[0.17 PDN] Feature Request: Create a Body Copied/Mirrored from another Body

[NormandC]

Hello,

There have been 2 recent topics in the Help forum ([1],[2]) where mirroring a Body was an issue.

There's an argument that this could be considered an Assembly feature, but I think it would be important to have such a feature accessible in the PartDesign workbench before the official 0.17 release. Currently, the only way is to create a Part Mirror, and this messes up the tree big time.

Another wish of mine would be to create a copy of a Body into a new Body. It can happen that you want two almost identical parts that only differ slightly, for example the "base Body" which would be some solid, and the "copied Body" with some added features like holes.

Here's an idea I had that might kill 2 birds in one stone: it is currently possible to create a ShapeBinder of a whole Body into a second Body. When using Part CheckGeometry on the ShapeBinder feature, it shows as a solid; but when checking the Body it shows as empty.

Would it be possible to have an option or a property to turn a ShapeBinder into a base solid, if it is the first shape in the Body and if it is a solid? While we're at it, could it have a property to mirror it along a given plane?

Would there be reasons not to have such features? Of course I would not be against having new, separate tools for each case.

Thanks for your input, based on this discussion I would create a feature request on Mantis. (of course I'm mostly waiting for ickby's )

[1] Filling a hole
[2] [0.17] Mirroring of PartDesign Body

[ickby]

I fully agree that the mirroring feature (as well as all other pattern features) should work on the whole shape too, maybe with a special property to not work feature based but use the whole shape if wanted by the user. I think we have a matis ticker for this already.

The other one, the body-into-body, is an interesting one. I can the the idea behind it but would need to make up my mind workflow wise. Shapebinder would be one, but I think the natural thing would be the "link" that realthuinder currently develops.

[NormandC]

I fully agree that the mirroring feature (as well as all other pattern features) should work on the whole shape too, maybe with a special property to not work feature based but use the whole shape if wanted by the user. I think we have a matis ticker for this already.

Yes, issue #2863 (that I requested ), but this is an entirely different thing.

The objective of issue #2863 is to mirror a body and fuse the result inside the body. It is a way to shortcut the modelling of a part that has one or more axes of symmetry, so you only need to model 1/2 or even 1/4 of it then mirror to get the final shape.

This topic is different because it would create a new separate but linked Body. And I'm mentioning copy as well as mirror, because sometimes, you want a straight copy, not a mirror. In the CAD software I use at work, it's a single feature that allows a straight copy or to mirror it on a given standard plane (XY, XZ or YZ). It is also the equivalent of ShapeBinder, because there's an option to copy the geometry only as construction, or to create a base solid with it.

I hope I'm making myself clear... I could provide a screenshot of this feature's parameters if you're interested.

I can the the idea behind it but would need to make up my mind workflow wise. Shapebinder would be one, but I think the natural thing would be the "link" that realthuinder currently develops.

That's kind of why I'm floating the idea here first before creating an "official" feature request. Thanks for your feedback!

[NormandC]

I think this is related: issue #3067

[ickby]

Ok I see your point, for modeling this would be very helpful. Actually I'm thinking of blurring the lines between datum and modeling tools a bit in general. There was annother request recently to allow extruding lines to faces so they can be used as datum for other operation. Currently this is not possible, but could be useful too. So the idea would be to make no hard distingshion between datum and modeling. For example:

Shapebinder: Normally creates a datum, bit if th elinke dshape is a solid it could be made a real shape by option (possible wit mirroring)

Pad/Groove/Revolve: Currently they do not work when one creates a Face with them. But it could be made that they automatically create a datum face if the result is not a solid. Also if it is a solid it could be marked as "datum".

What do you think about this normandc? I think it could help in modeling quite a bit but I'm also afraid this makes it too confusing as the clear lines vanish.

[Kunda1]

ping

Bringing @abdullah in to the conversation from issue #3067.

[NormandC]

There was annother request recently to allow extruding lines to faces so they can be used as datum for other operation.

Do you mean this topic? Feature request to work with surfaces

Shapebinder: Normally creates a datum, bit if th elinke dshape is a solid it could be made a real shape by option (possible wit mirroring)

Basically what I was suggesting so of course I would agree with this!

BTW I found odd behaviour with current ShapeBinder implementation:

1. Create Body, add stuff to it (additive Box)
2. Deactivate Body, create a second Body (Body001)
3. Select Body and create a ShapeBinder in Body001
4. Part CheckGeometry on Body001 reports no shape (to be expected I think)
5. Create a sketch attached to a face of the ShapeBinder
6. Pad: the new Pad is fused with the ShapeBinder

Is it supposed to do that?

FC017_PDN_ShapeBinder_fused_with_Pad.fcstd

(20.15 KiB) Downloaded 33 times

Pad/Groove/Revolve: Currently they do not work when one creates a Face with them. But it could be made that they automatically create a datum face if the result is not a solid. Also if it is a solid it could be marked as "datum".

What do you think about this normandc? I think it could help in modeling quite a bit but I'm also afraid this makes it too confusing as the clear lines vanish.

I don't have a strong opinion about this.

It would go against what's been the purpose of the PartDesign wb for years: to only create solids. Jürgen Riegel was planning to add a SurfaceDesign wb to for surface work. But it may take years before there's a complete Surface wb (the curent one only got 2 tools I've never tried).

On the other hand, are we sure this would make things more confusing? Maybe it would actually do the opposite! The Part workbench already allows creation of faces through Extrusion, Revolve, Loft and Sweep; I would say that many new users are confused that PartDesign cannot.

Creating construction/datum shapes is very much essential to advanced design work. If it's done in a separate workbench, it has to be possible to include such shapes in a Body to use them in PartDesign. In the solid modeller I work with, I have access to Surface/construction tools in a separate toolbar. All modelling tools (extrude, revolve, loft, sweep) are duplicated between the "surface" toolbar and the "solid" toolbar. This adds a lot of separate icons. But they are all accessible from the same "workbench".

I wouldn't have said this one year ago, but now I think I would see such a drastic change as beneficial. The important thing is to get more functionality in the PartDesign wb and in FreeCAD in general.

One important thing though: if modelling tools can create faces (what you call datum) in PartDesign, these faces need to be usable. For example, they should be usable with "Up to face" option for Pad/Pocket. Otherwise they serve no purpose that I can see...

And finally one more thing: with the possibility of creating surfaces, next come tools to manipulate those surfaces: trim, extend, stitch (to other faces)... Trust me, they will be requested once you open that door. How far are you prepared to go?

[abdullah]

abdullah wrote:
ping

Bringing @abdullah in to the conversation from issue #3067.

Not much to say myself. I think you are doing great defining this. I am happy I found my work-around, but I would welcome what you are indicating