SolidWorks Sheet Metal Tutorial - THRU BRACKET

[@VYBEKAT]

I appreciate this greatly. I need more sheet metal practice

[@TooTallToby]

Awesome - Glad this helped!

[@kobemaui9983]

Excellent, brilliant format and execution 👍

[@TooTallToby]

Wow thanks Kobe!

[@davinderkumar2059]

Great stuff ❤️

[@TooTallToby]

Thank you 🙌

[@rubendragan6514]

4:51 I did get that wrong but found later:)) Thanks Toby :)

[@TooTallToby]

Very nice and SPEEDY too!!

[@ericbaumgartner6558]

so cool! normal cut was the what I needed!

[@TooTallToby]

Aww yeah - Normal cut can be a blessing....but sometimes a curse - you have to be careful when cutting along bent edges with normal cut on / off - sometimes it truly can be the KEY!

[@KamSmiff]

Sheet metal!!! 🎉

[@TooTallToby]

Awwww yeah!!!!!!!!

[@cliffbaldwincocol2136]

Perfect as usual Toby. Great stuff!

[@TooTallToby]

Thanks cliff!

[@Ram-v7d7q]

Hey Toby Can you give a short video on tab and slots.

[@TooTallToby]

Sure!

[@semihyapici447]

i like this channel :)

[@TooTallToby]

thanks! me too! :-)

[@bp1599]

Thanks for the video, just wondering what the k factor is. You did not mention it. Regards Bob

[@TooTallToby]

Hi Bob! The term K-factor refers to this : kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y2XYf2ybh86bh7Msi=GhFN1V5vQjb-qOCa The K factor for this particular model is not explicitly disclosed because it only really comes into play when you are trying to determine the dimensions for a flat pattern, and that's not a key lesson in this tutorial. But it is important in real life - so it's good to know how it works

[@timheeney2060]

For the design of a part, such that a designer would give a manufacturer, it isn't needed. Only the manufacturer needs to use the 'k' factor when flattening out the part. It has been included into many 'Sheet metal CAD modules' as this would allow designer manufacturers or just manufacturers, fast and accurate results for many aspects of sheet metal designing.

[@ciorad1389]

Both are good, Solidworks and Onshape. But I love Solidworks. Dragos

[@TooTallToby]

nice! Thanks Dragos!

[@kenhaley4]

I just watched both videos -- OnShape and Solidworks. I'm an OnShape noob, and I've never used SW. But in this video, I'd have to say the two packages look equally capable. In any case, I was surprised to see how similar the two products are. Prior to learning OnShape, my only 3D modeling experience was with Sketchup, which is completely different in most respects. I'm having a blast learning OnShape, and your tutorials are an incredible resource for me. Thanks!!

[@TooTallToby]

Yeah onshape is amazing and if anyone asks me what 3D cad they should learn, I tell them Onshape. It just has so many great tools for collaboration and really opens up the possibilities for community driven enhancements (via featurescript)

[@timheeney2060]

Both programs had the same original founder. SolidWorks has been around a long time and is very established and probably has many users that have used the tool in an industrial setting since it's first release date in 1995. All CAD programs need users - so that's either new users or users that migrate from other programs. The comparison between the two programs in a functionality comparison makes much sense. For the no-cost hobbyist users or users that just want to learn 3D modelling with a capable parametric modeller, that also have no problem with their models being available to anyone, then learning Onshape seems a good idea. AutoCAD in the 80's made their 2D program available free ( or very low cost) to schools and technical colleges. At USD 1500 per year for usage to keep your Onshape files private ( the lowest tier level of subscription cost), I would expect only business users would consider subscribing.