er, i hae drawn a quck sketch. Different curves in blue and orange colour. i have marked on my sketch which is a a non-planar surface.
At the moment, i have modeled this with NURBS curve component (component without Knots & Weights). I have set 5 to its 'P' intput (I'm going to reduce it to 3). Each point having 3 parameters X, Y & X axis. I have set my slider from -100mm to 100mm range. It is a closed curve.
If i just loft it, i get random results which i donot want. I can get a planar surface if i set Z parameter to zero. But how do i get a non planar and preferably a burbs surface?
the curves are very important to this projects. as Whole form is dependent on these curves.
Your tips will be highly appreciated. If you have different way of modelling it, I'm open to suggestion too.
cheers,
aB…
and perpframes
3) Ellipse on perframes
4) Series + Move + Series + Scale + Series + rotate (to create generations)
5) Divide curve (ellipse) + Dispatch only seleced points + join those points on ellipse using Intercurve + Divide the resulting intercurve
6) List items (I used list items 4 times, you could do as many). For 'i' parameter in list item i used slider to create generations. depending upon your definition, at this stage you might have to flatten your list output
7) joint the points you get from list output to form another intercurve + repeat that for all items.
8) Loft the curve
9) to form fenestrations, i again used rhino closed curves.
8) Project curve onto surface + copy trim + surface to mesh + mesh thickening from WB.
Hope this helps
Cheers
aB
…
his project. Attached is my latest script. It seems to work for all points & directions of gravity except when the points are at equal height (in the reference plane the script creates, not in the world space). In other words, when the vector from A to B is perpendicular to the gravity vector, it doesn't work. It's totally due to the formulas used to solve for distance (see script), but I haven't found a way to fix it to make it work. Kudos to anyone that can help me figure it out!
Other notes: Required input: Point A, Point B, Gravity vector, and desired Height and/or desired chain/arch Length. Cool trick: when inputting both Height and Length, it recalculates the end point (point B) with those desired parameters, and the end point lies along the AB vector. Also, the "x" output shows either the found height, length, or distance (when both height & length are input), and "newPl" just shows the reference plane used to make calculations easier.
Cheers…
Added by Will McElwain at 11:52pm on January 18, 2014
med that a 1000 lux measurement for a particular hour on a workplane grid point will indicate a illuminance from direct sun at that point. If I remember correctly, these simulations are to be run without the presence of any shading devices.
From an ASE calculation perspective, there are several shortcomings within Daysim (as it exists right now). The daylight coefficient method, which Daysim employs, calculates illuminance by dividing the sky into discrete patches. (http://naturalfrequency.com/wiki/sky-subdivision) For a clear sky with sun, the luminance from sun is accounted for by approximating the position of sun into 3 (as far as I know) patches. That in turn leads to an incorrect estimation of both position and luminance contribution of the sun.
Anyways, as I wrote in the begining, in my opinion the closest you'd get to calculating ASE from daysim right now would be running an annual daylighting calculation with Honeybee by setting ambient bounces as zero. A better approach, in case you are not trying to comply with something like leed v4, would be to do a DGP analysis as Chris mentioned in his post.
…
i projected my surface on XY plane, created voronoi curves on the planar surface and re-project / map the curves onto the subject model.
However, i'm not getting a desired result.
can any-1 please help me. or even show me a different way to model it via GH? I donot want to use rhino objects.
I have attached my initial sketch, GH and Rhino files.
Hope to find some solution so I could move forward :-(
Moreover, I could not convert the initial non-planar curves into surface hence I converted them into Mesh (thanks to 'Brian Harms' for helping me out). However, the protruding edges of the mesh is not a smooth NURB curve, it forms kind of vertices of a polygon. Any way to smoothen / fillet it? Will it affect when i commence 3D printing?
Regards,
aB…
/ interest to some of you. I'm attempting to generate "bricks" along an arc, the span of the arc is known (Line AB), as is the desired brick edge length (shown as chords on the dotted circle). Im am essentially trying to solve for the diameter of the dotted circle and its center point (C). The variables within the grasshopper script would be span (X), chord Length (Y) and number of segments to the arch (N). Lacking the radius or central angle means that Im unable to solve this using my limited knowledge of Trig.
I guess the key issue here is that chord length and number is driving the radius of the arc / circle. Hence why Im not simply using the divide curve tool.
Any input members might have would be fantastic and I'd be very happy to share the resulting file.
Thank you!
…
Added by Robert Harvey at 11:24am on November 20, 2012
join site boundary curves with voronoi curves so that voronoi curves at the edges becomes a closed polygon?
2)I want to create a line between voronoi curve control points and voronoi cell centroid points, such that each 2D voronoi cell is broken down into a sets of triangles. Please refer attached sketch.
3) Then How do i project voronoi curves along with triangl curves onto a vaulted roof?.
4) lastly, i want to give some thickness to those curve. i.e. the curves basically are structural beams of the roof. with my definition pipe command does not work very well i.e. pipes intersect and crossover at each vertices, which is not my intention.
attached is a sketch and my definition.
Can any1 help me with any of the 4 problems?
Thank you very much
AB…
g a problem though when trying to set a daylight simulation with some determined radiance parameters. Here's the problem: After many tries I think I found out that setting -ab = 6 and at the same time -aa = .05 creates some sort of problem, because when I try to do so My PC blocks for several minutes, without letting me manually end processes from taskmanager, and when I'm able again to enter grasshopper, i get the following error:
"Solution exception:index out of range: 0"
Does this really depends on the parameters and values I found out or is it related to something else? Is the problem relative to the structure of HoneyBee or is it just relative to my specific case (and maybe PC)? Is it possible to solve it, and if yes, how?
Atteched you find my rhino model and my grasshopper file.
Thanks in advance for your help and again many compliments!
Luigi…
the Butterfly_Solution component to visualize only the last value, during the simulation.
With this setting, the optimization through Galapagos seems to start in a good way, but after some iterations it stops due to this error on blockMesh component:
Runtime error (ArgumentException): Environment variable name or value is too long.Traceback: line 420, in __setitem__, "C:\Program Files\Rhinoceros 5 (64-bit)\Plug-ins\IronPython\Lib\os.py" line 80, in getShellinit, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 69, in containerId, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 260, in _RunManager__command, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 316, in run, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 716, in command, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\case.py" line 748, in blockMesh, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\case.py" line 112, in getContainerId, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 215, in command, "C:\Users\mmel\AppData\Roaming\McNeel\Rhinoceros\5.0\scripts\butterfly\runmanager.py" line 47, in script
Anyone know how to fix it?
Thank you
…
essors. And their counter-attitude is not made because of some real reasons - it's just some kind of fear, that time will overrun them and that they will become useless in comparison to the new generation of "computer architects". That is why they are giving false replies on this subject you mentioned: about boring and soulless architecture.
But! I also need to agree that you can not be an architect if you can not draw that by hand, also and imagine the object and it's parts in 3d, in your head, without even using the 3d model from PC application.
I used to draw around 80% of all my projects on university during studies, by hand! And that part helped a lot, and gave me pretty decent base for usage of PC applications later. Drawing by hand develops a bit investigating spirit, and enables you to think about the shape, the way it looks, and the way it will look.Even today, I first do a dozen number of sketches and drawings, before going onto the drawing on PC.The same goes related to some details, that I am already drawing on PC - sometimes I feel it much more comfortable to solve them by hand, and then draw back to PC.
So my opinion on this is a bit mixed - I think that an architect needs to have a solid basis in hand drawing, in order to become a better architect. But I also think that using technology in process of creating architecture is inevitable and reasons for not using it, are pointless.
Just my two cents on this issue.…
Added by djordje to Hiteca at 4:22am on August 7, 2012