I am automating a process for passing geometry from Siemens NX to StarCCM+, another Siemens product. When I run examine geometry on my body, there are no errors flagged. I export a parasolid, and import it into StarCCM+, which then complains about various geometry issues. My question therefore is:
You are following the recommended (license-free) procedure.
If you have access to our Steve Portal it is explained here.
For those of you having access to our STAR-NX plugin, we have also a video explaining
the transfer here.
In your case, to see if there is a mismatch between Parasolid NX export version and Parasolid STAR-CCM+ version we would need the version information for both programs.
Finally, you do not detail the "complains about various geometry issues" from STAR-CCM+. It could be for example, that they are not critical, like cell quality or cell proximity which would not require manual intervention as opposed as critical ones like pierced faces or non-manifold edges.
Please let me know if you do not have access to our Steve Portal. In that case, I could attach a .pdf from the first link in this thread.
Firstly, thank you for your prompt reply!
Specifically, we are struggling with two kinds of geometry error.
Unfortunately I am unable to use the internal NX/star plugin, as our architecture is mixed OS so it would be an utter scene for us!
I do have some access to steve, so I'll have a read of that link
Also, you mention described it as the best practice "Licence Free" proceedure? Is there a better licenced option, as that's something my organisation would consider?
Only just seen you asked about versions:
I'm exporting from NX11 - parasolid 28.0 - NX 11.0, and importing in Star 1402012, which says it has parasolid modeler version 30.01.204. We have an update to NX V12 happening in a week though.
Thanks for the detailed feedback.
As you pointed out there is a mismatch between Parasolid versions. The version mismatch could explain the problem but not with certainty. I´ve checked here and in NX12 the Parasolid version is 30.0 (build 198) and NX18 is 31.1 (build 244).
If you do not want to wait a week for checking if the update will help you, then I would recommend sending
a representative geometry to your local support for testing. They could test if the import from NX12 will solve or not your problem for the geometries you are handling.
The first link in my previous post gives you the three recommended ways:
For the first and third you would need an extra license.
There are a lot of quality checks in NX. We are looking at which are most critical for automated process like what you are working on. It would be good if we could get some examples of the cases which are causing issues. Is it possible to submit some examples of the issues you are having with the local DSE? I would like to know where the non-manifold issues are occuring. Plus, it would be good to know where we are seeing differences in the Boolean operations.