re
Minimum principal curvature
by the way, look at this picture.... if I only use surface curvature the result doesn't seems right as well. Maybe I did some mistakes? thanks :)
Gene
import rhinoscriptsyntax as rs
import Rhino as rc
a = []
b = []
if ((u or v) is None):
u = 0.5
v = 0.5
c_u = Srf.IsoCurve(0,u)
c_v = Srf.IsoCurve(1,v)
if (Density < 2 or Density is None):
Density = 2
if Scale is None:
Scale = 6
ScaleFactor = -Scale
for i in range(0, Density+1):
Normal_u = Srf.NormalAt(i/Density, u)
su = Srf.CurvatureAt(i/Density, u)
#s = Srf.CurvatureAt(0.5, 0.5)
#print(s.Kappa(0.5))
Normal_u_length = rs.VectorLength(c_u.CurvatureAt(i/Density))
#Normal_u_length = Normal_u_length*rs.VectorLength(s.Direction(0))
Normal_u_length = Normal_u_length * su.Kappa(0.5)
Normal_u= Normal_u*Normal_u_length
#print(type(Normal_u))
Point_u = c_u.PointAt(i/Density)
a.append(Point_u)
b.append(Point_u + Normal_u*ScaleFactor)
for i in range(Density+1):
Normal_v = Srf.NormalAt(v, i/Density)
sv = Srf.CurvatureAt(v, i/Density)
Normal_v_length = rs.VectorLength(c_v.CurvatureAt(i/Density))
Normal_v_lengthTuple = rs.SurfaceCurvature(Srf, [v,i/Density])
Normal_v_length = Normal_v_length * Normal_v_lengthTuple[7]
Normal_v = Normal_v*Normal_v_length
Point_v = c_v.PointAt((i)/Density)
a.append(Point_v)
b.append(Point_v + Normal_v*ScaleFactor)
mid = int(len(b)/2)
bu = b[:mid]
bv = b[mid:]…
low cost fabrication techniques developed by RC6, a research laboratory based at UCL / The Bartlett School of Architecture. A part of Bartlett's BPro programme, RC6 traditionally engages in the development of design methodologies positioned at the overlap of digital and analogue computation, primarily investigating concepts which merge traditional, low-tech manufacturing processes and advanced technological concepts.Topic of this workshop - Composite Bodies - represents RC6’s ongoing research into hybridised material systems consisting of soft membrane materials and light-weight infill aggregates. In this particular case, from a material point of view, we will be looking into custom designed lycra pieces, filled with styrofoam beads and spheres and constrained with series of performative stitches. The resulting parts will be coated with latex and used to create series of interlocking components and surfaces.The workshop itself will consist of 2 stages. The first two days will be dedicated to intensive software training sessions. Students will be introduced to multiple digital platforms focusing on scripting in Processing and 3D modelling/sculpting in Maya/ZBrush. Aim is to enable students to understand algorithmic design processes and procedural modelling techniques and to help them to learn how to customize pre-made scripts and how to embed them in their individual workflows.The remaining five days will be dedicated to the fabrication of a spatial installation. Students will learn how to translate digital models into prototypical components and work alongside tutors to aggregate those into one large-scale architectural object which will be exhibited as part of SBODIO32 Exhibition for Milan Design Week 2017.Dates: March - April 2017 RC6 Program Director:DANIEL WIDRIGwith IGOR PANTICSTEFAN BASSINGSOOMEEN HAHMWorkshop Tutor:IGOR PANTICLead Designer at Zaha Hadid ArchitectsVisiting Lecturer at UCL Bartlett School of ArchitectureTeaching Assistants:Thomas Bagnoli, Evgenia Makroglou, Kalliopi Mouzaki, Darshan Singhaniaucl bartlett rc6 graduate studentsSoftwares: Maya, Rhino, Grasshopper, Processing*Previous knowledge of the softwares is not compulsory. Fabrication Tools: Lycra, Styrofoam beads, Latex, Sewing machines…
Added by Amrvitaloni at 9:38am on February 25, 2017
used of 180 being for the northern hemisphere and 0 for the southern hemisphere.For the optimal tilt, to my knowledge, they are mostly based on correcting location's latitude through a single formula.TOF component is more sophisticated. It essentially replicates the Solmetric's Annual Insolation Lookup tool.What it does is that it creates a grid of points. Each point represents the calculated annual insolation on the surface (PV module, SWH collector, facade, any kind of surface) for a single tilt and azimuth angle.Each point is then elevated according to the annual insolation values. The mesh is created from that grid of points. The portion of the mesh which is the highest, represents the optimal tilt and azimuth angles. So the higher your "precision_" input is, the more points in a mesh you'll have - thus the more precise final optimal tilt and azimuth will be.For the diffuse component of the annual incident solar radiation for each point the Perez 1990 modified model is used. Direct is from classical cosine law, and Ground reflected component from Liu and Jordan (1963).So TOF component calculates the optimal tilt and azimuth based on annual incident solar radiation, not AC energy....…
ld work.
For example there's a grid shell and I've got a number of control points (for example 3) that can move up and down.
Depending on the control points I get forms that are structurally good and some that are bad.
In my office we've got a GH-Component, which leads the geometry in structural members and solves the structural forces and so on through an external Software called Sofistik and afterwards gives back to GH some Values, for example maximum bending moments. (Like Karamba)
Now I want to create this optimization component or something like that to minimize e.g. the bending moments in the given geometry.
Let's start with the work of the component.
So when I've three control points that can only move in z-direction.
P1(0,0,Z1), P2(10,0,Z2), P3(5,5,Z3)
They only depend on Z, so everything depends on Z1 to Z3 which have a range between 0 and 10 f.e.
First I want to get some (between 9 and 15) random Particles, one particle consists of this 3 different Z's.
So for example the first particle Part1 is [Z1=10, Z2=5, Z3=7]
and the second particle Part2 is [Z1=7, Z2=1, Z3=9]
and so on.
I created these Start Particles in a Cluster. See attached file.
I also tried this in C#, but thought it is easier in GH.
After I've got the Start Particles I want to give out the first particle and evaluate with its including Z's the target value in GH. Therefore I had to take the first branch and graft this branch (Discussion before)
Afterwards I want to save this Target Value that depends on the first starting Particle. Then I want to give out the second starting Particle to evaluate its target Value and store it. And so on till the last target Value of the last Starting Particle got assigned.
Then I want to assign the particles with its target values. E.g. part1: t=0.9, part2: t=1.8...
Then I want to define neighborhoods or the count of the expected local minima.
These neighborhoods can look like: Each neighborhood has to include not less than 3 particles. And the particles have to be next to each other.
E.g. if there are 12 particles and I want to have a look for 3 local minima, I need 3 or 4 neighborhoods. Then I would take 3 neighborhoods, because the more particles in one neighborhood, the better.
So the Count of the neighborhoods would be N=min{(Count of Part/3)& N_min}
How to define these neighborhoods I don't know at the moment. I think it has to be searched for the distance between the particles. E.g. part1 with (9,9,9) and part2 with (9,9,8) are next to each other but part 3 with(1,1,2) is far away.
Then each StartParticle is set to Partx_localbest.
And in each Neighbourhood the best of these localbeststs is Part_NyBest. (The best ist the one with the smallest target Value)
Loop:
Now I want to create new Particles. These Particles don't change their Z-values randomly. They change their Z-Values depending on Part_NxBest and Part_localBest. Therefore it has to be evaluated a new velocityfactor with v_Partx_new=0,792*v_PartxOld+1,5*random(0,1)*(partx_localbest-partx)+1,5*random(0,1)*(part_NyBest-partx)
The new particles will then be partx_new=partx+v_Partx_new.
The new Particle partx_new will be set to partx and then set in the output.
then there has to be caught the targetValue of part1 afterwards part2 can be put out and its target value caught and so on.
Then it has to be looked for the Partx_localbest through comparing the partx_localbest and its target value with the new part_x and its target value. If the target value of the new partx is smaller than partx_localbest,
then partx_localbest is the new partx.
This has to be done for each partx. Afterwards the same for neighborhoods best (best of all partx_localbest in one neighborhood)
Endloop if velocity gets small.
Output all part_NxBest
Output all targetvalues of the part_NxBests.
So in the Input there have to be:
StartParticles if they are given through the cluster attached.
Device on the target Value like in the attached gh.file from David Rutten I found in the discussions
Count of neighborhoods
And in the output
Output particle for evaluation
Output all part_NxBest
Output all targetvalues of the part_NxBests
Hope didn’t forget anything. And hope it isn’t crushed to badly. Sorry for my bad English by the way ;-)
For more explanation, how the PSO works in other programs. There’s attached a workflow script (is it called like that?) I think for GH it should be a little bit changed like I tried in my explanations.
So if you can help me a in some parts or you have any advices would be great, otherwise thank you nevertheless!!!!
Thankfully there’s no limit for the words in the discussions :-D
Best, Heiko
…
bit:
Unable to load grasshopper.dll plug-in: Rhino version not specified.
I've also tried the current WIP grasshopper (0.7 rev 57) and I receive a slightly different error message:
Unable to load grasshopper.rhp plug-in: Rhino version not specified.
A similar thread: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/plugin-eror
…
Added by Koabi Brooks at 1:30pm on October 2, 2010
and I here is what I have to share:
Thanks! Thank you for being awesome! When I released Ladybug two years ago I could never imagine how this project will take over my life! It has been such an invaluable experience for me so far and it wasn’t possible without you - so thank you so much.
What’s next? Recently I get this question more and more and here is my fairly long answer! Chris is pushing the boundaries with comfort tools. Chien Si is working on HVAC systems integration. Chris, Anton and Alejandra will figure out how to effectively get natural ventilation to be modeled. Patrick, Sandeep, Michal and Boris are working on their developments. I’m working on getting 3 Phase method integrated, and Butterfly will be out at some point, but... they are not going to be what makes the next step. The next step is up to you. It is what you will do with the development. So go ahead and let us know what’s next!
If you can help someone on the group please do! Doing so you are not only helping another person (and potentially yourself) but also the developers. The more you can help each other here the more we will have time for development and documentation.
Best place to send your questions is this group. If you are using the latest version from github then you may want to sent it to github. Please consider emails as the last option. Go back to number 3 again! Thanks.
Don’t be nice to us! Well, I mean don’t just be nice to us. I love your nice comments like anybody else and please keep them coming ;) but what we also need next to nice comments is your critiques, wishes and insight. I feel that recently we are getting less wishes and critiques than what it used to be. You can post them here in the group or on github and either way we will know about it. Thank you to all of you who has already done this.
Thanks again! Before I let you go I want to specially thank all of you who contributed to the project by your development, thoughts and support. You are great and I can’t thank you enough.
David Weinberger in his book “Too Big to Know” says: “When an expert network is functioning as its best, the smartest person in the room is the room itself.” Reading some of the discussions on the group gives me the feeling of staying inside a smart room. Thank you and let’s keep the room growing!
Cheers,
Mostapha
PS: To avoid sending another post, I just post the updates about the two upcoming workshops here:
I will lead a workshop in LA next Friday (Feb. 6) and there is still few seats left. If you want to learn more about energy and daylighting simulation with Honeybee here is your chance. Here is more information who to register: (http://www.facadesplus.com/technology-workshops/).
Chris will lead a 3 days intense and comprehensive Ladybug and Honeybee workshop in Mexico City this March. You have probably watched Chris’s tutorials and already know what you can expect from a workshop with Chris so I don’t have to speak for that! I would take this workshop if I was around that area. If you are around Mexico City or know a friend who might be interested please let them know. Here is more information about the workshop: (https://www.facebook.com/LadyBugforGrasshopper/photos/a.442320969114095.107084.413910668621792/919318878080966).
…
nts for Ladybug too. They are based on PVWatts v1 online calculator, supporting crystalline silicon fixed tilt photovoltaics.
You can download them from here, or use the Update Ladbybug component instead. If you take the first option, after downloading check if .ghuser files are blocked (right click -> "Properties" and select "Unblock").
You can download the example files from here.
Video tutorials will follow in the coming period.
In the very essence these components help you answer the question: "How much energy can my roof, building facade, solar parking... generate if I would populate them with PV panels"?
They allow definition of different types of losses (snow, age, shading...) which may affect your PV system:
And can find its optimal tilt and orientation:
Or analyse its performance, energy value, consumption, emissions...
By Djordje Spasic and Jason Sensibaugh, with invaluable support of Dr. Frank Vignola, Dr. Jason M. Keith, Paul Gilman, Chris Mackey, Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari, Niraj Palsule, Joseph Cunningham and Christopher Weiss.
Thank you for reading, and hope you will enjoy using the components!
EDIT: From march 27 2017, Ladybug Photovoltaics components support thin-film modules as well.
References:
1) System losses:
PVWatts v5 Manual, Dobos, NREL, 2014
2) Sun postion equations by Michalsky (1988):
SAM Photovoltaic Model Technical Reference, Gilman, NREL, 2014
edited by Jason Sensibaugh
3) Angle of incidence for fixed arrays:
PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013
4) Plane-of-Array diffuse irradiance by Perez 1990 algorithm:
PVPMC Sandia National Laboratories
SAM Photovoltaic Model Technical Reference, Gilman, NREL, 2014
5) Sandia PV Array Performance Module Cover:
PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013
6) Sandia Thermal Model, Module Temperature and Cell Temperature Models:
Photovoltaic Array Performance Model, King, Boys, Kratochvill, Sandia National Laboratories, 2004
7) CEC Module Model: Maximum power voltage and Maximum power current from:
Exact analytical solutions of the parameters of real solar cells using Lambert W-function, Jain, Kapoor, Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, V81 2004, P269–277
8) PVFORM version 3.3 adapted Module and Inverter Models:
PVWatts Version 1 Technical Reference, Dobos, NREL, 2013
9) Sunpath diagram shading:
Using sun path charts to estimate the effects of shading on PV arrays, Frank Vignola, University of Oregon, 2004
Instruction manual for the Solar Pathfinder, Solar Pathfinder TM, 2008
10) Tilt and orientation factor:
Application for Purchased Systems Oregon Department of Energy
solmetric.com
11) Photovoltaics performance metrics:
Solar PV system performance assessment guideline, Honda, Lechner, Raju, Tolich, Mokri, San Jose state university, 2012
CACHE Modules on Energy in the Curriculum Solar Energy, Keith, Palsule, Mississippi State University
Inventory of Carbon & Energy (ICE) Version 2.0, Hammond, Jones, SERT University of Bath, 2011
The Energy Return on Energy Investment (EROI) of Photovoltaics: Methodology and Comparisons with Fossil Fuel Life Cycles, Raugei, Fullana-i-Palmer, Fthenakis, Elsevier Vol 45, Jun 2012
12) Calculating albedo: Metenorm 6 Handbook part II: Theory, Meteotest 2007
13) Magnetic declination:
Geomag 0.9.2015, Christopher Weiss…
Permalink Reply by Manuel Rodriguez 6 hours ago
Delete
yes!perfect! It has been a good example! The only thing that I would like to change is, that, instead of deform that following the control points on the surface's perimeter, I would like to deform all, with points in the shapes (in the middle of the circle for example). It is because I want, for example, the biggest circle in point 2, and the smaller circle in point 7. So, is it possible to do?
Summing up, is do the same, but changing the control points, putting them on the shapes (circles) instead the perimeter.
Thank you very much Danny and Chris, you are being really useful for me!
Thanks! Manuel
…
re my serial port was disappearing all the time when using the Leonardo on my laptop. I could only upload a sketch if I held down the reset button and then released it during the upload process... when the code was uploaded the serial port would immediately disappear again... which means I couldn't load any code which actually sent any Serial communication (which is pretty critical for Firefly). So I showed the problem to David Mellis (one of the founders of the Arduino platform who is getting his PhD at MIT, and he was confounded too). So he put me in touch with one of the main developers of the Leonardo board/platform (Zach Eveland) and I've been working with him to see if we can figure out the problem. As far as I can tell, the issue is that the Arduino driver seems to be failing on Windows 7 64-bit machines (like my laptop). He said one or two people reported similar issues during the development, but that he stopped hearing from them, so he thought it was fixed. We've tried several different things, but it seems the driver is failing at a really low-level. He's ordered a hardware USB analyzer so he can track the hardware communication between the computer and the board... but he hasn't shipped it to me yet. I'm hoping to get it resolved soon. As far as I can tell, the Leonardo is supposed to work almost identically to the Uno (it's just cheaper because it only uses 1 microcontroller... which handles both USB communication and running the code... where as the Uno has two microcontrollers on board which makes it more expensive). So, any code that runs on the Uno should (theoretically) also run on the Leonardo. Other than the code which I added to pick up the board type and load different parts of the sketch (which was a pretty significant overhaul of the firmata)... I only added a few lines to check if the serial port was available before sending the data over to Grasshopper (which seems to be required (or recommended) when using the Leonardo board. I've tested the code using the Uno and Mega and it works great... but I haven't fully tested the Leonardo support because of my machine. Apparently, this issue has only affected laptops like mine (others seem to work fine). If you're interested in testing the new version let me know and I could send it to you. You'd probably have to revert back to 0.8.0066 until I release the next version because David changed a few menu UI functions so I don't think the old version will run correctly (at least I don't think so). Anyway, let me know if your interested.
-Andy…
noceros 3D, en caso de aprobar satisfactoriamente el examen, se les otorga un reconocimiento avalado por el CMJ y la Secretaría del Trabajo. Este workshop va dirigido principalmente a estudiantes de arquitectura; sin embargo, ya que la parametrización es una herramienta que abarca diferentes ámbitos del diseño, se pueden integrar estudiantes de diseño industrial, artistas o estudiantes que tengan relación con lo gráfico y lo formal. Al finalizar el curso, los asistentes serán capaces de manejar Rhinoceros y Grasshopper en un nivel medio, con el objetivo de que el alumno pueda continuar aprendiendo con alguno de nuestros workshops subsiguientes o de manera autodidacta.
Las personas inscritas deben tener conocimientos básicos de geometría y de preferencia utilizar algún programa de dibujo en 2D o modelación en 3d. Rhino.GetMe Rigid // Enfocado a construir un objeto de diseño parametrizado a cualquier escala, el workshop se divide en tres módulos: Módulo 1 // Rhinoceros 3D // Una sesión de cinco horas. Módulo 2 //Grasshopper // Una sesión de cinco horas. Módulo 3 // Ejercicios prácticos /Tres sesiones de diez horas c/u. Es necesario traer el equipo necesario para trabajar, se cuenta con equipos en caso de que algún alumno no cuente con laptop pero son limitados, por favor avísanos a la brevedad si lo requieres. Se les recomienda que traigan dispositivos de almacenamiento en caso de que necesitemos compartir información.
El costo del Workshop es de $6500.00 para profesionales y $5000 pesos para estudiantes.
Pre-venta únicamente para estudiantes, hasta el día viernes 29 de junio, con un costo de $3500.00 pesos.
El cupo del evento es limitado puedes apartar tu lugar y terminar de liquidar antes del 29 de junio en pre-venta, antes del 6 de junio en admisión general.
Para hacer tu registro al workshop por favor envía un correo a workshop@transformalab.com incluyendo:
Nombre
Universidad u oficina de procedencia
Teléfono móvil
En el caso de estudiantes por favor incluyan una copia escaneada de su Constancia de Estudios para hacer válido su descuento.
Una vez recibida su información se les enviará un correo con la información necesaria para realizar su pago mediante depósito bancario, y posteriormente un mail de confirmación de su participación en el Workshop.
www.transformalab.com…