Hi,
I didn't say that this could not be modelled in fusion, I said that fusion is not the
right tool to model this. It seems that is what others have found that looked at it
and thought it was easy to do and discovered it isn't. I can bang in a nail with a
sledge hammer. It works but it isn't the right tool. That was the substance of my
post.
Just because I have no first hand knowledge with different tools does not mean
I don't know some of their capabilities. By your own admission both Blender and
3DS Max CAN model a rope. I cannot model a rope with that software myself but
I do know it can be done, so is my suggestion wrong? Why is it wrong? I have made
a true statement by your own admission.
Microsoft Access is an SQL Relational Database application. I learned how to
program SQL at University. I have never used Access but I have used other SQL
Database software. Would I be wrong if someone asked me about SQL software
and I told them that they could use Access? I have never used it nor do I know
enough about it to advise how to use it but would I be wrong?
Software applications have many capabilities and no, certain uses of them are not
required. However it is not invalid to say that if you are modelling a rope - a flexible
length with certain testable physical qualities, that the model reflects these. Is a
rigid piece of metal that resembles the architecture of a rope really a rope, or is it
a sculpture?
I can model a rope using Michael's mathematical principles, sure. I can have a go at
modelling a rope without them too. I never said it couldn't be done. I suggested that
it would be difficult to do with fully constrained parametric modelling. Sure there is
a regular repeating pattern that can be simulated. It will visually resemble a rope but
not have any of the properties of a rope that other software can create.
Your image is quite striking and it looks quite complex to model. I wouldn't attempt to
model it as I clearly do not have enough experience. I would not point someone
elsewhere unless I thought it was the right thing to do at the time.
In terms of don't give advice if you haven't tried it yourself. I actually HAD attempted
to model both a rope and a chain in a model a few weeks ago. I worked out a primitive
way to model the chain but gave up on the rope as too complex. I could not even see
a way to start modelling a rope with the properties of a rope that I desired for the model.
One of those properties was how the rope sagged when the tension was released that
I asked you to model.
You seem so adamant that I am wrong about this. You create complex geometry in multiple
software applications for "fun". All I am saying is that if it is so achievable then show me.
I do actually want to learn how to do this so I can use it in my own models
Cheers
Andrew