[Topologic] Redefining BIM through Spatial Topology, Information, and Grammars

1121315171826

Comments

  • @Sabufrancis Very interesting points. I am quite busy these days, but here is an example of a non-cuboid in Topologic. This is the result of intersecting two Cells with NURBS surfaces resulting in a third Cell with NURBS surfaces. While Topologic is fully capable of this using Dynamo and Grasshopper, I don't yet have the code to convert Blender NURBS to Topologic. However, if you create such an object as a Part/Shape in FreeCAD, it will be 100% identical in Topologic (because as I said, Topologic uses OCCT same as FreeCAD). For Blender and sverchok, I am only dealing with planar surfaces for the time being until I find time to understand how NURBS work and translate them to their equivalent Topologic entities.

    paulleearquitextonicaSabufrancis
  • edited March 2021

    @brunopostle said:
    cmake ..
    make

    Thanks! This should be included in the original github Readme ? :D

    @topologic said:
    Ping

    Maybe below warning shoud be discussed in github ?

    EDITED - transferred discussion to github

  • edited March 2021

    oops:
    Installing cppyy ...

    [paullee@f31 build]$ pip3 install cppyy
    ...
    EDITED - discussion transfered to https://bitbucket.org/wlav/cppyy/issues/327/pip-install-cppyy-on-fedora31-not-working

  • May I suggest that installation issues are sent to the GitHub issues rather than here? I think this forum is better suited for discussing ideas than for debugging. Also, for issues with installing 3rd party software such as cppyy, they have their own GitHub and can help you if you face issues.

    arquitextonica
  • edited March 2021

    @topologic said:
    May I suggest that installation issues are sent to the GitHub issues rather than here? I think this forum is better suited for discussing ideas than for debugging. Also, for issues with installing 3rd party software such as cppyy, they have their own GitHub and can help you if you face issues.

    Agreed, would transfer transferred to github soon :D

  • Just thought I'd share the latest progress here on Topologic Sverchok:
    https://youtu.be/zN_fTeuIuXM

    bruno_perdigaopaulleeCyrilJQLcarlopavCGR
  • @topologic said:
    Just thought I'd share the latest progress here on Topologic Sverchok:
    https://youtu.be/zN_fTeuIuXM

    And this is if you are tired of cubes: https://youtu.be/bGpb0vMbuoA

    JQLcarlopavpaulleeCGR
  • edited March 2021

    For any potential user of FreeCAD (AppImage) + Fedora (31), TopologicPy seems works after more than a weeks trial and error most importantly helps from e.g. Dr and wlav at github / bitbucket. Would try to find documents to see how to use TopologicPy without visual tools :D

    JQLbrunopostle
  • Hi everyone,
    Someone a while ago (sorry this thread is way too large to go back and find out who, but you know who you are) asked if they can do stacked floor plans that are then trimmed by a faceted outer building envelope. I am happy to report that I experimented with this in the latest Topologic for Sverchok and it works as expected. Below are a few images.


    bruno_perdigaoJQLbasweinpaulleecarlopavCGR
  • edited April 2021

    Another update on the addon (which I'm now calling the Homemaker add-on, because topologise was too similar to @topologic )

    @brunopostle said:

    [snip list of things previously done]

    1. A Perl library for assembling IFC data. There is nothing special here, if everything else was Python, this could be replaced by the IfcOpenShell Python library.

    This is all TODO, I need to figure out how to generate IFC entities within blenderbim, so far it looks reasonably easy (though I haven't started yet).

    Done, the File::IFC Perl library is now replaced by generating the IFC model entirely with IfcOpenShell and using various bits of the new python api.

    1. Another Perl library that actually generates the IFC geometry, places windows and doors etc.. this is a bit more of a problem as this is about 1500 lines of complicated code.

    This is a big job, not least because I want to change a lot of functionality: currently 3D entities such as doors and windows are loaded as DXF files, these need to pulled out of some kind of IFC library. I also intend to turn the style definition inside-out, which will enable a huge range of different buildings.

    Done, the Molior Perl library has been ported to python, the style system has been changed and should be a lot more flexible. I'm still loading assets from DXF files, but once there they form an IFC library, so switching to a 100% IFC system would be trivial (once I have some idea what such a thing looks like).

    1. Finally Topologise uses blenderbim to import the IFC into blender.

    The add-on is still creating external IFC files and importing them with blenderbim, for now.

    The add-on is still doing this, which involves creating the IFC model twice in IfcOpenShell, so fixing this would be nice.

    So, basically the old Perl backend is gone and the add-on is now 100% python (with dependencies on topologicPy, Blenderbim and ezdxf). There is still lots to do, I started writing a roadmap in the README.

    Finally a pretty picture, using all the styles:

    MoultJesusbillbruno_perdigaopaulleetopologicDADA_universetlangJohnCGRJQLand 3 others.
  • Do you reckon it's ready to add to the AEC Free Software Directory? :)

    brunopostletopologicCGR
  • @Moult said:
    Do you reckon it's ready to add to the AEC Free Software Directory? :)

    Maybe one day it will have its own thread on osarch ;)

    MoulttopologicpaulleeCGR
  • @topologic could we change the name of this thread to something more descriptive? Do you have a suggestion?

  • @duncan said:
    @topologic could we change the name of this thread to something more descriptive? Do you have a suggestion?

    How about “Topologic and Homemaker: Spatial Modelling Tools”

  • JQLJQL
    edited April 2021

    I like the name it has and it never really derailed. Homemaker is based on Topologic or isn't it?

    Homemaker needs it's own thread, definitely but this one has always been a "Talk on Topologic?"

    I don't relate with homemaker name though. Home making is a bit different than what I've seen about Homemaker. Homemaker is actually something around automatic architectural generator based on style rules. It doesn't make homes it generates buildings using preset codes. As I understood we would be able to set our own styles and rules for generating buildings in the future, I would think it has something to do with genetic codes for aechitecture. I'd call it "Project Genoma"

    MoultCGR
  • @JQL said:
    I like the name it has and it never really derailed. Homemaker is based on Topologic or isn't it?

    We're talking about the name of this thread. Not the name of a project. We want new visitors to the forum to have a change to understand what the different threads are about.

    JQL
  • @duncan said:

    @JQL said:
    I like the name it has and it never really derailed. Homemaker is based on Topologic or isn't it?

    We're talking about the name of this thread. Not the name of a project. We want new visitors to the forum to have a change to understand what the different threads are about.

    If I look back and what has been discussed in this thread, I can come up with four areas that aim to redefine BIM. Information, Grammars, Topology, and Space. So, perhaps: "Redefining BIM through Spatial Topology, Information, and Grammars"

    paullee
  • @topologic I've changed it once already - but it's really your thread so you just tell me what you want and I'll do it.

    JQL
  • @duncan said:
    @topologic I've changed it once already - but it's really your thread so you just tell me what you want and I'll do it.

    No it is fine, no worries at all. I hadn't realised it was already changed. Thank you.

  • Kind of spamming the thread again with "my things" but I think the advances have enough to do with the general topic to be somewhat interesting.
    It's in spanish, but you can mute it and set it to 2x speed to get to the end... Hope you all find it interesting.

    JQLpaulleetopologic
  • @duncan said:

    @JQL said:
    I like the name it has and it never really derailed. Homemaker is based on Topologic or isn't it?

    We're talking about the name of this thread. Not the name of a project. We want new visitors to the forum to have a change to understand what the different threads are about.

    You were talking about that, but Brunopostle was talking about his add-on name too:

    @brunopostle said:
    Another update on the addon (which I'm now calling the Homemaker add-on, because topologise was too similar to @topologic )

    To clarify what I stated, I was talking about both. Imho, homemaker has a great role in this thread but the thread is not about it, so it shouldn't figure in the name:

    • I don't think it's fit to have this thread cover topologic and homemaker . Homemaker, in this thread is a very interesting derivative work from topologic but the thread's core is topologic.
    • There are other derivative works as interesting as Homemaker, that are not being covered by the name of the thread. That isn't, imho, fair to them.
    • One of them, for me is @arquitextonica work, who now feels like he is spamming the thread while he is definetely not. He is showing topologic features through his very interesting work, as well as @brunopostle is.
    • I think changing the name of this thread was not needed, though complementing it with a more descriptive text of what topologic is about is ok too and very welcome indeed.
    • @brunopostle 's work is already worthwhile enough to have his own thread and wiki page, as @Moult suggested, independently from topologic's thread and eventual wiki.
    • Even so, as Brunopostle's Homemaker add-on is changing names from topologise to homemaker, and as I always thought Homemaker wasn't descriptive or made credit to the full scope of what his work is about, I figured out that I could meddle in this name choosing too.

    In the end I meddled in everything. I was only trying to help, but I've got a big mouth. I hope that is clearer and thanks for pointing me that confusion @duncan

    CGRbrunopostlearquitextonica
  • @JQL forums are never as good as talking. I think we've all (minus one) done a great job of communicating clearly on this forum. I've been very pleasantly surprised. Posts like yours are classic, you were half replying to me and half replying to an earlier message which I hadn't read so I thought you were only replying to me ... what a mess we made. Nice that we're all relaxed and friendly.

    But seriously - yes - names are important and thread names too. That's how new users find out what's going on. I fight for the (new) users. If it's time for a separate thread - just do it! @brunopostle ? I'm always happy to split and merge if that's makes things more useful.

    Anyone notice the Tron reference?

    arquitextonicaJQLtopologicJesusbill
  • JQLJQL
    edited April 2021

    @duncan I'd upload you a glass of portuguese wine, right now, if I could! I'm afraid of damaging my phone.

    Jesusbill
  • @duncan said:
    If it's time for a separate thread - just do it! @brunopostle ? I'm always happy to split and merge if that's makes things more useful.

    Thanks, but I think this thread tells a nice little story.

    I'll create a new thread for the Homemaker add-on when there is something to release (though it is reasonably easy to install right now, at least on Linux).

    Anyone notice the Tron reference?

    Nope, do tell, I haven't seen that movie since it came out!

    topologic
  • edited April 2021

    @brunopostle

    The movie wasn't well received but worth watching just for the graphics and music.

  • @JQL said:

    @duncan said:

    @JQL said:
    I like the name it has and it never really derailed. Homemaker is based on Topologic or isn't it?

    We're talking about the name of this thread. Not the name of a project. We want new visitors to the forum to have a change to understand what the different threads are about.

    You were talking about that, but Brunopostle was talking about his add-on name too:

    @brunopostle said:
    Another update on the addon (which I'm now calling the Homemaker add-on, because topologise was too similar to @topologic )

    To clarify what I stated, I was talking about both. Imho, homemaker has a great role in this thread but the thread is not about it, so it shouldn't figure in the name:

    • I don't think it's fit to have this thread cover topologic and homemaker . Homemaker, in this thread is a very interesting derivative work from topologic but the thread's core is topologic.
    • There are other derivative works as interesting as Homemaker, that are not being covered by the name of the thread. That isn't, imho, fair to them.
    • One of them, for me is @arquitextonica work, who now feels like he is spamming the thread while he is definetely not. He is showing topologic features through his very interesting work, as well as @brunopostle is.
    • I think changing the name of this thread was not needed, though complementing it with a more descriptive text of what topologic is about is ok too and very welcome indeed.
    • @brunopostle 's work is already worthwhile enough to have his own thread and wiki page, as @Moult suggested, independently from topologic's thread and eventual wiki.
    • Even so, as Brunopostle's Homemaker add-on is changing names from topologise to homemaker, and as I always thought Homemaker wasn't descriptive or made credit to the full scope of what his work is about, I figured out that I could meddle in this name choosing too.

    In the end I meddled in everything. I was only trying to help, but I've got a big mouth. I hope that is clearer and thanks for pointing me that confusion @duncan

    @duncan, I largely agree with @JQL on this. The name change feels jarring and the thread was not originally about Homemaker, but the unfolding conversation led Homemaker to evolve in a unique direction. And yes other explorations being had based off the thread will be made to appear relegated. 'Talk on Topologic' is still apt and relevant to the core discussion being had on the thread, if however we're placing premium on discoverability for new forum members, then @topologic 's suggested name change would be more logical, though I'd offer a slight adjustment thus: 'Talk on Topologic: Redefining BIM through Spatial Topology, Information, and Grammars' to retain the historical context which remains extant. Homemaker will have a dedicated thread and probably more random threads as more users get to experiment with it and start their own threads based on what interests them.

    topologicbrunopostleJQL
  • @JQL, the name Homemaker is indeed quirky but I find it to work in its quirkiness, after a fashion, with the way it places emphasis on making a home, rather than just making a house, and this speaks to the ethical, aesthetic and ergonomic concerns @brunopostle is trying to address through computation. Perhaps there can be another name that captures the same essence more eloquently, till we see such a name, let's keep homemaking ;o)

    brunopostleJQL
  • Seems people are not happy with the new name. I agree that Homemaker needs its own thread at a certain point. @duncan let’s change it to @DADA_universe’s suggestion: “Talk on Topologic: Redefining BIM through Spatial Topology, Information, and Grammars”
    The grammars part hints at homemaker’s contribution and perhaps can be used in the title of a future thread on homemaker to link the two threads.

    JQLbrunopostle
  • JQLJQL
    edited April 2021

    @DADA_universe said:
    @JQL, the name Homemaker is indeed quirky but I find it to work in its quirkiness, after a fashion, with the way it places emphasis on making a home, rather than just making a house, and this speaks to the ethical, aesthetic and ergonomic concerns @brunopostle is trying to address through computation. Perhaps there can be another name that captures the same essence more eloquently, till we see such a name, let's keep homemaking ;o)

    I agree with you that making a home, in a certain sense, is a poethical metaphor of what architecture is all about.

    However, in another sense, making a home feels like reducing of the scope of what homemaker is capable of to small domestic applications. It might even resemble that kind of phone software for interior design and decoration.

    Also, as architects we know that making a true home requires some sort of humane and creative action that shouldn't be confused with the automation of clicking a button and automatically applying a grammar of architectural elements to spatial relations.

    Grammar attribution to spatial relations is capable of becoming a great method of automating some actions we must perform, freeing the architect to focus on spatial design and architectural thought. This is not exclusive of home making, it's broader scope is all architectural design, all projects. I understand that starting by homes is good as it's a smaller scale kind of projects. But @brunopostle 's work is or can be developed to be fit, not only for housing but also for every commercial, industrial, cultural applications as well as any other.

    If I'd see something called "Homemaker" I would steer me away from it as it's reducing it and pushing it to a side I'm not interested in. In my case I know what it's capable of and what it's all about, so would still use it, of course, but as @duncan says, we are concerned about new users.

    Comparing this to the software I mostly use: Sketchup.

    Sketchup is a name that steers architects away. It relates to only a part of the project and people miss the fact that is a very robust and solid Software as they feel it's just good for concepts or presentations, or having a bit of fun modeling. It's not. It's a full fledged Architectural software, for concepts, design iteration, documentation, drafting and construction documentation that is even capable of getting in the BIM aspect of AEC. There are other things that don't help: knowing that google owned it, that users with no formation on architecture can use it to create their home designs, looking at the cartoonish design and knowing that the name can be changed to Mockup, Ketchup, Catch up, makes it feel very Unpro, even if it has a Pro version. I still use it because I know what it's capable of, but the name doesn't help much.

    CGRarquitextonica
  • edited April 2021

    @topologic said:
    let’s change it to @DADA_universe’s suggestion: “Talk on Topologic: Redefining BIM through Spatial Topology, Information, and Grammars”

    Done

    I might weigh in on the bold name "Homemaker" after it gets it's own thread ;-)

    arquitextonicaDADA_universe
Sign In or Register to comment.