Thanks for the link and the information. I will definitely look into that. Still interested in seeing it done with PowerSurfacing though.
So you are not importing bodies made with Modo that are coming in as NURBS via PowerSurfacing? This is what I thought you were claiming.
If you are just re-meshing the body as NURBS after importing as a mesh then it will be a worse workflow than taking via Rhino before going into SolidWorks.
Hope this helps to clear up what the workflow can be…
Option 1 - Modo
From Modo you can completely control how the mesh will be converted in terms of where the hard edges will be during the conversion to a NURBS model. This will export out as a (.step) file that you can then import directly into Solidworks and you’re off to the races.
Option 2 - Mesh
If you’ve received a mesh file from anywhere else…online, zBrush, 3D scanning etc…then inside of Power Surfacing you have the ability to first convert a tri-mesh to a quad mesh. You have control over the level of detail of how tightly will it hold to the original mesh. You have the ability to let the algorithm convert the quad mesh to a NURBS model in an adaptive way so that there are larger patches is less detailed areas and more patches in high level detailed areas.
Don’t get me wrong what Rhino is offering is great but it doesn’t give the granular level of control that Power Surfacing does. Plus you have the option to edit a model back in mesh/SubD mode and this will update to the rest of the model inside of Solidworks…
Is this a standard feature now? Does it not still require the Power Sub-D NURBS addon to do this also? I was asking about from Blender too as this is what you said in the post (quoted below).
tsElements for SW could import OBJ exported from mesh modellers directly into editable SW sub-D NURBS, I thought you were saying that you were importing Blender meshes via Powersurfacing directly like tsElements could
Yes from Modo the Power SubD plug-in is needed to gain this level of control when converting. The statement I wrote, with regards to Blender, was specifically importing the file through the nPower Surfacing add-in for Solidworks. As tsElements is no longer available since AD purchased them this really isn’t an option. But to this specific point yes the geometry converted can be edited.
I’m not saying you can use tsElements but that there’s a difference between being able to import an OBJ that is editable and importing a mesh that you have to manually re-mesh with sub-D NURBS. I thought you were saying that PowerSurfacing could do the same as tsElements which excited me but I don’t think it can?
You have access to the vertex, edges, faces of a mesh when using the Power Surfacing inside of Solidworks.
But can you import an OBJ (e.g. from Modo or Blender) which can be edited in PowerSurfacing without doing anything to it? This was how tsElements worked (even though it was extremely RAM intensive with anything even slightly high density).
Yes
So why even bother exporting as a STEP file from Modo if you can just import an OBJ that is editable?
There are different workflows for different reasons. There are options that you get within the conversion from Modo to SW that are different than anywhere else. But if you are a zBrush user or any other mesh software or 3D scanning than having the nPower Surfacing functionality is something that makes sense to have inside of SW.
Am not quite sure what you aim is here or what you’re needs are. If you don’t want to use the software then don’t I’m not trying to convince you. I’m just laying out what the functionality is. Either way go get the trial version or whatever it is that you need to fill this void man.
The initial discussion was about getting Blender models into SolidWorks, it got blurry when you brought Modo and ZBrush into the fold.
On the intial subject - I am certain that Blender (cage mode) exported to Rhino 7 (when it releases), to SolidWorks as 3DM/IGES/STEP will be the best work flow. Rhino 7 will be £1,000 permanent license vs PowerSurfacing at ~£1,000/year (could be more now). You can get the form you want in Blender before exporting, if you are going to edit the form in SolidWorks using PowerSurfacing anyway you might aswell just use it out of the box and ignore Blender anyway.
If you’re using tools in Modo or ZBrush for much finer details then it would be a different ball game and having mesh to NURBS in PowerSurfacing, or PowerSubD to NURBS might be needed.
This is actually a route I tried but didn’t succeed very wel. I could not get a workable Nurbs surface in Rhino. I tried the Quadremesh without too much succes.
Also when I want a specific wall thickness for example for a casting part I find it much easier to accomplish this with a fully parametric (Solidworks, Fusion360) model. Also changed in geometry are to a certain degree easier to manage.
I totally agree that power surfacing is quite expensive.
Are there actually people that use subd surfaces without conversion in mass produced products?
I can imagine this is possible through Fusion360.
Watch the video I posted. You export the cage (not smooth mode) as mesh to Rhino, then that mesh becomes the cage for sub-D in Rhino. There is no step to quad remesh it.
May only work well with models without tons of or very fine details as previously mentioned.
MK19: You’re kind of missing the optimization here in terms of workflow and what each of the options gives in terms of control. It’s not just about converting the data, that’s what it use to be about in the past. What I am point out here is how it can be for the future in ways that it can be optimized.
That said, no the workflow of Blender, Rhino, to Solidworks would not be the best route. Put price aside for a moment…Rhino has limits on the amount of mesh sizes it can work with. It’s gotten better but there are still limits. What people are designing in Blender, especially with the sculpting aspect becoming much more widely used, this is only going to increase in mesh density and overall file size. Rhino has it’s limits. Second NO nPower Surfacing is not a SAS model. You buy it one time and you use it forever. Now if you update your Solidworks then yes you can pay to upgrade the plug-in but that is just par for the course for any company…Rhino you have to pay for upgrades when they put out a new release. The resulting quality of mesh to nurbs conversion is night and day and I have Rhino in my wheel house. I’ve done the side by side comparison…quality, file size, time it takes to convert.
Every time you import/export a model from one software to another is an extra step and also leaves room for errors, changes, updates…etc. If you’re using the nPower Surfacing Plug In then you import the (.obj) or (.stl) into Solidworks but it doesn’t end there. You can adjust and change the mesh then convert it to a Solidworks model, then use features on that geometry. But wait…feel like going back into the mesh and make changes yes you can and guess what all of your features are updated to the changes made. You don’t have to go back to Blender, make changes, then export, then import to Rhino, then convert it, then import it into Solidworks. Talk about $$$ time is $$$ and the fact that you don’t see it coming out of your pocket directly doesn’t negate the fact that what would take more steps and more time just boggles my mind. Soft cost are never looked at but if you added up all that extra time I’m willing to bet that it would add up to costing more than you think.
…but hey it’s the internet and everyone is entitled to their opinion…this is just my take after doing this kind of work for over 30 years.
I am posting with the assumption that the vast, vast majority of Industrial Designers are not and do not need to use sculpting for the forms they require, but want G2 surface quality models with the least effort (i.e. Sub-D being more time efficient than traditional surface modelling techniques once you are used to it). That said, I already explicitly mentioned twice that if you want extremely fine detail it is another subject entirely. I am talking about common consumer goods and products - what do you need such fine detail for? Figurines and ornaments?
Rhino is £1,000 and new versions come out every 5-6 years. Obviously you update SolidWorks every year, and you need to update PowerSurfacing along with it which I think you do have to pay for (hence saying ~£1,000 a year).
I struggle to believe that you’re tweaking fine details on very high density mesh using PS inside SW. Once a model is inside SW, what features are you really adding anyway? Shell/Thicken/Split/Holes, maybe bosses and lips and grooves? Only a few features so fixing the design before exporting and making tweaks if needed isn’t really a major difference. I am curious what you are doing with such fine detail etc.
After making a tweak in Blender (same time to tweak if using PS, only the following is added work), then hitting export, open in Rhino, run QuadRemesh, export and open in SW is all of 30 seconds. Sure, time is money, but 30s a couple of times at most doesn’t add as much cost as you’re making out.
MK19; Cadjunkie;
It is really helpful to see both perspectives. Half a year ago I didn’t even know or think this was possible.
For me I see the benefit of adjusting the design after importing. But if it’s worth the up cost that’s workflow specific. For example if I design a shell around some internals, and I am not sure about wall thickness because it’s either metal casting or metal extrusion. Then the outer shell directly impacts the engineering side. In that case I want to shrink the whole shell to a specific size. Then it would be nice not to go back and forth between programs.
I now take an even longer route by rebuilding the whole shell in Solidworks. 
If you are shelling you can add an editable shell feature to a body regardless of whether it is an editable body from another Sub-D program or not. So you could change that wall thickness at any time regardless.
The difference is only whether or not you want to make tweaks to the form before shelling it, in which case I am wondering why not just do that in the original program and reimport. If you had a few features applied to the body, say a shell, a lip and groove, and a few bosses and only then realised you wanted to change the original form then it is ideal to want to be able to edit it as required.
My main question on that is why it would get to that point before you noticed the change that needed to be made? Also, even then, they’re only a few clicks to add back on. That said, you can right click an imported body and replace it. This way you keep the features in the feature tree as applied to the body anyway, and they just need a little tweaking sometimes at worst.
e.g.; SOLIDWORKS – How to Replace Imported Bodies in a Part File - YouTube
@MK19: You may not have encountered needing this workflow in your line of work. That’s fine but I’m telling you from experience that this is an essential workflow that needs to be actually be more widely understood by the design community as a whole. No different than learning how to actually create great renderings that help to communicate said project/idea to internal or clients.
Here are quite a few areas where zbrush, Blender, Modo type sculpting/SubD software is much more relevant to incorporate into the workflow than Rhino, Solidworks, F360 offer natively…
- Toy design: Textured details on models displaced only in certain areas.
- Perfume bottles: Ornate details, flowers and the likes.
- 3D Scanning objects and working with the mesh to reverse engineer.
Also Quad Remeshing on simple shapes is decent, but no on higher count meshes it sluggish and there are limits. PS also has adaptive NURBS which is very helpful in the conversion process because it’s creating larger patches where needed is smaller patches ins higher curvature areas. So no a one size fits all Quad wrapping does not work. You need to have the control over how it’s done.
To your question about not having to make a lot of changes tells me that you don’t work a lot with clients who change their mind all the time. Why would you want to go back out to Blender, make changes, export, import into Rhino, convert the data, then export to then reimport into SW. THEN you have to redo all the work that was done in SW all over again. That is more than 30 seconds. That is hours of work. You have to admit that makes NO sense when if you have the ability to just go back to the mesh inside of SW to make the changes and then update the rest of the features in the tree is much more optimized.
Your worry about pricing is a moot point in that it is simply the price of doing business. If you are serious about the work that needs to be completed then you make the investment. There is a difference between investing in SW vs Catia but that is not what we’re talking about. This would be a difference of maybe $500 - $1500. If that amount of $$ breaks your budget then you might as well just go use Sketch Up it’s only $600!!!