Zhe Lin's Reflection on Reading 5: Authoring Robotic Processes

This passage talks about ‘digital materiality’ of robots which happened in the past few years. This idea is mentioned in reading4 as well and the lab in Singapore is taken as an example in this passage. Unlike 3d printer or other method, robotic fabrication doesn’t dematerialize the model into pure form. On the contrary, it materializes the digital model. This is a big process which allows the robotics to be used in the construction site. Robotic fabrication can be used not only at model scale but also at full scale. The range of robotic fabrication has been greatly expanded.

Because of the materialization in robotic fabrication, architects need to consider material and construction more during design. The logic of the given material became important to architects. Architects explore the potential and assembly of material together with robots. Robots allow architects to try novel forms of architecture. They can use differentiated assembly of same elements or different elements. On the contrary, in the past, architects had to use same elements or same assembly method, which restricted the potential of architecture. With robotic fabrication, architects can find more novel forms.

At last, architects are not satisfied with the practice of robotic fabrication. They want to build a theory for robotics in order to define architectural production in today’s world. Theory can help architects think deeper into the basic elements of robotic fabrication. Only if robotics become an theory can it be accepted by the mainstream or remembered by the descendants. Unlike other engineering, architecture needs both practice and theory. This can be the next challenge for robotics.