English.
Hi all!
I created .ghx for Parametric Design of Bottle. I defined profile curves giving control points with slider, definition of hight, shifting, and offset based on referenced…
The workshop will engage these questions introducing a novel parametric modelling technique which will allow Grasshopper to connect to the web and be fed by live environmental data-streams. Architects, Landscape architects, Urban designers and students alike will find in the workshops a unique chance to improve their design skills while confronting themselves with the most debated advanced design subjects. The Workshop will involve 4 days of intensive design workshop with staff from experimental design and consultancy practice ecoLogicStudio and a final event-discussion with expert guests from the field of architecture, landscape and urban design.
Other Titles in the series:
-WS1 workshop1
Urban Pavilions
-WS2 workshop2
Responsive Skins
-WS3 workshop3
Algorithmic Landscapes
-WS4 workshop4
The Tree House Prototype…
oxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints. The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables: (1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!…
Boxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints.
The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables:
(1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!
…
re is my problem... I need to arrange Boxes in the most efficient way within boundaries of object and follow the following constraints.
The Goal: To fit 125 boxes in the most efficient way inside the total area. Starting Variables:
(1) 40% of the Boxes need to be between 60 and 85MSQ. (2) 40% of the boxes need to be between 86 and 110MSQ.
(3) 20% of the boxes need to be between 111 and 125mSQ. The breakdown doesn’t have to be exact to give the script some flexibility. Meaning you can have 41% +39% +20% = 100%.
Constraints:
1. A total MAXIMUM area of approximately 1600M per layer.
2. A maximum of 8 layers for a total of 12,800M per layer. Optimization can make as little or as many as 8 layers vertical to accommodate all boxes. So if script can achieve with 3 levels great. If needed all 8 levels, that's fine too. However, pay attention to next constraint (#3).
3. Approximately 15% of that space on each layer is off limits. (internal area) (blue area in example script) and the shape of the boundary cannot be modified to accommodate box design resulting in jagged lines for the internal area.
4. All generated squares/rectangles must have at least 3m touching an outside border (The Green lines).
5. All boxes must also be touching minimum 1M of border of the blue line.
6. If the boxes generated go outside the green boundary, they must be fillet to maintain the straight lines of the green boundaries.
7. Get as many of the boxes as possible a view towards the dots.
Could any one provide me a method or a way to start, if there are any useful links, please share with me. Thank you!
…
NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS". I'm not sure of where to start in troubleshooting this. I've attached the file.
Thank you,
See the errors and warnings below:
{0;0;0}
0. Current document units is in Meters
1. Conversion to Meters will be applied = 1.000
2. [1 of 8] Writing simulation parameters...
3. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
4. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
5. [3 of 8] Writing geometry...
6. [4 of 8] Writing Electric Load Center - Generator specifications ...
7. [5 of 8] Writing materials and constructions...
8. [6 of 8] Writing schedules...
9. [7 of 8] Writing loads and ideal air system...
10. [8 of 8] Writing outputs...
11. ...
... idf file is successfully written to : R:\Green\SuRG\Building_Performance_Analysis\2016_analysis_studies\Energy_Analysis_Comparison\Honeybee_+_Ladybug\tutorial01\EnergyPlus\tutorial01.idf
12.
13. Analysis is running!...
14. ...
...
Done! Read below for errors and warnings:
15.
16. Program Version,EnergyPlus, Version 8.5.0-c87e61b44b, YMD=2016.10.31 11:39,IDD_Version 8.5.0
17.
18. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:
19.
20. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...
21.
22. ************* 24 Sizing:Parameters,
23.
24. ************* Only last 1 lines before error line shown.....
25.
26. ************* 25 None, !- Heating Sizing Factor
27.
28. ** Severe ** IP: IDF line~25 Invalid Number in Numeric Field#1 (Heating Sizing Factor), value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
29.
30. ** Warning ** IP: Note -- Some missing fields have been filled with defaults. See the audit output file for details.
31.
32. ** ~~~ ** Possible Invalid Numerics or other problems
33.
34. ** Fatal ** IP: Errors occurred on processing IDF file. Preceding condition(s) cause termination.
35.
36. ...Summary of Errors that led to program termination:
37.
38. ..... Reference severe error count=1
39.
40. ..... Last severe error=IP: IDF line~
, value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
41.
42. ************* Warning: Node connection errors not checked - most system input has not been read (see previous warning).
43.
44. ************* Fatal error -- final processing. Program exited before simulations began. See previous error messages.
45.
46. ************* EnergyPlus Warmup Error Summary. During Warmup: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
47.
48. ************* EnergyPlus Sizing Error Summary. During Sizing: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
49.
50. ************* EnergyPlus Terminated--Fatal Error Detected. 1 Warning; 1 Severe Errors; Elapsed Time=00hr 00min 9.34sec
51.…
created surface with sweep and rotate them with number of division. Section curves of 2Railsweep is defined with 3 Point arc and shape is also controlable.
You can change shape by sliding 16 paramteters.
The definition is rather long, hope somebody can modify with more sphiscated manner.
日本語
パラメトリックにボトルデザインをする.ghxファイルを作成しました。ボトルのプロファイルカーブを、参照となる円に対して、高さ、シフト、オフセットでコントロールポイントの位置情報を与えて定義。次にスイープで分割数だけ回転コピーして作成。
スイープの断面、3点円弧で作成し、形状コントロールするようにしています。
ボトル形状は、16のパラメーターをスライドすることで定義出来ます。
…
onent are experiential or location specific. For example: humidex has been derived and widely used in Canada.Also both humidex and discomfort index should be used in in-shade conditions.For universal applications and locations, you should concentrate on either PET or UTCI (this is what "Outdoor Comfort Calculator" component is based on).
I have found out, that for instance - OutdoorComfortCalculator - which considers temperatures of 9-26 and other factors, gives the % of comfortable time outdoor for instance in Kenya in Africa (high temperatures and humidity) 55%, whereas within the same .epw data and some additional factors added to the Thermal Indices component, the "humidex" or "Discomfort index" give a result drastically lower, I think it was even 1-5% comfortable.How is that?
Yes, this is one of the issues that I have with UTCI index: the authors wanted to make it as an index applicable in any type of climate. To create the UTCI comfort categories a number of data has been collected from different locations (for hot humid climate, it was the data from Madagascar. I may be wrong on this). This resulted in universal comfortable range of 9 to 26 C which you mentioned. How would the people in Madagascar perceive the feel like temperature of 9 degrees as comfortable is beyond my understanding.Thermophysiology of a human in Madagascar, and in Poland is the same. However their acclimatization is quite different, which raises the issue with the upper universal comfortable range. In general people who live in hotter climates have a bit higher tolerance to high temperature than those living in continental climates. And vice-versa: their tolerance to lower temperatures is lower than the tolerance of the people from the continental climates. Here is a comparison of the UTCI - PET stress categories:
UTCI
all climates stress category
above +46 extreme heat stress+38 to +46 very strong heat stress+32 to +38 strong heat stress+26 to +32 moderate heat stress+9 to +26 no thermal stress+9 to 0 slight cold stress0 to -13 moderate cold stress-13 to -27 strong cold stress-27 to -40 very strong cold stressbelow -40 extreme cold stress
PET
(sub)tropical humid climate temperate climate stress categoryabove +42 above +41 extreme heat stress+38 to +42 +35 to +41 strong heat stress+34 to +38 +29 to +35 moderate heat stress+30 to +34 +23 to +29 slight heat stress+26 to +30 +18 to +23 no thermal stress+22 to +26 +13 to +18 slight cold stress+18 to +22 +8 to +13 moderate cold stress+14 to +18 +4 to +8 strong cold stressbelow +14 below +4 extreme cold stress
I attached below an example of PET humid climate comparison with UTCI, for in-shade and out-shade conditions.As it can be seen UTCI shows the percent of time comfortable: two times higher than PET.
Thank you Pin, for the useful comment, on usage of "Analysis period" component.…