top | item 47086853

(no title)

bsza | 9 days ago

Your ball looks well parametrized to me, what kind of editing are you missing from it? Unless you want to change the shape of the locking mechanism altogether, which I think would be a chore in any format.

discuss

order

willis936|9 days ago

Yeah the lock is what needs iterating. It was always marginal and took several rounds of prototyping to even get to a printable state. I'd like to experiment with something like a keyed screw.

The issue with this scad file is that I built the geometry up with no functions. I tried and failed to get them working so I just pushed through, so now it is mind melting to try to refactor it. I'm hoping to one day melt a mechanical mind to get it done. Until then, it's a fun challenge prompt for these models.

beachy|9 days ago

Openscad models are a bit like complex regexps, write only artifacts that do the job at the time but are regarded with trepidation afterwards.

lq9AJ8yrfs|9 days ago

there are a lot of "do what I mean" type papercuts in openscad. BOSL2 is a library that, for me at least, takes away enough of them to make a rewarding experience. still find myself brute forcing which axis to translate or rotate things the way i want.

concur otherwise that openscad is parameter friendly. the lightbulb moment for me was when i finally grasped its functional grammar and leaned into it, esp recursion instead of algebraic solutions. that should probably be the subject of a tutorial or several.