2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Umut CANandClaude Opus 5	978c1075ad	fix(task-5): cut faces on the real chord, cross sections that see features, a section with no dashed cut edge ... Three defects, all of them the same mistake in three places: the cut face was built from something other than the geometry it claims to show. 1. A prismatic cut face removed a feature by its BOUNDING BOX. `Hole.removal_box` is a square, so the gap punched in the cut face was the full diameter wherever the plane passed. On the plan's 80x50x8 plate with a Ho10 hole at (40, 25): a plane at y=29.9 grazes the hole (true chord 1.990) and the section still showed an 8 mm gap through solid metal - 560.0 mm2 hatched against a true 624.08, a 64 mm2 error in the hatched area AND a wrong drawn outline. `Slot` had the same obround-as-box. Features now answer `cut_spans(part, p1, unit)` with their own exact chord: `_circle_chord` for a hole, the union of two circles and a rotated rectangle for a slot, the polygon's own crossings for a pocket, and an exact slab clip of `removal_box` as the default. `_box_span` (the corner projection, which is the box's shadow and not a chord at all) is gone. 2. A transverse revolved section ignored every feature and the honesty rule never fired. A cross section through a DIN 6885-1 keyway came out as a plain hatched disc with `omitted == ()` - the commonest mechanical cross section there is, hatched straight over the 12x5 keyway. The face is now built by `_transverse_face`: its radii come from `radial_profile` (so a groove, an undercut, a bore or an ISO 6410 internal thread is in the face already, which the raw segment diameters could not report), a non-axisymmetric feature is asked for its own `cross_section` notch record, and one the plane really passes through with no such record is listed in `omitted` with its reason rather than hatched over. `Keyway._notch` is the one calculation the end view and the cut face both come out of. 3. A section drew its own cut boundary as a HIDDEN (dashed) line, because the longitudinal branch reused `silhouette_prims` and the silhouette draws the bore dashed - correct for an un-cut view, wrong for a section, where that line IS the hatch loop's boundary. ISO 128-50 bounds a surface lying in the cutting plane with a continuous wide line and ISO 128-3 leaves hidden detail out of a sectional view; via ROLE_LAYER['hidden'] this would also have put the cut boundary on the HIDDEN layer in Task 7. New `section_profile_prims` emits the cut outline all-continuous, and `half=True` keeps the dashed bore on the -Y half only, which is the half a half section does not cut. And the claim the last commit made without earning it: the hatched area and the drawn outline are now literally one calculation. The longitudinal loop is the *emitted* outline flattened (`_flatten_path`), so a chamfer or fillet that substitutes a silhouette corner is cut out of the hatch exactly where it is drawn - a 2 mm 45 deg chamfer takes its 2 mm2 off the 1000 mm2 half face instead of being hatched over. Eleven new tests, every one of them red on the parent commit: the hole chord at 0/4/4.9 mm off centre, a tangent plane leaving the face whole, the 45 deg slot, the keyway cross section against its own analytic area, the feature a cross section cannot project, the feature the plane misses, the groove read off the profile, the continuous cut boundary, the half section's dashed half, and the chamfered cut face. No new ActiveX member is called: all three fixes are pure geometry in the backend-free `engineering/mech` package. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FKFStjEFzpGyLq5bMpWxTd	2026-09-22 22:16:47 +03:00
Umut CANandClaude Opus 5	72bd17d024	feat(task-5): sections, cut faces, material hatch and detail views ... engineering/mech/views.py grows the two remaining view kinds. A section's cut faces come out of the same radial profile the silhouette does, so the hatched area and the drawn outline are one calculation and cannot disagree: a solid shaft's half-section loop measures exactly the sum of its segment rectangles, and a bore closes the loop on itself rather than being hatched over. ISO 6410's section convention falls out of the model rather than being special- cased: an internal thread's radial_edit already raises the bore to the major diameter, so the hatch stops there. ISO 128-3's rib rule is a flag on the feature - a pocket marked no_section_hatch is drawn and left unhatched, while the rest of the cut face is hatched with the part's ISO 128-50 material. Four styles, each either implemented or refused by name with the alternative rather than approximated: full and half on a longitudinal plane through a revolved axis; full and revolved on a transverse plane (the annulus, flattened at 2 degrees - 0.015% of the radius, stated in CIRCLE_SEGMENTS rather than hidden); full and offset on a prismatic part, where through features split the cut face and pockets reduce it to the remaining thickness. A plane that misses the part, or that grazes an outline vertex so its crossings cannot be paired, is refused instead of producing a guessed cut face. Details scale a circular region of a parent view, emit the ISO 128-34 circle and letter for the parent and the "A (5:1)" label for the detail itself, and report every feature that falls outside the circle in omitted - the honesty rule again. Three test assertions were corrected to the measured truth rather than the engine bent to them, each verified by running the code: * the ISO 6410 test asked for the whole cut-face loop's minimum to be the M20 major (r=10). It is not, and must not be: over the 5 mm that is drilled but not threaded the loop closes on the real 16 mm drill (r=8). The loop is ((0,10),(0,25),(25,25),(30,25),(30,8),(30,8),(25,8),(25,10),(0,10)). The test now pins both spans, which is the convention it meant to assert. * the transverse-annulus areas were pinned at rel=2e-4. An inscribed regular 180-gon is exactly 1 - (n/2pi) sin(2pi/n) = 2.0307e-4 under the circle, so 2e-4 rejects the very flattening CIRCLE_SEGMENTS declares. The tolerance is now 2.1e-4 and the test computes the deficit and pins it, so the number is derived rather than guessed. CIRCLE_SEGMENTS' docstring now states both figures: 0.015% radial (the 2 degree chord's sagitta) and 0.0203% of area. * tests/test_mech_views.py pinned VIEW_KINDS == ("front","side","top"), which this task deliberately grows. It now pins the three orthographic kinds as the first three and the full five-kind tuple. _is_longitudinal takes only the plane; the plan's signature also took the part and never read it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FKFStjEFzpGyLq5bMpWxTd	2026-09-22 21:40:29 +03:00