merger

[valeria_emme]

hi, I wanted to ask if someone can give me some indications about the piece I have to accomplish (theoretically, I have to make a project for a university exam).
I'd like some advice about the staff separation plan... the piece is symmetrical so the first idea that came to me is to make the separation plan coincide with the symmetry plane... But then I thought that if I make the separation plan coincide with the frontal plane, with a throw in one bracket, I avoid problems both regarding the precise positioning of the two brackets, and for the positioning of the materozzes (open sky????) thus facilitating the sizing of the collars... What do you say? ? ?

All the cavities I'll do to the machines, so my model will be full... I don't think it's appropriate to put a soul in the cylinder... (however I'll learn about this). .
from the hypotheses made the only functional surface is the base... then using the frontal plane as a material saving separation plan for the corners of sform, right? ? ?

Last question... in the attached file "img" I highlighted a point that I do not know how to achieve. . (considering that the emphasis is 25 mm long and 6 deep)... can you recommend something to me? ? ?

Thank you.

 

[SHIREN]

hi, I wanted to ask if someone can give me some indications about the piece I have to accomplish (theoretically, I have to make a project for a university exam).
I'd like some advice about the staff separation plan... the piece is symmetrical so the first idea that came to me is to make the separation plan coincide with the symmetry plane... But then I thought that if I make the separation plan coincide with the frontal plane, with a throw in one bracket, I avoid problems both regarding the precise positioning of the two brackets, and for the positioning of the materozzes (open sky????) thus facilitating the sizing of the collars... What do you say? ? ?

All the cavities I'll do to the machines, so my model will be full... I don't think it's appropriate to put a soul in the cylinder... (however I'll learn about this). .
from the hypotheses made the only functional surface is the base... then using the frontal plane as a material saving separation plan for the corners of sform, right? ? ?

Last question... in the attached file "img" I highlighted a point that I do not know how to achieve. . (considering that the emphasis is 25 mm long and 6 deep)... can you recommend something to me? ? ?

Thank you.

Hi.
construction of a model in nature rightly ez.second jpeg attached
devoid of souls with corners of sform to increase min.1/20 or according to agreements with the foundry
more than 3mm of overmetal
on the parts subject and associated with processing mecc
round all bevels and live edges r 2.5_3
the hole on the base can also be (if rough)repelled with special soul
if the hole is crossed by bolts or screws foresee an alesage for a washer
check if with normal tools you can alesare said hole
or prog otherwise the location of the hole
on the model are missing the writings for the identification of the fuse
and indicate a zone where the foundry must put
date of merger-lot-logo
add a metallostatic retreat (1.8%-2.0%-2.2%) depends on steel
Given the size (mignon) I believe that a wax melt to lose
or porcelain is more suitable
Thank you very much

 

[SHIREN]

Sorry.
I forgot to add
that the model must be placed on 1+1 plate sup+inf
and equipped with channels of casting and matarozze with its tedious sleeves
the weight of the straights for steels and more or less 50% of the weight of the cast
I am not a metallurgical
you have to ask an expert farmer in colate
Thank you very much

 

[valeria_emme]

Thank you... I really don't know what to say... you were very kind...

Unfortunately, however, my treatment is more theoretical, in the sense that my choice must be accompanied by motivations, tables and regulations... I can't make arrangements with the foundry. I have to do a theoretical job. I will use a steel fe g 520 and do not fe g 780 because the characteristics are suitable for use hypothesized and because it has a cheaper price. . .
My question about the division plan was to make my job easier... I'll have to dimensional both the straightness and the casting channels... same discourse for souls, which I prefer to avoid in order not to define the 'braining'. . .

cmq I thank you enormously, for the ideas you gave me...
If you have any other suggestions, I'd be grateful... However as soon as I catch angles I break, connection rays and overmetals I will post everything because I care to have your opinion (you are experts) :smile:

 

[SHIREN]

Thank you... I really don't know what to say... you were very kind...

Unfortunately, however, my treatment is more theoretical, in the sense that my choice must be accompanied by motivations, tables and regulations... I can't make arrangements with the foundry. I have to do a theoretical job. I will use a steel fe g 520 and do not fe g 780 because the characteristics are suitable for use hypothesized and because it has a cheaper price. . .
My question about the division plan was to make my job easier... I'll have to dimensional both the straightness and the casting channels... same discourse for souls, which I prefer to avoid in order not to define the 'braining'. . .

cmq I thank you enormously, for the ideas you gave me...
If you have any other suggestions, I'd be grateful... However as soon as I catch angles I break, connection rays and overmetals I will post everything because I care to have your opinion (you are experts) :smile:

Hi.
for the sforms you should think about how many mm of sform you have to put
not to speak of degrees
on the rough parts can be that you can also decrease the sform mm
that alter the perimeter part of the deck
while on the processed parts we subscribe
for souls and branching the hole on the base if it's rough it's convenient to do it in soul
costs less than a hole obtained by removal of chips
I hope you've been helped
Thank you very much