SolidWorks works Inventor still doesn't

[Anonymous]

I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor.
All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system.
Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there.
Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

I'm no expert, but if the model is correct on some of the machines how could this be a software problem?

[Anonymous]

That is definitely a problem, however, its not the fillet that is causing the problem but the shell command. Hope someone from AutoDesk takes a look at the files. VERY "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

Something wierd, 'cause I get a modelling failure..... -- Rui ruivaz@cadmais.pt www.cadmais.pt "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

I rec'd the modelling failure as well, and then tried moving the shell down the feature tree. I then got dumped out to the desktop (very few crashes normally), so this does seem problematic. "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

Which workflow did you use: SW or IV? I used a little different workflow. I've seen problems at interactions before. This one seems to be between the large fillet and the shell. Suppress either one and the flaw goes away. Changing the workflow seems to fix the problem, but it should work either way. Looks like hot-fix time ... yeah ... I'm sure they'll get right on it. ~Larry "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

Hmmm, I didn't get dumped out moving the shell down. ~Larry "Gary Cook" wrote in message news:4005a02d_3@statler... I rec'd the modelling failure as well, and then tried moving the shell down the feature tree. I then got dumped out to the desktop (very few crashes normally), so this does seem problematic. "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

Larry
If I take the EOP on you part just above shell and then back down everything is OK, but if I take it all the way to the top and then back down step-by-step it fails.

Unless I do a rebuild all.
Message was edited by: JDMATHER

[Anonymous]

jd, I think it's the 50 mm fillet. I've recreated everything after extrusion2, three different ways, and I cannot get that fillet to blend properly at the top. Something goofy in THIS ipt, that does not occur in the other. darvin "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:27440154.1074114231288.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2.autodesk.com... > Larry > If I take the EOP on you part just above shell and then back down everything is OK, but if I take it all the way to the top and then back down step-by-step it fails. > > Unless I do a rebuild all. > > > Message was edited by: JDMATHER >

[Anonymous]

This is an old part...........maybe some of you with some memory will recognise it also? Seem to remember it had problems before? -- Laurence, Power is nothing without Control --- "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

P.S. Redefining the sketches and fully constraining seems to give a result. -- Laurence, Power is nothing without Control --- "Laurence Yeandle" wrote in message news:4005b282_1@statler... > This is an old part...........maybe some of you with some memory will > recognise it also? > Seem to remember it had problems before? > > -- > Laurence, > > Power is nothing without Control > --- > > > "JDMATHER" wrote in message > news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor > and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works > in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program > called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time > the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to > the system. > > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I > walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there > should be no real difference there. > > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in > you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. > This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way > but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem. > >

[Anonymous]

A Rebuild All in the current R9 build fixes the problem. Without digging into it too deeply, it looks like they made a change to the kernel that improves the behavior. Loren Jahraus Autodesk Inventor Workflow Team "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to the system. > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there should be no real difference there. > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem.

[Anonymous]

R9?!? When can we sign up for beta testing? (Can't wait) "Loren Jahraus (Autodesk)" wrote in message news:4005b989_2@statler... > A Rebuild All in the current R9 build fixes the problem. Without digging > into it too deeply, it looks like they made a change to the kernel that > improves the behavior. > > Loren Jahraus > Autodesk Inventor Workflow Team > > "JDMATHER" wrote in message > news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor > and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works > in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program > called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time > the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to > the system. > > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I > walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there > should be no real difference there. > > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in > you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. > This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way > but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem. > >

[Anonymous]

You may be right. Its hard to say whether its the shell or the fillet. I
was able to redefine the fillet and it worked*.
*Note that I needed to use fillet twice. If I do it in one command, it
doesn't let me - blows up.

I remember someone had a sheetmetal problem where one side worked but the
other side couldn't execute the same command even though it was a mirrored
part.
VR

"darvinv" <darvinvREM@avicomREM.net> wrote in message
news:4005b13e_1@statler...
> jd,
> I think it's the 50 mm fillet. I've recreated everything after
> extrusion2, three different ways, and I cannot get that fillet to blend
> properly at the top. Something goofy in THIS ipt, that does not occur in
> the other.
> darvin
>
>
> "JDMATHER" <nospam@address.withheld> wrote in message
> news:27440154.1074114231288.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2.autodesk.com...
> > Larry
> > If I take the EOP on you part just above shell and then back down
> everything is OK, but if I take it all the way to the top and then back
> down step-by-step it fails.
> >
> > Unless I do a rebuild all.
> >
> >
> > Message was edited by: JDMATHER
> >
>



Attachment not added (too large): "Front Bracket bad - made good.zip"

[Anonymous]

Good to hear, but makes me wonder how many other parts are effected a lot farther down the feature tree. Seems like a patch to 8 would be appropriate if possible.

[Anonymous]

You know, i hate it when you guys tease like that So..... where do we sign up? "Loren Jahraus (Autodesk)" wrote in message news:4005b989_2@statler... > A Rebuild All in the current R9 build fixes the problem. Without digging > into it too deeply, it looks like they made a change to the kernel that > improves the behavior. > > Loren Jahraus > Autodesk Inventor Workflow Team > > "JDMATHER" wrote in message > news:2265646.1074108664041.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... > > I have my class model the attached part every semester in both Inventor > and SolidWorks because the steps are essentially identical. It always works > in SolidWorks but only works part of the time in Inventor. > > All of the computers are identical as far as I know. We have a program > called DeepFreeze that returns the configuration of the computer each time > the machines are rebooted to wipe out any changes a student might make to > the system. > > Today the lab exercise worked on 9 machines and failed on 4 machines. I > walked the students through the modeling process step-by-step, so there > should be no real difference there. > > Try mirroring Extrusion 4 and Hole 1 on the failed part. If you zoom in > you will see a small anomaly (line) that shouldn't be there on the one side. > This seems to be a problem with the fillet. I have tried every which way > but I cannot consistently reproduce the problem. > >

[Anonymous]

Yep ... you're right. If you extend the 188mm extrude by 32mm, you can see where the flaw ends. Seems to be a split 22.913mm long (shape manager?). Can't correlate that with any dimension I'm aware of. I reproduced the flaw in a new sketch as well, but on both, it only shows up on one side. I got it to work by extruding the boss 11mm (half way but not to the flaw) one way then 11mm the other way. Guess that fools the flaw into not showing up or something. I also remember seeing this part before. Been using it for awhile, eh? Sounds like it's time Inventor gets fixed so it will do it correctly. ~Larry "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:27440154.1074114231288.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2.autodesk.com... Larry If I take the EOP on you part just above shell and then back down everything is OK, but if I take it all the way to the top and then back down step-by-step it fails. Unless I do a rebuild all. Message was edited by: JDMATHER

[Anonymous]

Keep an eye on this page. http://betaprograms.autodesk.com/ In the past, they've made an invitation announcement in the newsgroup. Mike "Donovan Cox" wrote in message news:4005bf05$1_1@statler... > You know, i hate it when you guys tease like that > > So..... where do we sign up? > > "Loren Jahraus (Autodesk)" wrote in message > news:4005b989_2@statler... > > A Rebuild All in the current R9 build fixes the problem. Without digging > > into it too deeply, it looks like they made a change to the kernel that > > improves the behavior. > > > > Loren Jahraus > > Autodesk Inventor Workflow Team > >

[Anonymous]

Me too ... I thought bug fixes were appropriate for SPs. ~Larry "JDMATHER" wrote in message news:28937901.1074117871758.JavaMail.jive@jiveforum2... Good to hear, but makes me wonder how many other parts are effected a lot farther down the feature tree. Seems like a patch to 8 would be appropriate if possible.

[Anonymous]

i check that at least once a month. "Mike Maenpaa" wrote in message news:4005c015$1_2@statler... > Keep an eye on this page. http://betaprograms.autodesk.com/ > In the past, they've made an invitation announcement in the newsgroup. > > Mike > > > "Donovan Cox" wrote in message > news:4005bf05$1_1@statler... > > You know, i hate it when you guys tease like that > > > > So..... where do we sign up? > > > > "Loren Jahraus (Autodesk)" wrote in message > > news:4005b989_2@statler... > > > A Rebuild All in the current R9 build fixes the problem. Without digging > > > into it too deeply, it looks like they made a change to the kernel that > > > improves the behavior. > > > > > > Loren Jahraus > > > Autodesk Inventor Workflow Team > > > > > >