points data
Hi,
I would like to know if there is any way to get these point information along with coordinates.
I am actually thinking to write a macro which will check for %match of FE and CAD. What it does will be to extract mid surface and with the point data information, i'll match it with my FE coordinate. Maybe provide for an allowance. So if it is completely matching then almost all major feature change areas will have a corresponding FE node.
If any other command exists for this purpose also, please do let me know.
Answers
-
Answering your question:
you could select the points and use hm_getvalue to retrieve its info.
hm_getvalue points id=4 dataname=x
-25<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
As a important side note:
There are at least 2 tools already built in HM for checking and comparing CADxFE.
If you Ctrl+F and type 'comparison' you will find this one.
Another ore complete option is called MVD (Model Verification Director) and can be accessed in the Parts Browser. (more info in the help)
0 -
Thank you so much for the quick reply. Actually I was trying to select points based on surfid or geometry id. both didn't work. I think as you said I can use *createmarkpanel and select all the displayed points and perform the check.
I had no idea about the parts browser option. I am not able to find that option though. I'm using HM14.0. Does that matter ?
Yea i just found the option. thank you
0 -
Although i want to a customized output depending on % match. All the user needs to do would be to just run the tcl script and end result should be that of sets which contain sets of components which are 70%, 80%, 90% matching and a separate one for non matching comps.
Do you think this is possible with that comparison tool ?
0 -
If you know surface ID, you can select points by:
hm_createmark points 1 'by surface' $surf_id
0 -
In the newer versions MVD is included in HyperMesh as an astardard tool.
You will get an Excel report in the end, showing the percentage of match and more details.
0 -
Thank you all : )
Although on a side note, i would really like your opinion on the logic that i was going for. do you think that would work out or there is a better way of doing it?
0 -
this is a nice application. The logic seems nice for me.
I tried a small part of it for some project, and i've used the component area and CG coordinate as one of the criterea for comparison.
In case of a solid, there are some tools similar to midsurface, to get the equivalent thickness and surface area.
I don't have the script here with me, but it was something like this.
But again, this is already done by MVD, so I gave up.
0 -
ahh, okay. that is also quite a different take on this. Appreciate you sharing /emoticons/default_smile.png' srcset='/emoticons/smile@2x.png 2x' title=':)' width='20' />
0