Can this functionality be replicated in Rhino?

Thank you very much!

1 Like

Your explanation fails for two reasons, which I already mentioned above. :slight_smile: I will repeat:

  1. You can’t raise the suspension in a wheel arch extremely closely following the tyre (not to mention that your original assumption was that there is no suspension, i .e. solid suspension with zero travel).
  2. You can’t turn those wheels.

Nope, it doesn’t fail at all, you just didn’t pay attention to what I wrote:

  1. I suggested a passive mechanism that will slightly raise the chassis just above the front wheel axis when there is weight transfer during strong braking or turning, countering the stiff tires’ elasticity.
    When that happens, the gap between the front wheels and the fender above them will slightly increase, the tires will slightly compress, and the gap between the chassis and the road will stay the same.

That system will have zero elasticity towards the road in normal driving conditions.
Only during strong braking and while the wheel-fairing gap will increase, it will be slightly elastic towards the perfectly flat road due to a spring required to counter the horizontal force - which will be completely unnoticeable.

Conclusion: really small clearance, no suspension, and despite the slight compression of the stiff tires, there will be no lowering of the chassis and scratching of the street during strong braking.

  1. Like I wrote, you can turn them along with the fender. You lose the caster angle advantage that auto-centers the wheels, but with today’s active driving systems, that can be a non-issue. I’m not saying that it’s equally advantageous - I wouldn’t prefer that design, I’m saying that it can work if done properly.

If you believe so, prove it by achieving your claims in real-life conditions. :slight_smile: Meanwhile, I will stick with doing it the classic way and then we compare both on a perfectly smooth track.

Where is that supermarket? I want to only go to that supermarket you are talking about from now on.

I’ve never experience a smooth shopping cart in any supermarket before. Ever. Now I need it.

G

@ Gustavo Fontana
Easy: try a newly built one with new carts and a smooth clean floor. Load the cart with the week’s shopping list, then push.

Meanwhile, I will stick with doing it the classic way and then we compare both on a perfectly smooth track.

Me too. Like I wrote, that was just a working hypothesis.

I rely on actual experience.

The ‘extraordinary conditions’ you imagine exist virtually nowhere in the real world - unless you plan on driving your car inside a skating rink or some such small artificially constructed environment. Otherwise even racetracks have various bumps and dips that will cause your car to bottom out - not necessarily by braking which your active or passive suspension could try and compensate for, but rather in the middle as it went over the slightest ‘hump’.

So yeah, while your 1cm ground clearance vehicle will be great for videogames and the animation world, it has no practical application in the IRL one. It remains basically science fiction, with an emphasis on the fiction.

While you’re at it, you might as well put centerless wheels on your thing…

Personally I prefer no wheels at all… :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


2 Likes

The ‘extraordinary conditions’ you imagine exist virtually nowhere in the real world

I never said they do, so will you continue too to disagree that we agree? :joy:

omg that bottom image is soo cool!!

Blade Runner 1950 :wink:

1 Like

Nice, but apparently it took him many days to finish, and I have to be many times faster…

And… I have to abandon ship unfortunately.
After struggling to discover the most efficient workflow (from 3D conceptualization to a finished original design - every time), trying different features and different software, I ended up using Blender instead, 3 different methods from the same software.

Rhino has become very buggy, I had used it about 10 years ago for a while, and I’m not seeing anything significantly better today. I tried SubD, nurbs surfaces, even mesh tools, back and forth multiple times. All features are underdeveloped. Instead of focusing on one “technology” and perfect it, the developers spread their efforts on many, with mediocre results - which is also the case with most other software. They also persist to ignore convenient solutions found in free software…

3D creation only needs one, single, efficient and flexible “technology”, very few have realized that, and that should be parametric, not polygon-based nonsense.

My conclusion is that all today’s software is too primitive to be used efficiently for that creative task (if 10 is perfect, I’d rate them 0.1 - in other words trashware) because the software designers didn’t invest enough time to think about it and figure out what’s more important, how to make the creative process efficient, and how to set their priorities accordingly.
(I’m into software development myself and I have enough 3D modeling experience, so I know what I’m talking about, and after this 2-week exploration I have figured out exactly what is missing from all such software).

I respectfully suggest that it would be advantageous for you to familiarize yourself with the software, as it has proven to be effective in fabricating and designing cars. The software, Rhino, has a level of tolerance that makes it suitable for this purpose and has the added benefit of being easily customizable to meet specific needs, making it both convenient and efficient to use.

4 Likes

Bwahahahahaaaahahaa.

Hahahahaahaaaa.

snort

Whatever, kid. Bye.

The scornful laugh of ignorance.

Whatever, Mr “I’ve spent 2 weeks looking at this and have all the answers (except I have no actual actionable results,) but I now know more than everyone else in this industry.” I can’t believe you’re older than 12.

Yeah, you’re right, the technology today is abysmal, what we need are Star Trek replicators, holodecks, etc.

In the meantime, as you stated, “all today’s software is too primitive to be used efficiently”…
Since in all the industry up to now nobody has got it right yet, it might be that it’s just a little more complicated than you think.

2 Likes

Apart from wanting to quote Obi Wan Kenobi on absolutes, I urge you to remember that there are many, many different ways of using, creating and consuming 3D content. Some like parametric, some like polygons, some like a linear modeling approach, some people model top down, some model bottom up, some draft in 2D and covert to 3D, others do the reverse. It sounds as if Rhino is not for you, and that’s just fine.
-Jakob

2 Likes