LoL - see @Alim_Battal1, time to forget about your thesis!
Jk - but as itâs being pointed out by Quan and Joseph, this stuff is a pain in the butt, or can be, espcially via native components and with such amount of items.
I think you can first find a way to divide your surface into those production batches, which appear to vary or incrementally divide along the surface. Good luck with that, there must be some examples on this forum.
Second, without a more powerfully-scripted approach via code, you might want to go through the pain of relying on some native components for this. For example, if you fake unroll this baby onto the ground plane, you might be able to get away with it.
The problem is, again, speed.
For that matter, and just as an example, I am using the SubDPoly component to transform the control mesh of your SubD lattice (multi-piped lines). This makes things go âfasterâ, but very slow in grasshopper world (or for Josephâs patience 
):
NOTE:
What I did here is deconstruct the lattice control mesh to transform its vertices from the 3D surface to the {fake-unrolled} 2D surface using the handy component Sporh.Then you can transform back to 3D after performing solid intersections to get your lattice brep chunks. Again: I didnât use breps. Lastly, this approach employs a simplified partitioning of the 2D surface - meaning simple subsurface grid, not the staggered pattern you show for production batch examples - thatâs a more involved process. But, the goal of this example is to potentially lead us to the same goal of splitting your shape for 3D printing. You could even make your own partitioning by hand, then integrate back into the script to re-map things to 3D. I do not say this is a solution for effective lattice-structure-partitioning-optimization, just a way to get your print.
Hereâs the example:
shell structure.gh (848.3 KB)
Iâve left the heavy stuff disabled in case you want to delve into it gradually re-enabling in the suggested order:
*late edit:
I guess if all you want is to 3D print the model we can skip some things
2D-to-3D:
you can map the lines instead of the mesh, multi-pipe them on the 2D surface, do the splitting, and then transform to 3D as breps.
3D only:
Pending - I want to see how long it takes. Iâll give it a try when I get a chance tonight or tomorrow.
Best of luck on your thesis!
But the results are not good. Profiler time shows only 22 minutes, which is silly, and a text panel shows ~14 âInvalid Brepâ, one âOpen Brepâ and ~21 âTrimmed Surfaceâ. Attempt to internalize the results have resulted in a long freeze. Very disappointing for a new computer with 64 GB of ram. Waste of time, I wonât wait any longer.
Still waiting⊠
I can see R7 results using only one horizontal cutter surface and they look correct. Attempted to save the file and the endless spinner starts again. No idea what itâs doing?
