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: Create a freewheel mate condition?
I too am trying to model a design that has a one-way clutch. I'd be happy with either an abstract "one way revolute" mate, or a "pawl and ratchet" relation, or just some way to be able to model this with individual parts interacting somehow.
Like OP I don't want just a static design, I want to be able to move one part and see the effect that it has on the rest of the system (through the one-way clutch).
I've only just started using OnShape and this seems to suggest that it won't be suitable for this task. If this is a planned feature, someone please let me know!
Re: Auto-populating Part Numbers and/or Names
Since the previous post we have turned off release management as the part number generator (a positive feature) did not outweigh the learning curve that appeared. In that case the part numbers which were being generated were great, however they did not carry through when we attempted to export assemblies or part studios wholly. Therefore for the time being release management has been taken away.
Currently I am attempting to make export rules work for our use-case and the following nomenclature appears useful:
This, once again, works great for singular parts and for the top level of assemblies and/or part studios. The parts within the assemblies do not seem to translate over however once the files are exported from Onshape for further use, reverting to their Part 1, Part 2 etc. common naming convention.
This appears to be a common issue when using a different step translator between import and exporting operations. Looking into the causes of this I reference the following sources for information:
https://forum.freecad.org/viewtopic.php?style=4&t=39438
https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/fusion-support/when-exporting-to-step-file-all-body-names-and-folders-are-lost/td-p/10758938
https://www.alibre.com/forum/index.php?threads/loss-of-part-names-in-exported-assemblies.7123/post-37687
Per these sources I went to look at an exported Step (AP242) from Onshape and imported it back into Onshape to see what happens.
That test yields positive results:
Looking at the step file from that export we can see that the part name is provided under the identity "PRODUCT". And when imported all the names match with the imported parts.
Ref. https://www.steptools.com/docs/stp_aim/html/t_product.html
So we know that the exporter is taking the part names. We also know the part names cannot be auto-generated or directly link to a part number. Therefore, what does export rule do for me when I am trying to get parts to export with a provided file name from within an assembly or a part studio?
Even if I include Parts as a category within the scope of Part Studios and assemblies, I yield the same results. Have I misunderstood how the export rules are meant to function?
Under these settings Part Studios import using the names created by the export rules as shown:
Are we unable to utilize this on contained parts in the part studio?
Any feedback or thoughts would be appreciated.
Re: Why can I not see +Render Studio?
Hi Jason. Unfortunately, Render Studio is currently only available to Professional users.
Re: Circular pattern change the assembly type
I think I found out the problem : The axis I'm using is the origin, and when the assembly is inserted in another assembly, it keeps using the origin as reference !
Re: Show Dimensions in Assembly
Re: Problems merging parts
Boolean should work in this case. I got it to work after simplying Sketch 5.
Re: Create a freewheel mate condition?
Matt, the animation ABOVE - that's trickery. That's two videos edited together. Everything was modeled and animated in Onshape. But it was two separate videos. One with the pawl in the outward unengaged position. The other with the pawl engaged in the inward position. In that video, the pawl is NOT actually pushing that inner gray piece. I just had all 3 parts locked together, for the second part where the pawl APPEARS TO BE PUSHING the inner part.
I did this simply to show that there may be another way to accomplish this without having to delve more heavily into certain types of animations. I always think it's good to have a back up
Now as to the GIF below, it does have a little bit of trickery, but only that of the pawl flipping outward ——— the little flip at 3 o’clock. And that was accomplished simply by where the GIF loops
BUT, in the GIF below, the pawl actually does engage the inner gray part and pushes it along.
Now the way that happens is, that the pawl comes to the end of its tangent path. When it does, it starts pushing the end of that path. Now that path is part of the gray part itself. So as it’s pushing the end of the path, it’s pushing the gray part. So an actual type of collision, so to speak, is taking place.
But the other problem is, I couldn't use the animation dialog to make the pawl work the same way. I had to move my finger in a circle on my trackpad which is difficult to do if you want things to look smooth. Maybe if I had a mouse on a desktop, that might have worked better.
Here's the file if anybody wants to try and get it to work better.
Again, watch the polygon in the center
Re: Improvements to Onshape - November 22nd, 2024
Flatten surfaces is my new hero, especially for some sheet metal work from external CAD models, etc…
qnguyen
Re: Please help me: `deterministicIds` DO NOT in ALL ids returned by `qeverything()`
» But I found that the deterministicIds in chamfer or fillet cannot be found in this way, so I can't resolve the edges or faces referenced by chamfer or fillet operations. Why does this happen? How should I solve this problem?
The reason for this is once the chamfer or fillet feature executes, the edges they reference are no longer present after the regeneration. Hence they are not returned by qEverything. The way to solve this would be to get the query, move the rollback ( https://cad.onshape.com/glassworks/explorer#/PartStudio/updateRollback) just above the feature & then evaluate the query at this state.
