atom02:Structures michela turrin

Revision as of 12:24, 14 October 2011 (view source) Liviu (Talk | contribs) ← Older edit		Revision as of 12:24, 14 October 2011 (view source) Liviu (Talk | contribs) Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	First meeting:	+	First meeting conclusions:
−	A. The proposed Bubble-System was discussed:	+	'''A.''' '''The overall interface will be a three-part system :'''
−		+
−	1. The scale of the system and the maximum roof height (of five meters) do not seem to work together. For this amount of height the bubbles	+
−	themselves would have to be very big and this does not allow for the desired spatial flexibility.	+	1. User interface - via a website similar to [http://www.facebook.com |Facebook] or other social network websites (eg. Myspace, Last.fm, etc). The possibility of adapting a game-interface was discussed.
−	2. It is very difficult to achieve the floor & Bubble System while at the same time maintaining the elasticity of the floor. By constantly stretching	+	2. Management interface - which the manager entity of the site uses to control & evaluate various areas (e.g. managers can block parts of the site from long-term booking, can see the popular permutations of the site activity, can receive feedback for maintenance, etc).
−	the floor this creates stress in the material and the floor will at one point break. The solution of not deforming the floor for every demand was	+	3. A physical interface - on site, possibly a "physical stick" part analog, part digital.
−	considered.
−	B. Alternative Systems:'''	+	'''B.''' '''Whatever interface we decide on , the most successful interface is one you already know. And if we force the user to learn a new interface : make it count''' as in make the user suffer but suffer for more ultimate control (e.g. the Adobe software suite interface is somewhat difficult to learn but provides for greater functionality).
−	1. Continuous System: an elastic system of inflatables that are the structure is possible.
−	2. Discrete System: a system of rigid pieces that are movable (e.g. telescopic members, piston-driven, folding structures). This is a more feasible system that can achieve the project spatial flexibility.	+	See also:
−	'''Conclusions:'''	+	[http://studiolab.ide.tudelft.nl/studiolab/aprile |Walter Aprile]
−		+
−	The structural implications of the project are possible and can be realized. The reconfiguration limits need to be detected in advance and the consequences of those limits have to be identified. The expert's suggestion was to start making small mock-up models and try out different materials, both physical and in 3D. For continuous, inflatable systems Andrew Borgart was mentioned.	+
−		+
−	See also:	+
−	[http://www.michelaturrin.com| Michela Turrin]	+	[http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite.html?promoid=ITXQM |Adobe Creative Suite]
−	[http://meweb.larc.nasa.gov/meweb/vgt.html| Variable Geometry Truss]	+	[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarCraft |StarCraft]

---

Revision as of 12:24, 14 October 2011

First meeting conclusions:

A. The overall interface will be a three-part system :

1. User interface - via a website similar to |Facebook or other social network websites (eg. Myspace, Last.fm, etc). The possibility of adapting a game-interface was discussed.

2. Management interface - which the manager entity of the site uses to control & evaluate various areas (e.g. managers can block parts of the site from long-term booking, can see the popular permutations of the site activity, can receive feedback for maintenance, etc).

3. A physical interface - on site, possibly a "physical stick" part analog, part digital.

B. Whatever interface we decide on , the most successful interface is one you already know. And if we force the user to learn a new interface : make it count as in make the user suffer but suffer for more ultimate control (e.g. the Adobe software suite interface is somewhat difficult to learn but provides for greater functionality).

See also:

|Walter Aprile

|Adobe Creative Suite

|StarCraft