Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Correct me if I'm wrong on this. I've worked with a lot of surfacing programs in the past, as well as parametric. We have an argument every few months about "solids" and "surfaces". I'm having a hard...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Figure 1 is the "watertight" joined surfaces, which cannot define a closed volume. Figure 2 is a solid, which can be defined. Figure 3 is the "watertight" joined surface, which material cannot be...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Ryan, it is a moot argument simply because the difference is the background operations and definitions -within- Creo that makes the difference. In other words, yes, the solids also have surfaces but...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
The only solid models are those you can pick up and throw, and even then there are huge gaps between the electrons and the nuclei. As software goes, it's just a matter of what the interface appears to...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Ryan maybe right. There is a TPI about that:https://www.ptc.com/appserver/cs/view/solution.jsp?n=126505
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
all these explanations make sense to us but explaining it to ProE vets, that only know "surfaces" from Wildfire or Creo, I get looked at like I'm a 3rd grader talking to a college grad. lol Reinhard,...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
tthinking more about it, is knowing about surface construction and defining 3d geometry not even relevant anymore in the future of solid modeling in this industry?
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Yep, Ryan, It's like talking about some invisible things. It's cause Creo takes care all of that for the user, so they don't really need to know all of these things related to surface theory. Well, I'm...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
How about the option to "cap" the surfaces on a cross-section (creo 2). Why would the software have to cap anything if the models were actually "solid", hmmm?
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
For the most part, people seem to work in a solid environment with occasional surface geometry to create special "forms" or "cosmetic" shapes which are later thickened. However, working with quilts can...
View ArticleSolids, nothing more than surfaces....
Correct me if I'm wrong on this. I've worked with a lot of surfacing programs in the past, as well as parametric. We have an argument every few months about "solids" and "surfaces". I'm having a hard...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Figure 1 is the "watertight" joined surfaces, which cannot define a closed volume. Figure 2 is a solid, which can be defined. Figure 3 is the "watertight" joined surface, which material cannot be...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Ryan, it is a moot argument simply because the difference is the background operations and definitions -within- Creo that makes the difference. In other words, yes, the solids also have surfaces but...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
The only solid models are those you can pick up and throw, and even then there are huge gaps between the electrons and the nuclei. As software goes, it's just a matter of what the interface appears to...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Ryan maybe right. There is a TPI about that:https://www.ptc.com/appserver/cs/view/solution.jsp?n=126505
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
all these explanations make sense to us but explaining it to ProE vets, that only know "surfaces" from Wildfire or Creo, I get looked at like I'm a 3rd grader talking to a college grad. lol Reinhard,...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
tthinking more about it, is knowing about surface construction and defining 3d geometry not even relevant anymore in the future of solid modeling in this industry?
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
Yep, Ryan, It's like talking about some invisible things. It's cause Creo takes care all of that for the user, so they don't really need to know all of these things related to surface theory. Well, I'm...
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
How about the option to "cap" the surfaces on a cross-section (creo 2). Why would the software have to cap anything if the models were actually "solid", hmmm?
View ArticleRe: Solids, nothing more than surfaces....
For the most part, people seem to work in a solid environment with occasional surface geometry to create special "forms" or "cosmetic" shapes which are later thickened. However, working with quilts can...
View Article
More Pages to Explore .....