[Plugin] Hatchfaces (v1.8 beta) UPDATED 15-Dec-2012

TIG

You don't want the limits of a bounding-box - it's a rectangle, the face might be a circle ! Use my selected_face.classify_points(pt) tests for all edges after the explode/intersect etc...

jolran

Really? Bounds=boundingbox, no?

So boundingbox will not be like on the picture? darn... Typical.

TIG

entity.bounds== a bounding-box rectangular cube - even if the object is the shape of a banana

Use selected_face.classify_point() tests

jolran

Yes. That's what I want

It's for the exterior bounds of ALL entities, not the face. Then from that huge face do a boolean with the selected face.
If you intersect with the result from that you have everything intersected in a group wich can be deleted?
But ok, I will try what you say.

BTW. An exploded comp. don't always transfer the materials to the face lying underneath? It's risky.

jolran

No. Exploded instances do not merge materials to the face lying underneath. Is it supposed to happend?

TIG

On an explode it should [untested].
Alternative 'intersect' after the explode ??

jolran

Well lately I have done quite a few intersects. And the results vary. But no. Materials get lost=white default material.
However I will try intersection after exploding things.

Thanks.

Edited. Not very good results. Things are very negative at the moment. Exploding geometry connected to a face has very destructive behavior. On top of that materials don't get transfered properly, and that was the whole idea of this process.

There is more problems. Let's say I can recreate the face-clone first. No problem!
On top of the face-clone, recreate the whole component instance. Faces, edges without faces, and materials, in code.
Problem here is that I would probably have to do an intersect_with the face_clone, so the edges get connected and form new vertices at the edge crossings. And there the face materials would get lost...In the intersect_with method.

There is an theoretical alternative! I woulden't mind the opinions from TIG on this one:
If doing an component intersect_with face.edgeloops without face? That would at least give new vertices so the unwanted edges theoretical could be removed. Without affecting materials and destructive behavior (tested). But like the method TIG recommended, selected_face.classify_point(). One would need a face to compare against.
Could the face be in a different group? And deleted after comparison? What say you Massa TIG?

jolran

Yes. Something positive!

An intersect between component(hatch-pattern) and face-clone's edge loops(no face). Gives you new vertices. Without affecting materials and destroying faces! so now it's possible to erase all edges and vertices outside the face.

Will see if it's possible to make a comparison against a face in a group. Can't explode it! Destroys everything.

TIG

You can test if a point on a preselected-face in another entities context - BUT you might need to transform! the point by its container[s] transformation back to align with the preselected-face ?

jolran

Ah, sounds great, thanks. I will will try that now. Been busy with some other stuff..

jolran

I think I have a collection of points outside the face now. Plenty of iteration...
There is no way to see the real result until it starts deleting edges. Anyway, see some collection when
using puts.array of points to go

Simple question how do I convert those pt to vertices? Is there a simple way or another comparison?
I guess if getting the collection of vertices it's just a matter of deleting edges connected to that vertice. Edge.used_by?(collection of vertices) ?

jolran

Hang on! Edge.end and edge.start is vertex objects. I can't use them as point when using face.classify_point()???
In the API face.classify_points needs points as arguments.

How come I get a result from array.length? Strange... Or is there some equallity between points and vertices I'm not aware of?

Edited apparently I get some edge deleted. Almost there I think! Only did comparison against face. Maybe need against
other entities as well.

jolran

YEEEEEESSSSSSSS!!! ATM I am VERY happY!!

I'm sure there are things tome come that will put me off. BUT at least it's going forward!

I made the misstake of putting the collection of edges BEFORE the intersection. Had some problems with classify points to
edge removals. Anyway look at the picture! It has curves and circles to, with materials.
Now. Must convert it to component, so faces will cut underlying face and materials will get cleaner.
That's for tomorrow!

jolran

More tests. Overlapping components get intersected well. It's quite computable.. So one have to be careful not to overdo it I think.. We will see...This is all in 1 go. But I suppose one can split the computation up in several goes.
When I come and think of it. This is a 2D boolean!!

more tests.jpg

TIG

Do you now need to erase the uncolored faces or is that done ?

To avoid the 'z-fighting' with the existing face you could move the new group say 1mm in the originally_selected_face.normal so it's avoided...

You have indeed made a 2d-boolean tools... well done

jolran

Thanks TIG! I have o good Master

Yes it's done TIG! It's supposed to be colored for special hatches or design tool etc..It will be like Vector in
Layout.

Move the face 1mm in face normal vector.. Hm Yes that is probably easiest. I was thinking of converting to component and
put on a cutting behavior, to make it more perfect. Maybe overdoing it. Things must be stable first.

Thanks for your help in this.

TIG

When you make it a cutting component remember to set the face to the face it is glued to...

jolran

Yep! OK! Will probably have to do that. Even at 3mm from face there where still some glitches at certain viewing angles.
Don't want to get to far from the face. Some people might not like that, for aligning and stuff..

TIG

You are aware of the needs for the axes of a cutting component ? Z/blue is out of the face it glues to... You'll need to transform the group to the origin [flat], make it a component [changing its behavior to 2d/gluing etc]; move the instance back with a inverse transformation, then tell the instance to glue to the originally selected face...
That should avoid the z-fighting ?

jolran

Heh So that what it was.

Hmm ok, will see if it's worth the effort. I kinda know now why you recommended moving the component a few mm to get rid of the issue. And doing that, it can remain a group. Working on it.