Fillets are easy in Rhino (part 2)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 вер 2024
- For this particular case I used a free plug-in which I showed in detail in another of my videos. It's extremely powerful compared to Rhino's native filleting capabilities. Here is the overview video that shows various examples with that plug-in in action. You can find a download link in its description, as well:
• Chain surface fillet -...
The 3d model seen in the thumbnail image has two different display modes assigned to its surfaces. The graphite one is called "Crackdown 1", while the yellow one is "Зайо Байо" (written in Bulgarian alphabet in my Rhino 7). Both custom display modes could be downloaded from the following topic on the official Rhino forum:
discourse.mcne...
--------------------------------------------------------------
💚 If you like my work, you can support me with a small gift that will help me create more content like this 💚
PayPal: www.paypal.me/...
That's definitely not "easy". Maybe the result is good but that would take like a couple of seconds in Catia. Imagine doing that in Rhino when there are hundreds or thousands of edges to fillet, gonna take forever. Then you need to change something and you have to redo everything again. Catia's user interface looks like it was from the early 2000s though.
There is no doubt that Catia has more advanced filleting engine and could provide far quicker solution to complex cases with plenty of edges to be filleted. However, Catia also has its disadvantages and its fillets sometimes fail. Rhino is a free-form surfacing program, hence it works with a more direct approach that takes time while offering some degree of freedom to adjust the shapes exactly the way the creator wants. Solid-based parametric CAD programs like Catia are a bit limited in that regard, as they heavily rely on numerical parameters and automation (which is good, but also has its drawbacks).
If a CATIA fillet fails bad enough, then you could revert to CATIA‘s Freeform surfacing package to get the job done, much like what you seem to be doing here in the latter parts of this video. The case here is not that rhino does what CATIA can’t; It’s that rhino does what CATIA can, but at a much much cheaper price.
@@DeeeBoyy , that's correct. There is no other CAD program with so much functionality comparable to Rhino at a similar cost. Not to mention that the major parametric CAD programs are subscription based, whereas Rhino is a single, lifelong license. On top of that, the owner of the Rhino license could contact the "McNeel" team to re-sell his or her program to another person or a company. This is a huge difference compared to the rest CAd programs in the industry. Not to mention that the upgrade from a previous to the newest Rhino version is quite affordable, too. Currently, Rhino 7 owners could upgrade to Rhino 8 for just 395 EUR up until 27th February 2024 instead of 595 EUR, which will be the upgrade price after that date. A new owner will have to pay 995 EUR for Rhino 8.
try plasticity any you will never come back filleting in rhino
@@ulfpointner8141 , in fact, when I was working on some 3d models over the past months, Plasticity failed in several occasions where Rhino performed better with filleting the same models. But in general Plasticity is better at filleting due to using the Parasolid geometric modeling kernel.
Hello Bobi! I wonder if you have used only Rhino plugins or something third-party?Everything else looks excellent as usual
Hi Vitali! For this particular case I used a free plug-in which I showed in detail in another of my videos. It's extremely powerful compared to Rhino's native filleting capabilities. Here is the overview video that shows various examples with that plug-in in action. You can find a download link in its description, as well:
ua-cam.com/video/nOucAzL10Ao/v-deo.htmlsi=Z6IcqUW_JllQWrCJ
This probably wouldn't have failed if you just did all of the fillets at the same time. And you also may want to look into using blendEdge instead of filleteEdge to handle these. It's for A-surfaces only really since you obviously couldn't create some of these surfaces on interior corners with a CNC efficiently.
The purpose of the video is to show that Rhino could easily handle fillets with different radius where the resulting fillet surfaces intersect with each other. There is nothing that has failed here. In fact, if you try to apply those fillets simultaneously as you suggested, Rhino will fail for sure.
Also, the ! _FilletSrf tool which I use in the video produces true arc fillets, unlike the automated ! _FilletEdge tool which tends to create less accurate fillets with variable radius, and sometimes even duplicated end control points.
why not use mirror to the other side?
The idea of this video is to show how easy it is to create fillets with different radius values along complex areas, this is why both sides are not identical, hence mirror is not needed. Cheers
Can you please tell me how u did shading like that?
The 3d model seen in the thumbnail image has two different display modes assigned to its surfaces. The graphite one is called "Crackdown 1". The display mode used in the video is called "Bobi X10". This and more custom display modes could be downloaded from the following topic on the official Rhino forum. Cheers!
discourse.mcneel.com/t/share-your-custom-viewport-modes-here/151321
@@AutomotiveCNC thanks so much
Obviously Sarcastic video.
Here in Bulgaria we typically have a nice sense of humour. :)
_ShowEdges?
What about that command?
Fillets are easy only in Solidworks. Not even Fusion360. Rhino is notoriously bad with fillets, having the most basic, dumb algorythms that are ready to fail in even the simplest of occasions.
Solidworks creates bad geometry via using dirty tricks such like increased tolerance deviation (leaves lots of open areas) and fillets whose radius does not meet the input numbers. I already showed that in another video long time ago. Those fillets look OK-ish only in Solidworks, but often times need a lot of time to fix them in other CAD software due to the aforementioned shortcomings.
ua-cam.com/video/v6w95PDBPy0/v-deo.html
@@AutomotiveCNC interesting. i will check. thank you.
@@AutomotiveCNC Read your comments in the video you provided. On point. Manufacturing at this level is not forgiving. But you can always trim an reshape based on fillet geometry with history in SW. What is your experience whith surfacing in Solidworks? Can you trust it for surface continuity?
@@constantinosschinas4503 , I haven't heard of a single car whose body consisting complex surfacing was designed in Solidworks and then actually manufactured as a road legal car (apart from a few models by Palatov that use very basic shapes easily achievable in almost any software). On the other hand, there are at least 7 sports cars designed in Rhino that are manufactured since years. I myself designed 3 of them (Finnluxury Tritium, Aeromaster LMP and Sin R1) and currently develop two other models that are kept in secret for now. Saleen S7 was designed in Rhino 1 about two decades ago. The new Japanese Aspark Owl is also designed in Rhino. Finnluxury Tritium is the first sports car fully designed and engineered in Rhino, including chassis, body panels, body-in-white detailing, suspension, interior, battery package, lights, grilles and many mechanical components.
As a long time Rhino user myself, I was wondering why is the industry standard Autodesk's Alias regarding complex surfacing and transitional surfaces? I'm starting to switch to Alias for the simple reason of industry needs, although Rhino comes as second nature to me now, making the switch between softwares much harder than I thought and achieving the same level of profficiency. @@AutomotiveCNC
ngl its easier in solidworks and fusion
Every NURBS modeling software has its strength and weakness.
nah solidworks is king on this area
Visually, yes, Solidworks is fast and works properly 90% of the time. However, this is only true if looking at the geometry rendered in the viewport. The true geometry on more complex fillets is actually wrong. Once the 3d model created in Solidworks is being exported as STEP or IGES to other CAD programs, often times it suffers from unwanted errors such like: overlapping surfaces, radius deviation (not accurate number like the input number), badly split surface edges, non-joined surface edges, leaved holes, entirely missing split surfaces etc. It's a common issue with 3d models exported from Solidworks. I deal with such problematic models more than 20 years now, as I work with plenty of CAD data sent by various manufacturers of car components designed and engineered in SW. The aforementioned deviation made by Solidworks is intentional, because it's made to "cheat" by filling holes where a true radius would need a more robust filleting engine. You can observe this behaviour in one of my old videos here:
ua-cam.com/video/v6w95PDBPy0/v-deo.html
@@AutomotiveCNC im a cnc technician i can tell you no one uses rhinoceros even in automotive as I've worked for volvo trucks and cars, Scania CV.
You make it sound like it generates wrong fillets only visually but how do you explain it being correct for mastercam and the customer specifications? It would be a nightmare working with rhinoceros in this area, time is money.
I'm a heavy rhino user and use both but solidworks has it's strengths
@@skullfucker3381 , the majority of car manufacturers and car design houses use Rhino for their conceptual models, where Solidworks, Catia, Alias, ICEM (now integrated in Catia) etc are too slow with generating the primary surfacing. I have been using Rhino to generate G-codes with RhinoCAM since 2009. It worked perfectly well on two real car projects that I did between 2007 and 2019. The programs you mentioned suffer from the same inaccuracy as they rely on the same Parasolid kernel. However, since they are all based on the latter, they are programmed to ignore the errors such as tiny gaps, overlapping geometry, and irregular radius fillets.
The purpose of this video is to show that it's easy to create true radius fillets in Rhino. It's in no way made to compare Rhino with parametric CAD programs whose strength is doing complex parametric fillets.
So far there are 3 real cars designed in Rhino by me (Finnluxury Tritium and Aeromaster LMP both fully engineered in Rhino including all the tooling for manufacturing; plus Sin R1 - the exterior, all plugs for CNC-milling and some engineering of the inner door cards and other components), along with 2 more models currently under development. Other known sports cars designed in Rhino are Saleen S1, Aspark Owl and several Korean and Japanese models which I don't recall now. Plus countless of trucks, buses, trains etc made in Japan, China and Brazil where Rhino is quite popular. In the right hands Rhino is more than capable for doing Class-A surfacing and engineering work, except that its fillets are slower than other CAD programs and it lacks proper inverse kinematics engine to test suspension and other moving components.
@@AutomotiveCNC
Don't get me wrong rhinoceros is nice but in a world where you have customers wanting constant changes it is a nightmare to work with so I can say at least in Sweden no one uses rhino for automotive concept just small companies and smaller products, and that's right CATIA is the one used for that from what I've seen here in Sweden
you know how solidworks works with constraints, relations and configurations right? This is part of why its used
I honestly think a few lunatics like you use rhino for automotive more power to you 😂
@@skullfucker3381 , yeah, most customers typically demand quite a lot of changes during the design process. It's normal. :) This is why it's crucial to combine the most appropriate CAD program for the given task with good professionals who understand their stuff. Every popular CAD program have it's strengths and weaknesses.