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.

Can I derive parts from few tabs at once?

ben_partouchben_partouch Member Posts: 24 PRO
Deriving 15 parts one by one is very time consuming. 



  • john_mcclaryjohn_mcclary Member, Developers Posts: 3,693 PRO
    No, each derive will only do one tab at a time. 
  • S1monS1mon Member Posts: 888 PRO
    Can I ask why you need to derive from 15 separate tabs?

    Normally if I was building a part which was dependent on 15 others, they would all be in the same part studio, or perhaps they’d be in an assembly and I could use assembly contexts. 

    I’m not sure what other systems you might have been using in the past, but with Solidworks’ Insert Part, or Creo’s Publish/Subscribe Geom, you wouldn’t want to reference more than a few other parts at a time. 

    There’s a lot of different ways to do top down design in Onshape. Perhaps explaining a little more about what you are trying to accomplish would help us help you.
  • ben_partouchben_partouch Member Posts: 24 PRO
    Thank you for getting back to me.
    Yes I can definitely explain- I'm making kitchen cabinets. Each box is a configured part. Than I need to take all these boxes to a top level part studio so I can AutoLayout all the parts for CNC machining. (This might change as I we looking into CAM that nest parts out of a 3D model). The other benefit to working in part studio for top level is that I can make changes to all the boxes at once.
    I hope that make sense, Thanks.
  • ben_partouchben_partouch Member Posts: 24 PRO
    To clarify- Each box is in a separate tab to ease on re-gen time
  • BenTaylorBenTaylor Member Posts: 31 PRO
    I think assembly contexts could be used for this. If you create an assembly with all the configured parts you want to lay out, you can create a part studio in context, use Transform > Copy in Place to "derive" the parts, then use AutoLayout to set them up for machining. The one downside here is that you lose the part metadata (names, part numbers, etc.) in the part studio, but they are still maintained in the assembly.
    Ben Taylor
    Biomechanical Engineer - Healing Innovations
  • MichaelPascoeMichaelPascoe Member Posts: 876 PRO
    edited June 30
    @ben_partouch if there were some cabinet features similar to autoLayout, what kind of options and functionality would like to see in a feature?
  • ben_partouchben_partouch Member Posts: 24 PRO
    @BenTaylor I have heard about this method and tried before. It is not practical as with large assemblies it takes forever to generate. Really slow. 

    @MichaelPascoe to be honest I'm trying to move away from nesting parts inside OS. Hopefully soon will have a CAM that does that.
    But I would like it to be able to handle large amounts of sheets- It failed on me once working with more that 13 sheets (I need 25 and more sometimes).
    Also rotating (mostly for grain direction) and flipping sides without using transform would be nice.

    Thanks guys!
  • john_mcclaryjohn_mcclary Member, Developers Posts: 3,693 PRO
    Autolayout is a very simple nesting solution.
    there is no optimization for nesting small parts within voids of larger parts.
    there is no optimization for nesting two triangles together even.
    I use it to get a sheet count when quoting, the low optimization tells me the maximum number of sheets required.

    We use Radan and Radbend for sheet-metal.
    They work pretty well.
    Before that we used Mastercam which was also good.

    Derive is one of the slowest features.
    So, it would likely be more efficient to have a couple of parts in the single part studio if they share many features.
    Then you would be able to derive once and get multiple parts from one rebuild cycle.
  • ben_partouchben_partouch Member Posts: 24 PRO
    @john_mcclary The work flow up to the derived operation is pretty set. I must make each box separately in different tabs as the boxes are heavily configured and have many parts. 
  • john_mcclaryjohn_mcclary Member, Developers Posts: 3,693 PRO
    edited June 30
    Yeah, if they are configured you definitely want them separate
    I get that
Sign In or Register to comment.