@arquitextonica 100% agreed. The above is really just a proof-of-concept, but building the spatial structures through IFC and maintaining the full semantic graph is the correct way to proceed. It just requires some serious thought and programming.
I haven´t gotten too deep in the semantic graph of IFC, but I´m afraid it is more a tree (am I wrong?) than a network and that if we transform the network graph of topologic into a tree graph on IFC a lot of information would be lost.
I don’t know enough about IFC to comment. But yes if it is strictly a hierarchy then we will lose a lot of information. Below is the dual graph of the final resolved CellComplex. You can see the complexity of the relationships and all of them can be queried and reflected on.
(Note: The central node from which many edges radiate is the exterior wall which ends up being a single Cell so represented by a single Vertex).
This is really great Wassim!
I think BlenderBIM could take objects from topologic and, still in svershok, assign them IFC properties, right?
We could, therefore, create a whole geometric workflow that is automated by a set of topologic rules and then finish it off to send to another BIM package.
I understand that this is what homemaker is doing, but it’s ruleset is extensive and somewhat rigid, in the sense that it’s complying with a certain way of thinking. Having topological at a root level approach would allow any of us to create our own set of rules to generate building elements automatically. We could then decide which parts to model with this rule set and which parts to model directly or with other software and combine all conceptual processes more loosely.
If this was streamlined enough, I could see topologic being able to develop the main conceptual stages until the project is stable enough for detailing. In blender it would have the added advantage of being integrated with a highly flexible presentation tool, so it’s the right environment.
@arquitextonica said:
I haven´t gotten too deep in the semantic graph of IFC, but I´m afraid it is more a tree (am I wrong?) than a network and that if we transform the network graph of topologic into a tree graph on IFC a lot of information would be lost.
For what I understand it is a tree, but for topologic it doesn’t really matter, if you have geometry that is aware of its own relations with each other, you can present it in any way you wish, you can comply with any graph semantic right?
So, with topological, you can organize geometry by floors, buildings, zones, or anything else you wish for any purpose. From a conceptual model, you could generate any kind of export you need or any kind of report on the model.
@bruno_perdigao that model is really interesting. It would be nice to have your 2D plans being clipped to the outer shell bounds. That way one could control better stuff like areas or floor layout.
@JQL said:
For what I understand it is a tree, but for topologic it doesn’t really matter, if you have geometry that is aware of its own relations with each other, you can present it in any way you wish, you can comply with any graph semantic right?
So, with topological, you can organize geometry by floors, buildings, zones, or anything else you wish for any purpose. From a conceptual model, you could generate any kind of export you need or any kind of report on the model.
I agree that topologic can send the needed information to IFC, but the return trip is not guaranteed to be lossless. But yes, this is consistent with our original vision of Topologic as a driver model that has the lightest possible ‘weight’ and the largest possible amount of information. This ends up being Topologic = Space x Information. (Not an addition, but a multiplication). This model can then drive other models.
@JQL said:
in the sense that it’s complying with a certain way of thinking. Having topological at a root level approach would allow any of us to create our own set of rules to generate building elements automatically. We could then decide which parts to model with this rule set and which parts to model directly or with other software and combine all conceptual processes more loosely.
If this was streamlined enough, I could see topologic being able to develop the main conceptual stages until the project is stable enough for detailing. In blender it would have the added advantage of being integrated with a highly flexible presentation tool, so it’s the right environment.
Hi Wassim @topologic ,
I was watching your tutorial about Custom Properties and I couldn't find the node that you mention: Topology.TransferCustomProperties. I installed the latest version from today. Is this node available in this version? I found a DictionaryByCustomPropeties but it doesn't seem to work the same way.
@bruno_perdigao said:
Hi Wassim @topologic ,
I was watching your tutorial about Custom Properties and I couldn't find the node that you mention: Topology.TransferCustomProperties. I installed the latest version from today. Is this node available in this version? I found a DictionaryByCustomPropeties but it doesn't seem to work the same way.
Ah you caught that! Yes I changed the design so now you get the dictionary created from the custom properties and you can assign them to the topology (or any other topology). Feedback welcome on GitHub if not working well for you.
further to @topologic questions
1. Is it correct that outer walls will be thickened to the interior of the CellComplex? Best to have an option to vary the centreline to internal face as this would allow external walls to be thicker than internal walls
2. Is it correct that inner walls will be thickened centered on the face of the CellComplex? Generally Yes, although answer to 1. could apply
3. Is it correct that ground floors and roof slabs will be thickened to the interior of the CellComplex? It would be best that the floor surface defines the FL (floor level) and the slab/floor thickens towards the exterior, same should apply to the roof
4. Is it correct that any interior dividing slabs will be thickened centered on the face of the CellComplex?
5. What should one do about intersections? Leave as is for now? Yes
6. Would you want the outer walls to be made of several entities (per room outer wall) or merged into one entity per facade? Outer walls one entity and separate to the inner walls
@topologic Thanks, Wassim, the bug is fixed. However, I have another question regarding the tutorial. I managed to color my cells, but the order does not follow the text location. Even when I change the position of the texts, the colors remain the same. Anything missing in this setup?
@bruno_perdigao said: @topologic Thanks, Wassim, the bug is fixed. However, I have another question regarding the tutorial. I managed to color my cells, but the order does not follow the text location. Even when I change the position of the texts, the colors remain the same. Anything missing in this setup?
Hi @arquitextonica, I was playing with @topologic new nodes to try to replicate your demonstration. In this demo each cell has an information (the name of the room) and based on that I can create a different kind of outer wall. The ones that belong to the living room are blue, the rest is green. Is that the basics of what you showed? Am I getting it right? By the way, I'm very curious about your thesis. Great work.
PS - Thanks Wassim for fixing the nodes
@bruno_perdigao that is impressive, I'm not at that level yet. I am interested in orientation, relationships, and adjacencies so rules can be set for what rooms can connect to what other rooms and what rooms can share a wall or not and their orientation to North (for us at the bottom of the world) or South.
I’m thinking it might be time for a live Topologic workshop where we work together on a couple of interesting problems and create a working interactive demo.
Is there interest in this? And if so, please reply with a fairly specific/detailed design problem that Topologic can help solve. We can then vote on and choose two that are workable and I can test and prepare the initial workflows. We can do a morning and an afternoon session to accommodate different time zones. I’d rather not just demo them one-sided though, but we work together and brainstorm ideas on how it can be solved. We can share screen and offer screen control for participants to drag and drop nodes and test them. Could be messy and fun ?
If so, ideas please?
@topologic thank you for the workshop offer, it's very generous.
I would like to learn how to automate the extraction of geometry from a detailed IFC to make a clean and simple topologic model from which areas can be extracted for thermal envelope calculations, thermal analysis, sun studies and so on. I don't know if this is too simple or too hard for a workshop topic?
@topologic I'm back again, I would also like to learn how to get topologic to do concept plans and test them. I'm thinking of listing the rooms required, each with specific rules, dimensions, area, orientations etc. and then they join themselves into building with its specific rules and the whole thing tests itself for orientation, envelope complexity and so forth. All culminating in one or several iterations of designs while I'm drinking a latte:)
@Nigel these are great suggestions. One of my MSc students just completed her dissertation on exactly what you have described regarding concept plans. But it took her months and she used machine learning and evolutionary optimisation to solve it. So I am afraid both suggestions are quite complex for a half day workshop. Once the assessment of the dissertations is complete, I will share the videos that they have created.
Hi @Nigel as you see there hasn’t been a huge response so perhaps the idea of a workshop is not needed? Regardless, I am always happy to meet and help with topologic workflows. Ping me anytime to schedule a zoom session if you need any help with Topologic. Best wishes.
Hold on there Wassim. The workshop is a great idea. It's an opportunity to have a look at Topologic dealing with everyday tasks. I am just trying to figure out what I would like to see someone doing with it.
I haven't had the time yet to start testing it as for me it's still is a bit overwhelming: I don't use Blender regularly, I don't use Sverchok or any other parametric modeling software, I haven't even installed Topologic yet, and though I am hugely interested in it, I must find the time to start with it. A workshop is a great opportunity for me.
So, having said this, for me the workshop would be nice as a simple how to start with topologic and how to achieve something useful at a conceptual level. I imagine that my workflow with Topologic would start to assume a transitional form between what I do right now and a more parametric workflow. The thing is that I don't believe in revolutions, but I figure it's very easy to evolve.
So, the question for me is: How does topologic allow us to evolve on our processes instead of how it should impose a full 180º turn that changes everything.
I have been directly drawing 2D or 3D models of my buildings for a long time, so I'm not that much concerned about having topologic automatically modeling the building for me, I'm more concerned, at an initial stage, in having topologic checking if I'm doing something wrong in terms of connection between spaces and on the relations I'm creating in my buildings. If topologic is used to check my work and point my mistakes, I can move faster.
I would start by how to integrate topologic in the initial conceptual stage of organization of a building in a context:
1 - Translating a functional program to an organization schematic map of the building in topologic;
2 - Checking if our layout of spaces, that we have drawn ourselves in 2D or 3D, matches the schematic map. Example: A simple warning that the room has less area or more area than it's stated in the organizational map; or warning that the direct connection between auditorium and foyer is missing; or that the foyer has no connection with exterior spaces if those are objectives of the initial program.
3 - How these spaces we create interface with the building's context: acesses, orientation, surrounding buildings, green areas, etc... Example: I imagine this means that a road is a cell, a neighbouring building is a cell , a green area is another cell and that these cells are fixed in place, and we want the new cells we create to relate to them somehow.
4 - How to integrate things like orientation of the building, wind direction in this workflow?
5 - Then, how should topologic help us extruding these 2D spaces so their height is the same as in the program
6 - Then how should we pack spaces into multiple levels and create floors and floor connections with topologic. How to represent a stair or an elevator or ramp.
7 - Topography. Is the terrain another cell? is it geometry that imposes on cells or that imposes themselves to? How to deal with this?
I would pretty much end the workshop there and maybe this is already too much.
Other workshops would be about:
Exporting a topologic model into Ladybug tools and making use of it.
Integrating engineering as schematic planing in a topologic workflow.
Revisiting what you did a few posts before about the thickness of walls
At what level of detail should we dive with topologic from this point forward.
How to export and integrate a topologic model with other software and, if possible, keep it dynamically linked with the schematic base we did in Blender.
@JQL Some really interesting ideas! We had done a basic version of the space programme checking idea a few years ago so we can definitely enhance that and accomplish it. I think we can start with that.
Ok so I will schedule and announce a workshop soon. We’ll see how many attend. This will obviously use Topologic/Sverchok.
Comments
@arquitextonica 100% agreed. The above is really just a proof-of-concept, but building the spatial structures through IFC and maintaining the full semantic graph is the correct way to proceed. It just requires some serious thought and programming.
I haven´t gotten too deep in the semantic graph of IFC, but I´m afraid it is more a tree (am I wrong?) than a network and that if we transform the network graph of topologic into a tree graph on IFC a lot of information would be lost.
I don’t know enough about IFC to comment. But yes if it is strictly a hierarchy then we will lose a lot of information. Below is the dual graph of the final resolved CellComplex. You can see the complexity of the relationships and all of them can be queried and reflected on.
(Note: The central node from which many edges radiate is the exterior wall which ends up being a single Cell so represented by a single Vertex).
This new node is amazing!
This is really great Wassim!
I think BlenderBIM could take objects from topologic and, still in svershok, assign them IFC properties, right?
We could, therefore, create a whole geometric workflow that is automated by a set of topologic rules and then finish it off to send to another BIM package.
I understand that this is what homemaker is doing, but it’s ruleset is extensive and somewhat rigid, in the sense that it’s complying with a certain way of thinking. Having topological at a root level approach would allow any of us to create our own set of rules to generate building elements automatically. We could then decide which parts to model with this rule set and which parts to model directly or with other software and combine all conceptual processes more loosely.
If this was streamlined enough, I could see topologic being able to develop the main conceptual stages until the project is stable enough for detailing. In blender it would have the added advantage of being integrated with a highly flexible presentation tool, so it’s the right environment.
For what I understand it is a tree, but for topologic it doesn’t really matter, if you have geometry that is aware of its own relations with each other, you can present it in any way you wish, you can comply with any graph semantic right?
So, with topological, you can organize geometry by floors, buildings, zones, or anything else you wish for any purpose. From a conceptual model, you could generate any kind of export you need or any kind of report on the model.
@bruno_perdigao that model is really interesting. It would be nice to have your 2D plans being clipped to the outer shell bounds. That way one could control better stuff like areas or floor layout.
I agree that topologic can send the needed information to IFC, but the return trip is not guaranteed to be lossless. But yes, this is consistent with our original vision of Topologic as a driver model that has the lightest possible ‘weight’ and the largest possible amount of information. This ends up being Topologic = Space x Information. (Not an addition, but a multiplication). This model can then drive other models.
You described my doctorate research...
Coined some time ago... space to the power of information multiplied by control...
Hi Wassim @topologic ,
I was watching your tutorial about Custom Properties and I couldn't find the node that you mention:
Topology.TransferCustomProperties. I installed the latest version from today. Is this node available in this version? I found aDictionaryByCustomPropetiesbut it doesn't seem to work the same way.Ah you caught that! Yes I changed the design so now you get the dictionary created from the custom properties and you can assign them to the topology (or any other topology). Feedback welcome on GitHub if not working well for you.
Ok, I was able to transfer, but the array from the Color property came like this:
Maybe the problem is related to the way I created the custom properties?
Oh I probably didn’t accommodate the Color custom attribute correctly. Will look at it tomorrow
Thanks!
further to @topologic questions
1. Is it correct that outer walls will be thickened to the interior of the CellComplex? Best to have an option to vary the centreline to internal face as this would allow external walls to be thicker than internal walls
2. Is it correct that inner walls will be thickened centered on the face of the CellComplex? Generally Yes, although answer to 1. could apply
3. Is it correct that ground floors and roof slabs will be thickened to the interior of the CellComplex? It would be best that the floor surface defines the FL (floor level) and the slab/floor thickens towards the exterior, same should apply to the roof
4. Is it correct that any interior dividing slabs will be thickened centered on the face of the CellComplex?
5. What should one do about intersections? Leave as is for now? Yes
6. Would you want the outer walls to be made of several entities (per room outer wall) or merged into one entity per facade? Outer walls one entity and separate to the inner walls
@bruno_perdigao Hi. Topologic has been updated and this bug has been fixed. Please let me know if it working better for you.
@topologic Thanks, Wassim, the bug is fixed. However, I have another question regarding the tutorial. I managed to color my cells, but the order does not follow the text location. Even when I change the position of the texts, the colors remain the same. Anything missing in this setup?
Send me the blender file
@bruno_perdigao This has been fixed in the newest release. I will upload a new Youtube tutorial.
Hi @arquitextonica, I was playing with @topologic new nodes to try to replicate your demonstration. In this demo each cell has an information (the name of the room) and based on that I can create a different kind of outer wall. The ones that belong to the living room are blue, the rest is green. Is that the basics of what you showed? Am I getting it right? By the way, I'm very curious about your thesis. Great work.
PS - Thanks Wassim for fixing the nodes
@bruno_perdigao that is impressive, I'm not at that level yet. I am interested in orientation, relationships, and adjacencies so rules can be set for what rooms can connect to what other rooms and what rooms can share a wall or not and their orientation to North (for us at the bottom of the world) or South.
I’m thinking it might be time for a live Topologic workshop where we work together on a couple of interesting problems and create a working interactive demo.
Is there interest in this? And if so, please reply with a fairly specific/detailed design problem that Topologic can help solve. We can then vote on and choose two that are workable and I can test and prepare the initial workflows. We can do a morning and an afternoon session to accommodate different time zones. I’d rather not just demo them one-sided though, but we work together and brainstorm ideas on how it can be solved. We can share screen and offer screen control for participants to drag and drop nodes and test them. Could be messy and fun ?
If so, ideas please?
@topologic thank you for the workshop offer, it's very generous.
I would like to learn how to automate the extraction of geometry from a detailed IFC to make a clean and simple topologic model from which areas can be extracted for thermal envelope calculations, thermal analysis, sun studies and so on. I don't know if this is too simple or too hard for a workshop topic?
@topologic I'm back again, I would also like to learn how to get topologic to do concept plans and test them. I'm thinking of listing the rooms required, each with specific rules, dimensions, area, orientations etc. and then they join themselves into building with its specific rules and the whole thing tests itself for orientation, envelope complexity and so forth. All culminating in one or several iterations of designs while I'm drinking a latte:)
@Nigel these are great suggestions. One of my MSc students just completed her dissertation on exactly what you have described regarding concept plans. But it took her months and she used machine learning and evolutionary optimisation to solve it. So I am afraid both suggestions are quite complex for a half day workshop. Once the assessment of the dissertations is complete, I will share the videos that they have created.
@topologic I'm happy to learn anything I can
Hi @Nigel as you see there hasn’t been a huge response so perhaps the idea of a workshop is not needed? Regardless, I am always happy to meet and help with topologic workflows. Ping me anytime to schedule a zoom session if you need any help with Topologic. Best wishes.
Hold on there Wassim. The workshop is a great idea. It's an opportunity to have a look at Topologic dealing with everyday tasks. I am just trying to figure out what I would like to see someone doing with it.
I haven't had the time yet to start testing it as for me it's still is a bit overwhelming: I don't use Blender regularly, I don't use Sverchok or any other parametric modeling software, I haven't even installed Topologic yet, and though I am hugely interested in it, I must find the time to start with it. A workshop is a great opportunity for me.
So, having said this, for me the workshop would be nice as a simple how to start with topologic and how to achieve something useful at a conceptual level. I imagine that my workflow with Topologic would start to assume a transitional form between what I do right now and a more parametric workflow. The thing is that I don't believe in revolutions, but I figure it's very easy to evolve.
So, the question for me is: How does topologic allow us to evolve on our processes instead of how it should impose a full 180º turn that changes everything.
I have been directly drawing 2D or 3D models of my buildings for a long time, so I'm not that much concerned about having topologic automatically modeling the building for me, I'm more concerned, at an initial stage, in having topologic checking if I'm doing something wrong in terms of connection between spaces and on the relations I'm creating in my buildings. If topologic is used to check my work and point my mistakes, I can move faster.
I would start by how to integrate topologic in the initial conceptual stage of organization of a building in a context:
1 - Translating a functional program to an organization schematic map of the building in topologic;
2 - Checking if our layout of spaces, that we have drawn ourselves in 2D or 3D, matches the schematic map. Example: A simple warning that the room has less area or more area than it's stated in the organizational map; or warning that the direct connection between auditorium and foyer is missing; or that the foyer has no connection with exterior spaces if those are objectives of the initial program.
3 - How these spaces we create interface with the building's context: acesses, orientation, surrounding buildings, green areas, etc... Example: I imagine this means that a road is a cell, a neighbouring building is a cell , a green area is another cell and that these cells are fixed in place, and we want the new cells we create to relate to them somehow.
4 - How to integrate things like orientation of the building, wind direction in this workflow?
5 - Then, how should topologic help us extruding these 2D spaces so their height is the same as in the program
6 - Then how should we pack spaces into multiple levels and create floors and floor connections with topologic. How to represent a stair or an elevator or ramp.
7 - Topography. Is the terrain another cell? is it geometry that imposes on cells or that imposes themselves to? How to deal with this?
I would pretty much end the workshop there and maybe this is already too much.
Other workshops would be about:
Is this OK?
@JQL Some really interesting ideas! We had done a basic version of the space programme checking idea a few years ago so we can definitely enhance that and accomplish it. I think we can start with that.
Ok so I will schedule and announce a workshop soon. We’ll see how many attend. This will obviously use Topologic/Sverchok.
Interested in @JQL bullet points, 1 to 4, and 6 :)
(whilst starting to build those 'cells' in FreeCAD .)