For what is the fillet tool good for, if there is always a space between the surfaces
 

Hello friends !

Well, well, I think it´s a never ending story with the FILLET Tool in Maya. I decided to model in nurbs, because I think that nurbs are really cool for doing such stuff like modelling cars or airplanes, and some other technical things.

Now, I´ve tried a lot with simply two surfaces, which I wanted to connect or melt with a simply Circular Fillet or a Freeform Fillet.

But all attempts bring me the same problem . the fillet does not close the surfaces. There is always a space between the surfaces, and so I don´t get a good mesh.

I don´t want to fix the problem with the tesselation settings, because this only takes effect in the render process. And I want to have a good mesh.

Special Thanks to big Mike. His suggestion is, that I should convert the nurbs into polys, and after that I can fix the problem by "merge vertices".


But now there is one big question:
For what is the nubrs modelling good for, and for what is the fillet option good for, if it will never work in nurbs, and I always have to convert my surfaces into polys ?


I decided to show you some images, how I´m experimenting with the fillet tool. It shows the problem.


http://www.tophunter.at/3dproblems/step1to7.jpg
http://www.tophunter.at/3dproblems/step8.jpg
http://www.tophunter.at/3dproblems/step9.jpg



Okay, it would be really great, if we could fix the problem !!!
Thank you soo much for every little help, & special thx to BigMike !!!!


:bgreen: bernhard

I'd have to say that everyone I know who models in nurbs exclusivly are also rendering their nurbs models, so that's why increasing tessellation is the solution. I've never heard of anyone wanting to model in nurbs, yet not render it that way, but yet also having a clean nurbs model for whatever reason...

bernhard, you have to increase the tesselation... If you check 'show render tesselation' you will see the results in the viewport.
You cannot bypass this issue because of the way nurbs works (the mathematical method) and the way maya tesselates it to triangles for rendering (both in the viewports and in the software renderer).
Nurbs are infinitely smooth by definition, but Maya has to translate them to triangles for the displayhardware. Also small dense surfaces like fillets will always have an initial tesselation that is higher than large non-complex ones so you have to fiddle with the settings to get rid of cracks between them.

Also, what trim does is that is defines an area that is not to be drawn, like a boolean. And fillet never close the surfaces, it just creates a boundry surface to fill the gap and depending on tesselation of the (3) surfaces they may or may not line up. No complex nurbs model consists of only one patch, just look at all the patchmodeling techniques.

hmmm
 

Hello Fredriksson and thx for your reply.

Well, the reason why I´m not happy about the solution by using the tesselation is because this takes only effect in the render process.

What I want is a good mesh --> and the good mesh I only can get if my surfaces are well done. I want to have the opportunity to use my model in other software, so it should be possibly to convert my oject into polys for export to other software.

You are right, no complex nurbs model consists of only one patch. I´m learing nurbs modelling, cause I think it´s a very good way to get a good result , and at this time, I´m trying to find different patchmodelling techniques.

I hope that I will find one, which will fix my problem.
But I got one hint, maybe this will solve my problem.

I should use more Isoparms, to get get the spaces between the surfaces away.

I wlll try , so thx for your help,
bernhard

You can line up one to one on the isoparms, that will give a 'clean' surface, but it is pretty tedious and difficult for trims.

hmmm
 

yeah, you are right, it is pretty tedious and difficult to do - isn´t there any other way ?

I don´t know, but is it sooo hard to know how other guys are working with nurbs, and doing all the great stuff like photorealistic cars, or other techniqual things ?

The forum is great hear, and on the internet it´s possible to find many different tut´s and other help, but there is always the detail, which I´m missing.

I only want to build a fantastic great mesh, with no spaces, gaps, distortions or other things on it ..... :(

What do you think, which patchmodelling technique can you recommend ?

thank you soo much for every little help,
the never give up bernhard :D

I sympathise with your problem I am trying to make a hole where a car light can fit but I get those anoying gaps. On a slightly differnt note, how do you then connect the newly made object to your main model?

_LIVID

P.S. I have put a little scrrenshot here because I can probably explain better than I can :D

You can't connect to a trimmed edge like that. Impossible. It will remain a seperate piece as long as it remains a Nurbs object.

If it looks good in your scene, but doesn't in your render, then you need to increase the tessellation.

So the only way I can have have a hole with a bend like that and have it as one complete piece is to have it in Polys?

Could I convirt it to Polys, Merge them and then convirt it back to NURBS?

_LIVID

You can convert SubDs into Nurbs, but in doing so, it breaks the model up into patches. Which is where you are now.

Oh well, it's starange that a program as big as Maya isn't able to do that withoout having seperate pannels.

Nothing is perfect however.

Cheers for the help

_LIVID

It's not a Maya thing... it's a Nurbs thing. All other 3D apps handle Nurbs the same way.

Oh right, thanks for clearing that up. It's something to think about when I do future models.

_LIVID

I dont get your problem with fillets, but thats probably because I too am just starting out with nurbs so I prolly don't fully understand your problem.

What I do with fillets is use the rebuild surface function to have the same number of isoparms as the edge they need to join, then stitch, check surface origins and then attach. If there is no edge exactly on the fillet edge (always really) I copy out the fillet curves and delete the fillet surface. Then I run detach on the nearest isoparm to where the fillet is (on the object to attach the fillet to), copy out its curves, delete the detached surface, then loft them with the fillet curves to create an attachable surface. Rebuild, origin check and attach as normal.

Or if the detached surface is too large, and its going to be an arse to tweak back to what it was I build patches over the two objects instead using the fillet as a guide.