3
$\begingroup$

I wanted to connect two different diameter cylinders and then smooth the edge between the two.

But I just couldn't get it to work. There always are two spots where the bevel looks weird (like in the picture) even when I removed the two big faces and connected all edges it still made the bevel look weird at two points.

As you can probably tell I'm new to Blender and any help and tips are appreciated!

Thank you! Here you can see my problem more clearly!

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Is it a bevel? Have your recalculated the normals before the bevel? $\endgroup$
    – moonboots
    May 30 at 8:49
  • $\begingroup$ i think sharing your blend file is a good idea before we ask a lot of questions... $\endgroup$
    – Chris
    May 30 at 8:54

3 Answers 3

2
$\begingroup$

Maybe things already went wrong in the modeling process, because if you follow these steps, you will get your desired result:

  1. You will need three different cylinders. Let's call them Main, Add and Cutter. Arrange them like this:

    enter image description here

  2. Give Main a Boolean Modifier (set to union) to combine Main and Add. You can hide the original Add object afterwards.

  3. Give Main another Boolean Modifier (set to difference) to cut out the middle hole with the Cutter. You can now hide the Cutter.

    enter image description here

  4. Apply Modifiers (1) + (2) in this order; you should get the following geometry. Now you need to select the desired edge rings (Alt+LMB) and set their Mean Bevel Weight to 1 in the N-Panel:

    enter image description here

  5. Then add a Bevel Modifier and set the limit method to Weight.

    enter image description here

$\endgroup$
1
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Thank you! This worked, I think I made the mistake that Main wasn't overlapping with Add. $\endgroup$
    – Dennis
    May 30 at 10:10
6
$\begingroup$

Is it possible you don't need to 'merge 2 cylinders'?..

Can you can just Alt E extrude the second from the outer faces of the first, and bevel?

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
0
5
$\begingroup$

I would have modeled this completely different right from the start. The easiest and quickest way would be the one by @RobinBetts but here is another one so that you get an idea what other tools exist in Blender so that the Boolean modifier is not necessary.

I don't know if your cylinders and the hole have specific dimensions or if you just modeled them with random sizes - but it's quite easy to get something like this with the correct dimensions without any need for a Boolean modifier.

Let's say you want to create this thing: the base should have a radius of 1 m and be 0.2 m high, then it should extend upwards 1 m with a radius of 0.6 m (0.4 m smaller than the base) and there should be a vertical hole with a radius of 0.3 m (0.3 m less than the radius before, 0,7 m less than the base).

schematics

Then I would do it like that:

  1. Shift+A to Add a Cylinder. In the tool options, set the Radius to 1 m (if it isn't already) and the Depth to 0.2 m to get the base.

    add base cylinder

  2. Next select the top face and hit I to inset the face followed by .4Return to make the inner radius 0.6 m.

    inset for upper cylinder

  3. With the inner face still selected press E1Return to extrude 1 m along the normal to get the height of the upper cylinder.

    extrude upper cylinder

  4. To create a circle with 0.3 m radius for the hole, inset the top face by 0.3 m with I.3Return.

    inset top hole radius

  5. Now select the bottom face of the base. This has a larger radius, so you need to inset it 0.7 m to get same radius for the hole, I.7Return.

    bottom hole radius

  6. Now select both inner faces for the hole. From the viewport menu select Edge > Bridge Edge Loops. This way the top and bottom faces are deleted and their edges are connected to build the inner walls of the hole.

    bridge edge loops

And that's it for the modeling. You already got an accepted answer where the Weight method for the Bevel modifier is explained so I'll leave that to you, since your problem was primarily not the beveling itself but the mesh of your object.

finished object

$\endgroup$
0

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .