he sunPath component works. For example if you want to simulate the hours from 8 to 16 it means you want 8 hours from 8 to 9, from 9 to 10,.... from 15 to 16 (8 hours duration period) so you get from the sunPath component (using default timeStep 1) the 9 sun position/vectors 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 (in the image the yellow suns). The things is that if you ask for a smaller timeStep for example 3 = 20 mins then the additional sun position (in the image the orange suns) are added also after the time limit of h16 so probably when you don't want/need. I understand that when you input a time period there is the ambiguity if the hours are the just 9 (the 9 inputs) or the 8 hours included between pairs of hours, but I would make in a way that it is possible to chose if the extra timeStep after the last hour are added or not. Thank you for your comments.
…
is shorthand for [0 to 8].
> 10 Any number larger than X. This notation is shorthand for [11 to infinity].
>= 5 Any number larger than or equal to X. This notation is shorthand for [5 to infinity].
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Seattle, WA…
Added by David Rutten at 9:27pm on November 3, 2013
tName_FinalProject_PartD.pdf
Below is the desk crit list, please sign up for a spot in the comments below:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
See you Monday!…
ror "nighttime"
how could that be - must be in the weather file i assume - is there anyway to fix this ?
suncalc.net gives me the following
00:00—02:17 — night
02:17—03:43 — astronomical twilight03:43—04:39 — nautical twilight04:39—05:19 — civil twilight05:19—05:23 — sunrise05:23—21:11 — daylight21:11—21:15 — sunset21:15—21:55 — civil twilight21:55—22:51 — nautical twilight22:51—00:17 — astronomical twilight00:17—00:00 — night
plz help - thank you !!!
…
Loop'. The fun part of the slower version is that you can see what it's doing while it's running. 'Fast Loop' gives no indication that it's working, so you want to test it with small numbers and be sure it's coded properly before bumping the iteration count up.
The GH profiler running the slow version showed between 1 and 1.5 seconds per loop, but the reality was more like ~10 seconds per loop toward the end of an 11 X 11 grid, or ~20 minutes total. It's easier to be patient because you know it's working.
The 'Fast Loop' finished the same grid in 1.6 minutes! An impressive improvement. I've been running it on a 30 X 30 grid (900 points) for ~23 minutes so far and see nothing yet. Not the ~12 minutes I had hoped for... Now 36 minutes on this loop for 900 points... hope it's not stuck. Not fast! Later - DONE!! Profiler says 59 minutes for 900 points but it was more like an hour and twenty minutes total. It succeeded, I have a single 'Closed Brep' from 900 extruded rings, baked to Rhino.
Another strategy to explore would be doing 'SUnion' on a smaller grid using the Anemone loop, then replicate it by moving it as needed to form a larger grid; then run the copies through another 'SUnion' loop. I went ahead and implemented that while waiting. It works and is fast! Started with 3 X 3 and ran the result again as 5 X 5 (9 X 25 = 225 total) in barely ~70 seconds!? Trying 36 X 36 now... 1,296 points appears to have succeeded in less than ten minutes! Though it seems to take quite awhile after the loop ends before control is restored to GH/Rhino. I'll let you do your own experiments and benchmarks.
I encapsulated the loop in a cluster called 'suLoop' (blue groups).
Internal of 'suLoop' cluster:
…
Added by Joseph Oster at 11:14pm on March 22, 2017
ed an domain for doing that and it works for the list output, but not for my whole definiion.
My definition I made works for the first line, without the Steps. Now I want to have the same thing for the whole surface. But I dont know why, the result is quiet messy.
The "gradient" from open to close (for the whole surface in the same direction) is kind of splitted. Further I have more surfaces created on one u/v coordinate. There should only be one per coordinate. And then there is also a problem thet the normal vector is not picked correctly any more.
Maybe you can help me on this?
Would be verry great!
Thanks in advance!…
asuring Urbanity."
The seminar aims at re-centering the debate of measuring urban form on the contemporary issues of designing, planning and regulating the extensive city. It will bring together a group of international experts on the subject and the objective is to discuss the importance of combined qualitative-quantitative approaches on the generation of new insights on the contemporary urban environment and planning strategies.
The workshop presents a set of innovative approaches and methodologies using its own software. At the workshop participants will be invited to use the available toolset to address a specific urban issue where the construction of models for automatic measurement of urban indicators will be part of the urban design process.The workshop is intended for all urban planning professionals who want to improve their skills and knowledge as well as for students or doctoral students in urban planning. The CIAUD will issue a participation certificate equivalent to 3 ECTS credits.The workshop will run from 7 to 12 May 2012 and the seminar will be held on May 11, 2012 in FAUTL.The seminar and workshop program can be found attached ora t the website: http://www.measurb.org/en/home.html We thank in advance for the dissemination of this event to whom might be interested.
Best regards
José Beirão
Cristina Cavaco
workshop.pdf
seminar.pdf
Measuring urbanity…
all normals got pointed to the outside.
But I am still not out of the woods - even though the normals are OK now. I attached a 3DM file baked from my current GH layout. The part is made using 4 basic steps: (1) capping the outside surface which is made by joining 2 surfaces, each lofted from 11 polyline curves, (2) capping the inside surface made by lofting 11 circles, (3) whacking 5 units of height off the bottom of (2) by doing SDiff with a 5 unit high capped cylinder, and (4) using SDiff to subtract (3) from (1)
Step 3 is necessary to allow for a solid bottom thickness of 5 units. All the surfaces are NURBS, none have been converted to meshes.
I would have thought that there would be no problems printing this part because it is made from only solid surfaces. The 3DM file has no naked edges - which is what I expected. But my generated STL file is 23.19 MB in size and the 3D Builder program says it has errors. The 3DB program "fixes" the errors, but when it does so it closes the top of the part, so that function is useless. 3DB will also simplify the STL file and create a resulting file that is much smaller, but this also has problems that would result in a failed 3D print.
I totally realize that my problem may lie completely outside GH & Rhino and I don't mean to add clutter up this board with extraneous posts. It's just that I have not had issues like this until I tried the idea of joining 2 lofted surfaces that have reverse twists. I have made many parts before that included reverse twists - but not lofted surfaces. Here is just one example: http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1606442…
Added by Birk Binnard at 3:22pm on September 14, 2016
s
(distance from Spine to Profile)
4) Create Circles at each floor
5) Rotate Each Floor by twisted amount
(according to height of floor)
6) Divide each floor by number of Flutes
7) Flip Matrix of Flute Points (version 0.7)
(if using v0.6 then search flip matrix on site for method)
(Rows to Columns)
8) Interpolate Curve through Flute Points
9) Mirror Flute Curves
10) Create display grid
11) Make a vector 2Pt from the floor centre
to the corresponding display point…