Community
Inventor Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Inventor Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular Inventor topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Converting solids to surface

54 REPLIES 54
Reply
Message 1 of 55
coviepresb1647
587 Views, 54 Replies

Converting solids to surface

Article the First:

How does one convert a solid extrusion such as a plate to single planar surface representation? For example, I want to take a plate extrusion in an assembly and make a planar surface representation at the mid-point of its thickness. (This is prior to importing it into ALGOR FEA to make it into a shell element.) This is for a (1) normal extrusion, (2) "Base"-based solid (blue-colored "base" icon and name under the part), and (3) "Composite"-based solid (yellow-colored "composite" icon and name under the part).

Article the Second:

How does one create a Signature so that (s)he does not have to type his/her name and the program and/or computer information all the time?

Whit Roberts
Windows XP
Autodesk Inventor 11 SP2, build 344a
ALGOR FEMPRO 21 SP1 Message was edited by: coviepresb1647
54 REPLIES 54
Message 41 of 55
Anonymous
in reply to: coviepresb1647

> It finally went through

Super deal. Upward & Onward. ;^)
Message 42 of 55

Well, I thought I was in the clear. ALGOR is not representing the the mid-planes as surfaces as it usually does but as lines and circles. Now, my colleague gave me an IGES file made by Pro-E for the same model, and it imported better in my ALGOR (as surfaces rather than lines and circles).
Message 43 of 55

I did find a fix to the IGES import. (Choosing Solids as Surfaces and 144-Trimmed in the IGES save options.) ALGOR nicely represents the surfaces except one of the base plates, which show as two rings instead of a plate with 2 holes. That is my only issue now.
Message 44 of 55
Anonymous
in reply to: coviepresb1647

> an IGES file made by Pro-E for the
> same model, and it imported better

I've noticed that, too. It's because Pro/E has a more accurate kernel. ;^)
(Never mind. That was all before your time but if the peers don't play nice
I'll give you the link to the essay.) I ~think~I~may~ understand why in a
vague sorta way.

> except one of the base plates

Seeing the file would be nice, as would knowing if you could import the IGES
I posted a couple of days ago.

Try the attached (your 2 plates and tube again) and let me know which (look
them over carefully; seems we've had some trouble telling the good from the
bad) ones import cleanly so I can compare your results with what I saw in
FEMAP.
Message 45 of 55
Anonymous
in reply to: coviepresb1647

> Try the attached

If I remember to attach it, that is.
Message 46 of 55
drj5175
in reply to: coviepresb1647

How do I put the scale on the title page in Inventor?
Message 47 of 55

DRK5175,

How does your question apply to converting solids to surfaces?
Message 48 of 55

I was able to import the tempprt.zip file. The base plate and tubes are blue, and the perpendicular support plate is yellow. What is the difference in color?

I was also able to import the following in the iges.zip file:
all files except plate 2b - yellow outline and faint red surface
plate 2b - yellow outline and faint blue surface
Difference in color?

After deriving the midplane surfaces, I was able to save the full assembly using the 144 IGES and "Solids -> surfaces" options. However, one of the base plates is missing in ALGOR.
Message 49 of 55
moretti999
in reply to: coviepresb1647

enter it
AM
Message 50 of 55
Anonymous
in reply to: coviepresb1647

Whit, if you be still around ...

MANY hours and more than I EVER wanted to know about IGES later: I
isolated a (my) problem with the combination of Rhino export and
FEMAP v8.0 import. It's choking on geometry parameterizations. Rhino
will parameterize a 1" diameter trim curve domain -pi to 0, for
instance. FEMAP wants to see 0 to 1 parameterization for curve and
entity definition spaces. I imagine Rhino's parameterization is
perfectly legit and the real "CAD" programs I've tried don't seem to
care. You can check ALGOR (FemPro?) with the attached test files
(simple plane surface with a hole trimmed in the middle) to see if it
has similar problems. Might be useful info for a someday application
if nothing else. Looking at your "example assembly.igs"; it does not
look like that should be a problem with IV exports but I'd have to
dig some more before placing a bet.

If you want to pursue the issue duplicate the attached test file
using IV, export and post the export if ALGOR has a problem with it.
I'll take a look at it when I have time and see what happens if I
shake it around a little. If you have no problem with that test you
might try duplicating your normal workflow, i.e. exporting from an
assembly, using a similarly simple geometry definition. You might be
looking at transformation matrix or subfigure definition (ahv larned
a bunch o big new words the past week, still need to figer out what
they mean) problems. Getting a copy of problem data sets to ALGOR is
advisable, too, if you have the means. They need something to do in
addition to repainting the buttons for the next release.

Lastly, if you haven't tried it; "washing" thru and exporting from
Acad/MDT for FEA import has worked relatively well for me in the
past. I think the flat data structures, everything referencing a
single coord sys, yadadada, simplifies both write and read
transactions. I would clean out any extraneous data (solid surfs /
faces, block definitions, etc.), segregate surface functional groups
by layer and color, purge the file, etc. before exporting. Might be
worth testing a couple of data sets. Things you need to watch...
Insanely tight export tolerance Acad will write out. It will cause
failures if ALGOR tries to use a GP19 specified value like 1e-8 inch.
Sane values are in the .001", .01 mm range. It there's no user
accessible setting for import or export the value can be changed in
the IGES file. Freezing layers is suspect. I'd go for a clean file
and all layers On.
Message 51 of 55

I'm still around and will consider your post.
Message 52 of 55
Anonymous
in reply to: coviepresb1647

> I'm still around and will consider your post.

Hmmm

"All things considered, are you for or against AutoDesk?"


After due consideration all offers are withdrawn. You'll have to
rely on your classmates or the Peers.
Tags (2)
Message 53 of 55

Hmmmm? In other words, I have yet to get to doing that as I am busy on another project and am processing it (considering it) in my mind.

The Question is neither addressed to you nor a relevant part of this forum thread.
Message 54 of 55

ALGOR didn't have have a problem with it at all. I did the same part in Inventor, and no problem again. I just saved it as a IGS - 144 (Solids as Surfaces) after deriving the midplane surfaces of the part.

Thanks for the help. Shame on the withdrawal based on an irrelevant topic and non-due consideration. I have no idea how a Lord/Peer will help, but thanks for that suggestion which I will follow by contacting Lord Broers (Life Peer) in the the UK House of Lords and mentioning to him that you referred me.
Message 55 of 55

And thanks to all the other learned people for the help! 🙂

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Autodesk Design & Make Report