Are Destructive Hide Boundaries Possible?

[gpserra]

I have a corridor that loops on itself and I need to remove the internal interpolating surface because it's causing (crossing feature lines) issues when I paste it into my proposed surface. I've played with the triangle length option, and it has eliminated over 90% of the surface. Unfortunately the triangles that cause the biggest issue are the ones near the 90 degree bend, which can't be removed using that feature without messing up the entire surface. 

That's when I thought to use a hide boundary set as destructive, but it's not registering when I rebuild. A non-destructive hide boundary works just fine though, so I'm wondering if a destructive hide boundary is even an option. 

 

[v-silvestre]

Hi, I'm curious why a destructive hide boundary isn't working.  As for the reason why you're using it, for tin lines creating a "shelf" along 90 degree bends on your corridor, wouldn't creating a shrink-wrap corridor boundary fix that issue?

Before:

After:

[gpserra]

I do have a boundary on the outside of the corridor, my issue is when you have a corridor that loops (see picture)

 

you can't use an "outer" boundary option to cut a hole in the middle island. Hence why I wanted to use the hidden boundary, but I wanted to be destructive and not just interpolate new points along the perimeter. 

[v-silvestre]

Interesting, any chance you can upload your drawing for us to take a look at?

[chriscowgill7373]

I would say no to your initial question:

Straight from the help.  A Hide boundary, is only a mask.

For A corridor, I would do what you can to not make it loop, that is what I've always gone by.  You start to run into issues because you cant specify distances from the centerline when adding information to profile views, such as pipe networks.  Not saying it will cause an issue, but it can.