next level.
This Parametric Design course will provide the participants with the necessary knowledge and ability to use Grasshopper, a free visual programming plugin in Rhinoceros; you will be guided through a series of hands-on exercises that highlight NURBS modeling and its concepts. We will introduce Grasshopper as a graphical algorithm editor tightly integrated with Rhino’s 3D modeling tools. You will also learn how Rhino is used to render models for visualization, translate 3D models for prototyping, and export 3D models into 2D CAD or graphics programs.
English is the course main language.
Location: Düsseldorf city center
Registration and buying Tickets
www.digitalparametrics.eventbrite.de
Course Calendar:
4 Days 6 hours each
Total duration 24h
2 weekends
Date:
Sat. 17 - Sun. 18 June
Sat. 24 - Sun. 25 June
10:00 - 17:00
Getting Started in Rhino. 2 days (17 - 18 June)
Getting Started in Grasshopper. 2 days (24 - 25 June)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Participants will be given a certificate of participation at the end of the course.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Course fees:
Professionals: 600€ (excl. MwSt.) Students: 500€ (excl. MwSt.) Students need to provide: Copy of current student ID or proof of student enrollment at University/School.
Group discounts:
Group of 3 professionals: 3x500 = 1500€ (excl. MwSt.)
Group of 3 Students: 3x400 = 1200€ (excl. MwSt.)
Participants are kindly asked to bring their own laptops and have pre-installed Rhino + Grasshopper.
Useful Resources:
Rhinoceros Installation (90 days full version trial available): http://www.rhino3d.com/download
Rhinoceros for Mac (includes Grasshopper) http://www.rhino3d.com/download/rhino-for-mac/5/wip
Grasshopper Free Installation: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/page/download-1
Grasshopper Free Plugins: http://www.food4rhino.com/app/lunchbox http://www.giuliopiacentino.com/weaverbird
Main Tutor:
Rihan
M.A. Dipl.Ing. Architect
Architect at RKW Architektur + Düsseldorf
For any questions about the course, please email: info@immersive-studio.com…
ll geometry.
The difference with programs like Inventor is that they are made for production, regardless of the fabrication method. I won't go into detail about that, and instead focus on the modeling process.
In this little model, the starting point actually is a bit obvious, the foundation.
The only contents in the 3dm file are 27 lines. These indicate the location of each footing, and the direction of the tilt of each column. Everything else is defined in GH with the use of numbers as input parameters.
Needless to say, instead of those lines you could obviously generate lines and control the number of columns and panels, hence establish their layout, with any algorithmic or non-algorithmic criteria you please. That marks a major difference between GH and Inventor.
You can generate geometry with Inventor via scripting/customization (beyond iLogic), with transient graphics for visual feedback similar to GH's red-default previews. However Inventor's modeling functions are not set to input and output data trees. I won't go into detail on that, but suffice to say that the data tree associativity of GH was for me the first major difference I noticed. I've used other apps with node diagram interfaces like digital fusion for non-linear video editing since the late 90's, so the canvas did not call my attention when I first started using GH.
Anyways, here's a screen capture of the foundational lines:
In the first group of components, the centerlines of the rear columns are modeled:
And the locations in elevation for connection points are set. Those elevations were just numbers I copied from Excel, but you can obviously control that any way you please. I was just trying to model this quickly.
The same was done for the rear columns:
The above, believe it or not, took me the first 5 hours to get.
Here's a screen capture of what the model and definition looked like after 4 hours, not much:
If you're interested, next post I can get into the sketching part you mentioned, which is a bit cumbersome with GH, but not really.
I wouldn't say that using GH to do this little model was cumbersome, it just needed some thinking at the beginning. You do similar initial thinking when working with a feature-based modeler.…
Added by Santiago Diaz at 12:44am on February 24, 2011
i to usb cable and was able to connect Grasshopper with my digital piano realtime through a simple VB.NET component, no need for any other intermediate software. I used this library http://midiservices.codeplex.com/ (but there are several others).
The VB component outputs a list of 88 values that correspond to the intensity of each piano key at the current time (if the pedal is on and a key is depressed the value is halved, if the pedal is off the value is 0).
The rest of the definition is just to do something with this data. It uses these values to display each note as different floating colors that move with the wind (using Kangaroo). The strength of the wind changes as the music dynamics change.
If there are several devices connected you might have to change the line device.Open(0) to another number.
Definition: piano_midi.gh
…
an be given as 88° and 95°. All three angles must sum up to 180, and we're already 3 degrees over balance. Or maybe the user specifies three edge-lengths: 21, 12 and 8. 21 is bigger than 12+8, so even if the triangle was stretched flat, the two short edges cannot reach the ends of the long edge. The above is easy to test for and I add errors to the component if an invalid triangle is provided. However there are also many angle+edge length combinations which result in invalid triangles.
I could of course test for these as well, but the problem is now tolerance. What if the user specifies a redundant angle of 54.7°, whereas the mathematics tell us that the actual angle is 54.7002°. Is that an error? If so, is the angle wrong or is perhaps one of the edges wrong? Or has the triangle simply been over-constrained? Is there a mathematically robust way of dealing with this? And if so, would that also be the most user-friendly way of dealing with it?…
Added by David Rutten at 2:23pm on August 23, 2014
s are identical to those in Grasshopper so I am getting an ambiguous reference error when loading the OpenStudio.dll into my component and using the Point type hint.
private void RunScript(Point3d pt, ref object os3DVector)
{
OpenStudio.Point3dVector points = new OpenStudio.Point3dVector();
points.Add(pt);
}
Error: 'Point3d' is an ambiguous reference between 'Rhino.Geometry.Point3d' and 'OpenStudio.Point3d' (line 88)
Is there any particular reason the Grasshopper reference to Point3D is implicit rather than explicit Is this something that can be changed on my end as it appears to be locked down.
Would like it to read as follows:
private void RunScript(Rhino.Geometry.Point3d pt, ref object os3DVector)
{
OpenStudio.Point3dVector points = new OpenStudio.Point3dVector();
points.Add(pt);
}
Awesome, thanks!…
d' and no extension method 'AnnotativeScalingEnabled' accepting a first argument of type 'Rhino.Geometry.TextEntity' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) (line 94)
Along with some warnings:
1. Warning (CS0618): 'Rhino.Geometry.AnnotationBase.Text' is obsolete: 'Use RichText or PlainText' (line 88)2. Warning (CS0618): 'Rhino.Geometry.AnnotationBase.FontIndex' is obsolete: 'Use Font property instead' (line 92)
3. Warning (CS0618): 'Rhino.RhinoDoc.Fonts' is obsolete: 'Use DimStyles table instead' (line 92)
I've downloaded the latest version of FabTools.
I've completely un-installed and re-installed.
I've Googled everything I can think of to find a solution, but most references are circa 2013 which is probably under Rhino 5. Which works totally fine, BTW.
Does anybody know of a solution?
Thanks,
Michael
…
f buildings) but am working on a short term design project with a former professor of mine, to design a traditional wood schooner for the purposes of youth sail (and life) training.
I have helped developed a number of tools and techniques using grasshopper and rhino (which is why I was hired) to analyse hull form and to aid in the process of design.
My work in the world of naval architecture is short term, so i'll be moving back into the realm of buildings in the next year or two. Although, i will continue to use grasshopper and rhino as long as it is relevant. It will always be enjoyable :D…
ength is applied to particle b, and the same vector multiplied by -2*BendStrength is applied to a and c
Hope that helps. I was thinking of changing this input slightly for the next Kangaroo release, because I realize it can be a pain if you want bending stiffness of a curve to be independent of the number of points used, but I'll make sure to clarify any changes when I do update this.
…
ing up is that the glass polygon needs to have vertices that align with the endpoints of the therm BC line segments in order to be written into the thmx file. You can see that I have done this in the attached file by generating the glass thermPolygon from a polyline that has vertices that align with the thermBC endpoints.
I had been thinking of writing a check in the writeTHERM component to automatically split the polygons using the BCs when it sees that the BCs are not aligned with the polygons but it was increasing the calculation time a lot. Perhaps I'll put this in but I'll make it optional.
-Chris…