Creating tube miter correctly

[jamami]

For mitered joints you'd have to thicken the inside surface toward the outside, as described above by SEANT, but then also thicken the outside surface inward. The "interference" would be the end product.

nestly, thanks for this help. I have tried above but got some weird results, small 'blips' left over following deletion of the interference solid - any ideas?

Cope_60_inandout.dwg

[nestly]

The "interference" is the part you want to keep. Make sure you uncheck the box that says "Delete interference objects...." before you close the Interfere dialog box.

Here's a video of the process I used. http://www.screencast.com/t/GEoef7FQCXo

[jamami]

nestly
thats really useful, many thanks.
I have visited the laser cutting company I will be using. Their machine has a vertical laser and the tube is fed in at horizontally at 90 degrees symmetrically about its centre line. The mitre shapes are then made (very quickly) by rotating the tube and moving it backward and forwards while it rotates. It is all vey impressive, but I realise that the cuts will always be at 90deg to the material surface. Will the interference method kindly provided above be acheivable using this laser technology? ie does the interference create a non 90deg edge?

[nestly]

Yes, using the thicken method, the cuts are perpendicular to the bore, including the "interference"

http://youtu.be/0u_JcQyvFjY
http://youtu.be/FYLhQ2XWfX8

[jamami]

Yes, using the thicken method, the cuts are perpendicular to the bore, including the "interference"

http://youtu.be/0u_JcQyvFjY
http://youtu.be/FYLhQ2XWfX8

Many thanks for all your help with this. I need to change a whole bunch of drawings now that have been prepared 'the old way'. I also need to work out how best to dimension these sub assemblies so that they can be fabricated correctly.

[nestly]

Just a note... although the video shows copying the part, exploding then thickening the surfaces separately, that's really an unnecessary step, you can do them in-place.

With regards to dimensioning, I still find it more efficient to create 2D views of the 3D parts, and dimension those. and my personal preference is still FLATSHOT.
Here is a good tutorial that covers all the methods for making the 2D views. If you don't already have an account at Autodesk University, just sign up... its free.

Producing 2D documentation from 3D models in AutoCAD

[jamami]

I have always used solview/draw etc to create a 2d view to annotate. These drawings go into the ManufactureDrawings folder, while the 3d models sit elsewhere. This has always bugged me (and has caused a few issues)as changes to either drawing are not reflected in each other.
For this reason i have been investigating dimensioning in 3D. I also want to undertand more about how to tolerance objects correctly for manufacture, maybe the AU will be good for this? I do not have an account at present.

[Dadgad]

my personal preference is still FLATSHOT.

I've seen some pretty unacceptable images generated by both the flatten and the flatshot commands, complex 3D curves are less than reliable.
I suspect that anyone doing 2D drawings of 3D Models who is using Autocad 2012 will QUICKLY come to appreciate the VIEWBASE functionality. Just remember that when sharing with an earlier version of Autocad, DWG True View 2012 (free download from Autodesk) will be required to read the drawings. The time you save will be your own.

[Dadgad]

I have always used solview/draw etc to create a 2d view to annotate. These drawings go into the ManufactureDrawings folder, while the 3d models sit elsewhere. This has always bugged me (and has caused a few issues)as changes to either drawing are not reflected in each other.
For this reason i have been investigating dimensioning in 3D. I also want to undertand more about how to tolerance objects correctly for manufacture, maybe the AU will be good for this? I do not have an account at present.

VIEWBASE drawings are associative and thus clearly indicate when there is a dissimilarity between the 3D Model in modelspace and the drawings in paperspace, and can be updated with a single command. It is way better than the SOLDRAW & SOLVIEW commands, and much quicker.

[kencaz]

I have always used solview/draw etc to create a 2d view to annotate. These drawings go into the ManufactureDrawings folder, while the 3d models sit elsewhere. This has always bugged me (and has caused a few issues)as changes to either drawing are not reflected in each other.
For this reason i have been investigating dimensioning in 3D. I also want to undertand more about how to tolerance objects correctly for manufacture, maybe the AU will be good for this? I do not have an account at present.

If your already on AutoCad 2012 why aren't you taking advantage of the New Drawing Views... This has been in Inventor for many years and finally ported to AutoCAD. It really makes it simple to dimension your 3D objects and creates the views and viewports for you. These are also Dynamic and update as your model changes. I will be on AutoCAD 2012 soon and have been waiting for this change for a long time...

KC