I need user input regard the Carbon Copy tool. Basically, I am asking what the user expectations/intended use/intended outcome are.
One day I became intrigued about the use of a master sketch (I think ppemawm is to blame for that
), but I am rather lazy and I realised I could take advantage of copies. I was starting to use the new PDN and I had problems to understand attachments, mappings and placements. Because of this lack of understanding, sometimes I was choosing (parallel) planes, which had different origin, inverted normals, which led to different kinds of mirrors and so on. Because I did not know how to correct this, I added a mechanism to calculate the relative senses of the sketches. This senses were then used when applying directional constraints, such as horizontal distance, which is sign sensitive, changing the sign to make the sketch flip. It worked at least in some simple cases.
The tool evolved to another use case, lofting, enabling to have unaligned non-parallel sections. With this use case, the flipping correction mechanism makes no sense, so it is actually disable when copies to non-parallel planes.
Well, the correction mechanism, in its current implementation obviously fails, at least in some cases.
It is important to note that carbon copy does not suffer from toponaming. Not at all. Carbon copy does not rely on the indexing of the edges of a sketch, or the edges of a feature 3D shape.
After some consideration, I am starting to think that the "correction mechanism" might have been a mistake. The reasons are that: (a) no correction mechanism was needed in the first place, because the right way to correct orientation if/when needed, is to use the placement properties as openBrain suggested some posts ago, (b) forcing a sketch to flip by inverting the sign of the constraints, is an error prone method with a potential to end up in an unsolvable sketch, when the correction mechanism fails, the result cannot be corrected, not even by using the placement.
Now, I am only one of the users and certainly not the one that has used this tool the most. So, what I want to know is: Is anybody taking advantage of this "correction mechanism"? Is there a use case where it is necessary? Would you miss it if I disposed of it?
What do you think?