the various digital design methods and technologies that they employ in their design workflow, highlighted at various scales through their recent work. Organizers and Moderators: Andrew Haas, Program Co-Director, Architectural Association Visiting School New York Alfonso Oliva, Associate/Director, LERA Consulting Structural Engineers Speakers: Luc Wilson, Senior Associate Principal and Director, KPF Urban Interface Dan Levine, Associate Director, Solutions Engineering – United Technologies (UTC) Jan Leenknegt, Architect and BIM Manager, Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) Introductions by AIANY Technology Committee Co-Chairs: Michael Brotherton, AIA, VP of Operations, Situ Fabrication LLC Alexandra Pollock, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Director of Design Technology, Senior Associate, FX Collaborative – Due to building security requirements, a state-issued photo ID or valid passport is required to obtain building entry. Advanced registration is required. This event is free and open to the public. Refreshments and pizza will be served.
Register: https://www.facebook.com/events/1019498534923019…
Added by Andrew Haas at 10:42am on October 30, 2018
angel but when it comes to material behavior, stresses, surface tension i think that "our" tools are still no complex and powerful enough - and like i said i didn't really see the benefit in the work of my friend form the digital experiment.
so i think the question is is there a benefit from your digital experiment or do you rather stick to the physical experiment.
…
of 400 interlocked rings in a 20 X 20 grid.
V1 - A single 'suLoop' component doing 400 'SUnion' operations (20 X 20): 11.6 minutes
V2 - Two phases: 5 X 10 in phase one and 2 X 4 in phase 2, 58 'SUnions' total: ~88 seconds combined
V3 - Two phases: 4 X 5 in phase one and 4 X 5 in phase 2, 40 'SUnions' total: ~104 seconds combined
Again, these Profiler benchmarks don't reflect the whole picture, and might be affected by other things I was doing on the laptop while the code was running.…
Added by Joseph Oster at 12:29pm on March 23, 2017
,
and then I saw under Application that resources are managed by 'Icon and manifest'.
That can also be set as 'Resource file', but then a file path is required.
Is 'Icon and manifest' OK, or have I to set thing differently ?
Also, in the class code I inserted the following:
( I saw it mentioned here in the forum )
protected override Bitmap Icon { get { return Resources.colour; } }
( colour.png is the image file's name )
but VS gives me an error, saying:
Error 1 The name 'Resources' does not exist in the current context C:\Program Files\Rhinoceros 5 Evaluation\gh\plug-ins\ColourRhOb\Class1.cs 88 26 ColourRhOb
Did I miss a reference in the code ? Here they are:
using System;using System.Drawing;using System.Collections.Generic;using Grasshopper.Kernel;using Grasshopper.Kernel.Types;using Rhino;using Rhino.DocObjects;using Rhino.Geometry;
What am I doing wrong ?
Thanks
emilio
…
glass panel).
2. This actually means that the parts on duty they don't differ that much. Meaning that we can use an "average" size (and "local" topology) acting as the Jack for all trades.
3. Meaning that we can effectively solve the abstract topology with an abstract app the likes of GH and then place in properly defined coordinate systems all the real-life bits and nuts ... closely "emulating" a pro solution (that could "adjust" the parts as well).
4. This means that one particular C# needs more lines of code since as it is it defines cable axis on a per nod to node basis ... but in fact these are defined as the min segment between curves (circles to be exact).
5. Additionally the end part of each strut differs depending on how many pairs of stabilizing cables are used (either 2 or 1). Meaning some lines of code more for defining the proper coordinate systems for the instance definitions.
6. This is the reason that I've postponed mailing to you the 4 horsemen (because PRIOR finishing the whole you MUST define what parts to use: the classic bottom-top design approach).
But in order to receive the Salvation (aka: Apocalypse) you MUST answer correctly to a simple puzzle:
Provided that money is no object, pick your car:
1. Ferrari 245 (Less is more)
2. Lancia Stratos (Lethal).
3. Cobra 427 (Men only)
4. Ford GT40 (Mama mia)
5. Ariel Atom (Mental)
6. Aston Zagato GTB4 (Sweet Jesus)
7. Fulvia HF Fanalone (THE racer)
8. Lambo Miura (Enough said)
9. Lotus Elise (Just add lightness)
10. Alfa Romeo 8C Competizione (In red)…