discuss@lists.openscad.org

OpenSCAD general discussion

View all threads

Re: Discuss Digest, Vol 82, Issue 29

PV
Paul van Dinther
Fri, Sep 24, 2021 5:13 AM

Nah, can't see a picture. I am not even sure if I am actually replying to
you via this extremely arcane ancient forum system right now.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:07 PM discuss-request@lists.openscad.org wrote:

Send Discuss mailing list submissions to
discuss@lists.openscad.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or
body 'help' to
discuss-request@lists.openscad.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
discuss-owner@lists.openscad.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..."

Today's Topics:

1. specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
   (Adrian Mariano)
2. object count (Ray West)
3. Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
   (William F. Adams)
4. Re: object count (Ronaldo Persiano)
5. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
   (Torsten Paul)
6. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
   (larry)
7. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
   (William F. Adams)
8. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
   (William F. Adams)
9. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
   (Ray West)
  1. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
    (Adrian Mariano)
  2. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
    (Ray West)
  3. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
    (Torsten Paul)
  4. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
    (Ray West)
  5. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
    (William F. Adams)
  6. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
    (William F. Adams)
  7. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output)
    (Jordan Brown)
  8. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
    (Adrian Mariano)
  9. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
    (Jordan Brown)
  10. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads?
    (larry)
  11. Development snapshot (Sanjeev Prabhakar)
  12. Re: text output (Michael Marx)
  13. Re: text output (MichaelAtOz)
  14. 2D PathBuilder (Paul van Dinther)
  15. Re: 2D PathBuilder (nop head)

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 07:46:30 -0400
From: Adrian Mariano avm4@cornell.edu
Subject: [OpenSCAD] specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw
heads?
To: OpenSCAD general discussion discuss@lists.openscad.org
Message-ID:
<
CAHh+q6fpA4mOcAiAVVUcraAvmEm13otLWW-_1+O1cFxgjyrM2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

I'm wondering if anybody knows a source for full specs for the JIS
cross-type screw recess or the square / Robertson recess.  I've seen
some information on the JIS, but not enough detail to actually build a
model.  In the case of square recess I've found a couple documents
that give some information but they don't indicate what the taper is,
and they give dimensions that are inconsistent with my actual square
drive hardware (drivers and screws).


Message: 2
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 13:26:01 +0100
From: Ray West raywest@raywest.com
Subject: [OpenSCAD] object count
To: OpenSCAD general discussion Discuss@lists.openscad.org
Message-ID: ddfb3351-cc62-cbc3-364f-9a61dd441739@raywest.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed

where  or what, is the hidden volume?

Playing around, trying to get some verification that various components
make a single object, I came up with the following simple test code. If
any or all the comments are removed, it seems to be that when rendered
the volumes are always one more than the actual objects. e.g, two cubes
gives three volumes, glue 'em together, volumes become 2, and so on.

module glue(x,y){
# translate([0,0,-.5]) cube([x,y,2]);
}

module bolt(l,d){
cylinder(h=l,d=d);
}

module lump(){
cube (50);
translate ([0,0,51]) cube(50);

//  translate([5,5,50]) glue(40,40);
//  translate ([25,25,-5])bolt(120,6);
}

lump();
//  translate ([80,0,0]) lump();


Message: 3
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 12:30:34 +0000 (UTC)
From: "William F. Adams" willadams@aol.com
Subject: [OpenSCAD] Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text
output)
To: "discuss@lists.openscad.org" discuss@lists.openscad.org
Message-ID: 1785193328.170328.1632313834502@mail.yahoo.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_170327_110957700.1632313834500"

Short version, would someone please re-open:
https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/3400
See below for my argument on why.

Ray West asked:
re:

  • bill of material >> - assembly instructions >> - G-Code for cutting

out parts >> - SVGs w/ curves as opposed to polylines

What would be the mechanics of that?

As you're defining the parts/assemblies, one has all the
numbers/calculations for all this available, so writing it out then is
simple and direct.

From where are you getting the extra information from a drawing

produced in the manner that openscad generates shapes?
As a part of the design/programming process:
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/cnc-finger-joint-box/8880/126

Openscad drawing is part of the total project.>Seems a bit like the tail

wagging the dog if you >want to clutter up the process with what appears

to be a load of extra features.

Or, one is directly and naturally extending things w/ a single tool so as
to simplify the process.

Surely it is better to have some project software, to oversee >and

connect the various requirements together.
There are more of those than are easily counted --- I think all that
effort would be better served w/in OpenSAD, and that it would be simpler
and more direct if this feature were added.

Instead of being concerned about what you can get out of openscad, >be

more concerned about what you can put in. It is a plain text file,>write
code to generate that from what you have, as an alternative to >extract
information from openscad. You know exactly the size and >position of
things in openscad when you create them, it is not as >easy to find out
where they after you've created them it is difficult >to measure distances
after an object is created.

My solution for that sort of thing has been to write modules which return
values, then to re-use those modules both for making the 3D part, and for
writing out the dimensions at need.
What would be involved in re-opening:
https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/3400
and assigning a bounty to it? I have a side gig, and I'm willing to donate
some percentage of money from it until such time as it's either enough to
get someone to add this feature, or something else happens.
There are lots and lots of work-arounds and other projects addressing this
sort of thing --- I've even broken down and started on one of my own:
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/previewing-g-code-using-openscad/35153
https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview
but my life would be simpler, and I believe OpenSCAD more capable, and
flexible, and simpler to use and more accessible to a wider audience for
more complex projects if there was simply a facility for optionally writing
out one or more text files w/ user control of the extension, w/o the
clutter of "ECHO: " on every line.
If security is the issue, then let's allow a limited number of
letters/characters to begin lines for a given extension --- for .nc
(G-Code) I only need %, (, G, M, T, X, Y, Z --- presumably folks could
manage w/ a similarly safe set of characters for other purposes.
Please look at this from the viewpoint of the end-user --- there are folks
who are able/willing to download one easy to install application and to run
it on a single file --- complexity and support increase exponentially, and
the number of folks willing to use a design file drop off precipitously
when one adds the requirements of post-processing a log file --- moreover,
it's a tedious replication of effort to have to code a design in parallel,
such as when one is accessing the .json file from the Customizer:
http://tug.org/TUGboat/tb40-2/tb125adams-3d.pdf
and a real pain for me at least to have to code in some other tool, which
is a testament to how well-suited OpenSCAD is for this kind of work --- it
just needs one small modification of an existing capability (writing out to
a Log file) to open up an endless array of new capabilities.
As noted, I'm willing to donate a Shapeoko 3 Standard w/ Z-Plus to a
developer who is willing to take on this task, and once the issue is open
on GitHub I'll start putting money into it if that's not enough.
William

Nah, can't see a picture. I am not even sure if I am actually replying to you via this extremely arcane ancient forum system right now. On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:07 PM <discuss-request@lists.openscad.org> wrote: > Send Discuss mailing list submissions to > discuss@lists.openscad.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via email, send a message with subject or > body 'help' to > discuss-request@lists.openscad.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > discuss-owner@lists.openscad.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Discuss digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Adrian Mariano) > 2. object count (Ray West) > 3. Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (William F. Adams) > 4. Re: object count (Ronaldo Persiano) > 5. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (Torsten Paul) > 6. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (larry) > 7. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (William F. Adams) > 8. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (William F. Adams) > 9. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Ray West) > 10. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Adrian Mariano) > 11. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Ray West) > 12. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (Torsten Paul) > 13. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (Ray West) > 14. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (William F. Adams) > 15. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (William F. Adams) > 16. Re: Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text output) > (Jordan Brown) > 17. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Adrian Mariano) > 18. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (Jordan Brown) > 19. Re: specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw heads? > (larry) > 20. Development snapshot (Sanjeev Prabhakar) > 21. Re: text output (Michael Marx) > 22. Re: text output (MichaelAtOz) > 23. 2D PathBuilder (Paul van Dinther) > 24. Re: 2D PathBuilder (nop head) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 07:46:30 -0400 > From: Adrian Mariano <avm4@cornell.edu> > Subject: [OpenSCAD] specifications for JIS and square/Robertson screw > heads? > To: OpenSCAD general discussion <discuss@lists.openscad.org> > Message-ID: > < > CAHh+q6fpA4mOcAiAVVUcraAvmEm13otLWW-_1+O1cFxgjyrM2Q@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > I'm wondering if anybody knows a source for full specs for the JIS > cross-type screw recess or the square / Robertson recess. I've seen > some information on the JIS, but not enough detail to actually build a > model. In the case of square recess I've found a couple documents > that give some information but they don't indicate what the taper is, > and they give dimensions that are inconsistent with my actual square > drive hardware (drivers and screws). > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 13:26:01 +0100 > From: Ray West <raywest@raywest.com> > Subject: [OpenSCAD] object count > To: OpenSCAD general discussion <Discuss@lists.openscad.org> > Message-ID: <ddfb3351-cc62-cbc3-364f-9a61dd441739@raywest.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > where or what, is the hidden volume? > > Playing around, trying to get some verification that various components > make a single object, I came up with the following simple test code. If > any or all the comments are removed, it seems to be that when rendered > the volumes are always one more than the actual objects. e.g, two cubes > gives three volumes, glue 'em together, volumes become 2, and so on. > > > module glue(x,y){ > # translate([0,0,-.5]) cube([x,y,2]); > } > > module bolt(l,d){ > cylinder(h=l,d=d); > } > > module lump(){ > cube (50); > translate ([0,0,51]) cube(50); > > // translate([5,5,50]) glue(40,40); > // translate ([25,25,-5])bolt(120,6); > } > > lump(); > // translate ([80,0,0]) lump(); > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 12:30:34 +0000 (UTC) > From: "William F. Adams" <willadams@aol.com> > Subject: [OpenSCAD] Please re-open Issue #3400 (was Re: Re: text > output) > To: "discuss@lists.openscad.org" <discuss@lists.openscad.org> > Message-ID: <1785193328.170328.1632313834502@mail.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: multipart/alternative; > boundary="----=_Part_170327_110957700.1632313834500" > > Short version, would someone please re-open: > https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/3400 > See below for my argument on why. > > > Ray West asked: > re: > >>- bill of material >> - assembly instructions >> - G-Code for cutting > out parts >> - SVGs w/ curves as opposed to polylines > >What would be the mechanics of that? > As you're defining the parts/assemblies, one has all the > numbers/calculations for all this available, so writing it out then is > simple and direct. > > >From where are you getting the extra information from a drawing > produced in the manner that openscad generates shapes? > As a part of the design/programming process: > https://community.carbide3d.com/t/cnc-finger-joint-box/8880/126 > >Openscad drawing is part of the total project.>Seems a bit like the tail > wagging the dog if you >want to clutter up the process with what appears > >to be a load of extra features. > Or, one is directly and naturally extending things w/ a single tool so as > to simplify the process. > > >Surely it is better to have some project software, to oversee >and > connect the various requirements together. > There are more of those than are easily counted --- I think all that > effort would be better served w/in OpenSAD, and that it would be simpler > and more direct if this feature were added. > >Instead of being concerned about what you can get out of openscad, >be > more concerned about what you can put in. It is a plain text file,>write > code to generate that from what you have, as an alternative to >extract > information from openscad. You know exactly the size and >position of > things in openscad when you create them, it is not as >easy to find out > where they after you've created them it is difficult >to measure distances > after an object is created. > > My solution for that sort of thing has been to write modules which return > values, then to re-use those modules both for making the 3D part, and for > writing out the dimensions at need. > What would be involved in re-opening: > https://github.com/openscad/openscad/issues/3400 > and assigning a bounty to it? I have a side gig, and I'm willing to donate > some percentage of money from it until such time as it's either enough to > get someone to add this feature, or something else happens. > There are lots and lots of work-arounds and other projects addressing this > sort of thing --- I've even broken down and started on one of my own: > https://community.carbide3d.com/t/previewing-g-code-using-openscad/35153 > https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview > but my life would be simpler, and I believe OpenSCAD more capable, and > flexible, and simpler to use and more accessible to a wider audience for > more complex projects if there was simply a facility for optionally writing > out one or more text files w/ user control of the extension, w/o the > clutter of "ECHO: " on every line. > If security is the issue, then let's allow a limited number of > letters/characters to begin lines for a given extension --- for .nc > (G-Code) I only need %, (, G, M, T, X, Y, Z --- presumably folks could > manage w/ a similarly safe set of characters for other purposes. > Please look at this from the viewpoint of the end-user --- there are folks > who are able/willing to download one easy to install application and to run > it on a single file --- complexity and support increase exponentially, and > the number of folks willing to use a design file drop off precipitously > when one adds the requirements of post-processing a log file --- moreover, > it's a tedious replication of effort to have to code a design in parallel, > such as when one is accessing the .json file from the Customizer: > http://tug.org/TUGboat/tb40-2/tb125adams-3d.pdf > and a real pain for me at least to have to code in some other tool, which > is a testament to how well-suited OpenSCAD is for this kind of work --- it > just needs one small modification of an existing capability (writing out to > a Log file) to open up an endless array of new capabilities. > As noted, I'm willing to donate a Shapeoko 3 Standard w/ Z-Plus to a > developer who is willing to take on this task, and once the issue is open > on GitHub I'll start putting money into it if that's not enough. > William >