Welcome to MCAD Central

Join our MCAD Central community forums, the largest resource for MCAD (Mechanical Computer-Aided Design) professionals, including files, forums, jobs, articles, calendar, and more.

Register Log in

a bit of a challenge: But who knows Catia

design-engine

New member
I have a challenge for some of you great Catia users over the fence here.

the clay bake challenge was proposed (by me) on another board and we are interested from a Catia perspective how Catia would handle modeling this form.

http://www.productdesignforums.com/index.php?showtopic=8141

Pro/E: users utilize the add on package ISDX to use COS to trip back
the melted glass. 2 uses parametric combined with free form curves to
parametrically control (not calculate) the bake and melt sag. parent
child relations aid engineers calculate the bake process
parametrically. WF 4.0 allows user to tug and pull on internal CV's of
the surface yet while maintaining parent child relations to the
original curves. End point constraints can accomplished with the Curve
thru Points tool in stock Pro/E however upon redefine of the curve thru
points on surface requires loosing the tweak mods before redefining. No
Isoparm display on the surface offers no density feedback to designer
therefore compared to light geometry that might be created in Alias
Studio no isoparm display may create unnecessarily more dense geometry.
Warp tool in Pro/E is hard to localize manipulation and might be
difficult to manage the hot clay scenario.

Alais: - since Curve
on Surface cant force tangency on end points in Alias Studio or Auto
Studio experts might reach for the common work around alternate
technique of using a 3 degree curve not sketched on surface and project
instead as a work around. Alias experts like to tug and pull on the
internal control verticies of the surface to obtain the weighted hot
glass look instead of managing thru curves. Hi end users often brake
construction history so they get to rebuild the curves and surfaces
instead of making slight mods to make before and after bake or melting
games. When modifying and pulling on internal CV of surface user is
forced to brake construction history. Full tangency and isparm display.

Rhino:
user has to constantly rebuild curves and surfaces ... designers are
still struggling with the model in our office this week and I have not
seen if they can force tangency on COS endpoints. Rhino parent child is
maturing and users remodel to obtain the various modes of melted glass.
When modifying and pulling on internal CV of surface user is forced to
brake construction history. Full tangency and ispparm display.

SW:
model technique works similar as Pro/E without the add on expense of
ISDX but lacks realtime update feedback. SW can't project a 3d curve
onto surface so the Alias technique is not possible in SW (2007) but
this curve on surface technique works great since in SW users can
control end point conditions with curve on surface. As user flexes for
modifying the weight of the hot clay scenario before it cures the
parent child relations might fail or require a repair. Users can not
modify internal CV (maybe they can?) of a surface. 'Fill surface' tool
offers unique tools for managing the weight of the hot clay exercise. No
tangency line nor isoparm display might cause more complexity when
creating cross or internal curves due to not being able to snap
directly to the tangency edge. 'Flex input' tool works here for a work
around to managing the weight of the clay mods but the tool is
difficult to localize and control the tool (2007)


But who knows Catia surfacing well enough to enlighten us?


Edited by: design-engine
 

Zaki

Member
Hy Bart
I just spend 1 hour and its the result. As u know I am not much expert in Catia as compare to WF. As I cant make it thick, so I will upload another solution soon too.
 

Sponsor

Top