help creating FS multi results thickening feature

franco_otaola507

Hello,
I would like to create a FS that gives the same result as the thicken tool but with the main difference that for each surface selected, a different solid is created, separating them by the 'expansion' of the vertexes of the surface, something like the following image for a cube, where if we select the 6 surfaces we will get 6 different solids:
I am seeking help in this matter as I don't really know where to begin with, as I can not get my head around in a correct/proper way to do this using a classic workflow (not creating a FS) so any help/opinion in the matter of how to approach this problem, would be appreciated.
the current way that I did (and obviously not the correct one) can be seen in the following document: 
https://cad.onshape.com/documents/ab4965d9377239d26dee8833/w/cdb04f039d667d33b0f4838b/e/d590742d7217ebc68397a0cd?renderMode=0&uiState=6490033e251d9946355d83e1

glen_dewsbury

Might prove simpler to use a configuration table to get results wanted instead of a feature script. You can work out quite a bit of logic like whether offset extrudes are new or added. This table can be expanded to have basic cube custom dimensions as well. Note that 3D curves are also eliminated using draft on extrude. I sure there is more than one way to solve this but keep it simple when ever possible.
https://cad.onshape.com/documents/67f5f716a26c935c909c1ed2/w/6ef58a99a9e916b386436099/e/61315e8e7a6f6a874f19405e

Evan_Reese

If you want to make this as a script, I think you first need a better idea how you'd do it manually, and I don't think thicken is the right tool. If I understand right, offsetting the surface, then lofting the offset and the original surface is more like what you want. Here's an example of that. This is a nice workflow because it doesn't really matter much whether your inputs are planar or not. If the example looks right, then give that a go in FeatureScript and report back here if you get stuck on the code so I (and others) can help unstick you.

franco_otaola507

thank you guys!
@glen_dewsburythanks it is a little limiting you approach as it needs to know the angle before hand, but nevertheless thanks a lot!
@Evan_Reese yeah, that's for sure! i couldn't get my head around on how to do it even in the interface of onshape. thanks a lot! will have a look in detail but it looks like it does exactly what I was looking for.