Is Rhino better with handling solids?

The
situation: I have been using Rhino3 for years, but it drives me mad
sometimes with solids problems. I’ll describe one here:

I
start with 2 valid closed solids. They need to join, but one
tube-like solid must leave a hole in the union. . I start with an
intersect, but I get: “Objects do not intersect. Nothing done.”
That’s crap I can plainly see they DO intersect. So I ask for a
curves from objects>intersection. I get nine intersections and
they look like closed curves to me. So I explode the lot, then have
the surfaces cut each other and join the remainder to a solid. As
expected I get a bunch of unjoined edges as rhino does not cut
exactly. When I try to merge them Rhino says “This edge is already
merged.”. When I attempt to Join 2 naked edges, Rhino returns: “
Unable to find overlapping intervals.” Result I wasted lots of
time and no idea where to go next. Sigh.

So
my question to the forum: are these problems solved with Rhino5? Or
should I go look elsewhere?
Thanks,
Maarten

Hi Marten - please post a file with the objects, or send it to me via private message.

thanks,

-Pascal

If you’re using Rhino 4, yes, solid operations did get improvements in V5. You can download the trial version and try for yourself for 90 days.

Also, post the file here and someone will look…

–Mitch

He said he was running an old V3.
The surface intersector code was improved for V4 and again major improvements happened for V5.

Download V5 and install it as a 90-day evaluation version and try it there. I suspect it will work. If it doesn’t Boolean we want your model to see why.

Thanks

I need to get new glasses… I read “I have been using Rhino for 3 years” not “I have been using Rhino 3 for years” … :sunglasses:

Strange. That’s the way I read it also. Buy two pair of glasses, one for me.

Well, there are no solids in Rhino. It is always helpful to remember what kind of tool you are using and what can be done with underlaying technology.

huh? I do all of my solid modeling in rhino…

http://fireuser.com/articles/solids_vs_surface_modeling_what_and_why_you_need_to_know/

2 Likes

Rhino uses Boundary Representation…

I suppose if you want to get picky you could argue that no CAD software really produces “Solids”. It’s just a series of 1’s and 0’s that are manipulated to represent a “solid”. The only true “solids” exist once that item is manufactured and physically exists.

But in the meantime, I like the way Rhino handles my phony “solids” and I look forward to seeing where it goes from here.

Dan

Hi Guys, thanks for all the response.
As for solids: to me a solid is a real entity in that 1. it will allow me to perform boolean operations, and 2. I can export closed stl’s for 3d printing. Oh, I would love it when I could cut a solid in Rhino and end up with 2 solids.
In the meantime, I will have a good look at Rhino5.
For those who want to look, here is the file:
two solids.3dm (570.5 KB)
regardss, Maarten

You can easily do that even in Rhino V3 if you use the correct tools. V4 was better and V5 even better.

The problem is that one of your “solids” is a bad object with non-manifold edges (inside surfaces that shouldn’t be there) and also containing creased, self intersecting surfaces. Fix all that and your Boolean should work. How was that made - did you use Flow or FlowAlongSrf?

ts-fixed-V3.3dm (1.7 MB)

–Mitch

Hi folks, I fixed it. I made a new outer shell. But the first one was made by a surface offset solid. The crazy surface was made by Rhino.
I’m having a good time playing with Rhino5. Thanks for the tip.

Mitch wrote:The problem is that one of your “solids” is a bad object with
non-manifold edges (inside surfaces that shouldn’t be there) and also
containing creased, self intersecting surfaces. Fix all that and your
Boolean should work. How was that made

best regards, Maarten Visser