shiftlooki.blogg.se - Qblocker blender

QBLOCKER BLENDER SOFTWARE
QBLOCKER BLENDER SERIES

So a workflow like: add vertex, key XY 1.4,2.6,3.0 or T-Snap existing vertex and key DC 1.2,1.4,0, or key DR 1.3,45. Ability to input an absolute, or T-snap + delta input to place a new single vertex.So a workflow like: select a vertex, extrude, key XY = 1.4,2.6,3.0 this extrudes the vertex to the absolute coordinate given. Ability to use an absolute 3 axis location.This gives us the ability to use another vertex on the model as a starting point for a delta offset. So a workflow like: select a vertex, T-snap any existing vertex, accept this location, or key a delta offset like DC 1.2,1.4,0 or DR 1.3,45. Ability to use a “Tentative Snap” (T-snap) to an existing vertex.Or key DR 1.3,45 extrudes the vertex 1.3 at an angle of 45 degrees relative to view positive X (3 O’clock). So a workflow like: select vertex, extrude, key DC 1.2,1.4,0 extrudes the vertex 1.2 in X, 1.4 in Y and 0 in Z.

QBLOCKER BLENDER SERIES

Ability to extrude a vertex, or series of vertices, by a delta coordinate from its position, or by a delta length and rotational angle relative to the view plane.

AutoCAD in 1987, briefly - hated it!Īs a design engineer I can see many things I would like in Blender to make drawing mechanical parts better (CAD Functions), along with the suggestions already made here, might I also add:

Started in drawing office 1978, started with CAD 1981.ĬAD Packages used: Intergraph IGDS, Bentley MicroSystems, Matra DataVision (Euclid), SolidWorks, IBM Catia, FreeCAD. Qualified Engineering Drawing Teacher, Mechanical Engineer, Mechanical Designer, IT Developer.

QBLOCKER BLENDER SOFTWARE

One that isn’t missing from any other rendering software I’ve used in the last 20 years. It is an achingly absent feature of Blender. I want a way to quickly place, rotate, and scale an object with enough precision that it is quick easy to make renderings of mechanical components and architecture, for instance, without a lot of headache. Because that would mean I could fully ditch Autodesk products, but that’s not what I’m really looking for here. Believe me I would love for BREPs to be natively supported. This is off the topic of what I’m saying Blender is badly in need of. They mathematically calculate the volume and represent it using nurbs surfaces which are then used to generate mesh surfaces for display, plotting, and renderin BREPs don’t care about these limitations. Mesh booleans usually require modifying the resulting mesh by hand to prepare the surface for later operations like bevels. For instance mesh booleans are non-associative, and have often fail when calculating co-planer faces or when multiple vertices sit in the same location. BREPs are nondestructive representations of volumes defined by operations like projections, extrusions, sweeps, booleans, holes, and bevels which can be used to create or modify a solid volume, without a lot of the limitations you see on polygonal operations.

In other words there is not much more to these geometry types than what Blender is already capable of. Nurbs are just surfaces which can be trimmed, extruded, shaped in a freeform manner, etc. Trimmed nurbs surfaces are used as an intermediate step to create a mesh for BREPs, but whenever you describe nurbs, you seem to be referring to solid modelling or BREP.