algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Search Results - 福彩3天齐网首页正版保真『0TBH·COM』福彩三d试机号码开机号码2023年3月19日7时42分22秒.H5c2a3.kcssaaksa.com

Blog Post: Workshop FormFinding Strategies MILANO - ITALIA

only compression vault arturo tedeschi

FORM FINDING STRATEGIES WORKSHOP…

Added by Arturo Tedeschi at 3:55am on November 12, 2015

Topic: New example files - Mesh tools 1: but rather than keep everyone waiting, I've decided to share some as they become ready. This also has the advantage that questions about components can be more easily grouped under the relevant post - so please do add any questions / comments / bugs / suggestions about these examples below. So today I am posting some examples of the mesh utilities that come with the new release. While these are not directly physics based, many of the forces and types of relaxation in Kangaroo are designed to work with meshes, and in the process of development I've ended up adding a number of simple utilities to make working with them a little easier. I recommend also installing Weaverbird which has many more subdivision functions and other useful tools for working with meshes in Grasshopper. Also Plankton, Turtle, MeshEdit and Starling extend these possibilities still further. Diagonalize This component replaces every edge of a mesh with a new face. The new faces will always be quads, except for along the boundaries, where they will be triangles. It can be used to easily create diagrids. The input mesh can contain any mix of triangles and quads. When treating the edges of a quad mesh as springs, diagonalizing it will often significantly change its physical behaviour. If you are trying to planarize a quad mesh, diagonalizing may sometimes allow you to stay closer to a target shape if it matches the curvature directions better. diagonalize.gh Checkerboard This component assigns the faces of a mesh into a checkerboard pattern. The output is a list of 1s and 0s (which could represent black/white or true/false) which can be used to dispatch the faces into 2 lists, where no pair of adjacent faces have the same colour. One nice application I found for this is applying alternating clockwise and counter-clockwise rotations as shown below. Also, on occasion you may want to planarize a quad mesh, but have some constraints on the shape and grid that prevent this, and triangulating only alternating quads to give a hybrid quad/tri mesh can sometimes be a good compromise, allowing a bit more freedom. Note - Not all meshes can be assigned a checkerboard pattern! As a simple example, take a mesh with 3 quads around one vertex - If we assign one black face, then both the neighbouring faces should be white, but then we have 2 white faces adjacent to one another, which violates the checkerboard condition. Generally, we can say that if a mesh has any internal vertex with an odd number of faces around it, then we cannot apply a consistent checkerboard pattern to it (although not having any odd valence vertices is not in itself an absolute guarantee that a mesh is 'checkerboardable'). checkerboard.gh WarpWeft This sorts the edges of a quad mesh into 2 lists of line segments, which are like the warp and weft directions of a fabric. They can also be seen as a sort of mesh equivalent to the u and v isocurves on a NURBS surface. This can be useful if you want to control the shape of a tension structure, because it allows you to assign different stiffnesses in the 2 directions. As with the checkerboard component, not all meshes can be consistently assigned warp/weft directions. It follows a similar rule - all internal vertices should have an even number of adjacent faces. With a bit of care, it is usually possible to model the initial mesh in such a way as to allow this. This component also has an output telling us whether or not each line is on a boundary of the mesh, as we will often want to treat these differently. Same mesh relaxed with different warp/weft stiffness: warpweft.gh MeshCorners This one is hopefully fairly self explanatory. In many simulations we want to anchor the corner points of a mesh. This saves us having to pick them manually in Rhino. It works on quad meshes, and looks around the boundary vertices for any which do not have exactly 3 connected edges. corners.gh That's all for now. Coming soon - a "mesh tools 2" post explaining more of the components.…; Added by Daniel Piker to Kangaroo at 10:09am on December 17, 2013

Blog Post: Rheotomic surfaces and flowline generation tool

Around 3 years ago I wrote an essay on my blog about what I called…

Added by Daniel Piker at 12:49pm on February 19, 2012

Blog Post: Parametric Urbanism: 15 Basic Parameters In Urban Design

This list is not comprehensive but a starting point for any planning project.

In a successfully designed …

Added by Mr. Gudjon Thor Erlendsson at 7:52am on April 15, 2020

Event: Arduino for interaction (livello base-medio): 15, 16 marzo al Mediterranean FabLab: ssibili e facili da usare. Il corso parte dalle basi della programmazione di arduino fino ad arrivare all’interazione tra un oggetto fisico ed un imput informativo. tutor: Gianpiero Picerno Ceraso Programma: I giorno Introduzione al Phisical Computing, input digitali e analogici, le basi del linguaggio di programmazione, esempi applicativi; led, pulsanti, fotorestistenze, servo motore, sensore di temperatura, di flessione, sensori di movimento, potenziometri. II giorno Arduino ethernet, uso di un relè per carichi elevati, accelerometro, introduzione a Processing, interazione di Arduino e Processing, Introduzione a Grassoppher e Firefly e interazione con Arduino. orario corso: 10:00 – 13:00 e 14:00 – 17:00 (pausa pranzo 13:00 – 14:00) costo: 150€ + IVA deadline: 13 marzo numero minimo di partecipanti: 3 Per iscrizioni scrivi a info@medaarch.com specificando nome, cognome, mail, recapito telefonico e il nome del corso al quali sei interessato. In seguito all’invio del modulo di pre-iscrizione, i partecipanti riceveranno una mail contenente tutte le specifiche di pagamento. Per seguire il cluster su Arduino è necessario installare il software Arduino 1.0.5 al seguente linkhttp://arduino.cc/en/Main/Software#.Ux3hQj95MYE facendo attenzione a scaricare quello relativo al proprio sistema operativo, Windows 32 o 64 e Mac OS. Software necessari solo per una parte del corso: Processing 2.1.1 https://processing.org/download/?processing Rhino 5 http://www.rhino3d.com/it/download Grasshopper for Rhino5http://www.grasshopper3d.com/page/download-1Firefly http://fireflyexperiments.com/ Il cluster rientra in un fitto calendario di attività formative organizzate dalla Medaarch per lanno 2013-2014.…; Added by Francesca Luciano at 8:36am on March 11, 2014

Comment on: Topic 'VB.net: method for trim and detect the intersection': you will need to deal with all of the curves that intersect the boundry curve, but you will also need to sort through all of the circles inside because the planar surface algorithm won't sort those out for you. The good news is that because you are using circles and linear segments, you can use "pure" geometry equations for some of these intersections instead of relying on NURBS curve "physical" intersections. In the end this means faster and also "more" reliable intersections (especially with the circles). Method 1: Dealing with everything as a phyisical curve... First things first, i guess the "easiest" way to do this would be to translate everything into an OnCurve derived class, and then use the IntersectCurve method to find the intersections. You will need to sort through the resulting ArrayON_XEVENT to find the parameter of each intersection. There should always be 2 intersections, and you're always going to be interested in the intersections of the circle not the boundry curve. To trim the curves, you'll want to use the Split method along with one of the parameters on the curve that you retrieved from the intersection. The only issue is that the split method gets a bit complicated when using it on closed curves. You could either split at both parameters that you retrieved from the intersection results, then sort through the 3 resulting curves to join the two that you need. Or move the start point of the circle to where one of the intersection points happened, translate the other intersection point to the new curve parameter (ie the parameter will be a different number, but it will be physically in the same place), then split with that new curve parameter. Method 2: Try and work with the circles as circles Because you can tell if a circle intersects something by seing if the distance to its center point is less than the radius of the circle, this might be a quicker way to go. If you have the boundry curve as an OnCurve derived class, then you can use the GetClosestPoint method and use all of the center points for each of the circles. The nice thing is that after the 3Dpoint in, and the parameter on the curve that you'll get out, you have the option of supplying a maximum distance. If you do supply that value (use the radius of the circles), then you'll only get a result when the distance is less than or equal to that value. In which case there will be an intersection. To go even further, you can treat the segments of the boundry curve each as a line, and find the closest point/distance to that. That's maybe more complex than your looking to go, but speed wise, it might just be worth it. Take a look at the following link for more code/discussion on the subject. http://www.codeguru.com/forum/showthread.php?t=194400 Part 2: Circle-Circle intersections If you're going to want to make a planar surface out of those circes and the boundry curve, then you'll need to resolve all of the intersections that you have there. Again this is probably something that would be best taken care of by doing some distance tests between the center points of all the circles and seeing if that distance is less than the radius your using. After you've found circles that intersect, you can be try intersecting the curves using the same method mentioned above, or even manually generating the intersection with some trig, but ultimately creating a final result might take a bit of work, especially where you have more than two circles intersecting. The "lazy" way out of this is what's used by the curve boolean command, which is to take each individual curve, make a planar surface from that individual curve, and use standard Rhino booleans to get the result. Luckily you're looking for the union of all those areas, which will be the easiest to create and deal with. After you create the planar surface of each one (RhUtil.RhinoMakePlanarBreps), you can use either RhUtil.RhinoBooleanUnion or the more specialized version, RhUtil.RhPlanarRegionUnion. Note that RhPlanarRegionUnion only takes 2 breps at a time and needs the plane of the intersection.…; Added by Damien Alomar at 11:46am on June 6, 2010

Comment on: Topic 'Refactoring Parametricism': as the design table? I think this could be 'drawn' and constrained in Inventor in a lot less time. I know the GH model would have a lot of flexibility, but in this case, what can you do with it that wasn't provided by an Inventor model? Only the 27 lines mentioned were modeled in Rhino, the rest is modeled with GH. The 5 hrs involved thinking about the approach, defining vertical lines, tilts, elevations, pitch of the roof, intersections. Once I had decided what my approach would be, and tested the logic with those first lines, points and data path arrangements, it only took one more hour to get to this: Which is actually quite fast, compared to MCAD workflows. If you already have components (columns, beams, etc.) modeled and ready to drop into a project, of course it is lightning fast to model simple projects like this example. I am not as much interested in those situations, because improving efficiency is straightforward and obvious. I'm more interested in situations where there are no pre-defined families of objects, in which case you need to start from scratch. The GH model I'm showing is modeled from scratch, except for the 27 lines in Rhino. Here's one obvious advantage to modeling with GH, once the definition is set-up, it's virtually effortless to change inputs and alter the overall design. Here's an example, lets say we wanted to extend the roof 3 more units, curling away from the original direction. Plan view before: And after: An MCAD app will also allow you to do this, as long as the location of additional elements follows the existing geometric method of definition. What happens if you want completely change the way you locate columns, roof slope, intersection points? In MCAD, you'll need to re-model the underlying geometry, which will take the same effort as the first round. In GH, this process is not only much faster, it's open to algorithmic approaches, galapagos, etc. and it just takes some simple re-wiring to have all down-stream elements associate themselves to this new geoemtric definition. For instance, here's the same definition applied to two curves, which are divided in GH, the resulting points are used as a starting point for lines directed at normal from curves. This is not so easy to do in MCAD.…; Added by Santiago Diaz at 7:55pm on February 24, 2011

Comment on: Topic 'Degrees to Radians': degree symbol or the pi symbol, but they don't work. I'm fixing it now. Here's the total list of placeholders and what they convert into: 'Operators code.Replace("**", "┴") code.Replace("<cross>", "┴") code.Replace("<crossproduct>", "┴") code.Replace("<outer>", "┴") code.Replace("<d>", "°") code.Replace("<deg>", "°") code.Replace("<degrees>", "°") code.Replace("<2>", "²") code.Replace("<square>", "²") code.Replace("<3>", "³") code.Replace("<cube>", "³") code.Replace("<project>", "↓") code.Replace("<pull>", "↓") code.Replace("<push>", "↑") code.Replace("<dist>", "↔") code.Replace("<distance>", "↔") code.Replace("!=", "≠") code.Replace("<>", "≠") code.Replace("<=", "≤") code.Replace("=<", "≤") code.Replace(">=", "≥") code.Replace("=>", "≥") code.Replace("<almost>", "≈") code.Replace("<almostequal>", "≈") code.Replace("<approx>", "≈", ) code.Replace("<approximately>", "≈") code.Replace("<similar>", "≈") code.Replace("~", "≈") 'Functions code.Replace("<sum>", "∑") code.Replace("<sumtotal>", "∑") code.Replace("<summate>", "∑") code.Replace("<prod>", "∏") code.Replace("<product>", "∏") code.Replace("<average>", "Ā") code.Replace("<mean>", "Ā") code.Replace("<hmean>", "Ū") code.Replace("<harmonic>", "Ū") code.Replace("<harmonicmean>", "Ū") code.Replace("<gmean>", "Ġ") code.Replace("<geometric>", "Ġ") code.Replace("<geometricmean>", "Ġ") 'constants code.Replace("<pi>", "π") code.Replace("<phi>", "φ") code.Replace("<inf>", "∞") code.Replace("<infinity>", "∞") code.Replace("<1/2>", "½") code.Replace("<0.5>", "½") code.Replace("<half>", "½") code.Replace("<1/4>", "¼") code.Replace("<0.25>", "¼") code.Replace("<quarter>", "¼") code.Replace("<3/4>", "¾") code.Replace("<0.75>", "¾") code.Replace("<threequarters>", "¾") code.Replace("<1/3>", "⅓") code.Replace("<third>", "⅓") code.Replace("<2/3>", "⅔") code.Replace("<twothirds>", "⅔") So you should be able to write: 45<deg> -- David Rutten david@mcneel.com Poprad, Slovakia …; Added by David Rutten at 5:54am on March 16, 2011

Comment on: Topic 'Expression designer format': e. (C1 or C0) In the case of C0: I have four other cases In the case of C1 I have three other cases If C0: Pt1-Pt2 = 1 = 0 2-Pt1 = PTC1 2-Pt2 = PTC2 4-No Equal if C1 1-Pt1 = PTC1 2-Pt2 = PTC2 3-No Equal. Its become difficult to manage these conditions.. Thanks…; Added by Rémy Maurcot at 10:38am on April 18, 2012

Comment on: Topic 'Dynamic input component': n fact) according a vast variety of "modes" PLUS the required clash detection (ALWAYS via trigonometry). In plain English: outline any collection of Breps and "apply" a truss that is topologically sound (planarization in case of quads etc is an added constrain). PLUS outline/solve what comes "next" after that truss (like the planar glazing "add-on" brackets of yours [ the ones that need redesign, he he], or some roofing/facade skin system [secondary supports, corrugated sheet metal, insulation, final cladding, dogs and cats]) 2. Imaging doing this in real life (nothing to do with "abstract" formations of "lines" or "shapes" or whatever). This means primarily adopting a BIM umbrella: in plain English AECOSim, Revit or Allplan (I'm a Bentley man so I use AECOSim + Generative Components). This also means using "in-parallel" a top MCAD app for 1:1 details, FEA/FIM and the vast paraphernalia required for real-life studies destined for real-life projects (made with real-life money by real-life people). My choice: CATIA/Siemens NX. 3. What to send to Microstation (if not using Generative Components, that is) and/or CATIA? In what "state"? To do what exactly? For instance even if you could design this feature driven tensile membrane anchor custom node in Rhino (you can't) it could be 100% useless in CATIA: 4. Imaging masterminding ways to send them nested instance definitions of ... er ... a coordinate system (all what you need). In plain English: since is utterly pointless to send them nested blocks that can't been parametrically controlled (variations/modifications/PLM management/BOM/specs etc etc)... send them simply the "instructions" to place coordinate systems of components that ARE parametrically designed within Microstation and/or CATIA (classic feature driven design approach blah blah). So GH solves topology et all (working on data imported via, say, Excel sheets related with sizes of components etc etc) and sends to Microstation simply this (a myriad of "this" actually): I do hope that the gist of the "method" (the ONLY way to invite GH to the party) is clear. best, Peter…; Added by peter fotiadis at 12:16am on April 22, 2015