1
$\begingroup$

I've been having trouble with using the boolean modifier. I am making this model to 3d print so I am designing pieces that will lock into each other to make the gluing and painting process easier. These are the two objects I want to use. The opaque object needs to be cut out of the wireframe object

When I try to cut the hammer (opaque) out of the block (wireframe), instead of cutting the way I would expect, it seems to have no effect until looking at the edges of the object in wireframe or edit mode.This is what it looks like after using the modifier

As you can see, it cuts the perimeter of the intersecting portion, but does not register the rest in the process. I have already checked for doubles and recalculated the normals on both objects,

I'm relatively new to blender and entirely new to stack exchange (I made this account just to ask this question) so if there is anything else I can do to help you answer my question let me know and I will try my hardest to get you your information. Also, if this question has already been answered please link me to it as I have tried to find someone else with the same issue and failed.

A made a test file where I copied over the two objects from my main project to isolate them. I accidentally found a solution in this project (I will comment it to mark it as an answer) but added it just in case it could be of use to somebody.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ Can you explain the problem more? What kind of results are you expecting and why does this not correspond to your expectations? Because as I can see the square hole in the second screenshot is the result of the boolean and I don't see why it would not be correct. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 1, 2023 at 4:37
  • $\begingroup$ @mqbakamqbaka Although the initial portion of the cut is complete, I want it to have depth. Since this is for 3d printing, I would like the hammer to fit into the block afterward, thus having a whole in the shape of where the hammer intersects it (kind of like a trapezoid). If you need anything else, let me know. $\endgroup$
    – Dat_RPB
    Commented Aug 1, 2023 at 4:50
  • $\begingroup$ Would you mind taking a screenshot of the Boolean modifier settings? If you did something wrong there it would be easier to spot if we could see how you have set it up. Just from the shapes of the objects I recreated something similar and it works as expected. But I know that my meshes are watertight, have no duplicated overlaying geometry and no normals inverted. So probably it would be better if you uploaded your file here: blend-exchange.com and follow the instructions there to edit it into question for us to have a closer look at what's going on there. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 1, 2023 at 6:08

2 Answers 2

1
$\begingroup$

In the current Blender v3.6, the boolean modifier work as expected as is:

enter image description here

But in the V2.93 you are using as per your screenshots, the then-new "Exact" boolean modifier solver struggles to solve many cases in Difference mode:

enter image description here

Hence, you need to switch the solver from "Exact" to "Fast";

enter image description here

This is part of why it is very good practice to mention the version of Blender you are using. People will otherwise assume you use the latest version available at the time you post. Even if the version might be visible in the corner of a screenshot.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks mate! Like I said I'm new and I will be sure to include the version in any more questions I have. $\endgroup$
    – Dat_RPB
    Commented Aug 1, 2023 at 17:01
0
$\begingroup$

If anybody has had the same issue as me and checked for doubles and incorrect normals, try setting the boolean modifier to fast instead of exact. I'm not sure why, but I'd rather have it work and not know than not work and not know.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .