right-clicking and Edit Properties. Now set a name, nickname and description. You can also pick an icon and set Copyright info.
Then just go to File > Create user object and set where you want to save it. Make sure you save it somewhere sensible like Params and not in one of the tabs generated by an addon component.
Now you can place the cluster in any other document, just like you would a normal component.
Of course no actual link remains to the cluster and you cant make changes to it. Still very useful!
2. The second way is to use "Export & Reference", by right-clicking on a cluster and then saving the cluster as a .ghcluster file wherever you feel right (might even be inside a Dropbox folder ;).
Once that is done, the cluster in your document is linked with that .ghcluster file, which you can open and edit like any grasshopper document. You can place it in other documents by dragging it into the patch - I have not found another way of placing it which seems strange, but ok, it works.
Now you have to take care, because the link remains and any changes to the cluster will be used by all other references. You can of course Dereference the cluster and have it unlinked and placed in your document again, by clicking "internalise":
I have not tried it a lot, but both solutions should solve any needs for reusing clusters in different documents.
I have just noticed that placing a .ghcluster file in a new document resets the Icon, Name and Description - I will file it as a bug report.
ps (to David): Once again this does NOT work with a file server properly - using Export & Reference and saving on a file server causes Grasshopper to freeze for several minutes after which it works. I have used a lot of software and we work entirely on the file server, but I have not come across a single piece of software that shows this behaviour and doesn't work with a file server. Let's hope this gets sorted for GH2!…
Added by Armin Seltz at 3:31am on January 25, 2016
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
…
don't input it in the context input.
@ Chris I tried to graft the geometry input to get separate studies but I think is not working. As you can see from the images I have two buildings (dark grey) that are the same building in different locations, surrounded by other buildings (context). If I graft the geometry input I get six branches, the six sides of each box. It means that in each branch the results of the two boxes are merged, in factt if you see the results of the single building the number of test points is exacly the same. I tried also not with the copy of the same box but with two different and the result is the same. Or do I miss to do something?
Ok I could split each branch in two sub-branch {0;*} and {1;*} then I should separate the six branches of one box and the six brances of the other box... quite tricky.
If it is possible would be good that it works like I mentioned, that until you don't input the same object in geometry and in context, but you input only in geometry it acts only as geometry so no need to deal with complicated lists.
I say this because the reseach I work on requires the calculations of minimum sunlight hours for each day (of the specified period) for each test point so it gets really complicated. Thank you!
Francesco
…
thing that MicroStation does (or doesn't). The eternal debate between us is that they focus to the so called BIM aspect of things (and obviously on interoperability matters - that said IFC2*4 is" implemented" in certain Bentley verticals like BA and others) whilst I'm after assembly/component puzzles (and on that matter ... MS ...hmm... to put it politely is not exactly CATIA and/or NX, he he).
On the other hand this paranoid obsession with Level/Layer driven CAD (I hate it) defines a red thick line between CAD and MCAD - because the most intelligent importer can't emulate the way that Siemens NX/CATIA classifies objects - and without control power means nothing.
On the other hand Microstation V9 (...soon) has interesting scripting capabilities (think Modo rather Generative Components) ... meaning that Grasshopper could work there in a rather nice way. I think that I must talk for that to Ray (he recently ditched the ancient legacy MS render engine in favor for the Luxology/Nexus engine). Ray still is negative to buy Act3D mind (hope that you know the mother of visual scripting - the Quest3D VR thing).
On the other hand - within the broad AEC aspect - things these days are different (especially in fast developing countries the likes of UAE, Saudi Arabia, certain ex USSR "democracies" etc etc). Studies are outsourced even at Preliminary Design stage to various sub-contractors (they undertake the Study completion per discipline as well). This means that N separate groups doing M aspects of the whole ... meaning entropy^(N*M) - that's chaos in plain English.
With this in mind I'm quite (a lot) skeptical about the practical meaning of the whole exchange thing in AEC - at least with regard the countries mentioned (not to mention that several portions of a modern AEC thing are made via MCAD apps - chaos^chaos.
I'll back with more focused issues on that matter.
But the big question is: Grasshopper of Generative Components? Well...let's talk serious SS bikes instead: think a Ducati 1198 and a BMW S1000RR (I have them both): which is "best"? The thing is that not always the best bunny is the fasted bunny and not always the fasted bunny is the best bunny.
Cheers,
Peter
…
ails.
Some word about the mesh... (see Image_01)
I took a flat 4 points NURBS surface as imput (very easy, it defines the total area of my pavilion) and some points (that defines the contact with the ground).
Then I extracted a grid of points from the NURBS (Surface_Util_Divide surface) and compared 'em with the contol points, in order to associate to each grid's point its own attractor (Vector_Point_Closest Point).
Than I moved the points down. I used the distance from each point to its attractor (inverted) as amplitude for the vector of the movement, in order to say: the nearer you are to the control point, the more intense your movement will be. During this operation I've passed the distances' data list into a graph mapper (Params_Special_Graph Mapper), in order to regulate in a very intuitive and interactive way the shaping of my canopy.
At the end of the process I asked GH for a simple Delaunay mesh (Mesh_Triangulation_Delaunay Mesh). It's a very cool command, I believe!!!
Ok, now some word about the component, it's design and it's repetition/adaptation to the mesh...
(see Image_02)
I took the mesh and extracted components on first and faces's information on second. Then I selected and separated the vertexes (1°, 2°, 3°) of each triangular face into threee well defined list.
Then I re-created the triangles' edges. Please pay attention because it's not the same if you use output information from Delaunay components, because here we need a justapposition of edges where triangles touches each others.
After this work I joined the edges and found their centroid. At the same time I found the mid point of each edge.
Now the component... (see Image_03)
It' a little bit longer to describe: I'll try to be synthetic.
Substantially it is a loft from a curve to a point, repeated three times for each triangle (Surface_Freeform_Extrude Point). The point is an elevation of the centroid of the triangle (you can choose if the exstrusion has a single height or it's related to an attractor. In my case it was fixed). The curve is combination of things. There's an arch, which starts on the edge (there's an offset from the corner) end terminates on the same edge (on the other side, obviously). While it's generation the arch passes through a third point which belong to another segment. This last connects the mid point of the original edge (base triangle) with the centroid. The result is a kind of polyline, with two segments and an arch. If you go back to the image of the component that I posted probably you'll understand what I'm saying better than with the definition.
The posit…
good value so 4 times would get you there.
Ok. I understood. You have to consider that the mesh displayed is generated by genTestPoints component where the grid size is effectively 0.5m:
The pressure plot you shared above, it seems like your cell size varies, are you using any gradient options in the blockMesh step? In this example there'd be no need, as all areas are equally important.
The pressure plot varies because I have modified the cell grid size of the meshParams component in (0.25, 0.25, 0.25):
Now, I have re-uploaded the basic values of (1,1,1) and modified the cell size in the blockmesh component as you suggested in the previous post:
As cell size by default, this component considers the length/5. So, in this case, there would be a cell size of about (1.5, 1.1, 0.6). It’s correct? But If I display the mesh with load mesh component connected to the case output of the snappyhexmesh component, I find this:
With a cell size of (0.25, 0.25, 0.25) as modified in the screenshot of the blockmesh component reported above, the mesh is extremely dense:
The residuals decrease:
with a more clear image.
Regards,
Francesco…
um in Microstation):
But let's stay in Rhino for the shake of the thread...:
..the tricky bit is to use in GH a set of "static" geometry and instead of exploiting (at infinitum) forms, shapes, and such ...just finish the difficult part of the story:
1. Assume that this is covered the classic way: corrugated sheets + Foamglas T4 + fasteners directly glued on Foamglas (avoid classic fastener penetration = leaks) + aluminum guides + some MV Zink sheets (or CalZip or copper or titanium).
http://www.foamglas.ae/building/en/downloads/
2. The catch in such type of roofing is to make a "smart" definition (GH or Gen Comp) that can deploy these sheets into the existing geometry taking into account (a) their maximum flex/bending capability - trying to create a "skin sphere" instead of a faceted ugly chaos (b) their physical size in order to avoid getting into the usual wedge situations (i.e: examine if a given flexible sheet of metal - kind of ribbon- can cover a NURBS of some sort).
In other words and in the broad sense of things: how we can inquire static geometry in GH and get back, say for a start, a collection of working planes in order...etc etc etc. Or how we can use Orient brep type of components in Rhino geometry?
…
x way). Why may you ask? Well ... in order to control what "module" (triangle) is where my dear Watson, that's why.
2. Your data set is wrong in the sense that you provide a single dimension list of already "ready" Breps (triangles) and then instruct the C# ... er ... to subdivide each triangle (that's like dating 123,45 girls at once: not recommended unless you are some Sheik of some sort).
3. There's several solutions to that problem:
3a: The right way is to subdivide a surface AND THEN individually modify any desired module BEFORE the C# continues post processing the modules. Any why this is a bit complex? (although achievable) Well .. the explanation is ... er ... complex, he he (GH is not designed for doing this: GH operates in a fire and forget mode, so to speak, as regards collections of things).
3b: The other way is to mastermind some (rather inefficient) way to influence modules BEFORE the C# continues ... blah blah. In plain English: using the so called attractors and the likes (I dislike that: I'm an engineer and that's not engineering by any means, but is OK for artists).
3c: The other way is to create a Plan B in the C# : don't subdivide > just get these things (as Lists/DataTrees of Breps) and compute things/whatever/US (not the land of free). But ... we need to supply the modules in an U/V indexed way (obviously we can do that automatically with "some" lines of code more - but is a very stupid way to address the issue).
PS: a DataTree IS NOT a List of List of List of ... it's an indexed collection of single dimension Lists.
best, Peter…
esult".
Its about making radiant temperature map, but it gives some errors such as:
1. The length of data in the comfResultsMTX does not matech the number of faces in the viewFactorMesh.
1. Solution exception:index out of range: -2
Its just simple box building that simulation itself doesn't take long, and I've updated my HB and LB components and everything seems ok. But still having the problem. Since the components have major and minor changes I've managed to connect _comfResultsMtx to the read Comfort result component to do the simulation, however it has some other issues as well.
The components error message says
1. Failed to parse the result file. The csv file might not have existed when connected or the simulation did not run correctly.Try reconnecting the _resultfileAddress to this component or re-running your simulation.
So the question is how to achieve radiant temperature map? and could it be done in specific analysis period instead of annual cycle?
Best Regards. Awkweird. …
n fact) according a vast variety of "modes" PLUS the required clash detection (ALWAYS via trigonometry). In plain English: outline any collection of Breps and "apply" a truss that is topologically sound (planarization in case of quads etc is an added constrain). PLUS outline/solve what comes "next" after that truss (like the planar glazing "add-on" brackets of yours [ the ones that need redesign, he he], or some roofing/facade skin system [secondary supports, corrugated sheet metal, insulation, final cladding, dogs and cats])
2. Imaging doing this in real life (nothing to do with "abstract" formations of "lines" or "shapes" or whatever). This means primarily adopting a BIM umbrella: in plain English AECOSim, Revit or Allplan (I'm a Bentley man so I use AECOSim + Generative Components). This also means using "in-parallel" a top MCAD app for 1:1 details, FEA/FIM and the vast paraphernalia required for real-life studies destined for real-life projects (made with real-life money by real-life people). My choice: CATIA/Siemens NX.
3. What to send to Microstation (if not using Generative Components, that is) and/or CATIA? In what "state"? To do what exactly? For instance even if you could design this feature driven tensile membrane anchor custom node in Rhino (you can't) it could be 100% useless in CATIA:
4. Imaging masterminding ways to send them nested instance definitions of ... er ... a coordinate system (all what you need). In plain English: since is utterly pointless to send them nested blocks that can't been parametrically controlled (variations/modifications/PLM management/BOM/specs etc etc)... send them simply the "instructions" to place coordinate systems of components that ARE parametrically designed within Microstation and/or CATIA (classic feature driven design approach blah blah). So GH solves topology et all (working on data imported via, say, Excel sheets related with sizes of components etc etc) and sends to Microstation simply this (a myriad of "this" actually):
I do hope that the gist of the "method" (the ONLY way to invite GH to the party) is clear.
best, Peter…