Flat pattern blank size

[jletcher]

 Something else needs to be address I have mention this before like back 5 years ago but 2018 did not fix it so I will address again.

No I will not make an idea for it because it is not an idea but how it works in real life and should work in Inventor.

If you have a plate and it has angles cuts and radius are put on it the blank needs to be the right size before radius not after..

Blank sizes will be always wrong...

 Can this be fixed with a patch please.. I can't believe it has not been fixed..

[mcgyvr]

James,

Please let me know where it says that the flat pattern extents are always equivalent to the real world blank size used for manufacturing?

The software is currently displaying the correct values for the extents of the flat pattern.. 

Your assumption/opinion that those numbers are equivalent to a blank size in the real world are just that..

Based on the process I use here to manufacturer a part like that I would probably use the extents as shown by Inventor or if I needed extra material to account for the specific manufacturing process I was using then I would manually account for that based on the specifics of my manufacturing process.. 

You can voice your "opinion" and desire for that added functionality here..

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/idb-p/v1232

[jletcher]

 I agree the blank should have been correct from the start..

 But I don't make the parts and that was shown already to the engineers. Just like when they need to do a face off on a shaft they have to add to the length and face it off in inventor.

 But sheet metal should account for that in the blank automatically in my opinion...

"Please let me know where it says that the flat pattern extents are always equivalent to the real world blank size used for manufacturing?"

I never said that..

[mcgyvr]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

 But sheet metal should account for that in the blank automatically in my opinion...

---

James,

Just like everyone else..

Requests for additional functionality are best submitted to the ideastation..

Here is the link again.

https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/inventor-ideas/idb-p/v1232

Your statement that the current functionality is wrong/requesting a patch seem to very clearly imply that you expected sheet metal extents to always equal real world blank dimensions.. The extents are currently calculated correctly unless you have another case where they aren't.. 

[jletcher]

Can you make the part with the blank given? No

 Flat extents means the size needed to produce the part can I cut the size it gave me and make the part with correct dimensions given?

No it Knows or should know the radius needs material to make correctly... Just saying

[johnsonshiue]

Hi James,

I got your point. You are looking for a way to document a drawing in stages. In your case, you would to have dimensions in "blank state", not always in "machined state." This will require Inventor part to have multiple geometric definitions within the same ipt file. Unfortunately, we don't have the ability yet. You could sort of use iPart workflows to get the desirable result. But, I think it is not what iPart was designed for. iPart is to generate library components with similar geometry but different spec.

Anyway, we are aware of the requirements and we are working on a solution. If I recall correctly, you have signed up for Inventor Beta already. You could look for a forum, called "Alternative Representation" and participate in the discussion.

Many thanks!

[jletcher]

 Yes and no..

 I don't need to show the steps I just need the blank to be correct.

Flat pattern should show blank size needed to make the part. You have it where it accounts for bend deduction you don't build that into the part it is known by the information given..

 If you laser cut it is not much of an issue but when shearing or machining it does. This is where it catches the engineer in mistakes..

Extents to me mean what is need to make the part if it does not account for the radius material it is incorrect to me and many others..

Seems it would be real easy to make happen... But that's OK my opinions don't matter only been in the game 35 years I don't know nothing....

 I will just stop posting again......

 Thanks for your reply..

[mcgyvr]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Can you make the part with the blank given? No

 Flat extents means the size needed to produce the part can I cut the size it gave me and make the part with correct dimensions given?

No it Knows or should know the radius needs material to make correctly... Just saying

---

Actually... Yes I can easily make the part with the blank given.

Your assumption of the definition of flat extents is that... It is not mine.. I assume that flat pattern extents is just what it says... The extents of the flat pattern.. plain and simple.. and that exactly what it seems to be.. 

I fully agree that there are a cases where one would like the ability to use flat pattern extents as the real world blank.. (most cases in fact)

I agree that it would be nice if Inventor had the ability to adjust that value for specific manufacturing process/shape specifics,etc... I do know that the CAM program that I use with Inventor allows me to either use the blank dimensions as calculated by Inventor or to modify it manually to suit my needs.. (maybe I need hold down tabs as I do not have a vacuum table,etc... so I need more material on the left/right side to suit that specific process need)..

I do not agree that what it currently does is wrong. 

I cannot say that what it currently does is wrong as I was not involved in the implementation of this functionality so I cannot comment on what it should/shouldn't do..

I do not agree that this is something that Autodesk should address without the submission of an ideastation request and following that process as this to me is clearly extending its current functionality to include additional "improvements".. 

[johnsonshiue]

Hi James,

Inventor is smart in some workflows but it is not that smart in many places. The issue here is that the Extents function simply looks at the geometry. It is not aware of when a cut is made or the difference between blank state and machined state. The information could be there but it is not leveraged. This is why I said it would require multiple geometric definitions.

To Inventor, the fillet is just another feature to create geometry. It is not aware that it is a post process to a part. Unfortunately, as an engineer or CAD user, you will need to manage that. To certain degree, a CAD tool is too much focused on building a digital twin and it does not offer much help on guiding the user to make the part in real world. There is room for improvement, I believe.

Many thanks!

[Curtis_Waguespack]

There has been a discussion on the beta forum since June of 2017, that is on going, and I think that initiative when complete, would address this topic. 

This discussion can be found on the NDA based Inventor Feedback/Beta forums:
https://bit.ly/InventorBeta