I like the idea, but I dislike your suggestion.
_IF_ we are going to introduce such new primitive it should be in a kind that it can be used at many places.
This can only be used if there is a round hole with a closed stop at the end. I can not think of any more specific. But we need something general here.
If I think this line nearly to it's end (it is not the end), then the only really necessary information is how deep a stud will go into this part. For this purpose we need only a 4-4edge maybe named "studdepth" and that needs to be placed at the coordinates that the stud can reach at maximum inside a hole.
As I told before, this is still not the end.
What about all the parts that do have square underside studs - we need a new primitive.
What about all the parts with round stud connection hold from the side - we need a new primitive.
What about ...... (there are many more).
Again, I like the idea in global and just forcing a scheme for the towball (or whatever name we agree on) connections.
But that is an easy task.
The stud is one of the most global usable connections and therefore needs a very good plan for introducing.
Until today we do not have connectivity rules and I think that is a good point. The connectivity can be done outside of the parts. With all benefits and disadvantages. See for this SR3D and I was told that it works great. Why not simply use that?
If this part comes to the pt i will for sure not certify. As i know there are other opionion than mine i will also not hold it. But I have strong doubts that this file will do the job for what it is designed.
_IF_ we are going to introduce such new primitive it should be in a kind that it can be used at many places.
This can only be used if there is a round hole with a closed stop at the end. I can not think of any more specific. But we need something general here.
If I think this line nearly to it's end (it is not the end), then the only really necessary information is how deep a stud will go into this part. For this purpose we need only a 4-4edge maybe named "studdepth" and that needs to be placed at the coordinates that the stud can reach at maximum inside a hole.
As I told before, this is still not the end.
What about all the parts that do have square underside studs - we need a new primitive.
What about all the parts with round stud connection hold from the side - we need a new primitive.
What about ...... (there are many more).
Again, I like the idea in global and just forcing a scheme for the towball (or whatever name we agree on) connections.
But that is an easy task.
The stud is one of the most global usable connections and therefore needs a very good plan for introducing.
Until today we do not have connectivity rules and I think that is a good point. The connectivity can be done outside of the parts. With all benefits and disadvantages. See for this SR3D and I was told that it works great. Why not simply use that?
If this part comes to the pt i will for sure not certify. As i know there are other opionion than mine i will also not hold it. But I have strong doubts that this file will do the job for what it is designed.