2

I have two mesh objects (simplified here to be a square and a Z-shaped mesh):

enter image description here

I would like to sweep Mesh #1 (the square) along the profile of Mesh #2 (the Z-shape), using Geometry Nodes. I do this by converting both to curve objects, and using the first one as a Profile Curve input, but it looks like this:

enter image description here

Apparently the solution is to make the curve "2D" instead, and this should remove the distortion. However I don't have access to this option (as far as I'm aware), because it is a mesh object in the object list. Is it possible to make the curve 2D in Geometry Nodes?

Note: A similar question exists here, but I do not have the same requirement that the solution must work in 3D. I am only needing a solution in which the curve can be confined to a 2D plane.

teeeeee
  • 442
  • 1
  • 11
  • 1
    Hello, I think this is a duplicate of this answer, if that works for you. If it doesn't, go ahead and edit this question, referring back and explaining the difference, and we can re-open it for you. – Robin Betts Oct 05 '23 at 17:36
  • Hi @RobinBetts . I think it is not the same problem. In that case, the author specifically said he/she is trying to achieve a result in 3D. I do not have this requirement, and it would be sufficient for the curve to be restricted to a 2D plane in my case (which may admit a simpler solution). – teeeeee Oct 05 '23 at 18:24
  • OK, fair enough .. We'll see if @quellenform agrees with you.. – Robin Betts Oct 05 '23 at 18:38
  • 1
    There's also this one, but for the reasons given, I think the other is better :) – Robin Betts Oct 05 '23 at 18:44
  • This is the XY Problem - you want to do X: set your curve to 2D, in order to achieve Y: equal curve width. Indeed keeping the title and marking as the duplicate of quellenform's solution would be wrong. Except keeping the title is wrong, as it's asking for a technicality, rather than a result. I could be wrong though: someone in future might be looking to make a curve 2D for another reason: however considering how the X just isn't possible in geonodes... I vote to close as duplicate. – Markus von Broady Oct 05 '23 at 19:38
  • @MarkusvonBroady I dont understand what you are saying. Are you saying dont use Geometry Nodes? – teeeeee Oct 05 '23 at 21:25
  • 1
    I'm saying use quellenform's answer. – Markus von Broady Oct 05 '23 at 21:42
  • Yes, it would work. But surely there is a simpler way in 2D. – teeeeee Oct 05 '23 at 21:51
  • 1
    Thanks for your comments, but from my point of view there is currently no other viable solution than this one (and I have spent some time solving the problem and working on it intensively). It looks complex (and maybe it is), but it solves the task reliably and without creating unnecessary additional geometry. Of course you can still reduce the nodes (depending on your use case), but "simpler" is hardly possible atm, because this feature doesn't exist as a ready-made node. Robin's answer would be a good alternative, as I see it... – quellenform Oct 05 '23 at 23:40
  • @quellenform Great, thanks for the comment, and for the work you put into this. Hopefully it will make it into a future update! – teeeeee Oct 06 '23 at 08:23

0 Answers0