After buildig a solid experience in Solid Works for about 5 years, I took the step to design and develop a boat in Solid Works. Location: New Orleans I've just finished a project where we used Solid Works for a small (40ft) boat design. I did the modeling of the hull and some internal structures, you could even go further and get layer by layer of glass for every exact location, this gives you most realistic center of weight, BOM of needed materials, etc. Never tried to compare it to the reality as my personal project gets hooked of to a smaller one also getting form in SW. I really like the mass properties function for finding weight, displacement and center of gravity, but fairing 3d hull planks is a PITA. Originally Posted by ClarkT I've just finished a project where we used Solid Works for a small (40ft) boat design. The attached cabin house was done as a quick study in SW as an alternative for an existing design. Location: MX I don't find solidworks practical to model hull surfaces, surfaces are easier to control and easier to fair on rhino or maxsurf or any other hull design software, is true that is possible to model almost any surface in solidworks but again the true control of your surface is not as the one you may have in rhino or a hull design software. Location: Belgium (Europe) the shell method I prefer the shell method. What interests me is what you mean by ruled surface, as my problem for now is that I don't know if my shape is fair enough. When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Location: Sao Paulo, Brazil There's actually a solidworks add-on which allowes you to import rhino files directly into solidworks.
Location: USA Mike, I may go that route, but I was trying to leverage the experience here because a popular opinion seems to be rhino (marine or orca) to solidworks seems to be a great way to go for hull modeling. I have something wrong with the hull surface, but I am not sure what since I have changed nothing from the hull wizard. I have included the half hull in a couple different file formats if anyone wants to play with it. I thought I would fix it starting with offsetting the hull side and bottom with zero distance, loft the chine between the two, knit the surface, and thicken in.
I'm beginning to think I shouldn't start with the Rhinomarine hull wizard, although it gets me a rough shape to start from much quicker than the other methods within Rhino. As for thickening the hull, you do not want to use the 'thicken' command for precisely the reason you mentioned. SWorks' surfacing tools are really great, but faired hulls are a real killer and it makes me sad that they cannot come up with better tools (such as a 'net' inference editor). I dont use Solidworks anymore but I opened it and did all the offsetting etc in Inventor - no problems - but 1 surface at a time. I also put it into maxsurf for a quick check, the bow area needs some work and it could use some transverse curvature but other than that it looks good. After looking at this, I see that all you did was use the default starting powerboat model in Rhinomarine.
I would like to import using the 3dm file, but it says there is no surface or solid data when I try to open? First of all I work with MultiSurf, and because of that I have no problem with any surface in SW. I don't know if i answer to all your question but I think that you have enough to tray to make some small boat. Location: Destin, FL SolidWorks Center Console Hi Guys, I'm new to the forum and wanted to post a center console design I constructed in SolidWorks.
Location: Australia I have been using solidworks and would NOT recommend it.
Yes its a great modeller and you can do anything with it but every release for the last 5 years has been full of bugs. If you have been using 2009 Sp0, Sp1 or Sp2 you better upgrade to sp2.1 and go back and check all of your drawings. Location: Sweden, Sodertalje Yes, a good rule is to not _ever_ touch work-related or important files with a Sp 0.x version of Solidworks! However, I find it very capable and trustable in most aspects, and the amount of bugs is not larger than in any other high-end software. Surface modeling is not that hard once one master the spline-handling in SW and it does hulls well. Guest62110524 Previous Member   so kite, could you double check a developed surface that came from say Rhino 4 or maxsurf, against SW? Location: Sweden, Sodertalje If I understand you correct - Nope, SW don't have develop-capability. Rhino don't do them either from what I have seen, even though a Rhino-4 plug is claiming to do so.
Catia is more bang for the buck, and would do a nice package if it had Icem's capabilities.
One can add in Aerohydro's Multisurf or Surfaceworks to get some support for this, but I guess I never will do any other hulls than composite ones.
Originally Posted by kite If I understand you correct - Nope, SW don't have develop-capability. Kite - you can trick solidworks (and the others) to flatten any shape that has single curvature. If the plate has a strain of say 10%, then even though workshop will show the same shape as Rhino and it all looks ok, if it has this much strain then it wont pull up properly.
Location: Sweden, Sodertalje alidesigner - Oh, I didn't understand that it was 2D we were talking, I were referring to 3D shape, bends in both directions. And I have been taking care of Rhino files a number of times, so I know that it can bring a lot of cost for the customers trusting in designers delivering production files from it. Workshop et al, just allows small yards even large yards to minimise their wastage and also produce plate in kit form.
Originally Posted by alidesigner I have been using solidworks and would NOT recommend it. Location: Australia Dont judge software by the person presenting it, judge it by what it can and cant do.
Freeship problem » Thread Tools Show Printable Version Email this Page Display Modes Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode Search this Thread Advanced Search Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Which center console did you like best? My plan has been to get a hull shape I am happy with, generate an IGES file, and use Solidworks to generate the rest. 1) You must find why the surface won't work, because is the right thing to do, that way you know what the software is capable to do and what not or why.
2) I don't use solid for my hull surfaces, all my information in weights go to my spreadsheet, so they really don't do much, I don't trim the surface in any way, I don't trust trimmings in any software,( for surfaces).
3) I use Prosurf too, so I create the hull there and finish it in rhino and then goes to Solidworks as an iges, so from rhino I get all the cut outs in the hull, bulwarks and deckhouse, but again I try to do the least trimming. I use Proline Basic to design both round bilge and curved hulls and export IGES surfaces for further work in Cadkey 21 (Acis solids and surfaces). If your lower chine edge or fairbody edge curves to meet the stem edge tangentially, the surface may develop anomalies right near the intersection.
Also, examine your surfaces in Nautilus and test for Gaussian curvature using a high density color patch, looking paricularly at the corners.
Sometimes I can't create a thickened surface in Cadkey, but can create an offset surface, then add ruled surface around the perimeter and then convert that to a solid. Location: San Francisco Try useing the knit surface command in SolidWorks before you thicken. Once I fixed the wrap, by putting a knuckle in the surface, I retried the Solidworks thickening command. Played around with it a little and it turns out it made a difference which hand of the boat I was working on. So I guess I am less confident about slicing things up in Solidworks to produce my frames, front deck, and gunnels. I looked at the Gaussian curvature in ProChine and it looked OK, maybe I need to zoom in and get a little more picky.
4) Create whatever Mate relationships are desired, using either the origin or any of the starting planes of the empty part.
5) Right-mouse click on the node in the Assembly's feature manager that represents the empty part. 6) Pick a plane or face and open a sketch to serve as the base-feature of the new component. I don't cut sections on the boat, I use intersection curve if is a full bulkhead for example I do step 1 and 2 and instead of only intersect the bottom I intersect bottom, side and deck. I don't thick my surfaces and I don't trim surfaces or I tray to avoid it, you can roll or develop a surface with all the trims marks on it and once you have it flat just trim in 2d and leave the boundary to be cut. Prosurf you know why, Rhino is not better than solidworks, and solidworks in no better than rhino the two of them are good on their area I like to have rhino besides to be easier to work surfaces than prosurf and solidworks, I can expand my plates here with Expander, double curvature or developable surface is not that prosurf can do that, is just that I can work my surfaces, intersections and renders in rhino way better. I have used ProBasic with Cadkey to design several hulls, the largest being a 24'-8" round-bilge trimaran that I have female moulds for Vaka and Amas prepared for.
I typically model my hull surfaces in ProBasic projected to the centerline at the bow with an obvious acute angle where fairbody meets stem, then trim surfaces back to a final stem profile curve with a radius blending radius fairbody-to-keel in Cadkey prior to thickening the surface(s). My ProBasic surfaces run wild at the transom and then trim and generate transom surfaces or solids in Cadkey. Have had no problems with accuracy of section cuts through the Cadkey solids and surfaces on any plane.


Location: MX Hi Kris now i have a question for you, how do work with cadkey?, is stable?, it's memory hog?, i ask you becouse use solidworks at work, and i'm looking for a system for me i like solidworks or Pro E but cadkey seems to me like a very complete package becouse you can get 2d drafting, parametrics and surfaces for a good price specially now that was bought by this new company, i will like to hear your opinion.
Started using Cadkey years ago as a version because it was an inexpensive , easy to learn, fully 3d capable wire-frame CAD program with a good surfacing plug-in (the old FastSurf program). ACIS solid modeling and surface generation in 21.5 are is complete, making it a good value. In re-reading the thread I noticed I neglected to mention that I intend to CNC cut all of the pieces. I will try to get some time in this weekend on the project, but with the boat show in town and a friend moving, I think it is wishful thinking.
From your JPGs, it looks like a lot of control points defining fairly simple chine curves, and from the detail shot, it looks like the upper surface control points don't align with the lower surface (I'm assuming all the sqauer points are your editable control points. The chined hulls I've drawn - some with spray strakes, but none with transverse steps - have used maybe 10 columns max, and chine curves have always been bonded. Speed boat - fiberglass - The geometry was done in Solidworks, then the water flow simulated in Real Flow.
Suspension detail - Originally, the bio bike had a coil suspension at the back and used a pipe frame. Prototype casing, bio bike - I had to settle for a laser cut semi-monocoque construction for the prototype since few people in Australia could bend a tube to follow a biometrically correct path. It's got a low center of gravity and the same ground clearance as a road car - we tested it over several speed bumps, it cleared them all. I have designed a hull shape in Freeship and then exported this to Solidworks using an IGES file. This is my first attempt at modelling a boat in Solidworks (although I have used Solidworks for years).
Some of the stringers are running down the center of plywood panels and others follow the chines and need to be chamfered to match the two intersecting panels. Location: Spain You could make an extrusion of a rectangular shape (stringer section) along a path (the curve on the hull). Location: Hampshire UK This is briefly how I would approach the modelling problem. This is a very simple model in Rhino btw, and yes I have used SolidWorks but not for a while. There are various ways to specify the path, depending on how you want the stringer to run along the length of the boat. You could make your cross section a quadrilateral in a sketch and specify right angle corners at the two inside edges and also specify your 40 and 25mm dimensions on two adjacent sides of this quadrilateral.
When making such features I would nearly always make sure the 'merge part' box is not ticked, so that the stringer becomes a separate body to the hull skin. Another way would be to make the stringer either as a loft or a sweep but with a rectangular section 40x25 mm right along its length, then use the surface cut feature to make the inner hull skin cut away the unwanted material from the stringer. When it comes to the notches in the bulkheads I would set a plane at one side of the bulkhead and sketch the bulkhead with the notches.
Yet another way for the bulkheads - make each bulkhead a rectangle larger than the largest cross section of the hull then make a knitted surface out of the inner hull skin and all the stringers then use this surface to cut away the outer parts of all the bulkheads. Somewhere in a thread called 'post your own design ideas' there is a catamaran I drew a few years back. Since you seems to have some experience modelling hulls in Solidworks - do you have any thoughts on how I can flatten the plywood panels in a multichine hull to make the flat patterns ?
Location: Hampshire UK SLM, you may well be able to constrain the sweep by using another offset curve inboard.
It surprises me that SolidWorks has not quite caught up, but then Rhino is a Solid Gold partner.
Location: Sydney, Australia Thanks SukiSolo - great idea to import the SW model into Rhino and use that to develop the skins. If we consider a hull panel spanning between two chines in a multichine hull, I think the requirement for the SW panel flattening to work properly is that two adjacent corners of the panel (e.g.
For many hull shapes the above is not a limitation, you may well be able to achieve the requirement by generating the hull as a loft with the transom end sketch drawn with straight lines and the next cross section in the loft also drawn with straight lines, these being parallel to the corresponding lines in the transom sketch. The picture below shows a little row boat for which I developed flat panels for the chined hull using only the standard sheet metal flatten in SW. If you get really stuck with flattening surfaces I think there is a way to do it that must work, although I haven't tried it. Location: Hampshire UK Hopefully the image below shows something like a rectangular block similar in size to that suggested (40 X 20mm) swept into a stringer shape. John, you are quite correct, there is limited parametric ability in Rhino, it uses a Record History device which allows you to say change a loft curve section (or two) and reloft automatically.
I may have to try the loft approach but this is a lot more work and then I have the issue that the lofted shape will not necessarily follow the hull form between frames were the stringer cross sections are defined.
The image I posted earlier was one off a multichine hull and is of a rectangular section (stringer or chine log) that could be trimmed by either the outer or inner hull skin. Only other comment would be, how tight is the tesselation for the graphic render of the stringer?
Solidworks does do a reasonable job of importing the IGES geometry that has been exported from Freeship.
Unfortunately it is necessary to use software such as Freeship (and I may buy Delftship if I can get all this working) for the initial design of the hull to facilitate all the hydrodynamics calculations and allow the hull to be rapidly adjusted to meet the hydrodynamic requirements.
I must say regarding surface handling there are much better solutions, as for instance Uni Graphics, but at a whole different price level. You should not have any issues importing from Rhino though knowing which version of each software you have would be most helpful. It is seriously sophisticated, their new hull model is a quantum leap above max-surf et al. Not saying this is always the case, but I make some cash out of the fact that it do happen. It also allows 'designers' to calculate the amount of plate require for a job without ever having to leave the office. I am using New Wave Systems Pro Chine for the hull and have a design that I think is fairly close. I am somewhat proficient on both programs, but have little experience with surfaces in Solidworks.
I am used to working with solids and so the first thing I did was try to generate a solid out of the surfaces using the thicken command. What does Rhino do that Solidworks is lacking and when do you slice up your skins to produce the interior structure?
You could do this via the menus, (Insert - Component - From File), or you click on the top-level icon in the empty part's Feature Manager, and drag it into the assembly.
Good luck on your project, and I'd welcome any opinions on Solidworks - several friends are extolling it's virtues. In laying it out at first I used knuckle points in the transition from the straight aft to the curved forward. My boat is loosely based on Miss Madison, U-1, a race boat in the Unlimited Hydroplane class based in Madison, IN.
I have studied how people run, and using the data I designed a bike that mimics the human running pattern. Because there is no seat, and because of the feet following the biometric path, you have the sensation that each step is 2 meters long.It needs a lot of work though, it is however interesting to see that research work actually pays off. Your general web browsing experience will be much improved if you upgrade for free to Internet Explorer 9 or Google Chrome.
Create sketching plane normal to the curve, most likely the transom end especially if it is a vertical face.
In the real world when you build the stringers you may find that it is better to laminate them to eliminate stress. The first idea that comes to mind is to use the 'sweep' feature together with a 'guide curve'.
For example you could make the path the intersection between the inner skin surface and some plane you have specified, or you could make it the intersecton between the inner skin surface and some other wavy surface that you have set up. Another corner of would lie on the end of the path and a the fourth corner on the end of the guide curve. I do like the 'multibody parts' in Solidworks, indeed I cant see why they really need assemblies of parts distinct from multibody parts - couldnt everything just be a multibody part and when you want one bit to move relative to another you just adjust the constraints between them as required. This follows the procedure that you will use when you build the boat, you will fit the stringer with its rectangular section intact then apply an angle grinder, sorry, carpenter's plane, to shape the outer surface to fit the skin.
To include the corners of each stringer in this sketch a good way is to make these corners pierce points with the edges of the stringers.
I have done this and it is a quick way to make the bulkheads but the disadvantage is that it is too good - every edge of every bulkhead becomes a complex 3D shape which perfectly fits but that is more detail than you ever need for building and will probably slow down your computer. I added more detail and refinement after posting these pictures but then left it, I keep drawing these things then never build them (perhaps fortunately). I have also used Pro-E quite a bit and even with that I have occassionally resorted to some of the capabilities of Rhino and imported the result. However I like Solidworks for its ease of use - not to mention that that is what I use in my day job. Alternatively, you might be able to identify some section part way along the hull where you can do similar, then loft the two halves of the hull separately and join up the pairs of flattened panels later (not something I have tried though). In this case I initially drew the transom with straight lines as described above, producing a lofted hull shape with a planar transom.


Take two points fairly close together on one chine and a third nearby point on a second chine. The hull is a round bilge design from Freeship (one of the default hulls when generating a new model). It is going to take me a few days to work my way through them all and test them on my model.
I may have got the wrong end of the stick, I thought you were devloping a multi chine (with ply panels) boat not a strip plank one. I extended the desired chine curve, created a line perpendicular to it and workplane (Sketch plane), drew rectangle (on that workplane) and used Sweep 1 Rail with rebuild within tolerance option in Rhino. I have had quite a few tolerance issues on hulls for example, from Prolines using Iges V4.x as the translator. Certainly in Rhino you can set fast render and it will give angular graphics or slow render with more tesselations which gives lovely smooth rendering but a bit slower to regenerate. The Rhino (v.4) translator was available as a free add-on with SW-2008 (as long as you had maintenance) and is built-in to 2009. After extruding your sketches do you just cut the part to the hullsurface to get the right bevel?
I had used a hard knuckle point on the curve where the boat transitioned from the almost straight aft section to the forward section. So some trial and error and judicous use of mirroring allowed me to produce a complete solid.
The stringers are wood say 40 x 25mm and wrap around notches in the frames and need to sit against the surface defining the skin.
The sweep feature basically requires a cross section shape and a sweep path, guide curves are optional extras. Then you can make a guide curve as the intersection of the inner skin surface and another plane spaced 25mm from the first plane, or a wavy surface spaced 25mm from the first one. Disadvantage is that the outer surface becomes a complex 3D shape, may slow down your rebuilds but if you have a powerful computer you may not care.
If you do the alternative and intersect the bulkhead plane with the surfaces of the stingers you will get lots of complex splines in your sketch, which makes your files unnecessarily complex but you may not care. The stringers in that boat were easy since I wanted them to run horrizontally with level top and bottom surfaces so that they could easily be used as supports for bunks, cabin table, shelves etc. I guess I was hoping to find a method that would allow the face of the stringer (the 40mm dimension) to be constrained tangent to the outer loft line.
However I have decided that I really need to use Solidworks going forward because it allows the generation of working drawings much more easily.
As per my post above to Sukisolo, the challenge is to ensure that the stringer is tangent to the hull (round bilge) or makes an equal angle to each of the two panels intersecting at a chine (hard chine hull). My gut instinct is to unfold the panels in Rhino and import them into SolidWorks if it cannot develop them. That being the case, I think you may find it easier to model them as lofts rather than sweeps, although both would probably work. However, I actually wanted to have a pretty curved and sloped transom, so after doing the loft to make the basic hull shape I made a curved surface to cut the end off the hull on a slant to produce the transom I liked the look of. Make a plane through the three points then intersect this plane with the second chine to get four points all lying in a plane, 2 on one chine and 2 on the adjacent chine, then make a planar quadrilateral surface from these four points. My understanding is that Rhino has limited parametric capability compared to SW, is that so?
I say lofts because they will taper in width to get the hull skin, and possibly even then require 'let ins' to get it to go together. Rhino surfaces are good into SW and they remain parametric operations so you can change the input file and subsequent operations still remain valid.
I often use custom meshes to ensure an accurate render, especially for the surface analysis tools. However in attempting to prove that the swept cross section does not necessarily stay tangent to the surface I resorted to a round bilge hull not thinking about the confusion this might cause. The export to Solidworks would be painless and the detailed design stage of the project would carry on seamlessly in Solidworks. Previous versions will require you to use IGS (though I think the translator for Rhino actually came out with SP4 of 2007). Make sure the whole thing knits up nicely then create a shell with your desired wall thickness. As mentioned, 32 bit SW has an import module for Rhino 3DM, however I usually have better luck with IGES. Really though, flattening for something like this is completely unnecessary if it's made from GRP. Importing as 3dm will allow you to tweak the Rhino model and have those changes update in SolidWorks. These 'newer' yards want an idiot proof construction to bridge the huge gap in their lack of understanding, they just want a simple jigsaw puzzle and complain when it doesn't fit, computer says so type of attitude!
As such these 'designers' need some frame of reference that their hull shape and hence plate can be formed. When you convert the ruling lines to surfaces the knuckle is not transfered to the surface. When you extrude to make the bulkheads the direction of extrusion will depend on whether this is wood or metal construction - for metal extrude towards the larger side so as to leave a gap that weld metal will fill, for wood extrude towards the thinner smaller side so as to leave a bit to plane off, unless perhaps you also want a small gap to fill with epoxy. So I only had to set horizontal planes at the right heights, intersect with the inner hull skin, complete a sketch and extrude verticaly - never mind an imperfect fit with the hull side, its only fractions of a millimeter and this would be built with epoxy! The shape seems to be too complex for it so work with (even if it was a developable surface in Freeship).
Yes Rhino is rubbish for 2D drawing and I use a 2D package to clean up and dimension the output.
Using lofts gives you close control over the cross sectional shape at as many positions along the length as you may feel necessary.
Rather to my surprise, all the panels in the hull still flattened by pretending they were sheet metal!
Now pick another point a little way further along the first chine, use this to make another plane from a triangle, then another planar quadrilateral and so on all the way along the hull panel. If I was using Rhino I would probably think about using project curve to surface to generate the desired surface spline curves, although they would have to be simplified to get a really good result. May require minor rebuilding but generally pretty good, I have built a few like that, not hulls though. I get the same thing happening when I sweep along a chine but it was not so obvious in the graphics as on the rounded hull shape so I posted the pictures of that. Usually the shelling is an issue in the stem which is where you are probably trying to add a fillet. Usually when doing that, your features will fail, but you'll just need to edit one or two to get it straightened out. Development of plate I do in MS with position of frames which are imported from SW because MS-SW connection is live and hull surface is not dead.
When I added the ski it produced an odd little wrap in the surface just forward of where the knuckle used to be. Of course, if you really want detail, you can accurately include the weld prep for metal construction. As with real boat building, programs like SW give you many different methods to achieve a similar end result and you have to experiment a bit to find the methods that suit you best. Then plot all the quadrilaterals joined together as a 2D plot - tedious but it should give a close enough approximation for developable panels, even those that are twisted along the length. The panels in my test model have zero gaussian curvature in Freeship so they should be developable but Solidworks refuses.
I have had surfaces that needed rebuilding to be fair, up to 1.5mm out between port and starboard sheerline.
It has some capability in this area via the sheet metal functions but it will not flatten the panels on some sample multichine plywood hulls I have played with. So I fully understand how the excellent 2D drawing generation of the 3D model is so useful. I have seen it suggested that something similar could be done with a series of triangles rather than with planar quadrilaterals but that wont work accurately when there is twist in the panels.
Other ways would be using a Polar array of curves to generate surfaces to 'chop' up the skin of the hull. You may need to rebuild your Freeship surface or edit it, or use as a guide only to create a new surface. Considering the colossal amount of work that must be required to produce software such as SW (I should know since I was at one time involved in writing bits of code for CAD programs) it seems a pity that they didn't go the extra mile to include a robust algorithm to do this. Like you, I have found Solidworks to be a bit cantankerous - sometimes it works and other times not.
I understand that there are at least two third party plugins available to provide enhanced surface modelling for SW, so I perhaps these do provide that functionality. This is yet another boat I have drawn but not made, perhaps this one might actually get made someday, its not such a big project and we would love to have a lightweight row boat to use from our local beach when the sea is not too rough.



Wooden boat builders seattle
Pontoon boat with bathroom for sale
Boat dealers in savannah ga 5k