A Faster, More Robust Way to Model Advanced Aircraft
See how implicit modeling cut build time from weeks to days and made simulation-ready geometry from the start.
Why Traditional CAD Slows Conceptual Design
- Fragile parametric models break during design iterations
- Rebuilding complex geometry can take hours or even days
- Manual cleanup required before simulation can begin
- Limited exploration of design space due to time constraints
What This Guide Demonstrates
Build time reduced
from weeks to days with mathematically-defined geometry
100% rebuild success rate
across all design iterations
Simulation-ready geometry
from the start eliminates cleanup steps
10x more design variants
explored in the same timeframe
Two Panel Wing
Objective: Create parametric aerodynamic surfaces that maintain perfect continuity
Method: Field-driven design with implicit modeling of wing profiles
Result: 50+ design iterations in 3 days with zero rebuild failures
Inlet Duct
Objective: Optimize complex internal flow paths for supersonic aircraft
Method: Mathematically defined surfaces with precise control of transitions
Result: Simulation-ready geometry reduced analysis prep time by 70%
OML Configuration
Objective: Create reconfigurable aircraft components for rapid testing
Method: Component-based implicit modeling with programmatic interfaces
Result: 15 unique configurations generated and validated in one week
Side-by-Side: Traditional CAD vs Implicit Modeling
Metric | Traditional CAD | Implicit Modeling |
Model Build Time | 2-3 Weeks | 2-3 Days |
Rebuild Success Rate | ~60% | 100% |
Time to Simulation-Ready | Additional 3-5 Days | Immediate |
Design Variants Tested | ~5-8 | 50+ |
Geometry Definition | Surface-based | Mathematically defined |