First great vid. There aren't that many higher end surfacing people out here showing using Solidworks surfacing like this so it's nice to see. Second....ever since SW added G3 it's been hit or miss at times and have given them quite a few examples where the sketch relationship shouldn't over define but does. It made trying to keep things to the highest degree sometimes impossible.
Thanks for watching! Yes the G3 constraint is fussier than G2 has been in the past. I think I'm getting the hang of setting up the spline in a way to reduce issues when applying the constraint...
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio one place that has great insight is Dimonte Group. Ed Eton and Andrew Lowe are some of the best in the business. Also, philosophical speaking, modeling as a whole is way better than mirroring but when trying to hold Solidworks to that it's daaaaaam near impossible because they think mirroring is ok when it isn't. I personally don't like the isoparm to translate into my surfaces... I want them to be as nice and whole as possible.
I've been talking with Andrew Lowe a bit, he has some great content online and believe he was presenting at SW (3DS?) world 2023. I have not seen what he was discussing though. I don't see an issue with mirroring bodies that are meant to be symmetric. You do have to keep an eye on things to make sure you are carrying the right intent across the centreline. In the case of this bubble letter, the main sections are partial ellipses, so when mirrored the curvature where they knit is all good, as they are matching themselves. I didn't mirror the foot in this case as I knew then I'd probably have to introduce another section to control it and then have more to tweak! I know in the auto world roof surfaces, bonnets, etc may be made as a single surface rather than mirroring so there are no curvature issues, also they will be using single span surfaces. I think modelling symmetric parts as a full body can cause issues for users as there is more for them to keep track of. I recently watched a 'how to, what the pro's do' type video where the user modelled an entire desktop speaker that had some nasty twisting in the body (loft connectors twisted?), so they cut it down to a quadrant (kept a good quarter) then mirrored that twice. I'm not sure what you mean by isoparm translating into your surface! Every surface has isoparms. Do you mean knots? Multispan surfs?
![ROSÉ (로제) - number one girl [더 시즌즈-이영지의 레인보우] | KBS 241129 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/A9oByH9Ci24/mqdefault.jpg)
dis p be pushin
Phenomenal job mate, G3 can be a biatch to work with
Great as always 🙏
All good!
Hi Andrew
Love your 4 sided anticipations, hdr reflection, 3d sketch guiding connectors. Allround sw surfacing masterclass ! Thanks !!
All good Vincent, thanks for watching! Cheers, Andrew
First great vid. There aren't that many higher end surfacing people out here showing using Solidworks surfacing like this so it's nice to see.
Second....ever since SW added G3 it's been hit or miss at times and have given them quite a few examples where the sketch relationship shouldn't over define but does. It made trying to keep things to the highest degree sometimes impossible.
Thanks for watching! Yes the G3 constraint is fussier than G2 has been in the past. I think I'm getting the hang of setting up the spline in a way to reduce issues when applying the constraint...
@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio one place that has great insight is Dimonte Group. Ed Eton and Andrew Lowe are some of the best in the business.
Also, philosophical speaking, modeling as a whole is way better than mirroring but when trying to hold Solidworks to that it's daaaaaam near impossible because they think mirroring is ok when it isn't. I personally don't like the isoparm to translate into my surfaces... I want them to be as nice and whole as possible.
I've been talking with Andrew Lowe a bit, he has some great content online and believe he was presenting at SW (3DS?) world 2023. I have not seen what he was discussing though.
I don't see an issue with mirroring bodies that are meant to be symmetric. You do have to keep an eye on things to make sure you are carrying the right intent across the centreline. In the case of this bubble letter, the main sections are partial ellipses, so when mirrored the curvature where they knit is all good, as they are matching themselves. I didn't mirror the foot in this case as I knew then I'd probably have to introduce another section to control it and then have more to tweak!
I know in the auto world roof surfaces, bonnets, etc may be made as a single surface rather than mirroring so there are no curvature issues, also they will be using single span surfaces.
I think modelling symmetric parts as a full body can cause issues for users as there is more for them to keep track of. I recently watched a 'how to, what the pro's do' type video where the user modelled an entire desktop speaker that had some nasty twisting in the body (loft connectors twisted?), so they cut it down to a quadrant (kept a good quarter) then mirrored that twice.
I'm not sure what you mean by isoparm translating into your surface! Every surface has isoparms. Do you mean knots? Multispan surfs?
When all the surfaces are finished, will they become a solid part?
Correct, it is watertight surface body that can be solidified.
🍏