Best Of

Interesting. Seems like using Add with the part pattern requires that the parts all intersect. Natively the tiles don't but I could add a "grout" substrate part and use that to merge them all into one part. That might help with the perf I'm seeing now. As it is, the full render takes about 6s according to the perf tools. It seems to want to render frequently… In any event, I think we have what we need to get this job done. I'll play around with it a bit more in my "spare time" (hah!) to simplify and improve perf.

As an aside, re the dilemmas of tool choice, level of control/detail is critical. I have the same building model in Chief Architect (for example) and while I may be able to do a basic tile layout, I doubt very much I could experiment with the detail required for the 45deg transition as shown here (ignore the little spike on the corner tile). With Onshape I was able to setup multiple configurations for different approaches to the corner transition, as well as offsets to shift the whole pattern along the 22.5deg corner midline to left/right/center justify the tile pattern in the hallway and see how that affects doorways etc 50ft away.

With this setup, we can, in real time (ignoring the render delays), adjust during a design discussion to see what works best. FWIW, slate | iteration 4 has the full floor/tile plan. (some configurations are broken as we started ignoring ones we didn't like and made random breaking changes to the surrounding parts).

Anyway, thanks again all. The community makes platforms like Onshape awesome.

@jeff_mcaffer the part pattern allows joining/adding operation so you don’t have to do any Boolean and select a bunch of parts. This image is a random part that was 2 way patterned. In one feature and the part list never grew to more than 1. Not sure why there appears to be edges in the middle of it. But it serves as an example nonetheless of how I pictured your tile layout working.

Kudos to you for exploring and expanding your skill set with varied types of project. I love that.

In the case of the linear sketch pattern… I might suggest eliminating the gap between tiles since your just looking for problem places. This will reduce your sketch entity count by almost half. which might help.

An alternative idea might be to develop the base repeating pattern as one 'part' with extrudes that go "almost" through the the pattern to create the gaps. this will keep it as one part and then pattern that pattern as you need.

clear as mud? lol.

if theres a specific need to be able to see through the grout, I'd have to spend more time thinking on it.

Building on what @MDesign said, make a part which is the Asher pattern with some thin cuts which aren't all the way through for the grout. Then pattern that part. Patterning the composite parts is probably more overhead than necessary. Patterning a larger part is probably less challenging for the system.

It looks like @wayne_sauder managed to make it work for one part of the floor plan. Seems like his approach also would work.