My conclusion is that engineers / designers should aim for geometry symmetry resulting in at least 2 identical parts, rather than mirroring parts, resulting in 2 not identical but very similar ( and often confusing ) parts. Engineers should make things as simple / low cost as can be right?
Sheet metal component is a poor example as it's unlikely to have a front and back plate that are identical. I include it here as an example of the possible. The copy is a component copy revolved 180 deg but symmetry design makes it a mirror.
Here, the top inserts are not symmetrical - they are (mirrored) parts in an component.Creation sketches ( pair ) had an asymmetrical feature of the radius and subsequent symmetrical cuts in other planes have produced a mirrored 3D part. Interesting that 3D manipulation still keeps their associations. Moved from original creation planes, subsequent symmetric cuts are tricky and time consuming to produce.
Please sign in to leave a comment.