A low-resolution work. Real time motion capture display made with an 11x8 (88) pixels iPad matrix using Grasshopper + Firefly + Pure Data + TouchOSC for iPad.
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…
exact formula is inside /lib/skybright.cal if this can help you to find the name.
{ RCSid: $Id$ } { Sky brightness function for sunny and cloudy skies.
Additional arguments required for calculation of skybright:
A1 - 1 for CIE clear, 2 for CIE overcast, 3 for uniform, 4 for CIE intermediate A2 - zenith brightness A3 - ground plane brightness A4 - normalization factor based on sun direction A5,A6,A7 - sun direction }
cosgamma = Dx*A5 + Dy*A6 + Dz*A7;
gamma = Acos(cosgamma); { angle from sun to this point in sky }
zt = Acos(A7); { angle from zenith to sun }
eta = Acos(Dz); { angle from zenith to this point in sky }
wmean(a, x, b, y) : (a*x + b*y) / (a + b);
skybr = wmean((Dz+1.01)^10, select(A1, sunnysky, cloudysky, unifsky, intersky), (Dz+1.01)^-10, A3);
sunnysky = A2 * (.91 + 10*exp(-3*gamma) + .45*cosgamma*cosgamma) * if( Dz - .01, 1.0 - exp(-.32/Dz), 1.0) / A4;
cloudysky = A2 * (1 + 2*Dz)/3;
unifsky = A2;
intersky = A2 * ( (1.35*sin(5.631-3.59*eta)+3.12)*sin(4.396-2.6*zt) + 6.37 - eta ) / 2.326 * exp(gamma*-.563*((2.629-eta)*(1.562-zt)+.812)) / A4;
…
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
ts will basically be a set of different ellipses:{a1, a2, b1, b2} (with different properties) From that i want to create random Lists of let’s say 15 items (ellipses) Something like that {a1, b2, b1, a1, a2, b1, b1, a2, a1, b1, b2, a1, b2, a1, a1}. But I want to be able to create some constrains. So for example if I have a1 I will be able to have next a2 or b1 but not to b2. I am not sure if this is possible in grasshopper and i was messing around with some logic components but without any luck.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
…
Hello Alireza
Nice definition! Just wanted to mention that in the newer versions of grasshopper, the EH-path (line 98 and line 129) in your script needs to be changed to GH-path.
Hi Tom, I made a solution for your diagrid tower, based on the curves of the primer page 84 curves. If that is also what your mesh is based on (or somethin similar), this will work nicely.
GH) > then define (still in GH) some instance definition (or many: case variants) > then place it according some "policy" (3d point grid and the likes). Note: Only doable with code, mind (C# in my case).
Obviously you can skip the creation part and instruct GH to deal with instance definitions already listed in the Block Manager (say: find the block named "cell666_B3" blah, blah) ... but that means that you can only use them (meaning a rather "limited" parametric approach) and not make them from scratch (meaning a true parametric approach).
But I guess that you've tried the block way in the Rhino environment already. That said I use rather solely this approach in GH and yields quite manageable object collections - I would say "real-time" response (up to 20K instances) but I use dedicated Xeon E5 1630 V3 workstations (with NVida Quadros K4200 and up for the graphic response part of the equation) so the "performance" is rather a subjective thing.
Modifications:
easily doable with GH (on instance definitions at placing time: since you need only to scale them and not vary their topology).
Anyway post a portion of the R file.…