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
…
ed four workshops, each featuring a partnership of a creator of hardware technology and a software developer. The outcomes of the four workshops will form a single structure.
Workshops:
1. Facade panels with RoboFold & Kangaroo/Lobster
2. Cantilever CNC wooden lattice with Archiwaste & SMART Form by BuroHappold
3. Corian freeform surfaces by Cutting Edge & Evolute Tools
4. Milled foam and cast concrete with Cordek & Galapagos/David Rutten
Book on the Shape To Fabrication website or via SimplyRhino on 0208 498 9900. Tickets are limited to 10 per workshop at £500+VAT (professional) and £400+VAT (student).…
Added by Gregory Epps at 5:15am on September 29, 2011
izing strength/spring stiffness and even the unit of your 3DM file setting.
sometimes the same pattern that can be planarized in one file would stop working once something else is modified. and sometimes the force can't even planarize one single cell.
I think you can find some idea from the following post:
http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/planar-polygons-by-using-kangaroo
'Reply by Daniel Piker on December 17, 2013 at 10:25am
Making the faces of a polygonal mesh planar is not always possible without dramatically changing the shape of either the polygons or the surface.
When the target surface has only positive Gaussian curvature it makes things somewhat easier, but the surface in your file also has regions of negative Gaussian curvature.
To approximate a surface of negative curvature with a discrete mesh, we need the angles around some of the vertices to sum to less than 360°. This is impossible to do in a mesh with 3 hexagons around each vertex without making some of these hexagons non-convex.
There are a few possible approaches, but I would say how to automatically cover an arbitrary surface with nicely shaped planar hexagons is still an unsolved problem.'
I have uploaded some test files for you to look at. …
make sure I add this information to groundTerrain_ inputs in the next few days.
So if you are using "Gismo Terrain Generator" component (former "Ladybug Terrain Generator 2" component), only the following types are allowed for groundTerrain_ input: type_ = 2 (surface with rectangular edges)
type_ = 3 (surface with circular edges)If you are using "Ladybug Terrain Generator" component, then only the:
type_ = 1 (surface with rectangular edges)
is allowed.
As for terrain not being colored when it is created as a surface, you can analyse it additionally with "Terrain Analysis" component for Elevation analysis type. It can even be colored for rendering afterwards by using the "OSM Render Mesh" component. Check the attached file below.Have in mind that in urban areas "Ladybug Terrain Generator" component produces much more precise terrain than "Gismo Terrain Generator" component. On the other hand, the latter component can generate much larger terrain areas (up to 10 000 sq km2, at least in theory).
The reason why component might still work even though a terrain mesh has been added to the groundTerrain_ input is probably because once groundTerrain_ input fails to convert a mesh to a brep, this results in it being equal to None. Component then considers as if groundTerrain_ input is empty and runs as if nothing has been added to it (the buildings are laid down on a flat plane with 0,0,0 as the plane origin).
Thank you once again for all the testing you are doing!!! It really makes Gismo a better plugin!!…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 12:45pm on February 8, 2017
et us consider a plane somewhere in space, 10 units along each side, and it has UV domains 0-1 in both directions. It's a perfect square surface basically.
This surface only really 'exists' on the inside of the UV domains. You can evaluate the surface at {0,0}, which will give you the lower left corner, you can evaluate it at {1,1}, which will give you the upper right corner or you can evaluate it at {0.5, 0.5} which might give you the point in the middle. If you evaluate it at {2,-5}, you will get a point that is beyond the surface edge.
This surface 'space' is strictly two-dimensional and it is also bounded, meaning it has a finite region in which things can be said to exist. If we attach a point to this surface at UV coordinates {0.5, 0.5}, then move the surface about, the point will move with the surface. So it's XYZ coordinates will change, but the UV coordinates are still {0.5, 0.5}! These are just two ways of looking at the same point. Either we treat the point as a coordinate in infinite 3D euclidean space {x,y,z} or we treat it as anchored to a surface {u,v}. Going from XYZ to UV is usually called "Projecting" or "Pulling", going from UV to XYZ is usually called "Evaluating" or "Sampling", but they are mathematically very similar processes.
Evan mentioned that Voronoi only works in the flat 2D plane. He suggested remapping the points from the surface onto the World XY plane, then solving the Voronoi diagram, then mapping the result back onto the surface again.
Basically that means projecting all your XYZ points to surface UV space. That will give you a collection of points defined strictly by 2 coordinates, i.e. it is completely flat. You solve the Voronoi diagram on these flat points, and then you have to put the flat points (and the flat voronoi cell outlines) back onto the surface.
Have a look at the [Surface CP] and [Evaluate Surface] components, they provide the methods required to map coordinates from XYZ space to UV space and vice versa.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 12:51pm on April 29, 2010
. From the Thermal Comfort Indices component, Comfort Index 11 (TCI-11):MRT = f(Ta, Tground, Rprim, e)
with:- Ta = DryBulbTemperature coming from ImportEPW component- Tground = f(Ta, N) where N comes from totalSkyCover input. Tground influences the long-wave radiation emitted by the ground in the MRT calculation.- Rprim defined as solar radiation absorbed by nude man = f(Kglob, hS1, ac)- ac is the clothingAlbedo in % (bodyCharacteristics input)- I can't find any definition in the code of Kglob and hS1. Could you tell me please what are those values referencered to? --> probably the globalHorizontalRadiation but how?- e = vapour pressure calculated from Ta and Relative Humidity input
Do you agree that in this case the MRT does not depend on these inputs: location, meanRadiantTemperature, dewPointTemperature and wind speed?It does not depend neither on the other bodyCharacteristics like bodyPosture, age, sex, met, activityDuration...?
MRT calculated by the TCI-11 method is the mean radiant temperature of a vector pointing vertically with a sky view factor of 100%?For ParisOrly epw,
2. From the SolarAdjustedTemperature component (that seems to be more used for the UTCI calculation examples on Hydra compared to TCI-11).
In contrast to the TCI-11, this component distinguishes diffuse and direct radiation and contextualizes the calculation thanks to _ContextShading input, right? It can also be applied to a mannequin thanks to the CumSkyMatrix and thus evaluate the dishomogeneity of radiation exposure.This component seems not to consider the influence of vapour pressure on the result --> is it then more precise to put the MRT output (from the TCI) as an input of meanRadTemperature for SolarAdjustedTemperature?The default groundReflectivity is set to 0.25 --> is GroundReflectivity taken into account in the Tground or MRT calculation in the TCI component? If yes, what is the hypothesised groundReflectivity?The default clothing albedo of 37% (TCI-11 bodyCharacteristics) corresponds to Clothing Absorptivity of 63%?
If the CumSkyMatrix input is not supplied, I get 9 results for the mannequin --> where are those points/results coming from?
If the CumSkyMatrix input is supplied,I suppose the calculation of the 482 results correspond to a calculation method similar to the radiation analysis component that is averaged over the analysis period. Right?But I don't understand why the mannequin is composed of 481 faces and meshFaceResult gives 482 results.
Finally, what is the link between the MESH results, the solarAdjustedMRT and the Effective Radiant field ? Is there a paper to have a detailed explanation of the method?
3. Here are some results for the ParisOrly energyplus weather data. You can find here attached the grasshopper definition.There is no shading in this simulation and the result coming from the ThermalComfort indices for MRT is very different compared to the solar adjusted MRT.Why such a big difference and which of the result should be plugged into the UTCI calculation component?
Results for ParisOrly.epwM,D,H:1,1,12
Ta : 6.5°Crh: 100%globalHorizontalRadiation: 54 Wh/m2totalSkyCover: 10MRT (TCI-11): 1.2°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = directNormalRadiation : 0 Wh/m2diffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.64°CMRTDelta: 4.14°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = TasolarAdjustedMRT: 10.47°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C
_CumSkyMtxOrDirNormRad = CumulativeSkyMtxdiffuseHorizontalRad: 54 Wh/m2_meanRadTemp = MRT (TCI-11)solarAdjustedMRT: 5.17°CMRTDelta: 3.97°C
Thanks a lot for your helpRegards,
Aymeric
…
) Course Fee: Professional EUR 825,- (+VAT), Student EUR 415,- (+VAT)
Led by plug-in developer and structural engineer Clemens Preisinger, along with Zeynep Aksoz and Matthew Tam from the expert Karamba3D team, this three-day workshop will focus on methods of setting up structural systems in the parametric environment of Grasshopper. The participants will be guided through the basics of analyzing and interpreting structural models, to optimization processes, and how to integrate Karamba3D into C# scripts.
This workshop is aimed towards beginner to intermediate users of Karamba3D. However, advanced users are also encouraged to apply. It is open to both professional and academic users. For beginner users of Rhino and Grasshopper, there will be an optional introductory course one day before the Karamba3D course.
Karamba3D 1is a parametric structural engineering tool which provides accurate analysis of spatial trusses, frames, and shells. Karamba3D is fully embedded in the parametric design environment of Grasshopper, a plug-in for the 3D modeling tool Rhinoceros. This makes it easy to combine parameterized geometric models, finite element calculations, and optimization algorithms like Galapagos.
Course Outline
Introduction and presentation of project examples
Optimization of cross sections of line-based and surface-based elements
Geometric optimization
Topological optimization
Structural performance informed form finding
Understanding analysis algorithms embedded in Karamba3D and visualizing results
Complex workflow processes in Rhino, Grasshopper, and Karamba3D
Places are limited to a maximum of 10 participants with limited educational places. A minimum of 4 participants is required for the workshop to take place. The workshop will be canceled if this quota is not filled by October 28. The workshop will be taught in English.
Course Requirements
Basic Rhino and Grasshopper knowledge is recommended. An introductory course is offered.
No knowledge of Karamba3D is needed. Participants should bring their own laptops with Grasshopper and either Rhino 5 or Rhino 6 installed. You can download a 90-day trial version of Rhino. Karamba3D ½ year licenses for non-commercial use will be provided to all participants.
Please register here……
Added by Matthew Tam at 6:38am on September 13, 2019
n due at the end of march. i am hoping to see if i can do this as a sort of "HIVE MIND" experiment with one or two or more posters to the forum. i have uploaded two files to http://www.formpig.com/nine_bar-FAR and I have the following goals:
1. To "kinematically iterate" various formal building envelopes based upon a 50' x 100' lot that "conform" to the nine bar linkage geometry.
2. This lot would have "setbacks" consisting of two 5' side setbacks, a 10' rear yard setback and a 25' front yard setback. max height on the structure is 32' and the allowable overhangs into the setbacks are 2'. I would like to find a way to use the "nine bar geometry" to construct a series of iterations for "floors", "walls" and "ceilings", which would then be tied to a volumetric (cubic volume), or a total square footage (perhaps based upon two horizontal section cuts) which was based upon a given number that I will provide per local building code.
3. Laid on top of this we would also have "mcmansion ordinance" requirements based upon the pdf enclosed. i expect to have this "tent restriction" data in digital form to upload to ftp shortly.
It would be up to you individually or collectively to determine how best to position this "in the real world" based upon the lot, setbacks, zoning requirements etc. For instance, perhaps the nine bar configuration has its vertices coplanar with the 50' x 100' x 32' envelope restrictions and then the chosen volume is "trimmed' by the setback requirements. Or perhaps the nine-bar configuration is generated completely within the setbacks, or perhaps it is generated 2' outside of the setbacks so as to take advantage of the 2' overhang allowance on the setbacks, etc.
*
Given an opportunity to develop the work in a second phase we would have an opportunity to tie this into various efficiencies such as Bill of Materials (wall floor and ceiling square foot calculations), envelope to volume calculations, solar panel efficiencies (solar orientation and envelope geometry) etc, etc (love to get suggestions for this).
*
I've become /really/ convinced that this would be a /really/ interesting entry based upon my just finishing up Kas Oosterhuis' Towards a New Kind of Building: A Designer's Guide for Non-Standard Architecture". In an ideal world I was hoping that it would be possible to hash this out discussion-wise and then literally passing it around on the list after someone eventually made the first move by tossing out a rough ghx script. My expectation would be to finalize it rapidly in the next two weeks. Something of a contemporary version of a design charette.
However, I realize this may not be workable so if you have experience in this arena and particularly if you think this is a brief that is straighforward enough to be almost literally implemented in Grasshopper, please contact me for any wage and/or contract fee requirements.
I'm getting a bit of a late jump on this but my hope is that with the right participant(s) that I can thrash it together quick enough for the first round.
info@formpig.com…
e ghx file to grasshopper canvas
07 change the FLoc
08 save rhino-geometry to your FLoc
09 toggle the boolean switch to get the maya file in your FLoc
10 open maya 2012
11 import testCamera in maya
12 AND IT DOES NOT WORK!
HEEEEEELLLLLPPPPP (-;
…