I see how the calculating the space between can get complicated. I’m sure this is also why the spacing breaks down even in Armadillo when you offset the objects above or below the curve.
Maybe this is a different way around the same problem I’m having. Would it be possible to add a base surface to FlowAlongCrv for orientation? Maybe it would be Flow Along Curve on Surface. I know that Armadillo can do this well, but I’d love to see it in native Rhino.
There are times when creating a base surface for FlowAlongSrf is insufficient, especially when the target surface has compound curvature. Here’s a simple example:
If I want to place a circle of gems (or whatever) on top of this surface I can use FlowOnCrv using the isocurve as a target, but the gems won’t be normal to the surface.
I could use FlowOnSrf, but I get very different results with different base surfaces:
UV Curves gets me a base surface that’s too long. the distances between objects will be very different on the base and target surfaces.
UnrollSrf fails because the surface is doubly curved.
Smash gets me a surface that is very close in dimension, but it’s not straight so I can’t lay out my gemstones with regular spacing on it. Hence, my original request for Distribute Along Curve.
If I can use Flow Along Curve and still make my objects align with the normals of some target surface, then I could fine tune the spacing between the flowed objects using the current Distribute command on the parent objects on the base curve.