In a Networksrf command, is there any way to select multiple edges in a way that they act as a single curve?
If I have a curve that is a joined line/arc/line/arc/line such that the curves are all continuous, I can select that and use it in a networksrf comment.
If I extrude that shape, and try to use the edge in a networksrf, I click and I only get the one segment of the edge (one of the lines or arc). I would like to select the entire edge.
Some pictures:
I can select the multi-segment curve used to create a surface when I do a networksrf
However, when I select the surface itself, so far I have only been able to select a single segment.
Is there some way to select the entire edge in Networksrf?
Avoid using networksurf completely. This can be better accomplished with lofts and blends depending on the design intent.
Why avoid the NetworkSrf command? Sometimes it’s the best tool for the job.
In cases like these, I do a DupEdge and join if necessary to get a single continuous curve with which to apply the NetworkSrf command.
I was also hoping to find an answer to this. Duplicating the surface edges isn’t always useful, because if you don’t supply the actual surface edge as an input to NetworkSrf, it can’t match the curvature / tangency of the existing surface.
I also never saw the point of NetworkSrf, until I realised it could do this-- with the continuity options, it’s a more controllable way to blend multiple surfaces.
You can try some of these: MergeEdge, MergeAllEdges, RebuildEdges (Surface > Edge Tools).
Is there a well defined reason for not using NetworkSurf (or just a matter of taste) ?
As a newbie I’m learning habits, and I find NetworkSrf to be quite useful (except for the lack of ChainEdges issue).
// Rolf
Hi Rolf - there’s no reason not to use it, but like all the tools it has its limitations - in particular, NetworkSrf has the advantage/disadvantage, depending on the circumstances, that it does not pay any attention to the structure of the inputs. The upshot is that it tends to make rather denser surfaces than is possible with simple, matched inputs using Loft or EdgeSrf, but on the other hand can make useful surfaces from mismatched or even pretty junky (in terms of structure) input.
NetworkSrf also has the ability to make something from a bunch of disparately shaped curves, so it tends, perhaps, to be used to make shapes as single surfaces that might be much better or more cleanly modeled as multiple surfaces - so there is the abuse factor as well that gets it a bad reputation on some cases.
-Pascal
OK, pascal, that all seems to makes sense.
So it’s more like a question about priority, what to go for first hand, rather than “don’t use it”.
// Rolf
There simply are no good reasons to use network surf. It makes overly and unnecessarily dense surfaces that are difficult/impossible to point edit. It’s matching option is an approximation with a sudden fall off due to the surface density. It’s the go to command for beginners and people too lazy to learn the proper surfacing tools.
I encounter many shapes that would be difficult to impossible to do without networksrf.
If there be a sweep3, sweep4, … sweepN command, many of those would go away but there ain’t such an animal.
