Hi Andy,

re:
> I have two sweeps left, as you can see this one does not follow the guide lines and
> instead creates a bulge. What am I doing wrong?

It looks like you're not doing anything wrong, but sweep is having some problem with automatically determining the proper orientation of the profiles.

Try using Network for that problematic one instead of Sweep. With network select all 4 boundary curves before running it.

- Michael

I tried network and it just gives me a weird crease each time...sigh...



Andy

Hi Andy, the weird result is a bug in Network that can happen when it splits up a large surface at creased spots.

Try a smaller network like in the attached file:





- Michael

I don't follow - I have to network each side separately? So that is a total of eight networks?

Andy

Hi Andy, yes to avoid the bug you ran into you would need to do the networks separately.

But it looks like you've already done many of them with sweep, the one I posted was using Network in the spot where sweep isn't behaving well.

I have a fix for this creased surface splitting bug which will go into the first v5 beta.

- Michael

The problem I see with putting bug fixes into the next beta is that there is no release schedule. I can understand that for new features but IMO (as a professional software developer) bug fixes should be pushed out more frequently. Why not gather a few up and make a 4.1 release?

That way the V4 users can have the bugs fixed without needing to use beta software or have bug fixes potentially stalled while new features are added?

Andy

Hi Andy, the problem is that every change including bug fixes can have side effects causing other problems.

Haven't you ever experienced this problem with a software update causing something unexpected to break?

I like to have a long beta period and then once that period is over it's good to lock down that version and only update it with critical fixes such as if it won't run on a new operating system release.

- Michael

Regression testing.

Hi Andy, that would work if I had a QA department.

Since I don't, the most effective way to prevent regressions is to not make modifications to a stable release.

My process is that modifications go into beta releases, not stable releases.

- Michael

When will V5 final be released with the bug fixes for V4?

Andy

Hi Andy, it's way too early to know when the v5 final version will be released, the first beta hasn't even been released yet.

- Michael

Exactly. :)

Why not have two parallel tracks? V4.x betas for bug fixes for V4 users and V5 betas for people who want to test new functionality? Source code versioning can easily handle such an arrangement and ensure that problems in one are fixed in the other, and vice versa. It will allow bug fixes to get to V4 users quicker.

I assume that if someone uses V5 beta then they lose access to that when the beta is over and therefore lose access to the V4 bugfixes in it?

Andy

Got there in the end. I had to replace most of the sweeps with networks as there were small creases and glitches. Sweep seems broken to me.



Andy

Hi Andy, looks like sweep is having some difficulty with the 3D rails having tangent directions diverging from one another.

- Michael

Hi Andy,

re:
> Why not have two parallel tracks?

Because there is more administrative work to keep track of more versions like this. Keeping things simple and streamlined is one of the things that helps me to operate as a single person business.

Bug fixes for v4 that were reported during the v4 beta releases are in the v4 final release.


> I assume that if someone uses V5 beta then they lose access to that when the beta is over
> and therefore lose access to the V4 bugfixes in it?

The changes made during the v5 beta process will be for the v5 release, the v4 release is done and locked down.

But yes, to keep using v5 after the beta period is over you would need to upgrade to v5 when the beta period is finished.

- Michael

OK, I now have a part I am happy with - how do I get it watertight for 3D printing?

It's composed of:

- two solids from the STEP part I imported
- the eight networks

I've tried:

- joining the networks together
- separating the solids into surfaces and then joining those surfaces with the networks (seems doing that converts the surfaces back into the two solids)
- separating the solids into surfaces, selecting only all of the surfaces and then exporting

Any ideas what the steps are? Thanks, Andy

Hi Andy, you generally would use the Edit > Join command to glue surfaces together to make a solid.

However, you have some prep work to do first, there are some internal surfaces you need to delete first, for example if I hide this part:



You can see that there is a face on the inside of everything here:



There's also a similar one on the other side:



The Join command will join "naked edges" to other naked edges. A "naked edge" is an edge that belongs to only one face instead of being joined between 2 faces.

Your network surfaces have naked edges so they are ready to join. The other parts where you want to join them into do not have naked edges, they will once you delete those internal surfaces.

- Michael

Deleted

So yes you are super close to being finished there. You just need to delete the 2 faces on the inside that I showed above, then you can select everything and do Edit > Join and have a solid so it's ready to be sent for printing.

If the object type indicator here shows says it's a "surface" or "joined srf" then that means there is some opening in it that still needs to be closed off for it to be watertight. If it says solid then there aren't any naked edges so it's watertight:



- Michael

Great, thanks! Andy