Comparisons with SMLib

We are looking at geometric data libraries to integrate with our software and are interested in any comparisons you can make between OpenCascade and SMLib. I'm sure many of you went through a similar decision process and am wondering what made you go with OpenCascade and how happy you are with it.

In order to give you a perspective on what our needs are, here is a summary:

We are a manufacturer of numeric control machines including milling machines and coordinate measuring machines (CMMs), and we provide the software to support them. For the milling machines, we provide software for manipulating 3D surface data and generating cutter paths across it. Most of our data comes in the form of IGES files. We get B-spline surfaces, parametric spline (power series) surfaces, ruled surfaces, surfaces of revolution and tabulated cylinder surfaces. Frequently, they are trimmed with outer and sometimes inner boundaries. We are interested in converting these to NURBS surfaces and in tesselating into triangle meshes. I know SMLib has extensive NURBS capabilities and am wondering how OpenCascade compares in this regard.

For our CMMs, we will be dealing with DMIS data. We need to take sampled points and convert them to features such as cylinders, cones, spheres, etc., and need to compare against nominal data. The Canonical Recognition "Advanced Algorithms" add-on for OpenCascade sounds like it might be useful.

Thanks much.

Forum supervisor's picture


I've forwarded your post to our sales & marketing team. They will contact you with an email.

Best regards,
Forum supervisor

Joe's picture

We use OpenCascade for 3 years, why we make decision to use OCC? Because it's open source and come from MATRA Datavision, our company sell Euclid3 (a MATRA product) long times.
In this 3 years we develop ShoeMagic for shoe sole grading (like adidas, Nike sport shoes), MorphMagic for free form surface deformation, ShoeMagic_Upper for 3d/2d shoe design.
We got iges data(very complex surface model) from Catia/UG/PowerShape/Rhino/Camax/Cimatron...,OCC is very good for iges import. Generally I think OCC is good enough to develop a commercial product.

Best Regards

Jeanmi B's picture

You can have a look at this press release :

We use OCC for a long time in the development of our Inspection software and we are quite satisfied with IGES import and graphic visualization.

We don't use "Canonical Recognition" but I know that OCC company had been used this tool for a specific devlopment in the CMM domain.