Measurements - Need some help

[Geta-Ve]

Hmmm. Most interesting. I have tried out a new method, where abs snap does not appear to mess up my measurements at all, however after I invoke 2 intersect commands my measurements are off by miniscule amounts.

it is either an issue with intersect or flatten, or I am still doing something wrong. LOL. But snap absolutely did not change the measurements (at least in this example).

Check out the video.




Intersect OR Flatten not working correctly?

[Fonte Boa]

Before Snap, if you create various cross sections they will measure 2.0;
after Snap, they measure a little less, but all them are equal!
The new Snap operation you performed is nice!
As it moved those edges to their target, that changed the cross sections measures
(but they are equal).

No Intersect or Flatten problems here.

At second video, if you use mmb Flatten instead rmb one,
you will see that both cross sections will be coincident.

[Geta-Ve]

But the snap operation didn't change the measurements... as seen in the first video in the post above at 1:25. o_O

???

Also, even utilizing MMB flatten, I can't get the two to match up.

[Fonte Boa]

But the snap operation didn't change the measurements... as seen in the first video in the post above at 1:25.

You're sure. But Snap affects the orientation of the longest edges and this affects Intersect operation. Snap, as it was used, deforms the object. The correct would be to rotate that piece so that it reachs the wanted target.

If you make a copy of that object preserving the original
and apply Snap and Intersect in 1st one,
apply just Intersect in 2nd one,
and call Tools|Area & Volume
you will verify they are different.

But what matters here is:
from the moment you Snap those 4 edges (or that single face) to an specific point,
you changed the orientation of the longest edges and,
for consequence, the Intersect results.

The perfect soluction is Rotate to Target, because it doesnt change the nothing any object aspect that can affect Intersect operation.

[puzzledpaul]

Whilst it won't work here (properly / directly) because true non-facetted circles don't exist in wings ... one easy way to do this is ...

Draw both vertical bits (side view)
Find the centre of the (air) gap between them (draw 2 diagonals)
Draw a circle, of diameter the same as the width of the blocks (2 units here) with its centre on point just found.

If you now draw lines from the relevant block corners, tangential to the circle ...

... and yes, using such an approach it can be solved using trig ... but since no-one will use it, I'll not bother describing it ...

pp

[Geta-Ve]

@Fonte

Ahh. It makes more sense now! I apologize for all the confusion.

@ppaul

I was with you up until tangential. Sorry.

[puzzledpaul]

@ppaul

I was with you up until tangential. Sorry.

Obviously mr / mrs /ms etc google would be of use with this ... but a real world example would be

wine bottle lying on its side on a table top
view wine bottle from bottom ...at table top height, so see bottle end as a circle, table top as a line.
(line of) table surface forms a tangent to the circle ... ie a straight line 'just kissing' - at a single point (line along bottle for any pedants reading -assuming cylindrical bottle) - the circle.

Therefore 'drawing a line blah blah ...' means drawing a line from some point - towards a circle - such that it (the line) just -and only just - touches the circle.

best tested with an empty bottle as it'd be a crying shame / waste if the other sort rolled off and bottle got broken

pp

[Fonte Boa]

Hi, Paul.

Since Rotate to Target command wont work to solve this situation, i would like to try the trig via.

Draw both vertical bits (side view)
Find the centre of the (air) gap between them (draw 2 diagonals)
Draw a circle, of diameter the same as the width of the blocks (2 units here) with its centre on point just found.
If you now draw lines from the relevant block corners, tangential to the circle

I tried to reproduce these steps by eyeball and reached the following situation:



But i didnt understand what i have to do from this point ("draw lines from the relevant block corners, tangential to the circle").

I delete one of the diagonal lines and crease the other trying to make the new ones just touch in a single circle point each one. For sure this isnt the correct result:



Drawing in Photoshop as you described above ("draw lines from the relevant block corners, tangential to the circle"), the result was the following (that seems correct):



So the question is:
which Wings tools should i have to use to produce this last result?
if Tools|Connect is the way, how can i draw those 2 diagonal edges making them TANGENT the circle?

[puzzledpaul]

Last pic is correct solution - but not easy with wing's toolset.

I tried another 'eyeball' way which is easier and produced correct results - to 3 dec places (I got 2.0003 etc and 1.9992 etc)

Needs a pic (ideally) to describe, but mrs pp needs pc soon.

... but I'll try

Using your pics
select inside top face of LH column and inside bottom face of RH column > Face | Bridge
Place a 1 unit diameter cyl in the middle - as you have done.

Now, to adjust both diagonal lines - at the same time (important) - use Shift | Planar > (LMB)
Select the 2 edges - in the acute angle between the diagonals and the columns
Y for axis (or any vertical edge)
centre of cylinder for origin of operation

Drag until diagonal edge(s) just touch circle.

I used 360section circle to get it 'round'

pp

[micheus]

There is a good chance, micheus, that what you told me still applies and I am just too dense to get it yet.

Yes. You just need make it in two steps :