stuff trying to complete the 'sketch'

Post here for help on using FreeCAD's graphical user interface (GUI).
Forum rules
and Helpful information
IMPORTANT: Please click here and read this first, before asking for help

Also, be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
ajoeiam
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:36 pm

Re: stuff trying to complete the 'sketch'

Post by ajoeiam »

Bance wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 3:41 pm OK, I actually asked you to pocket the sketch with the trough all option. I knew it might not be visible if dimensioned.Please up load it.
Thank you very much for your assistance!
ajoeiam
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2019 9:36 pm

Re: stuff trying to complete the 'sketch'

Post by ajoeiam »

chrisb wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 3:47 pm I really really recommend to work through the basic PartDesign Tutorials. You still seem to miss very basic stuff. You should not only look at it, but really do it. I would even recommend to do it more than once until you can do it fluently.

Then you should look at the changes I made to your sketches, and revisit your model.

Sketch001: replaced dimensions with geometric constraints, used tangency
Sketch002: Use reference to external geometry instead of reconstructing the first sketch
Sketch003: see Sketch002
Sketch004: use external geometry; tilt the model in Sketcher by using the alt key plus mouse
Groove: Select the proper line as center
Sketch006: see comments above; use symmetry instead of repeating dimensions.
I will admit I've gotten quite lost in this process.
Its not that I need to learn PartDesign - - - - there is also Sketcher, there is TechDrawing then when you add that feature names here have different definitions to what I would expect (as a machinist not coming from any other program).

I have worked through some tutorials except it seemed that every one that I thought might be useful wasn't.
Even more interesting was that most of the tutorials were of very simple parts where there just weren't any features on features that were themselves on a feature. (Think a snap ring groove on a bore that is itself not a simple bore.)
What I've been trying to model is a real world part and, imo, its not even that complicated - - - that is until I add in the tolerancing and requirements for concentricity, the G D & T as it were, for actual fabrication.

Thank you very very much for your patience and your assistance.
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53934
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: stuff trying to complete the 'sketch'

Post by chrisb »

You are right, your part is not very complicated and could well serve for a tutorial. However, we don't have that tutorial yet, while we have the others. So discussing all this elementary stuff would be easier if you work through the official Tutorials. If things are unclear there, they possibly can and should be improved. That would be beneficial for all users.
If we discuss all this for your part it's just for you, and it is additional work for the helpers.

BTW, if you quote a post, quote only what you directly refer to, not all of it. We don't like to read it over and over again, not exactly knowing what you are referring to. In case someone wants to read the whole cited post he can simply use the up-arrow link.
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
drmacro
Veteran
Posts: 8870
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2014 4:35 pm

Re: stuff trying to complete the 'sketch'

Post by drmacro »

ajoeiam wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 5:33 pm
I will admit I've gotten quite lost in this process.
Its not that I need to learn PartDesign - - - - there is also Sketcher, there is TechDrawing then when you add that feature names here have different definitions to what I would expect (as a machinist not coming from any other program).

I have worked through some tutorials except it seemed that every one that I thought might be useful wasn't.
Even more interesting was that most of the tutorials were of very simple parts where there just weren't any features on features that were themselves on a feature. (Think a snap ring groove on a bore that is itself not a simple bore.)
What I've been trying to model is a real world part and, imo, its not even that complicated - - - that is until I add in the tolerancing and requirements for concentricity, the G D & T as it were, for actual fabrication.

Thank you very very much for your patience and your assistance.
I wish I could say you are mistaken about the simplicity of many tutorials.
In addition, you have jumped into a deep pool and there is a lot of swimming to learn. (And, apparently for you to unlearn. ;) )

In addition you have preconceived ideas that, to be honest, are making your journey more difficult.
Also, you have chosen to attempt to learn several "modules" at the same time or in parallel. (I'll define modules as areas of product design, for example technical drawing. Where, unless you plan to do tolerance analysis, the toleranced dimensions, concentricity specs, fab notes, etc. are typically spelled out.)

You have also fallen into the beginner quagmire of "what's the difference between Part and Part Design". (In some cases led to the quagmire by tutorials, no doubt. And, the beginner might ask, why do I as an end user need to care...that is a subject for a different discussion. 8-) ) And, of course, sketches can be used in both Part and Part Design, but the resulting object is (internally) different, but in the tree look similar and in the 3D window look the same.

What you see from the people trying to help is their hard earned experience. Some have grown with FreeCAD as the different workbenches and functionality has been added.

One hurdle for you is how to look at an real world object and break it into different modelling operations that result in the desired end model. This is the feature on feature you refer to. In 3D modelling you really have only limited options:

- define a shape/outline of a crossection, pad/extrude it to make a thick version of that shape. (or create shape primitives)
- select somewhere on that shape (or in 3D space) to define another crossection, and pocket/boolean it away (or, pad/extrude or boolean it on)

It can appear to be overwhelming at times.
Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan: Spock: "...His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking."
Post Reply