5 Replies Latest reply on Oct 12, 2018 12:56 PM by Paul Salvador

    surface properties of a surface model

    Eric Thaler

      Some of my automotive parts have tight radius-es. In this case SolidWorks fails very often to thicken parts. To prevent this the thickening has to be done prior to applying tight radius-es, but I have never time to play these time consuming strategies. Sometimes SW is able to do 1 mm thickness. So I could just multiply the surface (metric is required here) x 3  for 3 mm or x 4 for 4 mm thickness. Selecting with a window just selects the edges. Selecting all individual surfaces manually and clicking on measure works, but takes too much time. To create a box on the back of the part, from all part edges to create a solid works fine. I just subtract all box surfaces from the total surface are. Great, but who has so much time???


      SolidWorks programmers please:

      1. make the thicken function work no matter how complex the part is, because you claim to be the best besides Catia in the automotive industry, you should be able to

      2. create the function surface properties and eventually include a thickness input box, where the desired thickness can be entered and calculate the volume as described above by multiplying the surface (metric is required here) x 3  for 3 mm or x 4 for 4 mm thickness, to get the volume. Multiply this by specific weight. Done!


      Please respond only with helpful information!


      Thanks, Eric

        • Re: surface properties of a surface model
          Dave Bear

          Hi Eric,


          With all due respect, I think a better understanding and adoption of surfacing features, functions and workflow would solve your issues rather than SW programmers changing the software to suit you.


          If you can show the forum specific issues that you are having I'm sure that you will be gifted with viable solutions to make you work processes easier.



            • Re: surface properties of a surface model
              Eric Thaler

              Hi Dave,


              thanks for helping to find a solution by suggesting I should learn how to use SW.

              I can't show any details of parts that aren't released to the public. After SEMA show I can.


              My problem is that I have to many products to design in a very short time, so I can't afford time consuming procedures to overcome missing functions. The function "surface properties" is probably not to hard to program and that would do the trick for me. I'm sure there are many designers like me who use the surface modeling all day long and who would appreciate this function.


              Do you have any contact to the SW programming department.



            • Re: surface properties of a surface model
              Matt Lombard

              Here's the thing. If you're gonna save money by using SolidWorks, you're gonna spend extra time "playing these time consuming strategies". SW just doesn't do self-intersection very well, and it's not going to. They aren't going to change that so you can keep avoiding buying something more expensive. Surfacing in SW has always been a case of developing workarounds. They have made significant leaps forward at times, but regardless of what they do, it will never be enough, you'll always have to figure out work arounds. If it were easy, anybody could do it.


              You can split out the offending area and thicken it separately, or manually thicken the entire part. I've had to do this several times. Automotive is not the only application that runs into practical plastics modeling problems. It happens in furniture, consumer products, medical products, toys, anywhere you have to make thin walled parts.

              • Re: surface properties of a surface model
                Paul Salvador

                Eric,.. no argument from me.. it would be wonderful "if" they could offer a alternative shell feature.. which allowed for a range/tolerance/percent of the desired wall.. ...maybe having a SubD algorithm kick in and generate a patch... or trim back the overlaps/folds/intersects for the user to resolve as needed?