doubt about sunset.. .

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

The holidays begin and as always I am here to break... in this rest period I am trying to increase the knowledge of the program and drawing in general! I have a doubt: I am creating a fictitious hopper so to test and I easily transformed it into sheet (one piece) to be able to realize it. Given the complexity of the object I would want to divide it into 3 or 4 pieces to help the bending machine in the realization. My question is this: How do I do that? I already use a method, I realize it in extrusion and then save it with "sheet converts" in multiple rows that then mute with "assieme". Is there a faster and more precise system to do so? example like the "spaceclaim" program that makes you decide if on a fold you can remove it to pull the edges or to overcome them?

thanks for the help, I also attach the file...

Good holidays to all, rotten.

 

[sampom]

The holidays begin and as always I am here to break... in this rest period I am trying to increase the knowledge of the program and drawing in general! I have a doubt: I am creating a fictitious hopper so to test and I easily transformed it into sheet (one piece) to be able to realize it. Given the complexity of the object I would want to divide it into 3 or 4 pieces to help the bending machine in the realization. My question is this: How do I do that? I already use a method, I realize it in extrusion and then save it with "sheet converts" in multiple rows that then mute with "assieme". Is there a faster and more precise system to do so? example like the "spaceclaim" program that makes you decide if on a fold you can remove it to pull the edges or to overcome them?

thanks for the help, I also attach the file...

Good holidays to all, rotten.

hi folder (marco pure io :smile:. We are infinity), welcome.

I didn't understand what you say about spaceclaim, probably because I don't know him. but I know, and this is important for differences, which is not parametric, but "direct context". . then you can move, pull, stretch, adjust faces, edges, edges etc. Whatever. swx (and other parameters) are instead strictly fixed on "building" sketches, quotas, relationships, constraints etc.; all another principle.

Anyway. .
what you did in tram2 is correct as a procedure, of course doing so in a single piece would be practically impossible. and then rightly divide it.
that I think you should do in at least 4 faces (one includes the bottom) and in tram2-multi you wanted to try?
But you were doing a job, it's useless that you do the solid first and then the 3d sketch lattice. use directly the edges of the solid, or do only a 3d sketch without the solid "support"... but I would let it go, it is a mess with all the plans to do etc. etc.

I suggest you a method in my opinion more immediate:View attachment tramoggia prova2 multi.rar..this is the 2multi modified by me.
use surfaces; on the starting solid make a "zero" offset of the faces you want to merge into one sheet. then thicken (insert > basic extrusion > thickening) 2mm outside, you create a solid that you can now convert to sheet metal. repeat for all the plates you want to create (the 2 side symmetries you can mirror them) and you will find the hopper already assembled in a multibody (ah, remember non use the option merge results).
hide the starting solid and you're fine.

greetings and good holidays
Marco:smile:

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

hi pegatore (also I:smile:. We are infinity), welcome.

I didn't understand what you say about spaceclaim, probably because I don't know him. but I know, and this is important for differences, which is not parametric, but "direct context". . then you can move, pull, stretch, adjust faces, edges, edges etc. Whatever. swx (and other parameters) are instead strictly fixed on "building" sketches, quotas, relationships, constraints etc.; all another principle.

Anyway. .
what you did in tram2 is correct as a procedure, of course doing so in a single piece would be practically impossible. and then rightly divide it.
that I think you should do in at least 4 faces (one includes the bottom) and in tram2-multi you wanted to try?
But you were doing a job, it's useless that you do the solid first and then the 3d sketch lattice. use directly the edges of the solid, or do only a 3d sketch without the solid "support"... but I would let it go, it is a mess with all the plans to do etc. etc.

I suggest you a method in my opinion more immediate:View attachment 16085..this is the 2multi modified by me.
use surfaces; on the starting solid make a "zero" offset of the faces you want to merge into one sheet. then thicken (insert > basic extrusion > thickening) 2mm outside, you create a solid that you can now convert to sheet metal. repeat for all the plates you want to create (the 2 side symmetries you can mirror them) and you will find the hopper already assembled in a multibody (ah, remember non use the option merge results).
hide the starting solid and you're fine.

greetings and good holidays
Marco:smile:

grazi for the answer marco, I take everything by good and look at the example you posted to me for learning, because I never used the tool surfaces to draw and create pieces.. I think I will just have to look at some tutorials on youtube or the internal tutorials at solidworks. I thought the surface tool needed "only" to create "carbide plate" style and for this I never considered in the construction of metal carpentry. we say that I am also unexperienced with design 3d and solidworks in general. That's why in this holiday period I have to "train" as much as possible!!!!!:biggrin::finger:

 

[meccanicamg]

I remember that swx 2010 allows multilamiera multibody. It is to be seen if you can pass from a solid to multiple sheets or if you peel the solids and from them you make n sheets how many n bodies are.

 

[sampom]

I remember that swx 2010 allows multilamiera multibody. .

in fact we are doing those, working in that environment.

to see if you can move from a solid to multiple sheets

Yes, you can (in fact in multibody). as it is done in the file just above.

or if we forget the solids and from them we make as many as the n bodies.

..if you want you can do the operation for how many rows are the faces of sheet metal to create. instead of in a multibody part you then join them in a real set.

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[meccanicamg]

I hate to use the axieme for the plates.. finally from swx2010 you work in the part:finger:

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

in fact we are doing those, working in that environment.


Yes, you can (in fact in multibody). as it is done in the file just above.


..if you want you can do the operation for how many rows are the faces of sheet metal to create. instead of in a multibody part you then join them in a real set.

greetings
Marco:smile:

In fact, I wanted to post the method I use to do these jobs... to me it seemed a little long but also what you propose to me it takes more or less the same time at least for this particular. . . .
Thanks again for the celery answer!

 

[Marco74]

I do not know sw, but if, starting from 3 sketches on as many floors at right distance according to me you can make 3 sheets (if the central part you want to do in a single piece) or 4 (if you want to make detached) without surfaces or emptying of solids, then I repeat I do not know sw but it seems strange that does not make 4 sheets on the cross.

 

[re_solidworks]

I do not know sw, but if, starting from 3 sketches on as many floors at right distance according to me you can make 3 sheets (if the central part you want to do in a single piece) or 4 (if you want to make detached) without surfaces or emptying of solids, then I repeat I do not know sw but it seems strange that does not make 4 sheets on the cross.

in fact it does them without problems, the problem arises because it was initially modeled a solid with the volume of the finished hopper.

 

[sampom]

I do not know sw, but if, starting from 3 sketches on as many floors at right distance according to me you can make 3 sheets (if the central part you want to do in a single piece) or 4 (if you want to make detached) without surfaces or emptying of solids, then I repeat I do not know sw but it seems strange that does not make 4 sheets on the cross.

:biggrin:ahahah.. It also makes 8 or 16 or 32.. ahahah.
That's not the problem. but the "curiosity" (because it's not a problem) of the bending machine was about the management: building it in a single piece is improbable because it is too deep. then single files mounted together, or single multibody files including all sheets?
in fact, multibody.. and if it doesn't seem to me to understand this functionality.. in this case he is not doing "4 plates on the cross":tongue:.
then clear, the modeling modes that swx allows can be multiple, all right to find the most practical and fast; bending is precisely doing tests in this sense.

Anyway, try it and explain how it handles it if. these are some solutions: if you want to download the files above, if and swx "aprono" each other importing as parasolid.

Come on, let's go.

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Marco74]

:biggrin:ahahah.. It also makes 8 or 16 or 32.. ahahah.
That's not the problem. but the "curiosity" (because it's not a problem) of the bending machine was about the management: building it in a single piece is improbable because it is too deep. then single files mounted together, or single multibody files including all sheets?
in fact, multibody.. and if it doesn't seem to me to understand this functionality.. in this case he is not doing "4 plates on the cross":tongue:.
then clear, the modeling modes that swx allows can be multiple, all right to find the most practical and fast; bending is precisely doing tests in this sense.

Anyway, try it and explain how it handles it if. these are some solutions:View attachment 16106 View attachment 16107 View attachment 16108if you want to download the files above, if and swx "aprono" each other importing as parasolid.

Come on, let's go.

greetings
Marco:smile:

I can do it very well in 3 or 4 rows together, linked together with sketches, modifying sketches or plans where they lie changes the hopper accordingly. or directly from the part and cut file with surfaces to get the files that interest me.

 

[sampom]

:biggrin:

I can do it very well in 3 or 4 rows together, linked together with sketches, modifying sketches or plans where they lie changes the hopper accordingly. or directly from the part and cut file with surfaces to get the files that interest me.

Yeah, too.
These are just a couple of possibilities that offer swx with sheet metal... and perhaps just for that having many options you start always from the least intuitive, who knows why

greetings
Marco:smile:

p.s. ehi, this absolutely does not want to be a "confidence", only exchange of info:finger:

 

[Marco74]

p.s. ehi, questa non vuole assolutamente essere una "sfida"

absolutely no...become cad, different possibilities, will be that having not certain possibilities in itself, always start from plates and build the details as you think they are realized.

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

absolutely no...become cad, different possibilities, will be that having not certain possibilities in itself, always start from plates and build the details as you think they are realized.

hi marco also I agree with sampom and I would like to see some practical example also with solidedge, so much so to learn and have some extra ideas. I think more people give an opinion and more things and tricks you learn, don't you?

if you have time and want the starting files are in the post I created. .

hello and thanks, marco (piegatoresolidworks)

 

[sampom]

hi marco also I agree with sampom and I would like to see some practical example also with solidedge, so much so to learn and have some extra ideas. I think more people give an opinion and more things and tricks you learn, don't you?

if you have time and want the starting files are in the post I created. .

hello and thanks, marco (piegatoresolidworks)

I remember that at your first message you asked what was a good specific program for sheet bending.. you were already using and learning swx:biggrin:

I think you're doing enough with swx, right?
I think that for "normal" bending and rolling goes discreetly well, what do you say after a little use?

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[sampom]

I add another:biggrin: which is perhaps the most immediate.

Why waste time and resources building the support solid? if you know the shapes and sizes you can do directly the sketches of the folded sheets that are like the profiles of that solid.
make the first bigger (the double "bilateral") and then on the sides the other two. convert the existing edges to the sketches so all remain "parametric", changing the dimensions are updated all. a couple of cuts (always with sketches on the existing edges) to give the forms (it always remember to use the normal) and you're good: and all with the only commands of sheet metal.

This I attach is a multibody part (for me you do it first), but you can do the same thing together:View attachment SOLUZ 00.rargreetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Marco74]

place the hopper made in itself, let's say I did it quickly, measures except errors I respected them.

 

[sampom]

place the hopper made in itself, let's say I did it quickly, measures except errors I respected them.

Yes, "to the view" is equal..:biggrin:
only that it is a mixture of imported parts, you lose process and used functions.. but I guess it doesn't differ much from what is said (for the assemblies).

However I can immediately convert in sheet the "solids" of the faces hopper, the recognition happens without errors.

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Marco74]

I attach image where you see the initial sketches from which I started to build solids.

 

[sampom]

I attach image where you see the initial sketches from which I started to build solids.

in fact,
In the last one I posted I did so too. directly the sketches with the "sagoma" to get without passing from the solid.

greetings
Mar