e parallel lines:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/profiles/blogs/marching-cubes-curve-wr...
It's at least real code I could translate to my native Python, but I still don't know if it's even possible to solve the math to make things not bulge, as his gives the same result at Millipede:
If I join the four corners of the main box, those four bulges nicely disappear.
His field calculation code is pretty simple, just returning a single field value for a 3D test point input, for a single point or curve being considered, but I don't yet see how they add together to form an overall isosurface:
…
nd give it love.2. Everything else is to know the nature of the data and components. Data is all: numbers, formulas, colors, lists, branches, graphics, visual representation, connection between data, hierarchies, etc.3. Work, work and work.Have information is know about data, have knowledge is to know how the data is related with everything else and have wisdom is to have the right mental-programs to process data. And then there's the creativity, divergent thinking, ingenuity and talent that make the mental architecture not be something rigid. Then, to carry out algorithms, the mindset I usually follow is, I start with data/parameters to perform a design, and decompose the process into smaller processes that can manipulate. If I'm at a point where I do not know how to do, two things can happen, that I know what I have to do but can not, or not know how to do, the first is probably lack of knowledge aboud data or components, therefore, it is time to learn; and second, rethink the previous processes if I can avoid the problem, which often leads me to redo the whole algorithm, which is not allways bad.In short, delves into the data and components, so your mental program of execution will be more optimal if you know more about posibilities. And think in terms of process, not in terms of outcome. And work, work, work does the rest. There is no trick, just eager to learn. I did not start to understand that it was really the 3d until I began to learn programming, but this way I will advise you when you have confidence using grasshopper.Perhaps is not what you expected, but it all boils down to devote more hours. Grasshopper is easy to use and hard to learn.…
nd me to kill him but give him my regards anyway) is still around in BirdAir Italy ... talk with him.
3. Hope that you understand that designing the "details" means some decent MCAD app + FEA + this + that. "Fusing" this with some abstract graphic editor like GH ... is ... er ... impossible (in real-life, you know, he he ). Generative Components on the other hand may qualify but requires a lot of time in order to fully master it (approx 2-4 years).
4. FormFinder ... well ... that's utterly Academic but on the other hand ... (good luck).
http://www.formfinder.at/main/software/team/
5. http://tecno.upc.edu/cotens/software.htm
6. This is the second best (after the BirdAir internal stuff) but costs an arm and a leg
http://www.ndnsoftware.com/
7. This is a !%$!%$ in the !%$%!$:
http://www.sofistik.com/no_cache/loesungen/fem/leichte-tragwerke/
My realistic (low cost) advise:
use K1/2 (especially if you are after "parametric" exploitation(s)) ... and then diversify tasks: stuff for the structural department, stuff for whom claims that he can(?) design the "details" ... whilst be in a constant contact with the membrane provider (and in fact: the contractor for doing the real thing as well)
…
ithin an Urban context and taking into account the shading of the surrounding context, and we are testing the Ladybug Thermal Comfort Indices component. For what we understand there are two ways to take into account the Mean Radiant Temperature, you can either plug the meanRadiantTemperature_ or the solarRadiationPerHour_. According to the meanRadiantTemperature_ description it seems that if we are doing the calculation outside in the sun we mustn’t plug in anything and we must work only with the solarRadiationPerHour_ (as you also do in the example). Is it correct?
solarRadiationPerHour_ can be calculated in two ways, the first one is shown in your example and uses Ladybug_Radiation analysis component (Very clear thank you so much! : ) ) The other one uses the Ladybug_Sunpath Shading component and from the description is supposed to be more precise. And here are the other questions:
1) there is a parameter that takes into account vegetation, with which degree of detail should it be represented? 2D(silhouette) or 3D surface? Should we separate the trunk from the crown?
2) In this component we can also insert an albedo value. Is this value taken into account in the PET calculation and if yes, how?
3) In the Ladybug_Radiation Analysis component we can input a geometry at the ground level to be calculated and then place an analysis grid at 1.1 _disFromBase. Using Ladybug_Sunpath Shading, where should we place the geometry to be calculated and how can we place the analysis grid like in the other case?
We apologise for the long post!
Thank you very much for all your efforts!!…
rves that "intersect" a plane placed on Z=6 above the first circle. I did this to have a collection of points from which to choose 3 and make a 3pt-circle.
[this second circle "fits" the catenary at a certain height, that's what I wanted to do]
Maybe it's obtuse but anyway that's the way I managed it.. I then used the "intersection" of the top circle with the original catenary curve to "split" the catenary into 2 parts, I then "Rail Revolution" the first part of it around the axis of the original circle, using the circle as a "rail", and I get a Brep surface.
It is a "open brep" surface, so now i'm having the problem of managing it if I want to subdivide it with Isotrim or other commands to control the number of subdivisions.
Is there a better way to go about this?
I am attaching the file.
About the image, I checked my code about 10 times to understand why it has those "lines" every 1 meter in the Z, and they already appear in the "rail revolution" component when it is visible, but in the "brep components" I can see the individual points along the rail curve.
I think this is what might be causing the brep to surface problem, but for the life of me I can't understand why the rail is not smooth and is "divided" into the 7 points instead of just one smooth revolution...
Thanks! :)
…
it seems that was this. Now all is working fine !
Glad that it worked! But I am still a bit worried. Gismo components only modify the gdal-data/osmconf.ini file and no other MapWinGIS file. So your MapWinGIS installation files should not be compromised. The fact that you did not get the "COM CLSID" error message when running the "Gismo Gismo" component suggests that MapWinGIS has been properly installed. So I wonder if the cause for the permanent "invalid shapes" warning has again something with the fact that your system is again not allowing the MapWinGIS to properly edit the osmconf.ini. Maybe this problem will appear again, and again, and reinstallation of MapWinGIS every time can be somewhat bothersome.
- About the terrain generation, is it possible to have the texture from google or other provider mapped onto the terrain surface from gismo component ? (Same as using the ladybug terrain generator in fact). I try to used the image extracted by ladybug component and then applied it to the gismo terrain but the texture is rotated by 90°.
The issue with the rotation can be solved by swapping/reversing the U,V directions of the terrain surface. A slightly more important issue is that terrain surface generated with Gismo "Terrain Generator" component might have a bit smaller radius than what the radius_ input required. This stems from the fact that the terrain data first needs to be downloaded in geographic coordinate system, and then projected. Some projecting issues may occur at the very edges of the projected terrain, so I had to slightly cut out the very edges of the terrain which results in the actual terrain diameters being slightly shorted in both directions. This means that if you apply the same satellite image from Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component to Gismo "Terrain Generator" component the results may not be the same.I attached below a python component which tries to solve this issue by extending the edges of Gismo "Terrain Generator" terrain, and then cutting them with the cuboid of the exact dimensions as the radius_ input. Have in mind that this extension of the original terrain at its edges is not a correct representation of the actual terrain in that location. But rather just an extension of the isoparameteric curve of the terrain surface. So basically: some 0 to 10% (0 to 10 percent of the width and length) of the terrain around all four edges is not the actual terrain for that location, but rather just its extension.The python component is located at the very right of the definition attached below.
Also, if you would like to use the satellite images from Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component along with "OSM shapes", sometimes you may find slight differences in position of the shapes. This is due to openstreetmap data not being based on Google Maps (that's what Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component is using), but rather on Bing, MapQuest and a few others.
- About the requiredKeys_ input of OSM shapes, I understand what you mean and your advice, but in most cases I use it, the component was working fine even without input. I think it's better to extract all tags, values and keys of the selected area, instead of searching for specific ones as I try to find all data related to what I want after, isn't it ? To check what keys are present on the area also.
Ineed, you are correct.I though you were trying to only create a terrain, 3d buildings and maybe find some school or similar 3d building, for these two locations. The recommendation I mentioned previously is due to shapefiles having a limit (2044) to how many keys it can contain. This requires further testing of some big cities locations with maybe larger radii, which I haven't performed due to my poor PC configuration. But in theory, I imagine that it may happen that a downloaded .osm file may have more than 2044 keys. In that case shapefile will only record 2044 of them, and disregard the others. That was my point.But again 2044 is a lot of keys, and I haven't been checking much this in practice. For example, when I set the radius_ to 1000 meters, and use your "3 Rue de Bretonvilliers Paris" location I get around 350 something keys, which is way below the 2044.Another reason why one should use the requiredKeys_ input is to make the Gismo OSM components run quicker: for example, the upper mentioned 350 something keys will result in 350 values for each branch of the "OSM shapes" component's "values" output.Which means if you have 10 000 shapes, the "OSM shapes" component will have 10 000 branches with 350 items on each branch (values). This can make all Gismo OSM components very heavy, and significantly elongate the calculation process.With requiredKeys_ input you may end up with only a couple of tens of items per each branch.Sorry for the long reply.…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 8:57am on June 11, 2017
proxy). However I decided to use the Human plug-in and scatter them as block instances, this allows me to add some reference lines in a different layer to have a better visual reference of the proxies, and have a lighter work environment in Rhino. (If you have the blocks on a layer and the proxies inside in a different layer, the proxies will render even if their layer is off and they are not showing in the viewport)
The definition has two parts: the bottom part scatters 3 grass primitives on a circle surface and is mostly an updated version of Manuel's definition, I hope he doesn't mind (you can replace the circle with any surface if you want a small patch of grass), you then bake this geometry, create one or several proxies in Rhino and create the blocks; the top part scatters a block on either a Surface, Brep or Mesh.
The definition populates the base surface/brep/mesh with points, then offsets the edges with the circle radius and pulls the points outside that boundary to it, so the circles don't fall outside the surface. (this part was the one that gave most troubles and it still fails sometimes, maybe someone could help me with that)
It also autoflips the normals if they're not up, and aligns the X axis of the target planes to a set direction (so you can have some wind or gravity effect if you want).
I used, and you probably need to make it work: Rhino 5 sr11 64bits, V-ray 2.0, grasshopper 0.9.0076, and Human (3-17-2014)
In my examples I scattered 3 blocks each with its own material, but you can have proxies with multiple materials.
If you make your own grass primitives don't forget to map the textures before scattering.
I'm posting some example renders and sharing the vray materials and proxies I used (I was experimenting with vray2sidedmats and a second diffuse layer with yellow noise mapped to world coordinates)
I'd like some help to get some cooler and different ideas for grass materials and proxies.
If you get some bugs let me know...
Eduardo
…
Added by Eduardo A at 11:54am on September 14, 2015
tura digital en corte Láser, corte CNC, impresión 3d, y modelado paramétrico.
Este tercer taller enseña los fundamentos del modelado paramétrico y algunas bases de manufactura digital.
PERFIL DEL ALUMNO QUE INGRESA:
Diseñador, Arquitecto, Artista con conocimientos de Rhinoceros interesados en comenza a modelar paramétrico con Grasshopper para fabricación digital básica.
PERFIL DEL ALUMNO QUE EGRESA:
El alumno terminará con los conocimientos y criterios para el desarrollo de piezas o proyectos utilizando fabricación digital, mejorando y agilizando los flujos de trabajo, así como los criterios fundamentales del Modelado Paramétrico -Generativo.
Taller de modelado paramétrico con Grasshopper
Interfase
Manejo de Datos
Data Volátil
Data Persistente
Rangos y dominios
Atractores
Listas y Cull
Modelado por Layer Object
Análisis Básicos
Conexión de Curvas
Superficies
Análisis de Superficies
Panelización Básica
Relaciones con Excel
Modelado generativo
Fechas: del 8 de Febrero al 1º de Marzo
Días: Sábado
Horarios: de 10 am a 3 pm
Sesiones: 4 de 5hrs
Duración: 20 horas
Precio: $3,000.00…
r visual programming tools in the games world. MS's Kodu, looks interesting. Kismet and Visual3d look even more interesting..... mainly because they are more 'interactive' or 'reactive', rather than DAG-based.
Seems like the evolution path for GH-similar apps is:
1. base 3d or CAD app based on C/C++ code.
2. Add scripting language interface
3. Add some kind of visual interface
4. Add graph sorting / propagation engine
5. Re-jig base 3d or CADD app to make managed/interpreted scripts run faster, multi-threaded.
6. Add dynamic typed language, DLR stuff
6. ....
6. Add constraints solver...?
7. Rebuild CAD display engine to be procedural at the GPU level?
Seems like there are available tools for converting scripts into some kind of flowchart. There are even visual debuggers. MS even has something called the 'Debugger Canvas'. Spreadsheet constraints.
Seems like the time is ripe for lots of new apps like GH.
…
.
For my project I want to make a sphere or spherical-like shape and pack it with circles of varying sizes. The circles all have to touch each other and thus on a point where three circles 'sort of' meet, there can only be three circles. This is shown in the second picture I have attached, a 2D circle packing made by Daniel Piker. So basically what I want to achieve is having the second picture projected on a 3d surface, that I can also edit. Also I would like to be able to change the size and amount of the circles that populate the surface. This means that I would be able to say 'there should be 30 circles with a radius of 2, 40 circles with a radius of 3 and 50 circles with a radius of 4, put them on this particular shape'.
As I've just started the project I haven't done so much research yet. What I have found is for example this Kangaroo definition of circle packing in 2D: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/kangaroo/forum/topics/circle-packing-definition?xg_source=activity
It is very beautiful and does exactly what I want to achieve, except that it is in two dimensions. I also have to say that I feel pretty confident working with both Grasshopper and Rhino, but not really with Kangaroo. I have used it a few times but not extensively.
So what I'm wondering is, how could I best approach this project? I looked into the concept of 'circle packing' and I noticed that it can be approached very mathematically. As I am an architecture student I don't know much about the math behind the geometry (although I do think it is very interesting) and thus I'm wondering if I will be able to achieve what I want to achieve. Also, do you think I could best approach the project in Kangaroo and do you think it is realistic for me to think I could finish the project? I'm just trying to see if I'm not going to try to tackle a problem that is very difficult to solve even for skilled mathematicans or something. Sorry for the long and perhaps vague read, but I would be very happy with any sort of input you might have on my problem!
Thanks in advance!
…