Need Help with the Boundary Surface Tool

What are NURBS? Little bugs in your keyboard eating the lost crumbs?

Tell us what, exactly, learning Rhino's user interface & applications
software might have to do with using SW's software with their own
user interface, parametrics, history, kernel & applications software?

 

http://www.d84.org/DP/Pics/crayons.JPG

Now, if you had Solidworks ....

 

There was a janitor's convention with an open bar?

 

Yet you have been posing as an expert on Solidworks since Feb 11 1998
if not earlier.

[
Gerry,

Well actually EDS spun Unigraphics was off into a separate division. This
division then formed as joint venture with Intergraph. Unigraphics holding
the controlling interest.

So Unigraphics really owns and controls Solid Edge.

In my HMO Solid Edge has never been the equal of Solidworks except in
production drafting were it is superior. I do not feel this will last long
though.

I fail to see how Solid Edge could be overhauled so quickly to be on par
with SolidWorks modeler. It's going to be hard enough ripping out the ACIS
kernel and replacing it with Parasolids. I do think in time they will give
SolidWorks a run for their money but not any time in the next 6 months to a
year.

If you do decided to get SolidWorks I recommend Roy Wysack's book. This guy
is a true designer with years of experience and he knows how to teach...not
like reading some crap buy a tech writer who doesn't have a clue !!

Wish he would write a book on surface modeling which scares the hell out of
me

Rumor has it that CAD Labs is about to become a big time player but their
package is $9,000.

jon
]

A) EDS had purchased UG before that.
B) Intergraph had nothing to do with any of it.

No clues then either. Just BS & hype. Same old same old.

 

Nope.
You copied someone else's comments from Amazon.com:
http://tinyurl.com/2mdkcd
When others said it was good ...

 

This guy Benjy, just about says it all, I think! What I don't quite
understand is why would a Company that offers a product, not be
willing to make sure that that product can be learned thoroughly by
offering the levels of instruction needed to learn it, as part and
parcel of the cost of that product, which is not very inexpensive in
the first place. It seems odd that private individuals, who are
uncompensated for their generous efforts should be left to perform
against that responsibility, and bring others at a lower level of
skill up to theirs. Very weird set of circumstances here..... It is
more than clear to me why so many people, after several exasperating
failed attempts to become proficient at the free-form end of modeling
have migrated over to Rhino, and learned it with so much less effort.
Yours truly soon to be included.
http://www.productdesignforums.com/index.php?showtopic=6631

Amy Labritto

 

I believe Matt did that part as an example to show Mark how Boundary had
problems matching tangencies when it shouldn't be a problem. He wasn't
suggesting it as a real-world use, but an extreme test case.

Jerry Steiger
Tripod Data Systems
"take the garbage out, dear"

 

Jerry,

Several of the folks in this discussion are on my plonk list, so I never
see their posts unless they are quoted in a post like yours. Your
explanation was exactly right. The example I made was a "best case"
academically ideal scenario. Something in particular where the curvature
in the two directions at the corner should match exactly, so that the
error that shows when assigning boundary conditions is 100% unfounded.
You can only guarantee a situation like this reliably in SW by trimming
out a window in a single contiguous face. This is obviously not the type
of situation I usually create Boundary surfaces in, it just removes all
of the possible imperfections inherent in a real world situation.

Thanks for the clarification!

 

good ol' matt just the same...LOL

 

Update:

I spoke with Jason at Solid Professor in San Diego today. They are
working on advanced surfacing video tutorials that will include
Boundary surface. They should be ready in about 2 months. Price is
expected to be in the $300 price range.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, Ca

 

Amy,
Different people (learners, users, students, etc.) come to the
table with different grasps & understanding of the subject
matters.
Some can skim the manuals & know about how everything works.
Some can test their systems to see how & if they are correct & go from
there.
Some can barely move their lips while reading big words.
Some only know buzzwords they got from others & ads.

For seemingly complex (to the user at that time) matters
and interactive training session in small groups might work best,
each "trainee" user bringing a bit of the picture & their own questions
& conceptions to the table. Hence a class with questions, answers
& specific individual responses (as well as the advantage of having
other students to help & ask).
Live instruction can automatically tailor it's self to the real
students & their "background" in the subject matter. Why
repeat what everyone knows (see jb watching videos)?

Consider a university. Why not just read the ads? Why
not just skim the text & not attend a university?
What of lecture classes with 500 students compared to a
10 person seminar or class?
What value is there in exercises & problems to be solved to
test what has been learned (or not)?

For a few skimming the texts might well suffice for the
basics BUT nobody is going to answer or discuss questions.
Or perhaps even come up with them .. those questions are
often important to really grasping the subject beyond "monkey
see monkey do".

Or just watch an entertaining video of someone using
icons?

I'm probably clear as mud, sorry.

 

It would probebly be better to explain *how things
work* than to demo how to make part ABC.
Design philosphy behind the software, as it were.
How were the programmers thinking of it? What are the basic
constraints imposed as the result of other features, such
as parametrics, kernels, history, etc?
Philosophy, not button demos, perhaps. And Philosophy
might work in ASCII <g>.

 

Matt,

Sorry that its taken so long for me to get back to you; I've been
slammed with a new project.

I had a chance to take a look at your part2.sldprt. thanks for putting
together the example. What's interesting is that this was the very
first alpha test case for Boundary 2 years ago.

You're right - there is a slight deviation in the surface but very
slight and yes Fill is a better solution.... But there is an option in
Boundary that makes it match even better than fill, its called
"Tangent Influence" and it is in the drop down just above the edge
selection box in the PM. Go to your boundary configuration and edit
your boundary feature, Change the first direction curve's influence to
"Tangent influence".

What Tangent influence does is "Fill out" or propagate the influence
of the boundaries over more of the surface. Now, I think, this came
into the product in SP2 and I fought hard to get it in there. We had
it for SP0 but was not properly tested and passed till SP2. Give it a
try.

I devoted a slide to this subject in my SWW2007 presentation. I agree
with a lot of you that there could be much more instruction on SW
surfacing and I've been working with our chief writer to try to get
more "Advanced Modeling" curriculum for our customers - I think the
Advanced Surfacing modeling manual is a very good start. (and no I
don't set the pricing policies of how our material, and support is
set)

BTW, thanks for your contribution to the the ASM manual and best of
success on your new book.

Regards

Mark

 

'I agree with a lot of you that there could be much more instruction
on SW
surfacing and I've been working with our chief writer to try to get
more "Advanced Modeling" curriculum for our customers'

Hooray for that. Well done sir. Pat on the back. Just put a decent bit
of it in the SW box and everyone will wear nice big smiles )

 

"Just put a decent bit of it in the SW box and everyone will wear nice
big smiles ) "

Highly unlikely.

Jon Banquer
San Diego, CA