PTC Creo Parametric 6.0 does not have volume sweep?But Why?
It DOESN'T? Well, that's a total bummer if not.
well it does not show in any of their what's new videos.They have introduced an option to make helix curve directly from helical sweep.But no mention of Volume Sweep.
Yes, this is frustrating. 3D sweep was supposed to be delivered in Creo 4.0 F000, then pushed back to Creo 4.0 M020, then half delivered in Creo 5 with the 'Helical Volume Sweep'. While Creo 6 does have some improvements to this helical feature, the full blown (non-helical) 3D Sweep is still not available. Maybe Creo 7...
Not available even after 3 years, now its doubtful will they ever deliver it.I hope they do understand that its an important enhancement with all the mid-range CAD software's already having the complete capability.
It does have Volume Sweeps
More interesting is the fact they removed Creo Parametric 6.0 from the downloads section. I got it last week but it's not showing for me now.
Volume Sweep is not the same as Volume Helical Sweep.
The download is still showing up for me:
Odd I that I can't see 6.0 in the downloads section. Is there a reference for exactly what is considered a "volume sweep"? I understand where I was mistaken pointing out the helical type but am confused at to what a regular volume sweep is (say when compared to at standard sweep).
Imagine moving a square end mill through a piece of material in a straight line, but getting progressively deeper. The tail end of the cutter will cause the slot to be slightly concave while the cutter is descending. This can't be properly captured with a (planar) sweep today.
I understand now. Thank you for the clarification. I could approximate the form you're describing but it wouldn't be easy nor as accurate as have a true volume sweep.
Mmmmmm, maybe it CAN, at least in this instance now that I think about it. I'm 99.999% positive it would work with a non-planar trajectory, although I'm sure there are limits, and might not work for the barrel cam we discussed. Just did this quick to test a movement in X and plunge in Z (from left to right). I measured it at a number of different points along the trajectory and that cutter edge follows the surface perfectly. For fun! Who needs a solid body sweep? 🙂
... but how many features did it take?
Here's another example where having the entire cutter geometry remove material would be helpful in achieving the desired end result: https://community.ptc.com/t5/Part-Modeling/Uniform-cross-section-twist-feature/m-p/603734/highlight/...
Not many, as it turns out. It was my off Friday last week but I sent you the file Thursday, and I'll be in tomorrow (if we don't have a weather closure).
Yeah, there are sometimes when getting the geometry an actual cutter would make is easy....and sometimes when it's d@mn near impossible.
I have come across 3 or 4 different times I couldn't reasonably model what a end mill or ball end mill would create. It was always a mess when there was a direction change.
One of the times was just a cut for keeping a harness in place. I just got something close enough with that one, nobody cared about perfection.
The one other was a j-slot for a lock/unlock feature. Uggghhh, that one needed to be dimensionally accurate. I think me and another guy worked on it for a good long while and came up with some cluster of features that got reasonable geometry. That's the one that convinced me a 3D solid body sweep was a necessary feature. We used a surface pattern of the ball end mill along a path to verify we had something that was workable.
Agreed. Sometimes they can be a complete pain....for something that (mistakenly) looks so simple. I agree, we NEED a 3D solid body cut, where we have infinite control of the actual path the axis takes, AND the variable speed/proportions at which both ends of the cutter axis move. The actual shape of the removed material can vary greatly if the axis is meant to tilt at certain speeds, where it may not be normal to the "ribbon" that the axis path takes.
I believe the example they show in the "Volume Helical Sweep" could be done already using the helical sweep cut or sweep cut command, with the section normal to trajectory. The trajectory they show and resultant material removal should be exactly the same as what a ball endmill would give. I'm not seeing anything different here....unless I'm totally missing something.
FYI, it looks like the full blown volume sweep (not just helical) will finally be in Creo Parametric 7.0.
Hmmm, I HOPE so, but I ain't holding my breath...
Good thing you didn't hold your breath. Volume sweep has been tentatively planned for Creo Parametric 8.0
LOL Right Tom? Man, I'd be purple and dead LONG before that. H3ll, we're only on Creo 3...
Creo Parametric 8.0 should be dropping in March of 2021. I certainly hope you don't die before then... 😉
Now I think Elon Musk would have his Starship land on Mars much before PTC brings Volume Sweep in PTC Creo Parametric.😎
very very bad news! very very very disappointed， volume sweep is not still available in Creo 8.0 yet, also not plan for Creo 9.0, why? PTC ?
Winds of winter by GRR or Volume Sweep by Creo first?
Who are the members of the Creo Technical Committee? could you please help to confirm with the product manager which version will add this enhancement?
The technical committee members are just end users who choose to join the group. Ultimately they don't decide anything. It's PTC product management that makes these kinds of decisions.
You can join any of the technical committees here:
(You will need to create an account if you don't already have one.)
Does anyone know if this is yet available? It's **bleep** well frustrating that Creo doesn't have this simple function. Every other CAD out there has it, and Creo is dragging it's feet. I mean really. Inventor sucks and it even has this function.
It is still not available. 3D sweep was supposed to be delivered in Creo 4.0 F000, pushed back to Creo 4.0 M020, then half delivered in Creo 5 with the 'Helical Volume Sweep'. CS313656 used to say that volume sweep would be delivered in Creo 8.0, but after that release came and went the article was changed to say, "A change in functionality is being considered for a future release by Product Management but no timeline can be committed to at this time."