I ran into a surface that when unrolled was 33% smaller!:Bad_Unroll.3dm (35.5 KB)
Area is 172228.5814 sq millimeters (33.33 % ) smaller after unrolling
It is disturbing to find that Unrollsrf apparently still does not have the checks in place to ensure the result is within a certain tolerance. PLEASE make sure commands like this have proper meta checks and warn us users about it when things seems way off target.
I do not expect Unrollsrf to be 100% failproof as I guess that is not a realistic goal, nor do I want Unrollsrf to just fail in these type of situations. What I do expect is that a deviation of 33% in area is something the command will throw an alert on. Simply writing it to the commandline and expect us to catch it is too easy. Unrolling surfaces is a crucial part of my workflow and I need it to be reliable such that these obvious deviations are caught by Rhino.
Apart form the above I wonder how a planar surface input in Unrollsrf can come out this way. It seems to me too much of a mathematical approach is taken when a planar surfaces should be in basis just be laid flat on the XYplane and maybe slightly adjusted to fit adjacent edges when needed.