Great work!. Is each module geometrically bistable, so you can program the deployed state? However, it looked to have more degrees of freedom (2DOF?) in the case of real material.
No, these units don't automatically deploy to the correct position, however, by moving the unit hub to meet its neighbors, the programmed overall form is accomplished. I have thought of trying to develop bistable units, though I'm not sure it's possible with the kirigami approach. I have 3D printed and other types of re-deployable units. I've been thinking of using bending-active approach to make bistable units, but haven't tried it yet. Actually, after seeing your talk, I'm thinking about creating the primary surface tiling as an auxetic surface, in order to pack it more tightly into the sheet material. At the moment, we only cut flat strips of units for the double-curved versions, but it is still quite costly in terms of waste material on the sheet, unlike the original flat versions. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts sometime.
Hello. Thank you very much for the presentation and the article. Given the small size of the cell compared to the overall dimensions, have you considered homogenising (e.g. finding equivalent stiffnesses) this structure in order to quickly predict the structural behaviour and thus optimise thickness/pattern/input surface?
Hello Nicolas. Thank you. I think what you're describing is one of the desired next steps. Thus far, we've only been working with quadrilateral units (and those constrained to rombuses), so other work is necessary to describe other unit types. The complication comes when you describe a unit that deploys in non-parallel fashion (vs. a more simple parallel deployment). More geometry to solve in order to get to the point you describe, if I understand the question correctly. Thank you!
Great work!. Is each module geometrically bistable, so you can program the deployed state? However, it looked to have more degrees of freedom (2DOF?) in the case of real material.
No, these units don't automatically deploy to the correct position, however, by moving the unit hub to meet its neighbors, the programmed overall form is accomplished. I have thought of trying to develop bistable units, though I'm not sure it's possible with the kirigami approach. I have 3D printed and other types of re-deployable units. I've been thinking of using bending-active approach to make bistable units, but haven't tried it yet.
Actually, after seeing your talk, I'm thinking about creating the primary surface tiling as an auxetic surface, in order to pack it more tightly into the sheet material. At the moment, we only cut flat strips of units for the double-curved versions, but it is still quite costly in terms of waste material on the sheet, unlike the original flat versions. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts sometime.
Hello. Thank you very much for the presentation and the article. Given the small size of the cell compared to the overall dimensions, have you considered homogenising (e.g. finding equivalent stiffnesses) this structure in order to quickly predict the structural behaviour and thus optimise thickness/pattern/input surface?
Hello Nicolas. Thank you. I think what you're describing is one of the desired next steps. Thus far, we've only been working with quadrilateral units (and those constrained to rombuses), so other work is necessary to describe other unit types. The complication comes when you describe a unit that deploys in non-parallel fashion (vs. a more simple parallel deployment). More geometry to solve in order to get to the point you describe, if I understand the question correctly. Thank you!