26

MATT CHURCH
JAKE CRIPWELL
TOM LOVELL
TOBY NING
AVI SAHA
contents
i. INTRODUCTION & CONCEPTS
ii. RESEARCH/PRECEDENTS
iii. INITIAL IDEAS
iv. DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
vi. 1:10 FINAL MODEL
vii. PROGRESSION TO SCULPTURE
viii. DETAIL DESIGN
ix. FINAL SCULPTURE
x. SCULPTURE ON SITE
xi. DRAWINGS
INTRODUCTION & CONCEPT

Concept:
Kin/knosis interpretation:
INTERDEPENDENCE
SYMBIOSIS
RELATIONSHIPS

These were the keypoints of our interpretation of the concept,

and we wanted to relay it structurally into the design of the
sculpture. From the start, this meant using each separate
element structurally/for function rather than relying solely on
aethetics.

Each element in the model depends on an adjoining piece,

without one the whole design would fall apart, yet they all come
together into a unifying whole.

The idea of relationships was integral to the structural hier-

archy of the design - in the way each element is built upon
the previous one, but also in the forms represented. They are
all variations on triangles, some self-similar while others are
slightly different.
RESEARCH & PRECEDENTS

When starting our initial research, we looked at the meaning behind

our theme of kin/gnosis. We felt that it reflected a shared relationship
and meaning between each separate design element to create a single,
whole concept. We also looked into the varying connotations of the
prefix kin, and settled on the idea of a kinetic, dynamic and engaging
sculpture.

Our initial design concept centred around the idea of each element
relying on one another structurally to remain upright, in turn forming
one single visual piece. Tensegrity structures evidence this where the
structure of the design creates the complex aesthetic; every piece is
supporting another element, resulting in no wasted material.

When first developing our concept for our 1:10 scale model, we
searched for some similarly designed sculptures for inspiration. We
discovered the work of Alexander Calder, an American sculptor whose
work primarily consisted of sheet metal and wire kinetic concepts
featuring triangles and abstract shapes.
The sharp angles and crisp lines were areas which we felt we could
utilise in our design, as well as incorporating a dynamic aesthetic
which would tie in with the overall theme of kin/gnosis.
Another design we encountered in our research was a sculpture at the
Portsmouth Olympic Harbour designed to hold the Olympic torch from
the relay. Again it linked well with our theme as it is four large pieces
which appear separate, but are actually all interlinked and interde-
pendent to create the effect.
 SITE
The site for our sculpture will be on the flat area in front of the archi-
tecture and civil engineering building. The site is open to the south and
there is an existing building to the north. The direction the majority of
people will be walking is diagonally across the site from the existing
bus station and 6 East building. We have decided to place our sculpture
so that the most open and best-looking side is clearly visible as people
University of Bath - Google Maps
walk past.
01225 388388

Directions from here

Directions to here

What's here?

Measure distance
 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
INITIAL IDEAS Once we had an initial idea that we were happy with we started to look
at it in more detail and see if we could better utilise the materials. We
each had a go at building a sculpture using the basic idea that we al-
ready had, but we found that when we tried to add the canvas into the
sculpture it covered up or distracted from key elements in the design
that we liked. We eventually found a use for it when we realised how
much weight the boards on the back of the sculpture would produce,
so we decided to create a counter weight on the front using the canvas
and remaining pieces of wood. We think this looks very elegant while
not drawing away from what we already have. We have used the rope
in tension to tie the whole structure together including the boards that
lean outwards. This helps them to be more stable and also makes the
structural elements better integrated and linked.

Having identified our own personal meaning of our theme from

the initial brief, we set about trying to come up with a design
which incorporated it. Initially, we found the cutting restriction
very difficult and quickly realised that triangles were the best
shape to use, as they were easy to cut from the rectangles of
material and had good structural properties. We wanted to keep
the canvas in tension using the rope, so we set about forming a
structure out of the wooden pieces which would enable this to
be possible.
Our first attempt resulted in the canvas being in tension, sus-
pended between two points, but all elements appeared separate
as opposed to working together in unity as one concept. To
overcome this, we created a more dynamic design out of the
wood, centring around three points instead of two. The canvas
was cut into smaller triangles instead of whole pieces which
were then suspended between the three points using the rope.
We found the canvas obscured large sections of the design
which we wanted to be clearly visible, so we had to adapt our
approach when utilising it.
Counter-weighting was a concept we also looked into, using
smaller separate sections of wood to suspend the canvas in
the centre, creating a design with every element in tension and
reliant on one another.
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT

One of our ideas on how best to use colour was to paint all the
shadows cast by the sculpture - on itself and the ground around. The
intention behind this was to create a relationship between the site and
the sculpture. Concretising the shadows is akin to freezing a moment
in time and this added to the dynamic of the structure. Additionally it
made the scultupre look like it had erupted from the ground, and from
certain perspectives, it is had to tell what is sculpture and what is
ground.

Alas, this idea didnt fit within the rules, but it also detracted from the
centrality/nuclear nature of the model so we decided to find another
way to use the colour - one that would draw it together rather than
diffuse.
1:10 FINAL MODEL

Our final design for the sculpture is an intricate combination of similar

triangles that come together to produce a freestanding structure
that gives the impression of elements that have been frozen mid-
movement.

Looking through our previous models we realised that they all revolved
around a central triangle. Therefore, the final use of colour accentu-
ated this.The red triangle now acted as a central reference point which
holds all the other elements together - conceptually and structurally.

The model demands closer inspection from the viewer as it challenges

the nature of a structural system. The structural hierarchy - in terms
of which elements/entities depend on which- has been intentionally de-
signed so as to create intrigue and a design that slowly reveals itself.
The structure is meant to look unbalanced, as if about to tip over.

The placement of the sculpture on site had two purposes. One was to
ensure the view as you approach creates a sense of anticipation while
being aethetically pleasing. Similarly, the approaching view hints at the
central red triangle being suspended/floating rather than grounded,
thereby requiring the viewer to walk around it and explore it form
multiple angles in order to see how the elements are supported.
PROGRESSION TO SCULPTURE
1;5 MODEL

After our first crit we discovered that we would have to make

our design on a 1:1 scale. Although our 1:10 model worked very
well we were not sure whether it would work as well at a bigger
scale. We started this stage by looking at each joint individually
and deciding on how each connection would work.
In preparation for the final sculpture we made a 1:5 scale model
but this did not help much because the parts were still too small.
So we made maquettes of the more complex joints so we could
test how strong they could be. We quickly realised that the
hardest connection to make would be where the inner wooden
triangle touches the outer one.

Changes we made as we progressed:

The hardest part about moving from our models to making the
finished design was that all the joints had to be accurately cut
and needed to be much stronger. We were worried that the
sculpture would fall over so we were prepared to have to lean
the two supporting triangle boards further back to counter
balance the piece.

An interesting part of the design that changed as we went along

was the fact that the red triangle now only makes contact with
the rest of the sculpture in two places, and one of the corners
completely floats, which further adds to the illusion of the
design. In doing this we avoided making some awkward cuts in
the wood and ultimately enhanced how the piece looks.
DETAIL DESIGN

We had many ideas for the wood connections that would involve no
screws or nails but due to limited workshop time, not all of them were
possible. We ended up cutting a lot of the wood connections to fit and
then using screws to secure them. When holding the canvas in place
we used small nails which we think adequately does the job as well as
looking smart and clean.
Cutting the holes through the board was something that we found
difficult, particularly given the angles that the wood punctures it at.
We achieved this by marking up the wood and then using a chisel to
manually make the holes.

As previously mentioned, we realized that the connection between

the red triangle and the outer triangle would be the hardest and most
important if the sculpture were to stand. Originally we wanted to cut a
chink in the red triangle that the outer triangle would rest in, but this
involved some difficult angles and weakened the triangle with the piece
cut out of it. We decided on a small amount of dowel that the triangle
would rest on which gives the impression of hardly any contact with
the red triangle, which is an idea mirrored throughout the rest of the
design.
FINAL SCULPTURE
SCULPTURE ON SITE
PLAN
1:10
SOUTH ELEVATION
1:10
NORTH ELEVATION
1:10
WEST ELEVATION
1:10
EAST ELEVATION
1:10
ISOMETRIC
1:10
PERSPECTIVE