GH_PARAM::VolatileData, but this structure is always empty for all params.
Doing casting to GH_NUmberSlider I can recovery the value without problems
¿any idea?
Thank's!
....
for each (IGH_DocumentObject^ pObject in pObjects){ IGH_Param ^pParam = dynamic_cast<IGH_Param^>(pObject);
if (pParam != nullptr) { IEnumerator ^allData;
allData = pParam->VolatileData->AllData(true)->GetEnumerator(); allData->Reset();
// Always TRUE! assert(pParam->VolatileData->IsEmpty == true);
/* Param without data */ if (allData->MoveNext() == false) { // Always this branch i_DEBUG_STR(L"NULL DATA", 0, true); } /* Param with data */ else { // Never this branch
IGH_Goo ^data; data = (IGH_Goo^)allData->Current;
// Data treatment ... }
{ GH_NumberSlider ^slider;
slider = dynamic_cast<GH_NumberSlider^>(pParam);
if (slider != nullptr) { // The slider value is correct double value value = Decimal::ToDouble(slider->Slider->Value); } } }}
…
truss right?
2. Trusses are NOT made via lines ... they are made by real-life components like balls, rods and other mysterious (and maybe ominous, he he) paraphernalia.Good news for you: lot's of C# stuff around me that do that (but they are not exactly "entry-level").
3. PRIOR talking to ANY FEA/FIM thingy you need to address clash situations: I mean IF a given node is doable or not (because lines they don't rise clash issues ... but rods/struts/tubes/cones do). Good news for you: lot's of C# stuff around me that do that (but they are not exactly "entry-level").
4. Then you have to use some real-life (or at least some "realistic") components like the ones found in, say, a classic MERO "ball" system (and especially the adapter cones between the balls and the tubes). Or at least "some" of them that outline a "realistic" truss.Good news for you: see above.
5. Then you could validate the whole structure AND the parts VS structural loads: I mean there's absolutely no meaning "doing the whole" without taking into account the load bearing capability of the parts. For instance, say, what happens if the geometry (i.e. the topology) is "capable" but a given bolt is weak? That sort of stuff.
6. Now ... this is Academic ... but following the "abstract" way (I don't care about bolts because I'm a student)... this could teach you the entirely wrong way to use FEA/FIM for validating any structural ability of ... anything. And besides FEA/FIM is used for making the damn thing in the real-world ... and that involves (unfortunately) "some" bolts and nuts.
I can arrange a (rather long) Skype session for a demo of all the above ... but first I strongly advise to post here a finished thing (in terms of 3d component geometry) ... and THEN we can examine the whole strategy: what to export, how and especially what could be an "interactive" (both ways) protocol/strategy in order to give the green light for that truss.
BTW: Kangaroo is a physics engine and as such it's used as an abstract "shape" finder. I have no idea what Karamba does ... but always have in mind: BIM things ... are BIM things (meaning that without a serious BIM umbrella ... don't go out when it rains).…
len , I lost all of my work (at least the 3d modeling)
And I frankly if I want to participate I´ll need to finnish up the board and i cant do the renders on my own I need more time , but I only have until 11:59 pm of July 6 to finnish up one render, if you feel up to the challenge, whoever completes it will receive 290 dollars (its all I can give) to any account you want. I basically need one single image.
It consists on 3 towers, with an organic facade, I'm including the competition board I had saved on in my dropbox, I want more or less the same perspective shown on the left of the board.
Sorry, but i'm desperate, I had it all done but well cant control everything in life i guess, only do it if you feel you can pull off a professional render.
Thanks. (contact me and I´ll give you more info on the towers, I was able to save some limited sections and floor plans .... but yeah.. limited, so you´ll have to base your work on the images I provide here.
I can give some files now, including images of the physical model.
Board: http://i.minus.com/idYpFK844DWns.jpg
Physical model: http://imgur.com/a/PywJa
Hope its enough, I'm also including one image i had where I explored the footprints of all the buildings, but its just for reference.
I know theres barely enough time to finnish it... but I dont know what else to do, do you guys think i should probably just take a good photograph of the model and run with that? I feel that would probably look very unprofessional :l but I really dont have a choice here
…
w how. Thanks for that. Now I do have some questions.
1. I am using the area weight tool. I am first calculating the volume of the form. I then multiply that value by it's density. So for concrete I am using 2400 kg/m^3 x volume. I then divided that number by the area of the membrane that is supporting the mass. This gives me my area weight. It seems to be working well but I want to verify that this is the correct workflow. I also want to verify that gravity would be turned off since I am thinking it is already calculated within the weight component.
2. I am finding that the new triangular element tool works much better than trying to use EA/L as input for the springs from mesh. Even when I set the timestep, subiteration, and drag I still have issues with getting very stiff materials to work. On the new finite elements tool I wanted to verify that E was in pascals. I also wanted to ask if I use imperial units can psi be entered. Now from what I am seeing the materials are deforming more than expected and to get less deformation and stretch in the mesh area I am finding the E value needs to be increased more than the true material values. Often I am raising E by a multiple of 10 or 100.
I am going to describe my problem and I will gladly share the definition if you'd prefer looking it over but basically I have an inflated membrane at a certain pressure made of a particular material. I then have a certain volume of concrete on top of the inflated membrane. My goal is to review the displacements as the concrete is applied over the membrane and find the proper pressures to apply to keep it free from deformation. I am including a picture from a project that we used kangaroo on and attempted to deal with such issues. It was a class sponsored by Cloud9 architecture held at Art Center College of Design where I was one of the instructors. Hopefully this illustrates the problem. To summarize any example file that shows the best way to implement real material properties and unit based forces would be a helpful reference and would be greatly appreciated.
…
, Engineer and Researcher from France with broad programming experience. He is the author of the City in 3D Rhinoceros plugin for creation of buildings according to geojson file and with real elevation. Guillaume already created a new component: "Address to Location". It enables getting latitude and longitude values for the given address:
2) Support of Bathymetry data: automatic creation of underwater (sea/river/lake floor) terrain. This feature is now available through new source_ input of the "Terrain generator" component. Here is an example of terrain of the Loihi underwater volcano, of the coast of Hawaii:
3) A new terrain source has been added: ALOS World 3D 30m. ALOS is a Japanese global terrain data. Gismo "Terrain Generator" component has been using SRTM 30m terrain data, which hasn't been global and was limited to -56 to +60 latitude range. With this addition, it is possible to switch between SRTM and ALOS World 3D 30m models with the use of source_ input.
4) 9 new components have been added:
"Address To Location" - finds latitude and longitude coordinates for the given address.
"XY To Location" - finds latitude and longitude coordinates for the given Rhino XY coordinates. "Location To XY" - vice versa from the previous component: finds Rhino XY coordinates for the given latitude longitude coordinates. "Z To Elevation" - finds elevation for particular Rhino point. "Rhino text to number" - convert numeric text from Rhino to grasshopper number. "Rhino unit to meters" - convert Rhino units to meters. "Deconstruct location" - deconstructs .epw location. "New Component Example" - this component explains how to make a new Gismo component, in case you are interested to make one. We welcome new developers, even if you contribute a single component to Gismo! "Support Gismo" - gives some suggestions on how to make Gismo better, how to improve it and support it.
5) Ladybug "Terrain Generator" component now supports all units, not only Meters. So any Gismo example file which uses this component, can now use Rhino units other than Meters as well. Thank you Antonello Di Nunzio for making this happen!!
Basically just forget about this yellow panel:
This panel is not valid anymore, so just use any unit you want.
6) A number of bugs have been fixed, reported in topics for the last couple of weeks. We would like to thank members in the community who invested their time in testing, finding these bugs and reporting them: Rafat Ahmed, Peter Zatko, Mathieu Venot, Abraham Yezioro, Rafael Alonso. Thank you guys!!! Apologies if we forgot to mention someone.
The version 0.0.2 can be downloaded from here:
https://github.com/stgeorges/gismo/zipball/master
And example files from here:
https://github.com/stgeorges/gismo/tree/master/examples
Any new suggestions, testing and bug reports are welcome!!…
Added by djordje to Gismo at 5:13pm on March 1, 2017
well, very similar input data must result in wildly different hashes. For example, imagine we have an algorithm which computes hashes of text, and the hashes it computes are all numbers between 0 and 999. We then apply this algorithm to a piece of text:
"When Spring comes back with rustling shade" = 385
So far so good. Now imagine we change the text slightly, for example by removing a single "l":
"When Spring comes back with rusting shade" = 973
Minor change -> very different hash. There are of course way more unique texts than there are numbers between 0 and 999. This must therefore mean that a lot of text will result in the same hash. For example "When Spring brings back blue days and fair." may also result in a hash of 385. Because of the pigeonhole principle, there is nothing to be done about this.
Now for the tricky bit. Hashes are often used to validate executable code. Say your friend James at MI6 sends you a small program that will allow you to eavesdrop on Angela Merkel, and -over the phone- he tells you the hashcode for that application. You can then hash the application yourself, verify that it indeed results in the same hashcode and then you know you can trust the executable.
But now Jack from the FBI intercepts the email and adds a few sneaky lines of code to the original application allowing him to determine from your internet search history with up to 95% accuracy whether you like extra cheese on your pizza. The application has now been tampered with, it can no longer be trusted and you should be able to figure this out as it will no longer result in the same hash code.
But wait! Some hashing algorithms are more secure than others. MD5 is now officially considered to be 'hacked' and it is no longer recommended for doing naughty spying. Specifically, Jack will be able to inject his own code in such a way that it does not result in a different hash. Instead, the SHA family of hashers are to be used, as it is not yet known how to trick these hashers.
This is where the problem comes in, because apparently the US government has forcefully disabled the use of MD5 for all purposes. This is a shame because I use it to quickly compare bitmap icons for identicalness so I only have to store an icon in memory once. There is no security hole due to this, because I'm not hashing secure data. MD5 is somewhat faster than SHA, and since I have to hash several hundred icons on Grasshopper start, I opted for the faster one.
(Very) long story short; you're hosed. Grasshopper uses MD5; USgov does not like; Grasshopper does not run on USgov computers.
I'll do some testing to see if I can switch to SHA and then we can see whether or not that solves the problem. This however will take a while as I'm going on a business trip next week and have yet to prepare my presentations.
--
David Rutten
david@mcneel.com…
Added by David Rutten at 12:06pm on March 31, 2014
la corretta comprensione del software che di livello specialistico per un confronto diretto con alcuni aspetti fondamentali dell’ architettura e del design.
Attraverso l'utilizzo di Grasshopper rivoluzionaria plug-in di Rhinoceros, si insegneranno nuove tecniche di modellazione parametrica.
Grasshopper, permette di esprimere al massimo le qualità e le potenzialità della modellazione Nurbs abbandonando in parte l'interfaccia classica di Rhinoceros. Quest'ultimo infatti viene sostituito da un menù a tendine dove vengono collezionati nodi utili alla composizione di algoritmi risolutivi.
La plug-in Grasshopper, dimostra come il linguaggio del computer stia diventando un reale strumento progettuale.
Il corso si svolgerà nei seguenti giorni: Sabato 26 Ottobre dalle ore 10.00 alle ore 19.00 Domenica 27 Ottobre dalle ore 10.00 alle ore 19.00 Scadenza preiscrizione per Grasshopper: 23/10
Contenuti
Nella prima parte del corso attraverso degli esercizi base si insegneranno i metodi di esplicitazione degli algoritmi generativi. In queste ore di lezione si illustreranno, attraverso fasi operative, i seguenti argomenti:
Suddivisione degli algoritmi in parametri e componenti;
Tipologie di dati comptiili con Grasshopper e loro combinazione creando definizioni minime;
Funzioni matematiche e logiche;
Data flow, liste e filtri di esclusione;
Costruzione di curve e superfici e loro trasformazione;
Nella seconda parte del corso lo strumento viene specializzato affrontando editing e trasformazioni complesse sulle superfici:
Elaborazione delle superfici di suddivisione;
Tassellazione spaziale di superfici a doppia curvatura;
Gestione di parametri variabili per la progettazione di definizioni finalizzate al controllo del movimento;
Ideazione di algoritmi per il passaggio dal modello digitale al modello reale attraverso la tecnica dello sliceing;
Alla fine del corso, verrà rilasciato l’attestato di partecipazione ad un corso di Rhinoceros qualificato certificato dalla casa sviluppatrice McNeel, valido anche per la richiesta di crediti formativi universitari.
Tutor del corso
Il corso sarà tenuto da un docente qualificato, esperto in disegno e rappresentazione dell' architettura e del design:
Michele Calvano| _architetto, dottore di ricerca in rappresentazione architettonica specializzato nella modellazione matematica (Nurbs) e modellazione parametrica.
Docente ART (Autorized Rhino Trainer)
Info
Responsabile didattico e docente del corso: arch. Michele Calvano cell: 340 3476330
Info mail: parametricart@gmail.com
…
de in Italy: gli architetti Arturo Tedeschi, computational designer e autore del bestseller “Parametric Architecture with Grasshopper” e Maurizio Degni, i fashion designer Flavia Migani, Simone Bruno e Chiara Cola ed infine dello shoe designer Alessio Spinelli, vincitore del concorso Who’s On Next 2011 nella categoria Accessori.
Frutto della loro energia e sinergia emozionale è un’opera corale che fonde le singole discipline nel rispetto delle loro identità, generando un innovativo manifesto espressivo e produttivo basato sull’integrazione dei tradizionali strumenti di disegno con processi parametrici elaborati al computer, oramai potente sistema d’indagine e sperimentazione formale per ogni disciplina artistica.
L’installazione, composta da quattro abiti completi e due calzature collocati all’interno di una scultura parametrica in costante dialogo con lo spazio espositivo, è il punto d’incontro tra decenni di ricerca teorica e una nuova consapevolezza progettuale. Il contributo musicale di Davide Severi, la documentazione dell’intero processo creativo e i video firmati da Francesco Ricci Lotteringi si offrono allo spettatore coinvolgendolo in un apprendimento multidisciplinare.
__
In the evocative setting of the Cloister of Bramante, from July 7th to 10th, a new project created by Double comes to life: NU:S.
An extraordinary and engaging installation, which examines the contamination between Fashion and Architecture and attempts to break the mold of the Roman art scene taking advantage of the important creative contribution of young and talented members of Made in Italy: the architects Arturo Tedeschi (computational designer and author of the bestselling "Parametric Architecture with Grasshopper ") and Maurizio Degni; the fashion designers Chiara Cola, Simone Bruno, Flavia Migani, and Alessio Spinelli (shoe designer winner of the 2011 Who's On Next in Accessories category). The concept and the creative direction are the undertaking of Antonella Buono. The result is a harmonious work that merges the individual disciplines while respecting their identities creating an innovative expressive manifesto, thanks to the use of a revolutionary architectural language: the parametricism .
Parametricism is a paradigm which utilises digital models generated through new techniques of computer programming, which today can be considered as equally powerful systems of investigation and formal experimentation, as are considered conventional drawing tools.
The installation, which is the culmination of decades of theoretical research and a new planing knowledge, consists of four dresses, complete with accessories, which are located within a parametric framework in constant dialogue with the exhibition space, involving the audience in a multidisciplinary learning process.
The installation soundtrack was composed by Davide Severi, a talented musician with a substantial knowledge of reinassance music and strong digital music background.
…
t defined from the discussion of radiation exchange between urban surfaces and the sky in urban heat island research (See Oke's literature list below). It will be affected by the proportion of sky visible from a given calculation point on a surface (vertical or horizontal) as a result of the obstruction of urban geometry, but it is not entirely associated with the solid angle subtended by the visible sky patch/patches.
So, I think using "geometry way" to approximate Sky View Factor is not correct. Sky View Factor calculation shall be based on the first principle defining the concept: radiation exchange between urban surface and sky hemisphere:
(image extracted from Johnson, G. T., & Watson, 1984)
Therefore, I always refer to the following "theoretical" Sky View Factors calculated at the centre of an infinitely long street canyon with different Height-to-width ratios in Oke's original paper (1981) as the ultimate benchmark to validate different methods to calculate SVF:
So, I agree with Compagnon (2004) on the method he used to calculate SVF: a simple radiation (or illuminance) simulation using a uniform sky.
The following images are the results of the workflow I built in the procedural modeling software Houdini (using its python library) according to this principle by calling Radiance to do the simulation and calculation, and the SVF values calculated for different canyon H/W ratios (shown at the bottom of each image) are very close to the values shown in Oke's paper.
H/W=0.25, SVF=0.895
H/W=1, SVF=0.447
H/W=2, SVF=0.246
It seems that the Sky View Factor calculated from the viewAnalysis component in Ladybug is not aligned with Oke's result for a given H/W ration: (GH file attached)
According to the definition shown in this component, I assume the value calculated is the percentage of visible sky which is a geometric calculation (shooting evenly distributed rays from sensor point to the sky and calculate the ratio of rays not blocked by urban geometry?), i.e solid angle subtended by visible sky patches, and it is not aligned with the original radiation exchange definition of Sky View Factor.
I'd suggest to call this geometrically calculated ratio of visible sky "Sky Exposure Factor" which is "true" to its definition and way of calculation (see the paper on Sky Exposure Factor below) so as to avoid confusion with "The Sky View Factor based on radiation exchange" as discussed in urban climate literature.
Appreciate your comments and advice!
References:
SVF: definition based on first principle
Oke, T. R. (1981). Canyon geometry and the nocturnal urban heat island: comparison of scale model and field observations. Journal of Climatology, 1(3), 237-254.
Oke, T. R. (1987). Boundary layer climates (2nd ed.). London ; New York: Methuen.
Johnson, G. T., & Watson, I. D. (1984). The Determination of View-Factors in Urban Canyons. Journal of American Meteorological Society, 23, 329-335.
Watson, I. D., & Johnson, G. T. (1987). Graphical estimation of sky view-factors in urban environments. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLIMATOLOGY, 7(2), 193-197. doi: 10.1002/joc.3370070210
Papers on SVF calculation:
Brown, M. J., Grimmond, S., & Ratti, C. (2001). Comparison of Methodologies for Computing Sky View Factor in Urban Environments. Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA: Los Alamos National Laboratory.
SVF calculation based on first principle:
Compagnon, R. (2004). Solar and daylight availability in the urban fabric. Energy and Buildings, 36(4), 321-328.
paper on Sky Exposure Factor:
Zhang, J., Heng, C. K., Malone-Lee, L. C., Hii, D. J. C., Janssen, P., Leung, K. S., & Tan, B. K. (2012). Evaluating environmental implications of density: A comparative case study on the relationship between density, urban block typology and sky exposure. Automation in Construction, 22, 90-101. doi: 10.1016/j.autcon.2011.06.011
…
e following tutorial: http://digitaltoolbox.info/grasshopper-intermediate/offset-scale/
I think the beginning is correct because I have the same things. However, at the last step I can't correctly generate the tabs for assemble this shape. I try to put "flatten" everywhere but it doesn't work ... If someone just give me a little help please ? Or check if everything is okay? Or if there is an another tutorial ? Or if the question has already been asked in this forum ? I take! I'm really sorry if my problem is not very interesting but I'm new ... Yours, Anna, windows 7 on bootcamp Rhino 5 Grasshopper O.8.0063
Files :
Shape.3dm
Shape.gh
…