Modeling tip(s) desired 1

[finisher]

Hi:

The attached part is a model of a garden variety creamer that I did for practice in sweeps (SW2006 SP0). I am not happy at all with the intersection of the spout and the main revolve of the part. I did the spout as a surface sweep using two splines with a guide curve and then thickened the suface in both directions. Any tips on how to better model the spout to get a perfectly blended intersection with the main body (which was done as a solid) would be greatly appreciated.

Finisher

 

[Theophilus]

Create your prior features (at least the main base) as a surface, too. Connect the main pitcher with the spout using Trim (still surfaces--I like the Mutual option in cases like these). Add major fillets and thicken the whole thing. You may need to Knit the surfaces together before thickening (depends how you perform the Trim operation).

To work in the area of the spout for an increasingly better blend (if fillets don't work so well) use a variable fillet or cut away the actual junction of surfaces and then fill back in with a surface (more advanced surfacing technique).



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[thermoD]

I think you should start with solids and ignore any thickness (you can do shell later on), also, the handle you should use very simple sweep and adjust ends using (convert entities and extrude up to surface) that would give you a clean blend to the main revolve. as for spout, surface loft is great but to cut it you have to be more careful with the thickness of the revolve..
You were talking about sweep and all I saw was lofts..
It is a good part to practice with sweep, loft and surfacing and multiple bodies..I don't recommend surfacing in this part because it is not complicated..
I have only SW2008, but anyway, I did model the part and I hope that would help you or anybody reading this..
I didn't do any fillets or dimension, I just put here for help..

Good advice, leave fillets and shell to the end of modelling process

 

[thermoD]

here's a pic..I showed the sketches so that might give you an idea about what I am talking about

 

[Theophilus]

Working one something like this in solids can be much more clunky. If you've only a single surface of thickness, you don't have to worry about anything else until you're ready to assign a thickness to the whole. For instance, how would you deal with shelling the handle on the pitcher? Certainly you wouldn't want it to be hollow (cannot be manufactured).

Surfaces allow a much greater degree of freedom in design--but also require a tad more work as a result of that freedom (since you have to manually define more).

Check out one of Matt's tutorials, linked here:

http://dezignstuff.com/blog/2007/04/15/surfacing-tutorial-water-can/

You can see how surfacing can be tamed such as to deliver what you're really looking for. (The example is of a very different style, but gives a good look at the various tools used in making smooth surface-generated forms.)



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[thermoD]

yes..I am aware that the handle is not a hollow, that why you should work with multiple bodies..I am not against surfacing at all but in this case using surfacing is not the best choice..I know you don't have SW2008 to look at my part, but it was so easy to use solids if you know how to play with multiple bodies..I just don't see any need to use surfacing in this case..and remember the SW works best with solids..

thanks for the link

 

[Theophilus]

Well, that's a good point--keep the solid bodies separate while working and join them later. However, that's a bit along the lines of what I'd consider "clunky" in some cases. In this case, I think it works great.

Remember, I'm coming from the perspective of an industrial designer. In my case, surfaces are an every-day reality, so they're not scary. Lots of folks who don't work with surfacing seem a bit intimidated by them. However, if you want to work with curvature-continuous surfacing and other more complicated stuff, you'll soon find yourself needing to do so within the realm of surfaces--and not solids. Working/practicing with sweeps and lofts tends to go hand-in-hand with surfaces--or at least leads there down the road to more advanced control of forms.

In the last few releases the surfacing tools have improved greatly. And they're useful for much more than simple complex geometry--I use them all the time to break a part into pieces--adding tongue-and-groove parting lines, etc. for molded parts as an example (great for parting surfaces--much more control than planes). So the utility goes beyond ID work and well into the realm of tool and die once familiar/comfortable with this type of modeling.

This also depends on specific application. So for this part surfaces are certainly not necessary (although I'd still do it that way), but surfaces would be good in achieving the purpose of "practice" mentioned by finisher. Nice thing about SolidWorks is there are many ways to do almost anything.



Jeff Mowry

http://www.industrialdesignhaus.com

Reason trumps all. And awe transcends reason.

 

[finisher]

Theophilus & thermoD,

Thank you so much for your very detailed, helpful & appreciated responses. I'm going to remodel the pitcher both as sufaces making aid of the suggested tutorial and as mutibody solids.

I might have more questions along the way as I drive to the finish line. And yes, I did mean surface loft when I said surface sweep (sorry for the confusion).

finisher