# Urban Density And Anemone

Hi guys,
I am working on Density Explorer as an exercise to learn anemone a bit better.
I have a couple of questions regarding optimisation or ways to improve.
Density_p001.gh (33.4 KB)

1. Is there a way to output part of the list every iteration, so anemone can continue to work with rest of the data until the list is empty? Currently I am using Record Data and Data Damp components, maybe there is a more interactive way of doing it, so I can move attractions points and list is being updated without me cleaning up Record Data component every time.

1. I have 3 densities levels. High , Medium , Low. High and Low are controlled by attracting points, Medium is left over. I donâ€™t think I have made it in a most correct way possible?

Hi @arten,

I donâ€™t quite understand what you need Anemone for? Could you maybe explain that part?

Hi @diff-arch,
I was using anemone to offset plot boundary curve until area of offset boundary is equal to specified value. The value is based on FAR.

I donâ€™t think it is possible without some kind of recursion?

Different zones can have different FAR values which will determine the max footprint of the building on site.

Solved it. No worries

Maybe instead of using Anemone, you could try something like this:

Density_p002.gh (20.3 KB)

2 Likes

Thank you @diff-arch it will work with rectangular shapes. I was using offset to be able to work with different plot shapes.

I also added site coverage into my formula. I think it works more correctly now.
Just need to add attraction points for 3 density types.
I think the good think about your solution is that itâ€™s faster than anemone.

Density_p002.gh (18.3 KB)

1 Like

Still think there is should be a better solution. Faster or maybe every building mass appears one after another?
Also for some reason some plots are being offset more than they should be. Even though their area inside domain?

Density_p003.gh (79.6 KB)

Iâ€™ve managed to make some improvements!
Iâ€™ve added another parameter, which controls the minimum necessary lot area, to prevent really small ones from being built on, which in some cases produces exponentially high skyscrapers. This can be set to 0.0, if you donâ€™t want to get rid of any lots.

Another test now prevents the offset to reverse the curves and grow outwards again, which should remedy some of the issues you show above.
Iâ€™ve also changed your domain area test to a simpler test, because as you noticed yourself, it was prone to failing at times. I donâ€™t exactly know why eigther! You can now chose to maximise or minimise the maximum footprint area.

Other than that, the lot towards the middle was the most complicated one to get right, as youâ€™ll notice.

Toward the end of the evaluation all buildings come to nearly the same result in terms of their height and number of levels/floors.
Itâ€™s up to you know to come up with some more parameters and/or rules to prevent this and render the outcome more interesting. Maybe you need to fine tune your formulas a little or start with different settings per lot?

Density_p004.gh (94.5 KB)

1 Like

Hereâ€™s for instance another test with merely randomised FAR values and it already yields a much more interesting and diverse result. Donâ€™t you think?

Anyways, I hope this helps you.

Density_p004.1.gh (95.7 KB)

1 Like

Hi @diff-arch and thank you for your time and help.

Yes, I see what you did, it does work better.

You right, I was about to use points with set of radiuses (like in the beginning of this thread). So the user can play with radius and position to get results he want. Or maybe just a set of closed curves referenced from Rhino.

1 Like

Hi @diff-arch,
I hope you are well. Just wondering if you would be able to help with anemone again.
Just trying to get my head around itâ€¦

But I am trying to use Anemone to make new points inside region with slope from 0 to 12%. So I measure distance from centre point of the region to all point to get existing slope and then every iteration I reduce â€śZâ€ť of every point to get to desired slope %

Logic is correct (I think), but for some reason it doesnâ€™t work as expected?

Thank you

Hey @arten,

I hope youâ€™re fine, too. Iâ€™m doing well, just very busy! I wonâ€™t have time to seriously look at this, until the weekend. It would thus probably be a good idea to start a new discussion, since this does not seem to be related to the previously discussed topic. Also somebody else might chime in to help sooner than I can!

1 Like

Thank you @diff-arch

Yes, I was planning to work on it over weekend as well.
Will create a new thread , you right.

Thank you for your help if you will find time

1 Like