ornamental flowerpot

Hoopsnake algorithm was developed to find the optimal arrangement of the assembly parts, to use as less material as possible, while maintaining the main form-design idea.

9 members like this

View Full Size

Tags:

Comment

You need to be a member of Grasshopper to add comments!

Comment by Artyom Maxim on February 4, 2013 at 5:17pm: Fantastic machine) and I agree with you, in reality, this process is very complex and requires complex skills. But, from another point of view, the creation of toolpaths doesn't use energy resources, see what I mean?

Comment by Mateusz Zwierzycki on February 4, 2013 at 4:36pm: @Artyom : well it all depends on what type of fabrication process we are talking about. If we were talking here about more complex CNCing (not the 2d cutting), we could really argue about machining cost. Take a look at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjobN1YvUdY - I bet this piece of metal is cheaper than hiring somebody who had to create paths for the machine. But sure, in your case (and in most architecture related cases) machining is usually simpler.

Comment by Artyom Maxim on February 4, 2013 at 4:21pm: You're so right) The reality though is so far form the ideal...

In ideal you could think, the manufacturing process, what does it take? Some electricity for cnc and a "pair of free hands"? And the material- how long is for example the production chain of the same steel sheet!

And the reality is that we have to pay more $$$ for the process that actually uses less time and less energy than the production of the material that is used in this process...

Am I wrong?

Comment by Nick Tyrer on February 4, 2013 at 3:54pm: Well to be honest it totally depends on the material and process and maybe the quantity. Saving a tiny sliver of wood between each piece doesn't save all that much. Fabricators normally charge on cutpath length, because it determines how long the job will take to cut, man hours etc. I was on a project that ended up needing 1km of sheet metal plasma cutting. If we could of halved that = £££

Comment by Artyom Maxim on February 4, 2013 at 3:07pm: Here's a short video demonstrating the work of the Hoopsnake algorithm:

Comment by Artyom Maxim on February 4, 2013 at 3:05pm: Wow, thank you for guiding my thoughts in the right direction! Actually I somehow haven't considered the thought of the importance of production speed...

And is the cutting cost so crucial and significant in a big manufacturing project? It's just I always thought that it is material which is most important, and not the production processes that use the least resources in a project...

I'd love to take a look at your version!

Comment by Nick Tyrer on February 4, 2013 at 11:28am: Yes, i know i'm being pedantic, but your the one that stated 'less material' not me. By definition your final pot will have more material and weight than the absolute minimum. Which if the waste is going to be recycled/reused then its not the best solution.

I'm saying your under-selling your good idea by labeling it wrong. This sort of optimisation has more real world application than many i've seen. By sharing boundary conditions you nearly half the amount of actual lasercutting/cnc routing that needs to be done. Which would double the speed of production. Cutting costs at one of the most expensive stages of manufacture. Outweighing the fact that its not saving the maximum material.

I'm am gonna have to give it a go myself when i have some free time!

Comment by Artyom Maxim on February 4, 2013 at 10:56am: Thanks) So what is then the definition of "saving the most material"? Probably creating the design that follows the logic of minimal material waste? Clearly my design doesn't follow this idea, instead the assembly logic tries to make the design less "wasty".
Is this what you mean?

Comment by Nick Tyrer on February 4, 2013 at 8:50am: Looks fantastic Artyon, so just be clear, this is different to say using rhino-nest because instead of rearranging finished pieces you are generating the outer edge, then defining the inner edge of each piece by the next piece/layer of the model.

So 'technically' you might not be saving the most material, but you are definitely reducing the cutpath distance, therefore saving time/money etc.

I'm impressed, i like the unique take on fabrication optimisation. Though it can only be used on surfaces/objects, where the internal face isn't important.