, HVAC, blah blah).
BIM is NOT a parametric process at least having in mind graphical editors the likes of GH (or stuff the likes of Generative Components): it's a holistic data management approach. Some concepts used in BIM apps (for instance in AECOSim etc) the likes of "walls"/"openings" etc are "parametric" in the sense that allow auto perforation of this with that. On the other hand AECOSim is feature driven (since Microstation works in that "mode" as well) ... a thing that complex things even more with regard what is actually "parametric" and what not.
BIM is as good as the meta data structure is (especially the spec related aspect - Goggle MasterFormat and the likes). BIM AEC apps are notoriously incapable to work (without a lot of lines of code) with proper RDBMS. On the other hand Bentley Systems ProjectWise ... well ... but that's another animal (by no means a topic for the inexperienced).
In descending order or importance a contemporary AEC practice should use:
1. A general information "controller" like ProjectWise (who said/did what/when/why).
2. A Specs (say CSI - not the TV soap opera) management app.
3. Several Meta data RDBMS.
4. A BIM suite of apps.
5. Optionally some parametric thingy.
PS: For AEC ... when inviting the parametric thingy to the party you have only 2 options:
ProjectWise + AECOSim + Generative Ciomponents (my choice).
?? + Revit + Dynamo.
…
N, O}. In this case it's very obvious what needs to happen. You want to create lines combining the following points {AK, BL, CM, DN, EO}.
If the second set however only contains 3 points {K, L, M}, it is no longer obvious. The default behaviour for Components is to keep on matching points until both sets are depleted. This is called Longest List Matching. It will give you 5 lines, that connect the following points: {AK, BL, CM, DM, EM}. As you can see, the last point in the second list (M) has been 'recycled' three times.
You can also change the default data matching behaviour. For example if you change it to Shortest List, then the component will stop working as soon as the smallest set is depleted: {AK, BL, CM}. In this case the points D and E are completely ignored because no 'sibling' could be found for them in the second set.
A third option is Cross Reference matching, which will create all possible combinations: {AK, AL, AM, BK, BL, BM, CK, CL, CM, DK, DL, DM, EK, EL, EM}.
However the best solution in this particular case is not to muck about with the data matching, but instead Graft your data. Grafting means that all the items in a set are moved into their own little set. Thus, if you graft {A, B, C, D, E}, you actually end up with 5 sets, each containing a single item {A}, {B}, {C}, {D} & {E}. When you combine this new data layout with your second set {K, L, M}, each grafted item will be matched with all the items in the second set, this is after all how Longest List works. So you end up with a data layout that looks like this: {AK, AL, AM}, {BK, BL, BM}, {CK, CL, CM}, {DK, DL, DM} & {EK, EL, EM}, which is very similar to the Cross Reference matching, but retains more of the original layout. I.e., it's not just a huge list of all the lines, they are still five groups of three items each, which is a far more informative layout than Cross Reference would generate.
I'm afraid at this time of night this is the best I can explain it.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com
Poprad, Slovakia…
Or if this doesn't work the the lines who's end points Y value doesn't match
5) join all remaining curves. this gives you polylines for each row.
6) From these you can extract control points that will be on differrent branches
i would demonstrate this but i'm stuck watching the wedding at a friend's and until mcneel makes a rhinoid with gh app you'll have to wait 'til later…
omponents and Revit means Dynamo.
Both are masterminded by the very same fella (Robert Aish: an ex Bentley R&D head, then Autodesk paid more [life sucks]).
AECOSim eats Revit for breakfast but has a far steeper learning curve ... meaning that the masses would opt for Revit.…
sites the likes of Code Project etc etc) that may fit to your workflow/goals. Also the available literature/printed manuals/e-manuals/books etc etc.
3. Take into account the quality of the available editors (like VS etc etc). That said the "build-in" GH editor is a bit of a crap (but it's OK for smallish/not complex coding).
4. Most importantly: // computing is the holly grail these days (and it would become the standard in the years to come: either via trad CPU cores or via CUDA/Tesla type of stuff)... thus take into account ... well ... the obvious.
BTW: If 1 is true and there's some workflow around that involves many apps ... try to write code that is as "GH neutral" as possible.…
chitecture for quite a while. I've been through all versions of 3DS Max and I've used Maya and Softimage as well. In the last 3 years though, I started using the 3D apps as an architectural design tool, but you must already know that this it not the main purpose of them.
That's when a friend of mine introduced me to GH and I was blown away by it. This is like THE perfect thing for design. I'm currently designing a high-rise for a city here in China where I live and it has a very intricate twisting, thus I took the leap and started learning GH, but I think they time it'll take me to learn it will far exceed the time of this deadline so I did the whole model in 3Ds Max, but it was a real pain in the ass moving every individual row of vertices manually, and leading myself but nothing but rudimentary techniques to make it look right, and still, it doesn't look as I want and when having to modify it, it's just another full exhausting day at work.
Anyway, that's briefly the reason. I'm hoping to learn a lot from here. If you have any essential sources (preferably updated) from where I can push my knowledge do let me know please!
Thanks!!…
tructures)
Bad news: real-life AEC trusses are far and away from lines.
Ugly news: Rhino is NOT an AEC app by any means nor it would ever be. For AEC app I mean the known 3 (Allplan, Revit and my favorite: AECOSim) and/or proper MCAD apps (like CATIA/NX). In plain English : without exporting (meaning (a) bake in nested blocks + (b) export via STEP) proper structured data (assembly/component) this WIP case is absolutely useless.
why may you ask.
well ... trusses are made with numerous shop drawings like this, that's why:
more soon.
best, Peter…
some weird engine, you know, he he) IS NOT like designing plain vanilla AEC things.
Therefore features/calculation methods/capabilities as found in MCAD apps (considered off topic by many in our trade) are mandatory for certain types of designs.
Anyway and if we forget FEA stuff, currently I have 3 C# goals:
(1) master the art of controlling the placement of existed blocks in GH defined topology(done),
(2) master the art of baking blocks(done) and
(3) master the art of baking heavily nested blocks that NX/Catia can understand (progress is slow).
…
ide number n1= nx2^0 (if n=3; n0=3x1=3) / side length (L) / center axis on (H)
-Polygon2: on (P2) / side number n2= nx2^1 (of n=3; n1=3x2=6) / side length (L) / center axis on (H)
-Projection of (L) from (P1) to (P2) is made according:
*vertical axis on (H)
*a chosen angle (GAMMA) between axis on (H), and a vector [pointing the middle of (L) on (P1), from axis (H)] >> This is a constant for every shape of the first polygon.
Here is a GH file, with my start. To continue i find some difficulties about what option or icone to pick in and combine in GH.
I hope it could be makeable.
Thanks again,
AK
…
nite a zillion of "solids" (closed polysurfaces in Rhino speech) you need a decent solid CAD app. Rhino is a surface modeller ... meaning that you should narrow your search towards the right girl.
3. Personally I work with Microstation (same 3d core engine as Siemens/NX [ParaSolids]) and CATIA/NX. The difference in speed for doing things like these ... well ... find a friend who works with any of these and experience it first hand. …