วีดีโอ

Hi Samuel, unfortunately there is no 'global edge continuity' like Rhino. Deviation analysis will show you G0-1 only. I have a macro set up to send selected faces/bodies from SW into Rhino for better zebra/curvature analysis and for checking G2 continuity.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio thx for the quick response! Sounds interesting. How do you setup such a macro? In generall I think it would be super interesting to see what shortcuts you use and what macros you have setup. Maybe that would be a suitable topic for another video.

I have some videos that cover my short cuts as well as the Rhino macro. They should be in my playlists.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Alright, thank you. I'll take a look at it

People don't like change!

😂 if it ain't broke, don't fix it... Oh wait

Cheers!

Thanks!

"Modelled in Rhino 5, set up/materials in Lightwave, lit using HDR Light Studio Tungsten and rendered with Octane 2019."

They are not split lines, they are boundaries of separate surfaces, which presents more of a challenge to SW as split lines are just the same surface except split. Which is even better I guess as far as robustness goes. Be interesting to see what others think once SW2025 is more widely installed once it hits sp5

All good Zack!

Hi George, I have the following. Z - zebra. C - shaded curvature. D - deviation analysis. F2 - wireframe. F3 - shaded with edges. F4 - hide all. F5 - hide planes. Always have sketches shown, but controlled via F4.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio nice one. thank you very much for the quick reply. After seeing how quickly you jumped from one command to another, it makes me want to apply the same methodology to save time.

@@georges6591 Definitely worth setting up some shortcuts to control visibility/display etc. Makes modelling a more fluid experience!

Hi Vincent, all good! Hope you have a good Xmas!

All good John

I wish they'd have more info about how this is different to the pre Sw2025 variable fillet. It is guess work otherwise. In the case of patterning reference geometry, they're 20 years too late compared to Creo!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Dear Andrew, you are a reference and when you write this, I feel very sincere, because I have been following you for a long time and I remember that you have commented several times that you had great modeling experience with PTC Creo. I stay here thinking and I feel like suggesting some things to you, evaluate, think about it all, no charges ok, very calm about it, they are suggestions only and because what I imagine is the following, everything you do is first for the love of modeling, it is for learning and staying active and for helping people to evolve too and this all returns to you as encouragement, learning, job referrals, in the past I've suggested that you create a Patreon, but I believe that this conflicts with an internal "demand" for you, for example: "I'm going to feel pressured by having to produce content every month, and when I have work ordered how will it be", am I more or less right? If so, we would have to support you with a fixed monthly amount to at least pay for your hours of teaching and dedication, I think we should have a group of those who really like modeling in the surface segment for products, away from sheet metal bending, complex assemblies and hard engineering, but with a focus on modeling surfaces from simple to challenging models, of interesting products and pieces in bold shapes, nothing very different from what you have already produced... and maybe explore other programs also with the same challenge, with part and product, for example this test that you just did of the simple rectangle with variable fillet, you comment at 16:35 "it would be nice to have an edge distance option", I wonder, how would this behave in a hi-end program like PTC Creo? And how would you behave in a mid-end show like the popular Plasticity that's coming with everything? Speaking of Plasticity, I just signed it, I haven't installed it yet, I intend to install it and start studying it next year, I looked at it as a fun program and thought why learn it if you have Rhino and Moi or Alias, but I was wrong, I started looking at the videos of a modeler called Kuechmeister Swagger, it models concepts very fast and shows the power and agility that it is with this program, it has several others but it has a less commercial advertising footprint and more of industrial design and complex model modeling challenges, Pasticity has xNURBS and it looks pretty powerful with it for quick sketches, studies and closures of complex surfaces, so master Andrey, I think it's worth looking at it too, I would keep these 3 programs in mind Solidworks, PTC Creo and Plasticity, Solidworks is already in progress, PTC Creo and Plasticity start with the basics and go evolved. If you think it's better to keep "only" Soliworks it's okay too, your studies are already deep and fantastic with it and you already have your "ass" and it's okay... The only thing that still sticks in my mind is for the quick sketches of product design, would it be faster with Palsticity? It seems to me so... and at the same time my biggest doubt: And in a change is it faster or not, since it is not parametric?... See that you have so many questions here in this text that it would yield a video of you talking about it since you have so much experience in various programs and mainly involved in modeling real products for industry with its numerous requests for changes... Still on how to pay your hours, tell us what you prefer, if you set up a group via Patreon, Discord, or donate here through YT, or open an account on Gumroad with a monthly or annual amount and we will join and help you... All this, is a thought for you and for those who follow you here too, I want to be around and keeping motivated and always learning, you have this power to unite us and motivate us, and we have to help you too, thank you always and we will support you always, regardless of what you decide, just don't disappear for too long and I understand that sometimes you are committed to work and that you also need an important time to rest! PS.: I'll send you an email with a challenge, I want a quote and keep my contact. Thank you always and my highest admiration and respect for you master!

All good!

Wow, good investigation! I think I was running out of energy for the exploration, so did not look at creating a ratio for the relief circles. Definitely sounds good to have a nice round set of numbers to drive the corner with!

I think the corner crease is a loft with only one guide curve (the outside corner) and a mid profile to control the width and angle of the surface... I need to go and rewatch it to be 100% sure! The file is in the description if you want to pull it apart.

Good stuff! I think we both might have been modelling this around the same time because someone posted a 70's modelling challenge on the Rhino forums, along with scans of several products? discourse.mcneel.com/t/70s-surfacing-challenge-3d-scans-of-iconic-70s-designs/152180 How did you get on with your model in Inventor?

Sorry, not at the moment.

I picked up the trimmed corner technique when I was at Designpartners in 2003-4 (now a part of PA Consulting). They used it extensively on Logitech KB and mice. It is definitely one of the techniques I use frequently!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Well, thanks for sharing that !

Hi Zack, that sounds awesome! Are you running CFD in SW?

No, I leave that up to the pros.

Yes, there’s definitely some issues that have been consistent throughout multiple versions of SW. As you said, like when a surface that should split another (because the edges intersect) does not. In which case you go through the normal list… choose a surface body instead of faces… that fails, so extend edges on the splitting surface… that fails, run a body check. Theres a general error caused by a trim or knit further up the tree. Reorder features until the general error is no longer present. As for the sketcher and curvature continuous constraints!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Thanks for a fast reply :) We are thinking about moving to NX as we model may complex shapes with dependencies between them. Do you have any experience with other CAD systems other than solid?

I used ProE/wildfire/creo from about 2000i until Creo 1, mainly for sat nav’s and seating products. Never used NX although I’d love to at some point.

Yep, I recently unlisted it. If you want to view it you can here. th-cam.com/video/1dnIaRlx-jE/w-d-xo.html

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Thank you!!!

Hi, try the link now. It'd gone dead for some reason.

Hi Zack, good point about the trailing edge. I have an idea that might work with what I have done here. Would you need the trailing edge consistent in thickness?

Typically 0.5mm minimum. Typically consistent thickness. I usually radius the trailing edge for 3d printed wings. It would be flat for a larger scale wing that has a sheet metal surface. Similar thickness. Seeing your process here I considered using some simple offset curves surfaces to rework the trailing edge after your 3d wing is lofted. May play with this technique next week. I like not fussing with a bunch of equations. The big plus to equations is that you can parametrically edit the airfoils. You could easily change from NACA 44xx to 44zz, etc

No problem!

Hi, I downloaded the .dat point file from airfoiltools.com, renamed it .txt, imported as points into Rhino, then made a polyline through the points so I could make a surface to import into SW. I find importing a surface more reliable than importing a curve. I manually drew the splines used to generate the sections.

I like projection onto a plane idea. 1D scale!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Indeed, based on needs, you can even project on 2 planes, and get parametric scaling on 1D to x%/mm/etc and the other D to y%/mm/.. Plane project can be nice, if you need to translate a loft external profile (say front plane) to (say right plane), if sections are non square|cil, thus having better loft guides, end surface

The point of the exercise was to improve my nurbs modelling skills...

Not my area of interest sorry. I'm sure there must be someone offering tool design online though.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Do you have any links? There is someone who will teach

I did a google search and there seem to be several places that offer courses. Unsure if they are remote though.

All good! Thanks for the comment. AJ

.

Good stuff, thanks for watching and commenting.

Definitely, if it was built with the intent to make a watertight object. In this case, that was not a consideration. This can be made into one watertight body easily enough via surface extends and trimming.

@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Thanks for the response. I need to model something similar but I'm new to surface modeling and I've not found a good tutorial on surface modeling into solids.

@@ShermanStrike If I were modelling this as actual parts for manufacture, I'd normally thicken a part via offset surface, then building the side walls manually using ruled surfaces and extrudes. Then trim the outer surface, side walls and inner walls, followed by knitting them into a closed surface, then solidifying them. The reason I normally use offset surface and manually build side walls, instead of using solidify thicken, is quite often the side walls need to be drafted and using thicken makes the side wall normal to the input surface. Maybe I should make a tutorial on this!

.

.

Patience grasshopper.... it is based on a Les Paul Junior neck.

The exotic world of trying to scan mountain bike trails with an iphone lidar!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio any reason why? Just to put the lidar to use?

Good reason. One of the things I do is volunteer with a local group, for just over 15 years, building and maintaining mountain bike/multi use trails. This is a new trail our group has recently built and I wanted to see if the phone data, plus Rhino/GH, could help analyse the trail for slope etc.

Hi there. I used the '3D Scanner App' on an iphone 12 pro. Walking through took about 20-30 minutes. I got a warning about 75% the way through that I was half way through the available memory for the scan. I was surprised how well the phone and app handled it. Then imported the OBJ mesh into Rhino and started working on a Grasshopper definition to calculate the slope at discrete points. I did have to manually draw the centreline/middle of the tread curve, plan view, then GH projected it onto the mesh. I set the threshold angle to show the sections that have above grade slope. This result is a little misleading as the mesh is coloured red across the full width, when the reality is it is only calculating the slope where the number is displayed.

3D curves do need references to control each end. I try and fully define them when possible, even with splines with multiple CVs.

I walked it. You do need to scan around features a bit, so riding slowly would probably miss quite a bit

All good, thanks for the comment!

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio FYI... After watching your video, I had a look at the solidworks Fillet feature (filleting a solid object, not a sketch) and found the Conic Rho style is an optional fillet profile. So with a 12mm radius, you can change the weight of the curve and it's very close to apple curve. In the same "weight field" you can also drop an equation in.

Conic sections only have G1 continuity to a line on each end of the conic section. Make a 3D sketch, select an edge of the conic section and convert entites. Then show the curvature graph, which will show this.

Hi there. Not my area of interest sorry. There's lots of videos on car modelling out there.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Thank you so much to answer to me.ı watched your videos,that all is very good.ı wish succes to you to next tutorials.

Hi there. You mean you would like to see some tutorials on modelling chairs? Bit more work in that and definitely not a step by step video :) Thanks for watching

Likewise. I'm only a couple of minutes in and Andrew drops "Body compare" on us. How, after more years of using SW than I care to disclose, did I not know about this? I'm ashamed to think about the number of times I've mentally cursed the lack of a tool like this.

All good! Thanks for the comment, always appreciated.

Yeah body compare is quite handy. You can also use it to match a surface to curves (including 3D sketches), just you need to convert the curves to an extruded surface first. Quite handy for overbuilding surfaces. Another tool that people overlook is interference detection within a part. That has been around for a while. It used to only be in assemblies, but it makes sense to have it in parts, especially handy if you model multi body parts.