this was about some boring building I wouldn't respond ... but here we are talking sardines.
Here's my take on that matter:
1. The 4 C# first create/use a nurbs, then define some random planes (and transformations) and then (a) either they place some humble stripes or ... er ... (b) sardines as instance definitions (NOTE: Load Rhino file first).
2. All important decisions are the ones in yellow groups.
3. You control what you get via this (priority on stripes or sardines? that's the 1M Q):
4. If you decide for sardines (the right thing to do) then you must ENABLE the Sardiniser(C)(tm)(US patent pending) as follows:
5. The vodkaFactor on that Sardiniser C# adds some spice in the sardine placement (it does that by altering the priority on the "composite" transformation in use: first randomly rotate then planeToPlane .... or the other thing?).
6. Only the finest Da Morgada sardines are used in this definition:
7. Spot the WARNING in the filter related with what sardine to choose > do it wrong and no hard disk on your workstation > no risk no fun > sorry Amigos, he he.
8. 1M question for you all: why placing sardines (it's real-time you know) is WAY faster than creating these humble stripes?
9. Although the sardines are placed in real time as regards your CPU ... the critical factor is your GPU (display mode: rendered).
10.Still WIP (dancing sardines in the next update).
have some sardine fun, best, Lord of SardineLand…
t ''Morph'' turns Red saying ''Cannot morph from a degenerate box'' (image 2),
that's because every curve generates a box (image 3).
After what i check the Option ''Union'' box to make only one box for all the curves (image 4).
However, the result is aleatory and not accurate at all ... :/ (see image 6).I know you are developing Pufferfish and not ''Morph'' component, but recently you publish on instagram a video where i believe you could morph and Twist with success a collection of curves (please see image 7 and 8)...If you could give me a hint how that can be achieved, it would be awesome.(Piping/Meshing the curves with very small diameter will perhaps work and help for visualisation purposes, but i actually just need morphing Raw curves for fabrication purposes).Hope to read you very soon...Ghali,…
d Design workshop is a two day intensive workshop, exploring the new KingKong plugin for Grasshopper. The software simuates curved folding, and offers simple attractor functions to modulate an array of folded panels on a surface. The focus will be on building simulations of folding inspired by physical folding, and the comtrol of complex arrangements of panels, which will be realised with the CraftROBO vinyl cutter.
Day 1 - AM: Material Computation - intuitive techniques for designing shapes foldable by robots
Day 2 - PM: Folding Design - digitise fold patterns and use the KingKong plugin to simulate folding, design arrangements of panels with the attractor system, using differnet grid types, using different surface types, fill/empty feature, live baking feature
Day 3 - AM: Fabrication Data - refining the design for fabrication, outputing data
Day 4 - PM: Panel Assembly - cutting on the CraftROBO vinyl cutter, assembly of components
Two more dates in April and May.
More details and booking on the RoboFold website:
http://www.robofold.com/index.php?WEBYEP_DI=18…
mething like an i7 with four cores would serve best. i am running 4x3.4 here. you should see 100% cpu utilization when solving.
2) model specifics: topology (= how many elements coming together in one joint), joint and support freedom, which both define the number of degrees of freedom of the model. the more DOF, the larger the stiffness-matrix to invert , the longer computation time. truss-bars are a LOT faster than beam elements.
3) loads and load cases: in general the more load cases, the longer the solving time. the more load vectors on single nodes (which it all comes down to), the longer too. but loads dont affect the computation time too much, especially since once the stiffness matrix has been inverted, most load cases can be applied to it i think.
eigenmodes take a LOT longer to compute than normal analysis, in certain karamba releases the automatic calculation of the first eigenmode (for debugging your geometry) was turned on inside the analysis module when something was wrong with the actual calculation to debug. this could turn out to be pretty annoying with big models so now it's turned off again.
with 'nonlinear', do you mean the large deformations iterative approximation component of karamba?
an average model with 10000 beams and three load cases takes ~400ms here, so take this times 20 for some non-linear iterations and you are there, roughly.
best
robert…
com/Master-2020/
05 October 2021 - 04 October 2022 at Faculty of Engineering - Sapienza University of Rome Registration deadline is 26th of May 2020
Number of students: 20 – 30 students Official language: English Credit hours: 60 CR. Duration: One year of 1180 total hours; 600 for courses and laboratories + 480 for internship + 100 for Final project Place: 9 months in Sapienza University of Rome - Faculty of Engineering and 3 months Internship outside the university
…
rogettisti, artisti di vari media, paesaggisti, studenti.
Orario_ 9.00-18.00 ( 1 ora pausa pranzo). 16 ore_2 giorni da 8 ore.
Descrizione_Il livello base di Grasshopper serve come introduzione al plugin parametrico Grasshopper per Rhino 3d. I partecipanti saranno esposti a flussi di lavoro di livello principiante /intermedio ed a strategie di progettazione per la MODELLAZIONE PARAMETRICA. L'accento sarà posto sulle tecniche di flusso di dati, la visualizzazione e l'analisi in grado di fornire una solida base per la futura ricerca e sviluppo.
Le lezioni saranno composte da una parte teorica ed una pratica in cui si svilupperanno esercizi basati su elementi di Design ed Architetture contemporanee.
Iscrizioni_ generativef@gmail.com
+info_Grasshopper Workshop_Livello base
Organizza_generativeflow.com
Chi_ I docenti saranno Marco Bonucci & Fernando Rial
___________________________________________
When?_ 27/28 October 2012 (Saturday and Sunday)
Where?_ AD Comunicazione. Via di Sant'Anna, 3, Roma. (Centro Storico)
Schedule_ 9:00 to 18:00 (1 hour lunch break). Ore_2 days_16 hours_8 h/day
Who is the target Audience?_Architects, Engineers, Industrial Designers, Interior Designers, Product Designers, Artists of various media, Landscapers.
Abstract_ The basic level of Grasshopper serves as an introduction to Grasshopper, the parametric plugin for Rhino 3d. Participants will be exposed to beginner / intermediate workflows and design strategies for PARAMETRIC MODELING. The focus will be on techniques of data flow, visualization and analysis that will provide a solid basis for future research and development.
Registration_ generativef@gmail.com
+ info_Grasshopper Workshop_Basic Level
Organizes_generativeflow.com
Who_ I docenti saranno Marco Bonucci & Fernando Rial
…
Added by Fernando Rial at 10:48am on October 18, 2012
sent a 3D shape without any ambiguity. If the shape you're trying to convey falls outside the scope of existing standards, then it can't be done, but this is a problem of standards, not an intrinsic shortcoming of pencils.
[...] with the computer theoretically acting as a decision maker.
The computer makes no decisions on it's own. It's a fully deterministic machine, meaning that any output is the result of applying a set of rules to some pre-existing data. Humans make the rules. At no point can you blame the computer for coming up with a bad answer, it's always some human who is responsible.
[...] it seems to often be split between Computerization, and Computation.
I'm willing to concede there exist cases that are unambiguously one or the other, but there's a gradient in between these two extremes, they are not separate categories. If I draw a box by specifying the 8 corner points as XYZ coordinates then computation can be said not to be involved. If I draw a box by specifying 2 opposite corners then the computer has to compute the other 6 coordinates and we're already on our way towards the other extreme. If I draw a box by specifying a width, height and a required volume, more computation is needed. If I specify a box by a width, a volume and the requirement is doesn't cast too much shadow on some other shape, more computation is needed. At what point do we say "now it qualifies as computation/solving"?
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com…
Added by David Rutten at 7:22am on November 28, 2013
"flow" into which adjacent faces (as opposed to having abrupt angles displayed between the two faces). In Maya, if I recall, they do a similar thing with "flags". I've been trying to figure out the corresponding mechanism in Rhino meshes and I'm beginning to believe that you just have to repeat vertices to make "creases" between faces. So the Rhino box has 24 "vertices" which, is apparently because each vertex is repeated for each face it belongs on - 6 faces times four vertices per face is 24 vertices. Is that really the case? It seems wasteful. I'm assuming that if you only had 8 vertices that the display would be attempting to make the edges "blend together". This means that the cube is really just six conveniently placed squares. Does Rhino even know that these six squares form a closed mesh? I know there is an "IsClosed" property on meshes. I assume it's returning false for boxes?
Aha! I was going to ask how Rhino still "knew" that the three vertices were actually one so when you dragged it you would drag "that single" vertex instead of one of three but now that I actually construct a box and drag, I see that Rhino in fact, doesn't know that and you do in fact drag one of three so that seems to back up my assumptions here.
Is this really the only way to make "creases" in 3D meshes? I just want to make sure before I spend a lot of time making my meshes based on this assumption.
I'll attach my (apparently incorrect) code FYI. It's a grasshopper plugin. Just trying to learn how to code in this system.
Thanks!
Darrell Plank…
Added by Darrell Plank at 6:53pm on December 18, 2014
Loop'. The fun part of the slower version is that you can see what it's doing while it's running. 'Fast Loop' gives no indication that it's working, so you want to test it with small numbers and be sure it's coded properly before bumping the iteration count up.
The GH profiler running the slow version showed between 1 and 1.5 seconds per loop, but the reality was more like ~10 seconds per loop toward the end of an 11 X 11 grid, or ~20 minutes total. It's easier to be patient because you know it's working.
The 'Fast Loop' finished the same grid in 1.6 minutes! An impressive improvement. I've been running it on a 30 X 30 grid (900 points) for ~23 minutes so far and see nothing yet. Not the ~12 minutes I had hoped for... Now 36 minutes on this loop for 900 points... hope it's not stuck. Not fast! Later - DONE!! Profiler says 59 minutes for 900 points but it was more like an hour and twenty minutes total. It succeeded, I have a single 'Closed Brep' from 900 extruded rings, baked to Rhino.
Another strategy to explore would be doing 'SUnion' on a smaller grid using the Anemone loop, then replicate it by moving it as needed to form a larger grid; then run the copies through another 'SUnion' loop. I went ahead and implemented that while waiting. It works and is fast! Started with 3 X 3 and ran the result again as 5 X 5 (9 X 25 = 225 total) in barely ~70 seconds!? Trying 36 X 36 now... 1,296 points appears to have succeeded in less than ten minutes! Though it seems to take quite awhile after the loop ends before control is restored to GH/Rhino. I'll let you do your own experiments and benchmarks.
I encapsulated the loop in a cluster called 'suLoop' (blue groups).
Internal of 'suLoop' cluster:
…
Added by Joseph Oster at 11:14pm on March 22, 2017