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
…
a value.
In this case it will be between position 86 and 87 where the x value of a point jumps from 2.32... to -6.04... (see inside red rectangle @ attached image).
Idea so far is:
1) Decompose the list into x,y,z
2) get just the x values in one list
3) compare all values in a kind loop.
4) if value difference is more that let's say 1.0 - get the index
5) split list at that index.
My question: How to do that without looping?
I would be very thankful is someone could give me a hint.
Best, Boris.
…
Added by Boris Baehre at 5:33am on January 28, 2016
/stackoverflow.com/questions/7735036/naudio-frequency-band-in...
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17222492/how-to-change-frequency...;
I am no expert in this field; I would have to do research just like you. Maybe someone else on this forum has already done more work in this area, let's see. Or it might be you, the first one :)
This does not look like something completely at reach for someone with not much programming experience, but maybe with some guidance it could be doable.
--
>>Do you know other libraries that I can use with it?Sorry I would have to search for other libraries just like you.
EDIT: This link has a simple sine wave written from scratch. It might be a good start to mix with the code above and a playground to understand theory.
Giulio--Giulio Piacentinofor Robert McNeel & Associatesgiulio@mcneel.com…
ntage...
This is a standard mesh to nurbs conversion result: http://www.tsplines.com/j/subdtonurbs/MeshToNurbsBoatShell.png
You want to start with a proper mesh reparametrization:
http://www3.cs.stonybrook.edu/~gu/software/RiemannMapper/figures/ti...
Once you have your mesh reparametrized it's relatively easy to divide it into surfaces. That is the easiest approach but it doesn't take into account any features(creases etc)...
This illustrates a nice mesh parametrization with features.
https://www.graphics.rwth-aachen.de/media/paper_images/qgp_340.png
EDIT:
Got a brief look at the Geomagic thingy... seems like it's a subd modeler (like tsplines). Creating nurbs out of subd meshes is easy cause you can basically trace back the subdivision. With Giulios help I was able to make a rough version of that process here: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/skeletal-mesh?commentId=2985220%3AComment%3A558193 ;
(the point is that subd meshes to nurbs are not as much challenging as mesh to nurbs).…
(1) I have been exporting small sections of a larger model into Maya from Rhino as FBX. In Maya I rotate and scale the models (-90 in X, Scale XYZ 0.001). The Named Views are being saved, but do not have a successful import into the Maya model. They do not appear as in Rhino, and the problem is not solved by scaling or rotating the cameras.
(2) If I try going the other direction, the cameras exported from Maya as FBX are also not aligning with the model in Rhino as they are in Maya.. I will do my best to post some images of the problem and hope you can help.
error !!
This is what the named views look like
here I am trying to the other way with a good view from Maya
strange placement..
This is the best result I can achieve, after I scale the camera by 1000
Any Advice???
Thanks, Robert.
…
ysim.ning.com/
When you run the simualtion you will notice on the batch terminal that Daysim is also being called, so you may want to consider how Daysim uses Radiance files & data.
Regarding your current problem, I think you stumbled onto something weird and interesting.
Interior and exterior readings appear to differ by 40 in the best case scenarios. Even setting the transmittance to 1 yields similar results. I tried changing from cummulative sky to climate sky and got similar values. Changing the test points did nothing either.
I think, (yet I'm too lazy to prove this) that the difference in values stems from diffuse radiation over the sky dome.
If you delete everything except the glass you'll notice that interior values are like 80-90% of the exterior values (this seems like the expected behaviour with a transmittance of 1). So, if we consider that a vertical window, part of an opaque box, is receiving radiation from 25% of a sphere, as you start to inset the interior test points the radiation they receive will be a fraction of the 25%.
Let me try to explain this better...The exterior surface receives radiation from a section of a sphere calculated by 180degrees on the xy plane (let’s call this angle theta) and by 90degrees (let’s call this angle phi) in azimuthal elevation. If you integrate this over spherical coordinates (theta from 0 to pi; phi from 0 to pi/2) you will find that it comes to a quarter of a sphere. By comparison, the interior surface will not integrate theta from 0 to 180degrees,nor phi from 0 to 90degrees, instead it will be the subtended angle from the exterior surface as a function of their separation; the farther in you go the smaller the view of the outside.
If my hypothesis is correct there shouldn't be that much difference since the separation is only 10cms...the subtended angle would be like 170 instead of 180 for theta and 85 instead of 90 for phi...overall if you integrate both spherical areas there should only by a difference of 10%.
In conclusion, I believe the unexpected behaviour stems from the previous subtended angle thing. If direct radiation was the only factor the difference would be the aforementioned 10%, which suggests that an additional source of energy is also affected by this. Perhaps indirect and diffuse radiation from other areas of the sky dome.
I’m definitely intrigued on why this is happening. Please post if you figure it out.
Regards,
Mauricio
…
TB of RAM. I think I'm going to start a GoFundMe campaign to buy one for myself :)
2- The server's cost is about $13 an hour. I get free access to supercomputer through my university and xsede.org because I earned an NSF Honorable mention last March, however, the supercomputers available through both resources are a little complicated for me to use, as opposed to the one available from amazon that has Microsoft server 2012 already installed.
3- I wanted to run 400 annual glare simulations for 400 different views.
4- I tried a to perform annual glare simulation for one view on my Dell XPS that has Intel Core i7-6700HQ processor and 16GB of system memory. The simulation took 2 hours to complete. Radiance parameter ab was set to 6.
5- I wanted to obtain the batch file for each view so I can run them on the server. So I used the fly component to run all 400 simulations and closed the cmd windows, that wasn't bad ( for me at least) because I asked my son to this job for me, he was just glad to help me :)
6- I created one batch file using this cmd command:
dir /s /b *.bat > runall.bat
This created a file with the path to each .bat file. I edited this file in Notepad++ to include the word "start" at the beginning of each line. This was done using the "find and replace" dialogue box.
7- I split my newly created batch file into 3 batch files, each one has about 130 file names and " start" before the file names.
8- installed radiance on my server
9- Ran the first batch file on the server, this started 130 cmd windows performing my simulations, CPU usage was anywhere between 90% to 100% and about 105 GB of RAMs were used.
10. It took about 5 hours to complete all 130 simulations, I expected to run all in 2 hours but can't complain because this would've taken about 260 hours to run on my laptop. After the simulations done I ran the second and then the third batch files ( total of about 15 hours).
11. I got 400 valid dgb files. Couldn't be happier!
…