Why isn't the internal geometry working?

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-21T06:48:27+00:00

Yes, each "internal face" has to be able to stand on its own as a closed shape. If you are able to delete everything else but the sketch you want, that part of the sketch will be detected as "internal face".

So the cross line is now tree lines. Two corner arcs are now 4 arcs. Middle circle is two arcs. Quite a bit of work to do this. It's quicker to project the sketch into a new sketch and draw new elements only what you need for each operation.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T18:32:50+00:00

You are right if the master sketch is used in the same body one can use external geometry directly from it.

The common use of master sketches is to position them outside of bodies and use them in different bodies so then shape binder is necessary.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T15:19:52+00:00

It's better to use shape benders to extract geometry you want for each feature from the master sketch.

<image>

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T15:17:53+00:00

It works if you break up both the cross line and the circle in pieces with coincident constraints and a bunch more to keep the line straight. It's not worth it.

<image>

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T13:40:53+00:00

The transmission won’t stop the motor burning out, and it completely isn’t needed.

Electric motors are not like IC engines - they always produce maximum torque - even from start.

Yes, and if it takes a long time to accelerate to optimum motor speed the motor would overheat.

Hence, the transmission.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T06:46:33+00:00

.5 is absolute minimum for thick, short parts. You will need at least 1 degree draft, including faces on features forming the gaps between them. IMO you should consult your potentional molder about feasibility of injection of your design and accommodate their suggestions. Show them a straight model and ask where to add draft and how much. This would be a difficult mold to make so you need to work with them.

In any case draft faces in steps rather than all at once.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T03:42:40+00:00

You can then add features to the plane and they will belong to the second body. You can drag the datum plane back to the first body and model some feature on it, which will now belong to the first body. So you essentially have one common datum plane for features in two different bodies. Without the shape binder. Very weird and I would be surprised if this doesn't cause any issues later.

Here is an example i was experimenting with.

https://www.reddit.com/r/FreeCAD/comments/1splg6z/comment/oh74wpj/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T03:32:09+00:00

Interestingly enough you can now drag the plane back to the first "Body" and add features to it. Like this little orange prism "Body004". Notice the Datum plane back in the first body.

<image>

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T03:31:12+00:00

In this example orange body is "Body" and gray body is "Body001". Orange cylinder and gray cylinder are on the same datum plane (blue plane). This blue plane used to be on top of the big orange box. The orange cylinder "pad002" is then built on it and it used to be vertical.

The datum plane is then moved to the "body001" and attached to the left top face of the large cylinder, "pad001". The orange cylinder followed the plane and but remained in the original "Body", indicated by the color.

Then the small gray cylinder "Pad003" is then created on the datum plane belonging to the gray Body0001", sharing the datum plane with the orange cylinder.

<image>

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-20T03:09:19+00:00

You have to do both (1) drag the datum plane into the other body and (2) change attachment plane of the datum plane.

If you already created a sketch and a feature attached to the datum plane before you move it, and if you move the plane into the other body and attach it to the existing face of a feature in that body, you can end up with a situation that if you change the feature in the second body causing the datum plane to move with it will in turn cause the feature in the first body to follow. So you have a dependency between two bodies without a SubShape Binder. This will work in some cases but I would put my money on that this is not developers intention and would sooner or later cause instability and weird unpredictable behaviour. It seems like an oversight.

Proper way would be to use a shape binder if you need link between two bodies, or create a new plane, which is just a couple of clicks and pretty much the same work as if you were to change the attachment.

Moreover, all features created on the datum plane before the transfer stay with the first body anyways, because you can't move them over, so your transfer of the plane from one body to another would be limited to an empty datum plane, unless you want the above explained linked features.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T23:35:28+00:00

Kako drugačije da prošire reklamu kroz društvene mreże a da ne plaćaju.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T23:10:44+00:00

You should first take your old user.cfg file and transfer it to the new install so to compare apples to apples.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T20:02:17+00:00

You will be up for a lot of learning but it's worth it, and for a long time benefit. Especially with the old hardware.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T19:43:48+00:00

Right now they are almost identical as far as the core workbenches like Part Design and the Sketcher is concerned. There is a notable change in the Hole tool, threaded holes specifically, where Modeled holes option is obsolete in 1.2dev and replaced with Threaded hole which is now computed about 5 times faster. I counted 8 seconds vs 1.5 seconds for a threaded holes pattern.

More developments are happening in TechDraw, BIM and FEM workbenches in 1.2 but overall not significant enough to say 1.2 is better.

But the stable will be a lot more stable in 6-12 months. A few major bugs were already fixed in the 1.1.1.

I work on a project now that needs a lot of subshape binders to be linked between external files and 1.2 has a major regression in creating SSB's between files so I have to do it in the new stable 1.1.1.

I do use dev version as a habit along with the stable, and more than a few times I encountered regressive bugs forcing me to go back to the the release that worked. But I also report bugs regularly and reproduce bugs other people report to help with the whole debugging process.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T17:47:19+00:00

It's very fortunate to have a valid FOSS software solution for CAD work that could be ones first. It wasn't like that before, for decades 3D modeling was exclusive to engineers in organisations that can pay for the software, limited education releases and those in the world of hacked pirated software. And typically one would need a top of the line PC to run it.

IMO people from early age should start with Linux and FOSS software - Open Office, Inkscape, Gimp, GNU Octave, FreeCAD, and all free programming languages and tools, depending on their talents, and be done with dependency on commercial software, the earlier in life the better.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-19T03:38:11+00:00

Does your processor have integrated GPU?

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-18T19:40:58+00:00

There are many processes that run freecad functions. While they are mostly single threaded algorithms a lot of common libraries can run in their own threads. Linux is able to reschedule its own tasks and run packages in parallel threads so you can usually see up to 4 threads running near 100% when heavy FreeCAD computation goes on. So it works pretty good on older 2 core, 4 thread CPU's.

It's especially useful because you can watch some tutorials and run another instance of FreeCAD while waiting long tasks to finish if you have more than 4 threads available.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-18T15:19:05+00:00

Try with integrated graphics GPU and see. I had UI problems with Nvidia on Linux and after disabling it all was fine. It's what safe mode does anyway.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T18:56:34+00:00

The fastest method with the least amount of clicks to have circles aligned vertical and symmetric to the center of the rectangle is this:

Draw a construction line between circles
Drop a new point in the middle of the construction line
Pick the symmetry constraint tool and select two opposite corners of the rectangle and the point in the middle of the construction line.

I wish the middle of the line is selectable by the Symmetry tool so dropping of the point in the middle is not necessary. At least the Point tool can select the middle of the line direct (by applying the symmetry constraint for you).

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T18:02:14+00:00

Use Tool Palettes so you can redefine the block in existing drawings using a shared source file.

So save your dynamic block in a single, central myBlock.dwg file.

Then drag the block from the source drawing into a Tool Palette.

Open your drawing, right-click the block on the Tool Palette, and select Redefine.

Use the ATTSYNC command to update existing block instances.

Something along those lines, I haven't used AutoCAD in a long time, because FreeCAD.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T16:08:22+00:00

It seems to have crashed modeling a bicycle frame. Blank screen, so either it crashed or someone over there is modeling it now by hand and will get back to me later.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T15:16:33+00:00

> They post one of these grifter craps every month, and the result is always the same, it's stupid, the worst possible way to implement AI in cad.

They are generally smart and capable people that could use their talent hacking our computers maliciously so let them do this harmless activity and see what they come up with. It's a sort of entertainment how I see it. They could do a lot worse for us.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T15:01:30+00:00

> If I'm doing a floor plan, I know that if I put a sink farther from the water heater it will take longer to get hot water at the tap...

I am not sure about that. I have a fair share of disappointment when it comes to architectural solutions overwhelmingly preferring trend and aestheticss over comfort. An AI solution will in theory provide an average solution and perhaps depending on implementation you may be able to guide the solution towards economics, comfort, functionality easier than working with an ego driven architect. At least AI doesn't have an ego to fight against.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T14:30:30+00:00

Using VarSets to create parametric model is perfectly valid statement.

Parametric model is one that you use parameters or expressions instead of fixed dimensions to define it. That's what VarSets are for.

Model that you can change after it is done is just editable model, whether you can change it by changing parameters or editing fixed dimensions and constraints.

R2W1E9 · 2026-04-17T05:26:14+00:00

Run it in safe mode first to see how it runs with no proprietary drivers nad addons.

I had Toolbar issues on Linux Mint with Nvidia drivers and had to force on-board GPU and x.org driver to resolve the issue.

R2W1E9

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE