Hi Daniil, there is not yet material nor videos about the usage, this is something for early next year.
2 Likes
Cyberstrack = ?
I’m wondering if you might take any suggestions at this point?
CyberCV. Kind of rolls off the tongue nice.
How about PSM = Point Shape Modeling or could stand for Peter Salzmann Modeler.
This must be quite a challenge you are taking on, this Cyberstrack. I hope it serves its users well and you are rewarded also. Thank you for bringing some of these tools back ( and hopefully new ones too) to this group.—-Mark
I had suggested in the past CPM for Classic Patch Modeler, but it’s Peter’s baby and he can name it whatever he wants. 
How much? I downloaded it, but I don’t have a license …
ooo! got some fancy new tools 
oh i see u gimmie 90 days 
not sure why you want left and right click duplicated
yeah not sure where to begin with these tools, need some vids or something…
I’m pretty sure the German word strak (without a c) stands for Class-A
1 Like
The most fleshed out tool thus far is the CV Modeling tool. This truly allows you to do a “Sculpt and Match” workflow in a manner that is elegant and efficient - something sorely lacking from stock Rhino. I’ll be doing some vids on this in the coming week.
9 Likes
That will be awesome! 
Exciting days ahead! New VSR-like plug-in for modern day Rhino and Sky posting on YouTube again am I dreaming?
4 Likes
Hello,
maybe some day I should put some explanation about the name “Cyberstrak” to the web site.
“Strak” in German language is a term describing an old hand craftsmanship for designing ship hulls and other free form shapes using draw table and elastic wodden bars taken as curve lineals. So there is a tradition to call the Surface Modelers in the German automotive industry “strakers”. Even some departments are called “Strak Department”. Unfortunately I have only German links to the terms (Strak – Wikipedia , Straklatte - Wikiwand).
Then I used “Cyber” as prefix and that’s how the name was born. A good English translation could be “CyberSpline”. But this name is already in use…
11 Likes
I tried the latest version of “Cyberstrack”, but unfortunately the arrow handles get really huge up-close and as a result Rhino crashed every time that happens.
1 Like
Hi Peter, the wooden bars you describe sounds a bit like what I have used called a Batten. 3/4” x 3/4” x 20’ long made a of Sugar Pine. Now days they are made of pultruded fiberglass. They can be nailed down or screwed down as a guide to make a fair but curved line. Mostly used in boating.—-Mark
1 Like
Since we’re taking a nostalgic stroll down memory lane:
http://perryboat.sail2live.com/yacht_design_according_to_perry/2011/11/my-last-blog-entry-on.html
As I recall, at the US auto company I worked for there was no special term for the draftspersons (mostly draftsmen back then) who specialized in using those tools, but the department where they would be most heavily used was called the layout department in body engineering.
And the task was conducted above the shop floor up in the loft—hence the term, “lofting.” But “CyberLoft” would not be interpreted the same way today….
Hi Peter,
I have tested the CSCrvRefit on a trimmed edge of a fillet surface. I noticed the CSCrvRefit has quite some deviation from the trimmed edge and it doesn’t take start and end tangent or curvature into account.
If I manually draw a curve over the trimmed edge with BlendCrv I can get under the 0.001 tolerance where CSCrvRefit is at about 0.2 mm deviation for the same span and amount of CV’s.
Maybe this command is not intended for this purpose, but if I recall correctly approximate curve in VSR could do this?
See file for example.
CSCrvRefit.3dm (67.5 KB)
This is already possible in Rhino, I use this for surfaces where I don’t have a final shape or trimmed edge yet. I made a short video to show how.
Still a function with sliders would be nice.
10 Likes
Very nice example. A similar approach have been discussed in another topic, except that it uses “Loft” and a freeform curve (! _InterpcrvOnSrf) instead of an extracted isocurve. I typically use “Loft” for this, because its “Rebuild” options makes it possible to choose the number of control points in a live preview.
There is also a “Curve on surface” plug-in for Rhino 7 with two commands:
! _CurveOnSurface! _CurveOnSurfacePtOn
It lets you draw a freeform curve on surface and edit its points while updating its History. This is a very powerful approach, because the curve on surface could be shaped and/or oriented freely and it automatically on the surface again.
rhino6curveonsurface.rhp (166 KB)
Note: Rhino’s ! _InterpcrvOnSrf command supports subsequent edits natively via the ! _InterpcrvOnSrf _Edit command (or simply run the ! _InterpcrvOnSrf command again and press “Edit” in the Command line option). I set my RMB to be ! _InterpcrvOnSrf _Edit, because by default that command is absent from Rhino.
Personally, I prefer to use the “Curve on surface” plug-in, because the way its control points are edited via both, the Gumball and and Drag strength is more convenient for me. It also lets me scale the control points. Rhino’s ! _InterpcrvOnSrf command forces me to directly pick and move he control points, so it’s impossible to use the combination of Gumball and Drag strength to adjust the control points precisely. Scaling is also not allowed.
1 Like
Thx for the tip on the Curve on surface plugin.
Do you think by using the Loft instead of EdgeSrf it would be possible to have an equal redistribution of the control points of the matched surface after the curves have been repositioned?
Hi Niels,
thanks for your example, I’m currently checking the CSCrvRefit. This command is intended to get a single span curve (or user defined span and degree) from a given reference, mainly from polylines. But it should also work better here.
Somehow I’m too stupid to use Rhinos BlendCrv - I never get any useful Curve out…
Hi Peter @Peter_Salzman
I tested the functionality of CSMatch surfaces and found it very practical to develop a Minimize Changes feature for matching surfaces similar to the VSR plugin.
the Minimize Changes: Instead of computing a perfect mathematical connection, this option can be used to try and keep the control point modifications to a minimum for the surface to be matched. In this case, the control points will be projected onto the internally computed accurate matching result. Using this method, the control points will be moved much less from their original positions, however, the quality of the connection may not be perfect. We therefore recommend that you check the result with the integrated analysis functionality (see “Analysis”) when using this option.
and Start/End Partial: If not the entire selected reference edge should be used for matching, it can be restricted at start and/or end. The partial option is switched on automatically, if the associated end point marker is moved.
Thank you
@Alen_Rus:
This functionality will definitely come in a later version.
For Blending and matching first the quality of the curvature matching needs to be anhanced. Later on also trim edges need to be allowed as reference. Next step is then an option allowing to maintain the parametrization of the surface which includes minimum change.
Start/End Partial: This is already possible in the Blend command, you can expect it also soon in Matching.
3 Likes