blend wall - sheet metal

[vale61]

Can you show me how you got the mail?
to spy you have to do as says prof.
- control insert > advanced > union flat surfaces.

I'm home now and I don't have wf3 here.
Bye-bye.

 

[massi481]

bending such a piece is not simple in cold should first bring it to temperature in order to form it

 

[vale61]

I attach the piece made by blend+guscio, I repeat that I don't know how to handle it at surface level.
Surely the most experienced can recommend you a better way.
to model it the only thing to be expected is to have the same number of divisions for the two sections.
Bye-bye.

 

[kionn]

In fact, I'm considering welding in sectors

 

[gianello]

making the unbend of geometry with variable rays with the sheetmetal is not possible. you can only try to clear the surface. in the attached example I copied the outer surface of the geometry (copy and paste; a surface without father-son relationship is created) and then I "open" it with the insert > advanced > flatten quilt command. there is always a certain approximation between the open surface and the formed one but given the size of the particular should not be a problem.

 

[maxopus]

here is the pdf.
I did it with the wf4, with the wf3 the procedure is identical.

but did you read what I posted?
I did it with variable rays and the flat series has no problem.

 

[blubossa]

but did you read what I posted?
I did it with variable rays and the flat series has no problem.

Maxopus,
I followed your advice and it seems really great, just a clarification....

by variable rays is meant that the two sketches have different rays and heights?

but how do you make a sheet like that?

bb

 

[maxopus]

variable radius means a radius that varies in value in its trend (e.g. from 5 to 10 mm).
to produce such a thing they need specific equipment (special knives and matrices or moulds).
as they are expensive equipment, it is not advisable to use variable rays if you have to build very few pieces.

 

[blubossa]

variable radius means a radius that varies in value in its trend (e.g. from 5 to 10 mm).
to produce such a thing they need specific equipment (special knives and matrices or moulds).
as they are expensive equipment, it is not advisable to use variable rays if you have to build very few pieces.

thanks to the clarification. ...

bb

 

[vale61]

yes with variable rays no problem.
interesting would have been to understand how to manage the part without changing its geometry, since in geometry there was no curve with defined rays.
Clearly, it's just a didactic exercise.
Bye-bye.

 

[maxopus]

yes with variable rays no problem.
interesting would have been to understand how to manage the part without changing its geometry, since in geometry there was no curve with defined rays.
Clearly, it's just a didactic exercise.
Bye-bye.

I don't understand your question.

 

[vale61]

I missed your spèiegation in pdf (where you put the rays).
I'll try the same procedure after having recreated the same (non-ray) curves of the original to see if you can spy on everything.
Bye-bye.

 

[gianello]

yes with variable rays no problem.
interesting would have been to understand how to manage the part without changing its geometry, since in geometry there was no curve with defined rays.
Clearly, it's just a didactic exercise.
Bye-bye.

it was precisely the bending model_1.prt I referred to in the predent post in which I stated that with the sheetmetal you could not make the unbend. setting the config pro option: mesh_spline_surf = yes surface mesh lines are displayed. in the case of bending_1.prt (see attachment) the blue mesh lines are present in two directions (longitudinal regarding the length of the piece + a curve on the radiated part); to me they have always said that if the mesh lines are present in two directions, you cannot do the unbend. therefore a possible solution could be "open" the surface to have an idea of development.

 

[gianello]

In fact, I also missed the maxopus post with the correct solution.. Sometimes the rush is bad advice. .:wink:

 

[maxopus]

...to me they always said that if the mesh lines are present in two directions, you can not do the unbend. therefore a possible solution could be "open" the surface to have an idea of development.

Who told you, I think it was imprecise.
the problem of non-development can be attributed to the fact that the radius is divided into several surfaces.
If the radius was a unique surface, I think it would have developed it without problems.

 

[gianello]

In fact, however, if you look at the example attached, I created a blend deliberately leaving one of the rays of the upper non tangent section; the radiated surface is unique but, not being the tangent radius, the mesh lines are displayed in the two directions and actually then does not open that part of the component. If you make the radius tangent, the mesh lines disappear and you regularly open everything.

 

[gianello]

... here is the annex

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

What do you say instead of splitting the conical fold into multiple folds? It's what you normally do for hoppers. even if with much smaller thicknesses!

 

[blubossa]

but with proes how does a conical fold occur?

bb

 

[Andrea - Overcam]

Well, I think they created it in this case with the blend between two sections... In this case the roundings of one section have different radius from the other and therefore a conical fold is created.