Continuity options

Next
 From:  niko (NICKP100)
4534.1 
Any word for the continuity options for the network command on the beta?
This is the most important feature along with adjustable fillets that would simplify my workflow tremendously instead of going back and forth to Rhino.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
4534.2 In reply to 4534.1 
Hi niko,

> Any word for the continuity options for the network command on the beta?

Nothing for that quite yet - I'll probably still be focusing on the new deform commands for a little bit here yet.

And most likely the main continuity tool will be a separate "Match" command that will allow you to modify 2 surface to be smooth to one another, no matter which particular command was used to create them.

I'm not sure yet if that will get built into the Network command as well or if that is not really needed with a Match tool in place.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  niko (NICKP100)
4534.3 In reply to 4534.2 
I favor putting it as part of the network command as well in order to eliminate multiple steps/clicks. Imagine having a lot of these surfaces how much work it would be.....I dont think the extra line or so would clutter the interface IMO.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
Next
 From:  Michael Gibson
4534.4 In reply to 4534.3 
Hi niko, well it's a fairly big change for the Network command to do that because currently the way Network works is that you pick all the curves, then run Network and bam it's all finished without anything extra to do.

In order to add options to it also means making an extra stage in the command which is a pretty big step.

It could be possible to do that, but it's more important first to have the separate command so that you can get continuity in many other kinds of situations instead of only with Network.


> Imagine having a lot of these surfaces how much work it would be.....

If you're making a whole lot of little network surfaces, that may be a sign that you need to take a step back and re-evaluate the whole strategy for how you're approaching the model - you're generally going to get better results if you try to build sections of your model that should be smooth as one larger surface with pieces of that trimmed off, instead of trying to make a patchwork of a whole lot of little separate surface fragments.

The little surface fragment type approach tends to work better in a sub-d modeler where everything gets kind of melted and smoothed out as part of the sub-d process.

- Michael
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged

Previous
 From:  SteveMacc (STEVEH)
4534.5 
One of the other problems with Continuity is conflicts. Having a separate match command make sense. Creating a patch in Solidworks, for instance, and specifying the continuity on each edge can have some unexpected results or failure, depending on other surface continuities surrounding the patch.
  Reply Reply More Options
Post Options
Reply as PM Reply as PM
Print Print
Mark as unread Mark as unread
Relationship Relationship
IP Logged
 

Reply to All Reply to All