ature. By investigating the process of decay across various scales, we will formulate rules of generating decomposition as our design research area. These rules will evolve into design strategies for the creation and fabrication of a large-scale prototype. The design and fabrication process will be informed by the use of robotic fabrication techniques.
The three-week long programme is formulated as a two-phase process. During the two-week initial phase, participants benefit from the unique atmosphere and facilities of AA’s London home. The second phase, lasting for a week, shifts to AA’s woodland site in Hooke Park and revolves around the fabrication and assembly of a full-scale architectural intervention.
Prominent Features of the programme:
• Teaching team: Participants engage in an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (5:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
• Facilities: AA Digital Prototyping Lab (DPL) offers laser cutting, CNC milling, and 3d printing facilities. The facilities at AA Hooke Park allow for the fabrication of one-to-one scale prototypes with a 3-axis CNC router, various woodworking power tools, and robotic fabrication.
• Computational skills: The toolset of Summer DLAB includes but is not limited to Rhinoceros, Processing, Grasshopper, and various analysis tools.
• Theoretical understanding: The dissemination of fundamental design techniques and relevant critical thinking methodologies through theoretical sessions and seminars forms one of the major goals of Summer DLAB.
• Professional awareness: Participants ranging from 2nd year students to PhD candidates and full-time professionals experience a highly-focused collaborative educational model which promotes research-based design and making.
• Fabrication: According to the specific agenda of each year, a one-to-one scale prototype is fabricated and assembled by design teams.
• Lecture series: Taking advantage of its unique location, London, Summer DLAB creates a vibrant atmosphere with its intense lecture programme.
Eligibility: The workshop is open to architecture and design students and professionals worldwide.
Accreditation: Participants receive the AA Visiting School Certificate with the completion of the Programme.
Applications: The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £1964 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership fee. A deposit of £381 is required when registering with the online form. The deadline for applications is 20 July 2015. No portfolio or CV is required. Online application link:
https://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/ONLINEAPPLICATION/visitingApplication.php?schoolID=325
Return train tickets between London-Hooke Park, accommodation & food in Hooke Park, and materials from Digital Prototyping Lab (DPL) are included in the fees.
Programme Directors:
Elif Erdine (AA Summer DLAB Director): elif.erdine@aaschool.ac.uk
Alexandros Kallegias (AA Summer DLAB Director): alexandros.Kallegias@aaschool.ac.uk
…
ange’ for its 2016 cycle, as a starting point to investigate principles of natural formation processes and interpret them as innovative architectonic spaces. These concepts are carefully interwoven with spatial, performance-based, and structural criteria in order to create full-scale working prototypes.
The three-week long programme is formulated as a two-phase process. During the two-week initial phase, participants benefit from the unique atmosphere and facilities of AA’s London home. The second phase, lasting for a week, shifts to AA’s woodland site in Hooke Park and revolves around the robotic fabrication and assembly of a full-scale architectural intervention.
Prominent Features of the programme:
• Teaching team: Participants engage in an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (5:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
• Facilities: AA Digital Prototyping Lab (DPL) offers laser cutting, CNC milling, and 3d printing facilities. The facilities at AA Hooke Park allow for the fabrication of one-to-one scale prototypes with a 3-axis CNC router, various woodworking power tools, and robotic fabrication.
• Computational skills: The toolset of Summer DLAB includes but is not limited to Rhinoceros, Processing, Grasshopper, and various analysis tools.
• Theoretical understanding: The dissemination of fundamental design techniques and relevant critical thinking methodologies through theoretical sessions and seminars forms one of the major goals of Summer DLAB.
• Professional awareness: Participants ranging from 2nd year students to PhD candidates and full-time professionals experience a highly-focused collaborative educational model which promotes research-based design and making.
• Robotic Fabrication: According to the specific agenda of each year, scaled working models are produced via advanced digital machining tools, followed by the fabrication of a one-to-one scale prototype with the Kuka KR150 robot.
• Lecture series: Taking advantage of its unique location, London, Summer DLAB creates a vibrant atmosphere with its intense lecture programme.
Eligibility: The workshop is open to architecture and design students and professionals worldwide.
Accreditation: Participants receive the AA Visiting School Certificate with the completion of the Programme.
Applications: The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £1900 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership fee. A deposit of £381 is required when registering with the online form. The deadline for applications is 11 July 2016. No portfolio or CV is required. Online application link:
https://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/ONLINEAPPLICATION/visitingApplication.php?schoolID=392
Return train tickets between London-Hooke Park, accommodation & food in Hooke Park, and materials from Digital Prototyping Lab (DPL) are included in the fees.
For inquiries, please contact:
elif.erdine@aaschool.ac.uk (Programme Director)
alexandros.kallegias@aaschool.ac.uk (Programme Director)
…
elease, so for now I am back to the basics - using only what is built into the official release for the time being.
Perhaps as plugins are updated, the updated version/ release date/ download link can be added to this compatibility list. If someone has beaten me to this on another site; please let me know.
Plugins I intend to test would solicit compatibility advice for;
CENTIPEDE
CHAMELEON / WORKS /
DIVA
FAR CALCULATOR / WORKS /
FIREFLY / UPDATED / Firefly (1.0067) now works for 0.9.006. Download at www.fireflyexperiments.com
FLOWLINES / WORKS / native tools provided in 0.9 release
GENERATION / WORKS /
GECO / WORKS / update scheduled for 10.08.2012
GH KANGAROO / WORKS / plus more on the way! (per Daniel Piker)
GHOWL / WORKS /
GHYTHON / FIXED / Link to updated file; GhPython 0 5 1 0
GOAT
HAL / PARTIAL COMPATIBILITY / Fix should be available toward end of Aug.
HELIOTROPE \ BROKEN \
HOOPSNAKE
HORSTER / WORKS /
HUMMINGBIRD / WORKS /
LOCAL CODE / WORKS /
LUNCHBOX / WORKS / UPDATED 8.04 DOWNLOAD HERE
MATIS
MESHEDIT / WORKS / update scheduled for 10.08.2012
QUOKKA
SCARAB
SLINGSHOT \ BROKEN \
SOLARCIRCLES
SPIDERWEB / WORKS /
STARLING / WORKS / VER 0.2 AND 0.1
PANELING TOOLS / UPDATED / http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/panelingtools/forum/topics/pt-gh-new-release-of-august-22-2012
WEAVERBIRD \ BROKEN \
…
ack to .ghx?
This is in relation to a discussion I've been having with David Rutten & Scott Davidson about GH consuming memory in a relatively large GH definition (~. I think what I've learned from this is that one should limit the size of the GH file, or put some incremental stops in the definition to limit the length of calculations that it runs at once. Is this a valid conclusion?
The GH file we're talking about is 7Mb & the Rhino file is about 120Mb, but when working w/ the GH def. I try to only keep about 2 curves turned on.
Here's a summary of the discussion:
Hi Mike,thanks for sending it over. I've been fiddling with the file for about 10 minutes and it climbed from 1.7 GB to 1.9GB, but then I've been switching previews on which means more meshes get calculated so you'd expect a higher memory consumption. It is possible we're leaking memory, but if you're working for hours on end, memory fragmentation might also explain part of the increase. Basically, memory gets fragmented just like disks get fragmented after prolonged use, difference is that memory cannot be defragmented unless you restart the application and allow it to start with a clean slate. I'll try and find any leaks we may have missed in the past.Goodwill,David
──────────── David Rutten
On 09/03/2011 06:19, Mike Calvino wrote:
Thanks very much David for the quick response. I've attached the files zipped. I can't figure out what's doing it. After working in the file for awhile, the memory usage in the Windows Task Manager climbs . . . it's gotten to 1.57+Gb before I exited GH & Rhino5Wip & let it dissipate, then restart & work for awhile before it does it again. It probably takes like 4 or 5 hours before it gets that high. That's the highest it's gotten, & that only happened while I was working in a Rhino file that had all of the elements baked into it - turned off at least, but it still climbed to 1.57+Gb. It seems to climbs when you work in the file & move around in both the GH def. & the Rhino file. Like turn on a few of the Extr components at the right end of the "StandareRibExtuder" groups, you can watch the MemUsage go up, but when you turn them off, it does not go down. - goes up fast at this point. Maybe I need to figure out how to do the definition with fewer components, I'm sure that's part of it, but I must confess, I think I'm still early on in the learning curve.I really hope that this is not operator error on my part & I do apologize up front if it is. I have done a disk cleanup, I have tried excluding .3dm & .ghx files from my NOD32 antivirus, no change. I hope you can find something.Let me know if you have any trouble with the files.See if you find anything & please let me know . . . thanks!Cheers! --Mike CalvinoCalvino Architecture Studio, inc.www.calvinodesign.com
…
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
…
mers considering extreme sports reject mainstream retailers and like to check out small stores rather of at chains plus malls. Several smaller retailers discuss trends in sports shoe sales. http://skateszone.com/
Though athletic shoes and sports stores and from doorways retailers have reported somewhat uptick in footwear sales due to the increase in extreme sports, the particular beneficiaries inside the trend are independent surf and skate niche stores.
Some West Coast surf and skate shops stated teenagers and even more youthful Generation Xers are not only rejecting traditional sports, but they're also shunning mainstream retailers and malls meant for smaller niche shops transporting hard-to-come-by brands.
Eddie Miyoshi, district manager at Atomic Garage, a 3-store chain situated in Gardena, Calif., stated the soaring recognition of skateboard footwear has boosted the retailer's total footwear business 20-thirty percent this year, rather of '95.
Skate footwear presently represent 80-90 % of Atomic Garage's shoe sales, while couple of years back, Dr. Martens and Timberland drove the retailer's footwear business.
Like many retailers, Miyoshi pointed to Airwalk since the trend's catalyst.
However, if Airwalk broadened its distribution to larger chains, which are frequently located in malls, only a few skate shoe customers adopted. Rather, many youthful males have switched for your skate shops for additional elusive brands like Etnies, Duffs, and Electricity Footwear by Circus. By refusing to market bigger retailers or sports stores, these brands are increasing their cachet among youthful consumers.
"Kids don't want stuff which have been within the shops,In . Miyoshi added.
Searching ahead, Miyoshi forecasted skate shoe sales will remain strong through spring '97 provided "the [hot] vendors don't auction other [non-particularly shop] retailers."
"Skaters and non-skaters are rebelling against mainstream retailers so on to surf and skate shops for many looks," echoed Mark Richards, co-online sources Val Surf, a 3-store chain situated in North Hollywood, Calif. Soaring sales of skate footwear have driven total footwear receipts up 25 percent this year rather of '95.
"The quantity of that increase might be connected while using exposure of maximum games? I am unsure. [Skate footwear] may also be actually the think about the moment,In . Richards acknowledged. And in relation to getting this right look, youthful customers can be very picky.
"Skateboard footwear is a huge category for people, but we're not able to own the brands, Etnies, Duffs, Electricity and Nice, simply because they won't sell us," stated Mark Anderson, buyer at Chick's Sports, a six-store chain in Covina, Calif. "We have people coming every single day requesting them." Consequently, skate footwear have consistently ongoing to obtain about 5 % of Chick's overall footwear business. http://skateszone.com/the-top-8-best-skateboards-for-beginners-reviews-2017/
Nonetheless, some outdoors, niche sports and sports retailers are noting the growing recognition and coverage of maximum sports will receive a modest impact on footwear sales. Trailrunning footwear and approach/outdoors crosstrainers will be the two groups benefiting the very best inside the recognition. Like the skate shoe business, some retailers realize that styling instead of function frequently drives sales of individuals footwear.
"At this time the merchandise is a lot more visual than function," stated Chet James, gm of Super Jock 'N Jill, Dallas, speaking about trailrunning footwear. Still, James noted the current hype over adventure sports helps draw more customer traffic. "The marketing campaigns and media help bring growing figures of people in, nonetheless they frequently occasions day an issue that increases results on their own account,Inch he conceded.
John Wilkinson, executive vp inside the 85-store chain Track 'N Trail, Eldorado Hillsides, Calif., stated the shop has "seen some activity in approach footwear," but he requested the amount of consumers depend in it commercially sport. And, instead of accelerating total footwear business, Wilkinson speculated elevated sales of approach footwear and trailrunners are gnawing away at traditional hiking shoe and boot volume.
But Dan Bazinet, president of Overland Exchanging, a 34-store chain situated in Westford, Mass., believes the company-new looks have breathed existence for the wilting hiking boot category. "[Approach-type footwear] don't represent the lion's participate the hiking market, nonetheless they have elevated the hiking business and provided us extra sales," Bazinet stated.
He designated Timberland's Treeline Series and Rockport's Leadville line as strong performers. Unsurprisingly, he noted the company-new looks are attractive to youthful consumer base than traditional hikers.
For that month of June, sales of men's hikers were up 49 percent at Overland, rather of June '95, while sales of women's hikers were up 17 % for that month. Bazinet also attributed elevated sales that shops walked inside the hiking business, departing that business for that specialists.
Some retailers draw a good example concerning the hiking boom of two yrs ago combined with the current extreme sport phenomenon. "Plenty of bigger chains will get a specific percent in the industry while [extreme] sports remain a fad because they are selling cost-point type gear," described Steven Carre, assistant hard goods buyer at Adventure 16, a six-store chain situated in Hillcrest.
"However individuals [true enthusiasts] will say `we need real gear' and may shown up at us. That will help us after a while. What Size Skateboard good for an 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 year old
…
This is the actual reason I'm going through all this. I want to develop an algorithm that can be applied consistently and produce good results.
Here is a a little background. I'm working on my master's thesis in structural analysis. My thesis is on seismic behaviour of a roman temple in Portugal. I will be using a method of analysis suitable for block structures called the discrete element method. I am using a commercial code called 3DEC for this.
Now in order to the analysis I need to construct a 3D block model of my structure. I received a 3D scan of the entire structure (in *.wrl) format and spent a week trying to clean it up and slice it into the blocks that make up the structure. Now I want to use the scanned geometry of the blocks and describe a simplified prism around each that will represent the block in my analysis. I've attached a file with one of the columns in the temple. I think (at least with my tests so far) that it is representative of the all the blocks I'm dealing with.
Now my criteria for creation of the blocks:
I would like the contact area between the blocks to be as close as possible to the actual drum contact area,
I would like to get the volume of the blocks to be as close as possible (secondary to the contact area) to the volume of the actual drums in order to insure that the weight distribution in the structure is as close to reality as possible,
I would like the shape of the contact area to be as close to reality as possible
I order to satisfy all these requirements, I've done the following in my grasshopper file:
I take a section at the top and bottom of each of the drum meshes. I use this to extract the contact outline at the top and bottom of the drum. This is sometimes problematic and requires me to clean up the model and remove features that interfere.
Next I take each surface and try to fit a minimum circle around it. I try to do this because in my mind this is the best possible way to find the actual centre of the drum when there is cut outs and deterioration. This works well as long as more than half of the contact surface is still in its circular shape (third block from bottom in the example file doesn't satisfy this requirement and thus causes problems).
Knowing the centre, I use an algorithm I created in VB to search for one of the flutes on the contact profile. My ideas is that if I can find one of the flutes, I can then find the others by just going around at 30 degrees (there are 12 flutes) and find the location of all the flutes. In the VB code I've tried to explain my algorithm so I won't explain it here. I also think this algorithm is needlessly complicated and stupid as I'll explain later.
Once I've got one of the flutes, I just find the intersection of a line with at every 30 degrees with the outline curve.
Having all (12) points around the perimeter, I use an loop to scale the shape around the centre of the circle I found in step 1 to get the area within a tolerance value of the actual contact area (satisfying requirement 1). I was using HoopSnake before, but it required resetting every time so I decided to write my own thing.
I then connect the points on both top and bottom to get a solid block.
Now the problems are as follows:
Sometimes the algorithm doesn't find the best location as the starting point. As I said an important thing is that the circle is tangent to the flutes and that is true only if the column profile is larger than a half-circle.
The software I use requires convex blocks. I've tried to remedy this by using convex hull component before step 5 to insure the surfaces are convex.
I'm having issues sometimes with the alignment of top and bottom points. I think I just need to implement a component that sorts the points around a single basis so that there is no twisting.
I've been experimenting with convex hull as a general approach for defining the corner points, but I'm having problem take the convex hull curve and breaking it into a 12 sided polygon, preserving as much as possible the location of the flutes and the general shape of the contact surface.
I'm really sorry about the long post and complicated question. I hope someone can give some pointers on what I could try. I understand that this is not an easy question and that it is more a question of doing something rather than asking about grasshopper itself. My goal is to have an algorithm that I can explain as a general method for others to use in the future when dealing with these structures. This is only a small minor part of my thesis (the analysis is what is important) but it is taking a lot of time to figure out.
If you have any other questions, I would be more than happy to provide a better explanation. In the file I have created a region with all my input parameters. You can choose a different mesh from that point and change various settings. I hope that is self-explanatory.
Thanks for all your help,
Ali
BTW: I'm really sorry for the poor way I've done this stuff so far. I'm not a programmer and apart from some small macros in Excel I don't know much about this stuff. To add to that, I've just started with Rhino and Grasshopper about five days ago after almost pulling out all my hair trying to do this with AutoCAD!…
greatly appreciate it!!
You can write the number of the question and write your answer next to it, example:
1) a
2) c
3) a) Washington University in St. Louis
4) 2 weeks (1week+1week shipping)
5) 130
6) b
7) b
The survey questions are as follows:
1)
Did you 3D print before?
5)
How much did it cost (in dollars)?
a.
Yes, for a school project
a.
Between 20 & 50
b.
Yes, for a personal project
b.
Between 50 & 80
c.
Between 80 & 120
2)
Print size
d.
Please specify if otherwise: _____ dollars
a.
Between 2 & 6 cubic inches
b.
Between 6 & 12 cubic inches
6)
Do you think the price was expensive?
c.
Between 12 & 20 cubic inches
a.
Not at all
d.
Please specify if otherwise: ____cubic inches
b.
A little bit expensive
c.
Very expensive
3)
Where did you print your object?
a.
School
7)
Were you satisfied with the printed object?
b.
Outside school: _________________
a.
Yes, it was a great print without problems
b.
Not bad, some issues
4)
How long did it take to print?
c.
I was not satisfied, very bad quality
a.
___ days
b.
___ weeks
Thank you very much to all!!
PS: If you did many 3D prints, you can post multiple answers.
Wassef…