e any affect, but that's way too slow if 90% of the GH program is initialization and creation of source geometry to then simply alter a bit or array here and there. When I use Python directly to change output values that I plug into former slider inputs, again no new solution is triggered at all so I'd have to recalculate the entire Grasshopper program which is simply not how Grasshopper normally works. How do I actually emulate a human changing a slider value one slider at a time in a way that makes Grasshopper behave normally so that only downstream flow is affected in an efficient way?
An related example would be if you have several separate programs in a Grasshopper page and you wanted to only change one of them without triggering full recalculation of them all.
At this point it's almost like a Windows mouse scripting utility is needed but if I need to do combinatorial combinations of all possible slider values, that seems quite thorny too unless I set up a pre-arranged array of values that could then simply be incremented "manually" followed by a right click to bake and then typing commands into Rhino to save to a file. UGH. That would be quite difficult to pull off since I need to control file names, but it's what I seem to need.
I'm using Python since it avoids thorny Grasshopper schemes and it allows me to access Rhino to save baked objects files.…
ving a copy of the surface in the original position. Second, and more frustrating, not all of the surfaces orient properly. A few lay flat but then rotate 90 degrees horizontally.
Any help or insights would be greatly appreciated!
Images and files are below.
grasshopper screenshot 1gh%20problem%20part%201.png
grasshopper screenshot 2gh%20problem%20part%202.png
grasshopper file slat%20wall%20C2.gh…
Refinement component at first, possibly using MeshMachine instead which is slow but actually gives many fewer triangles and adaptive meshing for tight curves too. Neither are easy to adjust on a deadline!
Then you have to sneak up on workable settings, using only a few lines, or Grasshopper will freeze perhaps indefinitely for 200 lines with extreme settings, especially the CS (Cube Size) setting that can blow up into a huge number if your scale is big.
Cocoon gives lots of nearly flat split quad faces so I quadrangulated those for fun:
Or MeshMachine can refine the mesh to make it efficient:
Whereas the Cocoon Refine component will merely return an equally fine mesh with more equilateral triangles but no serious remeshing to rid so many tiny triangles where they are not needed? Actually, it does seem to remesh also:
David said he used some of Daniel's MeshMachine code in there.…
n account of the position of the sun and weather cannot be expressed in terms of a single set of luminous intensity values (which is what IES files do).
With regards to your example files, I agree with Chris. The primary reason for the low illuminance levels is that the light bounces are getting lost in the tube. Have you checked with the manufacturer/distributor if the location of the IES file should be inside the tube and not flush with the ceiling? Physically modelling such tubes in lighting software like Radiance (which is what HB uses) or AGI32 is a fairly expensive proposition. This is one of the reasons why manufacturers provide photometric data for such devices (however simplistic that data might be).
The candelamultiplier increases or decreases the luminous intensity values. So it will have a direct impact on the calculation. The primary reason for having that input was to enable users to do some testing with different lamp types and environmental factors such as dirt depreciation. You need not change them for your simulation. Assuming that the IES file is inside the tube, in order to make this calculation work inside HB you'd have to crank up the calculation settings to a very high level (start with -ab 10 -ad 4096).
Finally, due to shortcomings in the annual simulation software (Daysim), IES files will not work directly work with annual calculations. However, there is a fairly easy workaround for that issue. In case you are planning to run annual calculations with IES files, please let us know here.
Sarith…
ing illuminance and limiting exposure (lux hours). Hours with direct solar irradiance are likely to exceed the limiting illuminance thresholds, which range from (200 to 50 lux as per Table 3.4 in CIE 157:2004). It makes sense to consider direct illuminance (an ab=0 simulation in Honeybee) separately from a normal illuminance calculation.
Assuming that the museum exhibits have low to high responsivity to light, an ideal solution would minimize direct sunlight. For daylight from the sky and reflected light, it might be enough to keep the illuminance levels below the recommended thresholds and then sum up lux-hours.
Daysim, the annual daylighting engine used by Honeybee and DIVA, is not very accurate for direct-sun calculations. You will get more accurate results if you run your analysis with Radiance directly.
Instead of considering the horizontal illuminance grids, one can create grids that correspond to the dimensions of the exhibit and then average those values. I think single points, as shown in your gh file might not suffice. Calculating lux-hours is by far the simplest part of such a simulation. It will only require averaging these points, extracting them into an array and then summing up that array.…
they may not always give you a clear picture of their precise functionality. I thought this may be an issue with many users so I decided to use this opportunity to list all the parameters with my quick take at describing their functionality. Here it goes:
DEFAULT VERTICAL SHIFT -- Number - Shifts panels vertically creating a custom-sized panel with height of the specified dimension at first row of skin.
DEFAULT HORIZONTAL SHIFT -- Number - Shifts panels horizontally creating a custom-sized panel with width of the specified dimension at first column of skin.
DEFAULT SKIN CHAMFERED CORNER--True/False - If "True" wraps panels around surface corners. If '"False" creates a custom-sized panel if necessary to complete the skin surface at the shared edge, defining this way a sharp corner.
RESET BAY AT POINTS-- True/False - When using Panel Bays (Group of Panels) this option restarts the panel bay at a surface corner.
FLOOR HEIGHT-- Number - The Floor To Floor value of the Skin generated. If Panels are shorter than this value, a leftover 'gap' will be seen at top of panels.
MINIMUM PANEL WIDTH -- Number - If the width of a panel (standard or customized) created during the skin generation is less than this value, the panel won't be created and the placement will be skipped.
MINIMUM PANEL HEIGHT -- Number - If the height of a panel (standard or customized) created during the skin generation is less than this value, the panel won't be created and the placement will be skipped.
MINIMUM PANEL AREA-- Number - If the area of a panel (standard or customized) created during the skin generation is less than this value, the panel won't be created and the placement will be skipped.
PANEL PROFILE TOLERANCE-- Number - If a resulting panel shape is within the specified tolerance value to any already created panel, this panel is used instead of creating a new panel shape. The tolerance specifically tracks the distance between each corner of the new panel and the corresponding corners of the existing panels. This parameter is mostly used in "SURFACE PANEL MODE'', where a large number of custom-shaped panels can be generated, to reduce the number of unique panels created.
GENERATE PANEL TYPES ONLY-- True/False - This parameter allows the Skin Generator to discard the creation of scene geometry but still have the grasshopper panel data being generated. The skin panels can be retrieved as grasshopper geometry using SkinDesinger's Display components.
RESET DF BETWEEN SURFACES-- True/False - When "True", the Design Controllers (Design Functions in v.01) resets to its initial values each time it starts a new skin surface. Used for instance to restart a layout pattern at every new surface.
SURFACE PANEL MODE-- True/False - The "SURFACE PANEL MODE" is used to generate panels matching the shape of the surfaces included in the "skinSurfaceList" input.
SURFACE PANEL ORIENTATION -- Orientation Type - When activating the "SURFACE PANEL MODE'', this parameter defines the orientation of the panel generated relative to the normal of the surface that defines its shape. The acceptable values (found in the "Surface-Panel Mode Orientations" dropdown) are:RESETFLIPROTATE 90ROTATE 90 FLIPROTATE 180ROTATE 180 FLIPROTATE 270ROTATE 270 FLIP
I hope this helps but feel free to reach out if you have any questions!
Santiago
…
a pain to use sometimes. I recently found this great post:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/formatting-numbers-in-grasshopper
which points to the msdn .net framework standard numeric format strings:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dwhawy9k.aspx
and the custom ones too:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/0c899ak8.aspx
Sooo... today I was trying to make a 2D array generator for RGB values to use with a RGB LED and an Arduino. For instance, declaring a 2D array in Arduino:
int color[3][3]={{255,0,0},{0,255,0},{0,0,255}};
I'm using the blend color component to spit out transitions between two colors. I want the list in the panel to be in the format above, so I used both the expression component and the string format component (are they the same under the hood?). In any case, if I have R, G and B values coming into the component, I want to format them so the come out looking like {R,G,B}, so I can just copy the output in a panel and paste it into the Arduino IDE. But what about {curly braces}. If the expression/format component uses them in it's syntax, for instance:
Format ("{R:0},{G:0},{B:0}",R,G,B)
how do I get them into the formatting string? I tried escaping them like:
Format ("\{{R:0},{G:0},{B:0}\}",R,G,B)
but that just makes the component angry
Escaping characters is explained in the formatting references above. Is it implemented in this component? Should I be looking at a different approach?
I've included a sample file below.
Thanks!
~BB~
…
ing-in-python?commentId=2985220%3AComment%3A628495
For the most part, I got the serial port to work and I could share the port with other components without wiring the components together using a sticky Python dictionary. There were a couple of issues with closing the port (Rhino had to be restarted).
In any case, I'm back at it. I am however going the C# component route with an eye towards writing my own components with visual studio. I am trying to create bidirectional communication with a serial device in grasshopper. I need more control over the serial port that the generic Firefly components can afford. Furthermore, I would like to understand how to program this myself. The first goal would be to create a few components that could handle various serial tasks, one to open/close port, one to read from port and one to write to it. This is not unlike how I got it to work in python, and is also similar to the logic in Firefly's serial components.
The thing that has me stumped with C# is how one shares the port between components? If one component is responsible for creating and opening/closing the port, how do the read/write components address the instance of the port created in the other component? Python has the sticky dictionary, is there something similar in C#? I'm a novice when it comes to C# and how it works within grasshopper, so maybe I'm missing something simple.
I've attached a klunky definition that uses C# to open/close a serial port. I've tried accessing the port with other components, but I don't know enough to make it work. Again, I'm mainly interested in the mechanics of how one component can access the serial port instance created in another component. If I could get some user objects going for now, I'd be happy. In the future, I want to roll my own components. If anyone has any suggestions, code snippets, or any other forms of enlightenment, I'd be greatly appreciative!
Rhino5 x64 + GH version 0.9.0056
Thanks,
~BB~
…
cnicas y estrategias para resolver problemas que hoy se presentan en el diseño y fabricación digital de formas complejas y euclidianas. Se podrá entender mejor la diferencia entre el estilo Modernista y el Parametricismo que vivimos desde el 2000.
Tomando como plataforma básica Rhino, se explora y optimiza el diseño y fabricación de topologías complejas bajo los entornos de Rhino, Grasshopper y RhinoNest.
Instructores:
Andrés Gonzalez, McNeel Miami.
Director de RhinoFabLab.
MSc. María Mena Deferme, Directora de Arquitectura.
Tecnológico de Monterrey campus León, Mexico.
NOTA 1: Tendremos el patrocinio de LaserCUT.mx y podremos usar un Láser Industrial durante todo el taller, mas el laboratorio del iTesm.
NOTA 2: Estudiantes y docentes podrán adquirir Rhino 4.0 con un descuento del 50% sobre el precio de lista en USA.
Descarga el Outline del workshop PDF
http://www.screencast.com/t/M2FjOTBi…