Viewport Render - Out of Memory - Complex Model - Need Help

I’m working on highly complicated model of a figure, which will be injection moulded. 
The base & ball were modelled in Rhino v5 and the figure sculpted in Z-Brush.  The figure was imported as individual mesh parts and each part converted to a closed polysurface using T-splines.  If I leave the assembly in parts and do not Boolean them together the viewport render will display the model perfectly.  However, once I have performed the required Boolean operations to stick all the parts together I cannot get Rhino V5 to display the mesh in a rendered state as I run out of memory.  Can anyone suggest if there are any settings to get it to display correctly? 
If I export an IGES from the file it opens fine in a parametric modelling programme, but I can’t display it correctly in Rhino.

Hi Helen,

What you could try is to set a custom render mesh for the objects.
Either as a general setting for all object found here:

Or apply a custom render mesh to the objects via this route:

However, I would also suggest to try and reduce the Zbrush mesh before converting with t-splines.
Rhino has a command ReduceMesh wich does a great job in reducing a mesh density without loosing much features. Note that the details in that model appear to be tiny in relation to it’s size. When injection molded I wonder how much details will be actually visible and thus not essential even at this stage. Apart from feature details, the smooth surfaces of for instance the legs can do with much less mesh faces to keep the shape well intact.

Apart from all of this, is see you using Rhino 32bit, if you are working on a 64bit OS you can also get the 64bit version of Rhino wich can -in theory- handle large models much better. (depending on your system and installed RAM in particular). Also what is video card do you have, that can be the limiting factor with regard to the display as well. The card info can be found here:


1 Like

Rhino also has a great reducemesh tool that can be used to optimize our mesh parts.

There is no need to have too more resolution / detail than you need, but evaluate all parts closely after, so you don’t accidentally send off a jagged model to production.

When I used Rhino “Reducemesh” command it created a mixed mesh of Quadrangles and Triangles. I used the command “QuadrangulateMesh” but it didn’t convert the triangles to quads. Just wondering if I am over looking something? T-splines will only convert quads… which is what is making this project so tricky. If my supplier would work with .stl we’d be laughing as the model converts beautifully as an .stl and the file size is relatively tiny using Z-Brush decimation master.

I’ve got the mesh to display in a blocky way using the first suggestion of custom display:

Yeah, reduce mesh will not make quads.
But I don’t get this: Why would the supplier NOT work with STL? It’s an industry standard that has been used for 20 years for everything from printing to milling for casting. I would talk to the supplier, it sounds strange to me.

Converting mesh to t-splines to nurbs is one tough and unnecessary process. Z-brush makes great and detailed meshes, so you should be able to use them directly. (IMHO :wink: )

1 Like

I 100% agree with you Holo!  I’m in a peculiar industry, which when I joined it I was the only product designer mad enough to take it on and best practise at that time was fag packet sketches. It’s hard work trying to encourage people to embrace change!

My supplier is highly specialised to the industry I’m in and I have spoken to the owner a number of time about using .stl directly. They will not accept it and insist on IGES. They wont tell me what software they are currently using or what machines they’re running. If I knew these I’m sure I could find the solution for them or at least I could ask Delcam for some advice. If the horse isn’t willing to drink I don’t know what else I can do… can’t move suppliers for political reasons.

What industry are you in? I may well use this as a further example of why my supplier needs to get their head out the sand! Thanks :smile:

Hi Helen, I’m an industrial designer, working with all sorts of projects. I work closely with engineers and manufacturers on some of the projects. On other projects I only focus on the concepts.

My best advice is to contact some other manufacturers, and ask them how they would have solved the project, then take that info back to the initial manufacturer.
(Or just bite the dust and remodel the entire thing in nurbs…)

If you share a part then we might be able to help you in finding a good workflow.

I spoke to Delcam this morning. I can say with total confidence that Powermill WILL do the job. I’ve sent some information to the supplier… see what excuse they come back with this time… :wink:

The workflow I’ve got I’m fairly happy with, but the more I push the detail levels the more the machine struggles… it’s a careful balancing act, which ideally (as you have confirmed) could be avoided completely.

That is well done, and good luck.
I hope it works out well for you.

Know that meshes have a visual trick up their sleeve so they appear smoother than they are. This image is of two identical meshes, where one was unwelded with 0 degrees to show the true structure.

You can either unweld the meshes, or set up the display mode so it doesn’t smooth out the mesh.

So make sure the mesh is truly smooth enough to not show any facets. And at the same time as light as possible.