Hi Steve,

> For a simple object as being put forward, then yes,

I was referring to this:

Any time you have a symmetrical segments like this, it should be possible to form them into a solid because you don't need to use boolean union to do this, you can have the segments be surfaces that have open edges and then use Join to form a solid.

That will be quite a lot more robust than boolean union because it will not attempt to find any surface/surface intersections between the pieces and will only attempt to join unattached edges together.

That should generally work to solidify any kind of symmetrical segments like this.


> but as at the time of my first report on this, the main problem came
> from the overlapping swept solids, I posted a very simple example to
> show you, and your reply was:-

Yes, correct - that was a situation with 2 surfaces crossing over each other and touching at a kind of crown point at the top.

That's a totally different situation than gluing segments like this into a solid.


> Not all surface booleans are actually from a sphere.

Certainly that's true - just to clarify, my comment was meant to be applied to the topic of this thread which is about booleaning things from a sphere.

If something does not have a kind of radial symmetry to it, then I would not recommend this method.

If it does have a radial symmetry, then I would recommend it, it cuts down on the lot of kind of crossing pieces that tend to be problematic, the smaller number of those the more likely that things will go smoothly.

I would not really worry about the final segment joining which you seemed to say was a potential problem - it you have any problem with boolean union there I would definitely think that Join can be used instead to solve that part.

- Michael