Selecting a direction or axis for assembly pattern

brucebartlett

I've found a few times where I want to do a pattern in an assembly and do not have the correct geometry to get the axis or direction. My instinct is to hover over the origin and have the main axis jump up like when doing a mate connection to the origin in the part studio(*edit like when mating to the origin). If there is a way to do this that would be great otherwise this could be moved to an improvement request., 

mahir

Agreed. Alternatively, being able to select more than just the primary axis of a mate connector would be nice. That way a single mate connector at the origin would act like 3 reference axes.

brucebartlett

Adding an assembly mate connector referencing the origin does work to solve this problem. 

jakeramsley

Would being able to use an implicit mate connector, similar to how mate connectors show up in mates, work in this case?

michael_mcclain

I think that since the origin is the only non-alterable reference that it is the best available spot to attach any assembly reference to. I typically use planes and the origin in part studios as a solid reference since they cannot be changed. Therefore less unpredictable behavior in models as downstream changes are made.

I dont enjoy fixing references when they break because of a missing part or lost reference.

I don't see it necessary to add planes into the assemblies if you are able to use the origin as the coordinate system in place of any planes. I see the assembly origin as an end-all solution to assembly planes, axes, etc.

If we could reference all of the axes and planes of this coordinate system (i.e. z-axis, x-axis, y-axis, xy-plane, xz-plane, & yz-plane) then we could have the availability to reference something un-changable.

This concept is powerful and would allow smarter assemblies which are more resistent to changes in the models. I would like to see options in pattern dialogs (and other dialog hoxes) which allow users to reference these entities.

On a similar note, I like tying mates to the origin in assemblieswhen necessary, but I feel it can be difficult to 'wake up' the origin. Especially when a part is in the way. If there was a way to prioritize the origin over parts in most cases then I would be very happy 😁

brucebartlett

jakeramsley said:

Would being able to use an implicit mate connector, similar to how mate connectors show up in mates, work in this case?

I think so. This would save the extra step of creating the mate connector. Having the mate connector is handy because it can be edited with the move functionality. 

brucebartlett

michael_mcclain said:

On a similar note, I like tying mates to the origin in assemblieswhen necessary, but I feel it can be difficult to 'wake up' the origin. Especially when a part is in the way. If there was a way to prioritize the origin over parts in most cases then I would be very happy 😁

Yes @michael_mcclain, I find this an issue too. The select other does not work with the origin point and everything has to be hidden to get a selection which and be very time consuming and annoying.  This picture shows the lack of the origin in the select another list. 

3dcad

I think it's so common to pattern into x, y, z -directions that it should be built in option in pattern dialog without adding any mate connectors. In addition, I like @jakeramsley idea to use an implicit mate connector with pattern & similar tools.

mahir

brucebartlett said:

michael_mcclain said:

On a similar note, I like tying mates to the origin in assemblieswhen necessary, but I feel it can be difficult to 'wake up' the origin. Especially when a part is in the way. If there was a way to prioritize the origin over parts in most cases then I would be very happy 😁

Yes @michael_mcclain, I find this an issue too. The select other does not work with the origin point and everything has to be hidden to get a selection which and be very time consuming and annoying.  This picture shows the lack of the origin in the select another list. 

I believe you can also use the feature tree to select the origin in cases where it's difficult to do so graphically.

brucebartlett

mahir said:

brucebartlett said:

michael_mcclain said:

On a similar note, I like tying mates to the origin in assemblieswhen necessary, but I feel it can be difficult to 'wake up' the origin. Especially when a part is in the way. If there was a way to prioritize the origin over parts in most cases then I would be very happy 😁

Yes @michael_mcclain, I find this an issue too. The select other does not work with the origin point and everything has to be hidden to get a selection which and be very time consuming and annoying.  This picture shows the lack of the origin in the select another list. 

I believe you can also use the feature tree to select the origin in cases where it's difficult to do so graphically.

Yes that is helpful to use the tree to select. 

billy2

I drop an assembly from my library called planes. It even matches the XYZ color scheme if the axis. I use it for direction & mostly cross sections in the assembly. I don't assemble to it though as that would cause issues with onshape's assembly structure. 

I really like the way onshape inherits sub-assemblies and want to keep that working. My library is full of working assemblies and the ability to drag them into a higher assembly and they work, well that's pure genius. 



Don't want to go back to the flexible state which never worked properly. Onshape is sooooo much better. If you want inheritability in assemblies, which is really cool, don't assemble to the planes in an assembly. If you resist this temptation,  I don't care how deep your assembly structure gets, assemblies inherit from sub-assemblies. If you add a constraint along the way up the tree, then your motion becomes more restricted as you add to your project.

In short: don't assemble to these planes please.

theo_scott

Adding an assembly mate connector referencing the origin does work to solve this problem. 

3dcad

@billy2
Good point. I'm big fan of Onshape's fully functional sub-assemblies and never got this working so smooth (or at all) in Alibre by making loads of sub-stuff 'flexible' 

billy2

"fully functional sub-assemblies" I like the sound of that term. 

I'm glad you're using it too. It's one of the greatest new features and it's not talked about much. OS is the first to allow you to combine working sub-assemblies into higher assembly and everything works properly. It's recursive and true all the way down to lowest sub-assy. It's very organized.

If you're building any kind of automation, then OS is the only solution. All my linear rails and cylinders have motion that is limited. Then I drag'm into a higher assembly and that 'limit' governs the range of motion for my carriage or what ever I'm designing. It's the closest virtual experience to working on a bench and building something from real parts.

Sometimes I wonder if the fact that there are no planes in an assy, this prevents people from assembling to them. Once you assemble to an assembly, the chain breaks and things stop working. The mates tied to the assembly won't transfer when moving to the next assembly. You can see they're missing if you open it's mate folder in the high assembly. It's hard to write about this without diagrams and graphs.

The library planes I insert or you insert, please don't assemble to them. Keep the chain working.

brucebartlett

Yep the fully functioning flexible assemblies are awesome but will fall apart in higher assemblies if you have more than one part fixed or mated to the origin. It's good to keep this in mind and try to only lock down 1 part in the assembly, even if the assembly is solid probably still a good practice. 

brucebartlett

Selection of planes like with the mates on the origin for a section view would be also handy. This box has drafted side so become a little harder to get the perfect section perpendicular to the face.  

3dcad

Why couldn't there be global directions that are the same in all assemblies and would move along when inserted to higher level assembly to keep things 'flexible'. I would like to use that view cube on top right to select direction.