full parametric modeling of the bow

[full parametric modeling of the bow]

Hi Susan,

do you have something to start with (an existing CAD file, hull lines, etc.)?

[translation of a real value to a normalized value for the point type "position on curve"]

Hi Gustaf (sorry for misspelling your name repeatedly!),

with .getmax(2,true) you can return the max value along the z-axis of a curve (the "true" will return the parameter position of that max value, instead of the value itself). This parameter can now be used again, to acces the position of the curve at that parameter with .getPos() 

This should be what you need -- see attached project again for your specific example.

 

planing_hull_v03.cdb

[translation of a real value to a normalized value for the point type "position on curve"]

Hi Gustav,

well, that's the x-value 😉

See attached project...

Cheers,
Heinrich

planing_hull_v03.cdb

[translation of a real value to a normalized value for the point type "position on curve"]

Hi Gustav,

in your case you would have to us p2:z as elevation for the fv command:

point p1(curve.fv(2,p2:z))

let me know if this explains it -- otherwise feel free to attach your particular example and I'll quickly modify it.

Cheers,
Heinrich

[translation of a real value to a normalized value for the point type "position on curve"]

... if you use .ft instead of .fv you'd get the t-value instead...

[translation of a real value to a normalized value for the point type "position on curve"]

Hi Gustav,

you could create a point through the console with:

point p(curve.fv(2,zVal))

Instead of "curve" you'll have to choose your particular curve and zVal would be your z value. "2" corresponds to the z-axis (0=x, 1=y, 2=z).

[openfoam connection problem]

Hi Yukai,

generally, during an optimization CAESES automatically changes Design Variables to create different shapes. Hence, you should see a change in the evaluations/objectives from your external computation. You can also create screen shots of the different variants and look at them (as well as post processing data) in the Design Viewer to compare different shapes. I recommend the Tutorial Basics/Geometry Variation and Asessment to get a good first insight.

Best regards,
Heinrich

[openfoam connection problem]

Hi Yukai,

you can set the sub folder by adding it to the file name of your template like this:

If you have an allrun script which you execute for each design this would normally be executed in the same location as your STL file is exported to. Hence, typically referring to it by its name instead of full path works. Alternatively, you could add an entry an specify a path with getResultsDir() to have it adjust dynamically...

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Deck Area]

Hi CJ,

I guess I would just create a planar BRep intersection (BRep-based curves) and from this get the area. See attached project...

Cheers,
Heinrich

 

 

fishingVessel.cdb

[Deck Area]

Hi CJ,

you can simply create a parameter in your project and set it to

myCurve.getArea(0,2)

As you said, 0 corresponds to the x-axis (along which you want to integrate) and 2 is the z-plane (looking at the deck curve from the top of the hull).

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Export Equidistant points]

Hi Stanley,

there will probably be a robust way to trim consistently but it is a bit hard to suggest without looking at the project. Maybe you can attach a simplified project to show the problem?

About the translation: there is also an option to add a transformation as a curve operation...

I also recommend you take the time to take a closer look at some of the samples and tutorials to get up to speed.

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Export Equidistant points]

Hi Stanly,

as in reversing the curves orientation? You can either do that as an additional operation (Operations<More>Reverse) or create an Image Curve and flip the Domain to [1,0].

[Lackenby Generalized Shifts - Parallel mid body]

Hi Carlos,

sorry, I totally overlooked that Claus had already suggested the exact same thing. Sure, I can take a closer look. Can you upload your project?

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Lackenby Generalized Shifts - Parallel mid body]

Hi Carlos,

without being able to look at the geometry its hard to tell. One option you might want to try is the knot spacing of the BRep you are transforming:

Try and increase the density of the control polygon of your hull. A value of around 1 or 0.5 might be enough (assuming the hull is around 100-250 m or something in that...). What this will do is, insert additional control points to ensure a maximum distance of 1 or 0.5 between adjacent CPs. You can verify your choice by looking at them in the display options of your BRep:

You will need enough points on both adjacent patches so that they have a chance to be within tolerances even after you have applied the transformation. In short: you need enough points to get things to work, but not too many so it doesn't get too "expensive".

Hope this helps. Cheers,
Heinrich

[Export Equidistant points]

Hi Stanley,

sure, this is what CAESES is about (automatically creating lots and lots of variants -- typically you would have them analyzed (e.g. via CFD) and then use an optimization algorithm inside CAESES to converge your shape towards an optimum. Something like maximum lift/drag for example in the case of a profile definition...)

I'll send you a PM so you can share the file...

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Export Equidistant points]

Hi Stanley,

if you want to write a custom export, a Feature is the right way to do this. The code is pretty straight forward:

FVector3Series toExport()

FUnsigned n(100)
loop (n)
  FDouble pos($$i/(n-1))
  FVector3 onProfile(profile.getPosAtArcLength(pos)) // using arc length (instead of just .getPos() ) ensures the points are geometrically equi-distant.
  toExport.add(onProfile)
endloop

if (!file.openWrite())
  echo("Failed to open file \"" + file.getAbsolutePath() + "\" for writing")
  break()
endif

file.writeLine("profile data:")
file.writeVector3s(toExport)
file.writeLine("eof")

//close file when done with it
file.close()

Attached you find an example project.

Best regards,
Heinrich

exportDemo.cdb

[Exporting modified geometry after offline edits to Caeses batch script]

Hi Katherine,

I don't think there is a command to set just the path, not the name. In that case you would simply have to set the full name and path but keep using the same name. 

The commands available in fsc scripts are basically the same as in CAESES with the exception of things that require a GUI (e.g. screenshots are not available in batch mode). You can learn about most types and available commands through the Type documentation:

Also, if you start typing a command (even if it is just a "." behin a certain object) you can always use ctrl + space in CAESES and see what the auto-completion has to offer:

A third option many newcomers like to use is, to set things up in the GUI and then select a certain object or a whole bunch and right-click > Create Feature Definition:

This will give you a new feature definition containing everything you had selected.

BR,
Heinrich

[Exporting modified geometry after offline edits to Caeses batch script]

Hi Katherine,

maybe it is easier if you just run the fsc script in a unique directory for each design you want to generate -- this way also any other files generated by CAESES are taken care of.

However, you can also adjust the name trough the fsc script. I'm guessing you set up your export by providing a scope (folder) in CAESES which contains the geometry you want to export and for which you have set a custom file name like this:

Inside your fsc script you should be able to just change that name if you add a line like this:

19_export.setExportFileName("changeThisNameAsYouLike")

You can also provide a fullName (incl. absolute path) if you want.

BR,
Heinrich

[Boolean operation issue]

Hi Katherine,

of course, you can remove a face. In case of you model I would just recommend to this after joining the parts via boolean sum. You can choose any method to remove the face. Personally, for this case I would probably reference the face by color or via reference point.

BR,
Heinrich

[Boolean operation issue]

Hi Katherine,

for the boolean oyu want the 3 parts closed and distictly overlapping (no co-planar faces). Also, in you first add sources operation you accidentally added the tank and inlet instead of only the tank. See attached file for a working model...

Cheers,
Heinrich

Simple_test_geometry_ver4_redo_mod.cdb

[Ship modeling tutorial]

Hi Carlos, 

what's meant is an operation: 

Cheers,
Heinrich

[Poly Curve, Not Smooth, Modeling]

Hi there,

this is most likely a rendering issue and not related to the actual shape of the curve. Is there a particular reason why you are still using the CAESES4? If not, I strongly recommend you to upgrade. Apart from many many great new functionalities and a big difference in performance, also the rendering has improved significantly.

Best regards,
Heinrich

[Poly Curve, Not Smooth, Modeling]

Could you try attaching the screen shots again?

[Issue with fillet in first modeling steps tutorial for a duct]

Hi Katherine,

thank you very much for the hint. This seems to be a bug -- you can get it to work if you "rotate" the profiles (i.e. just add the 4 separate parts in a different order). We'll pass this on to our development and make sure it is fixed with the next maintenance release. 

Cheers,
Heinrich

[How to find rake of a B series propeller]

It's part of the documentation that comes with CAESES. You can either switch to the help workspace (bottom left) and just search for it:

or you create a blade and then select the Icon next to it in the object editor:

Cheers,
Heinrich