he picture (4).
Previously, I had a problem with generating intersections between the two directions of the beams, but a colleague helped me by extending beams, so there was no problem with lines of intersection. But this solution has generated curl (5) at the highest vertex geometry, which I ignored in order to repair it before printing, perhaps this mean my problem with my beam spread properly. Only when the beams is 19, does not jump no problem, but I still can not distribute them properly.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
I tried to show as simply as possible by removing or signing my code in GHX file.
Thank you in advance for your help
…
ll geometry.
The difference with programs like Inventor is that they are made for production, regardless of the fabrication method. I won't go into detail about that, and instead focus on the modeling process.
In this little model, the starting point actually is a bit obvious, the foundation.
The only contents in the 3dm file are 27 lines. These indicate the location of each footing, and the direction of the tilt of each column. Everything else is defined in GH with the use of numbers as input parameters.
Needless to say, instead of those lines you could obviously generate lines and control the number of columns and panels, hence establish their layout, with any algorithmic or non-algorithmic criteria you please. That marks a major difference between GH and Inventor.
You can generate geometry with Inventor via scripting/customization (beyond iLogic), with transient graphics for visual feedback similar to GH's red-default previews. However Inventor's modeling functions are not set to input and output data trees. I won't go into detail on that, but suffice to say that the data tree associativity of GH was for me the first major difference I noticed. I've used other apps with node diagram interfaces like digital fusion for non-linear video editing since the late 90's, so the canvas did not call my attention when I first started using GH.
Anyways, here's a screen capture of the foundational lines:
In the first group of components, the centerlines of the rear columns are modeled:
And the locations in elevation for connection points are set. Those elevations were just numbers I copied from Excel, but you can obviously control that any way you please. I was just trying to model this quickly.
The same was done for the rear columns:
The above, believe it or not, took me the first 5 hours to get.
Here's a screen capture of what the model and definition looked like after 4 hours, not much:
If you're interested, next post I can get into the sketching part you mentioned, which is a bit cumbersome with GH, but not really.
I wouldn't say that using GH to do this little model was cumbersome, it just needed some thinking at the beginning. You do similar initial thinking when working with a feature-based modeler.…
Added by Santiago Diaz at 12:44am on February 24, 2011
y interesting and smart way to construct surface. I tried some experiments out using a similar idea - take a developable surface which has a series of holes cut through it now offset that surface and unroll both of them, once both have been cut out insert a dowel into the holes (the dowel represents the offset distance). In the end the shape is recreated via tension and in that way there are some similarities. With your concept the thing I have trouble figuring out is how do you cut the variable angle kerfs. Are you using a 5-axis swarf cut, a cnc panel saw - how do you control this? It would be great to have a set of constraints which limit the number of possible angled cuts - these limits would equal the number of v-groove bits you have in the cnc - and then you could just cut the lines with the programmed tool which matches the given angle. Or maybe I am completely wrong, now I think I am wrong, about the execution and you are only changing the gap between each kerf and the angle of the side wall stays constant.
Anyway to answer your question catia can analyze the characteristics of a piece of formed material (this analysis is usually applied to sheet metal and to design forming tools)it's just a matter or defining the material to match that which you are using. Another possibility although not as numerically clear is using a simulation tool like Maya cloth or Virtools. I know this maybe less likely but you can define all sorts of materials in Maya and then simulate their behavior under numerous forces and constraints. I think it would work it's just how do you extrapolate the values Maya needs and then correlate them back into the cloth parameters. Once it yields the final formed mesh then further analysis could be performed in cosmos, ansys, or catia.
I have one other suggestion. In solidworks if you perform a lofted bend on a sheet metal part and then generate a flat pattern it creates a large set of bend lines representing how to perform the bending of an unusual shape using a metal brake. It seems like those bend lines could be machined with you technique to create lofted forms instead of extrusions.
What materials seem to work best so far, have you only been using wood (the purple stuff is probably not wood)?
If you are ever in Los Angeles I have a shop with a 3 axis and 5 axis router, a large vacuum bag, and all the other things to experiment on this and would be open to this.…
which needs to go in the first line only.
Each value K is one element of the knot vector
XYZ is an individual control point. Each point gets its own line/string in the output list
R is the weight of the XYZ point defined in the same line
I can get all these data into separate lists easily enough using the buttons etc. But getting them into the proper order and moving stepwise down the data to generate the desired output string list is eluding me so far.
My thought is to make an array of columns.
Column one is a list of knot values.
Column two is a list of X values.
Column 3 = list of Y values
Column 4=z values
Column 5 is weight values
etc
The idea would be to read the first value in each list into a list of five elements, then make a string out of it. The second value of each column into a separate string on the next line, then the third value from each column into the third string in the output list and so on.The last few values in the output list will contain knot vector elements only, as there are more of these than there are control points. Some of these curves are very long, with many control points, like hundreds and hundreds.
It seems I should be able to pull the lists of interest and combine them into a tree somehow; so far all I have been able to manage is to get them into a single list by starting with control points, then weaving each list of interest successively into the growing list. I'm thinking I need to get the list for each parameter into an individual branch, then read a path across the branches at each index value. But I am missing something about the terminology. I have watched a few videos and it makes sense when people are pulling nested geometry out of models, but this is a little different. More of a data management issue. I'm sure if I wrestle with it I will get it, but it may not be pretty. Any pointers appreciated. A couple of approaches are attached. Not sure whether to loop a list subset through the data or do something else. Thanks,
Karl in LA…
e in Euclidean space then the distance metric can be discontinuous:
Discontinuous means that a tiny change in input may result in a large change in output. Observe the image above, we start measuring euclidean distances from point A. At first the process appears to be continuous. We measure at distance b and we get point B. We increase the distance slightly to c and we get point C, which is very close to point B. We increase the distance slightly again to d, but now suddenly we're in a completely different location. This jumping behaviour can mean that certain questions (such as: "how do I divide this curve into 4 points, all equally far apart?") do not have an answer. It could be possible for 3 and 5, but not 4.
Another problem is that there may be multiple solutions. In the image above the point D isn't the only point that is d units away from A and coincident with the curve. There may be any number of those points depending on the shape of the curve, the location of A and the value of d. And of course once you have two (or more) solutions, you can have two (or more) answers. Then each of those solutions may yet again have more than one outcome for the next point in the chain and before you know it the question you asked has 35295 different answers and good luck trying to find one you like.
Now of course sometimes it is possible to answer your question unambiguously. I made a solution that uses Galapagos. It's pretty slow, and it'll get slower the more segments you want:
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Tirol, Austria…
Added by David Rutten at 4:26am on September 9, 2013
he Summer in the City program, part of the Portland School of Architecture and Allied Arts (an extension to University of Oregon).
Using both Grasshopper and the Firefly plug-in, this workshop will focus on the design of innovative facade prototypes that are configurable, sensate, and active. Students will become familiar with the terminology used in interactive facade design including an overview of hardware (ie.sensors, actuators, and programmable microcontrollers) as well as software interfaces terminology. We'll learn new prototyping techniques and develop digital and physical models which can respond to a plurality of environmental and user driven forces. This workshop will take a hands-on approach, and you will walk away with the ability to build your own custom electronic circuits (using the Arduino), as well as create interactive simulations and models.
This course will primarily focus on physical computing techniques. Unfortunately, given the time constraints of the workshop, I will not be able to provide an extensive overview of the Grasshopper interface (it is suggested that participants have some familiarity with the Rhino/Grasshopper environment). There are many great online resources to get you up to speed relatively quickly if you are new to this software. This is a good place to start.
The course will be held at the School of Architecture and Allied Arts in Portland, OR. The date/times of the workshop are as follows:
Friday July 19, 5:00-7:50 P.M.
Saturday July 20, 9:00 A.M.-3:50 P.M.
Sunday July 21, 1:00-3:50 P.M.
If you are a designer, architect, or anyone who is interested in learning about the digital tools and technology trends that are revolutionizing design today, this workshop is for you. Make sure to click here to find out more about registration and enrollment in this exciting new workshop.…
ly 26-27-28-29 (digital fabrication)
The third edition of digitalMed Workshop is structured as a design laboratory. Participants will learn the challenging process of producing ideas, projects and research analysis that are to be developed through specific software and concepts that emerge through the use of mapping, parametric design and digital fabrication.
The workshop will take place in the city of Salerno (Italy) and it will last 11 days structured into 3 intensive weekends: July 13-14-15 (mapping); July 19-20-21-22 (parametric design); July 26-27-28-29 (digital fabrication).
Goals and Objectives:
We aim to make clear the theoretical and technical knowledge in the approach to parametric and generative design and digital fabrication. (From collection and data management, to the manner in which these inform the geometries, to the fabrication of prototypes.)
Participants will also have the opportunity to practice the new knowledge gained in the design laboratory through project work.
Project Theme:
"Urban Field" Identify, study and analyze the system of public spaces in the urban area of the city of Salerno.
Connection, mutation, generation and evolution are the themes to be followed in project work.
Brief Description of Topics:
- Mapping. Our reality, in all its forms, has studied through concepts of the theory of Complex Systems. The techniques that will be used to study events and places of reality, will work for the management, manipulation and visualization of data and information. These will form the basis for project management and driven geometry, conducted during the second phase of the workshop.
- Parametric Design. Introduction to Rhino* and Grasshopper. Specifically, we will explain the concepts with which to work with the software of parametric design and how they function. Through these tools, we will arrive at the definition of systems of mathematical and / or geometrical relationships that are able to generate and govern patterns, shapes and objects that will inform the final design.
- Digital Fabrication. In this phase, participants of the workshop are organized into working groups. Participants have access to materials and conceptual apparatus that will take them directly to the fabrication of the geometries of the project, with the use of software CAD / CAM interface and the use of machines for the digital fabrication.
The DigitalMed workshop is organized by Nomad AREA (Academy of Research & Training in topics of Contemporary Architecture), in collaboration with the City of Salerno, the Order of Architects Province of Salerno and the National Institute of Architecture In / Arch - Campania.
Interested parties may download the Notice of Competition at the address www.digitalmedworkshop.com and fill the pre-registration no later than July 10th 2012.
PRESS OFFICE
Dr. Francesca Luciano
328 61 20 830
fra_luciano@libero.it
For information or subscriptions:
e-mail: info@digitalmedworkshop.com - tel: 089 463126 - 3391542980 …
http://www.pilkington.com/) dominates the planar market. Charges "around" 1K Euros per m2 for a "plain" system. Personally in bespoke projects I design my own stuff but due to economies of scale ... they cost a bit more (but they look far more sexier, he he) . On the other hand only in a bespoke project I could dare to suggest such a solution (for a large scale building we are talking lots and lots of dollars).
3. Several scales below (aesthetics) you can find static alu systems (either structural or semi-structural):
Or hinged systems (either structural or semi-structural) capable to adapt in contemporary double curvature facades/roofs/envelopes/cats/dogs etc etc ... pioneered worldwide many years ago by my best friend Stefanos Tampakakis (everybody in UAE knows that genius man: http://www.alustet.gr/company.html):
4. With the exception of some paranoid things that Guru Stefanos does for Zaha these days we are talking about planar "facets" (obviously a triangle is such a planar facet). The current trend is: the more edges the better (humans excel in vanity matters). But achieving planarity in, say, quads (like yours) it adds another "restriction" on what you are doing. Until recently Evolute Tools Pro was the only answer. But right now ... well let's say that in short time you'll be greatly surprised by some WOW things in this Noble Forum, he he.
5. MERO (and obviously custom systems) can adapt (at almost no extra charge) in anything imaginable. But in a bespoke building ... well.. you know ultra rich people: they don't want MERO anymore since "everybody" does MERO solutions. Vanity, what else?
6. Smart Glass would become a must in the years to come: Eco-Architecture MUST dominate everything you do. On the other hand spending millions to do some extra WOW stuff (Vanity) ... it doesn't look to me very Eco-Friendly/Whatever ... but let's pretend so, he he.
7. I'm Architect but a bit different from the norm: for instance I smoke cigars (highly politically incorrect stuff) I always talk openly (ditto) and I ride lethal bikes (ditto).
may the Force (as always the Dark Option) be with you: go out there and kill them all.
best, Peter
…
Ladybug + Honeybee:
(Follow steps 0-4 for basic functionality and 0-9 for full functionality)
0. If you have an old version of LB+HB, download the file here (https://app.box.com/s/ds96em9l6stxpcw8kgtf)
and open it in Grasshopper to remove your old Ladybug and Honeybee version.
1. Make sure that you have a working copy of both Rhino and Grasshopper installed.
2. Open Rhino and type "Grasshopper" into the command line (without quotations). Wait for grasshopper to load.
3. Install GHPython 0.6.0.3 by downloading the file at this link (http://www.food4rhino.com/project/ghpython?ufh) and
drag the .gha file onto the Grasshopper canvas.
4. Select and drag all of the userObject files (downloaded with this instructions file) onto your Grasshopper canvas.
You should see Ladybug and Honeybee appear as tabs on the grasshopper tool bar.
(If you are reading this instruction on github you can download them from http://www.food4rhino.com/project/ladybug-honeybee)
5. Restart Rhino and Grasshopper. You now have a fully-functioning Ladybug. For Honeybee, continue to the following:
6. Install Radiance to C:\Radiance by downloading it from this link (https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/4.2.2/radiance-4.2.2-win32.exe) and running the exe.
7. Install Daysim 4.0 for Windows to C:\DAYSIM by downloading it at this link (http://daysim.ning.com/page/download) and running the exe.
8. Install EnergyPlus 8.1 to C:\EnergyPlusV8-1-0 by going to the DOE website (http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/energyplus/energyplus_download.cfm), making an account, going to "download older
versions of EnergyPlus, selecting 8.1 and running the exe.
9. Copy falsecolor2.exe (http://pyrat.googlecode.com/files/falsecolor2.exe) and evalglare.exe (http://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/downloads-englisch/software/evalglare_windows.zip/at_download/file) to C:\Radiance\bin
10. You now have a fully-working version of Ladybug + Honeybee. Get started visualizing weather data with these video tutorials (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLruLh1AdY-Sj_XGz3kzHUoWmpWDXNep1O).
After I've done all the above I followed this video
https://vimeo.com/96155674
And everything works well.
…
nted" in space (at instance definition creation phase): indicates the obvious fact that if garbage in > garbage out (try it).
2. Load the GH thing. Task for you: Using Named Views locate the points of interest as described further and make a suitable view. That way you can navigate rather easily around (hope dies last).
3. Your attractors are controlled from here:
The slider in blue picks some attractor to play with. You can use this while the K2 is running.
4. Don't change anything here (think of it as a black box: who cares how it works? nobody actually):
5. Enable the other "black box": job done your real-life stuff is placed:
6. Enable the solver: your "real-life" things start to bounce around:
7. Go there are play with the slider. A different attractor yields an other solution:
8. With real-life things in place if you disable the C# ... they are instantly deleted and you are back in lines/points and the likes:
9. Either with instance definitions or Lines/points change ... er ... hmm ... these "simple" parameters and discover the truth out there:
10. Since these are a "few" and they affect the simulation with a variety of ways ... we need a "self calibrating" system: some mini big Brother that does the job for us. Kinda like applying safely the brakes when it rains (I hate ABS mind).
NOTE: the rod with springs requires some additional code ,more (that deals with NESTED instance definitions) in order to (b) bounce as a whole and at the same time (b) elongates or shrinks a bit.
More soon.
…