Paneling Meshes?!

Hey Guys,

i modeled a really nice form for a scyscraper, smoothed it with weaverbird an now i have a very clean mesh. My question is: How do I panelize a mesh? Do you know some ways to do that? For example just for paneling the whole mesh with some simple boxes, or whatever... Is there a way? I can't use paneling tools, cause it's a mesh...

Sorry for my stupid beginner questions, but I'm having real trouble at the moment and I have to present a paneling facade tomorrow...

Thanks for your help!!!

Patrick

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Martin Dembski on October 17, 2011 at 10:32am

Hi Patrick,

here I did now a definition in Grasshopper.

You will need the MeshEdit plug-in for Grasshopper by [uto].

Up to now I didn't proof, if it is also working with triangles.

Another possibility would be using ParaCloud GEM.

Hope this helps.

Best,

Martin.

Attachments:

Permalink Reply by konrad k sobon on September 2, 2012 at 2:59pm

Martin,

I was able to improve (I hope so) your way of converting meshes to surfaces and then paneling them using the morph component.

Check it out. Let me know if you need the GH file.

Attachments:

mesh_to_surface_converter.jpg, 312 KB
final_surface.jpg, 996 KB

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on September 2, 2012 at 4:26pm

just use flip matrix + explode tree instead of all the list iteming.

Permalink Reply by konrad k sobon on September 2, 2012 at 5:28pm

when i do that i get a warning at the Explode Tree Component that it contains more branches than it has output parameters. List Item component works for this application since it groups corner points of each face into individual subsets thus by calling out item 1 i am actually calling out item 1 if each face..

Maybe you are right. Idk. Can you put together a definition and post it?

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on September 2, 2012 at 5:31pm

yes I know what list item does, in your case its not needed. You got to use ZUI and add more outputs

Permalink Reply by konrad k sobon on September 2, 2012 at 5:39pm

i know how that parameter works.

What is wrong with listing them like i did?

Can you put together a quick definition so i can see how you think it should be? I am all about making it smaller/less complex.

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on September 2, 2012 at 5:43pm

see here, It is just less components / no manual input. Which I like.

Permalink Reply by konrad k sobon on September 2, 2012 at 6:26pm

In theory this works, however it somehow crashed my computer couple of times when i tried it. I will keep tinkering with it, and let you know if it works.

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on September 2, 2012 at 6:30pm

It works in actuality :), widget shows it is using less computation. can you post your definition?

Permalink Reply by Michael Pryor on September 2, 2012 at 6:52pm

see here, in general the computations are close in speed.

Permalink Reply by konrad k sobon on September 2, 2012 at 6:53pm

you are right Michael. It was killing my PC for some unknown reasons. I restarted and tried again. That error i was getting about more branches than outputs was that somehow along the way i managed to triangulate my mesh faces thus i was getting 7 points per polygon. 7 outputs needed. It works with 7 outputs even if 3 of them are not being used.

Problem solved!

Thanks so much for your help!

Permalink Reply by Mateusz Zwierzycki on September 2, 2012 at 6:33pm