I have added full support of element mapping to Part WB. In addition, pure python feature now should be able to get full benefit of stable names without any code change. I have tested some python feature in Part WB. Unfortunately, PartDesign mostly use c++, and never really use Part::TopoShape, but ...

I had tried a similar shape, that I generated with a Groove of a BSpline shape on a Padded Cube shape, and out of 206 generated passes, there were consistent errors generated at Y= 0, +/-58, +/-60, and +/-69. This is caused by an OCCT bug in one of its discretizers used by Path.Area. I have just su...

jpg87 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 14, 2018 5:52 am What do you think ?

It's not that simple. We'll need a way to programmatically determine the DOF left. It's not that obvious with some combinations of constraints. But I am sure it can be done. SolveSpace, the CAD software, does have animation of DOF.

Bric1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 12, 2018 7:08 pm thunder thanks a lot for answering. may i ask you some questions in case i would have some myself as well? thanks a lot for everything!

You're welcome. Feel free to ask anything.

What does an "empty lock constraint in the built subassembly" mean? Do I have to change something? In bati sub-assembly, you left a Lock constraint with no geometry element link inside. Another question: can we animate the whole other than with the Move tool? Currently, no. I'll add that ...

I'm testing asm3 on an assembly containing multiple nested subassemblies. The NoneType error you see is caused by an empty Lock constraint in sub-assembly bati. I have fixed the code to tolerate such problem. The overall failure of your assembly is because there is a bug in DatumPoint somewhere. If...

saso wrote: ↑Mon Mar 12, 2018 1:14 pm One more thing, I don't see anything if I export just a point, ideally I guess it would be if we get an export that is similar to the draft point?

It's a bug, will fix soon.

Or of course, there can be other was to handle it, i.e. mouse-over constraint event could select/highlight the parts in assembly, which is certainly more difficult to implement. I think that's a better idea, and may be easier to implement, saving the trouble to keep track of user re-label of both t...

I think you can take a good example of Plane/Plane constraint from the Assembly2: ASM2icon.PNG. It's very similar in SolidWorks, SolidEdge and Catia and certainly in other 3D CAD/CAM/CAE too. asm3 composite constraints are actually modeled after Assembly2. In asm3, this plane-plane constraint is ca...

I would suggest to build ASM3 abilities "bottom-up", meaning to put there the missing low-level plane/plane constraint as you proposed earlier on. You can do a LOT (nearly everything), just with Plane/Plane How does this plane/plane constraint of yours behave. I can't imagine one that is ...