XNurbs releases a ground-breaking NURBS software

(Marc Gibeault) #148

It’s ridiculous to use Patch in a situation like this.
I would try first with BlendSrf. You’ll get control over the continuity and the overall shape and get an untrimmed surface.


Marc, that’s what I was thinking. A blend surface would be better!


I agree with you. I am a beginner/intermediate user and I would gladly pay Mcneel for that document If @pascal or any other expert user create a detailed guide about how to solve those kind of situations properly using only rhino. That could be the Level 3 guide :thinking:


To achieve two G2 continuous surfaces, the curve has to start at the seam in this particular case; an extension of the seam, so to speak. The curve then has to be matched G2 to the seam and its theoretical continuation on the opposite side.

(Pascal Golay) #152

Hi all - this just in from the Department of FWIW - In my attempt above, I used all G1 matching - everything is a degree 3 by 4 pt. I usually see what I can get only matching G1, with the accompanying simplicity and only go to G2 if it looks like I need to - often times matching G1 turns out to get G2 ‘for free’ if things are well set up.



Is it possible to patch something like this?
Coming from same file as before, but just want to patch the center area.
If this can be done with couple of clicks I really wanna try it.
Multipleblends_20171122.igs (257.9 KB)


Did it ever occur to you that a one year subscription of Alias surface costs roughly 8 times as much as a rhino license?
I welcome constructive criticism, but you repeat the same things over and over, citing the same absurd examples of software that costs multitudes of rhino…
Alias, Catia, Nx etc.
A broken record couldn’t be more repetitive.

1 Like
(Tom) #156

I disagree. If someone asks for a solution it is not our job to solve others problems, but instead pointing to a real world solution. For instance, I’m very fast by using ICEM Surf. So I will provide a solution in there, at least if it would take much longer compared of doing it in Rhino .If you basically adapt the patch-layout it will be reproducible in Rhino, even if it takes much longer and the outcome may not be as good as. That’s what the price difference justifies.
This is thread is also about “superior”, and I believe that justifies including algorithms from other cad-platforms as well

1 Like
(Tom) #158

Indeed, quality vs quantity. :slight_smile:


Norbert_geelen, I will be repetitive and stressful, but you are not obliged to follow me. The cost of a software does not mean anything: even moi costs 1/5 of Rhino, for example, but fillets or mesh n-gons make it better than Rhino. Making comparisons is not always deleterious and unproductive.
I repeat: you pretend not to hear me, do not read my foolishness!


You are, of course, free to repeat yourself as long as you like.


Fortunately, you are not alone in this forum: there are other people who appreciate and, critically, evaluate the problem at best.

Thank you. You may also not read me in the future, I’m not offending!


davide76, maybe You will succeed mooning in the CGPersia Forums? Being repetitive to dead makes You easy to spot!

(Lukasz Domagala) #163

What a perfect end of the week! :joy::joy::joy:
Now let’s all go for a pint.


That explains why he is not hesitating comparing Rhino to software priced like a luxury car…LOL

(Wim Dekeyser) #166

yea… except that unlike the one in your picture, this one here will be on his feet again and continuing his quest in no time. We’ve pointed out the obvious several times in the past but that doesn’t bother him at all.
And financially contributing to the development of features is for suckers only…


back to topic, was there any progress in file I attached?


I’m sorry to disappoint you, but I’m not in CGPersia. It’s not easy to get into that site. We have the same nick …
If I were part of that site, I would not mind disturbing you here.



Hi Toshiaki_Takano,

Toshiaki_TakanoPerview3.png shows the preview and Toshiaki_TakanoZebra4.png shows the zebra view (All selected constraints are sketch curves, so no tangent/curvature continuity can apply. This is a quite simple model, and I am not sure why you would be interested in it).


However, there are a number of problems with your existing model. For example, Toshiaki_TakanoZebra3.png below shows the zebra view of two surfaces from your existing model. They are very bad. I wonder how you generated them?


Toshiaki_TakanoZebra5.png below shows the new surface generated by XNurbs (simply select six boundary edges and one internal edge). It is much better, and it also shows some problems with your boundary edges…

Before using the model for a real product, you may need to re-design them.