Structural canopy column

Hello, I would like to obtain a column in which it will expanded to the ceiling with a structure, but I have not been able to put some type of grid to be placed in the columns that i already created.

Could someone help me?

I would also like to know if someone know how to make the base of the column in square instead of a circle

Well …

  1. Get FULLY the gist of Kangaroo2
  2. Create a boundary and some holes according some logic (the columns in any valid shape), get the BrepFace out of these then use MeshMachine to get a tri FLAT mesh. If fact … there’s other far far better ways to do a proper mesh for K2 … but let’s forget’m for the moment.
  3. Relax the FLAT mesh via K2 (or - as option - use a target surface for the top part) by using as anchors the naked points related with the holes (i.e. get the mesh outline (as Polyline array), sort by Length and exclude the biggest poly, the anchors are the sum of the vertices of the rest polylines).
  4. For the relax: separate the clothed edges from the naked ones (they have one adjacent face) and use different spring variables. Use a unary force (+Z) to “inflate” the mesh upwards (or -Z for some LOL result).

I have tons of similar examples … but are carried over solely via C# code. If however you master 1 (and if no some other good Samaritan provides a solution of some sort) I could make an indicative demo using components.

Hi Peter, I’m curious about better ways to do a proper mesh for K2 instead of getting a tri flat mesh. Could you pls. Provide more details.

Well … as you know the more “rational” the mesh the easier to relax (and way faster).

There’s not a generic quideline for that mesh … but if we stick to the thread: Imagine a grid contained in the canopy boundary (kinda creating a uv mesh out of a BrepFace or dividing a BrepFace [with holes] etc etc). Now the x/y module sizes are variable meaning that you can adjust them to suit our columns (rational I do hope meaning the same footprint etc etc). So you get a grid of quad modules (all the same) that either are present or absent (columns). Then you can subdive that into also equal quads and finally triangulate (my advise: avoid that) the mesh. That way K2 gets a “uniform” input mesh to play with and obvioulsy works way faster AND yields a result that you can use for doing a rational W truss or a tensegrity truss (very expensive) or a hybrid one or a “dome like no W truss” or … something similar. Going from the K2 relaxed mesh to something with structural ability (with or without depth) is the 1M dollar thingy … since we do all that stuff in order to do something in real-life (OK, forget concrete ancient things - we live in contemporary times, he he). For instance (no “finished” columns in this case: waaaaaaaaay better aesthetics):

Even if you are after vaults … the same story:

BTW: Even if you have a tensile membrane in mind this approach works very fast: you just go from a quad arrangement into a cyclic one at the base (or top) of a given “column” that pulls the membrane (that’s why is critical to separate clothed/naked edges etc etc). See this linear arrangement (no “columns”) where the mesh is derived form subdividing the very simple flat mesh shown:

BTW: You can divide a quide BrepFace (non planar) that outlines the envelope and do the inverse with regard the anchors (unary -Z).

The same logic could being applied if you want hexagons or triangular column footprints etc etc [not valid for membranes] Obviously there’s some issues with pentagons and the likes … but the core of the matter is the envelope: nobody could complain about the shape of the column.

1 Like

BTW: Got some snapshots to illustrate the concept as briefly exposed above (related with membranes in this occasion). (11.1 MB)

1 Like