sweep with direction of sform.

[panormus]

hello raga, I should perform a sweep with sform direction
and give a law because the segment that flows along the guideline sweeps a certain alpha corner.

the sweep is necessary because I will serve as a support surface to realize the filling of the terminal part of the rudder, which as you see from figure, represents the terminal part of a naca profile and then ends with pointed shape.

and I wonder:

1- if I apply a law of deformity, the final alpha angle I impose seems not to start from the direction of deformity. Why? what references do you generate this angle?
the direction of deformed was obtained by creating a tangent line to the profile.
the angle I called alpha, between the direction of sform and the term direction of the sweep is of "90°-7,694".
At the end it creates a 7.694 angle that I don't understand from where it starts.
2- can I make sure that the final sweep plan changes and coincides with the other white segment designed? If so how?
I continue with the second post.. I don't get another attachment.

 

[panormus]

and these are the parameters I set.
Maybe it depends on the sweep plan? Maybe if you tell me how to change I solved... :wink:

 

[alpole]

Pan.
I didn't understand what you were asking. .
The images make me a certain confusion, it would be
better the file or a branch of the file;
But I think if you draw two lines
(one already drawn if I don't err that you need for
set the deformed direction )
the other in the opposite side of the profile with an angle of 7, .... degrees
or whatever
you can use sweept with two guide curves (using these two lines) to form the support surface. .
I'm wrong. . .
perhaps the process is simplified or perhaps
I don't understand what you're asking....

to the

 

[panormus]

azz.. maybe you're right, at home I try and if you're right I'll give you to his holiness the pope... ;-)

 

[panormus]

do not act.

I have placed more angles hoping that it would be well understood but perhaps so much more confused the message.
I tried to select the curve as a profile and the two segments as a guide, I tried to select one of the two guides (before one and then the other), but it is not.

I hope it's not too confusing.

I do not understand what is the principle with which catia v5 r19 assigns sweep plans and starting points of the surface.
because the surface on the right side begins with the segment, as established by me and to left instead takes a point that has nothing to do with it and that is not anchoring point?

 

[alpole]

Pan. never get discouraged. .
in the file that I attach to you I have not had great problems
to make the sweept, of course the curves will be different. .
but the principle remains the same
I also attach an image with the open fly out
on the sweept function.. as you see there is a topic
at the bottom.. profile positioned... Take a look.. .
In addition to thorns, in some cases, and this is one
of those, the field section must also be removed
The profile...
do different tests, using my file, to understand
feature that is far from obvious or intuitive
good continuation

to the

 

[mrwolverine]

Hello, panormus,
If you put a file, I'll give you a hand.

 

[panormus]

If I can place it tonight, thank you both. Consider that I have the r19 though... al, I hope it can open your file.

 

[panormus]

Thanks, guys. I managed to do the job. I didn't break a curve, or I did, then I made other changes and it came back together.

made the cut I performed without problems the sweep, although it is not very clear how it works. al, if you can get that file, would you turn it around so you can open it with the r19?

thanks also to you mrwolverine, I change your availability by publishing my work anyway, so maybe if you notice gaps you can also help me to seize them.

bye
View attachment profili.7z

 

[alpole]

pan
I worked a little on your file
I hope you don't want me to... .
I tried to improve the surface a bit -
I first recreated the sweept, then recreated the fill, and then I
try to create the joint of the " pieces" ;
joint operation with activated tangency option
It was wrong. .
I made some changes to the original surface, heling,vari
split , various blends and finally the result I got
come in tangenza-
in the added geometric group (change) , I proceeded differently. .
I leaned on these initial surfings to create
new surfaces that I finally reached. .
you can see the two results obtained and compare them, I don't know what it is
the most consistent. ..personally,in both cases
The result doesn't impress me, but keep in mind that I have kept
curves and constraints you had set. . .
perhaps the famous sweept with direction of sform, then realized
with two guides, too much force... .
then creating a closing fill too forced. .
I have in fact proceeded to cut the jointsurf and to recreate a blend
before effettaure the final joint.

this is just a small exercise I wanted to do for
show you that the result is better.. and I think it's still -
in any case for a modeling of the surface
maximum importance have the input curves and the wire that
It creates... let us say that if these are correct and well thought
the creation of surfaces and easy fluid and quality
Otherwise, even acting rats, as in my case
the result and quality less satisfactory-
from your file is not clear to me the strategy that brought you
to shape the piece in this way
often it is worth studying carefully the entrance curves
in relation to the form to be represented to try to use
The best strategy... .
Mine doesn't want to be a preacher but believe me only a way to
help you and I hope I can
to the
ps -the images and the file enters the compressed file

 

[marcof]

If I can place tonight... .

pan
I worked a little on your file
(cut)
this is just a small exercise I wanted to do for
show you that the result is better.. and I think it's still -
(cut)
from your file is not clear to me the strategy that brought you
(cut)
ps -the images and the file enters the compressed file

c.v.d. !

in the other thread I wrote this to you:
"You know well that, after months of work on your part, with the "finished" model and no native file on which to reason, for caia owners there is little to invent mraculous solutions. . . "

do you see that if instead of keeping your files jealously hidden in your pc (even if they were industrial secrets), sticking you to lamb pounded by the wolves (double rotfl!) posting fairy tales in Latin (language that just doesn't suit you) those files then publish the solutions and concrete aid arrive?
reflect on all this and return the lamb sink to the renter of theatrical costumes. He was very close to you so we dropped you off right away

 

[panormus]

pan
I worked a little on your file
I hope you don't want me to... .
I tried to improve the surface a bit -
I first recreated the sweept, then recreated the fill, and then I
try to create the joint of the " pieces" ;
joint operation with activated tangency option
It was wrong. .
I made some changes to the original surface, heling,vari
split , various blends and finally the result I got
come in tangenza-
in the added geometric group (change) , I proceeded differently. .
I leaned on these initial surfings to create
new surfaces that I finally reached. .
you can see the two results obtained and compare them, I don't know what it is
the most consistent. ..personally,in both cases
The result doesn't impress me, but keep in mind that I have kept
curves and constraints you had set. . .
perhaps the famous sweept with direction of sform, then realized
with two guides, too much force... .
then creating a closing fill too forced. .
I have in fact proceeded to cut the jointsurf and to recreate a blend
before effettaure the final joint.

this is just a small exercise I wanted to do for
show you that the result is better.. and I think it's still -
in any case for a modeling of the surface
maximum importance have the input curves and the wire that
It creates... let us say that if these are correct and well thought
the creation of surfaces and easy fluid and quality
Otherwise, even acting rats, as in my case
the result and quality less satisfactory-
from your file is not clear to me the strategy that brought you
to shape the piece in this way
often it is worth studying carefully the entrance curves
in relation to the form to be represented to try to use
The best strategy... .
Mine doesn't want to be a preacher but believe me only a way to
help you and I hope I can
to the
ps -the images and the file enters the compressed file

Thanks again to the, tomorrow I take a look if I can why I have the r19.

I'm looking for those who teach me, so no problem, I'm feeling.
you could start with the curves themselves, the ones used to repeat the profile taking into account the 3blueprints of eric, the guy who wrote the project.
I would like to understand how to impose the design, the wires, in the initial phase and how to throw down the first surfaces.
If you can't publish in r19, could you shoot me some pictures? clearly when and if you have time and want. Thank you.

 

[panormus]

the result and my notice is remarkable to, at least from the prints, but unfortunately I could not see at the moment how you worked for release issues as I mentioned.
the problem was the sweep? as you saw I used two tangent segments to their respective curves, so the surface had to behave and close properly, which was not and I don't understand why.