Hi Pilou,

> Precision is given by a point Array curve/ Ellipse -->radius
> base of the cone 3D so 2 decimal point after unity ;)

You didn't include a 3DM model file, so I'm not completely sure, but I think your method may result in cones that are not touching each other exactly.

For example if 2 cones are touching each other like this:



But then 2 other cones are touching each other like this:



Then the way that your intersected results touch between each piece will be not completely uniform.

That may make that result unsuitable for architectural construction.

The other thing is it looks like your result makes curved surface pieces? Often times this kind of paneling for architectural design it is desired to have planar pieces for the construction.

It is not unusual for architectural design to have some special requirements beyond just making it look good - I think it is possible that your method may not meet those requirements.

But it does look like a good way to get a visualization of something that looks similar to the desired result though!

- Michael

Seems remember my cones were perfectly fitting! (0.01 cm)
I will remake that ;)
Yes it's not planar of course : in this case must be hand drawing :)

Hi Pilou,

> Seems remember my cones were perfectly fitting! (0.01 cm)

You mean you measured each one to make sure?

It looked like you used ArrayCurve to distribute the cones - like I was discussing earlier when you use ArrayCurve it distributes things at equal distances as traveled along the curve.

The distance "as traveled along the curve" and the "straight line" distance between the centers of the cones are different things.

- Michael

here the 3Dm
I don't use polyline : just array curve
triangles are over the spline with 0.01 cm so just drop down
between each base triangle there is 0.01 cm

Hi Pilou, in your example file the cone centers are not all at the same "straight line" distance from one another.

For example here I drew 2 lines in between some of the cone tips.

This line is 1.13 units long (actually 1.1263 with more digits if you open up the size edit panel).



This line is 1.11 units long (more digits: 1.1143):



So actually more than 0.01 units deviation between them.

It basically needs a different technique, to generate a set of lines that are all equal sized, to get better uniformity in the results.

- Michael

yes it's the price to use the array curve methode :)
0.02 cm for a building it's not the painting :)
Maybe I willl find a better method

Hi Pilou - for construction the real problem is that for different kinds of path curves the amount of error with your method will be unknown until you measure each thing.

For a rendering or visualization purposes only, that should be ok but probably not as a basis for a physical construction.

Array curve just is not the right tool for this particular job - it does something different (making equal distances as traveled along a curve) than what is actually needed in this particular problem.

- Michael

Thanks Frenchy for your dedication to the cause! However I think it was really the principle I was addressing not specifically solely the triangle shape but a method that could be used that with any shape (like the tank tread example) that just used two end points in a straight line to determin the start and end of each segment. But good thinking outside the box!!

Michael- yup i think you have understood me on my snapping point. Here is a better example - I just want to snap the end point of the line to the implied intersection between the radius of the base point of the line and the curve im intersecting to. Currently point will just slide up and down the curve which is useful in many cases but would be good to also have this intersection snap too. I think a picture is definately worth a 1000 words in this case!.....









Re the straight line snap I can see the dificulty in determining the exact measurements for the implied circular intersections for an even split but i guess it would be easier for a purely fixed size measurement, that would save a fair bit of manual placing and rotating.

< not specifically solely the triangle shape
of course :)
the damned thing is that : the "Array curve" seems works fine with a "circle" :)

Hi Pilou,

> the damned thing is that : the "Array curve" seems works fine with a "circle" :)

A circle is a special case, where if things are split up into equal segments "as traveled along the curve", it also happens to have equal distances "as connected in a straight line".

For example if you split up a circle into arcs where each arc is the same length, then the "chords" that connect the endpoints of each arc will all be of the same length as well (same length as all other chords I mean, not the same lengths as the arcs).

With other curves that is not the case - in other general curves making points that are equal distances traveled along the curve result in different lengths between the connecting "chords".

- Michael

Hi Rob - re: additional int snap for rotation.

I've added this in for the next v2 beta, so that there is an additional "int" snap available when doing rotations.

This works with the "wheel mode" for grips (the one that is activated when you click on the rotation grip), and also the Transform/Rotate and Transform/Rotate axis commands.

There is now an implicit circle, with its center at the rotation origin and with a radius going through the first picked point and you will be able to pick up intersections of that implicit circle with neighboring objects, like this:




So I think that should handle the kind of thing you were mentioning previously in this thread.

- Michael

Perfect that's exactly it, thanks, will save some hair pulling im sure!