Advertisement

Negotiated Materialization: Design Approaches Integrating Wood Heterogeneity Through Advanced Robotic Fabrication

  • Giulio Brugnaro
  • Angelo Figliola
  • Alexandre DuborEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 24)

Abstract

Whilst robots are predictable, repetitive, predefined and constant, natural materials present unpredictable complexity. Over the past few centuries, materials have been standardized to fit industrial processes, in an attempt to defy this unpredictability. Thanks to new advances in sensing technologies and computational design, today we have the opportunity to reintegrate the intrinsic properties of natural materials in their full complexity. What is the potential of a synthesis between the particularity of each specific material element—specific properties and parameters—informing the fabrication process? Digital and Robotic Fabrication are based on the use of flexible machines that open the possibility to mass-customize the production process. Combined with sensors and computational analysis, they allow to work with “soft systems”, both adaptable and continuously evolving, whose dynamism is constantly fed by a flow of information. How can the designer integrate this uncertainty and complexity in the design process? In this paper the authors specifically discuss the management of structural and material tolerance inherent to large scale construction and anisotropic materials, such as wood. A series of projects developed and built at the Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia and the Bartlett School of Architecture are used as case studies to investigate tolerance management in Digital Fabrication with different kinds of wood.

Keywords

Wood design Parametric design and fabrication strategies CNC and woodworking technology Complex wood structures 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Dr. Mathilde Marengo for input.

Fusta Robòtica Pavilion is a research project of IAAC realized as part of the Open Thesis Fabrication 2015 developed with the generous sponsorship of Serradora Boix; in collaboration with Gremi de Fusters, Tallfusta, Incafust, Mecakim, Decustik.

Digital Urban Orchard is a project of IAAC, realized as part of the Open Thesis Fabrication 2015, developed with the generous sponsorship of Merefsa, and the collaboration of Windmill and Scanarq.

Both projects were led by Areti Markopoulou, Alexandre Dubor, Silvia Brandi; assisted by Djordje Stanojevic; and developed by students: Andrea Quartara, Angelo Figliola, Monish Siripurapu, Ji Won Jun, Josep Alcover Llubia, Yanna Haddad, Mohamad Mahdi Najafi, Fathimah Sujna Shakir and Nada Shalaby.

Robotic Sawmill is a project of IAAC, realized as a workshop within the Master of Advanced Architecture 2012–13, led by Tom Pawlofsky, assisted by Alexandre Dubor, and developed by students: Alexander Dolan, Kartik Ashok Gala, Robert Francisco Garita Garita, Vincent Huyghe, Stefanos Levidis, Iker Luna, Stuart Maggs, Dirce Medina Patatuchi, Pedro Moraes, Boleslaw Musierowicz, Urte Naujekaite, Amir Reza Saheb, Dori Sadan, Ahmed Selim, Jin Shihui, Anand Singh, Sofoklis Giannakopoulos, Georgios Soutos, Angeliki Terezaki, Ali Yerdel, Maria Kuptsova, Vicente Gasco Gomez, Inder Prakash Singh Shergill.

Digital Woodcraft is a project of IAAC, realized as part of the Master of Advanced Architecture Individual Thesis, in 2016–17, led by Marcos Cruz, with the input of Raimund Krenmueller and developed by student: Nikolaos Argyros.

The “Adaptive Robotic Carving” project is part of ongoing Ph.D. research conducted by Giulio Brugnaro, supervised by Prof. Bob Sheil and Dr. Sean Hanna, at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University College of London, within the framework of the “InnoChain Training Network,” supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 642877.

References

  1. Alemany M, Portel J (2014) Soft tolerance: an approach for additive construction on site. AD Archit Des J (214):122–127Google Scholar
  2. Brugnaro G, Hanna S (2017) Adaptive robotic training methods for subtractive manufacturing. In: ACADIA 2017: disciplines & disruption, proceedings of the 37th annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture (ACADIA). Cambridge, MA 2–4 Nov 2017, pp 164–169Google Scholar
  3. Brugnaro G, Baharlou E, Vasey L, Menges A (2016) Robotic softness: an adaptive robotic fabrication process for woven structures. In: “ACADIA//2016: Posthuman frontiers: data, designers, and cognitive machines, proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture (ACADIA), pp 154–163Google Scholar
  4. Capek K, Novak-Jones C, Klima I (2004) R.U.R. Penguin ClassicsGoogle Scholar
  5. Carpo M (2014) Mario Carpo in conversation with Matthias Kohler. In: Gramazio F, Kohler M, Langenberg S (eds) Fabricate: negotiating design & making. Gta-Verl, Zurich, pp 12–21Google Scholar
  6. Dörfler K, Sandy T, Giftthaler M, Gramazio F, Kohler M, Buchli J (2016) Mobile robotic brickwork. In: Reinhardt D, Saunders P, Burry J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design 2016. Springer International Publishing, pp 205–218Google Scholar
  7. Dubor A, Diaz GB (2013) Magnetic Architecture. In: Brell-Çokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Rob|Arch 2012. Springer, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  8. Dubor A, Camprodom G, Bello Diaz G, Reinhardt D, Saunders R, Dunn K, Niemelä M, Horlyck S, Alarcon-Licona S, Wozniak-O’Connor D, Watt R (2016) Sensors and workflow evolutions: developing a framework for instant robotic toolpath revision. In: Reinhardt D, Saunders P, Burry J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design 2016. Springer International Publishing, pp 411–426Google Scholar
  9. Figliola A (2017) Post-industrial robotics: esplorazione di architetture informate nell’era post-digitale. Techne.  https://doi.org/10.13128/techne-xxxxx
  10. Figliola A, Dubor A (2017) Fusta Robòtica: generic tools for complex structure through the performances. In: Favargiotti S, Staniscia S (eds) Monograph.Research REDS 03. Flowing Knowledge, Monograph.Research 03. List, Trento, pp 228–232Google Scholar
  11. Fure A (2011) Digital materiallurgy: on the productive force of deep codes and vital matter. In: ACADIA 11: integration through computation, proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture (ACADIA), Banff (Alberta), pp 90–97Google Scholar
  12. Gramazio F, Kohler M (2014) Made by robots: challenging architecture at a larger scale. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Hecht-Nielsen R (1990) Neurocomputing. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co, Reading, MassGoogle Scholar
  14. Jeffers M (2016) Autonomous robotic assembly with variable material properties. In: Reinhardt D, Saunders P, Burry J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design 2016. Springer International Publishing, pp 49–62Google Scholar
  15. Keller CM, Keller JD (1993) Thinking and acting with iron. In: Chaiklin S, Lave J (eds) Understanding practice: perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. Kolarevic B, Klinger K (2008) Manufacturing material effects: rethinking design and making in architecture. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Kwinter S (1993) Soft system. In: Culture lab. Princenton Architectural Press, pp 206–227Google Scholar
  18. Menges A (2015a) Material synthesis: fusing the physical and the computational. Architectural Design Profile, Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Menges A (2015b) The new cyber-physical making in architecture. In: AD Archit Des J (237):40–47Google Scholar
  20. Pye D (1978) The nature and art of workmanship. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwartz T, Andraos S, Nelson J, Knapp C, Arnold B (2016) Towards on-site collaborative robotics. In: Reinhardt D, Saunders P, Burry J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design 2016. Springer International Publishing, pp 388–398Google Scholar
  22. Sharif S, Gentry R (2015) Design cognition shift from craftsman to digital maker. In: Emerging experience in past, present and future of digital architecture, proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA 2015). pp 683–692Google Scholar
  23. Vasey L, Baharlou E, Dörstelmann M, Koslowski V, Prado M, Schieber G, Menges A, Knippers J (2015) Behavioral design and adaptive robotic fabrication of a fiber composite compression shell with pneumatic formwork. In: Combs L, Perry C (eds) Computational ecologies: design in the anthropocene, proceedings of the 35th annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture (ACADIA). University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati OH, pp 297–309Google Scholar
  24. Wu K, Kilian A (2016) Developing architectural geometry through robotic assembly and material sensing. In: Reinhardt D, Saunders P, Burry J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design 2016. Springer International Publishing, pp 241–251Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giulio Brugnaro
    • 1
  • Angelo Figliola
    • 2
    • 3
  • Alexandre Dubor
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.The Bartlett School of ArchitectureUniversity College of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.School of Architecture and DesignUniversity of CamerinoAscoli PicenoItaly
  3. 3.Sapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  4. 4.Institute for Advanced Architecture of Catalonia (IAAC)BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations