Solid Tools

ArCAD-UK

Solid tools are a great step forward, but I am frustrated by the outcome. Why does the process result in groups being renamed & moved to layer 0. It may be a great safety net for tracking changes, but I seem to spend more time moving stuff back onto the right layer and changing the name back again than I would dealing with any other problems which might arise through the process.

What do you think, should S.U. retain the original layer & name of the target when carrying out solid operations?

thomthom

@arcad-uk said:

What do you think, should S.U. retain the original layer & name of the target when carrying out solid operations?

What if the two objects one perform boolean operations has different layers?

ArCAD-UK

I would have thought it was a case of simple priorities.

Outer shell & union adopt first object layer
Trim & subtract retain original layers
Split & intersect would retain original layer(where retained) & create a new group on layer 0 for the white bit in the menu icon

Naming should also follow a similar pattern.

Easy?

jeff hammond

there's a sort of work around (though this work around is actually only helpful in a small number of situations for me)

select the solids you want to boolean and make them a component or group with the name you want. (you can put this component on the layer you want the resulting boolean to end up on.. or put it on a totally separate layer if you wish)

go inside the component then do the boolean then explode (good to have an explode keystroke here).. your new solid will now be on the layer of your choosing with the name you want..

[edit]..basically, it works best if you have this planned out before drawing. draw your solids with generic names (ie- the default 'component#1' etc..) inside of the component with the proper name/layer..
but, it's good because you can end up with a component instead of a group after the intersect

again, it's not helpful in most situations as it's not necessarily any more work to just rename and reassign layers..
i agree the SUteam should re-work some of this stuff.. your suggestions sound good

itsapplied4

@arcad-uk said:

Solid tools are a great step forward, but I am frustrated by the outcome. Why does the process result in groups being renamed & moved to layer 0. It may be a great safety net for tracking changes, but I seem to spend more time moving stuff back onto the right layer and changing the name back again than I would dealing with any other problems which might arise through the process.

What do you think, should S.U. retain the original layer & name of the target when carrying out solid operations?

I saw where several different views and workarounds were opted for. I ,Please excuse the pun "went to the drawing board" and developed about six solids on six layers .
Locking the entity restricts all operations.

1.In the first test I choose the "UNION" of two solids. layer1 and layer2 .The current working layer was zero. I found the completed model had chosen the first model picked as it's layer for home.
2. I tried the difference between two solid models, in this command the first pick has the shape extracted and it stayed in it's home layer ,naturally.
3. I then tried the resultant of the intersection of two models .Here again the first picked mandated the home layer.
4. I found this true on all other operations in the OSCoolean operations. First pick mandates the layer ,current layer mandated any new construction added to that piece.

As an example if you havea machine on layer 4 and added a pipe spool while on current layer 5 . If you pick the pipe spool first for unioning the spool will cause the machine to migrate to current level. If you pick the machine first then the spool will be on the machine layer after union.
From past expierience layering can serve as a great show and tell feature. On a top down presentation. However from a designer point . Creating components and importing them for review is always best . It's quite easy to have a current layer blended by accident into a layer and you not see it for several hours . Long after the edit (undo) command is an option.

ArCAD-UK

Just played with this and my findings don't match yours William. From what I see the results always end up on the current layer?

driven

@arcad-uk said:

Just played with this and my findings don't match yours William. From what I see the results always end up on the current layer?

your using SU's Solids Tool and he's using OSCoolean.rb http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?t=14773

itsapplied4

@driven said:

@arcad-uk said:

Just played with this and my findings don't match yours William. From what I see the results always end up on the current layer?

your using SU's Solids Tool and he's using OSCoolean.rb http://forums.sketchucation.com/viewtopic.php?t=14773

Your both exactly right I went back to my Pro and it remains on the current level. In the free version 8.0 using OSCoolean.rb it uses FIFO layering .Your first interaction determines the layer and were it will reside. I didn't expect the two to be that way but there ya go. I'll check both sides before saying what is what again. william