is made a box. The box(n) is put into a datatree "sampleMass". I test sampleMass through a type of simulation. The test returns TRUE. sampleMass is stored into permanentMass.
Moving on to the next round.
Then, sampleMass =box(n,n+1) I test the sampleMass. The test returns FALSE. It does not pass this round.
permanentMass stays the same.
sampleMass = box(n,n+2)
I test the sampleMass. The test returns TRUE sampleMass is stored into permanentMass.
Moving on to the next round.
etc until all points have been tested.
Below is the litteral concept of the script, perhaps you could give me directions:
On grasshopper I have divided a surface onto a grid of 9 points. Slider1 selects a point of the list. That point is the base of a box(i) for which the data is stored in a data recorder component. This can be called the permanent mass.Slider2 selects the following point on that same list. Also to build a box(i+1). This can be called the temporary mass.
The addition of both of the brep are collected and run as a geometry through a Boolean test.
If True then the value of Slider1 should increment and the box(i+1) recorded in permanent mass. Slider2 should increment.If False then Slider1 should remain. Slider2 should increment.
This should go on until all the points in the list are tested.
I have made some tries, in vain.please find the Grasshopper file and the rhinoscript/python code attached.
:) Olivier…
eventually found out about genetic algorithms on which I found extensive researches, projects,... ! I looked into it and ended up on a few papers which I believe are the jumpstart for my master thesis.
"Galapagos; on the logic and limitations of generic solvers" by David RuttenArticle in Architectural Design 83(2) March 2013
"Black-box optimisation methods for architectural design" by Thomas Wortmann and Giacomo NanniciniConference Paper: CAADRIA 2016, At Melbourne, AU, Volume: 177-186
So I started looking into alternatives to genetic algorithms in architectural design.So far, I've ended up on :
Thomas Wortmann's work with the surrogate(or model) based optimization approach!You can check out the tool he developped for GH (Opossum):http://www.food4rhino.com/app/opossum-optimization-solver-surrogate-models
Judyta Cichocka's work, specially with the Swarm approachYou can check out the tool she developped for GH (Silvereye):http://www.food4rhino.com/app/silvereye-pso-based-solver
And that's it !!! I've been researching through article references (mainly on "researchgate") but I'm now stuck in a loop of references I already visited!That probably means the litterature on the subject is not (yet) extended but I might probably be missing something.The keywords make it difficult to search : "optimisation", "algorithms", "architecture", send me most of the time to computational engineering and deep mathematics papers I unfortunately do not have the background knowledge to comprehend ! So there it is ! If you have any clue of where (or how ! ) I should be looking, please tell me :)I know Mr Rutten is pretty active on the forum so hopefully... (fingers crossed :p) !Also if you have any good tips for getting into algorithms in general (you think could help), I'd be glad to hear(read) it ! A book, tutorials maybe ?!So, autors, architects, projects books, articles, conferences I should go to,specialized architecture offices/studios (I'm also looking for an internship so ...).If you know about a more appropriate forum please let me know !If you want to get deeper into this, you can contact me at :
e1635331@student.tuwien.ac.at
tdissaux@student.ulg.ac.be
My master thesis is due for may 2018 but I have a paper to write for January 2018 in order to be elligible for a PHD program afterwards.What I mean by that is that if you read this message in 6 month, I'll still be open to discussion !
I am right now an erasmus student at TUWien (Vienna) but my main university is The university of Liège in Belgium.I can handle French, English, Italian litterature and eventually Dutch if really you think it's worth it ! I have access to most online libraries via my university's portals so access shouldn't be an issue !I'm very excited to hear from you I wish you all a great day,Cheers,Thomas
…
ne – power of the many è un corso advanced level che studia la produzione di effetti complessi a partire dalla modellazione di comportamenti semplici su un insieme strutturato con un numero alto di elementi. Attraverso un approccio generico e scaleless sarà possibile affrontare la tematica generale su più fronti e in una molteplicità di declinazioni possibili. Il corso è rivolto a chi,indipendentemente dal proprio background (urbanistica, architettura, ingegneria, design, arte o altro) già possiede una esperienza di base con Rhinoceros e Grasshopper, e desidera sviluppare aspetti di gestione avanzata del flusso di articolato di informazioni attraverso una strategia guidata basata su esempi pratici e sull’implementazione di un progetto personale sul tema generale del “field behaviour”. Sarà trattato anche l’utilizzo di alcuni plug-ins quali gHowl e WeaverBird. Il numero dei partecipanti è fissato a un massimo di 20 per offrire un tutoraggio proficuo ed una effettiva esperienza di learning ad ogni iscritto.
[.] Temi:
teoria
. complessità, emergence, effetti di campo (field behaviour), sensibilità, efficienza multiperformance
tecnica
. dati:gestione e manipolazione avanzata del data tree, streaming e visualizzazione; transizione, blending e modulazione delle geometrie; generazione e controllo multiperformance di popolazioni di componenti; attrattori, drivers e tecniche di modulazione avanzate; uso delle mesh con WeaverBird; ottimizzazione con Galapagos
[.] Dettagli :
Tutors: Alessio Erioli + Andrea Graziano – Co-de-iT
Si richiede esperienza di base nella modellazione in Rhino (equivalente a Rhino training Level 1, il Level 2 è gradito – la documentazione per il training è disponibile gratuitamente all’indirizzo: http://download.rhino3d.com/download.asp?id=Rhino4Training&language=it) e nell’uso di Grasshopper (la suddivisione di una superficie NURBS in componenti tramite isotrim è data come base assodata)
. luogo:
IreCoop – via Vasco De Gama 27 _ Firenze
. durata:
25-27 febbraio 2010 – 3 giornate consecutive _ orario 9:00 – 18:00
. costo:
professionisti – 450.00 € studenti – 280.00 €
. note:
scadenza iscrizioni: 20 febbraio 2010 il corso sarà attivato con un numero minimo di 15 iscritti al termine sarà rilasciato un attestato di frequenza gli iscritti dovrano venire muniti dei propri laptop con software installato. una versione free per 30 giorni è disponibile sul sito www.rhino3d.com
. contatti:
iscrizioni + info alloggi: www.irecooptoscana.it (Cosa offriamo > formazione > altri corsi)
info sul corso: info@co-de-it.com…
RESENTERS PETER ARBOUR seele KEITH BOSWELL Skidmore Owings & Merrill MARK E. DANNETTEL Thornton Thomasetti LISA IWAMOTO IwamotoScott JASON KELLY JOHNSONFuture Cities Lab/California College of the Arts HAO KO Gensler BILL KREYSLER Kreysler & Associates ANDREW KUDLESS Matsys/California College of the Arts CHRIS LASCH Aranda\Lasch ARNOLD LEE HOK MIC PATTERSON Enclos, Corp. M. MIN RA Front GEOFF ROSSI Element DENNIS SHELDEN Gehry Technologies ANN SMITH Cambridge Architectural MARCELLO SPINAP-A-T-T-E-R-N-S SANJEEV TANKHA Buro Happold BEN TRANEL Gensler PHIL WILLIAMS Webcor Builders & Consulting Group
DIGITAL FABRICATION WORKSHOPS
8 LU/HSW or 8 LU credits (depending upon workshop choice)
Friday, July 27th 2012 9:00 AM – 6:00 PMCalifornia College of the Arts San Francisco, California
PARAMETRIC ENVELOPES WITH GRASSHOPPERANDREW KUDLESS Matsys Design/California College of the Arts
COMPOSITE FACADES IN ARCHITECTUREBILL KREYSLER & JOSHUA ZABEL Kreysler & Associates
RESPONSIVE BUILDING FACADESJASON KELLY JOHNSON Future Cities Lab/California College of the Arts
SCRIPTED FACADESCHRIS LASCH Aranda/Lasch
PARAMETRIC FACADE TECTONICSKEVIN MCCLELLAN & ANDREW VRANA Digital Fabrication Alliance
BIM MODELING WITH REVIT/INTRO TO VASARIGERMAN APARICIO California College of the Arts & Autodesk Fellow
Facade technologies are developing at a more dynamic rate than almost any other issue related to construction today with an impact on performance, sustainability, materials, fabrication, design, delivery and much more. What was once thought impossible is now an everyday reality, and the future promises accelerating change.
Presented by Enclos and The Architect’s Newspaper, COLLABORATION will bring together in a two-day event, the industry, the profession, and the academy to explore the evolution and the issues surrounding today’s high tech building envelope through case studies and lectures presented by foremost
practitioners, as well as panel discussions, and workshops conducted by leaders in the AEC profession.
Aimed at architects, building owners and developers, general contractors, engineers, fabricators, material suppliers, educators, and students, the event’s panels and sessions address the transformative opportunities created by new technologies and resources. From using BIM for communicating effectively with fabricators, to energy modeling, to retrofitting practices and the latest design tools, the COLLABORATION conference offers an unprecedented opportunity to survey the possibilities of designing in the digital age.
Who Should Attend
Architects, designers, engineers, building owners, developers, and facade consultants interested in gaining increased understanding of cutting-edge building envelope technologies.…
ve Intermediate Insight of Computational Design Strategies While Exploring Rangoli Art form in 2 Dimension and 3Dimesion in which Participants will not only be trained to Digitally Design using Parametric software's but they will also be trained to Fabricate them in reality.
This Course will be explored in manner where Participants will understand inter-dependency of Rhinoceros3D & Grasshoper3D through a unique Hybrid Teaching Method While Exploring Rangoli Geometry .
The course will also take participants through Topics such as - Computational Thinking, - Computational / Parametric Design, - Computational Rangoli Exploration, - Digital Fabrication, - 3D Visualization ( Rhino3D 6), - Making Info-graphics & Design Diagrams ( Rhino3d 6 ).
Participants will also be doing a Project at the last Leg of Workshop in which they will implement the skill they gained in first Few Weeks.
{ Tutor } Nitant Pixelkar (Computational Artist / Designer, Mumbai)
Nitant Hirlekar A.k.a. Pixelkar, is a Computational Artist. He graduated from Rachana Sansad school of Interior Design 2011, Mumbai. In Academics He Bagged Two Gold and One Silver Medal on National Level.
In his post academic days, he came across the Emerging Computational Techniques in Design industry in which Algorithm serves as a main Functional part. He uses Algorithms to Deconstruct the Captured images in Pixelated form using the Grid of the Desired Indian Art Forms.
He Heads Collective Group Named "Mutation Lab” which is a multidisciplinary Design & Art Cell. Where they Explore Computational Approach while Designing Various Scales Spatial Installation, Digital Fabrication, Interactive Installations and Computational Consultancy for Various Architects.
He has exhibited his first artwork in Kalaghoda Arts Festival for in 2014 And further in 2016 and 2017.In 2015 he exhibited in Dharavi Biennale” organized by Wellcome Trust,London & Sneha Organisation, Mumbai Which was internationally acclaimed. In 2016 he got Featured on a TV show - The Creative Indian's as an Absolut Creative Indian of the Week.
Academically he is been involved in Many Computational Design Workshops / Elective Studios for School of Interior Design (Rachna Sansad), LS Raheja College of Architecture & Rat-Lab (Delhi).
{ Participants } The Course is aimed at Architecture, Interior Design, Product Design,Furniture Design & Fashion Design Students and Professionals. However we would be thrilled to have any Interdisciplinary Artist / Creator/ Maker to join the Course as well.
{ Level }
Intermediate
{ Timing } Monday To Friday - 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM (15 Hours/ Week = 5 Week X 15 Hours = 75 Hours )
{ Dates } Registration Ends - 24th April 2020 **Subejct to Availablity
{ Workshop Dates } 4th May 2020 To 5th June 2020
{ Venue } Lower Parel,Mumbai ( Details To Be Announced )
{ Schedule }
{Registration Form}…
stributes structural supports for a uniformly loaded domain using e.g. the internal energy of the loaded domain as fitness. Here the uniformly loaded domain is represented by the trimmed surface. My genomes are the support positions (green crosses), which are restricted to a set of predefined grid points. I’m currently using an (i,j)-coordinate indexing for these grid points (illustrated in the viewport just below) as opposed to a sequential , “one-dimensional” numbering (illustrated in the viewport further down).
(i,j)-indexing systemAltenative, sequential indexing system
The support positions are computed by two gene pools; one governing the i-index, Gene List {i}, and one governing the j-index, Gene List {j}, of each support. The value of slider 0 in Gene List {i} is paired with the value of slider 0 in Gene List {j} etc. and the amount of sliders corresponds to the amount of supports. The screen shot below depicts the slider constellation corresponding to the support distribution depicted above. Unfortunately the j-index represented in the sliders needs remapping as the number of j-indices vary for each i-index (horizontal row of grid points). With the current setup I have 12^6 x 9^6 = 1,6 x 10^12 different genomes. If I were to use the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering, I would only use one gene pool with sliders ranging from 0 to 76 meaning that remapping could be avoided and thereby having only 76^6 = 1,9 x 10^11 different genomes.
So, my current genome setup causes a bunch of issues related to the Evolutionary Solver: Remapping Changing one of the j-index sliders, will not necessarily change the related support position but it will still facilitate another genome to be calculated by the solver. (This problem could be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering)
Switching slider values around If the values of e.g. slider 0 were to be switched around with the values of slider 5, this again would yield a new genome but an identical solution. (This problem cannot be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering)
Coincident support positions Two or more supports may be located in the same position. (This problem cannot be eliminated by using the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering)
I find it impossible to imagine the fictive “fitness landscape” of this problem and not only because of the multidimensional genome characteristic but just as much because of these listed, intertwined peculiarities. I’ve tried running the Simulated Annealing Solver as well, but my experience is that the Evolutionary Solver yields better results. To my awareness, the solver uses some kind of topographical proximity searcher. This is why, I think that the solving process itself benefits more from analysing the (i,j)-index system, in which neighbouring grid points hold more uniform topographical information than the sequential, “one-dimensional” numbering, which might have big ID-numbering gaps between neighbours. Have I understood this correctly?
Cheers…
ns about them.
It's a direction for Kangaroo I very much intend to continue developing - and I am still getting to grips with the possibilities and experimenting with how different optimization and fairing forces work in combination with one another, so I would value your input and experience.
For those interested in some background reading material -
[1] http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~mmeyer/Research/FairMesh/implicitFairing.pdf
[2] http://mesh.brown.edu/taubin/pdfs/taubin-eg00star.pdf
[3] http://www.pmp-book.org/download/slides/Smoothing.pdf
[4] http://graphics.stanford.edu/courses/cs468-05-fall/slides/daniel_willmore_flow_fall_05.pdf
[5] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications.html
[6] http://www.math.tu-berlin.de/~bobenko/recentpapers.html
[7] http://spacesymmetrystructure.wordpress.com/2011/05/18/pseudo-physical-materials/
[8] http://www.evolute.at/technology/scientific-publications/34.html
[9] http://www.evolute.at/software/forum/topic.html?id=18
At the moment the Laplacian smoothing is uniformly weighted, which tends to even out the edge lengths as well as smoothing the form, which is sometimes desirable, and sometimes not. It also tends to significantly shrink meshes when the edges are not fixed.
I plan to try some of the other weighting possibilities, such as Fujiwara or cotangent weighting (see [1] and [3]), as well as other fairing approaches, such as Taubin smoothing [2], Willmore flow[4], and so on. This also has applications in the simulation of bending of thin shells.
Planar quad panels are often desirable, but I'm finding that planarization forces alone are sometimes unstable, or cause undesirable crumpling, so need to be combined with some sort of fairing/smoothing, but the different types have quite different effects, and the balance is sometimes tricky.
There's also the whole issue of meshes which are circular (I posted a demo of circularization on the examples page), or conical (this one still isn't working quite right yet), and their relationship with principal curvature grids and placement of irregular vertices, all of which is rather different when the whole form is up for change, rather than having a fixed target surface [7].
I'm also trying to get to grips with ways of making surfaces of planar hexagons, which need to become concave in regions of negative Gaussian curvature (see this discussion)
and I hope to release soon a component for calculating CP meshes, as described in [8], which I think could have many exciting construction implications.
While there are a number of well developed smoothing algorithms, their main area of application so far seems to be in processing and improving 3D scan data, so using them in design in this way is somewhat new territory. There can be structural, fabrication or performance reasons for certain types of smoothness, but of course the aesthetic reasons are also often important, and I think there are some interesting discussions to be had here about the aesthetics of smoothness.
Anyway, that's enough rambling from me, hopefully something there triggers some discussion - I'm really keen to hear about how all of you envision these tools might be used and developed.
…
Rhino5 SR9. PT will not load unless you update.2- Download the PT installer (PanelingTools_2014_08_24_00.rhi) from: http://www.rhino3d.com/download/rhino/5.0/PanelingToolsV5/2- Double click the downloaded rhi file and follow the prompts to install.3- Next time you open Rhino and grasshopper, you should see the new version installed and loaded.4- The updated toolbars should be also installed. You might need to load using "ToolbarLayout" Rhino command.Documentation:There are comprehensive manuals available. Please make use of them.1- PT-Rhino: http://wiki.mcneel.com/_media/labs/panelingtools.pdf2- PT-GH: http://
wiki.mcneel.com/_media/labs/panelingtools4grasshopperprimer.pdf
New in this Release:--------------------
PT-Rhino:
1- All 2D and 3D Paneling commands, now pay attention to the attributes of the source module. Morphed geometry is no longer added to a new layer and is placed in the same layer as that of the source module(s).2- ptPanel3DCustomVariable with mean option: added support to use multiple start/end modules.3- ptPanel3DCustomVariable command with mean option: added support to use points as part of pattern.
4- Fixed history bugs to custom2d and custom3d variable commands.5- ptOffsetBorder: added bitmap and draft angle options.6- Added history support to ptGridSurface* commands.7- ptPlanarLips command is discontinued and is now replaced with the new ptTabs. The new command has "Distance" and "Recess" options to create tabs with a miter. It works with planar surfaces and polysurfaces.8- ptUnrollFaces: Many improvements and new options.9- Many other minor bug and crash fixes.PT-GH:1- Added anew component to morph variable 3D components using mean or tween method between matching curves, meshes or surfaces.2- Added the new ptOffsetGrid component of a grid.3- Updated the ptMorph2dVariable component to accept a tree structure.4- Fixed a few miscellaneous UI bugs and crashes.Feedback:As always, feedback is ve
ry much appreciated. Please post questions and reports to the following:1- Rhino discourse forum (http://discourse.mcneel.com/)2- PT forums (PT-Rhino: http://v5.rhino3d.com/group/panelingtools) and (PT-GH: http://www.grasshopper3d.com/group/panelingtools).3- Email tech (tech@mcneel.com) or reach me directly (rajaa@mcneel.com).Enjoy!Rajaa IssaRobert McNeel & Associates…
mainly grasshopper. (If it were just Rhino it perhaps would have been easier for me). I've been working on it for a while now and I unfortunately am a bit stuck.
Below are some of my concerns:
1) I know the theory of what I'm suppose to do which is to have the rectangular base and scale it then array it up. However I noticed that the thickness of the each lath and support varies. There are 25 laths in all and from the structure diagram I have gathered that there are basically 4 groups of the same thickness from the base going up its the first 9, then 7, then 5 and then the top 3. I just can't seem to figure out how to vary the thickness. I would assume the attached lath and support definition diagrams would help but unfortunately I don't know how to read it. I've tried some formulas which didn't exactly work but I still included them in the file.
2) I also need to figure out how to create the hole in the structure which is the entrance. I know in Rhino I could just Boolean it out but is there a way to do it in grasshopper?
3) I also need helping figuring out the definition for putting the vertical supports in between each row. The diagram says something fancy about "Testing acceptable constraints in flexion and in shear, we find an acceptable eccentricity that varies with each row." Ok maybe it wasn't so fancy but I have no clue how to do that with grasshopper!
4) My lecturer wants a Structure Simulation which I'm going to assume is what number 3 is all about?
I've attached my progress so far and would appreciate any help possible. I'd prefer if anyone could guide me using basic things (without any fancy plug-ins unless it's absolutely necessary).
However, any help is appreciated! Thank you so much in advance.
Cheers!
Jo
…
NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS". I'm not sure of where to start in troubleshooting this. I've attached the file.
Thank you,
See the errors and warnings below:
{0;0;0}
0. Current document units is in Meters
1. Conversion to Meters will be applied = 1.000
2. [1 of 8] Writing simulation parameters...
3. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
4. [2 of 8] Writing context surfaces...
5. [3 of 8] Writing geometry...
6. [4 of 8] Writing Electric Load Center - Generator specifications ...
7. [5 of 8] Writing materials and constructions...
8. [6 of 8] Writing schedules...
9. [7 of 8] Writing loads and ideal air system...
10. [8 of 8] Writing outputs...
11. ...
... idf file is successfully written to : R:\Green\SuRG\Building_Performance_Analysis\2016_analysis_studies\Energy_Analysis_Comparison\Honeybee_+_Ladybug\tutorial01\EnergyPlus\tutorial01.idf
12.
13. Analysis is running!...
14. ...
...
Done! Read below for errors and warnings:
15.
16. Program Version,EnergyPlus, Version 8.5.0-c87e61b44b, YMD=2016.10.31 11:39,IDD_Version 8.5.0
17.
18. ************* IDF Context for following error/warning message:
19.
20. ************* Note -- lines truncated at 300 characters, if necessary...
21.
22. ************* 24 Sizing:Parameters,
23.
24. ************* Only last 1 lines before error line shown.....
25.
26. ************* 25 None, !- Heating Sizing Factor
27.
28. ** Severe ** IP: IDF line~25 Invalid Number in Numeric Field#1 (Heating Sizing Factor), value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
29.
30. ** Warning ** IP: Note -- Some missing fields have been filled with defaults. See the audit output file for details.
31.
32. ** ~~~ ** Possible Invalid Numerics or other problems
33.
34. ** Fatal ** IP: Errors occurred on processing IDF file. Preceding condition(s) cause termination.
35.
36. ...Summary of Errors that led to program termination:
37.
38. ..... Reference severe error count=1
39.
40. ..... Last severe error=IP: IDF line~
, value=NONE, in SIZING:PARAMETERS
41.
42. ************* Warning: Node connection errors not checked - most system input has not been read (see previous warning).
43.
44. ************* Fatal error -- final processing. Program exited before simulations began. See previous error messages.
45.
46. ************* EnergyPlus Warmup Error Summary. During Warmup: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
47.
48. ************* EnergyPlus Sizing Error Summary. During Sizing: 0 Warning; 0 Severe Errors.
49.
50. ************* EnergyPlus Terminated--Fatal Error Detected. 1 Warning; 1 Severe Errors; Elapsed Time=00hr 00min 9.34sec
51.…