use an attractor curve to adjust curves that are being lofted to create a "wavey" surface. I've attached a picture to show the end result. Right now i create all the curves and then loft them together to create a surface which could then have a rib definition applied to it, and it works, my problem is that this project is for a 80' section of wall with ribs that would be a few inches apart, so that is a ton of curves i have to change everytime i want to adjust the overall shape. So is it possible to have an attractor curve that instead of adjusting the spacing of shapes in plane with the curve, would create high points or low points perpendicular to the curve? Hopefully that makes some sense, i'm having trouble finding the words to explain it, the attached pictures should help.
Any advice on how to do this would be great. I hate being that guy but this project came up last minute and it seemed like something the Grasshopper help save a ton of time in as far as adjustments go.
Thanks,
Kyle
…
h kangaroo and have found one project that illustrates my idea exactly...
https://vimeo.com/88002087
So far my best attempt has been to use a gridded surface in which the lines of the grid are springs, with a rest length at 80% of their initial length. (call this grid A) This is to simulate as if the material has been stretched 120% of its resting dimensions.
I have been trying to anchor the springs to a secondary grid (Grid B, curves that will be deposited onto the material) at the points of intersection with grid A.
I am not sure if this is the best approach, maybe soapfilm would be better? although i require the boundary (grid B) to adapt also...
Any advice or attempts to explain how Taichi Kuma has done this in his video would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks…
A: Who created it? / Copyright?
B: Anyone have a larger resolution copy of this image (or a vector so I can do a large resize).
Long and short - I'm an artist and I'd like to make a quilt out of that image. I need a decent resolution copy of it so I can do a huge resize and get a 76" x 80" crop out of it. I've tried resizing it in Photoshop, but by the time it's large enough, the quality has dropped below what is usable for my needs.
Thanks in advance! I totally understand I'm relying on the kindness of strangers here. (Also if this is inappropriate to post - please delete. Thank you)
Michael…
ases where you have angled shades and the component is doing trigonometry to figure out how close the blinds could be to the glass without touching. I just re-wrote the code so that, now you cannot have the blinds closer to the glass than half of the blind slat depth, which seems to be the limit of what E+ will tolerate.
Also, E+ does not like it when you input blinds that are perfectly at 90 degrees so I changed the component to automatically write out shades at 89 degrees when you connect up 90.
Using the Shade geometry as context worked perfectly for me and I am not sure what was wrong in your situation.
See your working file attached.
-Chris…
Grasshopper. So, I once made an attempt to bind ms sqlServer in order to get frozen definitions at some states, to avoid managing baked objects in Rhino and also be able to retain whole results without using the GH state manager that rebuilds everything.
But at that time GH's VB.Net component didn't properly read referenced dlls and I forgot it since then.
At first, I was surprised by Slingshot's extensive interface : I was still having in mind my own old project, a tool that would have acted at the Rhino's geometry object level, and auto creating the needed tables.
The bd would have consisted of a main table, owning the objects ID and name, and related tables containing the necessary information relative to the main objects.
For example, a Brep is made of so and so underlying objects, passed to respective tables, according to GH objects definition layout (just the way they are written in the xml schema).
Then, on a db, query an object by name, and retrieve the whole object or underlying objects (e.g. at the bounding curves level, or points level for a Brep).
With Slingshot, I made a few attempts to cheat GH with BLOB data fields, but no way to get a whole object. It seems that GH simply provides an object.toString ... and GH is definitely not conceived to produce persistence outside of Rhino. If I have some spare time, I will try to extract
About points and colors, I am now simply using a single field with CHAR(asLargeAsNeeded...), as GH parses String to every Point (or Vector or Color) entry of any component.
I do so because it need less to display on the canvas...
Whatever I wrote before, I really like your conception, as opened to relational interactions between ...whatever you need or dream of !
One last thing : GH can't open the definition file "Genome_DB_Template.gh" that I've downloaded from your site : http://slingshot-dev.wikidot.com/database-genome. I was expecting to learn a lot from your very smart stuff ! (I am running GH 08.00.13 and Slingshot 0.7.2.0)
Slingshot is running great, opened to any use...Thanks again.
Best,
Stan
…
milar once its default data managment techniques are exceeded thus forcing a new address index to be inserted. Its all just so unnecessarily particular and finickity.
If addresses are added when forced to, why not just have that as the default behaviour in the first place? Its not so much 'one size fits all' as postulated previously, but more one size fits 80% of cases and in the remaining 20% of cases you're going to be a slave to your definition as constant manual management will be required just to control the thing.
My final point:
circle with points should have a list address of {0}
multiple circles with points should have list address of {0;0}
multiple circles in multiple locations with points should have list address of {0;0;0} etc
I really dont see how that is any less consistent for highly complex data strucutres. To any rational individual this is predicable and follows a logic. What advantage is there in fixing the address at {0;0} yet still allow for new address sequences to be added firther down stream? Logic is the key thing to keep in mind here, not peculiar nuances only the initiated can ever be aware of.…
cle
the 'Shape' is copied to all points
shapes are rotated randomly, plus or minus 'Angle' maximum
'Shape In Brep (ShapeIn)' is used to cull shapes that aren't within the circle
'Fast Loop' begins using 'MCX' (Multiple Curves Intersection)
first shape is added to 'D1' output and shapes intersecting it are culled
results minus first shape are passed to 'D0' of 'FastLoopEnd'
loop repeats until 'D0' list is empty
'D1' results are scaled down slightly (0.75) to leave more space around them
'Explode' results and return only the curved part, ignoring the base line that closes the shape
…
Added by Joseph Oster at 11:01pm on March 17, 2017
avid--this software is a pleasure to use, and David, you have done an amazing job. I also want to acknowledge it takes a lot of work to edit the software, and I understand that it can take a while before any changes are made.
Okay so here are some ideas:
Subcurve - just like subsurface, but based on 1-dimensional intervals
Map Values to Interval - a single component that could take a list of values, an interval, and would scale the list of values to match the input interval.
A Dispatch component that could dispatch according to a list of output indices. Instead of just True/False, you could output things based on a pattern using 0/1/2/3/4, etc. This component would be the inverse of Weave.
A text object parameter and data type, with some basic ways to edit it.
More string manipulation operations, allowing for easy editing with string subintervals, and character counts, and basic text formatting (line return, etc.).
I really really really wish the List Item component had a default index value of "0". That is what I input into it 80% of the time.
That's all for now. If any of these ideas are already adequately addressed, please let me know. Thanks.
…
ellation tool of GeomGym in Grasshopper.
The design looks for a new brick topology which is in the shape of two generative elements of Weaire-Phelan structure; dodecahedron and tetrakaidecahedron. An innovative approach is taken by applying varying types of solutions and details to the new brick elements.
There are other good examples and winners which are worth looking into. Our sheets can be downloaded from here.
All comments appreciated.
We would like to thank Jon Mirtschin and anyone who contributed to this tool.
Xue Ai and Serdar Aydin…