basis FE model to get some stresses to evaluate and then I remap these stresses into a thickness within a certain domain. These values are then used as input to a new FE model.
I look at a cantilever beam (8 x 3 m) which has uniformly distributed loads on top and bottom and all DOF's are fixed in the end (left side).
I get the exact opposite result as I would expect. See the result below.
I've tried to switch the domain input of the thickness which kind of gives a result more likely to what I would expect but still does some weird thing at the end of the cantilever beam. Also I don't really see the logic in doing that.
I've also tried the region boundary support instead but with no luck.
Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?
Thank you very much!…
te one of the boxes (kind of). Now I'm trying to set up the pattern, but I would like it to be random. I'm having trouble coming up with the actual algorithm, though.
I'm able to generate a list of items, randomly select some of them, and rotate them. I can also select the item after a rotated one and move it to the right.
However, I'm having trouble selecting all of the items after an item that's been rotated, and moving all of them.
Let's say I have a list of 15 elements and numbers 3, 6, and 7 are rotated. I would need to move numbers 4 through 14 (since it starts at 0) to the right by an x amount; numbers 7 through 14 to the right by a 2x amount; and numbers 8 through 14 by a 3x amount.
How should I go about doing this?
I'll add my current non-working setup. I should note that since I'm new, it probably looks horribly disorganized. Sorry about that.
Thanks!…
control point edit from a sphere.
Since it is the first time I try Exoskeleton, I checked the lists of input geometry in the exemple and got the same in my definition, but the component turned red, giving this error message:
1. Solution exception:Index was outside the bounds of the array.
For the Radius at Start and End values, I tried using the same principle applied inside the Exo-vase exemple, which links the radius to the Z values, remapping them from .3 to 8.
Is there the problem or elsewhere?
Could someone give me a hint about what I am missing ? Many thanks!!!
Below a screenshot., and I attach the definition.
…
lets say the setup at some time is like this:
min = 0.0
max = 10.0
val = 3.0
Then the dynamic domain changes to:
min = 5.0
max = 10.0
What happens to val? Does it stay as close to 3 as possible (i.e. 5.0)? Does it get remapped to the same percentage (i.e. 6.5)?
--------
Or let's assume that due to some fluke the dynamic bounds are identical:
min = 6.0
max = 6.0
Now at least it's obvious what should happen to val as there's only one value possible, but what should happen after the domain becomes valid again? Should I store the last valid value or percentage and restore it?
--------
What about rounding in case of integer sliders?
min = 0
max = 10
val = 3
When the dynamic domain is slowly adjusted one integer at a time until it reaches:
min = 8
max = 10
how do we prevent the massive amount of intermediate rounding that goes on which may push the final value percentage way off the original?
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 6:41am on January 28, 2011
his fast-moving class covers most of Rhino's functionality, including the most advanced surfacing commands. In addition, this workshop will give students a functional understanding of Grasshopper and Parametric design. This will allow them to build on this understanding into more advanced projects of their own including design optimization with RhinoNest and creating their models on a laser machine.
…
you'll learn to create and edit accurate free-form 3-D NURBS models. This fast-moving class covers most of Rhino's functionality, including the most advanced surfacing commands. In addition, you'll learn concepts and features of Grasshopper at an accelerated pace in an instructor-led hands-on instruction environment. The advantages of using Grasshopper in preliminary design and concept development come to life since the students will be able to create their models on a Type A Machines' Series 1 3D printer. Participants should have basic knowledge of Rhino 5.
Location:Type A Machines - SmithGroup San Francisco (map)301 Battery StreetSan Francisco, CA 94111United States
To Register:e-mail: Jackie Nasser - McNeel Miamiphone: (305) 513 4445
…
We are posting a few experiments, created with the work-in-progress RABBIT 0.2. We plan to release it within a week or two…
RABBIT 0.2 has a lot of new features:…
Added by Morphocode at 8:42am on February 23, 2010
of tensiles ... the Birdair/Taiyo Kogyo combo is like the 3 big German luxury saloon car makers combined (I mean that in 99.99% of cases you'll end up buying a S Class or an ugly 7 series or that 8 quattro).
So ... in a nutshell: It's a ping-pong thing: you design the "outline", Birdair calculates the membrane related forces, you test custom components (MSC Nastran, STAAD, RAM etc), you get feedback from someone capable to do these in real-life (like Donges GmbH), you argue about the cost (hideous, as usual), you replace bespoke custom cast things with commercially available ugly bits ... etc etc etc.
The big issue is that the whole design is supposedly a thing carried over under "some" BIM umbrella ... therefore the master composer must be either Revit (no thanks) or AllPlan (ditto) or AECOSim (yes please).
But these archaic things they don't understand an iota from MCAD stuff (most notably the assembly/component discipline or advanced feature driven nested components). But all things considered Microstation + Generative Components + AECOSim + Bentley structural analysis verticals define the most complete solution that you can use.
Moral: Chaotic chaos, what else?
PS: I'll post the full (quite complex) GH definition soon - among other stuff: using the real-life items shown imported as blocks to Rhino and "mapped" in space (PlaneToPlane) via GH/C#.…
unique properties (color, UV map, vertex normal) the vertex is duplicated. So if you weld a mesh using the weld command with an angle tolerance of more than 90 degrees you're left with a box with 6 faces and 8 vertices.
It's quite a common way to describe meshes, Also the way your graphics card consumes meshes, so there's little CPU processing needed to process the meshes and feed them to the graphics card. If it's hard drive space you're worried about, there may be some compression possible. Apart from primitives, I don't know a geometry that do not represent a box by having four faces (including maya's polygons).
A mesh is considered closed when there are no naked edges. So for boxes this does not return false. I assume that internally spatial queries are used (or perhaps a check if the vertices are exactly the same)(see https://github.com/mcneel/rhinocommon/blob/master/dotnet/opennurbs/opennurbs_mesh.c )
Conclusion: If you want faces to show as having a (semi) creased edge, you'll have a vertex direction for each vertex.
However, if your goal is to make gears, I'd skip the whole part of creating meshes, and leverage Breps and extrusions to create the geometry, or using Extrusion (the geometry) might be a solution to create lightweight geometry, and forget about creating meshes yourself.
…