Designof a CNCRouted Sheet GoodChair MASSACHUSETTSINSTITUTE OF TECHNWOLOGY by

SEP17 2O10 Noel R. Davis

Submitted to the Department of Architecture LIBRARIES in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of the Degree of ARCHIVES Bachelor of Science in Art and Design- Architectural Design

at the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

June 2006

@2006 Noel R.Davis. All rights reserved. The author herebygrants to MITthe permission to reproduceand to distributepublicly paper andelectronic copies of this thesis documentin wholeor in part in any medium nowknown of hereaftercreated.

Signature of Author: \o rDepartment of Architecture May 19,2006

Certifiedby: %AWY.7 Shun Kanda SeniorLecturer in Architecture Thesis Supervisor

Acceptedby: s \a Wahap r Professorof Architecture Director of the UndergraduateArchitecture Program

1 Design of a CNC Routed Sheet Good Chair

by

Noel R.Davis

Submittedto the Departmentof Architectureon May 19, 2006 in PartialFulfillment of the Requirementsfor the Degreeof Bachelorof Sciencein Art and Design- ArchitecturalDesign

ABSTRACT

A chair of acceptablecomfort, requiring minimum material andlabor, was madeby de- velopinga systemof parts andjoinery, cut from sheetstock, using only one tool-a 3-axis computernumerically controlled router.

Comfort is achievedthrough ergonomicshaping ofthe chair componentsto embrace the geometryof the humanbody, andsupport several comfortable seating positions.All componentswere cut with a 3-axis CNCrouter usingonly onecutting bit. The joinery requiresno additionalhardware, glue or fastenersto holdthe chairtogether.

The finalchair designrequires 12.5 squarefeet of 1/2" sheet stock. Cuttingtime on the router is 1.5 hours,and assembly, which requires only a mallet,takes 0.5 hours,giv- inga total productiontime of 2 hours. UsingBaltic Birch Plywood, the total materialcost is $16.00. UsingOriented Strand Board, the total material cost is $2.88.

Thesis Supervisor:Shun Kanda Title:Senior Lecturer in Architecture

2 ThesisCommittee

ShunKanda, SeniorLecturer in Architecture,MIT ThesisAdvisor

JohnOchsendorf, AssistantProfessor of BuildingTechnology, MIT ThesisReader

ChristopherDewart, TechnicalInstructor in Architecture,MIT ThesisReader

3 4 Introduction:

The impetusfor this thesis camefrom a desireto work with designand constructionat full scale. While con- structing buildingsat full-scalefor an undergraduatethesis would be impractical,the designand construction of furnitureincorporates many of the sameprincipals as architecturaldesign, and full-scale construction is not onlypossible, but givesthe opportunityfor usersto experiencethe design asbuilt rather than purelyin models and drawings.

Manywell knownarchitects havedesigned furniture throughoutthe last two centuries,and in some cases their furniture pieceshave become icons of design.Architects like Frank Lloyd Wright, Miesvan der Roheand

Alvar Aaltodesigned chairs that not onlyenhanced and completedtheir architecturalworks, but remain as well recognizedas manyof the buildingsthey weredesigned for.

The designof chairs-defined in this studyas a devicesfor sitting and resting the back,differentiating them

from stools,which have noback rest-has beenattempted by countless designers and craftsman overthou-

sandsof years. In order to giverelevance to this particularinvestigation, it was necessaryto first establisha

set of goalsand constraints to informthe design.

For this thesisthe use of a singletool, a 3-axisCNC Router, with a singlebit was permittedto producethe

componentsof the chair. The chair was to be madefrom a minimumamount of material. A productof the

previouslimitations was the necessityto incorporatethe joineryof the chair into its componentsso that con-

nectionhardware would not be necessaryin the design. Criticalto anysuccessful chair is the comfort of the

user, which couldnot be ignoredin the developmentof this design. Finally,as a reactionto globaleconomic

andenvironmental issues, the designwould also addressthe reductionof cost and environmentalimpact. 5 Process:

Followingthe criteria set forth in the thesis statement,an investigationencom-

passingthe designand development,to varyingstages of completion,of eight

chairswas carried out. Thefinal iteration is presentedas the completedproduct %*New

of the thesis,and the pieceon whichthe successof the investigationshould be

judged. 1~-~.--~'i

Chair1:

The first designiteration, called from here forth Chair 1, displaysa timid use

of the CNC router as the maintool. The router is usedto cut foam formwork,

aroundwhich, 1/8" plywoodsheets are bent andlaminated with glueto form the

outer "shell"of the chair. The flat seat portion is cut from 1/2" plywoodon the

router and gluedinto placewithin the shell. This shell servesas the structure

as wellas the backsupport of the chair. The methodof connection,or joinery,in

Chair 1 is strictly glue-strengthand the chair usestwo sheets of 1/8" plywood

for the shelland 1/4 sheetof 1/2" plywoodfor the seat. The form of Chair 1 is

inspiredby Frank Lloyd Wright's Barrel Chair(Eaton 1997).

Chair2:

Chair2, the seconddesign, uses a cantileveredstructure to supportthe seat off

the ground. Again,the router is usedonly for cutting foam formwork,and the

methodof connectionis glue-lamination.The baseof the chair,which supports

B the mainbent-wood component, is not definedcompletely and has beenmodeled

as a solid mass with a slot to hold the wood seat. Chair 2 requires 1 sheet of e 4. 1/8" plywoodfor the seat and an unknownamount of wood,metal or masonry

to form the base. The structural form of Chair2 comesfrom the precedentof

Marcel Breuer'sCesca Chair [Wilk 1981].

Chair 3:

In Chair 3 the capabilitiesof the router to cut plywoodand form integraljoinery

were investigated.A dadojoint, commonin traditionalwood joinery, is made by

cutting onlypart way into the plywoodwith the router, creating a slot. This slot

was cut to receive,with gluefor strength,the edgeof anothercomponent of the

chair. While Chair3 usesthe router more effectivelythan earlier designs,it also

revealsa limitationof the router, its abilityto cut dadosonly at 90 degreesto

the material'ssurface. Without usingan angledbit or a 4-axisrouter, thisdiver-

gencefrom 90 degreescan not be created,and as a result the joineryin Chair

3 doesnot fit exactlyand reliesheavily on glue strength. Ratherthan introduce

new or more complicatedtools it was decided,for future designs,to use the

dadojoint onlyin the applications whereit couldbe cut accuratelyby the router.

Chair3 was built in model,but neverat full scale,due to its joint inaccuracy.At

full scaleit woulduse 1 sheetof 1/4" plywoodfor the structural frame,seat and

back. The form of Chair3 is basedon a number of designs of3-legged chairs,

includingmy own(Noel Davis')3-legged AshChair.

7 ......

Chair 4:

Chair 4 was designed in two steps, first the seat and then the leg and arm as-

sembly. The seat is constructed using the dado joint within the router's 90 de-

gree constraint, and a new joint, the half-lap. The half-lapjoint, common in tra-

ditional wood joinery, creates a recess in two pieces of wood, which overlap at

these areas. The half-lapjoint relies heavilyon glue for its strength, but helps to

secure the accuracy of positioning between pieces. The back of Chair 4 has two

laminated rails, each made of two 1/2" thick pieces glued together, which use

dados to hold sheets of 1/4" plywood in a curved shaped. These 1/4" sheets

form the seat and back of the chair. The laminated rails are joined to each other

by four slats, which are connected with half-lap joints. The seat of Chair 4 is

shaped ergonomically,following the contour of Charles Eames' Aluminum Group

Office Chair (Drexler 1973).

The leg and arm system of Chair 4 demonstrates the first iteration of a mortice

and tenon joint, adopted from traditional wood joinery. In this case the tenon, a

rectangular peg cut into the end of a member, fits into the mortice, a rectangu-

lar hole cut into the side of a member. The friction between the surfaces of the

mortice and tenon provides a most of the joint's strength. Additionally,glue on

these surfaces increases the strength of the joint. The structural system of the

legs for Chair 4 builds on the design of Mies van der Rohe's Brno Chair [Glaeser

1977). Chair 4, requires 1 sheet of 1/2" plywoodfor the legs, arms and seat

frame, and 1/3 sheet of 1/4" plywoodfor the curved seat and back surfaces. 8 ...... :::::......

Chair5:

In Chair 5, two significantchanges cameabout, informing the final directionof

the study. First,a time-testedfour-legged design for the chairis adopted,shirking N0 the notionthat a usefuland well-designedchair must stand on a uniquestruc-

tural system. Second,the useof a seriesof small,repeated elements allows for

contouringof the seatto fit the curvesof the body,as well as provideda more ef-

tir - ficient useof wood.The connection method of Chair5 requiresthe useof dowels

to pintogether all components.This introducesadditional connection hardware

into the designand detracts from the uniformityof the piece. For this reason,

Chair5 was neverconstructed, in modelor full scale. At full scale,it woulduse

2/3 sheetof 3/4" plywood andfour 20" dowels.

Chair6:

Chair 6 pushesthe use of smallcomponents further to contain integraltenon.

Mortices are cut intothe sideframes of the chairand the slatsplug directly into

that frame. A slot is cut in eachtenon to accepta wedge. This adaptation ofa

wedge-tenongives the joint greaterstrength against separation. The wedges en-

ablethe framesto staysecurely in placewithout the useof glue in the joints. The

slats are individuallyshaped to givea contourto the seat andback. Finally,the in-

troduction of transverseframes connectingthe two front legstogether, and the

two backlegs together prevents racking, or lateraltorsion distortion, of the chair.

The resultingT-shaped section of the legs improvesthe chair'sstability greatly.

Chair6 reducesthe materialrequirement to2/3 sheetof 1/2" plywood.

9 Chair 7:

Chair7 further reducesmaterial use to 1/2 sheetof 1/2" plywoodby adopting

a shorter frame,which supports the lowerback rather than the shoulderblades.

This designchange was inspiredby the chairs of GioPonti [Nelson1994). The

frame is also shapedto providemore material in areas of greater stress and

tapers to smallerwidth in areasof lowstress. Thejoinery is expandedto include

a seriesof singleand double width morticesand tenon, containing wedges only

wherenecessary and remaining solid elsewhere. In this waya familyof four joints,

developsa language,or hierarchy,based on locationand structural application.

The last improvementis a boldershaping of the seat to more closelyfollow the

contoursof the legsand hips. The deepershaping also creates a sculpturalfeel

to the seat of the chair.

Chair 8:

Chair 8, the final iteration,improves upon Chair 7 in the area of ergonomics.

Greaterattention has beenpaid to the shapingof the backand angle of the seat

to providethree comfortableseating positions. The first positionis a "perch"at

the front of the seat in whichthe user ignoresthe backentirely. A secondposi-

tion providesfor shoulderblade support when slouchingin the chairto read or

relax. Finally,a lumbar support providesupright posturefor eating or working

in the chair. Chair 8 uses 1/2 sheet of 60"x60"x1/2" plywood,so two can be

madefrom a singlesheet. In addition to the nudeBaltic Birch plywood,which has

beenthe standardmaterial for allthe full sizechairs, versions of Chair8 were

10 producedin OrientedStrand Board, and red-stainedbirch to exhibitpossible en-

vironmentallyconscious and aestheticvariations of the chair. The joineryuses

no glue or externalhardware, the wedgesholding the mortice andtenon joints

together beingcut from the same sheetof wood. Chair8 is the sturdiest,most C3U comfortableand most aestheticallypleasing of all iterations. C3U

1313I3 El

EEn

11 OneTool:

For this investigation,all componentsof the pieceof furniture are crafted on a

singletool, the TechnoCNC3-axis LC Series 4896 CNCRouter. Further,while

this tool has the abilityto changebetween 8 bits, and is capableof contouring

(two dimensionalline cutting) as well as shaping(three dimensionalsurfacing),

onlythe contouringability and one bit are used. It is consideredthat the use of

the shapingfeature or other bits constitutesthe use of an additionaltool. The

reasonfor the use of a singletool is to pushthe limitsof that tool, andrelease its

greatest potential,rather than relyingon more or more sophisticatedtools.

For Chairs 1 and 2, where the router is usedto makefoam formwork,a 1/2"

diameterflat bottomedbit is usedto cut the foam. In all other cases,Chairs 3-8,

a 1/8" diameterflat bottomedbit is usedfor all operations.

While initiallythe joiningof chaircomponents was only glue, as mechanicaljoinery

beganto appearin the design,it becamenecessary to considerthe capabilities

and limitationsof the router when designingjoints [lookedat more specificallyin

the Joinerysection of this paper). Also,the router's strengthsand weaknesses

neededto be consideredwhen designing the shapeof eachcomponent.

The router is accurateto 0.001" and can cut in any direction. In this way,the

router has no preferencefor cutting straight linesor rectangles,like a

12 traditionalsaw. It can makeholes of any shape,and cut partlythrough or com-

pletelythrough the stock(material to be cut). Thesefeatures of the router make

it much more accuratethan traditionalsaws and drills for makingregular or ir-

regularshapes.

The router, however,has two main limitations. Becauseit is a 3-axisrouter, it

can onlymove along three axes,the X, Y andZ, andhas no capabilityfor rotation.

This meansthe router can onlyplunge vertically into the wood,so the resulting

anglebetween the surfaceof the stockand a cut edgewill alwaysbe 90 degrees.

A router with more degrees of freedom (5-axisor 6-axisrouter) could make

angledplunges. Also an angledbit couldbe usedto make angled plunges.How-

ever neither of these tools is used in the designor construction,thus all joints

and componentswere designedwithin the limitations. A limitationcommon to

all routers is the inabilityto cut insidecorners. Becausethe bit of the router is

cylindrical,it is unableto makea clean,90 degree,inside corner. Left behindis

alwaysa fillet with a radiusequal to that of the bit's radius.This fact hadto be

overcomeas well whencreating joinery.

While in some instances, theselimitations would serve to stand in the way of

designingjoinery, in this investigationthey havebeen usedto inform the design

and improvethe aestheticof the piece,creating joinery withan identitythat is

inextricablylinked to the machinethat madeit.

13 ......

The bedof the router is 48" x 96", limitingthe sizeof the stockused. In order to

makethe most efficientuse of material,it was necessaryto shapeand layout

the componentscarefully on the cut sheet. The stockmaterial, which must fit on

the router bed,also affects the environmentalimpact of the chair as well as its

perceivedvalue as an objectof design.

The conceptof usinga limited number of tools for furniture constructionis evi-

dent in manycultures, and was refinedgreatly by the Shakers of earlyAmerica

who heldsimplicity above all things in design(Andrews 1973). The ideaof using

plywood,or sheet goods is not uniqueto this study and has been consideredin

severalways. Charlesand Ray Eameswere on the forefront of using laminat-

ed sheet goodsto makethree dimensionalforms for furniture (Drexler 1973).

More recently,with the growingavailability of computer controlledfabrication

machines, designslike David Kawecki'sPuzzle Chair havetaken advantageof

laser cutting for fabrication(Byars 1997). This study seeksto further develop

the use of CNC machinesand Sheetgoods for constructingthree dimensional

forms,in this casefurniture.

14 Joinery:

Joineryhas playeda significantrole in the developmentof design,and many pos-

Dado Joint sibletypes were consideredbefore finally adopting the finalfamily of joints.

Half-LapJoint

Initiallythe joiningof componentsfor the chair,in Chair 1 and2, was purelyglue.

Thethin sheetsof plywoodwere to be laminatedtogether using wood glue and a

foam formwork. Thistype ofjoining relies entirelyon the strength of the glue for

its structural integrityand requires considerable formwork and clamping to hold

the piecein its correct shapeuntil dry.

Dovetail Jioning The first type of joinery producedon the router, for Chair 3, was a dado joint.

This,like all the jointsdeveloped for this study,is an adaptationof a joint common

to traditionalwood joinery. Specialconsiderations were madeto producethese

joints on the CNCrouter, as in a woodshopthere are often severalspecialized

tools usedto makeone specificjoint. The dadojoint is well suitedto the router, Wedge Tenon Joint becauseit consistsof a groovein the stockwith a flat bottom andperpendicular

sides. The router makesthis shape byplunging part way through a piece and J/2 makingseveral passes to expandthe dadoto the properwidth. The dadothen

accommodates theedge of another board,and is strengthenedwith glue. The

strength of the joint dependson howtight the fit betweenpieces of wood is,and

alsorelies on the gluestrength. Tusk Tenon Joint

15 NNOMMENOMEMEM I'm I'm -- - ...... ------...... : -- - - K,

Thedado joint constructedon the router is not capableof joining pieces at angles

other than 90 degrees. This meansthat the joineryfor Chair 3, which includes

dadosat varyingangles, is not capableof beingcut preciselyon the router, so

Chair4's designuses dados to join piecesonly at 90 degreeangles.

The next joint developedwas the half-lapjoint. In this joint, a portion of wood is

removedfrom two pieces,so that whenput together,their faces sit flushand the

joint holdsthe membersin position.The half-hapjoint, used in the back-stiffening

slats of Chair4, servesto positionthe piecesaccurately, but relies entirely on

gluefor strength.

In the legsof Chair 4, a mortice and tenon joint was used. This joint required

adaptationfrom its originalform to accommodatethe limitationsof the router.

In traditionalconstruction the shoulderof the tenon and the tenon meet at a

precise 90 degree insidecorner. However,the router leavesa radius in this

corner, so a "return" is cut into the shoulderof the tenon removingthe radius

materialand creating a cleaninside corner. The sameprocess is repeatedon all

four corners of the mortice,leaving a precise insidecorner for the sharpedges .4,

of the tenonto passthrough. The remaininghalf-circles left in the shouldersof 000 0 the tenonand the corners of the morticesserve as a designelement in the joint, 00

revealingthe processby which they were made. Inthis way,the limitationsof the

router addto the aesthetic,while the joint maintainsa purelyrational design.

16 ......

In Chair 6 the wedgetenon was developedby slotting the tenon and pounding

a wedge,cut out on the router, into the slot. This wedgeexpands the tenon,in-

creasingthe frictionalforce betweenthe tenon andthe mortice and increasing

the strength of the joint as a whole.

In the last chairs,Chair 7 and8, a seriesof variationson the morticeand tenon

joint is createdto suggesta hierarchyof functionand placement.Larger, double

tenonare usedin the legs,where a larger portionof frame is heldby a singlejoint.

Doublewedge tenon are usedat the topsand bottoms to holdthe frame in place,

and nowedge is usedbetween. On the seat andback slats, single tenon are used ii ii becausethe joints repeatmore frequently,and the wedges,again, are usedonly at the ends,to holdthe frame in place. In betweenno wedgesare used.

FF Fff H FJ' I Bycreating an exactfitting, strong andaesthetically pleasing series of joints,the joineryof the chairserves as its onlydecoration, and playsan essentialstructural

role as well. Thejoinery is a unifyingelement, which holdsthe chairtogether

physicallyand visually,and also revealsthe nature of its construction, through

small detailslike the returns,and wedges.

While often the use of newtechnology requires rethinkingall aspectsof design,

includingjoinery, in this studytime-tested methods of joinerywere adapted to the 'j advantagesand limitationsof the new technology.In this way a newsystem of jointswas bornfrom centuriesof wood-joiningtradition (Allen1990).

17 Structure:

The structure, in the case of this investigation,dictates the form of the chair.

The most obviousplace where structural factors haveinformed the shapeof the Ua membersis in the sideframes of Chairs7 and 8. UO UO 03 U13 In Chair6 the sideframes followwhat could be consideredthe archetypalchair

form. Inelevation, there are essentiallyfive points;one at the bottomof eachleg,

front andback, one at the seat front and seat backand the last at the top of the

back. Thesefive pointsare connectedby members of constantwidth. No con-

siderationis givento varyingforces, moments or stresseswithin the members

at anygiven position. The form is more or lessarbitrary.

In Chairs7 and 8, a consciouseffort was madeto shapethe sideframes based

onthe forcesthat wouldbe experiencedwithin them. Not bycalculation, but rath-

er bystructural intuition, the legsare widenedat the top to resist flexing,and nar-

rowedat the bottomwhere there is lessinternal moment. The horizontalportion

which supportsall of the seat slats is deepenedto providegreater resistance

to bendingunder the weight of a person. The junctionwhere the backleg, seat

and back meet is thickenedto resist the momentgenerated by an occupant's

weighton the seat andthe force of their backleaning on the backslats. Byusing

structural principlesto informthe shapingof the side frame,the frame begins

to appearsturdier andmore elegant,as well as behavingsimilarly. Byshedding

materialwhere it is not neededthe chair becomeslighter and more

18 efficient,and by increasing material where it is needed,the chair becomesstiffer

andmore durable.

Structural considerationswere appliedto other membersof the chair as well.

Theseat slats,while shaped mainly to acceptthe contoursof the body,also follow

the generalshape of the momentdiagram for beamwith fixedsupports at both

C13 ends loadedat the quarter points,by two hipbones.They are deepestat their

supportstapering to a constantdepth inside the quarter points.

3 0 0 DQOC3~oQ

The joineryof the piece,as notedabove, acts primarilyas a structural compo- C3 nent. Eachmortice andtenon joint acts to resist three types of stresseswithin the joint:shear, moment and tension.

Shearis the force that wouldcause a tenonto breakoff of a slat or for a tenon

to tear through the bottom of the mortice and sideframe. This failure modeis

counteractedby a deeptenon, 0.64", and byproviding substantial material be-

tweenthe morticeand the bottom of the seat portionof the sideframe, 0.68".

Momentfailure is representedby the slat bendingand breakingor bythe tenon

twistingout of the mortice. Thistype of failure is preventedby a tight fit between

the tenonand mortice,and byproperly shaping the depthof the seat slat.

19 A tension failure,the most likelyover the life of the chair, would result in the

tenon beingpulled out of the mortice alongthe samepath it was inserted. The

standardjoints, without wedges, prevent this throughfriction forcesdeveloped in

a tight joint. Thewedge tenon, however, creates a much strongerfriction force

whichacts to preventthe tenonfrom pullingout of the morticewith use.

Thereare twomembers of the chair,which exist solelyfor their contributionto

structural integrity. The front and backframes, which connectthe legs of the

two side frames,act to strengthen thelegs against buckling,and more impor-

tantly againstlateral torsion. Lateraltorsion is a structural weaknessof many

commonlyused pieces of furniture. It occurs whenthe legsare not of sufficient

sectionand do not connectrigidly enough to the frame of the chair. Manychairs

overcomethis problemby adding additional horizontal members between all four

legs betweenthe seat and the ground. Chairs 6-8 preventlateral torsion by

strengtheningthe momentconnection between the topsof the legsand the rest

of the chair.By connecting all of the legsto the seatwith strong momentconnec-

tions,they becomestiff enoughto preventlateral torsion. The"T" shapedsection

of the legalso increasesits resistanceto bendingand buckling.

Maintaininga designidentity, rather than an engineered assembly,the investiga-

tion usesstructural principlesand intuitionsto informthe shapingand joints of

the chair,but avoidsbeing limited by strict structural calculations.

20 - -- 7------......

Ergonomics:

It is impracticalto designa chair withoutconsidering the comfortof its intended

user. Yet, manychairs havebeen designedpurely on aesthetic,structural or

materialguidelines with very little thoughtto their overallcomfort.

Sinceat its core, this is an architecturalstudy, it is impossibleto designwithout

consideringthe potential"client" who the chair is beingcreated for. Inthis case,

for simplicityof evaluation,it was necessaryto designthe chair for my dimen-

sions,my comfort.

The bodydimensions, taken from myself, follow:

OverallHeight: 67"

AnkleJoint to KneeJoint Distance:15"

KneeJoint to HipJoint Distance:16"

HipJoint to ShoulderJoint Distance:19" r i r-~

There areseveral aspects of a chair, which must be informed byergonomics

- / aboveall other considerations. First is the overallgeometry of the chair, the

(- height,depth and slope of the seat. Also includedare the shapingof the seat,the \. ~~ shapingand position ofthe back.

AllChairs, 1-8, sharecommon seat geometry.All have a seat heightof 17 1/2"

at the front and 16 1/2" at the back. Seat depthvaries from 16"to 18". 21 In this investigation,ergonomics was not a serious concernuntil Chair 7. Inthat

iteration, theseat is dishedheavily to addressthe shape ofthe bodyit supports.

The seat is dishedin a horseshoeshape, to accommodatethe legs,hips and

buttocks,with a distinctrise betweenthe thighs,to cradlethe insideof the lower

legs. Theback of Chair 7 also includesa rudimentarylumbar support,rather

thana shoulderrest. Thisserves to shortenthe overallheight of the chairas well

as supportinga more uprightposture.

In GalenCranz's book,The Chair, the needfor mulitiplesitting positions in a chair

is madeevident. Cranz emphasizes the necessityfor peopleto movearound in a

chair tobe comfortable,that anysitting positionwill becomeuncomfortable after

a longperiod of time (Cranz 1998).

With this in mind Chair 8 was designedto facilitatethree sitting positions. For

ji this reason,the rise at the front of the seat,between the legs is flattenedout to

makemore roomfor movingaround.

First,the "perch"does not use the backof the seatat all. It involvessitting with

upright postureon the front third of the seat,which is flattenedlike a plateau.

The sitter usesonly lower back and trunk musclesto supportthe upper body.

Thisposture is quite comfortable,but cannotbe heldfor long bymost Western-

ers who haveweak lower backmuscles, because theyhave always used chairs

with backs(Cranz 1998).

22 ......

The secondseating position is an upright posture,with the hipsall the way back in the chair,using the gently curvedlumbar supportfor the lower back. This providessupport for a similar positionto the perch,but the addedstability in the lower backallows longer sit times. The front of the seat is angledslightly down to relievepressure underthe knees,and behindthe perch the rest of the seat is angledslightly up, from backto front. This helpsslide the sitter backfully into the seat.

The third and final position,the "slouch,"is achievedby sliding the hipsforward, and allowingthe shoulderblades to rest on the top of the back,which is angled back. This positionputs the spineinto an inward curve,which is not healthyfor long periods,but is more relaxingthan the other two positionsand is good for activitieslike reading. The inclineof the seat from backto front helpsprevent the sitter from slidingforward, outof the seat.

Carefuladjustment to eachslat was madeto create smoothcontours in the seat andback of the chair,so as not to cut intothe sitter. Theseat slatsare allaligned in the same direction,but the backslats are angledto create a gentler curve.

The lowerslats are angledslightly downward,the middleslats are horizontal,and the upperslats are angledslightly upwards.

23 While the seat does not incorporatepadding of anykind, it is, in general,quite

comfortablebecause of the careful placement,alignment and shapingof each

rigid component.Clearly, with no adjustability,the chairaccommodates a person

of a specificsize range, and larger or smaller peoplemay requirechanges in the

geometryof the chair to maximizecomfort. With the simplicityof design,and

automatedfabrication, it wouldnot be difficultto scalethe chair up or downfor

larger or smaller people.

24 ......

Material:

Thefinal aspect consideredin this studywas material. At first, BalticBirch ply-

woodwas chosenbecause of its availabilityand its highquality. Baltic Birch offers

an appearancethat is worthyof finishwork, and requiresno staining,painting or

sealingbefore use. The finishis consistentlyclear, without knots or discoloration,

and the wood is dimensionallyconsistent in thickness,which ensuresprecision

in the joints.

Likeall types of plywood,Baltic Birch has multidirectionalstrength, not suffer-

ing from the grain-biasedweaknesses of standard lumber,which meanscom-

ponentscan be laid out in anyorientation to maximizeefficient use of spaceon

the cut sheet. Chairs 5-8 were made up of many small membersin order to

minimizematerial consumption. With two largeside frames placedin the center

of the cut sheet, the23 smallslats couldbe cut from variouslocations to usethe

maximumamount of availablecut sheet. Bydecreasing the sizeof the cut sheet

for eachchair, more chairscould be cut from eachpiece of stock,decreasing the

overallmaterial useand cost of the chair.

AlthoughBaltic Birch plywoodwas the defaultmaterial for this investigation,sev-

eral other optionswere considered,and onetested.

Plywooddemonstrates a veryefficient method for usingthe wood ina tree. Shav-

ing off thin veneersof woodfrom the tree andstacking them with alternating 25 ......

graindirections produces large, structurally multidirectional sheets of woodfrom

fairly small trees, with very little waste. Constructiongrade plywoodcould be a

more environmentallyfriendly option as it uses lowergrades of wood,with more

knotsand flaws than BalticBirch. This processmeans even less waste, as lower

qualityveneers are acceptedfor the plywood.

Alltypes of plywood,however, use gluescontaining toxic ingredientsto laminate

the veneers,increasing their harmto the environment.

Anothertype of wood compositeis OSB,or OrientedStrand Board,which, like

plywood,uses glueto bindwood into a sheet. OSB,however, uses waste chips

of woodfrom sawmillsand constructionwaste rather than veneerstaken from

newlycut trees, so it requiresno virginmaterial. OSBis weaker,and less dimen-

sionallystable than plywood,but whenChair 8 was constructedwith OSBinstead

of plywood,the result was a geometricallyidentical chair that performed well

and lookedstriking (For final material use and cost of each chair iteration,see

AppendixA).

Also,for aestheticreasons and increasedlongevity of material,an iteration of

Chair8 was madeby staining red andsealing a sheetof BalticBirch plywoodbe-

fore cuttingand assembling. The resultingchair also performed well, and looked

vastlydifferent than the original.

26 ...... _4 ...... - _ '__

Conclusion:

It is difficultto imaginea chair without a broadercontext. Chairsplay a role in

everydaylife. They exudestatus and wealth,some are humbleand functional,

others are flashyand almost impossibleto use (Bradford 1978). The role of

the chair designedfor this thesis is simple. It is meantto be a chair for a first

apartment. It servesthe role of diningchair, desk chair, reading chair andsitting

chair. It is intendedto conveyboth economyand qualityof design.The chair is

not intendedto be reveredas precious,but is intendedto be durableand lasting

in use.

Somechairs suggestluxury, especially those, which are designedfor a specific

task. The office chair is synonymouswith power,the loungechair is identified

with wealth-the concept of loungingbeing uniqueto those with an excessof

time [Bradford 1978). Chairswith specifictasks come with undertonesof ex-

travagance.But somechairs are merelyutilitarian: the sidechair, the deskchair.

Thesechairs haveoften inspiredthe simplestand most elegantdesigns from

some of history's best designers. Throughoutthe 1800s MichaelThonet de-

signedsimple chairs for the massesthat today are iconsof style and elegance.

CharlesEames reinvented the way many peoplethink about furniture and his

simplestdesigns aretimeless.

27 It is the intentionof this thesis,this chair,to presentitself in a humblemanner, as

a well thought out,finely detailed and carefullycrafted masterpieceof everyday

lifethat is not to be reveredor coveted,but to be pulledout, dustedoff andsat in

for yearsto come.

28 ...... - ......

29 Bibliographyand References

Allen, Sam(1990). Wood Joiner's Handbook Sterling, New York.

Andrews, Edward D. and Faith Andrews (1973). Re/gion in Wood-A Book of

Shaker Furniture. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Bradford, Peter and Barbara Prete (1978). Chair: The Current State ofthe Art,

with the who,the why and the what of it Thomas Crowell, New York.

Byars, Mel (1997). 50 Chairs: Innovationsin Design and Materials. Rotovision,

New York.

Cranz, Galen(1998). TheChair W. W. Norton & Company,New York.

Drexler, Arthur (1973). Charles Eames. Museum of Modern Art, New York.

Eaton, Timothy (1997 ). Frank Lloyd Wright: The Seat of Genius.Eaton Fine Art,

West Palm Beach.

Glaeser, Ludwig (1977). Ludwig Mies van der Rohe.Mueseum of Modern Art,

New York.

Nelson, George (1994). Chairs Acanthus Press, New York.

Vegesack, Alexander von (1986). L'industrie Thonet Ministere de la Culture et

de la Communication, Paris.

Wilk, Christopher (1981). MarcelBreuer Furniture andInteriors. Architectural

Press, London.

30 Photo and Illustration Credits

All photos and images by the author unless otherwise specified.

P5. CNC Router Cutting Mortices P6. (Top Left) "Cesca" Side Chair. Reprinted in MarcelBreuer: Furniture and /nter/ors. Christopher Wilk, p74. (Center Left) Chair 2, Bending Formwork (Bottomm Left) Chair 2, Model (Top Right) Chair 1, Sketches (Center Right) Barrel Chair. Reprinted in Frank Lloyd Wright The Seat of Genius.Timothy Eaton, p57. (Bottom Right) Chair 1, Model P7. (Top Left) Noel Davis 3-LeggedAsh Chair (Top Right) Chair 3, Sketches (Bottom) Chair 3, Model P8. (Top Left) Chair 4 (Top Right) Chair 4, Precedent Sketch (Bottom Left) Brno Chair. Reprinted in Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Ludwig Glaeser, p64. (Bottom Right) Chair 4, SideView P9. (Top Left) Chair 5, Exploded Axonometric (Top Right) Chair 5, Sketch (Bottom) Chair 6 P10. (Top Left) Chair 7, Sketches (Top Right) Gio Ponti Chair. Reprinted in Chairs. George Nelson, p75. (Bottom) Chair 7 P11. Chair 8, Cutsheet

P1 2. (Top) Chair 1, Bending Formwork (Bottom) CNC Router Cutting Mortices P1 3. CNC Router Cutting Frame Contour P14. (Top) Shaker Chair. Reprinted in Religion i Wood-A Book of Shaker Furniture. Edward D. and Faith Andrews, p43. (Bottom) PuzzleChair. Reprinted in 50 Chairs: Innovations/n Design and Mater/als. Mel Byars, p13. P15. Traditional Wood Joinery. Reprinted in Wood Joiner's Handbook Sam Allen, p80 (Dado), p91 (Wedge Tenon), p99 (Tusk Tenon), p110 (Dovetail), p141 (Half-Lap). 31 Photoand Illustration Credits (Continued)

P16. (Top)CNC Dado Model (Center) CNCHalf-Lap Model (Bottom) CNCDovetail, Axonometric P17. (Top)CNC Wedge Mortice and Tenon, Sketches (Center) CNCMortice andTenon Variations (Bottom) CNCWedge Mortice andTenon, Axonometric P18. Chair6, Elevation P19. Chair8, Elevation P20. (Top)Chair 8, WedgeTenon Detail (Center) Chair 8, FrontFrame Detail (Bottom)Chair 7, SeatDish Detail P21. ErgonomicPositions, Sketch

P22. (Top)Chair 8, Position1, Perch (Center) Chair 8, Position2, Upright (Bottom)Chair 8, Position3, Slouch P23. (Top)Chair 8, Position1, Perch (Center) Chair 8, Position2, Upright (Bottom)Chair 8, Position3, Slouch P24. Chair7, BackDetail P25. Chair8, Seatand Mortice andTenon Detail P26. (Top)Chair 8 -OSB (Bottom) Chair 8 - Red,Cutsheet P27. (Top)Thonet No.14 Chair.Reprinted in L 'industrieThonet Alexander von Vegesack,p25. (Bottom)Plywood Dining Chair. Reprinted in CharlesEames. Arthur Drexler,p25. P28. Chair8 in Use P29. Chair 8 - Red, 3-DimensionalView

32 AppendixA

ChairMaterial Use and Cost

Chair Material Used Material Cost Total Chair Baltic Birch Ply per square foot Cost

Chair 1 5'x 1O'x 1/8" $0.56 2.5' x 2.5' x 1/2" $1.28 $36.00

Chair 2 5' x 5' x 1/8" $0.56 5' x 5' x 1/2" $1.28 $46.00

Chair 3 4'x 8'x 1/4" $0.92 $40.96

Chair 4 1.5'x 5'x 1/4" $0.92 5' x 5' x 1/2" $1.28 $38.90

Chair 5 3.5' x 5' x 3/4" $2.24 $39.20

Chair 6 3.5 x 5' x 1/2" $1.28 $22.40

Chair 7 2.5' x 5' x 1/2" $1.28 $16.00

Chair 8 2.5' x 5' x 1/2" $1.28 $16.00

Chair 8 2.5' x 5' x 1/2" $0.23 $2.88 OrientedStrand Board(OSB)

33 AppendixB

PreviousFurniture Design Experience Designedand Constructedby Noel Davis

34 AppendixC

Essayon ModernistFurniture Design

Modernist Wood Furniture: Structure, Joinery and Materiality Replace Ornament

The coming and going of aesthetic trends is a factor that defines design, and ensures the production of new ideas. Within this ever-changing aesthetic framework, a certain theme of functionality always remains constant. Interactive objects, regardless of their design must be able to perform the task for which they were created, or else they become merely for viewing. Louis Sullivan put forth the now famous idea that, "form follows function," referring to the ideal that an object must above all other things fulfill its functional role. This idea became a driving theme for the Modernist Movement in

Architecture and Design in the early and middle parts of the 20th Century (Stimpson 60-

61). Modernists favored design, which was, above all, functional. Yet the ideal did not stop there. The goal of the modernist movement was to allow the functionality of an object to permeate the division between form and function, and become, itself, the aesthetic component of the design. Nowhere in the history of design is this theory better shown than in the design of furniture (96).

Modernist ideals in furniture design exist in furniture from all ages, each encompassing a desire to forego outright ornamentation for a more clear form that relates to functionality. The structure, the joinery and the materiality of the piece are invited to do more than just hold the piece up, they are required to provide the aesthetic value of the piece as well. Through this process, the design of the construction, joinery and materials

35 become, simultaneously, the decisions about the final form of the piece. This idea forces

every component of the piece to be considered on two levels, both how it will function as

a part of the piece, and how it will be perceived by anyone who interacts with the piece

(Cooke 12).

While the modernist ideals are very simple, the reasons that have brought

designers to embrace them are as varied and complex as the designs that have been

produced in this style. In order to understand the complexity of the driving force behind

designers, the works that they have created within this mindset must be carefully

examined. Because of the universal presence of wood construction throughout much

modernist furniture design, regardless of geography or time frame, the selected pieces are

an examination of predominantly wood furniture, created between the early 1800s and

middle 1900s.

While certainly notthe first examples of furniture to adhere to a truth of exposing

construction and materiality, examples of Asian designs date back centuries, the

American Shakersare of notable importance for their contribution to furniture design

ideals. A communal Christian sect, the Shakers were inspired by a widespread desire to

praise and exalt god in all that they did. Their production of furniture was no exception

(Andrews 5).

Shakers considered the furniture they designed and produced to be a carrying out

of the will of God (17). They wrote that God considered it a "gift to be simple" and

strove for perfection in all things they created, no matter how simple. Usefulness was of

utmost importance, and anything made poorly or that contained frivolous decoration

detracted from this usefulness. Joseoh Meacham. a key figure in Shaker 36 communitarianism, wrote, "We have a right to improve the inventions of man, so far as is useful and necessary, but not to vain glory, or anything superfluous" (7).

With respect to craftsmanship, labor and creativity, the founder of the Shaker Societies,

Mother Ann Lee, said, "do your work as though you had a thousand years to live, and as if you were going to die tomorrow" (5). This statement reinforces a great respect for longevity in craftsmanship as well as a sense of urgency and excitement about labor and creativity.

Unlike many future modernist designers, whose goal was to advance high design and make it available to middle class people, Shaker's were not allowed identify themselves with the design of their pieces, meaning their individual contribution to design was not to be noticed or appreciated. (12)

The Shaker Side Chair, circa 1820s, is an excellent example of Shakers' clarity of design, quality of craftsmanship, and disdain for ornament. The simple turned components are uniformly shaped, and sufficiently robust, without appearing too large.

Small roundings on top act as handles and a cane seat provides a sturdy, comfortable sitting area. Finally, the back slats are curved gently to accommodate the human form, but not overly so as to suggest decoration. The Side Chair's construction is also logical,

37 and simple allowing the piece to be reproduced easily, making it more available to the

common man (43).

With the common man in mind, Michael

Thonet, championed an era of furniture designed

for the masses. Thonet's chairs were merely the

products of a desire and a process capable of

making simple, high quality furniture, at

affordable prices for millions of people. This

goal was achieved through the invention of a

process to bend wood to a desired shape that was

inexpensive and infinitely repeatable. Thonet

furniture is a modular assemblage of a finite

number of parts, mass-produced in an assembly

line fashion at one of several of his factories. Thonet's process may be one of the first

instances of the coming Industrial Revolution (Candilis12).

Released in 1859, the N'14 chair is still in production today and in its lifetime at

least 50,000,000 chairs have been sold (171). This chair, comprised of only six

components, is the epitome of reproducible design. Each component is manufactured by

bending a cane of wood on an industrial machine. The six pieces are then sub-assembled

and packed into crates to be shipped. The customer need only fasten a few screws, and

the chair is ready for use (54-55). The chair's durability has been shone by the longevity

of its production, and because of its clean, simple, rational design it has not fallen out of

38 trend in over 100 years. Surely this is not to say that the chairs popularity is independent of its form.

Clearly Thonet can be attributed with finding an elegant, curving form,which appealed to peoples' visual tastes, and from this idea he made many aesthetic variations to his designs. But ultimately, his initial formal decisions were based on an original necessity to produce a functional, affordable pieceof furniture as simply and rationally as possible. The seemingly timeless quality of the chair can be attributed to its modernist lack of ornament and dependency, rather, on simple design and construction.

While modern idealsare well suited to mass production, and serving the masses, the ideals can also apply to furniture designed more specifically for one instance.

Some of the best examples of furniture designed for a specific place are the designs of Frank Lloyd Wright.

Wright considered an architectural design incomplete without proper interior design, including furniture.

Furniture was to be a further expression of the architecture, while providing functions beyond human occupancy.

Wright used his furniture designs to contrast or harmonize with other features in his designs, as well as to facilitate smaller areas of space within larger open volumes (Fowler

8).

The High Back Dining Chair Wright designed for his own home in 1895 is an example of using furniture to mediate space. The high back of the chairs, aligned along

39 the side of the table create a smaller, more intimate space, within the larger dining room

for those eating at the table. The backs of the chairs provide a screen-like effect around

the table area. The chair, though unadorned, begins to act as a formal addition to the

room, a sort of functional ornament for the room (30-31).

Wright was always concerned with the materials used in his designs. He was vei

specific about the quality of craftsmanship he demanded, and the durability of his desigr

was very important. He was also concerned with the cost and availability of materials,

especially in his affordable, Usonianhouses. When it was practical, Wright used the

finest, expensive, materials for his furniture, often choosing to work with white oak,

quarter-sawn. The quality of material shows in the High Back Dining Chair, as the woo

brings a warmth and tactile quality to the furniture. However, when budget was a

question, Wright was willing to design in woods that were less expensive. Later in his

career he designed many pieces for his less-expensive projects out of plywood, a fairly

new product of technology, thought to be too crude for furniture by many (12-18).

The accepting of new technology to advance design is one often embraced by

modernist designers. After the first World War, Europe set out improve their quality of

life by incorporating high design into the livesof the masses. Along withthis goal to

mass-produce quality designs camea need to embrace new technology. With the

assembly-line style of production introduced during the Industrial Revolution, the

infrastructure was now in place to create large numbers of products with a consistency

and speed never seen before. One designer who embraced, and pushed the bounds of

technology at this time was the Finnish designer Alvar Aalto. During the 1930's Aalto

spent much time andeffort working with the forming and shaping of plywood. The 40 products of his experimentations and designs created an entirely new genre of furniture

(75-82).

The new material required a new language of design, new shapes, andnew forms. And in modernist fashion, the decision was made to let these new forms, suggested by new materials become the defining nature of this furniture. Aalto's pieces, therefore, do not even closely resemble the archetypal wooden chairs the world had seen before, like Armchair

406, designed in 1938. The long swooping curved forms of the chair and its cantilevered design, which allow for a dynamic reaction to the user (236).

Being such a new form, and so intriguing, visually, Aalto elected to make that the dominating characteristic of the chair, and merely used a woven web mesh to act as the seat and back. Thus the structure, which was entirely new, was allowed to become the dominating element of the chair (9).

Like the structure of Aalto's Armchair 406, Charles Eames' Dining Chair was also built around a new technological advance in wood. In Eames' case, this advance was the ability to bend a single sheet of plywood in a compound curve. When Eames finally achieved this breakthrough, the chair he designed to showcase it is very similar to

Aalto's. Where Aalto's brand new structure prevailed visually over the subdued black seat and back, Eames' chair showcased the seat and back, made from compound bent

41 plywood, and suspended them, almost floating, by a thin, light metal structure, that nearly

disappear behind the large, sculptural wood elements (Drexler 16-17).

While Eames embraced, and pushed the

limits of technology, he often struggled with

materiality. While compound-curved seat and

back of the Dining Chair appear delicate,

graceful and proportional in their placement,

Eames had a desire to unify the elements of the

chair. In this way, he wished to make the chair

entirely of plywood, bringing the chair together

as an assemblage of bent plywood forms.

However, after many experiments with wood

supporting systems, Eames came to the conclusion that the metal frame, formally, was

the best option.

At first, this conclusion may seem like a move away from modernist ideals,

however, it is actually just the opposite. By admitting that forcing a unified materiality in

the piece meant sacrificing the elegantly simple form, Eames was in fact making a

decision that led the form of his piece to be more pleasing, because its simplicity

harmonized with the other elements of the piece more fluently. The Dining Chair, with

wooden legs, though quite beautiful, does possess a certain formal quality of being off-

balance, or too heavy. Eames' decision to choose a new material, metal for the support

of the chair, led the chair as a whole to become a more rational expression of forms,

while maintaining a truth of construction and materiality (12-17). 42 While Eames created successful forms by using technology to minimize material, Hans Wegner has approached

materiality in a different, more traditional way, through joining and shaping wood.

Wegner's chairs utilize the intricacy and pattern of wood grain to enhance their

aesthetic appearance. The organic shapes produced by bending, laminating and shaping the wood are a form of ergonomic sculpture. No curve is placed merely for its look; rather each form is derived from its relationship with a particular part of the body.

A unique trademark of many of Wegner's chairs is his expression of both the backrest and armrests as a single form. This curved piece, which becomes the dominant formal expression of the chair, is shaped based on its placement and its attitude towards the body parts it will support (Bernsen 98-99).

The support structure of Wegner's Round Chair, designed in 1950, is simply sturdy, similar in fact to Shaker designs, with unadorned, turned uprights supporting the seat, and back and arm rest. These vertical pieces can be made by machine, or turned by hand in large quantities to allow for larger production runs. The larger, more complex back and armrest piece must be glued-up as an assemblage of bent laminations, it can then be machine milled. It is in the arrangement of the back and armrest's constituent elements, and the revealing of their inner grain through shaping that this piece becomes a seemingly decorative piece of art, rather than a simple chair component. However, because the 43 patterning of the wood is a property of its inherent grain and the shaping is used to

accommodate the human form, neither of these factors can be considered ornament

without function, because it is in fact their function that brings about their visual

splendor. It is in this way that Wegner, while maintaining a respect for clean, visible

construction, is able to achieve such sculpturally appealing pieces, by allowing the form

of the human body to reveal the character of the material (24-25).

With respect to the character of wood, few designers have come to a fuller

expression of this innate quality than George Nakashima. Nakashima learnedto craft

wood from a fellow Japanese prisoner in a World War II internment camp who inspired

in him the necessity to consider not only the look andfeel of the wood, but a certain

spirituality contained within it (Beyer 17, 23). This notion, similar to Frank Lloyd

Wrights idea of architecture growingfrom the landscape, suggested that certaincues for

the form of a piece are imbedded within the material itself. Rather than removing these

flaws or inconsistencies withinthe wood, Nakashima embraced them as a driving force in

his designs (30).

Where other designers

draw up a piece and specify

what type of lumber it is

crafted from, Nakashima

appears to start with the

lumber, and allows its characteristics to inform its embodiment. In this way the designer

allows the material to not only enhance, but also dictate the form of the piece.

Nakashima also uses simple, clean joinery to construct his pieces, further revealing the

44 construction and forces, which enable the piece to function (34-35).

The Conoid Bench with Back, designed in 1961, is a fine example of a piece designed specifically around the flaws of material. The large "slab" of wood, which makes up the seat of the bench, is left, for the most part, how it was milled. The edges are left in place as a subtle cue about the nature of the tree before it became lumber. The large crack which begins at one end of the bench has not been filled, or sawn off, rather it has been held in its state by three butterfly joints, and in this way exhibited as a flaw, but more importantly as a unique feature of this piece. The slab itself has inspired the design of the bench. The joinery of the piece is clean and exposed. The spindles of the backrest clearly plunge directly into the slab and reveal that the mass of the slab allows the back to function. The legs of the piece are

small and sturdy, merely elevating the slab to a comfortable height for sitting. Like the spindles, they are connected, structurally to the slab, the unifying element of the piece. In this way, the slab, from which the piece was informed and created, connects and supports all other elements of the bench (34-35).

By considering a piece of furniture as the union of a specific piece of wood, a method of joining that expresses and exhibits the inherent qualities and flaws of the material, and a simple structure which acts merely as a pedestal to showcase the "slab," a design is achieved which is at its base simple, yet upon further inspection reveals great complexity.

This group of chairs, though a small collection of many suitable examples of 45 modernist design in wood, arrives at an interesting conclusion. The reasons that

designers have shown for embracing modernist ideals are widespread, however they hint

at socio-economic truths that have had widespread significance for ages, and they appear

to come full circle in even this small sampling. The Shakers, an early example of

modernist design took their inspiration from God, and a desire to fulfill their own

spirituality through craftsmanship. Nakashima, at the other end of the spectrum, seems to

find spirituality in the material itself, crafting his creations from a material spirituality, or

divinity in nature. Others, like Thonet and Wright, used modem ideals to improve the

quality furniture available to the common man, providing quality products of design at

prices attainable by the masses. Aalto and Eames embraced technology as a way of

bringing about new forms, which remain to this day, timeless, in their formal clarity and

unadorned simplicity. Finally, Wegner used modernist design to embrace the human

body, to meet and support its contours.

All of these examples show that modern design, as it has been considered so far,

is not an idea brought about by architects and designers, but rather a mindset, or a way of

life, embodied in design, set forth to improve the quality of life for people. The goals are

not to create trends or styles, which can be priced and sold, but rather to create a new way

of designing; a way in which forms are inspired by a clear expression of how they are

made.

46 Works Cited

Andrews, Edward Deming, and Faith Andrews. Religion in Wood: A Book of Shaker

Furniture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1966.

Bernsen, Jens. Hans J. Wegner. Kobenhavn: Danish Design Centre, 1995.

Beyer, Steven, and Matilda McQuaid. George Nakashima and the Modernist Moment.

Doyleston: James A. Michener Art Museum, 2001.

Candilis, G., A. Blomstedt, T. Frangoulis, and M.I. Amorin. Bugholzmobel: Bent Wood

Furniture. Stuttgart: KarlKrammer, 1980.

Cooke Jr., Edward S., Gerald W. R. Ward, and Kelly H. L'Ecuyer. The Maker's Hand:

American Studio Furniture, 1940-1990. Boston: MFA Publications, 2003.

Drexler, Arthur. Charles Eames: Furniture from the Design Collection of the Museum of

Modern Art, New York. New York: The Museum of Modem Art, 1973.

Fowler, Penny, and Mary Anna Eaton. Frank Lloyd Wright: The Seat of Genius, Chairs:

1895-1955. West Palm Beach: Eaton Fine Art, 1997.

Pallasmaa, Juhani. Alvar Aalto Furniture. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1985.

Stimpson, Miriam. Modern Furniture Classics. New York: Whitney Library of Design,

1987.

47