) Course Fee: Professional EUR 825,- (+VAT), Student EUR 415,- (+VAT)
Led by plug-in developer and structural engineer Clemens Preisinger, along with Zeynep Aksoz and Matthew Tam from the expert Karamba3D team, this three-day workshop will focus on methods of setting up structural systems in the parametric environment of Grasshopper. The participants will be guided through the basics of analyzing and interpreting structural models, to optimization processes, and how to integrate Karamba3D into C# scripts.
This workshop is aimed towards beginner to intermediate users of Karamba3D. However, advanced users are also encouraged to apply. It is open to both professional and academic users. For beginner users of Rhino and Grasshopper, there will be an optional introductory course one day before the Karamba3D course.
Karamba3D 1is a parametric structural engineering tool which provides accurate analysis of spatial trusses, frames, and shells. Karamba3D is fully embedded in the parametric design environment of Grasshopper, a plug-in for the 3D modeling tool Rhinoceros. This makes it easy to combine parameterized geometric models, finite element calculations, and optimization algorithms like Galapagos.
Course Outline
Introduction and presentation of project examples
Optimization of cross sections of line-based and surface-based elements
Geometric optimization
Topological optimization
Structural performance informed form finding
Understanding analysis algorithms embedded in Karamba3D and visualizing results
Complex workflow processes in Rhino, Grasshopper, and Karamba3D
Places are limited to a maximum of 10 participants with limited educational places. A minimum of 4 participants is required for the workshop to take place. The workshop will be canceled if this quota is not filled by October 28. The workshop will be taught in English.
Course Requirements
Basic Rhino and Grasshopper knowledge is recommended. An introductory course is offered.
No knowledge of Karamba3D is needed. Participants should bring their own laptops with Grasshopper and either Rhino 5 or Rhino 6 installed. You can download a 90-day trial version of Rhino. Karamba3D ½ year licenses for non-commercial use will be provided to all participants.
Please register here……
Added by Matthew Tam at 6:38am on September 13, 2019
curve or locus] of a segment AB, in English. The set of all the points from which a segment, AB, is seen under a fixed given angle.
When you construct l'arc capable —by using compass— you obviously need to find the centre of this arc. This can be easily done in GH in many ways by using some trigonometry (e.g. see previous —great— solutions). Whole circles instead of arcs provide supplementary isoptics —β-isoptic and (180º-β)-isoptic—. Coherent normals let you work in any plane.
Or you could just construct β-isoptics of AB by using tangent at A (or B). I mean [Arc SED] component.
If you want the true β-isoptic —the set of all the points— you should use {+β, -β} degrees (2 sides; 2 solutions; 2 arcs), but slider in [-180, +180] degrees provides full range of signed solutions. Orthoptic is provided by ±90º. Notice that ±180º isoptic is just AB segment itself, and 0º isoptic should be the segment outside AB —(-∞, A] U [B, +∞)—. [Radians] component is avoidable.
More compact versions can be achieved by using [F3] component. You can choose among different expressions the one you like the most as long as performs counter clockwise rotation of vector AB, by 180-β degrees, around A; or equivalent. [Panel] is totally avoidable.
Solutions in XY plane —projection; z = 0—, no matter A or B, are easy too. Just be sure about the curve you want to find the intersection with —Curve; your wall— being contained in XY plane.
A few self-explanatory examples showing features.
1 & 5 1st ver. (Supplementary isoptics) (ArcCapableTrigNormals_def_Bel.png)
2 & 6 2nd ver. (SED) (ArcCapableSED_def_Bel.png)
3 & 7 3rd ver. (SED + F3) (ArcCapableSEDF3_def_Bel.png)
4 & 8 4th ver. (SED + F3, Projection) (ArcCapableSEDProjInt_def_Bel.png)
If you want to be compact, 7 could be your best choice. If you prefer orientation robustness, 5. Etcetera.
I hope these versions will help you to compact/visualize; let me know any feedback.
Calculate where 2 points [A & B] meet at a specific angle is just find the geometrical locus called arco capaz in Spanish, arc capable in French (l'isoptique d'un segment de droite) or isoptic [curve or locus]
of a segment AB, in English. The set of all the points from which a segment,
AB, is seen under a fixed given angle.…
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.
…
diseño, construcción y entendimiento de nuestro entorno.
BIM está poniendo a disposición de los diseñadores y gestores auténticas bases de datos que pueden generarse, conectarse y editarse de forma paramétrica, proporcionando una sólida capa de realidad a los ejercicios de diseño generativo y computación que son objeto de estudio en Algomad, el seminario que busca popularizar la programación y la parametrización en el diseño y en la experiencia de nuestro entorno construido.
Tras un paréntesis en 2015, Algomad vuelve con el objetivo de demostrar cómo una visión computacional del BIM es una oportunidad para mejorar la forma de trabajar de ingenieros, arquitectos, constructoras y operadores de edificios e infraestructuras, tendiendo un puente entre las técnicas de diseño digital más avanzadas y la realidad de la construcción.
Algomad 2016 tendrá lugar en el centro de Madrid, en IE School of Architecture and Design, IE University, los días 3, 4 y 5 de Noviembre de 2016 y comprenderá 4 talleres así como ponencias a cargo de expertos de primer nivel.
Estructura de Algomad 2016
Algomad 2016 se estructura en torno a tres áreas temáticas principales:
BIM, como la metodología total específica para el sector de la construcción.
Computación, englobando las aplicaciones de programación y parametrización al diseño de edificios e infraestructuras.
Realidad, como marco de trabajo, buscando siempre resolver problemas reales a través de los dos puntos anteriores.
Público objetivo
Arquitectos, arquitectos técnicos, ingenieros y en general académicos, estudiantes de últimos cursos y profesionales del mundo inmobiliario y de la construcción que compartan un interés por la digitalización de nuestro sector. Se espera un nivel mínimo en el uso de herramientas BIM y de parametrización. Algomad proporcionará formación adicional y gratuita en las herramientas básicas a emplear en los talleres para asegurar un correcto desempeño.…
reaky thing consisting from triangulated "modules" (i.e an assembly out of this, this and that) where the exterior edges ARE always under tension (= SS 304/316 cables OR nylon) and the interior ones MAY be under compression ( = steel, aluminum, wood, carbon) OR ... some of them ...may be under tension. Bastardized T trusses deviate a bit from theory ... but who cares? (not me anyway). T trusses have many variants (but as the greatest ever said: Less is More).
2. Large scale T for AEC is the art of pointless since it costs around the GNP of Nigeria. Here's some indicative components from a module of a multi adjustable TX system costing (the module) ~ the price of my Panigale (Google that):
The above is mailed to a friend who has MIT (yes, that MIT: the top dog) on sight ... therefor he needs some appropriate "credentials", he he.
3. The distance that separates the above with the demo TDT node provided is around 666.666 miles - but we don't care: we are after Art not some testimony to vanity.
4. On purpose I've used a smallish ring to give you a clear indication upon the constrain numero uno in truss design: CLASH matters.
5. You'll need:
(a) A decision related with the tensioners (classic Norseman + SS cables or nylon machined thingies?).
(b) A machinist who can do elementary stuff (like the adapters) and can weld this to that (the "ring" for instance). His abilities must be 1 in a scale of 100. If the fella has a computer (not a CRAY) and he knows what 3dPDF is (hmm) ... well ... use that way to communicate with him PRIOR designing anything: He must agree on the parts BEFORE the whole is attempted (as a design in GH or in some other app).
(c) A carpenter with a wood lathe for the obvious. BTW: BEFORE doing any TDT attempt > ask the carpenter about the available wood strut sizes. Against popular belief DO NOT varnish the wood (use exterior alkyd/oil stains from some top maker like the notorious US company PPG).
http://www.ppgpaints.com/products/paints-stains-data-sheets
(d) Good quality cigars (and espresso) plus some classic music (ZZTop, PFloyd, Cure, Stones, U2 etc etc) during the assembly.
(e) Faith to the Dark Side (see my avatar).
May the Force (the dark option) be with you.…
hacia donde crecerán las venas, y tenemos otro conjunto de puntos 'N' que son los que forman el patrón de venas.
1. Por cada 's' perteneciente a S, buscamos el 'n' perteneciente a N más cercano. Ese 'n' va a "moverse".
2. Por cada 'n' que se mueve, hacemos un vector dirigido a todos los 's' hacia los que se mueve.
3. Calculamos el vector medio de todos los vectores del paso 2, movemos 'n' con ese vector y lo añadimos a V.
4. Si algún 's' está muy cerca de algún 'n', ese 's' se elimina.
5. Se repite el proceso.
Esto es para formar venaciones abiertas sin autocrecimiento (como la siguiente imagen, hecho con Visual Basic).
Para las cerradas (las reticuladas que forman algo como células, como en la imagen tuya), el paso 1 y 4 son distintos y no sabría decirte cómo hacerlo. En ese pdf explica un método usando delaunay pero es muy lento, además gh no tiene ese algoritmo en 3d (entonces solo se podría hacer este patrón en 2d), por lo que estoy buscando otras vías, solo he logrado llegar a esto:
Es más complicado de lo que parece.
No obstante, si te conformas con menos, hay muchas formas de crear raíces y patrones similares, con SortestWalk, Anemone, etc... Hay ejemplos en este foro.
Si realmente quieres conseguir ese patrón, deberías aprender a programar porque para añadir distintos radios a las venas es necesario que las venas tengan topología y eso se complica demasiado desde gh. Nervous System para su "Hyphae" usó C++ con la librería CGAL, que es una muy poderosa librería de algoritmos de 3d.
…
d work exactly as the physical model. In the model, we have a curved surface which can be analysed into squares. These squares are filled with two kind of units which are connected with each other and create a grid that follows this curved surface.
We have managed to analyse this curved surface into a planar surface consisted of squares and we painted the squares with colours to represent the kind of unit that "fills" each square. So, now in rhino I have managed to build the curved surface that I want it to be filled with the two types of units.
I also have the planar surface built in Gh with the squares split into two lists, each one for each kind of unit. Because these units are mambranes, I used kangaroo to make them act like mambranes.
I hope I described the problem clearly. The point is to keep the dimensions of the units
the same and make it work in Kangaroo. Do you have anything in mind that I should look up or any advice ? Thank you in advance and i m sorry for the extended description.
*Pic 1: the curved surfaces that has to be filled with the units
*Pic 2: The binary system that shows which square is occupied by which unit
Blue=2 , Red=1, White= Blank
*Pic 3: unit 1
*Pic 4: unit 2
*Pic 5: a point of view of the physical model (not the final curve at the surface)
…
e.github.io/hydra/viewer?owner=chriswmackey&fork=hydra_2&id=Outdoor_Microclimate_Map
Thank you very much in advance!
1. why the underground zone representing the ground is defined as a plenum zone? By default, an office zone program is assigned. Will this affect the outside surface temperature of the ground plenum zone and affect, in turn, the outdoor microclimate map calculation?
2. I assume the construction GroundMaterial composed of five layers of 200mm concrete materials as assigned to the ground plenum zone is to assimilate a ground surface composed of thick concrete. But why this construction is assigned to this zone using both the Set EP Zone Construction and Set EP Zone Underground Construction components? Will the surfaces of this zone automatically recognized as underground surfaces based on their positions in relation to the default xy plane?
3. why a brep is connected to the input node distFromFloorOrSrf on the Indoor View Factor Calculator component which is expecting a number according to its annotation?
4. why the outdoor comfort analysis recipe is used for the indoor comfort analysis component?
5. why the OutdoorComfResult and DegFromNeutralResult are 2 csv files with PPD and PMV values if PMV/PPD thermal comfort model is only applicable to indoor air-conditioned space?
…
the following image of a hut.
I do not have experience using kangaroo to simulate forces, but I have made a test using multiple random components on a flat surface to fake the effect I'm going for. See image below.
The main issue I'm having is that the original file used for my test surface used box morph and the variable pipe command. Box morph is a bit touchy on a curved surface and it is not as elegant as I would like it to be (ie. I want all the hair diameters to be perfectly circular and uniform in size). Variable pipe also does not align the base of the hair with the existing surface, which means I have to offset the surface and then trim the excess of my pipe.....leading to heavy code and the file crashing.
So I'm trying to rebuild the "hairs" using a new method:
1) Subdivide the surface
2) Find the midpoint of each surface and then create a straight line that is perpendicular
3) Move a point along the on the straight line (between the start and end points) in the z direction, and then create a nurbs curve using this point and the start and end points
4) create a circle at the base of each crv, and then two more circles: one at the point in the middle point (I think I set it to .9) and the end of the curve
5) The problem: Now I am trying to sweep along these three circles and the nurbs curve to create a bent hair/pipe that is flush with the conic surface, but it does not work.
If someone can help that would be amazing. I've included my original surface test file and my new file where I am rebuilding using the sweep command. Below is a drawing of what I'm trying to achieve.
…
tives for low-dimensional, or highly continuous problems. Having a somewhat faster way to trigger a galapagos run would also be beneficial."
I found a post on the 'hoopsnake/forum' describing the very same problem I am trying to solve, and looked into using HoopSnake (without satisfaction so far):
Double loop and hydrostatics?
I don't want to wait until G2 so will re-state some of what I posted earlier, then offer a template for an ideal "fast solver" component ('B-Solve') that could be widely useful. I am ready to accept that it might be written in Python, C, or VB - as long as it's open source or built in to standard GH. If there is a GH plugin that will do this, I'd like to know that too, though prefer a lightweight solution rather than a big toolbox.
QUESTION: Is there a FAST (binary search speed) GH way to "solve" toward a goal by "moving" a single slider?
CONTEXT: I have a boat hull of a given displacement at rest. I rotate the hull to an arbitrary angle ("heel" caused by wind in the sails) and want to adjust a 'Z-offset' slider so the displacement is the same as it was at rest.
I can adjust the slider manually, zooming in for better control, and with a dozen tries or so, in a very short time, narrow in with a binary search method and get very close to matching the value.
When I hook up Galapagos, it runs on and on forever, trying values that are "obviously" further away instead of closer to the goal. When I can solve it manually faster than Galapagos, a different solution is needed.
OBJECTIVE:
I want a FAST solution that doesn't need any manual input. Ideally, it would respond like any other component and re-calc whenever its inputs changed. At worst, a 'start/reset' trigger, "soft input" so it can be used inside a cluster.
It doesn't need to control a slider, they just happen to be handy for defining a range and precision of values.
Using Galapagos: HydroSolve_2015_Sep8a.gh (attached)
An extremely stripped down version of the problem using Grasshopper.
NOTE: One obvious problem here is that by using absolute value ('abs()') for the 'difference' here, Galapagos doesn't know whether it's too high or too low!
Instructions:
Start with 'Roll=0', 'Volume=1543.943'
Adjust 'Roll' to ~35 degrees
"Solve" 'Z-offset' value to return to 'target' (original) volume of 1543.943
Using 'B-Solve': HydroSolve_2015_Sep8b.gh (attached)
'B-Solve' is the proposed fast solver component. Its 'solution' output is always in the range of zero to one, which is remapped by the green group as -5 to 5 and used as the 'Z-offset' for 'Pitch-Roll-Z'.
Starting value ('Reset') for 'solution' is 0.5, and 'B-Solve' tries different 'solution' values to make 'result' (the 'Volume') and 'goal' match. An efficient uphill(?) or binary searcher could be very fast.
Does this sound feasible? Can anyone implement 'B-Solve'?
Two at once?
The post noted earlier, Double loop and hydrostatics?, brings up a complication that's worth considering from the start... Depending on hull shape, the center of buoyancy may move fore and aft, away from the center of gravity, as the hull rolls. This induces a change in pitch so a second 'B-Solve' component could be used in the same model to adjust pitch, which of course changes 'Volume' again... Not quite sure how the two would get along?
Thanks.
Note: the hull in these examples is a really poor shape!…
Added by Joseph Oster at 1:30pm on September 9, 2015