Hi, I've tried to find the error in the problematic sketch, but I can't understand what is the error or where it sits.
Somehow I was able to create exterior swept blend but not internal one with material removal...
Have tried to sketch it identically to the other end of the pipe but the error is still there.
The main pipe track has been copied from another part and rotated. But it works well wen I add paths at one end, but not on the other...
ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Accepted Solutions
In reality what is this pipe made of and how is it manufactured?
For this type of geometry, I would suggest defining the centerline of the pipe as a 3D curve through space and use this as the sweep trajectory to create the interior surfaces (ID) of the pipe along the entire trajectory. Once you have the inside wall you can then thicken it to get a solid body representing the pipe. Make sure the sweep trajectory is valid for sweeps (Creo requirement) and that the path is consistent with the manufacturing limitations for the pipe (i.e. min bend radius).
The method you are using (swept blend) can be tricky as the ends of the swept blend more often than not will not be congruent with the adjacent pipe section you are trying to use. This is usually caused by the trajectory used for the swept blend not being built to address the alignment of the normal vectors of the swept blend open ends to be congruent with the open pipe ends you need to match.
It appears that the trajectory curves have some issues that are likely problematic. In general, you want your sweep trajectories to have G1 (tangent) or higher continuity along the length, you do not currently have this in your model. By changing the start end of curve 1 to be tangent, the geometry check for sweep 6 is eliminated. Start by creating trajectory curves fit for purpose along the entire length.
For troubleshooting check out the geometry checks in the model. These messages provide some insight into potential issues with your feature geometry.
In reality what is this pipe made of and how is it manufactured?
For this type of geometry, I would suggest defining the centerline of the pipe as a 3D curve through space and use this as the sweep trajectory to create the interior surfaces (ID) of the pipe along the entire trajectory. Once you have the inside wall you can then thicken it to get a solid body representing the pipe. Make sure the sweep trajectory is valid for sweeps (Creo requirement) and that the path is consistent with the manufacturing limitations for the pipe (i.e. min bend radius).
The method you are using (swept blend) can be tricky as the ends of the swept blend more often than not will not be congruent with the adjacent pipe section you are trying to use. This is usually caused by the trajectory used for the swept blend not being built to address the alignment of the normal vectors of the swept blend open ends to be congruent with the open pipe ends you need to match.
It appears that the trajectory curves have some issues that are likely problematic. In general, you want your sweep trajectories to have G1 (tangent) or higher continuity along the length, you do not currently have this in your model. By changing the start end of curve 1 to be tangent, the geometry check for sweep 6 is eliminated. Start by creating trajectory curves fit for purpose along the entire length.
For troubleshooting check out the geometry checks in the model. These messages provide some insight into potential issues with your feature geometry.
Thank you for the great explanations @tbraxton
The pipe is made of copper. It is pressed into a Heatsink part along a milled path (that' s why it is flat and not circular in one section). Then, top surface is milled to create one plane:
I need to fit to different geometries along the way, therefore I couldn't create just one path. The final pipe part is obviously different from the previous processing steps, and all I need is to just show the final result. The manufacturing documentation and modeling it from row pipes would be on a supplier side, with all the technological steps and preparations. All I need to show is the end result.
I do know about this way of creating a path 🙂. In my case, I couldn't use it as my cross-section changes from circle to long hole and back to circle. I'm not sure if that can be covered with this technique.
If you will be modeling the fluid flow and/or thermal effects with the fluid in the simulation(s) then I would model the wetted surface of the fluid path first as surface models and then use that to construct the solid geometry, build from the inside out. This will save whoever is setting up the simulation quite a bit of time. We deal with this problem frequently and our clients have been pleased with this approach as it streamlines both the design and analysis portions of the development effort. This has been the case even if the simulations are performed outside of Creo as we can provide the simulation domain models in near real time as design updates are made.
Example of a manifold fluid path surface model, the entire fluid domain is represented by the closed quilts (purple) for each circuit. The orange are valve bores passing through the circuits. The solid model used to manufacture the manifold is built from this fluid master model using a top-down paradigm.
Thank you for the file. I've looked into it and to be honest I can't see any difference between your sketches and mine's.
Can you tell me what did you change specifically?
The only difference I see , is that somehow it was possible to properly attach geometries together, see here:
HOWEVER, I didn't even change my file, and was able to do it in the original file, with only difference being, that my Display Style was set to Shading with Edges instead of Wireframe...
It would be great if you can expand also on why you see the design not being accurate in general. I'd love to learn about my mistakes please 🤔🙂
