FreeCAD: Peer Review | 4 | Cyclone for Hoover

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 17 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 34

  • @brucewilliams6292
    @brucewilliams6292 Год назад +5

    I really like these Peer Reviews! I learn a lot from them. Thank you for all your support of the community!

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад

      I wish I started these earlier as there were so many models I helped out with. Great your finding these useful. Thank you for all your support and kind comments over the lifetime of this channel Bruce 👍

  • @haraldlonn898
    @haraldlonn898 Год назад +6

    It is so simple when you see it but when you have a problem at least I have difficult to see what to do. This was really great info. Thanks.

  •  Год назад +7

    You make a complex geometry seems simple to be implemented in FC. Thank you.

  • @robgoodsight6216
    @robgoodsight6216 Год назад +4

    MJS is a truly FC master at work.

  • @sleepib
    @sleepib Год назад +1

    Can also use defeaturing in the part workbench to delete the part you don't want.

  • @ricardojunior1056
    @ricardojunior1056 Год назад +3

    Another fantastic design, Mango!

  • @terrylembke8100
    @terrylembke8100 Год назад +1

    Hi , Deron . I watched this video . Great instruction , as usual . By watching you break this down and using the inner and outer geometry. You could very easily make a core box and a pattern . For a Foundry mold , using the path work bench .

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад

      Thank you Terry, hope you are doing well. That's is a very good application, thanks for adding. Always interested to see people's projects or ideas related to the videos.

  • @Miniellipse
    @Miniellipse Год назад +1

    Peer reviews….super concept. Thank you.

  • @Clever_Motel
    @Clever_Motel Год назад +1

    Damn dudeson, thats some fancy cad work ya got there

  • @terrylembke8100
    @terrylembke8100 Год назад +1

    I love your teaching style , and your videos . I recommended your channel to a group of commenters on another channel . Have an awesome day , hope you and family are fine stay safe my friend .
    Terry

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад

      Thank you so much for sharing my videos. Thank you so much, I really appreciate that. Take it easy Terry. Always good to hear from you

  • @mariuszkuron
    @mariuszkuron Год назад +1

    Thanks Jelly

  • @alainbeliveau
    @alainbeliveau Год назад +1

    Wow, this is amazing!

  • @4axisprinting
    @4axisprinting Год назад +2

    When specifying the subtractive loft, why not hide the additive loft to make the section sketches visible?

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад +1

      You can but the only thing is you will loose the ability to see what the result will look like whilst your adding the profiles. If there are any errors you would have to delete the subtractive loft after rather than abandoning the attempt the minute you see a problem with one of the profiles, say, coming through the addative loft.

  • @torchmd
    @torchmd Год назад +1

    That was awesome. Thank you!

  • @warped_spacetime
    @warped_spacetime Год назад +1

    Could Thickness have been used instead of the Subtractive Loft?

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад +2

      Just tried. Unfortunately not as it ttried to remove a void in the circular section.

  • @imacmill
    @imacmill Год назад +4

    Nice.
    Now I'd like to know if the user is going to print this part, and if so, how.

    • @robgoodsight6216
      @robgoodsight6216 Год назад

      Yepp...a tonne of support

    • @robgoodsight6216
      @robgoodsight6216 Год назад +1

      ....on second thought...it could be limited through splitting the .stl in two and place it on the split surface on the working area.

    • @christopherkecun8349
      @christopherkecun8349 Год назад +2

      @@robgoodsight6216 Split through the circular pad?

    • @robgoodsight6216
      @robgoodsight6216 Год назад +1

      @@christopherkecun8349 yes...but also through a vertical section. Basically if one can intersect, cut, the curve of the loft, the curvature can be printed without the help of any support....or using a minor support.

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад +1

      Really interesting comments thanks for contributing everyone.

  • @NUeB_net
    @NUeB_net Год назад +1

    03:40 It's annoying that when duplicating multiple objects (sketches) FreeCAD puts in the copies in random order. I do duplicate one by one, so I can then select all at once in treeview and create a loft. That "Add Section" only adds one section at a time is also annoying… the "add" button of fillets and chamfers is smarter.
    Is it possible to create a subtractive loft from the 2 subshape binders?

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад +1

      Thanks for highlighting that I have never noticed about the random order. I don't know if you can change the order in the treeview, its not something I have ever tried. Something to look into. Regarding your question about the subshape binders. Yes lofts can be created with them but be careful as changing the geometry underneath can cause the sub shape binder to bind to a different face than the one you selected before. This would be easily solved if the support in the property tab was not read only. Other objects you can edit the support so you just select the faces/edges again. It's a shame lofts are not like the multi loft in the curves workbench as you ctrl select the objects then select the button and done.

    • @NUeB_net
      @NUeB_net Год назад +1

      @@MangoJellySolutions Thanks, I didn't think of TNP for a moment. I like using parameters in spreadsheets which change during the process fromk idea to print so lofting binders would be one of those traps...I really do lilke FreeeCAD, but it still has a long way to go…
      Happy holidays!

    • @MangoJellySolutions
      @MangoJellySolutions  Год назад +1

      @@NUeB_net if your changing the profile but not removing or adding new geometry that adds edges or faces to it then you should be OK such as placement, width, height, stretching individual parts of the geometry (increasing the length of a constraint) etc. If your lofting the sketches directly then you also shouldn't have any problems. Hope that helps

    • @NUeB_net
      @NUeB_net Год назад

      ​@@MangoJellySolutions The most common problem I run into is that after changing dimensions that seem not to alter the geometry, edges still get new names and esp. chamfers and fillets need zo be re-done. That's weird, because after all the model looks absolutely the same (except for that slightly changed one dimension) but the edges' names seem to the shuffled… Since not every fillet or chamfer can be done within a sketch, this is quite annoying.