superfive connection / surface

[Beth]

I would like to ask this question.

Is it possible to obtain an agreement which ends at the end of the support area? (Annex 1)
and not with the extension present (in Annex 2) I have tried in many ways without ever getting positive results.
the annexes have a very simple application with planar surfaces, but my intent is that, in the case of rough surfaces not to have extended surfaces to be trimmed later

hope to have been understandable

thanks in advance

 

[320i S]

I think I didn't understand, you want to make a connection like in photo 1, but you're like in photo 2?

 

[Beth]

That is exactly 320i s, just so I would simply like the resulting surface of the connection to be as the from a preview proe.
I want to avoid slipping it later

 

[320i S]

Are you using the surface command?, you tried the "agreement" command, has the same features as if it were in solid environment.

 

[Beth]

not command surface but command connection
with option attack new surface union.
It would be enough that the result is equal to the preview that does proe but there are never
managed always extends.

 

[320i S]

then, the solution is to use a surface sweep, select all the trajectory, sketch of the fitting and then shorten the side that you do not care:

 

[Beth]

I think it's hard to create a sweep
that gives the same result of the connection.

 

[320i S]

In this case, however, I suggest you complete the union of surfaces, solidify and then reconnect, you have many more strategies in this sense.

 

[Beth]

sincerely before starting the current discussion I have really done so many credible tests on both solid and sincerely unions I have not found great differences in the result. I tried to evaluate the transitions but I never managed to finish the surface on the normal of the last bearing surface. coming from other cads I would have liked to get the same result.
I hoped in some setting to set in the config since I am neophyte

 

[320i S]

pro-e/creo is the cad with the highest precision in terms of mathematicians (certainly more precise than catia to make an example) that is why for example it is very thrown for the design of molds and/or artifacts that require the use of 5 axes cmc.

this requires that certain commands be a little more ostical to be realized, just because the mathematical results, is read almost natively by certain cams without generating errors of sort or at the maximum errors that are then easily resolved.

the part of fitting is always the most ostica, many times it is enough to interspers with the features, the connections that you would do at the end, to have what you want.

I often solved even with sweep of surfaces with closed terminals and then solidified everything, to get fittings that in other ways were impossible to do.

 

[Beth]

I understand and share the great potential of the system, my problem solved it with longer procedures but leading to a
similar result.
I tried to ask... , the beauty of this community is being able to compare with people who know it!