Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.

If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.

Smooth blending between two parts

roger_blainroger_blain Member Posts: 10
I have this part, where I need to need to create a smooth transition between the parts. I have tried various methods, and keep ending up with chinks missing.
I need to have the part machined, and don't want these gaps machined into the part.
Any ideas?
Here is the link to my project:
https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3a718191eadfe8f03f24048e/w/d3099d26b7a842a9d19efd48/e/90c24cd5407f7885f1371c94


Best Answer

Answers

  • Alex_KempenAlex_Kempen Member Posts: 146 EDU
    Accepted Answer
    Here's one method, using some 3D fit splines and surface lofts to generate a smooth transition.  There's definitely better ways to do what I did, but it's hard to be more efficient since your model isn't fully constrained and has multiple broken features. If you want a more optimized solution, I would suggest fixing it up first. Otherwise, it's garbage in, garbage out, and there's only so much people will be able to do to help you.

    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3147daba19e6fe8c5333612f/w/60f6b5f6ff2524c6d71355c8/e/b10f5c9166e46d5bf365e226

  • MichaelPascoeMichaelPascoe Member Posts: 463 PRO
    edited July 8
    Here is an excellent place to learn some good modeling techniques:
    https://learn.onshape.com/catalog?labels=%5B%22Self-Paced%20Courses%22%5D&values=%5B%22All%22%5D
  • stephanos_androutsellis_theotokisstephanos_androutsellis_theotokis Member, Developers Posts: 6 ✭✭
    Hi Roger,

    There's a new cloud app in the Onshape App Store called Phi that specialises in freeform design. I gave this problem a try and I created a short (2 minutes) video showing how you could tackle it with Phi. I am not sure if this is exactly what you were after, I chose one approach that seemed reasonable to me but you could probably also try other ways. If you want to learn more about Phi you could have a look at the material on the product web site: https://phi3d.com/ .



    So the suggestion would be to shorten the one part as shown in the video, and then place the join that was designed in Phi in between the two blocks. Alternatively you can of course also build a freeform joint as the two parts are currently, but it may not have an ideal shape.

    I hope this may be of help,
    Stephanos
    PS. Full disclosure, I'm part of the team that created Phi, so apologies if this counts as self-promotion :-)
  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 532 ✭✭✭
    edited July 10
    @roger_blain

    Here’s another version

    The main thing about this way is that it uses all PLANAR surfaces. It starts with flat surfaces, near half rounds and holes. Then fillets. The primary tool was extrude. Loft was not used. So everything is easily defined

    The main surfaces lineup pretty close to what you have

    But I did use different size fillets, for a different take on your part


    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3437b508bc3b373ccdd7bf80/w/e58357f2ae6c0a05a597991b/e/6bc27960c9f460533a926e83




  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 532 ✭✭✭
    @roger_blain

    Look in Assembly for a comparison between the original part and the alternate




  • roger_blainroger_blain Member Posts: 10
    Thanks Michael, I will !
  • roger_blainroger_blain Member Posts: 10
    Here's one method, using some 3D fit splines and surface lofts to generate a smooth transition.  There's definitely better ways to do what I did, but it's hard to be more efficient since your model isn't fully constrained and has multiple broken features. If you want a more optimized solution, I would suggest fixing it up first. Otherwise, it's garbage in, garbage out, and there's only so much people will be able to do to help you.

    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3147daba19e6fe8c5333612f/w/60f6b5f6ff2524c6d71355c8/e/b10f5c9166e46d5bf365e226

    Thanks Alex, some valuable techniques I can use !
  • roger_blainroger_blain Member Posts: 10
    Thanks Steve, a useful approach!
  • roger_blainroger_blain Member Posts: 10
    Hi Roger,

    There's a new cloud app in the Onshape App Store called Phi that specialises in freeform design. I gave this problem a try and I created a short (2 minutes) video showing how you could tackle it with Phi. I am not sure if this is exactly what you were after, I chose one approach that seemed reasonable to me but you could probably also try other ways. If you want to learn more about Phi you could have a look at the material on the product web site: https://phi3d.com/ .



    So the suggestion would be to shorten the one part as shown in the video, and then place the join that was designed in Phi in between the two blocks. Alternatively you can of course also build a freeform joint as the two parts are currently, but it may not have an ideal shape.

    I hope this may be of help,
    Stephanos
    PS. Full disclosure, I'm part of the team that created Phi, so apologies if this counts as self-promotion :-)
    Well done Stephanos, this is a very interesting approach, thank you.
  • Evan_ReeseEvan_Reese Member Posts: 918 PRO
    Depending on how much control you need, just using one loft might be the simplest way. Note it's not your exact shape since all of the surfaces blend and there's no hard edge.

    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/fa47616ec0d6c2dac4c481db/w/0f92d938c8cdd94cf3b3c528/e/aa9aa62bc7b2d726ed2b2c00
    Evan Reese / Principal and Industrial Designer with Ovyl
    Website: ovyl.io
    Instagram: @evan.reese.designs
  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 532 ✭✭✭
    edited July 10
    @roger_blain

    I took a look at your URL again. And I noticed you were taking a PLANAR approach

    I played around with my document. Boiled it down to 20 features

    You might like the geometry on this one because it’s pretty clean and this time I used the same radius sizes that you had

    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/736ffd4b2035a8b614bb2fa0/w/c7bf6d15e884b1cd84456400/e/3104fd3ac2932bc1b800ceae



Sign In or Register to comment.