hours/day (40 hours) Future University in Egypt (FUE) Department of Continuing Education(DCE) ________________________________________ The aim of this workshop is to teach participants how to create a parametric housing model which can be associated with day lighting and thermal analysis. Moreover, participant will get the opportunity to develop passively design envelope. The workshop is highly interactive giving different examples that develop a strong understanding of Grasshopper Workflow & different passive strategies using the performance simulation tool (DIVA). The participants are divided into groups to study the different orientations and the final outcomes of each group are presented thus concluding the recommendation strategies for each orientation. At the end of the workshop, each participant will receive a Certificate of Attendance from Future University in Egypt. Target Participants: ‐Professional architects. ‐Master and PhD students. ‐ Last year of undergraduate students (ONLY). Prerequisite: -None, however, a basic Grasshopper & Rhinoceros knowledge is preferred. Used Software:(will be provided by the instructor). ‐Rhino 5 SR 3 ‐Grasshopper 0.90066 ‐DIVA Version 2.1.0.3 ________________________________________ Workshop Outline: 1st DAY (Wednesday 29 Jan): 1.Introduction to passive design strategies (efficient envelope) 2.Introduction to parametric design logic 2nd DAY (Thursday 30 Jan) : 1.Developing technical tools based on reverse engineering technology. 2.Examples for parametric facade design 3rd DAY (Saturday 1 Feb): 1.Enforcing the parametric logics with Grasshopper 2.Introducing the performance simulation tool (DIVA) 4th DAY (Sunday 2 Feb): 1.Facade design using grasshopper ‐Studio work. 2.Associative techniques – Day lighting and thermal simulation 5th DAY (Monday 3 Feb): 1.Final optimization and final results 2.Group work presentation ________________________________________ Participants are required to bring their own laptops. To register: 1.Fill in the application form found in this link: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/18OrcwwDks5-vd0irZITC430bjMVb8I8pdw0i5OefyMg/viewform 2.Kindly pay the workshop fees at FUE DCE Admission or in the Bank account Number of participants is a minimum of 20 and a maximum of 24 ________________________________________ Workshop Trainers: Ayman Wagdy Mohamed Ibrahim Researcher at Sustainable Design research group | AUC Lecturer at Parametric design | AUC M.Sc. Architecture – Architecture and Building Technology| Politecnico Di Milano Haitham Salah Ali Mahmoud Teaching Assistant of Design course | AASTMT Head of design team | YBA Architect Principal and cofounder | Arkan Architect ________________________________________ For any questions or info please do not hesitate to contact us at : Mob. : 01003220017 - 01008551772 Email : Fue_ppd@outlook.com…
Added by ayman wagdy at 12:12pm on January 17, 2014
ly fabricated interventions and interactive electronic performance art installations in Barra Funda. Along with other experts, these tutors will teach how to use and apply new design technologies, notably Rhino and Grasshopper (and numerous plug-ins including GECO, Galapagos, Kangaroo and RhinoCam); Arduino and Processing; and the use of laser-cutters, rapid- prototype machines and CNC routers and mills.
Alan Dempsey of NEX, was in 2010, selected by the Centre for European Architecture/Chicago Athenaeum as one of the 40 most significant architects in the EU under 40. In 2008 he was selected by the British Council as one of the six most significant Design Entrepreneurs. He previously worked with Future Systems, OCEAN and Homa Farjadi. Alan was an AA Unit Tutor and is Director of the AA Independent’s Group (www.independentsgroup.net), which facilitates research into the use of computational design and fabrication. Alan has lectured, exhibited and been published worldwide. His work has received a number of awards, including a LEAF award for Spencer Dock Bridge, and a D&AD pencil for the [C]space DRL 10 Pavilion.
Robert Stuart Smith of Kokkugiais a Studio Course Master at the AA DRL. Robert previously worked for Lab Architecture Studio and Nicholas Grimshaw & Partners. He focuses on self-organisational systems and developmental growth, pursuing polyvalent and environmentally responsive affect. He leads consultation to Cecil Balmond on non-linear algorithmic design research. Kokkugia has projects in the USA, UK and Mexico, and is exhibited and published internationally.
Iván Ivanoff is an artist, programmer, and researcher. He searches for new forms of communication for the society of the future and is the director of different Media Labs worldwide. He founded the artistic collaborative i2off.org+r3nder.net, which develops multi-media and interactive projects, and Estado Lateral Media Lab to investigate and develop new technologies.
The Barra Funda district of São Paulo was once characterised by a mix of small industrial, commercial and residential programmes, but, as economic policies have favoured larger production industries, numerous companies have abandoned the area. In response, the workshop proposes the creation of new types of smaller industries to produce a mix of both consumption and production, manifested through micro-manufacturing interventions that can co-exist alongside retail and housing. Computational design and digital fabrication could be used to help create these new micro-industries, which in turn will help empower local craftsman to produce and sell directly to consumers through micro-manufacturing, located in small urban workshops.
The workshop will tap into emergent gallery scene of Barra Funda and local initiatives that use computational technology to introduce a new cultural and economic impetus. The workshop is a part of the International Festival of Electronic Language (FILE), an exhibition of interactive electronic technology, and will import these electronic technologies out of the galler, collaborating with local manufacturers, artists, and activists, with a goal of disseminating a high-tech yet low-cost and small-scale fabrication systems to promote this new micro-industrial movement. The workshop is open to architecture and design students and professionals worldwide.…
sophy though, I have a rudimentary grasp of the Ancient Greeks and modern schools of thought such as Existentialism and Pragmatism, but there is certainly no depth in my understanding. However here the same rule applies. You can quote philosophy all you want, but unless you understand that which you're channelling you can be -at best- accidentally correct.
According to you, these are all vital characteristics:
Aesthetic judgement
Intuition about spatial effectiveness
Knowledge of construction materials & assembly systems
Consideration of performance-driven design properties
Mad synthesizing skillz
[1] and [2] are pretty much worthless, especially when we're dealing with students. Aesthetic judgement is not something that can be wrong or right. You can hone your aesthetic skills but you cannot cultivate better tastes. Intuition is also problematic. It's basically a stand-in for argumentation. Instead of saying "these buildings have to have 20 meters apart because of wind/sound/human perception/human psychology/light/shadow/etc. etc" is a far stronger statement than "these buildings have to have 20 meters apart because of my feelings". Who are you to be trusted? If you have a long and distinguished career backing you up, maybe your opinions carry some weight, but until that point you'd better be prepared to justify your decisions with cold hard logic and data.
[3] is certainly important for certain jobs in construction, but it can be argued that implementation details are not necessarily central to a design. One can design a good computer interface without having to be able to program, and certainly without being familiar with all the idiosyncrasies of a particular programming language. Conversely, one can design an excellent space without knowing exactly how strong certain atomic bonds are. If what you design is physically impossible, then obviously something has to change, but it doesn't mean that the design as an abstract idea was bad. Of course on the other hand one can argue that designing impossible things is not doing anyone any favours. I'm not exactly certain where I stand on this issue, probably comfortably in the middle; YES, students need to learn about what can be build in the physical world, but NO that is not part of design training.
I'm not quite sure what [4] means.
[5] is true for a lot of professions, not just Architects. I would concede that architects probably have more to take into account than most designers and that it is indeed an important skill to have.
I would say that -especially for students, who have little experience- an incredibly important skill to be able to ask yourself "why am I doing this?" about pretty much every decision you make. Basically you need to get very comfortable applying the Socratic method to everything you do.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Tirol, Austria…
Added by David Rutten at 11:03am on August 14, 2013
deform into rhombic dedocahedrons when they reach equilibrium.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/CubicClosePacking.html
I was trying to model sphere lattice constrained within a boundary box. When inflated, they would not intersect with each other; they would stay in place; and would be malleable just enough to expand and fill in the gaps in between the spheres.
I started off with the help of this thread here(Thanks for those contributed!). As I understood, there was a bug in Kangaroo2. Solver can't handle more than one item plugged in. So I tried to understand David's Stasiuk's Script and adopted it with a few variations, please see gh file attached.
In the first 5 - I've used David Stasiuk's C# component-variable pressure (posted on June 9, 2015 at 12:25am): 'No. 4.5' being the most successful simulation so far(inflation value is kept very low so that they would not intersect);
although I realised I made some math mistake in setting the close packing grid.(could be checked by plugging voronoi3D to see if the area of the rhombic faces are regular)
No. 6-7 I tried with Kangaroo2 components.
After consulting my tutor(Andrei Jipa)'s help, I realised the following changes could be made:
- The definition posted by David on June 8, 2015 at 4:47pm with constant pressure would've worked better.
- Icosahedrons with WbCatmull(Quad divisions) would result in more even load distribution. With wbloop, vertices more concentrated at poles.
- Load in dir Z could be omitted. Andrei has suggested to use lengths(line) in Kangaroo 2 as 'pressure' instead. And I am trying to improve the grid; and maybe try with David's constant pressure definition. I will keep you guys posted of the progress!
I am new to the parametric world, comments/advice very much appreciated! :) Zhini
…
ges can have much stronger impact on the final design.
The problem is that usually the more "nonlinear" the mapping is the more interesting the result usually are because a definition with a very "linear" mapping doesn't have so much potential for surprise and unforeseen solutions.
It can be a random number as you stated, but also some like for example a slightly different point coordinate leads to different typology in a delaunay triangulation, now the strength of the impact also depends on the total sum of the delaunay points as well on how early the triangulation happens in the definition.
I seen that a shape analysis is a not easy at all not only technical but especially by defining the criteria. Looking forward to see your approach compare genotype and phenotype 'solution' spaces. Maybe an additional approach could be to have something like a gene manager where you can narrow down ranges of certain genes, weight them or freeze them.
to 4) and 5) looking forward to see the history once its ready. I think it could be beneficial to also be able to insert solution "by hand" for further crossbreeding and saving.
What i found myself doing quite often was taking solutions from the biomorpher and then tweaking one or more parameters "by hand" because then you can really see the impact and then you would like to have the possibly to bring that solution back into the biomorpher process.
I will go on testing and get back to you guys in some weeks! I attached you the my definition in case you want to have a look. Its needs kangaroo1, lunchbox, heteroptera and wb. Its more a graphical formal exercise:
best, chris…
ond class to my c# Project to get a second Component, which doesn´t work. when i load the .gha file, only my first component appears.
so i have a C# Project with two classes like this:
namespace myUtilities{ public class My1stComponent : GH_Component { public My1stComponent() : base("My1stComponentName", "MFC", "do something", "myTab", "my1stToolBox") { } protected override void RegisterInputParams(GH_Component.GH_InputParamManager pManager) { //myInputs } protected override void RegisterOutputParams(GH_Component.GH_OutputParamManager pManager) { //myOutputs } protected override void SolveInstance(IGH_DataAccess DA) { //myAlgorithm }
public override Guid ComponentGuid { get { return new Guid("88e6231b-d998-4de2-85dc-451b0158c599"); } }
namespace myUtilities{ public class My2ndComponent : GH_Component { public My2ndComponent() : base("My2ndComponentName", "MSC", "do something else", "myTab", "my2ndToolBox") { } protected override void RegisterInputParams(GH_Component.GH_InputParamManager pManager) { //myInputs } protected override void RegisterOutputParams(GH_Component.GH_OutputParamManager pManager) { //myOutputs } protected override void SolveInstance(IGH_DataAccess DA) { //myAlgorithm }
public override Guid ComponentGuid { get { return new Guid("c5aaf8ea-3a02-4d6e-86ee-a8e35ba2b96d"); } }
Can anybody tell what´s wrong about that?
Another Problem i have is to to get my own icon. i added one to my c# Project like this:
protected override Bitmap Icon { get { return myUtilities.Properties.Resource_icon.myFirstComponent; } }
In Rhino 5 my icon appears, but not in rhino 4 :(.
Thanx for your answers.
…
Added by max wittich at 8:00am on September 17, 2012
ers can be applied from the right click Context Menu of either a component's input or output parameters. With the exception of <Principal> and <Degrees> they work exactly like their corresponding Grasshopper Component. When a I/O Modifier is applied to a parameter a visual Tag (icon) is displayed. If you hover over a Tag a tool tip will be displayed showing what it is and what it does.
The full list of these Tags:
1) Principal
An input with the Principal Icon is designated the principal input of a component for the purposes of path assignment.
For example:
2) Reverse
The Reverse I/O Modifier will reverse the order of a list (or lists in a multiple path structure)
3) Flatten
The Flatten I/O Modifier will reduce a multi-path tree down to a single list on the {0} path
4) Graft
The Graft I/O Modifier will create a new branch for each individual item in a list (or lists)
5) Simplify
The Simplify I/O Modifier will remove the overlap shared amongst all branches. [Note that a single branch does not share any overlap with anything else.]
6) Degrees
The Degrees Input Modifier indicates that the numbers received are actually measured in Degrees rather than Radians. Think of it more like a preference setting for each angle input on a Grasshopper Component that state you prefer to work in Degrees. There is no Output option as this is only available on Angle Inputs.
7) Expression
The Expression I/O Modifier allows you change the input value by evaluating an expression such as -x/2 which will have the input and make it negative. If you hover over the Tag a tool tip will be displayed with the expression. Since the release of GH version 0.9.0068 all I/O Expression Modifiers use "x" instead of the nickname of the parameter.
8) Reparameterize
The Reparameterize I/O Modifier will only work on lines, curves and surfaces forcing the domains of all geometry to the [0.0 to 1.0] range.
9) Invert
The Invert Input Modifier works in a similar way to a Not Gate in Boolean Logic negating the input. A good example of when to use this is on [Cull Pattern] where you wish to invert the logic to get the opposite results. There is no Output option as this is only available on Boolean Inputs.
…
of stuff. Then it works either with ExoW (black mesh) or IntraLattice (blue mesh).
That said ExoW is tricky: occasionally reports engulfing issues and stops playing the game. For instance in this (diagonal) anchor mode and with some U/V random values:
Whilst IntraLattice appears rather less temperamental:
The other def is more complex and works using the Proximity approach that makes more sense with regard random 3d line graphs (as an exercise: Add a gate and use IntraLattice as Plan B).
best
…
to Daniel Pikers' Tutorial mesh relaxation tutorials we are already pretty far.
The Idea of our design is a hanging structure suspendend in a gap between buildings, where you can find places to rest, read or even to sleep. You can find privacy in the cocoons, that are connecting the planes with each other.
As structure we have a net in mind, that is tighter in the area of the cocoons and more transparent in the common areas, but we really don't know whats the right way to get to this point.
In the end of the project we need a printable geometry. We start our boxy design in Sketchup, and remesh it in Rhino. After that we feed it in our kangaroo definition.
1. A nurbs surface could give us more freedom (for postprocessing in tsplines) to form meshes with shorter and longer edges, representing our net. But I see now easy way to get a surface out of the relaxed kangaroo mesh.
2. Working with the kangaroo mesh could also work fine, if we'd find a way to control the edge length of the mesh (for example 20 cm in the common area and 5 in the privates) with an attractor point. Remeshing with Daniel's Plankton Plugin sadly doesn't work, I always get the "runaway faces circulator"-error.
3. It woud be great to convert the mesh to a hexagonal mesh, but I don't know any possibility to remesh an existing one...
You see, we're full of questions, but I really hope to get some help here :)
Agostino & Johanna
…