Would people be interested in a course about complex product design, Data lead design, 3d printed tooling/innovative manufacturing and how to all of that can be combined with Grasshopper?
For the past few years I’ve specialized in creating complex product design mostly for the sportwear industry with innovative manufacturing methods (3d Printing, Complex Machining, Injection Moulding, etc). My engineering background and my experience has given me the ability integrate my knowledge to make the most out of Grasshopper in these areas. I am trying to see if its valuable enough that people or companies might be interested. Any comment / feedback will be well received!
nowadays youtube is literally full of GH videos on how to create almost everything, from buildings with weird shapes to complex surface patterns for futuristic cars, but I absolutely agree a good 90% of them are pretty theoretical: they get to a stage where models are good just for rendering
I would not anyway consider the amount of response you might get to this very topic as a true indication of how much the content you might produce would be succesfull: this place is a weird beast a wide percentage of forum users stop by twice per year -or so- just if they are struggling with a problem they can’t overtake…
if I was in you I believe the best way would be to publish a couple of videos and advertise them on multiple platforms, then see how many views/interactions you are getting and see what to do
I think this is the key sentence here. It’s not the knowledge about Grasshopper, but it’s about the actual subject. At the end, Grasshopper is nothing more than clicking together code for automating CAD.
What you do with that CAD model, and what your requirements are, is very different. As a consequence, you might offer great insights for knowledge not many people need to know. But maybe it’s entertaining at least, and people watch it for the nature of how you present. You never know, just go for it.
Quality tutorials beyond the basics are rather rare in almost any domain. Other than that, many industrial applications are unique and not meant to be shown in public. Apart from this, the learning curve and the knowledge required are high for anything complex. If you create tutorials or technical deep dives, you rather need to compress or exclude a lot of information. Grasshopper always had this strange idea of being a one-click solution to many (artificially-created) problems, but in reality it was always a tool hard-to-master
I once took a furniture design course at Parson’s in NYC and the instructor was completely focused on theory, even handing out thick, jargon-laden manifestos by some Italian designers. The only thing he managed not to cover is how to actually bring a piece of machine-made furniture to market.
Considerations like dimensions and materials, where objects have actual thickness, must fit snuggly together, but are made by machines that have their own tolerance issues and foibles, would be of interest in a GH course.
That is a good point. It would be interesting so tailor a few courses towards that direction. Then the subject of - Form to Manufacturing - becomes dissociated from the software used to design it. I think the GH would be interesting as it offers automatization and optimization on the design and manufacturing process. But then again, as you said, it is a tool rather than the knowledge itself. So then the question becomes, would people be interested in software side at all (Rhino/GH, Allias, SolidWorks, Fusion360, Etc) or just the knowledge behind how to manufacture?
I’ve also encounter a few instructors like the one you are describing. Though do you mean to make the machine-made furniture or the knowhow of how to create a market for the machine-made furniture?
To you second point, it could be interesting to have a workflow of how to integrate tolerances depending of what needs to be manufactured though would it be better than having a course that teaches the knowhow and how it can be applied into CAD design?