Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
Best Of
Re: Printable Onshape Keyboard/Mouse Shortcuts Quick Reference Card
Updated reference card to reflect the 3D Viewing (rotation) behavior change using the cursor keys in the latest update (1.191, 2024-12-13).
Here is the downloadable PDF…
StephenG
Re: #TraditionalCADsucks
I recently took a Catia/3D experience instructor led class. Took three month, and all I know now is that it is not the tool I could ever do my kind of work with. When participating in that, in the evenings, out of curiosity, I recreated each excercise in both Spaceclaim and Onshape. Bottom line: There wasn't much I would actually need Catia for (I don't do super high class surfacing), 3D experience as such is a mess, slow, and prices are ridiculous. I could afford another person to help modeling in OS full time for that and be three times as productive.
Re: #TraditionalCADsucks
I haven't touched Solidworks in years now, and have only a passing familiarity with the whole 3DExperience thing, but this blog post about it is gold. I guess Dassault just really wasn't happy with slowly improving their cash cow and wanted to rip everything up and integrate it more.
S1mon
Re: Configurable text item (Sticker or Padprint)
Awesome feature Joshua.
Greg brown also created a few simple features based on feature input to more easily take in however many parts are created by a feature.
these are called "auto Boolean' and 'auto rename', i just found he also has an 'auto composite'. (I like that naming convention)
Re: Issues with mating in assemblies
Most likely there's an overconstrained chain of mates.
These may or may not work depending on the underlying tolerances of the parts/mates etc.
sometimes the mates in a subassembly allow two different solutions and when inserting it in a parent assembly, it can jump into the wrong one. thats very annoying.
this thread shows an example of an overconstraint failing on tolerances
If you want more specific help, you could share your document or some pictures. that would make it easier for us to see what could be going on.
Re: Forum Posts Approval
My adding to the thread: it would be nice to know the algorithm. Now I don't think it's mentioned anywhere, and frankly I took the draft remaining after post as a (permanent) bug of the forum software, not a feature affecting newbies.
Re: Render Studio - why is it so slow recently?
@Paul_Arden ,
Good to know about face appearances.
One issue we are running into is that composite parts are not "supported" by render studio, which is a real pain as we have several things modeled as composite parts with multiple appearances and it just gets imported as single part with a ton of faces and appearances.
These represent off the shelf assemblies but were created before the "show assembly only" sub assembly behavior setting was available (i.e. a couple of years ago, which is why they are composites and not assemblies…) and used in a bunch of places so a pain to get rid of them…
Basically it means that recognizing the underlying part structure of a composite part would really help with performance and I hope that's being worked towards!
Re: Routing curve & Control point curve - Introduction of two new features for 3D curve creation
I've been working on this problem for about 2 years and have finally succumbed to a simple solution.
Solutions tried:
-morgon's piping script, it's public
-routing curve the script featured here
-routing the script I wrote
-stupidly simple
Morgon's script is pretty old code but is an amazing piece of work. I do like that a route is defined by a start and end. Routing curve, the one featured in this post, is a great attempt showing a lot of potential. Routing, the one I wrote, looks the simplist of all these but it would only work for 80% of my use cases. And, the problem is, while I could figure out solutions for many routes, no one could ever figure out what made them work.
My script interface. Start and end how simple is that?
This is when I gave up writing a routing script:
180 degree bend and the fs polyline function requires a strait halve way through the bend. Ok, I'm done.
The solution I've been using, the simplist is the following. I'm working in an assembly and I want to connect the 2 elbows:
I'm in a partstudio from the assembly and create a sketch defining the orthogonality of my route.
I create 3 planes:
I sketch on 3 planes. I know, it's ugly:
The rest is trivial:
Back to the assembly and I make a change, actually I make millions of changes:
It updates!
I know it's ugly, but it works 100% of the time. I do keep all of the components of a route inside a folder for tidiness and I've converted all my old routes to this simple style. I'm not saying that a fs for routing is a bad idea, it didn't work for me.
My biggest fear when designing is to create something no one can follow. These single feature routes can be impossible maintain or debug. When you have a parametric project and someone starts to deleting stuff, it'll kill the project and the model you created.
I'm happy and have all my routings controlled inside an assembly.
As a side note, I can now fill a computer rack with beer in less than a minute.
billy2