fusion bug - does this work ok in 0.17?

[diep]

See the screenshots and attached FCStd file. If you fuse the 10 objects together it has a bug in 0.15 and 0.16 release versions. Also MacroForceRecompute goes wrong.

Can someone with a working 0.17 latest build preferably have a look whether it goes ok there?

Note i found after some hours a solution here to be able to continue the CAD work. The largest cube, if i extend it downwards 1 millimeter in size, then after recalculation 0.16 goes ok then, 0.15 has bug then.

pro2017x041fusionbug.FCStd

(10.34 KiB) Downloaded 40 times

bugFreeCADfusionMissionPrototypeX041b.jpg (46.35 KiB) Viewed 1713 times

bugFreeCADfusionMissionPrototypeX041.jpg (34.04 KiB) Viewed 1713 times

[bejant]

I didn't have a problem in 0.16 so I didn't try or 0.17.

20170113b-fusion_no_bug.FCStd

(19.03 KiB) Downloaded 43 times

OS: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
Word size of OS: 32-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 32-bit
Version: 0.16.6707 (Git)
Build type: None
Branch: releases/FreeCAD-0-16
Hash: 5465bc47c95db45e0be85dc0e2872419efadce0f
Python version: 2.7.12
Qt version: 4.8.7
Coin version: 4.0.0a
OCC version: 6.8.0.oce-0.17

OS: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
Word size of OS: 32-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 32-bit
Version: 0.17.9542 (Git)
Build type: None
Branch: master
Hash: 96dc57c06861922b9dde830e3bcc07e43ed11cf7
Python version: 2.7.12
Qt version: 4.8.7
Coin version: 4.0.0a
OCC version: 6.8.0.oce-0.17

[diep]

That's most interesting as i have 0.16.6706 here - windows x86 though.

[Kunda1]

Related? issue #2845

[chrisb]

Works here:

OS: Mac OS X
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.17.9586 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: (detached from 0e2cf2e)
Hash: 0e2cf2ebcaaa50723de608cf030af740cb6ad548
Python version: 2.7.13
Qt version: 4.8.7
Coin version: 3.1.3
OCC version: 7.0.0

and here:

OS: Mac OS X
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.16.6706 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: tag: 0.16.6706
Hash: f86a4e411ff7848dea98d7242f43b7774bee8fa0
Python version: 2.7.11
Qt version: 4.8.7
Coin version: 3.1.3
OCC version: 6.8.0.oce-0.17

[bejant]

Works here:

Which file, the one posted by diep or the one in issue #2845, or both?

It looks like the problem in issue #2845 is where the blades intersect at the top faces and create triangular edges:

20170114a.png (12.31 KiB) Viewed 1657 times

Creating a Fusion of only the blades took a while, so I tried again with only two blades. That passed Check Geometry with BOPCheck = True but the resulting Fusion001 isn't as expected - most of one blade disappeared.

OS: Ubuntu 16.04.1 LTS
Word size of OS: 32-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 32-bit
Version: 0.16.6707 (Git)
Build type: None
Branch: releases/FreeCAD-0-16
Hash: 5465bc47c95db45e0be85dc0e2872419efadce0f
Python version: 2.7.12
Qt version: 4.8.7
Coin version: 4.0.0a
OCC version: 6.8.0.oce-0.17

[NormandC]

issue #2845 is a typical issue with OCC. All the parts share the same edge at the centre of rotation, with Booleans this is almost always a certain recipe for failure. The situation can easily be avoided by removing the condition, it's been discussed repeatedly for years on the forum and issue #2845 should never have been created in the first place, as explained in the "READ THIS BEFORE REPORTING" menu entry that links to the bug reporting guidelines on the forum.

[chrisb]

Which file, the one posted by diep or the one in issue #2845, or both?

I tried the one posted by diep and it was ok.

[chrisb]

Which file, the one posted by diep or the one in issue #2845, or both?

issue #2845 does not work on any of the both versions.