Three software-bugs in CadMachineAvoidGroups

Three software-bugs in CadMachineAvoidGroups

maurizio_manzi
Advocate Advocate
87 Views
2 Replies
Message 1 of 3

Three software-bugs in CadMachineAvoidGroups

maurizio_manzi
Advocate
Advocate

Hello,
Three software-bugs in the API relating CadMachineAvoidGroups.
The bugs are documented in the python script itself.
Use the atached template "AdaptivTemplate" and import it in your "local" fusion 
LocalLibraryLocation.

FIRST BUG: defaultGroup(1) don't change his mode from "maching" to "avoid".
SECOND BUG: If you activate model-option (useModelOption = True in the script), then the before that created MachineAvoidGroup with the "faces" dissapear again!
THIRD BUG: If you now recreate again the MachineAvoidGroup with the "faces", than you have both (model + MachineAvoidGroup with the "faces"), but then is now machineAvoidGroups.defaultGroup(1) = None !!!


Please see attached zip with script and template

Best regards
Maurizio Manzi

88 Views
2 Replies
Replies (2)
Message 2 of 3

boopathi.sivakumar
Autodesk
Autodesk

Hi @maurizio_manzi 

For the first you didn't apply the changes to the group by adding the third would solve the issue

ModelGroup = machineAvoidGroups.defaultGroup(1)
ModelGroup.machineMode = adsk.cam.MachiningMode.Avoid_MachiningMode
surfaceGroupsParam.applyMachineAvoidGroups(machineAvoidGroups) ## This is missing

 
I don't think the second and third are bug I guess this is by desgin if you try to do the excat samething in the UI the moment when you enable model the model will be removed from the machine and avoid group since you explicitly overriding models into the operations 

boopathisivakumar_0-1757573322950.png

Like what is hapenning in the UI the same will be hapenning in the API as well the moment when you have model enabled there won't be default model group in the Avoid machine surface so it returns null when you try to access it. But like in the UI you can create a new group and assign the avoid surface

 


Boopathi Sivakumar
Senior Technology Consultant

0 Likes
Message 3 of 3

maurizio_manzi
Advocate
Advocate

Hello,
Thank you.
I agree with the first point. That was my mistake.
But in my opinion, the second and third points are indeed bugs, because I don’t see why I shouldn’t be allowed to enable both. If the “error” also happens in the UI (without the API), then both are faulty.

Best regards
Maurizio

0 Likes