CADtools - alpha release (for 2.49)

(migius) #1

CAD-tools script goes in evaluation phase:
2009.10.22 - the first developer-version is out.
2009.12.13 - the first alpha-version is out.
2010.03.22 - 90% release: 0.46-alpha
2010.06.17 - release 0.49-alpha: prepared for Blender 2.49-cad-edition
2010.07.16 - release 0.50-alpha: improved Bezier-Curves support
2011.08.15 - release 0.60-alpha: more complete and stable
2011.12.22 - release 0.64-alpha: initial BIM implementation
2013.01.28 - release 0.65-alpha: updated BIM-tools and more

project homepage:

The new features in CADtools need patched Blender 2.49-CAD-edition.

(jawra) #2

It’s nice but I can’t see any download link !?

(migius) #3

no link needed, cause after registering you will get your evaluation copy per email.

(Kai Kostack) #4

wow, nice surprise. i only hope you don’t need to rotate the monitor like this. :eyebrowlift2:

joking aside, looks like you put some serious efforts into this. i wish you all success with this project as you deserve it. i’m sure blendernation will be reporting on this too.

will you speak at blender conference about it?

(jawra) #5

OK thanks. I’m gonna test it. :slight_smile:

(studioa) #6

Migius - there is a thread on FreeCAD forum that might be an interest for your CAD developing:

I also mentioned there your post here.

best - Adrian

(migius) #7

hi all, sorry for delay, i am busy on blender conference now, the CADtools presentation today evening needs still some preparation. (just listening Stani performance…)

(migius) #8

@studioa: thank you for pointing me to FreeCAD thread, actually i didn’t know about Yorik’s recent progress.

@Kai: yes, i’ve been speaking at blender conference on Friday evening. It was quite funny, because the first 10 min of presentation i was fighting with Blender trying to get script running. :smiley:

(migius) #9

evaluation version 0.40 alpha - 2009.12.13 is out, see first post

(migius) #10

evaluation version 0.40 alpha - 2009.12.13 is out, see first post

(Abidos) #11

Is there anything to test NOW… or you’re looking for paid tests too? :eek:

(migius) #12

i’m afraid i don’t understand your sentence, sorry. What are paid tests? :eek:

You can get the script and use it for free.
Feedback and donations are welcome but not a must.

(Abidos) #13

Sorry, but can you supply a direct link for downloading the script? I was really NOT able to find it in the site you point out…

I dont mind the donation… it’s not the point! But I am much more interested if your script really overcomes Blender restrictions (see my posting in this thread). CAD functionality in Blender is a pain for me too… although I dont really need reaching professional goals in that area but just for having a nice support of some hard calculation I’d like to perform using Blender… Therefore, I’d be happy to see that you succeeded :wink:

(migius) #14

You will get your copy after registration. Details on the homepage.

… I am much more interested if your script really overcomes Blender restrictions (see my posting in this thread).
no, unfortunately not in your sense.
CADtools works within Blender environment with all its limitations. My goal is to create CAD editor suitable for architectural projects - means effective precision 0.001[m]. It is on the level of Archicad than of Autocad.

(PapaSmurf) #15

wooot! congratulations.

(Abidos) #16

@ migius - Hum, well, ok… Hope your tool works nicely for the purpose! :wink:

What I mean saying “Blender is not appropriate for CAD issues” is not only that one is hard to display dimentions as a technical text but also Blender’s imprecision in working with floats.Due to this, almost all algorythms that are of difficultly N, in order to deal correctly with their tasks in Blender, become 2N or 3N or even N*N… My typical example of this situation is the checking if a plane (quad) is planar or non-planar. Mathematically, you need to compare a value with 0 but in Blender you should use + threshold to - threshold interval. This already makes a set of planes which you need to accept as being planat, while practically they are NOT. The problem is that one is NOT able to say if this is due to your quad (face) being really non-planar or due to Blender’s wierd treatment of floats!!! Should you need to test for collision, you make thresholds on X, Y and Z and the algorythm speed goes to hell… Should you like to test if a point is inside or outside a 2D or 3D figure - the situation is the same! And so on, and so on…

Some adjacent faces being planar is important in technical drawings… It is important in archi-drawings too. Some adjacent faces that you calculate to be planar, may look bad as if it is a reflective surface one may clearly see different reflections in the different parts of the compound surface. Even at precision of about 0.001 this negative effect may appear. Hope that you were able to cope with that though! :spin:


(migius) #17

i am aware about this, so i am very careful by writing code. I am always trying to find difficultly-N-algorithms. For sensitive places I write extra verify/correct routines. These routines are also helpful by correcting “buggy” models/drawings from outside: e.g. by “almost correct”-parallel/perpendicular/planar parts.

(migius) #18

update to 0.40 alpha - 2009.12.15:

  • bugfix for SELECT routine: not all selected vertices go to Selection-Set

“date” in version number is significant
“main number” will change only by bigger modifications
“alpha” means: not all functionality is implemented, many things in UI and work-flow can/will change.

(migius) #19

update to 0.40 alpha - 2009.12.16:

  • added vertical UI-layout

(migius) #20

texts on project homepage updated