Personally I think I forum is necessary. Even if it isn’t as great as this one. As the user base grows more and more people will need support and a forum can help with that. With most CAD softwares having one it becomes strange when one does not and seems suspicious as a new potential buyer. At least this is my experience.
If Rhino did metal bending and allowed for resizing of objects by altering dimensions, moving and resizing of holes etc in solids, and didnt fail on simple booleans, the coincident surfaces being the cause, to name a few things that frustrate me , I might not need to consider an extra program to assist. I opened the failing files into SC and it did them dead easy, no probs. Naked edges from OffsetSrf inwards is guaranteed on my complex shapes. …and I also get naked points. Try fixing a naked point, its an edge with infinite smallness ! No tool for that issue. When I consider all the fiddling done to try to redesign to suit the fail reason, sheeesh.
If I find SC enables a build with less teeth grinding then it will be a welcome addition.
We each have different needs in what we do and I find what are simple things for me failing. Solids made from a shared surface wont boolean union at that shared surface etc,. My work can have 1mm tolerance, yet I spend hours trying to satisfy 0.01mm, failures require 0.023mm for naked edge fixing, and so on.
If SC is so easy that it doesnt need a forum that bodes well, but committing to £2800 and a further £1k per year support only to find usage denial or limits on telephone support is scary, forums exist 24/7 but tel support knocks off end of working day. When asking SC sellers of why no forum, answer I get is there are training videos. This is not an answer or substitute, and causes further worry if this is ANSYS approach to user support, else all forums can close tomorrow, we dont need them. Some of the sellers have support by staff with other work to do, so will they have the time one needs, I doubt it, its all a bit offputting.
A separate forum somewhere else is the way to go. It will though be a user self help forum, its best as McNeel does it, users and company staff, so its not very encouraging, the damage by ANSYS is done. For SC developers to not want to feed off users ideas, suggestions, issues, etc as McNeel does, is also wrong.
Full marks to McNeel for the forum, its my first response to anyone asking what CAD prog to consider.
If SC resellers get approached with interested buyers saying they are now unsure due to withdrawal of forum then maybe they will rethink. I asked searching questions of the support in lieu of no forum and had to form my own answers out of the fog that came forth.
Steve
Hi Steve
Pascal was on a number of threads teaching this test command: '_testRemoveAllNakedMicroLoops
it often fix these little naked microscopic edges automatically. [test commands you probably know, won’t auto complete, so we need to paste the whole command or assign an aliases]
akash
In Rhino 5, use the commands _TestRemoveNakedMicroLoops and _TestRemoveAllNakedMicroLoops.
in Rhino 6, this is an official command named _RemoveAllNakedMicroEdges
c.
For the small naked edges try 'TestRemoveAllNakedMicroLoops’
clk
Moving holes is easy with the MoveHole command, or sub-object selection and the Gumball.
I have a script for resizing holes, but I agree that the functionality to resize a hole should be available to all.
Dan
If _RoundHole were History enabled and linked to Points mapped out before calling the command, then it would be pretty powerful. Grouped Arrays of Points could be controlled by Scale or ScaleByAdd & you’d have a very quick way of playing around with patterns of holes. I’ve had problems with MoveHole if I try to move the hole(s) across boundaries on polysurfaces.
All of which is straying a bit from the OP’s topic… 
Hi,
rather than stray from the SC theme, I have started a new thread on how to move a hole in a solid.
It appears that a reason for the forum nuke is that as Ansys charge for support , how can one also have a free forum supplying it, but as such, all the benefits of forums, the 24/7 responses, even the useful ideas folk come up with, wish list etc, the mass viewing of posts, is all lost, if there are 500 views on a post, thats 500 intrigued and learning folk or 500 with the same problem saving 500 calls to the official support team ! I am told spam was a cause, but thats easily solved. Autodesk and McNeel and others manage to do so…
Steve.
similar story here. I stopped paying subscription in 2015. I still find it useful to:
- import parasolids
- make direct edits to extend volumes/move faces in simple geometry (something that Rhino is not very good at, especially if surfaces are tapered or have curvature, even degree-2 and extrusion-like transforms)
- remove fillets and holes that extend across edges of patch boundaries
here’s an example of #2 (@rajaa @brian, you might want to take a look at this) where I think a solidpts edit should move this stuff without making the extruded form any busier
V6 file here: bad_solid_edit_resolve.3dm (1.4 MB)
Hi All,
Thought I’d say hi with reference to this discussion. I’m a
long term Rhino 3d user, running since 1.0 and now running Rhino 5.0 and 6.0
WIP. I invested in SC last year and currently running 2016.1. I’ve also stopped
my subscription largely due to inadequacies of its drawing sheet tools. I went
for it largely because of some of its more advanced direct editing and sheet
metal tools that I use for a particular client base. The price point was
affordable given the tools and its fantastic working relationship with the all
mighty Rhino 3D.
I never really used the forum due to the work i was doing
dropping off temporally. When I returned to SC with questions I was pretty put
out that i couldn’t post any queries. The help files are pretty hopeless and
the online coverage of anything deep seems sparse. You really only have your
local reps to mail / phone queries. They were incredibly helpful and answered as
best they could. Since stopping Subscription this service does stop.
I’d be really interested on comparing notes, discussing
certain functionality further as I’ve really not got fully into the package but
can see its massive potential mainly as for me as it’s a natural companion to
Rhino 3D and could streamline drawing generation and certain editing features.
Please let me know if there are any channels that we can
communicate on further.
The only SC support is with subscription, so stopping subs does mean a forum is the lifeline, so maybe they are ensuring subs but the many advantages of a forum is killed off, you are in a cell and just the guard talks to you !
I am partly put off by lack of forum, also struggling to find the first years subs.
Autodesk and SC have no affordable way in for hobbyist usage, no keen weekender, no ‘occasional needer’ whos work varies.
It sure though has extra tools that complement Rhino as gustojunk shows. Metal bending without having to construct each part of a twist is what also attracts me.
Steve
There is a new forum on facebook for spaceclaim, it’s very new and will take a while to be beneficial so the sooner you join it and invite other spaceclaim users, the sooner the usual benefits of a forum will come.
Hi Steve,
Id highly recommend it for the mental forming tools. Once setup (bend tables etc) it works well and is very dynamic with ‘Rhino to SC’ option via the Rhino/SC plugin. Im also using it more and more to de-feature models and to generate 2d drawings that I still layout in rhino to keep my designs centralised. I’ll be upgrading only when their 2d drawing package is further developed. From what I can gather this has not been revised for a number of years and is falling behind the competition. It’s a real pity about the forum and support, compare this to the McNeel guys who give you the best support I’ve ever experienced, long after a licence purchase.
Will.
Great! Thanks for the heads up. Much appreciated.
Coming here searching a SpaceClaim forum.
Not only did ANSYS kill the SC forum but also RS Components killed the DesignSpark (the stripped down free version of SC) forum also.
Tested SC I did like very much his usability, but not having a forum in 2016 is really bad reasoning, even if there are examples of successful unofficial forum such as C4DCafe for Cinema4D. I suppose SC users are is just too few and not really interested to cooperate.
Apparently its wasn’t being used enough. very very very frustrating. The help is really basic in the program too and very little online. its brilliant in many ways and an excellent partner for rhino 3d. Its 2d sheet drawing side needs a lot of attention as it fails on many basic requirements for me.
2.2K views on this thread, clearly it has a following, maybe such numbers are folk interested in SC and Rhino combination as seems a good thing to do, offset weakness in both progs.
Wish…that McNeel along with SpaceClaim acknowledge a sort of marriage to bring together both, still as separate progs but strengthen following on both sides of the fence, bring more SC users into also using Rhino and vice versa for the metal bending and other advantages of SC.
…and also then a sub-forum here, which would also attract others to Rhino. Win Win Win
Steve
That link was updated to be not just a number. I tried to edit my post but can’t so here’s the link again. There are few SC users listed now.
Thanks,
the forum aspect of SC is a real killer , fools, it held such promise.
facebook useless as a forum as its layout is not conducive to reading a post and replies, like scrolling down a toilet roll !.
As Rhino has no sheet bending capability the quest remains, just who now to use. Still none the wiser.
It needs a forum whatever prog is chosen.
5300 views sure shows the interest in what SC brought to Rhino.
Steve