SW2004, Splines still SUCK!!!


http://www.frontiernet.net/~mlombard /
go to macros library link, look for eqcurve. run the macro, type in an equation, and it will build a spline for you in a sketch. other people on the SW site have 3D equation macros
matt
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Actually the most basic building block in a hybrid modeler is support for disjoint solids. I would agree that splines are next, though. I guess SolidWorks users will have to wait till SolidWorks 2005 and for D-Cubed to develop decent spline control in 3D DCM. Using ACIS as SolidWorks main modeling engine would also help greatly as Parsolid contains very little in the way of surfacing routines where as ACIS does.
For those who need a solution now and don't want to wait...
Concepts has no problem with any of this whatsoever. Concepts uses Spatial Corp's, ACIS to get the job done. Spatial is a Dassault Systθmes company. ;>)
For $995 you get a modeler that has parametric solids and quality surfacing that is associative... both surface to spline and surface to surface. It's not for large assemblies, it doesn't do sheet-metal, it has no CAM but when it comes to pure modeling it blows the doors off of SolidWorks in many areas. Not all, but many.
Perhaps this can help for those stuck with SolidWorks less than adequate surfacing ???
Concepts offers a free demo that can be downloaded at:
http://www.cadsoft-usa.com/trybuy.html
Here are Concepts features:
. Same intuitive user interface for 2D and 3D tools
. Snaps for intelligently locating x y z coordinates, tangents, and perpendiculars
. Concept Explorer to examine and modify associative relationships and construction history
. Customizable key short cuts
. Prompt Window for prompting designer through commands
. Data Entry Window for explicit creation and modification of geometry.
. Object show/hide tools
. Layers and Sub Layers
. Tool Tips
. User defined views, work planes, and pen styles
. Precise kernel serves as foundation for NURB and analytic based geometry definitions
. Points, Lines, Arcs, Circles, Ellipses and Conics
. Splines construction methods of Through point, Control Point, Bezier, On Surface, and Sketch
. Add, remove, elevate, smooth spline control points
. Dynamic modification of position and tangencies
. Dynamic curvature plots
. Project curve to plane
. Best in class offset, trim and relimit curve tools
. 2D Fillet, Chamfer, and Corner
. 1 & 2 Rail Sweep
. Extrude by Vector
. Cover (Coon's and N-Sided)
. Skin, Skin with Guides, and Skin with Draft
. Nets (MxN curve networks)
. Offset
. Blend with user defined takeoff magnitudes
. Fillet
. Rebuild, Elevate, & Join
. Thicken
. Match G1 or G2
. Trim and Untrim
. Associativity for all creation and modifications
. Gaussian, Zebra, Draft Analysis
. Best in Class Filleting and Chamfering Tools
. Shelling
. Extrude, Sweep, Lathe
. 1 & 2 Rail Sweeps
. Protrusions and Cutouts
. Booleans (Add, Subtract, Union).
. Trim and Split
. Stitching and Healing with user defined tolerances
. Primitives
. Holes
. Lofting between Faces
. Parametric Features
. Associative History Tree
. Deform Face
. Remove, Offset, Move, Replace, Match Face
. Bend and Bend Along Curve
. Draft Faces
. Generate drawings automatically from 3D models from templates
. Pen Weights, Patterns, Styles
. Horizontal, Vertical, Radial, Diametric, Center Marks, Leaders, Callouts, Angular Dimensions
. Tolerances and User Settings for Dimension Attributes
. Stacked, Dual, Fractions
. Hatching and Fill Patterns
. Bill of Materials
. Text (Normal, Angle, Path)
. Raytracing with Anti-Aliasing
. Unlimited Point, Spot, and distant lights
. Adjustable soft and hard shadows
. Drag and Drop from Material Library
. Backgrounds & Foregrounds
. Material Editor for controlling reflectance, color, displacement, transparency, and texture space
. Walk Through, Fly By
. QuickTime Object VR
. QuickTime Panoramic VR
. QuickTime Event Recording Data Exchange
. DXF/DWG
. SAT, IGES, STEP
. CATIA v4
. Adobe Illustrator (up to v9)
. Rhino Import
. STL
System Requirements
PC
.Microsoft Windows XP Professional or Windows 2000 Intel Pentium or AMD Athlon class processor
.128 MG RAM or greater (512 MG to 1GB recommended for large parts)
.Mouse Point Device
.CD-ROM Drive
Mac
. OSX (Carbon)
. OpenGl
. G4 Processor
. 512 MB RAM
. CD-ROM Drive
. Mouse (recommend 2 button mouse)
jon

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thank you for the ad, oh great clueless one.
--
Cliff Huprich

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

NURBS is NURBS, idiot.
--
Cliff Huprich

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Functionality is pretty independent of the kernel.
UG uses parasolid, and has incredible functionality. The kernel, be it ACIS or parasolid, is just the last step in expressing the geometric result of a surface modelling routine.
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (Cliff Huprich) wrote in message writes:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Functionality is pretty independent of the kernel."
Wrong. Let me give you some examples of why your wrong and how wrong you are. I don't mean to be rude but you are way off base and I'm more than happy to prove it.
"UG uses parasolid, and has incredible functionality."
Yes it does. However the Parasolid kernel is devoid of the surfacing routines that are in Unigraphics. UGS PLM Solutions (their new name this week) is not about to give away the farm ! When a company chooses to use Parasolid and they wish to offer a full featured hybrid modeler that company *MUST marry outside surfacing routines to Parasolid* and try and get both to play nice. Good "F"ing luck ... It doesn't work very well.
Would you like a reference that will confirm this for you ? This company clearly states that they have married their surfacing routines to Parasolid. Why ??? Because the needed surfacing routines are not in Parasolid. Just ask and I'll provide the reference.
* Most people in this newsgroup have no idea that with ACIS not only are the surfacing routines there but the spline routines are there as well. *
If SolidWorks used ACIS as it's modeling kernel users of SolidWorks would not be having the massive problems with splines that they are having now.
Concepts users ACIS. Anyone can call Concepts and they will be glad to tell you that the spline routines in Concepts are a part of the ACIS kernel.
jon
writes:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Would you like a reference that will confirm this for you ? This company clearly states that they have married their surfacing routines to Parasolid. Why ??? Because the needed surfacing routines are not in Parasolid. Just ask and I'll provide the reference."
Tell you what, you don't even have to ask. Here is proof of what I have stated for many years in this newsgroup:
http://www.vero-software.com/corporate.htm
"Despite the limitations of the early personal computers the products were always designed to run on the PC platforms, first under MS-DOS and later within the Windows environment. Initial expansion was fuelled by an innovative approach to three dimensional modelling and machining. Having developed its own surface modelling and been among the first practical PC applications for free form design, the company went on to propose the first PC implementation of the EDS Parasolid modeller which has latterly become so popular with software developers and is now the de-facto standard for solid modellers."
As you can now tell from what is above, Vero Software was the first company to license Parasolid kernel and marry their surfacing routines to Parasolid.
* If Parasolid had the needed functionality, Vero would not of had to marry their surfacing routines to Parasolid !!! *
Further, SolidWorks would not be having the problems it has with trying to get surfacing to work with Parasolid.
The surfacing tools that are needed to create a true hybrid modeler simply do not exist in the Parasolid kernel.
Concepts has no such problems... why ??? Because Tim Olson the creator and owner of Concepts is smart enough to use ACIS.
Note, Autodesk was smart enough to purchase ACIS code at version 7 and rest their future on developing that code in what they now call ShapeManager.
Simply put, when a company chooses to use Parasolid they get the most robust solid kernel in the business. What they don't get is a hybrid modeling kernel. As ACIS has gotten better and better it has become a much more viable solution.
Alibre uses ACIS IronCAD uses ACIS Ashlar-Vellum Cobalt uses ACIS Autodesk Inventor is based on ACIS Cadkey Workshop uses ACIS Concepts uses ACIS Cimatron uses ACIS
ACIS is far and away a more complete solution than Parasolid. ACIS, while still maybe not quite as robust as Parasolid at solid modeling, is and has been good enough.
jon
writes:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
re: "I don't mean to be rude ..."
I've noticed that you are very much so, to nearly everyone. Just an observation.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm working on it.
jon

observation.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
....but I won't let that fact stop me from following up on your suggested reading.
I had the opportunity to do some major model surgery on Pro/E (pre-Granite) and parasolid in UG. Parasolid is nearly alive when it comes to healing abilities. Definitely a cut above what Pro/E had (was it ACIS?)
I don't know the politics that keep others from fully exploiting parasolid's possibilities, but I have seen quite well what it can do.
Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"I don't know the politics that keep others from fully exploiting parasolid's possibilities, but I have seen quite well what it can do."
The bottom line is that the *high level routines* that need to be in Parasolid don't exist ! This makes it extremely difficult for software developers and it's why no seamless, unified, hybrid solution has ever appeared that makes use of Parasolid besides UGS PLM Solutions products. A few years back I discussed the lack of high level surfacing routines in Parasolid with Mike Crown who use to work for Varimetrix, now VX. Mike Crown felt that SolidWorks Corp. would have a very difficult time making SolidWorks a true seamless, unified, hybrid modeler. Time has proven Mike Crown to be one hundred percent correct.
Mike Crown was one of the nicest, sharpest guys in the CAD/CAM business and he was well liked by several of us on alt.machines.cnc. Total straight shooter and a long time employee of Varimetrix (now VX).
Go have a look at the ACIS website. Download the .PDF on the 3D ACIS modeler. Note how Spatial pushes the hybrid capabilities of ACIS.
"ACIS is ideal for constructing applications with hybrid modeling features- integrating wireframe, surface, and solid modeling functionality with both manifold and non-manifold topology, and a rich set of geometric operations."
Like I've said for many years in this newsgroup, ACIS contains the high level routines that make it much, much easier to produce a seamless, unified, hybrid modeler.
With Parasolid, this is obviously a bitch to do and no one has done it besides UGS PLM Solutions.
I do not believe for one moment that SolidWorks Corp can pull it off alone. Only if other vendors such as D-Cubed create more robust products can any real progress be made.
Based on these FACTS, this should give people a very good idea of why Autodesk hired D-Cubed to work on their kernel !
http://www.caddigest.com/subjects/autocad/select/spatial_dcubed.htm
This may have been the reason why a slowdown occurred in what D-Cubed has been able to produce with 2D DCM as well as 3D DCM as D-Cubed does what probably is much more lucrative work for Autodesk.
SolidWorks must make the move to ACIS or it's going to be a long slow painful road to seamless, unified, hybrid modeling in SolidWorks.
It's also going to be very embarrassing when Alibre and IronCAD move past SolidWorks in the second quarter of next year by utilizing the surfacing routines in the ACIS kernel.
At $995 Concepts already makes SolidWorks look very bad when it comes to pure modeling capabilities.
www.cadsoft-usa.com
jon

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Got your head on backwards again today?

What's a "kernel", clueless idiot?

He hung up on you , right?

Nope. It's proven that you are clueless.

Never saw post one from him and a search finds not a single one. Lots of noise by jon_blabber though <G>. All from one attempted (collect?) phone call years ago? LOL ....

Still employed there is he? The black ball says "No".
--
Cliff Huprich


Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Take a good look at UGS PLM Solutions website for Parasolid. No emphasis whatsoever on building a hybrid modeler with Parasolid. None... just on how robust Parasolid is and that Parasolid is the only kernel used in a high-end solution (theirs)... Unigraphics.
Bottom line.... Parasolid does not contain the high level surfacing routines and other various tools that developers badly need to create a seamless, unified, hybrid modeler.
jon

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Dear clueless idiot: It's a kernel.
--
Cliff Huprich

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pro/e does not use ACIS (although, it does have ACIS import/export), it uses the same kernal it always has (granite, just got that name a few years ago).
Why do other tools, like SW, not take advantage of other parasolid features, I would think that is a limitation of the developer or the choices they make in utilizing those features, customer demands, market direction and of course cost. Since SW indirectly owns ACIS via it's parent company, Dassault Systemes, I can guess that the decisions to utilize and promote parasolid functionality maybe a contradiction to their future interest or a partial reason or unwillingness for SW Corp to move faster with implementing more surface tools from parasolid, for SW? And this may also be a waiting game for SW Corp to see if they can break away from parasolid, or shifting to ACIS, while maintaining the speed and functionality the SW users are use too? IMHO, I still think parasolid kicks ass but I'm sure the line between of speed and functionality is becoming a blur so... who knows...when the timing is right, and if ACIS saves SW Corp money and it does not have a adverse effect on it's users as well as give them what they need...?
It all comes back to their user base and most SW users do not need or will ever need surfacing... so what is the incentive for SW Corp?? Money and competition are the major driving influences and also new users requesting more surfacing tools are the only hope for users who have been requesting more surfacing tools.
Over the years, I just do not see SW Corp as a front runner to innovation. Yeah, they are better than AutoDe$k, but becoming similar over the years.. also they're a company they have been true to it's intention, to be a mainstream design tool and just a bit more at times. (mainstream = typical = average = general = conservative = the average levi wearing 9-5 joe...) Unfortunately, SW has been trying to be everything to everybody and in some ways loosing touch with the mainstream, which is still a huge market and that is where tools like Inventor (surfacing is limited but they are trying) have focused and another reason why (read, no competition) SW has not pushed enough with surfacing. Now, with Pro/e adding more ISDX surfacing to it's foundation package and SolidEdge pushing it BlueDot functionality.. as well as other inexpensive tools adding parametric and relational surfacing,.. the hope for adding more parametric curve and surfacing tools into SW will most likely be shifting towards the needs of SW users in need of those tools.
So, finally, there are other mainstream, inexpensive and evolved modeling tools which are again being innovative leaders and pushing relational or parametric driven curves and surfacing with more ease of use, control and manipulation functionality... so there is hope in the forseable future...
..
TheTick wrote:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
"Since SW indirectly owns ACIS via it's parent company, Dassault Systemes, I can guess that the decisions to utilize and promote parasolid functionality maybe a contradiction to their future interest or a partial reason or unwillingness for SW Corp to move faster with implementing more surface tools from parasolid, for SW?"
The tools that you think exist in Parasolid are not there. If the tools were in Parasolid then SolidWorks Corp. would have implemented them by now. SolidWorks is without a doubt a leader at early innovation of 3rd party software components. That you think the proper high-level tools somehow exist in Parasolid ignores all common sense. Specifically you ignore why so many companies have chosen the ACIS kernel and have put up with Spatial when the ACIS kernel left a lot to be desired, several years ago. Why do you think innovative companies like IronCAD chose ACIS first ??? Why was SolidWorks originally built with ACIS ??? The answer is the it's a more complete solution with higher level tools but up until a few years ago ACIS was not robust enough. ACIS is probably still not quite as good as Parasolid at solid only modeling.
IMO, Solidworks Corp. was caught out when Autodesk hired D- Cubed to work on ShapeManager and both SolidWorks and D- Cubed development have suffered.... BADLY !
"but I'm sure the line between of speed and functionality is becoming a blur so... who knows...when the timing is right, and if ACIS saves SW Corp money and it does not have a adverse effect on it's users as well as give them what they need...?"
For the last year or more Spatial has mainly worked to shore up ACIS and make it more robust and make it faster. Very little work seems to be done on new features. IMO, this is so that installing ACIS in SolidWorks and CATIA will not cause regression.
"It all comes back to their user base and most SW users do not need or will ever need surfacing... so what is the incentive for SW Corp??"
How bad does it look that $995 Concepts is a more versatile modeler than SolidWorks and surfacing and solid tools work very well together in Concepts ?
Concepts can be downloaded for a test drive at:
www.cadsoft-usa.com
Why put up with the low level surfacing functionality of Rhino or the poor surfacing tools in SolidWorks ?
How bad will it look when in the second quarter of next year Alibre and IronCAD implement more of what's in the ACIS kernel ? Hopefully PTC will keep losing their ass and find away to include ISDX II with Pro/E Wildfire at no charge. If this happens the shit will really hit the fan because Pro/E will suddenly become a major bargain. If PTC manglement had any brains they would already be doing this instead of continuing to loose their ass and sink in red ink. What a mess.
"SolidEdge pushing it BlueDot functionality..."
There is a new release of SolidEdge do out soon and it looks to have some very strong mold design tools and can do stuff that SolidWorks can't.
See:
http://www.cadcamnet.com /
This new version of SolidEdge will be targeted toward mold designers / mold shops because it now has *more* innovative features that most other products don't have. IMO, UGS PLM Solutions knows that the game is over and that SolidEdge is going to have to be a real bread winner for them and compete and win against SolidWorks, Inventor, etc. in more situations.
"So, finally, there are other mainstream, inexpensive and evolved modeling tools which are again being innovative leaders and pushing relational or parametric driven curves and surfacing with more ease of use, control and manipulation functionality... so there is hope in the forseable future..."
What you wrote above is beyond obvious. What doesn't help is so few SolidWork users (yourself included) don't understand what the real issues are with Parasolid and why ACIS needed to be in SolidWorks yesterday.
Anyone who thinks that SolidWorks Corp. can make the surfacing that is in SolidWorks work properly without outside help is in serious fantasy land.
jon

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I don't think anyone cares anymore how confused you are. Or how full of clueless BS.
Try actually learning something about 3D CAD, CAD/CAM or CAM systems someday.
--
Cliff Huprich

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@liquidschwarz.com (TheTick) writes:

People have been trying to explain such simple things to The Idiot Banquer for many years. He's still totally clueless in his rants. Give it a go <G>.
--
Cliff

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
This is how Don LaCourse describes ACIS.
http://www.cadalyst.com/features/0500kernel /
"ACIS is an object-oriented C++ geometry library that comprises 35 DLLs and integrates wire frame, surface, and solid modeling with both manifold and nonmanifold topology. It gives application developers a rich set of geometric operations for constructing and manipulating complex models. These include blending, sweeping, imprinting, covering, lofting, skinning, offsetting, slicing, stitching, sectioning, fitting, and interpolating surfaces. ACIS also offers a complete set of regularized and nonregularized Boolean operations, and length, area, and mass property inquiry functions. Its Laws Symbolic Math Interface and NURBS-based deformation allow the integration of surface and solid modeling. The ACIS kernel outputs a SAT file format that any ACIS-enabled application can read directly. "
Now lets take a look at how Don LaCourse describes VX's UPG2 kernel used in Vision:
"UPG2 (Unified Parametric Geometry-Second Generation) is a proprietary robust geometric modeling kernel unique to the CAD/CAM system VX Vision (figure 6) from Varimetrix (www.vx.com). UPG2 integrates solid, surface, wire frame, and drafting geometry as well as process, tool path, and other product information in a single, unified database."
The UPG2 kernel addresses the full range of 3D modeling tasks, from industrial design through mechanical engineering to mold and tool design within the context of VX Vision's Unified Modeling environment. This environment adapts hybrid-modeling techniques in a transparent manner so designers can seamlessly work in and move among solid, surface, and wire frame representations.
"UPG2 supports such functions as nonmanifold shapes, unlimited undo/redo, object versioning, advanced free-form surface creation, complex filleting and blending, and true in-context modeling of assemblies. The kernel's Proximity Compliant Tolerancing uses incremental, on-the-fly healing technology rather than fixed, relative or adaptive schemes. This provides substantial improvement in performance, according to the company."
jon
writes:

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip press release of yet another edited press release>
What part of all that caused your reading comprehension to bog down yet again?
--
Cliff Huprich

Add pictures here
βœ–
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.