CAD Forum

Okay this is my first time posting so hope I do it right.
So this is a rough model I made for a design proposal only.
Question is what is best way to find inside volume of the hopper?

Thanks,
Jean LeBlanc

I would do it this way:

- Make 4 offset surfaces of the 4 inside faces of the hopper (zero distance offset)
- make planar surfaces using opposing edges of the top and bottom of the hopper
- for each of those offset surfaces, use Extend Surface to extend it about 2 inches all the way around
- use surface trim (mutual) to trim all the surfaces into a solid.
- use Delete Bodies to get rid of everything else.
- Use Tools, Evaluate, Mass Properties to find the volume

Volume = 17984095267.17 cubic millimeters
I'm not sure this is the best way.

Another way to do it would be to make a big rectangle at the top representing the inside of the opening, and another smaller rectangle at the bottom. Loft the two together and turn off Merge Result

Volume = 17996996236.11 cubic millimeters

..hello Jean... you can copy/offset/0 the inner faces and close the ends (planar or fill.. but make sure your sides are even at the top).. and knit.

Faster way to collect interior surfaces is to copy the solid body and use Delete Face to remove the top edge. This is useful if there are a lot of small faces to collect on the interior.

I'll Start off with that I do actually understand what you are asking and that @matt has the correct approach. But... my brain read the post title.... Take the frog put in blender till smooth, put in measuring cup. Volume of hopper found.

HerrTick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:22 am Faster way to collect interior surfaces is to copy the solid body and use Delete Face to remove the top edge. This is useful if there are a lot of small faces to collect on the interior.

That would be a cool way to do it if the hopper were a single solid body, but it's not. The hopper is made of a series of 4 plate bodies that touch edge to edge. Like it's an unwelded weldment. So it's not a single solid. This was the reason I first used a surface technique, but then realized (depending on how you define the top and bottom of the hopper) you could do this with a simple solid loft as well.

All of these solutions highlight to me why people need to know advanced functions even if they are only working with prismatic shapes.

matt wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:41 am

HerrTick wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:22 am Faster way to collect interior surfaces is to copy the solid body and use Delete Face to remove the top edge. This is useful if there are a lot of small faces to collect on the interior.

That would be a cool way to do it if the hopper were a single solid body, but it's not. The hopper is made of a series of 4 plate bodies that touch edge to edge. Like it's an unwelded weldment. So it's not a single solid. This was the reason I first used a surface technique, but then realized (depending on how you define the top and bottom of the hopper) you could do this with a simple solid loft as well.

All of these solutions highlight to me why people need to know advanced functions even if they are only working with prismatic shapes.

I was going to do an extrude from the top of the hopper down to the bottom, use the hopper to cut this body, and then delete the exterior portion and have the interior body remaining to measure, but it wouldn't work because of the multiple bodies.

Glenn Schroeder wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 9:51 am I was going to do an extrude from the top of the hopper down to the bottom, use the hopper to cut this body, and then delete the exterior portion and have the interior body remaining to measure, but it wouldn't work because of the multiple bodies.

Yeah, that was actually the first thing I tried before I looked at how it was made. The dreaded zero thickness error.

When I make volume calculations on tank bodies, I have multiple planes at the heights of level switches, overflow weir, operating range, etc. I create a set of configurations as needed, and place all of these volume measure features into a folder because they are irrelevant in any other context.

What's more complex is to subtract a mixer impeller, fill pipe, diffuser, float switch or other interior protrusion from the volume. @matt's method applies to cylindrical tanks with dished heads as well, to make a geometry volume body. I use Intersect (with level planes) and/or Combine (with bodies) in parts upon the geometry volume to get a refined measure.

Tom G wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:12 am When I make volume calculations on tank bodies, I have multiple planes at the heights of level switches, overflow weir, operating range, etc. I create a set of configurations as needed, and place all of these volume measure features into a folder because they are irrelevant in any other context.

What's more complex is to subtract a mixer impeller, fill pipe, diffuser, float switch or other interior protrusion from the volume. @matt's method applies to cylindrical tanks with dished heads as well, to make a geometry volume body. I use Intersect (with level planes) and/or Combine (with bodies) in parts upon the geometry volume to get a refined measure.

I often have to do this for plastic bottles of some sort, where it's a lot easier. Just subtract the bottle from a larger solid body planar to the fill line of the bottle.

The Intersect feature is often difficult to visualize, and I have to say there are still situations where I can't wrap my head around it so I wind up making multiple features to do it in steps I can see in my head. What kinds of features do you combine with the Intersect to get your results?

matt wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:21 am What kinds of features do you combine with the Intersect to get your results?

In the case that I pulled up (to verify I was using the right word), I used Bodies and planes. This only works because this part is an uncut tank: there are zero openings, and whole wall bodies. In this case, I added nozzles, spools, and cuts in the assembly. Among my varieties, this is the simplest method without complications.
This part had only volume and material configurations, and not any volume configurations. They were saved with Intersect suppressed, but it can be called upon in any varied size within this similar series of tanks shaped same and oriented uniquely. You can see the clear segregation of the baby-making features and the study features by folder.

Thanks a lot for your help. You guys are awesome.
Looks like many ways to find the volume. I still have a lot to learn about SW.
Kudos to matt for your time and effort. I think you have best answer.

Also thanks to Arthur McR. Your method also works for rabbits and kangaroos.
p.s. Arthur, see you are in B.C. Nice to see someone local on here.
I am in the Fraser Valley region of B.C.

Cheers,
Jean

Jean LeBlanc wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 11:51 am Thanks a lot for your help. You guys are awesome.
Looks like many ways to find the volume. I still have a lot to learn about SW.
Kudos to matt for your time and effort. I think you have best answer.

Also thanks to Arthur McR. Your method also works for rabbits and kangaroos.
p.s. Arthur, see you are in B.C. Nice to see someone local on here.
I am in the Fraser Valley region of B.C.

Cheers,
Jean

Buncha Canucks on here it seems

AlexLachance wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 11:53 am
Buncha Canucks on here it seems

At least you were the first to say it.

Years ago I put together a volume catalog for our owner, using Quatro Pro, pre-Excel... I needed to find the volumes and tonnage per silo from 10' dia to 30 foot high to 100' dia to 200 foot high, with material weighing 25lbs per cu ft to 180lbs per cu ft and the other option was that each diameter/ht had a optional hopper bottom from 60, 45, and 30 degrees.

Every ten feet of height produces 2% compaction and and the material angle of repose was also calculated based on material selection, those numbers also needed to be calculated in, I remember the book was over an inch thick..

If you do 0" offset on the entire inside surface, you should list your volume as water level full, without any material angle of repose.

Roasted By John wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:57 pm Years ago I put together a volume catalog for our owner, using Quatro Pro, pre-Excel... I needed to find the volumes and tonnage per silo from 10' dia to 30 foot high to 100' dia to 200 foot high, with material weighing 25lbs per cu ft to 180lbs per cu ft and the other option was that each diameter/ht had a optional hopper bottom from 60, 45, and 30 degrees.

Every ten feet of height produces 2% compaction and and the material angle of repose was also calculated based on material selection, those numbers also needed to be calculated in, I remember the book was over an inch thick..

If you do 0" offset on the entire inside surface, you should list your volume as water level full, without any material angle of repose.

Thanks for the advice John, this could help me on future projects. In this case the volume I needed to find was only approximate estimated volume.
Cheers,
Jean LeBlanc