CAS/CAD WITH SURFACE RECONSTRUCTION

Manual shape definition is constantly receding because physical models are expensive, and from the processing aspect, an early use of CAD has the advantage of allowing for a higher number of themes to be tested both aesthetically and technically. In addition, CAD data can be reused more easily than models. The use of computer aided methods in the styling process is generally endorsed - in fact as early as possible, even if stylists often have to outgrow their dislike and a training and familiarization phase is unavoidable. The deep gap between manually working stylists and CAD-using designers is slowly overcome by the stylists’ CAS systems which is standard equipment nowadays not only in the automotive industry. But not even in this branch is the gap closed yet. First, the quality of CAS surfaces is usually not good enough for a constructive processing and second, the object created in CAS is still always milled for final testing. If the milled model is worked at manually for the finishing touch, the CAD/ CAS data gets lost. This means that -just like in the merely manual process- the transition to CAD works via the physical model and surface reconstruction.

 Loss of data quality when using surface reconstruction

Wherever work is done on physical models and be it only the manual modification of a small part of the milled model, surface reconstruction is unavoidable. The surfaces created through reconstruction, however, are qualitatively no design surfaces, since the scanned point clouds do not contain any information on the internal structure of the component. This is why mere automatic surface reconstruction does not work and you are continually forced to re-design with point clouds as constraints  and practically after each manual modification.

Back to Critical Aspects in Aesthetic Design