>>>> On Mar 23, 2010, at 7:24 AM, Sven Wesley wrote: >> Do you guys use any of the Parametric plugins for Rhino? >> Honestly I don't see why a non parametric 3D modeler is any useful in >> the industry >> where you need to make more then just a part, I am not talking about >> people doing this for a hobby or the one-offs > <snip> > > Regarding using the parametric plugins for Rhino (such as "hole > making" or assembly aids), I don't, and I've used Rhino for about 7 or > 8 years now (wow). I used to use both Solidworks and Pro/E (Mechanica) > and of course, where available, or required, drew with parametric > references. True, if you had a boss with hole that you wanted to keep > mathematically from the inside of edge of a wall (typical parametric > use - screw bosses in a plastic box is a good example) - and you > changed the size of the screw that goes into that boss, a parametric > reference could save many hours of rework. The types of products I was > designing changed from very prismatic to very...not. And to be honest, > the organic control points in Rhino (and other modellers) was more > useful than having to resketch or back up and edit the math. When a > designer is over your shoulder "directing", there is a value in the > instant gratification of grabbing a control point and moving it to the > tip of his finger. Thus I moved from SW to Rhino. Haven't seen the > need to move back since. > > I build assemblies in Rhino with many parts; the stock layer and > transform tools do an adequate job for visualization in our applications. > > I also use Rhino4 daily in a production environment, along with > MecSoft's VisualMill. It spits out good gcode to our Mazak VCN410 with > a separate 4th axis indexer. (The indexer is used just to flip parts > over, I don't do continuous 4th.) The parts that aren't a candidate > for machining will go to laser, waterjet or punching, typically - and > are all 2d sheet work. > > Under most circumstances, I don't use the solid model for machining - > I use curves that are either the construction lines for the solid, or > curves extracted from the solid. The solid model is most effective at > visualization and selling the part to the customer. I also print the > solid model to our Dimension printer if necessary. Thus references > from feature to feature aren't a benefit. > > Holes and other bored features that aren't helical milled don't care > if the drawn feature is a point or a 5 mile wide circle. The cam > software is interested in the center and the depth point. > The rest of the feature is created by the tool, not the model. > I do use 3d contouring often, but rastering (or waterline, if you > prefer) over an entire part in a production scenario is pretty > pointless. There are 30 tools in my carousel, I know there is at least > one that is much more efficient in hogging out material in a directed > pocketing operation than trying to do the whole job in one pass with a > single tiny ballmill. The finish and dimensional stability in a single > waterline pass is pretty lousy, too - again, in a production scenario. > > I did, like many others, use FreeMill as my first (own) cam package, > on my converted HF minimill, long ago. Also like others, I enjoyed the > (limited) feature set of that package enough to go and try&buy my on > copy of VMill for daily use. Only recently, I've begun to investigate > SprutCam again; there are demo CDs/downloads from almost every > manufacturer in my library here, some I liked, some I did not, and > while I would gladly stay with Mecsoft for their great service and > support, the VisualTurn (lathe) package is lacking significantly. > > None of the cam packages I am looking for need to be feature-based; > it's not even on my laundry list of requirements. > > I have "played with" the PlaceHole functions in Rhino a couple times; > the function like PlaceHole AlongCurve is cute - making a curved hole > - but it's not a feature I can easily machine. (While not "truly" > parametric, it's not overly difficult to write scripts to do this that > include references, thus providing to the user, a similar effect. I > don't bother.) > For me, a hole in a solid model is a "void" created by a secondary > "tool" I drew to perform a boolean operation on the original solid > block. The process is not unlike that of subtractive machining, and I > believe it gives me additional insight on how I eventually will hold > and machine the part. > > From a design stage, there are a couple plugins now that do > referential simulation - like Rhino Assembly - (and this may be more > what you're asking) which can have a value in a multi-part build. We > design a lot of robotic puppets that have many interfacing parts - > some we make, some are off the shelf - an animation of how parts fit > together into an assembly certainly could help sell the project; I > consider ourselves lucky that we have the "tribal knowledge" to be > able to do that with still imagery. I do have clients that will draw > up assemblies (such as Inventor) and bring them in for rework and > production. They aren't the machinists or builders, but they use those > tools to workout their initial intent. For them, it is a very valuable > tool. From strictly a machining aspect, I find it doesn't add any > value. I cannot yet machine the whole assembly from a single billet > (and trust me, I'll be cheering when I can!), so knowing how a u-joint > rotates against a shaft doesn't (as yet) lend any value to the > machining operation. > > A number of the job shops in my area don't even want to hear about > solid models - some only accept 2d dimensioned prints - not due to > lack of technology - but due to liability. No one wants to be the guy > who mis-interpreted or "assumed" a relation. Thus, they want to follow > every feature on the page, wrong or not! > > Ted. > > > >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev _______________________________________________ Emc-users mailing list Emc-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-users
