ase of resource and energy consumption identify significant developments of our time. Against this background and in the context of sustainable fairness to future generations, there will be a greater focus on energy and ressource efficient building structures.
This interdisciplinary course aims to lay the foundations of a „force based design“ through theoretical input lectures and presentations. Varying examples will show that the efficiency of structures depends largely on the flow of forces within the structure. Possible optimisation strategies will be discussed in the light of material saving and their impact on architectural form.
This course will introduce you to the use of digital analysis and optimization tools. You will learn to deal with three-dimensional parametric software (Rhinoceros 3D, Grasshopper, Sofistik, Karamba, GeometryGym, Kangaroo).
Finally, the knowledge acquired will be applied and developed in designing a pedestrian bridge or a slender tower.
Participants will be able to recognize the effects of forces as design parameters. They will recognize the potential of building geometry in the context of architecture and resource-efficient designs.
Information » Application deadline 15 May » Course duration 18 - 30 August » Course language English » Target Groups Master students, graduates, doctoral candidates and young professionals » Requirements basic knowledge of 3D parametric software is recommended » Course fee 490 € (100 € discount for students and alumni) (290 € discount for students of the Bauhaus-Universität Weimar)
Lecturers » Prof. Dr.-Ing. Alexander Stahr - HTWK Leipzig » Dipl.-Ing. Christian Heidenreich - Bauhaus-Universität Weimar » B.Sc. Martin Dembski - Bauhaus-Universität Weimar
Guest Lecturers » Dipl. Eng. Arch. Simon Vogt - Transform Engineers, Hamburg » Dipl. Bauingenieur FH Nico-Ros-Zeile - ZPF Ingenieure, Basel (CH)…
d the workshop PDF from this link: http://goo.gl/bcvRNH Download event poster from this link: http://goo.gl/Q0KWCM Brief: Cairo is filled with barriers controlling people movements, suppressing them as well as detaining green and public spaces to the extent that most people have been taking these spaces for granted. Public spaces have been for a while the periphery of our daily life. We will explore in this workshop how we can manipulate and alter people’s perception and direct their attention to how these spaces are integral for city life. This exploration will be backed up by intensive technical tutorials introducing computational design and fabrication techniques and tools mainly Rhino, Grasshopper, Geco and Ecotect. Not only will this be the typical technical workshop, but rather you will also have the chance to be guided step by step on how these tools are used through out different design stages in a real world scenario. Design prototypes will be produced through 3D printing, the main workshop output will be a fabricated one to one functional model for one of the designs using our new in-house CNC machine. Tutors (check the PDF for bio): Olga Kovrikova, MArch DIA Alexandr Kalachev, MArch DIA Karim Soliman, MArch DIA Islam Ibrahim, MArch DIA Sherif Tarabishy, B.Sc. AAST Application: Application deadline 1 September 2013 ** For students (undergrad / Master), teachers and PhD proof of status is required (university ID with a date or a certificate of enrollment) to apply for the students package. Packages (choose one of the following in the application form): 1. Standard registration Course fee is 4250 EGP For Students 3500 EGP 2. Early bird registration discounted fee For Professionals 3750 EGP For Students 3000 EGP ** Early bird offer ends on 14 August 2013 3. Group registrations discounted fee (5 or more) For Students 20% off - You will have to fill out an application form here: http://goo.gl/0QxAga - You will need to submit your CV and Short Portfolio (max. 10 MB) to info@morph-d.com, email subject: “Morphing Norms Application” (we will decide if you are eligible for an early bird discount or not based on the date of your email submission) - We will confirm receiving emails from all applicants. Successful applicants will be contacted 5 days after each deadline (early bird/final) and will have to confirm participation within 3 days, if they fail to do so, places will be given to others on the waiting list. - A maximum of 30 applicants will be selected.
…
difference consists of.
An Evolutionary Solver/Genetic Algorithm is an implementation of Metaheuristics. Metaheuristics tend to be flexible solvers, applicable to a wide variety of problems, fairly easy to implement, but slow. Other examples of Metaheuristic algorithms would be Random Search, Scatter Search, Simulated Annealing and do on. These algorithms are often modelled on physical or biological processes.
Simulated Annealing for example simulates the physical process of annealing (who'd have thunk it), which is basically the slow cooling of a material which allows it to settle into a crystalline lattice, i.e. a low energy distribution of all the atoms. I'm currently adding an SA solver to Galapagos, and in fact just yesterday managed to get the first successful run: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWtYLv-4oP0
Metaheuristics are especially useful for those cases where little is known about the problem ahead of time. If the problem search-space is mathematically well defined (differentiable, especially), then you can use more targeted algorithms such as the Newton-Raphson method, Pareto-search or Uphill search. You can still use these methods on non-differentiable search-spaces, but it involves sampling the local region to death to get an estimate of the differential. This can be a very costly enterprise, especially in high dimensional search-spaces. In a two-dimensional search-space you'll need 3 to get a lame estimate and 4 to get a halfway decent estimate and 8 to get a good estimate. In three-dimensional search space you already need 26 samples, and the number of samples grows exponentially with higher dimensions.
If you have a specific problem you're trying to solve, Metaheuristics are probably not the best solution, even though they may be easiest to program. Rhino uses something akin to Newton-Raphson for certain problems and that's fast enough to run in real-time.
Divide-and-Conquer algorithms are also quite popular. Sometimes they are called Binary-Search or Tree-Search algorithms as well. Their basic premise is to sample the search-space at a few intervals (but enough to capture the needed detail), then find two neighbours with promising values and sample again in between these two. Then repeat. Each new iteration typically doubles accuracy, which is great because then you only need ~30 ~40 iterations to get an answer as good as possible with double-precision floating point accuracy. However not all problems lend themselves well to this sort of search and in higher dimensions it starts getting slow with disconcerting alacrity.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Added by David Rutten at 1:54am on August 15, 2011
strictly with code (BTW: did you crossed Rubicon?).
1. See this: Imagine a curve (say a "rail") that is divided N times and then circles are created with random radii. Circle control points (9, that is) are sampled (obviously) into a DataTree where branches are the rail divisions. Let's call the control points: "start" seed points.
2. Imagine a capability ... that stores all these (the original "seed" control points) into a "parameter" and then each time that a change occurs to them (varying the x/y, on a per point on a per branch on a per plane basis[that provides the Z]) stores the "modified point" into the parameter (at the same index with the old: meaning "deleting" the old) ... and then some other code gets that data and makes curves and lofts them. Reset means: sample again the original "seed" points into that "parameter". Closing are reopening the definition has no effect: the lofted stuff is derived from the (internalized, so to speak) modified points (from the "parameter").
3. A variety of "automation" is available: for instance if you jump from branch to branch and from item to item the value of the selected point is inquired and the sliders that control the new x/y are "set" to 0,0 (meaning no change - yet) values. There's mo "store" mode: it works automatically as far as you modify points or you hit the reset button
4. This does that (only achievable with code):
5. Obviously points can been replaced with anything ... and thus ... we can individually modify items in collections ... and forget for ever attractor points and all that (OK where appropriate, he he).
I'll post 30 similar examples soon in the forthcoming mother of all threads: "GH goes (at last) interactive". Watch this space.
BTW: study the "animation" where points with index 6 are "sequentially" modified. I've added some delay in order to give you time to get the gist of the whole thingy.
best, Lord of Darkness
…
.
For my project I want to make a sphere or spherical-like shape and pack it with circles of varying sizes. The circles all have to touch each other and thus on a point where three circles 'sort of' meet, there can only be three circles. This is shown in the second picture I have attached, a 2D circle packing made by Daniel Piker. So basically what I want to achieve is having the second picture projected on a 3d surface, that I can also edit. Also I would like to be able to change the size and amount of the circles that populate the surface. This means that I would be able to say 'there should be 30 circles with a radius of 2, 40 circles with a radius of 3 and 50 circles with a radius of 4, put them on this particular shape'.
As I've just started the project I haven't done so much research yet. What I have found is for example this Kangaroo definition of circle packing in 2D: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/kangaroo/forum/topics/circle-packing-definition?xg_source=activity
It is very beautiful and does exactly what I want to achieve, except that it is in two dimensions. I also have to say that I feel pretty confident working with both Grasshopper and Rhino, but not really with Kangaroo. I have used it a few times but not extensively.
So what I'm wondering is, how could I best approach this project? I looked into the concept of 'circle packing' and I noticed that it can be approached very mathematically. As I am an architecture student I don't know much about the math behind the geometry (although I do think it is very interesting) and thus I'm wondering if I will be able to achieve what I want to achieve. Also, do you think I could best approach the project in Kangaroo and do you think it is realistic for me to think I could finish the project? I'm just trying to see if I'm not going to try to tackle a problem that is very difficult to solve even for skilled mathematicans or something. Sorry for the long and perhaps vague read, but I would be very happy with any sort of input you might have on my problem!
Thanks in advance!
…
we're actually using PET sheets for our flexures. We try to design so that the flexures don't go through more than +/- 30 degrees of deflection. If the angular deflection is kept small, the lifetime can definitely be on the order of 1000000 cycles.
As for the design process (item 2), ideally the designer would be able to use a simple 3D CAD tool to design a model of a robot, and the geometry would be represented by dimensioning the individual parts in the model. Maybe there should be some parametric primitive kinematic building blocks like four bar linkages, box frames, etc. that a user could build up a robot from. But, the key functionality the tool needs to provide is for the designer to be able to visualize how the robot will move when it's fabricated. This could mean observing (or plotting) the motion of a leg, a wing, or a series of body segments. Ideally, then, the tool would generate an unfolding of the design. How this would work is still very vague - maybe the user would assist in the unfolding, maybe there would be an optimization routine that computes optimal unfoldings based on criteria like minimal waste, or fewest pieces (I would *not* constrain the problem to construction from a single monolithic piece as in origami). The biggest problem we have right now, is that our design process is totally divorced from fabrication. Even if we went through the trouble of extruding individual thin plates in Solidworks and creating an assembly for visualizing the kinematics of a mechanism, that particular representation doesn't transfer easily to the fabrication process because it's essentially monolithic.
Item 3: The 2D drawing is simple a drawing done manually in Solidworks. There are different layers for flexure cuts, outline cuts, and potentially any cuts to be made in the plastic flexure layer. Depending on the robot, there may be many separate pieces for different parts and linkages in a single robot. For example, the drawing for a robot containing a fourbar linkage may have the linkage laid out as a physically separate piece consisting of five rigid links connected by four flexure hinges. During assembly, the designer would then fold up that linkage and insert it into the robot wherever it's supposed to go. If you're curious you can see some sample 2D drawings for older designs here: http://robotics.eecs.berkeley.edu/~ronf/Prototype/ under the "Example Structures" heading.
I noticed Kangaroo seems to be a popular choice for physical simulations. I don't really even need to include forces like bending resistance - I'm happy to allow the design tool to approximate flexures as pin joint-type hinges. Once the design is unfolded, the details of how to cut the flexures could be worked out in a post-processing step. I wouldn't expect the tool to be able to realistically simulate the bending of the hinges.
I'm going to have to dig a lot deeper into understanding Grasshopper and Kangaroo. I only just got started with Grasshopper today by following the folding plate tutorial on wa11ace.com.au today. …
to run at full screen. I've gone as far as using an iPad to use as the second monitor via AirDisplay (which actually works really well) but have never been satisfied with any setup that required you to look back and forth as if at a tennis match all day long.
Not long after first using Grasshopper 3+ years ago I've had the desire for a "Live Viewport" component that would allow a live image of the 3d geometry being generated directly in the canvas. Every once in a while I search the forums with the hope of finding a solution, but always come up empty handed. Someday this might exist although for now I have found what might be the next best thing to a native "Live Viewport" component and its enabled with a small app named Sticky Previews. This app uses the task bar preview feature within Windows 7's aero interface to create custom, floating preview windows from any open window currently running. I've only just discovered the app, but it seems to do the trick and has been stable and problem free so far. -- I will post an update if I find out that I might have spoken too soon. The install allows for a 30 day trial and is $15 bucks to purchase. I just found the app and don't know anything about this group that created the app. If you happen to know of them, Id be curious to find out more.
divided windows, cramped and slow;
unified window with floating rhino model preview;
link to the apps webpage;
http://www.ntwind.com/software/sticky-previews.html
Also works with other apps;
and the about me page screen shot;
…
Added by Tyler Selby at 11:25pm on November 26, 2012
rch, september, june.
I did two kind of simulation. The first one - just one hour 10h and then 15:30. The second, 10:00 to 15:30h. I think that's something wrong with the results kWh/m² because the biggest values for radiation, are for winter. And the results simulation 10:00 to 15:30h the result are different too, the biggest values for winter (june), then september, march, and them december (summer)
The results are (kWh/m²)
10:00h 15:30h 10 to15:30h
21/03 0,69 1,15 2,61
21/06 1,14 1,13 3,71
23/09 0,96 0,90 2,79
21/12 1,31 1,22 2,45
I will be very gratiful with your answer I'm using this software to a important academic work, and in my Country Its not commom use this software, I don't know anyone that could help me with this. I'd like to encourage university start to use this kind of software.
Thank you
Camila
…