Hollowing / Shell a complex Body

[wtyoung1]

I've been working on this design for a few months now but I'm quite stuck again.  I have seemingly managed to crash fusion in everyway I could think of, and I believe I'm finally on the final stretch, BUT it all kind of relies on my being able to hollow/shell this body so I can build the assemblies and installation locations of those assemblies in it.

https://a360.co/3skae3b

The "complex side" is drafted and filleted so that is should release semi-easily from a mold, and the inside will need to as well.  I know this is a kind of absurdly complex body and I probably could have been more efficient with my timeline, but the entire design so far has been to mimic the "R99 from Apex Legends" as I am trying to turn it into a sort of "Nerf Gun" 

Hopefully there is a way to do this, previously I managed to do so by extruding an offset sketch of the entire profile, but after drafting the outside it just says "cannot complete extrusion" with no additional details. 

I don't know if there is any way to easily or a best practice for hollowing the body, but if there are any ideas for either doing so or ways of at least partially doing so, I would greatly appreciate the help.

[mango.freund]

hello, if all does not work, then go to the net area and tessellate your volumetric body to a net body and hollow it out. that's working. greetings mango

[mango.freund]

[mango.freund]

max thicken 0.55mm

[wtyoung1]

Thanks for the help, but I guess I should have specified that I need it to reach a wall thickness of ~2.5mm (my mistake).  I've gotten similar approaches to work as well, but all of them have failed somewhere below 1mm.

[etfrench]

Use the Split Body command at each problem spot, then shell each new body.  But any parallel faces closer than 5 mm probably won't shell.

p.s. You can also use an offset face in those areas to create a face that bridges the problem.

[TheCADWhisperer]

Do you really want to shell these thin features?

Does shelling of these features even make logical sense?

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

[wtyoung1]

I don't need to shell any of those features in specific, I've actually been juggling a few of them around in the timeline to see if removing them makes shelling more possible.  

Here's an f3z file, if that helps, I don't know why but even after removing the referenced components it is only allowing me to export it as an f3z.

[wtyoung1]

I am going to try an approach similar to this tonight. I was thinking about trying to create two bodies with the surface tools, the original one based on the model, with an offset simplified one, and try using boundary fill to make it a solid again.

I don't know what you guys think about that approach, but let me know what you think or any other ideas.

Also I know you mentioned the distance of 5mm between certain faces may cause problems, would fusion have an easier time doing these options if everything was scaled up, or is it a relative issue?

[etfrench]

It's a relative issue. 

[TheCADWhisperer · Accepted solution]

@wtyoung1 

Start over.

Start with a major feature that has to be shelled.

After creating the feature verify that it will Shell. 

• Now drag the Timeline player back before the Shell.

Create next feature.

• Drag the Timeline player after Shell.

Repeat for each and every feature.

If at any feature it does not Shell, then rethink your approach and/or Attach your file here.

Of course, leave thin features that are not to be shelled for last and create those after the Shell feature.

[wtyoung1]

Yeah, that was my worry, I've already started a new file trying to do exactly that.

It seems that fusion doesn't want to subtract faces when you offset them and they collide, so It's another tedious process of reordering features and just try and try again.

Well thank you for the help, I'll probably mark this as the solution but if I run into something else weird I'm sure I'll let you guys know.

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@wtyoung1 wrote:
It seems that fusion doesn't want to subtract faces when you offset them and they collide, …

---

Actually it is pretty simple logic.

Once you understand Shell there is a logical workflow.