[NicoR44]

FYI Curt, removed some boundary curves in the fillets prior to posting to make the solution less obvious.

working on it, but indeed AAAARRRGGGHHHHH

btw, here is a quicky on wall-e:

[bjorn.syse]

ahh, maxwell-clay-porn

[hyltom]

EADC and Yanada how do you make fillets in Rhino to avoid this problem?
Does Pro-e handle radius the same way than Solidworks?

Also you don't think that those "line" will disappear after some treatment on the mould like polishing and that maybe it's useless to care of such problem during the 3d construction.

[bjorn.syse]

EADC and Yanada how do you make fillets in Rhino to avoid this problem?

I use the Blend tools (BlendEdge, BlendCrv etc) since they give the options of specifying the grade of continuity you're after (G0,G1,G2 up to G4)

For an interesting reasoning on form and continuity, check this out:

http://www.core77.com/blog/featured_ite ... _12752.asp

regards,

- Björn

[caryjames]

Hey Bjorn- Where do you specify the degree of continuity using BlendEdge? I have always used blend edge but have not seen where to specify G2- G4. I thought that the Blend option always gives at least G2 continuity but wonder how to go higher? Fillets by nature are G0-G1 correct?

[EADC]

Hyltom,

For me, in many cases, radius fillets are a no-go. Only conics or blends like Björn said. And yes, that's a lot of work... But it is the only way to get what you want. Polishing moulds makes you depend on the polisher. And with big radii there is no way you can "polish" them out. Usually also, where a rounded edge starts , ends and the way it evolves is way more important and defining than a radius value. For instance the teasing modelling challenge is simply impossible with radii only. In that case, the surface boundaries positions are much more important than any radius value. Just try to model something like that and make it look good... and curvature continous... and with nurbs of course....

Since a radius is a radius, it makes no difference at all in what app you make it. I have yet to see a tool that makes rounding corners in complex models easy since it is more a matter of feeling than mathmatics.

The article explains it all indeed. Good find Björn.

[bjorn.syse]

Hey Bjorn- Where do you specify the degree of continuity using BlendEdge? I have always used blend edge but have not seen where to specify G2- G4. I thought that the Blend option always gives at least G2 continuity but wonder how to go higher? Fillets by nature are G0-G1 correct?

My wrong, there's no option with the BlendEdge. BlendEdge produces G2-continous blends, but if you're after anything higher or more control I guess you'd have to make it manually with BlendCrv's and Sweep2's.

Also, note that BlendEdge does not produce G2-continous blends in the CORNERS of let's say a cube. Only along the edges.

yep, Fillets as in Fillet, FilletEdge etc in Rhino makes G1 (tangency) continous blends.

[hyltom]

Hyltom,

For me, in many cases, radius fillets are a no-go. Only conics or blends like Björn said. And yes, that's a lot of work... But it is the only way to get what you want. Polishing moulds makes you depend on the polisher. And with big radii there is no way you can "polish" them out. Usually also, where a rounded edge starts , ends and the way it evolves is way more important and defining than a radius value. For instance the teasing modelling challenge is simply impossible with radii only. In that case, the surface boundaries positions are much more important than any radius value. Just try to model something like that and make it look good... and curvature continous... and with nurbs of course....

Since a radius is a radius, it makes no difference at all in what app you make it. I have yet to see a tool that makes rounding corners in complex models easy since it is more a matter of feeling than mathmatics.

The article explains it all indeed. Good find Björn.

Thank for the explanation. For large radius or blending of surface, I understand that curvature is the way to go but for a tiny fillet (1or2mm) it's a lot of useless work...for me. Also, I can't spend my time to fight with engineer explaining them that their 2mm radius doesn't looks good. they will never understand why I'm requesting them to change because they will even not see the difference. But difference there is in the eyes of a designer.

And thank you very much Bjorn for the great link.

[EADC]

IMO, best to avoid sweeps, use surface blend or blend curve instead (the commandline version.. it's not the same as from the toolbar) both go up to up G4. And indeed, the corners are most challenging.

[NicoR44]

Indeed thanks guys for all your input!! very enlighting now I will have to re-model all my stuff no but really.. very very useful

[EADC]

Hyltom,

For me, blending starts somewhere around R3, depending on the product of course. Mobile phones or jewellery should start from R0.5 already

[Maximus3D]

The latest update you posted looks great Nico, love the details and accuracy you put into this.

Guys.. please don't hijack his thread anymore (unless Nico don't mind), start a new one in offtopic and continue there instead.

/ Max

[EADC]

Ooops.. just got carried away. Sorry Sir Max. En natuurlijk excuses aan de Wall-E master.

[bjorn.syse]

Yeah, sorry about that Nico. It's easy to get carried away when talking about surface modeling

Keep on Wall-E:ing us Nico.

- b

[Maximus3D]

Plz don't be sorry to me, Nico is the guy. And PLZ don't call me sir, i'm just a regular jerk.

Now Nico, updates plz.. post them and tell us more about your project. It looks like it's gonna be massive!

/ Max