Improvements to Onshape - September 1st, 2023

arick_gomes

wow that's a great  improvements

Evan_Reese

glen_dewsbury said:

@Evan_Reese
Thanks Evan. That was  very clarifying explanation.
You know the next question that will come. Can the part number be retrieved as text for engraving or embossing on a part?

Not that I know of because all of the part properties are generated after the feature list. There may be a workaround, but otherwise you'd need to generate the part number with a feature to have Onshape "know" what it is while the features are running.

chadstoltzfus

We use configurations very heavily, so finally seeing a configuration update after so long is very exciting. I'll also echo the enthusiasm for the eventual configured suppression implementation. 

Kyler_Walker

Awesome!  Driving Boolean values with expressions is huge!  This has been needed for a long time.

John_vd_Werff

Evan_Reese said:

I got into the new expression-driven stuff over the long weekend and made a 16-minute video detailing the experiments I did and what I learned. The functionality is very powerful, but there is a lot I learned that wasn't obvious to me at first, so I hope it can also help other people get up to speed faster. Check it out!
https://youtu.be/6HoMM2A3fm4

@Evan_Reese, thanks for posting the video, I learned a lot
Looks like using expressions can be extremely efficient, but not very intuitive to implement or edit.
One one hand I am tempted to use the expressions but on the other hand I fear that my coworkers will not be able to work with parts that contain these complex features.

Evan_Reese

John_vd_Werff said:

@Evan_Reese, thanks for posting the video, I learned a lot
Looks like using expressions can be extremely efficient, but not very intuitive to implement or edit.
One one hand I am tempted to use the expressions but on the other hand I fear that my coworkers will not be able to work with parts that contain these complex features.

To make them more obvious, you could do all of the logic in a Variable feature set to ANY, to get it to create the Boolean or String. That would externalize it to make it clearer where it's coming from and you could write a very clear description as to what it controls.

Lucas_Kuhns

This list view is going to be awesome!

MichaelPascoe

Wow. Fantastic update!! Ty Onshape team!




Really excited about the "Convert to expression" and the "Where used" for custom features.

When trying it out, it appears that "Convert to expression" is not available for configuration booleans yet.  =(
No doubt it's planned for future awesome updates!

_anton

MichaelPascoe said:

When trying it out, it appears that "Convert to expression" is not available for configuration booleans yet.  =(

It is, just not for suppression - it's on our list.

MichaelPascoe

@_anton Legit!

stvnvl_8501

Evan_Reese said:

I got into the new expression-driven stuff over the long weekend and made a 16-minute video detailing the experiments I did and what I learned. The functionality is very powerful, but there is a lot I learned that wasn't obvious to me at first, so I hope it can also help other people get up to speed faster. Check it out!
https://youtu.be/6HoMM2A3fm4

thanks @Evan_Reese , great video! 
This resolved an earlier issue I had. (moving faces in imported part in one or the other way based on a positive or negative value in an expression) 
 

stvnvl_8501

got me thinking: would you be able to get the expression driven text onto a drawing? making a view with the sketch that holds the text should work. but using it directly in the drawing "text" feature would be tidy. 
Would be very handy to reference the initial input parameters on the final drawing as a confirmation to the customer; 

eric_pesty

Lots of good stuff in this update!
Question on the list view, the video talks about "not having to remember folder structure" but it doesn't seem to bring up stuff from subfolders "recursively"... Am I missing something here?
Also anyone else wished it would keep the filters as you switch folder?

S1mon

One thing that seems a bit odd to me about the folder structure list view is that it only displays released parts/assemblies/drawings. In general, I 200% agree that this should be the default, but it seems like it would be useful to have the same view and filtering options for unreleased parts/assemblies/drawings.

I could see other litmus tests for displaying info in the list.

• Has a version been created?
• Does the part/assembly/drawing have a part number assigned?
• Is the part or subassembly used in an assembly?
• Has a drawing been created for it?

These are all steps toward something becoming a real thing that is being tracked.

I often would like to limit certain users/roles to only be able to view versions or releases. This is a feature of other PDM/PLM systems. Is there a way to do this in Onshape other than looking at the new list view or using a search filter?

Evan_Reese

stvnvl_8501 said:

got me thinking: would you be able to get the expression driven text onto a drawing? making a view with the sketch that holds the text should work. but using it directly in the drawing "text" feature would be tidy. 
Would be very handy to reference the initial input parameters on the final drawing as a confirmation to the customer; 

I think computed part properties is the way here.

PeteYodis

eric_pesty said:

Lots of good stuff in this update!
Question on the list view, the video talks about "not having to remember folder structure" but it doesn't seem to bring up stuff from subfolders "recursively"... Am I missing something here?
Also anyone else wished it would keep the filters as you switch folder?

@eric_pesty Recursive views are very much in our nearer term efforts.  We opted to release without it, as it certainly has value currently being scoped to one folder/project at a time - but we completely agree it should have an eventual recursive ability.  

Regarding the filter state being dropped on navigation, this is a bug that needs a fix, but might be related to some other contingencies in progress.  I've created a support ticket for you.  

eric_pesty

PeteYodis said:

I've created a support ticket for you.  

Saw that, thank you for the clarification and ticket

PeteYodis

S1mon said:

One thing that seems a bit odd to me about the folder structure list view is that it only displays released parts/assemblies/drawings. In general, I 200% agree that this should be the default, but it seems like it would be useful to have the same view and filtering options for unreleased parts/assemblies/drawings.

I could see other litmus tests for displaying info in the list.

• Has a version been created?
• Does the part/assembly/drawing have a part number assigned?
• Is the part or subassembly used in an assembly?
• Has a drawing been created for it?

These are all steps toward something becoming a real thing that is being tracked.

I often would like to limit certain users/roles to only be able to view versions or releases. This is a feature of other PDM/PLM systems. Is there a way to do this in Onshape other than looking at the new list view or using a search filter?

@S1mon Yes the longer term intent is let you create list and structure views of more than just the latest released data.  For the initial release we focused on some of the most used and most valuable data within companies, and that is easy consumption of the latest released data.  I'd personally like to see us push more to support Pending state data (what's coming just over the horizon within your company), and perhaps for data that has not even hit a release cycle yet.  I suspect there are some ways to focus attention on things without just opening everyone up to the firehose all the time.  Advanced search will always be an option as well, but the intent here is not need to reach for the advanced search tool as often and to accommodate the more common and useful ways of looking at your data.  Of course having data reside in potentially numerous different branches is powerful in Onshape but pose some more unique challenges on the logical consumption of data in that way, particularly when the data is linked across numerous different documents that don't all have the same branch structure.

In regards to being able restrict certain types of views of your data, yes we hear this and know it's important.  The very clear case is perhaps letting some role or group of users such as the "Shop floor" only see the latest released data, but not be able to easily see documents or other data in other non released states.

john_mcclary

PeteYodis said:

S1mon said:

One thing that seems a bit odd to me about the folder structure list view is that it only displays released parts/assemblies/drawings. In general, I 200% agree that this should be the default, but it seems like it would be useful to have the same view and filtering options for unreleased parts/assemblies/drawings.

I could see other litmus tests for displaying info in the list.

• Has a version been created?
• Does the part/assembly/drawing have a part number assigned?
• Is the part or subassembly used in an assembly?
• Has a drawing been created for it?

These are all steps toward something becoming a real thing that is being tracked.

I often would like to limit certain users/roles to only be able to view versions or releases. This is a feature of other PDM/PLM systems. Is there a way to do this in Onshape other than looking at the new list view or using a search filter?

@S1mon Yes the longer term intent is let you create list and structure views of more than just the latest released data.  For the initial release we focused on some of the most used and most valuable data within companies, and that is easy consumption of the latest released data.  I'd personally like to see us push more to support Pending state data (what's coming just over the horizon within your company), and perhaps for data that has not even hit a release cycle yet.  I suspect there are some ways to focus attention on things without just opening everyone up to the firehose all the time.  Advanced search will always be an option as well, but the intent here is not need to reach for the advanced search tool as often and to accommodate the more common and useful ways of looking at your data.  Of course having data reside in potentially numerous different branches is powerful in Onshape but pose some more unique challenges on the logical consumption of data in that way, particularly when the data is linked across numerous different documents that don't all have the same branch structure.

In regards to being able restrict certain types of views of your data, yes we hear this and know it's important.  The very clear case is perhaps letting some role or group of users such as the "Shop floor" only see the latest released data, but not be able to easily see documents or other data in other non released states.

I would love to see this work without release management.
Since we don't use that crap, this filter is just blank.

PeteYodis

@john_mcclary How do you distinguish the "good stuff" in documents versus everything else along the way that you may not want easily surfaced?

john_mcclary

It's always good if I made it 

naw,
We have a single document that is shared with the everyone on our Team called "Active Jobs"

They are the exported PDFs which by our company standards must be Quantity checked and initialed by hand on the official drawing.
any drawing that has that area blank is not allowed to be manufactured.

The reason for this is we use that as a double check to make sure we didn't have a typo on the QTY stamp, or sometimes we may want a couple extra for this batch for spare parts.

As parts get manufactured there may be errors or improvements, they red line the drawing and we drop what we are doing and make the change and re-release the drawing if necessary. The PDFs on Onshape are constantly being updated. So everyone in the shop only is exposed to the official stuff.
Being in Onshape means we don't have to run around to 20 different computers and close the open files every time there is a change, and we can also see who is currently viewing the PDF so we know if anyone needs to be informed.

When the job is done, we ship and pull the final PDF OFF of Onshape and save it on our server for History. Then as changes come in after final install/run-off they get updated and saved on our server as AS-BUILT

So, the only files the shop can see are drawings that are Released/Validated/Active that way the actual "Paper" with the hand written notes is what you see even if you are out of town viewing online.



Since the model is in a state of constant change, and most of our staff are not very computer savvy.
We have decreed nobody except the Designer is able to spoon feed the correct Drawing or Step File.

They can view and rotate the Assembly directly, but we throw an internet link in our job folder on the server so they are viewing the correct branch or whatever.

It's basically a manual release management. That works with both SolidWorks and Onshape, since we are still 50/50 on our releases right now.
If only we could put an eDrawing as an Onshape tab... I still have to go down and look at every damn computer until I find the one person who had the model read-only...

I attempted Onshape's release management once before, but it just felt like even more work for something nobody in the shop is allowed access to anyway.
Maybe it's updated since then and I should re-investigate it. But from what I've seen it was just another headache on top of what I already have to do anyway.

As for my comment above about wanting to be able to filter without using release management is, I want to use that feature as design tool as I'm designing.

for example a support ticket I have out I had to explain the document structure because there was odd behavior on the BOMs at the top level.
So I sent this image.
It would have been nice to just turn on your built in filter

bryan_lagrange

Time to break out the golden button, hopefully we can get some sheet metal updates............

sebastian_glanzner

@bryan_lagrange
We should make some "Onshape Update - Bingo Cards" 
On my card are the following features:

1. Dark mode
2. Sheet metal Loft
3. Assembly mirror
4. Textures
5. CAM Studio

That would be awesome 

john_mcclary

Something like this?

Onshape Bingo | Assembly 1

S1mon

@sebastian_glanzner

Is this a wish list or are we betting on what will be implemented? Here are some of my top wishes:

1. G3 constraints in sketches and on Bridging curve
2. Curvature constraints on Boundary surface
3. Internal guides for Boundary surface
4. Two or more configs able to share a part number/revision history (e.g. flexible parts)
5. Ability to extract/rebuild curves from edges etc.
6. A zillion small mate connector improvements
7. Customize keyboard shortcuts for all commands
8. Raise/lower degree of Bézier in sketcher
9. Selection filters
10. 3D sketcher with native version of Freeform spline

john_mcclary

Basically I think we fill in a bunch of top IRs in the configurations

Then copy that assembly for each score card, then scramble thier positions and change them up 

Once a ir is made, change the color and name in the partstudio config and all the score cards will update

After a few months someone aught to win

sebastian_glanzner

@john_mcclary
Awesome idea! We should try to imprint the text of each IR on a box. 
Is there a way to randomize the position with a seed value? Since true tandomie is not possible in FeatureScript. 

Maybe we can use the forum user name as seed, so everyone gets his unique bingo card.

@S1mon We can use a mix of our personal favorites and maybe the top voted IRs. We need 25 in total.

emagdalenaC2i

Are you guys thinking of playing a sort of 'Onshape Updates Bingo'? Count me in if you do!   

john_mcclary

sebastian_glanzner said:

@john_mcclary
Awesome idea! We should try to imprint the text of each IR on a box. 
Is there a way to randomize the position with a seed value? Since true tandomie is not possible in FeatureScript. 

Maybe we can use the forum user name as seed, so everyone gets his unique bingo card.

@S1mon We can use a mix of our personal favorites and maybe the top voted IRs. We need 25 in total.

I was thinking a master Document, I think we would have to scramble manually since it is at the assembly level.
I would add a link to each IR in the description where "yada yada" is. 

Then there would be a big assembly that shows all the active players on a big table.

Lucas_Kuhns

Ooh this sounds fun! But can we make it so that each of us can pick our layout? So for instance, there could be 50+ feature requests on the configuration list but each of us can make our assembly of the 25 we think will be done first and arrange them how we think will yield the highest probability of a Bingo. The assembly can then be configured with each of the participants (25 configured features in each one).