Okay I'm getting a little frustrated. See the attached picture. How do I get the fillet to transition smoothly between the chamfer and the other geometry?
Okay I'm getting a little frustrated. See the attached picture. How do I get the fillet to transition smoothly between the chamfer and the other geometry?
specifically I mean this:
Doug,
The video series called "Will it fillet" in the link below shows some interesting techniques for overcoming these kinds of situations. There are quite a few in the series but they are worth watching.
Pls post your part here so others can provide a better help
I wish I could but it is a customer proprietary design.
Doug Perzyk wrote:
I wish I could but it is a customer proprietary design.
You don't have to post a whole part. Just cut the section off and save it as step file and post here
One picture is not enough. In any drawing at least 4 views are given.
STEP file attached. I need a .125 radius that goes around the vanes both top and bottom. The radii has to be tangent to the .055 X 45 degree chamfer. That's what has been tripping me up. I can not get it to blend smoothly.
Doug Perzyk wrote:
STEP file attached. I need a .125 radius that goes around the vanes both top and bottom. The radii has to be tangent to the .055 X 45 degree chamfer. That's what has been tripping me up. I can not get it to blend smoothly.
Here's what I got
..could be simple order dependency,.. roll the chamfer feature before the fillet? (image)
Tried that already. The fillet looses its tangency to the chamfer.
Doug,.. looking at the STEP file,.. I think it's the inner ID cut.. if you can roll that forward.. and the chamfer back before the fillet,.. I think it may work?
or,...alternatively,.. try a R.125" VarFillet
Tried that already. The fillet looses its tangency to the chamfer.
No way the tangency can happen if the top edge of the chamfer stays sharp to the horizontal planar surface. You would get the result you want if you add a radius to the top edge of the chamfer. If you don't the CAD system has to try and blend to a point and that never goes over well.
No way the tangency can happen if the top edge of the chamfer stays sharp to the horizontal planar surface. You would get the result you want if you add a radius to the top edge of the chamfer. If you don't the CAD system has to try and blend to a point and that never goes over well
True ! surfacing model is an alternative
Is the outcome just to be tangent to the Chamfer or be tangent to both the Chamfer and the horizontal surface?
Ken Maren wrote:
Is the outcome just to be tangent to the Chamfer or be tangent to both the Chamfer and the horizontal surface?
Both:
To the horizontal suface
and 45 chamfer
Ken has it right. Cap a radius between the chamfer and planer surface and I get the result I had pictured in my head. In this case I only used a .001" radius but it worked. See the attached screen shot. In this particular part I used a face fillet for the radii in orange. Thanks Ken!
Try using the "keep face surface" check box radio button