Trouble matching surfaces along same curve

Hi- I am attempting to replicate the table pictured below. Ill will do my best to break down my approach, partially because the grasshopper file is a little jumbled, but also because i am not sure if it is my approach or my execution that is not allowing me to get the desired results. Here goes. Working on only one cell at a time I set up a voronoi diagram, offset and filleted the outside curve creating the outside edge of my surface. took same filleted curve, offset it, adjusted its z coordinate to create the curve for the upper edge of the crater shape. It is those two curves that i used to create a ruled surface on the outer edge. I attempted lofting and sweeping the surface but didnt achieve the consistent results. Following that i found the center, or average, of the area and used that point along with a point along the upper edge curve to create an arc that i could, using the rail revolve command, sweep around that same curve. This process seems to work satisfactorily on a number of the individual voronoi cells, but on many i encounter the problem pictured below. How can i remedy this? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you
BJ (14.9 KB)


Your approach is a little off. Everything you’ve got so far is right but the issue comes when you a single cell at a time.

Do all three at once and loft the smoothed versions together with the original boundaries.

To get the bowl you can do a small offset for the lip and then make curves to the original voronoi point.

Loft all of that stuff up and you’ve got it.

The table image shows a valley between the bowls which you can keep if you want, but you get rid of it by making the surfaces all tangent to the tabletop at the point where they converge.

File is attached (25.4 KB)

the problem with reversing 3d models from pictures is that you usually don’t know how it was made and how much time was involved unless you made similar shapes by yourself. It might be a better advice to do such shape by traditional surface modelling, because unless the designer is a mathematical genius, having created needed surface tools to do such shapes in grasshopper, chances are at 99 % that this shape is made the old way. Grasshopper lacks some vital and good surface tools to do such shapes. And even if these tools where present, it doubt a generative approach would have been much faster for 3 shapes involved, because in the end you are lacking the most important feature -> mouse input… And even the shape shown has some problems,for instance the radii of the filletblends in between these craters are too different in size, which looks a bit weird . However much better as having g0 surfaces or an undefined relaxed mesh produced in gh. My advise, dive more into freeform surface modelling, try to automate parts of the process if you have found the right surface layout.

Not to mention the antiquated idea that the original artist/craftsperson might not appreciate having their design “replicated.”