.

I don’t believe this geometry has a name beyond ‘the developing dragon curve’, so I’ve called it ‘*Dragon’s Feet*.’

Adding a little thickness to the model allow us to 3D print it.

Here is the Hilbert Curve going through the same process, which I am aptly naming ‘*Hilbert’s Curtain*.’

3D Printing Space-Filling Curves with Henry Segerman at Numberphile:

‘Developing Fractal Curves’ by Geoffrey Irving & Henry Segerman:

Unsurprisingly this can also be done with differentially grown curve. The respective difference being that **this method fills a specific space in a less controlled manner**.

In this case with *Kangaroo 2* is used to grow a curve into the shape of a whale. Like before, each iteration is used to inform a single-surface geometry.

Tiny house movement, which is a theme of DS10 second brief, is closely linked to the idea of self-build. It is commonly thought that both emerged simply as a response to housing crisis. However, compelled limitations can also encourage other unexpected movements. Here, I want to talk about how the self-build practice allowed discovering new possibilities that go beyond economy.

In 1980s, Berlin-born modernist architect Walter Segal proposed a solution to shorten the housing waiting list by allowing people to build their own homes. With the bold step of London borough of Lewisham, an ‘awkward’ piece of sloping land, that was found unsuitable for council’s programme, was donated for the experiment. People that got randomly chosen from the waiting list were allocated a site and given a basic induction in how to saw a straight line and drill a hole. Segal believed that a house should adapt to its occupants. Each household was invited to participate in the design stage, while the construction principles included lightweight timber frames and stilt foundations, meaning the layout could always be adjusted. New residents of Walter’s Way all worked collaboratively from the project commencement and as a result formed a tight community. At the end of the project, new occupants were given a chance to buy their homes. Walter’s Way became UK’s first self-built council housing project.

In spring 2016 I visited the site to interview residents for my undergraduate dissertation project. I was keen to understand how design principles of community influenced the level of happiness of it’s residents and therefore affected sustainable behaviour. Walter’s Way was a unique case study. Walking onto the street felt nothing like the rest of London and more like an eco-village in a countryside. You could sense a spirit of community that seemed to work great almost naturally. The road slopes down and main entrances to houses are oriented in such way, that you always see your neighbours as soon as they walk out their private spaces. The central core is used for weekly community activities and as a kids playground. All residents were happy to talk and during the conversation it was common to hear “I’m not as sustainable as my neighbour, but I learn from them”, which is almost like a good eco-competition. That is without saying that certain homes achieve carbon savings of 73% (according to SuperHomes).

Today, all houses are private with many owners occupying their homes for over 20 years. Everyone remembers the history of Walter’s Way and feels proud to be a part of it. Many continued the legacy of self-build by attaching extensions or upgrading buildings. The fact that all houses were designed by those in need and built with their own hands allowed for an activist community to be born. It not only challenges the traditional approach to solving housing issue, but creates new opportunities in the city by building on ‘abandoned’ sites, creating a new model for urban life and teaching others sustainable lifestyles.

]]>The art installation is composed of cone shaped cells that divide itself creating new cells, which in turn develop into new ones and the process repeats. The components are made of laser cut, rolled thin sheets of plywood and are connected with metal screws. The structure, measuring approximately 20 feet long and 26 feet high, becomes stronger with every iteration, is structurally stable and self-supporting but on the other side almost invisible and very fragile in appearance. By joining the cone-like shaped cells, a set of domes at different scale is formed which are composed into pavilion serving as shelter to partially protect from sun and wind and casting beautiful shadows at the same time.

The pavilion is providing an opportunity to lay down, calm and contemplate. Look around and reflect on the surroundings – is it the blurred, crowded playa that attracts your attention? Or the cells of the structure that interest you? You have a chance to hide away for a moment and meditate. At night, the structure becomes illuminated from the inside, which highlights the pattern, casting even more beautiful shapes than during the day. You can move the bulb around and play with the light to explore different parts of the structure and look closer into the cells and how they divide themselves.

The concept was born during my research on fractals and their exploration through the Mandelbulb 3D software where by composing different formulas and changing their parameters, I could create beautiful, endless shapes. Infinity is one of the main feature of fractals, therefore, trying to materialize the experiments into physical models was the biggest challenge. To represent endlessness, I started looking at cell division and unicellular organisms, such as bacteria and paramecia, which multiply by dividing themselves. The duration of the cell ends with the division, but the line can be considered immortal.

The life span of a cell usually has specific limits due to telomerase and a separate genetic program of aging and death of complex organisms that evolved only about a billion years ago. Single-celled organisms that lived on Earth before that did not experience either aging or death and at a certain stage of maturity, they divided into two new cells. The first death occurred, when the sexual reproduction appeared – evolution has sentenced us to the process of aging, and ultimately, to destruction. However, recent developments in the field of physiology and medicine show that the elixir of life does not sound like a myth anymore and may become a reality in the future. And what if it becomes a reality? Does it scare you or does it make you happy? The aim of the proposal is to reflect on immortality and how our live would look like if we could achieve it.

]]>

Crystal is lost within a sea of flashing lights. She is surrounded by a 6.4×12.8ft cubic lattice structure. She reacts to motion and touch. Walk through the interactive cube that holds Crystal hostage. Can you find her before she fades, and becomes one with the cube?

**Physical Description**

Finding Crystal is an interactive installation that takes the principles of Crystallography and Bravais Lattices, and uses these principles to create a structural lattice cube. This cube is made of 0.4×0.4ft cubic pieces, fixed on top of, and next to each other to create a 6.4×12.8×12.8ft cube. I have chosen to use a cubic body centered lattice, removing the given structural frame, to allow the internal arrangement to determine the overall structure. The structure is made of steel spheres, steel rods and motion sensor LED lights. Each 0.4×0.4ft structure holds 3 spheres, 4 rods and 3 LED light. These pieces are put together in a puzzle manner to create the entirety of the structure. The art piece is modular and can be easily assembled on site.

**Interactivity & Mission**

Finding Crystal takes principles from science and combines it with design to create a truly interactive art piece. It uses the science behind crystal lattice structures to produces a structural modular that encompasses the principles of crystallography. Each modular is sized specifically to produce a lightweight structure, reflecting back on the idea of a crystal flake and its lightweight properties.

The entire structure consists of 16384 0.4×0.4ftcubic lattice pieces, with 49152 LED lights. This creates a platform for the experience. The cube is programmed to displays ghost like figures that walk “through” the cube, the figures use human motion to “follow” or “escape” the users. This evokes a form of playfulness between the figure, which is Crystal, and its users.

**Philosophy**

Crystal is a human. The cube is a symbol of an AI being that is attempting to deceive Crystal. Crystal is trying to escape the hold of the cube, but she is finding it extremely difficult to, the cube keeps misleading her into thinking that she is dependent on it. This piece explores addiction, in any form, by using the cube to confine the users perception of Crystal. Crystal doesn’t believe she can escape the cube, but ultimately, she is the only one that can help herself escape it.

I am deploying this piece in hope that it creates a curiosity behind the connection between technology, science and design. As well as creating a better understanding of someone who is in Crystals position. I’d like to evoke a desire to take these principles and explore with them, I want this piece to inspire and motive people to be creative. I want it to awaken the users curiosity. I want the user to want to explore, understand and interact with the artwork, and take this curiosity further by exploring their own artistic expression.

The intention of this piece is for it to be used as an interactive play experience. In the end, we are just trying to save crystal from herself.

]]>

This project involves the conception and design of a new way of mapping constellations, based on subdivision processes like **Stellation**. It explores how subdivision can define and embellish architectural design with an elaborate system of fractals based on mathematics and complex algorithms.

An abstracted form of galaxy is used as an input form to the subdivision process called **Stellation**. In geometry, meaning the process of extending a polytope in n dimensions to form a new figure. Starting with an original figure, the process extends specific elements such as its edges or face planes, usually in a symmetrical way, until they meet each other again to form the closed boundary of a new figure.

The material used for this installation will be timber sheets of 1/3 of an inch thickness that will be laser-cut.The panels will be connected to each other with standard connection elements which have already been tested structurally based on an origami structure.

The lighting of the installation will consist on LED strips that will light with burners interactions.

Although stars in constellations appear near each other in the sky, they usually lie at a variety of distances away from the observer. Since stars also travel along their own orbits through the Milky Way, the constellation outlines change slowly over time and through perspective.

There are 88 constellations set at the moment, but I would like to prove that there are** infinite amount of stars that have infinite amount of connections** with each other.The installation will show you all the possible connections between this stars, but will never rule which connection is the one you need to make.

I would like burners to choose their own stars and draw their own constellations. Any constellation that they can possibly imagine from their one and only perspective, using coloured lights that react to their touch.

The end result will have thousands of different geometries/constellations that will have a meaning for each one of the burners and together will create a new meaningful lighted galaxy full of stars.

On a clear night, away from artificial light, it’s possible to see over 5000 stars with the naked eye. These appear to orbit the Earth in a fixed pattern, as if they are attached to a giant sphere that makes one revolution a day.This stars though are organised in Constellations.

The word “constellation” seems to come from the Late Latin term cōnstellātiō, which can be translated as “set of stars”. The relationship between this sets of stars has been drawn by the perspective of the human eye.

**“Omnis Stellae”** is a manifestation of the existence of different perspectives. For me, there is great value in recognising different perspectives in life, because nothing is really Black and White, everything relates to the point of view and whose point of view and background that is.

As a fractal geometry this installation embodies an endless number of stars that each person can connect and imagine endless geometries, that will only make sense from their own perspective. The stellated geometry will show you all the possible connections but will never impose any.

**“Omnis Stellae”** is about creating your own constellations and sharing them with the rest of the burners, is about sharing your own perspective of the galaxy and create some meaningful geometries that might not mean anything to other people but would mean the world to you.

**The grand finale is if it could become the physical illustration of all the perspectives of the participants at Burning Man 2018 shown as one.**

With Love,

Maya

]]>

The Amazing Surf is a complex fractal geometry which ascends toward the light, symbolizing our obsession with reaching for the stars. We use our increasingly digital world to help us extend our reach, but at what point do the shadows we cast reach out above us?

The shape is inspired by the Amazing surf fractal which is generated by a mathematical formula and visualized in Mandelbulb3D. A visually imposing 25ft tall Ply wood hyperbolic structure, with intricate evolving folded panels. Each folded panel is digitally unrolled into a 2D net and CNC milled, the resultant ply components will be glued to a layer of fabric and folded back to their original 3D shape. This construction technique removes the need for a supporting frame, keeping the complex geometry unobstructed from view. A few panels have been removed at the base to make way for an entry point. Neon strips attached to each panel will produce dramatic light patterns on the surface at night. The installation will orient toward the sunset, where the sun appears at it’s closest.

Click to view slideshow.The piece is intended to be used as an impromptu climbing frame, a ladder to ascend burners above the desert and into the stars. Sunlight will bounce off the multi-faceted shapes, creating intricate patterns of light and shadow. Burners are invited to dance in the light shafts and seek shelter in the shadows. As the shape begins to flatten toward the top, the folded panels can be used as armchairs, where vision will be limited to that of the sky and light above; burners can sit and watch as the sky transforms from day to night.

*“Keep your face always toward the sunshine – and shadows will fall behind you” *

*-Walt Whitman*

As a race we strive to advance, developing new tools and machines to help us in this process. There will come a point in the not too distant future where the machines we have developed to help us will supersede us; we will become so reliant on technology, it will begin to control us. I see the Amazing Surf installation as a juxtaposition to this potential future; on the one hand we are using technology to create built environments that are intricate, beautiful and unique, on the other hand these environments are only attainable through the use of technology. If only we took a moment to look back into the shadows, we could avoid the fate that we are gradually bringing upon ourselves.

]]>(IN)Finitely Bound is a recursive fractal geometrical form, similar to that found in nature. It symbolises the universe and its finite boundary, and is an expression to show us the limitations to which technology can take us. As nothing can be bigger and more powerful than the universe.

(IN)Finitely Bound is a recursive fractal Dodecahedron form, consisting of lengths of 2 by 4 timber held into place using bolts and metal plate joints. The structure will be fully burnable and will be both approximately 7m high and wide. On approach to the piece the structures beauty will be be hard to work out, symbolising our confusion with the colossal scale of the universe but as you get closer you realise the receptive nature of the form and come rest on the structure and understanding as we zoom in on aspects which make up the universe and include ourself within it. The piece will be lit up to gently to allow for meditation, contemplation and open our bodies up to mindfulness.

**Interactivity and Mission**

The initial singularity was a singularity of infinite density thought to have contained all of the mass and space-time of the Universe. The standard model of cosmology predicts that the universe is infinite and flat. However, cosmologists in France and the US are now suggesting that space could be finite and shaped like a dodecahedron instead. They claim that a universe with the same shape as the twelve-sided polygon can explain measurements of the cosmic microwave background – the radiation left over from the big bang – that spaces with more mundane shapes cannot. In a world where “computational power is increasing exponentially, much like the singularity which created the universe” realising our own finite boundaries is where we take power back from the robots and become masters of our own minds, bodies and universe. The piece through its self-replicating fractal structure creates a dodecahedron (Universal) Boundary defined by perspective. In defining our boundary we are then able to instead of focus our mind inwards, a symbol towards mindfulness.

]]>

]]>

The first thing I hope and imagine is wonderment as you try to understand the unique geometric shape of the structure. One single winding surface, where is the beginning, where is the end? Do they even exist at all? As people journey around the structure they will encounter all manner of different shapes, reflections and lights.

A simple attempt to emulate the complex beauty of nature with the aid of fractal geometry algorithms and human aesthetic. An impressive, otherworldly structure that will harvest man’s most important resource direct from the desert air.

A large, thermoformed structure inspired by the Stenocara Beetle of Africa which, using cleverly designed patterns on its shell, can harvest water from the air. Emulating the beetle, the building will harvest water from the humid morning air thanks to a hydrophilic surface material and biomimetic process.

Furthermore, the water collected by the biomimetic system will finish its way into well placed holes allowing visitors in the morning to refresh their face with the freshwater of the structure. I want people to become aware of the possibility of water recovery in the arid zone while enjoying a resource that’s so rare in the desert.

The idea that nature can inspire us to create robotic aided designs that have a positive impact on humans is something that fascinates me. Ever since I learned of the Stenocara Beetle’s unique ability to harvest water from the air, I knew I had to produce a design inspired by this. I hope this aspect alone will create some wonderment, questioning and reflection around what I personally deem to be one of the biggest crisis facing the planet: dwindling water supply.

The structure is also made entirely of bio-based material, taking life to create something that gives life back thanks to water seems a beautiful cycle to weave. The installation, with no beginning or end, actually relates directly to the cycle of life, the same journey everyone visiting the structure is part of. The mesmerising production of water from air, the necessity of movement to fully embrace the structure, every life cycle is different, but we all share a few key steps, I want everyone to share their own steps around the structure as the unique ribbon merges different identities into one.

A 13.13.13 feet structure made from light, translucent, flexible polypropylene material. The structure follows a complex geometric form made of Borromean rings and Mobius strip which consist of a single surface winding along three double ellipses and features a unique textured surface throughout.

Assembly always takes place at the base of the project as the sheets are assembled piece by piece using a thermoforming process. These large bumps take on an important structural role in helping form the sheets together. The peaks of the building follow attractor points and also become a unique artistic installation that reflect light in a unique way at night.

]]>