Surely in 2018 / V6 its time that a square is an option for the pipe command, rather the arcane workarounds in previous rhino versions…?
cheers
rabbit
2 Likes
Nope.
A round pipe doesn’t have to consider profile orientation relative to a CPlane.
You can use Sweep1 with any profile curve including a square, and the command includes the “road like” interface for keeping the profile curve aligned.
1 Like
Well, let me elaborate a little…
The spirit of this admittedly short post was “its time for a better pipe command / pipe tools…”
Sweep 1 is a great tool, but you have to orient the curve onto the rail, whereas the pipe tool automatically takes care of this.
In the case of a square pipe made with the sweep 1 tool, you cant find the centreline again; There is a command in my rhino (i think a script by Pascal?) that will find the centre lines of pipe sections once exploded, but this tools fails on square pipes made with sweep 1.
So I’d like to see the pipe command get some love:
handle round pipes as per now
handle square pipes
allow for the finding of the pipe centrelines, whether round or square, without exploding the pipe.
cheers
rabbit
1 Like
Hi rabbit - would you expect to be able to orient and scale the profile at multiple locations along the pipe CL? Would it be expected that there should just be a polygon pipe, not just a square?
If it is a simple pipe, you can macro something pretty painless - I know it’s not the same, but:
! _CPlane _Curve _Pause _Pause _Polygon _NumSides=4 0 _Pause _CPlane _Undo _#Sweep1
-Pascal
2 Likes
Here are a few tools I created along this line…
(read the header in the script for more info)
MultiProfilePipe.py (6.5 KB)
MultiRectPipeR.py (7.3 KB)
MultisquarePipe.py (5.8 KB)
MultisquarePipe2VR.py (8.2 KB)
–Mitch
1 Like
I’m echoing rabbit’s inquiry here. I open Grasshopper every time to create square pipes. It’s a very simple Gh definition, and as far as I’m informed it could be implemented directly into Rhino’s command line interface (much like Pascal’s macro). I was almost certain it would be in V6 considering how ubiquitous rectilinear members are in design. I hope it’s addressed eventually.