]]> http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/architecture/interconnected-loops-part-2//feed 0 http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/architecture/optimize-connections/ http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/architecture/optimize-connections/#comments Sun, 30 May 2010 16:22:33 +0000 morrow.liam http://www.sketchygrid.com/?p=433 This definition is very simple, but incredibly useful.  It sorts a series of points based on distance and then creates connections based on that list.  The only slider in the definition is used to control the number of connections that are allowed.  The purpose of the definition being that it optimizes the placement of connections.

Connecting Points Grasshopper File

Note:Version of Grasshopper Used-(Grasshopper 0.6.0059)

Interconnected Loop Tile Grasshopper File

Note:Version of Grasshopper Used-(Grasshopper 0.6.0059)

The aggregation of the module starts with a standardized grid; this grid is then distorted to create variation within the wall.  It could easily be linked to some kind of attractor point (as was intended).  The actual grasshopper definition of aggregation was borrowed from PinupSpace’s component population page.  The definition is very simple; all it requires is a subdivided mesh, preferably with some kind of color information embedded.  However, if you haven’t worked that out you can always just attach a Mesh Color component to your mesh, this will pattern your mesh with a color.  PinupSpace’s script basically just breaks your mesh up into its color coded parts and then applies the selected module using a simple box-morph.  I’ve included their video at the bottom of the page.

Part of what made this project such a learning experience was the fabrication portion of it.  Our material choice for the project was 2″ insulation foam.  This was mainly due to the contours that the router would need to cut.  Having never used the machine before, I had no idea what to expect in terms of accuracy.  I started with the preconception that the router would perfectly sculpt my 3d model.  This preconception was flawed in two respects, the first being that the router dropped every pass a slight amount in the z axis.  This meant you never really had a cut that was true to its digital counter part.  The second oversight was in the ability of the material to retain its rigidity after having half of it sculpted away.  A 2′x8′ sheet of foam does not stay flat after that much of it is stripped away.

-Liam Morrow

-Component Population On Mesh from Ted Ngai on Vimeo.

Perforation Panel Grasshopper File

Note:Version of Grasshopper Needed-(Grasshopper 0.6.0059)

This little macro is really sweet for skewing rhino models into axonometrics.  Its important to note however that this will actually skew your model, save your model before you do this.

Just paste the following text into your menu bar:

! _Select _Pause _SetActiveViewport Top _Rotate 0 30 _SetActiveViewport Right _Shear w0 w0,0,1 -45 _SetActiveViewport Top _Zoom _All _Extents

The aggregations involved connecting the spheres of flocking’s origin points.  After the aggregation each of the flocks was connected to the next via a poly-line.  Those lines were the divided to create points, these points were affected by the semi circles, which effectively represent spheres of influence.  The points are then turned into floor plates.

———————————————————————–

]]> http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/architecture/flockingbirds-and-the-like-part-3//feed 0 http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/tutorials/tutorialcircle-panels/ http://www.sketchygrid.com/index/tutorials/tutorialcircle-panels/#comments Sun, 20 Dec 2009 04:34:07 +0000 morrow.liam http://www.sketchygrid.com/?p=292

This Grasshopper definition uses a grid of points to generate a series of curves that respond to an attractor point.  This definition is a great example of using really simple and basic concepts of parametrics to accomplish a more complicated goal.  Essentially, all this definition is composed of is an attractor point that adjusts the curvature of a plane and an attractor point that adjusts the radius of circles that are projected onto that surface.  The small bit of vbscript at the end is used to split the circles from the surface.

Note:Version of Grasshopper Needed-(Grasshopper 0.6.0019)

VBscript:

a = rhutil.RhinoSplitBrepFace(y, 0, x.ToArray, doc.AbsoluteTolerance)

As a bit of code, its actually not very necessary.  Does it really matter if you split the circles in grasshopper or rhino space?  In this case, not really, however its useful to know and more importantly it brings up the question of how integrated grasshopper can become with rhino.  As a tool, grasshopper can be great a modeling things really quickly and when you start to make relationships its really great at doing calculations for you.  These panels are a good example, they illustrate both a much easier way of modeling and an easier way of calculating the relationships between points.  Grasshopper presents a much clearer way for the designer to understand what the relationships are within a given project.  Given this diagrammatic way of seeing the logic behind an object, designers should begin to spend more time articulating these relationships and less time articulating the form.

The set of images at the top of the article represent an ethereal form of an object.  They show a logic, but in order for them to mean anything they need to be put within context.  The context would then generate a meaningful form.  Whether you design in grasshopper or rhino space is irrelevant as long as there is some context attached to the object.  An example with respect to this tutorial could be assigning the attractor points some sort of value, such as amount of light, pre-existing site constraints, or even something as simple as compositional logic.

-Liam Morrow

I’ve just uploaded a new tutorial based around the grasshopper plug-in for rhino, Louver Tutorial.  For those who don’t know about grasshopper, visit this link (Grasshopper).  In short, grasshopper is a plug-in for rhino that is used to generate parametric objects.  Its more or less a playground for creating relationships between geometries.  In the tutorial, I explain by example how to decompose a surface in order to map points along it.  These points become the start of a louver system, in which all kinds of relationships could be created to organize their generation.

Note:Version of Grasshopper Needed-(Grasshopper 0.6.0019)

These are the iterations of the previously discussed grasshopper definition.  The system on the left has its ratios(see first article) set to change at each iteration starting at .3 moving towards .8 and then returning to .3 at even intervals.  The system on the right is used as a control it is permanently set to .5.

Flocking is the subtle organization of part to part relationships. One of the most common examples of this is obviously flocks of birds, such as the starlings at Otmoor(see video after the break). Flocking in that case consists of a couple elements. The first being clustering of parts, so these parts are forming a spatial relationship of proximity. The next being a correspondence to average heading, each of those starlings not only react to the spatial field of the others, but also to the direction in which they are headed. The final element is a collection of average mass, this is almost a example of part to whole, except for the fact that it is less a reaction and more of a product generated by the first two rules. The starlings as a field of objects generate an emergent condition, the first two elements are a reaction, while the center of mass is something else entirely it is an emergent product generated through the complexity of the system.

A Flock of Starlings at Otmoor

The challenge now is to generate an architecture from these systems and emergent qualities. After the initial analysis, it was important to generate an abstract system that could better explain the nuances of the system at work. The first step was creating an object, a boid, which is short for bird and droid. The first boids were developed by Craig Reynolds, for a quick history lesson visit his website, Craig Reynolds. A boid is the perfect solution for this system as it is the most basic shape that shows direction. As explained in the first analysis, the boids must respond both to the proximity of others and the direction. The second part of the image below demonstrates how this was done, there is a circle drawn around the first boid which is double the width, this creates a proximity on which to work. The second step is to rotate the boid based on two conditions a comparison of the vector of the previous boid and the tangent of the proximity circle. For the first iteration this creates solely a perpendicular relationship, but the more iterations that occur the more the angle will vary. This emulates how as the pieces become more distant from the origin there is less control.

The next image demonstrates object avoidance and the most important part of the system. The new arc is generated similarly to the first circle, except that the portion of circle within the first has been removed in order to maintain object avoidance. This is essential because the next step involves a ratio to find the next boid location. The interesting thing about this is that as you adjust boid location at the origin, the ratios will remain, but the position generated will change. This is what creates the reactive system, each boid is reacting to the others.

The following images explain in depth the system described above. The new location is reacting to a chosen ration and the rotation is once again a comparison of the vector from the previous boid and the tangent of the location on the arc. This system is repeated as needed.

I chose only three generation of boids in order to keep the system manageable, however in theory this system could be deployed ad infinitum. One of the final steps of the individual system was to prepare it for aggregation. It made sense to maintain the language of the system and continue the rules set forth.

Finally the system is aggregated together; and once again each of the individual spheres of influence are reacting to each other. Essentially creating flocks that react to other flocks. One of the most interesting things about this project is that it was accomplished within grasshopper, a plug-in for rhino. Grasshopper is a graphic system for coding within rhino, it however follows a very linear program logic. Referring back to the early analysis it is clear that flocking is anything but linear. Flocking would be more suited to a recursive language where there is some kind of conditional statement, such as:

If(boids are too close)

Then(move boids so they are not close)

Otherwise(do nothing)

This kind of conditional statement would be responsive to individual situations. It would loop continuously asking the question, are the boids too close, and when they are no longer in proximity it terminates itself. Grasshopper, however requires that as you build your system the, piece’s reaction is built in.