Magnets, Force and Trust: Designing Invisible Structure
Magnets introduce a different kind of responsibility.
Up to this point, the joins had been tested through form, material and weight. The introduction of magnets shifted the focus from static structure to active force. Unlike screws or bolts, magnetic connections are invisible and conditional. They rely on alignment, balance and trust rather than visible confirmation.
This stage of the project examined what it means to design joins that hold without being seen.
Why Magnets?
Magnets were not introduced as a novelty or a shortcut. They offered a way to allow modular elements to connect and disconnect repeatedly without damaging the material or requiring permanent fixings. They also aligned with the project’s interest in reversibility, adaptability and reconfiguration.
However, magnets do not behave neutrally. They demand precision and punish indecision.
Embedding Force
Embedding magnets into cast components required careful planning. Position, depth and orientation all proved critical. Even minor inconsistencies led to failure — repulsion instead of attraction, rotation instead of stability, or a join that appeared secure but failed under minimal load.
This made clear that magnetic joins cannot be retrofitted. They must be designed into the structure from the outset.
The process also exposed a tension between concealment and legibility. While the magnets themselves were hidden, their presence needed to be felt. A join that appears effortless but behaves unpredictably undermines confidence.
Testing and Failure
For these early experiments I used one of my designs laser cut in wood and then painted it with enamel colours. Joins were assembled and disassembled repeatedly to test reliability. Some performed consistently, snapping into place with clarity and strength. Others revealed subtle weaknesses: slight shifts under load, uneven distribution of force, or gradual loss of alignment.
These failures were instructive. They highlighted where geometry needed refinement, where magnet strength was mismatched to scale, and where tolerance had been underestimated.
Importantly, this stage reinforced that a join does not fail only when it breaks. A join that makes the user hesitate has already failed.
Trust as a Design Outcome
Trust emerged as a central concern. A magnetic join must inspire confidence through its behaviour, not through explanation. If it requires reassurance, it is not resolved.
This shifted how I evaluated success. Joins were no longer judged solely on whether they held, but on how they felt to use — whether they guided the hand, corrected misalignment and settled decisively into place.
In this sense, force became a design material alongside Jesmonite, concrete and silicone.
What This Stage Contributed
Working with magnets clarified several critical aspects of the project:
magnetic joins require structural clarity and restraint
alignment is as important as strength
tolerance must be designed for, not hoped for
trust is a measurable outcome
This stage also reinforced the value of repetition. Only through repeated assembly did patterns of success and failure become visible.
Looking Ahead
With magnetic joins now functioning reliably at a small scale, the project was ready to consider expansion. Questions of balance, load and orientation became more pressing, particularly in relation to larger configurations and alternative modes of display.
The next stage would address these issues directly, alongside a return to failure — this time through material incompatibility and chemical reaction, where control is even more limited.