1D when it comes to a location on a surface or a curve. If a 3D point shares a location on a surface we can represent it by means of the U and V co-ordinates of that surface.
In your example above the 4 surface corners are {2,2.5,0}, {17, 2.5, 0}, {17, 19, 0} and {2,19,0}. Unless you reparametrise the domains they will typically take the same domains as the curves that constructed them in this particular case the lengths (but these curves are only that length at the edges and only when you created the surface).
So the U domain is 0 to 15 (17-2) and the V domain is 0 to 16.5 (19-2.5). Even if you transformed the surface to another location or another shape these domains will not change and therefore the UV co-ordinate will not change. If you reparemterise the surface then the domains are set to 0 and 1 in both directions and this might be easier to work with. You can think of them as a percentage then, a UV location of {0.5, 0.5} of a reparameterised surface will always be in the middle of the 2D space.
All points on a surface in 2D have a 3D space co-ordinate as well, but not all 3D points have a 2D co-ordinate. This is why we need to use the Surface CP to get a UV value to evaluate a surface at a given point.
Incidently the 1D co-ordinate of a curve is represented by the parameter t
…
fferent features of the grasshopper plugin.
Comparing the results I have noticed a bug (or I'm completely missing out on something I've plugged in wrong).
When comparing solar gains from one to the other I first noticed the results Honeybee were shifted by an hour (winter) or two (summer) compared to the IES ones, and that the results were shifted by 1 hour for the entire year compared to running the IDF file and EPW seperately in EnergyPlus. I have used the same weather file (Leuchars.epw) for each simulation.
My findings are resumed in the 4 graphs attached to this post.
My question is: why is this happening? I understand EnergyPlus/Honeybee are not accounting for daylight savings which is why the IES model is shifted an hour further during the summer, but why is the EPW processed through ladybug shifted one hour back?
Also, I managed to get similar solar gains by assuming a frame factor of 15% on my IES windows, what exactly is assumed in honeybee/energyplus regarding frame factors? And can it be changed using honeybee components?…
t the maximum potential with the bridge BIM+PARAMETRIC DESIGN ;D
During this Intense Week, we will learn about the power of Rhino + Grasshopper + ArchiCAD with Professional and Useful examples for our Normal Working day :D
You will get Advanced Library Files + Personal Web + Knowledge and Skills to start using this incredible Methodology ;D
Also, the week is having Lectures from different Experts sharing their Computational Working Experiences ;D And Jam Sessions! opening the door to 5 interesting topics to research, learn and experiment together :D
2020 is your YEAR ;D !!!
Complete details and registration……
bounding box wont work because it will seldom be square shaped. this square bounding surface should always be larger than the open or closed curve
2. dividing the curve into then testing its closest point to the center of the bounding sqaure plane.
3. creating rectangles with the same size as the divisions of the bounding plane.
this works perfectly, but there is one last problem that needs attention.
it generates the same amount of closest points than what is specified for the curve divide. e.g. the curve can be closed for instance with 35 squares , but the curve was divided into let say 50 points. the curve will be closed with the 35 squares but there are an additional 15 squares ontop of the 35 squares.
SO if someone can tell us how to remove duplicate data from a list of points(the points with the same coordinates), then the final solution will have no duplicate data.
the duplicate data can be seen in the second image
Gordon
…
and demonstration of the component
3. Example
This way if people just want a description of the component they can stop watching before the example section.
For this video I explained the example I made at the end. So maybe that is a waste of time? Maybe it is better if I show an example and then post pictures of the components. That might be easier for people to build it themselves and get a deeper understanding.
I agree that it is best if there is only one idea covered per video and I will try to do that in the future.
I think that the winform with a fragmented video tutorial is a good idea but for me right now would be too hard to setup.
I think my videos will have to be within the 6-8 minute range, but I will try and we can see what will happen. (I originally had another example in the video above but it made the video 15 min and I thought that was way too long).
Thanks.
Shout out to NARUTO. Its been awhile. Hello.…
Added by Jake Hebbert at 8:06pm on November 19, 2015
f 15 points and my teacher said to me afterwards: "Chris, you know that the one point was a sympathy point don't you ?" ... so baby steps but i'm catchin up ..
to help me follow the breadcrumbs through the patch could you maybe dumb it down extremely for me and just list a couple of steps how the system functions, sth like. 1) define string gauge- 2) draw neck liine 3) calculate spacing or sth like that, like a super high level overview. it's great that you have grouped, named and colored everything (many many thx for that !) this helps a lot for my understanding but you are using so many components i have never used that it's a bit difficult at the moment to follow the logical flow.
BUT: everything pans out now and spacing is perfect and all is centered ... with this one can build guitars :-)
…
e it helps,
Mostapha
PS: I forgot two things in the video:
1. if you don't install Radiance at C:\Radiance then you need to add the path to the system. Check this page: (https://openstudio.nrel.gov/getting-started-developer/getting-started-radiance).
2. You need to also install GHPython component.
3. Radiance has been moved to github and now you can download it from this page: (https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases). Download the latest .exe file for Windows.…
he concept, moving on to decision making and continuing with digital and generative design tools TO GET THE BEST SOLUTION for each problem.
WHY? The world is complex and ever-changing and we need to be able to handle the volume of information we receive and, of course, to find and choose the best solution. Therefore, we direct our ATTENTION TO THE CAUSE, and not only on the effects/solutions.
We will learn from NATURE, the only “company” that has not gone bankrupt in over 4000M years, and it’s GENERATIVE SOLUTIONS.
> OBJECTIVES <
The participants will work in multidisciplinary groups (ex. architect + designer + business manager + constructor + communication specialist etc.) applying knowledge management tools, different approaches and nature-based optimization methods.
Listed objectives:
1. Improving the generative way of TURNING AN IDEA INTO A PROJECT through problem-solving thinking
2. Discovering nature’s ways of shaping evolutionary solutions
3. Getting out from our comfort zone and working together with other professionals in groups in order to achieve better solutions: Multidisciplinary Design Optimization
4. Learning to use technology to manage information in the decision making process
& surviving the whole week
> ATTENDANCE & COSTS <
> Early bird – until 17th March 2013
Lecture – 15 euro (includes presentations, food& drinks)
Workshop – 100 euro (includes lecture, food& drinks)
> Late bird – until 6th April 2013
Lecture – 25 euro (includes presentations, food& drinks)
Workshop – 120 euro (includes lecture, food& drinks)
…
genetic algorithm requires a lot of iterative calculations, but the computing power needed for analyzing structural models is very huge, and it also takes much time. And modifying the structual model according to genetic algorithm was not so easy for real-scale complex structures.So, we've developed StrAuto, a parametric structural modeler and optimizer based on Rhino/Grasshopper. StrAuto can execute iterative structural analysis and optimization automatically, and the most powerful feature of it is that it can execute the analysis task (the most time consuming part of optimization) in multi-processed way on distributed systems in network.Now, in the movie you can see the galapagos G.A. optimizer in the left monitor (the main system) is running and many instances(15) of structural solver Sap2000 are running along with it. The middle monitor shows 5 worker systems that are running 3 instances of Sap2000 for each under the control of the main system.The number of sap instances can be extended as much as your SAP license permits.(one license can launch 3 instances of SAP)With StrAuto, structural G.A. optimization can be performed 10 ~ 30 times faster so that even very complex real scale structures can be optimized.If you are interested in StrAuto, you can see more athttp://tree8.chang-soft.co.kr/Sangsu Lee, changsoft I&I…