Help with CAD Drawing

[Sean_T]

Hi All,
I would really appreciate any help I can get in regards to the CAD drawing I got back from Whiteflash.
My request was for the legato sleek to have six prongs, but I want it to be similar to the felicity setting where the culet is visible. Was reassured it will look very similar to felicity with slight differences.

I am concerned it doesn't look as curvey as the felicity.

WhiteFlash ‘s outline of things to consider:
1) CAD renderings show a preview of all of the style elements and proportions of your custom design. Everything you see in the CAD will be cast into metal for your final project.
2) The design in the CAD renderings will appear a little sharp in the edges and bulkier than the finished product. During the polishing and finishing processes, the metal casting will be refined into a more delicate finished state. More metal needs to be added to each design to compensate for the refinement process.
3) You may also notice that the prongs or bezels look a bit tall. Don’t worry! Our stone setters will polish and shape the prongs and/or bezels after the stones have been set.

Felicity (Requested for the head of this ring):
https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...-solitaire-engagement-ring-by-vatche-1614.htm

Legato Sleek:
https://www.whiteflash.com/engageme...-sleek-line-solitaire-engagement-ring-728.htm

CAD Drawing: https://imgur.com/a/ORJxR


@rockysalamander @bmfang

 

[farrahlyn]

I preface this by saying i am not an expert with CADs.

That said, the biggest thing i see is that in the CAD rendering, the shoulder cathedral does not come up on the head as high as the Felicity does. You can see in the photos of the profile on WF that the shoulder goes very high up which creates more open space on either side of the head. The shoulder meeting up with the head lower in the CAD is creating a less feminine/fluid look.


*edited for typos

 

[bmfang]

Like farrahlyn, I’m not much of a CAD person. But farrahlyn’s observations are similar to what I first thought re the cathedral shanks.

 

[rockysalamander]

Well, its a first CAD...but...wowza. That needs some serious work.

• Red line. The basket should begin with a slightly wider stance, not a single point. That allow the part under the swoop to have a nicer shape.
• Blue line. The two legs of the swoop should begin lower to have a steeper curved upward angle.
• Between Red and blue lines, the gallery should be concave, not convex.
• Between Blue and orange lines, the base of the two legs should begin on the blue line and curve upward. They start too high and are too straight.
• Orange line. They have the shoulder meeting the gallery at the right point, but the lower area of the head being to wide is throwing the whole thing off.
• Green line. Just under the table. The entire diamond needs to be lowered like the Tiffany. Their rendering has the diamond has the girdle at the height of the table.

I think if you start with that, we'll have to see if the top resolves itself.

 

[Sean_T]

Thanks... I agree with all you have said.

Appreciate the detailed breakdown @rockysalamander
I have sent the analysis of the CAD through to them.

Quite a lot of amendments but I did clarify I want it to basically be Felicity six prong on legato sleek.

 

[rockysalamander]

Tiffany=felicity. Glad ypu translated my typo. Fingers crossed on the next one.

 

[Sean_T]

Yeah a little disappointed at how it turned out. Definitely not the minor difference I was expecting.

 

[rockysalamander]

Yeah a little disappointed at how it turned out. Definitely not the minor difference I was expecting.

No worries. First Cads are often a mess. I have confidence in WF...

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Rockysalamander has already given you great advice. Your CAD should look like the Felicity head with the wider Legato Sleekline shank. It doesn't. The first thing I noticed was the stone is set way too high, and the head is not the same as the Felicity. I am sure they can fix it, too, but be sure the CAD person gets that profile shot of the Felicity.

 

[Sean_T]

There was some confusion and I should expect new CAD drawing next week.

As for what to retain from legato sleek, I basically asked for the taper and shank width.

 

[rockysalamander]

Here you go...Sleek shank with Felicity Head. Maybe that will help?

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Great job, RS!

Honestly, I love the Legato sleekline, but I'd be asking the widest part to be no more than about 2.2mm instead of 2.5, personally, if I were having it custom made.

 

[Sean_T]

Awesome thanks for the merge RS. I will see what the measurements are when I get it back.

 

[Sean_T]

Great job, RS!

Honestly, I love the Legato sleekline, but I'd be asking the widest part to be no more than about 2.2mm instead of 2.5, personally, if I were having it custom made.

I asked for their opinion if it can be done in 2.2mm, and its effect on the taper.

 

[Sean_T]

Hello, new CAD drawing with 2.2mm shank.

The prongs looks bulky but is it cause it is a CAD?

 

[Sean_T]

These are my thoughts now that I am not stuck at work and can write them out better.

1) The way the shank joins the prong looks a bit ugly but it may be normal as I am not a ring person. Looking at felicity it is because the joint between prong 8:00 and 10:00 is more parallel.



2) The joint onto 12:00 and 6:00 prong needs to be higher to allow more curvature of the prongs.


3) The bottom joint to the shank should curve like 'S' shaped.


Overall the prongs are too thick but could be for polishing etc.

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Yes, don't worry about the prongs. I love the 2.2mm! Now I will address your comments.

1) I don't like the Felicity shoulders attaching so high up. I like the WF version better.

2) Yeah, they just aren't getting the n-s prong right at all. That needs to be like the Felicity.

3) I think WF has done well on the shape and I'd leave it alone.

So the only thing that I would have them change are the N-S prongs.

Well, I might have them open up the area between the shoulders and the bridge just a slight bit more. Thats the open triangular area on either side of the head.

 

[Sean_T]

Thank you @diamondseeker2006. For the tip of the prong I am thinking to have it as claw prongs.

1) claw prong
2) fix north and south prongs
3) open triangle to be a little wider

 

[diamondseeker2006]

Perfect! I agree with the claw prongs for this ring!

I think the triangles are too big on the Felicity. You really have the chance to improve this design!

 

[Sean_T]

Thanks @diamondseeker2006.

@rockysalamander what do you think?

 

[cflutist]

Don't know if this helps but this is my Vatche Serenity size 4.5 with 2.21 diamond (Felicity with pave). I think that it is set too low and I like the Whiteflash photo of the Felicity better. But the latest WF CAD has it set too high imo. There should be a happy medium where the culet is easily visible. Should mention that they made the donut an oval instead of the usual round so I could wear a band with it if I chose to. Also, what are the dimensions of your diamond and ring size, that could change the curves a bit.

 

[Sean_T]

Don't know if this helps but this is my Vatche Serenity size 4.5 with 2.21 diamond (Felicity with pave). I think that it is set too low and I like the Whiteflash photo of the Felicity better. But the latest WF CAD has it set too high imo. There should be a happy medium where the culet is easily visible. Should mention that they made the donut an oval instead of the usual round so I could wear a band with it if I chose to. Also, what are the dimensions of your diamond and ring size, that could change the curves a bit.

Diamond is 1.2ct, ring size is 5. Thanks

 

[Shellcm]

Sorry if I have missed something but does this blue bit here get removed during polishing?

 

[rockysalamander]

I agree with many points by you and @diamondseeker2006 and some of these are repeats from above. But, here's my anal retentive view.

TOP
I can't see the pinch of the shank from above in the CAD. I think they go from the head to the full shank at 2.2 too quickly. They need to have the shank thinner for longer so you can see the pinch. That's the point

PROFILE
1) The Blue line is the girdle of the diamond on the Felicity. They still have the diamond higher in your CAD. They need to take the entire head lower it pull the diamond down.
2) Green line - They have the point of intersection of the legs of the N/S at the correct location now. That needs to remain at the same point.
2) Between red and yellow line. The legs of the N/S prong still begin too high. They should begin on the yellow line. That will give more space foe the legs to arc upward.
3) Between yellow and green line. The two legs that touch the yellow line are thinner than the prong. They have all three parts the same width. It is those two thinner lines joining the thicker one from above that emphasizes the upward curve in such a small space.
4) All three shoulders attach at the same point (Legato Sleek, Felicity and CAD). No change recommended.
5) The two triangles are too small in the CAD. If they can structurally, I like the openness of the Felicity. They need to lower the opening so that the metal between the two orange lines is removed.
6) The need to make the N/S prong a smooth curve.

PROFILE PIC




SHOULDER
1) I totally agree that the shoulder is attached and shaped wrong. The Felicity has some pretty curves on the top and the cross-bar pointed with the blue arrow needs to be eliminated.
2) The prongs are show to be convex and the Felicity are concave (this may be a difference between CAD and reality, so just ask).

 

[rockysalamander]

Top View. The top should be more curved, like the green line.

 

[Shellcm]

If you've reduced the shank to 2.2, and the felicity is 2.1 at its widest point, can I ask why you don't just get the felicity?

 

[Sean_T]

Maybe I should ask if I can just go for the felicity. The problem with the felicity is it slims until it is a thin wire at the top.

 

[Shellcm]

Maybe I should ask if I can just go for the felicity. The problem with the felicity is it slims until it is a thin wire at the top.

Yes it does. But it seems like the changes to the shank are turning it into the felicity and at least you then know the head will be right and I'm sure it's structurally sound or they wouldn't sell it. Both the legato and sleek line say they are 1.5 at their thinnest point. I'm sure someone will chime in if I am in the wrong here though and I'm open to hearing why.

 

[Sean_T]

Yes it does. But it seems like the changes to the shank are turning it into the felicity and at least you then know the head will be right and I'm sure it's structurally sound or they wouldn't sell it. Both the legato and sleek line say they are 1.5 at their thinnest point. I'm sure someone will chime in if I am in the wrong here though and I'm open to hearing why.

Ok I have asked my partner to be involved in the CAD design. What of the felicity we can forego and what will turn WF's CAD design into something she likes.

 

[rockysalamander]

Excellent decision. You might also show her the danhov classico to cover all your bases.