Cyclical constraint dependency was detected !

[Anonymous]

Dear Friends ....

    When i try to project loop from parts into a sketch to modify another part previously modified by a combine feature with the parts used to projet loops this error happens ... Is this normal ? how to avoid ?  . See the attachment ... Thanks in advance.

[TheCADWhisperer]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

... how to avoid ? ....

---

This probably won't be very constructive comments - I sincerely regret that I do not have the time to remodel from scratch to show how I would do the design as it looks interesting, but - 

I would most likely not have any Replace Face features (but not sure about that)

I would probably not have any Direct Edit features (hmmm, but that is an interesting use, maybe I need to rethink that one)

I doubt that I would have any Delete Face features...

I don't know - I need to take a long look at this one, quite unconventional from my modeling techniques.  Interesting techniques!

[Xun.Zhang]

Hi @Anonymous,

I am sorry, could you help describe a bit more about the sketch loop projection? what's the sketch definition plane and what loop to project?

Thanks!

[Anonymous]

I am surprised as when i project edges of the same face instead of projecting loop , the error disappeared . I am back to tell you that i am now confident there is a bug in this issue .... I am inviting Inventor developers to investigate the problem as it's affecting the product's reliability.

[kelly.young]

Hello @Anonymous I opened up your part and couldn't recreate what you are trying to explain. 

"When I try to project loop from parts into a sketch to modify another part previously modified by a combine feature with the parts used to project loops this error happens"

"when I project edges of the same face instead of projecting loop, the error disappeared"

There is only one part attached so it isn't clear where the sketch is being made, what face, which combine feature, or projected loops give you the cyclical dependency. Sounds like you are working in the assembly environment but only a single part was attached?

Can you record a screencast to show how you are achieving this error?

With a bit more information it would be easier to isolate the issue.

Please select the Accept as Solution button if a post solves your issue or answers your question.

[Anonymous]

Dear Sir ...

   if you rebuild all you will get the error . the last feature "Extrusion 108" is the one making the error . It contains a sketch (sketch 110) that has two projected loops . These loops are projected from two different solids which are solid 4 and solid 6 .You can find in the tree a combine feature entitled "Combine 7" this used the two solis 4 and 6 among others to modify solid 36 on which the "Extrusion 108" is intended to act.You will ask me why to project loops from the original solis (solids used to make the modification in the the combine feature) instead of projecting loops directly form the modified solid (solid 36) , the answer is that it gives me a "Projected loop failed because of multiple vertex solutions" error . The only way that worked without errors is to project edges not loops from the original solids.Try it ... Thanks a lot.

[kelly.young]

@Anonymous I see what you are trying to accomplish and can recreate the cyclical error on Rebuild All.

I think the hang up is you are having Sketch110 defined on the face of Solid4 instead of Solid36.

I think having projected loops from other solids and then Extrude Cut Solid36 at Distance To Solid4 face causes the error. 

Hard to explain with just words, the screencast might help:

Maybe someone has a better technical answer of why you are getting the cyclical error, but I think that just redefining the sketch to the Solid36 face will eliminate this.

In my experience Multi-Body Solids within a Part requires a bit of attention to where the sketch is defined in order to keep simplicity and stability.

Hope that helps!

Please select the Accept as Solution button if a post solves your issue or answers your question. 

[Anonymous]

I would like to express my respects and gratefulness for your kind concern . See this screen cast you will notice that the loop is projected from the bottom of the slot not the top surface one . It differs because  one of the faces is tapered . When i try to project this loop the "projected loop failed because of multiple vertex solutions" occurs . This pushed me to project the loop from the solids ( 4 & 6) that's why i chose the face of solid 4 to define the sketch plane. I solved it by projecting edges not loops to the same sketch defined to the face of solid 4 . I feel there is something wrong in the software itself that causes this inconvenience that's why i am sharing my experience . I think autodesk  developers may find a way to solve it in order to improve the software reliability and make its behaviour easier to predict.I think defining a sketch to face is a way to tell inventor to generate a work plane constrained to that face in space regardless of its pertinence to a specified solid.Thank you .

[johnsonshiue]

Hi! I believe this is a bug. Internally we call it naming and machining defect. For some reason, a vertex or an edge was not named and tagged properly (every topology has to be named and tagged to keep associativity). The source cannot be traced back.

I think this is related to the Rebuild All failure in the part. Go to Manage -> Rebuild All. You will see the Ruled Surfaces fail to compute. This may be the source or the symptom of the problem. In theory, Rebuild All should not make any difference. In this case the part was computed in the way that Inventor could not repeat. Could you do Rebuild All and fix up the sick Ruled Surfaces and see if it works better? If you know the way to reproduce the behavior, please let us know asap.

Many thanks!

[Anonymous]

I have no access to my inventor part file now.... But I don't remember any of the ruled surfaces failed with rebuild all .Note:I am using inventor hsm 2017 student version . However I will recheck in the morning the health of the ruled surfaces .Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Dear Mr. Johnson ....

   I rechecked my design now . No problem with my surfaces after a 'Rebuild all' process . I don't know why you got them sick .May be it's a version mismatch. Thanks for your concern.

[kelly.young]

@Anonymous were you able to discern what was causing you problems or was it just a singular instance?

If you have anything to follow up with let us know.

Please select the Accept as Solution button if a post solves your issue or answers your question.