Advertisement

TriVoc

Robotic Manufacturing for Affecting Sound Through Complex Curved Geometries
  • Dagmar Reinhardt
  • Densil Cabrera
  • Marjo Niemelä
  • Gabriele Ulacco
  • Alexander Jung
Chapter

Abstract

Complex curved surfaces posit challenges for manufacturing, but become more available through the range of toolpaths that come with 6-axis robotic fabrication. In this chapter, we present an in-progress report that explores the way in which an industrial 6-axis robot can become an interdisciplinary research tool that produces space that is both immediate and responsive. We link a robotic code directly to acoustic equations, so that in a reverse engineering process, kuka|prc and robot reachability give boundary conditions for the consecutive design process. The chapter discusses a framework in which the robot is first used as subtractive manufacturing device for cutting an acoustically performative space, and indicates future research into the potential of a robotic assessment of complex geometries and the resulting acoustic performance. Through integration of acoustic behaviour and robotic fabrication parameters, the production of a space with three distinct ‘sound colorations’ becomes possible. Furthermore, future research is outlined whereby the robot acts as both hand and head: shaping an environment as both input and output device.

Keywords

Parametric design Robotic fabrication Curved surface geometries Acoustic integration Sound concentration 

References

  1. Cremer L, Mueller L (1982) Principles and applications of room acoustics. Applied Science, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Keating S, Oxman N (2012) Robotic immaterial fabrication. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) RobArch: robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer Wien, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Kircher A (1966) Phonurgia Nova, Broude, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Langhans CF (1810) Ueber Theater, Julius Eduard Hitzig, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  5. Menges A (2013) Morphospaces of robotic fabrication: from theoretical morphology to design computation and digital fabrication in architecture. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) (2012) RobArch: robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer Wien, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Pottmann P, Asperl A, Hofer M, Kilian A (2007) Architectural geometry. Bentley, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. Reinhardt D, Martens W, Miranda L (2012) Acoustic consequences of performative structures—modelling dependencies between spatial formation and acoustic behaviour. In: Achten H, Pavlicek J, Hulin J, Matejdan D (eds) Digital Physicality—Proceedings of the 30th eCAADe Conference, vol 1. Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Architecture, Czech Republic, pp 577–586, 12–14 Sep 2012Google Scholar
  8. Reinhardt D, Martens W, Miranda L (2013) Sonic domes: interfacing generative design, structural engineering and acoustic behaviour. In: Stouffs R, Janssen P, Roudavski S, Tunçer B (eds) Open systems (CAADRIA 2013), pp 529–538Google Scholar
  9. Vercammen M (2013) Sound concentration caused by curved surfaces. J Acoust Soc Am http://scholar.qsensei.com/content/1vs7mb
  10. Williams N, Davis D, Peters B, De Leon AP, Burry J, Burry M (2013) FABPOD: an open design-to-fabrication system. In: Stouffs R, Janssen P, Roudavski S, Tunçer B (eds) Open systems (CAADRIA 2013), pp 251–260Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dagmar Reinhardt
    • 1
  • Densil Cabrera
    • 1
  • Marjo Niemelä
    • 1
  • Gabriele Ulacco
    • 2
  • Alexander Jung
    • 3
  1. 1.The Faculty of Architecture, Design and PlanningThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.AR-MASydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Reinhardt_jung, Architecture and Design in Theory and PracticeFrankfurtGermany

Personalised recommendations