Circular Pattern and fillets problem

[Anonymous]

Okay I want to pattern two fillets around a heatsink on a simple GU10 LED but it is adding extra lines as seen in the images. I pattern the fillet as a feature, the original is smooth but all patterns are not identical 😕 

Btw another weird observation is if I want to edit a feature/fillet on the original, like just individually select 20 edges additionally more after the original two edges then the selection can't be made unless I cancel the original two edge fillets and make 22 edge selections. Wouldn't it be more logical to just add onto the original selections? It can take long to select those original edges.

I might need to video this if you guys can't understand.

[TheCADWhisperer]

Can you File>Export the *.f3d file to your local drive and then Attach it here to a Reply?

My preference is to keep symmetrical geometry like that simple and then use Pattern of Body (rather than features) and Combine.

Note the lack of symmetry where I would logically expect symmetry.

[Anonymous]

I just saw those lines you pointed out. I can't explain how since I just cut the part at the exact distance all round.

Regarding the other thing I have used Solidworks for 7+ years, even though this is a very simple shape it will be frustrating for more complex bodies later on.

[TheCADWhisperer]

Well, while I was waiting for your file I decided to do a Feature pattern.

 (BTW - I have used SWx for 15 yrs)

See attached while I take a look  at your file.

[Anonymous]

I can't open the file, "Opening of local files is not supported!"... 😐

[TheCADWhisperer]

File>New Design from File

[TheCADWhisperer]

You can set sketch color to change to fully defined - just like SWx  (you have a number of sketches that are not fully defined).

[Anonymous]

I appreciate the help 🙂 Looks like I need more practice.

---

@TheCADWhisperer wrote:

You can set sketch color to change to fully defined - just like SWx  (you have a number of sketches that are not fully defined).

---

Would not fully defined sketches cause such visual problems in the pattern?

[TheCADWhisperer]

In Sketch1 you have a Spline that can be replaced with a arc that is well within the tolerance of any appropriate manufacturing process.

You will make the machinist and inspector happier - and the model comprised of basic geometry.

As noted - many of your sketches are not fully defined.

Extrusions 1 and 2 I would have done with simple Revolves of rectangles (1 sketch YZ Plane, 2 Revolve features).

I would never ever have a complicated sketch like Sketch8.  Not in Fusion, not in SolidWorks or any other MCAD software.  Pattern Features (or Bodies) rather than sketches.

I didn't fix all of the issues in your file - but examine the attached.

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 
Would not fully defined sketches cause such visual problems in the pattern?

---

The sketches not being fully defined is not the root of this problem - just good - disciplined modeling practice.  

Someone on the shop floor is going to have to make to specific dimensions - so why not the designer define the dimensions?

All I did was change the spline to Construction and replace with an arc - but it should work either way.

There is a bug in Fusion that is the real root of the issue.

Although you have discovered a bug using the Spline - I would always use the most primitive geometry possible.  Only use Spline when required for the design intent.

[Anonymous]

---

@TheCADWhisperer wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 
Would not fully defined sketches cause such visual problems in the pattern?

---

The sketches not being fully defined is not the root of this problem - just good - disciplined modeling practice.  

Someone on the shop floor is going to have to make to specific dimensions - so why not the designer define the dimensions?

All I did was change the spline to Construction and replace with an arc - but it should work either way.

There is a bug in Fusion that is the real root of the issue.

Although you have discovered a bug using the Spline - I would always use the most primitive geometry possible.  Only use Spline when required for the design intent.

---

The one thing I do really like about this program is this community activity and help, even though you ripped my file apart. I normally do define every detail, this LED is not such a important part only to get basic packaging (it is already a product you buy off the shelf) and this heat sink area won't be touching anything. The spline was chosen because I wanting some practice with it. But going by the results and edit, how can such a small technicality create such a undesirable look not to mention my file is much slower to process then your revision because of the spline. I wanted to come to 360 for its free flowing possibilities and a spline from the first sketch dramatically stumped it? 

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 I wanted to come to 360 for its free flowing possibilities and a spline from the first sketch dramatically stumped it? 

---

That's one for the developers.  I am sure one will be along and assure that it will be fixed in a future release.  (I would have held off on marking the problem a solved until one did.  If they think there is no issue left to solve - they might skip over this thread.)

Often it takes extensive use to uncover issues like this.

[Anonymous]

---

@TheCADWhisperer wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 I wanted to come to 360 for its free flowing possibilities and a spline from the first sketch dramatically stumped it? 

---

That's one for the developers.  I am sure one will be along and assure that it will be fixed in a future release.  (I would have held off on marking the problem a solved until one did.  If they think there is no issue left to solve - they might skip over this thread.)

Often it takes extensive use to uncover issues like this.

---

Noted I removed the solution marker. Thanks again for explaining it. I am learning just as SW this has it's own special personality flaws to work around...