and export the geometry out to VVVV to render it LIVE! RawRRRR. In this case, a digital audio workstation Ableton Live, a leading industrial standard in contemporary music production.
the good news is that VVVV and ableton live lite is both free.
https://www.ableton.com/en/products/live-lite/
i am not trying to use ipad as a controller for grasshoppper. I wanted to work with a timeline (similar to MAYA or Ableton or any other DAW(digital audio workstation)) inside grasshopper in an intuitive way. Currently there is no way of SEQUENCING your definition the way you want to see that i know of.
no more combersome export import workflows... i dont need hyperrealistic renderings most of the time. so much time invested in googling the right way to import, export ... mesh settings...this workflow works for some, for some not ...that workflow works if ... and still you cannot render it live nor change sequence of instruction WHILE THE VIDEO is played. and I think no one wants to present rhinoceros viewport. BUT vvvv veiwport is different. it is used for VJing and many custom audio visual installation for events, done professionally. you can see an example of how sound and visuals come together from this post, using only VVVV and ableton. http://vvvv.org/documentation/meso-amstel-pulse
I propose a NEW method. make a definition, wire it to ableton, draw in some midi notes, and see it thru VVVV LIVE while you sequence the animation the WAY YOU WANT TO BE SEEN DURING YOUR PRESENTATION FROM THE BEGINNING, make a whole set of sequences in ableton, go back change some notes in ableton and the whole sequence will change RIGHT INFRONT of you. yes, you can just add some sound anywhere in the process. or take the sound waves (sqaure, saw, whateve) or take the audio and influence geometric parameters using custom patches via vvvv. I cannot even begin to tell you how sophisticated digital audio sound design technology got last ten year.. this is just one example which isn't even that advanced in todays standard in sound design ( and the famous producers would say its not about the tools at all.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwz32bEgV8o
I just want to point out that grasshopper shares the same interface with VVVV (1998) and maxforlive, a plug in inside ableton. audio mulch is yet another one that shares this interface of plugging components to each other and allows users to create their own sound instruments. vvvv is built based on vb, i believe.
so current wish list is ...
1) grasshopper recieves a sequence of commands from ableton DONE
thanks to sebastian's OSCglue vvvv patch and this one http://vvvv.org/contribution/vvvv-and-grasshopper-demo-with-ghowl-udp
after this is done, its a matter of trimming and splitting the incoming string.
2) translate numeric oscillation from ableton to change GH values
video below shows what the controll interface of both values (numbers) and the midi notes look like.
https://vimeo.com/19743303
3) midi note in = toggle GH component (this one could be tricky)
for this... i am thinking it would be great if ...it is possible to make "midi learn" function in grasshopper where one can DROP IN A COMPONENT LIKE GALAPAGOS OR TIMER and assign the component to a signal in, in this case a midi note. there are total 128 midi notes (http://www.midimountain.com/midi/midi_note_numbers.html) and this is only for one channel. there are infinite channels in ableton. I usually use 16.
I have already figured out a way to send string into grasshopper from ableton live. but problem is, how for grasshopper to listen, not just take it in, and interpret midi and cc value changes ( usually runs from 0 to 128) and perform certain actions.
Basically what I am trying to achieve is this : some time passes then a parameter is set to change from value 0 to 50, for example. then some time passes again, then another parameter becomes "previewed", then baked. I have seen some examples of hoopsnake but I couldn't tell that you can really control the values in a clear x and y graph where x is time and y is the value. but this woud be considered a basic feature of modulation and automation in music production. NVM, its been DONE by Mr Heumann. https://vimeo.com/39730831
4) send points, lines, surfaces and meshes back out to VVVV
5) render it using VVVV and play with enormous collection of components in VVVV..its been around since 1998 for the sake of awesomeness.
this kind of a digital operation-hardware connection is usually whats done in digital music production solutions. I did look into midi controller - grasshopper work, and I know its been done, but that has obvious limitations of not being precise. and it only takes 0 o 128. I am thinking that midi can be useful for this because then I can program very precise and complex sequence with ease from music production software like ableton live.
This is an ongoing design research for a performative exhibition due in Bochum, Germany, this January. I will post definition if I get somewhere. A good place to start for me is the nesting sliders by Monique . http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/nesting-sliders
…
h, and using the BScale and BDistance are creating havoc somehow too. I've simplified first, and used the Kangaroo Frames component along with setting internal iterations, to make MeshMachine act like a normal component, along with releasing the FixC and FixV. The FixV didn't make any sense anyway. I've also set Pull to 0 to speed it up during testing, since much less calculation is involved to just let the meshes collapse, prevented from disappearing altogether by using a mere 15 iterations.
Also, your breps are open so that allows much more chaos and then collapse, though they did manage to close themselves too at times. Here is closed breps with a full 45 iterations:
So now that it's working, lets re-Fix the curves, and the problem arises that there is an extra seam line that is getting fixed too, running along the cylinder, stopping the mesh from pulling tight under tension wherever a vertex happens to be near that line:
So lets grab only the naked edge curves instead:
And what happens if we lose the end caps, now that we don't have an extra line skewing the result?:
There is no real curvature differences since it's not a curvy brep so the Adapt at full 1 setting has little to do. Now what does the BScale and BDist do? Nothing! Why? Your scale is out of whack, 99 mm high cylinders but only a falloff maximum of about 5, so let's make the falloff be 25 instead, but I must restore the end caps or the meshes collapse away for some reason and freezes Rhino for a minute or so the first time I try it:
It's a start.
If I intersect the cylinders, nothing changes, since they are being treated as separate runs. MeshMachine outputs a sequence of two outputs though, due to Frames being set to a bare minimum of 2 needed to get it to work, so I filter out the original run, which is just the unmodified initial mesh it creates.
The lesson so far is that closed meshes are much less prone to collapse and glitches leading to screw ups.
A Boolean union of the cylinders is when it gets funner, here show with and without the fixed curves that seem to define boundaries too where really there are just polysurface edges:
…
using Grasshopper.Kernel.Data; using Grasshopper.Kernel.Types;
using System; using System.IO; using System.Xml; using System.Xml.Linq; using System.Linq; using System.Data; using System.Drawing; using System.Reflection; using System.Collections; using System.Windows.Forms; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
/// <summary> /// This class will be instantiated on demand by the Script component. /// </summary> public class Script_Instance : GH_ScriptInstance { #region Utility functions /// <summary>Print a String to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component.</summary> /// <param name="text">String to print.</param> private void Print(string text) { /* Implementation hidden. */ } /// <summary>Print a formatted String to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component.</summary> /// <param name="format">String format.</param> /// <param name="args">Formatting parameters.</param> private void Print(string format, params object[] args) { /* Implementation hidden. */ } /// <summary>Print useful information about an object instance to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component. </summary> /// <param name="obj">Object instance to parse.</param> private void Reflect(object obj) { /* Implementation hidden. */ } /// <summary>Print the signatures of all the overloads of a specific method to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component. </summary> /// <param name="obj">Object instance to parse.</param> private void Reflect(object obj, string method_name) { /* Implementation hidden. */ } #endregion
#region Members /// <summary>Gets the current Rhino document.</summary> private readonly RhinoDoc RhinoDocument; /// <summary>Gets the Grasshopper document that owns this script.</summary> private readonly GH_Document GrasshopperDocument; /// <summary>Gets the Grasshopper script component that owns this script.</summary> private readonly IGH_Component Component; /// <summary> /// Gets the current iteration count. The first call to RunScript() is associated with Iteration==0. /// Any subsequent call within the same solution will increment the Iteration count. /// </summary> private readonly int Iteration; #endregion
/// <summary> /// This procedure contains the user code. Input parameters are provided as regular arguments, /// Output parameters as ref arguments. You don't have to assign output parameters, /// they will have a default value. /// </summary> private void RunScript(bool bake, List<GeometryBase> G, Point3d L, Color C) { COL = C; LOCATION = L; NAME = ""; pnts.Clear(); crvs.Clear(); breps.Clear();
foreach(GeometryBase geom in G){ switch(geom.GetType().Name){ case "Point": pnts.Add(((Rhino.Geometry.Point) geom).Location); break; case "Curve": //create a new geometry list for display break; case "PolyCurve": crvs.Add((PolyCurve) geom); break; case "Brep": breps.Add((Brep) geom); break; default: Print("Add a new case for this type: " + geom.GetType().Name); break; } }
if(bake){ Rhino.DocObjects.InstanceDefinition I = doc.InstanceDefinitions.Find(NAME, false);
if(I != null) doc.InstanceDefinitions.Delete(I.Index, true, true);
int index = doc.InstanceDefinitions.Add(NAME, "description", Point3d.Origin, G); doc.Objects.AddInstanceObject(index, Transform.Scale(L, 1)); } }
// <Custom additional code> //GEOMETRY Lists to display
List<Point3d> pnts = new List<Point3d>(); List<PolyCurve> crvs = new List<PolyCurve>(); List<Brep> breps = new List<Brep>();
string NAME; Point3d LOCATION; int THICKNESS = 2; Color COL;
//Return a BoundingBox that contains all the geometry you are about to draw. public override BoundingBox ClippingBox { get { return BoundingBox.Empty; } } //Draw all meshes in this method. public override void DrawViewportMeshes(IGH_PreviewArgs args) {
}
//Draw all wires and points in this method. public override void DrawViewportWires(IGH_PreviewArgs args) { foreach(Point3d p in pnts) args.Display.DrawPoint(p, Rhino.Display.PointStyle.ControlPoint, THICKNESS, COL);
foreach(PolyCurve c in crvs) args.Display.DrawCurve(c, COL, THICKNESS);
foreach(Brep b in breps) args.Display.DrawBrepShaded(b, new Rhino.Display.DisplayMaterial(COL));
args.Display.DrawPoint(LOCATION, Rhino.Display.PointStyle.ActivePoint, 3, Color.Black); args.Display.Draw3dText(NAME, Color.Gray, new Plane(LOCATION, Vector3d.ZAxis), THICKNESS / 3, "Arial"); }
// </Custom additional code> }…
inner As Curve() = section.ToNurbsCurve().Offset(normal, pc, -plate, 1e-3, 1e-4, Rhino.Geometry.CurveOffsetCornerStyle.Sharp)
the error message is:
"
{0}0. Error: Het oplossen van de overbelasting is mislukt omdat dit aantal argumenten door geen enkele toegankelijke Offset wordt geaccepteerd. (line 104)
"
this is the VBA script:
"Option Strict OffOption Explicit On'Import SDK and Framework namespacesImports RhinoImports Rhino.GeometryImports Rhino.CollectionsImports GrasshopperImports Grasshopper.KernelImports Grasshopper.Kernel.DataImports Grasshopper.Kernel.TypesImports GH_IOImports GH_IO.SerializationImports SystemImports System.IOImports System.XmlImports System.DataImports System.DrawingImports System.ReflectionImports System.CollectionsImports System.Windows.FormsImports Microsoft.VisualBasicImports System.Collections.GenericImports System.Runtime.InteropServices'Code generated by Grasshopper(R) (except for RunScript() content and Additional content)'Copyright (C) 2011 - Robert McNeel & Associates<System.Runtime.CompilerServices.CompilerGenerated()> _Public Class Script_Instance Implements IGH_ScriptInstance#Region "Members" ''' <summary>List of error messages. Do not modify this list directly.</summary> Private __err As New List(Of String) ''' <summary>List of print messages. Do not modify this list directly, use the Print() and Reflect() functions instead.</summary> Private __out As New List(Of String) ''' <summary>Represents the current Rhino document.</summary> Private doc As RhinoDoc = RhinoDoc.ActiveDoc ''' <summary>Represents the Script component which maintains this script.</summary> Public owner As Grasshopper.Kernel.IGH_ActiveObject#End Region#Region "Utility functions" ''' <summary>Print a String to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component.</summary> ''' <param name="text">String to print.</param> Private Sub Print(ByVal text As String) __out.Add(text) End Sub ''' <summary>Print a formatted String to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component.</summary> ''' <param name="format">String format.</param> ''' <param name="args">Formatting parameters.</param> Private Sub Print(ByVal format As String, ByVal ParamArray args As Object()) __out.Add(String.Format(format, args)) End Sub ''' <summary>Print useful information about an object instance to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component. </summary> ''' <param name="obj">Object instance to parse.</param> Private Sub Reflect(ByVal obj As Object) __out.Add(GH_ScriptComponentUtilities.ReflectType_VB(obj)) End Sub ''' <summary>Print the signatures of all the overloads of a specific method to the [Out] Parameter of the Script component. </summary> ''' <param name="obj">Object instance to parse.</param> Private Sub Reflect(ByVal obj As Object, ByVal method_name As String) __out.Add(GH_ScriptComponentUtilities.ReflectType_VB(obj, method_name)) End Sub#End Region ''' <summary> ''' This procedure contains the user code. Input parameters are provided as ByVal arguments, ''' Output parameter are ByRef arguments. You don't have to assign output parameters, ''' they will be null by default. ''' </summary> Private Sub RunScript(ByVal p0 As Point3d, ByVal p1 As Point3d, ByVal p2 As Point3d, ByVal pc As Point3d, ByVal plate As Double, ByVal itt As Integer, ByVal dev As Double, ByRef crvout As Object, ByRef crvin As Object, ByRef sec As Object, ByRef opp As Object, ByRef div As Object, ByRef pt4 As Object) 'your code goes here… opp = "test01" Dim section As New Polyline(5) section.Add(p0) section.Add(p1) section.Add(p2) section.Add(pc) section.Add(p0) Dim normal As Vector3d = vector3d.CrossProduct((p1 - p0), (p2 - p0)) Dim area As Double Dim chicken_int As Int32 = 0 Dim XX As Double Dim YY As Double Do chicken_int += 1 If (chicken_int > itt) Then Exit Do 'Compute the section offset Dim inner As Curve() = section.ToNurbsCurve().Offset(normal, pc, -plate, 1e-3, 1e-4, Rhino.Geometry.CurveOffsetCornerStyle.Sharp) Dim edges As New CurveList(inner) edges.Add(section.ToNurbsCurve()) crvin = edges Dim sections As Brep() = Brep.CreatePlanarBreps(edges) If (sections Is Nothing) Then Exit Do opp = "test02" 'Compute the centroid of the current section Dim am As AreaMassProperties = AreaMassProperties.Compute(sections(0)) Dim ct As Point3d = am.Centroid XX = am.CentroidCoordinatesMomentsOfInertia.X YY = am.CentroidCoordinatesMomentsOfInertia.Y area = am.Area Dim dx As Vector3d = pc - ct 'Compute the error of the current centroid Dim dl As Double = dx.Length div = dl 'Update output values crvout = section crvin = inner sec = sections(0) opp = area If (dl < dev) Then Exit Do 'Adjust outline with a boosting factor. section(3) += dx * 4 Loop pt4 = section(3) crvout = section End Sub '<Custom additional code> '</Custom additional code> End Class
"…
s. (Go to RCE Tabs)
Normaly a compoment is disable.
Fill the 3 parameters: name, e-mail and company.
Enable the component with the right mouse button on the component and enable.
A file is created here:
C:\RhinoDeveloppements\RhinoCivilEngineering\license\licence_a_envoyer.txt
Send it to this address:
rhinodeveloppements@gmail.com
You will receive your license within 24 hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pour procéder à la requête de licence, merci de suivre ces étapes.
1. Installer RhinoCivil Engineering
2.Charger Rhinoceros et Grasshoper
3.Glisser Déposer le composant RCE Protection sur le canevas de Grasshopper.(Sur le panneau RCE)
Normalement le composant est désactiver.
4. Remplir les 3 paramètres: Nom, Adresse mail et société.
Activer le composant avec un clic droit sur le composant et "enable"
Un fichier est alors créer ici:
C:\RhinoDeveloppements\RhinoCivilEngineering\license\licence_a_envoyer.txt
Envoyer le à cette adresse:
rhinodeveloppements@gmail.com
Vous recevrez votre licence dans les 24 heures.…
he picture (4).
Previously, I had a problem with generating intersections between the two directions of the beams, but a colleague helped me by extending beams, so there was no problem with lines of intersection. But this solution has generated curl (5) at the highest vertex geometry, which I ignored in order to repair it before printing, perhaps this mean my problem with my beam spread properly. Only when the beams is 19, does not jump no problem, but I still can not distribute them properly.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
I tried to show as simply as possible by removing or signing my code in GHX file.
Thank you in advance for your help
…
rameters, which forces the user to connect all three curve input parameters (even if only 2 are required) to avoid the message 'Input parameter ... failed to collect data'. How can I set up the curve inputs so that null values are valid? I'm currently registering these as curve parameters as below, and suspect the answer lies in using a different method for parameter registration.
protected override void RegisterInputParams(GH_Component.GH_InputParamManagerpManager)
{
pManager.Register_SurfaceParam(
"Reference Surface", "S", "Surface on which laths are to be generated", GH_ParamAccess.item);
pManager.Register_CurveParam(
"Surface curves 1", "Curves 1", "Set of curves across surface in first direction", GH_ParamAccess.list);
pManager.Register_CurveParam(
"Surface curves 2", "Curves 2", "Set of curves across surface in second direction", GH_ParamAccess.list);
pManager.Register_CurveParam(
"Surface Curves 3", "Curves 3", "Set of curves across surface in third direction", GH_ParamAccess.list);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam(
"Lath Offsets 1", "LO1", "Offset from surface to centreline of first layer", 0.0, GH_ParamAccess.item);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam(
"Lath Offsets 2", "LO2", "Offset from surface to centreline of second layer", 0.0, GH_ParamAccess.item);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam(
"Lath Offsets 3", "LO3", "Offset from surface to centreline of third layer", 0.0, GH_ParamAccess.item);
pManager.Register_IntegerParam(
"Seed Value (0, 1, 2)", "Seed", "Seed value for weave offsets (0 for no weave, 1 or 2 for weave)",0, GH_ParamAccess.item);
}
Thanks!
Alex
…
Added by Alex Baalham at 9:48am on October 1, 2012
r." I'm sorry to hear that, I take the interface and ease-of-use rather seriously so this sounds like a fundamental failure on my part. On the other hand, Grasshopper isn't supposed to be on a par with most other 3D programs. It is emphatically not meant for manual/direct modelling. If you would normally tackle a problem by drawing geometry by hand, Grasshopper is not (and should never be advertised as) a good alternative."What in other programs is a dialog box, is 8 or 10 components strung together in grasshopper. The wisdom for this I often hear among the grasshopper community is that this allows for parametric design."Grasshopper ships with about 1000 components (rounded to the nearest power of ten). I'm adding more all the time, either because new functionality has been exposed in the Rhino SDK or because a certain component makes a lot of sense to a lot of people. Adding pre-canned components that do the same as '8 or 10 components strung together' for the heck of it will balloon the total number of components everyone has to deal with. If you find yourself using the same 8 to 10 components together all the time, then please mention it on this forum. A lot of the currently existing components have been added because someone asked for it."[...] has a far cleaner and more intuitive interface. So does SolidWorks, Inventor, CATIA, NX, and a bunch of others."Again, GH was not designed to be an alternative to these sort of modellers. I don't like referring to GH as 'parameteric' as that term has been co-opted by relational modellers. I prefer to use 'algorithmic' instead. The idea behind parameteric seems to be that one models by hand, but every click exists within a context, and when the context changes the software figures out where to move the click to. The idea behind algorithmic is that you don't model by hand.This is not to say there is no value in the parametric approach. Obviously it is a winning strategy and many people love to use it. We have considered adding some features to GH that would make manual modelling less of a chore and we would still very much like to do so. However this is such a large chunk of work that we have to be very careful about investing the time. Before I start down this road I want to make sure that the choice I'm making is not 'lame-ass algorithmic modeller with some lame-ass parametrics tacked on' vs. 'kick-ass algorithmic modeller with no parametrics tacked on'.
Visual Programming.I'm not exactly sure I understand your grievance here, but I suspect I agree. The visual part is front and centre at the moment and it should remain there. However we need to improve upon it and at the same time give programmers more tools to achieve what they want.
Context sensitivity."There is no reason a program in 2014 should allow me to make decisions that will not work. For example, if a component input is in all cases incompatible with another component's output, I shouldn't be able to connect them."Unfortunately it's not as simple as that. Whether or not a conversion between two data types makes sense is often dependent on the actual values. If you plug a list of curves into a Line component, none of them may be convertible. Should I therefore not allow this connection to be made? What if there is a single curve that could be converted to a line? What if you want to make the connection now, but only later plan to add some convertible curves to the data? What you made the connection back when it was valid, but now it's no longer valid, wouldn't it be weird if there was a connection you couldn't make again?I've started work on GH2 and one of the first things I'm writing now is the new data-conversion logic. The goal this time around is to not just try and convert type A into type B, but include information about what sort of conversion was needed (straightforward, exotic, far-fetched. etc.) and information regarding why that type was assigned.You are right that under some conditions, we can be sure that a conversion will always fail. For example connecting a Boolean output with a Curve input. But even there my preferred solution is to tell people why that doesn't make sense rather than not allowing it in the first place.
Sliders."I think they should be optional."They are optional."The “N” should turn into the number if set."What if you assign more than one integer? I think I'd rather see a component with inputs 'N', 'P' and 'X' rather than '5', '8' and '35.7', but I concede that is a personal preference."But if I plug it into something that'll only accept a 1, a 2, or a 3, that slider should self set accordingly."Agreed.
Components."Give components a little “+” or a drawer on the bottom or something that by clicking, opens the component into something akin to a dialog box. This should give access to all of the variables in the component. I shouldn't have to r-click on each thing on a component to do all of the settings."I was thinking of just zooming in on a component would eventually provide easier ways to access settings and data."Could some of these items disappear if they are contextually inappropriate or gray out if they're unlikely?"It's almost impossible for me to know whether these things are 'unlikely' in any given situation. There are probably some cases where a suggestion along the lines of "Hey, this component is about to run 40,524 times. It seems like it would make sense to Graft the 'P' input." would be useful.
Integration."Why isn't it just live geometry?"This is an unfortunate side-effect of the way the Rhino SDK was designed. Pumping all my geometry through the Rhino document would severely impact performance and memory usage. It also complicates the matter to an almost impossible degree as any command and plugin running in Rhino now has access to 'my' geometry."Maybe add more Rhino functionality to GH. GH has no 3D offset."That's the plan moving forward. A lot of algorithms in Rhino (Make2D, FilletEdge, Shelling, BlendSrf, the list goes on) are not available as part of the public SDK. The Rhino development team is going to try and rectify this for Rhino6 and beyond. As soon as these functions become available I'll start adding them to GH (provided they make sense of course).On the whole I agree that integration needs a lot of work, and it's work that has to happen on both sides of the isle.
Documentation.Absolutely. Development for GH1 has slowed because I'm now working on GH2. We decided that GH1 is 'feature complete', basically to avoid feature creep. GH2 is a ground-up rewrite so it will take a long time until something is ready for testing. During this time, minor additions and of course bug fixes will be available for GH1, but on a much lower frequency.Documentation is woefully inadequate at present. The primer is being updated (and the new version looks great), but for GH2 we're planning a completely new help system. People have been hired to provide the content. With a bit of luck and a lot of work this will be one of the main selling points of GH2.
2D-ness."I know you'll disagree completely, but I'm sticking to this. How else could an omission like offsetsurf happen?"I don't fully disagree. A lot of geometry is either flat or happens inside surfaces. The reason there's no shelling (I'm assuming that's what you meant, there are two Offset Surface components in GH) is because (a) it's a very new feature in Rhino and doesn't work too well yet and (b) as a result of that isn't available to plugins.
Organisation.Agreed. We need to come up with better ways to organise, document, version, share and simplify GH files. GH1 UI is ok for small projects (<100 components) but can't handle more complexity.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the feedback, I really do, but I want to be honest and open about my own plans and where they might conflict with your wishes. Grasshopper is being used far beyond the boundaries of what we expected and it's clear that there are major shortcomings that must be addressed before too long. We didn't get it right with the first version, I don't expect we'll get it completely right with the second version but if we can improve upon the -say- five biggest drawbacks (performance, documentation, organisation, plugin management and no mac version) I'll be a happy puppy.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com…
greatly appreciate it!!
You can write the number of the question and write your answer next to it, example:
1) a
2) c
3) a) Washington University in St. Louis
4) 2 weeks (1week+1week shipping)
5) 130
6) b
7) b
The survey questions are as follows:
1)
Did you 3D print before?
5)
How much did it cost (in dollars)?
a.
Yes, for a school project
a.
Between 20 & 50
b.
Yes, for a personal project
b.
Between 50 & 80
c.
Between 80 & 120
2)
Print size
d.
Please specify if otherwise: _____ dollars
a.
Between 2 & 6 cubic inches
b.
Between 6 & 12 cubic inches
6)
Do you think the price was expensive?
c.
Between 12 & 20 cubic inches
a.
Not at all
d.
Please specify if otherwise: ____cubic inches
b.
A little bit expensive
c.
Very expensive
3)
Where did you print your object?
a.
School
7)
Were you satisfied with the printed object?
b.
Outside school: _________________
a.
Yes, it was a great print without problems
b.
Not bad, some issues
4)
How long did it take to print?
c.
I was not satisfied, very bad quality
a.
___ days
b.
___ weeks
Thank you very much to all!!
PS: If you did many 3D prints, you can post multiple answers.
Wassef…
ails.
Some word about the mesh... (see Image_01)
I took a flat 4 points NURBS surface as imput (very easy, it defines the total area of my pavilion) and some points (that defines the contact with the ground).
Then I extracted a grid of points from the NURBS (Surface_Util_Divide surface) and compared 'em with the contol points, in order to associate to each grid's point its own attractor (Vector_Point_Closest Point).
Than I moved the points down. I used the distance from each point to its attractor (inverted) as amplitude for the vector of the movement, in order to say: the nearer you are to the control point, the more intense your movement will be. During this operation I've passed the distances' data list into a graph mapper (Params_Special_Graph Mapper), in order to regulate in a very intuitive and interactive way the shaping of my canopy.
At the end of the process I asked GH for a simple Delaunay mesh (Mesh_Triangulation_Delaunay Mesh). It's a very cool command, I believe!!!
Ok, now some word about the component, it's design and it's repetition/adaptation to the mesh...
(see Image_02)
I took the mesh and extracted components on first and faces's information on second. Then I selected and separated the vertexes (1°, 2°, 3°) of each triangular face into threee well defined list.
Then I re-created the triangles' edges. Please pay attention because it's not the same if you use output information from Delaunay components, because here we need a justapposition of edges where triangles touches each others.
After this work I joined the edges and found their centroid. At the same time I found the mid point of each edge.
Now the component... (see Image_03)
It' a little bit longer to describe: I'll try to be synthetic.
Substantially it is a loft from a curve to a point, repeated three times for each triangle (Surface_Freeform_Extrude Point). The point is an elevation of the centroid of the triangle (you can choose if the exstrusion has a single height or it's related to an attractor. In my case it was fixed). The curve is combination of things. There's an arch, which starts on the edge (there's an offset from the corner) end terminates on the same edge (on the other side, obviously). While it's generation the arch passes through a third point which belong to another segment. This last connects the mid point of the original edge (base triangle) with the centroid. The result is a kind of polyline, with two segments and an arch. If you go back to the image of the component that I posted probably you'll understand what I'm saying better than with the definition.
The posit…