What's new
By:

ACISERROR_NO_THICKEN_PROJECT: Could not thicken projected sketch

D

dean448

Member
Another pesky (unhelpful) ACIS error. I'm trying to put three 4mm high ribs in a U channel (59mm high) using the Project command.
at 25.499 it works leaving a one micron step between the new rib and the end of the U channel.
If I make it 25.5 I get this error. Even though the sketch is adjacent (level with) the surface I'm projecting it on, it falls off or something resulting in this error.
Any thoughts? Thanks


Screenshot 2026-01-31 133951.png
 
What are you projecting from? Not obvious in the image.

I'm struggling a bit with some of your terminology, perhaps you could post the file here, or send it to support.
 
OK. This is a view of 4mm high ribs resulting from the Project command (Project an existing sketch into the faces of a body).
Three ribs generated from fully defined sketch shown in my first post.

Note the step from the U channel to the rib... which is one micron. 'step' shown as line in the middle of the U shape.
If I eliminate that step (level the surfaces by using 25.5) it will result in the ASIC error. I've tried this using sketch references, with same result.
I'm just struggling to seeing how this is a valid error. The one micron work around is an annoying compromise.


Screenshot 2026-01-31 153404.png
 
Ah, OK - I understand now. The Project/Wrap tool fails if the sketch reaches the edge of the target face. That's just the way it is.

Might be easier to sketch rib cross section on end face of the U channel, extrude it by 8mm and the linear pattern 3 instances with 25mm spacing along the channel. Use sketch offset to help form the sketch.
 
Alternatively make the original U channel slightly over-long, do your Project, then trim the U channel back to desired length.
 
DavidJ said:
Ah, OK - I understand now. The Project/Wrap tool fails if the sketch reaches the edge of the target face. That's just the way it is.

Might be easier to sketch rib cross section on end face of the U channel, extrude it by 8mm and the linear pattern 3 instances with 25mm spacing along the channel. Use sketch offset to help form the sketch.
Click to expand...
This is the best practice for any sort of geometry like that. Are there other ways? Sure, you actually found one. But the quickest, most robust, and easiest to control parametrically, is the way David described.
 
Thanks all for the suggestions on error work arounds. When it comes down to it my main issue is with the error and error message.

We have all seen software develop over time and when is the last time your computer or smartphone or any device sends an error like that when you did something it didn’t like?

I’m not impressed by the way Alibre posts those unhelpful ACIS messages to the screen with no explanation or no way to look up why they appear (no links to a help screen). Or not resolving them automatically.

I would have had no problem if the software automatically deplaned those two surfaces by one micron rather forcing me to figure that out, entirely on my own.
 
Those messages are generic ones from the ACIS kernel and could apply to many different circumstances, so deciphering into something to any specific circumstance is not a trivial task.

There might also be several possible fixes or workarounds, for a particular circumstance.
 
dean448 said:
...

I would have had no problem if the software automatically deplaned those two surfaces by one micron rather forcing me to figure that out, entirely on my own.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but many others might have many projects that might need a 1micron accuracy. Doing that would be an immediate and valid reason to drop a CAD system. Imagine only that hole and shaft tolerances are actually standardized in microns. For example, an h6 tolerance for a 6mm shaft is 0 to -9 microns from nominal.

Changing dimensions for random geometry generation should be a major Taboo for a Mechanical Engineering Design software.

Not to mention bearing seat fits...
 
dean448 said:
Thanks all for the suggestions on error work arounds. When it comes down to it my main issue is with the error and error message.

We have all seen software develop over time and when is the last time your computer or smartphone or any device sends an error like that when you did something it didn’t like?

I’m not impressed by the way Alibre posts those unhelpful ACIS messages to the screen with no explanation or no way to look up why they appear (no links to a help screen). Or not resolving them automatically.

I would have had no problem if the software automatically deplaned those two surfaces by one micron rather forcing me to figure that out, entirely on my own.
Click to expand...

D

Thread 'ACISERROR_SELF_INTERSECTING_WIRE: Wire is self-intersecting.'

I'm trying to extrude cut these corners out of a solid using this method. I got this annoying error complaining about the 25mm arch intersecting the vertical line when the center of the 25mm arch is 25mm from the line. If I move the center of the arch one micron away it works (shown below). Does this mean that lines in this ACIS system have a thickness? It doesn't seem correct that lines touching are the same as a lines intersecting.

My point is not to explore other ways to cut those corners out. Thanks.

Screenshot 2026-01-23 221853.png
D

Thread 'No angle measurement?'

For some reason I'm not getting an angle when trying to measure the chamfer angle in a slot. However, I do get an angle when measuring chamfer angle in cross section.
OD = R28 mm, ID = R12.5 mm. Slot width is 4mm. Cross section shown thru the center of the slot in YZ plane and the diameters are concentric with the origin.
Edge chamfer is 20 mm by 20 mm.

so, the measure tool recognizes the chamfer in the cross section but not in the plane of the slot. Am I doing something wrong?

V28.1



Screenshot 2026-01-28 135957.png

My comments were about geometry not design and engineering best practice or an acceptable workaround. Tolerance, scale, how a thing is made should be precise. Many ways to skin CAD:

1769986630685.png

I wouldn't use project for that part.
 
If anyone wants to try modeling this ribbed part, it came from a tootalltoby video:

if you look at this video both contestants are using SolidWorks and did not use this project feature. I have no idea if SW has that feature.
I felt that project was well suited for this part and went well until I hit this error. obviously, there are other great ways to create those ribs.
for whatever its worth the one micron workaround (as shown) didn't cause the check weight of the part to fail. this approach seems faster (one sketch for all ribs), but it does add an extra line to the ends of the part.

my features tree for this part contains 8 items, not counting that extra plane I created. see if you can beat that with another approach. :)


Screenshot 2026-02-01 193717.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top