Handle_coupler - Githubissues

GliaX / Otoscope

An open source otoscope ear inspection device that uses disposable specula. The goal is to bring production down to approximately USD$5 per unit

Other

85 stars 17 forks source link

Handle_coupler #11

Closed eddriesen closed 2 years ago

eddriesen commented 5 years ago

drawn in partdesign bench, withoutany bleedingedge features.

tareko commented 5 years ago

Thanks @eddriesen . Awaiting review by @Frankie-E4Rdesigns

0penBrain commented 5 years ago

Hi, had a very quick review. Some remarks in case it may help :

ears could be a bit closer from original with 2x 9.35mm diam. circles spaced by 21.2 mm
in cavity, the "clogs" can be closer represented if tangency constraints are removed and things constrained a bit differently
cavity uses external geometry. This isn't recommended for robustness (in this model it even triggers an error due to unsupported constraint). Here it isn't really needed to use it. You can just use an arc with a bigger radius. ;)
Fillet is also subject to toponaming issues. In this case, I would have model the fillet in the cavity sketch directly.
on nibs, 0.3 mm dim. could be reduced to 0.2 mm

All in all, it should reduce deviation from original part below 100 µm. ;)

tareko commented 5 years ago

@eddriesen and @Frankie-E4Rdesigns : Would you like to respond to @0penBrain's comments? I believe he's referencing this tutorial on how to compare parts. I haven't merged this for now pending your response. Frankie, please approve again once you're happy or if these differences don't matter in this context.

0penBrain commented 5 years ago

@tareko : I actually used same method as in the tutorial up to step 5. Then I open the sketches and so can visually compare original part and model, eventually using ViewSection feature to have a section view. ;) Some remarks also concern model robustness (due to some FC limitations) but community can easily deals with that in the future if needed. Anyway, feel free to take or let this comments. :)

eddriesen commented 5 years ago

Hi, had a very quick review. Some remarks in case it may help :

* ears could be a bit closer from original with 2x 9.35mm diam. circles spaced by 21.2 mm

* in cavity, the "clogs" can be closer represented if tangency constraints are removed and things constrained a bit differently

* cavity uses external geometry. This isn't recommended for robustness (in this model it even triggers an error due to unsupported constraint). Here it isn't really needed to use it. You can just use an arc with a bigger radius. ;)

* Fillet is also subject to toponaming issues. In this case, I would have model the fillet in the cavity sketch directly.

* on nibs, 0.3 mm dim. could be reduced to 0.2 mm

All in all, it should reduce deviation from original part below 100 µm. ;)

I'll check this out today or tomorrow! This is the most fun way of learning a new CAD suite! Thanks a lot for the feedback!