ne) graphs, makes a classic VV (vertex to vertex connectivity) Adjacency Matrix based on what Sandbox has to say (the Matrix is not actually required if someone wants to stay 100% in the GH world) and then ...er ... hmm ... attempts to find closed circuits as Microsoft suggests (forgot/lost the link but who cares? not me anyway [see VS stuff attached]).
It's quite faulty (like Windows) ... but is an indication on some things. Try to understand the recursion (critical in most AEC stuff). Recursion means that Matteo calls Matteo who calls Matteo ... until Matteo calls Maria and the loop is over. Notify if you need other recursion C# examples on other things (dozens available).
The working(?) chopped (minus sensitive stuff) real thing next week: just realized that this w/e there's the Malaysian MotoGP (Valentino lost the championship) AND a critical Formula 1 race in Mexico (forza Lewis).
Attached as well the original VS stuff from Microsoft (requires VS 2017)…
thon component by using the syntax below but the command does accept only the first three parameters and doesn't allow me to choose the both_sides or create_solids...
any idea??
thanks
ed
OffsetSurface
Offsets a trimmed or untrimmed surface by a distance. The offset surface will be added to Rhino.
Syntax
rhinoscriptsyntax.OffsetSurface (surface_id, distance, tolerance=None, both_sides=False, create_solid=False)
rhinoscript.surface.OffsetSurface (surface_id, distance, tolerance=None, both_sides=False, create_solid=False)
Parameters
surface_id
Required. String or Guid. The object's identifier.
distance
Required. Number. The distance to offset.
tolerance
Optional. Number. The offset tolerance. Use 0.0 to make a loose offset. Otherwise, the document's absolute tolerance is usually sufficient.
both_sides
Optional. Boolean. Offset to both sides of input surface. The default is False
create_solid
Optional. Boolean. Make a solid object. The default is False
…
copy this component so I have the same points but into another geometry collection why is it that grasshopper show me only the first set (in green I mean) when I click on the component and not when I am clicking on the second one (those remain red).
This thing gets annoying when I go further in developing my definition because I have sets which may contain the same objects but still I would like to see exactly which elements they have inside even if they shares those elements with other components.
(see image attached)
Is there a way to avoid this?
Second question, since I found myself a lot of time in need of an integer slider for example which span let's say from 0 to 10 or 100, or a curve of degree 2 and a close one, not to mention the evaluation of a curve at its midpoint, is there a way which those things can be put into the shelf and for example be called for example "integer slider", or "closed 2d curve". I tried with the cluster but for the slider for example I couldn't do that. Sounds silly but in the end is something which can spare some time..
Thanks a lot
V.…
his fast-moving class covers most of Rhino's functionality, including the most advanced surfacing 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 including design optimization with RhinoNest and creating their models on a laser machine.
…
ace Syntax." eCAADe 2013 18 (2013): 357.
http://www.sss9.or.kr/paperpdf/mmd/sss9_2013_ref048_p.pdf
The measure Entropy is newer. I hereby explain it (from my PhD dissertation):
Entropy values, as described in (Hillier & Hanson, The Social Logic of Space, 1984) and specified in (Turner A. , “Depthmap: A Program to Perform Visibility Graph Analysis, 2007), intuitively describe the difficulty of getting to other spaces from a certain space. In other words, the higher the entropy value, the more difficult it is to reach other spaces from that space and vice-versa. We compute the spatial entropy of the node as using the point depth set:
(11)
“The term is the maximum depth from vertex and is the frequency of point depth *d* from the vertex” (ibid). Technically, we compute it using the function below, which itself uses some outputs and by-products from previous calculations:
Algorithm 4: Entropy Computation
Given the graph (adjacency lists), Depths as List of List of integer, DepthMap as Dictionary of integer
Initialize Entropies as List(double)
For node as integer in range [0, |V|)
integer How_Many_of_D=0
double S_node=0
For depth as integer in range [1, Depths[node].Max()]
How_Many_of_D=DepthMap.Branch[(node,depth)].Count
double frequency= How_Many_of_D/|V|
S_node = S_node - frequency * Math.Log(frequency, 2)
Next
Entropies [node] = S_node
Next
…
metric/parəˈmɛtrɪk/adjectiverelating to or expressed in terms of a parameter or parameters.art/ɑːt/nounthe expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.// Summer School 2017 3 day intensive workshop for design students & professionals will delve into computational & parametric methods (using Rhino3D & Grasshopper3D) to create data-driven art installations, physically manifested into a space through hands-on fabrication & assembly.The experimental studio will run across 2 cities in India (New Delhi & Mumbai) and investigate the agenda of ‘filling the void’ at art installation scale, through the use of computation and parametric methods. Studio is designed as a 3-day event in both cities comprising of technical tutorials, teaching sessions, prototyping & presentations culminating in a symposium / round-table conference / open discussion with leading / emerging professionals that demonstrate computation, parametric design or alternative techniques in their work / practice / academia. // Cities & Dates*New Delhi – 30th June to 2nd July 2017 (Friday to Sunday)Mumbai – 7th July to 9th July 2017 (Friday to Sunday)//VENUE: DELHI: Startup Tunnel, Vihara Innovation CampusD-57, 100 Feet Rd, Pocket D, Dr Ambedkar Colony, Chhattarpur, New Delhi - 110074MUMBAI: Raffles Design International, MumbaiHi Life, 2nd Floor, Phirozshah Mehta Road,Santacruz (W). Mumbai – 400054// Registration DatesAll Registrations End 4 days prior to workshop start date (Or till seats last)// About rat[LAB] EDUCATIONrat[LAB] EDUCATION is an initiative by rat[LAB]-Research in Architecture & Technology (www.rat-lab.org) to start a new discourse in architecture & parallel design disciplines with the use of ‘computational design’ & it’s various subsets. Spread across various cities / countries, we are establishing a global dialogue in the domain of computational design by actively organizing and participating in workshops, lectures, presentations & symposia. While rat[LAB] has taken a top-down approach of exploring computational design through industry, a parallel, bottom-up approach is also in-line to involve students of all levels, from design & related backgrounds.…
it provided that you know how to use it, he he).
Note: prior switching from mesh (via StarlingStar) to brep+holes (via C#) - each one has his own K Engine - stop/kill the Kangaroo animation control mini Dialog otherwise ... you'll have "some" troubles.
djodje:
This thing used (see script in v4b) IS NOT the same as the P thing that you posted (the one that takes 3 arguments where the splitter is a curve).
for David:
Irrelevant with the thread, but a 100% repro case related with the GH inability to internalize data:
This brep is a human figure internalized (but every time when the def is stored and reopened GH reports it as "Null").
So import the man-and-dog.3dm, reference the man (or the doberman), save definition and reopen it.
I'm not sure if Image sampler can store (in file) a thing or two as well:
v5 "soon" (lot's of new stuff and 4.56 divisions by zero) , best, Peter…
ts (NOT meshes) using my (still WIP) BallPivot thingy (still highly temperamental despite wast quantities of Vodka consumed - in the Name Of Science, what else?):
Watch this Forum for the forthcoming mother of all threads : Get Points > Do Something.
On the other hand (real-life):
1. A truss without connectivity is nothing.
2. A truss without clash defection is nothing.
3. A truss without instance definition(s) is more than nothing.
4. A truss without (rather very complex that one, mind) roof/envelope stuff is nothing + pointless.
5. Mesh from points without a 1000% working ball pivot thingy is like 3rd marriage.
And as you'll discover this Monday ... well ... "some" things would be MIA from the definition.
Other than that:
For Chap, David, Angel and anyone else interested on these freaky things (get points do something, that is).
Do you people think that this (mode: dense [yellow stuff] ) has any meaning?
VS that (mode: hex):
I mean for the truss itself not the roofing paraphernalia. Notice that in this handsome hex mode we've already achieved max rigidity since we deal with tetrahedral stuff.
PS: My aunt Drusilla finds the dense mode ... utterly pointless (and a bit disgusting).
That's friends is the 1M question.
…
ng the code where its needed. There are several reasons for this. First off, Grasshopper is really not a proper IDE (integrated development environment). GH really doesn't have the debugging, syntax highlighting, and the development flexibility that you can get through Visual Studio. Having worked with VS for a bit, I can tell that it is much easier and more efficient for me to write code there than in GH, and I know more about what's going on with it in VS than in GH.
Secondly, if all I'm going to do within GH is have 2 or 3 scripting nodes that do the heavy lifting, what's the point of me doing that within Grasshopper. If a project is going to be made up of that much code, then you might as well just do it all in code, compile it, and load it up as a plugin or a script. As I mentioned above, it would probably be more efficient to do it that way. Besides, although scripting nodes are great for specialized functionality that may never be native to GH, I'm not sure that the point of GH is to just become another scripting interface.
Lastly, I personally feel that there's a value in the network that winds up being created when you work in GH that is not only worth while to you, but to other people who may have to work with your logic. When its laid out graphically it has a certain kind of accessibility that doesn't seam to be the same when one looks at code (even if its your own). I'm not saying that one is better than the other, but I think that the actual enterprise of creating the network has a certain amount of importance.
In regards to my personal workflow, I generally take 2 (maybe 3) things into account when I determine whether something should be done through code or through GH. The first one is pretty simple...if something can't be done natively in GH, then it goes into code. That seams pretty self explanatory to me. Second is whether, for organizational purposes, a given operation would be better to do through code as opposed to through components. One of the most complex and visually cumbersome things to do in GH is reorganize data so that it reacts in the way that's needed. Sometimes I find this better to do in code rather than the dozen components it would take, so those are the times that this situation sticks its head out. The "maybe 3"rd thing is whether or not I can pass the data between scripting nodes. Unfortunately, for things like transforms that haven't been added, that data is "stuck" in a scripting node, so if I want to continue working with it it almost has to be within the same node*. I guess to some up, if it doesn't need to be coded, and it doesn't make things easier to code it, then I take care of it through standard GH components.
HTH
-Damien
* this isn't 100% the case as there are ways to share data between components, but it may be more effort than its worth depending on the situation…