Hello Everyone,
Offset is now a parameter which is very nice.
Is there a way of making an offset of an offset profile? I seem not to be able to select the offset line to make a new offset based on that, only the original profile is selectable.
For sure I'm missing something.
Screencast: http://autode.sk/1TjIq6l
Best regards,
Ludo
I'm seeing the same behaviour.
If you offset again from the original profile and use a different value. Then delete the parameter, and attempt to apply a new dimension between the two offset profiles, f360 warns of an over constrained condition. I managed to get it to crash by trying to reapply the original dimension, between the source profile and the 2nd offset profile.
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
Hi Scott,
Selecting a dimension as input does not seem to function either.
In the Parameter table I was allowed to add dimensions by name (like d5 + d9) but from the graphics screen it does not seem to work.
Best regards,
Ludo
Currently we are not able to create offset from offset profile. The workaround we have is to delete the offset constraint which will break the offset association. After that we can create new offset from the profile:
Hello @jiang_peng,
Thanks for your reply.
I tried that same workaround earlier today, I guess it basically sets the Offset command back to the situation before the update.
Anyways, still like the fact that offset is a parameter now.
Will it be possible in the future to select existing (Offset) dimensions as input for a new Offset command ?
Best regards,
Ludo
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
kenneth.hill wrote:That is not to say that we can't make it work. We handle this kind of problem quite often. But since it is a bit of a project, and since in most cases one can offset the parent profile multiple times, we felt it was important to get associative offsets into customer hands. This way we can use the feedback to decide where to spend our development resources most effectively.
Perfect! I agree with this, since it was badly needed, and the current implementation is still pretty cool.
Maybe you could cheat and just take the selection from the offsets' parent and immediately start with the same offset value (internally) as the selected offset profile. Could that cause other problems?
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
Hi Scott,
If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that if one attempts to offset a child, the parent gets selected as the source profile. Correct? We've thought about that, but I worry about cases like this:
What is wanted:
What is actually created (Note that the right loop is also offset):
In my opinion, this result may be confusing. Do you agree, or do you feel that the result would be correct often enough to warrant this short-cut? One benefit of this approach is it gives an opportunity to display a warning such as "Offsetting an offset is not allowed, offsetting the parent instead" which helps clarify the issue.
-Ken
Which one was offset first in your image?
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
Hello Ken,
Thank you for explaining the associative Offset.
Actually, after playing around with the command, it works pretty well for me, and as you wrote, you can edit (select other dimension, formula) the Offset dimension after creating it.
Again, thanks for 'parametrizing' the offset.
Best regards,
Ludo
@kenneth.hill wrote:
Hi Scott,
@scottmoyse wrote:
Which one was offset first in your image?
The offset of dimension 13.527 was offset first, but it created two loops (as it should). Now a second offset was desired on just the right loop as shown in the first image. But following your suggestion, we re-offset the original profile, resulting in the second image. Instead of one new loop as was desired, we got two.
-Ken
Yes in this scenario my suggestion falls over. How often do you think this would come up? Because the excess geometry could be converted to construction geometry in those situations. How complicated/clever does this offset command need to be?
Scott Moyse
Did you find this post helpful? Feel free to Like this post.
Did your question get successfully answered? Then click on the ACCEPT SOLUTION button.
RevOps Strategy Manager at Toolpath. New Zealand based.
Co-founder of the Grumpy Sloth full aluminium billet mechanical keyboard project
