Is it possible to add more refinements (adjustments-settings) to the array tool? E.g., incremental space adjusting - so that a linear array - the space between objects - would increases or decrease a percentage as they are arrayed? That the ‘spin’ and/or size could also be adjusted in percentages?
1 Like
Hi @Thiebault
Take a look at ArrayCrvPLUS or Armadillo by @Jarek Bieda - I believe that one of them will do just that type of operation.
HTH, Jakob
Yes, thank you - however, I’m not keen on spending 165 USD for what I believe, are a few ‘tid-bits’ which ‘should’ be in the Rhino 5-6 ‘Array’ tool kit. True, Armadillo does what I’m after, and much more, however, I find the ‘look & feel’ of the Rhino interface & tool layout - with the ‘preview’ options which are offered - often - and the help files - to be more ‘user friendly’ than Armadillo’s. I found that doing an array of zipper teeth on a surface, or along a curve - much more sensible using Rhino’s ‘Array’ than any other plug-in tool; certainly in feasibility, because the way Rhino tools work is predictable - and more intuitive, in my opinion, and better integrated with the tool sets. IMO - Armadillo is a ‘flash-bang’ - it’s the rich caviar - compared to Rhino’s simplistic straight forward no-nonsense ‘Array’ tool. What I’m suggesting, (humbly?), is adding a few - whistles & bells to the already existing Rhino Array tool in the new Rhino 6 version coming out - ta-da~!
Hi @Thiebault,
Not questioning the wish for additional Rhino functionality for arrays here - I also thought it would be good to have these, that’s how the scripted tool started a while ago.
If you don’t need the full functionality of Armadillo you can always use the ‘light’, free version of it - ArrayCrvPLUS. It’s been a while since it was written but still works OK I think. Until you get your wish implemented.
-jarek
Jarek, My ‘beef’ is that Armadillo doesn’t capture the ‘look & feel’ of Rhino tools character, and no reason why it should, however, I like Rhino’s intuitive interface layout, as well as the predictable way the tools work (together). Rhino has it’s own character, and Armadillo is a different ‘animal’. I would prefer to work with Rhino ‘Array’ and then simply have included in the OPTIONS and incremental spacing & spin’ algorithm, or slider, or ‘something’ to ADD to the functionality of that Rhino tool - in other words, let me put it another way - the tool is a bit impoverished, looks like a Christmas tree without balls! You know what I mean? Ha-ha!
1 Like
what, exactly, are you trying to make? or, what are you wanting to model using this functionality…
i get it that it sounds cool to have the options but is it going to be helpful in real world usages?
because i think what will happen when someone sets out to design in a way which could make use of these kinds of tools, they’re going to fairly quickly realize this spinning/growing array tool isn’t quite tailored to their specific usage and they’re going to have to use python or grasshopper anyway in order to get what’s needed or to gain the desired amount of control over the objects.
i don’t know… i think rhino’s arrays are lacking some more basic functionality than bells&whistle stuff… like setting start and end points then having the desired number of items fill the space in between… personally, i’d rather have any efforts which are going towards arrays being focused around the more necessary/basic abilities 
3 Likes
setting start/end points is a terrific suggestion! I’m designing zipper teeth - and Armadillo is like driving a Ferrari in the suburbs.