ts connectors and slots that allow CNC machining the facets and connectors for assembly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34OvgflJEmI
We developed this construction methodology earlier this year while working on a large scale parametric structure for Midburn, the Israeli Burning Man. While doing so I used grasshopper to generate the facets for the geometry, while a friend on the team (Matan Zohar) wrote a javascript app that translated the mesh into connectors and slots for CNC manufacturing. You can see more about the project here:
http://www.shlomimir.com/triped/
I wrote this component as an exercise in learning rhinoscript and python, with the purpose of bringing the functionality into the grasshopper workflow. It's now to the point where it is working for triangle and square welded meshes while outputting the connectors and slots as an unorganized list.
Questions and To Do List
1. I'm new to object oriented coding and functions, and basically just wrote the whole thing as a series of conditional loops with two dimensional arrays holding the data. Planning on restructuring this better, would love any tips.
2. Right now outputting the connectors and slots on the input mesh itself in 3D, planning on setting this up layed out on one plane to organize for cutting. I was wondering if there are any existing tools for this or if I need to do this manually.
3. Labeling connectors and slots. Is there anyway to output text from python that can be later baked into the rhino for labeling?…
erning how to do that on a sphere.
So I know already all the different approches of how to get a relaxed voronoi pattern on a free-form open surface, but still don't know how to obtain the same elegant effect on a sphere (or an ellipsoid closed surface, whatever), or how to relax the facet dome cells.
Andrew stated on his site that he used kangaroo for this project, so the Spore Lamp consists in my opinion either of a relaxed voronoi 3d diagram (b-rep, b-rep intersection) on a sphere the cells of which have been planarized later on, or more likely it is a sort of relaxed facet dome.
The trick is to:
1. obtain a nicely-balanced voronoish diagram (or facet dome cells) on a sphere
2. keep each cell/polyline planar (or force them with kangaroo to be planar) in order to move scale and loft them later on.
Here is what I have by now.(files: matsys spore lamp attempt)
That's the closest appearance that I got so far (simple move scale and loft of facet dome cells with the amount of transformations being proportional to the power of the initial cell area: bigger cell = bigger opening etc.) - with no relaxation of the diagram. But it's obviously not the same thing as the matsys design.
Here are some of my attempts of facet dome relaxation, but well, it's certainly still not the right approach, and most importantly I don't know how to keep or force the cells to be planar after the relaxation.
1. pulling vertices to a sphere - no anchor points. That obviously doesn't make sense at all, but the relaxation without anchor points gives at the beginning a pattern that is closer to what I am looking for. (files: relaxation 01)
2. pulling vertices to a sphere - two faces of the initial facet dome anchored (files: relaxation 02)
3. pulling vertices to the initial geometry (facet dome) no anchor points (files: relaxation 03)
The cell pattern of the lamp kinda looks like this:
You can find it here: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/kangaroo-0-095-releasedgroupUrl=kangaroo&x=1&groupId=2985220%3AGroup%3A120977&id=2985220%3ATopic%3A972434&page=2#comments
Done with Plankton (of course without the "gradient increase" appearance), but in fact not, I took a look at Daniel Parker's Plankton example files, and it's not quite the same thing. Also the cells aren't planar...
The last problem is that during the relaxation attempts that I did, the biggest initial cells became enormous, and it's not like that in the elegant project by Andrew Kudless, that I'd like to achieve.
So to sum up:
Goal no 1: Obtain an elegant voronoi /facet dome cell pattern on a sphere (or an ellipsoid surface, whatever).
Goal no 2: How to keep the cells planar in order to be able to loft them later, obtain those pyramidal forms, and assemble easily
Have you got any ideas? Or maybe there's a completely different approach to that?
Cheers, and thanks in advance…
e screenshot, there are only two ROT3D(rotation 3d) commands and SEC (Brep/Plane Section) are defined, it seems that the cylinders are generated at first, and the rotated planes are used to intersect the cylinders, in order to generate the curves.
[Figure 1]
The redrawing is based on the previous assumpation, and there are 21 pairs of cross-arc drawn[Figure 1]. Finally, the problem is focused on the last step how to intersect curves.
In CCX, there are only 21 run times, which means the curves intersection are looped one-by-one, and 21 curves are arranged to finished 21 intersection[Figure 2, plz zoom in]. That is the reason, why CCX is not able to get the cross points between the neighbour arc.
[Figure 2]
For the curve-to-curve intersection does not work, in order to get the intersection points, I try to enlarge the set of intersected component, using the plane or cylinder to intersect with curve. When the PCX (plane-curve-intersect) is tested, 21 curves are intersected with the previous 21 rotated planes, the loop runs 441 times, which shows that the curves are mananged to intersect with the neighbour plane, and the intersection points are found. Moreover, the SCX (surface-curve-intersect) is tested, and the 21 cylinders are successfully intersected with the 21 curves. And more important point is that the SCX makes the intection points exactly between the curves and the cylinders, while the redundant ones of the intersection of plane and curve, in some combination of the rotated angles and cylinder distances, are are avoided.
Besides, the Graft/Merge command is also tried, I hope to merge the curves list together, and to intersect them with each other, but it fails. It is supposed that the graft command may change the data structure. When a list of cylinders are grafted, the new data is no longer the cylinders, which fails to plot.
In conclusion, if the loops of geometry are in the same level, the command is run in correspondence; if the loop is between different types of geometry, the total trials of loop are run.
[Rhino Version 5.0; Grasshopper 0.9.0076]
BTW, the .gh file includes the initial base line, which could be run directly in Grasshopper. Please help me to check the model, thanks.…
mpression bending test apparatus has been developed to measure the flexural properties of plywood-fiberglass composite slender beams. The number of fiberglass layers and the orientation of the fibres along the strip have been examined, in order to calibrate the bending behaviour of each strip segment, aiming to encode complex 3d form into flat 2d strips, which bent and anchored at both ends, form non-symmetrical arch shapes of variable curvature. The results show that the proposed method enables a unified materially informed form finding process, where the geometry is approximated according to local material specifications at macro, meso and micro scale. Informing physics based simulations with material properties data derived from the proposed mechanical testing scheme, allowed for fairly accurate material behaviour simulations, with deviations attributed, besides the non-standardized apparatus measurements, mainly to the manual fiberglass layup and the number of mechanical tests conducted for the calculation of the mechanical properties of each fiberglass layout variation.
more: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329016703_Vision-based_compression_bending_test_apparatus_Stiffness_grading_of_plywood_fiberglass_composite_strips
Test report sample : https://vimeo.com/242117397
using:
Grasshopper for Rhino3D (David Rutten)
grasshopper3d.com/
Kangaroo 2 grasshopper plugin (Daniel Piker)
https://www.food4rhino.com/app/kangaroo-physics
K2Engineering grasshopper plugin (Cecilie Brandt)
https://github.com/CecilieBrandt/K2Engineering
Human grasshopper plugin (Andrew Heumann)
andrewheumann.com/#computation
Tracker Video analysis and modeling tool (Douglas Brown)
physlets.org/tracker/
compadre.org/osp/bulletinboard/home.cfm
Tracks:
Poptraume -Traume-fon by rubber-records(gr)
https://rubber-recordsgr.bandcamp.com/track/poptraume-traume-fon
Poptraume - 4m2m bios records#002…
onstrates the following:
1. The definition's functionality employing HumanUI for the custom user interface.
2. The evaluation of the definition's ability to handle different point cloud data sets.
3. Video reports with the definition's results, animating subsequent per deviation step frames.
This definition calculates best fitting plane deviations. The number of manual set parameters has been minimized to two the facade per World UCS axis selection and the search width. This defines a box, which is used to crop protruding architectural details, which do not contribute to the analysis, but also ensures that large deformations are included in the calculation.
For the automation of the vertical and horizontal sections creation, the analyzed cloud is clustered, according to user defined number of 2d grid cells. The deviations corresponding to each cell are averaged in mean and median mode.
The process is displayed mostly in real time, with some speed up in some parts. Too long calculations have been omitted during video edit. The setup is responsive and benchmarks show that changing between dense point cloud data sets and facades is pretty quick (6.5-7.5M points, 25-45 deviation steps, 44x22 clusters), updates are calculated in acceptable timings (3-6 minutes).
I would like to thank Heumann A. and Zwierzycki M. who provided direct support with HumanUI and Volvox. Also Grasshopper3d forum users Maher S. and Segeren P., who contributed with Rhino viewport manipulation scripts.
More on Volvox:
http://papers.cumincad.org/cgi-bin/works/Show?_id=ecaade2016_171&sort=DEFAULT&search=ecaade%20volvox&hits=2629
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/volvox
http://duraark.eu/
HumanUI:
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/human-ui?page=1&ufh=&etx=…
giornata inaugurale sarà dedicata alla free-lecture introduttiva finalizzata alla realizzazione di un modello d'architettura complesso attraverso l'utilizzo di comandi e tecniche avanzate di rappresentazione con Grasshopper (plug-in parametrica di Rhinoceros) e 3dsMax. Sarà illustrato inoltre il potenziale di V-ray per 3dsMax realizzando un rendering concettuale. Durante il mini-corso dell' openDAY verranno mostrate le caratteristiche e le potenzialità degli strumenti per far luce sui nuovi valori assunti dalla modellazione 3D. La modellazione 3D sta interessando un pubblico sempre più vasto inserendosi in una nuova fase di ampia disponibilità per conoscenze, software, hardware di prototipazione e modelli. Pur mantenendo tutti i suoi valori già noti la questione si è talmente ampliata fino ad interessare norme giuridiche (diritti sui modelli ,concorrenza con offerte di servizi apparentemente simili, informazioni deformate e onfusione nei media) Makers University[http://www.makersuniversity.com], in collaborazione con parametricart, vi propone un punto di vista ampio e sintetico su queste tematiche.
Al termine della free-lecture, sarà illustrata l'offerta formativa [CLICCA QUI] di parametricart riferita ai corsi che si terranno nei mesi di Gennaio e Febbraio 2013 inseriti all'interno della più ampia programmazione della Makers University. SONO PREVISTE TARIFFE PROMOZIONALI PER COLORO CHE SI ISCRIVERANNO AI CORSI durante l'OpenDAY.
La lezione e la presentazione si terranno nel nuovo spazio co-working il PEDONE.
PROGRAMMAZIONE
- I temi della Makers University [Leo Sorge];
- Modellazione della parametricTower (concept di architettura complessa) utilizzando Grasshopper, applicativo per la modellazione parametrica [VIDEO] [Michele Calvano];
- Modellazione di una copertura reticolare 3D a completamento della parametricTower con 3dsMax utilizzando tecniche di modellazione mesh complesse [Wissam Wahbeh];
- Rendering con V-ray per 3dsMax illustrando la nuova interfaccia nodale [Wissam Wahbeh].
- Question Time per chiarimenti sugli argomenti illustrati.
COME
L'openDAY sarà aperto a tutti gli interessati,completamente gratuito e sarà replicato in tre sessioni di uguali contenuti organizzate nei seguenti orari:
Sessione [1] 11,30 - 13,30
Sessione [2] 15,30 - 17,30
Sessione [3] 17,30 - 19,30
Per necessità di organizzazione è importante la prenotazione all'evento utilizzando il form in fondo alla pagina specificando nella stringa apposita, il nome dell'evento e la sessione (es. open day sessione 1) oltre agli altri dati richiesti.…
e chosen to dive into Grasshopper. I’m about 6 months in. If some of my comments are completely off, please take that to mean that a feature is too inaccessible to a newish user rather that it’s just missing, as I may have stated.
One of my primary pain points is this. Things that can be done in other programs are invariably easier in other programs. This is a big enough issue that I doubt there’s an easy solution that an armchair qb like myself can offer up.
The interface:
I’ve used a lot of 3D programs. I’ve never encountered one as difficult as grasshopper. What in other programs is a dialog box, is 8 or 10 components strung together in grasshopper. The wisdom for this I often hear among the grasshopper community is that this allows for parametric design. Yet PTC (Parametric Technology Corp.) has been doing parametric design software since 1985 and has a far cleaner and more intuitive interface. So does SolidWorks, Inventor, CATIA, NX, and a bunch of others.
In the early 2000's, when parametric design software was all the rage, McNeel stated quite strongly the Rhino would remain a direct modeler and would not become a parametric modeler. Trends come. Trends go. And the industry has been swinging back to direct modeling. So McNeel’s decision was probably ok. But I have to wonder if part of McNeel’s reluctance to incorporate some of the tried and proven ideas of other parametric packages doesn't have roots in their earlier declaration to not incorporate parametrics.
A Visual Programming Language:
I read a lot about the awesomeness and flexibility of Grasshopper being a visual programming language. Let’s be clear, this is DOS era speak. I believe GH should continue to have the ability to be extended and massaged with code, as most design programs do. But as long as this is front and center, GH will remain out of reach to the average designer.
Context sensitivity:
There is no reason a program in 2014 should allow me to make decisions that will not work. For example, if a component input is in all cases incompatible with another component's output, I shouldn't be able to connect them.
Sliders:
I hate sliders. I understand them, but I hate ‘em. I think they should be optional. Ya, I know I can r-click on the N of a component and set the integer. It’s a pain, and it gives no feedback. The “N” should turn into the number if set. AAAnd, sliders should be context sensitive. I like that the name of a slider changes when I plug it into something. But if I plug it into something that'll only accept a 1, a 2, or a 3, that slider should self set accordingly. I shouldn't be able to plug in a “50” and have everything after turn red.
Components:
Give components a little “+” or a drawer on the bottom or something that by clicking, opens the component into something akin to a dialog box. This should give access to all of the variables in the component. I shouldn't have to r-click on each thing on a component to do all of the settings.
And this item I’m guessing on. I’m not yet good enough at GH to know if this may have adverse effects. Reverse, Flatten, Graft, etc.; could these be context sensitive? Could some of these items disappear if they are contextually inappropriate or gray out if they're unlikely?
Tighter integration with Rhino:
I'm not entirely certain what this would look like. Currently my work flow entails baking, making a few Rhino edits, and reinserting into GH. I question the whole baking thing, btw. Why isn't it just live geometry? That’s how other parametric apps work. Maybe add more Rhino functionality to GH. GH has no 3D offset. I have to bake, offsetserf, and reinsert the geometry. I’m currently looking at the “Geometry Cache” and “Geometry Pipeline” components to see if they help. But I haven't been able to figure it out. Which leads me to:
Update all of the documentation:
I'm guessing this is an in process thing and you're working toward rolling GH from 0.9.00075 to 1.0. GH was being updated nearly weekly earlier this year. Then it suddenly stopped. If we're talking weeks before a full release, so be it. But if we're looking at something longer, a documentation update would help a lot. Geometry Cache and Geometry Pipeline’s help still read “This is the autogenerated help topic for this object. Developers: override the HtmlHelp_Source() function in the base class to provide custom help.” This does not help. And the Grasshopper Primer 2nd Ed. was written for GH 0.60007.
Grasshopper is fundamentally a 2D program:
I know you'll disagree completely, but I'm sticking to this. How else could an omission like offsetsurf happen? Pretty much every 3D program in existence has this. I’m sure I can probably figure out how to deconstruct the breps, join the curves, loft, trim, and so forth. But does writing an algorithm to do what all other 3D programs do with a dialog box seem reasonable? I'm sure if you go command by command you'll find a ton on such things.
If you look at the vast majority of things done in GH, you'll note that they're mostly either flat or a fundamentally 2D pattern on a warped surface.
I've been working on a part that is a 3D voronoi trimmed to a 3D model. I've been trying to turn the trimmed voronoi into legitimate geometry for over a month without success.
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/profiles/blogs/question-voronoi-3d-continued
I’ve researched it enough to have found many others have had the exact same problem and have not solved it. It’s really not that conceptually difficult. But GH lacks the tools.
Make screen organization easier:
I have a touch of OCD, and I like my GH layout to flow neatly. Allow input/output nodes to be re-ordered. This will allow a reduction in crossed wires. Make the wire positions a bit more editable. I sometimes use a geometry component as a wire anchor to clean things up. Being able to grab a wire and pull it out of the way would be kinda nice.
I think GH has some awesome abilities. I also think accessing those abilities could be significantly easier.
~p…
artes y Jueves 18:00 a 22:00 Sábado 10:00 a 14:00
Durante el curso el participante conocerá y entenderá los fundamentos de programación y sus aplicaciones usando Processing: una plataforma de desarrollo en lenguaje java, que surgió en MIT, creada por investigadores enfocados a procesos numéricos y/o generativos para arte y diseño. Se realizarán ejercicios programados para generar gráficas, volúmenes o situaciones kinéticas en tiempo real, basado en algoritmos o reglas complejas y en el procesamiento de datos, soluciones que permitirán comprender temas esenciales como datos primitivos y datos compuestos, algoritmos generativos, geometría 2D y 3D paramétrica, programación estructurada y programación orientada a objetos, control de flujo, variables y ámbito de variable, entre otros temas.
NOTA: Es requisito para cursar los talleres del Bloque 1 y Bloque 2 que los alumnos inscritos tegan bases sobre programación. Este taller forma parte del propedéutico para el Diplomado.…
Added by Alberto Lara at 9:37pm on February 12, 2012
ial-by-nao-box-morphing/), but there are several reasons as to why it wasn't suitable for what I'm trying to do;
1. I'm interested in using a 2D pattern rather than a 3D form, which will then be repeated within a Paneling point grid which is assigned to a surface. The repeated patterns are then pulled onto the surface, which are then used to trim the surface.
2. The surface I'm using has high curvature, and using box morphing intersects the surface, so it doesn't conform to the surface as closely as I'd like it to unless the number of repeats along U and V are increased.
3. The surface I'd like to use has various trimmed regions on it. Paneling Tools is great for me, because the 2D pattern is repeated on a Surface Domain point grid, so it is initially repeated over the the trimmed regions, but once since the Pull setting is used, only the repeated pattern curves that lie over the kept surface remain (see Paneling tools jpeg).
The surface I've used in the images isn't the surface I need to use, but hopefully it shows what I'm trying to do. Also, I've managed to get the patterning that I need on the paneling tool example, but the reason why I want to use Grasshopper is that it allows me to scale up/down the UV ratio of the paneling points by using a slider tool, so the user can change the pattern density. The only trouble with this is that I can't bake the points out of Grasshopper into Rhino so I can use paneling tools.
Also...I'd quite like to know how the VB module works, because I'm curious, and I'd like to learn more!
Sorry if this is a bit wordy, but I can't think of a better way of explaining what I need.
Cheers, Abs…