The structural simulation fulfilled by Karamba 3D (Preisinger et al., 2014). Use the boolean toogle to pass from the basic pattern analysis to the optimize one. Grasshopper and is used in this paper to generate arenas with diverse geometries. I could only wonder if there is a problem with my script or if there is a bug somewhere in Karamba programming. Karamba3D is being developed by Clemens Preisinger in cooperation with Bollinger und Grohmann ZTGmbH in Vienna. It lets you analyze the response of 3-dimensional beam and shell structures under arbitrary loads. I'm really can't explain this difference, and it's was certainly not the kind of result that I want to show. Location: Vienna Members: 1112 Latest Activity: Sep 11 MySpace Tweet Karamba3D is an interactive, parametric finite element program. This one showing greater deformation than the original basic pattern. Unfortunatly, after doing a cycle of optimization, the new dome show, in RFEM, great amelioration, but I obtain the exact opposite result in Karamba.

As conclude, I still can use the ratio of the values to optimize my dome panel pattern. Even if annoying it was not discarting the benefit of Karamba since the deformation and force distribution were similar to the RFEM model. I first encounter very different values between the Karamba and RFEM models (at this point, I suspect the material proprieties - isotropic and calculation method to explain the difference). My ultimate purpose is to demonstrate the advantage of working with Karamba in a iterative design process for non-standard wood construction in CLT by using structural analysis as input to optimize the form. I'm doing a structural analysis comparaison for a wood panels dome between Karamba and RFEM.

Karamba grasshopper