Another issue needs to be fixed

[jletcher]

Chamfer callout does not callout correct when radii is applied to the corners.

 Can we please fix this bug as well? Maybe with patch or hot fix.

[mrattray]

I don't know if I'd call that a BUG, necessarily, as much as a poorly designed feature. Perhaps, you should post this as a request on the Inventor IdeaStation.

[jletcher]

Why would you not call it a bug?

 The chamfer note tool should get information from the chamfer feature not the IDW 2D or am I thinking the way it should work?

[cbenner]

My guess is that the fillet has been added after the chamfer, and modified the chamfer data, which is what the drawing is picking up on.  Does that even make any sense?

[mrattray]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Why would you not call it a bug?

 The chamfer note tool should get information from the chamfer feature not the IDW 2D or am I thinking the way it should work?

---

It's not a bug, because a bug is when something does not work the way it was intended to work. I don't think the chamfer dimension tool was ever intended to recognize chamfers that have been modified by other features, but rather to simply report the length of the line. I do agree that it SHOULD work the way you suggest, I just don't think it was intended to. Sort of like how chamfer notes SHOULD recognize the number of like chamfers in the view and report a quantity note, but they don't and were never intended to; hence, it's a feature request not a bug report. Just a technicality, really, but an important one.

[blair]

It makes sense, since you can do the chamfer a couple of ways inside the Feature command and still get the same "Label" in the drawing environment.

[Curtis_Waguespack]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Why would you not call it a bug?

---

Hi jletcher,

Within the software development world there is a distinction between a bug and a limitation. Here are my paraphrased definition of the two terms (I might not have this 100% correct):

A bug is typically thought of as an unexpected regression in behavior of an existing feature or an unexpected result of new feature( unexpected here meaning, unexpected to the everyone).

A limitation is a known, but unexpected result of an existing feature ( unexpected here meaning, unexpected to the user but not necessarily to the developer who might not know that the limiting behavior is a problem for the user).

I think this chamfer issue would be considered a limitation because it has been around for multiple releases. I think it has always worked that way, but I'm not certain. It's been that way for at least the last 6 releases though.

The problem is that the drawing Chamfer note tool is reading the drawing curve and not the Chamfer model feature data. You'll get the same issue if you place a hole or cut on the chamfered edge:

I agree with the thought of placing an IdeaStation idea for this improvement request. That would the be the proper way to communicate this with the Autodesk Inventor development team.  You might include a link to this discussion in your IdeaStation post  as well.

I hope this helps.
Best of luck to you in all of your Inventor pursuits,
Curtis
http://inventortrenches.blogspot.com

[kwilson_design]

The chamfer dimension tool does not recognize T.S.C. (theoretical sharp corners). What you're seeing is not a "bug" persay as it does not know to include the material where the fillet in theory consumed. Hope that makes sense. Frustrating as I can see your point but the only way to really dimension that chamfer the way you want is to NOT to use the chamfer dimension tool and use the Intersections instead. The chamfer dimension tool can't make assumptions that you want to include or exclude removed material from the fillet. Perhaps they could add that as an option to include T.S.C.? Post it up in the Idea Station

[jletcher]

the only part I don't agree on is :

but rather to simply report the length of the line

The length of the line would 1 5/16 if it was the aligned dim. But that is not the case some how it figures the length with angle but also knows the fillet..

Just feels like a bug to me Chamfer tool, Chamfer note should work together, guess not....

But I do understand what everyone is saying. But to me a bug or not a very thought out note tool....

[jletcher]

I am sure it has been this way from day one but this new client is the 1st to use a chamfer with a radius in all my clients and he made a few parts with the wrong chamfer because the drafter did not know the chamfer note is not a chamfer note at all. A chamfer note should give the right chamfer information no matter what cuts the line off. Hence Chamfer note.. Not a dimension..

 Hence why I say bug .... But do understand what you are saying..

 No need for idea if this is how it works just something I need to let all clients know.. Plus they don't like me so they will never do something I want LOL....

 Just trying to figure out why other softwares I have does it right and Inventor don't..

Thanks.......

[Curtis_Waguespack]

Hi everyone,

Please lend your support and comments to this feature improvement idea on the IdeaStation:

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/Inventor-IdeaStation/Improve-Chamfer-Note-drawing-tool/idi-p/5031524

I hope this helps.
Best of luck to you in all of your Inventor pursuits,
Curtis
http://inventortrenches.blogspot.com

[jtylerbc]

It's got my vote.  It's not uncommon for me to end up with the situation jletcher originally posted.  In my case, it's usually a steel plate with chamfered corners, followed by applying a default fillet radius to all the sharp edges.  I've stumbled across this problem with dimensioning those parts, and it is really annoying to have to dimension it with two linear dimensions instead of the chamfer note, all because of a couple of small fillets.

[inov8works]

Out of curiosity I tried this same thing in SolidWorks 2014 and it won't even create a note, it errors out right away.

[mrattray]

Same here, laser rounds to keep the cuts on our old laser somewhat clean with heavy plate.
The annoyance is double with the horrible, unintuitive method of dimensioning to virtual intersections.

[blair]

If they pull in the Chamfer Feature Data, and use it similar to the Hole-Note it should work fine. Never looked at the drawing standards for a Chamfer Note, it could end up being out of "Standard" but it would be correct.

[DRoam]

---

@Blair wrote:
If they pull in the Chamfer Feature Data, and use it similar to the Hole-Note it should work fine.

---

This would be the ideal solution. And what would complete it is if the chamfer annotation and fillet annotation were a single, shared tool which would read the feature data and display the proper notation and quantity, even if you switch from a chamfer to a fillet or vice versa.

There are a bunch of great ideas in the IdeaStation regarding improvements to the chamfer tool, and nearly all of them are requesting functionality which the Fillet tool already has.

In light of this, I created an Idea suggesting that the chamfer and fillet tools be combined into one so that all functionality is similar between the two tools, and so that you can instantly switch from one to the other if your design requires.

This would pave the way for so many other improvements to chamfer/fillet features and drawing annotations.

You can vote for the Idea here: Combine the fillet and chamfer tools.

Inside the Idea I also linked to several specific chamfer/fillet enhancements that you can vote for as well.

[The_Angry_Elf]

Whether considered a bug or a limitation,

THIS is in fact, a bug in the Chamfer note:

Only the Chamfer note has lower case text in it as the default. It should be all upper case, point blank.

I have asked for this fix for a number of releases, posted on the IdeaStation and still here we are in the 2017 release and still not fixed.

I once again need to go into the template files and correct it before rollout.

So, bugs/improvements I'm still waiting on:

1. Chamfer note being "CHAMFER"

2. Dimensions to include in stream modifiers (something CADDS5 and Pro/E had back in the late 1980's)

3. ALL of the 2009 GD&T symbols, not just the few that we have now.

The Angry Elf has spoken

[mcgyvr]

---

@The_Angry_Elf wrote:

Whether considered a bug or a limitation,

THIS is in fact, a bug in the Chamfer note:

1. Chamfer note being "CHAMFER"

---

@The_Angry_Elf

You simply need to correct the note in your style and standard library and change it to all uppercase..

edit... nevermind.. I read that you were complaining about it being sentence cased and didn't know you could change it.. Now that I fully read your post I see that part now..

[The_Angry_Elf]

Mac,

No worries. Yeah, this has been the case ever since I can remember with Inventor. I've been going into the drawing templates and correcting it since about release 3. It would sure be nice if this very minor change would finally take place so one doesn't have to do such.