algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Exoskeleton WIP

Developing an updated exoskeleton with variable end thicknesses for each strut and non-convex hulls at each node...hopefully will package it along with the geometry-wrapping isosurface component and a (possibly) exoskeleton for curves...

Views: 2822


You need to be a member of Grasshopper to add comments!

Join Grasshopper

Comment by Josh Draper on May 8, 2014 at 12:15pm

dream come true. can't wait to see it!

Comment by Christian Schmidts on May 2, 2014 at 1:39pm

yuppie yeah!

Comment by David Stasiuk on May 2, 2014 at 8:48am

Ha! Fair enough.

Comment by Nick Tyrer on May 2, 2014 at 8:30am

You have committed now David! I'm gonna put the date on my calender. I will be back in a few days!

Comment by David Stasiuk on May 2, 2014 at 8:27am

Hi Aidan....Daniel and I are this close to releasing the wireframe-based exoskeleton and cytoskeleton in a few days I hope! (Then incrementally, as I get time to debug, some other mesh thickening tools, including a curve-based exoskeleton and an marching cubes geometry wrapper.)

Comment by Aidan Ku on May 2, 2014 at 8:09am

Awesome! Are you planning a release within the next few weeks? If not, would you consider releasing a beta? My current biomedical research could really benefit from your latest progress, namely variable strut thickness. Keep up the great work!

Comment by Oliver Tessin on March 9, 2014 at 10:45am

Hi David, Hi Nick,

thanks for your reply. At the end, the calculation process was just too heavy... and I had to dramatically simplify my concept. Ill post a few images later.

Sorry Nick for posting your image without your name. I forgot where I got it from...

Many thanks,


Comment by David Stasiuk on March 4, 2014 at 3:22am

I knew I'd seen that image somewhere before! I still like yours better.

Comment by Nick Tyrer on March 4, 2014 at 2:45am


David pretty much has it sorted. I made it about a year ago, and no longer have the definition, but it doesn't use exoskeleton. Just old fashioned mesh components and trusty ol' weaverbird.

I think the only real differences between david's process and the original is the treatment of the closed cells, mine was much more angular because i was just creating large triangular mesh faces to the centre of each cell, that dont smooth as nicely. But i think Davids is cooler

Comment by David Stasiuk on March 4, 2014 at 1:11am

Hi Oliver...It looks like you're trying to thicken a 2D which case I can get this started for you. The image you've supplied definitely is doing something more interesting in terms of managing the depth of the solid cells, but hopefully this can get you on the right path:

There's endless room for improvement, and it'll need plenty of work. It's using a really dumb single curve attractor, which is driving both cell offset and the threshold for closing a cell. In your image, it looks to me like when a cell is closed, the attractors are also affecting the depth, so there's room to introduce there additional offset logics. You'll need weaverbird...

Christian...I think maybe you're making it more complicated than it needs to be :)


Search Grasshopper


  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2015   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service