Rhino SubD status document ” should reflect what works in RH6.
You can download that document from this post:
The SubD tools are in the WIP that will produce V7.
They are not in V6 now.
Sure. Model a forklift, aircraft seat or a surgical device with SubD and then put them through certification and then into production. Good luck with that.
The new paradigm:
- Conceive in VR
- Model in CAD
- Plot on paper
- Measure with ruler
- Cut with hacksaw
Really SubD is useless in production? Where it is possible to read about it (types of modeling and their feature)?
I’m doing that right now with one client: A child car seat, lots of regulation and crash tests. It’s because of this, that we use SubD first so we can do more iteration for virtual simulations and make changes faster and test again. Once we are done with this, we will rebuild in Nurbs.
I can’t even imagine how backwards, slow and expensive would be to do all this with Nurbs. Unless we took shortcuts on the way things are designed and surfaced. That’s what most do the industry does, and it shows.
Out of curiosity, what SubD program are you using?
We are using Modo now. It works well for us because we can rig complex assemblies (animation style rigging) and have a bunch of sliders so we can see all ranges of movements, variables of size constraints, and other collisions. And be able to change the model in real-time in any ‘pose’ to meet the requirements we need.
Thanks for confirming the points I raised.
And this is how?
We are using Rhino. We find it very good to do rebuilds, especially with the V6’s SubD-to-Nurbs conversions as a starting point.
I understand, but how exactly is this done? Or are you just redoing an object in Rhino?
Hahaha! Yes, it is done very carefully.
I need to make a simple tutorial with a few surfaces. I think it will be useful for McNeel to see some possible workflows for SubD-Nurbs integration. So much to share… so little time
you’ll start to notice the benefit of a nurbs or parametric approach if you are making things like car body panels or anything with a reflective material like chrome or car paint. Polygon models are inferior for modeling these things because the surface reflection relies on the normal angles of the faces and their neighbours which doesnt approximate very well to the real world. There are ways to remedy this but it involves modeling in a specific way which becomes more time consuming and destructive most of the time.
For industrial design I’d reccomend a parametric approach much like most of the main modelling tools in Rhino 3D.
Research “Class A surfaces”. This is mathematical surfacing method used when modelling parametrically to give you the best surface reflections and the most realistic render. It’s better for high quality industrial design showcases than a compete polygon build.
Another example, this time from the realm of domestic and contract furniture. Trying to design/model this plastic monoblock chair, which needs complex multi-part tooling for injection moulding (it needs much draft angle magic), with polygons will lead to a dead end. Forms like this are quick to do in NURBS based software, and not too much of a chore in solid modelling software, if that is all one has at one’s disposal.
How? SubD will somehow be transformed to NURBS?
But some nevertheless model cars in SubD. Why so?
And where it is possible to find information on such surfaces?
They model it because their main goal is to use them in animations or video games.
If you want to have a photo realistic render, you’ll need to model cars in Nurbs.
In polygons you cannot have good close-up shots too.