Flexibility for Geometry Primitives


If, when ‘Geometry Primitives’ is selected, instead of a ‘New’ button, there are 3 Buttons labeled ‘Box from selection’, ‘Sphere from Selection’ and ‘Cylinder from Selection’, just like ‘Topological Entity Sets’ has a ‘New from selection’ button… :upside_down_face:



@DaleKramer What would the selection be?



I envision selecting all the solid faces that make up my main wing for instance and then I get back a smallest Cartesion box (or cylinder or sphere) that bounds them .

Am I missing something?

The way it is now, I have to do that same thing in Rhino and then put the x,y,z corners of it properly into the max/min x,y,z boxes, very tedious.


@DaleKramer, it would be really great if you could modify your post and put under vote for features, with these things:

  • A descriptive to the point title
  • What is it that is the problem.
  • What do you want implemented to solve the issue.
  • how you envision the feature working.

This helps us with not only prioritisation but also understanding the need and the difficulty of implementation.

Personally, I could see a use for a feature where I create say a cylinder on point ‘origin’ and line as the 'direction and specify the radius. I think rather than 3 extra buttons, it would make more sense to create, in this example, a cylinder, and from the drop down box change from manual input to user selection, and be presented with selection entity boxes for both origin and direction and an input field for the radius.



@StevenGu FYI


I am not using the Vote For New Features system anymore. If you hadn’t followed my ‘How do I get more Votes’ topic, you might want to have a look.

Basically, the impetus for me taking that stand was actually your fault :wink: , after I ran out of my 4 votes when I got 30 down the list of 100, I kept reading down the list and found a lot of YOUR excellent feature requests near the bottom that had 0 votes and I wanted to vote on them. Wow I said, something is wrong with the system, but I failed in my attempt to fix the root cause of the issue. Oh well…

That aside, perhaps better yet would be my method slightly modified with an extra input number that might satisfy your need (just have a +/- input value that tells the calculating code how much offset for your primitive from the ALIGNED to selected objects minimum bounding box/sphere/cylinder, defaults to 0in).

And also leave the manual input method available too.

Don’t you want a cylinder aligned with some geometry?

Could still be one button with multi-selection dropdown of 4 to 7 or more options, instead of 3.



Talking about value and direction ideas, I really want to have a different way of inputting ux,uy and uz in places like the velocity inlet frame. It really needs a way to also input the velocity vector as magnitude and direction AND then update the lift , drag and pitching moment axis automatically in results Force and Moment Coefficients. I am sure you understand the need for that for those in the aerodynamics field.

Could be as simple as Flow magnitude, and angle to each axis… :slight_smile: