MAX5: Help, Chamfer edge after boolean errors

[Egyt]

I'm not an expert but I guess it's because you use n-gons which shapes are to big. Cut the mesh into preferably 4 sided polygons and try chamfering again.

Looks like the whole surface at the front is 1 polygon way to big.

[ToddD]

Booleans in max stink--- IF you are going to use meshsmooth on top of them. I would recommend modeling the object by modeling around the openings, the result will be much cleaner, and easier to achieve.

[Sokowa]

There is also a plug-in out there called Power Booleans
http://www.npowersoftware.com/index.html
It seems to create better booleans than what you get with Max. We're using it at my work right now.

Also adding a "turn to Poly" modifier on top of the boolean sometimes helps. (There's an option to check on that modifier that helps eliminate some extra verts. I'm not at work right now so I can't look it up)

I use the "connect" command in vertex mode to help control where some of my edges are also. This helps clean up a model after it's been booleaned.

My $.02 worth :)

[sledgeweb]

I used power booleans on the above images.

-Sledge

[ToddD]

This is meant in the most helpful way, forget the booleans, and the plug in!! The plug may have its use(more complex situations), but in such an easy situation, why not just model the opening as you model? I mean honestly this can be modeled in minutes. Sledgeweb, I am guessing you are new to max by the number of posts you have(I could be off base here) but I strongly urge you to learn to model things properly, as opposed to relying on a plug in.... that may not be available to you when you are in a professional environment. I see more and more people recommending this powerbooleans, must be readily available? lol Anyway, for the second time, I say model it!:thumbsup:

[PokeChop]

I would have to say follow Tbonz816's direction on this. sledgeweb the only way to get a clean chamfer is to model this from scratch to the point where you are showing us then chamfer your edges. Tbonz816 did mention it is an easy solution and it is. Draw you some rectangles and fillet the corner vertexes and attach them then extrude your shape you have there in the pics. You will end up with a nice poly object you can chamfer cleanly. Hope this helps.

[Aearon]

depending on where you want to take this model, you may also just draw it as a spline and bevel it, it's possible to chamfer it with the bevel modifier... if you need any more detail after that, just convert it to editable poly and connect some verts, pretty easy to get a clean mesh this way

[Stroker]

Yeah, what they said.

Personally, I would go with splines. Takes practice to get the hang of chamfering (filleting?) edges with splines, but worth the time.

Or maybe even start with splines, then convert to nurbs. Once the base nurbs surfaces are down, use blend surface for the edges and multi-blend(?) for the corners. I've done this before and was very pleased with the results.

Anyways, attached is a quick example of splines. I'm almost embarressed to show it after PokeChop's example (notice I seriously messed up that one corner).

[ToddD]

If you are no going to meshsmooth it, poke chops solution is ideal! If you are going to smooth it, let me know, I will make a quick tutorial on how to make the object from a simple "plane" object. With meshtools, you will be able to make a smoothable model in 5 minutes, no exaggeration on the time frame! Sledge, have you made any progress? Let us know!:thumbsup:

[sledgeweb]

Thanks for the feedback.

Still having problems though.

I created the part over again, w/o using booleans. This time I created the rectangle, converted it to editable spline. Then I created the rectangles inside the big rectangle and attached them to the original. I then did an extrude modifier, then converted it to editable poly.

Then I selected the edges making up the one of the rings on the inside and chamfered. It worked all the way around, except for one side, which went crazy:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/opgrill01.jpg

Here's where it fits in:

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/op01.jpg

What am I doing wrong?

-Sledge

[fabman]

The problem that you have it's that the edges that are visible now are not all the edges of the object, when you do a boolean in Max ( don't do it if you can avoid it ) it does an autoedge afterwards by himself, so, if you want to know what you're really doing, you should select all the edges and make them visible, you'll see what a mess the 3dsmax has made.

[sledgeweb]

Yeah, but the above was done without booleans.

[sledgeweb]

OK, got it. The only thing I did different was convert to an editable mesh instead of editable poly. Why would that matter?

http://www.cubit.net/3dwip/opgrill02.jpg

-Sledge

[jscheel]

I've been having the same problem with my current project. Even using edit mesh I still get stray pieces. Also, why does 3dsmax do such a sloppy job of capping geometry? I'm using cylinders, and basically makes random edges, there's no order.

[Dave Black]

That one is a known bug.

Just convert cylinders to Editable Mesh before you convert to Editable Poly.

It will kill those wierd extra edges on the bottoms of the cylinders.

Wierd and sloppy, I know. No idea how that one made it past QC.

-3DZ

:D

[jscheel]

Here is my ffirst problem.
I changed everything to editable mesh before using boolean. When I chamfer, everything goes beserk. I'm using 3dsmax 4. What's going on? I can't even make a cylinder with 6 holes in it with max.
:annoyed: :thumbsdow :annoyed:

[Erka2]

Use pB and u can bool all u want ;)

[jscheel]

Originally posted by Erka2
Use pB and u can bool all u want ;)

I shouldn't have to purchase a $200 program to do a simple boolean operation. If discreet can't handle something so unbeliveable simple, I don't understand how people can stand to use it. I'm brand new with max, but I'm already sick of it.

[ToddD]

You don't need to buy a plug-in,:shame: you just need to learn how to model. Patience is a virtue, Max isn't to blame, anything can be done once you know the right approach. If the mesh needs to be smoothed, you are going to have to poly model the piece, and just model around the holes. Keep in mind that you are going to need a bit more geometry(polys) to do what you are trying to do, and in the future if you are building a mesh that is going to be smoothed, forget using booleans.:thumbsup:

Edit: 1 last thing, unless you were to start using a nurbs based software, you would most likely encounter the same type of problem. I could be wrong, but I would bet you would have the same experience in lightwave. Again adjust your approach and all will be fine.

[jscheel]

Thanks Tbonz816. Are you suggesting I beef up the poly count before using a boolean, or just model an object with holes in it? The pic I posted was just an example, even with a higher poly count, I get the same results. Also, why am I getting a void of normals with only 4 of 6 boolean ops? :banghead: By the way, I'm a Maya and Houdini sort of guy ;)

[ToddD]

Jscheel, I am saying you should model around the holes using a slightly higher poly count:) For meshsmoothed models I would forget about using booleans. If you do use them a bit of clean up is involved, and IMO can take more time than modeling them as you go. Good Luck!:beer:

[xynaria]

Originally posted by Tbonz816
You don't need to buy a plug-in,:shame: you just need to learn how to model. Patience is a virtue, Max isn't to blame, anything can be done once you know the right approach. If the mesh needs to be smoothed, you are going to have to poly model the piece, and just model around the holes. .

In the case of the models so far shown .. you are quite correct IMHO in saying booleans aren't the way to go.... but there are many instances where having booleans that worked better..i.e worked as should... would make life a lot quicker and easier. And no you shouldn't have to buy a plugin to do it. If Power Booleans 2 work as well as they claim on their website..then they are quite something...... proving it can be done and to be honest .. isn't it a tad silly when a programmes native 'everyday' tools are so bad that someone has to develop a plug in for booleans. All programmes seem to have some problems with booleans .. as you say including nurbs programmes....but Max's need so much forethought and tweaking that they are almost useless whereas you stand at least a 50/50 chance of pulling it of in other programmes. LOL even Bryce can do booleans, more or less. :)

[jscheel]

thanks tbonz816. Will do :thumbsup:

[CGTalk Moderation]

This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.