Proper technique for large patterns ( modeling practical mesh work )

[doncawley]

Hi, I'd like the flat outer walls to allow air to pass through easily by creating a grid / "mesh" wall.  However, fusion does not like large patterns in the sketch workspace.  I have since learned autodesk suggests making the pattern with bodies instead.  However, this still seems to be too much for fusion to handle.  I absolutely refuse to believe this is an abnormal use case.  What is the proper way to model a "meshed" surface?  

Link to my exact issue  - I have tried the pattern in bodies solution

I have attached a save of the project and a screenshot of the product. 

[etfrench]

Pattern in Manufacturing instead of Design.  If you want to see it in the Design workspace, use a decal.

[etfrench · Accepted solution]

You only need one Grid Tool located at the Origin.  Cut one hole, then pattern the (hole) feature. 

p.s. Autodesk Support needs to fix that suggestion😎

[doncawley]

I've yet to use the manufacture workspace and I didn't even see create pattern...so im lost on that option.  Patterning the hole sounds like a great option though. 

I powered through the insane pain at got the cutouts working with the 589 bodies, but will keep patterning holes for future reference! 

[jeff_strater]

definitely do not use sketch pattern for even medium-sized patterns.  When patterning in the solid world, if you can use face pattern or "optimized" feature pattern, you will get much better performance.  This size of pattern should be fairly fast.  If you get to the point of a thousand holes or more, then you will have to expect some performance challenges, even with optimized patterns.

[g-andresen]

Hi,

try this

günther

[g-andresen]

Hi,

In this method, the pattern is created only for fully covered elements with a reference body.

Note: The calculation time is longer because of the necessary adjustment to the reference body. 

günther

[JPG_master]

@g-andresen 

Guenter,

may I recap what I understand from your example ( tell me please if I am wrong ) :
rather than

a.) SKETCHING patterns - create 1 object like a square or a hex one and replicate with SKETCH patter techniques -  and

b.) extrude them

you say / show to:

1.) create a body to cut to create the pattern

2.) replicate the SOLID BODY result via pattern / replicate the "SOLID / COMBINE / cut" result

3.) merge than the resulting SOLID pattern with the rest - like an inlay etc.

Right?

My Problem:

when I need to adjust a distance, Fusion 360 hobby run into endless loop.

FIRST trial was SKETCH / CREATE PATTERN / rectangular

SECOND trial was to manuall copy the Sketch object ( Hex ), duplictae via MOVE/COPY command and link via a LINE with DIMENSION

==> the createion did work more or less acceptable from the performance perspective, but ADJUSTINg ONE value ( Dimension pARAMETER ) killed the calculation.

IF YOU ABOVE ANSWER is yes, I will TRY and REPORT Here.

thanks and regards

When I n

[davebYYPCU]

What part of do NOT create Sketch Pattern did you miss?

[TrippyLighting]

Every! Single! Bit! 😉

[g-andresen]

Hi,

Here is a solution like in # 6, only with hexagons.

Avoid sketch patterns!

günther

[JPG_master]

Impressive.

thank you, my lesson is learned.
Thank you for a constructive answer ... some people unfortunately do not that in the way you did.
thanks again .. understood FOREVER.

[TrippyLighting]

---

@JPG_master wrote:
 ... some people unfortunately do not that in the way you did.

---

Guilty as charged 😉

When you create feature patterns, make sure to pay attention to the options in the Pattern dialogue.

Particularly for large patterns, changing from the default "Adjust" to "Identical"  or "Optimized" can make a significant and positive performance difference:

[JPG_master]

not to let this unreplied - as well to @TrippyLighting :
easy .. i did NOT see @jeff_strater's , because my search DIRECTLY guided me to @g-andresen's solution.

when I scrolled up to give LIKEs ... i saw Jeffs Post ... anyhow

[JPG_master]

Thank you for the constructive advice ... seeeeeems my learning is not yet done for today. 😉

[davebYYPCU]

When prompted to look for it, you found it, all is good.

[JPG_master]

OMG - just a few minutes and I am done with it .... the sketch in the previous trial took me ... ( no no no ... I am not going to tell 😉 )

.. see the history ... unbelievable ...

Thank you all for this LEARNING ....

[davebYYPCU]

How did the hexagon / circles miss the origin?  Not really done, 

Rule No.1, and Fully Constrained Sketches would be next topics.

Might help....

[JPG_master]

I always use an X-Offset & Y-Offset parametrized.
==> everything is fully constrained.
Makes it easier to correct an error in sketching because not ALL COINCIDENT constraints do sit at the same place.

Managing existing Constraints TO ME sometimes is not successful as I do not know / see which coincident belongs to which sketch object.

Do you have a hint here?

[davebYYPCU]

File Origin is basic location for inbuilt functions like symmetry, and stability.

Your file is constrained, but away from the origin is extra work, 

Gunther has the hexagon and circles positioned on the origin, for stability, and bonus of aesthetics, in the static thumbnail.  Much easier.

This example does not need any separate components.  File starts as an empty component, 

make the simple part at the top, and you won’t have to combine across components.  What Rule No.1 talks about.  Multiple (finished) parts multiple components, multiple steps to make a single part  - Go in the same component.

Yep lots to learn, take small steps at a time.

Difficulty with constraints - need examples to explain, but deleting them let’s you edit better.

your pic was not present when I started this reply, so Editing now.

Lets see you create 2 user parameters, Create 2 lines, and use 2 dimensions on those lines,

to replace a single origin point that Fusion supplies, and you HAD to use for your construction to actually work.  Hard work that is weird workaround for a non existent problem.

For me, Draw four dimensioned circles at the origin, will do the same job and be more simple in the process.   If - big IF, you don’t want the circles at the origin, you don’t put them there in the first place, again counter productive trying to move them away.  Use the user parameters to place the 1st centre point, don’t need the centre lines - at this stage.

Might help...