u see around you they lack any zen: that allows the 1% to shine.
2. Each thing that you do/design never dies inside you: Let's call it an "event". The sum of them formulate you as an Engineer. If some "events" are faulty (or worst: shallow) your kaleidoscopic sampling is disturbed proportionally to the sum of the bad "events".
3. "Events" MUST withstand Time: there's nothing worst than fading reasons for doing this or that.
4. "I want" means nothing (anyone wants this or that, so what?). "I did it because" means - maybe - something.
5. Cost (and modesty) should be always your FIRST concern: forget form exploitation(s), new frontier(s) and other similar nonsense > they just yield another pointless waste of resources and guide you gradually into an amoral state of the worst kind: Remember > 1 dollar can save the life of one kid in Africa per day > in this context it's rather hard to justify ... well ... pretty much anything.
6. If you can do anything imaginable this means that you should do LESS other wise you'll find yourself trapped into a rabbit hole that has many entries but not a single #^%^# exit.…
the mesh and 2 curves which represent the problem vector intersections. The VB script:
Dim cell_tot As New List(Of Integer) Dim ray_int As New list(Of line) For i As Integer = 0 To cells.Count - 1 Dim intx As Integer = 0 For j As Integer = 0 To pts.Count - 1 For k As Integer = 0 To sample_V.Count - 1 Dim r As Ray3d = (New Ray3d(pts(j), sample_V(k))) Dim cell_intx As Double = Rhino.Geometry.Intersect.Intersection.MeshRay(cells(i), r) If cell_intx > 0 Then intx = intx + 1 Dim l As New line(pts(j), sample_V(k), 100) ray_int.add(l) End If Next Next cell_tot.Add(intx) Next A = cell_tot B = ray_int
This works with 99% of the vectors but seems to systematically miss some. Wondering if it is a tolerance issue or if I am messing up the code. Screenshot of the geometry, rhino model, and GH defn attached.
Thanks,
Jeff…
ve an adequately low value for vibration. Script all runs fine and matches expected results for a few test cases. Phew. Note that in excel form this calculation runs over 6000 cells of look up's and arrays, it's not a trivial calc that can practically be rearranged to make it work back from an acceptable value.
But in my results I have 99 sets of vibration-acceptable outcomes, which I'd now like to examine to see which one uses the least material in its particular combination of beam thicknesses, slab thicknesses and other stuff to find the overall most efficient system. The plan at the moment is to copy the solver Record over into Excel, extract the %'s for the different variables and post-process the info to sort the acceptable outcomes by weight.
It feels like there must be a better way that avoids taking the data out and having a gap in the parametric thinking. Is there a way to ask Galapagos to give me all (or at least, loads of) combinations for which R < 8 and then test those for the minimum weight? Can I automatically take the winning results from fitness test 1 out into an array of data that feeds into a second fitness test in the same grasshopper space? …
value=WINTERDESIGNDAY, in SIZINGPERIOD:DESIGNDAY=SINGAPORE ANN HTG 99.6% CONDNS DB ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message: ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary... ************* 53 SizingPeriod:DesignDay, ************* indicated Name=SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99% Condns DB ************* Only last 10 lines before error line shown..... ************* 57 23.5, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb ************* 58 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} ************* 59 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) ************* 60 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} ************* 61 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} ************* 62 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} ************* 63 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} ************* 64 21, !- Day of Month ************* 65 12, !- Month ************* 66 WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type
The relevant lines in the IDF file is shown below:
SizingPeriod:DesignDay, SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99.6% Condns DB, !- Name 23, !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C} 0.0, !- Daily Temp Range {C} 23, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} 21, !- Day of Month 12, !- Month WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type 0, !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator WetBulb; !- Humidity Indicating Type ! SINGAPORE_SGP Annual Heating 99%, MaxDB=23.5°C SizingPeriod:DesignDay, SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99% Condns DB, !- Name 23.5, !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C} 0.0, !- Daily Temp Range {C} 23.5, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} 21, !- Day of Month 12, !- Month WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type 0, !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator WetBulb; !- Humidity Indicating Type
It seems that there is an empty line after the line for "!- Humidity Indicating Type" field, and nothing is specified for "! SINGAPORE_SGP Annual Heating 99%, MaxDB=23.5°C" field.
May I ask why this happens and how to correct the error?
Thank you very much!…
t BBox will then be mapped relative to the UVW space of that box to the new target boxes.
Where your definition is slipping up is the data matching aspect of GH. You have two lists (that count). One list contains 100 items of target boxes and the other contains 2 items of geometry. GH defaults to the Longest List data matching
List A --> List B
Target Box A0 --> Cuboid
Target Box A1 --> Cylinder
Target Box A2 --> (Oops List B has run out of items. Now GH will repeat the last item = Cylinder)
Target Box A3 --> Cylinder
.....
Target Box J9 --> Cylinder
Solution
There are two approaches to rectify this the most logical would be to group the geometries into one object (What you had in mind with the bounding box) to do this use the Group Component on the Transform Tab > Utility Panel.
The other approach is far more common in GH mentality. Use the Graft, right click the G input of Morph and select Graft from the Context Menu. This places all of the items in the List on to separate branches. Creating a list of lists (although these new list only have one item). When GH now tries to data match them it will apply the whole of the first geometry list (Only the Cuboid) to all of the target boxes and all of the second list (Cylinder) to the target boxes again.
I hope this helps…
like to use a single VRay material as a template for creating multiple identical materials with different colors within the GH environment (instead of creating manually in the document).
I have gotten as far as creating the materials. Now I need to add them to the document material table so that they can be used with Giulio's rendering component (which looks for either Rhino.Display.DisplayMaterial or a String that references a document object). I'm not going to learn C# to modify his script, so I am catering to its demands.
Private Sub RunScript(ByVal M As Object, ByVal C As Color, ByRef Mat As Object)
Dim mTemp As Rhino.DocObjects.Material mTemp = CType(M, Rhino.DocObjects.Material) If mTemp.Name.Length > 0 Then mTemp.DiffuseColor = C Dim nTemp As String = mTemp.Name & "_" & C.R & "_" & C.G & "_" & C.B mTemp.Name = nTemp End If
Rhino.DocObjects.Tables.MaterialTable.Add(mTemp) Mat = mTemp
End Sub
The code throws the error: Reference to a non-shared member requires an object reference. (line 96)
Do I understand that the material has to be assigned to a particular object in order to enter the Material Table? Can I assign it to a Layer instead? Any ideas? A better way to do this?
Thanks,
Marc
…
cannot be cast to [B]CustomClassXY. Type A originates from 'CustomLib, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' in the context 'LoadNeither' in a byte array. Type B originates from 'CustomLib, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' in the context 'LoadFrom' at location 'C:\Users\T\AppData\Roaming\Grasshopper\Libraries\CustomLib.gha'. (line: 96)This is how I do the casting:List<CustomLib.SomeClass.CustomClassXY> AllINPUTs = new List<CustomLib.SomeClass.CustomClassXY>();
for (int i = 0 ; i < INPUT.Count; i++)// { AllINPUTs.Add((CustomLib.SomeClass.CustomClassXY) INPUT[i]); }
The GHA is compiled with two namespaces, one for the component one for the library.
Thanks a lot in advance,
Tim…
st for the quality of the mesh.
Actually, convergence is much more than simply having low residuals. You can have a wrong solution with very low residuals. Usually, it is a combined process of both run time information on residuals and having an idea or expectation of what the simulation results should be. Another way of assessing convergence is if the residual values have been stable (within a very small limit, e.g. 1E-5) for more than a certain number of iterations (e.g. 1000). We are planning to provide run-time residual plots in Butterfly, hopefully soon. These plots can help keeping an eye on the solution.
You could try as a test if you want to switch to a blend of first and second order (by swapping upwind with linearUpwind in the fvSchemes)
.
Concerning mesh quality there are a number of ways, some of which are a bit advanced for this post and for BF's current capabilities. The best way to start is by refining the background mesh (i.e. the blockMesh). You can do that by assigning more cells to the x, y and z directions in the blockMesh component. However, make sure you increase the max global cells. I would suggest you monitor the output of the blockMesh in order to know the total number of cells there. Your max global cells has to be higher than that for SHM to even work. I'd suggest 2x to start with. Ofc all that requires a bit of trial and error depending on the case at hand.
Hope this helps!
Kind regards,
Theodore.…
nnot calculate (too many digits).
Or you want just to fill that space with random configuration and find some good for you?
Here's my first thoughts:
Again, as some other cases, iterative process.
(Conway's game of life, a cellular_automata-like process (?)... Install anemone.)
I would create 3 grids:
1 - grid of 100 values, cell's center points
these values can have more integer values like 0=free 1=occuped
2 - grid of 81 values, grid vertex points (excludig perimeter)
these values are where the center of 2x2 cells could be. 0=possible location 1=not possible location
3 - "grid" of 180 values, grid segment center, where 1x2 center could be
again 0 and 1
Then it's needed a "topology" between those 3 grids:
At each iteration those values updates each other by basing on placed cells and adjacent values.
At each iteration a new cell (random from A or B) is placed in a random possible location.
This is just my madness, and maybe I'm already far away from a result.
For sure a fasterst, simpler, smarter solution exists.…