I can not figure out why I am getting a zero thickness error when trying to do a linear pattern of a slot. I am at a loss. Your help is much appreciated.
Thanks,
Mike
it is the #4-40 tapped Hole5 feature that one or more of the slots end up tangent to.
Hi Jeremy,
I created this same model in a longer version and had no problem. The 4-40 hole was giving the error to begin with and was at the bottom of the feature tree so I moved it up for this model thinking if I put it ahead of the slots there would be no problem. Well, that caused the slot pattern to fault. I have been able to get the pattern done by deleting the original slot which I created on the top plane and did a mid plane extrude cut, and creating the slot sketch on the face of one of the legs and extrude cut thru all. For some reason that worked and allowed me to complete the linear pattern. As I said, I do not know why the other procedure worked and this model gave me so much trouble. I am attaching the first model so you can evaluate my process and maybe be able to tell me why the shotgun model had to be constructed differently than the rifle model.
It looks like the second slot is touching the pilot hole of #4-40 tapped hole5
Hi Mike,
See my response to Jeremy.
Thanks,
Mike
Michael,
I'm not sure I can follow all of that. But here is your problem. This wall is 0.5 inches thick. If you copy or move the slot 0.5 inches toward the hole the wall will be 0.0 inches thick. SolidWorks cannot do the math. Some people on this forum cannot emotionally deal with this, and if you search the forum for zero thickness geometry you can see what I'm talking about. But this is your problem. You can make the tapped hole shorter, make the slot skinnier, change the pitch on the slot pattern or move the base position of the holes or the slots to fix it.
Your explanation clears the issue up for me Mike. I see now, or at least I think I see that because the edge of the slot and the edge of the hole would be coincident with the .500 spacing and therefore creates the zero thickness error. As you say, if the positions were modified just a little that zero thickness issue would not be happening. After reading your response I looked at both models and see that the hole dimensions are different and therefore did not cause the zero thickness on the first model. However, as I showed in the attached models I sent to Jeremy I was able to use the same slot width, same hole size and same locations that was causing the fault to generate a viable model. The only change I made was to re-create the slot sketch on the face of one of the legs and did the extrude cut thru all. Originally the slot sketch was created on the plane in the center of the part and extrude cut as mid plane. I don't know why this made the difference, but it did. I hope I have explained what I did to solve the problem and thanks again for your time and effort on this issue.
Mike
I love your response Mike. Some people get so focused on what the tools can't do then figuring out how to make it work.
I would like to add to change the distance of the spacing by an incredibly small amount to not have the zero boundary thk error.
I personally wouldn't want a tapped hole that close but that's me. So at a precision of .00001 the spacing is 7.500015. You will never tell this by eye, your drawings will not have that precision and furthermore your cnc machines cannot get that precise. It's not 100% right but 99.999999999999999998% right.
Thanks for the tip Scott, and it makes perfect sense. I had thought of doing something as you suggested and that would have been my next attempt had the changing of the location of the sketch plane did not work. I agree about the placement of the hole in relation to the slot, but the holes came into the design by customer request after the slots were already in the model and the prototype. I mentioned to him that some of the holes would actually break through into the slot area, but he was OK with that. I am a firm believer in giving the customer what he wants, even if he chooses to disregard my suggestions. I find that usually they come back with a "great idea" to change something that sounds exactly like my original suggestion, lol. I just smile and make out a new bill when it's done, everybody is happy!
Mike
