Heatsink W/ Ruffles Very Challenging???

[Slambog]

I figured id post this here and maybe get a response from a guru on how this can exactly be accomplished.

Anyways heres what I was trying to do, some time ago I was making a model of a Heatsink, the fin's of the Heatsink have ruffles in them similar to radiator's fins, the trick is that they also loop.

Attached is a Model of what one of the fins looks like, and I have attached also a picture of my best attempt at making this, where all I did was array the pattern to get a result as close as possible.

What I couldnt accoplish was making a Heatsink as one Part instead I had to settle for an Assembly. I tryed making one sweep across a zig-zag line but ended up with a feature that fanned out.

Let me know gents...

[Anonymous]

Simple way from this point would be to derrive a new part from your
assembly.

Derek Burns

wrote in message news:4887636@discussion.autodesk.com...
I figured id post this here and maybe get a response from a guru on how this
can exactly be accomplished.

Anyways heres what I was trying to do, some time ago I was making a model of
a Heatsink, the fin's of the Heatsink have ruffles in them similar to
radiator's fins, the trick is that they also loop.

Attached is a Model of what one of the fins looks like, and I have attached
also a picture of my best attempt at making this, where all I did was array
the pattern to get a result as cl
ose as possible.

What I couldnt accoplish was making a Heatsink as one Part instead I had to
settle for an Assembly. I tryed making one sweep across a zig-zag line but
ended up with a feature that fanned out.

Let me know gents...

[Anonymous]

I just arrayed the feature and it looks just like what you have but one
part. (it did take a good amount of computer resources to do it though)


wrote in message news:4887636@discussion.autodesk.com...
I figured id post this here and maybe get a response from a guru on how this
can exactly be accomplished.

Anyways heres what I was trying to do, some time ago I was making a model of
a Heatsink, the fin's of the Heatsink have ruffles in them similar to
radiator's fins, the trick is that they also loop.

Attached is a Model of what one of the fins looks like, and I have attached
also a picture of my best attempt at making this, where all I did was array
the pattern to get a result as cl
ose as possible.

What I couldnt accoplish was making a Heatsink as one Part instead I had to
settle for an Assembly. I tryed making one sweep across a zig-zag line but
ended up with a feature that fanned out.

Let me know gents...

[Slambog]

I guess what my main question was, is it even possible to patten a feature like this in an "Ipt" in Inventor.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely, in fact that's how I did mine. I just took your feature and
patterned it (in the IPT) and it worked very well. After you finish the
feature and are out of the sketch just click the pattern button then pick
your feature, pick rectangular and then pick the direction using an origin
axis....presto.


wrote in message news:4888687@discussion.autodesk.com...
I guess what my main question was, is it even possible to patten a feature
like this in an "Ipt" in Inventor.

[dan_mayers]

Derek and Albert are both correct and have good ways to go about making your model. I have a follow up question for you based on their input. This model will be a serious resource hog. Do you need that much accuracy? Can you get away with a less complicated extrusion for your model and then have a detail view showing you fin geometry?

I ask this and then I will find out that you make the heatsinks and that yes you do need that much detail... 🙂

I ask this question because I am constantly running into models that are unnecessarily accurate.

Dan

[Anonymous]

"I ask this question because I am constantly running into models that are
unnecessarily accurate."

Dan, I go through this question on a regular basis with my co-workers and
boss and virtually every time I "cut corners" and make a model simpler, I
get burned.

Something that you would never guess it would interfere does.

We also leverage most of our models to create service manuals which means
all the inside "stuff" needs to be modeled too.

[Slambog]

Well originally I was using this to get an Accurate model with some CFD software, and how airflow would react so accuracy was critical in some regards.

Can some of you guys post back your model results id love to see them.

[dan_mayers]

That was what I was thinking. I figured you had a good reason, I just wanted to make sure. I wish we had a system to run something that complex on-- this would take several days on the machine I have. 🙂

Anyway, good luck!

[dan_mayers]

There is a fine line and you really have to apply your "engineering intuition" to make the call. We have a guy here who models EVERY detail- all pins, all holes, every fillet on every component. Some of his connectors (DB-25 and such) are larger than my mid-level assemblies with 30-40 parts. They look perfect, but management will only keep us up with the minimum system requirements for Inventor so he is crippling his productivity and making his components dangerous to use in other designs. One of the arguments I am using with management right now is that he has lost so much time waiting for regens and calculations during the year I have been here that the lost time would have paid for a new high end system. This is where the concern is.

[Anonymous]

Yep, it's always a balancing act isn't it?

The big thing for us is having to use our models for repair manuals as well
so ya gotta have every stinking part that could be replaced in detail.

It used to be the job of the technical illustrator to do exploded views but
not anymore...let's use the engineers models since they have them anyway!



wrote in message news:4889800@discussion.autodesk.com...
There is a fine line and you really have to apply your "engineering
intuition" to make the call. We have a guy here who models EVERY detail-
all pins, all holes, every fillet on every component. Some of his
connectors (DB-25 and such) are larger than my mid-level assemblies with
30-40 parts. They look perfect, but management will only keep us up with
the minimum system requirements for Inventor so he is crippling his
productivity and making his components dangerous to use in other designs.
One of the arguments I am using with management right now is that he has
lost so much time waiting for regens and calculations during the year I have
been here that the lost time would have paid for a new high end system.
This is where the concern is.

[Josh_Petitt]

do you use Fluent?

[dan_mayers]

We use CFDesign.