ace, the resulting surface does not exactly follow the curve. At the protruding edges, the surface falls out of the curve. Whereas at the edges which are going in, the surface forms is a curve of degree-1 i.e. not a smooth curve but lines.
What i want to know is, is this a normal thing in GH? when i have to print, will it print like a proper curve?
Also, at the moment, i have joined all curves together and connected it to surface component to get a surface. If there is any better way, please advise me.
I have attached the design representation and also part of my GH definition.
Any advise will be highly appreciated.
cheers
aB…
al structure that might resemble the shell structure of radiolaria - www.radiolaria.org - and then I want to manufacture it via 3D printing. Do you think mesh will be up to it?
Also, whether the mesh will work or not, could you please explain me the process on how you arrived to the mesh i.e. why you used all these components that you have used in your definition? As I do not want to directly copy and paste it, I want to understand on why you used all the other components to arrive to the resulting mesh. This will be a huge favour.
Knowing that the form that i have created is very important, do you think starting with the curves was the right thing or do you have any other way in mind to achieve this form with XYZ parameters?
regards,
aB…
rsuche deine Befehle später auf mein Modell anzuwenden.
Ja du hast Recht, ich sollte meine Fragen das nächste mal isoliert hochladen. Sorry für die "wirre" Datei.
Dennoch muss ich echt sagen, dass ich es mega schade finde, dass es einige in diesem Forum gibt die einen echt "runtermachen" indem sie ständig auf Fehler hinweisen und einen für komplett bescheuert halten. Es fällt eben nicht jedem leicht ein Programm ohne zusätzliche Hilfe sondern nur durch Ausprobieren zu erlernen. (Musste ich mal kurz loswerden!) Gut, dass es auch solche wie dich gibt, die einen Mut machen.
Gruß und nochmals Danke!…
see in my bottom post image there is only one isocurve showing in U and V.
In Grasshopper there's no surface rebuild? Well, the same old Grasshopper Patch command will let you specify spans I guess, to make a surface from a planar curve, but it won't work for things with holes since they will just fill in!
You can recreate a surface painfully by untrimming, adding many UV points, rebuilding from those points, then retrimming with the original surface info, but the retrimming simply fails.
If you make a planar surface from a curve in Rhino, you end up with utterly no point editability:
No wonder my CreatePatch tests were a failure. The starting surface could not be distorted except in the extreme case of moving four corner points!
I have no idea how to successfully rebuild a surface akin to the Rhino rebuild command. It's great to be able to prototype in Grasshopper, but with Python I can rebuild easily ( http://4.rhino3d.com/5/rhinocommon/?topic=html/M_Rhino_Geometry_Surface_Rebuild.htm ;), so I guess I should start a collection, like peter, of little script components for prototyping with.…
Added by Nik Willmore at 6:18am on February 26, 2016
try now to integrate Geco in an interdisciplinary architectural engineering studio: hoping we can show you some nice applications of your tool, I'll keep you update and sending now details by e-mail. Here the file (very welcome to be shared). It most probably contais trivial errors by me, thanks for helping and giving some tip! Gr. Michela
FILE:
Ok, right, I see the outputs update correctly. Origin of problems must be in some different mistake I do:
- Incident radiation: I am not sure I understand what is going on: why I get so many 'not a number' ? (The Galapagos report is full of NaNs).
Bio-Diversity: 0.887 Genome[0], Fitness=NaN, Genes [89% · 44%] { Record: Too many fitness values supplied } ...
Genome[7], Fitness=NaN, Genes [74%] { Record: No fitness value was supplied } ....
Genome[9], Fitness=NaN, Genes [37% · 11%] { Record: Genome was mutated to avoid collision Record: Too many fitness values supplied }
- Daylight calculations: the geometry accumulates withouth deleting the previous models. As a consequance, results almost do not change after few varations (so, outputs get updated but do not vary). In current daylight definition: the first object being imported is the one where the grid has to fit; its setting makes it cancelling all the other objects during import. All the others, do not delete anything when imported. When running loops (manual or GA) that vary parameters, the entire geometry do not get cancelled - so I guess the loop does not pass back by the cancelling step, but imports only the geometry which has been varied by the parameters using the setting of that import component only? I will then try again by changing the order of the operations, but if you have specfic tips, let me know.
THANKS!
…