What?!
Youre serious?!
WOW!!!!
With V1 youll acomplishe what Rhino didnt in 3 versions.

As Lord Vader said "Most impressive!" ;-)

Damned, I will see that only after the 5 mars :/
Have you plan for a beta before?

I haven't had a chance to test it too much yet, but it looks good so far, I should be able to tell more tomorrow.

Here's an example attached - instead of a fillet with a circular cross-section there are G2 blends here. Is this the type of thing that you were asking about?

You will still enter a radius which is used to determine the spacing, but you'll be able to choose a different shape than just circular. I think I'll also be able to have a "tension" parameter as well for the blend, we'll see...

- Michael

> Have you plan for a beta before?

Yeah, I think I'll have one at the end of this week.

- Michael

The nice thing about the next beta is that it should fix _all_ previously reported crashes in fillets, booleans, and shelling. Things that could previously crash in these commands should now just fail instead of killing the program.

But there are a lot of changes in how these commands are processed, so it will be good to have the new method tested more widely to make sure it is working properly.

In addition to being protected from crashes in these commands, you will also be able to cancel them if they are running too long.

This is going to be a pretty key improvement for program stability.

- Michael

BEAUTIFULL !!!! :-)

G2= tangency continuty?!
I think yes and G3 is the main thing, curvature continuity.

I don't think so....G2 is curvature continuity.
On the other hand, I have tried to create the same thing with _BlendEdge command in Rhino using Michael's stuff (from zip files) and analyse it and it seems MoI would be able to create even more smooth blend than Rhino...

Petr

You sure?!
This is a sreenshot from Npowers plugin for Rhino...

Natch!
  Position (G0)
  Tangency (G1)
  Curvature continuous (G2)
  Curvature continuous with a constant rate of change (G3)

Petr

Nice!
:-)

Michael this is what I had in mind in terms of meshing.

In the pic you see a yelow line that "separets" the model.
Any chance that you add parametar that would relate to angle like this...
eg. from 45-90 deg. dens meshing and from 0-45 deg. corase meshing

Im saying this because usualy when meshing an object like this one, you would look at those ending edges that are coming almost purpendicular to Cplane.
In that area I would like to have dens meshing so that transitions remains "smooth"....by doing this, I would unnecesry mesh the upper area where I dont need so fine meshing because of the angle thats geting almost paralel to Cplane.

This would realy be an optmization of the mesh so you dont end up with unnecesary meshes where they are not neded.

What do you think?

Hi Kreten, I think it might be a bit difficult to add in parameters that reference specific world directions, since then the parameters become very specific to just one part instead of working in a general way on all objects. Like for instance if you rotated that model, you probably wouldn't expect the meshing to change, but it would if there was special attention being applied to "perpendicular to cplane" versus "parallel to cplane"...

But it also looks to me like the part that you want to get meshed more heavily has somewhat tighter curvature than the top part - isn't it already getting meshed with more polygons than the top part if you move the slider up a bit?

The slider controls an angle parameter, but it is an angle between surface normals, not between a world direction. But this should generally give denser meshing in areas with tighter curvature...

- Michael