NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS". I'm not sure of where to start in troubleshooting this. I've attached the file.
Thank you,
See the errors and warnings below:
{0;0;0}
0. Current document units is in Meters
1. Conversion to Meters will be applied = 1.000
2. [1 of 8] Writing simulation parameters...
3. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
4. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
5. [3 of 8] Writing geometry...
6. [4 of 8] Writing Electric Load Center - Generator specifications ...
7. [5 of 8] Writing materials and constructions...
8. [6 of 8] Writing schedules...
9. [7 of 8] Writing loads and ideal air system...
10. [8 of 8] Writing outputs...
11. ...
... idf file is successfully written to : R:\Green\SuRG\Building_Performance_Analysis\2016_analysis_studies\Energy_Analysis_Comparison\Honeybee_+_Ladybug\tutorial01\EnergyPlus\tutorial01.idf
12.
13. Analysis is running!...
14. ...
...
Done! Read below for errors and warnings:
15.
16. Program Version,EnergyPlus, Version 8.5.0-c87e61b44b, YMD=2016.10.31 11:39,IDD_Version 8.5.0
17.
18. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:
19.
20. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...
21.
22. ************* 24 Sizing:Parameters,
23.
24. ************* Only last 1 lines before error line shown.....
25.
26. ************* 25 None, !- Heating Sizing Factor
27.
28. ** Severe ** IP: IDF line~25 Invalid Number in Numeric Field#1 (Heating Sizing Factor), value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
29.
30. ** Warning ** IP: Note -- Some missing fields have been filled with defaults. See the audit output file for details.
31.
32. ** ~~~ ** Possible Invalid Numerics or other problems
33.
34. ** Fatal ** IP: Errors occurred on processing IDF file. Preceding condition(s) cause termination.
35.
36. ...Summary of Errors that led to program termination:
37.
38. ..... Reference severe error count=1
39.
40. ..... Last severe error=IP: IDF line~
, value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
41.
42. ************* Warning: Node connection errors not checked - most system input has not been read (see previous warning).
43.
44. ************* Fatal error -- final processing. Program exited before simulations began. See previous error messages.
45.
46. ************* EnergyPlus Warmup Error Summary. During Warmup: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
47.
48. ************* EnergyPlus Sizing Error Summary. During Sizing: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
49.
50. ************* EnergyPlus Terminated--Fatal Error Detected. 1 Warning; 1 Severe Errors; Elapsed Time=00hr 00min 9.34sec
51.…
: Castellano
Horarios
Básico - miércoles
18.30 - 21.30 h
Avanzado - miércoles
15.00 - 18.00 h
Una vez finalizado el curso, el alumno podrá solicitar un diploma acreditativo del mismo.
Normativa: http://daetsam.aq.upm.es/servicios/cursos/informacion
Información cursos: http://daetsam.aq.upm.es/servicios/cursos/primavera2014
Métodos de pago: http://daetsam.aq.upm.es/noticias/2014/02/16/cursos-primavera-2014-aplicaciones-informaticas-e-idiomas
…
ecember 2017 from 18:30 until 20:30. We will have presentations from Heatherwick Studio and AKT II.
Please visit the following page for more details and registration: http://simplyrhino.co.uk/events/upcoming-events/grasshopper-uk-ugm-2017
Heatherwick studio will present two projects covering the topic of designing, making and collaborating through computational tools. Heatherwick’s Geometry and Computational Design team will go through the computational processes behind design and making in the studio concentrating on two projects, Vessel in New York with a focus on driving the geometry and Al Fayah Park in Abu Dhabi with a focus on Form Finding and working with collaborative tools.
AKT II's presentation will explore a series of examples where this new approach was experimented, tested and improved, the Al Fayah Park in collaboration with Heatherwick studio and the 2016 Serpentine Pavilion with BIG, and more.
We're looking forward to seeing you all again!
Many thanks,
Paul and Arthur
…
this common installation problem please find a tested remedy shared by one of the group members:
Comment by Iman Sheikhansari on August 26, 2019 at 8:33amDelete Comment
HiIf you are encountering a problem with rhino 6 versions don't worryFollow these steps.1. Download SYNTACTIC from https://sites.google.com/site/pirouznourian/syntactic-design2. Install it and go to the installation folder, Drag & drop SYNTACTIC(green one) over your grasshopper canvas.3. Close your rhino and reopen it. 4. Type GrasshopperDeveloperSettings5. Tick the Memory load *.GHA assemblies using COFF byte arrays option6. Run grasshopper and enjoy plugin
I hope this helps,
Best regards,
Pirouz
…
one" which is an indicator of which ones are considered to exist in more than one zone. (i added a list item) to the internalized data so you can see them. So you can use this to KNOW exactly which 28 lots actually need to be analyzed against the "zoning boundaries", and which are considered to be completely contained.
The trick here (and what I do not know how to do). Is to perform an operation on ONLY the lots that have the "Y" flag in the "Split Zone".
Essentially what i need to do is to calculate the PROPORTION of the LOT that exists in each of the ZONES, but the tree/list needs to stay in order because i have to match those proportions back up at a later point.
You've already done so much already, but if you could take a look and maybe even get me started (like. How do i perform an operation ONLY on geometry that has the "Y" indicator?) that would be super helpful.
Thanks!
EG …
Added by Eric Galipo at 3:03pm on January 15, 2016
somthin like this
Then I can with some correlation say that If I am in x=442.81 than x=1.7 and y=should be 28...but the Image Sampler dont schow me Where I am located..
in the second case
I need just to know wich color and where I am picking than with some command I can say if I get RGB(254,183,5) correspont to a value from -24 ...
thanks for your help David…
points that are just opposite of each other on each panel), while also getting rid of the points that are on the outer edges of the structure, how would I go about and do that?Would the best way be to use the "ClosestPoint" component, or is there a smarter way to build a definition that automatically pairs the needed points?Basically, I need to create a vector between the pair of points, so that I can begin working with connecting geometry.
I've attached Rhino file and Grasshopper definition.Any ideas or comments is much appreciated! I hope someone can help me out.Thanks,Claus …
planes created on each node to intersect each Brep (The planes are more than the Brep, so some planes might not intersect the Breps). The outcome for "Brep | Brep" does NOT give me 408 branches. It just gives me 3716 curves in 11,425 branches. I Basically want those outcome curves to be organize with their original surfaces so I can unroll them easily and associate them with their original surfaces for fabrication. But the outcome tree comes out a mess.I tried partition list. I tried to intersect the out-curves with the original Breps again in another step but nothing seems to work for me. I would really appreciate any help I can get. Thank you…
oo culm and the web is mad of bamboo slats connected to the culms on either side of the attachment points. To make things clearer (extracted from the above paper):
The authors of the paper did a numerical beam-model in ANSYS to see if they could replicate their theoretical results, and it is fairly correct (some differences due to the non-linear behavior of the semi-ring joints that they use, they remain of an order of 5-10% difference in maximum deflection).
My problem is that I am not able to obtain the same deflection values that the authors did (11.4 mm for a total service load of 7.063 kN applied punctually on the upper chord where the truss elements meet, or even replicate the load/deflection curve). Using an orthotropic material, with the engineering constants taken from (ResearchGate - A bamboo Beam-Column Connection Capable to Transmit Moment), my model is too flexible and I get a maximum deflection of 24.28 mm. I tried other orthotropic mechanical characterizations from other sources (Kathry & Mishra, 2012, Finite element analysis of bamboo and joints using steel members under various loading conditions for design study and Chand , Shukla & Sharma, 2008, Analysis of Mechanical Behaviour of Bamboo (Dendrocalamus strictus) by Using FEM), to no avail.
Of course, the problem could be with the material properties I inputted but I am trying to contact the research team to see directly with them. In the meantime, I am looking to make sure the model itself is not flawed.
It also seems to me that gravity was not accounted for in the numerical of the paper, but it seemed to much of an oversight to be possible (still, the deflection curve of their paper goes through 0).
There are several points I am not quite sure about: after all I am still fairly new to Karamba3D and may still have some things to learn about the inner mechanics of the plugin.
The very first is: should I put eccentricities of the slat-elements of the truss in the definition of their cross-section (directly with the Cross Section box) or as an offset of the beam element (with the ModifyElem box)? I tried both approaches and they seem to yield similar results (max. deflection change by 0.65mm in my latest model).
Second is: is it good practice to subdivide the beam elements in more than one element (and connecting the pieces rigidly) in order to get better results? I imagine some meshing or subdivision is performed when the analysis is run but there is no way of visualizing it (that I found in any case). Subdividing the chord elements seems to give smoother deformation results (though I did not check stress I have to admit). My issue on this topic is that the subdivision of the slat-elements of the web is problematic. On the screenshot below, where the elements are divided in two, lets take the example of node 18. It seems to me that all elements of the diagonal element (28, 29, 34 & 35) are all rigidly connected to the node 18. 28 & 29 are not connected together, independently from 34 & 35. The added rigidity may not be a bad thing for my model, but it is not correct I think? Is there a way of solving the problem?
Element tags:
Node tags:
And here is my GH file (clean enough hopefully): verification-model-V04.gh
Thank you all in advance for any insight (even on the inner logics of Karamba)!
…
t the maximum potential with the bridge BIM+PARAMETRIC DESIGN ;D
During this Intense Week, we will learn about the power of Rhino + Grasshopper + ArchiCAD with Professional and Useful examples for our Normal Working day :D
You will get Advanced Library Files + Personal Web + Knowledge and Skills to start using this incredible Methodology ;D
Also, the week is having Lectures from different Experts sharing their Computational Working Experiences ;D And Jam Sessions! opening the door to 5 interesting topics to research, learn and experiment together :D
2020 is your YEAR ;D !!!
Complete details and registration……