[Plugin] FredoTools::CurviShear 1.5a - 25 Aug 11 (ramps)
-
Top is relative to Base?
And Base is relative to Ground? -
Looks amazing!
-
Simple and efficient, as usual , THANKS fredo
-
Thanks! A useful plug-in -
Hi Fredo,
I know the plugin contains the word curve in it
... but would there be a way to get it to work on any geometry that isn't necessarily a curve?If it is possible to get it to work on any geometry, I believe this plugin should eventually work like the Joint Push Pull series (with preview and all), and even be added as one of them. I'd call it something like "joint push/pull to surface"...!?
Fredo! You make Great Stuff!
-
Sorry, all powerful Fredo, for interrupting, but what is the entry 'Rail Offset' that is shown in its context menu during the animation of the example? It sounds very interesting (That phrase has taken away the dream for some days) that's it Oh Great Fredo ?
-
Firstly: fantastic script Fredo! This has really helped a desperate architect frustrated by the 'old' manual way of making ramps, curved kerbs on a slope etc etc...
Secondly: Could I make a small request? Basically, it would be great if the top height value could be input driven relative to the context of the model.... a bit like the 'projection' tools which require you to define a vector (lenght) along which to perform the function. I often make use of this tool with a '0' base height as its easy to extrude the base shape later but if you can think of integrating this variable in the same way that would be cool too.
With the current interface things are easy if you're dealing with whole measurements but a little difficult if you're reading dimensions off a complex model in which non whole numbers are displayed relative to one's setting for the decimal places and in my case often shortened by the ~ prefix in which case i don't know what the exact dimension is.
Hopefully you can see the value in this too...
Thanks again.
David
-
@davidlouis said:
Secondly: Could I make a small request? Basically, it would be great if the top height value could be input driven relative to the context of the model....
David,
This plugin was written in a few hours and does not include all the bell and whistles that it may deserve. It could be interactive, and with preview, etc...
I can however fix your problem by extending the dialog box to accept altitude, instead of height to the base.Also, keep in mind that CurviShear is only an approximate solution to the problem. To have a real ramp as a regular surface, you need to have homologue curves, because each curve vertex si deformed according its individual curvilinear distance, not by reference to a common rail.
If I have time, I will also enhance the script to provide something more accurate.Fredo
-
@susy said:
Sorry, all powerful Fredo, for interrupting, but what is the entry 'Rail Offset' that is shown in its context menu during the animation of the example? It sounds very interesting (That phrase has taken away the dream for some days) that's it Oh Great Fredo ?
RailOffset is a small script that I wrote for myself to test Curviloft. Nothing fancy, just 3D offsetting.
Fredo
-
Now, this is a nice little "gem" by a really talented guy.
Edit: However, something in my installation will not complete the skinning process? Also, notably, I ran the ruby once with the console open to track the activity and nothing displayed, so I cannot provide any info beyond the following:
WinXPtabletpc pro edition SU7.1xxx
Curvishear.rb placed in Plugins folder.EDIT, AGAIN: Ok, I was dazzled by the video clip, and did not read at the bottom that automatic skinning is not available, yet. But, I will leave this post here as a lesson to myself that I must pay attention.
fredo's classic bezier curves used, 1" tall at low end, 30" tall at high end.
-
This is great! How ironic
I find this on the site when X Games rolls in. I think this would be great if it somehow incorperated banking. I'll be saving time by the hours with this on road courses 
-
@unknownuser said:
Hi Fredo,
I know the plugin contains the word curve in it
... but would there be a way to get it to work on any geometry that isn't necessarily a curve?I may have confused the plugin's functionality.
I guess I was thinking of something a bit different for ramp creations. You would push a curved surface onto a straight plane. Like Joint Push Pull but to a horizontal surface. You would use it when you have the ramp already created but don't have the base for it... how does that sound? -
Would it be able to do a ramp with say a "T junction" half way up? I'm just thinking about how to go about doing roads on uneven sites, which often have various junctions and so on.
-
@Macker:
I just tried a simple T Junction with Bezier curves, but I stubbed the ends with straight segments and ran the ruby. The script could not decide which end to set as the low elevation and which to set as the high. So it basically did both elevations for all four stubs, leaving a wire frame mesh as a group.
However, after throwing that away, I did a simple ramp and added Bezier plan profiles to the curvishear ramp and pushpulled the stubs up to the nearest point above and then adjusted them to coincide with the main slope. Not necessarily the best way, but one possible solution while we wait for any enhancements to this handy little tool.
Best Regards,
mitcorb -
Respect, Fredo.
Every once in a while a gem like this is there exactly when I need it.
I'm going to include "difficult ramp for parking" here so people get this topic at the top of the list when searching. Many thanks ! -
fredo
i realise this was just a quickie ruby but it is a good one that i use
however i am haveing trouble in SU8 is there a problem and does it need updating
regards
grim -
@grim said:
however i am haveing trouble in SU8 is there a problem and does it need updating
It helps to describe what the trouble is.
(Operations fails, error messages, messages in the Ruby Console?) -
punctuation helps too... are those questions or statements?
-
If some modifications are made for the V8, what are the results for the previous versions?
-
@unknownuser said:
If some modifications are made for the V8, what are the results for the previous versions?
Should be none - Ruby 1.8.6 has stricter parsing which has been the biggest cause of the incompatibility.
Advertisement