HELLO GUYS, I AM TRYING TO ORGANIZE MY STRIPS FROM MESH THAT HAVE BEEN GET TO MADE AFTER CREATE THE SURFACE FROM EQUATIONS.
I AM ALSO LOOKING TO IMPORVE THE OPENING ANGLE FROM THE QUADS OF THE MESH AND CHANGE TO MOST REGULAR QUAD
I LIKE LEARN TO IMPORVE MY MESH AND WATCH YOURS OBSERVATIONS, THANKS A LOT
Hi @jehd1107
Have a look at this discussion:
For your mesh, the cleanest topology would be to have 4 valence 6 vertices (on top and bottom of the branching parts), and the rest valence 4.
Hello teacher, i have read the post and I have tried to adapt my script to their examples. Likewise,i try to understand where i have to change te values of valence of the mesh.
DAY_01_A.gh (34.0 KB)
It looks better, but could it be improved or, being a mesh generated from an isosurface and reconstructed, does it have a construction limit?
Thank you a lot.
You are using an implicit approximation of the Chen-Gackstatter surface right?
An isosurface doesn’t give you a parametrization, so apart from visualizing the overall form, I think it won’t be much help here.
Here what I’d recommend is to manually build the base mesh, respecting the symmetry and topology of the intended surface, then relax it.
This is a suitable base unit (I realised that instead of 4 valence 6 vertices like I said earlier, there should actually be 2 valence 6 (on top and bottom) but in the middle they combine into a single valence 12 vertex)
When reflected and rotated this gives the full surface, which can then be subdivided and relaxed.
For the relaxation I simulated a rod with bending resistance for the outer boundary
One nice thing about using this particular discretization is that you can separate it into concentric rings, or strips that span across between the boundaries, depending on whether you include that MeshTurn step.
Here’s an old project from @enriquesoriano with CODA BarcelonaTech showing a similar relaxation approach (though with a different discretization).
Very nice! - thanks for sharing the photos
