shape generator cutting incorrectly

[Anonymous]

Hello, I'm new to how inventor's shape generator works, and I'm having trouble getting it to output useful information.

I was having trouble with more complicated models, so I decided to make something simple just to test it out.

It either cuts the model in two or makes the connection way too thin. Do you know of something that I may be overlooking? I have tried to follow instructions to the letter, but it hasn't made a difference. I also tried decreasing the target weight removal but it only made the gap smaller.

It makes it hard to trust the result even when it does seem to work.

Thank you for any insight you may have.

 

[Mark.Lancaster]

@Anonymous

In this case you have to provide the actual part or test part..  Images don't show your settings, forces, materials, and constrains of the design.  Also indicate what version of Inventor you're using.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for your reply.

I'm using inventor professional 2018.

There are two holes at the bottom left which act as the fixed points. There is a force of 100 lbs acting downward at the top right. There's a plane of symmetry through the center. There are two "preserve region" areas where the fixed points are and where the force is being applied because it was cutting those areas out completely. If I make the minimum member size anything other than 0, it makes the output even weirder. 

It is giving the warning "Warning T2004: unrecognized bulk data entry" when I run it. It may have been saying that all along but I just noticed it now.

I hope that this is enough information.

[johnsonshiue · Accepted solution]

Hi! The lever as is is not stable. I would add more constraints so that the potential deformation is limited on a plane and there should not be lateral movement. Could you try adding Frictionless constraints on both sides?

Many thanks!

[Anonymous]

Wow, thanks so much. It gave me an error saying that two sections could not be connected the first time I tried that. 

I then decreased the target % reduction and it worked perfectly. I'll keep those constraints in mind in the future. Thanks again.