Posted: 20 March 2006 at 11:12am | IP Logged

hi.....using solids for easy(not complecated) models is good.but if u want to design a complex shapes such a car body or pc mouse etc...it is better to use surfaces and some times u mustmno other choice...

i hope that is informative

Posted: 20 March 2006 at 11:27am | IP Logged

I use surfaces extensively in modeling even simple assemblies. They are a powerful tool.

The main advantage comes from the fact that you can model 3d volumetric parts, yet they don't have to be formal parts, so they are not ever included in BOM's. For this reason you can use them

As base features for individual parts to pull common data from

Skeletons to control size and locations

Tools to control the allotment of space and clearance

Incorporate other "meta" type data that you don't want to be visible (at least not in the default viewing mode). For instance you can create volumes in your part that are an exact reperesentation of the form that has to be machined in mating components to accomodate it. The manufacturing data / machining volume is then store within the actual part itself.

Posted: 22 March 2006 at 4:32am | IP Logged

Hi EddyVE,

  I am new to pro-e, only been using it on & off for about 3 months now ( but my total time using is more like 5 hours per week for 3 months

  I have started using surfaces and I am completely self-taught,  dont be put off if your unsure about them, there are plenty of tutorials and guides that you can find online.

 I am doing ok, but slow progress.

Posted: 22 March 2006 at 11:03am | IP Logged

appinmi wrote: We are a manufacturing house. We never create our own models. We create process models from customer's blue prints. We start with the "stock" material and. to simulate the machining process, everything is done with "cuts". If we were to allways use solid cuts, sometimes we would have to add material back onto the part. When machining, you can never add material to the part so we use surfaces, then merge them together, and use the merged surfaces as our cut. That way we are never trying to "add material" back onto the part.

I understand that no milling or turning can add material. But I fail to see how a cut can add material. Am I missing something ?

(I design turned components on a regular base. I do use revolved protrusions to add material but that's in order to create controllable features, the final product needs to be turned with realistic equipment - and that's the designers responsibility)

Alex

Posted: 22 March 2006 at 11:23am | IP Logged

We do a lot of 3D surfacing. If you design a cut at the base of the surfaces, if there are any protrussions, such as bosses, you will then have to create a protrussion on the model that puts the bosses back in. We create a surface with capped ends at the base of the cut. Then create the bosses as surfaces, merge together, and use these merged surfaces to create the cut.

Another example was something that happenedto us. We roughed out a part, leaving .030 stock all around, sent the part to heat treat, and then finished the part when it came back. To our amazement, the fillets did not clean up, because when we modeled the finish cuts, we did a CUT and then created the fillets using a ROUND. Since the finish cut left a square corner along the trajectory, putting a ROUND in to create the fillet was easy and didn't show any problems. When we went back and remodeled it, we changed the solid cut into a surface. Then added a ROUND to the surface, and then made the cut. We were surprised the this cut showed that the rough cut gouged into the fillet. So now we never create any features that will add material to the model.

Posted: 23 March 2006 at 2:42am | IP Logged

Is it possible to model this one just only using solid command?

Posted: 23 March 2006 at 3:17am | IP Logged

Yes : copy external geometry  

Alex