Hello I would like to create a mesh consisting of platonic solids connecting together. The mesh needs to dissolve in some areas or points. So the solids can dissolve into eachother in specific areas. I have tried shrinkwrap in rhino8 but it did not give the desired effect.
I have attached a refrence Image with my file I would really appriciate the help
Platonic_Solids.3dm (47.5 KB)
depends on the complexity of the geometry and what exactly you mean by “dissolve” but I’d first try to use boolean union.
If by that you mean face to face contact then it’s rather obvious what platonic to use (but who’s gonna notice portions of platonics in a complex layout? nobody I assure you - plus you violate the golden rule: form follows function):
So having the 3 “suitable” types (4F, 8F, 20F) on hand you are in fact after a “procedural” grow of some sort. Obviously according rules related with the terrain and some sort of spaces schedule (otherwise why bother talking?). Then get the outer skin (entry level Brep/Brep [F/F] connectivity). Then define openings etc etc
All that are are more or less easy via code. If you are not in that bandwagon try to find add-ons (I have no idea - nor any interest to know - where to find’m … if they exist at all).
Yes actually I would like to create some sort of outer skin with what you showed just like your explanation. However I do not know were to start do you have any suggesstions on what type of simple code would work for something like this? I tried looking at the past discussions on the forum but couldnt find something simillar to what you explained
Assuming that you know the thing that you don’t (how to code) there’s 2 ways to deal with that type of function follows form (a BIG mistake) Architecture:
Define your 3 Platonic solids (or 4 [6F] if the 8F is splitted in half). In any case the 12F is rather out of question. This means: given a Face in 3d space and the Type compute the thing (or use a Plane to Plane and a Scale trans). Rather use Meshes instead of Breps (for speed).
Do it via the fire and forget way mastermind rules to “teach” the idiot (the computer) how to “compose” something (or a collection of possible compositions). If I was you I would avoid at any cost that way (too much effort for nothing - besides how to teach a computer about aesthetics? [not the mention the spaces schedule part])
Do it interactively (by swapping volative <> persistent data). This means: start from some sort of seed, then identify a face and the Platonic(s) to add, then allow the idiot to compute clash situations (and the likes), then if the addition is valid (*) store the state of solution then repeat (pick another face in the new “composed” Brep/Mesh). Meaning that you end-up with a collection of possible solutions (stored in some sort of history Tree, so to speak). All these are impossible without code.
(*) in order to avoid the obvious remove the Faces in contact from some sort of Brep (or better/faster: Meshes) Faces Tree. That way when the whole thing is finished your “composed” Mesh would be a closed one (cross fingers) - if we forget for the moment the terrain part (maybe a post process thing).
See a fire and forget Tetrahedron grow (written as an Interview for Recursion matters - nothing to do with Architecture). Bees (as Instances) added for no reason.
Tip: forget Platonics. Search Daniel’s post(s) related with Mesh procedural growth (or maybe Laurent - as well - has posted similar stuff). So get a rational tri Mesh envelope and then do some Truss to support all that mess.
Spend a couple of minutes on that. First …as I said since the Platonics are triFaces collections the end result it would be kinda a triFace Mesh … where no observer can see the “Platonic logic” used.
So I would suggest Plan B (by miles more “rational”, so to speak):
3, Then do some W Truss (seismic activity) or a skin deep one:
Update:
Using an existed C# (see anim above) and 3 Platonic Meshes (4, 8, 20F) I’ve changed a few lines and … well … the result (A random [fire and forget] Grow - with 6 user defined options) is pathetic/pointless (as expected). See some UGLY tests:
The bad news is that this is done solely via code meaning that is not a suitable solution for you. Plus it requires several lines more in order to “guide” the Recursive Grow in order to respect the terrain AND “engulf” the required spaces (otherwise why bother talking?)
hello, yes this seems to be what I am looking for however I did realize how chaotic and ugly my composition looks when using all these solids together so I decided not to go with this idea for my project. Thanks though
