igitais de forma criativa e rigorosa, para a concepção de modelos 3D– Familiarizar-se com as lógicas de criação de geometrias tridimensionais NURBS.- Desenvolver técnicas de criação de imagens fotorealistas com o motor de render V-Ray- Introduzir as lógicas paramétricas e associativas processo criativo.- Introduzir novas lógicas de BIM no processo estrutural (Building Information Modeling).# INFORMAÇÕES E INSCRIÇÕESinfo@rhino3dportugal.comAna Fonseca: 917140716 Mais informações disponíveis no site: www.rhino3dportugal.com# FORMADORES Brimet Silva ( Authorized Rhino Trainer )
...................................................
Curso de Rhino3D Nível I
6, 7 e 9 de Julho9h-13h e 14h-18h (sessões diárias de 8h).....................................................Curso de Vray-Nível I
12 e 14 de Julho9h-13h e 14h-18h (sessões diárias de 8h).................................................Curso de Grasshopper Nível I
16 e 18 de Julho9h-13h e 14h-18h (sessões diárias de 8h).................................................
VisualARQ e Rhino BIM- Nível I
21 e 23 de Julho9h-13h e 14h-18h (sessões diárias de 8h)
…
r your need.. bravo my friend!
2.Hahaha career first, woman later.
3.maybe it is because my country has yet to use the softwares you mentioned, I am pretty sure they are used by engineer, since my practice is only architectural work, we always collaborate with the engineer to get the job done (by collaborate, I mean passing on the job to the engineer, and then we just let them handle all the stuff, the sad news is architect and designers doesnt get paid much to deal with those)
in contrast with your software, me and my team use Rhino,GH,3dsmax, and Zbrush-- these are standard package you got after u graduate from any arch.college. the level of detail I produce in my modelling is not as "heavy" as yours because the client I face every week only worries about the appearance of the building, as well as convenience in terms of planning, efficiency, and cost control over the design.
I am surprised you don't use REVIT or ArchiCAD? they are the standard for BIM documentation.
4.well, subdiv modeling is one of my fave. (That is why Tspline is my fave tool in rhino, to sketch out the model that I want, however it depends on the type of geometry you are after, for "solid modelling" I prefer Subdiv modelling rather than standard NURBS )
5. no comment for that hahaha
6.I disagree, I think Rhino needs a TOP rendering software as part of rhino system itself. to make it at least on par with 3dsmax. rhino isn't built for restrictive use like CATIA, so its purpose is for "MODELLING and VISUALIZATION". at the moment we only see the "MODELLING" part.
7.+1 for this
8.I have to agree with that. there is no way we can incorporate BIM in Rhino. also it is not widely accepted to somehow have BIM file in Rhino format. but...
9. in the future it might be, because if you compared rhino 4 to rhino 5 there has been a major breakthrough, who knows what will happen in rhino 6 or 7.
10.I saw a post the other day,David said he intended GH to be algorimtic modelling instead of parametric, and GH is like a swiss army knife, it has thousands of tools to do general job, but it requires 3rd party member (we call it add-on) to extend its uses. Id prefer GH to have much broader function to encourage people to expand its wings
PS= are u talking about augmented reality? :)
Peace!…
l the changes you want and then close it again, you'll only have to recalculate once, whereas adding 3 inputs via the ZUI would recalculate 3 times right away and once more after you've changed the cluster to hook up the new inputs.
Does the cluster recalculate the entire solution, even though the new input hooks aren't connected to anything? Would it be possible to not recompute (not call ExpireSolution or its equivalent?) when an input parameter is added via the ZUI only? Could this be done by adding a flag on each input hook added by the ZUI, triggering the flag when the input hook is connected to a parameter, and recalculating the cluster only when the flag has been triggered?
Also, the current behavior, I think, is actually different. In order to work with the cluster, you need to see the geometry/data you're working with, so you have to enter the cluster, add the hooks, leave the cluster, connect the hooks to parameters, enter the cluster, play around in Grasshopper, exit the cluster:
Double click cluster.
Navigate to where you want to add new hooks.
Add hook (either from the toolbars, or by copy/pasting existing ones, or by double click search)
Close and Save Cluster. This will cause a new extra-cluster solution which may take some time to complete. (1 ECSOLUTION)
Connect new inputs with relevant parameters in the parent document.
Double click cluster.
Connect hook to relevant parameter. This will cause a new intra-cluster solution which may take some time to complete. (input * ICSOLUTION)
Repeat 7 until satisfied.
Close and Save Cluster. This will cause a new extra-cluster solution which may take some time to complete. (1 ECSOLUTION)
Which comes to: 2 extra-cluster solutions, and N intra-cluster solutions, where N is the number of new inputs. The cluster was opened and closed twice.
Zoom in on cluster.
Click on the (+) symbols to add inputs. Each input added via the ZUI doesn't recompute, since we know that the input hooks created this way aren't connected.
Connect new inputs with relevant parameters in the parent document. Also no new solutions.
Double click cluster.
Navigate to where the new input hooks were created (Perhaps aligned vertically, below the last-most input hook?)
Probably move the hook to a more meaningful location.
Connect hook to relevant parameter. This will cause a new intra-cluster solution which may take some time to complete. (input * ICSOLUTION)
Repeat 7 until satisfied.
Close and Save Cluster. This will cause a new extra-cluster solution which may take some time to complete. (1 ECSOLUTION)
Which comes to: 1 extra-cluster solutions, and N intra-cluster solutions, where N is the number of new inputs. PLUS, you only had to enter/exit the cluster once.
Thanks again, David!
Dan…
Added by Dan Taeyoung at 8:47am on January 11, 2014
rves that "intersect" a plane placed on Z=6 above the first circle. I did this to have a collection of points from which to choose 3 and make a 3pt-circle.
[this second circle "fits" the catenary at a certain height, that's what I wanted to do]
Maybe it's obtuse but anyway that's the way I managed it.. I then used the "intersection" of the top circle with the original catenary curve to "split" the catenary into 2 parts, I then "Rail Revolution" the first part of it around the axis of the original circle, using the circle as a "rail", and I get a Brep surface.
It is a "open brep" surface, so now i'm having the problem of managing it if I want to subdivide it with Isotrim or other commands to control the number of subdivisions.
Is there a better way to go about this?
I am attaching the file.
About the image, I checked my code about 10 times to understand why it has those "lines" every 1 meter in the Z, and they already appear in the "rail revolution" component when it is visible, but in the "brep components" I can see the individual points along the rail curve.
I think this is what might be causing the brep to surface problem, but for the life of me I can't understand why the rail is not smooth and is "divided" into the 7 points instead of just one smooth revolution...
Thanks! :)
…
ipe Pecegueiro Type of participants Students, graduate students, researchers, professionals Duration 2 days, Sat – Sun Prerequisites 1 / participants skills Experience in Rhino and Grasshopper; programming experience with Processing or Arduino IDE is recommended but not necessary Prerequisites 2 / hardware Participants should bring their own computer with Windows XP or 7 64 bit OS Prerequisites 3 / software Rhinoceros Version 4 sr9, Grasshopper 0.8.0050, Arduino IDE, Processing, Google Earth* *Software versions should be the most updated versions at the time of the workshop. Rhino 5 is also acceptable. Description An associative model is only as relevant as the information it seeks to manage. This workshop will engage the associative model by feeding it with real time and real world data captured through prefabricated sensor nodes known as the Ambient Sensor Kit (ASKit). The ASKit is an Open Hardware platform for personal data collection and sharing. The ASKit project is based on the premise that a personal understanding of the information around us is key to a sustainable and informed habitation of our environment. http://uask.it. Workshop participants will be working with Grasshopper, a generative,logic based design environment where participants will be able associate real world data to their models. Several other tools will be employed including Processing, Pachube, Google Earth, and gHowl (a set of custom components which extend the functionality of Grasshopper). This two day workshop will focus on a specific area in Berlin to understand, through data, the differences between the physical barriers and invisible forces which define certain urban functions. The participants will engage in: - environmental data collection - site surveying with open hardware/DIY electronics - data visualization and analysis - associative modeling with collected data Day 1: Demonstration of ASKit hardware platform for data collection and associative modeling. Data capture session in specific zones in Berlin. Data visualization and associative modeling in Grasshopper. Day 2: Focused Data Capture Session Directed projects applying associative modeling with collected data.…
Added by Luis Fraguada at 11:34am on August 23, 2011
ag gets pinned in Temeswar)
7 days of training + exhibition and party!
During the the first 3 days we have prepared a training course where the participants will get acquainted with the basic notions and elementary algorithms in Grasshopper. Within the following 4 days you will have to apply your general knowledge in order to design and produce a 1:1 mockup of the digital model.
It’s going to be massive!
_ORGANIZERS AND TUTORS:
F-O-R
Oana Simionescu
Alex Cozma
DtArchLab + Idz
Ionut Anton
Dana Tanase
T_A_I
Irina Bogdan
_HOSTS:
EduKube Multimedia Center
Find out how to apply here and make sure to keep an eye on our blog. You cand also keep yourself updated by following our facebook page.
See you at EduKube, Timisoara on the 16th of July!
…
4 explode the text
5 select the exploded text, which are now curves, and the border from step 2 and use the planarsrf command again
6 make your surface using the two curves at top and bottom and a section. Use the sweep2 command
7 select your negative text surfaces and use the flowalongsrf command
maybe the scale of the text can be edited by the size of the surface or of the text but I bet you can figure that out! good luck!…
l design.
2/ Optimization
2.1/ in prefabrication
2.2/ combinatorial
2.3/ approach comparisons (i.e. deterministic vs stochastic)
2.4/ share your research
2.5/ ... etc. the list goes on and on
3/ Share you design rationale and how computation fits in
4/ Need help with this problem...
5/ Challenges and workshops announcements
6/ CD News
7/ Share computational design projects under construction or built (akin to skyscrapercity)
8/ and so many other categories and sub-categories...
Just my first thoughts. That breakdown in optimization is just an example. Maybe 'sections' is an old-school way of seeing things, I just wanted to share some thoughts on the kind of content I look forward to seeing. It can be pragmatic topics, but also theoretical, and allow folks to share their projects and research. Some categories are specific, others broad. I suppose I'm interested in community building with regards to computational design. I think SmartGeometry attempted to accomplish this at some point in the past, to some degree. However their focus appears to be in the workshops and challenges.
I recall the silly flame wars that the CG industry had 20 years ago (lame). I'd avoid that, even if it meant forbidding the mention of any specific software in certain areas or in the entire forum. Which would be tricky, but the endless flame wars and silly comparisons were such a waste of everyone's time in CG.
Without dwelling on this too much yet, I think that the software specific questions belong in software specific forums. If we already had a common language for computational design, you'd just need to add the right description as a meta-tag to any Dynamo or Grasshopper forum post, and you'd be able to find analogous solutions in either forum effortlessly, right?
The Dynamo and Grasshopper forums lack design-centric content. The emphasis is generally on the tools and workflow. Computational design is hybrid in essence, it involves both design and computer programming (be it visual or textual). We could really use a forum for knowledge exchange where the expectation is that both are discussed with equal status.
I disagree that such a forum ought to exclude professional programmers. It should include professional programmers whom have an interest in design, and also include professional designers whom have an interest in computer programming, and everyone in between, and enthusiasts, and artists whom are curious about algorithms as a creative medium, and academics, and students, and etc etc. As long as there is rich content and activity on design as well, not only the computational bit, then the crowd will be diverse and we'll all have more to learn from one another.…