what software is spaceclaim?

[cristian.zandona]

Good morning to all, we are an industrial automation company and special machines. we want to change business software and I wanted to understand what kind of program is spaceclaim and what kind of industry best suits you....someone can give me his opinion?
I thank everyone for the collaboration...:smile:

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

Hello, Christian,
is a non- Parametric cad 3d (so it does not have a features tree, the operations it applies) but of "direct modelling" (i.e. less bound to what you have done before, and changes can take place at a later time even on imported models without history). this makes it particularly suitable for those who need to import files (it is able to open several file formats and to process them as if they were designed in spaceclaim), to those who do prototyping (it is very fast and simple to change a geometry and see in real time such change) and to those who have little time to devote to long and expensive courses on the use of a more complex cad. of course inside it also has a sheet module that allows to obtain the developments of the individual parts. Moreover there is no separate environment concept between assembly and design of the single part. It's a very free software from old patterns.
in the market there are numerous cad3d, some more beautiful and powerful spaceclaim; However, the latter is characterized by simplicity of use and contained price.

If you want an online demo of spaceclaim contact me as well.

 

[Matteo]

I add a consideration to what has already written gorea: spaceclaim serves to "manipulate" geometry (it is a little as if "touch" models cad directly) mind a cad "feautre based" works on geoemtria through "features" i.e. mathematical functions controlled by parameters.

the philosophy of spaceclaim is advantageous in these cases:

• new projects in which geometry and structure can change heavily during design
• re-use of geometry from other cads (practically all)
• preparation of fem/cfd models
• need to quickly arrive at a construction model (e.g. in the bid phase for the design of a new product)
• Model management for rapid prototyping
• gestione di modelli per il rendering
• manipulation of geometry to be sent to cnc machines

there are then sectors, in my opinion 50% of the cases, in which there is a "gray zone" where a direct modeling cad (e.g., but also cocreate or st of siemens) has advantages and disadvantages that compensate with a cad feature based and counts more than other the attitude of the operator.

a suggestion: do not deceive you from the commercial promises of an integration between "express/sincrono/direct" and "cad feature based". are two "philosophically" incompatible worlds... you would end up buying 2 products (at the price of two...) sold as one tool.

for any information (as well as gorea) you also ask through my signature references.

 

[cristian.zandona]

thank you go and thank you matteo, you have been of help. If you need, I'll contact you.

 

[mpu]

Hey, guys.

I just signed up and read some of your discussions about and I would like to point out something about spaceclaim:

is an absolutely parametric explicit model!



♪

 

[flaviobrio88]

I add a consideration to what has already written gorea: spaceclaim serves to "manipulate" geometry (it is a little as if "touch" models cad directly) mind a cad "feautre based" works on geoemtria through "features" i.e. mathematical functions controlled by parameters.

the philosophy of spaceclaim is advantageous in these cases:

• new projects in which geometry and structure can change heavily during design
• re-use of geometry from other cads (practically all)
• preparation of fem/cfd models
• need to quickly arrive at a construction model (e.g. in the bid phase for the design of a new product)
• Model management for rapid prototyping
• gestione di modelli per il rendering
• manipulation of geometry to be sent to cnc machines

there are then sectors, in my opinion 50% of the cases, in which there is a "gray zone" where a direct modeling cad (e.g., but also cocreate or st of siemens) has advantages and disadvantages that compensate with a cad feature based and counts more than other the attitude of the operator.

a suggestion: do not deceive you from the commercial promises of an integration between "express/sincrono/direct" and "cad feature based". are two "philosophically" incompatible worlds... you would end up buying 2 products (at the price of two...) sold as one tool.

for any information (as well as gorea) you also ask through my signature references.

with spaceclaim if amounting an igs file of a particular plastic, so we often say 2 mm can tell him that the thickness has changed?

in the sense that the outer shell remains the same and change only the internal walls with equal angle and leaving also the lightenings and various invitations unchanged?
I think this would be a good example to show

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

Of course, you can. often iges contain various errors, but fortunately there are a number of tools that simplify and repair imperfect models.
in any way to give a thickness to a surface is used the command "transcina" (which is used for a lot of different functions). in the case of solid varies the thickness, in the case of surface thickens it. in the smo+ plugin there is even an automatism that from a selected surface draws a thick shell given in one command (last example of the video).

 

[flaviobrio88]

hello and thanks for the answer
I can't believe
igs do not contain various errors but errors generates them who does igs or who reads igs.
attention the outer shell should not change, what you have shown you can do even with autocad
do 0.1 out of the shell from the outside to the inside and get the desired result, but my question is very but very different. (of course I only refer to the offset that you show not to the deformer)




My question is completely different.



If you have a simple file, like an iron shell, if you see inside there are ribs.

My question is:
can I from an igs stp model catpart parasolid import it into spaceclaim and change the thickness while keeping unchanged ribs?
the offset must take place from the inside to the outside

If you have a video on the net showing what you said?
Thank you.

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

Can you send me a simple example in igs (even very simple, a surface with ribs) of how the igs is originally and how do you want it to be after transformation?
we start from a simple example and if you want then we also see a more complex example
my email is: ventura chiocciola overcam.it

 

[mpu]

Maybe this video can answer you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moipusnl7h4ciao,

♪

 

[flaviobrio88]

Can you send me a simple example in igs (even very simple, a surface with ribs) of how the igs is originally and how do you want it to be after transformation?
we start from a simple example and if you want then we also see a more complex example
my email is: ventura chiocciola overcam.it

thanks for availability, have you seen the video posted by mpu?

What I wanted to see is very close.
I also say that from what I have seen it seems that it does and it does it very well, thanks to all!.

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

thanks for availability, have you seen the video posted by mpu?

What I wanted to see is very close.
I also say that from what I have seen it seems that it does and it does it very well, thanks to all!.

Yeah, I saw, maybe I even figured out what you'd like to see.
there is a function of offset between faces that might be interesting to you. choose one or more reference faces and those that need to maintain a specific offset. the reference faces become dotted (more dark), in the section the lines become blue. when you select a face (or more than one contiguous face by double click) you can change the offset value (from 2 mm to 3 mm for example). you can also choose whether the reference (face that remains in the same position when changing thickness) is the external face, any internal or the one in between.

 

[flaviobrio88]

Yeah, I saw, maybe I even figured out what you'd like to see.
there is a function of offset between faces that might be interesting to you. choose one or more reference faces and those that need to maintain a specific offset. the reference faces become dotted (more dark), in the section the lines become blue. when you select a face (or more than one contiguous face by double click) you can change the offset value (from 2 mm to 3 mm for example). you can also choose whether the reference (face that remains in the same position when changing thickness) is the external face, any internal or the one in between.

Here's good, excluding the first 2 minutes, the part I was interested in is the last 10 seconds

without you making a video I trust your answer, I wanted to know if the 3 central walls were horizontal rather than vertical and connected them to the tilted walls and then translation in x positive or negative (not offset) how does spc the rays remain unchanged?

and if the walls are not along a floor but are curved like banana you have problems managing it?

Thank you.

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

Here's good, excluding the first 2 minutes, the part I was interested in is the last 10 seconds

without you making a video I trust your answer, I wanted to know if the 3 central walls were horizontal rather than vertical and connected them to the tilted walls and then translation in x positive or negative (not offset) how does spc the rays remain unchanged?

and if the walls are not along a floor but are curved like banana you have problems managing it?

Thank you.

if the ribs are planar fittings to curved walls or spline you can select the wall, and the fittings and move them together. In this case the geometry does not vary, it varies only the location (it is the user who selects through selection box all the entities that will have to move). in the case of curved rib some problem instead there is, in fact selecting the wall and the fittings and moving them along the axis of the x curve can no longer hold (if instead they move along the curve there would be no problem). with a small effort however it is possible to disconnect wall and rib, then drag the wall into x and rib curve along its curve. (maybe with a video I explained better

 

[flaviobrio88]

if the ribs are planar fittings to curved walls or spline you can select the wall, and the fittings and move them together. In this case the geometry does not vary, it varies only the location (it is the user who selects through selection box all the entities that will have to move). in the case of curved rib some problem instead there is, in fact selecting the wall and the fittings and moving them along the axis of the x curve can no longer hold (if instead they move along the curve there would be no problem). with a small effort however it is possible to disconnect wall and rib, then drag the wall into x and rib curve along its curve. (maybe with a video I explained better

You've been very clear, thank you very much.

 

[flaviobrio88]

where can I download a trial version 30 days?
is it easy to use without making a course?

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

where can I download a trial version 30 days?
is it easy to use without making a course?

you can also ask me by filling out this form:http://www.overcam.it/download/index.htmlI'll give you the trial tomorrow.

is easy for many applications. Anyway I learned by myself through the many videos that are around (then I pass the links). the advantage is that it is intuitive (so it approaches the way of human thinking), and there are few functions that do almost everything (for example with "transcina" you do so many operations according to what selections).

if you want I can also show you in 15 minutes (on line) the base of sc.

 

[mar.dan]

I would have had a comparison between rhinoceros and spaceclaim. use rhinoceros for 3d design of lamps consisting of folded sheets or turned elements. with rhinoceros I build the 3d and mute all to verify the correct assembly. Could spaceclaim be better? or is it better to think of using software like solidworks? I find myself comfortable with rhinocerso because I can use it now very well and quickly but I realize that to draw folded sheets is not the maximum. keep in mind that I do not need precise developments, so then I send to the external supplier a design of the flat plate and listed in 3d. the development calculates it him.

 

[Matteo]

I would have had a comparison between rhinoceros and spaceclaim. use rhinoceros for 3d design of lamps consisting of folded sheets or turned elements. with rhinoceros I build the 3d and mute all to verify the correct assembly. Could spaceclaim be better? or is it better to think of using software like solidworks? I find myself comfortable with rhinocerso because I can use it now very well and quickly but I realize that to draw folded sheets is not the maximum. keep in mind that I do not need precise developments, so then I send to the external supplier a design of the flat plate and listed in 3d. the development calculates it him.

hello, spaceclaim is very powerful for what concerns the sheet metal industry, in case you need complex developments there is also the possibility to include smo+ math (software specialized in sheet development calculation). also solidworks has a good sheetmetal environment.

in extreme synthesis these strengths of the 3 software:

rhino: very powerful with "sculpted" surfaces, typical tool of chifa design
spaceclaim: has an interface that allows to "touch" and "manipulate" geoemetry better than any other cad. very versatile when importing/exprting. compared to rhino has greater potential of "ignegnerization" (messa in tavola, parametrization of the parts, association of the assemblies, ...). compared to rhino is a cad more for the "mechanical" than for the "design", very suitable however in the preliminary study or products "ad hoc"
swx: 100% mechanical cad, "rigid" parametric more oriented to "production" (e.g. product configurator) than to the preliminary study or design. In some ways it is a "easy" version of proe that remains the reference point for a strict parameterization and a parametric gerstion of the very vertical product.

the choice depends a lot on the needs: considers that spaceclaim and rhino can safely coexist by working both on the native 3dm format, so sc could become the "main" cad while rhino could be used in an integrated way for the cases of particularly "stilose" surfaces.

If you want to open a thread like "spaceclaim can do this?" in the "spaceclaim" section and submit an application case are available.

 

[mar.dan]

thank you matteo, I really wanted to open a new thread but by mistake I made answer here, instead of opening a new one. However the tempa is the same, so I would say that we are not ot.
Thanks for the answer. I believe that at this point I discharge the demo to make practical considerations. very interesting also the fact that they both work with 3dm since all my projects of years have been developed with rhinoceros.