Hi Tony -

> However, I kept coming up with this type of error in the mesh.

It's not quite an "error" exactly - by which I mean the mesh is valid and closed, without flipped polygons, etc... Basically that happens if some of those polygons got additional points in their boundaries so that they formed n-gons rather than simple quads.

But yes I want to tune it up to avoid this happening when possible, which should be the case for the examples you've got here.

I did some work that was new in the Nov-21 beta to help avoid this for surfaces of revolution (for different cases than you have here), and for the next beta it looks like some other general tune-ups that I've done have already solved your example here. So it looks like this should be fixed with the next beta.

- Michael

That's great - thanks Michael. I'm look forward to the next beta.

I've been overhauling the mesher quite a bit for this next release. These changes hve been primarily to increase speed of the export meshing, but there are also a few other bug fixes as well.

I'm still working on a couple of those bug fixes and then I'll try some tune-ups to the meshing UI then I'll be able to release a new beta with these improvements.

- Michael

>>I've been overhauling the mesher quite a bit for this next release. These changes hve been primarily to increase speed of the export meshing, but there are also a few other bug fixes as well.

>>I'm still working on a couple of those bug fixes and then I'll try some tune-ups to the meshing UI then I'll be able to release a new beta with these improvements.


Although, as you say, technically the mesh is there, in reality it does have 'problems' rather than 'errors'. This means correcting it in the next app down the line. Especially if you want to use the MoI output as a basis for any sub-d work.

So anything you can do to reduce the problem areas would be great :-)