วีดีโอ

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.

All good! I don't use instant 3d all the time, but when you need easy tweakability, it definitely is handy. Thanks for commenting

No problem, thanks for watching.

All good

Hi there. I have been modelling on the computer since roughly 1997, so lots of time to pick up techniques off colleagues, as well as lots of mistakes and learning from that. There is a wealth of information available now. The Alias Golden rules are well worth checking. Different application, but the modelling strategies are the same as surface modelling in SW.

Hi there. I used the ID tabs of a digital caliper.

Hey there, thanks! Very generous of you. Cheers, Andrew.

All good!

You need to get the Rhino demo, then you can open the GH file and move the curve around. Seems fairly robust.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio soon Andrew. Need to get some work done first and make some time for uninterrupted learning

Good plan Tony. I find I really have to be in the right space to figure something like this out. Otherwise there is tumble weed traversing my brain.

Yeah thought you'd like that!

Hi there, thanks for the comment. Always good to hear the video and files are useful! Cheers, AJ

All good. Probably no real world application! I mentioned near the end of the video that I don't see where I'd use this for work. More an exercise to see if I could get something that looks roughly correct.

Cool, sorry…I watched it almost to the end 😅. Thanks for sharing, still really cool

I’m surprised you got that far😉 no need for apologies!

Thanks! Definitely a good exercise, even if the end result is not entirely useful.

Same here, one of those ideas that keep coming back. I had to rework this a few times, as I had 1mm away from the baseline/zero being 1mm radius. That meant I had some super curly spirals going on for a bit...

Hi there. I'm on Rhino 7 still so have not tried with 8. I posted it on a forum and someone there improved the script, maybe try that version? Here's the link. cadforum.net/viewtopic.php?t=3053

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Great, thanks!

Hi there. They are ratios that I took from the original Grasshopper clothoid output at the start of the video. Those ratios are based around a target corner radius of 10mm

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Thanks!

I arrived at a 40mm set back after placing a straight edge on the top planar surface then looking for where the fall off surface meets the planar surface. It looked about 35mm so I added an extra 5mm.

Hi there. For this one I found a mesh scan online. I used that for checking the general form and used measurements off the actual product to dial things in.

Hi there. Here's a help link on making custom short cuts as well as using view>hide/show. I have three keys set up to hide/show things. First key, hide/show all. Second key, hide/show sketches. Third, hide/show planes. I find that works well for most modelling situations. help.solidworks.com/2021/english/SolidWorks/sldworks/HIDD_CUSTOMIZE_KEYBOARD.htm help.solidworks.com/2022/English/SolidWorks/sldworks/t_hide_all_types.htm?id=59ce508b7ee24ac2a5162b5e9536286d#Pg0

Good stuff, pleased it was useful. I've not tried power surfacing, I always wanted to get Geometry Works.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio Geometry Works appeared to me to be discontinued in development. I was under the impression that the last available version was for solidworks 2021. Well, power surfacing isn't a magic bullet... A downside for example is that it is't as dimensionally exact as working with curves... but boy does it model fast! To give a practical example: the past few weeks we've been designing a medical device. I first designed it with solidworks surfaces. Took me about two days, close to 100 features that are maybe somewhat (but not really) robust and I still had sold small issues with the flow I wasn't 100% happy about. Re-modeled the complete design in half a day with power surfacing. Resulting in a smoother result, less than 20 features and a tree that is a lot more robust to change. And about the accuracy: using constraints to solidworks geometry, you can pretty much use it as accurate as anything else out there. It's just that once inside the add-on, dimensions become somewhat secondary (except for imported constraints). Anyway, as said: not affiliated, I gain nothing from saying this, it's just that for me, it can often bring my design time back with like a factor of 300% compared to classic solidworks surfaces. Especially in early stages of a design. Anyway, I very much appreciate your work here. You're often my reference when solidworks surfaces throw something my way I haven't quite figured out yet, so thank for sharing your knowledge. Know that I very much appreciate and respect your work.

Oh... too late for Geometry Works then!! I had a quick look at the Power Surfacing site. Sounds like Sub D modelling within the main SW environment, which (as you mention) sounds really useful. I know Dassault have their own SubD modeller, just it is a part of the 3dexperience. I've been using SubD in Lightwave since the 90's, albeit a rather old implementation. More recently I've been using the Rhino SubD tools both natively and in Grasshopper. I'd possibly look at Power Surfacing for SW if I had clients that used it. Quite often I will block out the primary surfaces for a master model, then pass it over to my client, so I cannot really use a 3rd party add-in unless they have it as well.

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio yeah, xform or what it's called the native Dassult subd. Don't like the fact it's yet again another platform and subscription even if it's 'integrated' in the end. Anyway, I see where you are coming from. Makes perfect sense that you want to keep things native solidworks then. Just as a sidenote: I still haven't verified it, because it doesn't matter for our design now, but I do think that people who don't have the add-in should still be able to open the file and edit all (native solidworks) features that were applied after the sub-d... they just won't be able to adjust the base sub-d form where all the features were applied to. I planned to check that on Tuesday with a colleague. Great to talk to a fellow lightwave enthausiast by the way, it's been a while (later I switched to modo and then I quit 3d animation a few years later), but I've spend years in lighwave myself... back in the days when #lightwaverz IRC was a thing. Brings back good memories :) a few weeks back I heard that lightwave got new life again as well. Happy to hear. Anyway, best of luck with the designs and thanks for sharing all the solidworks-surfacing wisdom! Truth is that sometimes one of you videos can save me hours of headaches, so much appreciated. Take care man

Yes, Lightwave is back in development. I've not upgraded in some time, using quite an old version. But I am using Octane inside Lightwave along with HDR light studio, so it's not entirely ancient! I might have to upgrade LW though, once they reconnect it with the newer versions of Octane. Or learn Blender... but i have been saying that for 10 years or so.

I was probably rambling... I used to use Creo (wildfire days) and it definitely has more robust tools for reference control as well as surface analysis. Cannot comment on NX

@@AndrewJacksonDesignStudio No worries mate. I enjoy the rambling. Noted - thanks, and thanks for the videos. I'm early stage in my design career, and in a young Aussie studio without deep knowledge in surfacing, so I'm really grateful for your videos Andrew.

All good, pretty different scene now from when I started off in 2000. Access to super powerful tools and cost is less of a factor. And... there are videos about most things to help you on your way! All the best!

The grasshopper clothoid cannot be defined in Solidworks as far as I know. The geometry/ratios are interchangable as both Rhino and SW are using single span bezier splines. I mainly use Solidworks for client projects. Completely different approaches as well for product development. Rhino you have to layer off progress, in case you need to go back and change something. SW, tree based, so easier to tweak things. Downside is SW surfaces can be average and analysis tools in SW are not fantastic.

Sounds good, looking forward to it!

Hi Duncan, all good, thanks for watching!