If I have a Catia file and import this into CADDoctor 2014, run the necessary cleanup and than export this file using the following Export options:
“File -> Import\Export Settings” – “Export UDM” in CADDoctor 2014 from the default “Export NURBS geometry” to “Export faceted model (Mandatory for Adviser)” – if we will get a dependable result.
What I mean is: when we do the upper setting, CADDoctor 2014 exports a “udm” file format, but after importing this into “Autodesk Simulation Moldflow Insight 360 2014” it creates the geometry into a Layer called “Stl Representation”.
When I try to apply a Dual Domain Mesh to this model it seems that the mesh has some “edge variations” according to the geometry at hand (ex: small radius, small edge length etc.) this would be fine if the “Match Mesh” value would be high, but it’s quite low <90%.
The specified “Global edge length” that has been tried are: 5mm, 4mm, 3mm, now running 2mm, but considering it’s a big part I am afraid of the calculation time.
My main concern is that the part we are studying has a grille area (lots of small diameter holes), this is why I need to know if the result is dependable / accurate.
My apologies, i might have posted this initially on the wrong Topic.
Why do you chose export to Adviser from CAD Doctor?
Choose export to AMI from CAD Doctor and then you should get a solid model.
AMI and AMA have differents way to deal with geometries, and so CAD Doctor uses different options.
I choose to export to Stl "Export faceted model (Mandatory for Adviser)", because the geometry is much better.
For example, on the part that we are working on, we have a grid area (full of small holes very close together) and with the normal export method (I think that is the AMI, if AMI means "Autodesk Simulation Moldflow Insight 360 2014"), we get a very poorly displayed resolution and some errors in moust cases.
And for the "Export faceted model (Mandatory for Adviser)", after we import this file into "Autodesk Simulation Moldflow Insight 360 2014", we have a fairly good resolution on the part, the only issue is that we did not find a way to specify a Mesh density for this type of file and it's quite necessary, especially for the grid area.
Surprising the geometry is much better with AMA option.
With AMI option, we export/import directly a CAD model.
Did you use the chord angle option on the CAD meshing tab then when meshing in synergy ?
If yes, I would be interested you pass your CAD Doctor file to our support, so we can investigate further.