the best?
And do you know how I can put in an expression for the width of the slits. When the lines stay vertical to eachother, they must have a width of the 'Grundplattenstärke' 0.21 + 0.01 on each side = 0.23.
But now when the lines stay in an other angle to each other the width have to be bigger. For the width I have an expression with two variables.
W=G/tan(α) +G/sin(α) +2×0,01
G stands vor the 'Grundplattenstärke'.
And α stands for the angle between the two lines.
Do you know how to put it in this system?
It would be very helpful for me.
Thanks, Tanja
…
ion. However, the image here with a complex curve asks for something more robust. My thought is to use Offset Curve then re-extrude to surface (if a simple straight surface) OR Offset surface (if a complex surface). From there generate your panels like normal on the base surface, get the center point (typically Evaluate Surface w/ MD slider after "S" input is set to "Reparamaterize") OR from closed curves using "Polygon Center". Use "Project Point" plugging in the EvalSrf Point and Normal and the surface you have determined as 'inside' or 'outside'. Use a "Vector 2pt" to get the new, unified normal vector, and adjust as needed with "Amplitude" to get a precise offset/extrusion or whatever you plan to do with that corrected vector data.
Hope that helps!
T …
Accidentally that was very close to some project that I have in mind (using solely C# and not components). On first sight I thought that that could be very easy ... only to discover that's not.
This definition is an over simplified version of the other mentioned (only a C# is maintained that does "preparation" work and some sort of naive "topology" checks: the yellow spheres are used as visual aids to the incompatible struts/R values combos).
You can control the 3 options available from that portion:
In a nutshell ... the Exo W behaves with an odd way (at least in my opinion). In order to get the gist of the issue stick to that portion of the def and forget the rest:
This portion of the def attempts to create an usual Exo mesh using a Line list (cleaned and user controlled as regard the min length) derived from exploded mini voronoi (i.e. brep edges). OK, I can understand the red Exo since due to the nature of voronoi breps there's more than possible the presence of small "struts" that may yield non manifold topologies.
But ... the thing is that Exo W is also red in the other mode (non Voronoi) where struts are quite big and no potential "engulfed" situations may occur:
And when the 2d Gate mode is set to Envelope ... there's cases (R values) where Exo W works as expected and cases that it doesn't.
Anyway ... if anyone has any bright idea, drop a world
best, Peter
…
e surface creation)
You
1.create a point grid then
2.create polylines through the x points
3 shifting the list (but I guess the algorithm works without that step, please correct me if i am mistaken)
4.explode the polylines to get the individual polyline segments between the points.
5.Extrude the individual polyline segments into y direction by the difference value
The only thing I dont get is the W-Value (Wrap) of the shift list component.What is it for?
Regarding the tag
cause I just started in this forum I am honestly not really sure what it is for?!
so i just entered something ;)…
思った感じになりません。
balls の代わりにplanarカーブを直接入れてみましたがエラーが出ます。
ファンクションにしてみたところ、forループので作った数値が反映されていません。
ファンクションのインスタンス?を出力していないと思い上記のようにしましたがエラーが出てしまいます。
以上の事から自分の認識が正しいのかよくわからなくなりました・・・
python自体の深いところをわかっているわけではないので余計こんがらがりました。
そこで、for b in ballsはどのような条件または使い方であれば使えるのでしょうか?
そして、上記のように別のオブジェクトに対しての使い方はどのようにすればできるのでしょうか?
2:同じファンクション内のdist = rs.Distance(self.pos,b.pos)についてですが
この文章も for b in balls によってbはBallのインスタンスであると定義?されたためb.posがbの位置であると分かるのでしょうか?
pythonは定義しなくても動いてしまうのでどのような時に使えるのか文章見ただけではよくわかりません・・・
大変細かいことかもしれませんが、よりpythonをしっかりと理解するためにも、どなたかわかる方ご教授いただけると幸いです。…
adybug (or any other tools that work with grasshopper) can create a solar radiation source with a given W/m^2 value.
To elaborate, something that would also be useful to me would be to use the Sun Path component, select a given month, day, hour to determine a sun location. Then use that sun location as a direct radiation source of specified value.
I looked over the available components, but did not see anything that matches this, but then again I am new to Grasshopper so maybe there is something I can do to achieve this.
Also, maybe it is worth starting a new thread for this question. Let me know that would be best and I will post as new thread for you to reply.
Thanks again,
Mike…
P is the component input parameter which is deemed most relevant and is therefore used as the mould for creating output data paths.
The logic of selecting which input is the MP is as follows:
Parameters with Tree access are never MPs, unless all inputs have Tree access, in which case the topmost one wins.
The longest path length in each parameter is found and it serves as an indication of the complexity of the parameter. The more complex a parameter, the more likely it is that it's important.
List parameters are treated as slightly less important than Item parameters in case they have identical complexity.
That's all there's to it. {0;0}{0;2} wins because it is has a maximum path length of 2 whereas the i and w inputs only have a maximum path length of 1. However by simplifying the data you end up with maximum path length of 1 {0}{2}, and since the L inputs have List access it loses out in this case.
I'm happy to make adjustments to the logic, but they need to be good. Changing this code will likely change the way a lot of files already work and if people rely on it working in a specific way we'll break those files, which is something to be avoided at almost any cost. So unless the proposed modification is clearly an improvement, I don't want to change this logic.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
etter with each release
but if I had my way, here are a few things that I might add, I'm sure there has been conversations about this already in the past, please excuse the redundancies:
- being able to print the "stage" (by stage I mean the space where you layout the components and wires...)
- problem w/vb component pt 1 - sometimes when adding new inputs, items checked as lists go unchecked
- problem w/vb component pt 2 - sometimes I find that when I put a name in an input when I hit ok I still get the default x, y, ....
- it might be nice to be able to "fit to content" a notepad component, sort of indesign style where it sets its shape to the limits of its content
- when copying and pasting, it would be great if the new item were somehow already aligned, so that a simple shit+drag would avoid having to go that extra step and use the align buttons - which are great btw. and yes I'm that lazy
- sliders - I'm not sure why when you right click and have access to its values the length stays fixed so that if you adjust the min or max you automatically affect the other. I'm not sure I get why that is...
-sliders pt 2 - I think it would be great to be able to set the incremental value - so instead of just integers of floats it could be multiples of a number - I know you could do this with a function, but in my mind, the less parts the better
- a more major one - it might be really great if we could completely disable components like the preview option but going one step further and actually eliminating that component from the computation.meant mostly for the ends that might be taxing on a system, to be able to return to early parts and quickly adjust without waiting for update of later stages, but could also see a use if you wanted to send data through to a later stage having bypassed some middle components - these middle components would then become completely empty and neutral conduits until being reactivated again - think of the 3DStudio Max stack
these are mostly incredibly minor and would just kind of heighten the expereince even more…
onto a plane using Point Oriented in grasshopper and get a resultant plane with origin point (-152.78838, -1065.812137, 1436.310291). If I perform the same operation in ghpython with Point.At the resultant point is -153.792951019493, -1065.84279597442, 1436.31029129594). The x/y/z vectors defining the plane are identical. The difference seems small (.03mm), but once curves are drawn on the planes, it is the difference between CurveCurveIntersection working at a normal tolerance (.01) and only working at a really slack tolerance (.2).
So, I have two options. One is to understand what is tripping me, and the other is to find another method to orient a point to a plane using u/v/w parameters. Any ideas?
Thanks so much, Kendra
…
at radiance is a measure of the light-power that radiates from a surface within a solid angle on a surface in W/(sr m^2), and that the RADIANCE-program evaluates the light in every point on an analysis grid by weighting the colour each light ray carries (i.e. the RGB channels of the light) with the equation R = 0.265*r + 0.670*g + 0.065*b.
To get illuminance one must then factor in the luminous efficacy of standard skies in RADIANCE by multiplying the equation with the factor 179, and to obtain the daylight factor, the luminous efficacy should be divided by 10000 which is the sky illuminance of the CIE standard overcast sky?
Also, can this be directly related to dynamic daylight metrics such as daylight autonomy?…