Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

About the development of the Part Design module/workbench. PLEASE DO NOT POST HELP REQUESTS HERE!
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Post Reply
Serchu
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 12:33 pm
Location: General Pacheco (Buenos Aires) - Argentina
Contact:

Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by Serchu »

Hi, I'm using Freecad to create models for FEA, and normally for appying boundary conditions is needed to divide/split a face. Normally while I model I have checked the preferences to refine the model (to keep surfaces continuos) after boolean operations, but for create this face splits what I do is to uncheck this preferences, and make a pad trough the material (that leads to a splited face). And after I has to check again the preferences to refine the operations and keep my modeling behavieur.

Can be added in the Pad task pannel directly the option to refine or not? Maybe could be turned on by default and then the user would have the possibility to uncheck it directly there to create a split on the face.

Regards, and thanks for this great software.
User avatar
DeepSOIC
Veteran
Posts: 7896
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
Location: used to be Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Re: Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by DeepSOIC »

Serchu wrote:Can be added in the Pad task pannel directly the option to refine or not? Maybe could be turned on by default and then the user would have the possibility to uncheck it directly there to create a split on the face.
Good feature request, it can solve some other problems as well.

Generally, I highly recommend you switch off automatic refinement in preferences, and refine the model only when it's necessary, such as a final step (for presentation purposes), or before applying a fillet/chamfer that otherwise doesn't work.
ickby
Veteran
Posts: 3116
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2011 7:36 am

Re: Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by ickby »

I always hated the global refine option, as this totally breaks file compatibility. So imho it is a good idea to make this a part::feature property and use the global option only as a default value on feature creation. Maybe even change part::feature to apply refine whenever shape is assigned, this would lift the annoying burdon to implement this for every tool?
Serchu
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 12:33 pm
Location: General Pacheco (Buenos Aires) - Argentina
Contact:

Re: Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by Serchu »

I didn't do too much use of FreeCAD by the moment, but what kind of problems can give to have the refine preference turn on? I did it because after doing some pads starting with an in face sketch, then I finish with a splitted face, and normally in others CADs the faces gets combined automaticly.

If this feature is implemented, then for revolution, sweep and loft could have it also, because is the same logic.
User avatar
DeepSOIC
Veteran
Posts: 7896
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
Location: used to be Saint-Petersburg, Russia

Re: Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by DeepSOIC »

If you attach sketches to faces of solids, or use vertices/edges of solids as external geometry in sketches, as soon as you switch the setting and force recompute your model, the links will break. This is because FreeCAD remembers face/edge/vertex index for these links, and if face/edge/vertex counting changes (as it happens when refinement is added or removed), the links are usually screwed.

If you are careful, in PartDesign Next you can avoid linking to solids, so you can make models that survive this option being toggled. But there is no such workaround for fillets and chamfers.
Serchu
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2015 12:33 pm
Location: General Pacheco (Buenos Aires) - Argentina
Contact:

Re: Idea/Feature request on Pad a selected sketch

Post by Serchu »

I did some models last week and none of the fillets/chamfers survive an update of the model, guess that now I'm start to understand the reason, thanks for the advice and explanation.
Post Reply