ExtendSrf result dependent on rational NurbsSurface placement

This also occurs in V5.

ExtendSrfDependentOnNurbsSurfacePlacement.3dm (58.0 KB)

Thank you,

Hi spb - yep, I see that - the actual extension is slightly more near the origin. The extension is somewhat an approximation as it is not a 3d distance, necessarily, but that seems a little extreme as a difference - It will seldom match the exact 3d distance of the number you type (e.g. the extension in your example has a different length at each end, in 3d) but I’d think the two cases should match each other. I’ll make a bug track item for the developer to have a look.



In this case, the surface at the origin was extended while the other was shrunk.

Also notice when using _ExtendSrf interactively, the dragging behaves differently for each, e.g., the surface at the origin extends further when a longer edge is picked. Even moving the CPlane origin to the relative corner of the other surface doesn’t make a difference.

Hi spb - the extension number is not going to be accurate as 3d distance - so different edges extending differently is not not ideal but in itself not unexpected in the current state of things; for now, I’ll stick with the location discrepancy.