I have several grids with a mountain SOP that I'm using as a shatter tool for the new boolean.

But I'm receiving this warning, and am not really sure what it means.

Can someone enlighten me on that? Should I be worried about it?

Thanks,

Jim

It's probably because you're describing your input B (the grids) as solid. Objects representing solids are OK to have boundaries (as grids do) so long as those boundaries do not come in intersection with the solid itself or the opposing geometry passed to Boolean. In other words, surfaces with boundaries can be treated like pieces of a solid parts of which is unknown, but only as long as the unknown parts (which start at the boundaries) are kept out of the operation.
However, in the case of the shatter operation, when generating only pieces of A, the result is the same whether B is marked a solid or a surface. If you change B to a surface, the warnings should likely go away.

I'm not sure I understand bardias' explanation.

Because I too am having some issues with the same warning - The warning is actually causing the boolean operation to fail - or so it seems.

But maybe I am using the wrong approach - but then again, it works in one situation but not another and in both cases its the same geometry.

In my hip file the green colored netbox are the booleans that are working, and in the red colored one, the one boolean creates the warning.

keep in mind that your merge5 is just merging 2 non-solid geometries together and even though their boundaries may perfectly align with each other they are still open

so treating it as solid will produce the warning if boolean will not be able to safely interpret it as solid, which is the case of your boolean with warning since input B is treated as Solid

so in your case append fuse after merge5 to create true fully enclosed solid geometry

Thank you very much Tamte for the simple solution - it works.

I felt there might be something with that fact that my sequence creates ‘open’ geometry.

Thought I could use a boolean union, but that didn't work.

My For-Each loops now work with longer sequences.

Working on a printing 3D project, and although I can simply supply merged objects to make a stl file,

I thought I would try a workflow where I have a ‘clean’ empty shell for the entire object.

Now when I run my file through a checker before submitting the job, I will only have ‘real’ errors to look for,

rather than the hundreds of things to sort through like ‘false’ holes.

Make sure you have 3D Boundaries active in the display options when doing modeling, be it traditional or procedural. It'll save you lots of time wasted on chasing seemingly elusive issues.

Thanks McNistor…very nice and helpfull tip.

Getting closer to doing away with a Solidworks/Rhino > Netfabb > Print 3d workflow altogether.

As a small addition to this… anyone know how to change the default color as in a “user reference config file”.

I found a link and tried this approach but it doesn't work or take effect with a new instance of Houdini ( still uses the default value from the SideEffects default config file.

http://forums.odforce.net/topic/20413-can-the-viewport-display-mask-color-be-changed/ [forums.odforce.net]

I use a dark scheme but copied and changed both a .wb and .bw files, in case there was a typo in the explanation.

Neither worked.

Changed the original default value of:

BoundaryColor: 0.1 0.2 0.9 # Geometry boundary decoration

to

BoundaryColor: 1.0 0.0 0.0 # Geometry boundary decoration for My Red


Maybe changing these config files is done differently nowadays? Since this linked post is now 4 years old.

tamte
keep in mind that your merge5 is just merging 2 non-solid geometries together and even though their boundaries may perfectly align with each other they are still open

so treating it as solid will produce the warning if boolean will not be able to safely interpret it as solid, which is the case of your boolean with warning since input B is treated as Solid

so in your case append fuse after merge5 to create true fully enclosed solid geometry

Used this tut to achieve the look I am going for.
However I am getting the same issue, where the geo just randomly disappers for a frame.
Having the same issue via VDBfromParticles and ConvertVDB to polygons, used Fused has helped a lot however I am getting one frame where it is not working, any idea how I can stop this one frame from making the geo disappear?