a working solution with replacing this line of code with:
Dim charList As New List(Of Char)(charArr)
Is this because of a version incompatibility (I'm using Rhino 4.0, and GH 0.8.0062)? Just curious.
Regards,
JJ…
by its own tangent vector on the curve... and this happens to the last item. Here's the algorithm:
B0 ----> B1
B1 ----> B2
B2 ----> B3
B3 ----> B4
...
…
f the mesh was self-intersecting everywhere. So instead I used Millipede (isosurface) to get the same undulations, but ignore the complex 'folds', you can see the difference in cross section thickness. I then tessellated it with the inverse pattern of the outer surface.
To make it a single 3d printable mesh, i just deleted a single face on inner and outer skin, then lofted the naked edges. (creating a tiny hole through the model). Therefore creating a single mesh that folds in on itself, not sure if there is a better way of defining the space between two meshes as the solid area...
Full GH (Kangaroo - Meshmachine - Weaverbird - Millipede)
Special thanks to Laurent Delrieu for his interesting offset mesh method that i based my approach on.
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/offset-mesh-problems-with-3d-mesh-with-weaverbird…
Added by Nick Tyrer at 5:25am on December 10, 2015
this target list:
(a1, b1, c1, d1)
(a2, b2, c2, d2)
(a3, b3, c3, d3)
....
What I want to do is injecting one more value (arbitrary angle in my case) to each point before I cull many of them - so that each point brings its angle data along.
Any hep would be greatly appreciated. TIA
…
omponent that increases in the x-axis (example below).
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 etc...B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 etc...C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 etc...D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 etc...
This is as far as I've gotten:
I have collected my points on the grid into a "List Length" component and input that into a "Series" which input into a "Function" with the expression Format("A{0}",x). The result labeling resembles the example below.
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5
A6 A7 A8 A9 A10
A11 A12 A13 A14 A15 etc...
Any help is appreciated.
Thank you in advance.…
g these times itself). If it works on selection alone, it would probably implement faster.
Theoretically, does this mean the total solving time of the definition is the 'chain of components' that takes the longest time? In the picture above, it would be the chain consisting 'point-curve-divideDistance'?
Because that still adds up only to 97%, I am assuming the Point and Slider component start solving in parallel, and the two Divide components also start solving in parallel?…