f my list.I don't understand why, but I guess I must be too young user ^^In the original list, i have a path {0;0;0;4} with two index and after the random node, {0;0;0;4} has 88 index.Items are not correct?I would have a comparable structure has the right list on my jpg (photomontage...)How I can do that?Thank you in advance
…
luppo del rapporto tra informazione e geometria. Si lavorerà su sistemi ad involucro in condizioni specifiche e i partecipanti impareranno a costruire e sviluppare strutture di dati parametrici per informare geometrie ‘data-driven’ ed estrarre le informazioni rilevanti da tali modelli per il processo di costruzione.
Tutors: Arch. Andrea Graziano (Co-de-iT) Arch. Salvo Pappalardo (Studio AION_architecture)
Informazioni complete e iscrizioni...
…
writing a solar-angle component, but I've never gotten around to that.
Dates are stored as 64-bit integers. Basically they count Ticks (1 tick = 100 nanoseconds, or 1 second = 10 million ticks) since midnight, January 1st, 1 AD. Formatting comes into play only when the time is represented as a String.
A wide variety of formatting flags is possible Dates, unfortunately the Grasshopper Expression language doesn't support the DateTime type, so it gets converted to Strings automatically. This makes formatting dates and times impossible. I'll probably get around to adding the type at some point, or maybe I'll make a dedicated DateTime formatter component (less work, but also less flexible).
I also do my best to interpret any string that might represent a date or a time:
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
catch-all phrases that pick up all of the rest of it: you have inputs, algorithms, and outputs.
It sounds like you don't necessarily want to wade into the miasma of academic reflection on the terminology, but in case you're willing to hold your nose and brave it there is some fairly interesting stuff out there. Nick's point about computation versus computerization is pretty reflective of a common mode of thinking about it. AD published a book edited by Sean Ahlquist and Achim Menges a couple years back called "Computational Design Thinking" and their introduction lays out a compelling argument for the distinction. Likewise Philip Galanter's paper "What is Generative Art? Complexity Theory as a Context for Art Theory" is a good read.
I mean, ultimately it's about semantics. If you're worried about "real, accurate meaning" the reality is you're going to have to justify the boundaries of your own definition one way or another. David is rather a wry literalist who I suspect enjoys taking the piss out of academics, particularly when they're all puffed up (and really, every event is a form of computation if you want to go there). But usage counts, and there's a growing body of work staking claim to these terms, so it's better to know how and why if you even want to ask the question.…
Added by David Stasiuk at 2:01pm on November 28, 2013
Excellent knowledge of Rhino and Adobe Creative Suite (Photoshop, Illustrator, Indesign)
* Experience in Revit is preferred * Knowledge of Grasshopper is a plus
* Excellent communication and expression skills, fluency in spoken and written English is a must
* Good team player
Please apply with the official LAVA application manager and refer to this ad:
https://lava.poolarserver.com/quicklink/pageApplicationUpload.aspx
…
t the elements I used CreateHBsrfs and I added "Adiabatic" in the EPBC input. Since the EnergyPlus results weren't what I expected, I checked the idf file and I discovered none of the element is adiabatic. Furthermore, the simulation doesn't use the materials I set up for the not-adiabatic wall.
I even tryed with MakeAdiabatic, MakeAdiabaticbyname and MakeAdiabaticbytype. With the first and second the problem is still the same. With MakeAdiabaticbyType, if I change one wall type in the CreateHBsrfs, it still remains the same type in EnergyPlus, so it makes all the walls adiabatic. Is there something I can do? I attach the GH file Thanks in advance Lisa…
The type of recipe appears to be related to the problem, because de error desolves when I connect the component to a different recipe.
A screenshot of the complete error message is in the attachment.
Error text:
0. Annual climate-based analysis1. The component is checking ad, as, ar and aa values. This is just to make sure that the results are accurate enough.2. Good to go!3. Current working directory is set to: c:\ladybug\unnamed\annualSimulation\4. Rotating the scene for 41 degrees5. Runtime error (TypeErrorException): unsupported operand type(s) for +=: 'str' and 'bool'6. Traceback: line 6509, in transform, "<string>" line 1665, in writeRADAndMaterialFiles, "<string>" line 193, in main, "<string>" line 258, in script
Many thanks in advance…
e design intent, but this is what Inventor is good at. The way it packages bits of 'scripted' components into 'little models' that can be stored and re-assembled is central to MCAD working. The big speed/usability advantage for the user that apps like Inventor provide is: All the defining, handling, assembling/gluing to the adjacent components is done as part of its 'main loop' with all the hooks that can cater to user interaction, ie traditional modeling. I guess one example of this is how Revit handles the placing of Adptive Components. AC's (and GC's GFT's) is pretty much a copy of Catia PowerCopies (which are probably a copy of something else). When placed, the AC's input points are transferred one by one to the cursor for the user to interactively place them. When copied, it tries to keep the same inputs, while changing its position/parameters. This saves a lot of time/nerves.
Catia, OTOH, is still thinking in terms of scripting and looks for matching property names, or uses a script to match strings, that nearly match. Sure, sometimes, this is unavoidable, but I think that there is a lot of room for incorporating a more traditional 'event-based' interface or 'wrapper' around the scripted components.So much is scripted in GH, maybe it should also be possible to script/define/constrain/assist the placement/gluing of the results? An example of this is how Modo's Toolpipe works. The Toolpipe is a simple tool to record the active selection, snap/alignment/working plane, tool settings for re-use. I could see the user benefitting if the GH component was aware of the app's 'state' when placing/assembling components.
Also, a lot of simple things could be 'modeled' first and translated into scripted form if GH could read the active workplane, snap settings etc. Draw first, convert to hand-scripted script later?Columns: Looking at your description, the vertical elements were modeled in Rhino, and referenced in GH? 5hrs to get some points on the lines? And using Excel as the design table? I think this could be 'drawn' and constrained in Inventor in a lot less time. I know the GH model would have a lot of flexibility, but in this case, what can you do with it that wasn't provided by an Inventor model? The other thing that MCAD apps like Inventor have, is the 'structured' interface that offers up all that setting out information like the coordinate systems, work planes, parameters etc in a concise fashion in the 'history tree'. This will translate into user speed. GH's canvas is a bit more freeform. I suppose the info is all there and linked, so a bit of re-jigging is easy. Also, see how T-Flex can even embed sliders and other parameter input boxes into the model itself. Pretty handy/fast to understand, which also means more speed.Would love to understand what you did by sketching.Starting point: I think we are talking across purposes. AFAIK, the solving sequence of GH's scripted components is fixed. It won't do circular dependencies... without a fight. The inter-component dependencies not 'managed' like constraints solvers do for MCAD apps.
With a manager, If one of the beams is connected to the column, changes in either component would trigger changes in the other to preserve the connection, regardless of the creation history. In GH, the dependencies are fixed, and the connection points would probably need to be defined independently, and placed 'upstream' of both elements. This makes editing laborious... but DAG processing is a lot quicker than constraints solving. Switching direction seems to be possible in the animation world. Maya etc have IK/FK switching, which seems to be able to reverse the solving direction on demand. Not sure how or whether the rig is scripted.…
. From the Thermal Comfort Indices component, Comfort Index 11 (TCI-11):MRT = f(Ta, Tground, Rprim, e)
with:- Ta = DryBulbTemperature coming from ImportEPW component- Tground = f(Ta, N) where N comes from totalSkyCover input. Tground influences the long-wave radiation emitted by the ground in the MRT calculation.- Rprim defined as solar radiation absorbed by nude man = f(Kglob, hS1, ac)- ac is the clothingAlbedo in % (bodyCharacteristics input)- I can't find any definition in the code of Kglob and hS1. Could you tell me please what are those values referencered to? --> probably the globalHorizontalRadiation but how?- e = vapour pressure calculated from Ta and Relative Humidity input
Do you agree that in this case the MRT does not depend on these inputs: location, meanRadiantTemperature, dewPointTemperature and wind speed?It does not depend neither on the other bodyCharacteristics like bodyPosture, age, sex, met, activityDuration...?
MRT calculated by the TCI-11 method is the mean radiant temperature of a vector pointing vertically with a sky view factor of 100%?For ParisOrly epw,
2. From the SolarAdjustedTemperature component (that seems to be more used for the UTCI calculation examples on Hydra compared to TCI-11).
In contrast to the TCI-11, this component distinguishes diffuse and direct radiation and contextualizes the calculation thanks to _ContextShading input, right? It can also be applied to a mannequin thanks to the CumSkyMatrix and thus evaluate the dishomogeneity of radiation exposure.This component seems not to consider the influence of vapour pressure on the result --> is it then more precise to put the MRT output (from the TCI) as an input of meanRadTemperature for SolarAdjustedTemperature?The default groundReflectivity is set to 0.25 --> is GroundReflectivity taken into account in the Tground or MRT calculation in the TCI component? If yes, what is the hypothesised groundReflectivity?The default clothing albedo of 37% (TCI-11 bodyCharacteristics) corresponds to Clothing Absorptivity of 63%?
If the CumSkyMatrix input is not supplied, I get 9 results for the mannequin --> where are those points/results coming from?
If the CumSkyMatrix input is supplied,I suppose the calculation of the 482 results correspond to a calculation method similar to the radiation analysis component that is averaged over the analysis period. Right?But I don't understand why the mannequin is composed of 481 faces and meshFaceResult gives 482 results.
Finally, what is the link between the MESH results, the solarAdjustedMRT and the Effective Radiant field ? Is there a paper to have a detailed explanation of the method?
3. Here are some results for the ParisOrly energyplus weather data. You can find here attached the grasshopper definition.There is no shading in this simulation and the result coming from the ThermalComfort indices for MRT is very different compared to the solar adjusted MRT.Why such a big difference and which of the result should be plugged into the UTCI calculation component?
Results for ParisOrly.epwM,D,H:1,1,12
Ta : 6.5°Crh: 100%globalHorizontalRadiation: 54 Wh/m2totalSkyCover: 10MRT (TCI-11): 1.2°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = directNormalRadiation : 0 Wh/m2diffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.64°CMRTDelta: 4.14°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.47°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = MRT (TCI-11)solarAdjustedMRT: 5.17°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C
Thanks a lot for your helpRegards,
Aymeric
…
ALISTICO. Ciascun modulo si svolgerà nell’arco di due giornate e si potrà scegliere se partecipare ad entrambi i moduli o altrimenti solo all’uno o all’altro.
In questo corso si insegneranno nuove tecniche di modellazione parametrica attraverso l'utilizzo di Grasshopper, rivoluzionaria plug-in di Rhinoceros. Grasshopper permette di esprimere al massimo le qualità e le potenzialità della modellazione Nurbs, abbandonando in parte l'interfaccia classica di Rhinoceros. Quest'ultimo infatti viene sostituito da un menù a tendine nel quale vengono collezionati nodi utili alla composizione di algoritmi risolutivi.
La plug-in Grasshopper, dimostra come il linguaggio del computer stia diventando un reale strumento progettuale.GRASSHOPPER-BASE - 8 oreil giorno 09/05/2013 dalle 10.00 alle 19.00
Nella prima parte del corso si insegneranno i metodi di esplicitazione degli algoritmi, applicati ad esercizi base utili alla comprensione del software. In queste ore si illustreranno, attraverso fasi operative, i seguenti argomenti:
Suddivisione degli algoritmi in parametri e componenti;
Tipologie di dati compatibili con Grasshopper e loro combinazione creando definizioni minime;
Funzioni matematiche e logiche
Data flow, liste e filtri di esclusione.
Costruzione di curve e superfici e loro trasformazione.
Scadenza preiscrizione per Grasshopper - BASE : 06/05GRASSHOPPER-SPECIALISTICO - 8 oreil giorno 10/05/2013 dalle 10.00 alle 19.00
Nella seconda parte del corso lo strumento viene specializzato affrontando editing e trasformazioni complesse sulle superfici:
Elaborazione delle superficie di suddivisione;
Tassellazione spaziale di superfici a doppia curvatura;
Gestione di parametri variabili per la progettazione di definizioni finalizzate al controllo del movimento;
Ideazione di algoritmi per il passaggio dal modello digitale al modello reale attraverso la tecnica dello sliceing.
Scadenza preiscrizione per Grasshopper - SPECIALISTICO : 07/05
Destinatari
Il corso è rivolto a tutti gli studenti universitari e professionisti che hanno una buona conoscenza delle tecniche di modellazione NURBS.
Prerequisiti
I partecipanti dovranno venire al corso muniti di proprio laptop e con software Rhinoceros perfettamente funzionanti.Alla fine del corso, verrà rilasciato l’attestato di partecipazione ad un corso di Rhinoceros qualificato certificato dalla casa sviluppatrice McNeel, valido anche per la richiesta di crediti formativi universitari.
Docente del corso
Il corso sarà tenuto da un docente qualificato, esperto in disegno e rappresentazione dell' architettura e del design:
Michele Calvano| _architetto, dottore di ricerca in rappresentazione architettonica specializzato nella modellazione matematica (Nurbs) e modellazione parametrica.
Docente ART (Autorized Rhino Trainer) - [vedi CV]
…