Search Results - 双色球和值尾数是8和9的数『1TBH·COM』全球通彩票代理注册2023年3月19日7时59分41秒.H5c2a3.ivhduifoj

Topic: Release Notes - Ladybug 0.0.63 and Honeybee 0.0.60: nd improvements. Many of the new features and components announced in the last release have become stable and have emerged from their WIP section. Additionally, after two years of work, we are happy to announce that we finally have full support of an OpenStudio connection within Honeybee, which has ushered in a whole host of new features, notably the modelling of detailed HVAC systems. As always you can download the new release from Food4Rhino. Make sure to remove the older version of Ladybug and Honeybee and update your scripts. LADYBUG 1 - Solar Hot Water Components Out of WIP After much beta-testing, bug-fixing, and general development, all of the Photovoltaic and Solar Hot Water components are now fully out of WIP! The main component is based on a Chengchu Yan's publication. Components have been added to Ladybug thanks to the efforts of Chengchu Yan and Djordje Spasic.. See Djorje’s original release post of the solar hot water components for more information on the components that just made it out of WIP. 2 - New Terrain Shading Mask Released in WIP In addition to Djordje’s prolific addition of renewable energy components, he has also contributed a widely-useful component to generate terrain shading masks, which account for the shading of surrounding mountains/terrain in simulations. While initially added to assist the solar radiation radiation and renewable energy components, the component will undergo development to optimize it for energy and daylight simulations over the next few months. Another new component called Horizon Angles can be used to visualize and export horizon angles. You can test them out now by accessing them in the WIP section. For more information, see Djordje’s release post on the GH forum here. 3 - New Mesh Selector Component After realizing that the Optimal Shade Creator component has applications to a whole range of analyses, it has now been re-branded as the Mesh Selector and has been optimized to work easily with these many analyses. Specifically, the component selects out the portion of a mesh that meets a given threshold. This can be the portion of a shade benefit analysis meeting a certain level of shade desirability, the portion of a radiation study meeting a certain level of fulx, the portion of a daylight analysis meeting a certain lux threshold, and much more! 4 - Solar Adjusted Temperature Now Includes Long Wave Radiation Thanks to a question asked by Aymeric and a number of clarifications made by Djordje Spasic, the Solar Adjusted Temperature component now includes the ability to account for long-wave radiative loss to the sky in addition to it original capability to account for short wave radiation from the sun. As such, the component now includes all capabilities of similar outdoor comfort tools such as RayMan. The addition of this capability is also paralleled by the addition of a new horizontalInfraredRadiation output on the ImportEPW component. See the updated solar adjusted example file hereto see how to use the component properly. 5 - Support for both Log and Power Law Wind Profiles In preparation for the future release of the Butterfly CFD-modelling insect, the Ladybug Wind Profile component now includes the option of either power law or log law wind profiles, which are both used extensively in CFD studies. Thanks goes to Theodoros Galanos for providing the formulas! 6 - New Radiant Asymmetry Comfort Components Prompted by a suggestion from Christian Kongsgaard, Ladybug now includes components to calculate radiant asymmetry discomfort! For examples of how to use the components see this example file for spatial analysis of radiant asymmetry discomfort and this example for temporal analysis. 7 - Pedestrian Wind Comfort Component Released in WIP In preparation for the impending release of the butterfly CFD-modelling insect, Djordje Spasic with assistance from Liam Harrington has contributed a component to evaluate outdoor discomfort and pedestrian safety. The component identifies if certain areas around the building are suitable for sitting, building entrances-exits, window shopping... based on its wind microclimate. Dangerous areas due to high wind speeds are also identified.You can check it out now in the WIP section. HONEYBEE 1 - New HVAC Systems and Full OpenStudio Support After a significant amount of development on the part of the OpenStudio team and two years of effort on the part of LB+HB developers, we (finally!) have full support for an OpenStudio connection within Honeybee. By this, we mean that any energy simulation property that can be assigned to a HBZone will be taken into account in the simulation run by the OpenStudio component. The connection to OpenStudio has brought with it several new capabilities. Most notably, you can now assign full HVAC systems and receive energy results in units of electricity and fuel instead of simple heating and cooling loads. This Honeybee release includes 14 built-in HVAC template systems that can be assigned to the zones, each of which can be customized: 0. Ideal Air Loads 1. PTAC | Residential 2. PTHP | Residential 3. Packaged Single Zone - AC 4. Packaged Single Zone - HP 5. Packaged VAV w/ Reheat 6. Packaged VAV w/ PFP Boxes 7. VAV w/ Reheat 8. VAV w/ PFP Boxes 9. Warm Air Furnace - Gas Fired 10.Warm Air Furnace - Electric 11.Fan Coil Units + DOAS 12.Active Chilled Beams + DOAS 13.Radiant Floors + DOAS 14.VRF + DOAS Systems 1-10 are ASHRAE Baseline systems that represent much of what has been added to building stock over the last few decades while systems 11-14 are systems that are commonly being installed today to reduce energy use. Here is an example file showing how to assign these systems in Honeybee and interpret the results and here is an example showing how to customize the HVAC system specifications to a wide variety of cases. To run the file, you will need to have OpenStudio installed and you can download and install OpenStudio from here. In addition to these template systems within Honeybee, the OpenStudio interface includes hundreds of HVAC components to build your own custom HVAC systems. OpenStudio also has a growing number of user-contributed HVAC system templates that have been integrated into a set of scripts called "Measures" that you can apply to your OpenStudio model within the OpenStudio interface. You can find these system templates by searching for them in the building components library. Here is a good tutorial video on how to apply measures to your model within the OpenStudio interface. Honeybee includes a component that runs these measures from Grasshopper (without having to use the OpenStudio interface), which you can see a demo video of here. However, this component is currently in WIP as OpenStudio team is still tweaking the file structure of measures and it is fairly safe to estimate that, by the next stable release of Honeybee, we will have full support of OpenStudio measures within GH. 2 - Phasing Out IDF Exporter With the connection to OpenStudio now fully established, this release marks the start of a transition away from exporting directly to EnergyPlus and the beginning of Honeybee development that capitalizes on OpenStudio’s development. As such THIS WILL BE THE LAST STABLE RELEASE THAT INCLUDES THE HONEYBEE_RUN ENERGY SIMULATION COMPONENT. The Export to OpenStudio component currently does everything that the Run Energy Simulation component does and, as such, it is intended that all GH definitions using the Run Energy Simulation component should replace it with the OpenStudio component. You can use the same Read EP Result components to import the results from the OpenStudio component and you can also use the same Energy Sim Par/Generate EP Output components to customize the parameters of the simulation. The only effective difference between the two components is that the OpenStudio component enables the modeling of HVAC and exports the HBZones to an .osm file before converting it to an EnergyPlus .idf. For the sake of complete clarity, we should state that OpenStudio is simply an interface for EnergyPlus and, as such, the same calculation engine is under the hood of both the Export to OpenStudio component and the Run Energy Simulation component. At present, you should get matching energy simulation results between the Run Energy Simulation component and a run of the same zones with the OpenStudio component (using an ideal air system HVAC). All of this is to say that you should convert your GH definitions that use the Run Energy Simulation component to have the OpenStudio component and this release is the best time to do it (while the two components are supported equally). Additionally, with this version of Honeybee you will no longer need to install EnergyPlus before using Honeybee and you will only need to install OpenStudio (which includes EnergyPlus in the install). 3 - New Schedule Generation Components Thanks to the efforts of Antonello Di Nunzio, we now have 2 new components that ease the creation of schedule-generation in Honeybee. The new components make use of the native Grasshopper “Gener Pool” component to give a set of sliders for each hour of the day. Additionally, Antonello has included an annual schedule component that contains a dictionary of all holidays of every nearly every nation (phew!). Finally, this annual schedule component can output schedules in the text format recognized by EnergyPlus, which allows them to be written directly into the IDF instead of a separate CSV file. This will significantly reduce the size of files needed to run simulations and can even reduce the number of components on your canvas that are needed to add custom schedules. For more information, see Antonello’s explanatory images here and Antonello's example file here. You can also see a full example file of how to apply the schedules to energy simulations here. 4 - EnergyPlus Lookup Folder, Re-run OSM/IDF, and Read Result Dictionary With the new capabilities of OpenStudio, we have also added a number of components to assist with managing all of the files that you get from the simulation. In particular, Abraham Yezioro has added a Lookup EnergyPlus Folder component that functions very similarly to the Lookup Daylight Folder component. This way, you can run an Energy simulation once and explore the results separately. Furthermore, we have added components to Re-Run OpenStudio .osm files or EnergyPlus .idf files within Grasshopper. These components are particularly useful if you edit these .osm or .idf files outside of Honeybee and want to re-run them to analyze their results in Grasshopper. Lastly, a component has been added to parse the .rdd (or Result Data Dictionary) file that EnergyPlus produces, enabling you to see all of the possible outputs that you can request from a given simulation. 5 - Electric Lighting Components Out of WIP After Sarith Subramaniam’s initial components to model electric lights with Radiance in the last release, we are happy to report that they have been fully tested and are out of WIP. Improvements include support for all types of light fixture geometries and the ability to use the components in a more “Grasshoppery” list-like fashion. See Sarith’s original release post for more information and several example files showing how to use the components can be found here. 1 , 2 , 3 . 6 - Improvements to THERM Components A number of bug fixes and improvements have been made to the THERM components in order to make their application more flexible and smooth. Special thanks is due to Derin Yilmaz , Mel King , Farnaz , Ben (@benmo1) , and Abraham Yezioro for all of the great feedback in the process of improving these components. 7 - HBObject Transform Components After some demand for components that can ease the generation of buildings with modular zone types, two components to transform HBObjects with all of their properties have been added to the 00 | Honeybee section. The components allow you to produce copies of zones that are translated or rotated from the original position. 8 - Comfort Maps Supports PET and Integration of CFD Results Thanks to the addition of the ‘Physiological Equivalent Temperature’ (PET) component by Djordje Spasic in the last stable release, it is now possible to make comfort maps of PET with Honeybee. PET is particularly helpful for evaluating OUTDOOR comfort with detailed wind fields at a high spatial resolution. As such, the new PET recipe has also been optimized for integration with CFD results. The windSpeed_ input can now accept the file path to a .csv file that is organized with 8760 values in each column and a number of columns that correspond to the number of test points. Components to generate this csv from Butterfly CFD results will be coming in later releases. Stay tuned! As always let us know your comments and suggestions. Enjoy!Ladybug Analysis Tools Development Team …; Added by Chris Mackey to Ladybug Tools at 8:39pm on August 11, 2016

Event: Workshop Gdl: Morfologías Algorítmicas: ntación en distintos procesos del Diseño. Se abordaran los conceptos basicos y la metodologia para abordar problemas de diseño a traves del desarrollo de Herramientas Algorítmicas mediante un proceso de programacion visual. Como plataforma de trabajo se utilizara Rhinoceros+Grasshopper. Instructor: Leonardo Nuevo Arenas Fechas: 17 y 18 de Septiembre de 2011 Lugar: Calzada del Federalismo Sur No. 135 Altos 3, Frente al Parque Rojo (http://bit.ly/nNOuZ5) Cupo: Limitado a 15 plazas Fecha limite de pago: Viernes 9 de Septiembre Importante: Los participantes deberán traer su propia Laptop con todo el software y actualizaciones (originales o versiones de demostración oficiales) previamente instaladas. (Se fijara una fecha unos días antes para revisas que todos los equipos estén en orden y listos para trabajar). Si planeas venir de fuera de la ciudad contactanos y te pondremos en contacto con otras personas que también vayan a hacerlo para en caso de desearlo puedan compartir su lugar de estancia. Contacto: Leo. 33 3956 9209 nuarle@msn.com Aye. 33 1050 3482 ayeritza.fara@gmail.com…; Added by Leonardo Nuevo Arenas at 3:36pm on August 28, 2011

Comment on: Topic 'Geco - UserProblems': try now to integrate Geco in an interdisciplinary architectural engineering studio: hoping we can show you some nice applications of your tool, I'll keep you update and sending now details by e-mail. Here the file (very welcome to be shared). It most probably contais trivial errors by me, thanks for helping and giving some tip! Gr. Michela FILE: Ok, right, I see the outputs update correctly. Origin of problems must be in some different mistake I do: - Incident radiation: I am not sure I understand what is going on: why I get so many 'not a number' ? (The Galapagos report is full of NaNs). Bio-Diversity: 0.887 Genome[0], Fitness=NaN, Genes [89% · 44%] { Record: Too many fitness values supplied } ... Genome[7], Fitness=NaN, Genes [74%] { Record: No fitness value was supplied } .... Genome[9], Fitness=NaN, Genes [37% · 11%] { Record: Genome was mutated to avoid collision Record: Too many fitness values supplied } - Daylight calculations: the geometry accumulates withouth deleting the previous models. As a consequance, results almost do not change after few varations (so, outputs get updated but do not vary). In current daylight definition: the first object being imported is the one where the grid has to fit; its setting makes it cancelling all the other objects during import. All the others, do not delete anything when imported. When running loops (manual or GA) that vary parameters, the entire geometry do not get cancelled - so I guess the loop does not pass back by the cancelling step, but imports only the geometry which has been varied by the parameters using the setting of that import component only? I will then try again by changing the order of the operations, but if you have specfic tips, let me know. THANKS! …; Added by Michela Turrin to [uto] tools Plug-ins at 7:34am on December 18, 2010

Topic: Difference between MRT calculation methods: . From the Thermal Comfort Indices component, Comfort Index 11 (TCI-11):MRT = f(Ta, Tground, Rprim, e) with:- Ta = DryBulbTemperature coming from ImportEPW component- Tground = f(Ta, N) where N comes from totalSkyCover input. Tground influences the long-wave radiation emitted by the ground in the MRT calculation.- Rprim defined as solar radiation absorbed by nude man = f(Kglob, hS1, ac)- ac is the clothingAlbedo in % (bodyCharacteristics input)- I can't find any definition in the code of Kglob and hS1. Could you tell me please what are those values referencered to? --> probably the globalHorizontalRadiation but how?- e = vapour pressure calculated from Ta and Relative Humidity input Do you agree that in this case the MRT does not depend on these inputs: location, meanRadiantTemperature, dewPointTemperature and wind speed?It does not depend neither on the other bodyCharacteristics like bodyPosture, age, sex, met, activityDuration...? MRT calculated by the TCI-11 method is the mean radiant temperature of a vector pointing vertically with a sky view factor of 100%?For ParisOrly epw, 2. From the SolarAdjustedTemperature component (that seems to be more used for the UTCI calculation examples on Hydra compared to TCI-11). In contrast to the TCI-11, this component distinguishes diffuse and direct radiation and contextualizes the calculation thanks to _ContextShading input, right? It can also be applied to a mannequin thanks to the CumSkyMatrix and thus evaluate the dishomogeneity of radiation exposure.This component seems not to consider the influence of vapour pressure on the result --> is it then more precise to put the MRT output (from the TCI) as an input of meanRadTemperature for SolarAdjustedTemperature?The default groundReflectivity is set to 0.25 --> is GroundReflectivity taken into account in the Tground or MRT calculation in the TCI component? If yes, what is the hypothesised groundReflectivity?The default clothing albedo of 37% (TCI-11 bodyCharacteristics) corresponds to Clothing Absorptivity of 63%? If the CumSkyMatrix input is not supplied, I get 9 results for the mannequin --> where are those points/results coming from? If the CumSkyMatrix input is supplied,I suppose the calculation of the 482 results correspond to a calculation method similar to the radiation analysis component that is averaged over the analysis period. Right?But I don't understand why the mannequin is composed of 481 faces and meshFaceResult gives 482 results. Finally, what is the link between the MESH results, the solarAdjustedMRT and the Effective Radiant field ? Is there a paper to have a detailed explanation of the method? 3. Here are some results for the ParisOrly energyplus weather data. You can find here attached the grasshopper definition.There is no shading in this simulation and the result coming from the ThermalComfort indices for MRT is very different compared to the solar adjusted MRT.Why such a big difference and which of the result should be plugged into the UTCI calculation component? Results for ParisOrly.epwM,D,H:1,1,12 Ta : 6.5°Crh: 100%globalHorizontalRadiation: 54 Wh/m2totalSkyCover: 10MRT (TCI-11): 1.2°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = directNormalRadiation : 0 Wh/m2diffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.64°CMRTDelta: 4.14°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.47°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = MRT (TCI-11)solarAdjustedMRT: 5.17°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C Thanks a lot for your helpRegards, Aymeric …; Added by Aymeric to Ladybug Tools at 8:29am on May 2, 2016

Comment on: Topic 'Start of an angle': curve or locus] of a segment AB, in English. The set of all the points from which a segment, AB, is seen under a fixed given angle. When you construct l'arc capable —by using compass— you obviously need to find the centre of this arc. This can be easily done in GH in many ways by using some trigonometry (e.g. see previous —great— solutions). Whole circles instead of arcs provide supplementary isoptics —β-isoptic and (180º-β)-isoptic—. Coherent normals let you work in any plane. Or you could just construct β-isoptics of AB by using tangent at A (or B). I mean [Arc SED] component. If you want the true β-isoptic —the set of all the points— you should use {+β, -β} degrees (2 sides; 2 solutions; 2 arcs), but slider in [-180, +180] degrees provides full range of signed solutions. Orthoptic is provided by ±90º. Notice that ±180º isoptic is just AB segment itself, and 0º isoptic should be the segment outside AB —(-∞, A] U [B, +∞)—. [Radians] component is avoidable. More compact versions can be achieved by using [F3] component. You can choose among different expressions the one you like the most as long as performs counter clockwise rotation of vector AB, by 180-β degrees, around A; or equivalent. [Panel] is totally avoidable. Solutions in XY plane —projection; z = 0—, no matter A or B, are easy too. Just be sure about the curve you want to find the intersection with —Curve; your wall— being contained in XY plane. A few self-explanatory examples showing features. 1 & 5 1st ver. (Supplementary isoptics) (ArcCapableTrigNormals_def_Bel.png) 2 & 6 2nd ver. (SED) (ArcCapableSED_def_Bel.png) 3 & 7 3rd ver. (SED + F3) (ArcCapableSEDF3_def_Bel.png) 4 & 8 4th ver. (SED + F3, Projection) (ArcCapableSEDProjInt_def_Bel.png) If you want to be compact, 7 could be your best choice. If you prefer orientation robustness, 5. Etcetera. I hope these versions will help you to compact/visualize; let me know any feedback. Calculate where 2 points [A & B] meet at a specific angle is just find the geometrical locus called arco capaz in Spanish, arc capable in French (l'isoptique d'un segment de droite) or isoptic [curve or locus] of a segment AB, in English. The set of all the points from which a segment, AB, is seen under a fixed given angle.…; Added by Beltrán Fernández Mariño at 11:03pm on July 24, 2011

Event: DIGITAL MATTER: rera de Arquitectura CEM | presenta la cordial invitación al Curso de Diseño Computacional a realizarse en nuestros laboratorios de Arquitectura y Diseño Industrial del Campus Estado de México. Fecha: jueves 21, viernes 22 de 18: a 22:00 Hrs y sábado 23 de 8:00 a 15:00 Hrs febrero 2013. 15 Horas. El taller está orientado a estudiantes y profesionales de la Arquitectura, Arte, el Diseño e Ingeniería. COSTO: Alumnos Tec o EXATEC con una cuota de $2000.00 pesos.* Estudiantes EXTERNOS y profesores TEC $3000.00*, Estudiantes de posgrado externos $3800.00* y Profesionales externos $4250.00 pesos.* OBJETIVO GENERAL: Alfabetización sobre lectura y escritura de herramientas computacionales para el desarrollo de la Arquitectura, Diseño e Ingeniería. Objetivos específicos: 1. Comprenderá los conceptos metodológicos del Diseño Computacional y generativo. 2. Aplicará las metodologías en el diseño, análisis y despiece de una cubierta (celosía, muro, losa, fachada o mobiliario) con base en un espacio existente en el campus. 3. Desarrollará los conceptos de programación orientada a objetos (POO Intermedia) 4. Generará algoritmos y análisis en Grasshopper sobre el ejemplo de praxis. 5. Desarrollo de documentación y presentación de resultados. 6. Fabricación del objeto, escala por definir. Requisitos: Conocimiento de alguna plataforma CAD/CAM/CAE. Profesor: Arq. David Hernández Melgarejo. http://bioarchitecturestudio.wordpress.com Mayor información: Kathrin Schröter, Dipl.-Ing./Arch. (D) Directora de la Carrera de Arquitectura e Ingeniería Civil Escuela de Diseño, Ingeniería y Arquitectura Campus Estado de México TEC DE MONTERREY Tel.: (52/55) 5864 5555 Ext. 5685 o 5750 Enlace intercampus:80.236.5685 Fax: (52/55) 5864 5319 kschroter@itesm.mx www.itesm.mx …; Added by David Hernández at 1:38pm on January 19, 2013

Comment on: Topic 'Pain Points in Grasshopper': r." I'm sorry to hear that, I take the interface and ease-of-use rather seriously so this sounds like a fundamental failure on my part. On the other hand, Grasshopper isn't supposed to be on a par with most other 3D programs. It is emphatically not meant for manual/direct modelling. If you would normally tackle a problem by drawing geometry by hand, Grasshopper is not (and should never be advertised as) a good alternative."What in other programs is a dialog box, is 8 or 10 components strung together in grasshopper. The wisdom for this I often hear among the grasshopper community is that this allows for parametric design."Grasshopper ships with about 1000 components (rounded to the nearest power of ten). I'm adding more all the time, either because new functionality has been exposed in the Rhino SDK or because a certain component makes a lot of sense to a lot of people. Adding pre-canned components that do the same as '8 or 10 components strung together' for the heck of it will balloon the total number of components everyone has to deal with. If you find yourself using the same 8 to 10 components together all the time, then please mention it on this forum. A lot of the currently existing components have been added because someone asked for it."[...] has a far cleaner and more intuitive interface. So does SolidWorks, Inventor, CATIA, NX, and a bunch of others."Again, GH was not designed to be an alternative to these sort of modellers. I don't like referring to GH as 'parameteric' as that term has been co-opted by relational modellers. I prefer to use 'algorithmic' instead. The idea behind parameteric seems to be that one models by hand, but every click exists within a context, and when the context changes the software figures out where to move the click to. The idea behind algorithmic is that you don't model by hand.This is not to say there is no value in the parametric approach. Obviously it is a winning strategy and many people love to use it. We have considered adding some features to GH that would make manual modelling less of a chore and we would still very much like to do so. However this is such a large chunk of work that we have to be very careful about investing the time. Before I start down this road I want to make sure that the choice I'm making is not 'lame-ass algorithmic modeller with some lame-ass parametrics tacked on' vs. 'kick-ass algorithmic modeller with no parametrics tacked on'. Visual Programming.I'm not exactly sure I understand your grievance here, but I suspect I agree. The visual part is front and centre at the moment and it should remain there. However we need to improve upon it and at the same time give programmers more tools to achieve what they want. Context sensitivity."There is no reason a program in 2014 should allow me to make decisions that will not work. For example, if a component input is in all cases incompatible with another component's output, I shouldn't be able to connect them."Unfortunately it's not as simple as that. Whether or not a conversion between two data types makes sense is often dependent on the actual values. If you plug a list of curves into a Line component, none of them may be convertible. Should I therefore not allow this connection to be made? What if there is a single curve that could be converted to a line? What if you want to make the connection now, but only later plan to add some convertible curves to the data? What you made the connection back when it was valid, but now it's no longer valid, wouldn't it be weird if there was a connection you couldn't make again?I've started work on GH2 and one of the first things I'm writing now is the new data-conversion logic. The goal this time around is to not just try and convert type A into type B, but include information about what sort of conversion was needed (straightforward, exotic, far-fetched. etc.) and information regarding why that type was assigned.You are right that under some conditions, we can be sure that a conversion will always fail. For example connecting a Boolean output with a Curve input. But even there my preferred solution is to tell people why that doesn't make sense rather than not allowing it in the first place. Sliders."I think they should be optional."They are optional."The “N” should turn into the number if set."What if you assign more than one integer? I think I'd rather see a component with inputs 'N', 'P' and 'X' rather than '5', '8' and '35.7', but I concede that is a personal preference."But if I plug it into something that'll only accept a 1, a 2, or a 3, that slider should self set accordingly."Agreed. Components."Give components a little “+” or a drawer on the bottom or something that by clicking, opens the component into something akin to a dialog box. This should give access to all of the variables in the component. I shouldn't have to r-click on each thing on a component to do all of the settings."I was thinking of just zooming in on a component would eventually provide easier ways to access settings and data."Could some of these items disappear if they are contextually inappropriate or gray out if they're unlikely?"It's almost impossible for me to know whether these things are 'unlikely' in any given situation. There are probably some cases where a suggestion along the lines of "Hey, this component is about to run 40,524 times. It seems like it would make sense to Graft the 'P' input." would be useful. Integration."Why isn't it just live geometry?"This is an unfortunate side-effect of the way the Rhino SDK was designed. Pumping all my geometry through the Rhino document would severely impact performance and memory usage. It also complicates the matter to an almost impossible degree as any command and plugin running in Rhino now has access to 'my' geometry."Maybe add more Rhino functionality to GH. GH has no 3D offset."That's the plan moving forward. A lot of algorithms in Rhino (Make2D, FilletEdge, Shelling, BlendSrf, the list goes on) are not available as part of the public SDK. The Rhino development team is going to try and rectify this for Rhino6 and beyond. As soon as these functions become available I'll start adding them to GH (provided they make sense of course).On the whole I agree that integration needs a lot of work, and it's work that has to happen on both sides of the isle. Documentation.Absolutely. Development for GH1 has slowed because I'm now working on GH2. We decided that GH1 is 'feature complete', basically to avoid feature creep. GH2 is a ground-up rewrite so it will take a long time until something is ready for testing. During this time, minor additions and of course bug fixes will be available for GH1, but on a much lower frequency.Documentation is woefully inadequate at present. The primer is being updated (and the new version looks great), but for GH2 we're planning a completely new help system. People have been hired to provide the content. With a bit of luck and a lot of work this will be one of the main selling points of GH2. 2D-ness."I know you'll disagree completely, but I'm sticking to this. How else could an omission like offsetsurf happen?"I don't fully disagree. A lot of geometry is either flat or happens inside surfaces. The reason there's no shelling (I'm assuming that's what you meant, there are two Offset Surface components in GH) is because (a) it's a very new feature in Rhino and doesn't work too well yet and (b) as a result of that isn't available to plugins. Organisation.Agreed. We need to come up with better ways to organise, document, version, share and simplify GH files. GH1 UI is ok for small projects (<100 components) but can't handle more complexity. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the feedback, I really do, but I want to be honest and open about my own plans and where they might conflict with your wishes. Grasshopper is being used far beyond the boundaries of what we expected and it's clear that there are major shortcomings that must be addressed before too long. We didn't get it right with the first version, I don't expect we'll get it completely right with the second version but if we can improve upon the -say- five biggest drawbacks (performance, documentation, organisation, plugin management and no mac version) I'll be a happy puppy. -- David Rutten david@mcneel.com…; Added by David Rutten at 2:11am on August 2, 2014

Event: Moltitudine - Power of the many _ GH advanced workshop: ne – power of the many è un corso advanced level che studia la produzione di effetti complessi a partire dalla modellazione di comportamenti semplici su un insieme strutturato con un numero alto di elementi. Attraverso un approccio generico e scaleless sarà possibile affrontare la tematica generale su più fronti e in una molteplicità di declinazioni possibili. Il corso è rivolto a chi,indipendentemente dal proprio background (urbanistica, architettura, ingegneria, design, arte o altro) già possiede una esperienza di base con Rhinoceros e Grasshopper, e desidera sviluppare aspetti di gestione avanzata del flusso di articolato di informazioni attraverso una strategia guidata basata su esempi pratici e sull’implementazione di un progetto personale sul tema generale del “field behaviour”. Sarà trattato anche l’utilizzo di alcuni plug-ins quali gHowl e WeaverBird. Il numero dei partecipanti è fissato a un massimo di 20 per offrire un tutoraggio proficuo ed una effettiva esperienza di learning ad ogni iscritto. [.] Temi: teoria . complessità, emergence, effetti di campo (field behaviour), sensibilità, efficienza multiperformance tecnica . dati:gestione e manipolazione avanzata del data tree, streaming e visualizzazione; transizione, blending e modulazione delle geometrie; generazione e controllo multiperformance di popolazioni di componenti; attrattori, drivers e tecniche di modulazione avanzate; uso delle mesh con WeaverBird; ottimizzazione con Galapagos [.] Dettagli : Tutors: Alessio Erioli + Andrea Graziano – Co-de-iT Si richiede esperienza di base nella modellazione in Rhino (equivalente a Rhino training Level 1, il Level 2 è gradito – la documentazione per il training è disponibile gratuitamente all’indirizzo: http://download.rhino3d.com/download.asp?id=Rhino4Training&language=it) e nell’uso di Grasshopper (la suddivisione di una superficie NURBS in componenti tramite isotrim è data come base assodata) . luogo: IreCoop – via Vasco De Gama 27 _ Firenze . durata: 25-27 febbraio 2010 – 3 giornate consecutive _ orario 9:00 – 18:00 . costo: professionisti – 450.00 € studenti – 280.00 € . note: scadenza iscrizioni: 20 febbraio 2010 il corso sarà attivato con un numero minimo di 15 iscritti al termine sarà rilasciato un attestato di frequenza gli iscritti dovrano venire muniti dei propri laptop con software installato. una versione free per 30 giorni è disponibile sul sito www.rhino3d.com . contatti: iscrizioni + info alloggi: www.irecooptoscana.it (Cosa offriamo > formazione > altri corsi) info sul corso: info@co-de-it.com…; Added by Alessio Erioli at 11:22am on February 7, 2011

Blog Post: Maze Bowl

From virtuality model to reality for a maze bowl :

After some encouragements in August 2016, I decided in December 2016 to made a real Maze Bowl similar to this one…

Added by Laurent DELRIEU at 3:13pm on December 19, 2016

Topic: Ladybug Photovoltaics components released !: nts for Ladybug too. They are based on PVWatts v1 online calculator, supporting crystalline silicon fixed tilt photovoltaics. You can download them from here, or use the Update Ladbybug component instead. If you take the first option, after downloading check if .ghuser files are blocked (right click -> "Properties" and select "Unblock"). You can download the example files from here. Video tutorials will follow in the coming period. In the very essence these components help you answer the question: "How much energy can my roof, building facade, solar parking... generate if I would populate them with PV panels"? They allow definition of different types of losses (snow, age, shading...) which may affect your PV system: And can find its optimal tilt and orientation: Or analyse its performance, energy value, consumption, emissions... By Djordje Spasic and Jason Sensibaugh, with invaluable support of Dr. Frank Vignola, Dr. Jason M. Keith, Paul Gilman, Chris Mackey, Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari, Niraj Palsule, Joseph Cunningham and Christopher Weiss. Thank you for reading, and hope you will enjoy using the components! EDIT: From march 27 2017, Ladybug Photovoltaics components support thin-film modules as well. References: 1) System losses: PVWatts v5 Manual, Dobos, NREL, 2014 2) Sun postion equations by Michalsky (1988): SAM Photovoltaic Model Technical Reference, Gilman, NREL, 2014 edited by Jason Sensibaugh 3) Angle of incidence for fixed arrays: PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013 4) Plane-of-Array diffuse irradiance by Perez 1990 algorithm: PVPMC Sandia National Laboratories SAM Photovoltaic Model Technical Reference, Gilman, NREL, 2014 5) Sandia PV Array Performance Module Cover: PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013 6) Sandia Thermal Model, Module Temperature and Cell Temperature Models: Photovoltaic Array Performance Model, King, Boys, Kratochvill, Sandia National Laboratories, 2004 7) CEC Module Model: Maximum power voltage and Maximum power current from: Exact analytical solutions of the parameters of real solar cells using Lambert W-function, Jain, Kapoor, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, V81 2004, P269–277 8) PVFORM version 3.3 adapted Module and Inverter Models: PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013 9) Sunpath diagram shading: Using sun path charts to estimate the effects of shading on PV arrays, Frank Vignola, University of Oregon, 2004 Instruction manual for the Solar Pathfinder, Solar Pathfinder TM, 2008 10) Tilt and orientation factor: Application for Purchased Systems Oregon Department of Energy solmetric.com 11) Photovoltaics performance metrics: Solar PV system performance assessment guideline, Honda, Lechner, Raju, Tolich, Mokri, San Jose state university, 2012 CACHE Modules on Energy in the Curriculum Solar Energy, Keith, Palsule, Mississippi State University Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) Version 2.0, Hammond, Jones, SERT University of Bath, 2011 The Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROI) of Photovoltaics: Methodology and Comparisons with Fossil Fuel Life Cycles, Raugei, Fullana-i-Palmer, Fthenakis, Elsevier Vol 45, Jun 2012 12) Calculating albedo: Metenorm 6 Handbook part II: Theory, Meteotest 2007 13) Magnetic declination: Geomag 0.9.2015, Christopher Weiss…; Added by djordje to Ladybug Tools at 2:04pm on June 15, 2015