llowing for higher skyline and construction areas along public transportation corridors. Up until now, neighborhoods once characterized by two-story houses, gardens and ground- floor open shopfront programs, have been completely transformed by the introduction of fortressed monolithic residential and office towers, which lack any sort of urban street life.
The new master-plan, however, now requires buildings to have an open street façade to accommodate multiple programs. Led by tutors from UNStudio (www.unstudio.com), the AA Visiting School São Paulo will address the changes being prescribed by the new masterplan through the redefinition of the tower typology in the extending of the ground of street culture, green landscapes and ecological mediation along the vertical axis of these buildings. For this, the workshop will teach advanced digital design and fabrication techniques to explore a series of novel differentiating structural and environmental organizations in the redefinition of the São Paulo skyscraper.
For more information:
saopaulo.aaschool.ac.uk
Applications:
https://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/ONLINEAPPLICATION/visitingApplication.php?schoolID=303
For any queries, please email: brazilvisitingschool@aaschool.ac.uk.…
llowing for higher skyline and construction areas along public transportation corridors. Up until now, neighborhoods once characterized by two-story houses, gardens and ground- floor open shopfront programs, have been completely transformed by the introduction of fortressed monolithic residential and office towers, which lack any sort of urban street life.
The new master-plan, however, now requires buildings to have an open street façade to accommodate multiple programs. Led by tutors from UNStudio (www.unstudio.com), the AA Visiting School São Paulo will address the changes being prescribed by the new masterplan through the redefinition of the tower typology in the extending of the ground of street culture, green landscapes and ecological mediation along the vertical axis of these buildings. For this, the workshop will teach advanced digital design and fabrication techniques to explore a series of novel differentiating structural and environmental organizations in the redefinition of the São Paulo skyscraper.
For more information:
saopaulo.aaschool.ac.uk
Applications:
https://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/ONLINEAPPLICATION/visitingApplication.php?schoolID=303
For any queries, please email: brazilvisitingschool@aaschool.ac.uk.…
r (top left) is connected with the list which contains the centroids of every triangle of my mesh (my canopy, that I turned into a series of triangular surfaces). In this part of the definition I evaluate the Z coordinates (extracted form the points).
I execute some operations in order to have my values from 0 to 1 (parametrization). Then I sutracted the lower value of the list to all the data. So I obtained a new list of numbers, which stay from 0 to 1 and I can use in order to determine a gradient in the arch openings.
The result? If you look carefully to the rendering I posted you'll see that the arches are less opened near the ground and more opened near the top. It's a structural way of design the canopy. The more loads you must support, the more closed your arches will be (and the more stronger you should be).
Anyway consider this part as not important, because this parameter is just a my interpretation, it's not essential in order to obtain the canopy I posted. If you want you can just substitute that emitter with a simple number, from 0 to 1. Don't know, try to put 0.4 as an imput and let's see what happens. The result will be more similar. ;-)
Nice to meet you Morgan.…
tecture: Realtime Physics for Space Planning
http://vimeo.com/15563685
"This is a preview of a parametric conceptual design tool for architectural
practice that I have been developing at NBBJ. I wanted to develop a
system that allows designers to quickly organize and understand complex
architectural programmes in three dimensions.
It is an advancement of the traditional bubble diagram; it solves
adjacency requirements automatically and suggests planimetric and
sectional relationships. The resulting diagrams are not formal
solutions; they are simply organizational diagrams with solved
adjacencies and accurate required areas. The diagrams are raw
materials, meant to be manipulated sculpturally, or even squeezed into a
formal container.
Technical Information
The tool was created in the Grasshopper plug-in for Rhino. Custom components, written in VB.NET,
read programme data directly from Excel into Grasshopper. The tool
uses the Kangaroo engine for realtime spring dynamics simulation."
…
green & B in red. These surfaces are at the centerlines of thicker beams in the model (not shown).
I have a list of "Intersections", the yellow vertical lines, usually four at each point the beams intersect (85 points or 340 intersections expected, though there are only 335).
What I'm trying to do is "get" the list of yellow vertical lines for each beam and keep them "associated", so that I can re-orient them with the thick beams in a flat, "nested" layout.
These intersections will appear in two sets of lists, one for beams "A" and another for beams "B".
I found and hacked a bit of C# script to partition the sorted list of indexes but not the related list of intersections ("Line-like Curves").
In this case, the data trees aren't working for me. I want "beam objects" with arbitrary properties, such as lists of intersections. Are there ways to do this "easily" in GH without resorting to C#, VB or Python?…
s levels of detail by subdividing a 6 sided cube mesh and projecting its vertices according to a referenced height map. This is one of the standard conventions for building full sizes planets. At the lowest level (0) the mesh planet is made of 6 pieces(each 32x32 resolution). The next level down (1) is made of 24 pieces... 6 divided by 4 = 24. Level (2) is 96 quads etc etc. The script will generate each quad at its sub-division level and compare edge vertices to neighboring quads. It will then make sure any shared vertices are in fact at the same projected vector. This ensures a planet quad with edge vertices that match.
The problems comes in texturing each quad.
If I build the quad as a nurb surface from points I can place the texture easily because each surface UV maps squarely to my texture map (which is also square).
If I build the quad as a mesh I cannot just apply the square texture to the mesh UVs. This is because when you unwrap the UVs from a mesh they will not unwrap like a nurb surface's UVs. Therefore to get the correct mapping I would have to manipulate each UV back to an evenly aligned array (which is 1024 points in a 32x32 resolution UV). Maya and blender have 'relax uv' and 'align UV' functions but they don't do the trick and manual corrections are out of the question. So why not skip the mesh method and use the nurb method?
I did this and there is a trade off. The nurb will accept the material texture I want with no other work on my end but when I export the object as an .obj rhino creates its own mesh to describe the nurb(with various unsatisfactory setting options). This works great up to a point because at some level the interpreted mesh will have vertices that do no match at the edges, ie .. creating visible seams in the mesh. The picture below is the nearly seamless planet at LOD(1) made of 24 quads, each with 32x32 vertice resolution and a 512x512 jpg texture running in Unity3d 5. It works but at close level there are seams. This will be resolved simply by having the next LOD(x) instantiate before getting close enough to see the seam but at core nerd level I want the seamless mesh.
So, I can make the seamless mesh but I can not realistically texture map it. I can also make the nurb surface from points and texture it at the expense of the edge vertices matching. I am at the split in the road but I want to have my cake and eat it too. Thoughts, comments, trolls...?
Thanks for reading =)
Footnote: For you pros I am not using seamless noise across the map I am using grasshopper to sew up my otherwise non perfect edges.
Other programs in the pipeline:
-WorldMachine 2
-Wilbur
-Photoshop
-Unity3d…
nowledge, tools, materials and machines. The Clusters provide a focus for workshop participants working together within a common framework.
Clusters provide a forum for the exchange of ideas, processes and techniques and act as a catalyst for design resolution. The Workshop is made up of ten Clusters that respond in diverse ways to the sg2012 Challenge Material Intensities. The Call for Clusters is now open to proposals which respond in innovative ways to this year's challenge.
Deadline: September 19 2011
More information can be found here:
http://smartgeometry.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=129&Itemid=146
sg2012 takes place from 19-24 March 2012 at EMPAC (http://empac.rpi.edu/) and is hosted by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, upstate New York USA. The Workshop and Conference will be a gathering of the global community of innovators and pioneers in the fields of architecture, design and engineering.
The event will be in two parts: a four day Workshop 19-22 March, and a public conference beginning with Talkshop 23 March, followed by a Symposium 24 March. The event follows the format of the highly successful preceding events sg2010 Barcelona and sg2011 Copenhagen.
sg2012 Challenge Material Intensities
Simulation, Energy, Environment
Imagine the design space of architecture was no longer at the scale of rooms, walls and atria, but that of cells, grains and vapour droplets. Rather than the flow of people, services, or construction schedules, the focus becomes the flow of light, vapour, molecular vibrations and growth schedules: design from the inside out.
The sg2012 challenge, Material Intensities, is intended to dissolve our notion of the built environment as inert constructions enclosing physically sealed spaces. Spaces and boundaries are abundant with vibration, fluctuating intensities, shifting gradients and flows. The materials that define them are in a continual state of becoming: a dance of energy and information.Material potential is defined by multiple properties: acoustical, chemical, electrical, environmental, magnetic, manufacturing, mechanical, optical, radiological, sensorial, and thermal. The challenge for sg2012 Material Intensities is to consider material economy when creating environments, micro-climates and contexts congenial for social interaction, activities and organisation. This challenge calls for design innovation and dialogue between disciplines and responsibilities.sg2010 Working Prototypes strove to emancipate digital design from the hard drive by moving from the virtual to the actual in wrestling with the tangible world of physical fabrication. sg2011 Building the Invisible focused on informing digital design with real world data. sg2012 Material Intensities strives to energise our digital prototypes and infuse them with material behaviour. They have the potential to become rich simulations informed by the material dynamics, chemical composition, energy flows, force fields and environmental conditions that feed back into the design process.
More information can be found at http://www.smartgeometry.org…
fear that it would be too hard, but I was pleasantly surprised. Not that bad, even for a C# novice. I am attaching the *.cs files for three components:
SerialCreate component creates the serial port instance. This component controls port parameters and opens/closes the port. (It won't close the port, however.) SerialWrite and Read try to interact with the port created by SerialCreate. I can verify that the port opens because it's unavailable to other terminal applications, but if I try to close the port, it won't...it stays open until I restart Rhino. SerialWrite works, because I can see the rx light on my device light up when I enter text in grasshopper. SerialRead does not work. I blue screen with a DPC WATCHDOG VIOLATION.
All in all, not too bad for a day's work. I'll forget the user objects and go for custom components. The question that still remains is that I don't think I'm correctly or efficiently sharing the serial port instance with the other classes. Again, this is just a hack, but I'm happy I'm closer to solving the problem (or so it seems). If anyone has any ideas about how to better go about this, I'd appreciate any suggestions.
Thanks again,
~BB~…
t BBox will then be mapped relative to the UVW space of that box to the new target boxes.
Where your definition is slipping up is the data matching aspect of GH. You have two lists (that count). One list contains 100 items of target boxes and the other contains 2 items of geometry. GH defaults to the Longest List data matching
List A --> List B
Target Box A0 --> Cuboid
Target Box A1 --> Cylinder
Target Box A2 --> (Oops List B has run out of items. Now GH will repeat the last item = Cylinder)
Target Box A3 --> Cylinder
.....
Target Box J9 --> Cylinder
Solution
There are two approaches to rectify this the most logical would be to group the geometries into one object (What you had in mind with the bounding box) to do this use the Group Component on the Transform Tab > Utility Panel.
The other approach is far more common in GH mentality. Use the Graft, right click the G input of Morph and select Graft from the Context Menu. This places all of the items in the List on to separate branches. Creating a list of lists (although these new list only have one item). When GH now tries to data match them it will apply the whole of the first geometry list (Only the Cuboid) to all of the target boxes and all of the second list (Cylinder) to the target boxes again.
I hope this helps…