I'll go first even though several came up with 3 feature solutions.
Of course we all probably started with an intersection of two simple extrusions:
I then swept a simple profile to cut the chamfers.
First the profile:
And then the path:
This was actually a simpler solution than using the regular chamfer command because of the boss and radii.
CadCloud's single-feature solution:
"What you do is make a 3D sketch of the entire part then make each Sketch plane into surfaces which all have to be "stitched" together using Inventor Stich tool which then makes the part into a solid using one feature. Like I said I would never normally do it this way but the challenge was to use the lest number of features."
This is also my solution in my second attempt. just in SW.
does it mean you need to have those many surfaces to get one feature?
All open sides must be enclosed by a surface feature. Only a totally manifold group of surfaces can be stitched together to form a solid. I’m not so sure I would consider this a single feature solution since it is compiled from so many individual surface features.
That was my doubt too. In Solidworks too, you can make all the surfaces and finally stitch them to get a single solid body but the feature tree will still show all the steps are features(see below). But inventor hides it.
Yes that's why its takes ages to do but when all is done and then you use inventor "Stich" it creates 1 solid and 1 "feature"
I can understand your thinking but there many things that use different individual components to create a single feature IE Loft.
A loft consumes sketches which can never be considered finished geometry. (Much like planes, work axis, points, etc.) Surfaces on the other hand are often used as finished geometry. Just because they're consumed by the stitch command and turned into a solid shouldn't discount their point value. There have been few challenges thus far that couldn't be done with a single feature by this method.
Some CAD systems have definite advantages over others when it comes to apparent feature counts. Like the way Creo consumes features and hides them within a pattern. Inventor consumes and hides surfaces within a stitched solid. All the CAD systems seem to take a similar number of steps and use the same types of features yet the way things are displayed on the feature tree gives some systems a unique advantage. So instead of a challenge between players, it's a challenge between CAD system nuances.
I like the simplicity of these challenges. But the solutions, including my own, are so convoluted sometimes they have me wondering what's the point?!
Personally I'd like to see things steered towards modeling methods that reflect what we do in the real world. But I can think of no judging criteria that doesn't become highly subjective. The low feature count challenge is working pretty good as it is. But maybe we need a few additional simple rules to level the field.
Ok Agree with you but untill other rules are made my solution counts 1 solid 1 Feature.
Of course. We don’t change the rules after a challenge and expect them to be retroactive.
That took a lot of tedious effort no matter what. I’m impressed!
If you don't receive the email within an hour (and you've checked your Spam folder), email us as confirmation@grabcad.com.