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: What is the proper approach in onshape for splitting model into multiple parts? (reverse assembling)
Select NEW instead of ADD when you do a revolve or extrude that should be a separate part. Additionally, the fact that the feature timeline allows you to go back in time, you can use this to change features in the past as your design evolves.
Re: Part split
You could create a solid that contains the part you want to separate. then use boolean intersect to create the part you want. and set the feature to keep the part and the 'tools'. you will have 3 parts after that…... then boolean subtract the 'container' part from the original part. and then you are left with two parts as desired.
MDesign
Re: Not fully defined sketch
sharing the document would be helpful, without we can only guess…
- the colour of the entities in your sketch gives you an indication of whether it is fully defined or not. Blue = not fully defined, black = fully defined. (if you are in black mode, the colours are different)
- Look for blue dots (undefined points)
- Look for overlaping lines
Re: Can anyone help me?
I think the other way to do it would be with actual physics/collision detection, which isn't really Onshape's wheelhouse.
Re: Part numbers in configurable subassembly
We use derive with drawers to insert standard parametric box into part studio and then model desired front for the box to avoid having copies of other parts.
This then becomes subassembly which is still parametric and can be configured for different chests of drawers.
Drawer boxes live in separate document to make it more convenient structure to use in different product design documents.
I have now created custom properties and make my own default bom and leave out built-in part no. etc - this might be the solution I'm after.
Now I have 'PartCode' and 'PartName' on top of my property list and BOM with Item, Qty, Pcode, Pname.
I can now set these directly from assembly and when I change configuration it only clears out values from parts that actually change. Hooray!!
I'm actually impressed how it turned out - well done Onshape and shame on me not following all the updates close enough.
3dcad
Re: Fillet or Face Blend on Icosahedron
It is interesting there is a place here where the handle sketch 7 doesn't line up perfect and not fully constrained. but when boolean 6 gets applied that cleans up. I wonder if this isn't was I'm seeing in the inconsistent fillets for similar parts of the objects.
MDesign
Re: Fillet or Face Blend on Icosahedron
Also you could of simplified your base object creation with just polar arrays and mirror features. Once the first loft triangular pyramid was done. no need for any more sketches and extrusions/lofts. Here's an example of just 3 fillet features getting all the edges.exterior, interior and then the opening edge.
MDesign
Re: Fillet or Face Blend on Icosahedron
When your looking at the preview. look for red highlighted areas for potential problems. You may have to do some of it in a series of steps rather than all the edges at once. I did a lot of them with fillet inside and out shown in pic, but I ran into some inconsistencies in geometry somewhere where it would fillet things the differently in one spot when it should be identical to another spot. Not sure what was going on there. depending on target radius you may have to fillet certain thing before others so you don't end up with self intersecting problems.
MDesign
Re: Faster way or shortcut to rename things
I would desperately love it if curves would be named by the feature that created them at least. Having curve 1, curve 2, …. curve 87 is not easy for finding things. I realize that there's not always a one-to-one relationship between a feature and a curve, but there are ways of dealing with that as well.
S1mon