Extrude / Taper Faces

Having difficulty with the taper side from the vertical dim of 15mm towards the Ø30mm.

Will I use Extrude Faces or Taper Faces?

On a different exercise, I was able to use extrude faces and get the taper of 45deg from Ø30mm towards the inside Ø20mm.

1. Solidedit > Extrude Faces >select top face

 

2. Specify height of extrusion : -5mm

 

3. Specify angle of taper for extrusion: 45deg

In this drawing exercise, I have hit a snag here...tried an angle of 53 but it didn't went well

Can someone help me with this..?

Another option that may be more direct is to use the Chamfer command. Based on what I see in the image:

Initiate Chamfer

Select lower edge in that pocket

Specify base surface chamfer distance or [Expression]: 15

Specify other surface chamfer distance or [Expression] : 5

Select an edge or [Loop]: Select edge once again and hit

The angle of 53deg is what went wrong.

By pythagoras TAN= Opp/Adj.

Your boss is 15 high by 10 wide so 15/10=1.5

Atan of 1.5 is 56.30993247deg

So when you try 53deg it would come out below the top of the boss. (13.27 up)

EDIT:

Sorry, I read your intention wrong there.

Based on your first images I thought you were trying to cut away the boss not add to it.

However if you are trying to join the inside top edge of the boss to the 30dia hole that is 15/15=1 so 45deg not 53.

You do have one other option and that is to draw the profile of the hollowed out cylinder, using the correct angle, then Revolve it.

Hello,

Sorry for the late reply. Thanks very much for the help here.

I had difficulty doing the "chamfer" and is still on-going.

The extrude faces I had some luck. Please see images attached. At first I used the 45deg angle but there was a problem with boss height not joining the Ø30mm hole. Kindly see image attached. Can you please check the angle there at left. I may be wrong...

I might have been wrong in understanding the angles so I tried again and took up from post#3. So,

Ø80 extrusion to: 20 (total height of extrusion)

Ø60 inner face extruded from top to a depth of 15mm.

15mm to be joined to the Ø30mm hole.

20mm - 15mm = 5mm -> remainder to be extruded

Cotangent = opp / adj

15 / 5 = 3

Cotangent 3 = 71.556505118 = 71.57deg

Using 71.57deg as angle, the 15mm boss height joined with the Ø30 mm hole.

I do not know if this is correct but it seems like it is...Please kindly check if it is...

Edit:

Was fiddling with the chamfer command a while ago and I think I had shed some light to the use of the chamfer command to join the 15mm boss height with the Ø30mm hole. Please check out the sequence below:

1. Extrude Ø80mm downwards 20mm.

2. Extrude Ø60mm downwards at 15mm to get boss height.

3. Extrude Ø30mm downwards at 20mm.

4. Substract Ø60mm and Ø30mm from Ø80mm.

5. Chamfer > select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

6. Specify base surface chamfer distance: 5

7. Specify other surface chamfer distance or : 15

8. Select an edge or: select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

Are the sequence / procedure correct..?

I had to extrude the Ø30mm downwards to 20mm in order for the chamfer command to work. In contrast to the "extrude faces" wherein I did not need to extrude the Ø30mm hole from the top face.

For the revolve command I will surely try that out later. I am here early and I might be able to do that and post again later.

Will be back here.

Note:

The Front>X-Ray viewport on the left is only to visualize the data of the total extrusion height of the Ø80mm versus the Ø60mm (with 15mm boss height) and the Ø30mm hole. I did not use that front view to extrude the object seen in the second viewport (SWIsometric>X-Ray).

AH, I still got your intention wrong.

That cross section would have been useful in your first post so that we could see just what you were trying to do.

Looks like you have got it now.

. . . .

 

I had difficulty doing the "chamfer" and is still on-going.

 

. . . .

 

Was fiddling with the chamfer command a while ago and I think I had shed some light to the use of the chamfer command to join the 15mm boss height with the Ø30mm hole. Please check out the sequence below:

 

1. Extrude Ø80mm downwards 20mm.

2. Extrude Ø60mm downwards at 15mm to get boss height.

3. Extrude Ø30mm downwards at 20mm.

4. Substract Ø60mm and Ø30mm from Ø80mm.

5. Chamfer > select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

6. Specify base surface chamfer distance: 5

7. Specify other surface chamfer distance or : 15

8. Select an edge or: select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

 

Are the sequence / procedure correct..?

. . . .

No. It should be:

. . . .

5. Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

6. Specify base surface chamfer distance: 15

7. Specify other surface chamfer distance or : 5

8. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

@ SEANT,

Oh thanks for the reply. I will check it out.

Hi guys,

Back here to add. I tried the revolve command earlier. Please see images attached. Same results but done faster.

Also redid the chamfer command. Kindly see images below.

Thanks

I guess my instructions assumed a different starting point with regard to modeling this boss feature. This screencast https://screencast.autodesk.com/Embed/Timeline/5ca82332-b75c-4c78-969e-fdc06250e69d

is what I envisioned.

I guess my instructions assumed a different starting point with regard to modeling this boss feature. This screencast https://screencast.autodesk.com/Embed/Timeline/5ca82332-b75c-4c78-969e-fdc06250e69d

is what I envisioned.

Thanks SEANT. I will download the webm file and save it as I need to finish up here. I'll be back to update here

@SEANT,

Thanks for the video. I got some new style of drawing from that video. Different approach from what I normally see in YouTube. Fast! Very nice. If I may ask you and the gurus again.

----

Hi,

Please bear with me again guys The attachments are not images but videos so you can see what I may be doing wrong.

Without the whole assembly I followed the instructions but I get an error: "Unable to complete sheet - blend may be too big. Failed to perform blend. Failure while chamfering." Hmmmm.....

5. Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

6. Specify base surface chamfer distance : 15

7. Specify other surface chamfer distance : 5

8. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

Following SEANT's video, I tried to replicate it with the assembly. Allow me to show it in a video I managed to make. I started with:

Procedure A:

a. Create Ø80mm circle via 2 points.

b. Offset Ø80mm circle 10mm inwards to get Ø60mm circle.

c. Presspull Ø80mm/Ø60mm surface upwards 20mm.

d. Erase 80mm/Ø60mm outline.

e. Launch Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

f. Specify base surface chamfer distance : 15

g. Specify other surface chamfer distance : 5

h. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

Now, I tried the procedure but with the extrude command.

Procedure B:

a. Create Ø80mm circle via 2 points.

b. Offset Ø80mm circle 10mm inwards to get Ø60mm circle.

c. Extrude 80mm/Ø60mm surface upwards 20mm.

d. Subtract Ø60mm from the Ø80mm.

e. Launch Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

f. Specify base surface chamfer distance : 15

g. Specify other surface chamfer distance : 5

h. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

The result wasn't the same. I get an error: "Unable to complete sheet - blend may be too big. Failed to perform blend. Failure while chamfering." Why am I getting this error...? Isn't it suppose to have the same result...? The press-pulled part is the same as that of the extruded one right....?

http://tinypic.com/r/r25agi/8

Isolating the Ø80mm / Ø60mm from the whole assembly, I tried to do the procedure again. Using "Procedure A" I got a different result. Using "Procedure B" I got the same error message. "Unable to complete sheet - blend may be too big. Failed to perform blend. Failure while chamfering."

Why does "Procedure A" work when doing it together with the assembly...?

I may have been overlooking something here...can you gurus take a look at both examples....

This is getting interesting as through your help I am learning more deeper than I ever started. This different end-result is very nice to understand.

http://tinypic.com/r/2woj58k/8

Now I compared the extrude_chamfer procedure I managed to do with "Procedure A". Got the same end result.

Procedure C: (extrude_chamfer procedure)

1. Extrude Ø80mm downwards 20mm.

2. Extrude Ø60mm downwards at 15mm to get boss height.

3. Extrude Ø30mm downwards at 20mm.

4. Substract Ø60mm and Ø30mm from Ø80mm.

5. Chamfer > select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

6. Specify base surface chamfer distance: 5

7. Specify other surface chamfer distance or : 15

8. Select an edge or: select upper edge of Ø30mm > enter

Please see video attached comparing the the use of "presspull_chamfer" and the "extrude_chamfer".

http://tinypic.com/r/rrmxed/8

This is very interesting as through your help I am learning more deeper than I ever started. This difference of end-result is very nice to understand further. The questions are based on a CAD standpoint. It has been reminded to me (thanks to NukeCad) that when using CAD it is also necessary to associate what is done in real-world, say, manufacturing this particular part in a machine shop via lathe machining and then drilling towards finishing. I will have to keep that in mind as I study CAD.

. . . . The press-pulled part is the same as that of the extruded one right....?

. . . .

Not exactly. The PressPull command provides additional functionality with an automated Boolean operation (Union or Subtraction). The Extrude method would be the same if you "Solid Union" the tube and yoke before Chamfering.

Not exactly. The PressPull command provides additional functionality with an automated Boolean operation (Union or Subtraction). The Extrude method would be the same if you "Solid Union" the tube and yoke before Chamfering.

@SEANT,

Thanks for the reply. I tried what you said with using the "Extrude command" and "Solid Union". It was okay. I obtained the same result. But as I was fiddling with it, when I first selected the "tube" and then the "yoke" for the "solid union" the result was different. Kindly bear with me please.

re:

e. Launch Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

f. Specify base surface chamfer distance : 15

g. Specify other surface chamfer distance : 5

h. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

Also I noticed that if I first select "tube" and then the "yoke" for the "solid union" and launch Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter, the selected part is different as that of selecting "yoke" and then the "tube" for the solid union.

Please bear with me as I am just trying to understand why is the result different. That's additional learning Now to get the same result for "tube" and then the "yoke" I used:

e. Launch Chamfer > select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

f. Specify base surface chamfer distance : 5

g. Specify other surface chamfer distance : 15

h. Select an edge or: select lower edge of Ø60mm > enter

Kindly see attached video for the comparison of results for "tube_yoke" and "yoke_tube".

http://tinypic.com/r/2vuzp86/8

because the surface you select is considered the base surface. The 'other surface' is the one that forms the edge with the base surface.

The reason it is the same in your last example is because it is the same chamfer just achieved from 2 different reference (base) surfaces .(basically 2 different sides of the same edge)

I agree with The Ninja Style, the chamfer inputs are dependent on the picked surface. You screen recording shows that two different surface were highlighted before the alternate results.

So, the question becomes: Why are different surfaces highlighted given the same picked edge?

Presumably, the collection of faces and edges have different historical ranking within a resultant solid - based on the Boolean selection history. The inside face of the tube will have an earlier ranking if the tube is selected first when union-ed with the yoke. It would have a later ranking if the Yoke was selected first.