ers can be applied from the right click Context Menu of either a component's input or output parameters. With the exception of <Principal> and <Degrees> they work exactly like their corresponding Grasshopper Component. When a I/O Modifier is applied to a parameter a visual Tag (icon) is displayed. If you hover over a Tag a tool tip will be displayed showing what it is and what it does.
The full list of these Tags:
1) Principal
An input with the Principal Icon is designated the principal input of a component for the purposes of path assignment.
For example:
2) Reverse
The Reverse I/O Modifier will reverse the order of a list (or lists in a multiple path structure)
3) Flatten
The Flatten I/O Modifier will reduce a multi-path tree down to a single list on the {0} path
4) Graft
The Graft I/O Modifier will create a new branch for each individual item in a list (or lists)
5) Simplify
The Simplify I/O Modifier will remove the overlap shared amongst all branches. [Note that a single branch does not share any overlap with anything else.]
6) Degrees
The Degrees Input Modifier indicates that the numbers received are actually measured in Degrees rather than Radians. Think of it more like a preference setting for each angle input on a Grasshopper Component that state you prefer to work in Degrees. There is no Output option as this is only available on Angle Inputs.
7) Expression
The Expression I/O Modifier allows you change the input value by evaluating an expression such as -x/2 which will have the input and make it negative. If you hover over the Tag a tool tip will be displayed with the expression. Since the release of GH version 0.9.0068 all I/O Expression Modifiers use "x" instead of the nickname of the parameter.
8) Reparameterize
The Reparameterize I/O Modifier will only work on lines, curves and surfaces forcing the domains of all geometry to the [0.0 to 1.0] range.
9) Invert
The Invert Input Modifier works in a similar way to a Not Gate in Boolean Logic negating the input. A good example of when to use this is on [Cull Pattern] where you wish to invert the logic to get the opposite results. There is no Output option as this is only available on Boolean Inputs.
…
ing the maps to the broader community.
At the moment, there are just a few known issues left that I have to fix for complex geometric cases but they should run smoothly for most energy models that you generate with Honeybee. Within the next month, I will be clearing up these last issues and, by the end of the month, there will be an updated youtube tutorial playlist on the comfort tools and how to use them.
In the meantime, there's an updated example file (http://hydrashare.github.io/hydra/viewer?owner=chriswmackey&fork=hydra_2&id=Indoor_Microclimate_Map) and I wanted to get you all excited with some images and animations coming out of the design part of my thesis. I also wanted to post some documentation of all of the previous research that has made these climate maps possible and give out some much deserved thanks. To begin, this image gives you a sense of how the thermal maps are made by integrating several streams of data for EnergyPlus:
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz2PwDvkjovJaTMtWDRHMExvLUk/view?usp=sharing)
To get you excited, this youtube playlist has a whole bunch of time-lapse thermal animations that a lot of you should enjoy:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLruLh1AdY-Sj3ehUTSfKa1IHPSiuJU52A
To give a brief summary of what you are looking at in the playlist, there are two proposed designs for completely passive co-habitation spaces in New York and Los Angeles.
These diagrams explain the Los Angeles design:
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz2PwDvkjovJM0JkM0tLZ1kxUmc/view?usp=sharing)
And this video gives you and idea of how it thermally performs:
These diagrams explain the New York design:
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz2PwDvkjovJS1BZVVZiTWF4MXM/view?usp=sharing)
And this video shows you the thermal performance:
Now to credit all of the awesome people that have made the creation of these thermal maps possible:
1) As any HB user knows, the open source engines and libraries under the hood of HB are EnergyPlus and OpenStudio and the incredible thermal richness of these maps would not have been possible without these DoE teams creating such a robust modeler so a big credit is definitely due to them.
2) Many of the initial ideas for these thermal maps come from an MIT Masters thesis that was completed a few years ago by Amanda Webb called "cMap". Even though these cMaps were only taking into account surface temperature from E+, it was the viewing of her radiant temperature maps that initially touched-off the series of events that led to my thesis so a great credit is due to her. You can find her thesis here (http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/72870).
3) Since the thesis of A. Webb, there were two key developments that made the high resolution of the current maps believable as a good approximation of the actual thermal environment of a building. The first is a PhD thesis by Alejandra Menchaca (also conducted here at MIT) that developed a computationally fast way of estimating sub-zone air temperature stratification. The method, which works simply by weighing the heat gain in a room against the incoming airflow was validated by many CFD simulations over the course of Alejandra's thesis. You can find here final thesis document here (http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/74907).
4) The other main development since the A. Webb thesis that made the radiant map much more accurate is a fast means of estimating the radiant temperature increase felt by an occupant sitting in the sun. This method was developed by some awesome scientists at the UC Berkeley Center for the Built Environment (CBE) Including Tyler Hoyt, who has been particularly helpful to me by supporting the CBE's Github page. The original paper on this fast means of estimating the solar temperature delta can be found here (http://escholarship.org/uc/item/89m1h2dg) although they should have an official publication in a journal soon.
5) The ASHRAE comfort models under the hood of LB+HB all are derived from the javascript of the CBE comfort tool (http://smap.cbe.berkeley.edu/comforttool). A huge chunk of credit definitely goes to this group and I encourage any other researchers who are getting deep into comfort to check the code resources on their github page (https://github.com/CenterForTheBuiltEnvironment/comfort_tool).
6) And, last but not least, a huge share of credit is due to Mostapha and all members of the LB+HB community. It is because of resources and help that Mostapha initially gave me that I learned how to code in the first place and the knowledge of a community that would use the things that I developed was, by fa,r the biggest motivation throughout this thesis and all of my LB efforts.
Thank you all and stay awesome,
-Chris…
teraction for its Correlations cycle, AA Athens Visiting School scales up its design intentions in order to investigate links among discrete individual architectural systems in its 2013 version, Recharged.
Recharged with interconnectivity on different levels, the theme of investigation will revolve around the design of semi-independent design prototypes acting together to form elaborate unified results. The driving force in Cipher City: Recharged is the synergistic effect behind complex form-making systems where interactive design patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple rules.
In collaboration with the National Technical University of Athens, Cipher City: Recharged will explore participatory design and active engagement modeling and will continue building novel prototypes upon horizontal planes.
As in 2012, the design agendas of AA Athens and AA Istanbul Visiting Schools will directly create feedback on one another, allowing participation in either one or both Programmes.
Discounts
The AA offers several discount options for participants wishing to apply as a group or participants wishing to apply for both AA Istanbul and AA Athens Visiting Schools:
1. Standard application
The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £695 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting Membership. If you are already a member, the total fee will be reduced automatically by £60 by the online payment system. Fees are non refundable.
2. Group registration
For group applications, there will be a range of discounts depending on the number of people in the group. The discounted fee will be applied to each individual in the group.
Type A. 3-6 people group: £60 (AA Membership fee) + 635*0.75 = £536.25 (25 %) Type B. 6-15 people group: £60 + 635*0.70 = £504.5 (30%) Type C. more than 15 people group: £60 + 635*0.65 = £472.75 (35%)
3. Participants attending both AA Istanbul and AA Athens | 40% discount
For people wishing to attend both AA Istanbul 2013 and AA Athens 2013, a discount of 40% will be made for each participant. (The participant will pay the £60 membership fee only once.)
£60 (AA Membership fee) + (635*0.60)*2 = £822
For more information in discounts, please visit:
http://ai.aaschool.ac.uk/athens/portfolio/discounts-2013/
Applications
The deadline for applications is 11 March 2013. A portfolio or CV is not required, only the online application form and payment. The online application can be reached from:
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/VISITING/athens…
Added by elif erdine at 12:33pm on December 13, 2012
uier momento del diseño de un modelo 3D y este se readapta sin necesidad de redibujar la zona alterada.
Otra de las principales características del trabajo paramétrico es que nos permite automatizar procesos de trabajo o diseño. Esto quiere decir que, con procesos sencillos, podemos generar geometrías complejas y siempre justificadas en función de unos parámetros que nosotros definamos; lo que, en cierto modo, elimina la arbitrariedad en el diseño y nos arma de argumentos en la toma de decisiones de proyecto. Por otro lado, se pueden generar texturas y patrones de manera aleatoria o variable en función de atractores.
Tras la realización de este workshop, el alumno será capaz de desarrollar sus propias gramáticas, con la confianza que da comprender los términos básicos de programación sobre los que se apoya todo el sistema de trabajo de Grasshopper.
Grasshopper nos abre todo un mundo de posibilidades en el diseño y en la fabricación digital.
PARA QUIÉN
El workshop está dirigido a estudiantes y profesionales de la arquitectura, el interiorismo, la ingeniería, el diseño de producto, el diseño industrial y, en general, perfiles creativos y disciplinas artísticas que quieran introducirse en el mundo del diseño paramétrico.
Es recomendable tener conocimientos previos de Rhinoceros (nivel básico) ya que hay algunos conceptos que pueden ser útiles para un mejor seguimiento del workshop.
…
frontare il tema della modellazione parametrica con Grasshopper. Questa plug-in di Rhino consente di progettare, confrontandosi con un contesto evolutivo, attraverso la comprensione e l'utilizzo di parametri e componenti che influenzano la rappresentazione e la rendono dinamica componendo algoritmi. Nel corso 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.Le informazioni teoriche saranno fornite in maniera accelerata ma organica e contestuale agli argomenti elencati. Per massimizzare i risultati, le lezioni saranno accompagnate da piccole esercitazioni pratiche.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 complessiStrutturaIl corso ha una durata di 16 ore programmate nell'arco di 2 giornate con i seguenti orari: i giorni 28/07 e 29/07 dalle 10,00 alle 19,00 con pausa pranzo di un'ora.DestinatariIl corso è rivolto a tutti coloro che hanno buone conoscenze di Rhinoceros e vogliono affrontare i nuovi metodi di progettazione in maniera consapevole attraverso il linguaggio visual scripting proposto dal software Grasshopper.PrerequisitiPer affrontare il corso è richiesta una conoscenza di base del software Rhino attraverso esperienze teoriche e pratiche. I partecipanti dovranno venire muniti di proprio laptop e con software Rhinoceros 5 o Rhinocero 4 perfettamente funzionanti.AttestatoAlla fine del corso verrà rilasciata l’attestato di partecipazione ad un corso qualificato McNeel valido per l’ottenimento di crediti formativi universitari.LuogoLe lezioni si terranno presso lo studio il Pedone in Via Muggia 33, 00195 ROMA…
l operations. Aside from its geopolitical position and commercial significance, Thessaloniki has been for many centuries the military and administrative hub of the region, and beyond this the transportation link between Europe and the Levant. A series of design studies will be put forward to rethink the way by which city environment in Thessaloniki have been affecting its’ population according to changing needs and to visualize such urban shifts on a more hyper specific contextualized construction model. Throughout the investigations on the research agenda, current trends on the habits of architectural practice will be re-visited.
Innovative urban interventions informed by bottom-up rules extracted from existing city conditions will formulate the major focus of design proposals. Design teams will be working with simulation tools and digital fabrication methods throughout the design research phase. The design brief will be initially explored through the combinatorial use of different computational design tools. Methods of connecting form‐finding methods with form‐making techniques will be investigated. Various manufacturing techniques enabling a hands‐on experience on the diverse range of digital fabrication systems will formulate the starting point for the physical tests. Finally, the design and fabrication of a one-to-one scale pavilion will unify the goals of the programme.
Prominent features of the programme / skills developed:
- Participants will be part of an active learning environment where the large tutor to student ratio (5:1) allows for personalized tutorials and debates.
- The toolset of AA Thessaloniki includes Autodesk Maya, Rhinoceros, Grasshopper and Arduino.
- Participants will have access to digital fabrication tools such as 3-axis CNC router, laser-cutter, and 3d-printer.
- Design seminars and lecture series will support the key objectives of the programme, disseminating knowledge on new design anatomies including machinic control, computational space, and complexity in systems, and innovative urban design approaches.
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.
Fees: The AA Visiting School requires a fee of £600 per participant, which includes a £60 Visiting membership fee. The deadline for applications is 15 October 2015. No portfolio or CV is required.
Discount options are available. Please contact the AA Visiting School Coordinator for more details.
Online application link:
https://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/ONLINEAPPLICATION/visitingApplication.php?schoolID=316
Programme Director:
Alexandros Kallegias (AA Greece VS Director): alexandros.Kallegias@aaschool.ac.uk…
ences, so not terribly important in the end. After all, it's not really worth going through a lot of trouble to get a 15% speed increase; 15% faster than slow is still pretty slow.
Also processor speed has pretty much peaked these past few years, there have been no more significant increases lately. Instead, manufacturers have started putting more cores on motherboards, which is something GH unfortunately cannot take advantage of.
Multi-threading (very high on the list for GH2) brings with it a promise of full core utilisation (minus the inevitable overhead for aggregating computed results), but there are some problems that may end up being significant. Here's a non-exhaustive list:
It's not possible to modify the UI from a non-UI thread. This is probably not that big a deal for Grasshopper components, especially since we can make methods such a Rhino.RhinoApp.WriteLine() thread safe.
Not all methods used by component code are necessarily thread safe. There used to be a lot of stuff in the Rhino SDK that simply wouldn't work correct or would crash if the same method was run more than once simultaneously. Rhino core team has been working hard to remedy this problem, and I'm confident we can fix any problems that still come up, though it may take some time. If components rely on other code libraries then the problem may not be solvable at all. So we need to make sure multi-threading is an optional property of components.
There's overhead involved in multi-threading, it's especially difficult to get a good performance gain when dealing with lots of very fast operations. The overhead in these cases can actually make stuff perform slower.
There's the question on what level should multi-threading be implemented. Obviously the lower the better, but that means a lot of extra work, complicated patterns of responsibilities and a lot of communications between different developers.
There's the question on how the interface should behave during solutions now. If all the computation is happening in a thread, the interface can stay 'live'. So what should it look like if a solution takes -say- 5 seconds to complete? Should you be able to see the waves of data streaming through the network, turning components and wires grey and orange like strobe lights? What happens if you modify a slider during a solution? Simple answer is to abort the current solution and start a new one with the new slider value. But as you slowly drag the slider from left to right, you end up computing 400 partial solution and never getting to a final answer, even though you could have computed 2 full solutions in the same time and given better feedback. Does the preview geometry in the Rhino viewports flicker in and out of existence as solutions cascade through the network?
…
n lofting, though, it makes perfect sense to scale sections independently from the distance between them.
For practical use, I found the graph mapper clumsy; too course and approximate. So I adapted the code I wrote here (Maths + Divide Curve) so that a list of numbers drives the spacing and, optionally(!), the scaling.
When 'Scale by Distance' is false, the numbers in the list determine scaling; '1' is actual size, '0.5' is half size, '2' is twice the size, etc.
When 'Scale by Distance' is true, the distance between the points is used for scaling. This is an indirect effect of the list of numbers (which determines point spacing) and the size of the original shape relative to the curve length.
'Tangent 0' is the curve tangent at each point. It works well for lofting.
'Tangent 1' is the vector between each point and its successor. It works well for orienting solids.
There are still some mysteries... ("Where there is mystery, there is no mastery.")
Lofting doesn't always work well, 'Cap Planar Holes' doesn't work anymore...
I had hoped that this sequence, ".5,1,2,1,.5", would result in:
two half size shapes, one at each end of the curve.
two full size ("1") and one double size ("2") shapes, spaced appropriately.
But I have a mental block about how to achieve that...? :( Instead, I settled for the last of the five shapes being one point short from the end of the curve, and the spacing is off.
Even so, I find this approach easier to use on a practical basis than the graph mapper.
…
y stages of design, mainly due to the large uncertainties that exist in these phases. Optimisation in the early phases may be helpful, but it does not provide the designers with more information on "where to go from here". Once the designer changes a parameter to suit a client requirement, legal requirement or other, the optimised result may very well be thrown out due to the parameter being changed having such a large effect.
I am hosting several workshops and focus groups in the next month (one for students at Victoria University of Wellington, one for architect practitioners and one for engineering practitioners) to teach the basics of Honeybee and Ladybug within Rhino as NZ is very new to any form of distributed modelling methods (using visual language programmes such as grasshopper and dynamo to communicate between design tools and building simulation program tools). In the focus groups, I am not focusing on the tool of Honeybee so much as I am asking the industry its opinions on the feasibility and wishes of developments such as Honeybee.
I find that many informal interviews I have been having have pointed to the question: Would you rather want to know the optimised concept or the most significant design parameters which you should be wary of at the early stages of design?
I am amazed at the capabilities of Honeybee because it has been such a pain to remodel anything for E+ and Radiance in the past. I particularly love the ability to generate hundreds of idfs with varying parameters within 10min, without having to set up some form of macro to do it. The visualisations of Honeybee are awesome! To say the very least. But as someone who is interested in doing a sensitivity analysis, say with Thermal Autonomy, I feel like there is a lacking element to analysis from an engineer and research/academic stand point.
The way I have set up my files actually create 300+ idfs with all the various different parameters. The parameter ranges only vary from a low, typical and high setting for power densities, WWR, schedules and insulation. These have all been drawn from a large 5 year project where we monitored commercial buildings here in NZ to gain a better understanding of data for purposes like this. I then run them in parallel as batch files and re-insert the data back into Honeybee.
What I am playing around with at the moment though is that, due to the fact that the TA component require so many additional components to then analyse the data in that form, and also that it does not simply give a numerical value in % for the space's performance, I need to re-evaluate the csv that it produces for further analysis.
I have only just begun to try doing some form of sensitivity analysis within Honeybee itself, but I was curious if there were already plugins within grasshopper which may already allow some form of sensitivity analysis.…
iles and rad files in this folder :
C:\Users\Sarith\AppData\Local\Temp\radSources (replace my name with yours).
However, the pic file which is created in that folder crashes. So, I tried to hack the process and get an image through a screenshot and ra_bmp.
This is the rendering that I got through Relux:
This is what I got from my own renderings with image that I got:
This is surprising because the material is called Glass. However the radiance definition of the material is :
void colorpict mat_104~19 red green blue surfpic2.pic alignpic.cal tile_u tile_v -s 0.5850001 0.975mat_104~1 plastic mat_104005 1 1 1 0 0
The colorpict on the the first line only modifies color patterns and does not make the material transparent/translucent. Similarly, the plastic type implies that the material won't be transparent anyway.
I don't think this material as defined in Relux is a physically based material. You are probably better off importing the Raytracer materials to Honeybee. Andy Mcneil had an excellent presentation about GlassBlocks in the last Radiance workshop: http://www.radiance-online.org/community/workshops/2015-philadelphi...
The pic file that I generated is here : https://www.dropbox.com/s/5c32layqehdns72/surfpic2.pic?dl=0…