Pinewheel Panelization of Attractor based windows -Mesh Creation with Data Trees?

I was experimenting with using attractor points to vary the openings of a facade, and wanted to panelize the surrounding components. Pattern 2 I think would give a more dynamic effect. I would prefer the output to be a mesh, because I will be taking the geometry into 3dmax, and I think it is easier to add thickness and details such as reveals etc in a well constructed mesh.

Question 1: Can Mesh accept Data Trees? And what would be the best way to Construct the above pattern?

I think that this would pose some issues just with managing the points and I did not have success with the mesh panel and data trees although maybe I was doing something wrong? The project seems suited for the use of data trees as I could build the four mesh components around the greyed out window.

Question 2: If i do use Nurbs surfaces Can I make sure that they mesh correctly?

I tried creating Nurbs and then meshing them but even planer quadrangles will sometimes triangulate or insert extra points. It seems to happen on the trapezoidal pieces.On the left are separate nurbs planer surfaces, on the right is the mesh version using the mesh command in rhino. Not sure why this would happen. Since they are quads I can not remove them with the Quadmesh command.

When I draw a polyline in Rhino, using the planarsrf command I get triangulation that can be removed with the Quad mesh command. Not surf why the planar srf component from points and the planar srf command in rhino would produce dissimilar nurbs and then meshes differently. There is probably a really long answer to that question!

Any help would greatly be appreciated! I attached the code I used to generate the nurb/mesh walls.Not sure if the code is efficient, maybe a naive solution but they both seem to work.

Attachments:

Mesh Surfaces.gh, 203 KB
Nurbs Surface.gh, 127 KB

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mateusz Zwierzycki on May 11, 2012 at 4:37am

1. Mesh has its own properties etc. which doesnt require data trees, although you can sort different meshes in data trees to manage them.

2. Why to mesh them correctly ? Make all the geometry in grasshopper, then export it to 3ds max - I personally change only materials in 3ds max + lights.

About you patterns : as for now I cant find in my head good solution for making pattern 2 - its topology is not unifrom, and that usually means lot of problems. First pattern is much much easier to achieve - make only one module, then place it in the grid.

Permalink Reply by Ben Fortunato on May 11, 2012 at 6:59am

1) I attempted to input data that was organized in data trees into the mesh component but I got a run time error. I will try to duplicate the error tonight and post it.

2) Clean meshes make adjusting geometry in max easy. There are certain things that are easier in Max, for example using the shell command, or using the chamfer and extrude commands to add a reveal/construction joint. . . . I was working mostly in Rhino but I found some commands quite helpful in Max. Its also helpful to manipulate geometry as you render, to tweak anything you feel needs tweaking. This is hard to do if you have a triangulated mesh. Most of the time rectilinear geometry imports nicely, in this case it didn't. . . . .Maybe its better to stick to NURBS since Rhino's mesh tools are really limited.

Permalink Reply by Ben Fortunato on May 11, 2012 at 7:06am

With regard to the patterns, If I output in a mesh, I can take pattern 1 and delete the extra edge to get to pattern 2. I image this might have to be done by hand, although if the mesh edges are rationally number one could do this with a cull pattern. I know how to do this in max (cntrl delete or remove while in edge mode) but I don't know if Rhino/grasshopper has a remove edge feature that won't delete the face.I also don't think that nubs can have a discontinuous typology. Isocurves need to be continuous. Or am I wrong?

What's nice about meshes is that I can also generate a typology, as in Pattern 2 and then operate on the individual polygons. For example extrude each according to surface normal, inset to create a frame. chamfer the edge and extrude the resulting polygon to create a reveal etc. This is harder to do with NURBS . . . unless there are some tools that I don't know about in Rhino!

Permalink Reply by Mateusz Zwierzycki on May 11, 2012 at 8:02pm

There are some more mesh tools in weaverbird components and uto mesh tools. but as for now I think you should first generate this pattern with polylines, and then create mesh directly from polylines (mesh component)

Permalink Reply by Ben Fortunato on May 12, 2012 at 2:57am

I downloaded the uto and the weaverbird components. They are super helpful! What is missing is a good shell or offset command and an extrude face command. I experimented with the offset component but I think its still in beta phase and it did not produce sharp corners. I need to play around with all these tools. I hope weaver bird continues to update there work and that this eventually becomes part of rhino. What we need is a program that can deal with both Nurbs and Meshes so that you you can use both inside one program without worrying about hitting a wall.

Thanks for your recommendations!

RSS