algorithmic modeling for Rhino

I' m trying to populate a surface with a component and I m using a box in my definition, but the problem is that it has a non square base...
I'm posting the definition, what i would like ( it 's a quick sketch in maya) and what i got in GH( geometry is not clear due to a change in the sliders, but i do now how to manage that, but, what i do not like here is that all the components are next to the others(due to the box method) loosing the rhythm of my maya modelling)
How can i do it????

Views: 4450


Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Oh, and just another question ,
What about if i also wanted these non square components to intersect each other ? again, i' m posting 2 screenshots with what i did in maya and what i did with the same definition that i have posted before in GH. Giulio,I have seen your beautiful definition for chains but i don' t know how to "chain" my own components.
I don't know how Giulio went about the chain's, but a strategy that may work is to make your components go outside of their "boxes" so that your tile becomes pieces of neighbors that put together make the whole instead of trying to get the whole to intersect...I hope that makes sense if not let me know and I'll try to put a sketch together that explains it a little better
Hi P.,
yeah, that is what i have done with my previous attempt, i didn' t try it with this component yet because i was wondering if there was a precise way to do it .Otherwise, i will have to modify my component to do it.But it would be nice to find a definition that can link a component without the box .Or an editable box so we could adjust it to our geometry.
or to be able to intersect the boxes...or???
those things would be great for sure, but are limited by the way that the box morphing is possible to build all of your geometry from the uv grid of points on the surface instead of relying on a component to be morphed into twisted boxes on the surface, however it is much more difficult than what you are currently doing, but not impossible.

Check out this tutorial to see an example of the kind of component creation that I'm talking about:

I tried another approach and here's what I've come up with:

The definition follows the logic of the box morph method, only the iso-trim portions of the surface are overlapping each other:

I've attached the ghx, tell me whether it works for you or not.

The drawback of paneling methods like this one is that the geometry gets deformed on curved surfaces (not mentioning uneven uv distribution), so they're useless if you're planning to fabricate the design using identical pieces...
If that's the case I think you should consider using a physical solver of some kind.

Just a guess - is this a jewelry design?
Hi J,
I am trying your definition( nicel! )and trying to understand it logics..but i guess i' ll need more practice! It does work pretty well for the effect i want to achieve ( specially when i subdivided it in maya and it gets really smooth) but i don' t know why, i only get half of the surface populated and without reaching the edges as well ( as the screenshot i'm posting now). and the definition shows that's something is wrong . I' ve tried to move all the sliders but only the one for the scale works.
How did you do to get the image you have posted? How do you do to get the whole chosen surface populated?
I' ve tried several surfaces but with the same result.

I don't have access to GH right now and won't have until the day after tomorrow, so I won't be able to make changes in the definition. I've attached a photoshoped image explaining the issues you've mentioned, so it should be easier for you to figure out how to solve them:

The two two-dimensional sliders in the definition control the direction of vectors m & n.
If you right click on the component which performs the vector addition you'll see the "cross-reference" data matching option is set.
It means that in the result you get all possible combinations:
0*m + 0*n
0*m + 1*n
0*m + 2*n
1*m + 0*n
1*m + 1*n
1*m + 2*n
limit_m*m + limit_n*n

So one way of dealing with the unpopulated part of the surface would be to use negative multipliers as well.

As for the components on the edges... I see two options:
1. extend the surface (don't know how exactly...) > populate it with components > filter the unwanted ones
2. use cropped or special components on the edges

Good luck and looking forward to seeing what you make of it!

Thanks! Yeah..also.
I will definitely try it.
I' m trying at the moment the brick pattern and it works pretty well for the simple surfaces I ' m trying, so, i guess i will be able to apply it to my whole design .
Thanks to all!!!



Search Grasshopper


  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2017   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service