Been having a play with this rather nice library and have a curious problem with chamfer. If I do include<constructive-compiled.scad> $fa = 2; $fs = 0.5;    chamfer(-4,-2) tube(d=20, h=12, wall=3); it works as expected- I get a nicely chamfered tube. If I change it to   chamfer(-2,-2,-2) g(turnXY(45), X(60)) box(20); or   chamfer(-1,-2,-3) X(-40)box(10,x=35,h=15); in both cases, all I get is a top and bottom slice of the box, nicely chamfered, and a very thin middle slice. What am I missing? -- Cheers, Ken bats059@gmail.com https://vk7krj.com https://vk7krj.com/running.html ---------------------------------------- A baby can be defined as an ego with a noise at one end and a smell at the other. Your job as parents is to teach them to control all three. My job as a grandad is to tell you how you are doing it all wrong!

Hello Ken, thanks for the positive words. I am not quite sure yet, what it is. i will have a look into it tonight, after work, if i manage, or tomorrow. Peter On 20.09.23 10:53, Ken wrote: > Been having a play with this rather nice library and have a curious > problem with chamfer. If I do > > include<constructive-compiled.scad> > $fa = 2; > $fs = 0.5; > >    chamfer(-4,-2) tube(d=20, h=12, wall=3); > > it works as expected- I get a nicely chamfered tube. If I change it to > >   chamfer(-2,-2,-2) g(turnXY(45), X(60)) box(20); > > or > >   chamfer(-1,-2,-3) X(-40)box(10,x=35,h=15); > > in both cases, all I get is a top and bottom slice of the box, nicely > chamfered, and a very thin middle slice. What am I missing? > >

Found the problem Peter- thanks to an email from Hans L <thehans@gmail.com> in reply to the topic "Dev build has different semantics than the 2021.1 release"- I turned off Lazy Union in my settings and the problem is fixed! On 2023-09-21 18:10, pproj@posteo.de wrote: > Hello Ken, > thanks for the positive words. > I am not quite sure yet, what it is. > > i will have a look into it tonight, after work, if i manage, or tomorrow. > Peter > > On 20.09.23 10:53, Ken wrote: >> Been having a play with this rather nice library and have a curious >> problem with chamfer. If I do >> >> include<constructive-compiled.scad> >> $fa = 2; >> $fs = 0.5; >> >>    chamfer(-4,-2) tube(d=20, h=12, wall=3); >> >> it works as expected- I get a nicely chamfered tube. If I change it to >> >>   chamfer(-2,-2,-2) g(turnXY(45), X(60)) box(20); >> >> or >> >>   chamfer(-1,-2,-3) X(-40)box(10,x=35,h=15); >> >> in both cases, all I get is a top and bottom slice of the box, nicely >> chamfered, and a very thin middle slice. What am I missing? >> >> > _______________________________________________ > OpenSCAD mailing list > To unsubscribe send an email to discuss-leave@lists.openscad.org -- Cheers, Ken bats059@gmail.com https://vk7krj.com https://vk7krj.com/running.html ---------------------------------------- A baby can be defined as an ego with a noise at one end and a smell at the other. Your job as parents is to teach them to control all three. My job as a grandad is to tell you how you are doing it all wrong!

Hello Ken , thanks again  for figuring out the cause, it indeed  did not render properly if you had lazy unions set to "on" (i have never tried this before) FIXED the LIB so please update.  it should work with lazy unions now, (please report if it is still a problem somewhere) Peter