part wb <-> part design wb

amka · Post by **amka** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:20 pm

Hi,

I wonder what could be an expert advice about which wb to use to make parts.

It seems to me that part design is ok. What could be a reason to take part wb ?

Thanks,

amka

Post by **openBrain** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:50 pm

Hi,

I believe it's an hazardous topic here. Kind of topics that can reach the Godwin point.

I guess that for most "CAD users", PartDesign corresponds to the standard workflow (I'm one of these). Draw constrained sketches then pad/pocket/sweep/loft/... them, and do it again and again...

From my PoV, Part is probably used by users approaching modeling differently with a less technical and a more shaping regard.
Tentatively, PartDesign is a "how will my part be built" approach while Part is a "what does my part look like" one.

But even for a PartDesign user, Part WB owes some very useful tools, eg. "Check geometry".
Et voila.

Keep in mind all that is guesses and I can't pretend exposing an absolute truth.

Syres · Post by **Syres** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 6:39 pm

openBrain wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:50 pm From my PoV, Part is probably used by users approaching modeling differently with a less technical and a more shaping regard.

That's a proper hornet's nest comment, it is purely a personal preference and what you're comfortable with and nothing more, nothing less.

Post by **chrisb** » Mon Feb 25, 2019 7:20 pm

I can second openBrain. From what I see in the forum it is rather a matter of taste. So my advice is to get familiar with both, invest these couple of days and see what is best for you. Knowing some basics from the workbench which you will not use further does no harm at all.

bejant · Post by **bejant** » Tue Feb 26, 2019 5:04 pm

amka wrote: ↑Mon Feb 25, 2019 5:20 pm What could be a reason to take part wb ?

One reason might be that you want to model something that isn't a solid.

NormandC · Post by **NormandC** » Wed Feb 27, 2019 5:35 am

Some users are not comfortable with the strict (even rigid) rules within the PartDesign workbench. Also, there are tools missing in PartDesign at this time, like mirroring a whole Body. So you need to use Part Mirror.

rstech · Post by **rstech** » Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:01 am

A suggestion would be to fuse both workbenches into one "Best of Both Worlds" workbench?

HarryGeier · Post by **HarryGeier** » Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:57 am

PART and PART DESIGN use different underlying structures. Thus a combined WB cannot be. But if used carefully PART can support PART DESIGN as well as PART DESIGN can extend a PART Object.

Back to the original Question, which one for what.

Experienced PART users will probably say.. you do not need PART DESIGN at all. I have lately done a process development for preparing SVG imported shapes to be used on a special machine. This was not possible in PART DESIGN , so i choose DRAFT & PART for it. Mostly i design more or less complicated technical parts. Here PART , for me is to tedious in the way it works and especially in the way elements are combined, thus PART DESIGN is my normal entry point. I attach PART when it makes sense for me..like reworking STL´s , sometimes for fillets, sometimes for mirroring whole objects etc.

triplus · Post by **triplus** » Thu Feb 28, 2019 5:54 pm

Hi @amka

The names are similar, and that i guess can confuse new adopters a bit. In addition inserting a Part feature, available in all workbenches. What's up with that? I know.

As for the short answer. I would suggest for you to try out both, or should i say all three?

From default set of workbenches. Draft workbench is good, when dealing with basic geometry too. And as you can see, there is much more of FreeCAD available today, beyond Part Design and Part workbenches:

https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic.php?&t=32381

part wb <-> part design wb

part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb

Re: part wb <-> part design wb