} (N=11) {0;1} (N=11) {0;2}(N = 11) {0;3}(N = 11) {0;4}(N = 11)
2. I run the Points that are coming out from the Divide Curve Components through the Path Mapper components with this definition:
{A;B} (i) > {A} (i)
3. I run data coming out from Path Mapper component through:
a) Parameter Viewer component and the result is:
{0} N=11 (data with 1 branches)
b) Point > Panel and the result is:
collection of 11 point (N=11) which is the exactly the same as the collection of point belonging to {0;4} (N = 11).
So, here is the question:
why the collection of points coming out from the Path Mapper {A;B} (i) > {A} (i) component is the same as the collection of points belonging to the curve {0;4}(N = 11) ?
Anyway ... It 's the first time I ask a question here... so I would like to thank you for what you do with your work! Thank you! You are really great!…
First use a series component with start=1, step=42, count=3
Use the output to create a new series component with start=existingseries, step=1, count=11
fault materials...6 RAD materials are loaded1. 2. Downloading OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf to c:\ladybug\3. Loading EP construction library4. 206 material found in c:\ladybug\OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf5. 30 windowmaterial found in c:\ladybug\OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf6. 284 construction found in c:\ladybug\OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf7. Loading EP schedules...8. The ScheduleTypeLimits: Fraction is already existed in the libaray.You need to rename this ScheduleTypeLimits.9. The ScheduleTypeLimits: Temperature 7 is already existed in the libaray.You need to rename this ScheduleTypeLimits.10. 21 scheduletypelimits found in c:\ladybug\OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf11. 1370 schedule found in c:\ladybug\OpenStudioMasterTemplate.idf12. 13. 14. Hooohooho...Flying!!Vviiiiiiizzz...…
9 8 7 6
5 4 3 2 1 0
I am triangulating this surface. I want to select just the red vertices. As you can note, I just need the inner vertices of this surface. I could do it mannually, but if I want to change the mesh density later, I will have to pick all of them manually again later.
Can someone help me?
Tks
…
5 8, and then the following values are obtain as the last one (8) plus 3, then this last one (11) plus 5, and then this last one (16) plus 8, and then it starts again: 24+3, 27+5, 32+8...
Thanks
…
Added by Jesus Galvez at 5:17am on November 27, 2012
pen Brep"; I didn't know it worked on flat surfaces. And I think it's only fair to include in your benchmark the considerable time 'SUnion' takes in this example: 21.9 seconds for 121 rings and likely much more with 400 or 1,000+ rings.
Then I noticed the pattern doesn't match. Checked the circles and they are the same. The distance between them, however, is different: 7 instead of 6. When I change that value to 6, the Python fails badly. All the holes and gaps are gone, which destroys the pattern:
I can't do the "two phase" approach on an 11 X 11 grid, but I can do 6 X 6 and 2 X 2 to get a 12 X 12 grid (40 'SUnion' operations) in 28 seconds total. That beats your benchmark of ~37 seconds for an 11 X 11 grid, if you include the 'SUnion' in your code.
…