itects are at the spoke of a number of different specialties, and their work affects many different people. It's not like an architect is a painter, whose work may offend or upset the occasional viewer. As an architect you have a responsibility to produce quality work. How can anybody trust you with this responsibility if you're taking a purely artistic approach? What guarantees do you have that your clients money won't be spend on a poorly designed project if you can provide no rational for why your design is the way it is?
2. What is any sense in purely architectural discourse?
I don't get. Discourse is there to flesh out problems and agree on solutions. It might not always accomplish that, but what's the difference between talking about architecture as opposed to any other topic?
3. strictly looked, can be determined sense generally in a purely architectural discourse?
I'm sorry I don't understand.
4. What is purely architectural discourse?
I imagine it's having a discussion where you only talk about architecture?
5. What is Funktionalismus or Rationalismus without philosophical support?
Functionalism and Rationalism are ideologies. Some would even call them methodologies. They are inherently philosophical things as they are nothing more than a collection of ideas and views. As a society we've decided that a certain level of rationalism is a good thing. The Enlightenment continued this trend after the Dark Age hiatus and it quickly led to a large number of very tangible benefits for almost everyone.
I'm not arguing for or against Functionalism as an architectural style. I'm asking for a measure of rationalism in our academic process.
6. Would not be the pure functional fulfilment empty ?
Let's find out. In the meantime I'll settle for a little functionalism.
7. Would be not a critical position on the promise of purely rational algorithms applied?
Algorithms and algorithmic design are rational in the sense that they do not allow for ambiguity. But that doesn't make them rational in the real-world sense. These are not the same kind of 'rational's. I can make an algorithm that produces total nonsense, but does so completely reliably. I can also use an algorithm in a setting for which it wasn't intended, thus invalidating the results.
This is actually the crux of the problem. Which algorithms does one use to solve a problem and what data do they require? If you can't answer this question or if you do not understand the algorithms you are using (at least on a superficial level) then I'd say you have no business using them.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Tirol, Austria…
Added by David Rutten at 12:48pm on August 19, 2013
an almost planar tissue (your case) can cause a variety of issues up to the undo able state (metal parts/components grow in size as well for no reason). See forces estimated by FF below.
2. Therefor I strongly suggest to consider Plan B (a) mastermind a secondary "anchor" capability in order to achieve a far more stable system (b) use a mount design that can support this (and comply with the attractor concept of yours). Here's a variable mount custom system (mostly machined AND not cast) that is suitable for the scope (Rhino reads the stp file OK .... but makes a colossally big file - thus I attach here the original).
3. On first sight lot's of things in this system appear "odd". For instance: is it stable? Why these double cables are used? How far can be adjusted? (that's a classic case for feature driven parametric design - not doable with Rhino).
4. This concept (strut axis exported only) is tested in FORMFINDER and some other far more complex membrane apps that I use quite often (not RhinoMembrane). Here's is what FF tells us about:
Observe a different kind of "stress" when this is converted to radial type:
5. If you insert the stp file to the Rhino file provided (exactly as exported from FORMFINDER - no mods of mine of any kind) you'll see what goes where (and why). That way the usage of double cables is rather obvious (and a lot other things - for instance the way that the struts achieve "equilibrium", see the slots in the base mount plate.
6. If this approach is worth considering your definition requires some serious rethinking (far more simpler/manageable with the drawback that the real parts they are "static" they can adjust only as far this particular solution allows them to do - controlling them parametrically is clearly impossible with the current state of R/GH capabilities).`
All in all: this case works because the cables push the anchor points downwards and the struts push them upwards.
more in a while
…
s mostly related with panelization. Panelization means many things, for instance (1.1) designing an aluminum facade system (most common case: "hinged" extrusion profiles that contain opaque or transparent materials - the "facets"), (1.2) designing insulation and final "coating" in roofs, (1.3) ... (1.n) continue at infinitum.
2. Let's stick to the least understood (and less glamorous) part : topic (1.2). The best core material for the core job is FOAMGLAS:
http://www.foamglas.co.uk/building/applications/
3. Most ignorants in our trade believe that the main point/task of a thermal insulation is the U thing. But in fact is the Dew Point (DP) management the most important of them all (DP = critical temperature at witch the relative humidity reaches saturation). Thus we arrive to the compact "roof" (or some compact "part" of the AEC thing) matter: (3.1): Dew point INSIDE the thermal insulation, (3.2): no thermal bridges, (3.3): no air from the application medium (say plywood, corrugated/flat sheets, special Foamglas Px panels etc etc) up to to the water proofing membrane(s) (say 2 layers of SBS bituminous membranes). Here's the most typical case of them all (special tapered inserts not shown - notice the cladding fixing method without perforating the sheets, no other insulating material can do that):
4. The above image brings us directly to Kangaroo matters (if we add the "liquid" thing meaning no linear geometry around). By "liquid" I mean that our working surface is no more "flat":
In particular we must: (4.1) test if the corrugated sheets can follow the curvature (they can up to a point), (4.2) test if the FOAMGLAS panels (straight "boxes") can safely AND FULLY adhere to the medium without spending the GNP of Nigeria to do it (*), (4.3) test if the VM Zink (or Kalzip) cladding systems can cut the mustard - they are more flexible than the corrugated sheets (and can been tapered on-the-fly, Germans are very innovative on that matter) ... but... well ... you understand where the issue is, I do hope.
(*) you can use 85/25 bitumen (cheap and nightmare to put it) or PC500 (very expensive and easy to apply). Obviously some mechanical fixing is required as well.
And what is the most important test of them all? Well ... the 4.2 thing, what else?
more soon.
…
Send Feedback
Defines enumerated values for all implemented corner styles in curve offsets.
Namespace: Rhino.GeometryAssembly: RhinoCommon (in RhinoCommon.dll) Version: 5.1.30000.12 (5.0.20693.0)
Syntax
C#
public enum CurveOffsetCornerStyle
Visual Basic
Public Enumeration CurveOffsetCornerStyle
Members
Member name
Value
Description
None
0
The dafault value.
Sharp
1
Offsets and extends curves with a straight line until they intersect.
Round
2
Offsets and fillets curves with an arc of radius equal to the offset distance.
Smooth
3
Offsets and connects curves with a smooth (G1 continuity) curve.
Chamfer
4
Offsets and connects curves with a straight line between their endpoints.
…
reaky thing consisting from triangulated "modules" (i.e an assembly out of this, this and that) where the exterior edges ARE always under tension (= SS 304/316 cables OR nylon) and the interior ones MAY be under compression ( = steel, aluminum, wood, carbon) OR ... some of them ...may be under tension. Bastardized T trusses deviate a bit from theory ... but who cares? (not me anyway). T trusses have many variants (but as the greatest ever said: Less is More).
2. Large scale T for AEC is the art of pointless since it costs around the GNP of Nigeria. Here's some indicative components from a module of a multi adjustable TX system costing (the module) ~ the price of my Panigale (Google that):
The above is mailed to a friend who has MIT (yes, that MIT: the top dog) on sight ... therefor he needs some appropriate "credentials", he he.
3. The distance that separates the above with the demo TDT node provided is around 666.666 miles - but we don't care: we are after Art not some testimony to vanity.
4. On purpose I've used a smallish ring to give you a clear indication upon the constrain numero uno in truss design: CLASH matters.
5. You'll need:
(a) A decision related with the tensioners (classic Norseman + SS cables or nylon machined thingies?).
(b) A machinist who can do elementary stuff (like the adapters) and can weld this to that (the "ring" for instance). His abilities must be 1 in a scale of 100. If the fella has a computer (not a CRAY) and he knows what 3dPDF is (hmm) ... well ... use that way to communicate with him PRIOR designing anything: He must agree on the parts BEFORE the whole is attempted (as a design in GH or in some other app).
(c) A carpenter with a wood lathe for the obvious. BTW: BEFORE doing any TDT attempt > ask the carpenter about the available wood strut sizes. Against popular belief DO NOT varnish the wood (use exterior alkyd/oil stains from some top maker like the notorious US company PPG).
http://www.ppgpaints.com/products/paints-stains-data-sheets
(d) Good quality cigars (and espresso) plus some classic music (ZZTop, PFloyd, Cure, Stones, U2 etc etc) during the assembly.
(e) Faith to the Dark Side (see my avatar).
May the Force (the dark option) be with you.…
s, Mesh Pleated Inflation". I am not an expert of this way of modelisation (first time today) but it is named funicular.
Almost 2 ways
1) Kangarooo from Daniel Piker , see example
2) http://www.grasshopper3d.com/profiles/blogs/finding-funicular-forms-using-the-dynamic-mass-method
I propose you a script, far from the real one but could help you to build a surface like you want, a smooth one. The real is not like that it has a lot of V shapes.
1) draw on XY plane the main lines of the structure
2) draw surface with rhino with corner points. Always with the same way in order to have U and V aligned correctly.
3) extract fixed edges with rhino (yellow here) put them on a specific layer
4) F10 => select all control point except edges moves them upper (z > 0)
I gave you an example far from perfect at this time. It uses kangaroo. Open rhino first followed by GH script.
Ways to improve :
In real shapes begin in zigzag.
Surface must be added to kangaroo, surely through mesh... play with goals of Kangaroo ... …
ach object has a "Source" property (layer, parent, object) - my fix causes it to look at this source property in order to determine where to draw the plot width value from. I was already doing this for color and material, but had neglected to do it for plot width.
2. The "Print Preview" viewport display option is calling the "PrintDisplay" command in Rhino, which you will notice takes a "Thickness" value - this is the conversion factor between plot weights/print widths (in mm) and the number of pixels in absolute screen width. As you note, this is a relative and not an absolute width in model units, so it does not change when you zoom. In most design applications it would be quite strange to specify the print widths of your geometry in absolute units - e.g. setting your lines to be 50 ft thick. In illustrator you are always working in "Paper Space" whereas in Rhino you have to be aware of the differences between Model Space and Paper Space (or Layout Space in Rhino terminology.)
My lineweight preview component operates on the basis of pixels - if you tell it "2" it will display a 2px-wide line irrespective of your zoom. The 4x conversion ratio you note is purely a function of the setting of your PrintDisplay command in Rhino.
3. The good news is my custom preview component ALSO supports "Absolute" lineweights in world-space units - so that they create a line that gets fatter when you zoom in and thinner when you zoom out (though it can't get thinner than a pixel, naturally.) Set the "Absolute" toggle (the 4th option" on the component - I think it will create the "Illustrator-like" behavior you're looking for, without having to create surfaces from your lines.
4. The dynamic pipeline component updates when the by-object plot weight changes. It does not update when the layer-level plot weight changes. In the end I have had to make some judgment calls about what kinds of changes should trigger a component refresh: too sensitive, and a definition could be forced to recompute unnecessarily on every little change; too insensitive, and you require too many forced refreshes.
In general I have focused on triggering updates from object-level attribute changes (Where they conceptually represent data about THIS OBJECT) and NOT from layer-level attribute changes (Where they conceptually represent data about a category). The Layer Table is the component that is designed to report changes to layer-level settings - and with "Auto Update" enabled on this component, it will in fact trigger an update on layer-level attribute changes.
With this approach, you may have to match up your geometry to the layers it belongs to, and then use the layer table component to retrieve the plot weight settings. The definition shown below is an example of how to do this. It assumes you are using layer-level plot weights.
…
d work exactly as the physical model. In the model, we have a curved surface which can be analysed into squares. These squares are filled with two kind of units which are connected with each other and create a grid that follows this curved surface.
We have managed to analyse this curved surface into a planar surface consisted of squares and we painted the squares with colours to represent the kind of unit that "fills" each square. So, now in rhino I have managed to build the curved surface that I want it to be filled with the two types of units.
I also have the planar surface built in Gh with the squares split into two lists, each one for each kind of unit. Because these units are mambranes, I used kangaroo to make them act like mambranes.
I hope I described the problem clearly. The point is to keep the dimensions of the units
the same and make it work in Kangaroo. Do you have anything in mind that I should look up or any advice ? Thank you in advance and i m sorry for the extended description.
*Pic 1: the curved surfaces that has to be filled with the units
*Pic 2: The binary system that shows which square is occupied by which unit
Blue=2 , Red=1, White= Blank
*Pic 3: unit 1
*Pic 4: unit 2
*Pic 5: a point of view of the physical model (not the final curve at the surface)
…
ace
4 : Waterplane inertia
5 : "Finesse" f = WLL/(V^1/3) _ f stands for "frog" also, I think you use WLL^3/V in the English speaking world. I could have used WLL directly because the hull is set at the desired displacement before analysis - no use to test at random displacement indeed!
---First try on a 40' cruiser with jittery control points and bad volume repartition, a 30-seconds-work to a tee.
Red dots are original points, white mesh is current surface control polygon.
INPUT
After just a few steps I was able to find good candidates. Check the video.
OUTPUT
---Second try on an Open 60' hull. This was an rhino modeling exercise for students, so it's clean and realistic already, and I gave the same objective values as the original to see if it would fall on its feet. In this case I blocked the edges points.
I was amazed to see that It works!
INPUTOUTPUT
See the nice diagram! All points closest to the wet surface axis have good CP and position. On the left, very round hulls with poor stability (purple) and short WLL (big), on the right, wide hulls with higher water resistance (cyan) and longer WLL (small).
This is only one generation. with a few steps more it zooms in where the two sides meet. The two surfaces actually cross and I found very quickly an individual dominant on both wet surface and stability fronts.
I LIKE IT :)))
========
…
e.github.io/hydra/viewer?owner=chriswmackey&fork=hydra_2&id=Outdoor_Microclimate_Map
Thank you very much in advance!
1. why the underground zone representing the ground is defined as a plenum zone? By default, an office zone program is assigned. Will this affect the outside surface temperature of the ground plenum zone and affect, in turn, the outdoor microclimate map calculation?
2. I assume the construction GroundMaterial composed of five layers of 200mm concrete materials as assigned to the ground plenum zone is to assimilate a ground surface composed of thick concrete. But why this construction is assigned to this zone using both the Set EP Zone Construction and Set EP Zone Underground Construction components? Will the surfaces of this zone automatically recognized as underground surfaces based on their positions in relation to the default xy plane?
3. why a brep is connected to the input node distFromFloorOrSrf on the Indoor View Factor Calculator component which is expecting a number according to its annotation?
4. why the outdoor comfort analysis recipe is used for the indoor comfort analysis component?
5. why the OutdoorComfResult and DegFromNeutralResult are 2 csv files with PPD and PMV values if PMV/PPD thermal comfort model is only applicable to indoor air-conditioned space?
…