Very interesting approach, thanks a lot for your help as i already met such a case while modeling and really had difficults with. I finally changed my design, rather than solving it elegantly. Now, if you allow me a question Sir, there is something that may look basic but i really didn't find an elegant way to reproduce with NX yet, always having geometry problems : it's about splitting a model to make a nice and coherent lip/groove feature, like those used for plastic parts. I've been used to the integrated feature available in Solidworks, but this whole software gimme headaches with its insane history driven phylosophy (one big reason why i switched to synchronous since). I've asked some people, professionals too, but none of them have been able to either understand my problem, nor to explain. So, i'm still searching for the right method to replicate the same within NX. If you or somebody else reading this have an answer or some guidelines, it's more than welcome ! :)
Is there any advantages to using Studio Surface over Through Curve Mesh if you have 4 curves to chose from? On your first one you only had three so I can see why you used it there but in the instance that you do have 4 right off the bat are they then essentially the same function?
They are close to the same. They do create slightly different surfaces though. The differences will really show in when you go to G2 and G3 continuity. Through Curves uses a different method to apply continuity. The math works out different.
You used splines as guide curves and I guess you constrained them to the blue and green surface each, which happen to be planar. I have the problem that my 'side surfaces' are not planar. I tried guide curves, but it does not allow G2 continuity. I tried curve on surface, but the resulting spline does not look like I want it to, I would like to decrease the value for G2 continuity, or otherwise the patch will appear very narrow and odd-looking. Is there a good (stable and editible) solution?
Actually those surfaces have some curvature. When building those curves and using Bridge Curve the best you can hope for is G1 and then adjust the shape of the curve to meet your needs. The Bridge Curve has all sorts of shape controls.
Okay, now I saw, the bridge curve allows me to change tangency value. Do you have a good technique to make this blend G2 continuous? At least along the blends. The blends themselfes can be circular with constant radius and G1 continuous to the sides. I am really struggling at a blend similar to this and I suspect this blend to prevent me from sewing the surfaces together. For now I am fine with G1 continuity as well.
You would make the Bridge Curve G2 or G3. Work the shape to get it as close to the surface as you can then project the curve down. That is the easiest way that works decently but not always. I will have to make a video of some other methods. Good subject.Thanks
Correct. All surfaces have an underlying math with 4 sides. Even if they look 3 sided all tat happens is one edge is collapsed to look like a 3 sided surface. That is bad because it can cause waviness and tiny radii.
I think this is the only Y Fillet Guide for NX, Thanks for your help!
Thanx! Helps so much!
Thanks for watching!
Very interesting approach, thanks a lot for your help as i already met such a case while modeling and really had difficults with. I finally changed my design, rather than solving it elegantly. Now, if you allow me a question Sir, there is something that may look basic but i really didn't find an elegant way to reproduce with NX yet, always having geometry problems : it's about splitting a model to make a nice and coherent lip/groove feature, like those used for plastic parts. I've been used to the integrated feature available in Solidworks, but this whole software gimme headaches with its insane history driven phylosophy (one big reason why i switched to synchronous since). I've asked some people, professionals too, but none of them have been able to either understand my problem, nor to explain. So, i'm still searching for the right method to replicate the same within NX. If you or somebody else reading this have an answer or some guidelines, it's more than welcome ! :)
Can you email me a picture? I will gladly see what I can do. I have a lot of plastics experience.
info@clasasurfacing.com
Is there any advantages to using Studio Surface over Through Curve Mesh if you have 4 curves to chose from? On your first one you only had three so I can see why you used it there but in the instance that you do have 4 right off the bat are they then essentially the same function?
They are close to the same. They do create slightly different surfaces though. The differences will really show in when you go to G2 and G3 continuity.
Through Curves uses a different method to apply continuity. The math works out different.
You used splines as guide curves and I guess you constrained them to the blue and green surface each, which happen to be planar.
I have the problem that my 'side surfaces' are not planar. I tried guide curves, but it does not allow G2 continuity. I tried curve on surface, but the resulting spline does not look like I want it to, I would like to decrease the value for G2 continuity, or otherwise the patch will appear very narrow and odd-looking.
Is there a good (stable and editible) solution?
Actually those surfaces have some curvature. When building those curves and using Bridge Curve the best you can hope for is G1 and then adjust the shape of the curve to meet your needs. The Bridge Curve has all sorts of shape controls.
Okay, now I saw, the bridge curve allows me to change tangency value. Do you have a good technique to make this blend G2 continuous? At least along the blends. The blends themselfes can be circular with constant radius and G1 continuous to the sides.
I am really struggling at a blend similar to this and I suspect this blend to prevent me from sewing the surfaces together. For now I am fine with G1 continuity as well.
You would make the Bridge Curve G2 or G3. Work the shape to get it as close to the surface as you can then project the curve down.
That is the easiest way that works decently but not always.
I will have to make a video of some other methods. Good subject.Thanks
To resume, it's always better to respect a 2-4 sided patches topology as it's more quad compatible than a triangulated 5 sided surface, right ?
Correct. All surfaces have an underlying math with 4 sides. Even if they look 3 sided all tat happens is one edge is collapsed to look like a 3 sided surface. That is bad because it can cause waviness and tiny radii.