tructures)
Bad news: real-life AEC trusses are far and away from lines.
Ugly news: Rhino is NOT an AEC app by any means nor it would ever be. For AEC app I mean the known 3 (Allplan, Revit and my favorite: AECOSim) and/or proper MCAD apps (like CATIA/NX). In plain English : without exporting (meaning (a) bake in nested blocks + (b) export via STEP) proper structured data (assembly/component) this WIP case is absolutely useless.
why may you ask.
well ... trusses are made with numerous shop drawings like this, that's why:
more soon.
best, Peter…
hnical University of Denmark, Israel Institute of Technology and Aarhus School of Architecture, TopOpt for Grasshopper provides a number of optimization methodologies that extends currently available methods based on the 99-line MATLAB code for basic mechanical topology optimization provided by prof. Ole Sigmund of DTU.
The current alpha-release features 2d topology optimization based on the interactive optimization app developed for iOS and Android; topology optimization of continuum structures with tension and compression prioritization; and dual material topology optimization for optimization of composite structures with materials of varying properties.
Interactive visualization, 3d-optimization and further methodological extensions will be included in coming updates…
-life fabrication issues ... then ... well ... that's the reason for the Skype.
2. In general I would say that exploiting parametric "arrangements" (in the broad sense) is less than 5% of the whole ... given the fact that in real-life there's a lot of other constrains. Again using Kim's IKEA note: for instance packaging (at least for the magnitude of IKEA's business) is rather more important than ANY smart of stupid design.
3. Reliable components VS Design/Manufacturing cost IS the ultimate "fitness" challenge: this involves bottom-top design disciplines (not doable with Rhino/GH by any means) and ... well... some top dog feature driven MCAD app. Most makers/designers use the cheapo alternatives (SolidWorks/Creo etc etc) and the results ... well .. you get what you've paid for, he he.
4. Why bottom-top may you ask? (and what means this anyway?) Well ... one "connecting node" that would been made 1Z times at the minimum cost possible is a 100 times more challenging task than designing a shelve system that uses that node. See for instance A LOT of IKEA solutions (i.e. the nuts and bolts of them) that are exceptionally flimsy, very badly designed and ... well ... suitable for 1 week's usage (but there's some others that are less faulty). On the other hand IKEA actually serves the ephemeral ... thus ... this MAY be intentional (recycle > buy > recycle > buy > ...).
I buy therefor I exist.
For instance a certain IKEA mold injected "multi join node" for a given series of shelves ... it would sustain less than 5 minutes "abuse" (in case that someone would attempt to "rearrange" things). Moral: reality and theory ARE not the same thing.
I could continue until the end of Time listing "aspects" of the whole puzzle related with production issues ... but for the moment I would conclude by the following:
GH is a good "general" purpose graphic editor and Rhino IS NOT a feature driven solid modelling app. If you combine these 2 ... you can easily outline what you can and what you can't (or shouldn't) do on that subject.…
sive:
It is using up all or a lot of the cycles on the app UI thread. So there's no computing power left over to handle mouse events, keyboard events and paint events.
It is using up more memory than the computer physically has, so Windows starts paging (i.e. using the hard-disk as a memory space). Since disc read/write access is orders of magnitude slower than RAM read/write speed, this will slow down everything.
Some other application is using a lot of computing power/memory and Windows deems that app more important than Rhino.
8GB might not be enough if Rhino needs more than 5GB or so to run. Windows will take up ~2, other apps will take up ~1 unless they are also doing heavy lifting, so you have about 5 left over for Rhino+Grasshopper+++. It is not difficult to make Grasshopper use lots of a memory, but its also not demanded. If you generate 5000 complicated Brep objects, they are going to have to be stored somewhere.
However I cannot comment from here about whether your problem is processor or memory related, or both.
…
it within the same smart umbrella? Or put it differently: is it worthy to exploit/consider/evaluate GH methods and development orientations that could "approximate" Utopia?
Let's split the case into segments:
The parametric part thing (although critical) is complex and rather beyond the scope of GH. Affects Rhino far more than GH. That said Microstation has 3 levels for doing this (but forget Microstation and/or Gen Comp).
So for a start we can focus in GH acting as a "composer" in 3D place of all the required (hopefully real) parts for the job. Parts must be nested AND readable as such by an external AEC app.
I'll post here (soon I do hope) all the parts that are required for assembling this. I mean individual static "blocks" that we assume (wrongly) that remain static: I mean we presuppose that the whole GH geometry is fixed (thus this is really a smart sketch of some sort) and no further changes are on schedule (that MAY affect parts).
That said I prefer an incomplete Utopia (one thing that "does" it all, or it thinks that does it) than a myriad of individual apps that take input one from the other and promise the Holly Grail (and/or delivering it). The core reason that I use Microstation as my basic platform is exactly that (obviously with a certain price to pay: bugs, shortcomings, wrong concepts in places etc etc etc).
Best, Peter
…
loop is a simple component
to iterate generative shapes with Grasshopper®
http://antonioturiello.blogspot.com/
RHINO OFFICIAL BLOG
FOOD4RHINO PROJECT
AEC-APPS.COM REVIEW
r this or that etc etc).
3. I would strongly advise to use some decent feature/dimension driven CAD app in order to create families of concrete deck/beam(s) profiles "manually" (the good old way PLUS recording history and using parameters for the steps taken). Find a friend who knows, say, AECOSim and ask for a small demo on that matter (specifically ask what DDD is [Dimension Driven Design]). Then you can have these in Rhino/GH, define some topology, do the "solid" and if 1M of decks/beams are required rather use instance definitions and plane to plane transformations (that's what the Orient component does) instead of creating 1M clone objects.…
n splitting curves and then join them to create the region; but I'am looking for a more straightforward solutions. 3- I know some plugins like clipper could do this, but I'm looking for more flexible solutions.
4- I tried Brep[] CreatePlanarBreps(IEnumerable<Curve>) in ghpython, but it doesn't work.
…
he two, including project information, materials, etc.
I'm looking at embedding Ecotect information within VB (or possibly C#) components and was looking for the most efficient connection.
It looks like I have 2 main options:
1. XML database-centric model of which both GH + ECO write to the XML document.
2. LUA scripting from within GH and ECO.
XML would be the first choice as it seeks to contain data purely outside of both apps, however, the redundant code that ECO needs to read / write gbXML files may be a headache to script the content.
Another question I had was to whether I can populate data (such as weather, location, materials, etc) directly from the Ecotect libraries (.lib) to feed into the GH components or would I need to decompile these first.…