Material properties: why separate visual from analytical?

[abeschneider]

It seems that in NX4 and earlier, the application of material properties for visualization purposes (ie: Studio display, rendering) is not linked at all to the application of material properties for analytical purposes (ie: density, mass calculation, inertia, strength, FEA).

Why is this so? In Catia, the application of material properties is done ONCE, and it affects both visual properties as well as physical properties. The user can add new materials too, with a reasonably easy to use GUI.

I think this is one of those obvious things that NX should be capable of doing. Seems like you could just add in a set of new properties to the already-existing Materials Palette, so that in addition to the rendering props, you have physical props.

(Of course, if I'm totally off base here and NX already does this, then great, can you please tell me how?)

 

[JohnRBaker]

Eventually we may link them together, however, these two concepts, photo-realistic rendering and analysis-based material properties were implemented as part of 2 different projects and from 2 different eras. Analysis-based material properties is relatively new while rendering has been part of UG/NX since V10, or about 13 years ago (which BTW was several years BEFORE Catia V5 was released). But even if we did link them together, we would have to provide a means to unlink them since many people will be applying rendering 'material properties' based on visualization needs rather than pure material properties. After all, with such materials as plastic, you would still have to provide the ability to define the color as a separate designation anyway.



John R. Baker, P.E.
Product "Evangelist"
NX Product Line
UGS Corp
Cypress, CA

http://www.ugs.com