Hi Foks
I've created a surface to make a cut in a solid body. I select the cut side and the feature regenerates fine.
When I toggle between configurations, the cut side randomly changes. Has anyone encountered a situation where the "cut with surface" side selector is unstable?
If so, has anyone found a solution. I have attempted to make individual "cut with surface" features for each of my configurations but this does not seem to help.
Thanks
Tyler
My surface is a composite surface composed of a series of trimmed lofted surfaces.
Do you mind to post your model here as I can't replicate the problem as you describe
Please see the att. model
Christian
Unfortunately I am unable to post the file as my client has strict confidentiality conditions. I will attempt to recreate the problem on a random part and post it here.
Thanks
Tyler
Totally understood !!! you can make up something similar and post here - as you can see from the file I posted here, I can't replicate the problem !
I'm way late to the party, but I can confirm that yes, in SW2018 SP05 this does happen exactly how you've described, and I don't know why. As an extreme example, I had a part where the top of the feature tree was a rough boundary box sketch that didn't do much other than serve as an always present source of the part scale, which I'm suspicious is useful to establish up front to control the internal scaling of the 3d kernel.
But that aside, I had a model with a cut-with-surface feature down in the feature tree that would flip if I added or removed an unconstrained point to that sketch at the top of the tree.
A work-around that might be more stable is to create a solid body that includes your desired cutting surface, and then do a "Combine" with "Subtract" type of operation. I'm going to try this approach going forward and see if it is more stable. I can't recall ever having a "thicken" feature flip sides of a surface, so I'll start by using that as a source of solid geometry when I can.
Another tactic would be to split with a surface and then delete the unwanted body.
Not sure if either of these would be be more stable in the end, but I can definitely say "cut with surface" is a feature that doesn't age well in a model with a long feature history or multiple configurations.
Ryan Feeley wrote:
A work-around that might be more stable is to create a solid body that includes your desired cutting surface, and then do a "Combine" with "Subtract" type of operation. I'm going to try this approach going forward and see if it is more stable. I can't recall ever having a "thicken" feature flip sides of a surface, so I'll start by using that as a source of solid geometry when I can.
Hi Ryan
Cut with surface is my 'go to' feature for the more complicated cut's I encounter in my work. I've never had a problem.. but I always start with a solid and remove a face. To guarantee I always remove the correct face I tend to create the face removed immediately prior to the delete face with a merging feature. I'd like to see an example where it doesn't work.
A great tip I was given by Paul Salvador is to create an oversize bounding box, subtract the the solid and then delete face on the exterior faces.
The post is gone now as it was in the Top Ten List, but if you are interested I attach it as a pdf
Thanks Rob! Great tips.
I couldn't edit my original response, but just wanted to add that I just ran into an issue that I thought was cut-with-surface flipping, but the flip was actually in a trim that I'd knitted into the cutting surface. It's possible that instances in the past that I'd attributed to cut-with-surface flipping where actually flipping because the surface itself was similarly getting "flipped" by an unstable trim further up the tree.
Just a question: do you use a flat surface/plane or curve surface ?