Hello, I am an fairly advanced user of NX but I have trouble recreating the surfaces as depicted. Could anyone please help me and enlighten me how to do this? Given that NX can't snip surfaces ending in one point (like the nose section). And also can't change degree of these surfaces, when they are created using through curve mesh. I am only able to recreate similar surfaces but the adjacent poles (highlighted in the image) are never the same as the ones in the adjacent surfaces (although the surfaces are G2). Is there any trick to lock the poles to the adjacent surface edge poles (same number and position) when creating a new adjacent surface (using studio surface or through curve mesh)?
(The Images above are parts I am trying to recreate. Not the surfaces I have created.)
The green surface is the one I am trying to recreate. This is what it should look like.I can only get a similar surface when I am using simple construction and not constraining any edge.But I need to constrain and when I do so, more rows are added.Obvously using normal construction does not work.
X-Form should have the ability to hold the existing constraints while you refine the surface. If not, then Match Edge can be used to correct the continuity that is lost when editing the pole structure.
I can only guess because I'm just looking at images, but the pole/CV structure looks too perfect - so I'm guessing there has been heavy editing using manual techniques (pulling/tugging of poles, continuity adjustments) - either that or the original model might have come from a subdivision type of modeler. That type of modeling is fairly new to me and I don't have a ton of experience in regards to the quality of surface it can produce.
Hi @TimF Thank you for your comments! Very helpful! I finally come to know about using Rebuild options along with other refining tools together to do "explicit control". And I would try to study "Modeling Preferences" carefully. Thanks again!
You're quite welcome.
Please try to keep in mind that there isn't an explicit set of rules for this type of modeling, there are only best practices or guidelines and then your own personal experiences. It's anyone's best guess what will result in a high quality surface using single commands in a mechanical modeler 100% of the time. The software just takes what you input, does the math and spits out a mathematical surface - if you require better than what is output, then you'll have to force it through refinement techniques and that's where things can turn into a dark art and most users run into a wall.