Boolean problems

PetGerbil

Member
error1.png


That It?
 

prometheus

REBORN
I tripled both objects and facetted them a few times. It seems to work! Thank you so far for all the effort.

As seen in the examples by Tim Parson and other recommendation, it seems so, but once you go that route, you can´t go in on the same model and do much fancy detail work afterwards..due to the complexity of the divided geometry that is there, so you better back up the main section profiles ..which you probably do and have to work it differently if you need changes on windows etc.

I would still vote for trying to keep in mind a constructional section workflow and treat parts more individual than slamming one irregular shape in the the workflow and then yet another boolean operation taking place all at once across the whole construction.
If you find a way to work like that, booleans shouldn´t be an issue unless it is non planar, and you could get away with less geometry and an option to further go in and edit insets bevel on such geometry that you most likely would have a nightmare to work on denser segmented geometry.

One way in such case with divided and tripled geometry on those walls, is to simply do additional facade or window profiles or other detail around windows on the simpler original shape wall, then copy loose geometry over to the segment that was boolean, but that could cause rendering issues if they aren´t connected.

As I showed in my example, the booleans don´t have any issues when I worked that way, and I got away with less geometry that still can be detailed much easier than tripled and divided segmented walls, so I can go in and add window profiles around the windows, or facades in a way you would have a nightmare doing with the tirple and division method,, unless you have a good method of merging polys nicely without breaking the boolean quality.

That said, if you are sure it´s the final stage of the process, go ahead and triple and subdivide before boolean operations.

Cad software etc face these issues thanks to the solid model approach, and
If I get the time I may try this model in Design sparks, end result for exporting to 3D rendering would still have to be tripled, but that occurs after boolean operations.
 
Last edited:

Geoff Vane

Worst 3D artist ever
As seen in the examples by Tim Parson and other recommendation, it seems so, but once you go that route, you can´t go in on the same model and do much fancy detail work afterwards..due to the complexity of the divided geometry that is there, so you better back up the main section profiles ..which you probably do and have to work it differently if you need changes on windows etc.

I would still vote for trying to keep in mind a constructional section workflow and treat parts more individual than slamming one irregular shape in the the workflow and then yet another boolean operation taking place all at once across the whole construction.
If you find a way to work like that, booleans shouldn´t be an issue unless it is non planar, and you could get away with less geometry and an option to further go in and edit insets bevel on such geometry that you most likely would have a nightmare to work on denser segmented geometry.

One way in such case with divided and tripled geometry on those walls, is to simply do additional facade or window profiles or other detail around windows on the simpler original shape wall, then copy loose geometry over to the segment that was boolean, but that could cause rendering issues if they aren´t connected.

As I showed in my example, the booleans don´t have any issues when I worked that way, and I got away with less geometry that still can be detailed much easier than tripled and divided segmented walls, so I can go in and add window profiles around the windows, or facades in a way you would have a nightmare doing with the tirple and division method,, unless you have a good method of merging polys nicely without breaking the boolean quality.

That said, if you are sure it´s the final stage of the process, go ahead and triple and subdivide before boolean operations.

Cad software etc face these issues thanks to the solid model approach, and
If I get the time I may try this model in Design sparks, end result for exporting to 3D rendering would still have to be tripled, but that occurs after boolean operations.
You are right. I am rethinking this. The outer walls can be sliced at every floor. Etc.
All a more of a real life approach which will simplify further modeling.
I found some of the old excitement again of watching something grow.
btw: I urge you all to model for the metaverse. I accidentally found out they are paying ridiculous amounts of money for buildings way simpler than this.
 

prometheus

REBORN
The Metaverse Is Coming And It’s A Very Big Deal (forbes.com)
What Is The Metaverse—And Why Does Mark Zuckerberg Care So Much About It? (forbes.com)

Personally I don´t believe it will becomes the universe to be in for the common man until many many years from now, heck second life hasn´t even kicked in and that seems ages ago.

We still struggle with internet connections and getting IOT to get moving on, a full metaverse with fancy gadgets on you connected will take time and cost a lot, but sure someday perhaps and those being the first to tap in to it may own the world so to speak, same with AI.

Personally I just wan´t to build my house that is highly cost efficient, sound and nuke proof with a good cooking place, bath, sleep and a fireplace for me and my kittens when I get old.
 

prometheus

REBORN
You are right. I am rethinking this. The outer walls can be sliced at every floor. Etc.
All a more of a real life approach which will simplify further modeling.
I found some of the old excitement again of watching something grow.
btw: I urge you all to model for the metaverse. I accidentally found out they are paying ridiculous amounts of money for buildings way simpler than this.

What is this project targeted at, your own just personal projects? or potentional clients, or already signed up payed projects?
That building is huge in size, 108 meters or something. :D

I tried to import in sketchup, but dealing with other object entities in there isn´t the same as constructing and merging faces from scratch in there, and with the free versions you are just too limited to do something useful with imported buildings from other software, sketchup can be nice for laying out main wall, windows, offsets archs valves etc and maybe export and work with rounding and bevels in other software like Lightwave.

unwelding is one way to separate your segments, then extrude as you need, if they are planar, thicken or multishift will yield angled extrusions based on the normal angle, which means that you would have to adress and line up areas that goes beyond the main shape construction before mirroring segments, extrude will of course just extrude in planar fashion, so you may wan´t to stick with that.

Walls are thick indeed, may hold for some nukes effects at 2 meter thickness and if made of pure Swedish steel.

extrude walls.jpg
 
Last edited:

prometheus

REBORN
Also, I would consider stay away from boolean, with this kind of angled faces, I think I mentioned it before..
but instead use solid drill instead with slice, and make sure to only slice through individual wall sections one at the time.
then select the faces on both sides of the wall and use bridge to "drill the hole"

This is by far more secure than boolean subtracts, unless you want to divide it all in to many segments as previously suggested, you just have to get to know how to best select the front and backside of the drilled sliced faces, and map your bridge command to ctrl-shift right menu for easy acess or a good shortcut, the important thing is not having to disrupt where your mouse are.

solid drill slice.jpg

But
 

Geoff Vane

Worst 3D artist ever
I’m no longer using LW professionally. I lack the ability to meet the deadline and I can’t even rig a puppet and make it walk, what everyone wants to see you do. Decades ago I tried Project Messiah for that which kinda worked.
This here huge ass building is intended to be an NFT museum / gallery. I have been thinking for many years about building a gigantic park with many museum buildings on it. This is the first building. The plan is to render cubic virtual tour maps and make it possible to walk through them with some script engine suited for html. It would be more elegant to have real 3D models online but this means I need engines I don’t understand or join the metaverse: i.e. give away control. And most online 3D is rather limited in render options.
Just as I am starting to realize my plans, I see the NFT museums booming around me. Like I said, money is being paid. I don’t fully understand why you would invest in this but I shouldn’t worry about that.
I’ll try post the requested link:

Metaverse builder sales

Most interesting is to investigate what this guy sold and how much he got for it.
 

Geoff Vane

Worst 3D artist ever
What happens in Boolean under the hood, is that everything gets trippled, the operation is done and everything gets untrippled after that. Somewhere in this process things can go wrong.
I now have trippled the inner walls once and went with that. No more Boolean errors but I do see some tripple folds on the wall that I would like to see disappear. For now, I gonna go with this result.
 

prometheus

REBORN
I must look into the Bridge function. It wasn't there in my days.

the bridge tool is foremost to bridge face to face and create geometry between selected polyfaces, but if the faces is on the same geometry on two opposite sides of the geometry, it will make a hole in the geometry and most often respect the interior polys when bridge cutting, this works most excellent when you bevel inset windows or similar, but it can also have issues of openGL not displaying it right if you even try to cut several holes with it and the shapes you choose can´t be connected to a corner.

See sample images and sample objects, though I used boolean subtract it is the same here as if I would use the bridge tool ..in this case anyway.
So always..check the corners :)

First object just a box to serve as a wall, when boolean subtracting the three simple box shapes, the holes that can be connected to the corners of the main shape will be succesful, while the middle hole can´t connect to any corner of the main shape, thus yielding this "error".

So the second shape, I just divided the main shape in to three segments to match the three cutting objects and to make sure each one of those cutting objects will make a cut to a corner of the main shape, and as you can see, perfect boolean, and it would work the same with the bridge tool as well if you had solid drill sliced it.

Bridge tool however, requires to select parts in a particular order, while boolean subtract will do the drill all at once, so generally for simpler objects, boolean works well and faster, while with your sample it just didn´t work out, but that could have been a matter of dividing the main shape better as well.


errors even in the simplest geomettry if not dividing the geometry to allow for corner connections after subtraction..

drill test_simple boxes.jpg



And division cuts made to allow for corner connections after subtraction, results is as it should be.

drill test_simple boxes_with divisions.jpg
 

Attachments

  • drill test object divide.zip
    3.2 KB · Views: 31
Top Bottom