Very strange. It's got to do with the sort list component. Looks like a bug in the new input manager. The thing is i noticed it, fixed it, saved it and uploaded it again but it's still there. To fix it: Go to the sort list component, right click on it, go to input manager, delete the B input, add it again, and link the B output with the 'y' input of the expression component at it's right. If the bug persists maybe delete sort list component and add it again.
On Apr 2, 8:47 pm, aloysius lian <aloysius.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Visose, > > When I tried to open the defn, there was an error: > > Output parameter Index[2] too high or too low for Component Sort List. > > Any ideas? > > Al > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Claudio <claudioarch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > HI Visose, > > > Thank you very much. I will take a very good look at your definition. > > > On Apr 2, 3:14 pm, visose <vic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Here:http://grasshopper3d.googlegroups.com/web/flatpanels.ghx > > > There are probably alternate ways of doing it. I added the rounding > > > down of panel sizes. To use the panel tolerance slider: 0 will round > > > all panels to the nearest unit, 1 will round them to the nearest 0.1 > > > unit, etc. In the previous example, setting this to 1 created 11 > > > different types of panels without any noticeable difference. > > > There's also an "option B" that places the panels instead on the top > > > of the surface, on the medium position of the interval, this is > > > because if you place the panel directly over the surface, in convex or > > > concave intervals the panel will sit on the top/bottom instead of > > > aligning it's sides with the boundary panels. > > > > On Apr 2, 12:03 pm, Claudio <claudioarch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hi Visose. > > > > > That sounds great. Can you post the definition plz. I really like to > > > > see how you do it. > > > > > Thank you very much > > > > > On Apr 2, 12:12 am, visose <vic...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I tried to reproduce the ceiling in GH. > >http://groups.google.com/group/grasshopper3d/web/fosterceiling.jpg > > > > > It sort of looks like it, if they did it like this (they most > > probably > > > > > didn't), then it's very simple, but most of the panels have a > > > > > different size. > > > > > I just used the divide interval2 component on the surface, found the > > > > > centers of each interval, found the width (in the u and v directions) > > > > > of each interval to use as the panel size (along the center of the > > > > > interval, since the distances will vary) and placed a 'center box' on > > > > > the centers normal to the surface using the calculated width as x and > > > > > y dimensions. If there is not much curvature and/or the panels are > > > > > small, most of the panels will have a similar size, so you could > > round > > > > > the panel widths down so you've got only x number of different panels > > > > > adding a little margin between panels. > > > > > > On Apr 1, 6:34 pm, Claudio <claudioarch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > I see what you mean I was completly wrong about the teatragon. So > > in > > > > > > this case all the panels used in fosters porject are flat and > > > > > > perpedicular to the curvature. Is that Right? > > > > > > > Thank you again > > > > > > > On Apr 1, 3:41 pm, David Rutten <da...@mcneel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Tetragonal doesn't mean a square base. A tetragon is what you get > > when > > > > > > > you deform a rectangle. A 'regular tetragon' is what you get when > > you > > > > > > > skew a rectangle.http://www.mathopenref.com/tetragon.html > > > > > > > > The angles and dimensions of each panel may still be different. > > > > > > > > I think the main reason Foster picked this solution is because > > all the > > > > > > > panels are flat, which makes them cheaper (actually, I know > > that's why > > > > > > > they did it, because I spoke to them about it). > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > David Rutten > > > > > > > da...@mcneel.com > > > > > > > Robert McNeel & Associates > > > > > > > > On Apr 1, 5:59 am, Claudio <claudioarch...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello David. > > > > > > > > > Glad you"ve answered. > > > > > > > > > I dont really know if the panels are really identical. The only > > fact > > > > > > > > that makes me think of that is an article in the detail > > magazine (an > > > > > > > > architectural german magazine) they explain that the panels are > > > > > > > > Tetragonal, Which means that they have a square base (a ; a) > > and a > > > > > > > > different height (c). So iI'm guessing that at least the panels > > are > > > > > > > > identical y the x & y axis. Otherwise as architect my self, I > > know > > > > > > > > that curved surface are very difficult to populate with a > > single panel > > > > > > > > solution, but is this solution that we all try to acheive. > > > > > > > > > Anyway I'll continue my research. If you have any more ideas on > > how to > > > > > > > > acheive this just keep me posted plz. > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 4:03 pm, David Rutten <da...@mcneel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Claudio, > > > > > > > > > > how do you know the panels in the Foster design are all > > identical? > > > > > > > > > > Panelling with identical panels is a very complicated area of > > > > > > > > > geometry. There are a number of obvious solutions: > > > > > > > > > > - rectangular, triangular and hexagonal planar grids) > > > > > > > > > - icosahedrons and other platonic solids > > > > > > > > > - singly-curved surfaces with rectangular panels (this one > > only works > > > > > > > > > for identical panel shape, not joint-angle) > > > > > > > > > - special cases where the underlying surface is a direct > > emergent > > > > > > > > > result of the panel geometry (for example penrose tilings) > > > > > > > > > > And then there are weird special cases. > > > > > > > > > > I found that many architects/engineers who face a > > facade-panelling > > > > > > > > > problem don't even try and come up with a single panel > > solution. > > > > > > > > > Instead, they try and minimize the number of different panels > > they > > > > > > > > > need to build the whole shape more or less accurately. This > > is always > > > > > > > > > a per-project problem that requires a per-project solution. > > Sometimes > > > > > > > > > they'll even design the panel and the underlying surface at > > the same > > > > > > > > > time, which gives you much more possibilities for solutions. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > David Rutten > > > > > > > > > da...@mcneel.com > > > > > > > > > Robert McNeel & Associates > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 12:23 pm, Claudio <claudioarch...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > > > > > > Can you please be more specific, In which cases this can be > > possible? > > > > > > > > > > I'm also iterested in diving a surface with identical > > panels. Please > > > > > > > > > > refer to this article for an exemple : > >http://www.detail.de/rw_5_Archive_En_HoleArtikel_5990_Artikel.htm > > > > > > > > > > And the architects website : > >http://www.fosterandpartners.com/Projects/1276/Default.aspx > > > > > > > > > > > In this case the roof has been divided with a glass pane > > responding to > > > > > > > > > > a very simple rule called Tetragonal crystal system. > > (http:// > > > > > > > > > > en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragonal_crystal_system). I guess > > the > > > > > > > > > > curvature of the surface is a critical parameter in this > > case. > > > > > > > > > > > I'll be more then happy to continue this subject > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you all > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 4:06 pm, David Rutten <da...@mcneel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Steve, > > > > > > > > > > > > creating a filling pattern with identical panels is only > > possible in a > > > > > > > > > > > very small subset of cases. > > > > > > > > > > > It's also impossible to create a closed pattern of > > hexagons on a > > > > > > > > > > > freeform surface, unless you allow the hexagons to be > > non-symmetrical. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > David Rutten > > > > > > > > > > > da...@mcneel.com > > > > > > > > > > > Robert McNeel & Associates > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 30, 2:35 am, Steve Townsend < > > stownsend_...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, I am very new to grasshopper and beginning to get > > my head around > > > > > > > > > > > > how to do things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > The main thing I am trying to achieve is a curving > > surface made up of > > > > > > > > > > > > a hexagonal grid (or even better equillateral > > triangles) that > > > > > > > > > > > > redefines itself when the surface changes shape. > > > > > > > > > > > > > An example of the sort of thing i wish to achieve: > >http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_pYWndsXyWeQ/Sb3_MS2utmI/AAAAAAAAChw/Z7dZW1y... > > > > > > > > > > > > > I have followed the diagrid and panelling tutorials in > > the primer but > > > > > > > > > > > > I need to create a grid where all panels are of > > identical size. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please could someone point me in the right direction of > > a way in which > > > > > > > > > > > > I might achieve this? Does anyone know of any tutorials > > along these > > > > > > > > > > > > lines? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Many thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > Steve Townsend- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -
