Sheet Explaining (I Don't Understand)

[Christian76]

Bye to all,
If I went to see my posts on the subject, and that I don't come to the end, I'm going to expose my problem:
I have to build a lot of galvanized sheet panels sp. 10/10
These panels are sheets of various sizes with 25mm edges.
now, years ago when I happened to manually work the sheet, I remember that it was worth the rule of "togliere 2 thicknesses for each bend at 90°"
and in carpentry not in series with thicknesses from 1 to 5mm, I must say that it was okay.
I never had to use inventor to create real developments, and now that I have to do it, I'm in trouble because the machine of the supplier to which I should give the dxf/dwg by doing tests, scale for every bend at 90° a 2.225mm (on this specific sheet)
How can I tell inventor to adjust the radiance to get a dxf that goes well with the machine?

help:

 

[Christian76]

I answer myself, sorry,
I think I found:
deduction fold -> custom equation -> imposed my value

development is

 

[Daniele82]

I answer myself, sorry,
I think I found:
deduction fold -> custom equation -> imposed my value

development is

I created 2 kfactor:
1: factor k folds 90° =0,273239545 on
2: factor k calandrature =0,5041

 

[meccanicamg]

exactly, it is necessary to change k magnets and k folds. However they are values to be tested experimentally depending on the sheets and equipment available.

 

[Tarkus]

I created 2 kfactor:
1: factor k folds 90° =0,273239545 on
2: factor k calandrature =0,5041

by curiosity:
How did you find that 0.5041 for the displacement?

 

[Daniele82]

by curiosity:
How did you find that 0.5041 for the displacement?

literally to attempts. developing a calandered tube I corrected the value as long as a right "theoretical" length (ømediox3.14)

 

[Tarkus]

literally to attempts. developing a calandered tube I corrected the value as long as a right "theoretical" length (ømediox3.14)

So that's why you get 5,041 because you use 3,14.
if you use the exact figure of p greek= 3,141592654, your factor k will be
0.5 round round round.... .

 

[Daniele82]

So that's why you get 5,041 because you use 3,14.
if you use the exact figure of p greek= 3,141592654, your factor k will be
0.5 round round round.... .

I wrote 3.14 to do before... I did the calculation with the pgreco button of the calculator... However I have optimized the development to the second decimal (0.00) that for the plants we do is more than enough.

 

[Tarkus]

I wrote 3.14 to do before... I did the calculation with the pgreco button of the calculator... However I have optimized the development to the second decimal (0.00) that for the plants we do is more than enough.

we are talking about hair in the egg of course, even I use only two decimals, but what has intrigued me of your 0.5041, is that I have also used your own procedures for determining factor k, and I feel good with 0.50000.
bho? :biggrin::biggrin:

 

[triplix]

if in the same piece I find a part of development by means of a tube with two vertical walls (simplified form to u) and two folds to 90° degrees on the vertical sides to form a board what type of factor k set? They would both serve, 0.27... for the edges but for the bottom it needs 0.5...
Did you have any problems like that? This kind of development is the basis of my work and until I made them with calculator no problem but now it is difficult. . .

Palo