UPDATE: here’s a selection of images of this design, folded. Thought I’d share this with you, in case you find it interesting too. This is some interesting grounds for exploration and adaptation, in my opinion. So after playing with all this for a while I’ve realized that almost every flat tessellation I have folded can be re-folded as a flagstone tessellation, which changes the nature of the design by quite a bit. The same sort of pleat shrinking applies to the normal straight pleating style, but apples to apples I think the flagstone method is less wasteful of space and paper. There’s a correlation here between complexity of folding and pleat width, though, so I wouldn’t suggest making them too small or you’ll have a very hard time folding them. And, with that, the smaller the angle of the hinge fold between the flagstone polygons, the more efficient the use of paper is. Of course, the hinges that connect the flagstone polygons together can be as far apart as you want, or as close together as you want, between 180 and 0 degrees. If we adhere to using just the grid and it’s main offset lines (in this case, 30 degree angles) the flagstone style pleating is more efficient in terms of total area that one can tessellate given a particular number of pleats. In the little box sketches in the upper right, you can find two examples of a rhombus tiling (the dual of the 3.6.3.6 tessellation) that have been done as a normal straight-pleat tessellation, and then as a flagstone style tessellation. I’m writing something down but I keep finding myself hamstrung by lack of proper wording and also some gaps in understanding. I did not draw the lines for the WB collapses but I’m guessing you can figure this out if you have any idea what I’m talking about, right? Formed by creating the initial “waterbomb” type collapses, and then twisted to form the familiar flagstone style tiling. Here’s a rudimentary sketch of a 3.4.6.4 “Flagstone” tessellation. Adding lots of creases will show how significant those changes are when they add up.Thinking Sketches - 3.4.6.4 Waterbomb-Flagstone Tessellation Always remember that the paper size changes when you add creases. Getting the other directions done precisely is then harder. (For ease of folding, fold a 16 x 16 square grid and cut one strip each from two adjacent sides to make a 15 x 15 grid.). If you first do all divisions for one direction, then the paper will have a significantly different size in that direction. I first make a full grid of 8 (all three directions), then expand it to 16, then to 32, etc. And the order in which you crease is also important. The translucent paper I have has quite prominent creases, and the translucency thus allows me to see the creases through a layer of paper.Īnother reference might be not to necessarily align edges for higher divisions, but really using the existing grid lines. At least at first, its probably better to concentrate on structures that. You can start experimenting: fold a grid and then see how you can collapse the grid into shapes and continue on. I find it much easier to work precisely with translucent paper, because rather than aligning edges, I can indeed align creases. But the true magic of tessellations lies in creating your own designs and patterns and how easy it is compared to designing representational origami. Like this there are never too many layers of paper on top of each other, which makes working precisely harder. details: Square Weave Tessellation(by: Eric Gjerde, Shuzo Fujimoto)See also: Square Weave CubeModel types: classic tessellationLocation: on other website, in print mediaType: Crease Pattern. When I work with higher numbers of divisions, I make a couple of pleats, unfold those and then start the next set of pleats. After folding a tessellation from the first of two sheets I received from Ioana (thank you) in the middle of the night I woke up feeling that itch in my fingers. This is what might help:įor small divisions I fold edge to edge, creating lots of pleats. I haven't done any more than 64 divisions, fyi. Hm, not sure, I've found it no harder to fold accurate grids with higher divisions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |