I have a sheet metal part whose development is calculated directly in the unfolded state. Except that I would like to recover this unfolded state to make new folds and thus obtain a second piece, different from the first, but having the same development.
To do this, I wanted to create a new part, then "Insert / Part... " when I went to get my original sheet metal. So far so good, SolidWorks inserts my original sheet metal into its current configuration (in "folded" configuration), except that I can't find how to change the configuration to put it in an unfolded state.
So, I wanted to be clever by opening my base sheet, putting it in an unfolded configuration, then inserting it into a new part... except that SolidWorks sends me into a frenzy, telling me: "Impossible to insert the part [...]. There is still an unfolded state function in the source or destination part. Remove all the Unfolded State functions and try again." Shit, it's a mess!
Except that no, it doesn't work. When I unfold my part, I no longer have access to the sheet metal functions (the icons are grayed out).
@gt22,
It's an idea of rescue that I only half like, because suddenly I lose the link with the unfolded sheet of my base sheet... which in my case can be a source of problems in the future.
But I think that's what I'll do if no other solutions;)
So it's almost perfect... except that when I use the Unfold function, it divides my part into several surfaces (corresponding to all the tangent arcs of my folded configuration; see the attached image)
Is there a way to merge all these surfaces to have something cleaner before I make my new folds?
Hello @littleworm, there is however one thing not to be neglected when you use an unfolded in two different pieces (or more) is that if one of the pieces has a modification well the two cuts could not look the same anymore and therefore it could quickly be a mess.
In addition, for solidworks, the fact of making several parts in one, it weighs down the file and it could easily make it lose its footing (with the bugs that go well).
I would also be of the opinion that you make an outer cut that you then insert into your new piece in order to have several files.
On the other hand, you do an unfolded and then a config. Piece 1 folded
then a config. Folded piece 2 etc...
In short, very cumbersome to manage, not always useful...
Personally, too bad I make a cut for each piece, even if they are identical.
Yes, it's indeed the "cleanest" way to do it if I had known from the design that I would have to make 2 different pieces with the same unfolded... Unfortunately, the basic piece has already been around for a while and I can't afford to review its hierarchy.
However, I found a hack to allow me to do what I want:
- I create a new configuration in my base sheet,
- in this one, I use the Unfoldfunction,
- I then create a sketch with the "Convert entities" tool corresponding to the cut of my unfolded,
- I remove the body (so nothing on the screen),
- then recreate the flat sheet metal thanks to my sketch; which gives me a usable unfold for any new fold, and directly linked to the unfolded of my original piece.
I grant you, this is completely unacceptable! :)
But it allows me to change the unfolded of my 2 parts (and therefore the shape of my 2nd folded sheet) by modifying the sketch dimensions of my 1st folded sheet, while being sure that they both keep the same unfolded... It's very exceptional, but that's what I'm trying to do.
- I then create a sketch with the "Convert entities" tool corresponding to the cut of my unfolded,
- I remove the body (so nothing on the screen),
- then recreate the flat sheet metal thanks to my sketch; which gives me a usable unfold for any new fold, and directly linked to the unfolded of my original piece.
I grant you, this is completely unacceptable! :)
But it allows me to change the unfolded of my 2 parts (and therefore the shape of my 2nd folded sheet) by modifying the sketch dimensions of my 1st folded sheet, while being sure that they both keep the same unfolded... It's very exceptional, but that's what I'm trying to do.