_Driving Dimensions, capture design intent at any product development stage.

_2D Design environment, Associative Drawing environment to enable design changes, as well as geometry creation and modification, from within drawing views.

_3D Annotation capabilities and highlighting tools to clearly communicate and document design changes.

_Design Tree, A single design environment for working on an assembly and its individual components, parts can be easily merged together or split to individuals piece parts as the design evolves, hierarchy can be changed by Dragging & Dropping component designations around in the Design Tree.

_And last but not least a script or export wizard for maxwellrender?

Thanks.

Hi Petr, I see what you mean. But distances are kind of difficult to associate with sliders, it is hard to pick a min and max value that applies to all objects since it is dependent on the scale of the object.

So I was thinking that the maximum chord height type control would be just an additional input of its own.

One other difficulty is what to name it - calling it something like "Max distance" might lead to confusion with the "Divide larger than" style maximum edge length, which is also a distance.

Maybe I would just call it "Max chord height"...

Hmmm or maybe "Deviation tolerance" ?

- Michael

Hi yannada, I have added your comments to the wiki.

But the things you are describing generally sound exactly like some other existing solid modeling systems like SolidWorks, Alibre, Pro/E, etc...

My general plan for MoI is not really to go so much exactly in that direction.

I just think that if you need software that works exactly like one of those existing solid modeling systems, then why not use one of those ones that already does all this stuff?

It's really more interesting for me to push MoI in a direction that is not exactly the same as already existing software.

However, having said that, there will be things that I want to add to MoI that will cover at least some of the areas that you mention - particularly the area of communication.

- Michael

Spot on Micheal,
Yes features are a collection from softwares that I have used and I fund them necessary for architecture and product design projects.
SolidWorks User since 2000, feels like yesterday.
But the good news 3 of us join forces to set a new design studio, so we looking at new tools .
We will be focusing on Concept and Viz of projects and outsourcing engineering...
Rhino is a very strong candidate(extensive Import/Export capabilities).
But as I mention before Moi is Fresh, Addictive, Original in Concept, and most important your knowledge and support, Priceless.

thanks

Hi yannada, congratulations on starting your new design studio, that is cool!

re: your wishlist - I guess the question I have is, what if I did implement all the items on your wishlist so that MoI behaved the same as SolidWorks. What would the benefit be to you? I mean, can't you already use SolidWorks to perform all the operations that SolidWorks does?

- Michael

I should say i did not want to bring any confusion,I guess I was using someone else terminology.
I Think I should seat back and enjoy the ride.

Why not use SW?
1st price tag
2nd Constrains, Parametric, NOT where I want to go, I had enough.....
From test I did Moi is Much faster in most cases. (No Mechanical staff here, WE KEEP IT SIMPLE)

Hi yannada,

> I Think I should seat back and enjoy the ride.

Please don't hesitate to post your wishes! :) I'd rather have more information than less...

Just if something doesn't quite line up with the direction that I currently see MoI going in, I would rather sort of get that out in the open more, that way if a lot of people see problems with it I might be able to hear something about it.


> 1st price tag

I thought this might be a big reason! :) But it is just not a very big motivator for me to do exactly the same stuff as something else just at a lower price...

- Michael

>>Maybe I would just call it "Max chord height"...

I agree with you in that... -Petr

I agree, it shouldn't fail, but... What is the "biggest fillet possible"? I am posting a 3dm file example with an object on which MoI didn't manage to create a fillet properly. However, I was able to manually trim and edit those surfaces to get a nice result. So from my point of view, fillet should lead to usable result at least...

Petr

Hi,

Maybe an option to have a 2d fillet gizmo adjuster (there is something like that in Rhino I think) could be great.

Regards,

Marc

A cool fillet will be a fillet "along a curve" so with it some versatility possibilities :)
Or better a fillet with 2 curves ! One top, and one down
Here juste one :the straight edge and one curve

Good idea Pilou!

Filleting is definetely a place where one can think of new solutions.
I whish se to elliptical fillets, where you specify two radiuses for each side of the fillets.

Very nice program, I am impressed,
Fredrik

Very interesting Concept Pilou!

Regards,

Marc

Hi Pilou, normally that is called a "Variable radius fillet", and it should be something that I can add in. The geometry library that I'm using supports it, I just didn't have time to figure out a UI for it for version 1.

Normally the curve is defined by specifying different radius numbers at spots along the edge, but it is an interesting idea to define it by a profile curve directly like you are showing there, that would be some kind of "scaling rail" type option.

I've added this to the wiki wishlist.

- Michael

Just tried the shelling on some basic computer mouse shapes, works like a dream!
One thing i noticed though is that the offset surfaces have many more conrol points than the originals. Could i be possible to have an option fo keeping the same number of points, or at least getting the number down? At the expense of precision off course.

The fillet with G2 is giving good results too, :)

- Fredrik

Hi Fredrik,

> I whish se to elliptical fillets, where you specify two radiuses for each side of the fillets.

I added this one to the wishlist at http://moi3d.com/wiki/wishlist as well.

This one is probably quite a lot more difficult though, the more variables and different factors that come into play, the more difficult it gets to create a clean and simple UI to control them all...

- Michael

Thank you Michael!

Not fot this christmas then, ... it's good to know it is on the list :)

I will try t think of good propsals for new features

Best regards!
- Fredrik

And a suggestion from me.

I would like whatever is selected to remain selected after doing an undo or cancel command. e.g. say you go to do a fillet and for whatever reason you want to go back, when you you press cancel or undo you lose the selection. You then have to go and reselect everything again.

Don't think I've seen this mentioned before.

Cheers
Nigel

Hi Fredrik,

> Could i be possible to have an option fo keeping the same number of points,
> or at least getting the number down? At the expense of precision off course.

I added this to the wishlist as well. It may be a bit difficult to set that up soon though, the geometry library that I'm using is focused more on accuracy for those results.

- Michael

Hi Nigel,

Re: preserve selection for undo/cancel - I think that one should be feasible to get in for V1, I'll see if I can get that tuned up after the final piece of the documentation is finished.

There are some cases where it is actually preserved currently, like for Move or Rotate transformations, but in other cases it isn't like when undoing a fillet. I don't think it should be too difficult to fix up.

Thanks for bringing it up!

- Michael