Fibonacci

Hi Guys,

I wanted to have sth like the attached picture , it is Fibonacci inscribed in rectangle

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 11:42am

It's done many days ago ... here's a WIP version

1. Many could disagree with my attitude on this: why providing a nightmare to a novice for something that could been done with components? (Planes apart) Is this help or some sort or bad humor/sadism? Well... even assuming that the AEC job is done - even in an Academic framework (far from it) ... my cryptic answer to that ... is this: keep this into your vault and several years later play it again: are all reasons clear?.

2. Whilst I'm performing a major reconstruction on the way that "master" parameters affect "slave" ones (the essence of AEC parametric stuff: we should study Art instead, he he) get this in order to rise(?) your moral(?). PS: Suicide is a viable alternative mind (who wants to live for ever?).

3. Don't touch much (other than the stuff marked with "play >"). But you can see your ramps using 5 demo profiles via these "palatable" GH components (Load Rhino file first):

4. Without an extensive control about what happens if this or that is "wrong"/unsuitable/conflicting ... this V4 is a hand grenade. And we haven't even scratched the surface ..

Attachments:

spiral_lofted_V4.gh, 754 KB
spiral_lofted_V4_profiles.gh.3dm, 264 KB

Permalink Reply by faya on March 16, 2015 at 1:30pm

Thank you very much Peter! dont know how to appreciate your great help and effort,

I wanted to have ramps on rectangle model ,as I explained earlier, I am toggling to Rectangle in the new GH file but the model disappears ?

Thank you,

Best

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 1:47pm

Er ... in rectangle mode (as I stated in my commends, there's a LOT of checks that C# must do in order to proceed - or not: it has to do with what conditions allow the rounded rectangle creation that is lofted to floors that provide the floor edges for the ramp creation that talk to the Plane correction function that ...). V5 takes care of these "conflicts" and allows a very RESTRICTED creation of things ... or some of them. This is clearly out of reach of components > when you have V5 on hand you'll understand why I used code instead of components for that. And we haven't even scratched the surface.

Welcome to the Dictatorship of AEC: a situation that "wraps" you before even realizing what's happening: such a simple case and already becomes a handful to manage: it's because the constrains rise "exponentially" and not in a "linear" way.

Nothing that some lines of code can't address ... but makes clear the message: NEVER assume that even the simplest idea could yield result a real-life thing.

In the mean time (until the V5) what about this? a variable W truss that supports these #%#^ ramps.

Permalink Reply by faya on March 16, 2015 at 2:41pm

as you say it just work for specific sliders on Rectangle mode.

Yes, I am thinking of space frame and right now I was studying Konard Waschsmann n Reiser Umemoto to see how would fit through the whole design, thank you

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 1:59pm

PS: Of course by using the right values you can have your rectangles (instead of squares) but relying on Karma is a very naive way to handle this: V5 is the salvation, the Messiah of lofted spirals, he he.

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 12:32pm

BTW: I would strongly suggest a "neutral" skin on that : don't add Vodka to Jack (nice idea, mind):

We can wrap it with a "random noised" truss (can Zaha do that? he he):

or a SIN distorted one (variable W length):

or deliver a skinless thing made with my patented see-through elastic goat skin (TM)(C) (floors exposed to the elements > waiting for the four horsemen arrival > soon I believe)

Permalink Reply by faya on March 16, 2015 at 2:02pm

i am doing my study on structure system, it has a core supporting structure for compression and skin is taking tension but as your suggestion it would be something neutral.

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 2:30pm

Er ... solving the structural aspect of parametric things it's not an easy task (double the Dictatorship ... and we haven't even reach HVAC , he he). For instance doing a valid core that may support extensive floor overhangs (eliminating a myriad of columns) ... appears easy busy ... but it's not. But if you insist: use space frame trusses for the floors - or some hybrid solution [HEB/HEA/IPN formed as planar "trusses"] in order to avoid wasting material, increasing the cost and having some chance VS seismic forces.

I would strongly suggest to "outline" a LBS solution and stay to topology matters: this is pro territory and ... well ... there's limits about what should being addressed within an Academic framework.

Permalink Reply by faya on March 16, 2015 at 2:55pm

Hybrid sound the best way to free the space form columns , exactly i am looking for trusses but still in the lower floor( which have more span) it wastes space since it needs to be strong enough

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 16, 2015 at 3:10pm

Waste space (height) is an easy claim before HVAC stuff is invited to the party.

Permalink Reply by faya on March 16, 2015 at 3:15pm

true, it can be used for that purpose definitely.But maybe more concentric along with distribution in the core which I have more free room overthere.

Permalink Reply by peter fotiadis on March 17, 2015 at 1:33am

A few hints:

1. Usually we design things like this using a vertical grid. Kinda like an horizontal grid, say, 0.6m*0.6m typical for false ceiling modules/raised floors (pretty standard that one).

2. Sizes like 0.6m, 0.8m, 0.9m and 1.2m are the most "common": In cases where mechanical floors are a must (hospitals for instance) a 2.4/2.4 is quite handy (habitable/mechanical per floor). You can try 1.8/2.7 as well (floor/habitable) since 1.8 floor thickness can host HVAC and some decent W truss size. Also 1.6/2.4 (floor/habitable) is used in small buildings. NOTE: see next.

3. Don't forget to include corrugated metal height + concrete screed height + raised floors height: for the latter, say, something like 0.3m (modules + adjustable mounts + free space for electric stuff [boxes etc]).

4. As regards exteriors, Laurent Buzon is a close friend of mine. Contact him directly on my behalf: