logo
NOTICE:  This is the new PunchCAD forum. You should have received an email with your new password around August 27, 2014. If you did not, or would like it reset, simply use the Lost Password feature, and enter Answer as the security answer.
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

6 Pages«<23456>
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
Jolyon  
#61 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 3:49:02 PM(UTC)
Jolyon

Rank: Guest

Joined: 9/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 219

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Modify Slope > Reference ... (have you played with that tool ?) will allow you to control spline tangencies into / relative to other splines / surfaces / faces

I do feel your pain : )

Jol
MaiFy  
#62 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 5:38:45 PM(UTC)
MaiFy

Rank: Member

Joined: 10/3/2014(UTC)
Posts: 71
Australia

Thanks: 9 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 8 post(s)
Hi N.T.FLA
Just wondering if you have the Power Pack add on?
It seems to be a set of tools that could make life easier for your type of project.
Power pack page
MaiFy attached the following image(s):
Power Pack1.JPG (68kb) downloaded 15 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
NeuTechFLA  
#63 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 6:45:18 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
MaiFy,

I have Shark Pro...are there options above and beyond that?
NeuTechFLA  
#64 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 6:46:40 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jolyon Go to Quoted Post
Modify Slope > Reference ... (have you played with that tool ?) will allow you to control spline tangencies into / relative to other splines / surfaces / faces

I do feel your pain : )

Jol


I think I have messed around with it. I will look at it more in depth this week. Thanks.
murray  
#65 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 7:33:16 PM(UTC)
murray

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 9/24/2014(UTC)
Posts: 213
Australia

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 29 time(s) in 27 post(s)
Can you recreate the surface that you want to rejoin the way you did it in the first place, or are there subsequent dependencies that make it impractical?
NeuTechFLA  
#66 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 7:54:47 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Originally Posted by: murray Go to Quoted Post
Can you recreate the surface that you want to rejoin the way you did it in the first place, or are there subsequent dependencies that make it impractical?


Hey murray...I did find I needed to create a duplicate surface(s) to get it all to work out. Seems a bit laborious to get to a solution.
MaiFy  
#67 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 8:32:40 PM(UTC)
MaiFy

Rank: Member

Joined: 10/3/2014(UTC)
Posts: 71
Australia

Thanks: 9 times
Was thanked: 11 time(s) in 8 post(s)
Originally Posted by: NeuTechFLA Go to Quoted Post
MaiFy,

I have Shark Pro...are there options above and beyond that?


I think they are. As I said before I am a bit of a noob on Cad drawing and all the variations, but I think these are for solid models or for checking out those wrinkles you are try to get rid of.
I bought it because we are getting a CNC and I, like you, are going through a learning process.
I am trying to learn because I want to not stare vacantly at someone when they start going on about nurbs, quads, splines and stuff...... (well there's not much I can do about the vacant look but perhaps i can understand a little :-) ....)
I think with shark pro you are paying for the extra licenses to communicate with other various software you might want to use, where as the power pack adds extra tools for modeling.

I'm sure others will be better able to confirm that.

I'm not sure, but Punch seems to license the base product and Tim seems to have made up the addon product.
If you click on the link (power pack page) in the above comment it will take you to product details.

More detail
Power pack V 10 description page link


To quote it does thing like "Remove Slivers: Examines triangles and quads for small edges. Edges below the user defined tolerance are collapsed. A triangle facet with a sliver edge removes the two facets sharing the edge. A quad facet with a sliver edge is converted into a triangle."

Edited by user Sunday, January 28, 2018 8:34:19 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

murray  
#68 Posted : Sunday, January 28, 2018 11:34:18 PM(UTC)
murray

Rank: Senior Member

Joined: 9/24/2014(UTC)
Posts: 213
Australia

Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 29 time(s) in 27 post(s)
Originally Posted by: MaiFy Go to Quoted Post

I think with shark pro you are paying for the extra licenses to communicate with other various software you might want to use, where as the power pack adds extra tools for modeling.

I'm sure others will be better able to confirm that.

I'm not sure, but Punch seems to license the base product and Tim seems to have made up the addon product.
If you click on the link (power pack page) in the above comment it will take you to product details.

More detail
Power pack V 10 description page link


To quote it does thing like "Remove Slivers: Examines triangles and quads for small edges. Edges below the user defined tolerance are collapsed. A triangle facet with a sliver edge removes the two facets sharing the edge. A quad facet with a sliver edge is converted into a triangle."



One of the things that attracted me to Shark in the first place is the licenses for CATIA and Pro/E, plus SW and Parasolid in V10, no history but that's no great problem. I'm a long-time TurboCAD user, and long ago they offered import/export plugins for CATIA/Pro/E to TurboCAD....at USD 1000. Don't know how many of those they sold, but none of them were to me, so there's some obvious value to me, at least! Then there's the PowerPack facet-to-analytic and facet-to-nurb, cause I often get given .stl or .objs and get asked whether they can be scaled without obvious faceting or if I can derive hole centres, radial or geometric and similar relationships from them. Nothing for additional feature relationships internally, but imports and interops, and for freeforms. More utilities than creative tools.
NeuTechFLA  
#69 Posted : Monday, January 29, 2018 3:24:29 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jolyon Go to Quoted Post
Modify Slope > Reference ... (have you played with that tool ?) will allow you to control spline tangencies into / relative to other splines / surfaces / faces

I do feel your pain : )

Jol


Jolyon...thanks for that suggestion. I have messed a bit with it. While it's a little clunky...it is most likely the closest I will get to where I ultimately would like to be. On the next project (and from here on out) I will use it more often and see if it changes the outcome of the surface transitions.
NeuTechFLA  
#70 Posted : Wednesday, January 31, 2018 6:14:22 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Just a hour or so tonight...Wife wants a date night. I guess it would be wise choose her over the Mustang! :o)
NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
013118-a.jpg (213kb) downloaded 3 time(s).
013118-b.jpg (189kb) downloaded 3 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
NeuTechFLA  
#71 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 5:44:30 AM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
A bit stumped on this one. Join Surface is a bit strange to me so far. For example, I cannot seem to get these two (in the images) to work out. I have also tried to extend the surfaces and add a fillet surface with the auto trim...but, no luck. This seems it should be a simple/fundamental operation. I really do not want to be forced to trim back every surface pair I want to add a radius to and add a loft between them. That might drive me over the edge.

Also, does anyone know how the math is behaving behind the scenes? I have noticed in other areas, when I apply a Join the surfaces seem to move wholesale and not just on the edges being joined.
NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
020118-a.jpg (195kb) downloaded 3 time(s).
020118-b.jpg (218kb) downloaded 6 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
Jolyon  
#72 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 7:50:42 AM(UTC)
Jolyon

Rank: Guest

Joined: 9/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 219

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Wise decision !

So are you a former Holden guy ? Presumably still in Melbourne ?

So -

... but - why would you 'join' the surfaces before blending ? That's bound to bring you distortion as one lies at 90deg to it's counterpart

You could :

1 - Use the 'Fillet Surface' tool to provide a 'tangent continuous' or 'curvature continuous' blend (with option to auto-trim)

2 - Better still, the 'Loft Surface' (If you've left a gap where you want the fillet blend) tool which allows you to control the influence (Bulge) of surface A and surface B to your new surface blend (controlled continuity) - allows you even to add guides

3 - Personally though I'd treat this component quite independently and stitch it into a solid. You can then blend to your heart's content with thumbwheel blends (which you can control very easily and nicely - with perfect continuity).

Not sure if any of that helps - but I hope you got dessert !

Jol

(No - the power pack won't help you with this - but it's got some great extras ... should you survive this project !)

Edited by user Thursday, February 01, 2018 7:54:28 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

NeuTechFLA  
#73 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 10:09:36 AM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Jol,

No, former Detroit guy..finally got out, now live in Florida. I get calls to return...but a team of Clydesdale horses could not drag me back to that pit. Have surfaced for a number of OEM's.

To your first question..."why would I Join them first"...a couple reasons I guess. 1. Since Shark is a curve based tool I assumed using the same curve to drive the sweet curve/surfaces at the intersection was the way to go. I did try first to use the Fillet Surface tool with the CNTL (trim) and that failed. 2. all the software I have used (Creo, Catia, Icem, Solidworks)will do this in multiple ways. I thought it would be the same here. Maybe just my Noob status biting me. The sliver result when Joining was just icing on the cake that I found by accident when trying different ways to get the radius. What I have not tried yet is your second suggestion...leave a gap and loft. But, that seems a lot of extra work just to get a radius. But, I will give it a go. Your third suggestion was somewhat my intent all along. The air dam is "separate" already. But if I can't even get the surfaces to join to one another without a resultant sliver, how would they ever stitch to a solid?

I am stumbling through. Thanks for the suggestions. Dessert was great. And...I will survive this project...even if it kills me!

Dean
Jolyon  
#74 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 11:00:29 AM(UTC)
Jolyon

Rank: Guest

Joined: 9/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 219

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Do you mind sharing the air dam bit of your model ?

I - like you - really like getting to the bottom of things if I can - and looking at it ... I think there should be an easy answer here

of course there are always workarounds

.. but a simple fillet blend should run round there fine, ??

Jol

PS - Another way would be to stitch the 2 surfaces into an 'open' solid (untick closed volume required - note one sided display facets) ... and then just use the solid thumbwheel blend. Not sure this method would be good for workflow as you then need to 'change object type' to surfs again - but it's interesting !

Edited by user Thursday, February 01, 2018 12:00:46 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

NeuTechFLA  
#75 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 12:55:31 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jolyon Go to Quoted Post
Do you mind sharing the air dam bit of your model ?

I - like you - really like getting to the bottom of things if I can - and looking at it ... I think there should be an easy answer here

of course there are always workarounds

.. but a simple fillet blend should run round there fine, ??

Jol

PS - Another way would be to stitch the 2 surfaces into an 'open' solid (untick closed volume required - note one sided display facets) ... and then just use the solid thumbwheel blend. Not sure this method would be good for workflow as you then need to 'change object type' to surfs again - but it's interesting !


I tried the open solid stitch...nada. But, it was about then I realized I had failed surfacing 101.25. That is make sure surfaces are discrete when working a different part. :o( So I somewhat fibbed in my last post when I said my air dam was "separate". You know those assumptions! Anyway, I think I am out of the woods for the moment.

I do want to see the "thumbwheel" blend in Shark. We have that in Creo too....that's a sweet thing.
NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
020118-d.jpg (297kb) downloaded 0 time(s).
020118-f.jpg (232kb) downloaded 2 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
Jolyon  
#76 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:20:53 PM(UTC)
Jolyon

Rank: Guest

Joined: 9/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 219

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Hmm ... curious about this 'joining'

Maybe it's terminology ?

... All you need is a common edge, no ?

Anyway - it's not holding you back !

Jol
NeuTechFLA  
#77 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 2:54:07 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Originally Posted by: Jolyon Go to Quoted Post
Hmm ... curious about this 'joining'

Maybe it's terminology ?

... All you need is a common edge, no ?

Anyway - it's not holding you back !

Jol


I think I am speaking Shark. :o)

The only way I have been able to get a fillet on that intersection was to use the technique of an ordered "join" then use the fillet tool that I showed in my last post. Nothing else works in the way of a fillet or blend. I will try the loft next...but it's getting tiresome. It should be VERY simple to get this done.
NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
020118-g.jpg (168kb) downloaded 4 time(s).
020118-h.jpg (177kb) downloaded 5 time(s).
020118-j.jpg (151kb) downloaded 4 time(s).
020118-k.jpg (172kb) downloaded 5 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
NeuTechFLA  
#78 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 3:03:31 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
Jol,

I take it all back. I tried the stitch solid again but flipped the normals prior to the stitch then added the G2 radius and it went in. No surprise to you, I know! You have been saying that all along. I will add images in a few minutes.

Thanks,

Dean

Addition: But the "Change Object Type" turns it into a set of Dumb-Dumb surfaces, eh? Seems like a huge price to pay for a couple radii. I guess it makes sense to wait and try to add all the rads after the solid is created then?

Addition 2: So it would seem I am no closer to the goal. I cannot thicken a solid stitched with "no closed solid required". Then even after changing the object type and getting back to surfaces (that are dumb) when I join the surfaces back together they morph into something other than what they seem to be. Is there an auto "smoothness" or "interpolate" setting I can un-tick? The surfaces are definitely changing with the use of the join.

This is the proverbial "painted myself into a corner" scenario.

Edited by user Thursday, February 01, 2018 3:27:29 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
020118-L.jpg (187kb) downloaded 5 time(s).
020118-m.jpg (151kb) downloaded 3 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
NeuTechFLA  
#79 Posted : Thursday, February 01, 2018 6:01:30 PM(UTC)
NeuTechFLA

Rank: Guest

Joined: 12/14/2017(UTC)
Posts: 236

Thanks: 27 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 7 post(s)
it's like slogging through muck.... slowwwwwww going.

And I am nervous about that asymmetric mirror. I hope there is an answer for that.

Edited by user Thursday, February 01, 2018 6:03:21 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

NeuTechFLA attached the following image(s):
020118-n.jpg (265kb) downloaded 8 time(s).
020118-p.jpg (268kb) downloaded 6 time(s).

You cannot view/download attachments. Try to login or register.
Jolyon  
#80 Posted : Friday, February 02, 2018 8:09:25 AM(UTC)
Jolyon

Rank: Guest

Joined: 9/27/2017(UTC)
Posts: 219

Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 21 time(s) in 19 post(s)
Hi Dean

I would say the mirrored geometry is probably the same as your original

Also - Linked mirror is sometimes very useful - (has anomolies / can trip over sometimes) - Perhaps view your 'off-side' as something you generate (or make visible via layers) when you need to to keep your geometry lighter. (see 4. below)

1.) Probably, the display facet triangles that convert the geometry to visible 'skin' are arranged in such a way as to fool your eye into seeing a fault or at least seeing a small fault bigger

2.) First try upping the custom 'high resolution' in the prefs

3.) Then try turning on 'Precise Facets' in Edit>Resolution

This alone will likely give you much cleaner display facets (albeit much slower - so do remember to turn it off when you're working normally)

If you are using a Zebra Envmap to see striped reflections - always go to precise facets first (if your graphics card can tolerate it) - Personally I think going to View>Surface Eval>XXX should automatically turn on 'Precise Facets' as it makes such a big difference

(Additionally, make your own simple straight-striped envmap - such that pixels can never be seen - I can send you one if you wish. It won't be better in all circumstances, but in most, you'll get clean Zebras)

If you still have a problem, try rebuilding the surface ('Rebuild Surface' tool)

4.) Finally, you can examine the display facets to see if there's a faceting error by doing this ... View>Shade Options>Display Facet Edges

It's worth noting how the visible display facet triangles change as you up the object's display resolution and toggle the Precise Facets button

Hope something there helps
Users browsing this topic
Guest
6 Pages«<23456>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.