radiance programer in Chicago

Greg

Do you know any good radiance developers in the Chicago area available for
contract work?

They have to be able to handle complex daylighting not just windows

You can see our product that needs to be incorporated into the model at
www.solar-track.com

Thanks

George

···

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Ward
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:02 AM
To: Radiance general discussion
Subject: Re: Duh (was: Re: [Radiance-general] rpiece error)

Weird. Normally, image files and the like aren't "executable" -- you
must have had that bit set on your file, somehow, and the OS
interpreted the header as a bash script. No wonder you had such a mess!

-Greg

From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <[email protected]>
Date: March 5, 2010 8:52:41 AM PST

Problem solved. I had an *image* called "rpiece" in the current
working
directory (and . in my search path). I'm not exactly sure what
causes that
to spawn all these bash shells, but obviously my system was very
confused.
Thanks for all the suggestions and the insights on case sensitivity.

And thanks to Mark for his runsmp script (in the benchmark package),
which
does a nice job of keeping my processors busy (it's hot under my
desk!).

_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general

hi... as you may remember, I had the chance to have a closer look at your products. You do not need a programmer for modelling this. Technically the photon map extension is essential for you. modelling may require some cheats (especially if you have bent pipes attached) and scripting to make the mirror system track the sun. Still no programming.
Cheers
Lars.

···

--
Dipl.-Ing. Lars O. Grobe

Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore (SERIS), www.seris.sg

On Mar 6, 2010, at 23:46, "George Kramerich" <gkramerich@solar- track.com> wrote:

Greg

Do you know any good radiance developers in the Chicago area available for
contract work?

They have to be able to handle complex daylighting not just windows

You can see our product that needs to be incorporated into the model at
www.solar-track.com

Thanks

George

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Greg Ward
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:02 AM
To: Radiance general discussion
Subject: Re: Duh (was: Re: [Radiance-general] rpiece error)

Weird. Normally, image files and the like aren't "executable" -- you
must have had that bit set on your file, somehow, and the OS
interpreted the header as a bash script. No wonder you had such a mess!

-Greg

From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <[email protected]>
Date: March 5, 2010 8:52:41 AM PST

Problem solved. I had an *image* called "rpiece" in the current
working
directory (and . in my search path). I'm not exactly sure what
causes that
to spawn all these bash shells, but obviously my system was very
confused.
Thanks for all the suggestions and the insights on case sensitivity.

And thanks to Mark for his runsmp script (in the benchmark package),
which
does a nice job of keeping my processors busy (it's hot under my
desk!).

_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general

_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general

Hi George,

I can't think of anyone in the Chicago area off-hand, but others on the list may be able to refer you (or suggest themselves).

It looks like the elements in your system are diffusing, which means you could probably model them with standard Radiance using the mkillum program. Most advanced users who apply Radiance to daylighting problems should be familiar with this method, and could help you. It would require some scripting as Lars points out, but this is pretty standard in the context of daylighting problems.

Best,
-Greg

···

From: "Lars O. Grobe" <[email protected]>
Date: March 6, 2010 8:08:47 AM PST

hi... as you may remember, I had the chance to have a closer look at your products. You do not need a programmer for modelling this. Technically the photon map extension is essential for you. modelling may require some cheats (especially if you have bent pipes attached) and scripting to make the mirror system track the sun. Still no programming.
Cheers
Lars.
--
Dipl.-Ing. Lars O. Grobe

Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore (SERIS), www.seris.sg

On Mar 6, 2010, at 23:46, "George Kramerich" <[email protected] > > wrote:

Greg

Do you know any good radiance developers in the Chicago area available for
contract work?

They have to be able to handle complex daylighting not just windows

You can see our product that needs to be incorporated into the model at
www.solar-track.com

Thanks

George

Hi Greg, George,
actually that is an interesting question whether it can be considered diffusing. a lensplate strays light, but it is not diffuse (if it was it had to look white from below). Still it may be a valid approach to treat it as diffuse in a model.
Cheers
Lars.

If the surfaces are "partly specular" then you can still treat it in mkillum. If it is purely specular, or has a purely specular component, it gets a bit more complicated and you'd have to use the mirror type, but mkillum would still work so long as the surfaces are flat. The photon mapping method really only applies when your surfaces are both highly specular and curved, which I don't think is the case, here.

Cheers,
-Greg

···

From: "Lars O. Grobe" <[email protected]>
Date: March 6, 2010 9:13:33 AM PST

Hi Greg, George,
actually that is an interesting question whether it can be considered diffusing. a lensplate strays light, but it is not diffuse (if it was it had to look white from below). Still it may be a valid approach to treat it as diffuse in a model.
Cheers
Lars.

Hi Greg, sorry, now I got it. You are referring only to the dome assembly, right? I was assuming an attached light pipe.
Cheers
Lars.

Yes -- I missed that. If there's an attached (specular) light pipe, I agree that the photon map would be the best way to go. You could still get by with mkillum and standard Radiance in cases where the sun was not striking the curved light pipe directly, only after bouncing off the diffuse or semi-specular reflectors, but I'm not sure what the case is here.

Thanks for pointing that out.
-Greg

···

From: "Lars O. Grobe" <[email protected]>
Date: March 6, 2010 9:29:31 AM PST

Hi Greg, sorry, now I got it. You are referring only to the dome assembly, right? I was assuming an attached light pipe.
Cheers
Lars.