Hi Tim,

<If I create a solid inside another but with a surface level with another , I find the smaller one hard to select, how should I do this?>

I often work with two versions of MoI open at the same time, one for the job I'm designing in & one for "Copy & Paste" of various parts.
I can then use the "parts version" to store various pieces in their correct position, while I continue to work in the "design version".
It's also handy for those designs where you get a "second idea" while working on the first one or when you've got a lot of parts to "Boolean Difference".
In the "design version", I can then Hide or Delete those various parts knowing that I can just Copy & Paste back from the "parts version".

Hope this makes sense, Colin

Thanks aal,

these are really good suggestions, just what I need1
regards Tim.

Infinite grid in the 6 views (if it's too hard for the 3D view) (for steph) :)

> Infinite grid in the 6 views (if it's too hard for the 3D view) (for steph) :)

I guess I still don't understand why this is a problem.

If he wants the grid to be larger, why doesn't he make it larger in the grid options?

I should be able to do an infinite grid in the ortho views eventually, but since it is so easy to increase the grid to a larger size like 2000 or 4000 sections, it just hasn't been a priority yet.

Does he need it larger because he has it still set to the original default, or is he doing something where 2000 or 4000 is not large enough?

- Michael

He has habit to begin to modelize without constraint :)
For example for his "background" of "watches" start to modelize for the 0,0,0 in the defaut mode
but following inspiration arrive to the end of univers' grid because not think of the limitated size !
For architecture and urbanism!
And seems the other 3D prog has also ortho view infinite!)

Some restraint is actually helpful.

The way floating point mathematics works on computers tends to cause a loss of numeric precision when larger numbers are mixed in calculations with smaller numbers. Just simple operations like addition and division sort of get rounded to coarser values.

So it can cause problems when objects are located farther and farther away from the origin.

I'm not sure of an exact number, but things should probably generally stay within coordinates of -5,000 to +5,000 or so to get the best results.

Placing objects that are farther out in space or larger in size than that will tend to generate additional failures especially in complex commands that do a lot of calculations like booleans.

- Michael

> but following inspiration arrive to the end of univers' grid because not think of
> the limitated size !
> For architecture and urbanism!

That would be nice, but generally such unrestrained and unlimited size to objects will cause numerous calculation problems....

Beyond the calculation problems, MoI version 1.0 just isn't envisioned as a city planning tool, it is more oriented towards modeling individual objects.

- Michael

Sure :)
we can't have more than 2 numbers visible after the decimal point on the tool barre bottom?

> we can't have more than 2 numbers visible after the decimal point on the tool barre?

You can have more - go to Options and set "Decimal places to display" to a different number, just the default is 2.

But several things such as intersections are calculated to a precision of 0.001 units. So unless you stay away from operations that involve tolerance (Boolean, Intersections, Fillets, Offsets, ...), it probably won't do you too much good to look at many more decimal points in the UI.

You generally need to pick a proper unit system and scale for your object such 0.001 units is smaller than the smallest detail that you want to represent, and your object should generally be less than 5000 units in overall size, otherwise there will tend to be problems in areas that require complex mathematical calculations such as Booleans and Fillets.

- Michael

thx I had seen before but don't refind it : Syndrome of the The Purloined Letter. by. Edgar Allan Poe :D

So If I have good understand
With a "Kilometer" unit "best" maximum precision can be the meter? :)
You say 5000 units max so 2500 "grid section" or admit 5000 "grid section"?
because in previous post you say -5000,+5000
so 2500 kms or 5000 kms with "snap size" 0.001:it is yet not so bad!

Hi Pilou, keep in mind these are just general guidelines to help avoid problems with commands that involve more sensitive calculations. Some commands are less sensitive to it than others. Booleans, Fillets, and Shelling tend to be the most sensitive.


> or admit 5000 "grid section"?

Yeah, I think that would probably be a pretty good limit.

- Michael

< Yeah, I think that would probably be a pretty good limit.
So a square surface of 10 000 kms with a precison of meters
(with Snap Size 0.001 and 3 decimal point in the barre bottom---> (or a precision of 1/ 10 000 000 with no unity):)
It's not so bad!)

Hmmm, setting snap size to 0.001 might not work very well. Since that is the fitting tolerance, basically you don't want to create curvy details that are at that size - that's sort of more the lower limit.

Setting snap size to 0.001 might encourage you to draw details that are around that same size... So something like 0.01 for the lowest snap size would probably be better.

It's even better yet to create objects that are not so near to these limits at all... I almost didn't want to include kilometers or miles as units at all because they kind of encourage pushing things to larger or smaller numeric values like you're talking about.

- Michael

Of course!
But you can if you want insert precise measures (even in kilometers with the 3 décimal in the tool barre box or read it under the mouse movement! :)
Not obliged but a possibility :)
Sure at this scale 0.001 precision is an hard work on the Mouse wheel :D
And "snapping" is only good on the helpers and curve's points not on the grid itself!