What (in the world) has happened with this? The boundary of the polysurface when flowed has gone totally nuts, even though it’s all contained within the base surface?
All the non-corner design elements are fine - so that would lead me to believe my overall strategy is ultimately wrong which is fine. But I’m still curious as to what has caused this pathway to fail so spectacularly.
Any thoughts?
hi, @Jonathan_Hutchinson1 1 in your case, it is best to flow only the internal objects
como usted menciona estos objetos recortados se deforman al ser fluidos en los bordes
2 then copy some of the interns and repetir them around the outline
file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/31u61t2tuqp9ax4/FlowAlongSrf_rev.3dm?dl=0
Not far at all - 400mm.
@Eliel - the ones at the edges are faded so that the depth goes to zero. I produced a workaround, as my use of Trim and CageEdit to fade the depth away didn’t seem to do any favours.
Yes, I would also like to have an answer from mcneel technical support 
The corner pieces are almost flat, the edge pieces not quite so much and the middle ones taller - is that intentional? In any case, my guess is the corner pieces are suffering because the underlying surfaces hang well off the edges of the base and target surfaces. I suggest making both large enough to accommodate a complete corner diamond shape.
FlowAlongSrf_PG.3dm (1.3 MB)
-Pascal
I have also extended the surfaces, but I did not present it as an option because it moves, it would touch record history to better adapt the flow, although it would flow one at a time
Hi Pascal, yes this was intentional to create a fadeaway at the edge. As an alternative I created objects that blend to a straight edge, all untrimmed surfaces, so as to avoid CageEdit as my instinct is that there was something wrong with overlapping points - especially the 3 sided surface which was created through filleting.
Okay that makes sense that the underlying surface would still be considered and as such create an issue.
