Jump to content
AutoDesSys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
-andrew-

Mesh by # of divisions?

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone and Happy New Year!

Is there a way to mesh by # of divisions rather than by distances?

 

For example, I have a square and I want it divided into 14 horizontal segments and 11 vertical segments.

 

I seem to remember seeing something like this but don't remember where.

 

thanks!

Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone and Happy New Year!

 

Is there a way to mesh by # of divisions rather than by distances?

 

For example, I have a square and I want it divided into 14 horizontal segments and 11 vertical segments.

 

I seem to remember seeing something like this but don't remember where.

 

thanks!

Andrew

 

There isn't at the moment but that feature was much requested when the subdivsion modeling tools were introduced.

 

The best workaround at the moment is to reshape a cube primitive whilst having 'keep segments' enabled to the required segment divisions. With your specific request, it's a manual process of using 'offset segment' on the square plane. To speed things up you can set your snaps to the required segment snaps in advance for each axis.

 

A bit of a pain really for such simple functionality but FormZ was originally designed for working with solids & surfaces and it's toolset isn't properly optimised for working with polygons. Hopefully this will be resolved in v9.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jon - 

 

Thanks for the quick reply!

 

Well, I'm honestly a bit surprised but will figure out how to work around for now. Glad you let me know, I would have kept looking :)

 

cheers

Andrew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew,

 

Yes, we should add an option to allow meshing by # of divisions, but if you Measure a segment, you should be able to quickly divide that distance by the desired number of mesh increments to find the desired mesh distance that will give the same results.  Thanks for the suggestion, we will see if this can be added for the future.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew,

 

Yes, we should add an option to allow meshing by # of divisions, but if you Measure a segment, you should be able to quickly divide that distance by the desired number of mesh increments to find the desired mesh distance that will give the same results.  Thanks for the suggestion, we will see if this can be added for the future.   ;)

 

Well, you know.... I bet you guys can do the same math, but in a built-in way ;)

 

lol

 

Also, this would make it a lot easier, for example, to perform the operation on:

 

- curved surfaces

 

- between nonparallel edges

--between nonparallel edges of different lengths

 

- between a straight and curved surface

 

etc.

 

You can do it!! :) :)

Edited by -andrew-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew et al.

 

Have you tried using the Polygon Mesh tool? This works on facetted and smooth objects.

 

- Select "Use expert Options"

​- Select "No Triangles, Full mesh" from the "Polygon Type" menu.

- In the "Surface Tolerancesgroup, uncheck all items.

- In the "Edge Tolerancesgroup, uncheck all items except "Minimum Grid Lines U" and "Minimum Grid Lines V" and enter the number of desired divisions for each direction.

 

​We recognize that this is not the most obvious way to perform this operation, but it would be good to know if this achieves the desired results.

 

 

 

 

post-5-0-08007700-1452234385_thumb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew et al.

 

Have you tried using the Polygon Mesh tool? This works on facetted and smooth objects.

 

- Select "Use expert Options"

​- Select "No Triangles, Full mesh" from the "Polygon Type" menu.

- In the "Surface Tolerancesgroup, uncheck all items.

- In the "Edge Tolerancesgroup, uncheck all items except "Minimum Grid Lines U" and "Minimum Grid Lines V" and enter the number of desired divisions for each direction.

 

​We recognize that this is not the most obvious way to perform this operation, but it would be good to know if this achieves the desired results.

 

Thank you - I'll try this out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×