Unable to put any more holes in solid.

[SLW210]

No doc, my leg isn't broken, your XRAY machine is, never mind the swelling and the blood.

[Dadgad]

Pursuant to having visited the OP's About Me,

I wonder if I am too old to learn FEAR OF FLYING?

 

In all fairness, having never used CorelCad, not sure what it is capable of.

Edited April 10, 2015 by Dadgad

[AerospaceDesk]

Thanks again Dadgad. It appears I am missing a basic concept of CAD. If I specify a flange to a x, y, z, coordinate at the contact points of the plate, why is it that it flies of into space as you have shown?

 

 

Then what are the steps to bring them back together?

 

 

Even when I use 3D Align, selecting coincident points to snap to, and all appears aligned and joined, the other view are showing the flange in outer space.

 

 

If you have the time. Thanks in advance.

[Dadgad]

Welcome back.

Try using 2D Wireframe visual style in a different isometric perspective than previously.

Turn grips on, Turn your End Osnaps on if they aren't already, use the MOVE command, select it and drag an appropriate grip to the point where you want it to be in relation to the plate.

 

Hopefully nestly will see this and do us all a big favor and grace us with one of his wonderful video clips to explain this.

[ReMark]

What visual style were you using when you attempted to use 3DAlign?

 

How zoomed in were you?

 

What view were you using?

 

Did you attempt the alignment using a non-standard view (i.e. - using 3DOrbit)?

 

I think your technique, whatever it was, is at fault here and not the program.

[AerospaceDesk]

I am making some progress. I managed to use Move Faces to move the out of alignment hole. It wasn't obvious to me that you had to select the face inside of the hole but that did the trick. Just bear in mind I am currently doing this in the CorelCAD 2015 trial.

 

 

So getting back to the flange, I used Modify - Align which leaves little line from source to destination for 3 sources and three destinationation and with esnaps on I can pick where they have to go. When I get to the third destination, the programme goes to autosave and will not return to the cursor to pick the 3rd destination.

 

 

Nevertheless, I did eventually get to lay the 3rd destination down but wasn't sure what to do next e.g hit ENTER??

 

 

Even so, nothing comes together. No doubt it is all happening in outer space but I cannot see it.

 

 

Going to Modify > 3D Operations > 3DAlign lays down a base point, then a second and third point followed by first, send and third destinations. Even then nothing happens even though I have had success with this method of alignment before.

 

 

I just don't understand why coordinates entered this way don't keep the 3D objects in the place they are put. It is not intuitive to me to see things fly off into space after that.

[ReMark]

"...I am currently doing this in the CorelCAD 2015 trial.

 

For most of us you might as well be speaking in Greek. The vast majority of us use AutoCAD. You are posting to an AutoCAD forum. And you expect us to tell you what you are doing wrong and/or tell you how to accomplish the task using CorelCAD. Forgive me but this just doesn't make much sense. My suggestion, if you are going to continue using CorelCAD, would be to find a dedicated CorelCAD forum and seek advice/assistance/help there. You might as well be posting at a forum for BMW owners asking how to do an engine swap out on your Ford Fiesta.

[AerospaceDesk]

Thanks ReMark.

 

 

I have been using 2D Wireframe. Sometimes in Hidden to turn off the back faces.

 

 

I am usually zoomed in to extents or to fit; sometimes I have to zoom in more to see if the CCS is properly set up.

 

 

I have been using SE Isometric. If I change the view to other views I see my flanges flying off into space.

 

 

Yeah, I am pretty sure I have found the Murphy's Law of CAD. However, if you can see where I am screwing up, I will be able to get better at it. You can get depressed with this stuff.

[AerospaceDesk]

Yes, thank you Dadgad I am trying that but silly things are happening that I don't expect. For example when I go to another Isometric view, I feel I am "out of the picture" and I only see dots; zoom in and it is the plate or flanges in space set apart. Go to the 3D modelling view and it looks great...... (Clayton's 3D obviously!!!)

[AerospaceDesk]

Ahh... thank you for that inspirational comment. Does it have grips?

[AerospaceDesk]

Well, ReMark I felt the same way but surprisingly, my Autodesk AutoCAD 2015 was problematic, because it kept crashing and as a result, to keep my skills up, I kept working with the same plate in CorelCAD. But it doesn't make a lot of difference does it, since we all help each other in these forums based on our personal experience? I can tell you though, even when working directly in the Autodesk AutoCAD forum, the basic concepts don't tend to change. And that's a good thing. However, I get the message. Thanks for all your help. Goodbye.

[JD Mather]

.... I am currently doing this in the CorelCAD 2015 trial. .

 

Autodesk Fusion 360 is FREE for anyone not making a significant (you will have to read the rules to define "significant") profit with the software, and is inexpensive ($30/mth or less by yr) for all others.

... and it works on Windows or Mac OS.

[Cad64]

Huh? CorelCad you say? All this time I thought we were talking about AutoCAD. Oh well, you're on your own with that one.

[Dadgad]

Yes, thank you Dadgad I am trying that but silly things are happening that I don't expect. For example when I go to another Isometric view, I feel I am "out of the picture" and I only see dots; zoom in and it is the plate or flanges in space set apart. Go to the 3D modelling view and it looks great...... (Clayton's 3D obviously!!!)

 

Thusfar, this whole thread has revolved around the fact that your SE Isometric view is LYING!

As it is known to be unreliable, stop believing it, barring an independent confirmation from another isometric perspective that it is in fact correct.

The secret to solving a problem, after repeated failures, is to stop repeating the process, and try something different.

By different in this case, I mean a DIFFERENT ISOMETRIC perspective, or two, as stated ad nauseum, and as recently as post #24 of this thread.

 

What was it Einstein said, that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results?

 

The reason I asked about your grips (if they are displaying) is that they should help you get it right, and that if they were not displaying

that would likely exacerbate your problem.

 

I appreciate that you are trying to come to terms with how to do this correctly, in software with which you are not familiar. Let's not lose sight of the fact that the corrected drawing has been attached to this thread in a few places, by different forum members, aspiring to help you.

 

How did it go at the other forum? Any smart members over there, or did they all agree with the numerous senior members of this forum?

Presumably nobody came up with any new insights, since you have come back here.

 

You could just stop trying to MOVE the old flange, adjust your UCS accordingly and recreate the flange in the correct place, starting at the appropriate vertex snaps on your base plate. If so I would strongly suggest that you choose a different perspective than SE Isometric, and I would use 2D Wireframe, don't bother to use HIDE, just pay attention.

 

And if that still doesn't work, then take JD's advice (he's smart, he's a college professor in this field), and check out Fusion 360.

And as for ReMark? Hell, he's just some guy with over 40,000 posts on this site alone, why would anybody listen to him?

The other two forum members Cad64 & SLW210 are both forum administrators, who have been around the block a time or two.

Bottom line, we all are, and have been trying to HELP you, hopefully you can rise to the challenge.

 

Hey nestly, if you read this how about a little Camtasia magic?

Edited April 11, 2015 by Dadgad

[Dadgad]

The attached screenshot, is taken from the .dwg file which I attached to post #3 in this thread, last Saturday.

Actually, I just reposted the .dwg, because in revisiting it, I noticed that one of your original flange holes did not go all the way through the plate, which I took to be a mistake, and I had missed previously, so I fixed it.

 

When your model is good, you won't need to go looking for a particular perspective in which it appears to be right, and favor that one. It will be right in ALL of them, as in the screenshot.

I am reminded of the old adage, that we only believe what we want to believe.

 

If you decide to use that one, please read the disclaimer in post #3, as I left a couple of things for you to do.

Should you be unable to do them in Corelcad, let us know, and I, or someone else will be happy to finish it up for you.

[JD Mather]

...Hey nestly, if you read this how about a little Camtasia magic?

 

I think Nestly already posted multiple animated GIFs on this topic

 

http://forums.autodesk.com/t5/forums/searchpage/tab/message?filter=labels%2Clocation&location=forum-board%3A706&q=aerospacedesk

 

Hmm, for some reason my link isn't working.

[Dadgad]

Thanks JD, that would explain his lack of enthusiasm for repeating himself here, one can only lead a horse to water, eh?

 

Perhaps as the OP now appears to have posted this topic on at least 3 different forums that I know about, he has forgotten to go back and check them ALL?

If he is smart he will follow that link to nestle's no doubt beautiful custom video presentation of the solution.

 

Failing to do so, this thread could get a lot longer, and sadly there will be no new information, as it has already been explained.

 

Having now visited that forum, and reviewed a few other posts by Aerospace, I notice that you seem to be using PRESSPULL incorrectly.

There is no need to use it to approximate the thickness of your plate, then SUBTRACT it. This likely explains the hole which I found which did not pierce your plate, on your old drawing. Just use PRESSPULL right through the other edge of the plate, by a healthy margin, and the center of the hole will be automagically SUBTRACTED. It is a great command, to facilitate and speed up modeling by reducing the need for a couple of the older standard Boolean commands. It can be used on the fly, to replace both the EXTRUDE and SUBTRACT commands, in a single operation.

Edited April 14, 2015 by Dadgad

[ReMark]

I see we are still treating this as though the OP is/was using AutoCAD when he stated he is actually using CorelCAD. I did not realize the similarities between the two programs were so striking. Or are they?

[Dadgad]

I see we are still treating this as though the OP is/was using AutoCAD when he stated he is actually using CorelCAD. I did not realize the similarities between the two programs were so striking. Or are they?

 

I haven't a clue about how to use Corelcad, but when I followed the link which JD posted, I saw some posts describing what the OP was trying to do with PRESSPULL, from a few weeks back, at which time he was still using Autocad.

But, as you infer, this may well be water under the bridge at this point.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Dadgad

[ReMark]

See post #26 where the OP says, "Just bear in mind I am currently doing this in the CorelCAD 2015 trial."

And see post #31 where he says, "...I kept working with the same plate in CorelCAD."

 

He should have stuck to using one program and he should have asked his questions in a forum where the majority of the members were using a similar such program in order to receive the best possible help.