Grasshopper

algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Hello  everyone, 

I am a very new to this program and I am trying to create a facade with tetragonal trapezohedron elements. 

I am trying to make first the shape, then the mesh ( I guess)...

So basically I need the shapes to create a facade. 

I attached a few image that might show my idea more clearly. 

It would be very very very helpful to me if someone could help! 

Thank you, 

Inna 

Views: 532

Attachments:

Replies to This Discussion

Well ...

... I would suggest (based on your 2nd sketch) this approach.

See notes (especially with regard the pathetic offset thingy).

Used some small C# for optionally transposing the target surface (but that's the 1% of the definition that's carried over 99% by native GH components).

This approach is purely indicative mind

Attachments:

No need of Grasshopper to make your first element. You can do them with Rhino. If you want them paramatric why not, but it is best that you bring a definition of what you want.

For the second image did you looke at that ?

http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/kernel-density-estimation...

I had to look up " tetragonal trapezohedron".  Fascinating shapes!  I stumbled through two false starts before coming up with a working model.  The number of sides is a parameter.

I was about to make a cluster out of it when I decided to try some test scenarios.  Then I struggled and failed (so far) to handle more than one reference plane at a time. :(  Data trees... grrr.

Attachments:

I struggled and failed (so far) to handle more than one reference plane at a time.

Instead of beating my head against the wall any further with GH data trees, I wanted to move on and explore the second part of this puzzle, Voronoi³.  The single trapezohedron being generated can be arrayed, oriented or rotated any number of ways to get multiple copies.  So I clustered it as is:

I can already see several other ways you might want to define a trapezohedron such as specifying the angle of the "kite" sides or fixed distance between the top and bottom apex points instead of a vertical offset value for the points as I'm doing now.

Not sure how much more I want to play with this but the results can be very interesting.

Attachments:

RSS

About

Translate

Search

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2021   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service