Sheet Metal Automatic Derived Configuration 2

[Russell67]

When i create a sheet metal part before i create the drawing i only see one configuration. If i click on the icon to flatten there still is only one configuration.

After i create the drawing i then see a derived configuration for a flat pattern available for drawing and in the part.

When i go back to my part and click the flatten icon it does not switch between configurations.

When did this automatic derived configuration created at the drawing phase become available?

As long as i can remember or have been using solidworks this has been this way, however i notice several people like to create a new configuration in the part before the drawing and suppress the feature.

Any advantage to letting SW do the work or vice-versus?

Just need to explain my method to some people and want to have my information ready. Thanks

 

[4zengineering]

There are times for my applications when the use of the unfold and fold features is more preferable to use than the flat pattern. That is one circumstance where I create the flat configuration ahead of time.

The majority of the time I just do it "your way".

The only advantage I can think of to doing it your way however, is that (I believe) Solidworks doesn't keep creating new Flat Pattern configurations when I create a new drawing. If I remember correctly, once it creates a flat pattern configuration for a parent configuration through a new drawing it's one and done.

 

[TheTick]

If you want to add parametric bend notes to a flat pattern in a drawing view, you MUST use the auto-generated FP view.

 

[Russell67]

Thanks for the responses. I threw together a quick part both ways with a drawing and derived wins in my book.

Problem is our standards were written in 1902 and half the people here are weeks away from retirement, one half of the rest is retired and half of the half of the half is followers and the rest are experienced people.

Sheet metal accounts for 10-15% of the parts we create to updating standards is not the top focus. Also all our parts are done by an outside vendor.

However for those that have used or created the sheet metal parts and have detailed the flat patterns how close do the folded parts compare? Especially if the parts are made at an outside vendor, given k-factors and all parameters are set-up. Also for those that make it in house. Trying to get a feel to help push standards in a logical not this is the way we have done it for 200 years attitude. Thanks

 

[AnnaWood]

Your outside vendor probably is not using your flat pattern. We don't....

You have no idea of their processes or tooling and will be likely to give them an incorrect flat pattern. So they will create their own flat pattern to the parameters their tooling works to.

For our parts we make in house our flat patterns work well out of SolidWorks. This happens because we use the k-factors, bend allowances, etc that works for our tooling. This info is gathered from testing and real world production of parts over time.

Cheers,

Cheers,

Anna Wood
SW2008 SP5.0, Windows Vista SP1
IBM ThinkPad T61p, T7800, FX570M, 4 gigs of RAM

http://www.solidmuse.com

http://www.phxswug.com

 

[ATDENGINEERING]

I agree with Anna's sentiments.

I don't know your exact situation, but you state that "..all our parts are done by an outside vendor". When you say "done", I'm going to assume that you mean "fabricated complete, including forming, etc."

If your company isn't doing the forming, then I must strongly urge you not to push your in-house standards to include the definition of flattened parts.

 

[Updraft]

Following the comments of others above, if you are not making your own parts then your drawings should explicitly state that the formed part is what is being contracted for (the drawing is the most significant part of that contract). IF you even supply a flat pattern, usually on a separate sheet within the drawing file, it should state something to the effect "Flat pattern provided for reference only." In this way you clearly make the vendor responsible for giving you what you want and do not expose yourself to liability for problems by telling them how to do it (your flat pattern). Any good s/m vendor knows this and gladly accepts responsibility for their work without being handcuffed as to how to do it.

As Anna indicated, a lot of s/m vendors are using SolidWorks, but they load the files with the particulars (k-factor, radii, actual thickness vs. "book values", etc.) for their operation and can produce excellent results from the start. These vendors are a delight to work with!

- - -Updraft

 

[NomLaser]

I agree with ATDENGINEERING. If everything is out of house, including fabrication and forming, then there's no reason to provide the flat. Your desired output is the detailed formed views.

 

[TheTick]

Adding to Anna's comments...

The better prog die makers I have dealt with would rather not see your flat pattern. They all had better means (like BlankWorks) to derive more accurate flat patterns. Plus, most of them have been burnt by customer flats in the past.

 

[Russell67]

To all those that responded thanks. You have helped to provide me with valuable information to aid in the writing of a process / procedure.