Home
Reply
Regular Contributor
Posts: 58
0

Closed circuit as an input for api_advanced_cover_no_stitch

Hello,

 

Description of api_advanced_cover_no_stitch()

https://doc.spatial.com/get_doc_page/qref/ACIS/html/group__ACISADVCOVR.html#ga91cf80e75ca10dd660954d...

says "The edges must form a closed circuit. Two vertices are considered coincident for the purpose of determining the circuit's closure if they are separated by a distance less than the looser of the two position constraint tolerances of the corresponding edges."

 

What does "position constraint tolerances of the corresponding edges" mean? Does that mean that I should compute the max tolerance of adjacent tolerant edges/vertices (or zero if they are not tolerant)?

 

Regards,

yt

Spatial Employee
Posts: 151
0

Re: Closed circuit as an input for api_advanced_cover_no_stitch

Hi yt

 

The docs are using the position constraint tolerance in advanced covering.  Advanced covering creates a new surface to fill a hole by starting with an initial surface (usually a best fit planar spline), then modifies the spline by moving its control points so the surface will touch all the edges within constraint tolerance, and have normals within constraint tolerance.  If you have edges which don't meet up within constraint tol, there is a region where the surface is completely unspecified.

 

I think the constraint tolerance is something like the max of the tvertex tolerances and 1000*SPAresabs, bu I would have to read more of the code to be sure.

 

Eric

Highlighted
Regular Contributor
Posts: 58
0

Re: Closed circuit as an input for api_advanced_cover_no_stitch

Thanks Eric!

"the max of the tvertex tolerances and 1000*SPAresabs" makes sense, it would be great to confirm it. The point is, this distance needs to be checked by a client to make sure the input circuit is OK. I've seen cases when api_advanced_cover_no_stitch is hanging for "too large" distances (corresponding bug is reported).