I’m generating panels on a curved surface in Grasshopper. Initially, I used polylines to define the panel boundaries. However, since polylines are segmented, the resulting panel edges are not perfectly smooth. When I extract edge lengths for fabrication, the “kinks” are detected as separate edges, which creates problems.
To solve this, I replaced the polylines with interpolated curves in order to get perfectly smooth edges. Then I used these curves to split the surface.
However, I’m now facing a new issue:
In some regions, the Surface Split operation fails and certain areas do not split correctly.
All your file does is successfully crash my Rhino. You are going to be more successful using UV params. If equidistant spacings are important (from the looks of the picture, it is not) you will have to look at the panelling tools plug-in.
What I would suggest, is that you start with the base form (a cone) and then get the brick layout via UV divisions with Iso Trim. Because the form is developable, you will be able to unroll it well with Flow. Unroll the surface to make the perimeter and entrance cuts, and remap to the cone.
The panels need to follow specific measurements, and they won’t be the same size all around. The panels on the visible side must be exactly 8 feet wide, while the panels on the back side can be smaller.
Would it make more sense to first divide the circle by creating lines at 8-foot intervals and then calculate the remaining space at the end? Or is it possible to achieve this layout directly using UV mapping instead?
In this case, the brick-layout will not look the way as in the picture. Each course has a different perimeter length, meaning the mortar joints will overtake each other. For this, panelling tools will be useful. But I think you need to decide on a plan of attack.
Taking your original R9 upload, all you need to do to get all the splits to work is to handle them in two steps. Split the surface with the horizontal curves, then split the result with the vertical ones. You don’t even need the Pulls. Here I internalised your surface and curves to avoid the slowdown from the rest of your processing and make the process obvious (note the flattening):
Well realized. But I don’t understand why this works. Does the order of the curves matter? Could you merge the horizontal curves with the vertical curves (in that order) before inputting to one Split Curve component?
That is what the OP had done and that wasn’t sufficient (and I checked this by inserting a merge component to be certain the curves were ordered correctly) so the way the component works internally means you can’t rely on the order.
