o express my gratitude. I've been experimenting with your definitions (and still am), but let me extend my question.
Actually what I'm trying to achieve, is to recreate another project by Andrew Kudless, the spore lamp (I mentioned the Chrysalis at the beginning just because of the animation, which wasn't included in the Spore Lamp presentation).
Basically the spore lamp seems to me to be something like a preliminary study to the Chrysalis III project (I think it's a similar approach).
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 which then has been planarized, 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)
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 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-released?g...
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: Keep the cells planar in order to be able to loft them later and obtain those pyramidal forms, and assemble easily
Any ideas? Or maybe there's a completely different approach to that?…
p across to Kangaroo 2, but I am still trying to wrap my head around it. I understand that it allows you to incorporate multiple forces dependent on one another a bit better, which is what my question pertains to...
We are currently developing a project around creating a tensile lattice structure within an inflatable. In mocking things up, I have been able to simply inflate forms with static anchor points. I was wondering if it would be possible to link the anchor points for the inflatable shell to tensioned cables or nets pulling on the interior that find equilibrium when the tension is changed?
Below are some illustrations of what I am trying to achieve that I did with a tetrahedron in Kangaroo 1. To get both the inflated form and the tensioned form I had to run two simulations and bake each. I am looking for a way to have to forces of both dependent on one another.
I'm isolating the interior tension member to cables for now, but I would eventually like to expand to suspending 3d netted volumes within the inflatable.
I have also attached my attempted gh file with Kangaroo 2. It kind of works but not as drastically as I would like, and it breaks down very easily. Any help/advice would be greatly appreciated!:)
…
learn, or as an alternative to your morning coffee + cross-word puzzle.
Rules:
Contributions can be posted by anyone. Either selected from a previously posted problem from the general discussion (please acknowledge original poster), a selection from one of the many grasshopper+ primers (please include credits) something you think is fun, curious about, or even something you want to learn.
We should keep the entries dated so we can track them. One new problem per day (so if you see one posted for today- there is always tomorrow).
User(you) adds post titled: date-name of problem.
Solutions will be posted with breakdowns, either in logic procedure, etc. And in the spirit of the NY Times, an explained solution will be posted as well within the following days.
Remember there are multiple ways to solve a problem- however the “official” post should include a “clean and elegant” (or simplest) solution. So that all learning can develop better scripting habits.
Rules: an explanation.
1- Submission categories are as follows:
Native
Plug In
Scripted
Each category should have a difficulty rating - 1 to 5 perhaps.
They should be included in title for clarity-
Date_NameOfProblem_Native Plugin or Script_Difficulty
2. Since we are an international community, and this is an open group- a C+G day starts at the time of 10 am local poster’s time.
3.Anyone can set the next question. However the same person cannot set two days in a row. If a question is up- then next person needs to wait until the following day to post. You can PM Danny Boyes or Myself (Monique) if you are having posting issues- (i.e.: how to post, or have been trying to post, but keep missing the opportunity)
4. Answers are presented in the typical grasshopper community response way: in the form of examples, and/or screen shots. For screen shots: make sure the nodes are legible, if you do a function inside a node make sure we can see what you did. Verbal explanation. Maybe picture of result.
The difference between this group and the general discussion is that the poster should know how to solve the problem, be able to post a solution up themselves.
5. The poster judges the answer. They should offer a sample solution as well when they declare the winner.
However overall quality control may be checked by moderators of the group.
6. Still thinking about this one. …
3 arms and 6 legs (PS: Remember: in real-life our fee is proportional to the budget > thus > like Godzilla > the bigger the better).
In the mean time (auto detection of struts < min Allowed == true) get the gist of the whole "torque" issue, the other gist not to mention the other-other gist.
Of course you can opt for NOT making the cables (green) that stabilize the "extension" part of a given tensegrity strut ... yielding the Mother in Law syndrome (fat and ugly):
But ... hmm ... well ... are you really the chosen one? Here's your chance for the ticket to Paradise (full Lord's assistance, that is). Identify this engine, name the designer and the related immortal racer (when men were men).
Moral: Heaven can wait. …
ese explanations help (we will also look at your file) asap.
About your question regarding the Tutte graph drawing algorithm (also known as topological embedding):
The Tutte algorithm can be viewed as a special case of Spectral Graph Drawing, which is a mathematical solution for topological embedding formulated as an optimization problem. The formulation of the topological embedding (e.g. as in Tutte algorithm) is in fact quite similar to the so-called force-directed drawing that is often solved by heuristic methods like the one we have made for the SYNTACTIC plugin. You can read more about Force-Directed Graph Drawing (a.k.a. coin-graph drawing and kissing disks drawing) and Spectral Graph Drawing and Spectral Graph Theory in my dissertation.
The functionality of the Tutte algorithm is only guaranteed for graphs that are 3-connected, i.e. graphs with more than 3 vertices which cannot be torn apart unless at least two vertices are removed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-vertex-connected_graph
Speaking of the conditions for the Tutte algorithm to work properly: Practically, this implies, for instance, that there should not be rooms connected only to one other room.
Anyhow, long story short, we have decided to continue with Spectral Graph Drawing and 3D force-directed graph drawing. These algorithms are ready and with a couple of adjustments for maximum speed and stability we will release them shortly. Some conditions for these algorithms are easier to ensure, but in general if a node(room) is connected to only one space or the graph is not well connected one cannot expect a good graph drawing from neither of these methods. The other issue that is also common is that the force directed graph drawing will not work if one forces a big bubble to be squeezed in the middle of smaller bubbles. Stay tuned. …
o fix before it becomes very usable, but I'm posting the file here in case anyone wants to try it out.
It is a few simple scripts which record point locations from a first Kangaroo simulation whenever the capture button is pressed, and then when you playback the animation it interpolates between this captured sequence of points, pulling a second Kangaroo simulation to these targets. You can control the playback with a slider or automatically with a timer.
This should work with other Kangaroo2 setups, but here demonstrated with a human figure modelled as a collection of rigid bodies. At the knees and elbows the rigid bodies share 2 points to give a hinge joint, while for shoulders, neck, hips, ankles, wrists and torso they share only single points, giving a basic ball joint.
This is also the first time I've posted this model, and I'm also including the setup without the animation script. I know there are numerous issues with this poseable figure - dragging joints sometimes moves parts of the model you don't want to, and joints have unrealistic ranges of motion. I made a start at trying to limit some of these - such as ClampLength goals to stop the torso bending too much, but more could be done. There is also an issue with the rigid bodies (which track orientations with a frame of 3 points) that if you grab the frame itself, the simulation can break. I'm currently rethinking this whole approach.
I should also say that although I have heavily modified this human model to make it work for this setup, I did start from a mesh downloaded from some free 3d model collection site, but unfortunately I do not know the name of the original artist. If someone recognises it I would like to add appropriate credits.…
bsp;
-Vehicle elements (3D objects and a component for custom vehicles; models from Google Warehouse)
-Traffic Velocity Graphs, drawn on every trajectory curve (allow custom graphs drawn)
-Traffic regulation elements (such as Traffic Lights and Stop Signals) and traffic density
-Particle Systems on trajectory curves, just to manage the traffic regulations and avoid collisions based on security distances
-Traffic Vehicle Animation Modes (Dots, Bounding Boxes or complex Meshes with attributes for final rendering (Giulio Piacentino´s Render Animation)
-Vehicle Lights and Vehicle Sights, to make visual studies
Team:
-Sergio del Castillo Tello (Doctor No, lead programmer)
-Everyone that wants to be involved, support.. these tools
The development of Roadrunner is planned to take part within a Research Group Program at ETSAM (University of Architecture in Madrid); This forum group is created just to test the interest of the community, while we keep on developing (it is still being tested), probably we will share the whole thing in the future. Cheers!
Traffic Cluster Scheme
Traffic Elements
Traffic Urban Systems
Vehicle Elements
Roadrunner - overview
Roadrunner 0 Basics
Roadrunner 1 Modes
Roadrunner 2 Elements
Roadrunner 3 Urban Systems…
raries by entering %appdata% into the dialog box and browsing to the Grasshopper Libraries folder to find KangarooSolver.dll.)
Oh wow, because of "physics" there is substantial gap between the surface layer of many particles and the inner truss, so we already have some form of boundary adaptive 3D meshing, albeit only in the surface "XY" direction not the normal "Z" direction. There's less full XYZ directional force on the particles at the surface, so they can cluster more there due to the forces from within having to struggle much more against one another from all directions. Something like that.
Differing surface curvature has not much if any affect on particle packing:
The actual physics of electrons along a conductor says they are all on the surface, where they concentrate at sharp features, but here I imagine if they concentrated more at the finger tip, they would then push more interior particles away, which is not very adaptive after all.
Higher falloff exponents than 3 (actually -3) give much more even distances of surface vs. interior, so my color coding by length doesn't even work and there are visibly a lot more interior particles:
I confirm that exponent -2 drives everything to the surface, but also gives a quite odd artifact that they are not minimizing energy by close packing away from each other but are forming squares that seem to align with the UV directions of the container:
Exponent -4 then and even more -5 maximize the interior population, but beyond -5 it it becomes unstable and bounces around like crazy.
The Kangaroo2 custom goal C# script is simple enough:
I'm still confused how to attenuate the effect according to distance to the surface and also curvature of the surface when you are getting close to it since I don't understand if Kangaroo is running the entire Grasshopper script each iteration or not so I could just do calculations via Grasshopper stuff and feed it into the C# script as needed?
…
Added by Nik Willmore at 7:43pm on August 12, 2015
2: https://vimeo.com/107502226
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi all,
1. Chris, Chien Si and I will present Ladybug and Honeybee at IBSA-USA NYC this Thursday (August 21st). The presentation will include some of the latest developments that we are working on. If you are interested to know more about some of the new developments and see some of the workflows and you are around New York then just stop by. If can't attend in person you can still watch the presentation online. Check the links below. (Make sure to register by Wednesday if you are attending in person.)
2. We would like to show some of the works that you have done with Honeybee and Ladybug during the presentation so if there is anything that you think is interesting and can be presented publicly send it to us at thisisladybug@gmail.com or just post it here. Make sure to let us know who do you want us to credit the image.
3. That's it for now. I copy the information about the presentation below and hope to see some of you there. Thanks for your help and support.
Cheers,
Mostapha
IBPSA-USA New York Regional Chapter presents:
Parametric Modeling Tools | Ladybug and Honeybee
Location: Thornton Tomasetti, 44 East 27th street (between Madison and Park)
Date & Time: Thursday, August 21, 2014 - 6:00-7:30 PM.
6:00-6:30 PM Networking
6:30-7:30 PM Ladybug and Honeybee
Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari, Thornton Tomasetti
Chris Mackey, MIT
Chien Si Harriman, Terabuild
7:30-7:45 PM Q & A
Click here to register**: https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/6507378565592582402
**Please register at least a day in advance if you wish to attend in person
Descriptions
Ladybug + Honeybee
Ladybug and Honeybee are open source environmental plugins for Grasshopper that help architects and engineers create an environmentally-conscious architectural design.
Ladybug imports standard EnergyPlus Weather files (.EPW) into Grasshopper and provides a variety of 3D interactive graphics to support the decision-making process during the initial stages of design. The plugin also provides further support for designers as they test their initial design options with radiation, sunlight-hour, and shading analyses. Integration with Grasshopper allows for an almost instantaneous feedback and, since the plugin runs within the design environment, the information and analyses are interactive.
Honeybee connects Grasshopper3D to EnergyPlus, Radiance, Daysim and OpenStudio for building energy and daylighting simulation. The Honeybee project intends to make many of the features of these simulation tools available in a parametric way. Just as users have made changes to geometry for years in Grasshopper, now users can parameterize system types, zoning schemes, schedules of operation, daylight sensor placement and controls - all of the “hardcore” simulation parameters that have never been exposed to parametric modeling tools.
https://www.facebook.com/LadyBugforGrasshopper http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/ladybug
…
, National University of Singapore.
An introduction workshop for Rhinoceros 3D and Grasshopper Generative Modeling for Rhino for architectural practices. Workshop goal is to provide basic functional understanding of both Rhinoceros 3D and Grasshopper, to enable participants to build own definitions, and understands existing definitions.
Grasshopper is a Work-in-Progress. Features and procedures are added/changed often. If you are bringing your own laptop, please update to Rhino version 4 service release 8 and Grasshopper version 0.8.0004 which will be use in the workshop.
If you are not sure of your current update, please email to Agnes (agnes.tan@mcneel.com) for assistance.
Speaker: Agnes Tan agnes.tan@mcneel.com
Contact Person: Pinglei ping_lei@nus.edu.sg
Campus map: http://www.nus.edu.sg/campusmap/
Seats Limited.
Registration fee: S$250.00 each person
Mode of payment: Cash or Cash cheque
*Please note exhibition and workshop venues are in different locations.
…