Tim,

Well, its all good for Shark getting new faceting, but what about the products you are selling/sold?

When I am building what should be a simple 30 minute model and getting problems with faceting that is then output to obj it makes VC pretty much useless for my projects.

I have attached pic01 from where I have simply added chamfers to some holes and the facets start to cover the holes up. I exported to a poly modeler to check if it was just a display problem but the output was the same with holes covered.pic02

I am really starting to get tired of the endless problems with VC. If this was V1 of the product line it would be classed as quite bad, but for V6 IMHO it is a complete embarrassment for the company.


- Steve

Nothing is fixing this. There should be no need to have to mess aroung changing display etc just to get correct faceting.


The model is very simplistic, but did make a check to post you screen shot.

I did think that if I changed the object to surfaces then the model would be re-built to surfaces from the underlying geometry, however, when I did that, the surfaces appear to be built from the faceting info with the result shown in the second pic.

I am using what is described as a Pro version CAD system, when I stop laughing at that I may decide to attempt the model again in VC. (and note, this is also a problem in the latest build of 2d/3d)

- Steve

Steve,

If you send/post the VC file that would be very helpful.

Tim

Tim,

I have come across another example.

The model was just a check on the behavior of the surfacing tools. The facets messed up pic01.

When loading the model it does take quite a time to load, it appears to get stuck on "Calculating facet display list", but it does eventually load.


- Steve

This is a problem with ACIS then?

App based on R20? What's that? :D

Great! :cool:

It makes you think doesn't it? :eek: :D:D

Poor old Tim. Actually, from what I read on Solidworks-based forums is that SW's users are having buggy problems too (sorry can't be over specific here- have a look for yourselves!). So perhaps we can blame that naughty buggy ACIS kernel after all?

Hey Tim, fancy switching to Parasolid? :cool:

I ask the guys at Spatial that frequently. Spatial would certainly like to see that happen but SolidWorks pretty much marches to it's own tune as part of the Dassault family. FYI, SolidWorks does have a few ACIS dlls included (SAT read/write and deformable modeling).

I think it's challenging to switch when you have a large installed user base of data files. Partially because designers are rightly demanding in preserving 100% of their data file integrity. A history based model must regen the part consistently. Converting between ACIS and Parasolids is very good, but there are enough differences where I don't think you can always guarantee 100% conversion. (This is a contrary opinion to some cad bloggers out there, a kernel is much more than a collection of NURB surfaces...)

Some years back at Lockheed we were switching from CADAM to CATIA. Our CATIA rep was IBM. They assured us that 98 percent of our files would come over from CADAM to CATIA perfectly. And this was 2 1/2D! We had thousands of master drawing files of the F-16 and F-16 derivatives in CADAM. Since we did not know what 2 percent would fail on our $20M airplane, we kept the master database in CADAM.

SolidWorks is also in an intense dogfight with Inventor for top dog in the 5K MCAD market. I'm not sure they can afford any slips right now. I remember when SolidEdge switched from ACIS to ParaSolids. I think the year it took them to switch the kernel gave SolidWorks a significant competitive edge as SolidWorks aggressively added new functionality. At that time and even today, I thought SolidEdge was a superior product, especially with drafting and sheet metal.



Tim