ClikScad - create OpenSCAD models without all the typing
I've mentioned elsewhere on this Forum that I have been working on a simple
Python program that enables me to create OpenSCAD code without having to
type all the syntactical stuff.
I think the program has now advanced far enough to make it public for anyone
that might be interested. I do appreciate that it will probably be more
attractive for the occasional OpenSCAD user as compared to those who are a
great deal more expert with OpenSCAD than I am.
http://forum.openscad.org/file/t2631/GetStartedBoth.png
This short Youtube video should give you a flavour of how ClikScad is used.
The video is intended for illustration rather than education.
https://youtu.be/q1Sd0Fuppuw
The Python code and the documentation can be downloaded from Google Drive.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uBpil6TeYyaar_0l8Zm_17UvE-EOTza7?usp=sharing
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Have you heard about https://graphscad.blogspot.com/ ?
On 10/12/19, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
I've mentioned elsewhere on this Forum that I have been working on a simple
Python program that enables me to create OpenSCAD code without having to
type all the syntactical stuff.
I think the program has now advanced far enough to make it public for
anyone
that might be interested. I do appreciate that it will probably be more
attractive for the occasional OpenSCAD user as compared to those who are a
great deal more expert with OpenSCAD than I am.
http://forum.openscad.org/file/t2631/GetStartedBoth.png
This short Youtube video should give you a flavour of how ClikScad is used.
The video is intended for illustration rather than education.
https://youtu.be/q1Sd0Fuppuw
The Python code and the documentation can be downloaded from Google Drive.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uBpil6TeYyaar_0l8Zm_17UvE-EOTza7?usp=sharing
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
tobject wrote
Have you heard about https://graphscad.blogspot.com/ ?
On 12.10.19 17:01, Robin2 wrote:
The Python code and the documentation can be downloaded from Google Drive.
Would you consider placing the code on Github or Gitlab (or something
along these lines)?
I'm interested in exploring this code further, but collaboration by way
of Google Drive is … painful.
--
-- Matthias Urlichs
I don't know if this is the proper place for it, but since it isn't on
github, I can't open an issue or ask questions there.
I ran clikscad.py, got the "listening" message, then opened OpenSCAD and
loaded GetStarted.scad, then in the ClikSCAD window on the browser, I loaded
GetStarted.clik
Nothing showed up in my OpenSCAD window. I tried rendering, and it showed
up, but when I made changes, nothing happened to anything in the OpenSCAD
window.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
I haven't used it but I presume it needs Auto-reload&Preview set.
Admin - email* me if you need anything, or if I've done something stupid...
- click on my MichaelAtOz label, there is a link to email me.
Unless specifically shown otherwise above, my contribution is in the Public Domain; to the extent possible under law, I have waived all copyright and related or neighbouring rights to this work. Obviously inclusion of works of previous authors is not included in the above.
The TPP is no simple “trade agreement.” Fight it! http://www.ourfairdeal.org/ time is running out!
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
MichaelAtOz wrote
I haven't used it but I presume it needs Auto-reload&Preview set.
Yes - sorry - I had assumed that would be second nature for Openscad folks.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
lar3ry wrote
I don't know if this is the proper place for it, but since it isn't on
github, I can't open an issue or ask questions there.
I have been assuming that people will comment here as it is essentially an
Openscad thing
You need to select Design/Auto-reload and preview - I have had that set for
so long I assumed it was the default.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
I've been looking at this sort of thing for a while now.
-
https://graphscad.blogspot.com/ --- this was neat in that it was a
desktop app, but the OpenSCAD code was much modified and I found that
confusing and problematic -
https://github.com/studiotc/NodeGraphInterface --- I have an irrational
mislike of Java, and I found setting up variables in this clunky -
https://www.blockscad3d.com/editor/# --- I've been using this quite a
bit, and greatly like it
I'd like to use OpenJSCAD, but I keep running into instances where code
doesn't seem to work.
Examples of my using BlockSCAD:
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/fitted-box-design-generator-underway/13437/12
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/design-into-3d-boxes-magazine-storage/16238/2
(there's some more on my GitHub)
I'd really like to see something which:
- had both a desktop and web version
- had robust support for the customizer (blockscad requires one finish up
coding it in OpenSCAD) - allowed one to put projects up on a site where others could access them
I have a URL I'd like to use for that --- designinto3d.com but I'm kind of
mystified by the whole web server hosting thing. Even better would be if the
server could run TeX/LaTeX and serve up files thusly generated.
William
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
I'd really like to see something which:
- had both a desktop and web version,
Who is going to create it? I reckon the first thing that is needed is for
the OpenSCAD folks to acknowledge that a GUI front-end would be "a good
idea". At the moment there seems to be no "official" interest. (By the way I
don't mean that the OpenSCAD folks should write the program - just that they
would support it)
- had robust support for the customizer (blockscad requires one finish up
coding it in OpenSCAD)
I recently tried the customizer briefly and I was grossly under-whelmed - I
will not repeat the experience. It seems to me altogether the wrong solution
to simplification (or whatever it is trying to solve) - it certainly did not
simplify anything for me.
- allowed one to put projects up on a site where others could access them
William
People can do that now. There are lots of projects on Thingiverse and any
Cloud storage can make a file publicly available. There is nothing to
prevent someone creating a design with my ClikScad and posting that on the
Cloud somewhere.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
IMHO, Openscad as it is works fine. Having used most major CAD systems for many years, for my own projects and for teaching, openscad is my preference.
My students learn a lot more by having to think about describing their geometries with “code” than pointing and clicking. It is also important for them for understanding the differences between a programming language and a descriptive language.
/mikael
University of Limerick, Ireland
Sent from a mobile device.
On 24 Oct 2019, at 21:28, "robin@nbleopard.com" robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the University of Limerick. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender's email address and know the content is safe.
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
I'd really like to see something which:
- had both a desktop and web version,
Who is going to create it? I reckon the first thing that is needed is for
the OpenSCAD folks to acknowledge that a GUI front-end would be "a good
idea". At the moment there seems to be no "official" interest. (By the way I
don't mean that the OpenSCAD folks should write the program - just that they
would support it)
- had robust support for the customizer (blockscad requires one finish up
coding it in OpenSCAD)
I recently tried the customizer briefly and I was grossly under-whelmed - I
will not repeat the experience. It seems to me altogether the wrong solution
to simplification (or whatever it is trying to solve) - it certainly did not
simplify anything for me.
- allowed one to put projects up on a site where others could access them
William
People can do that now. There are lots of projects on Thingiverse and any
Cloud storage can make a file publicly available. There is nothing to
prevent someone creating a design with my ClikScad and posting that on the
Cloud somewhere.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On 24.10.19 22:38, Robin2 wrote:
Who is going to create it? I reckon the first thing
that is needed is for the OpenSCAD folks to acknowledge
that a GUI front-end would be "a good idea". At the moment
there seems to be no "official" interest. (By the way I
don't mean that the OpenSCAD folks should write the
program - just that they would support it)
Who would that be ("the OpenSCAD folks")?
And what would "support it" mean?
ciao,
Torsten.
On 10/24/2019 1:38 PM, Robin2 wrote:
I recently tried the customizer briefly and I was grossly under-whelmed - I
will not repeat the experience. It seems to me altogether the wrong solution
to simplification (or whatever it is trying to solve) - it certainly did not
simplify anything for me.
Were you trying it as a model designer, or as a model consumer wanting
to customize somebody else's design?
It isn't intended to make things easier for the model designer. If
anything, it makes things more complex.
It's intended for a consumer who wants a box that somebody else
designed, but wants it in these dimensions, with these options.
This (hypothetical?) user doesn't want to see OpenSCAD or make
significant changes to the design, just pick options within the scope
laid out by the designer.
For instance: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:421886
(Doesn't seem to work in Firefox, but seems to work in Edge.)
It's frustrating to me that OpenJSCAD does have both a desktop and web
version, but doesn't work for me.
The customizer affords at least a basic interface for parametric design, and
for naïve users to customize designs. Things which I wish were possible in
it:
- unit conversion of customizer values when changing units --- so a design
which has a thickness of 1" would have a thicknes of 25.4mm when switched
from inches to mm - selectively hide/show elements
- additional options for formatting the customizer window
The thing which is missing from Thingiverse and other project sharing sites
is integration --- I want folks to be able to customize a design in 3D using
OpenSCAD, then use Tool Path Language (tplang), or lualatex and metapost, or
some other tool to generate cut files.
Imagine if one could use: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3575705 and then
get the .c2d file from: http://chaunax.github.io/projects/twhl-box/twhl.html
without having to enter the values twice.
William
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
tp3 wrote
Who would that be ("the OpenSCAD folks")?
And what would "support it" mean?
I don't know their names but I presume there are some people who act as the
"guardian" of the OpenSCAD project - for example in the way that Linus
Torvalds does for Linux. The people who decide what goes into the next
release and what doesn't.
All I mean by "support" is a statement of encouragement - "We believe XXX
would be a useful addition to OpenSCAD and we think it should have these
general features [or should not have these features]" And maybe "we will
bundle it with (or link to it from) OpenSCAD wen it is sufficiently
complete"
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
JordanBrown wrote
Were you trying it as a model designer, or as a model consumer wanting
to customize somebody else's design?
It isn't intended to make things easier for the model designer. If
anything, it makes things more complex.
It's intended for a consumer who wants a box that somebody else
designed, but wants it in these dimensions, with these options.
I was looking at it as a designer because IIRC someone referred me to it as
an alternative to my proposed GUI.
From what you say I can see how it can allow a designer to turn his
creations into a "consumer item" - and I have no quibble with that.
My interest is in creating a simpler interface for newbie designers.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Not sure how a graphical representation is any simpler than text. It is
exactly the same logical construction expressed in a different format. Do
people really struggle much with syntax? The hard part is how to decompose
and object into CSG operations and the trigonometry.
Using text is a major benefit of OpenSCAD because it can be pasted into
emails and checked into source control. It is also fairly concise. I
imagine the graphical representation of my typical designs would be an
enormous tree.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 09:27, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
JordanBrown wrote
Were you trying it as a model designer, or as a model consumer wanting
to customize somebody else's design?
It isn't intended to make things easier for the model designer. If
anything, it makes things more complex.
It's intended for a consumer who wants a box that somebody else
designed, but wants it in these dimensions, with these options.
I was looking at it as a designer because IIRC someone referred me to it as
an alternative to my proposed GUI.
From what you say I can see how it can allow a designer to turn his
creations into a "consumer item" - and I have no quibble with that.
My interest is in creating a simpler interface for newbie designers.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
Using the customizer forces one to use variables, and think about the model in those terms, which I believe helps.
The added complexity is worth it, though it would be nicer if it were more hierarchical.
William
nophead wrote
Not sure how a graphical representation is any simpler than text. It is
exactly the same logical construction expressed in a different format.
I think you misunderstand what I have in mind. Have you had a look at my
very short video https://youtu.be/q1Sd0Fuppuw
https://youtu.be/q1Sd0Fuppuw
I have no plan to produce a graphical representation of a design - the
output of my program is regular OpenSCAD code.
What I do think would be a great value is a system that eliminates the need
to do all the typing that is currently an inherent part of OpenSCAD.
In fact yesterday and today I have been using my ClikScad to design a part
that I want to 3D print and (while I can see room for improvement in
ClikScad) there is no way that I will go back to typing OpenSCAD code by
hand.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Yes I have seen your video but what would the screen look like for the
design I am working on at the moment?
[image: image.png]
It is 350 lines of code and it has taken me a couple of days. I am the
worlds worst typist but that is not what takes the time. It is working out
how the parts are going to fit together without clashes.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 12:14, William F. Adams via Discuss <
discuss@lists.openscad.org> wrote:
Using the customizer forces one to use variables, and think about the
model in those terms, which I believe helps.
The added complexity is worth it, though it would be nicer if it were more
hierarchical.
William
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
Good point, this is making OpenSCAD almost like Scratch Junior, which is a very cool thing to have done, and something I’ve wondered about and definitely appreciate. But for complex code it will be a lot of nested boxes!
One thing I would really like, which might actually exist, is a more powerful code editor which could do a running sense check because it knows Openscad code, and have options to zoom back to where variables are defined, etc. Things that would really speed up and help keeping your head around big Openscad projects.
Also… if just clicking on a section of code could highlight the parts of the model that depend on it…. That would be amazing. Not sure how feasible that is…?
I have a couple of designs that are 5000+ lines, and almost exclusively parametric. One was laid out in a basic form and is a total nightmare to maintain – not that I did it badly, it’s just too much scrolling! The other I broke out into separate .scad files a whole hierarchy of geometries, parts, subassemblies, major assemblies… it would be lovely to be able to navigate between them more intuitively.
Something this makes me want to do is make myself some keyboard macros to insert certain snippets of frequently used OpenSCAD code, like text and Minkowkski etc…
The thing is that when you are really in the middle of a project and the ideas are flowing, my brain is able to work ahead and typing the code is not really slowing me down. Then, going back over, is normally a text edit function.
Cheers,
Alex Gibson
admg consulting
edumaker limited
· Project management
· Operations & Process improvement
· 3D Printing
From: Discuss [mailto:discuss-bounces@lists.openscad.org] On Behalf Of nop head
Sent: 25 October 2019 12:31
To: OpenSCAD general discussion
Subject: Re: [OpenSCAD] ClikScad - create OpenSCAD models without all the typing
Yes I have seen your video but what would the screen look like for the design I am working on at the moment?
image.png
It is 350 lines of code and it has taken me a couple of days. I am the worlds worst typist but that is not what takes the time. It is working out how the parts are going to fit together without clashes.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 12:14, William F. Adams via Discuss discuss@lists.openscad.org wrote:
Using the customizer forces one to use variables, and think about the model in those terms, which I believe helps.
The added complexity is worth it, though it would be nicer if it were more hierarchical.
William
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
@nophead: Using text is a major benefit of OpenSCAD because it can be pasted into emails and checked into source control. It is also fairly concise. I imagine the graphical representation of my typical designs would be an enormous tree.
All this is true; text is important.
@nophead: Do people really struggle much with syntax?
Yes, some people do really struggle with syntax. The Elm community calls this "the syntax cliff": "How many people fall off the syntax cliff and give up on a language or just quit programming entirely?". https://elm-lang.org/news/the-syntax-cliff
As a professional software engineer, I can memorize large amounts of programming language syntax. It's a skill not everyone has, just as a concert pianist can sight read music notation while playing the piano in real time with all 10 fingers (I can't do that).
I know that OpenSCAD is a "CAD" program, but I got into it in order to make art. In the 3D computer graphics business, the most popular interface for programming languages aimed at artists is "node and wire" syntax. For example, Blender has this.
I'm not claiming that node+wire is the "best" graphical syntax. However, here are the benefits:
- You don't have to memorize module names. You can select a module from
a hierarchical menu, or find a module using keyword search,
and then a node is created which calls the module. - You don't need to memorize module parameters.
The parameters are all laid out for you in the node. - You can continuously tweak numeric parameters using a slider.
You can use a colour picker to tweak a colour parameter.
For me, the ability to tweak module parameters using a slider and get real time feedback in the preview window is a game changer. It makes me much productive in certain tasks. For other people, not having to memorize syntax is the key feature.
There are ways to combine the benefits of text syntax with the benefits I listed of the node+wire syntax. A "projectional editor" represents the program in memory, not as a character string, but as a syntax tree. As you edit the program, the syntax tree is modified, and the syntax tree is "projected" onto the display, possibly as text, or possibly using a graphical syntax, such as node+wire, or like BlocksCad. There are lots of text-based IDEs for conventional programming languages, which use this approach to provide assistance to the user, such as tab-completion of identifiers, auto-fill-in of function argument lists, and even sliders for tweaking numeric parameters. The GlslEditor supports sliders for live editing of GLSL shader programs (GLSL has a C-like text syntax).
What I think would be really cool is a projectional editor that lets you switch back and forth between text syntax and graphical syntax. I'm looking around to see if someone has implemented this idea already.
The problem is it is too sparse because typically one line of code becomes
a box. So what happens to a design that is 350 lines?
OpenSCAD is a very small language, it can all be summarised on the one page
cheat sheet. I am surprised anybody would struggle to learn the syntax but
using it to create geometry is much more complex than the language. It
requires an ability to imagine a shape and then decompose it it cubes and
cylinders, etc, and be able to understand what manifold is and do high
school level trigonometry. I don't see how replacing the text with boxes
helps with any of that. Code completion if the editor achieves more or less
the same.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 14:35, Doug Moen doug@moens.org wrote:
@nophead: Using text is a major benefit of OpenSCAD because it can be
pasted into emails and checked into source control. It is also fairly
concise. I imagine the graphical representation of my typical designs would
be an enormous tree.
All this is true; text is important.
@nophead: Do people really struggle much with syntax?
Yes, some people do really struggle with syntax. The Elm community calls
this "the syntax cliff": "How many people fall off the syntax cliff and
give up on a language or just quit programming entirely?".
https://elm-lang.org/news/the-syntax-cliff
As a professional software engineer, I can memorize large amounts of
programming language syntax. It's a skill not everyone has, just as a
concert pianist can sight read music notation while playing the piano in
real time with all 10 fingers (I can't do that).
I know that OpenSCAD is a "CAD" program, but I got into it in order to
make art. In the 3D computer graphics business, the most popular interface
for programming languages aimed at artists is "node and wire" syntax. For
example, Blender has this.
I'm not claiming that node+wire is the "best" graphical syntax. However,
here are the benefits:
- You don't have to memorize module names. You can select a module from
a hierarchical menu, or find a module using keyword search,
and then a node is created which calls the module. - You don't need to memorize module parameters.
The parameters are all laid out for you in the node. - You can continuously tweak numeric parameters using a slider.
You can use a colour picker to tweak a colour parameter.
For me, the ability to tweak module parameters using a slider and get real
time feedback in the preview window is a game changer. It makes me much
productive in certain tasks. For other people, not having to memorize
syntax is the key feature.
There are ways to combine the benefits of text syntax with the benefits I
listed of the node+wire syntax. A "projectional editor" represents the
program in memory, not as a character string, but as a syntax tree. As you
edit the program, the syntax tree is modified, and the syntax tree is
"projected" onto the display, possibly as text, or possibly using a
graphical syntax, such as node+wire, or like BlocksCad. There are lots of
text-based IDEs for conventional programming languages, which use this
approach to provide assistance to the user, such as tab-completion of
identifiers, auto-fill-in of function argument lists, and even sliders for
tweaking numeric parameters. The GlslEditor supports sliders for live
editing of GLSL shader programs (GLSL has a C-like text syntax).
What I think would be really cool is a projectional editor that lets you
switch back and forth between text syntax and graphical syntax. I'm looking
around to see if someone has implemented this idea already.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
I watched the ClikScad video, and ClikScad is cute, but I cannot imagine
doing actual work with that UI. Has anyone designed a real part (not a
simple part, a REAL part) using technology like that? I would love to
see that.
Also, I find changing the parameter values and pressing F5 is no slower
than what was shown in the video.
I agree that ClikScad is simpler for a novice, but the down side is that
it could seduce them into thinking that they can get real work done,
only to hit the wall and have to go back and do it in the old fashioned
way, and then give up for the usual reasons
On 10/25/2019 9:50 AM, nop head wrote:
The problem is it is too sparse because typically one line of code
becomes a box. So what happens to a design that is 350 lines?
OpenSCAD is a very small language, it can all be summarised on the one
page cheat sheet. I am surprised anybody would struggle to learn the
syntax but using it to create geometry is much more complex than the
language. It requires an ability to imagine a shape and then decompose
it it cubes and cylinders, etc, and be able to understand what
manifold is and do high school level trigonometry. I don't see how
replacing the text with boxes helps with any of that. Code completion
if the editor achieves more or less the same.
@nophead: The problem is it is too sparse because typically one line of code becomes a box. So what happens to a design that is 350 lines?
If you have text and graphics and direct manipulation, then you can build a better user interface than what you can build using text and a keyboard alone. So it becomes a matter of user interface design.
2D layout can pack more information onto the screen then 1 dimensional text layout. A zooming user interface, plus hierarchical structure, can allow you to manage programs containing thousands of nodes.
Nuke (by Foundry) has an overview pane that shows the entire program zoomed out, and an edit pane where you are zoomed in to part of the program. A zooming user interface can display fewer details of a node when you are zoomed out (eg, only the module name) and more details when you are zoomed in (eg, the module name and the parameters).
Here's one way to represent hierarchy using node+wire. It would be better if each supernode had an optional title that is visible when zoomed out:
Not sure what your definition of "real" part is, but I've worked up some
projects using BlockSCAD:
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/design-into-3d-games-chinese-checkers/16056
https://community.carbide3d.com/t/design-into-3d-boxes-magazine-storage/16238
For the latter, I actually worked through posting screengrabs of bits of the
code as I worked, so maybe proves the concept?
Two features which help in BlockSCAD are the ability to collapse blocks and
their contents, and to create modules. If it just had robust support for the
customizer I'd be goodl.
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
nophead wrote
Yes I have seen your video but what would the screen look like for the
design I am working on at the moment?
It is 350 lines of code and it has taken me a couple of days.
I suspect that you are not the type of user I have in mind for ClikScad.
Indeed as far as I can see none of the recent Threads in this Fourm have
been posted by newbies looking for assistance.
My mind is very firmly focused on the person who would like to design the
occasional part for their 3D printer without needing to take the trouble and
the time to learn a 3D drawing product. I think OpenSCAD provides an
excellent platform for that.
/And I have to confess that I don't understand the purpose of a model as
complex as yours - though it looks very impressive. In my mind I would model
each of the parts separately so I could print them one at a time and I see
no problem doing that with ClikScad./
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
On 25.10.19 10:30, Robin2 wrote:
I don't know their names but I presume there are some
people who act as the "guardian" of the OpenSCAD project.
I guess that would then be something like 90% Marius and
10% myself ;-).
All I mean by "support" is a statement of encouragement
I can speak only for myself, but in my opinion it would
be nice to have some additional GUI support. There's
a lot of opportunities to do that, Customizer and the
latest auto-completion changes are a small step into
that direction. I personally prefer some integrated
solution though.
For example I'd love to have a GUI editable polygon
where you can do something like right click it and
edit via some 2D editor.
All that is supposed to be optional features that can
be ignored by people who don't need them.
ciao,
Torsten.
On 25.10.19 15:50, nop head wrote:
The problem is it is too sparse because typically one
line of code becomes a box. So what happens to a design
that is 350 lines?
Not necessarily. Maybe a more sensible comparison would
be ICEStudio https://github.com/FPGAwars/icestudio which
can create blocks for whole Verilog modules.
ciao,
Torsten.
I always create full assembled models because a) I have to fit the plastic
parts around other off the shelf parts and b) my framework creates a full
bill of materials and assembly instructions. This is totally necessary
because a lot of my designs have hundreds of parts. and dozens of sub
assemblies. I often spend more time modelling the vitamins than I do the
printed parts.
This design is a case for an Enviro+ environmental sensors board that plugs
into an RPI Zero at right angles. There is also a particle counter module
and a tiny fan. Getting all the parts into a small space was a challenge
and the only way to do it is to model it as an assembly. I use the
customiser to switch different bits on an off in the view so I can see
inside.
The case is is a library item that is fully parametric. I can specify
arbitrary additions and subtractions as children. I added the optional
waves to see if it reduces the tendency to warp but I also like the
aesthetic. It does make it more difficult to have holes in the sides
because you can't have wavy bridges, so all apertures have 45 degree
chamfered surrounds that build out to a straight edge that can be bridged.
This is the BOM it produced.
Parts list
MainTOTALS
Vitamins
1 1 Enviro+
1 1 Fan 17mm x 8mm
4 4 Heatfit insert M2
1 1 Micro SD card
4 4 Nut M2.5 x 2.2mm nyloc
1 1 PMS5003 particle detector
1 1 Pin header 20 x 2 right_angle
1 1 Raspberry Pi Zero
4 4 Screw M2 cap x 6mm
2 2 Screw M2.5 pan x 6.4mm
4 4 Screw M2.5 pan x 8mm
3 3 Screw M3 pan x 6mm
4 4 Washer M2 x 5mm x 0.3mm
4 4 Washer M2.5 x 5.9mm x 0.5mm
3 3 Washer M3 x 7mm x 0.5mm
38 38 Total vitamins count
3D printed parts
1 1 bulkhead.stl
1 1 enviro_plus_case.stl
1 1 enviro_plus_case_base.stl
1 1 fan_jacket.stl
3 3 foot.stl
7 7 Total 3D printed parts count
And here are the printed parts that I designed:
[image: bulkhead.png]
[image: enviro_plus_case.png]
[image: enviro_plus_case_base.png]
[image: fan_jacket.png]
[image: foot.png]
The is quite small for my projects. The last one has 637 vitamins, 62
printed parts and 12 routed parts in 28 assemblies.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 20:20, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
nophead wrote
Yes I have seen your video but what would the screen look like for the
design I am working on at the moment?
It is 350 lines of code and it has taken me a couple of days.
I suspect that you are not the type of user I have in mind for ClikScad.
Indeed as far as I can see none of the recent Threads in this Fourm have
been posted by newbies looking for assistance.
My mind is very firmly focused on the person who would like to design the
occasional part for their 3D printer without needing to take the trouble
and
the time to learn a 3D drawing product. I think OpenSCAD provides an
excellent platform for that.
/And I have to confess that I don't understand the purpose of a model as
complex as yours - though it looks very impressive. In my mind I would
model
each of the parts separately so I could print them one at a time and I see
no problem doing that with ClikScad./
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
Yes I appreciate one can use nesting to get around fact you can't get as
much on a screen as with text.
About 20 years ago I wrote a UML case tool that generated entire C++
applications from class diagrams and state charts. It enabled a C
programmer to write C++ without knowing the class syntax as all the code
fragments entered in the GUI were pretty much C but got woven into C++
classes and object could be instantiated with web forms generated from the
class. All the diagrams were nested so you could drill down and pop up
again.
Now that I am retired I prefer a simpler life and text seems simpler and
quicker to me for OpenSCAD.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 20:50, Torsten Paul Torsten.Paul@gmx.de wrote:
On 25.10.19 15:50, nop head wrote:
The problem is it is too sparse because typically one
line of code becomes a box. So what happens to a design
that is 350 lines?
Not necessarily. Maybe a more sensible comparison would
be ICEStudio https://github.com/FPGAwars/icestudio which
can create blocks for whole Verilog modules.
ciao,
Torsten.
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
nophead wrote
Now that I am retired I prefer a simpler life and text seems simpler and
quicker to me for OpenSCAD.
I fully appreciate that and it is no part of my agenda to get you (or anyone
else who likes using text) to change.
But I would be interested to know if you think a simple GUI would be useful
for newbies?
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Very hard for me to judge because I am such a long way from a newbie. I
think I started using OpenSCAD about 9 years ago and probably found it the
easiest language I have learnt, but I spent about 30 years as a
professional programmer and before that and was making my own computers
and writing my own assemblers and compilers when I was a schoolkid and then
did a degree in computer engineering.
I don't think anybody who is a programmer would struggle to learn it and
they are the people it is aimed at. I can see a GUI could help somebody who
is not a programmer get started but are there many of those that would want
to use OpenSCAD? Why wouldn't they use Fusion360 or FreeCAD if they liked a
GUI based CAD?
I also felt the same about VHDL verses schematic entry for FPGA design. Yes
the schematic can be easier for a hardware designer but it is much quicker
to type HDL and not worry about laying out a schematic.
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 22:13, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
nophead wrote
Now that I am retired I prefer a simpler life and text seems simpler and
quicker to me for OpenSCAD.
I fully appreciate that and it is no part of my agenda to get you (or
anyone
else who likes using text) to change.
But I would be interested to know if you think a simple GUI would be useful
for newbies?
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
On 25.10.19 23:52, nop head wrote:
I don't think anybody who is a programmer would
struggle to learn it and they are the people it
is aimed at.
But why would we need to put a big restriction on
that and tell everyone who does not want to be a
programmer to find something else?
Modern IDEs for programming languages have lots
of GUI support and that's great. OpenSCAD does
not have much of a GUI, but all those Dialogs are
created with a GUI designer. And in general I
would hate programming C++ via notepad.
I think OpenSCAD will never turn into a point and
click program like FreeCAD. But I don't see why
there should not be additional visualization and
editing possibilities.
somebody who is not a programmer get started but
are there many of those that would want to use
OpenSCAD?
Looking at the number of external tools doing
exactly that, I suppose it's not just one or two.
ciao,
Torsten.
On 10/25/2019 2:23 PM, Robin2 wrote:
But I would be interested to know if you think a simple GUI would be
useful for newbies?
The existence of BlocksCAD makes it clear that you're not the only one.
I'm entirely serious, though, when I ask: what do you want that
BlocksCAD doesn't do?
(And sometimes the answer is that you want to reinvent the wheel, just
because you like the exercise. That's OK, but it's best done as a
conscious decision.)
nophead wrote
I don't think anybody who is a programmer would struggle to learn it and
they are the people it is aimed at. I can see a GUI could help somebody
who
is not a programmer get started but are there many of those that would
want
to use OpenSCAD? Why wouldn't they use Fusion360 or FreeCAD if they liked
a
GUI based CAD?
That was precisely my question about the original proposal—OpenSCAD is
designed for programmers who can't (or don't want to) draw. If someone
wants to draw, there are much better systems for their needs. I have never
found graphical interfaces for programming languages very good for real
programs. (OK, Scratch was fun for teaching 5th graders to program little
programs, but I wouldn't want to use it for anything big.)
I also felt the same about VHDL verses schematic entry for FPGA design.
Yes
the schematic can be easier for a hardware designer but it is much quicker
to type HDL and not worry about laying out a schematic.
I don't think that any of the FPGA developers use schematic entry any
more—the FPGAs have gotten too big. Verilog seems to be the dominant tool,
with a lot of development work into higher-level RTL languages with Verilog
as the output.
gasstationwithoutpumps.wordpress.com
www.thingiverse.com/gasstationwithoutpumps/things
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
JordanBrown wrote
I'm entirely serious, though, when I ask: what do you want that
BlocksCAD doesn't do?
You are quite correct when you guess that my project started as an "I thnk I
can do that" exercise.
Personally I don't like the Blockscad system (it is the same as MIT
AppInventor) and I'm not sure why. Maybe it is that it is too fussy - the
snazzy graphics are getting in the way.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Tried this but got:
This site can’t be reached
localhost refused to connect.
Search Google for localhost 8085
ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
This site can’t be reached
localhost refused to connect.
Search Google for localhost 8085
ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED
What operating system and browser are you using?
Did you see any message in the Terminal window?
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
My apologies.
I am using Windows 10 (build 1703) with Google Chrome
No message or warning from Python (I started it by double-clicking on
clikscad.py since Python isn't in my path).
William
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
My apologies.
I am using Windows 10 (build 1703) with Google Chrome
No message or warning from Python (I started it by double-clicking on
clikscad.py since Python isn't in my path).
Absolutely nothing to apologise for.
You should see a message like this from Python
Bottle v0.12.7 server starting up (using WSGIRefServer())...
Listening on http://localhost:8085/
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
Yes, I see:
Bottle v0.12.7 server starting up (using WSGIRefServer())...
Listening on http://localhost:8085/
Hit Ctrl-C to quit.
and it turns out the problem was not including the trailing slash.
Running now --- will hopefully have useful feedback or results presently.
William
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
Running now --- will hopefully have useful feedback or results presently.
Thanks. I appreciate any feedback.
Having started using it myself I have made a few changes that allow me to
work with many fewer elements (and clicks) but it will probably be a week or
so before I feel confident to publish the newer version. The general
approach to creating things will be the same.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
It's an interesting alternative to Blockscad and so forth.
It's a bit awkward for me, since the variables all end up buried in main():
// Code created by ClikScad at 15:36:12 27 Oct 2019
module Sph_15722048553 (radius = $radius, segments = 32, ){
sphere( radius, $fn = segments);
};
module main (){
$diameter = 6;
$radius = $diameter/2;
Sph_15722048553();
};
main();
and won't interact with the customizer.
The things I'd need for it to work for me:
- variables at top of code so that they will work in the customizer
- ability to more easily modify variables --- ideally one would be able to
set them to function exactly as they would in the customizer, and interact
with them thus, though just providing a way to set the comments around them
so that they would work in the customizer in OpenSCAD and modifying them in
the customizer pane in OpenSCAD would be workable
Need a good term for this category of application/interface.
Thanks!
William
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
The very first thing I would suggest changing in this would be to
completely remove the "Apply / Cancel" buttons. Making changes
automatically apply will encourage experimentation by making the workflow
much more fluid and with much faster feedback
Em sáb, 12 de out de 2019 às 11:53, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com escreveu:
I've mentioned elsewhere on this Forum that I have been working on a simple
Python program that enables me to create OpenSCAD code without having to
type all the syntactical stuff.
I think the program has now advanced far enough to make it public for
anyone
that might be interested. I do appreciate that it will probably be more
attractive for the occasional OpenSCAD user as compared to those who are a
great deal more expert with OpenSCAD than I am.
http://forum.openscad.org/file/t2631/GetStartedBoth.png
This short Youtube video should give you a flavour of how ClikScad is used.
The video is intended for illustration rather than education.
https://youtu.be/q1Sd0Fuppuw
The Python code and the documentation can be downloaded from Google Drive.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1uBpil6TeYyaar_0l8Zm_17UvE-EOTza7?usp=sharing
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
You don't really need to do anything special to make the customiser work
with a typical model. It just takes all the global variables before the
first function or module and makes them editable. You can add comments to
describe them and specify ranges, etc, and also put a stop marker to for
variables that you don't want to edit.
All of my projects include some constants at the top so it sort of works by
default.
On Sun, 27 Oct 2019 at 21:51, Robin2 robin@nbleopard.com wrote:
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
It's an interesting alternative to Blockscad and so forth.
It's a bit awkward for me, since the variables all end up buried in
main():
Thanks for your comments.
As I mentioned elsewhere I don't see the typical ClikScad user as someone
who would be advanced enough to build the customizer into his models.
However I would very much appreciate it if you would be kind enough to
hand-edit the ClikScad code you posted so that it satisfies the needs of
the
customizer. That way I will have an example I can think about. Maybe it is
a
feature that would not be difficult to add.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list
Discuss@lists.openscad.org
http://lists.openscad.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss_lists.openscad.org
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
It's an interesting alternative to Blockscad and so forth.
It's a bit awkward for me, since the variables all end up buried in
main():
Thanks for your comments.
As I mentioned elsewhere I don't see the typical ClikScad user as someone
who would be advanced enough to build the customizer into his models.
However I would very much appreciate it if you would be kind enough to
hand-edit the ClikScad code you posted so that it satisfies the needs of the
customizer. That way I will have an example I can think about. Maybe it is a
feature that would not be difficult to add.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
$diameter = 6;
$radius = $diameter/2;
$height = 3;
$width = 4;
$depth = 5;
Why all the $ variables? That makes them dynamically
scoped which should be only used for cases where that
is really needed.
ciao,
Torsten.
Sure!
// Code created by ClikScad at 18:57:14 27 Oct 2019
//see https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/OpenSCAD_User_Manual/Customizer
$diameter = 6;
$radius = $diameter/2;
$height = 3;
$width = 4;
$depth = 5;
module Sph_15722048553 (radius = $radius, segments = 32, ){
sphere( radius, $fn = segments);
};
module Cub_15722169053 (xlength = $width, ylength = $depth, zlength =
$height, center = false, ){
cube( [xlength, ylength, zlength], center = center);
};
module Trns_15722169779 (xMove = $radius+$width, yMove = 0, zMove = 0, ){
translate( [ xMove, yMove, zMove]){
Cub_15722169053();
};
};
module main (){
Sph_15722048553();
Trns_15722169779();
};
main();
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/
OpenSCAD mailing list-2 wrote
Sure!
Many thanks. I will consider that.
But just thinking about things overnight, if someone had ClikScad why would
they need to use the Optimizer. They could just as easily change the values
in MAIN in ClikScad - easier, maybe.
...R
--
Sent from: http://forum.openscad.org/