SiTI - Politecnico di Torino + ETH Computational Assessment Workshop at ETH - ValueLab - March 20, 2012 Assessment of 3 scenarios on the development of the F...
radius
36
48
58
67
75
82
So there is multiple file
1. This is the ghx made by Yasser for who ever needs it (Yasser if you want me to remove it i can)
2. This is the grasshopper that i made the longest lines represent the step i want to make disappear (cf the mind_mapping.jpg which shows what are the actions done)
3. This is the final result i would like to achieve (already done grasshopper + manualy but out of curiosity i would like to make it all with grasshopper !)
Thx all in advance :)…
emid=0
and I've been having some interesting discussion with Nick Cole on this thread about related issues:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/kangaroo/forum/topics/getting-spring-tension-out-of
…
ll these 12500 points.
Group 1 would represent the point located at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 etc.
Group 2 - 1, 6, 11, 16, 21 etc.
Group 3 - 2, 7, 12, 17, 22 etc.
Group 4 - 3, 8, 13, 18, 23 etc.
Group 5 - 4, 9, 14, 19, 24 etc.
I can create the pattern but the selection of points are all the points in row 0 and then all the points in row 5 and so on.
I would like the selection of points to start at the bottom left, and sequentially continue to the right and then continue on the 2nd row (left to right & bottom to top). i am hoping the pattern i am trying to achieve is more understood with the quick screen capture I uploaded.
the end goal is to be able to select all the points in the grid that are in each pattern.
Thanks in advance for any guidance with this. …
Added by Alyne Rankin at 6:53am on October 11, 2017
t case point 3 should be able to move from 20 to 33
so in other word
pt 3 depends on pt 2
the problem is if i only have sliders
pt2 could be 20
and pt 3 could be 20, that is higher than 33
so the loft loops in itself
gracias por tu ayuda
salu2
m…
. I would end up with domains of 0-6, 6-8, 8-16, 16- 24. Is there a simple way to do this besides using divide and moving the points around after?
thanks!
…
which doesn't exist in the actual problem spec. If galapagos is allowed to change the column position in all possible directions, it is less likely to get stuck in some local optimum.
Let's assume that (all other things being equal) column 20 would yield the best possible answer. The current state of the system though is at column 26, which is pretty good too, just not as good. Galapagos is more likely to 'mutate' the state a little bit instead of a lot, so it'll explore the columns near 26. However 20 isn't near 26 at all, only 25 and 27 are nearby, and maybe 24 and 28. But they'll all worse answers, so after sampling in those directions GP will abandon that as fruitless.
If however you specify the columns using two variables, then the columns near 26 are 20, 25, 27 and 32. That's a far richer space to explore which much better approximates the real problem.…
component I just used different components and GH tools to do the same - and this become part of my short paper submission for SimAUD 2016). My solution compares the height of the same points of different solar envelope and then chose the lowest one. I read about the improvement you are working on and it is good but I think it is not yet what I need (or how the solar envelope tool could be more complete).
What I need is a solar envelope that would guarantee on different facades with different orientations (the example I sent you) a certain amount of direct sunlight, say 4h per day in a given period for example all the month of June at 60°N. So to guarantee the south facing facade I should chose the vectors from 10 to 14. But these are not ok for all the other facades because in this timeframe the East and West facing facades get only 2 hours and the North get 0 hours.
So the fist step would be have the possibility to chose different sun vectors for different facades. For the example I did (the 4 hours in June at 60°N) the south facing facade would need from 10 to 14, the East facing for example from 8 to 12, the West facing facade from 12 to 16 and the North facing facade from 6 to 8 and from 18 to 20.
If I would chose a single longer time frame that could get all these hours, from 8 to 20 then the resulting solar envelope would result probably smaller than the sum of the four solar envelopes.
But this is not complete yet. I mean the use of different sun vectors on different facades. The reason is that for example when I chose the sun vectors from 8 to 12 for the four hours on the East facing facade how do I know that the sun hit on the facade in that time frame or maybe it is obstructed by surrounding buildings? Since the sun at 60°N (where I live) in June rise at around 3.15 then maybe for that specific facade the sun hit from 4 to 8 and not from 8 to 12.
I did an extreme case talking about 60°N and that maybe the sun hit on a facade at 4 instead than 12, but it is just to make understand the logic. My suggestion for a more advanced solar envelope it should be integrated with the Sunlight Hours tool of ladybug. So the input should not be the sun vectors because I don't know when the sun hit on the facade but the input should be just the desired number of hours and the possibility to specify different number of hours for each facade. Then this last component that sum different solar envelope (I didn't use it yet but I understood what it does) should be integrated yes so the result would be one single solar envelope more likely using the lowest points (the highest I don't understand what for).
Let me know what you think!
…