Material Feedback in Robotic Production
The success of CAD/CAM in architecture relies on the consistency between geometric information, material processes, and physical results. However, when material processes exceed a level of imprecision, the correlation between intended geometry and physical output cannot be secured and, therefore, conventional workflows are inadequate. This research investigates the expansion of one-way design-to-fabrication processes (from digital to physical) through the addition of feedback control. It develops methods to adjust fabrication instructions while it is occurring, in order to guide imprecise production into useful outputs. Experiments using feedback control to produce clay molds and to adjust a universal formwork are discussed.
KeywordsRobotic fabrication Real-time feedback Casting On-line robotic control Computer Vision
The research is supported by the Design Robotic Group at GSD Harvard and the ITE at TU Graz. Assistance from Panagiotis Michalatos, from Harvard GSD, was essential in the programming of the different components of the process.
Projects from the master studio Faksimile presented in the chapter are the result of the work by Gerda Villagrater, Martin Bratkovics, Pia Pöllauer, Lukas Jakober and Florian Landsteiner.
Programming during this research involves a variety of free and academic-licensed software, including Grasshopper, Kinect SDL, EMGU and OpenCV. In early experiments, Thibault Schwartz’ HAL (2013) was instrumental to create the robot motions.
- Bechthold M, King N (2013) Design robotics. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer, Wien, New York, pp 118–130Google Scholar
- Cederberg P, Olsson M, Bolmsjö G (2002) Remote control of a standard ABB robot system in real time using the robot application protocol (RAP). In: Proceedings of the 33rd international symposium on robotics (ISR), 7–11 Oct 2002, paper no. 113Google Scholar
- Dierichs K, Schwinn T, Menges A (2013) Robotic pouring of aggregate structures: responsive motion planning strategies for online robot control of granular pouring processes with synthetic macro-scale particles. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer, Wien, New York, pp 196–205Google Scholar
- Dörfler K, Rist F, Rust R (2013) Interlacing: An experimental approach to integrating digital and physical design methods. In: Rob-Arch 2012: Robotic Fabrication in Architecture, Art and DesignGoogle Scholar
- Helm V, Selen E, Fabio G, Matthias K (2012) In-situ robotic construction: Extending the digital fabrication chain in architecture. In: Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the association for computer aided design in architecture (ACADIA), ACADIA, San Francisco, pp 169–176Google Scholar
- Lim J, Gramazio F, Kohler M (2013) A software environment for designing through robotic fabrication. In: Proceedings of conference on computer-aided architectural design research in Asia (CAADRIA 2013), pp 45–54Google Scholar
- Pawlofsky T (2013) Rhino2krl. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer, Wien, New York, pp 167–172Google Scholar
- Schwartz T (2013) HAL: extension of a visual programming language to support teaching and research on robotics applied to construction. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer, Wien, New York, pp 92–101Google Scholar
- Schwartz M, Prasad J (2013) Robosculpt. In: Brell-Cokcan S, Braumann J (eds) Robotic fabrication in architecture, art and design. Springer, Wien, New York, pp 230–237Google Scholar