Rounded encap

[SW]

I've got the age old problem of trying to create a rounded endcap for the part shown in the following image:

The main body is created using a style feature. I've then trimmed with an extruded surface to create a four sided surface. That is when the trouble starts. As you can see a boundary blend does work, but it doesn't use one of the reference curves, even though it shows it used in the preview.



I've tried different techniques that usually work well in this scenario but can't get anything to work properly this time.

Here is a Wildfire 4 version of the part.

2009-07-16_130529_ws1000-1298.prt.39.zip

I'm trying to get a G2 surface that I can thicken internally by at least 1.8mm. Any help would greatly appreciated.

(Excuse the coincident datum planes, I will want to tilt the style feature off-vertical, but am not worried about this now. I also realise the round is not a G2 feature, but I will sort this later)

 

[jsantangelo]

I opened it and it won't let me edit the part. It says: "Pro/ASSEMBLY Module required to redefine this feature."

 

[Jacoolo]

it seems SW that Your model was made as skeleton in assembly mode(AXX license)

What I would do is to make this surface no as one BB, but devide it into two.

Still, consider avoiding Curvature transition, which - IMHO - is not required in Your case.

 

[solidworm]

sections 1 and 2 in your screenshot should be almost laying on two parallel planes. try using curve on surface to form the boundaries for your trim instead of the cut extrude. this way you'll get a better shaped rectangular gap to patch with boundary blend.
(boundary blend works best when it's boundaries are at 90 degs at their intersection when viewed from above and isocurves have a uniform look - view>model setup>mesh surface )



Edited by: solidworm

 

[SW]

Thanks chaps.

I've managed to sort it out by adding a datum curve through points across the gap instead of using the style curve as the reference. The result is shown below.


The completed file, as a standard part not a skeleton, is here:

2009-07-17_043058_ws1000-1299.prt.zip.


I tried dividing the surface into two, using the style curves you
can see on the images but this didn't work either. I do need G2 for
this, as it will be in shiny plastic.

Did this not work as as a style feature as the opposing curves were almost on perpendicular planes? I've just adjusting the curves so they are just about on parallel planes, as suggested by Solidworm, and it works fine as a style feature.

I did use to use curve on surface style features though, but found there was a bit too much freedom with the curves, which created untidy surfaces. Maybe this is something I should look at again..

Many thanks,

Sam

Edited by: SW

 

[SW]

The boundary blend using the cut extruded from the symmetry plane seems to give better results in terms of surface quality that the trim using style curves.


Trim using style curves (opposing cuves on nearly parallel planes).


Trim and boundary blend using an extruded cut from the symmetry plane.


I can usually get this sort of thing to work alright, but would be interested to hear about proven techniques and why they work in different situations.

(Next time I will upload smaller pictures and make everyone's life easier)

Sam


Edited by: SW

 

[Jacoolo]

I am really curious if the increae of quality is so high to maintain curvature transition instead of ordinary tangent one.

 

[solidworm]

my understanding is that when surfaces have U-V isocurves NOT normal to each other at their intersection (boundaries are themselves U-V curves in Bouundary blend), they usually look stretched out of their normal shape.so i think in general, for boundary blend, it's better to have rectangular boundaries which are normal to each other at vertices.