how do i merge the 2 surface?

[apollo]

Hi i have the pipe but it has a gap right at the elbow as shown. can someone teach me how to fill the gap? thanks in advance.


View attachment 5286

 

[design-engine]

with a boundary blend.... call me and Ill walk you thru it over the phone. 312.226.8339 ask for bart and see if you can get past the gate keeper steve.

 

[apollo]

Bart thanks but I dont have access to phone or I would. Thanks!

 

[apollo]

I did the boundary blend but when I change to wireframe it shows yellow there. Does that mean its not warer tight?

 

[tobbo]

did you Merge your new Boundaryblend together with the original surface, usingthe merge command? If the surfacegot yellow edges , it means that you got open ends on you surf.


Select one of the tubes and your new BB surf, then click the merge icon. When your done, do the same thing on the other tube. (if you want to do it the correct way then you should also change the option inside merge to "join" instead of "intersect")


Did you use any tangency on the edges or did you leave the edge "free"?


....and i some cases you might need to set up your controllpoints when connecting tubes like that.


//Tobias

 

[faisalmk]

Draw a trajectory (curve or line as you wish) connecting those two segments.


Go to variable section sweep and draw circlehaving same diameter as those two segments.

 

[tobbo]

Draw a trajectory (curve or line as you wish) connecting those two segments.


Go to variable section sweep and draw circlehaving same diameter as those two segments.

If you are about to draw a traj, then i would go for the Sweptblend instead..


//Tobias

 

[wtb999]

why would you do a VSS, when Boundary blend is so much
easier in this case?

Tobias - you can merge all the 3 surfaces in one feature.
You just have to make sure that they are picked in the
right sequence i.e. DONT pick the two pipes first and then
the blend.

 

[tobbo]

wtb999 - Yes you can if you got WF4,WF5 or Creosince that option wasnt introduced until then.... Looking at the pic and seeing the darkblue background made me think that he might not be dealing with the latest release. Or "apollo"might is , just that they got a different syscol or just got thier pro/e setup to use old school colors.


Regarding the "merge a lot of surfaces into one feature" , it good and it only works with surfaces thats got a "join connection". BUT....it makes the "failure-mode-handeling" more complex when dealing with large surfacemodells. A funny thing i often see in some surfacemodells is that people dont tend to change/use the optinon "join/intersect". Thats something that can break the most robust surfacemodells when changing some base features.


Speaking of BB , if the "gap" is bigger than in apollos picture, then you might want to add some more curves to force your BB to be more smooth. Although, i would recommend BB before a VSS and a sweptblend


View attachment 5288


//Tobias

 

[wtb999]

hey thanks for the info, Tobbo. learn something new
everyday on this website. And here I was thinking that I am
going to teach something to a MVP.

so on complex models, do you typically merge quilts one by
one? and I am guessing from your posts, that you recommend
using join and not intersect.

 

[apollo]

Thanks all you guys are gurus. I figured that out as Tobbo and Design-Engine suggested. Idid the boundary blend. It worked but then I had to merge them as another step so i can solidify it. Nothing is better than messing around with it. Thanks all!

Edited by: apollo

 

[tobbo]

hey thanks for the info, Tobbo. learn something new
everyday on this website. And here I was thinking that I am
going to teach something to a MVP.

so on complex models, do you typically merge quilts one by
one? and I am guessing from your posts, that you recommend
using join and not intersect.

Complex modells...yes , i do like to merge "one by one" since "merge many" only works with join connection surfaces....And since i find it easier to deal with failuremode then.Offcourse in this case, you can merge all three at the same time, but on more complex, i would say "keep it simple" and dont be afraid to have many featuers in your modelltree. (Btw, I think its kind of funny when people say they never need to use failuremode, or never ends up there.... That must be because they dont do complex stuff or never pushes themselfs to do anything beyond their knowledge ;-) )


I DO recommend using join instead of intersect when its a JOIN connection between the surfaces. If its a intersect, you have no choise, but on a join connection , you actually can use intersect, but i do recommend using join.


In this case with the pipes , you could probably stayed with "intersect" that would have worked...but since its actually a Join connection, then it should be a join connection. If you get used to always choose the right type (join/intersect) then your modells will be more robust in the end.


//Tobias