How do I find the face I just created with add_circle?

daiku

I modified a component definition using entites.add_circle, now how do I find the disc-shaped face I just created?

thomthom

Are you maybe drawing on a face? Or using edge.find_faces afterwards?

In any case, if you investigate one of the edges you create with .add_circle, check out it's attached faces. There might be multiple faces, but your face should be the one with the edge as part of the outer loop and have a matching normal to the circle you created.

thomthom

.add_circle only creates edges...

MartinRinehart

@daiku said:

I modified a component definition using entites.add_circle, now how do I find the disc-shaped face I just created?


a = entities.add_circle ... # a is an array of edges
f = entities.add_face a

thomthom

@martinrinehart said:

@daiku said:

I modified a component definition using entites.add_circle, now how do I find the disc-shaped face I just created?


> a = entities.add_circle ... # a is an array of edges
> f = entities.add_face a
>

Which of course is a much more sane version to do this than my rambling....

daiku

Or how about this brillaint (late) insight: I used the center point of the circle to add it, so I suppose I could now look for the face that point is on (DOH!). CB.

thomthom

@daiku said:

Or how about this brillaint (late) insight: I used the center point of the circle to add it, so I suppose I could now look for the face that point is on (DOH!). CB.

? How is looking for the face that way easier than Martin's method? AFAIK there isn't a method that returns a face from a given point. You'd have to loop through lots of geometry for that.

Question still remains, are you drawing the circle edges ontop of an existing face?

TIG

Why not make all of this new geometry - both the circle's edges and its face - inside a temporary group. Then it's easy to find the face - it's the only face in the group's entities. Afterwards explode the group back to the base entities and the face stays the same 'face-entity'...

daiku

I guess Martin's way is fine. It won't create a second face, will it? Yes, I'm creating it on an exisiting face. Looping through the geometry was straightforward - it's not that large a component.

thomthom

@daiku said:

I guess Martin's way is fine. It won't create a second face, will it? Yes, I'm creating it on an exisiting face. Looping through the geometry was straightforward - it's not that large a component.

In that case you should only need to check the faces collection of one of the returned edges.