On Sep 30, 10:40 pm, TOP wrote:
Creating a 3D parametric model can be likened to programming. Some
people make spaghetti code and some make nice tight robust models.
This is called capturing design intent.

I think I get it now. Hit me while walking my dog.

Example:

1. One dimension of fuel tank depends on required fuel capacity.
2. Fuel capacity depends on mass of certain parts.
3. Mass of parts depend on geometry and density of material of those
parts and load requirements, etc..
4. Load requirements depend on configuration of other structures.

And it would seem that there is a right way and a wrong way, and
again, finding the right way is more art than science. "Reaching" too
deep into model to extract parameters to be used elsewhere might be a
bad idea. Deliberate indirection and hierarchy would be important.
There would also be opportunity for circular references. Also, there
should be some kind of "on/off, part is there, part is not there"
programmability.

You can iterate in a non-parametric world too. It takes good revision
control.

I was wondering about this. It seems like parametric is a superset of
non-parametric in some ways.

-Le Chaud Lapin-