Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: I've been looking for a format to import 3D models of components for a quick rough viewing within PCB. fair enough. I'm hoping that there will be a route to do: Serious component model in CAD - VRML for use within PCB. With my current 3D CAD application varicad, I'd export STL and convert to VRML with meshlab ( http://meshlab.sourceforge.net/ ). Judging from the screen shots, this application is quite mature. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak tel: +49-511-762-2895 Universität Hannover, Inst. für Quantenoptik fax: +49-511-762-2211 Welfengarten 1, 30167 Hannover http://www.iqo.uni-hannover.de GPG key:http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=Knaak+kmkop=get ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: I'm coming round to the idea that 3D is more than just eye candy if we do it nicely. It helps visualise component placement and layout issues far more readily than just looking at flat layers can do. Your brain may spot issues it wouldn't otherwise. One of the things I thought of, is stretching the board in z-direction (make it thicker). I believe that can help see, whether blind and burried vias are really ending at the intended layers, if they are rendered as (transparent) pipes. To help save computing time, the layers in 3D can be just flat (in a mode) - no point in seeing the sidewalls of traces for many uses, e.g. the above one. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
ff they are rendered as (transparent) pipes. To help save computing time, the layers in 3D can be just flat (in a mode) - no point in seeing the sidewalls of traces for many uses, e.g. the above one. That is basically how PCB+GL renders the board. Z isn't very expanded, but you can make out the detail. Some work would be needed if you wanted to reliably look through a section of board in a particular place though.. possibly some adjustment of layer transparency would be in order. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 11/19/2010 05:02 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:06 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote: That suits me just fine.. OpenGL_likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? Primarily for the latter (at the moment). There's another format sweet home 3D uses, .obj, that could be good for parametric modeling and easy to parse: http://www.sweethome3d.com/support/forum/viewthread_thread,940 John Griessen ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Hi John, -Original Message- From: geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org [mailto:geda-user-boun...@moria.seul.org] On Behalf Of John Griessen Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2010 5:13 PM To: gEDA user mailing list Subject: Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??] On 11/19/2010 05:02 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:06 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote: That suits me just fine.. OpenGL_likes_ rendering triangles, and anyother geometry primitives are extra work to implement;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? Primarily for the latter (at the moment). There's another format sweet home 3D uses, .obj, that could be good for parametric modeling and easy to parse: http://www.sweethome3d.com/support/forum/viewthread_thread,940 John Griessen I just tried to look into an AOI portable.obj model of a laptop -- 580 kB zipped and 2.8 MB expanded. Nice ubunto logo though ;-) Nah, thanks, I think it's a bit too expensive on memory and IMHO vertexes resemble minced meat -- try putting it together to get the original cow ;-) I'd rather have 3D primitives like cubes, cylinders, spheres, toroids etc. Kind regards, Bert Timmerman. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: That is basically how PCB+GL renders the board. Z isn't very expanded, but you can make out the detail. Some work would be needed if you wanted to reliably look through a section of board in a particular place though.. possibly some adjustment of layer transparency would be in order. The cheapest trick to remove disturbing stuff in front of what you want to see is moving the camera facing bounding plane of the view frustum towards the model - at least in OpenGL. Maybe not what makes you happy though.. And there is a risk, that many users need a very clear explanation of this feature. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 01:29 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote: Peter Clifton wrote: stl (very nice) IMHO, stl is a mesh only format. That is, everything is made of triangles -- no squares, no circles, no real curvatures. There are no macros, no loops, or repetitions. That suits me just fine.. OpenGL _likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement ;) A decent pcb would make for a pretty large stl file if all the vias and pin holes were to be modeled realistically. Named objects are unknown to stl. This renders stl a one way format for most construction purposes. I've been looking for a format to _import_ 3D models of components for a quick rough viewing within PCB. I concur that we probably don't want many of the suggested formats for CAD interchange. I concur with your other points, but think I'll play with VRML models for now. I'm _hoping_ that there will be a route to do: Serious component model in CAD - VRML for use within PCB. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Fri, 19 Nov 2010 17:27:45 + Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 01:29 +0100, kai-martin knaak wrote: Peter Clifton wrote: stl (very nice) IMHO, stl is a mesh only format. That is, everything is made of triangles -- no squares, no circles, no real curvatures. There are no macros, no loops, or repetitions. That suits me just fine.. OpenGL _likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement ;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? On the other hand, it may be that most PCB elements can be quite accurately represented with triangle meshes, especially flat, rectangular SMT parts. Through-hole parts tend to have more round shapes that would be much more expensive to accurately model with triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, etc. Regards, Colin ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 11/19/2010 03:06 PM, Colin D Bennett wrote: Through-hole parts tend to have more round shapes that would be much more expensive to accurately model with triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, etc. STL seems to work fine for those shapes - your tool just chooses triangles that are long and skinny to accurately model the side of a cylinder for instance. The other formats are wanted just for interoperability and translation. VRML might do fine for that. John G ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:06 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote: That suits me just fine.. OpenGL _likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement ;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? Primarily for the latter (at the moment). I imagine your component design workflow is: Proper 3D CAD (e.g. insert cad program here) - or | | 3D graphics (e.g. Blender) | | | | | | \|/ | | Export VRML / Collada / ... for PCB's library| \|/ | |Export CAD constraints, case etc.. \|/ | Design board using PCB || | - Emit rendering description in graphics friendly format --- \|/ | | Emit board shape / component placement as CAD data in some format | | | \|/ | Render board in graphics app. \|/ povtrace / blender? Model board in CAD, design casing around it / whatever I'm coming round to the idea that 3D is more than just eye candy if we do it nicely. It helps visualise component placement and layout issues far more readily than just looking at flat layers can do. Your brain may spot issues it wouldn't otherwise. I have also spoken to design professionals who value the ability to emit 3D renderings, however rough, as it allows better communication of project progress and design ideas to clients, who may not themselves be technical. (Think.. your manager??) triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, My shiny through hole resistor screen-shots had approx 6000 panels, and yes, it does slow things down if you have lots on screen at once! -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 20/11/10 10:02, Peter Clifton wrote: On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:06 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote: That suits me just fine.. OpenGL _likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement ;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? Primarily for the latter (at the moment). I imagine your component design workflow is: Proper 3D CAD (e.g.insert cad program here) - or | | 3D graphics (e.g. Blender) | | | | | | \|/ | | Export VRML / Collada / ... for PCB's library| \|/ | |Export CAD constraints, case etc.. \|/ | Design board using PCB || | - Emit rendering description in graphics friendly format --- \|/ | | Emit board shape / component placement as CAD data in some format | | | \|/ | Render board in graphics app. \|/ povtrace / blender? Model board in CAD, design casing around it / whatever I'm coming round to the idea that 3D is more than just eye candy if we do it nicely. It helps visualise component placement and layout issues far more readily than just looking at flat layers can do. Your brain may spot issues it wouldn't otherwise. I have also spoken to design professionals who value the ability to emit 3D renderings, however rough, as it allows better communication of project progress and design ideas to clients, who may not themselves be technical. (Think.. your manager??) triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, My shiny through hole resistor screen-shots had approx 6000 panels, and yes, it does slow things down if you have lots on screen at once! Are you using a spatial data structure to omit emitting polygons for off-screen components? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 11:01 +1100, Russell Shaw wrote: Are you using a spatial data structure to omit emitting polygons for off-screen components? PCB does that (spatial data-structures) already for rendering layers, so yes. With the 3D perspective view, I fall back to rendering the whole board at certain view angles which make it more awkward to calculate the on-screen coverage of the board. This happens when the corners of the viewport don't lie on the projection of the board plane, e.g. for near edge-on views. (Which usually show most of the board anyway). For the individual component models, no.. let GL deal with it. It is unlikely you'll zoom into one so close that culling panels on the CPU will be a big win. It _is_ very helpful for board geometry though. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
It looks like you are almost to the next step, but probably the biggest value of having good 3d representations is the ability to do clearance checking as a DRC. This is not just visualization, it is rule-driven placement and flagging of errors when you place components in conflict with each other, enclosures, or anything else you want to represent in the PCB. My most recent designs were with Altium Designer, and they use STEP as their 3d format of choice. This is nice, because most connector manufacturers provide relatively good STEP models of their parts for this purpose. Altium supports simple objects like cubes and cylinders for most parts, but connectors are always the biggest pain, so it was helpful to be able to import a STEP. You get the pathway to pretty pictures too, but those are sort of on a different level of value (mostly for show and tell). If PCB could support clearance checking for components (as well as normal electrical and other clearances), you'd get the best benefit of 3d representations. Here are some notes on the checking in Altium: http://wiki.altium.com/display/ADOH/Component+Clearance On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Peter Clifton pc...@cam.ac.uk wrote: On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 13:06 -0800, Colin D Bennett wrote: That suits me just fine.. OpenGL _likes_ rendering triangles, and any other geometry primitives are extra work to implement ;) But wouldn't support for higher-level shapes be superior to triangle meshes for high-quality renderings (e.g., raytracing, etc.)? Is the goal for PCB 3D support intended to be primarily for high-quality renderings or for real-time viewing of and interaction with the 3D scene? Primarily for the latter (at the moment). I imagine your component design workflow is: Proper 3D CAD (e.g. insert cad program here) - or | | 3D graphics (e.g. Blender) | | | | | | \|/ | | Export VRML / Collada / ... for PCB's library | \|/ | | Export CAD constraints, case etc.. \|/ | Design board using PCB | | | - Emit rendering description in graphics friendly format --- \|/ | | Emit board shape / component placement as CAD data in some format | | | \|/ | Render board in graphics app. \|/ povtrace / blender? Model board in CAD, design casing around it / whatever I'm coming round to the idea that 3D is more than just eye candy if we do it nicely. It helps visualise component placement and layout issues far more readily than just looking at flat layers can do. Your brain may spot issues it wouldn't otherwise. I have also spoken to design professionals who value the ability to emit 3D renderings, however rough, as it allows better communication of project progress and design ideas to clients, who may not themselves be technical. (Think.. your manager??) triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, My shiny through hole resistor screen-shots had approx 6000 panels, and yes, it does slow things down if you have lots on screen at once! -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 20/11/10 11:43, kai-martin knaak wrote: John Griessen wrote: STL seems to work fine for those shapes - your tool just chooses triangles that are long and skinny to accurately model the side of a cylinder for instance. ... and the file size explodes. If the wires of thru hole components are supposed to look vaguely realistic on zoom, at least 20 triangles per cylinder are needed. The 90° bend needs another 40 triangles. Every triangle requires 3 nodes and every node includes three coordinates plus orientation. That way, the stl size of a simple resistor may easily xceed the memory footprint of its footprint by two orders of magnitude. You need lots of polygons for smooth shading only if the polygons are flat-shaded. If fewer polygons are used but with decent shading, the main effect is that the silhouette has a few visible corners. That wouldn't matter much for resistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gouraud_shading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phong_shading The other formats are wanted just for interoperability and translation. VRML might do fine for that. VRML is very similar to STL in that both are formats to export from 3D CAD applications to rendering software like blender. They both communicate just meshes, no objects. Beause of this, they are they are less useful as imports for 3D editing. From mechanical point of view these mesh formats are one-way roads. ---)kaimartin(--- ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: I'm coming round to the idea that 3D is more than just eye candy if we do it nicely. yes! It helps visualise component placement and layout issues far more readily than just looking at flat layers can do. Even better: It aids the process of enclosing design in a very practical way. I do this even in the absence of a way to transfer geometrical data from pcb to 3D CAD. The 3D model below, was not done for the sake of eye candy, but as part of the front panel construction: http://bibo.iqo.uni- hannover.de/dokuwiki/lib/exe/detail.php?id=eigenbau%3Alasertreibermedia=eigenbau:lasertreiber:frontplatte_lasertreiber.png I have also spoken to design professionals who value the ability to emit 3D renderings, however rough, as it allows better communication of project progress and design ideas to clients, who may not themselves be technical. (Think.. your manager??) Very true. triangle meshes: cylindrical resistors, disc-shaped ceramic capacitors, My shiny through hole resistor screen-shots had approx 6000 panels, Ok, bump up my estimation from the last mail by an order of magnitude ;-) and yes, it does slow things down if you have lots on screen at once! That's why I'd prefer to stick with the object approach as long as possible. And keep the rendering business away from the pcb binary. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Sat, 2010-11-20 at 11:59 +1100, Russell Shaw wrote: If fewer polygons are used but with decent shading, the main effect is that the silhouette has a few visible corners. That wouldn't matter much for resistors. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gouraud_shading http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phong_shading FWIW, my resistors were shaded with a crude Blinn-Phong pixel shader. (Simplified by having the viewer and light at infinity). (I think!) That was basically what fell out of me doing bump mapping, albeit very inefficiently. I probably ought to use the vertex shader to compute the texture space basis vectors rather than CPU. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 11/17/2010 09:41 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: I'm not sure there is any colour information in any of the files, I don't think STL export preserves color, and maybe not IGES either. The Heekscad original had two colors JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: stl (very nice) IMHO, stl is a mesh only format. That is, everything is made of triangles -- no squares, no circles, no real curvatures. There are no macros, no loops, or repetitions. A decent pcb would make for a pretty large stl file if all the vias and pin holes were to be modeled realistically. Named objects are unknown to stl. This renders stl a one way format for most construction purposes. Vital information like the diameter of holes or boolean operations of solids cannot be included. In original stl there is no way to give color or texture information. There are color extensions, though. Their color depth is confined to 15 bit. So shades tend to look like a zebra. Most of the above is true for vrml, too. Due to its ability to associate textures with surfaces, it may be the format of choice for good looking pictures. For construction purpose, it is a dead, though. iges (simple format, but I have no clue what the syntax is ;)) syntax description is supposed to be available here: http://www.uspro.org/documents/IGES5-3_forDownload.pdf/view My browser is unable to connect, though. This format is more CAD friendly in that it allows for cylindrical, spherical and even spline defined surfaces. In addition, it knows about objects. Because of this, iges can capture the exact dimensions of engineered parts. For most CAD applications there is still loss of information on export. Surfaces are contained as is, not as rendered by construction points. Color is added by object. There is no way to attach textures to surfaces. So unfortunately, iges does not lend itself to efficient production of eye candy STEP (_utterly_ evil format). This standard is supposed to cover every aspect in production of every industrial product, dismantling and recycling included. Even with thousands of pages, it can only scratch on the breadth of this goal. Most CAD vendors seem to have gravitated to the automotive subsection. In addition, step exports seem to limit itself to about the rage of features that iges can provide. That is, a geometrical description of the surface. The specification of the format is kept almost as a secret. I wasn't able to get a glimpse on it for free. For 3D features in pcb, all of the above suffer from some kind of deficiency. ---)kaimartin(--- -- Kai-Martin Knaak Öffentlicher PGP-Schlüssel: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x6C0B9F53 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:09 -0600, John Griessen wrote: On 11/14/2010 08:37 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: 3. What format would people like to make models in? STEP, so I can load it in HeeksCAD and use HeeksCNC to carve enclosures. Step looks obscenely complicated, and I'm not really sure what subset we can support. Can someone send me a handful of __SIMPLE__ geometric models in a STEP format (readable text?), so I can get a feel for what I'd be letting myself in for? I'm wondering if STEP to VRML might be nicer, as VRML should be a lot easier to parse. -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
Peter Clifton wrote: On Mon, 2010-11-15 at 10:09 -0600, John Griessen wrote: On 11/14/2010 08:37 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: 3. What format would people like to make models in? STEP, so I can load it in HeeksCAD and use HeeksCNC to carve enclosures. Step looks obscenely complicated, and I'm not really sure what subset we can support. If we need only a hand full of primitives to describe our parts, IGES is probably much easier and does the job. It's understood by practically all systems that understand STEP, and some, that don't understand STEP. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 11/17/2010 04:00 PM, Armin Faltl wrote: If we need only a hand full of primitives to describe our parts, IGES is probably much easier and does the job. It's understood by practically all systems that understand STEP, and some, that don't understand STEP. Yes, HeeksCAD and many others can use IGES. JG ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On 11/17/2010 12:50 PM, Peter Clifton wrote: Can someone send me a handful of __SIMPLE__ geometric models in a STEP format (readable text?), so I can get a feel for what I'd be letting myself in for? I put an example with rectangular solid, cylinder and some lines in a triangle at http://ecosensory.com/diybio/pcb-testing.zip It unzips to make a dir with this: j...@toolbench:~/EEProjects/junk$ ls pcb-testing pcb-example.heeks pcb-example.iges pcb-example.opencamlib.py pcb-example.step pcb-example.stl John -- Ecosensory Austin TX ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: STEP Format? [WAS: Re: PCB+GL+3D Packages??]
On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 18:01 -0600, John Griessen wrote: I put an example with rectangular solid, cylinder and some lines in a triangle at http://ecosensory.com/diybio/pcb-testing.zip I'm not sure there is any colour information in any of the files, but to me it would seem that the order of ease in processing would be: stl (very nice) iges (simple format, but I have no clue what the syntax is ;)) STEP (_utterly_ evil format). -- Peter Clifton Electrical Engineering Division, Engineering Department, University of Cambridge, 9, JJ Thomson Avenue, Cambridge CB3 0FA Tel: +44 (0)7729 980173 - (No signal in the lab!) Tel: +44 (0)1223 748328 - (Shared lab phone, ask for me) ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
