Help editing previously completed project (sketch/pad/pocket)

[WhiteWolf_Kevin]

Good evening.

Please bear with me as I'm still very new to CAD and don't have all of my terminology down.

System Info
============
OS: Windows 10 Version 2009
Word size of OS: 64-bit
Word size of FreeCAD: 64-bit
Version: 0.19.24267 +148 (Git)
Build type: Release
Branch: Branch_0.19.4
Hash: 476ecf091941bead59b14e44afa6064d5a66afa3
Python version: 3.8.6+
Qt version: 5.15.2
Coin version: 4.0.1
OCC version: 7.5.3
Locale: English/United States (en_US)
============

I have the attached project (Keypad_Box.FCStd) that I would like to make a change to. Specifically, I would like to add a lip around "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout". To do that, I would think I would need to take the following steps:

1. Create a new sketch named "Sketch_Keypad_Mount" on the XZ plane that references "Sketch_Keypad_Cutout", via external geometry, that is the desired width and height (in this case, the new sketch would be 3.5mm longer in both height and width relative to "Sketch_Keypad_Cutout") (See Keypad_Box_With_New_Sketch.FCStd)
2. Pad the newly created sketch (named "Pad_Keypad_Mount") to the desired thickness (in this case, 6.5mm reversed) (See "Keypad_Box_With_New_Pad.FCStd")
3. Apply "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout" after the newly created sketch

The last step in that process is where I'm running into issues. I've tried moving "Pad_Keypad_Mount" to before "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout" and I've tried moving "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout" to after "Pad_Keypad_Mount" with no success. The method I was using to try moving them was via right-click-> "Move object after other object".

So, can I please get some guidance on the proper way to edit a project? Are my first two steps correct or should I be doing something completely different?

My apologies if the above doesn't make sense or if I'm screwing up terminology. Please let me know if I can clarify anything or if you have any questions.

Thank you in advance!

[NewJoker]

It's rarely a good idea to move features in the tree. Especially when they are separated like that and have some dependencies.

Is that what you want to achieve ? I would just recreate the pocket.

Keypad_Box_With_New_Pad_mod.FCStd

(198.39 KiB) Downloaded 10 times

[WhiteWolf_Kevin]

It's rarely a good idea to move features in the tree. Especially when they are separated like that and have some dependencies.

Is that what you want to achieve ? I would just recreate the pocket.


Keypad_Box_With_New_Pad_mod.FCStd

**EDIT**
======
My apologies, I just saw that you included a modified file. I see now that you just added a new sketch and a new pocket without removing the old pocket. Is it possible to remove the old one without breaking what I described below? Just for the sake of keeping the attribute tree clean. Thanks!
======

I'd be perfectly fine with recreating the pocket as opposed to moving features. However, when I try deleting the current pocket "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout", it affects "Pad_LED_Mount" for some reason unknown to me, and the pocket isn't actually removed: See attached file "Keypad_Box_With_Deleted_Pocket.FCStd"

In that file, I deleted "Pocket_Keypad_Cutout", the pocket isn't actually removed as far as I can tell, and "Pad_Display_Mount" now has the error: "Pad: Result has multiple solids. This is not supported at this time."

[Bance]

Creating a feature earlier in the tree, is simply achieved by setting the Tip to the feature preceding the desired entry point in the model history.

Create the new feature, then reset the Tip to the last feature.

Your desire for a clean tree would be better focused towards a clean model, placing DP's on generated geometry is as bad as placing the sketches directly on faces, and they are often superfluous since sketches can be attached just as easily.

When creating Standoff's, think of using a pad, followed by a hole feature, the same sketch can be used for both since the positioning is the same and the hole feature simply uses the circles center point for reference.

Also consider using pattern features instead of more complex sketches (a single circle = less constraints overall.)

[Shalmeneser]

DP = DatumPlane

You cannot move your last Pad upward in the construction tree because its sketch is using edges from the before last operation (circular dependancy).

As said before, you must attach on sketch instead of solid.

[WhiteWolf_Kevin]

Creating a feature earlier in the tree, is simply achieved by setting the Tip to the feature preceding the desired entry point in the model history.

Create the new feature, then reset the Tip to the last feature.

Your desire for a clean tree would be better focused towards a clean model, placing DP's on generated geometry is as bad as placing the sketches directly on faces, and they are often superfluous since sketches can be attached just as easily.

When creating Standoff's, think of using a pad, followed by a hole feature, the same sketch can be used for both since the positioning is the same and the hole feature simply uses the circles center point for reference.

Also consider using pattern features instead of more complex sketches (a single circle = less constraints overall.)

DP = DatumPlane

You cannot move your last Pad upward in the construction tree because its sketch is using edges from the before last operation (circular dependancy).

As said before, you must attach on sketch instead of solid.

Okay, I think I'm following what you're both saying with regards to datum planes and generated geometry. That part makes sense now. Thanks!

@Bance, what are you referring to when you say to use "pattern features instead of more complex sketches"? Do you happen to have a file or screenshot available with an example?

Thanks!

[drmacro]

...
@Bance, what are you referring to when you say to use "pattern features instead of more complex sketches"? Do you happen to have a file or screenshot available with an example?

Thanks!

He is probably referring to using the pattern tools like linear pattern, polar pattern, etc.

They are preferable to making sketches with lots of repeating patterns.

And, anytime there is symmetry, the sketch should use the lowest denominator, then use pattern tools after the Pad/Pocket/etc. operation.

As for simple sketches...

chrisb said: "Concerning usage of simple sketches, there was the 7-7-7 rule from an old Pro/E teacher, saying a sketch should either have 7 elements or have 7 dimensions or take 7 minutes to build."

This is a good rule...

[Bance]

Like this.....

[WhiteWolf_Kevin]

Okay. So I started from scratch and remade my design. I'm not quite sure I understand using the pattern tools as I couldn't figure out a reliable way to space the standoffs properly using MultiTransform. Is using sketches for all of the standoffs bad practice?

I moved on to trying to use the hole feature for the screw holes. However, I'm having a problem now where the screw holes go through the face of the design (see attached). I believe this is because all of my sketches are on the XZ plane and I am applying thickness to the main frame inward. Is there a way to get around that or should I change up my design approach? Ultimately I want the screw holes for the standoffs to go until it hits the inside of the box frame (6.5mm for the display standoffs and 4.25mm for the RFID standoffs in the attached file). I could create a sketch off of the face of the standoffs, but I believe that @Bance said that it was bad to place sketches directly on faces.

Thanks for the guidance all!

[freedman]

There are many different ways to build this model, there are approaches using spread sheets, standard planes, sketch on face, equations. Since all the features are normal to the XZ plane you can use that to base all your work. You can offset your sketches and perform everything required. In the included file, notice the sketch Attachment offset ( Z direction) for Pocket001,Pad001,Pocket002; All the sketches can be based on the XZ plane but they are offset to do their function.