Hi nikkipollard, hi Torfinn,
nikkipollard: I am getting the same result. I had a similar problem when using the constraint method of creating parametric symbols.
I had to explode the part to see the correct results in the drafting palette.One of the main reasons I switched to ppm.
I tried adding a reference point but that didn't help.
You wrote while I responded to the previous posts.
I think it could be due to the IF statements in the ppm? Maybe you can look at this part in the script again and improve?
Torfinn: Like i try'd to say last nigth
Inside the ppm he make a wedge, (a triangle with thickness), and that wedge is just a tiny bit to small or not moved to correct Place.
If he add 2 mm extra on the Parametervalues heigth,length, width and move the wedge 1 mm in needed directions the cut will be perfect and then there will be no "lines" that show in renders.
There is nothing wrong with what we see, we do see how the profile actually looks like, in viewport or draft,but there is a tiny little part that not get subtracted, fix that as and the problem is solved.
In this ppm the cut is 45 degree, maybe add an option for cut in different angle's ??
And that Surkål can do very easy him self, change the wedge or use a box.
Nice that you have answered again.
You could change the ppm. But remember that the calculations of the angles (tangens) then give a wrong result.
Here then would have to be entered an intermediate step?
I have to incorporate your suggestion into the script and test it.
Surkål, think about it, what is the rest of you profile's, the main part, so lift the profiles up and use them for the subtract part
Btw: Unfortunately, Google Translater can not translate "Surkål". "norwegian" sagt Google Translater, no more.
Unfortunately, I do not know what you mean. The best would be an example.
It annoys me that the time saved with ppm's is lost again by the changes in the parts in TC.
If there is a solution or solutions, please post them. I would be very happy.
Thanks and best regards to you