REFACTOR: Move mcad assembly

[hui-zhou-a]

Description

• Move mcad assembly logic into pyaedt.
• new class MCADAssemblyService to manage assemble process.
• Improved assembly logic stability
• Refactored frontend to adapt the new code style
• Improved documentation and guide.

Issue linked

#8168 #8167

Checklist

• I have tested my changes locally.
• I have added necessary documentation or updated existing documentation.
• I have followed the coding style guidelines of this project.
• I have added appropriate tests (unit, integration, system).
• I have reviewed my changes before submitting this pull request.
• I have linked the issue(s) that are solved by the PR if any.
• I have assigned this PR to myself.
• I have added the minimum version decorator to any new backend method implemented.
• I have agreed with the Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

[SMoraisAnsys]

@hui-zhou-a Could you consider checking the extensions repo to perform this refactoring ? Some refactoring was made by @ecoussoux-ansys and this might conflict with some of the existing changes. If there is a need to have this into pyaedt soon, let me know and we can adapt. Otherwise, I would advise to have a look there too :)

[hui-zhou-a]

@copilot summarize what has been done in this PR

[Copilot]

@copilot summarize what has been done in this PR

This PR moves the MCAD assembly data models and core assembly operations into modeler.advanced_cad.mcad_assembly, leaving the HFSS extension focused on its UI and extension integration. It also updates the 3D stackup integration, refreshes the user and extension documentation (including screenshots and changelog), and adjusts the unit and system tests for the new structure.

[SMoraisAnsys]

Temporarily mark as "request changes" until my comment isn't answered

[hui-zhou-a]

@hui-zhou-a Could you consider checking the extensions repo to perform this refactoring ? Some refactoring was made by @ecoussoux-ansys and this might conflict with some of the existing changes. If there is a need to have this into pyaedt soon, let me know and we can adapt. Otherwise, I would advise to have a look there too :)

All changes in this PR will overwrite the one in extension repo. @eblanco-ansys what do you think?

[eblanco-ansys]

@hui-zhou-a Could you consider checking the extensions repo to perform this refactoring ? Some refactoring was made by @ecoussoux-ansys and this might conflict with some of the existing changes. If there is a need to have this into pyaedt soon, let me know and we can adapt. Otherwise, I would advise to have a look there too :)

All changes in this PR will overwrite the one in extension repo. @eblanco-ansys what do you think?

I would proceed into merging this into PyAEDT and then create a new PR in the extensions repo to align it. We need this refactoring being part of PyAEDT soon @SMoraisAnsys

[hui-zhou-a]

@SMoraisAnsys are you ok to approve this PR?

[Samuelopez-ansys]

I think we should review the code, because I see some pieces not efficient.

[Samuelopez-ansys]

I think the code can be updated to use non native API calls

[Samuelopez-ansys]

@hui-zhou-a @eblanco-ansys I did the review of this PR, and I performed some modifications.

It is still missed:

1. It is missed the unit test for the new class in pyaedt. You should create a new set of test because now is part of advanced_cad.

2. And also add a new section in the API documentation.

3. Most important, @ecoussoux-ansys performed some modifications in the internal pyaedt-extensions repo, please align with him because we can not have 2 different codes. I think this is what @SMoraisAnsys mentioned in the previous comments.