View Issue Details

IDProjectCategoryView StatusLast Update
0002863PartDesignFeaturepublic2021-02-06 06:43
Reporternormandc Assigned Toickby  
Status assignedResolutionopen 
Product Version0.17 
Target Version0.20 
Summary0002863: Add Mirror body feature to PartDesign
DescriptionThe current ParDesign Mirrored feature only mirrors selected feature(s).

A new mirror feature that mirrors the whole body would be really useful in the design of symmetrical parts. At this time the Part Mirror tool can be used but it forces the user to leave the PartDesign workflow, requires an additional step of creating a Part Fuse, then having to import the resulting Fusion as a base feature inside a new Body.

The new "Mirror body" feature should automatically fuse the mirror copy to the main body to follow the single body rule.
Additional InformationI think this tool should not require a selection before launching it. It would simply take the active body, mirror it and fuse the copy, then add a "Mirror body" feature to the Body tree.

Maybe the existing "Mirrored" feature will need to be renamed to avoid confusion...
TagsNo tags attached.
FreeCAD Information


related to 0002501 closedickby Mirror feature don't accept datum plane 
related to 0002235 closedkkremitzki Cannot mirror mirrored object (within Part Design) 
related to 0003006 closedkkremitzki PartDesign Mirrored features fail due to unexpected inversion 
related to 0003067 new Add Mirror body tool to PartDesign 



2017-01-16 09:58

developer   ~0007819

I thought of extending the current transformation tools like mirror a bit. By default they would use the whole body instead to the selected features as currently. Than the feature list in the task dialog would be called "Restrict to following features:".

Would you think this is intuitive, or is this too much functionality in the tools and would become confusing? I personally like having one tool for a operation and this tool to support specific subtasks, and "mirror" I would use for both, mirroring the whole part as well as individual features.


2017-01-16 16:48

reporter   ~0007820

Separate "mirror feature(s)" and "mirror body" would be OK, though increasing the number of menu and toolbar items is a drawback.

If it becomes integrated, I think it should be radio buttons for "Body" and "Feature(s)", the later followed by a list of the features. This way, it is spelled out what either does and it stays in line with how a user would likely describe the intention: either "I want to mirror the body", or "I want to mirror a feature (or features)", rather NOT "I want to restrict mirroring to the following feature(s)".


2017-05-02 21:31

administrator   ~0008860

I asked Abdullah if
can some of the mirroring code that you've implemented recently be leveraged against this feature (0002863) and also 0002235 ?

Abdullah's response:
Not really. The mirror code I wrote is for sketcher geometry. This is the mirror of a part design feature. Has to be tackled in the Part Design WB.


2017-06-02 13:55

manager   ~0009255

Maybe also another related "feature option" (in addition to the ticket): Do a separate body that is symmetric to the original body and depending on it, so that the second can have some extra features but still change with the original one. In this case an automatic fuse is not desired, as they are intended as separate parts of an assembly.


2017-06-02 14:03

administrator   ~0009256

Last edited: 2017-06-02 14:03

@Abdullah shall I open a new Feature Request then ?


2017-06-02 17:28

manager   ~0009259


I was weighting it, it that it is different, but unsure because it may be implemented together. Some hours later and after some sunshine I would say that: yes, please, open a new feature request and link it to this one as related. Thanks for keeping an eye ;)


2017-06-02 17:41

administrator   ~0009267

Created and linked 0003067


2017-06-17 23:33

manager   ~0009430

Setting target version to 0.17 to make it appear in the roadmap, if it proves impractical we can always bump the target version.


2018-11-17 20:25

manager   ~0012208

@ickby if you do not expect to return to PartDesign workbench development for the foreseeable future, wouldn't it be relevant to unassign this report and other PartDesign reports that were assigned to you?


2022-03-03 13:55

administrator   ~0016513

This ticket has been migrated to GitHub as issue 5678.

Issue History

Date Modified Username Field Change
2017-01-15 21:08 normandc New Issue
2017-01-16 09:42 Kunda1 Relationship added related to 0002235
2017-01-16 09:55 ickby Assigned To => ickby
2017-01-16 09:55 ickby Status new => assigned
2017-01-16 09:58 ickby Note Added: 0007819
2017-01-16 16:48 thor Note Added: 0007820
2017-03-02 18:17 Kunda1 Relationship added related to 0002501
2017-05-02 11:29 Kunda1 Relationship added related to 0003006
2017-05-02 21:31 Kunda1 Note Added: 0008860
2017-06-02 13:55 abdullah Note Added: 0009255
2017-06-02 14:03 Kunda1 Note Added: 0009256
2017-06-02 14:03 Kunda1 Note Edited: 0009256
2017-06-02 17:28 abdullah Note Added: 0009259
2017-06-02 17:36 Kunda1 Issue cloned: 0003067
2017-06-02 17:36 Kunda1 Relationship added related to 0003067
2017-06-02 17:41 Kunda1 Note Added: 0009267
2017-06-17 23:33 normandc Target Version => 0.17
2017-06-17 23:33 normandc Note Added: 0009430
2018-03-12 09:36 wmayer Target Version 0.17 => 0.18
2018-11-17 20:25 normandc Note Added: 0012208
2019-02-14 21:26 wmayer Target Version 0.18 => 0.19
2021-02-06 06:43 abdullah Target Version => 0.20