Real Thread Modeled

[admaiora]

Maybe there are already similar ideas..

But.

If you want a real modeled thread in Inventor what do you do?

1- you have to model it by yourself (sketch...coil/sweep, etc)  (

2- you have to use a third part app called "coolOrange threadModeler". (

But...why?

We (I) would like to see this!

[steinar_sorem]

What features is missing IN Inventor compare to SW?

[david_jones4]

I can't pretend to know or remember them all as it's been a while since I last used it but SW has had real thread modelling for years

Inventor also lack partial fillet but has partial chamfer.

Inventors surfacing and meshing is behind others and in a world where 3D scanned data is being used more. I would have thought this would have been improved.

Even the simplest thing like exporting a native dwg to autocad; inventor doesn't have the autodesk plot line style types after all these years. Unless they finally added it without me spotting it. Despite saying from day one, 100% autocad compatible.

Don't get me wrong, I like Inventor but it could be even better. And for me Fusion isn't the answer.

[WillL84]

---

Inventors surfacing and meshing is behind others and in a world where 3D scanned data is being used more. I would have thought this would have been improved.

---

SO MUCH THIS. I'm literally working on converting an STL to a solid RIGHT NOW so I can modify it slightly and it's a NIGHTMARE.

[Paul-Mason]

Everyone say "TRY COOL ORANGE" BUt has anyone stopped to think that some companies DO NOT ALLOW third party software/add-ins 

Also the number of years that this has been requested over and over by different people is, well, staggering UYET autodesk seem to continually ignore the request and will continue to do so as long as there are people that create these addons/ins

[nevillesyson9204]

I have mentioned this on multiple occasions .

If a third party company can create it and Autodesk can put it into Fusion , I don't see how they cant implement it into Inventor very easily

[andreas.sydlik]

Hi, thanks for your  comment,

absolute, I do not understand, why  we cant't use this necessary tool in
INVENTOR.

Are the Autodesk  software developers not smart enough...? I don't think
so 🙂

[nevillesyson9204]

I have found over the years that every Inventor user uses the software differently . That is , not everyone uses all of the available features depending on what type of work they do .
I have found it quite frustrating over the years that the developers seem to concentrate on features that I never use and new updates are mostly bug fixes.
This is one thing that I and many other people do want and ( not being an expert ) seems like it would be very easy to implement . as I stated previously , if a third party software company can implement it into Inventor then obviously Autodesk can .
We will have to wait and see ...........again .....

[christophe.portier]

The initial request dates back to 2013—that’s 13 years; I think we’ve waited long enough, don’t you?

[nevillesyson9204]

Exactly , and with more and more people using 3d printers it has become a bigger requirement

[This_Username_is_Taken]

It may be down to CoolOrange 'owning' the way its done. From my knowledge of Autodesk (which stretches back to before Inventor was a thing) they would usually just 'acquire' the company but if CoolOrange don't wish to be acquired, what can they do?

[Bert_Bimmel]

Ok, I see, that this might be a useful comfort-feature for the sake of 3D-Printing (if the resolution of the printer is sufficient) but please, please place a warning, that using this option is an absolute performance killer for all those "Digital Natives" who have no clue, what a Megabyte is! There are few things that are more obnoxius than real, 3D-modeled threads on downloaded purchase-part-STEP-imports!

And as I'm once here, I'd like to add three more ideas about threads (in case they haven't been added meanwhile - I'm still on Inventor 28 (aka 2024)):
1: Make them "measurable", i.e. let me pick a thread when the measure tool is active, and then display the thread info. It's tedious to either search the feature in the browser (which won't work in an Assembly - even if you switch to the "Modeling" browser pane, you can select it, but not open the edit-dialogue), or switch to feature selection in the graphics window to open the feature-dialogue to watch the thread's specification (and if it's not a threaded hole-feature, you're screwed too:  if it's a thread-feature applied to a cylindrical face, you'll always get the feature, that has created the cylindrical face, not the thread feature itself, and if it's part of a pattern-feature, you'll get the pattern-dialog)

2: Add an edge at the end of the thread if it's not covering the full surface, so that the depth can be picked with the measuring tool (maybe that use case is also covered by my first suggestion), plus the end of the thread is visible in wireframe-view (e.g. to check if the shaft of the screw is not longer than the thread is deep)

3: Add a toggle button to the thread feature dialog to swap the end of the selected face, where a non-full-length-thread shall be placed (currently it takes the end that is closer to where you've picked the face, and if you were a little careless, you'll have to close the dialogue and start again, and sometimes, it does not pick the desired end at all -  and then? Add an offset? That's not a robust workaround if the length of the cylindrical face changes later for instance.

[WillL84]

@Bert_Bimmel There needs to be the option. Fusion has had it as an option for YEARS. It's off by default but you can tick a box to make them modeled. Set the default to cosmetic and make the user have to do something to make them modeled for that one instance. It's not rocket science.