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 :)
…
late the angles between each.
My script so far isThe error occurs in line 90+91 I dont know why this is happening they should all be vectors since they are stored in a Vector3d list.
So if anybody could enlighten would be really appreciated.
Thanks and nice monday!…
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
…
ce issue with Rhino and shouldn't make an issue with EnergyPlus but just to have cleaner geometries, I untrimmed base surfaces so zones are closed brep now.
I also noticed that when you are adding multiple openings to a surface, the surface doesn't show-up in the output of createHBZoneFromHBSurfaces. The surfaces are there though and show up once you explode the zone! Again should be a tolerance issue for join. I need to take a closer look to both of these.
Also, in a number of the zones you had wall surfaces connected to createZoneFromHBSurfaces both before and after adding glazing. I removed parent surfaces so you don't end up having duplicate surfaces.
Back to adjacency which was your question, the issue happens since you have couple of zones with the same name so component was assuming them to be the same zone so it wouldn't solve the adjacency (Yes! it shouldn't. That was a bug which is fixed now). I changed the names and now it should find the surfaces that you are looking for.
Moreover, once you solve the adjacency, next solveAdjacency won't overwrite the BC unless you set remCurrentAdj to True.
Mostapha…
correct:
- the right value in the 0. path {0;77} is the smallest one.
- right value in the 1. path {0;78} is the value which is closest to the chosen value in the preceding path
- ..and so on for {0;79} and {0;80}
but when the paths change their first level, the iteration should start from the beginning:
- right value in the 4. path {1;32} is the smallest one.
- right value in the 5. path {1;33} is the closest to the chosen one in {1;32}.
- right value in the 5. path {1;34} is the closest to the chosen one in {1;33}.
..to be continued.
..this is, what I want to achive in the VB code, I implemented at the beginning of the discussion.
..and this is how I designed the input-parameter of the VB-element:
if someone could help me .. super-great!
…
Mac due to its versatility , but given this new laptop will be using mainly on Rhino, GH , i have some doubts whether to switch to a window based laptop.
I have a look at some high-end window laptops, Dell Alienware for example, with same specs as MBP and found the price are even more expensive than MBP , about 10-15 %.
With the new Rhino 5 is coming , will Bootcamp be good and efficient enough to run Rhino, GH and some rendering programs?
From my experience i find Rhino and Gh run smoothly on Bootcamp , but never run those programs on window based laptop myself , it's impossible for me to know the differences.
Some say BootCamp only deliver 80% performance of the program , if it's true i would really consider switching to window based laptop.
Any suggestions?
and if you suggest me to switch , what brand should i go for ?
Thank you,
…