rendo posizioni lavorative fino a qualche tempo fa impensabili. Questo nuovo approccio ha infatti la caratteristica di avvicinarsi alla programmazione informatica, ma con un approccio facilitato grazie ai componenti visuali.Hai bisogno di un motivo in più per usare Grasshopper? Eccolo! Trattandosi di uno strumento ancora in fase di testing (anche se perfettamente funzionante) l’applicativo è completamente gratuitoScarica la tua versione e inizia subito ad usarlo!Corsi certificatiLe lezioni sono tenute da Antoni(n)o Marsala, docente certicato McNeel, con alle spalle oltre 5 anni di esperienza nell’insegnamento di Rhinoceros. Negli ultimi anni abbiamo tenuto in grande considerazione l’evolversi di questo plugin e abbiamo deciso di investire sulle sue potenzialità.Nel Febbraio del 2011, grazie ad Antoni(n)o Marsala, è uscito Algoritmi Generativi, edizione italiana del libro di Zubin Khabazi Generative Algorithms with Grasshopper. Entrami sono scaricabili gratuitamente e rappresentano dei validi strumenti per capire il mondo di Grasshopper.Da diversi mesi inoltre, il Mandarino BLU, ha attivato una collaborazione con La Bottega di Galileo di Pisa, officina del libero scambio di idee, presentando dei progetti formativi post universitari, per coloro che vogliono entrare nel mondo della progettazione di nuova generazione.Dalla collaborazione con Multiverso, nasce invece un progetto formativo più ampio sviluppato a Firenze in via Campo d’Arrigo 40rLeggi il nostro programma didattico o scarica la versione in pdf…
2:
-Developing the winning design into a working application -Testing -Beers and BBQ
Details:
-Tutors: Gregory Epps, RoboFold founder, Florent Michel RoboFold software developer. -See previous workshops here. -Download Poster here.
-Please install Rhino5 and Grasshopper and Godzilla before this event.
-No previous experience with Grasshopper necessary. -Hours: 10am-6pm. -Location details: here.
***COMPETITION: THE BEST USE OF GODZILLA GETS A FREE PLACE***
Judged on creativity and practicality. Submit your name, association and a link to your video to robots@robofold.com We add an additional place for the winner. Flights, accommodation etc are not free...
Join us for the first Godzilla robot workshop - experiment with the easiest robot software on the Grasshopper platform.
More details and resources on: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/godzilla
Workshop Fee:
Student: £ 399
Professional: £ 599…
dellatore nurbs, Rhinoceros. Attraverso una serie di esercizi che si svolgeranno durante il corso, si spiegheranno i temi fondamentali che stanno alla base della modellazione generativa e del design parametrico.
Il corso è rivolto a chi ha già una familiarità minima con la modellazione attraverso Rhinoceros e vuole ampliare le proprie competenze verso il campo della modellazione parametrica e generativa, e si terrà da martedì 22.10.2016 a giovedì 24.10.2016 – dalle 10:00 alle 17:00.
Potete scaricare qui il PROGRAMMA DEL CORSO.
Il calendario dei corsi è consultabile qui.
VEGA Parco Scientifico TecnologicoVia della Libertà 12 – VeneziaEdificio Porta dell’Innovazione – Piano Terra
Per iscriversi al corso è necessario essere registrati al sito.Per tesserarvi al Fablab Venezia, diventare maker, usufruire dei vantaggi, clicca qui.
Le iscrizioni chiuderanno giovedì 17.11.2016.
Il corso ha un costo di 270,00 euro + iva (329.40) per i tesserati e convenzionati,per i non tesserati il costo sarà di 330,00 + iva (402.60) euro.
Vuoi risparmiare? Iscriviti entro tre settimane dalla data di inizio corso, usufruirai automaticamente dell’offerta “early bird” ovvero uno sconto del 20% sul costo a te dedicato.
Per iscriversi:
http://www.fablabvenezia.org/parametric-design-with-grasshopper/…
it could look like this:
Once you're told it's to do with flattening data structures called 'trees' it becomes obvious what it means and very easy to remember. If you had to guess what it meant before you were told about trees I'm not sure what you'd make of it. Perhaps something to do with downloading? Downward pointing arrows are often associated with downloading things.
If I compress the tree image the arrow can be above it, but now the tree doesn't look like a tree any more:
Unless you've seen it before on another icon and you know that shape represents a data tree in Grasshopper.
I in fact did use a downward pointing arrow to represent flatten in the parameter post-processes:
These icons only have 10x10 pixels so anything beyond a single, simple shape cannot be represented so I couldn't go with the stump.
I'm not particularly hesitant to change the UI from version to version. I know it annoys some people and I know that some tutorials and course materials will become outdated because of it. But while GH is in alpha mode I think it is more important to try and figure out what interface works best. I'm not particularly impressed by the improvement of the tree+arrow icon, because even if it immediately conjures up the words "Flatten Tree" in your mind, you still don't know what to make of it unless you already know about data trees and what it means to flatten them.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
laxation have been around much longer than any of the tools you mention, or indeed Rhino itself. A particularly well known one is Ken Brakke's Surface Evolver from over 20 years ago. Of the examples listed, some of them were inspirations when starting Kangaroo in 2009, and I've always tried to acknowledge those. (of course, surface relaxation is only one part of what Kangaroo is about)
I also was helped by conversations with many people, including Moritz as you mention, and especially yourself with the coding. Indeed the .Net class you ran back then for McNeel, as well as the other correspondence in your own time was really useful in getting started - thanks again!
As for mesh relaxation not being 'not so difficult', well - for sure there are many implementations of these things out there. Similarly there are dozens of examples of subdivision implementations (Andrew Heumann even showed you don't need to code anything, but can do it with standard grasshopper components), but let's not start being too dismissive of each other's work, hey ? Of course there's a lot more to making a flexible and useful tool than individual algorithms - making them part of a larger framework or system of tools makes a big difference.
Being the first to implement a particular existing algorithm on a particular platform maybe isn't as big a deal as inventing a new algorithm or technique. When other implementations of the same technique come along, we should just assess them on their merits. If the new tool owes something to previous contributions, then that needs to be acknowledged, and then if it improves in some way on what is already available then great. Even if it doesn't then it may still be useful as an exercise for the author or as an example of a different approach - though of course too much duplication of effort tackling already solved problems is a waste, and if there is no significant new contribution then it doesn't deserve to replace what is there.
If a new tool comes along that improves in some way on what we've done already (such as some of the topology tools available in Starling compared to what is in WeaverBird, or the material properties in Karamba compared to Kangaroo), then let's just learn from that and let it spur us on to greater things and improve even further!
So I'll look forward to using this and future versions of WeaverBird in conjunction with Kangaroo, as I think their feature sets complement each other very nicely.…
nt should stand up to reasonable, Socratic interrogation with logical and descriptive rigor. For example, I find entirely credible an architect who suggests that he placed his buildings 20 meters apart because he thought that it would make people more comfortable in light of his reading of the space relative to its environment, materiality, expected time of habitation/circulation, etc. His "thinking" such things is, for the most part intuitive, and backed by deductive logic. (Of course integration of wind analysis and other harder readings is obviously desirable) But I interpret the active denial of intuition's crucial role in design as at the heart of its current deplorable trending toward misuse of terminology, application of pseudo-science and intellectual over-reach. Architects wade out of their waters precisely when they invoke such things as human psychology or perception.
Furthermore, I believe that architects - student and professionals alike - regularly make formal decisions according to their aesthetic judgement. To suggest that students aren't qualified to make a design decision during their studies because they think it's formally successful seems exceedingly stingy; likewise, suggesting that a professional architect shouldn't rely on it is puzzling to me. I find architects' attempts to justify what are obviously decisions based on formal taste using other means often taking the same form of obfuscation that makes architects appear to be intellectual charlatans to specialists in other fields. Taste is taste. I would agree that it can't be taught. But good architectural design certainly remains at least somewhat grounded in artistic sensibility.
3) I'm by no means advocating that all architects must master every detail in their work. Rather, that architects have at least a generalist's working knowledge of materials and construction systems. Floors don't levitate, and windows require depth; rules of thumb count as vital knowledge.
4) I would say that consideration of performance-driven properties falls under basic understanding of how a building will operate in its given environment. For example, if you've designed a glass house in Arizona, ur doing it wrong. The more simulation and science you have, the better. Indeed, I think that such elements - wind analysis, solar gain analysis, structural performance - represent the most solid opportunities today for architects to assert the harder lines of defense in their design decision making...say for example, being able to demonstrate using basic geometry that your shade keeps the sun out in summer, but lets it in when it's cold.…
nome there will be one of those little [+] symbols. Also, when it finds a new best-answer-yet the I'm-giving-up counter is reset to zero.
B is the average fitness of the entire population over time. It is not a particularly interesting statistic.
C represents the portion of the population that is fitter than a single standard deviation away from the average, and E represents the portion that is unfitter than one standard deviation. In a similar fashion, D represents that part of the population that is within one standard deviation of the average. None of these are particularly interesting from the user's point of view, but it does give you a sense about the general fitness variability within a population. I.e. "all genomes are quite fit but there are one or two slackers" vs. "all genomes are absolutely terrible save for a rare few" vs. "genomes are pretty well distributed along the fitness spectrum"
The vertical blue bar indicates that you currently have generation 17 selected. A 'population' of genomes evolves over time and every time-step is called a 'generation'. If all goes well, the fittest individuals in any specific generation are fitter than the fittest individuals from the previous generation. If this doesn't happen -say- 20 generations in a row, the solver will abort the search.
A single generation contains a fixed number of genomes or individuals. When you select a generation, those individuals will be displayed in the bottom three graphs. On the left you see a 'similarity representation' of this generation. The closer two dots are the more similar their genetic make-up. Black dots represent genomes with offspring, red crosses represent genomes that did not contribute to the next generation.
In the middle you see a multi-dimensional-point-graph. Each slider that is being manipulated by Galapagos is represented by a vertical line. Each genome is then drawn as a polyline connecting these vertical lines at the percentage of the slider value they all have. This representation shows not just clusters of similar genomes, it also shows you which slider layout they roughly have. You can select genomes in this graph.
On the right is a list of genomes (sorted from fittest to least fit) with the fitness value written next to it. The green bands are once again indicative of the slider layout of each genome, so if two capsules look alike, they have a similar slider layout.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Tirol, Austria…
Added by David Rutten at 3:00pm on November 18, 2013
Loop'. The fun part of the slower version is that you can see what it's doing while it's running. 'Fast Loop' gives no indication that it's working, so you want to test it with small numbers and be sure it's coded properly before bumping the iteration count up.
The GH profiler running the slow version showed between 1 and 1.5 seconds per loop, but the reality was more like ~10 seconds per loop toward the end of an 11 X 11 grid, or ~20 minutes total. It's easier to be patient because you know it's working.
The 'Fast Loop' finished the same grid in 1.6 minutes! An impressive improvement. I've been running it on a 30 X 30 grid (900 points) for ~23 minutes so far and see nothing yet. Not the ~12 minutes I had hoped for... Now 36 minutes on this loop for 900 points... hope it's not stuck. Not fast! Later - DONE!! Profiler says 59 minutes for 900 points but it was more like an hour and twenty minutes total. It succeeded, I have a single 'Closed Brep' from 900 extruded rings, baked to Rhino.
Another strategy to explore would be doing 'SUnion' on a smaller grid using the Anemone loop, then replicate it by moving it as needed to form a larger grid; then run the copies through another 'SUnion' loop. I went ahead and implemented that while waiting. It works and is fast! Started with 3 X 3 and ran the result again as 5 X 5 (9 X 25 = 225 total) in barely ~70 seconds!? Trying 36 X 36 now... 1,296 points appears to have succeeded in less than ten minutes! Though it seems to take quite awhile after the loop ends before control is restored to GH/Rhino. I'll let you do your own experiments and benchmarks.
I encapsulated the loop in a cluster called 'suLoop' (blue groups).
Internal of 'suLoop' cluster:
…
Added by Joseph Oster at 11:14pm on March 22, 2017
he Summer in the City program, part of the Portland School of Architecture and Allied Arts (an extension to University of Oregon).
Using both Grasshopper and the Firefly plug-in, this workshop will focus on the design of innovative facade prototypes that are configurable, sensate, and active. Students will become familiar with the terminology used in interactive facade design including an overview of hardware (ie.sensors, actuators, and programmable microcontrollers) as well as software interfaces terminology. We'll learn new prototyping techniques and develop digital and physical models which can respond to a plurality of environmental and user driven forces. This workshop will take a hands-on approach, and you will walk away with the ability to build your own custom electronic circuits (using the Arduino), as well as create interactive simulations and models.
This course will primarily focus on physical computing techniques. Unfortunately, given the time constraints of the workshop, I will not be able to provide an extensive overview of the Grasshopper interface (it is suggested that participants have some familiarity with the Rhino/Grasshopper environment). There are many great online resources to get you up to speed relatively quickly if you are new to this software. This is a good place to start.
The course will be held at the School of Architecture and Allied Arts in Portland, OR. The date/times of the workshop are as follows:
Friday July 19, 5:00-7:50 P.M.
Saturday July 20, 9:00 A.M.-3:50 P.M.
Sunday July 21, 1:00-3:50 P.M.
If you are a designer, architect, or anyone who is interested in learning about the digital tools and technology trends that are revolutionizing design today, this workshop is for you. Make sure to click here to find out more about registration and enrollment in this exciting new workshop.…
+ Easily debug your system by displaying individual force vectors. + High performance, parallel algorithms, spatial data-structures. + Write your own custom forces, no coding required. + Open source framework for others to build custom behaviors. + Boid forces: Cohese, Separate, Align, & View. + Contain Agents within Brep, Box, Surface, and Polysurface environments. + Forces: Path Follow, Attract, Contain, Surface Flow, Seek, Arrive, Avoid Obstacle, Avoid Unaligned Collision, Sense Image, Sense Point, & more to come. + Behaviors: Bounce Contain, Kill Contain, Initial Velocity, Eat, Set Velocity, & more to come.
Future work:
+ Behaviors to drive simulations of people and vehicles.
+ Temporal inputs can change the actions of the system over time.
Download the add-on on Food4Rhino
If you find any bugs or have any feature requests please post them on the GitHub Issue Tracker which will allow everyone to see which bugs are open or closed and allows me to update you when it is fixed.
This is an open source project so if you need custom defined forces or behaviors for your project reach out to me about becoming a committer.
View the project on GitHub
To get started check out this video tutorial on how to set up a basic particle scene. Follow along with this example script.
Learn how to set up a flocking simulation with agents in this video tutorial and example file.
To learn more about the polymorphic type system in the latest release of Quelea see this video explanation.
For questions on how to use Quelea, please create a new Discussion.…
Added by Alex Fischer at 1:20pm on February 16, 2015