Is it possible somehow to place a MC as a reference to other MC? Should I create an IR?

Javier_López_del_Pueyo

Hello!

Mate Connectors can be referenced to basically anything. An sketch element, a point, a part face... but not to other Mate Connector. 

I find this extrange since technically it can be done (I did it in my Set/Get Pose Custom feature). Besides, Mate Connectors don't need to have owners anymore.

Is there something I'm missing here? Is there a simple way to reference a MC to another MC I just haven't found?

Konst_Sh

Multi Mate Connector feature has this option among a number of others:

https://cad.onshape.com/documents/58f9f75f4e5ebed44b5cd7d7/w/e36d50cb31de15f1ff148206/e/e270676fd69b05156914f90a?renderMode=0&uiState=6532e4e524e5ce05edcea316

S1mon

I believe this IR covers it: https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/9877/mate-connector-definition-from-another-mate-connector

Konst_Sh

Multi Mate Connector feature has this option among a number of others:

https://cad.onshape.com/documents/58f9f75f4e5ebed44b5cd7d7/w/e36d50cb31de15f1ff148206/e/e270676fd69b05156914f90a?renderMode=0&uiState=6532e4e524e5ce05edcea316

Javier_López_del_Pueyo

Oh right! I will check it out. Thanks!

_anton

But do please submit an improvement request.

S1mon

I believe this IR covers it: https://forum.onshape.com/discussion/9877/mate-connector-definition-from-another-mate-connector

billy2

I'm trying to create routes for plumbing and came up with this FS a few weeks ago. Plumbing routes tend to run along x, y, z although I need the plumbing to go any where and through any orientation.

So, I'm tracking the 1st mate connector (cSys[0]) and the previous mate connector (cSys[n-1]) :


I can switch the route to follow Csys[0]:


After a week of use, I've decided this isn't the solution.

-@Konstantin_Sh has the best mate connector stack generator. It'd be perfect if he left a trail. What I mean is I'm here and now I'm there, but how?

-Morgan created an amazing router using a million manipulators which is a must see FS. link

-This is going to be fun, someone should implement it:

This is a true 4x4 transformation x, y, z and rx, ry, rz. Remember that it will rx 1st then ry then rz. From a user perspective, you'd never know, but if your programming, it's going get you. This will replace any MC code written so far.

 -a working suspension in a part studio, I wish that guy would have built it in an assembly. OS has the best linkage solver I seen and it could have the designed the suspension easily. Assys have inverse kinematics, you're going to write that in FS? With global variables you could have made the changes in the assembly making designing easy. For the layout, I would have projected it from a front view and a side view in a PS, for me this is easiest. I'm not a fan for designing 3D on a 2D screen. Manipulating a 3D curve and then rotate the screen to really see what happens, it's not for me. In an assembly, you could have easily created a structural analysis and sized the connecting rods. You couldn't get a dynamic response, maybe one day. I'm sorry, I feel this guy missed the boat.