How to make equal and symmetrical solid figures on elliptical faces?

[Egui]

Hello everyone,

I am very new to CAD modeling and am starting to use Alibre Design.

I have a problem that I cannot solve in a piece with 3 faces in an ellipse format.

The 3 faces have different shapes and I must create solid symmetrical half balls on the entire surface of the faces. The only way I found is by inserting 3 Point Plane over the faces.

But there are 2 problems:

a) As the sketch is flat and the face is shaped like an ellipse, the balls sink as they go to the center of the face, this way the balls do not have the same height across the entire surface.

b) The way I did this job took me a lot of time and the more balls I add the more my PC slows down. Also, the leftover balls are very difficult to remove manually with the “Delete face or solid body” tool because the PC will slow down a lot.

Could anyone give an idea on how to make this piece in the best possible way?

I leave my work here so that someone can download it if they want to give an opinion or modify it.

Thank you very much for your attention.

 

[Joseph_L]

Wow @Joseph_L , you really get into some real interesting workflows using Alibre's surface features. That really shows some of the hidden power of Alibre that may go untapped by the average user.

Thanks Harold;
I would have done exactly as you did because I think yours and everyone approaches really is the best. But with the extra help you guys provided, I had the freedom to try something new, so you all really gave me the bandwidth to try some new things I wouldn't have otherwise been able to try. Thanks for the help!

 

[stepalibre]

Thank you to everyone for providing such great answers- and in such a timely fashion as well!

I tried my hand at a less conventional approach, and the video is here (when it is finished processing).

I speak more in the video about the extra "meat" around the pattern and how to prevent it.

 

[Joseph_L]

Man if only I wasn't working quite so much on these future versions. I'll see if I can get a backward file.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

Man if only I wasn't working quite so much on these future versions. I'll see if I can get a backward file.

Rename your Alibre shortcuts so it's more obvious which is Current and Beta.

 

[stepalibre]

Rename your Alibre shortcuts so it's more obvious which is Current and Beta.

Just ask the development team which switch to flip in the file to bypass the version checker at startup.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

Just ask the development team which switch to flip in the file to bypass the version checker at startup.

This has been discussed. It's very difficult to make software forward compatible. You can't know how to load features that don't exist yet. However being able to save files as a previous version format would be welcome.

 

[simonb65]

It's very difficult to make software forward compatible. You can't know how to load features that don't exist yet.

Nate, in this instance the version is still v28. Surly the file schema should be the same for the same major version as this is the 'feature' version. Minor versions are just 'bug fixes', or they should be, and shouldn't have changes in file formats! If they have, that's really not good practice!

 

[stepalibre]

YES. So it would mean there are breaking changes in a minor version? Was this true for V27? Just curious.

 

[stepalibre]

The same command that throws the "You have the wrong version" message could still open the file in a disabled or readonly mode or it could disable features that are not available or unsupported. Even if you have AD v26 and try to open v28 file unless there was a significant change to how the feature tree and modeling kernel work, they can still allow v26 to open/render the v28 model data. Only load the model data including the history in the older version of AD and when you save, it will be downgrade. Companies simply prefer to break file versions with new releases. This is a bad idea in the world of PDM. You have to check what version a file was made in and bulk upgrade them every time a new release ships. I hope Alibre innovate in this area.

 

[stepalibre]

FORUM NOTE: I have an issue posting to the forum. I get errors repeatedly for some reason.

 

[stepalibre]

 

[stepalibre]

This has been discussed. It's very difficult to make software forward compatible. You can't know how to load features that don't exist yet. However being able to save files as a previous version format would be welcome.

I really hope PDM handles this somehow. PDM can solve some of the file version issues and with an API we could make workflows that could flag old versions, automate conversions and other file tasks. I remember 15 years ago, upgrading and searching by file version in TeamCenter for Pro-E and other files.

 

[NateLiquidGravity]

Honestly for the few times file save versions have been a problem for me I would much rather developers spend time on other improvements and features I've already asked for.

 

[stepalibre]

I agree. It's not an important or critical issue at all. I think with PDM, file versions don't matter as much. Issues with software and file versions become a big problem when sharing files with someone who has a lower version of the application. They'll need to either update to the version you have or use a neutral format.

 

[stepalibre]

The same command that throws the "You have the wrong version" message could still open the file in a disabled or readonly mode or it could disable features that are not available or unsupported. Even if you have AD v26 and try to open v28 file unless there was a significant change to how the feature tree and modeling kernel work, they can still allow v26 to open/render the v28 model data. Only load the model data including the history in the older version of AD and when you save, it will be downgrade. Companies simply prefer to break file versions with new releases. This is a bad idea in the world of PDM. You have to check what version a file was made in and bulk upgrade them every time a new release ships. I hope Alibre innovate in this area.

FYI, this is the type of file format version feature I was referring to:

 

[Egui]

Another variation:

View attachment 42154
View attachment 42156

The reference geometry defines the starting ball/bump to pattern using the surface edges which are 3DSketches as the guide.

I wanted to know that too, because if you need a high density or a more complex surface, it will become too heavy. The "project feature" does work but, as HaroldL and I have said a composite curve and other features like real bodies would be amazing especially for this type of work. We can't pattern some feature types or reference geo in certain contexts. Not even part booleans can be patterned the last time I tried. And we can't parametrically remove/delete patterned instances, and they are merged into a solid (lump). If you delete a model piece, then update the input geometry and regen the feature will break because it's index based so an update to a pattern feature will change the selected piece index number, breaking the Remove Face and Remove Model Pieces feature. The feature doesn't actually throw an error, instead it'll just pick the next index. That will then break other features that are referencing it.

Hello,

Studying all the variants posted, I think your version is the fastest and without many steps, therefore I want you to be kind enough to publish a video of it. Especially in the part where you use 3DSketches as a guide to make the sketch that will shape the ball.

Thank you very much for your attention and work.