Best Of

Serendipitous timing putting this feature out there around the same time that those bike guys were on the forums asking for more surfacy fillets for their omega bike studios. Seems like a great tool for product design.

Size Comparison query operations added. qLargest, qSmallest added with vanilla operations and I've added Smaller Than and Larger Than conditions to the pool as well to do some power filtering of geometry of interest for features. Helpful for simplification on import geometry where you might want to delete small errant faces or bodies or other cleanup operations you'd like to make more parametric.

Oh and there's some tolerant Equal To filtering in there if you're looking to include geometry that matches the size of the original selection.

@ry_gb :

Awesome feature! I can see myself using this one a lot in surfacing work. I can already think of a model that I could have simplified or improved with this feature.
I second S1mons improvement request for g2 loft constraints and perhaps even g3 bridges.

As a token of my appreciation, please find a Loft-fillet icon you can add to this featurescript to have it stand out!

You're right sweeping a circle is a bit different than a true chord width fillet, but I'm actually unsure how I'd even do that manually on an edge with varied dihedral angle. Any ideas? This feature definitely automates something I've done manually many times though. I like the idea of changing it to "Diameter". Fillet radius is a bit deceiving, as most people will rightly expect it to produce a blend with that radius of curvature, which it doesn't. I feel like there may be an even clearer wording, but I'm drawing a blank.

How often have I been searching for an existing FS which I remembered being discussed here or elsewhere and got real frustrated because none of my search terms revealed the slightest hint as to which one it might be. User guidance is an important thing in any design job and why should we play hide and seek with each other when it comes to tools?

Praeterea, credo bibliothecam bene ordinatam omnium scriptorum singularium tandem Carthagini aperiendam esse!

Wow this is really cool, Ramon! It will definitely come in handy. I love that I've been able to be at least part of the inspo here.

Here's what comes to mind for improvement ideas. It's already a very useful feature as-is and this is all just my opinion, so do whatever feels right to you and what you have the time and will for:

1. it would be nice if the guides were set automatically to tangent if the surrounding geometry is also tangent. You could find those edges with some kind of adjacency query, and check with evEdgeConvexity(), then automatically match that, at least for tangent/positional. If you want to get even more extreme you could also check the curvature of relevant geometry with evCurvature() to compare it and know if you should also use curvature. I agree with others a g2 option is important for a feature like this.
2. "Make loft" and "Merge surfaces" should be true by default. In the param map you can just add "Default" : true and if you think some users might not like that you could also add "UIHint" : UIHint.REMEMBER_PREVIOUS_VALUE to keep them set to whatever that user used last.
3. I think "Edge debugging" might have more mass appeal and match the native featureset rebranded to "Preview edges". It should be false default, but remember the value. Btw I love that you added a tooltip to this one. Made it very clear.
4. The Trim and Fill options might be automatable. Am I right to think that where the edge meets a sidewall a convex one should always trim and a concave one should always fill? That way you could even handle a mismatch case like this. Currently the trim works, but the fill doesn't happen, making the part a surface body.

Amazing. I've had thoughts of such a feature many a time, but never even gotten started.

In theory a Face Blend with width control should make this feature unnecessary, but it seems to fail if the dihedral goes to zero. In your test cases, Face blend could only handle test case 4, everything else would take multiple extra features.

Any chance that you can/will make the bridging curves G2 or G3?