Unambiguous Offset

Recently, I got a hold of an article about an unambiguous offset of a surface. The idea of the article was to get a surface always offset in one direction, and not sensitive to a change in Parent orientation. A pretty simple procedure, i.e.:


– make an Offset in two directions,

– link those two Offsets with Join without Check Connexity,

– create point on that side of base surface, on which we will want to have our Offset,

– use Near from a Multi-Domain Join using the previously created point.


That way, when changing orientation of the base surface, we will always have Offset on the same side.


That’s all wonderful, but how is the Offset influencing its Children? A short clip in conjunction with the Split  operation – the surface created through the above described procedure:



As we can see, the only advantage of such procedure is that Offset is on the same side, but unfortunately, the orientation of that Offset changes just as Parent orientation does (orientation of a Join from the clip), thereby ruining our design procedure for subsequent operations. Next, we would have to create some clever procedure for cutting off the same side of a solid during orientation change of our cutting surface.

To put it in one word, we create an avalanche caused by a change in orientation of the base surface.

The question is, can we define an offset that will always stay on the same side of the base surface, and will keep the same orientation when changing Parent orientation (base surface orientation) ??

Of course we can, but let’s do first things first… subsequent entries coming soon…

Comments: Be first

Recent Posts

I welcome everyone interested in CATIA . I will […]

Each Part in CATIA has its own UUID identification. It’s […]

The matter might seems trivial… it gets a bit […]

In the previous entry, I have described some of […]

And now an entry for Fetishistic B-Rep Dodgers 🙂 […]