pro|e analog to solidworks fill command

[millmann2me]

Hi Jsantangelo -

Boundary blend...2 curves one direction...4 curves 2nd direction like in the image...tangency on the edges...I used ISDX for some of the curves but they could have been done without ISDX with a few more features...

It is kind of a bummer SolidWorks is so vastly superior for this type of condition...the fill feature in SW just blows Pro/E away...resolving the 5 sided surface in Pro/E has always been hard for the casual user to master...you have to play the game of breaking everything down into 4 sided surfaces...

Cheers...

 

[jsantangelo]

Hi Jsantangelo -



Boundary blend...2 curves one direction...4 curves 2nd direction like in the image...tangency on the edges...I used ISDX for some of the curves but they could have been done without ISDX with a few more features...



It is kind of a bummer SolidWorks is so vastly superior for this type of condition...the fill feature in SW just blows Pro/E away...resolving the 5 sided surface in Pro/E has always been hard for the casual user to master...you have to play the game of breaking everything down into 4 sided surfaces...



Cheers...

Thanks for the info. Been playing with this and I do not have ISDX. Been trying to get the curves correct that make a nice smooth blended surface.

I agree. If Pro/e had ISDX as part of the base package they would be more competitive on the surfacing side of things. Well maybe not competitive as Pro/e has very good surfacing, it would make it much easier/faster to get the desired result. From my understanding the Fill feature in SW was borrowed or taken from Catia.

 

[jsantangelo]

Here is the best method I came up with. But it's just like what everybody else is saying "break it down to 4 sided surfaces".

In the video you'll see I use a Curvature constraint for a couple of the Boundary Blends. I'm not sure if Tangent or Curvature is better.

Also I started the Boundary blends on the concave radius rather than the convex one. Again starting the BB on one over the other may give better results.

<div style="text-align: center;">http://www.screencast.com/t/hsXfn5IA




http://www.screencast.com/t/hsXfn5IA

<div style="text-align: left;">Cheers!
</div></div>



Edited by: jsantangelo

 

[millmann2me]

Hi Jsantangelo -

Checked out your video...nice job...as an exercise I replicated your approach in ISDX...same curves and topology but bundled up into one ISDX feature.

When I see those N-sided patches by default I start trimming back to get 4 sided patches, but your approach worked well.

The SW Fill feature takes the fun out of it...too easy...although creating all your own curves and patches can give you more control...but the times I have tried the SW Fill it always gave me pretty much what I wanted.

 

[cloughna]

Jsatangelo...

Excellent video... a clinic on how this should be done. Perhaps I'll print some t-shirts emblazoned with "break it down to 4-sided surfaces".

The topic of ISDX has come up a few times. I am familiar with ISDX, but hesitate to use it because it seems like it would be very difficult to debug. Does anyone have any thoughts on whether ISDX or native pro|e would be the most robust way to go?

 

[tobbo]

My experience is that "boundary blend" (and/or VSS) surfaces are "better" than ISDX surfaces.... but i still useIsdx for creating a lot of my curves...


About debuging isdx, is way easier now in WF4 and 5 since there is a separate modell tree for isdx features...


//Tobias

 

[jsantangelo]

Checked out your video...nice job...as an exercise I replicated
your approach in ISDX...same curves and topology but bundled up into
one ISDX feature.

Excellent video... a clinic on how this should be done. Perhaps I'll
print some t-shirts emblazoned with "break it down to 4-sided surfaces".

Thanks for all the kind words. I want a T-shirt like that, lol.