Hi Larry,
re:
> Can we get staggered releases for 5.0 for Windows and MacOS, if 5.0 is ready for one OS earlier
> than the other?
They're built from a common code base in MoI v4 so they are ready at the same time. There usually isn't any separate porting process that needs to be done just for one OS. Not now anyway - it did take a lot of work to arrive at this state but it's infrastructure work that does not generally need to be repeated again.
> Also, if you perform improvements on importing in 5.0, can you please keep my step files on hand to test with as well?
Yup!
> The models I import to MOI are solids only, so closed surfaces.
So by "closed surface" I was meaning something like a cylinder surface that has a "seam edge" in it where the surface is closed in one direction. It's these kinds of surfaces that different CAD systems can have pretty different ways of representing trimming boundaries.
> I downloaded the trial version of CAD Exchanger and was able to convert the mould model to .3dm
> with that but it still did not import correctly in MOI 3.0. I've attached it.
Hmmm yes this seems to be quite a bit worse than the STEP import. There seems to be a lot of messed up UV trim curves being generated. I'll try to investigate it some to see if I can figure out why that is happening.
> If that's the case then I consider the issue resolved or a non-issue to begin with. Unfortunately, I cannot check and
> confirm that it's Meshmixer misrepresenting the edges of very thin triangles as a seam or cut in the mesh.
Can you please upload the .obj file for this one here? :
I can take a look at it to see whether there is any actual seam in there or if it's a really skinny triangle. It would be good for me to test with the same mesh settings that you used when generating it.
> I only used the 'Divide Larger than' on curved surfaces because it made no sense to also use on flat surfaces as
> well as it would just inflate the poly count needlessly.
It's just a way you can reduce very skinny triangles if those are undesirable for what you're doing. They're kind of hard to reduce without using a different triangulation method which would be a lot more time consuming.
Thanks,
- Michael