XNurbs releases a ground-breaking NURBS software

Could you patch this up?
would like to have the blended curves to be part of the surface.
Also one of the the surface created by sweep2 has a buldge and I’d like to fix that too.

BlendsXnurbs_RhinoV5.3dm (341.1 KB)

Jep :smiley:


1 Like


Hi RichardZ,

Please send the model in IGES or STEP format as SolidWorks cannot load any curves in 3DM properly.

So I have to use the boundary faces without the extra curve. RichardZPreview.png shows the preview and RichardZZebra.png shows the zebra view. You should add some internal curve(s) as shown in the zebra view (one internal curve should get the work done).

RichardZOverlap.png shows that there is a big overlap at one corner – while XNurbs has no trouble to handle it, you should fix them if it is used for a real product.


Hi Toshiaki_Takano,

I can only select 5 edges and Toshiaki_TakanoPerview.png shows the preview.

Two problems in your model:
The gap between two connected faces is so big (0.03688 mm), which causes the second problem as showing in Toshiaki_Takano1.png - I need to select a part of the edge, but SolidWorks cannot automatically split the edge (I use Boolean to automatically split an edge, which is a lazy way to do the work, but the gap is too big for Boolean).

So could you manually split the related edges or try to fix the gaps? Also to get good results, you need fix the buldge beforehand, otherwise it will have negative impact to any downstream operations (You can use XNurbs to replace sweep2 to generate a good surface). To get good results, you should also add some internal curve(s) just as what Jim did (i.e., the blended curves you mentioned).

Could you please send your model in IGES or STEP format as SolidWorks cannot load any curves in 3DM properly?

If you are willing to spend time to draw additional curves, then you can simply input these additional curves as internal constraints into XNurbs, XNurbs will produce a single patch surface, which should be superior than your current method.

superior to what? In terms of speed or in terms of quality? Your initial example took me under 5 minutes to corner fillet in a completely manual approach. Learning how to do this takes much more time, true, and its not done in Rhino, also true. But that is not the point. One click solutions are only better if you achieve same quality standards. Don’t get me wrong. I still hope this tool will be successful, but if I read about “ground-breaking” and “superior” I rather think here is someone trying to sell me bs.

(rename to. igs)
manualApproach2.cs (83.0 KB)

1 Like

I also got some strange vibes from it - and starting to get more with every new XNurbs-response, hmmm…



Right - who’s the target market. Both you say? OK, then…designers like to use Alias and Fusion 360, etc., on Mac OS. And since Rhino 6+ is structured towards relatively simplified cross-platform development, it needs support from the ecosystem to grow.

Chicken - Egg…

What do you have to loose by deepening your target market, assuming you are able to do so cost effectively?

MCAD, you win! Is Rhino MCAD? I’d say not. You’re in a different end of the pool.

What does Autodesk and Adobe and Foundry and Blender Foundation, etc., know about designers and MacOS? Why do they bother?

Who is more likely to get excited about the fancy and sophisticated aspects of XN you’ve teased - designers or the average MCAD engineer? (Hint - not the MEs I come across regularly.)

What about the deep MacOS education market? Hook students on your magical, ground breaking, masterpiece generating CAD-crack, and those coming into the workforce will tell their employers that they can’t operate without XN. (Because you made it so that they never needed to learn how to cope otherwise???)

Simply don’t want to…but yea, have 7, 8.1, and 10 available. Use minimally only when absolutely necessary.

Just don’t want to too.


Half the fun…revolutionary or flaming turd?..

It’ll smoke out.

As the world turns.


funny, about 20 years ago i was thinking the same. now i think if one has to sit behind a very expensive 367 inch imac PRO palace to feel good not being able to do some work otherwise, then those are most certainly not the people i would entrust my work to.

@XNurbs i am not sure what is going to happen with this posted file it was a mess right from the start. most likely that some issues have remained. its not so important to me just thought it might be a good example and must say the patch you already have looks pretty good already, even without the extra curve implemented i tried patch in rhino and i had no chance whatsoever, with extra curve or without. in the end i waisted several hours doing it manually trying to get it well done just out of curiosity. i am not a hardcore experienced surfacer just interested though but i am sure even experts need a while to master some challenging situations.

the examples here may be not exceptionally well purposed to show what your tool might be capable of, that does not mean to say it can not be very helpful.

I’m exporting to as IGES.
For the surfaces I had below, it can be ignored, so I deleted them.
Surface based on reference curves are what I’d like to accomplish.

BlendsXnurbs_RhinoV5.igs (83.1 KB)

Also can the height of resulting surfaces be controled by pulling/pushing? That’d be nice to have.

Ok, I’ve enrolled in a self help program to re-evaluate life choices…

To gain your trust and business, please note that we do offer a 100% made on Windows service, and as a value add to our customers, we offer to perform your work on 17” 1024x768 displays. However, there will be an upcharge for that display work, as we need to fire up the time machine…:wink:

1 Like

The right tool for your example is polynurbs. Pick the right tool for the job at hand.

1 Like

I’m not able to judge the quality of a software without tryng it, but I know lot of people asking for a easier way to handle blends with more than 4 edges.
If your solution is easy like it looks and the price reasonable I’m sure you will have big success.
Ya, the price…
I’m not sure your plug.in would have the same ability of the SW one, because Rhino isn’t parametric, and this make a huge difference from a user point of view.
Psychologically less than €600,00 is a reasonable price (€595 as suggested before).
Hope you can have the brave to made a beta version and let us play with it for a week or two.
Good luck.

t-splines is a polynurbs modeler.

This is the ‘multiblend’ tool of Alias. Xnurbs should do better, right?
If Alias succeeds, why should not it be possible in Rhino?
It would be like a trial version of the plug-in, useless to make examples or suppositions.

Is there a recommend for plugins? I’ve been looking
for some.

These approaches with UGS nx: n-side, patch and fill surface.
Xnurbs could do as Ugs or better?

The Alias multiblend command came from the VSR acquisition, I see very little if any improvement.

t-splines was made for your difficult modeling example.

Then we do not take as reference Alias.
Better UGS …