Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
(OP)
Wondering whether surface analysis (coloured grading of curvature) in Alias and ICEM correspond to real outcome in tooling?
Recomended settings vs. milling/polishing tolerance?
Are we being to concious about virtual curvature? (A lot of work can be saved here...)
If coated, does paint add or smoothen uneveness?
/Gilea





RE: Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
RE: Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
I basically have an interest in 3 of them: steel sheet forming, alu sheet forming and injection moulded, all coated. A detail such as a front fender could work as an example.
Still, a connection between more methods (inj mould patterned vs. glossy, RIM, and even textiles) and achieved accuracy would help a lot in our daily work.(soft chairs are often modelled today with even surfaces for some reason)
/Gilea
RE: Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
I know what you really want is the numbers to look for but I don’t have any to give you.
RE: Class A: Alias/ICEm settings vs. real outcome
Hi again,
thank you for the info.
The reason for raising this question is that we made a comparison with a voxel modeller (Freeform) which can export in NURBS-based surfaces, which were analyzed in Alias. Time spent in voxel modelling i one third compared to surfacing...
The same geometry was made in Alias and compared. Using "zebra stripes" analysis, no difference was detected!
However, when colored fields were applied a difference was detected in favor of the Alias surfaces. So, is "zebra stripes" accurate enough?
/Gilea