I think a good early lesson for cad/cam is that computers can give you 5 decimal places of precision for an angle, but that is way beyond the physical tolerances of the tools that would make the objects.
@@RobDuarte I know, and I understand your point of view, but as an engineer seeing a gap of 0.6097mm for a dodecahedron with 1000mm sides is too much, I'm used to the automotive industry which often goes as far as 0.001mm tolerances on bigger panels, 0.6... mm is too much. Probably 5 decimals are overkill, but when doing cad I think that at least 3 decimals are almost a must, at least if you want to have accuracy. Nevertheless that was just a note, what is important from your video is the process and the explanation which still much appreciatted, and I mean it.
@@amigodesigns thanks for the reply. I'm interested to know if there's a difference in the final result after stitching, since it closes the gap. I might try it both ways and intersect them (or use the interference analysis) to see if there's a difference between the two solid bodies in the end. Thanks again
@@RobDuarte I have check it and there is a difference, all the edges except the ones attached to the bottom pentagon have different lenghts. Bottom ones in my case: 1453.085mm The ones affected by the slight difference in degrees with a tiny gap between them: 1452.916 mm; 1452.916 mm; 1453.836 mm; 1454.349 mm and 1453.689 mm. The next ones: 1453.794 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.907 mm; 1452.276 mm; 1453.942 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.794 mm and 1453.111 mm. There are some little differences, for something that doesn't need to be perfect it would look more than okay. Nevertheless, I think one of the problems could be one once you move point to point the half dodecahedron, you are choosing one of the vertexes of the two edges that aren't aligned, so that increase a bit the offset of that part, maybe with stitching before doing that could help a bit. And no problem thank you for taking your time, as I said the methodology is good and I found it helpful, so thanks :).
If you didn’t want the faces to be equal Can you manually pull on the edges of each pentagram to create the shape you want while keeping the edges and points together?
Best tutorial ever, No annoying music. To the point, Not to long, not to fast. Just right!
You just saved me hours of confusion! Thanks man.
Just discovered your channel Rob. Love how clear and straightforward your tutorials are.
What a pro you are. Well spoken and paced. Awesome video!
Hi Rob. I am new to F360 patches (your video introduced them to me). This a great starter! Thank you very much.
Thank you. I love your voice and the way you explain things.
Great tutorial. Quick and no bs. Thanks
Very straight forward! Thanks!
very useful feature or command. thank you
Nice! Great video.
Very helpful. Thanks
super useful
Awesome 👍 thank you ..I'm going to 3d print planters molds ..
For those who may want better accuracy: 116.56505º is a more precise solution. Anyway thanks for your video :)
I think a good early lesson for cad/cam is that computers can give you 5 decimal places of precision for an angle, but that is way beyond the physical tolerances of the tools that would make the objects.
@@RobDuarte I know, and I understand your point of view, but as an engineer seeing a gap of 0.6097mm for a dodecahedron with 1000mm sides is too much, I'm used to the automotive industry which often goes as far as 0.001mm tolerances on bigger panels, 0.6... mm is too much. Probably 5 decimals are overkill, but when doing cad I think that at least 3 decimals are almost a must, at least if you want to have accuracy.
Nevertheless that was just a note, what is important from your video is the process and the explanation which still much appreciatted, and I mean it.
@@amigodesigns thanks for the reply. I'm interested to know if there's a difference in the final result after stitching, since it closes the gap. I might try it both ways and intersect them (or use the interference analysis) to see if there's a difference between the two solid bodies in the end. Thanks again
@@RobDuarte I have check it and there is a difference, all the edges except the ones attached to the bottom pentagon have different lenghts.
Bottom ones in my case: 1453.085mm
The ones affected by the slight difference in degrees with a tiny gap between them: 1452.916 mm; 1452.916 mm; 1453.836 mm; 1454.349 mm and 1453.689 mm.
The next ones: 1453.794 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.907 mm; 1452.276 mm; 1453.942 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.021 mm; 1453.794 mm and 1453.111 mm.
There are some little differences, for something that doesn't need to be perfect it would look more than okay.
Nevertheless, I think one of the problems could be one once you move point to point the half dodecahedron, you are choosing one of the vertexes of the two edges that aren't aligned, so that increase a bit the offset of that part, maybe with stitching before doing that could help a bit. And no problem thank you for taking your time, as I said the methodology is good and I found it helpful, so thanks :).
@@amigodesigns Thank you for for this!
If you didn’t want the faces to be equal Can you manually pull on the edges of each pentagram to create the shape you want while keeping the edges and points together?
Cheers...
any idea how to make it parametric like this ?
Thanks!
Great.
How calculate the angle?
116.6 is not exact. How is this rounded number still working? Should there not be tiny gaps preventing it from being stitched?
Look at the Stitch dialog at 4:34 - stitching has a tolerance associated with it
@@RobDuarte Thanks - I should have known.
@@RobDuarte "180 - atan(2)" Will also work, but your solution is good.
I want to make a dodecahedron computer case. :)