‘The Corner Tree'

The fruit, flowers, leaves & branches of a tree are the various features that signify the growth of the tree & hence become landmarks along its lifetime.
This expression is the philosophy for ‘The Corner Tree’ Furniture.
‘The Corner Tree’ is placed at the corner of the room & shares the adjacent vertical faces of the walls of the room.
The zigzag & fluid form of ‘The Corner Tree’ is an interpretation of the growth of the tree. The spaces provided by ‘The Corner Tree’ can be enhanced with various mementos which mark the beautiful moments of the user’s life. The user can place his favorite mementoes such as photo frames, trophies or other collectibles on the tree.
The form of ‘The Corner Tree’ is very sculptural and conveys a strong aesthetic character while its white color suggests its timeless, classic, innocent, pure & peaceful nature.
The Corner Tree can be developed with 20 mm plywood or medium density fiber board. Molded wooden strips can be used at the corner joints of the furniture. An alternative material option could be single molded composite fiber. ‘The Corner Tree’ can become a beautiful & memorable element of design which enhances the interior space due its subtle & graceful nature & be source of joy & comfort to the user.

Comments… :bulb:

ADD
http://www.coroflot.com/Abhinav_Dapke

ADD

for very light loads only unless you attach each shelf (or every other one) to the wall as all the load forces transfer to the single bottom vertical leg putting a huge torsion stress on the intersection of bottom vertical and bottom horzontal.

It’s true, zippyflounder.

this design is meant for memontos (light load)
Otherwise, somesort of mounting/ support will require between this design & wall.


ADD

Good enough, here is a trick that you could use to beef it up (with a bow to bucky) below the top shelf provide for a attachment to the wall, this would prevent the thing from fallin (bad for fragile stuff) and convert the structure from just compression to tension and compression doubling your load ablity. I built someting very simalar in the 80’s our of a sheet of titianium that I got from boeing surplus (was into the impossiably thin thing at that time) it looked great but even using Ti it would do the spring thing. The tension/compression trick worked great, alas the ex wife got it in the divorce, oh well tis life.

You’ve been divorced? Can’t imagine :wink:

In my defence, it was my first her 3rd, she was seasoned :laughing:

Ohhhhhhhhhh … :open_mouth:

thanks for comments

ADD

It’s a really interesting idea. For me, I like simple objects and this is one I adore. On the other hand, i read what the others have posted and yes there seems to be a structural lack of some sort. The object could be anchored to the floor or attached to the wall for stability. for vertical support, I can’t visualize any possible distortion, but it would be safe to attach the rounded corners to the wall in some way, that is against my principles since it will ruin the simplicity of the design. I’ll be glad to hear of a solution to this problem and to see the end result if it’s ever to be produced.

See this is the problem NOW, if he had botherd to even model it ONCE in foam core he would have known of the structural problem right off the bat, but nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo you just crank up a pretty picture and then “wonder”. There was a award winning coat hanger bench, ok it looked cool but and its a big BUT the sucker would not be buildable as designed PERIOD.

I don’t realy understad what you mean. You’re writing in a way as if you were talking and its incomprehensible.

Not a native english speaker? The designer should have mocked up the design there by understanding its structural problems then adressing it. It is common now just to make pretty pictures then sit back in amazement when it turns out that it was un workable. Designers now are lasy, get your hands dirty and prove the concept works instead of living in fairy dust rendering land.

^^ he’s just old, done mind the ramblings. i think what zippy is trying to say, is that the design is structurally flawed in concept, and building a proof of concept model may help before you would have gotten to the render stage.

personally, i dont necessarily agree. the concept is nice, novel, unique and has a good balance of formal refinement with use (ie. shelves to hold stuff). For sure i’d bet you could find a solution of using different materials, or hidden reinforcements or supports to make it work in keeping with the concept.

being aware of the issue of structural support i agree is important, but from the looks of it this is a quick concept project, playing more with visual identity of the work, than an engineering/building project.

nice work. dont let a grumpy buzz-kill bring down ruin a nice idea.

R

Oh horse shit, he could have mocked it up in foam core in the time it took to write his prose. Visual idenity LOL formal refinement LOL, hey lets play buzz word bingo…I WIN.

im not saying he couldnt have mocked it up, or made a proto, but without knowing the project (a short school project, from the looks of it), i dont think the criticism is fair.

if you dont like the looks/concept, fine. but knocking production viability, if thats not clearly the demonstrated intent of the project is just a case of too many years souring the grapes on the vine, IMO.

R

(zippyflounder i do speak english but the way you compose your sentences, its no easy to understand.)

You shouldn’t call this laziness, maybe he just had the idea and wanted us to give him what we think about the looks of it rather than looking at the structural part of it. Ok, we brought it up, but we brought it up in a constructive way. Don’t just come up and start judging people based on a few remarks.

My opinion (and I suppose others would support my opinion) is that if you’re to criticize the work in a constructive way, you’re welcome. But if you’re trying to be the center of attention by spreading your angriness in your comments, because you think you’re perfect and everyone should do things like you do, and that you start putting apples and oranges in the same basket, THEN write your comments on notepad, save them on your computer just to let go your angriness and don’t post them on the forums.
(on the worst case use photoshop and make it look as if you posted it on the forum if that will make you happier!)

:wink: Designed for artifacts (light)……not as Ladder.

Yes in re reading that one post it was pretty obtuse, and my retort to you was a bit sharp, however in the big bad world out there its not uncommon. The point I am making here is that to move from stylist to designer you should have thought the item through, the more in depth the thought the better the reception. To me it was lasy not to have mocked up such a simple form, as his eye is not mature enought to have seen the structral problems in it from the get go. A difference in perspective and from RK’s view of the world and mine, summed up here, “ Inventor pioneers have a responsibility to society requiring that they render their publicly exposed inventions in so competent a manner as to provide means of judging the relative merits of the invention unembarrassed by shoddy, makeshift irrelevancies.” B. Fuller. To me ID"s are part of the inventor pioneer group or should strive to be.

We can now continue the discussion in a peaceful ambiance, I now understand your point of view and I support it. A Designer SHOULD evaluate various important aspects of an object before proceeding to rendering. but in this case, we will let ADD explain himself on the subject.