I'm trying to create a winding a pipe on a reel. Right now, I'm using helical sweep command. I can create one layer but for the next layer, I can't create without breaking the helix. Is there any way to create a continuous helical sweep with multiple layers?
Thanks in advance.
Curve from equation in theory.
Write the equation for the helix to expand between layers. The radius would be held constant for a given # of turns for each layer and then would move outward for the next "layer" to start. This will require logical control of the helix radius to be held constant, go variable after n turns and then be held constant for each layer.
I am not sure how you would reverse the direction trajectory for the helix to move opposite in a single feature though. It may be possible with relations within the curve equation but I have not actually done that.
Thanks for your comment.
I have also tried with helix with an equation. But, as you told I can't able to get the opposite direction in a single curve. My main mission is to keep the helix continuous in order to measure its length (length of a pipe or thread winded in reel).
If you are only using this to calculate the length wound on the reel then you do not need to reverse the direction of the helix. You would only need to control the total # of turns for each layer and run it out in one direction.
There are analytical solutions to the length of cable wound onto reels that may provide the length you need without modeling this.
I think what he means, is that the helix will advance linearly on the axis from one of the end disks on the reel until it hits the other disk on the reel (radius remaining the same), then the radius must change by one diameter of the pipe, then the helix reverses direction along the helix axis ONLY (radius remaining the same), with the cycle repeating itself. Because of these reversals it'd be a tricky bugger.
BUT, he can do it in separate layers, then create a measurement feature of the composite length of all the curves. The REALLY difficult thing is is he has a known length, and wants to see how many turns it would make as it jumps from layer to layer. I'm still not 100% sure what he's after.
You got the exactly what I want. Sometimes I need to Calculate the length of pipe or reel diameter for the length of pipe or how much length I can wind on a reel.
this is why I need to have a parametric model
You can do a cylindrical equation curve driven by 3 graphs, one for radius, one for the movement along the axis, and one for turns, BUT that's going to be really tricky, getting them to synch up properly. In fact, a REAL headache.
Is there a reason you really have to model this instead of faking it? It can be done, but is the effort worth it?
Thanks for immediate reply.
Yes. There is a reason for actual modeling instead of faking it.
Because I need to control the total length of a pipe.
If I tried to fake it I can't get the actual length of a pipe that is winded on the reel.
That's why I looking for a continuous helical sweep.
...one of the other major problems is making sure that the pipe (you mean wire, or cable?) doesn't share volume with itself where it suddenly increases one "pipe" diameter in radius from the helix axis. And then, at what point does the helix start to reverse itself along the axis? 1/2 turn? A full turn? Why is the length important? Could you overshoot it and then trim it to length after doing the composite curve? Is clocking important?
I'm all for learning for learning's sake, but if you have a deadline then this isn't the path.