Vertical Sky Component - Great Job

Hello Mostapha,

Amazing work!

I believe Ladybug is one of the most important extensions GH so far.

Are you considering to include a Vertical Sky Component analysis?

Keep up the good work and waiting for updated versions!

doompop

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on March 18, 2013 at 5:25pm

Hi doompop!

Great to know that you liked Ladybug. I added Vertical Sky Component as a wish. I believe that Vertical Sky Components next to Sunlight hours will enhance Ladybug capabilities for planning purposes. Time-wise though I'll be concentrated on developing Honeybee to the point that it can be shared for test, then I'll optimize current analysis components and add new ones like Vertical Sky Component. Thank you for the great suggestion!

Best,

-Mostapha

Permalink Reply by Dimitrios Papadopoulos on March 19, 2013 at 7:27am

Hello Mostapha,

Thank you very much for your quick reply. That sounds great!

I checked your preview video of Honeybee and it looks equally amazing to your Ladybug work so far.

Even the different sub components you have like the floor sub-division per ftf and use, are extremely useful to simplify custom made larger algorithms. You really stretch GH to a new level of usability for real life projects. Your work will be very soon widely used worldwide, replacing relevant software suites.

Thanks again,

doompop

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on December 1, 2013 at 7:12pm

Hi Doompop,

Do you have any example of results of the VSC calculation that you can share with me. I wrote a component for Honeybee to calculate VSC based on this discussion (http://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/2006-Sept...). The results makes sense to me but still I would like to double check the results with some examples before the first release.

Thanks,

Mostapha

Permalink Reply by Dimitrios Papadopoulos on April 8, 2014 at 8:57am

Hello Mostapha,

Apologies for the late reply. Have been some hectic couple of months.

Have you verified the results? Anything I could send to help you with it?

Thanks,

Dimitris

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on April 8, 2014 at 11:15am

Hi Dimitris, Thank you for following up. Yes. I did find some cases and ran some verifications. VSC is part of Honeybee right now.

Permalink Reply by Dimitrios Papadopoulos on April 9, 2014 at 9:30am

Thanks Mostapha!

Trying to learn Honeybee by using it for an active project now and looks really great.

Dimitris

Permalink Reply by Dimitrios Papadopoulos on April 9, 2014 at 4:00pm

Hello Mostapha,

I have a question. Although your examples seem to work fine, but when I drag and drop components from the toolbar I get the error below.

Thanks,

Dimitris

Attachments:

Honeybee_Error.jpg, 244 KB

Permalink Reply by Abraham Yezioro on April 10, 2014 at 12:14am

You should let ladybug_Ladybug and Honeybee_Honeybee fly.

-A.

Permalink Reply by Mostapha Sadeghipour Roudsari on April 10, 2014 at 5:34am

I think you have an older version of Honeybee_Honeybee is flying. That's my bad not updating the example files.

To solve the issue bring drop Honeybee_honeybee component from the toolbar and then try to generate the sky again. The issue should be solved.

I'm traveling right now. Will update the example file once I'm back.

Permalink Reply by Dimitrios Papadopoulos on April 10, 2014 at 9:44am

Got it!

Thanks a lot!

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on February 17, 2015 at 4:55am

Hi Mostapha and Dimitrios,

I Am using the VSC Compoment and i think this is really great compared to other tool i've been using for calculating it.

I just have a question about the results, Usually the maximum VSC value you can get is 40% while if I use a simulation Radiance based I am reaching values which are around 45%, and generally figure are higher than the same model calculated let's say with Ecotect.

I was wondering why is that happening, probably it has to deal with indirect reflections?

Attachments:

vsc.png, 822 KB

Permalink Reply by amedeo scofone on February 17, 2015 at 5:37am

I found the answer here, in case somebody is interested, basically Radiance does not take into account the azimuth, therefore you see an angle of 180 deg rather than 160 so the Waldram generated it is not correct.

It is still very useful to have a general idea.

https://radiance-online.lbl.gov:447/pipermail/radiance-general/2014...

Thanks Mostapha for your job this isgreat!

Perhaps VSC can be calculated via a simple tracing component not radiance based?

Bye