vellum 5
DESCRIPTION
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo Architecture Furniture CompetitionTRANSCRIPT
VELLUM 55 YEARS OF THE VELLUM FURNITURE COMPETITION
About UsThis book is published by the Architecture Department of California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. The Architecture Department is a part of the College of Architecture and Environmental Design, which also includes Architectural Engineering, City & Regional Planning, Construction Management and Landscape Architecture.
PublicationISBN: 9780981977126
Student Editor: Vince Cimo
Student Designers: Paul Ruppert, Tracey Coffin, Ashly Sigle, George Foreman, Kevin Bussett, Susan Kim, Ron Assa
Faculty Advisors: Tom di Santo, Eric Nulman + Karen Lange
Printing and binding by Lulu.com.
Contact InformationCalifornia Polytechnic State University Architecture Department One Grand Avenue San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0282 USA
Email: architecture@calpoly,edu Phone: 805 756-1316 Fax: 805 756-1500 Web: http://www.arch.calpoly.edu
RightsCopyright © 2009 by AeD Press/Architecture Department, College of Architecture & Environmental Design, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the copyright owners.
AeDP R E S S
124493
104
CONTENTS
FOREWARDBy Paul Abbott, Owner Vellum Inc.
Vellum Design Build and Cal Poly’s College of Architecture and Environmental Design (CAED) are very proud to present the first furniture design competition publication. This exciting collection of works from years past represents some of the best entries to the competition over the last five years and is a showcase of design and innovation excellence.
The competition was conceived in 2004 with the intention of showcasing the talents of Cal Poly’s students. A major premise to the competition was to hold a juried and public exhibition downtown SLO to share the creativity, hard work, and talent of the students with the citizens of SLO.
Design, creativity and innovation are being recognized as key drivers in economic, environmental and social sustainability. Faced with unprecedented challenges in these key areas, companies throughout the world are looking for ways to gain and maintain their competitive edge.
By participating in a juried design competition that considers functionality, innovation, materials, manufacturing, beauty, ergonomics and environmental impacts our students are not only creating unique and compelling pieces of furniture but also investing in a practice that will be the ultimate differentiator in a crowded and hyper competitive marketplace.
This competition promotes awareness and appreciation for well designed, well-made and environmentally conscious products. As a collaboration with the College and its students we seek to create an opening for
innovation and a continual improvement in our quality of products and life.
Congratulations to the designers behind past award winning entries. We encourage you to share your success in this competition proudly with potential employers, clients and business partners and we look forward to your participation in the 2009 Vellum / CAED Design Competition.
PREFACEBy Tom di Santo
It is with great pleasure that we present Vellum_5: Five Years of the Vellum Furniture Competition, a publication to document and display a small cross-section of the furniture and constructions conceived and fabricated in the context of this annual design competition held in San Luis Obispo for five years running. The Vellum Furniture Competition, now entering it’s sixth year, has been a collaborative effort between the community and the College of Architecture + Environmental Design - - most notably, the Architecture Department and local design-build and retail outfit Vellum Inc.
I am often asked why this competition, what do the students get out of it and why, in a contracted quarter system when the students are already challenged for design time, do so many of them elect to also design and construct furniture - further adding to their workload and lack of sleep? It is true that the number of students electing to participate grows every year. The competition has attracted well over 100 entrants in each of the last three years and has swelled to almost double the 80 inaugural participants back in 2004. So, what is it about this competition that engenders so much student and community interest?
I believe the myriad answers to these inquiries are as complex and varied as the furniture pieces themselves; nevertheless, I would posit several immediate responses:
1.0 The Vellum Furniture Competition re-confirms the rule that architecture students can seek validation in their work through the design and fabrication of small-size full-scale realizations to refine their design language and to test out body scaled straightforward use programs such as seating, lighting and tables.
2.0 The Vellum Furniture Competition re-introduces the modality of touch into design education and re-informs experiential phenomenological design. In an era of rapid digital advances in architectural representation, the competition reminds us to employ ALL tools (both analog and digital alike) into the process of design. It re-engages the tactile quality of design, engaging real material, and sensual phenomena in the development of a piece, allowing us to appreciate the intimacy of design as our bodies and senses come into close contact with the objects of our desire.
3.0 At the same time, the Vellum Furniture Competition invites students to incorporate the design efficiencies and new technologies embodied in the machine. Students are challenged to incorporate digital draughting and computer aided manufacturing via CNC routers and laser cutters into the production process.
4.0 The Vellum Furniture Competition affords an obvious extension of the Cal Poly ‘Learn by Doing’ strategy, this mode contributes to active learning, constructivist cooperation, and phenomenological development that looks to the immediate qualitative aspects of work as research in real time and place. The furniture piece is not a model or representation of something else. It IS an engagement in the real.
5.0 The Vellum Furniture Competition borrows from a long and storied tradition of Total Design and the Gesamptkunstwerk implying a consistency of idea and effort at every scale: the furniture, the building, the exterior environment and even the urbanisme. For historical context, this notion of research at the level of minutia has influenced the works of a host of brilliant architects over the last several centuries including Frank Lloyd Wright, Carlo Scarpa, Charles Rennie MacIntosh, Le Corbusier, Peter Zumthor, Mario Botta, Morphosis and Frank Gehry (to name only a small fraction of the many).
6.0 The Vellum Furniture Competition re-extends the emphasis on sustainability education. Participants are encouraged to re-use, reduce and recycle material. They are asked to write a one-page thinking paper explaining to the jury why their piece can be considered ecologically sensitive whether the emphasis be on material choices or low-impact fabrication process, zero waste or otherwise low embodied energy techniques.
7.0 Vellum Furniture Competition provides a real life test case employing real budgets, real materials, real engagement with suppliers, fabricators and manufacturers plus real design timelines and construction schedules not typically incorporated into academic enterprise.
We hope you view the work in this publication with these pedagogical outcomes in mind. At the same time, we wish for you to join us in an appreciation of the joy of making. We desire that you engage in the delight
that comes from the process, as well the gratification of product emanating from a well-designed piece of furniture. In the other words, this book can just as easily frame the conversation for a discourse into the importance of engagement in the real or it can simply lead you through a journey into the forest of beautiful objects. In either event, please enjoy.
A final note: In reviewing the work exhibited herein, we wish to convey that this is not an exhaustive catalogue of every piece to ever come through the doors of whichever vacant downtown space we were able to procure in any given year; nor is it a representation of only the best pieces to ever be exhibited at the Vellum Furniture Competition. Rather, it is meant to provide an incisive cut, a window onto the event, a diverse representation of the excellence, the failed experiments, the social catalyst, the Friday Folly and the juried results that have come to be known as San Luis Obispo’s little Salone del Mobile on the Central Coast, the Vellum Furniture Competition. Thanks for attending.
1 Designer: TJ Esser
Finished dimensions:60” L x 24” W x 15” D
Materials: Birch, glass, aluminum.
TABLES
Box Be a m Ta Bl e
12
13
1
TABLES
Ta Bl e ? or Ch a irDesigner: Collin Sprenkle
Materials: Hardwood, Steel
14
15
1 in T e nsion
Designer: Bryan Hitchcock
Materials:Plywood; steel cables
Description: A piece of bent plywood kept in form by tensioned steel cables. It acts as a table or a toddler display stand.
16 16
2 jaT iP e nD Ta Bl eDesigner: Jaitip Srisomburananont
Materials:Concrete and resin
17
2
TABLES
r iC o C of f e e Ta Bl eDesigner:Rico Castillero
Materials: Wood, steel, and glass
18
3 roUnD Ta Bl eDesigner: Stephanie Peterson,
Finished dimensions: 58” L x 58” W x 15” D
Materials: Plywood, Glass.
Description: The foot of table is constructed with stacked layers of plywood.
19
3
TABLES
The design is an experiment with merging lines (steel tube) and planes (steel plate). The intention is to compose the elements without mechanical connections (bolts and screws), but still maintain structural integrity.
one e n T i T YDesigner: Zhong Ren Huang, Yang Wang
Finished dimensions: 65” L x 30” W x 24” D
Materials: 1/4” steel plate and 1”x2” steel tube
Description: First, a cardboard prototype was made and used as a template for measurement. In construction phase, the steel plate were cut into sizes with a primas cutter and welded together. The design and construction of the couch were completed within 48 hours.
20
21
3
TABLES
a Da P T.Designer: Matt Ridenour and David Aine
Materials: Birch plywood, and vertical strand bamboo plywoodDescription: Arrange and rearrange.
22
3 T r ePPie DeDesigner: Andrew Mock
Materials: Birch plywood; glass; steel; found objects
Description: A reorganization and reuse of various found objects into a new and flexible object that can act as a table or a chair. A glass top of an old lamp, surveying tripod, and various metal parts were the found objects that were reanimated by their rearrangement and conjunction with birch ply-wood, steel all threads, steel cable, natural wood stains, spray paint [black, clear], and washers, nuts, bolts, etc...
23
3
TABLES
os T in aT oDesigner: Ryan Enz
Materials: Mahogany, Baltic birch, steel, brass, glass
Description:The pieces of the desk work with each other, creating connections which act in compression.
24
25
3
TABLES
s T ri aT e D Ta Bl eDesigner:Daniel Tiraschi
Finished dimensions: 48” L x 36” W x 18” D
Materials: Plywood, Glass.
Description: Wood with striated texture is laminated on plywood. The core plane, which supports glass from the center, is laminated with different texture.
26
27
3 m a nif e s TaT ion of a mome n TDesigner:Lucas Hernandez
Materials: Birch plywood, alumnium and glass
Description: A coffee table for architecture books....inspired by architecture and music, scaled for the Phaidon Atlas of Contemporary World Architecture, manifestation of a moment is a stage for books. the wood forms grow from the ground to suspend the aluminum pieces that radiate like a sound wave to gracefully support the immense sheet of glass as it slices into the wood. nature is the foundation, and architecture relies on it.
28 28
4 T oroDesigner: Nick Holbein, Year 4
Materials: Hardwood
Description:Beauty of wood is revealed through relief. This piece functions as both a musical in-strument and a table.
2929
4
TABLES
moDUl aT e
Designer: Thomas Burnworth
Finished dimensions: 36” L x 14” W x 15” D
Materials: Popular Veneer, Maple Veneer, Aluminum, Tempered Glass.
Description:A mold was constructed from OSB and then hand sculpted to achieve the complexly curved surfaces. Vacu-press technology was imple-mented to press and glue veneers over the mold. The glass table-top was made by heat-fusing recycled tempered glass in a glass kiln.
30
31
4 C U T.Be nD.Ta Bl eDesigner: Scot Bailey
Materials: Powder Coated Steel
Finished dimensions: 48” L x 30” W x 12” D
Materials: Aluminum
Description: A single sheet of aluminum was cut on a waterjet machine, then bent and powdercoated.
TABLES32
5
BU T T e r f lYDesigner:Kevin Bussett
Materials:Laminated baltic birch plywood; black walnut hardwood
Description: The legs of the table can be folded up or down by removing, rotating, and reinserting the center handles. This allows the table to act as a serving tray or lap desk while sitting on beds and couches, a portable dining table, or a simple coffee table.
33
5TABLES
T oo he av YDesigner: Anthony Stahl, Skye Jenkins
Finished dimensions:5.5’ L x 3’ W x 1.5’ D
Materials: Concrete, Fiber Optics
Description: The table was poured by the master himself, Skye, upside down in layered formwork. Weighing over 1,200 pounds, what is at first an un-adorned, monolithic concrete mass; transforms into an intricate display of technology. 2,000 feet of meshed, 1 “ gridded fiber optic cable transfers light from a single source hidden deep within the concrete to the surface of the piece. The light is operated by an outboard switch.
34
5
C UBBieDesigner: Hayley Alexis Snider
Finished dimensions: 48” L x 24” W x 12” D
Materials: Plywood, Chia, Fabric, Steel
Description: Twelve boxes: sixty sides: ninety-six miters, forty-eight dados, one thousand twenty-six hand-drilled holes.
35
5TABLES
Bl a De s of f iCeDesigner: Scot Bailey, Ryan Nearman, Reid Nystrom
Location: Blades Residence [Morphosis] Santa Barbara, CA
Finished dimensions: Desk 8’-0” L x 4’-0” W x 2’-8” HTable 6’-0” L x 4’-0” W x 2’-8” H
Materials: Birch and maple plywood, maple hardwood, 10g hot rolled steel, 16g perforated cold rolled steel, automotive paint, UHMW plastic, bicycle brake cable system, rebar, 1” X 3” steel tube.
Description: All cabinetry was fabricated by means of a CNC router and lamination, all sheet steel was cut by means of water jet and finished with an automotive clear coat, all other components were fabricated by means of milling, welding, tapping, folding. The only premanufactured components were drawer slides, sheaves and fasteners.
36
DRAWERFOLD DIAGRAMS
37
5TABLES
r eBUil DDesigner:Ben Handy
Materials: Crankshaft, windshield, windshield wipers
Description: Cradle to cradle design
38
39
TABLES
5 s T egos aUrUsDesigner:Tucker Huey
Materials:Wood and steel angle
Description: A funny looking table [saur].
40
41
TABLES
5 C U T.gl Ue .Ta Bl eDesigner:Scot Bailey
Materials: Wood
42
cut. glue. table.
43
s T iCks!Designer: Jason Pignolet
Materials: Wood Sticks
Description:Wood sticks are tied together with stringto construct the set of furniture.
1
CHAIRS44
C UBe s T oolDesigner: Laetitia Cop
Materials: Fiberglass; resin
Description: The primary function of this object is to act as a chair. This function, however, was meant to be unclear to the end user. The designer achieved this by designing the piece as a bold and platonic formal expression, a simple cube. If taken out of the context of a chair design competition the object is seen as a lamp. When lit, the wire mesh appears through the fiberglass, causing the structure to appear to be very fragile. In reality, however, the surface is very rigid.
1
4545
a n T hroP omorPhiC Ch a irDesigner: Erik Jones
Materials: Redwood, copper pipe,steal pipe, cable, spring
1
CHAIRS46
Dr e a m C aT Che rDesigner:Nitsan Yomtov
Materials: Ash and steel tubes
2
47
2
BaT T l e s Ta r g a l aC T iC a Ch a ise l oUnge
CHAIRS
Designer: Hugo Martinez
Materials: Steel
Description: Bent and meticulously welded steel that appears to be one folded piece. The single support and wieght distribution of the chair leaves it balanced and stable despite its fragile and perched appearance.
48
2 se rP e n T ineDesigner: Matt Hoffman
Materials: Wood
Description: SERPENTINE is a chair with the flexibility to seat one very tall person or many very tall people.
49
2
CHAIRS
C U r v eDesigner: Chris Allen
Dimensions: 40” L x 18” W x 34” D
Materials: Plywood, Hardwood, Steel, and Pneumatic Lifts.
Description:Each of the curved pieces of wood were cut by hand using either a jigsaw, a router, or bandsaw. Once the individual pieces were sanded, the seat was assembled and the pneumatic lifts were installed to the required position. The lifts provide for the opportunity to recline the seat for a more relaxed position.
50
51
3 P vC T UBe Ch a irDesigner:Nick Shanks
Finished dimensions: 36” L x 21” W x 48” D
Materials: PVC tubing
Description: Bent PVC tubing are connected withhardware.
CHAIRS52
3 P e r m a ne nCeDesigner: Gabriel Kaprielian
Materials: Rebar and plastic wrap
Description: A seat to reckon your own mortality.
53
CHAIRS
3 r a : Ta Bl e . Be nCh. Ch a irDesigner:Chungshen Tang
Materials: Cardboard
54
55
3 f o U n D D e e r e C h a i rDesigner: Jacob Aftreth
Materials: Found wood and John Deere equipment
CHAIRS56
3 ChoC ol aT e Chil lDesigner: Gideon Hillman
Finished dimensions: 36” L x 32” W x 36” D
Materials: Plywood and Steel
5757
4 roCk onDesigner: Scott Rothi
Materials: Plywood
58
4 T UrB a Ch a isel oUngeDesigner: Peter Turba
Materials: Wood
59
4 g r a v i T YDesigners: Chris Allen and Bonnie Miller
Dimensions: 32” L x 22” W x 32” D
Materials: Plywood, Laminate, Aluminum, and Steel.
Description: This project initially began as a test in the strengths of certain materials. However during the construction process the project became more about whether CNC water-jet machining could be used as a viable method for cutting both woods and metals. Though the process poses certain issues the end result speaks for the potential uses CNC water-jetting may have in future furniture construction.
CHAIRS60
61
4 a l . 3 9Designer: Katsunori Shigemi
Materials: Wood, Cable, Aluminum Channel
Description: The curve of the chair follows the user’s body proportion. Cables provide flexibility. Aluminum channel alows user to untie the wire and rearrange pieces. The structure is the components.
CHAIRS62
63
4
CHAIRS
T w e lv e
Designer: JR Thorton
Materials: Black steel, black walnut
Description: A single sheet of 4’ X 10’ mild steel divided into three parts. Two of the three parts of mild steel are used to create chairs. Black walnut accents the dark coldness of the steel. The third piece of steel is folded 6 times to create a modern and sleek coffee table accenting both table top and lower shelf.
64
65
5
soCi a l is T aDesigner: Michelle Holst
Finished dimensions: 16” L x 16” W x 16” D x 5
Materials: Ultralite MDF, Ring Magnets, Handmade Cushions
Description of construction process: Each unit connects three 16”x16” panels of 1” ultralite MDF with two 12” aluminum piano hinges. The mitred seam locks together with three 1” dia. neodymium ring magnets. The cushions are lined with magnets that attach to ones embedded in the panels. Table saw, drill, and router were essential tools in ensuring precision.
Relinquishing the stranglehold of technology on social interaction, playfulness and flexibility come together allowing the user to author infinite possibilities with a repetitive component.
CHAIRS66
Magnetic Connections1” diameter neodymium ring magnets set into the mi-tred seam hold up to 180lb of force. This makes each unit sturdy to sit and lean on as well as easy to open flat. Smaller 3/4” magnets are set into the blunt edges to strengthen configurations of multiple units.
67
5
i n T e n T T o r o C k
Designer: Sarah Cutler
Finished dimensions: 5’6” L x 1’6” W x 4’0” D
Materials: Lamenated Plywood, Steel Connections
Description: The Intent to Rock chairs developed from a small physical model, to a 3D digital model, to a 2D cut file, to plywood cut by the CNC router, and finally to a physical piece of furniture. While a majority of the material is lamenated plywood, the successes and failures are in the steel connection pieces.
CHAIRS68
The chairs were designed to configure into a rocking chair for two people: intent to rock. While this configuration has not been fully realized, the process of making these chairs has led to the discovery of new, not necessarily intended uses. Please feel free to interact with each other and the chairs to discover new uses, positions, and experiences of communication in the physical environment.
69
5CHAIRS
a U g m e n T
Designers: Jai KumaranClayton Taylor
Finished dimensions: 60” L x 30” W x 24” D
Materials: 1/2” MDF, IKEA Couch
Description: We purchased the cheapest couch from IKEA and augmented its formal possibilities. The new shape took aesthetic contours from the existing couch and turned them into structural lines. The augment is a single piece of MDF folded around these new contours. The entire couch was bought , cut, and reformatted with in 48 hours.
70
71
5
x - o s k e l e T o nDesigner:Chris Allen and Bonnie Miller
Finished dimensions: 68” L x 25” W x 38” D
Materials:Plywood, PEX piping, Used bullet casings
Description: Main “spine” and “rib” elements were cut from a single sheet of high grade Russian Birch ply using a CNC router. Wood elements were glued and screwed together. PEX piping was cut to length and placed in grooves on support ribs. The open ends of the piping were plugged with used bullet casings.
CHAIRS72
73
5
g- Ch a irDesigner: Mathew Granelli
Finished dimensions: 36” L x 30” W x 34” D
Materials: Steel.
Description:One sheet. Two cuts. Six bends. One chair.
CHAIRS74
75
CHAIRS
5
FLUX
f l U xDesigners: Jimmy Thornton, and Matt Zobel
Materials: Steel, Wood Slats
Description:On the bent steel frame, wood shingles hang to form a continuoussurface of seating.
76
77
5CHAIRS
f l iP a nD Cl iCkDesigner: Matt Coval
Finished dimensions: 80” L x 36” W x 18” D
Materials: Steel, pine, & suede.
Description: The frame consists of four welded plates made of 3/16” steel bar stabilized by 2” L bar. The seats are constructed with sanded and sealed pine paired with upholstered suede with foam backing. Six ratcheting wrenches were modified and reconfigured, welded to the frame to allow for locking rotation.
78
79
5CHAIRS
se nsUa lDesigner: Ryan Ahmadi
Materials: Plywood and threaded steel rods
Description: The form of this seat was generated via a study of the human form while sitting. A three dimensional modeling program was used to model the form, slice it into 13 sections, and determine locations for the connectors. These peices were then drawn in Autocad and cut out using a CNC router. Finally, the pieces were connected using metal rods
80
81
T he rUBBe r Ba nD Ch a ir
As the rubberbands wear out, new ones will replace them. Rust is welcome, so long as it embrasses the colors of the rubberbands themselves. All is 100% recyclable.
Designer: Judy Quan
Finished dimensions: 24” L x 54” W x 53” D
Materials: Steel, rubberbands
Description: Using a manual pipe bending tool, I bent the 20’-foot iron bar into shape and welded on two horizontal bars to give it stability. Then one by one, I slipped on the rubber bands, creating a uniform pattern at the seat and a more chaotic mesh for the back. No hardware was used, and no rubberbands have snapped (yet!)
CHAIRS
582
5
moD BoxDesigner: Jose Castillo
Materials:Wood
Description: A shapely box made from similarly cut wooden pieces that are laminated together. The box can be taken apart into several pieces, which can then be arranged into a number of different configurations relative to each other. These configurations can be used to perform a variety of func-tions as different pieces of furniture.
83
CHAIRS
165144 + 21144 + 21144 + 21144 + 21144 + 21144 + 21
perforationsperforationsperforationsperforations folds
chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
144 + 21144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair
165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 144 + 21165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforations165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforationsperforations165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforations folds165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair folds165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforations165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforationsperforations165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair perforations folds165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair 165_chair folds
5
Ch a ir 16 5Designer: Ed Becker
Materials: Sheet metal
Description: A sheet of metal was cut into a shape, perforated along cer-tain lines, and then folded it a form. The tensile strength and malleability of steel are emphasized in the process of vertical force distribution and the process of folding, respectively.
84
165144 + 21
perforations folds
Steel. In addition to a materials visual and tactile qualities, materials can be defined through their intrinsic properties. The tensile strength and malleability of steel are both emph -asized in the process of vertical force distribution and the process of folding respectfully. Criticality of process was demonstrated through the irony in material choice; sheet metal being thin and flimsy while a cantilever chair, in its very essence, epitomizes strength. In response to cost and mobility concerns, the chair dimensions were adjusted to fit into a compact template. Ideally, the single piece of metal that makes up the chair could be mass produced with a total cost of $85.
Project costs: Mild Steel [57”x24”] $50 Laser Cutting $33 Rubber Fittings $2 Powder Coat $60 [100x chairs] [optional] Total Cost: $85
strength through folding
chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165 chair_165
Force Dissipation Max Tension/CompressionFlex Tendancies
TensionCompression
1
7
3
5
Weight Tested: 200+ lbsa
b
Deflection: [change in distance measured between nodes a and b] 50 lbs: negligable 100 lbs: ~.1875” 150 lbs: ~.375” 200 lbs: ~.5”
*
*
def
lect
ion
was
test
ed b
y n
on
-exa
ct m
ean
s an
d
ther
efo
re is
no
t co
mp
lete
ly a
ccu
rate
Project Template
85
CHAIRS
create
5
ro TaT e Cr e aT e
Designer:Thomas Burnworth
Finished dimensions:48” L x 48” W x 16” D
Materials: Ultra-light MDF, Velvet, Paint, Wood Glue.
Description: Block Modules were designed and built to be reconfigurable utilizing similar dimensions. The modules are light weight and easily manipulatable by people of all ages. The puzzle-like qualities of “Rotate Create” allow individuals and groups to play and create a vast variety of environments.
86
87
CHAIRS
5 C a r DBoa r D f oY e r Ta Bl e
Designer: Viktoria Ciesiul
Materials: Steel, Corrugated Cardboard
88
89
CHAIRS
2
s e r P e n T i n eDesigner: Kelli Franz
Materials: Wood
Description: A lamp expressing a negative and postive surface through the use of light and dark.
90
3 in T o T he w inDDesigner: Nate Jakus
Finished dimensions: 7” L x 5” W 15” D Materials: Wood, Steel, Paper
Description: A leg of the lamp is made out of steel and is connectedto wooden base. Lamp shade is made outof semi-opaque paper.
91
LIGHTS
3 PaT T e rns l a mPDesigner: Cristina Villa-Reyes
Materials: Wood
Description: Controlled accident and spontaneity are brought together to create uniqueness in patterns
92
3 C ol e l a mPDesigner: Eric Cole
Materials: Stone and Glass
9393
LIGHTS
3 [ f ishing]Designer: Makoto Yagishia
Finished dimensions: 12” L x 12” W x 80” D
Materials: Fishing line, wood.
Description: Bulb is attached at the end of cord, which is placed as a fishing line in the fishing pole.
94
3 r e sP onseDesigner: Gideon Hillman
Materials: Sound responsive light units, steel, glass.
95
4
LIGHTS
B i k o nDesigner: Karin Johnson
Materiality: Concrete, LED lights
Description:After pipes are inserted into the mold (made out of paper tubing) to create the ways for LED lights to go through later, concrete is poured to make the body.
96
4 T r a nsl UCe n TDesigner: Brandin Roat
Materials: Mayline Drafting Components, I-beam Section, Task Lamp Springs
Description: Outside particles excite the atom, causing electrons to jump into a higher energy level. In order for the electrons to resume to their initial state they release photon energy_Light
9797
5LIGHTS
Bo T T l e l a mP
Designer: Lauren Lee
Finished dimensions: 30” L x 30” W x 30” D
Materials: Recycled glass bottles, fluorescent lightbulbs, electrical cord.
Description: Recycled bottles are first marked for cutting, then cut in order to remove their bottoms. Sandblasting gives the de-sired finish, and electrical sockets are friciton fit into the bottles.
98
99
3
MISCELLANEOUS
C a r T i T UPDesigner: Jacob Aftreth
Dimensions: 92” L x 30”” W x 53” D
Materials:Shopping cart, c-chanel steel, and high strength polyester webbing
Description:Create and test a parasitic mobile dwelling unit.
100
101
3
MISCELLANEOUS
f igh T on, ol D m a nDesigner: David Khuong
Finished dimensions: 70” L x 24” W x 11” D
Materials:Old Tires, Rebar
102
3 r e sin f ish C a r C a s sDesigner: David Khuong
Materials: Resin, fiberglass and steel.
103
5
5TH ANNUAL VELLUM/CAED FURNITURE COMPETITION
RUNNER-UP: GRAND PRIZE AWARD:KATE BARTON
MISCELLANEOUS
imP e r me a Bl e
Designer: Kate Barton
Materials: Plastic grocery bags
Description: 150 plastic grocery bags were collected. The handles and bottom seams were cut away. The seams 8 layers of bags were arranged upon each other with staggered seams and were ironed together at a low heat to make fabric. The fabric was then cut up into fabric pieces and sewn together to make the garment as if it were any other fabric.
104
105
sense~ual
derive: center section profile to determine form limits
surface to match profiles & find structural rod locations
sections through surface & export to AutoCAD
edge section profile from human body
edge section profile with Rhinoceros 4.0
extrude: generate: manipulate: cut:
- responsive to body- digitally designed- systematic construction
EPILOGUE
BY BRUNO GIBERTI
There is a long history of architects doing furniture, which takes us back at least to the Arts and Crafts Movement, with its focus on rejoining the aesthetic and the useful, the fine and the applied. In the 19th century context, the phenomenon of architect-designed furniture also derived strength from the idea of the Gesamptkunstwerk or total work of art, which implied a consistency of idea and effort at several scales: the artifact, the building, and even the landscape.
The idea of the Gesamptkunstwerk animated the work of Hoffman, Mackintosh, and Wright. It was in the DNA of the Bauhaus where it informed the work of Gropius and Mies. In addition, I don’t need to remind you that the design of furniture was at the center of the young Le Corbusier’s practice, or that in postwar Italy, where there was little actual building, a whole generation of architects embraced the design of everyday things and created an internationally recognized design culture. In the 1980s, with the onset of the Reagan recession, a similar phenomenon happened in the US; under-employed architects participated in a revival of art furniture as a way to explore architectural ideas.
This kind of work has a special poignancy in our digital age, when we run the danger of losing even the sense of craft that might be associated with the hand drawing. In such a time, the sense of abstraction that is always present in the word “design” runs the risk of becoming even more extreme as the tension between the idea and the artifact becomes aggravated by the distance between the virtual and the actual, between the world of the computer and the world of everyday things.
This kind of distance has of course always been the great rub of architectural education, even before the emergence of digital tools. The complexity of architecture and the obvious expense of its production mean that we are more or less forced to teach the idea of buildings in the absence of building. This is one good reason why the professional education of an architect includes an internship, but it also helps to explain why the design and production of a piece of furniture has become a useful analog for the more complex phenomenon of architecture. Like the building, the domestically scaled object can be designed, developed, detailed, and , to our great advantage, built.
This kind of exercise would seem to be sympathetic to our Cal Poly tradition of learn-by-doing, but I would like to conclude with a word of caution: learn-by-doing at its best is not learn-by-doing stuff. It is, as Cal Poly President Warren Baker has insisted, an intellectual act, and so it should have something to do with the conquest of ideas. The point of the Vellum exercise, then, is not merely for students to get their hands dirty and blow off steam. The point is to learn something fundamental about design and production at the scale of the body, which is similar but not necessarily the same as design and production at the scale of the building. I invite you the reader to reflect on the difference as you peruse this catalog. The Vellum competition represents a significant effort on the part of both students and faculty members, and I congratulate them on the results, which are displayed here.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We wish to thank many people in the development of the Vellum Furniture Competition and the documentation thereof for use in this publication. First and foremost, we would like to thank Paul Abbott, owner of Vellum Inc. for coming to us with the idea of showcasing student work in the context of a furniture competition and for his continued support of the event. We wish to thank the employees of Vellum Inc. for tirelessly helping to curate, especially Jenee Arends and Erica Jacobson.
We thank Henri de Hahn for encouraging us to pursue this publication endeavor and for his continued moral and financial support of the event itself as well as his support of this book. We thank all the esteemed jurors (architects and furniture designers) who have come from as far away as Milano, Chicago, Kentucky, Hilo, San Francisco, San Diego and Los Angeles to participate in the selection process of the winning pieces: Anne Fougeron, Jeff Jamieson (the exclusive manufacturer of Donald Judd furniture), Chris Deam, Joanna Grawunder, Craig Steely, Jill Salisbury, Joey Shimoda, Eric Pfieffer, Len Wujcik, Larissa Sand, Hugo Martinez, Hilary Nagler (of DWR) Jeff Sand, Joshua Aidlin, Mark Rawson, Tricia Hamachai, Ron Radziner, James Gates and James Brown of PUBLIC, Laura Rittenhouse, Chris Allen, Brian Starr and our faculty jurors, Howard Weisenthal, Gary Dwyer, Laura Joines-Novotny, Robert Arens, and Jonathan Reich.
We also thank all of the various sponsors over the years including our title sponsor, Vellum Inc. as well as M:OME, garcia architecture + design, SDG Architects, Design Within Reach, Alpha Rho Chi, RNT Architects, Coverings, Varo Sheet Metal, and Henri and Tracee de Hahn, Steve Barash, as well as the landlords who have graciously donated their vacant spaces to us over the years including Copelands, Todd + Korie Newman, The Silvaggios, Atmodsphere, Vellum Inc., Many students have helped in the design and development of this book: Kevin Bussett, Vince Cimo, Ron Assa, Ashley Sigle, Tracey Coffin, Paul Ruppert, George Foreman, and Susan Kim. Naturally, we also thank the faculty advisors, Tom di Santo, Karen Lange and Eric Nulman.
Finally, we would like to congratulate all of the students who have entered a winning piece in the first five competitions: Ben Handy, Jason Pignolet, Matt Granelli, Collin Sprenkle, Matt Covall, Tucker Huey, Viktoria Ciesiul, Bonnie Miller and Chris Allen, Kate Barton, Scot Bailey, Judy Quan, Ed Becker, Jose Castillo, Katsunori Shigemi, Brandin Roat, JR Thornton, Emily Woods, Nathan Jakus, Karen Johnson, Scott Rothi, Nick Holbein, Gabe Kaprielian, Gideon Hillman, Johnson Tang, Matt Ridenhour, David Aine, Daniel Tiraschi, Eric Cole, David Kuong, Nick Shanks, Christina Villa-Reyes, Nitsan Yomtov, Jaitip Srisomburananont, Hugo Martinez, Simon Diesendruck, Joseph Lyman, Bryan Hitchcock, Eric Jones, and TJ Esser.