FreeCAD: Attachment: tell objects where they can go.

Part 1 of a series on FreeCAD fundamentals

[@sillonbono3196]

Thank you for this video, what you have explained I had partially deduced by sheer number of hours stumbling around and testing, but you removed many of my doubts, I thought I was the only one being confused by the plethora of attachment modes. 👍

[@4axisprinting]

Glad it helped!

[@GnuReligion]

Have followed along with this tutorial. First time I ever worked with a disembodied sketch! Finally understand the most basal (and invisible) "document orientation." A "101" to FreeCAD tutorial MUST hit you in the face with the fact that all sketches are along the Document XY, then placed, mapped, and supported. Utterly bewildering! Before this, I have always created a reference body to "see" the coordinates ... so at the get-go, was disoriented with a derivative coordinate system. Another thing: You are absolutely correct, in that the ordering (re-naming) of sketch features really slams the unsuspecting user. One familiar with Solidworks does not expect that adding a small surface feature will throw off the rest of the work. Yeah, Moar! Show me how to create a model of a perfboard with 1000 holes, that does not bog down the system.

[@jiritichy6855]

Dear, what you have "always done before" was a correct thing on a professional CAD system. This is over-engineered, convoluted way of doing things, maybe usable in some industry,which works with light (maybe even display calculations of light reflection on the screen or similar). It is definitely not practical way for mechanical enginnering for manufacturing. If someone designs something, they might build aestheticaly pleasing model and then inspec it on CMM, get all the XYZ coordinates, from which are calculated all the angles of every feature in World CS or Local CS.....And that is how you design things - by simple XYZ. Any tilted plane is designed by only 3 points or line and a point, Then you a have to define coordinate system....What FreeCAD unfortunaly does is mixing these two things together in incomplete manner and giving you impractical possibilities to define planes and XYZ axes in incomplete mannner,where-as this guy said there is a whoe lot of guess work and uncertainity....If you create your solid from a paper sketch or drawing, you get all the dimensional infromation in very clear and simple and practical manner conforming to what I said above. As far as I am concerned, FC has 2 major problems: Topological renaming with resulting errors and practical attachment methods (and also translation) and definitions, conforming to real world fabrication and inspection methodologies. Instead they offer this highly theoretical stuf, which is only confusing. I am over 72 years old and I have never in my life seen drawing or crossed over any inspection, which would need Frenet coordinate system. Of course, there might be some theoretical ocasions...but when it comes down to practical design for manufacturing, it is just overkill. There are many other professional software packages, they might have utilities like that. But FreeCAD should be for everyday user, simple to utilize package for almost everyone out there. Not trying to develop a free application for Space Industry - for that we have other more sophisticated and very expensive application.They need to fix the first one problem and simplify the second one!

[@LeandroSehnemHeck]

This video is a bit chaotic. Author is speaking something but showing something else. Also, the amount of files opened in tabs does not help the understanding and makes the whole screen busy.