Regarding part studio

D8_Starpac

I have created multiple part in a part studio. Is there any option to split them into multiple part studio with features used for that part.

In filter option available in part studio can show the features used for a specific part. So that my question can be solve on this way. 
 

Jake_Rosenfeld

@D8_Starpac

The short answer to your question is just that we haven't implemented that functionality yet; voting on the improvement request that Don has supplied will help us prioritize the work.

The long answer to your question is that it's very non-trivial to do something like this.  While it is possible now to filter down the features that affect a part, extracting this part into a different studio is not as simple as just ripping out those features into a different studio.  What if other parts in the source studio depend on those features?  What if there is other geometry in the original part studio that the part in question references?  When it is moved into its part studio, do those reference parts come too?  There are lots of considerations here before we release a piece of functionality like this.

If the goal is just to represent each final part in its own part studio, you could use the Dervied feature:
https://cad.onshape.com/help/Content/derived.htm

owen_sparks

Hi all,

If we assume we've duplicated a partstudio then it would be great if we could invert that part filter selection and then delete that new inverted selection. We'd then have a new ps with just the features required to generate the part we filtered for.

Sure it would still exist in the original ps so it's not a real move, but I think there might be value there.

Owen S.

Jake_Rosenfeld

@owen_sparks

Imagine that you have a layout sketch and then an extrude, and the extrude creates two bodies, and then you edit those bodies separately in the same PS.  If you then take the inversion of the selection of the features affecting the part the you care about and suppress them, you will be still left with the initial extrusion of the part you don't care about.  The dependencies are not very easy to tease apart without a lot of under-the-hood processing.

KatieHuffman

You can filter for features that affect a specific part by typing ":part PART NAME" in the filter bar.

Don_Van_Zile

@D8_Starpac - Please vote for this Improvement Request; you look like you would like to do what I ran into with regard to "Splitting up Parts by their respective features into new Part Studio's"

https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/10004/extract-parts-and-its-features-to-a-new-document#latest


and since @KatieHuffman brought it up, which is a good suggestion to better see the tree "Part per it's Features", vote for this IR too.    We're not all coders so the need to type syntax to remember this bothers me; and it's cumbersome.

https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/comment/44268#Comment_44268

D8_Starpac

KatieHuffman said:

You can filter for features that affect a specific part by typing ":part PART NAME" in the filter bar.

I know this already and also I specify in the question.

My question is if it is possible to filter for feature that affect a specific part. Why not splitting of multiple part studio is not available.

Jake_Rosenfeld

@D8_Starpac

The short answer to your question is just that we haven't implemented that functionality yet; voting on the improvement request that Don has supplied will help us prioritize the work.

The long answer to your question is that it's very non-trivial to do something like this.  While it is possible now to filter down the features that affect a part, extracting this part into a different studio is not as simple as just ripping out those features into a different studio.  What if other parts in the source studio depend on those features?  What if there is other geometry in the original part studio that the part in question references?  When it is moved into its part studio, do those reference parts come too?  There are lots of considerations here before we release a piece of functionality like this.

If the goal is just to represent each final part in its own part studio, you could use the Dervied feature:
https://cad.onshape.com/help/Content/derived.htm

owen_sparks

Hi all,

If we assume we've duplicated a partstudio then it would be great if we could invert that part filter selection and then delete that new inverted selection. We'd then have a new ps with just the features required to generate the part we filtered for.

Sure it would still exist in the original ps so it's not a real move, but I think there might be value there.

Owen S.

Jake_Rosenfeld

@owen_sparks

Imagine that you have a layout sketch and then an extrude, and the extrude creates two bodies, and then you edit those bodies separately in the same PS.  If you then take the inversion of the selection of the features affecting the part the you care about and suppress them, you will be still left with the initial extrusion of the part you don't care about.  The dependencies are not very easy to tease apart without a lot of under-the-hood processing.

owen_sparks

Hi Jake, thanks for the reply.

Jake_Rosenfeld said:

@owen_sparks

Imagine that you have a layout sketch and then an extrude, and the extrude creates two bodies, and then you edit those bodies separately in the same PS.  If you then take the inversion of the selection of the features affecting the part the you care about and suppress them, you will be still left with the initial extrusion of the part you don't care about.  The dependencies are not very easy to tease apart without a lot of under-the-hood processing.

Understood; in fact @Don_Van_Zile and I were were having a discussion of the difficulty of separating out parts in an IR recently.

The suggestion here is not for a full on part separator function but a far simpler tool that would get us some of the way there.  As the user I'd be quite happy to accept that there will be some tidying up to do in this method.  There would be no comeback on Onshape staff as you've not produced a "part mover" just a filter in the feature tree.  The consequences of us using it are on our heads.

That's not to say I don't want a "move part and references to new PS" function.  That'd be great in the long term, but I appreciate how how big an ask that is and there are many things I'd rather see prioritized ahead of it.

Cheers 'n' all,

Owen S

Don_Van_Zile

I'm reinforcing @owen_sparks comments! 

owen_sparks

Kind of you @Don_Van_Zile