s because the geometry is too big for cuting in laser machine plotter, so I Want to separate this 5 segments, If you see the image 2.
I select the item number 3 that is in the midle and its all fine, but if u watch the image 3 when i select the Item 2 for example tooks segments for randomly :(.
Its like the curves are not in the same direction, i tried to flip them but no results, I tested the curve direction and it seems all ok. Look at this:
This is killing me T_T... any commentaries...…
resting make a challenge of games between all the community. Look here.
To all of us like games. There are many ways to make it, and isn't something that takes a long time. Essentially only need a good idea.
Therefore, if you want to participate, you will be subject to these rules:
1. You must publish the Grasshopper definition, without cluster with passwords. 2. Can not compete with a file already published. 3. May judge the whole community, but once finished the date of delivery and they must follow these bonuses:
- Playability. More entertaining, better.
- Originality. Classic, modern or new games adapted to Gh. - Divergence. Thinking differently, usual components used for other reasons. - Master. If you learn from its definition, reward it. - Simplicity. Not necessarily less components, rather a clear logic.
- Smoothness. Should be quick, no need to rent a supercomputer.
The deadline is November 30. From 1 to December 15, all we can score / value, with 3, 2 and 1 points to the first, second and third respectively. Who has the highest score on 16, wins the challenge.
Good luck! …
思った感じになりません。
balls の代わりにplanarカーブを直接入れてみましたがエラーが出ます。
ファンクションにしてみたところ、forループので作った数値が反映されていません。
ファンクションのインスタンス?を出力していないと思い上記のようにしましたがエラーが出てしまいます。
以上の事から自分の認識が正しいのかよくわからなくなりました・・・
python自体の深いところをわかっているわけではないので余計こんがらがりました。
そこで、for b in ballsはどのような条件または使い方であれば使えるのでしょうか?
そして、上記のように別のオブジェクトに対しての使い方はどのようにすればできるのでしょうか?
2:同じファンクション内のdist = rs.Distance(self.pos,b.pos)についてですが
この文章も for b in balls によってbはBallのインスタンスであると定義?されたためb.posがbの位置であると分かるのでしょうか?
pythonは定義しなくても動いてしまうのでどのような時に使えるのか文章見ただけではよくわかりません・・・
大変細かいことかもしれませんが、よりpythonをしっかりと理解するためにも、どなたかわかる方ご教授いただけると幸いです。…
grid size 3 = 2.7 mins
grid size 2 = ??? memory peaks and rhino freezes.
However now that I have switch the unit of the rhino file to feet,
now grid size 3 = 18 mins.
which makes i suppose since the analysis will have to work with smaller tolerance.
The below img is what i got after 18 mins. I think also the fact that I have joined the individual units with solid union also make it longer maybe? you can see the mesh triangulation not only around the corners of masses but also inbetween different units (if you look at the top level you will see)
oh, and I also have very little disk space left.
I would like to share the file but right its a big mess and has a lot of stuff that is unrelated to this particular memory issue, like revit interoperability and urban modelling. and the definition is set up so that it needs to have an excel file that feeds what you see on the lower left corner, wing mass scales. In order to compare design studies I am animating the index of list component that feeds the different scale of the wings and the width of the floor plates you see. you can see it in my video here. I will try to clean it up a bit when I get a chance, but it seems like grid size 3 might work as a starting point.
when I get around to extract values from the mesh vertices and actually apply different facade designs driven from the parameters, I would know better what grid size might be necessary.
…
rid y Barcelona, este año volamos a latinoamérica para compartir las experiencias acumuladas y aprender cosas nuevas de la arquitectura latinoamericana.
El seminario se desarrollará en torno a cuatro talleres monográficos complementados con una serie de conferencias.
Taller 1. Iniciación a Grasshopper.
Taller 2. Grasshopper para formadores.
Taller 3. Fabricación digital.
Taller 4. Edificación BIM
…
ou would do the following:
dim int1 as new inteval(0,1)
I suggest that you "reparameterize" your surface in code which happens like this:
(assuming that "sur" is a surface you've brought in or already dim'ed)
sur.setdomain(0, int1)
sur.setdomain(1,int1)
then if you want to cut the surface up into whatever pieces you can use the domains like percentages so 0 to .2 would be from the start to 20% and .2 to .3 would be 20% to 30% and so on.
I am not quite sure what you want with the chopped up domain unless you are trying to split the surface in which case please see the ghx I attached.
you could run that trim in a for loop to get a bunch of parts and add those surfaces to a list. Let me know if this is not what you needed and I'll see what I can do to help.
…
low for a degree of variation that my previous option was not allowing. There are two problems with this however.
1. i need to restrict the minimum and maximum distance of the curves at 30<100 mm respectively.
2. i also need to repeat the cycle of waves, so i dont think that splitting the curves at the cycle change and doing this method.would be useful because this would cause overlaps right?
3. most annoying constraint that I have is that the length of the elements cannot exceed 1500. :(
so basically there is limited room to play in the extent of the wave but, there is scope in repetition.
thanks for all your help so far man! once this is done I would like to make my definition as neat and communicative as yours and share it with everyone!
…
really impressive and fun: http://makeagif.com/i/bAFelo
The principles above (of bending beams interacting with an inflated cushion) can seemingly be successfully upscaled - see attached gh file.
However, if I want to increase the "strength" of the bending angle higher than "3", the whole system becomes unstable - energies seemingly not able to converge. Furthermore, some tips of my members are always jumping irregularly. I imagine this is due to their shorter lengths - but the differences in lengths are not huge, and so that surprised me a little.
I wonder if you have any ideas on how to stabilize this simulation? If it can be stabilized, I will attempt to calibrate its mechanical properties (for which I may need your help or documentation). Currently, each iteration takes between 10 and 30 seconds to complete - which I don't mind, especially if I can control each iteration step with an Anders-like script.
I hope you can find some time to feedback on this. It will be greatly appreciated, as ever!
See you in Copenhagen.
Greg…
ued obelisk": where cross-sect structural members are extruded along lines, using 'Perpendicular Frame' & 'Orient'. At certain junctions, the planes flip (or I assume they do as the structural members flip out-of-alignment).
I tried generating the structure 2-ways to see if it was just me --using curves w/ endpoints (left) and culled-subSurface-edges (right). The location of the "flip" seems to be dependent upon the rotation of the generative squares (3 arrayed vertically & rotated @ 0, 30, & 60 dgrs) as well as the derivation method, but I can't seem to negate it all together.
Surface orientation as well as curve direction all seem to be uniform...
>GG *might* be a workaround...
RH 6.15.19141.8361, 05/21/2019
GH 1.0.0007, 2019-05-21
Win7x64 Pro
Thx in advance,
-dt…