Shelling is for solids. Turning surfaces into solids can be done two ways.
You can 'Edit>Solidify' a completely enclosed, "watertight" volume just by
picking the quilt (must also be completely merged) and solidifying it. Or
you can thicken an open (like a shell or bowl) surface and doing
'Edit>Thicken'. Solidify is the most stringent in its demands on the type
and quality of the surface; thicken can be done to almost any surface,
providing all patches are merged. If you can't merge the patches to form a
single quilt, Pro/e won't let you solidify/thicken it either.
Thanks for the info, didn't help in this case. The file is an imported
iges with a single feature, and most options are greyed out
I don't know what the native format of the file was just want to get
to something editable to allow extra cuts and protrusions, etc.
The top left is the file in Pro, top right is in Rhino to simplify
creating sections/ tool paths.
Looks like both pics are Rhino.
The bad news is; it's a facet rep model, either facet mesh objects (don't
~think~ you're going to work it in Pro/E unless you have REXX, ReStyle, etc.) or
a planar surface representation of the mesh model (with a gazillion edges and
faces satisfaction won't come easy if at all).
You'd probably be much better off working that in a system intended for mesh
If you set your selection filter to Geometry or Quilt are you able to select
faces (anything?) in the graphics area?
What's listed in Rhino (mesh or planar faces)? If it's mesh objects you can
mesh2nurbs (or something like that) to get planar faces, maybe join everything
and export or vice-versa.
This is your nice, sweet, innocent, "just inquiring, mildly curious".
SOLIDS!?! SHELLS!?! Then, somehow, out of that, we arrive at STLs and
Rhino!?! WTF, you ignorant, lying, illiterate SOB (nicest thing I can say
about someone who suckers me into a discussion and then tells me the
discussion is about something entirely different). If ya got a practical
question, like, I'm stuck, trying to get from here to here, we'd be glad to
help!! If you got some theoretical "is it possible to....." yada yada yada,
who cares and go grank yourself. I'm not answering those dumbass questions
anymore, just to be made a fool of. Move on, we have better things to do.
Having trouble coming to grips with the "new" CAD forum model, David? All
that's left out here is us hobbyists, school kids, drafters hired in over our
abilities and, of course, the out-n-out shills. Or, maybe, it just goes with
the new affordable, "easy to learn" Pro/E territory? You have my sympathy, but
heck; they gotta learn it someplace. Loosen up, have some fun.
I asked because I don't know, if that makes me a dumbass so be it.
As for ignorant - don't tnink so I'm asking questions trying to learn.
Lying????? Illiterate, probably and my mom dresses me funny too.
The question was asked because I know squat about surfaces in any cad
program. I do appreciate all the HELP from the various posters, thanks
for the info! I'll keep trying on my own.
With regards to being made a fool of ............
Well, I agree, you had the better, more "fun" answer (mesh2nurbs!?!?! how do
you come up with this stuff, Jeff?) But, it took two posts to get this
simple scenario out of him. He talks about shells, surfaces, iges and
apparently knows nothing about faceted solds or STLs. I'm sure you'll be
happy to know, we're not done with the fun yet, I'm absolutely certain of
that. More dentistry to come. Always more teeth to pull. And, as far as
teaching the newbies, I do it every day. They're a talkative bunch; they'll
try very hard to describe the problem they're having, or, at least, just
enough to get you up out of your chair so you'll come and take a look. And
that's my problem (and always has been) with this forum, this pure text
methodology: it depends totally on the ability of those who come here to
communicate, in writing (no way we can be looking over their shoulders). And
9 out of 10 is horrible at written, verbal communication; and most of those,
when you point this out to them, act as if it were a personal insult, really
nerdy, social retard behavior. Engineers, no less, the ones whose
professional lives are based on presumptions of objective, critical
scrutiny, on data and numbers, which seem to hold sway until we examine
their participation in this process of obtaining help. Then, I'm the bad guy
for insisting that they not mumble, that they stand up straight, that they
not stammer and instead, speak in complete English sentences and present a
single, coherent, well formulated idea per paragraph. No wonder I scored in
the 90th percentile on the CLEP test in English Compostion ~ the doofuses
that come here brought the standard way down. Ah, well, that's kind of a
I understand completely.
"Mesh2Nurbs" (had to look it up) is actually (Rhino command) MeshToNURB.
Converts mesh object(s) to planar NURBS surf(s) which, I think, carry around
more baggage as it's a more complex definition but at least normal solid or
surface functions ~will~ work with it, albeit not very efficiently or
effectively. That model (for RC's benefit) is a little over the top for a
learning experience or for any "mechanical" or NURBS / Analytic surface based
system, though. Maybe worth piddling with if the desires are dirt simple or
you're just looking for an alternative to network TV? [Just speaking for
myself; I'd rather follow Cliff's Winger bashing on comp.cad.solidworks. ]