re_Never_Ends_V666".
3. Delete the left C# that does the Ziggurat (and feeds the truss maker with the "skin").
4. Remove all the comments of type "don't touch ..." > be brave.
5. Create any spiral surface (like the ones shown as demos) in Rhino. Or Any List of surfaces (say: one spiral surface and some others - but better start with ONE test surface). DO NOT use trimmed surfaces (only my "pro" C# truss maker does this - but it's incredibly complex to handle it). In fact ... you can use them ... but forget it, for the moment.
6. Feed this green GH component shown (aka: the Red pill [Matrix], he he) with your surface(s) > surrender to the crazy world of trusses.
7. Listen to some appropriate stuff .
…
思った感じになりません。
balls の代わりにplanarカーブを直接入れてみましたがエラーが出ます。
ファンクションにしてみたところ、forループので作った数値が反映されていません。
ファンクションのインスタンス?を出力していないと思い上記のようにしましたがエラーが出てしまいます。
以上の事から自分の認識が正しいのかよくわからなくなりました・・・
python自体の深いところをわかっているわけではないので余計こんがらがりました。
そこで、for b in ballsはどのような条件または使い方であれば使えるのでしょうか?
そして、上記のように別のオブジェクトに対しての使い方はどのようにすればできるのでしょうか?
2:同じファンクション内のdist = rs.Distance(self.pos,b.pos)についてですが
この文章も for b in balls によってbはBallのインスタンスであると定義?されたためb.posがbの位置であると分かるのでしょうか?
pythonは定義しなくても動いてしまうのでどのような時に使えるのか文章見ただけではよくわかりません・・・
大変細かいことかもしれませんが、よりpythonをしっかりと理解するためにも、どなたかわかる方ご教授いただけると幸いです。…
n splitting curves and then join them to create the region; but I'am looking for a more straightforward solutions. 3- I know some plugins like clipper could do this, but I'm looking for more flexible solutions.
4- I tried Brep[] CreatePlanarBreps(IEnumerable<Curve>) in ghpython, but it doesn't work.
…
tionResult is the amount of radiation for each test point in [kWh/m2]
Note: each test point is the center of a mesh face and the number represents the amount of radiation per m2 of that mesh face.
totalRadiation is radiationResult for each point [kWh/m2] * area of the face [m2] so it is in [kWh]
The image below shows how you can regenerate the totalRadiation by multiplying radiationResult with the area of each face.
Regards, -Mostapha
PS: Also thanks to djordje for correcting my grammar. Highly appreciated! :)…
.. I think I should modify the workflow to collect all the results and then bake them all together so the presentation of the result can be more solid.
2. radiationResult is the amount of radiation for each test point in [kWh/m2]
Note: each test point is the center of a mesh face and the number represents the amount of radiation for per m2 of that mesh face.
totalRadiation is radiationResult for each point [kWh/m2] * area of the face [m2] so it is in [kWh]
As you can see in the image below if you multiply the radiationResult with the area of the faces the result will be equal totalRadiation.
Regards, -Mostapha
…
tenary=cosh(x/a)).
If you're interested in the math behind it I may just write it down here. I also have a big equation which may be a solution for finding this "a" number, but there are imaginary numbers and this is math going far beyond my comprehence. The current script just starts with "a=0" and increases it slowly looking for a good curve*.
The def with vb script is in the attachment. I will post it later as .gha to milkbox group.
*Actually it looks for horizontal distance between 2 points on catenary curve, but the curve does not need to be constructed.
EDIT: There is a bug with final curve orientation, but the curve is a proper one.…
radiance parameters to get rid of blotching. To add another level of complexity to my problem, I am running simulations with a translucent material with the following properties: void trans testTrans
0
0
7 0.478 0.478 0.478 0.000 0.010 0.178 0.635
I have had no issues with the renderings when I use clear glazing, as seen on this image:
However the blotching-issue becomes very noticeable when I introduce translucent glazing into the scene:
For the two above cases I used the following parameters:
_av_ is set to 0
xScale is set to 2
_ab_ is set to 6
_dc_ is set to 0.5
_aa_ is set to 0.2
_ad_ is set to 2048
_st_ is set to 0.5
yScale is set to 2
_ps_ is set to 4
_ar_ is set to 64
_as_ is set to 2048
_ds_ is set to 0.25
_pt_ is set to 0.1
_dr_ is set to 1
_pj_ is set to 0.9
_dp_ is set to 256
_dt_ is set to 0.25
_lr_ is set to 6
_dj_ is set to 0.5
_lw_ is set to 0.01
I ran another test with increased Radiance parameters and got the following output:
with the following parameters:
_av_ is set to 0
xScale is set to 6
_ab_ is set to 6
_dc_ is set to 0.75
_aa_ is set to 0.1
_ad_ is set to 4096
_st_ is set to 0.15
yScale is set to 6
_ps_ is set to 2
_ar_ is set to 128
_as_ is set to 4096
_ds_ is set to 0.05
_pt_ is set to 0.05
_dr_ is set to 3
_pj_ is set to 0.9
_dp_ is set to 512
_dt_ is set to 0.15
_lr_ is set to 8
_dj_ is set to 0.7
_lw_ is set to 0.005
Although the second blotching case is much better than the first, it is still very bad for hours when the sun is lower in the sky. The above images are rendered for a clear sky at 18:00 in Germany in a West-facing room.
Sorry for the long post! Can someone help? Kind regards, Örn
…