guess this is just a rectangle you are starting with and, if I read your intentions correctly, you want to start with a box and be able to move its top vertices independently in x,y and z and also rotate them altogether (this seems a bit unnecessary since you already control each vertex independently but ok).
Starting from the beginning of your definition: You don't need to actually create the brep and then extract the vertices and move them and then re-create it. Instead you can just get the bottom vertices from the [Boundary curve], using [Discontinuity] and move them by a vectorZ equal to [Building Height]:
Next you want to create four vectors and move the four vertices. The only thing that could help reduce components here is to merge the four vectors into one list (since you already have the vertices in a list):
Then you can add the rotation just like you did in your definition:
and finally you can create the twisted box. At this point you have 2 lists of 4 points each. Like you did in your definition, you have to use a [List Item] component to get each vertex but instead of using 4 components you can use just one and create more outputs by zooming in and clicking the (+) icon at the bottom:
and you finally have this:
Hope this helps
ps. the reason you were getting 3 breps is because you were creating 3 seperate vectors (x,y,z) instead of one, so you were actually moving each vertex 3 times.
…
0 bend strength, relative hinge strength of 353 for the torsion and stiffness 1000 for all springs except from the connection springs. Any idea of what this might be?
I am thinking about going back to having hinge resistance in the changing diagonals only - as before, but keeping the mesh as it is now.…
which I understand analyses only 2 octave bands (500 Hz and 2 kHz) instead of the 8 bands (for which the STI component requires background noise.)
Or have I misunderstood this metric and the three values mean something else?
For reference / a minimal definition I have the open office example (gha and 3dm attached) which includes 20 receivers and the sti results show three values for each (see the image).
Thanks in advance Roly…
the baked result into a mesh in Rhino
3) Select the mesh, in Rhino and type "ReduceMesh".
4) Set the number of meshes as simple as possible (i.e. visually - click preview) without destroying the main structure. You'll see that the spheres dissapear. 500 seems to be good when handling the entire structure
5) insert the resulting, reduced, mesh into Grasshopper and subsequently into the script. The image only shows a section of the structure since the operation takes a while.
Exploding the mesh takes out the bulgy node effect we're after.
But, experiment with it.…
almost 60 seconds to compute, 50x50 points x 35 samples each x 3 rectangles = more than a quarter million curve|curve intersections), but at least not fossilised dog slow.
The inputs of the component are:
P = Plane in which to shoot the isovist sample rays, plane origin equals sample point
N = Number of rays per sample point
R = Maximum radius of sample rays. Any obstacles beyond the radius are ignored
O = List of obstacles (curves only). They will not be projected onto the sample plane, so you can have curves that are only partially 'active'.
Outputs:
P = Point at end of ray (at distance R from sample point) or point at closest obstacle along ray view direction.
D = Distance from sample point to P
H = Boolean indicating whether the ray hit an obstacle or not
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia
…
nd stress of a plate that is supported at two opposite sides (rotational degrees of freedom are allowed) and gravity load is applied. By now I can only verify the displacement of the plate with a deviation of less than 3 % using ANSYS Workbench. Kirchhoff's plate theory as an analytical approach gives a similar result with 10 % deviation.
The van Mises stress and Principal stress results in Karamba are approximately 200 times higher than the results in ANSYS and the analytical results. I tried to find the mistake for several days now and would appreciate any help or similar problems with validating the shell stresses.
Here are the values of the plate:
length: 1 m, width: 0.2 m, thickness: 0.01 m
Material: Steel 'S235' (standard)
resulting gravity load: 0.157 kN
displacement in Karamba: 0.000583 m
stress in Karamba: 116 kN/cm² (=1160 MPa = 500 % utilization!)
stress in ANSYS: 0.57 kN/cm² (=5.7 MPa)
The utilization of 500 % for a steel plate under its own dead weight makes we wonder what is wrong... See the grasshopper definition and the picture attached.
Best regards and thanks for any help,
Robert…
ome struggling i managed to get the effect i wanted but i have three problems:
1) i can't really scale these, hexagons were moved in the easiest way, so i have no control over the pattern
2) i feel that i made it pretty messy with all the dispatches, rotations etc - does it make the definition run slow? how could i simplify my definition?
3) most important i have no idea how to transfer it to hexagonal grid (so i can use jpg as attractor) for a bigger pattern. i tried starting from the hexagonal grid but couldn't get it and eventually got lost, but maybe thats the right way?
Pardon my english, hope i will get some help from you, have a good day :)…
edefining the axis variables, logarithmic scales, display thresholds, better marking management - or at least add contrast!
Hey Fred,
thanks for the feedback! This is a basic version, and personally I used a custom component to read and parse the history files from the canvas to be able to e.g. scroll through generations and solutions or display more solutions at once (via pathes, mostly requires modification of the initial setup) ...
but you are right. I would love to bring the solution's navigation directly into the rhino viewport but I think that would be a major hack .. unless you can give me a hint how to do that. the displaying and user-preference-handling are besides a re-entrant history, some more algorithms and parallelization the next things to tackle, but display is definitely one of the easiest, so ... soon! work will begin in january i guess, since the project then starts i hope - but it will start for sure.
best
r
…
ración de 150 horas divididas en cuatro módulos, arrancando el 22 de Marzo del 2011 y terminando la segunda semana de Junio con sesiones los Martes y Jueves de 18:00 a 22:00hrs y algunos Sábados de 10:00 a 14:00hrs.
El tema central del diplomado es el uso integral de la herramienta digital en el proceso de diseño a partir de la base teórica del fenómeno de la emergencia (entendida como la obtención de resultados complejos a partir de la interacción de elementos simples con reglas de bajo nivel de sofisticación).
El desarrollo del programa se concentra en la aplicación práctica de las reflexiones teóricas generadas mediante el uso de herramientas digitales generativas, principalmente Grasshopper (plug-in de modelado parametrico para Rhinoceros).
Contaremos con la presencia de dos colaboradores internacionales: EL primero será un miembro de LaN (Live Architecture Network) que impartirá un curso sobre programación avanzada en Grasshopper enfocandolo a la realización de un objeto construido, haciendo énfasis en la transición entre lo virtual, lo análogo y lo físico. El segundo es Jalal el Ali, maestro en arquitectura por la Architectural Association, líder de la Unidad de Geometría Generativa de Buro Happold y actual líder de proyecto en Zaha Hadid Architects, quien dará un curso intensivo enfocado al uso de la herramienta digital y la producción digital, enseñando procesos que ha aplicado en la empresa donde trabaja. Jalal pronunciará también una conferencia magistral.
Es un programa promueve el uso de nuevas tecnologías y la integración de procesos de producción desde la concepción del diseño, aplicando los conocimientos teóricos en un objeto físico usando el laboratorio de fabricación de la Universidad Iberoamericana.
…