p;biw=1680&bih=925&tbm=isch&tbnid=UQXK-STjeJrGhM:&imgrefurl=http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/sinusoidal-facade&docid=XRgBzjBowOStWM&imgurl=http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2768634805?profile=original&w=1805&h=727&ei=itp3UbHLCvDs0gWy-oGQCA&zoom=1&ved=1t:3588,r:0,s:0,i:80&iact=rc&dur=487&page=1&tbnh=141&tbnw=340&start=0&ndsp=28&tx=217&ty=36
But somehow, it doesn't seem to work when i do the same.. does anyone know why?
Regards, Rutger…
Join Somewhere Something in Downtown Los Angeles for Summer 2016 workshop series.
Physical Computing with Firefly / August 27
GIS in Grasshopper / August 28
Grasshopper Plugins / September10+11
vas
Closing and creating a new file (memory resets when this is done) @4:00, 5:57, 6:53
System slow down and crashes @ 8:16 (takes 5 minutes to end the process - perhaps not the most entertaining movie to watch until the end - a good point to turn the kettle on)…
upgrading to a 28" 4K monitor (3840 x 2160 pixels) and was a bit concerned about how GH would work on that resolution. But now you've got me interested in in a 5K screen. …
another comma separated txt file. I know how to import points (function Import coordinates), but I dont know how to connect them by lines if the only information I have about lines is the list of point numbers which should be connected. The txt file with point coordinates looks like:
-18,-36,-1000-18,-34,-19.728-18,-32,-17.603-18,-30,-15.372-18,-28,-13.121
...
And the txt file with line connections looks like:
1,22,33,44,55,6
...
Which means that I want to connect point 1 with point 2, point 2 with point 3 etc...
Both txt files are attached, thank you for the answer...…
pen Brep"; I didn't know it worked on flat surfaces. And I think it's only fair to include in your benchmark the considerable time 'SUnion' takes in this example: 21.9 seconds for 121 rings and likely much more with 400 or 1,000+ rings.
Then I noticed the pattern doesn't match. Checked the circles and they are the same. The distance between them, however, is different: 7 instead of 6. When I change that value to 6, the Python fails badly. All the holes and gaps are gone, which destroys the pattern:
I can't do the "two phase" approach on an 11 X 11 grid, but I can do 6 X 6 and 2 X 2 to get a 12 X 12 grid (40 'SUnion' operations) in 28 seconds total. That beats your benchmark of ~37 seconds for an 11 X 11 grid, if you include the 'SUnion' in your code.
…