Surfacing Course : Q & A ?

[[-Skint-]]

1. your mirror plane. your boundary surface that butts up to the mirror plane is not forced normal. We call that implied tangent because the implication is the surface will be tangent to itself as it is mirrored. Maybe in the case of the bottom image, you want the pointy tip to be sharp... but the next surface up probably should be forced normal to the mirror plane.

Bart, I went straight back to the model to see what options I could change. Thanks for the tip!! I managed to Force normal all of the surfaces apart from the "bottle neck " shaped one, but thats quite a cimplicated boundary blend, I couldnt find a better way of creating it... YET !


Cheers mate, One day I will come to the states any buy you that Pint you so deserve

 

[design-engine]

I drank enough beer at 'The Yardhouse' in Longbeach to last me for a while. English beer too!

 

[[-Skint-]]

are you in your class yet? when is that? I am sitting in the LAX airport and a girl just walked by with a tattoo covering her face. I guess thats cool with the real girls in LA. thats bad ass. Thought I would share my experiance with you on the other side of the pond.

Haha thanks for that mate, cheered up my afternoon anyway. Dont go chatting her up now will you

.


My course starts 2nd July. It will be the first surface training ive ever had so I want to go fully armed.

 

[jeff4136]

> "We call that implied tangent because the implication
> is the surface will be tangent to itself as it is mirrored."


Actually, given tangent vectors normal to a plane of symmetry,
mirroring will give you G2 continuity. That's what I call a
continuity freebie. ;^)


If curvature is monotone I think you could call it G3.

 

[design-engine]

if two layers of CV's are lined up we call that g2 in Alias

 

[[-Skint-]]

1. your mirror plane. your boundary surface that butts up to the mirror plane is not forced normal. We call that implied tangent because the implication is the surface will be tangent to itself as it is mirrored. Maybe in the case of the bottom image, you want the pointy tip to be sharp... but the next surface up probably should be forced normal to the mirror plane.

Iseethis phrase floating around quite a lot " Forced Normal ". By this I assume you mean when creating a surface you right click on the little white tangency dots and select normal, a lot of the time it doesnt seem to want to go Normal for me, so I`d love to know how to "Force" it ??


Another weekend overwith, a little sunburn and very achy muscles from Gardening. Back to the office now for more surfacing fun

 

[jeff4136]

Continuity is system independent. When you mirror a surface all the CVs are mirrored, hence it's 'automatically' G2 (C2, actually since the vectors are also equal?).


Forced = Constrained.

 

[design-engine]

Skint: thats simply because Pro/E is confused as to what to go normal or tangent too. If you hide (or layer off) your curves on surface ie. projected curves or COS curves first then Pro/E will not get confused.

Next time you get that problem go into the tool deeper and you will see the confusion. For example next time that confusion seams to occur, drop into the Constraints dialog and notice there are two windows there. The top window has the Tangent and Normal constraints pull downs. The lower window describes what exactly you are constraining too. And if you choose a curve projected onto a surface then of course proe might get a little confused as to what to go tangent too.... Tell proe what to go tangent too in the lower dialog box.


Edited by: design-engine

 

[[-Skint-]]

I think my boundary was just too complicated ( not very well planned maybe ) to give nice results. So I have re-visited the model, went way back down the tree and went about it a different way.


After a few hours, much motivation from people on this forum, your help and a lot of patience I have finally got it the way it should be, as near as damn it


Nothing a good powder coating wouldnt hide now anyways

 

[michael3130]

nice job

Did you animate it so that you can actually knock it?

 

[[-Skint-]]

Hey Thanks Michael,


Thats going to be the next step

. So many jokes to make about lovely knockers eh !!


On the back of this latest development, the same client has now asked for thier own specific window handle to be developed.... omg boring, I think Every single shape for a window handle has already been used at some point in time... I wonder if Sharp Edges and Block shapes will be coming back into fashion soon

 

[design-engine]

here is a design exercise for you and a good one for any engineer (who does not have a degree in industrial design)

Take 30 minutes to use Google images and look at stealthy aircraft. Now take thirty minutes to sketch (practice helps) door knockers with those stealth lines in mind. Try not to think of manufacturing process that step comes later (this is why engineers make bad conceptual designers because they struggle with all the details at once) A design process has to be broken into stages before it works. Once you have some sketches commence into proe (at this point you might still ignore manufacturing processes.... (I know its hard but try)

Now once you understand the form you have been exploring, (With my modeling technique I do one each hour) Re model the form to nail a manufacturing process that works. (I usually wait till the other concepts are hashed out first. Maybe the next day.

You goal is to web browse 15 minutes and sketch for 15 and model for 30 minutes x 8 hrs = 8 3d concepts

We call this process idation and it works. Engineers with industrial design masters degrees still struggle with this process because they cant let the manufacturing proccess down for a minute to make concept sketches.


Edited by: design-engine

 

[[-Skint-]]

Bart, I will give that a go one day when I get time.


Not sure if you are aware, but I took a look on your site and the Design Courses link gives me an error " Error 404: NOT FOUND! "

 

[davisdony]

Can the course give you informations than this forum gives you



I do not think so



I think you have almost solved most of your surface issues by now

 

[[-Skint-]]

Davis,


We`ll you can never stop learning can you ! I have been teaching myself surfaces for a week or so now, using multiple sources of help including this forum. I am certainly improving!! I am sure there will be many questions that I can still ask though.


Imagine having someone like Bart from Design-Engine sat next to me for 3 days solid

, im sure he can teach me a thing or two!

 

[michael3130]

Skint,


In a way I agree with davisdony. You're doing really well on the surfacing and making great progress. It will be interesting how much more you learn on the course and how beneficial it is to you. Let us know please.


We had a guy come into work from PTC 15 months ago to teach us sheet-metal. We did already have a good background and 2 of us worked really hard before hand to arm ourselves with as much knowledge as possible before the course, just as you are doing. When it came to the course, it was quite disappointing and I didn't get a lot out of it.


I'm not saying that will happen you, it's just my own experience. Anyway, let us know how you get on and keep up the good work.


Am dying to see the new Stealth Bomber handle!!!!!

 

[[-Skint-]]

Yeah I sort of agree too... I have learn a lot recently.. mainly down to trial & error, being stubburn and Having to get the job done. This forum does help.. a LOT.. but sometimes I just want the answers Straight Away, instead of having to spend time searching or awaiting a response. I have to admit, the responses on MCAD seem to come damn quickly though

The course is already paid for... by my company, so I`m not going to be out of pocket haha. I will certainly let you know if/what I come away with, hopefully felling a little wiser.


Sometimes I dont feel 100% confident in what I am doing with pro-e, always wondering if I could do something differently, more user-friendly, faster etc.. so perhaps i`ll learn short-cuts if nothing else.


Michael, just out of curiosity..where do you get your pro-e maintenance / backup etc. We purchased our three seats of pro-e from Concurrent Engineering based in the midlands, which is where I have my training next month. They are often too slow in responding to our problems, but when they do they are pretty good & a friendly bunch.


The Stealth Handle is in blue-print stage only

 

[michael3130]

Our Group IT department now handles all group software purchases. They deal with PTC in Coventry. We used to deal with Rand but we then empoyed an ex-PTC guy who looks after the dealings with PTC whereas each group used to handle their own. I can't remember the last time Iused the PTC helpline. MCAD forum is the best help I could get. The reponse times are usually excellent and the knowledge base of the membersis superb.


I think one of the most frustating parts with the sheet metal training we had was when it came to asking questions, the trainer either took a while to have to go and work out how to solve the problem or said let me take it away and I'll get back to you. I would have preferred a I will show you how to solve it now approach.


You are right in that the courses always highlight ways to do things better and quicker etc. It's nearly worth going to the courses just for that.

 

[dougr]

We call this process idation and it works. Engineers with industrial design masters degrees still struggle with this process because they cant let the manufacturing proccess down for a minute to make concept sketches.

Isn't "idation" what they do in these IBM ads ??


""what are you ideating ?" -"Don't know we haven't ideated that yet"


PS Engineers can "cartoon" concepts better than anyone, hate to rain on your parade but this is nothing new...


and manufacturing isn't the only consideration, what about safety, TMC, NRE, reliability, repair, performance, technical risk, leadtime, schedule, maintainability, weight, emissions, noise etc, etc, etc, etc


Must go, need my daily ideation with my newspaper...

 

[design-engine]

Hi doug.

Was reading thru some old posts and noticed this one. If you ever get the chance to work in a team with industrial designers you may change your mind. If you already do then your just a cocky ME then. That aint bad either

I designed one off furniture back in the early 1990's. I was the creative kid in the 3rd grade. I went engineering in college.... I took sculpture classes. Made parts for motorcycle racing. Forged aluminum and steel in kilns. Bent 1/2 rod into 25" rings. bla bla bla .... I thought I was creative.

I was also completely blown away at the process of how industrial designers concept out form. (our home depot buyer dudes call us 'idators') god I love the south!

I was silently blown away at how many new forms they degreed industrial designers can generate in less than an hour. My process lacked process. But only in hindsight could I realize that.

Now I value the collaboration on product design.... and crave working with industrial designers. I even made a school around it... a nice little niche too.

I made a lot of money in the 1990's creating complex forms for industrial designers because no one else could manage the forms and parting lines (parting surfaces) ect. Made such a niche that the industrial designers did not want to work with anyone else because of my modeling process. Modeling technique which became the blunt of my one week surfacing class.


Edited by: design-engine