No idea how to modify a 4 cornered patch into a more segmented one

[technikYB85C]

Hi, I am messing with patching and modifications of patches. 

I want to cut this contour from the underlying existing patch but I do not succeed. Tried desparetely for 5 hours, no idea exactly what to do and how to find a workflow to get these 2 edges inserted to the existing patches.

The upper picture shows why i need these trims, the contour has to be set back for later modelling of clamps. 

Please help if you can! Thanks a lot!

Fritz

[davebYYPCU · Accepted solution]

Like this?

With Modify > Trim.

[technikYB85C · Accepted solution]

Yeah, you did it. I will try to replay, had a first guess how you did that. I am new with surface design, started yesterday the whole day until 3 o'clock in the night. 😁. I am a self learning guy and i have learned catia, siemens nx and solidworks and now fusion. Almost I could find a way to fix my problems, but without help like yours it is a true nightmare. 

Thank you very much, i will try to replay!

Fritz

[davebYYPCU · Accepted solution]

Modify > Stitch to join the 2 wall bodies together.

For Modify > Trim, Select the new wall body in Browser as cutter (turns bluish),

click on panel to remove (turns reddish), press OK.

Might help...

[technikYB85C]

Umpff ... i wrote a special thanks, but is gone with the wind here ... After submission no entry. Oh yeah ... 😩

[technikYB85C]

Well, I am not outsourcing my tasks, I don't hope you will feel this way to be my intention. It's only a lack of understandig, because the parametric workflow in fusion aggregates generating elements and this is new to me and causes some problems for my understand how to continue. 

I fail to generate the top and bottom faces, because these are aggregated by Body36. The idea is to generate a cutting solid like in the left top corner. and remove this from Body36. 

[technikYB85C]

My problems of understanding are as described here: 

1) I do not exactly know the geoemetric prerequisties for Patches. I assume, they do not only have to be flat and to sit on a plane? They can also be on a ruled surface? They can sit on any ruled or parametric surface?

2) Aggegation sub elements is a kind of system behaviour to keep the history lean and not overwhelmed by elements. But my Body36 swallowed all surfaces and patches and if I want to get them out to make a copy I fail ... I have to do some systematic testings on this workflow. I forced this modelling because i wanted to have a result.

It's for scanning old automotive parts and doing a redesign or mechanical upgrade. I failed with scan data in SolidWorks, the system is very, very sleepy and has poor functions, When you want enhancements, you have to pay and this can be very expensive. 

Fusion is very capable in surfaces and manages very complex surface input. With Solidworks, you fail just when reading. 

[davebYYPCU]

Without studying your intent, the file seemed unusual.  Will revisit later, but
Based on prior answer - I stitched 2 walls for one body to become the cutter.  Are you stitching (aggregating) too many, or too early?

Patch definition - not related to planes, they are successfully created with a chain of coincident articles.  
Perimeter of a void.  You can further add rails, but I don’t have that experience.

You seem struck on modelling this detail with surfaces, I prefer a hybrid method or simply best tool for the job.

You set the mesh model up on the Origin, and then ignored it, consider a workflow that works away from the Origin. 

Only you know where the true geometry goes and what in the scan is erroneous.

A technique I use is to consider the initial stages as a series of shapes without the fillets.  Fillet later.

Updated file with examples attached.

Might help….

[technikYB85C]

Good morning dave, 

yes, You are right. There is too much struggling and fighting the system in at the current state. I will solemnly study your workflow to have a better and stable and shorter tree of modelling. And sorry very much, i was so much focussed on the cad problem and forgot documentation.

And you are very right on positioning criticism. I started with a youtube video and got messed and confused by his workflow of positoning without any explainations. This is a tremendous lack of teaching, almost all Youtubers only tell where to click and do not instruct intend or why they do by which means. 

This is the part. 

Next picture shows the part in position, but not already clamped in the B-Pillar cover because this is the trouble with this part. Once fixed, never can be unfixed without destroying. And Smart calls about 30 $ for this like breaker. Those white spots are remains of the scanner spray. Every scanner is in troube with black parts.

[technikYB85C]

Good morning dave,

you lost the focus. My intent was not to have somebody modelled the entity according to the scan, it was exactly focussed on the questions of message #6. 

"I fail to generate the top and bottom faces, because these are aggregated by Body36."

NO modelling by you of a dome and fixes required.This was not my intend. 

This part takes time, and stepping in by fast will lead to fail in result. Your first answer was so precise and focussed but here we are lost in space. I think i asked too much.

No chance, this model falls apart because of the huge amount of projections / intersections with planes in sketches from my modelling. If a reference for projection drops off, you only can guess which element this could have been. 

Hmmh ...

I think about to do a restart , take y time for a new version beginning again from scratch. Your idea on much more focus of the support surfaces need a second scan of the pillar part. 

Smile and thank you very much! I will do my tasks!

Remarks: The editor language here inside the posts is programmed by pure html. I tried to quote, but this trial did a full quote of the whole post, no detail quotation possible. Coding html inside the interface by html is a pure stress for untrained posters, therefore i only set this single quote to quotation remarks and bold. 

[technikYB85C]

Hi Dave, 

 further supply of information !

Here you can find a scan of the inner shape of the B-Pillar. As you said, the real shape is really essential for fit. It is a preliminary source for input. With your instructions i find a way! I am getting better and better, yeah! 

You can find the model of the inner Pillar Shape attached in the next post, because of limited to 3 attachments. If I reduce to 2, this neither works ... 

Have a good day! 

Fritz 

[technikYB85C]

Finally the scan ...