Expanding Sol Lewitt

Project Description |

This small project is inspired by Sol Lewitt, an American artist who introduced the complexity of geometry to art. One of his works, “no title, 1973”, reveals the possibilities of a simple geometry. This work is based on a square which contains 4 lines in it. Sol Lewitt simply shows all the configurations with these four lines: 1-line configuration, 2-line configuration, 3-line configuration and 4-line configuration. By manipulating the number of lines, he demonstrate how complex a simple geometry can be. Furthermore, this concept can be used in computational design to explore more potential of geometry. Sol Lewitt only reveals the complexity of line number changing, however, this geometry contain much more thing than we think. For instance, there are 28 configurations (or combinations) when the geometry is inquired for combinations of one T shape and one L shape shown as below.

No title, Sol Lewitt, 1973

T and L configurations in Sol Lewitt, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

Within these T-L configurations, it can be observed that each configuration can be a plan, section or elevation of a small house. In other words, this geometry actually provides us a large number of design candidates. This concept can also be seen in many architects’ plans. In Siza’s Museum of Contemporary Art Nadir Afonso shown as below, it can be observed there are some “underlying” geometries forming a geometry context. All the lines are part of this context. This context provides architect a source of design candidates. For instance, by removing some lines from geometry context, architects can create openings; by thickening some lines, architects can thus create walls; by trimming some lines, architects can thus create a interesting corner, etc. This geometry context is usually a combination of simple shapes such as rectangles, triangles, lines, squares just like the geometry that Sol Lewitt used. To explore more in Sol Lewitt’s geometry, we try different four-line configurations such as four-floating-line configurations, two-L configurations and other configurations shown as below.

Museum of Contemporary Art Nadir Afonso, Álvaro Siza, 2015

Four-floating-line configurations in Sol Lewitt, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

Two-L configurations in Sol Lewitt, page 1, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

Two-L configurations in Sol Lewitt, page 2, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

Two-L configurations in Sol Lewitt, page 3, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

Two-L configurations in Sol Lewitt, page 4, T.C. Kurt Hong, 2017

There are 46 results in four-locating-line configuration, and 258 results in two-L configuration. Each result can be used as a small plan to create space. In other words, this geometry can at least provide architects more than 300 Design candidates. The complexity of Sol Lewitt’s geometry actually can be much higher than 300 candidates if we ask for more configurations. Complexity is a critical element in design process. By introducing complexity, designers can thus create diversities to help them see more possible solutions, a mindful design category. Also, in Sol Lewitt’s works, the beauty of complexity is revealed.

Incomplete Open Cubes, Sol Lewitt, 1974

Incomplete Open Cubes, Sol Lewitt, 1974

Another term for complexity in Sol Lewitt’s work may be “variation”. Producing variations is also a critical step in design process. Incomplete open cubes show us that variations can be created by simply removing lines from a cube, or simply selecting lines from a cube. Removing things or selecting thing are two of the ways to create “combinations”, like the operations in geometry context while designing architectures. To wrap up, this project is to propose a computational methodology to create complexity and diversity. With a simple geometry context, architects can have a highly diverse category for design. By adopting this method, the potential of geometry can thus be revealed.

Shapes, geometries and complexity | A method to create architectures

Project Description |

This project is inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright and Louis I. Khan. In the works of both of them, obviously there was a "geometry context" in the very beginning of design process. Geometry context can be viewed as a "underline grid" for designer. After having this geometry context, architects start to do some operations on it such as "removing some lines", "making some lines thicker", "making some lines as dash lines", etc. The entire design process is actually based on this geometry context. When the geometry context changes, the design changes too. To be brief, the combinations of the operations on the geometry context can form a design, and there are so many combinations. However, the potential of geometry context is always under-evaluated because it is difficult to plot all the combinations by human's eyes. There is always a missed case if we only rely on our eyes. So, here is a question, why not take advantage of computer's powerful computation to figure out all the possibility of the geometries. Furthermore, once we can list out all the combinations, the complexity of the geometry can be surprisingly high and the design can thus be much richer.

Complexity of shapes can be incredibly high when users can inquire shapes in any way. For example, 2 overlapping squares can be a context for generating thousands of possibilities. In this case, users can inquire these two squares to get all the combinations of 1 “T” shape with 1 “L” shape. There are 36 different candidates for architects to create plans. Users can inquire these two squares to generate any kind of shape combinations such as 1 cross with 2 Ls, 2 crosses, 2 floating lines with 1 T, and so on. All the possibilities can be turn into an architecture and provide architects a category in the design process. Architects can put all the candidates into simulation software to test the energy performance, or use the category to communicate with clients and other professionals.

Fig.01 - Combinations with 1 T-shape and 1 L-shape

Fig. 02 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One "T" shape + One "L" shape)

Fig. 03 - Small 4-wall Architectures (Two "L" shapes)

Fig. 04 - Small 4-wall Architectures (Two "T" shapes)

Fig. 05 - Small 4-wall Architectures (Four jointed lines)

Fig. 06 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One "T" shape + Two floating lines) - Page 1

Fig. 07 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One "T" shape + Two floating lines)  - Page 2

 Fig. 08 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One "T" shape + Two floating lines)  - Page 3

Fig. 09 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One "T" shape + Two floating lines)  - Page 4

Fig. 10 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One floating line + Three jointed lines) - Page 1

Fig. 11 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One floating line + Three jointed lines) - Page 2

Fig. 12 - Small 4-wall Architectures (One floating line + Three jointed lines) - Page 3