We are talking tons here I’m afraid.
Here’s why:
- For some real-life cases percentage (say: 10% max) …the attached could(?) be the Jack of all trades but ONLY if the Polyline offset could work. OK … holes are needed as well … but that’s trivial to implement. In fact … there’s some other things involved but we are talking 100% internal stuff (not to mention that R/GH are not the apps to use for things like these: like multi leveled excavations related with seismic activity, separations, local regulations, soil stabilization, passive underground heat exchangers and the likes).
- As I said I can’t post my offset … so I added various checks that (in case of failure) inform you the reason. Plus I added some post Rhino offset stuff (get rid of colinear vertices).
- See the second demo case included that works only with very steep (and highly unrealistic) slope angles due to that crap Rhino offset thingy.
- 3 modes are available: (1) preview [tool + patched], (2) trimmed patched and (3) the tapered solid.
Excavations_FromPatchedPointsAndBoundaryAndKarma_V1A.gh (157.8 KB)
Preview:
Out of Karma:
Trimmed patched:
Tapered (NOT via Rhino taper) solid:
Crap matters (2nd demo - NOTE: test the yellow poly [boundary] and the GH offset using the value reported [on info panel] and enjoy the chaos) ):
Unrealistic taperSlope (in order to allow R offset to work) :
Maybe I can replace the crap stuff with a “detuned” version of one of my internal offset thingies (but that’s not a promise by any means) : that could transform the useless into something … er … less useless.
On the other hand in most of real-life cases with topo/soil restrictions we do this:
Best