Hello All,
I’ve searched but I couldn’t find my exact problem. All cards on the table, I’m a COMPLETE noob at GH.
What I want to do is create a sphere with the center at the sphere’s radius in plus Y. So the the “belly button” of the sphere is at 0,0,0.
I hope that makes sense,
Muggs
Joseph, Riccardo,
Thank you both. Joseph’s looks like something I already have so I’ll go with that one. I never thought of making a sphere to make a sphere. DUH!
Thanks,
Muggs
That doesn’t sound right so I re-read your description.
That sounds like @maje90 got it right, like this?
But this second part of your description contradicts that?
I don’t know what you are describing?
Yeah, that confused me but Riccardo (@maje90) read it correctly and got it right in his first example. Both of his examples, in fact, though the second one using the ‘Y’ vector is more obscure.
“B” input of sphere component require a plane object.
We can create that plane with “XY Plane” that ask for a point object.
And we can create a point from XYZ coordinates.
but
Points and vectors, in grasshopper, can be swapped at any time, as they both are “a small triplet of numbers”!
Also, any component requiring a plane will accept a point and convert it to a world XY parallel plane with origin on that point.
So, by giving a vector to a component that require a plane it will happen 2 implicit conversions:
vector>point>XYplane
It’s easy to understand that a point instead of a plane will default to a ‘World XY’ plane at that point location. The vector conversion is less obvious. To me, it’s not just that both are “a small triplet of numbers” but a vector instead of a point can be considered as “move the origin point (0,0,0) with this vector and use the resulting point”. Same result, different point of view, no pun intended.
I’m OK with using points instead of located ‘World XY’ planes but not as cool about using vectors where points are expected. Seems more like a type or logic violation, though it obviously works fine. YMMV.
