gone with the wind topic: since this is utterly Academic the main issue here is to oversimplify LBS (in real life: a collection of columns/beams/slabs/X members + tube frame rigid members (shafts/elevators/cats/dogs)). Reason is that if we use the real "solids" (turned into meshes) as the "node" pool for the hinges required ... only HAL 9000 could solve it in "real-time" (for instance an E5 Xeon 1630 v3 takes ... several minutes). And this is ... er ... challenging I must say. This is a typical case where "simplifying" means "stupidity" almost instantly.
Spam on:
where's my collection of "bend-a-truss-that-looks-like-a-tower" K1 demo defs? Is in this workstation or in another? (blame Alzheimer).
Spam off.
More soon.…
dro). The quality of the driver is also critical: hard to imagine NVidia working overnight to fix "some" driver bugs due to requests from gamers. Game cards are notoriously bad in dual monitor configurations.
3. A zillion of cores (triumph of marketing VS common sense) divided by the given clock rate ... gives you just ONE poor old core (Rhino/gh are single-threaded apps) that tries to do the job.
4. Single Xeon E5 2xxx V3 (the higher the clock the LESS the cores = better) would be my recommendation. ECC fast memory is also a must.
PS: Find a friend who operates a "loaded" H/P Z840 and test your defs.
…
of lines, etc) but I can't see a way to add the text I need where I need it. If I could get each line for the print run to generate automatically, I can put the rest in manually, so just need something like:
... ; I would do the previous to this manuallyG1 X10 Y5 Z3
G1 X5 Y5 E5
G1 X5 Y15 E10
... ; I would do the rest manually
for a 5 mm line from [10, 5, 3] to [5, 5, 3], followed by a 10mm line from there to [5, 15, 3]. Any pointers greatly appreciated.
Ewan…
the algorithm is unstable and not optimal. Unlikely to be able to somehow use it or learn something on it)
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/2x15zic85gsbfwb/%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%B0%20100.3dm?dl=1
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/a2avwghhdmb5tv1/%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F%20%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%BA%D0%B0%20100.gh?dl=1…
est of the best)
Crucial DDR4 2133 ECC (what else?)
4* WD RE 500 in Raid combo (not shown)
Some stupid 2.5'' HD thingy (avoid 2.5'' disks)
No SSD thingy
Corsair CPU cooler (Tequila replaced the OEM liquid: it works)
…
, a1200)}) Is there any way I can make this list into {a1, a2, a3, a4, -a5, -a6, -a7, -a8, a9, a10, a11, a12, -a13, ..... , a1200} ? ( 4 positive signs then 4 negative signs and so on) - alternating every nth in general.
or
2. Is there any way (workaround) to get negative angle value from 2 vectors? I know 'ANGLE (of 2 vectors)' component by itself doesn't work and I know why too. I have feeling that the reflex angle output might be useful but again, matter of list manipulation.
Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Hyo
…
xtract A1, A2, B1, B2 as one set, A2, A3, B2, B3 as the second set, A3, A4, B3, B4...etc. as the third set and so on. How can I get about doing this?
Any help would be much appreciated!
Thanks,
Ben…
. The rules to dispatch the lines are the next:
I start with a list that alternate true/false; like that: true, false, true, false.
If the angles between those lines are greater than 89° I want to inverse the next part of the list:
True, False, True, False, True, False,...
become
True, False, [>89°] False, True, False, True, [>89°] True, False,...
I managed to create a true false list, to check for the greater than 89° angle, to separate the lines relatively to the angles, but I don't know how to inverse part of the list at certain index.
(In the picture, I have written 90° but it should be 89°, I check for greater than 89° and not equal to 90° because in the real rhino model, the lines won't be exactly orthogonal)
If you have another idea to to reach the same result, it's also okay, I tried to find rules to solve the problems, but I may have overlooked other solutions !
And if there is some part of the patch that are correct but there is easier solution, I would love to learn as I am still new to grasshopper.
Thanks for taking the time to read. :)
…