6 Replies Latest reply on Oct 12, 2011 11:21 AM by Philippe Carette

# How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

Is it possible to define a curve, in a 3D sketch, which would be the copy of another, from the same 3d sketch, but translated / rotated.

So, if the source spline would be an intersection curve of 2 surfaces, if i change one surface, the copied spline would move jointly with the source, just the translation/rotation would be constant ?

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

No, you can't copy 3D splines. Maybe a workaround alternative for you would be to make a 3D spline, then make a surface from it, and copy the surface body. Then the edge of the copied surface would be your copied 3D spline.

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

Hi,

I can copy a 3D spline, and I already thought to make a specific surface.

But as SW parametric, I hoped that I could parametrizer such 3D spline ... too bad.

I hope that in a future version something totally basic in maths will be possible with SW : to define local frames, and transformation to handle them (so affine 3D transformations).

Then, such feature will be trivial.

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

Possible workaround (not pretty)...

Sweep a surface using the original spline (e.g. single-line section swept along spline), then copy the surface.  You can then use the edge of each surface for whatever 3D hijinks you have in mind.

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

Waoo : the base of the variety, and a cross section of its fiber.

Just beautiful.

A simple choice, done before any pasting would be confortable, but this tip is elegant, indeed

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

Philippe (or Roland),

So, what is different about Roland's workaround and Matt's?

Jerry Steiger

• ###### Re: How to define a destination spline, from a source spline ?

The second idea is the same of the first.

Just that the 2nd explanation is closer of a section in a fiber bundle than the first.