I am working with the G3 constraints in SW already quite a while, and they can be finicky. Generally, it helps to get the spline shape close to what you want (using the curvature combs) before adding the constraint. Otherwise SW might get you a solution that is far from what you want. And then, same as with CC and even tangent constraints, they will go overdefined for seemingly no reason when rebulding the model, even if nothing changed for that particular geometry. You can delete them and re-set them wihtout issues, which is an easy fix but can become quite frustrating at the same time. It is one of the reasons I am using the blend curves of GW3D's add-on a lot.
Business as usual but more finicky… is GW3d still perpetual? I’m interested to see what use G3 sketches are with blends using the boundary surface. Quite often boundary surface outputs deg 3 multi span surfaces, which means the internal continuity tops out at G2… might make using G3 a moot point.
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Yes, it is perpetual. I did not really know the answer to your question because I am using very little boundary surfaces these days, and a lot more GW3D or Xnurbs, so I tried it quickly, and the result is not positive. Between two G3 splines and 2 surfaces with continuity set to G2, SW creates a surface with 55 CVs in U direction (where the spline has 6). Is there a reason you are always using one CV more than really needed when doing G3 corners?
@Jonas Müller if you want to have each end independent you need to have 4 per side, so deg7. Imagine the curve was an S bend for example with an inflection, or the curve is in 3d space where you probably cannot share the 4th point of each end. But I guess you’re talking about corners specifically so I guess you could save a point and share them. The benefit being a curvature improvement? That boundary surface sounds bad. I have had SW produce a less dense surface when you make the tangent influence 100%. But then you need to have curves picked in both directions! Edit - this doc covers the curve degree needed the relevant G match on each side. knowledge.autodesk.com/support/alias-products/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2020/ENU/Alias-Reference/files/GUID-A8F5295D-FD68-4C33-914C-9E2578A37878-htm.html
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Yes that was clear to me, I was talking about planar corners without specifically mentioning it. The main benefit is just reduced complexity. Reduced CV count and one thing less to control.
I wish SolidWorks handled G conditions in the same way that Creo ISDX does. Going from Creo to SolidWorks you realize why people still prefer Creo for surfacing and this video is a case in point :) Nice video though, thanks for this, would be great to see a follow-up when you have figured out the bugs etc.
I never had the ISDX module in Wildfire, so it was endless 'curve, tweak' from memory. Equally tedious as the overzealous constraint system in SW! Have you got any links to the way ISDX handles matching? I'd be keen to have a look. It is a shame that SW constraints are so unpredictable, as the style spline offers so much, as theory is the same as Rhino etc.
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Oh agree, Creo is far from perfect. There are a bunch of Creo ISDX tutorials on RUclips or I'm happy to send you a screen capture :) if you upload the file you're working on in the video, I can provide a demo of the equivalent in ISDX
@@m.e.p.r I’m interested in how ISDX handles the G conditions. I used it briefly in the early to mid 2000s but lots of water under the bridge since then! I should stop being lazy and have a search as I’m sure there’s loads online!
Talk about a temperamental software! I barely ever use curvature continous constraints in SW sketches because it just seems to get in the way more often than not... BTW, thoroughly enjoy your videos! Plenty of super useful tips and insights!
Yes it can be a bit touchy! I only use co-linear constraints when making a CC constraint to lines as it is more stable than the actual CC constraint. Thanks for watching
I also tried to use the G3 constraint and I couldn't get positive results. I think that G2 is as far as SW can go. I read through some comments and I can see that if you are more intrested in building clean surfaces you either go with some add-ons or just move to other software. I have a love&hate relationship with SW because it did help me numerous times. But also pushed into hell of reparing broken relations in sketches. I think that the feature tree oriented CAD is not the best choice for robust and well defined curves and surfaces. Nevertheless even if I have to repair something, rebuliding only some features is still less time consuming than building entire model without history of operations :) I think we should establish a group of people who have access to different software and use the best software for the task :D
Agree with you, query whether there is a need for G3 in SW, especially as they have not backed it up with the matching surface and evaluation tools. At the moment I'm making a number of changes to models across a range of projects and if they had been built in Rhino, it'd be very time consuming. Guess that is the trade off.
Eons ago. Maybe they don’t think people use these features. A bug I want them to fix is the pink ghost line that appears on screen sometimes and never goes away unless you close the part. It has appeared in 2021 already
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Not a bug fix, but I’ve found a way you can remove the pink line without closing the part. If you edit the offending feature that created the pink line (usually a boundary surface with the “mesh preview” feature enabled), you can hover your mouse over the surface mesh lines to “reset” the temporary graphic. I think the bug happens when you exit the feature with the mesh line still highlighted, which causes it to get stuck.
I am working with the G3 constraints in SW already quite a while, and they can be finicky. Generally, it helps to get the spline shape close to what you want (using the curvature combs) before adding the constraint. Otherwise SW might get you a solution that is far from what you want.
And then, same as with CC and even tangent constraints, they will go overdefined for seemingly no reason when rebulding the model, even if nothing changed for that particular geometry. You can delete them and re-set them wihtout issues, which is an easy fix but can become quite frustrating at the same time. It is one of the reasons I am using the blend curves of GW3D's add-on a lot.
Business as usual but more finicky… is GW3d still perpetual? I’m interested to see what use G3 sketches are with blends using the boundary surface. Quite often boundary surface outputs deg 3 multi span surfaces, which means the internal continuity tops out at G2… might make using G3 a moot point.
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Yes, it is perpetual.
I did not really know the answer to your question because I am using very little boundary surfaces these days, and a lot more GW3D or Xnurbs, so I tried it quickly, and the result is not positive. Between two G3 splines and 2 surfaces with continuity set to G2, SW creates a surface with 55 CVs in U direction (where the spline has 6).
Is there a reason you are always using one CV more than really needed when doing G3 corners?
@Jonas Müller if you want to have each end independent you need to have 4 per side, so deg7. Imagine the curve was an S bend for example with an inflection, or the curve is in 3d space where you probably cannot share the 4th point of each end. But I guess you’re talking about corners specifically so I guess you could save a point and share them. The benefit being a curvature improvement? That boundary surface sounds bad. I have had SW produce a less dense surface when you make the tangent influence 100%. But then you need to have curves picked in both directions!
Edit - this doc covers the curve degree needed the relevant G match on each side. knowledge.autodesk.com/support/alias-products/learn-explore/caas/CloudHelp/cloudhelp/2020/ENU/Alias-Reference/files/GUID-A8F5295D-FD68-4C33-914C-9E2578A37878-htm.html
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Yes that was clear to me, I was talking about planar corners without specifically mentioning it. The main benefit is just reduced complexity. Reduced CV count and one thing less to control.
@@RadCJ33 👍
I wish SolidWorks handled G conditions in the same way that Creo ISDX does. Going from Creo to SolidWorks you realize why people still prefer Creo for surfacing and this video is a case in point :)
Nice video though, thanks for this, would be great to see a follow-up when you have figured out the bugs etc.
I never had the ISDX module in Wildfire, so it was endless 'curve, tweak' from memory. Equally tedious as the overzealous constraint system in SW! Have you got any links to the way ISDX handles matching? I'd be keen to have a look. It is a shame that SW constraints are so unpredictable, as the style spline offers so much, as theory is the same as Rhino etc.
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio does rhino have these issues?
@@avitolourenco not in Rhino 7 as it does not have a constraints based sketcher system, although I believe there may be constraints added in Rh8
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Oh agree, Creo is far from perfect. There are a bunch of Creo ISDX tutorials on RUclips or I'm happy to send you a screen capture :) if you upload the file you're working on in the video, I can provide a demo of the equivalent in ISDX
@@m.e.p.r I’m interested in how ISDX handles the G conditions. I used it briefly in the early to mid 2000s but lots of water under the bridge since then! I should stop being lazy and have a search as I’m sure there’s loads online!
Great explanation of spline constructions 🎉
Talk about a temperamental software! I barely ever use curvature continous constraints in SW sketches because it just seems to get in the way more often than not...
BTW, thoroughly enjoy your videos! Plenty of super useful tips and insights!
Yes it can be a bit touchy! I only use co-linear constraints when making a CC constraint to lines as it is more stable than the actual CC constraint. Thanks for watching
I also tried to use the G3 constraint and I couldn't get positive results. I think that G2 is as far as SW can go. I read through some comments and I can see that if you are more intrested in building clean surfaces you either go with some add-ons or just move to other software. I have a love&hate relationship with SW because it did help me numerous times. But also pushed into hell of reparing broken relations in sketches. I think that the feature tree oriented CAD is not the best choice for robust and well defined curves and surfaces. Nevertheless even if I have to repair something, rebuliding only some features is still less time consuming than building entire model without history of operations :) I think we should establish a group of people who have access to different software and use the best software for the task :D
Agree with you, query whether there is a need for G3 in SW, especially as they have not backed it up with the matching surface and evaluation tools. At the moment I'm making a number of changes to models across a range of projects and if they had been built in Rhino, it'd be very time consuming. Guess that is the trade off.
Position of first and second control points are sometimes swapped when setting the curve to g3
Good to know that, thanks.
I think that calls for a discount :D - Damn old bugs that appeared sometimes even before G3.
Eons ago. Maybe they don’t think people use these features. A bug I want them to fix is the pink ghost line that appears on screen sometimes and never goes away unless you close the part. It has appeared in 2021 already
Ah yes! Just watched a vid where it happened to the guy.
Sheetmetal bendlines that unhide itself repeatedly... it's probably there too still.
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Not a bug fix, but I’ve found a way you can remove the pink line without closing the part. If you edit the offending feature that created the pink line (usually a boundary surface with the “mesh preview” feature enabled), you can hover your mouse over the surface mesh lines to “reset” the temporary graphic.
I think the bug happens when you exit the feature with the mesh line still highlighted, which causes it to get stuck.
@@calvinhenderson1483 Good find! Thanks for sharing. I'll try that next time it happens.
Watching someone clearly very good at surfacing in Solidworks also struggle with it makes me feel so much better 😂. I guess it is just s bitch to use.
Yeah, there's normally a way to fudge around issues, but unpredictable constraint issues is one I really do not like!
That’s handy 😂
Handy, like a knife made from cheese? I think they must have added this to tick off a box vs competitors.