_MeshBooleanUnion no result, no feedback


#1

Hello,

_MeshBooleanUnion can be helpful when the desired result is a mesh anyway and other modeling tools don’t work.
In this case, it is not so helpful.

See this example:
NoMeshBool7.3dm (1.3 MB)

No result, no message:
2 Polygonnetze der Auswahl hinzugefügt.
Befehl: _MeshBooleanUnion
Boolesche Polygonnetzvereinigung in Bearbeitung… Esc drücken um abzubrechen
CRhCommandPropertiesEventWatcher::OnEndCommand::InCommand(1076938936)
Befehl: _CommandHistory

Thanks,
-C-H-A-R-L-E-S-


(Menno Deij - van Rijswijk) #2

Same problem in V5. If you look at MeshIntersect results (which I guess precedes a boolean union), the results are bad in V5 and worse in V6. If I need to guess, this is because the red mesh has intersections with edges of the blue mesh. If you move the blue mesh with only 0.00001 mm in the Y-axis direction, the boolean union works flawlessly. This seems to confirm my guess.


#3

Hello Menno,

I know.
The problem is the intersection for sure.

And the problem for the user is:
Model as precise as you can to avoid problems.
If then problems occur, then forget precision.
Same applies to NURBS modeling…

It should be the other way around, and then replaced by ‘good’.

-C-H-A-R-L-E-S-


#4

Hmm, yes, and why don’t they count as intersections?
When I think of 2 connected lines, they have 2 common ends and 1 intersection.


(Menno Deij - van Rijswijk) #5

bad in V5 and worse in V6

It should be the other way around, and then replaced by ‘good’.

I agree, I’m just pointing out what I see in both versions. Then hopefully this gets picked up by @dale to get looked at.

Hmm, yes, and why don’t they count as intersections?

In the case of meshes, this is a corner case. I totally agree that this should be handled, but it appears that it is not. Again this is something McNeel should pick up and fix.


(Dale Fugier) #6

I’ve reported this as a bug.

https://mcneel.myjetbrains.com/youtrack/issue/RH-38414

– Dale