ACDSeePrint Job

John Frazer’s “An Evolutionary Architecture” from 1995 is an obligatory read for anyone interested in the amalgam of evolutionary computation and design. In other words anyone interested in the potential of “breeding designs” using evolutionary algorithms (genetic algorithms belong to this category). I was very happy to see it available online for free from the AA website.


NURBS surface Processing

Couple of quick impressions from a Processing sketch, which I’m currently developing. The sketch is going to become a basis of my first PhD experiment: comparison of a “parametric” interface and a “genetic algorithm” interface of a configurator for mass customization of furniture. The experiment will actually be conducted online, so more details will follow. For now I will only say that in order to compare two interfaces I need a parametric definition of an object, which can be manufactured with CAM. I have decided to go for a NURBS surface with control points wrapped in both U and V dimensions.

Processing sketch was developed based on Alasdair’s Turner’s NURBS surface sketch.

Before moving to Processing I did a couple of quick sketches in Generative Components:

NURBS surface GC


There where three sessions on MCPC devoted entirely to configurators. Before moving on to discuss them, let’s answer a question: “what is a configurator?”. The definition provided by Configurators Database is a good answer:

“Simply put, a configurator is a software application for designing products exactly matching customers’ individual needs.”

B2C online product configurators are of my particular interests. These ones are the tools of communication between producers and customers (or users) by allowing the later ones to customize products of the former ones. The whole process takes place over the internet.

De-facto standards in the design of configurators

Clarissa Streichsbier’s talk on “Identification of De-Facto Standards for Designing the User Interfaces for Web Based B2C Product Configurators” was one of the most appealing ones. Streichsbier (who works with cyLEDGE) looked at similarities of layout in 126 different online product configurators from 3 different industries: electronics, apparel and automotive. The Configurator Database was her source of links to the online customization tools. Sean Hanna and me have used this database as well in order to access most of the configurators discussed in our review.

The findings of Streichsbier’s review are very consistent. Standarts can be found in designs of configurators from the same industry. For example: electronic industry seems to pay little attention to the actual picture of the product. Instead it devotes most of the screen space for the customization menu. Automobile industry’s approach is the opposite. Product visualization in this case occupies majority of the screen space. It additionally seems that there are no clear standards across the industries. This means that if an experimental research was about to be conducted on online product configurators, these de-facto standards would definitely have to be taken into consideration in the design of the experiment.

“Open Toolkit”

In a later session Günter Dressel’s and Wolfgang Frühwirt’s, also from cyLEDGE, launched the project called “Open Toolkit”. Their aim is to create an open-source tool for development of configurators. I’m looking forward to seeing how this will develop and hope to contribute as well.


MCPC logo

I have recently attended Mass Customization and Personalization conference in Helsinki (MCPC 2009), where I’ve presented the Review of B2C Online Product Configurators. There where couple of really interesting issues raised during these intensive two days and I would like to begin with discussion of the term “personalization”. Posts on automation in architecture as well as B2C product configurators will follow.

Personalization as an umbrella term

Diversity of meanings applied to the term “personalization” was quite astonishing. For example: Bruce Kasanoff used it to name nearly any kind of mass customization. His examples ranged from products up till body customization with electronic devices.

Personalization as an process in which user is passive with respect to product attributes

Sunnika and Brage’s literature review provided an interesting insight on the distinction between “mass customization” and “personalization”. Their work is an automated literature review, facilitated by text mining algorithms. They have found that “mass customization” referees more often to tangibles, while “personalization” is rather used in the context of “intangibles”. In other words mass customization is likely to be about products, while personalization is associated with information.

This goes in the same line with what Sean Hanna and I proposed in our review. We considered “mass customization” as the process in which user is active with respect to product attributes, while we referred to “personalization” as a process in which user is passive with respect to product attributes. We discussed recommender systems the examples of personalization.

Another interesting input from Sunnika and Brage is that exactly the same distinction in computer science literature was described as a difference between “adaptability” and “adaptivity”. Where “adaptability” is a process in which the user is active, while adaptivity is an automated process.


a factory on your desktop

Major media increasingly notice the possible change, which 3d printing might bring when it will be developed into an affordable technology capable of working with multiple materials. “A factory on your desk” is an article on Economist.com, which not only introduces the major players in the game, such as Z-Corp, but also gives a hint on the history as well as the future of additive digital manufacturing. 3D systems, a company which marketed world’s first stereolithography machine already back in 1986, is mentioned there right next to the potential shift from “rapid prototyping” towards “rapid manufacturing”. Even though the article does not provide enthusiasts of the topic with a new perspective, it is a very good introduction for those who are not familiar with notions such as Bruce Sterling’s “spime”.

I have accessed the article through Geometry Gym.


Krystian Kwiecinski and me just came back from Linz, where we took part in creative coding and digital fabrication workshop organized by Fluid Forms (I’ve mentioned it in one of my previous posts already). For a couple of days we where able to use a Dimension 3d printer and a laser cutter, which are part of the Fab Lab facility in Ars Electronica Centre. Below you can find a couple of pictures from these intensive few days.

UPDATE: You might also want to take a look at Fluid Forms’ post about the Ars Electronica this year.

Ars1

Stephen Williams from Fluid Forms explaining the basis of Processing to the Ars’ Centre visitors.

Ars2

Trabecula by Freedom of Creation exhibited in the Ars’ Centre Fab Lab area (photo: Krystian Kwiecinski).

Ars3

Hylozoic Soil by Philip Beesley – exhibition in the Ars Electronica Centre

Ars6

Ars7

Bios by Robolab – exhibited in OK centre.

Ars5

Corpora in Si(gh)te by doubleNegatives Architecture – exhibition in the OK centre.


WF’s Agata Kycia, Krzysztof Gornicki and me recently had a pleasure of tutoring a Generative Components and digital fabrication workshop in Warsaw. The event was organized in collaboration with Bentley Systems Polska and sztuka-architektury.pl. You can read much more about it on WF’s blog.

WF_092 2


London digital week1

If you are in London by the end of September void exhibit (AAC) is an event not to be missed. It’s the end of the year show of Msc Adaptive Architecture and Computation, starting at 6.30 pm on 25th of September. The venue is Arup’s “Phase 2 Exhibition Space”. Here is an excerpt from the exhibition description:

“The work combines computational models and physical pieces that address the themes of embedded, embodied and adaptive architecture. Each piece represents a scientific exploration of computation in the design process. There are analyses of space and structure, artificial intelligence techniques applied to design performance, and emergent systems built around bodily relationships between space and technology.”

London digital week2

Digital Hinterlands Exhibition will definitely be worth visiting as well. The exhibition, curated by Ruairi Glynn in collaboration with Arup, features works by recent graduates of the Bartlett, Architectural Association, Royal College of Arts and University of Westminster. Marilena Skavara’s Adaptive Fa[ca]de” is this year’s Msc AAC thesis project which became part of this exhibition. You can find a description of this project below:

“Marilena Skavara’s ‘Adaptive Fa[ca]de’ explores the functional possibilities and performative characteristics of cellular automata (CA). In addition to the unique emergent behaviour of CA, a neural network enables a further computational layer to evolve CA behaviour to the context of its surrounding environment. Building upon the early work of Conway’s ‘Game of life’ and Stephen Wolfram’s extensive research on the wider implementation of CA, Skavara’s facade becomes a living adapting skin, constantly training itself from the history of its own errors and achievements.”

Marilena

One more event which sounds very well is Digital Architecture London conference.

Discussions are divided into five thematic panels:

- space

- bio-technology

- interaction

- form

- fabrication

Alan Penn, Brett Steele and Hanif Kara are just of a few from many great academics and practitioners which will share their perspectives on computation and design. Take a look at the programme of the event for more details.

All three events are part of London Digital Week.

london digital week


Ars

Hannes Walter and Stephen Williams from Fluid Forms are going to run a Creative Coding workshop during the Ars Electronica Festival in Linz. It will start this Friday (4th of September) and last till Tuesday 8th. An excerpt from the description of the workshop is below:

“Personalised products resulting from the marriage of geometry, code and data are the focus of the workshop. Parametrically generated forms will be produced and tested using the FabLab production facilities.”


Aleksandra Wasilkowska has recently invited me to collaborate on the design of “Unusually Rare Events / Distribution of Noovantgarde” exhibition in Warsaw’s Centre of Contemporary Arts (CSW). Detailed description of the exhibition, written by it’s curator, Lukasz Ronduda, is available from CSW. You can find a short excerpt below:

“Extremely Rare Events / Distribution of the Noo-Avantgarde is an experimental artistic-scientific project, a result of intense interaction between art and science. The exhibition crowns one of the stages of a unique dialogue, continuing for over a year now, between artists and scientists devoted to the phenomenon of Extremely Rare Events and generally between complexity science and art. This dialogue has become a catalyst for a generational statement by a group of young artists, curators and architects, whose practices can be termed, in keeping with the exhibition’s manifesto, as Noo-Avantgarde.”

The exhibition features interdisciplinary work by artists, scientists and architects:

Artists: Janek Simon, Agnieszka Kurant and Oskar Dawicki.

Scientists: prof. Andrzej Nowak and Luc Steels.

Architects: Yona Friedman, Francois Roche and my collaboration with Ola Wasilkowska.

Cultural theoretician: Edwin Bendyk.

Graphic artists: Kasia Korczak and Boy Verecken.

Generative design: distortions of the grid of components

I have developed a generative procedure in Processing. It arranged 6000 concrete blocks within the exhibition space accordingly to locations of the pieces on display and desired trajectories of the visitors. Dimensions of each component where 60 by 20 by 10 cm. The locations of the art works and visitors’ trajectories where converted into spatial actors, physically influencing the location of the concrete components. Art works attracted the components, while movement trajectories repealed them. At the end, the procedure was used not only to generate the components’ spatial configuration, but became a part of the exhibition itself.

Below are photos by Maciek Landsberg and a video depicting actor’s influence on the arrangement of components.

CSW 1

Science section: interviews from prof. Andrzej Nowak’s collection and Luc Steels’ works.

CSW 2

Architectural section: works of Francois Roche, Agnieszka Kurant and Yona Friedman.

CSW 3

Architectural section: work of Janek Simon.

CSW 4

Components spill on the CSW’s courtyard.