2D Chamfer coming to Fusion 360

[al.whatmough]

 Look for an update to Fusion later this week.

[Steinwerks]

Awesome! Was just helping someone with a Chamfer and probably looked for a solid minute thinking "what this isn't in there yet?" This is what I get for following two different products and forums.

[Lonnie.Cady]

The equation mentioned in the video only works if the tool is 90deg and the tool comes to a sharp point.

Many chamfer tools have a flat on the end and in that case you will need to take it into account.

[Anonymous]

Is expression evaluation working correctly?  I was trying the expression example shown in the video and I'm not getting the correct answer.

This expression 

 (tool_diameter/2) - chamferWidth - 0.005in

  is adding the final 0.005 instead of subtracting it.  This expression evaluates correctly:

 (tool_diameter/2) - (chamferWidth + 0.005in)

[Lonnie.Cady · Accepted solution]

I have used this one before for tools that don't come to a point but are still 90 deg

((tool_diameter-tool_tipDiameter)/2)-(chamferWidth+0.005in)

[al.whatmough]

Lonnie,

Thanks for sharing, I remember you reached out and shared that when I made the dev update video about chamfer.

I forgot to share that with the guys when they made this video.

[Lonnie.Cady]

@al.whatmough

I just watched the video again and see it was in the one portion about the equation assumed a 90 deg tool that comes to a point.  I did not catch it until I had posted the above comment.

[juanaviles]

So how does this work if the chamfer is actually modeled in, and I'm not just deburring a sharp edge?  Do I select the bottom or top contour?  Do I still specify a chamfer width? Or do I go back to using 2D Contour?  

This is what I'm trying to chamfer, but I continue to get an empty toolpath error.

[Anonymous]

I am having the same problem, I can't seem to get the 2D chamfer toolpath to work when it is a modeled chamfer. It will only work for me when the chamfer is not modeled.

[Trigg3r]

With modelled chamfers you can choose the bottom edge of the chamfer as the geometry, set the chamfer width the same as it is modelled and then set the bottom height as the face at the top edge of the chamfer. Tip offset and clearance to suit you.

Example part attached.

[juanaviles]

Thanks for this!  I never would have guessed the bottom height would be the top face (Still doesn't make sense to me) but if it works, then it works.  

[Anonymous]

I still think it would be preferable if we could click on the actual chamfer, and not have to set the chamfer width and heights. Would really help improve the usability of this feature.

[al.whatmough]

The funny thing is, it is actually a lot more work to support modeled chamfers.

(the algorithm is designed to ""gouge" the edges that are selected and not the other part of the model.

When and chamfer is selected nothing it "gouged"

With that said, it is in our backlog to support selecting chamfers that are modeled.  We simply felt that the what we released was usefully enough on its own that we should let you all have access to it.

[mill-art]

al.whatmough wrote:

The funny thing is, it is actually a lot more work to support modeled chamfers.

(the algorithm is designed to ""gouge" the edges that are selected and not the other part of the model.

When and chamfer is selected nothing it "gouged"

With that said, it is in our backlog to support selecting chamfers that are modeled.  We simply felt that the what we released was usefully enough on its own that we should let you all have access to it.

---

I am actually fine with the way it is but rather than reinvent the wheel for selecting the modeled chamfer maybe you could put an explanation that for modeled chamfers select the bottom edge and in the heights tab add a discription that the bottom height must be the top modelled surface top of selected surface of which you wish to chamfer.   That IMO would be WAY easier than rewriting the code and possibly breaking the chamfer support that we currently enjoy!.  I am a Sr. Systems engineer for my day job so I understand the level of effort involved in rewriting a portion of an application.  Sometimes it is better to just give guidance than waste time  making unnecessary changes for convenience.