2006 and only supports Windows 2000 Service Pack 3, Windows 98, Windows 98 Second Edition, Windows ME, Windows Server 2003, Windows XP Service Pack 2.…
掌握编程过程中遇到的思路方面和技术方面的问题. 内容包括以下几个方面:
反向逻辑思维能力的培养;
建立清晰的编程逻辑思维能力;
GH 的程序设计理念;
并行数据结构深入理解和控制.
Grasshopper course of McNeel Asia focus on the cultivation of students flexible use of programming techniques, the ability to solve practical problems. Our course deep into the whole process of programming, from programming thinking model, the components principle to usage details do detailed explanation, help students complete mastery programming encountered in the process of thinking and technical aspects, include the following content:
Ability of reverse logical thinking;
Establishment of clear programming logical thinking ability;
The program design concept of Grasshopper;
Understanding parallel data tree structure and how to control it.
更多详细内容... More details…
授课讲师 Instructor 课程由Grasshopper原厂McNeel公司在中国地区的两位 Rhino 原厂技术推广工程师 – Dixon、Jessesn联合授课。课程结束后对达到授课预定目标的学员颁发唯一由Grasshopper原厂认证的结业证书.
Dixon & Jessesn, McNeel Asia Support engineer, by the end of course student who achieve the intended target will get the authentication certificate from McNeel Asia.
课程报名 Register this course 课程即日开始报名, 开课一周前停止报名, 名额满提前报名结束. This course begin to sign up, stop sign up a week ago, with the quota ahead over.
在线报名参加课程...
Sign up to this course…
课程日期 Schedule 7/15-7/20 Beijing 北京 7/26-7/31 Shanghai 上海 7/07-7/12 Shenzhen 深圳
课程范例演示 Samples of Grasshopper course demo
Note: pls follow below comments by Jessesn to see the samples…
ar. For the buildings I applied a surface on the cells and I choosed to offset the boundarys of the single cells two times and so on, ... I've seen this before by Zaha Hadid (Kartal Kendik Masterplan Turkey 2006 CLICK ME) and later on in the forum by Nathan Miller and RWNB I rebuilded it and added a lot of stuff to get round corners and so on! here is a screenshot of where I got with this:
1.
2. Ok combining this definition with the other one works, ... but not always, that's my problem! :( Sometimes I need to shift the points so that the cells work properly. Is this "normal" or is there a way to optimise this progress? see next picture:
3. Furthermore I thought it might depend on the short segments of the voronoi cells, so I tried to implement a step that rebuilds the cells. Honestly, I am not sure if it really helped or slowed down the whole thing. You can find this approach in the attached definition.
4. Applying height to those buildings. I used the extrude component. But I would prefer, making a second surface over the whole area and apply something similar like we did in the camp with the jews memorial in Berlin.
Well that's it so far. I don't know how to handle the problems in point 2. 3.
Point 4. I guess I will do this in the end when everything else on the landside is done, ...
I appreciate any help,
have a nice evening,
Sebastian
…
Illuminants like "A" or "D65" are spectral power distributions that are defined (as per CIE S 014-2/E:2006) for wavelengths ranging from 300nm to 830nm.
For example, CIE Illuminants A,B and C are defined as :
And D65 is defined as :
For illuminance and luminance calculations, the radiation from such illuminants are converted to Lux or Candela/sq.m by weighing them against the Photopic Luminous Efficiency function (also called as V-lambda):
The equation (1) used for this purpose is
Where y corresponds to the V-lambda function and J corresponds to an illuminant like "D65" or "A".
So, why is all this relevant? Honeybee/Radiance also use a similar method for calculation of luminous flux, illuminance and luminance. However, in the case of Honeybee/Radiance the lighting calculations are limited only 3 (R,G,B) channels (and not the 300nm to 830nm). So the equation (1) from above becomes something like:
F = 47.4*R+120*G+11.6*B
Where (R,G,B) refers to the spectral power of the radiation and the numbers (47.4,120,11.6) relate to the V-lambda function. So, the bottom line is that an accurate representation of CIE illuminants is not possible inside Radiance/Honeybee as the spectral information is severely restricted. Some studies have proposed using Radiance with more than 3 channels. For example: http://link.springer.com/article/10.3758%2FBRM.40.1.304 . However, such attempts have been limited. What is possible with Radiance/Honeybee is to create a fairly accurate representation of brightness of the sky. Although, I can explain that too, I would suggest that you try this link first: http://www.bozzograo.net/radiance/index.php?module=FAQ&func=dis...
By the way, which CIE document are you referring to for CIE sky definitions ?…
hat since we create a list of materials and we assign them to surfaces - volumes the next step could be to have an Life Cycle Analysis and Financial assessment produced.
The most common form to produce an LCA into a form that is commonly used and easily communicated is in the form of Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) that follow ISO 14025:2006. As every form of LCA, EPDs raise a bunch of question regarding their boundaries and the accuracy of the results especially if we include the factor of location. In comparison with other LCA practices though, EPDs have to be followed by Product Category Rules (defining the boundaries of the study) that can be reviewed by external parties if the EPD is to go public. Part from that EPD results reflect each stage of the life cycle of a product including potential benefits from Reuse or Recycling. Finally if you have a system - for example a building - you can add the EPDs of the different subcomponents forming the building and get a final EPD for the building itself - the point where I think HB's functionality is fully aligned.
The financial assessment can easily be concluded if one has the price of the material he/she uses. Finally the environmental indicators of the EPDs (LCI, LCIA) can be translated into Shadow Costs (Shadow costs for Environmental Indicators here) and added to the final financial assessment as an option.
I have developed a similar plug-in (in C#) for Grasshopper for my master's thesis last year. The project focused on the comparison between constructing normally and constructing implementing Design for Deconstruction practices in steel buildings. The idea was to compare the two cases based on their environmental and financial performance. In the process I included also options for transportation of the material and for shadow cost, embodied energy and carbon assessment and more. The final outcome can be visualised in Rhino's viewports and exported to excel sheets. The plug-in is connected to local db with EPD data for steel profiles. The same scheme though can be followed for any type of material if we have the right database to connect it to!
Please have a look if interested at the report here! And let me know if you have any questions!
Please note that the report includes 3+ chapters dedicated to design for deconstruction practices e.t.c that are irrelevant with the topic but maybe interesting to read:)
Also if someone is interested in the report I can always send it to you.
(I will upload a video -runthrough of the plug-in later this week)
I would be very interested to have these capabilities in LB and HB and happy to help realising it!
Thanks
Tasos
…
done by students of peter trummer in 2006, unfotrunatly I coulnd't find anything in detail only this image (don't know how fare that helps):
Had some similar ideas, but in the desert of new mexico (or so...)
However, I guess if you would like to use fluid dynamics with galapagoss or octopus, you will need to make a really simplified model precise enough to give you correct results but as fast as possible.
Commands on a simple Model:
1.) If you can work with drainage lines, why not populate the area with starting points, generate drainage lines, and count these. This would give you a direction + a "volume" -> force
2.) You could use a cellular automata based approch, like the one described by Stephen Wolfram in "A New Kind of Science", this should also give you the possibility to get volume and force of the water, plus it would also take into account the influence of water already running down the hill on newly added water...
3.) You could mesh your surface (grid) and assume that water always runs down, then you could use simple graph algorithms to compute the volume + more or less the direction of the flow... . (SpiderWeb)
http://www.gbl.tuwien.ac.at/Archiv/digital.html?name=SpiderWeb
Whatever model you choose I think it is more a question of what you need it for, if you are trying to develop an architectural concept the precision of the water analysis of a CFD software is most likely irrelevant.…