跳到主内容

Mirror Tool

评论

43 条评论

  • B.Brincken

    Honestly, I do not understand the purpose of this separation of the products as well as the communities.

    Would it not be advantageous for both to have one Product Name with a Free and a Pro version?

    How about the developer communities - are these also separate?
    Or in other words, can we expect improvements in DSM independently of SC?

    0
  • tab...

    I would expect ( this is my personal opinion AND NOT an official statement ) no separation between core modeling DSM and SC developments - only a reduced functionality set. There are improvements planned as stated in the wish list.

    Once information has been generated from DSM - it's possible that additional S/W might be produced to assist downstream applications if the 'need' can be demonstrated.

    If you look at the DesignSpark website, you can get a flavour of what's being attempted and what's being achieved. https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/home

    That's all i say...

     

     

     

    0
  • B.Brincken

    Help me, where on the linked page do I fnd a kind of roadmap of planned improvements?

    And where is the (or your?) wish list?

    I'd have a few dozen entries for that.

    0
  • tab...

    B.Brincken

    Go back to 'Community' then you'll find the DSM 'New Feature Requests' ...

    0
  • B.Brincken

    Ok, thanks, I'll pack my list in friendly words and post there soon.

    In the meantime I got the Spaceclaim Link and license key and installed the software. The list of im- and export formats is impressive, also there is an interesting 'Algoryx Momentum' extension offered for mechanical simulation.

    But let's focus on the mirror tool - it works basically, but in a funny way:
    It generates a mirror plane for each part in a component.
    "The plane becomes a persistent mirror once you create geometry using the mirror" say the docs (ansyshelp.ansys.com - only readable as a logged-in user).
    You can delete the mirror planes - but then each part still stays in the same parent-component with its counterpart. Or you mark the mirrored component with a selection rectangle and then "move to new component", which allows you to change the two components independently.
    But now all the parts of the new component are directly unter the top component - the structure is lost. You can now insert the original component structure and move the parts to their respective parents manually.
    This may be quicker than copying, cutting and re-arranging the parts what you need to do now in DSM, but IMHO still - cumbersome.

    Basically the developers seem to be motivated (or fascinated) by a concept of symmetry here.
    But, like the automatic linking when you copy a component this tends to lead to stress from unwanted effects in more cases - at least in my works - than it served a good purpose.

    0
  • tab...

    Hi - thanks for the update - a good read.

    I too noticed a verbal comment about symmetry being more important than mirroring during an Ansys produced video on the Sketch Constraint tool.

    It's my opinion that's right nearly always if we had a choice - i'm saying manufacturers would prefer 2 symmetrical parts used in L and R hand positions rather than to make a individual L and R hand part. Clearly though mirrored parts are often essential in function and esthetics e.g car headlights.

    Can i ask you a question?

    In DSM you can make mirrored bodies ( again, two bodies under a component) using the symmetry line in sketches ( actually a plane also works  - it can be better as well) - and these bodies still reproduce changes across each other even if a body is moved/rotated or put in another position - all good. However, it's then almost impossible to add more mirrored features because there is no longer a common mirror plane to use.

    So is this better with SC ? Can a mirrored body have different orientation/position and still have mirrored features added and reflected across both bodies?

    Usually i'll admit, both L and R positions are known so there would be a common reflection plane. Similarly, in all obvious cases i can think of, L and R hand versions are aligned and opposite each other...i think my hope for mirroring utopia isn't real world.

    Here's a link to Mirroring which can be found under 'Using Designspark Mechanical'   https://designspark.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/360015306893-Mirroring-Faces-and-Objects-to-make-Symmetric-or-Mirrored-bodies-in-DesignSpark-Mechanical-Operation-and-Examples-

    0
  • B.Brincken

    Tested it again with another part - steps:
    - Insert a plane benath the component
    - Start Mirror tool and chose the plane as mirror
    - Now there are 3 buttons in the mirror dialog: surface, part or component
    - I chose component and clicked each of the three top components (Top-Halt, Dampr, Adjustr) one after another
      > a mirrored component appears on the other side
    - Sub-components (like Top-Schraub) are now retained, with a '2' behind the name
    - Changes to any mirrored part are not applied to the original one

    So this is what I was looking for, with the minor downside of having to click the top-components one after another.
    Regarding your question: No mirror effect remains after this operation.

    So, "The plane becomes a persistent mirror once you create geometry using the mirror" is not working here. Dont ask me why, the software behaves just erratic.

    There may be other ways to use the tool, though, see second screenshot.


     

    0
  • B.Brincken

    Mirror Setup dialog:

    0
  • tab...

    Thanks very much for posting this...interesting.

    you said to my question... "The plane becomes a persistent mirror once you create geometry using the mirror" is not working here. Dont ask me why, the software behaves just erratic.'' i feared ( too strong) that might be the case as SC isn't a parametric modeler. still though, it makes a mirror copy instantly. I believe, as you hinted at in your last post, making an association of faces with a mirror plane can only 'link' these for subsequent bi-directional associative changes. I can't understand the reasoning of those tool tip words, if not that.

    If you have the time, experiment - sadly users are left to personal exploration to fully grasp any deeper functionality - i know DSM management is working to expand and make more accessible the growing operational knowledgebase of possible operations.

    With SC you also have 'Block Recording' which can record your modeling process allowing a ' go back / amend and replay ' procedure. Does it work simply and clearly i don't know.

    Thanks again...

    0
  • B.Brincken

    Ok, I tested this again, the mirror tool works in this way that it creates a mirror plane for each sub-component (-level). You could get the same result by adding and assigning mirror planes manually.

    What rarely works or messes the operation up reliably is any sub-component in an 'external' file.
    So a mirror of a complex component has to be done step-by-step with each of its sub-files.

    Block recording sounds like a reasonable addition, and may also serve to tackle problems with (too much) linked symmetry.

    Beyond that, my ambition to assess SC is sinking, the license expires on July 1, and also there is no way to bring parts to DSM - SC can read .rsdoc but not write ;-)
    I got a fair offer to 'upgrade' DSM to SC, but still not in my current budget.

    Basically, should my project and CAD career continue, I'd rather look into more classical tools for the 'serious' work - exchange with partners and shops - and keep DSM / SC for brainstorming and prototyping.

    0
  • tab...

    OK...hmm - some thoughts...

    With DSM /SC so much of deeper functionality is only acquired from user exploration - which the user has to remember 'now how do i ?, or how did i do that !'. So what is easily rememberable , basic Pulls and Moves etc becomes almost inversly proportional difficult when having to work with rarely used functionality, like sub-solid functionality with face and curve entities etc - i really have to practice.

    Other CAD s/w take Creo 8 Parametric as a common example, has many creation tools using 'Interactive Dashboards ' for object definition - i can appreciate how easy it is define , create and modify using a dashboard system and adjust the original inputs etc for a change.

    With a parametric modeler, If you plan out well the design first before actual model parametric definition,  the normal 'shuffing around' should be easily accomplished.

    Dynamic modelers S/C , DSM , Creo Direct and Creo Direct Elements are very good for radical unplanned / unanticipated changes.

    Adding the Exchange and Drawing Modules adds a little versitility to DSM. I may have said this before ( so forgive me) with a step output, free third party software can provide a mirror copy that can be imported back.

    Other CAD like Freecad might work better for you. Sketchup has mirroring...

     

    Anyway,

    Regards - nice chatting about this...

     

    0
  • B.Brincken

    "Adding the Exchange and Drawing Modules adds a little versitility to DSM" - yes, that is still a valid option for me.

    FreeCAD and others do not work better for me, but represent more of a standard, which is relevant with regard to partners.

    0

请先登录再写评论。