@mmaheux: obviously that's not the problem, by removing the mechanically welded tube the problem remains exactly the same.
@ac Cobra: Can I record my piece in a previous version myself? Or do you want screens?
To explain a bit, we work more in a logic "one welded assembly" = "one part", so it would suit me to have everything in one part. In the end, is it really a problem of 180° cutting? I have the impression that if my unfolded states were independent it would be perfect, wouldn't it? The upper section unfolds very well, but unfortunately all the others unfolded affect the same body.
I did a good job of making the shapes I wanted, but I'd like to have all my bodies in one room if possible. I don't understand why unfolded ones don't work.
The simplest thing is for each body to be individual pieces that you put in an assembly.
Each piece will unfold and be used to make your cut-outs which I hope for you will be done by laser otherwise hello the tip to trace and the nibbler ;-)
As said, I know I can do it this way but I was hoping that there would be a method on a part because 1) the parts become much more difficult to modify if they are separated (if you want to change a radius you have to modify on each part, for example) 2) We have facilitated procedures for multibody parts.
I'm sure that among the SolidWorks cracks that you are, someone could tell me why unfolded ones don't work:)
As explained in one of my previous posts; To put it simply, you repeat the same spiral and you make configurations, then you replace them and remove material in the assembly to make it conical and you share the function with the parts.
I thank you for your help, but I don't think I can express my need. I want to do everything in a single part file, as explained, but I'm stuck on the unfolded bodies of this part, not on other ways of doing it that would make me go through an assembly, even if your methods are very interesting.
I hope I don't sound harsh in this message, since I'm extremely grateful for giving me time to help me.
You are not rude at all since we are discussing: but what you want to do is not a priori possible, simply you have to do as @ac cobra indicated and that is very good. There is the other way as I propose which is a little less elegant surely: but I do it this way because I have never used the configurations.
What I do know is that from the point of view of the material we are faced with an absolute physical impossibility to do this with flat sheet metal and solidworks only does what is physically computable and can be done in real life.
Just for fun, as the young people say, we should understand why you want a single piece. An assembly made with one or the other method seems to me to be unavoidable.
Communication between human beings is not easy sometimes ;-) ;-) hihhihi
I really don't think it's physically impossible. We are able to unfold certain sections, and I have already seen it made elsewhere. But are we talking about the piece cut into sections?
As for my preference for a single part file, there is first of all the modularity aspect, having the fewest parameters to modify with each redesign, but also internal procedures, in terms of bills of materials and then laser cutting commands, which are much simpler if everything is saved in a part. And to come back to my initial question, I just need to understand why some sections can unfold and others cannot:)
I tried the cobra method, unfortunately it seems that the assembly function fails to take into account the part configurations.
Not being able to open your file because of an earlier version of the software; could you put the STEP file so that I can have the dimensions and help you in the design of the worm screw in one piece.
I can't open your file. I'm on SW 2017, is that why?
But in this case, why don't 288° cuts (5 sections) work either? Is it because of the method I chose for the removal of material? I'll give you the version I made like this.
For the method, for each piece of coil I create 2 new 3d sketches with the sketch from each Helice/spiral converted into a 3d sketch then shortened and constrained in relation to a plane (top plane) then with these 2 sketches each time I create a transition fold. And there is no problem for the unfolded.
If I understand your method correctly, in each 3d sketch you create a small part of the spiral? Maybe I don't know how to use the "convert entities" function to convert the spiral into a 3d sketch, but do we agree that it's not dynamic? If I have to change a dimension, I have to redo each sketch one by one (i.e. a small bunch of steps in total).
Not necessarily a bunch of steps if you use variables that use basic trigo or a rating control table (@sbadenis will explain to you ;-) ;-) how to do it with a table).
PS: @sbadenis a super big Congratulations (I love it) for your proposal, it's super simple and tasteful and in one room on top of that. Simply Fortich'
So I managed to get everything I wanted! Thank you!!
I admit that if you had a little tip to give me to make it dynamic, I'd be very interested, for now, I have to redo my 10 3d sketches each time for each modification of my spiral.
Small problem in your design, the 2 end points of the 3d sketch must be on the same plane passing through the center of the tube. To achieve this you create your 2 - 3 or more planes and then you constrain the endpoints of the 3d sketches on these planes and in addition it should be dynamic.
Even if I'm a fan of trigo Zozo_mp, I'm also in favor of the least effort! So I let solidworks calculate for me!
Oooh I see! I had gone through a 5-segment split of my 3d sketch but your method allows more modularity afterwards! Bravo, it's great! A bit tedious to constrain the 20 ends of the propeller portion, but the result is exactly what I want!
Thank you again and congratulations for the beautiful method proposed!
