Maker Chair Workshops

A one-week workshop asking a simple question: can you 3D-print a chair on an 18×18×18 cm build volume?

role: Group work — concept author (Organic Joints)
location: Warsaw Faculty of Architecture
org: KNAI — Information Architecture Research Group
tutors: Krzysztof Nazar
tools: Rhino · Grasshopper · Prusa Mini (3D printing)

Overview

The project started from the idea of building a chair that could not be made with traditional woodworking or sheet-metal bending. The only constraint: every part had to be 3D-printable on our Prusa Mini (18×18×18 cm build volume). With just one week on the clock, we split into three groups and spent the first two days on research — each taking a different theme.

Group 1 studied topological optimization in architecture (outside of engineering and construction). Group 2 explored modular, discrete architecture and new prefabrication methods, drawing on Philippe Block (ETH Zurich), Gilles Retsin and Kengo Kuma. Group 3 looked at Industry 4.0 in architecture (Thomas Bock), mass customization and open-source design.

My contribution was the first concept — Organic Joints. The logic: keep the wooden sticks uniform in length and let the 3D-printed joint absorb the curvature of the seat. Curves were divided by a sphere to distinguish joints (inside) from pipes (outside); cutouts on the intersecting parts formed the connection between them.

Group 1 — Organic Joints (my concept)

Curves were first sorted by length: 30 curves in <3.5, 5>, 23 curves in (5, 7.5>, and 55 curves in (7.5, 10>. Dividing the pipes into three lengths — a compromise on the original single-length idea — made the script more reliable and reduced structural instability. The final seat adds a denser top layer of wooden branches for comfort, supported from below by identical sticks meeting at 3D-printed organic nodes.

Group 2 — Polygon + screw connection

A surface-based design with a hexagonal pattern projected onto the seat geometry. Six-sided 3D-printed polygons are joined with bolts and nuts; sockets on both sides of each polygon hide the fasteners and prevent movement. Boundary cells outside the surface were trimmed. The approach worked cleanly until the surface bent drastically — at which point the projected pattern could no longer be applied consistently.

Group 3 — Puzzle intersecting structure

A puzzle-like assembly reinforced by intentional deviations on the intersections, raising friction between parts. The first attempt failed — pieces slipped apart and only held after gluing, which didn't meet the brief. The second attempt used a list-based scripting approach (sorting, replacing and swapping elements) and became the final design for this group.

Group 2 — exploded diagram of few layer panels