Hello,
I am having an unpredictable issue with sending and receiving data from speckle. I am sending a closed brep generated in grasshopper to speckle and when I receive the geometry in another grasshopper file it comes out as an “invalid brep”. Why would this happen and how could I fix it?
Could the complexity of the geometry be an issue with the sending/receiving?
Screenshots are lovely @aliture but the currency of support here is shared data. Can you share the file/speckle url?
On top of what Jonathon says, usually rebuilding or simplifying complex brep & mesh geometry helps, so you could give that a try!
Hello Jonathon, thank you for your reply!
I have attached a gh file with the url, let me know if it works for you or if it also gives an invalid brep.
I have thought about rebuilding the brep by sending simpler geometries, but if I could avoid doing that it would be ideal for a simpler workflow
GH to Speckle_Invalid Brep.gh (4.1 MB)
I exploded the invalid brep to check and it seems sending the closed brep causes the top complex surface to be invalid. If I send the surfaces separately and join them after receiving, the brep geometry is perfect. Is there just a general issue with sending breps?
To be totally frank your definition of a quite complex hierarchy and a definition with many GH Clusters means I will have to postpone looking into this until after SpeckleCon. Complexity level is too high for the time available.
Perhaps someone else in the community might like to pick this up for you in the meantime??
Perhaps you describe what you are trying to achieve with the particular nesting strategy to help?
Or isolate a singular objet and send that and we work from there.
You’re right I sent too much information, I simplified it to just the one object in the following gh script.
I noticed if the closed brep has had a Boolean difference operation it has the issue vs not having it it works perfectly (I added the two different geometries in the file)
GH to Speckle_Invalid Brep.gh (5.1 MB)
