tects to overcome the imposition of prefixed architectural forms in order to enhance performance-driven design and responsive kinetic solutions that interact with humans and environment. Lectures on parametric design simulation, generative and form finding as well as environmental optimization, analyzing and digital fabrication prototyping, are integrated together in 2 main modules. Students from the beginning of the school will be divided into groups to compete on a case project increasing their ability to define project parameters, design factors, solving problems, understanding factors relationships, involving environmental and human sensors, and optimizing their projects solutions in smart and inelegance way. In the beginning of the school, parametric modelling will be introduced (Rhino3d and Grasshopper) to build the necessary skills of parametric generative form methods to students. In this module will be dedicated to digital design methods and physical model making by various fabrication techniques, including laser cutting and 3D printing. Students will focus on the idea of creating algorithmic architectural form inspired by nature and their research will be supported by a series of lectures. Also they will be split into groups in order to develop projects assigned by the professors. This Module also adds Form Finding techniques to the parametric design strategies. Students will learn how material system behaviors, physical forces and responsive structure system can be digitally simulated into parametric models in order to explore complex forms that optimized and adapted to its natural behaviors, initial forces, material, particles, and structure systems. Series of lectures on form finding, natural structural algorithms, material behaviors, and physical forces will lead student to optimize their project forms. It is experimental laboratory in which kinetic interactive Architectural models are tested and designed. Students will develop novel solutions, building upon learning responsive kinetic systems. They will design Architectural responsive robotic systems inspired by nature. Projects will transform by adapting to environmental conditions and human behaviors happening at real and virtual levels.
…
cremental release is available for download. It fixes several bugs reported in the 0.9.0005 & 0.9.0006 versions. To wit:
Computer mice with smooth scrolling would not zoom well, this is fixed.
Previewable parameters with a lot of consecutive null items would crash, this is fixed.
Identical GHA files would collide during the loading process, this is handled.
GHA files with identical names would collide during the loading process, this is handled.
Solver Undo setting was not persistent, this is fixed.
Widget ZUI Zoom setting was not persistent, this is fixed.
Markov Widget Corner setting was not persistent, this is fixed.
Markov Widget Suggestion Count setting was not persistent, this is fixed.
Drag and Drop on Document and Template preview materials wasn't recorded, this is fixed.
AssignDataToParameter() COM-Access method was broken, this is fixed.
Geometry and Generic parameters with persistent data would not deserialize correctly, this is fixed.
Operator shortcuts via the Canvas popup instantiation menu no longer assigned data to the second parameter, this is fixed.
Cull Duplicates component did not always show the correct label upon deserialization, this is fixed.
Legacy VB/C# components would not correctly deserialize List access on input parameters, this is fixed.
Cloud Display component would still display old sprites on disconnect, this is fixed.
Minor changes to a document would trigger lengthy preview cache updates, slowing Grasshopper down. This is fixed.
Sphere 4Pt did not work correctly, this it fixed.
Failed data conversions in parameters would result in missing entries, this is fixed.
Text Tag components (2D & 3D) would not bake via the component menu, this is fixed.
There are also some new features:
Added Jump object for quickly navigating across a Canvas (Params.Util dropdown).
Added Relative Differences component which is basically the inverse of Mass Addition (Math.Operators dropdown).
Added tooltip wiggle controls to the Preferences window, Interface section.
'Draw Full Names' now also attempts to change the display of existing components, but only in the active document.
Drag+Dropping GHA, GHPY and GHUSER files onto the canvas now puts the original file into the bin.
Replaced Set Union component with a new one that has variable input parameters.
Replaced Set Intersection component with a new one that has variable input parameters.
Replaced And and Ternary And components with a single new one that has variable input parameters.
Replaced Or and Ternary Or components with a single new one that has variable input parameters.
Replaced Concatenate component with a new one that has variable input parameters.
Concatenate component now has a segment join option available via the component menu.
Added Digit options to the Transform Matrix Display object.
Integer parameters which represent options now have more informative context menus.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
…
Added by David Rutten at 11:06am on September 14, 2012
it seems that was this. Now all is working fine !
Glad that it worked! But I am still a bit worried. Gismo components only modify the gdal-data/osmconf.ini file and no other MapWinGIS file. So your MapWinGIS installation files should not be compromised. The fact that you did not get the "COM CLSID" error message when running the "Gismo Gismo" component suggests that MapWinGIS has been properly installed. So I wonder if the cause for the permanent "invalid shapes" warning has again something with the fact that your system is again not allowing the MapWinGIS to properly edit the osmconf.ini. Maybe this problem will appear again, and again, and reinstallation of MapWinGIS every time can be somewhat bothersome.
- About the terrain generation, is it possible to have the texture from google or other provider mapped onto the terrain surface from gismo component ? (Same as using the ladybug terrain generator in fact). I try to used the image extracted by ladybug component and then applied it to the gismo terrain but the texture is rotated by 90°.
The issue with the rotation can be solved by swapping/reversing the U,V directions of the terrain surface. A slightly more important issue is that terrain surface generated with Gismo "Terrain Generator" component might have a bit smaller radius than what the radius_ input required. This stems from the fact that the terrain data first needs to be downloaded in geographic coordinate system, and then projected. Some projecting issues may occur at the very edges of the projected terrain, so I had to slightly cut out the very edges of the terrain which results in the actual terrain diameters being slightly shorted in both directions. This means that if you apply the same satellite image from Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component to Gismo "Terrain Generator" component the results may not be the same.I attached below a python component which tries to solve this issue by extending the edges of Gismo "Terrain Generator" terrain, and then cutting them with the cuboid of the exact dimensions as the radius_ input. Have in mind that this extension of the original terrain at its edges is not a correct representation of the actual terrain in that location. But rather just an extension of the isoparameteric curve of the terrain surface. So basically: some 0 to 10% (0 to 10 percent of the width and length) of the terrain around all four edges is not the actual terrain for that location, but rather just its extension.The python component is located at the very right of the definition attached below.
Also, if you would like to use the satellite images from Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component along with "OSM shapes", sometimes you may find slight differences in position of the shapes. This is due to openstreetmap data not being based on Google Maps (that's what Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component is using), but rather on Bing, MapQuest and a few others.
- About the requiredKeys_ input of OSM shapes, I understand what you mean and your advice, but in most cases I use it, the component was working fine even without input. I think it's better to extract all tags, values and keys of the selected area, instead of searching for specific ones as I try to find all data related to what I want after, isn't it ? To check what keys are present on the area also.
Ineed, you are correct.I though you were trying to only create a terrain, 3d buildings and maybe find some school or similar 3d building, for these two locations. The recommendation I mentioned previously is due to shapefiles having a limit (2044) to how many keys it can contain. This requires further testing of some big cities locations with maybe larger radii, which I haven't performed due to my poor PC configuration. But in theory, I imagine that it may happen that a downloaded .osm file may have more than 2044 keys. In that case shapefile will only record 2044 of them, and disregard the others. That was my point.But again 2044 is a lot of keys, and I haven't been checking much this in practice. For example, when I set the radius_ to 1000 meters, and use your "3 Rue de Bretonvilliers Paris" location I get around 350 something keys, which is way below the 2044.Another reason why one should use the requiredKeys_ input is to make the Gismo OSM components run quicker: for example, the upper mentioned 350 something keys will result in 350 values for each branch of the "OSM shapes" component's "values" output.Which means if you have 10 000 shapes, the "OSM shapes" component will have 10 000 branches with 350 items on each branch (values). This can make all Gismo OSM components very heavy, and significantly elongate the calculation process.With requiredKeys_ input you may end up with only a couple of tens of items per each branch.Sorry for the long reply.…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 8:57am on June 11, 2017
(registrants will be able to re-watch it anytime) GOAL: understanding and managing surface continuity SOFTWARE: Rhinoceros, Grasshopper, Kangaroo 2 PREREQUISITES: basic experience of 3D modeling in Rhino LANGUAGE: English LENGTH: 160 minutes approximately TUTOR: Arturo Tedeschi
REGISTER HERE
One of the characteristics of contemporary design is a clear reduction of all visible connections, pursuing the idea of a seamless flow of curves and surfaces. From product design to automotive, from naval design to architecture’s envelope, understanding and managing surface continuity is an essential skill. The online webinar “Zebra” will introduce attendees to the notion of surface continuity in Rhino-Grasshopper. The lesson will cover mathematical aspect of curvature continuity, modeling strategies and practical examples. Contents are intended for users with basic knowledge of 3D modeling in Rhino. The webinar will be a fully interactive event hosted “live” but also available as a recorded video. Registrants will be able to re-watch it anytime. Zebra is part of our Parametric Vibrations webinar series. Tutor: Arturo Tedeschi. Language: English.
Main Topics:
NURBS representation
Notion of curvature for curves and surfaces
Curvature continuity for curves and surfaces: G0 – G3
Surface continuity in Rhino. Analysis tools: curvature analysis, Zebra, environmental map
Surface continuity in Rhino: tools, modeling strategies and tips for surface continuity.
Examples
Overview of continuity tools in Grasshopper
…
Introduzione a Grasshopper", il primo manuale su Grasshopper.
.
I corsi PLUG IT nascono dalla volontà di promuovere le nuove tecnologie digitali di supporto alla progettazione e condividere il know-how maturato attraverso ricerca, collaborazione con i più importanti studi di architettura e pubblicazioni internazionali.
.
Verranno introdotte le nozioni base di Grasshopper approfondendo le metodologie della progettazione parametrica e le tecniche di modellazione algoritmica per la generazione di forme complesse. Il corso è rivolto a studenti e professionisti con esperienza minima nella modellazione 3D e si articolerà in lezioni teoriche ed esercitazioni.
. Argomenti trattati:
- Introduzione alla progettazione parametrica: teoria, esempi, casi studio - Grasshopper: concetti base, logica algoritmica, interfaccia grafica - Nozioni fondamentali: componenti, connessioni, data flow
- Funzioni matematiche e logiche, serie, gestione dei dati - Analisi e definizione di curve e superfici
- Definizione di griglie e pattern complessi - Trasformazioni geometriche, paneling - Attrattori, image sampler
- Data tree: gestione di dati complessi - Digital fabrication: teoria ed esempi - Nesting: scomposizione di oggetti tridimensionali in sezioni piane per macchine CNC
.
Verrà rilasciato un attestato finale.
.
Ulteriori info e programma completo su: www.arturotedeschi.com e su www.edizionilepenseur.it…
o express my gratitude. I've been experimenting with your definitions (and still am), but let me extend my question.
Actually what I'm trying to achieve, is to recreate another project by Andrew Kudless, the spore lamp (I mentioned the Chrysalis at the beginning just because of the animation, which wasn't included in the Spore Lamp presentation).
Basically the spore lamp seems to me to be something like a preliminary study to the Chrysalis III project (I think it's a similar approach).
Andrew stated on his site that he used kangaroo for this project, so the Spore Lamp consists in my opinion either of a relaxed voronoi 3d diagram (b-rep, b-rep intersection) on a sphere which then has been planarized, or more likely it is a sort of relaxed facet dome.
The trick is to:
1. obtain a nicely-balanced voronoish diagram (or facet dome cells)
2. keep each cell/polyline planar (or force them with kangaroo to be planar) in order to move scale and loft them later on.
Here is what I have by now. (files: matsys spore lamp attempt)
That's the closest appearance that I got so far (simple move scale and loft of facet dome cells with the amount of transformations being proportional to the power of the initial cell area: bigger cell = bigger opening etc.) - with no relaxation of the diagram. But it's obviously not the same thing as the matsys design.
Here are some of my attempts of facet dome relaxation, but well, it certainly still not the right approach, and most importantly I don't know how to keep or force the cells to be planar after the relaxation.
1. pulling vertices to a sphere - no anchor points. That obviously doesn't make sense at all, but the relaxation without anchor points gives at the beginning a pattern that is closer to what I am looking for. (files: relaxation 01)
2. pulling vertices to a sphere - two faces of the initial facet dome anchored (files: relaxation 02)
3. pulling vertices to the initial geometry (facet dome) no anchor points (files: relaxation 03)
The cell pattern of the lamp kinda looks like this:
you can find it here: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/kangaroo-0-095-released?g...
Done with Plankton (of course without the "gradient increase" appearance), but in fact not, I took a look at Daniel Parker's Plankton example files, and it's not quite the same thing. Also the cells aren't planar...
The last problem is that during the relaxation attempts that I did, the biggest initial cells became enormous, and it's not like that in the elegant project by Andrew Kudless, that I'd like to achieve.
So to sum up:
Goal no 1: Obtain an elegant voronoi /facet dome cell pattern on a sphere (or an ellipsoid surface, whatever).
Goal no 2: Keep the cells planar in order to be able to loft them later and obtain those pyramidal forms, and assemble easily
Any ideas? Or maybe there's a completely different approach to that?…
low cost fabrication techniques developed by RC6, a research laboratory based at UCL / The Bartlett School of Architecture. A part of Bartlett's BPro programme, RC6 traditionally engages in the development of design methodologies positioned at the overlap of digital and analogue computation, primarily investigating concepts which merge traditional, low-tech manufacturing processes and advanced technological concepts.Topic of this workshop - Composite Bodies - represents RC6’s ongoing research into hybridised material systems consisting of soft membrane materials and light-weight infill aggregates. In this particular case, from a material point of view, we will be looking into custom designed lycra pieces, filled with styrofoam beads and spheres and constrained with series of performative stitches. The resulting parts will be coated with latex and used to create series of interlocking components and surfaces.The workshop itself will consist of 2 stages. The first two days will be dedicated to intensive software training sessions. Students will be introduced to multiple digital platforms focusing on scripting in Processing and 3D modelling/sculpting in Maya/ZBrush. Aim is to enable students to understand algorithmic design processes and procedural modelling techniques and to help them to learn how to customize pre-made scripts and how to embed them in their individual workflows.The remaining five days will be dedicated to the fabrication of a spatial installation. Students will learn how to translate digital models into prototypical components and work alongside tutors to aggregate those into one large-scale architectural object which will be exhibited as part of SBODIO32 Exhibition for Milan Design Week 2017.Dates: March - April 2017 RC6 Program Director:DANIEL WIDRIGwith IGOR PANTICSTEFAN BASSINGSOOMEEN HAHMWorkshop Tutor:IGOR PANTICLead Designer at Zaha Hadid ArchitectsVisiting Lecturer at UCL Bartlett School of ArchitectureTeaching Assistants:Thomas Bagnoli, Evgenia Makroglou, Kalliopi Mouzaki, Darshan Singhaniaucl bartlett rc6 graduate studentsSoftwares: Maya, Rhino, Grasshopper, Processing*Previous knowledge of the softwares is not compulsory. Fabrication Tools: Lycra, Styrofoam beads, Latex, Sewing machines…
Added by Amrvitaloni at 9:38am on February 25, 2017
to do once I figured out how you use only a small portion of each of my generated curves to make the 360 degree Loft surface. I had a huge AHA! moment when I realized the complete Loft surface really only needs a small portion of the generated curves rotated around to form a closed (except for top & bottom) surface. That is a major new insight for me and I appreciate you pointing it out.
I also tweaked the Twist angle parameter a bit so the resulting positive and negative Twist surfaces, when combined, yielded a result that was closer to my original shape. This is when I discovered something very interesting.
When I baked/exported the result using just one of the 2 twisted surfaces I got an STL file that had no errors, that 3D Builder was able to simplify from a 37 MB file to a 3 MB file, and that sliced A-OK. But, when I combined the left and right twisted surfaces, I was back with my same set of problems: the exported STL file had many errors, could not be fixed, and did not slice properly.
I went back to my original layout that uses the complete set of generated curves to create the Loft surface and found I got exactly the same results - using only one twisted surface worked fine, but nothing worked when the left and right twisted surfaces were combined. By nothing I mean I tried all the standard methods (GH Join and Sunion, Rhino Solid/Union, Join, etc.) What I think this means is that the Loft surface behaves the same, and apparently is the same, regardless if it is generated by rotating strips or by using complete closed curves.
Furthermore, I am guessing the problems with the combined/exported STL file made from both left and right twisted surfaces has to do with overlapping/coincident parts of each one - like the top & bottom planar surfaces and some of the wiggly parts.
If I am correct about this then it suggests to me that there is some sort of glitch in Rhino's STL Export function. This is surprising to me since I though an STL file only paid attention to the external shape of thngs,and did not know or care about any inside stuff. Of course this is all conjecture on my part, but at least for now seems it will be impossible for me to actually print the double-twisted geometry.…
Added by Birk Binnard at 3:52pm on September 23, 2016