Hi Anthony,
not sure what you mean that's in the file as it's the fan profile and I want to add the conic fillet to the tip and the 2mm fillet to the tail
of the A400M profile ?
Anyway regarding your questions in previous post I have added the flat profile plus the option of the 2 positions of the curved profiles.
I tried a rebuild of the Profile curves to see if that would reduce the surface points but no luck I think it's the way Moi works.
The option of adding dimensions within the node editor isn't possible as far as I know.
You mentioned other profiles posted on this thread for me to trial but I could not find them so if you have some or just points files can you send them to me.
Cheers
Barry

oh sorry barry,

i misunderstood. i thought you were talking about the root fillet. i see you mean the le ellipse and the te arc. if you were attempting the root fillet, that was the geometry i was mentioning. it's ok about the extra points. i was thinking that could also be due to differences in tolerances. i spent quite awhile messing with rhino tolerances. and eventually went with what they said in their help. i know changing those affects the results a lot. so it's probably just a difference in tolerances. but maybe also some difference in methods used. as long as it works, it's no big deal. when i was using higher tolerances in rhino, the surfaces would get so heavy it made it hard to rotate pan models etc with lots of blades. so that was my only fear with you having more definition than i had.

i think on the profiles, i was just referring to the list i made in an much earlier post. i think those were:

the naca airfoil (has an elliptical le and a small arc at the te)
the naca airfoil with a user defined te radius (needed for manufacturing something that can handle the operating stress)
the naca airfoil with the le made with straight lines and the te going to a point (useful for fea)
a flat plate cross-section with user defined le and te radius

i can't recall if there was another option i mentioned. but these would be sufficient i think.

i've been working with the a400m example geometry. i wanted to try a dovetail turbofan retention with a traditional fixed pitch propeller. i also wanted to look at hollow composite blades. i made a lot of updates to the file i shared previously. the main thing to be aware of for what you guys are working on is that the surface i get from rhino is worthless. you can't do anything with it. i ended up having to go back to the way i was doing the blades before. which is just a two rail sweep using the base profile. it's not accurate to what i want but it's the only surface that you can actually use for anything later on. if the surface is valid you should be able to do things like create solids, calculate volume, export it to mesh, etc... you can't do any of that with what rhino is creating using the projected airfoils and 2 rail sweep to a point. i found you can't go to a point at the tip either. that will corrupt the geometry. so i trim the geometry at the next to last point.

the geometry for you to compare to is still on the comparison geometry layer

there are a bunch of fea files you probably don't need. but i just have them there because it's how it's stored on my computer. they are for use with mecway.

one interesting note and something i know from my past experience. an aluminum blade is stressed to the point that it supports the weight of several african bush elephants, over 35,000 lbf in this case.

let me know if you have any questions