Tuesday, September 20, 2011
week two
Today was our third class period and second presentation cycle. Now that we are in our third groups of the class, it is nice to be getting to know everyone a little better, to have an idea of what I am getting into as far as personalities, working styles, and dynamic between the different disciplines. It is also nice to have a better idea of what will be expected of us and sort of the flow of thinking-up and modeling a new smart surface each week. This past week had me a little more off balance than the first week; our group (seasonally, sliding, heat)was having trouble finding a time to meet, so I ended up having to miss the first meeting and a good portion of the second meeting. When I did finally get there, rushing in from some meeting or other, though I got a brief summary of what they had been discussing, I had a hard time jumping into the project and understanding all the decisions that had been made. I don't think any of us were super confident in our concept, but on Saturday, after ending meetings on weds and thurs without a solid direction, we needed to get building.
We ended up with a sort of high-tech venetian blind that had white on one side for reflecting light when its hot out and black on the other for collecting light that can then be rotated around to emit that heat into the house. It also involved sliding panels to control the amount of light let through. The architects got started on modeling and lasercutting while the the rest of us did a bit of background research and made the presentation. Its unfortunate that I am so inexperienced with 3d-modeling and lasercutting; coming from an industrial design background, I have experience and skill in building models and making formal decisions, yet so far in this class most of that has fallen to the architects because of the methods we have been using. The physical design is often done as the modeler goes along since we don't have a ton of time for sketching and deciding on the exact form. I got a chance to go into the woodshop to help Keenan and Wu construct the model after the parts were cut out for this project and it made me remember how much I enjoy working on a physical project and figuring out how to best use the tools to get the exact effect that I want. This also made me more aware fo the unconscious expectations or ideas that are put on group members because of their discipline. Yes, I know my way around the woodshop, and no, I wont destroy anything or injure myself if leave me alone with the drill press. I will definitely try to have a bigger hand in the building process in the coming iterations of the projects.
This week's presentations especially highlighted to me the different values that exist between different team members. I won't use blanket statements regarding the disciplines here, but I will say that I noticed some distinct patterns. From my end I value directness in an explanation. Sure, the technical information is important, but that should never NEVER overshadow the bigger picture. What does it do? Why does it do that? How do we think it might work? There have been probably more presentations than not in this class so far where at the end I am still wondering what exactly they made. Another critique of the presentations is that groups often begin with process, inspiration, all the technical details before showing what they actually made. Opening with the final project gives the rest of that information necessary context, if you hear it before hand it doesn't make complete sense and much of the impact is lost.
This week I'm working with light, seasonal, and rotating. It's almost all people that I haven't worked with before, which I am excited about. We've decided to pursue the issue of security, carrying over from the group before us. This is one of the problems stated by Power House. I find it hard to design without ever having visited one of the houses and without really knowing the audience, so it is nice to have this little bit of input to tide us over until our visit in October.
We ended up with a sort of high-tech venetian blind that had white on one side for reflecting light when its hot out and black on the other for collecting light that can then be rotated around to emit that heat into the house. It also involved sliding panels to control the amount of light let through. The architects got started on modeling and lasercutting while the the rest of us did a bit of background research and made the presentation. Its unfortunate that I am so inexperienced with 3d-modeling and lasercutting; coming from an industrial design background, I have experience and skill in building models and making formal decisions, yet so far in this class most of that has fallen to the architects because of the methods we have been using. The physical design is often done as the modeler goes along since we don't have a ton of time for sketching and deciding on the exact form. I got a chance to go into the woodshop to help Keenan and Wu construct the model after the parts were cut out for this project and it made me remember how much I enjoy working on a physical project and figuring out how to best use the tools to get the exact effect that I want. This also made me more aware fo the unconscious expectations or ideas that are put on group members because of their discipline. Yes, I know my way around the woodshop, and no, I wont destroy anything or injure myself if leave me alone with the drill press. I will definitely try to have a bigger hand in the building process in the coming iterations of the projects.
This week's presentations especially highlighted to me the different values that exist between different team members. I won't use blanket statements regarding the disciplines here, but I will say that I noticed some distinct patterns. From my end I value directness in an explanation. Sure, the technical information is important, but that should never NEVER overshadow the bigger picture. What does it do? Why does it do that? How do we think it might work? There have been probably more presentations than not in this class so far where at the end I am still wondering what exactly they made. Another critique of the presentations is that groups often begin with process, inspiration, all the technical details before showing what they actually made. Opening with the final project gives the rest of that information necessary context, if you hear it before hand it doesn't make complete sense and much of the impact is lost.
This week I'm working with light, seasonal, and rotating. It's almost all people that I haven't worked with before, which I am excited about. We've decided to pursue the issue of security, carrying over from the group before us. This is one of the problems stated by Power House. I find it hard to design without ever having visited one of the houses and without really knowing the audience, so it is nice to have this little bit of input to tide us over until our visit in October.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
First
Last week after a crash course in Arduino we were put into groups and set to the task of creating a smart surface constrained by three words. My group, group 3, was dealing with 'wind', 'inflate', and 'daily'. With only an hour and a half we sat down to talk out the problem and shortly thereafter launched into fleshing out out ideas in cardboard and chip board. Several iterations of a power storing devices and turbines took shape culminating in a rushed, slightly sloppy model of a turbine that would store the windpower to be translated to a house fan to cool a living space. None of us were at all satisfied with what we had come up with, I think most of us prefer to have a more hashed out idea before we start building and tinkering (contrary to a few opinions expressed by some of our classmates).
When we met up the following evening, we scrapped the idea and set out to redefine the problem. We had a big breakthrough that night thanks to Ted and split off to build models of our own interpretations of the concept. We reconvened on Sunday and spent form 2pm to 2am (with a break for dinner) fleshing out the concept, putting together the presentation, laser cutting and finally assembling the form. Our group dynamic worked out surprisingly well. Maybe part of that can be attributed to the fact that it's the first week and we are still in the 'polite' phase of relationships with everyone, but I dont think a single argument occurred. Yes, there were discussions and debates, but everyone was patient and considerate.
As Steven said in the presentation, Stephanie was sort of our foreman, keeping us on track. Ted was responsible for both of our key breakthrough and had the modeling knowledge to model and animate the concept. Steven was kind of our feasibility-guy, helping to explain how things would work in real life and we all collaborated on idea generation and solving problems when they came up. At one point Stephanie and I were stuck on how to structure the 'balloon' so that it would fully retract when it deflated for maximum sunlight, so we asked for help and everyone stopped what they were doing until as a group we decided on an appropriate solution. We put a lot of work in and I am happy with what we came up with for the first week. I'm also excited to see what the next group does with it. Even if they scrap the whole thing, it wil be interesting to see a new take on wind inflating daily.
When we met up the following evening, we scrapped the idea and set out to redefine the problem. We had a big breakthrough that night thanks to Ted and split off to build models of our own interpretations of the concept. We reconvened on Sunday and spent form 2pm to 2am (with a break for dinner) fleshing out the concept, putting together the presentation, laser cutting and finally assembling the form. Our group dynamic worked out surprisingly well. Maybe part of that can be attributed to the fact that it's the first week and we are still in the 'polite' phase of relationships with everyone, but I dont think a single argument occurred. Yes, there were discussions and debates, but everyone was patient and considerate.
As Steven said in the presentation, Stephanie was sort of our foreman, keeping us on track. Ted was responsible for both of our key breakthrough and had the modeling knowledge to model and animate the concept. Steven was kind of our feasibility-guy, helping to explain how things would work in real life and we all collaborated on idea generation and solving problems when they came up. At one point Stephanie and I were stuck on how to structure the 'balloon' so that it would fully retract when it deflated for maximum sunlight, so we asked for help and everyone stopped what they were doing until as a group we decided on an appropriate solution. We put a lot of work in and I am happy with what we came up with for the first week. I'm also excited to see what the next group does with it. Even if they scrap the whole thing, it wil be interesting to see a new take on wind inflating daily.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)