Make Architecture



06: Mold_it

Assignment 6:  Molding and Casting

Lessons Learnt and Further Ideas:

1.) Although OOMOO 25/30 is advertised to capture very fine details, I believed that it would be able to handle a cruder job.  However its low tear strength makes it incapable of doing so.  On the other hand, just as advertised,  when I used my mixing bucket as a lid, the material captured the text underneath the bucket perfectly – where it was made, recyclable sign,etc.  So the flexible silicone rubber was not suitable for my initial purposes.

2.)  If I continue with this project, I would switch to the Mold Max which has a higher tear strength compared to OOMOO 25/30.

3.)  I understood how important it is to design a formwork by taking into account every step in assembly and disassembly.  Still, it is very difficult to foresee many issues, so I guess I would still have had to repeat many processes until I get it right.

4.)  It is also important to fix whatever is in the formwork – in my case the balloons.  Now I would glue or tape the balloons, and seal the edges with a sealing agent and make sure it is smooth and that there are no gaps.

5.)  A lid is necessary in my case because the balloons start to surface, both changing whatever organization is intended and dragging up material.  This makes it impossible to have a naturally formed (by gravity) straight surface.

6.)  Transparency turned out to be important for my model both design-wise and for disassembly during taking out the balloons.

7.)  As a further idea, after succeeding in the silicone rubber model, I am going to combine silicone rubber and wax, and think about integrating lighting.

Many thanks to my mom for her great help.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


Instructor: Nick Gelpi TA: Skylar Tibbits TA: Varvara Toulkeridou
Class Times, Monday, 1-4pm - room 5-216
4.184 is an intensive introduction to methods of making explored through a wide range of brief but focused 1-week exercises. We'll engage the real and leave behind representation in the focused context of this class gaining skills for utilizing a range of fabrication machines and technologies from lasercutting, waterjet, 3D printing, welding, formworking-molding, casting, gears, joints and composites.
In this workshop we'll constrain ourselves to the territory of the 1:1. Students will represent architectural constructions at full scale and develop a more intimate relationship with technology by engaging the tools and techniques that empower us. We will gain access to the most cutting edge machines and technologies in the MARS lab at the Center for Bits and Atoms.
The second layer of information for this course will be to look at a series of case studies in which construction methods and technologies have played a dominant role in the design process .
Over the past 20 years, architects have focused on the technology of representation to create new ideas of what architecture could be. Looking back today, much of that research failed to substantially change the way we design buildings by focusing on apriori formal configurations. This class makes the contention that this failure comes from a lack of considerations of the potentials within fabrication knowledge. We look to the future of what building might become, given the expanded palette of personalize-able technologies available to us as architects. Students will participate in curious technological and material investigations, to discover the potentials, known and unknown, for these various technologies.
The sub-disciplines of what's drawn and what's built have been compartmentalized and disassociated as the representational tools of architecture have distanced themselves from the techniques of making. At the same time the technologies for “making” in architecture have provided us with new possibilities for reinventing how we translate into reality, the immaterial representations of architecture.


%d bloggers like this: