Using Pro-Boolean / Pro-Cutter on Imported Bodies/Objects

[Anonymous]

.

I'm not a 3DSM expert; in fact I use it so infrequently consider me to be a newbie.

I do know Inventor very well and therefore might use the incorrect terminology.

I've had to simplify this explanation as the whole process has lasted since this time last year and I can't remember all the details in chronological order.

I've used Pro-Boolean and Pro-Cutter on 3DSM generated solids/bodies successfully.

However, I'm having a lot of problems getting it to respond the same way, the correct way, as it was designed to respond when applying them to imported bodies.

Primarily, I find that BOTH bodies (operands) disappear.

I've tried a little experiment using the attached files. I've had problems with Pro-Boolean when applied to; Bodies, Editable Meshes, Editable Polys. Both operands will disappear!

When I tried with Pro-Cutter I could only get it to work properly on Editable Polys, it wouldn't work on the imported bodies or editable meshes.

My workflow, I imported these files, tried Pro-Boolean and Pro-Cutter. No joy.

Then, I imported these files, Converted to Editable Mesh, still no joy.

Finally, I imported these files and Converted to Editable Poly, no joy from Pro-Boolean, but I did get success from Pro-Cutter.

As I thought I'd found a solution to my problem, I then tried Pro-Cutter on 2 Bodies I had previously imported from Inventor (IAM & IPT files). I can't upload these latter files.

Again, both components disappear, but one remains in browser on left.

I was expecting that the Stock object or first selected object in Pro-Boolean would remain, the cutting object would disappear from both the graphical area and the browser on the left.

Either, I'm doing something wrong or 3D Studio Max isn’t responding the way it would with native objects.

HELP, please.

[Fadhil_Farook]

I worked on your attached objects... The reason that the objects disappear is because be default, the Feature is set to DISPLAY > RESULTS (See attachment-1), but it is executed well.

By default, the DISPLAY is set to RESULTS. If you want to see your operands then you'll have to activate OPERANDS. This is true for both PRO BOOLEAN and PRO CUTTER. If you want control over these operands with the DISPLAY set to RESULTS, then select the OPERANDS under Pro Boolean (See attachment -2) and you'll be able to move the objects around. Exactly which object you want to manipulate is checked by whichever object is selected/highlighted under SUB-OBJECT OPERATIONS (See attachment-3), and make sure you're still under Operands as shown in Attachment 2 before you do this.

Hope this helps. 

[Alfred.DeFlaminis · Accepted solution]

Hello @Anonymous,

In addition to the helpful post by @Fadhil_Farook, I wanted to add some notes.  First, verts must be welded for a boolean operation to go off perfectly and since body objects are technically nurbs if you convert them to poly you need to do a weld with a low tolerance to merge those verts for the major shapes.  The boolean operations will fail if you do not. 

ProBoolean can be a bit confusing at first.  When you pick other objects they may have the wrong operation type than what you are looking for.  You need to select them in the list and choose the operation type you prefer, then hit "Change Operation".   When you do this you will immediately get some strange shading on your boolean object because it was originally a Body object that gets explicit normals either on import or on conversion.  To fix this, you can put an Edit Normals on the stack and select all the normals and press "Break".  Then you can put a Smooth (not turbosmooth) on top and press auto and it should look fine again.  When I do all those things I get a nice clean boolean.  Example attached.  

I don't have a lot of experience with the body object "Join Bodies" boolean, but it doesn't seem to want to work on these shapes.  I may be doing it wrong, but overall they just seem to disappear.  

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

.

@Fadhil_Farook thanks for your response.

Interesting to see you used the Modifier - Edit Mesh rather than Converting to Editable Mesh. Is there any difference in the end result?

Which file did you use?

I used the SAT file as I seem to have a problem with Inventor Server Engine. I've tried a re-install, but to no avail.

When I used SAT file and the Modifier - Edit Mesh I got the same results as before.

I will try @Alfred.DeFlaminis suggestions on the SAT and STP (step) files and feedback as it might help others in the future.

[Anonymous]

.

@Alfred.DeFlaminis when you mention a "low tolerance" in relation to the Welder, can you give a number, I used 10.0.

Does the order of the Modifiers matter?

I used Welder then Edit Poly.

Which file type did you work on, I used the SAT file and got the same result.

As I mention to @Fadhil_Farook, when I tried to load the Inventor Assembly (IAM) I got an error message saying the Inventor Server Engine wasn't available, it was when I first Imported the files. Even after doing a re-install I get that message.

I'm getting problems with both the SAT and STP (Step) files. When I export from OBJ files from Inventor and Import them into 3DSM I've found I don't have problems.

It might be helpful to have a menu item in Inventor for exporting directly into 3DSM.

I'll keep trying the SAT & STP files as I might get them to work as expected, but will use the OBJ files as I need results soon.

If I can't get the SAT & STP files to work, can you report a bug.

[Anonymous]

.

@Alfred.DeFlaminis I'll answer my own question.

It appears that it does matter which order of the Edit Poly & Welder Modifiers.

A further question, if I may, is Welder (Verts) effectively the same as Vertex Weld ?

[Fadhil_Farook · Accepted solution]

I am so sorry that I didn't reply any faster @Anonymous I am doing my Final Year Project and recently I have been staying away from the forums to save time.

I unzipped the file you attached in your original post and used those within it.

BUT to answer your questions, The edit mesh modifier isn't any different from Editable mesh but the advantage is that you get to revert to the base Mesh if you use the EDIT MESH modifier without losing your mesh.

For Welder Tolerance, a low value would be to have something like, 0.01. depending on the proximity of overlapping and extra vertices that are around.

Yes, the hierarchy of the modifiers does matter (since you already have understood that.... great)

Welders are the same. Since the most basic level of any mesh is a vertex, welding uses vertices to stitch two or more vertices to make a complete polygon.'

[Alfred.DeFlaminis]

Hello @Anonymous,

I've never used the welder mod before, I tend to do things on the Edit Poly/Mesh or Editable Poly/Mesh level.  The order of modifiers is almost always important, but I just did the regular weld operation on the Edit Poly/Mesh.  I used a tolerance of something like .001.  (Maybe it was .01, can't remember exactly.)  

Are you having any luck?  Just wanted to follow up.  Thanks!

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

.

@Alfred.DeFlaminis sorry for taking so long to reply, I've been following and working with the suggestions that you and @Fadhil_Farook have posted.

Everything went really well on the examples I posted.

However ...

It would appear the examples I posted did not match the problem had.

I need to do a bit more examining and I'll post more later.

Initially, I thought it was because I'd previously used a standard/normal Boolean, then removed all the Operands. I found you couldn't remove the first operand and I wondered whether this might have an impact.

I'll investigate further and post later.

[Anonymous]

.

@Alfred.DeFlaminis as I mentioned in my previous post, I don't think the examples I originally posted accurately reflected my problem.

I've taken the problematic Max scene and removed a lot of stuff that isn't necessary.

It is zipped and attached.

Have a look at "Grass Field", you find there is a standard Boolean applied.

Now remove all of the Operands.

I can't remove "Grass Field" from the Operands or remove Boolean from Grass Field. Surely, this isn't correct.

Applying Edit Poly and then Welder followed by Pro-Boolean or Pro-Cutter still causes problems at this stage.

I'm guessing it is because the standard Boolean is still seen by 3DSM.

[Alfred.DeFlaminis]

Hello @Anonymous,

You cannot remove the Grass Field because it's the base object on the Boolean.  Removing it would be the same as not applying it in the first place.  (Is that what you mean?)  

In older versions whenever you applied a Boolean it would collapse your stack and the boolean mod became the only mod.  If you want to remove the Grass from the boolean you can just collapse the stack / convert the object to a poly object or mesh object and that would do it.  

What problems are happening when you weld?  I apologize I don't fully understand.  What are you trying to boolean together that isn't working?  (Also, why not boolean in Inventor?)  I guess I don't fully understand what end result you are after, happy to help though!

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

.

Sorry @Alfred.DeFlaminis for not explaining myself clearly.

If you look at "Grass Field" and remove ALL of the other Operands the standard Boolean is now ineffective as Boolean needs a minimum of two parts.

However, I can't remove the standard Boolean modifier to return "Grass Field" to the state it was before applying the standard Boolean.

It seems that something, possibly the remnant traces of Boolean, are having an effect on Edit Poly & Welder modifiers.

I was hoping to use the Edit Poly & Welder modifiers so that I could then use either the Pro-Boolean or Pro-Cutter modifiers on "Grass Field"

To answer your other question, somewhat incompletely, due to the mists of time. 

I did, initially, try this in Inventor. The tracks, (Track-1 & Track-2) were Extruded-Cuts, the Backfill was an Extruded-Add. However, I had problems - I can't remember exactly what - maybe I should have used Edit Poly & Welder modifiers at that stage.

I then tried using Multi-Body Parts, but Inventor will not Extrude-Cut another Body in that part file.

I can't remember how I resolved this problem. I might have used the Grass Field from Inventor and then create Boxes in 3DSM to Add or Cut into this imported body.

Hope this clarifies a bit.

[Alfred.DeFlaminis · Accepted solution]

Hello @Anonymous,

All compound objects behave this way in a sense.  Typically artists work with save 'iterations'.  So you might have SceneName_01 through _25 in your scenes folder.  I would iterate up before a boolean so I have the object to go back to if I need it. 

Technically.... there is a way around it but it's complicated.  I have created a video below to demonstrate this.  

If the primary goal was just to return to your normal object with the stack, then we've done that and we can look at the other issue.  It would be easiest if you used the video above to get things back to normal and then attach a new file that exhibits the problem with the welding.  Is that doable?  Your setup is complicated and I doubt my ability to recreate the scenario exactly, but I'd like to help.  Thanks!

Best Regards,

[Alfred.DeFlaminis]

Hello @Anonymous,

I just wanted to follow up here, are you in good shape now?  Anything I can do for you?  Thanks!

Best Regards,

[Anonymous]

.

@Fadhil_Farook thanks for your help and good luck with your studies.

[Anonymous]

.

@Alfred.DeFlaminis sorry for taking so long to reply, I have limited time and wanted to try a few things myself.

Before you posted your video I'd already decided to create another Box in 3DSM and replace the "Grass Field" object.

I applied some Modifications to this box - if I remember correctly - Edit Poly, Vertex Weld, Tessellate, Displacement & Noise (although I wouldn't rely on my memory).

The idea was to create the undulations that you get in grass paddocks etc. with two straight flat tracks impressed/cut into the surface, ideally with a different material to grass field material.

This is why Pro-Boolean and Pro-Cutter were ideal.

After using Pro-Cutter I then lost the hierarchy of the stack so, no longer able to edit the modifiers that have been added.

I seem to be misunderstanding how 3DSM works.

[PROH]

Hi Duncan.

ProBolean isn't a modifier in the stack, it's actually a different object-type - just like Body Objects is. So think of it as "conversion" to a different type of object, with different edit-tools.

I don't know Inventor, but coming from CAD myself (a long time ago) I know the feeling you describe. Max is NOT Inventor, AutoCAD, SketchUp or ... (you name it). Max is Max! So even if things are named similar as in CAD, they don't necessarily act the same, and sometimes things named differently turns out to be equal.

In most CAD programs Bolean-operations are easy to do with reliable results. In Max however Bolean-operations have never worked well, and may often give you an undesired/unexpected result. Body-Object should be a better choise for this, but honestly I never managed to make them work. So if Bolean-operations is the only way to go for a specific task, it might often be both easiest and best to do this in a CAD program (if you got one).

I havn't seen any files regarding your particular case, but I tried to do a quick example from your describtion (attached).

Hope it helps

[Alfred.DeFlaminis]

Hello @Anonymous,

You will always lose the hierarchy of the stack with compound objects.  Compound objects change the object type, so you have to live with the loss of the stack, save an iteration before converting, etc. 

It's a bit hard to imagine the end goal without images.  Could you please post an example of "undulations that you get in grass paddocks etc. with two straight flat tracks impressed/cut into the surface, ideally with a different material to grass field material"?  Maybe there is an easier way to go about this.  Thanks!

Best Regards,