We are trying to create a surface that fills in a sketch and uses 2 curves to create a domed top. Can anyone tell me how to do it?
Here is a quick sketch of what we are trying to create. The 2 cross sketchs are raised.
I have attached a model of this skeleton. I also attached a STEP file of what we are trying to end up with.
*** Note *** we need it to be a curvature continuous surface.
This thread is inactive and closed by the PTC Community Management Team. If you would like to provide a reply and re-open this thread, please notify the moderator and reference the thread. You may also use "Start a topic" button to ask a new question. Please be sure to include what version of the PTC product you are using so another community member knowledgeable about your version may be able to assist.
ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Accepted Solutions
Ok, here's the latest and last stab at it. The surface is made with a VSS and with the exception of the spine, all the trajectory curves are conics with the rho vale for a perfect 90deg arc (use the sketcher section relation: rho = sqrt(2) - 1). If I used conics in the section of the VSS, it gave some funny artifacts at the curved edge, so the section was an arc driven by the 3 spines. I think this is a LITTLE better, but I think this is also the practical limit to Pro/E without the ISDX package. The grey surface is Pauls first STEP file, the bronze one is my latest. Have fun!
I tried that route but it creates a tangency at the points where the revolve meets the central extrude.
Here are some screenshots showing the reflection lines on the revolves compared to the STEP file.
Notice the much smoother reflection lines on the grey part below.
Industrial Design is requiring us to not have the tangency.
You didn't say that 
There must be some smoothing in the original that your sketch does not account for. This needs to be accounted for, obviously.
You might look up Tweak Tools... there are some tools that can take a planar surface and loft them based on guide curves. Specifically look at "section dome".
Actually I did say it in the line that starts with ***Note*** 
I really appreciate your help.
The original was done in that other program by the ID guy. No smoothing just a Fill surface laid down and then the archs used as secondary curves.
Here are some shots of the single feature created in SW. You start with the 3 sketches that I have in the skeleton. Then just lay a fill surface over them.
And you end up with this one feature. But the business group that is working on this project uses Creo so the editable design needs to be done in Creo.
In theory the center section would go straight across and not have the two humps in it. We originally thought we had it licked with the extrude/revolve trick, but the ID guy is stuck on the C2 idea for the top surface.
Getting the center flat can be done in SW by adding a 4th sketch between the two guide curves.
Attached are a copy of the SW file I am messing with and a step created from the SW file.
The "humps" are doing a lot for softening the transitions.
From a logical standpoint, I used the original profile to closely mimic the larger radius of the vertical section and came up with something that looked like this for surface transitions.
...which translates to this with the analysis:
which compares to the original step as:
I don't have the style module so I cannot go into this further. The tweak feature might give you something completely different.
Its a bit messy, and a solid version using the obsolete "general blend" feature. A sweep blend should be able to do the same thing as general blend is archaic to understand. The real trick was obtaining the tangent faces which still have some optional definition opportunities.
If you taper the the two flat tangency faces, you can probably straighten the "S" transition along the target face.
Attached is Creo 2.0
PS: general blend created a solid (requires closed cross sections). It should be able to do this with surfaces as well.
Sometimes Frank doesn't even know what kind of evil genius he really is...
Oh, did I say that out loud?
The Boundary Blend is probably the closest one can get without the Style extension. Notice that the command does have curvature options.
The attached was created with similar thoughts as the previous posts. When I tried to mirror only half the boundary blend, it had a really bad edge. Making the entire form in one go helped a lot.
You will find an ellipse in the flange face (for edge tangency) and you will find the "domes" controlled by a spline with an arc as a control feature. I am sure further refinement could be done with more boundary influence curves.
BTW: if you need to do this regularly, why don't you have the Style extension?
....insert Dr. Evil chuckle here......
I thought the VSS option was kind of interesting. Now I'm wondering if maybe using a conic section instead of an arc will smooth things out. Gonna try that.
I did the boundary blend with the curvature option (vs the tangency option if I remember) in the part I posted, and that still had the line that's so objectionable to the ID guy. I think in some instances a VSS gives you some options that the blend doesn't, and vice versa. I think the VSS opteion smoothed the transition out near the ends, but was obviously flattened (I emphasized it) in the middle. Although, I like that surface from a "styling" standpoint better than the ID guys! Looks cooler.
I'm going to try a conic and see where that gets me, and post that.
Did anyone have any luck opening the file I posted? I know some couldn't open things in the past.
The thing is, EXACTLY what surface do you want? The ID guys surface is NOT a cylindrical center with two fully radial ends, so what, exactly, is NEEDED (not neccessarily just wanted).
Ok, so, I think using a conic is a way of cheating, and getting as close to a C2 as you can. You need to make sure the conic's tangency's at the ends are correct (see model). Here's a pic, and I've attached the model. The grey surface is the STEP file Paul attached, the blue one is mine with the VSS using a curve that had a conic in it for one of the trajectories. I tried conics in the section, but it didn't work out as well as a simple arc. Have fun!
I love the way these discussions seem like voyages to discovery 
Frank, your VSS translates to a normal sweep in Creo. It works correctly in your model, but I cannot duplicate it in mine, not verbatim. I did get it to work however by using the spine as a trajectory and the two side curves as guides. I also found the VSS tutorial on the knowledgebase so supposedly, the sweet has replaced the VSS although it is not the same. We can discuss more later. I will try to make a tutorial for discussion later.
Paul, I got very close to the original. The light acts very close to the original and so do the iso reflections.
They are -not- the same although I used 3/4 references from the original. I copies the spine, the "floor" and the section at the center. I swept the center section along 1/2 the spine and used the "floor" as guide curves.
The overlay looks something like this:
