How would you do this with Var Sec Swp?

[jkasallis]

Hi,


I'm trying to get familiar with using variable section sweeps and this seems relatively simple but I can't get it to work. Right now what I'm doing is projecting a curve onto a surface to get the picture below. How would I get this using a variable section sweep? Hopefully this picture is clear enough. The bend is not all in the same plane, it is actually dropping down like a slide, depending on how you're looking at it.


Thanks for your help.


Jim


[EDIT] I'm using 2001


View attachment 1804






Edited by: jkasallis

 

[jeff4136]

Not sure what you're asking about; how to create the trajectory without projecting to surfaces or how to define the VSS.

As far as setting up the VSS goes I'd do a site and web search for tutorials and read thru them unless you can enlist the help of someone using 2001. Might look thru the Files section, too; maybe some older 2001 examples available. Other than that, play with it and if something doesn't work post the file for specific answers.

 

[jkasallis]

I guess what my real question is...can this be done using a variable section sweep? And I have to be careful how I word this because for pre-wildfire, sweep and VSS are two separate tools.


Right now I'm using a "simple" sweep along a projected curve...but I have to set up a bunch of curves and surfaces to get it. If I can do this all using just a VSS...that's what I'm trying to do.


For example...I was trying to set up two different trajectories, one for for the "U-shaped" top view, and another one for the "slide-shaped" side view. I want my section to follow the U shaped path but also drop down to match the slide-shaped path. But this wasn't working.


I hope this makes sense. I'm starting to think I'm looking at this all wrong and VSS isn't meant to do this.


Thanks,


Jim
Edited by: jkasallis

 

[rcamp]

From looking at the picture, you section doesn't vary, so you wouldn't use a variable section sweep. I think the way you have done it is the best way (from what I can tell).

 

[CPiotrowski]

Agreed, VSS wouldnt be used here. Making a surface, projecting the curve and doinga sweep is probably the easiest way to do it with only 3 features.

 

[jkasallis]

That makes sense. I thought I could utilize the multiple trajectory thing in VSS for what I was doing here.Thanks everyone.

 

[Miko]

Do U think something like that ? > 2006-02-14_143458_swept-blend.prt.zip


View attachment 1810

 

[james.lynch]

Agreed, VSS wouldnt be used here. Making a surface, projecting the curve and doinga sweep is probably the easiest way to do it with only 3 features.

I'm not sure how you'd create the 3D trajectory and sweep in 3 features but doing it as a VSS would allow greaterflexability in the long run..


I think if you didnt want to actually construct the "U" shaped trajectoy you could always do it with a graph but why woulf you?


View attachment 1812


here is the 2001 part file


2006-02-14_150641_prt0001.prt.zip


Looks good Miko!


James
Edited by: james.lynch

 

[jayuy]

Hi jkasallis,


I agree with them that you don't need to use VSS tocreate the part & the best way is using sweep command only, you can't use VSS directly without having a trajectory, how ever you can create the part without creating any surface in just two steps.


1. create a two projection curve


2. use the curve to sweep


Now your model is done...hope it helps


Jay

 

[jkasallis]

Thanks everyone for your input.


jayuy- that's a damn near perfect solution. That's exactly what I was looking for...I was just looking in the wrong place.

 

[Miko]

Little Deformed

View attachment 1830

 

[dougr]

Am always amazed at the way people are hung up over VSS's, I would go straight to swept-blend for this and create the trajectory as datum-curves first to break up the feature creation.


Brian Adkins had a great thread years ago tabulating the various sweep and blend features which was excellent for determining which would be appropriate for a particular case.

 

[dr_gallup]

Brian Adkins had a great thread years ago tabulating the various sweep and blend features which was excellent for determining which would be appropriate for a particular case.

It would be great if useful posts like that could be "stickied" so they can be found later or perhaps moved to a special forum headding for Most Valuable Posts. There is huge amount of info posted over & over because there is little logical organization of the forums. Searching can help but if you don't use the right key word in your search you may never find it.

 

[mgnt8]

it seems like there used to be an effort to do something similar to that with the "Articles" although these have lately fallen by the wayside. As far as VSS vs Swept Blends go, in WF 3.0 the Swept Blend has undergone a makeover so it has an interface similar to the VSS. It would be nice if they could just combine these into one feature and eliminate the uncertainty. (P.S. ...VSS rocks)