Home› Using Onshape› FeatureScript

Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.

First time visiting? Here are some places to start:
  1. Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
  2. Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
  3. Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
  4. 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.

Retaining Ring Groove Custom Feature

TimRiceTimRice Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 315
edited June 2020 in FeatureScript
Easily create grooves for ANSI and DIN retaining rings with my new Retaining ring groove featurescript. Simply select a cylindrical face and a mate connector for the groove center and it will automatically find the matching groove size.



Add to your toolbar here (no need to copy): https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3678ac479f1de6df6bfbeec1/v/d602f6ae54e731080960c13b/e/c1e0e394d0acf27cd4e15506
Tim Rice | User Experience | Support 
Onshape, Inc.
Tagged:

Comments

  • fnxf_scewofnxf_scewo Member Posts: 12 PRO
    Hi Tim

    This is fantastic! We've just been wondering two weeks ago if such a feature exists, and here you already have it!

    Thanks a lot!
    Florentin
  • TimRiceTimRice Member, Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 315
    V1.1.1 Now with tables!! Add to your toolbar:
    https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3678ac479f1de6df6bfbeec1/v/eb900aa4f0ab5840bda17ee2/e/98f12ba5c18d6a0abdb796ec


    Tim Rice | User Experience | Support 
    Onshape, Inc.
  • marcus_bernsteinmarcus_bernstein Member, User Group Leader Posts: 35 EDU
    edited June 2020
    Very cool! It would be really nice if there was a checkbox to derive the retaining ring model as well to save a step at the assembly level, especially because we don't have retaining rings in Standard Content. In case I need to change a shaft size or retaining ring type, it would be real nice if I went back into the feature and the retaining ring(s) changed too rather then going back to Mcmaster Carr and importing a totally new one. Thanks for making this awesome tool!
    Any chance Onshape is looking for interns?

    Philadelphia User Group Leader
  • NeilCookeNeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 5,714
    marcus_bernstein said:
    Very cool! It would be really nice if there was a checkbox to derive the retaining ring model as well to save a step at the assembly level, especially because we don't have retaining rings in Standard Content. In case I need to change a shaft size or retaining ring type, it would be real nice if I went back into the feature and the retaining ring(s) changed too rather then going back to Mcmaster Carr and importing a totally new one. Thanks for making this awesome tool!
    Nice idea, although it would mean having a new part created for every retaining ring which would be no good for Release Management. Also:


    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEAI
  • marcus_bernsteinmarcus_bernstein Member, User Group Leader Posts: 35 EDU
    NeilCooke said:
    a new part created for every retaining ring which would be no good for Release Management
    I would look at modeling the snap ring in the featurescript (or deriving a configurable part, if that works) so that it is the same part with the same path but can adjust in dimensions based on size. It may be necessary for unique parts based on different types of retaining rings, but maybe those are best kept on separate part paths anyways. 

    Either way, glad to know that we have retaining rings in standard content. Thanks - not sure how I missed that one!
    Any chance Onshape is looking for interns?

    Philadelphia User Group Leader
  • NeilCookeNeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 5,714
    marcus_bernstein said:
    NeilCooke said:
    a new part created for every retaining ring which would be no good for Release Management
    I would look at modeling the snap ring in the featurescript (or deriving a configurable part, if that works) so that it is the same part with the same path but can adjust in dimensions based on size. It may be necessary for unique parts based on different types of retaining rings, but maybe those are best kept on separate part paths anyways. 

    Either way, glad to know that we have retaining rings in standard content. Thanks - not sure how I missed that one!
    I don't think that will work. Derived creates a new part - if you don't use Release Management then it's OK because the BOM could list the same part number, but RM will see it as a brand new part.
    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEAI
  • marcus_bernsteinmarcus_bernstein Member, User Group Leader Posts: 35 EDU
    NeilCooke said:
    marcus_bernstein said:
    NeilCooke said:
    a new part created for every retaining ring which would be no good for Release Management
    I would look at modeling the snap ring in the featurescript (or deriving a configurable part, if that works) so that it is the same part with the same path but can adjust in dimensions based on size. It may be necessary for unique parts based on different types of retaining rings, but maybe those are best kept on separate part paths anyways. 

    Either way, glad to know that we have retaining rings in standard content. Thanks - not sure how I missed that one!
    I don't think that will work. Derived creates a new part - if you don't use Release Management then it's OK because the BOM could list the same part number, but RM will see it as a brand new part.
    Perhaps the featurescript could just model the part in-studio somewhat manually - no derive necessary...
    Any chance Onshape is looking for interns?

    Philadelphia User Group Leader
  • NeilCookeNeilCooke Moderator, Onshape Employees Posts: 5,714
    marcus_bernstein said:
    NeilCooke said:
    marcus_bernstein said:
    NeilCooke said:
    a new part created for every retaining ring which would be no good for Release Management
    I would look at modeling the snap ring in the featurescript (or deriving a configurable part, if that works) so that it is the same part with the same path but can adjust in dimensions based on size. It may be necessary for unique parts based on different types of retaining rings, but maybe those are best kept on separate part paths anyways. 

    Either way, glad to know that we have retaining rings in standard content. Thanks - not sure how I missed that one!
    I don't think that will work. Derived creates a new part - if you don't use Release Management then it's OK because the BOM could list the same part number, but RM will see it as a brand new part.
    Perhaps the featurescript could just model the part in-studio somewhat manually - no derive necessary...
    Even so, it would be a new part, which is a big no-no - you could use it as a reference for modeling only and insert the correct item in the assembly manually.
    Senior Director, Technical Services, EMEAI
  • sebastian_glanznersebastian_glanzner Member, Developers Posts: 425 PRO
    @NeilCooke
    It would be nice if the featurescript could place a new "intelligent mate" in each groove. This mate would know which size and type of retaining ring would fit in the groove.
    After you place the part inside an new assembly, you can press the new "auto-populate all intelligent mates" button. For each mate, all retaining rings are placed with the correct size and position. 

    Do think this is possible?

    The "auto-populate all intelligent mates" button could also be used to refresh all rings, in case the size of the grooves was changed. This would also be cool for o-rings :)
  • AsaEEAsaEE Member Posts: 6 ✭
    Not sure the effort involved in this, but it would be great to be able to drive this from one side of the retaining ring groove vs. the center. That seems like it would match design intent of a retaining ring to position a face of the retaining ring in a position rather than center line.
  • S1monS1mon Member Posts: 3,039 PRO
    Until someone adds this functionality, you could use move face (select the two groove faces) with the translate option and the direction would be the face of the groove you want to line up, and then the "up to entity" would be the other face that the groove wants to line up with. The two images show before and after.



  • xTimRicexTimRice Member Posts: 61 PRO
    Nice workaround @S1mon!

    @AsaEE I wrote the feature initially so I may be able to update it. I will see what I can do. 
    Handcrafted furniture in Boston
    https://thesmoothcut.com/
  • glen_dewsburyglen_dewsbury Member Posts: 822 ✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2023
    @xTimRice
    Nice going, I like this very much and have added to my list.
    One small note. The groove material is left behind as a separate part. Was that intentional?


    Interesting. I had one my first grooves in an existing document. One of the FS lessons, the material was left behind as separate part.
    Just tried in a new PS and the behavior did not repeat.
  • andrew_jackson232andrew_jackson232 Member Posts: 6 ✭
    Hi,

    I'm very new to CAD and I've been putting some assemblies together over the past few days using the many guides on YouTube from Onshape and the wider user community.  I'm coming along slowly but I'm making progress at least.  But I'm struggling with adding an internal grove for snap ring.  I added this feature script but I'm a little lost on how to use it and wondered if anyone had done a tutorial - I've looked but struggling to find anything.  I get an error something along the lines of the suitable retainer not found.  
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In

Categories

Vanilla Forums