ata in Grasshopper. So we learned a lot about data sources, environmental data, etc. and how to use them in GH. It was a great experience and was my start with GH. I knew it a little bit, but I learned so many things about it there. Not sure if they will do it again, but it was quite successful, so maybe they will.
I have not used ELK before, so can't comment on it, but I can confirm that it took a really long time. But for the most part even for a very large architectural project you wont need OSM data for a whole city, especially not one as big as Paris. So if you want to use ELK use it with normal size maps like a few hundred meters square, because 99% of projects wont be bigger than that. If they are then you will have the proper resources ;)…
Added by Armin Seltz at 8:16am on November 6, 2015
oking for a project Architect meaning an individual who knows top to bottom the whole route:
1. 1% is the conceptual/"sketch" design phase be that smart or traditional (in fact is less than that since everybody does "wild" things the one way of the other these days: finally it doesn't make any difference, just another twisted thing among other twisted things)
2. 99% is the shop drawings + specs + quantifications + tech descriptions.
3. 1345% is the ability to deliver something that is not laughable (and avoid the design construct alternative, the end of days that is).
BTW: making a Boeing 777 (the very first thing made without "papers" around) isn't convincing enough for mastering "work flows"?
…
precise) that unfortunately has more than one staff. This means that I pay the bills (unfortunate to the max). Practice is vertical meaning no Structural/HVAC etc services.
2. AEC Projects are made by teams. Period.
3. Teams are organized with some sort of hierarchy. Period.
4. On each team there's always one leader. Teams can being sampled in group teams - call them clusters (kinda like a List of List of ...)
5. All cluster leaders report to the supreme human being (yours truly). Leader heads are always on my disposal (it's fun to decapitate someone: I do this every Monday).
6. AEC projects are made with 1% idea(s) and 99% of what we call "sludge" (this is not my job: I'm the One , he he).
7. You can't steer any boat if you don't know each @@$#@ nut and bold. In the past there was a naive approach on that matter (ruined automotive companies, potato chip makers, software vendors, political systems, secret service agencies ... etc etc).
8. Efficiency is above all (even above tax-free cash).
9, You can't do ANY AEC real-life thing with what GH has to offer (nor Rhino is an AEC BIM app - it would never be). You simply use GH as a supplement to Generative Components (and/or as stand alone because it's good fun). There's nothing that GH does (I'm speaking solely for AEC as always) that can't being done with Generative Components.
10. I've done so fat 257 projects (a "bit" bigger than a house, he he). Let's say about 51427 drawings (master, master details, details) and 78956 lines of text (specs, cost estimations, space schedules, supplier lists, contracts, cats and 1 dog).
If you combine all the above you'll have the answer (i.e. why I use solely - if possible - code and not GH components). If you can't combine them I'm sorry.
PS: C# is the absolute standard (never judge a language as a "stand-alone" thingy).
best, Peter (Prince of Cynics)
…
he past Architecture was the art of sketching: some "idea" with pencils/crayons + vellum paper (or with some computer) > then "others" trying to make this happen. This in general is known as top-to-bottom approach. Naive and dangerous (for the reputation/reception/acceptance of Architects/Architecture) to the max.
2. These days we work both ways: whilst some work on some "idea" (called it: "assembly") others (in sync mode) resolve the bits and nuts of that "idea" - up to 1:1 level of detail (called it "components"). This is the bottom-to-top approach. Make this your way: NEVER proceed in something whist's not EVERY bit of that something is well addressed (with at least 3-5 ways).
3. The emergence of parametric (GH, Generative Components, Dynamo) in AEC (an approach well known in MCAD word many years ago, mind) made things ... worst: the tremendous topology exploitation capabilities blinded people's mind and they are completely sucked up by the forest forgetting/by passing the critical fact that there's no forest without trees.
4. That's expected: is in the human nature to follow/admire the blink/glam and omit/skip the humble. It's the easy way you know, he he.
5. The tremendous growth of countries the likes of UAE/China/Russia made AEC things ... even worst: lot's of cash available > make us some encomium to Vanity, forget Modesty. You can replace "Vanity" with "New Frontiers" ... if you like fooling yourself.
Some Academics are not capable to understand all that: if they could they would potentially operate in the field (where the pink color is rarely used) and not in fishbowl(s). Some Academics believe that an "idea" is the 99% of the whole whilst actually is less than 1%. But on the other hand anyone can do Architecture (even Architects, he he).
That said (Vanity crisis) you want some other "component" options for this case of yours? (starting with "some" dollars more and ending with the mortgage the house/sell wife+kids option).
take care (and kill them all)…
basis" problem ... all of a sudden - quite recently - a girl posted the MITESIGF (Most Important Thread Even Seen In Grasshopper Forums). She doesn't even realized that: she's novice:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/array-1
4. Why this MITESIGF is MITESIGF? For 2 reasons:
4.a: Wooden pairs (Beams) Profile Curves (belonging in some tree) MUST allow individual control on a per "item basis" (OK, that's obvious) - see Images posted in the thread. No attractor (or any other "global" policy) can cut the mustard here (to tell you the truth this happens in 99% of pure engineering cases, but they appear very rarely in GH Forums - if at all, mind). If the profile curves are defined with 5 points (or 9 for the double thing) we need "on-the-fly" control over this Array (like the radii in your Sphere Manipulator) :
4.b: Critical Bottom-to-Top issues arise: Create a "global" topology (call it "parent") - the beams - and then place real-life "components" (call them "childs") that affect (most probably) the "parent". OK, that's impossible to do with GH/Rhino (peace of cake with CATIA/Microstation) but you can "approximate" things up to a point. Alternatively: you can "trigger" some interest from GH/Rhino developers if they have any AEC market(s) in mind.
Topic 4.a requires the master-to-slave slider thingy (iterate over branches (index slider:master) > reset the 5 values (value slider:slave) > modify them on the fly > save > increase/decrease branch > ...).
Other than that my definitions are far more challenging than this simple case ... but ... anyway ... long is the path (and hilly).
more soon.
best, The Troll
…
l target) ... and redirect people towards the way that Quest3D (and others) does things. Export a 100K frame animation in 12.45 seconds anyone? he he.
On the other hand if Adobe could(?) resurrect(?) the dormant 3DPDF thing (what a stunning idea was that 10 years ago - left to die because that man ... censored due to politically correct reasons, he he). On the other hand, even mighty Israel (the brain behind CATIA) failed to deliver the Plan B (3d XML).
PS: An AEC thing is 1% idea(s) and 99% ugly/boring bureaucratic work. Never forget that if you judge AEC BIM software. But Rhino could kill the 3 giants in some sectors (i.e. AutoDesk, Bentley and Nemetschek ) provided that ... blah blah blah.
PS: All things considered (and including Generative Components) there's only one BIM AEC thing out there: AECOSim (but I'm a Bentley man, he he).…
.0001, the functionality is been put into dedicated components (see this post for further details).
Different branches are always combined using Longest List logic. I'm unhappy about this as well, I need to give more control over how different branches are combined, but I haven't figured out yet how to expose such functionality without it being utterly incomprehensible to 99% of the users.
If you want to ignore the data inside the fourth branch, you'll need to remove that branch before the data goes into the Line component. It's easy to remove a specific branch, somewhat trickier to make this removal dependant on variables elsewhere in the network.
You can use the Split Tree component to achieve this either way. Using a fixed mask (like in the image below) may be sufficient.
The !3 means that any branch is allowed except when it has a 3 in that location. The [0-2] means that only branches which have a number in between and including 0 and 2 will be allowed.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
value=WINTERDESIGNDAY, in SIZINGPERIOD:DESIGNDAY=SINGAPORE ANN HTG 99.6% CONDNS DB ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message: ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary... ************* 53 SizingPeriod:DesignDay, ************* indicated Name=SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99% Condns DB ************* Only last 10 lines before error line shown..... ************* 57 23.5, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb ************* 58 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} ************* 59 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) ************* 60 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} ************* 61 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} ************* 62 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} ************* 63 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} ************* 64 21, !- Day of Month ************* 65 12, !- Month ************* 66 WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type
The relevant lines in the IDF file is shown below:
SizingPeriod:DesignDay, SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99.6% Condns DB, !- Name 23, !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C} 0.0, !- Daily Temp Range {C} 23, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} 21, !- Day of Month 12, !- Month WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type 0, !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator WetBulb; !- Humidity Indicating Type ! SINGAPORE_SGP Annual Heating 99%, MaxDB=23.5°C SizingPeriod:DesignDay, SINGAPORE Ann Htg 99% Condns DB, !- Name 23.5, !- Maximum Dry-Bulb Temperature {C} 0.0, !- Daily Temp Range {C} 23.5, !- Humidity Indicating Conditions at Maximum Dry-Bulb 101133., !- Barometric Pressure {Pa} 2, !- Wind Speed {m/s} design conditions vs. traditional 6.71 m/s (15 mph) 320, !- Wind Direction {Degrees; N=0, S=180} 0.00, !- Clearness {0.0 to 1.1} 0, !- Rain {0-no,1-yes} 0, !- Snow on ground {0-no,1-yes} 21, !- Day of Month 12, !- Month WinterDesignDay,!- Day Type 0, !- Daylight Savings Time Indicator WetBulb; !- Humidity Indicating Type
It seems that there is an empty line after the line for "!- Humidity Indicating Type" field, and nothing is specified for "! SINGAPORE_SGP Annual Heating 99%, MaxDB=23.5°C" field.
May I ask why this happens and how to correct the error?
Thank you very much!…
ve an adequately low value for vibration. Script all runs fine and matches expected results for a few test cases. Phew. Note that in excel form this calculation runs over 6000 cells of look up's and arrays, it's not a trivial calc that can practically be rearranged to make it work back from an acceptable value.
But in my results I have 99 sets of vibration-acceptable outcomes, which I'd now like to examine to see which one uses the least material in its particular combination of beam thicknesses, slab thicknesses and other stuff to find the overall most efficient system. The plan at the moment is to copy the solver Record over into Excel, extract the %'s for the different variables and post-process the info to sort the acceptable outcomes by weight.
It feels like there must be a better way that avoids taking the data out and having a gap in the parametric thinking. Is there a way to ask Galapagos to give me all (or at least, loads of) combinations for which R < 8 and then test those for the minimum weight? Can I automatically take the winning results from fitness test 1 out into an array of data that feeds into a second fitness test in the same grasshopper space? …