tank and sheet

[aerox]

Good morning to all, I wanted to ask you an information. I know solidworks at an academic level, I used it to do an internship by always modeling solid parts (no surfaces), so I used the basic commands, assemblies and puts at the table (trying to make it look like the original one made with think design). if I had to model tanks is correct an approach in the classic way (revolution of a profile or set of three pieces) or using the sheet module? I never used it.

Can you possibly recommend a course to improve my knowledge or even a good reference book? ? ?

thanks to all and good work;-)

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

...modeling tanks.. .

In my opinion it is a little generic... I would say to post some image at least, or hand sketch or anything! :finger:

 

[aerox]

You're right, I did a sketch of what I would like to draw;-)

Bye!

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

You're right, I did a sketch of what I would like to draw;-)

Bye!

It also depends a bit on the machines you have....I would start with sheet and funnel for cups, turning flange or laser in 2 pieces and welded (better). . .

 

[aerox]

exactly, I think it's made this way! I was wondering if it makes sense to shape the parts and put them in a set, or use the dedicated sheet module of swx (2011)

Thank you.

 

[PiegatoreSolidworks]

exactly, I think it's made this way! I was wondering if it makes sense to shape the parts and put them in a set, or use the dedicated sheet module of swx (2011)

Thank you.

the parts to be made of sheet metal I would do them with the module sheet and modeling with its module. After that I would put everything together so as to handle everything to the best.

 

[aerox]

I understand!thank you very much for the advice! I immediately start looking at how the module works, if I can never try to post my doubts;-)

Bye!

 

[aerox]

good evening to all, unfortunately I am in the axieme, better explain: I created two rows of parts, respectively of the support and the tank, each of the two files has multiple selectable config.
Now the problem is to assemble them together because there is no default coupling that goes well (at least I think), I try to be clearer. Surely they use a first concentric coupling to align the parts and pretend no problem. the second constraint should be realized "on a circle", that is the lower dome rests on the inner diameter of the flange in a linear contact that wraps itself on the crconference. I can't do this directly, so I thought I'd do that.

I create in the model of the tank a tangent plane to the dome and design a circumference equal inner diameter of the flange. then I project the curve on the surface. later I can couple this curve with the support. This way seems to work, but now the configurations come into play. I would like to automate this game but I don't know how to do it, I thought I would use the equation command and make guided by the choice of support the diameter to project on the dome... the problem is that I don't know how to do it, do I have to prepare variables in the side files or do everything from within the environment together? ? ?

Hello ;-)

 

[MassiVonWeizen]

but if you select the dome and edge of the flag of support does not give you the alley of coincidence? then select a plane by side and the bond of parallelism. in this way also changing measures the parts remain bound and follow.
a solution without using equations could be the following:
draws a parallel sketch to the axis of the reservoir and draws a sketch point that corresponds to a diameter on the support of the imagina by listing it.
Sucessively create a passing plan for the sketch point and parallel to the support of the tank.
in the configurations of the tank you will change the diameter value on which the sketch point rests.
in this way to each configuration the plan will move in correspondence of the positioning of the tank on the flange.
of course in the axieme you will make the coupling tank top with upper flange top.

 

[Mike1967]

Good morning to all, I wanted to ask you an information. I know solidworks at an academic level, I used it to do an internship by always modeling solid parts (no surfaces), so I used the basic commands, assemblies and puts at the table (trying to make it look like the original one made with think design). if I had to model tanks is correct an approach in the classic way (revolution of a profile or set of three pieces) or using the sheet module? I never used it.

Can you possibly recommend a course to improve my knowledge or even a good reference book? ? ?

thanks to all and good work;-)

If you only need to draw and put it on the table you can do it with a single function (revolves), if instead you have to create a table also to build it (with sheet metal developments and other) then you have to use the sheet metal tools.
drawings that come from our customers represent the object as solid, sending us drawings with already developments is too expensive for them.
we arrange to choose the best method.
Again, it depends on what you have to do.

:smile:

 

[aerox]

thank you so much for the answers!!! for the moment in the company is fine the solid and assembled model, also for the coupling you can use a reference plan of the reservoir regarding the ground and adjust so the height.. a little coarse, but if that's okay, nothing prohibits me from trying to do better.