It's Bwoken Again!

Darkmann

While I appreciate my incredibly-high-feature-count studio in https://cad.onshape.com/documents/f7f17755bfe8a5b34f695cab/w/6e98b93b38e725802b27a1a8/e/9c8d8e72ffc02948f8ce2e70 "Printed parts" is far from an ideal usage scenario (scope creep…), I've not had this issue in a long time. Geometry not only doesn't render but is fully straight up not acknowledged. I know where faces are on the parts and I can't click on them, just click straight through, as if the parts are no longer solid bodies. I've tried refreshing, disabling adblock, exiting and entering the document, and toggling the visibility of various parts but nothing is fixing it so far (though toggling visibility shows the part correctly for a fraction of a second, then the view stutters and goes back to being broken, and only sometimes). As such I can't work on this document for the time being :(

Appreciate any tips on how to resolve or if I can split this thing out into multiple studios, I will, but I haven't found a good way to yet.

Cheers

Edit: FWIW, cad.onshape.com/check is green lights all the way, and nothing in my system is stressed by any of this. Using Mint 22.0/Cinnamon, and Brave

S1mon

I'm very often guilty of using 500+ features in a part studio or in a Solidworks master model. 1300+ seems really excessive, even to me. Total regen time is not too crazy, but I don't know how you manage this model. None of the features are in folders or renamed. How do you find anything to modify? Are you just slapping features at the end to make changes? 21 assembly contexts seems excessive as well.

The assembly seems overly complex with 136 mates and a lot of parts. I don't understand why there are almost no subassemblies. In the real world, it seems very likely that you will build some of these things up in subs and put those together later. Even simple things like your XYZ rails and carriages could be subs.

nick_papageorge_dayjob

1300 plus features to make 22 parts! No comment;)

I can confirm the studio does not load properly for me either. I'm using Firefox, which does not have a memory limit (most other browsers do).

nick_papageorge_dayjob

V1 opens properly. Maybe delete the new workspaces and branches you made and go back to that? You only made 2 new features in V2. The rest of the changes were showing/hiding parts.

PS, there is no reason to model parts on top of each other like you did. No advantages, and only disadvantages. If you are going to model multiple parts in one part studio (which is a recommended practice for small assemblies), they should be modeled where they will live in real life. This way you can take advantage of commonalities, which result in "fewer" features;)

.

MDesign

@nick_papageorge_dayjob small is quite subjective 😉

S1mon

I'm very often guilty of using 500+ features in a part studio or in a Solidworks master model. 1300+ seems really excessive, even to me. Total regen time is not too crazy, but I don't know how you manage this model. None of the features are in folders or renamed. How do you find anything to modify? Are you just slapping features at the end to make changes? 21 assembly contexts seems excessive as well.

The assembly seems overly complex with 136 mates and a lot of parts. I don't understand why there are almost no subassemblies. In the real world, it seems very likely that you will build some of these things up in subs and put those together later. Even simple things like your XYZ rails and carriages could be subs.

Darkmann

Sweet, well, I'm happy it's this instead of it being some obscure compatibility problem.

It was originally going to be the "cheap low effort printer project", "low effort" including the CAD, and which was already invalid by the time I started designing, lmao, it took ages.

Anyway, I built the thing, and was like "well, this thing could be a lot better with some redesigning" and so the jank piled on.

The latest version bump was to start redesigning the XY stage to be higher performance (yes, that long ago, motivation/work/etc issues), but it seems like I bumped into Onshape's limits before I could get there .:D

With that in mind, this is nothing I didn't already know. I do things properly with folders, subassemblies, in-context referencing and sensible-feature-count studios with clean philosophy (i.e. not stacking features up on top of each other to change the same geometry/part that could have been done further up the tree) in other projects, eg https://cad.onshape.com/documents/3ea8132aabfdfc4f3cce9ca0/w/adbc56b820086dcefcdcbe78/e/18da19cfbbad539f97f17e61?renderMode=0&uiState=6799dc6679307f4d75cb13bf, before I shelved it - I'm no stranger to the concepts. I suppose this proves to me that it's worth putting in the effort from the start, and that "low effort" projects turn into very-difficult-to-maintain ones later.

On that note, seeing as though a lot of stuff needs redesigning on the project anyhow, I'll take the opportunity to wangle the CAD around into something not quite as insane.

Cheers :)

nick_papageorge_dayjob

Why do you keep doing this? These are parts you modeled from scratch. No derives or imports. New part studios are free;) If the parts don't have any relationship to each other, they should be in their own studio, and drawn about the default planes. If they do have relationships to each other, they should be drawn in place.

Also what are you doing with contexts? I'm guessing any time you want to edit a part, you go to the asm and click edit in context. It makes a new context, and you go about editing the part. My coworker was doing this, and he'd end up with 20 contexts on a simple part studio.