Formed to Flat dimension

When modeling a SW sheet metal part (using legacy AutoCAD drawings as the dim refernces), the FLAT config islonger inwidth to what the AutoCAD drawing states it as. Of course, this means that the sheet metal part in SW isn't what the REAL WORLD FLAT is either. I understand K values, bend allowances, etc, factor in here. My question is: Is there a standard rule I can use to hit both sets of dims (Folded and Flat) . There is no one capable of telling me the values I need to input into SW here at the plant, so am I just going to have to figure it out by trial and error? I hope you can help

Well, your question is a good one. This bend allowance depends on your manufacturing folks. I currently utilize a k factor of .4063. This has been established as a fairly accurate dimension for our two different manufacturers.We currently also utilize the rule of interior bend radii = 1/2 material thickness minimum.


hope this helps good luck

Hi ttraser, thanks for the suggestion. My "manufacturing folks" could provide this if they could give me answers - they cannot. They are not at that level that you would assume and I was hooping for. Long story short, I went down that road before posting and crashed.......At a prior company, the 1/2 bend radii was the rule of thumb as well, but it is not here, and according to the AutoCAD is is much different, however, every drawing the % changes, so there is no rhyme or reason.


Maybe I was hoping for an easy answer - I imagined a sheet metal "pro" saying "When converting 2D to 3D, follow this example:.....". It is not a reflection on you ttraser, I appreciate your help. There are a lot of people who read this without posting (maybe fearful of sounding dumb) but I will say companies that switch from 2D to 3D, be prepared. AutoCAD makes it looks professional, but Solidworks (Pro/E, CATIA, etc) IS professional. The impact is reverbarated.....!





Any other suggestions???

Boy, have I opened a can of worms or what?? I can say this: The SW UG, the SW forum Q&A, The Sheet Metal Guy, lots of resources. There is no easy answer. If you don't have a MFG floor, or specifically sheet metal people to fall back on, good luck! And I press on..........

IN CONCLUSION:


First, the original AutoCAD was calculated flat by adding up all the sides. There were no calc's for subtracting the bend radii based on gauge thickness, etc etc. So right away,thisSW model and drawingwon't be right. Unfortaunately, MFG people are adamant that the "flat" number is correct and to hit the dim. It is an impossibilty.


The reason I asked this question orginally was because when first switching from Pro/E to SW (and working with sheet metal parts) the engineers told me there would be discrepancies between ACAD and SW. This issue is something different. I can't even get a sample of formed and/or flat part!! This isn't a dimensional issue. This problem is an incorrect legacy print that is incorrect, and no one will fix it. Nice huh?


For all of you who read these for informational purposes, I thought I would "close this up". Thanks again ttraser.