use unigraphics without sketch

[yuri55]

Bye to all,
I used cad as creo2 and catia v5 where the solid modeling is carried out mainly through sketch, regarding nx has a slightly different way of reasoning than the 2 previous cads I tendentially use here sketches but to what some carmaker told me to model in nx with the chunky model without the use of the sketch, do you understand?

I bring you a simple example, if at a cube I have to subtract another cube on nx I can also not do the sketch but the curves not drawn on the sketch are not parametric or better I can change the length of them but if I have to change for example the distance from a edge of the first cube how should I do? Are you using offsets?

if I have not been clear I remain in disposition for clarifications
thanks for the info...
yuri

 

[ceschi1959]

Bye to all,
I used cad as creo2 and catia v5 where the solid modeling is carried out mainly through sketch, regarding nx has a slightly different way of reasoning than the 2 previous cads I tendentially use here sketches but to what some carmaker told me to model in nx with the chunky model without the use of the sketch, do you understand?

I bring you a simple example, if at a cube I have to subtract another cube on nx I can also not do the sketch but the curves not drawn on the sketch are not parametric or better I can change the length of them but if I have to change for example the distance from a edge of the first cube how should I do? Are you using offsets?

if I have not been clear I remain in disposition for clarifications
thanks for the info...
yuri

Hello, I think there is somewhere in the section of ug-nx a discussion just about the chunky started right from me.
in uug especially, but also in nx, the modeling you can do as you want, using edge, surfaces, parametric curves or not. the speech is however slightly different: from what I know the carmakers use chunky modeling for example for ribs of sheet metal or similar things. for what concerns the 'style' adopts a 'hybrid' or semi-parametric modeling. an example is to build a spline where only some points are associated with parameters or other references, while the other points move them by hand to get the effect you want
for a concrete example look at my avatar.

Hi.

 

[yuri55]

I thank you for the answer, but using the edges or doing an offset of a curve of the model to go to create another 3d entity when I have to change the distance between the edge and my new entity (e.g. from 5mm I have to bring it to 10) not being in the scketch and not being parametric I can but I have to recreate all the geometry by doing a new offset with the modified quota.. or wrong?

 

[ceschi1959]

I thank you for the answer, but using the edges or doing an offset of a curve of the model to go to create another 3d entity when I have to change the distance between the edge and my new entity (e.g. from 5mm I have to bring it to 10) not being in the scketch and not being parametric I can but I have to recreate all the geometry by doing a new offset with the modified quota.. or wrong?

I understood little but I think you make confusion between parametric and associative, however the chunky speech, in my opinion, now with direct modeling or with synchronous modllation you can do a lot of things, still with i-forms and x-forms and with realize shape then I don't tell you.
Look here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9ofbpjar1q
ciao

 

[supertramp]

For example, to delete a portion of a solid you can open the extrude command select one of the edges and create a solid from that with the offset function inside the command. then with an external offset you will attach it to the direction of the edge you had selected, if necessary add a blend and finally subtract it. It's all parametric, but you didn't use sketch.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

I understood little but I think you make confusion between parametric and associative, however the chunky speech, in my opinion, now with direct modeling or with synchronous modllation you can do a lot of things, still with i-forms and x-forms and with realize shape then I don't tell you.
Look here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9ofbpjar1q
ciao

from what I remember, x-forms exist from a lot, at least from nx1 if not before. But I don't think they're tied to "chunky" modeling. it makes modeling "chunky" even without x-form.
my former owner called it "to dig a marble block of carrara with nails" ). but they were the beginnings and they still did not appreciate the potential of the parametric.

 

[Lettore espatriato]

For example, to delete a portion of a solid you can open the extrude command select one of the edges and create a solid from that with the offset function inside the command. then with an external offset you will attach it to the direction of the edge you had selected, if necessary add a blend and finally subtract it. It's all parametric, but you didn't use sketch.

I don't know if it's "chunky" or not. Surely go to select the edge of a solid to create a surface that you will need to cut the solid itself, it doesn't seem like an example of "best practices". can surely serve for very simple pieces or with few operations. But if your construction is made by 1000 operations, I would avoid doing so.

 

[ceschi1959]

from what I remember, x-forms exist from a lot, at least from nx1 if not before.

up to version 7.5 were not associative; they made a shotgun only of the surfaces and not even of the faces and remained 'wood pieces'.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kxqz-vwemahttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihm1iyiq9gw (I have done this is a banality of agreement but it makes good the association of x-forms) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auyans4wta8 (also this is mine, a somewhat more practical and especially real example, with divisions, deforms and so on)

But I don't think they're tied to "chunky" modeling. it makes modeling "chunky" even without x-form.
my former owner called it "to dig a marble block of carrara with nails" ). but they were the beginnings and they still did not appreciate the potential of the parametric.

here I explained badly myself, I wanted to say that with the current tools, type x-form, realize shape etc., chunky modeling (which is all another thing), imho, does not make much sense.

 

[The_Matrix]

Bye to all,
I used cad as creo2 and catia v5 where the solid modeling is carried out mainly through sketch, regarding nx has a slightly different way of reasoning than the 2 previous cads I tendentially use here sketches but to what some carmaker told me to model in nx with the chunky model without the use of the sketch, do you understand?

I bring you a simple example, if at a cube I have to subtract another cube on nx I can also not do the sketch but the curves not drawn on the sketch are not parametric or better I can change the length of them but if I have to change for example the distance from a edge of the first cube how should I do? Are you using offsets?

if I have not been clear I remain in disposition for clarifications
thanks for the info...
yuri

the chunky method was born 20 years ago in gm... and was then exported to fca as a parametric methodology, but not associative.
by tradition, some use explicit curve stees. . as well as explicit plans. . .
but it is only heritage of the past: use nx as well as exactly as creo or v5... is the most natural and powerful way.
chunky can also be made associative, using sketches and all the potential of nx.
I personally don't like it as a method, even if I've used it for many years... It's not intuitive.

personal use (in... I used... is from a while that not models strikes or car plates, unfortunately) the "kbe method" inherited from chrysler... then:
- full parametric
- full membership
- few parts with many features
- surfaces
- thicken sheet at the end