VSS - justification

Discussion in 'Pro/Engineer & Creo Elements/Pro' started by Sean Kerslake, Jun 30, 2004.

  1. I'm starting to get my course notes updated for next semester and am again
    at the Variable Section Sweep.

    Every year I get to this section and come upstuck in finding good real life
    example of its application - those endless bottles and abstract edge ribs
    really aren't very convincing for why my students should learn this
    function.

    If anyone has a some good real life application which really show the power
    of this feature they would be gratefully recieved.

    As soon as I show any examples* the question is why don't you use a boundary
    blend? - you have control over both end sections and you can 'fill' between
    existing sections. As I understand it you will generally get a smoother
    surface with a VSS - is the reason for this easy to explain to undergrads?

    I tend to sell it very much as a base feature or [as alot of the tutorial
    examples] a sweep along existing edges.

    Thoughts on this in terms of convincing students its worth understanding
    what is one of the more complex functionalities in the toolbox would be
    gratefully recieved.

    BTW - remember how rudimentary their knowledge is - I sometimes struggle
    getting them to grasp tangency and normalcy!

    Cheers, sean

    --

    *One of my ongoing frustrations with students and published tutorials is
    innapropriate use of a feature creation method - in the current version of
    the CadTrain Coach tutorials they have a revolved vase done as a VSS.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Sean Kerslake
    Dept. Design & Technology
    Loughborough University
    Loughborough
    LE11 3TU

    01509 228317
     
    Sean Kerslake, Jun 30, 2004
    #1
  2. Sean Kerslake

    David Janes Guest

    : I'm starting to get my course notes updated for next semester and am again
    : at the Variable Section Sweep.
    :
    : Every year I get to this section and come upstuck in finding good real life
    : example of its application - those endless bottles and abstract edge ribs
    : really aren't very convincing for why my students should learn this
    : function.

    One of the most exciting things about learning Pro/e was the discovery that there
    were always manu different ways to model the same part. Even the starting points
    could be quite different: start with a little piece of the part (one feature) and
    add features? or start with a big block and starting cutting the features out of
    it. Part discovering the rich variety of feature creation methods and styles was
    realizing that even a simple 30mm x 50mm x 10mm block (sketch and extrude a
    rectangle) can be made three different ways: sketch a 30x50 rectangle on the Top
    plane and extrude 10mm; sketch a 10x50 rectangle on the Right plane and extrude
    30mm, etc.
    :
    : If anyone has a some good real life application which really show the power
    : of this feature they would be gratefully recieved.
    :
    : As soon as I show any examples* the question is why don't you use a boundary
    : blend? - you have control over both end sections and you can 'fill' between
    : existing sections. As I understand it you will generally get a smoother
    : surface with a VSS - is the reason for this easy to explain to undergrads?
    :
    In addition, as I gained some sophistication in using the software and realized
    that there were usually several ways to create a feature, I started experimenting.
    If a feature could be made as a blend or a swept blend or an extrusion with a
    bunch of cuts, I tried them all. I evaluated them by the results achieved, by how
    easy they were to modify, by limitations in control of shape or attachment or
    surface continuity, and by their complexity and the time it took to create the
    feature. Along the way, I gained mastery of Pro/e's surface and curve analysis
    tools. When you're trying to evaluate the results of different methods, you can't
    rely on the unaided eye; you need 'porcupine' or 'highlight' analysis to see
    discontinuity. And, by these means, you'll also see the influence of the curve
    foundation on surface quality.

    Because of the curves that boundary blend surfaces are built on, they are usually
    the most troublesome. Part of it is the fact that boundary conditions and how high
    a degree of continuity you can impose depends on the curves and their end point
    tangency. So, building the curve framework that can support the highest degree of
    surface continuity is an art in itself. It is compounded by two things: by the
    number and size of the patches and by whether you *begin* with boundary curves.
    You have probably noticed that when you have a series of patches to construct, the
    first patch has no other surface to which to set 'surface curvature' boundary
    condition. That was the reason for introducing, in the last few revs, the Datum
    Ribbon. Before that, the best you could do was to set the surface at a boundary
    normal to a plane. One or two could be helped this way, the rest were left free to
    go where and how they would. Sometimes the problems didn't show up until the
    adjacent surfaces were set 'surface curvature' to this first patch. Then you'd get
    wrinkling or twisting. This type of problem was the basis for introducing another
    aid to good, curvature continuous surfaces, namely ISDX, which carries boundary
    blend surfaces to the next level. In any case, there are enough problems using
    boundary blend surfaces that I pretty consistently use them only for patching or
    blending between features.

    The VSS has none of these difficulties or defects. With smoothly curving
    trajectories and cross section curves, you produce the smoothest surface possible.
    And with less underlying curve geometry and with just as much control of tangency
    at the start and end of the swept geometry as with boundary blends and swept
    blends.

    : I tend to sell it very much as a base feature or [as alot of the tutorial
    : examples] a sweep along existing edges.
    :
    : Thoughts on this in terms of convincing students its worth understanding
    : what is one of the more complex functionalities in the toolbox would be
    : gratefully recieved.

    Again, the use of a variety of techniques, experimenting with different feature
    creation methods will do it's own proving, its own arguing. The only general
    argument that can be made for learning more technique(s) is that it makes choice
    possible. Ignorance will make the choice for them and their "reasons" for not
    using VSS or any advanced techniques, including boundary blends, will sound like
    sour grapes. Choice means being able to weigh and compare based on experience and
    they won't have any experience by avoiding learning VSSes. And the best you can do
    is practice and teach the first rule in life and learning ~ don't panic, it's
    probably not as bad or as hard as you think.

    David Janes
     
    David Janes, Jul 2, 2004
    #2
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.