solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Not Necessarily Me » Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:45:49 GMT

Can someone explain what this error means when I insert a sheetmetal forming

"The part's thickness may not be compatible with this form tool. The
thickness must be less than the minimum radius of curvature for the form
tool. "

What do I need to change on the forming tool to make it work?


solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Wayne Tiffany » Tue, 05 Jul 2005 22:52:45 GMT

I don't use the form tools, but I would guess that it's telling you that you
need to increase some forming radius that you have on your tool. It sounds
like you have a small radius that the program can't get the material to flow
around because the thickness of the material is too large relative to the
desired radius and would therefore have to coin it.


solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Jean Marc » Tue, 05 Jul 2005 23:14:38 GMT

"Wayne Tiffany" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > a rit dans le message de


And it is a way I use to prevent users from using a forming tool on too
large a thickness.

solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Not Necessarily Me » Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:55:01 GMT


That's what it was. The customer was trying to do the impossible...And I
was trying to let him do it.



solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Sporkman » Wed, 06 Jul 2005 06:59:17 GMT

Now that's an interesting and seemingly intelligent strategy! What . .
. do you just include a radius somewhere that won't necessarily impact
the part?


solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Jean Marc » Wed, 06 Jul 2005 15:01:48 GMT

"Sporkman" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > a rit dans le

Yes, but I must confess that most of our forming tools are very simple.
Those are designed to be mounted on the same presses we do the bending on.
(forming a hole for ex.)

For the more elaborate (ie. a whole panel), the problem is different as they
are designed for a given part.

solidworks >> Forming tool help

by Sean-Michael Adams » Wed, 06 Jul 2005 22:34:53 GMT

It is also notable that the forming tools can easily make geometry that
is impossible to attain.

Most apparent are lances (or any form) that are as long as their
opening - they always shorten in real life - and form tools will not
automatically adjust for developed length. Foresight in the form-tool
design process can account for correct development, but this becomes
problematical as the form tool must be adapted for the "as used"

Another one comes to mind is on the periphery of a form tool, the
material backside can be dead sharp as if the inner & outer radius were
zero. I have seen this on louvers for example. One can get different
levels of realism depending on the form tool design.

Another big problem is that the form tool cannot (usually) in any way
have a disparity between the punch & die side of a feature - i.e.
cannot account for size differences in shear/break. Generally this is
not a huge problem if one dimensions the die or punch size exclusively
(not using both sides to define definitions). Related to this is the
inability for a form tool to model things with different punch / die
sizes. Take a simple semi-perf for example. Anyone worth their salt
(my opinion - dissenters received) would not size a punch for a
semi-perf _smaller_ than the die opening as it creates a shear (weak
semi-perf). Common practice is to size the punch _bigger_ than the the
die to create more of an extrusion and create less of a shear line
(remember it does not enter and does not need to be smaller). Form
tools cannot deal with this very well.

Form tool detail all depends on what one needs (part designer or tool
designer), so there is usually a way to create the geometry needed in
either case. What a part designer and a tool designer deem passable is
often different.



Similar Threads

1. HELP - Double Bridge Lance Forming Tool Question

2. Help with Forming tool


I have made and altered forming tools before, however this time I need a 
"Card Guide Lance" which is like two single lances side by side...

The problem is that SW2007 (sp3.0) is not letting me make a forming tool 
with a multi-body part.  But that is how the lance tool is - two lances side 
by side.

Anyone made a forming tool like this?


3. Forming Tool Problem

4. Sheet Metal Forming Tools - Surfaces Simulate The Part

Hi Folks,

I have been playing around with sheet metal forming tools and using
surfaces to show a better image of the part feature you will get when
you use a given forming tool.

Essentially, the pallette will generally show you the anti-image of
the part (a view of the punch).  After a bit of playing around I have
come up with a novel way of using surfaces to design your part feature
in the pallette and have the part that forms inherit what was done,
resulting in a forming tool.

In short - design your part feature (with surfaces) in the pallette
part instead of playing the "punch design" game and hoping the part
comes out right when the forming tool is applied.  Derive the forming
tool from the part and then hide the forming tool body (not required
but makes the pallette look nicer).  When you go to use the forming
tool, the "real" part feature will appear and will be easier to
understand.  Since you have driven the forming tool part of the
pallette model from a viable part definition, you are assured a
correct forming tool outcome.

I like this one and thought is was worth sharing.  

See two samples:



5. Forming Tools

6. Insert forming tool fails (2005 sp0.0 and 0.1)

I'm trying to insert the louver that comes with Solidworks and when I
drag it over from the Design Library to a simple plate that I've
already added the Sheet-Metal feature to, I get the following error:
"Are you trying to make a derived part?"

If I say Yes, then it starts the derived part process (bad).  If I say
No then it simply opens the louver in it's own window.  At no time do I
get the preview that I recall seeing in 2004.
Anyone know what stupid mistake I'm making here?

7. Extrude and tap forming tool

8. forming tool orientation sketch

When did they change forming tools? Overall nice job, much simpler, but 
they seem to have blown it big time with the orientation sketch unless 
there is something I'm missing.

The orientation sketch cannot be edited. That in itself is not 
necessarily a problem, but if the footprint of the feature is 
symmetrical but the rest of the feature is not, then the "orientation" 
sketch becomes a "disorientation" sketch. Manually created sketches are 
ignored, it adds the giant "L", but this is not in the orientation sketch.

Fortunately you can edit it after you guess wrong.

The SolidWorks Three-step: two steps forward, one step back.