Spatial is confident that the STL output contained within the ACIS code is
of high quality, but this, indeed, does not account for differences in the
way that various software OEMs handle that code and choose to ouput it.
However, with that in mind, on Friday Spatial announced an alliance with
Materialise of Belgium which makes the Magics products for the RP industry.
Of great interest to us is the part of their technology which checks,
verifies and if necessary heals STL files to ensure their faster processing
into RP systems.
Although this technology is not yet implemented, we envisage it will work
rather like Spatial's other web service, 3Dshare.com, which allows healing
and repair of solid models.
In the meantime, we are also continuing to work closely with the OEMs to
understand what barriers exist in creating valid STL files. Spatial believes
in industry-wide interoperability and will continue to create software,
services and code that move the industry in that direction.
From: Fusioneng@aol.com [mailto:Fusioneng@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 8:32 AM
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: Re: Bits2Parts.com - a new web service for RP
Jorn and list ;
You are absolutly right. We have recieved many files from Mechanical Desktop
and also the new Inventor from Autodesk. We have the same problem, the STL
files are totally unusable for RP. I have yet to recieve a valid STL file
from an Autodesk product (since 1983). I have the same problems with SDRC so
I guess Autodesk is not alone. It's no wonder why all the STL fix programs
are doing such a brisk business when the major Cad vendors put out such
Its funny we very seldom have any difficulties with ProE, Solidworks, Catia,
or even UG (used to be McAuto). So if it can be done why can't they all do
right. After all none of these systems are shareware, (maybe it is for those
who don't buy it legitimatly). My advise would be if you use this service
the file translated into Step (the international standard exchange format
PDES/STEP). With Step you have the best chance to get the most valid data
into your own native system, then produce your own STL files from there in
your native system. Once the file is tessellated into triangles it is
anybodies guess what is correct and what isn't.
I have no real problems with ACIS (.sat), Parasolid (.par), or DXF
formats except they are all propriety and not internationally regulated or
licensed by the ISO. Thus they can be changed at any time by the vendors to
keep their competitors guessing Just look at the history of DXF every
is different. Most vendors wrote their DXF translators for Autocad 12 or
earlier and havn't updated the translator since (maybe thats why the DXF
translator is usually free). You get exactly what you pay for.
Even with its shortcomings I believe this E-based system from Spatial
will have a huge impact on the entire industry (talk about the right idea at
the right time). Who knows they might be the next Amazon.com
My 2 cents
In a message dated 4/14/00 3:09:41 AM Central Daylight Time,
<< Nice, nice ....
First Spatial (usw. Autodesk) must fix thier .STL generator in order to be
succesfull in RP. We regulary receive .STL models from Mech.Desktop wich are
a real disaster to handle/repair, and often can't be used for running on our
Anyone experienced these kind of problems too? We now usually export the
ACIS-kernel-format and switch it to Parasolid-kernel-format (Vero
Visi-series) If we then make a .STL export, in 9 of 10 time a correct .STL
file is made.
JB Ventures BV >>
For more information about the rp-ml, see http://ltk.hut.fi/rp-ml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 23:03:17 EEST