Is it possible for use to get the actual Grasshopper files used to create the definitions available on Food4Rhino? Are they already uploaded to Food4Rhino and just not available?
I might be missing something and maybe there’s an easy way to extract/view the file. A dig into the forms seems to indicate no.
One of the tutorials on your site has made the annotation symbol’s definition available. But other than that I’m making my styles from scratch and it’s an extremely slow process. Not to mention that I’m probably not utilizing efficient methods. It would be really helpful to also have the Grasshopper files themselves on Food4Rhino.
Hi @keithscadservices, it is not possible to obtain the grasshopper definition from a VisualARQ GH style right now. This is actually a feature planned for future versions. When we do so, we will make it optional, I mean, the creator of the style will decide whether the GH file is obtainable or not.
I can share the GH definitions of the VA styles that come with the templates. So let me know if you are interested in any specific one.
Also, in the tutorials available on the website, you can find the GH definition for every example. Grasshopper styles - VisualARQ
Right now I’m looking for a Door or Window utilizing a frame structure of some kind as the one in this video:
Something with a divided panel would be perfect but I for now I almost just want to create a nice clean definition that handles the frame well.
Note that I understand how to match the thickness to the host. It’s more about figuring out the solid geometry for the frame, studying how the opening affects the wall, etc…
You don’t need to create a Grasshopper style for that, you can create it with the regular VisualARQ features in Rhino or with the VisualARQ components in Grasshopper. Please, let me know if I missed anything.
The base style for Visual ARQ windows doesn’t handle wall reveals/wraps very well:
Yes we can adjust the parameters but 1) it’s tediuous, 2) it doesn’t work quite right and 3) there’s a relatively painless Grasshopper solution (which I’ve seen in the referenced videos).
I’m reaching a skill level in Grasshopper where I can create the definition myself. But I’m a beginner and it’s a slow process. It’s much easier to work off an existing definition. Basically, having a definition to start with would save me hours if not days. I understand how to match the wall thickness but it’s the frame geometry, the division of the window/door panels, etc…
Thanks Alfonso. I did see that definition. That’s the one I might start with. The reason I didn’t grab that one already is that it doesn’t (from what I can tell) have a frame wrapping all 3 sides of the door opening. The component from the video posted is close (enough) to what I was after. Remember that I’m looking for a semi-realistic looking window/door opening. Only good enough to look right in plans, sections, elevations, etc… at nothing closer than 1:20 (but more like 1:50).
I might maybe commission someone to make it for me so I prepared this (killing a couple birds with one stone, also testing a presentation format I’m working on):
In particular, the interior finish is wrapping against the frame, where as in real construction the window’s frame/rough-in would take up the space (in other words, a window or door frame would never bear against say, gypsum). Of course I could turn wrapping off but then I’m left with unfinished material exposed (illustrated by my example above). I guess I need the window/door frame to do the “wrapping” for me, and with it’s own material.
I think I’ll figure it out. Perhaps nobody has posted a definition yet because it’s something best left to each individual user… we’ll see
@keithscadservices.
You can never get correct wrapping for windows and doors with VA.
VA offers 3 wrapping options for opening: none, interior material, and exterior material.
None of these works for reality. These 3 options are really funny and very very risky for your projects. Because this makes it impossible to get correct opening size in the walls.
This is one of the reasons that we’ve stopped using VA.
We hope VA developers will fix this issue soon, but we don’t think they can.
Thanks for sharing! I totally get the frustration, not having these little things work. I just see so much potential and issues like these are common in almost every BIM program. If I can find solutions to all these little issues I believe that VARQ will prove to be the best bang for your buck. I’m at least going to build a “test project” before I’m married to my opinion. Just like Revit (a program that costs 5 times VARQ for just a 1 year subscription), finding solutions or work-arounds to various things just comes with the territory when using BIM… unfortunately.
VA offers 3 wrapping options for opening: none, interior material, and exterior material.
To be honest I haven’t even figured out how to control Exterior vs Interior wrapping yet
You can never correct wrapping for windows and doors with VA.
Here’s my plan: No wrapping at openings at all; I’ll just have the window frame/trim handle that via my grasshopper definition. Visual ARQ allows you to use the host thickness (in this case, the wall) in a data input. Hopefully the custom window/door component retains all the benefits of the system components (ability to mirror, automatically recognize hosts, etc…). I’m only at a beginner level in Grasshopper so although I believe it’s possible I’m not sure? Do you think it won’t work?
The thing I like is that when something doesn’t work, I’m able to simply resort to the freedom and modelling speed of Rhino (opposed to say, using “model in place” and cancelling my dinner plans when using Revit). To actually draw a window from scratch in 3D doesn’t take horribly long. It sucks but it’s not horrible. On smaller projects and one-off windows it’s even not that impractical.
In the interim, I might just use generic walls with no details. Yes this sucks… but keeps me moving forwards at least.
I’ll have to transfer everything to a swinging door eventually (I was hoping to start with something with a divided door panel). The hard part I think will be getting the interior and exterior trim in there. Being new to grasshopper I am having some trouble with what I guessed would have been the easier stuff:
I wasn’t able to figure out how to merge my solids before having to call it a day.
So… at least it’s a start. But what would it take to include proper sizing frames out of the box? I’m enjoying the heck out of Grasshopper but probably spent a little too much time on it.
If your project are not that complex, I’d recommend you give Vectorworks a try.
VA can never make an option for a professional project, no matter how small it it.
Yes…we also felt big potential from VA when we saw it first. However, we’ve now concluded that “Cheap is cheap.”
Please, let me know if you still have any questions about this and I’ll try to solve your questions.
I think this is the best solution for this issue for now. We already have an entry in our list to have two kinds of openings in doors/windows. Something like this:
That did the trick thank you! Who would have thought that it was in the “intersect” tab (I hadn’t looked there yet). The final version will likely have an extrusion using the opening profile as a rail. I think I can create that but it’s just a matter of time.
Re: Vectorworks - For what I do Vectorworks isn’t really an option. I also don’t really have the time to learn something new (to me that is). I need the functionality and modelling speed of Rhino. It also exports to AutoCAD quite well (back around 2017 Vectorworks wasn’t exporting what I needed). And Rhino one of the few programs I actually enjoy using; by comparison, Revit is one of my least favorite. If I go through the trouble of learning something new it would probably be Vectorworks’ big brother, ArchiCAD. Something with “Rhino Inside”. Although if I go that route it will be with my head hung low in defeat. I would rather just go back to AutoCAD to be honest.
I’m not actually an architectural technician (nor an architect). I’m in, let’s say more along the lines of construction. If I take on a project in the role of an architectural technician I would most likely be doing a reno, a tenant improvement, stuff like that. If things aren’t working well in Rhino/Visual ARQ I always have that bail out: Simply export all my stuff to DWG.
I’ve seen lots of great results with Vectorworks. I’ve seen some bad results too, so not everyone is able to adapt to it (there’s an interesting story behind that). I think a lot of it has to do with one’s workflow and their preferences, and of course, settling on one package. It was a huge surprise to me at first but looking online, I realized that it’s actually Sketchup that generates the most eye-catching results. I figure if Sketchup can do that, then…
Your advice and input is extremely helpful, especially when determining the possible outcomes of my foray.
Well… the hard part for me. For someone better at Grasshopper this stuff is actually pretty simple. At this point I think I understand enough about Grasshopper and VARQ components that I can create what I need. And I know it will work . I just have to decide on the level of detail I guess.
The door is easy. I can simplify my frame by just using some sort of extrusion. The window… I either have to make a simplified representation of what a window frame would look like, or go all out and include every component. To be honest I kind of get why the system’s component is the way it is. I guess my only gripe at this point would be that the frame should cover the wall by default. But at least the solution is there.
Re: Interior/Exterior Wrapping - I just saw the tab this morning ;-).
There’s quite a bit to learn. But just like Revit, once the content/template is created, things go pretty fast. I’ve created two test projects, one using my own content and one using the default content out-of-the-box. A mistake I made early on was not studying the existing components and styles enough. It’s actually working good and quite comparable to out-of-the-box Revit. Each has their own advantages/disadvantages of course; The exterior features were easier to create using Rhino/VARQ compared to Revit for example:
@keithscadservices In your grasshopper definition you can define the Profile curve to encompass the rough opening in the wall if you like and then handle all the wrapping or lack of within the wall type.
However, I wouldn’t do it that way. When you document the width and height of the door in a Schedule or Opening Elevation it will only account for the dimensions in that profile curve that cuts the wall, not the actual dimensions of the door. Hopefully in the future there will be a way to differentiate between the rough opening and the scheduled dimensions without having to make an entirely different parameter to differentiate between the two.
For now, I end up overlapping the wall and the jamb geometry so that the dimensions come out right in the schedule. I have the wall sheathing or interior finish wrap the opening so that it almost works as a kind of blocking. If you look really close this could look odd. But generally these are only shown at 1/4" / 1’-0" or 1/2" / 1’-0" scale drawings. Anything smaller is handled in a 2d detail (same as you would in Revit), so it hasn’t been an issue.
Thanks for sharing as I would have certainly tripped over this in the future.
I looked into this as I thought for sure that there would be a way to create a custom calculated parameter (I had to solve a similar situation in Revit way back in the day). There isn’t . I was blown away! At least they are planning on adding it . But I felt for sure like there’d be a way to add the parameter to the Grasshopper definition somehow.
For me it kind of sucks: I need the rough opening and frame size to be correct. The good thing is that I can create (non-calculated) custom parameters manually for each of my styles, and then schedule them. I’ll only have a few door styles on each project. But still… it sucks to go through the trouble of learning Grasshopper and not even be able to do these little things (I’d love to eat crow here if someone has a ‘calculated’ solution). I’m also content to wait until they resolve it. And who knows, maybe they have something special planned for the Grasshopper 2 release.
Nothing automatic yet as far as I know. You can have grasshopper do the math for you and then update the property of the object.
As an example, this script works pretty well with the default visualarq doors. You have to make a custom parameter of “clearHeight” and “clearOpening” beforehand. Then the script will subtract out the width of the frame and update the parameter of each door with the clear dimension. You then need to make sure that your door schedule is then pulling the “clear” parameter rather than the standard width and height so it shows up in the table.
This doesn’t work on the opening elevations however. Those are a bit more black box in terms of the parameters they will dimension. I’m not sure how to edit them. DoorScheduleClearOpening.gh (13.2 KB)
Thanks Thomas! Luckily I don’t think I will be doing anything with opening elevations in the near future. I think the Grasshopper definition will be the cure I’m after.
Update: I finished my definition, kind of. There’s a few glitches. But I discovered some things so feel like sharing before I wrap things up for the day.
By chance I stumbled upon another work-around for the rough opening size issues: I offset my Height and Width by whatever the frame thickness/padding will be.
The schedule automatically grabs the profile dimensions, not these, but these still appear as optional parameters if you create your own style. But… (and a frustrating but because it’s so close to being perfect), I cannot control the formatting of the numbers as they appear in the schedule.
My window definition appears to be working quite good. It took A LOT of work. Too much. If one person has to create each and every definition… I don’t know… maybe I can make better time on my next attempt. One glitch is that my sill disappeared. Probably one of the easier things to sort out however:
I’m able to get very close to what I was after: Basically a nice looking generic window that will look good enough on plans, sections and elevations. Many of the parameters are editable. Perhaps too many. I had an inclination to place numbers in front of the parameters (for example, naming them “1-Width”, “2-Height”) so that they appear in a rational order once loaded into a vaStyle.
This took A TON of time. It would be nice if we all had clean Grasshopper definitions to start off from. It’s to nobodies benefit that each and every user has to start virtually from scratch. That’s kind of what my objective is with the template I’m creating, but it’s going incredibly slowly (but I’ve given myself a good time frame). I’ve attached the definition but it’s a bit messy. Not sure if that will affect performance down the line we’ll see.
. I just have to decide on the level of detail I guess.
