using the ESO component

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Najna Sorin on October 5, 2011 at 4:14pm

any help on this please?

Permalink Reply by Karamba3D on October 17, 2011 at 5:01am

Hello Najna,

each component can add its results to the viewport. Try to disable the preview of all components and then enable it for only the ModelView-component in order to prevent unwanted multiple displays of the model in different states. The red mesh is the base geometry. In order to see how the structure changes enable CrossSection in ModelViews 'Render Settings'-section.

Your geometry seems to be in millimeter. Karamba expects input to be in meter. This means your structure is 1000 times larger than you probably expected. Karamba will nevertheless calculate a result. The rendering of the coss sections will be slow however because the default section length of the cross section mesh is one meter. Select a value of 30m for the 'Length/Subdivision'-slider.

You need not analyze the model before plugging it into a BESO/ESO-component.

The ModelView component of your definition handles three models simultaneously. Is this what you intended?

Best,

Clemens

Permalink Reply by Najna Sorin on October 18, 2011 at 9:32am

Thank you for the reply Clemens,

 

No I did not intend to handle three models, only one - the result of the ESO component. There for I made a mistake, sorry.

I scaled my model 100 times, and set the units to meters in the Tools->Units Rhino window.

But for some reason my model does not look so "regular" after ESO optimisation like yours. Take a look:

 

 

I am aware that you have a horizontal force, and the construction of your diagonal members is mirrored, but still I do not understand why my members are so irregular?

 

Here are the new edited files:

Attachments:

• eso2.3dm, 604 KB
• eso2.gh, 17 KB

Permalink Reply by Karamba3D on October 21, 2011 at 9:21am

Hello Najna,

try to use a higher value for the number of ESO/BESO iterations. When using BESO set also SmoothIter to a value of 15 or so.

The force is not exactly in the middle of the upper wall edge - that's the reason for the unsymmetric result.

Clemens