n lofting, though, it makes perfect sense to scale sections independently from the distance between them.
For practical use, I found the graph mapper clumsy; too course and approximate. So I adapted the code I wrote here (Maths + Divide Curve) so that a list of numbers drives the spacing and, optionally(!), the scaling.
When 'Scale by Distance' is false, the numbers in the list determine scaling; '1' is actual size, '0.5' is half size, '2' is twice the size, etc.
When 'Scale by Distance' is true, the distance between the points is used for scaling. This is an indirect effect of the list of numbers (which determines point spacing) and the size of the original shape relative to the curve length.
'Tangent 0' is the curve tangent at each point. It works well for lofting.
'Tangent 1' is the vector between each point and its successor. It works well for orienting solids.
There are still some mysteries... ("Where there is mystery, there is no mastery.")
Lofting doesn't always work well, 'Cap Planar Holes' doesn't work anymore...
I had hoped that this sequence, ".5,1,2,1,.5", would result in:
two half size shapes, one at each end of the curve.
two full size ("1") and one double size ("2") shapes, spaced appropriately.
But I have a mental block about how to achieve that...? :( Instead, I settled for the last of the five shapes being one point short from the end of the curve, and the spacing is off.
Even so, I find this approach easier to use on a practical basis than the graph mapper.
…
d of interpenetrating surfaces somewhere:
Now all links (except a possible single ball on the very end of odd numbered ball series) are four balls long, including the jostled ones. Without that step, those items simply don't appear in the output, leaving way too big of gaps to ignore, eventually leaving huge gaps at later stages of segment doubling:
So if I turn the jostling multiplication factor way down it should work imperceptibly:
Ta-dah! The jostling strategy WORKS! Granted, only in this special case where I know I'm dealing with adjacent pairs of worms along a curve, not generic objects arranged in space by some artist.
Now I just need to wrap the multiple Python script components I'm stringing together into one script.
How long does the full 2400 balls take, finally? It took 12 Python scripts that merge pairs, to achieve this breakdown: 2400 -> 1200 -> 600 -> 300 -> 150 -> 75 -> 38 -> 19 -> 9 -> 5 -> 3 -> 2 -> 1. Time was 2 minutes 50 seconds, so there is some extra struggle for 2X as many balls as 1200 that took 1 minute 20 seconds, but only ten more seconds.
…
Added by Nik Willmore at 9:06pm on February 17, 2016
I am not knowledgeable about google maps nor google maps api, but from what I read the two components will definitely show a bit different results due to different topography sources.If it is judging by this 2010 article, your Terrain Generator component offers much higher precisions for USA. Precision goes up to a couple of meters, which is amazing!!On the global scale it offers either SRTM 1 or 3 arc-second data or 30 arc-second GLOBE data. Again this is from the mentioned article, I couldn't find this information by searching the Google Maps website.Terrain Generator 2 component always uses SRTM 1 arc-second data from opentopography.org, and it is limited to 60 degrees north and does not have data for Antarctica. It does not come with satellite image either which is another very convenient feature that you have!I couldn't find information about the allowed radius provided by the Google maps api free account. I limited the "radius_" input to 100 000 meters, even though opentopography.org provides more than that (I successfully downloaded 300 000, but Rhino 5 was not able to create a topography on my PC from such a large amount of data).Even though I couldn't compare the results from two components, by looking at your upper example_LB_terrain_generator.gh definition: set the "I" input of "Surface from points" component to True. In this way the surface will be interpolated through points, which is what we want.
Again thank you for the permission, and I look forward seeing those high precision topography that Google maps offers!!…
Here I use one which has been refined with a 5 level subdivision...does it appear ok to you or would you recommend going even smaller? Green nodes are the ones loads act upon.
2) 'Local To Mesh' vs 'Global' vs 'Projected Global'
I am applying a positive wind pressure (0,729 kN/m2) in the direction of global positive y axis.
The façade mesh is 1505 m2, of which 1056 m2 runs parallel to the XZ plane.The wind pressure is 0,729 kN/m2 acting in the positive y direction ---> expected resultant of +/- 1056 x 0,729 = 770 kN.
'Global' gives +1098 kN in positive y direction.
'Global Projected' gives a +770 kN resultant in the positive y direction.
'Local to mesh'...gives -770kN along x axis (parallel to the façade according to ModelView) & -215kN along y axis. This surprised me since 'Local to mesh' is indeed the option to chose according to the manual yet I can't see how a wind load perpendicular to the facade would result in the tower moving in a cross-wind direction. 'Global projected' appears to provide the most logical result.
In view of these results, do you think the mesh remains ill-defined, the tower's shape is the culprit...or my choice of coordinate system for the load? What would you recommend?
Thanks again for your feedback, which is greatly appreciated.
Nathan
…
cript that and I attempted tweaking it for several days but I'm having problems achieving the full idea i had.
Problem 1:
Once I Brep a frame of the original cube, and the hoopsnake starts, it does not always select the right face of the frame, sometimes chooses a face inside rather than the exterior one, therefore not always fitting pieces together nicely. I tried applying a bounding box to each frame and use the face of the bounding box as reference for the hoopsnake mirroring but I couldn't figure it out so i got rid of it. So I'm stuck...
Problem 2:
The other thing, is I'm wondering whether its possible to parametrize some sort of structural principle into the linear growth sequence in order for structure to retain realistic structural integrity. For example, when you start hoopsnake, the cube linearly grows (mirrors itself) towards the selected point(s); if the growth goes up and across, how would I make it reach a structural limit to make it go back down to the floor and back up again and continue? Could even be as simple as "after 5 frames/cubes vertically and across it goes back down and then up again towards the referenced point(s)" or something.
PS. "Reset All" in Hoopsnake before doing anything.
Hope someone can help.
Thanks in advance,
Cesco…
tle.
I use rhino with the nurbsrelaxation plugin. Recently we have had rhino do some work to come up with an automated drawing tool via grasshopper.
Since grasshopper has been added to rhino i have noticed that when drawing surfaces and then using the nurbs tool the tools behaviour has changed and is now including iterations at the end of its process doubling the amount of time it takes to draw/finalise the surface/shape.
Below i have included 2 screenshots, the first one shows the surface(yellow edges), and then the cursor showing the nurbs icons (toolbar) and the rest of the info is in the command boxes.
The 2nd one shows info in the command line, detailing what happens once the tool is run (this is where you can see the iterations occuring).
Having done a little research i get the impression that this may be grasshopper related but cannot find any confirmation of this nor of anyone experiencing the same issue.
I also know that nurbsrelaxation is a plug in so not everyone will use this.
Can anyone help me with this as i would like to know why the iterations are occurring and if we can eliminate or reduce them.
Many thanks in advance
Matt…
Added by Matt Fairley at 4:08am on November 10, 2015
ooking for an efficient way to perform glazing of complex shapes.
I've only followed the Energy modelling workshops so far so i may have missed some essential components or workflows to achieve my needs. But i've made an attached definition with all my current attempts to get a proper HBzone with the numerous windows faces i will always have to deal with in this project.
I first thought that i was not using the HBObjWGZ correctly, then after some readings it was maybe an upgrading issue, then effectively i had my Therm 7.5 that needed to be reinstaled, but then ... I must be missing an essential HB tricks or workflow i guess ...
So I divided my attempt in two series :
- The Serie 1 : is a simplier version of the project step i'm working on but i'd be glad to achieve it first !
- The Serie 2 : is the real final direction of the project, which consist in sorting/dispatch faces to windowon one side and to an other material on the other, according to the winter sun and a pourcentage param.
Despite it is more complicated than the Serie one, it seems seems to create the same diversity of issues.
Until now, with the 5 different combinations of Serie 1, and the 3 of Serie 2, with and without using the different Glazing/window components, here are the logs i got from both HBZone component or OpenStudio component:
From OpenStudio - "1. The simulation has not run correctly because of this severe error: ** Severe ** BuildingSurface:Detailed="00073E23257843B6A948", invalid Construction Name="ETFE" - has Window materials.">> Has to deal with the way i'm trying to assign too early a customized EPConstruction material ? Done it wrong ? I tried to reload it in the library but doesn't change anything...
From OpenStudio - "1. The simulation has not run correctly because of this severe error: ** Severe ** BuildingSurface:Detailed="000579CD749E46DFA5EA", invalid Construction Name="EXTERIOR WINDOW" - has Window materials.">> Is it an issue in the way i define my surfs both as "WINDOW" (5) for srfType and Outdoors on the same component ?
From Create HBZone -"1. Solution exception:'EPZone' object has no attribute 'shdCntrlZoneInstructs'"
>> Happens when i try to introduce my ETFE EpMaterial after creating my first HBZone, with a Set EP Zone Construction, so this material seems to be not working either before and after trying to create an HB Zone
From Create HBZone- "1. Solution exception: 73df51a3b2144b1e858b has been moved, scaled or rotated."If you need to move or rotate a Honeybee object you should use Honeybee move, rotate or mirror components. You can find them under 12|WIP tab.
>> >> wich seems to exist in some on other thread Here and was a coding bug supposed to be fixed.
And last but not least ...
From OpenStudio - "1. The simulation has not run correctly because of this severe error: ** Severe ** checkSubSurfAzTiltNorm: Outward facing angle of subsurface differs more than 90.0 degrees from base surface.2. The simulation has failed because of this fatal error: ** Fatal ** GetSurfaceData: Errors discovered, program terminates" .
I'm attaching the file with each attempt in this post. The definitions are disabled and the log already copied separatly so there is no need to compute each of them to see what's wrong.
If someone from the beginner to one of the Kings of HoneyBee has any relevant answer/solution to this attempt with complex geometry Issue it will be really nice for me so i could to move forward !!
Thanks in advance guys and have a great day !
…
greatly appreciate it!!
You can write the number of the question and write your answer next to it, example:
1) a
2) c
3) a) Washington University in St. Louis
4) 2 weeks (1week+1week shipping)
5) 130
6) b
7) b
The survey questions are as follows:
1)
Did you 3D print before?
5)
How much did it cost (in dollars)?
a.
Yes, for a school project
a.
Between 20 & 50
b.
Yes, for a personal project
b.
Between 50 & 80
c.
Between 80 & 120
2)
Print size
d.
Please specify if otherwise: _____ dollars
a.
Between 2 & 6 cubic inches
b.
Between 6 & 12 cubic inches
6)
Do you think the price was expensive?
c.
Between 12 & 20 cubic inches
a.
Not at all
d.
Please specify if otherwise: ____cubic inches
b.
A little bit expensive
c.
Very expensive
3)
Where did you print your object?
a.
School
7)
Were you satisfied with the printed object?
b.
Outside school: _________________
a.
Yes, it was a great print without problems
b.
Not bad, some issues
4)
How long did it take to print?
c.
I was not satisfied, very bad quality
a.
___ days
b.
___ weeks
Thank you very much to all!!
PS: If you did many 3D prints, you can post multiple answers.
Wassef…