Thanks for the cheer, Michael.

Yep, I had the value set at 0.01. So, I will go with 0.007 and smaller.

BurrMan, "Malasada's". Like our doughnuts? Yum!

Good point: do one hole and then surface selection. I am still newish to this compact but elaborate toolset that makes the workflow so easy.

Hey Nick. Hole thickness? I will think about it.

Thanks,

Leonard

Hi Leonard, I also sent you this info through e-mail but I also wanted to mention it here.

When you start to approach radius values around 0.001 units, that will start to run into different problems there, since the fitting tolerance for the fillet operation is 0.001 units in size.

So currently when you want to go much under about 0.01 you may need instead to scale up your object (to do this select it, go to Transform/Scale and type 0 <enter> to place the origin at 0,0,0 and type 100 <enter> to scale up by 100 times).

I'm going to take a look today to see if I can tune this up for the next v2 beta, to make sure that the fitting tolerance is adjusted to be tighter if your fillet radius is approaching too close to it.

Then the other problem that you will probably run into is adding in a few hundred fillets is going to increase the complexity (in data size and memory consumption) of the model by quite a lot, you'll need to set MoI up in "large model mode" for that to avoid consuming a lot of memory. To do this means to adjust the display mesh density to be coarser - that's under Options / View / Meshing parameters . Switch the "Mesh angle" to 20 degrees (from the default of 10), and uncheck the "Add detail to inflections" button.

With those settings some of your objects will have a less smooth appearance, but it will help to greatly reduce the amount of memory consumption, since otherwise there will be a zillion little polygons made on all those little fillets.

You'll probably want to adjust these display mesh settings before doing the fillet.


- Michael

Hi Michael,

Scaling up: my metal thickness is 1/32", or 0.031". Are you suggesting I scale up 100 times? If I scale that up 100 times my metal thickness will be 3.125" thick. Am I right on that?

Got you on the "large model mode". I did experience slowdown. Do I change those settngs back prior to exporting?

Leonard

Hi Leonard,

> Scaling up: my metal thickness is 1/32", or 0.031". Are you suggesting
> I scale up 100 times? If I scale that up 100 times my metal thickness
> will be 3.125" thick. Am I right on that?

Yup, but the scale up is just a temporary measure to avoid approaching too close to the 0.001 tolerance value for the fillet calculation.

Once the fillet has been calculated on the larger scaled object, you can then scale that filleted version back down to its original size again.


> Do I change those settngs back prior to exporting?

Nope, that is not necessary - those settings only have an effect on the display of the model in the viewport during normal modeling.

When you export that calculates a separate mesh from that, which is instead controlled by the "Meshing options" dialog that is displayed during the export. The export mesher does quite a bit more work to try and avoid making an unnecessarily dense mesh.

If you switch back at some point later on to working on a more simple model instead of a denser one, then you may want to switch the settings back at that point in time to get the smoother display which looks nicer on the screen.

- Michael

That all sounds great, Michael.

Moi3D is not only a great and fun modeling app but it is a stimulating lateral thinking exercise, too.

Thanks,

Leonard

Hi Leonard, I have tuned Fillet up now for the next v2 beta, so that it can handle smaller radius values better.

When the radius gets small enough to approach fitting tolerance, it will now automatically adjust the tolerance to be tighter relative to the radius, so fillets with small values (for example 0.005, 0.001, etc...) will work better in the next beta without needing the "scale objects up" manual workaround anymore.

But putting in a whole lot of little tiny fillets will still increase the model complexity (in file size and memory consumption) by quite a lot though, so that is still something to take into account.

If the fillet is going to be very very small on the screen on the final renders, you might want to put a chamfer in there instead of a fillet - it will look about the same if it is really tiny in the render but will have quite a bit less increase in complexity and in final polygon count too.

- Michael

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the news. App updates in real time - new to me. :)

I agree with chamfer ILO fillets or no treatment. With no budget or schedule, it is for when it does matter. The app lures one to questionable and undisciplined behavior. (Fault transfer. ;) )

Thanks for the good works,

Leonard