Best Way to Achieve EXACT Cut Depth with Boxcutter in Blender

[@kennmacintosh2627]

Never thought I'd ever see a video done on one of my questions. Very detailed explanation. Thanks again. Watch ALL his videos.

[@ArtisansofVaul]

@kennmacintosh2627 since recording I've also found out there is another way! A video on that is incoming too.

[@paulthomann7911]

Brilliant as usual. Never knew about Lazorcut before. Saw this yesterday and probably used it 30 times today already.

[@ArtisansofVaul]

@paulthomann7911 😁 Since this I found out about another method too that blew my mind. That's video should be up next week.

[@wingwalker007]

Thank you

[@ArtisansofVaul]

@@wingwalker007 My pleasure 😁

[@kennmacintosh2627]

The error you mention @ 05:45 where the cut leaves a face on the edge, I get that error EVERY time I use "exact" but not with "fast". I'm using Blender 4.2.1, HOps 0.9.88_6, Boxcutter 7.20.6. I noticed you were using 4.3. I was hoping to use ur method to get my exact cut depth. My work around is to cut 1.51", then move the cutter back .01" . I even tried different origin points. Do you know how I can get this bug problem to the Dev's of Boxcutter? I could not find a Discord channel for Boxcutter. THX

[@rajendrameena150]

I think nd addon is quite close to hardops and it is free.

[@ArtisansofVaul]

@rajendrameena150 Agreed. I need to do a differences video.

[@andrzejczarnota3661]

All operations in Blender should be based on exact dimensions and exact relations, non destructive and fully parametric workflow. Otherwise blender is a very good free rendering software and a very poor design tool.

[@ND-SynrgStudio]

Not at all, you can design anything you want if you don't need measurements. Fully "non measured" and destructive workflow, could be worth your time if you have what you want to do in mind and you don't need the measurements

[@ArtisansofVaul]

@andrzejczarnota3661 I have to say that I really disagree with this. The reason Blender is great is that I can add in elements that have exact sizes for joining points/etc but I can also model more freely for the elements that don't. Otherwise it's just yet another bit of CAD software that doesn't allow for that free flowing thought process in the design of models. Now if you said that all operations should have the option of being based on an exact dimension I'd agree.

[@andrzejczarnota3661]

@@ND-SynrgStudio yeap, and without exact dimensions, tolerances and in scale propotions you get nice looking model that is usless in real life manufacturing. Even in architecture, were tolerances are large, exact dimensions are crucial to keep up with construction norms, not to mention mechanical engeneering and product design.

[@tlabelle1965]

​@@andrzejczarnota3661yeap, but blender is not just about real manufacturing, is it?

[@darrennew8211]

That would be the CAD Sketcher add-on you're after. Or the CAD Transform, if you don't want to go back and change things. If you watch the playlist "Precision Modeling with Blender" on the Keep Making channel, he shows viewers how to get the kind of design stuff out of Blender you're talking about. (This channel is more artistic stuff, and his channel is more functional stuff.) Blender isn't going to do any simulations for you either: it's not going to show you the stresses on joints or anything like that. That said, no, Blender isn't a "design tool." It's a mesh modeler along with all the graphics stuff it does. I can't imagine sculpting a face using exact dimensions and relations and parametrics. I wouldn't want to make D&D terrain in a CAD program. And sometimes if you're doing 3D printing, you really do need to make a hole of exactly the right size, even destructively. It's also very good at taking existing STLs and changing them far easier than any CAD tool could. It's also free: the effort you go into learning it won't be taken away as soon as the CEO retires and someone else takes over and wants to make more money off you. There's no reason to use *only* Blender if you're building stuff.