algorithmic modeling for Rhino
Chris, that's great! thank you very much... that is definitely an option.
However, I need something that i don't have to manually explode at the end, as it destroys the parametric dependencies if I, for example, increase the number of surfaces. In which case I may as well bake everything a step earlier and subtract in Rhino (which i would like to avoid and bake right at the end).
True.... however, the rectangles that i want to cut out of the surfaces overlap over the surfaces' edge (i did this because i thought a bit of overlap off the edge would ensure a subtraction). The planar surf in that case would leave the edge?
@Chris @Andrew maybe I should have made it clearer.... I am trying to cut slots in some surfaces (ribs) for later fabrication through laser cutting. It's a classic problem, and I've seen some other solutions, but I wanted to get my definition built from the ground up to try and understand all these processes. Here is
another screenshot to make it clearer.
The 14 surfaces are the vertical lamellae. The 70 curves are the little vertical triangles arranged on circular sections. There are 14 rectangles for each of the 5 circular sections.
So how do sort, remap the lists of surfaces and curves, in order that when i plug them into a subtraction/difference/intersection/boolean component, i get the result:14 surfaces each with 5 cuts down their vertical edge?
Excellent chris! I received your reply just now as I myself reached a solution! Thank you very much for your help!
I noticed on your solution, at the end, the planar surfaces still need culling, inthe last branch you'll notice there are another 10 surfaces (they are all without notches, and at the same coordinates. So I added the last step to cull the remaining indices. However, I think this breaks the flow of the algorhythm and must be changed manually to match? Perhaps it's to do with a data matching problem upstream (shortest list vs. longest?).
Further down there's screen shots of my solution and results. Now it is fully integrated into the definition, and I can change all parameters without it breaking down!
my solution:
Thanks chris! it has definitely helped me understand the path mapper a lot more... but i still don't quite get it fully! :)
for example, how is your pathmapper clipping the data when the source and target masks are identical? what's going on there?
It's because the branch with the multiple surfaces has one more index position than all the others, ie. it ends in H instead of G. Since it doesn't match it's dropped from the list.
Chris
Welcome to
Grasshopper
Added by Parametric House 0 Comments 0 Likes
Added by Parametric House 0 Comments 0 Likes
Added by Parametric House 0 Comments 0 Likes
Added by Parametric House 0 Comments 0 Likes
© 2024 Created by Scott Davidson. Powered by