The need for a default assembly workbench

Have some feature requests, feedback, cool stuff to share, or want to know where FreeCAD is going? This is the place.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
onekk
Veteran
Posts: 6144
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2015 7:48 am
Contact:

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by onekk »

askoh wrote: Wed Mar 22, 2023 7:22 pm ...
Not exactly the way different Asm WB are working now is different, it is not only a matter of workflow.

This is the main reason to have an Asm WB directly in FreeCAD and to have a "common assembly format" as proposed by Zolko.

But even if we will have this the real problem will be if different developers will follow the "new way" or maintain their WB as is. :D

Only time will tell what will happens.

Regards

Carlo D.
GitHub page: https://github.com/onekk/freecad-doc.
- In deep articles on FreeCAD.
- Learning how to model with scripting.
- Various other stuffs.

Blog: https://okkmkblog.wordpress.com/
User avatar
sliptonic
Veteran
Posts: 3457
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:46 pm
Location: Columbia, Missouri
Contact:

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by sliptonic »

easyw-fc wrote: Wed Mar 22, 2023 2:36 pm
thomas-neemann wrote: Wed Mar 22, 2023 12:40 pm does the realthunder version have a license problem?
a topic in which the license have been already approached (and 'solved'):
viewtopic.php?style=3&t=28208&start=10
That appears to be a discussion around the solvespace license. Not sure if it was ever 'solved'.

The assembly3 workbench itself is still carrying the GPL 3.0 license so I would consider it very much incompatible.
User avatar
easyw-fc
Veteran
Posts: 3629
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 9:34 am

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by easyw-fc »

sliptonic wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 5:28 pm That appears to be a discussion around the solvespace license. Not sure if it was ever 'solved'.
Why?
sliptonic wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 5:28 pm The assembly3 workbench itself is still carrying the GPL 3.0 license so I would consider it very much incompatible.
Why?
Assembly seems to be a must for FreeCAD and the Assembly WB or its solver (GPL 3.0) can be auto installed even if it is not distributed with the sw...
user1234
Veteran
Posts: 3328
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by user1234 »

easyw-fc wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 6:24 pm
sliptonic wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 5:28 pm The assembly3 workbench itself is still carrying the GPL 3.0 license so I would consider it very much incompatible.
Why?
It is not allowed to use and distribute it. You can optional use it, but then it must installed separate from the user itself. And there are many occasions, where this can not useable (example: companies with own digital ecosystem).


Maybe a dully questions, how does it work in the robot wb? I tried it a little bit and it can follow paths isogonal, all axis and position regulate it self. Means there is a kind of 3D solver in it? Or is it all made only for this one 6 axis robot in it?

Greetings
user1234
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53919
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by chrisb »

Discussion on licensing continued here: viewtopic.php?t=77061.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
grd
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2022 5:13 am
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by grd »

@chrisb very clever action.
@sliptonic I know that this discussion is to let people inform, but what are your ideas about solving the assembly "solver"? Do you think that this solver needs to be build here? And what kind of solver are you thinking about?

Edit: Or is this discussion about the file structure and the GUI?
About Nim. Latest Release 2.0.2. Here is Nim in 100 seconds and a Nim package. There are Qt and OCCT packages.
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53919
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by chrisb »

grd wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 11:24 am Or is this discussion about the file structure and the GUI?
The solver can be discussed here, although it is finally only a tool to perform certain tasks on assemblies. Before thinking about the license of a certain solver, we should identify what it is supposed to do. That's how I understood this topic.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
grd
Posts: 328
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2022 5:13 am
Location: Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by grd »

@chrisb So, what is this solver supposed to do?
About Nim. Latest Release 2.0.2. Here is Nim in 100 seconds and a Nim package. There are Qt and OCCT packages.
user1234
Veteran
Posts: 3328
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:08 pm

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by user1234 »

I looked in the sources of the RobotWB, it uses a solver called kdl (https://orocos.org/wiki/Kinematic_and_D ... lvers.html), which use a kinematic chain, since you can not add infinite constraints on it (if i understood that correctly). So each constraint must be seen as one chain. This would be hard to use. Also i did not found something about precision and licenses.

Greetings
user1234

edit:
stroke
i was wrong, the constraint can be adapted
User avatar
Jolbas
Posts: 327
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:48 am
Location: Sweden

Re: The need for a default assembly workbench

Post by Jolbas »

user1234 wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 1:38 pm Also i did not found something about precision and licenses.
LGPL: https://orocos.org/orocos/license
Post Reply