mple:
I wish to populate a rectangle with some random points, but I need them to be more dense at the base of the rectangle and then linearly getting more and more sparse towards the top.
This is how I worked it around:
1) first I have created a triangular prism,
2) then I've populated its volume with some random points
3) and finally I've projected them on the plane I'm wishing to populate.
But I don't really like the final result since the points are not as nicely spaced as if they were produced by the "Populate 2d" command. They look kind of "clumpy":
Do you have any better idea?
The best thing would be to be able to put a grayscale bitmap underneath and use it as a "density map"...
Here you have the .gh file I made:
prism.gh
Thank you very very much for the help! :)
By the way:
While I was preparing my 3d random distribution of points I've spotted a weird behaviour of the random command:
Even if the seeds are all different, for some values of them the points still belong to some common planes...
To solve that I had to jitter the output of one of the Random components.
I suppose this is a weakness of the pseudorandom generator implemented in the random component, isn't it?…
ilion.
Then i sketched the outline curves in rhino with a few control points. The building is symetric so i only draw one side. But i'm not sure what is better for a voroni. a sharp or a soft surface? Or dose i need points?
So i have some questions:
1. how can i loft the curves correctly? My problem is that if i divide my curves for more control points, grasshopper automatically change my curve. thats ok but than i've the problem with a short curve, which fit bevor with the large one, but after the devision it can't connect.
So i tryed to duplicate the long curve and split it but with the shatter battery it dosen't work. It always cut the curve somewhere.
2. my next problem is, the curves in rhino should be my main construction, which is always visible. so i decided to offset the curves that i got a colum. but i don't know how to orient the offset curves in the xyz axis.
3. hopefully if i have the surfaces, how can i build a voroni which is offsetet, and has maybe some different thicknesses? :D
Would be really great if s.o. can help me. I tried a lot but not every thing is simple.
Sorry for my bad english.
Thx max
Here are my files:
FCP_MAX_GH_konstruktion_1.3dm
FCP_MAX_GH_konstruktion_1.gh
…
that are available, I found myself in a quite difficult problematic.
I did a lot of google search/work and found some information, but still kind of haven't got the information that I need or want to use. Note: Our school has provided us 3 hours of basic Grasshopper tutorial and one hour of Honeybee/Ladybug temperature tutorial (with weather data etc).
For now I have used Grasshopper and Kangaroo, haven't quite implemented other plugins.
What I want to achieve?I want to create a basic wind simulation in a room (cube at first, but then add more space and use different models) that I can change inside grasshopper. For example I have two openings. I blow wind inside the object from one opening and it goes out the other opening. When I change the wind parameters I can analyse the wind and data that is flowing through the cube.
Is there a way I can visualize the wind?
I have seen different solutions, but mainly vectors with colors that are visualized as wind direction and temperature. Is it possible to make it 3D that I can actually make a real-life model out of it?
Why cube?At first I want to test it and see how it works, if it is viable or not. In the end I would create a facade that is designed for natural ventilation. I am kind of trying to put two projects together. One for the wind analysis, the other for the 3D-Result that is created with the wind. It might be a quite awful that I am asking, but I don't know where to go after doing the google research. Also, some Grasshopper links I found that might help describe the situation. http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/wind-analysis-by-grasshopperhttp://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/wind-cfd-change-form(Should I approach it with Ladybug and Ecotect?)
Thanks, A
…
ow..
It's basically using a 3d framework to define points on the framework and then interpolate curves through them.
Right now Im assuming that I merely translated something incorrectly early in the script that lead to most of the definition issues later on...?? It also seems I am not using the append function correctly... :(
If anybody well versed could take a look it would be awesome... :)
The code I've used is below and the erros I get are attached here:
Private Sub RunScript(ByVal ptSetA As List(Of Point3d), ByVal ptSetB As List(Of Point3d), ByVal divU As Integer, ByVal divV As Integer, ByRef A As Object, ByRef B As Object) Dim n As Integer = 0 Dim ptListA As New List(Of list(Of Point3d)) Dim ptListB As New List(Of list(Of Point3d)) For i As Integer = 0 To divU Dim ptRowA As New List(Of Point3d) Dim ptRowB As New list(Of point3d) For j As Integer = 0 To divV Dim ptA As New Point3d(ptSetA(n)) Dim ptB As New point3d(ptSetB(n)) ptRowA.Add(ptA) ptRowB.Add(ptB) n = n + 1 Next ptListA.Add(ptRowA) ptListB.Add(ptRowB) Next Dim intcvListA As New List(Of NurbsCurve) For i As Integer = 0 To divU - 1 Step 2 For j As Integer = 0 To divV - 1 Step 1 Dim pt01A As New point3d((ptListA(i)(j) + ptListA(i)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim pt01A As New point3d((ptListA(i + 1)(j) + ptListB(i + 1)(j)) / 2) Dim pt01A As New point3d((ptListA(i + 2)(j) + ptListA(i + 2)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim pt01A As New point3d((ptListA(i + 1)(j) + ptListA(i + 1)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim dis01A As Double = pt01A.DistanceTo(pt04A) Dim dis02A As Double = pt03A.DistanceTo(pt04A) Dim vt01A As New Vector3d((pt04A - pt01A) / dis01A) Dim vt02A As New Vector3d((pt03A - pt04A) / dis02A) Dim pt01B As New point3d((ptListB(i)(j) + ptListB(i)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim pt01B As New point3d((ptListA(i + 1)(j) + ptListB(i + 1)(j)) / 2) Dim pt01B As New point3d((ptListB(i + 2)(j) + ptListB(i + 2)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim pt01B As New point3d((ptListB(i + 1)(j) + ptListB(i + 1)(j + 1)) / 2) Dim dis01B As Double = pt01B.DistanceTo(pt04B) Dim dis02B As Double = pt03B.DistanceTo(pt04B) Dim vt01B As New Vector3d((pt04B - pt01B) / dis01B) Dim vt02B As New Vector3d((pt03B - pt04B) / dis02B) Dim ptArrA As New List(Of Point3d) ptArrA.Append(pt01A) ptArrA.Append(pt02A) ptArrA.Append(pt03A) Dim intcvA As New NurbsCurve() intcvA = CreateInterpolatedCurve(ptArrA, 3) intcvListA.Add(intcvA) Dim ptArrB As New List(Of Point3d) ptArrB.Append(pt01B) ptArrB.Append(pt02B) ptArrB.Append(pt03B) Dim intcvB As New NurbsCurve() intcvB = CreateInterpolatedCurve(ptArrB, 3) intcvListB.Add(intcvB) Next Next A = intcvListA…
ake a network of lines (i.e. a graph) and make a Plankton Mesh, from which you can use Cytoskeleton to make a solid mesh (and then smooth it with Weaverbird).
Works with ngons (polygons with 3 or more sides). Other examples I found only worked with tris and quads.
Works on open or closed surfaces
While these examples start with a surface, you could start with a network of lines and make a patch surface
This is meant for 2D networks/surfaces. I haven't attempted filling a 3D volume. My guess is this wouldn't work as it would require a non-manifold mesh that Plankton wouldn't handle.
Note similar results could be achieved with the following:
TSplines
MeshDual (dual of a tri mesh, not as much freedom/control)
Working backwards, here is the GhPython script from Will Pearson that builds a Plankton Mesh from vertices and faces. The vertices are a list of 3D coordinates, the faces are a tree a lists, with each list containing the indices of vertices that form a closed loop. From Will, "Plankton only handles manifold meshes, i.e. meshes which have a front and a back. This orientation is determined by the "right-hand rule" i.e. if the vertices of a face are ordered counter-clockwise then the face normal will be out of the page/screen."
# V: list of Point3d # F: tree of int
import Grasshopper appdata = Grasshopper.Folders.DefaultAssemblyFolder
import clr clr.AddReferenceToFileAndPath(appdata + "Plankton.dll")
import Plankton
pmesh = Plankton.PlanktonMesh()
for pt in V: pmesh.Vertices.Add(pt.X, pt.Y, pt.Z)
for face in F.Branches: face = list(face)[:-1] pmesh.Faces.AddFace(face)
These vertices and faces are precisely the output from Starling. Starling takes in a list of Polylines which form the (properly oriented) face loops.
The polyline face loops can be generated...
Directly from Panels on a surface using LunchBox
Using any network of lines/curves on a surface (curves will need to be converted to polylines before Starling)
The latter was achieved using the Surface Split command, then converting the face edges (converted to curves) into polyline loops to represent faces.
…
onstrates the following:
1. The definition's functionality employing HumanUI for the custom user interface.
2. Color based segmentation in manual and auto modes.
3. The evaluation of the definition's ability to handle different point cloud data sets.
This definition performs color based segmentation in two modes.
A manual mode, that implements the Delta-E CIE 2000 color difference formula, for targeted feature detection. An auto mode, that employs a simple RGB Color Range algorithm for quicker preliminary results.
RGB to XYZ to CIELab conversion and Delta-E scripts were based on Colormine's project code from github. Results have been compared and verified with the results of http://colormine.org/color-converter and http://colormine.org/delta-e-calculator/Cie2000.
Each stored class is charted and can be accessed through the UI, as shown at 2:30, where Delta-E CIE 2000, in CieLab color space, output results were found to be in perceptive conformity with human eyes, far superior to the preliminary RGB implementation.
Initial definition versions could process highly subsampled clouds in acceptable timings. Further research showed that employing the multithread processing of Volvox components, bundling the Delta E formula with the RGB to CIE lab color conversion script, per color segmentation calculations for a one million points point cloud would go down from 23 (c# script component) and 8 (vb script component) seconds to approx. 1 second (volvox script cloud component), thus allowing the segmentation of less subsampled point clouds.
I would like to thank Heumann A. and Zwierzycki M. who provided direct support with HumanUI and Volvox. Also Grasshopper3d forum users Maher S. and Segeren P., who contributed with Rhino viewport manipulation scripts.
More on Volvox:
http://papers.cumincad.org/cgi-bin/works/Show?_id=ecaade2016_171&sort=DEFAULT&search=ecaade%20volvox&hits=2629
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/volvox
http://duraark.eu/
HumanUI:
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/human-ui?page=1&ufh=&etx=
ColorMine:
https://github.com/THEjoezack/ColorMine…
ns about them.
It's a direction for Kangaroo I very much intend to continue developing - and I am still getting to grips with the possibilities and experimenting with how different optimization and fairing forces work in combination with one another, so I would value your input and experience.
For those interested in some background reading material -
[1] http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~mmeyer/Research/FairMesh/implicitFairing.pdf
[2] http://mesh.brown.edu/taubin/pdfs/taubin-eg00star.pdf
[3] http://www.pmp-book.org/download/slides/Smoothing.pdf
[4] http://graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs468-05-fall/slides/daniel_willmore_flow_fall_05.pdf
[5] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications.html
[6] http://www.math.tu-berlin.de/~bobenko/recentpapers.html
[7] http://spacesymmetrystructure.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pseudo-physical-materials/
[8] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications/34.html
[9] http://www.evolute.at/software/forum/topic.html?id=18
At the moment the Laplacian smoothing is uniformly weighted, which tends to even out the edge lengths as well as smoothing the form, which is sometimes desirable, and sometimes not. It also tends to significantly shrink meshes when the edges are not fixed.
I plan to try some of the other weighting possibilities, such as Fujiwara or cotangent weighting (see [1] and [3]), as well as other fairing approaches, such as Taubin smoothing [2], Willmore flow[4], and so on. This also has applications in the simulation of bending of thin shells.
Planar quad panels are often desirable, but I'm finding that planarization forces alone are sometimes unstable, or cause undesirable crumpling, so need to be combined with some sort of fairing/smoothing, but the different types have quite different effects, and the balance is sometimes tricky.
There's also the whole issue of meshes which are circular (I posted a demo of circularization on the examples page), or conical (this one still isn't working quite right yet), and their relationship with principal curvature grids and placement of irregular vertices, all of which is rather different when the whole form is up for change, rather than having a fixed target surface [7].
I'm also trying to get to grips with ways of making surfaces of planar hexagons, which need to become concave in regions of negative Gaussian curvature (see this discussion)
and I hope to release soon a component for calculating CP meshes, as described in [8], which I think could have many exciting construction implications.
While there are a number of well developed smoothing algorithms, their main area of application so far seems to be in processing and improving 3D scan data, so using them in design in this way is somewhat new territory. There can be structural, fabrication or performance reasons for certain types of smoothness, but of course the aesthetic reasons are also often important, and I think there are some interesting discussions to be had here about the aesthetics of smoothness.
Anyway, that's enough rambling from me, hopefully something there triggers some discussion - I'm really keen to hear about how all of you envision these tools might be used and developed.
…
Introduzione a Grasshopper", il primo manuale su Grasshopper.
.
I corsi PLUG IT nascono dalla volontà di promuovere le nuove tecnologie digitali di supporto alla progettazione e condividere il know-how maturato attraverso ricerca, collaborazione con i più importanti studi di architettura e pubblicazioni internazionali.
.
Verranno introdotte le nozioni base di Grasshopper approfondendo le metodologie della progettazione parametrica e le tecniche di modellazione algoritmica per la generazione di forme complesse. Il corso è rivolto a studenti e professionisti con esperienza minima nella modellazione 3D e si articolerà in lezioni teoriche ed esercitazioni.
. Argomenti trattati:
- Introduzione alla progettazione parametrica: teoria, esempi, casi studio - Grasshopper: concetti base, logica algoritmica, interfaccia grafica - Nozioni fondamentali: componenti, connessioni, data flow
- Funzioni matematiche e logiche, serie, gestione dei dati - Analisi e definizione di curve e superfici
- Definizione di griglie e pattern complessi - Trasformazioni geometriche, paneling - Attrattori, image sampler
- Data tree: gestione di dati complessi - Digital fabrication: teoria ed esempi - Nesting: scomposizione di oggetti tridimensionali in sezioni piane per macchine CNC
.
Verrà rilasciato un attestato finale.
.
Ulteriori info e programma completo su: www.arturotedeschi.com e su www.samilolab.it…
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
…
g-in, brief theory of complex systems, introduction to multi-agent systems and non-linear design, flocking, Boid library, basic examples - brownian motion, adhesion, separation, alignment, geometry following.-----------------------TIME: first session10am – GMT, London11am – Paris, Brussels, Rome, Vienna, Budapest, Bratislava, Warsaw9pm - Sidney7pm – Tokyo6pm – Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Taipei3:30pm – Mumbai3pm – Karachi2pm - Samara1pm – Baghdad, Moscow, St Petersburg12pm – Istanbul, Athens, Helsinki, Cairo, JohannesburgTIME: second session3pm – GMT, London4pm – Paris, Brussels, Rome, Vienna, Budapest, Bratislava, Warsaw7pm – Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Baku6:30pm – Tehran6pm – Baghdad, Moscow, St Petersburg5pm – Istanbul, Athens, Helsinki, Cairo, Johannesburg1pm – Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Montevideo12pm – Buenos Aires, Santiago10am – Toronto, New York City, Bogota, Lima9am – Mexico City7am – Los AngelesWEBINARSThe rese arch Grasshopper® sessions are unique for their thorough explanation of all the features, which creates a sound foundation for your further individual development or direct use in the practice. The webinars are divided into four groups: Essential, Advanced, Iterative and Architectural. If you are a Rhinoceros 3D or Grasshopper® newcomer, you are advised to take all the Essential sessions before proceeding to the next level. If none of the proposed topics suit your needs or if you require special treatment, you can request a custom-tailored 1on1 session. All sessions are held entirely in English.The webinars are series of on-line live courses for people all over the world. The tutor broadcasts the screen of his computer along with his voice to the connected spectators who can ask questions and comment in real time. This makes webinars similar to live workshops and superior to tutorials.…
Added by Jan Pernecky at 3:36pm on February 17, 2015