the bubble diagram. This algorithm works by a set of attractive and repulsive forces (as in Equation 9) acting recursively on graph vertices, seeks a ‘relax’ situation for a graph, and reaches to a graph drawing. This tool is quite intuitive and shows in real-time bubble diagrams neatly according to the specified areas and the connectivity graph.
Equation 9
Attraction: 〖AF〗_ij=ka ∆x_ij for all linked (i,j)
Repulsion: 〖RF〗_ij=kr /x_ij for all (i,j)
The attraction/repulsion strength inputs are denoted as ka and kr
in the above equations. If some configuration is very messy, you need to have a high repulsion first to untangle it. I have not tried Angel's method but it is very similar to the method we have scripted for this component.
I hope this helps.
Best regards,
Pirouz…
o be less from a tool-centric perspective, and more often geared toward general platforms (like BIM, or "computational" design).
For papers, I would search Cumincad first, as it captures a great deal of history as well as more current research from the proceedings of the eCAADe and ACADIA family of conferences. There are thousands of articles there.
Robert Woodbury's "Elements of Parametric Design" is considered pretty foundational. Sean Ahlquist and Achim Menges also put together a good anthology a few years back called "Computational Design Thinking" that collects several texts that are in line with the ICD's interests in biomimesis and emergence. "Inside Smartgeometry" is a good combination of theory, historical reflection, and state-of-the-art and edited by Brady and Terri Peters.
But really there is so much out there! One of my favorite short papers is Tom Maver's "CAAD's Seven Deadly Sins" which was basically a keynote mic-drop at the 1995 CAAD Futures conference. I'll spoil the end for you:
"7 Failure to criticise: Above all we have failed to exercise our critical faculties in relation to almost all of the research and development carried out by ourselves and by our peers in recent years. There has been a cosy conspiracy in the community to condone, even encourage, selfindulgent speculation and solipsism - a thoroughly bad example to set for young people in the academic community.
Conclusion: Perhaps these criticism are unjustly hard. Hopefully CAAD Futures 95 will prove me wrong or at least provide the opportunity for discussion."
…
Added by David Stasiuk at 11:10am on August 25, 2015
tween them)
However its not possible (Well its very tricky) for me to go back to the original geometry and merge the perimeter and the core into one zone.
As a result I thought that adding internal glazing would do the trick. However apart from using the addGlazing component I couldn't see any other way of adding internal glazing to the core zone without exploding it and putting it back together. So I modified the Glazing based on Ratio component so that the internal walls of the core would automatically be 95% glazing.
After passing the core zone through the modified Glazing based on Ratio component and then passing all the HB zones through the Solve Adjacency component I ran the daylight simulation. However the result is not what you would expect it appears as though there are no internal windows. (See the picture).
So two questions.
1. Is there a better way to merge these zones for a daylight study without going back to the original geometry?
2. From the illuminance map it appears that no light is passing through the internal windows. Why is this the case? Should I create a material that is like air so that the light can effectively pass through and then use this material instead?
…
ple I have to drag it through a panel before I can use it as an input to my python script. The supports comes as a list of strings (see figure) and I want to extract some of that information (e.g. what nodes are fixed) and write that to my txt file.
I extract the info with these lines:
for row in Support: node = row[8:row.find(' DOF')] file.write(" %s,\n" % node)
print node
>> 95
If I however don't drag it via a panel i get the following output:
for row in Support: node = row[8:row.find(' DOF')] file.write(" %s,\n" % node)
print node
>> Supports.Suppor
It's like the script doesn't get that each row is a string.
I have the input set to "list access" and type hint to "str" and I've tried to simplifying and flatten the list.
Greatful for help…
can be found in "C:\Documents and Settings\<user name>\Application Data\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\Plug-ins\IronPython\settings\lib\rhinoscript" folder on WinXP. So could have used yours too.
RhinoCommon is a SDK and basically the power behind grasshopper and rhinoscriptsyntax functions. In fact each time you call a rhinoscriptsyntax, a RhinoCommon code gets executed.
And, yes:
import Rhino - imports RhinoCommon
import utility - enables importing utility.coercebrep() (or coerce3dpoint() coercecurve() ... so on)
Item access means an input is consisted of a single item.List access means an input is a list.Tree access means an input is consisted of a tree with data on different branches.rs.BooleanDifference requires both of it's arguments to be lists, so it would be logical to set the inputs b1 and b2 as lists. But there is one problem, that Mitch pointed out to me: it seems that python components (like grasshopper components) are "intelligent", and can distinguish whether you are inputting item, list, or tree. Setting your input as list, might disable this ability and leave you with only possible type of input (list).So honestly I do not know why in this case, setting the inputs to Lists worked - due to mentioned "intelligence" of python component, even an Item type would work.This might be a question for an experienced user, I am just a beginner.…
(1) I have been exporting small sections of a larger model into Maya from Rhino as FBX. In Maya I rotate and scale the models (-90 in X, Scale XYZ 0.001). The Named Views are being saved, but do not have a successful import into the Maya model. They do not appear as in Rhino, and the problem is not solved by scaling or rotating the cameras.
(2) If I try going the other direction, the cameras exported from Maya as FBX are also not aligning with the model in Rhino as they are in Maya.. I will do my best to post some images of the problem and hope you can help.
error !!
This is what the named views look like
here I am trying to the other way with a good view from Maya
strange placement..
This is the best result I can achieve, after I scale the camera by 1000
Any Advice???
Thanks, Robert.
…
ysim.ning.com/
When you run the simualtion you will notice on the batch terminal that Daysim is also being called, so you may want to consider how Daysim uses Radiance files & data.
Regarding your current problem, I think you stumbled onto something weird and interesting.
Interior and exterior readings appear to differ by 40 in the best case scenarios. Even setting the transmittance to 1 yields similar results. I tried changing from cummulative sky to climate sky and got similar values. Changing the test points did nothing either.
I think, (yet I'm too lazy to prove this) that the difference in values stems from diffuse radiation over the sky dome.
If you delete everything except the glass you'll notice that interior values are like 80-90% of the exterior values (this seems like the expected behaviour with a transmittance of 1). So, if we consider that a vertical window, part of an opaque box, is receiving radiation from 25% of a sphere, as you start to inset the interior test points the radiation they receive will be a fraction of the 25%.
Let me try to explain this better...The exterior surface receives radiation from a section of a sphere calculated by 180degrees on the xy plane (let’s call this angle theta) and by 90degrees (let’s call this angle phi) in azimuthal elevation. If you integrate this over spherical coordinates (theta from 0 to pi; phi from 0 to pi/2) you will find that it comes to a quarter of a sphere. By comparison, the interior surface will not integrate theta from 0 to 180degrees,nor phi from 0 to 90degrees, instead it will be the subtended angle from the exterior surface as a function of their separation; the farther in you go the smaller the view of the outside.
If my hypothesis is correct there shouldn't be that much difference since the separation is only 10cms...the subtended angle would be like 170 instead of 180 for theta and 85 instead of 90 for phi...overall if you integrate both spherical areas there should only by a difference of 10%.
In conclusion, I believe the unexpected behaviour stems from the previous subtended angle thing. If direct radiation was the only factor the difference would be the aforementioned 10%, which suggests that an additional source of energy is also affected by this. Perhaps indirect and diffuse radiation from other areas of the sky dome.
I’m definitely intrigued on why this is happening. Please post if you figure it out.
Regards,
Mauricio
…
TB of RAM. I think I'm going to start a GoFundMe campaign to buy one for myself :)
2- The server's cost is about $13 an hour. I get free access to supercomputer through my university and xsede.org because I earned an NSF Honorable mention last March, however, the supercomputers available through both resources are a little complicated for me to use, as opposed to the one available from amazon that has Microsoft server 2012 already installed.
3- I wanted to run 400 annual glare simulations for 400 different views.
4- I tried a to perform annual glare simulation for one view on my Dell XPS that has Intel Core i7-6700HQ processor and 16GB of system memory. The simulation took 2 hours to complete. Radiance parameter ab was set to 6.
5- I wanted to obtain the batch file for each view so I can run them on the server. So I used the fly component to run all 400 simulations and closed the cmd windows, that wasn't bad ( for me at least) because I asked my son to this job for me, he was just glad to help me :)
6- I created one batch file using this cmd command:
dir /s /b *.bat > runall.bat
This created a file with the path to each .bat file. I edited this file in Notepad++ to include the word "start" at the beginning of each line. This was done using the "find and replace" dialogue box.
7- I split my newly created batch file into 3 batch files, each one has about 130 file names and " start" before the file names.
8- installed radiance on my server
9- Ran the first batch file on the server, this started 130 cmd windows performing my simulations, CPU usage was anywhere between 90% to 100% and about 105 GB of RAMs were used.
10. It took about 5 hours to complete all 130 simulations, I expected to run all in 2 hours but can't complain because this would've taken about 260 hours to run on my laptop. After the simulations done I ran the second and then the third batch files ( total of about 15 hours).
11. I got 400 valid dgb files. Couldn't be happier!
…
he time to work with it.
the project is about facade strips which turns along height. the top angle is
parallel to the facade and the bottom is max. 90 degrees twisted, but the strips
should turn diffrently to achieve more dinamic look.
first i have tried to achieve this by calculating distance between the rotation angle from points of the grid and a single point.
then i have tried to ad some more effecting points and used the distance to the divided surface (the circles are just to control the area of effection):
i manually lofted it.
the result is a bit annoying becouse the points that effect the angle are always visible:
i have triend to solve this by drawing a line and divided it to recieve points along the bottom of the geometry. the result is not working properly:
Anyway,
there must be a better/smoother way to achieve this. i would like to effect the twist of the surfaces by distance to a spline, but im just lost. can you help me please?
the problems im encountering:
0- distance spline to grid to effect the angle
1- list of x/y coordinates and angle of rotation for each point of the grid
2- export points to excel
3- lofting lines in one direction only (x1, x2, x3...)
4- reduce the list data to 2 decimal (0,00)
5- maybe angle from radian to degrees
thx…
have some spare time please fill in my 3D Printing Open Survey - If you could make almost anything, what would it be ? Updated results are publicly available after completing questionnaire (Please press "Wyślij" - Send button and "Wyniki ankiety" - Results button at the end). This survey will be used to evaluate demand for 3d printing services globally. It consist of 30 questions about: - open-source 3d printers - future of additive manufacturing - 3d printing services - ecology in 3d printing - copyright issues and 3d printing Three example questions: 2. Which of the following 3d printing applications is the most interesting? * - Things personalization - Printing food - Attempts to print structures resembles in functioning living tissues or blood vessels - Creating impossible or difficult to create by using conventional technology things - Printing rooms or buildings on earth/moon - Printing chemical compounds (for example drugs) - Using in renewable energy sources - Printing parts and/or mechanical vehicles 3 . Have you ever heard about cheap DIY 3D Printers (for example RepRap, PrintrBot, MakiBox A6) ? * DIY - Do It Yourself - Yes - No 4 . When 3D Printers will become one of the typical household appliances ? * - After 5 years - After 10 years - After 15 years - After 20 years or later - Never - I don't know Feel free to ask questions!…