ve I want to use.
I want to then divide the curve and paste in a few other components (diamonds in my case) that are placed perpendicular to the curve. To achieve this I'm using the Perpendicular Frames component to extract frames from the curve and then I orient the other geometry to these frames. This works fine, except for one issue I have which is that the middle frame generated by the PFrames component seems to be rotated 90 degrees from the other frames. Because of this the geometry I try to orient obviously also orients in the wrong direction.
Attached are two images that hopefully illustrate the problem, you can see that the middle frame has another direction in comparison with the rest. Why is this happening? It must have something to do with the initial curve and at one point I thought it might be because I used 'join curves' to create the curve from two other curves but when I tried it on another curve that I also extracted using Deconstruct Brep that wasn't joined, the same thing is happening. Does anyone maybe know what's happening here? Thanks!…
is we pumped some insulating foam into the mould to act as a further compression element to the initial blue rods. At this moment in time I am trying to create a grasshopper script to mirror this material behaviour
I have been playing around with the twist_frames script but it's not exactly what I want. In an ideal world I could create a relatively simple mesh and then have it tighten around the linear elements. This would mean that the initial model is made so that the mesh meets the points before the kangaroo is initialised.
Just to note. This image should be rotated 90 counter clockwise. The model tapers to the end because we weren't able to spray the foam to the bottom this should not be a concern for the script as that is a physical hurdle rather then a digital. Also, the model was hung thought out the process so was not in a state of tensile equilibrium
…
Added by Conor Scully at 6:26pm on November 25, 2014
direction.) these lines are important because they're all straight lines. The idea is then to have curved pieces going the opposite direction to form the lattice (doesn't have to be exactly 90 degrees right now).
So far, I haven't been having much luck with things like curve on surface or isotrim, and I'm a bit stuck. Even if someone had an idea for an approach, that would be a huge help. Here's where I get to before running into difficulties:
I've also highlighted two points on the straight pieces to show the approximate direction of where the curved connecting pieces would ideally go. I tried using those as uv points for a curve-on-surface, but with no luck!
Any help would be massively appreciated!…
m boundary for a much more fine-grained voronoi. So it may be similar to the 2D voronoi groups, but not really.
I managed to create the points within the geometry, and build a fine-grained voronoi diagram, but could not cut it down using SDiff.
Now I have a few questions:
1. Is there a better method to create the points? Because first generating thousands points in a bounding box and then throwing away 90% of them is quite time consuming and doesn't seem to be an elegant way.
2. Is there a good method to convert a mesh into a brep? Then I could use SDiff to get me a result (but I'm still not sure if that is exactly what I want)
3. Is there overall a better/smarter approach to the problem?
Thank you very much for your help :)
…
divides itself in 3.
Parameters: Length and Angle (the middle one is fixed, the other two vary in angle).
Goal: The circles need to be tangent at all times. So if you reduce the radius, the angle would close in order to bring the circles close together, till they are tangent.
When you increase the radius, the angle opens, up to a maximum of 90 degrees. From this point onward, the only parameter that can make the circles still be tangent is the length of the lines, which should increase in order to keep the circles tangent.
Thanks for any help
Shynn
…
oxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints. The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables: (1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!…
Boxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints.
The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables:
(1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!
…
re is my problem... I need to arrange Boxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints.
The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables:
(1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!
…
ion into the world of Parametric Design using these two sofwares. Grasshopper is a graphical program language through which one can model complex geometric forms. It builds generative algorithms were outputs to these forms are tied to the inputs of subsequent components. Rhino is an advanced NURBS modeler through which one does precision modelling, project workflow and organization. Grasshopper utilizes Rhino 3-D as a modeling platform to develop parametrically controlled models with real time geometric manipulation. These two programs are a powerful combination where Grasshopper parametrically defines the model logics to explore variations and optimized solutions while Rhino models and visualizes it. These two programs are essential for architects, designers, engineers, professionals, and students interested in exploring professionally the world of parametric design."This workshop will be held in Amman/Jordan between the 15th and 22nd of January 2016 from 5pm to 10pm …
his on the programming forum I'm guessing you're looking for a VB or C# approach to this?
Here are two algorithms (pseudo code, very similar) which will simulate a droplet of water on a surface (ignoring momentum, surface tension, surface angle, collisions with other drops etc.)
Algorithm one, easy implementation, slows down on horizontalish areas:
1) Pick a point somewhere on the surface. How you get to this level is your problem.
2) Lower the point by a certain fixed amount along the z-axis. Say, 0.1 units.
3) Project the lowered point back onto the BRep using a ClosestPoint function.
4) If the newly projected point is very similar to the input point, abort, otherwise, repeat step 2.
Algorithm two, more difficult, better control over step size:
1) Pick a point somewhere on the surface. How you get to this level is your problem.
2) Find the normal vector at this point.
3) If the normal vector is (nearly) straight up, abort.
4) Find the CrossProduct between the normal vector and the straight-up vector.
5) Rotate the normal vector 90 degrees around this cross-product.
6) Scale the rotated vector so it becomes the length of your sampling accuracy.
7) Move the point along the vector and pull it back onto the surface (should be a short distance if your step-size is small)
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 12:20pm on November 23, 2009