I'm trying to skin a solid using the paths shown. Even though the shapes are symmetrical and closed and grouped (they are made of lines, arcs, and conics), when I use the skin solid command in ViaCAD 5 ( and in the Shark FX Beta). I get the shown results. There is "twisting" occuring for lack of a better word. The Skinned solid IS NOT symmetrical. It's also hollow.

Any help/advice?

Norbert

Here it is Tim,

Thanks

Norbert

I also meet this issue very often.
The workaround is to add a few guide lines and use "skin with guides".
It doesn't solve everything though (cf my posts on that topic).

Against wrinkles, we need skin-care!

JL

The skin solid tool in ACIS will not support this case nor is it planned to do so. Each resulting capping surface must be able to be constructed from one continuous surface.

To do this particular set of curves, I think you will need to manually skin, cover, and stitch. There are some discontinuties in the curves you will also need to figure out how to transition.

My example is similar to the object shape above, except I'm using ViaCAD 2D/3D 5.x and the same problem occurs for me in V6 Beta.

Also, I cannot get volumes measurements from the shape. However, if I create a cube, sphere, tube, or other closed geometry via the palette tools, I CAN obtain volumes. But, when I create two curves (from the output of a hull generation program), then "skin" them, ViaCAD refuses to show volume for the shape. I forget the error message. It WOULD be nice if it says "Feature not enabled", or such, but even when I'm told about "gaps" or openings I cannot seem to resolve that matter.

I've thought about "subtracting a solid...", but I cannot seem to achieve that, either. And, even if that's possible, it would be painstakingly laborious and long for the shapes I'm going to be creating.

Worse, (and, boy, I hope it's just me, that I'm not doing something right), even when I draw extra lines to create new geometry snapped end to end JUST to make sure there really are NO gaps in the geometry, I STILL cannot end up with geometry that is considered closed and volume-measurable. I zoom in, turn on Intersection, play with end-point/mid-point, etc. I wish "Intersection" was more aggressive, more visible, and that there were an arrow key interaction to cope with shaky hands not keeping on the pointer-instantiated option-pop-up.

So, is it even permitted to end up with a closed shape that can be measured for volume when, say, several planes are thrown together and then trimmed plane-to-plane or surface-to-surface?

Also, is there some sort of "gap tolerance" that ignores minor openings in geometry so that volume measurements can be obtained? I realize it probably breaks some canon for there being closed geometry, and that a container for which volumes will be obtained should be drafted perfectly correctly, but, sometimes it's vitally time-saving to be able to throw together any number of shape-defining lines that are at least to scale and are a tiny fraction of distance apart relative to their scaled sizes. I suppose there is a tolerance/fit feature that may help with this, but maybe I'm misreading.

THANKS!