ython patching via Rhinocommon CreatePatch being 7 of those seconds.
Currently, to avoid failed splits to remove the backgrounds, due to super shallow areas in skinny features that kiss the construction plane, I'm plane cutting a small amount below that construction plane, then moving the result back up.
I'm not using a Patch starting surface, as you can play with in the normal Rhino command, since it just sort of squashes broad curved mounds in ugly fashion, or else pulls them down to make ugly doughnuts everywhere around the input curves.
Details on how to use the CreateSurface command of Rhinocommon, hassles solved, is discussed here, with great all hours help from Peter Fotiadis, and I also discovered some clues from Djordje via Google, where he was massaging points into proper format:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/python-longer-version-of-rhino-geometry-createpatch-expected
The highest level CreatePatch command doesn't accept a normal Python list of objects in a variable like the two more simple versions of the same command does. You have to regather them into a Rhino container, which is really a .NET container. I still don't know yet how to upgrade the Python parallel patch component to input the whole panoply of objects you can patch over in Rhino because I don't know what container exists to hold them all that won't break the command.
The point of this overall script is to now be able to arrange lots of mere flat surfaces, surfaces because those can define holes versus borders easily, and create real 3D single surface NURBS geometry that can then be surface morphed (equivalent of Rhino Flow Along Surface) onto other 3D models.
…
Added by Nik Willmore at 1:04am on February 27, 2016
tors: R.G.D.E tutors Mostafa R. A. Khalifa, Architect (PhD - UNICAM - Italy)
Assistants: Nagham Baitawy - Architect - Jordan
Ahmed Hassan - Architect & TA - Egypt
deadline registration August, 25th , 2013
http://grasshopperworkshopamman.blogspot.com/ introduction: This workshop will introduce basic and advanced notions of Grasshopper and the methodology of parametric design and algorithmic modeling and its usage in Architecture, design, landscape, and urban scale. It is intended for professionals and students with a minimum experience in 3D Modeling.
…
on Grasshopper, I'd probably research how people use the tools. For example; take a well known architectural shape and make algorithms that duplicate this shape in a number of languages (written English, drawn images, RhinoScript, MEL, AutoLISP, Grasshopper etc. etc.), then compare these different implementations. Which approach allows you to achieve the goal with least steps? Which representation can be most easily explained to others? Which can be most easily changed? and so on and so forth.
Voronoi diagrams are pretty mundane these days. Not that long ago only the best and brightest could use them for architectural purposes, but now everyone who is smart enough to install a plugin can.
One of the truly useful features of Grasshopper (and -of course- programming in general) over traditional approaches is that it can handle vast amounts of data. Given a couple of hours I can create a Voronoi diagram for 500 points by hand, but I would be hard pressed to manually evaluate the year-average of sun light contribution on every vertex of a 10000 point mesh.
If you're looking to do something reasonably innovative (and I think 10~11 weeks is plenty of time for that), I have yet to see someone do 3D isovist data maps of architectural models. I think Grasshopper can be used to at least aid in researching isovist properties of platonic, organic and custom volumes.
Or... a lot of people worry about shadow-casting properties of building envelopes, but nobody seems to be interested in solar reflection via windows and other reflective surfaces.
Or... given the average dioptre of the human eye, what can we say about the level of detail that is perceivable on every square unit of the facade of a 50 story building?
Or... how are grooves in a floor, wall or facade surface perceived as one walks past them? Or take it even further and research the rate of change of visual properties of a bas-relief surface.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 4:41am on November 21, 2009
noceros 3D, en caso de aprobar satisfactoriamente el examen, se les otorga un reconocimiento avalado por el CMJ y la Secretaría del Trabajo. Este workshop va dirigido principalmente a estudiantes de arquitectura; sin embargo, ya que la parametrización es una herramienta que abarca diferentes ámbitos del diseño, se pueden integrar estudiantes de diseño industrial, artistas o estudiantes que tengan relación con lo gráfico y lo formal. Al finalizar el curso, los asistentes serán capaces de manejar Rhinoceros y Grasshopper en un nivel medio, con el objetivo de que el alumno pueda continuar aprendiendo con alguno de nuestros workshops subsiguientes o de manera autodidacta.
Las personas inscritas deben tener conocimientos básicos de geometría y de preferencia utilizar algún programa de dibujo en 2D o modelación en 3d. Rhino.GetMe Rigid // Enfocado a construir un objeto de diseño parametrizado a cualquier escala, el workshop se divide en tres módulos: Módulo 1 // Rhinoceros 3D // Una sesión de cinco horas. Módulo 2 //Grasshopper // Una sesión de cinco horas. Módulo 3 // Ejercicios prácticos /Tres sesiones de diez horas c/u. Es necesario traer el equipo necesario para trabajar, se cuenta con equipos en caso de que algún alumno no cuente con laptop pero son limitados, por favor avísanos a la brevedad si lo requieres. Se les recomienda que traigan dispositivos de almacenamiento en caso de que necesitemos compartir información.
El costo del Workshop es de $6500.00 para profesionales y $5000 pesos para estudiantes.
Pre-venta únicamente para estudiantes, hasta el día viernes 29 de junio, con un costo de $3500.00 pesos.
El cupo del evento es limitado puedes apartar tu lugar y terminar de liquidar antes del 29 de junio en pre-venta, antes del 6 de junio en admisión general.
Para hacer tu registro al workshop por favor envía un correo a workshop@transformalab.com incluyendo:
Nombre
Universidad u oficina de procedencia
Teléfono móvil
En el caso de estudiantes por favor incluyan una copia escaneada de su Constancia de Estudios para hacer válido su descuento.
Una vez recibida su información se les enviará un correo con la información necesaria para realizar su pago mediante depósito bancario, y posteriormente un mail de confirmación de su participación en el Workshop.
www.transformalab.com…
ll the wires gone. Now you'll have to hook them up again. This is the sort of thing that gets annoying after the third time.
Problem #2. The solution in Grasshopper iterates over all objects and solves each one in turn. Of course a lot of objects depend on other objects, so it usually becomes a cascade of objects solving themselves for the benefit of other objects. It is therefore very difficult to predict the order in which objects are solved.
The root iteration is the same as the display order (back to front), but the topology of the network complicates matters greatly. If you change the topology of the network during a solution, you might end up with whole portions of the network not being solved at all, or, worse, a conflict in the topology checker that makes Grasshopper think a network is self-referencing.
Problem #3. Grasshopper caches all manner of things about a network that can be recomputed from basic principles, but take a long** time to do so. If you start to expire caches where I don't expect you to, we'll either run into null reference errors, or stale cache data, or invalid cache data. Problems like these are very difficult to track down.
Problem #4. File IO. Components get deserialized from ghx files based on their default layout. In your case, we need to solve a component before we know how many outputs it needs. This cannot be done until the file has been completely deserialized. It's a chicken and egg problem, which will result in missing wires every time you open a file.
If you want to have a flexible number of outputs on your component, I'd suggest you add a menu item to your component that will change the output list when clicked, then causes a recompute. This way you won't mess with the network topology during solutions and people don't get their connections pulled out from under them. You'll need to do quite a few things to make this work, but I'll be happy to help you out there:
- Adding menu items and menu click handlers
- Properly removing parameters from a component
- Properly adding parameters to a component
- Recording undo for parameter changes
- Writing custom settings to a ghx archive
- Reading custom settings from a ghx archive and making sure your component is compatible with the ghx layout before it tries to deserialize itself.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
* This sort of thing has cropped up before and it has always been due to human error.
** 2ms or more…
Added by David Rutten at 9:28am on October 19, 2010
strictly with code (BTW: did you crossed Rubicon?).
1. See this: Imagine a curve (say a "rail") that is divided N times and then circles are created with random radii. Circle control points (9, that is) are sampled (obviously) into a DataTree where branches are the rail divisions. Let's call the control points: "start" seed points.
2. Imagine a capability ... that stores all these (the original "seed" control points) into a "parameter" and then each time that a change occurs to them (varying the x/y, on a per point on a per branch on a per plane basis[that provides the Z]) stores the "modified point" into the parameter (at the same index with the old: meaning "deleting" the old) ... and then some other code gets that data and makes curves and lofts them. Reset means: sample again the original "seed" points into that "parameter". Closing are reopening the definition has no effect: the lofted stuff is derived from the (internalized, so to speak) modified points (from the "parameter").
3. A variety of "automation" is available: for instance if you jump from branch to branch and from item to item the value of the selected point is inquired and the sliders that control the new x/y are "set" to 0,0 (meaning no change - yet) values. There's mo "store" mode: it works automatically as far as you modify points or you hit the reset button
4. This does that (only achievable with code):
5. Obviously points can been replaced with anything ... and thus ... we can individually modify items in collections ... and forget for ever attractor points and all that (OK where appropriate, he he).
I'll post 30 similar examples soon in the forthcoming mother of all threads: "GH goes (at last) interactive". Watch this space.
BTW: study the "animation" where points with index 6 are "sequentially" modified. I've added some delay in order to give you time to get the gist of the whole thingy.
best, Lord of Darkness
…
4 explode the text
5 select the exploded text, which are now curves, and the border from step 2 and use the planarsrf command again
6 make your surface using the two curves at top and bottom and a section. Use the sweep2 command
7 select your negative text surfaces and use the flowalongsrf command
maybe the scale of the text can be edited by the size of the surface or of the text but I bet you can figure that out! good luck!…
l design.
2/ Optimization
2.1/ in prefabrication
2.2/ combinatorial
2.3/ approach comparisons (i.e. deterministic vs stochastic)
2.4/ share your research
2.5/ ... etc. the list goes on and on
3/ Share you design rationale and how computation fits in
4/ Need help with this problem...
5/ Challenges and workshops announcements
6/ CD News
7/ Share computational design projects under construction or built (akin to skyscrapercity)
8/ and so many other categories and sub-categories...
Just my first thoughts. That breakdown in optimization is just an example. Maybe 'sections' is an old-school way of seeing things, I just wanted to share some thoughts on the kind of content I look forward to seeing. It can be pragmatic topics, but also theoretical, and allow folks to share their projects and research. Some categories are specific, others broad. I suppose I'm interested in community building with regards to computational design. I think SmartGeometry attempted to accomplish this at some point in the past, to some degree. However their focus appears to be in the workshops and challenges.
I recall the silly flame wars that the CG industry had 20 years ago (lame). I'd avoid that, even if it meant forbidding the mention of any specific software in certain areas or in the entire forum. Which would be tricky, but the endless flame wars and silly comparisons were such a waste of everyone's time in CG.
Without dwelling on this too much yet, I think that the software specific questions belong in software specific forums. If we already had a common language for computational design, you'd just need to add the right description as a meta-tag to any Dynamo or Grasshopper forum post, and you'd be able to find analogous solutions in either forum effortlessly, right?
The Dynamo and Grasshopper forums lack design-centric content. The emphasis is generally on the tools and workflow. Computational design is hybrid in essence, it involves both design and computer programming (be it visual or textual). We could really use a forum for knowledge exchange where the expectation is that both are discussed with equal status.
I disagree that such a forum ought to exclude professional programmers. It should include professional programmers whom have an interest in design, and also include professional designers whom have an interest in computer programming, and everyone in between, and enthusiasts, and artists whom are curious about algorithms as a creative medium, and academics, and students, and etc etc. As long as there is rich content and activity on design as well, not only the computational bit, then the crowd will be diverse and we'll all have more to learn from one another.…
s not imported in the workflow, there is no problem for the intersectMass component, no matter how we change the random seed to generate different groups of breps with overlapping surfaces:
2. However, once we add the mass2Zone component into the workflow, we have this problem as posted here.
3. As you pointed out, the warning is given when "Hzones == True" which only happens when one of the objects in _bldgMassesBefore is recognized as a zone already stored in HB Hive. So, I added one line after line257 to print out the zone name:
4. It seems for the cases that the intersecMass component shows warning, there is a zone name printed:
5. Whereas for those cases that the intersecMass component shows no warning, there is no zone name printed:
6. Even if the zone creation is turned off, there is still zone name printed for cases that intersectMass is unable to process:
So, I agree with you that this might be related to the HoneyBeeHive which stores honeybee zones.
Maybe whenever upstream geometries change that are connected to either intersectMass or Masses2Zones, the HoneyBeeHive has to be cleaned up and zone objects inside need to be recreated.
Hope Chris and Mostapha can kindly take a look and advise if this is the source of the issue.
Thanks.
- Ji…
ariations, but each seems to lack the sophistication to generate a ‘zip’ that retains its general shape over the whole curve.
Basically I’m trying to understand the process behind this: http://www.schindlersalmeron.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=27&Itemid=29
Here is an image of the latest definition.
1. I draw a curve in Rhino, and then define it in grasshopper. I also define the point as the beginning of the curve.
2. I offset the curve to a specified depth, based on structural member
3. I generate a line from the point at a tangent to the curve, then rotate it a
defined angle.
4. I find the intersection between the rotated line and the offset curve. Then generate a tangential line from this new point
5. Line is rotated at the same angle as before.
6. Process repeated.
The idea is to then generate a circle of defined diameter at each of the intersection points, then find the intersection of the circles with the curves, which are then joined up with straight lines to create the ‘zip’. This would mean a lot of copy-pasting and list management that I’m not really capable of with my limited grasshopper experience.
I had tried generating points at intervals along the curve and then eventually generating lines from one line to another with a shifted listed to form the tooth angle, but it wouldn’t retain its shape over the entirety of the curve.
Does anyone have any advice for how to tighten up this definition? I imagine that I will need to delve into vb.net scripting to address the recursive nature of the process.
I fear that I’m going about this in entirely the wrong way...
Of course the next step is to flatten out the curve for CNC manufacture.
Any help would be greatly appreciated! The potential for using grasshopper in design is amazing, and I would love to gain a deeper understanding of it!…