Push Pull Tool creates Generic Solid

[bjoerka]

I haven´t noticed this before, but when i use the Push Pull Tool with the second mode (move face) the result is no longer a Solid Addition or Substraction.

The result is always a Generic Solid even when working on a simple cube.

Working with the first mode alsways returns a Solid Addition or Substraction.

Is that the correct behauviour?

[line-weight]

This has always been the case, I think.

[Christiaan]

I think this might be fixed in v2022?

[bjoerka]

not within SP4

[Jeff Prince]

@bjoerka That's a keen observation.  The behavior is the same in both 2022 & 2021.  The 1st and 3rd modes preserve the model edit history, but the 2nd mode does not.  Seems like an undesired characteristic to me, especially if you do not know this will happen and lose your edit history as a result 😞

Thanks for making this post.

[Jeff Prince]

@bjoerka That's a keen observation.  The behavior is the same in both 2022 & 2021.  The 1st and 3rd modes preserve the model edit history, but the 2nd mode does not.  Seems like an undesired characteristic to me, especially if you do not know this will happen and lose your edit history as a result 😞

Thanks for making this post.

[zoomer]

Yes, that has always been like this.

 

As I do not really like Solid Additions/Subtractions keeping their history,

I always use 2nd mode only.

There are only a few situations where 2nd mode fails and it will usually

work anyway with 1st mode. But I immediately convert the result to

a generic solid afterwards.

 

For those who prefer complex Solids, 1st mode is king.

[bjoerka]

but keeping their history is one of the main benefits that vectorworks is capable of compared to other software packages.

i have several detailed models that have a final status and are built or 3d printed as a final product, but i am still able to look into the history of modeling and make small changes.

that´s perfect.

if a atool, that is not intended to do as, changes the typology from an editable to an non editable geometry it is a kind of destructive and a bit of worthless in the whole process if you don´t recognize that behauviour...

imho.

[Tom W.]

The way I understand it the first mode you are performing an extrude operation on the face of an object + either adding or subtracting the solid so it makes sense that it becomes a solid addition or subtraction in the process. The second mode you are moving a face, a bit like Deform or Taper Face operations, + that is why it becomes a generic solid the same way it does with those operations. Because in many circumstances the two modes are interchangeable + can be used to achieve the exact same results the distinction isn't always clear.

[zoomer]

6 minutes ago, Tom W. said:

The second mode you are moving a face, a bit like Deform or Taper Face operations, + that is why it becomes a generic solid the same way it does with those operations.

 

And usually I just want to adjust a Face and do not want the ballast of a history as I do not want

to bring the Face back to where it was before anymore. And if I would, i would just PushPull it

to a new position.

 

On the other hand I care about File Size, do often Purge to eliminate the waste that comes over

time and also had problems with too complex histories. Usually I do not need that.

 

I grew up with a destructive Modeler and have no problems with these

(Microstation and now Bricscad, or any 3D Mesh Appe, as these usually offer the Tools to

comfortable deal with deconstructive Modeling, in a way that is easier to edit again instead

of going back in a history and changing parameters)

 

OK, I do not convert all my Extrudes to Generic Solids.

But I could cry when I always get the non hide-able warning "Once converted to a Generic Solid

you may not be able to change it again" - of course I can !

 

 

VW offers both ways for the same action. Mode 1+2.

I always care to use Mode 2 only, others should care to just run PPT in 1st Mode.

[Tom W.]

I also convert most objects to Generic Solids as soon as I've made them. I have the command in my Object Context (right click) menu to get to it easier + I agree be great to  be able to dismiss the 'Once Converted...' warning permanently!

[bjoerka]

all said is right and wrong. just related to the pov of the one who models something that he needs to do.

just one example from my pov.

i designed a case for an ipad several years ago. the client asked to produce more of these, but the ipad specs changed during the years.

as i kept a "Non Generic Solid" version of that case, i am still able to go back in every step, make minor adjustments and come back to merely the same case that the client already knows.

so far.

 

as an example.

draw a cube, add a chamfer, push pull one face with method one. double click that geometry and you are going back, having an extruded volume and a second (first drawn) chamfered cube which you still are able to edit. either in the dimension for the chamfer or the original 2d shape.

do exactly the same way with the second method of the pushpulltool and you are stuck.

the case is - you have not deformed the geometry as if you do a bulge or twist, which i understand, creates a generic solid, ´cause you might be leaving the planar-face-world. but here also - it might be possible to write the history of what you have done somewhere in a record of that geometry...

 

the devil is a squirrel (we say that in german when things will never come to an end .-))

 

the ipad case .-)

 

Edited July 7, 2022 by bjoerka

[zoomer]

That's fair enough.

 

And also why many destructive Modelers like Modo also offer an additional

non-destructive node based modeling meanwhile.

 

I am not sure if there are more important differences between first and second

mode of the PPT.

If yes, do you want M1 and M2 to produce history based geometry ?

 

Maybe VW could offer another UIOP Mode for History vs Generic and keep

M1 - M3 just as a PPT feature option selector (?)

[Tom W.]

18 minutes ago, bjoerka said:

draw a cube, add a chamfer, push pull one face with method one. double click that geometry and you are going back, having an extruded volume and a second (first drawn) chamfered cube which you still are able to edit. either in the dimension for the chamfer or the original 2d shape.

do exactly the same way with the second method of the pushpulltool and you are stuck.

 

Absolutely. But in this case you have the choice of performing the same operation in either mode of the tool: the first if you want to retain the history + the second if you don't. But the 2nd mode should be used when you want to move a face, not extrude it perpendicularly

 

e.g.

 

   

[line-weight]

I think it's poor design that there is the inconsistency between the modes. It's the kind of thing that causes confusion because you notice that sometimes your solids have an edit history and sometimes they don't. I wasn't aware of the different behaviour until I saw it mentioned on the forums here some time ago.

 

It would be better if all 3 modes behaved the same, and there was a "preserve history" tickbox in the top bar beside them that you could choose to have active or not, depending on your preferences.

 

For me, I don't often use the solids history in VW because I don't feel it is implemented well - it's quite hard to keep track of what you are editing at any stage. When some improvements were made to it a couple of years ago, I remember there was one of those misleading promo videos that made it look like editing the history was going to become more user-friendly but it was just fiction.

 

One of the reasons I don't use the history much, is that unless you are very careful it's easy to destroy it all by unthinkingly using mode 2. Why is there the (already mentioned as annoying) warning message when you do "convert to generic solid" (in which case you have almost certainly already decided that you want to lose history) but no warning when you use push-pull mode 2 (when you might not want to lose it)!

[Tom W.]

But as mentioned earlier the same applies to Deform + Taper Face operations: do you think these should have object history as well?

 

I agree the difference between the two Push/Pull modes (in this respect) should be clearer 

 

15 minutes ago, line-weight said:

It would be better if all 3 modes behaved the same, and there was a "preserve history" tickbox in the top bar beside them that you could choose to have active or not, depending on your preferences.

 

This is a good idea generally: to have a quick pref where you could toggle automatic history preservation on + off across the board. Would save me having to manually convert to generic solids hundreds of times a day

[Christiaan]

1 hour ago, line-weight said:

I think it's poor design that there is the inconsistency between the modes. It's the kind of thing that causes confusion because you notice that sometimes your solids have an edit history and sometimes they don't.

Agreed. I think this is probably why I thought it was "fixed"