What would you like to model in the flat

[Chris Lohman]

WHAT, would you like to model in the flat in sheetmetal and HOW would you like IronCAD to behave to allow you to accomplish this?

 

Here's a chance for you to provide us with feedback on how future functionality should work in IronCAD.

 

Technical Marketing is putting together a functional spec for adding modeling in the flat to a *future* release of IronCAD. (nothing specific on what version yet). They want info from you.

 

So here's an example of what we're looking for:

 

What

==I would like to be able to import a DWG onto a flat, cut the flat, then fold it and see the cuts fold with it.==

 

How

==My DWG has all of the cuts and bends in it. So what I would do if I could would be.

 

1) Drop in sheetmetal stock, set up all of the bends and all of the stock w/o any cuts/punches in it. Then unfold it.

2) Drop in a custom profile, edit it, then import my DWG and use that DWG to cut the sheetmetal. Once I re-fold the sheetmetal, that cut should follow across the bends.==

 

unfold-error.zip

[Alex Khenkin]

Chris,

this is exactly the functionality I was looking for awhile ago when I posted the request. I had an "unfolded" drawing which could be easily modeled in a flat, and then folded. I won't even go into the details of what a nightmare it was to do it in a folded state. Providing that IC will model the bending effects (stretching,etc.) realistically, it should be a great feature.

Thanks,

Alex.

 

 

[Jan Brits]

Sheetmetal improvements, are you be bored Chris?

 

Flatten cone's or flatten enything.

 

Unfold a model, model in the flatten form, making holes in the bend etc. and fold it back.

 

A unfold and fold simulation, each bent, step by step.

[tlehnhaeuser]

1. Full Associative between the Folded and Unfolded part. Can model on which ever makes the most sense at the time and have both update automatically.

2. Also the ability to change features at will (ie change a round louver to a lanced louver af design is complete).

3. Use 2D (dxf, dwg) geometry to use for bending, features, etc...

4. An automatic gusset feature would be nice for across bends. (Help: could be a extended shelled rib)

 

While your on the subject.

 

 

[Guest jkim522093]

I want the followings to be added too for sheetmetal;

1.When two or more stocks meet in IC 5.2(and also in old version),

these stocks become merged and one stock(part).

So when unfold this, we could not get the correct one.

In this regards, the option to split at the meet of the stocks should

be added.

 

 

2.And also we need the feature to add the custom punch.

 

JH

[Guest Wim]

model in flat sheetmetal would be great, but why not first enhance model in bended sheetmetal :

-extent the number of bends from 2 to endless with a cut throug bend with

a normal bend

-extend the number of bend from 1 to endless with a `bend with stock`

-add the feature`modify affected bend` for patterns and clusters

-in many occasions cuts throug bends give errors

-enhance the close-corner-relief so that i dont have to gamble what is right and left/and reduce the number of mouse-clicks for this feature

-for closing a corner ,give the three options in a popupmenu and let ironcad arrange the rest

 

 

 

[cborer]

Hi Chris, thank you for asking us:

Many interesting ideas!

My wishes:

Unfolding cones and loft skins ( two floors ).

To me it would be enough to have a theoretical unfolder with skin=0.

Easier way to cut out things when folded as when unfolded .

Construct as well as in unfolded as in folded state.

Better import – export of dxf / dwg.

When importing .dxf we also need a tool to clean lines!

European stocks automatically when I choose meters as default.

 

But in general or philosophically I would suggest the following:

The strongest part of IC is the way we can construct in the common IC part.

Why not constructing as usual in this part and using the command “ make face “ or new: “ make metal sheet face “ …from part.

Before that we would need to make the bends.

…. and we would be able to choose “ thicken inside “ or outside or both side of the face and the thickness ( or stock ).

As well we would need a the possibility to choose which corners are to open and which ones are connected.

Maybe some conflicts should be solved or corrected later in the metal sheet part itself ( overlapping a.s.o.).

 

 

 

[Chris Lohman]

Carlo: Hmm interesting idea there. We have the create surface shape tool; do something like that but make it "Create Sheetmetal". I wonder how the bends would work with that. Would you have to put radii on the part before creating the sheetmetal? Any ideas on how to handle bends?

 

Wim: I don't understand what "from 1 to endless" means. You can add as many bends as you want in succession. Can you give me an example?

 

Jkim: Split where the stocks meet...So if two stocks meet, you want an option to just trim off the excess material? How would you indicate where IronCAD should actually trim? It seems we would need to implement some sort of "trim line" where you draw a line and then trim the stock up to that line. IronCAD would then just automatically edit the profile of the stock to meet that trim line. Would this work for your purpose, having the trim line that is? Hey that trim line could be useful elsewhere, hmm....

 

I have a question for everyone...how to handle inserting bends in the flat. Let's say you import a drawing like this that is a fully completed sheetmetal part. You need to import it, fold it, then tweak it a bit. How could you import a dwg with bend lines on it, and tell IronCAD where the bends are and the bend properties? Here's an image:

 

 

 

How would you handle k-factor and stretching in that instance?

 

How to handle the material is the big problem with modeling in the flat. If you punch a block in the folded state then unfold it, there's a good chance that the unfolded block will have stretched a bit so it won't be exactly the same as the folded state. How could we handle this with modeling in the flat?

 

If you punch a square hole in the flat, lets say you punch it across a bend line, how should IronCAD handle the calculation of that profile going from flat to folded? It will have to stretch some where to compensate for the bend. Should IronCAD calculate the edges of the punch and insure that they are in the same location in the folded state, then stretch the center of the punch to compensate, or should IronCAD keep that profile exactly the same size and allow it to reposition in the folded state?

 

We need to know from you how to actually calculate transfering from a flat to folded state.

[Guest Wim]

this happenes when u unfold a sheet with a cutout throug more then 2 bends

 

 

[Chris Lohman]

Wim,

 

I don't know if it's fixed in 5.2 or if it's the cutting operation but I was able to make it work in 5.2.

 

I used a standard part (non-sheet metal) to perform a cutting operation across the bends and it let me unfold them. Here's a shot:

 

 

[Guest Wim]

Chris, i dont want to use the cutting-operation because not all the bends are always 90 degrees , and i want to be able to use the custom-profile

 

 

[Chris Lohman]

ok, I will add the bug report for the custom profile.

 

 

[cborer]

Chris

I thought to use simply the blend edges tool:

Blended edges would be unfolded while not blended edges would be opened.

Maybe it could be bound on a stock of bends.

For this way of constructing sheet metal parts most of the tools are in IC yet.

( as you said: “create surface shape” )

There would be the need of a translator to change the blended edges to bends.

This way it becomes very easy to make a complex sheet metal part.

And maybe it is the way to improve the missing cone and loft tools for sheet metal.

 

 

 

[Guest jkim522093]

Dear Chris,

 

Yes, maybe the trim line at the meet of two stocks good solution.

And if we could have the option to draw the trim line, input the

distance(gap) and so on, then it must be better.

But just with the simple trim line is good enough in practically.

When two stocks meet each other, it is easy to extract the line

(straight line) between the cross points of each profile of the stocks.

(When two stocks meet each other in the image of my previous

message, you could see the straight line in fig 3.)

It is easy, I think, to extract this line as a trim line and change

the profile of each stock to this trim line. Of course, there should be

some min. gap between the stocks at this trim line.

 

JH

 

[schizek]

I would like to be able to unfold an existing sheetmetal part, MODIFY the flat, and then refold the part KEEPING those modifications. Of course, there are other options I would want also, but they all would be based off the idea that this would work.

[Chris Lohman]

Scot, what I'm asking is, exactly what would you do to "modify" in the flat. Modify what/how, so far people are just saying "modify whatever". We're looking for specifics.

 

Take square punch for example. If you punch a perfect square in the folded state then unfold it, due to stretching that profile is not perfectly square in the unfolded state. So one thing we're discussing is, if you were to punch a perfect square in the flat, how do we compensate for stretching when putting it into the folded state. So since it might be more difficult to implements some things verses others, if people tell us what exactly they would do in the flat, then perhaps we can implement some of the features that wouldn't take years to write.

 

 

[schizek]

Chris,

 

1. V notch corners. The "watertight" corners option does not create what we are looking for. We use a 90 degree V notch at a given depth. This is not always on center with the bend. The easiest way to create this would be to modify the flat and have the folded part remember that information.

 

2. Any time there is a complex punch around many bends, or that aren't on a "flat" portion of the folded part. Once again, to be able to add this in the flat would be extremely beneficial.

 

I really don't have a long list of specifics. I can only say that sheetmetal design is done with the flat in mind. If that is correct, the part will be correct, not vice versa

[Chris Lohman]

ah I see, ok thanks scott