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.

Part Studio IOS - 3D Skeleton Methodology

Mr_GKMr_GK Member Posts: 19 ✭✭
edited July 2020 in General
Hi guys!

I’m challenging myself to design this assembly totally different from Solidworks approach.


I’m doing it using only my iPad 7 and the IOS version of onshape.

Is it a valid constructive method for you?

All parts are dependent on each other.
I’m applying a 3d skeleton Methodology.

Guilherme Kastner


  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭
    edited June 2020

    3D Skeleton Methodology

    I’m not clear on what you’re talking about here. But I will venture a guess.

    If you’re talking about making one part dependent upon another part that’s dependent upon another part ...    then yeah — you can do that with the iOS version of Onshape.

    So you’re using the iOS version of Onshape and you want to know if it’s a valid method for others. Well I’ll say this — it works for me

    Up until recently, all I’ve used Onshape on is my iPhone. And if you use it a lot (Onshape on iOS), you’ll find that like most things — the more you use it, the faster you get

    But I have recently done some things in Onshape using my computer (MacBook Pro), and found it very nice to use that way also. No doubt that Onshape via the browser is better for those employed by a company where they need to really crank out the parts as I’ve seen videos of people employing the shortcuts which makes it quite efficient on top of having configurations and drafting. But that still doesn’t mean I’m gonna do away with using Onshape on my iPhone.

    I’m still probably going to do a lot more Onshape on my iPhone than I am on my MacBook Pro, because I’m at that stage in life where I don’t want to sit at a desk anymore.

    And if I can use it when my back can’t handle sitting at my desk or table, then that’s valid

    In actuality, life now is not all about kickin back. In reality, I’m probably more busy now days doing a bunch of home projects then when I was actually working for a living. As such, I always have my iPhone in pocket with Onshape ready to go.

    So with iPhone in hand, I tap the Onshape icon – it starts immediately and within a little while, I’ve got it figured on how I’m going to get that next job done around the house.

    I don’t have to write down a bunch of dimensions and then transfer them into a computer only to find out that I forgot to take a critical dimension. And this definitely is an advantage of the iOS version over using the desktop version. Because in using the iOS version, you will see right away if you’re missing some needed dimension. And If you think that having a notebook computer is the answer to this, well it’s not always easy to find a place to set your notebook computer down. On the other hand, an iPhone and iPad were made to be mobile and hold in hand where you don’t need to find a place to set them down. So that’s a major reason for using the iOS app or mobile version. A very valid reason

    Can I make parts in different Part Studios and assemble them all together in the assembly tab using my iPhone? Absolutely. No big thing

    If you had a real big project with a ton of parts, you might want to have a bigger screen. And you could do that by hooking up your iPhone or iPad to a large screen TV via a cord or wirelessly. So you use the Onshape iOS app and view it on the big screen, where your iPhone in essence, acts like a trackpad for that big screen. I’ve done it this way also, and that works good. So there’s another valid way of using the Onshape iOS app.

    Hard to know exactly what it is you’re trying to accomplish. But I did open up your document. And those parts are easy to make on an iPhone, at least from what I could tell.

    Now if I’m way off point as to what you were trying to find out about, then like Emily Litella from Saturday Night Live used to say — ‘never mind’

  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭

    I did a rewrite of the above

  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭
    edited June 2020

    OK I finally found out what a Skeleton is with regards to Solidworks

    So I saw a video of a guy doing a skeleton part in Solidworks and then bringing that into the assembly. I did what I believe is a close equivalent to that using the iOS version of Onshape

    In the iOS version of Onshape, you cannot bring in sketches. But there is a workaround
    So the guy is making this skeleton that has a conveyor with three workstations and he made planes that showed the floor, table, and the conveyor levels, and then he made planes at the mid-point of the workstations

    In Mobile Onshape, instead of three planes for the floor, table, and conveyor — I created a proxy part that had the three levels. And instead of the planes that showed the midpoint of the workstations, I used mates
    Directly below is the URL of the guy making the skeleton with Solidworks


    And below is what I did with Mobile Onshape.
    I didn’t spend time showing how to do the sketch part of it. But the rest of the GIF, I showed in real time

    It’s jerky (it has dropped frames) because of the limitations of doing GIF’s on an iPhone. But what you see is real time.

  • Mr_GKMr_GK Member Posts: 19 ✭✭
    Hi @steve_shubin

    My post was not a doubt, I only wanted to share my concerns about my experience using onshape.

    Thanks for these answers above, and I’ll write more about it.

    1- skeleton

    I was trying to recreate these components using a different methodology using part studio.

    This post was created only for sharing this model as I design and change it in real time. I really like to do that using communities and forums..

    Some years ago, I created these Same components using a “regular“ methodology, component by component, as you can see bellow


    The new design is classified by myself as skeleton because it uses sketches and planes for driving all components in a single part studio. All dimensions are driven by them and all parts are based on the same sketches and planes.

    Based on that, an extrusion feature will not affect any other component or feature but all components are linked by all wireframes.

    I did other designs some years ago. It is based on part studio with multiple and single components per tab. Please, take a look over it.

    Solidworks is the design tool that I use since 2006, It is a pleasure for me to design some components using onshape sometimes.

    IOS APP was mentioned because It was unusual for me to create new components on Apple devices. This design experience is so cool. I left my professional workstation at the office during this weekend. For me, run onshape on PCs or macs will give me a better performance and usability, but a mobile device for cad looks nice.

    I hope you understand my concerns. It is nice to collaborate and share design techniques on this community.


  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭

    Your Vertical Steam Engine is some real nice work. There’s a whole lot to look at in that document. It looks really cool !

  • Mr_GKMr_GK Member Posts: 19 ✭✭
    Hi @steve_shubin

    I updated my first design posted on this thread 

    1- about skeleton 

    Now you can see all sketches working as a skeleton

    Does this design methodology making sense for you?
    Is it comprehensive for driving and updating this model?

    2- steam engine

    Nice to hear that you liked my steam engine! I wish to design more stuff like that and share here

  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭

    Does this design methodology make sense to you?

    So I’ll LOOSELY interpret this as — is this the best way to go about it ?

    I have given a few lengthy statements on why I believe the mobile app is very good. And when I think I could contribute on how to model some part, I may post a GIF. 

    But there are other people in this forum that know a whole lot more about the program that could give you the reasons for preferring one method over another.

  • steve_shubinsteve_shubin Member Posts: 439 ✭✭✭
    edited July 2020

    OK so you got no answer. I’ll give it a shot

    Another guy was trying to make a skeleton. Here’s what he said — “ With some goniometrics it should be possible to calculate the correct angles. But after some rough sketches, all the tangents, cosinus and arc-sinuses made me dizzy.”

    Obviously, that can be a very hard way to go about it.

    So here’s a generalized statement. If your project is fairly straightforward, to where you can make a bunch of sketches upfront (to act as a skeleton), without excessive effort, I’d say go for it if that’s your preference.

    But if making a bunch of sketches upfront is so incredibly hard, then you might want to intersperse sketches with extrudes and revolves and build some sketches on the sides of your solids as you go along — and set aside the doing of every single sketch upfront 

  • Mr_GKMr_GK Member Posts: 19 ✭✭
    Hi @steve_shubin

    So good to read your answer.

    I'm doing something different here on this design bellow:


    I created a few part studios using 3d skeleton as you can see next. A general folder for all wireframes and a single folder for each component.

    The next part studio has a similar methodology and it is allocated inside the same document. I created a folder that has all mate connectors for some components. It will help me in more assemblies.

    This last part studio for this document repeats this methodology one more time.


    I got your point, and it is right... Based on that I Created these small part studios and connected them on assemblies, like these

    I'm not an expert on onshape but your argument makes me think more about this kind of part design. I agree that a huge folder for wireframes can be an enormous headache.


Sign In or Register to comment.