Patterning Edge Blends

[CNSZU]

Hi all,

I've encountered a problem with patterning (Pattern Feature) blends in NX, whereas in Solidworks there is no problem whatsoever. Please refer to the attached images. The part is modeled exactly the same way in Solidworks and NX.

Solidworks - OK

http://files.engineering.com/getfil...8bb2f6&file=Solidworks-pattern_is_correct.JPG

NX - fails

http://files.engineering.com/getfil...4-8091-43edeebf3c9a&file=NX-pattern_fails.JPG

First, an extruded beam with a hole is created, then a slot is created with a blend feature added to the 4 inside edges of that slot. Now, I want to pattern this slot and blend, but only the bottom 2 blends are patterned. The upper 2 edges are ignored!

Of course, you might think "why not create the slot and blend first, create the pattern, and lastly create the hole?" Well, there might be situations where this order is not possible.

How should I pattern these blends correctly in NX (8)?

Thank you.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Well, you could always include the 'blends' as part of the sketch used to create the slot (which also saves you a feature in the Part Navigator):

But if you insist that you MUST create the blend as a separate feature, then simply Pattern the 'Faces' of the slot instead:

That's one of the things that people like about NX, there's always more than one way to do almost anything. We call this flexibility.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

UG/NX Museum:

http://www.plmworld.org/p/cm/ld/fid=209

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.

 

[CNSZU]

That's one of the things that people like about NX, there's always more than one way to do almost anything. We call this flexibility.

That would be true if they all worked.

Including the blends in the sketch is not a wise idea, because it complicates the sketch and makes it difficult to remove the blends later. Separating the two is considered a "best practice" in 3D modeling.

The Pattern Face tool is a poor mans Pattern Feature because it lacks Count and Span spacing which is something I often use. Also it complicates the whole process by having to select individual faces which can be tedious if the thing you want to pattern consists of many faces (of course you can select faces by feature).

There is no doubt the Pattern Face tool has it's value somewhere in the modeling process, but I would suggest to improve the Pattern Feature tool to be a little more intelligent.

 

[cubalibre000]

John,
what have you done it's possible also in SolidWorks (bends in the sketch and pattern face).
Remember that SolidWorks has the same Parasolid engine.

This is a bug in the pattern feature, because some bends are patterned.

Thank you...

Using NX 8 and TC8.3

 

[Xwheelguy]

Are we talking "best practices" (which will vary depending upon who and how you were trained in modeling)or just personal opinion? If it works and isn't completely failing constantly during updates, a certain method shouldn't be considered undesireable - I'd say the modeler is either lazy or just doesn't know how to fix something in a model when it "breaks" - especially something as simple as an Extrude.

Wouldn't an Array be even more appropriate over Patterning faces, seeing as how Array existed prior to anything dealing with Face manipulation in NX? I doubt the blend would fail in that particular context, which is what 15 years of design tells me is best practice.

BTW, if anything is a poor man's software, it's definitely Solid Works, hence why it's sold as a mid-range modeler and cannot do near the surfacing that NX can do, all while paying Siemens to allow the use of their kernel. So for all the major Solid Works fans out there, thank you for paying your money to Siemens to help make NX stronger with every release.

Hope that puts a smile on John's face

Tim Flater
NX Designer

 

[CNSZU]

Is far as I can tell, there is no tool called "Array" in NX apart from the Pattern Feature/Face tools which have both been demonstrated to be inadequate. Solidworks (despite using the same Parasolid kernel) has no problems at all.

What is revealing is that proponents of NX will tell you about the "power and flexibility" in allowing the user to choose many ways to accomplish the same thing, but when someone points out to them the issues of the software which limits the modeling, instead of being humble and admitting the faults, they instead turn around and accuse the modeler of being lazy!

How can you call Solidworks a poor mans software when in this case it demonstrably is more mature than NX? And if Siemens needs to piggy back on the immense popularity of Solidworks and rely on their license payments in order to provide adequate upgrades, that is simply clutching at straws.

 

[JohnRBaker]

The function often referred to as 'Array' was replaced by Pattern Feature.

Note that I've opened a PR covering this and will report back if and when I learn anything.

John R. Baker, P.E.
Product 'Evangelist'
Product Engineering Software
Siemens PLM Software Inc.
Industry Sector
Cypress, CA

http://www.siemens.com/plm

UG/NX Museum:

http://www.plmworld.org/p/cm/ld/fid=209

To an Engineer, the glass is twice as big as it needs to be.