ability to model complex surfaces

[Trotto@81]

as object, can complex surfaces such as those of a car body with a high degree of accuracy be modeled?

 

[maxopus]

as object, can complex surfaces such as those of a car body with a high degree of accuracy be modeled?

Yes.
we use the rex module (reverse engineering extension), also because it starts almost always from scanning a model (or a network of curves).
with rex controls the type, the degree of each individual surface and the deviation from the model (scan).

 

[Trotto@81]

I had already read about this, but if I wanted to model from scratch?

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

da zero devi usae isdx (interactive surface design extension).

 

[Trotto@81]

Okay, thank you, I just saw something on the net and that's exactly what it does to my case, I still don't know if my skills. :wink:

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

Okay, thank you, I just saw something on the net and that's exactly what it does to my case, I still don't know if my skills. :wink:

That's all the other speech...
Have you ever used at least the parametric surfaces?

 

[Trotto@81]

No, I'm in the first place with the paramentric cads.

 

[maxopus]

Okay, thank you, I just saw something on the net and that's exactly what it does to my case, I still don't know if my skills. :wink:

from scratch I see it hard, regardless of the cad used you should have the basics of automotive design.
It is not that by pulling 4 curves you realize a car:smile:.

start by making a simple component (a bumper for example).
If you want to achieve quality with isdx, use very simple curves (without intermediate knots) to achieve individual patches.
After that you make your good connections, merges, cuts and go.

Good luck.

 

[Trotto@81]

I modeled auto in blender, for the copy of cars on the market I used blueprints as a reference to get me the contours of the panels, in the end I finished the details trying to always have quadrangular surfaces.
I know very well that it is not just stuff, before last some exercises that concern the bases, I try to realize other components for further evidence and when I have greater familiarity I will pass to the surfaces, hoping always you will not throw the pc first from the window.

 

[maxopus]

I modeled auto in blender, for the copy of cars on the market I used blueprints as a reference to get me the contours of the panels, in the end I finished the details trying to always have quadrangular surfaces.
I know very well that it is not just stuff, before last some exercises that concern the bases, I try to realize other components for further evidence and when I have greater familiarity I will pass to the surfaces, hoping always you will not throw the pc first from the window.

Well, then you're not exactly zero.
the blueprints can be inserted on the isdx planes with the appropriate proportions and are a great base to realize correct geometries.

 

[Trotto@81]

just like I did with blender!! !
This cad is exciting to me, I started a few little realistic photos.

 

[flaviobrio88]

That's all the other speech...
Have you ever used at least the parametric surfaces?

for pure curiosity, you have a link to see the parametric surfaces of pro\e .
I searched on yt something that treated the topic parametric surfaces in pro/e but I happened in this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gldldbwdicorrect me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing here.

I also saw in the initial part of the video that the user does a mess of operations to make 2 spline in tangency.

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

for pure curiosity, you have a link to see the parametric surfaces of pro\e .
I searched on yt something that treated the topic parametric surfaces in pro/e but I happened in this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_gldldbwdicorrect me if I'm wrong, but there's nothing here.

I also saw in the initial part of the video that the user does a mess of operations to make 2 spline in tangency.

Hello flavio,
I prefer not to comment on that video... I don't want to be dark!
with parametric surfaces I mean, the use of the pro/surface module that is integrated into the basic pro/e license, with which you already do interesting things but it is not to be used as that dog....

for style and free form, refer to the isdx, which is a separate extension.
some videos that are on the net.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo3oq5ajiy0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixbk6n3rfsk&feature=related

 

[flaviobrio88]

Hello flavio,
I prefer not to comment on that video... I don't want to be dark!
with parametric surfaces I mean, the use of the pro/surface module that is integrated into the basic pro/e license, with which you already do interesting things but it is not to be used as that dog....

for style and free form, refer to the isdx, which is a separate extension.
some videos that are on the net.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo3oq5ajiy0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixbk6n3rfsk&feature=related

Good!
in the first video you see where you start to where you can get
There's a video that shows this
example if I made two pipes (central pipe and curved tube) and then the fitting, possibly in g2, I wanted to see if the fitting in curvature as it behaved by changing the section of the pipe.

ps.
If I were you for the video in English brasilero I would make a petition to take it from yt

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

As soon as I have a free moment, I'll show you. . .
I'll take care of it. I'll send him whom I owe!

 

[flaviobrio88]

As soon as I have a free moment, I'll show you. . .
I'll take care of it. I'll send him whom I owe!

I wait, if you give me the opportunity here myself I would like to deepen the superficial parametric speech, because I have some doubts that I would like to clarify.
Thank you.

 

[Parametric_Ozzy]

I wait, if you give me the opportunity here myself I would like to deepen the superficial parametric speech, because I have some doubts that I would like to clarify.
Thank you.

if I can help you more than willingly. :wink:

 

[flaviobrio88]

Here's my question, I try to do it as simple as possible.
model a cup and then then his handle that I don't tie to the size of the cup what happens if then I change the parameters as you see from the image? (attention that however the handle is connected to the rest of the cup)

and what difference is it if I parameterize it through solids or through surfaces?

 

[maxopus]

Here's my question, I try to do it as simple as possible.
model a cup and then then his handle that I don't tie to the size of the cup what happens if then I change the parameters as you see from the image?

and what difference is it if I parameterize it through solids or through surfaces?

hi flavio, there is no difference between the relationships you use in solid environment or surfaces.
depending on how you relate the sketch (curve to generate sweep) of the handle you will get different results.
If you want me to stay at the same height as the base you will put a share on the base, if you want me to stay centered on the height you will insert a coincidence relationship between the average point of height and the average point of the sweep curve (I don't know if I was clear).

 

[flaviobrio88]

hi flavio, there is no difference between the relationships you use in solid environment or surfaces.
depending on how you relate the sketch (curve to generate sweep) of the handle you will get different results.
If you want me to stay at the same height as the base you will put a share on the base, if you want me to stay centered on the height you will insert a coincidence relationship between the average point of height and the average point of the sweep curve (I don't know if I was clear).

Clearly, but if I say nothing and resize the cup since the handle has no relation to the cup but it's just a new element that I connected with the cup I wanted to know what happens.

I have not tied the handle to the size of the cup and as if it were a group that connects with another group