accept untrimmed surfaces, only Open Brep, but sometimes, seemingly out of the blue, the Open Brep changes into Untrimmed Surfaces and vice versa. I've already checked the unit tolerance in Rhino, that made no difference. Any ideas about where I could be going wrong?
--
Second issue is that some of the geometries should 'curl' outside their grid boundaries. I need to be able to play with the grid size while the geometry maintains its position.
Also, the first set of these geometries (bottom of image) should translate as a flat surface. But the points 1 and 3 tend to stick to the 2nd Grid - creating openings on the side. How could I fix that?
--
Third issue is that the geometries seem to be a little 'squished' at their plane normal (right until where the 2nd Grid offsets). I tried adding a number slider between the [z-vector] in the ptCoordinates and the [translation vector] in the Move component.. but that isn't working. Ideally I wouldn't need to control the offset distance, the shapes would retain proportion automatically. Any ideas?
Thanks so much in advance! :)
…
ling to make a parametric industrial box building as an exercise.
The problem is that DeConstruct Brep fails for some of the polylines which are created by slicing an extruded surface by Contour.
This is how my extruded surface looks like.
After I sliced it with Contour I got all the cross sections.
When I want to DeConstruct Brep of result polylines some of them fails. (2 from 6 inputs).
Attached GH file contains the complete geometry, I modeled everything from GH, no input linked from Rhino model.
Learning_04.gh
Could you give me an advice where I made a mistake?
Thank you in advance for your replies.
Best regards,
Henrik Magyar
…
cture (EPA_s)
When Karamba cross section optimiser is finding the most weight-efficient section for the given load then the actual EPA_s is just been calculated. The issue here is that one of the main load on a lattice tower is from the wind pressure. So the wind load is based on the EPA_s which we can get only after optimising the sections. With other words, one of our input is based on an output from the design.
This can be solved (for instance) with a recursive looping. The recursive looping work as per the following steps:
start the loop with an arbitrary wind pressure value (in this case 400N/m linear load on the members)
run the analysis
optimise the members
get the effective area of the members
send them back in the loop for wind load generation
repeat from step 2.
At the Anemone container we can define the number of loops (S). I found it sufficient to apply 6 loops in this case. After 4-5 loops no more optimisation is observed regarding the total weight of the structure.
One thing is also important to be mentioned. Since I am using Galapagos as evolutionary solver, I just did not want to run the loops manually. For an automated optimisation, one of the Galapagos input has been used as trigger for the Anemone loop. Which is a useful stuff ;) (I have tried HoopSnake before but without success)
Since my definition is part of a proprietary solution, I'm unable to share the .gh file. But I hope it still can give some hint what can be done by these components.
…
rth. Current components include:
Format_GPS: Takes NMEA Formatted GPS Latitude and Longitude values and converts them to Decimal Degrees. Will add further converters.
GPS->XYZ: Maps Longitude, Latitude, and Altitude to XYZ.
XYZ->GPS: Maps XYZ to Longitude, Latitude, and Altitude.
KML_Export: Exports imported geometry to KML format. Currently implemented for points, curves, and meshes. Any Breps should be meshed before. Will be adding conditions for other geometry as well as render styles.
Look forward to a WIP release next week.
…
o do this I used 'tangent duality' of the triangles (also in the paper). Yes that's the Soumaya Museum in mexico DF. I believe GT did the facade. If you look closely, the hexagons are not connecting watertight, there is a small gap between them so they can all be congruent, the small gap makes that possible. They're evenly distributed among the surface which is nothing new, it has been done before only with discs by future systems,http://www.gadailynews.com/thumbnail.php?file=assets-2012/Selfridge...
For me the challenge was to create a water tight planar hexagon grid mainly for efficiency reasons. If you look at the joints, which are more simple and easy to construct (only 3 edges come together, were a quadricular grid has 4 and triangular grid 6). And of course the panels are all planar :). Aesthetics came second.
With negative curvature it is not possible to aggregate your surface properly with convex planar hexagons (that fit watertight that is). That's why in the negative regions the switch from being convex to concave. See the pdf for more info, I also didnt knew this when i started messing around :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convex_and_concave_polygons
Thanks and I`ll keep you guys posted!
Cheers!…
, toggle component change corresponded one to each item automatically.
I guess this result would be something like this
is it possible? if so, please tell me!!!! thanks a million in advance!!!!!!!!…
he field of digital design, fabrication, emerging technology and makers. the experts spend two weeks in bratislava, developing their research project and at the end of their residency we invite eager and interested people – fellows – to form a think-tank and take part in the pinnacle of the project.the event will be highly experimental and no specific result is guaranteed. the event will be accessible also to people who want to observe and learn, however the purpose of the gathering is not to teach, but rather to experiment, consult, make and network. the rese arch lab is not a tutorial workshop, it’s a platform for common development.
download a pdf
research project
the project questions the current condition of the large scale 3d printing capabilities. while small scale, desktop 3d printers emerge each day with better and better quality of the output, large scale printing is based mostly on low fidelity concrete printing, or in few cases not-so-high-quality metal printing.we will try to develop new solutions for large scale, rapid 3d printing by merging different technologies. those will constitute the main structure of the designed output, while the 3d printing will be seen only as the solidifying agent.we will utilize the kuka robot with an attached abs/pla extruder as the main production tool.
call for fellows
the fellows will join the last 4 days of the research, consult the current state, come up with new ideas and help verify and test the outputs. the fellows are being called for through a portfolio and cv selection process. the exceptional individuals who can both, benefit from and contribute to the project will be selected by mateusz zwierzycki and jan pernecky. no specific number of open positions are available and it is possible that no one will be chosen.
call for trainees
it will be possible to attend the rese arch lab to the people with no expertise or previous experience. they will take a role of observers or trainees. it has to be explicitly stated though, that the event is not meant to teach any specific software or skills and the experiments can fail in achieving an output.
application
to apply send an email at lab@rese-arch.org. the deadline for the submissions is monday, 6 april 2015 at noon 12pm.
costs
the participation fee is fixed 150€ for the fellows and 200€ for the trainees. this covers only the participation at the rese arch lab event. the traveling expenses and accommodation costs need to be covered by the participants themselves.
equipment
various equipment will be available – including 3d printers, 3d scanners, milling machines, laser cutters, vinyl cutters.most of all, rese arch and partners have to their full disposal a robotic arm kuka kr15/2.
the requirements
if you find yourself proficient in: parametric design (viewed as aesthetics), 3d printing, robotics, scripting, architectural geometry, cam technologies or woodworking then the event will be surely interesting for you. at the same time we seek for people with exceptional sense for aesthetics, as the final output will be designed together (not just by the project leader).on the hardware/software side, we need you to bring your own laptop. we will work mainly with rhino/grasshopper.…
tangent lines don't, causing a data mismatch. So...
'Cull' all 'MCX' points that equal the origin, and apply the same cull pattern to the 'iA' list (light blue group).
Move the "Second Point" merge and 'Sort' by distance to earlier in the process.
Add a 4th point to the 'List Item' index list (0, 3, 5, 6).
Remove the tree hack nonsense.
Voila! Perfection. Now that is... persistence.
“Two percent is genius and ninety-eight percent is hard work.” -- Thomas Edison, April 1898
By the way, there is another way to do this kind of thing that doesn't require such deep knowledge as this method. Not considered as elegant because it doesn't apply in all cases, but it would work here. Create just one curve/pipe and rotate it 26 times.
…
ays be a bit, well, crinkly, so to speak (which is often something people want to avoid, but in this case it sounds like it is the desired result).
Also, they can indeed be created using Kangaroo, by simply setting a length goal for every edge:
(This was possible in the old Kangaroo, but such hard constraints work much better with the new solver in version 2)
Such meshes are sometimes referred to as Lobel frames after the French architect Alain Lobel.
I think some of the confusion arises because there have been numerous conversations on this forum where people were asking how to create a triangular mesh with precisely equal edge lengths on a given doubly curved surface, which also in some sense approximates smoothness, and this is generally impossible.
Of course no non-flat triangular mesh with a finite number of faces is ever actually truly smooth, since the individual faces are flat, while the curvature is concentrated at the vertices instead of distributed across the surface. However, by allowing slight variation in the edge lengths these kinks can be made small, and they get smaller as the mesh is refined (as is done for subdivision surfaces), approaching smoothness in the limit.
This isn't possible while keeping edge lengths equal, but interestingly Lobel frames can in some cases approximate slightly doubly curved surfaces, it's just that they have to take on a sort of up-and-down folding pattern between adjacent faces, like origami, instead of the faces lying tangent to the smooth surface like subdivision meshes do.
Also, such equilateral meshes inevitably form spikes at the extraordinary vertices (those surrounded by some number other than 6 faces), and unless the surface you are approximating is close to developable you usually need some extraordinary vertices.
Bearing in mind all these limitations, I still think equilateral meshes have some interesting possibilities and are relatively under-explored digitally, due to a former lack of tools for working with them.
They are also closely related to an interesting class of hexagonal beam structures, as described here:
http://www.geometrie.tuwien.ac.at/pottmann/2014/honeycomb/index.html
…
, Engineer and Researcher from France with broad programming experience. He is the author of the City in 3D Rhinoceros plugin for creation of buildings according to geojson file and with real elevation. Guillaume already created a new component: "Address to Location". It enables getting latitude and longitude values for the given address:
2) Support of Bathymetry data: automatic creation of underwater (sea/river/lake floor) terrain. This feature is now available through new source_ input of the "Terrain generator" component. Here is an example of terrain of the Loihi underwater volcano, of the coast of Hawaii:
3) A new terrain source has been added: ALOS World 3D 30m. ALOS is a Japanese global terrain data. Gismo "Terrain Generator" component has been using SRTM 30m terrain data, which hasn't been global and was limited to -56 to +60 latitude range. With this addition, it is possible to switch between SRTM and ALOS World 3D 30m models with the use of source_ input.
4) 9 new components have been added:
"Address To Location" - finds latitude and longitude coordinates for the given address.
"XY To Location" - finds latitude and longitude coordinates for the given Rhino XY coordinates. "Location To XY" - vice versa from the previous component: finds Rhino XY coordinates for the given latitude longitude coordinates. "Z To Elevation" - finds elevation for particular Rhino point. "Rhino text to number" - convert numeric text from Rhino to grasshopper number. "Rhino unit to meters" - convert Rhino units to meters. "Deconstruct location" - deconstructs .epw location. "New Component Example" - this component explains how to make a new Gismo component, in case you are interested to make one. We welcome new developers, even if you contribute a single component to Gismo! "Support Gismo" - gives some suggestions on how to make Gismo better, how to improve it and support it.
5) Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component now supports all units, not only Meters. So any Gismo example file which uses this component, can now use Rhino units other than Meters as well. Thank you Antonello Di Nunzio for making this happen!!
Basically just forget about this yellow panel:
This panel is not valid anymore, so just use any unit you want.
6) A number of bugs have been fixed, reported in topics for the last couple of weeks. We would like to thank members in the community who invested their time in testing, finding these bugs and reporting them: Rafat Ahmed, Peter Zatko, Mathieu Venot, Abraham Yezioro, Rafael Alonso. Thank you guys!!! Apologies if we forgot to mention someone.
The version 0.0.2 can be downloaded from here:
https://github.com/stgeorges/gismo/zipball/master
And example files from here:
https://github.com/stgeorges/gismo/tree/master/examples
Any new suggestions, testing and bug reports are welcome!!…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 5:13pm on March 1, 2017