algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Pachyderm Acoustic


Pachyderm Acoustic

Pachyderm is a plugin largely used by Designers and Scientists alike to simulate acoustics in buildings, rooms, cities, and other settings.

Location: Earth
Members: 87
Latest Activity: Mar 12

Discussion Forum

Mapping Crash 3 Replies

Hi Arthur,After I Calculate Solution in Hybrid Modules, I am trying to create a map. I create a mapping surface in Rhino, and then Rhino crashes every time I hit Run Calculation under the Mapping…Continue

Started by Sam. Last reply by Arthur Feb 27.

Transferring Pachyderm framework to new model 4 Replies

Hi,I am testing out my pachyderm framework on a new model, and I am encountering a couple issues.1) I am getting this error: 1. Solution exception:Number of Grasshopper Objects(GG) and number of…Continue

Started by Sam. Last reply by Sam Feb 20.

Auralization troubles 1 Reply

Hi Arthur,I am trying to render an auralization to hear differences in reverberation when I change geometry of the room. I can get Pachyderm to render the auralization but the sound file comes back…Continue

Started by Sam. Last reply by Sam Feb 18.

Grasshopper components of Pachyderm 15 Replies

Hi Arthur,Could you please show me the usage of these two components: Pachyderm File & Pachyderm for Rhino Result.Thanks a lot.Felix…Continue

Started by skyharvest. Last reply by Arthur Jan 5.

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Pachyderm Acoustic to add comments!

Comment by Arthur on August 3, 2018 at 7:40am

Some semi good news - I finally have access to a computer which manifests the problem with the Mapping Interface. (Remember that it doesn't happen on my development machines).

I will try and work it out within the next week or so.


Comment by Arthur on July 20, 2018 at 7:41am

Hi Alex,

I have witnessed that one with one other user, but I have not been able to reproduce it on my machine... ergo, I have no idea what causes it.

Answer me this - could you please provide a list of which plugins you have installed in Rhino? I wonder if it is a GUID conflict...


Comment by Alex Cligman on July 19, 2018 at 1:02pm

I have a similar issue with the mapping function running Rhino 5 on Windows 10, the pachyder_mapping command does nothing when it is executed and when you try to open it up in a Rhino tab it just crashes. Does anyone have any insights or remdies of this problem?

Many thanks,


Comment by Arthur on June 26, 2018 at 11:41am


It isn't clear to me what is causing the issue, but Rhino has always had trouble on Mac with Parallels. Since I am unable to reproduce the issue of the mapping tab crashing rhino, I can't really comment on it.


Comment by Sandrine Heroux on June 26, 2018 at 11:01am


I see that Zaqi Fathis and Rowan Browan have the same issue as me. Every time I open the Pachyderm Mapping Method tab, Rhino 5 crashes instantly, even though the file was empty. All the other tabs open without any problem. I'm on windows 10 on Parallels with a Mac. 

Did anyone find out what causes the bug and how to fix it?

Comment by Alex Cligman on June 17, 2018 at 4:48am

Hi Arthur,

Is there any you'd be able to at an issue myself and others have encountered with the ITDG component? At present in all simualtions it outputs a value of '0.0' despite other components successfully computing their respective paramters,

Many thanks,

Comment by David Probst on June 13, 2018 at 7:11am


I know understood that it is actually the hole pitch that defines the distances beetween the individual holes, I could calculate that from the percentage of the holes and therefore that works for me now. Sorry for my misunderstanding and thank you so much for your help!

Besides that, I would still love to hear your opinion on the calculations, if I can send you those privately.

All the best


Comment by David Probst on June 6, 2018 at 5:32am

Hi Arthur,

thanks for the answer, it helped me a lot to be more confident with my work. Also, please don't feel pushed by my questions, I really appreciate all the help you have given me already.

The only thing I don't understand comletely yet is your answer regarding the absorption-coefficient. I do understand the part about why the absorption designer is the right choice and whether or not the surface-structure would matter, but I am still struggling with the impact of the distances beetween each individual hole to the next hole.

I think I had phrased my question a little bit ambigious in the last post. Actually, the whole plate is perforated, but I am talking about the "frequency" of holes along the plate. By that I mean a 1m² plate could have 1000 or 100 or only 5 holes.  I know for example that 1.4 percent of the plate are holes and the rest is massive. With which setting could I compensate for this frequency of holes? Or is there a fundamental flaw in my thought process?

I would love to send you the model and hear your opinion about it, but would prefer to keep that private, since it is not my own creation and I am just testing around with it. Can you accept my friend request here, so I can send you a private message?

Thank you in advance!

Comment by Arthur on May 25, 2018 at 2:31pm

Hi David P,

I have been playing with it a bit more also. One thing I found is that if you make the radius too small, then your result will be poor. Another thing I have found is that the farther away from the sample your sphere is, the lower the magnitude of the scattering will be. This seems to suggest that maybe the base of the hemisphere should always be right at the bottom of the scattering panel.

Regarding whether or not your result is accurate or not, I can't really say. You could send me a copy of your model, though, and I could try it and give you my opinion...

Also, you made the right choice by doing the perforations in the absorption designer, rather than the scattering tool. At present, absorption can't be assigned to the boundaries of the FVM tool. One day I will figure it out, but I will need a lot of time to dedicate to it at once, and family life doesn't allow for that right now... My intuition says that the scattering probably doesn't affect the absorption much, other then that the depth of the perforations will vary with the depth of the panel, and that if you have portions of the panel that are not perforated, the final absorption of the panel will be an area-weighted average of all conditions. (I can't say for sure without studying your design in more detail, though.)

Thanks for giving this experimental tool a shot. I will help in any way I can, within the limits of the many roles I hold.

kind regards,


Comment by David Probst on May 24, 2018 at 8:57am

Hi Arthur,

thank you for your detailed answer and sorry for not answering for such a long time, I was just trying to make sure that I did understand everything before I answer back.

Now I do actually get quite reliably the same results and I have no issues with any crashes anymore. The only problem is that my intuition would sometimes suggest really different values. The main surface I am working with(see image) for example only delivers a scattering coefficient below 0.1 , while I would assume that it should be really high. Do you think that these calculations are right or do you have any idea what I might be doing wrong?

Also I was trying to assess the alpha-coefficient for the same pattern with holes and mineral wool behind, but decided to simplify things and just use the absorbtion designer. Do you think that the pattern itself could have a big influence on the absorbtion or is such a simplification probably all right? I was already building some manual tests to integrate its effect but it is a lot more work.
When using the Absorbtion Designer I did not find a value for the perecentage the holes take up, even though I thought, that this should be the most important value? So far I have just been playing around with the diameter of the holes and studying the results.

Thank you!


Members (87)






  • Add Photos
  • View All

© 2019   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service