've replaced them all with code (and been idiot I've deleted the old defs). Anyway with that thing you have a myriad of options (does "frames" as well) and 4 planar map modes (according to triad that you choose from the 4 subdivided surface "corners" available).
It's also rather easily doable with GH components - notify if it's a matter of life or death for you.
have fun, best, Peter…
ranches and two leafs on each branch but rather 1 branch with 50 leafs which was ok since i found this post by Manuel {A;B}(i) -> {Floor(i/ceiling(item_count/25))} but when I feed this into a curve component I get an error. I assume there is a way to alter a tree and then use it to create geometry, correct? If you have a chance could you please take a look. The end goal is to create 25 lofts one loft per boundary of a subsurface and circle. Really the result isn't that important I am just using this exercise as a learning tool.…
Added by jon kontuly at 8:09am on January 31, 2010
t and L,
so (L+(L/(3*π)))/2
and so on
I guess I could make theoretically make this value an input parameter.
With all the different features and controls people are asking for though, I'm concerned that if I keeping on adding them to one component it makes it an unwieldy 50 input monster.
I think it will be better to make several components each geared towards particular usage. For this it would be helpful to hear from all of you about what you are using or want to use it for.…
cross section from range of 2 to 10 CM, i could still get a very very very thin beam. The environment is only with gravity, no wind load, etc., so does the result saying with ONLY gravity, the very thin beam is rational? Now the beam is around 2CM and its length is about 50 CM, really slender.
Thank you so much!
Best,
Lei…
.", 1.5);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Maximum Force", "MAXF", "Maximum force w/h which the boid can turn.", 3);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Separation Factor", "SEPF", "Flock separation factor.", (double) 0);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Alignement Factor", "ALNF", "Flock speed alignement factor.", (double) 0);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Cohesion Factor", "COHF", "Flock cohesion factor.", (double) 0);
pManager.Register_IntegerParam("Number of Boids", "NBDS", "Number of boids to be spawned in the system.", 50);
pManager.Register_IntegerParam("Tail Size", "TSZ", "Size of the tail the boids leave behind.", 50);
//pManager.Register_BRepParam("Obstacles", "OBS", "Environment obstacles.", GH_ParamAccess.list);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Obstacles power", "OBSP", "How hard should a boid steer away from obstacles", 2);
//pManager.Register_PointParam("Start points", "SPTS", "Start points - where the boids will spawn from.", GH_ParamAccess.list);
//pManager.Register_PointParam("Attractors", "ATTS", "Attractors - boids will converge towards these targets.", GH_ParamAccess.list);
pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Attractor power", "ATTP", "How hard should a boid steer towards an attarctor.", 3);
//pManager.Register_IntervalParam("World boundaries", "BNDS", "World boundaries. If a boid gets out of the cube defined by this interval it will be killed.");
commenting out the GH_ParamAccess.list inputs takes care of everything - i mean no more errors, and no more lists as well.…
1) Scale down the inputs. e.g. if you are basing your project on a grid of 50 by 50 use 10 by 10 until you have a better idea about the direction you're taking.
2) Disable the solver. If you know you have to connect up 5 new components with 10 different wire connections. Disable the solver until the task is done and then enable it again.
3) Cache geometry or Intenalise. If the first half of your definition is working how you want it to then you can use the internalise feature of a Param component to disconnect the wire and set it in memory. and disable all the prior components so they no longer need to compute. Alternatively use the original Geometry Cache component to bake it to Rhino and call it back with a referenced name.
ALSO BEWARE of any components like BakeAttributes that have an activate Boolean. Unless this is set to false, each time the solution rebuilds it will bake its geometry to Rhino. I have been in the situation many times where I have an huge amount of objects in rhino, to the point that I have to force Rhino to close in order to get bake to using my computer. Make sure you set it to True and then back to false straight away.…
read the values from ecotect. It just says taht it is not connected to the running instances of ecotect and asks if it is connected to ecotect at all. Like not plugging in ecotect to true. Rewiring the nods is not an option, even if it works, since it has to be automated...
Rhino 5, Gh 009.14. and the latest geco
I have an i5 core and 8gb ram memory and it is going very slowly, somehow. Is there a way to speed up the calculation up.
I put 50 sky subdivision and average daily values for total sunlight hours, throughout the year from 5 to 20 hours and it calculates in 250 seconds. Since this is below 5 mintes it imports the values into grasshopper. If i put 40 sky subdivision the time is increased multiple, almost 12 minutes, 720 seconds. Is there anything I'm missing. I had same speed calculations on a dual core and 4gb of ram and am really unaware of a problem.
Thanks for any kind of response …
generations of 50 individuals) of the same model that I got NaN's on before. As far as I can tell, it shouldn't be a division by zero problem, I'm solving the following formula: (a/10*b)-(c*d)-(e*f)-(g*h). I did save the text outcome of the run but I'm not sure which gene is what so I'm not sure how to recreate the exact situation... Is there something you want me to try?
BTW, what is a collision?
cheers,
wim
Genome[24], Fitness=-300.29, Genes [3% · 33% · 98% · 7%]
{
Record: Point Mutation at index 3: 0.0465 -> 0.0497
}
Genome[25], Fitness=NaN, Genes [3% · 33% · 98% · 9%]
{
Record: Genome was mutated to avoid collision…
ld be by no means a general benchmark of all arrays and lists, but it would give an idea of where List<T> and where T[] might be more appropriate.
Here is how you could set this up: on my PC, with 1'000'000 arrays/lists constructions and 50 inner loops on each, "arrays vs. list" has about 1:2 speed relationship, and "array vs. unknown length list" 1:9. You can test on your system and change the tests, too. If you do, remember to build in release mode and "Run without debugging".
- Giulio
____________________
giulio@mcneel.com
McNeel Europe, Barcelona…