ere are ways to remap the data (PathMapper etc) and there's an excellent tutorial by David Rutten about path mapper on this forum somewhere.
And always look at whether you simply need to flatten your data to ba able to work with it.
For point lists I often use the PointNumber component to help visualise the data and the good old Panel component helps too!
When you see some of the elegant, compact definitions on here, there often seems to be some mystical foresight needed right from the first component but hopefully this jedi skill comes with practice!…
Added by martyn hogg at 12:24pm on January 13, 2014
"Z" elevation and get their heights.
As this will be used by people in my office, the letter tagging vs numbered indices might get confusing.
I can't really leave them as numbers as the points are separated into various groups, ie. Pt Aa, Ab, Ac...
Pt Ba, Bb. Bc... and so forth.
With that being said, is it possible to rename indices and/or paths to strings other than their default numbering?…
the bubble diagram. This algorithm works by a set of attractive and repulsive forces (as in Equation 9) acting recursively on graph vertices, seeks a ‘relax’ situation for a graph, and reaches to a graph drawing. This tool is quite intuitive and shows in real-time bubble diagrams neatly according to the specified areas and the connectivity graph.
Equation 9
Attraction: 〖AF〗_ij=ka ∆x_ij for all linked (i,j)
Repulsion: 〖RF〗_ij=kr /x_ij for all (i,j)
The attraction/repulsion strength inputs are denoted as ka and kr
in the above equations. If some configuration is very messy, you need to have a high repulsion first to untangle it. I have not tried Angel's method but it is very similar to the method we have scripted for this component.
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Pirouz…
o be less from a tool-centric perspective, and more often geared toward general platforms (like BIM, or "computational" design).
For papers, I would search Cumincad first, as it captures a great deal of history as well as more current research from the proceedings of the eCAADe and ACADIA family of conferences. There are thousands of articles there.
Robert Woodbury's "Elements of Parametric Design" is considered pretty foundational. Sean Ahlquist and Achim Menges also put together a good anthology a few years back called "Computational Design Thinking" that collects several texts that are in line with the ICD's interests in biomimesis and emergence. "Inside Smartgeometry" is a good combination of theory, historical reflection, and state-of-the-art and edited by Brady and Terri Peters.
But really there is so much out there! One of my favorite short papers is Tom Maver's "CAAD's Seven Deadly Sins" which was basically a keynote mic-drop at the 1995 CAAD Futures conference. I'll spoil the end for you:
"7 Failure to criticise: Above all we have failed to exercise our critical faculties in relation to almost all of the research and development carried out by ourselves and by our peers in recent years. There has been a cosy conspiracy in the community to condone, even encourage, selfindulgent speculation and solipsism - a thoroughly bad example to set for young people in the academic community.
Conclusion: Perhaps these criticism are unjustly hard. Hopefully CAAD Futures 95 will prove me wrong or at least provide the opportunity for discussion."
…
Added by David Stasiuk at 11:10am on August 25, 2015
tween them)
However its not possible (Well its very tricky) for me to go back to the original geometry and merge the perimeter and the core into one zone.
As a result I thought that adding internal glazing would do the trick. However apart from using the addGlazing component I couldn't see any other way of adding internal glazing to the core zone without exploding it and putting it back together. So I modified the Glazing based on Ratio component so that the internal walls of the core would automatically be 95% glazing.
After passing the core zone through the modified Glazing based on Ratio component and then passing all the HB zones through the Solve Adjacency component I ran the daylight simulation. However the result is not what you would expect it appears as though there are no internal windows. (See the picture).
So two questions.
1. Is there a better way to merge these zones for a daylight study without going back to the original geometry?
2. From the illuminance map it appears that no light is passing through the internal windows. Why is this the case? Should I create a material that is like air so that the light can effectively pass through and then use this material instead?
…
ple I have to drag it through a panel before I can use it as an input to my python script. The supports comes as a list of strings (see figure) and I want to extract some of that information (e.g. what nodes are fixed) and write that to my txt file.
I extract the info with these lines:
for row in Support: node = row[8:row.find(' DOF')] file.write(" %s,\n" % node)
print node
>> 95
If I however don't drag it via a panel i get the following output:
for row in Support: node = row[8:row.find(' DOF')] file.write(" %s,\n" % node)
print node
>> Supports.Suppor
It's like the script doesn't get that each row is a string.
I have the input set to "list access" and type hint to "str" and I've tried to simplifying and flatten the list.
Greatful for help…