Need Help with the Boundary Surface Tool

LOL

 

indeed, but why shouldnt it be 'free'...something to fill that largely
empty box SW comes in
you already forked out x thousand dollars for a program and a pc and
now you need to spend another thousand to get the full manual?!
hello...
probably though you should temper your enthusiasm until you actually
find out whats in the material.
my guess is that it still doesnt really give you the empowering
information that you seek...no offense to Matt but he seems to have
'contributed heavily' to it and he doesnt appear to know himself how
it works...
in fact nearing 9 months after its launch as a new and powerful tool a
large number of people seem to lack a decent understanding of it
including myself ;o)

 

"There is a new "Advanced Surface Modeling" manual that was just
release in May. I gave away a few copies at SWW. It is an excellent
example/tutorial-driven manual contributed heavily by Matt Lombard and
others. It is not for sale however, but offered as a 2 day course at
your local SW VAR."

You just don't get it Mark. Your not the only one. In fact, in the
CADCAM business your in good company. How does it feel to be part of
the problem rather than being part of the solution? As soon as
SolidWork Corp. hires a former critic it's amazing how they become
part of the problem and usually make the problem even worse.

Know who your daddy now is, Mark?

That would be me and the reason I'm your new daddy is I'm going to
call you on how you have sold out every chance I get. What your wrote
above has got to be some of the lamest bullshit posted to this
newsgroup since the days when Joe Dunne once claimed that one should
never break the history of a solid model and that what IronCAD and
SolidDesigner were doing was old school.

Joe Dunne was full of shit then.

You're full of shit now.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

"Why not just offer the manual for sale seperately? Many of us are
smart enough to make our way through it alone. Why force users to pay
hundreds (if not thousands) of dollars to have their hand held
unnecessarily simply to obtain a manual that probably cost less than
$10 to produce?

Your not going to like the answer, Scott.

Once upon a time Mark Biasotti use to stand up and state how fucked up
SolidWorks was when it came to the lack of decent surfacing tools in
SolidWorks... so SolidWorks Corp hired Mark to do something about it.

Now that Mark Biasotti works for SolidWorks Corp. Mark it's obvious
that Mark Biasotti feels he has to protect the SolidWorks VAR
network.

The bottom line is **** what is right for end users because it's the
VAR network first with SolidWorks Corp. The VAR model of doing
business has some really serious drawbacks. This is one of them.

Perhaps one day Ed Eaton will decide that instead of SolidWorks World
presentations that writing a book or doing a video would help far more
SolidWorks end users and be far more gratifying.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

"It comes across as Solidworks being more interested in squeezing
every possible nickel out of it's customers than having any interest
in people using Solidworks to it's full potential."

It comes across that way because it's a proven FACT.

I think the best that we can do at this point is to find ways to
reward and encourage independents outside the SolidWorks VAR network
to create the documentation that for 10 years SolidWorks Corp. has
been unwilling to create.

IMO there is a lot more that we can do to support those that have
already done something about the problem.... Matt Lombard, perhaps the
SolidProfessor people (I need to call / visit them as they are in San
Diego as well), others that I might not be aware of right now.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Come on Jon thats a bit over the top.You can be critical without being
outrightly abusive.
I think Mark does his best in a straight jacket situation. I dont
think he necessarily agrees with what happens at SW but he has a line
to walk

The capabilty of the ID tools are improving with each release in my
observation (except for the capless combs)
Its just they really arent connecting with users well on this.
I really dont see what the problem is making some insightful video
tutorials available with the product.
Mark has already made some good ones for promotional purposes but I
think it needs to be revisited with a what and why approach and throw
in one or two from Ed as well.
A lot of SW is self explanitory but the ID stuff needs some more
focused assistance IMHO

To answer the original poster of this thread -
Nothing really exists that you can access readily to help you.
Try looking for the promotional webcasts on the SW website for some
clues.
I have 3 in my collection I picked up along the way perhaps there are
others out there as well
This difficulty in finding truly empowering info is not confined to
boundary by any means.
Its a long standing fault with the type of documentation provided... I
still miss the printed manual..another lost cause...
I would like to think Ed would be generous enough to share some
powerpoint presentations to make up for the deficiencies of SW
themselves but then again why should he.

 

"You can be critical without being outrightly abusive."

After ten years I've had enough of the never ending bullshit on why
the proper documentation doesn't exist for SolidWorks and is not made
available directly to the end user.

Mark Biasotti put himself in this position by choice. He walks a fine
line by choice. He's the SolidWorks Product Manager who can't manage
to get the proper documentation available and into the hands of end
users without forcing them to pay outrageous rates for something that
should be included with the product at no additional cost.

I really can be a very easy person to deal with. :>)

For Instance:

I accept that the proper documentation is not going to be included at
no additional cost with SolidWorks. I'm happy to spend between $50 and
$100 on a quality book and in the $300 to $500 rage for quality
videos. I think I'm a pretty generous guy who is willing to pay good /
fair money to change a situation I find totally unacceptable.

"The capabilty of the ID tools are improving with each release in my
observation (except for the capless combs)"

Mark Biasotti has made a difference in this area. What Mark Biasotti
refuses to deal with is that without proper documentation it doesn't
mean much because so few SolidWorks users are willing to spend the
kind of time Ed Eaton does to painfully figure out how to use the tool
and what it's limitations are.

"I really dont see what the problem is making some insightful video
tutorials available with the product."

I've already stated what I feel the problem is. At the end of this
post I will state it again.

"Mark has already made some good ones for promotional purposes"

Yup. The CADjunky website is filled with this kind of sales video. I
can't watch these bullshit sales videos because all they do is piss me
the **** off because of the exceptionally poor documentation that has
existed for ten years in regards to SolidWorks. I could tolerate these
sales videos if the poor documentation situation didn't exist. At this
point as soon as I realize it's a video that isn't going to show how
the tool really works I'm done watching it.

"I would like to think Ed would be generous enough to share some
powerpoint presentations to make up for the deficiencies of SW
themselves but then again why should he."

Ed Eaton shouldn't be generous. Ed should be want to be paid good
money to fill the massive gap in SolidWorks documentation. Ed should
find away to get a lot more angry and actually make a real difference
to a much wider audience than he has now at SolidWorks World. I'd like
to see Ed Eaton move away from SolidWorks World presentations and into
offering his own expensive videos or books and promoting them every
place possible.

I'd like to see Matt Lombard's SolidWork Bible sell really well
proving that there is a large market for quality independent
publications.

Nothing is going to change inside SolidWorks Corp. because they will
do nothing to limit their VAR's who come before the end user.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

"Even that is way to much to pay."

Change costs money.

I like to reward those who change situations I find deplorable.

It's not too much for me to pay.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Found an ad for a canned free demo yet?
Oops .. "videos" ....

 

Consider all the things you have CLAIMED you would be "buying"
"tomorrow".
You don't even have a legal copy, do you? Of ANYTHING.

 

"Oh, I totally agree. I guess the question is what makes a video
worth $600 vs $50? If you spend $50 on a video and it turns out to be
crap well, it's only fifty bucks. $600 is a bit more painful."

I spent $50 bucks for Matt Lombards SolidWorks Bible. I got a 25%
discount at Borders with my Borders Rewards Card. I then spent $6 to
remove the perfect binding and split the SolidWorks Bible into two
books that have heavy black covers and are spiral bond. This works a
lot better for me and I do it with any book that I'm going to be using
to do tutorials with in front of a computer. I have not finished the
book yet. I feel I have already gotten my money's worth several times
over.

If I choose to purchase the Solid Professor videos it will be for
reasons such as:

I have seen them in more depth.

Because I have heard from others that I respect that they are a good
value.

I decide to take the advise of someone who I met who works for
Crower...

http://www.crower.com/

who has the Solid Professor videos and likes them.

Perhaps your best chance of not getting burned is to read opinions
from those you respect in regards to what they think is good material.

I have seen enough of Ed Eaton's material to purchase anything he
might come up with without needing to hear from anyone on whether it
represents good value to them.

I just rolled the dice on the SolidWorks Bible book and I feel I won
big time.

Years ago I saw David Murray's Inside SolidWorks book and didn't feel
it was good enough to wipe my ass with.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Mr Halpin, (the originator of this post, some 41 replies ago), must
feel as though he has been verbally stampeded by a bunch of
Intellectual buffalo.
It seems to me that his original problem and his original plea was
that the Solidworks Community was in need of basic instruction on the
subject of Surfaces . I doubt that he or many more of us reallly
understand the technical jargon that was offered back and forth by the
obvious accomplished Solidworks users among us. His original plea is
lost in the shuffle.
Certainly with all the brainiacs, ( and I mean that with total
respect), who frequent this Forum, there must be someone who can offer
some suggestions on his quandry at a level that a person who is asking
the question in the first place can understand.
<< " Instruction has one basic mission, that is to transport the
knowlege that exists in the brain of the Instructor, into the brain of
the Instructee. In order to do this the Instructor must first posess
the ability to explain that knowlege at whatever level is necessary
so that it can be asbsorbed, not only by someone at his level, but at
the level of the Instructee. If he does not have the latter
mentioned ability, he is just a smart guy, but he is no Instructor. It
is more important to be able to do this, than it it is to know the
subject to be instructed." Vince Lombardi >>

Hajii Kumaraju

 

wrote:


Surfacing is not as complicated as people make it out to be. The goal of
surfacing is usually to enclose a volume and convert a surface body into
a solid body. This is done by building faces one by one using surface
features.

The Boundary surface, being one of the newer types, is not as well
understood as other features such as loft. There are a lot of claims
coming from folks like the original poster's friend, which are sometimes
tough to verify in practice probably because there are some areas of the
tool that don't work as well as others, and it is certainly not
thoroughly documented, on top of the interface being a bit bewildering,
especially for people who are new to surfacing.

What it boils down to is that the help that Ben is looking for probably
does not exist.

I would recommend a number of sources for assistance, some free, some not:

- SolidWorks training has a course called Advanced Surface Modeling, 2 days
- SolidProfessor has a course on surface modeling
- http://www.dimontegroup.com/Tutorials/SolidWorks_Tutorials.htm , but
if you didn't follow the discussion here, you won't understand these
powerpoints either
- http://cvswug.dezignstuff.com/presentations.html there are a few
simple surfacing powerpoints here
- http://dezignstuff.com/blog/ a couple of surfacing tidbits including a
simple step by step tutorial
- solidworks on-line forums (in the subscription area)

There aren't any books out that comprehensively cover the topic, but the
SolidWorks Bible does have one chapter (out of 32) that goes through the
surface features and explains their use, shows a couple of techniques
and has 3 simple tutorials.

 

He asked if there were any PPT or videos about boundary surfaces and
there arent.
SW dont do things like that. They make some promo fluff/stuff but no
detailed self help educational material
They dont make em for surfacing either.
They do have VAR run 'advanced' courses for a fee and there are some
good books out there these days but not really containing the
enlightenment Mr Halpin is most likely seeking
Outsiders have done the most worthwhile zen stuff about surfacing you
can find to date - most conspicuously Ed Eaton ( big thumbs up for ED
for generously making it available for free)
see http://www.dimontegroup.com/Tutorials/SolidWorks_Tutorials.htm
Mr Halpins plea for better instructional documentation is an issue
that has been around for a while now.
Many people would empathise with Mr Halpins experience.
At this point in time there is no soln for him.
Possibly Mark will win out with his boss and make something
worthwhile. I am sure he could if he was allowed to.
The discussion bounced and strayed into opinion about SW policy and
implementation of the current toolset...and of course Jon and Cliff
landed here too..I am sorry if the 'excellent discussion' from passers
by did not yield the answers observers or Mr Halpin would wish.It is a
newsgroup after all not a SW managers meeting.
If Mr Halpin has some particular difficulty with a model he is working
on he could try posting details of that here and someone might render
assistance.
hope that helps )

 

"Surfacing is not as complicated as people make it out to be."

Surfacing is very complex compared to solid modeling.

Because of the lack of proper tutorials for SolidWorks I feel someone
who does not know NURBS surfacing is much better off starting with
something like Rhino and using McNeel's excellent materials to learn
the basics of NURBS surfacing. That would be the Rhino Level 1 and
Level 2 training guides.

www.rhino3d.com

Once someone has made it through Rhino Level 2 Training done by McNeel
employee Jerry Hambly then something like this seems to me to be the
next logical step:

http://www.hydraulicdesign.net/fvs3-sample/concept-a-sample.htm

This is the kind of independent surfacing tutorial that simply doesn't
exist for SolidWorks.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

"Mr Halpin, (the originator of this post, some 41 replies ago), must
feel as though he has been verbally stampeded by a bunch of
Intellectual buffalo."

Is there some reason you feel "Mr. Halpin" can't speak for himself?

"there must be someone who can offer some suggestions on his quandry
at a level that a person who is asking the question in the first place
can understand."

I just posted some suggestions.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA

 

Awaiting jb's response .... if anybody can help, an expert
such as himself can, right?

 

Doing such well may be a tad difficult in an ASCII only NG.

 

We used to do such long ago in things such as CADDS III, AD 2000,
Anvil 4000, etc. Long before workable solids, parametrics (though such
could have been used I suppose), compute power for often
overdone NURBS surfaces, even "reasonable" graphics, or fast
(by yesterday's standards) CPUs & memory, etc.

 

CLUE: A solid is a volume bounded by surfaces.

Q: What colour are they *inside*?