perienced with grasshopper, but so far I've managed to combine the following:
Giulio Piacentino's "Catenary arch from height" script
Pirouz Nourian's "Mobius" script (Obtained from a friend)
End Result:
Here's where I'm stuck: I want the mobius twist to revolve around the midpoint of the arch, but the script uses the input values to determine the endpoints, resulting in a weird sinuous shape when viewed from above. Also, the secondary end points (generated by the mobius script, determining the width of the surface) are generated by default along the z axis, resulting in an arch that only touches the "ground" at two points. I attempted to work around this issue by trying to force the zHeight parameter to correspond with the y axis (thus rotating the arch 90 degrees so it would lay "flat"), but the script interprets the third point as a value and not as an actual point to bisect. I thought this might be an issue with the C# component that I obtained from Giulio Piacentino's script, so I attempted to tinker around with the source code. Unfortunately, I'm not fluent in C# so I only managed to mess everything up (I've since recovered the code from the cache). Anybody got some ideas? -BC …
onsidered period.
Even if the end of July for the mediterranean climate is not the best period to perform an adaptive comfort analysis (it's just a pretest to define a LB model) I want to refine the Adaptive comfort Chart (AC) by changing the external air temperature data imported from the .epw file with that of monitored data as reported here below:
Where the monitored ext air temperature are in this form (green panel below):
I have used the comfortPar component to set the following parameters:
Adaptive chart as defined by EN 15251
90% of occupants comfortable
the prevailing outdoor temperature from a weighted running mean of the last week
fully conditioned space (even if it is not properly in line with AC as already discussed)
The question is this: the AC component could correctly apply the code below if there is only a list of external temperature data for a restricted period (without indication about the limits of this period) and not for an entire year?
else: #Calculate a running mean temperature. alpha = 0.8 divisor = 1 + alpha + math.pow(alpha,2) + math.pow(alpha,3) + math.pow(alpha,4) + math.pow(alpha,5) dividend = (sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-24:-1] + [_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-1]])/24) + (alpha*(sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-48:-24])/24)) + (math.pow(alpha,2)*(sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-72:-48])/24)) + (math.pow(alpha,3)*(sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-96:-72])/24)) + (math.pow(alpha,4)*(sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-120:-96])/24)) + (math.pow(alpha,5)*(sum(_prevailingOutdoorTemp[-144:-120])/24)) startingTemp = dividend/divisor if startingTemp < 10: coldTimes.append(0) outdoorTemp = _prevailingOutdoorTemp[7:] startingMean = sum(outdoorTemp[:24])/24 dailyRunMeans = [startingTemp] dailyMeans = [startingMean] prevailTemp.extend(duplicateData([startingTemp], 24)) startHour = 24
…
th one element which is a list of 10 numbers?
I can flatten it and get (I think) a list of 10 elements (even though when I hover over the output of "Flatten" it says "Tree(T) as tree"). I'm surprised I can flatten at all what would appear to common sense to be a simple list of 10 numbers.
I'm hoping that if I can get this answered it will become obvious why we have trees of lists rather than just lists of lists as you would in most computer languages. That's my real goal - to understand the purpose of adding what seems like an unnecessary complication - trees - to the concept of lists in GH. It seems to me as though a "tree" is just a list of other "trees" until you get to the leaves where you can have "lists" which are identical to trees but can have something other than a tree in them. Whether you can have lists of trees or trees with no lists I'm unclear on. Do the leaves of trees have to be lists? Do lists have to be contained in trees? It would appear from the series example where a tree is produced for no obvious reason to contain the list that this is the case but given that you can flatten it, I guess not - or is the "List" I see in the param viewer just another type of "tree"?
I've found many tutorials that talk about how to manipulate trees and lists and I've managed to get along fairly well with them so far, but nothing seems to explain the reasoning behind the existence of trees and the philosophy for how and when they should be used and when lists should/could be used and precisely what the difference is between them.
Sorry to be long winded but I'm so confused!
Darrell Plank
P.S. I've seen David Rutten's diagram with the colored leaves in Grasshopper Primer 2 and that seems helpful. It would appear that trees can only have lists at their leaves and lists can't have trees although I'm not sure that it comes out and says that directly but at least there are no examples of this shown in his tree diagram. I thought I had it down pretty much so decided to test myself. Apparently I'm as confused as ever:
It certainly appears to me that this tree has two levels - a first level with one limb and a second with 10 limbs - and that I should be able to index it with {0;0} and retrieve a tree with one item in it - the list {0}. The panel data seems to confirm this with indices of {0;0;0}, etc. so I put this path in with quite a bit of confidence that it would work and...bust. The error reads "Path {0;0} does not exist within this tree". Huh? Again, I'm just so confused.…
Added by Darrell Plank at 12:17am on January 20, 2015
ils.ExceptionUtils.RemoveData(System.Exception, System.Object)'.
Traceback: line 67, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\types.py" line 6, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\abc.py" line 11, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\_abcoll.py" line 83, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\UserDict.py" line 398, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\os.py" line 9, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\linecache.py" line 6, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\warnings.py" line 43, in <module>, "C:\Program Files\Rhino WIP\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\random.py" line 5, in script…
r "virtual partitions" as follows:
What I mean "air walls" here, is derived from the description of the E+ documentation with the header of "Air wall, Open air connection between zones". (Page 17, http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/pdfs/tips_and_tricks_using_energyplus.pdf)
As I understand, the term "air wall" used in E+ here refers to a description of something like "boundary condition" between adjacent interzone heat transfer surfaces, but not a kind of "construction or material" (like air space resistance or air gaps within a wall/double glazing window).
The main purpose of introducing the "air wall", is to simulate or approximate the airflow/convection/natural ventilation effect between multiple thermal zones which are connected by a large opening.
In my previous tests, using HBzones and GB, I managed to create the gbXML file which can be successfully imported to DB (without assigning any constructions within HB). And the adjacency condition can be recognized automatically by DB, even when I did not use the "Solve adjacencies" component in HB - shared surfaces between multiple thermal zones are recognized automatically by BD as "internal - partition"(which are standard partitions, but not virtual partitions).
In order to create/approximate "virtual partition", I need to manually draw a "hole" in the standard partition surface (fig.1&2). Again, the reason why we want to use "virtual partitions"(or "air wall") is that it allows airflow between multiple thermal zones which are connected by large openings and we could get different temperature of the each subdivided thermal zone which compose a large thermal zone.
My question is, if there is a possible way to simulate/approximate this kind of "virtual partitions"(or "air wall") in HBzones or in GB? If so, I would like to test if DB recognizes it or not. Actually, we expect that there is no need to involve any manual operations (like drawing a "hole" in the standard partition surface) in DB, due to an automatic optimization loop.
Thank you!
Best,
Ding
fig.1
fig.2
…
pe and its surface.
However, I don't have that much knowledge about both grasshopper and Mathematica.. I mean I can only make assumptions and think about relations of certain functions but that's all.
If you can help me on this, I would appreciate it so much.
You can see a screenshot of the code and model of the demonstration from mathematica in attachment.
And here is the mathematica code;
Manipulate[ Module[{\[CurlyEpsilon] = 10^-6, c1 = Tan[a1], c2 = Tan[a2], c3 = Tan[a3], c4 = Tan[a4], c5 = Tan[a5], c6 = Tan[a6]}, ContourPlot3D[ Evaluate[ c6 Sin[3 x] Sin[2 y] Sin[z] + c4 Sin[2 x] Sin[3 y] Sin[z] + c5 Sin[3 x] Sin[y] Sin[2 z] + c2 Sin[x] Sin[3 y] Sin[2 z] + c3 Sin[2 x] Sin[y] Sin[3 z] + c1 Sin[x] Sin[2 y] Sin[3 z] == 0], {x, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {y, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {z, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, Mesh -> False, ImageSize -> {400, 400}, Boxed -> False, Axes -> False, NormalsFunction -> "Average", PlotPoints -> ControlActive[10, 30], PerformanceGoal -> "Speed"]], {{a1, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(1\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a2, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(2\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a3, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(3\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a4, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(4\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a5, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(5\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a6, 1, "\!\(\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]\), \(6\)]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, AutorunSequencing -> {1, 3, 5}, ControlPlacement -> Left]…
use for some typical reasons why solar access can be important:
Solar Access for Passive Solar Heating - The conditional statement should request sun vectors for any hours below the balance point of the building (the temperature at which the building starts requiring additional heating). For residences, this can be as high as 18C and for commercial/retail buildings with high internal heat gains, this can be as low as 10C. 16C is around what you might find for some residences with better insulation and is probably the reason why that is chosen in the file.
Solar Access for Outdoor Thermal Comfort - The conditional statement should request sun vectors for any hours below the lower limit of outdoor comfort (UTCI uses 9C for this lower limit).
Solar Access for Health of Plants/Trees in a Park/Garden - This is a bit of the opposite of the other metrics since you want hours of the warmer season. In this case, I usually use solar radiation as the annualHourlyData with the conditional statement and I request hours that are above a certain radiation level (where the plants are benefiting the most). I then use an analysisPeriod to get rid of any months of the year when the trees don't have leaves on them.
Hope this helps,
-Chris…
explore new approaches to design in the line of Utzon's work, by extending his design principles with the use of computational techniques in a parametric design environment. The summer school is a hands-on learning environment, where theoretical knowledge is coupled with physical and digital design assignments related to the theme.
We will be working in the Utzon Center throughout the summer school and from the studies and prototypes developed by participants a 1:1 folded reciprocal canopy will be created and constructed to cover a large part of the Utzon Center courtyard.
Please send 2x A4 pages, including letter of interest (5-10 lines), 1-2 reference projects of previous work and contact details to Lasse Andersson (land@create.aau.dk) before 1. May.
For more information please see:
www.utzonx.org
www.utzoncenter.dk/en/welcome.htm…
ling" shapes, you can consult this video tutorial:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a38zoKkVa1c&feature=relmfuThis one too:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6O61dMrCN0U…
need to?
2. "if there's no points why bother making the branch?" - It seems the default behaviour of grasshopper components is to keep empty branches, I just did the same. Not sure if there are situations where it would make a difference, but it just seemed the right thing to do.
3. "The 2nd C#" - are you talking about the v.01 tree? because if so the v.02 is already a rewrite with a very concise Main.
"Main should use less lines than an A4 and/or what you can see in your screen editor without scrolling thanks for the tip" - thanks for this tip will do that from now on
"Use public Methods for the variables" - could you explain this a little better? what's the difference in the grasshopper script component of using public vs private?
thanks again…