Friday, September 11, 2009

Webinterface of dome generations

click HERE to see the evolution process of the domes!!

Thursday, August 6, 2009

GC - set-up

I decided after some discussion and thinking, to use the right support configuration for the model. Since cellular structures in nature, tend to arrange perpendicular to stiffer surfaces. This is the most optimal way to distribute forces within a structure. This phenomenon is also seen within radiolarian skeletons.

40 rings model with higher densities of points

This image illustrates the way the points are projected onto the dome in GC.


Symmetric or almost symmetric?
Either symmetric or total a-symmetric...? For our topic, it might be best to use symmetric, because we decided not to focus too deeply on wind forces for now.

Perfect Symmetric configuration of 40 ring model

To explore the possibilities of having the rings regulated, I added some images of different amounts of rings below. each set is a screen shot of a different GC model. Within one model, the rings are limited to a specific amount. (5,7,10,10,20,40)

I still hope to find a way to integrate them into one GC model.

random results of configurations based on different ring densities.

It would be best to control the density of the rings in the same GC model. But until this point we cannot integrate this into one script.together with the point distribution variables. I hope we can manage to solve this. but we might will test different models for specific ring densities.

This is an example of a possible configuration of points based on a 40 ring model. This would be the most dense ring-density possible within the model. We defined 41 different variables to define independent point distribution along each ring. .

This image shows a model with different densities of points per ring (20 rings)
voronoi on top & delaunay below (based on same points)

Voronoi (above) vs Delaunay (below) GC

Voronoi Dome GC

Test Run

This homogeneous hexagon dome is ready for a test run. The maximal values are illustrated in the pic below, all values in between are part of the "solution space"

test run

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Comparing different tessellations for a dome shape

What happens if you construct the three tessellations based on the same set of points?

Below you find 2 combined drawings. The hexagonal part is devided in two ways, the lower one comes closer in comparisation with the voronoi and delaunay part.

In these two dwawings the amount of points are chosen by using factors of 2. Thats why the structure is more regular. The second one is the best. Because the density of the hexagonal structure is more equal to the others.

For the research it would be interesting to test the three types of structures and compare them.
In the next scheme, I defined a try-out set up of the comparisation.

These domes are all constructed based on the same set of points. The amount of points per ring are random. Thats why the Delaunay and Voronoi version are a bit irregular. The errors in the hexagon sample are because it took too long to draw all lines manually and I arrayed one quarter. but it gives an idea. The size of the dome can be a parameter as well!! (unlike i noted on this picture) But to compare them, the size should be the same for all 3 domes.

How to define the circels and points (in GC), which define the tesselations?

In the picture below is illustrated how a plane is projected onto the dome. the set-up size of the plane has a diameter of 32 m, while the dome itselves has a diameter of 20.37 m. I defined the plane first, in order to get a regular division of rings possible.
The overal size can be changed afterwards by adjusting the diameter of the projection plane.

The rings can vary in number. They are always linear distributed on the plane.

Number of rings: n_ring

Diameter of projection plane: d_plane

The max distance between the rings is 4 meter.
The min distance between the rings is 0.5 meter.

The formula which defines this relation is: 1/2 = smaller than: (0.25*pi*d_plane)/n_ring = smaller than: 4


The points on each ring can vary in number. They are always linear distributed along the ring.

A similar system rules the division of points onto the rings
Number of points: n_point
Diameter of ring: d_ring

The max distance between the points is 4 meter.

The min distance between the points is 0.5 meter.

The formula which defines this relation is: 1/2 = smaller than: (d_ring*pi)/n_point = smaller
than: 4.

definition of the projection plane & rings

Diagram of GC hierarchy.