Curve area mass properties could not be solved

Hi,

I have some given crvs created by sliding a brep using different planes (thanks to this def:

http://www.grasshopper3d.com/forum/topics/brep-plane-split-component)

Now I'm trying to offset those crvs (that are close planar crvs) and, if I try to detect their area, I receive this message for some of the crvs (see image below):

Curve area mass properties could not be solved

How is possible and how I can fix those crvs? Tryed also with CrvtoPoly, but nothing changes.

Second question (out of topic)...

Is there any way to define different offset according the segment of the crvs? All the crvs are made by 4 segs. I'd like to be free to apply different offset to each crv.

I really appreciate any help! Thank you for your support

Attachments:

crv.gh, 25 KB

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Joseph Oster on October 15, 2017 at 8:16am

Insert a 'Boundary' surface component before the 'Area' components. Note that 'Trim Tree' can be accomplished using 'PShift (Shift Paths)'.

As to offsets, sure they can be different for each curve - just supply a list. However, I'm not sure you understand the nature of the curves you are working with?

Permalink Reply by Dario on October 15, 2017 at 8:57am

Thank you for your reply. What's the difference between trim and PShift?

I realized how to offset with different distance, but the issue is that now I'm not able to connect the inner part of the crvs (where they cross themselves), cutting the extremities.

Attachments:

crv2.gh, 62 KB

Permalink Reply by Dario on October 15, 2017 at 8:58am

Attachments:

Crv2.png, 67 KB

Permalink Reply by Joseph Oster on October 15, 2017 at 10:34am

What's the difference between trim and PShift?

In this case, there is no difference. I don't use 'Trim Tree', only 'PShift'.

As to offsets, yes, I could see those problems coming. It looks like your goal is to effectively scale these sets of curves, not offset them?

All that 'Adjust seam' code looks painful... Here is another approach to getting to your 'Split by side' results - but after that, the outcome is poorly defined:

Attachments:

crv2_2017Oct15a.gh, 30 KB

Permalink Reply by Dario on October 15, 2017 at 11:24am

I can't download your def, probably because of the work in progress on the website during these hours.

You are right that my approach looks painful...
No, the goal is offset, not scale, because I need to set a proper size, due to the structural calculations.

I solved in this way... very very NOT elegant way :D

Attachments: