at STL files of "thickened" wireframes.
The problem underneath, is that we are not dealing with 2d or 2.5d meshes, but a bunch of lines, intersecting in 3d vertex, wich globally are not topologically related, but its ideally a 3d spatial structure.
As fas as we know:
option1: mesh/solid boolean
>between tubes, for the edges, and spheres at each vertex.
>it happens to get many errors in Magics & crashes quickly with big structures and many meshes.
option 2: isosurface
>either isosurf , or realflow works fine for high blending needs, and small pieces
>looks always good but does not seem to fit slender tubular structures fabrication purposes
option 3: 3-matic software
>used by prototyping industry, seems to repair everything
>expensive, unaffordable, exceptionally
option4: topological extrude
>topologically solve the extrusion of a vertex with many edges, generating non overlapped geometry. For 2d and 2,5 D, it works, but our attempts in maya fail everytime we try with 3D vertices.
> we believe there has to be a geometrical mesh trick
(we imagine Giulio Piacentino's Weaver Bird could have this useful feature)
We'll be waiting for suggestions and solutions (or cases)
Thanks
Enrique & Pep…
ized triangles? Aesthetics? Constructability/financial? Frankly, much of the diagrid construction I've worked on and know about doesn't worry about same sizes but rather maximum and minimum sizes, and tolerances.
3. You could aim for families of sizes: understand the tolerance of the system as constructed and group similar panels by size and shape so that you could potentially have 10 of A, 8 of B, 4 of C, and 2 of D or something.
4. I highly recommend looking at Evolute Tools. It has all sorts of optimization of meshes that would allow you to control of size, shape, etc.
5. Finally, I don't think you want a simple mapping of a diagrid to your surfaces. I say that because of the way your form pinches down to a point. One thought would be to create a larger surface that has a more rectangular boundary, panelize it, then trim the panels. Then all the internal panels would be quite similar and you'd only have irregular edge panels.
Just a few thoughts.
That's my two cents!…
always working this way when a
2d-matrix tree structure is needed. I supposed many of us are using this logic
a lot.
It'd always be better if it's in 3 or 4 etc. dimensions.
best regards…
o a multiplication between two lists of N matrixes of 6x6.
So far, i've been working with them as data tree, therefore i have a "3 dimensional" setup(Paths are [X,Y}(Z))
i'm an absolute begginer in any programming language, but so far i've done something like this:ps: d is just an input, thats the number of dimensions,
both k and T are the lists of matrixes.well, i'm hoping to get one matrix list as an output, what is what i attempted by the c{m} up there, and if possible eventually(after some more operations) bring them back to data tree format.any ideas?Thanks!Bruno…
Added by Bruno Galvao at 1:19pm on February 20, 2014
at keeps me from modifying 'easier' the structure (in the same time not much time to study it since its for school). What I am intending to do next is to create 2 vertical 'pillars' (always in space frame), placed on the extremities, which would have its starting points(of the lines that generates the frame) at the center of a certain sphere (for exampling for the length 3 spheres..)going perpendicular to the 'ground' (plan x,y). So I do understand more or less how it works and all, but don't know the use of many functions from GH (started using since september 2014)....
Could please someone help me, ( if possible explain me) how to do it what to use ( using a language for a Noob to understand) Thx to whoever responded to my help 'demand' and may you be blessed :D
if it makes it any clear what i need ;)…
Added by Gangura Petru at 2:46am on October 14, 2014
oto )
I tried so many different ways but none worked !i need 3 layers, each layer has a different number of points, so there will be different size of holes. ( I think I've reached this point )I used a pop2d -> 2D Voronoi -> Scaled ( dist from curve ) but I want all three layers connected to each other, i tried also 3D Voronoi and the Voronax Plugin and none worked !I'm so confused :D
…
Added by Arian Sadafi at 3:59am on January 30, 2017
ay to make some real-life proper nodes for that kind of T truss (we use machined balls solely for MERO KK type of normal trusses).
3. I'll post here soon a modular demo system suitable for this case (real-life for AEC purposes - NOT for decorative/artistic stuff, I don't care about that since I'm an engineer). This would include a policy for the X struts that require a variable linkage (the X angle). and in the same time a multi cable tensioner "bracket".
4. "Basic" coding next week for T trusses ? Er ... well ... are you kidding me right? I mean that ... hmm ...
5. C# things (about 2+K) around me are classified into 2 "groups": things that are weapons in the right hands and others that serve as demos/start points for mostly abstract cases. The former are internal the latter for public use. I'll remove some sensitive lines from a T truss C# maker and I'll post it here as a "guideline" ... for ...hmm... 4.
All in all:
Provided that you have system(s) on hand (see 3) that work 100% OK in an ideal world you'll need:
A. Something that does the general topology AND (especially) clash detection. Maybe Kangaroo as well as a "first pass" with regard rigidity of the structure in case that you don't adopt a classic T "configuration" (there are many > Google tensegrity).
B. Connectivity trees that relate nodes/edges and maybe faces (say for roofing panels/curtain walls etc etc). Without them is impossible to assemble the T thingy.
C: Something that places real-life "parts" as instance definitions and/or (optional) a "tracking variants history" ability.
D. A bullet proof way to EXPORT things (on an assembly/component schema, say: STEP214 - see C) into a proper BIM app (the likes of AECOSim/Revit) and/or into a MCAD app (the likes of CATIA/NX).
E. FEA/FIM in order to validate the structural ability of the components and the T truss itself.
F. Roofing/cladding/envelope components.
G. "Interactive" cost estimation(s) - T trusses are hideously expensive at least versus "classic" trusses (exactly like a planar glazing system that retails 3++ times more than a humble semi-structural one)…
ject that involves the design of an app that allows people to interact with a 3d model through some sliders.)
Ok, imagine you have a symmetrical shape like the one i drew:
What I intend to do is to have different 3 sliders that allow me to adjust the 3 distances (x, y, z) independently of one another.
-1st question: my idea is to draw the curves in rhino, then use the "divide" and "list item" components to extract the points I need. Is it correct? :D
-2nd question: the "move away from" component can be used in a symmetric way?
(I try to be more specific: with only one slider, can I move both points 5 and 6 simultaneously about the axis i drew?)
-3rd question: is there a way that allows the curves to reshape themselves as I move the slider related to the distance between a couple of points?
I hope I have been clear ;) I would greatly appreciate any help you can give me!
Matteo…
ces, cats, dogs anything.
3. Pick some in 2 and write down some algorithm (rather impossible without code) that makes "random" tree - like columns that grow with some fractal logic and "end" to the grid points in 1. Take case about some "even distribution" (see step 4). Obviously columns are made by tubes welded on site (expensive + tricky) or modular via some MERO variant (cheaper but a bit ugly).
Break: in order to do WOW tree-columns you need quality code not a mesh (or a CRAY or even ... hmm ... HAL9000). Estimated CPU time for a random tree-like column with, say, 5-20 nodes: 0.001 milliseconds.
4. place I beams (or C or IPE or IPN) along a given direction (or both) using points in 1 and support them by the ends of the tree-columns. I would recommend ball-pivot joints for obvious reasons.
Now ... this ... (as I said: I'm a bit lost). I mean ... doing this in a large scale (as your initial image suggests) is rather out of question even in Dubai (prior the D-Day). Maybe out of question even in China (where billions are aplenty).…
g that there's clash issues related with the convex edges: the "inward" ones so to speak).
2. If we call the teeth that is contained inside the Face "inside" (Length as in D) and the other "outside" (shorter Length > make a sketch > trigonometry > etc) ... then there's no clash issues ("along" each teeth: i.e. "along" the initial donor edge direction) since the inside meats always the corresponding outside.
3. However there's clash issues related with the start/end portions of the polyline (due to offset).
4. There's also clash issues ("across" each teeth, i.e. perpendicular to the initial donor edge) .. meaning that the polyline must take into account all these constrains (at creation time ... or at "offset" time)).
Guru refused to dig into more details (God knows what he actually means with all the above). He only added that the trick is an ability to watch BOTH polylines (per adjacent Face) at once (rather easy for him).
Moral: a tipple espresso for me please. …