V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
working towards a better setup of the inner bend. i need to allow the 'stem' bezier surfaces to be more independent of the 'mouth' bezier surface. matching the primary surfaces along the 'neck' arcs is what causes the stem to be distorted.
it is currently possible to blend surfaces that match at least two corners along one edge (i usually match the entire edge). more coding will be needed to allow matching at a single corner (and also blending unconnected surfaces). there is no NURBS modeling issue, but a significant matter of handling inputs.
unfortunately, i also found a bug. the lower blend connection is clean, but the upper connection has a gap from the segment surface to the blend surface. i'm hopeful it's just a matter of properly propagating weights from the segment grids to the blend grid.
it is currently possible to blend surfaces that match at least two corners along one edge (i usually match the entire edge). more coding will be needed to allow matching at a single corner (and also blending unconnected surfaces). there is no NURBS modeling issue, but a significant matter of handling inputs.
unfortunately, i also found a bug. the lower blend connection is clean, but the upper connection has a gap from the segment surface to the blend surface. i'm hopeful it's just a matter of properly propagating weights from the segment grids to the blend grid.
- Attachments
-
- Silk_model_162_blending_test_00.png (166.96 KiB) Viewed 700 times
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
if i stop using arcs on the profiles, and just use 'normal' cubic beziers, the blend is continuous. this is encouraging in the sense that the topology is good for this type of bend with small tube on one side, and a thick tube on the other side.
i need to fix the blends so that they work reliably with Arcs. it's absolutely necessary to be able to connect to spheres and cylinders (for me).
In the meantime, if you don't need arc profiles, this setup is nice, because you don't need to split the 180 degree arc into two 90 degree arcs and mirror front to back. However, the arcs did give the advantage of matching curvature from top to bottom. this top-bottom matching will now have to be done carefully
i need to fix the blends so that they work reliably with Arcs. it's absolutely necessary to be able to connect to spheres and cylinders (for me).
In the meantime, if you don't need arc profiles, this setup is nice, because you don't need to split the 180 degree arc into two 90 degree arcs and mirror front to back. However, the arcs did give the advantage of matching curvature from top to bottom. this top-bottom matching will now have to be done carefully
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
i'm giving up making it pretty for a moment and testing a different blend setup. i thought it might be interesting in general even if it doesn't match the pipe in any way.
this setup is not quite ready to 'style' the inside bend and outside bend independently. I hope that after i fix the weights for arcs and allow matching a single corner, design freedom across the mirror plane should be possible.
this setup is not quite ready to 'style' the inside bend and outside bend independently. I hope that after i fix the weights for arcs and allow matching a single corner, design freedom across the mirror plane should be possible.
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
blending of surfaces that use arcs on the edges is fixed.
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
Hi, I wanted to model the F1 Halo using Curves and Surface WB I have to say that I got the two surfaces I needed but in order to get them I had to rise blends continuity to G15 which makes no sense, in order to fill the empty spaces I had to lower the deviation of the blends to 0.01, and make the fillings G1 , lowering blends continuity only make things worse ironically. Worst DRAW BACK I cannot create a solid, only compound.
- Attachments
-
- Halo 4.JPG (32.53 KiB) Viewed 493 times
-
- Halo 3.JPG (43.26 KiB) Viewed 493 times
-
- Halo 2.JPG (27.96 KiB) Viewed 493 times
-
- Halo 1.JPG (37.35 KiB) Viewed 493 times
-
- F1 Halo.FCStd
- (445.02 KiB) Downloaded 11 times
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
I had to erase the fillings and the lieds, otherwise file is more than 1mbLQ_6 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 09, 2023 6:46 pm Hi, I wanted to model the F1 Halo using Curves and Surface WB I have to say that I got the two surfaces I needed but in order to get them I had to rise blends continuity to G15 which makes no sense, in order to fill the empty spaces I had to lower the deviation of the blends to 0.01, and make the fillings G1 , lowering blends continuity only make things worse ironically. Worst DRAW BACK I cannot create a solid, only compound.
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
at first i thought your twisted profiles might be making things harder than they should, but after untwisting them, the Surface fill got worse.
this is going to take a bit longer to set up.
i played with deviation and now my file is too big to load, not sure why
maybe adding a single curve across the top as a guide could fix thisthis is going to take a bit longer to set up.
i played with deviation and now my file is too big to load, not sure why
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
In general, i find Surface>Filling much more reliable when used on the flattest possible things
in the pics below, i have my Silk surfaces for the sides, and a Surface Filling in the center. it handles the pinched edges nicely and G1 will be sufficient IF the hole is already as flat as possible.
This applies no matter how you create you boundary surfaces. can you create "a bit more" of the intended surface with Curves? or whatever tool you like?
if you look at your Curves model, 'untangled' liked i showed before, you might be able to add a guide curve across the top. then surface might look good again.
all of these suggestions are to try and make the surface fills more 'reasonable' and hope that they start working in solid operations.
in the pics below, i have my Silk surfaces for the sides, and a Surface Filling in the center. it handles the pinched edges nicely and G1 will be sufficient IF the hole is already as flat as possible.
This applies no matter how you create you boundary surfaces. can you create "a bit more" of the intended surface with Curves? or whatever tool you like?
if you look at your Curves model, 'untangled' liked i showed before, you might be able to add a guide curve across the top. then surface might look good again.
all of these suggestions are to try and make the surface fills more 'reasonable' and hope that they start working in solid operations.
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
adding a Silk curve to puff up the Surface filling (under non-boundary edges).
it's not very good because i did not put a lot of effort into the curve, but you can see the added control.
it's not very good because i did not put a lot of effort into the curve, but you can see the added control.
Re: V0.20.2 Curves WB issues, Macros & Silk WB
with more effort into the curve
It's....ehhh....it's ok...but it didn't follow closely in the center, and it's still pinched/creased in the center of the outer edges.
i'm trying to improve these things because they tell me the surface is 'stressed' so to speak. that makes it use a lot of file space, slows down everything, and whether you can get a solid is up in the air. even if you get a solid, offset/thickness is yet another higher level hurdle.
So i want to improve it as much as i can, as close to the final shape you showe din your pictures, before even trying solids, etc
It's....ehhh....it's ok...but it didn't follow closely in the center, and it's still pinched/creased in the center of the outer edges.
i'm trying to improve these things because they tell me the surface is 'stressed' so to speak. that makes it use a lot of file space, slows down everything, and whether you can get a solid is up in the air. even if you get a solid, offset/thickness is yet another higher level hurdle.
So i want to improve it as much as i can, as close to the final shape you showe din your pictures, before even trying solids, etc