74 Replies Latest reply on Sep 28, 2018 3:25 PM by Alin Vargatu

# The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Hello SOLIDWORKS Power-Users and welcome to the 8th WPUC!

For eternal glory and 1000 points, provide the best solution to this problem:

2. Import it in SOLIDWORKS

3. Solve any topological problems

4. Remove all the holes as per these pictures. Do not use sketches or curves!

From:

To:

5. The goal is to get as close as possible to the initial body geometry and topology, before the holes were added. Note that Surface Fill will not get you to the initial topology, since it will change the number of faces and edges.

Please watch this video for more details:

SOLIDWORKS 8th Weekly Power User Challenge (June 2nd, 2017): Reverse Engineer an Imported Model - YouTube

Awards:

1. Win 1000 points for being the first to provide an acceptable solution

2. Win 1000 points by being the first to provide an acceptable solution with the minimum number of features in the tree

3. Win 2000 points and be proclaimed a SOLIDWORKS DEMIGOD by providing an out-of-this-world solution.

Your award will increase by 50% if you attach descriptive comments to all features in the tree. Tell your story, make your checker's life easier and share your knowledge with the Community.

Disclaimer: I would use my judgment to pick "the best" solution. It will be probably subjective, so you should provide as many details as possible about the advantages of your solution.

We will accept entries until Friday, June 9th 2017, at noon.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Model Attached , unsuppress steps for result

Delete faces.  I selected all then deselected which was quicker

A couple of Surface Untrims

Delete face around outer ear piece then another Surface Untrim

A couple of Surface Fills to fill a couple of small gaps (with a create solid)

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin,

I have to be honest & say I have seen this online several years ago but not sure if I remembered all the correct techniques but stumbled through.

Not sure why the file size is so big.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Kevin Pymm wrote:

Alin,

I have to be honest & say I have seen this online several years ago but not sure if I remembered all the correct techniques but stumbled through

You have a good memory. This time, we try to return the part to its original condition, before the cut-outs where added. A slightly different challenge.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Kevin Pymm wrote:

Alin,

I have to be honest & say I have seen this online several years ago but not sure if I remembered all the correct techniques but stumbled through.

Not sure why the file size is so big.

Very nice, Kevin! Would you consider improving the topology for these areas? Please ignore this message if you already have done that. I am replying in chronologic order.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

I have to apologize to the first contestants.  I wrote the challenge in airports and planes.

The goal is to reverse engineer the topology. Surface Fill patches holes, but it will create new topology. Recreate as many of the old faces and edges, as you can, please.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin,... are you then wanting us to extract and remodel,.. "or make independent"..  the external shape/surfaces as solidworks features (curves/lofts/boundaries/..)?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin,... are you then wanting us to extract and remodel,.. "or make independent".. the external shape/surfaces as solidworks features (curves/lofts/boundaries/..)?

Just patch all the holes, while limiting "guesses". I need to get as close as possible to the original  geometry and topology. Any sketches or Fill Surfaces would be, in my book, guesses.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin,... are you then wanting us to extract and remodel,.. "or make independent".. the external shape/surfaces as solidworks features (curves/lofts/boundaries/..)?

I am currently attending the VAR Workshop at SW Headquarters. Should I still function, when I get in my hotel room tonight, I will try to record a video showing exactly what I hope to get from this challenge.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

You finally set a challenge that I think I can achieve ..... then you just go and whip the carpet out from under me

I've got nothing

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Michael Lord wrote:

You finally set a challenge that I think I can achieve ..... then you just go and whip the carpet out from under me

I've got nothing

I am sorry for that. Would you accept 1000 points as compensation for the time you put in solving this challenge?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

No need to provide sympathy points for me

I need to earn them like the real pros here.

Beside the points would push me way too high up the ranking to where I deserve to be!

People might get the wrong impression that I know what I'm doing

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Send Michael Lord the piece of carpet that you whipped out from under him, he's probably standing on the porch waiting to come inside, but would like to clean off his shoes.

(Say "hey" to everyone at the VAR workshop for me!)

todd

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

This is what i've done i'm not surface guy like Paul Salvador so i want to see what had he done, but anyway i learn something

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Sometimes editing to what Alin Vargatu wants isn't the SW help menu cookie cutter answer, but I look forward to the final verdict....

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thanks Jaja!

Would you like to try one more time, without using the Fill Surface? Let's attempt not to fill the holes with new surfaces, but heal and patch the existing faces.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Will yap i'll try my best

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

first try attached

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

The process:

1. Delete fillet faces that cross boundaries
2. Offset (zero) to copy earpiece end surfaces
3. Delete original earpiece end faces
4. Untrim interiors of copied faces
5. Knit/solidify
6. Use Delete Faces to remove remainder of slots

• Earpiece end faces (pink) were copied because untrimming when still attached was unstable (worked once but failed to regenerate properly)
• Slots deleted one at a time to make it easier to spot errors and not overload solver
• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Roland Schwarz wrote:

The process:

1. Delete fillet faces that cross boundaries
2. Offset (zero) to copy earpiece end surfaces
3. Delete original earpiece end faces
4. Untrim interiors of copied faces
5. Knit/solidify
6. Use Delete Faces to remove remainder of slots

• Earpiece end faces (pink) were copied because untrimming when still attached was unstable (worked once but failed to regenerate properly)
• Slots deleted one at a time to make it easier to spot errors and not overload solver

Nice, but where are the pockets?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

..Fun!...

...but, the back end recess w/radii was the challenge, imho.   so.. I re-did it.

...updated -b

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

I started toying with how to maintain the recess. The big challenge is the red surface (pic below). That surface is simply not present in the model. Creating that face as part of the bottom fillet is a reasonable assumption, something I would do IRL.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Nice. Are you going to make it a solid body?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

..updated -b  (above)

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Did say that I would give it a try. Here it is and she ain't that pretty.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dave Dinius wrote:

Did say that I would give it a try. Here it is and she ain't that pretty.

Interesting use of the Move Face command. I will have to spend some quality time with your model, to fully understand it.

In the future, I would give extra points to entries with comments in the feature tree.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

I will try to keep this fairly short. I cut the part in half as it gives me less to mess with. I assumed the part is symmetrical. (I know assuming can bite on in the ass, took that chance here)

I was having trouble with these surfaces so I just cut them out to get some that behaved more predictable.

Did a couple of delete faces to get rid of fillets so I could use the move face. Move face tends to keep the topography more intact from what I have seen. In this case it left a little funk where the four corners of the fillets meet. The second cut was to eliminate the corners as the split line and delete face would not clean it up.

I then offset the surfaces that get the slots untrimmed and then deleted the originals leaving most of the slots as surface bodies then just deleted the surface bodies. Untrimmed the slot holes in the offsets. Deleted the surfaces of the cut and patched with a surface fill (hoping a delete face would make it pretty, no such luck)

Untrimmed the surfaces around the long slot on the end. Wasn't able to merge them so i let it create without merging and deleted the originals. Knitted them up to clean the edges.

A loft and fill to get the corner fillet and fill the slot hole.

Forgot about the slot that crosses the middle of frame in the front so a quick delete face and a surface plane to fill it in. Knit to solid.

Delete face to merge the surface fill

Mirror to finish. Like I said earlier, she ain't pretty. Could I streamline the feature tree, probably. I was running out of time.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Second submission (third try). Only the "hard part". I think we've all shown how the easy part is done.

NO SKETCHES OR BOUNDARY SURFACES!!! Nearly all original topology. Only the fillet at the bottom of the well (green) is new. Yellow is original topology, trimmed and grown.

"If you look at your reflection at the bottom of a well, what you see is only at the surface. If you try to see the meaning hidden underneath, the measure of the depth can be deceiving. The bottom's got a rocky reputation." --Joe Walsh

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Each of the yellow surfaces was copied from the solid, then "grown" using Untrim and Extend so that the underlying definition was large enough to reach the bottom surface, then trimmed to its original shape. The original face is deleted and the new one sewn in.

This allows for the top fillet to extend its definition all the way to the bottom of the well. From there, we come to a point where we have the original well minus the bottom (green) fillet, which is recreated with Fillet at the original radius.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

..ok,.. that was deep (or shallow?)!

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Roland Schwarz wrote:

Second submission (third try). Only the "hard part". I think we've all shown how the easy part is done.

NO SKETCHES OR BOUNDARY SURFACES!!! Nearly all original topology. Only the fillet at the bottom of the well (green) is new. Yellow is original topology, trimmed and grown.

"If you look at your reflection at the bottom of a well, what you see is only at the surface. If you try to see the meaning hidden underneath, the measure of the depth can be deceiving. The bottom's got a rocky reputation." --Joe Walsh

Nice. If you have time, try to reduce the number of features below what I have in this picture:

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Nice Challenge Alin,

Thanks for putting together. (see attached for my attempt.)

I really like the "Delete Hole" hidden feature and also doing Lasso select in wire frame view to quickly gather up faces for deletion.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thanks for entering the challenge, Mark. I liked the use of the Ruled Surface for creating the pre-cut condition.

Would you consider submitting a second entry with the minimum number of features possible? Also, would you consider refining the topology in this area?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

sure. See attached.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin,

Here is my corrected second attempt.

File size has gone down by half now.

I only count 21 features including the Imorted1, not sure why the count is 24?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Is it counting your 3 reference axes (XYZ) as features?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Well spotted Ian Worrall, they are part of my default part template.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Messed around again & got the fillets more accurate to the original.

Trimmed surfaces & added fillets in a different order to be able to get full fillet size.

File size & rebuild times now increased.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Good News! The pot has been increased by 50%!

Do not leave points on the table!!!

Your award will increase by 50% if you attach descriptive comments to all features in the tree. Tell your story, make your checker's life easier and share your knowledge with the Community.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Just curious here Alin, were you expecting the entries to come back with such a larger file size?

Dave.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dave Bear wrote:

Just curious here Alin, were you expecting the entries to come back with such a larger file size?

Dave.

Yes. The file size almost doubles when you use the Delete Face or Move Face

commands on imported geometry.

As per Solution S-063830:

The reason for the increase in file size is that by adding the Delete Face feature SolidWorks needs to create a second working set of body data. This second set can then be modified to actually generate the new feature. The original body data is kept safe for future use.

This new data is what causes the increase in file size (doubling) when the file is saved.

By doing this, the original imported body data is kept as a reference so that that data is ready for future modelling. You can then roll back to just after the imported body feature in the FeatureManager tree (for example) and the original data will still be available. Similarly, if you

suppress the Delete Face command you will see the file size shrink back down again. This is because this new or duplicated data is not present in RAM when the file is in that state and so is not included in the part file during the save.

This new data is only added once i.e. the file will only double in size once. If you try adding further Delete Face or Knit Surface features (and then saving them of course) you will notice that the file size no longer doubles but increases by a much smaller and expected amount.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thanks for the explanation Alin, I suspect that there would be far more functions where this behaviour occurs as somewhat of a background 'master'?

Dave.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dave Bear wrote:

Thanks for the explanation Alin, I suspect that there would be far more functions where this behaviour occurs as somewhat of a background 'master'?

Dave.

I am currently attending the 2017 VAR Workshop and just learned about the way features are coded based on the software version they originated from. Fascinating stuff, which provides answers and opens new questions...

For example, did you know that a feature created in (let's say) 2010, will still use SW 2010 code, even when the file is opened and saved in SW 2017? The code will be updated only if the feature is edited in SW 2017 and the model rebuilt. That explains many things for me.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin Vargatu wrote:

For example, did you know that a feature created in (let's say) 2010, will still use SW 2010 code, even when the file is opened and saved in SW 2017?

Thank you for this bit of background information Alin.

It seems to go against common sense.

When a new version is released I seem to remember a recommendation to convert all old drawings to new version. Why bother?

If I open a file in newest version, save but don't change anything, why can't the older version open the file?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Rick Becker wrote:

Alin Vargatu wrote:

For example, did you know that a feature created in (let's say) 2010, will still use SW 2010 code, even when the file is opened and saved in SW 2017?

Thank you for this bit of background information Alin.

It seems to go against common sense.

When a new version is released I seem to remember a recommendation to convert all old drawings to new version. Why bother?

If I open a file in newest version, save but don't change anything, why can't the older version open the file?

Is not a simple as that. You still need to convert it to the new format (for now) in order to save time when opening files.

Remember that when you open an existing part, there is no rebuilding going on (if you applied the best practices)

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

This time i managed to do it without using surface fill but the feature history is kinda long a little bit

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Nice challenge that presents some Interesting dilemmas: I have recreated the fillets in the 'pocket' rather than having to do patchwork.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Hello.

I'm not a surface power user but i just needed to try:)

Here is my attempt... the only thing that i was no able to recreate is this tiny, small surface shown on screenshot.

..and here is the part itself...

Edit:

Second attempt with less features...

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Bump - a little CPR - just to make sure it don't die....

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

My apologies for the delay in crowning the winners. I was on the road this week, but intend to provide the results sometime this weekend (due to the great weather in weekend) on Tuesday or Wednesday.

I am back. Winners to be announced shortly.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thanks to all participants to the 8th WPUC, and many thanks to our sponsors:John Stoltzfus and Dave Bear!

This time, the challenge was to reverse engineer an imported SOLIDWORKS model. Getting as close as possible to the original the geometry and topology of the model, was the key to winning the awards. That meant limiting the use of features that would approximate the shape, like the Fill Surface.

Michael Lord has the merit to be the first one submitting a solution. He used very well the Delete and Patch Face command, to eliminate the holes and heal the surrounding faces. That is one of the best tools for reverse engineering in SOLIDWORKS. He used the Fill Surface to close some of the most complex gaps.

Kevin Pymm's first entry also used Fill Surface in one place. Kevin was the first who took advantage of the model's apparent symmetry, and saved a lot of time, by splitting it in two and working on one half only. His subsequent entries avoided the use of the Fill Surface, but they created many little facets in some areas.

Jaja Jojo's first entry used Fill Surface also.

Roland Schwarz's first entry proposed a model without holes, but also without pockets. The result, an elegant shape, but not the original one.

Paul Salvador submitted several entries, that got refined in time. His first acceptable solution was posted in Jun 6th at 12:13 pm. Very good use of Ruled Surface for recreating the original conditions before the fillets were applied. His solution has 2 more faces than the original model.

Dave Dinius shocked me with his original use of the Move Face command. Initially, it seemed to be a great replacement to the Untrim command. Spectacular!!!

He also helped in revealing bugs in the software. He demonstrated the instability of the Move Face command. Once is edited (with no change) and rebuilt, several features downstream will fail. Please submit the model to your VAR for getting SOLDIWORKS working on solving this problem. Again, a genial idea that would work well once the software gets repaired.

Dave also graciously provided a detailed play-by-play commentary to his model as a forum message. Thanks for that!

Roland Schwarz\s second submission was a sample of a typical work for a power-user who is not afraid to explore the model, by using a sculpting method. Change this, than that, with the ultimate goal to get the job done. He was consequent in using just reverse engineering tools and the end result is a beauty.

I am amazed on how much time Roland dedicated to this challenge. Take a look at the number of features:

101 features!!! Roland, you impressed me again!

Mark Biasotti's second entrance is a master's work of art.

Mark took advantage of most of the tools available in the surfacing toolbox. Take a look at his use of Replace Face!

Can you imagine how useful having all the designer's thoughts embedded in the most important features of model could be for your team?

Jaja Jojo submitted a new entry on Jun 6th at 7:44 pm. A fairly small tree. He used a Loft and Boundary features for re-creating the fillet, thus adding a certain degree of approximation. To be fair, this is what most of us would use in real-life projects.

Steen Winther submitted a beautiful, elegant solution, fully commented. Only 18 features, which could be reduced to 16. Two extra faces compared to Mark's solution. Great job, Steen!

Krzysztof W. made great use of the Heal Edges command. The result is a great.

It is time now to crown our winners!

Thanks to our sponsors, we can award more points than usual.

The hardest to figure out is who submitted the first acceptable solution. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Congratulations to Roland Schwarz for winning 1000 points for the first solution with the best final topology. 101 features, but the fastest to get the job done!!!

Congratulations to Mark Biasotti for winning 3000 points for the best solution, with the smallest number of features, that was fully commented.

Congratulations to Michael Lord for winning 500 points for providing the first entry before the rules were clarified.

Will also award 500 points each to Dave Dinius and Krzysztof W. for original solutions.

Videos to follow.

I have attached a file (SW2015), created by one of my students in the SURFACE MODELING class. You can see what geniuses I get in my classes. His solution (IMHO) is brilliant. What do you think?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Congratulations to all of the winners!

As a side note, I really wish I had that comments feature in SW2016 SP3.

Dave.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dave Bear wrote:

Congratulations to all of the winners!

As a side note, I really wish I had that comments feature in SW2016 SP3.

Dave.

You do....Or at least I have it in SW 2015 SP5:

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Well knock me down with a feather Dan, right under my eyes and I've never noticed it.......

Thanks!

Dave.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dave Bear wrote:

Well knock me down with a feather Dan, right under my eyes and I've never noticed it.......

Thanks!

Dave.

SW 2017 has enhanced the comments functionality further:

• Could be attached to anything in the tree
• Could be inserted with no attachment to existing features
• A new comments folder provides convenient shortcuts to all the important features ( the ones with comments attached)
• Pictures and screenshots can be embedded in comments.

Unbelievable tool for collaboration.

Comments are also excellent markers in the Part Reviewer. I can provide a full presentation just on that.

The bottom line is that a manager of a team using SW cannot ignore the power of embedding the designers' thoughts directly in the model!!!

Great reason for upgrading to SW 2017!

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Congrats

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thank you Alin Vargatu

Points stolen under false pretenses compared to the real Surfacing Experts!

Another greatly weekly challenge!

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Hi Alin,

Again, thanks for putting this together and for the award. I learned a lot from the other entrees also. I have been out of the country for the last 11 days  (on a missions trip with LWI in El Salvador to drill a water well - 3rd from left in below pic) and much to my surprise to see this when I came home yesterday.

I would be fun to see a future challenge that would be a surface creation exercise (as opposed to a RE surface exercise) of an industrial design shape or some other complex form. You could judge it like SW does CSWP exams - based on volume as well as aesthetic design intent. If you need examples, I have some.

thanks again

Mark

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

1-2BJ4O4K wrote:

Hi Alin,

Again, thanks for putting this together and for the award. I learned a lot from the other entrees also. I have been out of the country for the last 11 days (on a missions trip with LWI in El Salvador to drill a water well - 3rd from left in below pic) and much to my surprise to see this when I came home yesterday.

I would be fun to see a future challenge that would be a surface creation exercise (as opposed to a RE surface exercise) of an industrial design shape or some other complex form. You could judge it like SW does CSWP exams - based on volume as well as aesthetic design intent. If you need examples, I have some.

thanks again

Mark

Great story, Mark! Thanks for sharing the picture, also!

Great idea, also. You have my personal email, let's prepare the challenge. Would you please consider being a judge for it?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Mark Biasotti

Thanks for making a difference in other peoples lives, thanks for sharing your picture....

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Apologies for the delay. Was a hard challenge to judge being on the road most of the time.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Alin Vargatu

As always - Thank You for putting this together and especially since you were out and about last week..

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

John Stoltzfus wrote:

Alin Vargatu

As always - Thank You for putting this together and especially since you were out and about last week..

I took a day vacation, and got the job done in only 4 hours, this morning. Talking about being productive...

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Thanks For the Challenge Alin I think i'm starting to like surface

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

I have attached a file (SW2015), created by one of my students in the SURFACE MODELING class. You can see what geniuses I get in my classes. His solution (IMHO) is brilliant. What do you think?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

That is much too loud for my Monday morning!    (No hangovers, just a dreary tired start to the week.)

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Dennis Dohogne wrote:

That is much too loud for my Monday morning! (No hangovers, just a dreary tired start to the week.)

Sorry about that. Is this less painful?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

WoW there is a lot to surfacing that I have forgotten in the 6 years since I last used it. I would have to start from scratch at this point. I like how he detailed what he did with every feature. That really helped when scrolling through the file.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

The first several times I viewed this message, the attachments didn't show up. Not very robust web design...?

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

If you follow the link in the notices Bell icon you get a shortened version without links. If you double click on the thread header yu will get the links every time. I was frustrated by this for some time until I learned how it works.

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

Yes, thanks, this must be the explanation. It is, however, NOT obvious that you are reading a truncated version. If you follow the bell icon link and click 'Show More', you get more messages, but still no attachments. Apparently you need to click 'Show in context' to view everything...

• ###### Re: The 8th Weekly Power-User Challenge (June 9th, 2017): Reverse Engineering (Surfacing and Direct Editing)

That appears to be true.