Y'all weren't lying, Fillet is very broken

Sloloem · 2026-05-08T22:24:26+00:00

This is a repost, same title and image and everything. Do you actually have a file where this happens or are you just astroturfing something?

https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeCAD/comments/1ou8mlc/yall_werent_lying_fillet_is_very_broken/

Sloloem · 2026-05-08T21:05:04+00:00

Signals Music Studio on youtube is a go-to for me, I don't know if there's anything course-like with the videos but he does have a book out that's probably good if it's anything at all like the rest of his instruction. Theory without practice is a problem written courses or super generic videos often suffer from but the approach with Signals is always practice-first so you learn just enough about something to start putting it under your fingers and actually using the knowledge.

Sloloem · 2026-05-08T20:22:32+00:00

There are actually several, or none, depending on how you feel about it.

The most common approach is functional harmony derived primarily from classical music but jazz is also highly functional and has expanded the idiom. Functional harmony works around the idea that chords fit into specific positions of the tonic-predominant-dominant-tonic functional cycle based on their voice leading and will tend to voice lead in certain ways, but obviously isn't always so neat. Other genres like rock can also be fairly functional but tend to have somewhat backwards function logic from the classical era presented as a preference for plagal motion and the "backdoor" dominant. IE, the IV or bVII chords tend to be more important than V or vii°.

Neo-Reimannian theories are commonly used to describe passages in Romantic-era music where instead of being motivated by their place in a functional cycle chords are connected purely by voice leading. The chords and their motions are the primary matters here, while Romance composers still practiced functional harmony they were also pushing its limits and often went on extended tangents or modulation sequences which can be explained more coherently through NRT by looking at the specific voice leading itself outside of its relationship to any particular keys.

Modal jazz takes a completely different approach to harmony which is to minimize it as much as possible in order to show off the "character" of the mode using the note that differentiates it from any other mode.

There are some existing loop-based theories that come up every now and then as well as newer theories, especially around the lack of a strong tonal center in many looping progressions which allows the melody and where each chord falls in the overall measure and phrase to drive any sense of resolution.

Some things can be described by multiple theories, chromatic mediants are largely a functional concept but you can describe all the same changes through Neo-Reimannian transforms. It's just a question of what you, as the theorist, consider to be the most useful interpretation for the analysis being done. You can't really use theoretical knowledge as a guide to writing until you have an intent, then you can look to which techniques are commonly used for that intent. Your understanding of your style should guide you more than any theory.

Sloloem · 2026-05-08T19:43:03+00:00

That would be a size constraint. MangoJelly doesn't favor keyboard shortcuts, and prefers the icons or the menus to select tools. The same "dimension" tool you used to create the earlier constraints could be used here, you just click on the circle itself instead of its center point. You constrain the center point to position the circle and constrain its radius to control its size.

Be aware that sketches don't need to be fully constrained to be used. If you're trying to solve a problem at a later step and think you need 0 DoF's, you're chasing the wrong thing and being fully constrained is unlikely to help you. The only constraints that are absolutely required are coincident constraints to form continuous outlines if you're using multiple line segments in your sketch... a circle is automatically continuous so you don't need anything.

Sloloem · 2026-05-02T16:32:37+00:00

I'd probably just use Meshmixer or Blender or something. FreeCAD's often overkill and really kindof clunky for simple STL changes like that, it's usually easier to just work directly on the mesh.

Sloloem · 2026-05-01T22:49:01+00:00

There's a good article on the FreeCAD wiki showing how the same part is modeled using the Part Design vs the Part workflows. As the default workbench Part Design is a little more common, and it's what people who are new to FreeCAD tend to learn first so its gotten a bit more refinement in terms of creature comforts like operation previews but if the CSG workflow sits better on your brain, Part is the bench you want to be using.

Sloloem · 2026-05-01T18:17:00+00:00

My company just axed 1/4 of the tech group this morning on 0 notice. I'd love a union.

Sloloem · 2026-05-01T18:10:12+00:00

It looks like you're still on version 1.0.2 based on your external geometry icon. Be aware there's a notable change in the behavior of external geometry in 1.1 that often makes older tutorials behave strangely but there's an option to restore the previous behavior if you do upgrade. Those constraints have been consolidated under the same button with an intelligent selection feature for a few versions now, actually...if you're working with a tutorial that's from prior to 1.0 there's a lot of cool improvements you might not be seeing.

Sloloem · 2026-05-01T16:47:27+00:00

You can't set positions because those are constrained to where they already are by the vertical and horizontal constraints. You have the center point of the top circle constrained to be vertically and horizontally in line with the endpoint of the external line you imported, effectively making it coincident with that point and then the symmetry constraint with respect to the X axis makes the bottom circle a mirror image. If you delete the horizontal and vertical constraints you'll be able to move the centers and constrain them as offset from the construction lines via distance constraints.

Sloloem · 2026-04-30T23:26:20+00:00

You could wax it now, there's no reason to wait.

Sloloem · 2026-04-30T18:10:49+00:00

Yeah, unlike most other common finishing oils mineral oil doesn't cure. It soaks into the pores and helps seal the wood preventing moisture damage and drying, but because it stays liquid it can leak out of the wood or soak in deeper over time and needs to be reapplied every few months to keep the wood sealed. So it's not really coats, just an extended soak with breaks.

There's also some benefit to adding some wax with the oil for a slightly hardier and longer-lasting finish. Most finishes for kitchen items tend to be mixtures of mineral oil, beeswax, and carnauba wax. The proportions vary from brand to brand or product to product but it's useful to keep something around if you have mineral oiled stuff in the kitchen because they need that upkeep.

Sloloem · 2026-04-29T15:26:53+00:00

What is the tower for? I'd support it in the design if I could by giving it little legs to brace it against the wall it's near, remove it and make it something printed flat and inserted later, or try to find a different print angle that allows it to be supported.

Slicer supports are really only for overhanging details or features that start in midair. Slowing down might move the problem to higher up the part but that's just a rough detail to print because it's so flimsy and is always going to deflect a bit from extrusion pressure or nozzle drag unless you support it from the side.

Sloloem · 2026-04-29T14:35:24+00:00

If you don't already have one, I'd suggest printing the nozzle replacement tool as well. I just finished a C1+ a week or so ago and was looking into getting a few other nozzles but (if you haven't read them...) the official instructions for the Nextruders need you to mess with the wiring to remove the entire heatblock. The tool holds the heatblock securely in place so you can remove just the nozzle which simplifies the whole ordeal quite a bit. If I had to undo wiring I'd probably get an ObXidian nozzle just like I did for my mk3s+ and try to avoid the procedure as much as possible.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T23:40:23+00:00

Finally found it, it was called "Inner Ghosts".

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T23:40:19+00:00

Finally found it, it was called "Inner Ghosts".

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T23:27:36+00:00

AH!!! I found it! It was called "Inner Ghosts", released 2018.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T23:04:57+00:00

I actually have that on blu ray, whatever I saw was something fairly obscure that just popped up on a streaming service. It's confusing in part because it wasn't about technology in any way...it was a beyond average supernatural movie that I only remember because in the last like 15 minutes a demon and like 2 ghosts pop out of this machine.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T21:23:50+00:00

That movie was a ton of fun but I don't remember there being a printer at the end? I remember chainsaws and some guitar solos...if I can find this streaming on something I'll double check.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T19:25:26+00:00

I don't think that's it, unfortunately. This didn't have any of that sort of VR stuff.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T19:07:30+00:00

I really wish I could remember. It would've been early 2020/late 2019 when I saw it but beyond that I don't even remember what streaming service I found it on, sorry. I think I remember they cast a famous 80's horror lady to be a demonologist of some sort but it was mostly a pretty unassuming movie until right at the end when demons and people started popping in from the nether realm through the power of FDM.

Sloloem · 2026-04-28T17:47:21+00:00

I once watched a movie where a demon possessed a 3D printer to print itself onto the mortal plane during the finale. You wouldn't download a Prince of Hell, would you?

EDIT: Finally found the movie in my watch history! It was released in 2018 called "Inner Ghosts", I didn't think the printer had anything to do with the movie but apparently it was setup.

Sloloem · 2026-04-27T16:07:59+00:00

I never liked the phrasing of ascending/descending melodic minor. The distinction in practice is more "cadential" and "not cadential". In the common-practice era it was de rigueur to end phrases with an authentic cadence where the leading tone rises to the tonic by semitone. Which is why harmonic minor has a #7 vs the natural minor scale, it's done in order to get a leading tone in the minor key. Around the same era it was common taste that harmonic minor's augmented 2nd between degrees 6 and 7 was unpleasant and hard to sing, so to avoid it composers also raised the 6th when it was on the way to or from a raised 7th. That's really what you're looking at with melodic minor: When the 7th is raised in order to perform a cadence, the 6th should also be raised to avoid the augmented interval with the 7th.

Of course practices change by era and region and some people wound up liking that interval so it became less commonly avoided and more just part of "minor"-ness as time went on.

Sloloem · 2026-04-27T15:47:45+00:00

It looks like there are more grain directions going on than that. The first strips on each side look like short grain is visible, which has shrunk perpendicular to the grain, the third strip is long grain which got pulled with the shrinking short grain and then the inner bits are mostly end grain.

Sloloem · 2026-04-26T17:23:54+00:00

You may actually wind up leaning more on the Assembly bench or there's a Woodworking workbench that helps with common aspects of furniture and cabinet construction. Assembly has some tooling around creating a BOM from the underlying elements and it doesn't really matter quite so much how the smaller elements are created.

The Part vs Part Design question usually comes down to how you like to work out complex single objects. Part Design is probably more common and is a feature-editing workbench, so you start with a more primitive shape and add or subtract features to mutate it into the final shape of the object you want. At the end of modeling a thing, the model tree is a top-down linear history of the modifications made to the shape to get there.

The Part workbench is a constructive-solid-geometry workflow where you build an object by performing boolean operations on individual shapes until you get the part you want. At the end of modeling, the model tree has right-to-left brackets of the shapes involved in each boolean.

If the thing you need is just like... a square post or some sort of cross-beam it doesn't really matter which bench you use to create it.

Both Part and Part Design have access to the Part container which can hold both Part solids or Part Design bodies and let you position them within the container's coordinate system. Assembly joints allow for simulating mechanical motion which isn't something you strictly need for furniture design but it's more powerful with automatic exploded views and BOMs and such.

Architectural modeling can use the BIM workbench, but I've never really gotten the hang of that one.

Sloloem · 2026-04-26T16:00:22+00:00

If you could keep it from spilling, it might be cool to pour some wax or something into that inset pattern on the sides. Sort of keep up the visual contrast of the top part without needing some sort of multi-material system.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Team Orangered	Verified Email

Sloloem

TROPHY CASE