the programme will investigate patterns of emergence, differentiation and complexity in natural formation processes which will be transformed to digital simulation platforms for design purposes. In contemporary architectural processes, a significant diversion from linear parametric tools towards generative design simulations is taking place. The design and analysis processes will reflect this shift by focusing on simulations, whereby attention will be kept on the process of design generation as opposed to the final form itself. The design agenda of the programme will revolve around the design and fabrication of a one-to-one scale pavilion.
The programme will be formulated as a two-phase process:
Stage 1: Participants will gain an understanding of formation processes in nature, coupled with core concepts related to complexity. During this stage, basic and advanced tutorials on generative design algorithms and analysis tools will be provided. Building on its core methodology from its previous versions, AA Istanbul VS will perform as a team-based workshop promoting collaboration and research. Participants will be introduced to advanced fabrication techniques.
Stage 2: Participants will propose design interventions based on the skills and knowledge gained during the first stage. Study models of various scales will be produced, finally followed by the fabrication and assembly of a full scale working prototype which unifies the design goals of the programme.
The design agendas of AA Athens and AA Istanbul Visiting Schools will directly create feedback on one another, allowing participation in either one or both Programmes.
Prominent features of the programme / skills developed:
Participants will be part of an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (4:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
The toolset of AA Istanbul includes but is not limited to Rhinoceros, Processing, and Grasshopper, as well as analysis software.
Participants will have access to digital fabrication tools such as 3-axis CNC router, laser-cutter, and 3d-printer.
Design seminars and lecture series will support the key objectives of the programme, disseminating fundamental design techniques and relevant critical thinking methodologies.
The workshop is open to current architecture and design students, PhD candidates and young professionals. The deadline for applications is 08 June 2015.
The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £600 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership fee. Discount options for groups or for those wishing to apply for both AA Istanbul and AA Athens Visiting Schools are available. Please contact the AA Visiting School Coordinator for more details. Alternatively, you can find more information on discounts from the link below:
http://ai.aaschool.ac.uk/istanbul/portfolio/discounts-2015/
More information on the AA Istanbul Visiting School and the online application link can be found on:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/istanbul
If you have any questions, please contact:
Elif Erdine (AA Istanbul Visiting School Programme Director)
Email: elif.erdine@aaschool.ac.uk…
Added by elif erdine at 4:13pm on February 22, 2015
rototyping techniques, the programme will investigate patterns of emergence, differentiation and complexity in natural formation processes which will be transformed to digital simulation platforms for design purposes. In contemporary architectural processes, a significant diversion from linear parametric tools towards generative design simulations is taking place. The design and analysis processes will reflect this shift by focusing on simulations, whereby attention will be kept on the process of design generation as opposed to the final form itself. The design agenda of the programme will revolve around the design and fabrication of a one-to-one scale pavilion.
The programme will be formulated as a two-phase process:
Stage 1: Participants will gain an understanding of formation processes in nature, coupled with core concepts related to complexity. During this stage, basic and advanced tutorials on generative design algorithms and analysis tools will be provided. AA Istanbul VS will perform as a team-based workshop promoting collaboration and research. Participants will be introduced to advanced fabrication techniques.
Stage 2: Participants will propose design interventions based on the skills and knowledge gained during the first stage. Study models of various scales will be produced, finally followed by the fabrication and assembly of a full scale working prototype which unifies the design goals of the programme.
The design agendas of AA Athens and AA Istanbul Visiting Schools will directly create feedback on one another, allowing participation in either one or both Programmes.
Prominent features of the programme / skills developed:
Participants will be part of an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (4:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
The toolset of AA Istanbul includes but is not limited to Rhinoceros, Grasshopper, and Processing.
Participants will have access to large-scale digital fabrication tools.
Design seminars and international lecture series will support the key objectives of the programme.
Eligibility
The workshop is open to current architecture and design students, PhD candidates and young professionals.
Accreditation
Participants receive the AA Visiting School Certificate with the completion of the Programme.
Applications
The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £600 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership fee. Discount options for groups or for those wishing to apply for both AA Istanbul and AA Athens Visiting Schools are available. Please contact the AA Visiting School Coordinator for more details.
The deadline for applications is 30 May 2016. No portfolio or CV, only requirement is the online application form and fees.
For more information, please visit:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/istanbul
http://ai.aaschool.ac.uk/istanbul/
For inquiries, please contact:
elif.erdine@aaschool.ac.uk…
dologies and large-scale prototyping techniques from previous years, while bringing together a range of experts from internationally acclaimed academic institutions and practices, Architectural Association, Zaha Hadid Architects, among others.
AA Istanbul Visiting School will investigate the inherent associations between form, material, and structure through the rigorous implementation of innovative design and fabrication techniques. Computational methods for design, analysis, and fabrication will be coupled with physical experimentation. The key objective of AA Istanbul Visiting School will comprise the design and fabrication of a one-to-one scale prototype realized by the use of robotic fabrication techniques.
The programme will be formulated as a two-phase process:
Stage 1: Participants will gain an insight of material processes, computational methods, and various fabrication techniques, culminating with core concepts related to complexity in design practices. During this stage, basic and advanced tutorials on generative design algorithms and analysis tools will be provided.
Stage 2: Participants will propose design interventions based on the skills and knowledge gained during the first stage. Study models of various scales will be produced, finally followed by the robotic fabrication and assembly of a full scale working prototype which unifies the design goals of the programme.
The design agendas of AA Athens and AA Istanbul Visiting Schools will directly create feedback on one another, allowing participation in either one or both Programmes.
Prominent features of the programme / skills developed:
Participants will be part of an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (4:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
The toolset of AA Istanbul includes but is not limited to Rhinoceros and Grasshopper, as well as analysis software.
Participants will have access to advanced digital fabrication tools.
Robotic design and fabrication processes will formulate the physical prototyping phase of the programme.
Eligibility
The workshop is open to current architecture and design students, PhD candidates and young professionals. Prior software knowledge is not required.
Accreditation
Participants receive the AA Visiting School Certificate with the completion of the Programme.
Applications
The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £600 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership fee. Discount options for groups or for those wishing to apply for both AA Istanbul and AA Athens Visiting Schools are available. Please contact the AA Visiting School Coordinator for more details.
The deadline for applications is 14 June 2017. No portfolio or CV, only requirement is the online application form and fees.
For more information, please visit:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/istanbul
http://ai.aaschool.ac.uk/istanbul/
For inquiries, please contact:
elif.erdine@aaschool.ac.uk…
is also takes place in own system. However, this action can be also carried out successfully by a foreign reference, if this considers the focused system as own. Hence, these two criteria are considered in my reflexions, to make your criticism handier for me.
First the question must be put up, how is it in your case? Of friendly manner you answer this question perpetually with the statement that you are not a partial of the system of the architecture.
Furthermore the question would be appropriate, whether an external reference (eg CAD) determined architecture. This can be answered with no, because determining and influencing are different things.
Because you stress now your criticism as a foreign criticism, within the architecture the assuption must be put up, that this criticism is not unusual new on the one hand (because this condition were also in other times like that, and presumably also always so remain) and further more a lack of goodwill in your criticism comes to light, which perhaps distinguishes an external reference.
Based on your critique, it would be also desirable in the system of the architecture if the academic rules become satisfyingly followed, even if this is no guarantor for good academic works. Nevertheless, there is an aspect which at least tolerates the evident lack in the Interdiziplinarität of the architecture. This is the classical and still valid determination of the architecture, presumably regulates not only the actions of the architects, but also those who want to become it.
Many who stand in your criticism (the students, as well as the teachers, ... ), live in the awareness that architecture is a profession that combines as many areas around the topic of Building, and the architect is even only one dilettante among the external specialists. In this determination dilettantism is revalued rather positively, because this state the architects enables to assess the facets of a complicated building project better and to form thereby the whole result positively. To be a good architect, you should have circumspect specialists around yourself. And exactly this knows the system of the architecture, because "THE ARCHITECT" helps himself with the logic of other systems (to repair on the one hand his own deficits), and to create an artificial complexity, which ultimately aims to be the complexity of human beeing.
Here "THE ARCHITECTS" becomes a quality-spoken, which currently seems the external reference (CAD, BIM) would like to take claim for themselves.
........
If would not thought about it, this might be helpful:http://www.amazon.com/The-Alphabet-Algorithm-Writing-Architecture/dp/0262515806/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376920450&sr=8-1&keywords=mario+carpo"Finally, I’d like to restate my criticisms in general terms. If we are serious about moving architecture and urbanism away from purely artistic considerations and into a more rational arena, there has never been a better time than now. All of us have access to immense computational power which can be applied to problems that have been —until quite recently— intractable. But of course the garbage-in-garbage-out adage holds true; computation can be used to generate large amounts of complexity, but complexity does not equal worth. The only time when it makes sense to invoke computation in the design process is when there is some relevant data that needs to be computed" (David Rutton)I want to make it short, and just ask a few questions, and hope that the following questions are relevant also for you, and not be considered outside your system. i think that the weighting to such questions seem to be more valuable, not for the architects.1. What is wrong from a pure artistic intention?2. What is any sense in purely architectural discourse?3. strictly looked, can be determined sense generally in a purely architectural discourse?4. What is purely architectural discourse?5. What is Funktionalismus or Rationalismus without philosophical support? 6. Would not be the pure functional fulfilment empty ? 7. Would be not a critical position on the promise of purely rational algorithms applied?…
hat aren’t completely there. BIM will have to continue to evolve some more if their supporters want to get to realize the promise that still is. I can’t say much about PLM, but I would say that both BIM and PLM should be considered in future developments of GH and Rhino. David has said several times that some GH limitations regarding geometry and data structures (central to interoperability) are actually Rhino limitations. So, I wouldn’t put so much pressure on David for this, or at least I would distribute the pressure also on the core Rhino development team.
Talking about Rhino vs. GH geometry, there is one (1) wish I have: support for extrusion geometry. GH already inputs extrusion elements from Rhino, but they are converted to breps. Is not a bad thing per se. The problem is when you need to bake several breps that make the Rhino file to weight several hundred MB. When these breps are actually prismatic, extrusion-like solids, is a shame that they aren’t stored as Rhino V5’s extrusion geometry in a file of just a couple of MB (I overcame this once with an inelegant RhinoScript that wasn’t good for other people). This was one of RhinoBIM’s main arguments. We can develop a structural model made of I-beams in GH using the Extrude components. We should be able to bake them as extrusions. That would also work for urban models with thousands of prismatic massing buildings (e.g. extruded footprints). Even GH’s boxes are baked as breps! Baking boxes as extrusions could be practical for voxelated or Minecraft-like models.
(2) Collaborative network support. Maybe with worksession handling, or something that aloud project team members to work on a single definition or in external references or something alike. I know there is another Rhino limitation on this, but maybe clusters are already going in that direction?
And maybe on the plug-ins domain:
(3) Remote control panel that could be really “remote”, like from other computer or device. There is an old Android App for that, but is not only a matter of updating. I mean, it would be great to control a slider with the accelerometer of an Android phone, but to have that on an iPhone will require another development team. If GH could support networks, a remote counterpart of a RCP plug-in could be developed as a cross-platform web app. I don’t know if you can access accelerometer functionality through HTML5 already, but for now, asking a client (or an spectator or any stakeholder for that matter) to control your sliders from gestures of his/her own phone would be awesome (maybe Firefly will fill that hole?).
(4) GIS support. GH already imports .shp files. Meerkat can even access the database, but what about writing to shapefiles or generating our own with databases processed/generated in GH?
(5) SketchUp support. Not only starchitects and corporations are using GH in the AEC. There are a lot of small firms, freelancers and students interested. Most of them use SketchUp for 3D modeling (not CATIA, neither Revit). Yes, you can import/export .skp from Rhino, but if GH could support nested block at bake time (also mentioned by others), it could write .skp files with complex relations of blocks (that are called components in SketchUp) and nested groups, going beyond what Rhino can export.
(6) Read/Write other formats. There are some challenges with proprietary formats that are not completely supported by Rhino, but they’re still a lot of open formats that are relevant to the fields of GH users, like stl and ply for 3D-printing. It could be nice to write mesh colors to a ply for 3D-printing a colored prototype based on GH colors. There are others, like IGES, STEP, COLLADA, etc. and 2D, like svg, odg and pdf. Some of them could offer special formatting options like custom data that the format supports but nobody uses just because is impractical to access this from direct modeling environments (but not from visual programming).
--Ernesto…
eather data so it cannot be easily compared to Archsim. My account of the differences between Honeybee and Archsim will be far from complete but here are the key ones that I am aware of:
1) This difference is a bit of a superficial one but points to a deeper thinking about how the software should be used. Honeybee has many more components than Archsim, which means that Honeybee has a steeper learning curve than Archsim and will take longer to master. Along with this, you may also encounter a general mentality in the Honeybee community that "you should not be running a certain type of simulation unless you know how it works" whereas I know that Archsim is a bit more amenable to making things fast and easy to set up even when you are not sure what is going on under the hood. However, as a result of the large number of components in Honeybee, it is more open-ended, customizable, and includes more freedom in terms of cases that you can run and the parameters of the energy simulation that you can change than Archsim. You will also notice that, while there is a general ethos in the Honeybee community that you should not be running certain simulations unless you know what you are doing, we try to provide you with many resources to educate yourself if you are motivated. For example, we have long component descriptions that we assemble into documentation books like this (https://www.gitbook.com/book/mostapharoudsari/honeybee-primer/details), hours of video tutorial playlist like this one (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLruLh1AdY-SgW4uDtNSMLeiUmA8YXEHT_), and many GH example files on a github-based file sharing system (https://hydrashare.github.io/hydra/index.html). Not to mention a community of people who would respond to discussions like this one.
2) Archsim as a standalone application will soon be no more and will be instead distributed with the DIVA daylight analysis tool (http://diva4rhino.com/). While I am unclear on the exact trajectory of DIVA, it currently has a price tag attached to it and so I would assume that the future of Archsim will also carry this price tag. On the other hand, Honeybee and any derivative software will forever be free and open source under the GPL licence (https://github.com/mostaphaRoudsari/Honeybee/blob/master/License_Honeybee_GPL.txt).
3) This third point is a bit of a reiteration of the last one but Honeybee is open source, meaning that, if you need a feature of EnergyPlus that is not yet implemented on either interface, you can usually add it in yourself with a few lines of python code in Honeybee. This type of workflow is not possible with Archsim since it is closed source and requires you to use EnergyPlus's text editor interface after Archsim has exported an IDF in order to implement any additional EnerygPlus features.
4) The libraries and templates for Honeybee come from OpenStudio - the open source interface for EnergyPlus (https://www.openstudio.net/), which is supported by the US Department of Energy (just like EnergyPlus). Since Honeybee is open source, it is able to make use of the large database of building type schedules/loads and constructions that have been assembled by the OpenStudio team over the last several years as well as OpenStudio's SDK. I can also say that almost all of the development efforts of the Honeybee team are now focused now on integrating efforts with OpenStudio, including an exporter from Honeybee to OpenStudio that should be fully functional for the next stable release. I am not certain of the current extent of Archsim's libraries but, last I had checked, the creator was pulling them from his own experience and, as such, only had a few libraries to choose from. For all of my knowledge, through, this may be changing with the integration of Archsim with DIVA.
Let me know if this is helpful and, if anyone has more up-to-date knowledge on Archsim than I, please post there.
-Chris…
mment%3A1637953
First of all, the invalid Rhino license as seen previously has been removed, and the correct educational license we have is re-installed for this test.
The re-appearing issue is that RAM usage spikes once GH is open in Rhino. It seems that this happens when a series of large GH project files incrementally saved are stored in the same folder. Moving those previously saved large project files to a new folder seems to be able to solve this issue.
The images below explains the issue and the hypothetical solution:
1. A series of GH files were incrementally saved in the same folder previously, and the last few GH files are the ones opened most recently:
2. The total RAM usage is at the normal 5GB level once Rhino is open:
3. Once GH is open, the RAM usage spikes, and the it becomes very slow to maneuver the GH window before even opening any one of those GH files:
4. Once GH and Rhino are closed, the RAM usage drop to the previous level before the GH interface was open:
5. Now, all the incrementally saved GH files are moved to a new folder "wip" except the last one, i.e. for the last GH file, there is no other previous GH files in the same location:
6. Now, if we open GH, there is no sudden increase of RAM usage, and the 3x3 thumbnails on the GH canvas shows "missing" as those previously opened GH files are no longer in the same location as they were before:
I understand that David mentioned that the thumbnails for previously opened GH files on GH canvas will not take much RAM. Nevertheless, I'm still not sure what is causing the increase of RAM usage and slowdown of GH interface. Relocating the large project files previously saved in the same folder as the current GH file seems to be able to make this issue go away, for unknown reason ...
Appreciate if anybody experiencing similar issue can help to check if this solution works.
Thank you.
…
and where the decimal place should be.
The reason it only shows the first 5 numbers that make up 1,000,000 is because anything smaller than 100 is considered insignificant when talking about 1 million. Think of it like this if 1 million represents an Olympic size swimming pool then 10 would represent the volume of a full tank of petrol for an average family car. You would have to stand there for an extremely long time to fill up the pool from a petrol pump.
It's important to know that these insignificant digits are still there for the purpose of calculations but are just not being displayed.
There are times when you may want to display these numbers in a format that makes more sense, for these occasions we can use the Format() function.
Format() Function
For versions BEFORE 0.9.0001 the VB Format Function is available through the Expression Components found on the Math Tab > Script Panel
Either by using the F input* or the Expressions Editor found on the Context Menu you can apply a format mask to the x input.
* except FxN
Anatomy of the formatting function above:
Format(..............................) <-- VB function
Format("........................."....) <-- Display String
Format("{0....................}"....) <-- Place Holder for first variable
Format("{0:0.000000000}"...) <-- Format Mask for 9 decimal places
Format("{0:0.000000000}", x) <-- Variable
This can be applied to points and their components:
For versions AFTER 0.9.0001 there is a dedicated Format Component or you can use the Expressions Components successor Evaluate.
For more information on the tags used in the Format Function see these links.
Standard formatting tags Custom formatting tags
WARNING:
If you format a number to be displayed in this way it becomes a string and will no longer have the complete Real number available for calculations. Always use the input to the format function for further requirements in calculations.…
hat kind of employment) and someone asked to make a door for their children.(they're are crazy for fishes) with a design of a shoal, bank of Fishes, in it. So the thing, is that i remember some things but i can't make it in order.
-This is the shoal concept that we created or sketched-
-These are the lines that we think can pull off the concept-
The thing is that i want to make something like the drawings a lot of fishes (of different sizes, but in a range of 5-8 cm) but all these fishes are acommodated along the curves (like the second bunch of drawings).
The thing is:
1.- Do i have to draw each curve? or i can draw bunch lines that get deformed when i put a point near of them (i remember that i did something like that in the school) and just playing around until getting something that resembles the concept?
2.- How can i do it in "2D" what i mean is that, i remember doing that (i put a point near of others, and the latter get small or big according of the proximity of the point).
Right now i only have the "door", and populated it with "populate points 2d" but i want to order it. Populate 2d is the correct tool? or do i have to stablish a lot of points with different coordinates?
Thank you for asking such simple questions, but i need help to really start.
Here's the definition that i have right now, do not know if its right.
Here's the definition that i got right now, but im not sure about it.
Thank you very much!.
Shoal.gh…
tura digital en corte Láser, corte CNC, impresión 3d, y modelado paramétrico.
Este tercer taller enseña los fundamentos del modelado paramétrico y algunas bases de manufactura digital.
PERFIL DEL ALUMNO QUE INGRESA:
Diseñador, Arquitecto, Artista con conocimientos de Rhinoceros interesados en comenza a modelar paramétrico con Grasshopper para fabricación digital básica.
PERFIL DEL ALUMNO QUE EGRESA:
El alumno terminará con los conocimientos y criterios para el desarrollo de piezas o proyectos utilizando fabricación digital, mejorando y agilizando los flujos de trabajo, así como los criterios fundamentales del Modelado Paramétrico -Generativo.
Taller de modelado paramétrico con Grasshopper
Interfase
Manejo de Datos
Data Volátil
Data Persistente
Rangos y dominios
Atractores
Listas y Cull
Modelado por Layer Object
Análisis Básicos
Conexión de Curvas
Superficies
Análisis de Superficies
Panelización Básica
Relaciones con Excel
Modelado generativo
Fechas: del 8 de Febrero al 1º de Marzo
Días: Sábado
Horarios: de 10 am a 3 pm
Sesiones: 4 de 5hrs
Duración: 20 horas
Precio: $3,000.00…