I am not satisfied with any of these solutions as they are not technically sound enough for my liking. I would therefore love to hear your brilliant ideas!
I’m not clear on why the control point at B7 can’t do anything? If you don’t give the control point at B7 at least a little bit to do, you are likely to have problems with your pattern pieces rendering oddly on the Piece mode.
But someone with more sleeve practice than I have should be around later today.
You should give it some length. Control points with zero length are asking for trouble… especially like @Pneumarian said when creating pattern pieces and the SA. Technically you should formulize the curve lengths with any measurements used so the curves resize correctly. But that’s another topic.
Bad idea to hardcode a random value (other that something like 45, 90 or 180)… this will likely not resize well. If you make the CP length and angle correct… where the angle between B22 and B7 is going to be roughly 45 degs… your formula for the other angle would be something like 180 + (180 - Angle2SplPath_B13_B7) to mirror it on the horz axis.
As I look at the variables table I’m wondering if we ever discussed this before… but would it not make more sense to change the Table Header “Curve angles” to “Control point angles”? After all THAT’S what the angle is for.
And, yes, I agree with you heere, too. Perhaps if this 180° was more accurate, then the other curve would fall in nicely.
Because the angle is set randomly and the length is 0 doesn’t mean that this is correct. The one curve may look correct but it can’t be used in other places.
I did my tulip sleeve directly on my normal sleeve. If you place a point on the spline where you want the sleeve to break, then it will give you the angle values for either side of that point. You’ll be able to use the one plus or minus 90° for the tulip petal.
