I have this geometry in GH, and I would like to convert it into clean vector linework and plot it using a pen plotter. However, as you can see in the image, there are some missing lines, extra/unnecessary lines, and overlapping or fragmented curves in the geometry.
I have two questions:
What would be the best way to clean up this geometry?
I would like to remove the unnecessary lines and make sure the geometry is continuous and suitable for pen plotting.
What is the best way to convert the geometry into vectors?
My current idea is:
Curve → Deconstruct Curve → Start Point + End Point → Line (2Pt)
I lost the duplicate lines when I had to rebuild the invalid polylines anyhow.
It is sad that Sort Points does not allow you to choose the hierarchy of points (for example z,y,x instead of x,y,z)… or do polar sorting… or create branches based on the hierarchy. A limited component to my mind.
I just have a quick question about the final polyline you created in the script. Is it usable directly as a toolpath for the pen plotter, or do I need to convert it into one continuous polyline?
I don’t know. I don’t own a pen plotter. We’re talking about old technology that predates the bubble jet printer.
I am also unsure of what you are asking as the final polyline is already single and continuous.
I mostly created the continuous polyline as a check that the vectors I created were correct, i.e. that when added together, they create a polyline that covers the entire drawing.
With the vectors that I created, I was careful to split them so that in alternating branches of the data tree you get purely move, and then draw-and-move vectors.
However, do you even need the vectors? Most pen plotters I know come with software that takes a drawing, breaks it down into lines, and creates a toolpath itself.
And if you’re working with some homebrew, you’re going to need separate instructions for the movement of the pen (which is linear) and movement of the roller that moves the page up and down agains the pen.
In short, we need more information on your situation. If you come back with that, perhaps @Bruce_Shapiro can help you; pen plotters being movement and machinery and all that good stuff.
Not sure I fully follow everything above, but I think some of the confusion lies in semantics – especially “vector” and “continuous.” The only pen plotters I own now are spherical. But I spent many years playing with pre-inkjet, state-of-the-art HP pen plotters that I bought at 3M’s monthly “junk” auctions in St. Paul (the E-size were originally $10k). Amazingly engineered beasts! This was the spark that led me to create Eggbot in 1990. It also made me keenly aware of the difference between “vector” (line-based) and pixel-based images. I this case, I’m guessing the OP is using “vector” in this way and not the way Rhino / GH does. As for making drawings composed of lines / curves “plottable,” it depends on whether your plotter can do “pen ups.” All OG pen plotters as well current ones and Eggbots can move the pen without drawing. A single continuous polyline is not essential (though pen-up moves can cost a lot of time, so optimization algorithms are usually included in commercial plotter-ware). But continuous paths are essential for sand-plotters (with which I am rather well acquainted), or desired for aesthetic reasons (search “single-line art” in the forum).
Looking at the OP’s drawing, it looks like an example of “parquet deformation,” invented by William Huff. I plotted perhaps the simplest version, seamlessly on an egg ~1995: (definitely NOT a continuous pline!)
I was aware that you were the creator of the Eggbot, which is why I brought you into this discussion. The OP needs to tell us what their machine is otherwise we are talking in circles.
We’re talking about old technology that predates the bubble jet printer.