Fusion
Chamfer on already existing chamfer makes strange result. If I create on top and bottom faces of cube one chamfer, and on top of that chamfer feature I make another chamfer feature with exactly same distance, then new one makes result with more distance than needed.
Example, like I said cube with first chamfer
Then creating second chamfer feature
Makes this
I can't understand why it's different from 0.1cm , when i specifically told make 0.1cm chamfer
I am having trouble visualizing what you are attempting to model.
Do you have a picture of something similar that already exists in the real world?
Tip: Rather than use Chamfer - sketch in the beginning/end points of where you expect the geometry to cut.
It's just a quick example with the cube. I just need chamfer like this one
I mean, this strange behavior in fusion happens everywhere in similar situations. Even with real world examples.
Uhmm, this distance is the hypotenuse
Perhaps if you Sweep with an equilateral triangle
or
Pipe instead.
I still can't understand why fusion makes a chamfer different from the one I specified. Like makes 0.122cm chamfer, when I specified 0.1cm. Even when I choose only one edge. Where did this 0.1cm go?
The triangle you are measuring is not perpendicular to the edge that you selected.
I'll try one last time...
Q. Can you plot out the desired start/end points and Attach the file here?
@TheCADWhisperer wrote:The triangle you are measuring is not perpendicular to the edge that you selected.
I'll try one last time...
Q. Can you plot out the desired start/end points and Attach the file here?
I just don't quite understand what you want to me to do. Something like this?
You are measuring from the wrong location. Measure from where the corner of the cube was, IE .25 inch.
If you select all corners first, you have corner options in the chamfer dialog box.
@wmhazzard wrote:You are measuring from the wrong location. Measure from where the corner of the cube was, IE .25 inch.
If you select all corners first, you have corner options in the chamfer dialog box.
But the thing is corner of this edge was where I actually measure. It's 2 different chamfer features. And if I use only one, I don't get desired result which i show you in my blender screen.
let's back up and get a baseline of what should be happening with the chamfer and where we need to measure from. the equa distant chamfer measures back from the edge selected-
so when you put a chamfer on this edge-
it measures back from the EDGE-
you can see the chamfer is being applied correctly.
manipulating a mesh in blender works differently, because it operates on the vertices directly. but the result aren't always what you might think. I converted your mesh to a berep and took the same measurements as above and here are the results-
you can get closer to what you want by reversing the order that the chamfer is applied to the edges-
and if your trying to get that trapezoid face to be rectangular I suppose you could fudge it with the move face command to get it close, but that seems a bit janky to me-
Blender is not a CAD program, it makes nice pictures. You can make a corner like that if you construct an axis through the bottom two points and then a plane at angle along the axis, then split body with the plane. You will have to do math though to get the top and bottom edges equal length, it is around 36 degrees, not 45.
Accepted solution
If the intent is to have the same chamfer on all edges and the "miter" to be rectangular face then:
- Chamfer 2 opposite faces (8 edges) with dimension = 0,1cm
- Chamfer 8 new edges created by previous chamfer with dimension = 0,1cm * sqrt(2) / sqrt(3)
- Chamfer reminding 4 edges with dimension = 0,1cm
(Used a user parameter in my file)
