cles always had only position (3 degrees of translational freedom).
Now they can also optionally have an orientation (3 degrees of rotational freedom), which are updated by the solver at each iteration.
This makes possible new types of goals based on these orientations. The first example of this is a more robust rigid body component, and collision between pairs of rigid bodies. These can be any closed solids, and do not need to be convex.
In coming weeks I will be posting more examples of Goals which make use of the 6dof nodes, including some scripted ones.
…
emble machines (and require custom Articles for specs, cost pre-estimation and the likes).
Putting yourself against that "forest" you should answer the question N1: you want to just use (the unsafe option) these or cross the Rubicon and collaborate in some way with the software vendors? (the safe option plus numerous benefits: knowing what's in the pipeline years ago, solving bugs in no time etc etc etc).
The question N2 is: do you get involved (or you want to) in "developing" all that the one way or the other? If yes using what "platform"? (so to speak).
The question N3 is: what are your estimations concerning the future in our trade? (count the tremendous acceleration of things as well plus the unavoidable AI factor (sooner or later)).
By answering these 3 ... you can easily answer the other questions of yours.
Bad news: future is past already.…
y serve as a demo to you.
That said building regulations is a paramount factor (they vary according country).
In general and if the star body is mono-block (say: concrete) ... I would strongly suggest to use real-life "objects" as parts and orient them properly (steps. handrails et all). If the stair is an assembly this is utterly paramount.
But if you work with some feature driven BIM app (Revit, AECOSim etc) there's some automation available (100% useless in 1:1 detailed studies).…
xtract picture frames with one small app[adapter]. I get a total of 131 images, [ So in fact they are the same as screenshot] and I use this image as imagery to 3d photogrammetry. Probably this is incorrect, but it's how far I can go without drones in place.…
onstrates the following:
1. The definition's functionality employing HumanUI for the custom user interface.
2. The evaluation of the definition's ability to handle different point cloud data sets.
3. Video reports with the definition's results, depicting the image acquisition path.
The process is displayed in real time, with minor speed up in some parts. The setup is responsive and benchmarks show that change between dense point cloud data sets is pretty quick (13-15M points, 40-250 images), with updates being calculated in impressive timings.
I would like to thank Heumann A. and Zwierzycki M. who provided direct support with HumanUI and Volvox. Also Grasshopper3d forum users Maher S. and Segeren P., who contributed with Rhino viewport manipulation scripts.
More on Volvox:
http://papers.cumincad.org/cgi-bin/works/Show?_id=ecaade2016_171&sort=DEFAULT&search=ecaade%20volvox&hits=2629
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/volvox
http://duraark.eu/
HumanUI:
http://www.food4rhino.com/app/human-ui?page=1&ufh=&etx=…
is a exhibition building) generic outline (easy with GH), (b) real nested parametric part inclusion in the definition (hmm), (c) a GH ability to bake structured geometry to Rhino...and then Rhino (acting as a "companion" app to a given AEC app + FE analysis + cost analysis + ...) export properly structured data.
2. "Whole" and "Detail" here are tightly related : there's no meaning to promote an "idea" without solving the nuts and bolts of it. This is the so called "bottom-to-top" design mentality.
It's a mystery to me why GH doesn't include, say, some ways to control bake on a per block basis (actually on a per nested block basis).
…
j. to rhino for architectural scenes.
(unispiring ... I admit)
On recent iOS the app doesn´t work any more, so I figured out, if I should think about making a "light" version of that plant growing thing, with a definition on GH,...
I try to imagine any kind of simple setup to start with,
since I am a middle / low skilled GH user celebrating allways the taste of succes ...running an ordinary GH definition.
Angelos
…
s for some solution "as it is" no matter the cost? (that's an extra stupid approach, very old fashioned). Do you use EvoluteTools Pro and/or Kangaroo for "optimization" ?
2. What is the FEA/FIM stuff in use? Do you expect "from/back" interactions? (If this is not doable ... increase this or that etc etc).
3. Do you validate real-life components with FEA/FIM? By what means you design these components? - present and/or future (inside Rhino?). This makes things "interesting" in a variety of ways (we need to extensively talk about that - Skype). The problem is that Rhino IS NOT a feature driven solid modeling app and thus ... a "certain" bottleneck arrives in no time: In the CATIA world you design ("MANUALLY") a parametric history driven component that "complies" to his parent "directives" (say: the Topology) and/or "imposes" his rules to his parent. This is what we call top<>bottom design approach (would become a standard across the AEC industry pretty soon: in around 123 years give or take some). This is far and beyond from what Rhino can do - but we DO make real-life things don't we?
4. Are all these things under a BIM umbrella ? What BIM? What type of details (blue prints) you deliver? (or you just make the thing?).
5. By what means cost is restricting/encouraging the solution? By what means you get feedback from component(s) cost that is outsourced? (i.e. outside your company). Do you monitor all things via some RDBMS? (that's Data Base).
6. What are the long term plans for dealing with such solutions? Using what apps (even in theory for the moment).…