See file. I've noticed it with 2013, and it's same behavior in 2014.
1. Measurement between yellow faces shows 200 mm
2. Do Rebuild all and measure again: 200 mm
3. Move EOP behind Face1 and measure 200 mm
4. Move EOP down: 200 mm
5. Unsuppress Thicken1
6. Move EOP behind Thicken1: 205 mm now is ok.
7. Move EOP full down: 205 mm
8. Do Rebuild all. Now you get 195 mm. Funny to see, that the red face is moving, too.
9. Move EOP behind Thicken1 and back again. Yellow and red faces are well again.
10. Do it again, and again
Hmm. I think, I'll have to inspect several of my sheet metal files. And I think, Adesk should have a look here, too.
I experienced the same... ... but... i wonder...why using thickness!?
BTW, I tried with "move face" instead "Thickness" and works good!!! ...but in my opinion, it's not a good practice to use this kind of tools in sheet metal... only if I imported some SMetal part from another CAD package an need to make some edits.
Thanks for your reply, Carlos
Well, Thicken is a Quick-and-Dirty method for changing a single edge in complex SM parts, without the need of moving through the whole feature tree. I think, ADesk is aware of some benefits of Direct Editing, too.
IMO, Thicken is easier and faster to use than Move Face. There are several ways for getting the same result, no need for a discussion. But each of these different ways should be reliable.
I don't think, that a new edge is built by Thicken.
- Add a MoveFace operation behind Face1
- Move EOP again behind Face1
- Make an IDW of this situation and dimension both edges of the rectangle
- Now move EOP down one step (MoveFace1) and look at the IDW. No pink dimension.
- Another step down (Thicken1), and nothing pink again
Only the last step (adding Flange) shows pink. But that's normal.
These changes are happening even without a Rebuild All operation. I don't know exactly when that happens, but after changing parts back to their intended look, some time later they were damaged again.
I've rebuilt your model from scratch and i can't get it to do the same, see file attached.
What i did notice is that you have a Bend Relief setting of "none" which i don't, i wonder if that might be causing something.
Sure. I've been thinking of creating another test part with 2013.
Meanwhile I've done that for myself, and took a closer look at the template I used. It's a customer-modified template (originally made mit 11 SP3, last save with 2011 SP1). I'm wondering now why 2013 sent no message about using this old non-migrated template.
But I used it once more for testing. Strange now, that I couldn't reproduce that damage again.
Something's going wrong, and I don't know how it happens. But I'll save this old template as 2013 now.
Log into access your profile, ask and answer questions, share ideas and more. Haven't signed up yet? Register