problem difference patch rhino 4.0

[ecomusposta]

Hi, guys, I'm back here breaking up.
I happen to have a strange problem in rhino 4.0, I want how you see it in the attached file from me, create a boolean difference between 2 patch surface. I don't understand why sometimes the program creates a difference in a quiet way, sometimes not, like in this case, if I'm wrong, could you take a look at it? Do you think it's a program debug? I tried a thousand times but I don't get it. I did an analysis of the two surfaces and it was regular. Where am I wrong? thanks in advance.
p.s. the program does not tell me difference boolean failed, he goes ahead with the operation but the result is not the hole in the center of the figure, but the hole is not seen, in poor words does not create it.

 

[ecomusposta]

Okay, girl, I'm sorry if I resume the discussion after a long time, so I think I've solved the problem. to those who might be interested but I think you already know, the problem was in: "the patch surface I created was not all in the same level but had a small difference in altitude but so dwarf that even with a 1000 x magnification you could see, in fact I did not do anything but reconstruct the daccapo curve being very careful to check the curve that is well placed on a plane and finally applying the circle to the center (which would represent me I think the problem was just this and not a coincidence, but I think if it was a bug in the program at this time it wouldn't allow me the Boolean difference. anyway thanks to everyone for the attention.

 

[3dxx]

but why don't you use the curve to make the hole with a simple trim?

 

[3dxx]

Now I've tried to be a boolean and it's all right.

 

[teovisi]

asaaaaghe fare

 

[ecomusposta]

but why don't you use the curve to make the hole with a simple trim?

It is obvious that I had already thought about it before, but the exercise consisted of executing it with a Boolean operation, in fact with the trim that truncated me in a divine way, but the exercise as I said little consisted of that.
It's strange that I've been running it without problems. I obviously have a bug or system or program.

 

[c3kkos]

to me the hole does it with the Boolean intersection and not with the difference. .

Mah!

 

[giovanni.a]

I tried the exercise: with trim worked normally, while with the Boolean subtraction to get the hole I had to explode the two surfaces to separate them and then delete the surface corresponding to the hole.
Maybe that's the solution.

 

[ecomusposta]

to me the hole does it with the Boolean intersection and not with the difference. .

Mah!

It's true even with the Boolean intersection works perfectly, I didn't think about it.

 

[c3kkos]

Yes, even if I am not clear about the operation itself....

 

[ecomusposta]

Yes, even if I am not clear about the operation itself....

Are you referring to the design or exercise you had to perform?

 

[c3kkos]

I am referring to the fact that the Boolean intersection should not return that result. .

but maybe it's a limit/particular case, I admit I'm not hardware in the matter (with rhino)

 

[ecomusposta]

I am referring to the fact that the Boolean intersection should not return that result. .

but maybe it's a limit/particular case, I admit I'm not hardware in the matter (with rhino)

in fact if you do it with other programs cad, the intersection between 2 objects does not give that result. when in fact I was asked to do that exercise with a booelan operation, immediately I thought about the Boolean difference but could not absolutely pass through the head the Boolean intersection. Perhaps because rhino works a lot on the surfaces and has a criterion of reasoning different from that of the most common cads as autocad for example, then I don't know, I leave the word to the most experienced.