| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
suden
Posts: 39
|
Posted: Sun Feb 28, 2010 6:49 pm Post subject: Problem Merging 2 Blocks |
|
|
Hi
I understand that the new Boolian tool is still only on the Beta but I'm having a bit of a problem merging two relatively straight forward blocks.
I just keep getting the "failed to Create Block" message. I have attached the file if anyone else wants to have a go, it could just be me! I have downloaded the latest Beta 2.1.0.056, but still no joy.
Thanks
Si
| Description: |
|
 Download |
| Filename: |
Boolian test 2.dsb |
| Filesize: |
1.02 MB |
| Downloaded: |
60 Time(s) |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andrew Bairstow Site Admin
Posts: 247 Location: Birmingham, UK |
Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Si
I must admit to not be familiar with the new Boolean Geometry functionality. However I seem to have joined your two blocks without any problems simply using the move block tool and making sure that I click on a corner of one block and making sure I moved it to the edge of the other block. Also used construction lines to get the snaps. Anyway when I selected the two blocks and clicked on the Boolean icon I did not get any reported errors. Modified file attached
Andrew
| Description: |
|
 Download |
| Filename: |
boolian_test_2_846afb.dsb |
| Filesize: |
1.03 MB |
| Downloaded: |
58 Time(s) |
_________________ Andrew Bairstow
DesignBuilder Software |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
suden
Posts: 39
|
Posted: Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Andrew
Thanks for having a look. As far as I could tell the blocks were already joined together how I needed them to be (ie touching each other), but not merged. I just a had a look at your file in Beta 2.1.0.056, but they still show as being two separate blocks, and I still can't get them to merge, even if I pull them apart and stick them back together again using construction lines.
Regards
Si
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steve Potter

Posts: 439 Location: newcastle |
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Si,
The main geometric limitation of building blocks in DB is that each vertex of it's parent polyhedron must be adjacent to three surfaces in order to derive an unambiguous secondary vertex when the polyhedron is inflated to form the secondary 'skin' of the building block. During the conversion process going from a simple polyhedron to a building block, if any vertex is encountered which is adjacent to more than three surfaces, the conversion mechanism attempts to insert an additional surface in order to replace these vertices with additional vertices that are adjacent to only three surfaces. In some cases, this surface insertion is not possible due to the parent polyhedron topology which is what is happening in this case. I have replaced your building blocks with component blocks and unioned them to demonstrate where the offending vertex lies - see attached screen capture.
We will shortly be introducing a new building block type which does not have this vertex limitation and will enable any topology to be converted to a building block. Hopefully this feature will be available within the next couple of months.
Regards,
Steve
| Description: |
| Vertex adjacent to four surfaces |
|
| Filesize: |
49.01 KB |
| Viewed: |
315 Time(s) |

|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
suden
Posts: 39
|
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Steve
Thanks for the indepth response, I get the jist of what you are saying. I tried to cut one of the blocks back so they were level, then merge, then add on another block and merge to get the desired results, but still to no avail. I also had a go with adding a small block and using the drag face tool, but that wasn't having any of it either!
Oh well, I guess it was good while it lasted!
Kind regards
Si
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Steve Potter

Posts: 439 Location: newcastle |
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Si,
Yes, sorry to get so technical but there's no easy way to explain the problem
Anyway, once we've introduced the new building block type, this problem should go away altogether.
Regards,
Steve
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|