Multiblend in Rhino, how to do?

Hi davide76,

actually, there is a simple solution, where all surfaces are G2. The video rhinouserx linked above shows the right method, it is just executed in a sloppy way. When you build the fillets from degree 5 curves and select curvature continuity on two sides of the fill-in squares, all you have to do is to pick up symmetrically adjacent control points and move them together slightly with the UVN tool (use the normal direction). That a great result in the end, and it’s pure Rhino.

The benefit is, this method also works when the underlying geometry is not a cube, meaning when the sides are not perpendicular, or when the sat back fillets have more crown/bias (“pointier” fillets).

Maybe you want to give it a try…

Typical solution.3dm (735.8 KB)

1 Like

You have an ‘unusual’ method of naming your surfaces. :slight_smile:

Hi ChrisK,

it’s not me… it’s the system; there’s no escape!

Setback fillet in latest wip
use the SetbackFilletEdge command and

play with dist between edges, rolling ball, or distance between rail options. Still developing, try and report problems with files attached for review if possible-


Note this command is not really even ready for testing… Please don’t report problems yet.



party pooper… :wink:


It’s part of my job description!



Oh my! Is it really … finally … happening?

I will NOT miss the 19 steps to do it the old way, which I never got around to doing, since it was so tedious and painful. And I’m lazy.

That’s a great visual.

After nearly six versions of Rhino, the “setback” fillets should have been implemented, as well as the chamfer with different angles of 45 degrees.
Making Rhino as a renderer or “another” AutoCad makes little sense. Strong modeling and editing (of surfaces above all) should be the development priority!
Building everything (or almost) manually is crazy!

You can chamfer angles besides 45, but you use two different off-set number values. I have no idea what the resulting angle would be, though. That requires math.

An opportunity to improve? I’ll check my v6-WIP to see how edge chamfer is functioning … and then report back. (Or complain.)

While anxiously awaiting for annything to simplfy the task, I’d and many others would like to learn the hard way first to the concept behind making nice surfaces. If there are good approaches it please add to this thread!
Also adding another link to post of multiblends

It would be quite good to have a “upload bin” of typical solutions; a repository with schematic how-tos, sorted by theme (radii, fillets, blends, G2, G3, etc.) - like design studios keep maintained internally for new employees or existing ones to come back to.

K-junction of fillets, T-junction of two tubes of different diameter, G2 end-caps, Confluence of two fillets, etc. - there are many situations that recur in many products.


Rhino is very poor in fillets ever since. Solving some cases means improving but not enhancing. If many developers’ efforts focused on these features, the rhino could become unbeatable!

1 Like

I agree. It sometimes feels like most of my ‘tips and tricks’ involve filleting.

1 Like

We Rhino users should make a petition to get developers a greater effort towards surface modeling and editing tools (including fillets).
What do you need to have perfect views if you can not easily get a multiblend?
What is an internal rendering engine if you can not solve Y or K fillet?
What do you need to have a thousand commands if you can not get a continuity of curvature to the state of the art?
In industrial object modeling (not so much in architecture), fillets are found everywhere, they are fundamental, and Rhino should solve them six versions and many years of development software.
The potentials and resources there are, and we users have certain things we ask for many years. It would be necessary to focus the attention on some key points and Rhino would become very but very powerful.


(Gratuitous paste from the “vsr like” thread)

One man’s opinion on version 7:

Modleing improvements…PERIOD

Nothing else. Now that core changes are solidified and us PITA Mac version people are satiated, etc … modeling improvements.

Match, etc

A wiz bang effort to throw everything you’ve got at nothing other than the biggest set of modeling improvements your users have ever seen.

I think users will go ape over that. But then, I could be wrong…

Adding…all hands on deck for this one.


I was told by a McNeel developer that Rhino 6 is still in beta, is not suitable for “professional” use, is still full of bugs and unreliable in this regard.
We are at the end of July 2017 and still Rhino is full of bugs: but a stable and usable version when it needs to go out in 2020? :wink:
Since 2012, year release of Rhino 5, almost 5 long years have passed, I would like to remind you.

What do you think?

Hi David, can you imagine if V6 was released tomorrow . The forum would be bogged down with problems. People mad because their projects aren’t done (for whatever reason). Service release updated probably weekly. Sounds stressful. It must be very challenging to put a new release out.
If we continue to use it and send in our problems and ideas, wishes, etc. I think everyone will benefit. —Mark

1 Like

I just hope we can still use V5 in case there’s critical errors in V6… and price doesn’t go up too much.

what do you expect to happen davide?
when, let’s say, s.Baer walks into work tomorrow at McNeel HQ, what do you think he should he do, exactly?