Hi

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/3D-H-Gotic-4.gif

we've been through this before....

this "new" building system of yours right? that animation has yet to prove it to be structurally sound- or any other kind of sound. how do building systems work with it? how does the interior/exterior elements of a building integrate with it?

not to sound too pessimistic or anything, but these things gotta at least be addressed.

Note to self: Don't ever do what Per does.

i agree...

needs some work

no what it needs is to be ignored for the shit that it is....no really everytime i get suckered into looking at a link per posts, i see practically the same image - what appears to be a 21st century gothic cathedral....

per if you want some relevant discourse at least show some process, some context, some historical reference to back this shit up. architecture does not exist in a vaccum.

I agree with all above - it looks like a load of crap to my eyes, it looks like a cathedral - as beta says, but one that has twice the amount of structural mass than those of old. What the hell is the point in that? Why make copy something but make it LESS beautiful that the thing you copied?

I also object to it being labelled 'fancy graphics'. That looks as though it was done about 20 years ago. Take a look around you - that doesn't compare to anything happening, graphics-wise, nowadays (KDLab for example - now theres some skilled 'fancy' graphics).

calling it a cathedral is giving too much credit, and its certainly not gothic with those round arches, what it is closest to is a lamella truss (dia-grid vaulted roof of criss-crossing members) -- which is actually a very cool structural system -- in the end the gross form and lame animation/rendering do indeed seem sadly pointless though...

Hi

You are all right this is different --- it is cery different.
It is not the just forming the useal glass and steel, it is one material only, it is different as each building part go strait from 3D CAD to the mashin that acturly cut the piece it is different as not one single piece of paper is needed , it is another form language.

Hi
Forgot to say

It is different as it do not just create an emty mesh but a structure where the floors are suddenly just there no one placed the floors.
It is different as it is not just surface attitude but structure it is one material not 20 different, it form square as organic it is different as it is super strong it make a new technology it promise new jobs it is different as it build cheap houses and support new sheet materials, it can only be made with computer that way it is very different as with this computing ,it is not about the fancy sales renderings, but about the enginering structure . It is different for what it support it cover the old forms but don't support the old way's.

This is new ofcaurse it is different you can't blame it for that and realy all you do is blaming it for being different.

Must I realy name artists that was blamed for being different then this page is not long enough.

Dear Per,

At first I was amused by your numerous rants and terribly broken English. I actually spent a whole evening searching for, and reading through any threads in which you participated. I am now however, torn between amusement and embarresment on behalf of all danes, and danish designers.

A word of advice: It's obvious that from a communication standpoint you are not succeeding in delivering your amazing idea in a convincing fashion. You should perhaps go work on some material (a website for example) which actually describes the idea in a coherent and detailed fashion.

Until that work is done, please get of the internet and go work on proving us all wrong.

I wish you the best of luck
Love a fellow dane

Per

Are you looking for a discussion or are you looking for people to bow down and kiss your feet, and then raise you on their shoulders carrying you around like you are the king of architecture?

Respond to questions or shut it down. You are looking pretty dumb regardless of the language barrier. Provide some context, show how this "theory" works in a real world situation. Your waffle structure still requires other materials, sheathing, windows, doors, MEP systems, flooring, and lest I forget PEOPLE. You have these "skills" so show some people interacting with your things. Show some process, process, and more process. Your work without an understanding of process is meaningless.

Please don't pull the artist card on us, most of us know that artists - Must I realy name artists that was blamed for being different then this page is not long enough. [by the way this is a bullshit statement] - don't have anything to do with your work.

Hi

This is not about "me" as I do not have any drive in the direction of being any master architect, ---- guess a lot people will think so, but this is not so, I use computers I write my own applications I build ontop a life long experience in arts and crafts I know the tools.

Also I find architecture being stuck in a lead that progress nowhere, I know the code in today's architect applications and se these, as nothing but the old way's just written into computer code, from my poitn of view this is no progress no new tool but a splendid standstill.

--------- Realy do anyone think that to become famous is the only drive possible.

This is just a tool. but it is an easy one to use , I do not expect any other credit than what you expect when providing a new tool that solve the problem providing the first true direct link, 3D CAD to manufactoring.

I find that this tool provide exact measures down millimeter, at the same time challancing an architecture trend, that seem to lead only to more cold glass and steel forms. Forms without thought of structure ,forms becomming more and more fancy ,just for the attitude of it, --- not for the quality or even for the use of technology, what I show here, is even the most simple options with this construction idear, If I displayed the top of it, it would be so sofisticated that you would not belive your eyes, But I am not fighting to be famous, I am fighting to promote relevant new digital tools and from my years at the architect acadamy and the time I spended climing the stairs acturly building what the programs generated, I know what I am up against, what you Romans don't realise is, that I develobed these tools for you that I am a designer not an architect.

These tools is develobed for you to form Solids make them hollow, add the floors and stairs, se how the interiour can go in one with the walls, how beauty will show when structure become planned when two planes replace 3 planes. --- The progress must be clear for anyone who know architecture, know the actural tools master these. Unless you do so, you are only blaming your own perception of what you think I make.

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/index.htm

ugh.

wow, he really can't be saved

per,
for the love of god, Please, offer some validity to the "thing" it is you are trying to validate. because right now it is just that, a "thing", and nothing more. the structure is way over done, to actually think that anyone would want to "experience" a structure of this kind is rediculous. the whole point of architecture is for people (the real kind, not the kind you get from a cd) to use and experience the "things" that we make. the computer is a wonderful thing, but if you can't take your ideas any farther than that then you had better just pack it up and become a seamstress or something....my 2 cents

i think designing on the computer is for people that do not know how to design. all designs start on paper! cad is just a finishing tool

Wow, Per you are weird.
The problem with the drawings and animation you post is preciselythe fact that it doesn't relate to any intersting architectural background. The reason why it hasn't been used in architecture before is probably that it's not a very intelligent solution in terms of habitability vs structure. In architecture, intelligence is beauty. And you're system is not intelligent because it doesn't allow a wide range of formal expression and it reduces the space given to the body at the benefit of what looks like a cheap plywood structure. I really don't get the point.

Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). I'm not so interested in the formal aspects or the aesthetics which seem to bother everyone anyway, but rather the pragmatics behind your method. I fail to understand the newness of it, because to me it seems like traditional structural thinking.

It looks like it'd be kind of leaky in a rainstorm. And hard to walk across that floor in stilettos.

I must stand by Per on this one, aleph.
Kladd i sin vackraste kilt, besokte han Den Enda, och nu skulle det ske!

Hi

Thanks for all response I think every post is very valuable, If I can not use all this response I shuld not deal with design this is my attitude.

3D-H is pressing a button having an intergrated framework generated, this ask deciding the scale of the "mesh" and deciding the materials, but please exchouse that I keep things simple, that when not two different scales or materials work together, things can look a bit primitive, ----- but if I made things more complicated, some would say this is impossible and it's not. This tool screem for further develobment trying out combining instead of standing alone, but this ask skilled folks visionary craftmen or architects who belive in arts or crafts and who is looking ahead to the day ,when they can say to the engineer how things must be assembled.

Now that i've seen per's other examples on his homepage I get it --the 'newness' he's claining, its not the lamella truss paradigm I mentioned above, so much as the basic dia-grid egg-crate structure that every architect and their brother is doing (as can be found in such books as Architecture in the Digital Age ed. by Kolarevic, Digital Tectonics by Niel Leach, Praxis 6: New Technologies/New Architectures or such buildings as OMA's Seattle Library or H&DeM's Prada Tokyo) but here he's claiming the floor is integral to the shell (2 planes vs. 3 to complete a building) -- the problem is he doesn't have very compelling forms and/or any apparent response to program, but it might have potential in better hands...

Punkt, you shouldn't be embarrased about all recent Danish design though, have you seen Bruce Mau's huge new exhibition, Too Perfect: Seven Possible Denmarks with such sharp/hip young Danish firms as Plot;

and archiTEKE: its sad if you think the computer is only usefull as a 'finishing tool' -- you obviously haven't looked very carefully into some of the most interesting work of the last decade, or haven't used a 3D modelling program to its potential, or are just trying to be funny...

Hi

A-f ;
"Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). "

You are very close, But the amazing thing is that what you produce as 3D-H is in only two planes, not the tree planes we are used to only two.
These two planes are 90 deg to eachother to make a simple assembly notch possible-- a halve notch where two sections intersect.
Now the two planes forming the framework do not need to be just 45 deg rotated, they can be 45 deg rotated according to the tradisional xy plane but interesting things happen , when at the same time, they are 45 deg. rotated to the xz plane , those I published lately are simple ones only rotated 45 deg according to tradisional xy plane and this way the "waffle" assoc. come closer where rotating further by any other plane remove this expression. So 3D-H is as logic as the tradiaional top-front-side planes 3D-HoneyComb just carry it's own cooerdinate system where there are alway's 90 deg inbetween the two planes where the offsets describe the planes for each frame.

Sorry about the spelling, this is the best I maneage.

WELL SINCE IM STILL TRYING TO GET MY UNDERGRAD IM NOT ALL THAT FAMILLIAR W/ THE GREAT 3D PROGRAMS THAT ARE OUT THERE...YET. AND ONE THING I DO KNOW IS THAT WHEN A BUILDING, SPICIFICALLY A BUILDING IS BEING DESIGNED WITH OUT ANY FREE HAND SKETCHS - DWGS, OR MODEL MAKING...THE RESULT IS A DISASTER. THE BUILDER IS CALLING THE ARCH. EVERY 5 MIN. AND IT TURNS INTO A DESIGN AS YOU BUILD. LAME AND INSUFICENT! LIKE I SAID THE COMPUTER IS JUST A TOOL JUST LIKE MY PENCIL!
I ACTUALLY WENT TO THE NETHERLANDS FOR 10 DAYS THIS PAST SUMMER-THERES SOME INTERESTING WORK

Hi

A-f ;
"Per, I think you should clarify a little bit *exactly* what the 3d-h is. If I understand it right, it is a script which intersects threedimensional volumes with an extruded grid (thus, the "honeycomb"), rotated 45 degrees in plan or sometimes in elevation. This then forms the structure. To me, it seems like the only difference between this and an ordinary frame structure is firstly that the thicknesses of the elements come from form rather than necessity. Secondly the 45 degree rotation gives a frame that is built up "diagonally" compared to what usually would be done (visible in the green roof animation on your homepage). "

You are very close, But the amazing thing is that what you produce as 3D-H is in only two planes, not the tree planes we are used to only two.
These two planes are 90 deg to eachother to make a simple assembly notch possible-- a halve notch where two sections intersect.
Now the two planes forming the framework do not need to be just 45 deg rotated, they can be 45 deg rotated according to the tradisional xy plane but interesting things happen , when at the same time, they are 45 deg. rotated to the xz plane , those I published lately are simple ones only rotated 45 deg according to tradisional xy plane and this way the "waffle" assoc. come closer where rotating further by any other plane remove this expression. So 3D-H is as logic as the tradiaional top-front-side planes 3D-HoneyComb just carry it's own cooerdinate system where there are alway's 90 deg inbetween the two planes where the offsets describe the planes for each frame.

ArchiTEKE this tool was develobed after I spended years building boats with the same concept that formed bilbao ,atleast back then they pointed to plain mesh entities to be the basics , but after years of fighting the foults you experience with unfolded surfaces and strait line meshes with double curved faces , and even I solved all those trouble, I had to realise that this asked a compleatly different aproach, that making sections was part of it and that making each frame support any other was the right aproach then develoable surfaces can cover this but you shuld simply not try using unfolded surfaces without a 3D-Honeycomb foundation as that and only that and not a transvers fiddled pipework, will make the measures.
3D-H is the tool you want, you can sketch with Solids, but after making the first few clumpsy structures, you will start refining your expression chose the right scale or material do the nicest forms create the frame of the spaces and make the stairway go in one with the waals, and make the holes fit standard window frames down millimeter pressision.


Sorry about the spelling, this is the best I maneage.

umm. its almost like per isn't human. there is such a consistency to the responses, such imperviouness to all the scathing critisism, that they surely must have been produced by a machine.

that's it! 3d-h is not the script. per was the script the entire time!

Hi

Susan Surface :

"It looks like it'd be kind of leaky in a rainstorm. And hard to walk across that floor in stilettos. "

First if it came down to that, I would shape a building the same way as these shoes. ------ Any shape any size even buinding size.
Second ,will you find that if the structure catch 50 pct. of the rain it will change the climat under -- will 75 pct make a difference , anyway the open cubes can be pointed the direction you want, leading in light from only one direction ans "seen" from other directions the structure offer a multiple layered bullit prove structure impossible to penetrate as soon there be another layer or frame. Also you can place several framework in different cube directions within eachother, then you will have a house with no roof being weather proven as each shelll will catch some rain.
You are right about walking across the floors, but please note, that no one layed the floor, no one placed any floor beams as they just grew as by magic, but on the other hand, you can be sure that the floor plane is absolut plain and any paneling will be carried by multible frames and when paneled both sides, a real Honeycomb structure is the result, at that point you can start reducing the materials --- when paneled.

Maybe you should submit this idea for the Architectural Record Avant Garde Issue.

yes! you see? a script!

Per,
You're modelling all of your projects as if they were made out of some homogeneous stuff. Architecture simply isn't because of the scale. Architecture is forced by scale to acknowledge the connections of similar and dis-similar materials. Any "revolutionary" structural system is really a system of connections because of the magnitude of the forces. If you want your ideas to have legitimacy, you'll need to focus on the connections. Try taking ONE project and working it though the details instead of spinnning your wheels on rendering the 3d-h models...
Either that or fess up that you're really Phillip R.K. Nixon and you just got a Dell....

Hi

Now buildings and building structures is not the only issue covered by a new method ;

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/fig3.jpg

jeee, per, seriously, it looks like someone set you loose on a free copy of maya.

what is that image supposed to mean? that you can model an f14 in wiremesh? i dont see the novelty...shell structure is already been done, and to a degree of detail that is certainly not the one you got in your renderings. seriously, give up and move on, is very unimpressing and rather disturbing being here and discussing it...

Hi

el jeffe ,botton line is that also in this, there are a great part social skills involved, Anyway develobing crashing good promising attitude towerds modern manufactoring must be the attitude if you want to make a difference, ---- then with myself I know I can not make anything else I done so my whole of a life. Still Im'e happy.

I am happy as there are so much beauty avaible, and if you need a bad exchouse to make art, then beauty if you find it is worth the intire 54 year old trouble , things can only become better but I am not an architedt but a designer I do not draw as nice as many others, this I know.

i always understood weed was much stronger in denmark. apparently it is.

Look, I'm starting to like his sense of humour guys. it's hilarious.

Does anybody know this guy? Is he for real?

it is so in our face if per gets a priztker

oh man....where do i start

innovative idea- yes, per...

at just about the same time as when introducing janet jackson on the facts of life was an innovative idea.

you say you are a designer, not an architect. you cannot convey your ideas well enough for anyone- ANYONE- not just architects- to comprehend (or buy into) your "innovation". a designer- a half accomplished one- would be able to at least convince ONE person that their idea is feasible, sensible, and plain believable for that matter. you cannot do that.

i was in that last discussion where you were involved with in you showing this "innovative" structural system and the SAME exact thing happened then that is happening now- no one is convinced- even less some are down right pissed off.

it DOESN'T integrate with ANY thing dealing with architecture or engineering. some points are possible, but not necessarily any more advantageous than a traditional method to suit. the honeycomb deal? been done- recently by Rem K. nothing is "innovative" or money saving, time saving, more aesthetically pleasing about your system than other methods both old and new. NOTHING.

and a point of criticism: the renderings & little animations are straight-up juvenile- not even 1st year level of rendering- no sensitivity to any scale proportion or composition. no direct attack on you or your cronies, but it may attribute as to why we're totally rejecting anything you have to say.

language? F the language barrier man- what you're saying has no real coherence towards the questions and comments posed, so you could misspell all day long or spell like martha stewart in a parole request letter- you're not saying anything either way.

per, please regroup and gather all elements of design, architecture, engineering, and art- display them with your renderings or whatever, and then and only then come back and post...

and by the way bhands- i agree with the achiteke kid- the computer is pretty much just a tool. just like a pencil....the generator of design, idea, technology comes from the dome, not an advanced super hi-tech resin casting 3d forming program...

I think you have got something Per. Those who don't open their can of beer, won't know what color it is.
Ja, roligt blir det inte. Ska vi se efter pa termometern hur varmt
(kallt) det ar har i dag?

Hi

Richard ;

"what is that image supposed to mean? that you can model an f14 in wiremesh? i dont see the novelty...shell structure is already been done, and to a degree of detail that is certainly not the one you got in your renderings. seriously, give up and move on, is very unimpressing and rather disturbing being here and discussing it..."

I don't se it that way, realy a craftman wish for a reliable structure and as you know, this replace multible different building elements with one only ,that ontop doh't need to be solid timber or special fittings ,that do not ask those cheap universal steel fittings you bang full of nails ,beside this realy use the computer and a tool is not just somthing that by itself do your things, you need to use the tool be able to master it acturly create your works, it is a tool but the result depend on the material used and your skills how can it be different. Make it in cromeplated gold or eco sheet plywood replace, it will be two different things. Also the color of your choice will make a difference, make it good it will work, make it bad don't say the method is bad.
---------- Anyway I think any one that must build with this, will prefere it by simple resons ,it acturly create a usefull honeycomb structure it is accurate down millimeter, it go direct from CAD drawing to manufactoring mashin. No one will chose the vorse option if there was an honest choice but this tool must be very different from the tradisional ; please do anyone expect it to be different, that a new tool must look like somkthing we already know - then it is not new, but what we expect when did we start to dictate arts.
Still there are no bended timbers in 3D-H and from a crafts point of view ,this is an important issue ,it is a building method where there are no trouble with floor trusses, hangers and knee's ; there are no trusses hangers or bolts, and it hold better than fiddeling or fighting the materials as how you se in Disney cew concert hall ,acturly this ansver the measures and must not be fiddled and realy it as just one side effect offer a foundation for even an unrolled paneling, as the framework is cut exactly from the 3D form that define the unrolled surface ---- don't try this with a mesh entity as bilbao ,the world consist of different things than zero thickness vectors. 3D-H is very different don't challance it unless you have an open mind as you could be in the situation that a craftman will prefere that, being better than tradisional means, I develobed all design tools from unrolling to 3D transforming just to have the design tools, but still the old ribwork was never better than an intergrated framework. Now use it or use the tradisional means ,anyway this make a new option, one that don't describe the building element in codes on paper, but as ready N.C. codes any scale, to acturly build the wonder it will be, when skills made it happen.

Now watch out Romans Per Corell is out there to get you ;))

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Cyber-Boat/

"those who dont open their can of beer wont"- WHAT??

i dont get your f'd up analogy man...unless you're being sarcastic. so, gustav- back up your reasoning as to why per is on to something

and per-

are you actually typing this? or is it scripted? its just more babble with no backing....

oh- wait! everyone run! "watch out Romans Per Corell is out there to get you"

i think paul should consider a new discussion filter.... 'per'

more like John Cleese's line "people called romanis they go the house"

You might be a Monty Python fan if...your friends show off their house and you say: "It's only a model."

Ok, I understand that the 3D-H can be very useful for boat hulls, but your renderings have a completely different scale. You wouldn't be able to manufacture let's say 50x50 m big sheets out of wood or steel, less cut them with a laser cutter, and well... transporting them to the site and raising it could only be done with the combined effort of a small country's airforce. You can of course split the structure in different parts, but you would then have something of an ad-hoc solution, completely similar to a wooden frame building. There would also be difficulties with windows, openings and paneling, particularily since you make structural elements that are aligned to an *arbitrary* grid and not normal to the facade surface. This means, in short, that you would need to make universal or tailor-made joints that connect the structure to the facade, most likely complicated twisted laths.

I agree with a-f, the implications for boat hulls is 100% obvious, but architecture is a completely different animal. I think the artist in Per is getting the best of him, and doesn't understand what it would be like to inhabit the space, to have to deal with it on a daily basis. Per, I think if you want to push this, step outside of the 3D realm and start building. You say it would be amazingly simple to do this, then do it. Do some installation sculpture pieces where you show people experiencing the space. Then build a small building out of this system, show that it works. The partial beauty of computer modeling is that you can make nearly anything 'seem' feasible, but architecture is a physical built art. All you have to show for this idea is basically a very long string of 1s and 0s. If you want this to be recognized for the new concept that you seem to think it is, you gotta take it to the next step.

Give us something physical, and then maybe more people would buy into it.

Hi

The issue workplane to small for cutting large frames are easy solved, in the various 3D-H groups you will se several suggestions, from cutting a lock as soon as the frame extend the workspace to double layer sheet tom make butt join overlap. Realy this is already develobed for the porpus of using waer and laser cutters for large pieces, also as long as you re-callibrate the workpiece there are no limits for how big pieces that can be made, but the automated cut in lock system suggested make everything work beside already this shuld be a limitation with what is already made and cut in steel shop industrie and is not.
But please look further into where standard window frames are subtracted the Solids, then you will se that within these holes there will be an exact fit for the window frame and what you havn'e seen yet , is that how the framework is generated as by magic solve the problems you think will surface, ------- look closer and you se very interesting details about how a 3D-H form walls you addesd and holes you subtracted please check this graphic ;

http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2573.jpg

Now don't blame me for the looks, this is maby to tight a framework maby to wide frames, but these graphics is not here for the looks of it but to show the concept, --- please do not judge this concept from my ability to design the forms, this is not what it is about, as if you do that, you blame a new promising technike by the artistic skills of the inventor. Cars look very different today as what they did at the start, wouldn't it be sad if they was scrapped becaurse they scared the horses ?

Hi

Just want to add that when I say "this is possible" please remember that I do so with my experience of boats building and furniture building , you just was pointed to Cyber-Boat site, here is a sample of carpentry ;
http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2498.jpg

About the orientation or waffleness of a 3D-HoneyComb structure, please check this sample ( another one just being a sample not a design but an illustration) ;

http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/2422.jpg

Please again this is a concept not a design, but use your emagination and this method unfold multible side effects.

Maybe we can try to guess what the issue is, or at least I can try to explain why it is still not convincing to me. I don't believe a concept can exist outside of it's formalisation, which in that case are a bunch of not too good drawings and a very difficult to undestand verbal description. From what I undestand, the most interesting right both for Per and for us is the verbal description. The last post tries to emphasize on a distinction between a technique of conception and the resulting object itself, explaining that even if this object contains more problems than it solves, it doesn't prove that the conception technique is bad. I don't buy this distinction. The only thing that could start to interest me is a nice project prooving the qualities of this technique, and its "newness" or originality or simply difference with others.

Eh --- how can it be a drawback that this method ask more develobment, basicly it is a concept that most people can emagine and those who know 3D find exiting ( among these FAA that describe the concept very positive as a promising new method to build small planes ) --- but realy there are so much potentials in building ontop the basic concept , and I agrea that what can be develobed with what I call a brand new attitude simply can not be emagined .
Now many of the graphics are rather old several years old, so please open your mind even the designs themself can be primitive, these graphics is only to show ,and please reconise that each sorm focus on one particular detail.

This one show that there are no limits combining different forms, but don't try this with a mesh entity it will only work as a framework ;

http://www.designcommunity.com/scrapbook/images/1969.jpg

What to use it for, only to show there are no limitations and that you never bend one single piece with 3D-H

As far as I can tell, per, this technique, and the manner in which you use it, offers no reconceptualization of architecture or architectural technology, and is, in fact, not a concept, but is an operational tool--one that can easily be (and has been) utilized within any conventional modeling program. Further, it is a rather unintelligent process, which indiscriminatly sections a form along two axis in a fairly dumb kind of way; and thus, you produce DUMB OBJECTS. There's no selective variation in the size, orientation, frequency, or spacing, of the sections, which would be likely informed by the nature of the material being used, as well as countless other programmatic and structural issues. I don't even know why I'm responding to this discussion, because has now become very very old. I guess I just want the last word. Enter Per...

PER THIS IS MY POINT EXACTLY -- BILBAO DESIGNED BY FRANK GERRY
WAS IN FACT ONCE A PIECE OF PAPER CRUMPLED UP INTO A BALL. THEN SKETCHS ON PAPER... THEN THE PROGRAM THAT HE USES PRETTY MUCH DESIGNS THE BLDG FOR HIM --CERTIAN THINGS THAT HE DESIGNS CANNOT BE BUILT SO THE COMPUTER PROGRAM (CATIA) RE-SHAPES THE BLDG SO THAT IT CAN STAND. THATS NOT MUCH OF A DESIGN

OK GET SOME POOR SAP TO BUILD THIS THING A LETS SEE IF IT FUNCTIONS

Two cents worth (of water off a gooses back):

Per, I dont think you know much about architecture. If you want to become better at it, dont be such a goose, listen to criticism.

If you really feel like flogging this rather dead-looking structural system into the ground, I second what Pixelwhore said: build a room using your skinny fibreboard dinosaurs, 1:1 scale, and see if it really revolutionizes the world. I'll eat your hat.

Two cents worth (of water off a gooses back):

Per, I dont think you know much about architecture. If you want to become better at it, dont be such a goose, listen to criticism.

If you really feel like flogging this rather dead-looking structural system into the ground, I second what Pixelwhore said: build a room using your skinny fibreboard dinosaurs, 1:1 scale, and see if it really revolutionizes the world. I'll eat your hat.

Hi

Once I to was a rigid tradisional wooden boats builder, wanting nothing but good old quality and what we know work and no modern spooky computerworks. But I am a craftman not somone who want to ground any artistic graphics fancy coloring, ---- Listen I been there I know that, but it realy get irelevant when it gets ugly and self dependant realy if this is about rethat and Linux I just must tell you guy\s, that somone that can use a hammer withiut destry both nail plank acturly shuld be the one designing the home for your grand children. Unless ofcaurse anyone is saur that I raised two children and still love my crafts Listen < architecture is for making nice houses, not about bullying not about exelent social harasment. Architecture deal with beauty you never even talk about it.

I know you guy's care least about what you write, but somone is going to eat a Hat , one guy claim that "this is nothing and already ha ha is in use so it work. In same tread another one claim that if it work he is going to eat my Hat ; please runin go ask Pixelhome if Pixelhome realy think that 3D-H is no invention and where Pixelhome think it is used ,Jmac keep talking about that Jmac don't think it is nice instead it shuld be dumb , now what's the real trouble, you all hate progress to come, that computers shuld be used to shape the world, one say it is already develobed, another that it will never work, beside a beautifull building must think on it's own othervide it is not what Jmac expect and therefore stupid. Been there know that.

I know that academics already just hate the selfmade, esp if they make somthing better than theirs , but what shuld I care, I am just an artist, being designer develobing building methods ,but luck is, that whenever I show some fantastic challancing, exiting new designs there alway\s is some that just hate you for just that ,that you can use a tool can build a boat do the CAD drawings, do it in a new way.

What is it you jokers want, is it cold in hell and therefore you must get suply in this world ? You simply do not want different tools or beauty you want to build boats as in 1880 well guess what you get place your grand children in that, se what happen. Or maby you don\t have grandchildren and just want to feed the good old social artwork, well do that long enough and you will start stink..
I love mahogony and copper .craftmanship and exelent skills. But if you been there, you know how saur tradisionalist become when they harm what is growing in terms of develobment within the crafts, we started with stone adges and ended with social harasment and making the kids pay , isn't this how it is ?

Eat That Hat.

Now Hush you dryass usenet bore asses. BUH you selfprotective academics that just hate when a skilled craftman show some guts, FLY you sad arogant eternity students there are no need for you in this temple.
Se Romans this is how you give future a chance, you don\t make old dryass Linux fanatic talk about actural houses, you allow architects to make that. Then you realise that arts alway\s been a social game and that a lot of what you bought is worthless , well if you bought the lot you were clever, if you only invested in social games and zero quality not just art but you will suffer. If you allow hippie haters determine the language and tone , well what architecture do you think you will get.

architecture is definatly not about making pretty houses-per-it is way mor in depth than that. architects that think all architecture is is making a house and putting it on a large piece of land-they are the architects that make suburban areas boom...for about 50 years...then there is no land to build on --suburbia turns into an urban situation w/ no city plan---ex. long island, new york---LIRR which is totally insuficient, a huge parking lot that they call the long island expressway---architecture is more than even that - i could go as far into it as politics and economics, but thats a whole nother ball of wax
architecture is in everything that we do-every move that we make

this thread is just f**king unreal... "fancy graphics lovers" ha! man! boy-o! goddamn! yeah PER i studied architecture for 5 years to become a fancy graphics lover and because we discuss things we're "selfprotective academics"... i'm lovin reading this just for the comedic value...

Per, I know you've been thinking about this for a long time, my hat is off to you.
I don't know what it is going to take, a sledgehammer?

WARNING! WARNING!
Do not click that link - it contains a powerful virus that will not reside in your computer's memory but will reside in your physical brain. You can recognize it by you catching yourself rationalizing the wasting of time.

Per, I'm so sorry your cat died.

He is out of control. Per, you really are great. I love the 3dH, your drawings are beautiful. Sorry to be such a retard. Be seeing you.

Hi

Make you wonder, when you know that in this small contry back when things started ,the famous desing trends that surfaced, some 60 years ago the only reson was, that some architects and designers harrassed a few members of architect contect jury\s to persave the rest of the jury to support these designers .
Realy so it happened, it was impossible to come thru with modern design and architecture,and the settled crowd of those time had their own social game. Then some visionary designer simply started to in any way persave one particular jury member , somone being the typical socialy well skilled and therefore one of those the rest would follow, this guy was simply harrassed untill he chose to give in as it anyway didn\t mean anything for him, and Danish Design started.
Read about that, you be surprised. Find what you can about P.H. and you will know.

Hi

It\s alright for me if you just fill that hat with popcorn and place it in the microvawe.

i finally figured it out. i have come out of the cave and into the light. i really don't know why i didn't see it before, it really is obvious, you just need to hold your monitor in your arms, rotate on its base about 15 degrees, and tilt the upper right corner of the monitor toward the back at 2 1/2 degrees, then and only then will all be revealed. per is the james joyce for the new millenium. don't you see? the similarities are striking.

i bow to you sir, you are truly what you have claimed to be, a visionary voice of mythic proportions, here to guide the visionless through the mediocrity of idea and thought.

thank you Per.

I have found God.

surely we are being taken for a RIDE and AGAIN. Or maybe it is just DEJA VU...

Hi

Not before you realise that now you don\t need 20 different steel profiles ,expensive special fittings, fiddeling and bending to make a paper drawing work out a structure that do not fit with the measures in the plans.
What you maby forget, is how today\s architectural programs work maby you forget that these do not provide a direct link from CAD drawing to manufactoring ,but only provide the same paper and code work ,now done on computer, but with the exact same limitations as before computers.
This is a different world, one where the structurel framework is not individual bended and expensive frames as some lookalike calim in their expression, here there are more to it, than just playing fancy, --- you think 3 axis N.C. routers is more high tech, well choek out what they acturly produce and what they support ; take the boat industrie where you first make a plug full size boat in styrofoam here it's claimed that technology made a revolution, well is it realy a revolution to make an extreamly expensive 3D router do the exact same work as before, just to provide a plug to perform a mold for the same outdated technike casting plastic boats --- where are the new thing, isn't 3D routers just used to support outdated technology ?

Isn't it like saying "we want innovation and new technology, but it must look and be as what we already know" . Isn't it so that you realy don't give somthing that a lot of people find facinating and exiting a chance, but only do the same thing as any other academic, that you first look if this guy is an academic or not, do you realy give knowleage skills and visions a chance ?

Would you have accepted this exiting new method if an academic had put it forth ?

Isn't this where arts ended up redwine and roses, social skills and emty talk with no visions about a better world and those new jobs.
In this contry it is, real skills count nothing compared promising a museum an Spetacular exebition with dull talk about technology no one realy understand , just big words and nothing underneath just fancy surface with no structure, -------- and then having skilled craftmen make it fit together.

Again, in this contry some 70 years ago, some visionary designers got their way by forcing jury members to accept that somone else than the useal friends got the job, this thing about open contests and everyons oppotunity to show somthing visionary and realy fantastic forget about it, as if you realy leave in a brilliant suggestion and is not among the settled crowd, they just say that even your works as the only participant is Digital, then you did not fill in the right piece of paper with the right color , counting the arears, then it do not help you that your model is 3D and the arears give themself or acturly is added together ; if you didn't do it on the right piece of paper you can not use an open competition , to show new technikes and real visions.

Isn't this how it was 4 years ago, even everyone scremed for 3D and new brilliant architecture ? Don't you academics ever get enough, will you ever give anyone outside the academic circles a chance nomatter how skilled nomatter how experienced, ------ well it's your academic world I never had a chance in it anyway so keep on doing your harasment the best way bullying work within academics, let the least skilled of your friends do what you call art and kill the beast, with social games , ------ you don't want beautifull things anyway only expensive scrap that others say is art.

Realy Beta, couldn't you find better poison to describe this that others acturly are stunned about ;

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/index.htm

You guy's realy tought me what architecture is all about, sad isn't it.

This is getting ridiculous please let this thread die!

I bow to you Per, Kungen!

Men ska ni se efter vad ni har i den?
Den ar fodrad med natursilke!

Stop talking and start drawing Per...PROVE IT.

Per:

"You are very close, But the amazing thing is that what you produce as 3D-H is in only two planes, not the tree planes we are used to only two.
These two planes are 90 deg to eachother to make a simple assembly notch possible-- a halve notch where two sections intersect."

...

"The issue workplane to small for cutting large frames are easy solved, in the various 3D-H groups you will se several suggestions, from cutting a lock as soon as the frame extend the workspace to double layer sheet tom make butt join overlap. "

So, if I would keep the intersecting grid normal to the earth's surface, no 45 degree rotation in any plane that is, align it to the two axes of an orthogonal structure (your green roof, for example), and then intersect it with the solid of its walls and roof, I would in fact get an ordinary structural wooden frame solution, with a solid traditional overlapping joint, right? Where's the newness then? Where's the "method"? Is it the rotation of 45 degrees? Normally one wouldn't do that, since it is going against sound structural thinking: the earth's normal usually should be aligned to the direction of extrusion for the grid.... to me, it seems a bit unnecessary. Take your roof for example: give the beams some thickness and try to model a flat roofing panel that is laid on top of the four corners where the beams intersect, with millimeter precision. Not that easy, since there are a lot of gaps and angles here. Without the 45 degree rotation it is easy, since the thickness of the beams would be aligned to the surface of the roof. I don't find this very clever - it reminds me of Scharoun's sections through the Berlin Philharmonic, made at a completely arbitrary angle, without the computer. Use 3d-modeling to analyze surface parameters instead, not to make the old trick of overlaying a grid, borne out of a traditional twodimensional thinking in plan, elevation and section.

And please don't believe you're the only one with professional experience and knowledge in scripting.

So much feedback...........

THE LINK DEOSNT WORK FOR ME

Thanks for the links lexRie... It's really getting funny. I've been following the adventures of Per on architecture, but I never imagined he was also posting his ass off on other forums. Per is really someone. He is definitively talented in keeping the bandwith busy...

i cant believe this...i hit those links- did everyone see where the statues (venus de milo?) and the other were done in the same fashion as per's "groundbreaking revolutionary building method"?

just leads me to believe that whatever program he's using to generate this cross-grid is capable of a one click tool that converts a solid into this angled grid. kinda like "edit mesh" in 3dsudio or somethin...

show us more per. theres an angle to all this, i'm sure

so wait- "you don\t make old dryass Linux fanatic talk about actural houses, you allow architects to make that. " we allow our architects and engineers, designers to MAKE it....right- you said it yourself- MAKE it- something you have not done.

you have built nothing

you have shown nothing but a 45 degree cross grid that was more than likely sculpted by some program with a couple commands, not with precise calculation.

we ALL understand the rigidity that could be achieved with a honeycomb structural system- its not that difficult to understand. what i have a problem with is it's validity in terms of being "revolutionary" when #1- its not proven to be integral with the rest of the architectural/engineering elements of a building and #2- its NOT REVOLUTIONARY

http://www.talkaboutboats.com/group/rec.boats.building/messages/136627.html

This has to be a classic. If only I could bronze type face I would keep this one forever.

plus- wheres the beauty in this monotonous form of structure? does calatrava use the SAME kind of structural framing methods in his bridges or buildings? read Why Buildings Stand Up: The Strength of Architecture by Mario Salvadori- maybe you'll absorb something that would make you put up or.....

What I like about Per is he doesn't have to read this somebody's book or that somebody's book.
Do you have to stay in school your whole life, to conform to the latest elite?

Hi

There are foults ,as our local Pimp Minister point out when a frame is cut from sheet , thick sheet that acturly could be cast concrete, then as everyone can se ,there be an angle between the paneling and the frame --- Now is this good or is it bad, it don't mean bad fit as the top make perfect fit and if this was steel sheet then the open angle will fit perfect or would anyway need to be widened for a weld.
----- In wooden shipsbuilding (sorry I know this act a bit quirky but I guess a relevant paralell is on it's place) , well building a tradisional big wooden boat ,you handle ribs that from the tradisional building idears are placed paralell to the keel, you do so to even be able to make drawings as you need somthing that follow the tradisional top ,side and front planes, and you cut only that you can calculate from these planes, this is what plans are about ,the 3 tradisional planes. ------ But please Pimp Minister here the exact same problem occour as what you point to,that when all ribs is placed on the keel their outside along the planking (paneling) will not be angled the right way but need to be smoothened before you can place the paneling.

Now first of all it is quite an handicap that I can not take the renderings further and show how frames acturly can be produced as hollow tubes omitting this problem, but just staying within materials as steel sheet make this foult somthing to use for weld grove, and as I point out, the exact same problem occour in tradisional projecting as where the rigid 3 plane sections meet a curved paneling in a ship construction. Now staying with the other things you point out , that just rotating the grid make no difference from before ; well isn't this simply one of these things, where you say "this is so simple that you wonder why no one done it before". Guess that realy is the best argument for any real innovation.

What you forget is the multible floors that "grow" at the same time, how this framework support any frame by all others, where a tradisional rib structure only offer ribs that is depandant on themself and acturly move the forces onto the much weaker paneling. I try again, look at the structure for a plane, a structure that realy grew from the princips of boatsbuilding, here you also even today se, how individual frames as rings, is just attached to the panels blaffering in the wind if there was no skin , with no strength if not the skin held it in place ------- realy all these ribs do is keep the panels in form and leave out the tention to the skin, instead of distrubing it among the interconnected ribs making the panel form a honeycomb structure.
----- How much stronger would you think a plane fuselage would be if the ribs was interconnected ; well one particular WW2 plane was made _NOT AS A 3D-H_ but in a lookalike system , a genious system that produced a very strong and extreamly rugid fuselage, but as this was a semi-3D-H it was expensive to perform to complicated in some way , but again if you want a framework that fit exactly to a 3D shaped Solid, that will fit millimeter down , don't rely on mesh entities with the obvious problems investigated by everyone who tried, do it by creating a new cooerdinate system and make cross sections, but before look at how floor and wall structure on various hights form as by magic ; this is the exiting thing about this simple new method , you can not make it without a computer.

Now please concider this carefully ; I did not draw any single line of any of these structures, all I did was to ask the computer to generate the 3D lines where a plane in 3D met a 3D solid. The computer "ansver" with real calculations in 3D showing the exact result in real 3D. Now shuld I trust the mashin or worry if we would evenhit the moon when we calculate it with a computer.
Realy I did not draw anything not one single frame, I used the calculations you are supposed to ,calculations that yield a real result ,this result show up in 3D as the outline of the frame that will fit 32 bit onto the 3D Solid, this is math this work othervise there would be no numbers no calculations.
But the greatest problem here, is to grasp the obvious side effects ; how things like water supply and fire safety now can be solved much more flexoble as when your structure is the weakest one you can emagine, the card-house model, that with this diagonal and transverse structure clerly show to be the basics of tradisional upright and horisontal structure idear -- the tradisional one, where you already seen how it can be needed with diagonal structural members in the card-house highrise, this is nothing but diagonals and the floors and spaces you use is then what realy lock things in place, not the other way around.
But again, the real challance come when you accept this ,as it change everything, the building element now travel the structure but with no problem and even the building element is now not a "window" a 5 inch H-beam or a brick wall, it is defined as N.C. codes and it is not any more expensive or different ,to make a frame in the top or in the bottom, even one that support part wall and part stairway, will not be different than one being the roof traveling down the top floor, ---- even codes will be outdated everything will be defined 3D easy to find in the 3D drawing it will be not in one of 20 different materials it will be sheet material and you can cut it directly from CAD drawing with no paper inbetween.

I said that the potential is the side effects, and that mean that this "raw" idear will ask a lot of develobment, I just think that the gains must be obvious, a new technike, a real use of efficient cheap 2D manufactoring forming 3D objects , and finaly we can skip the hippie like organic shapes that realy don't offer anything but problems . We can replace the zero thickness mesh based structures with an earthquake safe structure , that allow you to shape the building so the winds will escape it, this mean a new form language as now you do not worry about the structure, engineers made sure that the program that generate the structure ,take another look at it and repair the foults in dimentions of materials.

Sorry have to stop, those offended please bear in mind I am only here to force upon you my Pony.

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/index.htm

Listen I done the best I can.
You want new visions new tools new technology that make computers work, do it in a brand new way in a new form language with new sorts of materials using the cheapest and simplest avaible N.C. production, skipping the paper using only 3D, ---- Realy do you expect and only accept a Superman will you only accept new things that you can reconise and is like what is here alraedy how can that be new, how can anyone ask innovation and visions and then say "no this is not what we expected" .
Architecture are about social skills isn't it, it's not about skills ability and will, no one is better to shape the future, than somone who can't use a computer ,refuse the new tools and omit detail ,it's not about wanting cheap houses new jobs and a promise of a bright future.
It's not about develobing new methods but about putting the old technikes and way's into computer code, tomorrow you better be a bookkeper than an architect or designer, if not academics succes to strangle the visions bookkepers will , it don't evolve 3D hardly 2D rather one D .
Duh.

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/3D-H-Gotic-4.gif

shhhh, its quiet, we're all drinking the kool-aid, shhhh.

this is amazing. ... i want to show this to the world and find this creature named Per. he seems a lot like gollum from lotr

this is amazing. ... i want to show this to the world and find this creature named Per. he seems a lot like gollum from lotr

HAHAHAHAHAHA

ahhhhh. ahhh..


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

oh ho HA hahahhaahhHa
ah
ah

ha ah

Now that you can call a stinking dryass usenet comment, When you old chickens get bored from talking plaintext you show what\s realy on your mind.

Hi
Alex Mymind ;

"this is amazing. ... i want to show this to the world and find this creature named Per. he seems a lot like gollum from lotr "

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/stv-1.jpg

This picture was taken at my first visit to the states workshops for arts and crafts, ----- realy Alex don't you think throwing shit make yourself stink.

Per,
I'll bet if Harvard or FAIA were mentioned somewhere in your resume, these little puppies would lick your shoes.

not puppies

and we would not lick his shoes

honestly- i've been in disagreements with the likes of betad, a-f, and others on this thread and they're actual intellects that could hold their own.

what we'd do, feebleminded one, had Per or ANYone boasting this b.s. put on their resume "Harvard", or "FAIA" is scoff at the idiot at the admissions board who allowed him in or out with this comedic act.

like I said before, gust or per- put up something that shows this innovation or just shut the holes in ya faces

and for the record, the idiot is he who thinks that he no longer is a student for life.

Hi

Kyll what is this realy about, I showed the tread to some close friends and they asked me why I even bothered dealing with thais stinking jeloux swamp, what is realy your problem try real the poison you try type, where are your own works. Do you think you build visions throwing shit.

Hi

Gustav thank's for your positive input.
This tread realy develobed into showing what seem to be the main issue on the web and and among students that think architecture and design is about having a big ego se how this amazing media contribute to the world of arts, ------ seem that bullying and throwing shit is more interesting than the arts. Now the different sad mails is no pieces of arts in themself and rather respond the quality of those "artists" that use the tools that fit their mind, this is attemts to social harrasment and dirt throwing.
Guess this define architecture for those throwing dirt, they try master that and show no visions themself.

Per:

You still haven't really responded to those of us who have asked you to show us an actual built form instead of 3D models. It doesn't have to be an entire building, but perhaps a full-scale mock up would serve your purpose - showing windows, doors, etc. and the other things that people have brought up here. Regardless of how its delivered, there has been some very valid criticism of this building type that you've proposed, yet you constantly show the same models over and over.

Instead of getting into arguements with people about "throwing shit" etc. spend the time applying your idea to prove the people doubting you wrong.

Hi

You are quite right but realy ,and sorry if anyone get offended by this statement, but what shuld the difference be between an accurate CAD drawing and a build model.
Now when you know what CAD is about, you will know that with 3D you have a gurantie that the points and planes defined within the CAD world is as real as in the real world --- othervise why do we use computers, or do most simply don't know that what you draw 3D can be made in real oposed what you sketch in 2D ,where you have no gurantie that it is even possible.
You are quite right but when you read some of the "arguments" you would proberly in my situation wonder if a picture would make any more "arguments" than graphics --- I mean if students don't even know that when you can draw it in 3D and render it, then bringing it into the real world is just rutine.
Beside the problems finding a workshop please realise that I already spended quite some years writing and proving software to acturly work such as what borught this ;

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/Lofot-1.jpg

Realy I spended 15 years develobing software as design tools, invented several new way's , made the intire process drawing a boat, unfolding the planks even the impossible zig-zag lapstrake planking no software othervise could unfold, build 12 different designs in real , why shuld it be needed for such a guy to "show" that what he project in real 3D can also be build.
Please check
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/stv-1.jpg
All the small boats you se there is projected 3D without use of a pen or ruler , but I still pay the bank for materials for my last project where a bad client never payed.
Is the knowleage about 3D realy that bad, that no one know that a 3D drawing is enough "prove" in itself. Strange.

No, a 3D model doesn't prove itself, at least not yet. A 3D program usually doesn't contain structural, material and logistical intelligence. For example, you can make a funky blob by just applying a FFD box on a sphere and tweaking the points, but would have some difficulties building it as a 20x20 meter model out of 3mm cardboard sheets and a perfectly smooth surface. You can of course say that your hundred meter high 3D-H towers are covered with wooden planks, 45 degree rotated steel beams, twisted laths and custom made double-curved glass, but I would like to see you estimate a budget for that project, especially since you claim that 3D-H "makes cheap houses". More irritating though, is that you somehow claim to have invented a structural system that is already in use! 45 degree rotation is not enough of an "innovation" to me, especially if the only thing it adds is to make the structure more weak. But having said this, it's still nice to see someone writing his own scripts and software - great!

Hi
WHAT !!!

You just proven that you know nothing about CAD, what you write is nonsense to a CAD profesional.

YEAH EAT THAT!

Hi

a-f what CAD program do you use, what do you think about Revit ?

P.C.
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/stv-1.jpg

Again I bow to you Per, Kungen!

Hi

Sorry right link;
http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/
make some discussion

http://home20.inet.tele.dk/h-3d/stv-1.jpg

that is SWEET computer! You must get blazingly fast render times