Thanks for checking. I will remove that option from the UI tonight then.
-Ian
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 12:35 PM Alexander Shuklin
wrote:
> Hi,
> I just checked the sheet shared across 2 projects. Thanks to the new
> schematic format, it works fine. It looks like you don't need this
> checkbox.
Hi,
I just checked the sheet shared across 2 projects. Thanks to the new
schematic format, it works fine. It looks like you don't need this
checkbox. The reason why this option was created doesn't exist anymore.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 00:00, Jeff Young wrote:
> I think this is no longer used.
Hi all,
I'm wondering if it is safe to limit the scale of shapes to be positive values?
Applying negative scales will cause inverted shapes and render issues on the
models.
Could be that anyone in the world is using negative scale values?
or should be safe to limit it?
This is related with
I'm seeing the following build error when building with python scripting
enabled on Linux:
/home/wayne/src/kicad-trunk/pcbnew/swig/pcbnew_scripting_helpers.cpp: In
function ‘BOARD* LoadBoard(wxString&, IO_MGR::PCB_FILE_T)’:
We can't remove the scaling option until we make the VRML importer handle
proper unit selection. I have routinely run into the case where I go
OpenSCAD -> Wings3D -> KiCad and design a model using mm in OpenSCAD
because it makes for easier computations (all the datasheet values are
nicely given in
Do other EDA tools allow model scaling? Altium doesn't even allow VRML
import in the first place.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 1:10 PM Seth Hillbrand wrote:
> Well, we've backed ourselves into a bit of a corner. VRML is specified in
> meters, so if we're assuming inches, we're a bit off in left
There has been some discussion to removing the scale option here
altogether. The logic being that if you need the model scaled, you should
be doing this in your solid CAD not in your electronic CAD. I have come
around to this idea and it might be worth implementing rather than doing
the scale
Well, we've backed ourselves into a bit of a corner. VRML is specified in
meters, so if we're assuming inches, we're a bit off in left field. But do
we need three separate scale parameters? We could reduce to 1, correct?
In the official footprint library, we have 7 footprints that specify
The question then becomes, how do we want to do this. Should we remove the
(scale ) s-expr from newly saved footprints and replace it with a units
one? Or do we make this a UI-only change and have the UI compute the
scaling factors that are saved in the file.
-Ian
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 7:02 PM
From my user experience: I use the 3 scale values on my projects.
I created unit solids (eg: 1mm cube, 1mm cylinder radius / thickness, etc) and
then I use it to quickly create shapes (by adjusting X,Y,Z scale) to populate
the board if I don't have the proper STEP model.
This is helpful to
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 2:33 PM Cirilo Bernardo
wrote:
> Oh, I wish VRML specified meters - that would have made life much easier.
>
See
https://www.web3d.org/documents/specifications/14772/V2.0/part1/concepts.html#4.4.5
This reads pretty clear to me. Was there a different reference you are
Note Altium's solution to the use case of needing "easy basic models": it
can actually generate the models built-in.
You just specify some parameters and it will generate cylinders, spheres,
or extruded shapes from a 2D contour.
If we could add this kind of feature in the future, maybe we would
Oh, I wish VRML specified meters - that would have made life much easier.
No, VRML *recommends* that the units be meters - the reality is that there
are models in inches,
0.1 inches, mm, cm and who knows what else, and unlike CAD model
specifications there is no
mechanism for specifying the units.
I'd find it a loss if the scaling options were gone - I often end up
using scaling for things like inductors, where there's too much variety
to make a model for each size and height, so I'll often grab a model
with the correct fp and wrong height and scale it.
Kliment
On 29.09.20 19:38, Ian
that would work for me too ;)
Mario
From: Jon Evans
Sent: 29 September 2020 19:53
To: Mário Luzeiro
Cc: Seth Hillbrand; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] 3D-Viewer: limit scale to positive values?
Note Altium's
A solution to this could be go genrate idf models more interactively as
suggested Jon. We already have idfcyl and idfrect as references. I assume
there is no reason to use IDF over STEP as the physical representation.
On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 21:01, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
> that would work for me
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 9:54 PM Jon Evans wrote:
> Note Altium's solution to the use case of needing "easy basic models": it
> can actually generate the models built-in.
>
> You just specify some parameters and it will generate cylinders, spheres,
> or extruded shapes from a 2D contour.
>
> If
Hi,
just to clarify: the 3d models of the official library must be created
such that the scaling factor in the footprint is set to 1. We are
currently rewording the whole section to be clearer
https://gitlab.com/kicad/services/kicad-website/-/merge_requests/502
On 29/09/2020 18:30, Ian
I am all for removing scaling completely on STEP models - those should be
properly defined. I'm not sure the history of why VRML was chosen as the
first model type that was supported, but we shouldn't remove it since it is
used primarily in the 3D viewer to get better renders.
We can probably go
I've never seen another package use VRML. Everyone uses STEP. I suspect
if we were implementing this today, we would look at the tradeoff on
support/benefit for VRML and limit ourselves to STEP as well.
I like Ian's suggestion for unit options.
-Seth
On Tue, Sep 29, 2020 at 10:22 AM Jon Evans
Specifying a 'VRML unit' will not work for many users since they like to
scale
cylinders/boxes to represent many (all?) components and regularly use
a different scale for each axis.
On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 3:39 AM Ian McInerney
wrote:
> I am all for removing scaling completely on STEP models -
Haha, I forgot about those tools (and tutorial) that I had written.
For simple blobs IDF works fine;
a basic editor can start with simple closed curves and if someone had
the inclination they could
even allow the creation of more sophisticated parts. In the short
term the idfrect and idfcyl tools
The document I linked is the HTML version of the ISO/IEC standard as
published by the Web3D consortium (previously known as the VRML
consortium). There is no textual difference between the PDF of the ISO
document and the webpage.
If Wings3D doesn't use this, then it makes sense that we may have
Although scaling is allowed in the IGES and STEP specifications, I have
*never* encountered MCAD
software that allowed a scale other than 1 and in engineering there are
essentially no acceptable
reasons to use any other scale factor. When engineers specify parts for an
assembly, the parts need
to
> Out of curiosity, does anyone have a screenshot from the old 3D Viewer?
Maybe this ones:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kicad_3dviewer.jpg
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pcbnew_3d_viewer.png
https://doc.ubuntu-fr.org/_media/applications/kicad/visu3d_sc.png
:)
Mario
I don't follow your statement. The standard says "ISO/IEC 14772 defines
the unit of measure of the world coordinate system to be metres." There is
no ambiguity here, so I would feel comfortable with saying that KiCad also
defines the VRML standard unit to be meters (metres).
As to the file
Hi Seth,
What you have on the w3 site is essentially an interpretation by the
author of that page;
the spec referred to reads differently. At any rate, that doesn't change
the fact that existing
software for creating VRML (including Wings3D that many KiCad users used
long ago)
don't use a unit
I don't know who created the original 3D viewer (our current viewer is a
100%
rewrite by Mario), but VRML was chosen because it could be reasonably
implemented and many users found it helpful for things such as checking for
mechanical collisions on the board and of course also for giving some idea
(I reopened https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/-/issues/3453 )
I personally think the best tool we could create is one that allows you to
take a closed shape drawn on a board layer and extrude that by a given
height to create a model that can then be exported as a STEP along with the
rest of the
That's the same reference - the problem is with the wording 'is', not
'shall' or 'must be'.
The reality is that for every tool you pick that generates VRML models, the
unit used is
anyone's guess. On top of that, for KiCad's purposes using meters would
actually
be a nuisance and would
My opinion is that what KiCad currently does is fine and the library
contributors
already ensure that VRML files are scaled to meet KiCad's expectations.
The fact that various tools will use different units in a VRML file and
that few
tools (including MCADs, our primary source of high quality
HI Mario,
Maybe I could make a small tool to allow you to create different
sized/colored boxes and cylinders
in VRML format. Would that be helpful to you? We could possibly even
add other basic shapes.
I'd like to help users move away from scaling (it's something I always
wished I could get rid
Hi Cirilo,
Thanks but for VRML I think it is not needed :)
Remember.. that it can be set ("manually") on the VRML model files by adding a
scale on a shape group (that I think the current VRML importer suport)
Adding scale on the VRML file manually could be an workaround in future if this
(what
33 matches
Mail list logo
