My initial design for the shapes were done on Fusion 360. This was because I wasn't so familiar with Rhino at the time, so due to a lack of confidence, I wanted to just get a general idea of what I wanted to do before starting on Rhino.

After I got familiar with the software Rhino, I started modelling other potential shapes on it. Though I liked my initial idea that I had modelled in Fusion 360, the shape was a bit too complicated and would require a lot of time to build together. However I decided to roll with my original idea in the end albeit with a few tweaks here and there to allow the build up to be much easier.

These are the failed designs during the unroll process. The design to the left had a very good initial idea, combining the two crosses in the centre to create a uniformed shape which allowed the attachment of the base to be simpler, however this design is flawed as it limits the amount of pieces that can be combined and put together making the construction process much more complicated. The design to the right was the first initial design, it includes no tabs for easier attachment and as will be seen on the first prototype, this greatly affected the outcome of the prototype.

The first prototype took a long time to make and ended up looking hideous as well, this was greatly due to the lack of tabs made for the project which makes attaching the pieces together difficult and unstable, along with that, my cutting skills were also quite below average so many of the cut outs got misaligned.

Learning from my lesson on my first prototype/iteration. I decided to add many tabs where they were needed which would allow the construction process to be much easier and simpler, also combining many pieces together which would further simplify matters and make construction much cleaner.

The second iteration was a huge step up from the first iteration, photos speak for themselves on how much cleaner the attachments of the pieces are. the tabs on the cylinder were also specially made for round objects as it has a smaller base but much wider platform. This allows the cylinder to curve much easier while also not compensating for a lack of tabs giving it a much stronger bond with the circle. A problem that I found while making the second prototype was a lack of tabs attaching two cross bases together which caused a weaker bond.

The development for the final model is very similar to the second iteration/prototype, the cut outs and pieces are relatively similar, just scaled to A2 instead of A3. During the final development, I put a lot more tabs in areas that had initially failed in the second iteration to strengthen the  The paper was a lot harder than the iteration material, this was both a good and bad thing as the paper kept it's shape easier however to form the shape, was a lot more difficult. This caused a lot of troubles when actually forming the shape into what I had in mind such as the cylinder. In fact the cylinder gave me the biggest trouble into forming the round shape especially down the centre. This caused the attachment of the base to the cylinder to be a very difficult and painstaking process.

The final design has quite a clean base but the cylinder is slightly bent and damaged due to wear and tear of trying to curve the paper. especially down the centre where it is quite weak as there are holes at the bottom where it's a lot weaker. Despite the cylinder being reinforced by extra excess circles that were stuffed inside the cylinder to help keep it's shape (not shown in the images) however the centre as said before is still too weak. The biggest problem with this was that this caused a huge gap between the base and the cylinder which makes the attachment very difficult, causing an extreme amount of glue to be used.

This probably couldn't be solved even with tabs as I have tried to before, I also hadn't predicted for this problem to occur as it had not for the second iteration, but when thinking back, the material for the second iteration was a lot softer allowing the shape the form easier.