bit:
Unable to load grasshopper.dll plug-in: Rhino version not specified.
I've also tried the current WIP grasshopper (0.7 rev 57) and I receive a slightly different error message:
Unable to load grasshopper.rhp plug-in: Rhino version not specified.
A similar thread: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/plugin-eror
…
Added by Koabi Brooks at 1:30pm on October 2, 2010
1 of 8] Writing simulation parameters...[2 of 8] No context surfaces...[3 of 8] Writing geometry...[4 of 8] Writing Electric Load Center - Generator specifications ...[5 of 8] Writing materials and constructions...[6 of 8] Writing schedules...[7 of 8] Writing loads and ideal air system...[8 of 8] Writing outputs......... idf file is successfully written to : c:\ladybug\unnamed\EnergyPlus\unnamed.idfAnalysis is running!...c:\ladybug\unnamed\EnergyPlus\eplusout.csv......Done! Read below for errors and warnings:Program Version,EnergyPlus, Version 8.4.0-09f5359d8a, YMD=2016.05.27 21:14,IDD_Version 8.4.0 ** Warning ** IP: Note -- Some missing fields have been filled with defaults. See the audit output file for details. ************* Beginning Zone Sizing Calculations ** Warning ** ManageSizing: For a plant sizing run, there must be at least 1 Sizing:Plant object input. SimulationControl Plant Sizing option ignored. ************* Testing Individual Branch Integrity ************* All Branches passed integrity testing ************* Testing Individual Supply Air Path Integrity ************* All Supply Air Paths passed integrity testing ************* Testing Individual Return Air Path Integrity ************* All Return Air Paths passed integrity testing ************* No node connection errors were found. ************* Beginning Simulation ************* Simulation Error Summary ************* ** Warning ** The following Report Variables were requested but not generated ** ~~~ ** because IDF did not contain these elements or misspelled variable name -- check .rdd file ************* Key=*, VarName=ZONE PACKAGED TERMINAL HEAT PUMP TOTAL COOLING ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=ZONE PACKAGED TERMINAL HEAT PUMP TOTAL HEATING ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=CHILLER ELECTRIC ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=BOILER HEATING ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=FAN ELECTRIC ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=ZONE VENTILATION FAN ELECTRIC ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=EARTH TUBE FAN ELECTRIC ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=PUMP ELECTRIC ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=ZONE VENTILATION TOTAL HEAT LOSS ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* Key=*, VarName=ZONE VENTILATION TOTAL HEAT GAIN ENERGY, Frequency=Hourly ************* There are 1 unused schedules in input. ************* There are 1 unused week schedules in input. ************* There are 3 unused day schedules in input. ************* Use Output:Diagnostics,DisplayUnusedSchedules; to see them. ************* EnergyPlus Warmup Error Summary. During Warmup: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors. ************* EnergyPlus Sizing Error Summary. During Sizing: 1 Warning; 0 Severe Errors. ************* EnergyPlus Completed Successfully-- 3 Warning; 0 Severe Errors; Elapsed Time=00hr 00min 1.19sec
…
available yet on this front.
Here's a basic breakdown:
1. Galapagos populates the first generation (G[0]) with random individuals. Basically the sliders are all set at random values.
2. Now we step into the generic evolutionary loop, so G[0] becomes G[n], as this is the same for all generations.
3. For each individual in G[n] the fitness is computed. This is the most time consuming operation in the solver.
4. The individuals in G[n] must populate G[n+1], there are two ways in which this can happen:
- Individuals 'survive' the generation gap and are present in both G[n] and G[n+1]
- Individuals mate to produce offspring that populates G[n+1]
Often, fit individuals will use both vectors.
5. Creating offspring is a complex procedure and there are many factors that affect it.
5a. Coupling: this step involves picking individuals from G[n] for mating couples. Individuals can be picked isotropically (i.e. everyone has an equal chance of being picked, regardless of fitness), exclusively (i.e. only the fittest X% are allowed to mate, but they are all equally likely to mate) and biased (i.e. the fitter an individual, the higher the chance it finds a mate, but everybody has a chance)
5b. Mate selection: this step involves someone picking a mate from G[n]. When an individual has been selected to mate (step 5a), he/she needs to find a mate. Instead of picking another fit individual, mate selection happens based on genetic distance. For example, individuals could be said to prefer very similar individuals, or they could be said to prefer very different individuals, or something in between. This is called the "Inbreeding factor" in Galapagos. A high inbreeding factor will result in 'incestuous' couples, a low factor will result in 'zoophilic' couples. Neither extreme is healthy.
5c. Coalescence: Once a couple has been formed, offspring needs to be generated. Basically coalescence defines how the genomes of mommy and daddy are combined to produce little johnny. The best analogy with biological coalescence is crossover, where P out of Q genes are inherited from mom and (Q - P) genes are inherited from dad. In Galapagos, these genes are always consecutive, thus if the genome consists of 5 genes, the first 3 come from mom and the last 2 come from dad. Or the first 1 comes from mom and the last 4 come from dad. The amount of genes per parent is random. Genes can also be interpolated (there is no analogy for this in biological evolution). Since a single gene in Galapagos is nothing more than a slider position, it is quite easy to average the positions for mom and dad. Finally, genes can be created via preference blending. Very similar to interpolation, but the blending is weighted by the relative fitness of both parents.
5d. Mutations: Once the offspring genome has been created in step 5c, mutations are applied. Mutations are random events that affect gene values in random ways. Although the Galapagos engine supports several kinds of mutations, in Grasshopper it only makes sense to allow for point mutations, as it it not possible grow or shrink the number of sliders.
6. Finally, a new generation is populated and solved for fitness. There is an optional final step which can ensure that fit individuals do not get lost in the process. The "Maintain High Fitness" value controls what percentage of individuals from G[n] are allowed to displace individuals in G[n+1] provided they are fitter. By default this percentage is 10. Which basically means that the 10% fittest individuals in G[n] are compared to the 10% lamest individuals in G[n+1] and if grandpa is indeed fitter, he's allowed to bump junior off the list.
7. This process (step 2 - step 6) repeats until the maximum number of generations has been reached, until no progress has been made for a specified number of generations or until a specific fitness value has been reached.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
ow the steps of the successful run when step 1.2 is bypassed (note that the and OpenFOAM session is open in the background while running the Butterfly demo file):
1. create wind tunnel, and use different parameters of (4,4) for _globalRefLevel_ as suggested by Theodoro in this post
2. run blockMesh:
3. run snappyHexMesh:
4. run checkMesh:
5. connect the case from checkMesh to simpleFOAM and run the simulation:
6. the simulation converged at 1865 iteration, but the results visualization part has some problem:
7. so I revised this part according to suggestions from Hagit:
8. and the results can be visualized for P and U values:
The GH file used for the successful run shown above is attached here.
Now, the following is the error I got when the case from the update fvScheme component is used for simpleFOAM simulation:
the warning message on the simpleFOAM component is:
1. Solution exception: --> OpenFOAM command Failed!#0 Foam::error::printStack(Foam::Ostream&) in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #1 Foam::sigFpe::sigHandler(int) in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #2 ? in "/lib64/libc.so.6" #3 double Foam::sumProd<double>(Foam::UList<double> const&, Foam::UList<double> const&) in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #4 Foam::PCG::solve(Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double> const&, unsigned char) const in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #5 Foam::GAMGSolver::solveCoarsestLevel(Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double> const&) const in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #6 Foam::GAMGSolver::Vcycle(Foam::PtrList<Foam::lduMatrix::smoother> const&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double> const&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::PtrList<Foam::Field<double> >&, Foam::PtrList<Foam::Field<double> >&, unsigned char) const in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #7 Foam::GAMGSolver::solve(Foam::Field<double>&, Foam::Field<double> const&, unsigned char) const in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libOpenFOAM.so" #8 Foam::fvMatrix<double>::solveSegregated(Foam::dictionary const&) in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/lib/libfiniteVolume.so" #9 Foam::fvMatrix<double>::solve(Foam::dictionary const&) in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/bin/simpleFoam" #10 Foam::fvMatrix<double>::solve() in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/bin/simpleFoam" #11 ? in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/bin/simpleFoam" #12 __libc_start_main in "/lib64/libc.so.6" #13 ? in "/opt/OpenFOAM/OpenFOAM-v1606+/platforms/linux64GccDPInt32Opt/bin/simpleFoam"
The error message from the readMe! output node is attached below as a text file.
Hope you can kindly advise what the important steps or parameters I might have missed here. I assume it might be related to OpenFOAM rather than with the Butterfly workflow...
Thank you very much!
- Ji
…
ns about them.
It's a direction for Kangaroo I very much intend to continue developing - and I am still getting to grips with the possibilities and experimenting with how different optimization and fairing forces work in combination with one another, so I would value your input and experience.
For those interested in some background reading material -
[1] http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~mmeyer/Research/FairMesh/implicitFairing.pdf
[2] http://mesh.brown.edu/taubin/pdfs/taubin-eg00star.pdf
[3] http://www.pmp-book.org/download/slides/Smoothing.pdf
[4] http://graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs468-05-fall/slides/daniel_willmore_flow_fall_05.pdf
[5] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications.html
[6] http://www.math.tu-berlin.de/~bobenko/recentpapers.html
[7] http://spacesymmetrystructure.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pseudo-physical-materials/
[8] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications/34.html
[9] http://www.evolute.at/software/forum/topic.html?id=18
At the moment the Laplacian smoothing is uniformly weighted, which tends to even out the edge lengths as well as smoothing the form, which is sometimes desirable, and sometimes not. It also tends to significantly shrink meshes when the edges are not fixed.
I plan to try some of the other weighting possibilities, such as Fujiwara or cotangent weighting (see [1] and [3]), as well as other fairing approaches, such as Taubin smoothing [2], Willmore flow[4], and so on. This also has applications in the simulation of bending of thin shells.
Planar quad panels are often desirable, but I'm finding that planarization forces alone are sometimes unstable, or cause undesirable crumpling, so need to be combined with some sort of fairing/smoothing, but the different types have quite different effects, and the balance is sometimes tricky.
There's also the whole issue of meshes which are circular (I posted a demo of circularization on the examples page), or conical (this one still isn't working quite right yet), and their relationship with principal curvature grids and placement of irregular vertices, all of which is rather different when the whole form is up for change, rather than having a fixed target surface [7].
I'm also trying to get to grips with ways of making surfaces of planar hexagons, which need to become concave in regions of negative Gaussian curvature (see this discussion)
and I hope to release soon a component for calculating CP meshes, as described in [8], which I think could have many exciting construction implications.
While there are a number of well developed smoothing algorithms, their main area of application so far seems to be in processing and improving 3D scan data, so using them in design in this way is somewhat new territory. There can be structural, fabrication or performance reasons for certain types of smoothness, but of course the aesthetic reasons are also often important, and I think there are some interesting discussions to be had here about the aesthetics of smoothness.
Anyway, that's enough rambling from me, hopefully something there triggers some discussion - I'm really keen to hear about how all of you envision these tools might be used and developed.
…
ding on the topography of your location you will probably end up with a 10 000 meters mask radius.2) Again you would plug in all the geometry (those blocks) into the context_ input. Depending on the topography of the location, you will probably end up with a mask radius higher than 10 000 meters.But in this case the default value of 0 of the minVisibilityRadius_ input needs to be increased, so that the topography near the location gets excluded. Which is exactly what the minVisibilityRadius_ serves for.To my knowledge there is no paper which describes the exact amount of the minVisibilityRadius_ which needs to be used.ShadeUp plugin for example uses 50 meters of minVisibilityRadius_ by default and 50 000 meters of maxVisibilityRadius_ by default, for objects of a tens of meters in diameter.Something similar can be applied to our minVisibilityRadius_ input. For example: for relatively flat location surroundings one can use minVisibilityRadius_ to be at least 3 times larger than the contextRadius output. For more hilly locations surroundings this value can be increased (6, 7 times of the contextRadius).For example if the contextRadius is 600 meters, minVisibilityRadius_ can be 3.6 kilometers, and so on.Let me know if this answers your questions.…
existing bowl sections and align them to various planes around the stadium. I will explain what each group is:
Polylines - Each section {0 - 7} is made up of multiple seating deck polylines (n=4)
Existing Planes - These deck polylines currently live 1 plane for each sections{0-7}
New Planes - I need to copy each of those decks onto each of the planes(N=6) in each section
So the problem is, how can i get the 4 decks copied form the existing plane onto the new planes in each section? I think the orient component is the correct answer but I cant get the data trees to behave correctly.
You can download the example file here:
DataTreeProblem.ghx
…
Added by Ryan Gathmann at 3:51pm on December 19, 2012
georges/gismo/blob/master/examples/green_view_index.gh
2) Shapefiles (.shp) files reader:Shapefiles to test the new "read SHP" component:https://qgis.org/downloads/data/qgis_sample_data.zip (folder '\qgis_sample_data\shapefiles')
3) Two bug fixes- "OSM 3D Roads" component now runs on Rhino 7 as well.- "Bathymetry 1' color palette allowed to be used.
Gismo wishes you happy holidays and Happy New 2021!…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 1:12pm on December 24, 2020
flectance and use .2 as default. You can use ShadingProperty:Reflectance to change the default value. We don't support this in Honeybee interface right now but you can create the objects and add them to your energy model using additionalStrings_ input.
I put a simple example together were I change the reflection for shading surfaces to .5 for unglazed part of shading and portion and .7 for glazed part. I also set the percentage of glazing to 50% of the surface area.
I didn't put any input checks. Make sure to read the documentation to put valid input values for energyplus otherwise the energyplus simulation will fail. I also assumed that all the shading surfaces (context) will be planar surfaces.
Keep in mind that it will only effect the results if you are using one of the solar distributions with reflections. Honeybee is using FullInteriorAndExteriorWithReflections by default so you should be fine if you're using the default settings.
Hope it helps,
Mostapha
…