Search Results - 广东11选五历史中奖号码『8TBH·COM』双色球所有诗谜汇总2023年3月19日5时44分48秒.H5c2a3.aivp39iyn.gov.hk

Topic: Difference between MRT calculation methods

. From the Thermal Comfort Indices component, Comfort Index 11 (TCI-11):MRT = f(Ta, Tground, Rprim, e) with:- Ta = DryBulbTemperature coming from ImportEPW component- Tground = f(Ta, N) where N comes from totalSkyCover input. Tground influences the long-wave radiation emitted by the ground in the MRT calculation.- Rprim defined as solar radiation absorbed by nude man = f(Kglob, hS1, ac)- ac is the clothingAlbedo in % (bodyCharacteristics input)- I can't find any definition in the code of Kglob and hS1. Could you tell me please what are those values referencered to? --> probably the globalHorizontalRadiation but how?- e = vapour pressure calculated from Ta and Relative Humidity input Do you agree that in this case the MRT does not depend on these inputs: location, meanRadiantTemperature, dewPointTemperature and wind speed?It does not depend neither on the other bodyCharacteristics like bodyPosture, age, sex, met, activityDuration...? MRT calculated by the TCI-11 method is the mean radiant temperature of a vector pointing vertically with a sky view factor of 100%?For ParisOrly epw, 2. From the SolarAdjustedTemperature component (that seems to be more used for the UTCI calculation examples on Hydra compared to TCI-11). In contrast to the TCI-11, this component distinguishes diffuse and direct radiation and contextualizes the calculation thanks to _ContextShading input, right? It can also be applied to a mannequin thanks to the CumSkyMatrix and thus evaluate the dishomogeneity of radiation exposure.This component seems not to consider the influence of vapour pressure on the result --> is it then more precise to put the MRT output (from the TCI) as an input of meanRadTemperature for SolarAdjustedTemperature?The default groundReflectivity is set to 0.25 --> is GroundReflectivity taken into account in the Tground or MRT calculation in the TCI component? If yes, what is the hypothesised groundReflectivity?The default clothing albedo of 37% (TCI-11 bodyCharacteristics) corresponds to Clothing Absorptivity of 63%? If the CumSkyMatrix input is not supplied, I get 9 results for the mannequin --> where are those points/results coming from? If the CumSkyMatrix input is supplied,I suppose the calculation of the 482 results correspond to a calculation method similar to the radiation analysis component that is averaged over the analysis period. Right?But I don't understand why the mannequin is composed of 481 faces and meshFaceResult gives 482 results. Finally, what is the link between the MESH results, the solarAdjustedMRT and the Effective Radiant field ? Is there a paper to have a detailed explanation of the method? 3. Here are some results for the ParisOrly energyplus weather data. You can find here attached the grasshopper definition.There is no shading in this simulation and the result coming from the ThermalComfort indices for MRT is very different compared to the solar adjusted MRT.Why such a big difference and which of the result should be plugged into the UTCI calculation component? Results for ParisOrly.epwM,D,H:1,1,12 Ta : 6.5°Crh: 100%globalHorizontalRadiation: 54 Wh/m2totalSkyCover: 10MRT (TCI-11): 1.2°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = directNormalRadiation : 0 Wh/m2diffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.64°CMRTDelta: 4.14°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.47°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C _CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = MRT (TCI-11)solarAdjustedMRT: 5.17°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C Thanks a lot for your helpRegards, Aymeric …

Added by Aymeric to Ladybug Tools at 8:29am on May 2, 2016

Comment on: Topic 'Galapagos ES mystery? Fittest genomes sacked'

stributes structural supports for a uniformly loaded domain using e.g. the internal energy of the loaded domain as fitness. Here the uniformly loaded domain is represented by the trimmed surface. My genomes are the support positions (green crosses), which are restricted to a set of predefined grid points. I’m currently using an (i,j)-coordinate indexing for these grid points (illustrated in the viewport just below) as opposed to a sequential , “one-dimensional” numbering (illustrated in the viewport further down). (i,j)-indexing systemAltenative, sequential indexing system The support positions are computed by two gene pools; one governing the i-index, Gene List {i}, and one governing the j-index, Gene List {j}, of each support. The value of slider 0 in Gene List {i} is paired with the value of slider 0 in Gene List {j} etc. and the amount of sliders corresponds to the amount of supports. The screen shot below depicts the slider constellation corresponding to the support distribution depicted above. Unfortunately the j-index represented in the sliders needs remapping as the number of j-indices vary for each i-index (horizontal row of grid points). With the current setup I have 12^6 x 9^6 = 1,6 x 10^12 different genomes. If I were to use the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering, I would only use one gene pool with sliders ranging from 0 to 76 meaning that remapping could be avoided and thereby having only 76^6 = 1,9 x 10^11 different genomes. So, my current genome setup causes a bunch of issues related to the Evolutionary Solver: Remapping Changing one of the j-index sliders, will not necessarily change the related support position but it will still facilitate another genome to be calculated by the solver. (This problem could be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering) Switching slider values around If the values of e.g. slider 0 were to be switched around with the values of slider 5, this again would yield a new genome but an identical solution. (This problem cannot be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering) Coincident support positions Two or more supports may be located in the same position. (This problem cannot be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering) I find it impossible to imagine the fictive “fitness landscape” of this problem and not only because of the multidimensional genome characteristic but just as much because of these listed, intertwined peculiarities. I’ve tried running the Simulated Annealing Solver as well, but my experience is that the Evolutionary Solver yields better results. To my awareness, the solver uses some kind of topographical proximity searcher. This is why, I think that the solving process itself benefits more from analysing the (i,j)-index system, in which neighbouring grid points hold more uniform topographical information than the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering, which might have big ID-numbering gaps between neighbours. Have I understood this correctly? Cheers…

Added by Daniel Kolling Andersen at 6:17pm on May 21, 2015

Topic: Five-story building

as one element. Thank you Comment by karamba on October 7, 2014 at 11:27pm Hello Patricio, divide the beams in such a way that each boundary vertex of the shell becomes an endpoint of a beam segment. Best, Clemens Comment by Llordella Patricio on October 8, 2014 at 8:30amDelete Comment Hi Clemens, I did what you suggested but now assemble element doesn´t work properly. Could you please tell me how to fix it? Thanks in advance, Patricio 8-10-14losa%20cadena.gh Comment by karamba on October 8, 2014 at 11:59am Hi Patricio, if you flatten the 'Elem'-input at the 'Assemble'-component the definition works. The triangular shell elements have linear displacement interpolations whereas the beam deflections are exact. In order to get correct results you should refine the shell mesh. Best, Clemens Comment by Llordella Patricio on October 9, 2014 at 8:35amDelete Comment Hello, succeeds in creating the mesh to the slab, and built the beam segment, but when I see the deformations are not expected because the beam is deformed as the slab. Thanks for the help PS: maybe I'm using the program for a type of structure that is not the most appropriate, as I saw in the examples of other structures. But this type of structure is that students taught best regards Patricio 9-10-14%20Example%201.gh Comment by karamba on October 9, 2014 at 10:46am You could use the 'Mesh Edges'-component to retrieve the naked edges and turn them into beams - see attached file:91014Example1_cp.gh Best regards, Clemens Comment by Llordella Patricio on October 15, 2014 at 3:41pmDelete Comment Dear clemens I was doing a rough estimate of the deformation, and I can not achieve the same result with Karamba. When I make a rough estimate of the result with Karamba beams and mine are very similar, I think the problem is when I connect the shell, because there are no similar results. I sent the GH file, and an image of the calculation The structure is concrete The result I get is 0.58cm thank youPatricio 15-10-14%20Example.gh Comment by karamba yesterday Dear Patricio, try to increase the number of shell elements. As mentioned in the manual they are linear elements. A mesh that is too coarse leads to a response which is stiffer than the real structure. Best, Clemens …

Added by Llordella Patricio to Karamba3D at 12:33pm on October 22, 2014

Topic: 3D FingerPrint - need to extract ridges and valleys?? Principal Curvatures Estimation

t file** - ply file with just x,y,z locations. I got it from a 3d scanner. Here is how first few lines of file looks like - ply format ascii 1.0 comment VCGLIB generated element vertex 6183 property float x property float y property float z end_header -32.3271 -43.9859 11.5124 -32.0631 -43.983 11.4945 12.9266 -44.4913 28.2031 13.1701 -44.4918 28.2568 13.4138 -44.4892 28.2531 13.6581 -44.4834 28.1941 13.9012 -44.4851 28.2684 ... ... ... In case you need the data - please email me on **nisha.m234@gmail.com**. **Algorithm:** I am trying to find principal curvatures for extracting the ridges and valleys. The steps I am following is: 1. Take a point x 2. Find its k nearest neighbors. I used k from 3 to 20. 3. average the k nearest neighbors => gives (_x, _y, _z) 4. compute covariance matrix 5. Now I take eigen values and eigen vectors of this covariance matrix 6. I get u, v and n here from eigen vectors. u is a vector corresponding to largest eigen value v corresponding to 2nd largest n is 3rd smallest vector corresponding to smallest eigen value 7. Then for transforming the point(x,y,z) I compute matrix T T = [ui ] [u ] [x - _x] [vi ] = [v ] x [y - _y] [ni ] [n ] [z - _z] 8. for each i of the k nearest neighbors: [ n1 ] [u1*u1 u1*v1 v1*v1] [ a ] [ n2 ] = [u2*u2 u2*v2 v2*v2] [ b ] [... ] [ ... ... ... ] [ c ] [ nk ] [uk*uk uk*vk vk*vk] Solve this for a, b and c with least squares 9. this equations will give me a,b,c 10. now I compute eigen values of matrix [a b b a ] 11. This will give me 2 eigen values. one is Kmin and another Kmax. **My Problem:** The output is no where close to finding the correct Ridges and Valleys. I am totally Stuck and frustrated. I am not sure where exactly I am getting it wrong. I think the normal's are not computed correctly. But I am not sure. I am very new to graphics programming and so this maths, normals, shaders go way above my head. Any help will be appreciated. **PLEASE PLEASE HELP!!** **Resources:** I am using Visual Studio 2010 + Eigen Library + ANN Library. **Other Options used** I tried using MeshLab. I used ball pivoting triangles remeshing in MeshLab and then applied the polkadot3d shader. If correctly identifies the ridges and valleys. But I am not able to code it. **My Function:** //the function outputs to ply file void getEigen() { int nPts; // actual number of data points ANNpointArray dataPts; // data points ANNpoint queryPt; // query point ANNidxArray nnIdx;// near neighbor indices ANNdistArray dists; // near neighbor distances ANNkd_tree* kdTree; // search structure //for k = 25 and esp = 2, seems to got few ridges queryPt = annAllocPt(dim); // allocate query point dataPts = annAllocPts(maxPts, dim); // allocate data points nnIdx = new ANNidx[k]; // allocate near neigh indices dists = new ANNdist[k]; // allocate near neighbor dists nPts = 0; // read data points ifstream dataStream; dataStream.open(inputFile, ios::in);// open data file dataIn = &dataStream; ifstream queryStream; queryStream.open("input/query. pts", ios::in);// open data file queryIn = &queryStream; while (nPts < maxPts && readPt(*dataIn, dataPts[nPts])) nPts++; kdTree = new ANNkd_tree( // build search structure dataPts, // the data points nPts, // number of points dim); // dimension of space while (readPt(*queryIn, queryPt)) // read query points { kdTree->annkSearch( // search queryPt, // query point k, // number of near neighbors nnIdx, // nearest neighbors (returned) dists, // distance (returned) eps); // error bound double x = queryPt[0]; double y = queryPt[1]; double z = queryPt[2]; double _x = 0.0; double _y = 0.0; double _z = 0.0; #pragma region Compute covariance matrix for (int i = 0; i < k; i++) { _x += dataPts[nnIdx[i]][0]; _y += dataPts[nnIdx[i]][1]; _z += dataPts[nnIdx[i]][2]; } _x = _x/k; _y = _y/k; _z = _z/k; double A[3][3] = {0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0}; for (int i = 0; i < k; i++) { double X = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][0]; double Y = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][1]; double Z = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][2]; A[0][0] += (X-_x) * (X-_x); A[0][1] += (X-_x) * (Y-_y); A[0][2] += (X-_x) * (Z-_z); A[1][0] += (Y-_y) * (X-_x); A[1][1] += (Y-_y) * (Y-_y); A[1][2] += (Y-_y) * (Z-_z); A[2][0] += (Z-_z) * (X-_x); A[2][1] += (Z-_z) * (Y-_y); A[2][2] += (Z-_z) * (Z-_z); } MatrixXd C(3,3); C <<A[0][0]/k, A[0][1]/k, A[0][2]/k, A[1][0]/k, A[1][1]/k, A[1][2]/k, A[2][0]/k, A[2][1]/k, A[2][2]/k; #pragma endregion EigenSolver<MatrixXd> es(C); MatrixXd Eval = es.eigenvalues().real().asDiagonal(); MatrixXd Evec = es.eigenvectors().real(); MatrixXd u,v,n; double a = Eval.row(0).col(0).value(); double b = Eval.row(1).col(1).value(); double c = Eval.row(2).col(2).value(); #pragma region SET U V N if(a>b && a>c) { u = Evec.row(0); if(b>c) { v = Eval.row(1); n = Eval.row(2);} else { v = Eval.row(2); n = Eval.row(1);} } else if(b>a && b>c) { u = Evec.row(1); if(a>c) { v = Eval.row(0); n = Eval.row(2);} else { v = Eval.row(2); n = Eval.row(0);} } else { u = Eval.row(2); if(a>b) { v = Eval.row(0); n = Eval.row(1);} else { v = Eval.row(1); n = Eval.row(0);} } #pragma endregion MatrixXd O(3,3); O <<u, v, n; MatrixXd UV(k,3); VectorXd N(k,1); for( int i=0; i<k; i++) { double x = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][0];; double y = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][1];; double z = dataPts[nnIdx[i]][2];; MatrixXd X(3,1); X << x-_x, y-_y, z-_z; MatrixXd T = O * X; double ui = T.row(0).col(0).value(); double vi = T.row(1).col(0).value(); double ni = T.row(2).col(0).value(); UV.row(i) << ui * ui, ui * vi, vi * vi; N.row(i) << ni; } Vector3d S = UV.colPivHouseholderQr().solve(N); MatrixXd II(2,2); II << S.row(0).value(), S.row(1).value(), S.row(1).value(), S.row(2).value(); EigenSolver<MatrixXd> es2(II); MatrixXd Eval2 = es2.eigenvalues().real().asDiagonal(); MatrixXd Evec2 = es2.eigenvectors().real(); double kmin, kmax; if(Eval2.row(0).col(0).value() < Eval2.row(1).col(1).value()) { kmin = Eval2.row(0).col(0).value(); kmax = Eval2.row(1).col(1).value(); } else { kmax = Eval2.row(0).col(0).value(); kmin = Eval2.row(1).col(1).value(); } double thresh = 0.0020078; if (kmin < thresh && kmax > thresh ) cout << x << " " << y << " " << z << " " << 255 << " " << 0 << " " << 0 << endl; else cout << x << " " << y << " " << z << " " << 255 << " " << 255 << " " << 255 << endl; } delete [] nnIdx; delete [] dists; delete kdTree; annClose(); } Thanks, NISHA…

Added by Nisha M at 10:30am on June 20, 2011

Comment on: Topic 'Why union of these two do not work?'

f objects with the main ring body, and that cannot be done in parallel since you are modifying the item once at a time, algorithmically. The original example of a cylinder and sphere are textbook failures of the Rhino 5 dumb algorithm, since that combination features kissing surfaces that confuse Rhino about where they are intersecting since really in tolerance values they are overlapping along a ribbon instead of a sharp line. Normally you would slightly move or rescale one of the pair to create a single loop intersection curve that doesn't wander around in jerky fashion trying to combine two surfaces that fail to actually plunge through one another. Your main Boolean union is 116 prongs with a ring base, and that's slow because Rhino bogs down as the model gets more an more complicated with each internal step, I imagine. The speed is not all that slow either, only 21 seconds for the Booleans themselves. If you turn of Grasshopper preview meshing via the toolbar menu it should be significantly faster while you are tweaking the design. To troubleshoot the slow Boolean, I went into Rhino and tried merely splitting the ring body with the prongs and that itself was just about as slow as the Boolean union, so Rhino is not being badass about it. Then I exploded the ring body and tried splitting just that with the prongs and it was *much* faster to operate on just that single surface! The black box reveals itself a bit. In kind, splitting the prongs with that single surface was about the same speed as splitting it with the whole ring body, so no speed gain there. But, to speed up your script, since we *cannot* in fact use parallel processing, we can instead manually create that prong surface by doing our own splits and using Grasshopper's natural order of parts, hopefully consistent, to get rid of the junk. That prong surface is item 4 of an exploded object. So I will mutually split them and tease out the good parts from the junk and then rejoin the parts, no Boolean union component needed. First, I went into your prong cluster and removed the capping, so I have merely an open revolution surface instead of a polysurface, letting me access the surface trim command after quickly finding the BrepBrep intersection curves between the prongs and the single ring surface. For that Boolean union step I'm down from 11 seconds to 4 seconds, but confusingly we added a second to the Boolean difference that follows: It's fast since we are manually selecting junk instead of Rhino having to sort which is which, I imagine. We still have a slow Boolean subtraction of the gems and holes from the finished ring body. That's not simple so will remain slow and cannot be parallel processed since again there's a single main ring body being modified in each step, and nor are there simple pairs of split object to select from manually to discard junk. …

Added by Nik Willmore at 6:31am on March 10, 2016

Topic: Paneling Tools Plug-in for Rhino 5

he plug-in supports intuitive design of paneling concepts as well as rationalize complex geometry into a format suitable for analysis and fabrication. The plug-in is closely integrated with Rhino 7 and is widely used for architectural and other building designers. Download The new PanelingTools for the new Rhino 7.2 is now available. You can access Rhino 7 evaluation and upgrades from here… Documentation For documentation and examples, please check: PanelingTools Manual for detailed description of commands and options. PanelingTools for Grasshopper Manual includes tutorials and description of PT-GH components. Paneling Scripting page has a listing of paneling methods for RhinoScript. Paneling Tutorials page has links to video tutorials. Paneling Short Clips page has short video tutorials that covers the core functionality of PanelingTools. Paneling Gallery page has users projects with PanelingTools. Videos **NEW** PanelingTools Webinar Course - December 2014 learn how Paneling tools works and how best to integrate it into your design process. Paneling Tools Webinar - February 11, 2011 Paneling Tools Webinar on Vimeo Feedback Please tell us what you think and how you are using PanelingTools to help shape future development. Join the PanelingTools Group in Rhino Forum and post photos, news and discussions. Make sure to tag with keyword “PanelingTools”. For questions and feedback, contact the developer. Source: McNeel Wiki Keshia C. Stich Grid Paneling Group …

Added by Keshia C. Stich to PanelingTools GH Add-On at 3:58pm on June 1, 2015

Comment on: Topic 'Meshes'

is set up to manipulate strings into an STL file that is quite different from how Grasshopper defines meshes, in that an STL seems to define each face by XYZ points, Grasshopper wants a single list of all vertex points and then has an allied lists of topological connectivity according to vertex number, so for now I just hacked it to spit out points minus so many duplicates it generates for STL: Right now it has an internal 3D trigonometric function I added input sliders to control, that creates surfaces that look a lot like molecular orbitals. So how do I make a mesh? I failed to make a single mesh face from each STL face since AddMesh seems to want a list, so I tried making a single list and matching it with a simple ((1,2,3),(4,5,6),(7,8,9)...) array of connectivity but it hasn't worked yet since the STL list of vertices has duplicates that won't work for Grasshopper and removing the duplicates scrambles the connectivity relation. After some work on this and seeing the output, I figure I could just randomly populate the mathematical function with points instead, unless it really gives a better mesh result than other routines. I'm not sure what to do with it yet, even if I get the mesh figured out. import rhinoscriptsyntaximport RhinoPOINTS_CONTAINER =[]POINTS = []class Vector: # struct XYZ def __init__(self,x,y,z): self.x=x self.y=y self.z=z def __str__(self): return str(self.x)+" "+str(self.y)+" "+str(self.z) class Gridcell: # struct GRIDCELL def __init__(self,p,n,val): self.p = p # p=[8] self.n = n # n=[8] self.val = val # val=[8] class Triangle: # struct TRIANGLE def __init__(self,p1,p2,p3): self.p = [p1, p2, p3] # vertices # HACK TO GRAB VERTICES FOR PYTHON OUTPUT POINTS_CONTAINER.append( (p1.x,p1.y,p1.z) ) POINTS_CONTAINER.append( (p2.x,p2.y,p2.z) ) POINTS_CONTAINER.append( (p3.x,p3.y,p3.z) )# return a 3d list of values def readdata(f=lambda x,y,z:x*x+y*y+z*z,size=5.0,steps=11): m=int(steps/2) ki = [] for i in range(steps): kj = [] for j in range(steps): kd=[] for k in range(steps): kd.append(f(size*(i-m)/m,size*(j-m)/m,size*(k-m)/m)) kj.append(kd) ki.append(kj) return ki from math import sin,cos,exp,atan2 def lobes(x,y,z): try: theta = atan2(x,y) # sin t = o except: theta = 0 try: phi = atan2(z,y) except: phi = 0 r = x*x+y*y+z*z ct=cos(PARAMETER_A * theta) cp=cos(PARAMETER_B * phi) return ct*ct*cp*cp*exp(-r/10) def main(): data = readdata(lobes,10,40) isolevel = 0.1 #print(data) triangles=[] for i in range(len(data)-1): for j in range(len(data[i])-1): for k in range(len(data[i][j])-1): p=[None]*8 val=[None]*8 #print(i,j,k) p[0]=Vector(i,j,k) val[0] = data[i][j][k] p[1]=Vector(i+1,j,k) val[1] = data[i+1][j][k] p[2]=Vector(i+1,j+1,k) val[2] = data[i+1][j+1][k] p[3]=Vector(i,j+1,k) val[3] = data[i][j+1][k] p[4]=Vector(i,j,k+1) val[4] = data[i][j][k+1] p[5]=Vector(i+1,j,k+1) val[5] = data[i+1][j][k+1] p[6]=Vector(i+1,j+1,k+1) val[6] = data[i+1][j+1][k+1] p[7]=Vector(i,j+1,k+1) val[7] = data[i][j+1][k+1] grid=Gridcell(p,[],val) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,0,2,3,7)) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,0,2,6,7)) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,0,4,6,7)) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,0,6,1,2)) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,0,6,1,4)) triangles.extend(PolygoniseTri(grid,isolevel,5,6,1,4)) def t000F(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): return [] def t0E01(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): return [Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v1],g.val[v0],g.val[v1]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v2],g.val[v0],g.val[v2]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v3],g.val[v0],g.val[v3])) ] def t0D02(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): return [Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v0],g.val[v1],g.val[v0]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v3],g.val[v1],g.val[v3]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v2],g.val[v1],g.val[v2])) ] def t0C03(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): tri=Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v3],g.val[v0],g.val[v3]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v2],g.val[v0],g.val[v2]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v3],g.val[v1],g.val[v3])) return [tri,Triangle( tri.p[2], VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v2],g.val[v1],g.val[v2]), tri.p[1]) ] def t0B04(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): return [Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v2],g.p[v0],g.val[v2],g.val[v0]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v2],g.p[v1],g.val[v2],g.val[v1]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v2],g.p[v3],g.val[v2],g.val[v3])) ] def t0A05(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): tri = Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v1],g.val[v0],g.val[v1]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v2],g.p[v3],g.val[v2],g.val[v3]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v3],g.val[v0],g.val[v3])) return [tri,Triangle( tri.p[0], VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v2],g.val[v1],g.val[v2]), tri.p[1]) ] def t0906(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): tri=Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v1],g.val[v0],g.val[v1]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v1],g.p[v3],g.val[v1],g.val[v3]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v2],g.p[v3],g.val[v2],g.val[v3])) return [tri, Triangle( tri.p[0], VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v0],g.p[v2],g.val[v0],g.val[v2]), tri.p[2]) ] def t0708(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): return [Triangle( VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v3],g.p[v0],g.val[v3],g.val[v0]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v3],g.p[v2],g.val[v3],g.val[v2]), VertexInterp(iso,g.p[v3],g.p[v1],g.val[v3],g.val[v1])) ] trianglefs = {7:t0708,8:t0708,9:t0906,6:t0906,10:t0A05,5:t0A05,11:t0B04,4:t0B04,12:t0C03,3:t0C03,13:t0D02,2:t0D02,14:t0E01,1:t0E01,0:t000F,15:t000F} def PolygoniseTri(g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3): triangles = [] # Determine which of the 16 cases we have given which vertices # are above or below the isosurface triindex = 0; if g.val[v0] < iso: triindex |= 1 if g.val[v1] < iso: triindex |= 2 if g.val[v2] < iso: triindex |= 4 if g.val[v3] < iso: triindex |= 8 return trianglefs[triindex](g, iso, v0, v1, v2, v3) def VertexInterp(isolevel,p1,p2,valp1,valp2): if abs(isolevel-valp1) < 0.00001 : return(p1); if abs(isolevel-valp2) < 0.00001 : return(p2); if abs(valp1-valp2) < 0.00001 : return(p1); mu = (isolevel - valp1) / (valp2 - valp1) return Vector(p1.x + mu * (p2.x - p1.x), p1.y + mu * (p2.y - p1.y), p1.z + mu * (p2.z - p1.z)) if __name__ == "__main__": main() # GRASSHOPPER PYTHON OUTPUTPOINTS = rhinoscriptsyntax.AddPoints(POINTS_CONTAINER)POINTS = rhinoscriptsyntax.CullDuplicatePoints(POINTS)…

Added by Nik Willmore at 8:29am on July 10, 2015

Event: OPENDAY|parametricDAY

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.…

Added by Francesca Guadagnoli at 2:04pm on January 6, 2013

Comment on: Topic 'Angular steel cross sections to cross section table'

rring to the above image) Area effective effective Second Elastic Elastic Plastic Radius Second Elastic Plastic Radius of Vy shear Vz shear Moment Modulus Modulus Modulus of Moment Modulus Modulus of Section Area Area of Area upper lower Gyration of Area Gyration (strong axis) (strong axis) (strong axis) (strong axis) (strong axis) (weak axis) (weak axis) (weak axis) (weak axis) A Ay Az Iy Wy Wy Wply i_y Iz Wz Wplz i_z cm2 cm2 cm2 cm4 cm3 cm3 cm3 cm cm4 cm3 cm3 cm I have a very similar table which I could import to the Karamba table. But I have i_v or i_u values as well as radius of inertia for instance. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 dimensjon Masse Areal akse Ix Wpx ix akse Iy Wpy iy akse Iv Wpv iv Width Thickness Radius R [kg/m] [mm2] [mm4] [mm3] [mm] [mm4] [mm3] [mm] [mm4] [mm3] [mm] [mm] [mm] [mm] L 20x3 0.89 113 x-x 4,000 290 5.9 y-y 4,000 290 5.9 v-v 1,700 200 3.9 20 3 4 L 20x4 1.15 146 x-x 5,000 360 5.8 y-y 5,000 360 5.8 v-v 2,200 240 3.8 20 4 4 L 25x3 1.12 143 x-x 8,200 460 7.6 y-y 8,200 460 7.6 v-v 3,400 330 4.9 25 3 4 L 25x4 1.46 186 x-x 10,300 590 7.4 y-y 10,300 590 7.4 v-v 4,300 400 4.8 25 4 4 L 30x3 1.37 175 x-x 14,600 680 9.1 y-y 14,600 680 9.1 v-v 6,100 510 5.9 30 3 5 L 30x4 1.79 228 x-x 18,400 870 9.0 y-y 18,400 870 9.0 v-v 7,700 620 5.8 30 4 5 L 36x3 1.66 211 x-x 25,800 990 11.1 y-y 25,800 990 11.1 v-v 10,700 760 7.1 36 3 5 L 36x4 2.16 276 x-x 32,900 1,280 10.9 y-y 32,900 1,280 10.9 v-v 13,700 930 7.0 36 4 5 L 36x5 2.65 338 x-x 39,500 1,560 10.8 y-y 39,500 1,560 10.8 v-v 16,500 1,090 7.0 36 5 5 I have diagonals (bracings) which can buckle in these "non-regular" directions too, and they do. If I could add those values then in the Karamba model I could assign specific buckling scenarios..... I can see another challenge which will be at the ModifyElement component, I will not be able to choose these buckling lengths, in these directions. Do you think this functionality can be added within short, or should I try to find another way to model these members? Br, Balazs …

Added by Balazs Kisfali to Karamba3D at 2:14am on May 23, 2017

Blog Post: Workshop FormFinding Strategies MILANO - ITALIA

only compression vault arturo tedeschi

FORM FINDING STRATEGIES WORKSHOP…

Added by Arturo Tedeschi at 3:55am on November 12, 2015

Search Results - 广东11选五历史中奖号码『8TBH·COM』双色球所有诗谜汇总2023年3月19日5时44分48秒.H5c2a3.aivp39iyn.gov.hk

About

Translate

Search

Photos

Random Metaball Explosion Pattern

Random Metaball Explosion Pattern

Random Metaball Explosion Pattern

Random Metaball Explosion Pattern

Random Metaball Explosion Pattern

Videos

Proximity Connection

SubD TriRemesh

Scaled Voronoi

Image-to-3d Workflow using OpenAI Shap-E and Rhino

Random Vector Lines

Text-to-3d-to-AR Workflow using OpenAI Shap-E and Rhino AR