> The easiest way to help ensure that you'll get clean intersection curves is to extend objects like you did, so that they are pushing through each other by some margin instead of having surfaces that skim over each other with overlapping surface areas.
I've run into problems with booleans a few times today, and indeed, extending the cutter a bit did solve the issue. I need to remember to do it more often. The way Moi is designed seems to induce making objects overlap though. I'll have to make it a rule to scale an object by 1.001 every time I run into an issue.

> You can get an idea of what the intersection curves look like by selecting the objects and running the Construct > Curve > Isect command to generate intersection curves. If they look messy in some area instead of making closed loops then that's probably going to be a difficult area for the booleans.
I tried doing that, but I wasn't sure how to interpret the result. I read in some Rhino docs (it is what came up while googling boolean problems) that booleaning is just automation for join, separate, delete and intersect operations. But if intersect just gives curves what use is it for booleans? For a boolean of two solids wouldn't you need an intersecting surface instead?

Hi MRAKGR,

re:
> I've run into problems with booleans a few times today, and indeed, extending the cutter
> a bit did solve the issue.

Also what version of MoI are you using? There are some tune ups to booleans in the v5 beta.

I have not been able to test if those changes are significant for what you are running into
since you have not posted any model files.


> But if intersect just gives curves what use is it for booleans? For a boolean of two solids
> wouldn't you need an intersecting surface instead?

The booleans use the intersection curves to partition the 2 solids into different chunks of
connected faces and then those chunks are either combined with others or discarded
depending on what volume they are contained inside of.

- Michael

>Also what version of MoI are you using? There are some tune ups to booleans in the v5 beta.
v4 trial.

>I have not been able to test if those changes are significant for what you are running into since you have not posted any model files.
I am trying to replicate it, but the boolean works for me now. Strange. Well, if I run into any tricky situations I'll pass them on to you for testing.

Also to everybody here, thank you for offering to look into the problem directly. Right now I am over it, but I'll probably run into something in the future and will take you up on the offer.