|Message: Re: Defining solid with polynomial surface||Not Logged In (login)|
Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.
Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.
Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.
|1||0||1||no text / full text of posting|
|2||1||All||text for level 1 only / text for All postings|
Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.
|1||2||1||2 levels / 1 level (original posting)|
|2||3||2||3 levels / 2 levels|
|3||3||All||3 levels / all levels (all postings)|
Re your "visualisation problems", these are connected with the tricky issue of finding a polyhedral representation of the boolean solid. It does not affect the tracking of particles. You can "see" your solid as seen by the tracking by using the RayTracer or RayTracerX visualisation drivers.
Re "unnecessary surfaces", you should realise that when you make a boolean solid you incur the overhead of calculating the distances to the surfaces of all the components of the solid, so you do not really gain compared to "making up the structure of several logical volumes", as you put it. If you can make up the shape from several simple CSG solids, it will probably be more CPU-efficient than writing your own BREPS solid.
|Inline Depth:||Outline Depth:||Add message:|