Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Wayne Stambaugh]

Cirilo,

I committed your vrml_export branch to product master.  I'll try to get
the kicad-step branch merged this evening.

Thanks,

Wayne

On 9/21/2016 9:36 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Cirilo,
> 
> Never mind.  I figured out what I was doing wrong.  Sorry for the noise.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 9/21/2016 9:14 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> Cirilo,
>>
>> Is this
>>
>> https://git.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/commit/?id=424d98f81c410b7b6cd315fd8a6834192cd9d2f3
>>
>> the only commit that needs to be merged from your vrml_export branch?
>> The reason I ask is for simple merges like this, a patch generated with
>> format-patch or send-email makes my life easier.  If it's just this
>> commit, I'll generate the patch and git-am it.  Merging with git just
>> makes more work for me.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Wayne
>>
>> On 9/20/2016 7:20 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>>> Yes, it should be OK to merge. I think it has been tested enough that
>>> we're not likely to get more feedback on problems until we push it and
>>> more people can use it.
>>>
>>> - Cirilo
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:00 AM, José Ignacio  wrote:
 Is this ready to merge? I've been using this branch on several boards
 and it works perfect, aside from the small inconvenience of not having
 the centering option.

 On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
  wrote:
> I had a look and the automatic centering option was removed at some point
> so only the user-specified X, Y offset remains in the VRML export.  I will
> add the options to use Grid or Drill origin as well, and make these 
> options
> per-project rather than per-user.
>
> - Cirilo
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:19 PM, José Ignacio 
> wrote:
>>
>> It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
>> noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
>> (the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
>> as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
>> was annoying to center for rendering on blender.
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
>>  wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio 
>>> wrote:

 That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
 originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
 the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
 might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
 invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".

>>>
>>> Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some
>>> of
>>> the
>>> polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some
>>> information
>>> from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case of
>>> X3D
>>> and
>>> all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
>>> create a VRML representation.
>>>
>>> If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:
>>>
>>>
>>> https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export
>>>
>>> I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked
>>> the
>>> output
>>> with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is
>>> really
>>> an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file,
>>> DEF/USE
>>> is
>>> employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no
>>> DEF/USE).
>>>
>>> - Cirilo
>>>
>>>

 On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
  wrote:
> OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
> Inline{}
> option but
> changed the behavior:
>
> + If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used,
> otherwise
> a
> monolithic
> file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute
> paths
> can
> be used in
> Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ
> depending
> on
> the OS
> and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it
> will
> be
> easier to
> share VRML files which use Inline{}.
>
> + In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
> typically
> makes
> the file smaller, especially if complex components have many
> instances.
> If
> people
> want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet
> Another

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Wayne Stambaugh]

Cirilo,

Never mind.  I figured out what I was doing wrong.  Sorry for the noise.

Cheers,

Wayne

On 9/21/2016 9:14 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Cirilo,
> 
> Is this
> 
> https://git.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/commit/?id=424d98f81c410b7b6cd315fd8a6834192cd9d2f3
> 
> the only commit that needs to be merged from your vrml_export branch?
> The reason I ask is for simple merges like this, a patch generated with
> format-patch or send-email makes my life easier.  If it's just this
> commit, I'll generate the patch and git-am it.  Merging with git just
> makes more work for me.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 9/20/2016 7:20 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>> Yes, it should be OK to merge. I think it has been tested enough that
>> we're not likely to get more feedback on problems until we push it and
>> more people can use it.
>>
>> - Cirilo
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:00 AM, José Ignacio  wrote:
>>> Is this ready to merge? I've been using this branch on several boards
>>> and it works perfect, aside from the small inconvenience of not having
>>> the centering option.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
>>>  wrote:
 I had a look and the automatic centering option was removed at some point
 so only the user-specified X, Y offset remains in the VRML export.  I will
 add the options to use Grid or Drill origin as well, and make these options
 per-project rather than per-user.

 - Cirilo

 On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:19 PM, José Ignacio 
 wrote:
>
> It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
> noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
> (the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
> as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
> was annoying to center for rendering on blender.
>
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
>  wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
>>> originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
>>> the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
>>> might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
>>> invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".
>>>
>>
>> Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some
>> of
>> the
>> polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some
>> information
>> from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case of
>> X3D
>> and
>> all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
>> create a VRML representation.
>>
>> If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:
>>
>>
>> https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export
>>
>> I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked
>> the
>> output
>> with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is
>> really
>> an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file,
>> DEF/USE
>> is
>> employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no
>> DEF/USE).
>>
>> - Cirilo
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
>>>  wrote:
 OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
 Inline{}
 option but
 changed the behavior:

 + If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used,
 otherwise
 a
 monolithic
 file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute
 paths
 can
 be used in
 Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ
 depending
 on
 the OS
 and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it
 will
 be
 easier to
 share VRML files which use Inline{}.

 + In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
 typically
 makes
 the file smaller, especially if complex components have many
 instances.
 If
 people
 want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet
 Another
 Flag
 to the export UI.

 The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to
 create
 the
 board
 model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation
 data
 and
 color data
 to the KiCad scenegraph 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[easyw]

Hi Cirilo,
I tested both VRML export options and they work just fine.
I agree that adding the automatic centering option would be a useful 
feature for vrml post elaboration...


Maurice

On 9/21/2016 1:20 AM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:

Yes, it should be OK to merge. I think it has been tested enough that
we're not likely to get more feedback on problems until we push it and
more people can use it.

- Cirilo

On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 7:00 AM, José Ignacio  wrote:

Is this ready to merge? I've been using this branch on several boards
and it works perfect, aside from the small inconvenience of not having
the centering option.

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:20 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
 wrote:

I had a look and the automatic centering option was removed at some point
so only the user-specified X, Y offset remains in the VRML export.  I will
add the options to use Grid or Drill origin as well, and make these options
per-project rather than per-user.

- Cirilo

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:19 PM, José Ignacio 
wrote:


It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
(the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
was annoying to center for rendering on blender.

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
 wrote:

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio 
wrote:


That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".



Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some
of
the
polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some
information
from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case of
X3D
and
all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
create a VRML representation.

If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:


https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export

I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked
the
output
with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is
really
an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file,
DEF/USE
is
employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no
DEF/USE).

- Cirilo




On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
 wrote:

OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
Inline{}
option but
changed the behavior:

+ If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used,
otherwise
a
monolithic
file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute
paths
can
be used in
Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ
depending
on
the OS
and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it
will
be
easier to
share VRML files which use Inline{}.

+ In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
typically
makes
the file smaller, especially if complex components have many
instances.
If
people
want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet
Another
Flag
to the export UI.

The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to
create
the
board
model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation
data
and
color data
to the KiCad scenegraph library).

Any more comments/suggestions?

- Cirilo


On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:20 AM, easyw  wrote:


Hi Cirilo,
I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...

it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb
board,
traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to
add
texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add
a
vrml
model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects
not
present in the pcbnew...

I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also
material
properties without any issues with the actual develop build
branch...

So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider
very
useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
structure.

Thank you
Maurice


On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:


Hi folks,

  Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has
not
been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have
not
been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library
developed
for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which
include
visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This
means
that VRML Export can now be 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Mário Luzeiro]

I believe Cirilo can easily apply an inverse transform based on the centre of 
the board, so they will get centre and at origin.

Mario

From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
Nick Østergaard [oe.n...@gmail.com]
Sent: 17 September 2016 15:15
To: José Ignacio
Cc: KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

Den 17/09/2016 15.20 skrev "José Ignacio" 
<jose.cyb...@gmail.com<mailto:jose.cyb...@gmail.com>>:
>
> It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
> noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
> (the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
> as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
> was annoying to center for rendering on blender.
>

Isn't that just because it uses the real origin in the pcb. IIRC there are easy 
ways to center blocks in blender.

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[José Ignacio]

The biggest annoyance is that the meshes for the board layers are made
with the origin in 0, but all the mesh data offset, so to center it
properly you need to center the mesh data or move the mesh origin to
the center of the mesh data on every layer, which is an annoying step
that wouldn't be necessary if the mesh was output centered.

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Nick Østergaard  wrote:
> Den 17/09/2016 15.20 skrev "José Ignacio" :
>>
>> It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
>> noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
>> (the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
>> as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
>> was annoying to center for rendering on blender.
>>
>
> Isn't that just because it uses the real origin in the pcb. IIRC there are
> easy ways to center blocks in blender.
>
>> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
>>  wrote:
>> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio 
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
>> >> originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
>> >> the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
>> >> might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
>> >> invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".
>> >>
>> >
>> > Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some
>> > of
>> > the
>> > polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some
>> > information
>> > from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case of
>> > X3D
>> > and
>> > all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
>> > create a VRML representation.
>> >
>> > If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:
>> >
>> >
>> > https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export
>> >
>> > I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked
>> > the
>> > output
>> > with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is
>> > really
>> > an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file,
>> > DEF/USE
>> > is
>> > employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no
>> > DEF/USE).
>> >
>> > - Cirilo
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
>> >>  wrote:
>> >> > OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
>> >> > Inline{}
>> >> > option but
>> >> > changed the behavior:
>> >> >
>> >> > + If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used,
>> >> > otherwise
>> >> > a
>> >> > monolithic
>> >> > file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute
>> >> > paths
>> >> > can
>> >> > be used in
>> >> > Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ
>> >> > depending
>> >> > on
>> >> > the OS
>> >> > and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it
>> >> > will
>> >> > be
>> >> > easier to
>> >> > share VRML files which use Inline{}.
>> >> >
>> >> > + In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
>> >> > typically
>> >> > makes
>> >> > the file smaller, especially if complex components have many
>> >> > instances.
>> >> > If
>> >> > people
>> >> > want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet
>> >> > Another
>> >> > Flag
>> >> > to the export UI.
>> >> >
>> >> > The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to
>> >> > create
>> >> > the
>> >> > board
>> >> > model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation
>> >> > data
>> >> > and
>> >> > color data
>> >> > to the KiCad scenegraph library).
>> >> >
>> >> > Any more comments/suggestions?
>> >> >
>> >> > - Cirilo
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:20 AM, easyw  wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi Cirilo,
>> >> >> I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb
>> >> >> board,
>> >> >> traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to
>> >> >> add
>> >> >> texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add
>> >> >> a
>> >> >> vrml
>> >> >> model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> present in the pcbnew...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also
>> >> >> material
>> >> >> properties without any issues with the actual develop build
>> >> >> branch...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider
>> >> >> very
>> >> >> useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
>> >> >> structure.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thank you
>> >> >> Maurice
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Nick Østergaard]

Den 17/09/2016 15.20 skrev "José Ignacio" :
>
> It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
> noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
> (the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
> as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
> was annoying to center for rendering on blender.
>

Isn't that just because it uses the real origin in the pcb. IIRC there are
easy ways to center blocks in blender.

> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
>  wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio 
wrote:
> >>
> >> That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
> >> originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
> >> the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
> >> might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
> >> invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".
> >>
> >
> > Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because
some of
> > the
> > polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some
information
> > from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case
of X3D
> > and
> > all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
> > create a VRML representation.
> >
> > If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:
> >
> >
https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export
> >
> > I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked
the
> > output
> > with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is
really
> > an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file,
DEF/USE
> > is
> > employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no
DEF/USE).
> >
> > - Cirilo
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
> >>  wrote:
> >> > OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
> >> > Inline{}
> >> > option but
> >> > changed the behavior:
> >> >
> >> > + If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used,
otherwise
> >> > a
> >> > monolithic
> >> > file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute
paths
> >> > can
> >> > be used in
> >> > Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ
depending
> >> > on
> >> > the OS
> >> > and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it
will
> >> > be
> >> > easier to
> >> > share VRML files which use Inline{}.
> >> >
> >> > + In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
> >> > typically
> >> > makes
> >> > the file smaller, especially if complex components have many
instances.
> >> > If
> >> > people
> >> > want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet
Another
> >> > Flag
> >> > to the export UI.
> >> >
> >> > The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to
create
> >> > the
> >> > board
> >> > model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation
data
> >> > and
> >> > color data
> >> > to the KiCad scenegraph library).
> >> >
> >> > Any more comments/suggestions?
> >> >
> >> > - Cirilo
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:20 AM, easyw  wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Cirilo,
> >> >> I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...
> >> >>
> >> >> it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb
board,
> >> >> traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to
add
> >> >> texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even
add a
> >> >> vrml
> >> >> model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects
not
> >> >> present in the pcbnew...
> >> >>
> >> >> I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also
> >> >> material
> >> >> properties without any issues with the actual develop build
branch...
> >> >>
> >> >> So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider
very
> >> >> useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
> >> >> structure.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thank you
> >> >> Maurice
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi folks,
> >> >>>
> >> >>>  Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has
not
> >> >>> been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have
not
> >> >>> been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library
developed
> >> >>> for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which
> >> >>> include
> >> >>> visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This
> >> >>> means
> >> >>> that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
> >> >>> inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the
scenegraph
> >> >>> library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[José Ignacio]

It works great, both in inline and monolithic mode! one thing I
noticed though is that the model output is not centered on the origin
(the old exporter probably did this too), it would be nice if it was,
as with the board i tested it was really far from the origin and it
was annoying to center for rendering on blender.

On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Cirilo Bernardo
 wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 4:35 PM, José Ignacio  wrote:
>>
>> That sound perfect! Does you "Copy 3D model" really copy the
>> originals, or rebuild them from the scenegraph? (I very much prefer
>> the latter so it's compatible with all the formats), in that case it
>> might be best to rename that option as "Use external model files" or
>> invert it and call it "Generate single/monolithic file".
>>
>
> Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some of
> the
> polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some information
> from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.  In the case of X3D
> and
> all other supported formats (IDF, IGES, STEP) the scenegraph is used to
> create a VRML representation.
>
> If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:
>
> https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export
>
> I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it. I've only checked the
> output
> with FreeCAD and view3dscene (FreeCAD uses the COIN library which is really
> an impressive fast VRML renderer).  When creating a monolithic file, DEF/USE
> is
> employed - there is not yet an option to create a flat file (no DEF/USE).
>
> - Cirilo
>
>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Cirilo Bernardo
>>  wrote:
>> > OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the
>> > Inline{}
>> > option but
>> > changed the behavior:
>> >
>> > + If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used, otherwise
>> > a
>> > monolithic
>> > file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute paths
>> > can
>> > be used in
>> > Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ depending
>> > on
>> > the OS
>> > and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it will
>> > be
>> > easier to
>> > share VRML files which use Inline{}.
>> >
>> > + In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
>> > typically
>> > makes
>> > the file smaller, especially if complex components have many instances.
>> > If
>> > people
>> > want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet Another
>> > Flag
>> > to the export UI.
>> >
>> > The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to create
>> > the
>> > board
>> > model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation data
>> > and
>> > color data
>> > to the KiCad scenegraph library).
>> >
>> > Any more comments/suggestions?
>> >
>> > - Cirilo
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:20 AM, easyw  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Cirilo,
>> >> I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...
>> >>
>> >> it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb board,
>> >> traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to add
>> >> texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add a
>> >> vrml
>> >> model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects not
>> >> present in the pcbnew...
>> >>
>> >> I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also
>> >> material
>> >> properties without any issues with the actual develop build branch...
>> >>
>> >> So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider very
>> >> useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
>> >> structure.
>> >>
>> >> Thank you
>> >> Maurice
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Hi folks,
>> >>>
>> >>>  Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has not
>> >>> been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have not
>> >>> been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library developed
>> >>> for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which
>> >>> include
>> >>> visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This
>> >>> means
>> >>> that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
>> >>> inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the scenegraph
>> >>> library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other file formats
>> >>> (x3d, STEP, IGES, IDF) or (b) create a monolithic file with all models
>> >>> defined internally and reused wherever possible. Personally I would
>> >>> prefer (b) since that would eliminate some options in the Export
>> >>> routine
>> >>> such as "Copy Model Files" and would also eliminate the problem of
>> >>> inline{} compatibility with some viewers. There may be problems with
>> >>> DEF/USE within some 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[easyw]

On 17/09/2016 11:53, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:

Copy 3D model will actually copy any *.wrl file; I did this because some
of the
polygon triangulation performed by the VRML plugin may lose some information
from the original file and cause some (minor) artifacts.

that sounds perfect!


If anyone wants to try out the branch it is here:

https://code.launchpad.net/~cirilo-bernardo/kicad/+git/kicad-oce/+ref/vrml_export

I would appreciate feedback from anyone testing it.

I'm going to :D
Thanks
Maurice

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Cirilo Bernardo]

OK, with the feedback from Maurice and Mario I have retained the Inline{}
option but
changed the behavior:

+ If "Copy 3D model files" is activated then Inline{} is used, otherwise a
monolithic
file is written. This removes the previous behavior that absolute paths can
be used in
Inline{}; the absolute paths are bad anyway since they differ depending on
the OS
and VRML files cannot be shared easily. With this new behavior it will be
easier to
share VRML files which use Inline{}.

+ In the case of a monolithic file, DEF/USE will be employed. This
typically makes
the file smaller, especially if complex components have many instances. If
people
want an option to not use DEF/USE let me know and I can add Yet Another Flag
to the export UI.

The rework is *mostly* done; I only need to add a few routines to create
the board
model in the monolithic file (basically pass existing tesselation data and
color data
to the KiCad scenegraph library).

Any more comments/suggestions?

- Cirilo


On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:20 AM, easyw  wrote:

> Hi Cirilo,
> I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...
>
> it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb board,
> traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to add
> texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add a vrml
> model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects not
> present in the pcbnew...
>
> I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also material
> properties without any issues with the actual develop build branch...
>
> So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider very
> useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
> structure.
>
> Thank you
> Maurice
>
>
> On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>>  Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has not
>> been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have not
>> been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library developed
>> for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which include
>> visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This means
>> that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
>> inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the scenegraph
>> library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other file formats
>> (x3d, STEP, IGES, IDF) or (b) create a monolithic file with all models
>> defined internally and reused wherever possible. Personally I would
>> prefer (b) since that would eliminate some options in the Export routine
>> such as "Copy Model Files" and would also eliminate the problem of
>> inline{} compatibility with some viewers. There may be problems with
>> DEF/USE within some programs like Blender but I can always add an
>> option to not reuse definitions (Blender's VRML code has so many
>> problems though that I doubt this would help).
>>
>> Any thoughts before I go ahead and rework the VRML exporter?
>>
>> - Cirilo
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Cirilo,

IMO the b) is most important for the users that want to use the features 
without having knowledge of how the things really work and want something that 
"it just works". (special good for sharing without copy many files)
but as Maurice point, the a) inline feature is a more wised way of using VRML, 
good for advance users.

Mario

From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 16 September 2016 00:20
To: Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

Hi Cirilo,
I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...

it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb board,
traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to add
texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add a
vrml model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects
not present in the pcbnew...

I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also
material properties without any issues with the actual develop build
branch...

So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider very
useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{}
structure.

Thank you
Maurice

On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>  Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has not
> been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have not
> been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library developed
> for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which include
> visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This means
> that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
> inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the scenegraph
> library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other file formats
> (x3d, STEP, IGES, IDF) or (b) create a monolithic file with all models
> defined internally and reused wherever possible. Personally I would
> prefer (b) since that would eliminate some options in the Export routine
> such as "Copy Model Files" and would also eliminate the problem of
> inline{} compatibility with some viewers. There may be problems with
> DEF/USE within some programs like Blender but I can always add an
> option to not reuse definitions (Blender's VRML code has so many
> problems though that I doubt this would help).
>
> Any thoughts before I go ahead and rework the VRML exporter?
>
> - Cirilo
>
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[easyw]

Hi Cirilo,
I found inline{} VRML export option very useful and powerful...

it allows an easy post elaboration to i.e. change color to pcb board, 
traces and solder mask with some macro or tweak the VRML models to add 
texture to the VRML result for an improved visualization or even add a 
vrml model inline{} to a 3D part to include some external extra objects 
not present in the pcbnew...


I use Blender to import kicad VRML exported boards and I use also 
material properties without any issues with the actual develop build 
branch...


So in case of a rewriting of the VRML exporter, I would consider very 
useful to leave at least an option to conserve the actual inline{} 
structure.


Thank you
Maurice

On 16/09/2016 00:25, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:

Hi folks,

 Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has not
been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have not
been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library developed
for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which include
visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This means
that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the scenegraph
library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other file formats
(x3d, STEP, IGES, IDF) or (b) create a monolithic file with all models
defined internally and reused wherever possible. Personally I would
prefer (b) since that would eliminate some options in the Export routine
such as "Copy Model Files" and would also eliminate the problem of
inline{} compatibility with some viewers. There may be problems with
DEF/USE within some programs like Blender but I can always add an
option to not reuse definitions (Blender's VRML code has so many
problems though that I doubt this would help).

Any thoughts before I go ahead and rework the VRML exporter?

- Cirilo



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML Export

[Cirilo Bernardo]

Hi folks,

 Since the merge of the new 3DViewer the VRML Export routine has not
been able to include x3d data and the few x3d users out there have not
been very happy about this. However, the scenegraph library developed
for the 3D plugin system can easily write monolithic files which include
visualization data for all file formats supported by plugins. This means
that VRML Export can now be modified to either (a) continue to use
inline{} when a file is created and when copying files the scenegraph
library is used to write VRML model equivalents of other file formats
(x3d, STEP, IGES, IDF) or (b) create a monolithic file with all models
defined internally and reused wherever possible. Personally I would
prefer (b) since that would eliminate some options in the Export routine
such as "Copy Model Files" and would also eliminate the problem of
inline{} compatibility with some viewers. There may be problems with
DEF/USE within some programs like Blender but I can always add an
option to not reuse definitions (Blender's VRML code has so many
problems though that I doubt this would help).

Any thoughts before I go ahead and rework the VRML exporter?

- Cirilo
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Cirilo Bernardo]

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:50 AM, Mário Luzeiro <mrluze...@ua.pt> wrote:

> Sorry, I cannot see the videos where I am at moment:
>
> > I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
> > Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
>
> My question was, you are adding that pad to make your reference for the
> align.
> Adding Cu is not nice, since it will be placed in the gerbers also? Maybe
> Silk.. or other layers.. or comments  would be better for that propose..
> So in that other ECAD, what they use as anchor to align enclosures?
>
> Mario
>
>
I agree it's better to place a mark on one of the layers which will not be
printed.
Exactly which layer is another issue; for example I wouldn't use the
Courtyard
Layer since in the future someone may want to implement formal collision
tests
on Courtyard outlines. There are also any number of ways to accomplish the
goal - for example you can place a small target mark on the Silk Layer and
that
serves as a placement reference for a generic mechanical model, or you can
put a target mark as well as an outline box to show the actual mechanical
extent
of a specific mechanical component.

- Cirilo


> 
> From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
> Sent: 25 February 2016 16:35
> To: Mário Luzeiro; Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
>
> > How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process
> you describe to align the model?)
> if you look at Altium
> https://youtu.be/1nePePnKGS0
> they do exactly what I do in FreeCAD with my kicad StepUp tool
> https://youtu.be/O6vr8QFnYGw
>
> https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-interactive-align-3d-model-to-pcbnew-footprint-new-tool-for-kicad-in-altium-style/1711
> I was inspired by that video :)
> Maurice
>
>
> On 25/02/2016 16.49, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
> > Hi Maurice,
> >
> > It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of
> using kicad features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the
> features! )
> > How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process
> you describe to align the model?)
> >
> > Mario
> >
> >
> > 
> > From: Kicad-developers [kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=
> ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
> > Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
> > To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> > Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
> >
> >> Creating a footprint with no pads,
> >> silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
> >> counter-intuitive to me.
> > I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
> > and I set it as Virtual module attribute
> > Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
> > That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
> > When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
> > kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
> > enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
> > Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
> > just beside your pcb artwork
> > the result is like this
> >
> https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif
> >
> > Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
> > F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
> > virtual attrib
> >
> >
> > both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
> > the tool a nice mechanical feature
> >
> > Thank you
> > Maurice
> >
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

You can insert an arbitrary "Free models" on Altium (so there is no footprint 
association)

that is not possible, useful in kicad

Their process suggest that you create a enclosure with a "sub-assembly" that is 
the board shape.
that sub-assembly would be in kicad i.e. a board edge footprint (some 
users do it)...

That "sub-assembly" can be snap to be the board shape .. so the enclosure (the other 
"sub-assembly") will be automatically aligned to the board..
if you have anchor holes for the pcb board, the best thing is to 
associate the enclosure to one of these holes or, more complicated, you 
can build a
footprint with the holes (your sub-assembly model) and align that to the 
enclosure... that your choice
If you don't have holes you can design your sub-assembly (I use DXF 
import directly from manufacturer's data) and align enclosure (that I 
normally download from manufacturer's site in STEP) to that footprint 
sub-assembly


Anyway, for kicad, the alignment has to be done / it is easier to be 
done obviously in MCAD environment (I would suggest FreeCAD with StepUp 
Footprint Loader)
But it is very reasonable because you are talking of enclosure, which 
means you are interested in MCAD aspects of your design :)

That is the option I use also for models

Anyway that is the way I use almost from 2013 to do my ECAD MCAD design, 
and once you get the idea to switch from MCAD to ECAD, everything will 
became easier and faster


Consider that my approach has a very little impact in kicad code, but 
can give the users a nice mechanical feature and everything with an open 
source chain


Maurice

On 25/02/2016 20.03, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

I watched the video,

You can insert an arbitrary "Free models" on Altium (so there is no footprint 
association)
Their process suggest that you create a enclosure with a "sub-assembly" that is 
the board shape.
That "sub-assembly" can be snap to be the board shape .. so the enclosure (the other 
"sub-assembly") will be automatically aligned to the board..

This is a different process...not directly supported on KiCad, but you can 
achieve similar results with KiCad and other MCAD software (or with your stepUp)


Mario Luzeiro


From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 16:56
To: Mário Luzeiro; Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

have a look here
https://youtu.be/kIkx86l5s_M

if you change
SolidWorks with FreeCAD
Altium with KiCad

and add StepUp tools to link STEP (MCAD) and VRML (ECAD) models
you can do a similar video with same result :)

and all in open source environment ;)

Maurice



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

I watched the video,

You can insert an arbitrary "Free models" on Altium (so there is no footprint 
association)
Their process suggest that you create a enclosure with a "sub-assembly" that is 
the board shape.
That "sub-assembly" can be snap to be the board shape .. so the enclosure (the 
other "sub-assembly") will be automatically aligned to the board..

This is a different process...not directly supported on KiCad, but you can 
achieve similar results with KiCad and other MCAD software (or with your stepUp)


Mario Luzeiro


From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 16:56
To: Mário Luzeiro; Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

have a look here
https://youtu.be/kIkx86l5s_M

if you change
SolidWorks with FreeCAD
Altium with KiCad

and add StepUp tools to link STEP (MCAD) and VRML (ECAD) models
you can do a similar video with same result :)

and all in open source environment ;)

Maurice
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

My question was, you are adding that pad to make your reference for the align.
I use, when the enclosure have them, the mounting holes of the pcb (that 
will correspond to mounting references in the box) to align the enclosure

have a look i.e.
http://www.hammondmfg.com/pdf/1553AA.pdf

Adding Cu is not nice, since it will be placed in the gerbers also? Maybe 
Silk.. or other layers.. or comments  would be better for that propose..
I use TH pads normally connected to GND, but you can use a NPTH 
Mechanical hole as a module for alignment
here you can see how I aligned Arduino to its enclosure for Checking 
Collisions

https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/1X/b3ca3668e35d1424285741eb81b4f40cbfc08329.png
Or in case you don't have mechanical hole for locking the board, you can 
add just a target model i.e. a small cross in F.Silks or in F.Fab and 
align the enclosure to that (i.e. center of x,y) and move the target 
cross where you want on your board (i.e. at a top left corner, or at the 
center of your board) that will move your enclosure similary

So in that other ECAD, what they use as anchor to align enclosures?
Each ECAD has to have a reference point which is normally a mounting 
hole on pcb, that is correspondent to the mounting block on the enclosure
In Altium they snap i.e. a center of a mounting hole of the enclosure to 
the center of a mechanical hole in the pcb


Maurice


On 25/02/2016 17.50, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Sorry, I cannot see the videos where I am at moment:


I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk


My question was, you are adding that pad to make your reference for the align.
Adding Cu is not nice, since it will be placed in the gerbers also? Maybe 
Silk.. or other layers.. or comments  would be better for that propose..
So in that other ECAD, what they use as anchor to align enclosures?

Mario


From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 16:35
To: Mário Luzeiro; Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

if you look at Altium
https://youtu.be/1nePePnKGS0
they do exactly what I do in FreeCAD with my kicad StepUp tool
https://youtu.be/O6vr8QFnYGw
https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-interactive-align-3d-model-to-pcbnew-footprint-new-tool-for-kicad-in-altium-style/1711
I was inspired by that video :)
Maurice


On 25/02/2016 16.49, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of using kicad 
features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the features! )
How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

Mario



From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


Creating a footprint with no pads,
silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
counter-intuitive to me.

I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
and I set it as Virtual module attribute
Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
just beside your pcb artwork
the result is like this
https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif

Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
virtual attrib


both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
the tool a nice mechanical feature

Thank you
Maurice



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

have a look here
https://youtu.be/kIkx86l5s_M

if you change
SolidWorks with FreeCAD
Altium with KiCad

and add StepUp tools to link STEP (MCAD) and VRML (ECAD) models
you can do a similar video with same result :)

and all in open source environment ;)

Maurice

On 25/02/2016 16.49, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of using kicad 
features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the features! )
How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

Mario



From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


Creating a footprint with no pads,
silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
counter-intuitive to me.

I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
and I set it as Virtual module attribute
Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
just beside your pcb artwork
the result is like this
https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif

Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
virtual attrib


both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
the tool a nice mechanical feature

Thank you
Maurice



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Sorry, I cannot see the videos where I am at moment:

> I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
> Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk

My question was, you are adding that pad to make your reference for the align.
Adding Cu is not nice, since it will be placed in the gerbers also? Maybe 
Silk.. or other layers.. or comments  would be better for that propose..
So in that other ECAD, what they use as anchor to align enclosures?

Mario


From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 16:35
To: Mário Luzeiro; Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

> How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
> describe to align the model?)
if you look at Altium
https://youtu.be/1nePePnKGS0
they do exactly what I do in FreeCAD with my kicad StepUp tool
https://youtu.be/O6vr8QFnYGw
https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-interactive-align-3d-model-to-pcbnew-footprint-new-tool-for-kicad-in-altium-style/1711
I was inspired by that video :)
Maurice


On 25/02/2016 16.49, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
> Hi Maurice,
>
> It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of using 
> kicad features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the 
> features! )
> How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
> describe to align the model?)
>
> Mario
>
>
> 
> From: Kicad-developers 
> [kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
> easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
> Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
> To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
>
>> Creating a footprint with no pads,
>> silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
>> counter-intuitive to me.
> I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
> and I set it as Virtual module attribute
> Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
> That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
> When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
> kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
> enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
> Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
> just beside your pcb artwork
> the result is like this
> https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif
>
> Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
> F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
> virtual attrib
>
>
> both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
> the tool a nice mechanical feature
>
> Thank you
> Maurice
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

if you look at Altium
https://youtu.be/1nePePnKGS0
they do exactly what I do in FreeCAD with my kicad StepUp tool
https://youtu.be/O6vr8QFnYGw
https://forum.kicad.info/t/how-to-interactive-align-3d-model-to-pcbnew-footprint-new-tool-for-kicad-in-altium-style/1711
I was inspired by that video :)
Maurice


On 25/02/2016 16.49, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of using kicad 
features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the features! )
How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

Mario



From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


Creating a footprint with no pads,
silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
counter-intuitive to me.

I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
and I set it as Virtual module attribute
Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
just beside your pcb artwork
the result is like this
https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif

Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
virtual attrib


both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
the tool a nice mechanical feature

Thank you
Maurice



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

Clever and useful.  Maybe something like this should be documented
somewhere for users.  I doubt most users would go through the trouble to
figure this out on their own.

Thank you :)

There are already some users waiting for it :)
https://forum.kicad.info/t/3d-new-library-for-mechanical-cad-exporting-and-enclosure-design/1763/19

Maurice


On 25/02/2016 17.05, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:

Clever and useful.  Maybe something like this should be documented
somewhere for users.  I doubt most users would go through the trouble to
figure this out on their own.


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Wayne Stambaugh]

odels would be loaded (adding
>>> rendering/parsing time) only if the Virtual is selected
>>>
>>> It is very small piece of code for a quite useful improvement
>>> Moreover it is very easy visually align your enclosure to the footprint
>>> just using my StepUp tools
>>> Please let me know if you need more details
>>>
>>> Maurice
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25/02/2016 11.16, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
>>>> Hi Maurice,
>>>>
>>>> .. back to discussion!
>>>>
>>>>> as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a
>>>>> model
>>>>> in pcb (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
>>>>> and this is done without changing anything in the pcb format
>>>>
>>>> I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
>>>> I checked the other threads, looks there was no much attention on that
>>>> and since nobody is reading us here :) I will open a new thread to
>>>> discuss that "Virtual" attribute and if that could be used
>>>>
>>>>> that was an already available option now missing
>>>> It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the
>>>> options is still there in same place.
>>>>
>>>>> it is a personal local branch...
>>>> Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?
>>>>
>>>> Mario Luzeiro
>>>> 
>>>> From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
>>>> Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
>>>> To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
>>>> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
>>>>
>>>>> In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save
>>>>> that options locally.
>>>> as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a
>>>> model
>>>> in pcb
>>>> (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
>>>> (e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated
>>>> or better an anchor hole/pad)
>>>> then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not
>>>> footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without
>>>> changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options
>>>> https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> as you can see the info are available...
>>>>
>>>>> So it will take time.
>>>> if someone cares of
>>>>
>>>>> Related with Materials.
>>>>> Please do not mix the two things.
>>>>> You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic /
>>>>> enclosures / ...
>>>> as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads,
>>>> flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material
>>>> props...
>>>> I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already
>>>> available option now missing
>>>>
>>>>> I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,
>>>> no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only suggested that with this
>>>> option also any other user would have this opportunity
>>>>
>>>>> I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for
>>>>> the branch?
>>>> it is a personal local branch...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> M
>>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Maurice,

It sounds a bit tricky (however sounds a possible ..tricky way.. of using kicad 
features.. and there is no imposition on how the users use the features! )
How does the other ECAD deal with that case scenarios? (with the process you 
describe to align the model?)

Mario



From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 25 February 2016 15:17
To: Wayne Stambaugh; kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

> Creating a footprint with no pads,
> silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
> counter-intuitive to me.
I normally use anchor pad (which correspond to anchor of the enclosure)
and I set it as Virtual module attribute
Then in 3D-viewer you see your pad with Cu and Silk
That pad has also a 3D model associated, which is i.e. the enclosure
When I model the 3D enclosure, I load the pad footprint in FreeCAD with
kicad StepUp and I align the 3D model to the pad, then I export the
enclosure VRML model to be displayed in pcbnew 3d-viewer
Enabling or not the Virtual 3D models you will see or not the enclosure
just beside your pcb artwork
the result is like this
https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/0/0b70db5f2bd661b6417bd086cf45035a5fa263ff.gif

Or you can build a model with just an alignment cross in i.e. F.Fab or
F.Silks and Hide reference and value, and assign to it the 3D model with
virtual attrib


both procedure can co-exist with the actual kicad format and will give
the tool a nice mechanical feature

Thank you
Maurice

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

[ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save
that options locally.

as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb
(Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
(e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated
or better an anchor hole/pad)
then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not
footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without
changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options
https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html

as you can see the info are available...


So it will take time.

if someone cares of


Related with Materials.
Please do not mix the two things.
You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic /
enclosures / ...

as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads,
flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material props...
I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already
available option now missing


I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,

no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only suggested that with this
option also any other user would have this opportunity


I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for
the branch?

it is a personal local branch...

Cheers
M



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Wayne Stambaugh]

On 2/25/2016 6:50 AM, easyw wrote:
>> .. back to discussion!
> here I am
> 
>> I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
> yes, as in pcbnew manual
> http://docs.kicad-pcb.org/en/pcbnew.html
> 13.11. Attributes
> "Virtual indicates that a component is directly formed by the circuit
> board. Examples would be edge connectors or inductors created by a
> particular track shape (as sometimes seen in microwave footprints)."
> Virtual IMO is perfect also for mechanical objects as for example
> enclosures or mechanical parts
> typically there is no 3D model associated to a footprint with Virtual
> Attribute, so it is possible to add e.g. the enclosures or mechanical
> PCB stand-off spacers

You could possibly use the virtual flag for 3D model only footprint but
I've never tried it so it may not work.  If it's possible, then I see no
reason not to allow it although it does seem like a bit of a convoluted
solution that may confuse users.  Creating a footprint with no pads,
silkscreens, and/or text and only a 3D model seems a bit
counter-intuitive to me.

> Please note that if you use e.g. a mechanical TH pad, the pad footprint
> will be displayed in 3d-viewer also if Virtual, but the 3D model will or
> will not in function of the virtual flag
> 
>> It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the
>> options is still there in same place.
> ok, I just will wait/hope for the resurrection :)
> 
>>> it is a personal local branch...
>> Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?
> in April 2016 we already talked about :)
> https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18083.html
> I just moved the sourced away, because the new 3d-viewer is now
> available, anyway here some code I added:
> info3d_visu.h
> enum DISPLAY3D_FLG {
> FL_AXIS=0, FL_MODULE, /*maui*/ FL_VIRT, FL_ZONE,
> 
> 3d_draw.cpp
> in void EDA_3D_CANVAS::buildFootprintShape3DList
> for( MODULE* module = pcb->m_Modules; module; module = module->Next() )
> { //maui
> if( !g_Parm_3D_Visu.GetFlag( FL_VIRT ) ) { //maui
> if(module->GetAttributes() != MOD_VIRTUAL) {  //maui
> render3DComponentShape( module,  loadOpaqueObjects,
> !loadOpaqueObjects );
> } //maui
> }   
> else {
> render3DComponentShape( module,  loadOpaqueObjects,
>  !loadOpaqueObjects );
> }  //maui
> } //maui
> the same for TransparentObjects and in case of not used Materials
> 
> and in
> 3d_frame.cpp
> you need to load/save your previous value if you want to start in the
> same condition (but can be saved with the other 3d-viewer flags e.g.
> FL_SHOW_BOARD_BODY)
> 
> Please note that the 3D mechanical VRML models would be loaded (adding
> rendering/parsing time) only if the Virtual is selected
> 
> It is very small piece of code for a quite useful improvement
> Moreover it is very easy visually align your enclosure to the footprint
> just using my StepUp tools
> Please let me know if you need more details
> 
> Maurice
> 
> 
> On 25/02/2016 11.16, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
>> Hi Maurice,
>>
>> .. back to discussion!
>>
>>> as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
>>> in pcb (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
>>> and this is done without changing anything in the pcb format
>>
>> I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
>> I checked the other threads, looks there was no much attention on that
>> and since nobody is reading us here :) I will open a new thread to
>> discuss that "Virtual" attribute and if that could be used
>>
>>> that was an already available option now missing
>> It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the
>> options is still there in same place.
>>
>>> it is a personal local branch...
>> Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?
>>
>> Mario Luzeiro
>> 
>> From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
>> Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
>> To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
>> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
>>
>>> In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save
>>> that options locally.
>> as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
>> in pcb
>> (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
>> (e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be assoc

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

I forgot that you need also to add some code to toolbar to toggle 
Virtual option as e.g. Preferences Show Virtual


PS the thread was in April 2015 :)
Cheers
M


On 25/02/2016 11.16, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

.. back to discussion!


as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
and this is done without changing anything in the pcb format


I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
I checked the other threads, looks there was no much attention on that
and since nobody is reading us here :) I will open a new thread to discuss that 
"Virtual" attribute and if that could be used


that was an already available option now missing

It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the options is 
still there in same place.


it is a personal local branch...

Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?

Mario Luzeiro

From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save that options 
locally.

as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb
(Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
(e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated
or better an anchor hole/pad)
then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not
footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without
changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options
https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html
as you can see the info are available...


So it will take time.

if someone cares of


Related with Materials.
Please do not mix the two things.
You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic / enclosures 
/ ...

as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads,
flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material props...
I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already
available option now missing


I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,

no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only suggested that with this
option also any other user would have this opportunity


I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for the branch?

it is a personal local branch...

Cheers
M



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

.. back to discussion!

here I am


I see, so that is a already implemented flag.

yes, as in pcbnew manual
http://docs.kicad-pcb.org/en/pcbnew.html
13.11. Attributes
"Virtual indicates that a component is directly formed by the circuit 
board. Examples would be edge connectors or inductors created by a 
particular track shape (as sometimes seen in microwave footprints)."
Virtual IMO is perfect also for mechanical objects as for example 
enclosures or mechanical parts
typically there is no 3D model associated to a footprint with Virtual 
Attribute, so it is possible to add e.g. the enclosures or mechanical 
PCB stand-off spacers
Please note that if you use e.g. a mechanical TH pad, the pad footprint 
will be displayed in 3d-viewer also if Virtual, but the 3D model will or 
will not in function of the virtual flag



It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the options is 
still there in same place.

ok, I just will wait/hope for the resurrection :)


it is a personal local branch...

Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?

in April 2016 we already talked about :)
https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18083.html
I just moved the sourced away, because the new 3d-viewer is now 
available, anyway here some code I added:

info3d_visu.h
enum DISPLAY3D_FLG {
FL_AXIS=0, FL_MODULE, /*maui*/ FL_VIRT, FL_ZONE,

3d_draw.cpp
in void EDA_3D_CANVAS::buildFootprintShape3DList
for( MODULE* module = pcb->m_Modules; module; module = module->Next() )
{ //maui
if( !g_Parm_3D_Visu.GetFlag( FL_VIRT ) ) { //maui
if(module->GetAttributes() != MOD_VIRTUAL) {  //maui
render3DComponentShape( module,  loadOpaqueObjects,
!loadOpaqueObjects );
} //maui
}   
else {
render3DComponentShape( module,  loadOpaqueObjects,
 !loadOpaqueObjects );
}  //maui
} //maui
the same for TransparentObjects and in case of not used Materials

and in
3d_frame.cpp
you need to load/save your previous value if you want to start in the 
same condition (but can be saved with the other 3d-viewer flags e.g. 
FL_SHOW_BOARD_BODY)


Please note that the 3D mechanical VRML models would be loaded (adding 
rendering/parsing time) only if the Virtual is selected


It is very small piece of code for a quite useful improvement
Moreover it is very easy visually align your enclosure to the footprint 
just using my StepUp tools

Please let me know if you need more details

Maurice


On 25/02/2016 11.16, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

.. back to discussion!


as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
and this is done without changing anything in the pcb format


I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
I checked the other threads, looks there was no much attention on that
and since nobody is reading us here :) I will open a new thread to discuss that 
"Virtual" attribute and if that could be used


that was an already available option now missing

It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the options is 
still there in same place.


it is a personal local branch...

Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?

Mario Luzeiro

From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export


In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save that options 
locally.

as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb
(Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
(e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated
or better an anchor hole/pad)
then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not
footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without
changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options
https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html
as you can see the info are available...


So it will take time.

if someone cares of


Related with Materials.
Please do not mix the two things.
You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic / enclosures 
/ ...

as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads,
flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material props...
I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already
available option now missing


I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,

no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only su

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Maurice,

.. back to discussion!

> as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
> in pcb (Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
> and this is done without changing anything in the pcb format

I see, so that is a already implemented flag.
I checked the other threads, looks there was no much attention on that
and since nobody is reading us here :) I will open a new thread to discuss that 
"Virtual" attribute and if that could be used

> that was an already available option now missing
It is not missing, it is not yet implemented in my branch :) .. the options is 
still there in same place.

> it is a personal local branch...
Is it online? How do you get the "Virtual" attribute from the model?

Mario Luzeiro

From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 20:45
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

> In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save that 
> options locally.
as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model
in pcb
(Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
(e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated
or better an anchor hole/pad)
then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not
footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without
changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options
https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html
as you can see the info are available...

> So it will take time.
if someone cares of

> Related with Materials.
> Please do not mix the two things.
> You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic / 
> enclosures / ...
as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads,
flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material props...
I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already
available option now missing

> I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,
no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only suggested that with this
option also any other user would have this opportunity

> I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for the branch?
it is a personal local branch...

Cheers
M

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save that options 
locally.
as I suggested it is possible to associate the Virtual option to a model 
in pcb

(Footprint Properties, Properties Tab, Attribute, Virtual)
(e.g. a silk/Fab model text to which the enclosure would be associated 
or better an anchor hole/pad)
then, as I mentioned many times, it is possible to display or not 
footprints that have Virtual attribute ... and this is done without 
changing anything in the pcb format, nor in the local/global options

https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg18069.html
https://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg15739.html
as you can see the info are available...


So it will take time.

if someone cares of


Related with Materials.
Please do not mix the two things.
You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic / enclosures 
/ ...
as already pointed out, it is a problem to display the board with pads, 
flashing when moving the board, just to display 'nice' material props...
I just said let the user choose what to display... that was an already 
available option now missing



I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures,
no, I'm not, I use virtual attribute, I only suggested that with this 
option also any other user would have this opportunity



I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for the branch?

it is a personal local branch...

Cheers
M

On 24/02/2016 21.22, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,


2) show/hide enclosures
I don't see the same problem on what it is done to save 3d-viewer board colors, 
that are saved *globally*


In order to show or not something, that must be somehow put a flag somewhere.
Each footprint on the board can have assigned different 3D model files.
Each assigned 3d model file of each footprint will need a flag.
Maybe this is also not the best approach (so this is open to discussion), and only  a 
footprint will have a flag to set to be "a mechanical part or not" (open to 
discussion)

In any case, I believe there is no elegant way to individual save that options 
locally. That will need in any case a new format to store the flags of the 
footprints /3D model files.

The colors, are saved globally because it is 1 (one) global parameter. They are 
in fact saved in user kicad configuration.

If in future we got an option "show/hide mechanical models / 
enclosures/whatever" that flag, yes, will be saved same way as the colors (and other 
options) in the kicad user configuration.

* note: as a reminder, there are some user requests to make the PCB color a 
parameter to be stored in the board. So maybe in future this example will not 
apply.

Mind that behind a simple checkbox maybe there are huge efforts.



I am not the person to discuss this as I don't know the details how that could 
be implemented.

so I wouldn't know to which I should point my suggestion, considering you and 
Cirilo are developing the new 3d-refactor


I am working in the render. It works like: data -> render -> display!
I can only work with the "data" that comes from the board as it exists.

Cirilo have some ideas of features that will be useful for Export and that may 
also be used for the Render for the propose you request.
So he may come with some proposal to be discussed here in the mailing list at a 
more technical level.

That may sound like a simple feature but may be related with lots of more 
things that need to be discussed.
Also a quick solution may not be a good solution.
So it will take time.


Related with Materials.
Please do not mix the two things.
You will get a proper way (I hope) to deal with virtual / mechanic / enclosures 
/ ...

I know that you are using the material option to show/hide enclosures, but that 
is not the propose of that option,
as I explained, the original propose of that option was to workarround the 
issues in the materials of 3D models that I hope to be solved one day.

In any case, that option of the materials still can be there ... but I dislike 
the idea that it could be used for the wrong propose :/
IMO it should be an aesthetic / artistic feature, not an workarround for a 
issue or a workarround for a missing feature.



Anyway I can put all these features on my personal branch


I remember you have an option in your branch, what is the link for the branch?
If I remember did you discuss that here in the mailing list? Do you have a link 
for the discussion thread at that time?
Thanks!

Mario Luzeiro



From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 19:41
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

Hi Mario,


2) show/hide enclosures

Maybe, but it must be saved somehow.
If it is saved locally it will not be possible to create footprints with that 
fixed options (with 3d and mec. models files and each 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Maurice,

>> 2) show/hide enclosures
>> Since that may need a change in/addition in the file format we didn't made 
>> nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
> not really, that can be saved on project folder locally, no need to change 
> file format

Maybe, but it must be saved somehow.
If it is saved locally it will not be possible to create footprints with that 
fixed options (with 3d and mec. models files and each flag)
If that is saved per-footprint then it need to be saved in the kicad format 
(that I dont know how it works). and that need a change in the file format..
I am not the person to discuss this as I don't know the details how that could 
be implemented.


> hoping also material props option will be working again

I was thinking to remove that option, but on non-realist mode it will only use 
the diffuse material. (so you can use the non realist mode to render without 
materials)
So that will work as an "eng viewer"

That options (not use the material props) exists because it is an workarround 
for the bad materials in some of the modules in the actual kicad library.

That use of the material props option to display/hide enclosures, must be 
implemented as a proper solution as proposed in 2)

> look at zoom fit in page that resize the view, but it doesn't restore initial 
> orientation of the board

I am also looking on that one at moment.

Mario Luzeiro



From: easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 15:14
To: Mário Luzeiro; Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

Hi Mario,
thanks for your reply...

> 2) show/hide enclosures
> Since that may need a change in/addition in the file format we didn't made 
> nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
not really, that can be saved on project folder locally, no need to
change file format

hoping also material props option will be working again, and please have
a look at zoom fit in page that resize the view, but it doesn't restore
initial orientation of the board, as in
http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18197.html


Regards
Maurice



On 24/02/2016 13.19, Mário Luzeiro wrote:
> Hi Maurice,
>
> Thanks for your interest,
>
>> I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new 3D 
>> viewer
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html
>
>> 1) pivot center of rotation
>
> I am thinking on this and see how can I implement some way of do it. It may 
> be not as you expected, I am looking at moment for the easiest / useful way 
> of have it working. I will let you know when I got it working.
>
>
>> 2) show/hide enclosures
>
> I discuss with Cirilo some ideas that could be used for this and other 
> proposes (eg: check if a model is a mechanical.. if it is to be used for 
> export or not.. etc..) . Since that may need a change in/addition in the file 
> format we didn't made nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
> IMO we will not get this feature at moment, it will only be possible after 
> get this merged in the trunk and a solution discussed and agree by the 
> managers.
>
> Mario Luzeiro
>
> 
> From: Kicad-developers 
> [kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
> easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
> Sent: 24 February 2016 12:01
> To: Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export
>
> Hi Cirilo,
>
> I'm happy you are interested in my approach to manage MCAD code.
>
> Consider that the native conversion code of VRML in FC is done by
> Coin3D, not by OCE
>
> I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new
> 3D viewer
> http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html
>
> Regards
> Maurice
>
> On 24/02/2016 04.30, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
>> Hi Maurice,
>>
>>Can you send a link to your VRML export code in the FreeCAD
>> repository? Since the kicad 3D model plugin system has been finished and
>> all legacy parsers replaced, I'm looking at the display of IGES and STEP
>> models via OCE.  I was thinking I can read your conversion code to help
>> me get started; otherwise my plan was to study the VRML export code in
>> OCE to see how the mesh hierarchy is translated.
>>
>> - Cirilo
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

Hi Mario,
thanks for your reply...


2) show/hide enclosures
Since that may need a change in/addition in the file format we didn't made 
nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
not really, that can be saved on project folder locally, no need to 
change file format


hoping also material props option will be working again, and please have 
a look at zoom fit in page that resize the view, but it doesn't restore 
initial orientation of the board, as in

http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18197.html


Regards
Maurice



On 24/02/2016 13.19, Mário Luzeiro wrote:

Hi Maurice,

Thanks for your interest,


I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new 3D 
viewer
http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html



1) pivot center of rotation


I am thinking on this and see how can I implement some way of do it. It may be 
not as you expected, I am looking at moment for the easiest / useful way of 
have it working. I will let you know when I got it working.



2) show/hide enclosures


I discuss with Cirilo some ideas that could be used for this and other proposes 
(eg: check if a model is a mechanical.. if it is to be used for export or not.. 
etc..) . Since that may need a change in/addition in the file format we didn't 
made nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
IMO we will not get this feature at moment, it will only be possible after get 
this merged in the trunk and a solution discussed and agree by the managers.

Mario Luzeiro


From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 12:01
To: Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

Hi Cirilo,

I'm happy you are interested in my approach to manage MCAD code.

Consider that the native conversion code of VRML in FC is done by
Coin3D, not by OCE

I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new
3D viewer
http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html

Regards
Maurice

On 24/02/2016 04.30, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:

Hi Maurice,

   Can you send a link to your VRML export code in the FreeCAD
repository? Since the kicad 3D model plugin system has been finished and
all legacy parsers replaced, I'm looking at the display of IGES and STEP
models via OCE.  I was thinking I can read your conversion code to help
me get started; otherwise my plan was to study the VRML export code in
OCE to see how the mesh hierarchy is translated.

- Cirilo



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Maurice,

Thanks for your interest,

> I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new 3D 
> viewer
> http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html

> 1) pivot center of rotation

I am thinking on this and see how can I implement some way of do it. It may be 
not as you expected, I am looking at moment for the easiest / useful way of 
have it working. I will let you know when I got it working.


> 2) show/hide enclosures

I discuss with Cirilo some ideas that could be used for this and other proposes 
(eg: check if a model is a mechanical.. if it is to be used for export or not.. 
etc..) . Since that may need a change in/addition in the file format we didn't 
made nothing yet or advanced with any propose.
IMO we will not get this feature at moment, it will only be possible after get 
this merged in the trunk and a solution discussed and agree by the managers.

Mario Luzeiro


From: Kicad-developers 
[kicad-developers-bounces+mrluzeiro=ua...@lists.launchpad.net] on behalf of 
easyw [ea...@katamail.com]
Sent: 24 February 2016 12:01
To: Cirilo Bernardo; KiCad Developers
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

Hi Cirilo,

I'm happy you are interested in my approach to manage MCAD code.

Consider that the native conversion code of VRML in FC is done by
Coin3D, not by OCE

I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new
3D viewer
http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html

Regards
Maurice

On 24/02/2016 04.30, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> Hi Maurice,
>
>   Can you send a link to your VRML export code in the FreeCAD
> repository? Since the kicad 3D model plugin system has been finished and
> all legacy parsers replaced, I'm looking at the display of IGES and STEP
> models via OCE.  I was thinking I can read your conversion code to help
> me get started; otherwise my plan was to study the VRML export code in
> OCE to see how the mesh hierarchy is translated.
>
> - Cirilo
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export

[easyw]

Hi Cirilo,

I'm happy you are interested in my approach to manage MCAD code.

Consider that the native conversion code of VRML in FC is done by 
Coin3D, not by OCE


I'm still waiting for your comment about the queries I made for the new 
3D viewer

http://www.mail-archive.com/kicad-developers%40lists.launchpad.net/msg18220.html

Regards
Maurice

On 24/02/2016 04.30, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:

Hi Maurice,

  Can you send a link to your VRML export code in the FreeCAD
repository? Since the kicad 3D model plugin system has been finished and
all legacy parsers replaced, I'm looking at the display of IGES and STEP
models via OCE.  I was thinking I can read your conversion code to help
me get started; otherwise my plan was to study the VRML export code in
OCE to see how the mesh hierarchy is translated.

- Cirilo



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export oddness.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

For now I converted the circle into two 180 degree arcs which solved my
problem.  I looked at the vrml export code and the only way I can see to
resolve the issue is to export the silkscreen text last so that any
circles do not obscure the text.  It may also be possible to make the
hole in the circle transparent when drawing graphical circles.

On 9/8/2015 5:28 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> Hi Wayne,
> 
>  This is a logic fault (definitely a bug).  The exporter composes each
> layer by
> creating a single layer of outlines and a single layer of cutouts. When the
> cutouts are applied at a later stage, in this instance the text in the
> circle is
> obliterated. A little thought is required here; I suspect it will be
> possible to
> distinguish between drill holes and circular holes within a graphical object
> and to apply slightly different algorithms to produce the expected effect.
> 
>  If you compose the circle of 2 arcs (or 4 arcs using the somewhat limited
> editor) you will not have that problem.
> 
> - Cirilo
> 
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Wayne Stambaugh  > wrote:
> 
> When I export the attached board to VRML.  The graphic text on the front
> silk screen of the board is not shown.  It appears that the graphical
> circle on the front silk screen is either obscuring the text or the text
> on the front silk screen layer has been completely replaced by the
> circle rather than added to it.  If you remove the circle from the front
> silk screen layer, the front silk screen text magically reappears on the
> vrml export.  Is this a bug in our vrml exporter or is this just a
> weakness in the vrml file format?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> 
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
> 

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML export oddness.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

When I export the attached board to VRML.  The graphic text on the front
silk screen of the board is not shown.  It appears that the graphical
circle on the front silk screen is either obscuring the text or the text
on the front silk screen layer has been completely replaced by the
circle rather than added to it.  If you remove the circle from the front
silk screen layer, the front silk screen text magically reappears on the
vrml export.  Is this a bug in our vrml exporter or is this just a
weakness in the vrml file format?

Cheers,

Wayne
(kicad_pcb (version 4) (host pcbnew "(2015-09-08 BZR 6170)-product")

  (general
(links 0)
(no_connects 0)
(area -6.374601 -6.374601 6.374601 5.829301)
(thickness 1.6)
(drawings 6)
(tracks 0)
(zones 0)
(modules 0)
(nets 1)
  )

  (page A4)
  (title_block
(title "PCA180 Isolated Dual Channel Hall Effect Board")
(date 2015-08-28)
(rev NC)
(company "Motion Sensors, Inc.")
(comment 1 "768 Pitts Chapel Rd.")
(comment 2 "Elizabeth City, NC 27909")
  )

  (layers
(0 F.Cu signal)
(31 B.Cu signal)
(32 B.Adhes user)
(33 F.Adhes user)
(34 B.Paste user)
(35 F.Paste user)
(36 B.SilkS user)
(37 F.SilkS user)
(38 B.Mask user)
(39 F.Mask user)
(40 Dwgs.User user)
(41 Cmts.User user)
(42 Eco1.User user)
(43 Eco2.User user)
(44 Edge.Cuts user)
(45 Margin user)
(46 B.CrtYd user)
(47 F.CrtYd user)
(48 B.Fab user)
(49 F.Fab user)
  )

  (setup
(last_trace_width 0.2032)
(trace_clearance 0.254)
(zone_clearance 0.508)
(zone_45_only no)
(trace_min 0.2)
(segment_width 0.2)
(edge_width 0.2)
(via_size 0.635)
(via_drill 0.381)
(via_min_size 0.4)
(via_min_drill 0.3)
(uvia_size 0.3)
(uvia_drill 0.1)
(uvias_allowed no)
(uvia_min_size 0.2)
(uvia_min_drill 0.1)
(pcb_text_width 0.3)
(pcb_text_size 1.5 1.5)
(mod_edge_width 0.15)
(mod_text_size 0.762 0.889)
(mod_text_width 0.1524)
(pad_size 1.524 1.524)
(pad_drill 0.762)
(pad_to_mask_clearance 0.2)
(aux_axis_origin 0 0)
(visible_elements 7F7F)
(pcbplotparams
  (layerselection 0x00030_8001)
  (usegerberextensions false)
  (excludeedgelayer true)
  (linewidth 0.05)
  (plotframeref false)
  (viasonmask false)
  (mode 1)
  (useauxorigin false)
  (hpglpennumber 1)
  (hpglpenspeed 20)
  (hpglpendiameter 15)
  (hpglpenoverlay 2)
  (psnegative false)
  (psa4output false)
  (plotreference true)
  (plotvalue true)
  (plotinvisibletext false)
  (padsonsilk false)
  (subtractmaskfromsilk false)
  (outputformat 1)
  (mirror false)
  (drillshape 1)
  (scaleselection 1)
  (outputdirectory ""))
  )

  (net 0 "")

  (net_class Default "This is the default net class."
(clearance 0.254)
(trace_width 0.2032)
(via_dia 0.635)
(via_drill 0.381)
(uvia_dia 0.3)
(uvia_drill 0.1)
  )

  (gr_circle (center 0 0) (end 4.5974 0.254) (layer F.SilkS) (width 0.2))
  (gr_text FRONT (at 0 0) (layer F.SilkS)
(effects (font (size 1.143 1.016) (thickness 0.2032)))
  )
  (gr_text BACK (at 0 0) (layer B.SilkS)
(effects (font (size 1.143 1.016) (thickness 0.2032)) (justify mirror))
  )
  (gr_circle (center 0 0) (end 5.8166 0) (layer Dwgs.User) (width 0.0254))
  (gr_line (start -3.515125 5.2578) (end 3.515125 5.2578) (layer Edge.Cuts) 
(width 0.1))
  (gr_arc (start 0 0) (end 3.515125 5.2578) (angle -292.5) (layer Edge.Cuts) 
(width 0.1))

)
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export oddness.

[Cirilo Bernardo]

Hi Wayne,

 This is a logic fault (definitely a bug).  The exporter composes each
layer by
creating a single layer of outlines and a single layer of cutouts. When the
cutouts are applied at a later stage, in this instance the text in the
circle is
obliterated. A little thought is required here; I suspect it will be
possible to
distinguish between drill holes and circular holes within a graphical object
and to apply slightly different algorithms to produce the expected effect.

 If you compose the circle of 2 arcs (or 4 arcs using the somewhat limited
editor) you will not have that problem.

- Cirilo

On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Wayne Stambaugh 
wrote:

> When I export the attached board to VRML.  The graphic text on the front
> silk screen of the board is not shown.  It appears that the graphical
> circle on the front silk screen is either obscuring the text or the text
> on the front silk screen layer has been completely replaced by the
> circle rather than added to it.  If you remove the circle from the front
> silk screen layer, the front silk screen text magically reappears on the
> vrml export.  Is this a bug in our vrml exporter or is this just a
> weakness in the vrml file format?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Wayne
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export issue in zone filling

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Cirilo,

I forgot to mention that the screenshot is from FreeCad, so, same issue on 
FreeCAD.
The board in pcbnew and normal view3d is OK, in fact, I already produced it, 
assembly and tested in real life :)

I found another issue, if you dont set the Footprint 3D model path, so, if it 
is null, the wxWidget will rise me an error, you may would like to check what 
happen when this path is zero ..

ASSERT INFO:
../src/common/filename.cpp(2004): assert Assert failure failed in 
IsValidDirComponent(): empty directory passed to wxFileName::InsertDir()

BACKTRACE:
[1] wxFileName::IsValidDirComponent(wxString const)
[2] wxFileName::AppendDir(wxString const)
[3] wxAppConsoleBase::CallEventHandler(wxEvtHandler*, wxEventFunctor, 
wxEvent) const
[4] wxEvtHandler::ProcessEventIfMatchesId(wxEventTableEntryBase const, 
wxEvtHandler*, wxEvent)
[5] wxEventHashTable::HandleEvent(wxEvent, wxEvtHandler*)
[6] wxEvtHandler::TryHereOnly(wxEvent)
[7] wxEvtHandler::DoTryChain(wxEvent)
[8] wxEvtHandler::ProcessEvent(wxEvent)
[9] wxWindowBase::TryAfter(wxEvent)
[10] wxEvtHandler::SafelyProcessEvent(wxEvent)
[11] wxMenuBase::SendEvent(int, int)
[12] g_closure_invoke
[13] g_signal_emit_valist
[14] g_signal_emit
[15] gtk_widget_activate
[16] gtk_menu_shell_activate_item
[17] g_closure_invoke
[18] g_signal_emit_valist
[19] g_signal_emit
[20] gtk_propagate_event
[21] gtk_main_do_event
[22] g_main_context_dispatch
[23] g_main_loop_run
[24] gtk_main
[25] wxGUIEventLoop::DoRun()
[26] wxEventLoopBase::Run()
[27] wxAppConsoleBase::MainLoop()
[28] APP_SINGLE_TOP::OnRun() 
/home/kammutierspule/kicad_sources/kicad.bzr/common/single_top.cpp:155
[29] wxEntry(int, wchar_t**)
[30] main /home/kammutierspule/kicad_sources/kicad.bzr/common/single_top.cpp:189
[31] __libc_start_main
[32] _start


I think the issue could be in the:
https://github.com/KiCad/kicad-source-mirror/blob/05073c15edd92611d672bf286cdfc8dc956e1326/pcbnew/dialogs/dialog_export_vrml.cpp#L176


Regards,
Mario Luzeiro

From: Cirilo Bernardo [cirilo.berna...@gmail.com]
Sent: 22 March 2015 22:11
To: Mário Luzeiro
Subject: Re: VRML export issue in zone filling

HI Mario,

 I don't understand what could cause those fill problems. Have you used another 
viewer like
'view3dscene' to see if it is only a problem with the viewer?

 In the past there were problems with OpenGL operations near (0,0,n) and the 
result was
missing points which of course caused rendering problems. To work around that 
problem
I had to render the board first then move everything so the board center is 
near 0,0.

- Cirilo

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 8:03 AM, Mário Luzeiro 
mrluze...@ua.ptmailto:mrluze...@ua.pt wrote:
Hi Cirilo,

while working in VRML model parser to import KiCad generated VRML files, I 
notice the issue attached.
The zone filling is strange and parts are missing. Any idea why?!

Regards,
Mario Luzeiro


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML export issue in zone filling

[Mário Luzeiro]

Hi Cirilo,

while working in VRML model parser to import KiCad generated VRML files, I 
notice the issue attached.
The zone filling is strange and parts are missing. Any idea why?!

Regards,
Mario Luzeiro___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

Cirilo,

I've taken a closer look at the x3d code and I was wrong about the x3d
file being converted and embedded in the board vrml file.  Apparently
what this code does is attempts to calculate the transforms from x3d
format to vrml format.  The larger problem is that the x3d file itself
is neither copied to the 3D model path nor is the file url added to the
child element.  This is a good thing because I tried it manually an the
vrml viewer I used choked on the x3d file.  What needs to happen is the
x3d file must be converted to vrml and then saved to the 3D model path.
 I'm not sure who wrote this code but in the future please refrain from
partial implementations that only confuse the next developer that tries
to figure out what you attempted to do.  I am going to remove this code
and only copy the vrml model files that actually exist.  All other files
will be ignored until such time that a proper file converter is implemented.

Wayne

On 10/4/2014 8:52 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
 On 10/3/2014 8:15 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
 On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
 mailto:stambau...@verizon.net wrote:

 I've been trying use Pcbnew the VRML export for a board a work and
 discovered some serious design issues with the way file names are
 manipulated which broke exporting the model files on windows.  I fixed
 those and while digging around in the VRML export code, I noticed a few
 things that didn't make any sense to me.  Why are only .x3d file names
 embedded inside the board VRML file and not .wrl files?  Why are the
 .x3d file names embedded even when they are copied to the 3D model path?
  Why wouldn't you either embed all the footprint models in the board
 file or copy all of the footprint model files to the 3D model path?  It
 seems to me it should be one or the other not both.  The use relative
 paths in the board VRML file option does nothing as far as I can tell.
 I'm willing to fix this but we need to define what this behavior should
 be because what we have now is rather chaotic.  My initial feeling is
 that the embedded code should be removed until we can embed all
 supported 3D model file formats.  Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

 One more note.  Please use wxFileName instead of wxString when
 manipulating file names and paths.  I've probably fixed a dozen or so
 places over the years where this same wxString path manipulation code
 has been used and has caused nothing but grief.  Please keep in mind
 that we are a cross platform application.  If you need Posix path
 separators for saving paths and/or file name in files, use
 wxFileName::GetFullPath(wxPATH_UNIX).  This will convert the separators
 from \ to / and still allow you to use native paths for file operations
 internally which is more reliable.

 Thanks,

 Wayne


 Hi Wayne,

  I'll find some time to have a look at the issues.  I don't get what you
 mean
 by the x3d file names being embedded and not the wrl files. I always thought
 it was the other way around. The X3D model data is written to the output
 VRML file but the VRML data is retained as separate files and only the names
 are put into the output VRML file. Embedding the X3D model date assures
 VRML2 compatibility; a VRML2 browser will not necessarily be able to
 parse and display the contents of an x3d file. I didn't realize the x3d
 models
 were being copied to the path as well; that's just wrong.
 
 Cirilo,
 
 Please don't fix anything just yet until I commit my changes.  Otherwise
 we will have clashes in the code.  You may be correct about the x3d
 files but I don't have any of them to test the code.  Looking at the
 code, the output of the x3d to vrml conversion is being added to the
 board vrml file not to a separate model file in the 3D model path which
 is where I would expect it to go.  I also fixed a memory leak for every
 x3d parser that is created.  If you happen to have an x3d model of a
 component, please send it to me so I can test/fix this code path.
 

  Before I rewrote much of the VRML exporter,  it always used file
 references to
 the models, never the actual model data. It is the introduction of the
 X3D code
 which changed this a bit. What I'd like to do is to put all the VRML model
 data in a single file as well, but this is not a simple task. For me, the
 ideal is to create a model management object which implements caching
 and other tricks to minimize the memory footprint. These object models
 should be able to export data in VRML2 format as the X3D code currently
 does (though admittedly in a very inefficient way). I'd also like the output
 to use DEF/USE to keep the file as small as possible.  It's all possible;
 the IDF tool 'idf2vrml' can create VRML files which reuse objects and it
 also has an option not to reuse objects so that the output can in turn be
 used an an input model to KiCad.  Of course if 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Cirilo Bernardo]

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
wrote:

 Cirilo,

 I've taken a closer look at the x3d code and I was wrong about the x3d
 file being converted and embedded in the board vrml file.  Apparently
 what this code does is attempts to calculate the transforms from x3d
 format to vrml format.  The larger problem is that the x3d file itself
 is neither copied to the 3D model path nor is the file url added to the
 child element.  This is a good thing because I tried it manually an the
 vrml viewer I used choked on the x3d file.  What needs to happen is the
 x3d file must be converted to vrml and then saved to the 3D model path.
  I'm not sure who wrote this code but in the future please refrain from
 partial implementations that only confuse the next developer that tries
 to figure out what you attempted to do.  I am going to remove this code
 and only copy the vrml model files that actually exist.  All other files
 will be ignored until such time that a proper file converter is
 implemented.

 Wayne
 [snip]


Hi Wayne,

 No problem there. I didn't write the x3d code nor do I actually remember
checking
that anything was written to the VRML file since I didn't have an ASCII x3d
file
to work with. I mistakenly thought that the method called wrote out the x3d
data
in a VRML2 compatible fashion (obviously I never had a good look at the x3d
code).  I had known all along that the VRML file cannot successfully
reference an
external x3d file though since x3d is a successor and superset and the VRML
specification does not require handling of external files; it is rather
fortuitous
that most VRML viewers actually implement inclusion of external VRML files.

 I'm still in 2 minds about whether or not I should implement improved
support for
the VRML specification.  Although it would be useful for everyone who uses
the
VRML features, it's no simple task and I imagine I'll be quite busy with
STEP code
for the next 6 months.  One of the things which puts me off doing more VRML
work is the patchy support within the tools people commonly use to create
the
models. Blender has the absolute worst VRML support of any viewer I've
tested
and yet it remains the viewer of choice for many users. Wings3D generates
such abysmal VRML code and is such an awful tool to use that I created my
own set of tools for VRML model generation. I always feel like any work I
do with
VRML is limited by a need to ensure some working compatibility with bad
tools.

- Cirilo
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

On 10/3/2014 8:15 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
 On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
 mailto:stambau...@verizon.net wrote:
 
 I've been trying use Pcbnew the VRML export for a board a work and
 discovered some serious design issues with the way file names are
 manipulated which broke exporting the model files on windows.  I fixed
 those and while digging around in the VRML export code, I noticed a few
 things that didn't make any sense to me.  Why are only .x3d file names
 embedded inside the board VRML file and not .wrl files?  Why are the
 .x3d file names embedded even when they are copied to the 3D model path?
  Why wouldn't you either embed all the footprint models in the board
 file or copy all of the footprint model files to the 3D model path?  It
 seems to me it should be one or the other not both.  The use relative
 paths in the board VRML file option does nothing as far as I can tell.
 I'm willing to fix this but we need to define what this behavior should
 be because what we have now is rather chaotic.  My initial feeling is
 that the embedded code should be removed until we can embed all
 supported 3D model file formats.  Anyone else have any thoughts on this?
 
 One more note.  Please use wxFileName instead of wxString when
 manipulating file names and paths.  I've probably fixed a dozen or so
 places over the years where this same wxString path manipulation code
 has been used and has caused nothing but grief.  Please keep in mind
 that we are a cross platform application.  If you need Posix path
 separators for saving paths and/or file name in files, use
 wxFileName::GetFullPath(wxPATH_UNIX).  This will convert the separators
 from \ to / and still allow you to use native paths for file operations
 internally which is more reliable.
 
 Thanks,
 
 Wayne
 
 
 Hi Wayne,
 
  I'll find some time to have a look at the issues.  I don't get what you
 mean
 by the x3d file names being embedded and not the wrl files. I always thought
 it was the other way around. The X3D model data is written to the output
 VRML file but the VRML data is retained as separate files and only the names
 are put into the output VRML file. Embedding the X3D model date assures
 VRML2 compatibility; a VRML2 browser will not necessarily be able to
 parse and display the contents of an x3d file. I didn't realize the x3d
 models
 were being copied to the path as well; that's just wrong.

Cirilo,

Please don't fix anything just yet until I commit my changes.  Otherwise
we will have clashes in the code.  You may be correct about the x3d
files but I don't have any of them to test the code.  Looking at the
code, the output of the x3d to vrml conversion is being added to the
board vrml file not to a separate model file in the 3D model path which
is where I would expect it to go.  I also fixed a memory leak for every
x3d parser that is created.  If you happen to have an x3d model of a
component, please send it to me so I can test/fix this code path.

 
  Before I rewrote much of the VRML exporter,  it always used file
 references to
 the models, never the actual model data. It is the introduction of the
 X3D code
 which changed this a bit. What I'd like to do is to put all the VRML model
 data in a single file as well, but this is not a simple task. For me, the
 ideal is to create a model management object which implements caching
 and other tricks to minimize the memory footprint. These object models
 should be able to export data in VRML2 format as the X3D code currently
 does (though admittedly in a very inefficient way). I'd also like the output
 to use DEF/USE to keep the file as small as possible.  It's all possible;
 the IDF tool 'idf2vrml' can create VRML files which reuse objects and it
 also has an option not to reuse objects so that the output can in turn be
 used an an input model to KiCad.  Of course if we improved the VRML loader
 for KiCad so that it handled DEF/USE better that would simplify some things
 and allow many detailed models to be more compact (for example we don't
 have hundreds of 1206 models, or 64 pin models on each TQFP64).

It makes sense to only have one copy of each unique model embedded in
the vrml file.  I'm guessing that each model definition in a vrml file
can be referenced more than once.  Until you have a chance to make the
changes to embed the models in the board vrml file, I will fix the
current code so it properly converts and copies x3d files to the 3D
model path.  I will also fix the 3D model file copying so it doesn't
overwrite the same model file for each time a model is used on the
board.  I'll probably use the source file modification time stamp and
only copy the file when the destination file doesn't exist or the
modification time has changed since the last copy.


 
 So changes are planned, but at the moment they're on hold pending the
 ongoing work 

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Cirilo Bernardo]

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 10:52 PM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
wrote:

 On 10/3/2014 8:15 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
  On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
  mailto:stambau...@verizon.net wrote:
 
  I've been trying use Pcbnew the VRML export for a board a work and
  discovered some serious design issues with the way file names are
  manipulated which broke exporting the model files on windows.  I
 fixed
  those and while digging around in the VRML export code, I noticed a
 few
  things that didn't make any sense to me.  Why are only .x3d file
 names
  embedded inside the board VRML file and not .wrl files?  Why are the
  .x3d file names embedded even when they are copied to the 3D model
 path?
   Why wouldn't you either embed all the footprint models in the board
  file or copy all of the footprint model files to the 3D model path?
 It
  seems to me it should be one or the other not both.  The use relative
  paths in the board VRML file option does nothing as far as I can
 tell.
  I'm willing to fix this but we need to define what this behavior
 should
  be because what we have now is rather chaotic.  My initial feeling is
  that the embedded code should be removed until we can embed all
  supported 3D model file formats.  Anyone else have any thoughts on
 this?
 
  One more note.  Please use wxFileName instead of wxString when
  manipulating file names and paths.  I've probably fixed a dozen or so
  places over the years where this same wxString path manipulation code
  has been used and has caused nothing but grief.  Please keep in mind
  that we are a cross platform application.  If you need Posix path
  separators for saving paths and/or file name in files, use
  wxFileName::GetFullPath(wxPATH_UNIX).  This will convert the
 separators
  from \ to / and still allow you to use native paths for file
 operations
  internally which is more reliable.
 
  Thanks,
 
  Wayne
 
 
  Hi Wayne,
 
   I'll find some time to have a look at the issues.  I don't get what you
  mean
  by the x3d file names being embedded and not the wrl files. I always
 thought
  it was the other way around. The X3D model data is written to the output
  VRML file but the VRML data is retained as separate files and only the
 names
  are put into the output VRML file. Embedding the X3D model date assures
  VRML2 compatibility; a VRML2 browser will not necessarily be able to
  parse and display the contents of an x3d file. I didn't realize the x3d
  models
  were being copied to the path as well; that's just wrong.

 Cirilo,

 Please don't fix anything just yet until I commit my changes.  Otherwise
 we will have clashes in the code.  You may be correct about the x3d
 files but I don't have any of them to test the code.  Looking at the
 code, the output of the x3d to vrml conversion is being added to the
 board vrml file not to a separate model file in the 3D model path which
 is where I would expect it to go.  I also fixed a memory leak for every
 x3d parser that is created.  If you happen to have an x3d model of a
 component, please send it to me so I can test/fix this code path.

 No problem, I'll wait until you've committed your changes.

I'll keep people informed on any progress on my wishlist. Developments with
STEP would be of particular interest to people and it's no small job so we
definitely want to avoid duplication there. I'm currently looking into using
'StepCode' (formerly STEP Class Library) because I want a well structured
assembly as an output. I've discarded OpenCascade since it cannot
produce an assembly that I would ever care to work with in MCAD; pretty
much every feature of every component is a 'part' in one big flat 'product'
and no MCAD user wants to waste time with such a thing.

- Cirilo
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Wayne Stambaugh]

I've been trying use Pcbnew the VRML export for a board a work and
discovered some serious design issues with the way file names are
manipulated which broke exporting the model files on windows.  I fixed
those and while digging around in the VRML export code, I noticed a few
things that didn't make any sense to me.  Why are only .x3d file names
embedded inside the board VRML file and not .wrl files?  Why are the
.x3d file names embedded even when they are copied to the 3D model path?
 Why wouldn't you either embed all the footprint models in the board
file or copy all of the footprint model files to the 3D model path?  It
seems to me it should be one or the other not both.  The use relative
paths in the board VRML file option does nothing as far as I can tell.
I'm willing to fix this but we need to define what this behavior should
be because what we have now is rather chaotic.  My initial feeling is
that the embedded code should be removed until we can embed all
supported 3D model file formats.  Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

One more note.  Please use wxFileName instead of wxString when
manipulating file names and paths.  I've probably fixed a dozen or so
places over the years where this same wxString path manipulation code
has been used and has caused nothing but grief.  Please keep in mind
that we are a cross platform application.  If you need Posix path
separators for saving paths and/or file name in files, use
wxFileName::GetFullPath(wxPATH_UNIX).  This will convert the separators
from \ to / and still allow you to use native paths for file operations
internally which is more reliable.

Thanks,

Wayne

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export.

[Cirilo Bernardo]

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Wayne Stambaugh stambau...@verizon.net
wrote:

 I've been trying use Pcbnew the VRML export for a board a work and
 discovered some serious design issues with the way file names are
 manipulated which broke exporting the model files on windows.  I fixed
 those and while digging around in the VRML export code, I noticed a few
 things that didn't make any sense to me.  Why are only .x3d file names
 embedded inside the board VRML file and not .wrl files?  Why are the
 .x3d file names embedded even when they are copied to the 3D model path?
  Why wouldn't you either embed all the footprint models in the board
 file or copy all of the footprint model files to the 3D model path?  It
 seems to me it should be one or the other not both.  The use relative
 paths in the board VRML file option does nothing as far as I can tell.
 I'm willing to fix this but we need to define what this behavior should
 be because what we have now is rather chaotic.  My initial feeling is
 that the embedded code should be removed until we can embed all
 supported 3D model file formats.  Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

 One more note.  Please use wxFileName instead of wxString when
 manipulating file names and paths.  I've probably fixed a dozen or so
 places over the years where this same wxString path manipulation code
 has been used and has caused nothing but grief.  Please keep in mind
 that we are a cross platform application.  If you need Posix path
 separators for saving paths and/or file name in files, use
 wxFileName::GetFullPath(wxPATH_UNIX).  This will convert the separators
 from \ to / and still allow you to use native paths for file operations
 internally which is more reliable.

 Thanks,

 Wayne


Hi Wayne,

 I'll find some time to have a look at the issues.  I don't get what you
mean
by the x3d file names being embedded and not the wrl files. I always thought
it was the other way around. The X3D model data is written to the output
VRML file but the VRML data is retained as separate files and only the names
are put into the output VRML file. Embedding the X3D model date assures
VRML2 compatibility; a VRML2 browser will not necessarily be able to
parse and display the contents of an x3d file. I didn't realize the x3d
models
were being copied to the path as well; that's just wrong.

 Before I rewrote much of the VRML exporter,  it always used file
references to
the models, never the actual model data. It is the introduction of the X3D
code
which changed this a bit. What I'd like to do is to put all the VRML model
data in a single file as well, but this is not a simple task. For me, the
ideal is to create a model management object which implements caching
and other tricks to minimize the memory footprint. These object models
should be able to export data in VRML2 format as the X3D code currently
does (though admittedly in a very inefficient way). I'd also like the output
to use DEF/USE to keep the file as small as possible.  It's all possible;
the IDF tool 'idf2vrml' can create VRML files which reuse objects and it
also has an option not to reuse objects so that the output can in turn be
used an an input model to KiCad.  Of course if we improved the VRML loader
for KiCad so that it handled DEF/USE better that would simplify some things
and allow many detailed models to be more compact (for example we don't
have hundreds of 1206 models, or 64 pin models on each TQFP64).

So changes are planned, but at the moment they're on hold pending the
ongoing work on the VRML model caching for 3DViewer. I'll assess the size
of the task when appropriate, but the STEP work has a much higher
priority for me.

I'll keep wxFileName in mind for file name manipulation. I've probably used
strings in my IDF tools as well.  I'll make a note to check the code.

- Cirilo
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML export issues

[Cirilo Bernardo]

Hi Jean-Pierre,

 I was looking at the VRML exports again and I noticed some inconsistency on 
what side a feature is visible from. For example, I wrote in a previous email 
that only the first pad of each DIL package seemed to be rendered even though 
all pads of resistors, diodes, and a few other components seemed to be rendered 
correctly.

 The other pads of the DIL packages were in fact rendered but they are visible 
from the bottom side; these pads are oval while all the circular and 
rectangular pads are visible from the top side. I had a closer look at the code 
and the features seem to be rendered visible from the same side (but which side 
they are visible from is a matter of chance) regardless of the layer which the 
feature appears on.

 One way to solve this of course is for features to have a thickness and be 
rendered so that they are visible from both sides. Would this be an acceptable 
solution?

 At the moment the board substrate itself is not rendered; if it is rendered 
then should we only render feature on the top and bottom copper layers and on 
the silkscreens? After all, once the board is rendered we cannot see inside it.

 Should the board substrate be rendered or not - or should this be 
configurable? If the board is rendered, should we place holes in the board ( I 
suspect we will need to, which makes the board rendering fairly complex and 
also requires a lot more data points in the VRML file).

 I also noticed that the pads do not seem to have holes in them - is this a bug 
in the code or are all pads solid but thru-hole pads have a drill coordinate 
specified in addition?

 I will ask on the users list how people use the exported VRML file to find out 
if people want the board rendered like the final product or if they want it 
see-through for inspecting things.

Regards,
Cirilo


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export issues

[jp charras]

Le 20/01/2013 10:50, Cirilo Bernardo a écrit :

Hi Jean-Pierre,

  I was looking at the VRML exports again and I noticed some inconsistency on 
what side a feature is visible from. For example, I wrote in a previous email 
that only the first pad of each DIL package seemed to be rendered even though 
all pads of resistors, diodes, and a few other components seemed to be rendered 
correctly.

  The other pads of the DIL packages were in fact rendered but they are visible 
from the bottom side; these pads are oval while all the circular and 
rectangular pads are visible from the top side. I had a closer look at the code 
and the features seem to be rendered visible from the same side (but which side 
they are visible from is a matter of chance) regardless of the layer which the 
feature appears on.

  One way to solve this of course is for features to have a thickness and be 
rendered so that they are visible from both sides. Would this be an acceptable 
solution?

  At the moment the board substrate itself is not rendered; if it is rendered 
then should we only render feature on the top and bottom copper layers and on 
the silkscreens? After all, once the board is rendered we cannot see inside it.

  Should the board substrate be rendered or not - or should this be 
configurable? If the board is rendered, should we place holes in the board ( I 
suspect we will need to, which makes the board rendering fairly complex and 
also requires a lot more data points in the VRML file).

  I also noticed that the pads do not seem to have holes in them - is this a 
bug in the code or are all pads solid but thru-hole pads have a drill 
coordinate specified in addition?

  I will ask on the users list how people use the exported VRML file to find 
out if people want the board rendered like the final product or if they want it 
see-through for inspecting things.

Regards,
Cirilo



I am *not* a VRML specialist.
However I am thinking the VRML export has a main issue:
- board items (pads, tracks, vias ) are exported as 2D objects. A 3D 
object is more complex.
I explain: when exporting a rectangular pad, currently, the exported 
item is just a quad ( a rectangular area).
I am thinking a pad should a 3D shape with a thickness ( the copper 
thickness: usually 15 to 70 micrometers),
with a front side, a back side, an 4 sides, each having its orientation 
to reflect light.
Therefore when a 3D object is exported as a 2D object, what you see 
depends on the VRML  viewer internal code,

and the orientation of the shape.

Pads with holes are exported as a 2D shape with no hole + a cylinder 
(the hole): could be a bug inside the code.


Perhaps  Lorenzo Mercantonio ( who wrote the code ) could explain better 
than me what should be enhanced.


--
Jean-Pierre CHARRAS


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Kicad-developers] VRML export issues

[Cirilo Bernardo]

- Original Message -

 From: jp charras jp.char...@wanadoo.fr
 To: Cirilo Bernardo cirilo_berna...@yahoo.com
 Cc: Kicad Developers kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
 Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 11:06 PM
 Subject: Re: VRML export issues
 
 Le 20/01/2013 10:50, Cirilo Bernardo a écrit :
  Hi Jean-Pierre,
 
    I was looking at the VRML exports again and I noticed some inconsistency 
 on what side a feature is visible from. For example, I wrote in a previous 
 email 
 that only the first pad of each DIL package seemed to be rendered even though 
 all pads of resistors, diodes, and a few other components seemed to be 
 rendered 
 correctly.
 
    The other pads of the DIL packages were in fact rendered but they are 
 visible from the bottom side; these pads are oval while all the circular and 
 rectangular pads are visible from the top side. I had a closer look at the 
 code 
 and the features seem to be rendered visible from the same side (but which 
 side 
 they are visible from is a matter of chance) regardless of the layer which 
 the 
 feature appears on.
 
    One way to solve this of course is for features to have a thickness and 
 be rendered so that they are visible from both sides. Would this be an 
 acceptable solution?
 
    At the moment the board substrate itself is not rendered; if it is 
 rendered then should we only render feature on the top and bottom copper 
 layers 
 and on the silkscreens? After all, once the board is rendered we cannot see 
 inside it.
 
    Should the board substrate be rendered or not - or should this be 
 configurable? If the board is rendered, should we place holes in the board ( 
 I 
 suspect we will need to, which makes the board rendering fairly complex and 
 also 
 requires a lot more data points in the VRML file).
 
    I also noticed that the pads do not seem to have holes in them - is this 
 a bug in the code or are all pads solid but thru-hole pads have a drill 
 coordinate specified in addition?
 
    I will ask on the users list how people use the exported VRML file to 
 find out if people want the board rendered like the final product or if they 
 want it see-through for inspecting things.
 
  Regards,
  Cirilo
 
 
 I am *not* a VRML specialist.
 However I am thinking the VRML export has a main issue:
 - board items (pads, tracks, vias ) are exported as 2D objects. A 3D 
 object is more complex.
 I explain: when exporting a rectangular pad, currently, the exported 
 item is just a quad ( a rectangular area).
 I am thinking a pad should a 3D shape with a thickness ( the copper 
 thickness: usually 15 to 70 micrometers),
 with a front side, a back side, an 4 sides, each having its orientation 
 to reflect light.
 Therefore when a 3D object is exported as a 2D object, what you see 
 depends on the VRML  viewer internal code,
 and the orientation of the shape.
 
 Pads with holes are exported as a 2D shape with no hole + a cylinder 
 (the hole): could be a bug inside the code.
 
 Perhaps  Lorenzo Mercantonio ( who wrote the code ) could explain better 
 than me what should be enhanced.
 
 -- 
 Jean-Pierre CHARRAS
 

Thanks Jean-Pierre,  I'll work on all that in my spare time.  I'll see if 
Lorenzo has any comments.

- Cirilo


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

[Kicad-developers] VRML Export with nanometer build

[Cirilo Bernardo]

I've exported a VRML file from the 'testing' branch build and the resulting 
file was a disaster for a number of reasons:

1. scale and translations are insane: taking the VRML specification where 1Unit 
= 1m, I've got offsets of Millions of Km.  I'm guessing this has to do with 
'nm' internal units rather than 10mil - are there any suggestions on how I 
might go about updating export_vrml.cpp to deal with the 2 build configurations?

2. URLs are not formed according to IETF RFC 1738.  For example I get an 
absolute file path specified like this: URL /some/path
The correct formulation of course is: URL file:///some/path.  Unfortunately 
RFC 1738 doesn't specify a scheme for relative file://  specifications 
although the non-standard  some/path is typically interpreted as a relative 
path.

- Cirilo


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp