@@petergamache5368 It was an option, but it's a lot to ask of a layman to install a development branch. Having those changes make their way into the mainline makes it a lot easier to recommend.
I am living for this fix. I teach FreeCAD in our makerspace for laser, CNC Milling and 3DPrint. It is relatively easy to explain to people that FreeCAD favours an approach that uses many simple sketches over other CAD programs that pack a lot of features into few sketches. BUT combine that with the information that laying sketches on faces will likely lead to breakages - in some ways it invalidates the FreeCAD approach. It's the one thing I have a really hard time explaining.
World is not the same anymore. I so much used to make my head around careful design considerations. TNP I shall miss you, but thanks for leaving us. All the best for the good work of FreeCAD enthusiasts, as well as MangoJelly. I ❤FC
I think you're wrong on that. Its really not that far off. Years of development sure. It's being built by a tiny team of developers mostly donating their time, what do you expect? It's already far better than ANY commercial software on account of not having control over your designs. If the community could just get over themselves and be a little more positive, that could only help.
@@jeffersonsharp2292 I'm with you on the free part, and I love FreeCAD and have never used any other parametric modelling app. I'm eternally grateful for its existence and acknowledge the incredible thing the developers have done. But it's a simple truth: the user experience is a mess, and in order to fix that part, a full rewrite will be needed.
Yep, that! In many cases, TNP can by avoided by sticking to "old-school proper modelling principles" (As in: Use independent planes. Don't glue base sketches for new features onto existing feature geometry). But fillets and chamfers rely on glueing-stuff-to-feature-geometry by design and there is no feasible way around it.
And especially frustrating if you don't understand what's going on. If you have multiple fillet and chamfer steps, changing the first step would break the later steps. So many rounds of rework.
@@jeremiahrex Especially frustrating since fillets are the last thing I do in my workflow, and FreeCAD is pretty arbitrary about them. I often find myself having to select individual lines to get a face to work at all. Any change to any earlier step and it's re-clicking the same 50 lines again.
Yes, this is where I run into problems all the time. When a parameter in a model needs to be changed somewhere this often results in chamfers applied later moving from one edge to another. And in most cases that breaks the model. I have started using separate chamfer steps for each type of chamfer. This helps a bit. If one of the chamfers end up on an incorrect edge, I just clear all chamfer edges in the step and reselect the correct ones. Not a big deal if you have four edges with the same chamfer value. A monumental task if you collect 20 chamfers with different values in the same operation. But I would naturally prefer a fix that stops renaming existing planes.
@@keinschwein8467 I am always sticking to “old-school modeling principles” and I am affected by TNP in Assembly WB every time I modify one of the parts. If you think dealing with messed up chamfers is a problem, try to rearrange complex assembly after modifying of one of the parts.
HOLY MACKEREL! This problem had been holding back so many other things - certain kinds of interoperability between workbenches, for instance - this is amazing and much welcome news!
Thank you to the Freecad team and their EXTREMELY hard work ... I have a feeling when the TNP Fix is implemented ... Freecad/Ondsel is gonna go ballistic !!!
this is a really good explanation of the problem, there's like a thousand places where i've seen people dismissively reference it and this needs to be on every one of them
at the point where i'm trying to show people i like how to use freecad and it's pretty complex to describe all the possible outcomes of even simple operations, best so far is like: "freecad is a frontend to opencascade, opencascade can do anything, any geometry problem you might have, it can do it, but as a frontend freecad can't always accommodate the result of what opencascade does for an operation, there are many cases not even anticipated by the authors of freecad in any real way", trying to keep them focused on solving their problems instead of getting mad
to reproduce the issue, it's enough to create two pads (second on a face of first) and add a hole to parent pad sketch. thank you so much for making this fix happening. topological naming issue is the biggest FreeCAD drawback for me. I typically use datum planes to prevent it.
HOLY COW! This is the best news this month! I was so annoyed fixing the topological naming issues so I was considering switching to a paid product. Thank you Darren and FreeCAD developers!
What if I say something in Dutch: FreeCAD heeft een sterke geur. Het is complex en doet net net wat jij wil waardoor je wordt afgeleid en niet hetgeen wat jij wil doen kan doen. Would you mind? Or can you say it in English?
@@gvdschoot OK. I'll try to say it in English. When I bought myself a 3D printer, I thought about choosing a design environment. I wanted something simple, accessible and easy. Of the free programs, Freecad is the best. I wouldn't say he's interesting. It is the same as any Linux distribution. It has its own problems, which are solved very slowly. This is a problem with any open source software. Very often it is very difficult and painful to use it. He just doesn't know how to do some obvious things that are available in commercial programs. But I've already spent a decent amount of time studying it and I don't want to study other software. I can only wish the project high rates of development and progress.
Mega.... Agree with others comments. When new to FreeCAD this was a hard thing to get my head around, if I was realising it was causing me issues at all .
Really looking forwrd to this one. I have been using FreeCAD for years and the progress over the last year or so is impressive. The interface looks the same but suddenly things just work and make sense! This is not how it used to be. FreeCAD sessions often ended in frustration and confusion. Not so much any longer.
Wow, I've heard this problem being discussed for a while but the difference is now, I understand what you're talking about and the possible results that may happen. Thanks
i lurked quietly in on the developer meeting sunday and they're getting ready to have a feature freeze meeting in a couple of weeks around the 15th, pretty awesome peeps seemed like
Feature freeze was announced for the middle of May (next week) some time ago on the forum. They just have to confirm this date during the next meeting.
Glad to hear that this issue has been resolved! It must be a huge relief, especially considering how crucial it was in your search for a viable alternative to Fusion 360. Here's to smoother workflows and more productive days ahead!
Nice. News from Brad dates back to April 17th so there's more progress now but the TNP fix hasn't been fully implemented yet. The comparison is still done with the Link branch so we are waiting to be able to do it in master (when TNP is fully merged and 0.22 becomes 1.0).
Amazing work, hates off to all those involved. I can year the CAD refugees stopping their regular payments as we speak. It's going to be a bight future.
I would have liked to see a little more digging into that last example from the Link branch. Did the faces get renamed and the anchor for the sketch get updated on the change? Did the existing faces keep their name and the new face get then next unused face name? Or... something else?
I thought I missed something here when you talked about the link branch but of course it's the realthunder version. I used it before but had compatibility issues with my designs so I left it and now I exclusively use the development version of the official freecad (which you also referred to several times). It is at 0.22.0 as I keep it updated each week. So far no complaints. Keep up you excellent channel!
In my personal experience this issue is most painful with chamfers. It seems like whenever I make a change to my model, the chamfers are completely screwed up and can't be fixed in the Edit Chamfer Edges dialog and I have to remove the complete chamfer and make a new one from scratch.
I've been using realthunder's link branch for about a year and it's as good as the mainline version is .. well, bad. The TNP makes mainline freecad essentially unusable for anything complex, and I'm so excited to hear that the changes are being merged.
@@KnugLidi I imagine the only way to solve it "completely" would be some pretty hefty AI that tries to figure out what exactly you mean when stuff moves around. But, still... just assigning a UUID that never changes to each object (which I think is what rt's branch does) makes things soooo much better for me. Right now my biggest pain points are bugs.. segfaults (especially in Path / CAM), broken fillets and chamfers, and this absolutely nasty one in the build I'm running where if you attach any sketch to a face from a different body, all 3D operations will be permanently fused with that body. I've spent hours trying to break that link to no avail; if a sketch loses an attachment and you reattach it, that part is forever unusable/inseparable up to that point and you've gotta delete it and recreate it from scratch. I'm not sure if it's just rt's branch yet, but I'll open some bug reports when I get some time off my current project. Still, all in all, the progress has been truly remarkable.
@@GordLamb The 'fixes' used aren't perfect, but they are a huge gain, certainly. Some high level math gurus put videos out explaining why it can't be truley solved, but only managed. And it looks like the management in FC is close to matching commercial software in this regard.
I am so excited for this release. The TNP has been a massive pain in my side and prevented me from diving deeper into the software. I'm so excited to have it "fixed" so I can continue on with the learning process. I've got a part I need to design and 3D print for my machine ASAP since the dealership wants $400 for a $10 piece of plastic!
Glad to hear it. Why has it taken so long though? Just don't rename faces once they are created and it's fixed, no? Give new faces new names when they appear, but keep the names of the old ones?
Just starting out with FreeCad without any prior experience with CAD. So - does that mean I do not have to go the extra mile by inserting helper planes anymore?
Personally I have never followed those recommendations. Inserting the datum planes adds more complexity and I have always stuck to attaching sketches to geometry as it's traditional CAD practice and freeCAD allows you to do it. Through it you learn how to manage the topo issue. Also my tutorials stay current when this problem is mitigated against. You have to be careful as a beginner, there is a lot of misinformation out their of what is caused by topological naming and what is caused by knowledge / understanding gaps.
@@MangoJellySolutions Thanks for your reply. As a teacher myself, I'd like to congratulate you on your courses: imho, they''re very well structured, good to follow (especially for newcomers), and have plenty of good examples of very good didactics!
Great. Do they fix the sketcher's DOF bug(?), too? You make a circle centered on the Y axis and constrain it. If you place( constrain point onto object) any feature on the Y axis AND the circle, the sketch is fully constrained. But that is not true. The feature keeps alternating seemingly random between the two common points of the circle and the Y axis, if you play with the constraints.
That's not a bug. A line intersecting a circle does have two solutions after all. So it's not really a degree of freedom, but rather an ambiguity. But I know what you mean. It sure is annoying, especially since you can't add an additional constraint to force the right solution, because from FreeCAD's point of view that sketch would be overconstrained then. This is not limited to the example you've given by the way. The same can happen with angle or length constraints. E. g. you have point B constrained 10mm to the right of point A. Now move point A some 30 or more to the right and point B is no suddenly constrained 10mm to the left of point A (so point B switched side). This usually does not happen when you drag point A with the mouse (because the constraints are continuously applied while dragging). But on the other hand it is almost 100% reproducible if point A is from external geometry and that external geometry move by that much. FreeCAD needs some kind of hinting system. Something that's not really a constraint, but a hint for which solution to pick if the solver has multiple to choose.
Didnt LinkStage 3 solved this some time ago along with many other improvements? The official freecad releases seem quite slow and behind LS3 by some margin.
To be honest I've not really found the TNP to be an issue since I took the advice NOT to put sketches on faces. I either sketch on the XY, XZ or YZ plane and offset the sketch (usually with a variable stored in a spreadsheet) or put the sketch on a datum plane. I always fillet/chamfer and if possible incorporate those features into my sketches.
This was just one simple example for the effects of TNP. Looks like you don’t use assembly WB. That is where TNP has huge impact. You add or remove a hole in one part and the whole assembly goes out of whack and you spend time repositioning parts.
The Tip of the Tree is always the last feature/operation created unless you select an ancient feature with the mouse right click and choose for that specific feature to be the Tip. The auto update in the Sketcher Solver panel must be ticked or as I prefer assign it permanently within Edit Menu-Preferences-Sketcher...
It did just those changes were thought to take a long time to be merged into the current branch. Sounds like we may be getting official freecad with realthunder's toponaming fixes
Pads are different to extrudes as they include a boolean operation, a union, to keep the model solid. Extrudes allow for surfaces, shells, solids and compounds defending on the arrangement of geometry included.
@@rok1475 Then there’s a problem because Zolko (A4 dev) was upset that one of the changes in 0.22 dev broke some stuff in his workbench so he stopped following this dev version and even added a warning that one should use 0.21 stable instead.
I think the term topological is a misnomer as it is not logical at all. It is more a topographical naming problem. It is like the way people like to use the term "logical fallacy" which is ridiculous. It's either logical or it's a fallacy. The two terms are mutually exclusive. . Topological it is not imo.
As software developer i really dont see the issue why the Topological Naming Problem exist in at all. in my simple mind a got a name should always use that name until the face is somehow removed, And or when a face get renamed all other linked sketches etc. should also being renamed. to me this is basic database management. where the database is the table of all faces and sketches.
I guess I didn't understand what's new. This version of realThunder that addresses TNP in some way has been around for quite a while. But until now, it looked like the TNP solution in the Dev version would be handled differently, and there was no apparent willingness to merge with realThunder. What has changed? So I'm waiting for that exclusive news.
While what RealThunder did was and is fantastic it wasn't in a state to be merged in a project that is managed by more than a single person, when you code in your own branch you tend to cut corners in the sense that you do not write enough annotations, code formatting standards, etc. Also RealThunder branch is separate from the main branch which over time diverged from RealThunder's. The TPN thing is not a trivial thing to address, you can't just copy and paste from one branch to another.
@@sillonbono3196 I read the original article on Ondsel regarding the realThunder merger and now I understand. In the meantime, Mango has also released a new video where the real exclusive news is already there - the TNP solution in dev version 0.22 - And it's awesome!
@@sillonbono3196 I read the original article on Ondsel regarding the realThunder merger and now I understand. In the meantime, Mango has also released a new video where the real exclusive news is already there - the TNP solution in dev version 0.22 - And it's awesome!
@@sillonbono3196 I've already read the article about the complexity of merging solutions from realThunder. I already understand it, and in the meantime Mango has released a new video where the current not-yet-public version is already shown which already contains the solution - mitigation - of the TNP problem - and that's the real exclusive news :-) Will there be more description somewhere on what exactly the mitigation of the problem means, and in what situations will we still need to be careful?
Over the years I've gotten pretty accomplished at repairing broken models, but I shall not miss it.
That's huge. I'll be glad to see that pitfall filled. It was the major problem stopping a lot of people I know from adopting the program.
... and the reason why other folks - myself included - have been using the RealThunder branch for years.
@@petergamache5368 It was an option, but it's a lot to ask of a layman to install a development branch. Having those changes make their way into the mainline makes it a lot easier to recommend.
I am living for this fix. I teach FreeCAD in our makerspace for laser, CNC Milling and 3DPrint. It is relatively easy to explain to people that FreeCAD favours an approach that uses many simple sketches over other CAD programs that pack a lot of features into few sketches. BUT combine that with the information that laying sketches on faces will likely lead to breakages - in some ways it invalidates the FreeCAD approach. It's the one thing I have a really hard time explaining.
World is not the same anymore. I so much used to make my head around careful design considerations. TNP I shall miss you, but thanks for leaving us.
All the best for the good work of FreeCAD enthusiasts, as well as MangoJelly.
I ❤FC
Such a wholesome message haha
Congratulations to Darren and all the freecad developers. This is really exciting.
Very exciting. Please give RealThunder the due credit he deserves as well!
Can't wait for this to finally be done so the awesome freecad team can move on to workspace integration and usability fixes.
I think it's too far gone for that. A complete reworking would be needed, with years of development.
I think you're wrong on that. Its really not that far off. Years of development sure. It's being built by a tiny team of developers mostly donating their time, what do you expect? It's already far better than ANY commercial software on account of not having control over your designs. If the community could just get over themselves and be a little more positive, that could only help.
@@jeffersonsharp2292 It's not that far off, and years of development? Doesn't grok.
@@jeffersonsharp2292 I'm with you on the free part, and I love FreeCAD and have never used any other parametric modelling app. I'm eternally grateful for its existence and acknowledge the incredible thing the developers have done. But it's a simple truth: the user experience is a mess, and in order to fix that part, a full rewrite will be needed.
The TNP is specially annoying when you apply chamfers and fillets
Yep, that! In many cases, TNP can by avoided by sticking to "old-school proper modelling principles" (As in: Use independent planes. Don't glue base sketches for new features onto existing feature geometry). But fillets and chamfers rely on glueing-stuff-to-feature-geometry by design and there is no feasible way around it.
And especially frustrating if you don't understand what's going on. If you have multiple fillet and chamfer steps, changing the first step would break the later steps. So many rounds of rework.
@@jeremiahrex Especially frustrating since fillets are the last thing I do in my workflow, and FreeCAD is pretty arbitrary about them. I often find myself having to select individual lines to get a face to work at all. Any change to any earlier step and it's re-clicking the same 50 lines again.
Yes, this is where I run into problems all the time. When a parameter in a model needs to be changed somewhere this often results in chamfers applied later moving from one edge to another. And in most cases that breaks the model. I have started using separate chamfer steps for each type of chamfer. This helps a bit. If one of the chamfers end up on an incorrect edge, I just clear all chamfer edges in the step and reselect the correct ones. Not a big deal if you have four edges with the same chamfer value. A monumental task if you collect 20 chamfers with different values in the same operation.
But I would naturally prefer a fix that stops renaming existing planes.
@@keinschwein8467 I am always sticking to “old-school modeling principles” and I am affected by TNP in Assembly WB every time I modify one of the parts.
If you think dealing with messed up chamfers is a problem, try to rearrange complex assembly after modifying of one of the parts.
Can't wait for this. Never thought this day would come.
oh how many hours of extra work this has kreated for me in the past. If this would get fixed it would be awsome!!!
HOLY MACKEREL!
This problem had been holding back so many other things - certain kinds of interoperability between workbenches, for instance - this is amazing and much welcome news!
Looking forward to 0.22. This will be a huge improvement.
Hurray! Good work Darren and the rest of FreeCAD community.
Thank you to the Freecad team and their EXTREMELY hard work ... I have a feeling when the TNP Fix is implemented ... Freecad/Ondsel is gonna go ballistic !!!
this is a really good explanation of the problem, there's like a thousand places where i've seen people dismissively reference it and this needs to be on every one of them
at the point where i'm trying to show people i like how to use freecad and it's pretty complex to describe all the possible outcomes of even simple operations, best so far is like: "freecad is a frontend to opencascade, opencascade can do anything, any geometry problem you might have, it can do it, but as a frontend freecad can't always accommodate the result of what opencascade does for an operation, there are many cases not even anticipated by the authors of freecad in any real way", trying to keep them focused on solving their problems instead of getting mad
This is absolutly fantastic ! I can´t wait to get this bug fixed !
Yay! Thank You FreeCAD team - Thank You Darren
to reproduce the issue, it's enough to create two pads (second on a face of first) and add a hole to parent pad sketch. thank you so much for making this fix happening. topological naming issue is the biggest FreeCAD drawback for me. I typically use datum planes to prevent it.
HOLY COW! This is the best news this month! I was so annoyed fixing the topological naming issues so I was considering switching to a paid product. Thank you Darren and FreeCAD developers!
Thanks MJ! As always, a clear and concise explanation that is easy to understand. A rare skill these days! Salome
Thank you so much for the kind comment. Glad you enjoyed
Познакомился с Freecad в сентябре 2021 года. При редактировании деталей всегда эта проблема давала о себе знать. Рад, что устранили эту проблему.
What if I say something in Dutch:
FreeCAD heeft een sterke geur. Het is complex en doet net net wat jij wil waardoor je wordt afgeleid en niet hetgeen wat jij wil doen kan doen.
Would you mind? Or can you say it in English?
@@gvdschoot OK. I'll try to say it in English. When I bought myself a 3D printer, I thought about choosing a design environment. I wanted something simple, accessible and easy. Of the free programs, Freecad is the best. I wouldn't say he's interesting. It is the same as any Linux distribution. It has its own problems, which are solved very slowly. This is a problem with any open source software. Very often it is very difficult and painful to use it. He just doesn't know how to do some obvious things that are available in commercial programs. But I've already spent a decent amount of time studying it and I don't want to study other software. I can only wish the project high rates of development and progress.
Really didn't expect this yet. Truly awesome news.
Thanks for that crystal clear demonstration of the issue. I feel like I understand it properly for the first time.
Pretty much the same case is discussed on the FreeCAD wiki page about TNP.
Mega.... Agree with others comments. When new to FreeCAD this was a hard thing to get my head around, if I was realising it was causing me issues at all
.
I’d say I’m unreasonably excited about this, but that would be saying this is no big deal. This is huge!
Really looking forwrd to this one. I have been using FreeCAD for years and the progress over the last year or so is impressive. The interface looks the same but suddenly things just work and make sense! This is not how it used to be. FreeCAD sessions often ended in frustration and confusion. Not so much any longer.
Well, I guess I checked up at the right time. I suspect FreeCAD will be much more popular a year from now.
Happy days, well done and thank you to all concerned 👏👏👏
What a long road to get to this. Hope to see it soon!
Wow, I've heard this problem being discussed for a while but the difference is now, I understand what you're talking about and the possible results that may happen. Thanks
Wonderful explanation of the problem! Thank you.
i lurked quietly in on the developer meeting sunday and they're getting ready to have a feature freeze meeting in a couple of weeks around the 15th, pretty awesome peeps seemed like
Feature freeze was announced for the middle of May (next week) some time ago on the forum. They just have to confirm this date during the next meeting.
This is great news! Very excited to get my hands on the release when it's ready.
Thank goodness, this issue was the dealbreaker when trying to find an alternative to Fusion 360
Glad to hear that this issue has been resolved! It must be a huge relief, especially considering how crucial it was in your search for a viable alternative to Fusion 360. Here's to smoother workflows and more productive days ahead!
exciting news! Glad to see progress.
Brilliant, that’s great to hear. 👍👌
Such welcome news! Thank you to anyone who has helped this along.
Great video and congrats to the FreeCAD team on resolving this one!
Nice. News from Brad dates back to April 17th so there's more progress now but the TNP fix hasn't been fully implemented yet. The comparison is still done with the Link branch so we are waiting to be able to do it in master (when TNP is fully merged and 0.22 becomes 1.0).
Amazing work, hates off to all those involved. I can year the CAD refugees stopping their regular payments as we speak. It's going to be a bight future.
Fabulous news for FreeCAD users news and keep up the great videos
awesome. been waiting for this to be finished :) nice work!
I would have liked to see a little more digging into that last example from the Link branch. Did the faces get renamed and the anchor for the sketch get updated on the change? Did the existing faces keep their name and the new face get then next unused face name? Or... something else?
I know; I was annoyed he only addressed half the conversation
I always do chamfers and fillets last.
Looking forward to it.
Very good news!
Any news when is this feature coming? can't wait!
That was an excellent explanation and illustration of the issue. Kudos!
Thank you kindly 😊😊
Heck yes! Been looking forward to this for a long time.
This is definitely huge!
Woot! Congratulations to the devs!
I thought I missed something here when you talked about the link branch but of course it's the realthunder version. I used it before but had compatibility issues with my designs so I left it and now I exclusively use the development version of the official freecad (which you also referred to several times). It is at 0.22.0 as I keep it updated each week. So far no complaints. Keep up you excellent channel!
good news, and a nice demo/explaination of the tnp
Finaly !!!!
In my personal experience this issue is most painful with chamfers. It seems like whenever I make a change to my model, the chamfers are completely screwed up and can't be fixed in the Edit Chamfer Edges dialog and I have to remove the complete chamfer and make a new one from scratch.
Great news !
Thank you for that update
Finally ! Super happy
Awesome!!!
Great News. Well done to all with the fix :)
Good news. Thanks!
Love it!
Awesome video mango jelly thx
Good. I love progress
I've been using realthunder's link branch for about a year and it's as good as the mainline version is .. well, bad. The TNP makes mainline freecad essentially unusable for anything complex, and I'm so excited to hear that the changes are being merged.
Bear in mind that TNP is not perfectly solved, not in any commercial projects and not in realthunder's version. The most common instances, yes.
@@KnugLidi I imagine the only way to solve it "completely" would be some pretty hefty AI that tries to figure out what exactly you mean when stuff moves around. But, still... just assigning a UUID that never changes to each object (which I think is what rt's branch does) makes things soooo much better for me.
Right now my biggest pain points are bugs.. segfaults (especially in Path / CAM), broken fillets and chamfers, and this absolutely nasty one in the build I'm running where if you attach any sketch to a face from a different body, all 3D operations will be permanently fused with that body. I've spent hours trying to break that link to no avail; if a sketch loses an attachment and you reattach it, that part is forever unusable/inseparable up to that point and you've gotta delete it and recreate it from scratch.
I'm not sure if it's just rt's branch yet, but I'll open some bug reports when I get some time off my current project.
Still, all in all, the progress has been truly remarkable.
@@GordLamb The 'fixes' used aren't perfect, but they are a huge gain, certainly. Some high level math gurus put videos out explaining why it can't be truley solved, but only managed. And it looks like the management in FC is close to matching commercial software in this regard.
Excited about it.
Woohoo! This is welcome news!
At last we see the light.....Thanks for telling us.
I am so excited for this release. The TNP has been a massive pain in my side and prevented me from diving deeper into the software. I'm so excited to have it "fixed" so I can continue on with the learning process. I've got a part I need to design and 3D print for my machine ASAP since the dealership wants $400 for a $10 piece of plastic!
I've gotten so used to working around it, I'm going to have to relearn the more direct workflow.
Glad to hear it. Why has it taken so long though? Just don't rename faces once they are created and it's fixed, no? Give new faces new names when they appear, but keep the names of the old ones?
I just wish freecad’s UI was more akin to Fusion/OnShape.
The customization and themes you can add help make the newer version much better UI wise. I think Onsdel I working on better UI / UX
Just starting out with FreeCad without any prior experience with CAD. So - does that mean I do not have to go the extra mile by inserting helper planes anymore?
Personally I have never followed those recommendations. Inserting the datum planes adds more complexity and I have always stuck to attaching sketches to geometry as it's traditional CAD practice and freeCAD allows you to do it. Through it you learn how to manage the topo issue. Also my tutorials stay current when this problem is mitigated against. You have to be careful as a beginner, there is a lot of misinformation out their of what is caused by topological naming and what is caused by knowledge / understanding gaps.
@@MangoJellySolutions Thanks for your reply. As a teacher myself, I'd like to congratulate you on your courses: imho, they''re very well structured, good to follow (especially for newcomers), and have plenty of good examples of very good didactics!
Great. Do they fix the sketcher's DOF bug(?), too?
You make a circle centered on the Y axis and constrain it. If you place( constrain point onto object) any feature on the Y axis AND the circle, the sketch is fully constrained. But that is not true.
The feature keeps alternating seemingly random between the two common points of the circle and the Y axis, if you play with the constraints.
That's not a bug. A line intersecting a circle does have two solutions after all. So it's not really a degree of freedom, but rather an ambiguity. But I know what you mean. It sure is annoying, especially since you can't add an additional constraint to force the right solution, because from FreeCAD's point of view that sketch would be overconstrained then.
This is not limited to the example you've given by the way. The same can happen with angle or length constraints. E. g. you have point B constrained 10mm to the right of point A. Now move point A some 30 or more to the right and point B is no suddenly constrained 10mm to the left of point A (so point B switched side). This usually does not happen when you drag point A with the mouse (because the constraints are continuously applied while dragging). But on the other hand it is almost 100% reproducible if point A is from external geometry and that external geometry move by that much.
FreeCAD needs some kind of hinting system. Something that's not really a constraint, but a hint for which solution to pick if the solver has multiple to choose.
Use angles instead of horizontal / vertical constraints and you will never see this problem again
At last! It’s such a huge problem, which basically makes Freecad pretty useless for a decent workflow.
Didnt LinkStage 3 solved this some time ago along with many other improvements?
The official freecad releases seem quite slow and behind LS3 by some margin.
❤❤❤
nice
To be honest I've not really found the TNP to be an issue since I took the advice NOT to put sketches on faces. I either sketch on the XY, XZ or YZ plane and offset the sketch (usually with a variable stored in a spreadsheet) or put the sketch on a datum plane. I always fillet/chamfer and if possible incorporate those features into my sketches.
This was just one simple example for the effects of TNP.
Looks like you don’t use assembly WB. That is where TNP has huge impact. You add or remove a hole in one part and the whole assembly goes out of whack and you spend time repositioning parts.
Good news. Question. How do you bring back the tip feature when working on an earlier sketch? I have been wracking my brains trying to do this.
The Tip of the Tree is always the last feature/operation created unless you select an ancient feature with the mouse right click and choose for that specific feature to be the Tip. The auto update in the Sketcher Solver panel must be ticked or as I prefer assign it permanently within Edit Menu-Preferences-Sketcher...
I thought Real Thunder branch already had it solved and released.
It did just those changes were thought to take a long time to be merged into the current branch. Sounds like we may be getting official freecad with realthunder's toponaming fixes
When can we get the fix.
Developers have just released the time line. The new version of v1 will be released approx mid July.
awesome!!
I dunno if this is how they solved it.. But wouldn't give every new face an UUID based name and then never change them solve it all as well?
HALLELUJER!!
🙌🙌🙌
Woot!
Why are extractions called pads ?
Pads are different to extrudes as they include a boolean operation, a union, to keep the model solid. Extrudes allow for surfaces, shells, solids and compounds defending on the arrangement of geometry included.
Why? It's a nomenclature from CATIA by which FreeCAD was inspired ;-)
🥳🥳🥳
Will this fix also work for Assembly Workbench where LCS move around when the part is modified?
Which Assembly workbench ? The new built-in one or one of the old add-on ones like Assembly4 ?
@@Gumball_W all my models are done in A4 so I have to continue with it.
@@rok1475 Then there’s a problem because Zolko (A4 dev) was upset that one of the changes in 0.22 dev broke some stuff in his workbench so he stopped following this dev version and even added a warning that one should use 0.21 stable instead.
@@Gumball_W thank you for the warning.
Is this fix in todays nightly build?
No, it's not yet fully implemented.
Clearly, they should have used aliases to SIDs
I think the term topological is a misnomer as it is not logical at all. It is more a topographical naming problem. It is like the way people like to use the term "logical fallacy" which is ridiculous. It's either logical or it's a fallacy. The two terms are mutually exclusive. . Topological it is not imo.
As software developer i really dont see the issue why the Topological Naming Problem exist in at all. in my simple mind a got a name should always use that name until the face is somehow removed, And or when a face get renamed all other linked sketches etc. should also being renamed.
to me this is basic database management. where the database is the table of all faces and sketches.
You explained the problem, but didn't explain the solution?
mitigated, not solved 👍
I guess I didn't understand what's new.
This version of realThunder that addresses TNP in some way has been around for quite a while. But until now, it looked like the TNP solution in the Dev version would be handled differently, and there was no apparent willingness to merge with realThunder. What has changed?
So I'm waiting for that exclusive news.
While what RealThunder did was and is fantastic it wasn't in a state to be merged in a project that is managed by more than a single person, when you code in your own branch you tend to cut corners in the sense that you do not write enough annotations, code formatting standards, etc. Also RealThunder branch is separate from the main branch which over time diverged from RealThunder's. The TPN thing is not a trivial thing to address, you can't just copy and paste from one branch to another.
@@sillonbono3196 I read the original article on Ondsel regarding the realThunder merger and now I understand. In the meantime, Mango has also released a new video where the real exclusive news is already there - the TNP solution in dev version 0.22 - And it's awesome!
@@sillonbono3196 I read the original article on Ondsel regarding the realThunder merger and now I understand. In the meantime, Mango has also released a new video where the real exclusive news is already there - the TNP solution in dev version 0.22 - And it's awesome!
@@sillonbono3196 I've already read the article about the complexity of merging solutions from realThunder. I already understand it, and in the meantime Mango has released a new video where the current not-yet-public version is already shown which already contains the solution - mitigation - of the TNP problem - and that's the real exclusive news :-)
Will there be more description somewhere on what exactly the mitigation of the problem means, and in what situations will we still need to be careful?
Oh me oh my..... That is good news....
Great news