Search Results - 湖北福彩30选5玩法『9TBH·COM』158计划网时时彩20192023年3月19日6时0分33秒.H5c2a3.jeusyfvdq

Comment on: Topic 'Blog post: Worrisome Trends in Architecture Education': 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?…; Added by RWNB at 9:56am on August 19, 2013

Comment on: Topic 'Pain Points in Grasshopper': 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…; Added by Ernesto Bueno at 3:00am on July 31, 2014

Topic: Grasshopper interface freezes and it uses large amount of memory during start: 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. …; Added by Grasshope at 12:49am on January 26, 2017

Topic: Is it possible to write a code and manipulate it in grasshopper?: V 0.5 . But I don't think it is the right thing to use. Basically the question is: Is it possible to write the code and manipulate it in grasshopper? Here is the code: Manipulate[ Module[{\[CurlyEpsilon] = 10^-6, c1 = Tan[a1], c2 = Tan[a2], c3 = Tan[a3], c4 = Tan[a4], c5 = Tan[a5], c6 = Tan[a6]}, ContourPlot3D[ Evaluate[ c6 Sin[3 x] Sin[2 y] Sin[z] + c4 Sin[2 x] Sin[3 y] Sin[z] + c5 Sin[3 x] Sin[y] Sin[2 z] + c2 Sin[x] Sin[3 y] Sin[2 z] + c3 Sin[2 x] Sin[y] Sin[3 z] + c1 Sin[x] Sin[2 y] Sin[3 z] == 0], {x, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {y, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {z, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, Mesh -> False, ImageSize -> {400, 400}, Boxed -> False, Axes -> False, NormalsFunction -> "Average", PlotPoints -> ControlActive[10, 30], PerformanceGoal -> "Speed"]], {{a1, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $1$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a2, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $2$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a3, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $3$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a4, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $4$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a5, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $5$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a6, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $6$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, AutorunSequencing -> {1, 3, 5}, ControlPlacement -> Left]…; Added by Aysu Aysoy at 3:19am on November 20, 2014

Topic: Is it possible to write the code and manipulate it in grasshopper?: grasshopper: Mantis V 0.5 . But I don't think it is the right thing to use. Basically the question is: Is it possible to write the code and manipulate it in grasshopper? Here is the code: Manipulate[ Module[{\[CurlyEpsilon] = 10^-6, c1 = Tan[a1], c2 = Tan[a2], c3 = Tan[a3], c4 = Tan[a4], c5 = Tan[a5], c6 = Tan[a6]}, ContourPlot3D[ Evaluate[ c6 Sin[3 x] Sin[2 y] Sin[z] + c4 Sin[2 x] Sin[3 y] Sin[z] + c5 Sin[3 x] Sin[y] Sin[2 z] + c2 Sin[x] Sin[3 y] Sin[2 z] + c3 Sin[2 x] Sin[y] Sin[3 z] + c1 Sin[x] Sin[2 y] Sin[3 z] == 0], {x, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {y, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, {z, \[CurlyEpsilon], Pi - \[CurlyEpsilon]}, Mesh -> False, ImageSize -> {400, 400}, Boxed -> False, Axes -> False, NormalsFunction -> "Average", PlotPoints -> ControlActive[10, 30], PerformanceGoal -> "Speed"]], {{a1, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $1$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a2, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $2$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a3, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $3$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a4, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $4$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a5, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $5$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, {{a6, 1, "\!$\*SubscriptBox[\(\[Alpha]$, $6$]\)"}, -Pi/2 - 0.01, Pi/2 + 0.01, ImageSize -> Tiny}, AutorunSequencing -> {1, 3, 5}, ControlPlacement -> Left]…; Added by Aysu Aysoy at 1:50am on November 20, 2014

Comment on: Topic 'Baking Breps w/ Color - RHINOCOMMON': es only have one raison d'être, which is to group types into logical chunks. A Type is the definition of a class or a structure. Classes and structures are very similar entities (they can both contain any number of methods, properties and other types), but because they behave differently, you need to know which is which. An Instance of a type is a single object that actually exists. For example, the class Human is the definition of what it means to be human. You are an instance of this class. I am a different instance of this class. Damien is yet another instance of this class. Every instance can assign unique values to all its properties and fields. If for example the type Human had a property for height, then in my case it would say 1.97m. In Damien's case it would be set to something much less, as Damien isn't anywhere near as handsome and tall as I am. A Reference is a piece of information that tells you where a certain instance is. Think of a reference as an address. When you mail a letter (or e-mail), you must specify a valid and unambiguous address or the letter won't arrive. Similarly, every piece of data stored in the memory of your computer also has a unique address, but instead of "3670, Woodland Park Avenue, Seattle", it looks like this 0x12345678. Trying to access an instance through an invalid reference is like sending a letter without an address. References are sometimes also called "variables", though sometimes the word variable is only used to indicate primitive types, such as Booleans, Integers and such. A reference is not the instance itself. Take the following code: 1. Dim crv As Rhino.Geometry.Curve 2. Dim dup As Rhino.Geometry.Curve 3. crv = GetACurveFromSomewhere() 4. dup = crv 5. If (dup IsNot Nothing) Then dup = dup.DuplicateCurve() One lines (1) and (2) I declare two references, one is called "crv", the other "dup". Because Visual Basic is a strongly typed language, I can assign limitations to what sort of data crv and dup are allowed to reference. In this case they can only point to instances of the Rhino.Geometry.Curve class or any class which derives from Rhino.Geometry.Curve (such as Rhino.Geometry.NurbsCurve, or Rhino.Geometry.LineCurve). On line (3) I assign an actual curve instance to the crv reference/variable. At least, assuming the GetACurveFromSomewhere() function actually returns a proper instance. If it doesn't, crv will remain a "null reference". Line (4) is interesting, because both crv and dup will now point to the same curve instance. So even though there is only 1 curve in memory, both crv and dup provide access to it. This means that when we change the curve via crv, then dup will notice that change. On line (5) two things happen. I want to duplicate my curve data so I can change the data via dup, without affecting the data available via crv. The best way to duplicate a curve (i.e. create a second curve in memory, that has the same shape as the first curve) is to use the DuplicateCurve() method on the Rhino.Geometry.Curve class. However I cannot call a method on an instance that doesn't exist, so before I do that, I need to check whether or not dup actually points to a real curve object, or whether it is a null reference. Finally, it is also possible to have an instance of a class in memory, without any references to it. In this case nobody can reach that curve any more and it is essentially dead weight, taking up pointless memory. In C++ this is called a Memory Leak and it's considered a serious bug. In VB.NET and C# this memory will automatically be cleaned up by the .NET Garbage Collector. In my opinion the Garbage Collector is the single most important feature in .NET. It's what turns VB and C# from frustration central into a friendly and flexible coding platform. -- David Rutten david@mcneel.com Poprad, Slovakia…; Added by David Rutten at 4:10pm on August 9, 2011

Blog Post: Silkworm Source Code Release and Development

Hello Silkworm users,

Due to recent interest in this plugin again we are today making the source code public. This source code can be downloaded at…

Added by Silkworm at 11:14am on June 1, 2014

Comment on: Topic 'Designing dynamic folded structures?': we're actually using PET sheets for our flexures. We try to design so that the flexures don't go through more than +/- 30 degrees of deflection. If the angular deflection is kept small, the lifetime can definitely be on the order of 1000000 cycles. As for the design process (item 2), ideally the designer would be able to use a simple 3D CAD tool to design a model of a robot, and the geometry would be represented by dimensioning the individual parts in the model. Maybe there should be some parametric primitive kinematic building blocks like four bar linkages, box frames, etc. that a user could build up a robot from. But, the key functionality the tool needs to provide is for the designer to be able to visualize how the robot will move when it's fabricated. This could mean observing (or plotting) the motion of a leg, a wing, or a series of body segments. Ideally, then, the tool would generate an unfolding of the design. How this would work is still very vague - maybe the user would assist in the unfolding, maybe there would be an optimization routine that computes optimal unfoldings based on criteria like minimal waste, or fewest pieces (I would *not* constrain the problem to construction from a single monolithic piece as in origami). The biggest problem we have right now, is that our design process is totally divorced from fabrication. Even if we went through the trouble of extruding individual thin plates in Solidworks and creating an assembly for visualizing the kinematics of a mechanism, that particular representation doesn't transfer easily to the fabrication process because it's essentially monolithic. Item 3: The 2D drawing is simple a drawing done manually in Solidworks. There are different layers for flexure cuts, outline cuts, and potentially any cuts to be made in the plastic flexure layer. Depending on the robot, there may be many separate pieces for different parts and linkages in a single robot. For example, the drawing for a robot containing a fourbar linkage may have the linkage laid out as a physically separate piece consisting of five rigid links connected by four flexure hinges. During assembly, the designer would then fold up that linkage and insert it into the robot wherever it's supposed to go. If you're curious you can see some sample 2D drawings for older designs here: http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~ronf/Prototype/ under the "Example Structures" heading. I noticed Kangaroo seems to be a popular choice for physical simulations. I don't really even need to include forces like bending resistance - I'm happy to allow the design tool to approximate flexures as pin joint-type hinges. Once the design is unfolded, the details of how to cut the flexures could be worked out in a post-processing step. I wouldn't expect the tool to be able to realistically simulate the bending of the hinges. I'm going to have to dig a lot deeper into understanding Grasshopper and Kangaroo. I only just got started with Grasshopper today by following the folding plate tutorial on wa11ace.com.au today. …; Added by Aaron Hoover at 5:30pm on March 31, 2012

Topic: Rhino Viewport Preview in Fullscreen Canvas - Potential Solution?: to run at full screen. I've gone as far as using an iPad to use as the second monitor via AirDisplay (which actually works really well) but have never been satisfied with any setup that required you to look back and forth as if at a tennis match all day long. Not long after first using Grasshopper 3+ years ago I've had the desire for a "Live Viewport" component that would allow a live image of the 3d geometry being generated directly in the canvas. Every once in a while I search the forums with the hope of finding a solution, but always come up empty handed. Someday this might exist although for now I have found what might be the next best thing to a native "Live Viewport" component and its enabled with a small app named Sticky Previews. This app uses the task bar preview feature within Windows 7's aero interface to create custom, floating preview windows from any open window currently running. I've only just discovered the app, but it seems to do the trick and has been stable and problem free so far. -- I will post an update if I find out that I might have spoken too soon. The install allows for a 30 day trial and is $15 bucks to purchase. I just found the app and don't know anything about this group that created the app. If you happen to know of them, Id be curious to find out more. divided windows, cramped and slow; unified window with floating rhino model preview; link to the apps webpage; http://www.ntwind.com/software/sticky-previews.html Also works with other apps; and the about me page screen shot; …; Added by Tyler Selby at 11:25pm on November 26, 2012

Topic: Problems with radiation result: rch, september, june. I did two kind of simulation. The first one - just one hour 10h and then 15:30. The second, 10:00 to 15:30h. I think that's something wrong with the results kWh/m² because the biggest values for radiation, are for winter. And the results simulation 10:00 to 15:30h the result are different too, the biggest values for winter (june), then september, march, and them december (summer) The results are (kWh/m²) 10:00h 15:30h 10 to15:30h 21/03 0,69 1,15 2,61 21/06 1,14 1,13 3,71 23/09 0,96 0,90 2,79 21/12 1,31 1,22 2,45 I will be very gratiful with your answer I'm using this software to a important academic work, and in my Country Its not commom use this software, I don't know anyone that could help me with this. I'd like to encourage university start to use this kind of software. Thank you Camila …; Added by Camila Leone to Ladybug Tools at 8:50pm on May 25, 2017