Hello
I recovered a STEP file with this material removal (in blue). I tried to reproduce it on Solidworks by doing a scan material removal or a smoothing material removal, but I can't keep the vertical faces (in blue on the second image). Anyone have the solution?
Thanks in advance,
Daniel
Hello
I think we should do a total removal and then do an extrusion of the square and rework it afterwards.
go through 2 volumes and then assemble them otherwise
1 main piece with big material removal and square apart
then merge maybe
Hello
I'm not sure I imagined the desired shape, but I think that a swept removal by volume body profile corresponds to your needs .
Good evening
The easiest way is to share the step. We can then help you more concretely. If it is confidential, remove the red zones and send only the area concerned.
Thank you for your answers. I tried to get there by these methods, but I can't get the desired result. I tried to attach the STEP file so that you can better visualize the part, but it seems that it stuck at the site level for security reasons. I'm now trying in stl format to see if it works.
I think that sweeping is the right method. What I can't do is keep the material removal vertical (without twisting).
Hello
I agree that scanning is the most suitable function.
I was unable to create the shape using a sweep with a volume body that would simulate the machining of a ball end mill. The very winding 3D trajectory may be the source of the problem.
I still got a result and combining four functions:
- two smoothing with 2D sketch profiles for the general shape of the gutter
- two removals with revolution to finish the extremities.
To avoid twisting the smoothing, open the Feature Options area, select Specify Direction Vector from the Profile Twist drop-down list, and designate a vertical segment of the profile sketch.
The dimensions of the attached model (SW 2017) have no relation to your stl document, which is difficult to use...
Kind regards.
Hello m.blt,
Thank you for the proposed solution, I'll tackle it now and I think it will allow me to perform the function as I want it . The way you created the 3D sketch to define the path is also going to help me a lot. I had problems connecting the lines at the level of orientation changes and your solution with the construction lines is a point on which I was stuck. I confirm it as soon as it's done on my 3D.
Best regards,
Daniel
There is one point where your result differs from the file I sent you, and that is at the level of the rays. We can see that the radius is 0.5mm while the result of your scan does not give this radius. I'm going to try to do 3 separate scans for each of the 3 directions and use the fillet function after the scans.
Nothing surprising...
The connection between two segments of the trajectory is an arc of a circle in a plane that is inclined with respect to the upper face of the boss.
During smoothing, the vertical segment of the profile must generate a shape close to an ellipse arc.
The difference is not considerable if the inclination is small, as is the case on the left side, it is much more marked on the right side or the angle is greater.
I am afraid that your 3-scan method with fillet connections will be difficult to implement in the "bends" at the bottom of the gutter.
Another idea: you can try to replace the arcs of circles of the trajectory with ellipse arcs to improve the shapes in the corners, and try to approach the radius of 0.5 mm.
After trying, 3D sketches do not allow you to draw ellipses...
On the other hand, splines are possible. The approach is described in the attached document.
One question: a lot of work to make this gutter shape. Is it really functional for the room?
Good night.
Mmmm, it seems that this shape can in no way be modeled with a Sweep, because the latter does not allow to modify the shape of the original sketch, the Smoothing is always optional, .
Thank you very much m.blt and Lynkoa15 for the time you have devoted to my problem. I have read your documents, explanations and images carefully.
I think I arrived at an acceptable result using yet another slightly different method. Here are the steps in pictures:
A first scan:
2nd scan:
Smoothing to join the two scans:
3rd Sweep:
Smoothing to join the 2nd and 3rd sweeps:
Last Sweep (Cutter Output):
Final Result:
It's a bit laborious, but it seems to me to work relatively well. Thank you again for your help, I was largely inspired by your methods.
Best regards,
Daniel