I’ve been testing again the WIP version of Rhino with this new feature, alongside other software. I created G2 fillets of different sizes to manually make a corner blend. Here’s what I did:
Created the fillets in Rhino easily (though I’d love an option to automatically select tangent surfaces and create small fillets in one operation).
Tried to create the corner blend by trimming the fillets and using the Patch command. The result was a large surface with many spans and CVs, which roughly matched the G2 continuity I wanted. While this works for some, it’s not enough for demanding clients even in the product design work not counting automotive design. This surface I created was a bit problematic for creating material thickness and B-sides in other software I use for that.
Next, I tried a different approach:
Built fillets with natural edges by manually extending the surfaces and blending at the smaller fillet.
After applying the Patch, the continuity was better and I got natural edges! but still not good enough. I then rebuilt it to to get the simplest surface I got using conversinglespan and rebuild but I could get a single surface with 5 cvs aligned perfectly in G2 at least not in a reasonable time.
In other surfacing software, this process is much quicker. For example, in Alias, to do all this tricky filleting could take less than 1min, and with the Corner Blend tool needs just few clicks to have the model filleted and close.
I’m not asking for super advanced tools for rhino 9. But be able to have the domain untrimed in more cases and simpler surfaces with better topology even if is not archiving the continuity will be a nice improvement since then you can match then G2 easily.
What I men with this is: Below is the patch I generated using the simplest settings: single span and degree 5. However, splitting the Cornel ball into four separate surfaces is not optimal for manual alignment. The ideal output would involve splitting it in half along the vertical isopalm, resulting in only two surfaces for easier manual alignment.
Here is corner blend using the patch tool with higher parameters to get G2, is okay for most cases but too complex, too many cvs and spans might not be accepted by many clients, the main technical reasons why this surfaces usually get rejected, engineers have problems to offset in Catia and join the parts, some CNCs creates little imperfection while routing molds, and the ease to modify and adjust.
(Disclaimer: Due to the technical complexity and length of this nerdy text, I used AI to refine it, as English isn’t my first language and some may misinterpret it
To me look like none of the procedure you’re using are suited for the new Patch tool nor for the FilletSrfcrv.
You may give it a try to Surface from 2,3,4 edges (that’s exaclty the Alias Square command) or the FilletEdge/BlendEdge (equal to the Alias CornerBlend).
Rhino was the first 3D CAD sofware I learnt in my design school, But I used it very casually for 3D modeling since them (7 years ago) professionaly I use Alias and a bit of grasshopper (I do mostly transportation design) The problem is not to patch this with the tool that takes nothing as you mention, problem is archive surface quality I need for the industry standards. Not just automotive but I have some mates having the same issue with consumer electronics like phones, headphones… this objects can be really shiny made with glas and shiny alloys where the surfaces need to be super clean for having the best quality in the milling of the object or molds, also is better to create the material thickness, you get less problems when the surfaces are as clean as possible…
Actually I really like this new tool, the results I got were the best compare surfaces from 2 3 4 edges and then surface matching g2 or the swepts this is a big progress on my eyes… Still really hard to simpler surfaces (max 5cv single span) while keeping continuity.
You’re trying to apply Alias process directly to Rhino.
Unfortunately this won’t works. Both share a lot but they’re really different tool.
Patch is not a Square equivalent. It can solve similar situation but it is intended for other purpose.
On this forum we have plenty of car designer, some of them working for big firms on very well known car project and they complain every day about improvement on surface quality and to getting close to CVS manipulation like in Alias
In Rhino a surface with 4 edges could be made in a perfect way with multiple process but NOT in a single tool. In Rhino you can’t control span number and continuity all together, at ,east until today.
If I sound impolite take my apologies but I saw this kind of request so many time and the majority of them were from untrained occasional users.
As I’m trying to say that to master Rhino you need training and practice like any other software.
Cademy.xyz has amazing training on class A modeling with Rhino for just 400euros and an incredible YouTube channel with amazing tutorial. If you think to move out of Alias it may worth the investment.
Patch is not designed to be a class A surfacing tool, I don’t think it can be either but @menno can better explain the limitations of this technology.
I think you’ll need to be a little more patient to see if the new style rebuild is going to make it into Rhino 9 for surfaces (currently there is only a new style rebuild for curves) . Then building G2 patches and rebuilding them afterward could be an interesting option.
When making these examples, post them so that other users can chime in and post their solutions.
I think we will have quite a few interesting surfacing tools that are in the works, including the point manipulation stuff that @Joshua_Kennedy is working on.
You should also definitely checkout the improvements in FilletSrf, FilletSrfCrv and FilletSrfToRail.
This can be done with EdgeSrf and MatchSrf, plus some minor NUV CV manipulation. For those transitioning from Alias, etc. to Rhino, I put together some what I believe are useful findings, pertaining to the “Rhino way” of doing things.
@fuzz_face Something you’re looking for can be found in this plugin, Cyberstrak. You can ask directly the developer, who’s active in this forum @Peter_Salzman
Anyway, this morning I took the opportunity to check how far along the fillsrf command was. I’m working on a women’s wedge, and when I used Xnurbs everything worked fine. However, when I tried using fillsrf to make a comparison, I ran into this issue, as shown in the attached photo. I’m also sharing the file.
Then, in XNurbs, I added two internal constraints (2 points), but since fillsrf was already failing, I didn’t include them in the command as internal constraints.
@brvdln in general I find that patches that are more or less flat tend to work better in Projected. That being said, it would be nice if those garbage results would be filtered out automatically.
I suggest to set the new “Patch” tool in a way to automatically disable the “Refine” option, in order to avoid overly-complex preview which could potentially lead to freezing or crashing Rhino.
Alternatively, allow the user set the maximum amount of control points and spans that will NEVER be exceeded by Rhino. For example, maximum 20 control points in any direction (unless the user opts for a manual override of the limit). That could be the better way to avoid freezing.
On top of that, the tool must provide an option to limit the amount of nearby control points, in order to avoid building of a too dense patch surface where many control points are located in a small area, thus generate an unpleasing result with ugly reflections.
Anything that will prevent unwanted freezing and crashes. The set limit for 20 control points in a direction by default is an excellent way to keep Rhino stable.
The ‘no preview by default’ doesn’t seem a good idea to me. If you don’t want a preview, run Patch, hit Enter before selecting any inputs to show the dialog first. Then turn off preview. The setting will stick between patches, files and sessions.
@Gijs Not a solution. Currently the setting only sticks until the user turns on Preview while working with Patch. Then Patch preview will be back on when the next time they use Patch (unless they remember to turn Preview off before completing Patch).
If Preview is off by default then the only burden on users who want Preview on is to click on Preview. But the current Preview on if it was on when Patch closed forces users who do not want Preview on to wait until the preview is generated before they can turn it off. For simpler cases that wait is very short. For complex cases, for instance with a large point cloud from a scan as input, the wait can be quite a few seconds.
Thanks a lot Lagom! amazing resource!! nice little manual to remember and learn new things. BTW that corner blended is what I wanted to archive, looking forward to try out with your way .
I find Rhino’s surfacing tools a bit overwhelming, there are so many ways to model surfaces, and several tools seem to do similar things but with different results. For example, when creating a surface between two curves, you could use EdgeSrf, Loft, or Surface from 2, 3, or 4 edges. But which one should you actually use to achieve the best quality? Everyone seems to do it differently, with varying results.
You understood what I meant about that corner blend and its surface quality. It would be really helpful to have a proper resource showing how to model and solve common surfacing cases, like corner blends, Y-fillets, and multi-blends, with a high-quality approach, similar to what you did here. I’ve seen examples online, but many don’t meet the level of quality I’m aiming for. I can see it’s possible to achieve, but as Skysurfer mentioned, it requires multiple steps and specific tools, which makes the process trickier, and also there are not enough quality resources to learn this online like exits with other softwares.
From what I understand, this new Patch works like a Swiss knife, it handles most cases for most users, and can do the work of many surfacing tools already in rhino, and is amazing. But what about the other tools? I feel I’m lacking a bit of structure on the approach, or more info regarding the tools or maybe it’s just me IDK
.