How to run parameters of various geometrical configurations in Spaceclaim?

  • Last Post 31 March 2019
zjuv9021 posted this 28 March 2019

Hi all,


I'm looking to run parameters/DoE with drastically different geometrical configurations of an inner lumen shape as can be seen below:

These are just two examples, but ultimately would like the ability to create much more. The problem is I don't know how to set these unique configurations up in Spaceclaim as parameters, as there is no parameter key for an entire component.

Is there some simple scripting or technique that I am missing here to allow for DoE runs with these differing shapes?

Kind Regards,


Order By: Standard | Newest | Votes
kkanade posted this 29 March 2019

this is like replacing a part and not parameter. 

scripting may help in this case. 

  • Liked by
  • zjuv9021
zjuv9021 posted this 29 March 2019

I have not done scripting before. Are there some relatively straightforward commands/examples of this to get me started in the right direction?


Thank you,


zjuv9021 posted this 31 March 2019

My logic was along these lines:

- Create a drawing parameter with an integer value (e.g. 1,2,3)

IF parameter = 1:

Draw a circle and and cut catheter tubing with this shape

IF parameter = 2:

Draw a triangle and cut catheter tubing with this shape

- Name the new faces the same across all parameters (e.g. Fixed Support Boundary, Inner Lumen, Displacement Boundary, Outer Catheter Surface) so that mechanical always is consistent with applying meshing, BC's.

I tried using the IF statement in Spaceclaim but did not produce the results that I wanted.

Does anyone know how the IF function or where a good starting point would be?

peteroznewman posted this 31 March 2019

In the DOE, I would expect all the other parameters to be present on both shapes equally. Why not just setup the DOE twice, once with each shape?

  • Liked by
  • zjuv9021
  • Jackely
zjuv9021 posted this 31 March 2019


How would this setup/workflow look like within Workbench? How can I aggregate all of my DoE's to get a single response surface optimization so I can understand what impact, if any, the shape has on the ending transfer function?



peteroznewman posted this 31 March 2019

Each shape would be optimized separately, then you compare which shape performs the best and pick a winner.

zjuv9021 posted this 31 March 2019

Would I still be able to get a transfer function to determine HOW much a geometrical difference impacts what i'm trying to minimize/optimize?