basis" problem ... all of a sudden - quite recently - a girl posted the MITESIGF (Most Important Thread Even Seen In Grasshopper Forums). She doesn't even realized that: she's novice:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/array-1
4. Why this MITESIGF is MITESIGF? For 2 reasons:
4.a: Wooden pairs (Beams) Profile Curves (belonging in some tree) MUST allow individual control on a per "item basis" (OK, that's obvious) - see Images posted in the thread. No attractor (or any other "global" policy) can cut the mustard here (to tell you the truth this happens in 99% of pure engineering cases, but they appear very rarely in GH Forums - if at all, mind). If the profile curves are defined with 5 points (or 9 for the double thing) we need "on-the-fly" control over this Array (like the radii in your Sphere Manipulator) :
4.b: Critical Bottom-to-Top issues arise: Create a "global" topology (call it "parent") - the beams - and then place real-life "components" (call them "childs") that affect (most probably) the "parent". OK, that's impossible to do with GH/Rhino (peace of cake with CATIA/Microstation) but you can "approximate" things up to a point. Alternatively: you can "trigger" some interest from GH/Rhino developers if they have any AEC market(s) in mind.
Topic 4.a requires the master-to-slave slider thingy (iterate over branches (index slider:master) > reset the 5 values (value slider:slave) > modify them on the fly > save > increase/decrease branch > ...).
Other than that my definitions are far more challenging than this simple case ... but ... anyway ... long is the path (and hilly).
more soon.
best, The Troll
…
, but without modifying the lists order:
suposing i have a structure list
(Paths = 75)
{0} (N = 51)
{2} (N = 51)
{3} (N = 51)
{4} (N = 51) ...............
I`m trying to apply to that list of values the statement:
if x>y then x=0
if x<y then x=x/z
but i need the list structure to keep exactly the same.
I`d be very thankful for any ideas on how to approach this problem.
Many thanks,
Roberto
…
that aren't relevant anymore or if there are any I missed please let me know. Maybe we can get a list like this in a better place as well.
Thank you.
Right Mouse - When wiring, plugs wire into multiple inputs.Shift+Click - Pick component aggregate.Shift+Clicking - Place component aggregate.Alt+Left - Click Split canvas tool.Ctrl+Q - Preview toggle.Ctrl+E - Enable toggle.Ctrl+Left - Navigate upstream.Ctrl+Right - Navigate downstream.Ctrl+M - Mesh Edge display toggle.Ctrl+1 - No previewCtrl+2 - Wireframe preview.Ctrl+3 - ShadedCtrl+Alt+Shift+Click - Save image of canvas.Ctrl+Alt and Shift+Ctrl+Alt - Highlights components on the canvas and component palette.Ctrl+Shift - Rewire component input/output.Double Click - Find/SearchAlt+Drag - Copy component on canvas.Ctrl+Tab - Document cycling.Ctrl+Shift+P - PreferencesCtrl+N - New fileCtrl+O - Open fileCtrl+S - Save file.Ctrl+Shift+S - Save as.Ctrl+Alt+S - Save backup.Ctrl+W - Close open document.Ctrl+Z - Undo copy.Ctrl+Y - RedoCtrl+X - CutCtrl+C - CopyCtrl+P - PasteCtrl+Alt+V - Paste in placeCtrl+Shift+V - Paste in centerCtrl+A - Select allCtrl+D - DeselectCtrl+Shift+I - Invert SelectionCtrl+Shift+A - Grow SelectionCtrl+Shift+Left Arrow - Grow UpstreamCtrl+Shift+Right Arrow - Grow DownstreamCtrl+Left Arrow - Shift upstreamCtrl+Right Arrow - Shift downstreamCtrl+G - Group selectionF3 - FindF4 - CreateF5 - RecomputeCtrl+B - Send to backCtrl+F - Bring to frontCtrl+Shift+B - Move backwardsCtrl+Shift+F - Move forwardsInsert - Bake selectedCtrl+Q - Toggle previewCtrl+E - Toggle enabled selected
…
ported to Rhino and "set" in Grasshopper, i trim both surfaces from their rectangular bases so that when sDivide is used it creates and distributes the same number of points on each surface.But heres the problems: a) if i use the "trimmed" surfaces with SrfGrid it errors warning: "A point in the grid is null. fitting operation aborted".I'd learned this was caused by "nulls" replacing position Data Items when the rectangular grid(surface base) was trimmed away. So i used Clean Tree which worked removing all nulls, then Shift Paths\Flip Matrix to create line-endpoint pairs for Polyline\Evaluate Curve. I Flattened the last Flip Matrix placing all data items in one source for SrfGrid, like in the working Untrim\CopyTrim definition.This time,.b) SrfGrid errored with: "The UCount value is not valid for this amount of points",.So, i substituted a 356 value, numeric Slider in the Addition B param., and tested its range until a valid UCount was found. Then SrfGrid fitted a surface thru the points, BUT,d) those SrfGrid surfaces are extremely deformed even thought the points preceding it from Evaluate Curve are accurate,SEE: def: "3b-RGH_SurfaceBlend.gh",AND,.a2) if i use Untrim with CopyTrim then SrfGrid works, but since the Jokers limbs WILL be in different surface positions then the blends between the Arm (for example) will rise from its relative FLAT position on the untrimmed Source surface to the Arm on the Target surface, rather than morphing from the Corresponding Arm position on the Source surface,. ..see def.: "4-RGH_SurfaceBlend.gh"So please let me know,..1) how to produce accurate surfaces from SrfGrid in def.: "3b-RGH_SurfaceBlend.gh",. ..(NOTE: BOTH these def's contain 2 indentical, "internalized" surfaces, but if def. 3b can be made to work it will also work with Dis-similar surfaces)2) which component to use or how else to determine the correct UCount value for a specified amount of points(ie:155), re: SrfGrid error: "The UCount value is not valid for this amount of points",.3) how else to force SrfGrid to work with Trimmed surfaces?, AND,..4) how to force intersurface, point-blend correspondence lines: Polylines(PLine) to be connected between correctly! correponding positions (Limbs) on the surfaces?,
Really! appreciate all help, definitions and kind generosity common to this knowledgable membership,
Cheers!,
Jeff…
termedio a avanzado.
2013 | mayo 22, 23, 24 y 25. 20 Hrs.
Horario: 18:00 – 22.00 Jueves, Viernes y Sábado de 8:00 a 15:00 Hrs. Instructor_ Arch. David Hernández Melgarejo.
http://bioarchitecturestudio.wordpress.com
Objetivos:
El curso está dirigido a cada diseñador, ingeniero o arquitecto que quiere obtener una sólida base en modelado generativo y paramétrico dentro del flujo de trabajo en Rhinoceros.
En el curso se explorarán y construirán estructuras en el espacio paramétrico, incorporando entidades geométricas (Curvas, Superficies, Puntos, etc…) y usando patrones algorítmicos para la generación de estructuras con metabolismos contextualizados.
Cada paso será soportado con ejercicios que gradualmente incrementarán su complejidad.
El alumno aprenderá cómo trabajar con asociación geométrica y parámetros. Para perfeccionar asociación geométrica – asociación entre partes, asociación dinámica – las formas geométricas son generadas al seguir la conexión lógica entre la parte geométrica y sus restricciones, dimensión paramétrica y él proceso dinámico del diseño: Estimulamos el pensamiento relacional para la construcción de Diseño y Arquitectura de alto desempeño.
Resultados:
Los participantes con éste entrenamiento obtendrán las siguientes fundamentos.
· Generar aplicaciones orientadas al análisis, la optimización, documentación del diseño y fabricación.
Palabras clave:
Diseño Computacional, Scripting, Rhinoceros 5.0 + Grasshopper, Parametrización, Análisis, Galapagos, Genetic Solver, Optimización, Fabricación Digital.
Para mayor información:
MArch. Kathrin Schröter. E-mail: kschroter@itesm.mx
Dirección de Arquitectura. Oficinas de Aulas 1, segundo piso.…
s my code, so I decided to write a new simple component refreshing all time at 300 ms interval and the problem came up again. The code provoking the display exceptions and images with the erros are listed below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
using System;using System.Drawing;using Grasshopper.Kernel;using FirstComp.Properties;using System.Timers;namespace FirstComp{ public class FirstCompGH : GH_Component { private Timer myTimer = new Timer(300); //3 veces por segundo private Random rand = new Random(DateTime.Now.Millisecond); public FirstCompGH() : base("Nombre", "Abreviado", "Descripcion", "Categoría", "SubCat") { myTimer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(MainLoop); myTimer.Start(); } protected override void RegisterInputParams(GH_Component.GH_InputParamManager pManager) { pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Op A", "A", "Primer parámetro de la operación",0.0); pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Op B", "B", "Segundo parámetro de la operación",0.0); } protected override void RegisterOutputParams(GH_Component.GH_OutputParamManager pManager) { pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Suma", "S", "Resultado de la suma"); pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Resta", "R", "Resultado de la resta"); pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Mult", "M", "Resultado de la multiplicación"); pManager.Register_DoubleParam("Div", "D", "Resultado de la división"); } protected override void SolveInstance(IGH_DataAccess DA) { // Variables para contener los datos de entrada // Le podemos asignar algunos valores iniciales. double opA = double.NaN, opB = double.NaN; // El objeto DA recupera los datos de la entrada. // Si no hay datos de entrada abortamos. if (!DA.GetData(0, ref opA)) { return; } if (!DA.GetData(1, ref opB)) { return; } opA += rand.Next(1,10); opB += rand.Next(1,10); // Ahora realizamos las operaciones matemáticas DA.SetData(0, (opA + opB)); DA.SetData(1, (opA - opB)); DA.SetData(2, (opA * opB)); if (opB != 0) //Rhino.RhinoMath.ZeroTolerance DA.SetData(3, (opA/opB)); else { AddRuntimeMessage(GH_RuntimeMessageLevel.Error, "Error de división por cero"); return; } } public override Guid ComponentGuid { get { return new Guid("44BEA3FE-7CB8-42fe-AEC9-BE5F6EE424E8");} } protected void MainLoop(object source, ElapsedEventArgs e) { this.ExpireSolution(true); } protected override Bitmap Internal_Icon_24x24 { get { return Resources.icono; } } }}
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Images showing errors.
I can't figure out what is causing these errors.
Best Regards
Ernesto
…
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.…
nd the tool can create a single surface having the texture of the original input surfaces. (Visualize two waves interacting on the surface of a body of water.) But a surface intersection operations is producing unexpected results, putting my entire algorithm at risk of failing.
I’ve enclosed a .GH that has a simplified version of the algorithm I intended to use to produce a single surface from the two input surfaces. How it works is to use the Brep | Brep component to generate a set of curves where the input surfaces meet. I then apply these cutting curves to a Surface Split component on each input surface. I intended to then programmatically cull the set of brep’s from the split operations, removing all those that aren’t on the face of the target surface. Finally, I would join all the remaining prep’s into a synthesized surface that reflects the facial interactions of the originals. This algorithm is however not completing successfully because the outputs of the Brep | Brep don’t appear to accurately reflect the complete set of curves at the intersections of the 2 faces. I think it’s because of these incomplete set of curves that the Surface Split operations are returning a very incomplete set of sub-surfaces. This sparse set of results don’t allow me to reassemble the sub-surfaces to form a complete synthesized face. This posting includes the Grasshopper document, as well as a screenshot of the GH code. The GH Intersection and split operations take a long time to complete. So I’ve enclosed Bake’d versions of the important geometries in the layers of the 3dm document as indicated below. But this results in a 12MB document, which is larger than the discussion can handle. But i can be downloaded from here. (my Google drive) Scaled Waves - Layer 1 Brep | Brep out - Layer 2 top Surface Split out - Layer 3 bot Surface Split out - Layer 4 I think there are problems in Rhino/Grasshopper related to intersections and splits. But I’m also open to somebody suggesting a better way to accomplish my objective — including workarounds. Thanks for any help, - Bob…
Added by neobobkrause at 8:46pm on August 31, 2016
are doing):
It's supposed to be an ARCHITECTURAL TAILGATING PAVILION,I had no idea what tailgating was at first,but apparently before the games(basketball,football...) or sometimes even during the games,people bring a canopy with themselves usually with a truck and start drinking,barbecuing,and watching the game under that!so as this semester's project,we want to design a pavilion instead of the ordinary cheesy canopy:D
The questions involved in the design of this tailgating pavilion are:
-it better have something with texas tech university but it's not really necessary!
-time management (installation and de-installation)
-having it into pieces that fit in the truck
-using new digital methods will be welcomed ( for example instead of having the typical television there,we can propose something like what zaha hadid did in the chanel pavilion,I guess she is projecting stuff on one of the wall panels(see the picture below))
-it should cover an area between 200-500 square-feet (20-50 sqm)(it's only for a few people(family and friends).
-the base surface that I provided in the rhino file is not what it will look like,I just made that to test the grasshopper definitions on it.so the shape of this tiny pavilion should try to devide the area into different zones to provide a scenario(oh they cook the food here,serve it there,and watch the game on the other side),so it could be a single volume or maybe a combination of different volumes ,Site placement design expressing content and messages rather than acting as a ‘container' or as the professor explained:
"It may comprise a single volume, or a number of smaller volumes, with internal spaces for few people gathering events and a possible dining - seating zone. Fifty per cent of the volume must be in the open air, not fully enclosed and be planned as to function also as an additional exhibition space as well as providing for a possible food outlet.
Capable of hosting small to medium-sized events and delivery of a retail, food and/or drink offer by sponsor partners.Mobility: designed to be erected in short time, plan to be used for one day only, and de installed by end of the day."
-at first I started with a voronoi shape on surface,but when I thought it through I saw that it's gonna be hard to assemble it when it comes to the physical fabrication,so I decided to use the triangles and try to kinda represent the voronoi pattern,not actually using it.
-the most important thing after coming up with the actual surface and volume for the pavilion is the joints.The material we should use is plastic!we can use the hot wirecutter to cut foam(that limits us to use a ruled surface for each of the modules),then we can either use the vacuum to get the shape and then use it to make molds(resin,glassfiber mold),actually I just got an email from our professor explaining that"Maximum table reach for a large modul is ~ 2050 mm or 1/2 of 13'-1/1/2" diameter. So a 8'x4' panel could be worked upon within the working space radius."
we can even use the foam as composite with the resin-fiberglass and not necessarily detach them.
I provided here some pdfs,for pavilions using plastic,the PE sheets seem interesting but I am not sure how to bend them exactly.(it is still considered using plastic,we dont have to necessarly use the instructions on how to use plastic that I explained above)(the first pdf provides good examples of plastic,and the second one has some example of joints"
-I am also wondering if I need to use any structure analysis plugins,to see if the shell will actually work and not fall apart in real life) ( I am not sure what plugins I can use for that since I am really new to grasshopper)
-also I am not sure what to do about the openings on the surface,I feel like maybe some of the modules shouldnt have openings(because of the sun,rain and also the dark needed in order to watch TV in the " TV area".and also for providing a more organic cool shape,and have differentiation in pattern like the first photo I provided in this discussion,which is also because those panel are smaller,and I tried to control the opening sizes with an attractor point so maybe later I can use the attractor points to control the opening sizes for the different zones"
I guess I never talked this much in my life,but I wanted to thoroughly explain what I nee to do,which was not bad for putting my thoughts together:D hehe:))
and as you can see I want to do alot with the small knowledge that I already have:(
hopefully I can make some modules with plastic,foam and/or resin composites showing the joints,and then maybe design a smaller area than the pavilion and make a tiny physical shelter,lol
…
e a fundamental failure on my part. On the other hand, Grasshopper isn't supposed to be on a par with most other 3D programs. It is emphatically not meant for manual/direct modelling. If you would normally tackle a problem by drawing geometry by hand, Grasshopper is not (and should never be advertised as) a good alternative.
I get that. That’s why that 3D shape I’m trying to apply the voronoi to was done in NX. I do wonder where the GUI metaphor GH uses comes from. It reminds me of LabVIEW.
"What in other programs is a dialog box, is 8 or 10 components strung together in grasshopper. The wisdom for this I often hear among the grasshopper community is that this allows for parametric design."
Grasshopper ships with about 1000 components (rounded to the nearest power of ten). I'm adding more all the time, either because new functionality has been exposed in the Rhino SDK or because a certain component makes a lot of sense to a lot of people. Adding pre-canned components that do the same as '8 or 10 components strung together' for the heck of it will balloon the total number of components everyone has to deal with. If you find yourself using the same 8 to 10 components together all the time, then please mention it on this forum. A lot of the currently existing components have been added because someone asked for it.
It’s not the primary components that catalyzed this thought but rather the secondary components. I was toying with a component today (twist from jackalope) that made use of three toggle components. The things they controlled are checkboxes in other apps.
Take a look at this jpg. Ignore differences; I did 'em quickly. GH required 19 components to do what SW did with 4 commands. Note the difference in screen real estate.
As an aside, I really hate SolidWorks (SW). But going forward, I’ll use it as an example because it’s what most people are familiar with.
"[...] has a far cleaner and more intuitive interface. So does SolidWorks, Inventor, CATIA, NX, and a bunch of others."
Again, GH was not designed to be an alternative to these sort of modellers. I don't like referring to GH as 'parameteric' as that term has been co-opted by relational modellers. I prefer to use 'algorithmic' instead. The idea behind parameteric seems to be that one models by hand, but every click exists within a context, and when the context changes the software figures out where to move the click to. The idea behind algorithmic is that you don't model by hand.
I agree, and disagree. I believe parametric applies equally to GH AND SW, NX, and so forth, while algorithmic is unique to GH (and GC and Dynamo I think). Thus I understand why you prefer the term. I too tend to not like referring to GH as a parametric modeler for the same reason.
But I think it oversimplifies it to say parametric modelers move the clicks. SW tracks clicks the same way GH does; GH holds that information in geometry components while SW holds it in a feature in the feature tree. In both GH and SW edits to the base geometry will drive a recalculation, but more commonly, it’s an edit to input data, beit equations or just plain numbers, that drive a recalculation.
I understand the difference in these programs. What brought me to GH is that it can create a visual dialog that standard modelers can’t. But as I've grown more comfortable with it I’ve come to realize that the GUI of GH and the GUI of other parametric modelers, while looking completely different, are surprisingly interchangeable. Do not misconstrue that I’m suggesting that GH should replace it’s GUI with SW’s. I’m not. I refrain from suggesting anything specific. I only suggest that you allow yourself to think radically.
This is not to say there is no value in the parametric approach. Obviously it is a winning strategy and many people love to use it. We have considered adding some features to GH that would make manual modelling less of a chore and we would still very much like to do so. However this is such a large chunk of work that we have to be very careful about investing the time. Before I start down this road I want to make sure that the choice I'm making is not 'lame-ass algorithmic modeller with some lame-ass parametrics tacked on' vs. 'kick-ass algorithmic modeller with no parametrics tacked on'.
Given a choice, I'd pick kick-ass algorithmic modeller with no parametrics tacked on.
2. Visual Programming.
I'm not exactly sure I understand your grievance here, but I suspect I agree. The visual part is front and centre at the moment and it should remain there. However we need to improve upon it and at the same time give programmers more tools to achieve what they want.
I'll admit, this is a bit tough to explain. As I've re-read my own comment, I think it was partly a precursor to the context sensitivity point and touched upon other stated points.
This now touches upon my own ignorance about GH’s target market. Are you moving toward a highly specialized tool for programmers and/or mathematicians, or is the intent to create a tool that most designers can master? If it’s the former, rock on. You’re doing great. If it’s the latter, I’m one of the more technically sophisticated designers I know and I’m lost most of the time when using GH.
GH allows the same freedom as a command line editor. You can do whatever you like, and it’ll work or not. And you won’t know why it works or doesn't until you start becoming a bit of an expert and can actually decipher the gibberish in a panel component. I often feel GH has the ease of use of DOS with a badass video card in front.
Please indulge my bit of storytelling. Early 3D modelers, CATIA, Unigraphics, and Pro-Engineer, were unbelievably difficult to use. Yet no one ever complained. The pain of entry was immense. But once you made it past the pain threshold, the salary you could command was very well worth it. And the fewer the people who knew how to use it, the more money you could demand. So in a sense, their lack of usability was a desirable feature among those who’d figured it out.
Then SolidWorks came along. It could only do a fraction of what the others did, but it was a fraction of the cost, it did most of what you needed, and anyone could figure it out. There was even a manual on how to use it. (Craziness!) Within a few short years, the big three all had to change their names (V5, NX, and Wildfire (now Creo)) and change the way they do things. All are now significantly easier to use.
I can tell that the amount of development time that’s gone into GH is immense and I believe the functionality is genius. I also believe it’s ease of use could be greatly improved.
Having re-read my original comments, I think it sounded a bit snotty. For that I apologize.
3. Context sensitivity.
"There is no reason a program in 2014 should allow me to make decisions that will not work. For example, if a component input is in all cases incompatible with another component's output, I shouldn't be able to connect them."
Unfortunately it's not as simple as that. Whether or not a conversion between two data types makes sense is often dependent on the actual values. If you plug a list of curves into a Line component, none of them may be convertible. Should I therefore not allow this connection to be made? What if there is a single curve that could be converted to a line? What if you want to make the connection now, but only later plan to add some convertible curves to the data? What you made the connection back when it was valid, but now it's no longer valid, wouldn't it be weird if there was a connection you couldn't make again?
I've started work on GH2 and one of the first things I'm writing now is the new data-conversion logic. The goal [...] is to not just try and convert type A into type B, but include information about what sort of conversion was needed (straightforward, exotic, far-fetched. etc.) and information regarding why that type was assigned.
You are right that under some conditions, we can be sure that a conversion will always fail. For example connecting a Boolean output with a Curve input. But even there my preferred solution is to tell people why that doesn't make sense rather than not allowing it in the first place.
You bring up both interesting points and limits to my understanding of coding. I’ve reached the point in my learning of GH where I’m just getting into figuring out the sets tab (and so far I’m not doing too well). I often find myself wondering “Is all of this manual conditioning of the data really necessary? Doesn’t most software perform this kind of stuff invisibly?” I’d love to be right and see it go away, but I could easily be wrong. I’ve been wrong before.
5. Components.
"Give components a little “+” or a drawer on the bottom or something that by clicking, opens the component into something akin to a dialog box. This should give access to all of the variables in the component. I shouldn't have to r-click on each thing on a component to do all of the settings."
I was thinking of just zooming in on a component would eventually provide easier ways to access settings and data.
I kinda like this. It’s a continuation of what you’re currently doing with things like the panel component.
"Could some of these items disappear if they are contextually inappropriate or gray out if they're unlikely?"
It's almost impossible for me to know whether these things are 'unlikely' in any given situation. There are probably some cases where a suggestion along the lines of "Hey, this component is about to run 40,524 times. It seems like it would make sense to Graft the 'P' input." would be useful.
6. Integration.
"Why isn't it just live geometry?"
This is an unfortunate side-effect of the way the Rhino SDK was designed. Pumping all my geometry through the Rhino document would severely impact performance and memory usage. It also complicates the matter to an almost impossible degree as any command and plugin running in Rhino now has access to 'my' geometry.
"Maybe add more Rhino functionality to GH. GH has no 3D offset."
That's the plan moving forward. A lot of algorithms in Rhino (Make2D, FilletEdge, Shelling, BlendSrf, the list goes on) are not available as part of the public SDK. The Rhino development team is going to try and rectify this for Rhino6 and beyond. As soon as these functions become available I'll start adding them to GH (provided they make sense of course).
On the whole I agree that integration needs a lot of work, and it's work that has to happen on both sides of the isle.
You work for McNeel yet you seem to speak of them as a separate entity. Is this to say that there are technical reasons GH can only access things through the Rhino SDK? I’d think you would have complete access to all Rhino API’s. I hope it’s not a fiefdom issue, but it happens.
7. Documentation.
Absolutely. Development for GH1 has slowed because I'm now working on GH2. We decided that GH1 is 'feature complete', basically to avoid feature creep. GH2 is a ground-up rewrite so it will take a long time until something is ready for testing. During this time, minor additions and of course bug fixes will be available for GH1, but on a much lower frequency.
Documentation is woefully inadequate at present. The primer is being updated (and the new version looks great), but for GH2 we're planning a completely new help system. People have been hired to provide the content. With a bit of luck and a lot of work this will be one of the main selling points of GH2.
It begs the question that I have to ask. When is GH1.0 scheduled to launch? And if you need another person to proofread the current draft of new primer.
patrick@girgen.com
I can’t believe wikipedia has an entry for feature creep. And I can’t believe you included it. It made me giggle. Thanks.
8. 2D-ness.
"I know you'll disagree completely, but I'm sticking to this. How else could an omission like offsetsurf happen?"
I don't fully disagree. A lot of geometry is either flat or happens inside surfaces. The reason there's no shelling (I'm assuming that's what you meant, there are two Offset Surface components in GH) is because (a) it's a very new feature in Rhino and doesn't work too well yet and (b) as a result of that isn't available to plugins.
I believe it’s been helpful for me to have figured this out. I recently completed a GH course at a local Community College and have done a bunch of online tutorials. The first real project I decided to tackle has turned out to be one of the more difficult things to try. It’s the source of the questions I posted. (Thanks for pointing out that they were posted in the wrong spot. I re-posted to the discussions board.)
I just can't seem to figure out how to turn the voronoi into legitimate geometry. I've seen this exact question posted a few times, but it’s never been successfully answered. What I'm showing here is far more angular than I’m hoping for. The mesh is too fine for weaverbird to have much of an effect. And I haven't cracked re-meshing. Btw, in product design, meshes are to be avoided like the plague. Embracing them remains difficult.
As for offsetsurf, in Rhino, if you do an offsetsurf to a solid body, it executes it on all sides creating another neatly trimmed body thats either larger or smaller than the original. This is how every other app I know of works. GH’s offsetsurf creates a bunch of unjoined faces spaced away from the original brep. A common technique for 3D voronois (Yes, I hit the voronoi overuse easter egg) is to find the center of each cell and scale them by this center. If you think about it, this creates a different distance from the face of the scaled cell to the face of the original cell for every face. As I've mentioned, this project is giving me serious headaches.
Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the feedback, I really do, but I want to be honest and open about my own plans and where they might conflict with your wishes. Grasshopper is being used far beyond the boundaries of what we expected and it's clear that there are major shortcomings that must be addressed before too long. We didn't get it right with the first version, I don't expect we'll get it completely right with the second version but if we can improve upon the -say- five biggest drawbacks (performance, documentation, organisation, plugin management and no mac version) I'll be a happy puppy.
--
David Rutten
Thank you for taking the time to reply David. Often we feel that posting such things is send it into the empty ether. I’m very glad that this was not the case.
And thank you for all of the work you've put into GH. If you found any of my input overly harsh or ill-mannered, I apologise. It was not my intent. I'm generally not the ranting sort. If I hadn't intended to provide possibly useful input, I wouldn't have written.
Cheers
Patrick Girgen
Ps. Any pointers on how to get a bit further on the above project would be greatly appreciated.
…