s finding the closest point from a building (internal element) to the street (external element). The subdivision and overlapping of these distances gives a graphic representation of which spaces are more susceptible to an intervention.
However I just hit a wall since I still don't grasp fully the concept and notions of trees and data in grasshopper.
the next step is to create a 2d polysurface (and someday 3D) with the points that conform the closest point lines. I need to sum 450 end point with 450 beginning points to generate 900 points. But using the math sum operator gives me the sum of the XYZ coordinate of the points.
After I solve this issue I will get to finding a way to replace the closest points that go inside a building with the second closest point. But for now, finding how to sum points and creating the surface is more than enough.…
s to be optimized for cooling loads and daylight factor.
The genes are the following:
1. Two sliders controlling the division of the facade (one for the horizontal one for the vertical).
2. Two sliders controlling the height of the louvers (from the lower left-hand corner to the top right corner)
3. 8 sliders controlling the selection of glazing panels.
The optimisation criteria I am using are:
1. The average daylight factor should be maximized. I am using the formula: if(x<y,1,0), with y=2
2. The total cooling loads should be minimized. I am using the formula: if (x>(or equal to) y, 1,0) with y = 900.
I don't know if my explanation is clear, any help is appreciated.
Thank you in advance.
All the best,
Luisa…
ng Grasshopper (Rhino. Plugin) by the end of the workshopStudent performance objectivesSchedule :Deadline for Registration : July 14,2016After Submitting your registration form, you will be contacted for confirmation.Workshop Starts : July 17, 2016The workshop consists of 10 lectures, Each lecture lasts for 3 hours.3 lectures per week (Sun,Tue &Thu) Fees : 900 L.EYou have to fill this registration form below if you want to attend the workshop. We only have few places available. Prerequisite:-Basic knowledge of any 3d modeling software “Sketchup, 3dsmax, Rhino, Maya, ...,etc.” is required to attend the workshop.- Student must bring their own laptops.Students output during previous workshops :https://www.facebook.com/GIZMOSTUDIO.AS/photos/?tab=album&album_id=548388031851299instructor: Hassan ragab https://www.behance.net/hassanragab…
are several reasons why not all commands are available as components:
Sometimes it makes no sense. Grasshopper doesn't have selections, layers, dimensions, data attributes or views, so commands like SelClosedCurve, CopyToLayer, MatchProperties, SetObjectName, PerspectiveAngle, DimOrdinate etc. would be meaningless.
Sometimes is it not possible. Not all commands in Rhino use algorithms that are exposed in our SDK. FilletEdge, CurveBoolean, MatchSrf, BlendSrf (to name just a few) cannot be used from within a plugin (short of actually running the command, which is a major pain in the ass for the developer). This is a deficiency we're trying to rectify, for Rhino5 and 6 and beyond we're trying very hard to remember to make our algorithms available to every developer.
Sometimes it doesn't seem to add much value. Grasshopper is used for different purposes than Rhino. That is also why Grasshopper has some components that do not have a corollary in Rhino. Do people really need a _Torus component? _TCone? If a command can be accomplished by stringing together 3 or 4 other components, would that not be a better solution if it's not needed that often?
Sometimes there is no good reason. We have a limited amount of man-power at our disposal, all of Grasshopper core and all the native components are written by just one guy. This may change in the future, but it simply takes time to add features and there are a lot of features to add.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com…
Added by David Rutten at 1:48am on November 28, 2013
with this machine.
As Jason says, Rhino and Grasshopper are mainly single-threaded, so I prioritized single core speed and got an i7 4790k, which comfortably overclocks to 4.7GHz (with a decent air cooler, but no fancy liquid cooling).
The Kangaroo2 solver is actually multi-threaded now, but the difference this makes is not great as you might imagine. Using 4 cores is certainly nowhere near 4 times faster, because although parts of the calculation are easily parallelized, everything still needs to be recombined at each iteration, and this is usually the bottleneck. I think there is still room for some improvement in how it is multi-threaded, but I wouldn't hold your breath for any massive changes on this front soon.
I'd be interested to know how the performance scales with the Xeon chips (more cores, significantly more expensive, but relatively low clock speeds). At the time I made the guess that they weren't worth it, but it would be good to really test this out.
RAM is relatively cheap these days, so I went with 32GB of it at 2133MHz. It does seem that the speed of the RAM matters, as enabling XMP in the BIOS (to make it run above the default 1333) seemed to make a noticeable difference.
Graphics-wise my personal feeling is that the gaming oriented GTX cards offer better value than the much more expensive 'professional' Quadro range - and have read that the hardware between the 2 has historically been very similar or even identical despite the Quadros being several times the price, with the difference being mainly in the drivers. There are some threads on discourse.mcneel.com about this, and it seems that recent GTX cards like the 970 do very well in Holomark (the Rhino performance benchmarking tool).
I got a GTX 770 (this was just before the 900 series came out), which is probably way overkill just for Rhino/Grasshopper, as they don't use the GPU for more than display (Though some of the render plugins do, and I think for those more CUDA cores is what matters, so there GTX is probably still better value.)
Probably swapping this for a much cheaper card wouldn't make much difference to Rhino/GH performance anyway (though if you want to use the PC for other stuff like gaming or virtual reality it does).
I don't have much experience with AMD cards, so can't comment on how they compare to Nvidia.
Eventually I do hope to make Kangaroo run the physics on the GPU, and potentially this does have a big speed impact. Nvidia recently released some impressive demos of their FLEX engine, which really fly with a decent graphics card. That is very much game-physics, and not suitable for most of the things Kangaroo is used for, but theoretically Kangaroo could also be adapted to use CUDA (or OpenCL), though it involves a lot of big changes, and I don't have a timeline for this yet.
In the much shorter term there are some things in the pipeline that should speed up Kangaroo for certain things like collisions between large numbers of objects, just by using some different algorithms.
Altogether my machine was still well under €2K, and I've been really happy with it. That said, the difference in performance between this and my 4 year old €700 i5 laptop is actually not that huge in day-to-day Grasshopper usage. It does seem that there is a strong case of diminishing returns with buying a PC - I'd hazard a guess that even spending 3 times this amount (as another thread on this forum was discussing recently) you'd be hard pushed to get anything that made a really significant difference to the experience of using it, and if you really want to spend more money, you would be better off just upgrading more frequently (and getting a nice monitor(s)).
Anyway, a long ramble, I hope some of it is useful. As I said, I'm no hardware expert, and would be interested to hear different opinions.
I also think it will be nice to make a simple benchmarking tool for Kangaroo and have people run it on their various machines and report back results (as with Holomark), to help others make informed decisions on these things. I'll try and put something together for this soon.
…