Wish for MatchSrf: "On surface" to work with "Multiple matches"

Currently, the “On surface” option of the ! _MatchSrf command only supports one edge at a time. It would be much better to make it work with up to 4 sides simultaneously, in a similar fashion like the “Multiple matches” option.

1 Like

stay tuned… work is going on in this arena.


With history, this will be sort of like patch but adjustable. I love this.

That sounds promising. Is it planned for Rhino 8 only?

Yes, but no promises can be made yet.

Fingers crossed to see how it will perform when it’s ready.
Hopefully, the ! _EdgeSrf command will have a native tangency option, as well.

1 Like

Just to tone down expectations, we’re not saying that multiple matches to multiple curves on surface is planned, but that work is being done on MatchSrf in general to make it more user friendly/interactive. As for EdgeSrf, nothing is planned in that direction AFAIK

1 Like

Will it be possible to match a surface edge to multiple surfaces that are at least tangent to each other?

The way I read this a match of a surface to two surface edges like in the example (A to B/B) at 1 and 2, but since this is already possible, can you explain what you mean?

Sorry, maybe I was not clear enough. What I mean is the ability to match a surface edge onto multiple surfaces, in a similar fashion like the “On surface” option. Sadly, the latter is restricted to only one target surface at the moment.

This was something that, in footwear design, could be a constraint in my process and would require some hacky workarounds in the absence of reconstructing things. A bit of a gotcha.

Personally, I think it would be nice for Rhino to try and differentiate itself a little bit in terms of its surface modelling tools. This would be a nice convenience function to have for sure.

1 Like

@Jonathan_Hutchinson can you share an example and tell us what this limitation means, or how you work around it? This might be insightful to share with our dev. who is working on surface matching, thanks.

@Rhino_Bulgaria ‘s example is pretty incisive in explaining it - but also a use case example would be if those two surfaces at the bottom were 4x4 points with some undulation, matched together, and you wanted to match another surface edge ‘across’ the seam if that makes sense.

But, arguably it’s a sledgehammer to crack a nut given you can just merge the surfaces, or plan better in the first place I guess. One of those concepting/freedom type things, maybe there are more funky matching things needed to catch up first though. My knowledge is mainly limited to those ‘gee I wish I could just do that’ moments.

Pretty please?

@norbert_geelen if you have examples on how you would use this, I can share this with our dev., pretty please :slight_smile:

I think @Rhino_Bulgaria explained the use case quite precisely:
the “on surface” option for surface matching should accept multiple surfaces as matching reference.
This is helpful when you want to match a surface edge across - wait for it - multiple surfaces.

1 Like

Sure, the way it works is completely clear to me.
I’m looking for examples of cases where you would use this and the workarounds if you don’t have this tool.

1 Like

It’s funny… most of the time developers ask for the most basic reproducible example so they can ensure they’re not given a unique edge case… and now that you have one, with four professionals telling you that it’s good and they want this (including me), you want a more complex example? :upside_down_face:

I can’t give you one, because since I know Rhino can’t do this it’s kinda stupid to try. I could give you examples from the other software we use where we don’t have to care about such things, but that’s probably not very useful either (because Rhino developers always say “build the surfaces better” when Rhino/Alias/ICEM are the only CAD packages left on the market which cares about such things). :wink:

I have never used/needed the OnSurface option, so I have no insight in what it solves that you cannot do otherwise. If this is so important to you then why is there so much resistance in sharing use cases and explaining what the tool would solve?

One thing is for sure, if I ask for this tool to be developed, the first thing they will ask me is, what does it solve. I don’t have that answer.

@Rhino_Bulgaria @eobet @norbert_geelen @Jonathan_Hutchinson
Apparently the second request in this thread (matching to a curve OnSurface (Near seems to be a better description as in this YT) to multiple surfaces) has already been typed up a couple years ago.