for the Watchmakertool-Challenge it would be great to not “invent” the blue inner curve, but to provide some “above” surface. … a below surface will be the opposite of course. Selection should show Normal direction. Maybe the algorithm is clever enough to decide wether those limits are below / above so it would be a “limit-surface”.
from a Users point of view it would be really great, if we can trust the command to produce symmetrical results within tolerance - even if the u-v-/isocurve-distribution does not look like.
of course this is an extreme example.
a setback fillet would be simpler…
for some transitions it is quite hard to find a nice trimming.
where should the surface be trimmed to allow a nice transition - rhino does not offer simple tools for this question.
their are some very limited workflows with matchSrf and history.
fillSrf should allow Curve on Surface as Edge, togehter with history. This would allow to modify the Curve and therefor the later trimming - and see the influence. hopefully this is explained well. please ask if I have described it badly.
smart trim, apprentLoops
i do not like the option name ApparentLoops you suggest on youtrack.
I am not a native speaker.
I think the term loops - even if it is technical correct regarding the Brep structure - is not used anywhere in the UI.
Similar functionality:
“region” in curveBoolean
“extend” in filletSrf
“trim and join” as commands and in filletEdge
other ideas might use trimmedPatch, biggest… , … (i ll edit this post if i have a better idea)
will it really support multiple Surfaces or inner loops ? as you use plural s?
I’m certainly open for alternatives, changing a command option name is trivial in the WIP stage.
With that in mind I’d go for ClosedRegions=Yes/No or indeed Extend=Yes/No
I used plural intentionally - with the question in the YT what to do in that case. Fitting one surface to all closed regions, or fitting one surface to each closed region, refusing to continue - they’re all options to consider.
i would stay with the premise one surface per command call - as nearly all surface commands work like this.
the (advanced) user still would have the option of pulling curves and trimming complex holes or multiple patches in a second step.
as there is a preview and there are many options - the shortest option name would be
trim yes/no
the old patch command uses “Automatic trim”
which might get shortened to “autoTrim” ?
another aspect would be to have nice and unique first character for accessing the options on the keyboard.
Got it. If you have a reliable crash (“poof, rhino is gone”) let me know with steps to reproduce. That needs to be looked at and fixed.
I know Rhino can also sometimes hang with the need to force-quit, because the surface density just gets out of hand while refining where edges do not meet the constraints. That is easier to fix by putting a reasonable upper limit on the number of control points.
