develop a rectangle cone to round

[Devis]

good morning to all I have to develop a cone of sheet that from rectangle (as measures are 2690x665 internal measures ) becomes round (with diameter 1030 inside ) decentralizing the round of 150 mm. the design in 3d as you can see I managed to do it, but I can't catch it

 

[ballino]

I think it's a problem of how you set the model.

Try this

Hi.
dancer

 

[marcof]

good morning to all I have to develop a cone of sheet that from rectangle (as measures are 2690x665 internal measures ) becomes round (with diameter 1030 inside ) decentralizing the round of 150 mm. the design in 3d as you can see I managed to do it, but I can't catch it

you need to use the "folding with loft" function in the sheet commands. see attached file.

Hi.

p.s. next time besides the image, which must at least be compleda of the feature manager (as loop you know if you have made a bending with loft, a loft of a solid, a loft of a surface...) allga also the swx file otherwise I will relaunch with a psd file, then the model in swx I will do it again looking at the figure with photoshop.

 

[Devis]

in reverence you have drawings that you sent me, I tried to bring back the actual measurements of the cone, and until they all well, but when I wanted to record the dxf with the bending lines the design disappears and you do not save

 

[sampom]

good morning to all I have to develop a cone of sheet that from rectangle (as measures are 2690x665 internal measures ) becomes round (with diameter 1030 inside ) decentralizing the round of 150 mm. the design in 3d as you can see I managed to do it, but I can't catch it

. consult the online guide

as you have drawn a sheet can never be, the surfaces in reality will always be "plane" (if we talk about bending/calandering) and not arquate, concave, convesse.. even if the program (but "he" is stupid), if you do the loft as you must, it develops the same "correct" (at least, it works to me and saves it in dxf/dwg)

greetings
Mar

 

[Devis]

I'm sorry, Marco, you have a chance to make a practical example, so I can see all the steps you do? Thank you.

 

[Mike1967]

View attachment 13786. consult the online guide

as you have drawn a sheet can never be, the surfaces in reality will always be "plane" (if we talk about bending/calandering) and not arquate, concave, convesse.. even if the program (but "he" is stupid), if you do the loft as you must, it develops the same "correct" (at least, it works to me and saves it in dxf/dwg)

greetings
Mar

Dissenting:wink: .
bending with loft never creates ironed or bombed sheets.
that hopper is part of the work I normally do with swx.
each section of the edges, upper/lower, are connected by a line
imaginary straight, so the piece is developable.
the only drawback is that, since there are no well defined folds (it is a
variable roller) it is not possible to have the fold lines. however the bending machine will trace the appropriate references for the forming.
for export, are you trying directly on the side, or
at the table?
Anyway, on the face of the sunset... You're forced to build it apart, it's very big.


Hi.

 

[sampom]

Dissenting:wink: .
bending with loft never creates ironed or bombed sheets.
that hopper is part of the work I normally do with swx.
each section of the edges, upper/lower, are connected by a line
imaginary straight, so the piece is developable.
the only drawback is that, since there are no well defined folds (it is a
variable roller) it is not possible to have the fold lines. however the bending machine will trace the appropriate references for the forming.
for export, are you trying directly on the side, or
at the table?
Hi.

Hi, mike.

No, I'm the one who said, "wink," but maybe not so much because I think we want to say the same thing, "smile."
what I mean is:..you will agree with me that this "fact" makes little real sense. this is not a bending but a "deformation"; the loft has created a single surface, without stony, all arquata, concave, convessa.. Call her whatever you want. Yet the program also solved the development (if you do the sheet loft in the right way) . But see that it continues to make little sense; it has only 2 straight edges (those of junction where there was cutting), others are all formed by "concave curves" (to speak of those on the rectangular profile clearly). are not indicated lines of fold and is perhaps what you mean when you say that the folder must be arranged to trace it, so big the shape is that, just join the edges and divide in how many folds you feel appropriate.

..and this file View attachment QUADRA-TONDA.rar
..continue. .

 

[sampom]

ciao mike...

Go ahead. (I open another post because then it does not handle the attachments)now itself, same measures, but made as it should be and applying the "good rules" of the loft:. this is real, there are flat faces and rounded "pigols" to change from rectangular to round. but all "treated lines", it is understood that it is derived from a folded sheet. is no longer a unique surface but different "triangular sectors" to delimit the working areas.
of course for development there are no problems. beautiful on the floor with all the edges of the rectilinear rectilinear rectilinear, as it must be, wanting (dimensions permitting) to be obtained with a net cut of cesoia (not for the other round profile). .
and you also put the correct lines of fold (of course you had assigned them previously in the loft property manager. Also in the example of before I put them but are ignored) so that the bending/traceler should not bang with angular calculations, just copy from the table you could quota quietly.
also of this file View attachment QUADRA-TONDA 1.rarI've been posting the guide page, it's all explained.

ah, and with both these models I have no problem saving in 2d for cutting the shape, both on the side and on the table.

in the end everything depends on how drawings/models, the program (which I repeat is "stupid") does what you tell him. you have to use the functions in the right way and "he" as far as it can arrive.

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[Mike1967]

Go ahead. (I open another post because then it does not handle the attachments)now itself, same measures, but made as it should be and applying the "good rules" of the loft:View attachment 13792. this is real, there are flat faces and rounded "pigols" to change from rectangular to round. but all "treated lines", it is understood that it is derived from a folded sheet. is no longer a unique surface but different "triangular sectors" to delimit the working areas.
of course for development there are no problemsView attachment 13793. beautiful on the floor with all the edges of the rectilinear rectilinear rectilinear, as it must be, wanting (dimensions permitting) to be obtained with a net cut of cesoia (not for the other round profile). .
and you also put the correct lines of fold (of course you had assigned them previously in the loft property manager. Also in the example of before I put them but are ignored) so that the bending/traceler should not bang with angular calculations, just copy from the table you could quota quietly.
also of this file View attachment 13794I've been posting the guide page, it's all explained.

ah, and with both these models I have no problem saving in 2d for cutting the shape, both on the side and on the table.

in the end everything depends on how drawings/models, the program (which I repeat is "stupid") does what you tell him. you have to use the functions in the right way and "he" as far as it can arrive.

greetings
Marco:smile:

azz, do you know that I'm arguing that system to develop stilts?
are those little subterfuges to make the prg believe to be really
"intelligent" :biggrin:.
in the file posted by devis (which I have escaped) in fact that stretch
right in the upper profile is missing; memorize of what I normally carry out
to develop similar forms (capita two/three times a year), I did not notice that "small" lack.
It is always a pleasure to exchange views and working methods!

Hi...:finger:

 

[Devis]

Thank you guys adessio everything seems fine to me, I will study for good the section in the online guide.
soon
Devis

 

[re_solidworks]

I'd like to add mine too. I have made a lot of hoppers and in some cases, with the loft sheet it is not able to make them. I quote for example a hopper that must subsequently be cut to embrace a round surface. I also do not like how to manage the folds of the loft sheet.
I prefer to relase the "real" surface with the fold edges. Sometimes I do it as solid, much more often I do it using the surfaces, but eventually I get a uniform thick solid, with all the flat faces and with the living edges instead of the folds. at this point just enter the folds and the game is done. is a method that takes + time but ensures you get to the result in any condition.

 

[sampom]

Thank you guys adessio everything seems fine to me, I will study for good the section in the online guide.
soon
Devis

observes well how the sketch of the disassed round profile is made at the top; You'll notice it's not exactly a complete circle.
and attention to when selecting the 2 profiles, you have to touch points that are respectively "coincidents", on the contiguous edges (usually clikko at the extreme near the opening cut).

for me a big limit is that you can't do the 2 sketches on non parallel planes.
And why? Haven't the programmers ever seen it?
Of course you get it differently, but if there is a function to limit its exploitation?

greetings
Mar

 

[re_solidworks]

observes well how the sketch of the disassed round profile is made at the top; You'll notice it's not exactly a complete circle.
and attention to when selecting the 2 profiles, you have to touch points that are respectively "coincidents", on the contiguous edges (usually clikko at the extreme near the opening cut).

for me a big limit is that you can't do the 2 sketches on non parallel planes.
And why? Haven't the programmers ever seen it?
Of course you get it differently, but if there is a function to limit its exploitation?

greetings
Mar

the problem of the sheet with loft is that there are no bend directions, instead using the surfaces solve the problem you said and get complete directions on how to fold.

 

[sampom]

the problem of the sheet with loft is that there are no bend directions, instead using the surfaces solve the problem you said and get complete directions on how to fold.

How not?
Did you look at the file I posted (the second, the "correct")? the fold lines are there and at the table with the flat repetition assigns them with the usual indication note of the corners.
but as I said you must set the nr of folds you will use (as you want the edge to be round or polygonal) and those are brought to the table. the indications there are all as for any bending.

greetings
Marco:smile:

 

[re_solidworks]

How not?
Did you look at the file I posted (the second, the "correct")? the fold lines are there and at the table with the flat repetition assigns them with the usual indication note of the corners.
but as I said you must set the nr of folds you will use (as you want the edge to be round or polygonal) and those are brought to the table. the indications there are all as for any bending.

greetings
Marco:smile:

You're right, until recently he didn't, and the notes remained a mystery. remains the fact that the result of the model is not real but quite approximate.

 

[reggio]

Hello, I would like to ask an opinion on how to finish my rectangle-tondo staggered sunset.
In practice I would like to understand if and how it is possible to add 4 lips "supported to plan1" to fix the hopper to my frame.

the image "tramoggia" can be seen the example of sampom (not staggered) to which I added the "flangia of the edge" but that they do not combine with the plan that served (1 and 4 too far, 2 and 3 too low ...).
the image "tramoggia-mia" shows my staggered hopper (to which I can not even select the edges to apply "board flange") with sketched as I would like to get the 4 lips...
finally attached the file (to be renamed as .sldprt).

 

[jacobiano]

In my opinion, the best development has always been self-adjusted..do all the reasonings on the average radius and you are in place..do some constructions with ahttp://www.cad3d.it/forum1/attachment.php?attachmentid=25283&stc=1&d=1328439286rchi and the result and beauty that ever..

 

[sampom]

according to me for hustlework the best development you always have autocad..make all the arguments on the average radius and you are in place..make some constructions with ahttp://www.cad3d.it/forum1/attachment.php?attachmentid=25283&stc=1&d=1328439286rchi and the result and beautiful that ever..

Ossignur!! which states:hahahahah:hahahahah:. It's almost carnival, it can be like: (which then acad doesn't give you anything, you have to draw it, and only "by approaching you" to real development)
Never used a 3d cad, did you? you don't have to make any reasoning (of course the brain must keep it on) and no construction, it does everything "he" in a fraction of second and dimensionally/graphically perfect.

 

[Mike1967]

In my opinion, the best development has always been self-adjusted..do all the reasonings on the average radius and you are in place..do some constructions with ahttp://www.cad3d.it/forum1/attachment.php?attachmentid=25283&stc=1&d=1328439286rchi and the result and beauty that ever..

If that's why... I'd already track them on the plates :biggrin:... but it's not the best system.... you've never used the 3d paramentrico!