Back to studying creating good surfaces…
Thanks for the feedback.
Back to studying creating good surfaces…
RichardZ, my intention is not to disturb, maybe I used a wrong word, but I would like to focus on some factors. I’m a little critical, I admit …
CGPersia I know this, I’m not the only one who knows this. They told me that from there it is possible to have many programs (cracked).
I’m not that davide76, I repeat, chats are full of equal nicknames, I would not have trouble saying that it was me.
For many years I have been following this forum; I’ve posted so many examples, videos, modeling problems; I suggested resolving many bugs and adding some missing options to Rhino. I’ve been actively involved … I’m very critical, I admit it!
Saying something does not work, or it works badly, does not mean discrediting software or the work of developers.
Yes, this is getting more than tiring. Cluttering this thread alone with 25 posts full of repetetive whining is… not making the thread more readable nor more informative.
As for the XNurbs, yes it is interesting for lesser than class A masters. Low end users (like me) needs - relatively speaking - high end tools to get the job done. High end may not be high end to all users, and so “high end” or “low end” is not a good criteria for pricing.
For users that doesn’t work around the clock with surfaces only (making them very skilled) - which is the majority of Rhino users I bet - a plugin loike XNurbs seems to add value at around $400 per seat.
What SolidWork users pay for a plugn for Solidworks doesn’t really matter, not to them (they pay more if they need it) and not to Rhino users who cannot affort to browse Solidworks web pages.
Okay, RIL, I’ll be repetitive, I’ll admit it, but my presence, even with a single posted video has some sense, a little logic, I have something to say, criticize, to highlight, although many do not like my way to do it: your presence does not even notice: the vacuum!
You may not even read my work, nobody obliges you.
(I’m not the only one complaining, believe me).
You may, as well, go to the Sketchup pro users forum and whine that for 400 Euro you can’t even draw a circle.
Already done! But I do not complain about anything, Rhino is a great software: you misunderstood my speech. In fact, we would not be here to discuss the lack, or not, of an indispensable tool for a surface modeler. This is a demonstration!
Drop it. Enough is enough. It’s good that you like Rhino - like we all do, but you are destroying entire threads making them unreadable.
Drop it. For heavens sake.
FINALY a sane comment on this farse of a thread! Thank you for bringing some Scandinavian simplisity to the topic Rolf!
Xnurbs seems to be the best patch tool I have seen and you would never use patching for A-class surfaces if you are very serious about your work. But for normal modelling it would do just fine as the imperfectness that comes with using a patch would be rubbed out in the mold.
How would you solve this manually?
The file was given to me, I did not try to run it manually.
For those who want to, try to do it.
A similar example I saw to do in Catia, seemed almost perfect. I can not find the file again…
Yes, the surfaces are cut and it is very difficult to find a good transition between the parts.
They will need support curves to make an acceptable junction.
That’s not particularly complex…
There are a few ways it could be completed logically, depending on the hierarchy of the fillets you want.
There are two in the file joined.
I did not took the time to match the surfaces but it shows how to “see” such hierarchy.
fillet complex_marc.3dm (1.3 MB)
Will there be a option to call xNurbs functionality by script in order to use it in an automated situation, eventually even a grasshopper component?
It seems to me a discrete result (maybe you could get something softer, in fact the Gaussian analysis is not the best, even the zebras …). Anyway thanks.
I would be curious about how Xnurbs works in this case.
Thank you @Marc !
This is good stuff.
Based on your model I did a sweep2 -> Blendcrv ->Use the blend curve to trim off the sweep2 ->Finally a surface from 4 edges and then matched all around.
I always have difficulty with those sharp corners, but trimming after creating bigger surface seems much better.
Was there match multiple surfaces?..
fillet complex_Sw2_BC_TRIM.3dm (324.1 KB)
Thank you very much for your kind words.
XNurbs can create superior Class A surfaces (otherwise, Catia won’t work – Catia’s surfacing is also based on variational tech).
“Interactive design” is how to use variational tech to create superior Class A surfaces: if the generated surfaces are not good enough, then simply adding more constraints will get the job done. Comparing the method others mentioned in the thread, there are two obvious advantages:
- With XNurbs, designers only need to add a part of constraints (20% - 30% curves mentioned by others);
- The additional curves do not need to be perfect, as XNurbs will use energy-minimization method to automatically optimize them.
This means superior surface quality and also speeds up the design.
I also read your message “Customers, not whiners”. It is very thoughtful and valuable to Rhino. I do not understand why Rhino does not fix the fillet issue so far.