l design.
2/ Optimization
2.1/ in prefabrication
2.2/ combinatorial
2.3/ approach comparisons (i.e. deterministic vs stochastic)
2.4/ share your research
2.5/ ... etc. the list goes on and on
3/ Share you design rationale and how computation fits in
4/ Need help with this problem...
5/ Challenges and workshops announcements
6/ CD News
7/ Share computational design projects under construction or built (akin to skyscrapercity)
8/ and so many other categories and sub-categories...
Just my first thoughts. That breakdown in optimization is just an example. Maybe 'sections' is an old-school way of seeing things, I just wanted to share some thoughts on the kind of content I look forward to seeing. It can be pragmatic topics, but also theoretical, and allow folks to share their projects and research. Some categories are specific, others broad. I suppose I'm interested in community building with regards to computational design. I think SmartGeometry attempted to accomplish this at some point in the past, to some degree. However their focus appears to be in the workshops and challenges.
I recall the silly flame wars that the CG industry had 20 years ago (lame). I'd avoid that, even if it meant forbidding the mention of any specific software in certain areas or in the entire forum. Which would be tricky, but the endless flame wars and silly comparisons were such a waste of everyone's time in CG.
Without dwelling on this too much yet, I think that the software specific questions belong in software specific forums. If we already had a common language for computational design, you'd just need to add the right description as a meta-tag to any Dynamo or Grasshopper forum post, and you'd be able to find analogous solutions in either forum effortlessly, right?
The Dynamo and Grasshopper forums lack design-centric content. The emphasis is generally on the tools and workflow. Computational design is hybrid in essence, it involves both design and computer programming (be it visual or textual). We could really use a forum for knowledge exchange where the expectation is that both are discussed with equal status.
I disagree that such a forum ought to exclude professional programmers. It should include professional programmers whom have an interest in design, and also include professional designers whom have an interest in computer programming, and everyone in between, and enthusiasts, and artists whom are curious about algorithms as a creative medium, and academics, and students, and etc etc. As long as there is rich content and activity on design as well, not only the computational bit, then the crowd will be diverse and we'll all have more to learn from one another.…
this was about some boring building I wouldn't respond ... but here we are talking sardines.
Here's my take on that matter:
1. The 4 C# first create/use a nurbs, then define some random planes (and transformations) and then (a) either they place some humble stripes or ... er ... (b) sardines as instance definitions (NOTE: Load Rhino file first).
2. All important decisions are the ones in yellow groups.
3. You control what you get via this (priority on stripes or sardines? that's the 1M Q):
4. If you decide for sardines (the right thing to do) then you must ENABLE the Sardiniser(C)(tm)(US patent pending) as follows:
5. The vodkaFactor on that Sardiniser C# adds some spice in the sardine placement (it does that by altering the priority on the "composite" transformation in use: first randomly rotate then planeToPlane .... or the other thing?).
6. Only the finest Da Morgada sardines are used in this definition:
7. Spot the WARNING in the filter related with what sardine to choose > do it wrong and no hard disk on your workstation > no risk no fun > sorry Amigos, he he.
8. 1M question for you all: why placing sardines (it's real-time you know) is WAY faster than creating these humble stripes?
9. Although the sardines are placed in real time as regards your CPU ... the critical factor is your GPU (display mode: rendered).
10.Still WIP (dancing sardines in the next update).
have some sardine fun, best, Lord of SardineLand…
diverse group of design participants from afar for a full schedule of exchanges with leading practitioners, practices, fabrication labs… all while exposed to European transit infrastructure... trains planes & even a few mountain roads. LaN FLIGHT EUROPE marks LaN's fifth initiative on-the-fly & our first in EUROPE. JOIN us for the full trip or the leg that suits your interests. LaN is looking to attract a geographically diverse group of students & professionals with various design backgrounds. LaN FLIGHT 2012 EU is co-piloted by LaN Monika Wittig & Co-de-iT Andrea Graziano. LaN FLIGHT is looking for highly ambitious-adaptable-endurance oriented participants to fully embrace the nature of this curated experience. Please take a look at our 3 previous editions to best judge if this type of experience suits you. If you are willing to allot 8 days of your life to this pursuit and have no allergies to extreme mobility & group dynamics… welcome to LaN FLIGHT.…
mport the geometry again.
Right?
How about this? I add an extra object called something like "Geometry Cache". You have to give it a unique name. If you plug geometry data into the left side of this component, it will bake all that geometry and attach UserStrings to all those objects like "<name>: {0;0;3}(8)" where <name> would be your name and the rest is the exact location of that piece of geometry in a DataTree. It should probably also delete any objects already in the 3dm file that have that custom name/data assigned to them.
If you don't plug any wires into the left side, it will instead search the 3dm file for all geometry with the appropriate user data, load them into a correct DataTree and supply that data to whoever plugs into the right side.
If you plug wires in both ends, it will just function as a generic Geometry Parameter.
It might be tricky to write a good event handler for this thing, maybe I'll just restrict myself to an UPDATE NOW! button on the object itself, so you can trigger an update manually.
ps. benefit of this approach is that everyone can create and harvest geometry with such user text, whether they use Grasshopper or not.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
me)
And got the same result as you did. Suddenly the definition started working. Although I got this error message when I opened the compression tension null.gh file:
Message log start (chronological): --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Plugin version: 0.8.0066 Input parameter chunk is missing. Archive is corrupt. Output parameter chunk is missing. Archive is corrupt. Output parameter chunk is missing. Archive is corrupt. Output parameter chunk is missing. Archive is corrupt.
Why is that?
Can I dare to ask you few more questions?
2) I want all of my members to be made of solid (not hollow) circular cross-sections.
Does that mean that my diameter and thickness need to have the same values? Like this:
?
3) I have wind load from 8 directions. Is there a way in Karamba to create load groups and choose the one with the most extreme values (group that will be used as the most relevant one for dimensioning)?
Thank you.…
are just the 8 cases, so you're actually doing it right here (scroll down on this page, and you'll see a separate subset all about marching tetrahedrons http://paulbourke.net/geometry/polygonise/). The benefit to using marching tetrahedrons is exactly this: that the number of possible "cuts" through the tetrahedron are dramatically smaller in number than those through a cube.
However, I have found that also what you're seeing that the linear interpolation creates some odd distortions (which is why I went ahead and later did the marching cubes implementation). Some of this comes from the density of the sampling grid: the more dense, the fewer distortions.
What I would suggest, if you want a (relatively) quick way to improve this outcome:
1) build up a full mesh rather that bunch of surfaces, and use Rhinocommon to combine identical vertices, and rebuild the vertex normals
2) run a couple rounds of laplacian smoothing on the mesh to better distribute your vertices (for each vertex, make it equal in location to the average of its neighbours)
3) create a line normal to each vertex roughly the length of your sampling grid and test the endpoints of it against your scalar field formula, and then do one final linear interpolation between those two points for your vertex.
This should give you a smoother mesh for sure.
But good work getting this far! …
Added by David Stasiuk at 1:37am on February 6, 2015
g commands. In addition, this workshop will give students a functional understanding of Grasshopper and Parametric design; this will allow them to build on this understanding into more advanced projects of their own. The class also covers information on fabrication techniques with RP or laser machines and optimization and fabrication using RhinoCAM for CNC machines.
Details...
Date: May 16 - 20, 2016
Time: 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (EST)*
*Note: All times listed are Eastern (Miami) time zone
Location: McNeel Miami1538 NW 89th CourtMiami, FL 33172United States…
mpletes, i will be incremented. The default increment amount is 1.
If you change the syntax to be:
For i As Int32 = 0 To 9 Step 2
then i will be incremented by 2 each time. So now the loop will run 5 times:
first iteration i = 0
second iteration i = 2
third iteration i = 4
fourth iteration i = 6
fifth iteration i = 8
sixth iteration i = 10 which is more than 9 so the 6th iteration never happens.
If you use Step 0, i isn't incremented at all, and the loop should run forever, unless you have some other abort statement or if you adjust the iteration variables inside the loop. You are doing the latter. Your iteration variable is D. The loop itself does not increment it, but you manually increment it when you call D += T.
Although this is logically solid, it is very bad practice since it makes the code very hard to read.
Since D, R and N are not external variables, I would not expose them as Input parameters.
Also, you inner loop is very weird:
For R = R1 To R Step 0
Your iteration variable here is R, but your termination limit is also R. Not to mention the step is again zero.
Trying to debug this is very difficult because it's been written in a very unorthodox fashion. I have a distinct feeling this algorithm can be written down with far fewer variables and constructs.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
s is like flattening your data PARTIALLY - chopping an index off the end of the branch paths without obliterating the tree entirely. When working with one "set" of input data, a flatten works to get these lists to match up - but when working with multiple sets, we need to be careful to preserve the original branch indices that keep all four of your original regions separate. As a rule, whenever you're feeding two data trees into any component, they should have the same number of branches. (or one should have branches and the other should be a flat list, in other cases).
The rule of thumb I tend to teach is this:
In 90% of cases...
For lists, all your inputs should either have 1 item or N items. That is to say, if you're feeding 4 items into one input and 9 items into another, something is probably wrong.
For trees, all your inputs should have either 1 branch or M branches. That is to say, if you're feeding a tree w/ branches {0;0} to {0;3} into one input, and a tree w branches {0;0;0} to {0;3;8} into the other input, something is probably wrong.
Grasshopper essentially matches up branches first, then lists second. By "matching" I mean it processes them together. Simple example of the Line component - it will match the first branch of points in the A input to the first branch of points in the B input, creating lines between those points, then match the second branches, the third branches, etc. THEN, it applies the same logic to the level of the list (with a pair of matched branches {0;2}, match all the items in those branches to each other - first item in one branch to the first item in the other branch, etc.)
This is a tricky concept but it seems like you're already well on your way to understanding it from your definition - "PShift" is a critical tool in your path management arsenal. I hope this (overly long) response helps clear things up for you!
…