ally put the component together a few months ago.
Abraham, the case of 1.2 failing was because of a bug where I simply put "< 1.2" in the code instead of "<=1.2". The error was specifically happening with 1.2 because that is the wind speed threshold at which the "hump" of the ASHRAE adaptive comfort polygon grows. It is perhaps easier to see this threshold in the inputs of the CBE Adaptive comfort chart:
I fixed the bug in the attached file and on the github.
Grasshope, to address why you are getting branched data and the 2 comfort polygons, it is because you have connected up the EPW windSpeed to the component. Usually, if you connect up multiple values for windSpeed_, the component will produce a comfort polygon for each wind speed. However, I built a mechanism into the component that stops it from generating 8760 comfort polygons (one polygon for each hour) if you connect up full EPW data. 8760 comfort polygons takes almost a minute to generate and so I figured that this is probably not what people want to do most of the time. Instead, the component just generates one polygon for the minimum wind speed and another for the maximum wind speed (to show you the range). The branched data that you get out of the component are values for each polygon (2 branches for two polygons). If you connect up the data to the 3D chart, this might make things clearer:
One polygon is for 0 wind speed and the other is for the maximum EPW wind speed.
I am interested in hearing your thoughts on my way of dealing with this since I am thinking of implementing something similar on psychrometric chart. I realized that a lot of people were crashing the psych chart by connecting up the EPW wind speed, which currently tells the component to generate 8760 comfort polygons.
Thanks, as always, for all of your help,
-Chris…
would like to ask someone with patience, time and disposition for a definition of maximum displacement, resulting force of gravity and internal elastic energy. I know that these topics appear on the Karamba manual, however the explanation is quick and brief and I, and perhaps some others, can´t grasp completely what are they and how they work.
Secondly I would like to ask advice on how to deal the problem of minimizing the quantity of material used and keeping the structure strength in an acceptable range.
Those were my two questions. Now I am going to explain the definition that I am working on in order to show how this relates to the problem I am trying to solve.
I am trying to optimize a column made of plastic, which is intended to be fabricated in a 3D printer. I have created a grasshopper definition that lets me customize plenty of options (height, width, number of sides, number of divisions, type of interconnections, etc… ).
Image 1 can provide a quick look of what I am trying to do.
I am using galapagos to fine-tune some of the values in order to achieve the best possible structure that can withstand a certain arbitrary weight (for example 100 Kg) within acceptable deformation values and use the least possible material.
Perhaps the key values that I am letting Galapagos manipulate are the number of division in plan and section of the column.
The problem arises when I choose to optimize by minimizing the maximum displacement, which is the most common case in tutorials and examples.
Galapagos naturally tends to divide the column in the maximum number of section that I allow (which is logical since it creates more beams and minimizes their lenght), image 2 provides an example of the minimum and maximum number of division that I am allowing.
This solution (empirically) seems wasteful. I believe that the real solution to the problem (sustaining an arbitrary weight without failing and most importantly using the less possible material) must be between the two columns presented in image 2.
Thank you guys for your help and for reading such a long post.
Sincerely
Diego…
between internal structural frameworks and non-bearing skin elements, this approach promotes heterogeneity and differentiation of material properties. The project demonstrates the notion of a structural skin using a Voronoi pattern, the density of which corresponds to multi-scalar loading conditions. The distribution of shear-stress lines and surface pressure is embodied in the allocation and relative thickness of the vein-like elements built into the skin. Its innovative 3D printing technology provides for the ability to print parts and assemblies made of multiple materials within a single build, as well as to create composite materials that present preset combinations of mechanical properties.
for registration please contact:
bioskinarc@gmail.com
tel: 09197804306
…
ual not tactile. i havnt touched the roof of my house i have been living in since 25 years yet its a part of my space. its still a visual plane between me and sky ( except that it protects me from rain). anyway, the point was to reconstruct huge cathedrals without moving big amount of earth.I came up with Nuun lense ( i had in sketches, it will be shorter form of this ugly cube, probably in mms) which will line the necessary floors and stairs-wells and towers.
During my experiment I realized this can be used for visualizing architectural spaces in real time, specially for arch student, it could be used as a console, that can replace cad and other 3d softwares. you can draw basic grids, orthogonal shapes ( not Zaha hadid stuff ). I still am very enthusiastic about this idea. I want to see it function some day.
Grasshopper was used to drive poor reflectors through firefly, to bend laser.( it failed badly) Its just for idea if anybody likes to follow, i dont have enough resources but it would make me happy if some day i see students working on realtime laser models and building having virtual ornamentation.
Any architecture/ electronics student who wants to further his research in lasers and its application in virtual modeling can contact me.
Pic taken at 30 sec exposure
1 ft acrylic cube , 3 slidable laser panels 1 by 1 ft for each axis. all in separate pieces. (glass table, reflectors not included)…
ive input but I have no clue how to begin doing this. I've read about using Processing and have even tried something with Processing but it didn't work for me.
I haven't had any luck finding step by step tutorials on inputing data with the 'read file' tool either. I have a feeling that just knowing how to import data would help a lot but the only examples I've found didn't work for me.
I'll be honest though, when it comes to programming and code, I'm an idiot and at a very beginner level. However, once I have working code to study and play around with, I pick up pretty quickly. I've done this with some of the GH definitions I've found and had some good results.
Basically, it's been very difficult and frustrating since I've spend literally 4 weeks trying to figure this out. Like I said, I'm not good with code! Fortunately I've had a little bit of help from the GH community and am very thankful. With any luck, maybe some other people on here would be willing to help out a couple students working on a thesis project? We don't have money but could exchange fabrication services for your help with code or definitions. We have access to a 3 axis CNC mill, Laser Cutter and FDM printer.
Thanks for your time (and hopefully your help),
Matt.
…
a and the Middle East through its affiliate offices, is pleased to announce that the official Rhino workshop “Digital Obsession-Advances in Architectural Geometry” will take place in Damascus – Syria on August and September 2011. The workshop will cover Rhino Level 2 – NURBS Modeling-Advanced and Basic scripting. In this class participants will learn how to create and edit accurate free form 3D NURBS models. This fast-moving class covers most of Rhino’s functionality, including the most advanced surfacing commands. At the end of the workshop each participant will receive an official certificate of participation from McNeel Europe (Barcelona – Spain) and MAG LAB. The event will be the key event of the year for discussing, learning and networking about the emerging practice of digital parametric. These events follow the highly successful previous workshops, Spain 2008-2009-2010-2011, Italy 2010, Syria 2009-2010-2011 and multiple preceding events. The Workshop applications are online and close on 14August.2011, provides a unique opportunity to work with the most established expert software in the world on digital parametric design. The most successful Workshop attendees will have their work shown at the AIU 2011 Conference and workshops, will also have an opportunity to be invited and attend next workshops held by MAG LAB where top architects, engineers and educators will participate.
…
Added by Aref Maksoud at 1:41am on September 15, 2011
us pouvons visualiser chaque objet déplier:
Ici l'objet 2...
Mais bien sur cela fonctionne pour tous....
Je joins la définition grasshopper si besoin...
…
ike this, and more specifically about Lofted geometry, is that if you give the Loft function a bunch of complex curves to match the edges of, the resulting Loft surface does not always match the curves used to make the surface. If you have 2 Loft surfaces that meet at the same curve (for instance, when picking the top curve of an inside and outside Loft surface to make a closed lip), the connection between them will have tiny gaps in various places. I attribute this to truncation and/or roundoff errors in calculating the Lofted surfaces.
However, it seems that using the Cap function actually eliminates this problem by turning an open Brep Loft into a closed/solid one. Of course I have no idea why this happens, but it does eliminate naked edges, edge gaps, and any other weirdness associated with joining Loft surfaces.
Before discovering this method I spent about a week trying all the suggestion you mentioned. None of them worked. All of the Join functions failed, different meshing parameters had no effect, and Mesh Smooth and Weld did not help either.
In pretty much all of these cases the 3D Builder app that I use for fixing/simplifying STL files exported from Rhino would run for a very long time, forever, or add artifacts (like a closed top) that rendered the part unprintable.
I have changed my GH layout to incorporate the Cap/SDiff functions now, but if you' like a 3DM file that uses the previous method I can certainly go back and create one for you.
…
Added by Birk Binnard at 9:35am on September 14, 2016
d as a mask). By inputting the # of grid points in the Y direction, it calculates # of grid points in the X direction, trying to create as close as possible a square grid division.
Hovering over the surfaces are 2 curves. By calculating the distance between the curves' points and grid points, an attractor pattern is created.
The source object is scaled based on the attractor curves, flipped upside down and adapted to the surface normal. Finally a solid difference is applied resulting in the indented surface pattern.
(Also, there is some more detailed input regarding object size, rotation and location.)
While running this on a machine with enough processing power to fly me to Mars, Grasshopper still becomes really slow and unresponsive ever since I've added the sDiff component. The same goes for utilizing the Trim component instead of the sDiff (I assume they do the same in this scenario?).
Am I missing something here? Is it somehow calculating large amounts of unnecessary data? Am I doing things overly-complex?
Attached the Rhino & Grasshopper files. Please play with the "# Objects in Y direction" slider, to (hopefully) experience what I mean. I am looking at a preferred # Object in the Y direction upwards of 50 at least. Changing the "3D Object" BRep to something else (in the hidden layers) might also influence performance.
So, what do you guys think?…
Added by Pete Bell at 10:34am on September 24, 2012