makeLab™ blog

Applying the Digital Vernacular by lauralovinglondon
October 17, 2012, 10:20 am
Filed under: makeLab Student Post

In the makeLab, there is a firm belief that form generation alone is  not a viable design solution. Rather, we are pushed to learn from the tried and true practices derived from generations of study and implement them using digital tools. This is what Jim Stevens refers to as the “digital vernacular” and is the basis of a design challenge using traditional, vernacular building types from around the world. The project objectives included a thorough study of the cultural and economic context, skill level of labor, materials, established construction processes, and aesthetic characteristics of each building type. From this study, a digital vernacular detail reflecting the methodologies and ideas was created via digital tools.

For this project, Ryan Asava, a second-year graduate student in Stevens class, studied the Toda hut. This building type originates in the Nilgiri plateau of Southern India, where the Toda people have perfected it for over a thousand years. The Toda people form pastoral tribes, who often leave their huts to accommodate the buffalo grazing periods. As a result, their dwellings are often left unattended, and incur damage as well. The Toda hut itself is a pent-shaped structure created with native materials of lashed bamboo sticks and fasteners of rattaen, the pliable stems of the bamboo stalk. Overall, the Toda hut is a simple, yet refined and extremely effective building type for that culture and location.


The ideas that Ryan derived from this research informed several goals for his detail: simplicity of assembly, ease of replacement, accommodation of same forces, and composition of common materials. He was most inspired by the use of lashed bundles of sticks, the primary component in the Toda hut. The significance of the lashed detail is that it creates a 360-degree fulcrum and resists structural forces in all directions. To apply this, he began to design a singular construction piece by mapping out the X,Y, and Z forces that it would resist. This singular piece, when replicated, would also need to form the arch shape similar to that of the Toda hut.

Through a series of mock-ups, and varying ideas, Ryan created multiple interlocking pieces out of three laminated sheets of  ¼” plywood. The laminated sheets allow for pockets to aid in the interlocking of the members. In terms of forces, the fulcrum created in the piece resists the X forces, while the interlocking of the pieces resists resulting Y forces. The Z forces are resisted by a combination of two pockets and tabs: a tab at the ends of the piece that fits into a pocket of the adjacent piece, and the center (hook) that goes into a pocket as well (see figure below). The pieces themselves are put together using friction-fit joinery, rather than any sort of fasteners, and the only glue used was for the laminating process. Since the pieces are friction-fit, the size and tolerance was very important. Ryan realized just how important it was when he accidentally forgot to compensate for the proper tolerance while cutting his pieces on the CNC machine. This problem was fixed in the post-processing, however, via a Dremel tool to ensure the proper fitting of the pieces. Once put together, the resulting architectural detail was extremely successful in fulfilling Ryan’s original goals.

The significance and success of this project is immense because the fully constructed arch holds a large amount of weight and is truly vernacular in its simplistic manufacturing, construction and native materiality. The singular piece also makes it easy to replace, and requires a low amount of skilled labor to produce and assemble. As a constructed arch, it has relatively low embodied energy largely because plywood is readily available in this region, no metal fasteners are needed, and little post-processing is required. This project proves that a well-designed yet simple piece can have great implications in construction.

In a broader context, this project also upholds many of the principles of the makeLab. We believe that digital fabrication should never be approached with the assumption that a new software or machine suddenly will suddenly create good design simply because it is new. Or, that as a westernized culture, we have the “right” building practices for every location and application. Rather, this project exemplifies that a careful and humble study of other traditional practices, cultures, and history is what aids us in using new tools appropriately. Because a digital tool at the end of the day is just that: a tool. Without the appropriate ideas, research, and historical precedent to apply those tools to, it does nothing.


Pushing up in Albania and Kosovo by Jim Stevens
July 7, 2012, 1:35 pm
Filed under: makeLab @Large

The Academy likes to take credit for the successes of alumni – it validates our efforts.  We state specific data referring to job placement rates and earned income.  What we do not tout is the spirit and tenacity of our students.  This is because it cannot be easily measured and does not fit nicely into a statistician’s spreadsheet.  As faculty members, we can only witness it through the actions of our students.  This “spirit”, “entrepreneurial drive”, or even “grassroots effort” has become cliché in academia.  Regardless, it is exactly what built, and continues to build, the makeLab.  I was only able to succeed because I intrusted the students, gave them ownership and removed barriers when I could.  The rest was their own doing.

This same energy is very much present in the students of Albania and Kosovo.  Unfortunately, the economy, corruption, politics, and of course the continued aftermath of the war has slowed the support of this new-found youth and energy.  There are exceptions of course, POLIS University , Urban Plus , and many others I have yet to meet, fight for what the students need.  Despite the lack of formal support, the young designers are not discouraged and are pushing up ideas from below.  With architecture web portals such as , a message, and more importantly, a dialog about design is maintained.  Illegal architecture, an experimental architecture network, operates in much the same way and asserts in its name that all design in Kosovo is, in one way or another, illegal.  This spirit is also seen in the beautiful film Utopian Tirana by Ajmona Hoxha, Blendina Cara, Elis Vathi, and Klodiana Millona.  The short film is crafted by expert technicians but it captures the beauty of Tirana while showing the suppressed imagination of the young designers that dwell within it.

I witnessed their vitality first hand in the coordination of my lecture in Kosovo.  The lecture held at the University of Pristina was proposed, organized and implemented by Illegal Architecture and (+ countless others).  They requested and received funding from the US Embassy and secured the venue at the University of Pristina.  They marketed the lecture on the web, print media and even a morning news show interview.  My accommodations and transportation was coordinated in a way I would normally receive from an established institution.  All of this was done even when met with resistance from above.

The night of the lecture the students where nervous, they wanted everything to be perfect, I was calm – it already was.  The excitement they felt when the room filled to capacity and extra chairs were brought in was evident.  I say all of this because the significant moment for architecture in Kosovo happened before my lecture began; what I had to say was only informational.  The young designers who came together to make an event happen that they wanted was the significant event.

These students will become the future leaders and architects of the region.  I will return and help when I can, but I hope one day it is  just to have a salep and reminisce.

Yep, we did that – CNC running smooth in Albania by Jim Stevens
June 27, 2012, 1:46 pm
Filed under: makeLab @Large

It is official.  You can build a CNC, carry it on a plane halfway around the world and cut architectural components.  Today, the machine ran for hours and cut nicely with only a few hiccups.  As significant as the machine is and what it represents for our ideas about the digital vernacular, it is not the most important aspect.  What is however, is giving students the opportunity to make their projects digitally for first time.  The intensity in the room suddenly changed and the outcomes where no longer imagined, no longer meaningless; they were real and included all of the benefits and shortcomings of each design.

Today was a good day for makeLab.

suitcase CNC by Jim Stevens
June 21, 2012, 6:28 am
Filed under: makeLab @Large

The more we work within the context of what we call Digital Vernacular the more our decisions become clearer and our actions more intentional.  This academic year has seen many accomplishments, but without a doubt it has been the year of machine building.  Our design logic informs us that if a tool is to be vernacular, one must be able to make it on their own, with out the need for corporate or extensive outside expertise.  We blogged over the winter about the completion of the laser cutter, but this spring we have focused our efforts on designing and building a CNC machine that will fit inside a suitcase.  This is driven by one of three hallmarks of the vernacular – access to tools.

The question was asked: could we build a 3-axis CNC machine that could be checked on an airplane and carried anywhere in the world?  This of course would demand that the machine be less then 50lbs, stand up to abuse, and be easily setup and broken down.  Not an easy task.  As I write this, I am sitting in Paris’ Charles de Gaulle Airport and the Suitcase CNC  is presumably under the plane that will take me on to Albania.  Over the next two months, the machine will visit and cut out projects in Albania, Kosovo and France.

For anyone hanging around the makeLab, you know that this machine could not have been built without Natalie Haddad.  Many long days and sleepless nights to get this done.  Please take time over the summer to check in on this blog and our facebook page to see where the CNC (and I) may be traveling and what we are making.


The No-Title Project by pgaqi
June 8, 2012, 4:07 am
Filed under: makeLab design, makeLab Enterprise

-I apologize in advance for the length of this article.

I am not an engineer nor an artist. I’m not a carpenter, welder, mechanic, graphic designer, nor an architect. And presently, I’m not even employed. At this point in time, after much retrospective, rationalization, post-rationalization, analysis, manual and mechanical labor, and 10000+ steps of stairs, I feel incredibly proud of the permanent Ceiling Installation at The A. Alfred Taubman Student Services Building Welcome Center.  The latter, by the way, makes for a longer than usual title to be given to an equally complicated (overlong) professional project of design. As it stands, the project was never named, but it has become quite the conversation piece around campus, and even garnered the respect or lack-thereof of a nickname. Dialogue has always been welcomed. Such a project as many completed by the makeLab, tends to get our best abilities, the ones that we pessimistically believe we don’t possess, out of us. Thus, I become the engineer, the artist, and everything else inside and outside of architecture.

It’s important to note and to thank in advance all the people involved with this project, from Assistant Professor James C. Stevens for bringing forth the challenge, to my better half, Blerta Lici, for helping (free of charge) during the installation stages, as well as, Wayne Guo for helping one of the days with louver installation. Many people contributed to the project’s design iteration and critique. Prof. Martin Schwartz gave his expertise on lighting, and Associate Dean of Graduate Studies, Ralph Nelson, shared his view on materiality and design editing. Lastly, let us not forget the unique/quirky, but equally important, input of the average freshmen walking the hallways during the late evenings.

Starting in mid-February my partner, Steve Kroodsma, and myself had been engaged in an unusually challenging and complex project. It was offered to the makeLab early September of last year by the university and the CoAD, at which point, it was presented to my partner and me by makeLab director, James Stevens.  I remember in great detail during our first meeting (of which we’re not supposed to talk about) how the problem was described with great frustration. Alternative solution samples were also presented, which amounted to high costs and bland, boring, and frankly inappropriate installations for an architecture school.  Since the construction of the A. Alfred Taubman Student Services Center, the University Welcome Center has seen many bright and warm days; sometimes, too bright and maybe uncomfortably warmer ones, prompting space occupiers to voice their concerns for the under-utilization of the space. It was uncomfortable to work in, while sometimes impossible to run slide shows through the white projector screen. Such challenging issues required a lot of thought and planning to overcome. Thus, we embraced our “Technological” middle name, and decided to give the school something that will define not only what we do, but inspire others’ ambition for good design.

At the finish line, I’d like to explain step by step the arduous process of designing, planning, constructing, assembling, and installing the baffled ceiling. More importantly, the project highlighted the collaborative nature of our work, and the notion that the correct partnership can yield great results. Tolerance and mutual respect between colleagues is sometimes more important than talent and craftsmanship. Our peers make us better, and make architecture better.

Sketches, drawings, and 120 renderings of the sun simulation in an individually constructed 3D Rhino model, yielded the necessary data to construct a three-dimensional volume that resembled a strangely distorted pancake. Each rendering represented the sun exposure image burn on a selected construction plane selected between the existing super-strut structure above and the suspended light elements 24” underneath it. These images were generated for every hour between 9:00am and 6:00pm (daily occupancy period, when natural light affects workflow), on the 21st day of every month for the current year. The renderings were not only important for identifying the problem, but also for comparison with images generated in simulations of the project’s final 3D model. The accumulated data and sun simulations influenced 85% of the final formal design, reinforcing the makeLab philosophy of bottom-up approach in design. The availability of a sprinkler fire suppression system (implemented with the love and care of any contractor-architect collaboration), required that any installation, in the form of a suspended ceiling, should have 50% openness or permeability to meet the fire code. The success of this project was solely dependent on its performance and functionality, hence, using available construction floor plans and taking new measurements would eliminate further derailment during the installation phase. Yet, even the plans provided had discrepancies and of course no fire suppression system included. To circumvent such problems, we had to avoid the erratic placement of the fire suppressant pipes and elbows completely.  (images below)

During the design phase of the project, we decided to emulate a scenario, where the project does not become a static fixture, permanently obstructing maintenance to the space and building structure. Formal flexibility, practicality, and the ability to disassemble with relative ease were important criteria that fit the goals set for functionality.  Choosing ¼” Low Density Fiberboard as the base material for milling, ensured that components would be light in weight and flexible to bend around corners and obstacles during the transportation and installation phase. One of the main disadvantages of LDF was its fragility. Given the nature of our project, where every piece milled on the CNC machine would be unique in size and shape, damaged components would be unnecessary derailments to the main objective. However, the right partnership and meticulous handling of tasks assured that everything went smoothly and quicker than expected, given the number of people involved. 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Choosing the correct color to paint the custom louvers was a stage of much debate in the makeLab and outside, as it represented more than just aesthetics. The appropriate color, would ensure the absorbance and diffusion of direct light, as well as, keep contextually  in line  with the space.  A different shade, tint, or hue could possibly create a darker than desired environment.  In conjunction with the new structure’s lower than original ceiling plane (8’ from the floor), a darker color would suppress/shrink the volume and possibly diminish functionality during presentations and formal events.

Manufacturing of 171 individual puzzle-like pieces yielded 66 different louvers that had to be glued, sanded, and painted, in limited working space. To be noted is the louvers’ characteristic for never giving away the final design form or application as they lied in the basement hallways beside student activity and curiosity.  During the drying of louvers, hardware was assembled through a simple mechanism that Steve and I came up with to exponentially cut down time (and minimize human casualties). (video below)

The installation phase was surprisingly easier than expected. With a little help (again many thanks), we were able to adjust for miscalculations during the planning phase and improvise on space limitations. The final product will ensure that no matter what aesthetic impact the ceiling has, it will first and foremost accomplish the goals we set.

We never uttered the words “it looks cool” (although it did). We never shared our project as an artistic expression of our post-undergraduate employment frustration (although it maybe was??). We never intended to make architecture without meaning (although meaning has its own viewing platform within the public, and thus, it morphs). Someone, somewhere, even started calling our ceiling “the cloud” or even “the hills?!?”. Anyhow, that innate ability of architecture students to ridicule the unusual or the new (even when it looks repetitious), had me thinking about something that I generally don’t come across too often. It emphasized the possibility of letting a project reveal itself to the public, rather than through words and diagrams. Here is an opportunity to observe the success (or failure/redundancy) of a project through its performance. The people who will never read this blog entry are the final critics perhaps. The possibility to discard preconceived ideas, and allow first impressions to fuel the curiosity is what I took out of my undergraduate education. This project is what I leave behind. 

Designed & Built by

Pandush Gaqi & Steve Kroodsma

Dining Chair inspired the wRIGHT way by azubikeononye
May 8, 2012, 6:48 pm
Filed under: makeLab design, makeLab Student Post | Tags: ,

MakeLab’s role as LTU’s digital fabrication lab found the perfect challenge in the design of a new dining chair for Frank Lloyd Wright’s Affleck House. Designed by Azubike Ononye and Nicholas Cataldo the chair needed to respond to the unique setting of the house. The Affleck House, being one of Wright’s “Usonian homes” which were designed specifically for middle income families, seemed to be the perfect source of inspiration for the chair. One of the major factors that drove the design was the issue of maintaining a low cost while producing something worthy enough of being in the Affleck House. Aside from cost issue, another factor that governed the design was the idea of mobility, which required the design to have a stack-able property.

Based on the requirements stated above, we decided that the chair had to be cut from one sheet of 4’ X 8’ birch plywood and started out small scale on the laser cutter, incorporating the twisting, stretching, and bending properties of plywood explored by Nicholas Cataldo and Kyle Gonzalez in the fall semester of 2011. This gave us the opportunity to explore other potentials and gave us a sense of the structural framework for the chair. It was amazing to see Professor Stevens turn into a mathematics tutor as he was converting model dimensions to actual dimension. That gave us something to laugh about when we discovered that our initial model of the chair had to be tweaked because in reality we couldn’t fit two cuts on one piece of 4’ X 8’ birch plywood, which would have a huge implication on the cost. We also discovered the surface area of the wood cutout was a lot and would have a negative impact on the stack-able character of the chair because of its dead weight. We adjusted our model by removing the arm rests which were initially part of the design, and introduced a slant cut to the legs of the chair to remove some of the dead weight. Another challenge we encountered was double milling the wood piece on the CNC machine. We had to improvise by creating an jig, which was screwed to the machine to avoid a shift in the X and Y axis when the piece was flipped. Then we were left with the metal work which involved cutting the steel tubing, bending it with a tube bender, inserting the stainless steel dowels- at the joints of the chair to ensure firm connection, and finally welding these joints.

From a business perspective one of the great features of the chair is its “value flexibility”. I call it value flexibility because the materiality of the chair can be changed to meet different value targets without changing the design itself. For example, the birch plywood used for the chair could be exchanged for a higher quality piece of plywood, thus increasing the value. So ideally the same design can fit different calibers of clients from lower to middle to the upper class.

In addition, the dining chair design provides us with the opportunity to explore TIG welding and metal works. Thus, the material syllabus of the makeLab was expanded. The makeLab not only utilizes wood, plastic, resins, and concrete but also metal and its related fields.

makeLab Pilot Program by Jim Stevens
May 6, 2012, 9:45 pm
Filed under: makeLab Enterprise

The following is a written reflection by Paul Wright.  Paul is an entrepreneurial business degree student who was embedded in the makeLab over the last few months.


I was given a great opportunity by Dr. Karen Evans to apply my entrepreneurial business degree, coupled with my decades of automotive prototype build experience, in an innovative new program idea she hatched with Professor Jim Stevens. The problem with many architectural and design students is they have a lot of creativity, but lack in practical business experience.  Karen knew “just the guy” to send over to help.  The plan was to put LTU’s School of Management students with the School of Architecture students to give insight into how to make practical things.

I was assigned to be Jim’s teaching assistant for a diverse group of talented students in his makeLab class. I was immediately hooked on what he was doing with the makeLab digital fabrication studio and knew I could help. I sensed a little bit of apprehension on the part of the students with this unusual arrangement.  Because I was a much older student, they didn’t seem to know what to make of me and what I was doing there.  Eventually the process of mutual creative discovery helped lower subtle social barriers and things started happening.

We first learned how to turn digital designs into executable code and use the CNC machine to make simple things. The immediate gratification of moving from an idea floating in your brain to something you can hold in your hand is inspiring. In my past life in the automotive prototype engineering business, it could take a very long time to get to this point. The process moved slowly from drawing by hand, to hand machining and fabricating parts. Now just about anyone can do it with home-built machines and a laptop computer.  Younger students may seem blasé about it, but for me this revolution is, well, revolutionary.

Once the competency projects were completed without anyone losing any digits, teams were created to handle the five project ideas created by Professor Stevens:

  • Eric Rito, Randy White and Saif Alawzi chose the task to design and build a new podium for the A200 Auditorium.
  • Randall Rozier and Chris Davis chose the “Inventibles Challenge”, where the students were to create something using unique items from the web site.
  • Sara Rugglio chose to design and create something that could be marketed on the web site for the “Etsy challenge” assignment.
  • Three architecture students from China; Wei Wang, Youyou Chen and Jing Xu; banded together and produce a CNC produced design element that would interact with existing lights.
  • Nick Catalado and Azubuke “Zubby” Onoye chose to design and produce dinner table chairs for the Frank Lloyd Wright designed Affleck house.

I was assigned to work with all the teams to make sure that financial and manufacturing limitations were kept on track. I would show them how to procure materials at economical prices, how to reduce waste, and maintain manufacturing feasibility.

One of the first projects that I saw needed help was Sara’s. She wasn’t sure what exactly she needed to make because that purposely wasn’t defined. She had an interest in fabrics and Jim suggested combining that with resin casting, a process she wasn’t familiar with, so there was some resistance at first. She was encouraged to just “make things” with it to see what could be done. Initially, she tried making a wood mold with the CNC machine, but the result did not produce a useful direction so that was abandoned.  She then used an ice cube tray as a mold, and the results were much better. She found some long and narrow silicone cube trays at IKEA, cut and applied fabric to the resin in the mold, and the end result was interesting enough to explore further.

Her idea for the final product was to string the molded pieces together into a “blanket” that could be used as a decorative window or wall treatment.  The resin magnified the fabric pattern, which was found very attractive by everyone in our informal focus groups. There was also some exploration in embedding LED’s into the mold to illuminate the fabric design. I assisted with the electronics and research. After testing, the artificial lighting had mixed reviews. The biggest problem was the complexity of embedding almost 100 LED’s plus the routing of the wiring detracted from the elegance of the basic design element. Sara was getting frustrated with the progress and time was running out for further development.  She abandoned the electronics and decided that natural light would be the better choice. Sara then turned her attention to experimenting with weaving fabric and casting the molds in sand to keep the shape more consistent.

Ultimately, she ended up with different shapes for the individual pieces, but despite all the temporary setbacks and frustrations, I think she made some creative breakthroughs. She has a real eye for design, that once she gets past the road blocks of inhibitions and resistance to unfamiliar processes, she can really do great work.

The Inventibles Challenge team had its share of dead ends, too. They selected several items from the site, super-stretchy plastic, a wire spring that changes length with the application of electricity and moldable plastic.  Chris and Randall tried a number different ways to combine all the materials. As with Sara’s project, their solution was to abandon complexity and focus on simplicity. The Nitinol helical wound wire had the most interesting properties with the ability to lift a heavy ViceGrip™ off the ground with just a little bit of voltage. They decided to build an interactive ceiling exhibit that would use cast weights suspended with Nitonal wires behind a stretchy fabric. It would be activated by a motion sensor as students walked by. The effect was intended to be eye-catching and intriguing.

Unfortunately the giddiness of the creative process left them ungrounded in the realities of the project parameters. Multiplying the number of weights and wires required more current than the initial single-weight test prototype used. Making the weights move independent of each other added a lot more wiring complexity than the budget or time allowed.  The structure size  required cross supports that they wanted to be adjustable for varying the effect. This created the problem of supplying current to the cross beams without a tangle of extra long wires to accommodate the distance changes. I suggested using copper conductive tape as a “buss bar”.  I advised them on where to get it, and that was the extent of my contribution to this project. It worked out well, but the wire gauge they used for the connections was a little too small for the amount of current they were dealing with. The project was too far along to rewire so they made do with what they had.

The decision to cast the weights using condoms as molds was the most controversial aspect of this project. Coupled with the choice of black stretchy fabric, the effect was decidedly sexual in nature. There was a bit of denial at first that it was not the intent of the project, but there was no getting around the obvious. If the outcome wasn’t the intent, then the design wasn’t well thought out.  The decision was made to embrace the outcome, change their design intent to match the result and declare victory.

The final design review dinged them for poor craftsmanship and poor selection of materials.  When the project was in place, the light from the window above  shown through the thin fabric and revealed the inner workings in an unflattering manner, which removed the mysteriousness of the device. The fabric looked cheap as did the particle board.  Because the wire couldn’t handle the current, the movement was slow and inconsistent.

They made the classic mistake of designing solely for themselves without considering the customer, the business case, the mechanics and materials, or details about the site location. Not to be deterred, this was a good learning experience for them. They plan to correct all the mistakes and work on an even better design.  I’m willing to bet it will be fabulous!

All teams struggled at some point, but I think the lighting design team had the most difficulties. Part of which was the fact that English was their second language and their unfamiliarity with the intricacies of American culture and local sources of materials. Their initial design looked fairly good on the computer, but didn’t translate well when built.  The first basic shape was a tapered plywood square that would be replicated on the CNC. These ¾” thick pieces would be screwed to a thin sheet of plastic to make a bendable light shade.

While the CNC can produce the same element over and over, it seemed inefficient to me to turn a big piece of wood into a lot of little pieces, a big piece of scrap wood and a pile of sawdust.  The end result was awkward to assemble causing a great deal of time consumed assembling them together. Even with cheap labor I would have still sought an easier way to execute the project.  After fabrication, the interaction of the squares didn’t give the effect they desired, so frustration was setting in. I suggested they look to nature for elements that nested together.  That sparked some creativity and they end up with a four leaf clover design that made more sense.

There still was the problem of making the parts from wood. I think they weren’t comfortable with searching for and testing alternatives, so they limited themselves to what they could find in the supply room.  Another thing that hindered the process was that the location for displaying their project wasn’t considered carefully.  At one point it was going to hang from the ceiling under a light in the stairwell.  The School ‘s refusal to allow drilling holes in the light fixture precluded that.  The team decided they were going to suspend the design from strings that tied to the exiting light fixture to get around that problem. But they hadn’t actually measured the size they would need to completely cover the area or calculated the amount of materials needed.  Once we did that, it became readily apparent that they would have the equivalent of a 4’ x 8’ sheet of ¾” plywood hanging, literally, by a few strings over student heads. By not considering the site requirements they made the same mistake as the Inventibles team.  The solution was to change the site location and instead of hanging the project, they placed it on an in ground landscaping light outside the architecture building. The effect when lit is very interesting.

The A200 Podium team had their preliminary design work done fairly quickly. They matched the theme of the auditorium and captured the customer’s needs in the initial design. The computer design became a small-scale model, and after some revisions it seemed like this was going to be a slam-dunk, except for one small detail:  One important rule of program management is that when it comes to procurement,  you have to  identify your longest lead item in the bill of materials to be sure everything is ordered in time for the required date. About one week before the project was due and in the middle of construction, they came to me about the source for the LTU blue laminate I had located during the planning session.  I found the web site again, but the special color material would be coming from Wisconsin, IF they had it in stock. If not, then it would be at least weeks for special order. Oops.

Out of necessity, they had to paint the inner cabinet rather than use the much nicer smooth laminate that was originally planned. The project had a good start but typical project setbacks ate up time and the podium wasn’t completely finished on the review day. I think they realized they would have benefitted from more disciplined program management techniques.

The last project is the Affleck House chair project. The task of building a set of chairs for the Affleck house was no minor undertaking. The design had to be compatible with the “Usonian” design of the house. Not only did the chair need to be considerate of the design intent, materials, and mass, but it had to in no way replicate any existing element. The chairs needed to be stackable, have the necessary frame rigidity, and have a comfortable seating surface and angle.

Professor Stevens picked Nick’s flexible plywood as the core design element. The “Pli-wood” process is documented elsewhere on the site, but it incorporates a milled pattern that allows the wood to flex and bend while maintaining compressive strength. The process was confined to the curved areas and the flat surfaces were kept intact, except for CNC milling of tube retention slots and curved seating area. The project would showcase remarkable makeLab achievements in a practical way.

The first step was the requisite CAD 3D model. That was quickly accomplished and ideas were bantered back and forth.  The approach to fabrication was considered early on. We wanted to try to minimize material costs and cutting waste, so it was decided to eliminate the arm rests early in the design process. This allowed two chairs to be made from one, standard size 4 x 8 sheet of Plywood. The tubular frame looked simple in the CAD model, but my experience saw issues with bending stainless in so many tight curves.

The next step was to make a scale model. After some issues with deciding on the exact scale to use, welding wire was bent to make a replica frame, and balsa wood was used to stand-in as plywood. The lab’s CNC laser cutter was used to cut the miniature pli-wood pattern into the balsa wood.

From the scale model process, improvements were identified, and the optimum material sizes were estimated. It was thought that ½” diameter stainless tubing would be the ideal size. This allowed a minimum of 15/16” radius bends while maintaining enough rigidity for a 300 pound person. 304 seamless tubing was specified for corrosion resistance, low maintenance, and the ability to take a pleasing natural, polished, or brushed finish. ¾” birch plywood was selected for the wood. No fasteners were required but we needed 3/8” stainless dowels to ensure straight alignment and strength for the welded joints.

A secondary project was undertaken to set up TIG (Tungsten Inert Gas) welding station in the makeLab fab room. I helped with getting all the necessary equipment together and up and running. Then I gave Nick some TIG welding lessons, and after a short time he was ready. Fortunately, he had prior experience with wire feed and stick welding, so he wasn’t exactly a total novice and adapted quickly to the new technique.

The stainless tubing was expensive, but the material was perfect for the application and Usonian theme.  Nick was able to find a wholesale source for the tubing which cut out all the middleman costs. The savings were a whopping 70% less than retail. Nick had wanted to build each chair using only one standard 20’ section of tubing, but reinforcements required after the full-scale prototype added a few feet to the BOM. We could have special ordered longer 24’ sections, but since the 20’ length was a stock item, it was deemed more prudent to just order an extra length. The project came in under budget, and the full-scale prototype was on time.

At this time the chair is still being refined, but the end result is sure to be fabulous. I imagine guests and visitors to the Affleck house will take notice of the unique design and strike up a conversation about it.  Professor Stevens envisions it being so notable that people will want to buy a set. We discussed making and selling copies online. The funds would be used to help expand the makeLab into new frontiers. This could lead to designers, engineers and business students working together to run a working mini-business laboratory.

I really enjoyed the opportunity to take part in this pilot program. I have looked forward to every Tuesday and Thursday class session.  I think that once you get  the makeLab spirit in your blood, you can never get over it. I plan on hanging around this summer to see how the projects turn out and what’s next. This is what education should be about. Teaching theory and practice in an interesting, meaningful, and practical way.

%d bloggers like this: