within tolerance. If it is than it can be considered as being "On the surface", although if you look closely enough (I'm talking VERY close), then there will always be a gap between a curve that lies on a surface and the surface itself.
Anyway, the Fin command doesn't use a standard surfacing command such as Loft or Sweep 2 rails or something. It constructs the nurbs surface directly, so it can take care of its own sampling. This is something that's likely to be overkill or extremely involved to try and replicate in GH. So if you're going to be using loft to recreate a fin, then throwing a bunch of points at it is pretty much all you can really do. If you throw enough at it (and by enough, I'd say from a couple dozen to about 50, depending on the complexity of the surface), then the resulting surface will be close enough to lying on the original surface.…
(7/32") Diameter.
I want to "Randomly" select 50% of the high lighted points and assign it a new 3/16" Diameter Circle.
I basically want to add a new variable to the field of points I have "baked" out in Rhino.
For some reason the definition that I have isn't working. When I hover over the outputs I have a list of values but when I turn on the circles and center points I only have 2 visible.
What is going on? Any input would be great - thanks. …
possible to send a number back and have the slider reflect that number?
For example:
1. If a number slider is connected to a component that ranges from 0 to 100 would it be possible to set that slider to a point between those two numbers - for example the number 50?
2. If a number slider is connect to a component that knows it's range - can it send that range to the slider to automatically configure it?
Thanks in advance.
NOTE: this discussion is being continued at this link [ here ].
…
... what process? You mean how are the crenelation is made?
One crucial thing is that the teeth length should be a variable. Now I cannot control it. It seems to depend on (1) the minEdgeDiv and (2) the startOffset. Where I am aiming for is a deviation of teeth seen from the midpoint of the crenelated edges with a value of e.g. 75 mm. Still taken into account the start and end offset of e.g. 50 mm
Teeth length is indeed variable (read further) But anyway .. I'll add some user controlled options for the teeth making. As it is indeed is controlled by the 2 as above variables (PLUS a "safe guard" check: if minEdgeLength / 3.0 < startOffset ... then startOffset = minEdgeLength / 3.0 ... meaning that you divide the remaining 33% and all the rest are "proportionally" to that [bigger edges, that is]). This yields as equal teeth(s) as possible for obvious reasons (recommended movie: Frankenstein Junior). …
Organic form and nature...
For designers who are exploring new
shapes using generative algorithms, Grasshopper® is a
graphical algorithm editor tightly integrated with Rhino’s 3-D
modeling
nitions prior to Karamba are to allow the genes to manipulate the form of the shell and then kangaroo to relax the form to its "equilibrium" state.
The definition, as attached, runs fine over one iteration. However, when I run the Galapagos solver, rhino slowly uses up my computers memory and then ultimately crashes (around 80 Galapagos iterations). I don't think that the surface patch, or kangaroo are the issue, as I have run other iterative definitions through them without issue.
I believe Karamba may be occupying memory each iteration that is not released when a new iteration begins. This problem is exasperated by the fact that I am running 11 load cases, 9 of which are point loads defined over each vertex of the mesh. I ran a definition with only one load case, and it reached 170 generations (with a population of 50 for each generation). However, at this point it had occupied 90% of my computer's available memory.
Do you know of a way to ensure that Karamba purges its memory after an iteration, or is this a possible memory leak bug?
Thanks again, any help you can provide is much appreciated.
Sean
…
s meios acadêmicos e profissionais do Estado de Santa Catarina em parceira com a Escola de Design ELISAVA de Barcelona.
Metodologia: Mediante um exercício prático os participantes poderão ter em primeira mão uma aproximação às técnicas mais avançadas de design e fabricação digital.
Web: http://santacatarina.elisava.net/
e-mail: secretaria@sc.asbea.org.br
As atividades estão divididas em 3 etapas.
1ª etapa: Roadshow (Ciclo de Conferencias)
Palestrantes:
Affonso Orciuoli, arquiteto, professor da Escola de Design ELISAVA de Barcelona, Univesitat Ramon Llullp.d. As conferencias do Prof. Orciuoli serão através de videoconferência desde Espanha
Regiane Pupo, arquiteta, professora da UFSC, Florianópolis
As conferencias da Prof. Pupo são presenciais.
Datas:
Lages 01/11Chapecó 03/11Caçador 04/11Criciúma 07/11Baln. Camboriú 08/11Blumenau 09/11Joinville 10/11Florianópolis 11/11
Horário: 18:00 horas
Conferencia: Arquiteturas disruptivas. Design e fabricação na era digital.
Palestrante: Prof. Arq. Affonso Orciuoli | Professor ELISAVA | Barcelona
2ª etapa: Curso on-line de Rhinoceros
Durante o Roadshow será apresentado o curso on-line de Rhinoceros (http://www.rhino3d.com/).
Entre 01 e 22 de novembro serão subministrados tutoriais a todos os estudantes e professores participantes, a título de se prepararem para o workshop, ver sessão ”downloads”
3ª etapa: Workshop E-luminárias
Entre 23 e 27 de novembro de 2011, das 8:00 às 18:00 h (10 horas por dia)
Workshop Internacional (50 horas)
Diretor: Affonso Orciuoli
Professores: Regiane Pupo | Ernesto BuenoLocal: InovaLab | Sapiens Parque | Florianópolis | Santa CatarinaInvestimento: R$ 150 (estudantes) e R$ 300 (professores & profissionais)Vagas: 50Obs.: Materiais para a fabricação incluídos.
Objetivo: reunidos em grupos de 3 participantes, se desenvolverá um projeto completo de uma luminária, utilizando plataforma CAD. Posteriormente os participantes, com a ajuda dos instrutores, deverão preparar os arquivos para a fabricação na máquina fresadora e laser. Por último as luminárias serão montadas e expostas em conjunto.
Cada participante deverá trazer um laptop com os programas instalados (“demos” do Rhinoceros, RhinoNEST, outros programas de CAD também poderão ser utilizados). Todos estes programas estarão disponíveis para serem baixados a partir do site da Escola de Design ELISAVA de Barcelona.
Equipamentos presentes no workshop e à disposição dos participantes:
Máquina CNC tipo fresadora de 3 eixos
Máquina de corte a laser
Máquina de impressão 3D (a título de demonstração)…
ay how many valid permutations exist.
But allow me to guesstimate a number for 20 components (no more, no less). Here are my starting assumptions:
Let's say the average input and output parameter count of any component is 2. So we have 20 components, each with 2 inputs and 2 outputs.
There are roughly 35 types of parameter, so the odds of connecting two parameters at random that have the same type are roughly 3%. However there are many conversions defined and often you want a parameter of type A to seed a parameter of type B. So let's say that 10% of random connections are in fact valid. (This assumption ignores the obvious fact that certain parameters (number, point, vector) are far more common than others, so the odds of connecting identical types are actually much higher than 3%)
Now even when data can be shared between two parameters, that doesn't mean that hooking them up will result in a valid operation (let's ignore for the time being that the far majority of combinations that are valid are also bullshit). So let's say that even when we manage to pick two parameters that can communicate, the odds of us ending up with a valid component combo are still only 1 in 2.
We will limit ourselves to only single connections between parameters. At no point will a single parameter seed more than one recipient and at no point will any parameter have more than one source. We do allow for parameters which do not share or receive data.
So let's start by creating the total number of permutations that are possible simply by positioning all 20 components from left to right. This is important because we're not allowed to make wires go from right to left. The left most component can be any one of 20. So we have 20 possible permutations for the first one. Then for each of those we have 19 options to fill the second-left-most slot. 20×19×18×17×...×3×2×1 = 20! ~2.5×1018.
We can now start drawing wires from the output of component #1 to the inputs of any of the other components. We can choose to share no outputs, output #1, output #2 or both with any of the downstream components (19 of them, with two inputs each). That's 2×(19×2) + (19×2)×(19×2-1) ~ 1500 possible connections we can make for the outputs of the first component. The second component is very similar, but it only has 18 possible targets and some of the inputs will already have been used. So now we have 2×(18×2-1) + (18×2-1)×(18×2-1) ~1300. If we very roughly (not to mention very incorrectly, but I'm too tired to do the math properly) extrapolate to the other 18 components where the number of possible connections decreases in a similar fashion thoughout, we end up with a total number of 1500×1300×1140×1007×891×789×697×...×83×51×24×1 which is roughly 6.5×1050. However note that only 10% of these wires connect compatible parameters and only 50% of those will connect compatible components. So the number of valid connections we can make is roughly 3×1049.
All we have to do now is multiply the total number of valid connection per permutation with the total number of possible permutations; 20! × 3×1049 which comes to 7×1067 or 72 unvigintillion as Wolfram|Alpha tells me.
Impressive as these numbers sound, remember that by far the most of these permutations result in utter nonsense. Nonsense that produces a result, but not a meaningful one.
EDIT: This computation is way off, see this response for an improved estimate.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 12:06pm on March 15, 2013