ppresentazione di modelli per l’architettura ed il design, verso un apprendimento d' alto livello delle tecniche di modellazione parametrica 3D.
Il corso si svolgerà nei seguenti giorni:
Sabato 19/10 dalle 10.00 alle 19.00
Domenica 20/10 dalle 10.00 alle 19.00
Scadenza preiscrizione: 16/10
Contenuti
Durante questo corso, attraverso l' uso di tecniche avanzate di modellazione Nurbs,
si potranno costruire modelli tridimensionali complessi che permetteranno di comprendere le tematiche legate alle forme complesse dell’architettura.
Particolare attenzione verrà data allo studio delle superfici a doppia curvatura, alle superfici rigate e alle superfici sviluppabili, quest’ultime adatte alla creazione di manufatti rivolti alla produzione. Allo studio delle superfici sarà affiancata la logica della loro tassellazione, quindi il passaggio da entità continue ad entità discrete, indagandone il valore attraverso esercitazioni pratiche.
Per comprendere meglio le finalità pratiche della tassellazione verrà adoperata una plug-in integrativa specifica per questo tipo di operazione: Paneling Tools. Le lezioni pratiche saranno arricchite da brevi comunicazioni teoriche utili a perseguire l’obiettivo della costruzione di modelli complessi. Sintesi programma
Costruzione di superfici free-form facilmente editabili attraverso tecniche di sculpting ed una gabbia adeguata di punti di controllo;
Presentazione e spiegazione delle superfici a doppia curvatura, rigate, sviluppabili e loro pannellizzazione attraverso elementi lineari o tasselli piani;
Studio della tassellazione attraverso la plug-in Paneling Tools per lo sviluppo di tasselli tridimensionali complessi;
Modellazione di un'architettura complessa, costruita avvalendosi della anche della tecnica del morphing.
Preparazione della mesh e del file per il rendering.
Alla fine del corso, verrà rilasciato l’attestato di partecipazione ad un corso di Rhinoceros qualificato e certificato dalla casa sviluppatrice McNeel, valido anche per la richiesta di crediti formativi universitari.
Docente del corso
Il corso è tenuto da un docente qualificato, con riconosciuta esperienza universitaria, esperto in disegno e rappresentazione dell' architettura e del design ed istruttore McNeel:
Michele Calvano|_architetto, dottore di ricerca in rappresentazione architettonica specializzato nella modellazione matematica (Nurbs) e modellazione parametrica.
Docente ART (Autorized Rhino Trainer) - [vedi CV]
Info
Per ulteriori informazioni di carattere didattico sono a disposizione i seguenti contatti: Responsabile didattico: arch. Michele Calvano
Info mail: parametricart@gmail.com
cell: 340 3476330
…
creating the structural frame, finding the endpoints, linking these endpoints with curves and afterwards lofting the surfaces between the curves.
The results were quite nice, however, the procedure is very time consuming and inefficient. There is just too much copy-pasting involved.
(see attached file: "Old Attempts.zip" )
Mesh relaxation:
I have later on used Daniel Piker's tutorials on Mesh Relaxation and realized that this might be the way to go.
The link to these online tutorials on wewanttolearn.net is:
https://wewanttolearn.wordpress.com/2011/10/22/mesh-relaxation-kangaroo-tutorial/
His tutorials, however, only deal with mesh boxes which are ideal cubes. He then joins them together in various directions, but it is under 90 degrees angle.
( see attached file: "Daniel Pikers Examples" )
What I would like to achieve:
I want my bridges to go in all directions and angles, not just under 90 degree angle.
Ideally I would like to make a square (polygon) follow a curve (which moves in all axis) at certain number of division points. I would then loft these squares into a mesh and use that shape as a mesh box. I would later use this mesh box and relax it the same way as Daniel Piker used the cubes in his tutorial. The anchor points are only the vertices of the squares which create the lofted mesh box.
( see attached file: "New Attempts" )
As you can see below this procedure works even if the curve is moving in all directions not only along xy axis. There are, however, many problems connected to it.
The problem:
Despite all the effort I cannot seem to come up with a design where I would be able to draw a random curve which would be the guideline for my mesh box and then apply this box to one definition in order to relax the mesh and create the shape that I want. Without this I am again forced into a lot of copy pasting as the final mesh box is made out of several sections.
Also is there any way I could make the final resulting mesh a bit smoother? Increasing the number of mesh faces is probably the only way, right?
Thank you guys so much for any potential help.
All best,
Luka
…
phere with the maximum number of triangles but not much than a defined threshold.
I scaled that mesh just to fit Rhino grid, but it is not mandatory. What is useful, is to scale not uniformly the mesh (Scale NU). It could be done after cellular modifier applied or before or before and after. The 3 options are possible in the script. If you don’t need them just put 1 in scale sliders.
Ellipsoid mesh is the populated with points, I put 2 independents populations to randomize a bit further. For each vertices of the mesh the closest distance from the populated points is calculated.
Here is an illustration in color of this distance.
This distance is then used to calculate a bump. If domain for bump is beginning with negatives values to 0, it carves the mesh. Instead it bumps/inflates it.
Some images to illustrate the difference with populating 100 points with one or two populations.
Here some images to illustrate the application of scale before carving or after.
Next phase apply noise. At the moment I don't find it good.…
de geometries, which can easily be adapted to changing design intentions and requirements. The core concept of the software is that the brick unit is the basis for every action performed. Basically, a design is generated through drawing, placing and manipulating individual bricks. BrickDesignoffers different methods to manipulate the individual bricks in order to map patterns on a façade. These methods can be extended ad libitum through an open script interface, which gives access to a number of brick parameters.…
Added by Ayuka Oomura at 3:40am on November 4, 2013
atch Online HD 21st Dec 2017. Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Watch Online HD 21st Dec 2017. Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 - Batameezdil Full EpisodeYeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Watch Online, Today Replay Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 On Star Plus. Indian Drama Series Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21 Dec 2017 In Hd Quality Full Part. Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Today Replay Recap Youtube Video. Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st ...Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Full Episode 1355 - VideoVideo watch online Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 full Episode 1355 of Star Plus drama serial Yeh Hai Mohabbatein complete show episodes.Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 DEC 21 2017 LIVE WATCH NOW ...- Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Full Episode Watch Online Dec 21 …Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Full Episode Colors Tv HD. Hotstar Yeh Hai Mohabbatein Episode full by Colors Tv.Watch Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st December 2017 Video Online.Yeh Hai Mohabbatein 21st ...Watch Ye Hai Mohabbatein Full Episodes Online, Streaming ... - HotstarWatch Ye Hai Mohabbatein latest & full episodes online on hotstar. Upgrade to premium membership to enjoy all the latest award winning Undefined TV shows instantly & ad-free in HD on hotstar!…
Introduzione a Grasshopper", il primo manuale su Grasshopper.
.
I corsi PLUG IT nascono dalla volontà di promuovere le nuove tecnologie digitali di supporto alla progettazione e condividere il know-how maturato attraverso ricerca, collaborazione con i più importanti studi di architettura e pubblicazioni internazionali.
.
Verranno introdotte le nozioni base di Grasshopper approfondendo le metodologie della progettazione parametrica e le tecniche di modellazione algoritmica per la generazione di forme complesse. Il corso è rivolto a studenti e professionisti con esperienza minima nella modellazione 3D e si articolerà in lezioni teoriche ed esercitazioni.
. Argomenti trattati:
- Introduzione alla progettazione parametrica: teoria, esempi, casi studio - Grasshopper: concetti base, logica algoritmica, interfaccia grafica - Nozioni fondamentali: componenti, connessioni, data flow
- Funzioni matematiche e logiche, serie, gestione dei dati - Analisi e definizione di curve e superfici
- Definizione di griglie e pattern complessi - Trasformazioni geometriche, paneling - Attrattori, image sampler
- Data tree: gestione di dati complessi - Digital fabrication: teoria ed esempi - Nesting: scomposizione di oggetti tridimensionali in sezioni piane per macchine CNC
.
Verrà rilasciato un attestato finale.
.
Ulteriori info e programma completo su: www.arturotedeschi.com e su www.samilolab.it…
greatly appreciate it!!
You can write the number of the question and write your answer next to it, example:
1) a
2) c
3) a) Washington University in St. Louis
4) 2 weeks (1week+1week shipping)
5) 130
6) b
7) b
The survey questions are as follows:
1)
Did you 3D print before?
5)
How much did it cost (in dollars)?
a.
Yes, for a school project
a.
Between 20 & 50
b.
Yes, for a personal project
b.
Between 50 & 80
c.
Between 80 & 120
2)
Print size
d.
Please specify if otherwise: _____ dollars
a.
Between 2 & 6 cubic inches
b.
Between 6 & 12 cubic inches
6)
Do you think the price was expensive?
c.
Between 12 & 20 cubic inches
a.
Not at all
d.
Please specify if otherwise: ____cubic inches
b.
A little bit expensive
c.
Very expensive
3)
Where did you print your object?
a.
School
7)
Were you satisfied with the printed object?
b.
Outside school: _________________
a.
Yes, it was a great print without problems
b.
Not bad, some issues
4)
How long did it take to print?
c.
I was not satisfied, very bad quality
a.
___ days
b.
___ weeks
Thank you very much to all!!
PS: If you did many 3D prints, you can post multiple answers.
Wassef…
whole design intent, but this is what Inventor is good at. The way it packages bits of 'scripted' components into 'little models' that can be stored and re-assembled is central to MCAD working.
The Inventor model shown is almost 5 years old. We don't model like that any more, however it does offer a good idea of general MCAD modeling approaches.
iParts is useful in certain situations, it could've been useful in the above model, its usefulness is often in function of the quantity of variants/configurations.
So much is scripted in GH, maybe it should also be possible to script/define/constrain/assist the placement/gluing of the results?
...
Starting point: I think we are talking across purposes. AFAIK, the solving sequence of GH's scripted components is fixed. It won't do circular dependencies... without a fight. The inter-component dependencies not 'managed' like constraints solvers do for MCAD apps.
Components and assemblies are individual files in MCAD.
Placement of these within assemblies in MCAD is a product of matrix transforms and persistent constraints. There is no bi-directional link, the link is unidirectional (downflow only), because of the use of proxies.
Consequently, scripting the placement of components is irrelevant in GH, unless you decide that each component needs to be contained in its own separate file.
This also brings up the point that generating components and assemblies in MCAD is not as straightforward. In iParts and iAssemblies, each configuration needs to be generated as a "child" (the individual file needs to be created for each child) before those children can be used elsewhere.
You notice the dilemma, if you generate 100 parts, and then you realize you only need 20, you've created 80 extra parts which you have no need for, thus generating wasteful data that may cause file management issues later on.
GH remains in a transient world, and when you decide to bake geometry (if you need to at all), you can do that in one Rhino file, and save it as the state of the design at that given moment. Very convenient for design, though unacceptable for most non-digital manufacturing methods, which greatly limits Rhino's use for manufacturing unless you combine it with an MCAD app.
One of the reasons why the distributed file approach makes perfect sense in MCAD, is that in industry you deal with a finite set of objects. Generative tools are usually not a requirement. Most mechanical engineers, product engineers and machinists would never have any use for that.
The other thing that MCAD apps like Inventor have, is the 'structured' interface that offers up all that setting out information like the coordinate systems, work planes, parameters etc in a concise fashion in the 'history tree'. This will translate into user speed. GH's canvas is a bit more freeform. I suppose the info is all there and linked, so a bit of re-jigging is easy. Also, see how T-Flex can even embed sliders and other parameter input boxes into the model itself. Pretty handy/fast to understand, which also means more speed.
True. As long as you keep the browser pane/specification tree organized and easy to query.
:)
Would love to understand what you did by sketching.
I'll start by showing what was done years ago in the Inventor model, and then share with you what I did in GH, but in another post.
Let's use one of the beams as an example:
We can isolate this component for clarity.
Notice that I've highlighted the sectional sketch with dimensions, and the point of reference, which is in relation to the CL of the column which the beam bears on. The orientation and location of the beam is already set by underlying geometry.
Here's a perspective view of the same:
The extent of the beam was also driven by reference geometry, 2 planes offset from the beam's XY plane, driven by parameters from another underlying file which serves as a parameter container:
Reference axes and points are present for all other components, here are some of them:
It starts getting cluttered if you see the reference planes as well:
Is I mentioned earlier, over time we've found better ways to define and associate geometry, parameters, manage design change, improving the efficiency of parametric models. But this model is a fair representation of a basic modeling approach, and since an Inventor-GH comparison is like comparing apples and oranges anyways, this model can be used to understand the differences and similarities, for those interested.
I haven't even gotten to your latest post yet, I will eventually.…
Added by Santiago Diaz at 10:36am on February 26, 2011
he picture (4).
Previously, I had a problem with generating intersections between the two directions of the beams, but a colleague helped me by extending beams, so there was no problem with lines of intersection. But this solution has generated curl (5) at the highest vertex geometry, which I ignored in order to repair it before printing, perhaps this mean my problem with my beam spread properly. Only when the beams is 19, does not jump no problem, but I still can not distribute them properly.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
I tried to show as simply as possible by removing or signing my code in GHX file.
Thank you in advance for your help
…