Living Architecture Spring 2007 Pratt

Project that translates voice patterns into a unique design for each user.

http://www.digitalstar.net/projects/voiceprints/index.html

In this phase of our experiment we tested out our Otto arm experiment. Using the two sensors to activate the Otto Arm in two seperate motions. One sensor that is higher would be triggereing our arm to move in one direction. The next sensor which is located inside the box display, will activate the arm in a second directuon. This video shows the otto arm dripping the paint and being activated in the two seperate directions.














Drip in Action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppv6nTPoeBU

Finally, we displayed our networking system in the higgins hall lobby to discover the interaction between the public.

A few videos of our latest incarnation: integration of module with frame and inputs

Walking by activation

Reaction to hand motion

Memory Trigger
the sensor remembers previous movements and has a delay in flexinol reaction

In this phase of our experiments we attached a drip mechanism to our reviced otto arm that moves in a two-directional motion. We also modified a base and turned it into a large display which we placed in the main lobby area of Higgins Hall. We recorded the interaction of the Otto arm display with the circulation of people coming into the building. The arm moves based on the triggering of two different sensors, one that moves when the main door opens, and another motion for when people become curious and peer over into the display box.

Test of modified arm moving in two motions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjNTb77ZG7Q
Arm and I/V drip attached and making art in process
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjNTb77ZG7Q

once a sensor is triggered, it goes into a back-and-forth motion subroutine which effectively locks out the other sensor until the subroutine is complete. ideally we would like both sensors to trigger action simultaneously...

' drip_drip.bs2

' {$STAMP BS2}
' {$PBASIC 2.5}

pir1 PIN 14
pir2 PIN 15
waitTime VAR Word
counter VAR Byte
flexOtto VAR Word

Main:
PAUSE 250
DEBUG CLS
DEBUG "drip_drip running...", CR
DEBUG "(RESET now if sensors aren't already covered)", CR, CR
DEBUG "select drip pattern type, ortho (1) or circle (2): "
DEBUGIN SNUM flexOtto
DEBUG CR, "drip_drip initiated...", CR, CR
FOR counter = 20 TO 0
DEBUG "continue passive infra-red (pir) sensor(s) warm up: ", DEC2 counter PAUSE 1000
DEBUG CRSRXY, 0, 7, CLREOL NEXT
counter = 0 waitTime = 3000
DEBUG "sensor(s) ready...", CR, CR

DO

IF pir1 = 1 THEN
SELECT flexOtto
CASE 1
GOSUB flexOttoOrtho1
CASE 2
GOSUB flexOttoCirc
CASE ELSE
DEBUG "invalid type specified, RESET.", CR
ENDSELECT
ENDIF

IF pir2 = 1 THEN
SELECT flexOtto
CASE 1
GOSUB flexOttoOrtho2
CASE 2
GOSUB flexOttoCirc
CASE ELSE
DEBUG "invalid type specified, RESET.", CR
ENDSELECT
ENDIF

LOOP

END

flexOttoOrtho1:
DEBUG "sensor 1 triggered...", CR
HIGH 1
DEBUG BELL
DEBUG " ...wire 1 activated..."
GOSUB beepDone
LOW 1
PAUSE waitTime
HIGH 2
HIGH 3
DEBUG BELL
DEBUG " ...wires 2 & 3 activated..."
GOSUB beepDone
LOW 2
LOW 3
PAUSE waitTime
RETURN

flexOttoOrtho2:
DEBUG "sensor 2 triggered...", CR
HIGH 2
DEBUG BELL
DEBUG " ...wire 2 activated..."
GOSUB beepDone
LOW 2
PAUSE waitTime
HIGH 1
HIGH 3
DEBUG BELL
DEBUG " ...wires 1 & 3 activated..."
GOSUB beepDone
LOW 1
LOW 3
PAUSE waitTime
RETURN

flexOttoCirc:
DEBUG "nothing here yet, come back later.", CR, CR
RETURN

beepDone:
PAUSE waitTime
DEBUG BELL
PAUSE 250
DEBUG BELL
DEBUG "deactivated.", CR
RETURN

In this step we attempted to analyze how the shipping peanut foams would dosolve under water addition. We wanted to see the effect of the red paint on the foam over time and recoded it in photo's. We also began to set up our new drip mechanism assembly. We also experimented with the length of the flexenol at 8 and 12 inches and got great results. We recoded it in the next videos.

Red-Paint Drip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XPOaHy-uCw
12" length flexinol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1RJqmDjxVU
8" length flexinol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlZT4djv9mA

Two videos of our half module tests showing the flexinol lever action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCpM1n7NT0U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0vh2YypnmI


Testing new Prototype modules. We began by taking our midterm model, keeping what worked, removing what didn't, and experimenting with more efficient ways collapse and open it.

First pic shows a module with hard connections at the top of the module and at the bottom of the flexinol, leaving the bottom and sides of the module loose. The component which reopens the module is, inthis case, a rubberband that attaches from the bottom of the modeul to the bottom of the flexinol.













The second image shows the module similarly arranged, except with the flexinol greatly lengthened and the reopening component connected to the backing, instead of the flexinol. Marks show the range of collapse we achieved with various power levels and rubberbands.


Our nearly finalized module. Reorients the reopening component to work perpindicular to the flexinol. In this case we used a length of piano wire that would bend and be compress outwards as the module collapsed. It would then bend back into shape, thus reopening the module.



We've also got 2 PIR sensors (one of which we think is bad), a relay ,and two circuits connected on the breadboard. Another relay will be added and hopefully a PIR that works. Below is an image of the breadboard and our code which is only partially working.

In this step of our experiments we combined the umbrella mechanism and our Frie Otto arm. We wanted to have the umbrella release the otto piece like an arm would release a hand. The Otto arm then would rotate in its six directions which would act as the hand in our mechanism. The movement of the arm in the six directions would run based on the processing pattern we assigned through the micro-controller which would be activated by the sensor attached to the controller. Our system would interact with the surrounding enviroment based on the sensor indication. We also attempted to add a fabric across two of the umbrella pieces and see how the fabric would deform when the flexanol was activated. This did not create results we were anticipating.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pR1lPxslwlQ

We began experimenting with using two boards to trigger one another. By placing them both on a piece of plexi we tried to trigger one board's sensor by tapping the plexi to activate the tapper to trigger another board's sensor causing the sound piezo to beep.

video of the two boards interacting vertically
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tot8942XnmA


video of the two boards interacting horizontally
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWI819cqjxU


We then tried to experiment with different codes, and found one that mimics the initial tapping. This is a start to a more intelligent processing system.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au0j8Ea49JI

A view from the computer screen of the input and output of the board
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTv1B8oI8uo

We took apart a doorbell and used it as our tapping device. The doorbell usually moves the tapper continuously to create a long ring. We found out that by using a relay to switch on/off the secondary battery that is powering the tapper we could get single distinct taps.


































Video of the tapper working with the relay.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KU6hAWT6vgQ























Video of the tapper on a window
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kfq6-n0gHFo

Second Prototype of the tapper on a window
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQJeYAWE73U

ran across more topics from mid-review:

7 story podium light wall with motion capture camera.

http://kinecity.com/7wtc/

from www.usgs.gov

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learning/eqmonitoring/eq-mon-6.php

"At the occurrence of an earthquake, one of the eight dragon-mouths would release a ball into the open mouth of the toad situated below. The direction of the shaking determined which of the dragons released its ball."

We started off testing out different outputs that can trigger a sensor connected to another board. In Prototype 07 we attached a motor as an output system that causes a vibration across the plexi board surface that triggers another sensor that is connected to another input-output system. The second system's output triggers a fan to start up. This is an initial beginning of our idea of a wireless system that triggers one another in a looping effect.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfuJDiNZQnI

In Prototype 06 we tried experimenting with different materials that can transmit vibrations across the surface. In this case, we used a thick sheet of plexi and attached the piezo sensor to the suface. We discovered that by tapping at all corners of the board, the vibration from the tapping was trasmitted across the surface, triggering the sensor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beWofszufR4

In this phase of the experiment we reintroduced the motion sensors system. Here we attched a second system arm using or original styrene model. When indicating motion the first arm would trigger and move. While retractiing the sensor would close and when tripped again would move the otto hand. The motion was controlled by the micro control system by directing the hand to move on a ordered sequence.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfExNZ3f2r4

...a reference from the below times article

http://www.ece.clemson.edu/crb/labs/biomimetic/elephant.htm

a variation of the elephant trunk is also something called OCTOR which has suction cups along the trunk (making it more like an octopus arm).

http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn9124-robotic-tentacles-get-to-grips-with-tricky-objects.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/27/science/27robo.html?hp

In this process we went back and incorporated the original micro-controller chip within our Otto experiment. With our Otto arm, which has three flexenol wires attached to it, we could adjust how it would move in certain directions based on computer script. This video whos that movement of the arm system when trigging off the wires in different orders. 1, 2, 3, 1-2, 1-3, 2-3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elrPXgETvpM

I saw this on Make.com:
http://www.makezine.com/blog/archive/2007/03/ken_rinaldo_robotic_sculp.html?CMP=OTC-0D6B48984890

"But of all audio channel measures, it is voice-recognition that is
most obviously called upon in constructing a computing that is
supposed to be invisible but everywhere. Voices can, of course, be
associated with specific people, and this can be highly useful in
providing for differential permissioning--liquor cabinets that unlock
in response to spoken commands issued by adults in the household,
journals that refuse access to any but their owners. Speech, too,
carries clear cues as to the speaker's emotional state; a household
system might react to these alongside whatever content is actually
expressed--yes, the volume can be turned down in response to your
command, but should the timbre of your voice indicate that stress and
not loudness is the real issue, maybe the ambient lighting is softened
as well.

We shouldn't lose sight of just how profound a proposition
voice-recognition represents when it is coupled to effectors employed
in the wider environment. For the first time, the greater mass of
humanity can be provided with a practical mechanism by which their
'perlocutionary' utterances--speech acts intended to bring about a
given state--can change the shape and texture of reality."

--Adam Greenfield, Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing
(New Riders, 2006)

These are the videos of our continued umbrella piece experiment. Here we attached two flexional wires to the umbrella to control the movement of the arm. One wire would lift the umbrella arm while the other would retract it. The second video also shows our attempt at hybridizing the styrene tube piece and the umbrella in order to generate a more controlled movement in the arm. Our latest experiment is taking a Frei Otto inspiration an applied to our process. This is done by adding the flexional wire through pieces of plexi-glass that is attached to a styrene rod. We also looked at how a difference in battery voltage would affect the movement of the piece.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wouJoenmo4A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSNE8ll3mFc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psqRWkJKxzE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcXydBWKl7E

From our previous experiments, we discovered that the radio shack piezo sensors weren't sensitive enough, so we ordered some piezo strips from the parallax site and found them to be very inexpensive and much more sensitive.

By using the same connection on the board we tried different ways to create a vibration on a surface that can trigger the piezo sensors.

We first tried to create a surface that was receptive to vibration like a "drum surface". With the use of an embroidery hoop and mylar we laid the piezo sensor on the surface and hit the surface of the mylar to create a vibration.
















We also tried other means of triggering the sensor. By attaching a piece of mylar onto the piezo sensor, and blowing on to the mylar we were also capable of triggering the sensor as well.

Prototype 04 : Using wind to trigger the sensor

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vp61nX5vWn8

From the previous experiment we realized that the piezo sensors weren't as sensitive as we expected, therefore we decided to break open the sensor covers. We also learned that the piezo sensors are triggered when there is a slight vibration or when the thin strip is bent.

In Prototype 03 we attached the sensor strips to wire legs hoping that with enough vibration it can trigger the piezo strips.
















With the our understanding of how sound produces vibrations in the air, we decided to place one of the wire legs onto speakers and by playing a sound, the vibrations would trigger the piezo sensors.

Prototype 03 : Wire legs transmitting vibrations to the piezo sensors with bjork screaming on the speakers. The Output is a very faint sound produced by another piezo sensor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQAncWWwFS4

We bought Piezo crystal sensors from Radio shack and connected it to the board, first testing its input, ouput, then a combination of both. The Piezo crystals were capable of detecting the vibrations(input) and producing a sound vibration(output).


Diagram of a combination of Input and Output:















Video of Prototype 2: Input & Output

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vP3GSiM2Nps

We decided to keep experimenting with the flexinol and its output. We took an old umbrella piece and attached a flexenol wire at two of the pivit points of the umbrella arm. This movement of the arm was a lot and very fast. The only downfall was that the arm did not reract. We then also began to modify our first attempt with the flexenol and styrene tubing. Here we used heatshrink and zipties to fasten the wire more tightly with the styrene. We also came up with a track system that could guid the arm as it moved. Here are the videos of the umbrella in motion, one while its on a horizontal surface, and the other where it is in a vertical condition. The last video is showing the movement of the adjusted experiment1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq82YUbNW48
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sHku63siDE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwP3-pZSu6Y

We wanted to investigate the variety of materials in our out put process. Our first attmept was to use basswood dowles but this gave us little movement. We then attached the flexenol to polystrene giving us great results. Here are the video links.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XjdpD3hz84
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jMuueHVZR0

As a group we determined that the use of springs as a counterforce would probably be required and to that end we devised a spring testing board. Each spring has a different measurements and strength.

We found that the middle spring, with the highest amount of tension worked best of the three.

Also of note, we actually broke one of our flexinol wires during the testing phase. We think its because we were using unregulated power straight from the battery instead of going through the breadboard. The wire itself also stretched longer during each test when it returned to its non powered state, from 5" to 6".

More to follow on the mechanical tests we did for figuring out how to collapse the box unit to a surface condition.

Found this handy resistor color-code chart: the gold bands on the end of our resistors are the tolerance (far right column). The first two bands at the other end are the first two digits, then the next band is the multiplier.

Living Architecture: Responsive Kinetic Systems Lab
Instructor: David Benjamin (d@thelingnewyork.com)
HORIZONTAL WALL

Group:
Andrew Bloomfield (aebloomfield@gmail.com)
Jose Cruz (JCCpanthers@aol.com)
Zack Oslow (zjoslow@gmail.com)
Troy Zezula (tzezula@gmail.com)

RESEARCH AGENDA

Statement of Intent:

A wall (or any sufficiently large vertical surface) is typically utilized in the attachment of many other common architectural elements. Most of these attached elements are horizontal in character such as a stair tread, bench, table, bar or shelf. Typically the function of a given horizontal element is predetermined and then it is correspondingly fixed to the wall at a prescribed height above the floor. This reality is one in which a height is not easily customized to the needs of an individual user or a function is not easily changed based on the varying requirements of an owner. It is not possible to quickly return a wall to its original state prior to the attachment of any horizontal elements.

The goal of our group is to investigate and construct a mechanical assembly that can be located within a wall that attempts to address the concerns described above. We seek to maximize the flexibility and usage of a wall as both a surface and a functioning horizontal element and shift the wall from its current static state to a more dynamic and responsive one. The following list of objectives provides a rough timeline and prioritization of the goals of the group. The objectives proceed from general to user specific and from less to more technically complex. With a group size of four we have the flexibility to attempt to pursue multiple objectives simultaneously unless the integration/coordination of objectives proves too difficult.

Primary Objective:

We seek to construct a mechanical assembly that will transform a vertical surface into a horizontal element capable of supporting load. The function of the horizontal element will be defined by its elevation in relation to the floor plane.

Secondary Objective:

We seek to make the horizontal element changeable by allowing its function to be decided by the user.

Tertiary Objective:

We would like to investigate the implementation of a sensor based input strategy that would allow the assembly to be responsive to the specific parameters of an individual user.

Quaternary Objective:

We would like to investigate the feasibility of creating an array of assemblies that could be integrated together to create continuous a horizontal element at a constant or varying elevation.


RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Methodology:

The primary research focus of the group will be on the operation of output components configured around a mechanical assembly operated with Flexinol wires (Primary Objective). Once a basic assembly is operable it can be calibrated to work at predefined elevation settings (Secondary Objective). Further customization and responsiveness input components based on user specific parameters could then be integrated into the system as time permits (Tertiary Objective). Or, depending on the preference of the group, multiple assemblies could be constructed and made to operate concurrently to maintain a sole focus on output components (Quaternary Objective).

Precedents:

http://www.med.umich.edu/lrc/Hypermuscle/
http://www.brianmac.demon.co.uk/musrom.htm
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/chb/lectures/anatomy4.html
http://www.botany.uwc.ac.za/sci_ed/grade10/manphys/joints.htm
http://www.nurseminerva.co.uk/adapt/flap1.htm
http://www.aviary.org/curric/wings.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/snake3.htm

Preliminary Research:

-folding seat/table structures-















-vertical-to-horizontal mechanical armatures-



















-Flexinol wires-












-lightweight yet stiff material-
(EVA foam)












-flexible stretchy materials-
(Nylon)
















Applications:

Flexibility is a common desire within architecture. With cities growing and space being limited the use of transformational architecture helps minimize space consumption but maximize its use. Retail, commercial, personal, industrial program all can benefit from more fluid systems that relate more to the user than a standard rule of measurement.

Yelena, Severn and Jintana

Research Proposal

In this age of effortless digital wireless networking, it is easy to forget that networks have a physical component as well – radio signals have a limited range and are affected by their wavelength and the surrounding terrain. Analogue signals do not have the same error-tolerance as digital packet-based communications, and begin to more accurately reflect the environment they are operating in.

We are seeking to use physically-based networking between two or more processing units to “compute” the physical layout and perhaps topology of the network. Because this data is automatically recomputed with every interaction, networks can be changed easily – the software for the nodes could remain relatively simple and identical. More complex interactions could be created with nodes that are moving in relation to each other.

Using these physical networks in an architectural space could allow the designer to magnify local interactions into larger phenomena, while using actual physical data to shape the magnification. The networking process could be transparent to the human actors, creating secondary effects in addition to the primary interaction.

Physical networking, as we have described it, requires three components: a transmitter, a medium and a receptor. Possible domains include sound (low-frequency vibration, audible sound, and ultrasonic) and light (visible and invisible).

Research Agenda

Our project will address the “processing” phase of the interaction cycle. We will build two units that will be able to perform very simple communication through a medium over a short distance.

Our first experiments will use sound/vibration, transmitted through either a solid surface or through the air. Piezo transducers are an ideal starting point, because of their low power consumption, small size, and ability to both send or receive vibrations. They are easily sourced locally.

We have located two possible additional BASIC Stamp boards, from students in previous classes.

Living Architecture

Anna Perelman
John Seward
Mike Ritchie

RESEARCH AGENDA:

objective: We will explore the potential of the wall as a kineticly responsive thickened surface with the ability to mediate social interaction.


1.kinetic / responsive thickened surface: The wall, in response to presence of an inhabitant(s), will be able to alter states: opaque/solid , transparent/solid, open

2.social interaction: The wall, through its altering states, can create differing levels of social interaction: opaque/solid- no interaction
transparent/solid- visual interaction
open- physical, verbal interaction


methodology: We will achieve this objective through volumized diaphram action: volumes becoming surfaces.
We will design and build a module that could be arrayed to create the kinetically responsive surface.

RESEARCH PROPOSAL:

primary focus: output
secondary focus: processing

input: motion sensor
processing: coding
output: flexinol wire + module

scale: 1 module, possibly arrayed into a field
siting: boundary between users - possibly a wall, ceiling, floor

technical issues: We will have to experiment ways in which a flexinol wire can transform a volume into a surface. We will have to experiment with the use and relation of rigid and flexible materials/connections.

Got everything set up and running correctly except for either a code or a PIR issue. Using the code provided on the blog, we got the PIR to trip properly with actual movement at the beginning and the memory wire flexed. Afterwards, it tripped and cleared constantly without any actual movement being read from the PIR.

By adding an END statement at the end of the DO: LOOP UNTIL segment of code, it would trip properly at first but would not trip again.

MAIN:

DO
IF PIR = 1 THEN ' Motion Detected?
counter = counter + 1 ' Update Trip Counter
HIGH 2 ' send power TO flexinol
DEBUG HOME, "TRIPPED...", DEC3 counter

DO
LOOP UNTIL PIR = 0 ' WAIT FOR PIR TO Clear
DEBUG HOME, "CLEARED...", DEC3 counter
LOW 2 ' Turn Off flexinol
END

ENDIF
LOOP

So, either the latest code provided is correct and our PIR is simply being tripped consistently and incorrectly, or the code is looping incorrectly. We've tried a number of variations of the code to no avail.

these sites have good technical construction/instruction ideas.

make magazine: http://www.makezine.com/

instructables: http://www.instructables.com/

just a follow-up on the links i posted (for completeness).

smart studio was absorbed into the interactive institute, but their archived projects are located here:
http://smart.tii.se/smart/front_en.php

PBASIC language references:
http://www.emesystems.com/BS2pbasic25.htm

all, i'm just getting up to speed with the blog and the class and the following links came to mind. most likely they have already been mentioned in class or posted here, so sorry if this is duplicate info.

wired nextfest: http://www.nextfest.net/index.php
(all the "pavillions" have interesting consumer based items)

interactive institute: http://w3.tii.se/en/
(one of the companies that displayed products at nextfest)

I came across this project on http://www.aether.hu/pgl/.Ping Genius Loci(PGL) is an architectural installation trying to build a network into the poetics of the place. PGL is built up from 300 radio networked, solar powered, self sustainable intelligent analogue pixels, that are placed on a 20 by 20 meters grid. These pixels function in the bright sunshine, and are interfacing the people walking in the grid. PGL is a platform in development, that enables us to try a larger set of possibilities, with different forms, interactive contents.

http://www.thelivingnewyork.com/LivingArchitecture/07SP-Pratt/070131-LivingArch-ResearchProposal.pdf

‘ {$STAMP BS2}
‘ {$PBASIC 2.5}
PIR PIN 3 ‘ this is the P# port that your PIR is wired to
counter VAR Byte ‘ Trip Counter

Main:
DO
IF PIR = 1 THEN ‘ Motion Detected?
counter = counter + 1 ‘ Update Trip Counter
HIGH 10 ‘ send power to flexinol
DEBUG HOME, “TRIPPED...”, DEC3 counter
DO : LOOP UNTIL PIR = 0 ‘ Wait For PIR To Clear
DEBUG HOME, “CLEARED...”, DEC3 counter
LOW 10 ‘ Turn Off flexinol
ENDIF
LOOP

We got the board hooked up and running. Everything worked great until we got to the IR sensor, which is definately finicky. We've gotten it to trigger the debugger (and Yelena swears she saw the Flexinol wire move), but not reliably. We're going to try again Monday night...

A few small changes - we found a way to plug the board directly into the back of the laptop, by removing the screws that would normally hold the plug on (pictures to follow). We also cut our groove too wide, so we used a piece of piano wire to hold the other end of the Flexinol, with a dogleg out forthe alligator clip.

Not that anybody else cares about this, but I found a BASIC compiller/tokenizer for Linux (the links are on the Parallax website). Haven't tried it.

As of this afternoon our circuit board kits had still not arrived to Barbara's office. Do we have a tracking number for the shipment?

Friday Jan. 26
There is a review at 2pm of current work and then presentations at 7pm
EyeBeam, 540 W 21st Street, New York.
Organised by Ruairi Glynn of www.interactivearchitecture.org , Eyebeam is pleased to co-host, with the Bartlett School of Architecture, an evening of presentations on Interactive Architecture. Presenters will include Phil Ayres of Sixteen Makers, Eyebeam residents Carmen Trudell and Jennifer Broutin, Marek Walczak of MW2MW and David Benjamin and Soo-in Yang of the NYC architecture firm, The Living. Presenters will discuss their work for 15 minutes followed by a panel discussion moderated by Professor Stephen Gage of the Bartlett with a reception from 9-10pm. This event is open to the public free of charge with a suggested donation. This evening symposium will be the culmination of a two day "work in progress" International Jury held at Eyebeam between final year students of the Bartlett’s Interactive Architecture Workshop, and Parsons The New School of Design. The Interactive Architecture Workshop would like to thank the Stuart Murphy Travel Award Trustees for their generous sponsorship

The Two day "work in progress" International Jury held at Eyebeam (25/26 Jan) is also open to all. We would welcome artists, architects and students from other schools in the NYC area who would also wish to share their work in progress. If you or your fellow associates / class members are interested in joining us please contact me for more details. ruairi@interactivearchitecture.org

Thinking about what we have gone over in class and by looking at the other sites posted by people on the blog I get a better sense of understanding of what is expected. Inspired by previous architects i can imagine the work we do in class as a skin or surface condition. As stated by zach in the previous post Im also fasciniated by Jean Nouvel's L'Monde de Arabe Library in France. I can imagine the potential from this to interact with the conditions of the enviroment, people, sound, light, and its surrounding. I also became inspired by my visit to the MOCA(museum of contemporary art) in Los Angeles. The exhibition juxtaposed various works from architects and fashion designers. I was motivated by this piece, a dress that became a table at the exhibit. I can also see our work lead to smaller scale issues such as fashion and industrial design that not only promote new methods of thinking that can lead to new living architecture.

http://www.thelivingnewyork.com/LivingArchitecture/07SP-Pratt/070124-LivArch-Prototype1.pdf

I too found the Moderating Skylights project quite interesting. It is comparable to the project done last year at Pratt (I no longer see the link to this on our blog) that dealt with apertures. The Pratt project seems to perform in a more materially integral way, as it uses a solid sheet with perforations. The walls of Jean Nouvel’s Arab World Institute come to mind as an early example of a mechanically responsive system. The animation of Moderating Skylights seems to be very mechanical. My hope is that by using this new technology, we can create this movement in a more organic way. The lack of a motor and mechanical gears will give the ability to move in a more integrated and smooth manner. The ability to transform surfaces and openings in a manner similar to that working of a human body will allow for greater control. The relationship to the user becomes more direct as the materials change form themselves. I am not yet sure of the structural properties of the materials to be used, but the relationship to the forces of the body become an interesting point of departure. Can a wall change into a floor or can stairs react to a specific bodily force? How can we control material to fold in a way to create interactions with the body dependent on an intended used of the space? This might allow for a desk that will fold out from a wall in a specific relation to the size of the user. I am looking forward to testing the properties of the materials in order to determine a new use for them.

I really like this image, reminds me of sails, that I found on the site Andrews mentioned. Its seems very lightweight. Also there were very interesting program ideas for projects on

http://www.robotecture.com/kdg/project.html

I particularly liked the moderating skylights. What if the skylight drips down to become an operable wall. The amount of light that could pour in from that much glazing would need a shading system, perhaps that is the most interactive part.

I was inspired by the works of Hoberman from the orginal sphere to the newer 'toys'. By using the different structural techniques the forms can collapse and expand changing its form. I think that it could be used as a good inspiration for a beginning structure that would begin to morph into forms for certain functions.

The 'toys':
http://www.hoberman.com/nopopup.html

Responsive Architecture
http://www.hoberman.com/site/architecture/architecture2.html

The exhibit in the California Science Center is good example of the transformation of the form. Maybe the structure could begin to transform spaces by dividing space like a screen or change or change into a different form based on the environment.

http://www.hoberman.com/site/exhibits/hypar.html

I found this website (which i'm sure David know's about?)
-http://www.interactivearchitecture.org/-
It's a great resource to see current projects that are interactive and innovative. One project I noticed that looks simple but is really beautiful can be found here http://www.interactivearchitecture.org/dune-40-daan-roosegaarde.html
the project is an interactive landscape (a scary one at that) but the second image is really exciting. The fibers respond to sound and movement, I can imagine waving my hand through it for hours just to see what happens.

I found this matrix of kinetic architecture and sculpture projects (X axis) and the basic mechanics/structural systems used in each(Y axis). It includes the likes of Otto, Calatrava, Piano, Fuller, and even some student project models. Its interesting to see the relationship between the small scale mechanics and overall projects in this way, but these are obviously missing the interative quality we are looking to achieve. I still think they could be good inspiration..

http://destech.mit.edu/Matrix/matrix.html

I'm interested in trying to implement some sort of primitive "wireless" network between multiple components. I'm imagining some sort of ultrasonic broadcaster/sensor: whereas a wired connection is largely ignorant of distance and direction, I think it would be interesting to explore the possibilities built in to the limitations of directionality and distance. The interaction with a single component could then be spread out on this network, creating position, gradients, contingencies, interference, etc etc etc.

I'm concerned that multiple processors would be a problem.

http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/001450.html

http://www.res.com/magazine/articles/makingtheworld125percentbetter_2004-12-15.html