branch. The weird part is that when I add stuff to the "trail" branch, the path "p" gets rewritten, and if I comment(trail) out it maintains its proper structure.
The structure normaly goes{0;0}-{1;0}-{2;0} and so on, when I enter the if statement it should be {0;0}-{0;1}-{1;0}-{1;1}-{2;0}-{2;1}, but what I get is {0;0}-{0;1}-{0;2}-{0;3}-{0;4}-{0;5}
The code in question is bellow(it is a part of a bigger whole).
For i As int32 = 0 To trail.BranchCount - 1 For j As int32 =0 To trail.Branch(i).Count - 1 Dim ghi As GH_Path = trail.path(i) Dim v As Vector3d = vL.Branch(i).item(j) Dim pw As New Polyline(trail.Branch(i).item(j)) Dim agent As New point3d(pw.Last) Dim p As New GH_Path(ghi(0), ghi(1) + 1) v.Unitize v *= seg agent += v If (count Mod math.Ceiling(conrate * div) = 0) AndAlso _
(stopper.Branch(i).item(j) = 0 AndAlso count > 0) Then print(p.ToString) Dim dupPw As New polyline duppw.Add(pw.Last) duppw.Add(pw.Last + v * seg) vl.Add(v, p) gen.add(gen.Branch(i).item(j) + 1, p) stopper.add(0, p) stopper.Branch(i).item(j) = 1 trail.Add(duppw, p) Continue For End If pw.Add(agent) vl.Branch(i).item(j) = v trail.branch(i).item(j) = pw NextNext
I am looking foreward to hear any suggestions.
Sincerely…
n get the correct results with cooling loads:
3. After I update LB+HB, a warning is given for the set EP construction component:
4. so I replaced it with the latest one (Feb 05, 2017):
5. Now the cooling loads is missing from the result for reason unknown ...
May I ask if the missing cooling loads is related to the latest update of LB+HB? What component update is causing this problem?
BTW, I'm using Singapore's epw file, and for a tropical city, there should be no heating energy at all. So, sth clearly is wrong over here ...
Thanks.
…
actually can perform using a dedicated software:
in 3D:
https://www.facebook.com/francescopiasentini/videos/523532707845171/
in 2D:
https://vimeo.com/189618609
The output of Modal Analysis (at a given frequency) is a list of point (x,y,z), each of them has the three coordinates and the maximum displacement in the direction normal to the surface (that's not flat)
Point number x y zmax1 24,007565 337,876028 -0,6545572 -28,0404705 337,947773 0,7760153 57,141457 316,757768 -0,8413914 18,667466 314,814543 -0,235288
My idea is:
-import stl surfaces of the object (violin)
-import Modal Analysis data
-deform stl (or Nurbs) surfaces using something like a customized CageEdit
-animate this deformation from zero to maximum displacement
-give a color to deformation (or first-second derivative of the interpoled deformation curves)
My wish is to have closed surfaces at any steps, and to create "natural" deformation shapes.
I just tried to import MA data. I was trying to create an array of circles with given x,y,z and radius, I could not figure how to separate information of position and radius when importing the file:
file content:
0,1,0; 5;2,1,3; 2;5,2,6; 4;
thanks for yout attention.
Looking forward to hear you soon!
Francesco
…
to convert nested arrays ?
For intance if I have 5 times nested array, do I need to another method, or there is a short quick version that combines all three methods below into 1?
public static DataTree<T> IEOfIEToTree<T>(IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> list, int iteration = 0) { DataTree<T> tree = new DataTree<T>(); int i = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<T> innerList in list) { tree.AddRange(innerList, new GH_Path(new int[] { iteration, i })); i++; } return tree; }
public static DataTree<T> IE3<T>(IEnumerable<IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>>> list, int iteration = 0) { DataTree<T> tree = new DataTree<T>(); int i = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> innerList in list) { int j = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<T> innerList2 in innerList) { tree.AddRange(innerList2, new GH_Path(new int[] { iteration, i, j })); j++; }
i++; } return tree; }
public static DataTree<T> IE4<T>(IEnumerable<IEnumerable<IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>>>> list, int iteration = 0) { DataTree<T> tree = new DataTree<T>(); int i = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>>> innerList in list) { int j = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> innerList2 in innerList) { int k = 0; foreach (IEnumerable<T> innerList3 in innerList2) {
tree.AddRange(innerList3, new GH_Path(new int[] { iteration, i, j ,k})); k++; } j++; }
i++; } return tree; }…
de modelación en 3D y aprovechen las ventajas que plantean, como mejorar su proceso de diseño y explorar múltiples alternativas para un proyecto en lapsos de tiempo muy reducidos en comparación de los métodos tradicionales.
En consecuencia, los alumnos tendrán la posibilidad de disminuir sus tiempos de trabajo, con resultados iguales o incluso mejores a los que obtenían con anterioridad; mejorar la calidad de sus presentaciones y, lo que es más importante, ampliar la fundamentación de sus proyectos en el aspecto funcional y formal, dependiendo de las características del proyecto.
Para lograr estos objetivos, se contemplan dos temarios y un ejercicio práctico.
Al finalizar el curso, los asistentes serán capaces de manejar Rhinoceros y Grasshopper en un nivel medio, con el objetivo que el alumno pueda continuar aprendiendo con alguno de nuestros siguientes workshops o de manera autodidacta.
Además del contenido teórico se incluye un ejercicio práctico, la magnitud del ejercicio y el material que se le destine se definirán con base en el número de asistentes.
El workshop tiene una duración de cinco sesiones:
Sesión 1 – Temario de Rhinoceros
Sesión 2 y 3 – Temario de Grasshopper
Sesión 4 y 5 – Ejercicio práctico
El horario es de 9 am a 4 pm, con una hora de receso para tomar un refrigerio.
No es necesario traer el equipo necesario para trabajar, se cuenta con un equipo para cada persona asi como el material de trabajo para el ejercicio práctico, por lo cual se les recomienda que no traigan portátiles u otro material, únicamente dispositivos de almacenamiento si desean guardar sus trabajos.
El costo del evento es de $3,500 estudiantes y $4,000 profesionales.
(Para poder tener el descuento de estudiante es necesaria una constancia de la universidad de la que proviene, acreditando que el interesado está cursando algún semestre de la carrera. Personas graduadas que estén cursando una maestría o algún grado superior no reciben el descuento).
Para apartar su lugar pueden realizar un depósito de $1,500 y terminar de efectuar el pago antes del 15 de abril si es mediante un depósito bancario o el primer día del evento en efectivo.
El evento se realizará en las oficinas de Vegasot, ubicadas en Circuito Cirujanos No. 23-A
Cd. Satélite, Naucalpan, Edo. de México 53100
http://www.vegasoft.com.mx
Para cualquier duda por favor escriban un correo a luzytextura@gmail.com, por teléfono al 044 55 4381 3302, o en facebook.com/archbernardorivera…
rce=activity
Basically, I want to create a workflow to automatically subdivide a building mass envelope geometry into different floors which will be further subdivided as perimeter zones and core zones.
But I encountered an error for a particular building mass geometry (a quite regular form) which doesn't work with the split building mass component (see item 4&5 below):
The workflow is:
1. import building mass geometry:
2. divide the building mass into floors (one zone per floor) using one of the two different methods depending on whether the floor surface has holes or not:
3. use the split building mass component to further divide the zone for each floor into perimeter zones and core zone:
4. I tested several building forms which work for this workflow as shown below, except for one form C05 which is a courtyard block with small tower blocks on top of it:
5. in the last step, there is an error from the split building mass component saying that "solution exception: index out of range: 0" ...
So, I wonder if this is error is related to the split building mass component or related to the way the building mass geometry is created.
Appreciate your kind advice!
Thank you!…
iles and rad files in this folder :
C:\Users\Sarith\AppData\Local\Temp\radSources (replace my name with yours).
However, the pic file which is created in that folder crashes. So, I tried to hack the process and get an image through a screenshot and ra_bmp.
This is the rendering that I got through Relux:
This is what I got from my own renderings with image that I got:
This is surprising because the material is called Glass. However the radiance definition of the material is :
void colorpict mat_104~19 red green blue surfpic2.pic alignpic.cal tile_u tile_v -s 0.5850001 0.975mat_104~1 plastic mat_104005 1 1 1 0 0
The colorpict on the the first line only modifies color patterns and does not make the material transparent/translucent. Similarly, the plastic type implies that the material won't be transparent anyway.
I don't think this material as defined in Relux is a physically based material. You are probably better off importing the Raytracer materials to Honeybee. Andy Mcneil had an excellent presentation about GlassBlocks in the last Radiance workshop: http://www.radiance-online.org/community/workshops/2015-philadelphi...
The pic file that I generated is here : https://www.dropbox.com/s/5c32layqehdns72/surfpic2.pic?dl=0…
is also takes place in own system. However, this action can be also carried out successfully by a foreign reference, if this considers the focused system as own. Hence, these two criteria are considered in my reflexions, to make your criticism handier for me.
First the question must be put up, how is it in your case? Of friendly manner you answer this question perpetually with the statement that you are not a partial of the system of the architecture.
Furthermore the question would be appropriate, whether an external reference (eg CAD) determined architecture. This can be answered with no, because determining and influencing are different things.
Because you stress now your criticism as a foreign criticism, within the architecture the assuption must be put up, that this criticism is not unusual new on the one hand (because this condition were also in other times like that, and presumably also always so remain) and further more a lack of goodwill in your criticism comes to light, which perhaps distinguishes an external reference.
Based on your critique, it would be also desirable in the system of the architecture if the academic rules become satisfyingly followed, even if this is no guarantor for good academic works. Nevertheless, there is an aspect which at least tolerates the evident lack in the Interdiziplinarität of the architecture. This is the classical and still valid determination of the architecture, presumably regulates not only the actions of the architects, but also those who want to become it.
Many who stand in your criticism (the students, as well as the teachers, ... ), live in the awareness that architecture is a profession that combines as many areas around the topic of Building, and the architect is even only one dilettante among the external specialists. In this determination dilettantism is revalued rather positively, because this state the architects enables to assess the facets of a complicated building project better and to form thereby the whole result positively. To be a good architect, you should have circumspect specialists around yourself. And exactly this knows the system of the architecture, because "THE ARCHITECT" helps himself with the logic of other systems (to repair on the one hand his own deficits), and to create an artificial complexity, which ultimately aims to be the complexity of human beeing.
Here "THE ARCHITECTS" becomes a quality-spoken, which currently seems the external reference (CAD, BIM) would like to take claim for themselves.
........
If would not thought about it, this might be helpful:http://www.amazon.com/The-Alphabet-Algorithm-Writing-Architecture/dp/0262515806/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1376920450&sr=8-1&keywords=mario+carpo"Finally, I’d like to restate my criticisms in general terms. If we are serious about moving architecture and urbanism away from purely artistic considerations and into a more rational arena, there has never been a better time than now. All of us have access to immense computational power which can be applied to problems that have been —until quite recently— intractable. But of course the garbage-in-garbage-out adage holds true; computation can be used to generate large amounts of complexity, but complexity does not equal worth. The only time when it makes sense to invoke computation in the design process is when there is some relevant data that needs to be computed" (David Rutton)I want to make it short, and just ask a few questions, and hope that the following questions are relevant also for you, and not be considered outside your system. i think that the weighting to such questions seem to be more valuable, not for the architects.1. What is wrong from a pure artistic intention?2. What is any sense in purely architectural discourse?3. strictly looked, can be determined sense generally in a purely architectural discourse?4. What is purely architectural discourse?5. What is Funktionalismus or Rationalismus without philosophical support? 6. Would not be the pure functional fulfilment empty ? 7. Would be not a critical position on the promise of purely rational algorithms applied?…
hat aren’t completely there. BIM will have to continue to evolve some more if their supporters want to get to realize the promise that still is. I can’t say much about PLM, but I would say that both BIM and PLM should be considered in future developments of GH and Rhino. David has said several times that some GH limitations regarding geometry and data structures (central to interoperability) are actually Rhino limitations. So, I wouldn’t put so much pressure on David for this, or at least I would distribute the pressure also on the core Rhino development team.
Talking about Rhino vs. GH geometry, there is one (1) wish I have: support for extrusion geometry. GH already inputs extrusion elements from Rhino, but they are converted to breps. Is not a bad thing per se. The problem is when you need to bake several breps that make the Rhino file to weight several hundred MB. When these breps are actually prismatic, extrusion-like solids, is a shame that they aren’t stored as Rhino V5’s extrusion geometry in a file of just a couple of MB (I overcame this once with an inelegant RhinoScript that wasn’t good for other people). This was one of RhinoBIM’s main arguments. We can develop a structural model made of I-beams in GH using the Extrude components. We should be able to bake them as extrusions. That would also work for urban models with thousands of prismatic massing buildings (e.g. extruded footprints). Even GH’s boxes are baked as breps! Baking boxes as extrusions could be practical for voxelated or Minecraft-like models.
(2) Collaborative network support. Maybe with worksession handling, or something that aloud project team members to work on a single definition or in external references or something alike. I know there is another Rhino limitation on this, but maybe clusters are already going in that direction?
And maybe on the plug-ins domain:
(3) Remote control panel that could be really “remote”, like from other computer or device. There is an old Android App for that, but is not only a matter of updating. I mean, it would be great to control a slider with the accelerometer of an Android phone, but to have that on an iPhone will require another development team. If GH could support networks, a remote counterpart of a RCP plug-in could be developed as a cross-platform web app. I don’t know if you can access accelerometer functionality through HTML5 already, but for now, asking a client (or an spectator or any stakeholder for that matter) to control your sliders from gestures of his/her own phone would be awesome (maybe Firefly will fill that hole?).
(4) GIS support. GH already imports .shp files. Meerkat can even access the database, but what about writing to shapefiles or generating our own with databases processed/generated in GH?
(5) SketchUp support. Not only starchitects and corporations are using GH in the AEC. There are a lot of small firms, freelancers and students interested. Most of them use SketchUp for 3D modeling (not CATIA, neither Revit). Yes, you can import/export .skp from Rhino, but if GH could support nested block at bake time (also mentioned by others), it could write .skp files with complex relations of blocks (that are called components in SketchUp) and nested groups, going beyond what Rhino can export.
(6) Read/Write other formats. There are some challenges with proprietary formats that are not completely supported by Rhino, but they’re still a lot of open formats that are relevant to the fields of GH users, like stl and ply for 3D-printing. It could be nice to write mesh colors to a ply for 3D-printing a colored prototype based on GH colors. There are others, like IGES, STEP, COLLADA, etc. and 2D, like svg, odg and pdf. Some of them could offer special formatting options like custom data that the format supports but nobody uses just because is impractical to access this from direct modeling environments (but not from visual programming).
--Ernesto…
mment%3A1637953
First of all, the invalid Rhino license as seen previously has been removed, and the correct educational license we have is re-installed for this test.
The re-appearing issue is that RAM usage spikes once GH is open in Rhino. It seems that this happens when a series of large GH project files incrementally saved are stored in the same folder. Moving those previously saved large project files to a new folder seems to be able to solve this issue.
The images below explains the issue and the hypothetical solution:
1. A series of GH files were incrementally saved in the same folder previously, and the last few GH files are the ones opened most recently:
2. The total RAM usage is at the normal 5GB level once Rhino is open:
3. Once GH is open, the RAM usage spikes, and the it becomes very slow to maneuver the GH window before even opening any one of those GH files:
4. Once GH and Rhino are closed, the RAM usage drop to the previous level before the GH interface was open:
5. Now, all the incrementally saved GH files are moved to a new folder "wip" except the last one, i.e. for the last GH file, there is no other previous GH files in the same location:
6. Now, if we open GH, there is no sudden increase of RAM usage, and the 3x3 thumbnails on the GH canvas shows "missing" as those previously opened GH files are no longer in the same location as they were before:
I understand that David mentioned that the thumbnails for previously opened GH files on GH canvas will not take much RAM. Nevertheless, I'm still not sure what is causing the increase of RAM usage and slowdown of GH interface. Relocating the large project files previously saved in the same folder as the current GH file seems to be able to make this issue go away, for unknown reason ...
Appreciate if anybody experiencing similar issue can help to check if this solution works.
Thank you.
…