option, after downloading check if .ghuser files are blocked (right click -> "Properties" and select "Unblock"). Then paste them in File->Special Folders->User Object Folder. You can download the example files from here. They act in similar way, Ladybug Photovoltaics components do: we pick a surface, and get an answer to a question: "How much thermal energy, for a certain number of persons can my roof, building facade... generate if I would populate them with Solar Water Heating collectors"? This information can then be used to cover domestic hot water, space heating or space cooling loads:
Components enable setting specific details of the system, or using simplified ones. They cover analysis of domestic hot water load, final performance of the SWH system, its embodied energy, energy value, consumption, emissions... And finding optimal system and storage size. By Dr. Chengchu Yan and Djordje Spasic, with invaluable support of Dr. Willian Beckman, Dr. Jason M. Keith, Jeff Maguire, Nicolas DiOrio, Niraj Palsule, Sargon George Ishaya and Craig Christensen. Hope you will enjoy using the components! References: 1) Calculation of delivered energy: Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, John Wiley and Sons, J. Duffie, W. Beckman, 4th ed., 2013. Technical Manual for the SAM Solar Water Heating Model, NREL, N. DiOrio, C. Christensen, J. Burch, A. Dobos, 2014. A simplified method for optimal design of solar water heating systems based on life-cycle energy analysis, Renewable Energy journal, Yan, Wang, Ma, Shi, Vol 74, Feb 2015
2) Domestic hot water load: Modeling patterns of hot water use in households, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Lutz, Liu, McMahon, Dunham, Shown, McGrue; Nov 1996. ASHRAE 2003 Applications Handbook (SI), Chapter 49, Service water heating
3) Mains water temperature Residential alternative calculation method reference manual, California energy commission, June 2013. Development of an Energy Savings Benchmark for All Residential End-Uses, NREL, August 2004. Solar water heating project analysis chapter, Minister of Natural Resources Canada, 2004.
4) Pipe diameters and pump power: Planning & Installing Solar Thermal Systems, Earthscan, 2nd edition
5) Sun postion and POA irradiance, the same as for Ladybug Photovoltaics (Michalsky (1988), diffuse irradiance by Perez (1990), ground reflected irradiance by Liu, Jordan (1963))
6) Optimal system and storage tank size: A simplified method for optimal design of solar water heating systems based on life-cycle energy analysis, Renewable Energy journal, Yan, Wang, Ma, Shi, Vol 74, Feb 2015.…
"flow" into which adjacent faces (as opposed to having abrupt angles displayed between the two faces). In Maya, if I recall, they do a similar thing with "flags". I've been trying to figure out the corresponding mechanism in Rhino meshes and I'm beginning to believe that you just have to repeat vertices to make "creases" between faces. So the Rhino box has 24 "vertices" which, is apparently because each vertex is repeated for each face it belongs on - 6 faces times four vertices per face is 24 vertices. Is that really the case? It seems wasteful. I'm assuming that if you only had 8 vertices that the display would be attempting to make the edges "blend together". This means that the cube is really just six conveniently placed squares. Does Rhino even know that these six squares form a closed mesh? I know there is an "IsClosed" property on meshes. I assume it's returning false for boxes?
Aha! I was going to ask how Rhino still "knew" that the three vertices were actually one so when you dragged it you would drag "that single" vertex instead of one of three but now that I actually construct a box and drag, I see that Rhino in fact, doesn't know that and you do in fact drag one of three so that seems to back up my assumptions here.
Is this really the only way to make "creases" in 3D meshes? I just want to make sure before I spend a lot of time making my meshes based on this assumption.
I'll attach my (apparently incorrect) code FYI. It's a grasshopper plugin. Just trying to learn how to code in this system.
Thanks!
Darrell Plank…
Added by Darrell Plank at 6:53pm on December 18, 2014
different curve degree and different no. of control points,
Some work and some not. Even with the same degree curve and same no. of control points, the results are same. As David mentioned, avoid degree 2 curve will increase my chances to get untrimmed surface.
I found this is quite useful.
Cheers
Hi David,
However it is not possible by just looking at the shape of a curve to say where stacked knots might be, but you can use the Rhino _List command to inspect all details of a Nurbs curve.
What should I look at in the list command o find out the stacked knots?
Rhino 6 Dream command under rebuild.
If this command had a control on max. deviation of the rebuilt curve (let said the figure can go around 0.001mm), at the same time allow us to set either point counts or curve degree or none (self-generated), It will be fantastic.
It really helps us to built good quality curves.
Cheers
…
v.0.1.00 contains 6 new components that could produce multiple Cellular Automata variations such as: 2X2, 34 Life, Amoeba, Assimilation, Coagulations, Conway’s Life(ghx included), Coral, Day&Night, Diamoeba, Flakes, Gnarl, HighLife, InverseLife, Long life, Maze, Mazectric, Move, Pseudo life, Replicator, Seeds (2), Stains, WalledCities…. The first release includes also a small list of pre-defined patterns.
This release works with version 0.6.0043 of Grasshopper and is freely distributable package licensed under Creative Commons License.
GET RABBIT HERE!…
Added by Morphocode at 2:00am on November 30, 2009
ask II component, which I think is the most trustworthy of all operations as long as we verify that the output shading mask geometry is correct. In this validation, I got the following result:
Sky Mask II (Most trustworthy if checked) - 43.0423 %
View Analysis (SVF) - 41.277 %
Radiance VSC - 37.10 %
While the 1.8% error of the Ladybug view analysis component is acceptable for many of my applications, the almost 6% error on the Radiance calculation seems to be way outside the acceptable range. Increasing the ambient divisions of the Radiance simulation did not help the issue. As a result, I am considering taking out the Radiance VSC until we can better understand why the answer is so much lower than the others.
I should also note that all 3 methods were in agreement when I fed in spherical test cases with known solutions for svf. It is just when we start introducing orthagonal geometry at lower svf that this discrepancy emerges.
Mostapha, what are your thoughts on taking out HB VSC for the time being or investigating the issue deeper?
-Chris…
through your short profile and deemed it necessary to write you immediately. I have something very vital to disclose to you, but I found it difficult to express myself here, since it's a public site.Could you please get back to me( mrsstellakwale588@gmail.com ) for the full details.
Have a nice day
Thanks God bless.
Mrs stella
and
Sent Sat 4/4/2015 6:01 AM
DENIS LEVEQUES added a comment to your profile on Grasshopper
------------
Good day,
How is everything with you, I picked interest on you after going through your short profile and deemed it necessary to write you immediately. I have something very important to disclose to you, but I found it difficult to express myself here, since it's a public site. Could you please get back to me on my private email: denisleveques11@gmail.com for the full details?
Have a nice day and God bless you,
Denis,…
rth. Current components include:
Format_GPS: Takes NMEA Formatted GPS Latitude and Longitude values and converts them to Decimal Degrees. Will add further converters.
GPS->XYZ: Maps Longitude, Latitude, and Altitude to XYZ.
XYZ->GPS: Maps XYZ to Longitude, Latitude, and Altitude.
KML_Export: Exports imported geometry to KML format. Currently implemented for points, curves, and meshes. Any Breps should be meshed before. Will be adding conditions for other geometry as well as render styles.
Look forward to a WIP release next week.
…
t, you can see 6 (+) signs with what you can add (A,B,C,P,Q,R).
Let's say you add A = 90 and B = 50.
Now you can't add the third angle (cause its 180-(50+90) = C output).
What you can add at the moment is P,Q,R.
You choose to add P = 10.
There is no more a possibility to add Q and R.
All component outputs now give us the data.
2. Triangle with P,Q,R
When you zoom the component, you can see 6 (+) signs with what you can add (A,B,C,P,Q,R).
Let's say you add P = 15, Q = 20.
Now if you add R, the component's outputs all the angles and edge lengths.
If R > P+Q then component throws warning. (> or >= ?)
You cannot add A,B or C anymone.
3.Triangle with P,Q and C
When you zoom the component, you can see 6 (+) signs with what you can add (A,B,C,P,Q,R).
Let's say you add P = 15, Q = 20.
Now if you add C (angle), the component's outputs all the angles and edge lengths.
You cannot add A,B or R anymone.
To make it all easier, disable the possibility to internalize the data.
Tolerance issue... Maybe round the angles always to floor , with 0.1 precision ?
…
n not angled in fact:
import ghpythonlib.components as ghcomp
...
AutoAlignedChild = ghcomp.SurfaceSplit(ChildBreps.Surfaces[0].ToBrep(), TrimCurve)[1]
That's just goofy, but it's internal black box stuff doing its thing so I indeed have to learn to build a brep from scratch, hoping that will not do the same damn thing of including three instead of the obvious one edge curve for the boundary, called BrepEdges in Rhinocommon. You can see these by using Rhino show edges, at least:
The Grasshopper Deconstruct Brep component can also see the extra edge vertex:
Again this is taking an existing dome, untrimming it after extracting its trim curve, then re-trimming after editing the start point of the trim curve, so to affect the outcome of the Rhinocommon surface blend command only available in Rhino 6 WIP.…
Added by Nik Willmore at 12:10am on March 30, 2016