• This forum is the machine-generated translation of www.cad3d.it/forum1 - the Italian design community. Several terms are not translated correctly.

making a mould

  • Thread starter Thread starter malpom
  • Start date Start date

malpom

Guest
Good morning to all I wanted some advice on making a mold for composite material.
I start from a solid i.e. in my case the model to be obtained and I must realize the negative for the realization of the mold in autoclave to be fed to a 5-axis machine.

I got a bit wrapped up believing I could simply remove the part from another that would be my mold and maybe make it bound to the original to follow any revisions.

Has anyone ever had this problem?

Thank you very much!
 
malpom said:
Good morning to all I wanted some advice on making a mold for composite material.
I start from a solid i.e. in my case the model to be obtained and I must realize the negative for the realization of the mold in autoclave to be fed to a 5-axis machine.

I got a bit wrapped up believing I could simply remove the part from another that would be my mold and maybe make it bound to the original to follow any revisions.

Has anyone ever had this problem?

Thank you very much!
Click to expand...
create a new part, derive the model to use and with the command combines the use to obtain the cavity of the matrix.
In that way, you have the corresponding modification of the cavity.
 
I miss the part of the derivatives I looked at the tutorials but I'm not very clear, are we in the environment together or part? ...thank you for the answer
 
Let's go.
derive the model, build us around the matrix taking care to create a new solid.
then with the combination go to "togliere" to the second solid (the matrix) the volume of the model
 
you must already have your model (step format to say) of which you want to make the mold and proceed in this way:

do two separate parallelepipeds (i.e. a two ipt. ) as big as your model . do a set and put in the first ipt, your model and the second ipt. you have to assemble them in such a way that your matrix is contained within the two ipts. Maybe you combine an ipt plan with the half-matrix of the model so half-matrix is connected in the first ipt, then do the same with the second ipt so that the other half-matrix is interlinked in the second ipt. In this way you have your matrix completely enclosed by the two ipts. Save your help.
at this point you open a new ipt and with the "derive component" command you fish the axieme where you decide what to hold or subtract. the result is half mold you get through the Boolean operations present in the command "derive component"
 
davide75 said:
you must already have your model (step format to say) of which you want to make the mold and proceed in this way:

do two separate parallelepipeds (i.e. a two ipt. ) as big as your model . do a set and put in the first ipt, your model and the second ipt. you have to assemble them in such a way that your matrix is contained within the two ipts. Maybe you combine an ipt plan with the half-matrix of the model so half-matrix is connected in the first ipt, then do the same with the second ipt so that the other half-matrix is interlinked in the second ipt. In this way you have your matrix completely enclosed by the two ipts. Save your help.
at this point you open a new ipt and with the "derive component" command you fish the axieme where you decide what to hold or subtract. the result is half mold you get through the Boolean operations present in the command "derive component"
Click to expand...
I don't get that set up and then do a part in which to derive the various solids.
you can do directly in the part, derive the model, build the solids of the matrices then do the Boolean operations.
from them then save the distinct components, example fixed matrix and mobile etc.
 
You're right, maybe I did it more complicated than it is, but I did it again to the example that there is on the pruners guide that I read at the time
 
davide75 said:
You're right, maybe I did it more complicated than it is, but I did it again to the example that there is on the pruners guide that I read at the time
Click to expand...
that of using the set was the only way before the multibody, now is obviously faster.
 
I pick up this post for similar processing.
I have to bite a spindle to get a piece to work.
I have my set with chuck, clamps and piece to work.

How do I remove the volume of the piece from the clamps?
I don't find the command combined.
 
I don't know if I got it right, but I'd mess with it.
in environment together: edited part.
in part: modify-copy object-surface-sculpt.
 
TECNOMODEL said:
I pick up this post for similar processing.
I have to bite a spindle to get a piece to work.
I have my set with chuck, clamps and piece to work.

How do I remove the volume of the piece from the clamps?
I don't find the command combined.
Click to expand...
There's no!
you have to make a fictitious set with clamps plus spindle body, then it comes in two files: spindle, clamps, and do its subtraction during the derivation.
question for my curiosity without knowing your work:
couldn't you model the various bodiesin the environment part in a single multibody file and then create the single pieces with the command creates?
 
Now that I know you can't do it together, I think I'll do it next time.

Let's see if I understand: make a set with the clamps and the piece placed. comes in a .ipt all by subtracting while coming?
this of course should be done 3 times, one for each clamp. Right?
 
no, for the body you'll take the three clamps, for the clamp you just need one that then serializes together: then remove the body and eliminate the other two clamps.
 
Tarkus said:
no, for the body you'll take the three clamps, for the clamp you just need one that then serializes together: then remove the body and eliminate the other two clamps.
Click to expand...
I think not, because if it has to have the actual clamp design, because of the radiality of the same, they have the back teeth that take the spindle of each other different from the other, so you can not serialize them so to the ugly. must make three different files.
 
We're messing up.

the clamps at the bottom are equal, they go on a pneumatic spindle with toothing guide.

in the area where "prendo" the piece are shaped, each differently because of the geometry of the same.

my intention was to place "new" clamps and piece to take in position as they will be on the spindle, then subtract the piece and so quickly get the clamps to work.

But I think I chose a wrong path, maybe it was better to make a multibody, even if it means drawing new clamps all the time.
 
Yes pardon, I thought of a "classic" spindle from parallel and not pneumatic lathe... Sorry.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
44,997
Messages
339,767
Members
4
Latest member
ibt

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 16 (members: 0, guests: 16)
Back
Top