Invert volume body

[Anonymous]

I have a 3d volume body say a cube in which a sphere is cut out. Now within the cube the cut out sphere defines surface, such that I could get the negative of my cube with the cut out sphere being the sphere itself. How can I achieve this?

[JDMather]

Several different ways.

Derived Component is probably the most usual way if you want two parts.

Multi-body solids if you want both bodies in one part.

Attach your file here if you can't figure it out.

[Anonymous]

This should be from what I want the sphere...

Could u elaborate a bit?

thx

[JDMather]

Sketch1 is not fully constrained?

It is easier to create a 2Point Center Rectangle or Polygon.

No dimension, yet when I add dimension - it is perfect?  What happened to the dimension?

Extrusion1 should be mid-plane.

Workplane1 is not needed.

Sketch7 (7?) is not fully defined.

Back in a moment with corrected model and solution.

[Anonymous]

What do you mean by constrained and not fully defined regarding the scetches?

Oh: and what about the dimension stuff? I'm confused...Sure the midplane I forgot would have been easier.

[JDMather]

What are you really really trying to do?

[Anonymous]

Thx for ur solution.

First of all: I was just asking about ur comments about the scetches which apparently were not properly defined.

Apart from that what u did works though I didnt figure out how yet.

1. Is is necessary to do it in a separate file like u did? I dont know if u imported the sphere test_jd.ipt or how did u get it in inventor?

2. I see u are using sculpt

3. what are the other surfaces u are using for?

Thx

[JDMather]

---

@c.kuenstler wrote:

..

1. Is is necessary to ...

---

No, it is not necessary (see attached file), but I have no clue what you are really trying to do.

Maybe you simply wanted to create the sphere as a second body and then Combine - Subtract in one file.

What is your end goal?

What is your design intent?

[Anonymous]

In the last part (Multibody) u just explicitly turned the halfcircle to create the sphere, am I right?
My intent is that I have some geometry which is too complicated to just quickly draw. The Geometry is actualy just the negative of what I want. That's why I started above with the circle in the cube. I need to start from the negative. That's the point, is that what u were asking?

[JDMather]

---

......I have some geometry which is too complicated to .... The Geometry is actually just the negative ..... That's the point, is that what u were asking?

---

Can you attach this geometry here?

Examine the attached file.

Pull down the red End of Part marker step-by-step.

The attached file starts with a mold cavity (the core and cavity).

Then reverses the process to derive the part.

Turn off the visibility of the various bodies for examining the geometry.

[Anonymous]

Hey, I can understand when u dont want to help anymore, but even if its nothing fancy I do not really want to submit it on a public forum.
Additionally it's an .iam file consisting of a few .ipt files.
What do u think?

[Anonymous]

Just a quick question: I just noticed that within .iam there are not all the features like sculpt available, is that correct?

So if i have multiple .ipt files i would have to load them within an .ipt file by ur "derive" function?

[JDMather]

You would start a new part file.

Manage>Derive 

and select the Assembly to be derived into the part file.

[Anonymous]

Since I have multiple parts: To combine them Autodesk asks for them to be "volume bodies" not as u chose in ur example surface after deriving the file.

But in the end the entire piece has to define a surface to be able to remove the outer surfaces, right?

Also is there no "make depedent" within .ipt to place the two parts accordingly...Something which is very easy within .iam

[JDMather]

---

@c.kuenstler wrote:

Also is there no "make depedent" within .ipt to place the two parts accordingly...Something which is very easy within .iam

---

You do not need to position anything in part file.  The parts are positioned in the assembly (where it makes logical sense to do so.

You could move bodies in part file - but that should not be necessary.

[Anonymous]

If i just add 2 parts these 2 are positioned within each other..to me that doesnt make sense.

Is it not possible to use .iam?

[JDMather]

You could do it in the assembly but that (Copy Object) requires more in-depth knowledge of using Inventor and might not (probably not) be any easier.

What is difficult about deriving an assembly into a part?

[Anonymous]

Deriving itself is not the difficult part i guess...But since u say the alignment is automatically i assume I cannot count upon the automatic alignment, since these 2 objects are placed within each other. If u would delete the files afterwards i could sent them to u via email and u see what i mean.

[Anonymous]

is that possible?