PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

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
paddle
Veteran
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2020 4:47 pm

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by paddle »

openBrain wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:31 am Can confirm change in the UI is probably useless as default value is overwritten when widget is created with actual object property value : https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/blob ... pp#L69-L70
Then perhaps it's best to remove the property from the UI file? If it's useless as it's overwriten?
User avatar
NewJoker
Veteran
Posts: 3018
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2020 7:49 pm

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by NewJoker »

@paddle and @openBrain Thank you, PR submitted: https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/pull/7488
openBrain
Veteran
Posts: 9034
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:38 pm
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by openBrain »

paddle wrote: Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:37 am Then perhaps it's best to remove the property from the UI file? If it's useless as it's overwriten?
There currently isn't a value in the UI file.
User avatar
uwestoehr
Veteran
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:21 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by uwestoehr »

I support the change tho make inner the default.

However, we must assure that your UI is consistent. At the moment the Thickness feature of the Part WB can only make the thickness towards outer. To get towards inner, one must enter a negative value.

Therefore we should take the opportunity and make Part and PartDesign consistent.

Here is my plan for that:
- like we already do for the pad/Pocket, Part and PartDesign should use the same dialog. This will automatically assure we don't have inconsistencies like we have (Part has the Join type "Tangent" while this is missing in PartDesign)

A question:
- Part has the option "self-intersection" while PartDesign has not. What is this option about, meaning can anybody share an example file so thee the effect of this option?

I expect the unification to become not an easy task since e.g. the face selection mechanism of Part is very different to that of PartDesign. Therefore I cannot promise I can do the unification.
openBrain
Veteran
Posts: 9034
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:38 pm
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by openBrain »

uwestoehr wrote: Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:49 am Here is my plan for that:
- like we already do for the pad/Pocket, Part and PartDesign should use the same dialog. This will automatically assure we don't have inconsistencies like we have (Part has the Join type "Tangent" while this is missing in PartDesign)
A main point is that current modification doesn't require code for retro-compatibility, while changing in Part would maybe need (depending how we exactly implement).
A question:
- Part has the option "self-intersection" while PartDesign has not. What is this option about, meaning can anybody share an example file so thee the effect of this option?
OpenCascade documentation is pretty clear on this :

Code: Select all

SelfInter tells the algorithm whether a computation to eliminate self-intersections needs to be applied to the resulting shape. However, as this functionality is not yet implemented, you should use the default value (false);
:)
User avatar
uwestoehr
Veteran
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:21 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by uwestoehr »

openBrain wrote: Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:02 am OpenCascade documentation is pretty clear on this :

Code: Select all

SelfInter tells the algorithm whether a computation to eliminate self-intersections needs to be applied to the resulting shape. However, as this functionality is not yet implemented, you should use the default value (false);
:)
So we support an OCC option that does actually not exist?
openBrain
Veteran
Posts: 9034
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:38 pm
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by openBrain »

uwestoehr wrote: Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:35 am So we support an OCC option that does actually not exist?
Roughly yes. Not the only one. :)
User avatar
adrianinsaval
Veteran
Posts: 5541
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:15 pm

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by adrianinsaval »

:shock: :shock: that's silly, it should be removed from UI if it does not work IMO, the existing options are confusing already without this, it's also a waste of time because when the operation fails the user will likely attempt many property combinations to see if it works.
User avatar
paddle
Veteran
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2020 4:47 pm

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by paddle »

uwestoehr wrote: Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:49 am Therefore we should take the opportunity and make Part and PartDesign consistent.

Here is my plan for that:
- like we already do for the pad/Pocket, Part and PartDesign should use the same dialog. This will automatically assure we don't have inconsistencies like we have (Part has the Join type "Tangent" while this is missing in PartDesign)

I expect the unification to become not an easy task since e.g. the face selection mechanism of Part is very different to that of PartDesign. Therefore I cannot promise I can do the unification.
+1 the tools should have the same dialog. Maybe even the same command. Did you made progress on that project?
User avatar
uwestoehr
Veteran
Posts: 4961
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2019 3:21 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: PartDesign Thickness - inwards by default

Post by uwestoehr »

paddle wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 5:31 pm +1 the tools should have the same dialog. Maybe even the same command. Did you made progress on that project?
I did not do anything in this regards. At the moment, when In find time, I work on FEM and I think this will need some more weeks.

So if you have time, please take over if you like.
Post Reply