On 9/24/25 18:12, William F Pokorny wrote:
>> What I meant, if you misunderstood, was to have one side be radius r, 
>> and the
>> other side be radius -r, so that it would make a "double-cone".
> 
> Ah, yes, the double cone looks to work fine.

Blast, it doesn't work for all +- values.  Let me see if I can figure 
out why not.

Started to look at allowing both values to be negative and in testing 
that potential change I found not all +- -+ radii values work for 
getting a double cone.

Saw your other post on normal changes. I've not seen that in v3.8+, but 
who knows. Maybe it worked at some point as you suggested.

Bill P.

Post a reply to this message