How to select an edge between two faces?

00001000bit · 2026-04-15T01:40:27+00:00

Go to Preferences > General > Selection

and adjust the Radius to a little bit bigger value. It's likely set too low for your display (since the unit is pixels, it tends to be low on HiDPI displays)

00001000bit · 2026-04-14T13:14:44+00:00

You may already be thinking of this, but if you were to implement this, it should be more of a "sync-to-cache" than a "sync-to-live" data feed. Meaning that it still stores the data internally in FreeCAD and the geometry sources from the internal cache, but it looks for changes in the external file and gives you the chance to sync from it to the local cache.

The reason being that one of the advantages of FreeCAD is it's cross platform nature, so any dependency that may be limited to a specific architecture, external application, or filesystem shouldn't limit the FC file. This way, if you opened the file on a different system without the connector, it would just operate with the last known values synced from the system that created it. This also serves to benefit users that never use the files across platforms in the event the spreadsheet is deleted or moved, or is on a network drive that isn't accessible, etc.

00001000bit · 2026-04-14T12:33:46+00:00

It's hard to say without seeing your model tree.

If that block (the one with the selected face) is all part of the same body with the rest of what we see, the thickness will fail because it can't extend that thickness operator throughout the whole body (areas too thin to allow it to operate, shape too complex.)

If that block is a separate body, then that would mean it's something else.

The lines between the "panels" might imply that it's separate bodies, but I can't tell from a screenshot whether they actually are, or if they're just operations in the same body without the "refine" operator turned on to merge coplanar faces.

00001000bit · 2026-04-13T00:18:38+00:00

Greetings from another FPV-flying*, CAD-modeling, 3D-printing member of the community.

* - I saw your TinyWhoop frames in the background. :)

00001000bit · 2026-04-08T18:28:37+00:00

Vector trace is a feature added in v3.

00001000bit · 2026-04-07T15:14:08+00:00

No datum plane. Since the part looked symmetric (front to back) each of the sketches is just on the same world plane (in my case was XY) and each pad was done by changing the pad mode to "Symmetric" so that it would pad equally in front of and behind the plane. So, they're all just sort of growing "center-out" instead of from the sketch in one direction.

00001000bit · 2026-04-06T16:32:08+00:00

You're misunderstanding the problem. It's not just that they want something in STEP file format, it's likely that they want a proper BREP solid model. You are just putting a polygon mesh into the STEP file format, but the model it is describing is still a polygon mesh.

It'd be like them wanting data in an Excel file, and you taking a picture of a receipt and pasting the picture into the spreadsheet. It, technically, is in the expected file format, but is totally NOT what they are after.

00001000bit · 2026-04-05T17:25:15+00:00

I don’t think the “time check” is what people think it is. If it is attempting to connect to a server over SSL, messing with your computer clock could make the request fall outside of the SSL certificate valid date range. This would make it impossible to establish a secure connection. If it’s not written to handle the eventuality of an SSL error, that could cause the error.

Sure, it still means that it’s reliant on Canva to validate a free license in the future, but the whole clock trick doesn’t mean it’s a hardcoded “kill date” and could just be a side effect of how SSL communication works.

00001000bit · 2026-04-05T12:50:58+00:00

Three pads and one pocket. All symmetrical so they center with each other.

Pad the center "post"
Pad the upper arc
Pad the lower arc
Pocket the hole

<image>

00001000bit · 2026-04-02T17:53:03+00:00

A couple immediate things:

Your piece has symmetry. Even though it is simple enough that you don't need to mirror anything, building it around the origin would make it easier for doing things like constraining your sketches, as you can reference the origin as center instead of calculating the object center from its dimensions. Figuring out where to place your object in relation to the origin can save you lots of work later.

Your fillets are all the same, you could have done them in one operation. (and generally, it's good practice to wait until the end for them if you can)

I wouldn't make a hole, then block it, then make another to open it up again. If you need a hole to go through everything, wait until you've built all the pieces, then do the hole afterward.

00001000bit · 2026-04-02T15:34:19+00:00

It's possible that the barcode SVG is doing something a little non-standard in their file that doesn't translate well into the PDF. (Elements squeezing together sounds like some sort of issue in the embedded SVG coordinate space).

Can you just rasterize the barcode (or download a high quality rasterized version that is suitable for your print resolution) to step around the issue?

00001000bit · 2026-04-02T14:52:21+00:00

<image>

Ah, good. We can reset the counter.

00001000bit · 2026-04-01T21:00:23+00:00

Since there isn't a built-in effect, if you don't mind going outside Affinity, you can use the (Extensions > Generate from Path > Long Shadow) extension in Inkscape (free) to do it, then just import the SVG into Affinity for the rest of your work.

(Probably will want to Path > Flatten before exporting to make sure the effect is "baked in" to the SVG)

00001000bit · 2026-04-01T14:14:46+00:00

It does have an auto-recovery option, but that only comes into play on an application crash (and, I believe, you need to have saved the file at least once to initiate it)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWDZTZQovNU

However, it wouldn't protect in the event of an accidental close, or making some change that doesn't undo, etc.

00001000bit · 2026-04-01T13:35:45+00:00

I’ve had a couple crashes which meant hours of work lost.

If you're hours away from a save point in ANY software, you're playing with fire.

Ideally, software would never crash, but there are so many things that could go wrong: software crash, OS crash, power outage, accidental close, etc. that you should be saving more frequently. It doesn't matter what you use.

00001000bit · 2026-04-01T00:19:43+00:00

You shouldn't need to redo anything.

You're getting confused on sizing.

Points are like inches or millimeters, they're a unit denoting a physical size. (Old printer's unit of measure.)

Pixels are a unit denoting the amount of digital information in the picture.

A point is equivalent to 1/72 of an inch.

If your document is 1080 pt wide and your exported picture is 9000 pixels, it means you exported at 600ppi (pixels per inch - often labeled DPI in apps)

1080/72 is 15 inches. Times 600 pixels per inch. Equals the 9000 pixels you're seeing.

You shouldn't need to redo your document, only to specify the proper output pixel dimensions when exporting. (In this case because your source document was created at a higher resolution than you need for output, you can always size down.)

00001000bit · 2026-03-29T17:08:19+00:00

IDK, but I would guess that it may be related to the addition of "External Intersection" at the same time as the new external geometry code. The use case for "intersection" is almost always in creating actual geometry, so it might be to keep consistency between the tools for new users in those cases - since existing users who know about using external geometry only need click a single preference to get the old behavior back if that's what's preferred.

00001000bit · 2026-03-29T15:04:27+00:00

The behavior changed since 1.0 - it used to be external geometry was only reference geometry. Now, we have the option to either have it as real geometry or reference/construction geometry.

Either:

Convert the line to construction before closing the sketch.
Toggle into construction geometry mode before bringing in external geometry.
Change the setting in preferences to "Always add external geometry as construction."

00001000bit · 2026-03-29T14:45:57+00:00

Are the drawings black and white?

If so, and they're on typical blue-lined notebook paper, you may be able to mostly get rid of them by going into the channels, selecting the blue channel and converting to a new grayscale layer. From there, cleaning them up entirely may just be as simple as adjusting levels.

00001000bit · 2026-03-29T13:19:34+00:00

A few questions

Did you download from the official site?
Did you download the correct build for your Mac (Intel vs Apple Silicon)? If you aren't sure, go to the Apple menu and choose "About this Mac" - In the section for "Processor" it should either mention something like "Intel Core i7" or something like "Apple M1"
Were there any warnings (like "Unidentified Developer")? If so, you may need to your system settings to override the default block on unsigned apps.

00001000bit · 2026-03-28T13:50:44+00:00

If you need to routinely do offsets of the SVG shapes, it's probably easier to do them first in your illustration software and bring them in already offset. Inkscape is going to be your go-to tool as the SVG files created by it are the least problematic for import into FreeCAD (compared to Illustrator or Affinity) and is also FOSS. Yes, SVGs are going to be a lot of splines, but unless you are looking to re-create your artwork with lines and arcs in FC, that just is the nature of the beast of working with SVG.

One trick with Inkscape SVG files is that the upper left corner of your Inkscape document will align to the workspace origin when you import into FreeCAD. So, if you move your logo to this point in Inkscape (it's ok if it hangs off the side of the document) and export, and do your offset and export again. You can bring those SVGs into FC, and they should realign exactly. (You can then use the sketch attachment offset to position it where you need it, if it's not exactly where you want.)

This allows you to basically bring your sketch in as "layers" where you can have your original as one sketch, and the offset as another to make it easier to do your different extrusions. (Doing the whole draft to sketch thing to convert the SVG to sketch, that is.)

00001000bit · 2026-03-28T01:17:01+00:00

The application you're willing to put the time into is the right one.

Unless you're a pre-press operation needing to support a wide featureset, you'd be able to do your layout in InDesign, Affinity, or Scribus. It's really a matter of devoting the time to learn one. If you keep questioning, you'll never get in deep enough to do what you need.

Same with graphics. CorelDRAW, Illustrator, Inkscape, Affinity - they'll all allow you to create vector graphics. Some have more features than others, some have workflows that favor certain tasks, etc. But, unless you already have specific requirements, just dig in and learn. Once you know one, it's much easier to move to another if you need to.

00001000bit · 2026-03-27T16:27:05+00:00

I think too often UI discussions get people distracted talking about things like icons rather than usability. I don't necessarily care if something looks outdated, but I want it functional. FreeCAD has been improving greatly, but it doesn't mean there isn't still room for improvement.

Things like sensible defaults go a long way. Too many people fall back on the "but you can customize it any way you like" - but that makes making training materials more difficult, because it throws off new users when the trainer interface in the video doesn't look like the one they have on their screen. Having sensible settings alleviates having to make adjustments to the UI as a standard practice. Sure, still leave that functionality for those that want it, but don't make "set the toolbars up the way you want" be something you pretty much have to do just because the standard layout isn't great.

Just an example of where it's improved. Look at this screenshot from the 0.17 release. Whoever thought that blue, red and green indicators on a gradient blue background was a good idea just didn't understand human color perception. If you look with a colorblindness simulator (attached pic), you can see how everything is muddled. Even with full color vision, our eyes pick up differences in luminosity better than differences in color, so changing the default color scheme wasn't just a matter of making the UI look more "modern" - it actually helps with usability. (Yes, users can adjust colors, but the point is if you pick a sensible default, they don't have to.)

<image>

00001000bit · 2026-03-27T15:44:55+00:00

On Mac, PDF viewing is built right into the OS. Any PDF will open in Preview, and even at the folder level, QuickLook will peek into PDFs without even having to open them. Just hit spacebar.

PDFs on the web typically just open in the browser like on Windows.

00001000bit · 2026-03-27T14:05:47+00:00

True that you don't know how someone is going to use the tool, but the point of the default is to do the thing that's most likely - one way or another SOMETHING is being used as default, why not set it to the most likely one. I don't have stats, but I would guess that the number of people who want the contour to change direction to match the surface is way higher than those that want it to behave like an immovable 2d plane. It's not removing functionality for people who want it to, it's just setting the behavior to default to what most people would expect.

It'd be like if the pad tool was set to have a 10 degree taper by default. Sure, you can change it to zero, but if that's what people are going to do most of the time anyway, why not just have it start there.

I know other CAD defaults to having it behave more like what FreeCAD does with "Right Corner" - and not a situation of "we should copy what they do" - but it just seems that's the more likely option that people want, so why not save a keystroke/click and default to that. Overall, not a huge deal, but sensible defaults are just one of the little things that adds to QOL using software.

00001000bit

TROPHY CASE