I TRIED, but it is just tooo bad.

[deychy]

Hello

I REALLY, REALLY wanted to use this software, especially since it did looked werry promising after looking on youtube videos how it suposed to be .... good.

And then i started to use it. OMG , so bad experience i had last time going from Photoshop to GIMP :/. But ok, ewery thing needs its time. i get that.
I used solidworks and some CREO prior, so i do know what parametric modeling is. I was coinfident to do it. And for start, it was prety straight forward.

I made SIMPLE object. box type, one hole, 2 protrusions of wich one is mirrored. So far all good. Made another thing to model and suddenly one mirrored part is not visible.
Okey, i try to make it visible again, only to discover now hole dissapears .. i mean ,... wtf.
ok, i delete last made thing, try to make it again and suddenly: cant do it, it it seems to be in middle of migration process from legacy PartDesign or have sklightly broken structure. Dio you want to make migration auto ... i select yes,

and a new crap happens: cannot use this comand as there is no siolid to substract from.

I mean ... at most BASIC shapes all that word censored ??

I get it, u made workbenches, as copied from i.e. solidworks, but cmoooonn. U dont need workbench for ewery damn line u draw ????

I tried to make body active, tried to go back at tree ,, ... only to see it is all useless.
It looks pretty complete software ill give it that, but after this basical level of complications ... i dare not spend time to do any , god forbid, assemblies only to discower all was in vain.

If anyone is going to read trough this, i attached file i was working on. I might have done something wrong, but in all frustration, i just went to fusion 360, it is free for hoby.

IF possible, check part, comment on what could be wrong with it.
If it is something really minor, i might give it another try, since in generall, i WAS actually impressed with it, i will admit that.

So i hope i get some encouraging feedback, if not,.. well thats it ?

Greetings, Dejan

[chrisb]

Hi and welcome to the forum - even if you are leaving right away!

You obviously looked at some of those numerous bad videos on youtube.

The first issue described sounds as if you have forked the Dependency Graph, i.e. you based the new feature not on the mirror, but rather on some previous state. (For that to happen you would have to change the tip of the body, see below).
However, I cannot see this from the dependency graph:

SnipScreenshot-a5e3ff.png (36.16 KiB) Viewed 2558 times

Except for the fact, that all features are outside of the body it looks reasonable. So it would be very interesting what exactly you did. Can you reproduce it and upload the state just before this happens?

I tried to fix your model by dragging the features into the body. It worked well for the first pad, and failed then with creating a base feature and weird dependencies.
But editing the body's Group property worked very well - except for the last pad, which is based on a sketch only and not on the previous feature.
So I activated the body, removed the pad, changed Tip to the last feature and added the last pad again.

For some reason I cannot add the file, I will try separately.

[chrisb]

Now it worked, and here is the fixed file.

I may add that due to the topological naming problem it is not advised to attach sketches to generated geometry such as faces of previous features.
From drmacro, an expert and teacher of other CAD systems, I learned that this is in general to be seen as bad practice.

[papyblaise]

I confirm Chrisb it would be necessary to call the peacekeepers or other to clean up the obsolete videos
you sailed between Partdesign and Part
I retrieve your drawing by going back to mirored to come back in a bodysuit
when you mirror in Part there are 2 objects, you have to add a boolean to have only one

[deychy]

Thank you for replies.
Much appreciated.

I will fiddle and try to understand things, since i actually 3D printed part and was all good.

So i will perhaps still try it in future. But not be able to draft from surfaces, i think it should be resolved.
Maybe make so that when surface gets its name, it stays locked on it

About boolean after mirror. It is really something that nowhere else is needed to be done, so i didnt used that here too.
It also might be uneditable in later fine tweaking of parts ?

All in all i think user should not be so concerned with HOW u build model for it not to break down, but just with
modelling itself. I disliked solidworks exactly for this reason.

Maybe with time ill give it another go, for now i wont uninstall it and use it paralely to fusion

Greetings and thank you again

Dejan

[papyblaise]

ho beh
A disappointed customer, it's the first time I've seen a refund request

[thomas-neemann]

there is a quick simple (non-parametric) method with no topo ... problem. if you want I can link videos to you

[Kunda1]

topologcal naming problem

FTFY
topological naming problem

Dejan

Hi, as you can see we have an awesome community here that is willing to orient you.

Lots of F360 and SW folks have a real hard time adjusting to FC. But there is HUGE number of you, especially because of the licensing shenanigans that took place recently. The FC workflow won't makes sense to you until you think in terms of FreeCAD. Good news there are YT channels like JokoEngineering and Brodie Fairhall and FreeCAD Academy that appeal to this niche.

Good luck.

[heda]

my 2 cents on motivational speech

it might look like 3d modelling is all about getting a volume onto the screen,
but any 3d parametric sw what you see on the screen is just a result of a mathematical description,
that mathematical description is what a user "codes" with the gui.

once you accept that premise, which is true for any 3d parametric sw,
the next logical consequence is that there is no escaping from that it actually matters
from which command a shape was created, in which orders things are made,
which wb is used, etc

now, fc has all the powers that any full-blown 3dpara has,
but maybe not yet the speed and ability to cope with xx-large models,


fc will (in a lot of cases) happily allow you to shoot yourself in the foot without any attempt to stop you

so the question is really if the individual user is able to navigate the powers of fc without shooting themselves in the foot,
some are able to do it, others rage quit, some permanently, others temporarily

give yourself a handful of rage quits,
and you are probably good to go for fc and can navigate the waters without shooting yourself in the foot too badly

[ppemawm]

...but maybe not yet the speed and ability to cope with xx-large models

I beg to differ: https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=29354
Note that this assembly model was created with 0.18. We are at 0.20 now with many remarkable improvements.