We’ll start first by talking about FreeCAD because it is a good launching pad for those already familiar with most mainstream modeling software, AutoCAD included. FreeCAD: Traditional Modeling Alternative For those who already have experience with another CAD software or a 3D modeling software like Blender, then this will be familiar territory. Practically speaking, this means that when working with FreeCAD you will be modifying things like faces, edges, and vertices and be using more complicated modeling operations, like extruding a surface outward. BREP technically has more complex and flexible operations available, such as: Instead of only combining primitive shapes using operations, BREP allows the editing of topology in addition to geometry. This is the same or very similar to methods used by most other CAD software and other 3D modeling software in general. In practical terms, this means that during modeling, you’ll be building complex shapes by combining a tree of other shapes using operations like intersections and differences.įreeCAD on the other hand primarily uses a method called Boundary Representation, or BREP for short. It builds complex shapes by using a combination of different operations, which we’ll talk more about in its section. Essentially, it works by building complex geometry using “primitive” shapes, like: OpenSCAD uses a technique called constructive solid geometry, or CSG for short. Their design philosophies differ and that affects their goals and development choices. Different Design Philosophiesīefore we even begin talking about their exact features and shortcomings, you should know that they have many differences just at a core level. While they accomplish the same goal in principle, they actually have many differences and it’s not as easy as just saying one is better than the other. Two of the most prominent are FreeCAD and OpenSCAD. The landscape has changed in modern times, and while AutoCAD still costs nearly $1,500 a year for a professional license there are a plethora of other free, open source CAD software. For a long time, if you wanted to make use of CAD programs you had to buy into licensing fees that could easily get into the thousands of dollars. Needless to say that the cutting operation under Arch WB (command ArchCutPlane.py) fails as well.CAD or Computer Aided Design programs have been around for a while, with famous programs like AutoCAD being as old as the early 80’s. If I import the same part (cut, paste) into the document, the cutting operation does the job properly.Īpparently Assemby2 WB creates outer shells. In other words, the cutting plane is not created. The result of such cut is always just a half hollow outer shell. I found out that not even a single part imported by Assembly2 WB can be cut. a big cube and the compound of the things collected and placed by Assembly2 WB into the assembly. Next, I tried the simplest of approaches to make a cross section: Make a cut of 2 parts, i.e. However, if applied to the same item pasted into the design rather than assembled under Assembly2 WB, then the macro does indeed create that cutting plane. The macro "Cross-Section" by "Aleph0", version "00.04", date "" "" " * 2", found somewhere in the repos of FreeCAD, produces not the cutting plane, but rather only a half hollow outer shell (not even a solid). We need is a cross section method for assemblies, made under Assembly2 WB.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |