Question about Part Feature

About the development of the Part Design module/workbench. PLEASE DO NOT POST HELP REQUESTS HERE!
triplus
Posts: 4988
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Question about Part Feature

Postby triplus » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:23 pm

Is current PartDesign NEXT Part feature equivalent of a Part or of an Assembly or both?
DeepSOIC
Posts: 4673
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby DeepSOIC » Tue Mar 28, 2017 7:07 pm

triplus wrote:Is current PartDesign NEXT Part feature equivalent of a Part or of an Assembly or both?
Assembly will most likely consist of Instances of Parts, or Parts themselves. Part will probably be able to contain a (sub)assembly, but I'm not sure... Part is called "Part", but you can use it for anything you want. You just need to consider, how various tools handle it, like exports...
triplus
Posts: 4988
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby triplus » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:01 am

This is what puzzles me:

PartOrAssembly.png
PartOrAssembly.png (18.46 KiB) Viewed 336 times


Part feature with added 2 Body features. Is this a Part or an Assembly?

P.S. Due to missing Revolve feature i settled for linear guide.
DeepSOIC
Posts: 4673
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby DeepSOIC » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:17 am

triplus wrote:Part feature with added 2 Body features. Is this a Part or an Assembly?
I'd say, both. It's a Part, which is itself an assembly of parts.

It's a question of how you want to call them, not what they are. You already said what they are: two Bodies in a Part container.
triplus
Posts: 4988
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby triplus » Wed Mar 29, 2017 11:34 am

On the plus side when looking at it we see it the same way. On the down side the level of confusion amazes me.

I'd say, both. It's a Part, which is itself an assembly of parts.


If only it could be that simple. Assembly shouldn't be called a Part in my opinion. That by itself introduces confusion beyond compare. And if it is an Assembly and not a Part user should be able to add Assembly constraints between Body features in the future? And likely that will work different compared to assembling assemblies?

It's a question of how you want to call them, not what they are. You already said what they are: two Bodies in a Part container.


Are they? Two Bodies in a Part container? Or are they two Parts in an Assembly container?
User avatar
saso
Posts: 624
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 1:14 pm
Contact:

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby saso » Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:57 pm

Onshape folks would probably call it part studio ;) Anyway, I think we should not complicate too much with naming and not go in to too strict, locked down workflows. As is the code of FreeCAD so should also its workflows be open and allow users of different backgrounds and industries to model as they like and need.
jnxd
Posts: 127
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 2:30 pm

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby jnxd » Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:02 pm

DeepSOIC wrote:
triplus wrote:Is current PartDesign NEXT Part feature equivalent of a Part or of an Assembly or both?
Assembly will most likely consist of Instances of Parts, or Parts themselves. Part will probably be able to contain a (sub)assembly, but I'm not sure... Part is called "Part", but you can use it for anything you want. You just need to consider, how various tools handle it, like exports...

I think it makes sense to use "part" as a general term to include "assemblies" and "bodies". A body would be an indivisible part, while an assembly contains multiple parts. In that sense, the only difference between a sub-assembly and an assembly is that a subassembly is used as a part of anther (sub)assembly.
triplus
Posts: 4988
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby triplus » Wed Mar 29, 2017 3:19 pm

saso wrote:Onshape folks would probably call it part studio ;) Anyway, I think we should not complicate too much with naming and not go in to too strict, locked down workflows.


My question has nothing to do with locking down the workflow. It's about determining what exactly is the Part feature in PartDesign NEXT.

jnxd wrote:I think it makes sense to use "part" as a general term to include "assemblies" and "bodies". A body would be an indivisible part, while an assembly contains multiple parts. In that sense, the only difference between a sub-assembly and an assembly is that a subassembly is used as a part of anther (sub)assembly.


A Body is not invisible and you say it is a Part. I agree with that. A Body is a Part? Assembly contains multiple Parts. I agree with that. And the only sane conclusion i can make of it is current Part feature in PartDesign NEXT is Assembly feature. No? Adding assembly constraints between Body (Part) features is therefore on the todo list? And once achieved Assembly NEXT/PartDesign NEXT like envisioned before starting the work should be achieved?
triplus
Posts: 4988
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby triplus » Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:19 pm

I guess it depends on the design intent:

Part.png
Part.png (37.35 KiB) Viewed 265 times


Assembly.png
Assembly.png (52.04 KiB) Viewed 265 times


Potential user facing confusion therefore can't be easily resolved.

P.S. As i was thinking if this would be Assembly feature it might make sense to move it in Assembly workbench. In PartDesign workbench user would therefore insert a Part (currently Body) feature and such Part features could be grouped under Assembly (currently Part) feature if needed. But that would i guess introduce confusion when user would need to insert Assembly feature to create what they perceive as a (multi Body) Part. And i don't know if it is planned but current Body feature is such a nice candidate to support adding (assembly) constraints between them. I guess they could be called Part constraints if that happens. :)

Anyway i hoped to think of a solution that could reduce potential user confusion. But i don't see an easy one ATM.
kcleung
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:56 am

Re: Question about Part Feature

Postby kcleung » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:19 am

Also, suppose if I make a CSG solid under the Part workbench, then how can I make a part out of it?

Currently I can't find anyway to do it under the Part or PartDesign workbench.